Land Use Plan 1985-1985

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
DCM COPY'- ` DCM COPY
lease do not remove!!!!!
Division of Coastal Management Copy
CARTERET COUNTY
LAND USE, PLAN
1985

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
CARTERET COUNTY LAND USE PLAN UPDATE
1985
PREPARED FOR: CARTERET:000NTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
WILLIAM E. SMITH, CHAIRMAN
JOHN MORRIS
CARL TILGHMAN
PATRICK O'HARA
LELAND GARNER
PREPARED BY:
NEUSE RIVER COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS
with technical assistance
from the
DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
and the
CARTERET COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT
JOHN P. YOST, PLANNER
PRISCILLA W. BEVERIDGE, SECRETARY
MH:AID ADUl''t HN APRIL 1, 1985
APPROVId) BY COA11TAI, RE.iOUtCE COMMIHSION SEPTEMBER 6, 1985
THE PREPARATION OF THIS REPORT WAS FINANCED IN PART THROUGH
A GRANT PROVIDED BY THE NORTH CAROLINA COASTAL MANAGEMENT
PROGRAM, THROUGH FUNDS PROVIDED BY THE COASTAL ZONE MANAGE—
MENT ACT OF 1972, AS AMENDED, WHICH IS ADMINISTERED BY THE
OFFICE OF OCEAN AND COASTAL RESOURGE MANAGEMENT, NATIONAL
OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE NO.
SECTION 1.0 PRESENT CONDITIONS
1
'
1.1 POPULATION
1
1.1.1 Current Population
1
1.1.2 Future Population
1.2 PRESENT ECONOMY
8
'
1.2.1 The Tourism/Recreatiun Industry
8
1.2.2 Commercial Fisheries and Research
10
1.2.3 Agriculture
12
1.2.4 1'orta-Related J.ndustry
14
1.2.4.1 State Ports Authority Facilities
14
1.2.5 Non -Porto Related Industry
16
1.2.6 Impact of the Military and Retirees
17
1.3 EXISTING LAND USE
19
1.3.1 General Land Use Descriptions by Category
20
'
1.3.2 Land Use by Township
23
1.3.3 Significant Land Use Compatibility Problems
45
1.3.4 Major Problems Resulting from Unplanned Growth
46
1.3.5 Areas Likely to Experience Major Land Use Changes
48
'
1.4 CURJIRNT PLANS, POLICIES AND REGULATIONS
51
1.4.1 Existing Local Plana and Policies
51
1.4.2 Means for Enforcement
57
'
1.5 CONSTRAINTS: PHYSICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL
58
1.5.1 Physical Limitations
S8
1.5.2 Fragile Areas
68
1.5.3 Areas with Resource Potential
74
1.6 CONSTRAINTS: CAPACITY OF COMMUNITY FACILITIES
80
1.6.1 Water and Sewer Services
80
1.6.2 Transportation Systems
82
1.6.3 Solid Waste
86
1.6.4 Educational Facilities and Services
87
1.6.5 Recreation
90
'
1.6.6 Medical Facilities and Health Services
91
1.6.7 Fire Protection and Rescue Squad
93
1.6.8 Social Services
94
'
1.6.9 Other County Facilities
94
1.7 FUTURE LAND NEEDS
96
1.8 COMMUNITY FACILITIES DEMAND
97
1.8.1 Water
97
1
1.8.2 Sewer
97
1.8.3 Transportation
98
1.8.4 Solid Waste
98
'
1.8.5 - Educational Facilities
99
1.8.6 Drainage
99
1.8.7 Recreation
100
11
C

k
11
PAGE NO.
SECTION
2.0 POLICY ALTERNATIVES
101
2.1 RESOURCE
PROTECTION
103
2.1.1
Areas of Environmental Concern
103
2.1.1(a)
The Estuarine System
105
2.1.1(b)
Coastal Wetlands
106
2.1.1(c)
Estuarine Waters
108
2.1.1(d)
Public Trust Areas
110
2.1.1(e)
Estuarine Shorelines
112
2.1.1(f)
Ocean Hazard Areas
114
2.1.2
Fragile Areas
119
2.1.3
Water Quality and Fisheries Resources
133
2.1.4
Flood -Prone Areas
138
2.1.5
Historic and Archaeological Properties
139
2.2 RESOURCE
PRODUCTION AND MANAGEMENT
142
2.2.1
Productive Agricultural Lands
142
2.2.2
Potential Mineral Extraction
144
2.3 ECONOMIC
& COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
146
2.3.1
Water and Sewer Services
148
2.3.2
Package Treatment Plants
150
2.3.3
Transportation
151
2.3.4
Solid Waste
156
2.3.5
Educational Facilities
157
2.3.6
Drainage
157
2.3.7
Beach and Water Access
158
2.3.8
National Seashore Development
160
2.3.9
Military Activity
162
2.3.10
Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Exploration
165
2.3.11
Port Development
168
2.3.12
Seasonal Population Extremes
170
2.3.13
Commitment to State
172
2.3.14
Inter -governmental Coordination of Growth Management
174
2.4 CONTINUING
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
176
2.4.1
Public Participation During the Update Process
176
2.4.2
Continuing Public Participation
177
SECTION
3.0 LAND CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
178
LISTING
OF STATE AND FEDERAL REGULATIONS
190-196
APPENDIX
A - STORM HAZARD POLICIES AND RECONSTRUCTION PLAN
197-209
* * * *
*NOTE: Curturet Coutity's hurr.t.cane evacuation, hazard mitigation
* and host disaatur reconstruction plan was completed in
* June 1984. 'I'lila suparatu document is available at the county
* planning department.
*** Carteret County Storm Hazard policies and reconstruction
plan are contained in thu Appendix of this plan.

LIST OF TABLES PAGE NO.
Table
1
Permanent Population Change, Carteret County,
1950-1980
2
Table
2
Increube in Dwelling Uuits, 1970-1980
3
Table
3
Municipal Population in Carteret County,
1950-19HO
4
Table
4
Permanent Population Projections for
Carteret County, 1980-1990
5
Table
5
Peak Seauonal Population Trends,
1970-1990
6
Table
6
Estimated Landings in Carteret County
11
Table
7
Tonnage llandled at Morehead City
16
Table,8
High Ground, Wetland and Waterway
Acreage. lit Cartcret County
19
Table
9
EstimaLrd General Land Use in
Cartertt Cuuuty, 1973 and 1981
19
Table
10
Townwhip Dutimitivu Per Square Mile
25
Table
11
Agricultural Farmland: Soil Association
and Management Limitation Rate
76
Table
12
Soil AuuuciaLlortu in Carteret County
77
Table
13
Carteret County Schools -
Individual Attalyais
89
Table
14
Baale Sarvicua 011cred by
Litt? Ilaa l t h Dcepa r tmuttt
92

M A P S
Map 1 Existing Land Use
Map 2 Land Use by Township
Map 3 Flood Hazard Areas
Map 4 Soils and Prime Agricultural Areas
Map 5 Fragile Areas Map
Maps 6-10 Primary Nursery Arras
Map 11 Land Classification Map
PAGE NO.
21
24
60
62
69
127-131
189

SECTION 1.0 PRESENT CONDITIONS
SECTION 1.1 POPULATION
SECTION 1.1.1 CURRENT POPULATION
During the past several decades, both permanent and seasonal popu-
lation in Carteret County has changed. significantly. Since 1950, total
permanent population had increased in 1980 from 23,059 to 41,092, an
increase of over seventy-eight (78) percent in three decades (see Table
1). Increases were fairly moderate during the 1950's and 60's (less
than two percent per year). Permanent population growth in the nine-
teen -seventies (30%) was double that of the nineteen -sixties (15`,6). The
Morehead, Newport and White Oak townships were responsible for the most
dramatic increases. Growth in these districts can be attributed in part
to the development of the communities of Atlantic Beach, Cape Carteret,
Emerald Isle, Newport, Indian Beach and Pine Knoll Shores. In addition
to new development in towns like Atlantic, Beach, Pine Knoll Shores and
Indian'Beach, the Morehead Township showed signs of significant growth..
Dwelling units in the unincorporated portions of the township more than
doubled" during the seventies from 2,248 dwelling units in 1970 to 5,115
units in 1980 (see Table 2). .Much of this new development may be attri-
buted to growth in unincorporated (or previously unincorporated) por-
tions of Bogue Banks, some of which falls into the extraterritorial
planning jurisdiction of incorporated towns. However, soundside devel-
opment in both Morehead and White Oak townships should be a significant
factor .in future growth patterns based on real estate trends in other
accessible coastal areas in'the southeast.
1

Table 1 - Permanent Population Change, Carteret County
1950 - 1980.
Townships
1950
1960
1970
1980
Atlantic
00<<
902
814
810
Beaufort
5,374
6,426
6,147
6,992
Cedar Island
290
255
290
333
Davis
00*
446
456
492
Harkers Island
00%'-
1,362
11639
1,910
Harlowe
00*
629
762
956
Hunting Quarter
1,519
00"'-
00
00 ,fir
Marshallberg
00%',
416
525
580
Merrimon
374
344
330
426
Morehead-
8,299
101054
11,929
15,803
Newport
2,259
2,644
3,926
5,469
Portsmouth
33
8
2
00 :'c
Sea Level-
00:
389
347
540
Smyrna
1,387
597
517
637
Stacy
00*
291
257
322
Straits
2,251
1,070
1,166
1,520
White Oak
1,273
1,785
2,496
4,302
COUNTY TOTAL
23,059
27,438
31,603
41,092
(+19.0)
(+15.0)
(+30.0)
SOURCE: Raw Data; U.
S. Department
of -Commerce,, Bureau of
the Census
No Data available
Total % Change
-10.2
+30.1
+14.8
+10.3
+40.2
+52.0
+39.4
+23.8
+90.4
+142.0
+38.8.
-54.4
+10.7
-32.5
+237.'9
+78.2
K

Table 2 - Increase in Dwelling Units
1970 - 1980
1970
1980
Percent
Township Dwelling Units
Dwelling Units
Increase
Atlantic
305
399
30.8
Beaufort
926
1,125
21.5
(Beaufort)
1,272
1,772
39.3
Cedar Island
107
146
36.4
Davis
162
223
37.6
Harkers
602
925
53.6
Harlowe
250
373
49.2
Marshallberg
201
271
34.8 .
Merrimon
140
209
49.3
Morehead
2,248
3,459
53.9
(Atlantic Beach)
1,586
2,699b
70.2
(Atlantic Beach
planning jurisdiction)
0*
1,656
1000 +
(Indian Beach)
500a
1,329
165.8
(Pine Knoll Shores)
0
1,007
1000 +
(Morehead City)
1,973
2,043
3.5
Newport
735
1,499
104.0.
(Newport)
534
647
21.2
Sea Level
145
173
19.3
Smyrna
185
.262
41.6
Stacy
93
124
33.3
Straits
469
686
46.3
White Oak
728
1,311
80.0
(Cape Carteret)
204
428
110.0
(Emerald Isle)
304
2,396
688.0
TOTALS ,
13,669
25,162
84.1
bEstimate for units in unincorporated areas of Bogue Banks, 1970.
Figure from appropriate Land Use Plans
No Data available
3

The beach towns of Atlantic Beach, Emerald Isle, Indian Beach and
Pine Knoll Shores have experienced tremendous growth over the past two
decades, as a result of investment in second and retirement homes (see
Table 3). Newport, one of the oldest municipalities in the county,
doubled in population between 1960 and 1970, a. result of expansion of
the U.S. Marine Corps _base at Cherry Point. Beaufort lost population
between 1950 and 1960, but grew by 13.6 percent between 1970 and 1980.
Since a high population of 5,583 in 1960, Morehead City's population has
decreased 22 percent, to 4,359 in 1980. The decrease can be attributed
to declining family sizes and migration to suburban residential neigh-
borhoods such as Mitchell Village, Country Club Road, Spooners Creek,
and sound front areas along Highway 24.
Table 3 - Municipal Population in Carteret County
1950 1980
Total % Change
Municipalities
1950
1960
1970
1980
1970 - 1980
Atlantic Beach
49
76
300
941
213.7
Beaufort.
3,212
2,922
3,368
3,826
13.6
Cape Carteret
00 _
52
616
944
53.2
Emerald Isle
00
14
122
865
609.0
Indian Beach
00
00
00
54
Morehead City
5,144
5,583
5,233
4,359
-16.7
Newport
676
861
1,735
1,883
8.5
Pine Knoll Shores
00
00
00
646
SOURCE: Raw Data; U. S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census
-` No total percent change because of unavailable data prior to 1980
SECTION 1.1.2 FUTURE POPULATION
General projections for. the. county have been prepared by the Office
of State Budget and Management through 1990. These figures reflect only
permanent population (See Table 4).
4

Table 4 - Permanent Population Projections for Carteret County,
1980-1990
1980 1983 1985 1990
41,089 44,747 47,039 53,090
These figures reflect a gradually increasing permanent population
(about 29% over the ten-year period, or' three percent a year). Of
greater significance are projections for peak summertime populations for
Bogue Banks, other incorporated areas, and unincorporated areas attrac-
ting seasonal residents.
The Carteret County Economic Development Council has estimated
there were 1,750,000 tourist visitors during 1980. Most of these sea-
sonal residents visit Carteret County during the months of April through
October. These temporary residents create tremendous demands on trans-
portation systems, solid waste collection/disposal operations and water
and sewer facilities.
Table 5 presents peak seasonal population figures for the unincor-
porated portions of townships and incorporated towns and cities for the
1970-1990 period. Peak housing occupancy figures (in persons per house-
hold) were derived from 1970 housing counts and 1970 peak seasonal
estimates. Peak seasonal population for 1980 was derived by multiplying
1970 seasonal occupancy rates by 1980 housing counts. The figures for
1990 peak seasonal estimates were (except as otherwise footnoted)
derived by applying the rate of increase in total number of dwelling
units between 1970 and 1980 by the seasonal occupancy rates used in
deriving the 1980 estimates.

Table 5 - Peak Seasonal Population Trends
1970-1990
Toumships (unin-
1
2
2
corporated areas) 1970
1980
%Increase
1990
%Increase
Atlantic
825
11077
30.5
11409
30.8
Beaufort
22775
31375
21.6
41101
21.5
Cedar Island
300
409
36.3
557
36.2
Davis.
475
653
37.5
900
37.8
Harkers
2,000
39053
52.7
41689
53.6
Harlowe
775
11156
49.5
11727
49.4
Marshallberg
550
743
35.1
12000
34.6
Merrimon
330
493
49.4
736
49.3
Morehead
6,250
92616
53.9
14,759
53.9
Newport
21191
4,467
103.9
92113
104.0
Sea Level
350
415
18.6
494
19.0
Smyrna
525
744
41.7
19054
41.7
Stacy
257
342
33.1
455
33.0
Straits
1.175
1,715
46.0
21150
46.4
White Oak
1,800
3,238
80.0
5,829
80.0
TOTALS: Unincor-
porated Carteret
County
20,578
31,496
+53.1
49,373
+56.8
Municipalities
Atlantic Beach
41800
122300
156.3
26,158
112.7
Beaufort
32500
42873
39.2
6,787
39.3
Cape Carteret
800a
1,678
109.8
31524b
110.0
Emerald Isle
912a
82500
832.0
122500
47.1
Indian Beach
29007
31987
98.7
72920
98.7
Morehead City
52500
51700
3.6
51901
3.5
Newport
12735
2,103
21.1
22548
21.2
Pine Knoll Shores
0
3 9413
-
69270c
83.7
TOTALS: Munici-
palities 19,254
422554
+121.0
71,608
+68.3
TOTALS: Carteret
County 39,832
742050
+85.9
120,981
+63.4
aEstimated from d.u. counts at 3.0 persons/d.u.
bTaken from Von Oeson & Associates, "Relationship of Wastewater Disposal Practices
on Development Density of Emerald Isle," 1983..
cTaken from Pine Knoll Shores 1981 land Use Plan
1Carteret County 1970 Comprehensive Water and Sewer Report.
2Office of Coastal Management. estimates (1983) derived from 1970 seasonal
occupancy rates and 1980 census housing counts, unless otherwise footnoted.

While increases in municipal growth rates are expected to be quite
significant overall, increases in seasonal population are expected to be
substantial .in unincorporated areas as well. Peak seasonal population
in Carteret County townships increased by over fifty (50) percent during
the nineteen -seventies. A similar figure is projected for the eighties
decade. This estimate may be conservative, since most of the resi-
dential development which occurred in the last decade has been -in the
form of single family or duplex units. The first three years of this
decade have been characterized by a trend toward high density multi-
family developments, mostly in the incorporated areas of Bogue Banks.
However, there exists the potential for a "spill -over" effect in attrac-
tive sound front areas throughout the county as the beach areas fill up.
Peak seasonal population increases in municipal areas were phe-
nomenal in the 1970's, averaging 121 percent. Peak seasonal population
in Atlantic Beach is expected to more than double in the course of the
next decade, in part due to the Town's policy of encouraging growth as a
means of reaching the economic ability for the provision of central
sewer services.l Cape Carteret's population is also expected to more
than double, based on past and .expected development trends. The Von
Oeson and Associates wastewater study estimated a conservative figure
for potential growth in Emerald Isle over the next decade; use of this
figure reflects an expectation that the Town will initiate actions to
moderate its growth potential. The Town of Indian Beach should also
double in peak- population; more dramatically, if development there
1Atlantic Beach Land Use Plan (1981) and Management Systems for the Town
of Atlantic Beach (1983).
7

occurs at the. town's prevailing density (11 dwelling units per acre),.
this small area could accommodate over 16,000 peak seasonal residents by
1990.2 The Town of Pine Knoll Shores should experience triple the 1980
seasonal population based on expected dwelling unit counts by 1990,
based on estimates in the Town's Land Use Plan.
Carteret County's peak seasonal population should swell by over
sixty percent by 1990, to over 120,000 persons. A large percentage of
this increase will occur in the incorporated areas, but growth in unin-
corporated areas will be substantial as. well. Because of the trend
toward higher density multi -family dwellings, particularly in areas that
were formerly single family, these estimates may be conservative.
SECTION 1.2 PRESENT ECONOMY
The mainstays of Carteret County's economy are its tourism, retire -
meat community, military preserve, commercial fisheries and agriculture
industries, and industrial development some of which is associated with
the State Port Authority at Morehead City.
SECTION 1.2.1 THE TOURISM/RECREATION INDUSTRY
Tourism in Carteret County consists of sport fishing, boating,
vacationing, day beach visits and second and summer home development.
There seems to' be little disagreement that the value of tourism to the
Carteret County economy is substantial, but there are disagreements
regarding how significant that value is. Restaurants are also important•.:.
2Based on 228.8 vacant acres developed at 11 dwelling units/acres with
peak seasonal occupancy estimated at 4:16 persons per household.-
11

In 1979, the State began a project to estimate tourist related
expenditure throughout the State', The State's estimates for Carteret
County for 1979 and 1980 were $62 million and $69 million respectively.
It was also estimated that these values would be low in situations where
there is a substantial summer house market (second or summer home devel-
opment is increasing significantly on Bogue Banks).
o Day visitors to the county average about 3,700 during the peak
May -August period each year.
o Overnight visitors to the county average about 15,000 per
night during the peak May -August period (an average increase
in County population of about 35% during the summer months).
The Carteret County Economic Development Council (EDC) estimates
that the County receives about 1,750,000 visitors per. year.
According to the N.C. Department of _Travel and Tourism, tourism
revenue in 1983 for Carteret County was $79 million. "And that figure
is probably closer to $100 million. These expenditures help create
jobs. The travel dollar turns over about 3.5 times (before leaving the
county), so that's a $280 million a year figure when all is considered,"
the Department stated at a January, 1984 meeting with leaders in the
County. The additional dollars above the $79 million figure represent
income related to condominium and cottage rentals. Since, according to
the N.C. Department of Revenue, total retail sales in Carteret County
for the 1982/83 year were only $272 million, it is likely that tourism
revenue for the County is somewhere between the estimates.
The new County Crystal Coast Civic Center, located on Bogue Sound,
opened in the Spring of 1984. It is expected to provide an additional
N. C. Dept. of Commerce Source
E

boost for the tourism/recreation industry. Facilities include a 1200
seat exhibition hall, meeting rooms, a Sound -front patio, a snack bar
and kitchen. The facility is expected to provide a forum for boat
shows, concerts, conventions, seminars and other exhibitions.
Section 1.2.2 COMMERCIAL FISHERIES AND RESEARCH
The commercial fishing industry is extremely important to the
overall economy of Carteret County. Data on commercial fishing activi-
ties for the past five (5) years indicate that during this period, the
County has been ranked Ytl in the State of North Carolina in terms of:
seafood landings (pounds); dockside value of seafood landings; number of
commerical fishing vessels licensed; and in the number of full-time and
part-time vessels involved in commercial fishing.
It is difficult to determine the total number of vessels in
Carteret County that are actually involved in commercial fishing activi-
ties on a full-time basis. In 1981, the State estimated that the number
of vessels involved in commercial fishing activities by category was as
follows:
Number
Full-time Vessels 1,365
Part -Time Vessels 1,482
Pleasure Fishing Vessels 1,080
Total 3,927
This figure- represents an increase of 150 vessels over the 1980
estimate.
In the report on "Coal Export in North Carolina," it was estimated
that 2,432 full-time fishermen, 2,216 part-time fishermen and 1,547
10

pleasure boat fishermen were involved actively in commercial fishing in
the County. Using a factor of .9 secondary jobs (fishing support acti-
vities such as boat construction, supply and maintenance and -fish pro-
cessing) for every full-time commercial fishing job, it was estimated
that about 4,621 persons are involved in the County's fishing industry.
This means that over 10% of the residents of the County are involved in
the fishing industry on a full- or part-time basis.
Data on seafood landings by county is maintained by both the State
of Forth Carolina and the National Marine Fisheries Service. Table 6
below compares the data collected on fish landings for the years 1980-
1984.
Table 6
Estimated Landings in Carteret County
(millions of pounds)
STATE OF NAT. MARINE FISHERIES
YEAR NORTH CAROLINA SERVICE
1980.
48
NA
1981
30
30
1982
32
32
1983
30
30
1984
34
34
It is generally assumed that a local community will receive between
2 and 2.5 times the dockside value of the landings in local income.
Using this range and the data on dockside values of the National Marine
Fisheries Service(does not include. menhaden landings) the economic value
of the commercial fishing industry to Carteret County in 1980 was
between $46 and $57 million dollars.
.There are five marine science and research facilities located in
Carteret County.
11

These facilities are:
o National Marine Fisheries Services Laboratory
o Duke University Marine Laboratory
o University of. North Carolina Institute of Marine Science
o North Carolina Division of Commercial Fisheries Laboratory
o North Carolina Coastal Resources Center
Permanent employment is over 250 people and the associated income
brought into the County approaches $10 million annually_
SECTION 1.2.3 AGRICULTURE.
According to the 1978 Census of Agriculture, fully twenty (20)
percent of Carteret County's land area was held 1n active agricultural
farms in 1978 (68,663 acres). This,is a significant increase over 1974,
when only 25,330 acres (7.4 percent) z:ere agricultural. The twenty
percent figure is significant in that federal, forested and freshwater
wetlands total some 68 percent of the land area in the County.
This large increase between 1974 and 1978 can be attributed almost
solely to the establishment of large corporate farms in the County.
Almost all of the corporate -owned farmland is new land in production.
Farms include the 45,000 acre Open Grounds Farm, located in east -central
Carteret County, and Smyrna Farms (8,000 acres) located off' Highway 70
East.
Although comparison figures for 1974 are not available, it appears
that the total acreage held in family farms (either full or part owners)
did not change appreciably from 1974 to 1978. The total number of farms
decreased by some 26 percent, which would indicate consolidation of
holdings. This change took place among full owners of farms.
12

Harvested Cropland in Carteret County
1974, 1978, and 1982
1974
1978
1982
Total Acreage 25,330
68,663
NA
(+171.0)
Total Cropland 13,356
341669
NA
(+160.0)
Harvested Cropland 11,291
17,562
30,870*
(+55.5)
+75.8
*Does not include crops in which 50 acres or less were harvested.
Harvested cropland jumped some 55 percent between 1974 and 1978,
the time period when several of the corporate farms began their opera-
tions. Between 1978 and 1982, this figure increased further to 75.8
percent, an average increase of almost nineteen (19) percent per year.
Corn, soybeans and tobacco are the leading crops produced in
Carteret County. The amount of acreage planted in corn has more than
tripled since 1974; the amount of land planted in soybeans has doubled.
Yields -of major crops for 1981 and 1982 are given below.
Corn (bushels)
Soybeans (bushels)
Tobacco (lbs)
1981
842,000
387,000
1,670,000
1982
1,315,000
387,000
2,002,000
Total crop values reflect the increase" in land in production,
jumping from roughly $7.5 million in 1975 to $13.5 million in 1979
(Carteret. County EDC Statistical Abstract). Crop values remained at
roughly the 1979 level in 1980 and 1981.
13

SECTION 1.2.4 PORTS -RELATED INDUSTRY
One of Carteret County's primary sources of industrial development
is its deep water port and existing industrial base in the Morehead
City -Beaufort Area. There are also numerous small industries scattered
throughout the County, as well as larger ventures such as Connor Homes
and Blue Bell (see Section 1.2.5).
The Morehead harbor is served by a three-mile, 42' deep ocean .
channel leading to Beaufort Inlet. From Beaufort Inlet, the Morehead
City Channel continues approximately two additional miles to the State
Ports Authority (SPA) Terminal. The depth of this channel is 40 feet.
The Morehead City Channel passes between the eastern end of Bogue
Banks, near Brandt Island and Fort Macon State Park, and Radio Island,
which is in unincorporated Carteret County. A turning basin with a
1,200-foot diameter lies between Brandt Island, Radio Island and the SPA
Terminal, where the Morehead City channel_ ends.
Radio island is bordered by the 15-foot deep Bulkhead Channel to
the east, which is connected to the Intracoastal Waterway in the Newport
River. Currently, the channel is primarily used by research vessels
associated with Pivers Island, commercial fishing vessels (primarily
Menhaden vessels) and sport fishing and pleasure boats.
Section 1.2.4.1 State Ports Authority Facilities
The State Ports Authority currently operates facilities at its
Morehead City terminal. The available facilities include:
0 5,300 feet of continuous concrete wharf, including a 1,000-
foot berth for bulk cargo handling.
14

o A barge terminal north of U.S. 70 which consists. -of 1,200 feet
of dock space and provides four 300-foot berths. This facil-
ity is currently used for phosphate handling.
o Four transit sheds with a capacity of 342,500 square feet.
o Warehouse space totalling 496,550 square feet.
o Fourteen (14) acres of paved open storage with rail and truck
access.
o A 3-million ton capacity (annual) bulk facility for receiving,
storing, conveying, loading and shipping bulk cargoes. The
loading capacity is 3,000 tons per hour. Storage capacity is
1069000 tons.
o A 3-million ton capacity (annual) coal handling facility. The
loading capacity is 1,500 tons per hour.
o Two 115-ton capacity gantry cranes. A container crane was
previously available at the facility, but has been removed.
Texas Gulf Sulfur transports phosphate rock, phosphoric acid, and
phosphate fertilizer by barge from Aurora via the Inland Coastal Waterway
to Morehead City. Typically, eight barges a day with a capacity of
2,000 tons each utilize the facility.
North Carolina Phosphate Corporation has an option to build a
storage building on Calico Creek to the North of Texas Gulf's existing
phosphate storage facility. It is anticipated that NCPC will b rge
several, million tons per year through Morehead City, with oper�ations
expected to commence in 1984. The SPA expects to be able to handle this
increased tonnage with.its existing bulk loading facilities. Currently,
an environmental impact statement is being prepared in reference to this
proposal, which will be reviewed by relevant state and local agencies.
15

Tonnagein the general cargo, asphalt, petroleum, and military
categories can vary significantly from year to year, reflecting changing
demands for different commodities (Table 7). However, over the ten-year
time frame, overall tonnage handled has nearly doubled.
Table 7 - Tonnage Handled at Morehead City
(in thousands of tons, rounded)
General
General
Asphalt &
Year
Import
Export
Petroleum
Military
Total
1971
375
473
291
8
1,147
1972
643
513
243
8
1,407
1973
584
436
315
10
1,345
1974
539
560
253
6
1,358
1975
395
611
156
3
1,165
1976
718
765
141
12
1,636
I977
160
871
709
5
1,745
1978
275
948
771
23
2,017
1979
936
11171
331
6
2,444
1980
716
978
324
8
2,026
1981
261
1,142
N/A
N/A
N/A
1982
119
1,528
N/A
N/A
N/A
1983
215
1,317
N/A
N/A
N/A
Source: Roberts & Eichler Associates, Inc. Area Development
Plan for Radio Island (June, 1982).
SECTION 1.2.5 NON -PORTS RELATED INDUSTRY
In addition to ports -related industries, Carteret County's economy
is increasingly boosted by industries related to tourism and second home
development. These include building construction, modular housing, land
development, and real estate and service -oriented businesses. Addi-
tionally, there is a small boat building industry in the county.
Building contractors provide an extensive 'array of services in the
County, ranging from paving, air conditioning, electrical, plumbing,
insulation, roofing to general building construction.
16

The modular housing industry is represented by numerous modular
sales establishments in addition to Connor Mobile Homes corporate
offices in Newport.
Land development firms and real estates sales are perhaps the most
visible beneficiaries of the development boom on Bogue Banks and other
water -oriented, growing residential areas.
Service industries include an extensive range of restaurants,
shops, vacation rentals and motels.
Boat building skills have long been a part of the Carteret County
economy. Most of these concerns are located "Downeast" in communities
such as Harker's Island and Marshallberg.
SECTION 1.2.6 IMPACT OF THE MILITARY AND RETIREES
The Marine Corps Air Station at Cherry Point is home to 11,440
Marines and Sailors and 10,997 dependents. Cherry Point is the largest
single sited employer in North Carolina providing employment for 5,650
civilians. Approximately one-third of these civilian employees, with an
estimated annual payroll of $47,000,000, live in Carteret County. In
addition, the estimated payroll for one-third of the approximately 2,300
military personnel living in local communities is in excess of
$14,000,000. Further economic benefit accrues to Carteret County from
the $45,800,000 annual aviation fuel purchases that come through the
Defense Fuel Terminal at Beaufort, the $5,500,000 ground fuel purchases
that come through the local area, and the $5,800,000 support goods and
services that are purchased locally. Another benefit to the local
economy is the civilian construction contractors on board Cherry Point
who provide employment for approximately 1,000 people while putting work
in place valued at $50,000,000 this year.
17

The Department of Defense currently has plans to establish a decon-
tamination facility for troops returning from overseas on Radio Island.
Expected to cost $25 million, the purpose of the facility is to meet
United States Department of Agriculture standards for sanitation and
disease control. The facility will cover thirty-three acres and should
be in place in the late 1980's.
Additionally, the National Association of Retired Federal Employees
has disclosed ,that in 1980 there were 1,174 federal retirees in Carteret
County with gross monthly annuities in excess of $1 million, plus 308
survivor annuitants with gross monthly annuities of over $100,000. This
totals over $13.5 million in annual income for federal retirees alone.
Military retirees and Social Security retirees would add significantly
to this,figure.
18

SECTION 1.3
EXISTING LAND USE
Carteret County contains more than 680,000 acres, fully half of
which are water areas and wetlands. Von Oesen & Associates estimates
that there are some 55,000 acres of saltwater wetlands in the county;
large water areas include Bogue, Back and Core Sounds, and the Newport,
White Oak, North and South Rivers. More than 90,000 acres (27.4 percent
of the high ground total) are in federal holdings such as Croatan
National Forest and Cape Lookout National Seashore and cannot be devel-
oped for urban purposes.
Table 8 - High Ground, Wetland and
Waterway Acreage in Carteret County
High ground land areas
Wetlands (salt)
Small and large water bodies
TOTAL ACRES
Estimated Acreage Percent
338,778 49.7
55,000 8.1
287,310 42.2
681,088 100.0
Source:. Von Oesen & Associates, Carteret County Complex 201
Facilities Plan, March 1979. "
Table 9 - Estimated General Land Use
in Carteret County, 1973 and 19818
Category 1973 Percent 1981 Percent
Federal land 70,776
Urban and rural built up 6,177
Cropland and pasture 20,381
Forest and freshwater 163,230
wetlands
Other land 78,214
TOTAL LAND AREA 338.778
21.0
92,637b
27.3
1.8
15,700
4.6
6.0
68,663c
20.3
48.2
161,778
47.8
23.0
- 0 -
100.0
338,778
100.0
a Von Oeson & Associates, Carteret County Complex 201 Facilities Plan,
March 1979
bDerived from acreage totals in 1980-81 Atlantic Beach, Beaufort, Cape
Carteret, Emerald Isle, Indian Beach, Morehead City, New -port and Pine
Knoll Shores CAMA Land Use Plans and estimated community acreage.
cN.C. Census of Agriculture, 1978
19

Since 1973, there have been significant changes in general land use
in the County (see Table 9). Federal land holdings increased some
21,000 acres with the establishment of the Cape Lookout National Sea-
shore on Core Banks. Urban and rural built up land almost doubled in
the same time period, a testimony to the rapid development of resort
communities on Bogue Banks and residential needs for the military near
Newport. With the development of Open Grounds and other large corporate
farms, crop and pasture land has more than tripled. General existing
land use is shown on Map 1.
Section 1.3.1 GENERAL LAND USE DESCRIPTIONS BY CATEGORY
Federal Land - There are nearly 95,000 acres. in federal holdings in
Carteret County. These holdings include:
o Cape Lookout National Seashore
o Cedar Island National Wildlife Refuge
o Point of Marsh (Marine Corps restricted military area)
o Bogue Field
o Atlantic Air Field
o Croatan National Forest
Urban and Rural Built-up Land - There are over 15,000 acres in this
category, which includes land within and adjacent to the municipalities
of Newport, Morehead City, Beaufort, Atlantic Beach, Pine Knoll Shores,
Indian Beach and Emerald Isle, and unincorporated communities such as
those down east. Some 12,080 of these 'acres are located in or near
municipalities. The remaining 3,620 acres are located in the less
densely settled unincorporated communities.
1. Residential
The average density per dwelling unit in these areas is
slightly over one dwelling unit per acre. (There are 13,977
20

I
n
ft7
w 7
(n cV
C :3 N C C
N
z a L° 3 m
Q
J
91IRM 0 0 0

dwelling units within town limits .and extraterritorial planning
areas.) . Actual lot sizes are much less, since much of the urban
land is allocated to other developed uses and some areas are yet to
be developed.
2. Commercial
There are approximately 1,000 commercial uses in the, County,
comprising roughly ten (10) percent of total urban and built-up
acreage. The major concentration of intensive commercial develop-
ment is in Morehead City and its one -mile extraterritorial area.
The U.S. 70 corridor from the Hwy. 24 intersection east is the
focus of much of this activity. Recently a great deal of com-
mercial 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.
3. Industrial
Recent Carteret County Economic Development Council figures
indicated there were nearly. 60 industries operating in the County.
Many of these industries are small and occupy minimum amounts of
land. Industrial activity is more fully discussed in Section
1.2.4. Major industrial employers are located in the Morehead City
port area.
4. Transportation, Communication and Utilities
There are approximately 337 miles of state maintained roads in
the County and, 40 miles of railroad track. The Beaufort -Morehead
City Airport covers 339 acres. City water and sewer facilities and
electric company and telephone company holdings are also included
in this category.
22

5. Cultural, Entertainment and Recreational
This land use includes County and State parks, churches,
cemeteries and certain businesses. This land use is a small per-
centage of the developed land in Carteret County.
Cropland and Pasture - Agricultural lands (nearly 70,000 acres) are
found predominantly in five areas:
o along NC 58, between the Croatan National Forest and the White
Oak River;
o surrounding the Newport area;
o along NC 101 north of Beaufort;
o north of U.S. 70 east (Open Grounds farm and other agricul-
tural holdings); and
o in the Herrimon vicinity.
Forest and Freshwater Wetlands - In addition to some 70,000 acres in the
federally -owned Croatan National Forest, there are extensive forested
lands between Newport and NC 101 north of the Newport River; and sur-
rounding the Open Grounds farm area in eastern Carteret County. Many of
these forested areas contain extensive freshwater wetlands. Addition-
ally, there are several thousand acres of unforested freshwater wetlands
in eastern Carteret County. Urban and rural encroachment has probably
reduced actual forested acreage to less than the 1973 estimate of
163,230.
Section 1.3.2 LAND USE BY TOWNSHIP
Carteret County is divided into 15 townships, most of which encom-
pass large rural and water areas (see Hap 2). Densities (in dwelling
units per square mile; see Table 10) are very low, averaging less than
23

3i
A TL AN T/C
O CEA N
TOWNSHIPS
1) CEDAR ISLAND 9) STRAITS
2)
ATIANrIC
10)
MERRIWN
3)
SEA LEVEL
11)
BEAUFORT
4)
STACY
12)
HARL01%TE
5)
DA�'IS
13)
MOREHEAD
6)
S"11R\A
14)
NnTPORT
7)
MARSKALLBERG
15)
VHITEOAK
8)
HARKERS ISIAND
A
ATL ANTlC
OCEAN
LAND USE
Urban and rural built-up
Agriculture
Forest
Wet land
Barren
CARTERET COUNTY
NO;TM CARMINA
LAND USE
BY TOWNSHIP
MAP 2
Page 24

50 units per square mile. Only the Morehead Township (312.6 dwellings
per square mile) approaches the transition/developed density standard of
500 dwellings per square mile.
Table 10 - Township Densities Per Square Mile
Area
Dwelling
D.U.'s/Square
Population
(Square Miles)
Units
Miles
Atlantic.
810
13.0
399
30.7
Beaufort
6,992
38
2,897
76.2
Cedar Island
333
31
146
4.7
Davis
492
61
223
3.7
Harker's Island
1,910
13
925
71.2
Harlowe
956
26
373
14.3
Marshallberg
580
6
271
45.2
Merrimon
426
56
209
37
Morehead
15,803
39
12,193
312.6
Newport
5,469
75
2,146
28.6
Sea Level
540
9
173
19.2
Smyrna
637
21
262
12.5
Stacy
322
16
124
7.75
Straits
1,520
31
686
22.1
White Oak
4,302
94
4,135
44.0
Totals
41,092
529 ^
25,162
47.6
NME:. Areas are rounded off. and therefore totAls are approximate.
1. The Atlantic Township is located about thirty miles east of
Beaufort.in extreme northeastern Carteret County. It is bounded to the
northeast by the Cedar Island Marsh in Cedar Island Township, and to the
north and southwest by Sea Level Township. The main commercial activity
in the Township, and in particular its sole .community of -Atlantic, is
commercial fishing. The Township contains predominantly wetlands and
lowland natural areas.
The largest manmade land use is Atlantic Airfield, operated and
maintained under the U.S. Department of the Navy, Cherry Point Marine
Corps Air Station, as an outlying field. The airfield occupies 1500
acres and is just northwest of the unincorporated community of Atlantic.
25

Roughly 1600 acres of the Cedar Island Wildlife Refuge falls within
Township boundaries. The Atlantic Natural Area, identified as an area
of regional significance by the N.C. Natural Heritage Program survey for
Carteret County, covers some 3,000 acres in the Township. Currently,
the primary use in the natural area has been for hunting.
Only a few hundred acres, mostly in -the vicinity of the Atlantic
community, contain residential and residential support uses. Average
residential lot size is slightly less than one dwelling unit per acre.
Trade and support services occupy approximately 21 acres. Industrial
uses, including boat manufacturing and scallop houses, occupy about '9
acres.
There are a number of constraints which should limit future devel-
opment in the Township. Low elevations and a high water table, combined
with present methods of water supply and sewage disposal (individual
wells and septic tanks) dictate large lot sites (nearly an acre per
dwelling). The amount of desirable land for expansion is limited to
areas fronting on or near Core Sound, particularly since the airfield
effectively blocks -any expansion of the Atlantic Community along its
entire northwest boundary. Also the presence of the field may cause
some degree of noise and safety hazards.
Any higher density development would necessitate the use of .a
package treatment plant for sewage disposal. Because of the area's
remoteness, and because of limitations imposed by federal flood insur-
ance regulations, it is unlikely_to experience any residential develop-
ment other than slowly paced growth at very low densities (less than two
dwelling units per acre) in the next five to ten years.
26

2. The Beaufort Township is located in the geographic center of
Carteret County and runs from the County border with Craven County to
Beaufort Inlet. It .is bounded to the northwest by Harlowe Township, to
the southwest by Morehead City and the Bogue Banks communities, and to
the east by the North River. Its nearest eastern neighbors are Harkers
Island and Shackleford Banks.
Although it contains the County seat (Beaufort) and a number of
urbanizing activities, over ninety percent of the Township's 38 square
miles is made up of agricultural, forested and wetland areas. Agricul-
tural land inactive cultivation generally runs parallel to both NC 101
and U.S. 70 north of. Beaufort. The vast expanse of land lying between
these two corridors -- by far the largest portion of the Township's
acreage -- is forested. It is not known how much of this land is being
actively cultivated for commercial purposes. An extensive freshwater
wetland linking the head of the North River to Adam's Creek (a Neuse
River tributary) covers at least five square miles in the township.
Certain areas in this marsh were identified as -having regional signifi-
cance in the Natural Heritage survey for Carteret County (see Straits
Township below).
The Town of Beaufort is the hub of the County's historical culture,
and is rapidly becoming a sailing harbor and tourist attraction with the
successful completion of the Old Towne Harbor Urban Renewal project.
Growth patterns within the County's jurisdiction near Beaufort should be
coordinated with those of the Town in order to preserve the historic
character of Beaufort.
New residential subdivision development has been occuring to the
east and west of the Beaufort extraterritorial jurisdiction, and to some
extent along NC 101 adjacent to Core Creek and US 70 along the North
27

River. If the growth trend to the north and east continues, water and
sewer services should be planned in conjunction with the Town's centra-
lized facilities. If access to such services is not available or
planned, permissible densities should reflect this.
The Beaufort -Morehead Airport, which is located within Beaufort's
planning jurisdiction, is an important asset to the Township and the
County in general. The airport provides support services to the State
Ports Authority Terminal and is expected to provide similar support
services in conjunction with an- -`OCS leases established along the South-
eastern North Carolina coast. The airport will assist in the shipping
of equipment, supplies and personnel to offshore drilling sites.
Areas north of the airport and the Town's extraterritorial juris-
diction are accessible to the intra-coastal waterway and are currently
zoned industrial. A recent trend toward residential development makes
-this area one which should receive special, scrutiny in terms of land
classification and possible zoning changes. Air travel impacts should
also be considered in evaluating future land uses in this area.
Major industries located in the township include Carteret Manufac-
turing, Beaufort Face Veneer, Atlantic Veneer, Beaufort Fisheries,
Standard Products, Brunswick Navigation, Carteret Quick Freeze, Davis
Fisheries, Gillikin Boat Works and .Aviation Fuel Terminals, Inc. Most
of these businesses lie within Beaufort's planning jurisdiction.
An area of special concern is Radio Island, located in the Newport
River. The Island has direct access to rail service, the Morehead City
and Bulkhead Channels, and US 70. The Island was created in 1936 as a
spoil area for the initial dredging of the Morehead City Channel, and
consists of about 240 acres suitable for development. The area had
-n Outer Continental Shelf
28

traditionally been viewed as an expected location .for port expansion,
and has been zoned port -industrial since 1962. In 1982, a development
plan was drafted for Radio Island, resulting in changes to the County's
zoning ordinance. These changes established a review procedure for, and
performance standards to be met by, new industrial users on the Island.
Another area of special concern is the Rachel Carson National
Estuarine. Sanctuary, a 2025 acre complex composed of Carrot Island,
Horse Island, Bird Shoal and Town Marsh. The complex has been acquired
by the State, which has also prepared a natural area management plan for
the Sanctuary.
3. The Cedar Island Township is located at'the extreme north
eastern tip of Carteret County and is bounded by the Davis, Sea Level
and Atlantic Townships. Most of the Township's 31 square miles consists
of saltwater and brackish marsh. A large portion of Core Banks and
Portsmouth Island, both part of the Cape Lookout National Seashore, lie
within Cedar Island Township.
About 11,000 acres of the Township is included within the Cedar_.
Island Wildlife Refuge area. The Refuge includes about two miles of the
westernmost end of the seven -mile long Cedar Island - North Bay barrier
Island. This unique area contains almost all features of an oceanfront
barrier island, although it faces Pamlico Sound. The mid -section of the
barrier contains a portion of the sparsely settled Cedar Island com-
munity and Cedar Island - Ocracoke Ferry debarkation point. The
easternmost three miles is in a natural state and is transacted by a
number of inlets, preventing access except by boat. The easternmost
five miles of the barrier, identified as a natural area of national signi-
ficance (N.C. Heritage Survey for Carteret County) are privately owned.
29

The number of residences in this remote community_ increased by
nearly fifty percent between 1970 and 1980, although there are still less
than 200 houses in the'Township. There may be some economic pressure to
develop additional residences.near.the central area of the barrier spit.
Any new development should be of very low key nature, given the Town-
ship's remoteness, exceptionally low and wet terrain, and extreme vul-
nerability to all types of Atlantic storms. The presence of the Marine
Corps bombing range in nearby Rattan Bay is another possible hazard to
future development.
Some 7000 acres in and adjacent to the Refuge'forms the Cedar
Island Marshes, which are bounded by Long Bay and West Bay to the north-
west and north, Cedar Island proper to the northeast, Core Sound and
Thorofare Bay to the southeast, and --the Carteret County mainland to the
southwest. A significant portion of the southwestern section of the
marshes is owned by the U.S. Marine Corps and the Bayland Corporation.
The U.S. Marine Corps owns approximately 500 acres northwest of N.C. 12
and the Bayland Corporation owns roughly the same amount southeast of
N.C. -12.
The Cedar Island Marshes are largely unaltered. They 'probably
contain the largest contiguous tract of undisturbed irregularly flooded
salt marsh in North Carolina.
4. Davis Township, in the extreme northeastern section of the
County, extends from Rattan Bay at the mouth of the Neuse River to the
Core Banks. It is one of the largest and most sparsely populated town-
ships in the County, and is bounded by the Stacy, Smyrna and Merrimon
Townships.
30

Most of the Township's 61 square miles was originally an extensive
pocosin; much of this area is now in cultivation as part of Open Grounds
Farm. Most of the .Township's -492 residents live in the small community
of Davis, which is located along US 70 on a peninsula jutting into Core
Sound. Like other downeast communities, Davis is largely supported by
the fishing industry.
Any additional residential growth in the next five or ten years
will be in the form of very low density second home or retirement devel-
opment, due to the lack of suitable land for residential services, and
the community's remoteness from more urbanized areas.
5. The Harker's Island Township includes Harker's and Brown
Islands, the Shackleford Banks, and Cape Lookout. The Township lies
across the North River from Beaufort, and is adjacent to the Straits and
Marshallberg Townships.
Harker's Island .is the only inhabited area in the Township, and is
year-round home for some 1,900 residents. This figure swells to roughly
3000 persons in the summer time. The Island is supported by fishing,
boat building and summer tourism. Roughly 570 acres are residential,
while .25 acres are devoted to commercial uses, with another 17 in use
for boat building and other activities classified as industrial.
The Island lies some twenty miles by road from Beaufort, limiting
its accessibility. There are approximately 8k miles of paved road on
the Island, and another 9k miles of unpaved roads. Most of the unpaved
roads are in good condition at the -present time, but the fact that more
than half of the roads on Harker's Island are unpaved may prove to be a
problem if additional development takes place. The Island is congested
in many areas, a result of haphazard development. Recent subdivisions
31

have complied with County Subdivision Regulations, but older areas often
have several residential (or mixed) structures on one lot, inadequate
access, and lack adequate sewage disposal. 'A central water system is in
place, but there is no central sewer. -New developments at moderate to
high densities should generally be required to provide centralized
package sewer treatment in accordance with the County's Subdivision
Regulations and State health standards.
Additional peak seasonal population, particularly of a "pass -
through" nature, will be created by the development of Shackleford, Cape
Lookout and the Core Banks as a National Park. Current plans indicate
100 acres on the eastern end of Harker's Island, including new admini-
strative offices for the Seashore Park, will be used to accommodate
tourists ferrying to the Park.. Additional 'ferry points are located at
Davis, Atlantic and Ocracoke, but given Harker's Island's proximity to
both Beaufort and the most desirable parts of the National Seashore,
ferry traffic should be heaviest there. Some accommodations. (i.e.,
motels and marinas) already exist to accommodate such traffic, and more
motel, camping and restaurant services, can be.expected.
Shackelford Bank is a remote island in the Outer Banks chain which
has been relatively undisturbed during the past.70 years. The Bank is
approximately 9_ miles long and up to one half .a mile wide. Its orien-
tation is east -west, making it perpendicular to prevailing winds and
providing an interesting contrast to the other barrier islands of the
Outer Banks.
The eastern two thirds of the Island resembles barrier islands to
the north: low dunes near the ocean, grasslands, low shrub trees and an
32

extensive salt marsh. In contrast, the. western end of Shackelford
features, dunes 30 to 40 feet high and an extensive and well developed
maritime forest.
Once the National Park Service finalizes acquisition, the Bank will
be classified as wilderness. The primary land use is beach recreation
on both the ocean and sound sides, fishing, camping, hiking and nature
study. Hunting and fishing are also authorized in designated areas.
The Island is used extensively as an outdoor laboratory and education
grounds by universities and research facilities for the study of barrier
island ecology.
Cape Lookout is a triangular barrier spit roughly three square
miles in area. It is the site of the historic Cape Lookout Lighthouse.
On the Island's western side, National Park Service and ferryboat docks,
water and comfort stations and a visitor contact station have been
established.
Brown Island is a relatively undisturbed natural area of about 600
acres located in the Straits just northeast of Harker's Island. It can
only be reached by boat. There are evidences of several old homesites
on the dune ridges, and there is at least one new homesite on the north-
east section of the Island.
According to the Natural Heritage Survey of Carteret County, the
Island has regional significance as a natural area. High ground areas
are 10' to 15' in elevation and consist of narrow relict dunes separated
by marshes. 'Some lots are currently for sale. The survey indicated
that the only area on the Island suitable for development would be the
north ridge, which could accept low density development.
33

6. Farlowe Township lies between Beaufort and Newport Townships,
and isseparated from Morehead Township to the south by the Newport
River. This 26 square mile Township has basically been an agricultural
and fishing community. Recent trends, especially along the Intra-
coastal Waterway (Adams Creek Canal) has been the conversion of agricul-
tural lands and woodlands into residential subdivisions. Evidence of
this is the recent development of Sea Gate Subdivision along the Water-
way, about one mile south of the Craven County line. A 300 acre area
north of this Subdivision, called Sea Gate Woods, is considered to be a
hardwood natural area of regional significance (N.C. Natural Heritage
Survey). The wood, which averages 8 to 13' in elevation, is not a
floodplain or swamp forest, which makes it unique in low-lying Carteret
County. Unfortunately, that fact (and its proximity to the Waterway and
existing residential development) makes it a desirable location for
future single family residential development. The wood provides habitat
for several rare bird species. The land is presently in the hands of
two owners: 244 acres are in the hands of a private individual and the
remaining 50 acres is owned by International Paper, Inc. The Corpo-
ration has recently installed drainage canals in its tract in support of
clearcutting operations on other tracts. This activity may affect areas
which are not cut.
Currently, there are roughly 2,050 acres of agricultural land in
the Township and nearly 600 acres of residential lands. Business, trade
and services account for roughly 4 acres. The remaining acreage in the
Township is largely forested.
7. The Harshallberg Township is the smallest township in Carteret
County, containing only 3,840 acres (6 square miles). It lies to the
34

northeast of Harker's Island and is roughly 20 miles east of Beaufort
via US 70. The Township is composed mainly of the community of
Marshallberg, which faces The.Straits and Core Sound. This is a fishing
and agricultural community, which, like other eastern areas of Carteret
County, reflects a rural community lifestyle. Boat works, boat manufac-
turing, marinas and fish houses provide an economic base for Marshall -
berg. The Marshallberg community is fairly densely settled although it
lacks public water and sewer services. Additional growth may create
problems in the future. Also, there are a few. rights of way which are
not fully developed that may cause transportation problems in the future.
8. Merrimon Township, which lies in north central Carteret
County, is bisected by the South River. It is bounded to the west by
Adams Creek and the Craven County line, and by Turnagain Bay to the east
(Davis Township). It is bounded to the south by Straits Township. In
size, it is fourth largest township in the County, and is one of the
least densely settled.
The area has traditionally 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.
At least one subdivision has begun development in the Township,
Sportsman's Village Subdivision, a retirement community. The major
development concern is the adequacy of transportation access.
A major portion of the Open Grounds Farm operation lies in Merrimon
Township, which makes it the predominant land use here. Open Grounds
has been a good neighbor to Carteret County, cooperating with an effort
which used Open Grounds' impact on the South River as a case study in
determining the effect of agricultural runoff on estuarine systems. The
study determined that lack of productivity in the South River was in
35

part due to pre-existing factors not associated with agricultural run-
off.. However, despite modern farming practices on Open Grounds Farm,
which include careful, controlled applications of fertilizers, green
strips along ditches and other soil conservation practices, the results
of farm development have altered water quality in the upper half of the
South River.l
Most of the erosion along the Intracoastal Waterway appears to stem
from boat traffic along the Waterway. This threatens development -along
the shoreline, especially over the long term.
9. Morehead Township, the most populous of the County's fifteen
townships, is bounded to the east and north by the Newport River, to the
west by Newport Township, and encompasses Bogue Sound and the Bogue
Banks Towns of Atlantic Beach, Pine Knoll Shores and Indian Beach to the
south.
The mainland portion of the Township is bisected by US 70, which is
an intensively urbanized corridor from its intersection with NC 24 into
Morehead City. The highway then takes on a heavily industrial character
on the far side of the Town's business district, at the State Ports
Authority complex. US 70 is Carteret County's most important link with
the Piedmont, which contains the State's most populated areas, and is
vital to the County's tourism, commercial fishing, and port related
industries. It is the location of most commercial activity in the
County including Morehead Plaza, and is the location of Carteret General
Hospital, Carteret Technical Institute, the Civic Center and the Divi-
Sion of Marine Fisheries.
1William W. Kirby -Smith and Richard T. Barber, The Water Quality Ramifi-
cations in Estuaries of Converting Forest to Intensive Agriculture,
Water Resources Research Institute, December 1979,.p. 38.
36

Although a great deal of the mainland area of the Township away
from US 70 is rural in character, including portions of the Croatan
National Forest, significant subdivision development is taking place
within Morehead City's extraterritorial jurisdiction and along Bogue
Sound south of NC 24. In adddition to its commitment to upgrade exist-
ing sewage facilities in the Town, Morehead City passed a bond referen-
dum in early 1982 to extend water and sewer services to newly annexed
residential areas. This increases the likelihood that developing areas
located near Morehead City will eventually have urban services. How-
ever, it seems unlikely that it would be feasible to extend such ser-
vices to development along Bogue Sound. There are at least eighteen
platted subdivisions in the extraterritorial area. Single family devel-
opments include Spooner's Creek and Mitchell Village; multi -family
developments include Brandywine Bay, Morehead Bluffs and Cannon Town-
houses. There are also over 2000 rural dwellings - in the Township.
Residential development will continue to occur along Bogue Sound,
the Crab Point Road area, and the Newport River where lands are suitable
for septic tanks. These areas offer the benefits of water access in a
rural setting which, at the same time, are located near urban services.
However, since public provision of sewerage services is not feasible in
the near -term, acceptable levels, of density and acceptable forms of
sewage disposal need to be determined for these areas.
The uncontrolled proliferation. of commercial activity along U.S 70
poses a severe traffic safety problem. Because of the linear nature of
most land forms in the most developed parts of the County (particularly
in Morehead Township), and the lack of more than a few major thorough-
fares, commmercial development occurs along these major thoroughfares_
37

Because of the heavy traffic load of the US 70 corridor, especially at
peak season, the commercialization of this road is extremely intense.
The safety hazards of intense land uses, primarily on small parcels,
stem from the number of curb cuts used to serve each parcel. If the
number of curb cuts could be substantially curtailed in now developing
areas of US 70, pressures on the highway, which is in danger of becoming
an extended bottleneck (and thus diminishing the area's attractiveness
for economic expansion), would be eased. This could be accomplished, in
part, by the establishment of access standards along major thoroughfares
such as US 70 and NC 24.
The Bogue Banks portion of the Township, which extends from Fort
Macon to Indian Beach, is the locale of the most intensive residential
development in Carteret County. Almost all of this activity is taking
place within the municipalities of Atlantic Beach, Pine Knoll Shores and
Indian Beach. Pine Knoll Shores is being developed in accordance with a
masterplan which shows the community eventually reaching a ."build out"
figure of some 3,367 dwelling units on its 1,430 acres, for an average
density of slightly more than two dwellings per acre.l Atlantic Beach,
which is encouraging multi -family development in an effort to reach a
"threshold" which would make a publicly financed sewer system feasible,
has witnessed the construction of over 1,700 condominium units since its
multi -family ordinance was adopted in 1975, most of them since 1980.
Indian Beach, a municipality of. 363.4 acres with an average
density on developed land of 11 dwelling units per acre, has recently
received development plans for three large multi -family projects, each
averaging over 20 units per acre.
1Pine Knoll Shores Land Use Plan
KM

There are two unincorporated areas on the Banks which do not fall
within any municipal extraterritorial jurisdiction. The first is an
area about 2,000 feet in width which lies between the Atlantic Beach
jurisdiction and that of Pine Knoll Shores. There is presently no devel-
opment along the oceanfront side; a few commercial establishments dot
the north side of the highway. It is probable that Atlantic Beach will
eventually annex the area. The Town of Pine Knoll Shores has already
officially indicated that it does not wish to annex the land.
Salter Path is a long established unincorporated community consist-
ing primarily of single family residences and mobile homes, located for
the most part on individually owned lots. There are also a number of
commercial establishments, primarily restaurants. Salter Path lies
between the two "pieces" of Indian Beach, but is not part of that muni-
cipality. Land ownership patterns and the lack of undeveloped land
should discourage massive high density development such as that experi-
enced in Indian Beach for the near future. The County has no plans to
provide either public water or sewer services there.
10. Neu -port Township .is bounded to the east by Harlowe Township,
to the south by- Morehead Township, and to the west by White Oak Town-
ship. It is the second largest township in terms rof area (75 square
miles), and its predominant land use is the Croatan National Forest.
Other land uses are limited to the cities of Nei. -port and Holly Springs,
the Masontown community, scattered residential development along US 70
and Nine Foot Road, and agricultural communities along Deep Creek and
Little Deep Creek. At least ninety percent of the Township's area is
forested.
W

Despite the predominance of the National Forest, the Township's
population and housing counts nearly doubled from 1970 to 1980. These
increases are attributable to Newport's growth as a military bedroom
community for- the Marine Corps Air Station fifteen miles away in
Havelock. New development in Newport is currently limited to the area
west of the Town along Highway 70, but the Town is expected to expand
its sewer system in the near future. Because of the presence of the
National Forest, growth will continue to concentrate in the Newport
area. Land development problems include small scattered mobile home
parks, the mixing of commercial and residential areas, and the proximity
of local industries to residential areas.
Significant natural areas in the Township include the Masontown
pocosin, Union Point pocosin, and Walker's Mill Pond.
Masontown pocosin lies two miles northwest of Newport and contains
much of the area above Neu -port between the Atlantic and East Carolina
Railroad (just west of US 70) and Lake Road (SR 1125). The 1200-acre
tract, all of which lies in the Croatan National Forest, is notable for
being a large, low pocosin area.
The Union Point pocosin, located about 1.5 miles northeast of
NeuTort, contains. some 6000 acres and is the second largest contiguous
tract of pocosin. in the County. It lies entirely within the Croatan
National Forest. There are no significant human encroachments within
the tract.
The Walker's Mill Pond natural area lies about three miles east of
Newport and contains Walker's Mill Pond and associated swamp forests and
floodplains. The pond apparently was created by damming Black Creek at
Mill Creek Road, which bisects the natural area. The privately owned
pond and swamp forest is being used as a hunting and fishing club.
40

11. Sea Level Township lies between the Stacy and Atlantic Town-
ships in northeastern Carteret County, with Long and West Bays at its
northern end. (A portion of the Cedar Island marshes lies between the
two Bays.) The Township is largely undeveloped, with most of its
inhabitants living in the Sea Level community. There is a hospital
located in the Township, and Sailor's Snug Harbor, a retirement com-
munity for mariners expected to house 101 residents, has been estab-
lished here.
Sea Level is -basically a fishing community and lacks public ser-
vices. It should attract additional retirement and second home develop-
ment, despite the area's limitations for septic tanks.
12. Smyrna Township cuts a narrow swath between the Straits and
Davis Townships below Merrimon Township, and extends to the Core Banks.
The major part of the 8,000 acre Smyrna Farm has been established here.
The Smyrna community is basically a fishing area. Boat building, fish-
ing and a small textile industry and support services provide its econo
mic base. Future residential growth will be curtailed by the new flood
insurance standards and the absence of central sewer and water.
13. Stacy Township lies between the Davis and Sea Level Townships.
The majority of its land area lies in the Open Grounds holdings and/or
was formerly pocosin. The Stacy and Masontown communities lie along US
70 along Core Sound. There are some small farm tracts in this area as
well. The communities are largely supported by fishing and farming
activities. Suitable areas for new residential development are very
limited due to the lowness of the area and its flooding potential.
14. Straits Township is a large (31 square miles), rural township
bordered to the north by Merrimon Township, to the east by Smyrna Town-
ship, to the south by the Harker's Island area, and ,to the west by
41

the North River and Beaufort Township. Its year round population was
the only one to decrease since 1970; however, it has shown signs of
growth in the past two years.
Major timber companies and the Open Grounds Farm own much of the
land in the Township. The Bettie, Straits, Gloucester and Otway com-
munities are also located here. Because of the areas' proximity to
waterways and the Harker's Island to Cape Lookout ferry facility, addi-
tional retirement/residential development can be anticipated in the
southern half of the Township.
This area contains the North River marshes, which are significant
saltwater nursery areas.
15. White Oak Township is the largest inland area of all Carteret
County tow::ships, consisting of 89 square miles, including the western
portion of Bogue Banks. It is bounded by Jones and Craven Counties to
the north, the White Oak River to the west, and Newport Township to the
east. Almost all of the mainland area above NC 24 and east of NC 58 is
in the Croatan National Forest. There are a number of significant
natural areas in the Township, including a portion of the Croatan Poco-
sins, the Millis Road Natural Areal the Patsy Pond Natural Area, Hadnot
Creek, Hadnot Creek Ponds and Longleaf Pine Woodlands, Pringle Road
Carolina Bays, and Wildberry Woods.
The Croatan Pocosins are composed of about 30,000 acres of pocosin
wetlands lying in the Croatan National Forest in Jones, Craven and
Carteret Counties. Only 11,000 of these acres actually lie in Carteret
County. This area has been proposed by the USFS as a Wilderness -RARE I1
area. This pocosin lies south of the Craven County line and is believed
to contain well -developed peat deposits. Acceptance of the pocosin into
42

the RARE II designation would make it part of the National Wilderness
System. If the area is not so designated, it may come under increasing
pressure for conversion into commercially productive activities. The
Natural Heritage Program has recommended that a management plan be
developed for the entire Croatan Pocosin complex, including the Carteret
County portion.
The Millis Road Longleaf Pine Savannah and Pocosin lies in the
Croatan Forest and is bounded by Millis Road to the north, on the east
and southeast by Peak Swamp, and to the west by Millis Creek. The
300-acre area is considered highly significant by the Natural Heritage
Program because of its unique plant communities and geological forma-
tion.
The Patsy Pond Natural Area is a 70-acre area which lies just north
of NC 24 west of Broad Creek. It consists of a series of naturally
impounded ponds in an old beach ridge system. It contains a unique
assemblage of plants and several endangered and threatened species. Its
accessibility makes it ideal for educational purposes.
Hadnot Creek, a tributary of the White Oak River, crosses NC 58
about 3 miles south of Kuhns, near Hadnot Road. Currently, the Creek is
in a natural and relatively undisturbed state. Hunting and fishing are
the primary activities along this tributary. Since most of the area is
owned by a lumber company, there is potential for extensive logging in
the future. The southwest section and Creek mouth, in private owner-
ship, have been registered as a protected Natural Heritage Area. The
northeast section of the creek is part of the Croatan National Forest.
The Hadnot Creek Ponds and Longleaf Pine Woodlands lie east of
Hadnot Road in the Croatan Forest, covering 210 acres. Considered to be
43

of medium significance by the Natural Heritage Program, the area con -
silts of freshwater ponds and longleaf pine woodland.
A group of Carolina Bays lie near the junction of Pringle Road and
Millis Road in the Croatan National Forest. Two of these, dubbed
Carolina Bay "A" and Carolina Bay "B", are considered to be especially
unique. They are located near other natural complexes in the township
and, because they are part of the Croatan Forest, are likely candidates
for preservation. Although Carolina Bays are not now rare in Carteret
County, they are increasingly being destroyed or altered by human acti-
vities, so that relatively unaltered examples will probably be rare in a
few years.
Wildberry Woods is a protected Natural Heritage Area adjacent to
the Patsy Pond area near Broad Creek, with a southern boundary along NC
24.
Because of the presence of the Croatan National Forest, residential
development on the mainland is largely limited to two areas: along NC
24 and Bogue Sound and along NC 58 and the White Oak River. The Town of
Cape Carteret and the communities of Cedar Point, Bogue, Ocean and Broad
Creek are located along NC 24, while the Bucks Corner and Peletier
Communities can be found along NC 58. This area contains some of the
most attractive land in Carteret County, including many high ground and
waterfront areas. Its potential for future residential growth is high,
despite the lack of central water and sewer services. Private provision
of at least the minimum level of community .services necessary to meet
health standards is likely to accompany new residential development.
44

Bogue Field (operated by Cherry Point Air Station) poses a land
compatibility problem, particularly as residential growth in the area
intensifies. Appropriate land use regulations around the Field and
proper coordination with the Marine Corps. are needed in this area.
The Bogue Banks portion of the Township is composed entirely of the
Town of Emerald Isle, which is eleven miles long, and to date, is the
least densely settled of the Bogue Banks communities. Large areas are
yet to be developed here as well. The Town recently completed a study
to evaluate the feasibility of developing a central sewerage system
using a combination of private and public resources, and has set a
maximum density limit of eight dwelling units to the acre for new devel
opments.
SECTION 1.3.3 SIGNIFICANT LAND USE COMPATIBILITY PROBLEMS
The most significant land use compatibility problems in the County
have to do with man-made impacts on natural systems, rather than man-
made impacts on other man-made uses. Large-scale agriculture and tim-
bering are generally exempt from State and local regulation, yet their
land altering and drainage_ impacts can be significant, particularly in
their effect on adjacent natural areas and estuarine waters. (An
example of this, on a smaller scale, would be the drainage activity
carried out in the Sea Gate Woods natural area.) The impacts of clear -
cutting and drainage are best addressed by performance standards speci-
fically designed to address these activities.
The major man-made conflict in Carteret County has to do with
continuing residential growth in close proximity to existing military
airfields and the Beaufort -Morehead Airport. The most intense instance
45

of this is near Bogue Airfield. White Oak Township will be one of
Carteret County's prime areas for growth in the next ten years, both
along. the mainland and at Emerald Isle. Both areas are vulnerable to
noise and the threat of crashes. (For further discussion, see Military
Activity policy.).
Another area of incompatibility is the encroachment of commercial
uses along US 70 northwest into lands which are now rural or residen-
tial. Conversely, residential uses are appearing in an area zoned for
industrial use along NC 101.north of Beaufort. A reevaluation of
current zoning should be considered for both areas.
A final type of land use conflict involves the potential for resi-
dential encroachment on' fragile and natural areas. Two examples would
be the possible. development of new residences on Brown's Island and the
Cedar Island Barrier (adjacent to the Wildlife Refuge). Because the
provision of community services cannot be expected in such areas, and
because of their proximity to fragile areas, the intensity of any devel-
opment should be very low.
SECTION 1.3.4 MAJOR PROBLEMS RESULTING FROM UNPLANNED DEVELOPMENT
Most of the problems which are a result of unplanned development in
Carteret County involve the provision (or lack thereof) of services
generally considered to be in the public realm; right-of-way and street
development, community water, and central sewer. Because most of the
unincorporated residential communities in the County are quite small and
substantially isolated from urban centers, provision of even minimal
public utilities is difficult from a financial standpoint. But because
many of these communities are attractive to retirement and second home
46

development, growth will continue to occur. In the downeast communi-
ties, even a modest increase in existing densities may endanger local
water supplies. New developments in all areas, -from small subdivisions
on up to planned unit developments, should be encouraged to provide
central water and, where feasible, central or package sewage treatment
facilties in order to reduce the threat to local drinking water, as well
as estuarine water quality.
Piecemeal site development and.an extensive amount of unpaved roads
leave Harker's Island unprepared for the expected impacts of the
expanded Harker's Island to Cape Lookout Ferry Service. However, new
developments are now required to meet State road construction standards
per the County's Subdivision Regulations, and required to tie into the
community water, system or provide an alternative source of community
water. Where feasible, package or central sewage plants should be
required for more intense residential development. Site design stan-
dards for new commercial activities (particularly along the main route
to the ferry) should be considered, providing for adequate building
setbacks from the right -of -way line (fifty feet is a good standard);
limited curb cuts, and buffering where adjacent to residential uses.
U.S. 70 west of Morehead City is increasingly under pressure as the
main corridor between the Piedmont and the State Ports Authority Termi-
nal and Bogue Bank beaches, and as the central commercial resource to
support these activities. The corridor also carries the rail line into
the port, which limits the design of left turn areas. The safety
hazards along such a corridor stem primarily from the number of curb
cuts used to serve the many small parcels along the route. If the
number of curb cuts could be curtailed along now developing portions of
47

US 70, pressures on the highway would be eased. This can be accomp-
lisbed by limiting each parcel to only one curb cut, requiring access
design plans for any subdivision of commercial land, and limiting access
points for commercial subdivisions to one curb cut per every 500 feet of
road frontage. Standards such as these, plus a 50-foot setback from the
highway right -of way, might also be applied along NC 24 and NC 58,,which
are beginning to carry substantial' amounts of traffic as well.
Traffic backups resulting from an aged and inadequate bridge link-
ing the Morehead City are,a to Bogue Banks should be -somewhat ameliorated
by a scheduled replacement bridge. NCDOT has conducted a needs and
feasibility study for the construction of a third bridge to link the
Banks to the mainland. A tentative bridge site is being studied.
SECTION 1.3.5 AREAS LIKELY TO EXPERIENCE MAJOR LAND USE CHANGES
Areas most likely to experience dramatic land use changes in the
next ten years are the Bogue Banks communities. Atlantic Beach and
Indian Beach are likely to become densely settled. Pine Knoll Shores, a
planned community, may reach its planned "build _out" threshold in the
ensuing decade. Emerald Isle should witness the development of much of
its undeveloped soundside acreage.
A secondary effect will be increasing development in and around the
Beaufort -Morehead area, and in unincorporated areas of the County,
particularly along Bogue Sound and the White Oak River. These water-
front areas to the west and south of NC 58 and NC 24 lend themselves to
the planned unit development concept. An advantage of this type of
development is that community services (internal streets, central water
and sewer, security and often solid waste collection) are privately
48

provided, thus relieving the County of the financial burden of providing
these services. In areas where it is unfeasible to provide public sewer
and water services, private provision of such services for PUD's should
be strongly encouraged or required. Package sewage treatment plants are
becoming increasingly popular. Because they are "left" to homeowners
associations for maintenance, the County should consider establishing
standards to ensure the accountability of such groups to manage these
systems according to State standards.
If an offshore oil discovery is made off the coast of North
Carolina, the. Morehead City -Beaufort area may experience a sudden,
dramatic leap in activity such as has been witnessed in once small
Louisiana and Texas cities which saw their populations increase ten-
fold. Public awareness should be fostered, and an on -going task force
should possibly be established, in,order that the County and its munici-
palities may react quickly in the event of offshore activity.-
Other areas likely to experience land use changes include certain
areas in eastern Carteret County in association with the development of
Cape Lookout National Seashore Park. Harker's Island has been desig-
nated as the site for the administration facilities of the National Park
Service. The impacts of expected growth on Harker's Island have been
discussed in Section 1.3.4.
A final area likely to experience change is Radio Island. This
largely undeveloped spoil island, located in the center of the area's
port industrial complex, is expected to attract water -related industry
or military activity. The Federal Department of Defense is planning to
construct a decontamination facility there in the near future.
49

The County Zoning Ordinance now contains a set of performance cri-
teria developed specifically for the Island. These standards are
detailed more fully in the policy section of the Plan.
W

SECTION 1.4 CURRENT PLANS, POLICIES AND REGULATIONS
SECTION.1.4.1 EXISTING LOCAL PLANS AND POLICIES
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 assisting 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 facili-
ties and lays out specific recommendations for community
facility development based on future land uses and future
populations.
51

D. A Plan for Parks and Recreation in Carteret County, 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 current 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 a comprehensive Thorough-
fare Plan based on present conditions. for all of Carteret
County is badly needed.
F. Regional Sewer Plana
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
west of this line. Plans for the most cost-effective method
of disposing of sewage in these regions are now being formu-
lated in compliance with Section 201 of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act.
G. 1978 CAHA Land Use Plan
While focusing on the requirements of the Coastal Act,
this Plan provides a detailed accounting of the position of
Carteret County in 1978.
H. Land Use Atlas, 1982
This document presents the many land uses and demographic
information within the County.
52

I. Beach Access Plan, 1979
This Plan outlines policies and incentives for the pro-
vision -of beach access facilities within the County's juris-
diction.
J. Hurricane Evacuation, Hazard ?litigation and Post
Disaster Plan, 1984.
This Plan was prepared in conjunction with Beaufort,
Morehead City, and the Bogue Banks municipalities.
K. Human Services Transportation Plan (in progress)
The purpose of this Plan is to assess and evaluate the
feasibility of public and/or subsidized transportation based
on demonstrated need in the area of Human Services.
II. Regulations
A. September 5, 1961 - Carteret County
Subdivision Regulations with Amendments; revised.1983
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 beneficial to the
interest of future property owners and citizens of Carteret County.
The County Subdivision Regulations require all proposed subdivi-
sions of land to be presented to the Planning Commission for their
review and approval before the sale and development of property can
occur. The. Carteret County Building Inspection Department inspects
all subdivisions and the development therein to assure the plans
approved by the Planning Commission are followed.
53

B. 1971 - Carteret County Zoning Ordinance with Amendments;
revised 1980; (major revision currently underway)
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 unincorporated
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 made by an enforce -
meat officer or a request for a variance from the regulation must
be submitted to the County Board of Adjustment.
A request for an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance must have
final approval of the Carteret County Board of Commissioners as
does rezoning of property and initial zoning of property.
C. 1972 - Carteret County Mobile Home Park and Camp Park
Ordinance with Amendment; revised 1980
This Ordinance was adopted in order to facilitate the develop-
ment of mobile home parks and camper parks throughout unincorpo-
rated Carteret County. Due to the resort nature of the County, it
was felt that there would be a need for the orderly development of
these parks.
The Carteret County Planning Commission reviews all proposed
mobile home parks and camper parks site plans in order to insure
that the plan complies with all County regulations. The Carteret
County Building Inspection Department is responsible for inspecting
the actual site to determine if the plan presented to the Carteret
County Planning Commission is actually being followed.
54

D. 1974 - Group Housing Ordinance; revised 1981
This Ordinance was adopted in order to help provide standards
for the many group housing projects that seem likely to occur in
unincorporated Carteret County. The Ordinance regulates the con-
struction of condominiums, townhouses, 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 with Amendments
The Outer Banks Land Protection Ordinance affects all develop-
ment in unincorporated Bogue Banks that would require any vegeta-
tion to be disturbed. This Ordinance was adopted because of the
increased pressure on the stability of Bogue Banks caused by con-
tinued land disturbing activities. The ordinance is enforced by
the Building Inspections Department.
F. N.C. State Building Code, Electrical, Plumbing and
Mechanical Codes
In order to facilitate safe construction standards in Carteret
County, the North Carolina State Building, Electrical, Plumbing and
Mechanical Codes are enforced by the Building Inspections Depart-
ment.
G. Septic Tank Regulations with Amendments
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.
55

H. National Flood Insurance Program
Administered at the local -level by the County Building Inspec-
tions Department, this program offers protection against flood
damage to property owners.
I. Carteret County Billboard Ordinance (under advisement)
This document, now being considered by County authorities,
would regulate the location, size and appearance of billboards in
the unincorporated area.
J. Environmental Health Regulations
Carteret County is mandated by the N.C. Department of Human
Resources to enforce public health regulations relating to septic
tanks, deep water wells, sewage treatment systems, illegal dumps
and vector control.
K. Junkyard Ordinance (1983)
This ordinance regulates the location and screening of junk-
yards in Carteret County's unincorporated area.
L. CAMA Minor Permit Program
Carteret County issues permits for development meeting State
regulations as defined under the Coastal Area Management Act which
meet the criteria of the minor permits process.
M. 1973 - N.C. Sedimentation Pollution Control Act
The County cooperates with the State to insure that new devel-
opment meets the standards of this Act which controls siltation.
N. National Fire Prevention Regulations
These federal regulations, enforced by the County Fire
Marshal, enhance the safety of public buildings and many commercial
establishments.
56

Section 1.4.2 MEANS OF ENFORCEMENT
Carteret County has employed a resident planner since 1975. This
position provides direct staff support to the County Planning Commission
and advice to the County Board of Commissioners and County Manager on
matters of concern relating to land use. The County Planner administers
the Subdivision Regulations, the Mobile Home Park and Travel Park Ordi-
nance, the Group Housing Ordinance and Zoning Ordinance.
The County's Chief Building Inspector and Building Inspections
staff enforce the provisions of the State Building, Electrical, Plumbing
and Mechanical Codes. This Department also enforces all land use Ordi-
nances and the Federal F1ood.Insurance Program. All Building Inspectors
are cross -trained and certified in the various codes.
Enforcement of the Septic Tank Regulations and issuance of Minor
CAMA Permits is provided by the Carteret County Health Department.
The County Fire Marshal enforces National Fire Prevention Regula-
tions.
LOCAL DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS
AGENCY PERMITS
Central Permit Department Sand Dune Permit
Building Permit
Electrical Permit
Insulation Permit
Plumbing Permit
Mobile Home Park Permit
Mechanical -Permit
RV Permit
Environmental Health Division Minor CAMA Permit
Septic Tank Permit
A listing of all the relevant Federal and State regulations affect-
ing coastal land and water resources are given in the appendix.
57

SECTION 1.5 CONSTRAINTS: PHYSICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL
SECTION 1.5.1 PHYSICAL LIMITATIONS
These limitations are comprised of natural characteristics of the
land and man-made characteristics that may constrain land development.
(a) Hazard Areas - These areas experience conditions which pose
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 construction, 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 effected by 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 pro-
perty 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 development. Limited
development can be successfully accomplished if done in con-
58

junction with nature, rather than destroying the physical
amenities of the area. Uncontrolled development will event-
ually cause adverse economic impacts in that many tourists
will no longer frequent areas of the County if no longer
attractive.
These areas are also included within the Areas of Envi-
ronmental Concern section of this plan. Please .refer to Sec -
Dion ZA-for a further description of these areas and a dis-
cussion of their environmental importance. (see page 103)
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. A hazard area map is
being developed in conjunction with the Carteret County Hurri-
cane Evacuation, Hazard Mitigation, and Post Disaster Plan
(see Map 3).
Airports - Within Carteret County there are three air-
ports that pose some degree of hazard to the area surrounding
them. These examples. of man-made hazards include the
Beaufort -?forehead Airport in Beaufort, 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 unreason-
able danger in life and property.
Storage of Flammable Liquids - These areas are another
example of man-made hazards. Development near these areas
could cause unreasonable danger to life and property. Storage
59

noco ZONES Om"Imi.)
QARWAS or too YEAtt COAST&L.
FL000 watacATY(wwo acTllw)
AREAS os tNum'NAL. FL+000mrs
amI�►s oe too �rsaR t=t,000 ; erstt
hcco nuvaeTle.t s cl ooc ►la.�to
FI►�To�t• wT attwrM�wto
�/ttH � 1,IMOt.TERtr11NiD 1stlT
ft*664 t PLACID "As.a-av
WOO
•ryMAOG OCIAN
to~
CARTERET COUNTY. N.C.
FLOOD HAZARD AREAS
MAP 3 Page 60

facilities for flammable liquids should be routinely monitored
to detect leakage to ground water.
Examples 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 these areas should be avoided. These installations are an
economic asset to the County, but should not be allowed to endanger life
and property.
(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 (4) pg. 62 included in this
Section indicates that almost.. all of the land areas in the
County should be analyzed carefully before development occurs.
The manner in which the land is prepared before development,
the type development that occurs, and maintenance of the
land after development are all. key factors to consider.
Map # 4 is designed to indicate those areas of the
County that have the most severe soil limitations. These
areas pose severe problems to proper drainage, septic tanks
and foundations.
These soils are of three basic types including Ponzer-
Wasda-Belhaven Association, Leon-Murvi.11e-Mandarin Association,
Lafitte-Hobucken-Carteret Association, and Newhan-Corolla-
Beach Association.
61

1
1
3sts era w
3
' w�v[w ,
�EUSE a
3 4' 0
�I 9 �q 3 `� •
ALn-
3
/ - ' 6 3 4
:. 6
6 C �
6
' se.rf♦ //►► T V 7 Z 2 2
e 04w-�3 /
I
2 b
� 2 0 9 r
t ,
>P 9
c A L A N riC
_ s
».. 4 9 1 3
s a 4 z- 3 OCEA N
4 i 3 .9 aP -
S 4
� 9 g
S ���• -. 4 o .
3
p V
`' CARTERET COUNTY
�
' . �cs.sio �uf
1Q�' • NORTH CAROLINA
' peloss-Tomot l e 1rap�hoe _
` I A T L A N r/ C O C E A .V Y t
t Torhunta-Pantego-Rains SOILS AND PRIME AGRt,CULT:jRAL AREAS
3 Latitte-Hobucken-Carteret
4 Leon-Murville-"landarin MAP 4 Page 52
' 5 Wando- Seabrook- Kureb 10
6 Ponzer-Wasda-Bellhaven
7 Croatan
' 8 Bapeade-Onslow-Lynchburg
9 Altavista -Augusta -State
10 Newnan-t'oroIla- Beach

SECTION 1.5.2 FRAGILE AREAS
In early 1983, the Natural Heritage Program completed its study in
Carteret County, resulting in the identification and mapping of signifi-
cant natural areas. While many of the areas identified lie within, or
contain portions of, Areas of Environmental Concern, on the whole they
are best generally described as fragile areas.
The following areas were considered to have high (national and
statewide priority) significance by the Natural Heritage Program. The
location of each site is indicated on the Natural Areas Map'(Map 5).
A. Portsmouth Island - Core Banks - This area is an excellent
example of the many stages of barrier island development. Due
to its remoteness and limited access they have been generally
subject to much less alteration and manipulation by man. As a
result, they serve as a good case of undisturbed barrier
island. Protection Status: The area is part of the Cape
Lookout National Seashore and most components will be managed
as natural areas.
B. North Bay Barrier - This is a geologically, unique area.
Except for the central area (near the Cedar Island Ferry) it
has been relatively unaltered by humans. This is an intri-
guing small scale edition of a barrier island, complete with
dunes,- beaches maritime shrub thickets and back barrier
marshes. Protection Status: The westernmost two miles of.the
system are protected from development by their inclusion in
Cedar Island National Wildlife Refuge; the easternmost three
miles are .rendered inaccessible by the presence of several
inlets.
.:

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 proper
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 and
municipalities.
(d) Slopes over 12 percent - In Carteret County topographic slopes
of twelve -percent (12%) or greater are not normally found
except on the Outer Banks. Such slopes (12% 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,
Shackleford Banks, Core Banks, and Portsmouth Island topo-
graphic variations are erratic due to sand dune development.
The natural conditions (wind and water) which create or
destroy sand dunes present profound physical. limitations. One
must realize that the dunes system protects the Outer Banks.
Development must fit in with the topography, and not destroy
this natural protection.
67

the Castle Hayne Aquifer is located in the limestones of
Oligocene and Ecocene Ages. Wells constructed in these aqui-
fers yield from 5 to 30 gallons per minute per foot of draw -
down dependent on well diameter and amount of aquifer pene-
trated by the open hole.
Water levels in wells penetrating the Yorktown and Castle
Hayne 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 Newp6 rt 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
content of up to 0.9 parts per million. Waters of high chlor-
ides 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 leaching 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.

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 thickness
ranging from 400 feet to 900 feet across the county. The
regional dip ,on these -Eocene sediments is approximately 10
feet per mile.
Principal Aquifers
In the Carteret County area three (3) aquifers are uti-
lized for water supply: the shallow water table, the Yorktown
Aquifer, and the Castle Hayne Aquifer.
In the Post Miocene sediments, the shallow water table is
located within 10 feet of the surface in the northwestern
portions 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 corro-
sive and usually have objectionable color, odor, and iron
content. 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 construct-
ing open hole wells penetrating both aquifers in. Carteret
County. The Yorktown Aquifer is contained within the sands,
shell ashes, and limestones of the Miocene sediments, while
65

facilities in areas with major soil limitations would address
some problems, but not all problems. Providing for subdivi-
sion regulations that require continued maintenance of
ditches in subdivisions and soliciting professional advice
from the Carteret Soil and Water Conservation District con-
cerning drainage within subdivisions are other methods of
approaching .this issue. Some types of development 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
Resources and Community Development.
Geology
Carteret County is underlaid by approximately 2,500 to
5,500 feet of sediments,. ranging in age from Cretaceous to the
present. These sediments are composed of interbedded sands,
clays, and limestones. Only the sediment of Eocene Age or
younger are considered to contain relatively highly minera-
lized 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 ashes ranging in thickness from 25 feet in western
and northwestern portions of the County to 70 feet in the
northwestern portion. The Post 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
64

Basically the Ponzer-Wasda-Belhaven Association is composed
of organic soils 16 to 80-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-Murville-Mandarin Association is composed of
basically wet sandy soils with organic hardpan subsoils.
These areas pose problems to foundations, but in particular
are poorly drained.
The Lafitte-Hobucken-Carteret and Newnan -Corolla -Beach,
marshlands and sand dunes. These areas may pose foundation
problems as well as problems to the stability and productivity
of the areas. In some of these areas drainage is good, but in
some cases may not provide proper treatment needed for septic
tank installations. 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.
A Compreensive Soil Survey has been prepared for
Carteret County. It should be noted that the applicability of;
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
become polluted, surface water may become polluted, and pri-
vate property may become damaged. The use of central sewage.
63

1 ,
1
1 31
1
1
1
1
1
A TLANTIC
c a 1U . , •
O CEA N
V
1 . . . . I C
Sp,
x
O
ORTSMOU H ISLAND -CORE BANTKS
ORTH BAY BARRIER
EDAR ISLAND MARSHES
HACKLEFORD BANKS
ACHAEL CARSON NATIONAL
STUARINE SANCTUARY
. ROATAN POCOSINS
7. MILLS ROAD
8. PATSY POND
9. THEODORE ROOSEVELT-
PINE KNOLL SHORES
A. ATLANTIC NATURAL AREA
B. BROWN'S ISLAND
C. NORTH RIVER MARSHES
D. SEA GATE WOODS
E. UNION POINT POCOSIN
F. WALKERS MILL POND
G. MASONTOWN POCOSIN
H. WILDBERRY WOODS
I. PRINGLE ROAD CAROLINA BAYS
J. HADNOT CREEK
K . EMERALD ISLE WOODS
CARTERET COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
FRAGILE AREAS MAP
MAP 5 Page 69

C. Cedar Island Marshes - This site is one of the largest contig-
uous tracts of irregularly flooded salt marshes in the State.
It is thought by.many to have significant aesthetic value and
contains one rare reptile (water snake) .and several rare
birds. Most notably, the area may contain the largest Black
Rail population in the U.S. Protection Status: The U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service administers some 6,000 acres of the 7,000
acre marsh. Currently, the Service is considering the
impoundment of about 2,000 acres northwest of NC 12 for water-
fowl habitat. The entire natural area is an AEC.
D. Shackleford Banks - Shackleford Banks is a remote island in
the Outer Banks chain which, unlike other barrier islands, has
remained relatively undisturbed by people during the last 70
years. The Banks is approximately 9 miles long varying in
width up to one-half mile. Its east -west orientation situates
it perpendicular to the prevailing winds, thereby resulting in
unique physiographic characteristics which provide an inter-
esting contrast to the other barrier islands of the Outer
Banks. Protection Status: Under NPS administration, all of
Shackleford is proposed as a "natural zone" and will be pro-
tected as a wilderness with minimal visitor facilities.
E. Rachel Carson National Estuarine Sanctuary - The Rachel Carson
site is 3.5 miles long and one mile wide and consists of
islands, marshes, intertidal flats and submerged areas. It is
representative of a well -mixed lagoon -type estuary that is
strongly influenced by inlet processes and tides. The rich
mix of communities provides diverse habitats for a large
70

variety of plants and animals, making the site particularly
valuable for research and education. Protection Status: The
complex has been acquired by the State, which has prepared a
natural area management plan for the Sanctuary.
F. Croatan Pocosins - This site is in the Croatan National Forest
and contains one of the best examples in North Carolina of the
low shrub pocosin ecosystem. The sites provide habitat for
several plants or animals listed as endangered or threatened
nationally and within the State of North Carolina. Protection
Status: Wholly owned by the U.S. Government, this area has
been proposed by the U.S. Forest Service as a Wilderness -
RARE II area, which would make it part of the National Wilder-
ness System.
G. Millis Road Longleaf Pine Savannah Natural Area - This site is
entirely owned by the U.S. Forest Service. It is believed to
be one of the best examples of Savannah Pine in the State. It
is also the habitat for the Red -Cockaded Woodpecker (Federal
endangered species), and several threatened plant and animal
species. Protection Status: Public land, not recognized as a
natural area. The N.C. Natural Heritage Program recommended
maintenance of the present vegetational structure and the
possible establishment.. of the area by the USFS as a "red -
cockaded woodpecker management area" or "savannah management
area".
H. Patsy Pond Natural Area - This area is also under the owner-
ship of the U.S. Forest Service. The area is a series of
naturally impounded ponds in the Outer Coastal Plain. It is
71

particularly noteworthy for its excellent examples of _plant
communities. Protection Status: Not recognized as a natural
area. The Natural Heritage Program recommended management for
endangered and threatened species preservation, for unique
community preservation, and for scientfic and educational
purposes.
I. Theodore Roosevelt Natural Area - This area consists of
approximately 450 acres of largely undeveloped land on Bogue
Banks. It is within the corporate limits of the Town of Pine
Knoll Shores. Within the Area is the N.C. Marine Resources
Center. It is a significant example of an undisturbed relict
beach area and a maritime forest and swamp forest. Protection
Status: Roughly 265 acres has been set aside to remain in a
natural state and is administered by the Division of State
Parks.
The areas listed below were considered to be of medium, or
regional, significance and are indicated on the Natural Areas Map. For
additional information on these areas, refer to the township descrip-
tions.
a. Atlantic Natural Area (Atlantic Township). Protection Status:
100% privately owned, not an AEC. The Natural Heritage Survey
suggested U.S. Fish and Wildlife buy the northwest portion of
the tract, which is adjacent to Cedar Island Wildlife Refuge.
b. Brown's Island (Harker's Island Township). Protection Status:
Currently classified conservation, privately owned. Some low
density residential development can be anticipated.
72

C. North River Marshes - (Beaufort/Straits Townships). Protec-
tion Status: Classified as an AEC (coastal wetlands); private
ownership.
d. Sea Gate Woods (Harlowe Township). Protection Status: None.
Privately owned.
e. Union Point Pocosin (Newport Township). Protection Status:
Not recognized as a natural area; 100% federally owned and
located in Croatan National Forest.
f. Walkers Hill Pond (Newport Township). Protection Status:
privately owned; current use limited to hunting and fishing.-
g. Masontown Pocosin (Newport Township). Protection Status: Not
recognized as a natural area; 100% federally owned and located
in Croatan National Forest.
h. Wildberry Woods (White Oak Township). Protection Status:
Registered N.C. Natural Heritage area.
i. Pringle Road Carolina Bays (White Oak Township). .Protection
Status: Not recognized as a natural area; -100% federally
owned and located in Croatan National Forest.
j. Hadnot Creek (White Oak Township). Protection Status:
Privately owned southwest section and Creek mouth registered
as a N.C. Natural Heritage area. Northeast, section. is part of
Croatan National Forest and is not recognized as a natural
area. Remaining 400 acres owned by a lumber company.
k. Emerald Isle Woods (Town of Emerald Isle). Protection Status:
In 1980 the Town adopted and began enforcing a Dune and Vege-
tation Protection Ordinance. This ordinance requires that
site development maintain a minimum of 45% of all resident-
ially zoned areas in natural vegetation.
73

SECTION 1.5.3 AREAS WITH RESOURCE POTENTIAL
These areas are valuable to Carteret County and add to the poten-
tial of the County and State. For this reason they should be protected
and development 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 agricultural lands.
(a) Productive and unique ag7'icmltural lands. Productive farmland
is generally defined as land suited and available for produc-
ing food, forage, fiber and oilseed crops; examples of produc-
tive farmland are cropland, pastureland, rangeland, forestland
and other land that is not urban built-up or water. Produc-
tive farmland has the soil quality, growing season and mois-
ture supply needed to economically produce significant and
sustained crop yield when treated and managed according to
modern farming methods, including water management. Unique
farmland, in addition to other productive farmland is land
that is suited and available for the production of specific
high -value food and .fiber crops.
Productive farmland areas can be identified and located
by interpreting modern detailed soil maps published by agen-
cies such as the USDA Soil Conservation Service. Carteret
County has a detailed Soils Survey (completed in April, 1982).
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
74

want to know the locations of large tracts that are suitable
for certain kinds of land use. It is not a suitable map for
the planning or the management of a specific farm or fields
because the soils in any one association ordinarily differ in
slope, drainage, depth, and other characteristics that could
affect their management.
Each soil association outlined on a general map is meant
for general planning rather than a basis for decisions on the
use of a specific tract. Soil associations may be designated
into soil management groups ranging from soils with slight
limitations to severe limitations if used as agricultural
farmland.
75

Table 11
AGRICULTURAL FARMLAND
SOIL ASSOCIATION AND MANAGMENT LIMITATION RATE
Legend for Coastal Area Soil Association Map
Soil Assoc.
Land Capability
No.
Soil Association
Class
1
Deloss-Tomotley-Arapahoe
3w
2
Torhunta-Pantego-Rains
3w
3
Lafitte-Hobucken-Carteret
8w
4
Leon-Murville-Mandarin
4w-6s-5w
S
Wando-Seabrook-Kureb
3sto7s
6
Ponzer-Wasda-Belhaven
3wto4w
7
Croatan
4w
8
Baymeade-Onslow-Lynchburg
3s-2w-2w
9
Altavista -Augusta -State
2w-3w-1
10
Newhan-Corolla-Beach
8s-7w- --
11
Masontown-Dorovan
- 7w
1 - Slight Limitation; 8- Severe and restrictive limitations
w= wetness s= low fertility
Soil Associations may be located on Map 4, page 62
The U.S. Soil Association Agency may be contacted for additional information.
76

Soil Association
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Table 12
SOIL ASSOCIATIONS IN
CARTEREr COUNTY
Limitations for Septic Tank Use
Degree of
Soil Association
Limitation
Deloss-Tomotley-Araphoe
severe, wetness
Torhunta-Pantego-Rains
severe, wetness
Lafitte-Hobucken-Carteret
severe, wetness
Leon-Murville-Mandarin
wetness, flooding
Wando-Seabrook-Kureb
severe, poor filter
Ponzer-Wasda-Belhaven
severe, wetness.
Croatan
severe, wetness
Baymeade-Onslow-Lynchburg
severe, wetness
poor filter
Altavista -Augusta -State
slight to severe
wetness
Newhan-Corolla-Beach
severe, wetness,
poor filter
Masontown-Dorovan
severe, wetness,
flooding
These soil associations may be located on page 62, Map 4
The U. S. Soil Conservation Agency may be contacted for additional information.
77

Those areas of Carteret County, which can be generally identified as
productive farmlands are identified generally on Map 47p.62. Portions b€ the
area northeast of Smyrna are too low for productive 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
Newport Township are larger than the average size for the County.
The Open Grounds Farm is an example of unique agricultural lands
within Carteret County. This farm contains- a total of approximately
45,000. acres. As of December 31, 1982, the land within the farm was
utilized as follows:
Pasture 12,000 acres
Corn 11,000 acres
Beans 10,000 acres
All Other, i.e., holding ponds,.
ditches, uncleared property 12,000 acres
45,000 acres
The Smyrna Farms -is another example of a large farm, and is located
adjacent to Highway 70 East. Syyrna Farms has approximately 8,000 acres
of cleared land. The "large farm" concept may have an important impact
on all of eastern North Carolina. On the positive side, this type of
farm can afford to develop types of land that 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.
1982 No major change in usage.
78

Inmost cases the "large farm" concept must pay particular atten-
tion to the environmental effects they may cause. This is because of
the magnitude of these operations, and the fact that in many cases they
develop land .near environmentally sensitive areas (i.e., wetlands and
estuarine waters).
(b) Potentially Valuable Mineral Sites. At the present time
potential peat mining sites have been identified in Carteret
County. Several studies of peat resources have been con-
ducted. Generally, it does not appear feasible at this time
to mine peat in Carteret County. (See Section on Peat Mining
in the Policy portion of the document.)
(c) Publicly Owned Forest, Parks, Fish and Gamelands, and Other
Non -intensive Outdoor Recreation Land. The following are
included in this category: (1) Croatan National Forest,
(2) Ft. Macon. State Park, (3) Cape Lookout National Seashore,
and (4) Cedar Island Wildlife Refuge, (5) Roosevelt Wilderness
Area.
79

SECTION 1.6 CONSTRAINTS: CAPACITY OF COMMUNITY FACILITIES
SECTION 1.6.1 WATER AND SDNTR SERVICES
At the present time, Carteret County provides neither water nor
sewer service to any area. Individual wells and septic tanks are the
primary methods of water supply and sewage disposal throughout most of
unincorporated Carteret County. The Harker's Island Community has
established a community water system. Last year, the County unsuc-
cessfully sought CDBG funds for the establishment of a similar water
system for the Merrimon community. Funds are also being sought this year.
The Carteret County Complex 201 Plan was adopted by all partici-
pating governments with the exception of Pine Knoll Shores. Step 1, the
201 planning phase, triggered a full-fledged Environmental Impact State-
ment (EIS) for Bogue Banks. This study has now been completed. Its
major conclusion was that a regional sewerage facility would not be
economically feasible due to the capital investment costs in'relation to
the size of the towns to be served. The Bogue.Banks municipalities and
participating mainland towns are presently evaluating the results of the
201 Plan and the EIS.
The Towns of Beaufort, Morehead City and Newport supply public
water and have sewage treatment facilities. The following summary is
given for each of these sewer facilities:
Town of Beaufort*
The present design capacity is for .75 mgd (millions of gallons per
day). The present average daily flow is approximately .30 mgd, giving a
utilization rate of 40%. It is estimated that 90% of the treatment is
for domestic waste, with the remaining 10% for industrial waste.
*Information supplied by the Town of Beaufort.
80

Morehead City*
The system's present design capacity is 1.7 mgd. Average daily
flow is estimated at 1.04 mgd, with a utilization rate of approximately
60%. When prospects for implementation of the 201 Plan diminished, the
Town made plans to update its own system to treat existing treatment
problems. In early 1982, Morehead City passed a bond referendum to
extend water and sewer services to newly annexed residential areas.
'^Information supplied from Carteret County 201 Complex Plan
(1979) and NRCD staff.
Town of Newport
The present design capacity of this system is .25 mgd. In order to
meet NPDES requirements by 1987, the Town is attempting to upgrade its
facility and expand its capacity to .4 mgd.
Town of Atlantic Beach
The Town of Atlantic Beach has revised its zoning ordinance to
encourage higher density development in order to achieve a "threshold*'
to adequately justify a publicly financed local sewer system. The Town
is also offering incentives for private developers to use centralized
sewer systems or package treatment plants in conjuction with planned
unit developments in the hopes that the Town may be able to consolidate
the various systems into one centralized entity eventually.
Town of Pine Knoll Shores
Pine Knoll Shores, a planned community, anticipates no need for a
centralized sewer system. Multi -family developments will be served by
package treatment plants.
81

Town of Emerald Isle
A study completed in the Spring of 1983 for the Town of Emerald
Isle by Von Oesen g Associates recommended that the Town pursue the
phased development of a central sewage system, since "build out" capa-
city in the Town will likely yield a sewage treatment load between 2.79
mgd and 4.78 mgd.
Tou-n of Indian Beach
The Town of Indian Beach is experiencing intense development, with
some new condominium projects expected to exceed twenty units per acre.
These developments will be served by package treatment plants.
Town of Cape Carteret
The Town of Cape Carteret is a single family, residential
community, served by individual septic and well systems. A study on a
Township -wide water system is in an early stage of development.
Unincorporated County
Up to the present, multi -family developments in unincorporated
Carteret County have located in or near the planning jurisdictions of
Carteret County municipalities. The areas that are likely to attract
multi -family development in unincorporated Carteret County are either
linear (along Bogue Sound and the White Oak River) or isolated from
existing services (small communities on Core Sound, and the unincorpo-
rated "pockets" on Bogue Banks). The financial feasibility of the
County supplying central sewer to these areas is low.
SECTION 1.6.2 TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS
Transportation of goods and services and the movement of people is
a vital part of any County's economy. This is particularly true in
Carteret County by virtue of its seaport and tourism. The four major

modes of transportation (water, rail, air and highway) all play a role
in the County's development patterns.
The State Port at Morehead City and the Intra-Coastal Waterway
provide inexpensive bulk goods movement to and through Carteret County;
the Railroad connects the Port with major inland industrial centers
including regional military facilities; the County Airport offers pri-
vate air service to the region; and U.S. 76, N.C. 58, N.C. 101 and N.C.
24 are major highway links to inland centers.
There are several specific transportation related issues in the
County. These are:
(1) Replacement Bridge and Third Bogue Banks Bridge - Bogue Banks
is served by two (2) bridges from the mainland; a highrise on
the western end to Emerald Isle and a low drawbridge from
Morehead City to Atlantic Beach. In recent years traffic
congestion on the Morehead City -Atlantic Beach Bridge has
nearly reached the intolerable stage during tourist season.
Delays and traffic backups of 30-45 minutes are common in the
Summer. Safety officials, the tourism industry and the
general public are concerned that the congestion is becoming
dangerous and a potential negative influence on the County's
tourism economy. A replacement bridge is scheduled for con-
struction in the vicinity of the Morehead City - Atlantic
Beach Bridge. NCDOT has completed studying the necessity of a
third bridge, which would be located somewhere between the two
existing bridges. If the Morehead City Bridge was rendered
unusable prior to the completion of the third bridge, undue
pressure would be placed on the NC 58 Bridge at Emerald Isle.
83

(2) Navigable Waters Maintenance - The Intra-Coastal Waterway
traverses Carteret County connecting it with major east coast
ports and industrial centers. A 40-foot channel is maintained
by the Corps of Engineers at the State Ports Authority faci-
-lity in Morehead City. The County participates with the Corps
of Engineers in maintenance of several channels, including
Gallants Channel, Bulkhead Channel, and Morgan Creek. Hardy
Creek, Nelson Bay - Long Bay Channel and several harbors of
refuge are also responsibilities of the County.
(3) White Oak River/NC 24 Bridge - This narrow bridge poses a
bottleneck for traffic entering Carteret County from the south
and may become a major problem over the next ten years. This
could potentially cause a threat to national security due to
the volume of military traffic which passes over the bridge.
(4) Core Creek Bridge Replacement - The N.C. 101 drawbridge across
the Intra-Coastal Waterway at Core Creek is a narrow, unsafe
lowrise bridge. It has a very restrictive weight limit that
prohibits many heavy vehicles from crossing the bridge.
(5) NC 24 Route Improvements - County representatives have re-
cently requested that plans for four-laning this increasingly
heavily used road be placed on the State work plan for road
improvements. In addition to traffic associated with rapidly
growing Bogue Banks communities, military traffic use on the
route is heavy. Military use is likely to increase further
with the establishment of the Department of Defense decon-
tamination facility on Radio Island. Improvements are underway.
84

(6) Air Transportation - The Morehead -Beaufort Airport is located
adjacent to the corporate limits of the Town of Beaufort. The
primary purpose in the construction of the Airport was to
provide 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 east of and 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 Fields were retained by the Department of Defense
for training purposes.
The Morehead -Beaufort Airport is located on approximately
340 acres northwest of Beaufort. The runways can accommodate
medium-sized propeller aircraft and small business jet air-
craft. The airport provides hanger space and fuel service.
Aircraft maintenance and repair service are not offered at the
facility.
The possibility of the Beaufort -Morehead City area becom-
ing an onshore support facility for Outer -Continental Shelf
(OCS) exploration has focused increased attention on the
Airport. OCS exploration requires air transport of people and
equipment to and from Texas and Louisiana on a frequent basis.
In addition, the County desires to upgrade the equipme-t
and facilities so the airport may become a greater asset to
economic development.
85

An updated Airport Master Plan was just completed
and was released in 1984. This Plan will help the
County identify specific facility and equipment needs and
establish a program for meeting those needs.
(6) Major Thoroughfares Development - Several areas adjacent to
major thoroughfares in the County are prime areas for develop-
ment. Specifically, these include U.S. 70 from Newport to
Morehead City, N.C. 24 westward from its junction with U.S. 70
west of Morehead City, U.S. 70 east of Beaufort near East
Carteret High School, N.C. 58 near the approach to Emerald
Isle, and N.C. 101 just north of Beaufort to a point near the
Intra-Coastal Waterway. These areas are all subject to pres-
sure for residential and commercial development. This devel-
opment, if uncontrolled, will likely cause congestion, reduce
the capacity of the highways to carry traffic, and may cause
adverse community appearance.
SECTION 1.6.3 SOLID WASTE
Carteret County operates the County's only sanitary landfill. It
is utilized by all municipalities. Residents in unincorporated areas
use the services of private contractors and/or an extensive green box
system operated by the County. The County landfill is the final dispo-
sal location of all of these waste collection systems as well as build-
ing rubble and stumps generated as urban development proceeds in the
County.
The new 137-acre landfill opened in February, 1984. The landfill
tract, leased from Croatan National Forest, is expected to have about a
LIV

ten-year life. The County is currently attempting to begin negotiations
with neighboring counties and Cherry Point MCAS in an attempt to form a
consortium for resource recovery and steam generation.
It is also anticipated that a sludge disposal system will be needed
by 1990.
SECTION 1.6.4 EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES AND SERVICES
The County School System encompasses the entire County (529 square
miles) and includes (12) schools. In 1981-1982, the School System had
an approximate enrollment of 7,396 (not including kindergarden). This
enrollment was served by a total of 339 teachers (including 14 interim
teachers). This means there was approximately 22 students for every
teacher. 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. As growth con-
tinues, this situation may change.
The operation of the County Schools is governed by the County Board
of Education. This Board is composed of five (5) elected officials.
Administrative duties for the School Board are the responsibility of the
Superintendent. The general administrative offices for the School
System are located on Broad Street, across from the County Courthouse in
Beaufort. Basically, the technical staff is responsible for statistics,
transportation, maintenance, food service, federal program coordination,
special programs, personnel and other administrative areas.
The labor demand in Carteret County and surrounding areas is re-
quiring more and more skilled labor. These demands come from the con-

struction industry, Cherry Point, MCAS, 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
Carteret Technical College. The main campus of the School is located on
a fifteen (15) acre site in western Morehead City. This has been ex-
panded recently by approximately seven (7) acres to the west and thirty-
one (31) feet to the east. Included within this expansion were improve-
ments to several existing buildings that can be used as workshops. The
most recent capital improvement has been the addition of the new
Learning Resources Center.
Additionally, there are several marine science. research and educa-
tional facilities in Carteret County, including the National Marine
Fisheries Services Laboratory, UNC Institute of Marine Science, and the
N.C. Coastal Resources Center.
The Carteret County Library System is an important element in the
educational life of the County. The existing facilities include a main
library facility, two branches and a bookmobile. The main building is a
new and attractive building 'located near the central business district
of Beaufort. The branch facilities are located in Newport and Pine
Knoll Shores on Bogue Banks.
At present the County Library systems contain approximately 35,000
total books.

Table 13
CARTERET COUNTY SCHOOLS -INDIVIDUAL ANALYSIS
Year Build No. of Present
and Added On Classrooms Capacity Enrollment Teachers Grades
Atlantic
1949
16
485
257
12
K-8
Elementary
1976
Beaufort
1945
61
750
609
29
K-5
Elementary
Beaufort
1950
19
450
390
20
6-8
Middle
1965
1971
1982
Camp Glen
1954
30
682
682
25
K-6
1975
East Carteret
1966
46
1,000
862
50
9-12
High
1982
Harker's Island
1957
16
350
289
13
K-8
Elementary
1966
Morehead
1979
29
600
546
24
K-5
Elementary
Neu -port
1967
39
900
946
35
K-8
Elementary
1978
1980
Smyrna
1920
30
400
375
20
K-8
Elementary
1982
Nest Carteret
1965
64
1,550
1,561
65
9-12
High
1982
White Oak
1963
23
700
705
24
K-8
Elementary
Morehead Central
1982
21
400
453
22
7-8

SECTION 1.6.5 RECREATION - CULTURAL
Carteret County is well endowed with recreation potential
including such attractions as water -related activities (boating, swim -
wing, water skiing, skin diving, surfing and fishing) and hunting.
Points of interest include Fort Macon State Park (a well preserved Civil
War fort), historic Beaufort, the Cape Lookout National Seashore Park,
Croatan National Forest, and the Marine Resources Center, and Hampton
Mariners Museum.
The purpose of public recreation is to serve people of all ages
throughout the year with a variety of recreation opportunities to enrich
their lives through the use of personal resources and the resources of
their environment. There is a growing awareness of the part recreation
plays in community living, as well as the growing acceptance of public
responsibility to provide recreation opportunities. Recreation is an
essential matter of public concern.
Public benefit and enjoyment are the principal objectives of
County recreation, but good parks, trails, campsites and ball fields
create economic rewards as well. Sufficient recreation activities and
parks are an inducement to new industry and an attraction to prospective
residents. County leadership and support for recreation make it possi-
ble for the inhabitants of the smallest community to participate in a
recreation activity that would not otherwise be available to them.
According to the National Association of County Officials, the
special role of the County in this area should be to acquire, develop
and maintain parks and to administer public recreation programs that
will serve the needs of communities broader than the local neighborhood
or municipality but less than statewide or national in scope.
90

Existing recreational facilities in the County include the public
beaches on Bogue Banks, Cape Lookout National Seashore Park, Ft. Macon
State Park and the Croatan National Forest; thus the majority of the
County's land area can be considered to have recreational value. Addi-
tionally, both Morehead City and the Town of Beaufort have two municipal
parks. The County operates Freedom Park, Beaufort; Eastern Park,
Smyrna; Swinson Park, Morehead City; Mariners Park, Sea Level; Salter
Path Athletic Field, White Oak Athletic Field, Newport Athletic Field
and numerous community play lots. The County also leases and maintains
public tennis courts on Harker's Island. The County Recreation Depart-
ment supervises public recreation activities in school gymnasiums at
night.
SECTION 1.6.6 MEDICAL FACILITIES AND HEALTH SERVICES
1. Hospitals
Carteret General Hospital, located on Highway 70 in Morehead City,
and Sea Level Hospital, owned by Duke University and located in Sea
Level, are the two hospitals in Carteret County. Together they offer
over 200 beds and bassinets. Carteret General is presently experiencing
a very adequate and stable patient census.
While it appears at the present time that additional beds will not
be needed at Carteret General in the immediate future, there is major
expansion underway providing for the improvement of ancillary services.
Under construction is a four million dollar expansion project which will
provide a new emergency room, pathology lab, x-ray department, dietary
facility and physical plant.
The new emergency room will be located on the Bridges Street side
of the hospital. Over 15,000 emergency patients are served each year at
Carteret General.
91

2. County Health Services
The Clinical Division of the Health Department is- concerned with
offering medical aid to the citizens of the County in many different
ways.
Table 14
BASIC SERVICES OFFERED FY THE GENERAL
HEALTH SECTION OF THE HEALTE DEPARTMENT
1.
Vital Statistics
2.
E-Ray Clinics
3.
Pre -School Clinics
4.
Chest Clinics
5.
Orthopedic Clinics
6.
Nurse Screening Clinics
7.
Pediatric Screening
S.
Communicable Diseases
9•
Venereal, Disease
10.
School
11.
Chronic Disease Control
12.
Family Planning Clinics
13.
Dental Programs
14.
Eye Clinics
The Public Health Department is currently inadequately housed in a
2,000 square foot building built in 1957 on Courthouse Square in Beau-
fort. Plans are in place to move the Department to a portion of a new
County -owned 10,500 square foot facility in 1985.
Similarly, the present Mental Health Department is housed in rented
quarters in Morehead City. Plans are underway to provide more modern,
expanded facilities in closer proximity to Carteret General Hospital.
Construction may begin in mid-1985.
The Environmental Health Division of the County Health Department
has as its mission the protection of public health through the control
of environmental contaminants and hazards which cause human illness and
92

disease or.adverse effects on man's health and to enhance the quality of
the environment through the elimination of unsanitary and other condi-
tions which contribute to the degradation of land and water resources
and to undesirable living conditions.
3. Mosquito and Rabies Control Department
The responsibilities of the Mosquito and Rabies Control Department
include mosquito control through spraying, rabies control, collection of
dogs, the operation of the animal shelter, and drainage work for the
County. The Department receives funding assistance from the North
Carolina Department of Human Resources.
SECTION 1.6.7 FIRE PROTECTION AND RESCUE SQUADS
The unincorporated portions of Carteret County are provided fire
protection by fifteen non-profit corporations acting as volunteer fire
departments within special taxing districts. The eight municipalities
within Carteret provide for their own fire protection. The volunteer
fire departments of Carteret County have over 700 nonpaid fire fighters,
and approximately 20 paid fire fighters. These departments have built
new stations and have acquired over 100 pieces of fire fighting equip-
ment. It is estimated to cost over ten million dollars to replace all
of the buildings and equipment now owned by the Carteret County Volun-
teer Fire Department. Most volunteer fire departments receive revenue
from a variety of sources, including ad valorem taxes, sales tax, sup-
plements from the County, and contributions. Nine (9) of, the volunteer
fire departments have a combined rescue squad facility. There are
several separate rescue squad facilities in the County, i.e., Broad and
Gales Creek, Beaufort, Morehead City and Wildwood. Carteret General
Hospital provides for patient transport.
93

The County provides a Fire Marshall as an overall coordinator for
fire protection services.
SECTION 1.6.8 SOCIAL SERVICES
The Carteret County Social Services Department provides a variety
of public assistance services to the citizens of Carteret County,
including financial, food stamp certification, adoption services, foster
care, home health, and licensing of certain institutions.
SECTION 1.6.9 OTHER COUNTY FACILITIES
1. Courts and Court -Related Offices
By State statute, counties are required to provide facilities for
the State Court System. As the Court System grows, counties must accom-
modate for this growth. Expansion and renovations work is underway on
Courthouse Square, Beaufort to provide for improved Court System facili-
ties. Construction is scheduled for completion in 1985.
2. County Jail
Local jail design and capacity requirements are controlled by the
State. The County's existing jail has reached capacity at peak times.
New facilities are planned to meet new construction requirements and to
provide for increased capacity. Work is scheduled to begin in late 19 87
and be completed 18 months thereafter.
3. Parking at County Facilities
Public parking for county offices and court -related facilities in
Beaufort is a critical problem. The lack of capacity on Courthouse
Square is aggravated by the adjacent proximity of both the Public School
Administration Building and Carteret Community Action Headquarters,
94

neither of which provide parking for their employees or visitors who
therefore also utilize spaces on Courthouse Square. Plans should be
formulated immediately, to provide long-range, adequate parking for
these governmental facilities.,
95

SECTION 1.7 FUTURE LAND NEEDS
Based on peak seasonal population trends, unincorporated Carteret
County can expect to see some 6,160 new dwelling units built by 1990,
accommodating an additional 17,875 permanent and seasonal residents.
Over seventy percent of these units will be built in the Morehead,
Beaufort, Newport and White Oak Townships. Residential development,
particularly of a second home or retirement nature, may tend to locate
parallel to NC 24 along Bogue Sound, along NC 58 and the White 0ak
River, and in waterfront areas in the vicinity of Beaufort and Morehead
City. Additional residential growth can be expected around Newport, but
will probably not equal. the amount of growth experienced in the 1970's.
Additional lands in these areas should be classified as transition to
accommodate the expected demand.
The expected levels of growth in the rural and downeast townships
should tend to locate near existing community development.
While most of Bogue Banks falls within various municipal juris-
dictions, new residential growth on that Island should be phenomenal
over the next decade. Based on past trends, slightly more than 8,500
new dwelling units will be added, able to accommodate roughly 27,500 new
residents (most of them seasonal). Bogue Banks is adequately classified
to handle the expected levels of development..
Growth in the municipalities is expected to range from low (More-
head City) to moderate (Beaufort and Newport) to high (Cape Carteret).
Growth in actual numbers is expected to be low, although dwelling unit
totals in Cape Carteret should more than double.

SECTION 1.8 COMMUNITY FACILITIES DEMAND
As key areas of Carteret County experience growth, there will be
additional community facility impacts on water, sewer, transportation,
solid waste, schools, drainage and recreational services.
SECTION 1.8.1 WATER
As new subdivisions, mobile home parks and planned unit develop -
meats begin to establish themselves along Bogue Sound and the White Oak
River, the need for centralized, community water systems will increase.
Many of these developments will provide community well systems, which
means the development can be more densely settled.
New development near. Beaufort and Morehead City should have access
to public water systems in those communities, and should be encouraged
to tie in to available centralized systems.
The establishment of community water systems in the more isolated
rural communities would be likely to improve health standards. The
establishment of such systems could be achieved by community initiatives
or possibly through federally financed programs such as the Community
Development Block Grant Program.
SECTION 1.8.2 SEWER
The feasibility of publicly financed sewage treatment and disposal
for those areas in unincorporated Carteret County likely to experience
growth in the next ten years and which are not near urban centers is
low. However, the lands along Bogue Sound and the White Oak River are
likely to attract higher quality developments which will provide package
treatment plants and possibly central sewer.
97

New developments near Beaufort and Morehead City are also likely to
take advantage of their proximity to centralized sewer services. Some
new developments may opt for the use of package treatment plants. There
are limitations to package systems, which are discussed in more detail
in Section 2.3.2.
SECTION 1.8.3 TRANSPORTATION
Increased development within Carteret County will have a dramatic
impact on transportation systems. Traffic traveling to Bogue Banks
should be accommodated adequately if the Morehead City -Atlantic Beach
bridge is replaced; necessary turning lanes and intersection improve -
meats are made on routes leading to and on Bogue Banks, and if a third
bridge is established. If residential development along Bogue Sound and
the White Oak River occurs at projected levels over the next ten years,
the widening of NC 24 and NC 58 should be given serious consideration.
The replacement of the bridge on NC 24 at Swansboro should also be a
high priority in the next ten years.
SECTION 1.8.4 SOLID WASTE
The new landfill should address solid waste disposal needs for the
next decade. However, as areas along waterways become more suburban
than rural in character, new alternatives to the greenbox system will
become necessary and will be more economically feasible. Additionally,
private collection of solid waste within individual developments may be
offered as part of homeowners association agreements or county fran-
chise.
98�

SECTION 1.8.5 EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES
Currently, school populations in Carteret County have leveled off
(see Section 1.6.4). As the County's population increases, there will
be a subsequent rise in the number of school age children. Although
much of the in -migration is expected to be in the form of "empty -
nesters", i.e., persons who are, retired or are only seasonal visitors
with grown children, the larger permanent and seasonal populations will
create a demand for increased services. Persons employed by service -
related businesses, many of them with school age children, will be drawn
into the area. The County School Board should anticipate an upward
shift in enrollments in the next decade. Carteret Tech may also need to
expand as the young adult population, drawn to the area by the prospect
of jobs, increases.
An additional elementary school for western Carteret County is
already being anticipated by the County School Board.
SECTION 1.8.6 DRAINAGE
Much new residential development in Carteret County will tend to
locate along waterways -- Core Creek, the Newport River estuary, Bogue
Sound and the White Oak River. The most significant environmental
impact of such water -oriented development will be the results of storm -
water runoff. The County currently has no drainage standards for resi-
dential development. If surface water quality is to be protected in
areas expected to receive residential development, drainage standards
which slow the rate of flow and allow runoff to reduce its pollutant
load before draining into surface waters are a high priority. The
establishment of such standards can substantially reduce the amount of
99

Q,
publicly financed drainage infrastructure required as well. These
standards are also applicable in relation to agriculture and other large
scale land -disturbing activities (see Section 2.1.3.).
SECTION 1.8.7 RECREATION
As development continues to increase on Bogue Banks, and as the
County's overall population grows, access to recreational areas may
diminish. Unless public access is required in conjunction with new
developments along waterways and at the beach, long-standing public
accessways may be lost. Greater. numbers of people will be using a
reduced number of access points. While it is recognized that Carteret
County is.blessed with the Cape Lookout National Seashore and Ft. Macon
State Park, access to other parts of Bogue Banks and to Bogue Sound and
1
other waterways should not be taken for granted. State and federal
monies can be tapped to help the County purchase beach, river and sound -
front property. for future accessways, and dedication of access and
parking space.can be required as a condition of approval for new devel-
opments.

SECTION 2.0 POLICY ALTERNATIVES
Policy has been defined as "intelligently directed action toward
conscious goals - as distinct from aimless drift and blind faith". As
directed action, it is at the head of a process which leads from policy
to plans to programs to projects, each contributing to support the
overall policy. The identification of policy issues begins the process
of directed action which ultimately leads to the question of how a local
government addresses a specific problem. Within the context of the
Coastal Area Management Act, the discussion of policy usually centers
around four (4) elements:
(1) the definition of issues;
(2) the discussion of possible policy alternatives;
(3) the choice of policies; and
(4) the description of proposed implementation methods.
Issues which have been identified in the course of -the Plan's
development are described,. and possible policy alternatives discussed in
the following section. Where applicable, the requirements necessary to
implement each alternative (such as changes to existing ordinances, for
example) are stated in parentheses after each alternative. Final policy
choices and the policy selected by the county are highlighted at the end
of each discussion.
Specifically, CAMA requires a discussion of resource protection,
resource production and management, economic and community development
and continuing public participation issues. Within each of these broad
areas, the overall policies must address several specific issues which
101

further define the areas of concern to the jurisdiction and frames the
possible courses of action. While the data elements of the first Sec-
tion show the nature of change in Carteret County in recent years, the
development of this policy section represents the changing perspectives
of the County as it begins to direct its planning efforts at more speci-
fic areas of concern.
CAMA also requires a discussion of storm hazard mitigation, post
disaster recovery and evacuation plans as part of a local government's
land use planning process. Carteret County completed that requirement
in June of 1984 and the reader should refer to that separate document
available at the planning department. As mentioned earlier, the plan.
includes all Bogue Banks communities, Morehead City and Beaufort.
102

SECTION 2.1 RESOURCE PROTECTION
SECTION 2.1.1 AREAS OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN
In 1978, the State assumed full responsibility for designating and
regulating development in the Areas of Environmental Concern (AEC). The
designation of AECs has a tremendous impact on Carteret County and
represents the major thrust of CAMA. Protection of the estuarine waters
serves to save a major incubation area for most marine life and to
buffer and protect the sensitive shoreline from damage. Public trust
waters provide everyone with the right to enjoy and use the water for
personal benefit and enjoyment. Fragile coastal, natural and cultural
resources include unique natural and social elements that enhance our
understanding of our past and present. Ocean Hazard Areas include those
areas subject to wind and wave erosion and other natural land forming
and changing elements.
In Carteret County, the following Areas of Environmental Concern
(AECs) have been designated:
(1) Coastal Wetlands
(2) Estuarine Waters
(3) Public Trust Areas
(4) Estuarine Shorelines
(S) Ocean Hazard Areas
a. Ocean Erodible Areas.
b. High Hazard Food Areas
C. Inlet Hazard Areas
103

fp
These areas have been classified as Conservation on the Carteret
County Land Classification Hap. Development within these areas is
expected to be of a nature that will provide the least possible damage
to land lying within the AECs. 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.
CAMA Provision for AECs
The Coastal Area Management Act requires that these State Guide-
lines "shall give particular attention to the nature of development
which shall be appropriate within the various types of Areas of Environ-
mental 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
conflicting needs of society expanding in industrial development, in
population, and in the recreational aspirations of its citizens".
Selection of Areas for AEC Designation
The selection of AEC categories was made after several months of
consideration by local governments. Thirteen (13) categories were
finally designated.

SECTION 2.1.1(a) THE ESTUARINE SYSTEM
The first AECs discussed collectively represent the water and land
areas of the coast that contribute enormous economic, social and biolo-
gical 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 AECs .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 aay
one component of an estuary. They are interdependent and ultimately
require management as a unit. Any alteration, however slight, in a
given component of the estuarine system may result in unforeseen conse-
quences in what may appear as totally unrelated areas of the estuary.
For example, destruction of wetlands may have harmful effects on estua-
rine 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 Objectives of the Estuarine System
It is the objective of the CRC to give high priority to the ,pro-
tection and coordinated management of Estuarine Water, Coastal Wetlands,
Public Trust Areas, and Estuarine Shorelines, as an interrelated group
of AECs, so as to safeguard and perpetuate their biolgoical, social,
economic and aesthetic values and to ensure that development occurring
105 il

within these AECs is compatible with natural characteristics so as to
minimize the likelihood of significant loss of private property and
public resources.
AECs within the Estuarine System
The following defines each AEC within the estuarine system,
describes its significance, articulates the policies regarding develop-
ment, and states the standards for development within each AEC.
SECTION 2.1.1(b) 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 artifical 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
(Spartina Alterniflora)
Black Needlerush
(Juncus Roemerianus);
Glasswort
(Salicornia SPp•);
Salt Grass
(Distichlis Spicata);
Sea Lavender
(Limonium Spp.);
Bulrush
(Scirpus Spp.);
Saw Grass
(Cladium Jamaicense);
Cattail
(Typha SPp•)
Salt Meadow Grass
(Spartina Patens); and
Salt Reed Grass
(Spartina Cynosuroides).
V

to
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 purpose 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 exporation and degree of importance appears to be variable
from marsh to marsh, depending primarily upon its frequency of inunda-
tion and inherent characteristics of the various plant species. Without
the marsh, the high productivity levels and complex foodchains typically
found in the estuarines could not be maintained.
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 estua-
rine system.
Use Standards
Suitable land uses shall be those consistent with the above manage -
meat objective. Highest priority of use shall be allocated 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.
107

Coastal Wetlands in Carteret County are generally found adjacent to
all water courses - rivers, tributaries, and sounds. The most extensive
wetlands are found in the northeastern part of the County. Also, exten-
sive 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, mobile home parks, parking lots, offices, public
and private roads and highways, and factories. Examples of acceptable
land uses may include utility easements, fishing piers, docks, farming,
and forestry drainage as permitted under the N.C. 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 described in the most
current reading of NCAC 7H .0208.
SECTION 2.1.1(c) ESTUARINE WATERS
Description
Estuarine Waters are defined in G.S. 113A-113(b)(2) as "all the
water of the Atlantic Ocean within the boundary of North Carolina and
all the waters of the bays, sounds, rivers and tributaries thereto
seaward of the dividing line between coastal fishing waters and inland
fishing waters as set forth in an agreement adopted by the Wildlife
Resources Commission and the Department of Natural Resources and Com-
munity Development and filed with the Secretary of State, entitled
'Boundary Lines, North Carolina Commercial Fishing - Inland Fishing
Waters' revised to March 1, 1965.
108 ,�

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 estua-
rine dependent species such as menhaden, flounder, shrimp, crabs,
oysters, and clams.
Management Objective
To give the highest priority to the conservation and management of
the important features of Estuarine Waters so as to safeguard and perpe-
tuate 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 objective. 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 devel-
opment activities that require water access and use which cannot func-
tion elsewhere such as simple access channels; structures to prevent
erosion; navigation channels; boat docks, marinas, piers, wharfs, and
mooring pilings.
109 :,

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 described in the most
current reading of NCAC 7H ..0208.
SECTION 2.1.1(d) 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 nevi-
gable natural bodies of water and lands therein 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 artifi-
cially 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 right 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;
(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;
110

(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 perpe-
tuate 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 benefits, 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 physi-
cal functions of the estuary. Projects which would directly or indi-
rectly block or impair existing navigation channels, increase shoreline
erosion, deposit spoil's below mean high water, cause adverse water
111

circulation patterns, violate water quality standards, or cause degrada-
tion 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 general use standards for coastal wetlands, estuarine waters and
public trust areas described in the most current reading of NCAC 7H
.0208.
SECTION 2.1.1(e) ESTUARINE SHORELINES
Rationale
As an AEC, estuarine shorelines, although characterized as dry
land, are considered a component of the estuarine system because of the
close association with the adjacent estuarine waters.
Description
Estuarine shorelines are those non -ocean shorelines which are
especially vulnerable to erosion, flooding or other adverse effects of
wind and water and are intimately connected to the estuary. This area
extends from the mean high water level or normal water level along the
estuarines, sounds, bays and brackish waters as set forth in an agree-
ment adopted by the Wildlife Resources Commission and the Department of
Natural Resources and Community Development for a distance of 75 feet
landward.
Significance
Development within estuarine shorelines influences the quality of
estuarine life and is subject to the damaging processes of shorefront
erosion and flooding.
• 112

Management Objectives
To ensure shoreline development is compatible with both the dynamic
nature of estuarine shorelines, and the values of the estuarine system.
Use Standards
All development projects, proposals and designs shall substantially
preserve and not weaken or, eliminate natural barriers to erosion,
including, but not limited to peat marshland, resistant clay shorelines,
cypressgum protective fringe areas adjacent to vulnerable shorelines.
All development projects, proposals and designs shall limit the
construction of impervious surfaces and areas not allowing natural
drainage to only so much as is necessary to adequately service the major
purpose or use for which the lot is to be developed. Impervious sur-
faces shall not exceed 30 percent of the AEC area of the lot, unless the
applicant can effectively demonstrate, through innovative, design, that
the protection provided by the design would be equal to or exceed the
protection by the 30 percent limitation.
All development projects, proposals and designs shall comply with
the mandatory standards of the North Carolina Sedimentation Pollution
Control Act of 1973.
Development shall not have a significant adverse impact on estua-
rine resources.
Development shall not significantly interfere with existing public
rights of access to, or use of, navigable waters or public resources.
No major public facility shall be permitted within the estuarine
shoreline if such facility is likely to require extraordinary public
expenditures for maintenance and continued use, unless it can be shown
that the public purpose served by the facility outweighs the required
113

r'
i
r
i
r
public expenditures for construction, maintenance, and continued use.
For the purpose of this standard, "public facility" shall mean a project
which is paid for in any part by public funds.
Development within estuarine shorelines shall not cause major or
irreversible damage to valuable, documented historic architectural or
archaeological resources.
In every instance, the particular location, use and design charac-
teristics of all developments shall be in accord with the most recent
use standards -for estuarine shorelines (NCAC 7H .0209).
Policy Alternatives
(1) To allow only those activities requiring water access and/or use
which cannot function elsewhere to locate in estuarine and public
trust waters, coastal wetlands and estuarine shorelines, -and sub-
ject to the _local minor development permit process and all regula-
tions specified in NCAC 7H.
(2) To allow only those activities requiring water access and/or use
which cannot function elsewhere to locate in estuarine and public
trust waters, and coastal wetlands. Residential and commerical
development may be located within estuarine shorelines. All acti-
vities in AECs will be subject to the CAMA development
permit process and all regulations specified in NCAC 7H.
SELECTED POLICY: Carteret County Adopts Policy #2.
SECTION 2.1.1(f) OCEAN HAZARD AREAS
The next broad grouping is composed of those AECs that are con-
sidered natural hazard areas along the Atlantic Ocean shoreline where,
because of their special vulnerability to erosion or other adverse
114

effects of sand, wind and water, uncontrolled or incompatible develop-
ment could unreasonably endanger life or property. Ocean Hazard Areas
include beaches, frontal dunes, inlet land and other areas in which
geologic, vegetative and soil conditions indicate a substantial possi-
bility of excessive erosion or flood damage.
Areas within Carteret County's jurisdiction which contain lands in
the Ocean Hazard AEC classification include Core, Shackleford and Bogue
Banks. Land altering activity within the Cape Lookout National Seashore
Park is not subject to the permitting process, but is checked for con-
sistency with State guidelines and the local Land Use Plan. Only two
areas on Bogue Banks lie within the County's permitting jurisdiction:
(1) the community of Salter Path (including about one-half mile of
oceanfront), and (2) an area between Pine Knoll Shores and Atlantic
Beach containing about 1,000 feet in the Ocean Hazard Area.
Significance
The primary cause of the hazards peculiar to the Atlantic shoreline
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 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 and is used by a vast number of visitors to the coast.
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 a permanent state of
flux, responding to meteorologically induced changes in the wave cli-
115

mate. 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 situation 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. 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
The CRC recognizes that absolute safety from the destructive forces
indigenous to the Atlantic shoreline is an impossibility for development
located adjacent to the coast. 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, particularly primary and frontal dunes.
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 Ocean Hazard system of AECs contains all of the following
areas:
(1) Ocean Erodible Area. This is the area in which there exists a
substantial possibility of excessive erosion and significant
shoreline fluctuation. The seaward boundary of this area is
116

the mean low water line. The landward extent of this Area is
determined as follows:
(a) a distance landward from the first line of stable natural
vegetation to the recession line that would be estab-
lished by multiplying the long-term annual erosion rate
which for the purposes of this Section shall be those as
set forth in tables entitled "Long -Term Annual Erosion
Rates Updated through 1980," approved by the Coastal
Resources Commission on March 18, 1983, times 60, pro-
vided that where there has been no long-term erosion or
where the rate is less than two feet per year, this
distance shall be set at 120 feet landward from the first
line of stable natural vegetation; and
(b) a distance landward from the recession line established
in Subparagraph (a) of this Paragraph to the recession
line that would be generated by a storm having a one
percent chance of being equalled or exceeded in any given
year.
(2) The High Hazard Flood Area. This is the area subject to high
velocity waters (including, but not limited to, hurricane wave
wash) in a storm having a one percent chance of being equalled
or exceeded in any given year, as identified as zone V1-30 on
the flood insurance rate maps of the Federal Insurance Admini-
stration, Federal Emergency Ptanagement Agency.
In the absence of these rate maps, other available base flood
elevation data prepared by a federal, State, or other source
may be used, provided said data source is approved by the CRC.
117

(3) Inlet Hazard Area. The Inlet Hazard Areas are natural -hazard
areas that are especially vulnerable to erosion, flooding and
other adverse effects of sand, wind, and water because of
their proximity to dynamic ocean inlets. This area shall
extend landward from the mean low water line a distance suffi-
cient to encompass that area within which the inlet will,
based on statistical analysis, migrate and shall consider such
factors as previous inlet territory, structurally weak areas
near the inlet (such as an unusually narrow barrier island, an
unusually long channel feeding the inlet, or an overwash
area), and external influences such as jetties and channeli-
- zation. These areas shall be identified on Inlet Hazard Area
maps approved by the Coastal Resources Commission. In all
cases, this area shall be an extension of the adjacent ocean
erodible area and in no case shall the width of the inlet
hazard area be less than the width of the adjacent ocean
erodible area.
Use Standards
General use standards for development in Ocean Hazard Areas must
conform to the most current reading of NCAC 7H .0306 - 7H .0310.
Policy Alternatives
(1) Carteret County can impose additional standards on Ocean Hazard
Areas within its jurisdiction, such as density or height limita-
tions. (Requires `amendments to subdivision/zoning ordinances.)
(2) Carteret County can endorse State standards for Ocean Hazard Areas
within its permitting jurisdiction.
SELECTED POLICY: Carteret County Adopts Policy 01.
118

SECTION 2.1.2 FRAGILE AREAS
The N.C. Natural Heritage Program has identified nine natural areas
in Carteret County of National or State significance, and twelve natural
areas of regional or local significance. These areas, which are more
fully described in Section 1.5.2, are listed below with policy recommen-
dations as necessary.
1. NATIONAL AND STATE SIGNIFICANCE
A. Portsmouth Island - Core Banks
Protection Status: The entire area is part of Cape Lookout
National Seashore, and the majority of the area willbe
managed as a natural area.
Policy Alternatives:
(1) Endorse the management of the majority of this area as a
natural area by the National Park Service.
(2) Classify entire area as Conservation. .
SELECTED POLICY: Carteret County Adopts Policy ail and #2.
B. North Bay Barrier
Protection Status: The westernmost two miles of the system
are protected from development by their inclusion in Cedar
Island National Wildlife Refuge; the easternmost three miles
are rendered inaccessible by the presence of several inlets.
Policy Alternatives:
(1) Classify.the westernmost two miles (Cedar Island Wildlife
Refuge) and easternmost three miles (privately owned but
inaccessible except by boat), which are undeveloped, as
Conservation.
119

(2) Classify all undeveloped portions of the barrier as
Conservation; classify developed areas Community.
(Entire area currently classified conservation).
SELECTED POLICY: Carteret County Adopts Policy #2.
C. Cedar Island Marshes
Protection Status: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service admini
sters some 6,600 acres of the 7,000 acre marsh. Currently,
the Service is considering the impoundment of about 2,000
acres northwest of NC 12 for waterfowl habitat. The entire
natural area is an AEC.
Policy Alternatives:
(1) Classify entire area as Conservation.
SELECTED POLICY: Carteret County Adopts Policy #1.
D. Shackleford Banks
Protection Status: Under NPS administration, all of Shackle -
ford is proposed as a "natural zone" and will be protected as
a wilderness with minimal visitor facilities.
Policy Alternatives:
(1) Endorse NPS administration of area as a "natural zone".
(2) Classify entire area as Conservation.
SELECTED POLICY: Carteret County Adopts Policy #1 and #2.
E. Rachel Carson National Estuarine Sanctuary
Protection Status: The Complex has been acquired by the
State, which has prepared a natural area management plan for.
the Sanctuary.
120

Policy Alternatives:
(1) Endorse State management as a natural area.
(2) Classify entire area within County's jurisdiction as
Conservation.
SELECTED POLICY: Carteret County Adopts Policy #1 and #2.
F. Croatan Pocosin
Protection Status: Wholly owned by the U.S. Government, this
area has been proposed by the U.S. Forest Service as a Wilder-
ness - RARE II area, which would make it part of the National
Wilderness System.
Policy Alternatives:
(1) Endorse USFS efforts .to have area designated.as a Wilder-
ness - RARE II area.
(2) Classify entire area as Conservation.
SELECTED POLICY: Carteret County Adopts Policy #1.
G. Millis Road Longleaf Pine Savannah Natural Area
Protection Status: Public land not recognized as a natural
area. The N.C. Natural Heritage Program recommended mainte-
nance of the present vegetational structure and the possible
establishment of the area by the USFS as a "red -cockaded
woodpecker management area" or "savannah management area".
Policy Alternatives:
(1) Recommend to USFS that the area be managed as a natural
area, particularly to protect as a habitat for the red -
cockaded woodpecker and Savannah species.
(2) Classify entire area as Conservation.
SELECTED POLICY: Carteret County Adopts Policy #1.
121 r;

H. Patsy Pond Natural Area
Protection Status: Not recognized as a natural area. The
Natural Heritage program recommended management for endangered
and threatened species preservation, and for scientific and
educational purposes.
Policy Alternatives:
(1) Recommend to USFS that the area be managed as a natural
area for endangered and threatened species and unique
community preservation.
(2) Classify area as Conservation.
SELECTED POLICY: Carteret County Adopts Policy #1.
I. Theodore Roosevelt Natural Area
Protection Status: Roughly 265 acres has been set aside to
remain in a natural state and is administered by the Depart-
ment of Administration.
Policy Alternatives:
(1) No recommendation, as area lies within Town of Pine Knoll
Shores jurisdiction.
(2) Recommend that the Town consider preserving the entire
tract as a natural area.
crTrrTED POLICY•
2.
Carteret County Adopts Policy f/l.
REGIONAL OR LOCAL -SIGNIFICANCE
a. Atlantic Natural Area (Atlantic Township).
Protection Status: 100% privately owned, not an AEC. The
Natural Heritage Survey suggested U.S. Fish and Wildlife buy
the northwest portion of the tract, which is adjacent to Cedar
Island Wildlife Refuge.
122

Policy Alternatives:
(1) Encourage U.S. Fish and Wildlife to acquire the northwest
portion of the tract, which is adjacent to the Cedar
Island Wildlife Refuge.
(2) Classify area as Conservation.
SELECTED POLICY: Carteret County Adopts Policy #1.
b. Brown's Island (Harker's Island Township)
Protection Status: Currently classified as Conservation, pri-
vately owned. Some low density residential development can be
anticipated.
Policy Alternatives:
(1) Classify all areas above the high water line not covered
'by marshes or 404 wetlands as Rural -Residential; classify
areas below the high water line, all marsh areas and all
404 wetland areas as Conservation.
(2) Classify entire area as Conservation.
SELECTED POLICY: Carteret County Adopts Policy #1.
C. North River Marshes (Beaufort/Straits Township)
Protection Status: Classified as an AEC (coastal wetlands);
private ownership.
Policy Alternative:
(1) Classify as Conservation
SELECTED POLICY: Carteret County Adopts Policy #1.
d. Sea Gate Woods (Harlowe Township)
Protection Status: None; privately owned.
Policy Alternatives:
(1) Recognize as a natural area; encourage maintenance of
natural tree cover if area is developed. (Example:
123

amend Subdivision Regulations to require protection of
trees as part of subdivision plat approval.)
(2) Classify area as Conservation.
SELECTED POLICY: Carteret County Adopts Policy #1.
e. Union Point Pocosin (Newport Township)
Protection Status: Not recognized as a natural area; 100%
federally owned and located in Croatan National Forest.
Policy Alternatives:
(1) Recommend to USFS that the area be managed as a natural
area.
(2) Classify area as Conservation.
SELECTED POLICY: Carteret County Adopts Policy #1.
f. Walkers Mill Pond (Newport Township)
Protection Status: Privately owned; current use limited to
hunting and fishing.
Policy Alternative:
(1) Classify area as Conservation.
C L`T t•f+TTT T
g-
OLICY: Carteret County Adopts Policy #1.
Masontown Pocosin (Newport Township)
Protection Status: Not recognized as a natural area; 100%
federally owned and located in Croatan National Forest.
Policy Alternatives:
(1) Recommend to USFS that the are be managed as a natural
area.
(2) Classify area as Conservation.
SELECTED POLICY: Carteret County Adopts Policy #1.
124

h. Wildberry Woods (White Oak Township)
Protection Status: Registered N.C. Natural Heritage Area.
i.
Policy Alternative:
(1) Classify as Conservation (registered as a N.C. Natural
Heritage Area).
OLICY: Carteret County Adopts Policy #1.
Pringle Road Carolina Bays (White Oak Township)
Protection Status: Not recognized as a natural area; 100%
federally owned and located in Croatan National Forest.
Policy Alternatives:
(1) Recommend to USFS that the areas be managed as a natural
area.
(2) Classify as Conservation.
SELECTED POLICY: Carteret County Adopts Policy #1.
j. Hadnot Creek Ponds (White Oak Township)
Protection Status: Not recognized as a natural area; 100%
k.
federally owned and located in Croatan National Forest.
Policy Alternatives:
(1) Recommend to USFS that the area be managed as a natural
area.
(2) Classify as Conservation.
OLICY: Carteret County Adopts Policy #1.
Hadnot Creek (White Oak Township)
Protection Status: Privately owned southwest section and
Creek mouth registered as a N.C. Natural Heritage Area.
Northeast section is part of Croatan National Forest and is
not recognized as a natural area. Remaining 400 acres owned
by a lumber company.
1-, 125

rs
1.
Policy Alternatives:
(1) Recommend to USFS that the area in their ownership be
managed as a natural area.
(2) Classify as Conservation.
(3) Classify all but 400 acres owned by lumber company as
Conservation; classify lumber holdings as Rural.
OLICY: Carteret County Adopts Policy ail and 03.
Emerald Isle Woods (Town of Emerald Isle)
Protection Status: Local ordinance requiring maintenance of
45% of site in natural vegetation for all residentially zoned
land.
Policy Alternatives:
(1) No recommendation, as .area lies within Town of Emerald
Isle jurisdiction.
(2) Recommend that the Town protect all or part of the area
as a natural area.
(3) Recommend that the Town establish landscaping standards
to encourage maintaining forest cover.
SELECTED POLICY: Carteret County Adopts Policy 01.
3. PRIMARY NURSERY AREAS
Primary Nursery Areas are identified on Maps 6 through 10.
.Policy Alternatives
(1) Classify all land areas adjacent to primary and secondary
nursery areas within 75-feet of mean high water as Con-
servation, and limit development to only those activities
requiring water access and/or a use which cannot function
elsewhere. Maintain natural drainage patterns into
primary and secondary nursery areas.
12b

000 _
a
)00
000
L

� � r
PRIMARY NURSERY AREAS
MAP 7 Page 128

1
2660003
I
2700000 2723000 2740060
PRIMARY NURSERY AREAS
MAP 8 Page. 129
276

t
PRIMARY NURSERY AREAS

(2) Classify all land areas adjacent to primary nursery areas
within 75 feet of mean high water as Conservation, and
preclude all land uses.
(3) Classify all land areas adjacent to primary nursery areas
within 75 feet of mean high water as Conservation, and
limit development to low density residential use (sug-
gested density: one unit per acre. or less, in keeping
with the Rural density threshold) and only those activi-
ties in conjunction with residential use requiring water
access and/or use which cannot function elsewhere.
(4) Classify all land areas adjacent to primary nursery areas
within 75 feet of mean high water as Conservation, and
limit development to only those activities which, in
conjunction with nearby residential activities, require
water access and/or use and which cannot function else-
where.
(5) Classify all land areas adjacent to primary nursery areas
within 75 feet of mean high water as Conservation, and
limit development to low density residential use (sug-
gested density: one unit per acre or less, in keeping
with the Rural density threshold) and only those activi-
ties which require water access and/or use and which
cannot function elsewhere.
SELECTED POLICY:
Carteret County Adopts Policy #5.
4. OTHER FRAGILE AREAS - SOUND AND RIVER ISLANDS
Carteret County, with its vast areas of protected water, is
scattered with hundreds of islands, many so small they do not
appear on detailed maps. Currently, all undeveloped islands
132

located in sounds are classified as Conservation, but river islands
are not included in this classification, leaving them in the Rural
category. Because of potential difficulties regarding access and
the provision of sewer and water, and because of the proximity of
such islands to estuarine waters, the County's development policy
for river and sound islands needs to be clarified.
Policy Alternatives
(1) Prohibit residential or other forms of development on all presently
undeveloped natural and spoil islands in Carteret County sounds and
rivers. (Classify such areas as Conservation.)
(2) Allow low intensity, dispersed residential development on presently
undeveloped, natural, non -spoil islands in areas above the high
water line which do not contain coastal wetland AECs. (Classify
all areas above the high water line not covered by coastal wetland
AECs as Rural; classify areas below the high water line and all
coastal wetland areas as Conservation.) Because of special diffi-
culties involving access and the provision of centralized services
such as sewer and water, densities on islands developed in the
future should not equal or exceed that of the Transition Class
(three (3) dwelling units per acre).
SELECTED POLICY:
Carteret County Adopts Policy #1.
SECTION 2.1.3 WATER QUALITY AND FISHERIES RESOURCES
Large-scale farming activities, including corporate farming and
peat and phosphate mining, may have an impact on water quality and
fisheries resources in Carteret County. Currently, there are no large-
scale peat or phosphate mining activities being conducted in Carteret
County, but two (2) large-scale farming operations have been developed
133

here: the Open Ground Farm in Straits Township and Smyrna Farms near
the community of Smyrna. Open Ground has cleared about 45,000 acres and
grows corn and soybeans and raises cattle. The Smyrna operation is
similar but on smaller scale.
Large-scale farming has many positive impacts on the County. It
provides jobs, increases the tax base and brings revenue into the County
from food and fiber sold. In addition, equipment dealers and suppliers
benefit. On the other hand, wildlife habitat is lost. Wetland areas
are reduced and many believe that fishing productivity is adversely
effected.
There are basically four (4) issues that arise around the matter of
large-scale farming in Carteret County.
(1) drainage and runoff,
(2) conversion of forested areas and forested wetlands to row
crops and pasture,
(3) sediment load, and
(4) freshwater infiltration of receiving streams.
To a large degree these issues are inter -related. Farm owners
should be encouraged to use Best Management Practices (BMP's) in pre-
serving and managing their farms. Briefly defined, this means using
drainage practices which slow the rate of flow and allow runoff to clean
itself of some of its pollutant load before it drains into surface
waters. The use of BMP's will help mitigate the potential problems
listed above, and will also help protect the property owner's investment
through the prevention of soil erosion.
Conversion of forested areas, and especially forested wetlands, is
essential to put farmland into production. However, the harvesting of
timber and the drainage of freshwater wetland areas on a large scale may
134

have significant impacts on surrounding surface waters. These impacts
may be so large that recommended mitigation procedures are not adequate
to address their effects (see page 33).
The UNC School of Journalism conducted a survey in early 1983 which
asked a number of questions about corporate farming and its relationship
to water quality and fisheries. Some 93 randomly selected Carteret
Countians participated in the survey.
Fifty-seven percent of Carteret County responders felt that corpo-
rate farming provided jobs that helped the area's economy. However, a
majority (63.4%) of responders said they would not like to see addi-
tional corporate farms locate in their area, and 55% said they did not
want corporate farms in their area at all. (These results may reflect
feelings regarding the more populated parts of the County rather than
areas where corporate farms already exist, since only a small proportion
of Carteret County's residents live in areas near corporate farms.)
Nearly 70 percent of Carteret County responders felt that big
drainage projects on corporate farms hurt the fishing industry.
(Eighty-five percent of all fishermen surveyed felt this way.) A sur-
prising percentage (57.2) of Carteret responders felt that corporate
farms should be subject to government regulations. Finally, an over-
whelming majority of Carteret County responders (nearly 95 percent) felt
that corporate farms should be required to pay for or correct any harm
that drainage or land clearing causes to the fishing industry.
While the message inherent in these last three survey results is
abundantly clear, the appropriate means of dealing with corporate farm
impacts is anything but clear. The overwhelming message seems to be
that agricultural drainage on a large scale is perceived as harmful to
135

the fishing industry and should be controlled through government regula-
tions. Carteret County's fisheries industry (perhaps the most signifi-
cant of any county in the State) is effected not only by large-scale
farming activities, but also peat and phosphate mining in nearby
counties. Agricultural activities are exempt from, and agricultural
drainage into estuarine waters is only peripherally addressed by, the
Coastal Area Management Act. Land clearing and drainage in conjunction
with agriculture is essentially exempt from CAMA as well. Carteret
County does not have the jurisdiction or the expertise to adequately
address these deficiencies in State regulations. However, the County
can consider alternatives to be recommended to the State in addition to
alternatives to be considered at the local level.
Another type of land alteration which can have a significant impact
on water quality and fisheries resources is urban development. The
major sources of urban runoff affecting Carteret County waters include
upstream development in the Piedmont, the largely incorporated urbani-
zing areas on Bogue Banks, and other Carteret County municipalities.
The runoff impacts of new development can also be addressed through
drainage standards designed to allow runoff to cleanse itself before
draining into surface waters.
Policy Alternatives
(1) Recommend to the N.C. Department of Natural Resources and Community
Development that proper enabling legislation be enacted to allow
drainage standards to protect fisheries resources be developed and
applied, through CAMA, or other legislation, for agricultural land
use.
136

(2) Develop County development standards for significant land altering
activities, particularly agriculture and urban development. (New
ordinance required.)
(3) Establish a conservation buffer around large scale agricultural
lands to work in conjunction with State or local drainage stan-
dards. (Land classification and/or zoning amendment required.)
(4) Nominate remaining, valuable freshwater wetlands in the County as
AECs (see fragile areas for recommended list). (Nomination to CRC
needed.)
(5) Designate lands adjacent to Primary Nursery Areas as Conservation
on the Land Classification Map. (Adopt as part of land classifi-
cation map and policy in Section 2.1.2.3.)
(6) Designate freshwater wetlands as Conservation on the Land Classifi-
cation Map. (Adopt as part of land classification map.)
(7) Require a drainage plan and local permit for any land clearing in
excess of 20 acres. (New ordinance or expansion of existing sub-
division regulations required; additional staff needed for enforce-
ment.)
(8) Limit potential densities within the County jurisdiction in areas
adjacent to estuarine waters. (Zoning amendments required.)
(9) Develop and apply local drainage standards in areas where public or
private community water and sewer services are necessary to support
the density of development. (Adopt drainage standards and hire
additional staff to implement.)
(10) Designate a task force to work with the Division of Marine Fish-
eries on resource management issues. (Resolution necessary.)
SELECTED POLICY: Carteret County Adopts Policy #1, #6, and #10.
137 ��

SECTION 2.1.4 FLOOD -PRONE AREAS
Flood -prone areas cover a large proportion of unincorporated
Carteret County (see Map 3), particularly in eastern Carteret County,
according to maps and information provided by the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA). The Flood Insurance Program (administered at
the local level by the County Building Inspection Department) offers
protection against flood damages to property owners in exchange for that
community's assurance that new construction in flood hazard areas will
be regulated to minimize damage.
Policy Alternatives
(1) To continue participation in the National Flood Insurance Program
as a means to promote good land development practices and to
protect the citizens of the County.
(2) To discuss federal program standards with FEMA to explore non-
structural alternatives to minimize flood damage.
(3) Carteret County should avoid structural solutions to flood damage
control and plan for non-structural alternatives to minimize flood
damage.
SELECTED POLICY:
Carteret County Adopts Policy #1, #2, and #3.
Implementation
The County Building Inspection Department (with the co-operation of
the County Planner) will continue to enforce the Flood Insurance regula-
tions for unincorporated Carteret County.
138

SECTION 2.1.5 HISTORIC AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL PROPERTIES
Carteret County, founded in 1772, is among the oldest counties in
North Carolina. The N.C. Division of Archives and History has listed
145 sites in the County that are considered archaelogically significant.
Of these, a total of 63 were recommended for testing for possible
National Register potential. Because of legislative restrictions, the
exact locations of these sites cannot be listed. However, it should be
noted that in general, the known sites for Carteret County tend towards
the rivers and major creeks. This situation reflects not only proba-
bility of site locations in particular areas, but also indicates what
areas of the County have actually been scrutinized.
Historic preservation interests in Carteret County have largely
been concentrated in Beaufort. Many other of the County's significant
historic properties are located within the County's municipality bounda-
ries and these are not subject to County regulation or control.
The following is a listing of properties in Carteret County which
are on the National Register of Historic Places:
Cape Lookout Station, Core Banks
Fort Macon, Atlantic Beach
Gibbs House, Beaufort
Jacon Henry House, Beaufort
Old Burying Ground, Beaufort
Beaufort Historic District, Beaufort (see map)
Portsmouth Village (see map)
139

The properties on the Study list in Carteret County are:
Rufus Bell House, Harlowe
Octagon House, Swansboro vicinity
Money Island (Archaeological site)
Oak Site (Archaeoloical site)
Additionally, the turn of the century County Courthouse is under-
going exterior renovation and repair.
Policy Alternatives
The County has, to date, played a relatively passive role in his-
toric preservation activities. Historic sites in the County tend to be
located in the municipalities and rural sites are scattered, remote and
of low visibility. Alternatives include:
(1) Encouraging local historical organizations to inventory poten-
tial National Register sites and submit them to the N.C.
Division of Archives and History for National Register consid-
eration.
(2) Request the Division of Archives and History provide the
County with a map, for planning purposes only, of significant
archaeologic and historic sites for use in subdivision review.
The Division of Archives and History could be contacted and
asked to suggest mitigation procedures whenever such review
indicated possible development impacts on such resources.
(Would require administrative "check -off" procedure for subdi-
vision submissions.)
SELECTED POLICY:
Carteret County Adopts Policy #1 and #2.
140

Implementation
The County will rdly on its staff and area residents to assist it in
developing the appropriate information and tolls for use in its planning
programs. Policy #2 necessitates contacting the N. C. Division of Archives
and History at the preliminary plat stage whenever proposed developments are
scheduled for areas which may contain significant archaedlogic or historic
resources.
141
W

SECTION 2.2 RESOURCE PRODUCTION AND MANAGEMENT
Agriculture, forestry, and fishing all play an important role in
the economy of Carteret County. There are also significant deposits of
peat in the County, although peat mining does not appear to be likely in
the near future.
SECTION 2.2.1 PRODUCTIVE AGRICULTURAL LANDS
Issue Discussion
Because of the significance of agriculture in Carteret County (see
Section 1.2.3, Agriculture), the identification of important and prime
agricultural soils is a priority. The Carteret County Soil Conservation
Services Board of Supervisors has identified soils in Carteret County
that are most significant to agricultural productivity. They have been
classed in two (2) categories:
Important
Prime
Arapahoe
Pantego
Altavista
Augusta
Ponzer
Craven
Autryville
Rains
Goldsboro
Belhaven
Roanoke
Norfolk
Conetoe
Seabrook
Onslow
Dare
Tomotley
State
Deloss
Waska
Lynchburg
A generalized soils map (see Hap 4) reveals that most of the impor-
tant and prime farmland areas are in the eastern Townships of Herrimon,
Straits, Smyrna, Davis, Stacy and Sea Level; the northern portion of
Beaufort Township; and areas in northern White Oak and Newport Town-
ships.
142

A random survey conducted as part of citizen participation require-
ments for the Land Use Plan revealed that 77% of the respondents (n=65)
felt that farmland preservation should be a priority for the County.
However, there are two identifiable "types" of farming in Carteret
County --traditional family farming, and large corporate farming (dis-
cussed above). The trend among small farmers is toward a reduction in
the number of owners, an increase in the size of farms, and little
change in the number of acres in "family" production (page 13).
Small farms are much more likely to be converted to other uses than
are large corporate farms. Those adjacent to urbanizing areas are
vulnerable to conversion for residential development; those adjacent to
corporate farms are likely candidates for consolidation as corporate
holdings expand.
It should be recognized that such conversion is in direct response
to economic considerations that make residential development or sale
more financially advantageous than continued farming on a small scale.
Policy Alternatives
(1) Prime and important farmland should be identified, and to the
maximum extent feasible, classified as Rural. (Address on land
classification map.)
(2) Through the Agriculture Extension or other County Services, farmers
should be informed of existing State laws, particularly tax laws,
which benefit farmers and make it financially more attractive to
continue farming.
(3) Where development pressures exist in agricultural areas, use devel-
opment controls (such as large lot zoning) and the provision and
143

location of public services to help preserve the rural character of
the area. (Would require amendments to existing ordinances.)
SELECTED POLICY:
Carteret County Adopts Policy #1 and #2.
SECTION 2.2.2 POTENTIAL MINERAL EXTRACTION
Issue Discussion
Peat is found in two (2) areas of Carteret County; one deposit on
the Open Grounds Farm property and another in the Croatan National
Forest. Research indicates that the deposits in the Open Grounds area
are not of sufficient quantity to merit serious consideration for
mining. In addition, land clearing activities at Open Grounds have
apparently disturbed the deposits to the extent that they would not be
suitable.
There are actually five (5) separate deposits of peat in the
Croatan National Forest; only two (2) of which are in Carteret County.
One site referred to as Croatan Pocosin contains about 5,200 acres of
peat while the other known as the Millis Road Site has a little over
1,500 acres. Both sites have been recommended as natural areas by the
Natural Heritage Program. At present, there are no known plans to mine
either site.
Policy Alternatives
(1) Since both areas in the Croatan National Forest have been identi-
fied as significant natural areas, the County discourages potential
mining activity at either site and classifies both areas as Conser-
vation.

(2) Should the possibility of mining activities become more probable,
the County supports a thorough analysis of environmental impacts of
peat mining prior to the institution of mining activities.
SELECTED POLICY: Carteret County Adopts Policy #1.
145

SECTION 2.3 ECONOMIC & COMMUNITY DtVELOPMENT
General
Carteret County is a diverse county. Fishing and farming dominate
in the east, and tourism and second home development has had a signifi-
cant impact in the Beaufort, Morehead City and Bogue Banks area. In
addition, the State Port Authority, its associated activities and other
industrial development in recent years make up a substantial part of the
County's economy.
The Carteret County Economic Development Council (EDC) actively
promotes overall economic development in the County. The EDC acts as a
focal point for prospective industries or businesses that express an
interest in locating the County. The EDC provides information on the
County such as site availability, utilities, labor force, etc. It also
acts as a conduit to other local resources which may facilitate develop-
ment.
The Chamber of Commerce, aside from advancing the interests of the
business community, has in recent years become more active in tourism
promotion. This includes operating a visitor information center, promo-
tion mailouts and similar activities.
It is also anticipated that the County Civic Center located on
campus of Central Technical College will provide a stimulus to the
county's tourism -related business.
Because Carteret County's major industries have direct and indirect
impacts on each other, it is important that the County develop policies
which take these interrelationships into consideration.
146

Policv Alternatives
(1) The County recognizes the economic value of tourism, agricultural,
commercial fishing, manufacturing, military -related, retirement -
related and State Port -related industries.
(2) The County will continue to oversee the relationship between large-
scale agriculture and commercial fishing resources through policies
adopted in Section 2.1.3.(see pg. 133-136)
(3) The County will continue its policy of assessing the environmental
and quality of life impacts of proposed industries (see Section
2.3.11). (see pg. 168-170)
(4) The County will continue to strive to attract industries and busi-
nesses which are compatible with the environment, which complement
the existing infrastructure and which will provide diversified
economic opportunities for Carteret County.
(5) The County will require that major industrial developments shall
submit a local environmental impact statement which would be re-
viewed by local officials and a special advisory committee for the
purpose of informing County authorities of the potential environ-
mental and economic impacts of the development.
(6) County zoning should be instituted to keep the amount and type of
development within the carrying capacities of public services and
the environment.
SELECTED POLICY:
Carteret County Adopts Policy i/1, #2, J/3, and #4.
There are several areas in unincorporated Carteret County which
have the potential for growth and development in the next five to ten
years (see Section 1.3.5, Areas Likely to experience major land use
changes, and Section 1.7, Future Land Needs). Most notably these are:
147

r�
(1) The Beaufort -?forehead vicinity (residential growth, parti-
cularly near waterways; some commercial growth along U.S. 70
extending to and north of NC 24);
(2) Along NC 24 and Bogue Sound and along NC 58 and the White Oak
River (primarily residential development with some service
commercial);
(3) Harker's Island and small downeast villages, most notably
Marshallberg, Davis, Atlantic and Sea Level (mixed residential
and service commercial at Harker's; mostly residential in
Downeast communities).
(4) Radio Island (Industrial and Commercial Development).
The expected growth necessitates the development of policies
regarding services needed to accommodate such growth. These include
water, sewer, transportation, solid waste, law -enforcement, fire protec-
tion, educational facilities, drainage and- recreation. The policy
discussion for each of these services has been broadened to address
existing needs as well. Special economic and community development
issues, such as OCS Exploration, National Seashore Development, and
Seasonal Population Extremes are also addressed.
SECTION 2.3.1 WATER AND SEWER SERVICES
Carteret County does not currently provide central water and sewer
to any area within its jurisdiction. There are community water systems
operating in both incorporated and unincorporated parts of the County,
but central, public sewer systems are limited to Newport, Morehead City
and Beaufort. The County does specify criteria by which centralized
utilities should be provided for large scale developments through its
Group Housing and Mobile Home Park Ordinances.
148

To date, there is no evidence of wide -spread public health problems
resulting from the use of private well water, or community water in some
cases, in conjunction with the use of private septic tanks or package
treatment systems.
Policy Alternatives
Should the need for central water and/or sewer become evident in
all or part of unincorporated Carteret County, the following alterna-
tives could be considered:
(1) The establishment of a County water and/or sewer Authority.
(2) The establishment of a privately owned and operated water
and/or sewer facility.
(3) The establishment of a water and/or sewer. cooperative.
(4) The establishment of a County Utilities Department. (Would
require bond referendum and creation of new Public Works/
Utility billings departments.)
(5) The establishment of a public sanitary district, separate from
any government entity.
(6) The establishment of a privately contracted arrangement for
water and sewer services.-
(7) The establishment of a City/County cooperative extension
agreement between the County and participating municipalities.
(Would require additional staff and would depend on inter-
governmental cooperation.)
SELECTED POLICY: Carteret County Adopts Policy #3, #5, #6, and
149

If and when a need for central water and/or sewer becomes evident,
Carteret County will consider the alternatives listed above which appear
most realistic at that time.
Implementation
Through use of County zoning and other land use ordinances, plan-
ning for developments in the County should include consideration of
water and sewage needs and the necessity of the County providing such
services.
SECTION 2.3.2 PACKAGE TREATMENT PLANTS
The feasibility of providing public sewer treatment facilities to
serve areas expected to experience development along Bogue Sound and the
White Oak River is quite low. However, Bogue Sound has already begun to
attract higher quality developments which will be served by package
treatment plants, or possibly central sewer. Because package treatment
plants are "left" to homeowners associations for maintenance, and
because they appear to have a life capacity limited to 10 to 15 years,
the County should consider methods to ensure that these systems function
properly and do not pose a threat to the County's sensitive environment.
Looking to the future, a report prepared for the Town of Emerald
Isle suggested that the municipality establish requirements for package
treatment plants that would standardize the components used in systems,
making it easier and more affordable for the Town to link individual
treatment plants. This suggestion would be applicable to Carteret
County as well.
150

Policy Alternatives
(1) Carteret County should establish standards for the dedication
of package treatment plant systems to homeowners associations
which provide accountability for the maintenance of such systems.
(Amend group housing, mobile home park ordinances.)
(2) The County should consider establishing standardized requirements
for package treatment plants in order to make individual units
compatible in a linked sewage treatment system.
(3) Where feasible, large residential developments should be encouraged
to tie into existing central sewer facilities. (Minor amendment
to existing subdivision regulations.)
SELECTION POLICY: Carteret County Adopts Policy V1 and #3.
SECTION 2.3.3 TRANSPORTATION
Specific transportation issues are discussed in detail in Section
1.6.2, Constraints: Capacity of Community Facilities: Transportation.
The issues and their policy alternatives are described below.
1. Third Bogue Banks Bridge: Policy Alternatives
The County can either support the construction of a
third bridge to Bogue Banks, oppose it, or remain neutral.
SELECTED POLICY: Carteret County continues to support construction
of Third Bridge to Bogue Banks.
151

2. White Oak River/N.C. 24 Bridge: Policy Alternatives
The County can request that DOT replace the bridge,
that DOT put the bridge replacement on a study list, or
remain neutral.
SELECTED POLICY: Carteret County continues to support the re-
placement Bridge over the White Oak River..
3. Core Creek Bridge Replacement: Policy Alternatives
The County can recommend to DOT that -the bridge be
replaced, that the bridge replacement be put on a DOT
study list, or remain neutral.
SELECTED POLICY:
Carteret County continues to support the re-
placement Bridge over Core Creek.
4. Beaufort -Morehead City Airport
The Beaufort -Morehead City Airport is of strategic
importance because of its proximity to the State Port
and the Bogue Banks area. The potential for OCS explo-
ration and activity may increase this importance. How-
ever, the airport is becoming increasingly surrounded by
residential development and some approach paths lie directly
over heavily populated areas in the Town of Beaufort.
152

Policy Alternatives
(1) Carteret County recognizes that existing conditions
regarding the location and level of activity of the
Beaufort -Morehead Airport may pose some degree of safety
hazard and inconvenience, and supports efforts to improve
the safety and minimize noise and hazard considerations.
(2) The County strongly supports the upgrading of equipment
and facilities at the Beaufort -Morehead City Airport.
The County Government recognizes the importance of the
Airport to the economic viability of Carteret County.
SELECTED POLICY: Carteret County Adopts Policy ail and #2.
5. Major Thoroughfares Development:
It is generally agreed that the overwhelming importance
of Carteret County's few major thoroughfares to its transpor-
tation system and economy, dictate that safety hazards be
minimized, conflicting land uses avoided, and that carrying
capacities not be exceeded. There are a number of ways to
achieve these goals.
Policy Alternatives
(1) Institute zoning regulations in those areas described in
Section 1.6.2(6) and not presently zoned;
(2) Strongly encourage the State Department of Transportation
to develop a limited access frontage road plan for U.S.
70 from Newport to Morehead City.
(3) Consider the adoption of access standards affecting all
subdivisions of two (2) or more parcels along major
thoroughfares (U.S. 70, NC 24, NC 58 and NC 101)
153

(4) Develop an off -premise sign control ordinance to regulate
safety, health and adverse community appearance; and
(5) Petition the State Department of Transportation to
develop a comprehensive major thoroughfare plan for
Carteret County.
(6) Develop a new ordinance and/or modify existing ordinances
to require screening along strip development.
SELECTED POLICY:
#6.
Carteret County Adopts Policy #2, #3, #4, 1/5, and
6. Navigable Waterways: Policy Alternatives
Commercial. use of Carteret County's waters provides a
valuable and important part to the County's economy. There
are over 1,500 licensed commercial fishing vessels in the
County. In addition, the Intra-Coastal Waterway runs through
the County and a major port is located in Morehead City.
The County and Army Corps of Engineers dredge and main-
tain several channels and harbors in the County. These in-
clude the Port Channel and Turning Basin, Bulkhead Channel,
Gallants Channel, Morgan Creek, Brown's Island and the Cape
Lookout Channel. In addition, the County Harbor Authority
oversees the operation of several Harbors of Refuge in the
County. These are Cedar Island, Atlantic, Beaufort Harbor,
Harker's Island, Salter Path and Sea Level. The Harbor
Authority strives to achieve self-sufficient, environmentally
sound harbors that best serve the needs of the community.
Another water use problem in Carteret County is the issue
of siltation of the White Oak River. In recent years the
154

White Oak River Channel near the mouth of the River
(in the Swansboro — Cedar Point area) has become in-
creasingly narrow and shallow and thus more difficult
and dangerous for fishing vessels to negotiate.
A recent study of the areas funded by the State of
North Carolina determined that the siltation was appar-
ently caused by the movement of small particles (sand
up the River) in conjunction with natural wave action
associated with the movement and erosion of the barrier
islands in the area. It is suspected that the location
of the Hwy. 24 bridge may have some influence on this
problem.
SELECTED POLICY: Carteret County continues to support Harbors
or refuge and maintenance dredging of existing channels and to en-
courage environmentally -acceptable means to improve the Waterway
System.
Implementation
The County Harbor Authority has prime responsibility for over-
seeing the maintenance of County harbor waters. The Board of Com-
missioners will provide review and provide input as appropriate to
the Army Corps of Engineers and the Authority's proposals.
155

SECTION 2.3.4 SOLID WASTE
Issue Discussion
Carteret County operates the community's only landfill. It is also
utilized by all municipalities. Residents in unincorporated areas use
the services of private contractors and an extensive green box system
operated by the County. The County landfill is the final disposal
location of all of these waste collection systems as well as for the
building rubble and stumps that are generated as urban development
proceeds in the County. The present landfill has just opened and is
located on a 137-acre tract owned by the National Forest Service
(Croatan National Forest). The new facility is expected to last ten
years.
Policy Alternatives
(1) Establish compactor -transfer stations to reduce solid waste bulk
entering the landfill and reduce the volume of traffic to and from
the landfill.
a. throughout unincorporated Carteret County (major capital
expenditure), or
b. in the most highly populated areas of the County, adding
additional stations in less populated areas as needs increase.
(Major capital expenditures over time.)
(2) Implement a resource recovery program to remove ferrous and non-
ferrous metals, glass and newsprint from the solid waste stream.
(3) Encourage private enterprises to institute recycling programs to
reduce the quantity of metals and glass discarded.
SELECTED POLICY: Carteret County Adopts Policy #1, #2, and #3.
156
1

SECTION 2.3.5 EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES
As the County's population increases, there will be a subsequent
rise in the number of school age children. Higher seasonal and year-
round populations will create a demand for increased services, and new
employees will be drawn into the area, many of them with school -age
children. The County School Board should anticipate an upward shift in
enrollments in the next decade.
Policy Alternatives
Carteret County can begin planning now for additional enrollments
by considering the most desirable methods of funding additional class-
room space. The County and State school planners should follow school
enrollments closely over the next few years to determine the extent of
the growth' trend, and to determine suitable locations for new schools.
SECTION 2.3.6 DRAINAGE
Almost all new residential development in Carteret County will tend
to locate along waterways -- Core Creek, the Newport River estuary,
Bogue Sound and the White Oak River. The most significant environmental
impact of such water -oriented development will be the results of storm -
water runoff. The County currently has no drainage standards for resi-
dential development. If surface water quality is to be protected in
areas expected to receive residential development, .drainage standards
whch slow the rate of flow and allow runoff to reduce its pollutant load
before draining into surface waters are a high priority.
157

Policy Alternatives
(1) Carteret County should consider establishing stormwater runoff
standards for new residential and commercial development, particu-
larly in close proximity to estuarine waters and drainage ways.
Requiring stormwater runoff controls on new residential and commer-
cial developments will reduce the need for publicly financed drain-
age improvements as well. Standards for new -residential and com-
mercial developments should maintain existing drainage patterns.
(Expand existing subdivision regulations to include drainage stan-
dards or pass new ordinance.)
(2) Carteret County should consider prohibiting residential development
with the 75-foot estuarine shoreline setback (see Section 2.1.1(e),
Policy Alternatives).
(3) Carteret County should discuss with N.C. Division of Environmental
Management its present authority and ability to regulate runoff
from urban development.
SELECTED POLICY:
Carteret County Adopts Policy #1 and #3.
SECTION 2.3.7 BEACH AND WATER ACCESS
Carteret County has experienced a rapid growth in tourism in recent
years. This growth has put added pressure on the existing water recre-
ation access points in the county. Boaters, fishing enthusiasts, swim-
mers and others all need access points to both the beach, sounds, and
rivers.
Most potential access points to beaches in the County are under the
jurisdiction of incorporated municipalities (Atlantic Beach, Indian
Beach, Pine Knoll Shores and Emerald Isle) or within the Cape Lookout
158

National Seashore Park. Therefore, the County has very little authority
or jurisdiction in the matter of beach access, although two small areas
on Bogue Banks are still unincorporated.
However, the County does have an interest in promoting access to
the sounds and rivers. The County Parks and Recreation Master Develop-
ment Plan outlined several potential access for site development.
As is the case with commercial boating, the recreational use of the
County's waters for fishing, sailing, skin diving, skiing and general
boating is an important part of the overall tourism business. Over
5,700 private boats are licensed in Carteret County; in addition, during
summer months many more boats are brought into the County from other
areas.
Another aspect of .recreational water use are the charter fishing
and sightseeing boats. Most of these are based on Morehead City and
provide fishing excusions to- ocean fishing areas. Several fishing
tournaments are held throughout the year; most notably the King Mackeral
and Blue Marlin Tournments.
Public access points for recreational boats are extremely limited.
Another policy section of this Plan addresses the issue of sound and
beach access.
Policy Alternatives
(1) Revise the Subdivision Ordinance to require the dedication of
frontage for water -access on new subdivisions with frontage of k
mile or greater on the water;
(2) Inventory existing unused public land with water frontage to deter-
mine its suitability for a water access facility;
159

(3) Conduct a feasibility study to determine the appropriateness of
developing a water access site at:
a. The spoils site on the north side of U.S. 70 along the
Beaufort -Morehead City Causeway.
(4) Seek grant funds from the State of North Carolina to develop sound
and river access points;
(5) Examine the suitability of developing access points on land under
County jurisdiction on Bogue Banks.
SELECTED POLICY: Carteret County Adopts Policy #2, #3, #4, and #5.
Implementation
The County would pursue the implementation of these policies with
three basic tools; first, continued enforcement of the County Subdi-
vision Regulations requiring dedication of public access points in new
subdivisions with water frontage; second, the County Parks ,and Recre-
ation Department will support the development of sites in accordance
with the County Parks and Recreation Master Plan; and the County will
seek grant funds (if and when they become available) from the State of
North Carolina for the development of sound access points.
SECTION 2.3.8 NATIONAL SEASHORE DEVELOPMENT
The Federal Government, through the Department of Interior's
National Park Service, is in the process of developing the Cape Lookout
National Seashore. The National Seashore will be located on the essen-
tially undeveloped barrier islands known as Shackleford Banks, Core
Banks and Portsmouth Island. The National Seashore's Headquarters will
be located on the eastern portion of Harker's Island.
160
1 ',

Once the Seashore project is fully developed by the National
Park Service it is anticipated that 100,000 to 150,000 persons
will visit annually for fishing, camping and a wilderness experience.
These visitors will travel to the National Seashore on existing or
potential future ferry service from Harker's Island,Davi.S and
Atlantic.
There is currently relatively little tourist -related commercial
development in Eastern Carteret County. It is anticipated by
National Park Service personnel that as the National Seashore
develops and visitation increases, campgrounds, gift shops, motels .
and other commercial tourist -related development will occur. Likely
areas for this development are Harker's Island, Davis, Atlantic,
Cedar Island, Harshallberg and Sea Level.
Policy Alternatives
The Cape Lookout National Seashore potentially can have a
very significant impact on the economy and development of Carteret
County. An alternative to the policy suggested below would be to
remain neutral, not plan for its development and not anticipate what
type of demands the Seashore and its -visitors may have on the County.
This alternative was deemed to be inappropriate considering the County's
commitment to land use planning and tourism promotion and development.

1�7
SELECTED POLICY:
Carteret County will continue to acknowledge and
support the presence of the park as a natural resource to be appreciated
and enjoyed by residents and visitors alike.
Implementation
The County Board of Commissioners, County Planning Commission,
County Economic Development Council and Chamber of Commerce all will
continue to work in concert wth the National Park Service to assure that
the Seashore's assets to the County are maximized and negative impacts
avoided where possible.
SECTION 2.3.9 MILITARY ACTIVITY
Issue Discussion
The military is an important aspect of life in Carteret County.
The Marine Corps Air Station in Cherry Point in Craven County employs
about 1,500 Carteret Countians in civilian positions (including the
Naval Air Re -work Facility). There are a sizable number of military
facilities in the County including Bogue Air Field, Atlantic Air Field,
the Coast Guard Stations at Emerald Isle and near Ft. Macon. Camp
Lejeune, home,to over 40,000 military personnel, is located in neighbor-
ing Onslow County.
One of the most significant or visible aspects of the military'-s
presence in the County are aircraft training flights. Low level flights
adjacent to urbanized areas often present conflicts; this issue is
particularly troublesome because often the urban development occurred
after the location of the Air Field was established.
162

�J
To address this issue the Department of Navy has developed an Air
Installation Compatibility Use Zone (AICUZ) Program. The overall pur-
pose of the AICUZ is to protect the mission of the air installation and
at the same time give consideration to the welfare of the community.
Essentially, the AICUZ designates geographic areas or "zones" where
certain types of land development should be restricted. Only a small
portion of Carteret County adjacent to the MCAS - Cherry Point is
"AICUZ - zoned". For the most part these zones are isolated unsettled
areas in the Croatan National Forest.
More densely populated areas around Bogue Field including the Towns
of Emerald Isle and Cape Carteret - do have areas designated for re-
stricted land development; Atlantic Field (located near the community of
Atlantic) was not included in the AICUZ because only a few rotary wing
aircraft use the field.
Recent crashes (including one in Morehead City resulting in one
death) have stimulated public concern over military flight activity.
Local government representatives of Carteret County, Morehead City and
Cape Carteret, among others, have met intensively with their military
counterparts regarding the issue of approach paths over populated areas.
The U.S. Marine Corps is investigating the establishment of a
Harrier Jet Aircraft training facility in Jones County.
Other points at issue include possible incompatibility of land uses
near air fields (both military and non-military) and night flights
(particularly at Bogue Field).
163

Policy Alternatives
While it is recognized that national security interests take prece-
dence over local policy when conflicts occur, the following alternatives
are options for the formal expression of County policy preferences.
(1) Request that the military services using air fields in and
around Carteret County restrict air flights over populated
areas, including isolated communities such as Smyrna and
Atlantic.
(2) Establish a policy opposing any further expansion of either
Bogue or Atlantic air fields.
(3) Classify land in hazardous or noisy areas (as determined by
the County) around the airfields in low intensity land classi-
fications, such as Rural, Community or Conservation, and
establish a policy prohibiting the reclassification of such
lands as either Developed or Transition. Consider formal
zoning of such areas to reflect this policy.
(4) Establish`a policy requesting the phasing out of Bogue Field
as area population increases.
(5) Recommend that an 11 p.m. curfew be established at Bogue and
Atlantic airfields for night training flights.
(6) County officials will continue to work with representative, of
the military to establish further safety policies.
SELECTED POLICY: Carteret County Adopts Policy #3 and #6.
Camp Lejeune, in nearby Onslow County, is home to over 40,000
military personnel troops and equipment are transported through the SPA
at Morehead City, resulting in, at times, heavy military use of U.S. 70
164 r�

and N.C. 24. These impacts may increase if the planned Department of
Defense Decontamination Facility is established on Radio Island.
Policy Alternatives
(1) Carteret County should request that NCDOT conduct an analysis of
military and civilian traffic volumes on N.C. 24.
(2) Carteret County officials should, in conjunction with their mili-
tary counterparts, establish a policy or policies on military
vehicular movement in Carteret County.
SELECTED POLICY: Carteret County Adopts Policy #1 and #2.
SECTION 2.3.10 OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF (OCS) EXPLORATION
Plans have been announced by several oil companies to conduct
exploratory drilling for oil and gas off the Coast of North Carolina.
At the time of the preparation of this plan the three sites nearest to
Carteret County most likely to be used for drilling are 38 miles east of
Cape Hatteras (leased by Chervon, 49 miles east of Cape Lookout (leased
by Arco) and 40 miles southeast of Wilmington (leased by Gulf). It is
generally 'anticipated that land support facilities for the North
Carolina off -shore exploration will be based in the Morehead City -
Beaufort area.
Environmental Review (ER) prepared in conjunction with the planted
exploration described the expected onshore impacts. It should be noted
that activities described in the ER, and briefly recounted here, deal
only with the exploration activities and do not address potential
impacts should a major find be made. The nature and magnitude of any
onshore activities as the result of a major find are not possible to
165

predict at this time.. Unforeseen variables such as the world oil
market, the size of the find and whether it is oil or gas can have an
impact on such onshore facilities.
A report entitled Outer Continental Shelf Development and the North
Carolina Coast: A Guide for Local Planners (funded by the Coastal
Energy Impact Program) (CEIP) describes anticipated impacts of OCS
activities on Coastal communities and suggests ways that local govern -
meats can best deal with these impacts. There are several key points of
interest listed in the CEIP report and repeated here for informational
purposes.
1. Since 1974, the Department of the Interior has operated under
an accelerated program of leasing to permit oil and gas ex-
ploration of the Outer Continental Shelf.
2. No reliable analysis of the impacts of OCS Development (beyond
the exploratory phase) are possible until discovery of econom-
ically recoverable oil and/or gas resources and identification
characteristics.
3. The greatest amount of offshore activity, and thus the great-
est potential for onshore impacts, is during the field devel-
opment stage.
4. Staging and support facilities tend to cluster in developed
harbors, providing employment and added business while often
producing moderate environmental effects and conflicting with
existing harbor uses.
5. The scope and impacts of OCS activity will vary from region to
region, depending on whether the region has established off-
shore activity (as in the Central and Western Gulf of Mexico,
and the Southern California area) or is a "frontier" region
(as in the North Atlantic and the South Atlantic areas),
whether the communities for onshore sites are urbanized or
rural, and the characteristics of existing economic activity
and area environmental conditions.
6. After a commercially valuable oil and/or gas find is made, one
of the critical questions is how to transport it to shore.
7. The need for large-scale facilities (oil refineries, platform
fabrication yards, and petrochemical complexes) depends on a
166

r;
complex array of worldwide market factors rather than the
development of a specific lease area.
Local governments face many challenges in attempting to prepare for
OCS impacts. Principally these are the provision of public services,
the availability of adequate facilities properly situated and housing.
It is important that lines of communication be established and main-
tained between the offshore industry, the local government and the
general public.
Policy Alternatives
(1) A Local OCS Management Task Force should be established to work
with the Oil and Gas Industry. The principal purposes of this
Local Task Force should be to:
a. Assess the likely impacts of proposed OCS activities on local
governments;
b. Suggest to local governments techniques they may use to best
manage such development; and
C. Act as a conduit between oil and gas companies, local govern-
ments and the general public.
d. Pursue actions oil and gas companies could take to mitigate
the effects of OCS development.
(2) The local governments of Atlantic Beach, Morehead City, Beaufort
and Carteret County should have representation on this Task Force.
In addition, representatives of the Economic Development Council,
the Division of Coastal Management, Chamber of Commerce, Division of
Marine Affairs and local citizens with special knowledge on ex-
perience in OCS should be appointed.
167

(3) The Task Force should be established with the onset of significant
exploratory activity.
SELECTED POLICY•
Carteret County Adopts Policy #1 and #2.
SECTION 2.3.11 PORT DEVELOPMENT
A proposal, in late 1981, for development of a coal storage and
loading facility on Radio Island sparked opposition from interested
parties in the County. The lack of adequate rail access, the potential
environmental problems associated with coal and an inappropriate land
classification led to the preparation of an Area Development Plan for
Radio Island. The ADP was reviewed and approved by a Task Force ap-
pointed by the Governor representing Atlantic Beach, Morehead City,
Beaufort, Carteret County, the State Department of Commerce, Natural
Resources & Community Development and the. Department of Transportation.
The Task Force recommended that Radio Island be reclassified to a
rural -port classification and that the County's Zoning Ordinance be
strengthened to give more control over development on the Island. The
Island has been zoned "Port -Industrial" since 1962; an indication of the
County's longstanding intent to have the Island developed for some type
of port -related industrial use.
As part of its study of the Radio Island issue, the Task Force also
oversaw a study of rail transportation problems associated with the
movement of large quantities of bulk goods through the SPA. A study of
the problem by the N.C. Department of Transportation concluded that the
movement of in excess of three million tons of coal per year through
Morehead City would cause serious delays and interruptions to the com-
munity that simply were not acceptable. The N.C. DOT study suggested
168

that some type of pipeline slurry of coal through Morehead City would be
more acceptable. This pipeline would terminate at the SPA site and thus
"free" Radio Island for other uses.
After the Task Force's Area Development Plan and Transportation
Study, the Carteret County Planning Commission has amended the Zoning
Ordinance -to allow the County greater control over industrial develop -
meat on Radio Island.
The new amendment to the Zoning Ordinance establishes procedures
and requirements for a [gartaatOly Special Use Permit within the Port -
Industrial District (Radio Island). In order to obtain a Special Use
Permit, the Board of Commissioners must make the following findings
regarding the proposed industrial use:
(a) That the Special Use will not materially endanger the public
health, public safety, adjacent water and air resources or
environment if located -where proposed and developed according
to the plan as submitted and approved; and
(b) That the Special Use meets all the requirements, conditions
and specifications of this ordinance; and
(c) That the use will not substantially injure the value of ad-
joining or abutting property, or that the- use is a public
necessity; and
(d) 'That the location and character of the use if developed
according to the plan as submitted and approved will be in
harmony with the area in which it is to be located and in
general conformity with the plan of development of the zoning
district and its environments; and
(e) That either adequate water, sewer and safety equipment and
facilities are either present or are proposed and will be
constructed to adequately provide for and protect the adjoin-
ing areas; and
(f) That adequate public or private transportation means and
facilities are present at or near the site or are proposed and
will be carried out by or on behalf of the applicant to serve
the site and the activities and uses on the site so as not to
endanger the safety or unduly disrupt the normal activities of
169 1

nearby property owners or the citizens of nearby communities
through which the transportation system must pass; and
(g) The proposed use would not have an adverse environmental
impact on water and air resources.
Policy Alternatives
(1) Carteret County will continue to enforce the provisions of its
Port -Industrial Special Use Permit requirements, and if necessary,
further refine them to ensure the public health, welfare and safety
of its citizens.
(2) The County should consider re-establishing the Radio Island Task
Force, or establishing a new task force, to deal with ongoing
issues related to port development.
SELECTED POLICY:
Carteret County Adopts Policy J11.
SECTION 2.3.12 SEASONAL POPULATION EXTREMES
Carteret Countyhas developed into a major tourist destination
point for people seeking to enjoy water -related recreational activities.
Much of this growth has occurred in the last five (5) years. Estimates
by the County Economic Development Council (EDC) set the total visita-
tion at about 1.75 million, mostly from late April to Labor Day.
Many of these visitors rent or own housing in the County. There
are approximately 3,000 condominiums complete or under construction
(with others still in the planning stages) and over 5,000.mobile homes
in the County. Seventy-five percent of the existing or under construc-
tion condominiums are on Bogue Banks (in the Towns of Emerald Isle, Pine
Knoll Shores, Atlantic Beach and Indian Beach). Atlantic Beach alone
has 700 mobile homes.
170

When analyzed, seasonal population increases within a community
have both positive and negative impacts. On the positive side, of
course, is the expenditure of money for goods and services (and subse-
quent sales tax revenue for the local government), employment of people
in recreational and tourism business and with the exception of traffic
congestion related problems the negative impacts on public services
appear to be minimal. Traffic congestion and the high cost of living
are the most critical of problems associated with the seasonal tourist
population. Congestion is not only a nuisance to the general public,
but more importantly .presents a real danger when emergency situations
arise.
In addition, visitation to the Emergency Room at Carteret General
Hospital is increased during the summer .months and the demands on the
beach community's reserve and emergency services is increased. Criminal
Court case loads and Jail population are also increased due to the
increased activity.
The new County Civic Center is expected to benefit from the sea-
sonal population growth as well as generate "off-season" tourist and
convention visitations.
Policy Alternatives
(1) Carteret County will continue to address the effects of seasonal
population extremes through its efforts to improve, or to seek the
improvement of:
a. crucial transportation linkages such as bridges, and major
thoroughfares (see alternative policies in Section 2.3.3 and
discussion in Section 1.6.2),
b. beach and water access facilities (see alternative policies in
Section 2.3.7),_and
171

C. county services and county -related services experiencing
direct impacts from seasonal population extremes, such as
emergency hospital care (see Sections 1.6.6 and 1.6.9).
(2) The County will strive to manage tourist, seasonal and second home
development to assure environmentally sound growth (reference:
Group Housing Ordinance, Land Protection Ordinance, Beach Access
Ordinance, Mobile Home Park and Camp Park Ordinance, Hurricane
Evacuation, Hazard Mitigation and Post Disaster Plan; see Section
1.4).
(3) The County will continue to work closely with the municipalities in
the County to assure that each local government has the best possi-
ble resources to meet the needs of tourist/seasonal development.
SELECTED POLICY:
Carteret County Adopts Policy #1, #2 and #3.
Implementation
Coordination and inter -governmental communication is an integral
part of implementation of this policy. Tourist and visitors cross
numerous jurisdictional boundaries in their visits to the County and
thus create different challenges, opportunities or problems in,each of
these communities.
Workshops, seminars, public hearings and Board meetings are always
available to foster intergovernmental cooperation to address matters
related to the seasonal population.
SECTION 2.3.13 COMMITMENT TO STATE AND FEDERAL PROGRAMS
Overview
Carteret County has been involved in a variety of State and Federal
programs in recent years that impact the development of the County.
172

Among these are working with. the State Ports Authority, development of
the Cape Lookout National Seashore, maintenance of the Intra-Coastal
Waterway, cooperation with military facilities in the County, partici-
pation in the Federal Flood Insurance Program, the Croatan National
Forest and Outer -Continental Shelf Exploration.
Possible Policy Alternatives
Coordination between all levels of government is essential in the
implementation of resource management programs. The interwining of
jurisdictional authority and the complexity of many problems would
dictate that intergovernmental coordination and communication be con-
stantly stressed.
Policy
Commitment to State and Federal programs:
The policy of the County with regards to Federal and State programs
is to continue to support and participate in Federal and State programs
that are beneficial to the County and to question and oppose those that
are not.
Implementation
The County Manager will have primary authority for overseeing the
participation, commitment and evaluation of State and Federal Programs
which affect the local Community.
173

SECTION 2.3.14 INTER -GOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION OF GROWTH MANAGEMENT
Issue Discussion
This is a particularly complex issue to define and address.
Carteret County is among the fastest growing coastal counties, and as
such is experiencing a "boom" in recreational activity, second home
development and associated tourist -related commercial activities.
Each of the eight incorporated municipalities in Carteret County
exercises their own zoning and subdivision authority and in most cases
extraterritorial jurisdiction of zoning and subdivision regulations for
a distance of. up to one mile beyond their corporate boundaries.* Land
development decisions made in one jurisdiction clearly can impact on
other jurisdictions. This is particularly true on Bogue Banks where
four municipalities and the County have jurisdiction. Many of the
issues discussed in this Plan overlap local, State and federal jurisdic-
tional boundaries, often with "fuzzy" lines of authority or responsi-
bility.
Policy
The County Government will continue to encourage intergovernmental
cooperation to- address multi -jurisdictional growth management issues.
Implementation
There are- several mechanisms in place to assist in the implemen-
tation of this policy; first, the County Planning Commission has munici-
pal representation and secondly, there is an association of Bogue Banks
municipal officials. Other multi -jurisdictional committees have been
formed from time to time to address specific land development issues.
-� Indian Beach does not have Subdivision Regulations.
174

These include the Radio Island Task Force, the Fall of 1982 Workshop on
condominium development impacts, and the current Hurricane Evacuation,
Mitigation, and Post Disaster Plan, which involves the County and six
municipalities.
175

SECTION 2.4 CONTINUING PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
SECTION 2.4.1 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION DURING THE LAND USE UPDATE PROCESS
The Carteret County Board of Commissioners appointed an Ad Hoc
Committee to work with the Consultant and County Planner in the Update
process. Membership of the Ad Hoc Committee included the County Board
of Commissioners. The overall purpose of the Ad Hoc Committee was to
oversee the work of the Consultant, review the contents of the draft and
make recommendations to the Board of Commissioners.
Several Ad Hoc Committee meetings were held during the -preparation
of the Update. These meetings allowed the public to hear about and
comment on the Plan. In addition, a mailing list of nearly fifty inter-
ested persons or organizations was used. The Consultant made presenta-
tions; (both formally and informally) to interested groups or organiza-
tions in the County. These included the Chamber of Commerce, Economic
Development Council and a citizen environmental lobby group. Also, a
survey of public attitude toward development and planning issues were
sent to two hundred randomly selected County citizens. Results of this
survey have been incorporated within relevant policy statements. A
meeting was also held in Smyrna (co -sponsored by the Carteret Crossroads
organization) to gather comments from citizens in the eastern part of
the County. The local newspaper publicized upcoming meetings and
reported the results of the meeting.
A public forum was held on the revised Plan in Hay, 1984. This
well -attended meeting produced largely constructive suggestions, many of
which were incorporated in the plan. Subsequent public meetings were held
in October 1984 and February 1985, and many suggestions generated at these
meetings are also reflected in the plan.
`' 176

SECTION 2.4.2 CONTINUING PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
Several mechanisms exist for continued participation on issues
related to environmental planning and management in Carteret County.
The County Planning Commission reviews proposals for subdivisions and
zoning. The Board of Commissioners: from time to time addresses issues
related to development or environmental management. Board meetings are
open for public comment.
177
.1

SECTION 3.0 LAND CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
The Land Classification Map is an important part of the Land Use
Plan. It offers a visual portrayal of policies adopted by the County
and provides a tool for projecting which areas of the County should be
developed and which should be left reserved for conservation. It should
be noted that the Land Classification Map does not supersede a local
government's zoning or subdivision authority.
The following are the land classifications definitions as utilized
by the Land Classification Map.
1. Developed Areas meeting the intent of the developed classi-
fication are currently urban in character where minimal undeveloped
land remains and have in place or are scheduled for the timely
provision of the usual municipal or public services. Urban in
character includes mixed land uses such as residential, commercial,
industrial, institutional and other uses at high to moderate densi-
ties. Services include water, sewer, recreational facilities,
streets and roads, police and fire protection. In some instances
an area may not have all the traditional urban services in place,
but if it otherwise has a developed character and is scheduled for
the timely, provision of these services, it still meets the intent
of the developed classification. Areas developed for predominantly
residential purposes meet the intent of this classification if they
exhibit existing high to moderate densities such as:
(1) at or approaching a density of 500 dwelling units per
square mile, or
178

(2) are clustered at a density of three (3). or more dwelling
units per acre, or
(3) where the majority of lots are 15,000 square feet or
less, and are provided or scheduled to be provided with
the traditional urban services, and/or
(4) have permanent population densities approaching or ex-
ceeding 2000 persons per square mile and seasonal popu-
lation may swell significantly.
Local governments may subdivide the developed class into sub-
classes:
1. developed multi family residential,
2. developed single family residential,
3. developed commercial, and
4. developed industrial.
These are examples. In applying the developed class or sub-
classes the local government should discuss how, when and where it will
provide the services necessary to support the needs of an urban area.
This class is designed to illustrate urban intensity development and
services necessary to support it.
Developed - Public Lands: The purpose of this class is to desig-
nate State or Federal lands which 'meet the intent of the Developed
Classification, and to indicate the County's endorsement of present
usage.
2. Transition - The purpose. of the transition class is to provide
for future intensive urban development on lands that are.suitable
and that will be provided with the necessary urban services to
support intense urban development.
179

Areas meeting the intent of the transition classification are
presently being developed for urban purpose or will be developed in
the next five to ten years to accommodate anticipated population
and urban growth. These areas are in, or will -be in a "transition"
state of, development going from lower intensity uses to higher
intensity uses and as such will eventually require urban services.
(1) Areas classified transition will provide lands for inten-
sive urban growth when lands in the developed class are
not available. Transition lands must be able to support
urban development by being generally free of physical
limitations and be served or readily served by urban
services. Urban development includes mixed land uses
such as residential, commercial, industrial, institu-
tional, and other uses at or approaching high to moderate
densities. Urban services include water, -sewer, streets
and roads, police and fire protection that will be made
available at a time development occurs or soon there-
after. Permanent population densities in this class will
be approaching 2000 persons per square mile and seasonal
population may swell significantly.
(2) In choosing land for the Transition class, such land
should not include:
A. Areas with severe physical limitations which would
make the provision of urban services difficult or
impossible,
B. lands which meet the definition of conservation,
180

C. lands of special value (unless no other alternative
exists) such as productive and unique agricultural
lands, forest lands, potentially valuable mineral
deposits,- water supply watersheds, scenic and .
tourist resources including archaeological sites,
habitat for important wildlife species,
D. areas subject to frequent flooding,
E. areas important for environmental or scientific
values,
F. lands where urban development might destroy or
damage natural systems or process of more than local
concern, and
G. lands where intense development might result in
undue risk to life and property from natural or
existing man-made hazards.
(3) If any designated area of environmental concern is class-
ified transition.a definitive explanation shall be in-
cluded stating why the area is felt to be appropriate for
high density development.
(4) Predominantly residential areas which meet or will meet
the intent of the transition classification if it exhib-
its characteristics such as:
A. are at or are approaching a density of 500 dwelling
units per square mile, or
B. are clustered at a density which will meet or exceed
three dwelling units per acre, or

C. are where the majority of lots are 15,000 square
feet or less and which are provided with or will be
provided with the necessary urban services to sup-
port high intensity development, and
D. in most cases the Transition class will be adjacent
or contiguous to the Developed class.
The developed or transition classes and subclasses should be the
only areas under active consideration by the local government for in-
tensive urban development .requiring urban services. In applying the
transition class or subclasses the local government should describe how,
when and where it will provide services necessary to support the needs
of this intense land class. If the local government intends to allow
the private provision of urban services such as sewage package treatment
systems, community water systems, private or rural fire protection,
private garbage pick up, etc. then the local government should also
discuss how it will ensure these private services will be provided so as
to avoid unnecessary future public expenses. This class is designed to
illustrate emerging and developing urban areas and to help local govern-
ments ensure adequate urban services will be provided to support such
development.
A. Transition - Residential: This subclass designates
lands which meet the criteria for the transition
class land which are presently being developed or are
expected to be developed in the next five to ten
years primarily for residential purposes. Public
services normally provided to such areas will in-
clude, at minimum, law enforcement, fire protection,
182

solid waste disposal, and road maintenance. Private
services would normally include, at minimum, water;
sewage disposal (septic tank, package treatment, or
central sewer - see Sections 2.3.1 and 2.3.2); and
in some cases solid waste disposal.
B. Transition Commercial: This subclass designates
lands which meet the criteria for the transition
class and which are presently being developed or are
expected to be developed in the next five to ten
years primarily for commercial purposes. Public
services normally provided to such areas will in-
clude, at minimum, law enforcement, fire protection,
solid waste disposal, and road maintenance. Private
services include, at minimum, -water; sewage disposal
(septic tank, package treatment plant, or central
sewer - see Sections 2.3.1 and 2.3.2); and in some
cases solid waste disposal.
3. Community - The purpose of the community class is to provide
for clustered, mixed land uses at low densities to help meet the
housing, shopping, employment and other needs in rural areas.
Areas meeting the intent of the community class are presently
developed at low densities which are suitable for private septic
use. These areas are clustered residential and/or commercial land
uses which provide both low intensity shopping and housing
opportunities and provide a local social sense of a "community".
Very limited municipal type services such as fire protection and
community water may be available, but municipal sewer type systems
183

are not to be provided as a catalyst for future development.. In
some unusual cases sewer systems may be possible, but only to
correct an existing or projected public health hazard. Areas
developed at low density in a cluster meet the intent of the com-
munity class if they exhibit characteristics such as:
A. Where densities are less than or at 500 dwellings per
square mile, or
B. Where few residential development densities meet or
exceed three (3) dwellings per acre, or
C. where most residential lot sizes are 15,000 square feet
or greater, and/or
D. population densities will be low, such as 640 persons per
square mile (one per acre).
It should be stressed that the community class applies to
clustered low intensity development in a rural landscape. This
development is usually associated with crossroads in counties.
Some "communities" may have or may require municipal type services
to avert an existing or anticipated health problem. Even though
limited services may be available, these areas should not be shown
in the higher intensity land classes, as the major characteristic
which distinguishes community with limited services from the de-
veloped and transition classes in that services are not provided to
stimulate intense development in a rural setting, but rather to
neutralize or avert health problems. Due to the small size of most
communities they will appear as small areas in a dispersed pattern
on the county land classification map. This class illustrates
small, dispersed groupings of housing and commercial land uses in a
rural landscape.
184

4. Rural - The purpose of the rural class is to provide for
agriculture, forestry, mineral extraction and various other low
intensity uses on large sites including low density dispersed
residential uses where urban services are not and will not be
required. Any development in this class should be compatible with
resource production and should not significantly impair or perma-
nently alter natural resources.
A. Rural/Residential The purpose of this class is to
provide for low density, single family uses within rural
areas where lot sizes are large and where denities do not
require the provision of urban type services. Private
septic tanks and wells are the primary onsite services
available to support residential development, but fire,
rescue squad and sheriff protection may also be
available.
B. Rural/Port - The rural/port classification is used to
identify areas that are appropriate for development for
port or water -related facilities and that will not re-
quire the provision of public services such as water and
sewer. Light manufacturing and transportation -related
facilities would also be appropriated uses in this class-
ification. Potentially "heavy polluting" or dangerous
uses, such as oil refineries or liquified gas terminals,
are not appropriate in this land class, -but may be appro-
priate in Transition or Developed areas where adequate
public services are available to deal with their po-
tential problems.
185 ,;.

C. Rural/Agricultural - The purpose of this .class is to
retain significant agricultural and forestry resources in
their productive states. Any development in this .class
.should be compatible with resource production and should
not significantly impair or permanently alter natural
resources. Areas meeting the intent of this classifi-
cation are appropriate for or are presently used for
agriculture, forestry and similar allied uses. Very low
density dispersed, single family residential uses may be
found in such areas, but population densities will be
very low, Iess than one person per acre.
D. Rural/Agricultural - Public Lands: . The purpose of this
class is to designate state or federal lands which meet
the intent of the Rural/Agricultural land classification
and to indicate the County's endorsement of present
usage.
5. Conservation - The purpose of the conservation class is to
provide for the effective long-term management and protection of
significant, limited, or irreplaceable areas. Management is needed
due to the natural, cultural, recreational, scenic or natural
productive values of both local and more than local concern.
-Areas meeting the intent of this classification include:
(1) AEC's, including but not limited to public trust waters,
estuarine waters, coastal wetlands, etc. as identified in
15 NCAC 7H;
(2) other similar lands, environmentally significant because
of their natural role in the integrity of the coastal
186

region and include but are not limited to bottom land
hardwoods, pocosins, swamp forests, areas that are or
have a high probability of providing wildlife habitat,
forest lands that are essentially undeveloped and lands
which otherwise contain significant productive, natural,
scenic or recreational resources.
The conservation class is designed to illustrate the natural,
productive, scenic, and recreational features of the coastal zones
which make the region a desirable place in which to live, work and
visit. As such the conservation class should be applied to areas
that because of their unique, productive, limited or natural feat-
ures should be either not developed at all (preserved) or if devel-
oped, done so in an extremely limited and cautious fashion. Urban
services, public or private, should not be provided in these areas
as a catalyst to stimulate intense development. In most cases
limited onsite services will adequately support any limited devel-
opment within this class and will also protect the very features
which justify the area's inclusion,in the conservation classifica-
tion. Mapping of AEC's in the conservation class on the local
government's land classification map should be accomplished with
the understanding that AEC' are intensively defined by their char-
acteristics in 15 NCAC 7H, and -therefore maps only indicate approx-
imate locations and are not definitive enough for site specific
regulation purposes. Policy development in the land use plan
should acknowledge the intent of this class and policies should be
consistent with, the function of areas shown in the conservation
class. All sound islands not shown otherwise are in the Conser-
vation classification.
187

A. Conservation - Public Lands: The purpose of this class
is to 'designate State or federal lands which meet the
intent of the conservation classification and to indicate
the County's endorsement of present usage.
It should be noted that each of the incorporated municipalities in
Carteret County, including Emerald Isle, Atlantic Beach, Newport,
Morehead City, Beaufort, Pine Knoll Shores, Indian Beach and Cape
Carteret have their own CAMA Plans. Land Classification information for
their communities is not included on this land classification map.
Relationship of Policies & Land Classification System
The major policy statements in this Plan reflect .the County's
interests and concern in the critical development and environmental
issues facing Carteret County. Many policy alternatives reference land
classification, and the final form of the land classification map will
reflect policy decisions on issues as diverse as military aircraft
activity and fragile areas identification. Because of the scale of the
land classification map, an attempt has been made to describe the class-
ification of certain crucial areas in the text of the plan.
188

o
• i• V l C 0 S O Y M O
N E U S E
4
CN+
o , 0
•�'` ,� ,
`\\ \\\\• S � oO ® YUN/ClPI[ ./UR/SC/C7:CN
c o u ■ r • \\ - DE ✓ELOPED - P:/91/c L•
t- a a V t ■ ® LAWS
' I
R \\ 0 • `A
\\ \V -X.
\
\ \ \\\ RA"T
\\\\\\ \
RA \\\\\\\ ,,\\\ \\\ \\.. \ •
3 L O r \\� \\\\\ \. \�.. ' •�•
c o to r r rdop
. o
0
D
e
M F[
4
..I • � Yat91M tF.ra
� r0
ArLANr1C OCEAN
PREPARED BY: A. TAYLOR, R.
:.7 -PANS!'/CNAL COvrEOC/.11
CowwuN/Tr
RURAL R£S/DENTltL
F A RURAL IGR/CULTURE
OCEA N ® PORT
CCNS£R✓Arlo&
NOTE: All ocean beacbsa are in the
conservation classification. All
sound Islands not specifically
designated transition, community.
Or rural are in t-M conservation
classification.
CARTERET COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
LAND CLASSIFICATION MAP
MAP 11 Page 189

LISTING OF STATE AND FEDERAL REGULATIONS
I. STATE LAWS
A. Statutes Directly Regulating Land or Water Resources Use
(1. Criminal Provisions)
G.S. 14-128.1 Unauthorized taking, etc., of certain ornamental
plants from lands of another
G.S. 14-129 Taking off wild plants from lands of another
G.S. 14-129.1 Selling or bartering of Venus Fly Trap
G.S. 14-130 Trespass on public lands
G.S. 14-131 Trespass on land under option by the
Federal Government
G.S. 14-133 Erecting artificial islands and lumps in
public waters
G.S. 14-134.1 Depositing trash, garbage, etc., on lands of
another or in waters of the State
(2. General Regulations)
G.S. 68-42 et seq. Stock along Outer Banks
G.S. 74-39 et seq. Mining Registration Act of 1969
G.S. 74-46 et seq. Mining Act of 1971
G.S. 76-40 Obstruction of Navigable Waters
G.S. 77-12, 13, 14 Obstruction in Streams
G.S. 87-81 N.C. Well Construction Act
G.S. 104 B-3 Protection of Sand Dunes along Outer Banks
et seq.
G.S. 143-211.11 Regulation of use of Water Resources
et seq.
G.S. 113-202 Leases of oyster and clam bottoms
G.S. 113-24 Protection of Waterfowl food growing in
public waters

(Statutes Directly Regulating Land or Water Resources Use, con'd)
G.S. 113-229 Permits to dredge or fill in estuarine
waters or state-owned lakes
G.S. 113-230 Orders to control activities in coastal
wetlands
Chapter 130
Article
13D
N.C. Drinking Water Act
G.S.
113-378
Oil and Gas Conservation
et seq.
G.S.
113A-30
Natural and Scenic Rivers Act of 1971
et seq.
G.S.
113A-50
Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of .1973
et seq.
G.S.
113A-100
Coastal Area Management
et seq.
G.S.
130-157
Water and Sewer Sanitation
et seq.
G.S.
130-166.22
Ground Absorption Sewage Disposal System
Act of 1973
G.S.
136-141
Junkyard Control Act
et seq.
G.S.
139-1 et seq.
Soil and Water Conservation Districts
G.S.
139-47
Watershed improvement or drainage projects -
procedures
G.S.
143-214.1
Water Quality Standards
G.S.
143-214.2
Prohibited Discharges
G.S.
143-215
Effluent Standards
G.S.
143-215.1
Control of Sources of Water Pollution;
permits required
G.S.
143-215.51
Floodway Regulation
et seq.
G.S.
143-215.63
Water and Air Quality Reporting Act of 1971
et seq.
G.S.
143-215.77
Oil Pollution Control Act of 1973
et seq.
191

(Statutes Directly Regulating Land or Water Resources Use, con'd)
G.S. 143-215.105 Air Pollution Control
et seq.
G.S. 143-350 Environmental Management Commission
et seq.
G.S. 143-434 Pesticide Control
et seq.
B.
G.S. 156-1 to Drainage of Land
156-138.4
Statutes Indirectly Regulating Land or Water Resources Use
G.S. 90A-20 Certification of Water Treatment
et seq. Facility Operators
G.S. 90A-35 Certification of Wastewater Treatment
et seq. Plant Operators
G.S.
143-215.7
Effect of Water and Air Resources
Statutes on laws applicable
G.S.
104-1
Acquisition of lands by U.S. for
et seq.
specified purposes authorized
G.S.
105-227.2
N.C. Differential Tax Laws
et seq.
G.S.
113-29
Acquisition and control of state forests
et seq.
and parks
G.S.
113-54
Duties of Forest Rangers; payment of expenses
by state and counties
G.S.'I13A-1
N.C. Environmental Policy of 1971
et seq.
G.S.
113A-83
N.C. Trails System
et seq.
G.S. 121-9 Administration of state acquired historic
properties
G.S. 130-166.16 Solid Waste Disposal
et seq.
G.S. 136-122 Preservation of Scenic Beauty of Areas
et seq. Along Highways
292
j

(Statutes Indirectly Regulating Land or Water Resources Use, con'd)
G.S. 136-126 Outdoor Advertising Control Act
et seq.
G.S. 143-211 Water and Air Resources
et seq.
G.S. 146-3 to 15 Disposition of State Lands
C. Land Use Planning or Coordination of Land and Water Resources
Use Statutes
G.S. 63-30 to Model Airport Zoning Act
63-37
G.S. 113A-150 Land Policy Act of 1974
et seq.
Im
G.S.
139-9
Soil and Water Conservation District -
et seq.
Adoption of Land Use Regulations
G.S.
143-215.38
Federal Water Resources Development
et seq.
Projects
G.S.
153A-320
Rights of County Governments with respect to
et seq. Act 18
Planning and Regulation of Development
G.S.
160A-360
Cities and Towns - planning and regulation
et seq.
of development
"Enabling Statutes".
G.S.
62-46
Water Gauging Stations
G.S.
63-6
Acquisition of (airport) Sites
G.S.
63-55
Airports on Public Waters and Reclaimed Land
G.S. 65-3 County Commissioners' control of abandoned
cemetaries
G.S. 77-1 Commissioners for Opening and Cleaning Streams
G.S. 77-11 Public Landings
G.S. 113-30 Use of lands acquired by counties through tax
et seq. foreclosures as demonstration forests
G.S. 130-130 Power of Sanitation District Boards to
Condemn Property
G.S. 130-206 Mosquito Control
193

("Enabling Statutes" con'd)
G.S. 139-38 Watershed Improvement Districts -
Power of Eminent Domain
G.S. 139-46 Recreational aspects of watershed improvement
programs
G.S. 143-215.2 General Powers of EMC - local air pollution
control programs.
G.S. 143-215.62 Hurricane Flood Protection and Beach Erosion
Control Project Revolving Fund
G.S. 143-260.6 State Nature and Historic Preserve Act
G.S. 162A-1 Water and Sewer System
II. FEDERAL LAWS
(A. General Resources Policy and Planning)
42 USC 4321 et seq.
National Environmental Policy Act
Pub. L. No. 91-190
of 1969 (NEPA)
(1970)
Housing Act of 1954,
"The 7C1 Program"
Sections 701-03, 40
USC 460-62 (1970),
Amending 40 USC 460-62
(1964)
(B. Solid Wastes)
Pub. L. No. 89-272,
Solid Waste Disposal Act of 1965, as
tit. I1 79 Stat.
amended by the Resource Recovery Act
997, as amended 42
of 1970
USC 3251-59 (1970)
(C. Coastal Resources)
Act of Oct. 27, 1972
Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972
16 USCA 1451-64
(Supp. 1973)
16 USC 1221-1226
Estuarine Areas Act
(1970)
Pub. L. No. 92-532
Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries
86 Stat. 1052, 33
Act of 1972 (Ocean Dumping Act)
USCA 1401-1441
(Supp. 1973)
194

(C. Coastal Resources, con'd)
16 USC 661-666 Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act
(1970) ELR 41801
43 USCA 1331 Act The Outer Continental Shelf Lands
of 1953
33 USCA 1501 Deep Water Ports Act of 1974
Pub. L. 93-627
33 USCA 1221 Sec. 1, Ports and Waterways Safety Act of 1972
Pub. L. 92-340
16 USCA 459 q., et seq. Cape Lookout National Seashore
Pub. L. 89-366, 1, 80
Stat. 33
16 USCA 459 Cape Hatteras National Seashore Recreational
Area
43 USCA 1301 et seq.' Submerged Land Act of 1953
FWPCA 404 33 USCA Permits for Dredged or Fill Material
1344 ("Section 404")
(D. Water and Air Resources)
16 USC 1271-87 (1970) Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1968
Act of April 3, 1970, Water Quality Improvement Act of 1970
Pub. L. No. 91-224,
84 Stat. 91
Pub. L. No. 92-500,
Federal Water Pollution Control Act
33 USCA 1251 et seq.
(Supp. 1973)
Pub. L. No. 92-500
Federal Water Pollution Control Act
(1972), 86 Stat.
Amendments of 1972
816.33 USCA 1251
et seq.
33 USC 407
The Refuse Act
42 USC 1857, Sec. 2,
Clean Air Act of 1955, As Amended, 1967
Pub. L. Title I.
(E. Pesticides)
7 USC 135 et seq.
Federal Environmental Pesticide Control
(1970) as amended,
Act of 1972 (FEPCA)
7 USCA 136 et seq.
(Supp. 1973)
195

(F. Historic Sites)
16 USC 470-470m National Historic Preservation Act of 1966
(1970), as amended,
16, USCA 470h, 470
(1)-470n (Supp. 1973)
and Pub. L. No. 93-54,
87 Stat. 139 (1973)
(G. Conventions)
Part II, Article 23, Convention on the Territorial Sea
1958 (Undoc. A/Conf. and the Contiguous Zone
13/L. 52)
Pursuant to UN Con- Convention on the High Seas
Terence on the Law
of the Sea, Geneva,
1958
i J

APPFMnTX A
Recommended Hazard Mitigation Policies
Existing Carteret Couty policies and ordinaces permit deveolpment to
occur in hazard areas. All hazard areas in Carteret County are encompassed
within the 100-year flood plain boundary. As discussed in Section E, it is
expected that development within the flood plain will continue to occur
because in many coastal communities, flood plains are not generally consi-
dered to be an impediment to development. It is even stated in Before the
Storm that "Safe reconstruction can occur on hazardous parcels of land if
buildings are designed to withstand flood waters, high winds and wave ac-
tion."
However, the fact that flooding represents a potentially serious hazard
to both the public safety and to property must remain the major consider-
ation in permitting development to occur in flood plain areas. In addi-
tion to inundating homes and business, flooding can pollute water supplies,
cause sewers to back up and overflow, and undermine structures of various
types. Despite these problems,the basic issue in developing the Carteret
County Hazard Mitigation Plan and accompanying policies is not where future
development should or should not locate (e.g. in flood hazard areas), but
how should this development be constructed so as to minimize damages in the
event of maior storm.
There are two issues that must be addressed regarding development in
flood hazard areas - the control of new development, and reconstruction in
flood plain areas after a storm.
1) Mitigation Policies Related to New Development. The Carteret County
zoning Ordinace is not applied uniformly throughout the unincor-
porated areas of the County (zoning is done on a "request only"
basis from laud owners) and it therefore is not a useful tool in
mitigating storm damage. However, the County does have three other
ordinaces that can be utilized to manage development in flood prone
areas;the Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance, Subdivision Regula-
tions, and the Mobile Home Park and Travel Trailer Park Ordinance.
Recommended policy changes are presented below:
Carteret County Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance
This ordinance is the County's primary means of controlling flood
plain development. Its policies are straightforward and meet re-
quirements of the National Flood Insurance Program. However, the
ordinace lacks reference to specific, accepted methods of "mini-
mizing flood damage". The ordinance should be amended to refer-
ence such accepted practices and methods. This would remove pos-
sible discretion on the part of County enforcement personnel while
setting forth uniform rules for developers. For example,•the sec-
tion governing water and sewage should be amended to include:
o all new and replacement water supply and waste disposal
systems shall be designed to minimize or eliminate in-
filtration of flood waters into the system either by
elevating the system above the 100-year flood elevation
or by floodproofing the system. The adequacy of a flood
proofed system shall be certified by a registered pro-
fesional engineer.
197

Additionally, the County Central Permitting Office should maintain
a complete set of up to date Flood Insurance Rate daps at all times.
Maps that are obsolete through revisions should be purged from County
files and new maps should be filed in such a way that finding a parti-
cular piece of property on the maps can be accomplished through a spe-
cific procedure.
Carteret County Subdivision Regulations
Article VIII, Section 2, of the subdivision regulations states
that "lands subject to flooding, improper drainage, erosion or that
is for topographical or other reasons unsuitable for residential use
as determined by the Planning Board, shall not be platted for resid-
ential use nor for any other uses that will continue or increase
the danger to health, safety, or property unless the hazards can be
and are corrected." As discussed in the previous section of this
report, the ordinance goes on to discuss the prevention of flood
damage. This entire section is vague and needs to be stregthened.
It is recommended that this section of the subdivision regulations
be amended to include the following provisions:
o The 100-year flood plain shall be clearly indicated on all sub-
division plats and or deeds and plats for all individual building
sites as determined from the County's FIRM's.
o A portion of each building lot shall be filled to provide a safe
building site above the 100-year flood plain elevation or restric-
tive covenants shall be filed to require structures to be placed
on pilings or otherwise structurally elevated above the 100-year
flood plain.
o All water lines, sewers and other public facilities shall be
either flood proofed with the flood proofing measures designed
and certified by a registered professional engineer or such
facilities shall be elevated above the 100-year flood plain
elevation.
o All streets in new subdivisions or access roads to such sub-
divisions shall be elevated above the 100-year flood plain
elevation. This shall be certified on the plat by a registered
professional engineer.
Carteret County Mobile Home, Mobile Home Park and
Travel Trailer Ordinance
This ordinance can be an effective tool for controlling mobile
home development in flood prone areas. It could be strengthened
by stating:
o "Areas susceptible to flooding" shall include all areas located
within the 100-year flood plain.
o Specifically require that all new mobile homes be elevated above
the 100-year flood plain elevation.
198

o All Water lines, sewers, and individual sewage disposal systems
shall be either flood proofed with the flood proofing methods
designed and certified oy a registered professional engineer or
such facilities shall be elevated above the 100-year flood plain
elevation.
2. Mitigation Policies Related to Redevelopment of
Hazard Areas After a Storm
Reconstruction of damaged properties in Carteret County after
a storm will be subject to the following:
o The North Carolina Building Code requires any building damaged in
excess of 50 percent of its value to conform with code requirements
for new buildings when repaired. (This will be particularly bene-
ficial in the event of wind damage.)
o The Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance requires that all existing
structures must comply with requirements related to elevation above
the 100-year flood plain elevation and floodproofing if they are
substatially improved. A substantial improvement is defined as
"any repair, reconstruction, or improvement of a building, the cost
of which equals or exceeds 50 percent of the market value of the
building either before the improvement or repair is started, or
before damage occurred if the building has been damaged."
A final recommendation is that the Carteret County Mobile Home Park
and Travel Trailer Ordinance be revised to require that all "old" mobile
home parks (those constructed prior to the adoption of the Ordinance) com-
ply with all provisions of the Mobile Home Ordinance if either: 1) more
than 50% of the homes in the park suffer wind or flooding damage (this
would not require that each of the mobile homes sustain damages amounting to
50% of their value); or, 2) damage is such that either the water system,
sewer system, or the on -site disposal systems serving the park is damaged
to the extent that more than 50% of any of the systems has to be repaired
or replaced. Currently, Section 18(3) allows the reconstruction of non-
conforming facilities if work is begun within one year of damage.
III. CARTERET COUNTY POST -DISASTER RECONSTRUCTION PLAN
A. Introduction
A post -disaster plan provides a program that will permit a local govern-
ment to deal with the at,termaths of a storm in an organized and effecient
manner. The Plan provides the mechanisms, procedures, and policies that will
enable a local community to learn from its storm experiences and to re-
build the community in a, -wise and practical manner.
A post -disaster reconstruction plan encompasses three distinct re-
construction periods:
o The emergency period is the reconstruction phase immediately after
a storm. The emphasis is on restoring public health and safety,
assessing the nature and extent of storm damage, and qualify-
ing for and obtaining whatever federal and state assistance might
be available.
199

r
1
o The restoration period covers the weeks and months following a
storm disaster. The emphasis during this period is on restoring
community facilities, utilities, essential businesses, etc. so
that the community can once again function in a normal manner.
o the replacement reconstruction period is the period during which
the community is rebuilt. The period could last from months to
years depending on the nature and extent of the damages incurred.
It is important that local officials clearly understand the joint
federal -state -local procedures for providing assistance to.rebuild after
a storm so that local damage assessment and reconstruction efforts are
carried out in an efficient manner that qualifies the community for the
different types of assistance that are available. The requirements are
generally delineated in the Disaster Relief Act of 1974 (P.L. 93-288)
which authorizes a wide range of financial and direct assistance to both
local communities and individuals. The sequence of procedures to be
followed after a major storm event is as follows:
1. Local damage assessment teams survey storm damage within the
community.
2. Damage information is compiled and summarized and the nature
and extent of damage is reported to the Forth Carolina Division
of Emergency Management (DEM).
3. DEM compiles local data and makes recommendations to the Governor
concerning state action.
4. The Governor may request a Presidential declaration of "emergency"
or if disaster". A Presidential declaration makes a variety
of federal resources available to local communities and indivi-
uals.
5. Federal Relief assistance provided to a community after an "emer-
gency" has been declared typically ends one month after'.the initial
Presidential declaration. Where a "major disaster" has been de-
clared, federal assistance for "emergency" work typically ends six
months after the declaration and federal assistance for "permanent"
work ends after 18 months.
Federal disaster assistance programs previously provided aid for com-
munities to rebuild in the same way as existed before the disaster occured.
This policy tended to foster recurring mistakes. However, recent federal
policy has started to change the emphasis of disaster assistance programs.
Specifically,
o Executive Order 1198 (Floodplain Management) directs all federal
agencies to avoid either directly or indirectly supporting future
unwise development in floodplains (e.g. through sewer grants in
locations that foster floodplain development).
o Section 406 of the Disaster Relief Act can require communities,
as a prerequisite for federal disaster assistance, to take speci-
fic actions to mitigate future flood losses.
The County has been provided a comprehensive listing of the Federal
Disaster Assistance Programs that may be available following a major storm,
200

The programs identified fall into the categories of Temporary Housing,
Individual Assistance and Assistance to Local and State Governments.
The listing is comprehensive and therfore all the programs listed may not
be applicable to Carteret County.
The remainder of this chapter presents recommended recovery proce-
dures in the general sequence of response by the County. While damage
assessment (Section B & C) will be the first operations conducted by the
County after a disaster, it should be realized that the recommended re-
covery operations (Section D) will begin simultaneously. The remainder
of this chapter is, therfore, organized as follows:
1) Procedures that Carteret County should follow to carry out its
damage assesssment program to meet all federal and state require-
ments including organization of the damage assessment team and
recommended damage assessment procedures.
2) An overall organizational framework for restoration operations
after the emergency period.
3) Replacement/Reconstruction policies that the County should adopt
to insure that future development that does occur in local hazard
areas is constructed in a manner consistent with sound land use
planning, public safety considerations, and existing and evolving
federal and state policy.
B. Organization of Local Damage Assessment Team
A local damage assessment team should include individuals who are quali-
fied to give reliable estimates of the original value of structures, as esti-
mated value of sustained damages and a description of the repairs. Addi-
tionally, the logistics involved in assessing damage in unincorporated sec-
tions of the County after a major storm will necessitate the organization
of several damage -assessment teams in Carteret -County. The following are
recommended team members.
Public Property Survey Team
County Department Head(s)
Professional Engineer
Architect *
Sheriff's Deputy (driver)
Business and Industry Survey Team
Tax Assessor
Building Inspector
Industrial/Commercial Real Estate Broker
Chamber of Commerce Representative
Architect *
Sheriff's Deputy (driver)
Pivate Dwelling Survey Team
2 teams - depending upon capacities and plans of Cape Carteret and Newport:
Tax Assessor
r j 201

rJ
Building Inspector
Residential Real Estate Broker
Building Contractor *
Sheriff's Deputy (driver)
*Commuity volunteer.
The Emergency Management Coordinator should immediately undertake
a recruitment effort to secure the necessary volunteers and to establish
a training program to familiarize the members of the damage assessment
team with required damage classification procedures.and reporting require-
ments. It is suggested that the County assume the responsibility for de-
veloping and implementing a training program for both County damage assess-
ment teams and the local damage assessment teams that the Towns establish.
In establishing the County teams, it must be recognized that it might be
very difficult to fill certain positions, such as the building contractor
position, because the services of individuals with such skills will likely
be in great demand after a storm disaster. A commitment from the Home
Builders Association may be a way of guaranteeing needed assistance. Add-
itionally, the Emergency Management Coordinator should establish an active
"Volunteer file"; volunteers should have standing instructions where to
automatically report following a storm. Damage assessment forms and pro-
cedures should be prepared now and distributed to volunteers as part of the
training program.
C. Damage Assessment Procedures and Requirements
Damage assessment is defined as rapid means of determining a real-
isitic estimate of the amount of damage caused by a natural or man-made
disaster. For a storm disaster, it is expressed in terms of 1) number of
structures damaged; 2) magnitude of damage by structure type; 3) estimated
total dollar loss; and 4) estimated total dollar loss covered by insurance.
After a major storm event, members of the -Damage Assessment Team should
report to the Emergency Operations Center for a briefing from the Emer-
gency Management Coordinator. One way to effectively deploy teams to areas
where damage seems to be concentrated would be to have prearranged com-
mitment from the Marine Corps to provide' for a helicopter in reconnaissance
of storm damage within the County for the Emergency Management Coordinator
in order to establish field reconnaissance priorities. The Civil Air -Patrol
may also appropriately provide assistance during the damage assessment
phase.
The extent of damage will depend on the magnitude of the storm and
where landfall -occurs along the Atlantic coast. Because of the poten-
tially large job at hand, the limited personnel resources available to
conduct the assessments, and the limited time within which the initial
assessment must be made, the first phase of the assessment should consist
of only an external visual survey of damaged structures. A more detailed
second phase assessment can be made after the initial damage reports are
filed.
The initial damage assessment should make an estimate of the extent
of damage incurred by each structure and identify the cause (wind,flood-
ing, wave action, combination, etc.) of the damage to each structure. This
first phase assessment should be made by "windshield" survey.
Damaged structures should be classified in accordance with the sug-
gested State guidelines as follows:
202

o Destroyed (repairs would cost more than 80 percent of value).
o Major (repairs would cost more than 30 percent of the value).
o Minor (repairs would cost less than 30 percent of the value, but
the structure is currently uninhabitable).
o Habitable. (some minor damage, with repairs less than 15 percent
of the value).
It will be necessary to thoroughly document each assessment. In
many cases, mail boxes and other information typically used to identify
specific structures will not be found. Consequently, the Damage Assess-
ment Team must be provided with tax maps, (aerial photographs with pro-
perty line overlays) other maps and photographic equipment in order to
record and document its field observations. Enough information to com-
plete the Damage Assessment Worksheet must be obtained on each damaged
structure. (Samples of damage assessment worksheets are contained in
Appendix Two).
The second phase of the Damage Assessment Operation will be to es-
timate the value of the damages sustained. This operation should be car-
ried out in the Emergency Operations Center under the direction and super-
vision of the Emergency Management Coordinator. A special team consisting
of County tax clerks, tax assessment personnel, and other qualified staff
should be organized by the Emergency Management Coordinator. This team
should then be incorporated into this Damage_ Assessment :Plan.
In order to estimate total damage values it will be necessary to have
the following information available for use at the Emergency Operations
Center:
o A set of property tax maps (including aerial photographs) iden-
tical to those utilized by the damage assessment field team.
o County Maps delineating areas assigned to each team.
o Copies of all County property tax records. This information
should indicate the estimated value of all commercial and resi-
dential structures within the County. Because time will be of
the essence, it is recommended that the County immediately com-
mence a project listing the property values of existing structures
in unincorporated areas of the County on the appropriate lots of
the property tax maps that will be kept at the Emergency Operations
Center. While somewhat of a tedious job, it should be manageabl+e
if it is initiated now and completed over a 2 to 3 month perid.
The information will prove invaluable if a storm disaster does
occur. This set of tax maps should be updated annually prior to
the hurricane season.
An alternative method that would be less accurate but perhaps more prac-
tical due to the time constraints would be to utilize median housing values
from the 1980 census or derived from the County's tax digest. A simple
chart could be devised for use in the field that presents median values for
houses and mobile homes by township. This chart could include the multi-
plying factors to avoid the need for actual math calculations in the field.
Because there are significantly less commercial and industrial structures
203

than homes, this portion of the assessment could still be made util-
izing the first method above.
County officials recently polled local mortgage institutions to
determine the average flood insurance policy coverage and the estimated
number of property owners in flood hazard areas that carry the insur-
ance. The results of this May, 1984 survey were that 75% of the home-
owners with mortgaged property in the flood plain have 75% to 80% cover-
age. Overall, it was estimated that only 10% - 15% of all homes in the
flood plain have insurance covering 75% - 80% of the improvements. This
information should be updated before each hurricane season. Annual up-
dates should be disseminated to each Town and kept available in the Emer-
gency Operation Center for estimating the value of sustained damages
covered by hazard insurance.
In order to produce the damage value information required, the fol-
lowing methodology is recommended:
1. The number of businesses and residential structures that have
been damaged within unincorporated areas of the County should
be summarized by damage classification category.
2. The value of each damaged structure should be obtained, from the
marked set of tax maps and multiplied by the following percen-
tages for appropriate damage classification category.
o Destroyed - 100%
o Major Damage - 50%
o Minor Damage (uninhabitable) - 25%
o Habitable - 10%
3. The total value of damages for the unincorporated areas of the
County should then be summarized.
4. The estimated value loss covered by hazard insurance should then
be determined by: 1) estimating full.coverage for all damaged
structures for situations where the average value of such cover-
age exceeds the amount of damage to the structure; and 2) multi-
plying the number of structures where damage exceeds the.aver-
age value of insurance coverage by the average value of such
coverage.
5. Damage assessment reports should be obtained from each muni-
cipality and the data should then be consolidated into a single
County damage assessment report which should be forwarded to the
appropriate State officials.
6.. Damage to public roads and utility systems should be estimated
by utilizing current construction costs for facilities by
lineal foot (e.g. 10' water line replacement cost = X$/L.F.)
The Damage assessment Plan is intended to be the mechanism for esti-
mating overall property damage in the event of a civil disaster. The
procedure recommended above represents an approach for making a rela-
tively quick, realistic "order of magnitude" damage estimate after a dis-
saster. This process will not provide the required information within
the time constraints of organization and data collection are not com-
204

pleted prior to the storm event.
D. Oragnization of Recovery Operation
Damage assessment operations are oriented to take place during the
emergency period. After the emergency operations to restore public
health and safety and the initial damage assessments are completed, the
State guidelines suggest that a Recovery Task Force to guide restoration
and reconstruction activities be created to guide restoration and re-
construction activities during a post -emergency phase which could last
from weeks to possibly more than a year. The responsibilities of the
Task Force will be:
1. Establishing an overall restoration schedule.
2. Setting restoration priorities, in advance, by definition.
3. Determining requirements for outside assistance and request-
ing such assistance when beyond local capabilities. (Pre -
disaster agreement, procedures, contact persons, should be
defined before the disaster event.)
4. Keeping the appropriate State officials informed using Situa
tion and Damage Report.
5. Keeping the public informed.
6. Assembling and maintaining records of actions taken and ex-
penditures and obligations incurred. Standardized forms should
be developed in advance and kept on file at the EOC.
7. Proclaiming a local "state of emergency" if warranted.
8. Commencing cleanup, debris removal and utility restoration
activities which would include coordination of restoration"
activities undertaken by private Utility companies.
9. Undertaking repair and restoration of essential public facil-
ities and services in accordance with priorities developed
through the situation evaluations.
10. Assisting private businesses and individual property owners -
in 1) obtaining information on the various types of assistance
that might be available from federal and state agencies; 2) in
understanding the various assistance programs, and 3) applying
for such assistance. When a major storm does eventually hit
Carteret County and major damages occur, consideration should
be given to establishing a Community Assistance Team within
the appropriate County Department to carry out the above func-
tions as long as there is a need to do so.
In Before the Storm, a sequence and schedule for undertaking local
reconstruction and restoration activities is presented. The schedule
was deliberately left vague because specific reconstruction needs will
not be known until after a storm hits and the magnitude of the damage
can be assessed. The following sequence of activities and schedule is
submitted as a guide which should be considered by the Recovery Task
205

Force and revised as necessary after the damage assessment activities
are completed.
Activity
1) Complete Initial Damage
Assessment
2) Complete Second Phase
Damage Assessment
3) Prepare Summary of Recon-
struction Priorities and
Master Reconstruction
Schedule
4) Dicision with Regard to Im-
position of Temporary Devel-
opment Moratorium
5) Set Reconstruction Priorities
and Prepare Master Recon-
struction Schedule
6) Begin Repairs to Critical
Utlilties and Facilities
Timo Fromm
Immediately after storm passes
Completed by second week
after the storm
Completed one week after second
second phase damage as-
sessment is completed
One week after second
phase damage assessment
is completed
Completed one week after
summary of reconstruction
needs is completed
As soon as possible after
disaster
7) Permitting of Reconstruction
One week after second
Activities for all Structures
phase damage assessment
Receiving Minor Damage Not
is completed
Included in Development Mora-
torium Areas
8) Permitting of Reconstruction
Two weeks after second
Activities for all Structures
phase damage assessment
Receiving Major Damage Not
is completed,.
Included in Development Mora-
torium Areas
9) Initiate Assessment of
Existing Mitigation Policies
10) Complete Re-evaluation of
Hazard Areas and Miti-
gation Policies in Areas
Subjected,to Development
Moratorium
11) Revise Mitigation Policies
and Development Standards
for Areas Subjected to De-
velopment Moratorium and
Lift Development Moratorium
Two weeks after second
phase damage assessment
is complete
The length of the period
for conducting re-evalu-
ations and receiving
input from the State
should not exceed two
months
Two months after Tem-
porary Development Mora-
torium is imposed. (Sub-
ject to change based on
circumstance encountered)
12) Permit New Development
206
Upon suspension of any temporary
development moratorium

�f
E. Recommended Reconstruction Policies
It is recommended that the Carteret County task Force consist of
the following individuals:
o Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners
o Carteret County Manager
o Emergency Management Coordinators
o Chief County Tax Appraiser
o County Finance Director
o County Code Inspections Director
The following policies have been designed to be considered and
adopted by the Carteret County Board of Commissioners prior to a storm;
and 2) implemented, as appropriate, after a storm occurs.
Permitting
1. Building permits to restore structures located outside of desig-
nated AEC areas that were previously built in conformance with local
codes, standards and the provisions of the North Carolina Building
Code shall be issued automatically.
2. All structures suffering major damages as defined in the County's
Damage Assessment Plan -shall be repaired or rebuilt to conform with
the provisions of the North Carolina Building Code, the Carteret
County Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance, Carteret County Zoning
Ordinance, the Bogue Banks Land Protection Ordinance, Group Housing
Ordinance, and Mobile Home Park Ordinance.
3. All structures suffering minor damage as defined in the Carteret
County Damage Assessment Plan shall be permitted to be rebuilt to
their original state before the storm condition, provided non -con-
forming use regulations of the zoning ordinance are met.
4. For all structures in designated AEC's and for all mobile home lo-
cations, a determination shall be made for each AEC as to whether
the provisions of the N.C. Building Code, the State Regulations for
Areas of Environmental Concern, the Carteret County Flood Prevention
Ordinance, and Carteret County Mobile Home Park Ordinance appeared
adequate in minimizing storm damages. For areas where the construc-
tion and use requirements appear adequate, permits shall be issued
in accordance with permitting policies 1, 2 and 3. For AEC's where
the construction and use requirements do not appear to.have been
adequate in mitigating damages, a Temporary Development Moratorium
for all structures located within that specific AEC shall be imposed.
5. All individual mobile homes located in mobile home parks sustaining
some damage to at least 50% of their mobile homes in the park shall
be required to conform with the provision of the Carteret County
Mobile Home, Mobile Home Park and Travel Trailer Park ordinance;
and the County's Flood damage Prevention Ordinance regardless of
whether such park is currently subject to these ordinances.
6. Permits shall not be issued in areas subject to a Temporary Develop-
ment Moratorium until such a moratorium is lifted by the Carteret
County Board of Commissioners.
207

Utility and Facility Reconstruction
1. All damaged water and sewer systems (both public and private) shall
be repaired so as to be elevated above the 100-year floodplain or
shall be floodproofed, with the methods employed and the construction
being certified by a registered professional engineer.
2. All damaged roads used as major evacuation routes in flood hazard
areas shall be repaired so as to be elevated at least one foot above
the 100-year flood plain elevation.
3. All local roads that have to completely rebuilt shall be elevated
so as to be above the 100-year flood plain elevation.
Temporary Development Moratorium
Under certain circumstances, interim development moratoriums can
be used in order to give a.local government time to assess damages,to
make sound decisions and to learn from its storm experiences. Such a
moratorium must be temporary and it must be resonably related to the
public health, safety and welfare.
It is .not possible to determine prior to a storm whether a tem-
porary development moratorium will be needed. Such a measure should
only be used if damage in a particular area. is very serious and if re-
development of the area in the same manner as previously existed would
submit the residents of the area to similar public health and safety
problems. The Carteret County policy regarding the proclamation of
temporary development moratoriums shall be to:
Require the Carteret County Recovery Task Force to assess whether
a Temporary Development Moratorium is needed within one week after the
Damage Assessment process is completed. Such an assessment should clear-
ly document why such a mortorium is needed, delineate the specific uses
that would be affected by the moratorium, propose a specific schedule of
activities and actions that will be taken during the moratorium period,
and establish a specific time period during which the moratorium will be
in effect.
Wind Damage
It is assumed that many structures constructed to conform with the
provisions of the North Carolina Building Code will not be able to with-
stand "the accompanying winds if a major hurricane hits the N.C. coast.
It is stated in Before the Storm that "the State Building Code, as it
now stands, falls short in adequately protecting buildings from the dam-
aging forces of hurricanes and other coastal storms. The Building Code
Council, in seeking to maintain uniformity of regulation across the state,
has been resistant in the past to allowing more stringent local standards.
Another problem small coastal communities are likely to face is a lack
of fiscal and staff resources to sponsor the engineering and architec-
tural studies that the Building Code Council requires to justify any local
variations to the Code."
While Carteret County has no technical studies to indicate that the
provisions of the Code are inadequate as they effect the county, the
County should have some flexibility in imposing stricter standards if it
desires. This is a problem that the Coastal Resources Commission must
208
1

face if it expects local communities to take the initiative in devel-
oping effective storm mitigation programs. The County policy shall be
to request the Coastal Resources Commission to carefully assess this
problem which is common to all coastal communities.
209