CAMA Land Use Plan Update-1980

DCM COPY DCM COPY
lease do not remove!!!!!
Division of Coastal Management
CITY OF JACKSONVILLE
CAMA LAND USE PLAN UPDATE-1980

f
CITY OF JACKSONVILLE
CAMA LAND USE PLAN UPDATE-1980
The preparation of this report was financially aided through a
federal grant from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Admini-
stration. The grant was made through the North Carolina Department
of Natural Resources and Community Development.

ti
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Article PaHB
CHAPTERI - INTRODUCTION ................... I-1
...Purpose of Study ........................ I-1
...The Study Area .......................... I-1
...Citizens' Advisory Committee............, I-1
..1980 CAMA Citizens' Advisory Committee 1-1
...Citizens Participation .................. I-3
...Goal. &'Objectives for Preparation of
Plan ..................................... I-3
..Summary of Issues & Goals From 1975 Plan I-4
...Effectiveness of 1975 Plan .............. 1-4
CHAPTER II - ANALYSIS OF CHANGE............ II-1
...Annexations ............................. II-1
...Population & Economy .................... II-1
...Existing Land Use ....................... 1I-3
Introduction ........................... 11-3
..Land Use Analysis.... 11-3
..Special Land Use Analysis ............. II-7
..Land Use Compatibility Problems....... 11-7
..Problems Resulting From Unplanned
Development ........................... 11-8
.. Relationship of Urban Growth to 1975
Land Classification ................... 11-8
...Current Plans & Policies ................ 11-9
..Existing Plans ............. 11-9
..Other Non -Permitting Lave .............. II-10
CHAPTER III - CONSTRAINTS TO DEVELOPMENT... III-1
..Introduction ............................ III-1
:**Water & Sewer Systems ................... ZII-1
..Water Supply .......................... 11I-1
..Recent Water Usage .................... III-1
..Sources of Supply ..................... 111-1
..Water Treatment ....................... III-3
..Water Storage Facilities .............. III-3
..Water Distribution System ............. III-3
..Fire Flows ............................ III-3
..Per Capita Water Use(Non-Fire)........ I11-4
..Projected Per Capita Water Use
(Non -Fire) ............................ III-4
..Onslow County Water System............ III-4
...Wastewater Collection & Treatment System III-4
..EPA "201" Facilities Plan.............. III-4
..Jacksonville System - Central......... II1-5
..Collection System ..................... III-5
..Treatment Facilities -City Owned....... 1II-5
..Other Treatment Facilities............ III-5
CHAPTER IV - ESTIMATED.GROWTH DEMAND....... IV-1
...Introduction ............................ IV-1
...Population Growth ...................... IV-1
...Planning Area Population ................ IV-1
...Future Economy .......................... IV-1
...Future Land Needs.... IV-1
...Community Facility Needs ................ IV-2
CHAPTER V - DEVELOPMENT ISSUES .............
V-1
............................
V-1
...Introduction
...Resource Protection & Management
Commercial Forests ......................
V-1
...Historical Resources ....................
V-1
...Industrial Development ..................
V-2
...Land Use Development Patterns...........
V-2
...Court/New Bridge Streets
Commercial Area Redevelopment...........
V-3
...Residential Blight.
V-4
...Recreational Land .......................
V-4
...Other Development Issues ................
V-5
CHAPTER VI - LAND CLASSIFICATION............ VI-1
...Introduction ............................. VI-1
...Land Classification Map & Narrative...... VI-1
..Developed Class ........................ VI-1
..Transition Class ....................... VI-1
...Community Class ........................ VI-1
..Rural Class ............................ VI-1
..Conservation Class ..................... VI-1
..Transition Areas ....................... VI-3
CHAPTER VII - POLICIES & IMPLEMENTATION.....
VII-1
...Resource Protection & Management -
New River ................................
VII-1
...Economic Development .....................
VII-1
...Strip -Commercial Development .............
VII-1
...Redevelopment of Developed Areas -
OldDowntown .............................
VIZ-1
...Redevelopment of Developed Areas - Other.
VII-1
...Recreational Lands .......................
...Planning Tools & Capacity ................
VII-1
VII-1
List of Exhibits
Article
Page
...Exhibit 1 - Location of Onslow County
to State .................................
Z-1
...Exhibit 2 - Planning Area Map............
I-2
...Exhibit 3 - Annexation Map ...............
II-2
...Exhibit 4 - Land Use Map .................
II-5
...Exhibit 5 - Water System .................
III-2
...Exhibit 6 - Sewer System .................
III-6
...Exhibit 7 - Project R-217................
IV-4
...Exhibit 8 - Project R-535................
IV-4
...Exhibit 9 - Land Classification Map......
VI-2
Appendices
...Appendix A - Technical Advisors............ A-1
...Appendix B - Public Information Meeting
Notices ....................... B-1
...Appendix C - Constraints ................... C-1
...Appendix D - Areas of Environmental Concern
D-1
.............................
D-1
.Introduction
Potential AEC's............
..Jacksonville
.
Plain Land Uses ....................
D-1
..Flood
D-1
..Definitions ............................
Uses .........................
D-1
..Permitted
Permit Procedure ...............
D-2
..Special
..Water Classification .....................
D-2

e nz
Quadrant Number
Outside City Limits
GL adrant Number
Inside City Limits
------ City Limits
—'— Planning Ana Boundary
Inside City Limits
O Outside City Limits
WINE,, Outside Planning Area
C. A.M.A. LAND USE
for tho
CITY OF JACKSONVILLE)
PLAN UPDATE
Thin rgori was financed. In Port by the National Oceanic
and NORTH CAROLINA Ro "*I Cohaticmmission,
Adnnm hotion,he S the Coastal PlainCarolina;
A ••Nn•I Commission, and the State of North Carolino;
sad Insets the r•piirornords of the North Carolina
PLANNING AFEA MAP
»s• rr. tar.+ 1� tree •rurl Carr i Y•Mr ur •0, W o 1
R�U••• •�w� R�tlt•1 �� R •Ia1• �
1•••) lM�ii1 (Mry 7a/�aaa 1a�1 4M�•1�• 1./11 1M-7
Coastal Area Manallom•nt Act of 1974, as ontOW"
Date
EXHIBIT NOL 2
8 INC.
•aMi t...un Mmt
1000 0 1000 4000 NORTH
1� �stana
SCALEINJEET J

Chapter I
INTRODUCTION
PURPOSE OF STUDY
The City of Jacksonville prepared a Land Use Plan
in 1975 in response to the Coastal Area Management
Act, passed by the North Carolina Legislature in 1975.
The purpose and intent of the Act is best described
in Section .0101 "Introduction to Land Use Planning"
Subchapter 7B - Land Use Planning Guidelines (as
amended 09-01-79):
.0101 Introduction
(a)..The Coastal Area Management Act of 1974
establishes a cooperative program of coastal area
management between local governments and the state.
Land use planning lies at the center of local
government's involvement, as it gives the local
leaders an opportunity and responsibility to es-
tablish and enforce policies to guide the devel-
opment of their community.
(b)..The purpose of these state•guidelinss is to
assist local governments in each of the 20 coast-
al counties with the preparation of their own in-
dividual land use plans. Each county and the
municipalities within the coastal counties are
encouraged to develop a plan which reflects the
desires, needs and best judgment of its citizens.
The land use plans prepared under these guide-
lines, when considered together, form the basis
for "a comprehensive plan for the protection,
preservation, orderly development and management
of the coastal area of North Carolina," which is
the primary objective of the Coastal Area Manage-
ment Act of 1974.
Further in the guidelines in Section .0201 (c),
the heart of why North Carolina communities and coun-
ties need to prepare land use plans is described:
.0201 Introduction
(c) .Local governments, through the land use plan-
ning process, address issues and adopt policies
that guide the development of their community.
Many decisions affecting development are made by
other levels of government, and local policies
must take account of and coincide with estab-
lished state and federal policies. Most decisions,
however, are primarily of local concern. By care-
fully and explicitly addressing these issues,
other levels of government will follow local
policies that deal with these issues. Policies
which consider the type of development to be en-
couraged, the density and patterns of development,
and the methods of providing beach access are ex-
amples of these local policy decisions.
The purpose of updating Jacksonville's 1975 CAMA
Land Use Plan is, therefore, to give the local elect-
ed officials, their designated representatives and
the citizens of Jacksonville an opportunity to re-
evaluate the "policies to guide the development of
their community" by re-examining the "desires, needs
and best judgment of its citizens."
THE STUDY AREA
The City of Jacksonville is located in Onslow
I-1
County and is the county seat. The County's location
relative to the rest of North Carolina is shown on
Exhibit 1. The City and its surrounding environs are
the subject of this plan update.
Exhibit 1: Location of Onslow County in State
Annarations, during and after the 1975 Plan was
prepared, required changes in the area to be studied
in this update. Amendments to the North Carolina
Planning Enabling Legislation in 1977 required the
City to redefine its extraterratorial planning juris-
diction and set new boundaries for it. Upon approval
of the City Manager, staff, and elected officials,
the planning area shown on Exhibit 2 was selected and
is used in this study.
CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Prior to beginning work on this plan, the City
Council considered it necessary to appoint a Citizens'
Advisory Committee (CAC) to assist them during the
preparation of the Plan. Committee members were ap-
pointed by the Council with the intent of drawing to-
gether a cross-section of the general public of
Jacksonville and its new planning area. The Com-
mittee's members are listed below, along with the
organizations each represents.
1980 CAMA Citizens Advisory Committee
Planning Board
...Stuart B. Bourquin, CAC Chairman
...Homer Hobgood
...Ron Daniels
Ciy Council
...Joe T. Morgan
...A. D. (Zander) Guy
Community Development Committee
...Paul Guillory
...William J. Hemingway
...Herb DeVusser
Comaunity At -Large
...George W. O'Bryant
...Ron Brown
...Leander Crawford
The CAC met at least monthly during the planning
period and sometimes twice in certain months to dis-
cuss community problems identified during the inven-
tory and analysis phases of the project. They solici-
ted alternative solutions to the issues identified.

}
As part of the decision process, the CAC invited
experts in various technical fields to.discuss
problem areas with them. This aided the Committee by
providing additional information with which they could
make reasonable decisions on alternative solutions to
problems of the community. A list of these technical
advisors is provided in Appendix A.
CITIZEN PARTICIPATION
As part of the planning process, and in accordance
with State planning guidelines, the Citizens' Advisory
Committee held quarterly Public Information Meetings
(PIM's). These meetings were announced in most of
the local news media well in advance in hopes of at-
tracting the general public, and thereby eliciting
opinions regarding issues being discussed by the Com-
mittee. Documentation of notices of the PIM's is
shown in Appendix B.
The Citizens' Advisory Committee concluded that
additional measures were not necessary for achieve-
ment of public input objectives. Survey techniques
were rejected because a survey effort in connection
with preparation of the 1975 Plan resulted in only
-80 responses from 27,000 forms distributed. The Com-
mittee concluded that, adequate opportunities for
public participation and adequate representation of
general public opinion had been accomplished, since
the public information meetings were widely adver-
tised, the Committee included two media representa-
tives, the committee meetings were regularly cover-
ed by the media, and the committee's membership
represented a good cross-section of the community.
GOALS AND OBJECTIVES FOR PREPARATION OF PLAN
The following goals and objectives ware adopted by
the Citizens' Advisory Committee to serve as mile-
posts to evaluate both the progress of the plan and
its validity to the needs of the City of Jacksonville.
Goal dl - To prepare an effective update of the 1975
CAM& Land Use Plan which can be used to
guide urban development and the management
and protection of Jacksonville's natural
resources.
Strategy- Collect most recent available data on pop-
ulation, economy, existing land uses, an-
nexations, public facilities and natural
resources.
Strategy- Analyze collected data and determine changes
that have occurred since 1975 and try to
define the impacts of those changes to the
growth of urban development in and around
Jacksonville.
Goal U2 - To evaluate the effectiveness of the exist-
ing CAMA Land Use Plan and to devise a sys-
tem to evaluate the effectiveness of on-
going planning programs in the future.
Strategy- Relate the 1975 CAMA Land Use Plan to of-
ficial actions of the Jacksonville City
Council and Planning Board, to determine if
positive actions toward implementation of
the Plan's objectives and recommendations
were taken.
Strategy- Analyze growth of urban land uses and relate
I-3
them to the Land Classification Map in the
1975 CAMA Land Use Plan to determine if that
growth is taking place in accordance with
the Plan.
Strategy- Recommend changes, if found needed, to the
Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Regulations
and any other existing implementation tools
which would provide a system of identifying
whether growth activities are in conformance
with the CAMA Plan Update.
Goal U3 - To increase public awareness of the planning
process for the CAMA Plan Update and future
planning and to increase public participation
in the planning process.
Strategy- Prepare a statement of ways the general pub-
lic will be informed of land use policies,
issues, and goals and objectives throughout
the planning period of the CAMA Land Use
Plan Update.
Strategy- Develop public information guidelines, for
future use, based on citizen participation
activities during the CAMA Land Use Plan
Update process.
Goal_C4 - To increase the knowledge of local elected
and appointed officials of the planning
process and of the management and protection
of local natural resources.
Strategy- Through the CAMA Land Use Plan Update, pro-
vide accurate information about existing
natural resources within the Jacksonville
planning area and their potential uses over
the next ten years.
Strategy- Suggest methods of exchanging information
with appropriate state and federal agencies
which can serve to provide a constant flow
of information to the local elected and
appointed officials.
Goal 05 - To develop specific policy statements, re-
lated to each land use issue, developed
during the planning process, that are
reasonable and achievable by the City of
Jacksonville.
Strategy- Develop .a policy statement describing con-
straints to develop and areas of environ-
mental concern, which includes the types of
development that will be allowed in sensi-
tive areas.
Strategy- Develop a policy statement describing Jack-
sonville's capabilities of protection and
management of its natural resources and how
they will be.related to future growth.
Strategy- Develop a policy statement describing the
City's economic and community development
plans. This statement should include the
City's dispositions toward the provision
of capital improvements to stimulate growth,
the use of this,Plan as a guide for growth,
the possible redevelopment of older urban-
ized areas, the use of state and federal
programs, and the annexation of areas ad-
joining its corporate limits.

SUMMARY OF ISSUES AND GOALS FROM 1975 PLAN
The synopsis of the 1975 CAMA Land Use Plan pro-
vides a summary of the issues the City considered
relevant at that time, along with a set of goals for
future growth and development for the City. They
are stated, verbatim, below:
Issues
..a need to maintain a_high level of -public ser-
vices in those areas where citizens have expressed
high satisfaction --such as fire protection, postal
service, homes, water system, garbage collection,
police protection, neighborhood, library, air qual-
ity, and newspapers.
..an opportunity to enhance the guality of_ser_
vices deemed as fair --such as street lights, shopping
areas, telephone system, radio, sewage disposal, air-
port, electric supply, overall quality of living,
television, schools, streets, storm water disposal,
and industrial areas.
...a challenge to upgrade the only four areas with
which citizens have shown dissatisfaction: sidewalks,
parks, employment opportunities, and the Downtown
area.
..a desire that the City continue to_&row in
population and land area.
..a desire for more industrial development and
employment.
..a desire that any futuregrowbe—guided beuided by,
and in conformance with, a community land use plan.
Goals
..Residential land - to make our homes and neigh-
borhoods good places for a family to eat, sleep, play,
live and grow together --by providing a physical en-
vironment free from noise, odors, traffic hazards --
and one that is surrounded by compatible uses. And,
it must be an objective to make sound and decent
homes equally available to all citizens, and to make
a sincere effort to help secure proper housing for
low income families.
..Transportation - to maintain and improve the
safety and efficiency of our transportation system,
especially in relation to walkways, bikeways, streets,
and highways.
...Economy - to work towards establishing a more
diversified and balanced economy in order to provide
more job opportunities, and to make job training and
assistance continually available to all citizens.
..Protection and conservation - to protect and
conserve those parts of our community that are already
assets --such as our natural environment, historical
areas, and other areas of environmental concern.
...New growth - to guide and plan for new growth
in order to assure that it will be a community asset.
The above issues and goals identified in the 1975
Plan provide an insight into the problems of the City
and its desires for the future. Throughout the rest
of this update, the 1975 Plan is used to compare what
existed then, what exists now and how any changes may
have had an impact on development which has occurred
during the interim period.
EFFECTIVENESS_ OF 1975 PLAN
Determination of the.effectiveness of the 1975
Plan in providing guidance for City development de-
cisions is, at best, a subjective exercise. Although
various suggestions were made and deficiencies noted
relative to public facilities and land use implement-
ing tools, the major thrust of the 1975 Plan was to
designate various land classifications. Within each
classification, certain development types could take
place. So far as the planning jurisdiction boundaries
of the Plan extended at that time, it can be said that
the Plan has been used. However, most of the urban -
type development which has taken place since 1975 has
.occurred outside of the planning jurisdiction of that
date. For example, major subdivisions within the one
mile limit have occurred, like Willow Woods, Alders -
gate and Branchwood. But outside the jurisdiction
major subdivision expansions have taken place in Brynn
Mary, Country Club Hills and Country Club Acres. The
growth outside'the planning jurisdiction has not been
affected by the recommendations of the CAMA Plan be-
cause they were not within the planning area.
..Commercial areas - to make them conveniently
accessible to other areas without improperly intrud- The extent of growth outside the one -mile planning
ing on residential neighborhoods; to encourage im- jurisdiction indicates a possible need for the City
proved aesthetics in buildings, parking, and signs; to exercise two-mile planning authority in order to
and to encourage safe and efficient traffic patterns. effectively guide development.
..Industry - to encourage additional industrial
development in order that the City's economic base
will become more diversified and offer additional job
opportunities.
...Community facilities - to maintain or enhance
existing facilities, and to plan for new ones to ac-
commodate future growth, in order that all citizens
will be properly served by parks, schools, libraries,
and police and fire protection.
...Utilities - to maintain and enhance utility ser-
vices to all existing and future development in order
that all buildings will be properly and safely served
by water, electricity, and telephone --and assured of
proper removal and disposal of storm water, sewage,
and solid waste.
I-4
..Zoning, -Ordinance - Recommendations made in the
1975 CAMA Plan have not, as yet, been implemented.
These suggestions included:
...Clarifying the single-family residential
character of the RA-7 District.
...Constructing the various residential dis-
tricts to give them clearer purposes and uses.
..Creating an "agricultural" district for
agricultural and other non -urban uses and use this
district rather than RA-7, for any "automatic" clas-
sification of new jurisdiction.
..Eliminating conflicting residential uses from
commercial and industrial zones; making the purposes
of these districts more exclusive.
...utilizing site plan development requirements
in districts other than just mobile home parks.
4L

Only three significant amendments to the Zoning
Ordinance text have occurred since completion of the
1975 Plan: the addition of a townhouse district, the
addition of an adult business zone, and the incorpora-
tion by reference of state standards for Areas of.
Environmental Concern. No other revisions or studies
of the ordinance have been completed. During the
same period, 30 rezoning petitions were approved and
5 proposed classification changes were denied by the
City.
The City has, however, initiated an effort for
comprehensive review and revision of the ordinance.
A city planner was hired in April, 1980, and complete
review of the existing ordinance was set as a high
priority project in improvement of Jacksonville's
planning capacity.
•..Public Facilities - The recommendations made in
the 1975 CAHA Pian were taken in whole or in part
from various planning studies which had preceded the
CAMA Plan. Specifically, recommendations for water
and sewer facilities were those made as part of the
1972 water System Report and the "201" Facilities
Plan. These were incorporated into the CAMA Plan.
To date, the City has acted on the recommendations of
both reports. The "201" Plan has been used as justi-
fication for EPA grants. The major improvements to
the sewage treatment plant are being completed in
1980, as are most of the major sewer interceptors.
The additions to the water system were completed a
few years ago. The City is also active in pursuing
Community Development Block Grants in order to extend
water and sewer service to low and moderate income
families. City policy on utility extension is dis-
cussed below.
...Annexation Policy - The City of Jacksonville
adopted a policy on annexation and utility extension
in its report, Annexation Report and Extension of
Services Plan, March, 1979. Suggestions were made in
the 1975 CAMA Plan as to the adoption of specific an-
nexation policy. Adoption of the policy named above
meets the suggestions made in the Plan. It also
provides part of the policy statement required as
part of the CAMA Land Use Plan Update legislation.
...Summary - The major recommendations of the 1975
Plan were related to implementation methods which
could be utilized by the City to ensure that the Plan
was followed. Most of these recommendations were in
the form of suggestions or proposed actions that would
give the City more efficient control over future devel-
opment,within the planning jurisdiction. With the
exceptions noted above no other actions have been
taken to implement the Plan recommendations.
However, it is necessary to note in analyzing the
effectiveness of the 1975 CAMA Land Use Plan that the
major purpose of the plan was to designate land clas-
sifications for the planning area, based on criteria
set forth in the CAMA planning legislation. Because
of this it is not reasonable to assess the effective-
ness of the CAMA Land Use Plan as if it ware a fully
developed Comprehensive Plan, made up of all the
various component plans developed over a one or two
year period. Judged in this light it can be said
that the 1975 CAMA Land Use Plan for the City of
Jacksonville has been an effective tool in guiding
the development within the planning jurisdiction of
the City.
I-5

t
Chapter II
r t,
''
HA
r
t.
ANNEXATIONS
Since 1975 the City of Jacksonville has pursued an
active annexation program. An annexation feasibility
study for three areas was prepared by the City Man-
ager in November, 1978. In March, 1979, the City
published its Annexation Report and Extension of Ser-
vices Plan in which the City stated its goal to con-
trol its own destiny, establish Jacksonville as an
urban center and create a pattern of sound develop-
ment (i.e., in the urban fringe areas)." Although
aimed at one specific area, it established the goals
and purposes of all future city annexations. In
addition, the City's participation in the Community
Development Block Grant program has been designed to
facilitate orderly extension of Jacksonville's corp-
orate limits.
Annexations made since 1975 are shown on Exhibit
3. As can be seen, land has been annexed on the north
side of town, but the major annexations have taken
place to the east of the City.
Specifically, 3,206 acres of land have been annex-
ed since 1976 increasing the area of the City from.
4,006 acres to 7,212. This represents an increase in
size of 81 percent. Table 1 shows these increases by
City sections as illustrated on Exhibit 3.
Table 1: Acres Annexed by City Section
Section
Area (in acres)
Increase
1975
1986
No.
z
350
726
376
108
1
2
2,408
2,471
63
3
3
--
2,406
2,406
100
4
1,248
1,609
361
29
TOTALS
4,006
7,212
3,206
81
Estimates of population increases brought about by
these annexations indicate an additional 4,447 people
now live within the city limits of Jacksonville.
When added to a pre -annexation population estimate of
17,553, the estimated 1980 population of Jacksonville
is 22,000.
It should be noted that the recommendation was
made in the 1975 CAM& Plan that the City adopt a
specific annexation policy so that a rational series
of annexations could take place: By adopting the
policy mentioned above, the City has fulfilled that
recommendation. This policy will also become part
of the City's policy statement required by the amend-
ed CAMA Land Use Plan Update legislation.
POPULATION AND ECONOMY
The 1980 estimates of population for Jacksonville
and Onslow County were prepared by the City and were
based on preliminary 1980 census figures.
Besides the growth which took place in and around
Jacksonville after the establishment of Camp Lejeune
in the early 19401s, there have been no major events
that have caused drastic increases or decreases in
the populations of either Jacksonville or Onslow
County, even though growth has occurred. When com-
paring the relative population changes between the
two, it is notable that Jacksonville's population in-
creased by 37 percent between 1970 and 1980, while
Onalow County's increased by only 5 percent. As
stated in many other sections of the report, the
City's increases have been in large part brought
about through annexation. This has been, and con-
tinues to be, a key factor in the City's growth over
the past three decades.
Other population characteristics which are normally
reviewed, such as age, sex, education, family income,
etc., cannot be compared between 1970 and 1980 due to
the lack of 1980 census data. However, these pre-
liminary census statistics do indicate that the
average population per household has decreased from
3.20 in 1970 to 2.75 in 1980. This decline in pop-
ulation of nearly one person per two housing units
from 1970 to 1980 underlines the fact that more hous-
ing units and land area per capita are being used to
support the population. This trend towards a lower
density per dwelling unit and per acre was further
extended by a projected vacancy rate of 9.8 percent,
compared to 7.1 percent in 1970. As a result, the
City's enormous gain in housing units of approx-
imately 45 percent resulted in a population increase
of "only" 20 percent.
For more detailed historical population statistics,
see the 1975 CAMA Land Use Plan.
Because the limits of the Planning Area have just
recently been established, no estimates are available
of population outside the City within the new Plan-
ning Area. However, using the total number of acres
of developed residential land uses, and a density of
3 dwelling units per acre and multiplying the result-
ing number by the 1980 average household size of 2.75
persons, a population estimate of 2,790 can be achiev-
ed. When added to the City's 1980 estimate of 22,000,
Table 2: Historic Population Cbanges. Jacksonville and Onslow County
Area
1920
1930
1940
1950
1960
1970
1980 Est.
Onslow County
14,703
15,289
17,939
42,047
86,208
103,126
109,000
Jacksonville
656
783
873
3,960
13,491
16,021
22,000
X Jax to Co.
4%
5%
4%
9%
15%
16%
20%
Source: 1920 - 1970 from U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1980 estimate by City of Jacksonville based on
preliminary census data.

a total Planning Area population of 24,790 people can
be made for 1980.
When data from the 1980 census becomes available,
the City should consider the preparation of a detail-
ed analysis of its population and its economy in the
form of socio-economic base studies. These studies
will be of immeasurable value in the preparation of
future community plans.
Economy
The economy of Jacksonville and its environs has
changed very little in character since the 1975 CAMA
Plan was prepared. The City's economy was greatly
stimulated by the establishment of Camp Lejeune in
1942. The City continues to rely heavily on the sales
of goods and services to military personnel as a
primary source of employment.
There has never been an economic base study com-
pleted for the City of Jacksonville. There is a
definite need for such a study which could help guide
and influence the City's economic future. Since there
is no economic base data available for the City, coun-
ty data is presented below. This economic data is re-
flective of the county as a whole and should not be
interpreted to necessarily reflect economic conditions
within Jacksonville. The available Onslow County
economic statistics are taken from a report published
in 1978 by the Onslow County Economic Development
Office and are as follows:
Onslow County's Economy Is Primarily
Due To Five Sources
... CaU Lejeune Marine Cow Base - The Camp Lejeune
Marine Corp Base has 42,000 (by 1980 this figure had
decreased to 33,888) active military persons with ap-
proximately 3,300 (4.121 in 1980) civilian employees
that work on the base. The annual total payroll at
Camp Lejeune is $300,000,000.
Note: Of the 27,294 dependents of military person-
nel in 1980, only 15,200 live on base in 4,500 base
housing units. The other 12,094 dependents live in
and around'the Jacksonville area.
...A�riculture - Agriculture continues to be an
important part of the County's economy. In 1977,
agricultural income grossed over $25,000,000. Major
crops include tobacco, fruit, vegetables, cattle,
swine, and poultry, along with forestry products.
...Manufactng - Manufacturing employment in
the County is approximately 3,300 persons with an
estimated annual payroll of $23,000,000.
...Tourism - In 1977 out -of -County travelers spent
over $16,000,000 in Onslow County.
...Seafood Industry - Onslow County is blessed with
an abundance of marine resources with over 40 miles
of New River that leads directly to the Intracoastal
Waterway. In 1977 the seafood products that were
harvested and processed in Onslow County were in
excess of $10,000,000.
While manufacturing employment in 1970 represented
only 10 percent of total employment in Onslow County,
retail trade (commercial enterprises) made up 21 per-
cent. Services accounted for 22 percent. Combined,
retail trade and services made up almost half of the
II-3
total employment. With the increases in industrial
employment, it can be assumed that its percentage
share of total employment has grown. But as stated
above, the sale of goods and services is still the
major source of employment.
Through their support of the Onslow County Econ-
omic Development Office the City of Jacksonville and
Onslow County are making efforts to diversify their
collective economy. The major thrust has been to
attempt to attract new industries and thereby provide
more employment opportunities therein. The increases
noted in industrial employment since the 1975 Plan
show that these efforts are paying off.
EXISTING LAND USE
Introduction
The inventory of existing land use -was made so
that it could be compared where possible to the land
use inventory of 1975. In those areas where compari-
sons were not possible, explanations of the circum-
stances are noted in the narrative.
The annexations made by the City since 1976 have
obviously changed the city limit boundaries in many
areas. Also, because of annexations and the need to
use geographic features as extra -territorial planning
boundaries, it is necessary to redefine the extra-
territorial jurisdiction of the City. (These limits
are depicted on Exhibit 3.)
Generally, several observations can be made. The
change in the extra -territorial jurisdiction increas-
ed the total planning area 65 percent. The area out-
side the city limits was increased 56 percent and the
annexations increased the city's area from 4,006 acres
in 1975 to 7,212 acres in 1980, an increase of 81
percent.
Land Use Analysis
The following analysis is presented by discussing
sections of the City and Planning Area. An effort
was made to simplify identification of each segment
by using only a section number, designating a quad-
rant of the Planning Area, and sub -sections, desig-
nated as A, for areas outside the city limits, and
B, for areas inside the city limits. (Refer to
Existing Land Use Map, Exhibit 4).
The Analysis is based on the data shown in Tables
3, 4 and 5 which follow. Table 3 presents acreage
by land use for each section and sub -section for 1980.
Table 4 shows the comparable acreages that existed
in 1975. Table 5 shows the changes which took place
in all areas of the Planning Area.
Section 1
Section 1 is the largest of the four, containing
a total of 5,189 acres. It is seconded only to Sec-
tion 3 in.total urban growth.
Because of annexations, the amount of land inside
the city limits (1B) increased by 108 percent, from
350 acres in 1975 to 726 by 1980. However, the
character of urban development has remained the same.
Residential development occupies 41 percent of the
total land area of this sub -section. The subsections
in this area are typical for Jacksonville, containing
one or two major streets and the minor streets ending

in cul-de-sacs. There are three subdivisions which
have been platted and submitted to the City which
have not yet been constructed. The land for these
subdivisions is listed on Tables 3, 4 and 5 under the
heading, "Undeveloped", although they should more ap-
propriately be termed as "vacant -urban" land.
There are 23 acres of new commercial development
along Gum Branch Road. It is interesting to note
that a little over twenty acres of land between Gum
Branch and Onsville Road were used for agricultural
purposes in 1975. The same land is now used for
commercial purposes in 1980., This trend is one which
is common in American cities and towns.
Residential density in this area averages around
3 dwelling units per acre (or 1,920 per square mile)
in the subdivisions. Of course, the density on acre-
age occupied by apartments and townhouses is greater.
While expanded in size by the extended Planning
Area limits, the land use character of area outside
the city limits (Sub -section IA) is generally rural -
undeveloped. Urban development accounts for only 3
percent of the total 4,463 acres. Almost 97 percent
of the remainder is used as forested land or vacant -
rural land.
Section 2
The redelineation of the Planning Area adds 254
total acres to Section 2, when compared to the Plan-
ning Area used in 1975. As a matter of fact, the
area outside the city limits (2A) has not changed at
all since that time in terms of land use.
All of the changes which have taken place in this
Section have occurred inside the city limits - sub-
section 2B. A majority of all growth in this section
has taken place between Henderson Drive and Gum Branch
Road. Table 5 shows urban development has increased
slightly, however, from 1,725 acres to 1,750 acres
within the five year period; an increase of only 2
percent. Most of'this limited growth has been in the
form of highway -commercial and office developments
along Gum Branch Road and Doris Avenue.
Although Table 3 shows 342 acres of undeveloped
land in area 2B, there are less than 125 acres of
land remaining in this area for potential future
urban development. The rest of the undeveloped land
is in the flood plain of the New River.
Significant Public -Institutional land within 2B
consists of Northwoods and Parkwood Elementary Schools,
Northwoods Junior High and Jacksonville Senior High
School. Together these schools make up 105 acres of
the 146 in this land use category. The amount of
land in this category has not changed at all since
1975.
Section 3
While the land use acreage of the other three sec-
tions can be compared to those in the 1975 Plan, only
1,289 acres of Section 3 were included in that Plan.
Annexations added 2,406 acres to the City, which in
turn required expansion of the Planning Area .boundary.
Area outside the city limits (3A) increased 4,115
acres. Almost none of this area was included in the
1975 Plan, therefore, no comparisons of changes in ,
land use can be made. But because this area has pro-
vided a substantial proportion of Jacksonville's"urban
growth, its land use characteristics will be discussed.
II-4
Although two-thirds of the land area in Section 3
is still undeveloped, preliminary plats have been ap-
proved for over 100 acres of new subdivision develop-
ment. The remainder of the undeveloped land consists
of open fields, forest land, and the flood plain of
the Northeast Creek.
There are 23 acres of developed industrial land
in sub -section 3B. This represents 41 percent of the
total industrial area within the City. Sub -section
4B contains the rest of the City's industrial land
along U.S. 17 and around the downtown area. However,
there is very little vacant land available for future
industrial growth in 4B, with possible exception of
the Ellis Boulevard area, while 3B contains almost
200 acres of vacant land suitable for this purpose.
This is especially significant because historically.
Jacksonville has experienced relatively slow growth
in industrial employment. Both the City and County
are actively seeking new industries to locate here.
This is discussed in more detail under "Economy"
(P. II-3). It is sufficient to note that the vacant
industrial land within 3B appears to hold good
potential for future industrial development.
Residential development in Section 3 makes up 54
percent of all urban land uses in that section. Over
50 percent of all residential development in Section
3 is located within 3A, outside the city limits. Ex-
cept for four apartment complexes, one elderly hous-
ing development and one townhouse development, all
other residential is single family. Subdivisions in
this section were largely designed according to modern
standards and are similar in that regard to the new-
er subdivisions in Sections 1B and 2B.
As in other parts of Jacksonville, commercial land
uses in this section are in "strip commercial" devel-
opments along N.C. 24, Western Boulevard, Bell Fork
Road and U.S. 17. The commercial land uses in 3B
account for 32 percent of all commercial development
in the Planning Area.
The small Public -Institutional (P-I) uses shown on
the Existing Land Use Map consist of churches. The
larger P-I areas shown include the Onslow Memorial
Hospital on Western Boulevard, between Memorial Drive
and Oxford Road; Coastal Community College on Western
Boulevard and University Drive, and Onslow Academy, a
private school located at Commerce Drive and Fairway
Road. The largest P-I area shown is the Jacksonville
Country Club (golf course) which makes up for almost
half of the P-I land in this section. The Country
Club and the other P-I uses in this section comprise
46 percent of all P-I uses in the Planning Area.
Section 4
Section 4B could be called "old" Jacksonville. It
contains the Court Street/New Bridge Street commercial
area, city hall, and the county courthouse. Only 77
acres of urban development has taken place since 1975,
making 76 percent of this area urban -developed.
There are still 319 acres of undeveloped land in this
area. The majority, (225 acres) of this land is
forested and is located in two areas. The largest
forested area is located near Ellis Boulevard and is
presently surrounded by mostly strip commercial de-
velopments on N.C. 24 and Ellis Boulevard. The sec-
ond area of forested land is located south of N.C. 24
near the intersection of N.C. 24 and U.S. 17, near
the Court Street area. The potential future uses of
both pieces of land are more fully discussed under
"Future Land Needs."

0
M
. . - - . __ .. - _ _ _ _ -- w •_ _1__--..J11 - 01 ---/-_ A--- - 100A . T- An-ne
Aerial Unit
Urban -Developed
Land
Undeveloped
Land
TOTAL
ACRES
Resid. Comm. Ind. TCU. Pub.
Insti
TOTAL
Undev. Agri. Forest Water
TOTAL
Planning
Totals
Are
3,197
842
67
1,183
683
5,972
5,843.
41
6,685
439
13,008
18,960
Section
1
391
64
-
61
21
537
644
-
4,008
-
4,652
5,169
..A
..B
98
293
23
41
-
-
11.
50
-
21
132
405
323
321
-
-
4,008
-
-
-
4,331
321
4,463
726
Section
2
1,087
191
-
470
146
1,894
410
41
2,360
231
3,042
4,936
..A
..B
38
1,049
50
141
-
-
56
414
-
146
144
1,750
68
342
33
8
2,189
171
31
200
2,321
721
2,465
2,471
Section
3
1,058
286
27
315
310
1,996
4,414
-
92
59
4,565
6,561
,•A
.,B
564
494
22
264
4
23
24
291
-
310
614
1,382
3,437
977
-
-
60
32
44
15
3,541
1,024
4,115
2,406
Section
4
661
301
40
337
206
1,545
375
-
225
149
749
2,294
..A
..B '
78
583
41
260
2
38
58
279
104
102
283
1,262
281
94
-
-
-
225
121
28
402
347.
685
1,609
fl1 .. -,-.. A--- _ 1 07L T- An
Aerial Unit
Urban -Developed
Land
Undeveloped
Land
TOTAL
ACRES
Resid. Comm. Ind. TCU. Pub.
Inati.
TOTAL
Undev. Agri. Forest Water
TOTAL
Planning
Totals
Area
2,237
626
68
1,060
415
4,405
1,462
41
5,262
390
7,155
11,560
Section
1
366
30
2
113
16
528
40
-
2,825
2
2,867
3,395
..A
..B
155
211
12
18
2
-
65
49
3
13
237
291
40
-
-
-
2,768
57
-
2
2,808
59
3,045
350
Section
2
1,071
186
-
465
146
1,868
278
41
2,203
291
2,813
4,681
..A
..B
38
1,034
50
135
-
-
56
410
-
146
144
1,725
163
115,
33
8
2,032
171
91
200
2,319
494
2,463
2,219
Section
3
147
122
26
145
101
541
739
-
9
-
748
1,289
..A
..B
-
147
-
122
-
26
145
-
101
-
541
-
739
-
-
-
9
-
-
-
748
-
1,289
Section
4
653
287
40
337
151
1,468
405
-
225
97
726
2,194
..A
..B
78
575
39
248
2
38
58
279
51
100
226
1,242
264
141
-
-
-
225
69
28
333
393
559
1,635
II-6

Table 5: Changes In Land Use For The Jacksonville Planning Area 1975-1980, In Acres
Aerial Unit
Urban -Developed
Land
Undeveloped
Land
TOTAL
ACRES
Resid. . Comm. Ind. TCU. Pub.
Insti.
TOTAL
Undev. Agri. Forest Water
TOTAL
Planning Area
Totals
96G
217
-1
123
268
1567•
4381• -1
1423
49
5853
7420
Section 1
25
34
-2
-53•
5
9
604
1183
-2
1785
1794
..A
..B
-57
82
11
23
-2
-
-54
1
-3
8
-105
114
283 -
321 -
1240
-57
-
-2
1523
262.
1418
376
Section 2
16
5
-
5
-
26
132 -
157
-60
229
254
..A
..B
-
15
-
6
-
-
-
4
-
-
-
25
-95 -
227 -
157
-
-60
-
2
227-
2
252
Section 3
911,
164
1
170
209
I455
3675 -
83
59
3817
5272
..A
..B
564
347
22
142
4
-3
24
146
-
209
614
841
3437 -
238 -
60
23
44
15
'3541
276
4115
1117
Section 4
8
14
-
-
55
77
-30 -
-
52
23
100
..A
..B
-
8
2
12
-
-
-
-
53
2
57
.20
17 -
-47 -
-
-
52
-
69
-46
126
-26
With the exception of the Court Street/New Bridge
Street commercial area, commercial land uses in both
4B and 4A are characterized by strip development
along the major highways. Much of this development
caters to Marine Corps personnel, and, as such, is
made up of a wide variety of goods and services.
This is especially true of those commercial develop-
ments along N.C. 24, which is the main access route
to the main gate of Camp Lejeune, and along U.S. 17
near the main entrance to Camp Geiger.
Industrial land uses in 4B consist of small, older
industries located generally south of the central
business district and east of the New River. Ware-
housing makes up most of the industrial area on U.S.
Highway 17 between Onslow Drive and the Marine Corps
railroad. These industrial uses comprise only 4 per-
cent of all urban uses in sub -section 4B, but account
for over half (57 percent) of all land in the Plan-
ning Area developed for industrial purposes. This
was true in 1976.
Residential development in 4B has increased only
2 percent since 1976. Existing residential develop-
ment ranges from old neighborhoods near downtown,
developed in the traditional grid street pattern, to
the relatively newer neighborhoods north of Wilson
Bay Park and those along either side of Hargett
Street. Also located in this area is the oldest and
largest (in terms of acres and total number of units)
of any multi -family housing development in the Plan-
ning Area. This is the New River Apartments, which
contain 676 units and covers over 100 acres. This
one apartment development makes up 40 percent of all
multi -family dwelling units within the Planning Area.
II-7
Residential development in sub -section 4A contains
mainly low-income single family development in the
Georgetown Area. The only multi -family development
is the Beacham Apartments on U.S. 17S. The next two
major land users in 4A are the Onslow County Board of
Education, and commercial strip developments along
U.S. 17 and N.C. 258. The P-I uses account for 37
percent of all developed land uses in this sub -area,
while commercial developments make up 15 percent.
Special Land Use Analysis
A special analysis of land use problems noted
during the existing land use inventory made in 1975
was included in that plan. Specifically, two major
problem areas were analyzed. They were "Land Use
Compatibility Problems" and "Problems Resulting from
Unplanned Development." Because these two problem
areas still exist in Jacksonville, it was considered
necessary to reiterate and expand, as necessary, the
problems noted at that time.
Land Use Compatibility Problems
Jacksonville's major land use compatibility prob-
lems were described in the 1975 Plan as listed below:
..improper street design that forces through
traffic onto local residential streets (Henderson,
for instance);
...improper street and commercial area design
that permits commercial driveway intersections every
fifty feet or so along arterial streets, thereby
making the arterial much more susceptible to unneces-

sary auto accidents and reducing its capacity to ef-
fectively move traffic (e.g., Marine, Western, or Le-
jeune Boulevards);
...Lhprrper_location of residential units fronting
along arterial streets and permitting frequent drive-
way access. Generally speaking, the owners of these
residential units sooner or later will request a
change to commercial zoning, noting that the City's
high volume of traffic on the adjecent arterial as
having made their property unsafe and unlivable for
residential purposes. (Henderson, Western Boulevard,
or Johnson Boulevard);
...improper_conservation of the natural environ-
ment whenever urbanization replaces open or agri-
cultural land. Buildings in any of the Jacksonville
Flood Plains illustrate this incompatibility whenever
heavy rains flow down the natural drainage lines and,
in the process, flood properties and buildings which
have encroached upon the flood plain. In some recent
development, more attention has been given to preserv-
ing trees, other plantlife, flood plains, etc.
Unfortunately, these problems are still the major
land use problems within the Planning Area. It should
be noted, however, that most of these problems are
located in the older (relatively speaking) areas of
Jacksonville (Sections 2 and 4). It is also unfortu-
nate, but true that once these problems are allowed
to occur in a community, it is usually financially
impossible for the communities to correct them. These
problems point out the need to plan for suture devel-
opments so that these errors are not repeated else-
where in the Planning Area. This leads us to the next
set of problems noted in the 1975 Plan.
Problems Resulting From Unplanned Development
It was noted that Jacksonville, like many American
communities, does not have a comprehensive, up-to-date
plan for future growth and development. A discussion
of existing plans can be found under "Current Plans
and Policies", which follows this section. The prob-
lems cited in 1975 were:
...a lack of nejghborhood-parks within walking
distance of all residential units;
...a need for larger community Parks within a ten
to fifteen minute maximum driving time of residents;
..pressure created on the original Downtown Area
in Jacksonville by the development of new shopping
centers and strip commercial along arterial streets,
as well as the lack of Downtown action policy;
... the development of areas adjacent to, or near,
theCity--butwith the City having no_jurisdictional
control over the type of development. This fragmen-
tation of jurisdiction between City, County, and
Marine Corps presents an extreme challenge to Jack-
sonville officials in trying to properly guide its
future growth in respect to land use, transportation,
community facilities, and utilities; and
...the problem of housing and services for fami-
lies of low income to be able to privately purchase
adequate housing within the community.
In 1980 there is still a deficiency in the number
and types of recreational lands available to the
residents of the Planning Area. The City does not
have a city wide park; instead, there are a series of
II-8
neighborhood parks totalling 26.4 acres. Phillips
Park (7.5 acres), Keer Street Park (5.2 acres), Bell
Fork Park (2.5 acres), Northwoods Community Center
(0.7 acres), Sherwood Forest Park (3.1 acres) Jack
A.myette (0.9 acres), and Brook Valley Park (3.5
acres), are all City owned, while Wilson Bay Park
(3.0 acres) is maintained by the City Recreation
Department.
The City also has an agreement with the Onslow
County School System, which allows the City to utilize
school recreation facilities, when they are available.
School acreage available for public recreation use
totals 11.5 acres. The City and school recreation
lands total 37.9 acres, which must service the recre-
ation needs of 22,000 people.
The pressures placed on the old downtown area
(Court Street/New Bridge Street commercial area) by
new shopping developments continue to be a problem
which should be addressed. The narrow streets,
limited parking, and non -central location of the old
downtown area compound the problem of attracting
customers and additional retail businesses. The
viability of this area is not expected to improve un-
less a concentrated effort is made toward redevelop-
ment.
Through annexation and the recent delineation of
its extra -territorial limits, the City has improved
its control of new developments taking place outside
its immediate jurisdiction. However, the City should
consider expanding its extra -territorial planning
boundary from the existing one mile to two miles in
order to insure orderly growth. This action, along
with active enforcement of the Zoning Ordinance and
Subdivision Regulations should go a long way toward
mitigating this type of problem in the future.
Private developers have taken a very active role
in providing low to moderate income housing for the
residents of the Planning Area. Over 640 units have
been built or renovated through programs sponsored by
the U.S. Department of HUD. The City is also seek-
ing Community Development Block Grants from HUD which
will, if funded, provide needed streets and water and
sewer facilities to low and moderate income neighbor-
hoods.
Relationship of Urban Growth
To 1975 Land Classification
All urban growth which has taken place since com-
pletion of the 1975 Plan has taken place on land
designated as either "developed" or "transition" on .
the "Land Classification Map." Most growth, however,
has taken place outside of the 1975 Planning Area
boundary.
Only one CAMA permit has been issued within any of
the areas designated for "conservation" in the 1975
Plan and that was for a commercial marina adjacent
to a seafood restaurant near the west end of the new
bridge across the New River. This project met all
CAMA requirements and is therefore considered an ac-
ceptable use in a "conservation" area.
The primary reasons no development has taken place
on lands not designated for it is that:
...The designations of "developed" and "transition"
lands was logically arrived at during the 1975 CAMA
planning process; and

..The 1975 Plan has been used by local, state and
federal agencies to ensure conformance of proposed
developments to the plan. There were no "Areas of
Environmental Concern" (AEC) determined within the
Planning Area in 1975 and therefore, no "fragile" en-
vironmental areas have been threatened by urban growth
during the 5-year period.
CURRENT PLANS & POLICIES
Listed below are existing land development plans
and policies of the City of Jacksonville. It should
be noted that several plans were prepared for the City
in the early and mid 1960's. Many of these were list-
ed in the 1975 CAMA Land Use Plan. However, many of
them are so out-of-date that they are useless for the
formulation of policies for orderly growth,and devel-
opment. It should also be noted that there are a num-
ber of important plan elements and policies.that the
City does not have. An economic base study, housing
plan, recreation and open space plan, communityfacil-
ities plan, capital improvements program, minimum
housing code, historical and archeological survey,
and detailed existing and future land use plan are
necessary if the City is to have a good comprehensive
plan to guide its future. The plans and policies
listed below represent ones which are now being used
by the City.
Existing Plans and Policies
..CAMA Land Use Plan - Prepared in 1975 and pub-
lished in 1976. This plan covered a wide range of
topics and stated issues, objectives, and policies
for use by the city council in making future decisions.
..201 Facilities Plan - Prepared and published in
1976. This plan details sewer system needs for a 20
year period. The City has followed the recommendations
of this plan and is now completing construction of
recommended improvements. There are other recommended
improvements which are awaiting favorable priority
ratings by E.P.A. for funding.
..Report on Water System —Improvements - Prepared
and published in 1972. Major recommendations of this
study included development of a new well field north
of the City and improvements to the distribution sys-
tem. Most of these improvements have been constructed.
...Housing Assistance Plan - Prepared as part of a
Community Development Block Grant program. This plan
is presently being revised to reflect changes since
the original plan was prepared.
...Thoroughfare Plan - Prepared in 1969 and amend-
ed in 1978. The North Carolina Department of Trans-
portation is in the process of updating this plan.
This update should be completed in 1981. The plan
will include recommendations for improvements to state -
maintained roads within the Planning Area, which will
result in improved traffic flows and safety. Various
projects recommended in the 1969 plan have been or
are being implemented. The proposed extension of
Western Boulevard from its present intersection with .
U.S. 17 to Gum Branch Road has been approved for com-
pletion.
...Jacksonville Area Soil Survey - Prepared by
the U.S. Soil Conservation Service in 1975. While not
a plan in itself, the findings of soils suitable for
various types of development are invaluable in the
preparation of a land use plan, such as this, and for
II-9
making development decisions on a daily basis.
..Preliminary Engineering Report on the Provision
of Water and Sewer Services to the Pickettown Area -
-------------------------
While the City has had several preliminary engineering
reports prepared prior to construction of public pro-
jects, this particular report contains a land use
analysis and housing condition inventory for a pro-
posed annexation area, which was being also consider-
ed for a Community Development Block Grant for public
improvements.
..Flood Hazard Boundary Maps - Prepared by the
Federal Insurance Administration of the Department of
Housing and Urban Development in May, 1974 and revised
in.May, 1977. These maps indicate special flood
hazard areas and are used as guides for development.
..Zoning, —Ordinance - Prepared and published in
1972, and amended periodically thereafter. Review of
this ordinance indicates several weaknesses which
should be scrutinized by City officials. It is
strongly recommended that the City undertake a com-
prehensive review of the existing zoning ordinance
and map.
..Subdivision Ordinance - Jacksonville's existing
subdivision ordinance regulates residential growth,
but does not control commercial and industrial sub-
division. It is recommended that the City undertake
a comprehensive review of its existing subdivision
ordinance provisions.
..Building —Code - The City has adopted the North
Carolina State Building Code. The City's building
codes provide ample construction guidelines.
..Soil Erosion and Sedimentation Control
Ordinance - A soil erosion and sedimentation control
ordinance was adopted by the City on March 20, 1980,
in order to regulate land -disturbing activities that
would accelerate erosion and sedimentation.
...Ciy of Jacksonville Hurricane/Severe Storm
Damage Reaction Plan - Prepared in 1979 in order to
set out a definitive policy as to what actions should
be taken by city employees before, during and after
a major/severe storm, hurricane or tornado.
...Jacksonville_Onslow Count' Operational Data
Manual - Prepared in 1972 and updated in 1977 by the
Onslow County Civil Preparedness Agency. This plan
contains a complete analysis of the civil prepared-
ness capabilities of Jacksonville and Onslow County.
There are many state and federal regulations and
Policies which regulate local development. Local
units of government throughout the state are uniformly
required to adhere to these regulations. These state
and federal regulations and policies, listed by the
administering agency are as follows:
...Department of Natural Resources and Community
Development _Division of Environmental Management -
Permits to discharge to surface waters or operate
waste water treatment plans or oil discharge permits;
NPDES Permits, (G.S. 143-215). Permits for septic
tanks with a capacity over 3,000 gallons/day (G.S.
143-215.3). Permits for withdrawal of surface or
ground waters in capacity use areas (G.S. 143-215.15).
Permits for air pollution abatement facilities and
sources (G.S. 143-215.108). Permits for construction
of complex sources; e.g., parking lots, subdivisions,
stadiums, etc. (G.S. 143-215.109). Permits for con-

struction of complex sources; e.g., parking lots, sub- Other Non -Permitting Laws
divisions, stadiums, etc. (G.S. 143-215.109). Per-
mits for construction of a well over 100,000 gallons/ Federal
day (G.S. 87-88).
...Department of Natural Resources and Commmuaity
Development, Office of Coastal_Manaagement - Permits
to dredge and/or fill in estuarine waters, tidelands,
etc. (G.S. 113-229). Permits to undertake develop-
ment in Areas of Environmental Concern (G.S. 113A-
118). Note: Minor development permits are issued by
the local government.
...Department of Natural Resources and Cotmm:unity
Development, Division of Earth Resources - Permits to
alter or construct a dam (G.S. 143-215.66). Permits
to mine (G.S. 74-51). Permits to drill an exploratory
oil or gas well (G.S. 113-381). Permits to conduct
geographical exploration (G.S. 113-391). Sedimenta-
tion erosion control plans for any land disturbing
activity of over one contiguous acre (G.S. 113A-54).
..Department of Natural Resources and Community
Development. ,_Secretary of NRCD - Permits to construct
an oil refinery.
..Department of Administration - Easements to
fill where lands are proposed to be raised above the
normal high water mark of navigable waters by filling
(G.S. 146.6(c)).
...Department of Human Resources - Approval to
operate a solid waste disposal site or facility
(G.S. 130-166.16). Approval for construction of any
public water supply facility that furnishes water to
ten or more residences (G.S. 130-160.1).
..Army Corps of Engineers S,Department of Defense) -
Permits required under Sections 9 and 10 of the Rivers
and Harbors Act of 1899; permits to construct in
navigable waters. Permits required under Section 103
of the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries
Act of 1972. Permits required under Section 404 of
the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972; per-
mits to undertake dredging and/or filling activities.
...Coast Guard (U.—S. Department of Transportation -
Permits for bridges, causeways, pipelines over navig-
able waters; required under the General Bridge Act of
1946 and the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899. Deep
water port permits.
...Geological Survey _Bureau of Land Management
(Department of Interior) - Permits required for off-
shore drilling. Approvals of OCS pipeline corridor
rights -of -way.
...Nuclear Regulatory Commission - Licenses for
siting, construction and operation of nuclear power
plants; required under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954
and Title II of the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974
...Federal Energy Rig latory Commission - Permits
for construction, operation and maintenance of inter-
state pipelines facilities required under the Natural
Gas Act of 1938. Orders of interconnection of elec-
tric transmission facilities under Section 2O2(b) of
the Federal Power Act. Permission required for ab-
andonment of natural gas pipeline and associated
facilities under Section 7C(b) of the Natural Gas Act
of 1938. Licenses for non-federal hydro -electric
projects and associated transmission lines under
Sections 4 and 15 of the Federal Power Act.
II-10
...National Historic Preservation Act of 1966.
...The Archeological and Historic Preservation
Act of 1974, Public Law 93-291
...Executive Order 11593, Protection and Enhance-
ment of the Cultural Environment, 16 U.S.C. 470
(Supp. 1, 1971).
...National Environmental Policy Act, Public Law
91-190, 42 U.S.C. 4321 Et. Seq. (1970).
...Community Development Act of 1974, Public Law
93-383: Environmental Review Procedure for
the Community Development Block Grant Program
(40 CFR Part 58).
...Procedures for the Protection of Historic and
Cultural Properties (36 CFR Part 800).
...Comprehensive Planning assistance Program (701)
as Amended by Public Law 93-393.
...The Department of Transportation Act of 1966,
Public Law 89-670.
...Identification and Administration of Cultural
Resources: Procedures of Individual Federal
Agencies.
State
...G.S. 121-12(a) Protection of Properties in the
National Register.
...State Environmental Policy Act, Article 1 of
Chapter 113A of the General Statutes.
...Executive Order XVI.
..Indian Antiquities, G.S. 70.1-4.
...Salvage of Abandoned Shipwrecks and Other
Underwater Archeological Sites: G.S. 121-22,
23; 143B-62(1) g, (3).
...Archeological Salvage in Highway Construction,
G.S. 136-42.1.
...Provisions for Cultural Resources in Dredging
and Filling Operations, G.S. 113-229.

Chapter III
INTRODUCTION
The analysis of physical constraints to urban de-
velopment which was made in the 1975 CAMA Plan was
very detailed. It discussed hazard areas, fragile
areas and other areas where constraints to develop-
ment may cause a change in growth in Jacksonville.
Generally, the analysis indicated that most land
in the planning area contains soils which have severe
limitations for almost all types of urban development.
However, it also stated that while these limitations
do exist, it is possible to develop these lands as
long as the limitations are considered during the de-
sign and constriction of buildings, roads and public
utilities. It also discussed the fact that the only
"fragile or hazard areas" in the planning area are in
the flood plains of the New River and its tributaries.
Because of the soils limitations, hazard areas and
fragile areas have not changed since 1975, because
soils limitations play such an important role in de-
velopment. The discussion of them from the 1975 CAMA
report is included as Appendix C of this report. It
was considered necessary to show the expanded planning
area, showing the flood plains. Northeast Creek is a
major tributary of the New River, but it was not in-
cluded in the 1976 planning area. It is for this
reason it is shown here on Exhibits 2-9.
Within the expanded planning area, soils are gen-
erally the same as those discussed in the 1975 Plan.
Mitigation of severe limitations for urban development
must be considered before development can take place.
WATER AND SEWER SYSTEMS
Water Supply
The 1975 CAMA Plan drew all its data from the re-
port on Water System Improvements, Jacksonville, North
Carolina, dated April 1972 by GRW, hereinafter refer-
red to as the 1972 Water Report. A major part of this
report has been implemented, especially in the area
of supply and storage facilities. However, some of
the recommended infra city strengthening mains were
not installed.
The system as it existed prior to 1972 and the
changes made as a result of the 1972 Water Report are
shown on Exhibit 5. These changes also include ad-
ditions made to the System by annexation or general
improvements. Mains smaller than 8" are not shown.
The 1972 Water Report and the resulting water sys-
tem improvements were based on a population of 21,900
persons with an annual average and maximum day water
demand of 2.8 and 3.4 mg respectively. The storage
capacity requirements to fight a 10 hour fire for a
population of 21,900 persons were estimated to be
4.55 mg including an allowance for normal use on the
maximum day.
Recent Water Usage
Water demands have increased substantially over
those existing prior to the 1972 Water Report. Table
6 shows the relationship of the annual high, low and
average use days for 1954, 1971 and 1975 through 1979.
The major increase occurred due to the adding of
County users in the Brynn Marr-Western Boulevard area
in February, 1976. These areas of the County had
previously been served by local wells owned by the
subdivision developer. Until May, 1980 these areas
were served through a master metering system, but
since May, 1980 when the annexation process was com-
pleted, this part of the system has been operated
directly by the City's Public Utilities Department.
Table 6: Water Usage
Year
Water Usage
Avg. Day
(MG)
Max. Dav
Min. Da
(1) 1954
1.2
1.4
--
(1) 1971
2.0
2.3
--
(2) 1975
1.87
2.55
1.64
(2,3) 1976
2.41
3.33
1.64
(2) 1977
2.49
3.62
1.84
(2) 1978
2.51
3.62
1.87
(3) 1979
2.45
3.73
1.89
(1) From 1975 CAMA Plan
(2) From Deptment of Public Utilities Record
(3) Brynn-Marr College Park Area added to City
System in February 1976
Sources of Supply
Jacksonville is presently served by three well
fields; two active and one standby.
The standby system known as Well Field No. 1 is
located along the railroad in the old downtown por-
tion of the City. The water is taken from the Castle
Rayne Formation and produces a water that, while pot-
able, is undesirable due to high hardness and high
hydrogen sulfide concentrations. Only two of these
wells are ready for service. They result in a capa-
city of 0.34 MGD.
One major source of water for Jacksonville is Well
Field No. 2 (commonly known as 258 Well Field) which
is located approximately eight miles northwest of
the City along State Road 1320 near its intersection
with U.S. 258. There are six wells in this field
drawing water from the Pee des formation. The wells
have a total capacity of 2.0 MGD.
The second major source of water is Well Field
No. 3 (commonly known as the Gum Branch Well Field)
which is located approximately 7 miles north of the
present City limits on Gum Branch Road near its inter-
section with State Road 1316. This well field draws
up to 3.67 MGD (3 wells) from the Pee dee formation
and 0.43 MGD (2 wells) from the Castle Rayne forma-
tion. Even though the quality is somewhat less in
the Castle Hayne the mixture seems to neutralize the
bad effects.
The total capacity obtainable from the above
sources is 6.44 MGD.

1 0
m A ju
0
c
kND
CLASSIFICATION
MAP
REYNOLDS
;MA M
r,4$M
1726
(502)
—
"Q­
14M
WATKINS CONSULTING
, C� tin 4..db-
Ky. .91 �, K j:�
(IN) .9",
�
ENGIN
401 Wnt Fl,st Sim
C. 2703
[9191 758 7#7
HIBIT NO. b

Table 7 lists the capacity of each well in their
respective fields.
Table 7: Well Field Capacities*
Field No.
Well No.
Well Ca srm
Field Ca . m d)
1
OC-1
120
OC-2
120
0.34
2
258-1
300
258-2'
300
258-3
200
258-3A
100
258-4
200
258-5
300 .
2.00
3
GB-2
150
GB-3
150 .43
GB-1
1200
GB-4
750
GB-5
600 3.67
4.10
TOTAL ALL WELLS 6.44
*Data from Study by N.C. Division of Health Services,
N.C. Dept. of Human Resources (underway at present).
Water Treatment
The quality of water in Well Fields 2 and 3 is
such that the only treatment required is chlorination
for disinfection purposes.
Chlorination is provided along the supply main
from Well Field No. 2 (258 Field) as well as at the
former treatment plant on Railroad Avenue. Well Field
No. 3 (Gum Branch) is chlorinated at a pumping sta-
tion in the well field area. Fluoridation is not
required as it occurs naturally in the water.
Water Storage Facilities
Prior to 1972 the City had three elevated and one
ground storage tank with total capacities of 900,000
gallons elevated and 500,000 in ground storage at the
Railroad Avenue Treatment Plant -Pumping Station.
Following the 1972 Water Report an additional
1,000,000 gallons of elevated storage was added —
half in the Northwoods Area near the junior high
school and the other half on Ellis Boulevard approx-
imately one-half mile north of Lejeune Boulevard.
An additional 500,000 gallon ground storage tank was
also added at the Gum Branch Pumping Station Site at
Well Field No. 3.
The May, 1980 annexation also brought into the
system the 400,000 gallon elevated tank in the Brynn
Marr area.
The location and capacities of the water storage
facilities are listed in Table 8 shown below and are
shown on Exhibit 5, Water System Map.
Water Distribution System
There are two basic water supply systems, both
controlled by storage tank level. The first system
consists of the 258 well field and its 16" trans-
mission supply main to the ground storage tank at the
Water Treatment Plant. From the treatment plant
storage tank, water is pumped into the City distri-
bution system --the need determined by the water level
of the U.S. 17 (Marine Boulevard) storage tank.
III-3
Table 8: Water Storage Facilities
No.
Type
Location
Capacity (MG)
1
EL
Water Treat. Plant
0.20
2
EL
Marine Blvd. @ Cox Ave.
0.20
3
EL
Gum Branch Rd. @ Iienderson
0.50
4
EL
Northwoods
0.50
5
EL
Ellis Blvd. near Bell Fork
0.50
6
EL
Brynn-Mary on 24 Road
0.40
TOTAL ELEVATED
2.30
7
GS
Water Treatment Plant
0.50
8
GS
Gum Branch Pump Station
0.50
TOTAL GROUND STORAGE
1.00
TOTAL STORAGE
3.30
EL Elevated GS - Ground Storage
Tha other system consists of the Gum Branch high -ser-
vice pumping station, which draws water from a ground
storage tank and pumps it directly into the City grid
through a 16" transmission/supply main. This system
is regulated by the U.S. 17 tank water level.
High service pumping at the water treatment plant
consists of 3 pumps rated at 300, 500 and 1000 gpm
with a stand-by pump rated at 1400 gpm. Those at Gum
Branch consist of two 1850 gpm vertical turbine type
centrifugal pumps with space for a third pump.
The system pressures are maintained generally in
the 40 to 50 psi range. The system is monitored and
controlled from the control center located at the
water treatment plant on Railroad Avenue. It can be
done either automatically or remote/manual from this
location or may be manually controlled from the pump-
ing stations themselves. In addition to the U.S. 17
tank the level of all other tanks is monitored in the
control center.
The system consists of all sizes of pipe from
1-1/2 inch to 12-inch with 6-inch generally the most
common. Generally a 6-inch is the minimum used for
new work where fire hydrants are used. A 4-inch line
may be used on cul-de-sacs.
Fire Flows
The 1972 Water Report determined the required sys-
tem capacities based upon the National Board of Fire
Underwriters (NBFU) formula and guidelines. In short,
the calculations projected a need for a population
of 21,900 of 4.55 mg, based upon a 10 hour fire at a
rate of 4500 gpm in excess of normal maximum daily
usage.
There are approximately 800 fire hydrants, includ-
ing the area annexed in 1980. The City's policy is
for the hydrants to be tested by the Fire Department
twice yearly and for the Utilities Department to fix
all hydrants not in working order.
The North Carolina Insurance Services Office last
surveyed the City in 1972 and normally does so every
5 years. NC -ISO is tentatively scheduled to survey
the City again in the latter part of 1980, at which
time they will take into account the newly annexed
areas.
In 1973 after publication of the 1972 Water Report
the ISO (Insurance Service Offices, successor to the
NBFU) revised its approach to determining water
capacity requirements. The new approach is based on

the fact that business districts are located in more
than one area and that -the requirements in these other
areas may be the same or greater than the old central
business district approach. The old approach was based
on population as the variable while the new approach
is based mainly on square footage of buildings and
types of construction.
It is beyond the scope of this plan to do the de-
tailed analysis required to investigate fire flow re-
quirements throughout Jacksonville. However, consider-
ing the system as a whole, a cursory review was.made.
It was based upon square footages in a few of the new
larger buildings where it appears that required fire
flows may be as high as 5500 gpm. For a fire with a
5500 gpm demand for a period of 5 hours (as required
by ISO) on a maximum day of 3.73 mg, the fire demand
would be 3.11 mg. The system production and storage
during this 5 hour period is 4.08 mg'whlch indicates
that, under present circumstances, the system is
adequate from a supply standpoint for a 5 hour fire
at a rate of 5500 gpm.
Per Capita Water Use (Non -Fire)
Per capita water use in Jacksonville has declined
rather substantially since 1954. The 1954 record
shows the per capita water use -to be 151 gallons per
day. Water use declined to 121 gallons per day in
1972, and to 111 gallons per day by 1978. The pro-
bable reasons for these water use reductions are
better City control of unaccounted-for water.. the
public interest in conservation of resources, and
increased costs.
Projected Per Capita Water Use (Non -Fire)
It is not likely that the gallons per capita per
day (gpcd) water usage factor will experience sub-
stantial reduction during the next 10 years. How-
ever, based upon current trends, a slight reduction
will occur. A usage factor of 105 gpcd in 1985 would
generate a need for 2.47 million gallons per day (mgd),
while a 1990 demand of 100 gpcd would require 2.50
mgd.
It should be emphasized that if Jacksonville adds
any industry, especially wet industry, the per capita
use figures will increase.
Table 9: Per Capita Water Use (Non -Fire)
Year
Avg. MGD
Poo.
Avg. Use(gpcd)
Ref.
1954
1.20
7,960
151
1
1972
2.00
16,500
121
1
1980
2.45
22,000
ill
2,3
1985
2.47
23,500
105
2
1990
2.50
25,000
100
2
1. Data from 1972 Water Report
2. Pop. Table for 1980 this Report
3. Pop. Table for 1985, 90 this Report - 1979 Flow
from Table - this report for 1980.
Future Requirements (Fire Flow)
The estimated average flows for 1985 and 1990 are
2.47 and 2.50 MGD, respectively (See Table 9). As-
suming the maximum day to be 1.5 times the average
day and the peak hour to be 2.5 times the maximum day,
the 1985 maximum day and peak hour demands are 3.71
and 9.26 MGD, respectively, and those for 1990 are
3.75 and 9.38 MGD, respectively.
Under the previously noted fire flow conditions of
5500 gpm for 5 hours, the system supply requirements
would be approximately 2.76 MGD for 1985 and 2.93 MGD
for 1990. This would indicate the system has the
storage to meet both of these needs. This does not
however indicate that the distribution system itself
is or is not adequate to meet these demands through-
out the system. A detailed study of this problem
should be conducted to make this determination.
III-4
Onslow County Water System
Onslow County is presently constructing a water
system to serve most urban and many rural areas of
the County that are not presently being served by the
municipalities in the County., The capital cost of the
system is being financed through grants and loans from
the Farmers Home Administration, the State of North
Carolina and a County wide Bond Issue authorized by
referendum in 1979.
The County system within the CAMA planning area
boundary is shown on Exhibit 5. This shows its
relationship to the Jacksonville System.
At this time there have been no arrangements to
provide for formal connections of the two systems for
emergency purposes. Neither have there been formal
arrangements for determining what procedures will be
best for both political bodies should Jacksonville
annex an area through which the main service lines
serving north and east of the City pass. There is a
10 year agreement executed in 1977 covering areas
served with wholesale water purchased from the City
by the County. It does not appear that this agree-
ment applies to the above issue.
WASTEWATER COLLECTION AND TREATMENT SYSTEM
EPA "201" Facilities Plan
In November, 1972 Public Law PL-92-500, The Federal
Water Pollution Control Act was enacted. This law
was the most comprehensive clean water legislation
enacted during a 20 year period that had seen many
initiatives in this area. More specifically, the
Act had three major elements that were not the major
thrust of previous legislation. They were as follows:
...Comprehensive Planning
...75 Percent Facilities Planning & Const. Grants
...Strong Enforcement Procedures through the
NPDES permit system.
The Jacksonville Area Facilities Plan developed as
a result of this act was presented to City and County
officials on December 23, 1976. The area includes
that part of Onslow County extending on the east from
the.Northeast Creek Drainage Basin (Piney Green) to
the center of Southeast Creek on the west, a distance
of about 14 miles, and inland a distance of about 6
to 7 miles.
In July of 1977 the City was given a 75 percent
Federal and 12.5 percent State grant to provide the
facilities called for in the selected plan for the
City of Jacksonville and that part of the County in
the Planning Area that is east of the City.
This program is virtually completed and much of it
is in service. All facilities will be completed and

in full operation in late 1980.
Jacksonville System - Ceneral
The Jacksonville wastewater treatment system con-
sists of lateral, collector and interceptor gravity
sewers, force mains and pumping stations, two sewage
lagoon treatment plants and one packed tower biologi-
cal filter secondary treatment plant with aerobic
sludge digestion. It is planned to eliminate one
sewage lagoon and to place the second one on standby
in the near future.
The biological filter plant has been operating for
several months and is meeting all its discharge re-
quirements.
The Jacksonville system is shown on Exhibit No. 6.
Collection System
Jacksonville is relatively flat with elevations
ranging from zero to 60 feet. As a result of the
flatness it is necessary to construct sewers at mini-
mum grades.
Jacksonville also spans across several partially
tidal tributaries to the New River.
For these two reasons, as well as the fact that
Jacksonville has grown through a series of annex-
ations of subdivisions with their own waste handling
systems, the current system consists of a number of
separate force mains and pumping stations.
The recent 201 program scught to eliminate a num-
ber of the smaller pump stations. However, there
still remain the 5 new large stations and over 15
smaller stations. The larger stations are all dry pit
type with variable speed centrifugal pumps and are
provided with standby unit as well as automatic switch -
over to auxiliary power by diesel generators. All
small stations are wet -pit installations and are pro-
vided with standby pumping units --either submersible
or suspended type. The more important units also have
an auxiliary power supply by diesel generators.
All pumping stations operate automatically based on
sewage level with maintenance visitations made as de-
termined by management. The major stations functions
are monitored from the biological treatment plant at
Wilson Bay.
Treatment Facilities - City Owned
It was noted earlier that The City of Jacksonville
presently has three treatment plants. They are as
follows:
...Sewage Lagoon on Northeast Creek in Brynn Marr
area.
...Sewage Lagoon on New River North of U.S. High-
way 17.
...Biological Filter Secondary Plant at Wilson Bay.
The Brynn Marr Lagoon was, until recently, opera-
ted by Onslow County but is owned by the developer of
the Brynn Marr area. Negotiations are presently
underway to utilize this lagoon as a back-up facility.
The sewage lagoon on the New River in the Brook -
view area consists of a 15 acre primary lagoon, a 5
acre secondary lagoon and a chlorine contact lagoon.
It has a capacity of 0.5 MCD. The "201" Plan pro-
III-5
vided for this lagoon to be abandoned as effluent
standards for lagoons were not acceptable at the time
of the "201" report (1976). However, the recent de-
tarminatious of the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) and the North Carolina Department of
Natural Resources and Community Development (NC-
DNRCD) permitted the use of Lagoons. Under these
circumstances Jacksonville plans to maintain the
ability to place the lagoon in service thus giving
an additional one-half MGD capacity to the system.
The main treatment plant at Wilson Bay is designed
to serve a population of 39,000 persons resulting in
a flow of 4.46 MGD average with peak flows up to 12.2
MGD. The facility is designed to meet its NPDES Per-
mit requirements as follows:
...Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BODS): 30 mg/l
...Suspended Solids (TSS) : 30 mg/1
...Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) : 25 mg/l
...Dissolved Oxygen (DO) . 5 mg/1
The new treatment plant was designed for the year
1995. However, recent census data and growth pro-
jections indicate that this plant will be more than
adequate past the design date.
Other Treatment Facilities
The "201" Facilities Plan notes 22 Point Discharge
sources in the Jacksonville 201 area.
Three of the discharge points have been discussed
in detail above.
Thirteen are outside the planning area boundary
covered by this report, although most of these have
been recommended to be brought into the system early
in the 1980's.
The remaining six point sources have all been
recommended to be brought into the system when sewers
are extended to the area south of the New River and
in the Piney -Green area as shown on Exhibit 6 as
future extensions.

Chapter IV
INTRODUCTION
The changes which have occurred since the prepara-
tion of the original CAMA Land Use Plan in 1975 have
been examined in the preceding chapters. In this
chapter, determinations are made relative to the
ability of the City to accommodate future growth.
Estimates of population growth are made which give a
very good indication of the amount of land that will
be needed for housing in which the future population
can live. Along with land for housing, it is neces-
sary to estimate the amount of land that will be
needed for commercial shopping areas and for jobs.
If this growth occurs, the public utilities and ser-
vices will have to be able to serve it. It is the
purpose of this chapter to project the numbers as-
sociated with future growth in all of these areas.
POPULATION GROWTH
The North Carolina Department of Administration
(DOA) estimated Jacksonville's 1980 population to be
28,000. Recent United States Department of Commerce,
census statistics indicate that Jacksonville's popu-
lation is nearer to 22.000. This lower -than -expected
population is due to a high vacancy rate (9.8%), a
decline in the average household size (from 3.2 people
per household in 1970 to 2.75 people per household in
1980), and the lack of diversified employment oppor-
tunities.
The DOA had projected Jacksonville's population
to be 33,390 in 1985 and 35,700 in 1990. However, in
view of the preliminary census statistics, these pro-
jections seem excessively high. Based upon the pre-
liminary census estimates, Jacksonville's population
is projected to increase to 23,500 by 1985 and to
25,000 by 1990. Should any new industry move into
the area, or if the City extends its boundary through
annexation, these projections will need to be revised.
Table 10 indicates the estimated and projected
populations for both Jacksonville and Onslow County.
PLANNING AREA POPULATION
It was stated in Chapter II that the Planning Area
population in 1980 is estimated to be approximately
24,790. Using a method similar to that used to pro-
ject Jacksonville's population, Table 11 below shows
the estimates of population growth that can be antic-
ipated through the year 1990.
Table 11: Planning Area Population Estimates to 1990
1980
1985
1990
24,790 (est.)
25,780
27,070
FUTURE ECONOMY
While no projections of future employment are
made here, it seems reasonable to make certain as-
sumptions based on information learned in Chapter II
and from the pupulation projections discussed above.
First, manufacturing employment has increased since
1970 to a total of 3,300 jobs. As discussed in
earlier sections of this report, increases in manu-
facturing job opportunities will attract new labor
into the area. Discussions between the Citizens'
Advisory Committee and the executive director of the
Onslow County Economic Development Commission revealed
that speculative buildings have been built and new
ones are being planned to attract new industry. Pub-
lic facilities, especially water, sewer and highways
in and around Jacksonville are being improved to the
point that new industries can be accommodated (at
least those which do not require large amounts of
water or which discharge large amounts of non -pre-
treated toxic wastes).
Secondly, the population projections include an
assumption that economic opportunities in the Plan-
ning Area will continue to increase, at least as much
as they have over the past 10 years. The fact that.
no increase in military -related personnel (employ-
ment) is anticipated by Camp Lejeune would indicate
that future employment growth will be in other employ-
ment sectors, such as retail -wholesale trade, ser-
vices, and industrial employment.
FUTURE LAND NEEDS
The most appropriate method for estimating Jack-
sonville's future land needs would be by undertaking
detailed economic and marketing studies for the City's
residential, commercial, and industrial land, as well
as its projected population growth. Unfortunately,
this approach is not feasible at present due to lack
Table 10: Population Projections, Onslow County and City of Jacksonville
Est. Change
EST.
1980-85
-9
1980
1985
1990
No.
%
No.
%
Onslow County
109,000
113,000
119,000
4,000
4
6,000
5
City of Jacksonville
22,000
23,500
25,000
1,500
7
1,500
6
Co. Remainder
87,000
89,500
94,000
2,506
3
4,500
5
% Jacksonville to Co.
20%
21%
21%
—
1%
—
0%
IV-1

necessary funds and time for such work.
A second method is simply to assume that develop-
ment is the next five to ten year period will reflect
the City's existing land use to population ratios.
And, a third method is to amend the existing ratios
where d7WlfcT.r objectives project a variation
(for instance, 1£ the City sets an objective of en-
couraging a greater industrial growth, or projects
the acquisition of considerably more park land). This
third approach will be used for Jacksonville.
A Cautionary Word About the Study Area
The reader also must remember that the area under
study in this report does not include Camp Lejeuna and
some other urban activity areas adjacent to the study
area. As a result, some of the activities that are
really a part of the "Greater Jacksonville Community"
or "Jacksonville urban area" are not reflected in the
land use inventory, projections, and other important
statistics. Thus, this study is restricted to con-
sidering only the Jacksonville portion of a much
larger and viable economic, social, and physical com-
plex with daily interactions.and interelationships.
For instance, the many Camp Lejeune land uses of a
commercial, industrial, residential, or institutional
nature (Commissary, PX, hospital, warehousing, bar-
racks, housing, etc.) cannot be considered in the
Jacksonville land use figures. If the Camp's indus-
trial areas were added to the Jacksonville figures,
a different industrial land use/population ratio would
result. Also, the relatively high Jacksonville ratio
of commercial land would be reduced once the service
area included recognition of service to Camp Lejeune
personnel.
Comparison to Other Cities
Another helpful exercise in considering Jackson-
ville's present land use and future projections is to
make comparisons with how other cities use their land.
Such comparisons must not be reviewed with an attitude
of "our city should m7c7other cities," but, rather,
used primarily to understand how different cities
show variances and similarities, and to raise ques-
tions that, once answered, provide a better under-
standing of one's own City.
A search was made to find comparison cities which.
were: (1) near a military installation such as Camp
Lejeune; and (2) in a coastal area where natural re-
sources would be similar. Communities were contacted
by telephone and asked if they had inventories of
land use. The cities contacted were: Goldsboro,
Fayetteville, Elizabeth City and Havelock in North
Carolina; Myrtle Beach and Sumter, South Carolina,
and Hinesville, Georgia. Of these, only Elizabeth
City, Havelock and Hinesville, Georgia had detailed
land use,data to make a comparison with Jacksonville.
These three communities had data showing the per-
cent of total developed land occupied by each land use
category. Jacksonville's land use allocations were com-
pared to an average of the percentages of each land use
category of the three communities,as shown by Table 12.
The table shows that Jacksonville uses about the
same percentage of its land for residential and in-
dustrial purposes, a higher percentage for commercial
purposes, and a lower percentage for transportation
and public -institutional.
It must be noted that these comparisons are not
intended to show quantitative deficiencies. Rather,
they -show in a very geeneral way how Jacksonville's
allocation of the various land uses compare with other
communities. However, it has been noted throughout
this report that Jacksonville contains a relatively
small amount of industrial and public recreational
land. Also, the large amounts of commercial land
uses are explained, at least in part, by the ser-
vicing of Camp Lejeune personnel.
Future Land Use Estimates
The future land use needs for Jacksonville are
estimated at 951 acres, in order to accommodate
future population (an estimated increase of 2,280
persons), economic development, and City policy.
The estimates, summarized in Table 13, are based
on either projecting 1980 land use to population
ratios, or amending those ratios to reflect City
policy determinations. For instance, the commercial
and residential ratios are not changed; while the
industrial and public land use categories are signif-
icantly increased to reflect the City's objective of
encouraging industrial development and acquiring ad-
ditional public land.
.The impact that this growth will have on public
facilities is discussed in the following sections.
COMMUNITY FACILITY NEEDS
Water Supply and Distribution System
The 1972 Water Study should be updated. A number
of events have occurred that have impacted on the
original study and the system developed therefrom.
These include the following:
1—The estimated population (21,300) for which
the system was designed has already been reached.
2... The effect of the County water system should
be assessed --both from an emergency service stand-
point as well as the adequacy of design for service
to future annexed areas. The effect of their well
field on the Jacksonville fields should also be as-
sessed.
3... The needs of the system with regards to the
1974 ISO recommendations should be reassessed.
Several large commercial buildings have located away
Table 12: Land Use Allocations by Type of Urban Use, 1980-1990
Urban Land Use
3 City Avg. %
Jacksonville % Allocation
% Difference (+)
Residential
49.5
50.4
+ 0.9
Commercial
6.9
14.7
+ 7.8
Industrial
1.4
1.3
- 0.1
Transp., Comm. Util.
30.7
21.6
- 9.1
Public Inst.
34.6
12.1
-22.5
IV-2

Table 13: Projected Jacksonville Land Use Allocations, 1990
Urban Land Uoo
1980 Ration
Acres 1000
1980 Amended
Ratios
1990 Projected
Land In Acreaa
1980
Acr©o
-Net Acres
Needed
Residential
110
110
2,750
2.419
331
Commercial
32
32
800
706
94
Industrial
3
8
200
61
139
Public/Institutional
26
30
750
579
171
Trans., Commun., Util.
47
50
1.250
1,034
217
TOTALS
5,750
4,799
951
from the Court Street/New Bridge Street commercial
area. The upcoming ISO Review of the City's fire
fighting system will need to address the problem of
commercial despersion.
4... Jacksonville has grown to the point that a fire
reserve water supply should be considered.
5... The original CAMA Land Use Plan, this update,
and the 201 Facilities Plan have been completed since
the 1972 Water Report. The changing patterns of
development that have been noted in these three plans
should be assessed as they relate to the water system.
6... The facilities at the water treatment plant
were modified in 1952-53 to convert the plant to a
chlorination and pumping station. Although the facil-
ity is well maintained, its age suggests that the
equipment should be evaluated in the light of modern
technology and current energy costs.
7...A need has evolved to develop design standards
and regulations for future growth areas. This is espe-
cially important since the principal water supply area
is on the opposite side of the system from one of the
more active growth areas (Brynn Marr).
Sewage Collection and Treatment
System Recommendations
The "201" Facilities Plan is quite specific in this
area; therefore, the first recommendation is to follow
the Facilities Plan. This is important since the
plan was a very detailed study and had much public
participation. This, of course, does not mean it
should not be revised when such revision is warranted.
A second reason to follow the Facilities Plan is that
any state and federal funding under.the Water Pol-
lution Control Act can only be made on projects in
conformity with this Plan.
Exhibit 6 shows planned future sewerage extensions
to the Piney Green Area, to the area south of the New
River, and to the area outside the City north of Bell
Fork Road along U.S. 17 (Marina Boulevard). The City
is in the process at this time of implementing the
first phase of providing service into this latter area.
It was noted above that there were 20 pumping sta-
tions and that all are mechanical and therefore sub-
ject to failure. It is recommended that the City
Engineering, Planning, and Utilities Department staffs
be encouraged and supported in their efforts of
reviewing plans and specifications for developments
both within the City as well as in the extraterritorial
area to assure that as few pumping stations as pos-
sible are added to the system and, when added, that
the materials and equipment used are of high quality
and compatible with the City's other facilities.
IV-3
As an example, each added pumping station should
be required to have a compatible monitoring system
that will sense and transmit to the treatment plant
information on pump operation and high sewage levels.
Such equipment would provide for monitoring the
added stations the same as existing stations within
the system.
Roads, Streets, Highways
The results of the 1969-1970 Thoroughfare Plan
were included in the 1975 CAMA Land Use Plan. The
1969-1970 Thoroughfare Plan, which was amended in
1978, is presently being updated. However, projects
shown in the amended Thoroughfare Plan, which have -
been completed are discussed below:
. ...Gum Granch Road - A portion of new road was
constructed from one end of Onsville Drive to the
opposite end. This realignment took all major through
traffic from what is now called Onsville Drive and
placed it on the new straight section of Gum Branch.
This road was also widened and improved from U.S. 17
to the city limits near Lakewood Drive.
...Doris Avenue - Doris Avenue has been extended
from Henderson Drive to Gum Branch Road.
..Onslow Drive - Onslow Drive was widened from
U.S. 17 to its intersection with New River Drive.
Gum Branch Road is one of the main arteries
within the Planning Area. The completion of the new
section and widening increased its capacity. Doris
and Onslow Drive are considered minor arteries. The
widening and other improvements have likewise'increased
their capacities as intra-city collector streets.
Other major improvements proposed in the 1969-70
Thoroughfare Plan have not as yet been implemented,
although the extension of Western Boulevard is present-
ly nearing construction. However, the alignment has
been changed since 1976. (See present proposed align-
ment on any of the Exhibits herein). The loop system
or bypass system being proposed in 1976 is still under
consideration by NCDOT. Like the Western Boulevard
extension, the alignments of the various segments of
that system are still being reviewed.
One project to be completed in the near future
is the widening of the existing Western Boulevard --to
create seven lanes with one to be a turning lane.
Several hearings have been held to discuss the project.
Projects proposed in the NCDOT's Transportation
Improvement Pr gram,_1980-1986 for the Jacksonville
area are shown below as Exhibits 7 and 8.

Exhibit 7: Project R-217
Exhibit 8: Project R-535
IV-4

Chapter V
,7p�
x.]r lt.# F,11
INTRODUCTION
Several problem areas related to developments with-
in the Jacksonville Planning Area have been discussed
in previous chapters. The need for additional land
to accommodate urban growth through the year 1990 has
also been discussed, as have the constraints to that
development.
It is the purpose of this chapter to discuss the
problem areas, or issues, which have been identified
throughout the planning process thus far, and to ex-
amine the possible alternatives for the solution of
those continuing and potential future problems. There
are some issues discussed below which must comply
with the Coastal Area Management Act.
Those issues that were not applicable to the Jackson-
ville Planning Area, in the opinion of the Citizens'
Advisory Committee, are so noted. Each issue is dis-
cussed and the decisions of the Committee are shown.
RESOURCE PROTECTION AND MANAGEMENT
COMMERCIAL FORESTS
Two major natural resources were identified as part
of the planning process. They were the New River and
the co— ercial_forest areas surrounding the northern
city limits of Jacksonville. After much discussion
it was decided that because the identified commercial
forest lands had been recently replanted after a major
timber harvest, it was considered unnecessary to rec-
ommend a public policy for the protection of this land
against urban development. The extension of Western
Boulevard through a portion of this land, and the fact
that it is privately owned, also provided the Com-
mittee with sufficient justification not to declare
this land in need of public protection.
New River
The Committee did feel that a public policy is
needed for protection of the New River. The reasons
for this decision are because the New River is present-
ly polluted to the extent that commercial shellfish-
ing has been banned in areas outside the planning area
and public bathing has been banned. The Committee
also felt that the New River and its tributaries can
be used for potential recreational purposes. It can-
not be used now due to its polluted state. The po-
tential recreational uses and potential economic uses
for shellfishing and eel fishing make it necessary to
develop a public statement of policy recommending
cleaning up the New River so that it may be used for
these purposes in the future.
Need
Discussions with Corps of Engineers personnel in
Wilmington and state personnel in the Division of
V-1
Environmental Management indicated that all com-
munities are in compliance with all effluent standards
and that the existing pollution is coming from "non -
point sources." These can include agricultural run-
off and pollutants introduced into the river prior to
establishment of state and federal environmental
standards.
Alternatives
No Action
The City can choose to "do nothing." To do so
would be the same as endorsing continued pollution of
the river. It would also indicate no recognition of
the river's potential for recreational and economic
uses.
Maximum Action
As a second alternative the City can demand im-
mediate clean up of the New River within its juris-
diction. This section could include filing suits
against any farmer or business outside the City's
jurisdiction who is found to be using practices which
promote surface water runoff of agricultural chemicals.
Intermediate Action
The City could adopt a policy which will let all
appropriate agencies know that the City wants the New
River to be free of pollution so that it can be used
by the citizens of Jacksonville for recreational pur-
poses (boating, fishing, swimming) and for commercial
fishing purposes (both shellfish and others).
Recommendation
The Citizens' Advisory Committee recommends that
the intermediate action be selected. It further
recommends that the City, through a policy statement
in this plan, advise all appropriate local govern-
ments in Onslow County and state and federal agencies
that the City has major concerns about the potential
economics and recreational potential of the New River
which are not being realized due to its present pol-
luted state.
The Committee also realizes that channel mainten-
ance in the New River within the Planning Area and
the New River Inlet may become necessary to accommo-
date pleasure boats and commercial fishing boats.
However, the City should discourage any channelization
or other dredge and/or fill operations which do not
meet the environmental guidelines of both the Corps
of Engineers and the Coastal Resources Commission.
While the New River Inlet is not within the planning
jurisdiction of Jacksonville, the importance of main-
taining that access to the Atlantic Ocean for the
pleasure and commercial fishing fleets is recognized
and should be incorporated into this policy statement.
HISTORICAL RESOURCES
Need
It is understood that archeological and historical
sites might exist within the Jacksonville Planning
Area. However, there have been no definitive studies
or inventories which locate each site or describe its

significances. An archeological and historical sur-
vey should be made so that future developments will
not destroy whatever historical resources exist with-
in the Jacksonville Planning Area.
Alternatives
No -Action
The City could choose not to request historical
resource studies. This action would indicate that
the City is unaware of the benefits associated with
historic preservation.
Maximum Action
The City could request detailed investigations of
all historical resources within the Planning Area.
Upon completing these studies, the City could adopt
a policy prohibiting any developments which would
adversely affect identified historical and/or archae-
ological sites.
Intermediate Action
The City could request a survey of all historical
resources of the Planning Area. Upon completion, the
City could adopt a policy discouraging developments.
which would cause the loss of these resources identi-
fied as "significant".
Recommendation
It is recommended that the Intermediate Alternative
be selected. It is further recommended that the City
contact the North Carolina Division of Archives and
History to determine, (a) what funding may be avail-
able, and (b) what agency should conduct detailed
inventories of all historic sites, buildings of archi-
tectural significance, and archeological sites in the
Planning Area. Upon completion of these studies, the
City should adopt appropriate policies to protect
significant historical and archeological resources
from loss by future urban development.
INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT
The economy of Jacksonville since the establishment
of Camp Lejeune in the early 1940's has grown. The
retail -wholesale trade and services sectors have
experienced the greatest increases, both in employ-
ment and income. The potential for increased com-
mercial fishing was discussed in the preceding sec-
tion. This section deals with the need for more in-
dustrial employment and land.
Need
The Citizens' Advisory Committee recognizes the
City of Jacksonville has only 67 acres of land which
are developed for industrial purposes. The Committee
also recognizes.that other cities of comparable size
to Jacksonville have an average of 11 acres per
1,000 population. The 1980 population of Jackson-
ville has been estimated to be 22,000. Therefore,
a minimum of 242 acres of land should now be avail-
able for industrial purposes.
Alternatives
No Action
The City could take no action to encourage new
V-2
industrial development. Since completion for indus-
try is very active among cities and regions, this
would probably diminish the community's chances for
new industry as a result of interest only by less
desirable industries.
Maximum Action
The City could adopt a policy of purchasing large
potential industrial sites, providing to them suf-
ficient utilities, roads and site preparation and
could soon construct large speculative buildings ready
for occupancy. For the City to take such actions on
its own would require vast long-term investments with -
the possibility of no immediate returns on those in-
vestments.
Intermediate Action
In cooperation with Onslow County and other com-
munities in the County, the City could share in the
purchase of tracts of land for potential industrial
development. It could also adopt definitive policies
as to what public services would be provided to new
industries should they locate in the City.
Recommendations
The Citizens' Advisory Committee recommends the
intermediate alternative be selected, because there
is a need for industrial employment for residents of
the Jacksonville-Onslow County area. The Committee
strongly recommends that the City, in cooperation
with the Onslow County Economic Development Commis-
sion and the local Chamber of Commerce, begin a search
for a vacant site of at least 100 acres in size with
rail and major highway access and with feasible con-
nections to local utility systems. It is further
recommended that, upon identification of such a site,
an option be acquired and plans be prepared for its
development as a site for new industries.
As part of the process of updating the Jacksonville
CAMA Land Use Plan, a site was designated as "transi-
tion -industrial", located on the northeast side of
the soon -to -be developed Western Boulevard extension.
It is recommended that this land be investigated to
determine its potential for industrial use. Should
this site prove unsuitable, it is recommended that
another site be identified. It should be located to
ensure reasonable proximity to existing utility sys-
tems and to ensure enforcement of existing land use
controls to protect the site for industrial purposes.
LAND USE DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS
The "special land use analysis" in Chapter II show-
ed that land use problems which existed in 1975 con-
tinue to exist. These included: "strip -commercial"
development along major roads and highways; and in-
compatible land use developments in the old downtown
area and along the northern end of Bell Fork Road.
The Committee also felt that there was a need for
additional low density residential developments, where
Larger lot sizes (1/2 acre) would provide lower den-
sities. Also identified in both the 1975 Plan and
the updated Existing Land Use Analysis was the lack
of public recreation lands. All of these issues are
discussed below.
Due to a lack of detailed economic base data, it
is impossible to determine the specific types of in-
dustries which would be best matched with the skills

of the existing labor force. However, the committee
does recommend that no industries be solicited, nor
allowed to locate within the planning area which
would discharge pollutants in either the air, ground,
water or sewerage system which could not be efficient-
ly treated by that system.
Strip -Commercial Development
The pattern of co=ercial enterprises along U.S. 17
and N.C. 24 has developed over a period of many years.
The major impact of this development to the community
includes traffic congestion along major highways, re-
sulting in unsafe movement of vehicles, and miscel-
laneous designs of business and related signs, result-
ing in a "carnival" appearance. It should be noted
that the City is now in the process of developing a
sign ordinance which should, when implemented, provide
control over types, size and location of billboards
along major roads.
Need
The Citizens' Advisory Committee agrees that un-
controlled strip -commercial development poses a po-
tential hazard to the driving public. The Committee
considered various alternatives, which are given be-
low, and felt that, because a few areas have not yet
developed in this fashion, they should be singled out
for discussion.
Alternatives
No Action
Should strip -commercial development be allowed to
continue, the unsafe driving condition caused by un-
controlled access to major highways and arteries will
continue. Also, should no action be taken, undevel-
oped areas along Gum Bracnh Road and along the pro-
posed extension of Western Boulevard will develop in
similar fashion, compounding the problems which al-
ready exist. Because of the negative implications of
this, the Committee felt this was not an acceptable
alternative.
Maximum Action
In order to take maximum action toward solving this
problem, the City would have to require access roads
along already developed highways as well as along new
roads such as the Western Boulevard extension. To re-
quire new access roads, and to limit access to those
highways already strip -developed, would be economically
unfeasible for the City and would cause undue financial
hardship to business owners should an assessment be
required. Coordination with the North Carolina De-
partment of Transportation would also be necessary for
this alternative because, for it to be implementable,
the state would have to bear a major portion of the
cost.
Intermediate Action
A more realistic approach than the two given above
would be to acknowledge the existing problem and to
keep it from happening in the future.
Recommendations
It is recommended that development on vacant land
along Gum Branch Road and the proposed Western Boule-
vard extension be controlled to prevent strip -com-
mercial development from taking place. Where any
V-3
development takes place in these two areas, and along
any other major or minor streets in the City, a con-
trol of access to those streets should be developed.
through the City's zoning ordinance. Further, where
large commercial developments occur, frontage roads
should be required to meet state standards for paving
and maintenance (60' right-of-ways and 24' pavement
widths). It is also recommended that such controls
which exist in the present zoning ordinance and sub-
division regulations be strictly enforced.
COURVLEW BRIDGE STREETS
COMMERCIAL AREA. REDEVELOPMENT
Need
The analysis of existing land uses in both the
1975 CAM& Land Use Plan and the 1980 update showed
that the mixed land uses in the old central business
district are in many cases incompatible. This prob-
lem is compounded by narrow streets, inadequate park-
ing, run-down buildings, and public safety problems.
In most communities the "downtown" area provides a
focal point of the community's economy, seat of
government, and "town image." In Jacksonville, recent
development of shopping centers in suburban areas have
caused merchants to leave the downtown area for the
more attractive shopping areas. As a result, vacant
buildings have generally been occupied by bars,
lounges and "adult" businesses or have remained vacant.
Alternatives
No Action
The alternative of taking no action to redevelop
the old downtown area would result in a continuation
of the type of development which has taken place over
the past several years. It would also result in a
lack of identification of a focal point, a center
core, on a community -wide basis by the general public.
Potential reinvestment in the downtown area by private
investors would become less probable without the
public investment stimulus needed to fully redevelop
downtown. This would also make preservation of his-
torical buildings in this area less meaningful and
possibly curtail preservation efforts altogether.
Maximum Action
The maximum actions the City could take would be
a full-scale commitment by the City to revitalize and
redevelop the Court Street/New Bridge Street com-
mercial area. This action would include a commitment
of sufficient financial resources to accomplish the
work. Unfortunately, the amount of money which would
be required is beyond the financial capacity of the
City. Downtown redevelopment programs take years to
complete and require generous shares of public and
private investment.
Intermediate Action .
A more reasonable approach to solving the problems
of old downtown Jacksonville would be to encourage
participation of business owners, building and prop-
erty owners, Onslow County, and the State, in partner-
ship with the City, to plan and implement redevelop-
ment of the area. Revitalization of this area may
require a re -definition of its role in the local
economy.

Recommendation
The Citizens' Advisory Committee recommends that
the City Council, in cooperation with the area mer-
chants and other interested parties, have prepared
an analysis of Jacksonville's old downtown.area, de-
fined generally as that area bounded by College Street,
Marine Boulevard, the New River and Warlick Street.
This analysis should include sufficient detailed in-
formation about this area's economic condition, build-
ing and street conditions, and land use compatibility
to indicate whether or not a full-scale revitalization
plan is justified, needed, or even desired. This
analysis should also include a preliminary investi-
gation of buildings in the area to determine if any
of them possess historical or architectural signifi-
cance. Sites already identified in this area include:
the Masonic Lodge. on Old Bridge Street; the Onslow
Count' Courthouse at the corner of Old Bridge Street
and Mill Avenue; the Pelletier House on the north side
of Old Bridge Street. on the east bank of the New River
and the Seaboard Coastline Railroad Depot on the east
side of the railroad tracks at the intersection of
West Railroad Street and Court Street. Funds are
available from the state's Division of Archives and
History and through CAMA planning programs.
RESIDENTIAL BLIGHT
Need
Five areas of concentrated residential blight exist
within the Jacksonville planning area. These de-
teriorating neighborhoods are located near the inter-
section of Bell Fork Road and U.S. Highway 17, near
the intersection of Bell Fork Road and N.C. Highway
24, in the Court/Karr/Mill Streets area, in the.
Georgetown area, and near the intersection of N.C.
Highway 24 and U.S. Highway 258 with U.S. Highway 17.
Alternatives
No Action
Recommendation
The City should undertake a more detailed study to
determine the extent, nature, and causes of develop-
ing blight in each of these neighborhoods and then
prepare a plan, with priorities, for conservation and
redevelopment of these areas. The following resources
and devices should be considered for use in efforts to
prevent and reverse deterioration of these neighbor-
hoods:
1 ... Neighborhood councils, to involve residents in
support and direction of improvement efforts:
2...A community facilities plan, to relate the
development of public facilities to the solution of
blighting problems;
3 ... Intergovernmental funding assistance, to util-
ize federal and state community development and hous-
ing grants in these areas;
4... Minimum housing and health codes, to prevent
the deterioration of the housing stock, preserve
property values, and maintain healthful living con-
ditious.
RECREATIONAL LAND
Need
The Citizens' Advisory Committee has determined,
through the planning process of updating the CAMA
Land Use Plan, that there is a deficiency in the
amount of publicly -owned land designated for recrea-
tional purposes. National recreational standards
suggest the need for 2-3 acres per 1,000 population
for neighborhood parks, and 7-8 acres per 1,000 popu-
lation for city-wide parks. With an estimated 1980
population of 22,000, the City of Jacksonville should
now have 44-66 acres in neighborhood parks and 154-
176 acres in one or more city-wide parks. At the
present time the City has 37.9 acres of land desig-
nated for recreational use.
The alternative of no action by the City in regard
to these blighted areas would mean the continued de- Alternatives
cline of the housing stock, community facilities, and
overall quality of life in these areas. No Action
Maximum Action
The maximum action that the City could take would
be a full scale redevelopment of all identified
blighted areas. This redevelopment effort would in-
volve new housing construction, housing rehabilitation,
and the provision of all needed public facilities
(i.e., streets, water, sewer, recreation, etc.). A
redevelopment program of this magnitude would take
many millions of dollars, several years, and a total
commitment by the City and the affected property owners.
Intermediate Action
A moderate approach to the conservation and re-
vitalization of blighted residential areas would be
to set goals and priorities in the improvement of
these neighborhoods and to use the most cost-effective
combination of locally funded improvements, inter-
governmental assistance, and codes application to re-
duce and eliminate the blight conditions.
V-4
No public action to increase the amount of recrea-
tional lands available for public use would result
in a maintenance of the "status quo."
Maximum Action
The maximum actions the City could take would in-
clude the immediate purchase of a large tract of land
and the development of facilities on that land for a
variety of recreational experiences for use by the
general public. These actions would require a size-
able investment by the City.
Intermediate Action
Before purchasing any land the City could determine
exactly how much land is needed now and how much will
be needed in the future as the population of Jackson-
ville grows. It could also determine the types of
recreational facilities most wanted and needed by the
general public to ensure maximum usefulness of facil-

ities. Then, the City could begin a planned program
of land acquisition and facility development which
could become part of the City's overall projected
budget.
Recommendation
,While the CAMA Lend Use Plan update can determine
general needs for recreational land, it is beyond the
scope of the Plan to prepare a detailed analysis of
site locations, type of parks needed, etc. It is
therefore recommended that the City Council instruct
the Recreation Director and City Planner to prepare
a Master Plan for Parks for the City of Jacksonville.
This plan should include a public opinion survey to
determine the types of recreational activities most
preferred by the citizens of Jacksonville and should
indicate the general geographic locations where parks
are most needed within the City. It would also in-
clude estimates of cost for land acquisition and
development. The estimated cost for a Master Plan
for Parks should range between $15,000 and $25,000.
Funds for such a plan are available from the state as
part of the CAMA planning program.
Recognizing that the preparation of a Master Plan
for Parks should take twelve to eighteen months, the
Committee recommends that efforts be made to provide
improved interim facilities for recreational programs
which have involved participation of large numbers of
people. Specifically, the City's adult softball
program is in dire need of more softball fields to
accommodate its public demand. Other such programs
and related facilities can be improved through a
continuing dialogue with the City's own recreation
staff.
OTHER DEVELOPMENT ISSUES
Roads, Streets, Highways
As stated in Chapter III, the N.C.D.O.T. is in the
process of preparing an update of its 1969-1970
Thoroughfare Plan which will be complete in 1981.
Because of its incomplete status not even origin and
destination information will be available until the
end of 1980.
It is therefore recommended that, as soon as the
new Thoroughfare Plan is completed and accepted by
the City, it should be adopted by reference as a part
of this plan, thereby making it an official expression
of City policy for future development.
Water Front Access
Many communities have adopted policies on public
access to waterfronts. However, because access to
the New River and its navigable tributaries in the
planning area has historically been through private
boat ramps and marinas, it was not considered nec-
essary to recommend such a policy as part of this
plan.
Transportation Facilities
The City of Jacksonville recognizes the integral
relationship of air, railroad, and bus transportation
facilities to the continued vitality of the local
economy. The City should actively seek expansion of
these transportation facilities to insure future
economic growth. The City is actively pursuing four-
laning of U.S. Highway 17.
V-5
Preliminary information indicates that Seaboard
Coast Line is considering abandonment of its rail
line from Jacksonville to Wilmington. This rail
transportation route.is vital to the local economy
and its potential for industrial growth. The City
should resist loss of this rail link to a major port.
Public Transportation
There is no existing or planned public transporta-
tion within the Jacksonville planning area. City
officials feel that the lack of a centralized busi-
ness district will preclude the establishment of such
a system during the 10 year planning period.
Agricultural Land
Protection of agricultural land is not discussed
at length in this plan. Since there are only 41 acres
of agricultural land identified within the planning
area, and since none of it is classified as "prime
agricultural land", methods and policies protecting
it were not considered necessary.

Chapter VI
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of classifying land within the Planning
Area of the 20 coastal counties and their communities
is to delineate densities and areas of desired devel-
opment over a 5-10 year period. Through the prepara-
tion of a Land Classification Map and explanatory
narrative, the communities can express the policies
needed to solve issues they have discussed during the
planning process. By doing so, state, federal and
local regulatory agencies may base their decisions on
whether or not to issue permits for various develop-
ments on the community's local decisions related to
desired future growth.
The following portions of this chapter provide the
definition of land classifications used in this plan,
a Land Classification Map, and a narrative explain-
ing the rational used to develop the map.
LAND CLASSIFICATION MAP AND NARRATIVE
Developed Class
Land classified as developed must have an existing
population density of at least 2,000 persons per
square mile, and be adequately served with water sup-
ply, sewage disposal, schools, and primary roads.
All land within the City has greater population
densities than 2,000 persons per square mile and
would be considered developed.
Transition Class
The transition class identifies land where moderate
to high density growth is to be encouraged, and where
any such growth that is permitted by local regulation
will be provided with the necessary public services.
The area to be designated as transition must be no
greater than that required to accommodate the esti-
mated population growth at a minimum gross density of
2,000 persons per square mile. Lands to be clas-
sified as transition should be considered in the
following order:
..First priority is for lards which presently
have a gross density of 2,000 people per square mile,
but which lack the necessary public services to
qualify as "developed." Such areas may not be ex-
pected to accommodate additional population, but they
will require public funds in the future for adding
the needed services.
Second�riority is for lands which have all
the necessary public services, but which lack the
population density of 2,000 persons per square
mile.
VI-1
...Third priority is for additional land necessary
to accommodate the remainder of the estimated transi-
tion area growth for the ten year planning period.
It was estimated that 535 acres of new urbanized
land would be required to accommodate the needs of
another 2,280 people by 1990. This land is shown on
the Land Classification Map. It is all located with-
ia the Jacksonville planning area, and all of it
falls into the third priority.
The discussions of existing and proposed City and
County water and sewer lines should be recalled when
reviewing this particular land classification. For
example, large water mains are being installed all
along Piney Green Road to serve the existing and
future residential areas, but areas such as Regalwood
and White Oak are currently treating sewage through
package treatment -plants located in those sub-
divisions.
The City's annexation policy and agreements be-
tween the City and County will make needed utilities
available to developing or developed areas after they
are annexed by the City.
Community Class
The community class identifies existing and new
clusters of low density development not requiring
major public services. It includes:
...Existing clusters of one or more land uses such
as a rural residential subdivision or a church,
school, general store, industry, etc.
,.New rural growth when the lot size is ten acres
or less. Such new growth should not occur on land
with severe physical limitations for development, on
"conservation" lands, or on fragile or other similar
sensitive lands unless no other reasonable alterna-
tive exists.
No land within the Planning Area was considered
to fall into this category at present, and none has
been allocated for such development in the future.
Rural Class
The rural class identified lands for long term
protection and management of resources, where limited
public services will be provided. Development in
such areas should be compatible with resource pro-
duction and would include any land not assigned to
one of the preceding three classifications. This
category also would include land for future needs
which are not currently recognized.
Exhibit 9 shows two large areas in the north and
northwest of the Planning Area grouped into this
classification. The Citizens' Advisory Committee
feels that these are the areas where Jacksonville's
growth will, and should, occur after 1990.
Conservation Class
The conservation class identifies land which
should be maintained essentially in its natural state
and where very limited or no public services are
provided. These lands are the least desirable for
development because they are too fragile, have severe
or hazardous limitations, or contain natural re-
sources too valuable to endanger. They include:

..Fragile lands - such as wetlands, surface water,
wildlife habitats, historical and archeological areas,
and steep slope areas. Hazard lands - such as flood -
ways, erosive areas, etc. Other areas - such as
publicly owned forests or parks—
, private sanctuaries,
water supply watersheds, etc.
A discussion of Jacksonville's Areas of Environ-
mental Concern, as presented in the 1975 CAMA Plan,
is included as Appendix "D" of this report.
The only lard classified as "conservation" was that
land located within the (10' contour) flood plains,
as illustrated by Exhibit 7.
Transition Areas
Considering the level of discussion related to
issues developed during the process, it was consider-
ed necessary to further specify the types and densi-
ties of lard uses which might be appropriate should
the land in the transition class actually develop
during the next ten years.
There are several letter -designations shown on
the Land Classification Kip (Exhibit No. 9) which are
not defined in the legend. These letter -designations
and their meaning are as follows:
...R-L - Residential -Low Density. - Land designated
as R-L fa1Zs into the Tthird priority" of land clas-
sified in the transition class. Substantial devel-
opment of these areas is expected since public water
will soon be available to these areas from the Onalow
County water system. Other land uses which might
occur in these areas could be public developments,
such as parks, schools, etc.
...R-M - Residential -Medium Density - Lands with
this designation are more likely to develop by 1990,
but still fall more into the "third priority" of
transition lands. Public uses could also take place
in these areas.
R-H - Residential -High Density - This designa-
tion 17s found only inside existing urban developed
areas in the City of Jacksonville. Apartments, dup-
lexes or other types of high density developments
could be allowed on this land. Again, public uses
might be another alternative use in these areas.
These areas fall more into the "second priority" of
transition lands.
...PUD _ Planned Unit Devel2pment - This designa-
tion is one which may be foreign to the general pub-
lic. It simply refers to a type of development which
would contain a carefully planned "mix" of various
land uses. These developments usually contain low
to high density residential uses, balanced to give
a variety of residential types in a well -designed
way. Along with the residential neighborhood, com-
mercial shopping centers may be allowed which are
small, bur designed to blend into the neighborhood
surrounding it. Also, public uses such as parks and
schools may be in a PUD.
The most appealing aspect of PUD's to a com-
munity like Jacksonville is that when made a part of
the subdivision regulations, developers may design
the complete development and include conveniences
(i.e., small shopping centers and parks), which in a
sense, make the total development self-contained.
The areas with the PUD designation on the Land
VI-3
Classification Map are shown only to point out that
various developments at varying degrees of density
should be permitted in these areas. Like the other
designations discussed in this sub -section, this is
only a suggested land use layout, rather than a
recommendation of a land use configuration. The
final designations should be reflected in the zoning
ordinance and subdivision regulations which are being
revised by city staff at this time. It is expected,
however, that the land classified as "transition"
will be the only lands upon which future (10 years)
development will be permitted to take place.
...CC _Commercial Clusters - Following the recom-
ion merdats in Chapter V, no strip commercial is to be
developed in the next ten years. Transition lands
with this designation will be expected to be devel-
oped in the form of shopping centers or groups of
small commercial activities. Notably, at the inter-
section of the proposed Western Boulevard extension,
plans are already under way for the development of a
relatively large shopping center. Wherever this
designation is shown, it is expected that access to
the major road nearest the development will be limit-
ed, and, where appropriate, frontage roads will be
required. As in the other sub -designations, public
recreational uses would also be appropriate in these
areas.
...IND - Industrial - The need for industrial land
hasbeen made evident in this plan and the recommenda-
tion made that land along the extended Western Boule-
vard near its intersection with U.S. 17 be investi-
gated to determine its potential for large-scale
development of light industrial parcels. Utilities
can easily be extended to this area, as can railroad
spurs. The final design of this industrial area and
necessary utilities would be part of the investigation.
Other areas shown with this designation are
logical extensions of existing land uses. (See
Existing Land Use Map.)
...P-I - Public -Institutional - Land with this
designation could best be used for public purposes.
The only area so designated on Exhibit No. 9 is sur-
rounded on three sides by Chaney Creek.
Due to the location and surrounding land uses,
no further high density urban developments are need-
ed on this land.
While these sub -designations in transition
areas are not intended to be nor should be construed
as definitive recommendations of future land use in
this Plan, they should be recognized as indications
of possible land uses which would meet the stated
needs and recommendations in this plan for future
land use in the Planning Area.

Chapter VII
' P LEE MM
The recommendations made in Chapter V represent
courses of action which must be taken to solve the
problems identified and discussed. In order to make
these courses of action .mown to all local, state and
federal governments, a series of policy statements
are made below. These policy statements were recom-
mended by the Citizens Advisory Committee and adopted
as official policy of the City of Jacksonville by the
City Council at their November 4, 1980 meeting.
RESOURCE PROTECTION AND MANAGEMENT
NEW RIVER
It shall be the policy of the City of Jacksonville
to advise all interested local governments,*the State
of North Carolina, and the U.S. Government that the
City has determined through the CAMA Land Use Plan
Update that there are potential recreational and
economic uses for which the New River is not present-
ly being used due to its polluted state. The City
shall participate with local, state, and federal
agencies to determine existing sources of pollution
and methods of preventing such pollution of the New
River in the future.
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
It shall be the policy of the City of Jacksonville
to cooperate and participate with the Onslow County
Economic Development Commission and the Jacksonville
Chamber of Commerce to identify potential industrial
sites, thereby encouraging location of new indus-
tries in the Jacksonville area. The City shall extend
utilities to identified industrial sites where engi-
neering feasibility studies prove such extensions to
be financially feasible.
STRIP -COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT
It shall be the policy of the City of Jacksonville
to discourage strip -commercial development along any
future or existing aertial, collector or minor streets
within the planning jurisdiction of the City. Such
discouragement will be in the form of appropriate
revisions to the City's zoning ordinance requiring
various types of control -of -access to major roads
and streets and through zoning decisions.
REDEVELOPMENT OF DEVELOPED AREAS
OLD DOWNTOWN
It shall be the policy of the City of Jacksonville
to participate in the investigation of the feasibil-
ity and/or desirability of redeveloping the original
downtown area in cooperation with merchants and
property owners of that area, as well as with other
VIZ-1
interested groups, such as local, state and federal
agencies. Further, the City shall cooperate with
public and private organizations in preserving
structures in the old downtown area and the rest of
the City which have or may be identified as having
historical significance.
REDEVELOPMENT OF DEVELOPED AREAS
OTHER
It shall be the policy of the City of Jacksonville
to redevelop developed areas of the City which con-
tain either housing units that are determined to be
substandard and therefore unsafe for human habita-
tion, or areas where the preponderance of incompatible
land uses have developed in the past due to unplanned
growth. Redevelopment of such areas will be contin-
gent upon the availability of local and federal funds
and the financial feasibility of such projects.
RECREATIONAL LANDS
It shall be the policy of the City of Jacksonville
to locate and acquire recreational lands and facil-
ities so as to meet the recreation needs of the
citizenry. These needs shall be determined through
development of a detailed recreation and open space
plan.
PLANNING TOOLS AND CAPACITY
It shall be the policy of the City of Jacksonville
to improve its capacity and potential to guide com-
munity growth and land use by developing a full range
of comprehensive plan elements by 1985. These ele-
ments should include a detailed land use plan, an
economic base study, a housing study and plan, a
recreation and open space study, a community facil-
ities plan, a capital improvements program, and a
historic survey and inventory. The City shall also
explore the extension of its planning jurisdiction
up to two miles from its corporate boundary and will
consider uniform administration of its development
regulation codes throughout its jurisdiction.

Appendix "A"
During the planning process several technical
local, state and federal personnel provided source
data, advice and personal presentations to the
Citizens' Advisory Committee. Their names and agen-
cies they represent are given below. The Committee
and GRW Engineers, Inc., wish to express their ap-
preciation to these technical advisors for their
cooperation during the preparation of this plan.
City of Jacksonville
...Mike Ellzey, City Engineer
...Horace Mann, City Planner
...Bob'Barcinski, Assistant City Manager
...Ken Hagen, City Recreation Director
also
...Mr. Ron Baker, Executive Director, Onslow
County Economic Development Commission
N. C. Department of Natural Resources
and Community Develooment
...Chuck Wakild ...Arcelia Wicker
...Rick Shiver ...Ralph Cantral
...Greg Seymour ...Allen Kimek
N. C. Department of Transportation
...Davis Moore
U. S. Corps of Engineers,
Wilmington District
...Ken Jolly ...Cliff Winefordner
United States Marine Corps,
Camp Lejeune
...Col. K. P. Millice
...Mr. A. C. Austin
A-1

Appendix "B"
PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETING NOTICES,
FEBRUARY 25, 1980 MEETING
The contents of the newspaper advertisement for
the public information meeting of February 25, 1980
is shown below, as well as a copy of the ad from the
newspaper.
The Advisory Committee for the 1980 CAMA Land Use
Plan Update for the City of Jacksonville will hold a
Public Information Meeting on Mond X,. Februay 25th
at 7:30 P.M. in the City Council Chambera
ilat Jack-
sonvle City Hall.
The purpose of the meeting will be to explain the
objectives of and the progress to date on the prepara-
tion of the City's Land Use Plan Update. The second
purpose of the meeting is to elicit public comments
and to answer public questions about the Plan and
its significance to the citizens of Jacksonville and
the surrounding area.
The original CAMA Land Use Plan for the City of
Jacksonville was prepared in 1975. This Plan serves
as a guide to planning and development for the City
of Jacksonville.
All interested citizens are urged to attend.
For further information, please contact the Di-
rector of Public Works or City Manager's office
455-2600.
tnau.Norta
PvsucweoatunoN em•Fta+a
crnoriAaccoNvais
CUTA PLAN UMATZ
7b Advbm? Ca =Wm hr the
The
W0 be
b sr = ur = do pw�e pd�nutldawtlr
tt�Caty�s�.[P&oM t daft r Ras L*do& tL
v a of on me*"
d�to Arwoar
poetic auatleae atamt dti P1aa and ea
d� IkI,.* atotLa�ariz -
The Qtf UM Crud We Plan
!or do Qb d Ackma.me vat
an WVW to
e. plow Can,
at Waeka or
B-1
JUNE 2, 1980 MEETING
The contents of the newspaper advertisement for
the public information meeting of June 2, 1980 is
shown below, as well aa. an article from the
newspaper.
The Advisory Committee for the 1980 CAMA land Use
Plan Update for the City of Jacksonville will hold a
Public Information Meeting on Mondays June 2nd at
7:00 P.M. in the Ciy Council Chambers at Jackson-
ville City Hall.
The purpose of the meeting will be to explain the
objectives of and the progress to date on the prepara-
tion of the City's Land Use Plan Update. The second
purpose of the meeting is to elicit public comments
and to answer public questions about the Plan and
its significance to the citizens of Jacksonville and
surrounding area.
The original CAMA Land Use Plan for the City of
Jacksonville was prepared in 1975. This Plan serves
as a guide to planning and development for the City
of Jacksonville.
All interested citizens are urged to attend.
For further information, please contact the Di-
rector of Public Works or City Manager's office
455-2600.
City to review /plan • - -
Jaduonvma dfidals will bdd a pubik .
bearlas ucW to report on ft Ws
.sview d its Costal Am Mwg-Xd
Adlar6mop1m•• ''
IJmse pravidau d the CAMA, a W4
stafs law which regulates devalopmeot of]aud'In 20 aautal cmdes. a dtys laud
usa pbm must be reviewed evet7 far
The pLe is and primarily by local, state
and fal n agencies m a fadde in dda•
miaw the Luumm at developmat pe -
mits incosdal ataas.
tbe' plan for JadwmvMs is bft
davdopW by a Gee -Mo algioeatng
firm-. - .- .. ..
the besting w01 begin at 7 pm at CRY
HWL . . " .

Appendix "C"
CONbTKAa 69% F% & I N a-lu S
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this chapter is to gather informa-
tion on any growth constraints in the Jacksonville
area. Such information will be helpful in preparing
the land classification map of Chapter VII, and the
areas of environmental concern in Chapter VIII. The
constraints are divided into two groups; those
related to undeveloped land, and those related to
the capacity of community facilities. The outline
of these two groupings is shown below:
...Undavelooed Lead Suitability_aad Potential: Analyze
the general suitability of undeveloped land to
accommodate new growth, with consideration given to:
...Physicall Limitations for Development: Areas
likely to have conditions making development
costly or causing undesirable consequences,
such as:
...Hazard Areas, including:
...Man -Made Hazards: Such as airports,
tank farms for storing flammable liquids,
ate.
...Natural Hazards: Such as ocean erosive
araaa, astuariaa erosive areas, and flood
hazard areas (flood plains and floodways).
...Areas with Soil Limitations: Such as areas
presentinghazards for foundations, shallow
soils, poorly drained soils, septic tank and
other development related facilities.
...Sources of Water S 21y: Including ground-
water recharge areas (bedrock and surficial),
public water supply watersheds, and wall -
fields.
..81op. Areas: Those exceeding 12 per -
cant lopes.
Fragile Areas: Areas which could be damaged
or destroyed by inappropriate or poor develop-
ment, including:
...Wetlands, frontal dunes, beaches, prime
wildlife habitat, scenic and prominent high
points, unique natural areas, estuarine
waters, and other surface waters, rivers,
lakes, or streams.
...Resource Potential Areas: Including archeo-
i cal and historic sites, productive and
unique agricultural lands, potentially valuable
mineral sites, public -owned forests and parks,
and private -owned wildlife sanctuaries.
...Caoaci� of Comm<mit� Facilities: Including
existing watar.and sever service areas; deaitn
caosciV of existing water treatment plant, sewage
treatment plant, schools, and primary roads; and
percentage of present utilization of those facil-
*This material originally appeared itiu.
in the 1975 Plan as a part Of Each of the constraints will be discussed in
Chapter V . detail in the remainder of this chapter.
C-1

HAZARD AREAS
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this section is to determine if
there are any natural or man-made hazard area in the
now under private operation, and portions of the
Marina Bass (see Exhibit 5.1m). The airport site,
however, is expected to be replaced by a sub-
division and/or commercial development in the
near future.
Jacksonville Planning Are that could make future NATURAL HAZARDS
development very costly or could cause undesireable
consequences. The only natural hazard in the Jacksonville
Planning Are would be the flood plains, which is the
land along the New River and its tributaries that
MAN-MADE HAZARDS is flooded when heavy rainfall occurs. Exhibit 5.2m
shows the flood plains as delineated by the
Thar* are only two areas that might be considered Jacksonville Are Soil Survey*22 and the Jacksonville
as representing son* dopes of hazard to any future Flood Lnsuranca Application.
development in their vicinity: The old airport site,
Exhibit 5.1m: The Old Jacksonville Airport Site and the Marina Bass
J
ti *
Now man
�, tirs
ft.3R7'�' Z
�tt
MARINE RASE
AMR
awe
OLD JACRSONVILLE
AIRPORT SITE
Itl
Ilk .0
-100
ANY � �.i ,, \ `� ! .:1�..•
Cara iaxu.G MARINE BASE
r
0
C-2

C-3

SOIL LIMITATIONS
n1TRODUCTION
The type of soil that exists in an ayes is
axtramely important to a community's development --
and, expacially to new urbanization. When construc-
tion activities have not been properly related to
Important characteristics of the soil. a large
number of unnecessary problems can result:
...Houses Battle and cause va11e to crack,
resulting in falling plaster, warped door
frames, and leaking basements;
...yards, garages, and living areas flood after
heavy rainfall;
...septic tank effluent bubbles to the ground
surface; and
...streets, curbs, gutters, and sidewalks crack
and become filled with pot -holes.
The proper approach to insure that these problems
to do occur in new development is to investigate the
soil limitations for the type of development being
considered, and then makiag certain that these limi-
tations -are properly accommodated as part of the
construction work.
JACKSONVTT.iZ AREA SOIL SURVEY
In 1975, Mr. A. B. Whitley, District Conserva-
tionist of the U.S. Soil Conservation Service, in
cooperation with the Onslaw Soil and Water Consar-
vation:District, completed a "Jacksonville Area Soil
Survey." Using aerial photographs, the study delin-
eated twenty-three soil mapping units. Soil intar-
pretation shoats were prepared for each unit, das-
cribiag the soil's physical and chemical properties,
suitability as a resource material, limitations
affecting selected urban -related uses, agricultural
capability, and wildlife and woodland suitability.
LIIaTATIONS
For most of the soil interpretation items, the
study ranked the mapping units in one of four levels
of limitations: Slight, moderate, severe, or very
severe limitations.* Jacksonvilla's planning con-
sultant, GRW Engineers, summarized this data and
transferred it to maps of the Jacksonville area,
which resulted is Exhibits 5.3a through 5.6m.
Since most of these exhibits show that "savara"
or "very several' limitations exist for urban or
agricultural -type activities, it would be appropriate
to emphasise that this does NOT mean that all con-
struction or davelopmant is prohibited. Rather, it
means that, if an ample supply of land exists that
is better suited to the contemplated activity, one
would be visa and more efficient to select the more
*A more detailed description of the rankings and other
aspects of the Soil Survey are included in
'Appendix "D".
suitable land for development. Since some areas,
such as Jacksonville, do not have an ample supply of
more suitable land, the agy_reio%rea, if more daval-
opmaut is to occur, is —to make thedifficult—and
co@tly modifications neaded to altar the soil or to
design astructure so as -to compensate for a severe
degree of limitation.
DWELLINGS, LIGHT INDUSTRY, AND SEPTIC TANKS
Most of the undeveloped land in the Jacksonville
Planning Area has "severs" limitations for use for
dwellings, light industry, or septic tanks. The
2ri ry cause of the "savers" ranking for these uses,
as well as moat others, is thayroblem_of drainage.
Good drainage is difficult simply because
Jacksoavilla's land elevation is very close to sea
level, creating a high water table, and the topography
is relatively flat (sea Exhibit 5.3m).
For dwellings, light industry, and similar con-
struction, the common problems are either a high water
table or shrink -swell characteristics of the soil. To
overcome these problems, it is necessary to install
drainage tile linea (at ±80 cants par foot) approxi-
mately 100 feet on center (around $160 for a 100 x
200 foot lot), as wall as add surface drainage
ditches. For septic tanks, the high water table
again is the problem. The soil is generally sandy
enough to percolate, but that is only after the
water table.is lowered to a suitable laval by means
of expensive drainage improvement.
ROADS, STREETS, AND AGRICULTURAL USES
Development of roads and streets, as well as
agricultural uses, also encounters severe soil limi-
tations (see Exhibit 5.4m). For streets and roads,
the common problem is the shrink -swell capacity,
which requires more stringent and expensive con-
struction methods, and sometimes requires the
expensive removal and replacement of unsuitable soils.
PLAYGROUNDS AND RECREATION AREAS
All of the undeveloped land is ranked as having
moderate or savers limitations for playgrounds and
recreation, which generally requires tile or ditch
drainage to lower the water table (Exhibit 5.5m).
Pedestrian traffic use is the most important char-
acteristic of playground use, and the high water
table simply turns playgrounds into giant mud
puddles.
WILDLIFE
The majority of the undeveloped land has only
slight or moderate limitations for wildlife, reflect-
ing the suitability of the land to sustain cover and
natural growth. This is shown by Exhibit 5.6m.
C-4

Soil limitations are similar for dwellings, light Industry,
=4 septic tacks, escept that the areas marked on this map
as "noderats" apply'anly to dwellings and Light lndustzrc-'-'---.
lar septic tacks, the Liar
tatim mould be "swore."
Severe
CITY die
as
Severe
gN
VMS
'W
UL - URBAN LAND maw INVIIII
® ' LIIIWND
SCAL4 IN RRsamom
Is
S mom
X i1Y
X
44
Severe.
A
ULasp
Severe
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
CAM; LBAMG
vsrh4 it 5.3m
son UMIM10119 for Dwellings, L Light
.industry, and Septic Tanks
CITY Oft JACKSONVILLE KQ C A M A LAND USE In
C-.;5

C-6

W
0

Soil limitations for "opcals.:d", 'Nuvodlsnd," or "watland" wildlife differ
pr:L=Jly in areLs a d j a3cc=t to Sc.: River ry: d iia tributaries. " Openland"
wildlife has alight to $asvere limitaticuo in them are& -th6_z, it of
the plaaaing area generally has only alight
and moderate lirsitatioae. "Woodl&nd" wildlife /• Slight ,\
has slight to moderate limitation, c=apt that
the southweatern past of ho UCLA isI= y \
liriitod. "Wetland vildlif o alighht t v yry •
load
lain. do along da the caw n t
tlOod plain, +. dad 0'S t
slope of hand
k
a•ia�-_mil\--
_ x
sib
\'t`
l
r
Slight q� 3
Slight
Ar
�pl• � ?'.5! r•y.�`aY`"..'%�!"' �� � �' ` i, Slight • 7
Slight .'+!
T.
Ts,
UL - URBAN LAND Nas Naas Exhibit 9.6ta
Son Lknmbm for
VW
Madumb wildlife
O PTIMLOS WATKIN5
°W CONSMTIW ENOI=RS
... • - -- _ _ r .rW nri tseranuv11 1 N rc
C-8

4
Appendix "D"
INTRODUCTION
The 1974 North Carolina Coastal Area Management
Act requires that "particular concern be given to
the nature of development which shall be appropriate
within the various types of Areas of Environmental
Concern (AEC) that may be designated by the Coastal
Resources Commission."
The Land Use Plan shall include a description of
any potential AEC, along with a statement of specific
land uses which may be allowed in such area, consis-
tent with policy objectives. These are areas in
which uncontrolled or incompatible development might
result in irreparable damage to the very features of
the Coastal Area which make it economically, aesthet-
ically, and ecologically rich. The six basic cate-
gories for potential AEC's are:
...Coastal Wetlands
...Estuarine Waters
...Renewable Resource Areas
...Fragile, Historic or Natural Resources Areas
...Public Trust Areas
...Natural Hazard Areas
JACKSONVILLE POTENTIAL AEC's
Of the six basic categories, Jacksonville has land
that fits only one: the natural hazard area which is
concerned with flood plains.
The Coastal Resource Commission guidelines further
describes a floodplain as follows:
..Description - River flood plain is defined as
a land area adjoining a river, stream, or watercourse
which is likely to be flooded once every 100 years
(i.e., that has a one percent chance of being flooded
each year).
...Significance - Floodplains store floodwaters,
thereby reducing inundation of adjacent lands. Flood
plains also absorb and dissipate the energy of flood-
waters, thereby reducing downstream destruction.
... Poliy Objective - To protect the public health,
safety, and welfare by restricting land uses within
the flood plain which have a significant potential to
increase flood damage and cause loss of life.
..Appropriate land uses - Appropriate land uses
shall be those consistent with the above policy
objective.
FLOOD PLAIN LAND USES
The delineation of a flood, and its later sub-
division, is shown by Exhibit B.lm. The remainder
of this section will define these different areas,
and describe the uses permitted in each. The most
appropriate way to provide the necessary regulations
would be to prepare and adopt a "floodplain zoning
ordinance."
D-1
Definitions
The flood plain, for regulatory purposes, is cal-
led the "general floodplain." With proper hydrologic
studies, it can be subdivided further into a "flood -
way" and "flood fringe." (See Exhibit B.lm).
Exhibit B.lm: Flood Plain Delineated and
rlood Plain
i, Flo" rloodw► _�. rlood .�
rrinae -erring
General Flood Plain District_(GFP, - is the channel
of a stream, and the adjacent land which tias been,
or may be in the future, covered by water,! and in-
cluding, but not limited to the regulator} flood.
This area of coverage may be referred to as the flood
plain or flood hazard area. With proper hydrologic
studies, the GFP may be subdivided into al"floodway"
and "flood fringe" as defined in the following:
i
...Floodway (FW) - is the channel of a!stream and
that adjacent hand that are required to carry the
deep and fast moving floodwater, and the two principal
factors in its determination are the selected flood
discharge and the permitted increase in flood heights.
...Flood Fringe (FF) - is the portion of the GFP
beyond the floodway that carries the floodwaters that
usually are shallow and slow moving.
Regulator Flood - is the flood of a 100 year fre-
quency, and the flood protection elevation shall be
one foot higher. The regulatory flood shall be the
basis for determining the discharge, profile, pro-
tection elevation, floodway, and flood fringe.
Permitted Uses
The land uses permitted in each area are described
in the following sections.
General Flood Plain Uses
The permitted uses within the general flood plain
district (GFP), which are allowed as a matter of
right, are open space uses and do not involve struc-
tures, fill, or storage of materials or equipment...
such as agricultural activities, industrial loading
or parking, private and public recreation uses, and
residential lawns, play, or parking areas. All other
uses must meet the requirements for a special permit,
after determining if it is in the floodway or flood
fringe. .
Floodway District Uses
The uses permitted as a matter of right are the

same as those for the GFP district. The "special
permit uses" primarily include activities that would
not suffer great damage from flooding, are extensive
uses that must be located within a floodway for con-
tinuity (streets, utilities) or could be moved or
taken down prior to flooding (signs, carnivals, etc.).
Standards imposed by a Board of Adjustment on any
special permit may include a prohibition against un-
duly affecting floodway capacity or increasing flood
heights. The Board also must take into consideration
that future requests of a similar nature may be
received for the opposite side of the stream. Fill
must be minimized and protected against erosion, and
any structures permitted shall not be for human
habitation, must have a low damage potential, and be
situated to minimize effect of flood flows.
Flood Fringe District Uses
Not only are the GFP uses permitted outright in
this district, but additional uses can be considered
if they are flood -proofed or elevated above the regu-
latory flood level. Fill extending at least 15 feet
beyond the structure is the preferred method of pro-
tecting structures in this district because it acts
as a buffer for the buildings, protects streets and
utilities, and discourages walk -out basements that
are easily flooded.
Special permit uses may include buildings placed
on stilts, piles, or partial walls (as opposed to
fill) if such supporting members have a proper foun-
dation to withstand flooding and do not create other
undesirable effects. In permitting such for build-
ings, one should not forget that this may provide no
protection for lower elevation streets or utilities.
Special Permit Procedure
Detailed procedures would have to be developed for
guidance in filing special permit applications, as
well as any other steps leading up to the Board's
decision in regard to a special permit request in the
floodway or flood fringe districts.
The type of information required by the Board
shall include the hydrologic data delineating the
floodway and flood fringe, and the relation of the
lot and any structures thereto. Cross -sections and
profiles of the districts also will be needed, as
well as specifications for floodproofing, filling,
dredging, -or other pertinent construction activities.
Upon receiving this information, the Board will
transmit the data to qualified professionals for
their advice and recommendations.
WATER CLASSIFICATION
The streams within the Jacksonville Planning Area
are classified as "C" by the North Carolina Stream
Classification System. The "C" classification means
that the water is suitable for fish and wildlife
propagation, boating, wading, and fishing, but is not
fit for human use of bathing, diving, waterskiing, or
as a water supply. These waters have a decreased
diversity of fish species, but an increased popula-
tion of fish such as catfish, gizzard shad, bass,
gar, and mosquito fish.
Outside the Planning Area, from the New River
railroad bridge south to Hickory Point, the water
classification is "SB." From Hickory Point south to
the Atlantic Ocean, the water classification is "SA."
The best usage of "SA" waters is shellfishing for
market purposes and any other usage requiring waters
of lower quality. For "SB" waters, the best usage
is bathing and any other usage except shellf ishing
for market purposes.
Implementation of the "201 Water Quality Plan"
recommendations will provide higher treatment for
the Jacksonville domestic and nondomestic sewage
generated by existing and future urban development.
This could lead to the consideration of upgrading the
water quality classification and standards, unless
non -point pollution sources overbalance the improved
point source treatment.
The Board of Adjustment within a reasonable time,
shall review the special permit request to determine
the suitability of the proposed use in relation to
the flood hazard, considering factors such as the
danger to life and property, water pollution effect,
alternative locations for the proposed use, and the
need to attach special conditions. (Taken from the 1975 Jacksonville CAMA Plan)
D-2