Land Use Plan CAMA-1976

�r�n.�'Er� 'C,�'
•

P&SI 325
Memorandumt
7b: Planning
is
wand Social
FromJohn Issues Ow nittee
SubDate:
Beaufort County land Use Plan Amendment
Date: S January 1990 t
On 2 January 1990
Public hearing the Beaufort Countyunissioners he
involves reclassifconsider aland classification ma held the -required
the tr yIng a 61 acre P chan e, heclocal
transition land class, tract of land from the g The change
Pamlico River about 1 1 The tract is located on rural land class to
/2 miles. east of the fer the north shore of the,
As You kno;a our new rY landing.
include new Plannin �
provisions for g guidelines becafie effective l Nov
the minimum local 1 Plan amendments �r 1989 and
Planned Unit and management t For local governments not
Development ordinances Dols; zoning, subdivision regulations such as water, sewer inances and that.do not Supply gulations or
a'cemand-su fire and police services etc. PP1Y Public se
these PPly analysis must rvi,es
privately su be conducted on serviceas part of an amendment
discuss supplied services provisions so
the circwnstances are adequate. The local as to ensure
change will help then,-achie �g the amendment government shall
Protection and econ their stated necessary, advise how also
manic develo Policies for this change is beingPment and evaluate both environmental 9
Presently sought as to why it is the site for which the
the classification more appropriate
As �g sought. than other vacant lands You also know the .new
land class, but rather n Pl Ing guidelines no
intense development ,in °W include an longer have only
��urban transition class a transition :t
transition class" and o ill existin to illustrate 4
With water designed to illustrate g cities and t ;
and/ sewer at a 3+ unit Predonunantl owns, and a imited
less developed landscape. Y r_sIdential development
Per acre' density, but located
The public hearing in.a larger,
plan �g notice the Beaufort Count
advice the was fora change to tr y'�nissioners ran
ansition class concernn
transition class the lass
adopted however at g this
• with refer r our staffs
-reference to the new definition for the limited
A map of the,site location, supply Per our new guidelines.
are attached. PPly demand
analysis and other required analysis
p

SUNBELCO, INC. has requested the Beaufort County Board of
Commissioners to amend the County's Land Use Classification for a
sixty-one acre tract located approximately one and a half miles east of
the ferry landing .on the North Side of the Pamlico River. The request
is to change the land classificationfrom "rural" to "transition". Plans
for this sixty-one acre tract call for a thirty-five unit development with
no marina' facilities. Using density of development criteria this project
is more suited to a "rural" class than "transition" but the provision of
sewer services necessitates the "transition" class. Some services are
provided through county financed programs and others are the
responsibility of the private property owner. These services are listed
below along with how each service will be provided.
WATER: County at this time does not provide any public .
water systems. For this project water will be provided - f
by private "wells .,,or a community water system provided
initially by the developer. Plans for a community j
water, system would have to be approved, by the State
Division of Health Services. Ownersh'ip. and future i
maintenance would be by a Homeowners Association.
SEWER: County at this time does not provide public
sewer systems. Plans for this project cull for sewer
to be collected and pumped to a central upland ground
absorption disposal area. Specific site plans would be j
�I
approved by the Local Health Department and the State j
Division of Health S re I ^ Services. Ownership.:. and. future
maintenance would be the responsibility of a
Homeowner's Association. !
1s

FIRE & POLICE PROTECTION: Fire protection would be
provided by Bath Volunteer Fire Department which has
a
substation at Bayview, less than three miles from this
project.
Police protection would be furnished by the Beaufort County
3
Sheriff Department which maintains a twenty-four hour
communication 'center for the dispatch of Fire and Police.
SOLID WASTE: Beaufort County operates a sanitary landfill and
does not feel this project would have a substantial impact"on the
landfill.
r
SCHOOLS: With the relative size of the proposed project the
County does not feel that there will be an im a p ct on the school
? `.
facilities in .this area.
J
TRANSPORTATION NETWORK (ROADS): The proposed project
_
would have a forty -foot private right of way or roads.
fd
The initial right of way, and road construction would be
l
done by the developer and ownership and future
I
maintenance would be the responsibility of the
Homeowners Association. Public roads in this
area are
sufficient for increased traffic from this proposed
project.'
€
The "transition" class would . allow denser development than. is
currently proposed. Allowed uses for the transition class run the
�\ spectrum and include all types of development up to the level of
services provided by a municipality. Even allowing for the most dense
(2)
I

•
THIS REPORT HAS BEEN PREPARED FOR THE RESIDENTS OF
• BEAUFORT COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
•
BOARD OF COAUSSIONERS
J. Stancil Lilley, Chairman
M. D. Whisnant Frank Bonner
• Calvin Pittman Mrs. Arthur Lee Moore
Thomas Baines, County Manager
PLANNING BOARD
Robert L. Smith, Chairman
Robert A. Smith John Hird
Ray Tuten Malvin Respess
•
• N. C. DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL & ECONOMIC RESOURCES
Northeastern Field Office
Thomas B. Richter, Chief Planner
John W. Shore, Community Planner
Marian Alligood, Secretary ,
Debra Ingalls, Secretary
• Mary E. Noe, Secretary
Mike Yount, Draftsman
Danny Smith, Draftsman
" t
• J'r' �lnD�VG1FP%t .
May 1976 �r
G,tti{t�. nr

i
•
•
•
•
•
0
U
•
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
I.
Introduction
1
II.
Description of Present Conditions
4
A. Population and Economy
5
B. Existing Land Use
21
C. Current Plans, Policies, and Regulations
22
III.
Major Land Use Classes (Public Participation Activities)
30
A. Identification and Analysis of Major Land Use Issue
31
B. Alternatives Considered in the Development of
Goals and Policies
40
C. Land Use Goals and Objectives
43
D. Process Used in Determining Goals
46
E. Securing Public Participation
46
IV.
Constraints on Development
50
A. Land Potential
51
B. Capacity of Community Facilities
59
V.
Estimated Demand
66
A. Population and Economy
67
B. Future Land Needs
73
C. Community Facilities Demand
74
VIm_
Plan Description
78
VII.
Areas of Environmental Concern
87
VIII.
Summary (Bibliography)
98
IX.
City.- County Plan Relationship
103
0

•
U
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
LIST OF TABLES
Table No.
Description
Page
1
Population Changes, Beaufort County, 1920-1970
6
2
Summary of Population Trends, Beaufort County and
Townships, 1960 and 1970
8
3
Black Population By Townships, Beaufort County,
1960 and .1970
9
4
Population Trends, Selected Places, 1960 and 1970
9
5
Median Age, Beaufort County & North Carolina,
1960 - 1970
11
6
Population Change By Age Group, Beaufort County,
1960 - 1970
12
7
Years of School Completed, Beaufort County,
1960 and 1970
13
8
Work Force Estimates, Beaufort County, 1962, 1967,
and 1972
14
9
Employment Analysis, Beaufort County, 1962, 1967,
• and 1972
16
10
Commuting Patterns, Beaufort County, 1960 and 1970
18
11
Family Income Data, Beaufort County, 1969
19
12
6
Manufacturing Firms, Beaufort County, 1975
20
13
Inventory of Historic Areas, Beaufort County
56-B*to-56-J
14
Utilization of Primary Roads, Beaufort County, 1974
65
15
Projected Township Population, Beaufort County,
1970 - 2000
70
16
Projected Population, Municipalities of Beaufort
County, 1970 - 2000
71
17
County and Municipal Revenue'and Debt Data,
Beaufort County
77
1
Population By Age and Sex, Bath, 1970
107
2
Projected Population, Bath Township, Bath and
Beaufort County, 1970 - 2020
114
0

•
LIST OF TABLES (Continued)
Table No. Description Page
•
1 Population By Age and Sex, Chocowinity, 1970 118
2 Projected Population, Chocowinity, Chocowinity
Township and Beaufort County 122
• 1 Population By Age and Sex, Pantego, 1970 127
2 Projected Population, Pantego, Pantego Township and
Beaufort County, 1970 - 2020 131
•
•
•
•
r
•
•
0

•
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure No, Description Page
1 Projected Population, Beaufort County, 1970 - 2020 69
1 Population Trends, Bath, 1940 - 1975 107
1 Population Trends, Pantego, 1940 - 1975 126
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
0

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Map Number
Description
Page
1
Population Distribution
7
2
Townships
10
3
Transportation
23
4
Phosphate Deposits
37-A
4-A
General Soils Map, Beaufort County
5
Historic Sites
56-A
6
Phosphate Deposits
57-A
1.
Flood Hazard Area, Pantego, N.C.
129-A
•

•
This document, The Beaufort County Coastal Area Management Act Land Use
Plan, is the result of almost two years of intensive effort on the part of
many people in Beaufort County. The plan was initiated in response to the
North Carolina Coastal Area Management Act passed by the 1974 General Assembly.
The Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) established a cooperative program
•
of land use management -between local and.state governments. The goals of the
act were:
1) To provide a management system capable of preserving and
managing the environmentally sensitive areas;
2) To ensure that development in the coastal area proceeds in an
orderly manner; and
•
3) To provide a balance between the use and preservation of our
coastal resources.
Under the Act local governments are responsible for developing local land
•
use.plans which reflect the public's desires concerning local growth and devel-
opment. The Coastal Resources Commission (CRC) was established by the Act to
oversee the development of local land use plans. The CRC was also given the
•
responsibility of designating Areas of Environmental Concern (AEC), which are
to receive special attention from both the,local governments and the CRC.
This document represents Beaufort County's efforts to comply with the re -
•
quirements of the Act. It is written in accordance with the "State Guidelines
For Local Planning In The Coastal Area Under The Coastal Area Management Act
of 1974." These guidelines were prepared by the CRC and adopted on January 27,
•
1975, amended October 15, 1975.
•
0
0

•
The planning process that resulted in this plan was a trying experience
for local government officials, planning board members and the public. Issues •
were raised which many people did not wish to face. Emotion often overruled
reason with the result of more heat than light being created by the debate.
In the end, the county established goals for its,future development. There
exists no concensus of.these goals in Beaufort County.; but,hopefully,they.
and the resulting plan: represent a reasonable course with which the majority
of the citizens concur. •
•
•
3

•
A. POPULATION AND ECONOMY
1. Population
Beaufort County has experienced a population loss during the past two
decades. There was a decrease of 1,120 people between 1950 and 1960 and a small
decrease of 34 people between 1960 and 1970. This large loss of population
between 1950 and 1960 can probably be attributed,in part,to the national trend
of population migration from the rural areas to urban areas,coupled with a change
in agricultural practices which reduced labor demand.
Most rural areas, especially in Eastern North Carolina continued to expe-
rience population loss during the 19601s. Beaufort County's minor loss of pop-
ulation can be attributed to the opening of the phosphate mining industry,plus
location of a number of other industries in the county. These job opportunities
countered the loss of jobs in other sectors of the economy and held population
0 loss at a minimum.
While the county managed to minimize population loss during the 19601s,
it continued to lose black population. Between 1960 and 1970,the county lost
a total of 1,355 blacks, or 10.11 percent. Every township except Long Acre
lost blacks (Table 2). In one township, Pantego, blacks accounted for 83.7
percent of the township's population loss.
The major population movement during the 1960's was within the county. Of
the six townships in the county, three lost population, headed by Washington
Township and followed by Pantego and Bath. The remaining three gained popula-
tion. Richland Township had an increase of 31.2 percent.
Of the incorporated areas in the county, only Aurora had a population in-
crease (Table 4). Aurora's population increase accounted for 104.2 percent of
Richland Township's population increase.
5

The above indicates a pattern of population loss in most areas of the
county, with Long Acre Township, which serves as a residential area for Wash-
ington, and Aurora increasing in population.
TABLE 1 POPULATION CHANGES
BEAUFORT COUNTY
1920 - 1970
CHANGE
BEAUFORT IN
YEAR _ COUNTY...._ NUMBERS
1920 31,024 --
1930 35,026 4,002
1940 36,431 1,405
1950 37,134 703
1960 36,014 - 1,120
1970 35,908 - 34
SOURCE: U. S. Census of Population: General Population Characteristics,
North Carolina, 1920 - 1970.
R

•
a

•
TABLE 2 SUNIlARY OF POPULATION TRENDS
Beaufort County and Townships
1960 and 1970
•
Change:
1960 and 1970
1960
1970'
Number
Percent
Beaufort County
36,014
35,980
- 34
- 0.1
a
Chocowinity Township
4,628
4,661
33
0.7
Long Acre Township
5,318
6,976
1,658
31.2
Bath Township
3,323
3,237
- 86
- 2.6
•
Richland Township
39462
3,626
164
4.7
Pantego Township
5,377
5,126
- 251
- 4.7
Washington Township
13,906
12,354
-1,552
-11.2
•
SOURCE: U. S. Census
of Population:
Number of
Inhabitants 1960 and 1970.
•
•
:M
8
•

TABLE 3
BLACK POPULATION BY TOWNSHIPS
BEAUFORT COUNTY
1960 and 1970
TOWNSHIPS
1960
1970 NUMBER CHANGE
% CHANGE
•
County
13,290
11,935 -1$55
-10.11
Bath
940
813 - 127
-13.5
Chocowinity
1,540
1,366 - 174
-11.2
Long Acre
648
737 89
13.7
Pantego
2,730
1,753 - 210
- 7.6
Richland
1,822
1,753 - 69
- 3.7
•
Washington
5,610
4,746 - 864
-15.4
SOURCE: U. S.
Census of Population, 1960 and 1970.
TABLE 4
POPULATION TRENDS
Selected Places
1960 and 1970
•
Change:
1960 and 1970
1960 1970
Number
Percent
Aurora
449 620
171
38.1
Bath
346 231
-115
-33.2
Belhaven
2,386 2,259
-127
- 5.3
Chocowinity
580 566
--22
- 2.4
•
Pantego
262 218
- 44
.-16.8
Washington
9,939 8,961
-978
- 9.8
Washington Park
574 517
- 57
- 9.9
SOURCE: U.S.
Census of
Population: Number of Inhabitants, North Carolina
1960
and 1970.
9
•

• • i • • • • • � � •
0

•
Table 5 examines the median age of the population in Beaufort County and
North Carolina for 1960 and 1970. The table indicates that Beaufort County's
•
median age rose faster than that of the state. This reflects an increase in
the ratio of older people to younger. Table 6 examines population change in
the county by age group between 1960 and 1970.
•
TABLE 5 MEDIAN AGE
Beaufort County and North Carolina
1960-1970
1960 1970
Beaufort County 26.2 29.0
North Carolina 25.5 26.5
The age groupings have important implications for the provisions of ser-
vices by local government. The different age groups make different demands for
services. An increase in population below five years of age, for instance, would
indicate an increased demand on schools in the near future.
40
The educational attainment of the county's population increased between
1960 and 1970. Table 7 examines the number of years of school completed for the
county. Notice the sharp decline in the number with no schooling, while those
•
with some high school or college increased.
2. Economy
A definitive analysis of Beaufort County's economy is beyond the scope of
this study. This section will attempt to provide an economic overview and
framework of Beaufort County to,he.usod.by local decision makers.
•
11
0

•
TABLE 6
POPULATION CHANGE BY AGE
GROUP
Beaufort County
•
1960 - 1970
1960
1970
Number
Percent
•
Under 5
years
4,085
2,905
-1,180
-28.8
5 to
9
4,209
3,517
- 692
-16.4
10 to
14
4,305
3,867
- 438
-10.1
•
15 'to
19
3,152
3,597
- 445
14.1
20 to
24
1,809
2,431
622
34.3
25 to
29
1,849
2,072
223
12.0
•
30 to
34
2,027
1,859
- 168
- 8.2
35 to.39
2,075
1,859
- 216
-10.4 .
40 to
44
2,181
2,038
- 143
- 6.5
•
45 to
49
2,340
2,013.
- 327
-13.9
50 to
59
3,621
4,229
608
16.7
60 and over
4,361
5,593
1,232
28.2
TOTAL
36,014.
.35,980
SOURCE:
U. S. Census
of -Population Characteristics, 1960 -
1970.
12
•

•
•
•
TABLE 7
YEARS OF SCHOOL COMPLETED
Beaufort County
1960 and 1970
Number
Percent
Total
1960
1970
Change
Change
Male and Female, 25 yrs.
and over 18,508
19,653
1,145
6.1
Number school years completed 733
367
- 366
-49.9
Elementary:
1 to 4 yrs.
3,065
2,279
- 786
-25.6
5 to 8 yrs.
7,128
5,863
-1,265
-17.7
High School:
1 to 3 yrs.
2,801
4,295
13%494
53.3
4 yrs.
3,050
4,'448
1,398
45.8
College:
1 to 3 yrs.
1,003
1,236
233
23.2
4 or more
728
19162
434
59.6
SOURCE: U. S. Census of Population, 1960 and 1970.
The past two decades have witnessed a profound change in the agricultural
practices in the United States. Farming has become increasingly mechanized,
creating a trend toward fewer, but larger, farms and fewer workers needed to
produce equal or greater yields. This change in agricultural practice has had
its impact upon Beaufort County.
In 1962, 31.8-percent of Beaufort County's total employed were engaged in
agricultural employment. During the following decade, the county lost 1,550
agricultural jobs. As Table 8 shows, this loss in agricultural jobs was more
than made up for in industrial jobs. During the same period the county gained
4,910 non-agricultural wage and salary jobs. These are largely accounted for
13

by the opening of Texas Gulf's operations in 1964 and the Hamilton Beach plant'
opening in 1966,with several other smaller concerns locating in the county
during the period.
TABLE 8 WORK FORCE ESTIMATES
Beaufort County 1962, 1967 and 1972
Net Change
1962
1967
1972
(+or) 1962-72
Civilian Work Force
12,760
14,830
16,740
+3,980
Unemployment, Total
760
640
590
- 170
Rate of Unemployment
6.0
4.3
3.5
- 2.5
Employment, Total
12,000
14,190
16,150
+4,150
Non -Agricultural Wage &
Salary Employment
6,440
9,180
11,350
+4,910
Manufacturing!/
2,010
3,260
4,310
+2,300
Non-Manufacturing2/
4,430
5,920
7040
+2,610
All Other Non -Agricul-
tural Employment 1,780 2,230 2,570 + 790
Agricultural Employment 3780 2,780 2,230 -1,550
1/Includes: Food;_lumber and wood; tobacco; apparel; printing; stone, clay
and glass; and non -electrical machinery.
Includes Construction; transportation, communication and public utilities;
trade; financial, insurance and Veal estate; service; government
and other non -manufacturing.
1
Over the past decade Beaufort County has enjoyed a period of economic
prosperity with the civilian work force expanding and the number and rate of
unemployed dropping. This is in contrast,to a number of neighboring rural
counties who have not been able to. -replace the jobs lost in the agricultural
sector with jobs in the non-agricultural sector.
14

•
•
One method of analysis of the work force estimates for counties is to
divide the reported activities into basic and non -basic activities. Basic activ-
ities are defined as those which"export goods and services outside the county.
In exporting goods and services, these activities inject outside money into the
local economy. This "outside" money has a multiplier effect, in that it sup-
ports other non -basic activities within the county. The non -basic activities
are defined as those which provide goods and services for consumption within
"the county.
An.example of the basic and non -basic activities defined above might be
provided by a worker at Texasgulf. This worker assists in the production of
phosphate fertilizer -which is -sold for consumption outside of the county. The
"outside" money paid for the product goes, in part, to pay the worker.,'s,wages.
The worker's activity is basic. With the money'the worker receives, he purchases
items for his family, pays taxes which are used to educate his children and dis-
poses of his "outside" money in other ways. The merchants who sell the worker'
items, the teacher who teaches his children and others who provide other goods
and services are engaged -in non -basic activities.
In this basic -non -basic approach, the export base is the major factor
determining the level of the county income in that it supports the non -basic.
sector. An indication of the area's economic health can be gained by examining
the ratio of basic to non -basic activities in a county. While a large ratio
of basic to non -basic activities would generally indicate a healthy economy,
it .must be noted that a county that depends too heavily on one or a few.large
basic industries may prove unstable in an economic slump.
Table 9 utilizes employment figures in breaking down Beaufort County's
employment into basic and non -basic activities for the years 1962, 1967 and
•
1972. The trend shows a slight decrease in basic activities vis-a-vis non -basic.
0

•
This has proven to be a national trend as service industries have come to play
a larger role in the economy. Beaufort County's decrease is smaller than the
national and state average. The success in locating industries in the county,
ten industries between 1962 and 1972, has assured the county a healthy economy.
The new basic activities support new non -basic activities.
TABLE 9 EMPLOYMENT ANALYSIS
Beaufort County •
-1962, 1967 and 1972
Euployment Category
Number of Employees
1962 1967 1972
BASIC
Manufacturing
2,010
3,260
4,310
Food
340
380
.430
Wood & Lumber
360
350
380
Other Manufacturing
1,310
2,530
3,500
Non -Manufacturing
5,560
5,010
4,800
Agricultural
3,780
2,780
2,230
All Other Non -Manufacturing
1,780
2,230
2,570
TOTAL BASIC
7,570
8,270
9,110
TOTAL NON -BASIC
4,330
5,920.
7,040
Total Employed
12,000
14,190
16,150
Percentage Basic/Total Employed
63.1
58.3
56.4
Not only have the increased job opportunities in Beaufort County provided
jobs to county.residents, but they have also provided job opportunities to,
workers commuting into the county. Between 1960 and 1970 the county has
experienced also a 300 percent increase in the number of workers commuting into
the county.
16
r,
LJ

•
In 1960, Beaufort County had a net commuting -loss as workers commuted to
other counties to work. By 1970,the county had a net commuting -gain of 561
• workers. Table 10 examines the commuting patterns for Beaufort County in
1960 and 1970:
Beaufort County had a total of personal income of $117 million in 1972.
• This broke down on a per capita basis of $3,248,which is 72 percent of the
national average and 86 percent of the state average.
Income data for families,.otten a more meaningful index of .income, shows
• that while Beaufort County has not been successful in providing job opportuni-
ties, those job opportunities have not raised the median income above the
state level. The median income for Black fam ies is only $3,575. Almost 52%
of all Black families have a family income below poverty level,and 62.9 percent
have an•income which is less than 125 percent of the poverty level. Table 11
examines.family income levels for the -county. The data is further broken down
• by race..,
•
S
This income data gives an indication of the overall wealth and prosperity
of the county's population. Incomes can.serve as the bellweather of the local
economy.
Another indication of economic health is the number of manufacturing firms
in the county and the number employed by the fis. Table 12 lists.manufacturing
firms in,Beaufort County.
17
0
FA

r
•
•
•
•
•
•
Beaufort County,
1960 and
1970
1960
1970
Out-
In-
Out-
in -
County
Commuting Commuting
Commuting
Commuting
Bertie
12
5
22
48
Carteret
12
--
14
0
Craven
176
74
169
334
Dare
0
0
7
0
Edgecombe
0
0
8
19
Halifax
0
0
7
--
Hyde
1.15
37
65
115
Lenoir
35
--
30
0
Martin
99
76
231
263
Nash
0
0
.11
--
Onslow
0
0
15
17
Pamlico
40
12
19
150
Pitt
145
223
132
580
Tyrrell
11
--
0
0
Washington
70
31
286
110
Wayne
0
0
--
14
Wilson
0
0
20
0
Elsewhere
191
68
278
225
TOTAL-
906
526
1,314
11875
Live & Work in Beaufort County
9,972
92972
11,751
11,751
Employed Residents
10,878
XXX
13,065
XXX
Persons Working in Beaufort County
x
10,498
XXX
13,626
Net Commuting -Gain (+) or Loss (-)
-380
+561
Source: Employment Security Commission of North Carolina
North Carolina Commuting Patterns, 1960 and 1970.
18
7

' TABLE 11
F7
FAMILY DIX
Beaufort Cc
All Families
.Median Intone
Percent Receiving Public Assistance
Percent Less than Poverty Level
Percent Less than 75% Poverty Level
Percent Less than 125% Poverty Level
Black Families
Median Income
»
Percent Receiving Public Assistance
Percent Less than Poverty Level
Percent Less than 75% Poverty Level
Percent Less than 125% Poverty Level
SOURCE: U.S. Census, 1970.
A=
01 E DATA
unty, 1969
Beaufort County `
North Carolina
$6,435
$7,774
7.8
4.4
24.9
1:6.3
17.9
11.0
32.4
22.3
$3,575
$4,803
18.8
4.37
51.1
. 38.7
38.0
27.3
62.9
49.3
19

TAi3I,E 12 riADUFACZuREIG FIR1,15
Beaufort County,
1975
Employment
Firm
Vocation
_ Product
Range
a
Aurora Packing Co.
Aurora
Crab Meat
50-99
Texasgulf, Inc.
Aurora
Phosphoric Acid
500-999
Diammonium Phosphate
Phosphate Rock
Granular Triple Superphosphate
Baker Crab Co.
Belhaven
Crab Neat
50-99
Belhaven Feed Mills, Inc.
Belhaven
Livestock Feed
5-9
Liquid & Dry Fertilizer
Belhaven Fish & Oyster Co.
Belhaven
Crab Meat
50-99
Belhaven Manufacturing Co.
Belhaven -
Ladies Outwear
50-99
Harris Furniture & Upholstery Co.
Belhaven
Furniture
1-4
Blue Channel Corp.
Belhaven
Canned Crab Meat
100-249 .
r
Gwinn Engineering Co., Inc.
Belhaven
Dredges
5-9
Molded Polyurethane
Younce & Ralph
Belhaven
Lumber Pine
20-49
Hatteras Industrial Corp.
Chocowinity
Rubber Linings
5-9
Metal Fabrication
The Singer Co.
Chocowinity
Wooden Furniture
250-499
r
Coastal Lumber Co.
Pantego
Lumber, Wood Chips
20-49
Kamlar Corp.
Pantego
Pine Bark Products
20-49
Pungo Machine Shop, Inc.
Pantego
Job Shop
5-9
F. C. Howell & Son
Pinetown
Dimension Stock Hardwood
20-49
Beaufort County Iron Works, Inc.
Washington
Machine Shop
1-4
Coca Cola Bottling Co., Inc.
Washington
Carbonated Beverages
10-19
East Coast Electronic Weighing, Inc.
Washington
Wheel Load Weigher
5-9
On Board Truck System
Special Weighing Equipment
Edinburg Hardwood Lumber Co.
Washington
Hardwood Furniture Squares
20-49
Logs Hardwood, Chips
Flanders Filters, Inc.
Washington
Air Filters
50-99
Glass Fibre Filter Papers
Foster Wheeler Corp.
Washington
Valves Nuclear Power
20-49
Hankney & Sons. Inc.
Washington
Truck Bodies, Delivery Vans
100-249
Sam��ns M` ;`�orp,
Washington
Shirts
500-999
J. S. Hill Construction Co.
Washington
Ready Mix Concrete
10-19
Jackson Bedding Co.
Washington
Bedding Products, Furniture
1-4
Mallisons Climate Craft
Washington
Sheet Metal Work, Heating &
10-19
Air Conditioning
Maola Ice Cream Co., Inc.
Washington
Ice Cream
20-49
Mason Lumber Co.
Washington
Lumber
20-49
Moss Planing Mill
Washington
Lumber, Millwork
500-999
National Spinning Co., Inc.
Washington
Yarn
2,500 & Ove.
Roberson Beverages, Inc.
Washington
Soft Drinks
100-249
Scovill Manufacturing Co.
Washington
Household Appliances
1,000-2,499
Seacrest ,Farire Corp.
Washington
Boats
100-249
Washington Beverage Co.
Washington
Carbonated Beverages
10-19
Washington Garment Co.
Washington
Phildren's'Dresses
100-249
Washington Graphics Inca
Washington
Commercial Printed Material
1-4
Washington News Publishing Co.
Washington
Newsnaper
20-49
Washington Packing Co.
Washington
Sausage Products, Pork Products 10-19
R. S. Wiley & Son
Washington
Lumber Hardwood
5-9
20

•
B. EXISTING LAND USE
Beaufort County has a total of 618,179 acres within its boundaries. Water
areas comprise 88,836 acres, or 14.4 percent of this total area. The predomi-
nant land use in the remaining land area is forestry, which utilizes 340,497
acres, or 55.1 percent of the total acreage. This is followed by cropland, with
137,449 acres (22.2 percent); other land, such as farm roads, feed lots, mines,
etc., with 28,954 acres (4.7 percent); urban and built-up with 11,983 acres
(1.9 percent); pasture, 8,157 acres (1.3 percent); and federal land with 2,300
acres (0.4 percent).
0 Between 1959 and 1967, Beaufort County had a 137.5 percent change in urban
and built-up land. There was a small increase in other lands category, 18.1
percent, and cropland, 5.8 percent. There was a decrease in pasture, -17.4
t percent, and forest, -5.4 percent.
An examination of the existing land use map will reveal that the county's
population is largely grouped in the western portion of the county. Small con -
Of centrations,exist in the eastern population; but, by and large, the population is
centered around Washington. Conceptually, the county can be viewed as having
the eastern portion devoted to resource production --forestry, mining, and
agriculture --while the area around Washington is the residential and commercial
center.
This seems to be the trend in development --with the townships in the eastern
ID portion of the county losing population, and most new development taking place
around Washington, especially between Broad Creek and Washington.
Although there has been no effort on the county level to influence devel-
opment patterns, there have been few problems encountered with land use com-
patibility. The major problem which has resulted from unplanned development
has been unsightly riverfront development. Largely, this development has
0 - 21

occurred in a helter-skelter fashion to the detriment of the Pamlico River,
one of the county's most valuable resources. Areas which are likely to expe- •
rience major changes in predominant land use are the areas north of Aurora and
in the vicinity of Pamlico Beach. Phosphate mining is scheduled to begin in
both of these areas in the near future. f
C. CURRENT PLANS, POLICIES, AND REGULATIONS
•
1. Plans and Policies
Transportation Plans - Beaufort County has no transportation plans.
The following is an analysis of the county's transportation
•
systems.
Roads and Highways
Primary roads in Beaufort County include U. S. 264 and N. C. 33,
•
providing east -west transportation, and U. S. 17, N. C. 32 and N. C. 305,
providing transportation in a north -south axis. The two principal routes
are U. S. 17 and U. S..264 and, as such, are highest in priority for
•
improvement. The State DOT has in its semen year plan four-laning a por-
tion of U. S. 17 in Washington.
Many groups in the county;;led primarily by the Chamber of Commerce,
•
have pushed for the upgrading of U. S. 17 and U. S. 264 to four lanes.
While the -right-of-way has been purchased -on U. S. 17, little progress
has been evidenced toward upgrading of these two vital highway routes.
•
In addition to the above primary routes, transportation in the
county is centered on secondary roads which lace the county. There are
369 miles of paved secondary roads and 355 miles of unpaved secondary
•
roads in the county.
22
0

N
W

The major obstacle to highway transportation in the county is the
• Pamlico River. Local groups have supported a proposal for bridging the
river in the Bayview area and thus providing an eastern link between the
northern and southern halves of the county. Those efforts have failed
A and are unlikely to succeed in the future. Building of such a bridge
would be a major expense and is a project unlikely to be undertaken by
the State Department of Transportation. Any plan for the future develop-
ment of Beaufort County, in order to be realistic, must take into account
the highway transportation barrier created by the Pamlico River.
Rail.Transportation.
• Beaufort County is served by the Seaboard Coast'Line and the Norfolk -
Southern Railroad. Seaboard Coast Line serves Washington with a branch
line. Norfolk -Southern serves Chocowinity, Pinetown and Washington with
• a main line and has branch lines serving Belhaven, Pantego, Aurora and
the Texas Gulf Phosphate mining complex. No passenger service is avail-
able.
• Air Transportation
Beaufort.County has no commercial air service. The county is served
by four airports: Albert J. Ellis Airport (Jacksonville), Seymour Johnson
Air Force Base (Goldsboro), the•Simmons-Nott Airport (New Bern), and
Stallings Field (Kinston). Commuter service can be obtained at Greenville
through Wheeler Airlines.- Serving general aviation, Washington Municipal
Airport has three 4,500-foot paved runways and Belhaven has a 2,600-foot
grass strip. In 1973, 25 general aviation aircraft were based in the
county.
•
0 24

Trucking Companies
Beaufort County has one motor freight carrier terminal, Estes.
Motor freight carriers certified to stop in the county include Bell,
Carolina -Norfolk, Everett, Fleming, Helms, Hemingway, JML, Jones,
McLean, New Dixie, .Pilot, Northeast, Thurston, Virginia -Carolina and
Estes. Piggyback service is available with the nearest ramp in Green-
ville.
Water Transportation
Although the Pamlico River is the dominant physical feature in
Beaufort County, present water transportation is limited. A 12-foot
deep channel connects the City of Washington with the Intercoastal Water- 0
way. Bulk cargo is moved to and from the county over this route. The
major user is the Texas Gulf Phosphate operation, which transports
phosphate from the mine site to the State Port in Morehead City.
The possibility exists that the Pamlico River could be used more
for commuting purposes. Large numbers of people move daily in an east -
west direction in.the-county,commuting to and from jobs. Some type of
mass transit might be,possible using the river. Hydrofoil boats are
used in Europe today to turn rivers into highways for millions of people.
Such a system used in Beaufort County could use the Pamlico River to
join the county,rather than create a barrier.
Beaufort County is served by Carolina Trailways with a terminal
in Washington.
Community Facilities Plan - Beaufort County has no comprehensive com-
munity facility plan. Such a plan is presently being prepared for the
county by the Department of Natural and Economic Resources' Division of
25 40

•
Community Assistance. The plan will examine the capital needs of the
•
county for a 20 year planning period and will establish a capital
budgeting process.
The Region Q.Water Management Plan,compieted in 1975,examines water
and sewer needs of Beaufort County for a 50-year planning period. This
information is presented later in this plan.
Two 1201' areas have been designated in Beaufort County. One is
•
located in and around Belhaven,and the second covers Washington, Washing-
ton Park, Chocowinity and the surrounding area. Plans are being developed
for wastewater treatment in these.areas. See the Belhaven and Washington
•
plans for more complete information on these 1201' areas.
Utility.lExtension Policies - Beaufort County has a policy for the exten-
sion of water and sewer lines. The policy establishes a formula based
•
on the tax value of the project. This policy has been used one time.
None of the current elected officials or employees of the county were
aware the policy existed.
•
Recreation Policy - With the advent of Revenue Sharing, the county began
making recreation grants available to local governments. In 1975 the
County Commissioners established a county -recreation advisory committee
•
to assist the commissioners in determining recreation needs in Beaufort.
County. The current policy of the advisory committee and the county com-
missioners is to continue making recreation grants to local commLmities.
•
Open Space Policies - Beaufort County has no policy for the acquisition
or preservation.of open space.
Prior Land Use Plans-- Beaufort County contracted with the Forth Carolina
• .
Department of Conservation and Development in 1967 to prepare an economic
potential study and a land potential study. These studies provided a look
..26

at Beaufort County and its needs. As a result of the study, the county
planning board recommended the adoption of subdivision regulations. The
proposal met stiff opposition, was permanently tabled, and, as a result,
the planning board disbanned. As a result, neither plan had any bene- ,
ficial.impact on land development patterns in the county. The county
was without a.planning board until January, 1975.
Prior Land Use Policies - Beaufort County had no prior land use policies.
It has had industrial development policies which would have a signifi-
cant impact on land use patterns. In February, 1962, the county appro-
priated $5,000 to match state and federal funds for a survey of the
phosphate deposit in Beaufort County.
In May,.1962, the county adopted a resolution requesting the State to
postpone leasing the river bottoms" ...until such time as the survey and
study of phosphate deposits is completed and until a thorough investiga
'tion reveals what damage will be done to the river bottoms and .... how
the land owners in Beaufort County will be affected..."
In June, 1962, another resolution was passed requesting that the state
".,;,.provide in any leases for the mining of phosphate or other minerals
under the bottom of the Pamlico and Pungo Rivers reasonable safeguards
for the protection" of wildlife, fish, recreation and shore lines.
'In November,.1966;`March, 1969; and April, 1969, Tesolutions were passed
endorsing a bridge -dike across the Pamlico River.
2. Local Regulations
Counties in North Carolina have available to them a broad range of regu-
latory powers which enable local government to influence land use decisions.
Below are listed a number of these regulations and their status in Beaufort
County.
27

•
zoning Ordinance - Beaufort County does not enforce a zoning ordinance
•
in any form.
Subdivision Regulations - Beaufort County does not enforce any sub-
division regulations. The county commissioners have recognized the
•
need for subdivision standards.in the county and have requested that
the planning board prepare subdivision regulations for consideration.
Floodway Ordinances — Beaufort County is not presently enforcing any
•
floodway ordinances. The county is under the emergency flood in-
surance program. Flood prone areas should be mapped by 1979. Follow-
ing mapping of the flood prone areas, the county will enforce flood -
way ordinances.
Building Codes - Beaufort County is presently enforcing the North
Carolina Plumbing and Electrical Codes. The county is not enforcing
•
any other form of building codes at this time.
Mobile Home and Travel Trailer Ordinance - Beaufort County passed an
ordinance in September, 1975,.establishing minimum standards for mobile
•
home and travel trailer parks. The ordinance also required tie -downs
on all mobile homes in the county.
Septic Tank Regulations - The Beaufort County Health Department enforces
•
septic tank regulations. These regulations are more stringent than
the regulations promulgated by the N. C. Department of Human Resources.
Historic District Regulations- Beaufort County does not enforce any
•
historic district regulations. However, there is.a county historic
properties commission.
Nuisance Regulations - Beaufort County has no nuisance regulations
• which impact land use patterns.
28

A
Dome Protection Ordinances - Beaufort County has no dune protection
ordinances.
•
Sedimentation Codes - The county has no sedimentation codes. The
Mobile Home $ Travel Trailer Park Ordinance does requre that a sedimen-
tation control plan be filed with the plat.. This provision will be
•
incorporated into future county ordinances, such as subdivision regu-
lations.
Environmental Impact Statement Ordinance - While the county has no
•
EIS ordinance; an EIS provision is included in the Mobile Home
and Travel Trailer Ordinance.
3. Federal and State Regulations
•
As can be seen above, Beaufort County enforces few regulations which
have a significant impact on land use decision. Of more consequence are the
myriad of state and federal regulations which impact on the citizens of
•
Beaufort County.
The state guidelines for preparation of these land use plans require that
these state and federal regulations be listed and discussed. The N. C.
•
Department of Natural and Economic Resources was to prepare such a'listing
and.discussion for inclusion in their plan. At the date of this writing,.
the listing has not been presented to local governments for inclusion into
•
the Plan.
•
•
29 is

•
A. IDENTIFICATION AND ANALYSIS OF MAJOR.LAND USE ISSUES
The framework of this plan is the identification of major land use issues
and proposed courses of action to deal with the identified issues. In identi-
fying the major land use issues discussed in this plan, seven subject areas
were examined. These were: (1) the impact of population and economic trends;
(2) the provision of adequate housing and other services; (3) phosphate mining;
(4) other industrial development; (5) agriculture, forestry and commercial
fishing; (6).local control over environmentally sensitive areas; and (7)
recreation related development.
The issue of how fast and where growth would take place in Beaufort County
was considered a major land use issue. While in the past Beaufort _County,has..
not lost a large portion of population.like other rural.areas, there has been
a shift in population distribution within the county. Population has shifted
from the rural eastern portions of the county into the more urbanized area
around Washington. This is most evident in Long Acre Township,in the area.'
between Washington and Broad Creek.
Beaufort County is projected to gain in population over the next fifty years.
Is this growth to be encouraged to occur as rapidly as possible or will attempts -
be made to control the rate of growth? The citizens of Beaufort County indi-
cated they wanted a slow, orderly.pace of growth. This would call for actions
by local government to control the rate of growth in Beaufort County.
Where should future growth be. accommodated? If no action were taken by local
government, it is anticipated that the past trend of development being accom-
modated in the Washington area would continue. Most of this development is
located outside of the City of Washington Planning and Zoning jurisdiction. No
action by local government would mean that patterns of conflicting land use would.
31

likely develop in the growth area. High density development relying on septic
tanks for sewage disposal would create water quality problems in the area.
The citizens of the county indicated that they would like to center.growth
around the towns in the county. This concentrating of population will minimize
the cost of providing public services by local government. While a majority of
future growth will probably occur in the -Washington area, there was a desire by
the county to ensure that -the -smaller towns such asBelhaven and Aurora remain
viable towns in order to serve the population in their section of the county.
A second issue identified.as a major land use issue is that of protecting
the quality and natural setting of the county's waterways.. The Pamlico and
Pungo Rivers and their.tributaries are considered the major asset of the county •
by.many people. The quality and natural setting of the county's waterways are
threatened in many ways.
Portions of the county's waterways are underlaid by phosphate deposits.
These deposits are controlled by the state. At the present time Texasgulf has
leased from the state mineral rights for a portion of•the Pamlico River that is
iii front of its processing plant. While there are.presently no plans by Texas
gulf to mine the phosphate under the river, the maintenance of .the.lease agree-
ments with the state leaves the possibility open that they may be mined in the
future'. Open pit mining of -the river would involve diking off portions of the
river in order that a dry pit could be obtained.
The citizens of the county were concerned that the mining of the river
would alter the natural.setting.of the county's waterways - and that the mining
would have adverse long-term environmental impacts. It was felt that the county
should register with the State opposition to mining of the river.
Another project which threatens the quality and natural setting of the
river is a proposal to dam the Pamlico River. This is a proposal which has
32 0

!
surfaced several times. The .proposed project, which would not actually dam the
! river, but would create -two jetties with a gap in the middle to allow a.contin-
uous flow of water, is perceived as having several benefits: Its proponents
state that the project would (1) provide flood protection to large areas of the
county, (2) ensure a large body of fresh water for the development of the Wash-
ington area, (3) provide a transportation link across the river in the Bath area,
and (4) provide fresh water that could be used by the phosphate mining concerns:
both in processing and to.recharge the fresh water aquifer affected by -the mining
process. Opponents of the project feel that the benefits are overstated and
that the environmental impacts, such as destruction of portions of the estuary,
would make the project an environmental disaster.
The damming of the Pamlico River is backed by such groups as the.Washington
_Chamber of Commerce. However, a.majority.of the citizens in the county oppose
the project. The County Commissioners had considered positive and negative
impacts of such a project and feel that more study of the proposal is necessary
before it can be determined.whether.the'benefits outweigh the cost.
The water quality of the county's waterways is threatened by development in
the county. Much of the development occurring in Beaufort.County relies on
septic tanks for sewage. disposal,despite the fact that few soils in the county
are suitable for septic tanks. The result is pollution of our shallow.ground
water and surface waters.
The Division of.Environmental Management, N..C._Department of Natural and
Economic Resources, has identified four areas in Beaufort County where there is
concern over pollution of surface waters from development relying on' -septic tanks.
These areas are:
33

(1) The north shore of the Pamlico River from Washington Park to Broad
Creek. This area has very dense development which is unsewered. •
There is probably some direct discharge into the waterways.. Marinas,
boat basins and heavy boat traffic on Broad Creek constitute a poten-
tial problem. This whole area presents potentially severe problems
(2) Bath - There is moderately dense development on.Bath and Back Creeks
which is-unsewered. There is pressure for additional development and •
marinas. The soil and. water table is _.generally suitable for septic
tanks but continuing development poses a potential for water quality
degradation-.
(3). North shore of the Pamlico River below Bath There are isolated
pockets.of dense development with increasing pressure for additional •
development. The s oil is -marginal -to unsuitable with a high water
table in some areas.
(4) Chocowinity Bay Area — This area is developing with pressure for ad-
ditional —development.. Soil is generally suitable for septic tanks.
Should not-create,waterquality problems if density is controlled. •
The North Carolina Board of Water and Air Resources classifies. all streams
t
in the state as.to their best usage. This,in effect,establishes water quality
standards. They provide a'guide-in determining what level of treatment is �.
necessary prior to discharge of waste into the streams. A brief explanation
of the "best usage" for which waters in'each class must be protected is given
as follows: •
Fresh Waters
Class A -I - Suitable as a source of water supply for drinking, culinary,
or food processing purposes after treatment by approved dis-
infection only, and any other usage requiring waters of
lower quality.
Class A -II - Suitable as a source of water supply for drinking, culinary,
or food processing purposes after approved treatment equal
to coagulation, sedimentation, filtration, and disinfection,
etc., and any other usage requiring waters of lower quality. •
Class B - Suitable for outdoor bathing, boating and wading, and any
other usage requiring.waters of lower quality.
Class.0 - Suitable for fish and'wildlife propagation. Also suitable for
boating, wading, and other uses requiring waters of lower
quality.
34 •

LJ
C1ass.D - Suitable for agriculture and industrial cooling.and process
• water supply, fish survival,,navigation., and any other usage,
except fishing, bathing, or as a source of water supply for.
drinking, culinary or food processing purposes.
Tidal Salt Waters
Class SA - Suitable for.shellfishing..for market purposes and any other
• usage requiring waters of lower quality.
Class SB - Suitable for bathing and any other usage except shellfishing
for market purposes.
Class -SC Suitable for fishing, and any other usage except bathing and
• shellfishing for market purposes
Swamp.Waters. Those waters which are topographically located so as to
generally have low velocities and certain other character-
istics which are different from adjacent streams draining
steeper topography are designated by the letters "SW' in
• the schedule.
The large number of streams in Beaufort County and the wide range of class-
ifications exhibited by those streams make it very difficult to map the streams
• and code them as to classification. For this reason, a -listing of the streams
in the Tar -Pamlico basin as pertains to Beaufort County is provided. This
list is contained in the North Carolina Administrative code. -
• A final type of development which poses a problem to the county's water
ways is marina development. There is -increasing pressure for this type of
development in Beaufort County. The county commissioners are being asked by
• groups such as the U.S. Army.Corps of Engineers to -comment on applications
for permits for marina developments. It is difficult,if not impossible,for
the county to respond without.having a stated policy. Beaufort County needs
• to develop a policy on marina development in the county.
The most controversial land -use issue discussed was the issue of phosphate
mining.- Public opinion was divided on what the county's posture should be
• toward this`.industry which has such•a large impact onthelocal economy, land
use patterns and environment.
• 35

Large tracts of potentially recoverable phosphate reserves are owned by
•
Texasgulf, North Carolina Phosphate, FMC, and Weyerhaeuser. Also, 10,000 acres
of state-owned land in the Pamlico estuary are under lease for potential_.ex-
traction. Open cast mining is currently being employed to recover thick high
_ grade ore in the Lee Creek.area. Expansions of operating.plants and other
developments are underway. Hydraulic mining thru bore holes has beentAsted,
and plans to develop some.deeper high grade ores in.the Pungo River'Pamlico
•
River peninsula area are underway.
Mining and reclamation regulations involved with ore extraction are under
.the auspicies of the Department of Natural and Economic Resources of.North
•
Carolina as set out in the Mining Act of 1971. The agency is amply staffed
with competent professionals to regulate the operations.
The ground water* and surface water usage involved with the phosphate
•
mining and -processing operations are likewise monitored and regulated by the
Department of Natural and Economic; Resources under the Water Use Act and Well
Construction Acts of 1967. These acts regulate depressurization of the aquifer
•
by the mining companies. .This depressurization affects the water level in
wells and may cause salt water intrusion into freshwater aquifers.
*Groundwater - Water standing in or moving through the soil and underlying strata. •
36 •

Phosphate mining and,more imoortantly,the processing of the recovered ore
•
is an important industry of Beaufort County and of the state.. The .current
operations are one of the largest of its kind in the world,and future develop-
ments promise much larger. establishments. The industry is directly.related to.
•
agriculture whereby phosphate._is.an absolutely essential-mineral,used along with
-nitrogen and potash,to enhance the growth of crops. With the increasing United
States and world demand for.food, the usage of phosphate.fertilizers.will con-
tinue to expand while sources of the raw materials diminish. The long-range
projections of the phosphate industry in Beaufort County are for steady growth
and security to provide.quality employment for additional.work forces for many
•
decades. Currently, over $13 million is annually pumped into the local economy
thru salaries,.property taxes and procurements. Revenue from property taxes from
Texasgulf phosphate operations amounts to +30a of the entire county property
•
tax returns. Expansions will,in turn,increase these revenues,subsequently in-
creasing the affluence of the entire population of the county.
RegulationLof_- mining.activities has been a function of state government
to.,date. The state has a mining act which regulates the mining itself, and
regulations concerning the amount of water which can be withdrawn to depres-
surize the aquifer so that mining can take place. Local government can, and
should, also play a regulatory role in assuring that the mining can continue
and to assure that the continuing mining does not disrupt desired features with-_
in the county.
Several existing population centers are located over phosphate deposits.
Most of the people living in.these centers do not want their communities dis-
rupted and dislocated by mining activities.' Therefore, the Town of Aurora,
•
Bath, Pantego, and Belhaven should take steps to zone within their territorial
jurisdiction to prohibit mining activities from encroaching. The county should
37
•

w
t
a
r
MAY 1976

institute zoning to protect unincorporated population concentrations such as
Bayviewe
Many citizens are concerned that open pit mining will begin on the
north side,of the Pamlico in the Bath area. Neither N. C.-Phosphate or Texas
•
gulf,.the two.companies mining or planning to mine by. the open pit method, have
any plans to mine on the north side.of the river at present. It is felt that
mining in that area in the near future is unlikely due to (1) the fragmented
land ownership pattern in the area,,.(2) the presence of population centers that
could be protected by zoning and (3) the location of process plants on the south
side of.the.river which would present transportation problems.
The land underlying the rivers is under state control and the state will
. make.the decision on whether or not to allow mining in these areas. However,
due to local desires to protect the integrity of the county's waterways,
Beaufort County should notify the state of its opposition to mining of the rivers
unless competent studies demonstrate that such mining can be accomplished with-
out permanently changing the character of the rivers or creeks.
i
Another major land use issue -was industrial development. In order to
achieve the.growth policy stated earlier, it will be necessary to selectively
recruit industries that meet certain needs in the local economy. The citizens
a
of the county desired to recruit high Quality industries which would meet the
labor demands of the area. Ideally, these industries should utilize local
products.such as agricultural goods or fsh'products, thereby strengthening
•
the existing economy.
•
0
38

•
The fifth major land use issue identified dealt with agriculture,
forestry and commercial fishing. These industries, which are dependent upon •
the .county's productive natural resources, have historically played a major
role in Beaufort County.
The estimated cash farm income for Beaufort County in 1975 was
$56,975,841.42. As you can see, this is an important segment of the local
economy. If. agriculture is to continue to prosper it is important- that. the
impact of local government's actions on agriculture is evaluated. In develop
ing a long range development plan for the county, prime agriculture must be
protected. But, before.it can be protected, it must be identified. Beaufort
County should begin a program of identifying its prime agricultural land. •
Once identified, the county can take actions to protect•it.
Much of the agriculture that is conducted in Beaufort County is hampered
by a high water table, and it is necessary to drain the land to farm it. •
Farmers in the county have encountered increasing difficulties in securing the
Permits necessary for drainage, particularly if the drainage canals are to
traverse marsh grass. It is essential that the process to obtain these permits
•
be streamlined to.insure that minimum delays are encountered by a farm seeking
to drain his land. One avenue suggested would be to allow the local Soil and
Water Conservation District administer permits for drainage.
In addition to agriculture, forestry and commercial fishing were found
to be important uses of productive natural resources. Local government is
limited in its impact on these two industries. Beaufort County should seek
to ensure that the.natural resources that these industries are dependent on,
remain in abundant supply.
Beaufort County has a number of environmentally sensitive areas which
will be.designated as Areas. of Environmental Concern by'the CRC. The CAMA
39 •

•
legislation allows local governments to issue permits for minor development
in AEC's. The citizens of Beaufort County feel that control should remain on
the local level and therefore favored enforcement of permits for minor develop-
ment in AEC's by the county.
•
In addition,.it was felt that the county's development plans should seek
to protect these AEC's. For example, it was felt that while Goose Creek State
Park would be an AEC that the land adjoining it should be protected to ensure
that development occurring in the vicinity of the park would be compatible with
.. . it.
•
•
•
0
The final major land use issue identified by the*county was the need to
deal with recreational development. Beaufort County's major attraction, the
natural environment and the activities it supports (hunting, fishing, boating,
and camping) creates additional development pressures. 'People outside of
Beaufort County enjoy these activities as well. As a result second homes,
marinas, campgrounds and commercial establishments are built to cater to those
'who visit. Adding to these pressures is the establishment of a state park
at Upper Goose Creek, further development of Historic Bath and activities
related to the historic site. These attractions will mean more people coming
to Beaufort County. Even the ferry between Swan Quarter and Ocracoke will
mean more people coming through the county. If the growth that occurs is not
guided, then that growth could.destroy the very thing that created it - the.
first-rate natural environment.
B. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
A number of alternatives to the selected goals.were considered and
rejected. These included:
0
40

•
1)
Growth - A no growth alternative and rapid growth alternative were
•
considered. Both were rejected as incompatible with the
public's desires. It was felt that rapid growth would not
enable the retention of the quality of life desired by most
citizens. The no growth alternative was viewed as unrealistic
in view of the development pressures facing the county.
2)
Population Distribution - A laissez-faire alternative and a dispersed
•
population alternative were considered.. The laissez-faire
approach would result in the additional development occur-
ring only in the Washington area and possibly to a small
.
extent in Aurora. This would be counter to the county's de-
sire to maintain the present towns in the county as viable
communities able to serve the surrounding'areas. It would
also result in undesirable development patterns in the
Washington area. The dispersed population alternative would
have scattered population throughout the county with the
adverse impacts of higher service cost and inefficient land.
use patterns. The alternative chosen,.to.center future
_
growth among existing towns throughout the county, would allow
for more efficient utilization of service and a more efficient
land use pattern. It would also protect agricultural land
from encroachment of urban -type development.
3)
Phosphate. Mining - The phosphate mining issue was Ia complex issue
with many facets. Alternatives considered but rejected were
_
(a) no action by the county leaving the issue to be decided
•
by the state, (b) land use regulation which would have pro-
41
•

•
tected potential phosphate deposits from incompatible
•
development, and (c) favoring mining at all environmental
cost. The question of the state and national interest
in the phosphate deposit was.addressed. Local governments
i
role is in monitoring permit letting by state and federal
agencies. Local regulations should be used in the event
state and federal regulations.fail to represent local
interest.
4)
Other Major Land Use Issues - The remaining land use issues were clear.
cut. The only other major alternative considered was to do
•
nothing at the local level.
5)
Housing and Other Services - It was felt that housing was not a
major land use issue in Beaufort County. The private market
•
and public housing authorities are meeting the demand in
the county. Other governmental services were not perceived
as major land use issues but as tools to be used by local
•
government in guiding.growth.
6).
The Protection of Cultural and Historical Resources - The protection
of cultural and historical resources was not identified as
i
a major land use issue. The cultural and historical heri-
tages are viewed by the citizens as valuable resources.
Beaufort County has a very active Arts Council and Historic
•
Properties Commission. These groups have been successful
in protecting the county's cultural and historical resources.
Plans for, and control of growth in the county should include
provisions for conserving these resources.
0 42

C. GOALS FOR DEVELOPMENT
•
Goals provide an ideal or.target for which to'aim. The following goals
and objectives were established for Beaufort County. The goal is a broad,
general area or issue such as how fast growth should occur. The objectives •
listed under that goal describe specifics such as where growth should occur.
When taken together, these goals and objectives draw a.picture of what Beaufort
County should look like in the future. Your elected officials will constantly
refer to these goals while considering matters related to the future growth
and development of -Beaufort County. The goals and objectives for Beaufort
County are:
I.
GOAL: To -guide growth in Beaufort County so that it occurs in a slow,
orderly manner.
0
OBJECTIVES: •
-To center future growth around the towns in the county.
To; -zone areas of rapid and intensive growth throughout the
county and along major thoroughfares to ensure that future
growth occurs in an orderly manner.
-Public facilities, such as water and sewer, schools, etc.
will be provided in a manner that.encourages development
to occur in areas best suited for development.
-County regulations will consider natural constraints.on
development such.as soil limitati6ns, fragile areas, etc. •
-Building codes, subdivision regulations and other minimum
standards will be enforced to ensure that the development
that takes place in Beaufort County.is of high quality.
Industries will be recruited in a manner consistent with
this goal.
Planning for and control of growth in the county should
include provisions for conserving valuable cultural and
historical resources.
-To seek the upgrading of highways U. S. 17 & 264.
43 0

0
II. GOAL: To protect the quality and natural setting of the county's
waterways.
OBJECTIVES:
-To oppose any land using project or development such as mining or
damming of the river which cannot be shown by competent studies
to have._no harmful impact on the natural setting environmental
quality of our waterways.
-To discourage location of industries or development in Beaufort
County which would be detrimental to water quality.
To develop local regulations which would ensure,that.waterfront
development does not constitute visual pollution or contribute
to water quality problems.
To develop a policy regarding water -based recreation development,
such as marinas
III. GOAL: To encourage the further development of phosphate mining while
.ensuring that the natural environment and lifestyle of Beaufort
County is protected.
OBJECTIVES:
-To register with the State, which regulates mining, the county's
desire to ensure that the environment is protected during and
after mining activities.
-To encourage that open -pit mining remain on the south side of
the river for the foreseeable future.
-To oppose mining of the rivers and creeks until a competent study
can be conducted as to the impact on such mining.
To zone existing unincorporated residential areas to protect them
from undesirable land uses:
To encourage incorporated towns to exercise land use controls
to protect their residential areas from undesirable land uses.
I� -Mining should not be allowed to jeopardize the ground water
supply of the area.
IV. GOAL: To encourage quality industries to locate in Beaufort County.
OBJECTIVES:.
To recruit industries at a pace consistent with the county
growth policy.
-To recruit industries which would utilize local products such
as -agricultural goods and fish products..
•
0 44.

-To recruit industries to meet the specific labor requirements of
various areas of the county.
-To identify markets within reach of Beaufort County, available
labor and resources to aid in industrial recruitment.
V. GOAL: To develop the agricultural, forestry, and commercial fishing
sectors of our local economy. «
OBJECTIVES:
-To identify and protect our prime agricultural land.
-To remove unnecessary impediments to maintaining agricultural
drainage canals and other conservation practices.
To continue and further develop extension services such as
agricultural education, Agricultural Extension Service and
Soil Conservation Service.
-To stress the importance of proper forest management.
-To protect habitats essential .to fish production with
reasonable consideration for farm drainage.
VI. GOAL: To maintain local control over environmentally sensitive
areas and implementation of the .plan.
OBJECTIVES:
-To issue permits locally for minor development in areas
designated as Areas of Environmental Concern by the Coastal
Resources Commission.
-To design County development plans so as to protect environmentally
sensitive areas.
-To protect Goose -Creek -State Park from conflicting land uses.
To insure that local•desires and.concerns are considered by
State and Federal agencies.
-To insure administration .of local matters by local people .
familiar with local problems.
-To speed the issuance of permits for desirable projects..
VII. GOAL: To ensure that -recreational developments such as camping areas,
marinas, travel trailer camps, second home developments, etc.,
will occur in a manner that will protect the natural amenities •
that attracted.such development.
OBJECTIVES:
-To establish and enforce minimum standards for recreation -based
development.
-To regulate corridors leading to recreation -based developments
so as to avoid congestion, unsightly construction, and unnecessary
alteration of natural amenities.
45

D. PROCESS USED IN DETERMINING -GOALS
A process known as the nominal group process was used to determine
Beaufort County's goals. These goals were determined at a workshop held in
August, 1975, and attended by planning board members,-elected-officials,.and
members of the Citizen Advisory Council.
Upon arriving at the workshop, participants were provided with the results
of the efforts to obtain citizen input into the planning process. Results of
the county -wide survey and small group discussions were to be considered in
conjunction with the results of their own personal interviews of the county's
..populace. The participants were divided into small groups to identify and
to discuss issues facing Beaufort County. These issues.were prioritized in
each group.
Following discussion by.each group, the issues from each group -were. -
listed for display. All of the.participants then meet to discuss the.identi-
fied-issues. Following this discussion, the issues were once again prioritized
by the group as a wholes
•
Staff then took the.results:of the workshop and grouped compatible issues'
into broader headings entitled goals'. These goals were then submitted to the
planning board for action,
•
For a detailed discussion of how this process fits into the overall
public participation process, see the following section.
• E. SECURING PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
Beaufort County's public participation program was developed by its
Planning Board generally following the suggestions outlined in the Coastal .
• Resources Commission's "Handbook on Public Participation." In addition to
the steps outlined in the "Handbook", there was extensive use of the nominal
46

.group process. This process centered on small groups identifying count land
use issues.
The firstphase of the program was to inform local citizens about the
CAMA program. The local newspaper, the Daily News, with a circulation of
9,112, gave extensive coverage,to the Planning Board's activities. In
. .addition, a number of articles related to CAMA were published.' The local
television -and radio stations.also provided coverage of CAMA activities and
over 3,000 CAMA leaflets were distributed.
While the informational process was evolving, the Planning Board began
making a concerted effort to provide avenues for local citizens to input into
the planning process. Basically three different avenues were provided. They
were (1) personal. interviews, (2) surveys, and (3) workshops and public
meetings. An undetermined number of personal interviews were conducted by
elected officials, planning board members and members of the Planning Board's
Citizen Advisory Council. This face-to-face contact enabled a two-way flow
of information about the issues facing Beaufort County.
During the.spring of 1975, approximately 3,000 questionnaires were dis-
tributed in Beaufort County. These questionnaires asked questions related to
local problems, level of..local.government expenditures and a number`of questions
regarding development and environmental quality.
In addition to the personal interviews and questionnaires, a number of
workshops and public meetings -were held throughout the county.
Following these efforts, a day -long goal setting workshop was held. At
this workshop, planning board members, elected officials, and members of the
.Citizen Advisory Council established a comprehensive set of goals'for.Beaufort
County. These goals established the framework for a draft plan that was to
be submitted to the CRC by November 23, 1975.
47

During and after discussion of the November 23 draft, public interest
in the plan ignited. A number of goals in the plan, particularly those related
to mining, generated a great deal of controversy.
Simultaneous with this.rising debate in.the;county over the goals, the
•
CRC was reviewing the March 23.draft plan° In their review the CRC felt that
the plan did not address sufficiently the negative impacts of mining and that
the .issues facing the county needed to be better defined.
•
In response to the debates. -locally and the CRC review, the planning
board identified four major land.use issues facing the county and scheduled
three public hearings to enable the public to express their views on these
!
major land use issues. The. -issues were 1) mining, 2) growth, 3) water
quality and 4) land use regulations.
These public hearings generated a great deal of participation. .Public
opinion on the issues was often divided. The planning board attempted to
develop new goals relating to the major land use issues. These were agreed
upon and then staff developed a revised plan using the new goals as the
framework for the plan.
The Planning Board held.a public.hearing on the plan in April and recom-
mended it to the county commissioners. The county -commissioners held a
public hearing on May 10, 1976 and adopted a land use plan prior to the
May 21 CAMA deadline.
To what extent was the.public participation process successful? It
would appear that the initial attempts to obtain meaningful public partici-
pation were a failure.. This can be attributed mainly to public apathy.. De= .
sOite efforts by the planning board to impress upon the public 'the -.significance
i .
of the CAMA legislation, the public did not feel that it would affect them
personally and that there was.no'great need to become involved.
0 48

Meani-Agful public participation occurred only after preparation of the
•
November 23 draft. Goals set forth in that document were strongly opposed by
individuals in the county. They served as targets which could be criticized
and debated. The resulting debate enabled interested groups such as the
•
Pamlico -Bath Preservation Foundation to mobilize people to ensure that their
.opinions were represented.
The final plan does not represent the concensus of opinion on the major
issues - for no concensus exists. It does represent what the planning board
and county commissioners feel is the most reasonable course of action, a course
that will benefit the whole county. Ideally, the issues raised in this plan
•
will 'continue to be debated and that free and open discussion of the issues
by all interested groups will result in -decisions which will prove right
when our children examine our actions fifty years hence.
•
•
49
•

•
A. LAND POTENTIAL
1. Physical Limitations
a. Hazard Areas
Hazard areas can be either man-made or natural. Beaufort County
• has few man -,made hazard areas. Possibly of greatest danger are above
ground tanks used for storage of flammable liquids. No large concentra-
tion of these exist in Beaufort County.. Caution should be exercised in
• development of sites immediately adjacent to any existing tanks. Future
land use regulation should address the problem of storage tanks..
Two types.of natural hazard areas exist in Beaufort County, flood
♦ hazard areas and shoreline erodible areas. The shoreline of the Pungo
and Pamlico River have a high probability of excessive erosion occurring,
thereby endangering development in the area.
• Large areas of.Beaufort County are subject to flooding. The
flooding is largely in conjunction with hurricanes or severe winter
storms. Beaufort County has taken steps to come under the National
Flood' Insurance Program. Once mapping has been. -completed the county will
adopt and enforce regulations to control development in.flood hazard
areas.
b. Soil Limitations
Soil limitations in Beaufort County will.determine where, and to
what extent future growth canoccur. While it is possible, from an
engineering point of view,_to carry on almost any activity or.develop-
ment-in any type of soil, the soils can present problems that,'for
economic reasons, are impossible to overcome.
The following map examines -the soil associations in Beaufort
County:
51

•
The accompanying legend list on the limitations encountered in.each
soil association.
c. Water Supply Areas
There is only one water supply area identified by the N. C.
Department of Human Resources in Beaufort County. That is the Tranters
Creek Watershed -which -serves the City of Washington as a water source.
Since the watershed represents a source of.potable water for. -Washington,
any loss'or serious detriment to the area would have serious public
health implications. Such a loss would also have a significant adverse
financial impact.
Uncontrolled development within the watershed would cause signifi-
cant changes in the runoff patterns and would affect the quantity of
water available as a raw water supply. Such development would also
adversely affect water quality by.introducing a wide variety of_pollu
tants from homes, businesses, or industries, either through.discharge
or.surface runoff into the water supply.
d. Steep Slopes
Steep slopes for the purpose of this planare defined.as.-areas
where the predominant slope exceeds twelve percent. The only areas in
Beaufort County which could be defined in this manner are the cliffs
and high banks along the south side of the Pamlico. River. These.cliffs
and high banks are constantly threatened by erosion and any development
.occurring too close to these areas could be threatened. •
2. Fragile Areas
Many areas exist in coastal North Carolina which are 'important
economically, environmentally and aesthetically, yet can be easily,
destroyed by inappropriately or poorly planned development. These areas
52 •

•
in Beaufort County include coastal wetlands, estuarine and public
trust waters, areas that sustain remnant species, scenic areas and
archaeological and historic sites.
Wetlands, estuarine and public -trust waters, areas that sustain
•
remnant species and some historic sites are to be given particular
attention as to their constraint on development.
a. Coastal Wetlands
Beaufort County has a number.of coastal wetlands (marshes)
located along the Pamlico and Pungo Rivers and their tributaries.
This marshland type .contributes to the.detritus supply necessary
•
to the highly productive estuarine system essential to North Carolina's
economically valuable commercial.and sports fisheries.
The higher marsh types offer quality wildlife and waterfowl
habitat depending on the biological and.physical-conditions of the
marsh. The vegetative diversity in the higher marshes usually supports
a greater diversity of wildlife types than the limited habitat of the
low tidal marsh. This marshland type also serves as an important
deterrent to shoreline erosion especially in those marshes -containing
heavily rooted species. The dense system of rhizomes and roots of ,
•
Juncus roemerianus are highly resistant to erosion. In addition, the
higher marshes are effective sediment•traps.
..b. Outer Banks and Dunes
Beaufort County has no outer banks or dunes.
c. Ocean Beaches and Shorelines
Beaufort County has no ocean beaches and shorelines.
• 53

d. Estuarine Waters and Public Trust Waters
Estuarine waters are defined in G.S. 116-229(n) (2) as, "all the
water of the Atlantic Ocean within the boundary of North Carolina and
all the waters of the bays, sounds, rivers, and tributaries thereto
seaward of the dividing line -between coastal fishing waters and inland
;fishing waters, asset forth.in an.agreement adopted by the Wildlife . .
Resources Commission and the Department.of Conservation and Development.
filed with the Secretary of State;entitled.'Boundary,Lines, North
Carolina Commercial Fishing--Inland•Fishing Waters, revised March 1,
1965,111 or as:.it may be subsequently revised by the Legislature.
Public trust areas are.defined through the CAMA Planning Guide-
lines as "A11'waters of'the Atlaatic Ocean and the lands 'thereunder'
from the mean high water,'mark to the. seaward, limit of State`juris�
diction; all natural bodies -of water.subject to measurable lunar tides
and -lands thereunder to the mean high water mark; all navigable natural
bodies of water and lands thereunder to the mean -or ordinary, high. water
mark.as the case may be, except privately owned lakes having.no public .0
access; all waters in artificially created bodies of water in which
exists significant public fishing resources or other public resources,'
which are accessible to the public by navigation from bodies of water' i
in which the public has rights of.navigation; all waters in artificially
created bodies of water in which the public has,acquired. righis.by
prescription, custom, usage, dedication or any other means. In deter-
mining whether the public has acquired rights in artificially.created
bodies of water, the -following factors shall be considered: (1) the
use of the body of water by the public;.(ii) the length of time the •
public has used.the area; (iii) the value of public resources in the
54

M
body of water; (iv) whether the public.resources in.the body of water
are mobile to the extent that they can move into natural.bodies of
water; (v) whether the creation.of the artificial body of water required
permission from the State; and (vi)...the value of the body of water to
the public for navigation from..one public area to another public area.
While estuarine waters. and public trust areas are treated separa-
tely in the State Guidelines, they will be considered as one for the
purpose of -this plan. The distinction drawn between them in.the.guide-
lines is an artificial one and has no basis other than as a political
division between the commercial and sport.fisheres interest._.The._
significance of both areas is identical as are the appropriate land°uses.
The estuarines of any river system afire among the most productive
0
natural ezivironments of North Carolina. They.not only support_ valuable
commercial and sports fisheries, but are also -utilized for commercial
navigation, .-recreation and aesthetic purposes. The high level of
commercial.and'sports fisheries and.the aesthetic appeal of coastal
North Carolina is dependent upon the protection and sustained quality
of our estuarine and river systems.
e. Complex Natural Areas
Complex natural areas are defined,as areas that have..remained
essentially unchanged by human activity. The Planning Board does not
f .
identify any areas in Beaufort County as complex natural areas.
f. Areas Sustaining Remnant Species
Both the American alligator and the red -cockaded woodpecker are
.listed as endangered species in North Carolina, and both.have recently,
recorded occurrence in Beaufort County. No recent sightings of the
55

•
bald eagle or the peregrine falcon are known. The Atlantic sturgeon,
which is considered to be rare, and the short -nosed sturgeon which is
classed as.endangered possibly occur in the Pamlico River.
g. Areas Containing Unique -Geological Formations
Beaufort County has no areas containing unique geological for-
mation. .
h. 'Registered Natural Landmarks
Beaufort County has no registered natural landmarks.
i. Archaeological and Historic Sites
Forty-eight archaeological or historic sites have been identified
in Beaufort County. Six of these are registered on the National
Register of Historic Places and as such will.be considered as areas of
environmental concern. The remaining 42 sites possibly have as much
local significance as those listed on the National Register. The
County should encourage that these historic sites be retained and
i.
that adjacent development be compatible with the sites. Map S;locates
the historicsiteswhich are listed on Table 13.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
56 •

71
Ln
rn
i

Table 13 " " ......
" ' " ' ..' ....IN<rENTORY 'OF 'HISTORIC 'AREAS
BEAUFORT
COUNTY
Map No.
or
Letter
Name
Type of Area
Location
Description
Present Use
1
Archbell Point
Historic
Bath
Location of Seca on
Texasgulf, Inc.
Site
(Aboriginal)
John White's map
Horse Farm
(Private)
2
Back Creek Site
Pre -historic
Bath
Midden layer has been located
Private farm
(Aboriginal)
3
Bath Creek Site
Pre -historic
Bath
Sherds and flint fragments
Private farm
(Aboriginal)
have been located
4
Bath Historic
Historic
Bath
In 1705 Bath became the first
Town
District
(Commercial-
incorporated town in N. C.
(Entered in
Political)
Cary's Rebellion (1708-1711)
National Reg -
took place in the vicinity.
aster of
In 1744 and 1752, Colonial
istH'�oric
Assembly met here; and three
laces
colonial governors made their
homes in Bath. The town con-
tains St. Thomas Church
(ca. 1734), the oldest church
building in the state. Other
old homes include the Palmer -
Marsh House (ca.1750) and the
Van Der Veer House (ca.1790).

Ln
o�
n
Table
13,;:(Continued).................. INVENTORY"OF HISTORIC"AREAS"....
BEEAUFORT COUNTY
Map No.
or
Letter
" Name' " '
e of"Area
I:ocation.
.......... Description
Present Use
5
Beaufort County
Historic
Washington
Constructed in 1786 when the
Courthouse
Courthouse
(Architectural)
county seat was moved from
(Entered in
Bath to Washington, this court-
NationaliRe is-
house has been continuously
used for its original purpose.
ter o 1storic
PI_ac_esT_Present
structure built in
1913 in Neo-Classical style.
6 _
Blounts Creek
Pre -Historic
Chocowinity
Potsherds found together with
Private homes
Site
(Aboriginal)
a shallow humus
7
Bonner House
Historic =
sath,
Ca.1835, two-story frame house
Restored by
(Entered in
(Architectural)
"'
with exterior and interior
Historic Bath
National"Regis-
chimneys, one-story veranda,
Commission $
and a number of outbuildings.
Oscar Smith
ter o istoric
aces
Lots originally owned by John
Foundation
Lawson. Part of Lawson House
foundation still present.
8
Broad Creek
Pre -Historic
Long Acre
Shreds have been located
Salvation Army
Site
(Aboriginal)
Cft-"*Site
9
Buzzard Hotel
Historic
Bath
Circa 1850-1860. Operated as
Private
(Commercial) .
an ordinary inn.
residence
10
Carrow House
Historic
Bath
Late 18th Century. One-story
Private home
(Architectural)
frame house with a shed porch.

•table
13 (continued) ... ......... INVENTORY 'OF 'HISTORIC
AREAS ' ' BEAUFORT COUNTY
Map No.
or
Letter
Name
Type of Area
'Location
Description
Present Use
11
Chocowinity
Pre -Historic
Chocowinity
Site of an Indian village or
Private
Site
(Aboriginal)
dwelling area
12
Core Point
Historic
Richland
John Lawson, first Survey-
Private homes and
Site
(Aboriginal)
General of North Carolina,
summer homes
located the Core Indians
....
...I........
................
at this site.
13
Fort Hill
Historic
Chocowinity
Circa 1860. Site of-
Private homes
Site
Confederate batteries on
Pamlico River used irit;iiege
of Washington, North Carolina,
in 1863.
14
Fort Hill
Pre -Historic
Chocowinity
Site of an Indian village
Private homes
Site
(Aboriginal)
is
Glebe House
Historic
Bath
1762, two-story frame house
Rectory
(Architectural,
with fanlights in the gable
Religious)
ends. Built to serve as the
rectory for St. Thomas
Episcopal Church.
16
Graveyard
Pre -Historic
Pantego
Site of an Indian village
Private farm
Point Site
(Aboriginal)
17
Gum Point
Pre -Historic
Bath
Aboriginal materials found
Private farm
Site
(Aboriginal)

En
rn
rn
Table 13 ' (Continued) . . . ..." " " ' INVENTORY 'OF 'HISTORIC AREAS
AEAI IFORT COT I i'Y
Map No.
or
Letter
Name
a 'of 'Area
Location'-
`.._ Description
Present Use
18'
Handy's Point
Historic
Bath
Site of Secoitan village
Private homes
Site
(Aboriginal)
19
Hassell Site
Pre -Historic
Bath
Sherds have been located
Private farm
..............................
(Aboriginal)
......
20
Haven Warehouse
Historic
Washington
Ca.1776. One of the four
Private storage
and Fowle Ware-
(Commercial-.
original warehouses built in
area
house
Military)
Washington to handle the West
Indies trade. Used as a
quartermaster depot and
_
Confederate and Union prisons
during the Civil War
21
Hunter's Bridge
Pre -Historic
Bath
Evidence of Indian village
Private farm
Site
(Aboriginal)
22
Jarvis Site
Pre -Historic
Richland
A small midden has been
Private homes
(Aboriginal)
located.
23
Kirby Grange
Historic,
Bath
Early 18th Century. Home of
Private home
Site
(Political)
Christopher Gale, first Chief
and farm
Justice of North Carolina
24
Lawson Shore
Pre -Historic
Bath
Midden materials have been
Private farm
Site
(Aboriginal)
found

Table ' 13
' (Continued) . ' ' ' . ' . ' ' .
' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' INVENTORY 'OE 'HISTORIC 'AREAS
RF.ATIFnRT
rnumw
Map No.
or
Letter
Name
Type'of -Ares.'
.. 'Location..
' .. 'Description
Present Use
25
McGowan Site
Pre -Historic
Bath
Sherds have been located
Private farm
(Aboriginal)
.......................
26
Maul's Point
Pre -Historic
Chocowinity
Possible site of an Indian
Private farm and
Site
(Aboriginal)
village
summer homes
27
Mayo Law
Historic
Washington
No known date
Law office
Office
(Political)
28
Moore's Beach
Pre -Historic
Bath
Midden, marked by black
Summer homes and
Site
(Aboriginal)
htums and shell lenses,
private beach
.......................................
has been located ..
29
Myers House
Historic
Washington.
Ca.1814. Two-story frame
Private
(Architectural)
townhouse on a brick founda-
residence
tion.. Myers and Telfair
Houses are the two oldest
houses extant in Washington
30
Norfleet Site
Historic
Bath
Possible site of Asquatock
Private farm
(Aboriginal)
village

Table 13 ' (Contiriued)
_iOT1.1•nrW
Map No.
or
Letter
Type 'of 'Area "
"Location ' .
' Description
Present Use
31
N.C. National
Historic
Washington
Constructed in 1854, this
Bank
Bank, West End
(Architectural-
fine example of Classic
Branch (Formerly
Commercial).
design is one of the few
known as Bank of
remaining small buildings
Washington, West
in North Carolina built in
End Branch)
the temple -form idiom.
Entered in
National'Re is -
ter o istoric
Places.
32
Palmer -Marsh
Historic
Bath
Built about 1750, the house
Restored and
House. 'National
(Architectural-
is an excellent example of
furnished by
Historic Land-
Commercial)
a two-story townhouse design
Historic Com-
mark, entered in
for both business and resi-
mission. Home
National Regis-
dential use. The east end is
maintained as a
ter o istoric
dominated by two great English
Historic Site,
PI -aces
bond chimneys united by a
N.C. Dept. of
two-story brick pent -roofed
Archives and
closet. House once served as
History
a chandlery.
33
Pamlico Beach
Pre -Historic
Bath
Shell midden located
Private summer
Site
(Aboriginal)
homes and beach
34
Pine Crest
Pre -Historic
Bath
Midden located
Private homes
Site
(Aboriginal)

Ln
rn
x
Table13'(Continued)
INVENTORY
OF 'HISTORIC AREAS BhAU.FUxr CUUNrY
Map No.
or
Letter
Name
e'of'Area -
Location'
Description
Present Use
35
Rest Haven
Pre -Historic
Bath
Midden located
Private summer
Site
(Aboriginal)
homes
36
Rodman Creek
Pre -Historic
Washington
Sherds and shells
Private land,
Site
(Aboriginal)
located
woodland
37
St. Thomas
Historic
Bath
1734-1740. St. Thomas
Worship
Episcopal
(Religious)
Parish was organized in
Church
1701, and services were
(Entered in
being held in St. Thomas
National Re is-
Church by 1739, making it
ter of Historic
the oldest building still
71acesT
standing in North Carolina.
It has been the scene of
religious services for over
230 years. Originally,
Church of England.
38
Service Camp
Pre -Historic
Long Acre
Sherds located
Summer camp for
Site
(Aboriginal)
retarded children
39
Shell Landing
Pre -Historic
Richland
Possible site of a village.
Private farm
Site
(Aboriginal)
40
Sparrow's Point
Pre -Historic
Bath
Site of a large Indian
Private farm
Site
(Aboriginal)
village

tn
H
. 'Table '13 ' (Continued? ' " " " " " " " ... 'INVENTORY 'OF HISTORIC AREAS
RRAi1FnRT Cni?NTY
Map No.
or
Letter
'N40 ' .. .
. . e 'of 'Area ....Location
...
........... Descri�tion
Present Use
41
Telfair House
Historic
Washington
Circa 1818. Two-story frame
Private
(Architectural)
townhouse on a brick founda-
residence
tion. Telfair and Myer Houses
are the two oldest houses
extant in Washington
42
Trinity Chapel
Historic
Chocowinity
Originally built in-1773 on a
Worship
(Religious)
site on the east side of the
Washington -Greenville hwy.
(U.S. 264) near present Chapel
Branch. Chapel was moved to
present site in early 20th
Century because of constant
...........................................................
vandalism.
43
Van Der Veer
Historic
Bath
Originally located on property
Being restored by
House
granted.to Thomas Sparrow by
Bath Historic
the Bath Town Commissioners
Commission
in 1706. The gamble -roofed
house changed hands several
times before it was bought by
...................................................
Jacob Van Der Veer in 1824
44
Washington
Historic
Washington
.19th Century large group of
Commerce
Waterfront
(Commercial)
commercial buildings which
reflect port activity

Table ' 13 '
(Coritiriiiedl ' ' ' ' ' . ' ' ' ' '
' ' ' ' ' ' INVENTORY 'OF 'HISTORIC 'AREAS
REAi1FORT
COTINW
Ln
IT
Map No.
or
Letter
Name
e.of Area.
.'Location...
Description
Present Use
45
Whalen Site
Pre -Historic
Bath
Possible Indian village site
Private farm
(Aboriginal)
46
Woodlawn
Historic
Washington'
Early 18th Century.
Private
Originally faced Hackney. Ave.
residence
Later moved to West Main St.
and remodeled
47
Woodstock,
Historic
Bath
Incorporated in 1738.
Private farm
Townsite of
(Commercial-
The remains of the town
Political)
of Woodstock
48
Wooland Site
Pre -Historic
Chocowinity
Site of a large Indian
Private farm
(Aboriginal)
village area

r,
u
3. Areas with Resource Potential
The County has large acreages of prime agricultural land, forest
land (much of which is publically owned) , park and wildlife land, and
areas underlain with phosphate minerals. All of these resources should
be used for their most desirable purpose, for productivity and economic
gain, or for conservation and recreation.
a. Agricultural Lands
The highly organic soils and much of the 'mineral soils are highly
productive when drained and managed correctly. Much of the forest land
is cropped on well organized bases yielding high quality pulp and saw
timber. The cleared and drained areas are some of the state's most
productive grain, fodder, potatoes, and tobacco lands. For the purpose
of identifying the prince agricultural lands, more detailed soils.maps
are needed for re-evaluation of the forest lands whereby taxes will be
levied on.the potential of the land to grow timber.
b. Mineral Resources
Much of the county is underlain by phosphate bearing sediments.
and some heavy minerals. The limits of the phosphate sediments are
well-known and are found to be feather edged at about Blounts Bay on
N-S strike and extend continuously beneath land and rivers on a gently
dipping and thickening trend eastward to some unknown distance beneath
or beyond Pamlico County (see Map 6)...The phosphate content of the
sediments vary widely in thickness and in grade. The total tonnage of
phosphate bearing material is estimated in several billions of tons.
However, the material that is deemed recoverable by current technology �.
as ore (material that can be extracted and processed profitably) is
57

•
. 4
1
S ry +4 `tF:� Y
\•
BEAUFORT" COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA ��•� x
3
PHOSPHATE DEPOSITS
—]
PHOSPHATE DEPOSITS (MINABLE BY
OPEN PIT) r<
®
PHOSPHATE DEPOSITS (NOT MINABLE
BY OPEN PITS)'a,r,
Map 6
lWMAY'll
:��✓VMO
MAY 1.976

estimated at over l billion tons. With changes in the fertilizer values
and technological developments, these ore tonnages can vary greatly.
With the rapid.aepletion of the Florida phosphate reserves, it.is ex-
pected that much of the thinner and lower grade `sections and.deeper
buried material will be feasibly classified as'ore in the.not too dis-
tant future, thus, it is not cognizant to establish fined boundaries
to this ore deposit for the.purpose of extraction.
Large tracts_of potentially recoverable phosphate reserves are
owned by.Texasgulf, North Carolina Phosphate, FMC, and Weyerhaeuser.
Also, 10,000 acres of state owned land in the Pamlico estuary are under
•
lease for potential extraction.. Open case mining is'currently being
employed to -recover thick high grade ore in the Lee Creek area.
Expansions of operating plants and other developments are underway.
Hydraulic mining thru bore Boles has been tested and plans -to develop
some deeper high grade ores in the Pungo River -Pamlico River peninsula
area are underway.
Mining and reclamation regulations involved with ore extraction
are under the auspices ---.of the Department of Natural and -Economic Resources
of North Carolina as set outin the Mining Act of 1971. The agency is
amply staffed with competent,professionals.to regulate the operations.
c. :publicly --Owned Lands and Other Non -Intensive Outdoor Recreation Lands
.Goose Creek State Park.is being developed along Upper Goose Creek
•
in Long Acre Township. The site is intended to provide: (1) an area of
unique value; (2) recreational use of natural resources; (3) portrayal
and interpretation of plant and animal life and natural features; and
(4) preservation of.a natural area of state importance.
•
58

d. Privately -Owned -Wildlife Sanctuaries
The only privately -owned wildlife sanctuaries in Beaufort County
are those lands contained in, -the Goose Creek Wildlife Refuge that border
on Lower Goose Creek.
•
B. CAPACITY OF COMMUNITY FACILITIES
1. Identification, Design Capacity and Utilization of Existing Water and
Sewer Service •
Town of Washington Park
The Town of Washington Park abuts the southeastern municipal
limits of the City of Washington. The residents rely on individual
wells for water. The proximity of individual septic tanks and shallow
wells increases the chances of utilizing contaminated water.
Town of Chocowinity
The Chocowinity water system is supplied by"one deep well, capable
of producing 150 gallons per minute. A 75,000 gallon elevated storage
tank supplies a distribution`'system of eight and six inch mains. The
town is presently in need of an additional well and additional storage.
Town of Bath
The Town of Bath, in conjunction with the Farmers Home Adminis-
tration, recently started construction of a central water system. The
system will consist of two deep wells treatment facilities•, 50,000
gallons of elevated storage, and a distribution system consisting of -
six, four, three, and two inch mains.
•
•
•
59 0

Town of Pantego
r
The Town of Pantego presently does not have a municipal water
system. A study was made to determine the feasibility of.installing a
small groundwater system, for ,the town, but to date funding has not been
acquired..
The cities of Washington, Belhaven, and Aurora have water and
sewer services. For a complete discussion of those systems, see the
individual town plans.
2. Identification; Design Capacity and Utilization of Existing Schools
• Education
There are two public school systems serving the primary and secondary
educational needs of Beaufort County. These are the Washington City Schools,
which serve all of Washington Township and the portion of Long Acre Town-
ship west of Broad Creek., and the Beaufort County Board of Education, which
serves all of the county outside the Washington City School district.
• The Washington City Schools operate five schools within their system.
All of the schools..are located in the City of Washington. A brief des-
cription of each.school follows.
• a. Eastern Elementary.School is located on the corner of.'Highway 264 and
Hudnell Street. The original building was built in 1966.• Classrooms
were added in 1969 and 1975. The condition of the present facility
• is good. A new roof will be added in the near future. The present
facility is filled in excess of capacity with 946 pupils.. There are
38 teachers assigned to this school. Kindergarten, first and second
• grades are housed in this facility.
• 60

b. John C. Tayloe School is located on Tarboro Street extension.
The original building was built in 1960. Additions were made in
1964, 1970 and 1975. The.condition of this building is good.
The present facility is filled to capacity with 551 third and
fourth grade pupils. There are 29 teachers assigned to this school.
c. John H. Small -School is located -on Fourth Street between Harvey
and Bonner Streets. It:was built in 1922. An addition was made •
in 1958. The condition of this facility is poor. The building
and grounds are inadequate. It is presently filled with 611 fifth
and sixth graders. Additional classroom space will probably.come •
from renovation of the auditorium. Plans have not been made, but
this building will have'to be replaced in the not too distant
future. Twenty-nine teachers are assigned to this school. •
d. P. S. Johes.Junior High School.is located on Seventh and Ninth
Streets between Pierce and Bridge Streets. The original building
was constructed in 1922. This portion of the building was reno- •
vated after a fire in the.1950"9.- Primary rooms were added on
this site in 1950. A.cafeteria was added in 1951. The present
ninth grade building was completed in 1952. Other additions •
were .made in 1964 and 1965. The gymnasium was completed.in 1970..
The condition of this facility varies from very poor to good.
The original building (two-story section and auditorium) should •
be replaced. Plans have not been completed for replacement at
this time. The present facility is not crowded. There are
presently 1,109 seventh,.eighth, and ninth grade pupils in this •
school. There is room for some growth. Projections do not
61 41

indicate any large increase in the near future'. There are 46
teachers assigned to this school. Plans to renovate and to expand
the present library are in the making.
e. Washington High School is located on Eighth -and Harvey Streets.
•
The original building was completed in 1952. The auditorium was
completed in 1955. Eight classrooms were added in 1965. "Nissen
huts" are used for.agriculture and carpentry shops. The condition
of the facility'is fair. There are now 884 tenth, eleventh, and
twelfth graders. The present facility could accommodate about
950 students. Plans are presently being formulated for the con-
struction of a Vocational Education Building and for the. expansion
of the library. There are 48 teachers assigned to this schools
A special $.08 tax is levied.in the Washington school district. This,
•
combinbd with local, state and federal sources, allows the system an expenditure
of $835 per pupil for the 1973774 school year. This is $61.18 higher per pupil
expenditure than the county school..systemo
•
An average of 55 percent of the 1970 graduates from the Washington City
school system have.continued their.education after graduation.
The Beaufort County Board of Education operates ten schools.throughout
•
the county. A brief description of the schools follows.
a. Aurora High School, Aurora, was constructed in 1928 with additions
in 1954, 1966, and 1972, The Board of Education has determined
that the school is in need Of replacement. The present facilities,
can handle 600 students with-460 presently attending.. Twenty-two
teachers are assigned to the school.
•
0 62

•
b. Bath High School, Bath, was constructed in 1920 with additions in
1938, 1943, 1948, 1953, 1967, 1972,, 1974 and 1975. The Board of •
Education has determined that.this building needs replacing. The
present facilities are capable of handling 850 students with 718
presently attending. Thirty-four teachers are presently assigned
to the school, teaching grades kindergarten through 12.
c. Beaufort County Elementary School., Pantego, was constructed in 1923
with additions in 1956, 1974, and 1975. The condition: is rated as •
good. The present facilities are capable of handling 600 students
with 309 students presently attending.
d. Belhaven Elementary School, Belhaven, was constructed -in 1950 with
additions in•1953, 1974 and 1975. The condition of the buildings
is rated as good. The present facilities are capable of handling
600 students with 490 presently attending. There are 23 teachers •
assigned to the school.
e. Chocowinity Primary School, Chocowinity, was constructed.in 1952 with
additions in 1974 and 1975. Condition of the buildings is rated good •
to new. The facilities are designed to handle 360 students with
204 presently attending. Nine teachers are assigned to the school.
f. Chocowinity High School, Chocowinity, was constructed in 1937 with •
additions in 1949, 1952, 1964 and 1967. The condition of the building
is rated as good. The facility.is designed for 900 students with
838 students,presently attending. Thirty-five teachers are assigned
to the school.
•
63

G
g. John A. Wilkinson High School, Belhaven, was constructed in 1938 with
additions in 1951, 1953, 1961, 1965 and 1968. Condition of the facili-
ties is rated as fair to good. The facility is designed to.handle 700
students with 475 presently attending. Twenty-four teachers are present-
ly assigned to the school.
h. Pantego High School, Pantego, was constructed in 1924 with additions
in 1939, 1952, 1963., 1972, 1974.and 1975. The Board of Education has
determined that the facility needs replacing. The facility is capable
of handling 540 students with 264 presently attending. Sixteen teachers
.are presently assigned to the.school.
•
L. Pinetown Elementary School,.Pinetown, was constructed in 1937 and 1950.
The condition of the facility is rated as good. It is capable of hand-
ling 240 students with 183 presently attending. Nine teachers are
•
assigned to the school.
j.' S. W. Snowden Elementary School, Aurora, was built.in 1938 with addi-
tions in 1955, 1964 and 1966.. The condition of the facility is rated
as good. The facility can handle 720 students with 611 presently at-
tending. Twenty-eight teachers are presently assigned to the school.
The expenditure per student in the Beaufort County school.system is $773.82.
In addition to the above public educational institutions, primary and secon-'-
dary education is provided by three private institutions, Pamlico Community School
in Washington Park, the Pungo Christian Academy in Belhaven and.Terra Ceia
Christian School in Pantego.
Post -secondary education is offered by Beaufort Technical Institute. The `
present facilities at the technical institute are overcrowded. A bond referendum
to construct additional facilities was held during the spring.of 1975 but was
defeated.
0 64

3. . Identification, Design Capacity and Utilization of Primary Roads
Beaufort County's primary roads consist of U.S. 17, running north -
south in the western portion of.the county; U.S. 264, running east -west
on the north side of the Pamlico River from Hyde County to Pitt County;
N.C. 33, running east -west on the south side of the Pamlico River; N.C.
306, running from N.C. 33 west of Aurora, south; N.C. 92 running from
264 to Bath and rejoining U.S. 264 at Belhaven; N.C. 32, running north
from.U.S. 264 to Plymouth; and N.C. 99 running from Pantego to N.C. 32.
In order to determine capacity, the peak 24 hour traffic flow is
compared to design capacity. Those peak traffic counts are only for
areas in county jurisdiction.
Table 14 examines percentage utilizations.
TABLE 14 _
Utilization of Primary Roads
Beaufort County, 1974
Road Design Capacity Max. 24 hr. County Percent Utilization
U.S. 17. 109920 6,900 63.2
U.S. 264 103%920 7,400 67.80
N.C. 32 10,920 1,600 14.6%
N.C. 33 10,920 4,000 36.6%
N.C. 99 7,200 1,400 19.4%
N.C. 92 7,200 1,500 20.8%
65

•
A POPULATION ECONOMY
1. Population
Accurately estimating future population figures is recognized as an almost
impossible task, yet it is recognized that it is essential to attempt such esti-
mates in order to plan for future development.' Providing services, such as
schools, water and sewer require that local government make some estimate of
the demand that -might be placed on these services,
The population projections used in this study were prepared by Freeman
and Associates in their study, Region Q Water Management Plan. These projections
show Beaufort County gaining population. These projections seem most reasonable
in light of (1) the anticipated expansion of phosphate mining in the county, and
(2) an estimated.population of 37,000 on July 1, 1974 by the U. S. Department of
Commerce. The following figure charts the projected populations to the year
2020.
Table 15 breaks the population projection'for'19.7.0-2000-'down-by townships.
These township projections were prepared by the North Carolina Department of
Natural and Economic Resources. Table 16 gives the projected municipal popula-
tions for 1970-2020.
Beaufort County is projected to increase population by 1,460 from 1975 to
1985.
The above population projections are consistent with the desires of the citi-
zens of Beaufort County. The people of.the county desired a moderate pattern of
growth, which is .reflected in the population projections.
The capability of the land and water to sustain the above projected popula-
tion is largely defined.by the means used to dispose of sewage. Beaufort County
67

•
has an abundant supply of ground water and water supply provides no constraints'
to growth.
If the projected population is accommodated in dwellings utilizing septic
tanks, it is conceivable. that the projected population could exceed the capacity
of the land and water to sustain it. In the coastal area the detrimental i
effects of sewage disposal on ground and surface water resources represent an
important example of physical limitations of -development. After the density
is reached which the land can effectively assimilate in its natural state, then
any increased development results in a diminution of the quality of ground and
surface waters.' Up to a certain point, which varies depending on the species,
this diminution in.water quality can be tolerated by marine organisms which •
dwell in the surface waters. Also, up to a certain point, the diminution in sur-
face and ground waters can be tolerated by humans. However, after one of these
threshold "toleration" points..is•reached, the waters become unusable or unaccept •
t
able for use by marine organisms and humans. Beyond such a threshold a different
order of public investment is. needed to prevent degradation. Thus upon approach-
ing these thresholds, and there are no easily determinable indices by which these •
thresholds can be established, certain planning decisions need to be made.
Basically these decisions.involve determining whether to limit further increases
in density, to put money and energy into the system to provide alternative
methods of waste disposal, or to tolerate the diminution in water quality as
an acceptable "cost" of.further development. If neither one of the first two
•
choices is made, then the thir& alternative is chosen by default. It is clear •
that at some point density must be regulated or water quality will diminish.
It is not.possible.to choose both alternatives without expending money and
energy on alternative solutions,to the problem.. •
::
0

1
FIGURE .1
1•
PROJECTED POPULATION
BEAUFORT COUNTY
1970-2020
- 4%200
�500
CFO, 00 37, 900 =', 000
400
30,000
20,000
i
10,000
lg,10 1gffo .igzo 2a-00 -2o
•

•
TABLE 15
•
•
•
w
•
PROJECTED TOWNSHIP POPULATION
Beaufort County
1970-2000
1970
1980
.1990
2000
Beaufort County
35,980
37,400
38,900
41,.000
Bath Township
3,237
2,993
2,837
2,712
Chocowinity Township
4,661
.4,854
5,050
5,300.
Long Acre Township
6,976
7,686
8,_930
10,457
Pantego Township
5,126
5,043
4,958
4,916
Richland Township
3,626
3,185
2,966
2,786
Washington Township
12,354
13,637
14,159
14,829
• 70

TABLE 16 PROJECTED POPULATION
Ymnicipalities of Beaufort County
1970-2020
1970'
1980
1990
2000
2010
2020
Beaufort County
35,980
37,400
38,900
41,000
44,500
49,200 .
Aurora
620
726
850
995
1,190
1,380
Bath
231
135
83
51
32
20
Belhaven
2,259
2,134
2,113
2,031-
Chocowinity
566.
532
509
490
475
462
Pantego
218
172
139
114
94
77
Washington
.8,961
9,528
9,947
104117
11,125
12,300.
Washington Park
51.7
356
268
204
156
120
SOURCE: Region Q Water. Resource Nbna ement, 1975, except for Aurora and
Belhaven which were prepared by to town planners.
71

Since it is unknown at what density and where the projected population
• will be accommodated and to what extent means other than septic tanks will be
used for sewage disposal, it is impossible to determine the exact'capacity-
of the land and water to sustain population growth. During the implementation,
• of this plan, it will be necessary to constantly monitor the impact of new
w
development on the ­land and water.
Seasonal population has not traditionally played a major role in Beaufort
• - County.- It is anticipated that theamountof'seasonal population will increase
in the future;,drawn:to.the amenities offered here. The major impacts this
will.have locally are-1) an increase in service related activities and 2) in-
-creased demands made on selected local governmental services such as solid
waste caisposai .
2. Economy
• In order to make decisions for the future, it is necessary to understand
forces at work in our national economy which will influence Beaufort County.
What follows -is a -look at these forces.
There recently has emerged a national recognition that resources are
limited. The•impact of_this is just making itselffelt on the. -national economy.
The resulting competition for limited resources will have a largely positive
impact on Beaufort County.
The local economy is dependent to a large extent on resource extraction.
Forestry, agriculture and mining provide resources for which there is increasing
competition. The planned expansion of phosphate mining was triggered by an in-
creased demand for fertilizer to aid in the production of world food suppliers.
In addition, other major deposits of phosphate in the U. S. are being depleted,
0 giving added importance to.Beaufort County.
- 72

•
The long range prospect for the county's resource extraction businesses,
such as forestry, agriculture and mining .is good. Beaufort County remains •
rich in natural resources which -will bring an increasingly higher price in
the market place.
Agriculture has played a dominant role in Beaufort County, but that role
is changing. With changes in agricultural practices, mainly mechanization,
the number=of workers needed,in agriculture has been reduced. There are in-
dications that the impact of mechanization has leveled off. In the future
there should be fewer jobs lost to mechanization, but it is likely that the
'remaining jobs will demand a higher level of training and skills.
The major negative impact from the increased competition for natural
resources will be in the area of higher energy cost, particularly gasoline.
Most workers not employed in agriculture are dependent upon the private auto-
mobile to transport them from place of residence to place of work. Many
workers commute to work as much as 30 miles one way each day. These workers
will come under increasing pressure to.locate closer to where they work or
find an alternate means of transportation.
An additional negative impact will result from the increased competition
for natural resources. As this competition increases, agricultural and
forestry land will be displaced by urban uses,_mining and recreational develop-
ment. The county will.have to take steps to ensure that prime agricultural
land is not displaced by competing land uses.
•
B. FUTURE LAND NEEDS
The North Carolina Coastal Area Management Act Guidelines direct that a
gross ten year estimate of land needs be allocated to the appropriate land
classes. Ii doing this, the estimated population growth is allocated to the
73 !

•
Transition, Community and Rural classes of the Land Classification System. This
• system is explained in detail in Part Three of this plan.
Beaufort County's projected population increase from 1975 to 1985 is
1,460.. Some of this population will locate in rural areas, but the majority
• will locate in the areas classed Community, especially the area east of Wash-
ington. The only areas likely to be transitional are those immediately adjacent
to Washington. The City of Washington plans to annex adjacent areas in the
• future. These are classed Transitional.
C. CONYMITY FACILITIES .DERW
* 1. Ten -Year PopulationIncrease
As discussed in the previous section, Beaufort County's population is
expected to increase.by 1,460 between 1975 and 1985. Most of this increase is
• expected to be absorbed in the area east of Washington.
2. Services Needed:to.Accommodate Projected Population
What type of services will be required to accommodate the projected popula-
tion increase? What will they cost? Of the major services discussed previous-
ly (water and sewer, school and roads), the school system will be the most
severely affected. The facilities'of the Washington City School System are
already overloaded in some cases. The majority of the population increase is
anticipated to locate in the area served by the Washington City Schools. This.
will further tax this system and necessitate constructing additional facilities'.
The Washington Chamber of Commerce has recently completed a study of all the
schools in Beaufort County and estimates that a total of $12 million of
• improvements are needed..
0 1 74

Two 1201' studies are being conducted in Beaufort County at this time.
These studies will evaluate the wastewater treatment needs of the two study r
areas. While this study is not complete, it is anticipated that a need will
be demonstrated to extend sewer service outside to Washington to Washington
Park, Chocowinity and certain growth areas east of Washington. If these facili-
ties are provided, then the expected population increase in the area could be
accommodated utilizing federal money from the 1201'' Program.
The other 1201' study area is Belhaven-Panteo and surrounding area. It
is anticipated that the study will recommend that the Belhaven sewage treatment
plant be upgraded to accommodate seasonal demands.
Upgrading of this system should accommodate any anticipated increases in
population.
Due to the ease with which potable water is obtainable in Beaufort County,
it is not anticipated that water supply will become a factor in accommodating
population increases.
The present road systems are capable of accommodating anticipated popula-
tion increase.
3. Ability of Local Economy to Finance Service Extension
A local government's ability to provide services to its citizens is limit- •
ed by the amount of revenues it can raise. Local governments in North Carolina
depend basically on four sources of revenue. An important share comes from
grants from the State and Federal government. While these are important.sources
of revenue, local government has limited control over how much money they will
receive and how it will be spent.
A second source.of funding is local property taxation. Beaufort County has `
a higher per capita appraised value of taxable property than the state average.
75

M
This reflects the high"capital investment involved in mining operation. Expan-
sion of mining in Beaufort County will mean an even higher per. capita value for
taxable property. The county presently has the lowest effective tax rate in
Region Q. Increased capital investment in the county will allow county govern
• ment to either lower taxes,or raise the level of services offered.
A relatively new source of income for local governments in North Carolina
is the local sales tax. The county's per capita retail: sales of $2,033_is
higher than Region Q's and near the state level. This relatively high level
of retail sales makes the local sales tax an important source of revenue for
county government.
M Other revenues are collected from miscellaneous sources- such as. ABC
revenues, licenses and fees. Table 17 looks at county and municipal tax and
debt data.
•
•
•
•
'• 76

TABLE 17 COUNTY AND. MUNICIPAL 'REVENiJE: AND '.DEBT DATAI/
Beaufort County
Local
Government
Appraised.
Value
Per Capita
Appraised
Value
Total All
Revenues
Tax
Rate-
Bonds
Outstanding
Per Capita
Debt.
Beaufort County
$349,697,283
$ 9,719.21
$2,913,509.00
$.62
$3,220,000
$-89.20
Aurorae
3,833,361:
6,182.84
96,060.31
.62
177,5001/
286.29
Bath
1,023,923
44432.57
8041.27
.32
70,000
304.35
Belhaven
10,197,656
4,514.23
763,292.50
.52
503,000
221.58
Chocowinity
6,541,812
11,510.27
39,587.15
.30
140,600
246.67
Pantego
1,294,035
5,935.94
17,295,94
.32
-0-
-0-
Washington
63061,819
7,082.00
5003,313,02
.68
1,672,000
185.98
Washington. Park
4,573,158
8,845.57
34,029.46
.45
-0-
-0-
County data is for 1975-75. Municipal data is for 1973-74.
-2/Bond anticipation rates.
SOURCE: North Carolina Local Government Commission and local governments.
Computation by North Carolina Department of Natural and Economic
Resources.

•
The Land Classification map which is included in this document depicts
a desirable future land use pattern for Beaufort County consistent -with the
goals outlined in this plan. The map.represents a generalized overview of
desirable land development patterns over the next ten years and should be
used as an aide to decision making regarding location of -public facilities,
economic development activities, adoption of land use regulations and other
decisions which affect development activities in the county.
•
Conceptually, the map depicts the area around Washington as being the
major developed area in the county. The eastern portion of the county is
depicted as a resource extraction area with the principal activities being
agriculture, forestry, and mining. The incorporated areas of Aurora, Bath,
Belhaven and Pantego would serve as service.centers for the resource extrac-
tion area.
•
The land classification map depicts the above by classifying all of the
land in the county into six classes of which five are part of the. North
Carolina Land Classification System and a sixth class, Secondary Transition
•
has been added to meet development needs in Beaufort County.
As a statement of local policy consistent with statewide needs and goals,
the county land classification map will serve as a basic tool for coordinating
numerous policies,.standards, regulations and other governmental activities
•
at the local, State.and Federal level.
The system also.provides a guide for public investment in land. For
example, State and local governments can anticipate the need for early acqui-
sition of lands., -and easements in the Transition class for schools, recreation.,
transportation and other.public facilities.
0 79

•
The system can also provide.a useful framework for budgeting and -plan-
ning for the construction of community facilities such as water and sewer
systems, schools and roads. The resources of many state and federal agencies,
as well as those of the local government which are used for such facilities,
•
can then be more efficiently allocated.
In addition, such a system will aid in better coordination of regulatory
policies and decisions. Conservation and rural production lands will help
to focus the attention of state and local agencies and interests concerned •
with the valuable natural resources of the state. On the other hand, lands
in the Transition and Community classes will be of special concern to those
•
agencies and interests who work for high quality development through local
land use controls such as zoning and subdivision regulations.
Finally, the system can help to provide guidance for a more equitable
•
distribution of the land tax burden. Private lands which are in the Rural
and Conservation.classes should have low taxes to reflect the policy that
few, if any, public services will be provided to these lands. In contrast,
lands in the Transition and Secondary'Transition classes should be taxed to
pay for the large.cost of new public services which will be required to
support the density of growth anticipated.
•
THE SIX CLASSES
DEVELOPED .
Purpose: The Developed Class identifies developed lands which are -presently •
provided with essential public services. Consequently, it is distinguished
from areas where.significant growth and/or new service requirements will
occur. .Continued development and redevelopment should be encouraged to pro- •
vide for the orderly growth in the area.
80 0

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Description: Developed lands.are areas within a minimum gross population
density of.2,000:people per square mile. At a minimum, these.lands contain
existing public services including water and sewer systems, educational
systems, and road.systems--all of which are able to support the present popu-
lation and its accompanying land uses including commercial, industrial and
institutional.
TRANSITION
Purpose: The Transition class identifies lands where moderate to.high den-
sity growth is to be encouraged and where any growth that is permitted by
local regulation will be provided with the necessary public services.
Description: The area to be designated as Transition must be no greater than
that required.to accommodate the estimated county pdpulation growth at a
minimum gross density of 2,000 people per square mile. For example, if the
population increase for the following ten year period is projected to be
10,000 people, and it is planned that 8,000 of them will be accommodated in
the Transition area, then no more than four square miles of -transition area
should be shown. _In -addition, the minimum services which will'be required
are the necessary water and sewer facilities,.educational services, and roads.
Consideration must be given to the.cost of public services in the Transition
area. Each local government is encouraged to estimate the approximate cost
of providing public services where they do not already exist.
Lands to be classified Transition should be considered in the following
.order:
1) First priority.is for lands which presently have a gross population
.density of more than 2,000 people per square mule, but do not
0
IM

qualify as Developed -because they lack the necessary minimum.public
services. These areas may not be expected to accommodate additional
population, but they will require funds for services to avoid public
health and safety problems.
2) Second_ priority is for lands that have all the necessary public
services in place, but which lack the minimum gross population.
density of 2,000 people per square mile needed to qualify the area
as Developed. These areas therefore have not utilized the capacity -
of the existing services:
3) Additional lands necessary to accommodate the remainder of the
estimated Transition growth for the ten year planning period..
In choosing lands for the Transition class, such lands should not -in-
clude: _
1) Areas with severe physical limitations for development with
public services.
2) Lands which meet the definition of.the Conservation class.
3) Lands of special value such as the following unless no other
reasonable alternative exists:
a) Productive and unique agricultural lands;
b) Productive forest lands;
c)_Potentially valuable mineral deposits;
d) Potential aquifers and key parts of water supply watersheds;
e) Scenic and tourist resources;
f) Habitat for economically valuable wildlife.species;'
g) Flood fringe lands;
h) Open coast flood hazard areas, exclusive of -ocean erosive areas;
i) Estuarine flood hazard areas, exclusive of estuarine erosive areas.
82

SECONDARY TRANSITION
• Purpose: The Secondary Transition class identifies lands where moderate den-
sity growth is to be encouraged. It would be desirable.to provide these
areas with necessary public services such as water.and sewer, but the local
government made no commitment to provide their services during the ten year
planning period.
Description: The area designated as Secondary Transition shall be those
lands where development exists and is anticipated to accommodate further
development during.the planning period. These lands shall be suitable for
development as stipulated in the Transition class. While local government
• anticipates development in these areas, it makes no commitment to.provide
services during the planning period. If the local government is able to
provide services beyond the Transition areas, then the secondary areas will
be provided the additional services.
COMMUNITY
• Purpose: The Community, class identifies existing and new clusters. of low
density development not requiring major.public services.
Description:
• 1) The Community class includes 'existing clusters of one or more
land uses such as a rural residential subdivision or a church,
school,.general store, industry, etc. (Cluster is defined as a
• number of structures grouped together in association or in physical
proximity - Webster's Dictionary).
2) This class.will provide for all new rural growth when the lot size
is ten acres or less. Such clusters of growth may occur.in new
areas, or within existing community lands.. In choosing lands for
Community growth, such lands should not include:
• 83

(a) Areas withseverephysical limitations.for development;
(b) Areas meeting -the definition of the Conservation class;
(c) Lands of special value such as the following unless no
other reasonable alternative exists;
(1) Productive and unique agricultural lands;
(2). Productive forest lands;
(3) Potentially valuable mineral deposits;
•
(4) Potential aquifers and key parts'of water supply
watersheds; .
(5) Scenic and tourist resources;
(6). Habitat for economically yaluable wildlife species;
(7) Flood fringe lands;
(8): Open coast flood hazard areas;
(9) Estuarine flood hazard areas, exclusive'.6f-estuarine.,.
erosive areas..
3)_
New development in the Community Class areas will.be subject to sub -
:division regulations under the Enabling Subdivision Act (G.S. 153A-
330 et. seq..)
4)
In every case, the lot size must be large enough.to safely accommo-
date onsite.sewage disposal and where necessary, water supply so
that no public sewer services will be. required now or in the future.
5)
Limited public services should be provided in the Community class
such as public road access and electric power. .
6)
As a guide for calculating the amount of land necessary to accommo-
date new rural community growth, a gross population density of 640
people per square mile or one person per acre should be used. For
84
•.

example, if 1,000 new people are expected to settle in low density
clusters during the following ten year,period, then roughly 1,000
acres of .land should be allocated for new growth in Community
class areas.
RURAL
Purpose: The Rural class identifies lands for long-term management for -
productive resource.utilization, and where limited public services will'be
provided. Development in such areas should be compatible with resource -
production.
Description:. The Rural class includes all lands not in the Developed,
Transition, Community and Conservation classes.
CONSERVATION
Purpose: The Conservation class identifies land which should be maintained
essentially in its natural state and where very limited or no public services
are provided.
Description: Lands to be placed in the Conservation class are the least
desirable for development because:
1) They are too fragile to withstand development without losing their
natural value and/or
2) They have severe or hazardous limitations to development and/or;
3) Though they are not highly.fragile or hazardous, the natural
resources they represent are too valuable to endanger by development.
Such lands at a minimum should include:
1) Fragile
(a) Wetlands
ER

(b)
Steep slopes and prominent high points
(c)
Frontal -dunes
(d)
Beaches
(e)
Surface waters including
- Lakes and ponds
- Rivers and streams
- Tidal waters below mean high water
(f)
Prime wildlife habitat
(g)
Unique natural areas and historic and archaeological sites
2) Hazard
•
(a)
Floodways
(b)
. Ocean, erosive areas
(c)
Inlet lands
•
(d)
Estuarine erosive areas
3) Other
(a)
Publicly -owned forest, park, and fish and game lands and
other non -intensive outdoor recreation lands
(b)
Privately owned sanctuaries, etc., which are dedicated to
preservation
(c)
Undeveloped key parts of existing water supply watershed
(d)
Potential water impoundment sites
In addition
to the above named types of land, a county'may include
other areas to
be maintained in an essentially natural state which are
needed -'to implement
their stated policy objectives.
86
•

• 87

im
INTRODUCTION
The North Carolina Coastal Area Management Act states that the local
land use plan "shall give special attention to the protection"and appropriate
development of areas of environmental concern" designated by the Coastal
Resources Commission. That.is the purpose of.this part of'the plan.
Those areas of environmental concern which are listed in the."State
Guidelines for Local Planning in the Coastal Area".and occurs in Beaufort
County will*be described, the significance will be discussed, a policy ob-
jective stated and -appropriate land uses -prescribed.
Once the areas of environmental concern (AEC) have been adopted by the
Coastal Resources Commission,then development taking place within an AEC
will require a permit. Major developments must receive their permit from
the State.while minor developments can.be administered their permits.by
local government. However, the identification of AEC's in this document
will not serve.for_.purposes of permit letting..--. This identification is for
planning purposes only.
All maps identifying areas of environmental, concern are general illus-_
tration and not for determining areas requiring permits.
E:�l

DESCRIPTION
An existing state park is defined as existing sites that have been
acquired for use as state parks, as identified by the Secretary of Natural
and Economic Resources.
The only existing state park.in Beaufort County is the Goose Creek
State Park property located around upper Goose Creek in Long Acre Township.
SIGNIFICANCE
Existing state parks are areas containing environmental or natural
resources of more than local significance where uncontrolled or incompatible
development could result in major or irreversible damage to important his
toric, cultural, scientific, or scenic values, or natural systems, or
would be detrimental to the recreational uses of natural systems. These
sites provide: (1) areas, of unique or scenic value: (2) recreational
uses of natural resources; (3) portrayal and interpretation of plant and
.animal life, geology and natural features; and (4) preservation,of scientific
sites and natural areas of statewide importance:
POLICY OBJECTIVE
To protect and preserve the scenic, historic,'cultural, scientific
and natural.values:of state parks.
APPROPRIATE LAND USES.
Land use within the park will be determined by the state. Beaufort
County should ensure that development in areas surrounding the park are
compatible with the park. Emphasis should be placed on entrances to the
park with careful consideration given to sign control and aesthetics.
•
•
•
7
•
►]
•
0

•
HISTORIC PLACES"
DESCRIPTION
Historic places are.defined as -historical, archaeological, and other
places and.properties owned, managed, or assisted by the State of -North
Carolina pursuant to.G.S. 121; and properties.or areas that have been desig-
nated by the.Secretary of the Interior as.National Historic Landmarks.
Specifically these sites are the Palmer -Marsh House, Bath.
SIGNIFICANCE
Historic resources are..both non-renewable and fragile:. They owe their
isignificance to their association with American history, architecture, arch-
aeology and culture. Properties on or approved for the National Register of
Historic Places may be of national,''§tate or local significance.
�! POLICY OBJECTIVE
To protect and/or preserve the integrity"of'districts, sites,'building
and objects in the above categories.
w
APPROPRIATE LAND USES'
Adjacent development should be in keeping with the character of the
historic place. Local government can ensure this by historic zoning, estab-
lishing a historic properties commission ,and careful planning of facilities..
The county and state should encourage the appropriate.municipalities to take
the action necessary to protect these historic sites.
A
0

0
ESTUARINE AND RIVER ERODIBLE AREAS
•
Estuarine and river erodible areas are defined as the area above ordinary
high water where excessive erosion has a high probability of occurring. In
delineating the landward extent of this area a recession.line shall be deter-
mined.
The erodible areas in Beaufort County are found along the'Pamlico and
Pungo Rivers.
SIGNIFICANCE
The estuarine, sound and river erodible areas are natural hazard areas S
especially vulnerable to erosion. Development within this type of AEC is
subjected to the damaging process of erosion unless special development stand-
ards and preventative measures are employed.
POLICY OBJECTIVE
To ensure that development occurring within the 25-year erodibility line A
is compatible with the dynamic nature of the erodible lands thus minimizing
the likelihood of significant loss of property.
APPROPRIATE LAND USE
No development activity shall take place within the area vulnerable to
erosion unless measures are taken to prevent the erosion which have proven
effective in similar situations.
The 25-year erodibility line shall be used in determining setback from
the river or sound in all ordinances and regulations such as subdivision
regulations and health regulations.
A
91

SMALL SURFACE WATER SUPPLIES
DESCRIPTION
Small surface water supplies are defined as relatively small watersheds
or catchment areas which contain streams classified A -I or A -II by the Environ
..mental Management Commission. In Beaufort County this includes the Tranters
Creek Watershed.
SIGNIFICANCE
Small water supply watersheds represent a source of.potable water for a
locality or region. Any. -loss or serious detriment to such an area would have
serious public health implications. Such a loss would also have a significant
adverse financial impact.:
Uncontrolled -development within.the watershed would cause significant
changes in the•runoff patterns and would affect the quantity of water avail-
able as raw water supply. Such development would also adversely affect water
quality by introducinga wide variety of pollutants from homes, businesses, or
industries, either through discharge or surface runoff into the water supply.
POLICY OBJECTIVE
* To insure the continued maintenance of water quality and quantity of the
surface water supply.
APPROPRIATE LAND USE
Development should be stricly controlled in this area. Extra caution
should be taken in designing and placing septic tank nitrification fields to
ensure that streams are not endangered. Discharge into any stream must meet
* water quality standards.
0 92

0
COASTAL MARSHLANDS
DESCRIPTION
Marshes subject to regular or irregular flooding by tides, including
wind -tides (whether.or not the tide waters reach the marshland areas through
natural or artificial watercourses), provided this shall not include hurri-
cane or tropical storm tides. Marshlands shall be those areas upon which
grow some, but not necessarily all, of the following marsh grass species:
Smooth or salt water Cordgrass (Spartina alterniflora); Black Needlerush
(Juncus roemerianus); Glasswort (Salicornia spp.); Salt Grass (Distichlis
S icata); Sea Lavender (Limonium spp.); Bulrush (Scirpus.spp.); Saw Grass
(Cladium Jamaicense); Cat -Tail ( has .); Salt -Meadow Grass (Spartina S
Patens); and Salt Reed Grass (Spartina cynosuroides). Marshlands -are
located along the Pamlico River.and'Pungo River and their tributaries.
•
SIGNIFICANCE
This marshland type also contributes to the detritus supply necessary
to the highly productive estuarine,system essential to North Carolina's
economically valuable commercial and sports fisheries.
The higher marsh types offer quality wildlife and waterfowl.habitat
depending on,the biological.and.physical,conditions..of,the marsh. The -
vegetative diversity in the higher marshes usually supports`,,:a:greater
diversity of wildlife types than the -limited habitat of the low tidal marsh.
This marshland type also serves as an important deterrent to shoreline ero- •
lion especially in those marshes containing heavily rooted species. The
dense system of rhizomes and roots of Juncus roemerianus are highly resis-
_..
tant to erosion. In addition, the higher marshes are effective sediment A
traps.
`93

POT.TrV (1R-T rTTVRC
To give the highest priority to the preservation of low tidal marshland.
APPROPRIATE LAND USES
Appropriateland. uses shall be those consistent. with. the policy objective.
These marshes should be considered unsuitable for all development which will
alter their natural -functions. Inappropriate land uses include, but are not
+ _.:...limited to the following examples: restaurants and businesses; residences,
.............—apartments, motels,hotels,:and-trailer parks; parking lots and offices;
spoil anddunp sites;.wastewater lagoons; public and private roads and
highways; and factories. Examples -of acceptable land uses may include
utility easements, fishing.piers, docks, certain agricultural uses and such
other uses which•do not significantly alter the natural functions of the
M marsh. Agricultural drainage canals and maintenance of such canals shall
be an appropriate land use.
r •
ESTUARINE WATERS AND PUBLIC TRUST AREAS
.DESCRIPTION
Estuarine waters are defined in G.S.113-229 (n)"(2) as, "all the water
of , the Atlantic Ocean within the boundary of North Carolina and all the waters
of the bays, sounds, rivers,.and tributaries thereto seaward:of the dividing
line:between'coastal fishing waters and inland fishing waters, as set forth
i in an agreement adopted by the -Wildlife Resources Commission and the Depart-
ment -of Conservation and Development filed with the Secretary of State en-
�titled 'Boundary Lines, North Carolina Commercial Fishing - Inland Fishing
Waters, revised March 1, 1965,11' or as it may be subsequently revised by the
Legislature.
0 94

M
Public trust areas are defined through the CAMA Planning Guidelines as
"All waters of the Atlantic Ocean and the lands thereunder from the mean
high water mark to the seaward limit of State jurisdiction; all natural
bodies of water subject to measurable lunar tides and lands thereunder to
the mean high water mark; all navigable natural bodies of water and lands
thereunder to the mean or ordinary high water mark as the case may be, except
privately owned lakes having no public access; all waters in artificially
created bodies of water in which exists significant public fishing resources
or.other.public resources, which are accessible to the public by navigation
from bodies of water in which the public has rights of navigation; all
waters in�artificially-created bodies of water in which the public has ac
quired rights by prescription, custom, usage, dedication or any other means.
In determining whether the public has acquired rights in artificially
created bodies of water, the following factors shall be considered: (i)
the use of the body of water by the public; (ii) the length of time the
public has used the area; (iii) the -value of public resources in the body of
.;:water; (iv) whether the public resources in the body of water are mobile to
the extent that they can move into natural bodies of water; (v) whether the
creation of the artificial body of water required permission from the State
and (vi) the value of the body of water to the public for navigation from
one public area to another -public area.
While estuarine waters and.public trust areas are treated separately in
the State Guidelines, they wiil be considered as one for the purpose of this
plan. The distinction drawn between them in the guidelines is an artificial
one>and -has no basisotherthan as a political division between the commercial
and sport fisheries interest. The significance of both areas is identical as
are the appropriate land uses.
•
f
•
u
LI
CI
CA
95 0

•
SIGNIFICANCE
Theestuaries of anyriver system are among the most productive natural
environments of North Carolina. They not only support valuable commercial
and sports fisheries, but are also --utilized for commercial navigation, rec-
reation and aesthetic purposes. The high level of commercial and sports
fisheries and the aesthetic appeal of coastal�North Carolina is dependent
upon the protection and sustained quality of our estuarine and river systems.
POLICY OBJECTIVE
To preserve and manage our estuarine -waters and public trust• areas -so
• as to safeguard and perpetuate their biological, economic and aesthetic values.
APPROPRIATE USES
Appropriate uses shall be consistent with the above policy objective.
•
Highest priority shall be given tothe conservation of estuarine waters and
protection of -public trust'rights. The development of navigation channels,
' the use.of'bulkheads to prevent erosion, and the building of piers or wharfs
are examples of appropriate land use, provided such land uses will not be
detrimental to the biological and physical estuarine function and public
trust waters. Projects which would directly -or --indirectly block -or--impair
existing navigation channels, increase shoreline erosion, deposit spoils
below the mean high tide, cause adverse water circulation pattern, violate
water quality standards, or cause degradation of shellfish waters are gen-
erally considered incompatible with the management of estuarine waters and
public trust areas.
Development control over development occurring in estuarine water or
public trust areas is presently exercised by state or federal government.

Local. government can assist in managing these areas by controlling develop-
ment adjacent to . these areas.: Devices such as setback lines, minim m lot
sizes, septic tank ordinances, flood plain ordinances and sedimentation
control -can be .used to control adjacent development which could impair
estuarine waters or public trust areas.

Dawson, Amos. "Report on Land and Water Resource Use Problems Related to the
Carrying Capacity of the Coastal Area of North Carolina.", N. C. Coastal
• Resources Commission, Raleigh, N. C., 1976.
Employment Security Commission. North Carolina Commuting Patterns, 1960-1970,
Raleigh, N. C., 1974.
•
Endangered Species Committee. "Preliminary List of Endangered Plant and Animal
Species in North Carolina, "N. C..Department of Natural and Economic Re-.
sources, Raleigh,'N. C., 1973.
• Ferrell, Joseph S. County Government in North Carolina, Institute of -Govern-
ment, U.N.C. of Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, N. C., 1975.
Fish, Frederic F. A Catalog of: the Inland Fishing Waters of North Carolina.
The Graphic Press, Raleigh, N. C., 1969.
Freeman and Associates.. Region Q Water .Management Plan, Mid -East Economic
Development Commission, Washi.ngton,.N. C., 1975.
• Mid -East Economic Development,Development Commission. Planning for Open Space
and Recreation in the Mid -East Region, Washington, N. C., 1975.
Mid-East:Economic Development Commission. A Guide for Land Use and Development
In the -Mid -East Region, "Regional Land Use Plan", Washington, N. C., 1975.
Mid -East Resource Conservation and Development Project.of North Carolina.
NaturalResources for Today and Tomorrow, Washington, N. C.1975.
* North Carolina: State Government::.Statistical Abstract. N. C. Department of
A stration,.Raleig , N. C., 1973.
N. C. Department of Administration Profile:._. North Carolina. Counties, Raleigh,
• N. C., 1975:.
N. C. Department of Conservation and Development. Economic Potential Study:
Beaufort County., N. C., Raleigh, N. C., 1968.
N. C. Department of Conservation and Development. Land Potential Study: Beau-
fort County,_N. C. N. C. Department of Conservation and Development,
Raleigh, N. C., 1969.
• 99

0
A. MANNER OF DATA ASSEMBLY AND ANALYSIS
Due
to time
and monetary
limitations, very little primary data was
generated
for this
study.
Data.used in
this plan was obtained from six different
sources.
These sources are:
1) Standard references such as U.S. Census, N.C.'
Statistical Abstract,
N.C. Agricultural Statistics, Profile: N.C. Counties, etc.;
2) A county -wide survey -conducted by the Planning Board;
3) Small group discussions held county -wide;
4) Interviews;
5) Previous studies; and
6) Field studies:
Analysis of this data was conducted by staff and presented to the Planning
Board for their consideration.
The following is a bibliography of material used.
40
Barack, Frank B. and T. Stuart Critcher. Wildlife and Land Use Planning with
Particular Reference -to Coastal._.Counties,.N. C. Wil life. Resources Commission,
Raleigh,, N. C. 1975. •
Beaufort: Soil and Water Conservation District. An Appraisal of .Potentials:
Outdoor Development, Beaufort.County;.N� C.,.Beaufort Soil and Water Con-
servation District, Washington, N. C. 1972.
I
Bechtel Incorporated. Overview of..P.roposed FMC Phosphate Operation, Beaufort
County, North Carolina;.FMC=Corporation, 1975.
Bureau of Employment Security Research. North Carolina Labor. Force Estimates,
Employment Security Commission of N.C., Ralei , N. C. 1975.
County Population Trends,.North Carolina 1790-1960.. Carolina Population Center,
U.N.C. and Statistical Services Center, N. C. Department of_Administration,
Raleigh, N. C. 1969.
100 •

r]
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
N..C. Land Policy Council. "North Carolina Land Policy Council --A Land
Policy Program for North Carolina", Raleigh, N. C., 1976.
N. C. Department of Agriculture. North Carolina Agricultural Statistics,
1974-75, Raleigh, N. C., 1975.
N. C. Department of Transportation. Seven Year Highway Plan, Raleigh, N. C.,
1975.
Ospina, Enrique and Leon Danielson.. North Carolina Land Use Data, The North
Carolina Agricultural Extension Service,•Raleig , N. C., 1973.
Parsons, Brickeshoff, Hall and Macdonald. North Carolina Inland Waterways.
Parsons, Brinckeshoff, et.. al'., New York, N. Y., 1954.
Rodman, W. C. Comprehensive Water and.Sewer Study: Beaufort County, N. C.,
W. C. Rodman --Land Surveying and Civil Engineering, Was�iington, N. C.,'1971.
Sharpe, Bill. A New Geography of North Carolina,.Edward-and Broughton, Raleigh,
N. C., 1966
U. S: Department of Commerce. U. S. Census of Agriculture: -1959, Washington,
D. C., 1960..
U. S. Department of Commerce.- U. S. Census of. Agriculture: 1964, Washington,
D. C. , 19.65.
U. S. Department of Commerce. U. S. Census of Agriculture, 1969, Washington,
D. C., 1970;
U. S. Department of Commerce. U. S. Census of Housing, Washington, D. C., 1972.
* U. S. Department of Commerce. U. S. Census of Population, 1970: General Social
and Economic_:Characteristics, Washington, D. C., 1972.
U. S. Department of Commerce. U. S. Census of Population, 1960: General Social
.and Economic Characteristics�Was ington, D. C., 1962.
U. S. Water Resources Council. OBERS Projections, Series E, Bureau of the Census,
Washington, D. C., 1972.
• 101

VEPCO. City of Washington and:.Beaufort..County, North Carolina: A Economic
Study, Virginia Electric and Power Company of Williamston, N'G; 1964.
Welch, Robert L. and Herbert A. Knight. Forest Statistics.for the Northeast
Coastal Plain of North Carolina, Uhited States Department of Agriculture,
Sou eastern Forest Experimental Station, Asheville, N. C., 1974
Wilkinson, Richard P. and R. Paul Darst. Critical Environmental Areas of
North Carolina, N. C. Department of Administration, Raleigh, N. C., 1972.
Wilson, Kenneth A. North Carolina -Wetlands, Their Distribution.and Management,
N. C. Wildlife Resources Commission, Raleig , N. C., 1962.
•
B. APPLICATION OF DATA TO.PLAN FORPMATION
•
Once data was assembled and analyzed, then it was presented to the
Planning Board. The Planning.Board utilized the data by using it as (1) a
catalyst to discussion of issues, (2) parameter to discussion,. and (3) docu-
•
mentation that problems and issues exist,
•
•
•
102 •

•
RELATIONSHIP DEFINED
The Washington, Aurora, Belhaven and Beaufort County Plans' relation-
ship can be.defined as "a coordinated effort through effective land use plan-
ning..to.provide a balanced growth that.offers the best affordable working
•
and living environment for all Beaufort residents." This relationship has
been part of -a continuous process which. -has taken two forms: (1) complementing
goals and.objectives and (2) a compatible County -City Land Classification
•
System.
Both County and City Plans address similar interest and citizen concerns.
There are many examples of City and County Plan relationships in terms of
•
complementing goals and objectives. For more specifics, the reader is asked
- -to consult the goals and objectives sections of individual plans. In addition,
examination of both Land Classification Maps and text will graphically and
•
verbally_ depict compatibility and relationship of the plans land classifica
•
�:tion system.
While the municipalities of Aurora,.Belhaven and Washington were per-
.mitted.to prepare their own plans, the remaining municipalities were under
the county. A`small- "mini -plan" has been prepared for each of those n -i-
-palities. These=`'mini-plans" give a more detailed look at each area. Goals
and desired growth patterns were not determined for each area. All popula-
tion figures are projections and may vary from local desires.
104

•
� �
• COASTAL AREA MANAGEMENT ACT
LAND DEVELOPMENT PLAN
•
•
•
105

•
The -Town -of Batheis located at,the confluence of Rath and Back .Creek
on the north side of the Pamlico River in Beaufort County. The town was
incorporated in-1705 and is North Carolina's oldest town.
.Bath played an important role in the early history of North Carolina.
It served as the state port of entry for a number of years: The General
Assembly met in Bath from 1744 to 1752. Blackbeard, the notorious pirate,
made.his headquarters in Bath.
•
Today Bath is a quiet farming community,. The primary means of access
to the town.is via N.C. 92 which links.Bath with Washington, 15 miles to
the west, and Belhaven,-18 miles to the east. Transportation south, across
..the .Pamlico River, is provided by the ferry at Bayview. Secondary roads
connect Bath with surrounding rural areas.
• POPULATION
Bath's population is estimated at 220 for 1974. The town has been
experiencing a.decline in population since 1950 (Figure 1). This pattern
of population loss is occurring at a more rapid rate than the countyrs popu-
lation decline.
A look at Bath's population in 1970 shows that.over 50 percent of the
• population is over 45 years of age .(Table 1). This is a disproportionate
r number.:of.older people as compared to county, state and national averages.
The higher proportion•of older people indicates that Bath will not be as
• 'likely to increase in population due to deaths exceeding births. Any popu-
lation increases,or-even maintaining existing population levels, will
require people moving into Bath.
•
. 106

•
Table 1
Population by Age and Sex
Bath, 1970
Age
Total
Male Female Percent
of Total Population
•
Under 5 yrs.
7
4 3
3.03%
5
- 14
29`
14 15
12.55%
15
- 24
35
15 20
15.15%
•
25
- 34
15
8 7
•6.49%
35
- 44
24
12 12
10.39%
45
- 54
25
13 12
10.82%
55
- 64
47
15 32
20.35%
•
--------------------------------------------------------------
65+
49
18 31
21.21%
---------
TOTAL
231
99 132
100.0%
•
Figure 1
Population Trends
Bath, 1940-1975
•
1940 1950 1960 1970 1975
• 107

The age distribution in Bath also has implications for provisions of
services -by local government. For instance, Bath probably would not be
interested in placing the major emphasis in their recreation program on
programs for pre-school children with only seven -.pre-school children in town.
Other characteristics for the.231 people in Bath in-1970 include: 13
percent of the population was Black, the average household size was 2.4
people, and 84.6 percent of the families in Bath had both husband and wife
living with the family.
Bath is largely a residential community with residents commuting to
work. There are no industries in Bath or immediately adjacent to it. The
nearest industry is Texasgulf, which is located across the river.
The only businesses in town are service related businesses, such as
general merchandise stores, service stations, a bank, grocery stores, etc.
There -is presently one marina located on Bath Creek and one on Back Creek,
with others planned. ,
The Bath Historic District attracts a number of tourists to Bath. This
tourist trade supports a few gift shops and contributes to the support of
other service -related -businesses. This tourist trade does not represent a
significant contribution to Bath's local economy.
Plans are underway to establish a historic drama in Bath. If these
plans are realized, there should be an increase in the number.of tourists
visiting Bath and thus increased economic opportunity for those businesses
serving the tourist trade.
A
•
•
•
•
0
i
•
108
0

GOVERZENT
Bath is governed by a Mayor -Council form of government. The town has
no full-time employees. The town has'a historic zoning regulation which is
' not enforced.and,due to a lack of standards within the ordinance, is of
questionable legality.
EXISTING LAND.USE
Most of the land in Bath is vacant or in agricultural production. Of
the developed land in Bath, the overwhelming majority is residential. Com-
mercial development is spotted largely along the itestern side of Main Street
and along N.C. 92.
The Bath Historic District is centrally located in town. Land uses
within the Historic District include a visitors', center, restored houses,
and residences.
There are no distinct commercial and residential areas in Bath. These
activities are located adjacent to each other but,due to the low level of
commercial activity, do not pose a problem of conflicting,land uses.
CONSTRAINTS ON DEVELOPMENT .
Several factors act as -constraints on development in Bath. These may
be broken into the broad categories of land potential-- the natural con -
placed on development-- and capacity of community facilities.
These constraints on development do not mean that development cannot take
place in the affected areas. With society's engineering expertise Bath can
develop anywhere, but the constraints listed will affect the economic
feasibility of developing.
109

•
Soils . .
Bath has good soils for development. The soils are moderately well
drained with a friable subsoil. These type soils are suitable for septic
tanks. As such, they provide few constraints on development.
Flood Hazard
Areas within Bath which are below a ten foot contour can be considered
flood prone. This means that they are subject to flooding in the event of •
a 100-year frequency flood, in other words, they have a 1% chance of being
flooded in any given year.
The areas in Bath which meet this criteria are those immediately adja-
cent to Bath and Back Creek. Most structures that are located on property
adjacent to the creeks are situated so as to be out of the flood area.
Flooding presents little problem to existing development and poses few •
constraints on future development.
Water .Supply
•
Bath relies on ground water for its water supply. Ground water is
abundant throughout the area,and availability of water provides no con-
straints upon development
•
The -availability and quality of ground water could.be affected by open
pit mining activities in the area. The town should remain cognizant of this
-if asked to comment on permits for additional pumping of ground water by a
•
mining concern.
Wetlands
Small patches of marsh grass spot Bath's shoreline. This marsh grass •
serves as a vital link in the food chain of the area's fisheries. As such,
110 0

efforts are made,at the state'level to preserve as much of the marsh grass
1
as possible. This is accagnplished through the N. C. Dredge and Fill Act which
requires a state permit for dredging and filling in North -Carolina coastal
. waters.
•
The marsh grass also serves a beneficial purpose for the property owner.
The,grass:,.due to its rizone root structure, serves as an effective means of
erosion control. Property owners should encourage growth of the marsh grass
• to prevent. erosion.
Due to the small quantities of marsh grass in Bath, it does not serve
as a constraint on development.
•
`Scenic Areas and Townscape
water to Bath provide anabundanceof
The proximity of large bodies of
scenic vistas.- Entering: into_ Bath from the west along N.C. 92, one passes
over Bath Creek. The initial view, of Bath, across Bath Creek with its marina
and boat docks,creates a unique impression of Bath.
Once in town, the tree -shaded streets, large, historic residences and
rural: atmosphere create a townscape worth preserving. The well. laid out
streets make Bath reminiscent of. Williamsburg and other colonial towns, but
• fortheshabby condition of many of Bath's buildings.
If.one proceeds down Main Street to Teach.'s Point, the panorama of Bath
-Creekopening up:into the Pamlico River is afforded. The,development which
• :: :has occurred on .the -visible. shoreline is obscured from view by a buffer zone
of trees and other vegetation. As a_result, the shoreline looks undeveloped.
If Bath is to capitalize on its historic past and retain its desirable
• features, it must preserve its scenic areas and townscape. This poses some
constraints on development, largely in the'area of architectural design of
111

buildings and provision of buffer zones between new de-vrelopmnt and the water.
Historic Areas
The Bath Historic District, created by the General Assembly in 1959,
comprises a significant portion of the town. The State of North Carolina
owns the property on the Historic Site and controls the land use within.
Included within the site are the Palmer Marsh House and the Bonner House.
The Town of Bath should take action to insure that development occur-
ring adjacent to the historic site is not detrimental to it. This could be
accomplished by a historic zoning district.
Presently there are no constraints to development due to historic
sites except on state-owned property. If the town adopted a historic zoning
district, these would be a constraint on development adjacent to the historic
site. This would not preclude development; rather, it would insure compatible •
development.
Capacity of Communty.Facilities
Lack of community facilities or inadequate camrunity facilities can
serve as a constraint on development. For instance, the density of develop-
ment within Bath is limited as long as the town is dependent on septic tanks.
Other factors such as water systems, fire departments, etc. influence both
individuals and businesses in decisions on where to locate.
At the present time Bath has no wastewater facilities and relies totally
on on -site disposal methods. This,in effect,imposes a minimum lot size due 0
to the area needed for septic tank and drain field. This places a constraint
on development both from a density standpoint and from the standpoint of the
town being unable to accommodate any type of development which cannot use 0
septic tanks for wastewater disposal.
112

•
The town has recently -constructed a water system. The system is sup-
•
plied by two deep wells with hydroneumatic tanks. A 12,000 gallon ground
-tank provides limited storage for the system. The distribution system con-
sists of 6", 411,,and 211 mains and sixteen fire hydrants. The only extension
outside the municipal limits is to Springdale Village, a residential area
just to the east of town.
The water system is -adequate to meet Bath's anticipated demands. It
•
poses no constraints on development.
ESTIMATED FUTURE DEMAND
Population
Bath`is projected to continue losing population. The town's past track
record is failing to attract new residents; a lack of any basic job oppor
• tunities and a high percentage of people past the childbearing age tend to
bear this out.
The population.projection presented below was computed by Freeman and
Associates -for -the Region Q Water Resources Management Plan. :A projection
is only_a guess based on past performance. Factors such as the location of
an..industry in Bath or,a substantial.influx of tourists are not taken into
account in- the, projection; and if these occurred, then it would affect the
population change.
•
•
0 113

Table 2 Projected Population
Bath Township
Bath, and Beaufort County
1970-2000
1970 1980 1990 2000' 2010 2020
Bath 231 135 83 51 32 20
Bath Township 3,237 2,993 2,837 2,712
Beaufort County 35,980 37,400 39,900 41,000 44,500 49,200
Source: Region Q Water Resources Management Plan; Township projections by
N.C. Department of Natural and Economic Resources.
Economy
There are no indications that Bath's service related economy will change.
A decline in the area's population possibly will curtail the current level
•
.of service.
Bath has no basic industries and no developed industrial sites. The
probability of attracting industry is small.
The area with the most potential for growth in the.Bath economy is
tourism. If current plans for a historic drama are realized, there should be
an increase in the number of tourists visiting historic Bath.
•
Bath Creek provides one of the finest sheltered harbors in Eastern North
Carolina. With a growing interest in recreational boating, more people are
seeking an area such as Bath to build marinas. At the present time there
•
are a number of people interested in opening marinas in Bath. These would
attract people into Bath on a short-term basis and supplement the tourist
trade visiting Historic Bath. This would benefit those service related
•
businesses which rely in part on tourist trade.
114 0

Future Land Needs
_If Bath should be able to reverse its population loss, it should concen-
trate -on developing land within the existing service areas of the town.
This would allow the town to realize the greatest return on the investment
already made in the water system and would minimize the cost of providing
future services, such.as sewer.
This policy of containing -growth -,within the existing town boundaries and
upgrading existing services within those areas has resulted in the town being
classified Transitional in the county land use plan.
Community Facilities Demand
If the community maintains its°present population or declines in popula-
tion, the present water system and reliance upon on -site disposal of waste-
: -.water is.a.dequate. A gain in population or location of an industry in Bath
might require a wastewater treatment system.
...LAND USE ISSUES
-. In summary', the, land- use issues facing Bath are:
1)'Continuing population loss;
2)-Lack of:local economic base;
3) A highproportion of elderly population;
4) A need to protect the historic aspects of Bath;
5).A need to retain the existing townscape;
6) A need to protect the scenic properties.of Bath
0 7)"The impact of marina development on.Bath Creek and Bath itself; and
8) The.impact of an outdoor drama on Bath.
IMPLEMENTATION
If Bath is to retain the desirable characteristics of the community and
address the land use issues outlined above, it must,

1) Form a planning board to advise local officials on development
issues;
2) Make a decision on 'whether the town will.attempt to attract
industry, increase the tourist trade, or face a continuing
loss of population; and •
3) Develop land.use regulations to protect the historic aspects
of Bath, the townscape and the aesthetic qualities of the town.
Due to its small,size it is questionable whether Bath would be'able to •
properly administer a set of land use regulations as proposed. The town
should explore the possibility of the county administering these regulations
for the town. •
•
•
•
•
116 0

•
The Town.of Chocowinity is located on the south -bank of the Pamlico,
49
opposite Washington.It is an -old community, originally strictly agricultural.
The large plantations which supported the town were broken up after the Civil
War. Since that time Chocowinity has been largely a crossroads trading place.
1
Primary access to Chocowinity is afforded via U.S. 17 which connects
Chocowinity with Washington,.four miles to.the north; and New Bern, 31 miles
to the south.. U.-S. 264 also connects Chocowinity with Washington.and with
Greenville, -l6.miles to the west. N.C."33 links Chocowinity with Aurora, 26
miles to the.east. Secondary roads connect Chocowinity with the surrounding
rural areas. The Norfolk -Southern railroad serves the community.
•
POPULATION
Chocowinity was formally incorporated during the 19501s. The 1960
'Census -indicated that Chocowinity's population was 580. The 1970 Census
indicateda small drop in population to 566. Chocowinity's population for
1974 was estimated at 580, back up to the 1960 level.
•
TABLE 1
POPULATION BY AGE AND SEX
CEiOCOWINITY, 1970
Percent of
Age
Total
Male
Female
Total Population
Under.5 yrs.
46
21
25
8.1%
5 - 14
94
31
63
16.6%
• 15 - 24
97
41
56
17.2%
25 - 34
67
38
29
11.8%
35 - 44
59
28
31
10.4%
45 - 54`'
84
39
45
14.8%
• 55 -'64
63'
32
31
11.1%
65+
56
20
36
10.0%
TOTAL
546
250
316
100.0%
118

•
A look.at Chocowinity's population in 1970 (Table 1) shows a normal
distribution by age group. There is an unusually high percentage of females
in the 5 - 24 age group.
These age and sex distributions have implications for services provided
by local government. For instance, if Chocowinity was providing a recreation •
program for young people.,.that recreation program would be affected by the
large number of females relative to males in the 5 24.age group.
•
Other characteristics of the 566 people in Chocowinity in 1970 include:
only 4.6 percent of the town's population was Black compared to 33.2 percent
for the county; the average household size was 2.8 people; and, 82.9 percent
•
of the families had both husband and wife living at home.
IMONki�
Chocowinity originated as an agricultural community., However, like the
county, Chocowinity has in recent years broadened its local economy. Hatteras
Industrial Corp. located in Chocowinity in 1966,employing 5 - 9 workers. The
Singer Company opened a plant in.1970 which employs 275. Edinburg Hardwood
Lumber Company opened in 1971 and employs 30. In addition to these local
plants, a number of people commute to;jobs in Washington, Greenville and
Texasgulf.
In addition to the above industries, a number of retail establishments
line U. Si 17 between Chocowinity and Washington. A livestock market is
located south of town. A
119 •

0
LOCAL GOVERNMENT
i
Chocowinity is -governed by a Mayor -Council form of government. The town
has two full-time employees --a town clerk and a policeman. The town exercises
no regulations which would impact land development patterns.
EXISTING.LAND USE
Most of the land in Chocowinity is vacant, or in forestry or agricultural
production. Of the developed.land, the overwhelming majority is residential.
Commercial development exists in strips along U.S.'17 and N.C. 33.
A pattern of development has emerged in Chocowinity, where commercial
land use: is located along the major thoroughfares. Residential development
is located behind this commercial strip on connector roads.
Conflicting. and .undesirable _.land :use. patterns have occurred in Chocowinity
* due -to the -commercial strip development. Residential neighborhoods abut
commercial and industrial land use.
• CONSTRAINTS ON DEVELOPMENT
Several factors act as constraints on development in Chocowinity. These
-maybe broken down into the broad categories of land potential -- the natural
:constraints placed on development -- and capacity of community facilities.
These.constraints on development do°not mean that development cannot take
'—place in the affected areas, only that the development may not be economically
i feasible.
•
120

•
Soils
r,
Chocowinity has moderately well drained soils. The subsoils are firm
resulting in a low percolation rate. The low percolating rates impose con-
straints on the use of septic tanks, thereby imposing a constraint on develop-
ment.
Water Supply
The Town of Chocowinity is presently served by a water system supplied
by one deep.well. A 75,000 gallon elevated storage tank supplies..a distribu-
tion system of 8" and 6" mains. The townis constructing an additional well
and an additional 275,000 gallons of elevated storage.
The area had abundant groundwater; therefore,water supply provides no
constraints upon development.
Capacity of Community Facilities •
Lack of community facilities or inadequate facilities can serve as a
constraint on development. For instance, the density of development in
•
Chocowinity is limited as long as°the town is -dependent upon individual
septic tanks as a means of wastewater disposal. Factors such as this in-
fluence both individuals and businesses in location decisions.
•
At the present -time, Chocowinity has no wastewater, or sewage system.
This, in effect, imposes a,minimum.lot size due to.the area needed for indi-
vidual septic tanks°and drain fields. This places.a constraint on develop-.
•
ment both from a density standpoint and from the standpoint of the town being
unable to accommodate any type of development which cannot use septic tanks
for wastewater disposal.
7
121 0

ESTIMATED FUTURE DEMAND
Population
Chocowinity is projected to continue losing population. Since Chocowinity
was incorporated•during.the 1950.'s, the only Census data for the town is the
1960 and 1970 'Census. The town.lost a small number of people between 1960 and
.1970; therefore,most population projections will indicate a decline in popula-
tion..
The population projection presented below CTable 2) was computed by
Freeman and Associates for the Region Q Water Resources Management Plan. A
projection is only a guess based on past performance. Factors such as the
location of an industry in Chocowinity are not taken into account in the
projection and if such occurs, it would affect the population change.
Table 2 PROJECTED POPULATION
CHOCOWINITY, CHOCOWINITY TOWNSHIP AND BEAUFORT COUNTY
Area 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020
+� Chocowinity 566 532 509 490 475 462
Chocowinity Township 4,661 4,854 5,050 5,300
Beaufort County 35,980 37,400 38,900 41,000 44,500 49,200
Source: Region Q`Water Resources Management Plan; Township projections by
N. C. Department of Natural and Economic Resources.
• The projected decline in population for Chocowinity seems unrealistic
in view of:
1) An estimated increase in population between 1970 and 1974.
2) A projected increase in township population, and
3) Anticipated growth in the Washington area.
0
122

•
Economy-
Chocowinity should benefit-from.expected development in the western
portion of Beaufort County. With development of a wastewater treatment
facility, the town will be more attractive to industries.
i
Future Land Needs
Chocowinit' has enough vacant land'withiii its boundaries to meet future
land needs - •
The town is classed Transitional in the coimty land use plan. Under this
classification, the county would have a policy of providing facilities in this
area before in Community or Rural areas.
Community Facilities Demand
Chocowinity's water system is adequate to meet anticipated demand. Due
•
to poor soil conditions, the town will need a sewer system to accommodate
future demand.
LAND USE ISSUES •
In summary, the land use issues facing Chccotvilnity are:
_1. Strip development along major thoroughfares;
2. Conflicting land uses; and. •
3. Need for municipal sewer system.
IMPLEMENTATION
If Chocowinity-is to address the land use issues outlined above, it •
must: : .
1. Expedite development of a municipal sewer system, and
2. Establish.zoning to address the issues of strip development and •
conflicting land uses.
123 0

•
•
COASTAL AREA MANAGEMENT ACT
• LAND DEVELOPMENT PLAN
PANTEGO NORTH CAROLINA
• BEAUFORT COUNTY
•
•
•
124

The Town of Pantego is located on Pantego Creek in eastern Beaufort
County. The foundation of the town was laid in 1775 when homes were estab-
lished on three hundred.acres north of Pantego Creek. No growth occurred
until 1840 when lumbering operations were started. The town was incorporated
i
in 1881 with a population of approximately 300. After 1900 a number of
.-drainage districts were formed west of town. Since that period Pantego has
been a farming community.
The primary means of access to Pantego is via U.S. 264 which links
-Pantego with Washington, 27 miles to the west; and Belhaven, 4 miles to the
east.. N.C...99 connects Pantego with Plymouth in Washington County, 23 miles
•
north. Secondary roads.connect Pantego with surrounding rural areas. The
town is served by a railroad line.
POPULATION
Pantego's population is estimated at 220 for 1974. The town has been
experiencing a decline in population: since 1940 (Figure 1). This pattern
• of population loss is occurring at a more rapidratethan the county's
population decline.
A look at-Pantego's population in 1970 shows that only 15.6 percent of
its population.is in the 25-44 year age bracket. This is the result of
past population loss. Generally, those who leave a community are the young
who are seeking greater opportunity elsewhere. If Pantego is to reverse
the past pattern of population loss, opportunities will have to be provided
for those completing their secondary education.
C
• 125

FIGURE 1
POPULATION TRENDS
Pantego, 1940 - 1975
300 11294
280 275
262
260
250
240
230
1-8-220
220.
200 1940 1950 1960 1970 1975
126

•
TABLE
1
POPULATION BY AGE AND SEX
PANTEGO,
1970
•
Percent of
Age
Total
Male
Fomale
Total Population
Under 5 yrs.
15
7
8
6.9%
5 - 14
35
17
18
16.1%
15 - 24
28
16
i2
12.8%
25 - 34
24
14
10
11.0%
35 - 44
10
5
5
4.6%
45 - 54
22
7
15
10.1%
55 -64
40
20
20
18.3
•
65+-
44
15
29
20:2%
TOTALS
218
101
117
100.0%
•
7
•
• 127

LJ
171
•
•
The age distribution pattern in Pantego also has indications for pro-
vision of services by local government. For instance, Pantego would want to
aim'a recreation program at school age children and older adults rather than
only programs aimed at adults 25-44 years old.
Other characteristics,of the 218 people in•Pantego in 1970 include:
37.7 percent. of the. population was Black; the average household size was
2.9 people, and 83.9 percent of the families.had both husband and wife
living at home
ECONOMY
• Pantego has largely a farm -service related economy. Almost all of the
businesses in town are farm -service related.
There are no industries located in Pantego. The nearest industries are
• in Belhaven.
GOVERNMENT
Pantego is governed by'a Mayor -Council form of government. The town
•
has no full-time employees. The town exercises no regulations.which would
impact land development patterns.
• EXISTING LAND USE
Most of the land in Pantego'is vacant or; in forestry or agricultural
production.. Of the developed land in:Pantego, the overwhelming majority is
1 residential. Commercial development is spotted largely along U.S. 264.
The only distinct corwercial area in town is at the junction of U.S.-264
and N.C. 99. Several commercial establishments are grouped together here.
• Elsewhere, commercial and residentialareas are not distinct. There are
no real conflicting land uses in Pantego,due to the low level, of development.
,�. 128

CONSTRAINTS ON -DEVELOPMENT
Several factors act as constraints on development in Pantego. These
may be -broken down into the broad categories of land.potential the natural
constraints. placed on development - and capacity of community facilities.
These constraints on development do,not mean that development cannot take
place in the affected areas, only that the development may not be economically
feasible.
-Soils
Pantego has poor to very poorly -drained soils; While the soils have a
good percolation rate, they are affected by seasonally high water tables,
twelve.:to eighteen inches below the surface. Due to this,the area is not
suitable for septic tanks and, therefore, provides a constraint upon develop-
ment.
Flood -Hazard
Large areas of Pantego lie in the flood hazard zone. This means they
have -been identified by the_Federal Insurance Administration as subject to
;flooding in.the event of a 100-year frequency flood. In other words, they
have, a: one percent chance -of being"flooded in any given year.
The areas in Pantego which meet this .criteria.are those adjacent to
---Pantego Creek-. Flooding in these areas provides a constraint on development
(Map 1)
Water. Supply
Pantego does'not have a municipal water system. A study has been made
to determine the feasibility of installing a small groundwater system for
the town, but to date, funding has not been acquired.
The area has abundant groundwater.and-whether relying on individual wells
or a water system, there is no constraint on development due to water supplies.
129
•

f
Pia p 1
Flood Hazard Area
Pariteno, P.C.
O
.. Q
..............
......:::::::..........
'
...... ?ECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AR ?.e
+�.n.--:..,�.. :.-�-.....�..•......-- fix:• .� � �;3• , ��
^. Y:
D
............... ................................................................. ....... ......::.. .......................................
...... . ..... . ........
:..
G
yy .F
Y:4:'
:3
.............................::::::::: ............................... ..................................................................................
......................
...... - ......... -� � 3 ..........� ....... ice.
......::.......
y 3 s v a....:::::::::_ ......
o .
rti:: ::..
6cm
r'.::;/
rt L..... .:...: :-�• �� Q.I.
�8 5
CL N
�i ORATE ��TS o
129-A
0

Wetlands
Marsh grass can -be found along..Pantego Creek. This marsh grass serves
:as.a vital link in the food chain of -the area's fisheries. As such, efforts
are made.at the state level to preserve as much of the marsh grass as possi-
ble.This is accomplished through the N. C. Dredge and.Fill Act which re-
quires a state permit.for dredging and filling in North Carolina coastal
waters.
The marsh grassalso serves a beneficial purpose for the property owner.
The grass, due to its rizone root structure`, serves as. an effective means
• of.erosion,control... Property owners should encourage the growth of the
--marsh grass to prevent erosion.:
Where marsh grass is present along Pantego Creek, it should serve as a
• constraint upon development.
CaPacity ' of Community Facilities
Lack of community -facilities or inadequate community facilities can
serve as a constraint on development. For instance, the density of develop-
ment in-Pantego is limited as long as -the town is dependent on individual
wells and septic tanks. These factors influence both individuals and busi-
;`nesses in decisions on where to locate.
At the present time, Pantego has neither.a water system or a wastewater
system. This, in effect, imposes a minimum lot size due to the area needed.
•
for individual.`well, septic tank -and -design field. This places a constraint
onrdevelopment both from a density standpoint and from the standpoint of
the town.being-unable to accamnodate any type of development which cannot
use septic.tanks for wastewater disposal.
130

ESTIMATED FUTURE DEMAND
Population
Pantego is projected to continue losing population. The town's past
track record in failing to retain young adults and a lack of basic job
opportunities tend to bear this cut.
The population projection presented below (Table.2) was computed by
Freeman and Associates for the Region Q Water Resources Management Plan.
A -projection is only a guess based on past performance. Factors such as the
location -of an industry in Pantego are not taken into account in the projec-
tion;and,if such occurs, it would affect the population change.
Table 2 PROJECTED POPULATION
PANTEGO, PANTEGO TOWNSHIP AND BEAUFORT COUNTY
1970-2020
Area 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020
Pantego 218 172 139 114 94 97
Pantego Township 5,126 5,043 4,958 4,916
Beaufort County 35,980 37,400 .38,900 41,000 .44,500 49,200
SOURCE: lion Q Water Resources Management Plan; Township Projection by
N. C. Department of Natural and Economic Resources.
Economy
There are no indications that Pantego's land economy will change from
its present -farm service economy. There are no industrial sites and no
infrastructure to attract any industry.
131 0

•
Future Land Needs
r If Pantego should be able to service its population loss,.there is
adequate vacant land within the corporate limits to meet future land needs.
The town is classed Tra s tional in the county..land use plan. Under
• this classification, the county would have.a policy of providing facilities
in this area before in Community or Rural areas. Due to little prospect for
growth,-Pantego should have a low priority of the Transitional areas in pro-
• vision of services.
Community Facilities Demand
If the community maintains its present population or declines in popu-
lation, the reliance on individual well and septic tank is adequate. A
gain in population or location of an industry in Pantego might require a
wastewater system.
•
LAND USE ISSUES
In summary, the land use issues facing Pantego are:
1) Continuing population loss,
2) Lack of any local basic jobs;
3) Soil condition unsuitable for proper septic tank operations; and
• 4) Extensive areas subject to flooding.
IWLEMENTATION
If Pantego is to address the land use issues outlined above, it must:
•
1) Explore suitable means for wastewater disposal;
2) Make a decision on whether the town will seek location of an
industry in Pantego or rely on the farm service economy; and
w 3) Request that the county regulate development.in the flood hazard
area so residents will be eligible for federally backed flood
insurance.
0 132

E'VIRGNMENTAL MANAGEMENL
A C. DEPT. OF NATURAV
RESOURCES & COMA DEV. �

R ;i �, r T N T Y
i L / W A- S_ H I — °C U
'�-
Ilm , n a ' 33 c, ..� PARK ��+•.. .: �3 sa. w °�. '• 1 — \ �%- N O R 1
S•• POP. 51> ".'fi �. �, / / \ /��
7 t Ise .r � '.ra J_a> ,ha'•. � \ � ` t». >.lan r J .. ta..s � ? \ �s; _ 6� �'\--- - J L/�\\ v'.
HOCO,�
CWINI7W it �'
� �>.•1 13� A .� "r 4��, ,�� _ �_G I>ia � >�i —_
r' POP. ,t
F xxz m �i ti \
p 3s^3o'
35'30' � I ! 3 �
aY "`
�l _ �\ � \\\ , d` wbin,Pa,r
.xt
z
�ee,F UAPer. G / a;MTX
7. I1TJ ' POP...! J A
Ack /
2 ilavi a \ _ f '.Z irJ ! C x S O N -. __
Cl P.nr `� `\ s w \ C
, L var.' 11 \ J nN A M P Wmsleadville / i \(
sa ,— sa
,J10
LL!3 � :A I I>. w . - \\ 9 !e& tuk t C��
$ � pie - s \ `S �,.. O Ilia > >n I>3e Ro
I!L ..'� 4z ie.- i{;: 0a° * ®r IneO - u�o _ .. ' ( __ - �_�\ 1 \ Bmbou, Crw—d,
ids EPb.we ch \ BNTS / Poinr L \i� ' .v, ,�:'.,. Owrdt
BA of Chrlsfk
i
e.d d, 0, . Cr." a.
730
—104
trend, aaP.1 ( ; R
1P cm�„d,
rg
JP�s
rk
.q Pw
zA "'� a. �i S^rmu a. `.f.% „ _ �.rnm > -i1>< a. o i44E
S A V A N N A
461 •� E
t c �
35°20' It, Edward ` j1.42:1 v
EXIST USE MAP
1976
EXISTING LAND
M
\ �` taus AURpp��e cddr.r t�
LEG END:"
t
tat
Residential ,. Cultural,�'� : s" a� L� �.� �� `r;`'�:
Entertainment, ��°�� 33 �m
OEM Commercial _ .'°
& Recreation ne:
Industrial Agriculture �. E s� a° s" A M P
Government & Forestland 35,5,E
Institutional Water � �
r �
L
X/
o.d' C'
n
r
Z
\
_
GraY Po:,,
35°35' /
Poxd
-P
\ •\
j
f \
- ko B-d,
Wad. h.
\
,' of
,r U
BEAUFORT COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
SCALE
1 0 1 3 J t,Y16
y,,• 0 0.5 1 MlE
s„
SCALE FOR R ARCEMENTS
V
INVIRONW-r4TA1. MAA .
MENr
Ea7OL.J.iY�i
e�
.......... - - - - - --- - --
:8
DLEPT.. OF NATUR.Q
REZURGES & CONIM., DEO I
EXISTING LAND USE
The above map depicts how the land in Beaufort County is
presently being used. As you can see, the predominant land use
is forestry which comprises 64 percent of the county land area.
Next, in area, is cropland which comprises 26 percent of the land
area. This means that 90 percent of the county is being used for
production of agricultural or forestry products. The remaining
10 percent of our land is used for roads, houses, busineforestry
etc.
r r
As you can see, most of the agricultural and o est y land is
located in the eastern portion of the county. Most of the
developed land is located in the western portion of the county,
surrounding Washington. Past growth trends show that most of
the country's growth is occurring in this area.
LAND CLASSIFICATION
The above map is the Land Classification Map for Beaufort
County. It depicts how the county should grow during the next
ten years. Most of the growth will be directed into the Transition
Areas. These will be the areas where an effort will be made to
provide water and sewer and other governmental services which
need tax dollars. As you can see, most of the growth is
scheduled to go into the Washington area. In the eastern part of
the county, new development will be focused on the towns. The
county's growth policy, as depicted in the Land Classification
Map, will protect agricultural areas and guide new land uses
into those areas of the county best suited for development.
A Secondary Transition area has been added to Beaufort
County's Land Classification System to meet local needs. This
classification shows those areas where growth will occur and
which will be the Transition areas of the future.

' J�C e•
f
S
r 3 + f
J J '.�t +•e
xa r •�- i x .�° "`r",• sz ', m` 45a I III I' ,.,,�;m
.`z• x 1. �r,•c �` r z�. � z ,t.,, x"�c �171j1' ITn1 1 �� �
ARL
FITTf.,_...
Q&` Residentol Water
Commercial `Wetland
x,� ® Industrail Barren
z` k gp
Trans. com a uti I i ti es
t gig,
Government a Institutional
X "Y L 0 R. C R 1 Cultural,entertainment a recreation
Undeveloped land
Agriculture
Forestla nd
EXISTING
LAND USE MAP
BEAUFORT
ACCURACY
PLANNING AREA GUANOT
RANTEED
CITY LIMITS — DATE : 3/13/75 REVISED
PREPARED BY THE CARTERET
COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT. SCALE.* I inch = 400 feet
PURSUANT TO THE COASTAL
AREA MANAGEMENT ACT OF 1974.
+00 0 100 400 G00 1200 1000
o \
T 0 w M
C REEK •.• �•• •' • v v
• •. �• •i �•• •• •o
�o
FT-
z I
t PqUj
t)
f ,
Developed
Transitional
Y �! . e
CommunI y
_..—....—...:��...—. _.�_� � ._.. t
T A Y L 0 R G C R E E K Rural
Conservation
LAND CLASS MAP
BEAUFORT
ACCURACY
PLANNING AREA GUNOT
ARANTEED
CITY LIMITS — DATE* 3/13/75 REVISED
PREPARED BY THE CARTERET
COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT. SCALE . I InCh = 400 feet
PURSUANT TO THE COASTAL
400 0 too 400 Goo 1200 I400
AREA MANAGEMENT ACT OF 1874.

•Japnbae aql jo uo!1
-euiweluoa ivanbasgns pup uoismiw jaleMiles asnea pinoa siyl
paialdap aq pinoa jaj!nbae siyi jo � lddns jaleM ayl 'saiiunoa
leiseoa lie uaaMiaq uoilewpjooa jadoid inoyilM 'Alddns
jaleM si! joj jaj!nbaV au�PH-allseD ayi uo spuadap 'eulloJeD
y1JoN waisea jo uoniod pooS a se IIam se'vojneag •paMasuO
aq pinoys ieyi aainosai leinleu jayioue si Alddns jaiem ayi
•sailddns jaiem lenp!A
-!pu! Alglssod pup siaieM auuenisa Suipunwjns ayi aleuiwei
-uoa pinoa uoilnilod 'Aiisuap g8iy e le smaao luawdolanap
j! 'leyi pooylli) 111 a si ajayl `Mou luap!Aa si uoilnllod ou allgM
•sJuei alldas pup sliaM lenp!A!pu! asn sluapisai'sjaleM auuenisa
of asola aie yaiyM ijojneag jo aplsino seam, ay ul `AlluasaJd
•sialeM auuenisa olui ivanijja pawajiun jo aSjeyasip ayl
dols padlay s,0961 ayi u! iueld ivawmaii a jo uop:)njisuoa ayi
pue'iaafojd u01ien0uaJ JaMas e'lueJS lejapaj V •spunoA9 Suiysij
jaleMiles jo uoiinllod ayi pasnea siaiem auuenisa olui Su!dwnp
slyl •PaaD s,Jolttel pue JaaiD uMol olui ivawwaii inogpm
papdwa seM aSeMas ayi 'Apuaaai Illufl •uo!lexauue yaea yi!m
Suuinaao sauil jo uoisuaixa yi!M uMoi ui pallelsui seM walsAs
jaMas leuiSuo ayi 'LZ6L ul •ssluei alldas lenp!A!puI uo pallaJ
sluaplsai ayi 'waisAs jaMas a pa1anJ1suoa liojneag ajojag
*ueld luawdolanap puel siyi ui passaippe
aq isnw pue lueliodwi aye sialeM auuenisa ay1 paiealpul
aney liojneag jo suazilla ayi •samumioddo leuolleaiaai
pue A1neaq aluaas ap!AOJ8 osle inq'saarnosai leinleu anlianpojd
Aluo lou aye liojneag Suipunojins sialeM auuenisa ayl
•uoisoia auilaioys lsuleSe asuajap
jo auil isiij ayi se 1ae saysiew JaMOI ayi jo saneal pue swals
iueld ayi 'oslV •aj!lpl!M pue spfiq ajoys snoiawnu joj siellgey
ap!Aoid saysjew ayi •sgeja pue 'siaisAo 'japunolj 'dwijys
se vans ysi jllays pue ysi j jo saiaads ivapuadap auuenisa ioj pooj
jo aajnos Aiewijd ayi ale yaiyM sivaumnu ap!Aoid spuelysiew
asayl •saajnosai algenlenui We puelSI 10JJeD pue 'sleoys piia
'ysjew uM0l'1aaJD um0l JapJoq yaiyM spueliaM leiseoa ayi
-Suiuueld asn puel aininj Aq palaaioid pue paMasuOa
aq pinoys yaiyM saainosai leinieu lueaipuSis ajow ayi
Jo sisAleue pue uo!le3lpluapi ue sl Suimolloj •suazilla leaol isnf
iou—aU0AJana jo Sulaq-llaM ayi of ainq!iiuoa AIddns ialeM ay1
pue 'sialeM auuenisa 'spueliaM se saainosai leinieu vans ieyi
azileai aldoad -sanssi asn puel leptiassa aye saainosai leinleu
Pup luawUOJIAUa leiseoa ayi ieyi paieaipui sey indui ailgnd
anssl awnosab pue ;uawu0J1Au3 IeinjeN a41
•umol ayi jo sluawaiinbai asn puel aininj ayi ui pajapls
-uoa aq pinoys uo!s!Aoid siyl •sllwil uMol s,ljojneag ulgl!m
pajaluaa AIlea!ydeaSoaS ajow ease IeuolleajaaJ a jo swial ul
Alielmmied'slallno leuollew:)ai ajow ioj ailsap ilayl paleaipul
pey ailgnd ayi •salllllaej uo!peajaaj alenbape jo uOislAoid ayi
ul sl kwaialjap vans auO •saa1A1as ailgnd s,ljojneag ui 1sixa op
saiauaiaijap ulelJaa ieyi `JanaMoy'paieaipui sey indui ailgnd
•san!Ains—ijojneag
—aini Supsixa ay j! Aluo panaiyae aq ue:) siellop ui pue 'aped
ul'uolleanpa ui'sak%eiuenpe ayi asuawwi si'saseaKW! wsiinol
se 'anleA aiwouoaa sl! pue `snowioua si lenuaiod uoiiejolsai
sil •suMoi leiseoa iayio Maj Aq palenba anleA IeUo'peanpa
pue 'leinilna 'leauoisiy 'leiniaallyaie sey ijojneag 'AluielaaD
saa�nosa� leinilna pue leauoisiy s,liojneag jo uoilaalojd
ayl apnlaui isnw Suiuueld sdiojneag 'neat( Sulwoa ayl ul
eulloJeD VON jo Ajoisiq ayi of yanw painquluoa
sey yaiyM uMoi a jo ued Suiaq ui apud ialeaiS a sluapisai
w Sulpeaia Aq pue 'aauejeadde s,Aiaadoid Jlayl anoidwi
of sJauMoawoy alenud Suilelnuips Aq uopnquluoa leiaos
pup leinllna a apew osle sey 11 •wsiinoi SuiSeinoaua Aq Awouoaa
IleJano ayi of paingliiuoa sey uoiwiaossV ayi 'saunivaa yi6l,
pue y 9l, alel ay jo sasnoy ljojneag leaidAl jo uopejolsai ayi
pue'Aiaadoad jo uon!sinbae ayi'uoneaijlluap! (sea ioj sawoy
auoisiy jo Suiliew ayi se vans 'slaafojd ySnoJyl •pawJoj seM
uolleiaOssV Iea1J01s1H uojneag ayi ua4m 08e sea,( uanala Ipun
unSaq 1ou seM saajnosai leauoisiy s,ljojneag jo uolleMasaid
pue uoq:)aiojd ay spieMol vojja alajauoa 'pazlueSio uV
•puels II!ls `s,00LL
ayl se 13eq Jej se Suhep aw0s'saw04 pro Auew pue sulewaJ I!!ls
ajaydsowle paivaijo-eas 'SuioS- (sea 'tools ayi •OSe sJeaA OOL
seM 1! al!l yanw sAeM Atiew u! lllis s! um01 ayi `,(epol •aauejnpua
alge1hewaj qpm Ajoisiy jo asinoa ayl 48noiyl palaneJl
sey vojneag'euilojeD 41JON ui uMoi isaplo pjiyi ayi sV 'zzLL ui
uMol a se palejodioaui pue s1s1uolo3 ysilSu3 Aq 60LL u! papunoj
seM liolneag 'sjajoldxa yauaj j Aq yzSL ui paiySis AlleuiSuO
-Aivazilla leaol ayi of lueliodwi Alawaalxa ll!ls si yaiyM
punoj§l:)eq leinlmna pue leauoisiy AgiSual a sey ljojneag
anssl aainosab leinlinJ pue le:)ijotsil.l a41
•uoilelndod pue luawdolanap leiluapisai aininj
1aej11e of dray osle pinoys sallluawe iuoijialeM pue leauoisiy
s,liojneag •seaie uoileaiaai pup 'salllllaej yaJeasaJ auiJew
1A1lao4inv sijod amS 'uonelS iiV iulod AiiayD se vans sialuaa
ivawAoldwa iofew of asola paleaol si 1! aauis `AI!unwwoa
lelluappai lueliodwi ue se dolanap 01 lellualod ayi aney
'ianaMoy `saop 11 'Jaluaa ivawAoldwa iofew a awoaaq of Alalll
iou si iiojneag ieyl azileai am'spuail ised jo sisAleue ue woi j
-puel
lepuapisai padolanap AIsnolnaid jo suoilexauue jo asneaaq
AlaSiel 'Allsapow paseajaul sey 'JanaMoy 'asn puel lelwaplsab
Obviously, not only the citizens of Beaufort should protect 1•
their natural environment and conserve resources, but citizens
of the state and national coastal regions should also practice
conservation. We live in an age when the misuse of resources by
a few could cause detrimental effects for everyone.
The tourist industry should increase the economic viability of
the town in the near future. As the restoration of the historic
district continues, complimented by the renewal of the central
business district, Beaufort should capture more and more of the
county's tourist revenues.
Future land use practices should be aimed at preserving the
historical and cultural charm Beaufort offers. In the central
business district, commercial development and design should
be consistent with the historic district. Outside of this area,
commercial land uses should be restricted in well-defined areas
and not allowed to develop haphazardly along major thorough-
fares.
The Housing and Service Issue
The citizens of Beaufort have indicated that the provisions of
adequate housing and public services are important land use
issues which Beaufort should recognize and consider in the
future. No doubt, the environment of each home is important to
the overall environment of Beaufort.
An analysis of past housing conditions shows that residential
development has, for the most part, been orderly and properly
maintained. There are, however, several areas in town where
substandard and deteriorating dwellings exist.
The older section of town, south of Cedar Street and west of
Gordon Street is principally residential in nature. In the last ten
years extensive efforts have been made to renovate historic
homes and rehabilitate deteriorating dwellings. There still exist
several areas with substandard houses, particularly the area
along Broad Street.
The geographical area occupied primarily by the black
populace (north of Cedar Street) has a high incidence of sub-
standard housing and inadequate public services. Commercial
land uses have increased in this area making the desirability for
new construction negligible and leaving the older homes in an
unattractive environment.
The town has made impressive progress recently towards
correcting the housing problems. The town has adopted a
minimum housing code, has constructed 100 units of low-
income housing, and is presently engaged in a five-year
Community Development Program. (Improvements in housing
and public services are presently in progress for the area north of
Cedar Street).
The provision of adequate public services is another land use
issue to consider. Beaufort presently provides a variety of public
services to its citizens; and these, for the most part, are adequate.
Water and sewer facilities, basic to all community services, are
presently being extended to the perimeter of the town's
corporate limits. Their design capacity should adequately service
the expected population during the next ten years.
LAND USE CONDITIONS AND TRENDS
Before anyone can plan for future use of the land, he must
have a thorough knowledge and understanding of the past and
present use of this land. By knowing past patterns and problems,
effective plans and decisions can be made that will correct or
prevent problems and misuses of land in the future.
Past Land Use
From the original layout in 1722 until now, land use in Beaufort
has developed primarily as residential. By 1816, the original town
was almost developed; the natural water barriers of Taylor's
Creek, Beaufort Channel, and Town Creek forced the town to
expand both to the north and the east. As the town grew, so did
the residential development and the population. Past com-
mercial and industrial land uses have also reflected Beaufort's
orientation towards the sea, with local tradesmen establishing
stores along the waterfront and the development of fisheries and
fish -processing industries.
After 1940, a major economic decline in the local economic
base activities —fishing, boating, and shipbuilding —led to an
out -migration and population decline. This had a significant
effect on land use. The central business district whch had
developed along the waterfront declined as a commercial
center. Other business establishments began to locate hap-
hazardly along major highways, not in defined commercial
areas. Industrial land use inside and adjacent to town declined.
Additionally, more residential developments were beginning to
occur outside rather than inside Beaufort's corporate limits.
Present Land Use (1975)
Of the total 1,530 acres within Beaufort's corporate limits, 34%
of the land is in some way developed. The remaining land is not
presently being used for any urban activity and is mainly
comprised by the dredge -spoils islands which are inside the
town's limits. Following is a description of the various categories
of land uses found in Beaufort during 1975. The land use map will
show their location and relationship in the planning area.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
*asn leuisnpui joj paiaalas AlsnolnaJd puel jo luawdolanap
jo 1:)el pup `(iaulsip ssauisnq lejivaa ayi ui Alielnaiiied)
sSwpl!nq le!aJawwoa JUeaeA u1 pailnsai sey ijojneag ui asn puel
uo suoilipuoa aiwouoaa pup uoilelndod aims jo laapa siyl
'isixa sapiunlioddo
qof ialiaq ajagm seaip jayio of silnpe SunoA slAvunw
-woa ayi jo uoileiSiw-ino leiluanbasuoa aqi pup 1Uojneag
ui sail!unlioddo aiwouoaa jo Iael ayi Aq lied ui pasnea uaaq
sey uoiiipuoa uoiielndod alleis siyl •uo!lpindod sl! palgnop
lsowle sey Aiunoa ay1 al!gm awes ayi AlaAllelaJ pau!etuaJ
sey liojneag jo uoileindod ayl 'sje@A 0t7 ised ayi Supna
anssl Awouo:)3 pue uoilelndod a41
•saainosai sl! pue puel ayl jo suoilepwil pue 'saipI!gedea
'sa!l!l!glssod ayi jo aieMe awoaaq ue:) luawwanoS leaol pup
suaziila ay1'sanssi asayi SumuSoaaj isig Ag •1sed ayi ui uasue
aney sanssi asayi qpm paleiaosse swalgojd `sasea awos ui 'leyi
palealpu! pey suaz!i!a ayi •iiojneag jo Suiuueld aininj ayi of
iuenalaJ se sanssi SuiMolloj ayi paipluapi sey uoiwdo ailgnd
S31111181SSOd UNV SW318O21d 3Sf1 0NV1
uotleaiaai ut Xpejnapied 'SOD.Was
fediaiunw ut saiaua.pgap uieliaa laaiioa iiojnea8 iegl —
liofnea8 ui aleaof sivawgsifgeisa 8uii3pjl1e-isifnol iegl -
-sanuanaJ antlaadsat nag) pue slsunoi
Suilaeille ui sluawafa iueailiusis aye Xagi asneaaq
'palaaloid aq saainosai 1pingna pue auoisig iegl —
amiapow of Mof uieuwai
luawdolanap feiluapisa.t pup uo.oefndod s,liojnea8 legs —
alqissod
se ialaeiega su jo yanw se u.temiew liojneag iegl —
:aiisap e paieaipui paledia
-11jed oqm nok •sasn puel aininj Suluiwiaiap pup 'swalgoid
SujApivap!'sasn puel luasaid Suilenlena `sanliaafgo Aijunwwoa
Suidolanap ui alOJ an!iae up 1001 suaz111a awns 'anoge
passnmip uoiled!aiiied ailgnd jo swioj snoiJeA ayi ySnojyl
UIVS nOA 1VHM
•luawnaop algeljoM pue algepueisiapun
ue jo ivawdolanap ayi pue AJuazilla ayi yl!M iaeiuoa
leuoiilppe ainsui of paysilgeisa seM 'sivaplsai eaje Suiuueld
aajyi jo pasodwoa `aaillwwOD t(aos!ApV uaz11!D e'Alleu011lppV
•suoliepuawwoaaJ pue leap! uMo i1a41 Sulppe se !lam se'(walsAs
indui ailgnd ayi ySnojyi passajdxa se) ijojneag jo suazilla
a41 jo saiisap pue saysiM ayi jo iseaige idal pieog uMol ayi
•S8uliaaw ailgnd asayl le paiedia!ued pue papualle sivaplsai
uanas-A1gSi3 •ailgnd ayi woij indui iiallos pue suoilsanb jamsue
of ivasaid ajaM `iueiinsuoa Suiuueld of uoiilppe ui `sleiaipo
luawuJaA0S Ieaol 'VWVD ssnas!p of liojneag ui sSuilaaw
ailgnd 9 play am 'indui ailgnd uleS of ldwalle Jayloue ul
•uMol ayi Suiiuoijuoa Apuairna
aye swalgoid le4m pue ijojneag ui paiisap si luawdolanap adAl
le4m se suoiisanb vans palse saiieuuoilsanb ayi •1:)eq ways
pal!ew pue suopsanb ayi palaldwoa LLL 'iiojneag ui sluapisai
OOS nano of sai!euuoiisanb puas of seM sayaeoidde ino jo auO
ipaiueM suaziila ayi iegm 1no puij'jauueld ayl'aM pip MOH
•ease Suiuueld ayl ui aldoad ayi jo sailiunlioddo
pue 'swalgojd 'spaau 'suoimidse 'saniiaafgo ayi laaljai isnw
sueld luawdolanap puel Ianiiaajja aq of •uoiiediawed ailgnd
laas of seM ueld ay Suidolanap ui aSels isJ11 ayi 'SL6L Tea u!
ueSaq ueld luawdolanaa puel s,iiojneag uo AJOM AJeuiwllaJd
S033N UNV S1NVM 11171OA 03NHV31 3M MOH
ueld asn puel s,ijojneag jo Aiewwns a si SuiMolloj ayi
T,We leiseoa ayi jo ivaw
-aSeuew pue 'luawdolanap AIJapJ0 `uoileAJasaid 'uoiiaaloid
ayi joj ueld jaisew a wjoj ll!m sueld asayl 't(Ian1laaII0D
•saqunoa leiseoa 0Z ayi jo sueld asn puel ayi joj sauilapinS
asodwoa of uoissiwwoD saajnosaN leiseoD e saiinbai 1aV ayi
'(VWVD) 13V luawaSeueW
eaiv leiseoD ayi passed t7L61, jo AlgwassV IpJauaD eu!IOJeD
y1JoN ay1'al04m a olul sueld alejedas ayl ysaw 01 pup sueld asn
puel umO nayl ajedaid of saiiunoa leiseoa Ile aSeinoaua of
•pooS ueyi wjey ajow sasnea y1MoiS luiod 1e4M le aplaap
of sn sdlay Suluueld _41M0JS s!yl uoddns uea puel ayi jayiagm
pue '41m0JS s141 Joj saa!AJas ap!Aoid uea am Ja4la4m 'inaao
01 41M0JS iueM am aja4m jo auilino ue si 'uayl 'Suluueld
-Auew ale
saldwexa ayi •siaipm Suisluup ino Suopnllod aye sl!os alglled
-woauw ui paaeld sluei alldas sayaeaq pue 'sauenisa 'spunos
ino jo sauilajoys ayi Suole uoisoia paiaylinj sey ivawdolanap
ssalaieD -sialeM Suiysijllays ino jo Auew pasola sey uollnllod
•eullOJeD 41JON
leiseoa jo seaie Auew ui uoiianjisap jo uSiedwea a unSaq Apeajle
sey 41M0JS pauueldun Joj -Aofua am leyl siljauaq aiwouoaa
pue Aineaq leiseoa awes ayi Aofua ue:) uaipllya s,uajpllya
ino ieyl ainsse of lioM isnw 11iojneag jo suazilia ayl aM
Residential Land Use — As stated before, Beaufort is
basically a residential community with 59%of the developed
land devoted to residential usage. With 86.4% of all housing
being single-family dwellings, mobile homes are the second
largest with 6.1% of the residential dwellings.
Commerical — Commercial land use in Beaufort occupies
8% of the developed land and is found in three general
districts: the Front Street Central Business District, the
shopping center at N.C. 101-U.S. 70, and along Cedar Street
(U.S. 70). There are also scattered business establishments
located along West Beaufort Road.
Industrial —The amount of land used for industrial purposes
in Beaufort is very small. The most intensive concentration of
industrial use is located just outside the town's limit. Several
fishing/processing companies and a veneer manufacturing
plant are located here.
Transportation, Communication, and Utilities — Of the
developed land inside of Beaufort, 22% is devoted to streets
and railroads (and their right-of-ways), sewage and water
plants, power stations, and other transportation, com-
munication, and utility facilities. Streets and railroads are by
far the largest land uses in this category.
Governmental and Institutional — This land use category
includes school, post office, town hall, courthouse, and
other governmental and institutional facilities. Of the
developed land, 6% is devoted to this category, with the
Beaufort Elementary School occupying the greatest acreage.
Undeveloped Land — Undeveloped land in Beaufort is the
land not used for urban purposes —excluding, however,
agricultural land, forest land, water bodies, barren areas and
wetlands. This classification represents 10.7% of Beaufort's
land.
Agricultural — Agricultural land occupies approximately
6.3% of the total land area within the Town of Beaufort.
Almost all this land is found exclusively in the newly annexed
section of town (in the northern section) and along the West
Beaufort Road.
Wetlands — Wetlands in Beaufort are classified as any salt
marsh or other marsh subject to regular or occasional
flooding by tides. Approximately 23.3% of the total land area
has been classified as wetlands with the largest acreage
occurring along Town Marsh, Bird Shoal, and Carrot Island.
Barren — Barren lands include the dunes and other high
ground found on Town Marsh, Bird Shoals, and Carrot
Island. just over 16% of the total land area in Beaufort has
been identified as barren.
DESIRED POPULATION
Population projections are valuable tools in almost all major
planning decisions. They can give the local government a guide
in planning and providing the necessary public services needed
to accommodate the estimated population. Additionally, the
local government can have an idea of how much land will be
needed for the future population.
The citizens of Beaufort have expressed their desires, through
questionnaires and at public meetings, that Beaufort's future
land development consist basically of low to medium residential
development. With this growth policy determined, population
projections for 5, 10, 25, and 50 years were calculated and
presented at several public meetings. The following projections
were discussed at public meetings and were found to be
consistent with the public's desires.
1975 1980 1985 2000 2025
3,719 3,831 3,946 4,183 4,601
GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
Having addressed the problems and possibilities of land use in
Beaufort, we will now discuss goals and objectives which can
help guide future land development in Beaufort.
Goal — To protect and upgrade the Historic District.
Objectives — A revision of the zoning ordinance is needed
to insure that future development is consistent
with the residential and commercial character
of this area.
— Efforts to document, restore, and preserve
architectural and historical structures should
be intensified.
— A reorganization of the Board of Architecture
Review is recommended, to include a
professional with architectural/historical
expertise.
Goal — To encourage tourism and tourist -related activities
emphasizing the scenic, historical, and cultural attrac-
tiveness of the town.
Objectives — Highway markers could be placed at strategic
locations in eastern North Carolina. These
signs should carry the legend "Historical
Beaufort" and the mileage.
NO11 11dOb1N1
— Provisions in the zoning ordinance for com-
mercial establishments which complement
tourism should be encouraged. Such esta-
blishments might include specialty shops,
social and cultural facilities, motels, restau-
rants, and marinas.
Goal — To encourage and strive for better housing for all the
citizens of Beaufort.
Objectives — Continue efforts to secure federal renewal
assistance programs and public improvements
projects.
— A code enforcement officer is needed. Self-
help improvements of homes should be en-
couraged through enforcement of the town's
housing code.
Goal — To provide adequate recreational facilities for the
citizenry of Beaufort.
Objectives — Emphasis should be placed on centralized
recreational area.
— Recreational plans and facilities should be
directed towards all age groups.
Goal — To protect and preserve the wetlands and estuarine
waters surrounding Beaufort.
Objectives — Enforce proper land use regulations within the
areas which are designated Areas of Environ-
mental Concern.
— Establish proper land use regulations to pro-
tect Town Marsh, Bird Shoal, and Carrot
Island from development.
HOW MUCH OUR LAND CAN SUPPORT
To maintain a healthy environment that is free from over-
crowding, we must study the capability of the land to sustain the
projected population. Presently, Beaufort has an adequate
amount of developable land to support a population of 5,400, a
figure far above the desired population for the next fifty years.
By developable land, we mean land where the Town can
provide water and sewer facilities for residential development.
In 1985 the estimated population of Beaufort should be
approximately 3,946; a slight increase of 6% from 1975. The
additional population is not expected to place any significant
demand on the basic features which the town now operates.
Water and sewer services should be adequate, with the recent
construction of a new water tank and the extension of sewer
lines to the newly annexed area. Beaufort's participation in
Carteret County's 201 Facility Plan should also insure that the
future residents will be served by a regional sewer system.
Public input, however, has indicated that more recreational
facilities and programs are desirable for the near future. An
annual assessment of all services by the town has and should
continue in order to provide the citizens of Beaufort with the
highest quality of services possible.
LAND CLASSIFICATION
One of the benefits of CAMA is the establishment of a Land
Classification System for the twenty coastal counties and their
respective municipalities to use. Classifying land into categories
helps the citizens to recognize the expected general use of all
land within their planning area. More importantly, land
classification is a statement of policy by the local government as
to where to conserve the area's natural resources by guiding
growth. Obviously, areas with different growth rates and
capabilities should be viewed differently.
Land use classifiction also encourages coordination and
consistency between municipal land use policies and those of
the county. In fact, it isessential that the municipal plan take into
consideration the needs of the county (and vice versa).
Since land classification indicate where growth will probably
occur, it also shows citizens where community facilities should
be extended. The Coastal Resources Commission has adopted a
classification system whereby all lands will be classified under
one of five categories.
Beaufort's land classification has been coordinated and is
consistent with Carteret County's system. A reference to
Beaufort's Land Classification Map will familiarize the reader
with the two different land classes existing in the planning area.
The majority of Beaufort is classified "developed". The coastal
wetlands and floodplain, estuarine waters, and Town Marsh,
Bird Shoal, and Carrot Island are identified as "conservation"
areas. The classifications were based on the following descrip-
tions:
a.
Developed — Lands where existing population density is
moderate to high and where there are a variety of land uses
which have the necessary public services. At a minimum,
these lands contain existing central water and sewer
facilities.
b.
Conservation — Fragile, hazard, and other lands necessary
to maintain a healthy natural environment and necessary to
provide for the public health, safety, or welfare.
Potential Areas of Environmental Concern
CAMA provides for the management of environmentally
fragile areas throughout the coastal area of North Carolina. The
Beaufort Land Development Plan has recognized several
potential areas of environmental concern. These are now under
study.
Following is a brief description of the fragile areas in Beaufort
and identification of appropriate land uses for each area.
1. Coastal Wetlands — Any salt marsh or other marsh subject
to regular or occasional flooding by tides.
Appropriate Land Use — These marshes should be con-
sidered unsuitable for all development which will alter
their natural functions. Examples of acceptable land uses
may include utility easements, fishing piers, docks, and
certain agricultural uses.
2. Estuarine Waters — All the water of the Atlantic Ocean
within the boundary of North Carolina and all the waters of
the bays, sounds, rivers, and tributaries thereto seaward of
the dividing line between coastal fishing waters and inland
fishing waters.
Appropriate Land Use — Highest priority shall be
allocated to the conservation of estuarine waters. The
development of navigational channels, the use of bulk-
heads to prevent erosion, and the building of piers
or wharfs where no other feasible alternative exists are
examples of land use appropriate within estuarine waters
provided that such uses will not be detrimental to the
biological and physical estuarine functions and public
trust rights.
3. Fragile, Historic, or Natural Resource Areas — Historic
Places — Historical, archaeological, and other places and
properties owned, managed, or assisted by the State of
North Carolina. In Beaufort, the "Old Burying Ground"
between Ann, Craven, and Broad Streets is the only site
in this category.
Appropriate Land Uses — Land use which will result
in substantial irreversible damage to the historic value of
the area is inappropriate.
4. Areas Subject to Public Rights —Certain Public Trust
Areas — Areas such as waterways and land under or flowed
by tidal waters or navigable waters, to which the public
may have rights of access or public trust rights and areas
which the State of North Carolina may be authorized to
preserve, conserve, or protect under the North Carolina
Constitution.
Appropriate Land Uses — The development of naviga-
tional channels, drainage ditches, the use of bulkheads
to prevent erosion, and the building of piers or wharfs are
examples of appropriate land uses provided that such
land uses will not be detrimental to the biological and
physical functions and public trust rights.
5. Natural Hazard Areas —Coastal Floodplains — The land
areas adjacent to coastal sounds, estuaries, or the ocean
which are prone to flooding from storms with an annual
probability of 1% or greater (100-year storm).
Appropriate Land Uses — Development activities must
conform with the standards of the Federal Insurance
Administration for coastal high -hazard areas and safety
during the flood surge from a 100-year storm.
Following a period of study involving potential AEC's, the
CRC will name final AEC's. Development within one of these
fragile areas will require a permit. Minor projects, defined as
projects less than 20 acres or which involve construction of
one or more structures having an area less than 60,000 square
feet, will be processed by the Town of Beaufort. Major projects,
defined as projects currently needing state permits, those of
greater than 20 acres in size, those that involve drilling or ex-
cavating natural resources on land or underwater, and those
involving construction of one or more structures having an
area in excess of 60,000 feet will require a permit from the
Coastal Resources Commission.
The success of any plan depends on how well it is put into
effect. Little will be accomplished unless the proposals set forth
by this plan are implemented. Numerous legal avenues are
available for implementation, but most importantly it must have
the support of the citizens in the planning area. Finally, the
planning process is continuous. Citizen participation will be
needed continually to revise plans and policies to meet changing
situations.
Some major means by which the Land Development Plan can
be implemented are discussed below.
Code Consistency — There must be consistency of all existing
local regulations and ordinaces with the Land Classification Plan
and with the standards within Areas of Environmental Concern.
(The standards for development in these areas are presently
being formulated.)
Zoning — A zoning ordinance, properly formulated and
administered, can be used to guide physical development by
regulating the use of property, the size of lots, yards and other
open spaces, and the height of buildings. In short, it can
accomplish many of the objectives set forth in the Land
Development Plan.
Subdivision Regulations — Subdivision regulations will
provide for the orderly growth of an area and also insure that
individuals purchasing building lots will be adequatly protected
by requiring the developer to meet minimum standards of
health, safety, and welfare.
Minimum Housing Code — This code specifies minimum
standards for space and sanitary heating and lighting conditions
for both new and existing housing. Through strict enforcement,
substandard housing conditions can be eliminated.
Local Permit Letting — The municipality is enpowered under
CAMA to let permits for "minor development" as defined
earlier in this synopsis. Specific criteria for permit -letting are
being formulated at the present time.
Plan Up -date — This plan will be subject to reviewand revision
at least every five years, but the Town Commissoners will make
their revisions only after a comprehensive public participation
program. The revisions should reflect the changes in lifestyle and
the environment pressures which might have occurred.
CONCLUSION
The synopsis which you have just read was prepared with the
hope that you would study it, understand it, and even question it
if necessary. We want you to take a part in planning.
Remember: The land use plan itself is not the end. Planning
must continue so we can prepare for more orderly growth, and
your participation will always be necessary for planning to
achieve its goal.
Because no approved plan exists for Carteret County, the Coastal Resources
Commission is unable to evaluate the consistency of this plan with the county
land use plan as required by the Coastal Area Management Act. However, this
plan is satisfactory in all other respects. Accordingly, this plan has been approved
contingent on a finding by the Coastal Resources Commission that it is consistent
with an approved land use plan for Carteret County.