2005 Land Use Plan Update-2010

2005 Land Use Plan Update
CARTERET COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
Adopted by Carteret County
April 20, 2009
Certified by the North Carolina Coastal Resources Commission
. December 20, 2010
Planning Assistance Provided By:
Kathy B. Vinson, AICP
Coastal Planning Services, Inc.
Morehead City, North Carolina
The preparation of this report was financed in part through a grant provided by the North Carolina
Coastal Management Program, through funds provided by the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972,
as amended, which is administered by the Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

2005 Land Use Plan Update
CARTERET COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
Adopted by Carteret County
April 20, 2009
Certified by the North Carolina Coastal Resources Commission
December 20, 2010
Planning Assistance Provided By:
Kathy B. Vinson, AICP
Coastal Planning Services, Inc.
Morehead City, North Carolina
The preparation of this report was financed in part through a grant provided by the North Carolina
Coastal Management Program, through funds provided by the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972,
as amended, which is administered by the Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
SECTION 2. POPULATION, HOUSING AND ECONOMY
i 9
Population
....... . ........
j 9
Regional and County Growth Trends
9
i Geographic Distribution of Growth
I 10
Population Age Characteristics
11
Current estimates and projections of permanent and seasonal populations
13
Housing
Housing Characteristics
Housing Types
14
14
T-15
Housing Age
15
Building Permits
1 16
Economy
16
Employment and Income
17
...... . . ......
MilitTy
20
Tourism I!np4q=20
Commercial Seafood IE!pact
22
[—Retiree Population Impact
22
SECTION 3. NATURAL SYSTEMS ANALYSIS
I 23
Natural Features Inventory
23
Areas of Environmental Concern (AECs)
21
Estuarine and Ocean System AECs
Ocean Hazard System AECs
24
24
Public Water Supply AECs
25
Natural and Cultural Resources AECs
25
AECs in Carteret County
25
Soil Characteristics
26
i Water Quality Classifications
27
Prima Nurse Areas
28
.. . .. . .....
.
Flood Hazards and Storm Surge Areas
29
Non -coastal Wetlands
30
Natural Heritage Areas .
31-
. ... . ... ..........
Anadromous; Fish Spawning Areas
31
Environmental Composite Map
32....:
Environmental Conditions
35
Water Quality
35
Surface Water and Impaired Streams
Wastewater Treatment Systems
35
38

Public Health Hazards
39
Beaches
I 40
Natural Hazards
40
Repetitive Flood Losses
40
Shoreline Erosion
40
Natural Resources
i 41
Agricultural Resources
41
SECTION 5. COMMUNITY FACILITIES ANALYSIS
48
Water and Wastewater Systems
.... . .....
i 48
Water Systems
48
Sewer Systems —
---- -----
Transportation
51
-
T52
Stormwater
..............
56
--78;
SECTION 6. LAND SUITABILITY ANALYSIS
SECTION.7. REVIEW OF EXISTING POLICIES
62
Implementation of 1999 Land Use Plan
1 63
Consistency of Existing Development Program with 1999 Land Use Plan
63
Effectiveness of 1999 Land Use Plan Policies
64
SECTION 8. GOALS, POLICIES, AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP
65
Land Use and Development Goals
65
Future Land Use and Development Policies
65
1.0 Public Access
67
2.0 Land Use Compatibility
70
3.0 Infrastructure Carrying Ca acity
73
4.0 Natural and Man-made Hazard Areas
77
5.0 Water Quality
81
6.0 Local Areas of Concern — Economic Development
86
Future Land Use Map
89
Allocation of Land to Various Land Use Categories
96
Gross versus Net Acreages
98
Cost of Required Community Facility Extensions
100
SECTION 9. TOOLS FOR MANAGING DEVELOPMENT
103
Role & Status of Plan or How to Use the Plan)
103
Existing Develop _q!ent Program
104
New Tools
111
Action Plan and Schedule . . .. . ...... .
112
ii

REFERENCES 116
TABLES
2.1 Total Population and Percent �qhange for CAMA Regulated Counties
2.2 Summary of Year -Round Population Growth
i 10
11
2.3 Population by Age Group
12
2.4 Population Projection by Awe Group
12
2.5 Seasonal Population Estimates and Projections
14 1
2.6 Carteret County Housing Characteristics
15
2.7 Types of Occupied Housing Units in Carteret County
115
2.8 Housing Age in Carteret County
16
2.9 Carteret County Building Permits
16
2.10 Carteret County Key Economic Indicators
17
2.11 Employment by Major Industry in Carteret Co"
Y-M.
18
2.12 Earnings by Major Industry in Carteret County
1 2.13 Largest Manufacturing & Non -Manufacturing Employers in Carteret C
19
20
2.14 2000 Seasonal Housing Units
21
2.15 Tourism ITpact in Carteret County
-21
Classifications 3.1 Water Quality
28
3.2 Major Primary Nurse g Areas in Carteret County
29
4.1 Land Use in Carteret County Planning Area
44
4.2 Estimate of Future Land Needs for Residential Use
45
1 4.3 Projected Land Use In Development 2005 to 2025
4.4 Additional Land Area in Acres Needed for Development 2005 to 2025
46
46
5.1 Water System Service Areas
49
5.2 1999 and 2002 Traffic Volumes
54
6.1 Carteret CoyEty Land Suit bility Analysis Wei is
59
1 8.1 Significant Natural Heritage Areas
95
8.2 Exist* ing Development 2005) by Future Land Use Map Classifications
97
8.3 Existing Development by Land Use Type & Future Land Use Map Classifications
97
a q�e Type 2025 _
8.4 Additional Land Area Needed for Development by Land Through98
8.5 Estimated Net Buildable Acreage Available for Development _!!lent
98
9.1 Existing Development Management Plan
109
9.2 Action Plan and Schedule . ....... . . .... .
114
FIGURES
2.1 Carteret County Population Age Groups
13
2.2 Employment by MajorIndustry
19-1
3.1 Carteret County Acres Closed to ShellfishiRg.
36
MAPS
___- 3.1 Environmental Coln 34 p
... ....... . ............
4.1 Existing Land Use
iii

6.1 Land Suitabili _Analsis _ 61
8.1A Future Land Use western section 101
8.1B Future Land Use (eastern section) i 102
APPENDICES
Appendix A: Citizen Participation Plan
Appendix B: Public Forum Comments
Appendix C: Explanation of Demographic and Population Statistics
Appendix D: Policies that Exceed State and Federal Standards
Appendix E: Definition of "Active Terms" Used in Policies
Appendix F: Required Policy Analysis
Appendix G: Maps Used in Plan Preparation
Appendix H: Hazard Mitigation Plan
Appendix I: Zoning and Land Classification Compatibility Analysis
Appendix J: Holding Capacity Analysis
Appendix K: Gross versus Net Acreages for Future Development
iv.

I
I
C
CARTERET COUNTY
2005 LAND USE PLAN UPDATE
INTRODUCTION
The 2005 Carteret County Land Use Plan represents an update to the 1996 Carteret County Land Use
Plan, which was prepared with assistance from Holland Consulting Planners, Inc. of Wilmington,
North Carolina. The 1996 plan was locally adopted by the Carteret County Board of Commissioners
Q on September 13, 1999, and was certified by the Coastal Resources Commission on November 19,
1999.
The 2005 Carteret County Land Use Plan has been prepared in accordance with the requirements
contained in the North Carolina Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA), the North Carolina Coastal
Resources Commission (CRC) Land Use Planning Requirements [15A NCAC 7B], and the relevant
planning process requirements of Local Planning and Management Grants [15A NCAC 7L]. The
Land Use Plan follows the organizational format prescribed in 15A NCAC 7B and utilizes the
methodology and data sources suggested by the Technical Manual for Coastal Land Use Planning,
prepared by the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources.
In November 2001, the CRC adopted revisions to the 1996 Land Use Planning Requirements. The
new guidelines are designed to be less complicated than the past guidelines, better tailored to the
needs of local governments, and more in line with the goals of CAMA. The revised guidelines
became effective in August 2002, and are the basis for this planning effort.
The CAMA legislation requires that each of the twenty coastal counties prepare and adopt a land use
plan. Municipalities within these counties have the option of adopting individual plans, or the option
of falling under the authority of their county plan. In Carteret County, the Towns of Bogue, Peletier
and Cedar Point fall under the purview of the Carteret County Land Use Plan. The remaining
incorporated municipalities prepare individual land use plans. The Towns of Cedar Point and Peletier
use the Carteret County Land Use Plan for guidance in rezonings and other land use decisions and
rely on the County plan for CAMA permitting decisions and state and federal consistency
determinations. The Town of Bogue relies on the County plan for CAMA permitting and consistency
determinations, as well as a guide for development of an initial land use plan for the community.
This Land Use Plan is intended to provide a framework that will guide local government officials and
private citizens as they make day-to-day and long-term decisions affecting development. The Land
Use Plan serves as an overall "blueprint" for the development of Carteret County that when
implemented, results in the most suitable and appropriate use of the land and protection of the
county's natural resources. In addition to serving as a guide to the overall development of Carteret
County, the Land Use Plan will be used by local, state and federal agencies in CAMA permitting
decisions, project funding and project consistency determinations.

The Coastal Resources Commission places great emphasis on involving citizens and property 3owners
in the development and implementation of the Land Use Plan. The goal is to involve as many citizens
as possible in the development of the plan, and thereby enhance the likelihood that the plan will be
implemented. Accordingly, on October 6, 2003, the Carteret County Board of Commissioners
adopted a Citizen Participation Plan (Appendix A), which designated the Carteret County Planning
Commission as the lead group responsible for preparation of the Land Use Plan. The Planning
Commission is composed of citizens that represent a broad cross-section of the population of Carteret
County. The purpose of the Citizen Participation Plan is to ensure that all interested citizens have an
opportunity to participate in the development of the plan. The Citizen Participation Plan describes the
public participation tools that are to be used to inform the public of planning progress and to solicit
public participation. The Citizen Participation Plan also provides a general outline of the Planning
Commission's meeting schedule for discussion and development of the Land Use Plan. a
In accordance with the Citizen Participation Plan, the Carteret County Planning Commission held an
initial public information meeting on November 10, 2003 and a Community Forum on December 8,
2003. These meetings were held to receive public input from citizens on issues, concerns and
opportunities available to Carteret County. "Open house" informational meetings were also held in
July 2004 and February 2005 to allow citizens an opportunity to review maps and draft policies
developed in conjunction with the planning process and to interact informally with members of the
Planning Commission.
In addition, all Planning Commission meetings that included discussion of the Land Use Plan Update
provided time on the agenda for public comment. Participation by non-resident property owners was
encouraged by regular planning updates to the Carteret County website. Viewers of the website were
encouraged to direct questions and comments to the Carteret County Planning Director.
The Planning Commission reviewed the technical information developed for the Land Use Plan
Update and identified major land use assets and problems as a basis for the Community Concerns and
Aspirations section of this report. The assets, problems and key planning issues identified through
this process, as well as .public comments provided at the initial public information meeting and
Community Forum, were used by the Planning Commission to develop the Community Vision. The
Community Vision is a description of the general physical appearance and form that represents the
citizens' plan for the future. It also serves as the foundation for the objectives and policies contained
in the Land Use Plan.
One of several steps in the planning process included an analysis of existing and emerging conditions
that affect Carteret County. Examples include current and projected population trends, housing
characteristics and economic conditions. Natural systems and environmental hazards were analyzed
and compiled onto an environmental composite map. This .map depicts environmentally sensitive
areas where development may already be limited or limited in the future due to public safety issues
or protection of the environment. Other factors that were analyzed and considered in the planning
process included existing land use and development patterns, projected land use needs and
community facilities and utilities. a
A land 'suitability analysis was conducted to determine the relative suitability for development of
land in the Carteret County planning jurisdiction. Considerations included proximity to important
natural features, existing and planned community services, existing developed areas and existing
local, state and federal regulations affecting growth and development.
2
r

A plan for the future was developed and includes land use and development goals and policies for
Carteret County. This section of the Land Use Plan addressed the CRC's management topics, which
include the following: Public Access, Land Use Compatibility, Infrastructure Carrying Capacity,
Natural Hazard Areas, Water Quality and Local Areas of Concern. Carteret County selected
Economic Development as the local areas of concern. A future land use map was developed to show
areas that are expected to see future growth and development, as well as "protected lands" such as
state and federally owned properties that are not available for development, and those areas
designated for conservation.
An implementation strategy or tools for managing development was developed to describe Carteret
County's implementation strategies for the updated Land Use Plan: This includes a description of
existing ordinances, policies, codes and regulations and how they will be coordinated and employed
to implement land use and development policies. This section also describes additional tools, such as
new or amended ordinances or other specific projects selected by Carteret County to implement the
updated Land Use Plan. The effective period for the 2005 Land Use Plan Update is for the ten-year
period following adoption of the plan.
ORGANIZATION OF PLAN
The land use plan is organized into a series of sections, in accordance with the outline contained in
the CRC's Land Use Planning Requirements (15A NCA_C 7B).
• Section I addresses community concerns and aspirations. This section provides an
overview of the community's perceptions of the dominant growth related conditions
affecting land use, development, water quality and other environmental conditions, and
economic conditions. This section also includes the Community Vision and summarizes
the results of a Community Forum held on December 8, 2003.
• Section 2 provides an analysis of population, housing, and economy trends that influence
land use and impact natural resources.
• Section 3 provides an analysis of natural systems in Carteret County. This section
describes Areas of Environmental Concern (AECs) present in Carteret County, as well as
other important natural features. An Environmental Composite Map is included which
shows the overlap and extent of these features and the County's determination of the
capabilities and limitations of these features and conditions for development.
• Section 4 provides an analysis and map of existing land use and development.
• Section 5 describes and analyzes water, wastewater, and transportation systems in
Carteret County.
• Section 6 contains the land suitability analysis and map required by. the Coastal
Resources Commission. -
• Section 7 summarizes the existing policies and describes implementation and an
assessment of policy effectiveness.
• Section 8 contains the County's land use and development goals and policies and the
future land use map.
• Section 9 describes the County's implementation strategies or "tools" for managing
development. These include a description of the role and status of the land use plan, a
description of the current development management program and additional tools that
will be required to implement the plan, and an action plan and schedule for
implementation.
3

• The Citizen Participation Plan and public forum comments are contained in Appendices
at the end of the plan. Also included is an explanation of demographic and population
statistics and local definitions for "action" works contained in land use and development
policies.
0

SECTION 1. COMMUNITY CONCERNS AND
ASPIRATIONS
The purpose of the Community Concerns and Aspirations section of the Carteret County Land Use
Plan is to provide overall guidance and direction for the development of the plan. The Planning
Commission used the following three-part process to describe dominant growth -related conditions
that influence land use and development patterns in Carteret County, describe key planning issues
and develop a community vision:
1. Review of technical information related to existing and emerging conditions;
2. Identification of major community assets and problems related to land use and development;
and
3. Development of the community vision statement to serve as the foundation for more specific
objectives and policies stated elsewhere in the Land Use Plan.
DOMINANT GROWTH -RELATED CONDITIONS
During the planning process, the Carteret County Planning Commission, citizens, and staff of the
Carteret County Planning and Development Department identified the following growth -related
conditions that influence land use, development, water quality, and other environmental conditions:
• Population trends indicate that the population of Carteret County is aging. The number of
older and retirement age residents is increasing, while younger age groups are showing a
significant decline. The lack of good paying jobs is thought to be a major reason for the
decline in working -age adults, while the area's attractiveness as a retirement destination
helps explain the increase in older age groups. Steps should be taken to further improve
the attractiveness of the County as a retirement area by developing a more "senior
friendly" community and thus capitalizing on this potential economic growth
opportunity. Likewise, economic development strategies should be developed to create
more and better paying jobs to attract and retain younger adults.
• Carteret County continues to experience steady subdivision and land development
activities. In recent years the majority of this growth has occurred in the western portion
of the County, with the greatest percentage of growth occurring in the White Oak
Township. This pattern is expected to continue throughout the planning period, although
areas of central Carteret County, particularly those served by central water service, are
expected to also experience increased growth.
• The number of acres of closed shellfishing waters in Carteret County continues to
increase, although not at the rates experienced in the early 1990's. Most of the closed
waters are located in more densely populated areas, with Core Sound and Back Sound
containing larger percentages of open waters. The relationship of development to closed
shellfishing waters is a concern, although some believe that existing land use policies are
partly responsible for the slowing of this trend. Since the status of shellfishing waters is
thought to be:one .of the best determinants of overall water quality, the County should
work to protect water quality, while recognizing the qualities that attract residents and
visitors to the area.
• The Carteret County economy is strongly influenced by the military presence in the area.
Military and associated civilian employment constitutes the largest employment sector in
the County. Impacts from the upcoming Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) 2005
5

could potentially hurt the County's economy by closing military installations or reducing
the level of military and associated civilian employment.
• Tourism continues to have major impacts on land use, natural resources, and economic
conditions.
• Commercial and recreational saltwater fishing continue to provide significant economic
impacts to Carteret County. Water quality and other environmental conditions impact this
industry.
• Marine trades (boat building) and marine research are important contributors to the local
economy.
• Transportation issues surround major highways (US 70, NC 24, NC 58, and NC 101).
These include the need for improved safety, regional accessibility, and traffic flow.
Anticipated growth. of the County is expected to continue to place transportation
pressures on the County.
• Carteret County lacks central sewer service..The development of countywide sewer has
not occurred due to cost and permitting restrictions that have not been resolved. Central
water service is available in some areas. Individual septic tanks and wells serve most
homes.
• Approximately one-third of the area under Carteret County planning jurisdiction is zoned.
All zoned areas are located in the western and central portions of the County.
ASSETS AND PROBLEMS
The following list summarizes the planning conditions that are important to the future of Carteret
County and are the focus of this Land Use Plan. These conditions address the CAMA Land Use Plan
Management Topics, which include public access, land use compatibility, infrastructure carrying
capacity, natural hazard areas, water quality and local areas of concern. The identification of assets
and problems was developed with input from local citizens and property owners.
Assets
• Plentiful waterfront areas throughout Carteret County to attract tourism and retirement and/or
second home development
• Countywide waterfront access plan in place to guide future acquisitions and improvements
for public access
• . Opportunities available for acquisition of additional waterfront access sites through the buy-
out provisions of the FEMA Hazard Mitigation Program
• County policies require local determination of consistency of proposed zoning. and
subdivision actions with Land Use Plan policies and Land Classification Map
• State and federal permitting programs (such as those administered by the NC Division of
Coastal Management and the US Army Corps of Engineers) provide a measure of protection
for natural resources and provide basic requirements that affect construction of infrastructure
(roads, utilities, etc.)
• County employs a variety of local programs and regulations to protect natural features
• County is a National Flood Insurance Program participant and has adopted a Flood Damage
Protection Ordinance
• Public outreach and education activities are in place to minimize flood damage risk
• As a result of the damage caused by Hurricane Isabel, all substantially damaged pre -FIRM
(Flood Insurance Rate Maps) constructed dwellings are to be elevated
G

• New revised FIRM maps are more accurate than previous FIRM maps
• Opportunities exist for participation in the Scenic Byways Program, particularly in Down
East area of Carteret County
• Retiree population is an economic growth opportunity
• Existing lifestyle of smaller communities is desirable
Problems
• Limited beachfront areas under Carteret County planning jurisdiction
• Inadequate funding for needed public access land acquisition and improvements
• Much of available waterfront is privately owned
• Subdivision regulations require water access for residents but not for the general public
• Existing access to public beaches is often inadequate to meet requirements for federally
funded beach nourishment.projects
• Local land use and development regulations often mimic state and federal standards and
provide no additional protection for natural features
• Much of Carteret County is designated as wetlands
• Closed shellfishing areas due to impacts from development
• Lack of county -wide zoning
• Limited soil suitability for septic tanks
• Lack of central sewer systems to eliminate problems with malfunctioning septic tanks
• Lack of County capital improvements and infrastructure plans
• No County engineer results in lack of professional oversight of technical projects
• Much of County is located in a designated flood zone
• County's location and topography make it vulnerable to hurricanes, tropical storms and other
storm events
• Much of the County and adjacent waters are affected by uncontrolled stormwater runoff
Funding and permit approvals for needed beach nourishment projects are difficult to obtain
• Attractiveness of waterfront areas for development stresses fragile areas
• Transportation improvements are needed to enhance economy and improve traffic patterns
• Capacity issues on major roads are troublesome
•. Some residents view existing environmental regulations as excessive
• Seasonal population stresses local services, but helps support the economy of area
• Lack of job opportunities for young adults results in migration from the County
• Economic development versus resource protection is a source of conflict in County
• Economic growth is limited by lack of suitable jobs
• Impacts from Base Realignment and Closure (BRAG) 2005 could hurt County's economy
On December 15, 2003, the Planning Commission sponsored a Community Forum to receive input
from the public on the identification of the County's assets and -problems relative to the CAMA Land
Use Plan Management Topics. The results of the meeting were considered in the development of the
a Community Vision. Please see Appendix B for a summary of public comments provided at the
Community Forum.
aCOMMUNITY VISION
The Community Vision for Carteret County was developed by the Carteret County Planning
aCommission at the beginning of the planning process to provide the foundation for setting priorities,
7

defining goals and developing land use policies to achieve local government goals. The Community.
Vision is an important feature of the Land Use Plan because it provides a description of how the area
will look in the future. Input from the public was considered in development of the following
community vision:
Carteret County creates an atmosphere and infrastructure that is conducive to sustainable
economic development and growth of the County.
Carteret County balances growth with protection of its natural resources
Water quality and the area s rich history are vital to the Countys continuing development.
Carteret County 'explores traditional and alternative methods for the protection of its
waters:
Carteret County strives to blend the benefits of new development with the Countys
heritage by actively taking steps to preserve community character.
Carteret County recognizes the contributions of the military community to its economy and
actively promotes its continued presence in the County.
Carteret County strives to improve the quality of Me for its residents and the economic
stability of the County by encouraging and promoting sustainable industries and job
opportunities -

SECTION 2. POPULATION, HOUSING AND
ECONOMY
POPULATION
Information on Carteret County's permanent and seasonal population and the degree to which it will
LJ - change during the planning period is an important component of the land use planning process.
Population analysis can help identify growth areas, as well as the amount of land that should be
allocated for future uses. Population trend analysis provides information on expected impacts on the
area's natural resources and future infrastructure needs. Population age and income characteristics
help estimate demands for different types of housing and related land use, as well as special needs of
the community. AppendixC provides an explanation of demographic and population statistics and
how they are compiled.
Regional and Countv Growth Trends
(� Population growth in Carteret County has increased at significant rates since 1970. The permanent
(j population increased more than 95% from 1970 to 2003, making it the sixth fastest growing North
Carolina coastal county (Table 2.1). Two of the reasons for the growth increase are the national
trends of population movement toward the coast and the area's increasing popularity as a
retirement/resort area. Another important reason is the expansion of nearby military facilities.
(� Eighteen of the twenty North Carolina counties regulated by the Coastal Area Management Act
j.j (CAMA), including Carteret County, experienced a net permanent population growth from 1990 to
2000. During this period, only two coastal counties lost population (Bertie and Washington
Counties). Compared to surrounding counties (Beaufort, Craven, Hyde, Pamlico and Onslow),
- Carteret was the second fastest growing county, slightly behind Pamlico at 13.8%.
The highest rates of permanent population growth from 1970 through 2000 in the coastal region have
occurred in oceanfront counties. These six counties are Carteret, Brunswick, Currituck, Dare, New
Hanover and Pender (Table 2.1).
Population statistics from 2000 to 2003 reflect a slowing of the growth rate in Carteret County. For
this three-year period, Carteret County population grew from 59,383 to an estimated 60,712. On
average, between 1990 and 2000 the population of Carteret County grew 1.3% per year compared to
the estimated average yearly growth rate of 0.7% between 2000 and 2003.
Population growth projections anticipate an annual growth rate of 0.82% for the 2000-2005 period.
Reasons for. this projected slowing of- the growth rate compared to the 1990-2000 period are
attributed to Carteret beaches being largely developed by 2000, lack of adequate jobs to attract and
retain younger residents and transportation deficiencies which may result in Carteret County being
less accessible than other coastal areas. Table 2.1 provides populations and percentage change for the
twenty CAMA regulated counties from 1970 through 2003 and includes population change
projections through 2005.
a

Table 2.1- Total Population and Percent Change for CAMA Regulated Counties
Area Name
Year
Percent Change
1970 1980 1990 2000 2003 2005
(estimate) (projected)
1970-1980 1980-1990 1990-2000
2000-2005
(estimate)
1970-2005
(estimate)
Carteret County;
"31,603
41,092
52,553
59.383
60,712
61,825
30.0%
'27.9%.
13.0%
AM
<:95.6%
Beaufort County
35,980
40,355
42,283
44.958
45,792
46,244
12.2%
4.8%
6.3%
2.9%
28.5%
Bertie County
20,528
21,024
20,388
19.757
19,649
19,441
2.4%
-3.0%
-3.1 %
-1.6%
-5.3%
Brunswick County
24,223
35,777
50,985
73,141
80,751
84,610
47.7%
42.5%
43.5%
15.7%
249.3%
Camden County
5,453
5,829
5,904
6,885
7,265
7,455
6.9%
1.3%
16.6%
8.3%
36.7%
Chowan County
10,764
12,558
13,506
14,150
14,710
14,929
16.7%
7.5%
4.8%
5.5i
38.7%
Craven County
62,554
71,043
81,613
91,523
93,236
94,504
13.6%
14.9%
12.1%
3.3%
51.1%
Currduck County
6,976
11,089
13,736
18,190
19,726
20,591
59.0•1
.23.9%
32.4%
13.2i
195.2%
Dare County
6,995
13,377
22,746
29.967
32,440
33,697
91.2%
70.0%
31.7%
12.4%
381.7%
Gates County
8.524
8,875
9,305
10.516
10,726
10,960
4.1%
4.8%
13.0%
4.2%
28.6%
Hertford County
24,439
23,368
22,523
22.977
22,289
22,395
-4.4%
-3.6%
2.0%
-2.5%
-8.4%
Hyde County
6,571
5,873
5,411
5,826
5,830
5,922
5.4%
-7.9%
7.7%
1.6%
6.3%
New Hanover County
82,996
103,471
120,284
160,327
171,279
178,754
24.7%
16.2%
33.3%
11.5%
115.4%
Onslow County
103,126
112,784
149,838
150,355
150,633 152,804
9.4%
32.9%
0.3%
1.6%
48.2%
Pamlico County
9,467
10,398
11,368
12,934
13.144
13,440
9.8%
9.3%
13.8%
3.9%
42.0%
Pasquotank County
26,824
28,462
31,298
34,897
35.678
36,325
6.1%
10.0%
11.5%
4.1%
35.4%
Pander County
18,149
22,262
28,855
41,082
44,548
47,046
22.7% l
29.6%
42.4%
14.5%
159.2%
PerquimansCounty
8,351
9,486
10,447
11,368
11,678
11,811
13.6%
10.1%
8.8%
3.9%
41.4%
Tyrrell County
3,806
3,975
3,856
4,149
4,219
4,291
4.4%
-3.0%
7.6%
3.4%
12.7%
Washington County
14,038
14,801
13,997
13,723
13,529
13,457
5.4%
-5.4%
-2.0%
-1.9%
-4.1%
Source: NC State Agency Data: Office of the Governor, obtained March 2004
Geographic Distribution of Growth
Most of the About 96% of the 24 municipal and township areas in Carteret County experienced net
population growth from 1980 to 1990 (Table 2.2). The fastest growing township from 1980 to 1990
was the White Oak Township in the western portion of the County. The two fastest growing
municipalities from 1980 to 1990 were Indian Beach (183.3%) and Emerald Isle (181.4%). During
that same period, Atlantic Township experienced a 0.6% net loss in population. The only
municipality that experienced_a net loss in population between 1980 and 1990 was Beaufort, with a
0.5% loss.
The 1980's showed a much larger growth rate for all areas in Carteret County when compared to the
1990's. This slowing of population growth rates from 1990 to 2000 is consistent with most of the
North Carolina coastal counties (Table 2.1). Between 1990 and 2000 almost half of the areas in
Carteret County experienced a net loss in population. Most of the areas that lost population. are
located in the eastern portion of the County. Six Down East townships lost population, with Stacy
Township and Sea Level Township experiencing the greatest population losses from 1990 to 2000, at
-48.6% and -40.4% respectively. Three municipalities also lost population from 1990 to 2000, Indian
Beach (-37.9%), Atlantic Beach (-8.1%) and Beaufort (4.0%). The western portion of the County
experienced the greatest growth for the 1990-2000 period. The fastest growing township from 1990
to 2000 was again the White Oak Township, which grew 55.4%. The fastest growing municipalities
in the same decade were Cedar Point (47.9%) and Emerald Isle (43.3%).
Table 2.2 shows population changes for the County's townships and municipalities from 1980 to
2000. Township boundaries are delineated on Map 4.1 Existing Land Use.
10

0-
Table 2.2 - Summary of Year -Round Population Growth
Township
Municipality or Area
Year Round Population
Percent Change
1980 1990 2000
1980-1990 1990-2000
1980-2000
1 Atlantic
810
805
817
-0.6%
1.5%
0.9%
2) Beaufort
6,992
8,013
7,665
14.6%
-4.3%
9.6%
Beaufort
3,826
3,808
3,771
-0.5%
-1.0%
-1.4%
Unincorporated Area
3,166
4,205
3,894
32.8%
-7.4%
23.0%
3 Cedar Island
333
385
324
15.6%
-15.8%
-2.7%
4 Davis
492
535
412
8.7%
-23.0%
-16.3%
5 Harkers Island
1,910
2,237
1,525
17.1%
-31.8%
-20.2%
6 Harlowe
956
1,190
1,272
24.5%
6.9%
33.1%
7 Marshallberg
580
646
528
11.4%
-18.3%
-9.0%
8 Merrimon
426
542
657
27.2%
21.2%
54.2%
9) Morehead
15,803
20,482
23,748
29.6%
15.9%
50.3%
Atlantic Beach
941
1,938
1,781
106.0%
-8.1%
89.3%
Indian Beach
54
153
95
183.3%
-37.9%
75.9%
Morehead CitL
4,359
6,046
7,691
38.7%
27.2%
76.4%
Pine Knoll Shores
646
1,360
1,524
110.5%
12.1%
135.9%
Unincorporated Area
9,803
10,985
12,657
12.1%
15.2%
29.1%
10) Newport
5,469
7,333
8,326
34.1%
13.5%
52.2%
Newport
1,883
2,516
3,349
33.6%
33.1%
77.9%
Unincorporated Area
3,586
4,817
4,977
34.3%
3.3%
38.8%
11 Sea Level
540
773
461
43.1 %
-40.4%
-14.6%
12 Sm ma
637
782
679
22.8%
-13.2%
6.6%
13 Stacy
322
401
206
24.5%
-48.6%
-36.0%
14 Straits
1,520
1,948
2,686
28.2%
37.9%
76.7%
15) White Oak
4,302
6,483
10,073
50.7%
55.4%
134.1%
Cape Carteret
944
1,008
1,214
6.8%
20.4%
28.6%
Emerald Isle
865
2,434
3,488
181.4%
43.3%
303.2%
Cedar Point
0
628
929
NA
47.9%
NA
Unincorporated Area
Z493
Z413
4,442
-3.2%
84.1%
78.2%
Total Munici aliti� es "
<13,518
19,891
23;842
47.1-X
- 19.9%
<76.4%
*Total Unincor orated Areas
' ,.27,574
32,662
35,541
_ 18.5°/a'' .
8.8%
:: - 28.9%
Total County
41,092
52,553,
"-59;383
27 9%.
13.0%
< "" ": 44.5%
Source: 1980-1990 Population - 1996 Carteret County LUP
Source: 2000 Municipal Population - NC State Agency Data: Office of the Governor, obtained March 2004
Source: 2000 Township Population - U.S. Census Bureau data, obtained March 2004
' Extrapolated by subtracting Total Municipalities from Total County Population
J Population Age Characteristics
An analysis of population broken down by age provides insight into the population trends that affect
(� Carteret County. This data provides valuable information for use in projecting infrastructure, service,
u housing, and other special needs of the County, as well as land use needs.
a One of the most notable trends in the County is the increase in average age of the population. Since
1970, significant increases have been seen in all age groups over 40 (Table 2.3). The largest percent
increase in population from 1990 to 2000 came in the 50-59 and 70+ age groups. The growth of these
age groups is largely attributed to the County's popularity as a retirement location and the resulting
D immigration of older adults. Other reasons for growth in older age groups include non -migratory
demographic factors such as birth rates, death rates and aging of the existing population. In general,
a age groups over 50 are projected to grow faster than the County as a whole through 2030, especially
in the 70+ age group (Table 2.4). This trend has significant implications for housing, future land
needs, transportation, medical care and other personal and professional services.
' 11

Decreases in growth rates were seen in all age groups under 40, except for the 5-19 group, which
experienced a modest growth of 6.6% during the 1990-2000 period (Table 2.3). The decline is
associated with aging into older age groups and the emigration of the younger childbearing age
groups. This trend has implications for schools and other services associated with younger age
groups.
Since 1970, population in the 20-29 age group has declined steadily, with a dramatic negative growth
rate of more than 25% occurring between 1990 and 2000 (Figure 2.1). This decline may reflect the
overall job market in Carteret County and the resulting emigration of the younger working group
population. This trend has implications for economic development planning.
Table 2.3 provides information on the relative changes. in Carteret County's population age
characteristics from 1970 to 2003. Figure 2.1 shows a detailed comparison of age groups from 1990
to 2000. Table 2.4 shows population projections by age group and changes through 2030 as
computed by the Office of the Governor. '
Table 2.3 - Population by Age Group
Age
Year
Percent Change
1970 1980 1990 2000 2003
estimate
1970-1980 1980-1990
1990-2000
70 & up
1,774
2,913
4,620
7,033
7,556
64.2%
58.6%
52 2-0
60-69
2,517
3,917
5,881
6,691
7,177
55.6%
50.1 %
13.8%
50-59
3,253
4,675
5,512
8,671
9,562
43.7%
17.9%
57.3%
4049
3,954
4,310,
6,859
9,570
10,024
9.0%
59.1%
39.5%
30-39
3,608
5,625
8,532
8,102
7,428
55.9%
51.7%
-5.0%
20-29
4,767
7,361
7,927
5,888
5,870
54.4%
7.7%
-25.7%
5-19
9,103
9,517
9,861
10,515
10,159
4.5%
3.6%
6.6%
0-4
2,627
2,774
3,361
2,913
2,936
5.6%
21.2%
-13.3%
Total _
-31,603
41,092
52,553
59,383
=_60,712
<� �_;=30.0% -�27.9%
13.0%
OVtllGC.. LVVJ C.SUlIIdLU - IVU J(dle nyency Udld. VIIIGe OI nle vovernor, Oufalneu Marcn Luu4
Source: 1970-2000 population - NC State Agency Data Corrected. Office of the Governor, obtained March 2004
Table 2.4 - Pbotdation Proiection by Aye Qum
FtWafimbyAge
Qap
Pared anve
Age
20M
2005
M10
M15
20M
2025
2MO
2000-2005 200&2010
2010-2015
2015.2020
2029-2025
2025-2030
70&up
7,033
7,892
8,934
1Q472
13,722
12,428
16,708
122-1
132-O
17.2-/
31.01
-9.4•0
34.4-0
60-69
6,691
7,722
9,630
10,971
11,872
12,122
11,92
154-0
24.7-0
139-o
a2-/
21%
-1.6%
50-59
8,671
1Q217
11,316
11,628
1Q(
10,994
9,33
17.8-0
10.8'10
28%
-132-/
a9'%
-16011/0
4049
9,570.
1QC26
9,188
8,169
6,708
7,313
7,897
4.8-�
-84Yo
-11.1%
-17.9°'/O
9.0"/0
80'%
3039
8,102
7,031
6,173
6,542
6,621
6,747
6,
-132-/
-122--
60'1
1.2'0
.1.9'10
-37'0
20.29
5,888
6,200
Q471
6,623
4,160
6,189
5,
53-0
4.4-0
23-0
-37.2-0
4a8-0
-4.3-0
5-19
1Q515
9,816
9,872
9,199
11,521
9,592
9,
-66-0
a6-�
-68%
25.2-0
-167-1
Q2%
0.4
Z913
2,921
Z883
Z953
Z935
Z896
Z804
0.3-0
4.3-�
24%
-a6•0
-1.3-0
-a2-lo
Total
59,383
61,825 64,467
> 66,557
67,635
.68,281
: 70,5q
4.1%
4.3-0
32-o
1.6%
1.0"/0
34-010
.ui� c�.urcvaiNyww-�w.xcacrc,Fxayuaa urn u uvu mixi, uatn,wrvvul dun
12

Figure 2.1 - Carteret County Population Age Groups
80 to 84
70 to 74
60 to 64
a. 50 to 54
3
O
L
a�
40 to 44
Q
30 to 34
20 to 24
10 to 14
0to4
0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 - 3,000 3,500 4,000 4,500 5,000
Population
Current estimates and projections of permanent and seasonal populations
Table 2.1 shows estimates of the County's current (2003) permanent population. Table 2.4 shows
permanent population projections through 2030.
Carteret County's 2003 population estimate is 60,712. This estimate is based on official state
estimates for 2001 and 2003 and the number of housing units added since the 2000 Census. The
projections show Carteret County's population growing from 60,712 in 2003 to 68,281 in 2025 for an
increase of 7,569 people. This is an increase of almost 12.5%; or an average annual growth rate of
less than 1% for this time period.
Estimates and projections of seasonal population for 2000 to 2025 were determined using a
combination of information from the Census, the Carteret County Economic Development
Commission (EDC) and the Carteret County Tourism Development Authority. The number of
seasonal housing units (13,333) from the 2000 Census was estimated to have eight people per unit.
That population was added to the number of seasonal population staying in hotel and bed and
breakfast rooms (estimated to be 1,826 rooms, three people per room) to obtain the estimated
seasonal population of 112,142 for the year 2000. Permanent population would bring the overall total
seasonal population to 171,525 (Table 2.4). Projections in five-year intervals up to 2025 are also
provided in Table 2.4. These projections were calculated using growth rates from the EDC for the
2000-2010, 2010=2020 and 2020-2025 periods. The five-year growth rates were extrapolated. The
total seasonal population (including permanent population) is expected to increase approximately
27% from 2000 to 2025.
13

Table 2.5 Seasonal Population Estimates and Projections
Year,
Seasonal
Population
Percent
Change
Permanent
Population
Percent
Change
Total
Percent
Change
2000
112,142
NA
59,383
NA
171,525
NA
2005
119,207
6.3%
61,825
4.1%
181,032
5.5%
2010
126,717
6.3%
64,467
4.3%
191,184
5.6%
2015
132,673
4.7%
66,557
3.2%
199,230
4.2%
2020
138,909
4.7%
67,635
1.6%
206,544
3.7%
2025
150,022
8.0%
68,281
1.0%
218,303
5.7%
OVUIGe: LVVu-LULU rClrlldnerll rupuldllurr CSrrrrrare anu r-rojecrions / tuuu aeasonat tiousmg units -
NC State Agency Data: Othce of the Governor, obtained March 2004
Source: 2000 Seasonal Lodging - Carteret County Tourism Development Authority
Source: 2000-2025 Seasonal Population Growth Rate - Carteret County EDC
`Growth rates for rive -year periods extrapolated based on EDC data
HOUSING
Housing Characteristics
The summary of population trends in the previous section indicates that the seasonal population of
Carteret County continued to grow faster than the permanent population from 1990 to 2000, similar
to previous decades. This trend continues to be reflected by the higher growth rate of seasonal
housing units than year-round units over the same period (Table 2.6). While growth of the seasonal
housing market continued to be strong during the 1990's, the number and percentage of seasonal
housing units showed a slower rate of growth over that of the large 1980's population growth.
Data from the year 2000 shows that owners occupy a large percentage, almost 77%, of the permanent
occupied units in Carteret County. Average household size has been consistently. decreasing since
1980. The 2000 average household size was 2.31 persons, compared to 2.66 persons in 1980. Table
2.6 provides an overview of the characteristics of Carteret County's housing. "
14

Table 2.6 - Carteret County Housing Characteristics
Statistics
Total housing units
Year
Percent Change
1980 1990 2000
1980-1990 1990-2000
1980-2000
23,740 34,576 40,947
45.6% 18.4%
72.5%
Permanent housing units
17,292
24,604
27,614
42.3%
12.2%
59.7%
Occupied units
15,128
21,238
25,204
40.4%
18.7%
66.6%
Vacant units
2,164
3,366
2,410
55.5%
-28.4%
Owner units
11,394
15.761
19,316
38.3%
22.6%
69.5%
Renter units
3,734
5,477
5,888
46.7%
7.5%
57.7%
Seasonal units
6,448
9,972
13,333
54.7%
33.7%
106.8%
Average household size (persons)
2.66
2.43
2.31
-8.6%
4.9%
-13.2%
Source: NC State Data Center, obtained
March 2005
1999 Carteret County Land Use Plan
Housing Types
Table 2.7 portrays -the types of housing units that make up Carteret County's permanent housing
stock. In 2000, the majority, or 65.9% of the county's housing consisted of single-family detached
dwellings. Mobile homes are the second largest type of housing at 22.1%. Duplexes and multifamily
units make up 9.6% of the housing stock.
Table 2.7 - Tvnes of Occunied Housing Units in Carteret Countv
Occupied units in structure
1990
1990%
2000
2000%
Single-family detached
12,858
60.5%
16 601
65.9%
1 unit attached
431
2.0%
591
2.3%
2 units
682
3.2%
685
2.7%
3 or 4 units
682
3.2%
797
3.2%
5 to 9 units
493
2.3%
424
1.7%
10 to 19 units
242
1.1 %
135
0.5%
More than 20 units
347
1.6%
390
1.5%
Mobile homes
5,385
25.4%
5,570
22.1%
Other
118
0.6%
11
0.0%
Total occupied housing units
21,238
100%
25,204
100%
Source: 1990 H022 Tenure by Units in Structure - U.S. Census Bureau data, obtained March 2004
Source: 2000 DP-4 Profile of Selected Housing Characteristics - U.S. Census Bureau data,
obtained March 2004
Housing Age
Age of the housing stock in Carteret County has remained fairly consistent since 1990. There has
been a moderate increase in homes ranging in ages from 11 to 30 years from 1990 to 2000. Table 2.8
provides a summary of the age of Carteret County's housing stock.
15

Table 2.8 - Housing Age in Carteret County
Age
1990
1990%
2000
2000%
more than 50 years
2,248
6.5%
3,295
8.0%
41-50
1,767
5.1%
2,706
6.6%
31-40 years
2,894
8.4%
3,885
9.5%
21-30 years
4,209
12.2%
7,279,
17.8%
11-20 years
9,401
27.2%
12,564
30.7%
6-10 years
7,173
20.7%
5,334
-13.0%
2-5 years
5,808
16.8%
4,595
11.2%
Less than 2 years
1,076
3.1 %
1,289
3.1 %
Total housing units
34,576
100%
401947
100%
Source:2000 QT-H4. Physical Housing Characteristics - U.S. Census
Bureau data, obtained March 2004
Source:1990 H025 Year Structure Built - Universe: Housing units - U.S.
Census Bureau data, obtained March 2004
Building Permits
Table 2.9 provides information on the number, type and value of residential building permits issued
by Carteret County since the last land use plan update (1999-2003). Consistent with recent
population growth trends which showed higher growth in the western portion of the County, the
Carteret County Building and Inspections Department records indicate that approximately 50% of
building permits issued annually were in the fast-growing White Oak Township.
Table 2.9 Carteret County Building Permits
Housfn ape
Year
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
Number of Permits (Total)_
466
465
458
429
358
Modulars
19
37
37
39
7
Mobile Homes
262
263
263
221
145
Frame Houses
185
165
158
169
206
Value (Total)
$38,586,310
$32,762,925
$30,662,101
$34,905,950
$38,544,413
Modulars
$1,536,000
$3,002,500.
$2,383,331
$3,530,000
$620,000
Mobile Homes
$13,430,080
$7,745,280
$8,817,270
$7,928,600
$4,261,890
Frame Houses
$23,620,230
$22,015,145
$19,461,500
$23,447,350
$33,662,523
Source: Carteret County Planning Department (2004)
ECONOMY
Carteret County's economy is strong and has been growing consistently over the last twenty years.
Retail sales slowed some in the 1990's, as did the population growth; nonetheless, the growth is still
on an upward trend with a 142.6% increase in sales from 1986 to 1990 and 70.0% increase from
1990 to 2000. The employed labor force has also seen a steady growth in the decades leading to the
present. Paralleling this. economic growth, income in the county has increased significantly and
poverty rates have decreased steadily since 1980.
At no surprise, this insurgence of economic activity has raised the cost of housing. The median
housing value in Carteret County is above the North Carolina state average. For the year 2000, the
Carteret County median occupied housing value of $123,900 was 14.4% higher than the North
Carolina state average of $108,300, however, the median gross rent was 7.2% below the North
Carolina state average of $548.
[UGV

Despite the fact that Carteret County's economy is growing significantly, and because the housing
cost is only marginally above the state average, Carteret County should not be considered
exclusionary to low or moderate -income persons. Key economic factors for Carteret County from
1980 through 2003 are shown in Table 2.10. _
Table 2.10 - Carteret County Key Economic Indicators
Statistics
Yeats
Percent Chan e
1980 1990 2000 2003
1980-1990 _1990-2000
1980-2000
*Per capita income
Carteret County
$6,146
$13,227
$21,260
NA
115.2%
60.7%
245.9%
North Carolina
$6,133
$12,885
$20,307
NA
110.1%
57.6%
231.1%
Total p2rsonal income (si,00vsl
$325,198
$801,864
$1,543,915
NA
146.6%
92.5%
374.80
Median family income
$15,300
$29,100
$45,400
NA
90.2%
56.0%
196.7%
Median occupied housing value
$36,900
$72,600
$123,900
NA
96.7%
70.7%
235.8%
Median gross rent**
$205
$385
$511
NA
87.8%
32.7%
149.3%
Gross retail sales gi,ow!•)
$188,684
$457,743
$778,265
$883,303
142.6%
70.0%
312.5%
Total employed labor force
17,128
24,301
32,163
NA
41.9%
32.4%
87.8%
Families in poverty
11.5%
9.1%
8.0%
NA
-20.9%
-11.8%
-30.3%
Source: 1980.2000 PCI - Federal Agency Data. Bureau of the Census -Census of Population and Housing, obtained from LINC hbrch 2004
PCI is total money income perresident of the area, including young children, elderly, and others who may not be earning money
Median gnus rent is monthly contract rent plus the estimated average monthly cost of utilities
Employment and Income
There have been significant increases in a few of Carteret County's employment sectors since 1970
(Table 2.11). Farm employment. is the only sector that experienced significant decline losing 64.5%
of the employment from 1970 to 2000; non -farm employment increased 218.5% in that same period.
Private employment has consistently grown from 1970 to 2000 with services and retail trade
employment being driving forces within the county. Government employment has also grown
178.5% between 1970 and 2000, with only modest losses to federal military employment.
Manufacturing showed a net 17.9% increase from 1970 to 2000 (Figure 2.2). Overall, all economic
sectors, except farm employment and federal military, have showed net increases from 1970 to 2000.
Earnings by major industry complement the employment data and provide information about which
sectors produced the most revenue for Carteret County. Even though the government does not
employ the largest numbers of people, it has the second largest earning sum while the service
industry has the largest earning capacity. From 1990 to 2000 the amount of earnings increased in
three industry sectors at above average rates; the construction sector (135.4%), local government
(127.7%), and the services industry (108.2%). The only net loss in earnings from 1990 to 2000 came
from the federal military sector. Farm earnings showed a net increase in earnings from 1970 to 2000
despite losing a significant amount of employment during that same period., Table 2.12 shows
Carteret County wages and salaries by industry type from 1970 to 2000. Table 2.13 shows the largest
Manufacturing and Non -manufacturing employers in Carteret County.
17

Table 2.11 - Fmnlavment by Mainr industry in Carteret C'nunty
Total employment
Years
Percent Change
1970 1980 1990 2000
1970-1980 1980-1990 1990-2000
1970-2000
Agriculture, services, forestry,
and fishing
_ . 529
_1,291
1,222
1,329
144.0%
--5.3%
8.8%
151.2%
Mining
-
-
-
115
NA
NA
NA
NA
Construction
557
941
1586
2,996
68.9%
68.5%
88.9%
437.9%
Manufa�
1,650
2,268
1,795
1,945
37.5%
-20.9%
8.4%
17.9%
Transportation,
communications, and public
utilities
616
591
806
1,147
-4.1%
36.4%
42.3%
86.2%
Wholesale trade
549
803
791
996
46.3%
-1.5%
25.9%
81.4%
Retail trade
1,788
3,424
6,316
1,671
91.5%
84.5%
21.5%
329.0%
Finance, insurance, and real
estate
455
1,113
1,901
2,710
144.6%
70.8%
42.6%
495.6%
Services
2,163
3,304
5,693
8,346
52.8%
72.3%
46.6%
285.9%
Total private employment
8,308
13,741
20,114
27,155
65.4%
46.4%
35.0%
226.91/6
Federal Civilian
156
200
274
297
28.2%
37.0%
8.4%
90.4%
Federal military
410
533
624
367
30.0%
17.1%
-41.2%
-10.5%
State
NA
552
- 679
977
NA
23.0%
43.9%
NA
Local
NA
1,612
2,336
3,186
NA
44.9%
36.4%
_
NA
Total Govt employment
1,733
2,897
3,913
4,827
67.2%
35.1%
23.4%
178.5%
Non -Farm employment
(private + government)
10,041
16,638
24,027
31,982
65.7%
44.4%
33.1%
218.50%
Farm employment
510
490
274
181
-3.9%
-44.1%
-33.9%
-64.5%
ITotal employment: : ,
10,551
17,128 ,
> 24,301
32,163
62.3%
-. 41.9%
32.4%
; 204.8%
,jource: ryru-zuuu tmproymenr- reoerar Agency vara: rsureau or tconomIc Anarysrs sic, 00ramea rrom unc marcn zuu4
Source: 1970-2000 Government Employment -obtained from Bureau of Economic Analysis, Table CA25 (SIC) March 2004
18

Figure 2.2 - Employment by Major Industry
9,000
8,000
7,000
O 6,000
d
0
O
a 5,000
E
W
a 4,000
O
ry
IL 3,000
2,000
1,000
0
1970 1980 1990 2000
Table 212 - Farninos by Ma inr 1ndustry in Carteret Cnunty
--*-Agriculture, _
services, forestry,
and fishing
Construction
-X- Manufacturing
---x-Transportation,
communications,
and public utilities
-*--Wholesale trade
=t-Retail trade
--Finance,
insurance, and
real estate
-Services
---- Federal Civilian
--m-Federal military
-- State Govemment
--x local Government
Industry
Total eamings
in THOUSANDS of dollars
Percent Change
1970 1980 1990 2000
1970-1980 1980-1990 1990-2000
1970-2000
Agricultural services, forestry, fishing
and other
$1,820
$7,216
$9 366
$11 631
296.5%
29.8%
24.2%
539.1%
Mining
$594
AU
$122
NA
NA
NA
NA
Construction
$4,106
$11,594
$27,986
$65,885
182.4%
141.4%
135.4%
1504.6%
Manufacturinq
$8102
$30 752
$32 015
$44 882
279.6%
4.1 %
40.2%
454.0%
Transportation and public utilities
$3,994
$8 868
$17 237
$33 022
122.0%
94.4%
91.6%
726.8%
Wholesale trade
$3,067
$9,671
$14 731
$25 368
215.3%
52.3%
72.2%
727.1
Retail trade
$7,306
$26,789
$68,627
$112,316
266.7%
156.2%
63.7%
1437.3%
Finance, insurance, and real estate
$1,126
$5,028
$20,894
$37,750
346.5%
315.6%
80.7%
3252.6%
Services
$9 040
$28 596
$80 496
$167 586
216.3%
181.5%
108.2%
1753.8%
Total Private earnings
$38,582
$129,108
$271,384
$498,562
234.6%
110.20/6
83.7%
1192-20/6
Federal civilian
$1,453
$4 512
$9 538
$16,221
210.5%
111.4%
70.1%
1016.4%
Mllitar r�
$2,085
$7,741
$13,767
$11,552
271.3%
77.8%
-16.1%
454.1%
State government
NA
$7,328
$18,375
$31,998
NA
150.8%
74.1%
NA
Local government
NA
$16,856
$46,580
$106,054
NA
176.3%
127.7%
NA
Total Government earnings
$10,686
$36,437
$88,260
$165,825
241.0%
142.2%
87.9%
1451.8%
Nonfarm earnings
(private + government)
$49,268
$165,545
$359,644
$664,387
236.0%
117.2%
84.7%
1248.5%
Faun earnings
$1,361
$2,000
$3,085
$1,747
47.0%
54.3%
-43.40/a
28.40/6
Total earnings
?$50,629
$167,545
$362,729''
$666,134
230.9%
116.5%
83.6%
1215.7%
source. : 7anr[vuu a0venvnenr rnlwoymnenr - ooramea morn txneau or ce=mC Hnarysn, r awe w raw n�rcn �uw
(L) Less than $50,000
19

Table 2.13: Largest Manufacturing and Non -manufacturing Employers in Carteret County
Manufacturing Employers
Non -manufacturing Employers
Name
Employees
Name
Employees
Atlantic Veneer
327
Carteret Coup Public School System
1442
Bally Refrigerated Boxes
178
Carteret General Hospital
788
SPX Air Treatment
178
Wal-mart
527
Parker Marine Enterprises
147
Carteret County Govemment
345
Creative Outlet
139
Carteret Community College
317
Jarrett Bay Boatworks
138
Food Lion
243
Veneer Technologies
115
Hen s Tadde and Sporting Goods
221
Beaufort Fisheries
55
U.S. Coast Guard
201 .
Sea Striker
50
NC Dept. of Transportation
149
NCCOAST Communications
49
Lowes Foods
134
Franklin Baldng Company
37
Town of Morehead City
132
Source: Carteret County Economic Development Council, obtained March 2004
Military
Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) Cherry Point is the leading employer of Carteret County
residents. Thirty percent of the 1,770 civilians employed at the base reside in Carteret County.
Carteret County civilian employees earn approximately $106,273,702 (30%) out of a total payroll of
$354,245,674 for the quad -county region of Carteret, Craven, Jones and Pamlico Counties.
Ten percent, or 884 people, of the total active military population at MCAS Cherry Point reside in
Carteret County. Carteret County active military residents earn approximately $42,640,550 (10%)
out of a total active duty payroll of $426,405,497 for the quad -county region. Active military and
retired personnel, civilian employees and their families account for 9,517 people, or 16% of the
County's population (Carteret County EDC-A 2004).
Tourism Impact
Much of the local economic activity in Carteret County is based on or related to tourism. Restaurants,
accommodations, fishing, retail trade, services, construction, and the real estate and finance
industries benefit directly from the impact of tourism. In 2000, approximately 24.4% of all housing
in Carteret County was considered to be.for seasonal or recreational use. This ranked Carteret County
third in North Carolina in the number of seasonal housing units, following Brunswick and Dare
Counties. Table 2.14 shows the CAMA-regulated counties and their seasonal housing units in 2000.
According to the NC Department of Commerce, Division of Tourism, the Carteret County tourism
industry generated $206.87 million dollars in revenue and was ranked twelfth in the state in travel
impact in 2002. Over 3,170 jobs were created due to tourism. These jobs generate an annual payroll
of $47.03 million. A total net occupancy tax of 5% generated $2,831,114 from 2001 to 2002. This
was divided between the county, municipalities, and the Tourism Development Authority. State and
local tax revenues from travel to Carteret County amounted to $10.13 million and $13.69 million
respectively, and represent a $396 tax savings to each county resident. Table 2.15 shows the
economic impact tourism has on Carteret County. (Carteret County EDC-B).
20

0
0
a
e
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Table 2.14: 2000 Seasonal Housing Units
Rank
County
Seasonal Housing Units
1
Brunswick
15,540
2
Dare
13,355
3
Carteret
13,333
4
New Hanover
4,387
5
Currituck
3,297
6
Onslow
2,906
7
Pender
2,881
8
Beaufort
1,890
9
Pamlico
903
10
Hyde
666
11
Perquimans
614
12
Craven
433
13
Bertie
354
14
Chowan
337
15
Tyrrell
246
16
Washington
208
17
Pasquotank
157
18
Hertford
82
19
Gates
72
20
Camden
44
Source: 2000 NC State Aaencv Data: Office of the Governor.
obtained March 2004
Table 2.15 - Tourism Impact in Carteret County
Year
Payroll
($Millions)
Employment
($Thousands)
State Tax Receipts
($Millions)
Local Tax Receipts
($Millions)
2002
47.03
3.17
10.13
13.69
2001
48.30
3.25
10.18
13.63
2000
48.10
3.29
10.34
13.94
1999
45.03
3.27
9.93
13.98
1998
48.99
3.64
9.42
10.63
1997
44.81
3.73
9.13
10.52
1996
38.44
3.42
8.28
9.84
1995
37.82
3.45
8.01
9.58
1994
.36.74
3.39
7.48
9.22
1993
34.83
3.25
7.42
9.01
1992
32.99
.3.16
6.81
8.46
1991
30.54
3.24
5.53
7.02
1990
29.07
3.11
4.831
6.95
Source: NC Department of Commerce Tourism - County by County Statistics,
obtained March 2004
21

Commercial Seafood Impact
According to the NC Division of Marine Fisheries, Carteret County consistently leads North Carolina
in commercial seafood landings. A 1994 Marine Fisheries study found that commercial fishing in
Carteret County generated an estimated $46 million in sales of goods and services, and an additional
$24 million in value added. Approximately $14 million in employee compensation was paid to nearly
5,000 part or full-time workers employed in the commercial seafood industry in 1994. Recreational
saltwater fishing adds an additional $130 million in sales of goods and services and employs over
600 people with an annual payroll exceeding $12 million (Carteret County EDC-C).
Retiree Population Impact
While attracting retirees is not the traditional type of economic development, it is important because
retirees provide significant economic benefits to the community in which7they live. Retirees have the
ultimate effect of attracting business. The spending of retirees provides the same type of spending
multiplier effect as does adding employment to a community. Factors which tend to influence retirees
location decisions include housing characteristics, availability of health care facilities, continuing
education opportunities, availability of restaurants, number of stores (grocery, department, and
specialty), ease of transportation, recreational opportunities, entertainment and cultural amenities,
availability of part-time jobs, social opportunities, and climate.
As expected, the percentage of individuals who receive retirement income is higher in Carteret
County that for the state. In 2000, according to the U.S. Census Bureau, 6,736 people, or 26.7% of
the permanent population, received retirement income. For North Carolina, 16.4% of the population
received retirement income.
22

SECTION 3: NATURAL SYSTEMS ANALYSIS
This section of the Land Use Plan provides a description of the natural features and environmental
conditions within the planning jurisdiction of Carteret County and an analysis of the suitability or
limitation of these features for development. In accordance with the requirements of the Coastal
Resources Commission's. Land Use Planning Guidelines [15A NCAC 7B], this section of the Land
Use Plan addresses the following components:.
• A summary of the inventory of the major natural features and an interpretation of the
capabilities or limitations that these features have for development
• A composite map that shows the extent and overlap of environmental features in Carteret
County and the compatibility of these features for development
• An assessment of environmental conditions and trends with an emphasis on water quality,
natural hazards and natural resources
NATURAL FEATURES INVENTORY
The inventory of natural systems addresses the following features and conditions:
• Areas of Environmental Concern (AECs)
• Soil characteristics
• Water quality classifications
• Primary Nursery Areas
• Flood and other natural hazard areas
• Storm surge areas
• Non -coastal wetlands
• Environmentally fragile areas
Areas of Environmental Concern (AECs)
Areas of Environmental Concern (AECs) are the foundation of the Coastal Resources Commission's
(CRC) permitting program for coastal development. AECs are areas of natural importance and are
classified by the CRC. The purpose of the AEC classification is to protect these areas from
uncontrolled development, which may cause irreversible damage to property, public health or the
environment. Development within the designated Areas of Environmental Concern is limited by
CAMA regulations and minimum use standards. The CRC establishes use standards to regulate
development in AECs. Local governments, through the CAMA Land Use Plan, can establish
development standards for AECs that are more stringent than state standards.
The CRC has established four categories of AECs:
• Estuarine and Ocean System
• Ocean Hazard System
• Public Water Supplies
• Natural and Cultural Resource Areas
23

Estuarine and Ocean System. AECs
Public Trust Areas are all waters of the Atlantic Ocean and the lands underneath, from the normal
high water mark on shore to the state's official boundary three miles offshore; all navigable natural
water bodies and the lands underneath, to the normal high watermark on shore (a body of water is
considered navigable if you can float a canoe in it), not including privately owned lakes where the
public doesn't have access rights; all water in artificially created water bodies that have significant
public fishing resources and are - accessible to the public from other waters; and all waters in
artificially created water bodies where the public has acquired rights by prescription, custom, usage,
dedication or any other means. Public trust areas often overlap with estuarine waters. a
Estuarine Waters are the ocean, sounds, tidal rivers and their tributaries that stretch across coastal
North Carolina and link to other parts of the estuarine system: public trust areas, coastal wetlands and
coastal shorelines. For regulatory purposes, the inland/upstream boundary of estuarine waters is the
same line used to separate the jurisdictions of the NC Division of Marine Fisheries and the NC
Wildlife Resources Commission. 0
Coastal Shorelines include all lands within 75 feet of the normal high water level of estuarine waters.
This definition also includes lands within 30 feet of the normal high water level of public trust waters
located inland of the dividing line between coastal fishing waters and inland fishing waters. Along U
Outstanding Resource Waters (ORWs), this definition includes lands within 575 feet of the normal
high water level. Uses in coastal shoreline AECs can significantly impact water quality and the
productivity of the estuary.
Coastal Wetlands are any marsh in the 20 coastal counties that regularly or occasionally floods by
a
lunar or wind tides and that includes one or more of 10 plant species:
Spartina alternj7ora: Salt Marsh (Smooth) Cord Grass
Juncus roemerianus: Black Needlerush
Salicornia spp: Glasswort
Distichlis spicata: Salt (or Spike) Grass
Limonium spp: Sea Lavender
Scirpus spp: Bulrush
Cladium jamaicense: Saw Grass
Typha spp: Cattail .
Spartina patens: Salt Meadow Grass
Spartina cynosuroides: Salt Red or Giant Cord Grass
Freshwater swamps and inland, non -tidal wetlands are not in the CAMA permit jurisdiction unless
a
the CRC specifically designates them as AECs. However, these wetlands are protected by the federal
Clean Water Act. An Army Corps of Engineers 404 permit may be required for projects taking place
in these wetlands.
Ocean Hazard System AECs
The Ocean Erodible AEC includes beaches and other oceanfront lands that are subject to long-term"
erosion and significant shoreline changes. The seaward boundary of this AEC is the mean low water
line. The landward limit of the AEC.is measured from.the first line of stable natural vegetation and is
determined by adding a distance equal to 60 times the long-term, average annual erosion rate for the
shoreline to the distance of erosion expected during a major storm. The width of this AEC varies
from about 145 feet to more than 700 feet.
24
0

I
The High Hazard Flood AEC includes lands subject to flooding, high waves and heavy water
g J g g v3'
currents during a major storm. These are the lands identified as coastal flooding with velocity hazard,
or V Zones, on flood insurance rate maps prepared by the Federal Insurance Administration. V Zones
are determined by an engineering analysis of expected flood levels during a storm, expected wave
and. current patterns and the existing topography of the land. The high hazard flood AEC often
u overlaps with the ocean erodible and inlet hazard AECs.
The Inlet Hazard AEC includes lands near ocean inlets. Inlet shorelines are especially vulnerable to
L1 erosion and flooding and can shift suddenly and dramatically. For each inlet, the inlet hazard AEC is
L1 determined by a statistical analysis of inlet migration, previous inlet locations, narrow or low lands
near the inlet, and the influence of man-made features, such as jetties and channelization projects.
The distance the inlet hazard AEC extends inland is estimated to be large enough to encompass those
lands where the inlet can be expected to migrate. At a minimum, this distance is the same distance
inland as the ocean erodible AEC. Inlet hazard AECs range in width from about 250 feet for a fairly
u stable inlet to about 4,000 feet for the most dynamic inlets.
Public Water Supply AECs
The Small Surface Water Supply Watershed AEC protects coastal drainage basins that contain a
public water supply classified as A -II by the NC Environmental Management Commission.
Currently, only two such watersheds in the state have been designated as AECs: the Fresh Pond at
the Nags Head and Kill Devil Hills border and Toomer's Creek near Wilmington, neither of which
are located in Carteret County.
n Public Water Supply Wellfields are areas of rapidly draining sands extending from the earth's surface
u to a shallow groundwater table that supply public drinking water. Only one wellfield in NC, on
Hatteras Island at Buxton, is designated as an AEC.
7
U
I
Natural and Cultural Resources AECs
Natural and Cultural Resources AECs include natural and cultural resources of more than local
significance in which uncontrolled or incompatible development could result in major or irreversible
damage to scientific, educational, associative values or aesthetic qualities of natural systems cultural
resources. These areas include coastal. complex natural areas, coastal areas that sustain remnant
species, unique coastal geologic formations and significant coastal archaeological resources and
significant coastal historical archeological resources. Any person can nominate an area as a natural or
cultural resource AEC. However, the CRC makes the final decision on designation.
AECs in Carteret County
Areas of Environmental Concern located in the Carteret County planning jurisdiction include the
Estuarine and Ocean System and Ocean Hazard System AECs, with the exception of the Inlet Hazard
AECs. There are currently no Public Water Supply or Natural and Cultural Resources AECs within
the County.
The County's Estuarine and Ocean System AECs include the waters and tributaries of the White
Oak, Neuse, Newport and North Rivers and Bogue, Back, Core and Pamlico Sounds, as well as
waters of the Atlantic Ocean and the shorelines of these water bodies. Coastal wetland AECs are
located throughout the County and are identified on -site by the permitting staff of the Division of
Coastal Management. Locations of extensive coastal wetland areas located under Carteret County
planning jurisdiction include Cedar Island and adjacent areas in the eastern portion of the County,
0
25

Brown's Island, Middle Marshes in Back Sound, shore of the North River and the Bogue Sound area
in the western portion of the County.
While the CRC's use standards give priority to the conservation of coastal wetlands, estuarine waters
and public trust areas, certain water -dependent uses are allowed. Generally, those uses which require
water. access and which cannot function elsewhere, such as simple access channels, structures to
prevent erosion, navigation channels, boat docks, marinas, piers, wharfs and mooring pilings are
allowed provided construction occurs in compliance with state standards.
The CRC's guidelines for development within the coastal shoreline AEC are found in 15A
NCAC 7H. Key guidelines include the following:
• Not weaken or eliminate natural barriers to erosion
• Limit impervious surfaces such as buildings, paved parking lots and roads to the amount
necessary to support the use and generally not exceed 30%\of the AEC area of the lot, except
along the shoreline of an Outstanding Resource Water (ORW) where the built -upon limit is
25% of the AEC area
• Maintain a buffer zone for a distance of 30 feet landward of the normal water level, except
along shorelines where the Environmental Management Commission has adopted its own
buffer standards
The only Ocean Hazard System AECs under Carteret County planning jurisdiction are located along
the ocean shoreline areas of the unincorporated community of Salter Path, located on Bogue Banks.
The CRC allows uses in the ocean hazard AECs, consistent with use standards contained in 15A
NCAC 7H. A key consideration contained in these standards includes compliance with setback
requirements based on erosion rates. The erosion setback line extends inland from the first line of
stable vegetation and varies based on size of the structure as well as local erosion rates.
Due to map scale and size, the .exact locations of AECs are difficult to map, particularly coastal
wetlands, coastal shorelines and ocean hazard AECs. However, for general information purposes, a
general depiction of the location of AECs in Carteret County may be found. on the Areas of
Environmental Concern Map, available for review at the Carteret County Planning and Development
Department. It is stressed that this map is for informational purposes only. The exact location of
AECs must be identified on -site by the permitting staff of the NC Division of Coastal Management
(DCM).
Soil Characteristics
In 1987, a soil survey was completed in Carteret County by the Soil Conservation Service, now
known as the United States Department of Agriculture - Natural Resources Conservation Service
(USDA-NRCS). According to the survey, there are 53 different soil types in Carteret County. Only
ten of these soil types are considered to have slight or moderate limitations for septic systems.
According to the soil survey, all soil types in Carteret County have slight erosion hazard ratings.
The soil survey is for planning purposes and is not completed at the detailed scale needed for permit
decisions. Based on the soil survey, the Soil Suitability for Septic Systems Map available. in the
Carteret County Planning and Development Department provides a general soils map of the County
planning jurisdiction. Because the map is for general planning purposes only, all determinations of
septic suitability must be made by onsite investigation by a licensed soil scientist or county

environmental systems health specialist. In general, the soils in the planning jurisdiction have
Y P g P g
limitations for many uses due to wetness, flooding and high sand content.
aCountywide, approximately 99% of the soils in Carteret County have moderate to severe limitations
for conventional onsite soil absorption waste treatment systems (septic systems). Soils with slight
limitations for septic systems are primarily located in western Carteret County along the White Oak
River and the Newport River. The extent of soils suitable_ for development is important due to the
continuing development of the County and the absence of centralized sewer systems in most areas.
u Planned development densities in areas without central sewer service must consider soil suitability
LJ for septic systems or alternative systems must be developed.
a Water Ouality Classifications
All surface waters in North Carolina are assigned a primary classification by the NC Division of
Water Quality (DWQ). The Water Quality Classes and Subbasins Map, available for review at the
a Carteret County Planning and Development Department, provides the use classifications for
estuarine waters in Carteret County. As shown on the map, a wide range of primary and
supplemental classifications are present. These classifications are described in Table 3.1 DWQ
Primary Classifications. Further discussion of surface waters is provided under the Environmental
Assessment discussion found later in this section.
ill
0
L
0
7
I
I
27-

Table 3.1 WATER OUALITY CLASSIFICATIONS
DWQ PRIMARY
CLASSIFICATIONS
Class C
Waters protected for secondary recreation, fishing, wildlife, fish and aquatic life propagation and
survival, agriculture and other uses suitable for Class C. Secondary recreation includes wading,
boating, and other uses involving body contact with water where such activities take place in an
infrequent, unorganized or incidental manner. There are no restrictions on watershed development or
types of discharges.
Class SC
All tidal salt waters protected for secondary recreation such as fishing, boating and other activities
involving minimal: skin contact; aquatic life propagation and survival; and. wildlife. Stormwater
controls are required under CAMA and there are no categorical restrictions on discharges.
Class SB
Surface waters that are used for primary recreation, including frequent or organized swimming and all
SC uses. Stormwater controls are required under CAMA and there are no categorical restrictions on
discharge .
Class SA
Surface waters that are used for commercial shellfishing or marketing purposes and all SC and SB
uses. All SA waters are also HQW by definition. Stormwater controls are required under CAMA. No
domestic discharges are permitted in these waters.
DWO SUPPLEMENTAL CLASSIFICATIONS
High . Quality
Supplemental classification intended to protect waters with quality higher than state water quality
Waters
standards. In general, there are two means by which a water body may be classified as HQW. They
(HQW)
may be HQW by definition or they may qualify for HQW and then be supplementally classified as
HQW through the rule -making process. The following are HQW by definition:
• SA (shellfishing)
• ORW
• Waters designated as Primary Nursery Areas or other functional nursery areas by the Marine
Fisheries Commission
Nutrient
Supplemental classification intended for waters needing additional nutrient management due to their
Sensitive
being subject to excessive growth of microscopic or macroscopic vegetation. In general, management
Waters (NSW)
strategies for point and nonpoint source pollution control require control of nutrients (nitrogen and/or
phosphorus usually) such that excessive growths of vegetation are reduced or prevented and there is no
increase in nutrients over target levels. Management strategies are site -specific.
Outstanding
Supplemental classification intended to protect unique and special waters having excellent water
Resource
quality and being of exceptional state or national ecological or recreational significance. To qualify,
Waters
waters must be rated Excellent by DWQ and have one of the following outstanding resource values:
(ORW)
• . Outstanding fish habitat or fisheries
• Unusually high level of water based recreation
• A special designation such as NC or National Wild / Scenic / Natural / Recreational River,
National Wildlife Refuge, etc.
• Important component of state or national park or forest
• Special ecological or scientific significance (rare or endangered species habitat, research or
educational areas)
No new or expanded wastewater discharges are allowed although there are no restrictions on the types
of discharges to these waters. There are associated development controls enforced by DWQ. ORW
areas are HQW by definition.
ADDITIONAL CLASSIFICATIONS BY OTHER AGENCIES
Primary
Primary Nursery Areas, as defined by the. Marine Fisheries Commission, are those areas in the
Nursery Areas
estuarine system where initial post -larval development takes place. These areas are usually located in
(PNA)
the uppermost sections of a system where populations are uniformly very early juveniles. The Division
of Marine Fisheries is responsible for preserving, protecting and developing Primary Nursery Areas for
commercially important finfish and shellfish.
Primary Nursery Areas .
Primary. nursery areas are areas where initial post -larval development of fish or shellfish take place Q
and are generally located in the upper reaches of creeks and bays. These areas are usually shallow
with soft muddy bottoms and are surrounded by marshes and wetlands. Table 3.2 shows the locations
of significant Primary Nursery Areas (over 100 acres) in Carteret County. Primary nursery areas are n
28

shown on the Fragile Areas Map available at the Carteret County Planning and Development
Department.
Table 3.2 Maior Primary Nursery Areas in Carteret County
Primary Nursery Areas
Area acres
Thorofare Bay
2,174
Cedar Island Bay
2,171
Newport River
1,532
Jarrett Bay
1,461
North River
1,359
Nelson Bait
1,063
Long Bay
792
West Thorofare Bay
783
Ward Creek
596
Ditch Bay
482
Upper Cedar Island Bay
381
Back Creek
262
Brett Bay
249
Pettiford Creek
230
Broad Creek
204
Oyster Creek
173
Sleeper Creek
150
Crab Point Bay
148
Calico Creek
140
Harlow Creek
139
Cod du en Creek
108
Lewis Creek
103
Areas less than 100 acres.
1,824
TOTAL
16,524
.source: IV(; centerjor ueographtclnjormatlon and Analysis (pna.shp)
Flood Hazards and Storm Surge Areas
(� Flood hazard areas are usually defined by the 100-year floodplain (one percent chance of flooding in
L.1 any year). In Carteret County, the flood hazard areas include the following: .
• V zones — one percent chance of flooding in any year that includes wave action
a • A zones — one percent chance of flooding in any year
• X shaded zones — 0.2 percent annual chance of flooding and areas with a one percent chance
of flood with average depths of less than one foot or with drainage areas less than one square
Q mile
• X zones — areas determined to be outside of 0.2 percent. annual chance of flooding
a A general depiction of the 100-year floodplain is shown on the Flood Hazard Areas Map available at
the Carteret County Planning and Development Department. More detailed flood maps prepared by
the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) are also available for review, both at the
County Department and at www.ncfloodmaps.com
Storm surge is the relatively rapid rise in sea level caused by water being pushed towards shore by
the force of the winds associated with a hurricane or other intense storm. As the water comes ashore
29
I

with the storm, it causes flooding that is often a hurricane's most dangerous and damaging
characteristic. Extensive areas of Carteret County are vulnerable to storm surge hazards associated
with hurricanes. Depending upon the severity and speed of the storm, much of the area could be
impacted by storm surge. According to the storm surge models prepared by FEMA, slow -moving
Category 1-3 storms (forward velocities less than 15 miles per hour) would impact greater areas than
fast moving Category 1-3 storms. Likewise, fast-moving Category 4-5 storms (forward velocities
greater than 15 miles per hour) would produce a more intense impact than slow -moving Category 4-5
storms. The Flood Hazard Areas Map depicts the areas subject to storm surge based on the most
intense storm intensity and speed. This map may be reviewed at the Carteret County Planning and
Development Department.
Carteret County is a participant in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). The NFIP is a
federal program that enables property owners in participating communities to purchase insurance
protection against losses by flooding. Communities that participate in the NFIP agree to adopt and
enforce floodplain management ordinances to reduce future flood damage in flood hazard areas
Non -coastal Wetlands -
According to the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), wetlands are "areas that are periodically or
permanently inundated by surface or groundwater and support vegetation adapted for life in saturated
soil." Wetlands include swamps, marshes, bogs and similar areas. Wetlands serve important
functions relating to fish and wildlife, food chain production, habitat, nesting, spawning, rearing and
resting sites for aquatic and land species, protection of other areas from wave action and erosion,
storage areas for storm and flood waters, natural recharge areas where ground and surface water are
interconnected, and natural water filtration and purification functions (USACE Wilmington
Regulatory Division).
While individual alterations of wetlands may constitute a minor change, the cumulative effect of
numerous changes often results in major damage to wetland resources. The USACE regulates
development in wetlands under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, which determines which areas
qualify for protection as wetlands. The NC Division of Water Quality regulates uses in wetlands
under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act.
The North Carolina Coastal Region Evaluation of Wetland Significance (NC -CREWS) rates
wetlands as having exceptional, substantial, or beneficial functional significance. Carteret County
served as the pilot county for the NC -CREWS program and as such, was the first county to benefit
from the information provided by this program. NC -CREWS was later expanded to other coastal and
non -coastal counties.
The following brief explanation of NC -CREWS and the overall wetland functional significance
rating definitions are based on information contained on the NC Division of Coastal Management
website (http://www.nccoastalmanagement.net). Please refer to this website for -additional
information on NC -CREWS.
NC -CREWS is the name of the procedure used by the NC Division of Coastal Management to assess
the functions of wetlands in the coastal region. The process rates each wetland type on its ability and
opportunity to provide water quality, hydrologic, and wildlife habitat functions. Although most
wetlands perform a variety of wetland functions, all wetlands do not provide all functions. Some
wetlands may not perform some functions due to degradation or alteration, but may provide other
functions at below normal levels.
30

NC -CREWS rates a wetland as exceptional when it performs at well above normal levels, or when
any two of the primary wetland functions (water quality, hydrology, and wildlife habitat) are rated as
exceptional. The system also rates wetlands that are located adjacent to primary nursery areas, unique
natural ecosystems or special wildlife habitat areas, wetlands that contain threatened or endangered
aspecies, and estuarine shrub -scrub wetlands as exceptional.
A wetland is rated substantial when the wetland performs the three wetland functions at normal or
slightly above normal levels. A wetland that is a buffer to a wetland rated exceptional is also rated as
substantial.
A wetland is rated as beneficial when it performs the three primary wetland functions at below
normal levels or, in some cases, not at all. A wetland is rated beneficial when any two of the primary
wetland functions are rated low and none are rated high.
A Fragile Areas Map is available at the Carteret County Planning and Development Department.
This map shows areas that may classified. as non -coastal wetlands. While this map does not
provide a lot -by -lot identification of wetlands, it does provide information as to the general areas that
may contain non -coastal wetlands. These areas are extensive in Carteret County and must be
f1 determined by on -site investigation.
U Natural Heritage Areas
Natural Heritage Areas include lands that support rare plant and animal species, rare or high quality
natural communities, or other important ecological features as identified by the North Carolina
Natural Heritage Program within the NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources. The
program inventories, catalogues and facilitates protection of the rarest and the most outstanding
elements of the natural diversity of our state. These elements of natural diversity include those plants
and animals that are so rare, or the natural communities that are so significant, they merit special
attention as land use decisions are made. The Natural Heritage Program has identified 176 sites,
aconstituting approximately 146,000 acres, in Carteret County.
Significant Natural Heritage Areas are those Natural Heritage Areas that have particular bioversity
significance. In Carteret County approximately 45 sites (approximately 99,627 acres) are classified
as significant. The Fragile Areas Map shows general locations of Significant Natural Heritage Areas
in Carteret County. A list of these sites is found on Pages 95 - 96.
aThe Natural Heritage Program is not a regulatory program, although some of these sites may be
protected or regulated by other state or federal agencies. Many of these sites are unprotected.
Anadromous Fish Spawning Areas
Anadromous fish spawning areas are those tributary streams where fish swim upstream to spawn.
These fish migrate from their primary ocean habitat to spawn, or breed, in freshwater areas.
Anadromous fish are valuable recreational and commercial species and are an important component -
of the ecosystem.
aThree main anadromous fish spawning areas are located in Carteret County. These include the
Newport River upstream from Morehead City, the White Oak River from north of the NC Highway
24 bridge to Jones County and Pettiford Creek. The Fragile Areas Map shows the locations of
anadromous fish spawning areas in Carteret County.
31

ENVIRONMENTAL COMPOSITE MAP
Map 3.1 Environmental Composite Map shows the extent and overlap of natural features described in
this section. Based on the County's analysis of the features and the determination of the capabilities
and limitations of these areas for development, this map also contains the general locations of three
classes of land. The Carteret County Planning Commission reviewed each of the natural features to
be considered in the development of the map and judged the features listed below to be appropriate
for inclusion in the respective classes.
The land classes shown on the Environmental Composite Map, the description of the classes and the
natural features contained in each class are shown below:
Class I
Class I is land containing only minimal hazards and limitations that may be addressed by commonly
accepted land planning and development practices. In Carteret County, this class contains the
following natural features:
• Soils with slight to severe limitations for septic tanks
• Soils with slight to severe erosion hazards
• Non -wetland area or wetlands rated beneficial significance (NC -CREWS)
• Land located inside or outside 100-year flood hazard area
• Land located inside or outside storm surge area
• Land located more than 500 feet from a historic or archaeological site
Class II
Class II is land containing development hazards and limitations that may be addressed by methods
such as restrictions on types of land uses, special site planning, or the provision of public services. In
Carteret County, this class contains the following natural features:
• Estuarine shoreline
• Public Trust shoreline
• Ocean erodible area
• High hazard flood area
• Non -coastal wetlands rated as substantial significance (NC -CREWS)
• ORW watersheds
Class III
Class III is land containing serious hazards for development or lands where the impact of
development may cause serious damage to the functions of natural systems. In Carteret County, this
class contains the following natural features:
• Coastal wetland
• Estuarine waters
• Public trust areas
• Unvegetated beach area
32

• Non -coastal wetlands rated as exceptional significance (NC -CREWS)
• Protected lands
Map 3.1 Environmental Composite Map is a "broad -brush" depiction of the location of the three land
classes discussed above. Due to the size and scale of the map, it cannot be used for permit decision -
making or for final development plans. The Geographic Information System (GIS) — based model
that was used to create the map uses one acre units. Therefore, one "cell" in the model represents one
acre. When the different data sets overlay in the model, the highest class present will be assigned to
the cell. For example, an area that is located inside an exceptional wetland with high potential risk
(Class III) inside the storm surge area (Class I) and in an area with soils with, severe limitations for
septic systems (Class II) will be assigned to Class III.
It is not technically feasible. to calculate the amount of land included in each class on the
Environmental Composite Map. However, the following percentages are provided as estimates:
Class I 35%
Class II 25%
Class III 40%
kv

Composite Map
The preparation of this map was
-
Class I
financed in part through a grant
provided by the North Carolina
Class II
Coastal Management Program,
-
Class III
through the funds provided by the
North Carolina Coastal Management
Incorporated Areas under
Act of 1972, as amended, which
Carteret County Planning
is administered by the Office of
Jurisdiction
Ocean and Coastal Resource
Management, National Oceanic
Areas not under Carteret
and Atmospheric Administration.
County Planning Jurisdiction
County Boundaries
Roads
Railroads
Water
I !�
I
I
I
_ I
� I
� I
N I
ti
� I
� I
r
BLUE
Land Water
fnfrasmicrarc
1
T
ri �i•, j'f ����.� �y .psi\� .
I
7y
Map 3.1 Environmental Composite
i.
CAMA Land Use Plan Update
Carteret County, NC
Scale: 1" = 4 miles
4 0 4 8 Miles

i
U
0- Environmental Conditions
a This section of the Land Use Plan provides an assessment of the following environmental conditions
and features and discusses their limitations or opportunities for development: water quality, natural
hazards and natural resources.
aWater Ouality
Surface Water and Impaired Streams
Parts of three river basins are found in Carteret County: the White Oak River Basin, Neuse River
Basin, and Tar -Pamlico River Basin. The White Oak encompasses most of the populated land area
whereas the Neuse encompasses undeveloped, agricultural, and sparsely populated land. A small area
I of the Pamlico Sound is part of the Tar -Pamlico River Basin portion of the County.
a Basinwide water quality planning is a non -regulatory watershed -based approach to restoring and
protecting the quality of North Carolina's surface waters. The NC Division of Water Quality (DWQ)
prepares and updates basinwide water quality plans at five-year intervals. While DWQ prepares the
basinwide plans, their implementation and the protection of water quality requires the coordinated
efforts of many agencies, local governments, and stakeholders. Recommendations contained in the
applicable basinwide plans were reviewed and considered in the development of this plan.
L� Each river basin is divided into subbasins or smaller watersheds. (A watershed is a geographic area
t� draining to a common water body.) The, basinwide plans describe water quality and make
recommendations for actions to improve or protect water quality on a subbasin basis. A Water
Quality. Classes and Subbasins Map, which portrays the boundaries of the subbasins, is available at
the Carteret County Planning and Development Department. (sentence relocated from below).
The North Carolina Environmental Commission has designated certain waters within North Carolina
as Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW). This designation is intended to protect unique and special
waters having excellent water quality and being of exceptional state or national ecological or
recreational significance. (Please see Table 3.1 DWQ Primary Classifications for more information
on this classification.) Three areas of Carteret County are designated: (1) Western Bogue Sound, (2)
Core and Back Sounds, and (3) Southeast Pamlico Sound. Locations of ORW waters in Carteret
County are found on the map of Water Quality Classes and Subbasins located in the Carteret County
Planning and Development Office and is available on the NC Division of Water Quality website at
http://`h2o.enr.state.nc.usladminlmapslcountieslinde-x.htm.
The Shellfish Sanitation and Recreational Water Quality Section of the NC Division of
Environmental Health is responsible for protecting the consuming public from shellfish that could
cause illness. The Section is responsible for testing and monitoring coastal waters to ensure that
harvested shellfish is safe and for establishing shellfish growing area classifications. These
classifications include approved, . conditionally approved - open, conditionally approved — closed,
and prohibited areas for shellfish harvesting. Areas that are classified conditionally approved — open
are considered safe for shellfish harvesting, except following heavy rainfall. The Shellfish Sanitation
Section is responsible for testing these waters and recommending to the Division of Marine Fisheries
a temporary closures when heavy rainfall increases fecal coliform bacteria levels above acceptable
levels. Likewise, waters classified as conditionally approved - closed are usually closed, except that
in very dry weather the Shellfish Sanitation Section .is responsible for testing and recommending
temporary openings when fecal coliform bacteria counts are acceptable.
35

Shellfishing waters are located throughout Carteret County. In the western portion of the County,
shellfishing waters include the White Oak River and its tributaries, Bogue Sound and its tributaries
(including Broad Creek, Gales Creek, and Spooners Creek), and the Newport River and its tributaries
(including Core Creek and Harlowe Creek). Shellfishing waters in the eastern portion of the County
include South River, North River, Jarrett Bay, Nelsons Bay, Back Sound and Core Sound.A map of
the 2004 Carteret County Shellfishing Classifications is also available for review at the Carteret
County Planning and Development Office. For shellfishing classifications of specific water bodies,
please contact the Shellfish Sanitation and Recreational Water Quality Section at 252-726-6827.
In 2004 in Carteret County, 9,861 acres of shellfish growing areas were classified as prohibited or
permanently closed: This was an increase from 9,409 acres classified as prohibited in 2003. The
prohibited areas in 2004 represent approximately 3.3 percent of the total 305,050 acres of
shellfishing waters in the County.
Figure 3.3 depicts the pattern of permanent shellfish closures in Carteret County from 1984 through
2004. Overall during this time period, the number of closed acres has steadily increased, with a major
peak in 1992. Staff with the Shellfish Sanitation and Recreational Water Quality Section indicate that
the spike may have been a result of clear -cutting a large area of land adjacent to the South River that
occurred that year. As the land re -vegetated, the number of closed acres gradually decreased over a
four-year period, thus showing the value of vegetated buffers for protecting and restoring shellfishing
waters.
The status or classification of shellfishing waters is considered by many to be among the best
indicators of water quality. The 2004 shellfish growing area classifications, in conjunction with
information contained in the 2001 White Oak and 2002 Neuse Basin -wide Plans, were used to
develop the following subbasin descriptions of impaired waters and potential sources of pollution:
36

I
0 White Oak River Subbasin 03-05-01
Carteret County represents a portion of the area within this subbasin. The subbasin contains the
White Oak River and its tributaries in Onslow, Jones, Craven, and Carteret County.
In the subbasin, 60.5% of the waters are listed as SA, 15.5% of the waters are considered ORW, and
a 59% of the shellfish harvesting waters are considered impaired. The only area of concern in the
Carteret County portion of the subbasin is the upper reaches of the White Oak River. The listed cause
of impairment is fecal coliform bacteria. Potential sources of pollution are runoff from subdivisions
a and agricultural land. Some problems with septic systems have also been reported along the NC24
causeway between Cedar Point and Swansboro. The remaining impaired streams in the subbasin are
mostly west of the White Oak River in Onslow County (NCDENR 2001).
I
11
I
I
it
I
C
Cl
I
I
White Oak River Subbasin 03-05-03
This subbasin contains the center of Carteret County, extending from the Croatan National Forest to
the Town of Beaufort and Beaufort Inlet. In the subbasin, 88.9% of the waters are listed as SA,
29.6% of the waters are considered ORW, and 22% of the shellfish harvesting waters are considered
impaired (NCDENR 2001).
Current areas of concern include the Newport River and its tributaries (including Core Creek and
Harlowe Creek) to the north of the Town of Morehead City, the north shore of Bogue Sound, Broad
Creek, Gales Creek, and Spooners Creek. The cause of impairment for waters in this subbasin is fecal
coliform bacterial contamination, resulting from runoff from urbanized areas and subdivisions and
agricultural/forestry land uses (NCDENR 2001).
White Oak River Subbasin 03-05-04
This subbasin contains major waterbodies, including the North River, Jarrett Bay, Nelson Bay, and
the landward halves of Back Sound and Core Sound. A large part of the subbasin is cultivated
cropland (Open Grounds Farm). In this subbasin, 90% of the waters are listed as SA, 59.6% of the
waters are considered ORW, and 29% of the shellfish harvesting waters are considered impaired
(NCDENR 2001).
Water quality in this subbasin is generally considered good, although there are areas in the North
River and adjacent bays and tributaries that are not supporting shellfish harvesting. These waters
include Wards Creek, Davis Bay and a small portion of Back Sound. There are also areas of concern
in the tributaries of Jarrett Bay and Nelson Bay. The cause of impairment for waters in this subbasin
is fecal coliform bacterial contamination. Potential sources of pollution include runoff from
subdivisions, agricultural land, domesticated animals, forestry practices, and wildlife (NCDENR
2001).
White Oak River Subbasin 03-05-05
This subbasin includes Core Banks and Shackleford Banks and is outside of the Carteret County
planning jurisdiction. All of the waters in this subbasin except the Atlantic Ocean are Class SA, and
over 91 % are classified as ORW. None of the waters are closed to shellfishing.
Neuse River Subbasin 03-04-10
Carteret County represents only a portion of the area within this subbasin. Of the entire subbasin,
29.5% of the total waters are impaired while 4% of .those waters are impaired in the shellfish
harvesting use support category. The impaired shellfish harvesting waters are located in the South
River and its tributaries. The cause of impairment is overloading of nutrients into'this segment of the
37

Neuse River and high fecal coliform bacterial levels. According to the Lower Neuse Basin
Association, since 1998 there has been a 48% reduction in total nitrogen discharges. Open Grounds
Farm, adjacent to South River, has recently removed cattle operations and installed flashboard risers
on many ditches. Both of these Best Management Practices help reduce sources and delivery of
bacterial contaminants to shellfish harvesting waters. However, because of the chronic overloading
of nutrients into the Neuse River over a long period of time in the past, it may be some time before
current reductions will result in improved water quality. (NCDENR 2002).
Neuse River Subbasin 03-04-13
A small sliver of this subbasin is found in the county. The sliver is part of Pamlico Sound and
contains no land area. This small area is classified as SA NSW.
Neuse River Subbasin 03-04-14
This subbasin is almost entirely encompassed by Carteret County and has very little developed land.
area. There is persistent bacterial contamination from the abundant wildlife in Thorofare Creek and
Golden Creek (NCDENR 2003). Despite this, almost 100% of the waters are listed as fully
supporting for shellfish harvesting.
Tar River Subbasin 03-03-08
A small sliver of this sub -basin is found in the county. The sliver is part of Pamlico Sound and
contains no land area. This small area is classified as SA.
Information and recommendations contained in the DWO Basinwide Plans were considered in the
development of local land use policy contained in Section 8.
303(d) Listed Waters
Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act requires states to develop a list of waters not meeting water
quality standards or which have impaired uses. Listed waters must be prioritized, and a management
strategy must subsequently be developed for all listed waters (NCDENR 2003). There are 138 water
bodies in Carteret County listed on 2002 North Carolina §303(d) list (NCDENR 2003). Combined,
the impaired waterbodies listed constitute about 24,555 acres (less than 10% of the total water areas
in Carteret County); 80 water bodies are rated high priority, 52 are rated medium priority, and 6 are
rated low priority (NCDENR 2002). All calculations were derived from areas and miles distributed
by the state of North Carolina and are assumed to constitute those geographic areas within Carteret
County only.
The NC Division of Water Quality prepares and maintains the list of impaired waters in North
Carolina. Further information and the list of impaired waters are available at
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/tmdl/General 303d.htm#Questions About the List
Wastewater Treatment Systems
Portions of three river basins are located in Carteret County; the White Oak, Neuse, and Tar -Pamlico
river basins. The Carteret County portion of the Tar -Pamlico river basin contains no land area and
therefore is not addressed in this section. There are portions of three White Oak subbasins and -two
Neuse subbasins in the county. Three major National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) dischargers, all municipal wastewater treatment plants, operate' within the geographic
bounds of the county and include the Town of Morehead City Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP),
Town of Newport WWTP, and Town of Beaufort WWTP (NCDENR 2001). All three WWTPs have
been fined at least twice since 1998 for limits violations to a total sum of over $11,000 in fines
38

1
(NCCF 2004). There are 11 (5 in Carteret County jurisdiction) other minor NPDES dischargers
within the geographic bounds of Carteret County, some of which have had chronic system
a malfunctions in the past. Beaufort Fisheries, Inc. has been cited for limits violations eight times since
2001. Other frequent violators include `Peppertree Atlantic Beach Assoc -Drip,' `Pebble Beach HOA-
Condos,' `Point Emerald Villas Wastewater Treatment Facility (WWTF),' and `A Place at Atlantic
Beach' (NCCF 2004). Of the total of 14 NPDES permitted dischargers located within the geographic
bounds of Carteret County, eight (one in the Carteret County planning jurisdiction) have been cited
frequently for limits violations and would constitute having chronic systems malfunctions.
Much of the County is dependent upon individual septic systems. As expected, some septic systems
experience failures. Notable areas with concentrations of septic failures include the Hibbs Road,
Lake Road, and Mill Creek areas.
Public Health Hazards
Septic systems in Carteret County are generally considered to be well -functioning. Some septic
problems occur in low-lying areas and in high -density areas on the fringe of sewer supply lines.
Septic systems that were permitted or installed prior to 1977 North Carolina regulations are more
likely to be problematic.
a There is one registered animal operation in Carteret County CDW 2004 . The animal operation
g P tY � Q ) P
is located in Newport, NC, and is a farrow to wean swine operation with an estimated 818 animals
(NCDWQ 2004). Other health hazard trends have been developing within Carteret County, and are
best described by referencing each of the subbasins that occur in Carteret County.
White Oak River Subbasin 03-05-01
Carteret County exists only partially in this subbasin and all of the WWTPs located in this subbasin
exist in Onslow County. Most of the area exists as undeveloped forested and wetland areas, and
a septic system problems are frequent (NCDENR 2001). Areas that are potential sources of polluted
runoff include development and agricultural land in the northern part of the subbasin and areas
around the NC 24 causeway near Swansboro (NCDENR 2001).
aWhite Oak River Subbasin 03-05-03
This subbasin is relatively developed. The cause of impairment for impaired waters in this subbasin
(1 is fecal coliform bacterial contamination, and is likely caused by rapid growth rates and large
LLJJ seasonal populations (NCDENR 2001). Current areas of concern include the Newport River and its
tributaries to the north of the Town of Morehead City, and Bogue Sound to the south of the city. One
a other notable source of water contamination has been occurring on Bogue Banks and Atlantic Beach
because of stormwater pumping onto beaches and into shellfish harvesting waters (NCDENR 2001).
White Oak -River Subbasin 03-05-04
This subbasin is mostly undeveloped and agricultural.. Many acres of water are classified as ORW,
however continuing urban development is having a detrimental effect on water quality in the
a subbasin. Septic system problems have been noted around the community of North River, and in the
low-lying areas around Jarrett Bay, Oyster Creek, and Nelson Bay (NCDENR 2001).
Neuse River Subbasin 03-04-14
u This subbasin is almost entirely encompassed by Carteret County and has very little developed land
area. There are two sewer systems in this subbasin not listed as NPDES dischargers; the BT-11
39

Marine Corps Air Station and Atlantic Field. There are no noted septic system problems for
residences or businesses located in this area.
Neuse River Subbasin 03-04-10
A small eastern portion of this subbasin is located in Carteret County. There are no WWTPs located
in the Carteret County portion of this subbasin, but many are located in the adjacent counties and
have reported effluent problems (NCDENR 2002). There is one sewer system in this subbasin not
listed as NPDES discharger; it is BT-11 Marine Corps Air Station. Even though the WWTPs are
located in other counties, they are still in the same subbasin and pose a potential risk to the water
quality in Carteret County.
Beaches
Since 1997, there has been one beach advisory in the planning jurisdiction area of Carteret County.
An advisory for the beach at North River Highway 70 Bridge was issued 8/19/03 and lifted the next
day for high levels of fecal coliform bacteria. Other similar beach advisories have been issued for
municipalities in Carteret County (NCDEH 2O04).
Natural Hazards
Repetitive Flood Losses
Portions of Carteret County have been subject to recurrent flooding. Repetitive loss data compiled
through the National Flood Insurance Program's (NFIP) Community Rating System (CRS) has
identified 222 properties with at least two flood insurance claims within the County's planning
jurisdiction.
The claim areas are sporadic, but generally located within communities in close proximity to one
another. The Down East area contains 63 of these claims, or 28% of the total. Repetitive claims are
reported in Williston, Stacy, Sea Level, Harkers Island, Gloucester, Davis, and Cedar Island. The
largest number of repetitive claims in this area are in Sea Level, Davis, and Cedar Island.
The Merrimon area contains 48 claims, or 21% of the total. The claims near Beaufort and the North
River community consist of 43, or approximately 19% of the overall claims within the County
jurisdiction.
The number of repetitive claims located to the west of Morehead City within the County's planning
jurisdiction total 68, or 36% of the total claims. This includes property within the Broad Creek and
Salter Path communities.
In addition to the above statistics, repetitive loss properties within the Town of Cedar Point total 27.
Shoreline Erosion
The Division of Coastal Management Erosion Rate Maps incorporate shoreline erosion data over the
past 50 years. These maps indicate that beach erosion in the small oceanfront area in the Carteret
County planning'jurisdiction (Salter Path) is minimal and rated in the lowest category (NCDCM
1992, 1998). The majority of ocean beaches in Carteret County are outside the planning jurisdiction.
The Carteret County Shore Preservation Office coordinates ocean `beach preservation efforts
throughout the County, including beach areas. located in the _Towns of Atlantic Beach, Pine Knoll
.M

0
Shores, Indian Beach, and Emerald Isle. The Carteret County Shore Beach Preservation Plan
contains preservation strategies that encompass the entire Bogue Banks barrier chain.
aNatural Resources (Environmentally Fragile Areas)
Fragile areas are sensitive areas that are easily destroyed by inappropriate or poorly planned
development. Fragile areas include the following: coastal and non -coastal wetlands, sand dunes,
ocean beaches and shorelines, estuarine waters, public trust waters, primary nursery areas, estuarine
and public trust shorelines, complex natural areas, prime wildlife habitats, areas that contain
aendangered species, maritime forests, natural heritage areas, and prime farmland. Much of Carteret
County is located within or in close proximity to fragile areas. Incompatible development could
result in a loss of these resources or impacts to the resource functions of these areas. Many of these.
areas have been previously discussed in this section. Agricultural resources are discussed below.
a Agricultural Resources
Prime farmland soils are those that are best suited to production of food, feed, forage, fiber, and
oilseed crops (USDA 1987). There are seven prime farmland soil types found in Carteret County,
accounting for 6.3%- (21,174 acres) of all the soils in the county (USDA 1987). Currently,
approximately 14% of the land use (57,747 acres) is devoted to agriculture in Carteret County.
Current trends show the continuing loss of agricultural land due to conversion into residential uses.
This loss is attributed to development and economic pressures.
w
I
111
11
I
it
I
41

SECTION 4: EXISTING LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT
This section of the Land Use Plan provides a description of current and emerging development trends
in Carteret County and a forecast of future development based on existing trends. The analysis of
existing development is a major component of the foundation upon which land use policies and the
future land use map are built. It provides a base for projecting future land needs and for forecasting
the location of development.
Existing Land Use
a Carteret County is considered to have three distinct areas in terms of general land use. The first area
is the Down East area, which lies east of the Intracoastal Waterway connecting Core and Adams
Creeks. The central area is generally described as being north of the Town of Beaufort and includes
the Towns of Morehead City and Newport: The third area lies west of Morehead City along the NC
24 and NC 58 corridors and Bogue Banks. This area is generally referred to as western. Carteret
County.
The Down East area continues to be predominantly rural with large areas of wetlands and agriculture.
The population is concentrated in numerous unincorporated communities along the waterfront. A
major land use in this area of the County is Open Grounds Farm.
Central Carteret County has traditionally contained the population centers of Newport, Morehead
City, and Beaufort, all of which are outside of the Carteret County planning jurisdiction. Other than
these municipalities and their planning jurisdictions, this area has been considered to be mostly rural
in character. However, recent and anticipated residential growth has been influenced by the provision
of central water service and the development of additional subdivisions. The Jarrett Bay .Marine
aIndustrial Park is also located in this area.
Western Carteret County continues to be the major development and population base of the County.
aDevelopment is concentrated in the incorporated areas on Bogue Banks and along NC Highway 24
and Bogue Sound west of Morehead City. Increasingly, new subdivisions and other development are
occurring in areas near the White Oak River and in the farthest western portions of the County,
including areas along NC Highway 58. The majority of the County's zoned areas are in Western
Carteret County in the areas experiencing the heaviest growth.
According to the Carteret County Planning Department, subdivision activity from 1997 to 2003
throughout the County resulted in the creation of 1,792 new lots. On a township basis, the majority,
or 43% (778 lots), of these new lots are located in the White Oak Township in western Carteret
County. Subdivision activity in Morehead Township accounted for almost 13% of the total (232 lots)
and new lots in Beaufort Township were approximately 11% (203 lots) of the total. The remaining
579 lots (33%) are located in the remaining 12 townships.
In addition to residential development, scattered commercial and industrial development continues to
occur throughout the County. Concentrated commercial and industrial development has occurred
along US Highway 70 between Newport and Morehead City, with increasing development along the
NC Highway 24 corridor.
42
I

The developed areas of the County extend well beyond central water and sewer systems operated by
municipalities and private entities. The majority of the unincorporated'areas under Carteret County
planning jurisdiction are served by individual septic systems or package treatment plants. In addition
to individual wells, Carteret County's water supply system is composed of 20 individual systems,
including five large systems. Section 5 of this land use plan provides information on these systems
and the service areas.
Second home, retirement and tourist related development is concentrated in the Bogue Banks
communities, with increasing presence in mainland areas both Down East and in western Carteret
County. Carteret County's vast shoreline areas are attractive -for development and are expected to
continue to attract resort/retirement development.
A large percentage of the land in the County consists of areas that are not under Carteret County or
municipal planning or regulatory authority. Included are federal, state, local, and non-profit property
and easements that are managed for conservation or open space and federally owned lands used for
military purposes. These lands are not available for future development. The Croatan National Forest
covers large portions of western and central Carteret County. The Cedar Island Wildlife Refuge is
located in the Down East area. The Cherry Point Marine Corps Air Station in Havelock, Craven
County operates three facilities in Carteret County. BT-11 Piney Island and the Marine Corps
Outlying Airfield Atlantic are both located Down East. The Marine Corps Auxiliary Landing Field
[MCALF] Bogue Field is located near the community of Bogue along the NC 24 corridor. Other
areas within the County that are unavailable for development include Cape Lookout National
Seashore, Cedar Island National Wildlife Refuge, and Fort Macon State Park.
Incompatible land uses (primarily residential) associated with the Marine Corps outlying field in
Bogue are a concern due to noise associated with the facility and the potential for aircraft crashes in
populated areas. The Eastern Carolina Joint Land Use Study (ECJLUS), developed by local
governments impacted by the facility, has been adopted by Carteret County to address this concern.
AICUZ zoning has also been implemented for areas adjacent to the facility and in the flight path of
the aircraft. Due to the Down East area being less populated, safety and noise concerns associated
with the MCAS outlying field in Atlantic have not been as prevalent. Additionally, use of the
Atlantic site by the military has lessened in recent years. The Down East area is unzoned, so no
special protection is currently available.
Other potential land use or land use/water quality conflicts include junkyards located adjacent to
residential areas and public trust waters. One such site exists on NC 101 north of the Town of
Beaufort. While the area was recently rezoned to an industrial zone that allows junkyards, the facility
is out of compliance with existing regulations aimed to mitigate impacts. The site drains to Ware
Creek, which is a tributary of the Newport River, and is adjacent to residential uses. Another
junkyard is located in western Carteret County, on SR 1106 (West Firetower Road) that is adjacent to
existing and anticipated residential areas.
Another land use conflict is located on a site formerly used for industrial purposes in Marshallberg.
There are concerns with the quality of the land and potential impacts to ground water. Soil and
groundwater testing for a proposed redevelopment project identified soil and groundwater
contamination. While the levels were within state -accepted levels, they were considered to be high.
Adjacent uses include the Harbor of Refuge and a public picnic area maintained by the County.
43

The Existing Land Use Map (Map 4.1) provides a general pattern of existing land use in areas under
Carteret County planning jurisdiction. Land uses shown on this map include commercial, industrial,
institutional, residential and undeveloped. The institutional category, as shown on this map, includes
all military bases, federal lands such as the Croatan National Forest, state-owned land, county parks
and beach access points. This category also includes churches, schools and other institutions. The
undeveloped category includes sparsely developed land or land that might be used for agriculture or
forestry practices.
Table 4.1 provides an estimate of the number of acres and percentages for the various land uses in the
Carteret County planning area (unincorporated areas, plus the Towns of Bogue, Cedar Point, and
Peletier), based on analysis of 2005 tax parcel data. For the table, all military bases, federal lands
such as the Croatan National Forest, and state-owned lands, as well as sparsely developed,
agricultural, and forestry lands have been counted in the undeveloped category. This distinction is
important for projecting land needs in the various land use categories as required by the CRC's
planning guidelines and provided in Chapter 8 of this plan.
Table 4.1 Land Use in Carteret County Planning Area
Land Use
Acres
Percentage of Total
Land
Percentage of Total
Develo ed Land
Residential
14,400
4.0%
92%
Commercial
828
0.2%
5%
Institutional
351
0.1 %
2%
Industrial
43
< 0.1 %
<1 %
Total developed acres
15,622
4.3%
100%
Undeveloped
347,447
95.7%
Total acres in County
planning area
363,069
100%
Future Development Trends/Conflicts with Classes II and III Lands
Western and central portions of Carteret County are expected to continue to experience growth
pressures during the planning period. Areas near or adjacent to the White Oak River and Bogue
Sound will continue to attract retirees, second -home owners, seasonal visitors, and others, thus
maintaining strong residential and associated development trends. The NC 24. corridor, from
Morehead City to Cape Carteret (including the Town of Bogue) and the NC 58 corridor north of
Cape Carteret are expected to experience increasing development. Redevelopment and infill
development of existing developed areas, such as the Town of Cedar Point and the Salter Path
community on Bogue Banks, are also 'expected to continue.
Other areas of the County are also expected to continue to grow, particularly those areas served by
central water service. In particular, the areas north of the Town of Beaufort along the NC 101 and US
70 corridors and north of the Newport River, are expected to experience increased development when
planned water service improvements are in place.
The CRC's planning guidelines require an analysis and description of any potential conflicts between
the expected growth areas and lands designated as Class II or Class III on the Environmental
-Composite Map. It is important to understand that the Environmental Composite Map is a "broad

brush" depiction of the area's capabilities and limitations for development and that the development
trends described above are also general descriptions.
No major conflicts between these areas have been identified. The areas expected to experience
development during the five years following certification of this plan are primarily designated as
Class I, although small pockets of Class II and Class III lands may be found in the general area. In
most cases, the Class II and Class III lands consist of protected lands (usually federal or state owned
lands which are not available for development) or wetlands which are often precluded from
development by state and federal requirements.
Future Land Needs Forecast
Carteret County has prepared a forecast of future residential, commercial, industrial, and institutional
land use needs for five, ten, and twenty-year periods. Future land use needs are estimated based on
permanent and seasonal population projections contained in Section 2 of the Land Use Plan and
likely land use patterns.
Table 4.2 shows these estimates for residential land needs through the twenty-year planning period.
In developing future residential land needs, population data for the County was adjusted to account
for populations of municipalities outside Carteret County planning jurisdiction. (The percentage of
the municipal population of the entire county population was estimated and subtracted from the
County population to determine growth rates for areas under County planning jurisdiction.) Growth
rates for the entire County were used to determine the projected population. Seasonal population for
the County planning jurisdiction was estimated to be 25% of the County's estimated seasonal
population. Average household size of 2.3 persons was based on current Census data for Carteret
County. Average number of households per acre is estimated at 2.86, based on average densities
contained in the land classification descriptions and County zoning.
According to these estimates, approximately 1,740 acres will be needed to accommodate the
residential land needs of the projected increase in permanent and seasonal population during the
twenty-year period. The projected number of residential acres needed to accommodate future
population has been increased by fifty. percent to allow for unanticipated growth and to provide
market flexibility, as provided for in the CRC's Land Use Planning Guidelines. A total of 2610 acres
are projected to be needed for residential development during the twenty-year period.
Table 4.2 Estimate of Future Land Needs for Residential Use
2005 - 2010
2010 - 2015
2015 - 2025
2005 - 2025
Permanent Population Growth
1,549
1,226
1,015
3,790
Seasonal Population Growth
1,878
1,489
4,337
7,704
Additional Permanent Households
671
531
440
1,642
Additional Seasonal Households
813
645
1,877
3,335
Total Additional Households (permanent plus seasonal)
1,484
1,176
2,317
4,977
Estimate of Average Residential Households/acre
(average density allowed by future land use categories)
2.86
2.86
2.86
2.86
Residential acres required for growth (projected)
518
411
810
1,740
Total projected acres (based on 1.5 adjustment)
778
617
1,2151
2,610
45

I
I
u
9
III
I
1
11
7
Table 4.3 projects the amount of land needed for development by land use category for the next five,
ten, and twenty years. The amount of future residential land estimated (2610 acres) accounts for 92%
of the additional estimated acres for development. The remaining acres are estimated at the same
percent as the developed land in 2005 and as shown for the Carteret County planning area in Table
4.1.
The percentages of land use by category were determined by analyzing 2005 Carteret County tax
parcel data for the planning area (unincorporated areas of the County, plus the Towns of Cedar Point,
Bogue, and Peletier). Tax parcel data was used to identify the developed parcels and categorize them
by land use. It is assumed that the percentage of developed land by category will remain roughly the
same throughout the twenty-year planning period.
Table 4.3 Projected Land Use in Development, 2005 to 2025
Land Use
Category
Percentage
of Developed
Land 2005
Acres
2005
Acres
2010
Acres
2015
Acres
2025
Percentage of
Developed
Land 2025
Residential
92%
14,400
15,178
15,795
17,010
92%
Commercial
5%
828
87.0
904
970
5%
Industrial
<1 %
43
47
50
57
<1 %
Institutional
2%
351
372
389
422
2%
Totals
100%
15,622
16,467
17,138
18,459
100%
Table 4.4 displays the calculations for the additional land area needed for development
incrementally for the next 20 years by major land use category. The additional land area was
calculated using the total projected acres for residential growth as shown in Table 4.2 and
calculating the projected development to be at the same percent as the existing land use in 2005
as shown in Table 4.1. The projections assume that current development trends will continue and
that the population will continue to increase as projected in Section 2 of this plan.
Table 4.4 Additional Land Area in Acres Needed for Development, 2005 to 2025
Percentage of
Additional
Additional
Additional
Land Needed
Land
Land
Land
Total Added
by Land Use
Needed
Needed
Needed
Land Needed
Category 2005
Land Use Category
2005-2010
2010-2015
2015-2025
2005-2025
through 2025
Residential
778
617
1,215
2,610
92%
Commercial
42
34
66
142
5%
Industrial
4
3
7
14
<1 %
Institutional
21
17
33
71
2%
TOTALS
845
1 671
1,321
2,837
100%

Land Use
- Commercial
- Industrial
Institutional
- Residential
Undeveloped
Water
Roads
Areas not under Carteret County
Planning Jurisdiction
Municipalities under Carteret County
Planning Jurisdiction
County Boundaries
Townships
IRV Archeaological Site
I
� I
i
I
� I
t
c
The preparation of this map was
financed in part through a grant
provided by the North Carolina
Coastal Management Program,
through the funds provided by the
North Carolina Coastal Management
Act of 1972, as amended, which
is administered by the Office of
Ocean and Coastal Resource
Management, National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration.
J
Morehead
i
i
i
Cedar
Island
i
i
i
i
Merrimon
Davis
Portsmouth
Island
''''Atlantic
Sea
Level
St ait Stacy
m a
Marshallberg
Smyrna
N ��� "WOCWhite Oak Harkers
Island
room -A -VI
Land -
Wfiter
infrastructure
Davis
Map 4.1 Existing Land Use
CAMA Land Use Plan Update
Carteret County, NC
Scale: 1" = 4 miles
4 0 4 8 Miles

r
a
SECTION 5: COMMUNITY FACILITIES ANALYSIS
An important consideration in developing the land use plan is analyzing the capacity of Carteret
County's community facilities. It is important that the County's .infrastructure carrying capacity is
sufficient to meet the needs of current and planned development. This section of the. Land Use Plan
analyzes the existing and planned capacity and adequacy of Carteret County's larger water,
wastewater and transportation systems.
Water and Wastewater Systems
In many areas, private wells and septic tanks are the basic forms of service. A map of Water and
Wastewater Systems is available for review at the Carteret County Planning and Development.
a Department.
a Water Systems
In addition to individual wells, Carteret County's water supply system is composed of 20 individual
facilities (NCCGIA 1997). These facilities and their service areas are shown in Table 5.1. Of the 20
water supply systems, operational and engineering information is available for the following five
systems: 1) West Carteret Community Water Corporation, 2) Harkers Island Water Sanitary District,
3) North River Community Water System, 4) Merrimon Community Water System and 5) Bogue
Banks Water Corporation. Information is unavailable for the other 15 private water systems and is
therefore not included in this analysis.
Of the five systems for which information is available, the North River and Merrimon Community
systems are operated and maintained by Carteret County. Combined, the five facilities are able to
provide 4.91 million gallons per day (MGD) of supply and serve approximately 10,900 metered
connections. Overall, the combined average daily use for the facilities is 2.33 MGD, which
arepresents 47.4% of the supply. [Data sources include West Carteret Water Corporation (2003),
Bogue Banks Water Corporation (2004) and NCDENR (2002, 1997-A, 1997-B).] These facilities
serve areas classified as developed, limited transition, and rural with services. Below are detailed
adescriptions of the five water supply systems for which information is available.
West Carteret Community Water Corporation
The system consists of four 10-inch wells located in the Croatan National Forest. From the ground,
water is softened, color is removed, the water is chlorinated and it is injected with polyphosphate for
system -wide corrosion control before being distributed (West Carteret Water Corporation 2003). The
total treated water storage capacity is 1.35 million gallons distributed in two elevated storage tanks.
In 2003, there were 3,950 active customers, and of these, 36 customers were large volume users.
There are approximately 4,250 equivalent residential customers (West Carteret Water Corporation
-� 2003). According to the 2003 Water Quality Report, the system had no violations and drinking water
met or exceeded all federal and state requirements.
The West Carteret Water Corporation has an available supply, of 1.6 MGD. Average daily use in
2002 was calculated at 0.676 MGD with a peak daily use of 1.176 MGD (West Carteret Water
Corporation 2003). The current average daily use represents 42.3% of the current available supply.
Future system plans include adding a fifth well which is expected to be located in the Croatan
National Forest (West Carteret Water Corporation 2003).
I

Distribution lines are installed from Gethsemane Memorial Park near Morehead City along the NC
24 corridor to the White Oak River in Cedar Point (West Carteret Water Corporation 2003). The
northernmost supply lines are on NC 58 near Hadnot Creek (West Carteret Water Corporation 2003).
Table 5.1 Water Svstem Service Areas
Water S stems
Service Area
West Carteret Community Water
Co oration
Along NC 24 and NC 58 in the White Oak Township
Harkers Island
All of Harkers Island
North River
Parts of Harlowe and Beaufort Townshi ss
Merrimon Communi
Along Silver Dollar Road
Seagate I
Subdivision Seagate Drive
Seagate IV
Subdivision Steel Tank Road east of SR 1161
River Oaks Plantation
Subdivision near Stella
Sea Level
On US 70 near North Street
Down East Mobile Home Park
On Harkers Island Road
Bogue Banks Water Corporation
All of Bogue Banks
Dutch Treat
MHP off of NC 24
E-MA-HENWU
Camp off of Sam Hatcher Road
Country Pine Estates
Near intersection of NC 24 and SR 1122
Coral Shores/Holiday Village
Sanders Creek Road off of NC 24
Goose Creek Landing &Camp ound
Off of SR 1119
Bogue Field
Marine Base in Town of Bogue
Comer's Cove
On Jones Street off of NC 24
Ocean Spray MH S/D
MH S/D south of VFW Road
Page's MHP
MHP north of VFW Road
Pondside MHP
Off of NC 58
Harkers Island Water Sanitary District (WSD)
The system consists of two 10-inch wells. Well #1 is located on Guthrie Drive near the intersection
of Bayview Drive. Well #2 is located at the corner of Yeomans Drive and Bayview Drive (NCDENR
2002). Each well is capable of providing 0.324 MGD, although well #2 is currently not operational.
The total storage capacity of the system is 0.250 million gallons with one elevated tank located in
conjunction with well #2 (NCDENR 2002).
In 2003, there were 952 metered connections with 94% residential and the remaining 6% commercial
customers (NCDENR 2002). According to the 2002 Water Quality Report, the system had no
violations and drinking water met or exceeded all federal and state requirements (Harkers Island
Sanitary District 2002).
49

C
aHarkers Island WSD has an available supply of 0.324 MGD. The average daily use in 2002 was
0.137 MGD, and the peak daily use was 0.248 MGD (NCDENR 2002). The current average daily
a use represents 42.3% of the available supply. The estimated future service demand in 2020 is
expected to grow to 0.211 MGD. The expected available supply in 2020 will be 0.648 due to planned
expansions (NCDENR 2002). This future projected need will represent 33% of the available supply.
This is far below 80% of the available supply, which is the most allowed without adding additional
supply (NCDENR 2002).
(rj The Harkers Island Water Sanitary District provides service to all of Harkers Island. Future
�J expansion plans include bringing well #2 into operation to provide an additional 0.324 MGD in 2005.
There are indications that a third well may be built at some point in the future (NCDENR 2002).
allorth River Community Water System
The system consists of two 10-inch wells. Well #1, located on Laurel Road, is capable of supplying
0.238 MGD and well #2, located on Merrimon Road, is capable of supplying 0.104 MGD
(NCDENR-A 1997). The total finished storage capacity of the system is 0.200 million gallons. In
1997 there were 180 metered connections; three connections were commercial, two were institutional
and the remainder were residential (NCDENR-A 1997). According to the 2002 Water Quality
Report, the system had no violations and drinking water met or exceeded all federal and state
requirements (Carteret County -A 2002).
aFuture plans for this system include being owned and connected to the Town of Beaufort by 2010
(NCDENR-A 1997). This system is located in the proposed Central Coastal Plain capacity area and
the water supply may be limited in the future due to declining aquifer water levels (NCDENR-A
1997).
The service area includes NC 101 and SR 1163 Laurel Road to the north, the intersection of SR 1300
and US 70 to the south, SR 1300 Merrimon Road to the east, and NC 101 / SR 1155 Old Winberry
Road to the west. An expansion completed in early 2006 enlarged the service area south to the
southern intersection of SR 1466 and US 70. As noted previously, this system is operated and
maintained by Carteret County.
Merrimon Community Water System
The Merrimon Community water supply system has a total available supply of 0.064 MGD. The
system consists of one 6-inch well located at Jonaquin Creek Road. The total finished storage
capacity of the system is .0.010 million gallons (NCDENR-B 1997). In 1997, there were 30 metered
connections; one connection was institutional and the remaining were residential (NCDENR-A
1997). According to the 2002 Water Quality Report, the system had no violations and drinking water
met or exceeded all federal and state requirements (Carteret County-B 2002).
The average daily use in 1997 was 0.007 MGD and the peak -daily use was 0.010 MGD (NCDENR-B
1997). The current average daily use represents 11% of the available supply. The projected future
supply in 2020 is 0.064 MGD and the projected future demand for 2020 is 0.012. This future
projected need will. represent 18% of the available supply. This is far below 80% of the available
supply, which is the most allowed without adding additional supply (NCDENR-B 1997).
There are no future plans for additional development to this small rural system. The system is owned
and operated by Carteret County. The service area extends along Silver Dollar Road in the
community of Merrimon.
50

Bogue Banks Water Corporation
The system consists of 11 wells located along Bogue Banks (Bogue Banks Water Corporation 2004).
From the ground, the water is chlorinated at each well before being distributed (Bogue Banks Water
Corporation 2004). The total water storage capacity is 3.20 million gallons distributed in two
elevated storage tanks and four ground storage tanks (Bogue Banks Water Corporation 2004). There
is also an Electro-Dialysis Reversal Plant installed at well #4 to treat high chloride levels (Bogue
Banks Water Corporation 2004).
In 2003, there were 5,795 active customers, and of these, 94 customers were large volume users.
There are approximately 6,400 equivalent residential customers (Bogue Banks Water Corporation
2004). According to the 2002 Water Quality Report, the system had no violations and drinking water
met or exceeded all federal and state requirements (Bogue Banks Water Corporation 2002). `
The Bogue Banks Water Corporation has an available well supply of 2.7 MGD (Bogue Banks Water
Corporation 2004). Average daily use in 2003 was calculated at 1.48 MGD with a peak daily use of
3.56 MGD (Bogue Banks Water Corporation 2004). The current average daily use represents 54.8%
of the current available supply.
There are 73 miles of water mains and 5400 service laterals located along most of Bogue Sound
(Bogue Banks Water Corporation 2004). The service area includes Emerald Isle to the west along the
outer banks to Lost Treasure Golf & Raceway located at 976 Salter Path Road in Salter Path, NC
(Bogue Banks Water Corporation 2004). Within the Carteret County planning jurisdiction, Bogue
Banks Water Corporation provides service to the Salter Path community.
Sewer Systems
Most of the unincorporated areas of Carteret County are served by individual septic systems and
package treatment plants. Of the wastewater treatment systems located within Carteret County's
planning jurisdiction, 108 are Type V on -site wastewater treatment systems and 43 are Type VI
(Carteret County-C).
Type V systems are any systems with sand filter pretreatment, any >3,000 gallon per day septic
system with a permit nitrification field designed for >1,500 gallon per day, aerobic treatment unit, or
any other mechanical, biological, or chemical pretreatment plan <3,000 gallon per day. Type VI
systems are any systems with >3,000 gallon per day with mechanical, biological, or chemical
pretreatment system plant; and any wastewater reuse/recycle (NCSWNR 2004).
Operational and engineering information is readily available for the following six systems: 1)
Beaufort Wastewater Treatment Plant, 2) Snug Harbor Wastewater -Treatment Plant, 3) Taylor
Hospital and Extended Care, 4) Bogue Landing Field (MCAS), 5) Atlantic Field (MCAS) and 6) BT-
11 Cherry Point (MCAS). These wastewater treatment systems serve relatively -small areas of
unincorporated areas of the County and are described below in greater detail.
Beaufort Wastewater Treatment Plant (NPDES permit # NC0021831)
This point discharge system consists of 17 sewage -pumping stations that operate as a linear system
and are located in different areas throughout Beaufort (Town of Beaufort 2003). The plant operates
as a 1.5 million gallon per day (MGD) activated sludge process using a combination of air,
microorganism, and chlorine gas treatment before the effluent is discharged into Taylor's Creek
(Town of Beaufort 2003). The discharge pipe is located at the end of Leonda Drive on Front Street
(Town of Beaufort 2003).
51

I
For the fiscal year period 2002-2003, the treatment plant processed an average daily quantity of
l� about 1.08 MGD (398 million gallons total) (Town of Beaufort 2003). The system is currently at
72% capacity and nearing 80% capacity. The plant experienced a 35% increase in treated flow
compared to the fiscal year 2001-2002, which led to several system overflows. This was due to
excess stormwater infiltration during the 2002-2003 fiscal year. Overflows were also caused by
accumulation of fats, oils and greases in the wastewatef collection system (Town of Beaufort 2003).
The system has been fined five times since 1999 for limits violations; once in 1999, twice in 2001,
once in 2002 and once in 2004. The combined total fines exceeded $7,490 (NCCF 2004, NCDENR-
C 2004, NCDENR-D 2002).
a The Beaufort Wastewater Treatment system provides service to limited areas of the Carteret County
planning jurisdiction, including East Carteret High School, Jarrett Bay Marine Industrial Park, and
the Eastman Creek Landing subdivision.
Sailors Snug Harbor Wastewater Treatment Plant (NPDES permit # NC0028827)
This point discharge facility has a designed capacity of 0.02 MGD (USEPA-A 2004). It located in
Sea Level, North Carolina. There have been two past limits violations; on 8/21/02 the facility was
a- fined $290.55 and on 2/7/03 the facility was fined $290.55 (NCDENR-D, NCDENR-E)
a Taylor Hospital and Extend Care (NPDES permit # NC0047759)
This point discharge facility has a designed capacity of 0.014 MGD (USEPA-B 2004). It located in
Sea Level, North Carolina. There have been two past limits violations; on 11/12/2003 the facility was
fined $368.70, and on 1/8/04 the facility was fined $248.40. (NCDENR-C, NCDENR-F)
Bogue Landing Field (MCAS)
The permitted effluent discharge for this system is 3,400 gallons per day (NCDENR-H). This facility
consists of a treatment lagoon with concrete baffles, a polishing lagoon, a new tablet chlorinator, a
modified irrigation pump station and a four -acre spray field (NCDENR-H). The facility is serviced
by the Marine Corps Air Station and accepts no public wastewater.
Field CAS Atlantic F d(M )
The permitted effluent discharge for this system is 2,000 gallons per day (NCDENR-G). This facility
consists of one primary stabilization lagoon, one 468,000 gallon polishing and storage pond, one
chlorine tablet contact chamber and two one-half acre spray irrigation fields (NCDENR-G). The
facility is serviced by the Marine Corps Air Station and accepts no public wastewater.
BT-11 Cher Point CAS
Cherry _ � )
The permitted effluent discharge of this system is 1,750 gallons per day (NCDENR-I). This facility
consists of approximately .805 linear feet of six inch gravity sewer, a 3,800 gallon septic tank, two
265 square foot recalculating surface sand filters, a re -circulation pump tank, a tablet chlorine unit
and contact tank, a 64,100 gallon holding tank, a spray irrigation pump tank, and a total application
field area of 62,832 square feet (NCDENR-I).
TRANSPORTATION
nTransportation issues, particularly surrounding major highways, are of concern to Carteret County.
U These include the need for 'improved safety, regional accessibility, and traffic flow.
52

Carteret County's major road network is limited. The four major arteries are US 70, NC 24, NC 58,
and NC 101. Each of these roadways has a varying speed -limit, capacity, and number of lanes. The
primary access to the County is by US -70. However, there are numerous stoplights and other
problems along US 70 from Raleigh to Carteret County that result in diminished traffic flow,
congestion, and other transportation difficulties. A major upgrade of NC 24 was completed in 2002,
which provides a link to Interstate 40. Carteret County's major road systems are summarized on the
Transportation Systems map that is available for review in the Carteret County Planning and
Development Department.
The County's transportation system is highly dependent on automobile use. There is no
comprehensive public transportation system, although limited transit service is available for the
elderly and disabled. Bicycle and pedestrian networks are also limited, particularly along roadways.
Numerous state and privately operated ferry services provide access to natural and recreational areas,
neighboring communities, and the Outer Banks.
Carteret County adopts Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) priorities on regular cycles. The
Carteret County Transportation Committee presented transportation priorities for the County to the
North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) in November of 2003 to be considered for
inclusion in the state's 2006-2012 TIP. The Committee report identified six priorities for the 2006-
2012 Transportation Improvement Program. Five of these pertain to the US70 corridor.
• The highest priority is the replacement of the Gallants Channel Bridge (TIP project R-3307
mentioned below).
The second priority for the County is the completion of bypasses at Clayton, Goldsboro,
Kinston, and Havelock as well as projects between these cities so that US70 will be a fully
controlled -access freeway from Raleigh to the Port of Morehead City.
• The third priority involves widening and improvement of US70 from Beaufort to East
Carteret High School.
The fourth priority consists of stormwater improvements for Beaufort and Morehead City.
Priority five is the widening and improvement of the Newport River Bridge.
Priority six is construction of the Northern Bypass from the Havelock Bypass to the Port of
Morehead City. A preliminary environmental feasibility study identified three potential
locations for the bypass.
The Carteret County Transportation Committee also reported on capacity deficiencies for the western
half of the county. Roads that were near, at, or over capacity in 1996 were identified.
US70 was near capacity from Newport to Old Murdock Road in Morehead City, from 24`h to
4`h Streets in Morehead City, and from downtown Beaufort to the North River. US70 is at or
over capacity from Old Murdock Road to 24`h Street in Morehead City, from 4`h Street to
downtown Beaufort,.
• NC24 was at or over capacity from the Onslow/Carteret County border to the intersection
with US70 (improvements to address this deficiency were completed in 2002).
• NC58 was at or over capacity from the intersection of NC24 to Islander Drive and from
Headen Lane in Salter Path to Ocean Ridge Road. NC58 was near capacity from Coast
Guard Lane to Emerald Isle and from Ocean Ridge Road to the Atlantic Beach Causeway.
• The Atlantic Beach Causeway was at or over capacity.
53

0
I
ilk
I
R
0
if
0
L
u
0
Other road sections near capacity in Morehead City include a section of Country Club Road less than
one mile in length near the intersection with US70, North 35`h Street between US70 and Bridges
Street, and Bridges Street near Barbour Street.
The report includes estimates of capacity deficiencies for 2025. All roads identified in 1996 as at or
over capacity continue to be so. Those roads near capacity in 1996 are all at or over capacity by
2025. The only exception is the segment of US70 through downtown Beaufort. The capacity
deficiency in this area will be eliminated after completion of TIP project R-3307 mentioned above.
Additional roads identified as at or over capacity in 2025 are:
• Hibbs Road from US70 to NC24
• NC101 from Beaufort to the Carteret/Craven county line
• Two additional segments of NC58, one from SRI Ill to SR1259 (Taylor Notion Road) and
the second from the Atlantic Beach Causeway east for 0.5 miles.
Roads identified as near capacity in 2025 include:
• NC58 from SR1106 (West Fire Tower Road) to SRl 111
• Nine Foot Road from Sam Hatcher Road to NC24
• Merrimon Road from US70 to Laurel Road
• Country Club Road from US 70 to North 35 h Street (Morehead City)
• Bridges Street from North 35`h Street east to US 70 (Morehead City)
Table 5.3 shows traffic volumes for 1999 and 2002 for roads in the Carteret County (NCDOT 1999,
NCDOT 2002). The roads are broken down into five corridors: US70, NC24/NC58, NC101,
Merrimon, and Harkers Island.
Table 5.21999 and 2002 Traffic Volumes
Road #
Location
1999
2002
US70 Corridor west to east
SR1125
North of intersection with SR1124
3400
4100
_US70 _
US70 north of Newport _
_ 20000
_ 22000
SR1247
North of SR1129
2800
2700
US70
North of Beaufort and south of SR1300
11000
9400
US70
Between SR1140 and SR1247
18000
21000
SR1247
At intersection with SR1124
4600
6100
US70
West of the US 70/NC 24 Intersection
27000
31000
US70
East of the US 70/NC 24 Intersection
30000
32000
SR1176
Between 24t' and 25t' Streets
14000
13000
US70
Between N 35ffi St and Taylor Street
26000
30000
US70
Between 28t' and 30ffi' Streets
25000
31000
US70
Between 8 h and 9`h Streets
21000
21000
SR1177
Near intersection with SR1241
4300
5200
SR1178
Between SR1241 and SR1176
1100
1300
East of Radio Island
19000
_ 21000
_US7_0
US70
_
Between SR1174 and SR1312
14000
15000
SR1174
Between US70 and SR1170
4200
3700
US70
Between SR1310 and NC101
17000
_
17000
D:
54

SR1331
Near SR1329
1200
1200
US70
Between SR1332 and SR1347 (west of Smyrna)_ — _
6100
5300
SR1333
North of intersection with SR1339
480
480
SR1343
Between SR1342 and SR1335
960
900
US70
US70 west of Davis
4400
2900
_
US70
-_—...._....._......_—_—..........__...........__.........__.........-----......_._... _...._—...
East of SR1363
---
4400
—.._...---
2900
US70
Between SR1368 and SR1369
4100
2900
SR1363
Between US70 and SR1362
940
820
—..._
US70
_..—_.._—._.. _......----—..._..- ........ --- _...—._._...—........—....__........—
US70 west ofNC12
---- — —
3000
—
2300
SR1381
intersection with SR1417
400
290,
SR1378
_Near _
Between SR1384 and SR1387
1100
990
NC12
NC 12 north of SR 1387
1200
1100
NC24/NC58 Corridor
SR1100
Between SR1102 and NC58
1100
1200
SR1104
Between NC58 and SR1105
140
150
SR1109
North of SR1106
300
_
360
NC24
Between SR1116 and NC58
16000
20000
SR1118
East of Barrington Ridge —
_ 600
_ 490
NC24
Between SR1123 and SR1143
14000
15000
SR1141
Between NC24 and SR1285
5400
6100
NC24
Between SRl 141 and SR1672
13000
15000
NC101
Between SR1631 and SR1644
7200
7000
NC101
_
NC 101 north of Beaufort, south of SR1163
4500
4600
NC101
NC 101 north of SR1163
6000
6600
SR1155
South of intersection with SR1154
1800
2100
SR1154
North of intersection with SR1157
720
590
Merrimon Corridor
SR1300
North of SR1163
1600
1900
SR1318
Between SR1319 and SR1407
470
580
Harkers Island
SR1337
Between SR1335 and SR1338
1400
1500
SR1335
Between SR1337 and SR1336
4800
4600
The US70 corridor saw an increase in traffic volume between 1999 and 2002 from the Craven
County border to Beaufort. From 1999 to 2000 there was a decrease in traffic volume from the North
River Bridge to Cedar Island.
0
Al
in
111
11
Il
A
in
In
The NC24/NC58 corridor and the Merrimon corridor also saw increases in traffic volume between
1999 and 2002. There is no clear trend on Harkers Island as traffic volume decreased in one area and
increased in another. The NC101 corridor has some increases and some decreases in traffic volume.
The NCDOT Transportation Improvement Program for 2004-2010 includes seven road
improvements / new routes, three enhancement projects, eight bridge replacements, two ferry
projects, a feasibility study for upgrading US70/NC12 from Beaufort to Cedar Island (FS-9902D)
and a corridor management plan for the Outer Banks (S-4004). TIP construction projects are a
described below.
55

I
Roads:
a Guardrail rehabilitation on US70 (portion of project R-4401 affecting Carteret County)
a a Widening and relocation of US70 from Radio Island to SR1303 (Pinners Point) (R-3307)
a Convert intersection of NC24. and NC58 to an interchange (R-4721)
a Relocate NC101 by the Beaufort -Morehead City Airport (to accommodate runway extension)
(R-3624)
a . New connector between US70 and NC101 in Newport (R-3437)
a New bypass from Havelock to Beaufort (R-4431)
a Widen SRl 124 (Nine Foot Road / Nine Mile Road) to 24 feet from SR1140 (Roberts Road)
to west of US70 (W-4700)
Enhancement:
a Sidewalks on NC58 from Ocean Ridge Drive to Atlantic Beach Corporate Limits (E-4734)
a a Bike path onNC58 from Coast Guard Road to Merchants Parkin Emerald Isle (E-4733)
a Multi -use trail in Morehead City parallel to North 35`h Street, Friendly Road, and Country
Club Road (E-4510)
Bridges:
a
US70 over North River (B-4722)
a
a
SR1101/SR1442 over White Oak River (B-2938)
SR1124 over the East Prong of Broad Creek (B-3625)
a
SRi 124 over a branch of Newport River (B-4055)
a
SR1133 over Deep Creek (B-4454)
a
SR1154 over Black Creek (B-3428)
a
SR1154 over a branch of Newport River (B-3626)
aa
Oakleaf Drive in Pine Knoll Shores over McNeil Inlet (B-4335)
Ferry:
aa
Fast ferry for Cedar Island/Ocracoke (F-4004)
a Parking and roadwork at Cedar Island (F-4405)
aSTORMWATER
Like most counties in North Carolina, Carteret County does not operate a stormwater infrastructure.
The only systems in the County are ditches for mosquito control, side ditches along roadways, and
private drainage systems. No mapping of these facilities is currently available. No comprehensive or
asignificant data is available off the location or condition of stormwater systems in the County.
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) maintains structures associated with
public roadways. The North Carolina Department of Transportation generally maintains records
through County Maintenance Engineers for all culverts (but not other stormwater system
components) in the systems they maintain. The location of these, however, is generally only
referenced by a sketch and estimated mileage to nearest intersections. Similarly, Carteret County
a. does not regulate stormwater systems owned by nongovernmental entities beyond property
development permit application review and approval. Large developments require stormwater
management and sedimentation and erosion control plans. Available information on such systems is
56

generally limited to subdivision design plans held by the County Planning and Development
Department. As a result, though these systems have a significant and direct affect on water quality,
an assessment of such is not currently feasible.
Phase H of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Stormwater program requires some larger
communities to apply for permits for their stormwater system. A community may fall under the a
requirements of the Phase II program in one of three ways: automatic designation under the Federal
rules, designation by the state, or designation by petition of a third party. Currently Carteret County
is not a designated Phase II community.
Should designation occur, Carteret County will be required to develop a stormwater plan that is
designed to reduce the discharge of pollutants. The plan must include the following components:
1. Education and outreach program to inform citizens how to reduce pollutants in
stormwater.
2. Public involvement program that meets state requirements.
3. Detection of illicit discharges.
4. Reduction of runoff pollutants from construction.
5. Reduction of pollutants from new construction or reconstruction that disturbs one acre or a
more.
6. Pollution prevention/good housekeeping program for local government operations to
prevent or reduce pollutant runoff.
Land use policies contained in this plan address many of the major requirements contained in this
list.
0
IN-J,
I�
nil
it
'I
I
I
57

SECTION 6: LAND SUITABILITY ANALYSIS
The land suitability analysis (LSA) is a process for identifying land in Carteret County that is most
suitable for development. The analysis is not intended to "rule out' any land or site from
development. The LSA simply ranks land from least suitable to most suitable for development. It is
intended to provide this information to local decision -makers in order to guide the formulation of
local land use and development policies.
The LSA is based on consideration of several factors. These include the following:
• Natural features and their capabilities
• Existing development
• Compatibility with existing land uses
• Proximity/availability of community facilities
• Regulatory restrictions on land development
As part of the land suitability analysis, the CAMA Land Use Planning Guidelines require the
development of a Land Suitability Map. The Division of Coastal Management (DCM), in
conjunction with the NC Center for Geographic Information and Analysis, has provided a geographic
information system (GIS)-based model for analyzing land suitability and development of the LSA
map. This system utilizes the suitability factors shown in the table on the following page.
The LSA model puts land areas into one of four categories: least, low, medium, and high suitability.
Areas that are the most undesirable for development, such as coastal wetlands, are placed into the
least suitable category and cannot be weighted or changed in the model.
The remaining characteristics, such as soil septic suitability or proximity to water lines, are weighted
as important, very important or extremely important in determining suitability. Using a weighting
scale, the local planners and decision -makers can determine the relative importance of these
characteristics in Carteret County. The chart below illustrates the weighting scale.
Relative Importance
Important
Very important
Extremely important
Numerical Weight
1
2
3
To develop the local LSA map, the Carteret County Planning Commission assigned numerical
weights indicating the relative importance of each factor. The following table represents the factors
included in the analysis, the suitability rating of each factor and the locally assigned weights.

Table 6.1 Carteret Countv
Land Suit bilitv Anal sis
Wei hts
Suitability factor
Least
Suitable
Ratin
Low
Suitability
Rating
Medium
Suitability
Ratin
High
Suitability
Rating
Local
Assigned
Weight
zA..CoastaL Wetlands : , '
:Inside
Outside
nla _
By1kc-ephonal & ", �'
Substantial NoncoastalAl
Wetlands
Inside
Outside
nla
X
C Estuarine" Waters
Inside`:
;..
-'Outsider
SIR
D Protected Lands :r -
Inside
Outside
,- _
nla
E) Beneficial
Noncoastal Wetlands
Inside
Outside
1
F High QualityWaters
Inside
Outside
1
G Storm Surge Areas
Inside
Outside
1
H) Soils with septic
limitations
Severe
Moderate
Slight
1
I Flood Zones
Inside
Outside
1
J) Significant Natural
Heritage Areas
<500'
>500'
3
K) Hazardous Substance
Disposal Sites
<500'
>500'
1
L NPDES Sites
<500'
>500'
1
M) Wastewater
Treatment Plants
<500'
>500'
1
N) Sewer Discharge
Points
<500'
>500'
1
O Airports
<500'
>500'
1
P Developed Land
>1 mi
.5 — 1 mi
<.5 mi
3
Q Primary Roads
>1 mi
.5 —1 mi
<.5 mi
3
R Water Pipes
>.5 mi
.25-- .5 mi 1
<.25 mi
3
S Sewer Pipes
>.5 mi
.25 —.5 mi 1
<.25 mi
3
The suitabilities have been established in the LSA model by DCM. Factors in rows A through D are
least suitable for development and cannot be weighted. However, the Planning Commission has
determined the importance of each of the other factors (rows E through S) and assigned weights (1, 2
or 3) to meet local goals and policies. Weights have been assigned based on Carteret County's
determination of the importance of each factor as it relates to suitability to development.
Map 6.1 shows the results of the land suitability analysis for Carteret County. The map shows four
classes of land — least suitable, low suitability, medium suitability and high suitability.
In general, the higher and medium suitability areas for development are located along the Highways
24 and 58 corridors, as well as north of Beaufort and scattered areas in the southeastern portion of the
County. In general, these areas "are near other developed land, primary roads, and central water
service, and do not contain features which the County has determined make them unavailable for
a
development. Vacant land is available in these areas to accommodate new residential and associated
development.
59
I

Areas determined to be least suitable include large areas of protected lands. These include federal
properties used for military activities or managed. for conservation and open space, such as the
Croatan National Forest and Cedar Island Wildlife Refuge. These areas are unavailable for
development and are therefore included in the least suitable category for development. Areas
containing exceptional and substantial non -coastal wetlands are also included in the least suitable
category.
A relatively large area of the Down East portion of the County, which includes Open Grounds Farm,
is included in the low suitability category. This is due in large part to its agricultural use and not
being in close proximity to existing developed lands and primary roads.

0
U
Land Suitability Analysis
-
Least Suitable
ON
Low Suitability
Medium Suitability
High Suitability
-
Areas not under Carteret County
Planning Jurisdiction
Municipalities under Carteret County
Planning Jurisdiction
County Boundaries
Roads
Railroads
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Jones I
County I
f �\
Onslow t
County
BLUEnfrastrticnire
and
i�tiler
The preparation of this map was
financed in part through a grant
provided by the North Carolina
Coastal Management Program,
through the funds provided by the
North Carolina Coastal Management
Act of 1972, as amended, which
is administered by the Office of
Ocean and Coastal Resource
Management, National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration.
Craven County
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
Pamlico County411
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/ f
r
Rogue sound
Atlantic Ocean
Pamlico Sound
West Bay ' n ' Y,
4

SECTION 7: REVIEW OF EXISTING POLICIES
0 .
The purpose of this section of the Land Use Plan is to evaluate how the 1999 Carteret County Land
U Use Plan has been used to guide growth and development and the County's success in implementing
u policies contained'in the plan..
a The 1999 Carteret County Land Use Plan included local policies required by the Coastal Resources
Commission (CRC) in effect at the time of plan adoption. At a minimum, the 1999 Carteret County
policies met the CRC's standards for land use planning and development in Areas of Environmental
(� Concern (AECs).
u Several policies contained in the 1999 Carteret County Land Use Plan exceeded the CRC's minimum .
(� requirements for development in AECs or federal standards for development in 404 wetlands. Those
1,J policies are listed below:
(� • Carteret County opposes the installation of package treatment plants and septic tanks or
discharge of waste in any areas classified as coastal wetlands or freshwater wetlands (404).
This policy applies only to areas shown as freshwater wetlands and coastal wetlands on Maps
(� 17A and B, Land Classification Maps contained in the 1999 Land Use Plan.
U • No marina associated dredging will be allowed through active shellfishing areas. When
dredging through coastal wetlands is essential for access to upland marinas, as provided for
in 15A NCAC 7H, the county requires replacement of lost wetland areas with mitigation at a
1:1 ratio.
a• . When new navigational channels and canals must be constructed through coastal wetlands,
Carteret County requires replacement of lost wetlands areas with mitigation at a 1:1 ratio.
a• Unless essential for mosquito and vector control, new drainage ditches shall not be
constructed which discharge into primary nursery. areas. Existing drainage ditches may be
amaintained but not increased in depth or width.
• Carteret County opposes the location of floating structures in all marinas, primary nursery
a areas, outstanding resource waters, public trust areas, and estuarine waters. Floating
structures as defined as any structure or vessel used, designed, and occupied as a permanent
dwelling unit, business, office, or source of any occupation or any private or social club,
which floating structure or vessel is primarily immobile and out of navigation or which
functions substantially -as a land structure while moored or docked on waters within county
jurisdiction. Floating structures shall not be used commercially or inhabited in one place for
more than 15 days.
• Carteret County opposes marina construction or expansion in coastal wetlands and primary
nursery areas, and opposes upland marina construction with access channels connected to .
primary nursery areas. Coastal wetlands that have volunteered within upland marinas shall be
exempted_ from this policy. Carteret County will allow access structures not exceeding six
a .
62
a

feet in width to be constructed above coastal wetlands for the purpose of providing access to
marinas which otherwise meet state standards.
Carteret County opposes the construction of docks or piers with more than four boat slips in
primary nursery areas. One dock or pier with four or less slips used for residential purposes
or purposes directly related to commercial fishing shall be allowed per parcel of land that
borders a primary nursery area. Waterfront parcels of land with more than one -quarter mile
of shoreline bordering a primary nursery area shall be allowed one dock or pier with four or
less slips for residential purposes or purposes directly related to commercial fishing within
every one -quarter mile (1,320 feet) of shoreline along the primary nursery area.
• For all waterfront development, parking lots shall be set back from the shoreline 75' or 20%
of the depth of the lot, whichever is less. This setback issue shall be further studied by any
such committee established for the purpose of developing a county -wide Comprehensive
Plan.
Industrial development should occur in areas classified as developed, urban transition, and
limited transition. Industries generating only domestic sewage are acceptable in areas
classified as community and rural with services. Carteret County does not oppose industries
locating within rural classified areas. Industrial uses that are not water dependent or related to
fishing or aquaculture activities will not be all in estuarine shoreline and ORW estuarine
shoreline areas. This policy shall not apply to the estuarine shorelines of mosquito ditches..
Implementation of 1999 Land Use Plan
The Carteret County Planning Commission used the Land Use Plan to establish general planning
policy. In addition, the Land Use Plan policies were implemented in the following ways:
• All rezoning requests were reviewed for consistency with the Land Use Plan.
• Policies contained in the 1999 Land Use Plan were used to develop storm hazard mitigation,
post -disaster recovery and evacuation plans.
• Land Use Plan policies guided the extension of central water service in the unincorporated
areas of the County.
• The building permit process, subdivision regulations, and CAMA permitting program were
used to implement all policies affecting development/land-disturbing activities within AECs.
• Zoning and subdivision regulations were used to implement a minimum 20,000 square foot
lot size in areas without central or community sewer or water service.
• Subdivision regulations were used to require compliance with 404 wetland permitting
requirements for. development with land disturbing activities in excess of one acre. The
County required 404 wetland delineation on all subdivision plats.
• The subdivision regulations were amended in 2001 to bring into consistency with the land
use plan.
Consistency of existing development program with 1999 Land Use Plan
The NC Division of Coastal Management implements local land use plan policies affecting Areas of
Environmental Concern (AECs) through the CAMA permitting process. However, further
implementation of the plan is the responsibility of Carteret County, primarily through its existing
development management program. In order 'to - effectively implement policies and guidance
contained in the 1999 Carteret County Land -Use Plan, an assessment was made of the consistency of
the plan with local ordinances affecting land use and development. Minor inconsistencies with the

n
subdivision regulations were noted and resolved with the 2001 revision of the ordinance. No other
conflicts between the plan and local ordinances were found.
aEffectiveness of 1999 Land Use Plan policies
Policies contained in the land use plan were judged to be effective in meeting the planning and
j� development goals of Carteret County. The policies were particularly effective in the following
u ways:
• Restrictions on construction of marinas, docks, piers, and drainage ditches in primary
nursery areas and wetland areas have served to protect both water quality and the
County's commercial and recreational fishing resources. Water quality has also been
protected through policies that prohibit floating structures in all public trust waters.
• Set -back requirements for new parking lots associated with waterfront developments has
helped control run-off into public trust waters.
• Restrictions on industrial development in shoreline areas has helped control pollution of
(� estuarine and Outstanding Resource Waters (ORWs).
M

0
0 SECTION 8:
I
0
III
it
it
0
0
a
0
III
11
GOALS, POLICIES, AND
FUTURE LAND USE MAP
Land Use and Development Goals
Carteret County's land use and development goals are the desired ends toward which the policies and
programs of the land use plan are directed. The goals also describe the values and general principles
that guide the development of the County.
The land use and development goals listed below were developed based on key planning issues and
concerns identified by the Planning Commission and through citizen . input, the community vision,
and the analysis of existing and emerging trends. They provide the benchmark for developing
effective policies and programs to achieve the County's desired future.
• Conveniently located access for residents and visitors to Carteret County's public trust waters for
a range of activities.
• Land use and development patterns that are consistent with the capabilities and limitations of the
County's natural systems, preserve the area's heritage and life styles, and promote sustainable
economic growth.
• Protect natural areas that have high biologic, economic, and scenic values.
• Infrastructure systems (such as water, wastewater, transportation, natural gas, and
telecommunications) that encourage and promote sustainable industries and job opportunities as
well as orderly residential development.
• Mitigation of risks associated with storms, flooding, and shoreline erosion.
q Maintain, protect, and where possible, enhance water quality in the County's public trust waters,
including shellfishing areas.
• Quality of life that attracts and retains young adults, retiree population, military community and
other groups that contributes to the County's economic diversity and well being.
Future Land Use and Development Policies
Carteret County's policies are the principles and decision guidelines or courses of action that have
been selected to attain its land use and development goals.
The CRC's planning guidelines require that local policies address six management topics. The
management topics are listed below:
• Public Access
• Land Use Compatibility
• Infrastructure Carrying Capacity
• Natural Hazards
65

• Water Quality
• . Local Concerns: In Carteret County the topic of local concern is Economic Development.
In addition to the role that land use and development policies play in local government, policies are
also regulatory in that they are used by the Division of Coastal Management in making consistency
determinations for the issuance of CAMA permits. Other state and federal agencies use the local land
use plan policies in making project consistency, funding, and permit decisions.
The CRC's planning guidelines also provide planning objectives for each of the management topics.
Objectives are intermediate, attainable steps toward goals. The management objective(s) for each
management topic is shown at the beginning of each policy section.
Carteret County's policies that address each of the six management topics are described below.
Policy Notes:
1. The Carteret County Board of Commissioners accepts state and federal law regarding
land uses in AECs, with the exception of a few local policies that exceed state and federal
requirements.
2. Carteret County policies that affect CRC designated AECs and that are more stringent
than state standards are printed in Italics. These policies are also found in Appendix D.
3. Active words contained in many of these policies (such as "support" or "encourage") are
defined in Appendix E.

I
0 1.0 Public Access
I
J
Public Access CAMA Planning Objective
Develop comprehensive policies that provide beach and public trust water access for shorelines
within Carteret County's jurisdiction for all segments of the community, including persons with
disabilities.
Discussion
As a shoreline county located in a mild climate, Carteret County offers a variety of water access
opportunities. In addition to pedestrian access to its ocean beaches and public trust shorelines, these
opportunities include boating, swimming, scuba diving, water skiing, surfing and fishing. Visual
access to its waters is also important to Carteret County and its residents and visitors.
The limited number of regional and neighborhood public access sites in unincorporated areas of the .
county is a need that has assumed greater importance as these areas continue to grow. Ocean
shoreline access is primarily a municipal concern as the beachfront communities on Bogue Banks
nhave expanded. Ocean beaches under the County's jurisdiction are limited to those in the
Li unincorporated community of Salter Path on Bogue Banks.
lJ Carteret County considers boating activities to be an extremely important part of its tourist economy
lJ and overall economy. The County recognizes that the provision of adequate ocean and public trust
access improves tourism and enhances the economy of the entire county. Additionally, the provision
aof public access is a requirement for federal assistance in beach nourishment activities.
Carteret County maintains the following public access facilities:
n • Salter Path Regional Beach Access
U • Radio Island Water Access
I
I
0
III
• Harkers Island Beach Access
• West Beaufort Water Access
• Straits Fishing Pier
• Airport Marina
• Marshallberg Picnic Area
In addition to County maintained access facilities, other major access points include the following:
• Fort Macon State Park
• Cape Lookout National Seashore
• Cedar Island National Wildlife Refuge
• Croatan National Forest/Cedar Point Campground
• Roosevelt Natural Area
• Cedar Island Boat Ramp
• Newport River Boat Ramp
• Salter Creek Boat Ramp
• Stella Boat Ramp
• Highway 24 Boat Ramp (Cedar Point)
rm

Policy 1.1
Carteret County supports the development of additional estuarine and ocean shoreline access
facilities for pedestrian, boating, and fishing access in all areas of the County.
1. The County will encourage and cooperate with municipalities and state and federal
agencies to locate and develop public access sites where appropriate. Areas that have
traditionally been used by the public will be given special attention.
2. The County will seek financial assistance from the State for development of additional
public access facilities.
3. The County will make the location and acquisition of access facilities on the County's
major water bodies a high priority.
4. The County encourages the NC Department of Transportation (DOT) to provide limited
access for fishing, kayaking and other water activities at new or rebuilt bridges. DOT
should replace any existing access facilities that are removed or destroyed with new
access facilities.
Policy 1.2
Carteret County will provide satisfactory access to residents and visitors of all abilities. The County
will review and update the 1999 Shoreline Access/Parks and Recreation Comprehensive Master Plan
to develop a multi -year plan, including timelines, to expand public access throughout its jurisdiction.
The update of the plan will serve as a guide to the location, development and improvement of ocean
and sound access. The updated plan shall address the following objectives:
• Review the community's needs for universal access and identify steps to eliminate barriers.
• Identify existing and potential boat ramp locations throughout the County. In addition, the
plan will provide for adequate parking for boat ramps.
• Capitalize on existing ramps and access areas. There are numerous formal and informal
access locations throughout the County. The plan will review the status and condition of
these locations and identify those that are available and suitable for public access.
• Identify a system of small sites for put-in/take-out facilities for sailboats, canoes, and kayaks.
• Explore mechanisms through which property owners may donate property or easements for
public access and describe potential federal and state tax advantages associated with property
donation.
• Develop a long-range financial plan that identifies sources of revenue to acquire and/or
develop access facilities.
Policy 1.3
Carteret County will require new waterfront residential developments to provide neighborhood
access for non -waterfront lots as provided for in the Carteret County Subdivision Ordinance. Non -
waterfront developments must provide areas for recreation or pay a fee in lieu of recreation areas.
The County will revisit the existing fee structure to determine if fees are sufficient to provide for
additional recreational opportunities.
Policy 1.4
Carteret County does not wish to impose local restrictions that would deny any waterfront property
owner the opportunity for water access. The County also wishes to allow for water access
opportunities for non -waterfront property owners. Subject to the following policies, Carteret County
does not oppose the construction of marinas or other boat docking or storage facilities.
1. Carteret County will allow marina construction or expansion in all areas, provided local,
state, and federal minimum standards are met.
.:

7
a2.
Carteret County will allow dredging associated with the construction of new or expanded
marinas, provided all local, state, and federal standards are satisfied.
3.
Carteret County's policy for marina construction in Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW)
or ORW shorelines shall be consistent with the state's management strategies for ORWs.
4.
Carteret County will allow construction of dry stack storage facilities for boats associated
either with or independent of marinas. All applicable zoning and subdivision regulations
must be satisfied.
5.
This plan does not prohibit that docks and piers in primary nursery areas existing as of
(j
the date of the Coastal Resources Commission certification of this plan may be rebuilt to
the original size and capacity.
6.
To help protect the visual quality of public trust waters, the County will encourage joint
development of piers and docks to serve nearby residential properties.
Policy 1.5
Carteret County will continue to maintain Harbors of Refuge at Harkers Island, Atlantic, and Cedar
Island. The Carteret County Harbor Authority is responsible for these sites.
a Policy 1.6
Carteret County will maintain the regional Public Beach Access facility in Salter Path to ensure
meeting current (2005) US Army Corps of Engineers access requirements for nourished beaches.
0
0
I
0
III
I
7

2.0 Land Use Compatibility
Land Use Compatibility CAMA Planning Obieciive
Local policies that (a) balance protection of natural resources and fragile areas with economic
development and (b) that provide direction in local land use decisions and consistency determinations
for zonings, divisions of land, and public and private projects.
Discussion
Carteret County supports protection and long-term management of its natural resources and fragile
areas, due to the strong role these resources play in protecting water quality, providing food and
habitat for fish and wildlife, and otherwise maintaining the coastal "way -of -life." At the same time,
the County recognizes the rights of its property owners and the need for continuing economic
development improvements. As such, the County supports the Coastal Resources Commission's
development regulations for Areas of Environmental Concern (AECs) and other state and federal
regulations regarding development in wetlands. In addition, the County believes that state standards
are sometimes insufficient to protect its natural resources and in these cases has adopted policies that
exceed or are more restrictive than the State's minimum use standards.
Carteret County considers all lands classified as coastal wetlands and freshwater wetlands to be
valuable. Some development, as allowed by state and federal regulations and consistent with policies
contained in this plan, may occur in these areas.
Carteret County strongly supports management of development in its coastal shoreline areas,
estuarine waters, and public trust areas to protect water quality, conserve valuable coastal resources,
and maintain the aesthetics of the waterfront. The County concurs with the CAMA minimum use
standards for coastal shorelines, although some policies contained in the Land Use Plan exceed, or
are more stringent, than the State's use standards for development in wetlands and public trust
waters.
Carteret County will support growth and development at the average densities specified in the land
classification definitions. During the planning period, it is projected that western Carteret County will
contain the majority of the County's urban type development. The "Down East" area is expected to
remain a low density, relatively undeveloped area, consistent with the average densities portrayed on
the Future Land Use Map. Low density land classifications include Limited Transition (three
dwelling units per acre), Rural (two dwelling units per acre), Community (two dwelling units per
acre), and Rural with Services (two dwelling units per acre).
Currently, only about 30% of the planning jurisdiction of the County is zoned. All of the zoned areas
are .located in the central and western portions of the County. The Down East Conservation
Ordinance (DECO), which applies to all land within the Down East section of the County, was
adopted by the County in September 2006 and regulates density and other development in these
areas. The County's Subdivision Ordinance applies to all areas under Carteret County planning
jurisdiction and also contains requirements designed to ensure that proper development patterns are
considered. (See Section 9: Tools for Managing Development, Existing Development Program for
more information on zoning, subdivision, and DECO regulations.)
70

I
Policy 2.1
Carteret County's policies for development in coastal and non -coastal ("404," "401," or
jurisdictional) wetlands are as follow:
1. Carteret County will allow only land uses in coastal wetlands that require water access,
cannot function elsewhere, and are consistent with state and federal regulations.
(-j Examples of acceptable uses are utility easements, piers, and docks.
u 2. When new navigational channels and canals must be constructed through coastal
wetlands, Carteret County requires replacement of lost wetland areas at a 1:1 ratio.
Q 3. Carteret County concurs with state and federal standards for residential, commercial, and
industrial development in freshwater wetlands except as prohibited by this plan.
4. Carteret County will cooperate with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in the
regulation/enforcement of the "404" wetlands permit process. The County will require
that areas of non -coastal wetlands be shown on all new subdivision plats.
S. Carteret County opposes the installation of package treatment plants and septic tanks or
discharge of any wastewater in coastal or freshwater wetlands.
Policy 2.2
n Carteret County's policies for development in coastal shoreline areas are as follow:
u 1. Residential and commercial development meeting the state's minimum use standards
shall be allowed in coastal shorelines and ORW estuarine shoreline classified lands.
Construction will be in accordance with all Carteret County ordinances. Allowed
densities are set forth in future land use map category descriptions beginning on Page 94
of the land use plan.
R 2. Carteret County will allow all uses (such as residential, commercial, industrial, and
uinstitutional) in estuarine shoreline and ORW estuarine shoreline areas, provided all
local, state, and federal standards are satisfied.
3. For all waterfront developments, parking lots that meet local, state, and federal
requirements will be allowed.
a Policy 2.3
Carteret County believes that "Living Shorelines" may provide a- better alternative to shoreline
stabilization than conventional structures. "Living Shorelines" are vegetated marshes and small stone
sills used to prevent erosion rather than conventional hard bulkheads. The County will provide
property owners with information on "Living Shorelines" as a shoreline stabilization option.
Policy 2.4
Carteret County's policies for development in estuarine and public trust waters are as follow:
1. Carteret County will only allow development activities in estuarine and public trust
waters that are associated with .water -dependent uses, consistent with state and federal
standards, and meet all local policies contained in this plan. .
2. Carteret County will not allow floating structures in any public trust waters. Carteret
County defines a floating structure as any structure, not a boat, supported by means of
L� floatation, designed to be used without a permanent foundation, which is used or
L' intended for human habitation or commerce. A structure will be considered a floating
structure when it is inhabited or used for commercial purposes for more than thirty days
* This policy exceeds state and federal standards for development in AECs or other fragile areas.
u
71

in any one location. A boat may be deemed a floating structure when its means of
propulsion has been removed or rendered inoperative and it contains at least 200 square -
feet of living space area. *
3. Marinas and other docking facilities must be constructed in accordance with state
requirements and must meet local requirements contained in 1.0 Public Access.
Policy 2.5
1. Major development of an urban nature should be concentrated in the developed and
limited transition areas. Major development is considered to be development that utilizes
urban services, particularly water and sewer.
2. In areas classified as developed and limited transition and not served by public or
community sewer and water service, a minimum lot size of 20,000 square feet (2.2 units
per acre) shall be required through existing zoning, subdivision, and other regulatory
ordinances. In areas classified as developed and limited transition and served by
community water service, but having no public or community'sewer service, minimum
lot size is 15,000 square feet (2.9 units per acre).
Note: Carteret County ordinances consider package treatment plants to be public or
community sewer service.
Policy 2.6
The county will initiate zoning of unzoned areas when requested by the community.
Policy 2.7
Carteret County encourages private acquisition of conservation areas by purchase or gift from
property owners for the purpose of preserving these areas.
Policy 2.8
Carteret County supports efforts by the NC Division of Marine Fisheries to identify areas suitable for
shellfish bottom leases.
Policy 2.9
Carteret County will allow the development of estuarine islands consistent with the CRC's minimum
use standards and local ordinances. However, the County encourages purchase for conservation of
sound and estuarine islands that have been identified by the North Carolina Natural Heritage
Program as Significant Natural Heritage Areas.
Policy 2.10
Carteret County regulates building heights in zoned areas and in close proximity to the Michael J.
Smith Field. Residential structures are limited to fifty (50) feet, with commercial, industrial, and
other structures limited to sixty (60) feet. Heights adjacent the runways of the Michael J. Smith Field
are restricted through the Airport Height Regulations. Permitted heights are determined based on a
sliding scale of distance from the runways.
*This policy exceeds state or federal standards for development in AECs or other fragile areas.
72

0
a3.0 Infrastructure Carrying Capacity
Infrastructure Carrying Capacity CAMA Planning Obiective
Establish level of service policies and criteria for development, extension, and upgrade of County
infrastructure.
Discussion
Policies addressing the Infrastructure Carrying Capacity management topic deal primarily with the
provision of water service, wastewater treatment, and transportation systems throughout the County's
planning jurisdiction. However, policies addressing other infrastructure concerns (such as solid
waste management, public schools, natural gas service, the North Carolina State Port, and Internet
access) that were identified during the planning process are included in this section.
Individual septic systems and package treatment plants serve most of the unincorporated areas of
Carteret County. Although the development of countywide sewer has been of great interest, no
solutions have been developed to satisfactorily address the high cost of building and operating such a
system. Also permitting requirements that accompany wastewater collection, treatment, and disposal
have not been satisfactorily addressed in previous proposals for central sewer service. It should be
noted that the Towns of Morehead City, Beaufort, and Newport operate municipal sewer systems.
In the absence of central sewer service, areas under Carteret County planning jurisdiction will
continue to rely primarily on septic tanks and private package treatment plants. The County is
concerned about the efficiency and effectiveness of these systems and has adopted policies to address
these concerns. Although a countywide system does not appear to be feasible during the planning
period, the County will continue to support the provision of sewer service including alternative
methods, where appropriate.
Central water service is available or is currently being extended to areas classified on the future land
use map as developed, limited transition, and rural with services. The County anticipates that Phase
II improvements to the North River Community Water System will be completed in. June 2005.
Additionally, West Carteret Water System continues to make improvements to its service in the
western end of the County. It is not anticipated that any other major extensions of water service will
be provided during the planning period.
The service area boundary for provision of central water service for the planning period corresponds
to areas classified on the Future Land Use Map as developed, limited transition, and rural with
services. In addition to being shown on the map, these areas are described in the Future Land Use
Map discussion found later in this. section.
Transportation issues, particularly surrounding major highways (US 70, NC 24, NC 58, and NC 101)
are of concern to the County. These include the need for improved safety, regional accessibility, and
traffic flow. Anticipated growth of the County, and the increasing number of commercial rezoning
requests along major highways, particularly NC 24 are expected to continue to place transportation
pressures on the County.
Carteret County has no established stormwater infrastructure, other than ditches and other traditional
stormwater conveyances. A variety of state and federal programs address stormwater control.
73

However, there is no central management of drainage issues. Carteret County is considering changes
to local ordinances or development of an initial stormwater ordinance that address reducing and
controlling stormwater. Policies addressing these potential changes are found in 5.0 Water Quality of
this section.
Policy 3.1
The County will provide educational information on alternative septic systems for soils that have
severe limitations for conventional on -site soil absorption waste treatment systems (septic tanks).
Policy 3.2
Carteret County will undertake an educational program that provides information to property owners
on proper maintenance of septic tanks and will pursue federal and state funding to assist property
owners in identifying, mitigating, and upgrading failing or failed septic tanks.
Policy 3.3
Carteret County encourages the use of monitored pilot projects using advanced technology for
wastewater treatment in areas not suitable for septic tanks, including the use of constructed wetlands.
Policy 3.4
Carteret County will support the provision of centralized sewer Iservices in areas classified as
developed, limited transition, and rural with services when the following conditions are met:
• Sewer service will serve to steer dense development away from environmentally sensitive
areas, such as floodplains and fragile coastal ecosystems.
• Service will encourage a more compact development pattern in areas adjoining existing
urban areas, thereby conserving farmland and other open spaces.
Citizens request service.
Zoning is in place prior to the extension of service.
Policy 3.5
Carteret County supports the provision of central sewer service that results in the development of
new or expanded industry and the creation of permanent jobs in numbers commensurate with the
expenditure required.
Policy 3.6
Carteret County encourages the development of sewer services that employ water reuse technologies
for agriculture and other uses.
Policy 3.7
Carteret County allows the construction of package treatment plants in areas not provided with
central sewer service. The county supports more effective monitoring of package treatment plants by
the state and local health department.
Policy 3.8
Carteret County supports efforts to extend central water service to areas classified as developed,
limited transition, and rural with services.
1. The County supports - development of a countywide plan for the provision of central
water service.
74

I
I
I
0
2. Carteret County will cooperate with and support the West Carteret Water Corporation's
efforts to expand a central water system in Western Carteret County.
3. The County supports efforts to extend the county -operated systems serving the North
River and Merrimon areas.
Policy 3.9
The County's solid waste disposal policies are as follows:
1. The County will support and dispose of its solid waste in the Tri-County Landfill, located
in Tuscarora in Craven County.
2. Carteret County will provide education on waste reduction and recycling through
postings to the County's website and development of an informational brochure.
3. The County supports recycling by users of the landfill and supports setting up practical
collection methods and education efforts to achieve a high degree of countywide
recycling.
4. Carteret County favors the siting of recycling centers by its solid waste management
contractor throughout the County, except in Conservation areas.
Policy 3.10
The County will coordinate facility planning with the school system and the municipalities by
sharing growth projections and plans for new development which impact school capacities.
Policy 3.11
Carteret County supports highway projects that will improve highway safety, regional accessibility,
and traffic flow within the County's planning jurisdiction. Carteret County requests that the
following transportation improvement priorities be included in the 2007-2013 Transportation
Improvement Program (TIP):
• Replacement of the Gallants Channel Bridge
• Completion of bypasses at Clayton, Goldsboro, Kinston, and Havelock as well as projects
between these cities so that US70 will be a fully controlled-acces"s freeway from Raleigh to
the Port of Morehead City
• Construction of the Carteret County Northern Bypass from the Havelock Bypass to the Port
of Morehead City
• Widening and improvement of the Newport River Bridge on US70 from the Town of
Morehead City to the Beaufort Causeway
• Feasibility study for the construction of a third bridge on to Bogue Banks
• Extension of Bridges Street to the vicinity of Newport
• Widening of NC58 not to exceed 3 lanes, from Emerald Isle to Atlantic Beach
Policy 3.12
Carteret County will support and participate in the multi -county effort spearheaded by the Highway
70 Corridor Rural Planning Organization (RPO) Committee. The goal of this effort is to improve
traffic flow along US70 from Wake County to the Port of Morehead City.
Policy 3.13
Carteret County shall require that new development along US70, NC24, NC101, and NC58 provide
safe access to these corridors while minimizing the need for additional stoplights. Amendments to
subdivision and/or zoning regulations will require new commercial development to minimize access
points to these highways by use of such techniques as shared driveways and access roads.
75

Policy 3.14
Carteret County will undertake a Highway 24 corridor management study to identify and understand
causes of increased traffic pressures and develop strategies to improve the safety and mobility of this
route. The study will address the following areas: access management, land use and subdivision
management, right-of-way needs and preservation, operational strategies, intergovernmental
cooperation, financing of corridor management improvements, and aesthetic concerns. Strategies
developed for the Highway 24 corridor will be expanded to apply these principles to other highways
experiencing growth pressures.
Policy 3.15
Carteret County supports growth and material expansion of the North Carolina State Port Terminal,
provided plans are prepared that address the impact of associated rail and road traffic increases in
Morehead City and Carteret County. Carteret County will rely on the State Port Authority to prepare
these plans prior to any material expansion.
Policy 3.16
Carteret County supports the extension of fiber-optic cabling throughout Carteret County to provide
high speed Internet access for the entire County.
Policy 3.17
Carteret County supports the extension of natural gas lines throughout the County.
Policy 3.18
Carteret County supports plans for expansion of Michael I Smith Field as detailed in the airport's
Master Plan. This plan is the responsibility of the Carteret County Airport Authority.
W

I
I
1
0
I
I
I
I
0
R
u
4.0 Natural and Man-made Hazard Areas
Natural Hazard Areas CAMA Planning Objective
Develop policies that minimize threats to. life, property, and natural resources resulting from
development located in or adjacent to natural and man-made hazard areas.
Discussion
Hazard areas in Carteret County include those associated with both natural and man-made hazards.
Natural hazards are related to its location as a coastal county subject to flooding, high winds, erosion
and other impacts of storm events. Additionally, accident potential and noise impacts associated with
aircraft operations at Marine Corps Auxiliary Landing Field (MCALF) Bogue represent man-made
hazards in the western portion of the County.
Carteret County recognizes the. risks to life, health, public safety, and property that exist within its
flood hazard areas and the ocean hazard area AECs. The County also recognizes that a significant
amount of its housing stock was built prior to implementation of the Flood Damage Prevention
Ordinance (1980) and is working to obtain funding to assist in elevating existing homes in flood -
prone areas above base flood level. The County participates in the National Flood Insurance Program
(NFIP) that requires the community to adopt a Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance and the Flood
Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM).. The County joined the program in 1980 and updated the ordinance and
maps effective July 16, 2003. Additionally, the County participates in the Community Rating
System, a voluntary incentive program that recognizes and encourages community floodplain
management activities that exceed the NFIP minimum standards. As a result, flood insurance
premium rates in Carteret County are discounted to reflect the reduced flood risk resulting from the
community actions.
Carteret County has adopted a Hazard Mitigation Plan that contains mitigation actions aimed toward
reducing vulnerability to all natural hazards that can be addressed in a practical manner at the local
level. Mitigation actions contained in the Hazard Mitigation Plan have been determined to be cost
effective, environmentally sound, and technically feasible. Mitigation policies fall into six mitigation
categories provided by . FEMA. These include the following: prevention measures, property
protection measures, natural• resource protection, emergency services, structural projects, and public
information activities. The Carteret County Hazard Mitigation Plan and the Carteret County Land
Use Plan Update are consistent with one another. In the event that any policy statements are. found to
be conflicting, the Land Use Plan will take precedence over the Hazard Mitigation Plan. The
mitigation action plan as contained in the Hazard Mitigation Plan is included as Appendix G of the
Land Use Plan.
The County has considered traffic handling capacity in emergencies and during evacuations in its
Thoroughfare Planning. Needed improvements that affect evacuation are included in the NCDOT
Transportation Improvement Program. Hurricane evacuation routes in Carteret County are marked
with blue and white evacuation route signs. The evacuation routes for Carteret County are US 70, NC
HWY 101, and NC HWY 58.
77
r

Carteret County supports measures to mitigate the impacts of aircraft accident potential and elevated
noise levels associated with operations at MCALF Bogue. The County was a partner in the East
Carolina Joint Land Use Study (JLUS) that addressed the impacts of military activities at Bogue
Landing Field and provided recommendations for mitigating impacts of aircraft accident potential.
The County has also implemented an overlay district to its zoning ordinance that affects areas in the
western portion of the County that are in "accident potential" and "noise impact" zones. The total
number of parcels affected by the overlay district in 2005 was 1340. Of these parcels, 443 were
located in the Town of Bogue.
The County recognizes the need for maintaining navigation inlets and harbors to promote
commercial and recreational uses of coastal waters. The County further recognizes that dredging
activities to maintain and deepen navigation channels within tidal inlets and harbors often alter the
natural movement of sand resources within the littoral zone. Negative alterations are exacerbated
when sand resources are removed and subsequently deposited in designated offshore or upland
disposal areas instead of being returned to the natural beach, shoreface, and inlet system. This is
particularly relevant to the Morehead City Federal Navigation Project located within and adjacent to
Beaufort Inlet, Carteret County as documented by the County, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
and N.C. Division of Coastal Management. These negative alterations adversely impact recreation,
tourism, coastal economies, and the County's ability to protect life and property.
Mitigation strategies for risks associated with these hazards also include providing information to
residents, local development requirements, support of the North Carolina Coastal Management
Program, and support of local beach nourishment programs, including the Carteret County Shore
Protection Program.
Policy 4.1
All development within the flood hazard areas and ocean hazard area ABCs will be coordinated with
the County Department of Planning and Development, North Carolina . Division of Coastal
Management, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers. The County will implement the following measures to mitigate risks:
1. Carteret County will continue to enforce its existing zoning and flood damage prevention
ordinances.
2. The County concurs with the CAMA use standards for the ocean hazard AECs. Examples
of suitable land uses in these areas include low -density residential and commercial uses,
recreation and beach management activities.
3. The County allows development and redevelopment within the 100-year floodplain
subject to the provisions and requirements of the National Flood Insurance Program,
CAMA, the County's Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance, and other local ordinances.
4. The County will finalize and implement the Hazard Mitigation Plan that addresses a
broad range of natural hazards in the County, per the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000
(DMA2K). The County will periodically update this plan.
5. The future location of public facilities and structures will take into consideration the
existence and magnitude of natural hazards. The County will not allow construction of
public facilities (utilities) in hazard areas unless no other option is available. When
location in hazard areas is unavoidable, all facilities, utilities, and structures will be
designed and located to comply with requirements of the National Flood Insurance
Program, the Carteret County Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance, and CAMA.
6. Carteret County is supportive of local beach nourishment programs, including the
Carteret County Shore Protection Program.
78

Policy 4.2
Carteret County will maintain or improve its NFIP Community Rating System (CRS) score to allow
for continued discounted flood insurance rates for property owners.
Policy 4.3
In order to mitigate risks for older properties and keep communities intact, the County will continue
to cooperate with state and federal agencies and property owners to elevate residences and other
structures above the base flood elevation. Funds from the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program and the
Community Development Block Grant Program will be used for elevation projects.
Policy 4.4
To minimize the impact of high winds,. Carteret County will continue to enforce the North Carolina
State Building Code on wind resistant construction with design standards of 130-mph wind loads (or
current code requirements) for residential construction and wind loads for commercial construction
as required by the code.
Policy 4.5
The County will implement and regularly update the Carteret County Emergency Operations Plan.
This plan addresses/assigns responsibilities following a variety of disasters.
Policy 4.6
Reconstruction of damaged properties in Carteret County after a natural disaster will be subject to the
following:
1. The Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance requires that all existing
structures comply with requirements related to the 100-year floodplain
elevation and flood -proofing if they are substantially improved. A
substantial improvement is defined as "any repair, reconstruction, or
improvement of a building, the cost of which equals or exceeds 50
percent of the market value of the building either before the improvement
or repair is started, or before damage occurred if the building has been
damaged."
2. The North Carolina Building Code requires that all new construction meet
code requirements. Repairs to damaged structures are also considered to
be new construction.
Policy 4.7
Carteret County supports measures to mitigate the impacts of aircraft accident potential and elevated
noise levels associated with operations at. Marine Corps Auxiliary Landing Field (MCALF) Bogue.
The County has amended the Zoning Ordinance to establish the Bogue Field Air Installation
Compatible Use Zones (AICUZ) Overlay District which identifies properties within the proximity of
the landing field. The following policies have been established for these properties:
1. Disclosure of proximity to Bogue Field is required at the time . of property transfers,
leases for greater than 90 days, and the issuance of building permits. Disclosure is also
required on subdivision plats with any lots located within the AICUZ.
2. Compatible Use Zones (CUZ-1 and CUZ-2) have been included in the Table of Permitted
and Special Uses of the Zoning Ordinance. Permitted uses may be developed, provided
the use meets the zoning requirements for the underlying zoning district and other
requirements of the ordinance. Uses listed as a special use in the CUZ-1 and CUZ-2
require a special use permit from the Zoning Board of Adjustment.
79

d
3. The County will not rezone areas within the CUZ to a zoning district that allows higher
residential densities than the current district.
4. The County requires property owners and developers within the AICUZ to implement
compatible land uses and encourages appropriate construction techniques when
developing or redeveloping their property.
5. The County provides property owners with informational brochures and access to maps (j
that can assist them in evaluating the impact of potential accidents or noise on their LJ
property. The County has available a sound attenuation construction manual to offer
voluntary measures to reduce the impacts of sound within structures within the AICUZ. Q
Policy 4.8
Carteret County
Airport.
will enforce height regulations for areas in the vicinity of the Michael J. Smith
Policy 4.9
Carteret County will coordinate with Morehead City and the North Carolina State Ports Authority on
emergency operations and procedures associated with the port facility and its operations.
Policy 4.10
With the exception of bulk fuel storage tanks used for retail and wholesale sales, and individual
heating fuel storage tanks, Carteret County opposes the bulk storage of hazardous materials in areas
classified as developed and limited transition unless the specific sites are zoned for industrial use.
Storage of hazardous materials, other than chemical toxic waste, in low -density areas classified as
rural or rural with services will be allowed. In those areas within the County in which federal
holdings are located, applicable state and federal regulations shall apply.
Policy 4.11
Carteret County is opposed to the establishment of toxic waste dumpsites within the County.
Policy 4.12
Carteret County will coordinate the regulation of underground storage tanks with the North Carolina
Division of Water Quality. . Carteret County concurs with the state's criteria and standards
applicable to underground storage tanks.
Policy 4.13
It is the policy of the County that there shall be no net loss of sand from the County's barrier beaches
resulting from dredging activities to maintain and deepen navigation channels within tidal inlets and
harbors. Specifically, the following shall apply to all beach compatible sand that is collected from
dredging maintenance and deepening of the Morehead City Harbor Federal Navigation Project:
1. The sand must be utilized for direct placement on beaches. If any dredging maintenance
or deepening effort does not include the direct placement of sand on beaches, then an
alternate plan must be approved by the County.
2. If sand encountered during maintenance or deepening activities is placed elsewhere than
the barrier beach, then an equal volume of sand from an alternative location shall be used
to nourish barrier beaches.
The definition of beach compatible sand for the purposes of this policy is as defined by the
Coastal Resources Commission through its rules and policies as contained in 15A NCAC
07H .0312 Technical Standards for Beach Fill Projects.

0 5.0 Water Quality Policies
III
III
a
Water Ouality CAMA Planning Objective
Policies for coastal waters within the County's jurisdiction to help ensure that water quality is
maintained if not impaired and improved if impaired.
Discussion
Carteret County supports management of land uses and development in its coastal shoreline to
maintain and enhance water quality, conserve valuable coastal resources, and maintain the aesthetics
of the waterfront. The County's wetlands also play a major role in managing stormwater runoff and
protecting water quality and are designated by the County as conservation areas. Within these areas,
development is required to be consistent with state, and federal policies and regulations and with all
local ordinances. At a minimum, the County concurs with the CAMA minimum use standards. Some
policies contained in the land use plan exceed, or are more stringent, than the State's use standards. A
summary of those policies that exceed the minimum use standards is found in Appendix D of this
plan.
State regulations implement buffer requirements along coastal shorelines. Carteret County does not
currently implement waterfront buffer requirements beyond those required by the State. The Carteret
County Planning and Development Department, through the central permitting process, identifies
areas subject to the CAMA coastal shoreline buffer requirements and the NC Environmental
Management Commission (EMC) Neuse River buffer requirements. The County implements the
CAMA requirements through the Minor CAMA permit program. Property owners are responsible for
compliance with the EMC Neuse River buffer rules.
The County recognizes the impact of paved areas, rooftops, and other hard surfaces on water quality.
These hard surfaces, known as impervious surfaces, prevent infiltration of water into soil and create
runoff that carries pollutants into surface waters. Carteret County believes that education on the
"cause and effect" relationship of everyday household practices, construction techniques, and land
development principles for elected and appointed officials, developers, property owners, and
residents is needed as an initial step to protect water quality. Additionally, more study and
consideration of potential reductions in impervious surfaces and building density and stormwater and
erosion controls along the County's waterfront areas are in order. The County is concerned about
water quality, but also recognizes existing development patterns, the rights of property owners, and
a the need to provide affordable housing as considerations in the balance of resource protection and
economic development.
a Much of the existing residential development in Carteret County consists of traditional subdivisions
that include fairly large lots, little or no open space, and other site design features that do not take
into account techniques to protect water quality.. The County is supportive of Low Impact
a Development (LID) as an innovative, ecologically friendly approach to land development and
stormwater management that seeks to mitigate development impacts to land, water, and air. Also
known as "conservation development," this approach to subdivision design can lower site
infrastructure costs, protect water quality, and improve lot and community marketability.
a Agriculture and forestry operations are often the source 'of nonpoint source water pollution. Common
g tt'Y p p
agricultural nonpoint source pollutants are sediment, nitrogen, phosphorus, pathogens, and pesticides.
81

However, many agricultural and forestry production activities are exempted from CAMA and state
and federal water quality permitting requirements.
Carteret County does not impose additional regulations on agriculture and forestry operations beyond
state and federal requirements. The County is supportive of the State's soil erosion and sedimentation
program and stormwater management programs. -
It should be noted that farming operations in the County are continuing to convert to other uses,
especially residential development. In 2005, approximately 15. commercial full-time operations
farmed about 54,000 acres. Open Grounds Farm, the largest agriculture operation in the County with
approximately 44,000 acres, has implemented practices that have resulted in improved water quality
adjacent its farm area. According to staff of the Soil and Water Conservation District, the smaller
established agricultural operations in the County have also been amenable to implementing Best
Management Practices (BMPs) to. improve on -farm management and reduce the potential for
polluting surface and ground water.
Policy 5.1
Carteret County will promote awareness of good water quality practices. The Carteret County
Planning and Development Department will coordinate an inter -departmental water quality
outreach/educational effort for elected and appointed officials, property owners and citizens. The
effort will include the following components:
1. Inform citizens of specific household actions that can be undertaken to protect or improve
water quality.
2. One cause of fecal coliform contamination of waters that results in closure of shellfishing
waters is failing septic systems. The County will provide information to property owners on
proper maintenance of septic tanks and will pursue federal and state funding to assist
property owners in identifying, mitigating, and upgrading failing or failed septic systems.
3. Educate developers and property owners on methods for low impact development designed to
protect or improve water, quality.
4. Provide information to developers and property owners about steps .that can be taken to
reduce the volume and rate of stormwater runoff and the amount of pollutants that the runoff
carries, including small scale stormwater controls distributed throughout a building site.
5. Educate and encourage actions to prevent erosion in construction areas (use appropriate best
management practices for controlling sediment, re -grade or use structural controls on steep
slopes, seed bare areas or apply a thick layer of leaves, wood chips, or other mulch in barren
spots.)
6. Educate citizens on actions to prevent water pollution from pet waste.
Outreach/educational efforts will include use of the County's website, news releases, pamphlets,
and seminars to respond to citizen inquiries.
Policy 5.2
Carteret County supports measures to address drainage concerns and protect water quality. Carteret
County will pursue the following specific steps through changes to zoning, subdivision, and other
land use ordinances:
1. Limit density in areas adjacent to water bodies, wetlands, and other sensitive areas. In
particular, limit development density in areas adjacent to shellfishing waters.
2. Investigate and consider reducing impervious surface limits in areas adjacent to shellfishing
waters.
82

3. Investigate and consider implementation of a stormwater ordinance, including controls for
post -construction runoff for new development and redevelopment. The County will consider
a provisions for engineered solutions to stormwater problems in the ordinance.
4. Investigate and consider implementing local erosion and sedimentation controls for site
disturbances of less than one acre (state regulations require an approved erosion and
sedimentation control plan prior to disturbing areas greater than one acre).
Policy 5.3. -
a Carteret County will encourage the use of Low Impact Development (LID) to control the volume,
rate (velocity), and quality of stormwater into surface waters. This will be achieved through
outreach/education throughout the County and changes to the subdivision ordinance. LID provisions
of the subdivision ordinance will emphasize site design and address stormwater controls and rate of
flow and volume characteristics of stormwater runoff. The County will take the following steps to
reduce development impacts:
1. Encourage the use of bio-retention areas, rain gardens and other innovative practices (such as
constructed wetlands, infiltration trenches/wells, level spreaders, forested or grassed buffers
alongside streams and rivers, and reinforced grassy swales) to help manage and treat
stormwater on site.
2. Encourage innovative construction of roadways using the minimum required pavement width
to support projected traffic volumes, in compliance with the Subdivision Ordinance.
3. Encourage new road construction to avoid curbs from road designs to allow water from the
roadway to sheet flow to adjacent vegetated shoulders.
4. Encourage actions to prevent erosion in construction areas (use appropriate best management
practices for controlling sediment, re -grade or use structural controls on steep slopes, seed
bare areas or apply a thick layer of leaves, wood chips, or other mulch in barren spots).
5. The County will continue to allow the use of pervious paving materials, where practical, and
innovative development techniques to reduce impervious surfaces associated with new
development or significant redevelopment. The County encourages the use of alternative
types of paving surfaces on individual lots to decrease imperviousness. Porous surfaces
include washed stone or gravel, paver blocks and bricks set in sand, grass pavers, and grid
pavers. All development must be consistent with local ordinances.
Policy 5.4
Carteret County will seek to conserve its surface groundwater resources by supporting CAMA and
N.C. Division of Water Quality stormwater run-off regulations. The County will coordinate local
development activities involving chemical storage or underground storage tank
installation/abandonment with Carteret County Emergency Management personnel and the Ground-
water Section of the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (See 4.0 Natural and Man-made
Hazard Areas).
Policy 5.5
To preserve conservation areas and avoid water quality impacts due to development, Carteret County
encourages private acquisition of these areas by purchase or gift from property owners.
Policy 5.6
a Carteret County discourages inappropriate disposal of hazardous wastes which may impact water
quality, Carteret County will establish, promote, and facilitate periodic hazardous waste collections
in areas throughout the County. This effort will be coordinated with the Coastal Regional Solid
83

Waste Management Authority (CRSWMA), NC Cooperative Extension Service, and NC Department
of Agriculture.
Policy 5.7
Carteret County supports design of NC Department of Transportation projects to minimize
destruction of wetlands and stormwater runoff into public trust waters.
Policy 5.8
Carteret County allows the construction of state -approved package treatment plants in areas not
provided with central sewer service. The County supports more effective monitoring by the State of
the operation of package treatment plants. If any package plants are approved by the State, Carteret
County supports the requirement of a specific contingency plan specifying how ongoing private
operation and maintenance of the plant will be provided, and detailing provisions for assumption of
the plant into a public system should the private operation fail. Operational plans should also address
elimination of package treatment plants when the system owner elects to connect to a central sewer
system.
Policy 5.9
Carteret County does not impose additional regulations on agriculture and forestry operations beyond
state and federal requirements. County water quality policies related to agriculture and forestry
operations are as follows:
1. Carteret County agrees with and encourages use of the United States Department of
Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service BMP program to limit non -
point source pollution of public trust waters. BMP's include vegetative, structural, and
management systems that can improve the efficiency of farming operations. The County
strongly encourages farmers and 'timber operators to employ accepted Best Management
Practices to minimize the impact of these operations on water quality.
2. Carteret County recommends control of forestry runoff through implementation of forestry
Best Management Practices as provided by the North Carolina Division of Forest Resources.
3. Carteret County discourages non -point source, as well as the direct point source discharge, of
agricultural runoff into primary nursery areas, productive shellfishing waters, and ORW
designated areas.
Policy 5.10
When sedimentation and erosion control and stormwater management plans are required by State
regulations, Carteret County requires the submission of State -approved plans and proper State
permits prior to granting final approval of subdivisions.
Policy 5.11
For all waterfront development, parking lots that meet local, state, and federal requirements will be
allowed.
Policy 5.12
Carteret County will work with staff of the Soil and Water Conservation District to identify strategies
to lessen existing drainage problems that impact water quality.
Policy 5.13
Carteret County encourages the use of monitored pilot projects using advanced technology and
engineered solutions to treat stormwater runoff.

Policy 5.14
Carteret County encourages marinas to participate in the "Clean Marina" program. This is a
voluntary program administered by the NC Division of Coastal Management and the NC Marine
Trades Association to recognize marina operators who use management and operations techniques
that exceed regulatory requirements.
Policy 5.15
Carteret County will pursue the development of a tree -protection ordinance that will provide benefits
to the County, including limiting soil erosion and mitigating stormwater runoff.
M.

6.0 Local Areas of Concern — Economic Development
Local Areas of Concern Planning Obiective
Identify and address local concerns and issues regarding economic development of Carteret County
Discussion
Participants in the public participation process associated with the land use plan have indicated a
desire that Carteret County take steps to foster sustainable economic growth to provide jobs and a
better way of life for its citizens. Population trends show that young adults are leaving Carteret
County in large numbers. This trend is thought in large part to be the result of limited good -paying
employment opportunities for young adults. The Local Area of Concern Management Topic of the
CRC's Land Use Planning Guidelines require local governments to identify those areas that are of
particular local concern, but are not addressed elsewhere in the CRC's requirements. Carteret County
has chosen Economic Development as its Local Area of Concern.
The planning process identified several economic development topics that are addressed in this
policy section. These topics are listed below:
• The existing and future retiree population is considered to be an economic growth
opportunity. The County will treat retirees as an industry.
• Carteret County contains a wealth of marine science operations that have contributed to
its economy for decades. Included are Carteret Community College (Aquaculture
Program), Duke University Marine Laboratory (Nicholas School of the Environment and
Earth Sciences), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, NC Aquarium at
Pine Knoll Shores, NC Division of Marine Fisheries, NC Maritime Museum, NC Sea
Grant, NC State University Center for Marine Sciences and Technology, and the
University of North Carolina at. Chapel Hill Institute of Marine Sciences. This marine
sciences cluster creates good paying jobs for Carteret County. These agencies are
members of the Marine Science and Education Partnership.
• The boat building industry is important to Carteret County. In 2004 there was
approximately 33 boat building operations located along the Atlantic Intra-Coastal
Waterway (AICW), including Jarrett Bay Marine Industrial Park.
• Carteret County recognizes the uniqueness and economic value of Cape Lookout
National Seashore and Cedar Island Wildlife Refuge. The County acknowledges that
heritage tourism helps communities preserve their unique character while helping to
diversify the economy.
• Carteret County recognizes the relationship between a community's character and its
economic well being. The County appreciates that attractive, well -planned communities
attract visitors and high quality investment.
• Carteret County is concerned with the impacts from the Base Realignment and Closure
(BRAC) 2005 that could potentially hurt the County's economy by closing military
installations or reducing the level of military and associated civilian employment.
Policy 6.1
Carteret County encourages efforts to capitalize upon the potential economic impacts of the retiree
population. In order to plan for this growth opportunity, the Carteret County Economic Development
Council (EDC) will undertake an evaluation or study of the attractiveness of the County as a
retirement destination. The study will compare Carteret County to other areas that compete for this

I
group and will identify the factors that attract retirees to Carteret County. Results of the evaluation
will be used by the County to encourage cooperation among the County, municipalities, and private
entities to develop "Senior Friendly Communities."
Policy 6.2
a Carteret County supports the Marine Science and Education Partnership and its goals to utilize.
existing and future assets in marine sciences to attract and create spin-off industries and new jobs.
The County has adopted the following policies related to the Marine Science and Education
Partnership:
1. In conjunction with Carteret Community College, the County supports a feasibility study, and
if feasible a wet lab incubator facility for private research in marine sciences. The facility
would be utilized for manufacturing activities associated with local marine science research.
2. Carteret County supports development of additional dormitories and offices for expansion
activities of local marine science operations.
aPolicy 6.3
Carteret County will support the existing public/private partnership for expanding and growing the
a Jarrett Bay Marine Industrial Park. The County will support the following actions:
• Acquisition of additional properties contiguous to the existing site, including properties
across the AICW.
a • Extensions of water and sewer service and construction of new roads to serve the industrial
park, including consideration for establishment of a Development Zone to fund infrastructure
improvements.
Policy 6.4
Carteret County has adopted the following policies to preserve the uniqueness and economic value of
the Down East Community:
1. In conjunction with the Economic Development Council, the County will initiate an
educational program aimed at protecting those aspects of the Down East Community that
make it unique and special.
a 2. In an effort to balance nature and the economy, the County will investigate measures to
protect this "Gateway Community" and will support by resolution the designation of eastern
Q Carteret County by the federal government as a Scenic Byway. The designation will promote
the economic health of the area by attracting visitors to the area, including the national
seashore and wildlife refuge.
Policy 6.5
Carteret County encourages efforts to enhance the relationship between its community character and
economic vitality. The County will take the following steps:
1. The Carteret County EDC will undertake educational efforts to show how commercial
development (such as chain stores, franchises, and big box retailers) can be made more
attractive, efficient, profitable, and compatible with the identity or uniqueness of Carteret
County.
2. Carteret County will consider changes to subdivision and other land use regulations to
promote development that is consistent with the unique character of Carteret County.
This includes allowing "conservation subdivisions" that maximize open spaces,
recreational opportunities with water and greenways, and other low impact features as -
permitted uses, rather than conditional or special uses. Carteret County believes that these
87

developments, as opposed to conventional developments, have the potential to increase
quality of life for residents, promote sense of community in rural areas, and provide
benefits to developers in terms of reduced costs of development and increased
marketability.
Policy 6.6
Carteret County will discourage the growth of additional strip commercial development in favor of
mixed -use town centers. Mixed -use town centers include a mixture of commercial and residential
facilities or development. To improve its attractiveness for retirees, tourists, and other citizens and
residents, the County will investigate the following actions suggested by the Conservation Fund to
transform existing strip shopping centers into mixed -use town centers:
• Limit the length of new commercial areas, but allow expansion in greater depth. This
encourages walking between stores.
• Limit curb cuts and consolidate entrances along the road to a few main driveways. This
relieves traffic back-ups, accidents, and the need for road widening projects.
• Require high quality parking lot landscaping.
• Build sidewalks and crosswalks to encourage walking between stores.
• Develop incentives for the use of attractive architecture, smaller signs, and multi -story
buildings.
• Encourage a mix of other uses, including nearby housing, to begin to build a walkable
neighborhood, rather than a driving -only strip district.
• Improve the attractiveness of the development by controlling signs, undergrounding utility
wires, planting street trees, and improving the design of new buildings.
Policy 6.7
During the planning period, Carteret County will revisit the existing sign ordinance and consider
amending it with the goal of visibly improving the County's appearance and maintaining its
distinctive character.
Policy 6.8
Carteret County will encourage the use of conservation easements to preserve important scenic
resources such as coastal wetlands, pocosins, swamps, farms and timberlands. The County will
implement an outreach/educational program on the value of conservation easements and will provide
technical assistance to property owners who wish to apply these to their property.
Policy 6.9
Carteret County will pursue the development of a tree -protection ordinance for the purpose of adding
value to real estate and protecting and enhancing the County's aesthetic image (See 5.0 Water
Quality).
Policy 6.10
In an effort to protect the existing military presence in Carteret County and its economic impact upon
the area, the County will work to implement the recommendations of the Joint Land Use Study. In
accordance with the study, Carteret County has recently implemented a zoning overlay adjacent and
near Bogue Landing Field. (See 4.0 Natural and Man-made Hazards.)
N.
.

I
I
I
I
111
Future Land Use Map
The CAMA Land Use Planning Guidelines require the development of a future land use map that
depicts the application of the County's policies for growth and development and the desired land use
and land development patterns. The map must also consider the constraints of natural systems and
the County's infrastructure policies.
It is important to understand the purpose of the future land use map in the context of the full land use
plan. The future land use map is an extension of the County's planning vision and is considered to be
part of its planning goals. The future land use map contained in this plan is a "broad brush" depiction
of the County's land use policies and desired growth patterns. The map portrays where the County
wants growth to occur and the appropriate density of development and where land should be devoted
to conservation or rural and other low -intensity uses. The map also shows the general location of
resources the County wishes to protect or conserve. It is not as detailed as a zoning map and does not
specify detailed locations of land uses such as residential, commercial, industrial, etc.
The future land use map is an important component of the land use plan that is used by local, state,
a and federal governments to assist in determining the consistency of projects located within the
Carteret County planning jurisdiction. Due to its size and scale, the map is only a guide and is not to
be substituted for on -site investigation.
aThe Land Use Planning Guidelines provide flexibility to Carteret County decision -makers in
designing a land use classification framework that best addresses the County's needs. Previous
updates of the Carteret County Land Use Plan incorporated a traditional land classification approach.
Since this approach has been useful for the County, the current planning effort continues use of this
system, with the following land classifications:
aDeveloped
• Limited transition
• Community
• Rural with services
• Rural
• Protected lands
a • Conservation
a Each of the future land use map categories and the policy intent of each class_ are described in the
section below. The land classifications contained in this section and portrayed on the future land use
map are intended to be general guidelines. However, due to the "broad brush" nature of the map,
there may be small areas within the mapped categories where different densities may be appropriate,
based on the County's land use plan policies and ordinances. Users of the land use plan should refer
to both the future land use map and the text descriptions to determine land classifications. In the
n event of a conflict, text descriptions take precedence over mapped locations of the land
uclassifications.
The densities must be accomplished through land use control ordinances 'and other tools for
managing development that are described later in this section. Descriptions of the land classifications
that apply in Carteret County are provided below.
89

DEVELOPED: Areas included in the developed land classification are currently urban in character,
with only minimal undeveloped land remaining. Central water service is in place and, in some cases,
individual private package treatment plants exist. Land uses include residential (single- and multi-
family), commercial, institutional, industrial, and other urban land uses at high or moderate densities.
In areas classified as developed, urban development pressures are expected to continue during the
planning period. Redevelopment and infill development activities are also expected to continue.
Residential densities are allowed in excess of an average of three dwelling units per acre. In areas
served by central water and sewer, minimum single-family residential lot size is 10,000 square feet or
4.4 dwelling units per acre. Areas served only by central water are subject to a minimum single-
family residential lot size of 15,000 square feet or 2.9 dwelling units per acre.
For commercial development in zoned areas, minimum lot size is based on availability of services, as
well as the zoning district designation. In general, properties served by either central water or sewer
must be a minimum of 15,000 square feet (or 2.9 units per acre), while properties served by both
water and sewer are allowed to be a minimum of 10,000 square feet (4.4 units per acre). The
exceptions are in the B-3 and OP (office/professional) districts that require minimum 30,000 square
feet lots (1.5 units per acre) and the B-IA district, which requires a minimum of one acre (1 unit per
acre).
Areas of the County included in this category include the Town of Cedar Point, the unincorporated
portion of Bogue Banks, and the Morehead City/Beaufort causeway and northeast portion of Radio
Island.
LIMITED TRANSITION: The limited transition classification applies to areas that have some
urban services, such as central water and individual private package treatment systems, but are
suitable for lower densities than those associated with the developed class or are geographically
remote from existing towns and municipalities. Areas included in the limited transition category will
experience increasing development during the next five to ten years, with the bulk of development
occurring in the western portion of the County and will require some municipal type services. Many
areas in this category are found near valuable estuarine waters or other fragile natural systems.
The limited transition classification is intended for predominantly residential use, with minimum lot
size based upon the availability of water and sewer services. However, some commercial,
institutional, health care, and industrial development occurs in these areas, with the majority located
along the major highways. Clustering or development associated with planned unit developments
(PUDs) and low impact development discussed in the policy section of the land use plan may be
appropriate.
Residential densities at art average of three units per acre or less are acceptable. For those areas with
water and sewer service, lot sizes may be as small as 10,000 square feet (4.4 units per acre) but must
average three dwelling units per acre or less. When only central water service is available, single-
family residential lots may not be smaller than 15,000 square feet or 2.9 units per acre. For PUD
developments, residential densities are no greater than 2.9 units per net acre.
For commercial development in zoned or other areas, minimum lot size is based on availability of
services, as well as the zoning district. In general, minimum lot sizes for areas served by individual
wells and septic tanks are 20,000 square feet (or 2.2 units per acre). Properties served by either
central water or sewer must be a minimum of 15,000 square feet (2.9 units per acre), while properties
GE

I
served by both water and sewer are allowed to be a minimum of 10,000 (4.4 units per acre). The
exceptions are in the B-3 and OP (office/professional) districts that require minimum 30,000 square
feet lots (1.5 units per acre), and the B-lA district, which requires parcels that are at least one acre in
size (1 unit per acre).
This classification accommodates increasing development in the following areas:
• north of the Town of Beaufort along the N.C. 101 and U.S. 70 corridors
• NC 24 corridor from Morehead City to Cape Carteret, including the Town of Bogue
• NC 58 corridor north of Cape Carteret, including the Town of Peletier
• Harkers Island
All of the areas in this classification are currently served by central water service. Areas along NC
101 and US 70 north of Beaufort were recently provided with central water when Phase II of the
North River Community System expansion was completed in 2006 at a cost of approximately $2.9
amillion. Growth pressures along NC 101 are expected to increase with the provision of water service.
COMMUNITY: Areas included in the community classification are presently developed with
�j mixed land uses at low densities. Uses include single-family residences, general and convenience
(� stores, churches, public facilities, health care facilities, and other mixed land uses at low densities
mainly along US -70 East and NC 12. Residential densities average two dwelling units per acre, with
a minimum lot size of 20,000 square feet (2.2 units per acre). Individual wells and septic systems
serve these areas.
Areas of Carteret County within this classification include the Down East communities of Sea Level,
Stacy, Davis, Atlantic, Bettie, Otway, Smyrna, and Marshallberg. The areas are depicted on the
Future Land Use Map and are described below:
Atlantic
Starting at Winston Drive and proceeding east on Highway 70 (becomes Seashore Drive) to the end
a of Morris Marina Road, then following Old Cedar Island Road east and ending at the west end of the
Monroe Gaskill Memorial Bridge.
Bettie
Starting on the east end of the North River bridge on Highway 70 East and proceeding to the west
end of the Ward Creek bridge.
a Davis
Starting at the east end of the Smyrna Creek bridge on Highway 70 East and proceeding east to the
intersection of Community Road, to include all of Community Road, then proceeding east on
Highway 70 to the west end of the Oyster Creek bridge.
Marshallberg
Starting on Straits Road at Pigott Road, proceeding east to the intersection of Marshallberg Road, to
include all of Marshallberg Road to the south, and Star Church Road from Marshallberg Road to the
Sleepy Creek bridge to the east of Pigott Road. Then from the intersection of Straits Road
proceeding north on Marshallberg Road to Lige Piner Road.
a
91

Otway
Starting at the east end of the Ward Creek bridge (from Bettie), proceeding east on Highway 70 to
0.4 miles past North River Farm Road (1175 Highway 70 Otway), also proceeding south on Harkers
Island Road to the north end of the Harkers Island bridge.
Sea Level
Starting at the east end of the Salters Creek high rise bridge on Highway 70 East and proceeding east
to the west of Winston Drive.
Smyrna
Starting at 0.3 miles west of the intersection of Marshallberg Road and Highway 70 (1175 Highway
70 Otway) and proceeding east on Highway 70 to the intersection of Marshallberg Road, then
proceeding south on Marshallberg Road ending north of Middens Creek Drive. Also proceeding east
on Highway 70 from Marshallberg Road to Stephen Willis Road.
Stacy
Starting at the east end of the Brett Bay bridge on Highway 70 East and proceeding east to include
Stacy Loop Road and ending at the west end of the Salters Creek bridge.
RURAL WITH SERVICES: Areas included within the rural with services classification are
developed at very low densities. Land uses include residential, public facilities, health care facilities,
and scattered commercial and industrial uses. Central water service is provided or is currently being
extended to the areas. Wastewater treatment is by individual septic tanks. Lot sizes are large and the
provision of services should not disrupt the primary rural character of the landscape.
Development should remain low density in order to maintain a rural character. Residential densities
average two dwelling units per acre, with a minimum lot size of 15,000 square feet. In planned unit
developments, residential densities are no greater than 2.1 units per net acre. For commercial
development in zoned areas, minimum lot size is based on availability of services, as well as the
zoning district classification. In general, minimum lot sizes for areas served by individual wells and
septic tanks are 20,000 square feet (2.2 units per acre). Properties served by either central water or
sewer must be a minimum of 15,000 square feet (2.9 units per acre). The exceptions are in the B-3
and OP (office/professional) districts that require minimum 30,000 square feet lots, which calculates
to 1.5 units per acre, plus the B-lA district which has a minimum one'acre lot size (1 unit per acre).
Areas currently classified as rural with services are described as follows:
• Merrimon Road (SR 1300) north of US 70 to Laurel Road (SR 1163); Laurel Road west to NC
101; north on NC 101 to the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway.
• NC 101 from the AICW west to the Craven County line
• South on Hardesty Loop -Road (SR 1160) from the intersection of NC 101 to Hardesty Farm
Road (SR 1158) to the Newport River
• Mill Creek Community [Old Winberry Road (SR 1155) from NC 101 to Mill Creek Road (SR
1154) and along Mill Creek Road east looping back to Old Winberry Road]
RURAL: Areas included within the rural classification include lands that are appropriate for or
presently used for agriculture, forestry, mineral extraction, and other uses that should be located in a
92

0
relatively isolated and undeveloped area. The predominant land uses are agricultural and residential.
However, public facilities, health care facilities, and scattered industrial and commercial uses are
allowed. Areas classified as rural are usually served by individual wells and septic systems. No
central water service is anticipated during the planning period.
Residential densities average two dwelling units per acre, with a minimum lot size of 20,000 square
feet (2.2 units per acre). Extensive portions of the Down East area are classified as rural, as are areas
in northwest Carteret County.
Within areas depicted as Conservation on the Future Land Use Map, there may be high -ground areas
that are suitable for development. These high -ground areas shall be considered as Rural and
development shall be consistent with densities and requirements contained in the Rural classification
description, policies contained in the Land Use Plan, and applicable local, state, and federal
regulations.
PROTECTED LANDS: This classification consists of lands that are not under Carteret County or
municipal planning or regulatory jurisdiction. Included in this category are federal, state, local, and
a non-profit property and easements that are managed for conservation and open space. These
designations permanently preclude development. Many of these areas are also designated as
Significant Natural Heritage Areas (see Conservation classification). The protected lands category
aalso includes lands under federal ownership used for military purposes.
These lands are unavailable for growth and development of the County. Consequently, the County
has not designated appropriate uses, nor has the County planned for the provision of infrastructure to
serve areas within the boundaries of protected lands. Due to the large area of the County comprised
of Protected Lands, and the resulting impact on planning for growth, and development of the County,
these areas are shown on the Future Land Use Map.
The protected lands classification includes the following areas:
P g
a• Cape Lookout National Seashore
• Cedar Island National Wildlife Refuge
• Croatan National Forest
a• Fort Macon State Park.
• Salter Path Regional Beach Access
• Theodore Roosevelt Natural Area
• Wildlife Resources Commission (WRC) Cedar Island Access Area
• WRC Cedar Point-Swansboro Access Area
• WRC Sea Level Access Area
• Sea Level/Snug Harbor Park I
• Shackleford Banks National Wilderness
a John R. Jones Tract (wetlands)
• Hay Stack Marsh Preserve
• Hoop Hole Creek
• Walkers Millpond
• Jones Island Audubon Sanctuary
• North River Marshes
93

• WRC New Dump Island
• WRC Sand Bag Island
• Piney Island Bombing Range
• Bogue Landing Field
CONSERVATION CATEGORY: The primary purpose of this classification is to provide
protection and long-term management of Carteret County's significant and fragile natural systems.
The classification also assists the County to mitigate risks associated with development in areas with
significant hazards associated with wind, flooding, and erosion. The conservation classification is
applied to areas that due to their unique, productive, limited, cultural, or natural features should either
not be developed at all (preserved), or if developed, done so in a limited and cautious manner. Some
development activities, as specified in the following sections, are allowed by Carteret County.
The conservation classification in Carteret County includes the following:
1. Areas of Environmental Concern (AECs) designated by the Coastal Resources
Commission
2. Non -coastal wetlands (often referred to as "404," "401," or jurisdictional wetlands)
3. Significant Natural Heritage Areas.
Areas of Environmental Concern - AECs present in Carteret County include Estuarine and Ocean
System AECs (public trust areas, estuarine waters, coastal shorelines, coastal wetlands) and Ocean
Hazard System AECs (ocean erodible and high hazard flood areas). The general locations of AECs in
Carteret County are described in Section 3 of this plan. Due to map size and scale, it is difficult to
accurately map the exact location and extent of AECs. Precise determinations of locations must be
determined on -site by permitting staff of the Division of Coastal Management. Uses allowed by
Carteret County in AECs are those that are consistent with the State's minimum use standards,
except when the policies contained in this plan are more restrictive than State standards. Those
policies were previously discussed in this section of the plan. -
Non -coastal wetlands - Other areas included in the conservation classification include non -coastal
wetlands (often referred to as "404" wetlands, "401" wetlands, or jurisdictional wetlands). Non -
coastal wetlands are subject to regulation by the US Army Corps of Engineers and the NC Division
of Water Quality. Non -coastal wetlands are further discussed in Section 3: Natural System Analysis.
The location of non -coastal wetlands is extensive in Carteret County. Carteret County accepts
applicable state and federal regulations regarding development activity in non -coastal wetland areas,
with the exception of Land Use Compatibility Policy 2.1.5 which exceeds state and federal standards.
The Fragile Areas Map that shows general locations of areas classified as non -coastal wetlands is
available for review at the Carteret County Planning and Development Office.
Significant Natural Heritage Areas — The conservation category also includes lands that support rare
plant and animal species, rare or high quality natural communities, or other important ecological
features as identified by the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program within the NC Department of
Environment and Natural Resources. Significant Natural Heritage Areas are those Natural Heritage
Areas that have particular biodiversity significance.

I
aSignificant Natural Heritage Areas should be primarily preserved in their natural state with only the
development activities listed below allowed. Since the primary purpose of including these areas in
the conservation classification is to provide protection, in as much as possible all allowed
development activities should be done in such a manner as to protect the -fragile nature of these sites.
Carteret County allows the following uses in Significant Natural Heritage Areas:
a■ Public facilities and improvements to provide limited shoreline access;
ni
Ul
R
0
111
11
Ul
U-1
Ul
■ The use of areas by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers as spoil disposal sites;
■ Development of public facilities by the National Parks Service and the State of North
Carolina. However, Carteret County requests the opportunity to review and comment on all
plans for development of public facilities.
■ Development of any sound or estuarine island that is consistent with the development of
sound and estuarine islands policy included in this plan.
■ Uses consistent with the policies in this plan.
Significant Natural Heritage Areas located wholly or in. part in the Carteret County planning
jurisdiction are shown in Table 8.1.
Table 8.1 Significant Natural Heritage Areas
Site Name
Site Code
Acres
INDIAN BEACH MARITIME FOREST
S.USNCHP*897
0.773
WHITE OAK RIVER MARSHES AND SWAMPS
S.USNCHP*1763
0.828
HUNTERS CREEK UPLAND FOREST
S.USNCHP*352
2.637
THEODORE ROOSEVELT STATE NATURAL AREA
S.USNCHP*612
3.153
HIBBS ROAD PINE RIDGES
S.USNCHP*965
3.425
SANDBAG ISLAND BIRD NESTING COLONY
S.USNCHP*622
8.913
NEW DUMP ISLAND BIRD NESTING COLONY
S.USNCHP*495
9.225
JONES ISLAND/WHITE OAK RIVER
S.USNCHP* 1829
12.848
HOOP HOLE CREEK MARITIME FOREST
S.USNCHP*908
14.965
CORE SOUND (WAINWRIGHT) BIRD NESTING ISLANDS
S.USNCHP*205
17.716
SALTER PATH DUNES NATURAL AREA
S.USNCHP*620
27.738
OCRACOKE INLET BIRD NESTING ISLANDS
S.USNCHP*522
54.542
PHILLIPS AND ANNEX ISLANDS
S.USNCHP*553
82.658
HUGGINS/DUDLEY ISLAND
S.USNCHP*350
122.498
SEA GATE WOODS
S.USNCHP*644
124.704
NINE FOOT ROAD/ROBERTS ROAD LIMESINK PONDS
S.USNCHP*506
125.761
EMERALD ISLEIWEST END BEACH
S.USNCHP*260
131.53
RADIO ISLAND ACCESS SITE
S.USNCHP*2066
143.002
BRANDT ISLAND
S.USNCHP*110
197.504
MILLIS SWAMP ROAD PINEWOODS
S.USNCHP*966
346.192
CEDAR POINT/WHITE OAK RIVER MARSHES
S.USNCHP*776
347.201
HUNTERS CREEK FLATWOODS
S.USNCHP*2191
423.759
FORT MACON STATE PARK
S.USNCHP*286
440.818
HADNOT CREEK NATURAL AREA
S.USNCHP*321
456.527
HADNOT CREEK PONDS AND LONGLEAF PINE WOODS
S.USNCHP*322
584.839
95

CEDAR ISLAND/NORTH BAY BARRIER STRAND
S.USNCHP* 1232
606.45
BROWNS ISLAND
S.USNCHP*819
671.804
WALKERS MILLPOND AND BLACK CREEK
S.USNCHP*762
688.244
PATSY POND LIMESINK COMPLEX
S.USSEROI * 1107
712.004
NINE FOOT ROAD/BROAD CREEK PINEWOODS
S.USNCHP*507
732.58
RACHEL CARSON ESTUARINE RESEARCH RESERVE
S.USNCHP*585
1,022.593
MILLIS ROAD SAVANNAS AND POCOSINS
S.USNCHP*455
1,392.568
MASONTOWN POCOSIN
S.USNCHP*437
1,616.225
NORTH RIVER BRACKISH MARSHES
S.USNCHP*516
2,050.025
PRINGLE ROAD BAY RIMS
S.USNCHP*579
2,453.981
CEDAR ISLAND FLATWOODS AND BAYS
S.USNCHP*1231
3,094.074
PETTIFORD CREEK OPEN FLATWOODS
S.USNCHP*967
3,741.288
UNION POINT POCOSIN
S.USNCHP*738
4,374.643
BOGUE INLETBOGUE SOUND BIRD NESTING ISLANDS
S.USNCHP*102
4,406.105
SHACKLEFORD BANKS
S.USNCHP*647
5,165.997
ATLANTIC NATURAL AREA
S.USNCHP*46
8,236.135
CEDAR ISLAND MARSHES
S.USNCHP*1230
1,0464.55
POCOSIN WILDERNESS
S.USNCHP*1233
1,1672.63
CHERRY POINT PINEY ISLAND
S.USNCHP*964
1,2160.48
CORE BANKS AND PORTSMOUTH ISLAND
S.USNCHP*204
2,0681.73
TOTAL
99,627.86
Areas designated as Conservation . often overlap other land use classifications. Areas of
Environmental Concern, non -coastal wetlands, and Significant Natural Heritage Areas are present in
many areas generally classified as Developed, Limited Transition, Community, Rural, and Rural with
Services. Due to their size and scale, these overlapping Conservation areas are not mapped on the
Future Land Use Map. Their locations must. be identified and confirmed in the field by the
appropriate state or federal agency. In these situations, the density of the underlying land
classification is applied. Development within these Conservation classified areas must also be
consistent with applicable local, state, and federal regulations, including applicable Land Use Plan
policies.
Within larger areas depicted as Conservation on the Future Land Use Map (predominantly wetland
areas), there may be high -ground areas that are suitable for development. Development in these high -
ground areas may be permitted in accordance with applicable local, state, and federal regulations.
These high -ground areas are not mapped on the Future Land Use Map. In areas where there is no
underlying land classification, these high ground areas shall be developed consistent with densities
and requirements contained in the Rural classification found earlier in this section.
Allocation of Land to Various Land Use Categories
The land use planning guidelines require Carteret County to provide an analysis of the amount of
land allocated to each of the land use classifications shown on the future land use map. This analysis
must be compared with the land needs forecast contained in Section 4 Existing Land Use and
Development. Tables 8.2, 8.3, and 8.4 provide details of this analysis.
Total acres developed, as shown in Tables 8.2 and 8.3, were determined by analyzing 2005 Carteret
County tax parcel data. Using this data, the developed acres were identified and their locations
a

I
I
I
I
0
C
7
I
I
III
applied to the land use classifications as contained on the Future Land Use Map. Table 8.3 provides
additional detail of the total acres developed in Table 8.2 and portrays the existing development by
major land use type as well as land classification.
Table 8.2 Existing Development (2005) by Future Land Use Map Classifications
Future Land Use
Classification
Total Acres Allocated
per Land Use
Classification
Total Acres
Developed
Developed
2,125
588
Limited Transition
25,619
5,721
Community
3,416
1,176
Rural with Services
13,369
1,189
Rural
101,172
3,736
Protected Lands
107,504
147
Conservation
109,864
3,065
Totals
363,069
15,622
Table 8.3 Existing Development by Land Use Type and Future Land Use Classification
Future Land
Use
Classification
Residential
(acres)
Commercial
(acres)
Industrial
(acres)
Institutional
(acres)
Total
Developed
acres
Total
Undeveloped
acres
Total
Acres
Developed
402
134
11
41
588
1,537
2,125
Limited
Transition
5,326
241
10
144
5,721
19,898
25,619
Community
1,078
76
11
1 11
1,176
2,240
3,416
Rural with
Services
1,131
19
5
34
1,189
12,180
13,369
Rural
3,538
153
0
45
3,736
97,436
101172
Protected
Lands
95
17
6
29
147
107,357
107:504
Conservation
2,830
188
1 <1
47
3,065
1 106,799
1 109,864
Totals
1 14,400
828
1 43
1 351
1 15,622
1 347,447
1 363,069
Additional acres needed for residential, commercial, industrial, and institutional uses as shown in
Table 8.4 were projected by calculating needs at the existing percentages of developed uses as shown
on Table 4.1 (residential = 92%, commercial = 5%, institutional = 2%, industrial = <1%). It is
assumed that current development trends and patterns will continue at the same percentages existing
at the time of plan development. It is important to note that the CRC's land use planning guidelines
allow the projection of land needs to be increased by 50% to allow for unanticipated growth and to
provide market flexibility. Accordingly, the numbers shown in Table 8.4 reflect this 50% increase.
As shown in Table 8.4, the amount of land needed for residential development (2,610 acres) is
consistent with the estimated residential land needs provided in Table 4.2. Areas needed for future
commercial, industrial, and institutional development are projected at currently existing ratios to
residential areas. The Land Use Plan does not anticipate additional development in areas classified as
Protected Lands or Conservation.
97

Table 8.4 Additional Land Area acres Needed for Development By Land Use T e Through 2025
Future Land
Use
Classification
Residential
Commercial
Industrial
Institutional
Total
Developed
146
8
1
5
160
Limited
Transition
1,414
77
5
47
1,543
Community
79
5
1
5
90
Rural with
Services
505
27
4
13
549
Rural
466
25
3
1
495
Protected
Lands'
0
0
0
0
0
Conservation "
0
0
0
0
0
Total Acreage
2,610
142
14
71
1 2,837
Gross Versus Net Acreages
Areas projected to support future development are located in the Developed, Limited Transition,
Community, Rural with Services, and Rural classifications of the Future Land Use Map. All of these
classifications contain significant acreages that are not available (cannot support) development or are
capable of supporting only limited development, thus reducing net land availability. Areas included
in gross acreages, but that reduce net available land, include streets, utility easements, wetlands,
farmland, privately -owned forests, and soils with severe limitations for septic use. Additionally, land
use buffers and restrictions applied by CAMA regulations, the Division of Water Quality buffer rules
in the Neuse River watershed, and the Carteret County Down East Conservation Overlay District
(DECO) further limit net.available land.
Detailed charts of estimates of unavailable acreage used to calculate net buildable acres are found in
Appendix K to this plan. Methodologies used to prepare the estimates are also included in the
appendix. Table 8.5 shows the preliminary estimate of net buildable acres for those classifications
expected to support future development when readily identifiable and calculated areas are removed
from the calculation of gross acreage for those land use classifications anticipated to experience
development (see Tables K-1 and K-2 located in Appendix K).
Table 8.5 Estimated Net Buildable Acreage Available for Development
Total
Future Land
(Gross)
Total Acres
Estimated
Net Estimated
Use
Acres
Currently
acres
Buildable
Classification
Allocated on
Developed
unavailable for
Acres
FLUM
development
Developed
2,125
588
778
759
Limited
25,619
5,721
171604
2,294
Transition
Community
3,416
1,176
1,820
420
Rural with
13,369
1,189
11,788
392
Services
Rural
101,172
3,736
85,225
12,211
Total
145,701
12,410
117,215
16.076
The preliminary estimate of net buildable acres, or acreage available for development, as shown in
Table 8.5 exceeds the estimate of future land needs (2,837 acres) as shown in Tables 4.2 and 4.3.
However, additional factors further limit the area actually available for development within these
acres. Therefore net buildable acres contained in Table 8.5 should be viewed as areas where the
anticipated growth will occur, but not as projected built -out acres.

I
I
I
7
0
I
I
I
0
I
0
I
it
These additional limiting factors include state and federal land use regulations (such as CAMA,
stormwater, and wetland rules) that restrict land use and/or densities and further reduce the net
acreage density in Carteret County. Limiting factors also include restrictions associated with the
prevalence of soils with severe limitations for septic and the general unavailability of central sewer
service in Carteret County. State and federal rules limiting loss of wetlands to development also
impact the net availability of buildable land.
Areas located outside the CAMA buffer but within the Coastal Shoreline AEC are normally limited
to no more than 25% to 30% built -upon -areas (BUA), depending upon the classification of adjacent
waters. (BUA includes all portions of a project that is covered by impervious or partially impervious
surfaces, including, but not limited to, buildings, pavement and gravel areas such as roads, parking
lots, and paths, and recreation areas such as tennis courts.)
Areas located within 575' of ORW waters, such as Western Bogue Sound, Back Sound, and Core
Sound ORWs are normally restricted by CAMA regulations to 25% BUA. Areas adjacent estuarine
waters not classified as ORWs are usually limited by CAMA regulations to no more than 30% BUA.
Based on these regulations the amount of land available for development within the Coastal
Shoreline AEC is reduced as shown in Tables K-land K-2 contained in Appendix K.
Future development is also subject to revised North Carolina coastal stormwater regulations.
Stormwater regulations adopted by the Environmental Management Commission and implemented
by the NC Division of Water Quality in 2008 further limit density, particularly in areas located
within one-half mile of SA (shellfishing) waters. Projects classified as "low -density" by these rules
are normally limited to 12 % BUA. Low -density development located more than one-half mile from
shellfishing waters is normally limited to 24% BUA. In general the revised rules permit lower
densities than allowed under previous regulations. The land use classifications suitable for future
development contain more than 54,000 acres within one-half mile of shellfishing waters. Based on
County tax parcel data, and as shown in Appendix K, approximately 17 percent of this sector is
already developed and further limits available land. Higher density developments usually impose
additional planning and construction costs which serve as a restraint to higher densities.
In areas subject to the Downcast Conservation Overlay District (DECO), Carteret County adds an
additional 20' buffer in addition to the 30' CAMA buffer, thus further reducing net buildable land.
Approximately 1,052 acres in these areas, in addition to the CAMA buffer area, are affected by the
local regulation.
Significant areas within the future development classifications consist of soils with severe limitations
for septic suitability. Within those land classifications anticipated to accommodate future
development more than 125,000 acres contain soils with severe limitations for septic.
Additionally, 404 wetland jurisdictional rules usually limit wetland loss to ten percent. As such, of .
the estimated 32,187 acres of non -coastal wetlands within these classifications, approximately 28,968
acres should be considered unavailable for development due to the presence of wetlands. Coastal
wetlands are estimated to total more than 13,000 acres in the future development classifications.
State and federal regulations strictly limit (disallow) most residential, commercial, industrial, and
institutional development of coastal wetlands.
At the scale of the Land Use Plan maps, most of these limitations for development cannot be readily
mapped. Comparison of estimates of gross and net acreages must consider that many of the limiting
I

characteristics overlap and therefore complicate projections and calculations of available land. The
gross acreages allocated to each of these classes indicate total land areas where development may
occur, but do not represent projected build -out acreages.
Carteret County tax parcel data, GIS data collected by the Division of Coastal Management and
provided to the County as part of the land use planning process, and data from other state agencies
were assimilated to estimate the difference between gross and net acreages as shown on the Future
Land Use Map. Detailed estimates of acres unavailable for development are found in Appendix K.
Cost of Required Community Facility Extensions
Water facility usage at build -out of the net available acres in the Carteret County planning
jurisdiction has been projected based on existing land use patterns, total net acres of land allocated to
each land classification on the Future Land Use Map, local records and experience, and industry
standards for water use. A breakdown of usage by land classification can be found in Appendix J.
The development patterns shown on the future land use map required the extension of central water
service along US 70 East and NC 101 to accommodate the limited transition and rural with services
classifications. Improvements to the North River Community Water System were completed in 2006
to address this need.
Carteret County completed Phase I improvements to the North River Community Water System at an
approximate cost of $3.6 million in April 2004. Phase I provided water service to properties along
NC 101, Old Winberry Road, Hardesty Farm Road, and parts of Hardesty Loop Road.
Phase II improvements were completed in early 2006 at a cost of $2.9 million. Completion of this
phase provided water service to the area generally described as the intersection of NC 101 and
Tuttles Grove Road to the Russells Creek Road community looping back to NC-101. Service was
also extended along US 70 south of Merrimon Road.
Water. service, for areas where this service is available, should be adequate to serve projected growth
during the planning period.
Carteret County does not maintain a central sewer system and has no plans to establish one during
the planning time addressed by this plan.
100

Note: The Conservation category also includes Areas of
Environmental Concern (AECs), which due to map size and scale
are not shown on this map. Please see Section 3 for a description
of AEC5 present in Carteret County. Precise locations of AECs mi
be made on -site by the appropriate permitting agency.
i
i ne preparation of this map was financed in part
through a grant provided by the North Carolina
)astal Management Program, through funds provided
the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as
amended, which is administered by the Office of
Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, National
;eanic and Atmospheric Administration. �_
r
�,.
0 0.5 1 2 3 4
N
WE
03020204050020
OAi
s��
TOM MAN R
1 03020106030010
10602003
Li
tie SoUnd
,Olt 8-
0 •
MAP 8.1 A Future Land Use
CAMA Land Use Plan Update
Carteret County, North Carolina
fi
03020204050040
a� _y
03020106030030
0302 603
- tt
03
6
Ll
1 inch equals 9,325 fee
Legend
Carteret County ® 14-Digit Hydrologic Code
Centerlines Future Land Use
NC County Boundaries Developed
0 Municipalities not Included Limited Transition
Participating Municipalities Community
® Bogue Rural
® Cedar Point Rural With Services
Peletier Protected Lands
Conservation

03020106050010
-
�o
03020204070010
Bay
_.
t
e S
w t
30,L01
o:r
N
N e
s
fQ`?S /G ^
�/o�o' �vf 1 �z bO
P�
106 ObO�
- Oti
Oti
j
o�eQn
AtjantiC
Carteret Count
Communities
1. Bettie
2. otway
3. Smyrna
4. Marshallberg
5. Davis
6. Stacy
7. Sea Level
8. Atlantic
MAP 8.1 B Future Land Use
CAMA Land Use Plan Update
Carteret County, North Carolinc
Legend
Carteret County
NC County Boundaries
Centerlines
Municipalities not Included
14-Digit Hydrologic Code
Future Land Use
Developed
Limited Transition
Community
Rural
Rural With Services
L70
Protected Lands
Conservation
1 inch equals 17,650 feet
I Li L-1 I i IMiles
0 1 2 4 6 8
N
W E
s
The preparation of this map was financed in part
through a grant provided by the North Carolina
Coastal Management Program, through funds provided
by the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as
amended, which is administered by the Office of
Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
Note: The Conservation category also includes Areas of
Environmental Concern (AECs), which due to map size and
scale are not shown on this map. Please see Section 3 for
a description of AECs present in Carteret County. Precise
locations of AECsmust be made on -site by the
appropriate permitting agency.

SECTION 9: TOOLS FOR MANAGING DEVELOPMENT
aThis section of the land use plan provides Carteret County's strategy and action plan for
implementing the policies contained in Section 8. The following components are included:
a1. A description of the role of the plan and the status of its policies in Carteret County's
land use and development decisions.
a 2. A description of Carteret County's current development management program, including
policies, ordinances, codes, and regulations and how it will be employed to implement
the County's land use and development policies.
3. Additional tools that will be used to implement the land use plan.
4. An action plan and schedule for implementing the plan.
QRole and Status of Plan (or How to Use the Plan)
The Carteret County Land Use Plan provides a framework to guide local government officials and
citizens as they make day-to-day and long-term decisions affecting development. The land use plan
serves as an overall "blueprint" for development of Carteret County that when implemented, should
result in the most suitable and appropriate use of the land and protections of the County's natural
a resources. In addition to serving as a guide to the overall development of Carteret County, the land
use plan will be used by local, state, and federal officials in CAMA permitting decisions, project
funding, and project consistency determinations.
The CAMA legislation provides that no permit for development in Areas of Environmental Concern
(described in Section 3) may be issued unless the proposed development is consistent with the local
land use plan. State and local permit officers who implement the CAMA permitting program will
evaluate consistency of proposed development with the local government policies contained in the
plan and will use this information in permit determinations. Policies in the plan will also affect other
state and federal consistency and funding decisions.
In addition to its well-known use in CAMA permitting, an equally important use of the Carteret
County Land Use Plan is the establishment of policy for both short-term and long-range planning.
aThe plan will be used by the County's administrative staff and elected and appointed boards, as well
as property owners and citizens. These uses are described below.
Short-term or day-to-day functions relate primarily to use of the plan by County staff, Planning
Commission, and Board of Commissioners in the administration of land use and development
ordinances and the public's understanding and use of these ordinances in development decisions
affecting their own property.
Property owners and developers will use the policies contained in the land use plan to determine the
types of land uses and development that is desired by the community. They will use this information
to design or formulate development proposals (such as rezoning requests, special use _permits, and
subdivision approvals) that are consistent with the land use plan, thus increasing chances for
a approval. The land use plan will also provide information to property owners to help them
understand the capabilities and limitations of their property.
103
a

Planning and Development staff will review development proposals in light of policies contained in
the land use plan. Staff will identify policies that support proposals or that are in conflict, and will
point out those policies that carry the most weight. This information will be used by staff to
formulate an overall response or recommendation to the Planning Commission.
The general public will use the plan to obtain information that will help them better understand
development proposals in developing a position in favor or opposition to proposed development.
The Planning Commission will make individual determinations of the consistency of development
proposals with the land use plan policies. Planning Commission members will consider staff
recommendations, but may choose to give different weights to the land use plan policies. The
Planning Commission will then make recommendations to the Board of Commissioners for final
approval of development requests.
The Board of Commissioners will consider the policy interpretations of the petitioner, Planning and
Development staff, Planning Commission, and public comments by citizens in making its own policy
interpretations and final decisions regarding proposals.
Long range functions of the land use plan include providing a policy and decision guide to the
Carteret County Planning Commission and Board of Commissioners in developing new ordinances
(tools) and amendments to existing ordinances to implement the land use and development policies
The land use plan itself is not a local ordinance or code.
Other long-range functions include guidance in planning public expenditures for developing new
capital improvement projects, such as new roads, water system extensions, or sewer systems.
Additionally, the land use plan will be used to guide development of plans for projects that support
implementation of the plan. The Board of Commissioners will periodically review the
implementation plan and make necessary adjustments based on changing community needs, budget
considerations, and coordination with other projects.
Existing Development Program
Carteret County will use its existing development program as the basis for implementing the land use
plan. The plans, ordinances, and policies that make up this program are listed below:
1. Plans
a. 1999 Carteret County Land Use Plan
The land use plan was adopted by Carteret County on September 13, 1999 and was certified
by the Coastal Resources Commission on November 19, 1999. The plan is an update to previous
land use plans prepared in 1967, 1978, 1985, and 1991. The Carteret County Planning and
Development Department is responsible for coordinating the implementation of the land use plan.
b. Shoreline Access/ Parks and Recreation Comprehensive Master Plan
This document was completed in 1999 for use by the County for decision -making concerning parks
and recreation, including public access facilities, through the year 2010. This plan replaced a
104

I
aprevious parks and recreation plan that was developed in 1974 and updated in 1985. The Carteret
County Parks and Recreation Department and Board of Commissioners are responsible for
implementing this plan.
C. Transportation Plan
In 1971, the North Carolina Department of Transportation prepared a transportation plan for portions
of the county; however, the document was not adopted. In 1998 the Crystal Coast Thoroughfare Plan
(� was developed. The Carteret County Board of Commissioners adopted the plan in November 2003
u and has appointed a Transportation Committee to advise the Board on implementation.
d. Hazard Mitigation Plan
Carteret County adopted a Hazard Mitigation Plan on December- 15, 2005. The purpose of the
C document is to outline the County's vulnerability to each of the hazards it faces and outline steps it
can take to lessen or eliminate the impact of each of them. The Hazard Mitigation Plan lists
supporting agencies that can be counted on for technical or fiscal help. The plan also documents the
a legal, political, technological, fiscal, and institutional capability that Carteret County has to
implement mitigation measures within its boundaries.
n A summary of hazard mitigation'actions for Carteret County and the Towns of Bogue, Cape Carteret,
'ul Cedar Point, Newport, and Peletier as contained. in the Hazard Mitigation Plan is included as
Appendix G of the Land Use Plan.
a
2. Regulations and Ordinances
a.. Carteret County Subdivision Regulations
aThe Carteret County Subdivision Regulations were adopted in 1961 and updated in 1983, 1986, and
2001. The 1986 and 2001 revisions involved a complete review and rewrite of the ordinance. The
ordinance includes shoreline access requirements, Sedimentation and Erosion Control Plan approval
requirements, standards of design to address nonconforming storm damaged structures, stormwater
management permits, and requirements to note presence of 404 wetlands on subdivision plats.
The Carteret County Planning and Development Department staff and a Subdivision Technical
Review Committee review subdivision plats to ensure consistency with the subdivision regulations.
The technical review team is composed of representatives of all county departments affected by
development. The plats are presented to the Planning Board for preliminary and final approval. Staff
may administratively approve -some final plats.
b. Carteret County Zoning Ordinance
The Carteret County Zoning Ordinance was originally. adopted in 1963 and revised in 1980. By the
early 1980s, the ordinance became very disjointed and difficult to implement. A thorough review
and rewrite was undertaken and the new ordinance was adopted in 1990. One area of concern
addressed was the incorporation of planned unit development regulations and a conditional use
aoverlay. Amendments approved since the last update of the Land Use Plan included updates for
105

Planned Unit Developments (PUDs), allowed locations of docks and piers, added a recreational
camper park district, provided for maximum building heights, and added temporary provisions
following emergencies/disasters. Approximately thirty percent of the County's land area is zoned.
All of the zoned areas are in western Carteret County and the central (Beaufort) area.
The Carteret County Planning and Development Department staff reviews all requests to amend the
Zoning Ordinance, both for text and map amendments, and makes recommendations to the Planning
Commission. The Planning Commission then considers the requests and makes recommendations to
the Board of Commissioners for final action.
C. Carteret County Mobile Home Park and Camp Park Ordinance
The county's Mobile Home and Camp Park Ordinance was adopted in 1972 and revised in 1980 and
1997. The Carteret County Planning and Development Department staff reviews all plans for mobile
home parks and camp parks to ensure consistency with the ordinance. The plans are subsequently
reviewed and approved by the Carteret County Planning Commission. The Planning and
Development staff enforces the ordinance to ensure compliance with the approved plans.
Amendments since the last land use plan update addressed temporary RV use following an
emergency or disaster and screened enclosures, sunrooms, and other enclosures in approved RV
parks.
d. Group Housing Ordinance
This ordinance was adopted in 1981. The ordinance regulates the construction of condominiums,
townhouses, rowhouses, and apartments. The Carteret County Planning and Development
Department reviews all plans to ensure consistency with the ordinance. Site plans are reviewed and
approved by the Carteret County Planning Commission.
e. North Carolina State Building, Electrical, Plumbing, and Mechanical Codes
The Carteret County .Planning and Development staff enforces all state building codes to ensure
compliance with minimum construction standards. Amendments to the North Carolina Building
Code were included in 2002. Additional updates are expected in 2005.
f. Septic Tank Regulations
In- 1974, the Carteret County Health Department adopted regulations to govern the design,
construction, installation, cleaning, and usage of sewage disposal systems. The county's
Environmental Health Department enforces the regulations.
g. National Flood Insurance Program/Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance
Carteret County began participation in the National Flood Insurance Program in 1980. A Flood
Damage Prevention Ordinance was adopted that year. The program is administered locally by the
Carteret County Planning and Development Department. In 2003 Carteret County amended the Flood
Damage Prevention Ordinance to incorporate updated National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP)
Maps. This action ensured compliance with the minimum NFIP criteria and NC law.
h. Carteret County Sign Ordinance
106

In 1985, the County adopted a sign ordinance to regulate the location, size, and appearance of signs
in the unzoned areas of the County's planning jurisdiction. The County's Planning and Development
staff enforces the ordinance. Signs in the zoned areas of the County are regulated by the Zoning
Ordinance.
i. Junkyard Control Ordinance
In 1983, Carteret County adopted a Junkyard Control ordinance. The ordinance regulates the
location and screening of yards. Enforcement is the responsibility of the Carteret County Sheriff's
Department.
CAMA Minor Permit Program
n Carteret County issues permits for all developments that meet the CAMA regulatory definition of a
Lj minor permit. Carteret County building inspectors serve as the local permit officers.
ak. North Carolina Sedimentation Pollution Control Act
Carteret County does not enforce the 1983 Sedimentation Pollution Control Act. However, the
a County cooperates with the State to ensure that new developments meet the standards of the act. The
act is designed to control siltation and surface stormwater runoff.
a1. National Fire Prevention Regulations
The Carteret County Fire Marshal enforces these federal regulations, which are designed to increase
the safety of public buildings and privately operated establishments.
M. "404" Wetlands Regulations
Carteret County does not have any regulatory authority for enforcement of the "404" wetlands
program authorized by the Clean Water Act. Regulation is provided by the Regulatory Branch of the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers through the Wilmington, North Carolina district office. Anyone who
undertakes work in a wetland area is required to obtain a permit. The County coordinates its local
planning, and in particular its subdivision review and approval process, with the "404" program. The
subdivision plat approval process requires that "404" wetland areas as delineated by the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers are identified on subdivision plats.
an. Airport Height Regulations for the Michael J. Smith Field
In 2001 Carteret County implemented Airport Height Regulations to protect . approaches to the
runways of the Michael J. Smith Field. The regulations regulate the height of structures and natural
objects within the approaches to the airport. The regulations do not address uses in the vicinity of the
a airport. The Carteret County Planning and Development Department is responsible for implementing
these regulations.
r, o. Down East Conservation Ordinance
In September 2006 Carteret County adopted an ordinance establishing comprehensive conservation
regulations for certain areas of the Down East portion of the County. The purpose of the conservation
107

regulations is to protect the sensitive environmental areas located in the Down East area by reducing
and controlling future surface water quality degradation to Outstanding Resource Waters and Areas
of Environmental Concern.
This ordinance governs the development of land and structures in the Down East portion of the
County, which includes the following areas: Straits Township, Harkers Island Township,
Marshallberg Township, Smyrna Township, Davis Township, Stacy Township, Sea Level Township,
Atlantic Township, and Cedar Island Township. The regulations do not apply to bona fide farms,
although nonfarm uses on a farm are subject to the Ordinance.
The Down East Conservation Ordinance regulates building heights, density (lot sizes), and package
treatment plants and implements a 50' buffer requirement for. all building within Areas of
Environmental Concern.
Table 9.1 Existing Management Development Program shows how each of these ordinances and
plans are used to implement the land use plan.
The Carteret County Planning and Development Department is responsible for coordinating the
administration of the development management program and the implementation of the land use
plan. It is also responsible for administering all ordinances related to building and development in
areas under County planning jurisdiction and for administering the State Building Code.
The Planning and Development Department works closely with other County departments, including
the Parks and Recreation Department, Environmental Health, Emergency Management Services, and
the Transportation Committee to coordinate management of development throughout the County.
108

Table 9.1
Carteret County CAMA Land Use Plan
Existing Development Management,Program
Infrastructure
Natural and
Ordinances
Land Use
Economic
Public Access
Carrying
Manmade
Water Ouality
And Policies
Compatibility
Development
,CapacityHazard
Areas
requires water access for
"unsuitable for septic" lots
lot -by -lot septic
must comply with Bogue
Sedimentation & Erosion
waterfront SD; major SD
are identified on final plats;
evaluations; requires
Field AICUZ Overlay
Control approval and
shall dedicate recreation/
AECs identified
connection to public water
District, CAMA
Stormwater permit required
Subdivision
open space or pay fee in
supply where available;
regulations, Flood Damage
for projects disturbing>1
Regulations
lieu of land dedication
road construction standards;
Prevention Ordinance and
acre; must comply with
certain projects require
Airport Height Regulations
CAMA regulations/ amount
NCDOT driveway permits
of impervious surface;
require 404 wetland
delineation on final plat
parking/ handicapped
zoning districts protect
certain projects require
Bogue Field AICUZ
development must comply
provides protection for
parking requirements for
against incompatible uses;
NCDOT driveway permits
Overlay District requires
with CAMA regulations;
residential uses;
public parks
limits density; dimensional
disclosure, limits uses;
parking improvements may
specifications for
Zoning Ordinance
requirements/ setbacks;
development must comply
include innovative materials
commercial development
screening/ buffering,
with FDPO and CAMA
signage requirements for
regulations; buffering
commercial uses
requirements for
incompatible uses
no solid/ hazardous
all new/ replacement water
all new and substantially
septic systems located and
allows participation in
Flood Damage
waste/chemical storage
supply and sanitary sewage
improved structures must
constructed to avoid
FEMA's Community
Prevention Ordinance
facilities, or salvage yards
systems designed to
meet flood ordinance
impairment/ contamination
Rating System
allowed in Special Flood
minimize/ eliminate
standards; must comply
from flooding
(FDPO)
Hazard Areas
infiltration of flood waters
with CAMA regulations
MHPs shall dedicate
vegetative buffer required •
Option for RVP to provide
must comply with FDPO,
proper grading and drainage
Manufactured Home,
recreation/ open space or
to screen uses within the
central structure/toilet
CAMA regulations
required; Sedimentation &
Manufactured Home
pay fee in lieu of land
MH/RV park from abutting
facilities; requires
Erosion Control approval
dedication
properties
underground utilities for
and Stormwater permit ,
Park and Recreational
RVP; requires each MH/RV
required for projects
Vehicle Park
space to have water, sewer/
disturbing>1 acre; must
Ordinance
septic, electric connection;
comply with CAMA
road construction standards
regulations
MH, MHP & RVP
ORD)
109

requires minimum acreage
EH septic evaluations/ State
must comply with FDPO
Sedimentation & Erosion
for group housing projects;
permitted WWTP; EH
Control approval and
Group Housing
limits density
individual wells/ State
Stormwater permit required
Ordinance
permitted community well;
for projects disturbing 1
requires road and parking
acre, must comply with
plans within development
CAMA regulations
addresses specifications
no septic/ sewage required
specifications for
require zone III, exposure D
for public park
for certain uses
connection to public water
manufactured homes within
North Carolina State
buildings/ amenities,
(miniwarehouse, boat
supply
1,500 feet of Atlantic
Building Code
walkways, decks, docks
storage); fire walls between
Ocean; wind load and V
mixed uses; distance
flood zone requirements
requirements between
buildings
provides specifications
depending on size/category
depending on size/category
must comply with CAMA
Sedimentation & Erosion
promotes local and tourism
for local, neighborhood
of site, provides
of site, offers dune
regulations, FDPO, building
Control approval and
activity by providing public
Shoreline
regional and multi-
requirements for pedestrian,
crossover pier, litter
codes
Stormwater permit required
water access
Access/Parks &
regional water access
parking and boat access
receptacle, public access
for projects disturbing>1
Recreation Master
sites
sign, parking, restrooms,
acre; must comply with
foot showers, concession
CAMA regulations/ amount
Plan
stand, open space
of impervious surface;
parking improvements may
include innovative materials
maintain public facilities
must comply with CAMA
protect infrastructure from
must comply with FDPO,
protection of open spaces/
reduce public/ private
in functioning order
regulations that limit
damage; building code
floodplain management;
wetlands/ marshlands;
damage costs, social/
impervious surface, provide
enforcement
discourage development in
restoration of natural area to
emotional/ economic
Hazard Mitigation
buffer, acquisition/
flood plains/ special Flood
provide natural
disruption; better access to
Plan (Draft)
elevation of primary
Hazard Areas
storage/flood peak
funding for mitigation
residences; land use
attenuation
projects; improve ability to
regulations
implement post -disaster
recovery projects
Sign Ordinance
principal use/ on -premise
prevent adverse community
(for Uri-incor-
signs allowed for
appearance and protect
businesses; limits location,
character of the area/
porated and unzoned
spacing, height, area and
natural resources
areas of the County)
setbacks ofbillboards (off -
premise signs)
encourage land use patterns
preserve utility of airport•
limits height and location of
does not limit uses (only
consistent with airport
structures/
location and height)
Airport Height
operations
equipment and trees within
Regulations
approaches to airport
limits density & building
regulates package treatment
limits density, prohibits
provides protection to water
Down East
height, requires waterfront
plants; prohibits discharge
discharge of waste into
quality, thus protecting
Conservation
buffers
ofwaste into wetlands
wetlands, requires buffers,
natural attractiveness of
Ordinance
regulates package treatment
area
plants
110

0
New Tools
aImplementation of the land use and development policies contained in the land'use plan will
require review and possible amendments to existing ordinances,. as well as potential
development of new tools (ordinances). These reviews and amendments/ordinances are listed
below.
New Ordinances and Amendments
1.
Consider amendments to Subdivision Regulations and Zoning Ordinance to:
• minimize number of access points for new development along US 70, NC
a
24, NC 101, and NC 58.
• implement a Highway 24 over -lay zone.
• encourage development of mixed -use town centers rather than strip
shopping centers.
2.
Consider amendments to Subdivision Regulations to'limit development densities
D
in areas adjacent to shellfishing waters.
3.
Consider amendments to Subdivision Regulations or adoption of a Stormwater
Ordinance to:
• reduce impervious surface limits in areas adjacent to shellfishing waters.
a
• control post -construction runoff for new and redevelopment projects.
4.
Consider amendments to Subdivision Ordinance to designate Low Impact
Development practices or "conservation subdivisions" as allowed uses. These
a
practices include the following:
• Use of bio-retention areas, rain gardens, and other innovative practices to
a
manage and treat stormwater on site.
• Innovative construction of roadways.
• Actions to prevent erosion in construction areas.
D
• Use of alternative paving materials to reduce impervious surfaces.
• Smaller lot sizes to. retain/protect open spaces and valuable natural
features within individual developments.
Q
5.
Revisit existing sign regulations and consider amendments to improve the
County's appearance.
6.
Pursue the development of a tree -protection ordinance.
7.
Consider implementing local erosion and sedimentation controls for site
disturbances of less than one acre.
aProjects and Plans
1. Update the 1999 Shoreline Access/Parks and Recreation Comprehensive Master
Plan to develop a multi -year plan, including timelines, to expand and improve
public. water access throughout the County's jurisdiction.
Q 2. Revisit, and if necessary update, the existing fee structure to determine if existing
fees in lieu of dedicated recreation areas provided for in the subdivision
ordinance are adequate.
a
111
a

3. Pursue federal and state funding to assist property owners in identifying and
repairing/upgrading faulty septic tanks.
4. Develop a countywide plan for the provision of central water service.
5. Coordinate facility planning with the Carteret County School System and
municipalities.
6. Finalize and implement the Hazard Mitigation Plan.
7. Continue participation in the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program and Community
Development Block Grant Program to fund elevation projects in flood prone
areas.
8. Implement the Carteret County Emergency Operations Plan.
9. In coordination with the Town of Morehead City and the NC State Ports
Authority, develop emergency operations procedures for the State Port.
10. Develop educational materials on:
• waste reduction and recycling
• value and use of conservation easements
11. Develop an inter -departmental water quality outreach/educational program geared
towards elected and appointed officials, property owners, and citizens. The
program will aim to provide information to protect or improve water quality. The
following components will be included:
• Specific "everyday" household actions that impact water quality
• Proper maintenance of septic tanks
Alternative septic systems for soils that have severe limitations for
conventional on -site systems
Construction techniques to prevent erosion
Construction techniques to reduce the volume and rate or stormwater
runoff, including small scale stormwater controls
• Prevention of water pollution from pet waste
12. Work with the Coastal Regional Solid Waste Management Authority
(CRSWMA), establish periodic hazardous waste collections in areas throughout
the County.
13. Work with staff of the Soil and Water Conservation District to identify strategies
to lessen drainage problems.
14. In conjunction with Carteret Community College, undertake a feasibility study
and subsequent development of a wet lab incubator facility.
15. Request the Carteret County Economic Development Council (EDC) to
• undertake an evaluation or study of the attractiveness of the County as a
retirement destination
• initiate an educational program with the goals of a) protecting the
uniqueness of the Down East community from unplanned development
and b) showing how commercial development cari be made more
compatible with the uniqueness of the County
16. Support by resolution the designation of eastern Carteret County by the federal
government as a "Scenic Byway."
Action Plan and Schedule
Table 9.2 Action Plan and Schedule shows the implementation action plan for the Carteret
County Land Use Plan. The action plan includes the priority actions that Carteret County will
112

undertake to implement the land use plan. The accompanying schedule specifies the fiscal
year in which the actions are to be initiated and the year they will be completed. The schedule
ncovers
L.�
a 6-year period.
The proposed action plan and schedule is an ambitious work plan for the County and other
organizations. Due to the multiple actions, it will be necessary to annually evaluate the work
a
plan in terms of funding availability and changing priorities. It may be necessary to adjust the
schedule to add or delete projects and to change completion dates.
aCitizens
will be involved in the implementation of the plan in much the same manner as with
the development of the land use plan. All local government meetings involving land use plan
implementation will be open to the public and public comment will be solicited. Updates to
a
the County's website and local news releases will be used to keep the public informed as to
implementation progress.
113

Table 9.2
Carteret County CAMA Land Use Plan
Action Plan and Schedule
2005-2012
Action
Responsibility
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10
2010-11
Review Subdivision Regulations
Planning Commission
X
X
• Highway Development
• Densities, Impervious Surfaces,
Run-off
• Low Impact Development
Highway 24 Corridor Study
Board of Commissioners/
X
Planning Commission
Review Zoning Ordinance
Planning commission
X
X
• Highway Development
• Mixed use town centers '
Revisit sign regulations
Planning Commission
X
X
Develop Tree Protection Ordinance
Planning Commission
X
Update Shoreline Access/Parks &
Parks and Recreation Dept.
X
X
Recreation Comprehensive Master
Plan
114

Study of County's attractiveness as
a retirement location
Economic Development
Council
X
Education/outreach on protecting &
Economic Development
X
x
X
X
X
enhancing the unique qualities of
Council
the Down East areas & County as a
whole
Coordinate the development of
Interdepartmental
X
X
X
X
X
x
water quality outreach/education
coordination by the Planning
Dept with County
program
Cooperative Ext,
County Health Dept (Env.
Health Division),
Soil Conservation Service.
115
L� C7 CI C] © �] C7 C7 C7 C1 CI L� C7 C� C7 C] C7 CI C7

I
References
aBogue Banks Water Corporation. (2002). 2002 Annual Drinking Water Quality Report Bogue Banks
Water Corporation, PWS ID# 04-16-028. Emerald Isle, NC.
Bogue Banks Water Corporation. (2004). Engineering Report Bogue Banks Water Corporation, April
2004. Emerald Isle, NC.
Carteret County -A. (2002). Department of Water Utilities and Operations. 2602 Annual Drinking
Water Quality Report, North River Water System, PWSID # 04-16-197.
DCarteret County-B. (2002). Department of Water Utilities and Operations. 2002 Annual Drinking
Water Quality Report, Merrimon Community .Water System, PWSID # 04-16-198.
oCarteret County-C. (2004). Department of Environmental Health. Carteret County Wastewater
Treatment System Database. Retrieved (03/31/04). Beaufort, NC.
(Carteret County EDC-A) Carteret County Economic Development Council (2003). Business
Performance Office. Cherry Point Marine Corps Air Station. Cherry Point Impact 2003. Available on
the Internet at: http://www.carteretedc.com/demographics/cheMMoint.htm. (Downloaded
a03/23/2004)
(Carteret County EDC-B) Carteret County Economic Development Council (2003). North Carolina
Q Department of commerce. Tourism Impact 2003. Available on the Internet at:
http://www.carteretedc.com/demographics/tourism.htm (Downloaded 03/23/2004)
a (Carteret County EDC-C) Carteret County N.C. Division of Marine Fisheries. Stanford White
Associates. Seafood Industry 2003. Available on the Internet at:
hgp://www.carteretedc.com/demographics/seafood.htm (Downloaded 03/23/2004)
aCarteret County Planning Department. Carteret County Land Use Plan, 1999.
Carteret County Transportation Committee. (2003). Carteret County Transportation Improvement
Program Priorities for the 2006-2012 Transportation Improvement Program. Compiled and printed
n by the Carteret County Economic Development Council, November 10, 2003.
L( Harkers Island Sanitary District. (2002). Consumer Confidence Report Harkers Island Sanitary
n district Report Year 2002. Harkers Island, NC.
U North Carolina Center for Geographic Information and Analysis (NCCGIA). (19.97). Geographic
Data Content Standard for Water Distribution Systems and Sanitary Sewer Systems, Version 2.2.
(� Raleigh, NC.
u North Carolina Center for Geographic Information & Analysis (NC CGIA). O1/28/2002. BasinPro -
Detailed Stream Edition - Version 2.1 Feet Sanitary Sewer Systems and Natural Heritage Element
Occurrences. Raleigh, North Carolina.
116

North Carolina Coastal Federation (NCCF). (2004). The Pollution Database, List of Chronic
Polluters. Obtained (04/09/04) on the Internet at:
http://www.nccoast.orWCKSewer/Chronic%20Polluters.htm.
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR). (2004). Division of
Environmental Health. On -Site Wastewater Section. Laws and Rules for Sewage Treatment and
Disposal Systems. Obtained 04/12/04 from the Internet at:
ht!p://www.deh.enr.state.nc.us/oww/Rulelaw/rules.htm.
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR). 2002. Neuse River
Basinwide Water Quality Plan, July 2002. Division of Water Quality -Planning. Available on the
Internet at: hllp://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/basinwide/Neuse/2002/plan.htm
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR). 2001. White Oak
River Basinwide Water Quality Plan, July 2001. Division of Water Quality/Planning. Available on
the Internet at: hq://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/basinwide/whiteoak/2001/whiteoak2001.htm.
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR). 2003. North
Carolina Water Quality Assessment and Impaired Waters List: 2002 Integrated 305(b) and 303(d)
Report, February 2003. Division of Water Quality / Planning. Available on the Internet at:
hiip://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/tmdl/General 3 03 d.htm#Downloads
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR). 2002. Division of
Water Resources. Local Water Supply Plan for Harkers Island WSD. Part 1: Water Supply System
Report for Calendar Year 2002; Part 2: Water Supply Planning Report; Part 3: Water Conservation
and Demand Management. Raleigh, NC.
(NCDENR-A) North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR).
(1997).' Division of Water Resources. 1997 Local Water Supply Plan for North River Comm. Part 1:
Water Supply System Report for Calendar Year 1997; Part 2: Water Supply Planning Report; Part 3:
Water conservation and Demand Management. Raleigh, NC. Available on the Internet at:
hllp:Hdwr.ehnr.state.nc.us/cgi-bin/foxweb:exe/c:%5Cfoxweb%5CIwsp972%5EO4-16-197
(NCDENR-B) North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR).
(1997). Division of Water Resources. 1997 Local Water Supply Plan for Merrimon Comm. Part 1:
Water Supply System Report for Calendar Year 1997; Part 2: Water Supply Planning Report; Part 3:
Water conservation and Demand Management. Raleigh, NC. Available on the Internet at:
http://dwr. ehnr.state.nc.us/cgi-bin/foxweb.exe/c:%5Cfoxweb%5CIwsp972%5EO4-16-198
(NCDENR-C) North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR).
(2004). Environmental Enforcement Data. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Resources Civil Penalties Assessed by the Water Quality Section in January 2004. Obtained on the
Internet (04/09/2004) at: http://www.enr.state.nc.us/novs/wg0104.pdf.
(NCDENR-D) North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR).
(2004). Environmental Enforcement Data. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Resources Civil Penalties Assessed by the Water Quality Section in August 2002 Obtained on the
Internet (04/09/2004) at: http://www.enr.state.nc.us/novs/wg08O2.pdf
117

I
(NCDENR-E) North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR).
(2004). Environmental Enforcement Data. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Resources Civil Penalties Assessed by the Water Quality Section in February 2003 Obtained on the
Internet (04/09/2004) at: h"://www.enr.state.nc.us/novs/wg0203.pdf
1.1 (NCDENR-F) North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR).
�.1 (2004). Environmental Enforcement Data. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Resources Civil Penalties Assessed by the Water Quality Section in November 2003 Obtained on the
(� Internet (04/09/2004) at: http://www.enr.state.nc.us/novs/wg1103.pdf
(NCDENR-G) North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR).
a (1996). Environmental Management Commission. Spray Irrigation System Permit No. WQ0005233
for MCOLF Atlantic -Marine Corps Air Station, Cherry Point Carteret County. Effective 10/24/96
through 11/30/06. Raleigh, NC.
(NCDENR-H) North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR).
(1997). Environmental Management Commission. Spray Irrigation System Permit No. WQ0004240
for U.S. Marine Corps' Auxiliary Landing Field at Bogue, Carteret County. Effective 09/24/97
through 12/31/05. Raleigh, NC.
a (NCDENR-I) North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR).
(1997). Environmental Management Commission. Spray Irrigation System Permit No. WQ0007217
for U.S. Naval Aerial Target Facilities at Piney Island (BT-11), MCAS Cherry Point, NC, Carteret
County.
North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT). (2003). 2004-2010 Transportation
Improvement Program. Available at http://www.ncdot.org//plannin /dg evelopment/TIP/TIP/
North Carolina Department of Transportation. (1999). Traffic Survey County Maps 1999. Available
at htW://www.ncdot.org-/planning/statewide/gis/DataDist/GISTrafSurvMEs.html
North Carolina Department of Transportation. (2002). Traffic Survey County Maps 2002. Available
at http://www.ncdot.org/planning/statewide/gis/DataDist/GISTrafSurvMEs.html
North Carolina Division of Coastal Management (NCDCM). (1992). Long -Term Average Annual
Shoreline Change Study & Setback Factors -Updated Through 1998. Retrieved March 01, 2004,
afrom: http://dcm2.enr.state.nc.us/Maps/erosion.htm
North Carolina Division of Coastal Management (NCDCM). (1998). Long -Term Average Annual
Shoreline Change Study & Setback Factors -Updated Through 1992. Retrieved March 01, 2004,
from: http://dcm2.enr.state.nc.us/Mgps/ER 1998/SB Factor.htm
North Carolina Division of Environmental Health: Shellfish Sanitation Section & Recreational Water
Quality (NCDEH). (3/12/2004).
North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ). (3/12/2004). Current data provided by J.R.
Joshi via e-mail at the NCDWQ office in Raleigh, NC.
118

Town of Beaufort. (2003). Annual report for the Town of Beaufort Wastewater treatment Plan and
Collection System. Fiscal Year: July 1, 2002 to June 30, 2003. Beaufort, NC.
United States Department of Agriculture -Natural Resource Conservation Service (USDA-NRCS).
1987. Soil Survey of Carteret County. Soil Conservation Service.
(USEPA-A) United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). (2004). Water Discharge
Permits (PCS), Detailed Reports for Sailors Snug Harbor. Obtained on the Internet (04/09/2004) at:
http://oaspub.epa.gov/enviro/pcs det reports.pcs tst?npdesid=NC0028827&npvalue=l&npvalue=2
&npvalue=3 &npvalue=4&npvalue=5 &npvalue=6&rvalue= l 3 &npvalue=7&npvalue=8 &npvalue= l 0
&npvalue=l l &npvalue=l2
(USEPA-B) United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). (2004). Water Discharge
Permits (PCS), Detailed Reports for Taylor Hospital and Extended Care. Obtained on the Internet
(04/09/2004) at:
http://oaspub.epa.gov/enviro/pcs det reports.pcs tst?npdesid=NC0047759&npvalue=l&npvalue=2
&npvalue=3 &npvalue=4&npvalue=5&npvalue=6&rvalue=l3&npvalue=7&npvalue=8&npvalue=l0
&npvalue=l 1 &npvalue=l2
West Carteret Water Corporation. (2003). Engineering Report May 2003. Newport, NC.
West Carteret Water Corporation. (2002). Notice of Annual Meeting and 2002 Annual Drinking
Water Quality Report April 2003. Newport, NC.
119

I
a Appendix A:_
Carteret County Land Use Plan Update
a CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PLAN
Carteret County has received grant funding from the Department of Environment and Natural
Resources (DENR) through the Local Government Planning and Management Grant Program
to prepare an update to the existing CAMA Land Use Plan. A condition of the funding
agreement requires the local government to "employ a variety of educational efforts and
participation techniques to assure that all socio-economic segments of the community and
non-resident property owners have opportunities to participate during plan development"
[15A NCAC7L .0506 (a)].
DDevelopment and implementation of a Citizen Participation Plan is the main resource to
address these public participation requirements.
The Citizen Participation Plan provides the following opportunities:
• Sharing of information about the CAMA land use planning process between the local
government, the State, and local residents
• Actively involving citizens in the process of identifying land use issues, identifying
and evaluating options and the development of land use policies
Active citizen involvement in the development of the Land Use Plan is essential to the
development of a quality plan and the success of its implementation. To provide information
l� to the public and to encourage adequate citizen involvement, the following Citizen
L Participation Plan will be utilized by Carteret County.
L� Designation of Lead Planning Group: The Carteret County Board of Commissioners will
L� designate the Carteret County Planning Commission to take the lead role in preparing the
land use plan. The Planning Commission is composed of citizens that represent a broad
cross-section of the population of Carteret County.
The Planning Commission will advise and coordinate plan development with the Carteret
j1 County Board of Commissioners and the County's Planner -in -Charge Kathy B. Vinson. The
L,J Planning Commission will have the following duties and responsibilities:
• Provide overall direction for development of the Draft Land Use Plan
a • Serve as a public contact for citizens to get information and to comment on the
proposed plan
• Review technical planning materials for accuracy
(� 0 Assist with'preparation of major plan elements, including identification of concerns
L1 and key planning issues, development of a. community vision, goal development,
preparation of draft policies and future land use map
n • Assist with organization, management and facilitation of public participation events
• Help publicize public participation events in the community
• Recommend and present a draft land use plan to the Carteret County Board of
QCommissioners
The Planning Commission meets on the second Monday of each month at 6:00 PM in the
Commissioners Meeting Room in the Carteret County Administration Building. Special
meetings will be called as needed. All meetings of the Planning Commission that include

discussion or consideration of the Land Use Plan will include time for public comment from
citizens. The County will keep a record of residents and property owners who speak at Land
Use Plan meetings and other plan events and will retain any written comments that are
received. The names of the speakers and written comments will be provided to the Division
of Coastal Management (DCM) District Planner for use in draft plan review.
An initial orientation meeting with the Planning Commission is scheduled for Monday,
October 13, 2003 at 6:00 PM.
Initial Public Information Meeting: The County's funding agreement with DENR requires
a public information meeting(s) at the beginning of the process. The meeting will be an
educational opportunity to inform the general public of the purpose of the CAMA Land Use
Plan and to outline the County's public participation process. The meeting is tentatively
scheduled for Monday, November 10, 2003 at 6:00 PM in the Commissioners Meeting Room
in the Carteret County Administration Building. .
The following items will be discussed at the Initial Public Information Meeting:
• Policy statements contained in the current (1999) Carteret County Land Use Plan
• Effect of current policies on the County
• Ways the current plan has been used to guide development during the last planning
period
• An explanation of how Carteret County will report to the public and solicit the views
of citizens in the development of updated policy statements
• The tools to be used to report on the planning process to the public during plan
development
• A description of the methods and techniques that shall be used to solicit public
participation and input from residents of the County and non-resident property
owners, including the results that are'expected from these methods and -techniques
• The general meeting schedule for meetings of the Planning Commission to discuss
the Land Use Plan
Opportunity for public comment will be provided during the Initial Public Information
Meeting.
The County will give two public notices of the initial public information meeting. The first
notice will be published in the Carteret County News -Times not less than 30 days before the
meeting (no later than October 11, 2003). The second notice will be published not less than
10 days before the meeting (no later than October 31, 2003). In addition, the County will
notify local members of the Coastal Resources Advisory Council (CRAC) and the DCM
District Planner of the date, time, and place of the meeting.
Public participation tools: Carteret County will use several methods to solicit public
participation in the Land Use Plan process. These methods were selected to assist in meeting
the citizen participation objectives of education, listening, collaboration and support. The
public participation tools include:
• A communityforum near the beginning of the process will provide an opportunity for
a wide range of residents and property owners to express their views on land use and
development issues and the Land Use Plan. It will also provide an opportunity for
citizens to learn about the views of others. This method will help meet the listening
Ll
I
C.
in
11
C
I
I

and education goals of the citizen participation program. The community forum is not
designed for debate, for negotiation or for decision -making.
• Open houses near the end of Phase I and Phase II will allow for public review of
maps and policies. This will provide an opportunity for the community to express
views and concerns about what is being proposed. It provides an informal setting for
stakeholders to examine work products and to interact with members of the planning
group. This technique will assist in meeting the listening and collaborative objectives
of the citizen participation program.
• Media releases will keep the community informed and educated about the Land Use.
Plan process. Newspaper articles and public service announcements will be used to
report planning progress, as well as to encourage participation in and support for the
planning process.
• Carteret County wehsite updates will be used to report planning progress to and
solicit participation by the public, including non-resident property owners.

Tentative Meeting/Public Participation Schedule *
1. September 8, 2003 - Carteret County Planning Commission discussion of the draft
Citizen Participation Plan.
2. October 6, 2003 — Carteret County Board of Commissioners approval of Citizen
Participation Plan.
3. October 13, 2003 — Orientation session with Planning Commission on the Land Use
Plan process.
4. November 10, 2003 - Initial Public Information Meeting.
5. December 15, 2003 — Community Forum to receive input on issues, concerns and
opportunities.
6. January 2004 — Planning Commission review of existing and emerging conditions,
key planning issues, vision statement for Carteret County.
7. February 2004 — Planning Commission review of technical analysis of population,
housing, and economy.
8. March 2004 -Planning Commission review of technical analysis of natural systems
and existing land use.
9. April 2004 — Planning Commission review of technical analysis of s_ tormwater and
community facilities.
10. May 2004 - Planning Commission review of land suitability and current plans and
policies.
11. July 2004 — Open House for citizens to review work completed on Land Use Plan
and to express support or offer suggestions for change.
12. September 2004 — Planning Commission identifies any needed changes to Citizen
Participation Plan, begin development of Land Use Plan goals.
13. October 2004 — Board of Commissioners approval of Phase II Citizen Participation
Plan.
14. October 2004 - Planning Commission finalizes Land Use Plan goals, begin
development of draft policies.
15. November 2004 — Planning Commission continues development of draft policies.
16. December 2004 — Planning Commission continues development of draft policies.
17. January 12, 2005 — Planning Commission completes development of draft policies.
18. February 14, 2005 —Planning Commission reviews Future Land Use Map and Tools
for Managing Development.
19. February 28, 2005 - Open House for citizens to review and comment on work
completed on Land Use Plan; Planning Commission reviews preliminary draft Land
Use Plan and identifies any needed adjustments.
20. March 7, 2005 — Staff presents information on planning process to Board of
Commissioners. .
21. March 21, 2005 — Present draft Land Use Plan to Board of Commissioners.
22. April 4, 2005 — Receive comments. on draft Land Use Plan from Board of
Commissioners.
23. April 2005 — Planning Commission revisits draft Land Use Plan, if necessary based
on Board of Commissioners' comments.
24. May 2005 — Final draft Land Use Plan submitted to Board of Commissioners,
Planning Commission, and Division of Coastal Management.
25. July 2005 — Review DCM comments on draft Land Use Plan and make necessary
adjustments.
26. September 2005 — Board of Commissioners hold required Public Adoption Hearing.
*Revised December 2004

APPENDIX B:
MAJOR ISSUES IDENTIFIED BY CITIZENS
CARTERET COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
COMMUNITY FORUM DECEMBER 15, 2003
Citizens in attendance were asked to comment on their likes/dislikes of Carteret County,
areas where development should be directed, areas where development should be
discouraged, other development issues/concerns and opportunities for improvement. At the
conclusion of the meeting, each attendee was given five (5) voting dots to place next to the
issues they felt most important.
The following comments were offered by citizens. The number of votes each item received is
indicated in parenthesis following the comment.
• Water quality concerns (20)
• Stormwater concerns (15)
• Engineered solutions to stormwater problems should be allowed (13)
• Need to protect shellfishing and other waters (12)
• Maintain current policies in Land Use Plan which exceed state standards when
appropriate for Carteret County (11)
• Balance economic development and natural resource protection (9)
• Preserve existing Down East lifestyle (8)
• Sensible growth (5)
• Customize policies for Carteret County (5)
• Enforce existing rules rather than add new rules (4)
• Some constraints on growth are needed (4) .
• Control tax burden on residents (3)
• CAMA fits our area — state policies are sufficient (3)
• More stringent policies are sometimes needed (3)
• Need more public access to waterways (3)
• Target retirees as residents (3)
• Need smart growth (2)
• Provide rationale for rejected policies (2)
• Important to implement land use plan (2)
• Sensible, enforceable plan (2)
• Avoid increasing costs of building lots (2)
• Consider economic future of citizens (1)
• Regulations increase building costs (1)
• Opposed to impact fees (1)
• Grayden Paul Bridge — keep closed and turn area into a park (0)
• Change in policies which affect water quality is needed (0)
Infrastructure needs to be considered (0)
• More stringent regulations are needed on the water (0)

0
APPENDIX C:
(� EXPLANATION OF
i.j DEMOGRAPHIC AND POPULATION STATISTICS
According to the US Census Bureau (USCB) decennial census statistics are considered to be
100% data based on short -form questionnaires that are sent to every person and housing unit
and long -form questionnaires that are sampled of every 1 in 6 persons and households. All
demographic data for the non -decennial years are estimates based on the latest decennial
data. Population estimates are released annually by the US Census Bureau and are calculated
by using predictor variables or administrative records that are available on an annual basis.
Examples of some administrative records include: birth and death certificates, Internal
Revenue Service data, Medicare enrollment records, Armed Forces data, etc. Growth rates
j� based on changes in these administrative 'records are combined with the latest decennial
u census statistics to form the yearly demographic estimates (USCB 2003).
Population Estimates
U.S. Census Bureau annual demographic estimates are considered to be rough estimates
based on administrative records easily available to Federal Demographers. State
Demographers are privy to more detailed annual administrative records and may have access
to local data from the Department of Motor Vehicles, housing permits, Medicare, birth and
death data, and school enrollment data which can be analyzed to produce population
a estimates. The North Carolina Demographers Unit uses a similar methodology and any
annual administrative records available to make their population estimates.
a For example, in calculating the 2002 North Carolina county population estimates, the North.
Carolina State Demographer used the 2002 US Census Bureau population estimates (that
were released in April 2003) as a starting base (North Carolina State Demographics -Unit
2003). For this 2002 estimate, the U.S. Census Bureau assumed that the institutional
population for each North Carolina county would be the same as that of 2001 (NCSDU
2003). Available data from current state Medicare enrollees and all North Carolina. military -
bases and institutions proved that assumption invalid, so the data was used to adjust the US
Census Bureau's original estimate (NCSDU 2003). Due to the fact the North Carolina.
Demographer has access to more detailed administrative records, demographic data released
by the state may differ slightly from US Census Bureau data estimates and can be considered
.to be more accurate.
Population Proiections
A population projection differs from an estimate in that it relies on certain assumptions about
long-term trends in data that are not .yet available, while an estimate is based on data from
predictor variables or administrative records that are available for the estimate year. Recent
population projections were released in June 2002 by the North Carolina Office of State
Budget and Management for all geography types in the state. The base decade used to
determine the forecasting trend for the population projections is 1990-2000 (NCSDU 2002).
The -most fundamental base year for these projections is the 2000 US Census Bureau's
modified age, race and sex file (NCSDU 2002). The most basic technique used to project the
population projections for age, race and sex is to combine the trends of birth and death data,
Q migration data and institutional population (NCSDU 2002). It is important to note that it was
assumed all institutional population would remain constant after 2000 (NCSDU 2602).

Housing, Income, Employment and Economic Statistics
Statistics regarding housing, income, employment and economics are not generated by the
North Carolina State Demographics Unit. They are listed on the North Carolina State
Demographics Internet site for convenience, but are generated by federal agencies including a
the US Census Bureau and the Bureau of Economic Analysis. All data of this type included
in this report has been checked for consistency between the federal agencies and the North
Carolina State Demographics Unit. Any discrepancies have been noted. �.
a

Appendix D:
Policies That Exceed State and Federal Minimum Standards
for Development in AECs and Fragile Areas
Policy 2.1.2 When new navigational_ channels and canals must be constructed through coastal
wetlands, Carteret County requires replacement of lost wetland areas at a 1:1 ratio.
Policy 2.1.5 Carteret County opposes the installation of package treatment plants and septic
tanks or discharge of any wastewater in coastal or freshwater wetlands.
Policy 2.4.2 Carteret County will not allow floating structures in any public trust waters. (A
floating structure is defined as any structure, not a boat, supported by means of floatation,
designed to be used without a permanent foundation, which is used or intended for human
habitation or commerce. A structure will be considered a floating structure when it is
inhabited or used for commercial purposes for more than thirty days in any one location. A
boat may be deemed a floating structure when its means of propulsion has been removed or
n
u
rendered inoperative and it contains at least 200 square feet of living space area.)
U1
I
I
0
u

I
Appendix E: Definitions of "Active Terms" Used in Policies
Consider: Examine or evaluate and discuss a possibility or options
OContinue: Follow past and present procedures.
Discourage: Show opposition to, seek to check or hinder by disfavoring.
Encourage: Foster the desired goal through County policies and staff assistance. May
include financial assistance.
Implement: Take action to guide the accomplishment of the plan recommendations.
Provide: Take the lead role by supplying the needed staff support or information to achieve
the desired goal.
Recommend: To advise or counsel in favor of.
Shall: Indicates a mandatory requirement or action that must occur.
Should: An officially adopted course or method of action intended to be followed to
implement the County's goals. Though not as mandatory as "shall," it is an obligatory course
of action unless clear reasons can be identified that an exception is warranted.
Support: Supply the needed staff support and policies to achieve the desired goal. May
include financial assistance.
A
11
7
11
11

p Appendix F:
Required Policy Analysis
The CRC's Land Use Planning Guidelines require Carteret County to provide two types of
analysis of local land use and development policies and the future land use map. The first
required analysis is of the consistency of the land use plan with the CRC's Management
Topics. The second required analysis is of the impact of the local policies on the
Management Topics. Both of these analyses are contained in this appendix to the plan.
aConsistency of Plan with Management Topics
a1. Consistency between goals and management topics — direction of policies.
Public access. Access policies contained in the plan are intended to provide
"conveniently located access for residents and visitors to Carteret County's public trust
waters for a range of activities." The policies provide for development of additional
estuarine and ocean shoreline public access facilities to serve all areas. of the County and
provide access opportunities for all waterfront property owners. In particular, the policies
provide for additional public access along major water bodies, capitalize on existing
ramps and access sites (including those that have traditionally existed at the County's
Cj
bridge sites), and establish a system of launching facilities for sailboats, canoes, and
u
kayaks. The policies provide for continued public access along nourished beaches on
Bogue Banks, address the elimination of barriers for universal access, and provide for
continued maintenance of Harbors of Refuge_ The County intends to update its Shoreline
Access/Parks and Recreation Comprehensive Master Plan to incorporate these policies.
The update will provide a multi -year plan, including timelines, to serve as a guide to the
(�
11
location of improved public access.
Land use compatibility. The Carteret County goals are "land use and development
patterns that are consistent with the capabilities and limitations of the County's natural
systems, preserve the area's heritage and life styles, and promote sustainable growth."
The policies support management of the County's public trust waters, wetlands, and
coastal shoreline areas to protect water quality, conserve valuable coastal resources, and
Q
maintain the aesthetics of the waterfront. The plan recognizes the value of non -coastal
wetlands in managing stormwater runoff and protecting water quality and classifies them
as conservation to encourage compatible development. The policies support the use of
"living shorelines" or vegetated marshes and small stone sills to prevent erosion, and
believe that these may be better alternatives than conventional hard bulkheads. Policies
promote educational efforts on the "cause and effect" relationship of everyday household
practices, construction techniques, and land development principles to protect and
improve water quality.
Infrastructure carrying capacity. The plan's goal focuses on development, extension,
and upgrade of infrastructure systems (such as water, wastewater, transportation, natural
gas, and telecommunications) that encourage and promote sustainable industries and job
opportunities, as well as orderly residential development. Policies address central water .
service extension into areas classified as developed, limited transition, and rural with .
services. Policies support the development of central sewer service in unincorporated
areas of the County (while recognizing the difficulties associated with this effort) and
educational efforts on maintenance of septic tanks and alternative septic systems. Policies

support the use of advanced technology to treat wastewater, including the use of
constructed wetlands (Policy 3.3). However, if a state or federal permitting agency
identifies a constructed wetland as a coastal or freshwater wetland, Policy 2.1.5 shall
apply. Policy 2.1.5 prohibits the discharge of wastewater into areas classified as coastal
or freshwater wetlands.
Transportation policies address issues associated with US 70, NC 24, NC 58, and NC 101
and address the need for improved safety, regional accessibility, and traffic flow.
Transportation policies include development of a Highway 24 corridor management
study and requirements for safe access by new development to the County's major
corridors. Other policies address the Michael J. Smith Field, the NC State Port Terminal,
fiber-optic cabling, and natural gas extensions.
Natural and man-made hazards. The plan's goal is to "minimize threats to life,
property, and natural resources resulting from development located in or adjacent to .
natural and man-made hazard areas." The plan supports continued enforcement of the
North Carolina State Building Code, Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance and CAMA
use standards for development in flood hazard areas and participation in the National
Flood Insurance Program to maintain or improve the County's Community Rating
System (CRS) score. To mitigate risks for older properties and to keep communities
intact, policies support elevation of residences and other structures above the base flood
elevation through funding assistance from the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program and the
Community Development Grant Program.
Policies in the plan support measures to mitigate the impacts of aircraft accident potential and
elevated noise levels associated with operations at Marine Corps Auxiliary Landing Field
(MCALF) Bogue in the western portion of the County. The plan also supports local beach
nourishment programs, including the Carteret County Shore Protection Program.
Water quality. The plan's goal for coastal waters is to maintain, protect, and where
possible, enhance water quality, including shellfishing waters. Policies include providing
education for county officials, developers, property owners, and residents on impacts of
everyday activities and construction and land development practices on water quality.
Additional policies include undertaking more study and consideration of reducing
impervious surfaces and building density and implementation of stormwater and erosion
controls along the County's waterfront. Policies also encourage the use of monitored pilot
projects using advanced technology and engineered solutions to treat stormwater runoff.
Plan policies also support Low Impact Development (LID), an innovative, ecologically
friendly approach to land development and stormwater management that seeks to
mitigate development impacts on land, water, and air. Existing state regulatory programs,
such as CAMA use standards and the stormwater runoff regulations, and Best
Management Practices (BMPs) of the US Department of Agriculture Natural Resources
Conservation Service and the NC Division of Forest Resources are also incorporated into
plan policies.
Local concerns — economic development. Carteret County selected economic
development as the local area of concern to address in the land use plan. The goal is the
development and maintenance of a "quality of life that attracts and retains young adults. -
retirees, the military community, and other groups that contribute to the County's
economic diversity and well being." Policies include capitalizing upon the area's

attractiveness as a retirement location and the related economic impacts. Policies also
support the Marine Sciences and Education Partnership and its efforts to attract and
create spin-off industries and new jobs and the expansion of Jarrett Bay Marine Industrial
Park.
Policies in the plan aim to improve the County's appearance and maintain its distinctive
character. These include recognition of the uniqueness of the Down East Community and
support for the development of heritage tourism, including the designation of this area by
the federal government as a Scenic Byway. Policies include educational efforts and
amendments to land use ordinances, such as the existing sign ordinance, to promote
development that is consistent with the unique character of the County. Policies in this
section also include implementation of the East Carolina Joint Land Use Study that
addressed impacts of military activities in Bogue Landing Field.
2. Consistency between future land use map and land use plan requirements.
A. Residential density.
The residential densities depicted on the future land use map are consistent with the
capabilities of Carteret County's natural systems. Typical densities are shown below:
C'.lassificatinn Estimated densitv
Developed
Limited Transition
Community
Rural with Services
Rural
Protected Lands
Conservation
4.4 units/acre
3.5 units/acre
2.2 units/acre
2.5 units/acre
2.2 units/acre
N/A
N/A*
a *AECs are not mapped on the future land use map, although a note is
provided on the map that precise locations must be identified in the field by
the appropriate permitting agency. AECs, non -coastal wetlands, and
significant natural heritage areas generally overlay other land classifications,
and would be subject to the overall density of the general classification, as
well as regulations of permitting agencies.
a
B. Comparison of environmental composite map, land suitability map, and future
land use map.
There are no material differences between the development patterns shown on the
a future land use. map and the development constraints shown on the environmental
composite map and the land suitability patterns shown on the land suitability map.
All of the lower capability areas shown on the composite map and the lower
suitability areas shown on the land suitability map are classified as Conservation or as
Protected Lands.
C. Comparison of land classifications that depend on central water service and
planned water service extensions.
a The Developed, Limited. Transition, and Rural with Services classifications depend
on the provision of central water service. Water service is available in areas classified
as Developed. Except for the NC 101 and US 70 corridors, all areas classified as
Limited Transition are served by central water service. Areas along NC 101 and US

70 north of Beaufort will be provided with central water when Phase H of the North
River Community System expansion is completed, anticipated to be in the summer of
2005. Central water service is provided or is currently being extended (at the time of
plan preparation) to all areas classified as Rural with Services.
The provision of water service to these classifications is consistent with policies
contained in Section 8 of the land use plan.
D. Natural Hazards
Policies for land uses in flood hazard areas and ocean hazard AECs adopt the CAMA
minimum use standards. The use standards ensure that risks to life and property in
these areas are reasonable. Carteret County will continue to enforce existing zoning
and flood damage prevention ordinances and the state building code to mitigate risks.
The County will implement and regularly update the Hazard Mitigation Plan and the
Emergency Operations Plan.
The major evacuation infrastructure for Carteret County is US 70, NC 24, NC 101,
and NC 58. A major upgrade of NC 24 was completed in 2002, which provides a link
to Interstate 40.
Policies in the land use plan support improved highway safety and traffic flow on
these highways, and identify transportation improvement priorities for the County.
The transportation priorities, identified by the Carteret County Transportation
Committee, include improving traffic flow on US 70 (including construction of
bypasses at Clayton, Goldsboro, Kinston, and Havelock) and construction of the
Northern Bypass from Beaufort/Port of Morehead City to the Havelock Bypass.
Other priorities include widening and improvement of the Newport River Bridge on
US 70 from Morehead City to the Beaufort Causeway, conducting a feasibility study
for a third bridge from the mainland to Bogue Banks, and widening of NC 58 from
Emerald Isle to Atlantic Beach. Completion of these transportation priorities will
improve storm and hurricane evacuation capability. The Transportation Committee
will continue to consider traffic handling capacity in emergencies and evacuations in
its recommendations for transportation improvements.
E. Protection of shellfishing waters.
AECs (including coastal wetlands, estuarine waters, public trust areas, and coastal
shorelines) and non -coastal wetlands are classified by Carteret County as
Conservation. Uses allowed by the CRC's regulations for AECs are limited to those
that are compatible with natural characteristics and that have acceptable impacts.
Additional state regulatory programs (stormwater and erosion and sedimentation
control) and federal (US Army Corps of Engineers) wetland regulations also provide
protection to shellfishing waters. Carteret County concurs with these standards,
except that some policies in this plan affecting wetland areas and public trust waters
are more stringent than state and federal standards.
Residential land use patterns shown on the Future Land Use Map are not high
density. These densities provide limits to non -point pollution, which is a major factor
for impaired shellfishing waters. Policy statements included in the land use plan
reflect the commitment of the Board of Commissioners to investigate and consider
development of additional land use controls to protect shellfishing waters. These
controls include implementation of a local stormwater ordinance and amendments to

a existing ordinances. to reduce impervious surface limits and densities in areas
adjacent to shellfishing waters, control post -construction runoff, and implement local
erosion and sedimentation controls for site disturbances of less than one acre.
Additional policies in the plan establish educational programs on the "cause and
effect" relationship of everyday activities, construction techniques, and development
practices that affect water quality. Policies in the plan also encourage use of Low
Impact Development to control the rate of flow and volume characteristics of
stormwater runoff into shellfishing waters.
Analysis of the Impact of Policies on Management Topics
The planning guidelines require Carteret County to analyze the impacts of the land use and
a
development policies on the CRC's Management Topics. This analysis must include both
positive and negative impacts. If negative impacts are identified,- the plan must include
apolicies
to mitigate the negative impacts.
The impacts of the Carteret County land use plan policies are shown on the following Table-.
Analysis of Impacts of Carteret County Policies on Management Topics. Based on this
analysis, all of the policies have either a beneficial or neutral impact on the Management
Topics. Therefore no mitigation policies are required.
N
0

Analysis of Impacts of Carteret County Policies on Management Topics
Management
Topics
Public Access
Land Use
Compatibility
Infrastructure
Carrying
Capacity
Natural Hazard
Water Quality
Local Concerns
Areas
(Economic
Development)
• More planned access
locations
• Upgrades to existing
access locations
• Policies protect
natural systems
• Policies allow
economic
development
• Water & other key
facilities & services
available in required
locations at adequate
capacities to support
planned growth &
development patterns
• Policies have
location, density, &
intensity criteria to
help new
development &
redevelopment avoid
or withstand hazards
• Land use &
development criteria
& measures that .
abate impacts that
degrade water
quality
• Policies support
Carteret County
economic
development goals
1.11
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
1.1.2
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
1.1.3
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial .
1.1.4
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
1.2
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
1.3
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
1.4.1
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
1.4.2
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
1.4.3
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
1.4.4
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
1.4.5
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
1.4.6
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
1.5
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
Beneficial
1.6
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
2.1.1
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
2.1.2
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
.2.1.3
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
2.1.4
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
2.1.5
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
2.2.1
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
2.2.2
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
2.2.3
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
2.3
Neutral
Beneficial .
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
2.4.1
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral

Public Access
Land Use
Compatibility
I
Infrastructure
Carrying
Capacity
Natural Hazard
Water Quality
Economic
Development
Areas
2.4.2
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
2.4.3
Beneficial
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
2.5.1
Neutral
Beneficial
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
2.5.2
Neutral
Beneficial
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
2.6
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
2.7
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
2.8
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
2.9
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
2.10
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
3.1
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
3.2
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
3.3
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
3.4
Neutral
Beneficial
Beneficial
Beneficial
Beneficial
Neutral
3.5
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
3.6
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
3.7
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
3.8.1
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
3.8.2
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
3.8.3
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
3.9.1
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
3.9.2
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
3.9.3
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
3.9.4
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
3.10
Neutral .
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
3.11
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
3.12
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
3.13
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
3.14
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
3.15
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
3.16
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral

Public Access
Land Use
Compatibility
Infrastructure
Carrying
Capacity
Natural Hazard
Water Ouality
Economic
Development
Areas.
3.17
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
3.18
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
4.1.1
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
4.1.2
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
4.1.3
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
4.1.4
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
4.1.5
Neutral
Beneficial
Beneficial
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
4.1.6
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
4.2
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
4.3
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
4.4
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral '
4.5
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
4.6.1
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
4.6.2
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
4.7.1
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
4.7.2
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
4.7.3
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
4.7.4
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
4.7.5
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
4.8
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
4.9
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
4.10
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
4.11
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
4.12
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
4.13.1
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
4.13.2
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
5.1.1
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
5.1.2
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
5.1.3
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
5.1.4
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
5.1.5
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral

Public Access
Land Use
Compatibility
Infrastructure
Carryin
Capacity
Natural Hazard
Water Ouality
Economic
Development
Areas
5.1.6
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
5.2.1
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
5.2.2
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
5.2.3
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
5.2.4
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral.
5.3.1
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
5.3.2
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
5.3.3
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
5.3.4
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
5.3.5
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
5.4
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
5.5
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
5.6
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
5.7
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
5.8
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
5.9.1
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
5.9.2
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral.
5.9.3
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
5.10
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
5.11
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
5.12
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
5.13 .
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
5.14
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
5.15
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
6.1
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
6.2.1 .
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
6.2.2
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
6.3
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
6.4.1
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
6.4.2
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
6.5.1
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial

Public Access
Land Use
Compatibility
Infrastructure
Carryin
Capacity
Natural Hazard
Water Ouality
Economic
Development
Areas
6.5.2
Beneficial
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
6.6
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
6.7
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
6.8
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
6.9
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial
6.10
Neutral
Beneficial
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Beneficial

Appendix G:
Maps Used in Plan Preparation
The land use plan makes reference to the maps listed below that were produced as part of the land
use planning process. The maps are available for review in the Carteret County Planning and
Development Office.
• Water and Wastewater Systems
• Transportation Systems
• Areas of Environmental Concern
• Soil Suitability for Septic System
• Water Quality Classes and Subbasins
• Flood Hazard Areas
• Fragile Areas
• Shellfishing Classifications
• Primary Nursery Areas

Appendix H: Carteret County & Towns of Bogue, Cape Carteret, Cedar Point, Newport and Peletier Mitigation Action Plan
n #
F
Carteret County Actions
Hazard
Relative
Funding
Responsible .
Target
(including the Towns of Bogue, Cape Carteret, Cedar
Priority
Sources
Party
Completion
Point Newport and Peletier)
Date
Preventative Actions
Review and include hazard mitigation policies at the next
All
Moderate
Local
Planning Dept
Ongoing
P-1
CAMA Land Use Plan Update.
Develop a policy to minimize public services to proposed new
Flood
Moderate
Local
Planning Dept
Ongoing
P-2
structures that will be located in 100- ear flood lain areas.
Review the Floodplain Ordinance to provide improved flood
Flood
Moderate
Local
Planning Dept
Ongoing
P-3
protection standards.
Update the land use regulatory ordinances by reviewing and
All
Moderate
Local
Planning Dept
Ongoing
P-4
incorporating hazard mitigation objectives.
P-5
Review the Zoning Ordinance. to allow for clustering of
Flood
Moderate
Local
Planning Dept
Ongoing
residential lots.
P-6
.Revise and update the regulatory floodplain maps.
Flood
High
Federal
State
Ongoing
State
Planning Dept
Damage Assessments — Flood Damaged Structures.
Flood
High
Local
Inspection
Ongoing
Any and all portions of buildings that have been submerged for
Dept
P-7
any length of time will be inspected for flood related damage
Tax Dept
as well as other conditions that may be dangerous to life,
health or other property.
Develop policy and procedures related to storm damage and
All
High
Local
Inspection
Ongoing
P-g
disconnected utility services.
Dept
P-9
Maintain and update County's GIS System
All
High
Local
Planning Dept
Continuous
Tax Dept
Sponsor/Co-sponsor a hazard mitigation seminar for elected
All
Medium
Local
Planning Dept
Every 4 years
officials, business leaders, and all municipal, county and
regional organizations (American Red Cross, Salvation Army,
P-10
etc.) which includes educational information on natural
hazards, potential impact and mitigation measures to reduce
risk
P-11
Continue participation in FEMA's Community Rating System
Flood
High
Local
Planning Dept
Continuous
Establish a reconstruction policy that includes procedures for
All
Medium
Local
Planning Dept
January, 2006
P-12
issuance of building permits after a natural disaster
P-13
Apply for grant fimding to enhance the Coun 's hazard
All
Medium
Varies
All
Varies

Action 4
Carteret County Actions
Hazard
Relative
Funding
Responsible
Target
(including the Towns of Bogue, Cape Carteret, Cedar
Priorit
Sources
Party
Completion
Point Newport and Peletier)
Date
mitigation effort, as applicable.
Departments
Establish local and regional partnerships to identify funding
All
Medium
Varies
All
Varies
P-14
sources for natural hazard mitigation activities and seek to
Departments
obtain funding.
Maintain the Hazard Mitigation Advisory Committee to
All
Medium
-N/A
All
Continuous
P-15
continue relationship building and keep updated on mitigation
Departments
measures taking lace throughout the community
P-16
Require all new developments to submit storm water
Flood
Medium
Local
Planning
Ongoing
management plans as required by the State.
Private
Inspections
P-17
Encourage utilization of alternatives to impervious surfaces in
Flood
High
Local
Planning .
Ongoing
all projects.
Private
P-18
Revise development ordinances to encourage use of
Flood
High
Local
Planning
Ongoing
alternatives to impervious surfaces
Inspections
P-19
Review wetlands maps for possible updates.
Erosion
Low
Local
Planning
2 years/
Tax Dept
annually
P-20
Revise development ordinances to encourage shoreline
Erosion
Medium
Local
Planning .
2 years/every
vegetation along marshes & other AEC's
Inspections
5 years
P-21
Develop water shortage response guidelines
Drought
Medium
N/A
Public Works
Ongoing
Coordinate with other utility providers to inform residents of
Drought
Medium
N/A
Public Works
Ongoing
P-22
drought hazards and regional drought policies.
County
Manager
Coordinate with other utility providers to inform residents of
Drought
Medium
N/A
Public Works
3 years/every
P-23
water conservation techniques.
County
5 years
Manager
Join the National Insurance Program
Flood
High
Local
Town of
6 months
P-24
Peletier
Planner
PropertyProtection
PP-1
Maintain a list of repetitive flood loss properties.
Flood
Moderate
Local
Planning
Ongoing
Monitor trees and vegetation on publicly owned property to
Hurricanes
Low
Local
Public Works
Continuous
PP-2
assure that no property or utility damage will occur as a result
Severe
Dept.
of diseased or dying trees/vegetation.
Storms
Parks & Rec.
Dept.
PP-3
Partner with Utility Companies to identify problem areas and
All
Low
Local
Public Works
Continuous

Action #
Carteret County Actions
Hazard
Relative
Funding
Responsible
Target
(including the Towns of Bogue, Cape Carteret, Cedar
Priority
Sources
Party
Completion
Point Newport and Peletier
Date
work to eliminate them where feasible.
Private
Dept.
Utilities
Emergency Services
Ensure adequate evacuation warning in case of major hazard
All
High
Local
Emergency
Ongoing
ES-1
event. '
Services
Improve shelter . capacities with alternate power/heat/air
All
High
Local
Emergency
When
ES-2
conditioning sources.
Services
funding
becomes
available
Establish program to maintain continuity of government
All
High
Local
Emergency
When
operations.
Services
funding
ES-3
becomes
available
Identify alternate Emergency Operations Center locations.
All
High
Local
Emergency
When
Services
funding
ES-4
becomes
available
Maintain current emergency response .plan
All
High
Local
Emergency
Continuous
ES-5
Services
Department
Familiarize local public officials with the principles and
All
Medium
Local
Emergency
Bi-annual
ES-6
practices of emergency management and emergency
Services
following
operations.
Department
election
Procure and maintain backup generators for all critical public
All
High
Varies
All
When
facilities. Evaluate the equipment on a regular basis to assure
Departments
funding
ES-7
it continues to meet the needs of the operations occurring at
becomes
each facility.
available
Prepare a Hazardous Material Action Plan that addresses
Hazardous
Low
Local
Fire Marshal
January 2006
ES-8
proper containment of spills, etc.
Materials
Fire
Departments
ES-9
I Develop plan for consolidated E-911 dispatch center and EOC
All
High
Varies
Emergency
Ongoing

Action #
Carteret County Actions
Hazard
Relative
Funding
Responsible
Target
(including the Towns of Bogue, Cape Carteret, Cedar
Priori
. Sources
Party
Completion
Point Newport and Peletier
Date
located outside of floodplain.
Services
When funds
Department
become
available
Identify alternate detour routes from major arteries in the
All
High
Local
Emergency
Ongoing
ES-10
county.
Services
De artment
Public Information
Place flood protection and other hazard education materials in
All
High
Local
Planning
When
PI-1
all branches of the Carteret County public library system.
funding
becomes
available
PI-2
Maintain a zoning map (digital) that can be easily
All
High
Local
Planning
Ongoing
reproduced/updated for staff and public use.
PI-3
Conduct a natural hazard awareness program in County
All
Low
Local
Planning Dept
Ongoing
Schools
PI-4
Include articles in the papers/newsletters explaining hazard
All
Medium
Local
All
Continuous
mitigation and preparing for natural disasters
Departments
Promote nationally recognized "awareness" weeks (i.e.
All
Medium
Varies
Planning
Continuous
PI-5..
hurricane preparedness, severe weather preparedness, etc.)
Dept.
through local media
PI-6
Provide public links to relevant hazard'mitigation websites.
All
Low
Local
Planning
Continuous
Dept.
Coordinate with other utility providers to inform residents of
Drought
Medium
NIA
Public Works
Ongoing
PI-7
drought hazards and regional drought policies.
County
Coordinate with other utility providers to inform residents of
Drought
Medium
N/A
-Manager
Public Works
Ongoing
PI-8
water conservation techniques.
County
Manager

C] C=
Appendix I: Future Land Use Plan Compatibility Matrix
Consistency Review of Future Land Use Map Classifications and Existing Zoning Districts
water or
ter or sei
N/A I N/A
2 120,0
2 115.0
� omm ' i� . rnm%*"qrTToTffwm1 m
1 111
OOOOOQOO�������J�J�1����00
1 ..
'
111
000000000�000�0���
1 111
000000®0�00���0���
Offlce/1 1 I L•
1 111
0000000��000��00��
1 111
���0000�000��00���
_.. 11 1 _ : l . I J.
. _. •
1 111
•�
'111
o00000000000000000
• '. 1 ' .. 1 L
00�����00000000000
' . (' 1 . e •_ . '
.
1 111
00�000000000000000
1 . ' •_ ' , : 1 .
1 111
00000000�00�00��00
1 ll'• 1 ' . ' _
111
000�0��0�00000��00
1 ll L! ' . e .
1 111
000000000���000�0�
Offlce/vrofesSiOTal-MCI
0000000�0��00�0000
• 11.1
_ •
• , 1
111
000�0�0000�000�000
• 1 . L �
1 111
0�0���000®00�00000
• �
1
0��0�0000000000000
1 Ll LL' . 1 .
•
111
00000000�����0�0��
1 1 L 1 �.
1 111
00000000�00�00����
1 1 I l
1 111
0�000000���00��000
"generally consistent"
V "conditionally consistent"
X "inconsistent"
"not applicable"

Appendix J: Holding Capacity Analysis
This appendix provides the following:
1. Approximate level of density and intensity of development allowed in each category shown on the Future
Land Use Map,
2. Water infrastructure projections for maximum density build -out and total projected usage, and
3. Transportation (roads) analysis for each category shown on the Future Land Use Map.

Land
Classification
Conservationrnder
otected Lands
Rural
Rural/with
Services
Community
Limited
Transition
Developed
Generally not applicable.applicable;
Primarily agricultural
Residential, public facilities,
ixcd land uses,
Predominantly residential;
esidcntial (single- and
High -ground areas
sists of lands not
nd residential uses, with
ealth care facilities, and
including single-family
However, some commercial,
ulti-family), commercial,
located in Conservation
Carteret County or
ome public facilities,
cattered industrial and
esidenccs, general
nstitutional, health care, and
nstitutional, industrial, and
eas and suitable for
icipal planning
icalth care facilities, and
ommercial uses;
ind convenience
ndustrial development
thor urban uses at high to
evelopment shall be
urisdiction.)
cattercd industrial and
verage densities
Acres, churches, public
rimarily along major
oderate densities.
onsidored as Rural and
ommercial uses;
ascd upon the availability
acilitics, health
ighways. Minimum lot sizes
esidcntial densities
development shall be
minimurn 20,000 square
f services; in general,
are facilities, and
ascd on availability of services
ivcrage 3 units per acre,
onsistent with densitiesFeet
lots; average 2 units
inimum lot sizes served
ther mixed
ind zoning district. For
vith minimum lot sizes
nd requirements
or acre; height limit in
y individual wells &
iscs at low densities.
7esidential properties, those
ascd on availability
pplicable to the
nzoned areas = 45'
optic tanks are 20,000
inimum 20,000
crved by central water and
f services. If central
Rural classification.
can roof height with
quare feet (2.2 units per
square feet lots;
ewer may be as small as
vatcr & sewer is available,
ighest roof height not to
cre), properties served by
average two
! 0,000 square feet with an
minimum lot size is 10,000
xcced 50', zoned
entral water or sewer are
units per acre.
verage of 3 units per acre
quare feet (4.4 units per
residential areas
minimum of 15,000 square
r less, properties served
cre). Areas served by
50'.
7cct (2.9 units per acre).
my by central water
entral water are subject
xccptions include
ay be a minimum of
o a 15,000 square foot
ropertics in the B-3 and OP
15,000 square feet (2.9 units
minimum (2.9 units per
office/professional)
or acre). PUD developments
cre). Commercial densities
istricts that require 30,000
Ilow residential densities
irc based on zoning
quare feet lots
(o greater than 2.9 units/acre.
listrict and availability of
1.5 units per acre)
Commercial development,
ervices. In general, areas
nd the B-IA district
minimum lot sizes for
erved by either central
Approximate
hat has a minimum
ropertics served by wells
Nater or sewer are subject
no -acre lot size
ind septic tanks are 20,000
o a 15,000 square feet
Level of Intensi
I unit per acre); height
quare feet (2.2 units per acre)
minimum (2.9 units per
and density
imit in unzoned areas = 45'
hose served by either
cre), while properties
mean roof height with
entral water or sewer are
crved by both water and
ighest roof height
minimum of 15,000 square
ewer maybe 10,000
of to exceed 50', zoned
Feet (2.9 units per acre),
quare feet (4.4 units per
esidential areas = 50';
ind properties served by
cre). Exceptions include
�ropertics
xccptions are B-3
3oth central water & sewer
in the
60', O-P = 60', and B-1 A
ay be 10,000 square feet
-3 and OP
50', and R-B district
4.4 units per acre).
officelprofessional)
35'.
Exceptions include B-3
istricts require 30,000
d OP (office/professional)
quare feet lots (1.5 units
istricts that require 30,000
er acre) and the B-IA
quare feet lots (1.5 units
istrict that has a minimum
)or acre) and the B-IA district
ne-acre lot size (1 unit per
hat has a minimum one -acre
cre); height limits in
of size (1 unit per acre); height
zoned areas are residential
imit in unzoned areas = 45'
= 50' and commercial
mean roof height with highest
= 60'.
oof height not to exceed 50',
oncd residential areas = 50%
xccptions areB-3= 60', O-P
60', and B-IA = 50',
nd R-B district = 35'.
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

Conservation
Protected Lands
Rural
Rural/with
Services
Community
Limited
Transition
Developed
Generally
of applicable
i
of applicable.
(consists of lands not
Will continue to be served
Central water:.14 million
Will continue to be served
Central water:.86 million
Central water: 0.42
High -ground areas located
under Carteret County or
by individual on -site water
gpd (residential)
by individual on -site water
gpd (residential)
million gpd (residential)
in Conservation areas
municipal planning
and wastewater.
I
and wastewater.
and suitable for '
jurisdiction).
Residential central water
Residential central water
Residential central
development shall be
calculation:calculation:
ater calculation:
developed at densities
92 net acres per FLUM x
2,294 net acres per FLUM
759 net acres (FLUM) x
consistent with the Rural
2% residential x 2.9
x 92% residential x 3.0
2% residential x 4.4
classification if there is no
average density x 136
verage density x 136 gpd
average density x 136
underlying classification
average gpd (per local(per
local utility actual
gpd (per local utility
portrayed on the Future
utility1actual usage records)
usage records
g ) 861,076.
usage )
a records —
Land Use Map.
42,236.
17,851.ctual
Water
Will generally continue to
ill generally continue to
Will generally continue
Infrastructure
e served by individual on-
be served by individual on-
site wastewater.
o be served by
individual on -site
Projections for
site wastewater.
wastewater.
Maximum Density
Build -out
Total Projected
Usage**
* Water Infrastructure: Carteret County does not maintain a central sewer system and has no plans to establish one within the planning period addressed by this
plan. Assumptions for water usage are based on existing and projected development patterns (percentage of developed land in residential use), total net acres of
land allocated to each land classification, average allowed densities, records of, local utilities (actual usage), and the experience of local engineers. The
calculations are based on complete build -out of net acres available for development in the Carteret County planning jurisdiction as shown in Table 8.5 on Page
102 at the estimated average densities described in Section 8. The forecast only accounts for residential development. The reader should note that this plan does
not anticipate build -out during the planning period.
** Water:1.42 million gpd

Conservation
Protected Lands
Rural
Services Rural/with
Community
Limited
Transition
Developed
Generally not applicable.
Not applicable
US 70 East is the
This classification
US 70 East and
Major highways serving.
Major highways serving
High -ground areas located
(consists of lands not
major artery for
is primarily served
NC 12 are the primary
this classification are NC
this classification
in Conservation areas and
under Carteret County
this classification. The
by NC 101 and secondary
arteries serving this
4, NC 58, NC 101, and
include NC 24
suitable for development
or municipal
section of this highway
roads, including
classification. Information
US 70. Capacity issues
Town of Cedar Point),
hall be considered as
planning jurisdiction).
from downtown Beaufort
Merrimon Road,
contained under the Rural
along NC 24 from the
NC 58 (Bogue Banks),
Rural and development
to the North River
Laurel Road,
classification related
nslow/Carteret County
and portions of US 70
hall be consistent with
are near capacity,
Hardesty Loop Road,
to these highways
border to the intersection
Morehead City
requirements applicable to
while traffic volumes
Hardesty Farm Road,
is also applicable to the
with US 70 were addressed
eaufort Causeway).
e Rural classification.
from the
Old Winbe Road
Communityclassification.
y improvements
Capacity issues along
P ty
North River Bride
g
and Mill Creek
om leted in 2002. US 70
P
e
C 24 were addressed
to Cedar Island
Road. NC 101
from the Craven County
by improvements
have shown
from Beaufort to the
border to Beaufort and the
completed in 2002.
some decreases in
Carteret/Craven
NC 24/NC 58 corridor
Seasonal traffic volumes
recent years.
County line is expected
continue to see increased
continue to affect the
e North River Bridge
to be over capacity
traffic volumes. Hibbs
major roads in this
as been identified
in 2025,
Road from US 70 to NC 24
lassification. Priority
for replacement in
Merrimon Road from US
is expected to be at or near
improvements include
e NCDOT
70 to Laurel '
capacity in 2025. Portions
projects affecting
Transportation
Road is expected
of NC 58 and Nine Foot
US 70, including road
Program (TIP)
to be near capacity
Road are expected to be
widening and bridge
Transportation
for 2004 — 2010.
in 2025. The NCDOT TIP
near capacity in 2025.
improvement projects.
e TIP also
for 2004 — 2010 provides
Priority improvements
identified parking
for a bridge replacement
include projects that
and roadwork at
over the Newport River
affect the major arteries,
the Cedar Island
on Mill Creek Road.
including the Gallants
Ferry and a fast ferry
Channel Bridge
for Cedar Island
replacement project,
to Ocracoke,
widening of the Newport
River Bridge, and
construction of a new
bypass from Havelock
o Beaufort. Additional
priorities include widening
f portions of Nine Foot
Road, several bridge
replacements on secondary
roads, and widening and
improvements to US 70
from Beaufort to East
Carteret High School.

= o = cn = = =
Appendix K: Gross versus Net Acreages for Future Development
Tahle K-1 Estimated Acres Unavailahle for Develonment
Non -coastal
Unavailable
Carteret
Land Use
Utility
Coastal
wetlands
Privately
In Coastal
EMC Neuse
County '
Classification
Roads
Easements
Wetlands
(90% of total)
Farmland
Owned
Shoreline
River Buffer
DECO Buffer
TOTAL
Forests
AEC*
Developed
154.9
38.9
81.2
137.2
0.0
0.0
365.3
0.0
0.0
777.5
Limited
Transition
1,158.1
277.6
1,259.1
12,143.7
175.1
187.3
2,288.1
0.0
115.3
17,604.3
Community
219.9
42.3
156.0
529.8
0.5
0.0
738.3
0.0
133.4
1,820.2
Rural with
Services
273.7
52.7
1,159.9
8,415.9
1.9
1,137.1
736.8
0.0
9.8
11,787.8
Rural
1 1,320.1
1 300.7
10,386.6
7,741.5
50,890.1
8,388.2
5,238.4
166.6
793.2
85 225.4
Totals
1 3,126.7
1 712.2
13,042.8
28,968.1
51,067.6
99712.6
9,366.9
166.E f
1,05-1.7
117 215.2
*From Table K-2
Table K-2 LAMA Cnastal Shnreline AEC Acres Unavailable for Develonment
Land Use
Classification
75' AEC
Available for
Development*
Unavailable for
Development
575' AEC
Available for
Development"
Unavailable for
Development
Total Unavailable
Developed
343.6
103.1
240.5
166.4
41.6
124.8
365.3
Limited Transition
2,062.6
618.8
1,443.8
1;125.7
281.4
844.3
2,288.1
Community
458.2
137.5
320.7
556.7
139.2
417.5
738.3
Rural with Services
1,052.6
315.8
736.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
736.8
Rural
5,793.1
1 1,737.9
4,055.2
1,577.6
394.4
1 1,183.2
5,238.4
Totals
9,710.1
2,913.0
6,797.1
1 3,426.4
856.E
1 2,569.8
9366.9
*CAMA regulations normally allow only 30% of the area to be developed
** CAMA regulations normally allow only 25% of the area to be developed
a

Table K-3 Undeveloped Acres Located Within One -Half Mile of SA Waters
Land Use Classification
# Acres located within'/2 mile
of Class SA waters
# Acres developed
# Acres Undeveloped
Developed
289.6
157.7
131.9
Limited Transition
14,455.8
4,321.0
10,134.8
Community
3,000.2
1,137.6
1,862.6
Rural with Services
5,746.5
806.5
4,940.0
Rural
30,709.2
2,910.0
27,799.2
Totals
54,201.3
9,332.8
44 868.5
Table K-4 Soils with Severe Limitations for Septic
Land Use Classification
# Acres
.Develo ed
1,459.9
Limited Transition
25,701.8
Community
3,184.1
Rural with Services
13,235.0
Rural
82,117.4
Total
125 698.2
Assumptions and methodology for development of data shown in Tables K-1, K-2, K-3, and K-4:
• Roads — areas calculated using buffered NCDOT roads (60') and private roads (30'); intersected with land use layers.
• Utility easements — assumed 10' easement (calculated using roads layer) on both sides of roads.
• Coastal wetlands — DCM data layers were intersected with Carteret County parcels layer. Assumed no residential,
commercial, ,industrial, or institutional uses in these areas
• Non -coastal wetlands — DCM data layers were intersected with Carteret County parcels layer. Jurisdictional (404) rules
usually limit wetland loss to 10%; therefore assumptions made that in general up to 90% of such areas are undevelopable.
• Farmland — created farmland shapefile from Carteret County parcel data.
• Privately -owned forests — created forest shapefile from Carteret County parcel data.
Unavailable in Coastal Shoreline Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) — CAMA regulations usually limit built -upon -
area (BUA) within this AEC to no more than 25% to 30%, depending upon the classification of adjacent waters. Areas .
located within 575' of ORW waters are limited to no more than 25% BUA, thus resulting in 75% of the area being
unavailable for development. Areas adjacent to estuarine waters not classified as ORW are usually limited to no more than
30% BUA, rendering 70% of the AEC in these areas unavailable for development. Areas adjacent public trust waters are
subject to the 30' CAMA buffer where no new residential, commercial, industrial, or institutional uses are allowed. For
areas located within the 75' and 575' Coastal Shoreline AEC the CAMA 30' buffer does not reduce the allowed percentage

of BUA, which is calculated on the entire AEC area. Acres shown in the above table as being unavailable for development
were estimated by creating buffers around DCM data for rivers and streams and calculating the appropriate percentages.
• EMC (Environmental Management Commission) Neuse River Buffer — created 50' buffer around river and estimated each
land use overlaying the buffer. Since the Neuse River Buffer includes the CAMA 30' buffer, only areas within the .
remaining 20' of the Neuse buffer are shown in this table.
• DECO 50' buffer —created buffers around DCM data for rivers/streams. Since the DECO buffer includes the CAMA 30'
buffer, only areas within the remaining 20' of the DECO buffer are shown in this table.
• Acres located within '/Z mile of Class SA waters — buffered %z mile from DCM data for SA waters.
• . Soils with severe limitations for septic — used soils layer from DCM; used acreage from "severe" type and intersected with
Carteret County parcel layer.