Land Use Plan-1987

ilease do not remnvAIIII
Division of Coastal Management
Land Ust.
Elizabeth City._ North Carolina
Adopted by the City Council of Elizabeth City
on January 5, 1987
Certified by the North Carolina Coastal Resources
Commission on January 23, 1987

Land Use Plan
Elizabeth City, North Carolina
Adopted by the City Council of Elizabeth City
on January 5, 1987
Certified by the North Carolina Coastal Resources
Commission on January 23, 1987

1
I
1
11
1
The preparation of this document was financed in part '
through a grant provided by the North Carolina Coastal
Management Program, through funds provided by the
Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended, which is '
administered by the Office of Ocean and Coastal Resources
Management, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
1

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
1
1
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
Elizabeth City, North Carolina
City Council
Tyra L. Newell, Jr., Mayor
Joseph B. Anderson Tommy S. Griffin
Garnie Banks W. L. Hooker
Louis S. Bell Robert T. Hutchins
Ann L. Chory A. Parker Midgett
Planning Commission
Robert L. Ford, Chairman
Gerald Bray, Vice-chairman
Bruce Biggs
Terry Cooper
Bill W. McCain
Ronald L. Matthews, Sr., City Manager
Marvin W. Davis, Finance Director/Assistant City Manager
Donna L. Godfrey, Planner

Consultants
Timothy Beatley
David J. Brower
Coastal Resources Collaborative, Ltd.
612 Shady Lawn
Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27514

Contents
Chapter
Paee
'
1.0
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . 1
2.0
Growth and Change in Elizabeth City . . . . . . . . .
. . . . 4
3.0
Existing Land Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . 12
4.0
Traffic and Transportation . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . 15
5.0
Revitalizing the Waterfront . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. .. . . 29
6.0
Open Space and Recreation . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . 43
7.0
Housing (Including Historic Preservation) . . . . . .
. . . . 56
'
8.0
Economic and Industrial Development . . . . . . . . .
. . . . 64
9.0
Mitigation of Natural Hazards . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . 76
'
10.0
Planning for Compatibility with the Coast
Guard Station (AICUZ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . 85
11.0
Public Services and Facilities . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . 88
12.0
Protection of Natural and Fragile Areas . . . . . .
. . . . 95
'
13.0
Urban Design/Aesthetic Resources . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . 101
14.0
Land Classification System . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...
. . . 108
15.0
Implementation Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . 113
16.0
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . 120
17.0
Appendices
'
1. Citizen Participation . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2. Assessment of Previous Policies
. . . . 122
123
A Note Concerning Maps
There are a number of maps referred to in the Plan; some of them are
found in the text, usually adjacent to the page on which the
appears; the remainder, including (1) Existing Land Use Map,
reference first
(2) Natural
Hazards
Map, (3) Water and Sewer Service Map, and (4) Land Classification
System
Map, will be found folded in an envelope inside the back
cover. Copies
of the
latter, in color and at a larger scale, can be found
in the offices of
the Elizabeth
City Planning Department.
11

1
I
Index
Accidents, 17-18, 20, 26, 86. See also Safety
Acreage: and Charles Creek, 36; for various purposes, 12-14, 70, 85; in
water, 13-14; undeveloped, 13-14. See also Land
Adaptive use and re -use, 30, 39, 40
Advertising, 33, 102, 103, 105, 118, 122
AEC's, 89, 95, 96, 97, 123
Aeathetic and visual resources, 2, 30, 31, 32, 33, 35, 40, 41, 43, 50, 53, 54,
61, 62, 72, 76, 95, 101-7, 110, 112, 123
Age distribution, 9-10
Aged people. See Senior citizens
Agriculture. See Farms and farming
AICUZ study, 85-86
Aircraft. See Airports
Air Installation Compatible Land Use Zones, U.S. Coast Guard Support Center
(AICUS), 85-86
Airports, 2, 7, 51, 66, 69, 70, 74, 85-87, 90, 95, 119, 125, 126
Air quality, 21
' Albemarle Hospital, 39
Annexation, 6, 88, 93, 108, 111, 117-18
Apartments. See Construction and construction industry; Housing
Aquifers. See Water quality and water resources
Architecture, 29, 31, 59-60, 101, 103, 104, 106
Areas of Environmental concern (AEC's), 89, 95, 96, 97, 123
Art, 32, 33. See also Cultural activities
Assessments. See Fiscal resources
Athletics, 36, 38, 39, 43, 44, 45, 46,'47, 48, 50, 52, 53, 54, 55, 87. See
also Recreation and recreational facilities
Atlantic Ocean, 30, 95, 126
Atlantic Strike Team, 126
Auditoriums, 45
Automobiles, See Motor vehicles; Travel, transportation, and transportation
industry
Avenues. See Streets
Aviation. See Airports
Bakeries, 65
Banks, 22, 65. See also Fiscal resources
Baptists, 44
Bays, 95
Beaches, 54, 80, 124
Beaufort, N.C., 29
Bibles. See Christianity
Bicycles, Bicycle Plan, and bikeways, 23-25, 27, 30, 31, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38,
40, 49, 50, 51, 55; route for, diagrammed, 24, 51
Birth rate, 5
Boats and boating, 30, 34, 37-38, 39, 40, 41, 45, 47, 49, 50, 53, 70, 74, 95,
96

2
Boulevards. See Streets
Boundaries: of city, 6, 7, 117; of city, diagrammed, 24; of county,
diagrammed, 24
Boy's Club, 44
Brickhouse Road, 50
Bridges, 23, 34, 36, 37, 38, 51, 96. See also specific bridges
"Brown Street NRA," 59
Budget. See Fiscal resources
Building, building permits, and building codes. See Construction and
construction industry; Housing
Business. See Commerce and trade
Busses, 21, 23
Butchko, Thomas R., 60
Bypasses. See Roads and highways; Streets
Cafes. See Restaurants
CAMA, 1, 79-80, 82, 89, 96
Camden Causeway, 29, 31, 35
Camden Causeway Bridge, 35
Camden County, N.C., 35, 53
Canals, 69, 70, 74, 126
Cannery (Calif.), 32
Canoes. See Boats and boating
Cape Hatteras, 96
Capital. See Fiscal resources
Capital improvements program (CIP), 113
Carolina Power and Light Co. (CPL), 126
Carolina Trailways, 21
Catholics, 44
Causeway Marina, 35, 45
Causeway Marina Restaurant, 35
Causeway Park, 35
Causeways, 29, 31, 35, 45, 91, 108, 111-12
CDBG, 59
Cemeteries, 36, 38, 39
Central business district. See Downtown area
Central Elementary School, 91
Central School, 44, 81
Chalk Street Park, 44, 47
Chamber of Commerce, 122
Charles Creek 16, 23, 29, 31, 34, 36, 37, 38-39, 41, 43, 47, 49, 50, 52, 54,
79, 95, 101, 110
Charles Creek Basin, 38
Charles Creek Bridge, 16, 34, 36
Charles Creek Natural Area, 38-39
Charles Creek Park, 36, 38, 43, 47, 50, 54
Charles Creek park Area, 36, 37
Charles Creek Study, 36, 37, 38
Christianity, 7, 29, 34, 44, 50, 65, 87. See also specific churches and
denominations
Churches. See Christianity
CIP, 113
Cities and municipalities, 5, 21, 29, 43, 126. See also specific cities and
municipalities

11
3
fl
L
�i
1
City Council, 36, 70, 88, 122
City Hall, 92
City Manager, 81, 122
Civic organizations, 53
Civil preparedness. See Natural hazards, mitigation of
COA, 7, 39, 44, 45, 125
Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA), 1, 79-80, 82, 89, 96
Coastal areas, 1, 33, 79-80, 82, 83, 89, 95, 96, 99, 125. See also Waterfront
and waterfront revitalization
Coastal Plain Regional Commission, 33
Coast Guard (U.S.) and Coast Guard Base, 2, 7, 66, 85-87, 95, 125, 126;
diagrammed, 51
Coast Resources Commission, 125
Cobbs Point, 95
College of the Albemarle (COA), 7, 39, 44, 45, 125
Colleges. See Education and educational facilities; specific colleges
Commerce and trade, 7, 8, 12, 20, 21, 26, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38,
39, 40, 41, 43, 44, 45, 48, 57, 60, 64, 65, 68, 71, 72, 73, 74, 79, 90, 94,
102, 103, 105, 116, 118, 124. See also Economy and economic base; Industry
and industrial development; Tourism and vacationers
Community centers, 36
Community parks. See Parks
Comprehensive Plan: Housing Element, 56, 58, 59
Computers, 67
Condominiums. See Construction and construction industry; Housing
Congestion, vehicular. See Travel, transportation and transportation industry
Conservation and conservation programs, 1, 89, 108, 110-11, 112, 114, 115,
118. See also specific topics
Construction and construction industry, 7, 8, 48, 55, 62, 65, 67, 80, 84, 89,
91, 98, 101, 102, 103-4, 106, 110, 114, 115-17; subdivisions listed, 91.
See also Housing
Corinth Baptist Chureh, 44
Costs. See Fiscal resources
Council (city), 36, 70, 88, 122
Counties, 22, 55. See also specific counties
Country clubs, 44
County commissioners, 81
County Manager, 122
CPL, 126
Credit agencies, 65
Creeks. See Rivers, streams, and creeks
Cultural activities, 32, 33, 39, 41, 45, 61, 108
Death rate, 10
Demography, 4, 9-11, 21
Department of Human Resources (city), 21
Department of Human Resources (state), 90, 96
Departments of Parks and Recreation (city), 46, 47, 50
Department of Social Services (county), 21
Department of Transportation (state), 15, 23, 37, 125
' Design standards. See Construction and construction industry; Housing
Development. See Growth and development
Diagrams, 24, 51, inside back cover
I

Disaster relief. See Natural hazards, mitigation of
,
Dismal Swamp, 69, 70, 74, 96, 97, 126
Dismal Swamp Canal, 69, 70, 74, 126
District of Columbia, 41
Division of Parks and Recreation (state), 43, 45
Docking facilities. See Marinas and mooring facilities
Doctors. See Health care and health facilities
Downtown area, 12, 22, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 36, 38, 40, 41, 59-60, 62, 70,
'
72, 73, 118, 125
Downtown Historic District, 59-60, 62
Drainage, 23, 34, 123
,
Dredging, 37, 38, 126
Durable goods. See Commerce and trade; Industry and industrial development
Dwelling units. See Construction and construction industry; Housing
'
Easements, 36, 38, 39, 52, 54, 86, 114-15
Ecology, 35, 99, 123. See also Fish, fishing, and fishing industry; Wildlife
Economic Improvement Council, Inc., 21, 44, 58
Economy and economic base, 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 21, 31, 33, 40, 44, 53, 55, 58, 61,
64-75, 76, 85, 88, 94, 95, 98, 118-19, 123, 124. See also Commerce and
trade; Industry and industrial development; Tourism and vacationers
ECSU, 7, 12, 36, 38, 39, 44, 45, 91
Education and educational facilities, 7, 12, 23, 35, 43, 44, 64, 65, 66, 67,
81, 91, 125. See also specific schools and colleges
Effluents. See Sewage and wastewater disposal
Elderly people. See Senior citizens
ElectriCities, 126
Electricity, 34, 36, 126. See also Energy production
Elementary schools. See Education and educational facilities
Elizabeth City, N.C. See specific topics: entries immediately following
"Elizabeth City Airport Industrial Park," 69
Elizabeth City National Register Historic District, 60
Elizabeth City State University (ECSU), 7, 12, 36, 38, 39, 44, 45, 91
Elizabeth City Zoning Ordinance, 104
Elizabeth Manor, 44
Elizabeth Street Park, 44, 47
Elizabeth Street Tennis Courts, 44, 47
Emergencies. See Natural hazards, mitigation of
,
Employment, 4, 7, 15, 16, 64, 66, 67, 70, 72, 73, 85, 124. See also
Occupations
Energey production, 60-61, 62, 126. See also Electricity
Enfield Park, 43, 47
Engineers, 65, 67, 70
Entertainment, 32, 44, 47, 65. See also Recreation and recreational
facilities
Environment: and aesthetics, 101; and conservation, 111; and greenways, 110;
and growth, 99; and industry, 124; and public utilities, 92; and sewers,
94; and solid wastes, 90; and urbanization, 114; and water, 94; commission
manages, 89; concerns about, 89, 95, 96, 97, 123; nature of, 98-99, 101;
resources of, see Natural resources; sensitive, 89, 116 (and see Natural
and fragile areas); values concerning, 72. See also Greenways
Erosion, 79, 123, 126
'
Estuaries. See Shorelines and estuaries

Ethnic groups, 10-11
ETJ. See Outlying areas
Evacuation, emergency. See Natural hazards, mitigation of
Expenditures. See Fiscal resources
Exports, 64. See also Industry and industrial development
Extra -territorial areas and extra -territorial jurisdiction (ETJ). See
Outlying areas
Farmers market, 33, 41
Farms and farming, 13, 14, 33, 41, 50, 64, 65, 67, 70-71, 72, 75, 83, 86, 87,
92, 94, 97, 98, 101, 108, 110, 111, 123, 124. See also Rural areas; Soils
Federal Flood Insurance Administration, 76
Federal government. See United States and United States government
Fees. See Fiscal resources
FHA, 76
Financial factors. See Fiscal resources
Fires and fire fighting, 25-26, 27-28, 67, 88, 92, 108
Firms. See Commerce and trade; Industry and industrial development
First United Methodist Church, 44
Fiscal resources, 2-3, 5, 15, 38, 43, 48, 49, 53, 54, 55, 58, 19, 62, 70, 75,
76, 77, 82-83, 84, 88, 92, 93, 98, 99, 113-14, 115, 118, 124. See also
Banks
Fish, fishing, and fishing industry, 37, 91, 95, 124. See also Ecology;
Wildlife
Flood Insurance Rate Maps, 77
Flood Plain Area, 78
Floodplain 0rdinance,.77
Floods and flood control, 27, 38, 76-79, 83, 95, 115, 117, 123, 124
Flying. See Airports
Food and food industry, 21, 22, 32, 33, 65, 67, 91, 123. See also -Restaurants
Forest Park Recreation Center, 44
Forests, forestry, and forest products industry, 13, 14, 32, 50, 64, 65, 66,
67, 99, 101, 111, 123, 124. See also Furniture industry
Fragile areas. See Natural and fragile areas
Fringe areas. See Outlying areas
Funding. See Fiscal resources
Furniture industry, 64, 65, 66. See also Forests, forestry, and forest
products industry
Garages. See Parking and parking lots
Gasoline stations, 37, 65
General Assembly (N.C.), 1
Girl's Club, 44
Goals: for Coast Guard compatibility, 86; for economic/industrial
development, 72; for historic sites, 103; for housing, 61; for natural and
fragile areas, 98-99; for natural hazard mitigation, 82; for public
facilities and services, 92; for recreation and open spaces, 52; for
' traffic and transportation, 26; for urban design/aesthetic resources, 104-
5; for waterfront development, 40; general, 2, 26, 64, 91, 113, 115
Gosnold Avenue Open Space, 44
' Gosnold Park, 39
Grants. See Fiscal resources
Greenways, 39, 40, 52, 110, 111, 114. See also Natural and fragile areas;
Open spaces

6
Ground water. See Water quality and water resources
Growth and development: and aesthetics, 101-2, 104-6; and causeway, 111-12;
and Coast Guard, 85, 87; and conservation, 115; and economy, 124; and
environment, 99; and farms, 71, 72, 75, 124; and fires, 27-28; and floods,
76-77, 117; and greenways, 52; and Halstead Boulevard, 20, 21, 102; and
historic sites, 103-4, 106; and housing, 58, 61; and land use, 29, 108,
125; and marshes, 99; and natural areas, 94, 99; and natural hazards, 82,
83, 123; and neighborhoods, 63; and Pasquotank River, 105; and pedestrians,
25; and public utilities, 92; and recreation, 49, 52, 55; and
rehabilitation, 73; and resources, 123; and sewage, 90, 93, 94, 100, 114;
and soils, 98; and solid wastes, 90; and storms, 80; and streets, 105; and
traffic, 15, 20, 21, 26; and transition lands, 109-10; and UGB, 115; and
urban services, 93; and waterfront, 29; and water resources, 89, 93, 94,
97, 100, 114; and wetlands, 111; discouraged, 114; encouraged, 108, 109;
existing and trends in, 2, 4-11; general, 4-11; planning for, 1-3, 123;
regulated, 115; stimulated, 124; strip, 35, 102, 105; urban, see
Urbanization. See also Commerce and trade; Economy and economic base;
Industry and industrial development; specific types of development
Habit Causeway, 91
Halstead Boulevard Development and Growth Study, 20, 21, 102
Harbor Place (Md.), 32
Harbors, 32, 36, 37, 38, 41. See also Marinas and mooring facilities
Harriot Drive Public Housing, 44
Hazardous wastes. See Solid waste disposal
Hazards. See Natural hazards, mitigation of
Health care and health facilities, 10, 21, 22, 39, 50,
110, 125
Herrington Road Bridge, 36
High Schools. See Education and educational facilities
Highways. See Roads and highways
Hiking trails, diagrammed, 51
Historic Districts Commission, 31, 117
I
I
I
65, 67, 77, 87, 97, 98, 1
1
History, historic sites, and Historic Districts, 29, 30, 31, 33, 40, 54, 56,
59-60, 61, 62, 70, 73, 74, 101, 103, 106, 117, 125, 126
Hobbs Park, 34, 43, 47
Holly Square, 72
Hollywood Cemetery, 36, 38 ,
Homes. See Construction and construction industry; Housing
Hopkins Drive Tot Lot, 44, 77
Horseback riding, 49, 50, 55; trails for, diagrammed, 51
Hospitals. See Health care and health facilities
Hotels, 79. See also Inns; Motels
Housing, 2, 7, 8, 10, 12, 13, 20, 21, 26, 30-31, 34, 35,
44, 48, 49, 55, 56-63, 71, 76, 77, 82, 83, 86, 89, 91,
103-4, 105, 106, 115-17, 125; subdivisions listed, 91.
Construction and construction industry
Housing Authority (city), 36, 58-59
Housing Element, 56, 58, 59
HUD, 76
36, 37, 38, 49, 41, '
94, 98, 101, 102,
See also
1
Human resources, 21, 90, 96
Hurricane Evacuation Plan (county/city), 80-81
Hurricanes, 1, 26, 76, 79, 80, 81, 82, 84, 117, 124. See also Natural
hazards, mitigation of '

7
Implementation, 2-3 40 52 113-19
P , ,
Income levels, 21, 58, 64, 68, 69, 95. See also Poverty
Industrial Development Commission (county/city), 66, 67, 68, 73, 118
Industrial Park, 69
Industrial parks. See Industry and industrial development
Industrial Park Site, 118
Industry and industrial development, 2, 4, 11, 13, 20, 21, 64-75, 90, 103,
105, 116-17, 118-19, 124; also Commerce and trade; industries, listed, 65,
66, 67, 91. See Economy and economic base
In -migration, 5
Inns, 40. See also Hotels; Motels
Insurance industry, 65, 76-77, 117
Intracoastal Waterway, 30, 126
Investment. See Fiscal resources
Irrigation, 97
Junior High School, 44, 81
Junior high schools. See Education and educational facilities
Kiosks, 33
Knobbs Creek, 12, 19, 25, 29, 31, 34, 43, 47, 49, 50, 52, 54, 79, 100, 101,
110, 111, 114, 118, 122, 125;'diagrammed, 51
Knobbs Creek Bridge, 25
Knobbs Creek Park, 43, 54
Knobbs Creek Recreation Center and Park, 47, 122
Kramer Building, 70, 73
Labor force. See Employment
Land: acquired, 114-15; along waterfront, 20, 35; and causeway, 111, and
Coast Guard, 86, 87; and farms, 71, 75; and floods, 77; and housing, 62,
116; and marshes,-99; and open spaces, 49; and recreation, 49, 54, 55; and
streets, 20; and urban growth areas, 108; and water, 100; city owns, 37,
52, 112; classification system for, 2, 40, 52, 75, 108-12, 115, 118;
classification system for, diagrammed, 2, 40, 108, 110, 114, inside back
cover; developed, 108; for conservation, 110-11; public, 125; rural, 108,
111-12; transitional, 109-10, 114; undeveloped, 108, 111-12; uses, of, 108.
See also Acreage; Land use and land use planning; specific topics
Land Classification Plan, 94. See also Land: classification system for
Landfills. See Solid waste disposal
Land use and land use planning: and automobiles, 15; and coastal area, 95;
And Coast Guard, 85, 86; and conservation, 115; and economy, 64, 124; and
estuaries, 99; and farming, 71; and floods, 83, 117; and fragile areas,
111; and harbors, 37; and housing, 12, 56, 61; and NFIP, 76-77; and
outlying areas, 118; and population, 7; and recreation, 54, 55; and sewers,
98; and signs, 118; and soils, 98, and solid wastes, 90, 92; and spot
zoning, 20; and storms, 79; and urbanization, 114; and waterfront, 29, 30;
' decision making in, 1; existing and trends in, 2, 11-14; existing and
trends in, diagrammed, inside back cover; general, 1-3, 4; jurisdiction in,
95; policies for, 2; problems in, 4; surveys for, 11. See also Land; Land
use Plan; specific toQics
Land Use Plan, 8, 10, 11, 43, 122. See also Land use and land use planning
Land Use Plan Update (1981), 123, 125

e
Lawyers, 65, 122
Leisure activities. See Parks; Recreation and recreational facilities
Lexington Drive Tot Lot, 44, 47
Libraries, 122
Life, quality of, 72, 73, 101, 117
Lighting. See Electricity
Lions Club Park, 44
Logging. See Forests, forestry, and -forest products industry
Machelhe Island, 29, 35, 42, 50
Malls, 30, 31, 35, 48. See also Commerce and trade
Maps, 24, 51, inside back cover
Marinas and mooring facilities, 30, 32-34, 35, 37,'38, 39, 41, 45, 47. See
also Harbors
Mariners' Wharf, 39
Markets and marketplaces. See Commerce and trade
Marshes. See Swamps, marshes, and wetlands
Mayor, 81
Medical care. See Health care and health facilities
Memorial Field Complex, 44
Merchandising. See Commerce and trade
Methodists, 44
Migration, 5
Milling, 40
Minerals. See Mining
,
Mining, 65, 111, 124
Mini -parks. See Parks
Minorities, 10-11, 94
,
Mobile homes and mobile home parks, 12, 13, 35, 58, 62, 91
Mobility problems. See Travel, transportation, and transportation industry
Moore (P.W.) School, 44, 81
Mooring facilities. :See Marinas and mooring facilities
Mosely Street Public Housing, 44
Motels, 91. See also Hotels; Inns
Motor vehicles, 15, 21, 25, 31, 34, 65, 92, 107, 124. See also Accidents;
Parking and parking lots; safety; Travel, Transportation, and
transportation industry
Movies, 44
Municipalities. See Cities and municipalities
Museum of the Albemarle, 45
Museums, 32, 45
National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP),-76-79, 83, 117
National Register of Historic Places, 59, 60, 70, 74, 126
Natural and fragile areas, 2, 35, 36, 38-39, 40, 43, 72, 94, 95-100, 106, 110-
,
11, 114, 123
Natural hazards, mitigation of, 1, 2, 26-27, 76-84, 123; diagrammed, inside
back cover
Natural resources, 1, 26, 33, 49, 98, 108, 123-24. See also specific natural
'
resources
Naturalscientists, 67
Nature trails, 31, 36, 39, 47, 49, 50, 110; diagrammed, 51
'
Navigation. See Boats and boating
LA

Neighborhood parks. See Parks
Neighborhood Revitalization Areas (NRA's), 59
NFIP, 76-19, 11, 117
1981 Land Use Plan Update, 123, 125
1976 Open Space and Recreational Plan, 45, 46, 47, 49-50, 51, 55
Noise, 21, 85-86, 87
Norfolk, Va., 41
North Carolina: and AEC's, 95; and coastal planning, 1; and disaster relief,
82-83; and Dismal Swamp Canal, 70, 74; and erosion, 126; and grants, 53;
and Intracoastal Waterway, 126; and land use, 1; and ocean, 95; and
planning, 123, 125-26; and pollution, 93; and transportation, 125; and
water access, 50, 53; and welcome center, 74; building code of, 89; elderly
in, 10; employment in, 68; ethnic groups in, 10; highways in, 16; housing
in, 56, 59, 62, 67; income in, 68, 69; plumbing in, 56, 57; population of,
4, 5, 6, 9; poverty in, 68, 69; roads in, 35, 50, 69, 96. See also entries
immediately following: specific cities, counties, and topics
North Carolina Department of Human Resources, 90, 96
North Carolina Department of Transportation, 15, 23, 37, 125
North Carolina Division of Parks and Recreation, 43, 45
North Carolina Eastern Municipal Power Agency, 126
North Carolina Environmental Management Commission, 89
North Carolina General Assembly, 1
North Carolina Office of State Budget and Management, 5
' Northeaster High School, 43, 81, 91
NPDES permit limits, 89
NRA's, 59
Nurses. See Health care and health facilities
Oak Stump Road, 19
Occupations, 66-67; listed, 67. See also Employment
Old Elizabeth City Municipal Airport, 90
Olk Quake Cemetery, 39
Open Space and Recreational Plan (1976), 45, 46, 47, 49-50, 51, 55
Open spaces, 2, 31, 32, 33, 38, 40, 43-55, 83, 86, 87, 88, 106, 110, 111, 114,
123. See also Environment; Greenways; Natural and fragile areas
Ordinances, 1, 23, 31, 61, 62, 77-78, 83, 84, 86, 87, 89, 102, 103, 104, 105,
106, 113, 115, 117, 118
Outlying areas, 7, 8, 11, 12, 35, 42, 48, 50, 55, 57, 58, 88, 94, 100, 101,
108, 109, 110, 111, 114, 117-18; diagrammed, 51
Out-migation, 5,10
Parking and parking lots, 31, 35, 36, 49, 60, 104, 105
Parks, 12, 34, 36, 37, 38, 39, 43-55, 110. See also Picnicking; Recreation
and recreational facilities; specific parks
Pasquotank County, N.C., 4-6, 21, 22, 27, 50, 51, 53, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70,
71, 73, 74, 75, 80-81, 82, 90, 92, 96, 97-98, 118, 119, 122
Pasquotank Elementary School, 44, 81
Pasquotank River, 26, 29, 30, 31, 35, 36, 40, 41, 49, 50, 52, 53, 76, 79, 80,
88, 96, 99, 100, 101, 105, 118, 123, 125; diagrammed, 51
Pedestrians, 23, 25, 27, 30, 31, 33, 34, 35, 36, 38, 39, 40, 41, 51, 55. See
also Hiking trails
r Pelican Marina, 35
Perquimans County, N.C., 89

10
Personal services, 22, 65
Picnicking, 34, 46, 47. See also Parks
Piers. See Marinas and mooring facilities
Pine Lakes Country Club, 44
Planning. See Land use and land use planning; specific tonics
Planning Commission (city), 122
Planning Department (city), 43, 36, 60
Plants. See Vegetation
Playgrounds, 43, 44, 46, 47, 48, 54. See also Parks; Recreation and
recreational facilities
Plumbing. See Sewage and wastewater disposal
Police, 67, 81, 88, 92, 108
Policies: and hazard zones, 80; and land use plans, 2; assessed, 123-26; for
Coast Guard compatibility, 86-87; for economic/industrial development, 72;
for historic sites, 103; for housing, 62-63; for natural and fragile areas,
99-100; for natural hazard mitigation, 82-84; for public facilities and
services, 92; for recreation and open spaces, 52; for traffic and
transportation, 26-28; for urban design/aesthetic resources, 105-7; for
waterfront development, 40-42; general, 2, 108, 113
Pollution and pollution control, 21, 73, 89, 90, 93, 97, 99, 112
Ponds, 14, 95
Population, 1, 2, 4-8, 9, 15, 16, 20, 26, 45, 58, 108, 110
Ports, 29, 64, 74. See also Marinas and mooring facilities
Poverty, 22, 68, 69. See also Income levels
Power. See Electricity; Energy production
Pricing. See Fiscal resources
Private sector, 34, 35, 36, 43, 44, 50, 53,
125
Professions, 64, 65, 67
Property taxes. See Taxes
Public administration, 64, 65, 67
1
69, 76, 82, 83, 84, 107, 114, 117, 1
Public areas, facilities, services, and participation, 2, 10, 20, 21, 30, 32,
38, 39, 41, 43, 44, 45, 46, 50, 53, 54, 56, 58, 71, 77, 79, 80, 83, 84, 88-
94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 100, 107, 109, 110, 113, 114, 115, 116, 122, 125. See
also specific topics
Public housing. See Housing
Public transportation. See Travel, transportation, and transportation
industry
Public Transportation Study, 21
Public Transportation Task Force, 22
Public Trust Areas, 95, 96, 111
Public utilities, 27, 65, 92, 126
Public Water Supply Well Fields, 95
Quakers, 39
Quality of life, 72, 73, 101, 117
Railroads, 23, 25, 27, 50, 96; diagrammed, 24, 51
Real estate industry, 35, 65
Reconstruction, emergency. See Natural hazards, mitigation of
Recreation and recreational facilities, 2, 10, 12, 13, 25, 32, 33, 34, 35, 37,
40, 43-55, 62, 65, 73, 87, 88, 96, 98, 99, 108, 110, 115, 122, 123, 124,
125. See also Athletics; Parks; specific recreations
1
I
1
1

' 11
Refuse. See Solid waste disposal
Relief. See Topography
Religion, 7, 29, 34, 44, 50, 65, 87
Rental housing. See Housing
Residences and residential housing. See Construction and construction
industry; Housing
Resources. See Natural resources
Restaurants, 32, 33, 35, 37, 41, 79. See also Food and food industry
Retail trade. See Commerce trade
Retirees. See Senior citizens
Revenue. See Fiscal resources
Rivers, streams, and creeks, 53, 95, 123; diagrammed, 24, 51. See also
specific rivers. streams
Riverside Avenue Bridge, 38
Riverside campus area, 39
Roads and highways, 12, 15, 16, 18, 19, 23-24, 26, 27, 35, 44, 49, 50, 68, 69,
71, 74, 81, 96, 101-2, 110, 114, 118, 125; diagrammed, 24, 51. See also
Accidents; Safety; Streets
Roanoke Bible College, 7, 29, 34, 44, 50
Robinson Building site, 35
Roman Catholics, 44
Rural areas, 108, 111-12, 114, 115. See also Farms and farming; Soils
Safety, 15, 23, 25, 26, 77, 83, 85, 87, 97, 98, 110. See also Accidents
Sailboats. See Boats and boating
St. Catherine Catholic Church, 44
Sales taxes. See Taxes
San Francisco, Calif., 32
Sawyer (J.C.) School, 44,, 81
Scenic areas. See Aesthetic and visual resources
Schools. See Education and educational facilities
Science, 67
SCS, 98
Sculpture, 32. See also Art
Seafood. See Fish, fishing, and fishing industry
Section 8 units, 58
Senior citizens, 9, 10, 21, 22, 39, 58
Septic tanks. See Sewage and wastewater disposal
Service station, 37, 65
Sewage and wastewater disposal, 34, 50, 56, 57, 76, 84, 88, 89-90, 91, 92, 93,
94, 97, 98, 100, 108, 109, 110, 112, 113, 114; sewage system, diagrammed,
inside back cover
Sewage Plant Road, 50
Sheep Harney School, 81
Sheriff, 81
Shops and shopping. See Commerce and trade
Shorelines and estuaries, 29, 37, 95-96, 99, 100, 111, 112; shorelines,
diagrammed, 24, 51. See also Waterfront and waterfront revitalization
Sidewalks. See Pedestrians
Sign Control Ordinance, 102, 103
Signs: advertising, 102, 103, 105, 118; highway, 34
Site designs, site review, and site plans. See Construction and construction
industry; Housing
P��

12 ,
Slips, boat. See Marinas and mooring facilities
Social life and social services, 4, 9-11, 21, 22, 27, 61,
63, 65, 94, 123
Soils, 97-98, 100, 123. See also Farms and farming; Rural
areas
Solar energy, 61, 62. See also Energy production
Solid waste disposal, 88, 90, 92, 104, 105, 106-7, 108
Solid Waste Planning Study, 90
Sounds, 95
Southern Avenue playground, 47
Southern Railway, 96
Southgate Mall, 48, 72
Southgate Manor, 44
"South Martin Street NRA," 59
Spanish people, 10-11, 94
Special Orders of Consent, 89, 90, 91, 93
Speed limits, 102-3
Sports. See Athletics
Sportsman's Marina, 45
Stores. See Commerce and trade
Storms, 26, 34, 76, 79, 80, 82, 83. See also Drainage; Natural
Hazards,
mitigation of
Streams. See Rivers, streams, and creeks
Streets, 12-14, 15, 16-21, 23, 26, 27, 28, 29, 31, 32, 34,
35, 36, 37, 38, 39,
40, 43, 44, 47, 48, 59, 70, 72, 81, 95, 101-2 105, 114,
125; diagrammed,
24, 51. See also Roads and highways
Strip development, 35, 102, 105
Subdivisions. See Construction and construction industry;
Housing
Swamps, marshes, and wetlands, 13, 14, 17, 38, 50, 69, 70,
74, 95, 99, 100,
101, 111, 112, 126. See also Coastal areas
Swimming. See Athletics
Taxes, 71, 75, 78, 89, 93
Taxis, 21. See also'Motor vehicles
Teachers. See Education and educational facilities
Terrain, 98, 101
Theatres, 44, 47. See also Entertainment
Thoroughfares and Thoroughfare Plan. See Roads and highways; Streets
Tides, 95
Topography, 98, 101
Tot lots. See Playgrounds
Tourism and vacationers, 25, 27, 30, 32, 33, 35, 41, 49,
62, 73, 99, 101, 102, 119, 124. See also Commerce and
Traffic. See Travel, transportation, and transportation
Trailer parks. See Mobile homes and mobile home parks
Trails, of various types, 55; diagrammed, 51
Transition lands, 109-10, 114
50, 53, 54, 55, 61,
trade
industry
Transportation. See Travel, transportation, and transportation industry
Transportation Improvements Program (state), 125
Travel, transportation, and transportation industry, 2, 10, 12, 15-28, 34, 37,
50, 64, 65, 67, 69, 70, 71, 72, 74, 82, 125. See also Motor vehicles;
Parking and parking lots; Roads and highways; Streets
Trees. See Forests, forestry, and forest products industry
Trigg (H.L.) School, 44, 81
Trucks. See Motor vehicles
I
1
1

' 13
UGB, 108-11, 115
Unemployment. See Employment
United States and United States government, 7, 29, 53, 59, 62, 76, 82-83, 123,
125-26; roads of, see Road and highways; See also entries immediately
following
United States Army Corps of Engineers, 70
United States censuses, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 22, 56, 69, 71
United States Coast Guard and Coast Guard Base, 2, 7, 66, 85-87, 95, 125, 126;
base, diagrammed, 51
United States Coast Guard Support Center. See United States Coast Guard and
Coast Guard Base
United States Department of Agriculture, 98
United State Department of Defense, 86
United States Justice Department, 94
United States Soil Conservation Service (SCS), 98
Universities. See Education and educational facilities; specific universities
Unnamed Point, 95
Urban Advisory Committee, 122
Urban growth areas, 108
Urban growth boundary (UGB), 108-11, 115
Urbanization, 2, 32, 43, 71, 75, 85, 88, 92, 93, 98, 101-7, 108-11, 113, 114,
115, 122, 123, 124
Utilities, public, 27, 65, 92, 126
VA, 76
Vacationers. See Tourism and vacationers
Vandalism, 71
Vegetation, 101, 102, 104, 105, 116
Virginia, 16, 41, 69, 74, 126
.� Virginia Dare Arcade Building, 70, 73
Virginia Dare Transportation Co., 21
Virginia Electric and Power Co., 126
Visual resources. See Aesthetic and visual resources
Voorhees and Associates, 21
Walker Ave./Southern Ave.NRA, 59
Walking trails. See Pedestrians
Walkways. See Pedestrians
Walnut Street Community Development Project, 59
Washington, George, 70
Washington, D.C., 41
Wastes and wastewater disposal. See Sewage and wastewater disposal; Solid
waste disposal
Water, bodies, of: access to, 32, 50, 53; acreage in, 13, 14; and causeways,
112; and Public Trust Areas, 96, 111; and recreation, 53, 125; open, 37.
See also specific types and bodies of water: entries immediately following
Waterfront and waterfront revitalization, 2, 20, 26, 28,,29-42, 49, 50, 73,
102, 106, 116, 119, 124, 125. See also Shorelines and estuaries
Waterfront Development Study, 29-31, 36, 39, 40,
Waterfront Park, 34, 36, 38, 40, 43, 45, 47, 50
Water quality and water resources, 34, 84, 88-89, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96-97, 98,
99, 100, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 123, 125; water system,
diagrammed, inside back cover

14
Water Street Open Space, 43
Water table. See Water quality and water resources
Weeksville, N.C., 23, 25, 51, 68, 81
Weeksville Road, 23, 25, 68; diagrammed, 51
Weeksville School, 81
Well Field Area, 50
Wells. See Water quality and water resources
West Main Street Historic District, 59-60, 62, 106
Wetlands. See Swamps, marshes, and wetlands
Wharves. See Marinas and mooring facilities
White (Kermit E.) Graduate Center, 122
White people, 10-11
Whyte, William H., 32
Wildlife, 123. See also Ecology; Fish, fishing, and fishing industry
Wildlife Commission, 45
Wildlife Commission Boat Ramp, 45
Wilmington, N.C., 29
Winston-Salem, N.C., 39
Yachts. See Boats and boating; Marinas and mooring facilities
Yacht Yard and Marina, 39, 45
Young people, 9, 10, 44, 65, 67
Zoning, 2, 20, 21, 31, 51, 62, 75, 86, 87, 102, 104, 105, 106, 113, 115-17

n
Chapter 1.0
Introduction
Preparing for change in Elizabeth City
The Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA), enacted by the General Assembly
in 1974, creates a collaborative planning process between coastal localities
and the state. Coastal localities are required to prepare and adopt land use
plans, consistent with state guidelines and specifications, which address a
number of substantive issues ranging from economic development to conservation
of fragile natural resources to hurricane hazard mitigation. Once adopted,
CAMA requires that each land use plan be reviewed and updated every five
years.
The purpose of the land use plan is to permit local officials to make
informed decisions about growth and change in their jurisdiction. The plan
analyzes population, economic and other trends and conditions and the possible
ramifications of these, both positive and negative. The plan identifies
important goals for the locality in guiding its physical development, and
policies and implementing devices for advancing these goals. The plan is,
then, an important policy tool to be used in land use decision making. The
plan is also very important in that under the CAMA framework it serves to
coordinate the future actions of federal and state agencies.
Elizabeth City prepared and adopted a land use plan under the provisions
of CAMA in 1976. It updated this plan in 1981. This plan is the update of
the 1981 plan. It incorporates elements of the 1976 and 1981 plans, and
builds substantially upon these documents. While this plan is the primary
tool for guiding future decisions concerning land use and development in the
11
1

4
city, and its extraterritorial jurisdiction, the reader should read the
current plan in conjunction with the policies contained in other relevant City
policies and ordinances.)
Organization of the plan
The plan begins in Chapter 2.0 with a review of population trends and
characteristics and is followed in Chapter 3.0 by a review and discussion of
existing land use and current development trends. The chapters which follow,
Chapters 4.0 through 13.0, provide discussions of substantive policy areas of
relevance to Elizabeth City. These include: Traffic and Transportation
(Chapter 4.0), Revitalizing the Waterfront (Chapter 5.0), Open space and
Recreation (Chapter 6.0), Housing (Chapter 7.0), Economic and Industrial
Development (Chapter 8.0), Mitigation of Natural Hazards (Chapter 9.0),
Planning for compatibility with the Coast Guard Station (Chapter 10.0), Public
Services and Facilities (Chapter 11.0), Protection of Natural and Fragile
Areas (Chapter 12.0), and Urban Design/Aesthetic Quality (Chapter 13.0). For
each of these chapters a brief discussion of the issues, problems, and
opportunities presented by that particular substantive area is provided,
followed by a general goal or goals, and a series of more specific policies.
Chapter 14.0 presents the land classification system for the city. This
permits the City to attach the specific goals and policies identified in the
plan to particular geographical areas and zones in the city. The land
classification map is both a way to implement policies, and a proposed land
use design that requires further implementation through other more specific
tools and techniques, such as the zoning ordinance or the City's capital
'The Plan applies to the City of Elizabeth City and the area adjacent to
the City over which the City's planning and zoning jurisdiction extends
(usually referred to as "the extraterritorial jurisdiction."

11
3
1
f
i
11
1
improvement program. These implementation tools and techniques are described
in Chapter 15.0.

Chapter 2.0
Growth and Change in Elizabeth City
The nature and magnitude of Elizabeth City's planning problems will
depend in large degree on the amount and type of growth and development it
will experience in the future. This chapter is intended to provide a baseline
for the remainder of the plan by examining population and development trends
and estimating future growth. The chapter also provides a capsulized view of
the demographic and social characteristics of the Elizabeth City population,
which may in turn assist the City in identifying existing and future planning
problems. These are features and characteristics of the population which
have relevance to the entire planning effort, and leave.the examination of
other relevant facts and information to subsequent chapters. For example,
information concerning the local economic and employment base, and important
trends in this area, is contained in the chapter of the plan (chapter 8.0)
which deals with economic and industrial development.
Population and Development Trends
Population growth in Elizabeth City has not been great in recent years.
Table 2.1 presents city and county population estimates for 1960 to 1984 (the
most recent state estimate). While the city grew 2.3% between 1960 and 1970,
the population declined between 1970 and 1980 (by 0.4%). The population has
increased slightly since 1980 (0.8% between 1980 and 1984). Prior to 1960 the
city grew by an average of 10% per decade. Slower growth rates, and the
decline during the 1970's are generally attributed to a combination of

5
1
i
u
I
1
1
Table 2.1
Population Estimates
Percent Percent Percent
Change Change Change
1960 1970 1960- 1980 1970- 1980-
Census Census 1970 Census 1980 1984 1984
Elizabeth
City 14,062
Pasquotank
County 25,630
14,381 (2.3%) 14,002
26,824 (4.7%) 28,462
(-.4%) 14,109 (.8%)
(6.1%) 28,993 (2.0%)
North
Carolina 4,556,155 5,084,411 (11.6%) 5,881,766 (15.7%)
Source: Office of State Budget and Management
factors including: inadequate economic growth, a net out -migration rate, a
declining birth rate and little in -migration (1976 plan).
Population statistics at the county level indicate.that county population
has been steadier, albeit relatively small in terms of annual percentage
increases. For instance, while the city lost population between 1970 and
1980, the county grey by 6.1%. Between 1980 and 1984, the county grew by 2.0%
(see Table 2.1) compared to the city's .8% growth rate during this same
period.
Population projections for Pasquotank prepared by the N.C. Office of
State Budget and Management indicate that substantial future growth in the
area, at least in the very near future, is not expected. These estimates are,
however, based on past trends. As Table 2.2 indicates, the county is expected
to grow by only about 7% between 1984 and the year 2000. While the state does
not prepare projections for municipalities, the county projections can be used
to calculate a rough projection for the city. Several approaches, involving
different assumptions about the relationship between the city and county

0
Table 2.2
Population Projections (Using the Proportional Method)
Percent
Percent Change
1984 1990* Change 2000* 2000
Elizabeth City 14,109 14,579 (3.3%) 15,076 (6.9%)
Pasquotank County 28,993 29,960 (3.3%) 30,982 (6.9%)
Source: Office of State Budget and Management
*These are new projections as of June, 1986.
populations, can be used to calculate the city projections. One approach is
to assume that the city of Elizabeth City will comprise the same percentage of
the total county population as it has in the past. In 1984, city population
comprised 48.7% of the total county population. Assuming that this proportion
will stay the same in the future, this approach yields a projection of 14,579
residents in the city in 1990 and 15,076 residents in 2000. (See Table 2.2.)
Of course, the extent to which this relationship of city and county
populations will continue depends upon the extent to which the boundaries of
the city extend to encompass population growth on the fringe (i.e., the extent
to which it engages in annexation).
Another approach to projecting the city's population is simply to use a
straight-line projection technique; that is to simply carry into the future
current growth rates. Applying the 1980-1984 annual growth rate of .2%,
yields a 1990 city population estimate of 14,277 and a year 2000 estimate of
14,557. Continuing the 1980-1984 growth rate into the future adds approxi-
mately 450 additional residents by the year 2000, or roughly 28 new residents
per year. Note that this method yields a lower projection because the state
does not use the county's most recent and relatively high growth rate.

Recent building permit data confirm the observation that growth is
relatively slow. As Table 2.3 indicates, between 1980 and 1985 (inclusive of
both years) the city issued building permits for only 165 residential
structures, and substantially fewer commercial structures. At a national
average of 2.8 persons per household, these new structures could at the most
accommodate 462 additional city residents. Of course, this does not consider
a number of factors which would reduce this number: that housing structures
were subtracted from the local housing stock over the same period; that not
all building permits result in the building of dwelling units; that some
permits are issued for additions/renovations; and so on.
The 1980 Census of Housing indicates that there existed 5,395 housing
units in the city. The building permit data indicate that over the five year
period 1980-1985, the city experienced only a 3% increase in its housing
stock.
'As Table 2.3 indicates,
building permits were issued for
a number (though
not a great number)
of residential and commercial structures
outside the City
limits,
yet within
the City's extraterritorial boundaries.
Thus, these areas
of growth will add
to the population of the county, but not
to the city.
These areas on the
fringe of the city are likely to account
for a considerable
portion of the future growth in the area (see discussion of
existing land
use).
In addition to general uncertainties
concerning economic growth in
Elizabeth City, future population growth
is also dependent
upon future
enrollment levels at the city's colleges
(Elizabeth City State University,
�I
College of the Albemarle, Roanoke Bible College;
fall 1986
enrollment was
6 3 4 v w
1 1 1 80, and 137 respectively) as well
as the n umber of
employees and
families affiliated with the Coast Guard
Support Center.
U

8
Based on responses to a citizen questionnaire, the 1976 Land Use Plan
indicates that a 1985 projected population would range from a 1,500 to_4,000
population increase (over 1975 population of 14,770). The upper boundaries of
this projection would have yielded a city population of nearly 19,000,
obviously very optimistic compared with the actual growth that occurred.
Table 2.3
Building Permit Trends
City
Limits
Outside City
Limits
Residential
Commercial
Residential
Commercial
1980
34 Bldgs.
4 Bldgs.
36 Bldgs.
4 Bldgs.
$1,236,000
$2,275,000
$1,188,000
$447,000
1981
41 Bldgs.
7 Bldgs.
12 Bldgs.
1 Bldg.
$1,612,000
$3,526,000
$420,000
$ 5,000
1982
21 Bldgs.
8 Bldgs.
6 Bldgs.
1 Bldg.
$1,178,000
$1,854,000
$206,000
$45,000
1983
27 Bldgs.
8 Bldgs.
15 Bldgs.
$1,017,000
$1,122,000
$587,000
1984
17 Bldgs.
4 Bldgs.
20 Bldgs.
6 Bldgs.
$1,468,000-
$277,000
$975,000
$197,000
1985
25 Bldgs.
5 Bldgs.
20 Bldgs.
4 Bldgs.
$1,657,000
$211,000
$906,000
$210,000
Source: Elizabeth City Building Inspector

E
Demographic and Social Characteristics of the Population
Table 2.4 presents some basic statistics concerning age characteristics
of the Elizabeth City population. While the median age of residents in the
city is nearly the same as that for the state (in 1980), it is interesting
that the percentage of residents under 18 years is lower in Elizabeth City,
and the percentage of residents 65 and older is higher in Elizabeth City.
This may indicate that special needs exist with respect to older residents in
the city.
Table 2.4
Age Characteristics of Elizabeth City Population
Age Groups: Elizabeth City
Under 18 years 24.5%
18 to 64 years 60.3%
65 and over 15.2%
Median Age 29.7%
Source: 1980 Census of Population
It
1
North Carolina
28.2%
61.6%
10.3%
29.6%

10
Elizabeth City has followed the general trend of an aging population, and
a lower percentage of people in the 19 and younger category. The 1976 Land
Use Plan noted this "aging" of the Elizabeth City population in comparison to
trends at the state level: .�
According to census data, the age groups 45-64 and 65 and over are
increasing at much faster rates in Elizabeth City than in the state of
North Carolina as a whole. The age group 65 and over has grown faster
than the age group 45-64. The main reasons appear to be that the older
members of the community tend to be less mobile and are tied to the local
community through relatives and retirement. It is also true that people
are living longer today, and the death rate has been significantly
checked because of more advanced health care and better medical
facilities. Finally, an out -migration of younger people has resulted in
a substantial increase in the proportion of older people in the
population. Also communities like Elizabeth City offer excellent
retirement locations.
During the next 25 years a shift in age group distribution is
anticipated, as population of the younger age group decreases and older
age groups increase. The 19 and under age group is projected to decrease
by 45% while the 65 and over age group increases by 29%. This potential
age group distribution shift could have significant implications for
community services and facilities, especially in the area of health care,
housing, recreation and transportation, as the population within the
older age groups increases. (City of Elizabeth City, 1976, pp. 142-143)
Currently, the ethnic composition of the city is approximately 46.0%
black and 53% white, with a small number of residents (less than 1%) of
Spanish origin (see Table 2.5). This ethnic composition is different from
that of the state in several The . s waY proportion of black residents in
Elizabeth City is more than double the percentage for the state as a whole.
As well, the percentage of residents of Spanish origin is somewhat lower than
the state as a whole. The ethnic composition of Elizabeth City's population
has been changing since the 1960's with the percentage of non -white residents
slowly increasing.
1
t

11
Table 2.5
Ethnic Composition of Elizabeth City Population
Black
White
Spanish
Source: 1980 Census of Population
Elizabeth City
46.0%
53.2%
.8%
North Carolina
22.4%
76.6%
1.0%

Chapter 3.0
Existing Land Use
As a preliminary step in the land use planning process for Elizabeth
City, an analysis of existing land use patterns was conducted. This was
accomplished by updating the data obtained from land use surveys conducted in
preparation for the 1976 and 1981 land use plans. Generalized land use
patterns for Elizabeth City and its extra -territorial jurisdiction are
depicted on Diagram 3.1. This information is summarized in Table 3.1.
As the Existing Land Use Map (in the pocket at the back of this Document)
and table indicate, within the developed area of the city the largest use of
land is single family residential. This reflects the fact that the city is
largely composed of neighborhoods of low density, single-family detached
homes. Multi -family and more intensive forms of residential use are few.
Relatively small amounts of acreage are used for mobile homes.
A sizeable acreage is contained in commercial uses, including approxi-
mately 340 acres. These areas are primarily in the downtown section of the
city, but are also found along the major thoroughfares within the planning
area. A relatively small amount of land is contained in industrial uses, with
the largest segment northeast of the city along the northern side of Knobbs
Creek.
Some 1,360 acres of land is used for government purposes. This includes
city schools and government buildings, but the largest portion of this area is
found in the Elizabeth City State University. Approximately 100 acres are
contained in recreational uses, including public parks and recreational
facilities. Some 74 acres are contained in transportation uses, most of this

13
Table 3.1
Existing Land Use in the Elizabeth City Planning Jurisdiction, 1986
Percent of Total
Acres* Land Area
Residential
-Residential
single family
1984.5
'19.3%
-Residential
multi -family
92.2
.9
-Residential
intensive
96.9
.9
-Residential
mobile home
100.7
1.0
Commercial
340.0
3.3
Industrial
116.6
1.1
Government
1360.9
13.2
Recreation
101.3
1.0
Transportation
74.3
.7
Water (ponds)
28.3
.3
Undeveloped
547.5
5.3
Other
5439.1
53.0
Agricultural
Forested
Wooded swamps
Total 10,282 Acres
*Acreages have been rounded

14
comprised of street and roadways. Approximately 28 acres are contained in
several small ponds in the planning area.
A relatively large area (548 acres) is classified as undeveloped. These
are vacant lands which appear to be developable and are not currently in
agricultural or forested use. These latter uses, agricultural and forested
and wooded swamps, comprise the "other" category which is by far the largest
existing land use category. Some 5,439 acres are contained in this category,
comprising approximately 53% of the total land area in the city's planning
jurisdiction.

1
i
1
1
1
11
1
Chapter 4.0
Traffic and Transportation
As a community grows, traffic problems often grow with it. Road and
street improvements often do not keep pace with development; traffic
congestion occurs, and alternative forms of transportation are often not
available. This chapter of the plan will discuss transportation issues in
Elizabeth City and establish traffic and transportation policies.
The primary mode of transportation for residents of Elizabeth City is,
and will likely remain, the automobile. This suggests that the City pay
particular attention to land use and capital facilities decisions which
facilitate the ease and safety with which residents are.able to move around
the city in their automobiles. Thoroughfare plans for the city were prepared
by the State Department of Transportation in 1961 and 1965, and a substantial
update was prepared in October 1978 but was never adopted.
Travel estimates were generated by using travel forecast models design.
Table 4.1 presents these estimates, based on population and employment
assumptions for 1995 and 2000. Note that the proposed plan predicts that
total daily trips in the study area will increase by approximately 34% between
1978 and the year 2000.
I

16
Table 4.1
Travel Data Summary for Elizabeth City Study Area
1978
1995
2000
Population
18,936
22,000
24,000
Employment
10,490
12,000
13,151
Avg. Daily Trips/DU
5.8
6.8
7.0
Internal Trips
40,500
49,300
51,850
External Trips
23,200
28,200
29,400
Through Trips
3,290
8,100
8,450
Total Daily Trips
66,990
85,600
89,800
Source: 1978 Thoroughfare Plan (Proposed)
The proposed plan indicates that a number of major .road and street
improvements have been made in the last twenty years. These have included the
widening of Ehringhaus Street, the widening of Water Street, the widening of
existing U.S. 17 and'U.S. 17 By-pass (Hughes Boulevard), improvement of
Elizabeth Street and the development of portions of Main Street and Colonial
Avenue as a one-way pair of streets (1978, p, 31). Improvements identified in
the thoroughfare plan as being already programmed included the four laneing of
U.S. 17 to the Virginia state line and the widening of South Road Street (N.C.
168) from Peartree Road South to the Charles Creek Bridge.
From the trip generation projections the proposed plan identifies
Elizabeth City streets which are likely to have significant capacity
deficiencies by the year 2000. (See Table 4.2.)

17
Table 4.2
Existing Elizabeth City Streets that will have Significant
Capacity Deficiencies by Year 2000
Volume/Capacity Ratio
1.
Halstead Boulevard
1.5
2.
North Road Street
2.1
3.
Water Street
1.4
4.
Southern Avenue
2.0
5.
Hoffler Street
1.1
6.
Weeksville Road
2.1
7.
Road Street
1.8
8.
South Road Street
1.6
9.
Hughes Boulevard
1.6
Source: 1978 Thoroughfare Plan (Proposed)
Several "system" deficiencies were identified. They are:
1. The lack of:an east -west bypass.
2. Insufficient number and inadequate symmetrical dispersion of radial
streets.
3. The absence of good loop streets to provide for lateral movements.
The 1978 study also analyzed accident data from 1973 to 1976, and
identified a number of intersections in the city which appeared to be
particularly dangerous (see Table 4.3).
To address capacity deficiencies, the 1978 study considered several
different packages of alternatives, including doing nothing. The study
finally recommends widening a number of streets (see Table 4.4) at an
estimated cost of some $9,380,000. The plan then proceeds to organize the
proposed improvements according to priorities (see Table 4.5)..

18
Table 4.3
Frequent Accident Locations*
Number of
Accidents
1. Ehringhaus Street at Road Street 35
2. Hughes Boulevard at Main Street 34
3. Hughes Boulevard at Church Street 30
4. Elizabeth Street at Road Street 29
5. Ehringhaus at McArthur Street 28
6. Church Street at Road Street 23
7. Road Street at Shepard Street 22
Total 201
*Based on data for period 1973 to 1976.
Source: 1978 Thoroughfare Plan (Proposed)
Table 4.4
Recommended Road Widenines
1. Water Street (Main to Elizabeth Street)
2. Herrington Street
3. Poindexter Street (U.S. 158 routing)
4. Ward Street (U.S. 158 routing)
5. Southern Avenue (Water Street to Herrington Street Connector)
6. Weeksville Road
7. Halstead Blvd.
8. Parsonage Street
9. Hoffler Street
Source: 1978 Thoroughfare Plan (Proposed)

' 19
' Table 4.5
Major Road Improvement Priorities Identified in the
1978 Thoroughfare Plan (Proposed)
'
First Priority: Five projects
1.
Widening of Ward Street and realignment of Poindexter to connect
Water and.Elizabeth Streets.
2.
Construction of Herrington Street -Southern Avenue connector and
widening of Southern Avenue between the connector and Ehringhaus
'
Street.
3.
Widening of Herrington Street between proposed connector and
Weeksville Road.
'
4.
Widening Water Street to four lanes.
of
5.
Widening of Weeksville Road to four travel lanes.
Second
Priority: To improve mobility and accessibility in the planning area.
'
1.
Roanoke Avenue -Oak Stump Road connector.
2.
Griffin Street -Hardin Lane Minor Thoroughfare..
3.
Halstead Blvd. extension.
4.
Elizabeth City extension.
'
5.
Walker Street Halstead Blvd.
widening and extension to
'
6.
Tatem Street widening and realignment.
Third Priority: To correct capacity deficiencies to occur later in the
planning period.
'
1.
One-way pairing of Colonial Street and West Main Street plus
extension of West Colonial Street to West Main Street.
'
2.
Widening of Halstead Blvd. between Hughes Blvd. and Weeksville Road
3.
Construction of an outer loop between U.S. 17 West and U.S. 17-158
'
north.
Fourth
Priority:
1.
Widening of South Road Street to four lanes.
2.
Extension of Parsonage Street across Knobbs Creek.
Source:
1978 Thoroughfare Plan (Proposed)

20 '
Of course, these improvements are based on a study area population of '
some 24,000 by the year 2000, of which 73% or 17,520, of this will be made up
of the city's population. As we have seen in an earlier chapter, this '
estimate is somewhat greater than that which is obtained using the '
proportional methodology and more recent population estimates. Consequently,
the future generated trips would be somewhat lower, and thus the need for
improvements contained in the 1978 Thoroughfare Plan modified somewhat.
Although it was not adopted, the 1978 Thoroughfare Plan provides some
useful information in making traffic and transportation decisions. However,
many of the improvement recommendations contained in the plan may, for various '
reasons, be inappropriate or undesirable. For instance, while several plans
have recommended the widening of Water Street, this would eventually require
the destruction of structures and loss of critical land.along the waterfront. '
The City will evaluate each proposed street and road improvement with a
critical eye to ensure that the broader public interest is advanced through
them.
Traffic congestion and accident problems are particularly exacerbated by
unplanned or poorly planned development along major thoroughfares. This has
already become a problem in Elizabeth City along such thoroughfares as I
Halstead Boulevard. Several recommendations to this effect are contained in '
the 1977 Halstead Boulevard Development and Growth Study:
1. Avoid spot zoning of land uses, resulting in uses being scattered '
along the Boulevard that would tend to create excessive entrances
along the entire Boulevard and add to the hazards of driving even on
a 4 lane road. Multi -entrance residential, institutional, ,
industrial, or commercial uses should be required to be located so as
to require minimal access roads or entrances onto the Boulevard.
Wherever possible, developments should be encouraged to provide
internal traffic circulation with few access points to the main road.
Use of intersections where traffic can be slowed could serve as areas
to encourage access roads. Adequate undeveloped land should be
reserved for proposed street changes. '

21
L
r
2. Larger developments, such as planned unit development with
residential, commercial, institutional, or industrial uses should be
encouraged and internal traffic circulation should be preferred over
multiple accesses to the Boulevard. Zoning districts should be
designated along the Boulevard to achieve the above emphasis on
larger unified developments. (p. 33)
Heavy reliance on the automobile, while a practical necessity, presents a
number of problems. In addition to traffic congestion, air pollution, noise,
and other externalities, many individuals in the city, particularly the
elderly and low income, may lack access to this mode. To reduce the
externalities associated with heavy auto use and to provide greater access,
the City should attempt, to the extent that it can, to provide other forms of
transportation. In 1979, the City sponsored a traffic study, prepared by
Voorhees and Associates. This study assessed current public transportation
services, identified transportation needs, and developed a strategy for long-
range public transportation in Elizabeth City. (See Voorhees and Associates,
1979.)
Public transportation services in the city have not existed since the
1940s. Several local agencies do, however, provide limited transportation
services, including the Economic Improvement Council, Inc., the Pasquotank
County Department of Social Services, and the Elizabeth City Department of
Human Resources. Intercity bus service is also provided by Carolina Trailways
and Virginia Dare Transportation Company. In addition to these services,
approximately 30 taxicabs are licensed to operate within the city.
The Public Transportation Study conducted an extensive needs assessment,
considering income and demographic data, and the location of important travel
destinations (e.g., medical, food and other shopping facilities). The study
concludes that needs do exist, particularly in the following areas: (1) the
need to provide essential transportation services for persons with virtually
no alternative means of mobility, and (2) the need to provide transportation

22
services related to essential needs (medical, banking, personal services and
food shopping).
It is important to note that these mobility problems may be on the rise.
(see Table 4.6 ). As noted in earlier chapters, the Elizabeth City population
appears to be increasing in age, indicating that greater mobility problems may
emerge here.
Table 4.6
Mobility Problems of Elizabeth City Residents
Percent households without
automobiles
Percent families under
poverty line
Percent individuals over 65
years of age
Source: 1960 Census of Population
1970 Census of Population
1980 Census'of Population
1960 1970 1980
-- 20.3% 15.3%
9.3% 12.2% 15.2%
The 1979 transit study proposes a public transportation program, in
collaboration with Pasquotank County and the Public Transportation Task Force.
Among the components of this program were : (1) improved coordination of
existing services in a multi -county region; (2) designation of one agency as
the primary provider of human services transportation in a multi -county
region, and (3) provision of scheduled public transportation services in the
city and county. The first two components would focus on improving and
coordinating the medical and human service -program related transportation,
while the third component would provide more traditional public transit

1 23
services. The plan proposed that the latter component would entail, among
.other things, the acquisition of two small buses which would operate on a
fixed route schedule in the city. The recommendations have not been
' implemented.
Two important alternative modes of transportation which the City has
considered are those of pedestrian and bicycle travel. With respect to the
second, the N.C. Department of Transportation prepared in January 1985, at the
' request of the City, a Bicycle Plan (Bicycling in Elizabeth City: An Analysis
of Needs, 1985). This study identifies current bicycling conditions and needs
' in the city and proposes a series of recommendations for the City. Among the
specific recommendations included in the Bicycle Study were: (1) the City
should initiate a bicycle safety education program; (2) the City should
' renovate or redesignate the city's current signed bike routes, and consider
future bikeways and bike paths; (3) the City should make appropriate on -road
improvements, including the replacements of hazardous.drainage grates, the
provision of wide shoulders, and the paving of hazardous railroad crossings
' and bridges; (4) the'City should provide adequate bicycle racks throughout the
town; (5) the City should implement and enforce its bicycle registration
ordinance; and (6) the City should revise and distribute its bicycle map.
Diagram 4.1 presents the City's existing designated bikeway system. One area
where a separated bike path may be appropriate is along the Charles Creek (see
Open Space Chapter). In addition, the N.C. Department of Transportation has
designated an Elizabeth City bikeway (running along Business 17) as part of
its cross -state route.
' The Bicycle Plan presents a detailed analysis of the bike issues and
problems in two areas of the city: (1) bicycling along U.S. 17, and
' (2) bicycling along Halstead Boulevard and Weeksville Road. The Route 17

RCH ST
8
W.
VPRES
ST
ATALIM
AVE
s
ATER ST
OQ
\ w
! 8/DF
RALEIGH
ST
P 41
J
/ DOWNTOWN BICYCLE r
ROUTE ` \
0 1ti00 3200 feet 'Nw�-.M*
/ l
--- County Boundary -r—I a 1 Railroad Corporate Llmita �`- Stream; Shoreline��` ���� Bltc.d_ yal. i i i

r 25
corridor is found to be particularly hazardous for bicyclists, and the plan
recommends a'number of improvements to correct these problems: bicycle -safe
grates near the Knobbs Creek Bridge, the smoothing -out of rough railroad
tracks, and the installation of regulatory signs and stripes. With respect to
bicycling along Halstead Boulevard/Weeksville Road, the major recommendation
is the construction of a two-way separate -from -traffic bikeway along either
part or all of this corridor.
' The importance of pedestrian access and a pedestrian -orientation has been
emphasized in several other chapters of this plan. It should be reiterated
that future development and redevelopment in the city should permit as much
pedestrian orientation as possible. The more extensive are such
opportunities, the less important will be reliance upon the automobile. The
' tourism and recreational aspects of a pedestrian, as well as bicycle,
orientation are emphasized throughout this plan.
The existing transportation system also has implications for the City's
ability to respond quickly to fires. The fire department has indicated that
' its ability to respond to areas in the northern and western portions of the
city is impeded by the presence of an active railroad line passing through the
city. One possible solution is the construction of either an overpass or
' underpass which would permit the fire department to respond to fires even when
a train is on the tracks.
The fire department has also indicated that heavy congestion at the
intersections of Halstead Boulevard, Ehringhaus Street and Oak Stump Road is
impeding effective response to fires. One possible solution to reducing this
' congestion is to construct a street connecting Roanoke Avenue and Oak Stump
Road.
' Providing adequate vehicular access is important in ensuring fire
protection. The fire department has expressed particular concern about future

26
development along the waterfront. Since the department relies heavily upon
drawing water from the river access to street openings such as Burgess Street,
Colonial Avenue, Main Street, and Fearing Street is extremely important.
Goals - Traffic and Transportation
Elizabeth City will ensure that an adequate street and road system exists
to promote the safe and easy movement of traffic. To the extent possible,
modes of transportation will be oriented to the needs of all residents of the
city. Promotion of an efficient transportation system will be balanced
against the need for safe and quiet neighborhoods, the need to protect
environmental and other resources, etc.
Policies - Traffic and Transportation
1. The City will strive to make whatever future street and road
improvements are necessary to prevent traffic congestion and dangerous travel
conditions. The 1978 Thoroughfare Plan is a useful guide in making future
street and road improvements but the recommendations contained in it must be
qualified in light of lower population and other City goals and objectives.
2. Development along major thoroughfares in the city must be carefully
planned and controlled to minimize traffic and congestion problems. For
instance, efforts to reduce the number of direct roadway exits and
thoroughfare will help tremendously in enhancing traffic flow along
thoroughfares as well as reduce the danger of accidents. Larger commercial
and residential developments should plan internal traffic flow to minimize
congestion.
3. Road and street improvements will be planned and constructed with
hurricane and storm evacuation in mind. For instance, new roads which are
likely to carry a substantial number of evacuating vehicles should be of

' 27
sufficient capacity to accommodate this traffic in an expeditious manner, and
should be designed and planned to reduce any potential obstructions to traffic
(e.g., perhaps elevated to prevent flooding, utility lines put underground,
' etc.). The City, in collaboration with the County, will periodically assess
the adequacy of the current road and street system to facilitate evacuation.
4. Mobility problems exist, and will likely increase, for a significant
segment of the Elizabeth City population. The City will consider, in the
' future, the implementation of public transportation programs which address
these mobility concerns. Demand -responsive transportation services provided
by human service agencies should be improved.
5. The City recognizes the importance of bicycle and pedestrian modes of
transportation in the city. The City will strive to implement the detailed
' recommendations contained in the Bicycle Plan for Elizabeth City. The City
recognizes the potential importance of bicycle and pedestrian access and
' facilities to the objective of promoting tourism in the city.
6. The City will evaluate future traffic and transportation improvements
for their ability to"improve fire fighting capability. The railroad line
passing through the city is a problem in particular. The City will consider
the possibility of installing an overpass which would permit the fire
department to respond to fires in the northern and western portions of the
city when trains are blocking the primary response routes.
7. Toreduce congestion at the intersections of Halstead Boulevard,
' Ehringhaus Street and Oak Stump Road, and to thus facilitate quick response to
fires in the city, the City will consider constructing a road to connect
Roanoke Avenue and Oak Stump Road.
8. Future development proposed in the city will be carefully evaluated
' to ensure that adequate access for fire fighting vehicles is provided. This

28
is particularly important along the waterfront. Each development along the '
waterfront should be carefully designed and sited so that the street openings
such as Burgess Street, Colonial Avenue, Main Street, and Fearing Street, are
left accessible to fire fighting vehicles. '
11

V
Chapter 5.0
Revitalizing the Waterfront
Elizabeth City had its beginnings on the banks of the Pasquotank River,
and at one time was a thriving port community. Elizabeth City today has a
scenic but underutilized waterfront, and is faced with important questions
concerning its future use and development. Increasingly, Americans are
rediscovering their waterfronts, and the efforts of cities such as Beaufort
and Wilmington to rejuvenate these areas attest to this strong and renewed
interest in the water. Elizabeth City has similar potential for encouraging a
"back to the water" movement, and must carefully consider the options
' available for managing and utilizing its precious shoreline resources.
Concern over the use of the waterfront is evident in much of the previous
planning work done by the City. A 1980 Waterfront Development Study divides
the Elizabeth City waterfront into five areas: 1) Knobbs Creek/Roanoke Bible
iCollege Area, 2) Downtown waterfront, 3) Machelhe Island/Camden Causeway,
4) Charles Creek Area and the 5) Riverside Avenue Area. For each of these
areas, the waterfront study provides a review of land use trends and
recommendations for future development. This plan retains these five
geographical.areas so that it is consistent with the waterfront study.
In addition to specific recommendations concerning each of the five study
areas, the waterfront study provides recommendations and policy guidance for
the development of the entire waterfront. Specifically, the plan identifies
the following objectives for future waterfront development (pp. 10-11):
1.. New uses within the downtown waterfront should be integrated with the
historic and architectural character of the existing structures.

30
2. Public space should provide the unifying themes for the downtown
waterfront areas (e.g., through the use of sidewalks, pedestrian
malls, etc.)
3. Bike paths and walking trails should be developed along the
waterfront area and integrated into a larger system that includes
individual historic sites, the historic district, central business
district, and existing bike paths.
4. Public access to the waterfront should be provided wherever feasible
and compatible with surrounding land uses.
5. Preserve and expand where possible existing residential development -
along the waterfront.
6. The city's waterfront commercial area should not be a typical
shopping area (should take advantage of river and historic
character).
7. The downtown waterfront commercial area should become a mixed use
area that caters to the needs of both residents and tourists.
8. The tourist potential of the waterfront should be developed to its
fullest to promote visitation to the city and tourist -commercial
activities along the downtown waterfront.
9. The provision of adequate mooring facilities is an essential
component of,any plan to make the city attractive to intracoastal
waterway or ocean boating traffic.
To achieve these objectives, the plan identifies a general development
strategy composed of five basic elements:
1. Promote the adaptive reuse of existing sound structures.
2. Open -up the waterfront to pedestrians.
3. Redevelop the downtown waterfront as a unique shopping area.
4. Develop a tourist industry for the downtown waterfront.
5. Develop a promotion and marketing program for the downtown
waterfront.
The 1980 waterfront study elaborates somewhat on each of these
development strategies. Adaptive reuse is seen as particularly relevant to
the downtown area, where a number of two or three-story structures remain
under utilized. Mixed or multiple -use projects may be particularly

1 31
appropriate from an economic point of view. Unique commercial shopping areas
can be combined with residential uses which can utilize the riverfront views.
The 1980 study recommends revising the zoning ordinance to permit these types
of mixed uses. The Historic Districts Commission should also take efforts to
preserve the area's early twentieth century architectural character.
The need for a pedestrian -orientation for the city's waterfront is a
major conclusion of the 1980 study. It recommends a systematic effort to tie
the waterfront and its many important sites together through a pedestrian
network, including the use of sidewalks, boardwalks, bikeways and pedestrian
malls. Included here would be the idea of connecting the waterfront with an
historic walking tour (along Riverside Avenue to the east, and Main Street to
the west) and pedestrian nature trails along Charles Creek to the South and
Knobbs Creek to the North, as well as east across the Camden Causeway.
The authors of the 1980 study envisioned the use of vacant lots and
' alleys in the downtown waterfront area as pedestrian malls where possible.
Moreover, the City should act to preserve these existing open spaces so that
these open space alternatives are not foreclosed in the future.
Orientation of the waterfront to the pedestrian can be achieved
simply by.using existing undeveloped or underdeveloped spaces such as
alleys, parking lots, and vacant lots behind and between existing
buildings for pedestrian courtyards or plazas. For example, the vacant
alleys in between Main Street, Colonial Avenue, McMorrine Street and
Poindexter Street could be transformed into pedestrian malls with small
commercial shops and access off McMorrine Street and Colonial Avenue.
The parking and vacant areas along the waterfront should be developed
into pedestrian malls. These mall areas, complete with street furniture,
landscaping and other pedestrian amenities would be linked wherever
possible with boardwalks behind the existing buildings to tie the
' waterfront together and create intimate spaces with scenic views of the
river.
A major component of the downtown waterfront area concept plan, is the
creation of a continuous pedestrian mall by closing off auto traffic along
Poindexter, south of Elizabeth Street.

32
Considerable research in recent years has been conducted on what makes
small public open spaces successful. What attracts people to urban open
spaces and what makes their use of these spaces enjoyable? Whyte (1980)
concludes, for example, that a number of factors are important in designing
such areas. Among them: 1) people are attracted by other people and open
spaces should be designed as such; 2) the importance of adequate and abundant
sitting space; 3) the orientation of urban spaces so as to maximize exposure
to sun and light (i.e., southern orientation), and minimize winds and drafts;
4) the presence of trees (accessible and available for sitting under);
5) access to water (fountains, waterfalls), which people can touch if they
wish; 6) the availability of food (e.g., snackbars, outdoor cafes, food
vendors); 7) interaction and pleasant transition between streets and open
space plaza (open spaces should entice and attract passersby; streets should
themselves be full of activity); and the importance of what Whyte calls
"triangulation" (formal points of attention such as scenic views, sculptures,
museums and entertainers, art shows); among other factors.
Many of the more successful downtown open space areas have combined these
factors to create viable and stimulating areas which attract both residents
and tourists. The idea of creating a downtown marketplace has been a
successful strategy, incorporating many of the features identified by Whyte,
in reviving and economically rejuvenating these areas. Success stories of
waterfront -oriented marketplaces are common. Harbor Place in Baltimore and
the Cannery in San Francisco are famous examples (see Project for Public
Spaces 1984). While these are examples occurring in much larger cities, the
lessons learned are not irrelevant or inapplicable. The secret to success
appears to be the provision of a diversity of activities, and the attraction
of people.

1 33
iThey offer a variety of activities and events in their public
spaces, and a wide selection of things to look at and do when browsing or
window shopping. There are food vendors, jugglers, and performers, and
places to sit and watch. There is also a conscious design decision made
to concentrate people and activities in certain areas, building up
excitement and the feeling of being in a marketplace. (Project for Public
Spaces, Inc. 1984, p. 22).
In Elizabeth City, this downtown/waterfront marketplace could incorporate
the farmers market, which already exists (see Project for Public Spaces, Inc.
1984).
Promoting the development of the downtown waterfront area as a unique
shopping area is an important idea. To this end the character of this
waterfront area must be enhanced, including maintaining and restoring original
brick work, and protecting and enhancing the original facades of waterfront
structures. Shoppers and tourists should be treated to impressive scenic
views of the river. Landscaping should seek to enhance the natural feeling of
the waterfront and not obstruct these views. Pedestrian amenities, such as
benches and kiosks, should be used to enhance the waterfront's attractiveness.
The use of outdoor att, such as building murals, and the control of
unattractive outdoor advertising, in the downtown waterfront area would
enhance the attractiveness of the area.
These improvements would also enhance the local tourist industry. Shops
and restaurants along the waterfront, improved pedestrian orientation, etc.
icould serve to enhance the economic productivity of the downtown waterfront
area. Attracting tourists will be possible by emphasizing and providing
opportunities for pedestrians to view the city's historic and natural
resources, as well as to utilize its recreational facilities. In an earlier
study (1969) by the Coastal Plain Regional Commission it was recommended that
an appropriate project for the Elizabeth City waterfront would be a "marina
11

34 1
village." Such a village would include family sleeping facilities, a marina, ,
and recreation and shopping facilities.
An important component of the waterfront development strategy is a strong
promotion and marketing component. This will range from the City's sponsoring
of annual events to bring people to the waterfront (e.g., the waterfront
festival...) to an imaginative merchandising campaign, including perhaps the
development of a distinctive promotional logo.
In addition to these strategic recommendations, the 1980 study provides ,
recommendations for each of five study areas. Study Area 1, the Knobbs
Creek/Roanoke Bible College area constitutes the northern waterfront in the
city, running from Burgess Street north to the city's waste treatment plant.
Among these specific recommendations presented for this area by the 1980 plan.
utilizing the existing water treatment plant site for a.canoe and boating area
'
(including restroom'and picnic facilities); a pedestrian and bicycle bridge to
link Poindexter Street and Knobbs Creek Drive; consideration of a campsite
,
around the treatment plant (long term); the screening of the electrical
Poindexter
S
substation on at the Roanoke Bible College; encourage private
rehabilitation of substandard housing between Broad and Ward along Poindexter;
and improvement of storm drainage along Poindexter.
The downtown waterfront area (Study Area 2) runs generally from Burgess
Street southward to the Charles Creek Bridge, along Poindexter and Water
Streets. Among the specific recommendations proposed by the 1980 study for
i
this area: 1) repairing sidewalks along Poindexter and Water Streets;
improvement
of pedestrian and auto signalization and signage at Elizabeth -
Water Street intersection; prohibition of business vehicle parking on Water
Street sidewalks in Colonial -Elizabeth Street block; limited development of
Hobbs Park (directly across Water Street from Waterfront Park); acquisition of

35
the old Robinson Building site (corner of Poindexter and Fearing Streets) and
development into a mall area (possibly including a fountain, areas for special
event displays, focal point for the mall); provision of new parking in the
area (need for a detailed parking study).
The Machelhe Island/Camden Causeway portion of the waterfront (study
area 3) runs from the Pasquotank River east to the Causeway Marina area,
along Highway 158. The general development concept for the island entails
the concentration of commercial development in the two existing pockets of
commercial development (Pelican Marina/Causeway Marina Restaurant and ABC
Store/Causeway Marina/Pefley Realty Company), and restricting strip
development on the north side of Highway 158. More specifically, the 1980
plan proposes.
Because of its unique scenic and ecological character and its close
proximity to the City the northern side of the highway is recommended to
remain in a natural state. By preserving the north side, tourists and
residents could enjoy a wilderness experience within walking distance of
the Central Business District and provide a scenic and natural view for
the west bank of the River. The City should make its land available for
the natural area and participate along with Camden County in its
development. The private owners of the remaining sections should be
encouraged to participate in this development. (p. 12)
Among the specific recommendations for the Machelhe Island area: 1) the
City should extend its extraterritorial jurisdiction to include the causeway,
so that it can control its appearance and future development; 2) development
of a system of elevated educational/recreational trails in the natural area;
3) conversion of northern most half of Camden Causeway Bridge a converted into a
bicycle and pedestrian trail; 4) the eventual use of Causeway Park for low
intensity passive recreation; 5) the productive use of existing oil tank
foundations; and 6) controlling the number of individual driveways to mobile
homes at the foot of the causeway (potential use of this area for residential
or commercial uses which could benefit from river views).
LJI

36
The Charles Creek Area (Study Area 4) lies to the south of the downtown
waterfront area and encompasses both banks of the creek, south to the
Hollywood Cemetery. Among the specific recommendations for this study area
offered by the 1980 waterfront study: 1) Ideal Repair Shop parking should be
redesigned to permit residential use; 2) future bridge replacements should
include sidewalks and bicycle facilities (current bridges are currently
inadequate for such purposes); 3) pedestrian walkway under Charles Creek
Bridge to tie Charles Creek and Waterfront Parks together; 4) need to
landscape electrical substation on Southern Avenue at Dawson Street;
5) pedestrian nature trail from Charles Creek to the E.C.S.U. Stadium complex
(using open spaces of Charles Creek Park, Hollywood Cemetery, Housing
Authority property and University property, as well as private easements);
6) use of old garage building on Charles Creek Park expansion property as a
community center.
A separate, more extensive Charles Creek Study was conducted by the
Elizabeth City Planning Department in 1981 (as a companion document to the
Waterfront Development Study). Specifically, it examined, at the City
Council's request, the possibility of a protected harbor encompassing the
Charles Creek basin to Southern Avenue. The study delineates three subareas
of the basin, corresponding to the areas separated by bridge and culvert
crossings. These three areas are: 1) the Charles Creek Park Area (from
Southern Avenue culvert to Pasquotank River), 2) Southern Avenue -Herrington
Road area (from Southern Avenue culvert to the Herrington Road Bridge), and
3) Charles Creek natural area (open space between Herrington Road Bridge and
Halstead Boulevard).
In the Charles Creek park area, the City owns most of the acreage
adjoining the creek, with the exception of several homes along Southern

37
Avenue. This represents an opportunity to develop or promote the development
in this area in a comprehensive way that might not otherwise be possible. The
Riverside Avenue bridge is low in height and only permits the passage of small
craft into the Charles Creek park area. The major development concept
'identified and examined in the Charles Creek Study is that of a protected
harbor. The report cites a number of characteristics of the creek basin which
make it suitable for such a development, such as access to nearby open water
and fishing areas, and City ownership of much of the land. A major impediment
would be the removal of the Riverside Avenue bridge, which the N.C. Department
of Transportation has estimated would increase local gasoline consumption by
some $120,000 per year. To rectify the loss of access to Riverside Avenue,
the study proposes constructing a Riverside Avenue -Southern Avenue connector,
aligned along Dawson and Morgan Streets. This alignment is preferable because
it would permit the elimination of a number of substandard housing structures.
The connector would be designed to incorporate a two-way bike path. Also, to
accommodate sailboats and other sizeable boats, dredging would be required.
Dredging and shorelifie bulkheading would also be necessary to ensure adequate
turning space for boats.
The protected harbor concept would incorporate a mixture of land uses.
The commercial uses would be located mainly along Southern Avenue, while the
Dawson, Morgan, Hunter and Agawam areas would remain in residential and park
uses. Commercial uses would be varied, but would include such things as
specialty shops, restaurants and offices, as well as a marina. Marina
facilities would include temporary docking slips, and this would facilitate
the use of restaurants and specialty shops by boaters. Condominium or
apartment units would have a unique and attractive orientation to the creek
and its recreational amenities, as well as providing residents with the
11

38
ability to moor a boat in close proximity to their homes. The central
business district would be connected to the protected harbor through a
boardwalk from Waterfront Park.
A primary limitation to the protected harbor concept is the potentially
very high cost of public development, the Charles Creek Study indicating that
such site development costs (e.g., removal of Riverside Avenue Bridge,
dredges, etc.) could exceed $5 million.
Short of adopting the full protected harbor concept, the Charles Creek
Basin can be developed in other more limited ways. Among these possibilities
is to promote a mixed use development on the Southern Avenue portion of the
site, without the marina component. Other options identified in the Charles
Creek Study include a blight clearance and rehabilitation project for the
creek area, and promoting the Charles Creek Park as part of a linear park
which would connect the Waterfront Park to the north and the E.C.S.U. Stadium
complex to the southwest, with an accompanying walkway/bikeway network.
In the Southern Avenue -Herrington Road area, residential uses are
dominant. The Charles Creek Study recommends the continuation of these types
of uses, along with efforts to improve the quality of existing housing. With
proper buffers, it does suggest that limited commercial or higher density
residential uses could be accommodated along Herrington Road. The fact that
most homes are set back from the creek, permits the acquisition of open space
easements and development of the linear public park discussed earlier.
The third area discussed in the Charles Creek study -- the Charles Creek
Natural Area -- encompasses the land from the Herrington Road bridge to the
E.C.S.U. stadium complex at Halstead Boulevard. Here there is public
property, such as the Hollywood Cemetery, and vacant deep lots. This is a
very swampy area, prone to flooding, and the Charles Creek Study recommends

i 39
keeping it in an undeveloped state. Specifically, it proposes acquiring
easements in perpetuity to ensure the protection of a 100 to 200 ft.
greenbelt. A nature trail would then be developed along this greenbelt. A
pedestrian bridge connecting Gosnold Park and the Old Quaker Cemetery is also
proposed. Such a nature trail would also provide E.C.S.U. with pedestrian
access to the downtown.
A separate report, Charles Creek Natural Area Conservation Easement
Project (1983), describes in more detail the easement program. The proposed
Charles Creek Natural Area is comprised of approximately thirty acres, of
which the town already owns about 44%. As of 1983, E.C.S.U. had donated an
easement to the City for its approximately 12% of the area. The remaining
land in the natural area is owned by eleven individual small parcel owners,
and a construction company.
The final area described in the 1980 waterfront study, the Riverside
Avenue study area (study area 5) runs along Riverside Avenue, east from
Charles Creek to the former COA Riverside campus area (Albemarle Hospital
Marea). It includes the Elizabeth City'Yacht Yard and a large residential area
along the river. Among the specific recommendations for this area: 1) that
the City continue its search for a public swimming pool; and 2) the City
should encourage the adaptive use of the COA property as a senior citizen's
complex and/or cultural center (need to protect residential character of
surrounding area). These recommendations have in large degree already been
implemented. An outdoor pool does now exist which is open to the public, and
the COA property is being used as apartments and a health club. An indoor
pool also exists at Elizabeth City State University.
Recently a proposal by a Winston-Salem firm to develop a portion of the
waterfront on the south side of Mariners' Wharf has been discussed. The
1

40
proposal would involve the construction of a 3 1/2 story inn (behind Sassy Ole
Sisters Waterfront Shops), restoration of the milling company warehouse and
the construction of boat slips along most of Waterfront Park. This type of
project could have a positive impact on the waterfront and should be
encouraged by the City.
Goals -- Waterfront Development
Elizabeth City's waterfront and the Pasquotank River are unique and
important resources which should be capitalized upon and properly managed for
economic, aesthetic, recreational and other purposes.
Policies -- Waterfront Development/Revitalization
1. The City will continue to consider implementation of many of the
recommendations contained in the 1980 Waterfront Development Study, where they
have not already been implemented, including the concept plans prepared for
different segments of the waterfront.
2. The City will continue to ensure that adequate open space areas on
the waterfront are protected, and are connected with other natural and open
space areas in the city. This connection should occur in part through a
network of biking and pedestrian trails, and through the designation and
protection of an extensive undeveloped greenbelt. The greenbelt is identified
on the City's land classification map (see Chapter 14.0).
3. The waterfront areas will be connected with the downtown and West
Main Streets Historic Districts.
4. To the extent possible, historically -significant structures along the
waterfront will be protected. To this end, adaptive re -use of existing
structures will be encouraged.

1 41
5. The City will encourage mixed -use developments along the waterfront,
incorporating residential, retail and tourist -oriented activities. The
concept of the waterfront area as a "downtown marketplace" is a promising one.
6. In development in and around the waterfront area, scenic waterfront
views and vistas should be preserved and enhanced.
7. Retail, restaurant and other commercial uses permitted along the
waterfront should incorporate direct access to the Pasquotank River and river -
related uses (e.g. boating).
8. The City will ensure that marina facilities are adequate to
accommodate both transient and local boating traffic.
9. The City must develop an effective approach to publicizing and
marketing the waterfront. Included in such a program might be the development
of a distinctive waterfront logo, the sponsoring of waterfront activities
(e.g. the annual "waterfront festival"), and distribution of information about
the city and waterfront to prospective market areas (e.g., Norfolk area,
Washington, DC, area).
10. The City will consider further investment in various public
improvements to enhance the accessibility and attractiveness of the waterfront
area to tourists and residents alike (e.g., sidewalks, additional seating
areas, public piers, public fountains, cultural activities and events etc.).
11. The City will not abandon the concept of a protected harbor
development for the Charles Creek area. While a number of practical
impediments exist to such a development, such a project could serve as a
catalyst and anchor for further development along the waterfront.
12. Efforts should continue to be made to incorporate the farmers market
into the development of the waterfront.
13. Consistent with'this policy the City will discourage piecemeal
development of the waterfront and will seek a comprehensive, long-range
Il

42
strategy or plan to guide its development. Efforts will be made by the City
to extend its extra -territorial jurisdiction so that it has control over
development of the Machelhe Island area.
I
I
1
I
11
I -

Chapter 6.0
Open Space and Recreation
As Elizabeth City grows, its need for open spaces and recreational
facilities will increase as well. Open space and recreational needs are, of
course, not necessarily the same. Local open spaces may be passively used
(e.g., as scenic and natural buffers) or more actively used (e.g., such as
playgrounds, urban parks, baseball fields). Recreational facilities may
include open spaces and open space uses, such as playing fields, but will
' entail a host of other capital and public investments, from swimming pools to
golf courses.
The 1976 Land Use Plan indicates that the City is seriously deficient in
the amount of open space and park land available to the.public. While the
N.C. State Division of Parks and Recreation has established that every city
ought to have a minimum of 1 acre of park land for every 100 residents,
Elizabeth City had only .19 acres for every 100 residents in 1976 (1976, p.
130).
A comprehensive inventory of and plan for open space and recreational
facilities was developed in 1976 by the Elizabeth City Planning Department.
The inventory categorizes open space and recreational facilities by type
(mini -parks, playlots, neighborhood parks or community parks) and ownership of
resource (public, semi-public, private or commercial). The following were
identified as public community parks: (1) Charles Creek Park (3.04 acres);
(2) Waterfront Park (5.7 acres); (3) Hobbs Park (then called Water Street Open
Space; 2.5 acres); (4) Enfield Park (13.0 acres); and (5) Knobbs Creek Park
(30 acres). The Northeastern High School (10-12 acres) is identified as a

44 1
semi-public community park. The Gosnold Avenue Open Space (4.39 acres) is
identified as a public neighborhood park, and the following were identified as
semi-public neighborhood parks: 1) the College of the Albemarle (40 acres
along U.S. Highway 17 North; 3.5 acres along Rivershore Road); 2) Central
School (3.5 acres), 3) Pasquotank Elementary School (4.5 acres); 4) Elizabeth
City Boy's Club (5.0 acres); 5) Elizabeth City Junior High (.07 acres); ,
6) Memorial Field Complex (5 acres); 7) J.C. Sawyer School (5 acres);
8) Elizabeth City State University (3.4 acres) and 9) Roanoke Bible College.
The inventory also identifies a number of other smaller recreational and
open space "mini -parks" (mostly less than 1 acre in area). Specifically, such
public parks falling into this category are: 1) Elizabeth Street Tennis
Courts, and 2) Elizabeth Street Park. Lions Club Park was also identified but
no longer exists. Semi-public mini -park areas include:. 1) Elizabeth City
Girl's Club; 2) P.W. Moore School; 3) H.L. Trigg School;. 4) Mosely Street
Public Housing; 5) Corinth Baptist Church; 6) Economic Improvement Council and
7) Elizabeth Manor. St. Catherine Catholic Church was also identified but no
longer exists. The private mini-park,'Forest Park Recreation Center, is
identified. Public playlots are found in the following locations: 1) Hopkins
Drive Tot Lot, 2) Lexington Drive Tot Lot; and 3) Chalk Street Park. Semi-
public playlots include: 1) First United Methodist Church; 2) Harriot Drive
Public Housing and 3) Southgate Manor.
The inventory also identifies other local recreational facilities which
do not fall into these categories, including the semi-public ECSU driving
range and the private Pine Lakes Country Club (which includes tennis
facilities, swimming and golf course). A number of commercial recreational
facilities, including movie theatres, billiard halls, a skating rink and
bowling alley are also identified. Included among Elizabeth City's

1 45
recreational facilities are also local auditoriums, such as those at E.C.S.U.
and the College of the Albemarle, and cultural activities such as the Museum
of the Albemarle. Boating areas include: 1) Wildlife Commission Boat Ramp;
2) Waterfront Park Boat ramps; 3) Elizabeth City Yacht Yard and Marina
(commercial); 4) Causeway Marina (commercial); and 5) and Sportsman's Marina
(commercial).
Each of these public and semi-public recreational areas entail different
types and combinations of recreational facilities from tennis courts to
baseball fields. Table 6.1 presents a selected overview of existing public
and semi-public facilities, and in turn highlights areas of particular need.
As noted earlier, the recreational standard of l.acre per 100 residents
(adopted by the N.C. State Division of Parks and Recreation) indicates the
inadequacy of Elizabeth City's current open space/recreational facilities.
More specific standards were identified in the 1976 Open Space and
Recreational Plan for different types of recreational activities (e.g., tennis
courts, neighborhood parks, community parks, etc.), based upon an optimistic
projection of future population in the'Elizabeth City area (22,595 persons by
1985 in planning jurisdiction; compared to 18,592 persons estimated in 1975).
From these standards, the plan indicated the need for a number of additional
facilities to meet the expected 1985 recreation demands, from softball fields
to basketball courts to swimming pools. Although the population projection
for 1985 was substantially overestimated, the City has made considerable
progress in providing many of these facilities (see Table 6.1 and 6.2).

46
Table 6.1
Selected Public and Semi -Public Recreational Facilities
Facilities Number of Facilities
Picnic area 6
General playground 20
Spec. playground 17
Baseball field 3
Softball field 7
Football field 2
Basketball 6
Track 2
Tennis 20
Swimming 2
Golf - driving range 1
Golf - Par 3 course 1
Source: 1976 Open Space and Recreation Plan, updated June 1986 by Elizabeth
City Department of Parks and Recreation
Accessibility to existing recreational facilities is of considerable
importance. Elizabeth City may have a sufficient number of tennis courts, for
example, but because they are located at relatively great distances from user
groups, they may be inaccessible and thus inadequate. The 1976 Open Space and
Recreational Plan conducted an accessibility analysis by enumeration -district
to determine whether particular neighborhoods or portions of the city did not
have adequate access to such facilities. This analysis was conducted for the
following facilities: baseball fields; basketball courts; tennis courts;
playlots; miniparks; neighborhood parks; and community parks.

47
Table 6.2
Elizabeth City Parks and Recreation Facilities
Existing Facility Acreaee Description
(1) Charles Creek Park 3.04 Picnic area, general playground,
boating, open space
(2) Enfield Park 13.00 5 softball fields, 2 basketball
courts, 4 tennis courts
(3) Waterfront Park 5.7 Picnic area, boating access,
open space
(4) Knobbs Creek Recreation
Center and Park 30.0
(5) Hobbs Park
(6) Elizabeth Street
1.5
Par 3 golf course, baseball
field, nature trails, boat slips,
horseshoe pits, etc.
Outdoor stage, activity shelter,
open space.
Tennis Courts
1.2
4 tennis courts, closes at 11 PM
(7)
Elizabeth Street -Park
0.74
Playground and open space
(8)
Hopkins Drive Tot Lot
0.28
Playground apparatus
(9)
Lexington Drive Tot Lot
0.07
Picnic area, playground, basket-
ball court
(10)
Chalk Street Park
0.22
Picnic area, playground
(11)
Southern Ave. playground
0.41
Playground, basketball court
(12)
Gosnold Avenue playfield
4.39
Open field play area, softball
field, basketball court
Source: 1976 Open Space and Recreation'Plan,
updated June 1986 by Elizabeth
City Department of Parks
and
Recreation.
1

48
A number of problem areas were identified from this accessibility
analysis. Enumeration districts in the city's west side and southeast side
found
were to need access to tennis courts. The area west of Hughes Boulevard
was the only area found to have low access to basketball courts. The
northern, western and southeastern portions of town were found to have low
access to baseball fields. Areas having low access to community park
facilities included west of Hughes Boulevard, near Southgate Mall and near
Edgewood Drive. Miniparks are found to be needed in the Church and Prichard
Streets areas. Residents in areas west of Hughes Boulevard and around
Edgewood Drive found
were to have low access to neighborhood parks. The worst
levels of accessibility were found to exist for playlots. About 75% of the
city's population did not live within 1/4 mile of a playlot. Areas most in
need of playlots are in the northern section of the city, areas south of
Ehringhaus Street and the Riverside Avenue area. Future recreational
investments should acknowledge these particular geographical inadequacies.
The average inaccessibility of each enumeration district over all of
these facilities was computed, indicating portions of the city in particular
need of future recreational investments. Enumeration districts 14A and 3B
(western portion of the city) and 22 (southeastern portion of the city) were
found to have the highest levels of overall inaccessibility.
The recreational needs of residents, both future and existing, who are
located outside the city's boundaries but within the planning area are also of
concern. The 1976 inventory indicates that a number of recreational needs
exist here, specifically: insufficient tennis courts and basketball courts in
the area; and the need for additional park land,of all types, particularly
community, neighborhood, and mini -parks. One way to provide for these
recreational facilities is to require new subdivisions to provide such
II

1 49
services, or to provide land or funds for such services. An open
space/recreational impact fee is one option, in which new development helps to
cover the additional demands created by growth. New development can also be
designed and planned in ways which reduce the amount of land actually consumed
by housing, roads and parking areas. For instance, requiring future
development to cluster will free a'greater portion of a development's land
which can be kept in open and undeveloped uses.
In 1975, a survey was administered to a sample of Elizabeth City
residents asking them about the adequacy of existing open space and
recreational facilities. Some of the conclusions of this survey were: most
residents would like to see more parks and recreation facilities; most would
like to see natural resources conserved and protected; most would like to see
a beautification of the waterfront; most favor increased tourism in the city;
and most favor the development of better bike trails (see The 1976 Open Space
and Recreation Plan).
The development of a system of bike and nature trails is an opportunity
which Elizabeth City'should recognize and carefully study. These trails would
include a number of types and functions: bikes, horses, nature, canoe. The
City s access to the Pasquotank River, and its Charles Creek and Knobbs Creek
tributaries provide particularly good opportunities for the City to develop
such trails. The 1976 Open Space and Recreational Plan identifies a number of
,I. desirable locations for trails in and around the city. They are:

50
(1) Knobbs Creek (canoe trail)
(2) Rights of way along State Roads 1333, 1332, 1309, 1101, 1139, 1307,
1308, 1306, 1169, and other state roads to the north and south
(horses and bikes).
(3) Well Field Area (horse and nature trail)
(4) Logging road northeast of Knobbs Creek Drive, Sewer Plant Road,
areas along the river in back of hospital and college (bikes and
horse trails with logging road used extensively by horse).
(5) Branch railroad line to 1169 (horse trail).
(6) New thoroughfare arterials and 17 north (bike and horse land).
(7) Edge of wooded swamps and farm land along Pasquotank River north of
Elizabeth City (horse trail, limited bike, and nature trails).
(8) Dismal swamp logging roads (horse trail)
(9) Machelhe Island (nature trail)
(10) Charles Creek extension (nature trail)
These potential trail locations are depicted on Diagram 6.1. Such a
trail system has the potential of tying together various sites along the
Elizabeth City waterfront, and may hold considerable potential for enhancing
tourism in the city (see Chapters 4.0 and 5.0 regarding traffic transportation
and waterfront revitalization, respectively).
Providing boat access and swimming areas in Elizabeth City is an
additional important recreational objective. In preparing the plan update, a
field inventory of boat and water access points was conducted. The following
boat access points (both public and private) were identified in or near the
city: Waterfront Park, South Water Street (across from Charles Creek Park),
Brickhouse Road, and the state access point near the sewage treatment plant.
The City Department of Parks and Recreation has also been working with
Pasquotank County to develop a scenic canoe trail down the Pasquotank River.
These efforts should be encouraged and expanded in the future.

m an 1. ANK 4up WIMP Aml la '� m m w m so aw w an " m
rn
0
G
r{
n
V
a1
0
10
fD
b
w
0
m
w
r ,a.
m
0
rt
m
w
n
r•
0
ro
F-
w

52
Goals - Recreation and Oven Space
It is the goal of the City to ensure that adequate recreational
opportunities and open space exist for all residents. The City will make
efforts to ensure that these opportunities are of appropriate quality,
quantity and location to ensure accessibility to them by residents in all
parts of the city. Future growth and development shall provide, or contribute
to the provision of, adequate levels of recreation and open space.
Policies - Recreation and Open Space
1. The City will develop an open space greenway system. This system
would be comprised of a network of natural and open space areas surrounding
the city, and could also be used for numerous recreational activities. The
proposed greenway system connects the Knobbs Creek, Charles Creek and the
Pasquotank River. Such a greenway system is depicted on the City's land
classification map (see Chapter 14.0) and should be retained in an undeveloped
state. Development should be discouraged in these areas, and the City should
pursue the acquisition of land and easements here.
2. The City will seek to implement the recreational and open space
recommendations included in the 1976 Elizabeth City Open space and Recreation
Plan which have not yet been implemented. This plan should be carefully
reviewed and updated on a regular basis.
3. The City will continue to regulate development to ensure that
adequate recreational and open space needs are met. Specifically, this
regulation would address two separate issues: 1) the incorporation of
adequate recreation and open space within or adjacent to the development, and
2) contribution to the provision of broader, citywide recreational and open
space facilities.

1 53
4. The City will strive to provide a diversity of open space and
recreational services and facilities, to satisfy the range and diversity of
the needs and preferences of its citizens.
5. The City will continue to seek to coordinate the provision of
recreational services by all agencies, institutions and civic organizations.
The provision of redundant or overlapping facilities and services should be
avoided. The City should also seek to work closely with, and coordinate its
recreational and open space investments with Pasquotank and Camden Counties.
6. Promoting recreational and open space opportunities which utilize
access to the Pasquotank River and the creeks which run into it will be*given
priority. It is particularly important to ensure that adequate boat and
swimming access points are provided. The City will prepare a detailed water
access plan which identifies existing and potential boat and swimming areas.
It will also establish priorities for future acquisition or provision of these
water access points and identification of the possible means for securing
them. The City will seek to obtain state and federal grant monies which can
be used to secure and develop these access points. The City will work to
protect those access points that currently exist and should not permit private
development or other activities to occur which may foreclose their future use.
The City will work with Pasquotank and Camden Counties in protecting and
developing such water access points.
�I
7. The City will, in collaboration with the counties, work to develop
scenic canoe trails along the area's waterways and to protect the scenic
integrity and beauty of these waterways.
8. Providing open space and recreational facilities which will be
accessible and attractive to visitors and non-residents is a viable approach
to increasing local tourism and promoting economic development. Elizabeth
i

54
City has immense aesthetic and recreational potential which can attract many
tourists if developed carefully and conscientiously. These could include the
transient tourist on their way to the beach and those who visit Elizabeth
City as a point of final destination. Ideally, the City should seek to
develop those open space and recreational resources, such as public golf
courses, which can be efficiently utilized by both residents and nonresidents
(tourists).
9. As noted in other components of this plan, priority should be given
to acquiring additional lands, easements or other public actions which will
expand the potential recreational uses, both passive and active, of the
Charles Creek and Knobbs Creek Parks.
10. Tourist -oriented recreational facilities should, to the extent
possible, be tied to the city's historic resources.
11. Where feasible, different kinds of recreational facilities need to be
dispersed throughout the community whereby they are accessible to all
residents.
12. Certain recreational facilities, such as golf courses and swimming,
are few in number and in some cases inaccessible to the public. Future
expenditures should focus on the provision of these facilities.
13. Few recreational activities, such as playgrounds or tot lots, exist
for younger children, and future recreational investments will address this
problem.
14. Future open space and recreational investments must be particularly
cognizant of the increasing elderly population in the city. The City must
increasingly plan for the recreational needs of this portion of the
population.

55
15. More attention must be given to ensuring that adequate open space
park land and recreational facilities exist on a neighborhood level.
16. The City will continue to give proper attention to providing needed
recreational and open space services to areas within its planning area, yet
outside its city limits. These services should be provided in conjunction
with the counties. In particular, the 1976 Open Space and Recreation Plan
identifies the need for additional park land and tennis and basketball courts.
17. The City will modify its regulatory review of new subdivisions to
ensure that the maximum amount of open space and undeveloped land is
protected. Moreover, efforts should be made to ensure, either through an
impact fee or land dedication, that new development is adequately and
equitably assessed for the additional recreational/open space demands it
creates.
18. The City will seek to develop a trail system for pedestrians, horses
and bikes, and to coordinate this with its other open space and recreational
investments. The trail system can be developed on an incremental basis,
adding to it as opportunities arise.
19. The City acknowledges the importance played by recreational
facilities in.attracting tourists and economic development to the area.
Future investments in recreational facilities should take this into
consideration.

Chapter 7.0
Housine
Housing continues to be a major issue in Elizabeth City's planning
process. The issue can be broken down, for public policy -making purposes,
into several component parts: 1) concerns about the type and mix of housing
in the community; 2) concerns about the affordability of local housing;
3) concerns about the quality of housing; 4) concern about the preservation of
historic structures in the city; 5) concern about the appearance of housing;
and 6) concern about the location of housing in relation to other uses and
activities occurring in the city.
For a number of years a significant portion of Elizabeth City's housing
stock has been substandard or in serious disrepair. The Comprehensive Plan:
Housing Element (1978) noted that in that year there were 4,752 occupied
dwelling units in the city, of which 11% (517 units) were considered to be in
substandard condition. Table 7.1 presents similar information from the 1980
Census of Housing. In this year (1980) 2.4% of the housing units in the city,
lacks plumbing facilities which is less than half the rate for the state as a
whole. 3.6% of the housing units in the city contained 1.01 or more persons
per room. This too is lower than the state average but, nonetheless, this is
a significant number of units which are inadequate and/or overcrowded.

57
Table 7.1
Characteristics of Housing in Elizabeth City
Total housing units
Median rooms
Y
Lacking complete plumbing
Owner occupied
With 1.01 or more persons per
room (owner occupied)
Median value
Median contract rent
Vacancy rate - homeowner
Vacancy rate rental
Source: 1980 Census of Housing
Elizabeth City
1980
5,395
5.4
2.4
2,759
3.6
30,600
102
1.6
4.9
North Carolina
1980
2,274,737
5.1
5.2
1,397,425
4.5
36,000
134
1.51
7.8
The 1980 Census.of Housing indicates that 63% of all housing units in the
city are owner -occupied. Owner -occupied units as a proportion of total
housing units in the city has been on the increase. This can be attributed to
several factors, including an overall reduction in the number of rental units
in the city, due in part to City redevelopment projects and commercial
conversion of existing rental properties. The increase in owner -occupied
housing is also a result of single family construction on the city's fringes.
The lack of rental units is also indicated by a relatively low rental vacancy
rate. In 1980, this rate was 4.9 in contrast to a rate of 7.8 for the state
as a whole. The vacancy rate for owner occupied units in 1980 was 1.6,
compared to 1.5 for the state as a whole. Thus for owner -occupied units the
vacancy rate is about the same as the state average.
11

m
These facts indicate that Elizabeth City has a problem of providing
affordable housing to all of its residents. The Housing Element states this
conclusion eloquently:
The financial realities of housing are depressing. It appears that
many Elizabeth City citizens, particularly the low and moderate income
residents, are not able to compete successfully in the open housing
market. Material, labor, and related cost increases have risen faster
than household incomes, thus forcing families who desire home ownership
out of the market. Rental housing, the only alternative in many
instances, has actually declined in absolute numbers since 1970, thereby
creating a greater demand for the existing units. The high cost of home
ownership suggests that the high degree of renter occupancy can be
expected to continue and grow unless effective alternatives for home
ownership are made available. (p. 28)
Much of the new development in the city, as noted in an earlier section,
is occurring on the city's fringe areas. The 1978 Housing Element warns
against these areas becoming "gilded ghettos," with lower income families
coming into the area having to locate in less -expensive, lower -rent
neighborhoods within the city limits.
Therefore, housing within the city proper will increasingly become
occupied by `captive' lower income groups who will need greater housing
and other governmental assistance. As the city's population becomes
proportionally dlder, the elderly, which often wish to remain in their
lifelong homes or desire the conveniences of the city, will also become
significant occupants of the future housing stock. (p.56)
This may suggest that the City needs to consider the options available
for increasing such affordable types of housing. One approach it may wish to
consider is encouraging/facilitating the use of less conventional housing
units, such as mobile homes and prefabricated housing units. To the extent
possible, the City should continue its efforts to provide publicly -assisted
housing. The Elizabeth City Housing Authority was created in 1962 for this
purpose and as of 1978 the Authority operated 330 public housing units, and 90
Section 8 units (under the supervision of the Economic Improvement Council).
These units are fully occupied and there is a waiting list of people -

' 59
families hoping to move in, indicating that the need for such housing exceeds
the supply. Federal cutbacks in the public housing area, however, indicate
that expansion of the Housing Authority's role is infeasible.
The City has taken, and should continue to take in the future, actions to
improve the condition of existing housing. The 1978 Housing Element indicates
that a large portion of the substandard housing is located in two large areas:
in the northern portion of the city (Sawyer Town Neighborhood/Walnut Street
Community Development Project) and in the southern part of the city (Walker
Ave./Southern Ave. neighborhood). The City has designated these areas
Neighborhood Revitalization Areas (NRA's) and has been partially successful in
obtaining federal and state monies (CDBG) to finance housing rehabilitation
and neighborhood improvements. The revitalization of Sawyer Town/Walnut
Street CDP was completed in 1980. The Walker Avenue/Southern Avenue NRA
comprises a very large area, of which a portion known as the "Brown Street
NRA," was completed in 1985. Ongoing rehabilitation efforts are aimed at
adjacent areas, including the City's current funding application for the
South Martin Street NRA,11which is awaiting approval by the state.
' Protecting the city's historic structures is also a housing issue of
great importance. The city's structures create a special character for the
city which should be maintained and reinforced. The City has established two
separate historic districts: The Downtown Historic District and the West Main
Street Historic District. As Table 7.2 indicates, these two districts
together contain some 193 historic structures. 217 properties are included in
the National Register District. Until recently an architectural review board
existed for each of the historic districts. However, the duties of these two
boards have been combined in one board which exercises purview over both

60
Table 7.2
Number and Type of Historic Properties in the Downtown
and West Main Street Historic Districts
Downtown Historic District
135 properties
123 structures*
-101 commercial
- 34 residential
West Main Street Historic District
72 properties
70 structures
-1 commercial
-71 residential
*Vacant lots are parking lots and are therefore classified as commercial.
Source: Elizabeth City Planning Department
architectural districts. These districts provide guidelines for individuals
wishing to alter the exterior of structures in the district, and provide a
procedure for obtaining a certificate of appropriateness for such alterations
A recent survey of historic structures in the city has been conducted by
consultant Thomas R. Butchko. He inventoried approximately 1,OOO structures
in the city and determined that approximately 400 are also eligible for
inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places, as either parts of
historic districts or as individual structures. These 400 structures are in
addition to the two locally designated districts which comprise the Elizabeth
City National Register Historic District. This suggests that the City should
give serious consideration to expanding these existing districts to encompass
these additional buildings, as well as nominating additional structures to the
National Register of Historic Places.
An increasingly important issue in the construction of new housing is the
extent to which energy efficiency can be achieved. One way to do this is

1 61
tthrough the use of solar energy. Solar energy may represent a viable source
of heating and cooling for Elizabeth City homes in the future and the City
should consider developing policies to protect access to this resource. The
ability of a homeowner to take advantage of solar energy may be obstructed by
unduly tall buildings (and the shading which occurs) or through orientation
and improper setback of buildings, and so on. A number of communities have
developed ordinances restricting the extent to which solar access can be
infringed upon and Elizabeth City may wish to address this issue in the future
as well.
Goals - Housine
All residents of Elizabeth City should have safe and affordable housing
available to them. The City will take whatever action it reasonably can to
ensure that adequate housing exists. Land use and other decisions relating to
future growth and development in Elizabeth City will be sensitive to the
housing needs of existing and future residents, including consideration of its
location, type, density and cost. The.City will take appropriate action in
the future to maintain or improve the condition of existing housing.
Elizabeth City has a rich history exemplified in its historic homes and
buildings. Historic preservation can attract tourists and economic
development, and enhance the aesthetic and cultural quality of the city. The
City will continue to protect its historic districts and to view these as
important economic and social resources to be carefully managed.
1

W6
Housing Policies
1. To the extent possible, the City will explore ways to increase the
local supply of affordable housing. This will include continuing to
accommodate mobile home and prefabricated units in accordance with the
provisions of the zoning ordinance, as well as obtaining federal and state
funds for housing assistance.
2. The City will continue to work to improve the condition of the
existing housing stock, and to focus its housing improvements on those
neighborhoods and areas of the city in greatest need.
3. The City will do what it can to eliminate impediments to the
construction of new multi -family and rental housing units in the city. This
should entail, at the very least, the provision of an adequate supply of land
zoned to permit these uses.
4. The City will seek to promote a balance of different types of housing
in different parts of the city.
5. Historic structures represent tourist, recreational and aesthetic
resources for the community. The City will continue to take actions and adopt
policies to protect these structures. Specifically, the City will continue to
enforce the provisions of its two historic districts, and will explore the
need for additional districts, or the need to include additional historic
structures within existing districts.
6. Care will be taken in the enforcement of the City's minimum housing
code so that individuals are not displaced from housing. The housing code
will be utilized in ways which encourage the rehabilitation of existing
dilapidated structures.
7. The City will consider developing policies and/or amending its zoning
ordinance to protect solar access for homes and businesses in the city.

W
' 8. The City will work to maintain the integrity of its existing
neighborhood units. The city's neighborhoods are viable and important social
units and future development and redevelopment in the city should not
' jeopardize them.
11
.1

Chapter 8.0
Economic and Industrial Development
Elizabeth City residents depend on a strong and healthy local economy for
their livelihoods. A primary function of the City's land use plan ought to be
to chart a future course to ensure the viability and vitality of the City's
economy, and to identify areas for expansion and growth, consistent with the
other stated goals and objectives of the City.
The Elizabeth City economy is based upon a number of different, yet
equally important sectors. The City initially developed as a trading port and
service and trade center for the surrounding agricultural economy. Table 8.1
presents information on the industries in which persons.in Elizabeth City are
employed. While agricultural employment is still important in the region,
relatively few Elizabeth City residents are employed in this sector (the
county figure would show much higher figures, of course). The largest
category is the professional and related services, including educational
services. This indicates, among other things, the economic importance of the
educational facilities located in the city. Retail trade employment is also
quite high, indicating that Elizabeth City does indeed serve as a regional
hub. A relatively high level of employment is found in the manufacturing
sector which tend to be "basic" (exporting) industries, serving to bring
income and wealth into the community. As Table 8.1 indicates, the majority of
manufacturing jobs are in the production of durable goods, including
furniture, lumber and wood products and transportation equipment. A large
number of individuals are employed in public administration indicating the

65
Table 8.1
' Industry of Employed Persons and Labor Force Status (1979) for
Elizabeth City -- Employed Persons 16 Years and Over
Industry
Employed persons 16 years and over 5,094
Agriculture 88
' Forestry and fisheries -
Mining
Construction 351
' Manufacturing 655
Nondurable goods 200
Food and kindred products 41
' Textile mill and finished textile products 87
Printing, publishing, and allied industries 48
Chemicals and allied products -
' Durable goods 455
Furniture, lumber, and wood products 241
Metal industries 14
Machinery, except electrical 29
Electrical machinery, equipment and supplies 9
Transportation equipment 143
' Transportation, communications, and other public utilities 301
Transportation 83
Communications 158
' Utilities and sanitary services 60
Wholesale trade 208
Retail trade 838
'
General merchandise stores
77
Food, bakery, and dairy stores
108
Automotive dealers and gasoline stations
115
Eating and drinking places
205
'
Banking and credit agencies
92
Insurance, real estate, and other finance
104
Business and repair services
105
Private households
ill
Other personal services
213
Entertainment and recreation services
51
Professional and related services
1,510
Hospitals
220
'
Health services, except hospitals
Educational services
169
937
Social services, religious and membership organizations
113
Legal, engineering and other professional services
71
Public administration
467
Source: Elizabeth City-Pasquotank County Industrial Development Commission.

66
large economic role played by the Coast Guard station which employs 435
employs 435 civilians in addition to its military workers.
Table 8.2 provides a more detailed, and more recent, view of
manufacturing employment in Elizabeth City, providing a listing of major
manufacturing employers compiled by the Elizabeth City-Pasquotank County
Industrial Development Commission.
Table 8.2
Major Manufacturing Employers in Elizabeth City Area
Name Products/Services Employees
17 South Mfg.
Elizabeth City Cotton Mill
Pell Paper Box Co.
Sanders Co., Inc.
IXL Furniture Co., Inc.
J.W. Jones Lumber Co.
Pro-Gro
Leslie Co.
TCOM Corp.
Chesapeake Lumber
Animal Crackers
Atlanta Knitting Mills, Inc.
Dolphin Systems
Davric, Inc.
Hockmeyer Equipment Corp
Airship Industries
Cabinet World
Children's wear
95
Cotton yarn
115
Boxes, printing
40
Foundry
45
Cabinets
115
Lumber
62
Peat Moss
35
Control valves and repair
20
Airborne Comm. systems
40
Lumber
140
Children's wear
75
Children's wear
75
Fuel.system components
25
Government printing
110
Industrial mixers
47
Blimps
60
Cabinets
15
111
Source: Elizabeth City-Pasquotank County Industrial Development Commission '
(1986).
Table 8.3 presents the occupational categories of Elizabeth City workers. '
A high number of workers are found in the following categories: teachers,
sales personnel, service occupations, administrative support occupations,
machine operators, and operators/fabricators, among others.

67
P
Table 8.3
Occupation of Employed Persons in Elizabeth City.
1980 --
Employed Persons 16 Years and Over
Occupations
Employed persons 16 years and over
5,094
Managerial and professional specialty occupations
1,336
Executive, administrative, and managerial occupations
518
Officials and administrators, public administration
36
Management related occupations
76
Professional specialty occupations
818
Engineers and natural scientists
61
Engineers
20
Health diagnosing occupations
51
Health assessment and treating occupations
125
Teachers, librarians, and counselors
475
Teachers, elementary and secondary schools
353
Technical, sales, and administrative support occupations
1,214
Health technologists and technicians
80
Technologists and technicians, except health
37
Sales occupations
432
Supervisors and proprietors, sales occupations
52
Sales representatives, commodities and finance
81
Other sales occupations
289
Cashiers
67
Administrative support occupations, including clerical
665
Computer equipment operators
13
Secretaries, stenographers, and typists
149
Financial records'processing occupations
62
Mail and message distributing occupations
36
Service occupations
920
Private household occupations
69
Protective service.occupations
132
Police and firefighters
79
Service occupations, except protective and household
719
Food service occupations
206
Cleaning and building service occupations
190
Farming, forestry, and fishing occupations
95
Farm operators and managers
29
Farm workers and related occupations
56
Precision production, craft and repair occupations
629
Mechanics and repairers
213
Construction trades
310
Precision production occupations
106
Operators, fabricators, and laborers
900
Machine operators and tenders, except precision
244
Fabricators, assemblers, inspectors, and samplers
84
Transportation occupations
170
Motor vehicle operators
163
Material moving equipment operators
26
Handlers, equipment cleaners, helpers, and laborers
376
Construction laborers
91
Freight, stock, and material handlers
67
Source: Elizabeth City-Pasquotank County Industrial Development Commission.

68
A number of local economic indicators can be examined to assess the
health and stability of the local economy. Unemployment is one gauge, but
fluctuates yearly, monthly and seasonally. Data for 1979 indicate that 8.8%
of the civilian labor force in the city was unemployed. This compared to 7.6%
in the county and 9.5% for the state as a whole.
Income levels and poverty status represent another approach to assessing
local economic performance. Table 8.4 presents a number of income and poverty
measures for Elizabeth City, Pasquotank County and the State of North
Carolina. On almost every measure the City falls considerably behind the
state averages. For instance while the state per capita income is $6,133 (in
1979) the per capita income for Elizabeth City is only $5,294. While only
14.8% of the persons in North Carolina have incomes below the poverty level,
some 23.4% of the persons in Elizabeth City have incomes below this level (in
1979).
The City has in the past, and should continue in the future, to create an
attractive climate for industry and commerce. In recent years it has begun to
assume a more aggressive role in attracting industry. A joint city -county
industrial commission was formed in 1976 to address these questions. The
commission has purchased and developed a forty-two acre industrial park off
Weeksville Road. The industrial commission recently purchased a second, 26
acre industrial site off U.S. Highway 17.. A full-time industrial recruiter is
employed by the commission to promote the area and to facilitate the location
of industry into the area. Additionally, the IDC has prepared a promotional
video tape of the Elizabeth City area which it loans to prospective industries
and businesses.

'
69
Table 8.4
Income
and Poverty Status
(1979)
Elizabeth
Pasquotank
North
City
County
Carolina
Median family income
$14,033
$14,950
$16,792
Mean family income
17,231
17,294
19,513
Per capita income
5,294
5,276
6,133
% Families below poverty line
15.3%
14.1
11.6
'
% Persons below poverty line
21.1%
17.7
14.8
% Families below 125 percent
of poverty line
23.4%
20.9
16.9
'
% Persons below 125 percent
poverty line
28.1%
25.2
20.7
' Source: 1980 Census of Population
I
In addition to these industrial sites, a group of private investors have
recently purchased a parcel adjacent to the existing Elizabeth City-Pasquotank
' County Industrial Park which they intend to develop as an industrial park
(under the corporate name "Elizabeth City Airport Industrial Park").
Access and transportation are key factors in making the Elizabeth City
' area attractive to new industry and commerce. An important issue is the
possible four-laneing of 10 miles of Highway 17 north of the city (within
Virginia), which would increase access to southeastern Virginia. North
Carolina officials in council with Virginia businessmen, recently requested
such improvements from the State of Virginia, as well as improvements to
Highway 168. The City should do all it can to encourage these improvements
and to create a mutually -advantageous economic climate between the City and
' its Virginia counterparts.
Recent efforts by local officials to convince the state of the need for a
' welcome center on U.S. Highway 17 are also positive and should be encouraged.
This facility would serve both highway traffic and boat traffic along the
' Dismal Swamp Canal.

70
Another important transportation issue is the long range status of the
Dismal Swamp Canal. This waterway supplies a substantial portion of the
transient boat traffic in the City. The Corps of Engineers, however, has
recommended that it be closed because of the cost of maintaining it and the
relatively low levels of boat traffic. A cost -benefit study is currently
being conducted by the Corps. Because the canal represents an important water
link, efforts should be taken to keep the canal open. The canal is an
important historic resource, surveyed by George Washington. A recent
suggestion for its protection is to list the canal on the National Register of
Historic Places. An alternative is to request the State to designate the
canal as an historic water route.
Improvements to the City's airport is also a technique currently being
used to make the City more attractive to industry. Such improvements would
include realignment of the airports non -directional beacon which would make it
easier for larger aircraft to land at the facility in poor weather. Hangar
improvements are also under way. These types of improvements would be more
easily undertaken if an airport authority were created, a move currently
underway. Presently, an airport commission exists which can only offer
recommendations and advice to the Elizabeth City Council.
Revitalizing the economy of the downtown should be an element in
Elizabeth City's economic development strategy. A recent example of
revitalization efforts is the push to renovate the Kramer and Virginia Dare
Arcade Buildings on Main Street.
Despite the fact that few Elizabeth City residents are directly employed
in agriculture, this sector does represent an important component of the
regional economy. As Table 8.5 indicates, there are some 73,766 acres of land

1 71
in farms in Pasquotank County, generating agricultural products with an annual
' market value (in 1982) in excess of $21 million dollars.
Given the importance of the agricultural sector, the City should take
' steps to ensure that its land use and development policies are consistent with
these activities. Urban growth and development is often detrimental to
agriculture, and the mixing of agricultural and residential uses create.
numerous incompatibilities. Urban growth creates numerous negative effects
for farming, including the generation of traffic, vandalism of farming
equipment and products, increased property taxes, and the driving -out of farm -
related businesses and services. New non -farm residents also often view
' normal farming operations as annoyances. They often object to the noise of
' farm equipment, the odors created by spreading manure and fertilizers, and the
operation of tractors and other farm equipment on public roads. To protect
the regional farming economy, the City will pursue land use planning measures
which minimize the extent to which agricultural areas within the City's
planning jurisdiction are exposed to future urban development and growth.
Table 8.5
Characteristics of Agriculture in Pasauotank County
(in 1982)
' Number of farms 253
Land in farms 73,766 acres
' Total market value of agricultural
products sold (in 1982) $21,849,000
Average market value of products
' per farm $86,361
Source: 1982 Census of Agriculture

72
Goals - Economic and Industrial Development
The City should continue to encourage economic and industrial growth to
ensure that adequate levels of employment exist for residents of Elizabeth
City and the region of which it is a part. This economic growth should be
compatible with the environmental and aesthetic values of the community and
should be carefully managed to ensure that any negative impacts are minimized
Policies - Economic and Industrial Development
1. The City welcomes and encourages future economic growth and
development in the area. This growth should not occur, however, at the
expense of the city's currently high quality of life.
2. Elizabeth City will continue to take advantage of its position as a
service and retail center and seek to accommodate these uses in the future.
However, it must more carefully control the location and the design of
commercial uses to minimize their traffic, aesthetic and other impacts on the
community.
3. Planning for future commercial uses must seek an efficient balance
between the need to economically revitalize the downtown and the economic
attractions of perimeter sites, such as Southgate Mall -Holly Square area, and
the commercial areas along Hughes Boulevard and Ehringhaus Street. To the
extent possible commercial uses should be particularly well -suited for the
specific area or site involved. For example, certain commercial uses, such as
specialty retail shops, may be more suited to downtown commercial sites than
to other less central locations.
4. The City acknowledges the importance of agriculture to the local and
regional economy, and will protect, to the extent it can, the premature
conversion of farmland into developed uses. (See also policies dealing with
the protection of natural and fragile areas).

' 73
' 5. The City will continue to promote, in collaboration with the County,
the recruitment of industries into the city and region. The Industrial
Development Commission should continue to play an important role here. The
City will focus on attracting non-polluting industries, and industries
consistent with the employment needs of the community. The City will
continue to stress in its recruiting efforts the amenities of the area as
well.
6. The City will increasingly focus on the promotion of tourism and
leisure -related services as a form of economic development. Elizabeth City's
unique historic resources and vast natural amenities suggest that this could
be a much larger and stronger component of the local economy than is currently
the case.
' 7. Economic development efforts should focus on revitalizing and
rehabilitating currently unused and dilapidated structures in the downtown.
Several highly visible commercial renovations might serve as anchors for
future redevelopment. The Kramer Building and Virginia Dare Arcade Building
are good examples of this type of renovation effort. Emphasis on the city's
historic resources, access to the waterfront, and -emphasis on promoting
tourism in the city will enhance the feasibility of such downtown
redevelopment projects.
8. The City will make every effort to maintain the high quality of life
and amenity values of the community as an effective approach to economic
development.
These local qualities serve as
important positive attractions to
prospective
industry and commerce.
'
9. The
City will continue to encourage
new industries to locate in its
industrial park.
The City, in collaboration
with the County, will pursue the
'
development
of additional industrial parks in the future.

74
10. The City will support and lobby for transportation improvements, such
as the four-laneing of U.S. 17 north, which enhance the ability of the City to
attract industrial and commercial activities, and which enhances access to the
market and port area of southeastern Virginia.
11. The City views its impressive airport facilities as a strong element
in making Elizabeth City more attractive to industry. It will make
improvements to the airport in the future, such as the realignment of the non -
directional beacon and hanger improvements. The City will support efforts to
create an independent airport authority and to actively involve the County in
this arrangement.
12. The City acknowledges its existing and potential economic ties with
Southeastern Virginia and take all actions possible to nurture this economic
connection. Future economic projects and activities which are mutually -
beneficial should be pursued. In particular, the City officials will continue
to encourage the State of Virginia to undertake improvements to U.S. Highway
17 and Highway 168.
13. Efforts will be made by the City to keep the Dismal Swamp Canal open
to boat traffic. Among other things, the City will explore the possibility of
having the canal listed on the National Register of Historic Places and having
it designated by the state as an historic water route.
14. The City will continue its efforts to obtain State approval and
funding for a Welcome Center on U.S. Highway 17.

' 75
15. The City acknowledges the regional importance of the agricultural
sector and will plan and regulate its future growth and development so as to
minimize negative impacts on agriculture. The City will seek through its land
classification system, and its zoning and other regulatory measures, to
adequately separate agricultural areas from future urban development. The
City will also seek to secure, in conjunction with the County, special reduced
property tax assessment for farmland to reduce the financial pressures to
idevelop these valuable lands for non -farm uses.
r

Chapter 9.0
Mitigation of Natural Hazards
While locations on the river have scenic, economic and other benefits,
certain natural hazards -- namely flooding from storms and hurricanes -- also
accompany them. The potential loss of property from flooding in Elizabeth
City is great. As the Natural Hazards Map (in envelope at the back of this
document) indicates, a large portion of the city (in terms of geographic area
and economic value) is located within the 100-year floodplain, as delineated
by the Federal Flood Insurance Administration and/or is within an area that
will be flooded by a Category 1, 2, or 3 hurricane (Source: U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers SLOSH Map, 1986) .
The primary mitigation approach taken by the City to address flooding
hazards is participation in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).
Under the NFIP, the federal government makes flood insurance available to
homeowners that would not otherwise be available in the private sector. As an
incentive for participation in the program, no federal loans or grants (e.g.,
HUD, VA, FHA mortgage loans) are permitted to be issued in designated flood
areas without flood insurance. Secondary purchases of mortgages by federal
agencies for uninsured properties are also prohibited. In addition, federal
disaster assistance for non -emergency recovery in the 100-year floodplain
(e.g., for rebuilding damaged sewer lines) is not available to localities that
are not participating in the NFIP. To participate in the program, localities
must adopt certain land use restrictions which minimize damages to structures
located in the 100-year floodplain. Specifically, development is prohibited
within the floodway (main river flow) where such development would raise the

77
1
11
I
1
base flood elevation (100-year flood level) above a foot, and all development
within the 100-year flood plain must either be floodproofed or elevated to the
base flood elevation (residential structures must be elevated). Local land
use regulations must also control the design of development subdivisions in
ways which minimize flood damages.
The NFIP designates a number of different types of flood zones depending
upon the severity and frequency of the flood hazard. Table 9.1 lists zone
designations commonly found on Flood Insurance Rate Maps. The insurance
premium actually paid by a property owner will vary according to the type of
zone and the elevation of the structure.
The City of Elizabeth City satisfied the minimum NFIP regulatory
requirements in March 1978 with the adoption of the Floodplain Ordinance. As
required by NFIP this ordinance places restrictions on development in floodway
and floodplain zones. In Elizabeth City, the Flood Insurance Rate Map
delineates several different flood zones, with a large amount of floodplain
property in the city located in the A -zone, or 100-year floodplain (see
Table 9.2).
The stated purposes of the Floodplain Ordinance suggest good reasons for
the City to ensure that its provisions are actively and conscientiously
implemented. The ordinance is intended to protect uses and structures
vulnerable to flood hazards, so as to:.
1. Promote the public health, safety, and general welfare of citizens in
flood hazards areas;
2. Protect individuals from buying lands which are unsuited for intended
purposes because of flood hazards;
3. Provide for public awareness of flooding potentials;
4. Control development which will, when acting along or in combination
with similar development, create an additional burden to the public
in flood hazard relief, investment and disruptions;

78
Table 9.1
Explanation of NFIP Zone Designations
Zone
A
Areas of 100-year flood; base flood elevations and flood hazards
,
factors not determined.
AO
Areas of 100-year shallow flooding; where depths are between one
(1) and three (3) feet; average depths of inundation are shown,
but no flood hazard factors are determined.
AH
Areas of 100-year shallow flooding where depths are between one
(1) and three (3) feet base flood elevations are shown, but no
flood hazard factors are determined.
Al-A30
Areas of 100-year flood; base flood elevations and flood hazard
factors determined.
B
Areas between limits of the 100-year flood and 500-year flood; or
certain areas subject to 100-year flooding with average depths
less than one (1) foot or where the contributing drainage area is
less than one square mile; or areas protected by levees from the
base flood. (Medium shading).
C Areas of minimal flooding. (No shading). ,
D Areas of undetermining, but possible, flood hazards.
Source: Federal Insurance Administration, Flood Insurance Rate Map for
Elizabeth City, N.C. (August 5, 1985).
5. Help maintain a stable tax base by preserving property value for
future development within the Flood Plain Area; and
6. Meet the requirements of the National Flood Insurance Program and
qualify the City for the regular Flood Insurance Program

79
Table 9.2
NFIP Floodplain
Zone Designations
for Elizabeth
City
Base
Flood
Flooding Source
Zone
FHF*
Elevation**
Pasquotank River
A8, V8
040
8
feet
Charles Creek
A8
040
8
feet
A5
025
8
feet
Knobbs Creek
A8
040
8
feet
Knobbs Creek Tributary
A8
040
8
feet
A4
020
8
feet
Knobbs Creek Tributary
A5
025
8
feet
East Branch
*Flood Hazard Factor
**Given in feet above mean sea level
Source: Elizabeth City
Floodplain Ordinance,
1978
Recent changes to CAMA provisions have placed hurricane and coastal storm
hazard mitigation high on the priority list of planning issues which coastal
localities should address. The CAMA land use planning guidelines were revised
in May of 1983 to require coastal localities to incorporate into their local
plans storm hazard mitigation and post -storm reconstruction components (15
NCAC 7B .0203(a)(6)). The mitigation and reconstruction policies which
localities are instructed to develop are to consider at least the following:
1. Separate policies which deal with the effects of high winds,
flooding, wave action and erosion for those hazard areas where such
forces may be expected;
2. Means of dealing with structures and uses which do not conform to the
hazard mitigation policies;
3. Means of encouraging hotels, restaurants, and similar large
commercial structures to locate outside of erosion -prone areas;
4. Policies which deal with the acquisition of parcels located in hazard
areas or rendered unbuildable, for the purpose of public access.
u

:1
The development of post -disaster reconstruction policies are intended to
assist localities in making development and redevelopment decisions in the
aftermath of a hurricane or severe storm, where the pressures to rebuild are
great and where opportunities for careful deliberation are often few.
Reconstruction guidelines are to address, among other things; "the timing and
completion of damage assessments; the timing and imposition of temporary
development moratoria; and the development of standards to which repairs and
reconstruction shall conform."
Localities are to establish schedules for staging reconstruction
"according to established priorities assigned to the restoration of essential
services, minor repairs, major repairs and new development." Localities are
also required to prepare policies to direct the repair and reconstruction of
public facilities, and to consider their possible relocation outside of high
hazard zones. Consideration must also be given to the establishment of a
"reconstruction task force," to oversee post -storm recovery and to deal with
the policy questions which arise during the reconstruction phase.
While many of these mitigation and redevelopment provisions have more
relevance to beachfront or oceanfront localities, Elizabeth City and its
riverfront proximity does contain sufficient disaster potential to warrant
development of such institutional frameworks and policies.
The City and County have together prepared a Hurricane Evacuation Plan,
updated as recently as August 1985, which is intended to "provide for an
orderly and coordinated evacuation and shelter system to minimize the effects
of hurricanes on residents and visitors in Pasquotank County." (1985, p.l).
The plan establishes a "control group" which provides overall direction and
control over evacuation and a "support group" to assist in the implementation
of evacuation directives. The control group consists of the Chairman of the

1 81
County Commissioners, the Mayor of Elizabeth City, and the County Civil
Preparedness Coordinator (an advisor). The support group consists of a wide
range of City and County officials, including the City manager, and the
sheriff and Chief of Police, among other officials. These groups have
responsibility for ensuring that adequate hurricane warnings are provided, and
that evacuation is conducted in an efficient and orderly manner. The
city/county evacuation plan also provides instructions for evacuees and
identifies designated hurricane shelters within the county. Nine schools are
designated as hurricane shelters (see Table 9.3) in the Evacuation Plan.
Since the plan was adopted one school was destroyed by fire (Sheep Harney),
one has been condemned (Weeksville) and parts of two others have been
condemned H L Trigg and P W Moore Reconstruction or renovation of all of
( gg Moore).
these have been scheduled.
Table 9.3
Hurricane Shelters
Sheep Harney School 307 N. Road, Elizabeth City
Elizabeth City Jr. High 304 N. Road Street, Elizabeth City
H.L. Trigg School 1004 Parkview Ave. Elizabeth City
Weeksville School Weeksville
Pasquotank Elem. School
1407 Peartree Rd.
Elizabeth City
P.W. Moore School
604 Roanoke Ave.
Elizabeth City
Northeastern High School
963 Oak Stump Rd
Elizabeth City
J.C. Sawyer School
1007 Park Street,
Elizabeth City
'
Central School
U.S. Highway 17
Source: Elizabeth City/Pasquotank
County Hurricane
Evacuation Plan, 1985

82
Goals - Mitigation of Natural Hazards
The City will, to the extent possible, take action which will reduce the
actual or potential damages and loss of human life from hurricanes and
flooding, and other natural hazards.
Policies - Mitigation of Natural Hazards
1. The City, in collaboration with the County, will periodically
evaluate the adequacy of designated hurricane shelters, both in terms of their
capacity and location. Where necessary, and in response to future growth and
development, additional public shelters should be designated.
2. The City, in collaboration with the County, will evaluate and
identify appropriate transportation routes which will be used during hurricane
evacuation. Evacuation procedures should focus on evacuating citizens from
those homes and structures which are particularly vulnerable during a coastal
storm or hurricane.
3. The City and County will conduct an exercise annually to familiarize
staff with emergency procedures and operations and to evaluate the evacuation
plan.
4. As prescribed under CAMA provisions, the City will consider the
formation of a post -hurricane recovery and reconstruction task force. This
team will provide oversight and direction during the reconstruction phase,
will assist in making crucial decisions concerning local recovery and
reconstruction operations, and should identify mitigation opportunities during
reconstruction which can reduce the potential damages and loss of life from
hurricanes and severe coastal storms.
5. The City, in collaboration with the County, will establish a post -
hurricane damage assessment team in advance of such a disaster. Such a team

83
will facilitate the acquisition of state and federal disaster assistance
funds, will facilitate decisions concerning rebuilding and reconstruction, and
may assist in the identification of mitigation opportunities.
6. The City supports the objectives and intent of the National Flood
Insurance Program and will continue to require new development in floodplain
to meet NFIP building requirements.
7. The City will, where possible, regulate and/or encourage future
development in the floodplain to minimize exposure to future hurricane and
coastal storm events. For instance, future residential subdivisions may be
clustered so that structures are at a maximal distance from potential flood
waters and are situated on the safest portions of development sites. Future
high intensity uses should be located in the safest locations in the city.
Where feasible, high hazard floodplains should be retained for more
appropriate, non -intensive land uses, such as for public open space and
agricultural uses.
8. The City will carefully regulate redevelopment and reconstruction
following a hurricane so that mitigation opportunities, as well as
opportunities to accomplish other local objectives, are not foreclosed by
abrupt and hasty rebuilding. The City will consider an appropriate ordinance
to permit local officials to impose a temporary reconstruction moratorium
following a hurricane.
9. Future public investments by the City will to the extent possible
take local flood hazards into account. Where possible, future public
structures and facilities will avoid location in the floodplain. Where
location in the floodplain is unavoidable, structures and facilities should be
designed to minimize future hurricane and flooding damages (e.g., elevation of
public buildings, floodproofing of sewer and water lines, etc.).

84
10. To the extent possible, the City will ensure that future residents
locating in flood hazard areas are sufficiently aware of these natural
hazards.

1
I
Chapter 10.0
Planning for Compatibility with the Coast Guard Station (AICUZ)
The U. S. Coast Guard Support Center is an important part of the
Elizabeth City community. It is a major employer and a major influence on the
stability of the local economy. More than 1,400 individuals are stationed on
the base. The station is a joint -use facility, with separate Coast Guard and
civilian facilities. It contains 810 acres and two active runways, one over
7,000 feet long. Approximately 20 acres of the facility are used by Elizabeth
City as its municipal airport. Separate access and terminal facilities are
provided, with all air traffic under the control of the Coast Guard control
tower.
Air facilities and city growth and development, however, are often not
compatible. While the Coast Guard air facility is currently relatively free
of this sort of problem, a study was undertaken in 1980 to ensure that
incompatibilities are avoided in the future. The findings and
recommendations, contained in the resulting report, Air Installation
Compatible Land Use Zones, U.S. Coast Guard Support Center (AICUZ), have
substantial implications for the development of Elizabeth City. These
implications are examined in this chapter of the plan.
The AICUZ study dealt with two primary problems associated with mixing
' air traffic and urban development: noise and safety. The AICUZ study
identifies areas within or near the air facility where these problems were
likely to be greatest, and then identifies appropriate land use for those
Iareas to minimize the problems.
1-1

86
With respect to noise, the study considered a number of factors including
aircraft noise, flight paths, frequency of operations, and so on. From these
conditions, aircraft noise contours were prepared, which locate high noise
areas. Using Department of Defense accident potential criteria, the AICUZ
study also identified accident potential zones and then examined operational
changes that could be undertaken to reduce noise and hazards.
Recommendations in the study are aimed at influencing the use of the high
noise and hazard areas. The action recommended in the plan are: (1) the
acquisition of fee -simple land or easements, (2) revision of zoning
regulations to restrict the density of future uses, (3) soundproofing,
(4) identification of potentially hazardous areas where concern about high -
intensity future uses should be expressed.
Goal - Compatibility with Coast Guard Station
The City will, to the extent possible, take actions to ensure that the
amount of future development subjected to the noise and risks to human life
associated with the Coast Guard air base are minimized. Future land use
decisions will strive for compatibility with this facility.
Policies - Compatibility with Coast Guard Station
1. The City will encourage the Coast Guard to employ traffic patterns
which minimize noise impacts and accident hazards for City residents.
2. The City will review its existing zoning ordinance and other land use
policies and consider adjusting permissible densities in high hazard/high
noise areas identified in the AICUZ Study to reflect the added public risks
here. Under no circumstances should high -intensity residential uses be
permitted here. To the extent possible, these areas should be encouraged to
remain in agricultural and other open space uses.

1 87
3. The City will encourage the Coast Guard to pursue the acquisition of
land in clear zones, through the purchase of easements or fee -simple title in
these areas. The City should reinforce this recommendation by revising its
zoning ordinance to reflect the very high risk of locating any form of
development here. The City should encourage these areas to remain in
agricultural or other low -intensity open space uses.
4. The City will encourage all future development locating in high noise
areas to be designed to incorporate soundproofing features.
5 The City will prohibit the location of future high -occupancy uses
such as hospitals, churches, sports arenas, recreational facilities, etc., in
designated areas of concern. These types of uses should be required to locate
in the safest locations available or near the City.
6. To the extent possible the City will ensure that future occupants of
structures and future owners of land within the delineated airport hazard
areas are sufficiently aware of the risks and disamenities associated with
these sites.
r

Chapter 11.0
Public Services and Facilities
The City of Elizabeth City has provided and will continue to provide
quality public services and facilities to its residents. Among the basic
public services provided are: fire and police protection, solid waste
disposal, water and sewer service, and open space and recreation. While other
city services exist, this plan will discuss only the aforementioned because
they have a particularly important relationship to urban growth and
development. Particular emphasis in this chapter is placed on sewer and water
services. Open space and recreational facilities are discussed in Chapter
ME
Sewer and water services are crucial services under the control of the
City. Water and sewer tap-ons must be approved by the City Council; the fees
assessed for line extension and tap-ons are substantially higher outside the
city corporate limits than inside.
These pricing policies provide an economic incentive for areas outside
the city to be annexed to the city. Most of the annexation requests made to
the City in recent years appear to be the result of desire to take advantage
of the lower facility charges.
Historically, the City has obtained the bulk of its water supply from
deep and shallow wells in the City's well field northwest of town. Now the
Pasquotank River is the primary source of water with the deep wells in the
well field as a secondary source. Its normal policy has been to use 75% river
water and 25% well water. High salinity and treatment of alligator weed has
kept the City from using the river water for the past 15 months.

1 89
Consequently, while the City has intended to reduce its reliance on well
sources, this has not been possible. The City's well field has been
designated an Area of Environmental Concern, under the Coastal Area Management
Act, because of the importance and environmentally -sensitive nature of its
wells (this is discussed further in Chapter 12.0, Protection of Natural and
' Fragile Areas). Since 1975, however, the shallow wells have stopped
producing; the City draws its well water only from deep wells.
The current capacity of the City water plant (5 million gallons \per day
capacity; 2 million gallons per day average use) is adequate to serve
additional growth and development well into the future. The Perquimans County
water system, which serves areas adjacent to the city, was built after the
city system was expanded thus decreasing potential future demand on the city
system.
Sewage collection and treatment facilities are considerably less adequate
however. The current collection system suffers from serious infiltration
problems. In 1985, the City entered into a Special Order of Consent with the
North Carolina Environmental Management Commission. Under the agreement, the
City is permitted to discharge 327,460 gpd of additional wastewater, under the
condition that the City continue to undertake improvements to the wastewater
system which will eventually bring the City into compliance. Specifically,
the City has agreed to: 1) remove additional infiltration/inflow sources each
year to the extent that on or before July 1, 1987, the City will attain
compliance with all NPDES permit limits; enforce water conservation provisions
of the state building code as it applies to new residential construction;
develop and adopt sewer use ordinance limits for non -conventional pollutants,
including a pre-treatment program; use forty percent of the revenue received
from the one-half percent sales tax option for water and sewage capital outlay
I

all
purposes or to retire indebtedness incurred by the municipality for these
purposes.
Table 11.1 shows the additional effluent wastes permitted under the
Consent Order. As of January 1987, approximately 100,000 additional gallons
per day is available for future sewage taps. City public works officials have
indicated that this extra effluent capacity is adequate to accommodate
foreseeable future growth for a number of years into the future. While sewage
capacity does not appear to be an immediate problem under current patterns of
growth, a number of large industrial users could exhaust this capacity very
quickly.
Solid waste disposal is another service the City must plan for in the
future. A Solid Waste Planning Study was prepared for the City and County in
1980. This study estimated that the capacity at the existing site would be
reached by January, 1982. However, because of pollution and environmental
problems generated by the site, the City was notified by the Solid and
Hazardous Waste Management Branch of the State Department of Human Resources
that a permit to operate the existing landfill would not be reissued. The
City was advised that they should close this site and have a new landfill site
operational by July, 1981. A new landfill site was developed on property
southwest of the Old Elizabeth City Municipal Airport. This site has capacity
to accommodate City and County growth well into the future.
The landfill is open Monday through Saturday, with the majority of refuse
coming from the City's municipal collection service and the County's private
contractor. Such service is provided to Elizabeth City residents twice each
week. Commercial collection is provided by the City to approximately 150
accounts. These routes are serviced at night, usually at least twice a week.

91
I
1
I
1
11
1
1
1
1
11
Table 11.1
Approved Additional Effluent Flows
Project
Brookridge Subdivision
Rosewood Subdivision
Winslow Acres
Hockmeyer Corp.
Elizabeth City Garden Apts.
E.C.S.U. Housing
Vicki Villa Motel
River City Seafood
Cypress Court Apts.
Roanoke Avenue Phase II
8 Plex Condos
Industrial Park Shell Bldg.
Elizabeth City Garden Apts.
8 Plex Condos
Haskett Const. Co. Townhouses
Mays Projects
Southgate.Manor Phase II
Habit Causeway
COA
Davric
Sweet 17
Habit Water St.
Roanoke
Tanglewood Farms
Central Elementary School
Northeastern High School
Haskett Mobile Home Park
Shoreflight
Vans II
Taps to Existing System
Flow in eyd
7,000
8,000
8,000
500
2,400
4,000
6,000
1,200
7,000
1,500
1,200
18,000
14,000
3,600
9,500
6,200
9,360
15,500
5,000
2,200
1,000
2,700
2,500
45,000
5,000
10,000
30,000
500
600
100,000
Total 327,460
Source: Special Order of Consent, N.C. Environmental Management Commission,
EMC WQ No. 79-52 Ad III.
IU

92
Police and fire protection are also important services provided by the
City. As of July, 1986, the Police Department employed a staff of 30. The
department is currently housed in the City Hall. The Fire Department, as of
July 1986, employed a staff of 34, with 20 additional volunteers. The Fire
Departments facilities include two fire stations, 6 pumpers, one ladder truck,
one tanker, one squad, one brush unit, and two cars. These levels of service
are adequate to meet the existing needs of the city.
Goals - Public Facilities and Services
The City will provide sewer, water and other public utilities consistent
with future levels of growth. Provision of these facilities will occur in
ways which reduce their financial and environmental costs, and which properly
assess beneficiaries for the benefits received.
The City will provide levels of police, fire and other public services in
levels consistent with future levels of growth. These services will be
directed to those area of the community where they are most needed.
Policies - Public Facilities and Services
1. The City, in collaboration with the County, will periodically
evaluate the capacity and predicted future need for solid waste facilities.
Because the availability of appropriate sites is often low, particularly in
urbanizing areas, the City will take early efforts to acquire such necessary
additional sites far in advance of need. The City will ensure through its
planning and land use controls that appropriate types of compatible land uses
(specifically non -intensive, agricultural uses) occur near existing and future
solid waste facilities. Future solid waste facilities should be located on
sites, and developed in ways, which do not jeopardize the City's water supply.
The City will plan for the equipment and personnel necessary to accommodate_
the needs of future population and development.

1 93
2. The City will plan for necessary sewer and water facility
improvements commensurate with future growth and development.
3. The City will continue to make improvements to the existing
wastewater treatment system in order to come into compliance with State
pollution control requirements and with the specific provisions of the Special
Order of Consent. The City will continue to make efforts to correct its
infiltration/inflow problems.
4. The provision of sewer and water extension will be financed in such a
way that those residents who benefit from these services are required to pay
for them. The City will review its present financing policies to ensure that
the beneficiaries of these facilities are paying their fair share for them.
This may suggest, for instance, a greater use of special assessments as an
approach to financing sewer and water facility improvements. Development
where the costs of these facilities are greater (e.g., where force main
extensions and additional pump stations are required) should be required to
assume a greater proportion of their costs.
5. The City will consider annexation as an approach to increasing the
City's tax base and its ability to pay for needed public services and
facilities. Consistent with this objective, the City will review the manner
J in which it reviews proposals and areas identified for annexation. It will
develop specific policies to assist in evaluation of possible annexations.
6. The City should consider how its sewer and water extension practices
influence the cost and efficiency of these facilities. The City should
consider all phasing and locational decisions which will reduce the costs of
these services to the public. The City will generally attempt to provide
urban services to those areas immediately contiguous to areas already
developed; however, these decisions may be influenced by other issues which

94
require much further analysis, such as the needs of existing and proposed
development in outlying areas and the relative benefits to the citizens; the
U.S. Justice Department review criteria, which may involve maintaining certain
levels of service to minority persons, etc. This practice will reduce the
public costs of these facilities and will serve to advance other local
objectives, as well (e.g., the protection of farmland). The Land
Classification Plan reflects this intention.
7. The City will consider the impacts of its facility extension
decisions on overall patterns of growth and development and the accomplishment
of other local goals and objectives. For instance, the extension of a sewer
line into a valuable natural area will serve to increase future development
demand in this area, perhaps in conflict with the objectives to protect such
areas. Without such facilities, growth may occur at a Considerably lower
density, representing less of a threat to the integrity.of the natural area.
The City should consider restricting the extension of sewer and water
facilities into environmentally fragile and sensitive areas and highly
productive agricultural areas. Likewise, as indicated in Policy 6, above, the
City should consider supporting the extension of sewer and water facilities
into those outlying areas which may exhibit special needs (such as septic tank
failure), on which may otherwise demonstrate the potential to provide an
increased benefit to the city, whether it be in the form of rental housing,
retail marketing, or other socioeconomic return.

11
Chapter 12
Protection of Natural and Fragile Areas
Within the planning jurisdiction of Elizabeth City, there are a number of
important natural areas. In large part it is these natural areas that make
Elizabeth City such a special place. They are of aesthetic importance in that
they add to the beauty and charm of the area but they are also of economic
importance in that they are a source of income (fishing, boating, etc.) and of
water (see Chapter 11) for the city. The State has recognized the importance
of these areas by designating them as Areas of Environmental Concern. Areas
of Environmental Concern of significance to Elizabeth City are:
1. Coastal Wetlands
2. Estuarine Waters
3. Estuarine Shorelines
4. Public Trust Areas
5. Public Water Supply Well Fields
"Coastal Wetlands are defined as any salt marsh or other marsh subject to
regular or occasional flooding by tides, including wind tides..." (15 NCAC
l 07H.0205(a)). Coastal Wetlands within the planning jurisdiction include:
1) An area adjacent to Charles Creek off Southern Avenue.
2) Small shallow pond off Unnamed Point approximately 3/4 miles
downstream from Cobbs Point near the northernmost portion of the
Coast Guard Base.
Estuarine waters are defined 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..." (15 NCAC 07H.0206(a)). All

waters south or seaward of the Route 158 Highway bridge are considered
estuarine waters under the CAMA provisions.
Estuarine shorelines include "all shorelands within 75 feet landward of
the mean high water level, or the normal water level, of the estuarine
waters."
Public Trust Areas include "all navigable natural bodies of water, and
lands thereunder to ... mean water level..." (15 NCAC 07H.0207(a)) and thus
the Pasquotank River. The public trust doctrine requires that the public not
be denied basic navigational and recreational rights to the use of these
waters.
The City's well field has been designated as an Area of Environmental
Concern. "These are areas of well -drained sands that extend downward from the
surface into the shallow ground water table which supplies the public with
potable water. These surficial well fields are confined to a readily
definable geographic area as identified by the North Carolina Department of
Human Resources with assistance and support from affected local governments"
(15 NCAC 07H.0406(a)).
The administrative rules provide a detailed description of the Elizabeth
City well field -- one of only two well fields on the coast designated as an
AEC (the other being the Cape Hatteras well field):
The Department of Human Resources proposed the well field at
Elizabeth City in Pasquotank County as an area of environmental concern.
The City of Elizabeth City is supplied with raw water from a shallow well
field in the southeastern section of the Dismal Swamp at the end of SR
1309 approximately one-half mile west of the corporate limits of
Elizabeth City. The well field begins at SR 1306 and extends west into
the Dismal Swamp. The area to be designated is bounded to the south by
the Southern Railway until it intersects SR 1144, to the east by SR 1306,
1309, and 1333, and to the north and west by the Dismal Swamp. The well
field consists of approximately 250 wellpoints piped by vacuum systems
which deliver the water to storage basins. The shallow wells deliver

1 97
about two gpm each. In addition, there are four deep wells in the field
with capacities of about 400 gpm each. Total capacity of the field is
approximately 1.5 mgd. The swamp is the source of recharge. (15 NCAC
07H.0406(a)(1))
Minimum use standards stipulated for the well field are:
(1) The project does not use ground absorption sewage disposal systems
within the designated boundary of the well field.
(2) The project does not require subsurface pollution injection within
the designated boundary of the AEC.
(3) The project does not significantly limit the quality of the water
supply or the amount of rechargeable water to the well fields.
(4) The project does not cause salt water intrusion into the public
water supply or discharge toxic and/or soluable contaminants (15 NCAC
7H.0406(a)).
The City Director of Sewer and Water Services reports that due to the
digging of agricultural irrigation ditches in the area of the well field, the
supply of water from,:the shallow aquifer diminished and in 1975 the City's
shallow wells stopped producing. The extent to which these shallow aquifer
resources have been replenished or could be replenished in the future is
uncertain (perhaps if certain agricultural practices are modified). It is the
City's position to continue the special protection given to the well field as
a sensitive area, and to place the burden of proof on those proposing to
develop these areas to show that this resource is no longer useful or valuable
to the City and that the proposed development will not damage the well field.
The type and characteristics of soils in the Elizabeth City area also
define fragile natural areas. The characteristics of these soils have
implications for the quality of the area's ground and surface water resources,
and protection of public health and safety. A soil survey of Pasquotank

98
County prepared by the U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service in 1957 identified a
number of limitations created for development. The 1976 plan summarizes these
limitations:
The area's nearly level terrain, high water table, poorly drained
soils, poor structural sub -soil conditions and other unfavorable soil
properties place severe limitations on urban development and expansion.
Without the use of community or public water and sewer systems, which are
expensive, special building designs or soil modifications, the area's
unfavorable soil conditions for the most part pose serious problems for
urban development. At best the soils in this area have only marginal
suitability for development and some particularly wet land soil types are
absolutely unsuitable for any type of development (p. 75).
Soils in the Elizabeth City area are generally unsuited for septic tank
use. Generally, only those soils of the fine sandy loam and loamy fine sand
are suitable for septic tanks. "Suitable" soils are considered those which
require no mechanical modifications to the soils or septic tank system design.
Soils are considered "provisionally suitable" where such modifications are
possible and necessary. Less than 5% of the soils in the Elizabeth City
planning area are found to be suitable for septic tanks, while only 20% are
found to be provisionally suitable. The vast majority of soils in the area,
some 75%, were found'to be unsuitable for septic tank use. These facts
suggest the importance for protecting the quality of groundwater and surface
water, and the public's health and safety, of ensuring that the City's public
sewer system is the primary mode of waste disposal in the future. Future
development should be required to tap into this system, and efforts should
also be made to tie older subdivisions relying on septic tanks into the public
sewer system.
Goal - Natural and Fragile Areas
The city's natural environs are an important resource which can be
utilized both to promote economic development and to satisfy the recreational
and other needs of residents. This natural environment includes the soils,

1 99
water, wetlands, and forested areas. Future growth and development in
Elizabeth City must recognize these assets and protect and enhance them to the
extent that this is possible.
The City will continue to work to reduce the extent of pollution
occurring within its boundaries and in nearby areas. In particular, the City
iwill make appropriate efforts to ensure the future quality of surface and
ground water.
Policies - Natural and Fragile Areas
1. The City recognizes the ecological and recreational importance of its
wooded swampland areas and, to the extent possible, will limit future growth
and development in these areas. The City will consider the perpetual
protection of these areas through fee -simple or less -than -fee -simple purchase.
2. The City acknowledges the importance, for ecological and recreational
reasons, of protecting the quality of estuarine waters (i.e., the Pasquotank
River). The City regulate will late future land uses and activities aloe the
S g
river to prevent their destruction.
3. The City will protect the few remaining saltwater marsh areas. Again
this might be accomplished through land acquisition or regulation of future
development in these areas (e.g., by requiring clustering, by reducing
density, and so on).
4. The City recognizes the tourist and recreational potential that its
designated natural and fragile areas hold and will protect and enhance them
accordingly.
1

100
S. To protect the quality of estuarine waters (The Pasquotank River) the
City will continue its efforts to correct the infiltration and other problems
associated with the current wastewater disposal system; the City will
continue to strive to minimize the impact of its municipal sewage disposal on
the Pasquotank River.
6. Development will be monitored and managed in sensitive, groundwater
recharge areas. In particular, areas along the Knobbs Creek and wooded swamp
areas north of the City where the water table is highest will be carefully
protected. The use of septic tanks here should be prohibited and the quantity
of future growth and development limited.
7. An analysis of the area's soils indicate that these are, by and
large, unsuitable for septic tank use. The City will, to the extent possible,
ensure that septic tank use is minimized in the future and that future
development is required to tap into the City's public sewage system. Efforts
will also be made to encourage or require existing older development relying
on septic tanks to tap into the public system.
8. The City supports actions to continue to protect the well field land.
It is the responsibility of those wishing to develop or use these lands to
show either that the well field resources (the shallow wells) are no longer
productive or that proposed land alteration will not damage or destroy these
resources.

1
Chapter 13.0
Urban Design and Aesthetic Resources
BY virtue of its historic structures and natural environment Elizabeth
City has a number of aesthetic resources which it should protect. The
enjoyability and livability of a community to its residents are intimately
tied to its visual and scenic qualities. Moreover, the attractiveness of the
city to visitors and other non-residents will depend upon these qualities as
well. Environmental resources of great value are the swamp and wooded areas
to the north of the city, the Pasquotank River, Knobbs and Charles Creeks, the
farmland surrounding the city, among others. With respect to the built
' environment, the historic structures contained in the city are perhaps the
most important. Without careful management, the quality of these resources
could be quickly diminished.
In addition to these resources, areas that will be developed in the
l
future can be visually pleasing or visually obtrusive developments depending
on the care and imagination invested in them. New development should be
compatible with existing visual resources but should also be expected to
adhere to high architectural and site -design standards. A new subdivision in
a previously undeveloped area can, on the one hand, be a sterile, uncreative
placing of box -like structures, with little vegetation and relief,
contributing little to the visual quality of the city. New development should
be encouraged to strive for site designs, architectural design, landscaping,
and so on, which enhance the community rather than detract from it.
Development along the city's major streets and thoroughfares hold
1 particular potential for aesthetic and visual enhancement as these are areas

102
regularly frequented by residents and visitors. They are areas where
unattractive strip commercial development often occurs, including the signage
and visual clutter which typically accompanies it. The Halstead Boulevard
Development and Growth Study is particularly sensitive to the issue of
aesthetics. Among other things it proposes the use of vegetative buffer
zones, the use of landscaping in project layout and design, discouraging small
scale uses in favor of larger -scale, more integrated, projects, and more
aesthetically -sensitive requirements for building height, bulk, spacing, lot
coverage, and so on.
The Study also proposes the creation of a community appearance commission
or committee to establish appearance standards and to provide overall guidance
on aesthetic issues. The study also suggests a review of the specific
provisions of the City's zoning, subdivision and nuisange ordinances to ensure
that they adequately address visual/aesthetic integrity.. These suggestions
are sound and should be pursued in the future by the City. Perhaps a first
step would be the designation of key "visual corridors" (e.g., along the
waterfront, along major boulevards, etc.) and a review of existing development
ordinances as they apply in these corridors.
The City has taken a major step towards ensuring the visual integrity of
its streets and thoroughfares by developing a Sign Control Ordinance. This
ordinance has not been adopted however. Among other things, the ordinance
would prohibit types of signs and provides detailed standards for those that
are permitted. For instance, as Table 13.1 indicates, the maximum sign area
of free-standing signs would be restricted, in accordance with the posted
speed limit on that particular stretch of road. As a further example of these

103
Table 13.1
Maximum Sign Area for Free-standing Signs
Posted Speed Limit Maximum Sign Area
50 mph or above 150 sq. ft.
45 mph 120 sq. ft.
30,35 mph 90 sq. ft.
25 mph and below 60 sq. ft.
Source: Elizabeth City Sign Control Ordinance
restrictions, outdoor advertising structures (off -premises signs) would only
be permitted in commercial and industrial zones, and could not exceed an area
of 1,200 square feet, a height of thirty feet, or a width of sixty feet. Such
signs would not be permitted to be located less than 100 feet apart.
The historic structures and architecture of the city are a major part
of its visual pleasantness. The historic areas of the city should be managed
carefully to ensure that their visual integrity is protected and that future
incompatible uses do.not occur which would jeopardize these aesthetic
resources. As noted in earlier chapters, the two historic districts in the
city, and the historic district commission which oversees them, are important
tools in protecting these resources. The commission has prepared and adopted
a set of review criteria, and a statement of policies and goals for
maintaining the integrity of these districts, which have largely to do with
protecting their
visual qualities. Specifically,
these criteria and policies
address.a range of building and site practices designed
to ensure the
compatibility of
new development or renovation of
existing structures in the
district. Among
the established are the
following:
policies
a New construction should have a lot coverage
similar to that of existing
buildings
in the area;

104
• Structures must be situated on a lot to ensure consistency of setback,
to ensure order and coherence, and a strong and continuous streetscape;
• The height of new buildings should be consistent with the height of
existing buildings in the districts;
• Spacing between buildings should be of uniform distances, consistent
with the "footprint" of the surrounding neighborhood or area;
• Architectural design components (such as exterior building materials,
roofing materials, surface textures, proportion of width to height of
openings, roof form and pitch, shape and form of the building) must be
compatible within the building as a unit and with the building
surroundings;
• New buildings will be oriented to the street in accordance with
existing dominant patterns;
• The scale of new development must be consistent with existing
development; human scale is appropriate, a monumental scale is not.
The Elizabeth City Zoning Ordinance also incorporates design standards
for parking lots, parking spaces, and for planting strips, buffers and
landscaping. Aggressive implementation of these requirements would do much to
enhance the aesthetic quality of existing and future development in the city.
An additional aesthetic problem is created by the presence of junk,
trash, old automobiles and other debris on lots and homesites. These
conditions are not only unsightly but create a negative image for the city and
its neighborhoods. The City currently has the authority, through its building
and housing codes, to prohibit or prevent this type of visual clutter.
Goal - Urban Design/Aesthetic Resources
The City will ensure that the aesthetic and visual integrity of the
community is protected. Future growth and development will be managed to

105
protect the city's appearance and avoid creating an unsightly and cluttered
landscape.
Policies: Urban Design/Aesthetic Resources
1. The City will continue to enhance the visual and scenic qualities of
the Pasquotank River. Future growth and development along the waterfront
should protect and enhance this visual resource.
2. Future efforts will be made to control and regulate commercial and
other forms of development along the city's major thoroughfares. Commercial
Istrip development along these thoroughfares can create visual disorder and
unsightliness. Careful review of building and project designs along these
corridors will protect their visual integrity.
3. To the extent possible visual buffers should be provided to obscure
certain visually-intrusive/unpleasant uses and structures. These structures
or uses could range from junkyards and solid waste collection units to less
intensive commercial or industrial uses, parking lots, etc. The use of
vegetation and landscaping and effective project on site designs should be
encouraged in order to provide such visual buffers.- The City will
aggressively enforce the existing design standards included in the zoning
ordinance. The City will review these design standards for their adequacy and
stringency, and make whatever additions/modifications are appropriate to
achieving this desired protection of community aesthetics.
4. The City will protect the visual integrity of its environs by
carefully controllingthe size, location and configurations of signs and
S
advertisements. The City will consider adopting a sign control ordinance.
5. The City will require or encourage new development to adhere to more
stringent project and site designs which are more responsive to visual and

106
aesthetic quality. For instance, new subdivisions which cluster density and
are able to protect open spaces and natural areas should be encouraged.
Creative architectural designs which contribute to the visual experience of
residents should be encouraged. Repetitive and monotonous architectural
designs should be discouraged. Aggressive enforcement of the existing design
standards in the zoning ordinance would go far in achieving these objectives
6. The City will consider the preparation of a specific visual resource
protection plan which would elaborate in considerably greater detail on the
above policies (e.g., might provide examples of visually and aesthetically -
pleasing site designs and developments, or more specific policies and actions
for protecting the visual integrity of waterfront areas, examples of building
and project designs which do this and others which do not and so on). As part
of this effort the City will carefully review its existing site review and
development regulations and to modify these in ways which advance the
aesthetic and visual quality of future development. The City will consider
the development of visual management/appearance guidelines to be used in
assessing future development proposals. These policies would vary according
to different neighborhoods and parts of the city (e.g., the northern
waterfront vs. the West Main Street Historic District). The City will
consider the creation of a city-wide appearance commission (and the
institution of an urban design process for the city).
7. The City recognizes the visual and aesthetic importance of its
historic structures and districts and will continue to ensure that future
development and redevelopment is visually compatible. The city's two
designated historic districts, and the design criteria and policies which
occupy them, are important tools for visual management and will continue to be
vigorously supported and implemented (see Chapter 7.0).

1
107
8. The City will seek, through the enforcement of its housing, building
w and other appropriate policy and ordinances, to eliminate outdoor junk, trash,
!� abandoned automobiles and other unsightly debris located on public and
private, vacant and developed lots throughout the City.
1
i

Chapter 14.0
Land Classification System
A land classification system and map of that system have been prepared
for Elizabeth City which will assist in the implementation of the policies
identified in the earlier chapters of this plan. The land classification
system provides a framework for identifying the future uses of all land areas
within the city and its extraterritorial jurisdiction. The designation of
different land classes permits the City to identify those areas where and when
future urban growth and development should occur, and where the City should
conserve and protect its natural and"cultural resources.
At the most general level, the land classification system attempts to
distinguish between urban growth areas and areas intended to be left in
primarily undeveloped or rural uses. This is indicated on the land
classification map through the delineation of an urban growth boundary (UGB).
Different classification zones are used to designate areas within and outside
of this urban growth boundary; these are described below. The recently
annexed causeway is dealt with separately.
1. Developed
The developed classification contains land within the corporate limits of
Elizabeth City and is intended to designate those areas where continued
intensive development and redevelopment is appropriate and is to be
encouraged. These are areas which are currently serviced by sewer and water,
and receive the full range of urban services including police and fire
protection, solid waste disposal, recreation, etc. These areas have a
moderate to high population density.

109
2. Transition
The transition classification identifies areas where future growth and
development is possible or likely. The classification system provides several
different categories of transition lands to differentiate between levels of
density and public services to be provided. Two of the Transition
Classifications -- Transition I and II -- are used to designate areas intended
to receive future urban growth and are thus contained within the designated
i urban growth boundary (UGB). Transition III is used to designate areas
outside of the UGB which represent isolated pockets of lower density
development, where future water and sewer service will not be provided in the
foreseeable future. Each of these specific categories is further described
below.
/ (a) Transition I. These are areas generally contiguous to existing
urbanized areas in the city. It is the policy of the City to encourage future
= development in the next ten years here first. These areas will be given
priority in the provision of sewer and water, and other public facilities and
services. Permitted development densities in these areas will generally be
higher than in other transition areas, and land will not be permitted to
develop without public sewer and water.
(b) Transition II. These are areas within the UGB, which are also
designated for future urban growth -and development. To maintain the
contiguity of the city's growth, and to ensure maximum efficiency for urban
services and facilities, these areas are intended to be developed secondarily
-- ideally, but not necessarily, after Transition I lands have been fully
developed. These areas will receive full urban services, including sewer and
water, eventually, but can be developed without such services. Permitted
development densities will generally be lower here than in Transition I areas.

110
(c) Transition III. These are areas outside the UGB which reflect
existing development patterns and where limited development will be permitted
These are generally areas which have already been committed to development in
some way, such as through land subdivision or the construction of access
roads. To be consistent with the predominantly rural surroundings, the
permissible densities of future development will be relatively low. Public.
sewer and water services, if they are not already provided, will not be
provided in the foreseeable future unless they are needed in already populated
areas for compelling health and safety reasons. Maximum effort will be taken
to ensure that this development does not unduly interfere with existing
agricultural and rural uses.
3. Conservation
The purpose of.the conservation classifications is to provide for the
effective long term protection of sensitive and irreplaceable natural areas.
These are areas which should not be classified as transition in the future.
Several different conservation classifications have been designated on the
land classification map and these are described in greater detail below.
(a) Conservation -- Greenway. As described in a number of the chapters
of the plan, an open space greenway is established to encircle the city.
These areas will provide an important visual and environmental buffer, and
will also be available for various forms of recreational uses (e.g., nature
trails, park areas). The bulk of this greenway is formed by Knobbs and
Charles Creeks, and their tributaries. The City intends for these areas to be
left in an open and undeveloped state. Recreation -oriented uses will be
permitted, however, where they do not interfere with the functioning of the
greenway as a natural buffer.

111
(b) Conservation -- Well Field. This classification is used to
designate the City's well field located northwest of the city. While the land
is located outside of the city's extra -territorial jurisdiction, it is owned
by the City, and is a valuable resource that should be carefully protected.
As indicated in earlier chapters, the City relies heavily upon the well field
P y y P
for its municipal water supply. It is the intention of the City to maintain
this area in an undeveloped condition.
(c) Conservation -- General. This category includes all other fragile
and environmentally -sensitive areas in the City's planning jurisdiction.
Included are the public trust and estuarine waters, the large wetland areas
northeast of the city, and those portions of Knobbs Creek not contained in the
Greenway. It is the intention of the City to maintain these areas in an open
and undeveloped state.
4. Rural.
This classification is used to designate all remaining areas outside of
the UGB. These are areas which are principally used for agriculture, forest
.management, mineral extraction, or other non -urban uses. It is the intention
of the City to protect these areas from the pressures of future urban growth
and expansion.
5. Causeway.
The recently annexed causeway is dealt with separately because of its
unique characteristics and special importance to Elizabeth City. The land
q P P y
area has been used for a variety of things over the years making it a less
significant part of.the natural system than it would have been had it not been
repeatedly developed, but of great significance to Elizabeth City nonetheless.
The extent of shoreline, the fact that it is a major entranceway to Elizabeth
I

112
City and it's visual proximity to much of Elizabeth City, all make the
causeway worthy of special attention. It has been classified as follows:
(a) Causeway Developed. This area is intended to be developed in a way
that is compatible with the sensitivity of the adjacent waters and wetlands,
the visual importance of the causeway as a water oriented entranceway to
Elizabeth City and as a focal point for the city itself. This means that any
development in this area should be water dependent but not polluting or
contaminating and should be low in height and density so as to maintain
continuity of scale, use, and design.
(b) Causeway Transition. This area is intended to be developed in the
same manner as Causeway Developed but only after adequate water and sewer
facilities are extended.
(c) Causeway Conservation. This area includes all of the land owned by
the City and a strip fifteen feet wide extending landward from.the shoreline
in the remaining area. The purpose of this area is to conserve the shoreline
and to protect the adjacent waters. The only development in this area must be
water dependent and must, to the extent possible, protect the adjacent waters
and preserve the visual resources of the area.

Chapter 15.0
Implementation Measures
Implementation of the preceding goals and policies will require the use
of a number of regulatory and other measures available to the City. Many of
these mechanisms are already in place in one form or another, and may only
require slight modifications; others may be completely new. It is not the
intention of this section of the plan to provide a detailed implementation
program, but rather to identify, at a rather general level, the implementation
measures available (both existing and possible) and their orientation and
content necessary to accomplish the objectives and policies of this plan.
Under the discussion of zoning, for instance, a detailed analysis of the
zoning ordinance and its numerous and specific components is simply
inappropriate. The discussions which follow should provide substantial
guidance in modifying existing implementation measures or developing new
measures, but will not take the place of the more detailed analysis and
ft preparation necessary for each of these measures.
Capital Improvements Programs and Other Public Investments.
The City should carefully plan and program its capital facilities
investments, as to their location, timing and configuration, to accomplish the
various objectives identified in the previous chapters. Specifically, the
City should develop and update annually a detailed capital improvements
program (CIP) which reflects the values and priorities expressed in this plan.
The extension of public sewer and water service is of particular
importance. Such services should not be extended beyond the designated urban
growth boundary. This will increase the efficiency of these services and
I

114
prevent the premature development of areas on the fringe of the city. Such a
practice will ensure a sharper demarcation between urban and rural, and will
serve to reduce urban development pressures on environmentally sensitive lands
in the planning area.
Services should be phased and sequenced in accordance with the land
classification map. This map indicates, as we have seen, that priority should
be given to providing urban services to Transition I lands over Transition II
lands.
Other capital investments, such as the construction of street and roads,
should be discouraged in conservation and natural areas. While it may
sometimes be difficult to prevent private alteration of these areas, the City
can eliminate any subsidies or incentives for developing such areas.
Pricing policies for urban services, and sewer and water service in
particular, should be modified where possible to encourage more compact and
contiguous urban growth.
Land and Easement Acquisition
The plan has identified a number of areas in the city which should remain
in open and undeveloped uses. The City should consider the extent .to which
particularly valuable lands can be purchased, either through fee -simple or
less -than -fee -simple acquisition. Particularly promising is the continuation
of the public easement program begun in areas along the Charles Creek. This
easement program should be revived and expanded to include the Knobbs Creek
and proposed greenway areas.
Future plans to acquire interests in land and property should consider
the multiple objectives identified in this plan. For instance, a particular
parcel of land may at once satisfy local objectives of open space protection,

1
1
115
provision of public recreation facilities, and reduction of local flood
hazards. Priority should be given to the acquisition of these areas.
The City should develop a more detailed study of land acquisition
alternatives. This study should, among other things, identify and prioritize
possible areas for acquisition, and identify a feasible schedule and
alternative means for financing these acquisitions.
Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances
The City's development regulations play an important role in
accomplishing many of the goals and objectives identified in this plan.
Following the adoption of this plan, a detailed and careful review of the
City's zoning and subdivision ordinances must be undertaken to ensure that
their provisions are consistent with the plan.
A critical manner in which the zoning and subdivision ordinances
implement the plan's intent is the extent to which they acknowledge the
distinction between urban and rural delineated in the Land Classification
System.. These regulations should permit higher urban -type densities in areas
contiguous to the developed portions of the city and areas generally within
the designated urban growth boundary. Such densities should not be permitted
by the ordinances outside of the UGB.
It is particularly crucial that the zoning and subdivision regulations
restrict permissible development in sensitive conservation areas. If not
prohibited entirely in these areas, the amount of permissible development
should be extremely small. Moreover, the zoning and subdivision regulations
must contain adequate performance standards and criteria to minimize the
negative impacts of that amount of development that does in fact occur in
these areas. Projects proposed in these areas should be subjected to a more
intensive planning review process than similar projects proposed in less

116
environmentally -sensitive areas. The City must review its current zoning and
subdivision provisions to ensure that adequate performance standards and a
more intensive environmental review process are incorporated.
The plan suggests at numerous points the crucial importance played by
site plan and project design reviews. The"City must ensure that its review
criteria and standards are adequate given the objectives of this Plan. For
instance, the potential benefits of requiring clustered developments have been
mentioned in several chapters of the plan, yet do adequate provisions
requiring or encouraging this practice actually exist in the development
ordinances? The vegetation and landscaping requirements (design standards)
contained in the existing zoning ordinance are a positive step, and should be
aggressively enforced. The adequacy and stringency of these measures should
also be reviewed.
Particularly careful review must also be given to the zoning provisions
applying to the waterfront areas. Are these consistent with the waterfront
development objectives expressed in the plan? What is the correct mixture of
uses to be encouraged here, and at what scale? How and where shall public
access be assured?
The zoning ordinance also plays an important role in ensuring the future
availability of affordable housing in the area. The zoning ordinance must be
reviewed to ensure that an adequate amount of land is zoned for multi -family
and other more affordable forms of housing. The ordinance should provide for
these uses while also ensuring that incompatibilities between housing types
are minimized. The zoning ordinance must protect the integrity of existing
residential neighborhoods.
The zoning ordinance serves a similar function in promoting future
commercial and industrial activities in the city. The ordinance should be

1.
I
1
1
117
reviewed to determine, for instance, whether there are adequate sites in the
city designated for industrial uses.
Historic District Commission and Ordinances
The present regulatory provisions applying to structures within the
city's two historic districts play an important part in preserving the
heritage and high quality of life in Elizabeth City. The City must continue
to exercise these controls in the future in an aggressive manner.
In addition, and in light of the recent survey of historic structures in
the city, the possibility of expanding the districts should be considered.
Flood Plain Ordinance
The City should continue its participation in the National Flood
Insurance Program and should continue to aggressively enforce the minimum land
use and building standards required under it. These measures will serve tc
reduce the extent of private property damages during hurricanes and floods.
However, the City should realize that current standards offer "minimal"
flood protection and:could be strengthened substantially. Ideally, the City
should restrict the quantity of future development in the 100-year floodplain.
For development permitted within the 100-year floodplain, NFIP requirements
could be strengthened to increase protection from future flood damages. For
instance, the floodplain ordinance could require buildings to be elevated to a
certain height above the NFIP-established base flood elevation (a practice
known as "free -boarding").
Annexation and ETJ Extension
Extending the geographical boundaries and authorities of the City may
also assist in implementing the plan. This can occur in several ways.
Extension of the City's extra -territorial jurisdiction (ETJ) would permit the
A

118
City to increase its regulatory control over development occurring in the
region. Extending the City's ETJ further north, for instance, would permit
the City to exercise greater control over development along the Pasquotank
River and Knobbs Creek, areas which are currently designated as conservation
zones under the land classification system. The City should carefully study
the existing ETJ in light of the land use plan update, and identify areas
where ETJ extension appears most crucial.
Annexation may also be a useful tool in accomplishing the plans
objectives. While annexation will generally not expand the regulatory
authority of the City (as these are areas that already usually are within the
ETJ), it may serve in the long run to increase the City's tax base and
financial capacity to undertake many of the programs and projects proposed in
this plan.
Sign Ordinance
The City has prepared but has not yet adopted an ordinance regulating the
size, location and design of signs in the city. This ordinance represents a
positive step towards implementing a number of the policies and objectives
identified in Chapter 13.0, Urban Design/Aesthetic Quality. Prior to
adoption, however, the City should carefully review its provisions in light of
the new land use plan.
Economic Development Strategies
The City should continue to pursue economic and industrial development in
the city. The efforts of the City -County Industrial Development Commission
should be supported. These include, among other things, development of the
new U.S. Highway Route 17 Industrial Park Site. Other industrial and economic
development projects, which the city should continue to aggressively pursue,
include: efforts to renovate and redevelop downtown businesses, efforts to

119
encourage tourist- and vacation -oriented development along the waterfront, and
upgrading the facilities and economic attractiveness of the city (e.g.,
improvements to the airport). These varied and positive actions should be
organized into a comprehensive economic and industrial strategy for the City
to aggressively and systematically implement, in collaboration with the
�t County.
1

Chapter 16.0
References
City of Elizabeth City. 1983. Charles Creek Natural Area Conservation
Easement Project, May.
1980. Waterfront Development Study, June.
1981. Charles Creek Study (with Protected Harbor
Analysis), January.
1976. Elizabeth City Land Use Plan: 1976-1985, May.
1976. Elizabeth City Open Space and Recreation Plan,
July.
1978. The Comprehensive Plan: Housing Element, June.
1981. Charles Creek Study, January.
1981. 1981 Elizabeth City Land Use Plan.
1975. Public Improvements Program and Capital
Improvements Budget 1976-1985, July.
1983. Charles Creek Natural Area Conservation Easement
Project, May.
1972. Zoning Ordinance, May.
1980. Subdivision Ordinance, May.
1978. Flood Plain Ordinance, March.
1977. Halstead Boulevard Development and Growth Study,
August.
1977. Evaluation Study for a Downtown Funding Mechanism,
September.
City of Elizabeth City and Pasquotank County. 1984. Hurricane Evacuation
Plan, Elizabeth City and Pasquotank County Emergency Management Agency,
August, updated from 1980.
CH2M-Hill. 1980. Air Installation Compatible Land Use Zones, U.S. Coast
Guard Support Center, July.
North Carolina Department of Transportation. 1978. Elizabeth City
Thoroughfare Plan, October.

1
1
121
. Bicycling in Elizabeth City: An Analysis of Needs,
January.
Pease Associates. 1977. Wastewater Facilities Plan for Elizabeth City
(Volumes 1 and 2).
Project for Public Spaces, Inc. 1984. Managing Downtown Public Spaces.
Chicago: APA Planners Press.
Talbot and Associates Ltd. 1980. Solid Waste Planning Study, June.
Voorhees and Associates. 1979. Transit Program for Elizabeth City, June.
Whyte, William H. 1980. The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces, Washington,
D.C.: Conservation Foundation.

-122-
Appendix 1
Citizen Participation
The 1987 Land Use Plan update process encouraged citizen participation
through the Elizabeth City Planning Commission. Several work sessions and
neighborhood meetings were held by the Commission to review the issues and
S
receive public comment.
In addition to the necessary legal notices, the initial work sessions
were announced to the City Council and the Urban Advisory Committee by special
'invitation. Each member was given the first draft review copy and was
encouraged to consider it for accuracy and thoroughness. They were also
requested to discuss this material with other citizens, and to encourage
citizen participation at the sessions or through written comments.
Another major effort to draw citizen input was made by calling together
those persons involved in providing basic community services, including the
directors of all City departments, as well as directors and officials of the
key agencies in the local area. At this time these individuals were given the
"draft review copy", and were asked to participate in its consideration by
attending the meetings or through written comment.
These initial steps laid the groundwork for the preliminary draft Plan,
which was then made available for public inspection at several additional
locations throughout the City, including the offices of the City and County
Managers, the Elizabeth City Area Chamber of Commerce, and several libraries.
The Planning Commission then held special neighborhood meetings in
different locations (Knobbs Creek Recreation Center and the Kermit E. White
Graduate Center) to review the preliminary plan and obtain public comment.
These meetings, and those held to review the final draft Plan, were advertised
by necessary legal notices as well as special public interest articles.
It has been and is the policy of the City to encourage all of its
citizens to participate fully in all aspects of the governing process.
11
1
1

123
Appendix 2
Assessment of Previous Policy
Policies in the 1981 Land Use Plan Update focusedonresource protection;
resource production and management;. economic and community development; and
special local issues. A final section outlined the City's commitment to State
and Federal programs.
With respect to changing conditions and current trends or laws,
modifications are required for a small number of policies, such as:
preserving important agricultural and forest land; maintaining the quality of
the raw water supply, creeks and rivers; evacuation plans; and urban growth
patterns. These issues, and nearly all of the others, are of an on -going
nature and require continuous implementation to be effective. Unless
otherwise noted, they are all continued in the current Plan.
I. Resource Protection Policies
A. Policy on uses appropriate within the City's Areas of
Environmental Concern
(1) Protect and enhance the ecological, social, economic and
aesthetic value of areas of environmental concern in
the Planning Area.
B. Policy on constraints to development
(1) Protect areas within the City's jurisdiction from man-made
hazards and natural constraints such as flooding, erosion
and poor soil.
C. Policy on specific local resource development issues, hazardous
or fragile land areas.
�l (1) Preserve g
important agricultural and forest land within the
P
Planning Area for food and wood product production and
discourage conversion to other uses.
(2) Protect open space areas within the urban core that sustain
wildlife, improve drainage, and provide recreation.
(3) Protect the water quality of the Pasquotank River as the
City's raw water supply source and as a resource potential.
�i (4) Protect the City's deep well ground water supply.
1
11

124
D. Policy concerning hurricane and flood evacuation needs and plans
(1) Provide for the safe evacuation of the citizenry during
a natural disaster.
II. Resource Production and Management Policies
A. Policy statements on productive agricultural lands, commercial
forest lands, existing and potential mineral production areas,
commercial and recreational fisheries, and off -road vehicles.
(1) Important agricultural areas should be preserved to protect
the agricultural base of the community, but in a manner that
will not conflict with the City's future growth.
(2) Future urban growth should be directed away from important
agricultural areas in order to protect the community's
agricultural base.
III. Economic and Community Development Policies
A. Policies on types of development to be encouraged.
(1) Encourage future development that will be compatible with
the existing land uses within the City, provide employment
opportunities and bring about a diversified industrial base.
B. Policy of redevelopment of developed areas
(1) Promote projects within developed areas of the City that
aid towards a more viable community and economic growth.
C. Policy on types and locations of industries desired
(1) Promote varied industrial developments which are
environmentally clean and provide local employment
opportunities.
D. Policy on the local commitment to provide service to development
(1) Provide services to develop by the most efficient and
cost effective method.
E. Policies on types of urban growth patterns desired
(1) Insure orderly growth in the Elizabeth City Planning Area.
F. Policy on tourism or beach and waterfront access
(1) Establish a local tourist industry.

125
IV. Local Issues For Policy Discussion
The 1981 Land Use Plan Update also paid special attention to four (4) issues
which the Coast Resources Commission deemed important to the future
development of Elizabeth City:
1 V.
a
1
1
1
A. The Waterfront/Downtown/Historic Area
(1) The City will continue to move forward with public property
improvements, and, in conjunction with other agencies, both
public and private, to further the redevelopment of the
downtown, waterfront and historic areas.
B. Coast Guard Air Base
(1) Support the location and operation of the Coast Guard
Airbase as a "good neighbor."
C. Knobbs Creek/Pasquotank River Water Quality
(1) Maintain and improve the current water quality of Knobbs
Creek and the Pasquotank River.
D. Public Lands Concern --College of the Albemarle (COA) Campus Move
(1) Develop the former COA campus site (on Riverside Avenue) -
in a manner compatible with -the surrounding neighborhood
and the needs of the City.
Status: This objective was accomplished through the renovation
and redevelopment of the site into apartments and
health spa facilities with water -based recreation
along the waterfront. Access to the recreational
facilities is available through private club member-
ship on a daily, weekly, monthly or annual basis.
The facility has proved to be an asset to the
community.
Commitment to State and Federal Programs
A. Highway Improvements: The City supports highway improvements
as submitted to the North Carolina Department of Transportation
for inclusion in the seven (7) year Transportation Improvements
Program.
Status: Broadened to include support for the four-laneing of
regional accesses to Elizabeth City as identified in the
North Carolina Department of Transportation Transportation
Improvement Program.
1

126
1
B. Military Facilities: The City supports the continued location
and operation of the U.S. Coast Guard Air Base, Support Center
and Atlantic Strike Team.
C. Erosion Control: The City will consider the possibility of
enacting and enforcing erosion and sedimentation control
regulations at the local level, replacing the present efforts
of the State of North Carolina which are hampered by lack of
personnel.
Status: Abandoned.
D. Intracoastal Waterway: The City supports a continuing program
of dredging and maintenance of the intracoastal waterway to provide
access to the City.
Status: This on -going commitment has been broadened to explore the
possibility of having the Dismal Swamp Canal listed on the
National Register of Historic Places, and having it
designated by the State as an historic water route.
E. Energy Facilities Siting: There are no energy production
installations indicated in or planned for the Elizabeth City area.
However, the City is participating with other ElectriCities in
negotiations to secure an alternative to Virginia Electric and
Power Company as the major supplier of wholesale electric energy
for the City's Electric Department.
Status: Accomplished through the cooperative effort of
ElectriCities' formation of the North Carolina Eastern
Municipal Power Agency to purchase wholesale power from the
Carolina Power and Light Company (CP&L). In keeping with
this commitment, the City has initiated, through its load
management program, measures to reduce peak demand (e.g.,
voltage control system; load shedding devices; and
auxiliary generators in high -demand usage areas).
1
1
.1
1
1
4
1
1

�\
EK0 80 40 HO LA MBE
CLASSIFICATION
.............
...............
SINGLE FAW-Y
...............RSI
...............
IIIIIIIIIIII
-
Iillllllll
• � -
///%i
TRANSPORTAT111.
_ENVR"ENTAL
100000
"I"I'11
• • - •
ploess
■
■■
1■■■ we ���./■■■■ \ / f/■it■■■',1/■•il■���_■'r\/\/■■■Ir
�uGuuiuu■ uu■ \ d�!�f.,l■olnu u//u/====_e•--n■._�.
hill ul ur� �usr 1 � ..///u■unu■uuluuo.�■■...■r/.■
alm
Ha
on
I
riu■ssu ,.■■ ■uu.
■ursuuY�■ ■w*r � / \
■u.■'..0■u■o,■ ■■■r.r .■■lamesses'lame ::Gmv..d .@:m:::! 6 IN
1" = 14M Feet
0 14M 2800 4200
��■i��ci n?i-nD/
`�■■■I•/ram\■
■■■■: 1
0
■1 \■
;■■ram■I/■
/ elm
1
I
..I
.1
.1
ft
i
NOMTAL
rLEGE OF M ALBEMARLE
NORFOLK •
SOUTHERN RAILVAY
ELIZAKTM
WATER
LANE
The preparation of this map was financed in part through a grant provided by the
Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended, which is administered by the
Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Admin istration .
COMPUTER BASED MAPPING PLANNING CONSULTANT
GEOGRAPHIC DATA MANAGEMENT COASTAL RESOURCES COLLABORATIVE,LTD.
559 JONES FRANKLIN ROAD 612 SHADY LAWN
RALEIGH, N C 27606 CHAPEL HILL, N C 27514
166
E I TI LD E
ELIZA=ETH CITY
HOR7H C&ROM H&
1007

i
Q
�N
s�
AMM
OFF
Y\
i
CI MFICATION eyel
rESrLANW
0EHOIML
PARK
OX-M
L &HO CAL NO IF MV5 OH 10VVEN
. ..��. I�i��l�►
NORTH CAROLINA
�LEOE OF TIE ALOE
fNURlaO)
1
I
I
i
PEWM LANE
The preparation of this map was financed in part through a grant provided by the
Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended, which is administered by the
Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration .
COMPUTER BASED MAPPING PLANNING CONSULTANT
GEOGRAPHIC DATA MANAGEMENT COASTAL RESOURCES COLLABORATIVE,LTD.
559 JONES FRANKLIN ROAD 612 SHADY LAWN
RALEIGH, N C 27606 CHAPEL HILL, N C 27514
1097

ARML4I
OF TW
/
P�*10
OF
rtSnAwv /
POW
lounWTt ALL
kVLLV SHOW" CEMM
Sawa
1
f/It ST,Inor,
,a '�� •
/ ���
j'.
GAOTAL STORM HAMARD AREA
CLASSIFICATION
CATEGORY I 2
CATEGORY 3
100 YEAR FLOOD PLAIN
I'I = 1400 Feet
1400 0 1400 2800 4200
00
i
roiaiwAL �
LAW
The preparation of this map was financed in part through a grant provided by the
Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended, which is administered by the
Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Admin istration .
COMPUTER BASED MAPPING PLANNING CONSULTANT
GEOGRAPHIC DATA MANAGEMENT COASTAL RESOURCES COLLABORATIVE,LTD.
559 JONES FRANKLIN ROAD 612 SHADY LAWN
RALEIGH, N C 27606 CHAPEL HILL, N C 27514
COQVQL 040G'3N bQZGJRD AG3EQa
L Ek,0[F=ETH C UY
HDRUH C&ROM Ha
IN?

156.19'
wfu ElecEosE rh cnr I� a
J
S
s,D,000
o� 3
3
Y
a
F
W
r
x F
r
hr�
t� Y
0
iv - gP
ILI-
D.0 P/K <Ixft LC 1 v
G1F CpMSF .
J \ ANK .li, �l/< ss!
PpSOU01
CpODE
�-
/ � Kd�YK[ MJSAEK �L • I
KNOlIS �\I/ �\�/ ^cq �rrr rnrAarraxr/xuvunci �� `I� �!� \
rosFWcao fi, ' SOUTHERN
/ 0 L
-- R
�* I
�\ N °
w�nR�a,.:evr
_ •x.rE �
„ KxFJ �...� ., ❑ Q._ CAFE
rA
9T EAT ❑ __ � F. I \
''rYdF /rRf
` � irhfhr
[Sli aWx
fM�iAl !t=
r•,•,yb xAFK� V ` �� i �111L
'whys PA
\
//�; hINt Sp/rh(MrF has
. O '� .YCVwhG CENTER
\ � 6
—•�• \ '�OAwiw ry
— 1
•Ir,
,a.I,rs
waxa/ eaFxxs
to
R
! i
t RSO/c
NORTH \
Ba Mop of
3ETH CITY , NORTH CAROLINA
by North Carolina Department of Transportation July,197
by Elizabeth City lanrNng Department January,1975; ctober,1980
36 •rol I
CAMDEN
Y
a r � ♦Cry -� , ��
M NW
� Arc�sr/oh a �. �1 i q � taa aj�,y� , •" r -.: ,` �, PN,OE�P�fVL `\\ \
4 \
hOtarWOap` Q�• � \ \77
cthrrawr r,"� \
} U \,4, a
— ;x
AZ—
� aaa •h,r
----- aFUz. rh /r F sra a, � a ; � � 36 • /7'
FCSU W/✓ENJ/rr O i �OI"•..r o.. ! �' l \
—_/CFO a. fir STADIUM + u S \ CO
c yG co+,-
I � �
fD6'EWCOD ,1
Itaca••°I KANINOIEW O e ,�
P• viLA
4'ri
` xJu
PI h
k •Mp SOT
4MtlrxG P�9/ .1`�T�92 • p
❑ O 0 0 �✓
00
us ccasr rwxD asf O /
1101
36°/57-� � ��1 � t\vC � .�� _ / I e� "•1 Vl I � � � _�I ^I � l I "�1 '�`I � 1 \ l �I
56,15
wl

A B C D E F G H I
1
3
4
5
J
rl
'J
K
EBBS \I
�ulG
y�
J
AL6IEMARLE HOSPITAL
� \
�j COL OfTREALBEMARLENORS/NGJ
STREET INDEX
\�/� "A" ST., Fb JACKSON'S LN. RD., C3
ADAMS ST., D5,D6 JEFFERSON ST., D5,D6
L
+5, sz•
vv/�
/
AGAWAM ST., FS,F6 JONES AVE., FS,GS
c
ALBEIIARLL ST., D5,E5 JORDAN SST. E6
G
ANDERSON ST., ll2,D3 JUNIPER ST., E3,F3
APPLE ST., E7,E8
ARBUTUS ST., Fb KING ST.,
��
ROSEW000 �
ASHE ST., C4,D4 D
KNOBBS CREEK DR., F2,G2,G3
CREEK
AYDLETT DR., G7,G8 KRAMER ST., F3
6
S O
"B" ST., E6,F6 LAFAYETTE AVE., E8
BAILEY ST., E8 LANE ST., DS,E5
/
K
BALL ST., ES LASSITER ST., US
L
_
BANK ST., E3 LAUREL AVE., D5,D6,E5
BARTLETI' AVE. , F6
BAXTER ST., C4,D4 LEXINGTON DR., AS,BS
LINCOLN ST., F6
nn �1h
JO
'y
0 R
N
�'
`
1'CtYk�h�
�',p
��L
1 K"off \
1 °sF\
`
/ / \ ♦
\ \�/ BEECH ST., D3,D4 LOCUST ST., D4
BEECHWOOD AVE., D8,E8 LOWE ST., G7
rY\C1r 1 Y\ S T 1
f�
1 f+
\
\
BELL ST., E3 LOWRY ST., D6
C + ar k\ V\`, I-OI .
f+
\ \I/�
\
v �\
•
1
\
��� BIAS ST., F6
BONNER DR., B5 MACON ST. , ll6
BOSTON AVE., ES MADISON ST., D5,D6
V
BRAY ST., C4 MADRIN LN., ES
•� ____ BROAD ST., E3,F3 MADRIN ST., ES
BROOKRIDGE DR., E7,E8 MAGNOLIA ST., F6
EL/ZABErHClrY
WATER rREATWVr
Q
�_-- BROOKS AVE., E5,E6 MAIN SSC4,D4,E4,F4,B3,C3
PLANT
i
/
�
BROTHERS DR., H7 T.
- BROWN ST., E5,F5 MAPLE SSD4,E4
\ MARTIN ST., F3,F4,E4,E5
I
O
BUNNELLS AVE., 05,ES MARYLAND AVE., E6,E7,F6
BURGESS ST., E3,E4,F4 MASSACHUSETTS AVE., E6,F6
_
BURKE ST., B4,C4 McARTHUR ST., CS
BUTLERS LN., F5,F6 McMORRINE ST., E4,E5
BYRll ST., CS McPHERSON ST., C4,D4,D5
MEEKINS ST., C4
CAL SST. EESMERRIWOOD ST., C4
CALF ST. , MILLET DR., G7
m
0
6u L� J
J°r
♦
/
a�6RDA0
KN06B5 fREtK
U REGREAriON
I
I
I '�
m
gT'N a
.
CALVERT ST., E4 MILL
MAIN ST EXT
/ p z a :
eL
BGo FCWR9�
,
CAMllEN AVE., GS,G6 MITCHELL�ST4,CF6D3
I
y W
UBE
\
CAMELLIA DR., E7,E8 MORGAN5
'
�~
Jst..7,C,Iy
I
CARDWELL ST. C5,C6 MOOREST. F6
/ NIP
PARK
+'
r"
I E s
ST. �+ v
�?
♦
,
r/
5tWAGETR64TMEN/
P/aN
, ,
CAROLINA AVE., GS MORRISETTE AVE., F6,F7
CARVER ST. , ll6
MOSELEY ST., E6,E7
c
`Q- st �q�
'sv'�CAT'ALINA
p D+czS�
^ �j e
��( ��
_,__--�.--
\
' 1
AVE.,EY
D5,E5 NEW JERSEY AVE., E6,F6
CEDAR ST., D4,E4 NEWPOORT AVE., FE6,F6
CELESTE ST., ll6,ll7
CENTER ST., F3 NORMAL AVE . , F6,F7
O
•
�� .�% Y
•
st" " Bos E
gDEggST, C,qAI
6 sr' S.
E
1`�O
O ',�
\
\
, _
CHADBURN AVE., C4
CHALK ST., C4,D4 OAK GROVE AVE., ll8,E8
z-
mr
DE +oE i
o`'
CHARLES ST., B4,C4 OVERMAN CIR.,CS
CHESSON IST.,FD3,D4
CHESTNUT
CHURCH ST., A4,B4,C4,D4,E4,E5,F5 PANAMA ST., D4
PARK DR. , G6 , G7
✓ErHR 'y �\t�
PARK V
•
i� p
'YAWL E
sT,
(yER Bopcfss
,z r ,
E) �AnNt r E+"
"
Sr �
\ `•
\
\
,
4
r
°HOAR
_
�w.
a
o
E lR H5
nA/�
sT.
/yp?�
coccEc
�i'�
O / ~
�_ A
\
\ \
/AVE.,
PARK ST., F6,G6
COLLEGE ST., G7 PARKVIEW DR., F6,F7,G7,H7
C4,ll4,E4,F4 PARSONAGE ST., CI,D2,D3,D4
COLONIAL AVECOHOON ST., Fti
COOKE ST., G7 PAXTON ST.,D6
i�
m
"
LIZAE,
��
/i
\\`.!
---
PEARTREE RD., E5,E6,E7,E8
CORSAIR CIRCLE, US PEARL ST., E4,F4
ULSTER DR.
uc
❑❑�
\\
rERGgR:ENST ExT �\ ���
BA
G\pF +IER
i
h' i C.
st. "_
eEENS
gT.4 �'+
�w,
ST i "'"
ST.. i�
°LwIAL rr ST
AVE.y y
st
�a❑ CR
/
u.
❑'�..
�.,�
�/ --_,-
I +
CRAWFORD ST., C3,D3 PENNY DR., C7
CRESCENT DR., Gfi,G7,G8,H6 PEPSI DR., DS
CULPEPPER ST., E4,E5 PERRY ST., E6
3 E3 F
CYPRESS ST D 4 PERQUIMANS AVE., G6
_
- -_
DNURG" �i
x a
�� -
"•
W. E
e
nRiND S HSF #
-
PERSSE ST. , D4 D5
DANCE ST F6
h
�"CpNFRgpN
T---� ❑ r.
I 1�
N. sr. ❑❑a ~❑ g
��❑
^__.
�'
^��
\
. , POINDEXTER ST., F3,F4,E4
DAVIS AVE., E6 POOL ST. E4,E5
llAWSON ST., FS
sr.
`"kf
°pjg�O
W
\
/
PREYER AVE., G5,G6
i r.
"C p�NER50NJ 5,.
LN. 3
`
-
_ DDeBRYELAW RE , E6 PRICE ST. , F6
llELAWARE AVE., E7,F7 PRITCHARD ST., C4,C5
DOUGLAS ST., F6 PROVIDENCE CIR., A5
DUNSTAN LN., D4,E4 PROVIDENCE RD., AS,BS
_ DURANT ST., E2
/
ox TSPA
o
*\aDt°" o�
p
P' s Ic xx
, ov
: g
LN. si
^ e
W z
- of a
; w,�„cE'
��
WA FRONT
\
' \
♦
D
DR
f
?g4 °• BYRD ST
°
SPELL"p
PAR --
`
L
DYER ST., E4,E5
(QUEEN ST., E3,F3
Q
rrW
i
\\
-
EDGE ST., ES,FS RALEIGH ST., G5,G6
EDGEWU011 DR., G7,G8 RAY ST., D5,E5
AVE., E6,F6
\ACIp.
\ OXFORD HEIGHTS
9
/
j\
S� ° NLBEY NPIE
wpw�r sTk>
^CATAIINN
PpP
a w
CHARLES
°o
�" R F
" °
\
RHODE ISLAND
ELCINOCAUDR. B SC`yD5,E5,F5 RICHARDSON ST., D3,E3
ELIZABL"TH ST., ll3,ll4,E4,F4 RIllLEY ST.' G7
ELLIOTT ST., E4,E5
\y/
\
O
4
r `
pVE
I ,7ERFE/aTOM,
st
O i = 90 C Bp°w
=
m
ED°
s,.$
Q �,f a VD"'Eg
: Ay(L
ACE. 4yE. \.
c
'"+
RIVER
ELM ST., E7,L8 RIVERSIDE ,G5
1 EMILY ST., E1 RIVERSHORE RD., GS,G6,E(6,I6
ETHERIllGE ST. E3,E4
Po q DUpprE
�ca Pp
s pvE
cogsNla UMN v
u
• o -
s
'•
�+ corn
+yE
'D'h'y +yE
\`
\
PN► > ROAD ST., E2,E3,E4,ES,E6
Ci ROANOKE AVE., E5,E6,D6,D7
�SQ\ FACTORY ST'., ll3,E3
HOLLY
S'-" '•"'"a �,
cf
`/ °► ," �,
AROq+
8
ROBINSON ST., F6
SOUARE
MHO.
o w.
o
= a
` Ay
\
FAIR ST . , ll3
P ROCHELLE DR., G7
. FAIRFAX AVE. , Gb
�I ROSEBUll AVE., FI
FEARING ST., ll4,E4,F4 ROSEllALE DR. , F1
FIFTH ST., E3,F3 ROSEWOOD
•
v s?
H�c_rw000
CONDDN +N):F., �'
c
o gt Ay +'
' B 4st m W E'
yF RE',0 y o1/h•
o
ov+ '+
hF, "B +yE. �_
\
\
\
w`rocK
4Prs
P rE
•�"E
r onvls Nv EMErcar
°
r pERgY gT.
_ "
sr.
�
\\
\ �
FIRST ST., F3,F4
FLEETWO011 ST., D3 RUSSELL LN., E1
\
-'w MC�ORE
EL EM
•
�n
NANNON
1
��i
FLORA ST., GS,Gti
G5,
v
\`
APA NTS
N.TON sr /
Mpss►cPusE
G NOCD
Sr NANP- ROBIN N ST.
pVE. TON
TS °R. • D ;
zsT �e I'o/NIA . a �o
�*�
r. /�
y` ' �~s �/q
r�N
171E
\
FORREST DR., G7,H7 SALEM DR., E7
FOURTH ST., E3,F3
\ FRANCIS ST. , G6 , G7 SANFORD DR., 3
SECOND ST., F3,F4,E4
G
1'( I--
I"1PO LI
-
- -I PA RKa
IT I a i�
n o III.
"E"L
cE �'$st. RRKE y __��
sPPu r ar
r
W •v
.. N
oAN
\
\ GARDEN ST'., B5
\ GLADE ST., E3,E4 SHANNONSELDEN IST.,DF6D5
\ GOODWIN AVE., F6
I
`t Lf
"+q "S I
O ?
py10DE
DEBRY" ;
• K
i pEw YOR
=
��st.
v Mp°MOLIp Esr rRiGG
N FEZ
Q
+ s
s 4i f
��'
SHEPARD ST., ES,FS
F
`_ GOSNOLU AVE., E6 SHILOH ST., E6,E7
- GRACE DR., H7
♦ I
w
st.
It
LIArg
pE RD.
, SHIRLEY ST., D4,D5
SHIRLEY
(O„'Pi Sg) I
cf I
N
~O = PSE
NEW ,E
NV. pRBUt Us !� A
e
c,A q �,"DE"i
e
°a a�VEpswO
GRAVESRADY SAVE.E3E8 SIMPSON ST., C4
SIXTH ST., E3,F3
s
<<g ?
A Ry,E i i
a et °
Ew DR, 1
GRAVES LN, ES SOUTHERN AVE., F5 , F6
GREENLEAF ST., E3 SPEED ST. , ES
GREGORY ST., E3 SPELLMAN ST., DS,E5
SALEN Dq. \\ ,,qYL
N pVE �? Q
m�Wt70
m OPE,cE s \\
DR
GRICE ST., DS,E5 SPRUCE ST., F6
--_r GRICE ST. EXT., CS
rH Ir
q'
/
SUNSET CIR., CS
/ GRIFFIN ST., D4,ll5
E
s E O TY
S.U.S.U.I/N/V RS/
MOLLOwE
SNPGCN
b qOp,
o ELLE
/ s
o
GROVE ST., D4
/ � TATEM LN., E6
AaSO LYI EL EM SrA
NUM
L °R
W
�"Lo,yE °e
o s'
��
i
/
THIRD ST. , F3
1 HAMPTON BLVD., B5,B6,C6,C7,D7,E7,F7 TUSCARORA AVE., F5,F6,G6
kiAMPT'ON DR. F6
V j
�/T
�
me
'�/OLEr �:{ g' m
1 ,
HARDING LN. , D6
ULSTER DR., A4,B4
HARDING ST. , D6
HARIOT DR., CS VIRGINIA ST., F6
E L ZABETH
CITY
d
EO
EWOOD e
x ---
W
HARNEY ST. , E3,E4
\•, wq+Sow HARRIST., C4 WALKER AVE., C6,D6,E6
/ gcREs HARRIS DR., F6 WALNUT ST., E3,F3,F4
e
O
\
\
\ 1
\�/ HARVEY ST., E8 WALSTON ST., FS
NORTH C A R O L
I N A
aK GROL=
st' u
APP'E a
`
Dp'
L
HEMLOCK ST., F6 WARD ST., E3,F3
HERRINGTON RD., ES,E6,F6,F7 WAREHAM ST., GS,F5,F6
HIGHLANll AVE., F6 WASHINGTON ST., D5,E5,E6
HINES AVE., E8
of pvE. a _
MERR/NOTON *o
a;
0 A00 Boo I
O
a NNE' '�,
APrS `f
`
WATER ST., F4,F5
HOFFLER ST., F6,F7 WEEKS ST., C4,D4
°pOVE
HOGGARD ST., G6,G7 WEEKSVILLE RD., F7,F8,G8
HOLLOWELL DR., F7 WESLEY DR., A5,B5
ELIZABETH CITY
\IQROOK
BAILEVST
E %
�O
`�
g
HOLLY ST., , WHITENER ST. , D4,D5
HOPKINS UR. G8 WHITE ST., ES,FS
PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DE
DEPARTMENT
ELOPMENT
E %
\
W
HORNER ST., G6 WILLIAMS CIR., G6
F
HUGHES BLVD/US HWY 17: A6,B6,B5,C5,C4, WILLOW ST., F3
D4,D3,E3,E2,F2.
OCTOBER,1980
AVIES AVE.
/Nou R/AL
\
WILSON ST., E2,E3
HULL DR., CS,D5,U6 WINSTON ST., E6,E7 '
ll
HUNNICUTT AVE., FS,GS WOOD F6
�
1
'Q.to r
\
HUNTER ST., F5,F6 WOODRUUFFFF AVE., FS,GS
_
J
!�
�
WRIGHT ST., D5
PARK
c9
i
YORK ST., D3,E3
SFALLYNG
s,
,DLL��y
A B C D E F G H I