Coastal Area Management Act Land Use Plan-1978

DCM COPY'" DCM COPY
lease do not remove!!!!!
Division of Coastal Management Copy
Coastal Area Management Act
Land Use Plan
CARTERET COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
February, 1978
North Carolina
Coastal Resources Commission
P.O. Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611

Coastal Area Management Act
Land Use Plan
CARTERET COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
February, 1978
North Carolina
Coastal Resources Commission
P.O. Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611

TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES, MAPS
Page
Introduction..................................................
1
Purpose.................................................
1
History of CAMA Effort ..................................
1
Description of Present Conditions .............................
3
Population...............................................
3
Economy .................................................
9
Employment and Income .......... .......... .....
9
Commercial Fishing .................................
10
Tourism ............................................
12
Agriculture ...........................................
16
N . C . State Port Terminal ..........................
16
Industry ...........................................
18
Summary................................................
18
Existing Land Use ........................................
19
Urban and Built-up ................................
21
Residential ....................................
21
Commercial ....................................
21
Industrial .....................................
21
Transportation, Communication, and
Utilities .......................................
21
Government and Institutional ..................
23
Cultural, Entertainment and Recreational.......
23
Agriculture ..........................................
23
Forestland..........................................
23
Undeveloped Land .................. ......... ......
23.
K
A
r
(i)

Page
Wetlands............................................
23
Land Use Briefs .........................................
24
Atlantic Township ..................................
25
Beaufort Township .................................
25
Cedar Island Township .............................
27
Davis Township ....................................
27
Harkers Island .....................................
27
Harlowe Township ..................................
28
Marshallberg Township .............................
28
Merrimon Township .................................
29
Morehead Township .................................
29
Newport Township ..................................
30
Sea Level Township........... ...................
31
Smyrna Township ..................................
31
Stacy Township ....................................
31
Straits Township ...................................
31
White Oak Township ................................
32
Bogue Banks .......................................
32
Compatibility Problems ...................................
32
AICUZ Summary ....................................
33
Compatible Land Use Plan ......................
33
Analysis of AICUZ.............................
35
Problems Related to Development .........................
38
Areas Likely to Experience Major Land Use Changes .....
42
Current Plans, Policies, and Regulations .......................
42
Plans and Policies .......................................
42
1962 Land Use Survey and Analysis ..................
44
1967 Land Development Plan ........................
44
1967 Community Facilities Plan and Public
Improvements Program ..............................
44
A Plan for Parks and Recreation in Carteret
County, 1974.......................................
44
Transportation Plan ................................
44
Regional Sewer Plan ................................
44
4

Page
Regulations..............................................
45
1961 Carteret County Subdivision Regulations .......
45
1971 Carteret County Zoning Ordinance .............
45
1972 Carteret County Mobile Home Park and
Camp Park Ordinance ...............................
45
1974 Group Housing Ordinance ......................
45
1973 Outer Banks Land Protection Ordinance........
46
N. C. State Building Code ..........................
46
Public Participation Activities ............. .......... .......
46
Land Use Issues .........................................
46
The Impact of Population and Economic Trends
on Land Development ...............................
46
Service Impact Issue ................................
51
Housing............................................
51
Water and Sewer ....................................
52
Police and Fire Protection, Rescue Services,
Transportation, ad Solid Waste Disposal .............
54
Conservation of Productive Natural Resources ............
54
Protection of Important Natural Environments ............
54
Protection of Cultural and Historic Resources ............
55
Alternatives Considered for Objectives, Standards
and Policies .............................................
55
Population and Economy .............................
56
Housing and Services ...............................
56
Conservation and Natural Resources .................
56
Protection of Cultural and Historic Resources .......
56
Objectives, Policies, and Standards ......................
57
Cultural and Historic Objectives .....................
58
Land Development Objectives ........................
58
(am)

Pa e
Economic Objectives ................................
59
Service Objectives ..................................
61
Governmental Objectives ............................
62
Public Input and the Development of Land Use Issues
Objectives, Policies, and Standards ......................
63
Questionnaire and Response Summary ....................
66
Plan Formulation .........................................
66
Eastern Townships ........................................
67
Central Townships . .............................
68
......
Western Townships .......................................
70
BogueBanks ..........................................
72
Constraints on Development ............ . .....................
73
Physical Limitations ......................................
73
Excessive Erosion Areas .............................
73
Flood Hazard Areas .................................
74
Airports............................................
74
Storage of Flammable Liquids ........................
74
Areas with Soil Limitations .........................
74
Source of Water Supply ............................
75
Slopes over 12 percent.......... ....................
77
Fragile Areas ...........................................
78
Coastal Wetlands ...................................
78
Sand Dunes along the Outer Banks .................
78
Ocean Beaches and Shorelines ......................
78
Estuarine Waters ...................................
78
M
(iv)

Page
Areas with Resource Potential......... ................
78
Productive and Unique Agricultural Lands ..........
79
Potentially Valuable Mineral Sites ...................
82.
Publicly owned Forests, Parks, Fish and
Gamelands..........................................
82
Capacity of Community Facilities .........................
83
Water and Sewer Services ..........................
83
Beaufort ......................................
83
Morehead City.......... .....................
83
Newport.......................................
83
Roads and Streets ..................................
84
Educational Facilities and Services ...................
85
Technical Education ...........................
89
County Library Services ...........................
91
Recreation.... ...................................
91
Medical Facilities and Health Services ...............
93
Social Assistance ...................................
96
Refuge Collection and Disposal ......................
98
Police Protection ...................................
99
Fire Protection .....................................
99
Rescue Squads .....................................
100
Air Transportation .................................
101
Estimated Demands ........................................:..
102
Population .....:........................................
102
Relationship of Long -Range Projections to the
Desires of the People ..............................
102
Tourist Attraction of County ........:..............
105
Retirement Communities ............................
105
(v)

Pa e
Improved Transportation ...........................
105
The Relationship of the Capabilities of the Land and
Water to Support Projected Population ...................
106
Water Quality and Carrying Capacity ...............
107
Planning Related to Water Quality Problems .........
107
Surface Water Problems in Carteret County.........
108
Groundwater Problems ..............................
108
Seasonal Population ......................................
110
Bogue Banks Land Analysis ........................
ill
Economic Trends ........................................
ill
Tourism ............................................
112
Industry ...........................................
112
Commercial .........................................
112
Agriculture .........................................
112
Commercial Fishing .................................
112
Civil Service .......................................
113
N . C . State Port Terminal.......... ..............
113
Future Land Needs ......................................
113
Residential Demands ................................
114
Demands for Seasonal Development ..................
114
Commercial Land Use for Next 10 Years .............
114
All Other Land Uses ...............................
115
Community Facilities Demand .............................
115
Water and Sewer Services .. . ................
115
Schools............................................
116
Roads.............................................
116
County Services ...................................
116
(vi)

Page
Plan Description .............................................
118
Land Classification System ..............................
118
Developed.........................................
118
Transition .........................................
118
Community .........................................
118
Rural..............................................
119
Conservation .......................................
119
Carteret County Land Classification .....................
120
Plan Review ..................................................
125
Summary.....................................................
126
City -County Plan Relationship ...............................
128
Areas of Environmental Concern ..............................
129
CAMA Provisions for AECs .............................
129
The Estuarine System ...................................
131 .
Coastal Wetlands .....................................
131
Estuarine Waters ...................................
133
Public Trust Areas .................................
134
General Use Standards .............................
135
Ocean Hazard Areas .....................................
138
Ocean Beaches .....................................
139
Frontal Dunes ......................................
140
Inlet Lands .........................................
140
Ocean Erodible Areas ...............................
140
General Use Standards ..............................
141
Development Standards Applicable to All AECs...........
143
(vii)

LIST OF TABLES
Page
1.
Population of Carteret County Townships ................
4
2.
Population of Municipalities Within Carteret County .......
5
3.
1975 Estimates of Municipal Population Within Carteret
County..................................................
6
4.
1970 County Population and 1965 Residence ..............
6
5.
1970 Population: Age, Sex, Race .......................
7
6.
Employment - Labor Force ...............................
7
7.
Rate of Unemployment and Average Weekly Earnings,
1963-1974...............................................
9
8.
Principal Species of Fish Landed in Carteret County .....
11
9.
Carteret County Menhaden Landings, 1965-1973..........
11
10.
North Carolina Menhaden Landings, 1964-1974............
12
11.
Carteret County Travel Income ..........................
13
12.
Estimated Carteret County Tourist Expenditures, 1971...
14
13.
Number of Visitors .to Fort Macon State Park............
15
14.
Import -Export Tonnage............ ....................
17
15.
Industry - New and Expanded ...........................
18
16.
Sales and Use Tax Gross Collections .....................
18
17.
Gross Retail Sales .......................................
19
18.
1973 Land Use Categories by Acres for Region "P"
and Carteret County ....................................
20
19.
Rural Dwelling Density ..................................
22
20.
1970 Acres Per Person ..................................
24
21.
Land Use Objective Matrix ..............................
36
22.
Analysis of Significant Land Areas ......................
39
23.
Agricultural Farmland - Soil Association and
Management Limitation Rate ..............................
81

Page
24. Typical Capacities ..................... 84
25. Carteret County Schools ................................. 86
26. Carteret County Public School Expenditures
(1973-1974)............................................. 88
27. Population Projections, 1975-2025........................ 102
28. Potential Population Growth, Towns and County......... 103A
29. Seasonal Population Projections for Bogue Banks......... ill
MAPS
1. 1975 Annual Average Daily 24 Hour Traffic Volume on
Hard Surface Roads ..................................... 83A
Y

I. INTRODUCTION
Purpose
The Land Use Plan for Carteret County was prepared for the
purpose of providing a sound basis for managing the natural resources
of the -County in the future. The management of these resources will
result in more compatible land uses, better direction of growth pat-
terns, and more efficient use of County tax revenues.
It should be understood that this plan can only be effective if the
citizens and elected officials of the County desire to plan for their
future, rather than allowing haphazard development to occur without
regard to the environment which has made the County an attractive
place to live. Just having a plan for the County will not ensure ' sound
development practices.
In order to grow in the manner expressed by citizens in the
County, money is going to be needed. Water and sewer services are
going to be necessary, especially on Bogue Banks where most of the
intense development pressures are going to occur. These services will
cost money and the County needs to prepare now for having to bear
part, if not all, of the costs of these services. Even with the expected
money from the 201 Facilities Planning, the County will have to provide
at a minimum, 12.5 percent of the costs of the facilities. In addition,
201 money presently allows for only a 10 percent growth factor. This
will be insufficient for providing the needed facilities if the expected
growth occurs.
The ultimate purpose of the Plan is to show where growth has
occurred in the past, determine where it should occur in future, and
provide a means for directing growth in the desired direction. As the
unexpected occurs, the Plan will need to be revised to handle the new
situations. However, it is important that the Plan be used to guide
growth rather. than growth guiding the Plan. Too much unwarranted
change will make the Plan ineffective.
History of CAMA Effort
The Coastal Area Management Act was adopted in 1974 . by the
North Carolina General Assembly in order to help local governments in
eastern North Carolina form a basis for a comprehensive plan for the
protection, preservation, orderly development, and management of- the
coastal area of the state. All of the twenty coastal counties were
required by the Act to prepare and adopt land development plans in
compliance with the "Guidelines for Planning in the Coastal Area."
These Guidelines were developed to aid local governments to comply
with the requirements of the Coastal Area Management Act.
The Carteret County Land Use Plan includes many traditional
aspects of land -use planning such as an analysis of the existing popula-
tion and economy and existing land uses. A greater emphasis than
ever has been placed on obtaining public input. The new aspects of
1

this planning process include the use of the Land Classification System,
and the description of Areas of Environmental Concern (AEC's). These
new agencies of planning are tools that local governments can use to
facilitate their planning efforts.
It is essential to understand the legislative goals of the Coastal
Area Management Act before going into this Plan. They are:
I. To provide a management system capable of preserving and
managing the natural ecological conditions of the estuarine
system, the barrier dune system, and the beaches, so as to
safeguard and perpetuate their natural productivity and their
biological, economical and aesthetic values.
2. To insure that the development or preservation of the land
and water resources of the coastal area proceeds in a manner
consistent with the capability of the land and water for devel-
opment, use, or preservation based on ecological considera-
tions.
3. To insure the orderly and balanced use and preservation of
our coastal resources on behalf of the people of North
Carolina and the nation.
4. To establish policies, guidelines and standards for the con-
servation of resources; the economic development of the "
coastal area; the use of recreational lands and tourist
facilities; the wise development of transportation and cir-
culation patterns; the preservation and enhancement of
historical, cultural and scientific aspects of the region; and
the protection of common law and public rights in the lands
and waters of the coastal area.
2

II. Description of Present Conditions
A. Population and Economy
(1) Population
The number of people living in a specific geographic
area is one of the most important elements of man's environ-
ment and should always be evaluated prior to the formulation
of a plan for future use and management of our land. Popu-
lation data is basic in making decisions and determinations as
to the capacity of land to support a given population. In
addition, population data should be collected and analyzed to
reflect economic and social conditions and problems, which in
many instances are directly or indirectly related to the use
and misuse of land.
Carteret County's population has changed significantly
during the last several decades, as has the population of
other areas of Eastern North Carolina. From 1950-1970
Carteret County's population increased from 23,059 to 31,603,
or 37 percent. The Bureau of Census indicates that the 1975
Carteret County population is approximately 35,000. The
Bureau of Census has also projected that Carteret County will
reach a population of 44,100 by 1985, an increase of 9,100
persons (26 percent). The projected increase is not an
unusually high increase for Carteret County in light of popu-
lation increased since 1950. Those increases were:
(a) From 1950 to 1960 -- 19 o increase
(b) From 1960 to 1970 -- 15.20-o increase
Three basic questions arise when one analyzes population
data: (1) 'Why an increase or decrease in population? (2)
Where did the increases or decreases occur? and (3) What
impact did such increases or decreases have on the local
area?
In order to obtain an answer to the above three ques-
tions, a review of the County's township population is
needed. Table 1#1, Population of Carteret County's
Townships, reflects a breakdown in township population for
the years 1950 to 1970.
3

Population
of Carteret County
Townships
Table #1
Townships
1950
1960
Change
1970
Change
I.
Atlantic
NA
902
-
814
-9.8 0
2.
Beaufort
5,374
6,246
16.0%
6,147
-1.60
3.
Cedar Island
290
255
12. 0 0
290
13.7%
4.
Davis
NA
446
-
456
2.2%
5.
Harkers Island
1,244
1,362
9.5 0
1,639
20.3 0
6.
Harlowe
NA
629
-
762
21.106
7.
Marshallberg
NA
416
-
525
26.2$
8.
Merrimon
374
344
.-8.0%
330
-4.2%
9.
Morehead
8,299.
10,054
21.10
ll, 929
18.6%
10.
Newport
2,259
2,644
17.0 0
3,926
18.5 0
ll.
Portsmouth
33
8
-75.8 0
2
-75.0 0
12.
Sealevel
NA
389
-
347
10.8 0
13.
Smyrna
1,397
597
-56.9 0
517
-13.4 0
14.
Stacy
NA
291
-
257
-ll . 7 0
15.
Straits
2,251
1, 070
-52.5%
1,166
9.0 0
16.
White Oak
1, 273
1, 785
40.2 0
2,496
39.8%
COUNTY TOTALS 23,059 27,438 19.0% 31,603 15.2%
Source: U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Census
NA: Not Available
The above table indicates where population increases oc-
curred between 1950 and 1960. From 1950 to 1960, the White
Oak Morehead and Newport Townships had significant
increases in population. The following decade (1960 to 1970)
Newport Township, with an increase of 48.5 percent and
White Oak Township with an increase of 39.8 percent, again
rank highest in population increases. Between 1950 and 1970,
all townships had continuous increases with the exception of
Straits, Smyrna, Merrimon, Stacy, Portsmouth and Beaufort
Townships. The average township population increase bet-
ween 1950 and 1960 was 19.0 percent, and between 1960 and
1970 the average increase was 15.2 percent.
Table #2, Population of Cartaret County Municipalities,
reflects municipal population for towns within Carteret County
for the years 1950 to 1970. Between 1950 and 1960, the
average municipal population increased by 4.7 percent. The
average town population increased by almost .20 percent. bet-
ween 1960 and 1970. One reason for this increase is due to
the incorporation of the Towns of Cape Carteret and Emerald
Isle. Other municipalities increased in population by 9
4

percent, except Morehead City which declined. Morehead
City's population decline could be attributed to
some national
influencing factors in existence between 1960 and
1970 such as
northern migration of non -whites from many southern
towns,
the continued increase in the cost of living and the desire by
many families to live in suburban and rural areas due to the
changes. in individual values concerning "what is" and "what
is not" a good place to live.
The Carteret County Planning Department
has derived
the following 1975 population estimates (Table
#3) for the
eight (8) municipalities in the county. These
figures are
only estimates and should not be used for official purposes.
They are based on the 1975 housing counts.
Population of Municipalities
Table # _27-
Within Carteret County
MUNICIPALITY - 1950 1960 Change
1970 Change
1. Atlantic Beach 49 76 55.1 o
300 294.7 0
2. Beaufort 3,212 2,922 -9.00
3,368 15.30
3. Cape Carteret Incorporated
in 1957 52 -
616 1, 084.6 0
4. Emerald Isle Incorporated
in 1957 14 -
122 771.4 0
5. Indian Beach Incorporated
in 1973
6. Morehead City 5,144 5,583 8.5%
5,233 -6.3%
7. Newport 674 27.70-o
1,735 101.5 0
8. Pine Knoll Shores Incorporated in 1973
Total: 9,079 9,508 4.7 0 ll, 374 19.6%
Source: U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Census
5

1975 Estimates of MunicipalPopulation Table #
Within Carteret Countv
Municipality
1975 Year Around
1975 Summer
Atlantic Beach
500
*7,360
Beaufort
3, 719
-
Cape Carteret
. 790
-
Emerald Isle
320-400
5,000-5,600
Indian Beach
90
5,000-5,500
Morehead City
5,900
-
Newport
1,944
-
Pine Knoll Shores
680
2, 770
*Includes the one mile area of Atlantic Beach
Table #4, 1970 Population and 1965 Residence, gives
a good indication of w-hy Carteret County's population
has increased. Table #4 indicates the location of the
population during the year 1965.
1970 County Population and 1965 Resident Table #4
I.
Persons living in same house
II.
Persons living in different
house in county
III.
Persons living in different
county in N.C.
IV.
Persons living in different
state
A. Northeastern states
732
B . North Central states
419
C . Southern states 1,480
D . Western states
302
V .
Persons living in different
country
VI.
Persons not reporting 1965
residences
Subtotal:
County population under 5
years of age:
Total County
Population:
15,769 persons
5,703 persons
2,508 persons
2,933 persons
435 persons
1,694 persons
29,042 persons
2,561 persons
31,603 persons
Source: U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census
Between 1965 and 1970, close to 5,900 persons moved
their residence to Carteret County either from another
county, another state, or some foreign country. These
persons account for a 20 percent increase in the total
County population. Another 8 percent of the population
was accounted for through births between 1965 and 1970.
A breakdown of age categories is given in Table #5,
Age, Sex, Race, 1970 Population, 5 Year Groupings. It
L

1970 Population:
5 Year Groupings
would be expected, due to Carteret County becoming a
second home and retirement area, that the number of
males and females in age categories 1150 years and above"
would increase. In fact, the "50 years and above"
categories account for almost one-fourth of the total
population in the County.
Age, Sex, Race Table #5
All Races
White
Negro
Age
Total
Male
Female
Male
Female
Male
Female
Under
5 Years
2,627
1,322
1,305
1,137
1,117
174
185
5-9 Years
3,004
1,519
1,485
1,279
1,256
230
220
- 10-14
Years
3,187
1,688
1,499
1,451
1,285
233
208
15-19
Years
2,907
1,455
1,452
1,235
1,240
216
207
20-24
Years
2,684
1,382
1,302
1,234
1,157
145
1.36
25-29
Years
2,081
1,051
1,030
948
926
98
99
30-34
Years
1,836
912
924
818
835
90
81
35-39
Years
1,772
849
923
772
814
74
86
40-44
Years
1,966
978
988
876
893
101
89
45-49
Years
1,985
981
1,004
909
905
70
94
50-54
Years
1,700
834
863
765
769
72
92
55-59
Years
1,553
740
813
658
725
81
88
60-64
Years
1,389
620
787
555
735
47
50
65-69
Years
1,127
519
608
469
549
49
59
70-74
Years
811
354
457
338
414
16
43
75-79
Years
490
194
296
170
278
24
18
80-84
Years
302
114
188
106
177
8
11
85 and
over
132
74
108
70
100
3
8
TOTAL
31,603
15,571
16,032
13,790
14,176
1,731
1,786
Median Age
28.3
27.0
29.7
27.9
30.6
20.4
22.6
Source: U.S. De artment of Commerce, Bureau
of the Census
Force^
Table
-
Employment -Labor
Total
Non-
Public
Employ-
Manufac-
Manufac-
Adminis
Agricul-
ment
turing
turing
tration
tural
Other
1963 6,820
1,160
2,660
920
620
1,460
1964 7,070
1,140
2,930
930
500
1,570
1965 7,920
1,200
3,110
940
440
2,230
1966 8,440
1,340
3,420
990
420
2,270
1967 3,470
1,430
3,490
970
390
2,190
1968 8,840
1,440
3,680
1,150
350
2,220
.1969 9,170
1,500
3,770
1,280
340
2,280
1970 11,580
1,610
3,940
1,470
330
2,330
1971 11,380
1,430
4,100
1,410
330
2,320
1972 11,880
1,580
4,410
1,370
310
2,380
1973 13,140
1,740
4,050
1,470
NA
NA

The median age in Carteret County is 28.3 years,
with males having a median age of 27.0 years and
females 29.7 years. This compares with a median age of
26.5 for the State.
In relation to the above mentioned population
figures it seems appropriate to equate the population
with the total work force of the county. Table #6 gives
some indication of where the work force has been
employed during the period 1963 through 1973.
Manufacturing jobs have increased slightly, while
non -manufacturing and public administration jobs have
increased more rapidly . At the same time the number
of persons employed in agricultural jobs has decreased.
In 1972 the percentage of farm workers was 2.6 percent;
in 1963 the percentage was 9.1.
Plans for the future need to recognize the demands
that are being made by this increasing work force.
Seasonal Population
Up to this point, the analysis of population has
considered permanent year round population. Seasonal
population in Carteret County has become significant in
recent years. Most areas of the County experience some
seasonal population increases, but Bogue Banks is the
focal point for summer residents. A recent count of
living units on Bogue Banks (including all municipalities)
has indicated the peak seasonal population of Bogue
Bank is approximately 2,000 people giving an additional
23,000 people during the summer months. This number
does not include the many day visitors who frequent the
Carteret beaches during the summer months.
Morehead City, Beaufort, and many of the Eastern
Townships of the County experience significant numbers
of day visitors. Most of these visitors are probably
accommmodated on Bogue Banks. One possible exception
would be the community of Harkers Island. Current
efforts are being made to estimate the seasonal popula-
tion of Harkers Island. Many economic factors such as
the development of Core Banks as a National Park may
affect Harkers Island and all Eastern Townships in the
near future.
Summary
This analysis is intended to give an understanding
of the past and present population trends in Carteret
County. Only after these trends have been analyzed
can the planning process continue in a meaningful way.
Later in the planning process, the future of the popula-
tion of Carteret County and its potential effects on land

use will be addressed. Once this is done, alternative
methods of dealing with potential problems will be
addressed.
(2) Economy
Emplovment and Income
The economy of Carteret County has diversified into
many different businesses, services, and industries in
recent years. In addition to commercial fishing and
farming, such areas as tourism, construction, trade, real
estate and finance have become important to the citizens
of Carteret County.
Unemployment rates and average weekly earnings
are given in Table P. An analysis of this table indi-
cates total employment has increased from 6,820 in 1963
to 13,140 in 1973. Nonmanufacturing employment has
increased more than all other types of employment. The
number employed in agriculture in Carteret County has
declined steadily since 1963. The unemployment rate has
also dropped steadily since 1963 but this. should be
carefully considered because of the large amount of
seasonal employment in Carteret County (more recent
data was not available at the time this report was
printed).
The 1970 median family income for Carteret County
was $7,156 as compared to $7,774 for the rest of the
State. In addition, in 1970, the County had 16.6 percent
of the population below the poverty level; the State was
16.3 percent.
Table #7 Carteret County
Rate of Unemployment and Average Weekly Earnings, 1963 - 1974
Year Rate of Unemployment Average Weekly Earnings Scate
1963
10.5%
$ 55.69
1964
9.7%
59.94
1965
7.3%
63.47
1966
7.0%
62.88
1967
6.6%
64.28
1968
6.5%
74.02
1969
4.5%
79.03
1970
4.7%
83.12
1971
5.3%
89.80
1972
5.3%
92.43
1973
4.3%
97.55
1974
$ 106.98
146.15
0

Commercial Fishing
The 1975 Commercial Fishing Audit completed by the
North Carolina Department of Natural and Economic
Resources indicates there were a total of 347 individuals
listed on the Carteret County Commercial Fishermans
Roster. Included in the total of 347 are full-time and
part-time commercial fishermen. Also, this category of
commercial fishermen generally includes those. with boats
less than 30 feet in length.
The 1975 Commercial Fishing Audit also includes a
listing of Carteret County vessels which are in excess of
thirty feet in length. There were a total of 128 vessels
registered in excess of 30 feet and a total of 418 persons
listed as crew members for the 128 vessels. Crew size
for vessels range from a crew of one to a crew of 17.
Vessel sizes ranged from 25 feet in length, displacing
seven tons, to a 176 foot vessel with 630 ton displace-
ment.
In addition to the boats, vessels and crew members
involved in the Carteret County fishing industry,
numerous other services and facilities are involved in the
County fishing industry. Such services and facilities
include the processing plants, fuel supplies, ice plants,
repair facilities and shipbuilding facilities.
The economic impact of the fishing industry on
Carteret County can be somewhat gauged by the follow-
ing information. Commercial fishing and related activ-
ities are of vital importance to Carteret County and
North Carolina. Approximately 6.4 percent of the total
menhaden catch is in the United States. Carteret
County is a major fishing center in North Carolina with
1973 landings representing 45.2 percent of statewide
landings, and 41.3 percent of statewide landing value.
Principal species landed in Carteret County include
croaker, flounder, sea trout, spot, blue crab, and
shrimp.
10

Table #8 indicates these six species accounted for
63.5 percent of the total fish landings and 83 percent of
food fish exvessel value in Carteret County.
Table 8 Principal Species
Landed in Carteret County
Percent of 1974 Percent of 1973
Species Food Fish Landing Cxvessel Value
Croaker
9.9
4.7
Flounder
11.6
19.7
Sea trout
14.7
8.4
Spot
14.3
10.0
Blue Crab
7.0
5.5
Shrimp
6.6
34.7
Table 9
Year
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
In addition to the food fish landings, the menhaden
landings are also important to Carteret County. The
menhaden is an industrial fish that yields fish meal, fish
oil, and other fish products. The menhaden industry
fluctuates a great deal from year to year (see Tables #9
and #10) . In 1974 the National Marine Fisheries Services
estimated approximately ten vessels in excess of 75 feet
in length active in the menhaden fishery.
Carteret County Menhaden Landings, 1965-1973
Thousands of Pounds and Dollars
Pounds
Value
128,719
1,661
174,676
2,432
129,489
1,458
131,852
1,566
111,125
1,705
74,651
1,033
37,446
526
41,408
596
31,016
1,177
Source: National Marine Fisheries Service, Beaufort, North Carolina, 1975
11

Table 10 North Carolina Menhaden Landings, 1964-1974
Year
Thousand of Pounds and Dollars
Pounds Value
1964
172,992
2,249
1965
160,595
2,072
1966
182,289
2,538
1967
130,481
1,694
1968
167,189
1,958
1969
145,235
2,228
1970
108,235
1,570
1971
79,488
1,116
1972
84,692
1,219
1973
66,943
2,540
1974
121,201
2,968
Source: National Marine Fisheries Service, Beaufort, North Carolina, 1975
Certainly commercial fishing is a significant part of
the economic base in Carteret County. It is impossible
to gauge the total effect of fishing on the economy of
Carteret County. The information presented in this
section indicates the magnitude of fishing to the economy
of Carteret County. The fishing industry employs
people directly and provides jobs for support industries
as well. The economic multiplier effect provides a large
amount of dollars to the economy of Carteret County.
Tourism
The tourist industry of Carteret County plays an
important role in the local economy. The following table
indicates the total travel expenditures as compared to -
total sales in Carteret County from 1963-1972. In 1972
approximately one-half of the total sales of the County
were a result of the tourist industry.
12

Tablq 11 Carteret County Travel Income
Year Total Travel Expenditures
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968 $ 5,815,000.00
1969 6,317,000.00
1970 7,020,000.00
1971 7,390,000.00
1972 8,050,000.00
Source: Dr. Lewis Copeland
University of Tennessee
Total Sales
$ 4,329,000.00
7,159,000.00
8, 014, 000. 00
8,575,000.00
9,270,000.00
10,482,000.00
13,410,000.00
Not Available
Not Availab".!
17,182,000.00
The tourist industry is difficult to gauge because of
the numerous supportive and related business and ser-
vices available. Table #12 estimates the expenditures of
tourists on a month by month basis in Carteret County.
It indicates that summer months do in fact add a great
deal to the economy of the County as, a result of the
tourist industry.
13

Table 12
Estimated Carteret
County Tourist Expenditures 1971
Estimated Visitors
Percentages
Expenditures
January
13,843
2.50,
$ 161,550.00
February
8,860
1.6%
103,392.00
March
23,810
4.3%
27.7,866.00
April
34,885
6.3%
407,106.00
May
37,100
6.700,
432,954.00
June
88,596
16.00-o
1,033,920.00
July
130,126
23.500,
1,130,850.00
August
96,902
17.50-
1,130,850.00 -
September
59,903
10.80,
697,896.00
October
33,777
6.10,
394,182.OU
November
17,165
3.10o
200,322.00
December
8,960
1.60,
103,392.00
6,462,000.00
553,727
Day Visitors
500,000
1,225,000.00
1,053,727
$ 7,687,000.00
Source: Carteret
County Economic
Development. Council,
Inc.
14

Table #13 indicates the number of day visitors
visiting Fort Macon State Park and the amount of
increase over the years, giving some idea of the magni-
tude of tourism in the County. Most of these visitations
are during the period May through September.
Table 13 Number Visitors Fort Macon State Park
Year Visitors
1940 18,000
1950 193;361
1.960 443,624
1965 578,961
1966 599,149
1967 580,867
1968 642,595
1969 712,361
1970 756,653
1971 785,249
1972 862,711
Source: North Carolina Department of Natural and Economic Resources,
Divisions of State Parks
In summary, the tourist industry is big business in
Carteret County and seems to be growing steadily. A
recent survey by the Carteret County Planning De-
partment indicated that approximately 1,535 hotel and
motel accommodations are in Carteret County, housing
approximately 4,600 persons per night. In addition to
the fishing industry and the tourist industry, the
following elements of the County influence the economy.
15

Agriculture
Agricultural activity is an important part of the
economy of Carteret County but has been declining as a
significant occupation in recent years. The number of.
farms and farm employment are both decreasing. This is
a result of residential and commercial development in the
rural areas, an increase in farm size, and mechanization.
Open Grounds Farm is a 45,000 acre farm which will
certainly affect the economy of Carteret County in the
future. The economic effects of this farm have not been
determined, but the additional employment and related
economic benefits of such a large operation are being felt
throughout the County. Since this type of. large farm
seems to be occurring more and more in eastern North
Carolina, immediate efforts should be made to analyze the
economic effect they have on the economy of their respec-
tive areas.
Total sales from agricultural productions increased
from $6.8 million in 1973 and 1974 to $7.5 million in 1975. _
These figures indicate that agricultural activities are
continuing to contribute to the economic well-being of
Carteret County.
N . C . State Port Terminal
The port facilities at Morehead City also have a
profound impact on Carteret County. The volume of
business handled by the port gives some indications of
the potential value to the economy of the County. Table
#14 indicates the business handled by the State Port
Terminal is significant. Recent trends have indicated
that the number of ships that use the port has fluctu-
ated considerably. The total amount of business has
remained relatively high, but the inconsistency has been
a problem.
16

North Carolina State Ports Terminal
Morehead City, North Carolina
Table 14 Import -Export Tonnage
GENERAL CARGO
ASPHALT &
YEAR
IMPORT
EXPORT
PETROLEW
1952
-0-
-0-.
366,817.40
1953
21,347.80
11,299.10
404,505.22
1954
1,456.10
10,952.37
347,865.07
1955
1,500.00
16,693.38
279,959.66
1956
-0-
56,418.89
261,041.95
1957
1,987.14
49,384.42
265,031.23
1958
194.61
.65,119.40
288,839.91
1959
4,883.60
92,772.02
280,638.14
1960
7,093.40
100,668.06
274,619.32
19G1
6,968.04
105,693.12
250,619.67
1962
4,093.89
97,208.C5
171,470.43
1963
16,369.56
103,975.22
171,324.86
1964
10,019.24
118,062.97
171,779.83
1965
5,758.07
149,027.77
265,489.36
1966
7,246.88
131,370.45
239,904.90
1967
13,718.41
118,545.48
194,918.74
1968
138,564.99
202,430.20
204,923.70
1969
378,360.39
437,649.26
227,549..95
1970
41.8,927.58
587,264.70
303,202.69
1971
374,621.08
472,922.05
291,104.71
1972
643,256.80
512,721.68
243,056.23
1973
583,895.81
435,697.04
314,788.31
1974
538,683.74
559,680.80
252,537.74
1975
395,133.36
610,823.58
156,375.39
SOURCE:
NORTH CAROLINA
STATE PORTS
AUTHORITY
17
MILITARY
37,222.70
87,954.23
210,904.56
187,143.58
93,622.96
93,203.25
122,523.18
69,571.29
125,223.34
181,897.62
147,687.54
50,480.70
118,850.71
63,195.25
42,211.43
38,558.98
31,2.26.11
29,035.13
17,811.98
7,985.45
8,159.17
10,090.45
5,623.28
3,192.84
GRAND
TOTAL
404,040.10
525,106.35
507,178.10
485,296.62
411,083.80
409,606.04
487,677.10
447,865.05
507,604.12
545,178.45
420,460.71
342,150.34
418,712.75
403,470.45
420,733.66
365,741.61
577,145.00
1,072,694.71
1,327,206.95
1,146,638.29
1,164,697.18
1,029,683.30
1,103,987.82
1,009,149.73

Industry
As mentioned earlier, industry is becoming more
important in Carteret County and this trend is expected
to continue. The County is now engaged in active
recruitment of industry that will provide additional
employment and tax base but will be compatible with the
fragile environment of the County. Table #15 will
indicate the investment made in recent years. (Note
that 1974 had a substantial investment in Carteret County
but the detailed information was not available at the time
this document was published) .
Table 15 Industry -New and Expanded
Investment
(in 000's) Employees
Calendar Year
New
Expanded
New
Expanded
1960-64
$ 592
$ 598
149
215
1965-69
33095
1,640
387
377
1970-73
285
1,050
143
20
Slowly, Carteret County is developing an industrial
economic base that is diverse and dependable.
Summary
The economic base of Carteret County is very
important in the planning process. In order to indicate
the actual level of economy in Carteret County the
following information is given on Sales and Use Tax
Gross Collections and Gross Retail Sales.
Table 16 Sales and Use Tax Gross Collections
A. Total
Fiscal Sales and Use Tax Retail Sales
1963-64
$ 794,783
$ 35,584.727
1964-65
815,760
36,656,471
1965-66
989,574
40,028,938
1966-67
974,957
43,728,644
1967-68
1,047,384
46,950,787
1968-69
1,183,874
52,713,779
1969-70
1,316,140
57,375,570
1970-71
1,422,318
61,820,306
1971-72
1,722,955
75,616,348
1972-73
2,015,820
87,968,452
1973-74
2,335,549
102,689,782
18

Table 17
Gross
Retail Sales
B. By Business Groups
Sales and
Use Tax
Retail
Sales
Fiscal
Fiscal
F1Sca1
Fiscal
1968-69
1973-74
1968-69
1973-74
to Retail Sales $
2,627.11
$ 7,025.76
$ 269,076
$ 713,345
1110- Auto & Planes
79,885.79
178,286.83
5,468,523
9,154,755
Apparel
27,488.05
43,568.57
958,407
1,511,679
Automotive
116,564.03
174,379.55
9,045,120
15,470,562
Food
463,671.66
853,541.34
16,377,436
30,753,092
Furniture
62,468.91
118,184.20
2,293,852
4,684,691
General Merchandise
186,185.56
378,512.09
8,002,358
15,518,949
Building Materials
98,635.02
230,376.12
3,989,191
10,151,178
Unclassified Group
136,696.97
312,601.61
6,309,816
14,731,531
Use Tax-10 & 30
8,230.11
37,102.77
Licenses -Wholesale
1,421.00
1,970.00
and Reg.
These totals indicate
significant growth in the
economy. The
dollar amount
of retail sales has increased
steadily between
1963 and 1974
giving the County in-
creased revenues from Sales
and Use Taxes.
Table #17
gives the increase in the amount of revenue
generated
by business
groups within the County.
The food
industry had
the most significant contribution, again
reflecting the
importance of
the tourist industry to the
overall economy.
This discussion has attempted to indicate the level
of the economic base in Carteret County, establish
trends, and indicate the key factors that are affecting
the economy. Carteret County is not a developed
county, but does have the natural resources to sustain
itself in a competitive society. The planning being
undertaken will identify those things which help support
Carteret County and will encourage proper development
to occur.
B . Existing Land Use
In formulating a long range development plan for
Carteret County, a close examination of existing land use
conditions must be made. In order to provide a basis for
this examination, the County Planning Department conducted a
windshield survey of each township in Carteret County. The
survey included an accumulation of facts concerning the use
of each lot within the County and the subsequent development
of land use maps representing the uses noted during the
19

survey. Map #1 represents a generalization of land use
throughout the County. It is impossible to reflect a com-
pletely accurate picture of existing land use from a map of
this scale; however, more detailed information can be obtained
from the County Planning Department.
Before an analysis of the land use within Carteret
County is presented, there are many facts about the county
that may be helpful in interpreting the results. According to
the North Carolina Agriculture Extension Service, Carteret
County comprises 2 percent of the ' total land and water area
in North Carolina. Approximately 340,000 land acres are in
Carteret County of which 65,000 acres represent public lands
and public forest lands. Generalized land usage in Carteret
County as compared to the Neuse River Region "P" land use
figures is reflected in Table #18. Carteret County contains
over 50 percent of the large water area (bays, sounds, etc.)
in the Neuse Region, and approximately 14 percent of the
large water areas in North Carolina.
1973 Land Use
Categories by Acres
for Region "P"
and Carteret County* Tabic l8
Carteret
Category
Region "P" Acres** County• Acres
Total Federal
Land 267,874 70,776
Total Urban F
Built Up Area 58,452 6,177
Total Small Water
Areas 1.8,528 1,702
Total Cropland
713,192 17,420
Total Pasture
42,654 2,961
Total Forest.
1,805,921 163,230
Other Land
192,32S 78,214
Large Water Areas 562,432 340,608
Total Acres 3,671,382 681,088
Total Percentage of State: 10.80 2.Oo
Source: N.C. Agricultural Extension Service, 1973 Land Use In N.C.
**Region includes Carteret, Onslow, Duplin, Wayne, Green, Lenoir, Jones »
Craven and Pamlico Counties.
20

Table #18 indicates the relationship between land devel-
opment in Carteret County and Region "P" in 1973. "Urban"
and "Built Up" land in Carteret County . had increased to
approximately 8,000 acres by 1975. Also, Federal Land
increased with the establishment of the Cape Lookout National
Seashore (Core Banks) by approximately 25,000 acres. These
changes were not made in the chart in order to preserve the
relationship between Carteret County and Region "P" reflected
by the chart.
These general land use categories indicated by Table #18
have been analyzed in the following discussions. The
existing Land Use MaR should be referred to for location of
all land use categories.
Urban and Built Up
1. Residential - Within the Urban and Built Up Category,
rest entia land use is the most predominant land use in
Carteret County. Table #19 indicates the number of
rural dwellings in Carteret and the approximate acreage
they occupy in each township. This Table indicates that
the average lot size for each dwelling is one acre in
size. The dwellings within the. municipalities of the
County have been excluded to represent the average
rural density in the planning jurisdiction of the County.
Including the dwellings within the municipalities would
raise the total housing count to some 15,302 units.
2. Commercial - Approximately 1,000 commercial uses are in
Carter et ounty comprising approximately 10 0 of the total
development. The concentration of major commercial
development is in Morehead City and its one mile area.
Recently a great deal of commercial development has
occurred on Bogue Banks in support of an expanding
tourist industry. Commercial development throughout
the County area has been geared towards providing
necessary services. The land use briefs will analyze the
development in each township.
3. Industrial Development - The Carteret County Economic
Development Council indicates approximately 58 industries
are in operation in Carteret County. Many of these in-
dustries are small and occupy minimum amounts of land.
The Land Use Map will indicate the general location of
industrial development. Basically the central section of
the County contains the majority of the industrial uses.
4. Transportation, Communication and Utilities - This land
use is very important to Carteret County. . The depen-
dency of the County on the tourist industry 'indicates
the importance of transportation to the County and
within the County. Major transportation categories.
include the roads of the County, the Beaufort -Morehead
21

Table 19
Township
1. Atlantic
2. Beaufort
3. Cedar Island
4. Davis
S. Markers Island
6. Harlowe
7. Marshal lberg
S. Merrimon
9. Morehead
10. Newport
11. Portsmouth
12. Sea Level
13. Smyrna
14. Stacy
15. Straits
16. White Oak
TOTAL:
Total
Acres
8,320
24,320
19,840
39,040
8,320
16,640
3,840
35,840
24,960
48,000
5,120
5,760
13,440
10,240
19,840
56,960
340,000
RURAL DIVELLING DENSITY
1975
Rural Dwellings
343
944
121
189
748
258
203
152
3,000
471
0
174
242
III
549
1,201
8,706
1975
Rural Residential
Average
Acres
Density
410
1
Acre
650
3/4
Acre
328
2
3/4
Acre
290
1
1/2
Acre
570
3/4
Acre
593
2
Acre
230
1
Acre
182
1
Acre
1,400
1/2
Acre
260
1/2
Acre.
0
--
295
1
/2
Acre
320
1
1/4
Acre
175
1
1/2
Acre
678
1
1/4
Acre
464
1/4
Acre
6,845 1 Acre Avg.
22

Airport and the Atlantic -Southern Railroad. There are
approximately 337 miles of state maintained roads in
Carteret County and 40 miles of rail - track. The
Beaufort -Morehead Airport includes 339 acres. Also
within this category one would find the water and sewer
facilities of the municipalities, the electric company's
property and the telephone company's property, just to
name a few. The scale of the Land Use Map does not
allow this category to be fully represented. For detailed
information contact the Carteret County Planning Depart-
ment.
5. Government and Institutional - For the most part, this
category of land use refers to the Federal and State
Parks located in Carteret County. Currently there are
approximately 70,000 acres in this category.
6. Cultural, Entertainment and Recreational - This land use
includes county parks, churches, cemeteries, and some
businesses. - This land use is a small percentage of the
developed land in Cape Carteret.
Agriculture
This category included approximately 20,000 acres in-
cluding pasture land and cropland. The addition of Open
Grounds Farm has added approximately 3,300 acres to this
total. There are approximately 830 farms in the County.
Forestlan d
This land use is a valuable resource for Carteret
County. Currently, approximately 163,230 acres of forestland
are in Carteret County.
Undeveloped Land
There are approximately
land in Carteret County. This
of the built-in growth facts
noted that there are between
these areas.
Wetlands
330,000 acres of undeveloped
category is significant because
of these areas It should be
4,000 and 4,000 vacant lots in
Wetlands were not included on the land use chart. They
are very important resources and are identified on the Land
Use Map. There are approximately 55,000 acres of wetlands
in Carteret County. Refer to the Areas of Environmental
Concern section for more details concerning wetlands.
23

Land Use Briefs
It seems appropriate at this time to consider each town-
ship in Carteret County with particular attention to:
A. Significant land use capability problems.
B . Major problems which have resulted from unplanned
development and which have implications for future
land use.
C . An identification of areas experiencing or likely to
experience major changes in predominant land uses.
Table #20, 1970 Acres Per Person, should be referred to
for basic land use data for each town -ship.
1970 Acres Per Person
Table 20
Township
Population
Land Acres
Acres Per
Person
1.
Atlantic
814
8,320
10.22
,acres
2.
Beaufort
6,147
24,320
3.95
acres
3.
Cedar Island
290
19,840
68.41
acres
4.
Davis
456
39,040
85.61
acres
.5.
Markers Island
1,689
8,320
5.07
acres
6.
Marlowe
762
16,640
21.83
acres
7.
Marshallberg
525
3,840
7.31
acres
8.
Merrimon
330
35,840
108.60
acres
9.
Morehead
11,929
24,960
2.09
acres
10.
Newport
3,926
48,000
12.22
acres
11.
Portsmouth
2
5,120
2,560,00
acres
12.
Sea Level
347
5,760
16.59
acres
13.
Smyrna
519
13,440
25.99
acres
14.
Stacy
297
10,240
39.84
acres
15.
Straits
1,166
19,840
17.01
acres
16.
White Oak
2,496
59,960
22.82
acres
Total
31,603
340,480
10.77
acres
24

1. Atlantic Township is composed of 13 square miles and has
experienced small amounts of growth since the 1962 Land Use
Survey. The Atlantic Township, and in particular the
Atlantic Community, is supported mainly by the fishing
industry. The density of the township is approximately one
dwelling unit per acre of residential land. (Density refers to
the average lot size containing a residential structure) .
Trade and services occupy approximately 21 acres and
industrial use occupies nine acres of land (including boat
manufacturing and scallop houses) . Sailor's Snug Harbor,
located in the Sea Level Community, may increase the growth
potential of the Atlantic Township over the next ten years.
Water and sewer services are provided by individual
wells and septic tanks throughout the Township. Significant
growth may affect the water supply in the Atlantic com-
munity, as well as some shellfish areas due to septic tank
affluent discharge.
One of the largest single uses of land in the Atlantic
Township is the Atlantic Airfield (operated and maintained
under the U.S. Department of the Navy, . Cherry Point Marine
Air Station as an "outlying field"). The airfield occupies
1500 acres of land and is located north of and -adjacent to the
Community of Atlantic.
The presence of the airfield has two basic effects on the
community of Atlantic. First of all, the size and location of
the field limits the expansion of the community. Also, the
presence of the field causes some degree of noise and safety
hazards. In the Atlantic Community this is not causing a
significant problem at the present time, but should be con-
sidered as a potential problem area. For further information,
see the section on Land Use Compatibility problems.
The Cedar Island Wildlife area also limits growth poten-
tial. This refuge occupies approximately 1600 acres. of low-
lands, and wetlands in the Atlantic Township.
A major problem in the Atlantic Township is the sound
erosion occurring along its eastern shoreline. The erosion of
the shoreline is being further affected by Drum .Inlet
(reopened in 1973) . The erosion is not only affecting the
mainland, but also the Outer Banks. The result is the sound
becoming unnavigable in places which in turn affects the
fishing industry.
2. Beaufort Township contains 24,320 acres or 38 square miles.
Recent land development in the Beaufort Township have been
in the form of residential subdivisions such as Sea Gate, Shell
Land Addition, Wallace Garner Subdivision, Bryantwoods
Subdivision, and other small subdivisions located adjacent to
the corporate limits of Beaufort. If this trend continues,
water supply and sewer services should be planned in con-
junction with the Town of Beaufort facilities. Without this
25

coordination, the valuable shellfish waters of North River may
be endangered due to septic tank discharge.
The Beaufort Township contains much of Carteret
County's agriculture land, forest land and timber land. In
addition, major industries in the Beaufort Township include:
1. Carteret Manufacturing
2. Beaufort Face Veneer
3. Atlantic Veneer
4. Beaufort Fisheries
5. Standard Products
6. Brunswick Navigation
7. Carteret Quick Freeze
8. Davis Fisheries
9. Gillikin Boat Works
10. Aviation Fuel Termination, Inc. "
The Intracoastal Waterway and railroad service gives the
Beaufort Township the potential to develop additional indus-
trial sites. However, this potential may be in conflict with
some present land use regulations. The areas around the
Beaufort -Morehead Airport offers one of the best industrial
sites, and is zoned Industrial.
The Beaufort -Morehead Airport is an important aspect of
the Beaufort Township and the County in general. Problems
have arisen concerning potential land use around the airport.
As a result, airport planning is of vital importance to the
County and should be undertaken to insure proper land use
developments around the existing airport facilities.
Radio Island is an area in the township with potential for
additional growth. Compatibility problems could arise if not
analyzed beforehand. In addition, the Duke Lab on Pivers
Island is becoming active on a year around basis and will
continue to affect the township due to the influx of students
and permanent personnel.
Finally, the Municipality of Beaufort is the hub of the
historical culture of the County. The growth patterns of
Beaufort and the County area should be coordinated in order
to preserve the historic culture of Beaufort.
26

3. Cedar Island Township located at the eastern most
end of
Carteret County's mainland encompasses 19,840 acres
or 31
square miles. The majority of the land in Cedar
Island
Township is included within the Cedar Island Wildlife
Refuge
Area. Approximately 11,000 acres are in the refuge.
The
Cedar Island Community is basically residential and has not
experienced significant growth in the last five years.
Cedar
Island is supported by the fishing industry and is the
site of
the Cedar Island to Ocracoke Ferry. The Cedar
Island
Community is not expected to expand because of
limited
economic opportunities and physical limitations imposed
by the
federal game land and the low areas within the township.
Problems in the township stem from lack of economic
opportunity. This is due in part to its remoteness from the
remainder of the County. Also, the presence of the Marino
Corps bombing range in Rattan Bay is a possible safety
hazard.
The development of a federal park on Core Banks may
affect the economy of the area because of possible additional
visitors gaining access to the Banks from Cedar Island.
4. Davis Township is composed of 39,040 acres or 61 square
miles. Davis Township is the third largest township in land
area in Carteret County; however, township population places
Davis Township in the category of one of the least densely
populated townships. Most of the populated land in the Davis
Township is centered in the community of Davis on U.S.
Highway 70. Some scattered residential development is
located adjacent to Highway 70. (Some scattered residential
development is located adjacent to Highway 70) . Davis
Township is mainly supported by the local fishing industry
centered in the Davis community. The northern section of
the Davis Township comprises some of the land contained in
the Open Grounds Farm project. Much of the land north of
Highway 70 in the Davis Township is classified as wetlands
and not suitable for urban development purposes. Timber
production and farming operations are being carried on in
portions of the township. Residential density patterns for
the Davis Township reflects one dwelling unit per one and a
half acres of residential land. As compared to 1960, resi-
dential acres have increased from 65 acres to 290 acres,
however, the number of dwelling units has only increased
from 141 in 1960 to 189 in 1975, indicating large lot resi-
dential patterns or possibly small farms.
5. Harkers Island is composed of 8,320 acres or 13 square miles.
These figures seem excessively high. However, Harkers
Island Township encompasses Shackleford Banks 'and Brown
Island which are uninhabited. Harkers Island is supported
by the fishing industry, the boat building industry and the
summer tourist industry. Of the total developed acres on
Harkers Island, 570 acres are developed for residential use,
25 acres are developed for business uses, and 17 acres for
manufacturing (primarily boat building) .
27

There are approximately 82 miles of paved roads on
Harkers Island and 92 miles of unpaved roads. Most of the
unpaved roads are in good condition at the present time, but
the fact that almost half of the roads on Harkers Island are
unpaved may prove to be a problem in the future. Harkers
Island is very congested in many areas, which stems in part
from the lack of good land planning. Recent subdivisions on
Harkers .Island have complied with county subdivision regula-
tions, but the older areas have several structures on one lot,
inadequate access and lack adequate sewerage disposal
systems. Harkers Island has a central water system, but
lacks a central sewer system. Due to the increasing conges-
tion on this relatively small island, the absence of the central
sewer services could cause severe problems to wetlands and
estuarine waters surrounding Harkers Island. Added conges-
tion and seasonal peak population could be substantially
increased by the development of Core Banks as a National
Park. Current plans indicate 100 acres on the eastern end of
Harkers Island may be used to accommodate the tourists using
the park. This will have the effect of adding to the stability
of the tourist businesses (i.e. motels and marinas) that
already exist on the island.
6. Harlowe Township is composed of 16,640 acres (26 square
miles) and has been basically an agricultural and fishing
community. The recent development of the Sea Gate Sub-
division has added to the residential nature of the township.
Recent trends in the township, especially along the waterway,
have been to convert agriculture and woodlands into residen-
tial lands. This may cause future problems because of the
potential industrial value of some of these lands. Without
proper land use planning, the value of the Intracoastal
Waterway in Carteret County may be jeopardized. Currently,
there are 2,047 acres of agriculture land and 593 acres of
residential land. Business, trade and services compose
approximately four acres. Some farm land in the Harlowe
Township drains into the Newport River which may have some
effect on the future of the water. quality of the Newport River.
7. Marshallberg Township. is the smallest township in Carteret
County containing only 3,840 acres or six square miles. It is
basically a fishing and agriculture community. Like other
eastern areas of Carteret County, it reflects a rural com-
munity life style. Boat works or boat manufacturing, marinas
and fish houses represent the economic base of Marshallberg.
The 1975 residential density of Marshallberg was one dwelling
per acre, but within the Marshallberg community the density
is much higher. The increasing density may be a potential
problem for Marshallberg -because of a lack of public water
and sewer services. Also, there are a few rights -of -way not
fully developed that would cause transportation problems.
0

8. Merrimon Township which contains 35,840 acres or 56 square
miles is the fourth largest in land area in Carteret County.
Traditionally, the Merrimon Township, abutted by South River
on the east, by Adams Creek on the west, and the Neuse
River on the north, has been a fishing and farming area.
Much of the land is owned by large timber companies. There
are only minimal commercial uses in the township at this time.
Two factors appear to be influencing the land use and
economy of the area. First is the presence of Sportsman's
Village Subdivision. This is a retirement village and seems to
have the potential of increasing density significantly. Also,
another large subdivision (Indian Summer Subdivision) is on
the drawing board. Land capabilities to handle septic tanks
and transportation should be considered potential problems.
The second factor is the presence of the Open Grounds
Farm. This farm contains approximately 45,000 acres that
spans across township lines. The main portion of its opera-
tion is within the Merrimon Township. Any operation of this
size will certainly affect its surrounding area in many ways.
Up to this point, there has been a great deal of effort
devoted toward studying the impact that runoff from this
large farming operation may have on the shellfish waters in
the area. Due to the fact that both farming and fishing are
economically important to the area, this subject is contro-
versial. At this point, extensive efforts are being made to
minimize the potential effects this operation may have on the
fishing industry. Public meetings in the area indicate an
acceptance of the large farm concept, with the stipulation that
proper protection of shellfish waters is carried out. At this
point, there appears no need to choose between farming and
fishing, but to work toward proper land management that will
allow both.
State road #1300 servicing this area should be analyzed
carefully as development continues. The road is very narrow
and is not well -drained in many areas.
Erosion along the Intracoastal Waterway in some parts of
the township poses some severe problems to the land owners.
Without- proper erosion control and efforts by the residents,
severe problems may arise. It seems that most of the erosion
stems from boat traffic along the waterway.
9. Morehead Township which consists of 24,960 acres or approx-
imately 3,000 rural residences on 1400 acres of land indi-
cating an average rural density of one-half acre per dwelling.
It should be noted that portions of Bogue Banks are included
in the Morehead Township. Residential development in the
Morehead Township will be affected by many factors in the
planning period. The presence of eighteen platted sub-
divisions in the Morehead one mile extraterritorial jurisdiction,
and the presence of other large subdivisions such as
29

Spooners Creek, Brandywine Bay and Mitchell Village are
examples of significant factors. The possibility of extending
water and sewer services by the City of Morehead would
greatly affect residential development.
The Morehead Township contains the largest amount of
commercial, trade, and service development of all the town-
ships. The presence of the State Port, Carteret Techno-
logical Institute, the Morehead Shopping Plaza, N.C. Govern-
mental Offices, the Morehead City Waterfront Tourist Busi-
nesses, the Railroad Service and the Presence of U.S. High-
way 70 are some of the reasons for commercial development.
These activities not only indicate the basis for the current
level of development, but indicate commercial growth in the
township. (The Bogue Banks portion of the township will be
considered separately in depth).
The possible expansion of the Morehead City water and
sewer services would also add to the potential growth of the
commercial base of the township. Obviously, a township
experiencing extensive residential and commercial growth. has
land use problems associated with this growth. The first
problem is the supply of water and the method of disposing of
sewage. Without the extension of the central system of
Morehead City, this development will have to be curtailed -
certainly less densely developed. Other land use problems
concern .development along the existing railroad line. The
Land Use Ob'ectives section indicates a desire to emphasize
the importance of the railroad, but existing development has
already used up many prime spots for potential industrial or
commercial activities in the township. Problems also arise
because of the many vacant lots remaining in the township
which are too small to be developed until water and sewer
services are provided. Recent growth should be analyzed.
Residential growth has occurred along Bogue Sound . and the
Country Club Road. These areas are becoming more dense,
but central sewer is not provided. The level of capability of
this land to sustain growth without sewer services should be
analyzed.
10. Newport Township consists of 48,000 acres or 75 square miles
and is the second largest township in land area. The
majority of land in the Newport Township is included within
the Croatan National Forest. The Town of Newport serves as
a business and service center for the communities of Mill
Creek and Harlowe. The Town of Newport, in addition to
being a service and business center, serves as a residential
community for the Cherry Point Air Facility located at
Havelock approximately 15 miles away.
Due to the proximity of the Cherry Point Air Facility, it
appears the Newport Township. has the potential for growth
Since the opening of the Highway 70 bypass in 1967, much
development has occurred along the bypass. Limiting factors
30

to development include soil types, the presence of the
Newport River and the Croatan National Forest. Without the
expansion of the Newport Sewer system, development is
limited to the area west of the town along Highway 70. Other
land development problems include small scattered mobile home
parks, the mixing of commercial and residential areas and the
proximity of local industries to residential uses.
11. Sea Level Township is composed of 5,760 acres or nine square
miles. The Sea Level Hospital and Sailors Snug Harbor (now
being constructed) represent major impacts on the township.
Sailors Snug Harbor will be able to house 101 residents, and
will probably stimulate the development of many supportive
services. The Sea Level Hospital has a total of 78 beds and
has already accounted for much of the development in the
township.
Currently, Sea Level is basically a fishing community.
The residential density is one dwelling per one and one-half
acres. Development problems have been related to sewerage
disposal problems. All planned growth should be studied
carefully, and like all other communities, carrying capacity
should be determined.
12. Smyrna Township, composed of 13,440 acres or approximately
21 square miles, is basically a fishing area. Rural density is
approximately one dwelling unit per one and one. quarter
acres of residential land. Boat building, fishing, and a small
textile industry along with supportive services provide the
economic base for the township.
A potential land development problem in the Smyrna
Township is the potential density along Jump and Run Creek.
This potential density could damage the creek if proper pro-
visions are not taken to prevent runoff and septic tank
discharge.
13. Stacy Township consists of 10,240 acres or 16 square miles.
Stacy Township, like most eastern townships, is a fishing
community with small farming activities. Residential density
is approximately one dwelling unit per one and one-half acres
of residential land. Stacy is expected to remain much the
same as it is now during the planning period. As in all the
Eastern Townships, density and building near the high water
mark may endanger the estuarine waters.
14. Straits Township is basically a farming community consisting
oT 19,840 acres or 31 square miles. Residential density is
approximately one dwelling unit per one and one quarter
acres of residential land. Major timber companies own much
of the land in the township. The Straits Township has shown
a tendency to grow in the last two years. The development
of the Core Banks National Park may add to the growth
potential of the Straits Township.
31

15. White Oak Township, the largest in land area of all Carteret
County townships, consists of 56,960 acres or 89 square miles
(including the Western portion of Bogue Banks). Much of the
mainland area of the White Oak Township is in the Croatan
National Forest which restricts growth to the North. The
fishing industry, farming industry and tourist industry are
the economic bases for the township. Within the township,
Cape Carteret will probably bring in a significant amount of
growth to the township during the planning period. Also,
much of the surrounding area seems to be prime areas for
subdivisions, mobile home parks and camper parks. The
major drawback is the lack of central water and sewer
services. Bogue Field (operated by Cherry Point Air Station)
is a potential land - compatibility problem. Problems could be
in the form of noise and safety. Proper land use regulations
around the field and proper coordination with the Marine
Corps are needed in this area. For further information, see
the section on Land Use Compatibility problems.
16. Bogue Banks -'Bogue Banks has been considered separately
because the development of Bogue Banks is quite different
from that on the mainland. Development of Bogue Banks has
been of a residential nature. This is evidenced by the fact
that the year around population is approximately 2,000, and
the summer population is approximately 25, 000 .
Approximately 35 percent of Bogue Banks is developed,
of which 85 percent is residential development. There are
approximately 4,500 vacant residential lots on Bogue Banks .
a. Compatibility Problems
Land use compatibility problems in Carteret County
like other coastal counties is more dominant in some
parts of the County than others. The County has had
zoning regulations since 1971, and even now only 30
percent of the County (excluding municipalities) comes
under these regulations. It is natural for some incom-
patible land uses to occur even in the most advanced
planning situations.
Most of these incompatible land uses are of a nature
such as residential development existing along side some
type of industrial or commercial establishment. The
County is presently trying to avoid such future occur-
rences by enforcing land use regulations around the
more built-up urban areas of the County.
However, two areas of the County have been
identified through studies which indicate some existing
and potential land use compatibility problems. These
areas are located around Bogue and Atlantic Air Fields
operated by Marine Corps Air Station at Cherry Point.
The studies were completed at. the request of the
32

Department of the Navy by an independent research
firm, Burns & McDonnell. The studies are intended to
be a guide for local officials in determining future land
uses around military air installations with noise problems
and potential accident problems.
The studies are entitled Air Installation Compatible
Use Zones (AICUZ)* and . treat the problems of incom-
patible uses of land around these air fields. The follow-
ing is a summary taken from the two studies. The
reader is referred to the full studies for more detailed
information. The full studies may be found at the
Carteret County Planning Department or the Marine
Corps Air Station, Cherry Point, North Carolina.
AICUZ SUMMARY
Land which is attractive for retirement/resort type
development near a military air station is readily devel-
oped without much concern for the environment which
the air station creates. In the absence of compatible
land use controls encroachment will normally occur. The
land .surrounding the air station will be subject to high
noise levels and aircraft' accident potential. Aircraft
noise often exceeds levels compatible with some land uses
and impacts a large area of real estate due -to the per-
formance characteristics of. jet aircraft. To .eliminate the
conflicts arising from lack of adequate land use plan-
ning, local governments, the air station command and the
local populace must take positive, coordinated action to
insure that future land use will be compatible with all
activities. In order to protect the mission of air instal-
lations as well as the welfare of surrounding commun-
ities, the Department of Defense has established the Air
Installation Compatible Use Zone (AICUZ) Program.
The Secretary of the Navy is required to develop
and implement a plan to study all Naval and Marine
Corps air installations and to develop an AICUZ for each
installation. This study was initiated at Marine Corps
Auxiliary Landing Field - Bogue (MCALF Bogue) for the
purpose of recommending an AICUZ Plan, including
methods for implementation, as set forth in "Department
of Defense Instruction No. 4165.57, of 30 July 1973,
Subject: 'Air Installations Compatible Use Zones'."
The AICUZ is a concept of achieving compatible
land use around the air station. The purpose is to
guide compatible development through cooperation with
local jurisdictions in order to minimize public exposure to
aircraft noise and accidents while at the same time
protecting the operational capability of the station. By
AICUZ, Burns & McDonnell, Kansas City, Missouri
33

defining multiple compatible use zones, the range of
acceptable land uses is maximized. The results of the
AICUZ and the recommendations for consideration are a
determinant in developing or amending land use controls.
AICUZ
The AICUZ for MCALF Bogue and MCOLF Atlantic is
derived from support studies concerned with noise and
accident potential resulting from aircraft operations.
These factors are related to land use, community re-
sponse, and possible methods of implementation.
Compatible Land Use Plan
The Compatible Land Use Plan indicates the recom-
mended land use for undeveloped areas within the
AICUZ. The Plan is intended for a long range guide
showing how a wide range of compatible land used can
be achieved as need for more intensive - development
occurs. As with any long range planning guide, the
Plan should be reviewed and. updated to reflect new
technology, national defense requirements and changing
development trends. (The reader is referred to the full
AICUZ Study) .
The primary strategies for achieving the compatible .,
land use goals of the AICUZ involve the following:
Adoption of the AICUZ footprint
Zoning Ordinance
Fair Disclosure Ordinance
Height Controls
Land Development Plan
Coastal Land Management
Subdivision Regulations
Building Codes
Adoption of the AICUZ footprint: The AICUZ foot-
print should be adopted as a basic determinant for
future planning.
Zoning Ordinances: Land use control in the form
of zoning ordinances should be adopted or, where
existing, modified to reflect the compatible uses outlined
in. the Land Use Objectives Matrix.
Fair Disclosure Ordinance: The Fair Disclosure
Ordinance should specify disclosure of those items
directly related to the air station operation.
1
Height Controls: Height control of structures
should be regulated either by separate ordinances or by
incorporation into zonng ordinances.
34

Land Development Plan: Carteret County's Land
Development Plan should be updated to include recogni-
tion of the AICUZ area.
Coastal Land Management: The AICUZ area should
be designated an "Area of Environmental Concern" under
the Coastal Land Management Act and any land develop-
ment plans coordinated with the Coastal Resources
Commission.
Subdivision Regulations: Existing regulations
shouldbe amended to provide for rejection of new sub-
divisions not compatible with the AICUZ land use objec-
tives and to provide controls for continued development
in existing subdivisions.
Building Codes Building Codes should be amended
to contain requirements for sound insulation in struc-
tures in CNR Zones 2 and 3. Such amendments should be
based on performance specifications similar to the
Uniform Building Code. This is an extremely important
item as it expands the range of compatible land uses and
is the basis for including the land use category
"Residential.Noise Level Reduction 30" in the Plan.
Capital Improvement Program: The capital improve-
ment programs, particularly utility extension policies,
should be carefully reviewed to discourage incompatible
land use patterns. This is particularly applicable in this
area because of the exceptionally high cost and ineffi-
•ciency of septic systems. Presently, there are no
sanitary sewer systems.
Analysis of AICU•Z .
MCALF Bogue
The AICUZ was analyzed in terms of land uses
development trends and land use strategies for guiding
future development. Land areas of significance were
identified based on impact of noise, accident potential
and imminence of development. If these areas are
allowed to intensively develop incompatibly, some deroga-
tion of mission capability could occur due to pressures to
reduce activity from such development. The areas are
briefly described as follows:
Area 1 is located northwest of the air station in the
Star Hill development. This area, which is covered by
CNR Zones 3 and 2, requires immediate attention due to
the type of development involved and the pending pres-
sures for continued development. Portions of an 18-hole
golf course cover much of the CNR Zone 3 area.
35

LAND USE OBJECTIVES MATRIX
No new development
Res,rieted new development
t� f.:0 restricticns
AICUZ ZONES
A Accjcien: Potential Zone A
L A N D U S E
i .0
X
�
v
,
0
{
I
cc
co73
O
f
W
+
E
O {
LL'
(
I
U
j
C
N
a.
I
N
I
j
t
r
Lt i
1 1
!1 O
r—,
w
0
r
G
..
V
N
W
1 "
0
o
L.
N
-Y
<
<
�
0
I
c�
C-
u
..
I
_N
-
?
►
C
(
1 cn
cn
i
1 to
o—
--
—
i -
2
U I
O
U
I
I n- I
•-
a
! --
l a.
a
G
f
c..i
I�
I
•—
an
O
B3 Accident Potential Zone B
IHich-Boise Impact - CNR 3 ��
E2 Accj::2nt Potential Zone B
Moderate Noise Impact - CNR 2
B1 Accident Potential Zone B
Low -Noise Ini act - CNR 1
;C3 Accident Potential Zone C
High -noise In -,pact - CNR 3
IC2 Accident Potential Zone C
N1oderate Noise Imp -.ct - CNR 2
3 No Accident Potential
High -noise Impact ?_one
2 No Accident Potential I I I I
N'loderate Noise Impact Zone I
For restrictions to new develoopment see
Appendix A, Figure A Land Use Objectives
_ Amplified.
' ' ' 1

Single-family residences and undeveloped lots are inter-
spersed throughout the area. Further development in
the CNR Zone 2 area should be restricted to structures
incorporating sound insulation.
Area 2 encompasses the future commercial and
residential area south of the Cameron Largestone Bridge
on Bogue Banks. This land is currently zoned for such
uses but is undeveloped at this time. However, develop-
ment pressures are intense in this area due to the resort
atmosphere of Emerald Isle. Also, sewer service from
the mainland is expected to become available at the
Bridge site first, making this a very desirable area.
The area is within Zones . C2, C1 and CNR 2 which
should be considered for regulating future development.
Commercial uses for the most part are acceptable;
however, residential development in this area should be
restricted to structures incorporating sound insulation.
Area 3 is located to the east of the air station
south of N.C. Highway 24. It has become increasingly
popular for residential development to locate between the
mainland coast along Bogue Sound and N.C. Highway 24.
This area within the AICUZ is presently only partially
developed. It is recommended that no further develop-
ment occurs in Area 3.
Area 4 is located along N . C . Highway 24 on both
sides of the road encompassing existing and future com-
mercial and residential strip -type development. These
areas are within Zones C3, C2, CNR 3 and CNR 2.
Residential uses in the CNR 2. Residential uses in the
CNR 2 zone are recommended with sound insulation.
Commercial uses are acceptable in the CNR 3 area.
However, the undeveloped property on Zones C3 and C2
should be used in an Agriculture/Forestry/Fisheries
capacity.
Area 5 is located on Bogue Banks directly south of
the air station across Bogue Sound. This land is pre-
sently undeveloped, comprised mainly of marshland and
wooded lowlands. Current zoning has classified this
area as R-MH which is normally unacceptable in the noise
environment. Further development of this area within
the CNR 2 area should be restricted to structures incor-
porating sound insulation.
Area 6 covers the property on the southwest,
northwest and northeast corners of the Highway 24 and
58 intersection. These areas are within the CNR 2 zone
of the AICUZ. Residential development should be per-
mitted with proper sound insulation. Commercial devel-
opment is normally acceptable.
37

Area 7 encompasses the established residential com-
munity of Cape Carteret. The entire area is within CNR
Zone 2 and for the most part is 100 percent developed
and normally unacceptable in the noise environment.
Area 8
is located
to the north of the
air station in
CNR Zones
3 and 2.
This area has a low
potential for
development
in the near future due to its
isolated loca-
tion without
street and
utility access. It is
recommended
that this
area remain in an Agriculture/Forestry/
Fisheries category.
Area 9 is located northeast of the air station adja-
cent to the Croatan National Forest and having the least
potential of all the areas for development. This area has
also been recommended to remain in an Agriculture/
Forestry/Fisheries category.
MCOLF Atlantic
Areas 1 and 2 are located under the approach to
runway 5, southwest of the installation. These areas
require serious attention due to the projected noise and
accident potential. Future residential development is
very likely to occur in these areas along U.S. Highway
70. Further residential development in the CNR 2 areas
should be restricted to structures incorporating sound
insulation. Further residential development in the. C2,
C3 and C1 areas should be discouraged. Undeveloped
properties in these areas should be used in an Agricul-
ture/Forestry/Fisheries capacity.. Zoning is not recom-
mended for those areas within the incorporated limits of
Atlantic due to its minimal chance of being implemented.
Area 3 is located southeast of the installation,
adjacent to the field boundary. Located within CNR
Zone 2, this area which is presently undeveloped, should
have steps taken to preclude incompatible development
adjacent to this station. It is recommended that this
area remain undeveloped or in an Agriculture/Forestry/
Fisheries capacity.
Areas 4 and 5 are presently undeveloped and
largely consist of land uses clearly acceptable with the
projected -noise and accident environment. Steps should
be taken to regulate the future development especially in
the APZ and high noise areas. It is recommended that
these areas be designated Agriculture/Forestry/Fisheries
or Coastal Wetlands.
(b) Problems Related to Development
1. The lack of central water and sewer services is a
major concern for most areas of Bogue Banks.
38

ANALYSIS OF SIGNIFICANT LAND
AREAS
----- ^—
STRAlFfilf.S
LAND AICU.: I'xV;IIfir,
Ixv.IING •,1 l',trs!+I NI)
MICA ZONL LAND LPA.
'ONING 1 1) LANO Wil.
1 CNIt 3 Hrsirlent;al
H 30 Itrcedential,
ZONING 5uI+I.nrt rristing Calk Ca,1-vt : oninq
CNII 2 Undr'vnlopptl
Agr;cultme/
wtth NLII 30 in CNII 2 areas. f1equest rrioninq of
I olestry/
undeveloped areas within CNFI zone :1 1u Agricultu,e
349 Ac
F isherios
1 orrslry/F ishetws.
CAPI IAt IMPIt(1VI' Mr N I;;: Fslaldi•h LI�,MC/
City/County revirvl cO,n ,it te0 on all lulure capital
Irnproven,rrsts affecting AICUZ..
IIUILDING COOS: Rcqurst on,endmrnt to
11,rilding Corle.•
SUBDIVISION RCGLAWTIONS: Ite,ju'sl adoption
of plat and site design roview for noise, considrra•
lions.
1 Alit MSCL OSUIIF 01101NANCE: llequcst adop
lion of Ordinance. _
2 C2, C1 1lrisnlant;aI
Comm.
Ilesidential,
ZONING: Support existing Emerald Isle Co.imwrcial
' CNII 2 LlndevvIOprrl
It Mll
C.Ornmcrclal
/oning. nrquesl rrioning of F1 kill to It 1 or it 2
fi 2
with NLII 10 in CrJil 2 tune.
CAPITAL IMPHOVf MENTS • EstabhO. USh,C/
012 Ac
County review committee on .,II prOpOsed capital
Improvements affecting AICUZ.
BUILDING U1011: Request amendmrnl 10
•
Building Code.'
SUIIDIVISION REGULATIONS, Fierlurst adop
lion of plat and -.Ile design review for timse
considerations.
f"Ain DISCLOSURE ORDINANCE: Reqursl
adoption of Ordinance.
CNR 3
Hesulrnt;al
None
Agriccultute/
701'JING, Adopt rotrnty Toning ocrlinancc. Ile-
CNII 2
Untlrvrlopc,
Forestry/
quest Toning • Agricullurr/Fmestrv,'F ishr,irs.
CJ, C2
Fisheries
CAPITAL Irv41'IIOVLMCNIS; Eaabli;h US%4Ci
County review committee on all proposed capital
551 Ac
Improvco,rnls affecting AICUZ.
13UILDIN(i COOL: Not ori,licable
SULIUIVISION NIA-IMLATIONS. Not . pulirsbt.
FAltt C)ISCLO.SURF. ORDINANCE: Ilt••tuest
adoption of Ordinance.
'
4
CJ, C2
Con,lie, cial
None
Rrsuteniial,
ZONING: Adopt rourlty loving Ordln.,ncr--, fir
CNII 2
Itrsidential
C: ....rsert ial,
quest toning . con,n,rrrial in it,,! CNII 1 tone to
CNII 1
Undcvrloperl
A picultme/
preclude residential dr.vclol­,r„t.
I orrslry/
CAPITAL IMI'Itc1VI MUN1 ;. Fst.,bt;h U�,MC/
294 Ac
I isheries
City/County revu•w rornmittrr on I 1 nropusrd
capital improvements allectinq AICUZ
BUILDING CODE: Ilrtturyt amcntimetit to
Building Cotic.'
SUBDIVISION 111, GULATIONS: flequ,•st atop
-
lion of plat and s;le design review for noise. and
arcident considerations.
FAIROISCLOSURF ORDINANCE: Request
adoption of Ordinance.
• North Carolina has rstabhO,rd a State Building Corlr which Awes not intludo requirements for sound insulation,
The Fluildi'sq Code shoal,, hv a...... ded to includr rrqur r,••rr,ts for sountl intt7Mlion bawd on porforn,ance standards
similar to "I lie Uniform Puild,ng Code."
Analysis of Significant Land Areas
39
•

ANALYSIS UI SIVNII CAN I LAND AREAS
MCALF Bo if( -
LAND AICl17 _- -I XV;IINti T XI!;IING 1 I Ctv.1M1 ND
AREA ZONE LAND 11SF 7UNINC. 11 () I.ANI) LISF.
S CNII 3 Undeveloped n 11111 IIr; drnlinl
CNH 2 l.grir allow/
Forestry/
276 Ac Fisheries
STnATF.GILS —
7lrNITJ Ci: -pport existing Emr.rald We -oning .
,;.it, N( It 3(1 in CNN 2 areas. fleqursl viuninin,
arras within CNN 3 lone to Agriculture/Forestry/
f i0wries.
CApI TAL IMrNOVLMLNTS. Fsint—sh 11SrJC/
City/County review eommittre on ,ill proposed
calrital improve nrerits affecting AICU7.
BUILDING CODE' Request amendment to
BuUdiog Code.*
SUBDIVISION REGULAI IONS: f)rquest adoption
of plat and site design review for noi;r runsrdcration:
FAM DISCLO SUNF. ORDINANCE-' Neclm!st
arlo;lion of Ordinance.
6
CNR 2
Ilesillential
Il 10
Nrsidential,
: OUING: Support existing Cape C,rrlervt rornmvr-
Cuearterr,l.rl
11 ; 0
Comme,rrial
cr.rl rooinq. ,Support existing rr•siclrnral 7oninq wills
1'uhhi
Nl 11 30.
561 Ac
LImW,:l•luolal
CAVITAL IMp1I0VEMFNT S: Fstshlish t14MC/
CitviCrnlnty review conunilter on all prnposrd
capilal improve—enls alh-cling AIC117.
Il ILDING CODE: Nequest arnrnd... rot to
•
Building Codr •
SL111DIV1 SION nUGULATION'.: liv,ow,f adoption
of plat and site design review for nnise considers
'
tiolm
FAIN OISCLO;ilr flE OIIUINANCE: Hrg ursl
adoption of Ordinance.
7
CNII 2
nvsidential
N 20
ffesidantial
70NING: Support cxistinq roninq.
CAF'ITAI. IpArIjDVEMFNTS. Fslahlrsh L1f MC/
-
County rrvirw r.onvnitterr on all proposed r.alowl
129 At
Improvements affecting AICUZ.
BUILDING CODE: Rngucst arnendrnvot to
Building Codc.•
!;urmiVI^.ION nEGULATIONS: flegursl ado; _
.
lion of plat :end situ design rcviow for not,,-
enn:iderat inns.
FAIN DISCLOSURT. ORDINANCE: Nrquesl
adoption of Ordinance,
U
.'CNH3
Uodevnlopvd
None
Aglirullure/
TONING. Artopt ro urr iy ton injo,o-anrr It,
'
CNII 2
Forestry/
wwst zoninq • Agriculture/F orr.slryil itlu••rvs.
Fisheries
CAJ•I1 AL Ifv1PIIOVLMLN I:; 1 stahhsh U;,4'C/
716 Ac
County review rommillrn on all proposed raplial
improvements offectinq AICUZ.
BUILDING COOL: Not applirable,
S0B0I VISION HEGULA1 ION" Not applicable
FAIR DISCLOSURE. OHDINAIJCF. fit -quest
adoption of Ordinance.
9
CNH 2
Unclevolopod
None
Agriculhrre/
ZONING: Adont county zoning ordinance. ne-
-
Forestry/
quest zoning - Agriculture/Forestry/f isherins.
Fisheries
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS: Lstablish USMC/
441 Ac
Chy/County review rornmitlee on all proposed '
capitol Improvements alfectJng AICl1Z.
BUILDING CODL: Not applicahle.
SUBDIVISION FICGULA T IONS: Not .wplirable.
FAlli DISC. LOSUfir. OIRDINANCE: Itequc•st
adoption of Ordinance
• North Cornlina has rtl alth •J n•d a State 11uBrllrtl) Code whir lr rinr•s not inrhrrtr frgtnren,rnts for soond Insu.lntion. -
I Ile Iluildlnp Codo should br snrrnrled to include requrrco-ms for sound insulation based on limlormance staml.vds It
similar to "I he Uniform Ilrnlrlinp Coda, -
Analysis of Significant Land Areas _
40

ANALYSIS 01: SIGNI171CAN T LAF
LAND
AlCtf7
(XI!;IINt;
AnLA
ONF�
1.ANU U_:(
1
C1, C2
Ilrsidr'nlr..l
CNI1 2
Umkwloped
213 Ac
2
200 Ac
3
V) A C
4
1,125 Ac
J
1,22b Ac
JD AM:
70rJR!(r
Nunn
C3, C2 lirsidrnli,tl None.
Uodev.:low
C P411 2 jUndoveloln•01 Nano
I DI AND U_C
Ir•.n lr mwI, Iltill f)IrV. CODI Ilrvlurtl un,rnrbnrnl 1.,
Ail, it iltmv/ Ituild'i"I Cndr,'
F orrSuy/ SUIIOIVISION fit GULATIONS: IL•.lurtt nduPUnrt
I isheries of plat and site design rrvr(!.v for noisy and artittenl
cnrradrraw...
FAIR DI :CLOSURE ORDINANCE: flrtlucst
ndolrt ion of Ol dinant r.,
Residential, BUILMNG CODF: lie,west arnrodfnerrt 10
Auriroltow, limbfunl Code..'
I orrstry and SitltfJl\/I:.ION 111.G1,I1 ATION ,: Ilrrlursi adool,on
I ikhetles Of plat and Slle (Irsitlo tl'Viv,v for rent;(• and acre. voi
tnnsirlrr alions.
I AM DI SCLO :trait 01101NANCf . 11equest
mlolrtiooOf Orthnan(r•
Aqr iu.t 11, err, IttllI DIN(; CODE' Not nlytlic nlJr,
I nrr•slr,t anti !•l rltl )I VON I11. Gt11.AI IUNC.IinI apt OwAdil.
I isherle I Alit OI .CLOSUfll. DRDINANCL: Ite(turst
nrfal.tion of Ordinance.
C1, C2
Coastal
None
Coastal
ZONING' Adopt county Toning ortlinance. Fic(urst
C3,
%W0,1110k
Wel lnrt(Is
tsllnnll - or"m sf)acr.
CIJII 2
Residr116.11
IIt111.DIfJG CODE: Ite.lurst amendment to
CNn3
Undt•selnite..
Iin.l.lurgCod'!.•
Ult1)IVISION Rf:Gt1LATlONS rirtlursla-Plotion
of hint and silo rlusifln review lot noise nod twritio of
con•.idrratio nS.
/All; tw;ci.n um (MI)MANCE: Itryur;t
n(lolrlioo of ordinance.
C:r• C3,
Undvvrin(.rr
None
AnricuILttre,
7M.1ll4G: Adolrt r:oomv toning or•!-nncr. Iivquett
CNR 3
F orestry and
toning Ayica lUut•;'F nrrsir y/F i;hr•r ms.
CNR 2
Fishrrics
Hlllt_I)INC, CODE.: Tit(luett amendment to
I1n61.1inq Corlr••
SLAMIVISION REGULATIONS 11ego st;.delrt•on
of blot nn(l site dr•trgn rrvi(•w to, noise COnsidl( ration-
nnrl a(C;rlrttt Considerations.
FAIR DISCLOSURE ORDINANCE.': ncqursl
adoption of Ordinance.
• North Carolina has r•stahGthrd e aau• fluilrlinq Code which does not it,, lurtr rryuirr—enis for sound insul.rlioo.
7 he Ill,ildwel C(••11• shoul(1 he nn....wed to in( I ... le rrquirrinrnts for soutnt utvrlation based On petforinance slantlerds
similar to "Tho Uniform tluildu.p Coda."
Analysis of Significant Land Areas ,
41

Without these services, future. development will be
constrained. Also, more land is needed because.
development must be more spread out where wells
and septic tanks are used.
2. Transportation is another major concern. for Bogue
Banks. The access to Bogue Banks is inadequate
at the present time. As more development occurs,
this problem will increase.
3. Inappropriate development along the Intracoastal
Waterway and the railroad have contributed to
incompatible land uses. Much of the area which
could be used for industrial uses both along the
waterway and the railroad have been subdivided
and developed for residential purposes. If industry
is to be attracted to the County, access to these
facilities may be necessary.
4. Many natural features of the Banks including wet-
lands and frontal dunes have been destroyed by
past development. Future development must con-
sider the value of these areas.
5. In the past, land uses have not been properly
separated.
c . Areas Likely to Experience Major Land Uses Changes
Three primary areas in Carteret County are most
likely to experience major changes in land use over the
next ten years. The first area is around municipalities.
Most of the municipalities in the County are experiencing
growth in the form of housing developments just on the
outskirts of the town limits. This trend is expected to
continue, with more people looking to the more rural
areas for lower taxes, less expensive housing and a more
relaxed way of life. As towns begin to take in portions
of these areas, it can be expected that development will
move further out from town limits, thus attempting to
avoid annexation as long as possible.
As new areas are taken into municipalities, exten-
sion of services will be needed. If growth is allowed to
scatter around the towns it becomes more difficult, and
thus more expensive, to provide services at some future
date.
The second area likely to experience land use
changes is Bogue Banks. Pressure is already great on
the Banks to allow more development at higher densities.
This trend is not expected to decrease over the next
decade. The ability for the land to sustain growth that _
will occur depends on the services which can be pro-
vided to the development. Sanitary sewer service is
42

essential if any moderate to heavy growth is to be
accommodated . Of course, sewage collection and treat-
ment is costly and area residents need to be aware of
the costs involved. It will be money from local sources,
at least in part, needed to finance such operations.
In addition to a sanitary sewer system, growth also
demands adequate means of access. Bogue Banks is
already experiencing heavy traffic demands during the
summer months; additional growth will serve to compound
the already present problems.
A third area of
major land use changes
25. Development has
Bogue Sound, and thi
tinue. Again, most o
form of housing, eithe
is likely to require ser
43
s
f
r
the County likely to experience
is the area along N.C. Highway
already begun to crop up along
trend can be expected to con -
the development will be in the
second -home or permanent, and
vices at some future date.

CURRENT PLANS, POLICIES AND REGULATIONS
Carteret County initiated a land planning program in 1959 with the
establishment of the Carteret County . Planning Commission. This Com-
mission helped develop the following plans and policies for the future
development of the county.
I. Plans and Policies
A. 1962 Land Use Survey and Analysis
The 1962 land use survey and analysis was the first attempt
at identifying the existing land use within Carteret County.
This analysis was valuable in that potential problems, and past
land use patterns were identified for the first time.
B . 1967 Land Development Plan
In 1967 the Carteret County Planning Board and Board of
Commissioners adopted a Land Development Plan for the
county. This action was the first attempt to provide an
orderly plan for the future land use of Carteret County.
C . 1967 Community Facilities Plan and Public
Improvements Program
This plan for the development of community facilities and
public improvements reflects an inventory of existing facilities
and lays out specific recommendations for community facility -
development based on future land uses and future popula-
tions.
D . A Plan for Parks and Recreation in Carteret Countv. . 1974
This plan gives an overview of recreational needs for the
county. It is presently being revised for the purpose of
more adequately dealing with the recreational needs and
desires of the people.
E . Transportation Plan
A transportation plan was prepared for 'certain areas of
Carteret County by the Department of Transportation in 1971.
This plan has not been adopted but should be reviewed and
modified for adoption.
F . Regional Sewer Plan
Carteret County is divided into two regions as far as regional
sewer planning is concerned. One region includes all the land
east of a line running through Broad Creek on the mainland
and the western boundary of Pine Knoll Shores on the Outer
Banks. The other region includes the land lying to the west
of this line. Plans for the most cost-effective method of
44

disposing of sewerage in these regions are now being
formulated in compliance with section 201 of the Clear Water
Bond Act of 1973.
II. Regulations
A. September 5, 1961-Carteret Count
Subdivision Regulations
Subdivision regulations were adopted for the unincorporated
areas of Carteret County in order to encourage development
to occur in an orderly fashion, and provide for and be bene-
ficial to the interest of future property owners and citizens of
Carteret County. The county subdivision regulations require
all proposed subdivisions of land to be presented to the
Planning Commission for their review before the sale of
property can occur. The Carteret County Building Inspection
Department inspects all subdivisions and the development
within them to assure the plans approved by the Planning
Commission are followed.
B . 1971 - Carteret County Zoning Ordinance
The Carteret County Zoning Ordinance was adopted in order
to help facilitate the orderly development of land throughout
the county. Approximately 30 percent of the county's area
that is in private ownership is zoned. The Carteret County
Building Inspection Department is responsible for enforcement
of the zoning ordinance. Any appeal of a decision by an
enforcement officer or a request for a variance from the
regulation must be submitted to the Zoning Board of Adjust-
ments. A request for an amendment to the zoning ordinance
must be presented to the . Carteret County Board of
Commissioners for final approval.
C . 1972 - Carteret County Mobile Home Park
and Camp Park Ordinance
This ordinance was adopted in order to facilitate the develop-
ment of mobile home parks and camper parks throughout
Carteret County. Due to the resort nature of the county it
was felt that there would be a need for these parks, and in
order to provide for orderly development this ordinance was
adopted. The Carteret County Planning Commission reviews
all proposed mobile home parks and camper parks in order to
assure the plan complies with all county regulations. The
Carteret County Building Inspection Department is responsible
for inspecting the actual site to assure the plan presented to
the Carteret County Planning Commission is actually followed.
D . 1974 - Group Housing Ordinance
This ordinance was adopted in order to help provide
standards for the many group housing projects that seem
45

likely to occur in Carteret County. This ordinance affects
condominiums, town houses, row houses and apartments. The
Carteret County Planning Commission reviews all proposed
plans and the Building Inspection Department inspects each site to assure compliance with all plans.
E . 1973 - Outer Banks Land Protection Ordinance
The Outer Banks Land Protection Ordinance affects all
development on Bogue Banks that would require any
vegetation to be disturbed. This ordinance was adopted
because of the increased pressure on the stability of Bogue
Banks caused by continued development. The ordinance is
enforced by the Outer Banks Land Protection Officer and
Shoreline Protection Committee.
F . N . C . State Building Code
In order to facilitate proper building development in Carteret
County, the North Carolina State Building Code was adopted
and is enforced by the building inspector.
G . Septic Tank Regulations
Regulations governing Design, Construction, Installation,
Cleaning and Use of Sewage Disposal Systems in Carteret
County were adopted by the Carteret County Board of Health '
in 1974. These regulations are enforced by the Environmental
Health Division of the Carteret County Health Department.
III. Public Participation Activities
A. Land Use Issues
An integral part of any planning process is the identification
of issues to be faced during the planning period. Through
careful analysis of citizens' ideas as well as analysis of
existing conditions of Carteret County, land use issues have
been identified. Without facing up to these issues, land
development planning will not be effective in Carteret County.
1. The Impact of Population and Economic Trends on
Land Development in Carteret County
This issue has been discussed time and time again
throughout Carteret County and all coastal counties of
North Carolina. An increase or decline in population or
the economic situation in Carteret County will certainly
have an impact on land use.
a. The impact of population not only refers to sheer
numbers of people in the county, but more
precisely where they will be located, and how well
the land and public services will accommodate the

population. Recent population trends in Carteret -
County have caused many impacts on land develop-
ment including the following:
(1) Increased demand for housing units which
has resulted in the conversion of undeveloped land
or other land classes to residential land.
(2) Increased demand for public services such
as fire station, schools, medical facilities, refuse
collection and disposal, and many others.
(3) Increased access problems around the
county; but particularly from the mainland to Bogue
Banks.
(4) Increased demands for employment oppor-
tunities, commercial services, commercial facilities,
social and cultural services and facilities.
(5) Increased consumption and destruction of
natural resources based on the use or misuse of
land.
(6) The reduction of cultural and historic
attachments that county residents have associated
with for many years.
If current population trends continue 'during the -
planning period, these same impacts on land
development will probably continue. On the other
hand, a decline in population may have as much
impact as an increase. A decline in population
could have some of the following impacts:
(1) Reduction in the economic status of a
geographic area.
(2) Reduction in the quality of public
services and facilities due to insufficient funds to
provide quality services and facilities.
(3) Possible increase in urban and rural
blight.
(4) Possible reduction in tax base.
In order to fully understand the magnitude of
the potential development problems as related to
population; an attempt has been made to determine
the potential population of Carteret County if no
further subdivision of land occurs.
47

Since 1970, ninety (90) subdivisions have been
approved by the -county for recordation and
development (not including municipalities) . The
ninety (90) subdivision approvals represent a total
of approximately two thousand (2,000) new lots.
Approximately twenty percent (200) of the two
thousand (2,000) lots have been converted from
vacant residential lots to developed residential lots
(those lots with dwellings). It is difficult to
estimate the total number of vacant residential lots
in Carteret County. However, by field surveys
and tax records it has been ' determined that approx-
imately 2,000 additional vacant, platted lots exist
within subdivisions in county area outside municipal
planning areas (those platted before 1970) . The
total of approximately 4,000 platted, vacant lots, if
all are developed, represents at least 4,000
additional dwelling units. (Some lots may contain
duplexes and some lots may not be. developable).
Assuming that the average number of persons per
household (3.1) in the county remains. constant, an
additional 12,400 persons can be expected within
the seven municipalities. The- expected population
for the municipalities indicates an additional 12,000
persons over the next 10 years. Though many of
these people will already reside in the county, and
will become a part of the municipalities through
annexation, many of the 12,000 can be expected to
move into the county for the first time.
Additional population increase of this magnitude
can be expected to magnify existing problems with
providing services, and unless dealt with
adequately, additional problems will arise.
In addition to existing vacant lots, second
homes and seasonal homes are of importance because
of the increased usage of these units. A survey of
the utility companies in Carteret County indicates
that approximately eight thousand (8,000) seasonal
dwelling units are located throughout Carteret
County. If no further subdividing occurred, and if
seasonal dwelling units are occupied, the population
has been estimated to be over 60,000.
b . Economic trends throughout Carteret County have
had a sign' icant impact on land development, and
most certainly will continue to affect future develop-
ment. Specifically, major development trends within
the county have hinged on the following factors:
(1) The tourist industry has had an impact
on Carteret County's economy over the past two
decades and is expected to increase. Many

commercial enterprises are dependent on tourist
trade during the summer months, especially busi-
nesses on Bogue Banks.
The overnight tourist trade in 1971, accounted
for $6.5 million in expenditures in the county.' As
expected, almost 75 percent of these expenditures
occurred during the five month period May through
September. Day visitors added another $1.2 million
accounting for 16 percent of the total tourist expen-
ditures in 1971. * Total sales for Carteret County in
1971-72 were over $75 million. Total tourist expen-
ditures accounted for 10 percent of the entire sales
of the county during that period.**
Assuming no major developments such as a
shortage of gasoline, or a series of major storms, it
is likely that the tourist trade will continue to have
a significant impact on the economy of the county.
The impact of the tourist trade on the economy also
brings about impacts on the use of land. Services
must be provided to accommodate the large numbers
of persons visiting the county. More tourist -ori-
ented accommodations and seasonal homes will be
provided, which in turn depends on the ability of
the land to sustain such development. Much of the
land which attracts these temporary residents is too
fragile to accommodate dense development, especially
without such services as central water and sewer
services.
(2) The fishing industry has long been a way
of life as well as economically important to Carteret
County. Commercial fishing is still important to the
overall economic picture, and sport fishing has been
increasing in economic importance. Although not as
many people are directly employed by the fishing
industry, many work in supportive activities which
in turn impacts on the economic situation in the
county.
Of prime importance to the fishing industry,
especially shellfishing, is the quality of the sound
and estuaries. Water quality is a result in part of
land use around these fishing waters. Dense
Source: Carteret County Economic Development
Council, Inc.
**Source: N.C. Department of Revenue as reported
in North Carolina State Government, Statistical
Abstract, 2nd ed. , 1973.

development dependent on septic systems which may
leak effluent into these waters present hazards to
the fishing industry. Shellfish waters have been
closed in the past due to pollution from various
sources which are directly related to land uses
around the waters. As development continues and
densities. increase, pollution of the shellfish waters
will increase and may well affect the economy of
Carteret County. Only through protection of the
land areas around the sounds and estuaries can
some protection be provided these important waters.
Estuaries are more than just of local importance,
but extend to state and perhaps national impor-
tance.
(3) Farming in Carteret County is still an
important aspect of the economy. Like most other
areas, the number of farms in the county have been
decreasing over the years. However, farm pro-
duction is up and the sale of farm products
amounted to $3.2 million in 1970. Most of this
money was probably used in the county, and with
the multiplier effect added significantly to the
economy of the county.
The housing/resort industry may have an
important impact on farming in the county in the
near future. Already,. farms are being converted
through subdivision of land for new housing devel-
opments. This trend is expected to continue, and
could create problems if some means of protecting
farm land is not taken.
Another farming enterprise likely to impact on
the economy of the county is the large farm concept
such as Open Grounds. The farm operation should
impact on the economy through the sale of farm
products, but also the ancillary effects could prove
important. Development of such supportive
activities as processing of certain farm products
locally could add significantly to the economy of the
county.
(4) Cherry Point Marine Air Station adds to
the economic well-being in that many of the military
as well as civilians working at the base live in
Carteret County. Payroll checks are spent in the
county and people need housing which in turn is a
great boom to the economy.
The air station poses a potential problem in
that its operations can fluctuate a great deal.
Depending on the world situation, many more
50

persons may be in the area. This results in stimu-
lating the economy through more money being
spent, but also means more housing and services are
needed. During peacetime, the potential for cut-
backs is a real possibility, leaving the area with a
large number of vacant houses, and less money in
the overall economic picture. This situation does
not seem to be present at Cherry Point at this
time, but the potential is always there. More
recently many other factors have affected the
economy of Carteret County and land development.
These include emphasis on non -offensive industrial
development and reliance on expanded commercial
uses within the county. As this growth continues,
economic trends will remain an important issue.
2. Service Impact Issue
This issue like many others that relate to the
utilization of land, also relates to population impact and
the economic impact. At present, Carteret County, like
many areas of eastern North Carolina, has received
numerous requests for subdivision development, mobile
home park development, and multi -family development.
The reason that Carteret County has been the recipient
of many such requests is simple; (1) recreational poten-
tial, (2) second home potential, (3) land speculation,
and (4) retirement potential.
This existing impact on county land use as well as
potential impacts on land use that exists in the County
at present indicate the following services need to be
examined:
a. Housing
Providing adequate housing for residents of a
county is always a concern of local government. It
is difficult at times to determine what "adequate"
housing is, but certainly one aspect depends on
supply. If a county lacks enough housing units,
people are not likely to move into the area. By the
same token, persons in the county are likely to move
away, or be forced to live in overcrowded condi-
tions.
Supply of housing units in Carteret County
appears to be adequate at the present time. The
County has approximately 14,500 housing units.
These include conventional type units, mobile homes
and multi -family type units. An additional 1500
motel units are available, primarily on Bogue
Banks. Of the total housing units, mobile homes
account for 28 percent. A majority of these mobile
51

homes are located in mobile home parks on Bogue
Banks. Many of these parks present crowded
conditions and have inadequate lot sizes for septic
tanks to operate efficiently, creating potential
health problems.
With the high cost of land and construction,
especially on Bogue Banks, it is likely that demand
will increase for mobile home type units, which in
turn will require the use of land. If not ade-
quately planned, these additional parks can present
overcrowded conditions and potential health pro-
blems. On the other hand, if the parks are planned
for, they can provide a lower cost housing at a
time when housing costs are soaring. Without
mobile homes, there would be a housing shortage in
Carteret County.
Although housing supply appears adequate at
this time, certain conditions could alter the situa-
tion quickly. For instance, if the Air Station at
Cherry Point were to close a portion of its base
housing without providing additional units, a num-
ber of military personnel would be dependent on
private housing supplies for living quarters.
Though not all would look to Carteret County for
this housing, a portion probably would, potentially
causing a short supply of housing units in the
County.
Housing development ' requires land on which to
build. The County has an important issue con-
fronting it in deciding how and particularly where
these units will be provided. Filling of marshlands,
wetlands, and prime agricultural land should be
avoided as land for housing developments. Areas
where central water and sewer services can be more
easily provided, or areas where septic tanks can
function properly are areas where housing develop-
ments should be concentrated.
b . Water and Sewer
The manner in which water and sewer services
are to be supplied is important, as well as potential
environmental problems that may be caused by
different alternatives. At the present time, water
and sewer services are not supplied by the county.
Questions that need to be addressed include:
(1) Should
sewer services?
be provided?
52
the County provide water and
If so, in what areas should they

(2) Who should pay for these services?
(3) What are the alternatives to county water
and sewer services?
Implications of Water and Sewer
The existence of central water and sewer, or
the lack of it, will have an impact on land use.
The degree of impact and whether positive or
negative depends in part on the activity within the
community. Central water and sewer systems
generally indicate capability of the land to sustain
higher densities. Indeed, higher densities are
usually encouraged in areas with water and sewer
facilities in order to avoid certain health problems
associated with septic systems, and to increase the
cost of effectiveness -of the sewer system itself. A
central system means more people and therefore the
need for additional services such as police and fire
protection, schools and roads just to name a few.
A central water and sewer system costs the
taxpayers money directly in a number of ways --
from construction of the system to maintenance of
the system to subsidiary activities (police, fire,
roads, schools, etc.) which occur along with the
system. This is one of the areas where growth
costs and trade-offs need to be determined in order
to provide growth at the most cost-effective level
possible.
Lack of central water and sewer impacts on
land as well. When development depends on septic
tanks, it always requires more land and lower
density. For example, a 100-lot subdivision with
septic tanks might require as much as twice the
amount of land as with water and sewer provided.
Also, if density is created at a lower level and
services are required at some future date, the cost
of providing the services will be more.
The County, through the planning effort, can
identify the most likely growth . areas, especially
around and in conjunction with municipalities, and
attempt to provide these areas with services at an
early date so that higher densities can be main-
tained. Other areas can be identified as desirable
for lower density because of certain land capability
problems. In this way the County and municipal-
ities may jointly guide the growth of the County.
53

C. Police Protection, Fire Protection, Rescue Services,
Transportation and Solid Waste Disposar
These services are contingent upon future land
development. Once the pattern of land development
is determined, these services must be provided
accordingly. Public comments have indicated these
services are important to County residents, and the
following characteristics of these services should be
analyzed thoroughly:
(1) Manpower
(2) Location and Equipment
(3) Location of Capital Construction
(4) The effectiveness as to personal protection
(5) Convenience to the public
(6) Environmental Protection
3. Conservation of Productive Natural Resources
Carteret County contains many acres of productive,
natural resource areas. These areas include coastal
wetlands, estuarine waters and other land necessary for
the production of food and to sustain wildlife. A prior-
ity should be placed on these areas, and methods of
protecting these areas should be devised compatible with
the overall development plan. These areas are not only
important to commercial and sports fishermen; but,
beginning today, without proper protection of these
areas in all of the coastal counties of North Carolina, all
citizens will suffer a great loss.
Land development in Carteret County is posing a
threat to productive natural resource areas. Project
after project has been proposed that require permits
from state and federal agencies charged with the pro-
tection of these areas. During the planning period of
this land development plan, Carteret County must face
up to its responsibility to plan for the preservation, or
wise use of these areas. The County cannot leave the
fate of these areas to chance. The overall development
of the County will affect these areas; not just activities
that may occur within the natural resource area.
4. The Protection of Important Natural Environments
Carteret
Outer Banks,
many other
coastal areas
County encompasses a large strand of the
a large amount of estuarine waters, and
natural environmental characteristics of
that are very fragile:
54
r

a. Flood Prone Areas
b . Soils with septic limitations
C. Acquifers with ground water that are sensitive
to development
d. Frontal Dunes on the Outer Banks
e . Estuarine Waters
These natural environments add to the stability,
safety, and beauty of the entire County. As in the case
of productive natural resources, these areas are affected
by the overall development, the location of development,
and many other characteristics of development potentially
affect these natural environments. The County needs to
coordinate the overall planning process within the
County so as to assure _development will not adversely
affect these characteristics. These natural environmental
areas cannot be replaced once they are destroyed or
contaminated. With this in mind, the decision making
process must always face the issue of protecting these
natural environments.
5. The Protection of Cultural and Historic Resources
In addition to the abundant natural resources
throughout Carteret County, there are many cultural and
historic resources. These include not only physical
structures and artifacts, but also a unique way of life
that seems to be important to the residents of the
County. In general, public input seems to indicate most
residents are very proud of their way of life, and enjoy
living in Carteret County. The historic resources within
the County attract many visitors to the County, and, in
fact, have helped sustain a viable tourist industry in the
County. More important, these historic resources have a
value of their. own. They are examples of the heritage
of the County and the nation. . Without proper land use
planning, the significance of these areas could be lost
forever.
In addition to the historic sites in the County, the
actual way of life seems to be important to most citizens.
Most citizens remained in the County, or moved to the
County because they appreciated the characteristics of
the County as it is now. Certainly, there is a realiza-
tion that the County needs many improvements, but not
at the expense of the traditions that are important to
most citizens. This is a most difficult area of the plan-
ning process, but should be dealt with accordingly.
a. Alternatives Considered for Objectives, Standards
and Policies
The following alternatives were considered:
55

(1) Population and Econom
(a) To discourage additional people from
moving into Carteret County, thus allowing the `
population to decline.
(b) To maintain the status quo by not encour-
aging additional economic growth .
(c) To encourage slow growth so that addi-
tional population can be properly served by
County government.
(d) To encourage all-out growth without
public regard to servicing or protection of the
natural resources of the County.
(e) To discourage additional tourist -type
commercial enterprises.
(f) To encourage inoffensive industrial and
commercial enterprises which will provide
economic stability without damaging the overall
natural environment of the County.
(2) Housing and Services ,
(a) To discourage additional second -home.
developments.
(b) To discourage new housing developments
outside of municipal planning areas.
(c) To encourage housing starts of any kind
in areas where services can be provided, or
where little adverse environmental impact will
occur.
(d) To discourage municipalities from expand-
ing. water and sewer services beyond present
city boundaries.
(e) To encourage Carteret County to establish
a countywide water and sewer system.
(f) To encourage the County and towns to
work in cooperation in providing water and
sewer services to those areas where growth is
occurring most rapidly.
(3) Conservation of Natural Resources
(a) To conserve natural resources at all
costs - allow no new development where any
56

adverse conditions might destroy a portion of
the natural resources.
(b) To conserve natural resources through
planning and proper use of regulations which
will allow development in harmony with the
environment.
(c) To allow natural resources to survive only
to the extent that economic forces do not
suffer.
(d) To encourage protection of dunes by pro-
viding adequate public access points to the
beach.
(e) To allow dunes to be cut 'and destroyed
where economic forces so dictate.
(4) Protection of Cultural and Historic Resources
(a) Take no concern in preserving cultural
and historic resources of the County.
(b) Allow no development which might jeo-
pardize any historic or cultural asset of the
County.
(c) To plan for development which will not
adversely affect cultural and historic resources
of the County.
b. Objectives, Policies and Standards
Once the major land use issues have been
identified, a method of facing these issues must be
formulated. This has been done in the Carteret
County Land Development Plan by the identification
of land use objectives, policies, and standards.
These objectives, policies and standards are de-
signed to give the Planning Board and Commis
sioners a clearer indication of public desires and
wishes. It is important to remember that all land
use objectives are not equally obtainable. With this
in mind, "trade-offs" need to be made in order to
arrive at decisions that are consistent with the
overall desires of the residents and property
owners of Carteret County.
The objectives, policies and standards that
have been determined by the participants in the
planning process of the Carteret County Land
Development Plan are as follows:
57

(1) Cultural and Historical Objectives
(a) Preservation of the historic importance of
the County through:
1. Identification of historic sites,
2. Subsequent management of these
areas that will preserve them and allow
them to be observed and enjoyed by
everyone.
(b) Preservation of meaningful local traditions
and local culture through:
1. Land use regulations that emphasize the
value of the local traditions within each town-
ship. In particular, community development
throughout the County has been indicated as
desirable and should be preserved.
2. Land use regulations and policies that will
encourage commercial and industrial develop-
ment to fit in with existing development.
Proper buffer areas should be emphasized.
(2) Land Development Objectives
(a) Encourage major residential and com-
mercial growth to occur near municipalities to
prevent leapfrog development patterns, and to
facilitate the extensions of existing water and
sewer facilities, This objective can be accom-
plished through the establishment of water and
sewer extension policies by municipalities which
will locate these developments close to their
existing boundaries. Location of development
near towns will aid towns in future annexation
proceedings.
(b) Preserve the rural nature of the County
outside the municipalities. When land is devel-
oped in rural areas of the County, it should
be developed in basically a low density resi-
dential character. Without the provision of
water and sewer services, most of the devel-
opment will be at lower densities. Also,
through large lot zoning, the rural character
may be somewhat preserved.
(c) Encourage the preservation of the
County's natural resources. All development
should consider the potential effect it has on
the County's natural resources and insure
maximum effective utilization of public facilities
M:?

and services. Some resources that should be
considered include: 1. Wetlands, 2. Estuarine
Waters, 3. Frontal Dunes, 4. Water Supply and
5. Flood Hazard Areas. These land develop-
ment objectives can be achieved through:
1. Emphasizing the importance of County
land use regulations (zoning ordinance, subdi-
vision regulation, group housing ordinance,
Outer Banks land protection ordinance, and
mobile home park ordinance and flood plain
regulation) . These regulations should be
developed and adopted in accordance with the
stated objectives of this land development
plan.
2. ' Proper use of the land classification
system provided in this land development plan.
3. Emphasis on inspection and enforcement
procedures.
(3) Economic Objectives
To
develop -an
effective program to
pro-
vide better job
opportunities, . and increase
personal
income
for all citizens of Carteret
County,
without
significantly affecting
the
"traditional" way
of life so important to
the -
citizens
of Carteret County. It is hoped
this
objective
can be achieved by:
(a) Continued emphasis on tourism as a major
source of income for Carteret County. It
should be noted that efforts should be closely
coordinated with all local governments and
organizations within the County involved in
tourist related activities. These interests
include:
1. Sport Fishing
2. Hotel and Motel Services
3. Restaurants
4. Retail stores relying basically on tourist
business.
5. Other retail interests and services that
help support these interests and other tourist
related business (for example the construction
industry) .
59

(b) Development of plans identifying areas to
accommodate retail trade and services for the
expanding population of Carteret County, and
those who visit Carteret County. Land use
regulations should be coordinated with the
municipalities so as to assure proper develop-
ment of retail trade and services.
(c) Encourage additional import and export
tonnage through the port of Morehead City.
This can be done by efforts to monitor the
needs of imports and exports within North
Carolina, and coordination with the port of
Wilmington to assure the most effective use of
both facilities.
(d) Emphasize and encourage improved trans-
portation facilities. This includes highways
and roads, the Beaufort -Morehead Airport, and
freight services within the County.
(e) Encourage and assist in providing im-
proved navigational channels in the County.
This includes the Intracoastal Waterway, the
"Deep Water Channel" for the port, and other
service channels where economically justified.
This will improve all economic activities in the
County including commercial and industrial
activities in general, and in particular, the
tourist industry. .
(f) Increase efforts to attract non -offensive
industry that will provide better job oppor-
tunities and personal income for citizens of the
County. The Intracoastal Waterway and the
railroad service in the County should be
emphasized as potential assets for industry,
and land use regulations should be used to
protect desirable industrial locations.
(g) Continue to emphasize agriculture and
livestock production throughout the County.
This can be done in some of the following
ways:
1. Continue efforts to assure that the
deferred tax incentive is understood.
2. Emphasize the. importance of the Agricul-
ture Extension Service and Soil Conservation
Service within the County. They are able to
help evaluate the proper use of farm land, and
can help with production methods and market-
ing .

3. Through the use of the comprehensive
soil survey (now in progress), and the pro-
fessionals within the Agriculture Extension
Service and Soil Conservation Service, try to
pinpoint productive areas that are not being
farmed at the present time.
(h) Encourage and promote the commercial
fishing industry within the County through:
1. Land management that will help preserve
the productivity of the estuarine waters within
Carteret. County.
2. Help coordinate the interests of the local
commercial fishermen with regional organiza-
tions such as the Food Service Extension
Services of North Carolina State University.
This can be done through the County Planning
Department and the Carteret County Economic
Development Council.
(4) Service Objectives
Provide those services desired by the
citizens of Carteret County so as to improve
the living conditions of all citizens of the
County.
(a) Encourage . the development of a regional
water and sewer plan and its implementation.
(b) Encourage and strive for the development
and improvement of recreational opportunities
and facilities for citizens of all ages. This can
be done through close attention to the Carteret
County Recreational plan and its proper imple-
mentation.
(c) To provide for the protection of the
County's dunes system on Bogue Banks. This
is to be done by providing adequate cross-
overs for access to beach areas. Where
feasible, the County, in cooperation with the .
towns, will attempt to provide parking facilities
at selected areas along Bogue Banks with
cross-overs provided nearby. Cross-overs are
inexpensive means of protecting the valuable
dunes system which protects the mainland
during storm surges.
(d) Encourage and emphasize the solid waste
disposal program through: y
61

1. Proper landfill management.
2. Proper collection procedures.
3. Proper equipment management and landfill
site planning so as to cut unnecessary. costs.
(5) Governmental Objectives
Strive for the development of an effective
long range County planning process through:
(a) Improvement of channels for citizen par-
ticipation by the continued use of public
participation techniques used in the develop-
ment of this plan.
1. Public meeting conducted by elected and
appointed officials.
2. Questionnaires
3. Advisory committees
(b) The development of methods of coordin-
ating planning efforts with all local govern-
ments within Carteret County.
(c) The development of better methods of -
coordinating planning efforts on a regional
basis.
(d) Update all County land use regulations in
accordance with this land development plan.
(e) Strive for proper enforcement of land use
regulations. This should include proper
emphasis on assuring land use regulations
reflect the desires of the citizens, as well as
emphasis on proper training for all enforcement
officers.
62

Public Input and the Development of Land Use -
Issues, Objectives, Policies, and Standards
In developing a long range land development plan it is necessary
to identify the issues that will be faced during the planning period.
Once this is done, alternative approaches for dealing with these issues
and their respective implications should be considered in the develop-
ment of land use objectives, policies, and standards. Once these
objectives, policies, and standards are determined, they should serve
as a guide to classify land areas as to potential development desires, as
well as clearly established priorities for action during the planning
period.
Due to the importance of this basic portion of the planning process
a great deal of effort has been exerted toward obtaining public partici-
pation. It seems appropriate . at this point to describe the public parti-
cipation process and summarize the information received. It is hoped
this will clearly demonstrate the basis for the determination of major
issues, objectives, policies, and standards that are contained within
this section. Also, the alternatives that were considered are discussed.
The Carteret County Planning Department used several methods of
obtaining public input in the planning process for this land development
plan .
A. There were a total of 21 public meetings conducted through- f
out the County in an attempt to involve individuals from all
16 townships. (This analysis refers to those meetings held
prior to the necessary meetings for formal adoption of this
plan) . These meetings were conducted in the following loca-
tions.
•
63

Total No.
Location of Meeting
Townships Invited
Attending
1.
Smyrna (2 meetings)
Marshallberg, Straits,
17
Smyrna
2.
Atlantic (2 meetings)
Atlantic, Portsmouth
12
Cedar Island
3.
Davis (2 meetings)
Davis, Stacy, Sea Level
93
4.
Harkers Island (2 meetings)
Harkers Island
.16
5.
Merrimon (2 meetings)
Merrimon
25
6.
Beaufort (2 meetings)
Beaufort
27
7.
Morehead (2 meetings)
Morehead
27
8.
Newport (2 meetings)
Newport
12
9.
White Oak (2 meetings)
White Oak
50
Total
279
10.
Carteret County Meeting
All county residents
14
(Beaufort)
11.
Carteret County Meeting
All county residents
11
(Bogue Banks)
(Emphasis Bogue Banks)
12.
County Comm. Meeting
All county residents
15
Total
319
These meetings were advertised by the local newspaper,
the local radio station, and by notices posted in public
places. Also individual notices were sent to key individuals
living within the township that were invited to attend each
meeting. The meetings served a twofold purpose:
1. To advise the residents of • the requirements of the
Coastal Area Management Act.
2. To solicit ideas from the public for the purpose of devel-
oping issues, objectives, policies and standards for land
development planning.
(The results of these public meetings are summarized in this
section. )
B . Questionnaires were distributed at each public meeting in .
order to stimulate discussion and to firm up some basic levels
of public participation. There were a total of 174 question-
naires returned. (The results of the questionnaires are
summarized in this section.)
64

C. Public input was also solicited from a 13-member advisory
committee made up of a cross section of Carteret County resi-
dents. They not only added necessary information, but
assisted in analyzing the results of other public input
attempts.
The makeup of the Development Guide Advisory Committee was as
follows:
Names Background
1. George Kloek Environmental Resources Commission
2. Jim Brown Commercial & Sports Fisheries
3. David Reeves County Residential Development
4. Don Brock Development Bogue Banks
5. M . E . McNeil Real Estate
6. Roy Stevens Economic Development
7. James Davis Chamber of Commerce
8. Ken Newsome County Commissioner
9. W . A. Townes Engineering
10. Shelby Freeman County Planning
11. Ron Clapp Regional Planning
12. John E . Way, Jr. County Planning
13. Jim Bunce Agriculture
D . The Carteret County Planning Department also reviewed the
results of the public participation process for all of the
municipalities within the County. In addition, the Carteret
County Planning Department was directly involved in six of
the eight municipal planning processes within the County.
The remaining two' municipal planners communicated directly
with the County Planning Department. It was hoped that this
communication would allow the County to incorporate municipal
desires into a comprehensive county plan. This is important
because approximately 40 0 of the County residents live within
the planning areas of municipalities. (Land Development
Plans and an analysis of public participation for all munici-
palities in Carteret County can be obtained from the respec-
tive municipal governments). Additional communication was
provided for by three meetings in which the public was
invited, as well as members of all the planning boards in the
65

County. These meeting were held for the purpose of publicly
reviewing land use plans to assure they were consistent with
the overall county planning process.
Notes
1. Questonnaires were not sent out to all County residents,
because it was felt the results would be impossible to
analyze properly. The Carteret County Planning Com-
mission along with its 13 member advisory committee felt
the individual contact offered by (21) public meetings,
and the cross section of the public that was reached by
these meetings, offered a better guide to the desires of
the citizens of Carteret County.
2. The local newspaper and radio stations contributed a
great deal to the planning process. Their contributions
were in the form of explanations of the planning process
as well as a great deal of effort toward advertisement of
public meeting. We owe them a great deal of thanks.
Results of the Public Input Process
The results of the (21) public meetings and the questionnaires ob-
tained from these meetings are summarized in this section. Only those
questions that were easily summarized were included. There were some
questions that required written responses or were otherwise difficult to
summarize. All questions are available in the Carteret County Planning
Department.
Questionnaire and Response Summary
The ideas obtained from these meetings were from many different
townships and it is very hard to bring out specific issues and objec-
tives. The one point that was stressed at this meeting was the need to
inform the citizens of the planning activities in the County.
Plan Formulation
A summary of the overall Carteret County public input process
indicates a total of 319 individuals participating. This is a low percent-
age of the residents of Carteret County, but it was felt that their ideas
were significant. These 319 participants represented a cross section of
the public in the County. All of the 16 townships within the County
were represented, and it seemed that the comments from the Eastern,
Central, and Western townships were very consistent. It is hoped
these comments were representative of the general public.
The Development Guide Advisory Committee was an integral part of
the planning process. The thirteen members on the committee were
picked because of their diversity of interests and backgrounds includ-
ing Environmental Resources Commission, Commercial and Sports Fish-
eries, County Residential Development, Chamber of Commerce, County

Commissioner, Engineering, County Planning, Regional Planning, and
Agriculture.
Specifically, this committee added technical input and helped refine
the input from other sources in a written form. Once this was done,
the Planning Commission and County Commissioners reviewed several
preliminary drafts, and made additional refinement.
A. Eastern Townships
(Cedar Island, Portsmouth, Atlantic, Davis, Stacy, Sea Level,
Marshallberg, Straits, Smyrna, Harkers Island)
Questionnaire Response
1. What is your opinion concerning the quality of roads and
streets in your township? (6) Excellent (26) Good (40) Fair
(15) Poor
2. In your opinion, what is the quality of recreational facilities
and recreational areas in your township? (6) Excellent (12)
Good (17) Fair (32) Poor (23).There are none
3. Would the development or use of land next to your property
concern you? (55) Yes (25) No (5) No opinion
4. Do you want your township to remain as it is now? (73) Yes
(10) No (4) No opinion
5. Do you think that your township should be planned to insure
that it remains the same as it is now? (61) Yes (16) No (9)
No opinion
6. Do you think that your township should be planned to insure
that if growth occurs the growth will be planned . as opposed
to unplanned growth? (40) Yes (20) No (17) No opinion
7. Does your township need:
a. Employment
b . Food stores and
shopping facilities
c. Industry
d. Recreation facilities
e. Better fire protection
f . Better roads
67
a. .(31) Yes (28) No (9) No opinion
b. (23) Yes (34) No (8) No opinion
c. (20) Yes (39) No (4) No opinion
d. (45) Yes (26) No (1) No opinion
e. (44) Yes (21) No (5) No opinion
f . (43) Yes (22) No (3) No opinion

g. Better drainage of g.
(38) Yes
(26) No (6)
No opinion
storm or flood water
h. Day Care facilities h.
(9) Yes (32) No (15)
No opinion
i. Better Police protection i.
(48) Yes
(22) No (3)
No opinion
Questionnaire and Response Summary
The results of these questionnaires
and the
personal contact with
individuals from the Eastern Township
indicate
contact with
approxi-
mately 138 individuals in the Eastern Townships
of Carteret
County.
Public input is summarized as follows:
A. The public input indicates the people are proud of their
culture and the appearance of their communities. It is felt
they would like to see them remain virtually the same.
B . There is a recognized need for growth and expanded eco-
nomic base. Some growth and economic development would fit
in, but not to the degree that it would jeopardize their
culture and community appearance. A moderate rate of popu-
lation growth will be acceptable. Due to a recognized need
for employment, there seems to be a desire to encourage
commercial development if it is not in traditional residential
areas.
C . Personal contact emphasized a need to protect the natural en-
vironment. There was a great deal of emphasis on proper and
well -planned environmental protection. Most comments con-
cerned water supply, wetlands, and shellfish waters.
D. Desires indicate a need for expanded emphasis on fire,
police, roads, and recreation. Water and sewerage was
discussed at great length and naturally would be very desir-
able, but they emphasized the idea that users should pay the
cost. Without sewer significant growth should be discour-
aged.
B . Central Townships
(Beaufort, Merrimon, and Harlowe) - The results of the central
township meetings indicate approximately 44 individuals participated
in the meetings.
Questionnaire Response
1. What is your opinion concerning the quality of roads and
streets in your township? (0) Excellent (14) Good (18) Fair
(10) Poor
2. In your opinion, what is the quality of recreational facilities
and recreational areas in your .township? (3) Excellent (7)
Good (13) Fair (12) Poor (6) There are none
.:

3.
Would the development or use of
land
next to your
property
concern you? (34) Yes (5) No (1) No
opinion
4.
Do you want. your township
to remain
as it is now?
(22) Yes
(17) No (3) No opinion
5.
Do you think that your township
should be planned
to insure
that it remains the same as
it is
now?
(18) Yes (13) No (3)
No opinion
6.
Do you think that your township
should be planned
to insure
that if growth occurs the growth
will
be planned as
opposed
to unplanned growth? (31) Yes (5) No
(2) No opinion
7.
Does your township need:
a. Employment a.
(21)
Yes
(4) No (7) No
opinion
b. Food stores and b.
(18)
Yes
(11) No (3) No
opinion
shopping facilities
c. Industry c.
(18)
Yes
(14) No (1) No opinion
d. Recreation facilities d.
(26)
Yes
(5) No (3) No
opinion
e. Better fire protection e.
(25)
Yes
(6) No (3) No
opinion
f . Better roads f .
(26)
Yes
(7) No (2) No
opinion
g. Better drainage of g.
(33)
Yes
(1) No (5) No
opinion
storm or flood water
h. Day care facilities h.
(15)
Yes
(11) No (6) N
opinion
i. Better Police i.
(25)
Yes (6) No (1) No
opinion
protection
Questionnaire and Response Summary
1. The residents indicated that growth was desirable in and
around Beaufort, especially in areas that could be serviced
by city water and sewer (basically residential development
complemented by some commercial) .
2. Merrimon and Harlowe townships indicated a desire to maintain
the character of their communities, but to encourage growth
(both residential and commercial) . They indicated a need to
consider ability to handle water and sewer.
3. Employment issues were very important to these townships.
They would encourage industrial growth, especially along the
Intracoastal Waterway.
Aln

4. Services most desired were fire, police, recreation, and
roads. The citizens of the Merrimon township were partic-
ularly interested in drainage.
5. Within the Beaufort township, the tourist industry and histor-
ical significance of the county (in particular Beaufort) was an
important issue.
6. All townships expressed a desire to concentrate on environ-
mental protection. The Large Farm issue was discussed and
generally acceptable. Most public input indicated proper
planning was the key to acceptance of these type projects.
Both the integrity of the environment and large operations
such as the farms in the Merrimon township can co -exist.
C. Western Townships
Morehead township, Newport township, and White Oak township
(just mainland areas of these townships are discussed in this
section) - The result of the Western township meeting indicate
approximately 89 individuals participated.
Questionnaire Response
1. What is your opinion concerning the quality of roads and
streets in your township? (1) Excellent (16) Good (18) Fair
(1) Poor
2. In your opinion, what is the quality of recreational facilities
and recreational areas in your township? (4) Excellent (7)
Good (11) Fair (6) Poor (4) There are none
3. Would the development or use of land next to your property
concern you? (31) Yes (6) No (0) No opinion
4. Do you want your township to remain as it is now? (20) Yes
(14) No (2 )' No opinion
5. Do you think that your township should be planned to insure
that it remains the same as it is now? (18) Yes (15) No (13)
No opinion
6. Do you think that your township should be planned to insure
that if growth occurs the growth will be planned as opposed
to unplanned growth? (31) Yes (4) No (2) No opinion
70

7. Does your township need:
a. Employment
b . Food stores and
shopping facilities
a. (20) Yes (12) No (3) No opinion
b. (20) Yes (13) No (2) No opinion
c.
Industry
c.
(21)
Yes
(15)
No
(2)
No
opinion
d.
Recreation facilities
d.
(24)
Yes
(10)
No
()
No
opinion
e.
Better fire protection
e.
(21)
Yes
(12)
No
()
No
opinion
f.
Better roads
f.
(26)
Yes
(7) No (
) No opinion
g.
Better drainage of
g.
(25)
Yes
(11)
No
(1)
No
opinion
storm or flood water
h. Day Care facilities h. (13) Yes (12) No (8) No opinion
i. Better Police i. (23 Yes (8) No (3) No opinion .
protection
Questionnaire Results Survey
1. The questionnaire and personal contact indicate well -planned
growth is desirable in these townships. Growth, both com-
mercial and residential, was indicated as desirable in the
planning areas of Morehead and Newport. Cape Carteret is .a
basically residential town. The remaining area desired
basically residential growth. Water and Sewerage services
were encouraged to be extended from the municipalities in
order to facilitate more growth opportunities and to alleviate
some existing problems.
2. Employment was discussed at great length and there was
general agreement that economic development should be encour-
aged in this area of the county (especially Newport and
Morehead Areas).
3. Recreation, road drainage, and police protection were import-
ant points to the citizens. It was generally considered that
fire protection was very good, but should be emphasized and
maintained at least at current lands.
4. Good land use planning was emphasized.
5. The natural environment and its proper protection was an
important topic of discussion.
71

D. Bogue Banks
Bogue Banks was considered at a separate meeting in addition to
the regular township meetings that included different portions of
the island. This meeting was attended by 11 interested citizens.
The input of these citizens in addition to the input derived from
the municipal land use plans of Bogue Banks indicate the following
ideas:
1. Proper protection of the stability of the banks and the sur-
rounding environment was recognized.
2. Basically, residential growth is desired in and around munici-
palities with complementary commercial development. This is
based on the assumption that sewer services will be provided.
If they are not, density and general development was
recognized as a potential problem. Areas between munici-
palities (solely in county areas) are dependent upon future
services. Without water and sewer services, development has.
to be limited. Concern was expressed with the potential
"Built-up" look that Bogue Banks may attain without proper
planning.
3. Water and sewer, beach access, police, fire, and refuse
disposal all are of interest on Bogue Banks.
4. Good land use planning was emphasized.
E . The two remaining county meetings provided an opportunity for
communication with all the municipalities in the county to assure
consistency with the county planning efforts.
72

IV. CONSTRAINTS ON LAND DEVELOPMENT
There are many acres of undeveloped land in Carteret County that
may be considered for development in the near future. This section
will try to identify the areas of the county which may have constraints
on land development. Constraints on land development means certain
characteristics of the land may cause development to be expensive or
not appropriate. In this report two basic types of constraints will be
analyzed. The two types of constraints include those impaired by the
land capability and those impaired by the capability of community facili-
ties to sustain development.
A. Land Potential - This broad category refers to characteristics of
the land considered to have physical limitations to development and
those considered fragile areas.
1. Physical limitations - These limitations are comprised of natu-
ral characteristics of the land and man-made characteristics
that may constrain land development.
(a) . Hazard Areas - These conditions constitute physical
limitations that are extremely expensive and in some
cases impossible to overcome. - The inability to overcome
these limitations may result in severe damage to con-
struction, were it to occur. Hazard areas include:
Excessive Erosion Areas - Areas where excessive erosion
has a high probability of occurring. Ocean, sound,
river, and inlet erodible areas are included in this
category. Permanent construction within these areas
should be limited unless stabilization along the affected
reach is achieved.
Areas of the county most concerned with these potential
problems are basically Bogue Banks and areas along
Bogue Sound. The erosion of these areas is significant
due to the predicted heavy development along the ocean
and sound fronts. If inadequate measures before and
during construction are not taken, these areas are likely
to erode away endangering property and life.
Erodible areas are important to Carteret County because
of the conflict between allowing uncontrolled development
and protection of the environmental amenities which make
the area attractive to tourists and second home develop-
ment. Limited development can be successful if done in
conjunction with nature, rather than destroying the
physical amenities of the area. Uncontrolled development
will eventually cause adverse economic impacts in that
many tourists will no longer frequent areas of the county
if no longer attractive.
73

These areas are also included within the Areas of Envir-
onmental Concern section of this plan. Please refer to
that section for a further description of these areas, and
a discussion of their environmental importance.
Flood Hazard Areas - These are areas that are adjacent
to coastal sounds, estuaries, the ocean and rivers within
the 100 year flood line. Improper development in these
areas may unreasonably endanger life and property.
The hazard area map included in this section will iden-
tify the approximate limits of the flood hazard areas in
Carteret County as defined by the U.S. Department of
Housing and Urban Development.
Airports - Within Carteret County there are three air-
ports that pose some degree of hazard to the area sur-
rounding them. These examples of man-made hazards
include the Beaufort -Morehead Airport in Beaufort, the
Atlantic Field in the Atlantic Township, and Bogue Field
on Bogue Sound near the Town of Cape Carteret. (See
land use compatibility section) Improper development
near these airports could cause unreasonable danger to
life and property. (Refer to the Hazard Map for loca-
tion)
Storage of Flammable Liquids - These areas are another
example of man-made hazards. Development near these
areas could cause unreasonable danger to life and pro-
perty. Examples of these areas in Carteret County
include: Bulk oil distributors, the oil storage at the
State Port, and the railroad that traverses Morehead
City among many others. Development which brings
large numbers of people close to the areas should be
avoided. These man-made hazards are an asset to the
economy of the county, but should not be allowed to
endanger life and property unnecessarily.
(b) Areas With Soil Limitations - These areas include areas
of the county that may present problems to development
in many ways. Some of the problems that may be caused
by soil limitations include: improper drainage, areas
with limitations for septic tanks, and areas that may
present hazards for foundations.
The generalized soils map included in this section indi-
cates that almost all of the land area in the county
should be analyzed carefully before development occurs.
The manner in which the land is prepared before devel-
opment, the type development that occurs, and main-
tenance of the land after development are all key factors
to consider.
Map #2 is designed to indicate those areas of the county
that have the most severe soil limitations. These areas
74

pose severe problems to proper drainage, septic tanks
and foundations.
These soils are of three basic types including Pamlico-
Ponzer Association, Leon -Lynn Haven-Kureb Association
and Capers -Coastal Beach-Newhan Association.
Basically the Pamlico-Ponzer Association is composed of
organic soils 16 to 40 inches deep over sandy or loose soil
materials. This may certainly cause foundation problems,
and may allow waste material to easily flow into the water
table. The Leon -Lynn Haven-Kureb Association is
composed of basically wet sandy soils with organic hard-
pan subsoils. These areas pose problems to foundations,
but particularly cause poor drainage. The Capers
Coastal Beach-Newhan Association includes marsh lands
and sand dunes. These areas may pose foundation
problems as well as pose problems to the stability and
productivity of the areas. In some of these areas drain-
age is good, but in some cases may not provide proper
treatment needed for septic tanks installation. The
areas of the Banks that have been filled pose severe
limitations for development with reference to septic tank
installation and foundation construction. Extra care and
planning must be exercised before development occurs in
these areas.
Currently, a. comprehensive soil survey is being pre-
pared for Carteret County. Until this survey is com-
pleted, the generalized soils map will have to be used
for land use planning. It should be noted that the soil
limitations mentioned in this section are subject to the
type of development, the preparation of the land, and
the maintenance of the land. (e.g. maintaining ditches)
Without proper emphasis on the soil limitations of the
county, many hazardous results may occur. The water
table may be polluted, surface water may become pol-
luted, and private property may be destroyed. A cen-
tral sewerage treatment plan for the areas with the major.
soil limitations will certainly solve some of the problem,
but not all problems. Providing for subdivision regula-
tions that require continued maintenance of ditches in
subdivisions and soliciting professional advice from. the
Carteret Soil and Water Conservation District concerning
drainage within subdivisions are other methods of ap-
proaching the problem at hand. Some types of devel-
opment may never be suitable for some of these areas.
(c) Source of Water Supply - The following groundwater
report for Carteret County was issued by the N.C.
Department of Natural and Economic Resources.
75

Geology
Carteret County is underlaid by from approximately
2,500 to 5,500 feet of sediments, ranging in age from
Cretaceous to the present. These sediments are com-
posed of interbedded sands, clays, and limestones.
Only the sediments of Eocene age or younger are con-
sidered to contain relatively highly mineralized water and
are not usually utilized for water supply purposes.
The undifferentiated post Miocene sediments consist of
superficial fine to medium sand with interbedded clays
and sandy shell hashs ranging in thickness from 25 feet
in western and northwestern portions of the county to 70,
feet in the northwestern portion. The most Miocene
sediments, ranging in thickness from 50 feet in the
northwestern portion of the county to 200 feet in the
eastern portion, dip at a rate of approximately 5 feet
per mile. The sediments of Aligocene age are sandy
shell limestone with some interbedded clays and sands
common in the eastern portion of the county. These
sediments, dipping to the southeast at from 5 to 10 feet
per mile, range in thickness from 300 to 550 feet along
their dip.
The Eocene sediments of Carteret- County are of the same
lithology as the Oligocene sediments and have a thick-
ness ranging from 400 feet to 900 feet across the coun-
ty. The regional dip on these Eocene sediments is
approximately 10 feet per mile.
Principal Aquifers
In the Carteret County area three (3) aquifers are
utilized for water supplies, the water table, the York-
town aquifer, and the Castle Hayne aquifer.
The water table located in the post Miocene sediments
within 10 feet of the surface in the northwestern por-
tions of the county and within 5 feet in the coastal and
low lying areas of the county. The waters from this
zone, while adequate in quantity for domestic supplies,
are corrosive and usually have objectionable color, odor,
and iron contents. Salt water intrusion into the water
table in areas along the coast and in areas adjacent to
brackish water bodies is an ever present possibility.
The Yorktown and Castle Hayne aquifers are considered
together in the description due to the practice of con-
structing open hole wells penetrating both aquifers in
Carteret County. The Yorktown aquifer is contained
within the sands, shell hashs, and limestones of the
Miocene and sediments, while the Castle Hayne aquifer is.
located in the limestones of Oligocene and Eocene ages.
76

Wells constructed in these aquifers yield from 5 to 30
gallons per minute per foot of draw down dependent on
well diameter and amount of aquifer penetrated by the
open hole.
Water levels in wells penetrating the Yorktown and
Castle aquifers range from 1 foot above land surface in
the north central portion of the county to approximately
10 feet below land surface in locations in the Atlantic
Beach area and approximately 20 feet in the Newport
area.
The quality of water from these aquifers is noted for its
hardness; reported as calcium carbonate, it ranges from
200 to 350 parts per million. Waters from the wells
penetrating the Yorktown in the northwestern portion of
the county have iron contents of up to 0.9 parts per
million. Waters of high chlorides have been reported. at
a depth of 286 feet at the west end of Bogue Banks, at
150 feet at Fort Macon, and at 98 feet in the Cape
Lookout area. While the chlorides in the other two (2)
areas are in keeping with other data in the region, the
report from the Fort Macon well is not substantiated by
other data from wells in the Atlantic Beach area. This
anomaly is probably attributable to shallow brackish
water leaking into the casing; therefore caution should
be exercised in the construction of wells to the beaches
to insure that brackish water from shallow sands will not
enter the well or that heavy withdrawals will not allow
brackish water to move up dip in these aquifers.
Groundwater is of extreme importance to Carteret County
because it is the only source of water supply. The
aquifer and the recharge areas must be protected.
Without rp oper protection, the aquifers could become
depleted and salt water intrusion could occur.
The Division of Health Services and other State agencies
are in the process of identifying recharge areas. in
Eastern North Carolina. The protection of the water
supply must be a coordinated effort by all Eastern North
Carolina Counties.
(d) Slopes over 12 percent - In Carteret County topographic
slopes of twelve percent (12 0) or greater are not nor-
mally found except on the Outer Banks. Such slopes
(122% or greater) are related to dune development. The
mainland of Carteret County unlike the mountain areas of
North Carolina is basically flat with the highest elevation
being approximately forty-five (45) feet and gently
sloping down to sea level. On Bogue Banks, Shackle -
ford Banks, Core Banks, and Portsmouth Island topo-
graphic variation are erratic due to sand dune develop-
ment. The natural conditions (wind and water) which
77

create or destroy sand dunes present profound physical
limitations. One must realize that the dunes system pro-
tects the Outer Banks. Development must fit in with the
topography, and not destroy this natural protection.
2. Fragile Areas - These are areas that could easily be de-
stroyed inappropriate or poorly planned development. Within
Carteret County, the following areas have been considered
fragile. (Please note that all fragile areas listed in this
section are also included in the Area of Environmental
Concern's section of this plan. Refer to that section for fur-
ther identification of these areas and appropriate uses with
them) .
(a) Coastal Wetlands - Any salt marsh or other •marsh sub-
ject to regular or occasional flooding by tides, including
wind tides, not including hurricane tides.
(b) Sand Dunes Along the Outer Banks - Ridges or mounds
of loose wind-blown material, usually sand along the
Outer Banks.
(c) Ocean Beaches and Shorelines - Areas along the Outer
Banks without vegetation covering, consisting landward
from the mean low ' tide to a point where any of the fol-
lowing occur: (1) vegetation, (2) distinct change in
slope or elevation which significantly alters the land
form
(d) Estuarine Waters - All the waters of the Atlantic Ocean .
within the boundaries of North Carolina and all of the
waters of the bays, sounds, rivers and tributaries
seaward of the dividing . line , between coastal fishing
waters and inland fishing waters as set forth in an
agreement adopted by the Wildlife Resources Commission
and the Department of Conservation and Development.
These areas are ecologically significant not only to
Carteret County, but to the state and nation as well.
Fragile areas need to be protected from development
Which would destroy their existence and importance. If
destroyed, much of the county's economy will suffer
through loss of commercial and sport fishing activities,
and through loss of tourist activity.
3. Area With Resource Potential - These areas are valuable to
Carteret County and add to the potential of the county and
state. For this reason they should be protected and develop-
ment should not infringe upon the value of these areas.
The areas with resource potential include productive and
unique agricultural land that .consists of prime agricultural
soils, potentially valuable agricultural lands with moderate .
conservation efforts, and other productive or unique agricul-
tural lands.
78

These areas include:
(a) Productive and unique agriculture lands. Productive
farmland is generally defined as land suited and available
for producing food, forage, fiber, and oilseed crops.
Examples of productive farmland are cropland, pasture-
land, rangeland, forest land and other land that is not
urban built-up or water. Productive farmland has the
soil quality, growing season and moisture supply needed
to economically produce significant and sustained crop
yields when treated and managed according to modern
farming methods, including water management.
Unique farmland, in addition to other productive farm-
land is land that is suited and available for the produc-
tion of specific high -value food and fiber crops. Ex-
amples of such crops are citrus, clives, cranberries,
fruit and vegetables.
Productive farmland areas can be identified and located
by interpreting modern detailed soil maps published by
agencies such as the USDA Soil Conservation Service.
However, more detailed soil maps are not available for
the majority of the twenty coastal counties participating
in the cooperative programs in the Coastal Area Manage-
ment Act. Only generalized soil. maps are available for
the majority of the twenty coastal counties, and these
maps are meant to be used for general planning only. A
generalized soils map is the only one currently available
for Carteret County. A detailed survey is presently
underway and is expected to be completed in the near
future.
For purposes of CAMA planning, until more detailed soil
maps are available, generalized soil maps may be used to
identify and locate productive farmlands, potentially
productive farmlands and lands that are not economically
or ecologically suitable for farmland.
General soil maps depict soil association areas within the
twenty Coastal counties. A soil association is a land-
scape that has a distinctive proportional pattern of soils.
It normally consists of two or more major soils and other
minor soils, and is named for the major soils. The soils
in one association area may occur in another, but in a
different pattern.
The map showing soil associations is useful to persons
who want a general idea of the soils of an area, or who
want to compare different parts of a county or the
region, or who want to' know the locations of large tracts
that are suitable for a certain kind of land use. It is
not a suitable map for the planning or the management of
79

a specific farm, or a field, because the soils in any one
association ordinarily differ in slope, drainage, depth,
and other characteristics that could affect their manage-
ment.
Each soil association outlined on a general soil map is
meant for general planning rather than a basis for
decisions on the use of a specific tract. Soil associa-
tions may be designated into soil management groups
ranging from soils with slight limitations to severe limita-
tions if used as agricultural farmland.
Carteret County contains 20,000 acres of farm land which
is generally productive. Basically, the production of
crops in Carteret County includes: tobacco, cabbage,
soybeans, corn, potatoes, and a few others.
11

AGRICULTURAL FARMLAND
SOIL ASSOCIATION AND MANAGEMENT LIMITATION RATE
Legend for Coastal Area Soil Association Map
Soil Assoc. Limitation
No. Soil Association Rate
1
Conetoe - Dragston - Wando
.3
2
Lenoir - Bladen - Craven
6
3
Bladen - Bayboro - Portsmouth
6
4
Bertie - Tomotley - Altavista
3
5
Roanoke - Pasquotank - Barcley
5
6
Hyde - Weeksville - Engelhard
5
7
Belhaven - Ponzer - Wasda (Upland Mucks)
7
8
Newhan - Corolla - Duneland
8
9
(Tidal Marsh)
8
10
Dorovan - Johnston
7
11
Norfolk - Goldsboro - Wagram
1 ~
12
Wickham - Altavista - Wahee
3
13
Wehadkee - Chewacla - Roanoke
6
14
Rains - Lynchburg
3
15
Murville - Seagate - Leon
5
16
Stallings - Woodington - Baymeade
3
17
Onslow - Rains - Norfolk-
3
18
Pungo - Dare
7
19
Invershiel - Meggett - Gr'ifton
5
20
Kenansville - Lakeland
3
21
Rains - Pantego - Torhunta
4
22
Bibb - Johnston
6
23
Nahunta - Grantham
3
24
Portsmouth - Torhunta - Lakeland
5
25
Kureb - Baymeade - Rimini
2
26
Pantego - Ponzer - Rains
5
27
Lynn Haven - Pamlico - Leon
6
28
Wrightsboro - Onslow - Kenansville
r
2
29
Kenansville - Leon - Lakeland
3
30
Weeksville - Pasquotank
5
*1 = slight limitations; 8 - severe and restrictive limitations.
81

Those areas of Carteret County which can be generally
identified as productive farmlands include areas east of
the Town of Beaufort, down to Smyrna. Portions of the
Area northeast of Smyrna are too low for productive type
farming activities.
The area north of Beaufort between State Highway 101
and U.S. Highway 70 is also identified as productive
farmland. Additionally, most of the Newport Township is
in productive farmland. Many of the farms in the New-
port Township are larger than the average size for the
county.
The Open Grounds Farm is an example of unique agri-
culture lands within Carteret County. This farm con-
tains a total of approximately 45,000 acres. As of
December 31, 1975, the land within the farm was utilized
in the following fashion:
Permanent Pasture 1,800 acres
Temporary Pasture 1,500 acres
Idle cropland 150 acres
All other 41,550 acres
45,000 acres
The "large farm" concept may be of extreme importance
to all of eastern North Carolina. On the positive side
these type of farms can afford to develop land small
farms were unable to develop and provide an expanded
economic base for the county. Potential for processing
locally that which is grown locally adds to significance of
farm production.
In most cases the "large farm" concept must pay par-
ticular attenton to the environmental effects they may
cause. This is true because of the magnitude of these
operations, and the fact that in many cases they develop
land near environmentally sensitive areas (i.e. wetland
and estuarine waters) .
(a) Potentially valuable mineral sites - At the present time
potentially valuable mineral sites have not been identified
in Carteret County. It should be noted that more de-
tailed information on this subject may be available in the
near future.
(c) Publicly .owned forests, parks, fish and gamelands, and
other non -intensive outdoor recreation land
- Within Carteret County the following are present:
1. Croatan National Forest 3. Cape Lookout National
Seashore
2. Ft. Macon State Park 4. Cedar Island Wildlife
Refuse
99

B . Capacity of Community Facilities
Community facilities are very. important to the development of -
Carteret County. Without proper community facilities, development
may be a liability instead of an asset. The basic community faci-
lities that are normally associated with development have been
analyzed in the following discussion with particular emphasis on
the capacity and percent utilization of each facility.
Water and Sewer Services
At the present time, Carteret County serves no areas with
either water or sewer service. Individual wells and septic tanks
are the primary methods for water supply sewage disposal through-
out most of the county. Currently, Carteret County is actively
participating in the development of regional water and sewer ser-
vices. A 201 waste treatment facilities plan is underway and
expected to be completed in the near future. It is unknown at
this time whether the 201 Plan will be implemented because of the
nature of the solutions posed for disposing of the treated sewage.
The ocean outfall proposal has not thus far received a favorable
assessment.
At the present time, the towns of Newport, Morehead City
and Beaufort have sewage treatment facilities. The following
summary is given for each of these facilities as to capacities and
percentage of utilization.
Town of Beaufort*
The present design capacity is for 750,000 GPD (Gallons Per
Day) . The present average daily flow is approximately 300,000
GPD, giving a utilizaton rate of 400. It is estimated that less than
10a of this treatment is from industrial waste. The remainder is
domestic waste.
*Information supplied by Town of Beaufort.
Morehead City
The present design capacity is for 1.7 million GPD. The
average daily flow is estimated at 1.04 mgd, with a utilization rate
of approximately 60 0. The system is presently confronted ' with
infiltration problems.
*Information found in Preliminary 203 Facilities Plan, Henry Van
Oesen & Associates and Wm. F . Freeman Associates.
Town of Newport
r
The present design capacity is 250,000 gpd. The average
daily flow is approximately 154,000 gpd. The utilization rate is
approximately 62 0.
83

I . Stella It. Gloucester
2. Cape Carteret 12. Marshallbe rg ti�1
3. Emerald Isle 13. Smyma QP.l1 GOJ
<. Salter Path 14. W iIIiston
I,ampert -15. Davis
5. Y',ld.vood 16. Stacy
7 Morehead City 17. Seelevel
S. Atlantic Beach 18. Atlantic
^s Beaufort 19. Cedar Island Point
10. lorkers Island 1
1g75 Annual Average Daily
24 Hour Traffic Volume On
Hard Surface Roads
CRAVEN COUNTY
s
10Ilk 100
U 2
/ 1
Z�
O ,
7400 1100 700
CARTERET COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
.14
tiro
00
F
1 0 1 2 3 4
i
MILES
1
1

Roads and Streets
The location and design of traffic routes play an important
part in the use and development of land. It has become highly
important that both traffic route planning and land use planning
be coordinated to insure compatibility. Many uses of land, such
as for shopping centers, industrial parks and public recreation
areas usually generate high volumes of traffic; whereas residential
development generally creates lower traffic volumes. Roads,
streets, and highways are designed for specific purposes: (1) To
carry traffic from one geographic location to another; (2) To carry
a designed volume of traffic during a given period of time. These
two purposes could be identified as being the "design -capacity."
Carteret County's needs are served by 81.95 miles of primary
roads and 8.62 miles of primary municipal roads. Secondary roads
add 259.80 rural miles and 22.44 municipal miles to the system.
Map 1 indicates Traffic Counts at Key Locations and Table 24
gives typical capacities for different types of roads.
Table 24 Typical Capacities
Practical Capacity
Vehicles/Hour
Facility Lane Vehicles/Day
Two Lanes Plus Parking 400-500 5,700-8,200
Two-way 450-600 10 , 000-13 , 000
One-way
Four Lanes, No Parking
Two-way 450-550 13 , 000-18 , 500
Two-way with special
Measures 600-800 17,000-26,000
Six Lanes, No Parking
Two-way with special
Measures 500-700 21,000-34,000
Four Lane Urban Expressway 800-1,000 23,000-33,000
Four Lane Urban Freeway 1,200-1,500 35,000-50,000
Six Lane Urban Freeway 1, 200-1, 500 50, 000-75 , 000
Note: These typical capacities are based on average traffic flow
characteristics with 10 percent of the 24-hour volume
during - the peak hour and 60-70 percent peak hour traffic
in the predominate direction. For intersections the green
time has been assumed of 50 percent.

M E M O R A N D U M
TO: JOHN PARKER June 26, 1979
SUBJECT: OFFICE OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT GONSL6TENeY--9TATEMENT-
APPLICANT: WILMINGTON DISTRICT CORPS OF ENGINEERS
PROJECT NO: -0009
DESCRIPTION: DISPOSAL OF SPOIL MATERIAL ON HIGH GROUND: RADIO ISLAND
The following elements have been considered in this review:
AEC Standards: The project is exempt from AEC permit requirements but was
reviewed for consistency with standards. We see no conflict with the
estuarine system standards, as spoil will be retained on high ground.
Local Land Use Plan: Although the Land Classification Map indicates a
conservation fringe around Radio Island, the statement of goals and
objectives clearly favors such a project Due to.the history of spoil
disposal on Radio Island, we feel that the project is consistent with
the Carteret County Land Use Plan.
Other CRC Policies: None applicable.
Comments: The Office of Coastal Management believes this project is con-
sistent with the applicable goals, policies and standards of the Coastal
Resources Commission.
< r,
Ralph 6 Cantral
Coastal Land Use Planner

EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES AND SERVICES
Elementary, Secondary and Private
The Carteret County School System is dedicated to preparing the
school age children of the county to become better adults. It is hoped
that the school system will in addition, upgrade the lives of all the
residents of the county.
The County School System covers the entire county (532 square
miles) which. includes twelve (12) schools. Last year (1973-1974) the
school system has an approximate enrollment of 7,349 (not including
kindergarden) . This enrollment was served by a total of 329 teachers
(including 14 interim teachers). This means there was approximately 20
students for every teacher. For the 1974-1975 school year, the enroll-
ment for grades 1-12 was approximately 6,945 students. Including the
kindergarden program, the county schools are estimated to have an
enrollment of 7,326. Public school enrollment has gone down in recent
years (excluding kindergarden) but shows signs of stabilizing. This
drop in public school enrollment seems to be related to fewer births in
the county as well _as the addition of new private schools.
The operation of the county schools is supervised by the County
Board of Education. This board is composed of five (5) elected offi-
cials . The technical staff of the school board is headed by the Super-
intendent of Carteret County Schools. The general administrative
offices of the school board are located in the courthouse annex.
Basically, they are responsible for statistics, transportation, mainten-
ance, food service, federal program coordination, special programs,
personnel, and many other administrative areas.

Carteret Countv Schools -Individual Analvsis
Year Built
and
No: of
Present
Added On
Classrooms
Capacity
Enrollment
Teachers
Grades
Atlantic
1949
16
Elementary
1976
485 .
257
12
K-8
Beaufort
61
Elementary
1945
750
609
29
K-5
Beaufort
1950
19
Middle
1965
1971
450
390
20
6-8
Camp Glenn
30
25
East Carteret
1966
46
High
1968
1000
862
50
9-12
1976
Harkers Island
16
Elementary
350
289
13
K-3
Morehead
29
24
Elementary
600
546
K-6
Newport
39
35
Elementary
Smyrna
1920
30
K-8
Elementary
1941
550
1461
20
1950
1976
West Carteret
64
High
1550
1461
65
9-12
White Oak
23
24
Elementary
Morehead Central
21
400
453
22
7-8
:.

Evaluation of Existing Schools and Development Plans:
The evaluation of existing schools and future development plans is `
based on the 1972 Information and Statistics for Carteret County pub-
lished by the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction, and
plans made available through the Carteret County Board of Education.
Carteret County Schools -- Individual School Analysis:
The Atlantic Elementary School is located on a 10 acre tract and
has on -site water and sewer. The main classroom building was con-
structed in 1949 and seems to provide kindergarden space as well as
practical arts space.
The Beaufort Elementary School is located on a 10 acre tract and
is served by municipal water and sewer. The main classroom building
was constructed in 1945 and additional space was added in 1954 and
1957. The gym was constructed in 1934. This school is old but with
proper renovation it should be adequate for future use.
The Beaufort Middle School- is located on a 20 acre site and is
served by municipal water and sewer. Fire has destroyed much of the
major classroom building which should be replaced as soon as possible.
There is a question of whether to build on the same site or to acquire a
new site.
The Camp Glenn Elementary School is located on a 10 acre site in
Morehead City and is serviced by city sewage and water facilities. The
main classroom building was constructed in 1954 and the addition of an
auditorium multiple purpose room took place in 1959. This school needs
additional teaching space for the addition of a kindergarden as well as
increased - enrollment. This facility is also in need of better mainte-
nance.
East 'Carteret High School serves the entire high school population
west of the Beaufort & Morehead City Bridge. This facility was built in
1965 on an 85 acre lot and has on -site water and sewer facilities. This
facility needs additional physical education classroom space as well as
vocational space. Along with additional equipment and proper mainte-
nance this facility should remain adequate.
The Harkers Island Elementary School was constructed in 1956 on a
10 acre tract. It is serviced by an on -site sewer system and community
water system. Present enrollment indicated the need for at least one
additional classroom along with proper maintenance.
Morehead Central School is located on a 10 acre tract and -is ser-
viced by municipal water and sewage. The main classroom building was
built in 1949 with subsequent additions of space. Another facility is
being planned and should be constructed by 1977 or 1978. The pro-
posed site is in Morehead City north of St. Bridges and is approxi-
mately 25 acres.

Morehead Elementary is served by city water and sewage. This
facility is located on a 7 acre site and was built in 1929. This facility
is in the process of being rewired which should be continued along with
an overall renovation plan.
Newport Elementary is located on a 10 acre site with city water
and sewage. The main building was constructed in 1954 with major
additions in 1962 and 1968. This school is in need of improved light-
ing, additional kindergarden space, equipment for kindergarden, space
for home arts, and practical arts program.
Smyrna Elementary is located on a 28 acre site and has on -site
water and sewer. facilities. The building on this site was constructed in
1929, 1944, 1950 and 1956. This school is in need of media space,
improved lighting, additional classrooms, additional kindergarden space,
and teaching equipment. As soon as possible new structures should be
constructed on this site in order to replace the two (2) older struc-
tures.
West Carteret was constructed in 1965 and is located on a 50 acre
site. This facility is served by on -site water and sewer. This rela-
tively new facility should be kept in proper maintenance in order to
assure it will be adequate for many years to come. This facility is in
need of approximately six (6) classrooms at the present time. Also
there is a need for additional vocational space as well as teaching
equipment.
White Oak Elementary is located on a 20 acre site with on -site
water and sewer facilities. The school was constructed in 1964 with
additions in 1966. There is a need for approximately 3 classrooms,
added kindergarden space and additional teaching equipment.
Carteret County Public School Expenditures 1973-1974 Table #26
STATE
1973 - 1974 3,945,349
FEDERAL
964,713.70
LOCAL
823,862.80
Total
5,733,928.50
o from STATE o from FEDERAL o from LOCAL
1973 - 1974 68.8% 16.8 0 * 14.4 o
The county tax levy for the 1974 - 1975 fiscal year amounted to
$902,600. This includes $728,325 for operating expenses and $184,275
for capital outlay and school debt service. The total county budget for
fiscal year 1974 - 1975 amounts to $4,131, 629 .
PRIVATE SCHOOLS
Private schools in the county include Beaufort Christian Academy,
St. Egberts School, and Grace Christian School. All of these schools at
present are elementary schools except Grace Christian Academy which
offers courses through the loth grade level.

Beaufort Christian Academy offers grades kindergarden through
eighth (8th) and had an enrollment in 1973 - 1974 of approximately 85
students. They employ 6 teachers and have a student teacher ratio of
one (1) teacher for every 14 students. In 1974 - 1975 they expect to
increase enrollment to 125 and to 320 by 1976. They are expecting to
add approximately one (1) teacher a year to accommodate increased
enrollment. Their plans include a new facility and new vans to be used
as school buses.
St. Egberts School offers grades 1. - 6 and had an enrollment in
1973 _ 1974 of approximately 85 students. They employed 3 full time
teachers and 4 part time teachers. In 1974 - 1975 they expect to
expand their enrollment to approximately 90 students. There are no
future plans for expansion of facilities.
The Grace Christian Academy offers grades kindergarden through
tenth. The 1973 - 1974 enrollment for this school was approximately
120, and they employed seven (7) teachers. In 1974 - 1975 they expect
approximately 150 students. At present the school does not have any
plans to expand their facilities, which can accommodate approximately
200 students.
TECHNICAL EDUCATION
The labor demand in Carteret County and surrounding areas is
demanding more and more skilled labor. These demands come from the
construction industry, Cherry Point, the State Port, and many other
sources. The county must provide opportunities for its residents to
acquire necessary skills to compete for the jobs available.
With this in mind, the county has put a great deal of emphasis on
CTI. The main portion of the school is located on a fifteen (15) acre
site in western Morehead City. This has been expanded recently by
approximatey seven (7) acres on the West and thirty-one (31) feet on
the East. Included in this expansion were several buildings .that can
be used as work shops.
I. Facilities
A. Main
Building
1.
Classrooms - 19
2.
Shops - 4
B. Hut
(4 shops)
C . 5 shops in other buildings
D . Other
1. Auditorium
2. Library.
3. Learning Labs (2)
4. Appliance Repair Class (Downtown)

II. Enrollment
A. Full Time
1. Fall - 280
2. Winter - 314
3. Spring - 269
4. Summer - 132
B . Part -Time
1. Fall - 246
2. Winter - 64
3. Spring - 209
4. . Summer - 77
III. Teachers
A. Full Time - 28
B . Part -Time - 20
IV. Budget
A . ' 1974 County Budget for CTI Operating Expenses was $72, 200
B. 1974 County Budget for CTI Debt Service was $43,875
C . Total 1974 County Tax levy for CTI was $114, 075 . (.0325
miles)
Evaluation
The present classroom situation is adequate, but the lab space is
not adequate. A total enrollment of 600 is expected for 1974 - 1975.
This is about a 75 student increase from 1973 - 1974. The largest
increase is in the technical areas as opposed to general education.
Future Plans
Future plans for CTI include additional curriculum such as:
A. The ability to offer general college requirements with
contracting with East Carolina.
B . The addition of a commercial fishing curriculum.
C . The addition of a Hotel, Motel Management and Con-
dominiums management curriculum.
D . The addition of a Land Scaping & Horticulture Curri-
culum.
E . The addition of a building maintenance curriculum (for
janitor service) .
.o

F . To improve the buildings that were recently obtained in
their expansion program.
CARTERET COUNTY LIBRARY SERVICE
The Carteret County Library system is a very important element in
the social and economic life of the county. All the citizens of the
county are benefited by the library system, and due to the increased
population and demand for library service, the role of the county
library system is -becoming more and more important.
The existing facilities include a main library facility, one branch
and a bookmobile. The main building is a new and attractive building
located near the Central Business District of Beaufort. There are three
(3) full time employees at this site and three (3) part-time. The
branch facility is located in the Newport city office building and usually
has one (1) attendant. The bookmobile is -,a 1973 Ford Van and offers
service throughout the county.
At present the county library systems contain approximately 30,000
total books.. These books are available through the main library in
Beaufort, the Bookmobile and the branch in Newport. Circulation of
books in the main library amounted to 53,383 books last year. The
bookmobile circulated 55,973 books, and the Newport branch circulated
8,641. The three (3) elements of the county library system circulated a
total of 117,999 books last year, or approximately 3.6 books per capita.
The county library also offers the use of film strips. Last year
the county library system let out 140 16mm films obtained through the
N.C. State Library films service. The seating capacity is below
average, but for the most part there is not a demand for a greater
seating capacity. The total county budget for the library is $32,352.
Both the North Carolina Library Association and the American
Library Association have published standards which contain policy
guides and recommended goals for the development of adequate library
systems It must be remembered that realistic goals must be adopted
for individual library systems.
Evaluation
In evaluating the library system in Carteret County, one should
first of all notice that the main library facility is new and seems to
have adequate space for the use of the public as well as being centrally
located. The bookmobile seems to be functioning quite well as indicated
by its circulation figure of 55,973. The branch at Newport seems to 'be
functioning below par. The number of books available (30,000) is
low -- quite a bit low as compared to the national average per capita..
RECREATION
Although Carteret County is well endowed with many natural and
beautiful recreational locations, there is a need for county development
and coordination of recreational facilities. The purpose of public
91

recreation is to serve people of all ages with a variety of recreational
opportunities that wll enrich ther lives.
The Carteret County recreational department has responsibility for
providing public benefit and enjoyment through parks and ball fields as
well as the many programs offered. Adequate recreational facilities and
programs enrich the lives of all county citizens, as well as attract
prospective residents to the county. Without the coordination provided
by the recreation department, many segments of the county would not
have access to- adequate recreational facilities.
Existing recreational facilities in the county include Atlantic Beach,
the Outer Banks, Ft. Macon State Park and 56,169 acres of the Croatan
National Forest. The Town of Beaufort has a 4 acre park, including
tennis courts. Morehead City has a 4 acre park and two (2) recrea-
tional centers including tennis courts. At present the county has two
(2) large community parks. One (1) is located on the east side of
Beaufort, and the other in the Country Club area of Morehead City.
Also there is another smaller park located in the Smyrna area. At the
present time all of these parks are still in the process of development.
It seems obvious that county recreational facilities fall far below
minimum standards as set forth on page 5 of A Plan for Parks and
Recreation in Carteret County, prepared in 1974.
This plan offers several recommendations that if followed will
assure sufficient park and recreational facilities are available to -accom-
modate present and future needs of citizens of Carteret County.
The first of these recommendations is to develop the two (2)
community parks the county has recently acquired. It is felt that large
parks of this nature are needed to provide citizens both in the eastern
and western portions of the county access to a large well planned and
well equipped park area. A description of facilities proposed for these
sites are included with the 1974 Plan.
The next recommendation is to develop seven (7) neighborhood
parks of five (5) to ten (10) acres throughout the county. This is an
attempt to bring park and recreational facilities into the neighborhood.
The facilities to be included in these parks is also outlined in the 1974
Plan.
The Plan also recommends the organization and development of a
large (approximately 50 acre) park on the Bogue Banks in order to
provide citizens of Carteret County more access to the county's water
resources.
Finally it is felt that the success of this plan is dependent on
continued efforts to maintain a well staffed Recreational Department.
The 1975 fiscal year's budget for the Parks and Recreation
Department is $99, 750. Of this budget $49, 750.00 is for operating cost
and comes from the county. The other $50,000.00 is a budget amount
to match an anticipated grant of $50, 000.00 from the Bureau of Outdoor
92

Recreation. In addition the County Parks and Recreation Department
received $4, 735.00 from the Neuse River Council of Governments to help
support some of its summer programs. -
County State Federal Total
$49,750.00 $4,735.00 $50,000.00 $104,485.00
MEDICAL FACILITIES AND HEALTH SERVICES
Hospitals
There are two (2) hospitals in Carteret County that offer a total
of 170 adult beds and 22 bassinets.
Carteret General is an attractive building located on Highway 70 in
Morehead City. The 1974 county tax levy for the hospital operating
fund was $61,425. Debt Services levy was $52,650. The total tax levy
for Carteret General Hospital is $114,075. The total budget for
Carteret General in 1974 was $136,125. There are plans to add a 4th
floor to the existing. structure that will add 22 beds and increase the
total adult beds in this hospital from 98 to 120. The estimated contract
price of the additions is $750,000 of which $500,000 will come from the
county. At present the hospital is operating at an 80% occupancy rate.
Office space is becoming cramped and should be studied carefully as to
future expansion. At the present time parking facilities are adequate
but. they should be considered in conjunction with the number of beds
being added to the structure.
Staffing is helped by the fact that Carteret Tech supplies many
LPN's that are needed. Registered nurses are more of a problem to
obtain. Cherry Point Marine Base helps to supply many nurses, but of
these there is a high turnover rate.
Sea Level Hospital is owned by Duke University and is located in
the Eastern, less populated portion of the county. This division of
hospitals is necessary because of the length of the county, and its
sparse population east of Beaufort. The main building is adequate and
offers a total of 72 adult beds and 4 bassinets. At the present time
they are operating at approximately 60 0 occupancy rate. The hospital
seems to be adequate from the standpoint of total number of beds, but
the number of bassinets does seem to be low.
The number of beds in the county is adequate to accommodate the
year round population. The increase in summer tourism and the
presence of Cherry Point Marine base in the vicinity would warrant a
close look at the actual demand placed on hospital facilities in Carteret
County. This refers basically to emergency room facilities and
personnel.
RKI

Also there seems to be a need for adequate medical. arts space.
This could be associated with hospital office space in the immediate
vicinity of the hospitals.
HEALTH SERVICES
I. County Health Department
The Carteret County Health Department offers a variety of
services to the citizens of the county. These services are provided
through major branches, including the Sanitation Department, the
General Health Services Department, and the Mosquito and Rabies
Control Department. These branches of the County Health Department
are dedicated to providing a minimum standard of health protection and
health service to the citizens of the county. The county tax levy for
Health Services is $228,150. The total county budget for Health
Services is $581,317.00.
Sanitation Department
The Sanitation Deprtment is composed of a Chief County Sanitarian
and four (4) other sanitarians . They are housed in the now
overcrowded Health Department building along with other members of
the Health Department staff. Their duties involve inspection services
for different segments of the county in an attempt to keep general
sanitaton facilities up to a desirable level. This would include
inspection of schools, motels, restaurants, individual water and sewer
facilities, milk products, swimming pools, stream pollution, meat markets
and food handlers in general, jails, ambulances, and various other
facilities used by the general public in Carteret County.
Major Inspection Services by the Health Department in 1973
A - 5,126 total inspection visits
B - 14 schools inspected
C - 383 new water systems were approved
D - 766 new sewer installations approved
E - 342 stream pollution inspections
F - 33 food and drink stand ratings
G - 207 restaurant ratings
H - 69 motel and hotel ratings
Health Department (General Health Services Provided)
The general health section of the Health Department is housed in
the same crowded building as the sanitation department. At present
this department is composed of six (6) nurses and three (3) clerical
94

people. This section of the health department is concerned with
offering medical aid to the citizens of the county in many different
forms. It should be noted that they are becoming more of a health
services provider than ever before. This is demonstrated by their new
role under Title XIX of the Child Health Program. Basically this
program provides, through the Health Department, more extensive
services to children from low income families. Along with projected
population increases, this idea of the Health Department becoming more
of a health provider indicates a need for expansion of Health
Department facilities, personnel and equipment.
Basis Services Offered by the General Health Section
of the Health Department
1. Vital Statistics
2. General Clinics
A . ' Daily immunizations
B . Blood Tests
C . V . D . Detection
D . T.B. Skin Tests
E . Health Cards (issued)
y
3. X-Ray Clinics
4. Pre -School Clinics
5. Chest Clinics
6. Orthopedic Clinics
7. Nurse Screening Clinics
8. Pediatric Screening Clinics
9. Communicable Disease and Venereal Disease
10. School
11. Chronic Disease Control
12. Family Planning Clinics
13. Dental Program
14. Eye Clinics .
95

15. Glaucoma and Diabetes Screening
16. Cancer Screening
17. Hypertension
18. Migrant Health
19. Gonorrhea Cultures
Mosauito and Rabies Control Department
The Mosquito and Rabies Control Department is an arm of the
Health Department. Its primary responsibilities include mosquito con-
trol, rodent control, fire ant control, rabies control, collection of dogs
and the operation of the dog pound, and drainage work for the county.
All of these are full time responsibilities and are performed along with
other services this department is requested to perform for the county.
The administrative offices, storage areas, maintenance shop, and
dog pound are all located at the county airport. There is a lack of
storage space for the equipment operated by this department. Also
there is a total of twenty (20) employees and one director operating
within this department.
SOCIAL ASSISTANCE
Social Services
The Social Services Department provides a variety of services to
the citizens of Carteret County, including financial aid to needy people,
family service, licensing of certain institutions, services to institutions
involved in handling the county's poor, aged or sick, medical care for
specified needy people, as well as many other services.
Three (3) levels of government including federal, state and county
are involved in administering social services to the citizens of Carteret
County. The basis of Social Services is determined by Federal law, but
N.C. legislation has provided for its administration within the state.
The state supervises the administration, but the county is its main arm
of administration.
The Social Services Department includes 36 employees:
1 Director
8 Social Workers
1 Social Worker Supervisor
1 Homemaker
10 Clerical Workers
0.

9 Eligibility Specialists
1 Eligibility Specialist Supervisor
2 Registered Nurses
2 Licensed Practical Nurses
1 Personal Care & Family Aid Specialist
Specific Programs Include:
February, 1974
1. Aid to families with dependent children 627
2. Medicaid 279
3. Local General Assistance 21
4. Foster Home Placements 41
For Year 1972 - 1973
1. Eligible for medicaid services under Title XIX - 1,345
2. Social Services budget in 1972 - 1973 was $1,541,268.23
31. In 1973 - 1974 the budget was $1, 805 ,133.00
Local State & Federal Other Revenue Total
1973-1974 $140,400 $1,532;117 $132,616 $1,805,133
Other Services Provided by the Social Services Department
1. Adoption - (for unwed mothers and for prospective persons
who may want to adopt.)
2. Licensing and Supervising Foster Care Homes...
3. Protective Care (taking cases if reported.)
4. Social workers help to move parents, etc. (try to help them
be able to get child back)
5. Provide Services to all public service receivers.
6. Planning and placing in rest homes, family care, nursing
homes.
97

7. Licensing and supervising rest homes and nursing homes.
8. Providing protective services to all adults in Carteret County
and other social services to adults.
9. Providing work incentive to families under AFDC.
10. Assist in having persons committed to Cherry Center Hospital
in Goldsboro and Caswell Training.
11. Certify persons to receive food stamps.
12. Issue work permits to youngsters.
13. Provide nursing services and aid services to persons at home
that have been referred by families or physicians. (55
persons required 125 visits)
14.
Maintain
clothing
closet.
15.
Provide
social
history to persons needing a psychological
evaluation by the, state psychiatrist.
16. Making referrals of people who need to go to Development
Evaluation Clinics in Greenville.
17. Provide homemaker services for persons who do not have
anyone to do so.
18. Provide female attendants for transfers to Caswell or women's
prison.
19. Handle home investigation in divorce and custody situations.
20. Serve as social agency in the county for home studies upon
request.
21. Provide consulting services to adult day care center.
22. Certify for crippled children's fund.
23. County eye clinic (help coordinate) .
REFUGE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL
Due to the growing population of Carteret County, as well as
increased tourism, solid waste disposal is becoming more and more im-
portant. In Carteret County the municipalities provide house -to -house
collection service once or twice a week. There are private collectors
that provide this type of service in portions of the county for a fee.
The county also provides a container collection system (including over
100 Green Boxes) for the rural areas of the county. The county pro-
vides the pick-up service for the containers West of the North River
Bridge and a private collector provides the collection for the containers
East of the North River Bridge.
r�

The county landfill site is located in the Croatan National Forest
near Newport. This site is serviced by two county packer trucks, one
front end loader, one dragline, and a new trash compactor. Some
equipment used at this site is used in conjunction with the Mosquito
Control Department. All solid waste collected West of the North River
Bridge, except the collections within the Beaufort corporate limits, is
taken to this site. There is an average of approximately 60 large truck
loads of solid waste per day in addition to numerous small loads
deposited at this site per day. It is estimated that this site should last
about two years due to the new compactor that is now in operation.
There is another site in the same general vicinity that is under consid-
eration for a future landfill site. Since this site is in the Croatan
National Forest, the county must negotiate with the Park Service for
the use of this site. It is important that the present site be kept up
to the State Health Service standards so as to indicate to the Croatan
National Forest Authorities the county is capable of operating the future
landfill site adequately.
There is a private landfill site located in the Atlantic area that is
used to handle all of the solid waste East of the North River Bridge.
This site is on approximately one hundred acre site and should be
adequate for quite a long time. A private . contractor operates this site
and the collection of green boxes east of the North River Bridge.
POLICE PROTECTION
The Sheriff's Department of Carteret County is authorized by law
to enforce motor vehicles laws, criminal laws and many more. Just as
important as the above mentioned laws, the sheriff and his department
are involved in civil matters such as the execution and return of civil
process issued by the District Court. In addition, the sheriff is
required to serve and process all Superior Court orders and/or sub-
poenas.
The Carteret County Sheriff's Department is located in Beaufort at
the Courthouse square and is housed in the county jail.
The present Sheriff's Department is composed of:
1. 8 Deputies
2. 1 Clerk
3. 1 Jailer plus 2 Night Jailers
4. 1 Bailiff
5. 2 Jail Cooks
6. 1 Chief and 3 Communications Operators
Deputies provide their own patrol vehicles, however, Carteret
County pays for uniforms, vehicle travel, maintenance, communications
equipment and other related law enforcement equipment.
FIRE PROTECTION
In Carteret County there are 18 volunteer fire departments of
which only two (2) have paid personnel. There are over four hundred

(400) firemen in the county that answer over two hundred (200) calls
annually. They also spend more than six hundred (600) hours training
each year, seven hundred and fifty (750) hours in meetings and eight
hundred and ten (810) hours raising money for the fire departments.
In addition, the firemen help inspect schools, foster homes and hold
fire drills and give fire fighting classes and instruction in local schools.
Last year the volunteer firemen in Carteret County spent more than two
thousand eight hundred (2,800) hours performing the duties of
volunteer firemen
Last year the firemen of Carteret County spent more than fifty
thousand dollars ($50,000) for protective clothing and personnel equip-
ment needed for fire fighting. A large part of this money comes out of
the pockets of the firemen. Also, they additionally drive their personal
vehicles more than twenty-one thousand (21,000) miles a year.
The volunteer fire departments in the county own more than one
million five hundred forty thousand ($1,540,000) worth of equipment,
land and buildings. Included in this figure are thirty six (36) pumper
trucks, seven (7) tanker trucks, two (2) pick up trucks and fourteen
(14) rescue vehicles.
As a result of the volunteer fire departments in the county, fire
insurance rates in approved fire districts have gone down. Of the
eighteen (18) fire departments in the county, two (2) have 9AA rating,
two (2) have 9 ratings, one (1) has a 6 rating and twelve (12) have 10
ratings.
The average response time for county fire departments is approx
imately three (3) minutes. This is mainly due to a tone activated
alerting system in more than one hundred and fifty (150) homes of .
volunteer firemen. All fire fighting equipment is radio controlled, and
the central emergency communications center is available to receive calls
for all areas of the county. This communication system handles more
than nine hundred (900) emergency calls annually.
RESCUE SQUADS
At the present time, Carteret County has nine (9) volunteer
rescue squads, including Mill Creek, Morehead City, Harkers Island,
Sea Level, Broad and Gales Creek, Newport, Beaufort, Salter Path, and
Merrimon, and South River. The services, these volunteer organizations
provide are among the most essential to the citizens of the county.
Basically they provide emergency ambulance service to accident
victims and non -emergency service to the needy upon request of a
doctor. Although this is their basic duty they provide many other
services such as assisting in recovering drowning victims, and ad.! -
ministering highly qualified emergency medical aid to accident victims.
In addition, the men in these organizations offer their services to the
community during any type emergency.
100

AIR TRANSPORTATION
The Morehead -Beaufort Airport located adjacent to the corporate
limits of the Town of Beaufort was established by the Department of
Defense during the World War II period. The primary purpose of the
construction of the airport facility was to privide another military
airport facility to be included in the Coastal Air Defense System during
World War II. Other similar coastal air defense facilities located in
Carteret County and constructed during the World War II era are Bogue
Field, located west of but adjacent to the Town of Cape Carteret and
Atlantic Field, located north of and adjacent to the community of
Atlantic. The Morehead -Beaufort facility was turned over to Carteret
County after World War II and Atlantic and Bogue Field were retained
by the Department of Defense for training purposes.
Since the receipt of Morehead -Beaufort Airport . from the Depart-
ment of Defense, the facility has been utilized basically as. an airport
serving the local civil aviation needs. During recent years the
Morehead -Beaufort Airport has become ever increasingly, important to
Carteret County due to two (2) basic reasons. The first being the
availability of commuter air service, which adds to the accessibility of
Carteret County, thus benefiting not only the tourist industry but our
business and manufacturing industry. The second basic reason for the
airport facility's ever increasing importance is due to its strategic
location. The Morehead -Beaufort Airport facility has been termed by
many as being an ideal spot or location for a possible industrial park.
The reason for such comments are clear. The facility first of all pro-
vides air service which could be expanded to include air freight
service. Located adjacent to the Town of Beaufort, public water,
public sewage and other public services could be provided at a lesser
cost as compared to other potential industrial park locations. In
addition to air service and public services, rail service and water
freight service can be provided.
The Morehead -Beaufort Airport is located on approximately 340
acres and contains a 4,250 foot and a 4,400 foot runway. The runways
can accommodate medium sized propeller aircraft and small business jet
aircraft. The airport provides hanger space and fuel service. Aircraft
maintenance and repair service are not offered at the facility. The
terminal and communications building is a small concrete block building
that would have to be expanded if additional commuter service or com-
munications service is needed. Airport parking is of a minimum 'and
parking facilities would have to be improved and expanded if additional
commuter service is made available.
The Morehead -Beaufort Airport facility has great potential parti-
cularly along the line of a future industrial park. Previous and
existing land use regulations which regulate development adjacent to the
airport expansion due to the allowance of residential development to abut
airport property.
101

V . ESTIMATED DEMANDS
In order to plan properly for the future, the estimated demand on
the land should be considered and analyzed. This section will consider
the demand for land that will stem from the projected year round popu-
lation, the projected seasonal population, and projected economic
trends. From this analysis, future land needs for the county will be
analyzed as well as the demand placed on community facilities.
A. Population and Econom
1. Population - Public input received throughout , the early
planning process has indicated most residents are pleased
with the nature of the county and do not care to see drastic
changes in population. In most cases, moderate to low
increases in population were indicated as desirable.
Population projections provided by Office of State Plan-
ning of the North Carolina Department of Administration
indicates the following population projections for Carteret
County.
1975 1980 1985 2000 2025
35,000* 39,550 44,100 56,600 70,000
_Interpreted by Carteret County Planning Department
These figures indicate an increase of 9100 people in the
county over the next 10 years. However, if the predicted
ten year population for municipalities are examined, it is
found that the municipalities alone are predicting population
increases of 12,500 for 1985. Population increases in the
unincorporated areas of the county would be added to the
12,500 figure.
The Land Classification Map included in this plan can be
used to demonstrate the manner in which the ten year popula-
tion growth will be apportioned throughout the county.
Relationship of Long Range Projections to the Desires of the People
Long range population projection derived by some mathematical
formula can be considered as a guess at best. Ten year projections are
sometimes difficult to determine accurately because of the many
unknowns which may alter the final outcome. Closing of a military
installation, economic recession, rural to urban migration are all factors
which may contribute to a decline in population growth. The reverse of
these factors can also contribute to. increases in population not
foreseen. This is all to say that long range population projections
should be used as a guide and not as absolute.
.,
102

Carteret County long range projections indicate the county will
increase to a population of 70,000 in the year 2025. If this number of
people were reached over the next fifty years, it would mean a
doubling of the present population. Doubling of the population over
the next fifty years does not necessarily carry adverse conditions. If
the location of this additional growth is properly planned for, amenities
protected, the increase in population can probably be handled without a
great deal of difficulty.
However, it is expected that a majority of these people will want to
settle along Bogue Sound and on Bogue Banks. Great numbers of
additional persons living on Bogue Banks under present conditions will
be almost impossible. Without central water and sewer systems, the
land simply cannot sustain large amounts of high density growth.
Additional high density growth on Bogue Banks under present condi-
tions will create the adverse condition of polluting the sound and ocean,
and possibly the aquifer.
The desires of the people have already been stated. Low to mod-
erate growth in most areas of the county has been the desire of those
participating in the early public participation process. When the total
expected growth, as expressed by the municipalities, is compared with
the expected population for the entire county, total of expected popula-
tion growth over the next 50 years may be compatible. Total population
within municipal planning areas is expected to be around 70,000
persons. The total county population, based on desires of the people,
is expected to be around 70,000 in 2025. At first glance, these figures
may not appear to be compatible, since additional people will be living
in areas not included in town planning areas. However, it must be
.remembered that we are dealing with a long period of time. Much of
the now unincorporated areas with concentrations of people may very
well be within the planning jurisdiction of one of the towns. Also,
additional incorporations are possible.
Another factor contributes to the expected growth within an area
which is often not given enough consideration. This factor is known as
the built-in growth factor. Built-in growth is determined largely by
examining the number of platted, undeveloped lots which already exist
in an area. Also, zoning of property, especially of undeveloped land,
is used to determine potential growth. Zoning is not very accurate
because of its sometimes dynamic nature. It is subject to and likely to
change over the course of time. Also zoning densities give minimum lot
sizes or number of units per acre and in many cases the maximum
density cannot or will not occur.
When the built-in growth factors for Carteret County and its muni-
cipalities are examined some interesting statistics become obvious. The
following table gives an indication of built-in growth for the towns.
Column I of the table indicates over 153,000 potential people if present
conditions developed to the maximum. However, this figure includes a
potential total population of 67,300 for Emerald Isle which appears to be
unreasonable. The Town of Emerald Isle has indicated a maximum
population of around 28,000. If the 28,000 figure is used, the potential
population for municipal planning areas is around 114, 000. It should be
103

A 9
5
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
I.
�p
2025
# OF PLATTED,
# OF PERSONS
POT.
# OF UNPLAT
ZONING
# OF
POT.
TOT. POT.
1975
POP.
UNDEVELOPED
PER
POP.
TED, RES.
# UNIT/
PERSON/
POP.
POP.
1975 POP. +
POP.
(EXPECTED)
LOTS
HOUSEHOLD
AW=C
ACRES
ACRE
HOUSEHOLD
DxExF=G
C+G=H
POT. POP.(H)
BEAUFORT
3,719
4,601
193.
3.0
579
183
R-15
3.0
1,647
2,226
5,945
3 DU/AC
(1,3.14+)
MOREHEAD CITY**
7,281
15,600
382
3.1
1,184
1,500
R-15
3.1
13,950
.15,134
22,415
3 DU/AC
(6,815+)
ATLANTIC BEACH***
7,360
11,189
324
4.0
1,296
225
RR
4.0
7,200
8,496
15,856
8.0
(4667+)
DU/AC
PINE KNOLL SHORES*
1,770
7,800
778
2.5
1,945
234
10
3.0
7,020
7,798
9,568
DU/AC
(1,763+)
INDIAN BEACH*
5,200
7,480
92
80
4.0
2,944
3,344
8,5,.4
50
DU/AC
4.0
400
(1,064+)
2 DU/AC
FMERALD ISLE*
5,672
17,000
2,400
4.0
9,600
1,300
10
4.0
52,000
61,600
67,30
DU/AC
(50,272)
CAPE CARTERET
790
3,400
(854)***
3.1
1,984
50
3 DU/AC
3.1
465
2,449
3,239
640
(161-)
NE4PORT
1,942
4,543
155
3.2
496
333
3.5
3.2
3,715
4,211
6,153
DU/AC
(1,612+)
AVERAGE
ONE -MILE AREA
1,978
4,727
119
3.2
380
NA
N/A
N/A
'ACREAGE
12,380
14,353
& ZONING
(9,631+)
= 12,000
*INCLUDES SEASONAL POPULATION IF CONSIDERED SIGNIFICANT 153,371
**INCLUDES ONE -MILE AREA
***MANY LOTS ARE TOO MALL TO BUILD ON
****INDICATES MAXIMUM # OF HOUSING UNITS IF DEVELOPED TO MAXIMUM ALLOWED UNDER ZONING

noted that this does not include potential growth in unincorporated
areas of the county.
Zoned Areas of the County
These figures represent primarily unplatted, zoned residential
acreage.
Bogue Banks
# of platted lots =
15
# of persons per household =
3.1
potential population =
47
# of unplatted, residential acres =
75
zoning (# of units per acre) =
8.0
# of persons per household =
3.1
potential population =
1,860
Total potential population =
1,907
In addition, there are some 1,535 motel/hotel rooms on Bogue
Banks. With an occupancy rate of 3 per room, an additional 4605
persons can be expected during seasonal months.
Counting municipalities, county areas, and motel/hotel accom-
modations, the potential population based on built in growth
factors for Bogue Banks is 68,480. (This figure assumes that the
maximum population of Emerald Isle will not exceed 28,000.)
Morehead Citv Area
# of unplatted acres = 300
Zoning (# of units per acre) = 3.0
# of persons per household = 3.1
Total potential population = 2,790
Newport Area
# of unplatted residential acres = 200
Zoning (# of units per acre) = 3
# of persons per household = 3.1
Total potential population = 1,870
Beaufort Area
# of unplatted, residential acres = 1, 000+
Zoning (# of units per household) = 3
# of persons per household = 3.1
Total potential population = 9,300
Total potential population in zoned areas of the county 15,857
104

Vacant, platted lots within subdivisions in county areas
outside municipal planning areas.
*# of platted, undeveloped lots = 2,000
# of persons per household = 3.1
Potential population = 6,200
Total potential built-in growth for county areas 22,057
*Does not include lots scattered throughout the county,
only subdivisions.
The foregoing information gives potential growth due to built-in
factors in unincorporated areas of the county. The total potential
growth for county areas is 22,057. This brings the total potential
population based on existing built-in growth factors to 136,135 con-
siderably above the desired, expected population of 70,000.
(It should be noted that some of the zoning figures are based on
the assumption that sewer services will be provided. Therefore,
the likelihood of developing at the indicated densities is not very
great. It should also be pointed out that zoning . densities are
maximums, and development will not generally occur at the
maximum density allowed, especially where water and/or sewer
services are not provided from the beginning of development.)
The significance of these numbers is to give local officials some
idea of what to plan for in the way of services . If the population
doubles or quadruples over the next fifty years, additional services will
have to be provided. This is especially true with water and sewer.
Existing services will have to be upgraded.
Although population growth can mean prosperity for an area, it
can also be very costly to taxpayers. The demand for services will
place additional burdens on taxpayers and if development is not well
planned, the county will ultimately suffer from loss of natural amenities.
It is up to the people of Carteret County to determine if growth is to
occur with little or no restraint. The decision made will determine what
additional costs will be paid by the people of the county.
2. Tourist Attraction of the County - This factor indicates the
county has the potential of attracting significant population
increases. It is felt by most citizens of the county that
tourism draws people to the county and helps support them if
they choose to stay.
3. Retirement
Communities - This factor
also indicates
the
potential
of the
county to attract
additional
population.
There are
several
areas of the county
that have
experienced
growth in
the past
because of this factor, and in
fact seem to
have the potential
to attract additional
retirees.
105

4. Improved Transportation - This factor is very subtle. Recent
and projected improvements to Highway 70 seem to have made
Carteret County a little more attractive. These improvements
will make Carteret County more accessible to the remainder of
the State. Also, transportation within the county has
improved and seems to have made the county more attractive.
One good example of this is the improved bridge systems
throughout the county.
The people of- Carteret County must participate in the
future planning efforts. If it appears the long range
population estimates are not desirable, they must convey their
ideas to the Carteret County Planning Commission and
Carteret County Board of Commissioners. If this occurs, the
planning efforts can be adjusted in accordance with the
desires of the people if necessary.
The Department of the Navy is presently conducting a study to
determine land use and aircraft compatibility for military airport faci-
lities. The study will focus on aircraft noise impacts on property
abutting military airports and on the establishment of aircraft hazard
areas or zones. (See Land Use Compatibility Section.)
The Relationship of the Capabilities of the Land
to Support Proiected PoAulations
The use of the carrying capacity concept as a planning tool has
significant limitations. However, it is reasonable to assume that future
planning must recognize that physical limits exist where certain levels
of human activity will lead to undesirable and unacceptable degradations
of the environment. Considering the resource limitation of local coastal
planning bodies, it is obvious that the carrying capacity of a particular
areas can only be roughly determined. Nevertheless, if these limita-
tions are recognized, the carry capacity concept can still provide a
useful planning tool.
In the coastal area the detrimental effects of sewage disposal on
ground and surface water resources represent an important. example of
physical limitations on development. Up to a certan density, the land
is capable of absorbing human waste from on -site sewage disposal
systems without adverse effects on the quality of ground and surface
waters within the area. After the density is reached, then any
increased development results in lowering the quality of ground and
surface waters. . Up to a certain point, both marine life and human life
can tolerate lower quality of surface and ground water. Once the
toleration point is reached, the waters become unusable or unacceptable
for use by marine life and humans. At this point a choice of alterna-
tives present themselves for handling the situation. These alternatives
include limiting further increases in density, putting money and energy
into the system to provide alternative methods of waste disposal, or
tolerating the lowering the water quality as an . acceptable "cost" of
further development. Unfortunately, many people prefer the last of the
alternatives, with little regard to degradation of environmental aspects
necessary for the quality of life.
106

It is clear that at some point density must be regulated or the r
quality of water will be lowered. This is especially true under present
conditions in Carteret County with most of the county, and particularly
Bogue Banks, operating individual wells and septic tank systems.
The choice of alternatives is further complicated by the fact that
the financial costs of alternative systems, even public sewerage facil-
ities, are high and there exists a general lack of money to finance the
projects. The amount of growth related sewerage facilities which will
be funded by EPA is strictly limited under existing regulations; and
State Clean Water Bond Act monies have effectively already been
allocated or expended. Therefore, Carteret County must recognize the
very real possibility of increasing costs for public sewage facilities at
the same time . that outside available funding capacity is decreasing.
It might be appropriate to point out here that many coastal
communities may assume that the adoption and enforcement of more
stringent septic tank and land use density regulations, whether at the
state or local level, coupled with the possible inability of the
communities to finance central sewage facilities, may tend to severely
retard economic development. However, the real long run effect is that
such limitations should encourage an ordered, thoughtful pattern of
development which benefits not only the permanent residents of the area
but developers as well. Enforcement of such regulations would mean
that the costs of constructing sewage disposal units or of financing
alternative types of on -site sewage disposal systems would be borne
ultimately not by the developers or by the permanent residents, but by
the creator of the waste - the buyer. Unless septic tank regulations
are strictly enforced, there will be no economic incentive to develop
alternative on -site systems, and the present trend toward a prolifera-
tion of the use of these systems in coastal residential developments will
continue with a consequent diminution of ground and surface water
quality.
WATER QUALITY AND CARRYING CAPACITY
In the coastal area water resources, both in terms of their quality
and their availability, may very well constitute the key carrying
capacity determinant. With our increasing awareness of the importance
of estuarine waters and wetlands as the breeding grounds of our marine
fisheries and our increasing concern over the quality and availability of
ground water supplies in the coastal area, the amount of degradation
which we are willing to accept in these . water resources may constitute
the carrying capacity limitation which we reach before any other.
Hence, the relationship between projected growth and area water quality
is a key issue which should be addressed in the land use plan.
PLANNING RELATED TO WATER QUALITY PROBLEMS
Carteret County is currently involved in planning for central
sewage disposal by way of the 201 Facility Plan. At this time the plan
is still being revised, but preliminary indications are that sewage
treatment will continue at the three existing plants (Beaufort, Morehead
City and Newport) with upgrading of the facilities, and an additional
Ir
107

treatment system on East Bogue Banks. The East Bogue' Banks system
includes ocean outfall for disposal which is under fire from EPA.
The Cape Carteret -West Bogue Banks areas within the county are
under the Swansboro 201 Facilities Plan. It too is still in preliminary
form. Present alternatives for disposal include spray irrigation and
ocean outfall.
Completion of these studies and their eventual implementation have
tremendous significance on future growth in Carteret County and the
towns. Without these facilities growth opportunities will necessarily
have to be curtailed in order to protect the public health. For the
systems to become a reality, residents of Carteret County and towns
are probably going to have to contribute financially. It should be
recognized that this is just one of the costs associated with growth in
an environmentally sensitive area.
SURFACE WATER PROBLEMS IN CARTERET COUNTY
As stated above, the increasing awareness of the great value, both
in ecological and in economical terms of our estuarine waters and wet-
lands has caused increased concern over the quality of our coastal
surface waters. These coastal waters are the collecting basins for land
run-off from adjacent areas,. for the drainage of the entire eastern
divide, and for seepage of effluents from adjacent ground waters.
Their capacity to assimilate the products of run=off, , drainage, and
seepage differs from one body to another, depending primarily on
circulation patterns. This means that the ability of Currituck or
Albemarle Sounds to effectively assimilate` human sewage is much less
than that of a body of water with better circulation patterns, such as
Bogue Sound or the lower Cape Fear Estuary.
Although North Carolina's sounds have thus far generally been
able to effectively absorb and convert the fertilizer run-off and sewage
waste loads imposed upon them, there are an increasing number of
indications that their capacity to assimilate non -or poorly treated sewage
has been exceeded in some areas.
Perhaps the most significant index is the number of acres of
county waters closed to the taking of shellfish. As of the end of
February, approximately 670,000 acres, or about one-thirdof the
state's coastal waters, were closed to our oyster and clam fisherman.
Of this amount, approximately 5700 acres of shellfish waters of Carteret
County were closed.
GROUNDWATER PROBLEMS IN THE COASTAL AREA
Lowering of the quality and availability of ground water resources
in the coastal area is also a significant potential problem in the coastal
area and hence also a potential carrying capacity limitation. As a
result of federal and state regulations, increasingly stringent regula-
tions have been imposed on the disposal of wastes into the surface
waters. Hence, more emphasis has been placed on land disposal of
waste in order to reduce increasingly higher treatment costs made
108

necessary by the surface water discharge on land or into holding
ponds, lagoons, and septic tanks, posing a serious threat to the
groundwater quality, as these systems are usually inadequately
designed to preserve the quality of groundwater.
Most of the groundwater pollution resulting from surface activities
remains within the upper few feet of the water table; however, the
polluted ground water flows laterally and discharges into streams,
sounds and other surface water bodies, and usually causes deterioration
of the surface water quality.
Although the water table aquifer is not presently utilized as a
primary source for public water supplies, it is a major source of supply
for domestic uses. The water table aquifer is highly vulnerable to
pollution from surface activities in the coastal areas of the county for
several reasons. The water table is close to the surface and the
permeability of the surface sands is such that the waste is not usually
filtered to the degree necessary to prevent deterioration of the ground-
water. Also, in many coastal areas, the seasonal high water table is
very near the top of the land surface and, in some cases, septic tank
nitrification lines in these areas are below the water table.
Areas in which the water table aquifer is the primary source of
fresh water and areas in which the soil conditions are not suitable for
waste treatment should be protected with stringent regulations to
prohibit the installation of any surface pollution source that would lower
the natural existing groundwater quality below the limits recommended
for safe drinking water.
The significance of all this discussion of carrying capacity is how
it relates to Carteret County. Based on prior discussion of potential
population increases in the county, it can readily be seen that current
conditions will not allow doubling or quadrupling the population of
Carteret County without adversely affecting the quality of the water.
This is especially true on Bogue Banks and areas immediately adjacent
to the sounds and rivers.
Carteret County is faced with making certain decisions which will
affect the future of the county - both ecologically and economically. It
is apparent that the decision to do nothing and let nature take its
course will eventually be countered at either the State or Federal level,
or both. From strictly a health standpoint, the quality of water cannot
be allowed to diminish to the point that it is no longer usable.
The decision to make attempts at protecting water quality will be
no easy task. It will be financially difficult for the county and towns
to "foot the bill" for protection of the water supply as well as fishing
and recreation waters. However, it should be assumed that much of
the financing of these facilities will be borne at the local level. The
county can ill -afford to wait until such time as state and federal grants
becoming available before taking some action to protect the quality of
the water.
109

Until such time as central sewage treatment facilities become avail- r
able to the most sensitive areas, (Bogue Banks, Bogue Sound and along
the rivers), the county needs to implement a series of actions which _
will aid in protecting water quality. These actions include, but are not
limited to the following:
1. Provide lower density requirements through large -lot zoning
in the identified sensitive areas.
2. Adoption of strict local septic tank regulations.
3. Strict enforcement of septic tank regulations.
4. Adoption and enforcement of strict sedimentation control to
eliminate as much as possible runoff from construction pro-
jects. Also, some means of controlling agricultural runoff
needs to be put forth.
5. Strict enforcement of subdivision ordinances in the towns and
county.
6. Strict enforcement of Dunes Protection ordinance.
7. Require some form of environmental impact assessment prior to
each new project begun in the county or towns.
Most of the foregoing actions are already at the disposal of the ,
county. Only more strict enforcement is needed to improve the situa-
tion. All of the foregoing recommendations are presently available to
the county and towns to adopt as ordinances and enforce.
One additional alternative to the above mentioned is to begin a
moratorium on any new development desired in the identified sensitive
areas. This alternative seems neither desirable nor feasible, but if
other steps are not taken, such as those mentioned above, a moratorium
may be the only answer until such time as facilities can be provided.
Population expections on the part of the county and towns appear
too great to allow without some protective measures. With proper
protective measures some development can continue to occur while water
quality is being preserved.
SEASONAL POPULATION
In addition to the permanent population projections for Carteret
County, there seems to be a desire and a likelihood of attracting a
significant amount of seasonal population during the planning period.
This population has been indicated as desirable by most areas of Bogue
Banks. The following chart will indicate the amounts of seasonal popu-
lation for all areas of Bogue Banks. _
110

Seasonal Population Projections
for BoLTue Banks
1975 1985
Atlantic Beach 7,360 8,317
Indian Beach 5,200 6,340
Pine Knoll Shores 2,770 5,870
Emerald Isle 5,000-5,600 10,000-11,000
*County Areas 5,000 6,500
The desire to encourage this level of seasonal population on Bogue
Banks can be related to the objectives set forth in this plan and many
of the municipal plans that have expressed a desire to continue to
emphasize the tourist industry. Also, well -planned multifamily pro-
jections seem to be desirable in most jurisdictions of Bogue Banks which
would support these seasonal projections. The manner in which the
seasonal population is accommodated will determine if it is truly
desirable.
The likelihood of this level of seasonal population occurring can be
demonstrated by the following chart that addresses the availability of
land and the built-in growth factor of Bogue Banks.
Bogue Banks Land Analysis
1. Vacant Development Residential Land - 1900
2. Vacant Platted Lots - 3500
The capability of the land and water to support these projections
is a very difficult question to answer. Peak populations have been
increasing rapidly in the past twenty years. Recently, much attention
has been focused on the effects the increased use of the Banks may
have on the estuarine waters, the ground water, and the stability of
the island itself. It seems evident that if current peak projections are
reached, certain conditions must be met. These conditions include the
provision of water and sewer services, some degree of control of the
amount of vegetation that is disturbed, and control of the effects
development will have on the frontal dunes.
A summary of this section indicates development will have a
profound effect on the land during the planning period. Both the year
around and seasonal population figure should be used in determining
the actual amount of land that will be required to support population
increases in the future. Also, the capability of the land and water to
support the population should consider both seasonal and year around
population estimates.
Economic Trends
The economy of Carteret County will greatly affect the development
of land during the planning period. The objectives for local planning
have indicated a need for economic growth throughout Carteret County.
Without this growth the projected population may not occur.
111

Tourism
The tourist industry will be one of the most important economic
trends affecting Carteret County during the planning period. The
development of water and sewer services on Bogue Banks will allow the
county to accommodate the anticipated influx of tourists. The develop-
ment of related services such as restaurants, gift shops, and enter-
tainment facilities will also have to be supplied.
The development of the Cape Lookout National Seashore Park will
also have a significant effect on the tourist industry. The park will
attract an increasing number of tourists to the county. This will place
added demands on the tourist related services. The plans for the park
have not been determined. When these plans are finalized, the summer
population estimates for the county will certainly have to be revised.
The possible development of a convention center will also have an
affect on the tourist industry. A convention center may create a
demand for tourist related services on a year around basis.
Industry
The future of industrial development in Carteret County is difficult
to determine at the present time. Efforts are being made to attract
non -offensive industry to the county. If this is successful the
permanent population will be greatly affected.
The development of a deep water port and oil refinery in eastern
North Carolina would affect Carteret County. The feasibility of such
development has not been determined at this time.
!'nmmPrnial
Commercial development in Carteret County has. been rapidly
increasing during recent years. A continued increase will be necessary
to supply the demands of the anticipated population. The location of
commercial development will be one of the most important factors during
the planning period. Without proper planning, commercial development
could become a liability.
Agriculture
The future of agriculture is important to Carteret County.
Carteret County relies on agriculture and cannot afford to lose this
integral portion of local economy. The success of the "Open Ground
Farm" will have a profound effect on the future of agriculture through-
out eastern North Carolina.
Commercial Fishin
The commercial fishing industry of Carteret County is a traditional r
way of life for many of Carteret County's residents. This has been the
backbone of the economy of the eastern portions of Carteret County. `
Without a successful commercial fishing industry, Carteret County will
not be able to support the projected population estimates.
112

Civil Service
Civil . service employment. has had a stabilizing effect on the
economy of Carteret County in the past. Efforts are being made to
diversify the economy of the county, but the stability that is offered
by the employment opportunities at Cherry Point and Camp Lejeune will
be important to future development.
A summary of this section indicates the economy of Carteret
County. is becoming diversified. There are a few variables in the
future of Carteret County and eastern North Carolina that could affect
the planning process considerably. The citizens of Carteret County
must express their opinions on these important issues so they can be
incorporated in the planning process.
North Carolina State Port Terminal
The. Port facility located at Morehead City has the potential for
having a significant impact on the economy of Carteret County.
Increased activity will increase the availability of employment.
Much of the impact will be indirect rather than direct in term of
financial benefits to. the county. The Port acts as a potential drawing
card for industry needing such facilities. It also helps to retain
industries already located within the county which rely on the port
facilities. Without the Port facilities, a possibility exists that railway
service would be terminated. Loss of both of these facilities would
have a significant impact on both existing and potential industry.
In addition to the longshoreman employment, the port employs state
and federal personnel. The financial benefits derived from this
employment contribute to the overall economy of the county.
B . Future. Land Needs
Once it has been determined there will be significant demands on
the land within Carteret County, the next step in the planning process
is to determine as accurately as possible the amount of land needed to
supply this demand. In order to determine the amount of land needed,
it is first necessary to determine the density of .development. This
section will determine the future land needs based on the ten year
population estimate.
During the next ten years, the permanent population is expected
to increase from 35,000 to 44,100 for a total of an additional 9,100
people. Also, the seasonal population of the county is expected to
increase by approximately 10,000. This means that during peak periods
in ten years approximately 20,000 additional people will have to - be
accommodated.
This population increase will place demands on the land for all •
types of land uses. Past trends have indicated that recent growth has
shown a tendency to cluster in moderate to high density areas. The
low density areas have shown some growth tendencies, but the overall
113

16
density of most of these areas has not changed significantly in the past
few years. The Existing Land Use section of this plan will help
support this idea. This pattern of growth is consistent with the public
input and the capability of the land to support growth. The capability
of the moderate to high density areas to sustain growth was based on
the fact that most of these areas are either located near water and
sewer services or are capable of supporting water and sewer services in
the next ten years.
Residential Demands
Currently, it is estimated that 40 percent of the total county per-
manent population is located in municipalities and the one mile area
around them. After careful consideration of the existing trends and
public input, the Carteret County Board of Commissioners and the
Carteret County Planning Commission have estimated that 60 percent of
the additional growth will occur in moderate to high density areas.
This means that approximately 5,500 people will settle in these areas.
This population growth will demand approximately 2,000 living spaces.
The remaining year around population will be distributed through-
out the low density areas in the county. (These areas will be defined
as either community or rural in a later section) . This means that
approximately 1,000 living units will be placed in these areas in the
next ten years.
Demand For Seasonal Development
The additional seasonal population is anticipated to occur mainly on
Bogue Banks. The ten year seasonal population should increase by a
total of approximately 10,000. This means that there will have to be
approximately 2,500 new living units to facilitate this additional popu-
lation. (The average occupancy rate is higher on Bogue Banks than
the remainder of the county) . This population can only be supported if
water and sewer services are provided. Alternatives that should be
considered if water and sewer services are not provided are discussed
in the Population Section of Estimated Demands.
It is difficult to analyze the exact amount of land necessary to
accommodate the residential growth that will occur in the next ten
years, because of the varying degrees of density that is anticipated.
The description of the Land Classification Map included in a later
section will indicate the areas that have been designated to accommodate
this demand.
Commercial Land Use in the next Ten Years
During the next ten years, the demand for commercial land use
will be evident in the areas that are expecting moderate to high density
growth. These areas are predominately within the planning jurisdiction
of the municipalities of the county. Presently, commercial development
ranges between 8 percent to 12 percent of total development. Future
estimates indicate the same approximate percentage can be expected.
The area along Highway 70 West of Morehead City and some areas of
114

Bogue Banks should incur the most significant commercial growth. The 40
areas that are labeled transitional on the County Land Classification Map
have taken this demand for land use in consideration in determining the -
amount of land necessary for transitional uses.
All Other Land Uses
Residential and commercial uses will make the most significant
demands on the land in the next ten years. It should be noted that
industrial, recreational, governmental, cultural and entertainment will
make some demands on the land. The moderate to high density areas
will be most affected by these demands. This is true because these
uses are normally placed in accordance with those accessible by more
people. The objectives for local planning indicate all of these land uses
are desirable, but should not change the character of the development
of the county.
C. Community Facilities Demand
Community facilities demands will certainly become greater as
Carteret County grows. In order to help plan for the future properly,
these demands must be determined, their cost must be evaluated, and
consideration must be given to the ability of the local economy to
finance service expansion.
1. Water and Sewer Services
In the next 10 years Carteret County is expected to
increase its year round population by 9,100. The Land
Classification Map included in this document indicates most of
this permanent growth will occur in the transitional areas
near Beaufort, Morehead City, Cape Carteret and Newport.
Also, there is expected to be a seasonal growth on Bogue
Banks of approximately 10,000. This would mean there would
be a year around population in Carteret County of 44,100 and
a peak population on Bogue Banks of 35,000.
To support this anticpated growth, central water and
sewer services willbe essential. Currently, there are two
regional sewer plans being formulated to accommodate Carteret
County. A preliminary review of these plans indicates the
areas that anticipate significant growth during the planning
period are included in the service areas of the regional sewer
plans. The areas of the county classified Transitional on the
Land Classification Map will demand water and sewer services
to support the desired growth projections.
The cost of water and sewer services will influence the
extent of these services. The support of the regional sewer
planning efforts throughout Carteret County indicates there is
a desire to implement sewer services in the growth areas of
the county. The determination of the ability to support water
and sewer services will be determined when the Morehead
Area and Swansboro Area 201 Regional Sewer plans are
completed.
115

2. Schools
Currently, some of the schools in Carteret County are
near capacity, but there are plans to alleviate this problem.
The 10 year population increase of 9,100 has been anticipated
by the Carteret County School Board and will be provided
for.
Building Plans
(A) Morehead Central
(B) Beaufort Central
These building projects should relieve the pressures that
some of the other schools may have. The remaining schools
are all included in a comprehensive plan for maintenance and
expansion. These plans have been established for quite some
time, and the availability of funds has been considered in
formulating the plans.
3. Roads
Coordination between Carteret County and the North
Carolina Department of Transportation will be essential factors
in developing an adequate transportation system for the entire
county. If past trends continue, the demand for better roads
will stem from the local citizens and from the thousands of
visiting tourists which come to Carteret County.
Areas of the county that need immediate attention
include:
1. Access to Bogue Banks
2. Salter Path Road
3. Highway 101
4. Access to the eastern portion of the county
5. Access to the Merrimon and South River
Communities
These are just a few of the areas of the county that will
need special attention as the county grows.
4. Carteret County Services
The preceding discussion has included facilities that are
necessary for growth to occur. There are many other ser-
vices that will be expected by the growing population of
Carteret County. These include:
r,
116

1. Fire Protection
2. Rescue
3. Technical Education
4. Hospital and Health Services
5. Air Transportation
6. Police Protection
7 Refuse Disposal
8. Administrative Services
9. Civil Preparedness
These services and others are being offered by Carteret
County at the present time. The results of this planning
process will be used. to formulate specific plans for these
services.
117

VI. PLAN DESCRIPTION
The Coastal Area Management Act requires that all of the land
within the twenty coastal counties be classified one of five land classi-
fications. This classification is an attempt to identify areas that are
expected to experience similar growth patterns, and demand similar
services from the local government. The five land classes include:
1. Developed
Purpose: The developed class identifies developed lands
which are presently provided with essential public services. Con-
sequently, it is distinguished from areas where significant growth
and/or new service requirements will occur. Continued developed
and redevelopment should be encouraged to provide for the orderly
growth in the area.
Description: Developed land are areas with a minimum gross
population density of 2,000 people per square mile. At a minimum,
these lands contain existing public services including water and
and sewer systems, educational systems, and road systems --all of
which are able to support the present population and its accom-
panying land uses including commercial, industrial and institu-
tional.
2. Transition
Purpose: The Transition class identifies lands where
moderate to high density growth is to be encouraged and where
any such growth that is permitted by local regulation will be
provided with the necessary public services.
Description : The area to be designated as transition must be
no greater than that required to accommodate the estimated county
population growth at a minimum gross density of 2,000 people per
square mile. In addition, the minimum services which will be
required are the necessary water and sewer facilities, educational
services and roads. Consideration must be given to the cost of
public services in the transition area. Each local government is
encouraged to estimate the approximate cost of providing public
services where they do not already exist.
3. Community
Purpose: The community class identifies existing and new
clusters of low density development not requiring major public
services.
118

Description:
1) The community class includes existing clusters of one or
more land uses such as a rural residential subdivision or
a church, school, general store, industry, etc.
(Cluster is defined as a number of structures grouped
together in association or in physical proximity -
Webster's Dictionary) .
2) This class will provide for all new rural growth when the
lot' size is ten acres or less. Such clusters of growth
may occur in new areas, or within existing community
lands.
3) New development in the community class areas will be
subject to subdivision regulations under the Enabling
Subdivision Act (G . S . 153-330 et . seq .) .
4) In every case, the lot size must be large enough to
safely accommodate on -site sewage disposal and where
necessary water supply so that no public sewer services
will be required now or in the future.
5) Limited public services should be provided in the Com-
munity class such as public road access, and electric
power.
6) As a guide for calculating the amount of land necessary
to accommodate new rural community growth, a gross
population density of 640 people per square mile, or one
person per acre should be used.
4. Rural
Purpose: The Rural class identifies lands for long-term
management for productive resource utilization, and where limited
public services will be provided. Development in such areas
should be compatible with resource production.
Description: The rural class includes all lands not in the
developed, transition, community and conservation classes.
5. Conservation
Purpose: The conservation class identifies land which should
be maintained essentially in its natural state and where very
limited or no public services are provided.
Description: Lands to be .placed in the conservation class are
the least desirable for development because:
119

1) They are too fragile to withstand development without
losing their natural value; and/or
2) , They have severe or hazardous limitation to development;
and/or
3) Though they are not highly fragile or hazardous, the
natural resources they represent are too valuable to
endanger by development.
The classification of land throughout the county has attempted to
identify adequate amounts of all land classifications to accommodate the
demands for land during the next 10 years. All of the municipalities in
Carteret County have coordinated the classification of land in their
jurisdiction with the overall county plan to insure all growth is planned
and the proper services will be provided to accommodate growth.
County coordination meetings were held with all municipalities to verify
each municipal plan was an integral part of the overall county plan.
Carteret County Land Classification
The classification of land in Carteret County is based on the local
objectives expressed during the planning process. The Land Classi-
fication Map contained in this section gives a pictorial representation of
the classification in Carteret County. The following discussion will
analyze each land class and indicate why each area was classified in the
manner indicated on the map. This classification of land was based on
the ten year population estimate.
1. Developed There are three areas that fit within the
developed classification. . These include the city limits of Beaufort,
Morehead City, and Newport. These areas not only are high
density areas, but provide municipal services (especially water and
sewer) .
The existing and ten year population estimates for these areas
are as follows:
1975 1985
Beaufort 3,719 3,946
Newport 1,944 2,399
Morehead City 5,516 6,100
This chart indicates that of the 9,100 additional population
estimates for Carteret County, approximately 1,266 will occur in
developed areas. These projections ' have been made on the area
that is currently within the city limits of these towns. The fringe
areas of these towns will be considered within. other land
classifications.
120

The objectives for planning the area within these munici-
palities can be found within their respective Land Development
Plans. These plans will demonstrate the capacity of the land to .
sustain the growth and will indicate the most desirable method of
apportioning the different land uses within the jurisdiction. This
development can be supported by the built-in growth factor of 500
lots.
2. Transitional - The most significant demand for land should
occur in the transitional areas as indicated on the Land Classi-
fication Map in this document. These areas have been determined
by the local governments of Carteret County to accommodate
moderate to high density development during the following ten year
period, and to supply this development with necessary public
services. (i.e. public water and sewer services . )
Many factors were considered in the determination of the
transitional areas for Carteret County.
1) The Land Demand section indicated that approxi-
mately 5,500 people will settle in moderate to high
density areas in the next 10 years. Approximately
1,300 people are anticipated to settle in developed
areas, therefore, an additional population of 4,200
can be expected to settle in transitional areas .
(This refers to permanent population . )
2) The Land Demand section also indicated that there
would be a demand for an additional 10,000 to
11,000 summer population within the transitional
areas of Bogue Banks.
3) The likelihood of having water and sewer services
was considered.
4) The density and character of the development at
the present time.
5) The desire of the people for increased development.
The following is a summary of the areas that have been determined
transitional areas, and a brief explanation of why they have been
classified as such. The map should be used for identification and
extent of these areas.
(A) The area North and West of Morehead City - This area was
classified transitional because there is a high likelihood that it
will receive. water and sewer services from Morehead City in
the next ten years. Also, the recent development in this
area has been in the form of subdivisions that average 2.5 to
3.0 dwellings per acre. It is felt that the addition of water
and sewer services will allow the vacant portions of this area
to be developed in accordance to the moderate density desires
of the citizens. (Refer to Morehead City Land Development
It
121

Plan for the desires of the citizens of the one mile area of
Morehead City.)
(B) The area North and East of Beaufort City Limits - This area
will probably receive water and sewer services from the City
of Beaufort. Growth trends indicate that Beaufort does not
have sufficient space to accommodate those desiring to live in
the area, and the tendency for residential and commercial
uses has been to move in these directions. The existing
density of this area is below the density for transitional
areas, 'but there is a demand fon land in this area, and the
likelihood of services being provided.
(C) West of Newport along Highway 70 - Due to constraints to
land development in the Newport area, this area along
Highway 70 west of Newport will be the prime area for
extension of water and sewer services. There are approxi-
mately 540 acres in this area that could be used for develop-
ment This is only a small portion of the one mile area of
Newport but should receive a large percent of all the growth
expected in the one mile area.
(D) Cape Carteret - The entire town of Cape Carteret has been
indicated as transitional. The built-in growth factor is the
major reason for this land classification. Most of the town
area is already platted in a total of 1, 348 residential lots.
These lots range from 7,000 square feet to approximately
25,000 square feet. They do not anticipate water and sewer
service, but have many problems to overcome before they are
to achieve this goal.
(E) Bogue Banks - All of the developable areas of Bogue Banks
Has been indicated as transitional for the purposes of this
report. This has been done with a great deal of caution, and
a full understanding of problems that may occur from this
classification.
A. Atlantic Beach, Pine Knoll Shores, Indian Beach, and
Emerald Isle were all classified transitional because they
are expecting significant seasonal population. All of
these towns. have indicated that moderate density is
desirable for growth in their jurisdiction. It should be
noted that all of the towns on Bogue Banks have the
characteristics of having areas. developed with moderate
to high density, and a considerable amount of land that
is not developed at all. It is not anticipated that the
additional development in all the undeveloped areas will
reach a transitional level, but the overall character of
the development will certainly not fall in any other
classification. That is to. say, single family subdivision
development or well -planned multi -family is desired for
most areas. These desires do not indicate a rural or
community density. The key to the entire classification
problem is the availab ty of water and sewer services.
122

All of these areas have 'indicated a desire for these +
services and a willingness to pay for them. There are
still many obstacles in the way. Current efforts to
develop a "Metropolitan Water District" that would be
capable of administering regional water and sewer
services is an example of the desire of these areas to
accomplish this goal.
This transitional classification is not intended to
indicate Bogue Banks should be built up completely.
The long range projections indicate development will not
completely engulf the banks. It is anticipated that
approximately 40 percent of Bogue Banks will not be
developed.
B. The "County Area of Bogue Banks" - This too is a
difficult area to classify. The county controlled area of
Bogue Banks is divided in three relatively small areas.
(A) Between the Atlantic Beach one mile line and Fort
Macon to. the east.
(B) Between the Atlantic Beach one mile line and Pine
Knoll Shores to the west.
(C) The Village of Salter Path and the Hoffman Beach
Subdivision.
Within the areas of Bogue Banks that are within the
Carteret County Planning jurisdiction, there are appro-
ximately 200 vacant developable acres. This area is
similar to the land in the municipalities. Past trends
have indicated multifamily and single family residents
development is desirable for these areas. If other areas
of Bogue Banks obtain water sewer services, all of the
county area would have access to these services if they
were willing to pay the price. The current interest in
the development of a Metropolitan Water District on
Bogue Banks is an indication of the willingness of the
people to support water and sewer services.
Community
There are 17 areas of Carteret County that have been classified
community. This classification identifies areas of low density develop-
ment that have been grouped in existing settlements. It is anticipated
that these areas will continue to develop in basically the same fashion,
and will not require public water and sewer services in the next 10
years. The location of the communities have been indicated on the
Land Classification Map.. The 17 communities include Cedar Island,
Atlantic, Sea Level, Stacy, Davis, Williston, Smyrna, Marshallberg,
Gloucester, Otway, Harkers Island, South River, Harlowe, Mill Creek,
Broad Creek, Bogue and Stella.
123

It has been estimated that 3,600 additional residents will settle in "
low density areas. Past growth trends indicate one-half or 1,800 will
settle in communities. This can be supported by the following factors:
(1) Most of the public input that has been received indicates some
additional low density development will be desirable, (2) the projected
population growth will create a need to develop some additional land
within community areas.
All development within the "Community Classification" must be
large enough to safely. accommodate on -site sewage disposal, and
individual water supply - (Note that Harkers Island has a water
system, but does not have central sewerage. Much of the undeveloped
land of Harkers Island has been approved for on -site sewerage.) The
gross population density of areas classified "Community," should be at
least 640 people per square mile. This has been used as a guide for
determining the areas that are "Classified Community . "
Rural
The rural classification has been used to indicate lands whose
highest use is for . agriculture and forestry. These areas will not
require public services such as water and sewer services.
The Carteret County Land Classification Map indicates a great deal
of land has been classified as rural. This includes all the county area
�- that has not been classified Developed, Transitional, Community, or .
Conservation. Farming and forest management is the major use of land
in these areas. Some residential development will occur in these areas,
but the overall density will not increase significantly.
Conservation
The conservation class identifies land which should be maintained
essentially in its natural state and where very limited public services
are provided. These areas are the least desirable for development
because:
1. They are too fragile to withstand development without losing
their natural value.
2. They have severe or hazardous limitations to development.
3. Though they are not highly fragile or hazardous, the natural
resources they represent are too valuable to endanger by
development.
Areas in Carteret County that have been classified Conservation in-
clude:
1. Fragile
(a) Wetlands
(b) Steep Slopes
124

(c)
Frontal Dunes r
(d)
Beaches -
(e)
River, streams, and tidal water below mean high water
(f)
Historic places
2. Hazard
Areas
(a)
Floodways
(b)
Ocean erosion areas
(c)
Inlet lands
(d)
Estuarine erosion areas
3. Other
(a)
Publicly owned forest, park and fish, and game lands,
and other non -intensive outdoor recreation lands.
(b)
Privately owned sanctuaries which are dedicated to
preservation.
The classification of. land in Carteret County should be used to
implement the
stated policy objectives set forth in this plan. During
the next year, development policy in all of the land classes will be
identified. Public input in this process will be required to achieve the
proper implementation of land- development objectives.
Plan Review
The plan that has been developed for Carteret County will undergo
an extensive review process at least every five years. This process
will emphasize public input and the development of objectives, policies
and standards that are consistent with the desires of the public.
125

VII SUMMARY
Data assembly for the CAMA Land Use Plan was gathered in much
the same way as any conventional land use plan. Information contained
in the 1970 Census was heavily relied upon. In addition data was
assembled from various state and local sources. Certain information ,
such as goals and objectives, contained within the Plan is a result of
the public participation process.
The data collected has been analyzed as to its impact on existing
conditions and to future implication for growth in the County. As a
result of a lack of data, as well as some data being of questionable
value, those sections containing extensive statistics should be updated
periodically.
Conclusions drawn for this Plan were based in part on the analysis
of the data collected and in part from the public participation process.
Major conclusions drawn are as follows:
1. The County has many unique natural assets which have
attracted people to visit and these natural assets should be
protected in conjunction with the expressed growth expecta-
tions.
.2. The people of the County desire growth to occur at a slow to
moderate rate. Growth is expected to be concentrated most
heavily on Bogue Banks . .
3. Services such as water and sewer facilities are desirable and
needed especially in the areas of ' expected growth concentra-
tions such as Bogue Banks.
4. In order. to provide the necessary facilities, the County will
need to prepare a plan for financing them. This may be done
through issuance of bonds, possible increases in taxes, or,
through available grants from federal and state sources.
5. Through use of the Land Classification System, the county
has the opportunity to indicate where they are willing and
able to provide needed services. The intent of this is to
guide developers toward the areas identified as most desirable
for growth and away from the more productive farmlands that
are being converted to residential subdivisions.
6. Based on where growth is going to occur, the County has the
opportunity to spend tax monies more efficiently by identi-
fying where the need will be. This is true for such facilities
as water and sewer, roads, schools, recreational sites, and
police fire protection.
126

The opportunity to manage the growth of the County in a manner
that will be conducive to both development and environmental interests
is just beginning. This opportunity needs to followed through at the _
elected officials level and the public. The public needs to be contin-
ually involved in decisions made which will affect the land use patterns
of the future.
127

VIII CITY -COUNTY PLAN RELATIONSHIP
The Coastal Area Management Act requires all counties in the
coastal area to prepare and adopt a Land Use Plan for the entire
country. It is first the responsibility of the county to see the entire
county is covered by an acceptable land use plan. However, the
General Assembly and the Coastal Resources Commission recognized that
many municipalities were already involved in a planning process and,
therefore made provision for towns to prepare and adopt plans for their
own planning jurisdictions.
In order to accomplish the end result of having all plans within a
county compatible, a method of coordination was devised. Cooperation
from the planning boards, advisory bodies, and elected officials of each
town and the county was needed. Many of the town plans were pre-
pared by the Carteret County Planning department which aided the
coordination and integration of the various plans into the county plan.
Planning consultants for Pine Knoll Shores and Emerald Isle were very
cooperative in this coordination effort.
All citizens of the towns, as well as officials, were allowed to
participate in the development of the County Plan. Review of the
various goals and objectives of the towns and the county have been
reviewed and found to be overall compatible. Land classifications were
generally left to the towns,' and no contradictions in classification
appears to be present.
Finally, both the citizens of the county and the towns were asked
to participate in the public hearing process for purposes of adoption of
the county and city plans.
Coordination will continue in the future as to possible changes in
any of the plans .with respect to goals and objectives. and Land Classi-
fication. Coordination of these areas will insure that the plans do not
become incompatible at some future date.
128

Areas of Environmental Concern
One of the primary purposes of planning in the coastal area of
North Carolina is to protect and manage as much of the natural
resources as possible. The coastal area contributes vitally to the
support of animal and plant life, which provides many assets to the
State such as commercial fishing activities. Without proper management
of the Areas of Environmental Concern, aspects that provide an
economic base for Carteret County will soon be eroded. Pollution of
shellfish waters will decrease economic benefits from the shellfish.
industry; septic tank pollution has the potential for damaging ground
and surface water sources. Destruction of the dunes will allow erosion
and flooding of inland areas, thus destroying beaches which have
attracted tourists to Carteret County over the past years.
Lack of proper management of inlet lands may result in the
destruction of expensive residential areas causing financialhardship
upon the owners. However, if steps are taken at an early stage, many
of the potential hazards can be lessened or eliminated.
In Carteret County, the following Areas of Environmental Concern
(AEC's) have been designated:
1.
Coastal Wetlands
2.
Estuarine Waters
3.
Public Trust Areas
4.
Estuarine Shorelines
5.
Ocean Beaches
6.
Frontal Dunes
7.
Inlet Lands
8.
Ocean Erodible Areas
These areas
have been classified
as Conservation on the Carteret
County
Land
Classification Map.
Development within
these areas is
expected
to be
of, a nature that will provide the least
possible damage
to land
lying
within the AEC's.
In no case should
development be
allowed
to an extent that will
cause complete destruction
of the
resources which cause it to be found in an AEC.
Both the development of local land use plans and the designation
and regulation of critical resource areas contribute to rational manage-
ment by encouraging local and state governments to exercise their full
authorities over coastal resources and to express their management
goals in a comprehensible and uniform manner. Local objectives benefit.
through their incorporation into a state management scheme, and the
statewide objectives of resource protection and development benefit
through an integrated and comprehensive management approach.
CAMA Provisions for AEC's
The Coastal Area Management Act requires that these State Guide-
lines "shall give particular attention to the nature of development
129

which shall be appropriate within the various types of Areas of En-
vironmental Concern that may be designated by the Commission . "
The Act further provides that local land use plans "shall give
special attention to the protection and appropriate development of Areas
of Environmental Concern."
The 1974 Legislature found that "the coastal area, and in parti-
cular the estuaries, are among the most biologically productive regions
of this State and of the nation", but in recent years the area "has been
subjected to increasing pressures which are the result of the often con-
flicting needs of society expanding in industrial development, in popu-
lation, and in the recreational aspirations of its citizens."
"Unless these pressures are controlled by coordinated manage-
ment," the Act states, "the very features of the coast which make it
economically, aesthetically and ecologically rich will be destroyed."
To prevent this destruction, the Act charges the CRC with the
responsibility for identifying specific types of areas -- water as well as
land -- in which uncontrolled or incompatible development might result
in irreversible damage. It further instructs the Commission to deter-
mine what types of development activities are appropriate within such
areas, and it calls on local government to give special attention to these
environmentally fragile and important areas in developing their land use
plans. Also, the Act provides that upon establishing the types of
development activities appropriate within AEC's, the CRC should
implement a permit program capable of controlling inappropriate or
damaging development activities within the AEC's. The intent of this
authority is not to stop development, but rather to ensure the
compatibility of development with the continued productivity and value
of certain critical land and water areas .
The Act divides the implementation responsibilities of the permit
program between local governments and the CRC. Individuals pro-
posing "minor development" activities within an AEC will be required to
receive permits from a local permit officer, while individuals under-
taking "major development" activities will seek .permits directly from the
CRC.
Selection of Areas for AEC Designation
The selection of AEC categories was made after several months of
consideration by local governments, the CRC, and the Coastal
Resources Advisory Council (CRAC). The Act specified the potential
AEC categories from which the Commission was to choose a mix of AEC's
that would most effectively achieve the goals of CAMA . Local govern-
ments played a major role in the selection process by identifying AEC
categories they considered to be appropriate for their jurisdictions.
These recommendations formed the basis for selecting Interim AEC's
(IAEC's) after which the categories were once again reviewed by the
Commission and further narrowed in scope. Thirteen categories were
finally designated.
130

THE ESTUARINE SYSTEM
The first AEC's discussed collectively represent the water and land
areas of the coast that contribute enormous economic, social, and
biological values as North Carolina's estuarine system. Included within
the estuarine system are the following AEC categories: Estuarine
Waters, Coastal Wetlands, Public Trust Areas, and Estuarine Shorelines.
Each of these AEC's is either geographically within the estuary or,
because of its location and nature, may significantly affect the estuary.
Significance of the Systems Approach in Estuaries
The management program must embrace all characteristics,
processes, and features of the whole system and not characterize
individually any one component of an estuary. They are all completely
interdependent and ultimately require management as a unit. Any
alteration, however slight, in a given component of the estuarine system
may result in unforeseen consequences in what may appear as totally
unrelated areas of the estuary. For example, destruction of wetlands
may have harmful effects on estuarine waters which are also areas
within the public trust. As a unified system, changes in one AEC
category may affect the function and use within another category.
Management Objective of the Estuarine System
It is the objective of the CRC to give high priority to the pro-
tection and coordinated management of Estuarine Waters, Coastal
Wetlands, Public Trust Areas, and Estuarine Shorelines, as an inter-
related group of AEC's, so as to safeguard and perpetuate their
biological, social, economic and aesthetic values and to ensure that
development occurring within these AEC's is compatible with natural
characteristics so as to minimize the likelihood of significant loss of
private property and public resources.
AEC's Within the Estuarine Svstem
The following defines each AEC within the estuarine system, de-
scribes its significance, articulates the policies regarding development,
and states the standards for development within each AEC.
Coastal Wetlands
Description - Coastal Wetlands are defined as any salt marsh or,
other marsh subject to regular or occasional flooding by tides, including
wind tides (whether or not the tide waters reach the marshland areas
through natural or artificial watercourses), provided this shall not
include hurricane or tropical storm tides.
Coastal Wetlands contain some, but not necessarily all, of the
following marsh plant species:
Cord Grass (S artina alterniflora);
Black Needlerush Juncus roemerianus ;
131

Glasswort
Salt Grass
Sea Lavender
Bulrush
Saw Grass
Cat -tail
Salt Meadow Grass
Salt Reed Grass
(Salicornia spp.);
Distichhs s icata) ;
Limonium spp
Scir us spp . ) ;
Cladium 'amaicense) ;
TT--yph,a spp . ;
S artina patens); and
Spartina cynosuroides) .
Included in this definition of Coastal Wetlands is "such contiguous
land as the Secretary of Natural Resources and Community Development
reasonably deems necessary to affect by any such order in carrying out
the purposes of this Section." (G . S . 113-230(a) )
Significance - The unique productivity of the estuarine system is'
supported by detritus and nutrients that are exported from the coastal
marshlands. The amount of exportation and degree of importance
appears to be variable from marsh to marsh, depending primarily upon
its frequency of inundation and inherent characteristics of the various
plant species. Without the marsh, the high productivity levels and
complex food chains typically found in the estuaries could not be main-
tained.
Man harvests various aspects of this productivity when he fishes,
hunts, and gathers shellfish from the estuary. Estuarine dependent.
species of fish and shellfish such as menhaden, shrimp, flounder,
oysters, and crabs currently make up over 90 percent of the total value
of North Carolina's commercial catch. The marshlands, therefore, sup-
port an enormous amount of commercial and recreational business along
the seacoast.
The roots, rhizomes, stems, and seeds of Coastal Wetlands act as
good quality waterfowl and wildlife feeding and nesting materials. In
addition, Coastal Wetlands serve as the first line of defense in
retarding estuarine shoreline erosion. The plant stems and leaves tend
to dissipate wave action, while the vast network of roots and rhizomes
resists soil erosion. In this way, the Coastal Wetlands serve as.
barriers against flood damage and control erosion between the estuary
and the uplands.
Marshlands also act as nutrient and sediment traps by slowing the
water which flows over them and causing organic and inorganic particu-
late matter to settle out. In this manner, the nutrient storehouse is
maintained, and sediment harmful to marine organisms is removed.
Also, pollutants and excessive nutrients are absorbed by the marsh
plants, thus providing an inexpensive water treatment service.
Management Objective - To give highest priority to the protection:.
and management of Coastal Wetlands so as to safeguard and perpetuate
their biological, social, economic and aesthetic values. To coordinate
and establish a management system capable of conserving and utilizing
Coastal Wetlands as a natural resource essential to the functioning of
the entire estuarine system.
A
+.
132

Use Standards - Suitable land uses shall be those consistent with,
the above management objective. Highest priority of use shall be allo-
cated to the conservation of existing Coastal Wetlands. Second priority
of Coastal Wetland use shall be given to those types of development
activities that require water access and cannot function elsewhere.
Coastal Wetlands in Carteret County are generally found adjacent
to all water courses - rivers, tributaries, and sounds. The most ex-
tensive wetlands are found in the Northeastern part of the county.
Also, extensive wetlands are found on Core Banks adjacent to Core
Sound.
Unacceptable land uses may include, but would not be limited to,
the following examples: restaurants and businesses; residences, apart-
ments, motels, hotels, and trailer parks; parking lots and offices; spoil
and dump sites; wastewater lagoons; public and private roads and
highways; and factories. Examples of acceptable land uses may include
utility easements, fishing piers, docks, marinas, and agricultural uses,
such as farming and forestry drainage, as permitted under the Dredge
and Fill Act and/or other applicable laws.
In every instance, the particular location, use, and design charac-
teristics shall be in accord with the General Use Standards for Coastal
Wetlands, Estuarine Waters, and Public Trust Areas (page 11) .
Estuarine Waters
Description - Estuarine Waters are defined in G.S. 113-229(n)(2)
as "all the water of the Atlantic Ocean within the boundary of North
Carolina and all the waters of the bays, sounds, rivers, and tributaries
thereto seaward of the dividing line between coastal fishing waters and
inland fishing waters agreed upon by the Department of Natural and
Economic Resources and the Wildlife Resources Commission" and set
forth in joint regulations filed with the Attorney General in section
.0200, Chapter3F Title 15, North Carolina Administrative Code. These
boundary lines may be changed from time to time by joint action of the
two agencies. The category is a simplified administrative breakdown of
public trust areas which allows for efficient management of the'
mid -salinity brackish waters and their biological components.
Significance - Estuarine Waters are the dominant component and
bonding element of the entire estuarine system, integrating aquatic
influences from both the land and the sea. Estuaries are among the
most productive natural environments of North Carolina. They support
the valuable commercial and sports fisheries of the coastal area which
are comprised of estuarine dependent species such as menhaden,
flounder, shrimp, crabs, and oysters. These species must spend all or
some part of their life cycle within the estuarine waters to mature and
reproduce. Of the ten leading species in the commercial 'catch, all but
one are dependent on the estuary.
This high productivity associated with the estuary results from its
unique circulation patterns caused by. tidal energy, fresh water flow,
and shallow depth; nutrient trapping mechanisms; and protection to the
many organisms. The circulation of Estuarine Waters transports
133

nutrients, propels plankton, spreads seed stages of fish and shellfish,
flushes wastes from animal and plant life, cleanses the system of
pollutants, controls salinity, shifts sediments, and mixes the water to
create a multitude of habitats. Some important features of the estuary
include mud and sand flats, eel grass beds, salt marshes, submerged.
vegetation flats, clam and oyster beds, and important nursery areas.
Secondary benefits are derived from stimulations of the coastal
economy from operations such as are required for commercial and sport
fisheries, waterfowl hunting, marinas, boatyards, repairs and supplies,
processing operations, and tourist related industries. In addition,
there is considerable nonmonetary value associated with aesthetics,
recreation, and education.
Management Objective - To give the highest priority to the con-
servation and management of the important features of Estuarine Waters
so as to safeguard and perpetuate their biological, social, aesthetic,
and economic values. To coordinate and establish a management system
capable of conserving and utilizing Estuarine Waters so as to maximize
their benefits to man and the estuarine system.
Use Standards Suitable land/water uses shall be those consistent
with the above management objectives. Highest priority of use shall be
allocated to the conservation of Estuarine Waters and its vital
components. Second priority of Estuarine Waters use shall be given to
those types of development activities that require water access and use "
which cannot function elsewhere such as simple access channels;
structures to prevent erosion; navigation channels; and boat docks,
piers, wharfs, and mopring pilings.
Public Trust Areas
Description - Public Trust Areas are all waters of the Atlantic
Ocean and the lands thereunder from the mean high water mark to the
seaward limit of state jurisdiction; all natural bodies of water subject to
measurable lunar tides and lands thereunder to the mean high water
mark; all navigable natural bodies of water and lands thereunder to the
mean high water level or mean water level as the case may be, except
privately -owned lakes to which the public has no right of access; all
water in artificially created bodies of water containing significant public
fishing resources or other public resources which are accessible to the
public by navigation' from bodies of water in which the public has
rights of navigation; and all waters in artificially created bodies of
water in which the public has acquired rights by prescription, custom,
usage, dedication, or any other means. In determining whether the
public has acquired rights in artificially created bodies of water, the
following factors shall be considered:
1. the use of the body of water by the public,
2. the length of time the public has used the area,
134

3. the value of public resources in the body of water,
4. whether the public resources in the body of water are mobile
to the extent that they can move into natural bodies of water,
5. whether the creation of the artificial body of water required
permission from the State, and
6. the value of the body of water to the public for navigation
from one public area to another public area.
Significance - The public has rights in these areas, including
navigation and recreation. In addition, these areas support valuable
commercial and sports fisheries, have aesthetic value, and are important
potential resources for economic development.
Management Objective - To protect public rights for navigation and
recreation and to preserve and manage the Public Trust Areas so as to
safeguard and perpetuate their biological, economic, and aesthetic
value.
Use Standards - Acceptable uses shall be those consistent with the
above management objective. In the absence of overriding public
benefit, any use which significantly interferes with the public right of
navigation or other public trust rights which the public may be found
to have in these areas shall not be allowed. The development of
navigational channels or drainage ditches, the use of bulkheads to
prevent erosion, and the building of piers, wharfs, or marinas are
examples of uses that may be acceptable within Public Trust Areas,
provided that such uses will not be detrimental to the public trust
rights and the biological and physical functions of the estuary..
Projects which would directly or indirectly block or impair existing
navigation channels, increase shoreline erosion, deposit spoils below
mean high tide, cause adverse water circulation patterns, violate water
quality standards, or cause degradation of shellfish waters are
generally considered incompatible with the management policies of Public
Trust Areas. In every instance, the particular location, use, and
design characteristics shall be in accord with the General Use Standards
for Coastal Wetlands, Estuarine Waters, and Public Trust Areas
(below) .
General Use Standards for Coastal Wetlands,
Estuarine Waters, and Public Trust Areas
The CRC will . use the following criteria to determine if a devel-
opment or its intended use would interfere with or negatively affect
either public interests or natural values of the Coastal Wetlands,
Estuarine Waters, and Public Trust Areas.
135

Public Interests
1. Finding that a project does not illustrate either the public or
private need for a proposed development will be considered a negative
factor in project evaluaton.
2. Finding that a project is in conflict with officially adopted
state, regional, or local land use plans, or policies applicable to the
land and water areas under review will be considered a negative factor
in project evaluation.
3. Finding that a project is incompatible with the purposes of an
existing or proposed civil works project will be considered a negative
factor in project evaluation.
4. Those particular projects, supported by public funds, that
are initiated, planned, and constructed by federal programs and
agencies must clearly exhibit overriding factors of national interest and
public benefit in order to obtain favorable consideration. Preferred
federal projects may include navigation aids, devices, and structures;
maintenance activities in vital shipping channels to continue intrastate
and interstate commerce; and work necessary to increase use by
waterfowl or conserve important wildlife resources
5.
Finding
that
a proposal will or could create a significantly .
adverse
effect on
the
value and enjoyment of the property of any
riparian
owner will
be a
negative factor in project evaluation.
6.
Finding
that
a project may impede navigation of, or create
undue interference
with
access to, or use of, navigable waters will be
considered
a negative factor
in project evaluation.
7. All landowners have the general right to protect their pro-
perties from erosion, and usually these projects will be viewed favor-
ably. Finding that there exists substantial probability that a proposed
protective structure will result in damage to nearby properties or harm
public resources will be considered a negative factor in project evalua-
tion.
8. In order to determine the proper balance between social,
economic, and ecological costs and benefits of a project, the overall
development plan will be evaluated to consider project purposes,
multiple uses, social needs, local economic benefits, and anticipated
secondary effects. If the balancing of these considerations does not
interfere with the public interest, the project will receive favorable
consideration.
9. If substantiated negative comments or reasonable objections
are received from federal or state agencies, local governments, public
interest groups, riparian owners, and individuals, these comments will
be considered negative factors in project evaluation.
136

Natural Values
f
1. A project will be evaluated with the recognition that it will be
part of a complete and interrelated estuarine resource area.
2. A project's probable impact on the biological systems will be
evaluated in relation to the cumulative effect of existing and anticipated
uses within the general vicinity of the site.
3. The location, design, and need for a project, as well as the
construction activities involved, must be demonstrated to be suitable,
considering the biological and physical processes of the estuarine
system. The planning and evaluation criteria of North Carolina's
Division of Marine Fisheries and the Corps of Engineers will be utilized
in determining the project's suitability regarding location, design, and
construction methods.
4. In order to conserve the vital components of the estuarine
system, all development will be consistent with the following policies:
a. Finding that a project would require excavation and/or
fill work directly within the highly productive, regularly flooded coastal.
wetland (Spartina alterniflora marshes) or would alter their important
drainage patterns will be considered a negative factor in project
evaluation.
b . Finding that a project would destroy, alter, pollute or
interfere with the social, economic, and biological values of productive
shellfish beds (including sand, mudflat, and oyster beds) will be
considered a negative factor in project evaluation.
c. Finding that a project would destroy or adversely impact
important marine grass beds; spawning and nursery areas of valuable
quality of estuarine life and is subject to the damaging processes of
shore front erosion and flooding.
Management Objective - To ensure shoreline development is com-
patible with both the dynamic nature of Estuarine Shorelines and the
values of the estuarine system.
Use Standards - Suitable land uses shall be those consistent with
the management objectives.
Highest priority of land use allocation shall be given to .
recreational, rural, and conservational activities in those shoreline areas
exhibiting a significant erosion rate. High priority shall be given to
water access and shoreline protection proposals, provided that public
resources will not be detrimentally affected.
Second priority of land use allocation shall be given to proposals
which illustrate a sound understanding of the management principles of
this dynamic and susceptible zone. The applicant must demonstrate, in.
cases where the shoreline is to .be altered, that notification of the
proposed activity has been given to adjacent riparian land owners.
137

r
All allowable construction activities shall require the applicant's
written acknowledgement that there may be associated risks with
building on the particular location.
In order to give proper guidance to the applicant, the most
up-to-date information concerning shoreline erosion rates and potentials
for flooding shall be given, accompanied by recommended shoreline
stabilization and' flood proofing techniques.
Proposals must not conflict with the purposes and goals of
officially adopted state, regional, or local land use plans and
regulations.
Proposed land uses should not significantly harm estuarine
resources (both biological and physical) or cause damage to adjacent
riparian properties.
Major public facilities that guide growth and land use patterns
which may include, but are not limited to, roads, water lines, and
sewers, will not be permitted within this AEC if their placement would
result in a substantial possibility of excessive public expenditures for
maintaining public safety and continued use of the facilities or would
result in a loss of significant private resources.
All construction within the 75-foot shoreline zone shall be in
compliance with all relevant provisions of local and state building codes.
All construction within the 75-foot shoreline zone shall be in
compliance with the mandatory standards of the North Carolina Sedi-
mentation Pollution Control Act -of 1973 (G.S. 113A-57).
Estuarine shorelines in Carteret County are found along the areas .
adjacent to the sounds, the bays, and generally along- the rivers and
tributaries of waters designated as commercial for a distance of 75-feet
landward. All of the shoreline adjacent to the sound, on the outer
banks are included in this category.
OCEAN HAZARD AREAS
The next broad grouping is composed of those AEC's that are
considered natural hazard areas along the Atlantic Ocean shoreline.
where, because of their special vulnerability to erosion or other adverse
effects of sand, • wind, and water, uncontrolled or incompatible.
development could unreasonably endanger life or property. Ocean
hazard areas include . Beaches, -Frontal Dunes, Inlet Lands, and other
areas in which geologic, vegetative and soil conditions indicate a
substantial possibility of excessive erosion or flood damage.
Significance
The primary causes of the hazards peculiar to .the Atlantic shore-
line are the constant forces exerted by waves, winds, and currents
upon the unstable sands that form the shore. During storms, these.
forces are intensified and can cause significant changes in the
138

bordering landforms and to structures located on them. Hazard area
property is in the ownership of a large number of private individuals as
well as several public agencies; hazard area land is used, however, by
a vast number of visitors to the coast in addition to the land's owners.
Ocean hazard areas are critical, therefore, because of both the severity
of the hazards and the intensity of interest in the areas.
The location and form of the various hazard area landforms, in
particular the beaches, dunes, and inlets, are in permanent state of
flux, responding to meteorologically induced changes in the wave
climate. For this reason, the appropriate location of structures on and
near these landforms must be reviewed carefully in order to avoid their
loss or damage. As a whole, the same flexible nature of these
landforms which presents hazards to development situated immediately
on them offers protection to the land, water, and structures located
landward of them. The value of each landform lies in the particular
role it . plays in affording protection to life and property; the role of
each landform is described in detail in Technical Appendix #2 in terms
of the physical processes most important to each. Overall, however,
the energy dissipation and sand storage capacities of the landforms are
most essential for the maintenance of the landforms' protective function
Management Objective of Ocean Hazard Areas
The CRC recognizes that absolute safety from the destructive
forces indigenous to the Atlantic shoreline is an impossibility for
development located along the ocean. The loss of life and property to
these forces, however, can be greatly reduced by the proper location
and design of shoreline structures and by care taken in prevention of
damage to natural protective features. Therefore, it is the CRC's
objective to provide management policies and standards for ocean hazard
areas that serve to eliminate unreasonable danger to life and property
and achieve a balance between the financial, safety, and social factors .
that are involved in hazard area development.
AEC's Within Ocean Hazard Areas
The following defines each AEC within ocean hazard areas and -
describes its significance. Standards for the issuance of permits for
each of these AEC's are found in General Use Standards for Ocean
Hazard Areas (page 19).
Ocean Beaches
Description - Ocean beaches are lands consisting of unconsolidated
soil materials that extend from the mean low water line landward to a
point where either (a) the growth of vegetation occurs or (b) a distinct
change in the slope or elevation of the unconsolidated sands alters the
configuraton of the landform.
Significance Sand deposits of ocean beaches and shorelines
represent a dynamic zone which does not afford long-term protection for
development. The nature of tidal action and the force of storms is
such that they cause the beach areas to constantly shift. Littoral drift
139

is a natural phenomenon whereby 'sand is deposited upon a different
stretch of the beach. The action also shifts the line of high tide and
low tide. Ocean beaches and shorelines are valuable for public and
private recreation and are located within a natural hazard area.
Development within this dynamic zone may result in loss of property
and possible loss of. life.
Frontal Dunes
Description - Frontal Dunes are mounds of sand located directly
landward of the ocean beaches and extending inland to the lowest'
elevation in the depression immediately behind the first dune ridge.
Significance - Frontal Dunes comprise a significant portion of the
Outer Banks and barrier islands and represent a protective barrier for
development on the Outer Banks. Development with inadequate design
or construction may alter the protective character of the dunes and
subject' property to an increased risk of substantial damage due to the -
adverse effects of wind and water. Frontal Dunes are also extremely
dynamic and highly susceptible to the erosive effects of storm surges.
Inlet Lands
Description - Inlet" lands as identified by the State Geologist are
those lands with a substantial possibility of excessive erosion located
adjacent to inlets and extending inland a distance sufficient to encom- '
pass that area through which either the inlet is predicted to migrate
during the next 25 years or the maximum extent of recorded migration
over the past 25 years, whichever is less; this distance will be
determined for each inlet using a procedure outlined in Technical
Appendix #3.
Significance - The particular location of the inlet channel is a
temporary one, as such channels are subject to extensive migration.
Coastal inlet lands are extremely dynamic land areas that are highly
susceptible to becoming completely displaced by water.
Ocean Erodible Areas
Description - The landward extent of
identified by the State Geologist to have
excessive erosion has been determined for
from the report (no. 73-5) prepared by C. ]
and. Richard McDonald, published by the N.
for Marine Coastal Studies, as follows:
Virginia ' line to Hatteras Inlet
Hatteras Inlet to Bogue Inlet
Bogue Inlet to Rich Inlet
Rich Inlet to Cape Fear Inlet
Cape Fear Inlet to South Carolina line
those ocean shoreline areas
a substantial possibility of
each ocean -fronting county
Knowles, Jay Langfelder,
C. State University Center
- 61 ft.
- 72 ft:
- 121 ft.
- 156 ft.
- 144 ft.
y.
I

The above distances are measured landward from the seaward toe
of the frontal dune.
Significance - Ocean Erodible Areas are extremely dynamic lands,
highly susceptible to becoming displaced by water created by periodic
storm surges.
Ocean Hazard Areas - General Identification
As an AEC, ocean hazard areas include Ocean Beaches, Frontal
Dunes, Inlet Lands, and Ocean Erodible Areas, each characterized by a
substantial possibility of excessive erosion. The landward boundary of
the hazard areas is formed by the -landward -most extent of the included
land areas.
For the purpose of public and administrative convenience, each
designated permit -letting agency for miner development permits is
authorized to designate, subject to CRC approval, a more, readily
identifiable land area with which to serve public notice of the
probability of property's being located in the hazard area. This
designated notice area, however, must include all of the land areas as
defined above. It is recommended that for this purpose each
permit -letting agency consider the use .of natural or man-made land=
marks such as roads, existing hazard area delineations such as those -
prepared for administration of the federal Flood Disaster Protection Act,
or existing shore protection lines established for administration of •
county sand dune protection ordinances.
General Use Standards for Ocean Hazard Areas
1. In order to avoid unreasonable danger to life and property,
the construction or placement of structures to be used for residential,
institutional, or commercial purposes will be permitted only landward of
the frontal dune.
2. In order to avoid the necessity of excessive public expen-
ditures for maintaining public safety, no construction or placement of
major public facilities to be supported by state funds, including but not
limited to roads and sewer and water lines, will be permitted in hazard
areas.
3. In order to avoid weakening the, protective nature of frontal
dunes, no development will be permitted which would. involve the re-
moval or relocation of frontal dune sand or frontal dune vegetation.
4. Any residential building, erected within an Ocean Erodible
Area is required to be in compliance with the 'piling requirements
(Appendix D, Section 3.0) of the N. C. Uniform Residential Building
Code. All other construction in ocean hazard areas must comply with
the state Building Code or more stringent local- building codes
141

Exceptions to the General Use Standards for Ocean Hazard Areas
1. Development which does not involve the placement or con-
struction of major state supported facilities or of structures to be used
for residential, institutional, or commercial purposes may be permitted
in hazard areas if it can be demonstrated that that development will not
(a) reduce or cause to be reduced the amount of sand held in storage
in beaches and frontal dunes, (b) cause accelerated erosion along the
shore, or (c) otherwise increase the risk of loss or damage presented
to life or property.
2. The following construction activities may be permitted on or:
seaward of the frontal dune, provided that their specific location and
design are demonstrated to be the most suitable alternatives and in
compliance with the North Carolina Building Code and the standards set
in paragraph 1 above:
a. necessarily water -oriented structures such as fishing
piers;
b. structural accessways to beaches; and
c . non -permanent recreational structures such as lifeguard
chairs.
3. The construction or placement of a structure to be used for
residential, institutional, or commercial purposes may be permitted on
the frontal dune if it can be demonstrated that the size or location of
an existing lot (as defined in the Note below) would not otherwise allow
any practical use to be made of it. In such a case, written acknow-
ledgement of the lot's location in a hazard areas and of the State's
policy concerning public expenditures in hazard areas will be required
of the property owner, as well as compliance with relevant provisions of
the North Carolina Building Code and the standards set in paragraph 1
above.
4. The minimum necessary amount of removal or relocation of
frontal dune sand or dune vegetation may be permitted if it can be
demonstrated that the size or location of an existing lot (as defined in
paragraph 5 below) would not otherwise allow any practical use to be
made of it or if the development requiring that removal or relocation is
shown to be in the best public interest. In either case, it must be
demonstrated that such activity will be in compliance with the standards
set in paragraph 1 above and that all reasonable measures will be taken
to prevent erosion of the dune and to reestablish the dune and its
vegetation in the most appropriate location.
Ocean Beaches, Frontal Dunes, and Ocean Erodible areas are all
found on the ocean side of the Outer Banks. The landward boundary
of the. hazard areas is formed by the landward -most extent of the
particular category. The landward extent of the Ocean Erodible AEC is
72-feet landward of the toe of the frontal dune throughout the county.
142

Y
Inlet lands in Carteret County are found in five areas - all located
on the Outer Banks. These areas include the following:
1. Ocracoke Inlet (Portsmouth Island)
2. Drum Inlet (Core Banks)
3. Barden Inlet (Core Banks/Shackleford Banks)
4. Beaufort Inlet (Shackleford Banks/Bogue Banks)
5.. Bogue Inlet (West Bogue Banks)
Development Standards Applicable to All AEC's
1. No development should be allowed in any AEC which would
result in a contravention or violation of any rules, regulations, or laws
of the State of North Carolina or of local government in which the
development takes place.
2. No development should be allowed in any AEC which would
have a substantial likelihood of causing pollution of the waters of the
State to the extent that such waters would be closed to the taking of
shellfish under standards set by the Commission for Health Services
pursuant to G.S. 130-169.01.
w
r
143