Land Use Plan Update-1987

ATlease do not remove!!!!!
Division of coastal Management
w'
tt t `
1 t t t
LAND USE PLAN
UPDATE
TALBERT, COX & ASSOCIATES, INC.
An Espey, Huston Company
Local Adoption Date:
MARCH 21, 1988
CRC Certification Date:
MAY 27, 1988
The preparation of this document
was financed in part through a
grant provided by the North
Carolina Coastal Management
Program, through funds provided by
the Coastal Zone Management Act of
1972, as amended, which is
administered by the Office of
0crtnn and Coastal Resource
Management, National oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration.

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
t
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
CRAVEN COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
LAND USE PLAN: 1987 UPDATE
PREPARED FOR
CRAVEN COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
CRAVEN COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Edward P. Armstrong, Jr., Chairman
Sidney R. French
Roger R. Bell
G. Roger Forrest
Charles T. Potter
PREPARED BY CRAVEN COUNTY PLANNING BOARD
Charles T. Potter, Chairman
Shirley Bryan
David L. Stewart
Rodney Russell
James A. Lewis
V. 0. Andrews
Willie Perry
William F. Daugherty
AND
CRAVEN COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Donald R. Baumgardner, Director
Arnita Brown, Secretary
PLANNING ASSISTANCE PROVIDED
BY
Kenneth Weeden, AICP
Planner -In -Charge
Talbert, Cox & Associates, Inc.

GE1
Scale in Miles
0 25 50 75 100
RIVER
�nf�v�iv �UUIVTY
MAP 1
Location Map

�J
CRAVEN COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
LAND USE PLAN: 1987 UPDATE
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
PREFACE:
Analysis of 1982 Policy Statement/
Implementation Actions
SECTION
I: Analysis of Existing Conditions
A.
Establishment of Information Base
1
B.
Present Conditions
2
1.
Population
2
2.
Economic Analysis
8
a. General
8
b. Agricultural
8
c. Commercial Forestry
10
d. Commercial Fishing
11
e. Mani4facturing and Commercial Activity
11
f. Tourism
12
g. Employment and Income
13
h. Local Government Revenue Summary
15
i. Economic Summary
15
3.
Housing
15
C.
Existing Land Use Analysis
17
1.
General Patterns
17
2.
Significant Land Compatibility Problems
22
3.
Major Problems from Unplanned Development
22
4.
Areas Experiencing or Likely to Experience
Major Land Use Changes
22
5.
Identification of Areas of Environmental Concern
23
D.
Review of Current Plans, Policies, and Regulations
25
E.
Constraints: Land Suitability
28
1.
Physical Limitations
28
2.
Fragile Areas
34
3.
Areas with Resource Potential
36
F.
Constraints: Capacity of Community Facilities
38
1.
Water
38
2.
Sewer
39
3.
Solid Waste
39
4.
School Enrollments and Facilities
39
5.
Transportation
40
6.
Medical Services
42
7.
Emergency and Protective Services
42
G.
Estimated Demand
42
1.
Population and Economy
42
2.
Future Land Need
43
3.
Community Facilities Need
44
SECTION II: POLICY STATEMENTS 45
A. Resource Protection 45
1. Areas of Environmental Concern: Development Policies 45
2. Development in Areas with Constraints 49
ii

1
1
n
1
1
PAGE
3. Hurricane and Flood Evacuation Needs
51
4. Protection of Potable Water Supply
51
5. Use of Package Treatment Plants
51
6. Stormwater Runoff Associated with Agriculture,
Residential Development, etc.
51
7. Marina and Floating Home Development
52
8. Industrial Impacts on Fragile Areas
52
9. Development of Sound and Estuarine System Islands
52
B.
Resource Production and Management Policies
53
1. Agriculture
53
2. Commercial Forestry
54
3. Mining Resource Areas
55
4. Commercial and Recreational Fisheries
55
5. Off -Road Vehicles
56
6. Residential and Commercial Land Development
57
C.
Economic and Community Development Policies
58
1. Types and Locations of Desired Industry
58
2. Local Commitment to Service Provisions
60
3. Desired Urban Growth Patterns
61
4. Redevelopment of Developed Areas
63
5. Commitment to State and Federal Programs
65
6. Assistance to Channel Maintenance
65
7. Energy Facilities Siting
66
8. Tourism and Beach and Waterfront Access
66
9. Density of Development
67
D.
Continuing Public Participation Policies
68
E.
Storm Hazard Mitigation, Post -Disaster Recovery,
70
Hurricane Evacuation Plan
SECTION III: LAND CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
79
A.
Developed
80
B.
Transition
80
C.
Community
82
D.
Rural
83
E.
Conservation
84
F.
Land Classification Summary
86
SECTION IV: RELATIONSHIP OF POLICIES AND LAND
87
CLASSIFICATIONS
87
A.
Developed and Transition Classes
87
B.
Community Class
87
C.
Rural Class
87
D.
Conservation Class
88
SECTION V: INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION
89
iii
L

is
CRAVEN COUNTY
LAND USE PLAN: 1987 UPDATE
LIST OF TABLES AND MAPS
TABLE NUMBERS PAGE
1.
Craven County Population 1940-1980, 1996
with Projections to 1995
2
2.
Urban -Rural Population Trends
3
3.
Craven County Municipal Population
4
4.
Population Change by Townships, 1940-1980
5
5.
Historical and Projected Racial Composition
5
6.
Selected Age Group Summary
6
7.
Craven County Crop Production Income, 1981-1985
9
8.
Craven County Livestock and Product Income
10
9.
Craven County Forestry Income: 1981-86
10
10.
Craven County Commercial Fishery Income
11
11.
Craven County: Establishments and Payroll: 1980-83
12
12.
Craven County Tourism Income: 1981-85
12
13.
Craven County Unemployment Rate: 1982-1985
13
14.
Families Below Poverty Level: 1969-79
14
15.
Persons with Incomes Below Poverty Level: 1969-79.
14
16.
Per Capita Personal Income: 1979-83
14
17.
Property Tax Values, Craven County, 1981-1985
15
18.
Craven County Housing Summary
16
19.
Major Land Use Categories in Craven County
17
20.
Craven County Approved Bu-ilding Lots by Township
19
21.
Non -Municipal Water Service in Craven County
39
22.
Craven County School Enrollments
40
23.
Craven County Highway Mileage - 1984
41
24.
Average Daily Traffic, Selected Locations
41
1 MAPS
1
1. Location Map
2. Craven County Township Map
3. Existing Land Use Map
4. Locations of Major Subdivisions by Township
5. 100-Year Flood Zone
6. Estuarine Erosion Areas
7. General Limitations for Septic Tank
8. Water and Sewer Service Areas
8a. Concentrations of Substantard Housing Conditions
9. Composite Hazards
10. Land Classification System
CHARTS
1. Estuarine Erosion Areas in Craven County, N.C.
iv
i
4(a)
(Attached)
(Attached)
(Attached)
30
(Attached)
(Attached)
64(a)
(Attached)
(Attached)
31

1
CRAVEN COUNTY
LAND USE PLAN UPDATE, 1987
Analysis of 1982 Policy Statements/Implementation Actions
The CAMA Land Use Plan for coastal communities is essentially a
policy document aimed at guiding localities toward sound growth
management. Because circumstances, conditions, and issues change
over time, the Coastal Resources Commission, under State law,
requires the local land use plans to be updated every five years in
order to "take a second look" at old policies for their relevance as
well as examine newly emerging trends and concerns. The Commission
is also requiring in all 1987 updates an assessment of the previous
policy statements and implementation steps taken to effectuate them.
This summary analysis of the 1982 policies is being presented to the
Planning Board as a "Preface" to the 1987 Plan Updating process. A
review of the current status of 1982 policies and proposed actions
will help identify newly emerging issues.
DEVELOPMENT ISSUES
Policy/Implementation
A. RESOURCE PROTECTION
1. POLICY: ESTUARINE SYSTEMS - To
' continue the local permitting process
of allowing minor development forms in
all estuarine and public trust waters.
These development forms shall consist
of activities requiring water access
and use which cannot function elsewhere
such as simple access channels; struc-
tures to prevent erosion; navigation
channels; boat docks; marinas, piers,
wharfs, and moving pilings.
IMPLEMENTATION - The County would
continue issuing local permits through
its Building Inspection Department.
2. POLICY: UNIQUE GEOLOGICAL
FORMATIONS - The Craven County Planning
' Board will secure information pertain-
ing to the location, nature and value
of each area with unique geological
formations and will use this informa-
tion in approving development plans in
adjacent areas.
IMPLEMENTATION - The Planning Board
will use the available services of the
Planning Department to implement this
policy.
v
Status/Relevancy
Actions
1. Ongoing concern,
continually implemented as
stated. The County now
believes that more
emphasis should be placed
on water quality efforts
in upstream locations.
2. Not Implemented.
Unable to acquire informa-
tion in sufficient detail
upon which to base such
decisions.

Status/Relevancy
Policy/Implementation Actions
3. POLICY: OTHER SIGNIFICANT AREAS:
a. The flood plain policy of Craven a. The County, as of
County is to continue participation May 1, 1987, began partic-
in the National Flood Insurance ipation in the "Regular
Program as a means to promote good Phase" of the National
land development practices and to Flood Insurance Program
protect the citizens of the and has adopted a,Flood
County. Damage Prevention
Ordinance.
b. The County's policy on peat b. This issue is no
mining/pocosin development is to longer considered relevant
await the final preparation of the because the incidence of
State's natural area inventory and peat reserves within the
the National Forest Service's plan- County's jurisdiction is
ning document before evaluating not economically
actions required to serve the mineable.
County's interest in protecting
areas of significant peat deposits
from adverse impacts. The County's
policy will be based on the desired
futures of the National Forest
Service for the Croatan National
Forest.
C. The policy of Craven County with C. Not Implemented.
respect to pocosins and shoreline
erosion is to undertake an investi-
gation into the problems associated
with pocosin development and shore-
line erosion and, more particu-
larly, the immediate effects of
these areas on the Big Pocosin and
on the Neuse River.
IMPLEMENTATION: The Planning
Department will be asked to provide
information relating to the local
effects of pocosin development and
shoreline erosion as its schedule
allows.
4. POLICY: AREAS OF HISTORICAL 4. Partially implemented.
SIGNIFICANCE - Craven County should Information has been ob-
become more aggressive in promoting tained from the N.C. Divi-
its historical past and utilize current sion of Archives and
and available archaeological and History concerning the
historical preservation information in presence of County histor-
its planning programs. ical resources.
vi
U
1
1
L�

1
Policy/Implementation
IMPLEMENTATION: The County will
rely on its staff and area residents,
especially those connected with the New
Bern historic program, to assist it in
developing the appropriate information
and tools for use in its planning
programs.
5. POLICY: HURRICANE AND FLOOD
EVACUATION - To continue the test
and make ready all emergency procedures
outlined in the hurricane evacuation
plan and to make certain that all
members of the support group know their
roles in the hurricane evacuation
plan.
IMPLEMENTATION: (None Discussed)
B. RESOURCE PRODUCTION
1. POLICY: PRODUCTIVE RESOURCES
a. Productive Agricultural Land
Productive agricultural lands
should be protected from urban
development to the greatest extent
possible. The County will use the
assistance of the Soil Conservation
Service and other agencies to
promote sound subdivision growth in
rural areas without impacting prime
farm lands. However, in those
areas designated for growth, the
County, through development
controls and public services, will
encourage development forms that
may impact farming operations. In
these areas, primarily along the
Neuse River, the main policy will
be one of an urban orientation.
b. Commercial Forest Lands
The location and use of commercial
forest lands will become a more
complex issue as forest production
' as a source of economic development
is balanced against forests as a
barrier to development. This
vii
Status/Relevancy
Actions
5. In 1984, the County
received a grant from the
Division of Coastal Man-
agement and developed a
separate set of policies
regarding Storm Hazard
Mitigation, Post -Disaster
Recovery, and Hurricane
Evacuation.
a. Ongoing Concern.
b. Ongoing Concern.
However, lesser of the
most valuable commercial
forest lands appear to be
being cleared.

Status/Relevancy
Actions
_Policy/Implementation
dilemma will not be serious in the
areas north and west of the urban
corridor but may become serious in
Townships 6 and 7 where commercial
forest and the National Forest
restrict development. In the
latter case, the County will use
,
its development controls to mini-
mize these impacts but recognizing
that at some time the County will
need to encourage land being made
available for growth from
commercial timber stands.
,
c. Mining
C. The National Forest
Service has not yet
Based on available information, the
completed its New Master
only commercial grade peat area in
Plan.
Craven County is in the National
Forest. However, until the
National Forest has completed its
long-range plan and RARE II studies
and developed a use plan, the
County is not in a position to
adopt a mining policy. The County
will use the National Forest
Service Plan and the CEIP funded
national areas inventory to formu-
late a peat mining and natural
resources policy when more current
and detailed data is available.
,
IMPLEMENTATION: (None discussed)
C. ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
1. POLICY: RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
1. Continual concern and
nearly completely impl e-
The County will continue to
mented. The County Sub -
encourage high quality residential
division regulations were
development through its subdivision
revised in 1982. Also,
'
review process, to seek out additional
since the last Plan
sources of low-income housing rehabili-
Update, the County has
tation assistance; and will begin to
applied for and received
develop a detailed housing strategy
three (3) Community Devel-
'
that recognizes the various housing
opment Block Grants aimed
needs in the County.
at housing rehabilitation
and other community revi-
IMPLEMENTATION - The County Plan-
talization activities.
ning Board will accept as one of its
Although planning was part
on -going projects, to analyze and
of each application, no
'
viii

1
11
Policy/Implementation
review current housing need and to
develop detailed plans to meet this
need. With the help of the staff, it
will seek to prepare a housing plan.
2. POLICY: INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT
To provide a solid economic base on
which to add new employment sources at
higher skill levels and wage rates. In
addition, the attraction of industry is
seen as a major County function
requiring the efforts and talents of
all County citizens. The County will
commit its resources and best efforts
to this goal.
IMPLEMENTATION - The Craven County
Industrial Commission and its staff
serve as the major implementors of the
County's industrial development
policy.
3. POLICY: COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT
To encourage major commercial faci-
lities to locate in areas providing
good access and reduced off -site
impacts to existing developments. To
' promote appropriate neighborhood and
small area shopping centers offering a
high level of convenience and access
and supporting, not detracting from,
surrounding residential areas.
IMPLEMENTATION - This policy shall
be carried out by the Planning Board
and staff by careful consideration and
enforcement of land use plans and
controls.
4. POLICY: COMMITMENT TO PROVIDING,
SERVICES TO DEVELOPMENT
To continue to provide a high level
of support services to meet the
requirements of the future population.
This is especially critical in Town-
ships 2, 5, 6, 7 and 8 where most of
' the growth will occur.
ix
Status/Relevancy
Actions
separate housing needs
plan has been developed.
2. Ongoing Concern; and
implemented. Since the
1982 Plan, seven new
industries have located in
the County. Also, the
County has established a
Tourism Development
Authority and has offi-
cially joined the "Keep
America Beautiful" cam-
paign, to continually
promote the area's attrac-
tiveness.
3. Ongoing Concern;
policy continually being
implemented.
4. - Implemented and
expanded to include the
provision of water servi-
ces to Townships 1, 3, and
9. Studies on water
service have been comple-
ted or are being prepared
for Townships 2 and 5.

Policy/Implementation
IMPLEMENTATION - (None discussed)
4. URBAN GROWTH PATTERNS
The urban corridor in Townships 6,
7, and 8 is slated to receive most of
the future growth and will be able to
do so. The remainder of the County,
with the exception of transition areas
such as Dover and Cove City, should be
reserved for farming, forestry, and
very low density development.
IMPLEMENTATION - (None discussed)
5. CHANNEL MAINTENANCE
Craven County
maintain safe and
depths and widths
Trent Rivers.
supports efforts to
adequate channel
in both the Neuse and
IMPLEMENTATION - (None discussed)
D. CONTINUING PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
(No "Policy Statement" Declared)
E. SPECIAL LOCAL ISSUES
1. POLICY: NEUSE RIVER WATER QUALITY
The County Commissioners have
stated that the deteriorating water
quality of the Neuse River will be the
major land use problem in the 19801s.
However, the issue has such a magnitude
and crosses so many governmental
boundaries and involves so many appar-
ently yet unresolved scientific issues,
that the County must rely on State and
federal authorities for guidance and
leadership. After years of neglect,'
the County hopes that this assistance
will be forthcoming in a scale similar
to that now being done on the Chowan
River.
IMPLEMENTATION - (No Clear
Implementation Statement)
x
Status/Relevancy ,
Actions
i
4. Townships 6, 7, and 8
are still growing; how-
ever, so is Township 2.
Also, because of the
development of centralized
water in Townships 1, 3,
and 9, more of those areas
may need to be classified
as "transition."
5. Ongoing Concern.
1
7L
D. Policies are included
in the 1987 Plan Update.
1. The County, while con-
tinually supportive of
local efforts to enhance
water quality, believed
strongly that state-wide
efforts should focus on
mitigating stream pollu-
tants in upstream loca-
tions. In January 1988,
the entire Neuse River
Basin received the special
designation of "Nutrient
'
Sensitive" waters, which
will require over a period
of years certain actions
to reduce point and non -
point sources of pollu-
tion. I

Policy/Implementation
2. Waterfront Development (No Policy
discussed)
3. Impact of Cherry Point (No Policy
discussed)
i
1
1
1
1
1 _
xi
Status/Relevancy
Actions
2. The County is
concerned that adequate
public access be estab-
lished in water -front
developing areas.
3. Current concerns of
the County relate to
noise, accident potential
and the acquisition of
land for avigation ease-
ments.

SECTION 1 :
Analysis of Existing Conditions
and
Projected Demand .
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

ICRAVEN COUNTY CAMA LAND USE PLAN
' A. Establishment of Information Base
This 1987 Land Use Plan Update for Craven County is being
prepared in accordance with requirements of the North Carolina
Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA). Specifically, this document
complies with Subchapter 7B, "Land Use Planning Guidelines," of
the North Carolina Administrative Code, as amended, June 1985.
The initial CAMA Land Use Plan was prepared for Craven County
in 1975, and the first update in 1982. According to the Land Use
Planning Guidelines, the major purpose of periodic updating of
local land use plans is to identify and analyze newly emerging
community issues and problems. An additional element which must
be addressed which was not required in either the 1975 Plan or the
1982 Update is "Storm Hazard Mitigation, Post -Disaster Recovery,
and Hurricane Evacuation Plan." This element is designed to help
local governments coordinate effective policies and actions
relating to the impact of hurricanes or other severe storms.
' The guidelines further give the following objectives the
update should meet:
-- to further define and refine local policies and issues;
-- to further examine and refine the land classification
system and the land classification map;
-- to assess the effectiveness of the existing land use plan
- and its implementation;
to further explore implementation procedures, and;
-- to promote a better understanding of the land use planning
process.
Both the 1975 Land Use Plan and the 1982 Update provided some
of the needed information base for this most recent update.
However, in many cases, new information had to be developed. A
number of data sources were tapped during the preparation of this
plan in order to prepare updated analyses of population, housing,
economics, and existing land uses. Most of the data came from
primary and secondary sources in the form of direct contacts with
representatives of various state and federal agencies and/or
previously published documents or reports. Interviews were
conducted with various County officials. Efforts were made to
obtain data that was as up to date and accurate as possible.
i

B. Present Conditions i
1. Population:
Craven County, although located in predominantly rural
Southeast North Carolina, is one of the fastest growing counties
in the eastern half of the State and is increasingly becoming more
"urban." Table 1, below, shows the decennial population of Craven
County from 1940 to 1980, with 1986 estimates and projections to
1991 and 1996.
Table 1: Craven County Population:
1940-1980, With Projections to 1996
Num. Pct.
Year Population Change Chancre
1940
31,298
--
--
1950
48,823
17,525
56.0
1960
58,773
90,950
20.4
1970
62,554
3,781
6.4
1980
71,043
8,489
13.6
*1986
82,560
11,517
16.2
*1991.
92,079-
9,519
11.5
*1996
101,656
9,577
10.4
Source: U.S.
Census
*Projections by the N.C. Office of State Budget & Management
Currently, the 1986 projected population for Craven County is
82,560, according to State demographers. The population of Craven '
County has seen steady growth, although with fluctuating rates of
growth for all of the census reporting periods shown in the above
Table. The largest growth took place between 1940 and 1950,
spurred by the establishment and growth of the Marine Corps Air
Station at Cherry Point near the then small village of Havelock,
beginning in 1941. Growth continued through the 501s, 601s, 70's
and now at a stepped up pace, through the 1980's.
In fact, according to 1986 projections provided by the North
Carolina Office of State Budget and Management (OSB&M), Craven
County's population during the six years since the official 1980
U.S. Census has already exceeded the 10-year growth recorded
between 1970 and 1980 by an astounding 37 percent. From 1980 to
1986, the County gained 11,517 persons -- almost 2,000 residents
per year -- compared to the 1970-80 gain of 8,489 persons (about
850 persons per year). This strong growth trend is projected by
State demographers to continue through the next 10 years, so that
I

by 1996, the County's population will be nearly 102,000 persons.
This is an increase of nearly 20,000 persons in 10 years.
Obviously, the historical and projected population trends in
Craven County are very significant factors in the development of a
Land Use Plan.
a. Dispersal of Population
1) Urban -Rural
Along with the increasing overall growth in Craven
County's population during most of this century has come
increasing urbanization. Notice Table 2, below, which shows the
dramatic rural to urban shift since 1960.
In 1960, nearly three -fourths of the county's residents
(43,056 persons) were classified as "rural" that census year.
However, as shown in Table 1, between 1960 and 1970, the number of
residents classified as "urban" more than doubled
TABLE 2: Urban -Rural Population Trends
in Craven Countv 1960-1980
1960 *% 1970 % 1980 %
Urban 15,717 (29) 34,549 (55) 35,228 (50)
Rural 43,056 (73) 28,005 (43) 35,815 (50)
Total 58,773 62,554 71,043
Source: U.S. Census of Population 1970, 1980
*Percentages are rounded.
to comprise over one-half of the County's population. And
although according to the 1980 Census, the "rural" population grew
more than the "urban" sector, the total 1980 rural population is
still significantly less than the 1960 rural total. Also, the
significantly increased population called "rural" bewteen 1970 and
1980 may be somewhat :misleading. This classification is more
likely indicative of the increased "suburban" and even "extra -
suburban" residential development taking place adjacent to, but
outside of, the larger municipalities of New Bern and Havelock as
well as sizeable planned unit developments such as Fairfield
Harbor. Because of their proximity to, demand for, and reliance
upon urban services, these areas are essentially "urban" in
character instead of "rural."
L

2) Municipal Populations
Currently, there are eight (8) incorporated municipalities
in Craven County. New Bern is the county seat and was,
historically, by far the largest municipality in the county.
However, in 1980, Havelock annexed the Marine Corps Air Station at
Cherry Point and "overnight" became the-county's most populous
municipality. Notice Table 3, below.
TABLE 3:
CRAVEN COUNTY
Bridgeton
Cove City
Dover
Havelock
New Bern
River Bend
Trent Woods
Vanceboro
Municipal Total
Craven County Municipal Population
April 1970
Census
AL 62,554
520
485.
585
3,012
14,660
*
719
758
20,739
April 1980
Census
71,043
500
600
17,718
14,557
959
1,177
833
36,805
Source:' N.C. Office of State Budget -& Management.,
*Not yet incorporated.
The municipal proportion of
seen steady growth in recent years
of annexation, it is quite possible
increase in the future.
3) Townships
July 1984
Estimate
76,807
491
541
619
21,608
17,706
1,584
1,511
922
44,982
the County's population has
and because of the feasibility
for this proportion to
Craven County is divided into eight (8) Townships. The
populations of these townships are shown in Table 4, page 4, for
1940 through 1980. Map 2, next page, shows the boundaries of the
Townships. The most populated Townships are those containing New
Bern, Havelock, Trent Woods and River Bend; i.e., Townships 8, 6
and 7. Township 2, however, which contains the Fairfield Harbor
development, had the fastest rate of growth between 1970 and
1980.
4
1
I
1�1
L
I

�:
dll
s:l
I I A 0 1 0 1 1
C O Y N 1 1
MAP 2
CRAVEN COUNTY
TOWNSHIPS
I
r
��atsab��f.- 'k `'••. �
w `.
��.� may.. ,, •
CRAVEN COUINW
NORTH CAROLINA
��
ill

1
91
Township
TABLE 4
POPULATION CHANGE, BY TOWNSHIP, CRAVEN COUNTY
1940-1980
1940 1950 1960 1970 1980
Township
1
5,486
5,494
5,310
4,946
5,359
Township
2
1,874
2,471
3,003
3,257
4,414
Township
3
3,957
4,398
4,315
3,837
3,803
Township
5
1,428
1,333
1,823
2,047
2,551
Township
6
723
11,695
18,053
20,798
21,963
Township
7
1,662
2,632
3,887
4,757
6,149
Township
8
14,337
18,952
20,686
21,125
24,645
Township
9
1,831
1,848
1,696
1,787
2,159
Total 31,298 48,823 58,773 62,554 71,043
Source: 1982 Land Use Plan; Update 1980 Census.
Total % Chancre
1970-1980
8.4
35.5
-1.0
24.6
5.6
29.3
16.7
20.8
13.6
b. Composition
Table 5 below shows the racial and sexual proportions of Craven
County's population from 1960 with projections through 1996.
TABLE 5
Historical and Projected Racial Composition:Craven
White Total Non -White Total M.
Year M F M F
1960
21,858
19,906
41,764(71%)
8,216
8,793
17,009(29%)
1970
24,756
21,556
46,312(74%)
7,777
8,465
16,242(26%)
1980
26,409
23,999
50,408(71%)
10,102
10,533
20,635(29%)
*1986
29,874
27,073
56,947(69%)
12,577
13,036
25,613(31%)
*1991
32,536
29,650
62,186(68%)
14,694
15,199
29,893(32%)
*1996
35,258
32,466
67,724(67%)
16,643
17,289
33,932(33%)
Sources: U.S. Census; N.C. Office of State Budget & Management
*Projections by Office of State Budget & Managanent.
0

1
The racial composition of Craven-County's population has not
changed dramatically since 1960 and is projected to continue at
roughly the same existing proportions, i.e., about two-thirds
white and one-third non -white. The percentage of non -white,
however, is projected to increase slightly by 1996. According to
the 1980 U.S. Census, about 93% of the non -white population
consists of Blacks, with the rest being composed of persons of
Spanish origin, Asians and Pacific Islanders and American
Indians.
Table 5 also shows that the male -female ratio in Craven
r
County (currently about 48% female and 52% male) will likely
remain stable throughout the period. It should be noted that
among national and statewide trends, it is more usual to find the
number of females slightly outnumbering males. But in Craven
County, the reverse is true and is likely the result of the
presence of the Marine Corps Air Station at Cherry Point.
As far as age groupings are concerned, it is interesting to
note that according to 1986 projections by State demographers, the
school -age population in Craven County, i.e., from 5-19 years old,
has peaked and is projected to decline. This age group currently
composes about one-third of the total population (32.7%). Notice
Table 6, below:
TABLE 6: Selected Age Group Summary: 1986-1996
% % % Total No.
Selected Total Total Total Change
Age Group 1986 Pop. 1991 Pop. 1996 Pop. 86-96
5-19 26,983 32.7 20,869 22.6 22,793 22.4 -4,190
20-59 45,096 54.6 50,132 54.4 55,456 54.6 10,360
60+ 10,481 12.7 12,627 13.4 14,462 14.2 3,981
Source: N.C. State Data Center, Office of State Budget
and Management
From 1986 to 1996, according to the State Data Center projec-
tions, the school -age population is projected to decline to about
22%, with a net numerical loss in this age group of -4,190 per-
sons. This trend, if such projections are accurate, would have
serious implications for the planning and development of school
facilities and services. However, the demographic projections are
in conflict with projections prepared by the State Department of
Education, which shows an overall increasing trend in the number
of school -age children in Craven County. This issue will be dis-
cussed further under Capacity of Community Facilities. (It should
be noted, however, that other external factors such as immigration
of more younger families could easily alter State demographic
projections.)
6

1
1
I
LI
The middle grouping of working adults (20-59) is projected to
maintain a stable proportion of the total population, i.e., about
55%, and increase numerically by 10,360 persons from 1986 to 1996.
This trend is very significant to land use planning, e.g., where
will people live? This is an issue to be addressed in the policy
section of this plan.
Finally, the 60 and older population in Craven County is also
projected to increase moderately from 1986 to 1996, growing from
12.7% to 14.2% of the total population, representing a net
numerical gain of 3,981 persons. Facilities and services for the
aging will also be a very relevant planning issue in Craven
County.

2.
Economic Analysis
a. General I
The economic picture for Craven County has steadily
been improving. The county's economic base is no
longer primarily agricultural income, but has increas-
ing diversification. Other significant elements of
Craven County's economy include tourism, manufactur-
ing, commercial forestry, commercial fishing, and the
Marine Corps Air Station at Cherry Point is a major
civilian employer. Existing economic conditions are
discussed in more detail, below.
b. Agricultural
Total farm income has declined since 1981, as Table
7, page 9, shows. Between 1982 and 1983, regular
farm income actually decreased by nearly 6 million
dollars. Even when government payments, particularly
the Payment -in -Kind (PIK) program, which was a
one-year program in 1983, are taken into account,
total farm income in 1983 was still 17% less than that
for 1982. Field crops, most notably flue -cured
tobacco, soybeans, and corn, produce the most farm
income. Notice Table 7 on the following page.
I

Table 7: Craven County Crop Production Income: 1981-1985
Crop 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985
Field Crops
Flue -Cured Tobacco
$20,756,830
$21,977,251
$18,124,282
$17,522,041
$14,759,708
Maryland Tobacco
2,079
--
-
-
-
Peanuts
32,937
22,772
20,552
36,802
34,363
Corn for Grain
6,743,389
5,083,331
4,874,716
4,774,938
2,485,035
Wheat
1,189,188
1,008,420
437,693
1,254,240
257,616
Oats
65,550
-
14,784
19,672
16,913
Grain Sorghum
11,849
22,050
2,904
49,640
3,600
Soybeans
5,591,175
4,839,712
3,376,931
3,810,797
1,548,424
Hay
5,525
6,930
-
--
5,200
Barley
-
-
10,320
6,486
-
Vegetables & Berries
Irish Potatoes
126,875
107,625
100,625
--
5,400
Sweet Potatoes
Cabbage
69,000
173,160
73,200
150,000
144,000
195,000
46,200
150,000
24,000
87,000
Canteloupes
97,387
48,696
68,910
825
500
Corn, sweet (5 doz.)
42,200
57,000
88,000
105,000
33,250
Cucumbers -processing
32,160
40,200
39,375
7,125
4,750
*Leafy greens
45,000
56,250
52,500
17,600
12,600
Okra
-
40,000
-
-
-
Peppers -fresh market
--
-
37,920
4,350
4,200
Peppers -processing
23,250
23,400
Snap Beans -fresh market
26,784
35,712
45,000
9,300
5,000
Southern Peas
32,725
32,725
44,000
8,000
6,200
Squash
3,000
4,800
2,440
2,200
9,000
Tomatoes
_
4,435
9,660
5,040
Watermelons
5,544
5,544
4,950
1,350
560
**Other Vegetables
-
-
-
1,000
1,500
Blueberries
1,176,000
636,120
581,400
607,500
115,190
Strawberries
123,000
135,000
102,000
35,000
10,800
Fruits and Nuts
Pecans
10,500
13,000
13,600
9,300
-
Grapes
23,850
24,075
24,300
6,820
6,320
Nursery & Greenhouse
Greenhouse crops
137,250
137,250
139,500
139,500
35,000
Outdoor flowers
3,600
3,600
3,600
1,200
2,000
Ornamental shrubs & trees
250,000
250,000
250,000
250,000
250,000
Subtotal
$36,796,807
$34,837,298
$28,811,322
$28,882,166
$19,726,329
Government Payments
141,477
44,445
571,552
79,572
442,472
TOTAL CROP
PRODUCTION INCOME
$36,938,284
$34,881,743
$29,382,874
$28,961,738
$20,168,801
turnip
*May include collards, kale, mustard,
spinach, and
greens.
**May include asparagus, beets, broccoli,
cauliflower,
celery, dry beans, lettuce, lima
beans, onions, rutabagas,
and other minor vegetables
Source: Data Worksheets of
Cash Farm Income
- 1985,
1984, 1983, 1982,
and 1981, Craven
County Agriculture
Extension Office
9

Livestock production, mostly hogs, accounts for the
majority of the rest of farm income. Income from hog
production and from beef production declined during
the period 1982-1984, but increased significantly in
1985. Notice Table 8, below.
Table 8: Craven County Livestock and Livestock
Product Income
Year Dollar Value t
1982 $9,342,158
1983 $6,939,296
1984 $6,904,550
1985 $10,552,881
Source: Estimated Income from Sale of Farm Products and Govern-
ment Payments, By County, Extension District, and State
of North Carolina for 1982, 1983, and 1984; N.C. Agri-
cultural Extension Service, N.C. State University,
Raleigh, North Carolina
It is interesting to note that, perhaps consistent
with national trends, the number of farms and total
farm acreage in Craven County is declining. According
to the 1982 U.S. Census of Agriculture, between 1978
and 1982, the total number of farms declined from 701
to 562 during the period. This decrease by 139 farms
represents a total decrease of 20%, or about 27 farms
per year. However, it appears that some smaller farms
became part of larger ones, since although the number
of farms declined, the average size of each farm rose
from 152 acres in 1978 to 164 acres in 1982. This
trend of fewer, but larger farms in Craven County is
significant.
c.
Commercial
Forestry
Table 9:
Craven County Forestry Income, 1981
- 1986
1981*
1982* 1983*
1984*
1985*
1986*
Pulpwood
$1,478
$1,681 $ --
$1,448
$2,158
$1,290
Lumber
5,575
6,918 --
9,115
6,114
3,431
Other
Forest
Products
--
17 --
--
--
--
Total
$7,053
$8,616 $ --
$10,563
$8,272
$4,721
Source: N.
C. Agricultural Extension
Service,
Annual Estimates
of
Cash Farm
Income
*In
thousands
of dollars
10 1

u
L�
1
Overall forestry income in the County increased from
1981 to 1982, jumped from 1982 to 1984 (1983 figures
not available), and dropped significantly from 1984 to
1986. Forestry income has been quite irregular.
d. Commercial Fishing
A substantial amount of commercial fishing occurs both
in the Pamlico Sound and in the Neuse River. Although
the total poundage for Craven County fluctuated
between 1981 and 1983, and there was a slight decrease
in dollar value from 1983 to 1984, dollar value for
1985 increased by a substantial 90% over the 1981
dollar value. However, for 1986, as poundage
decreased, so did the dollar value by 36%. Overall,
from 1981 to 1986, dollar value increased by 85%.
Notice Table 10, below:
Table 10: Craven County Commercial Fishery Income,
1981-1986
Pounds
Dollar
Year
(Total Catch)
Value
1981
115,960
$ 33,127
1982
59,853
101,171
1983
485,140
268,372
1984-
558,570
204,978
1985
857,433
342,586
1986
688,710
218,442
Source: N.C. Division of Marine Fisheries
Craven County ranked 16th out of 20 of the State's
coastal counties reporting commercial catches in 1986,
a slight drop from 15th in 1985, consistent with 16th
place for 1983 and 1984, and a jump over 17th for 1981
and 1982.
e. Manufacturing and Commercial Activity
Other major income sources for Craven County include
income from manufacturing as well as from wholesale
and retail trade and services. According to the U. S.
Bureau of the Census' County Business Patterns, 1983,
the annual business payroll fluctuated from 1980
through 1983, with a slight drop in 1982 and an over-
all increase of 20% in annual business payroll from
1980 to 1983. Notice Table 11, below:
11

n
Table 11: Craven County: Establishments & Payroll,"
1980-83
1980 1981 1982 1983
No. Establishments 1,244 1,256 1,161 1,328
Annual Payroll
(0001s) 145,954 162,508 161,819 184,602
Source: County Business Patterns, 1980, 1981, 1982, and 1983,
U.S. Bureau of the Census
As Table 11 shows, overall, within the three-year
period, 84 additional establishments were noted, and
annual payroll increased by 38.6 million dollars (not
accounting for inflation). This is a significant
economic trend for Craven County.
f. Tourism
Income from tourism has been on the rise in Craven
County and has a substantial impact upon the County's
economy. Historic New Bern is an appealing riverfront
community, stocked with colonial legend and lore and
beautiful historic homes. The friendly shops and
stores, pleasant restaurants, and exceptional "bed -
and -breakfast inns" accommodations are attracting more
and more people each year. Notice Table 12.
Table 12: Craven County Tourism Income 1981-1985
Year Expenditures ($1,000,000)
1981 21.99
1982 19.41
1983 26.10
1984 26.16
1985 29.21
Source: N.C. Travel and Tourism Division, Department of Commerce
Craven County recognizes the increasing potential for
the expansion of tourism in the County. In 1985, the
County established a "Tourism Development Authority."
This Authority was established to promote tourism in
the County and was to be financed by revenues from the
3% room occupancy tax. In 1986, the first -year taxes
were collected, the County received $139,000. The
1987 projections, because of the construction of three
new motels in the County, is anticipated to increase
to $175,000. Beginning July 1, 1987, the Authority
will be staffed with a full-time director.
Somewhat related to tourism is the fact that Craven
County has joined the "Keep America Beautiful" cam-
paign, and as of January 1, 1988, will employ a local
12

coordinator. The local coordinator will also help
promote the area's attractiveness.
g. Employment and Income
1. Employment
Overall employment in Craven County increased from
1982 to 1983, and again from 1984 to 1985,
although the labor force decreased overall.
Notice Table 13, below, which shows the general
employment pattern from 1982 through 1985.
Table 13: Craven County Unemployment Rate, 1982-85
Change
1982 1983 1984 1985 1982-85
Civil. Labor Force 30,210 30,550 27,840 29,780 -430
No. Employed 27,700 28,160 26,050 28,240 - 540
No. Unemployed 2,510 2,390 1,790 1,540 -970
Unemployment Rate 8.3 7.8 6.4 5.2 3.1
N. C. Unemp. Rate 9.0 8.9 6.8 5.4 3.6
Source: N. C. Employment Security Commission
As the data in Table 13 shows, Craven County's
average annual unemployment rate, from 1982
through 1985, has been favorable when compared to
the rate for North Carolina. From 1982 to 1985,
the County's labor force decreased by a net of 430
persons, or by 1%. However, during the same
period, the number of unemployed decreased by 970
persons, impacting favorably overall on employment
conditions in the County, relative to other
counties and the state as a whole. In 1985 (the
latest year for annual statistics), Craven County
had an unemployment rate substantially lower than
that for North Carolina. Statistics for 1986 are
expected to show continued improvement in the
local employment picture.
In 1980, the largest occupational categories of
the civilian labor force, according to the N. C.
Employment Security Commission, Bureau of Labor
Market Research, were managerial operators and
fabricators (4,779/19%); precision production,
craft and repair occupations (3,726/15%); opera-
tors and fabricators (3,647/15%); administrative
support occupations, including clerical
(3,495/14%); service occupations (3,329/13%); and
sales occupations (2,818/11%).
I - 13

2. Income I
Although the income picture in Craven County has
been improving, there are still a number of fami-
lies and individuals below the poverty income
level. The 1980 U. S. Census data showed that
2,869 (or 15.5%) of the County's 18,455 families
(enumerated in 1979) had below poverty incomes.
Table 14: Craven County: Families Below Poverty
Level, 1969-79
1969 1979
No. Percent No. Percent
Craven County - - 2,869 15.5
N. C. - 16.3 - 11.6
Source:
U. S. Census, 1970, 1980
According to the 1980 Census, Craven County's
percentage of families with below poverty incomes
is significantly higher than the state's percent-
age. Likewise, this was true for individuals with
incomes below the poverty level, as noted in Table it
15, below:
Table 15: Craven County: Persons With Incomes Below
Poverty Level, 1969-79
1969 1979
No. Percent No. Percent
Craven County - - 12,318 18.5
N. C. - 20.3 - 14.8
Source: U. S. Census, 1970, 1980
Percentage -wise, the improvement in Craven County
was greater than for the state as a whole. - _
Another measure of local income posture is growth
in per capita personal income. Notice Table 16,
below:
Table
16: Craven County:
Per Capita
Personal
Income, 1979-83
Craven
Craven Co.'s
Craven Co.'s
Year
County N.C.
U.S.
Pct. of N.C.
Pct. of U.S.
1979
6,354 7,104
8,651
89%
73%
1980
7,289 7,774
9,494
94%
77%
1981
7,738 8,655
10,544
89%
73%
1982
8,707 9,148
11,113
95%
78%
1983
9,248 9,805
11,687
94%
79%
Source:
U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis; Neuse River Council of
Governments
14

Per capita income has been increasing in Craven
County. The County's per capita personal income
is significantly below that of the state as a
whole and substantially less than the U.S. per
capita income.
h. Local Government Revenue Summary
Local government revenues, most notably from property
taxes, also can be indicative of local economic
trends. Notice Table 17, below. From 1982 to 1983,
which was not a period of revaluation but real growth,
assessed values rose by over $100 million in one year,
which is quite.substantial.
Table 17: Property Tax Values Craven County
1981-1985
Year Assessed Value % Increase Tax Rate/100
1981 $ 791,169,076 .80
1982 850,020,396 7.4% .80
1983 952,190,897 12.0% .84
1984 1,032,680,356 8.5% .80
1985 1,113,183,054 7.8% .80
Source: Craven County Tax Office
i. Economic Summary
The analysis of current economic conditions indicates
the following trends:
1. Agriculture is no longer a dominant force in the
County's economic base. However, other income
sources, notably tourism, manufacturing, commer-
cial fishing, and forestry are increasing in
importance.
2. Overall, income increased in Craven County between
1970 and 1980. Nevertheless, it appears that
additional economic activity will be needed during
the next 10 years if previous income gains are to
be maintained.
3. Housing
The provision of adequate housing to shelter a population
is always an important consideration for any jurisdiction.
Notice the summary below in Table 18:
15
J

iJ
Table 18: 1980 Census Craven County Housing Summary
Item No .
Total Units 13,468
Vacant - Seasonal & Migratory 55
Year -Round Units 13,413
Vacant Year -Round Units 1,133
Occupied Year -Round Units 12,280
Persons in Households 66,763
Average Household Size 2.83
Source: U.S. Census, 1980.
N.C. State Data Center
It appears that Craven County has a significant vacancy
rate, i.e., 8% of all year-round units in 1980. However,
a number of these units may be considered "substandard"
since only 418 were reported to be either "for sale" or
"for rent" or "held for occasional use," and 715 listed as
"other vacant," according to the Census. Although the
Census does not have specific measures for "substandard"
or "standard," the number of units lacking complete indoor
plumbing for exclusive use provides some indication. The
1980 Census reported that 1,040 (7.8%) of the County's
13,413 year-round units lacked complete indoor plumbing
for exclusive use, with 784 of the units being occupied
and 256 vacant.
During land use surveys conducted in late 1986, it was
noted that there was a significant number of units which
appeared to be substandard scattered around the County.
Most new construction appears to be taking place in
Townships 6, 7 and 8.
Another notable housing trend is the growth of mobile
homes in the County. The 1980 Census reported a total of
3,586 mobile home units. However, based on the best
available data, between 1985 and 1986, permits were issued
for the placement of 663 additional mobile homes, an
average of 331 per year over the two-year period.
I
16 1

C. Existing Land Use Analysis
1. General Patterns
The general land use pattern has changed little since the
1982 Update. Notice Table 19, below, which was compiled
from data contained in the Profile of North Carolina
Counties, 1981.
Table 19: Major Land Uses in Craven County - 1981
Estimate
Category Acres % of Total
Land 459,900 91.6
- Farms _ 76,700 -15.3
- Urban & Built-up 6,600 - 1.3
- Forestland-287,100 -57.2
Water 42,400 8.4
Total 502,300 100.0
Sources: Profile of North Carolina Counties, 1981
According to the U.S. Census of Agriculture, the amount of
land in farms (including croplands, pasturelands, home
sites, and woodlands) was 106,664 acres in 1978. However,
the total acreage in farms in 1982 was 92,047 acres which
was 14,617 acres less than the 1978 estimate. This loss
of farm acreage is perhaps not only an indication of fewer
but larger farms in the County, but also a modest conver-
sion trend of farmland being used for non -farm or "urban"
uses. The majority of the land area in Craven County is
covered with forests, but there does appear to be a
modest, but steady trend of conversion of forestland into
other uses.
The primary "urban and built -up" areas in the County are
p Y
Township 8, and specifically, the City of New Bern, and
Township 6, with the City of Havelock and 70 East in Town-
ship 7. other "built-up" areas include Trent Woods and
River Bend. As noted in the 1982 Update, the potential
for significant urbanized development (mostly residential)
exists in the Trent Woods and River Bend areas, and in the
Bridgeton and Fairfield Harbour areas. Since the 1982
Plan Update, development has continually taken place in
these areas-- almost exclusively residential. Additional
information on existing land uses is presented in the
following discussions. (See Map 3, Existing Land Use Map,.
attached.)
a. Residential Land Use
The primary concentration of residential land uses
outside of the incorporated municipalities are newly
17

developing subdivisions on the "fringe" of these areas
and in major developments such as -Fairfield Harbour.
(See Map 4, "Major Subdivisions; 1980-1986".) From
1980 through May, 1987, a total of 1,943 building lots
were approved through the County subdivision review
process. Although a number of these approved plats
were for smaller subdivisions, a total of 1,544 lots
were approved in developments consisting of 10 or more
lots. Consistent with a trend identified in the 1982
Plan, most of the major subdivisions are being devel-
oped in Townships 2, 6, and 7, respectively. Addi-
tional unincorporated "crossroads" communities, usual-
ly consisting of a cluster of houses, one or two
stores, a church, etc., are found along several of the
major highways and secondary routes in the County.
The most notable include Tuscarora, Askin, Fort
Barnwell, Ernul, and Harlowe.
The subdivision ordinance for Craven County was
revised, effective November 1, 1982. This ordinance
includes standards and procedures for the development
and subdivision of land, and is enforced by the Plan-
ning Department. From 1980 through mid-1986, the
Subdivision of raw land into developable building lots
has been a steadily increasing activity in Craven
County, as mentioned earlier. As noted in the 1982
Plan, and as depicted on Map 4, the Townships
attracting the most intense concentrations of "major"
subdivisions are numbers 6, 8, and 7. However, the
pattern appears to be shifting somewhat with Township
2 posting an increasing share of the total subdivision
lots. This is primarily due to the growth of the
Fairfield Harbor development in Township 2. Notice
Table 20, below:
18
I

Table 20:
Craven County
Approved Building Lots,
1980-1986, By
Township
Township
*Small
**Large
Total
Number
Subdivisions
Subdivisions
Lots
Percent
1
91
78
169
8.7
2
3
108
3
473
10
581
13
30.0
.7
5
15
28
43
2.2
6
40
420
460
23.6
7
75
293
368
19.0
8
31
215
246
12.6
9
36
27
63
3.2
399
1,544
1 , 943
100.0
*Less than 10 lots in Subdivision:
**10 lots or more in Subdivision.
Source: Craven County Planning Department; Talbert,
Cox & Associates, Inc.
In addition to the trends in Township 2, Table 20
shows that both Townships 1 and 9 have significant
numbers of lots in relatively "small" subdivisions,
i.e., under 10 lots per plat. This trend is quite
notable since these two Townships, along with Township
3, are scheduled to receive centralized water services
during the current planning period. (Additional dis-
cussion is under "Capacity of Community Facilities,"
page 37.)
It should also be noted that for the years 1984
through July, 1986, a total of 762 permits were
granted for the construction of new conventional
single-family dwellings, and for 1985-86, 663 permits
for mobile homes*. This is a three-year combined
total of 1,425 residential units, including "attached"
single-family, two-family, and three- and four -family
units. The average for conventional "stick -built"
units during the period was 25 units per month, and
27.6 mobile home units per month. There is a strong
trend of continuing residential development in the
County.
*Records were not available for years 1983-84 for mobile homes.
1
19

b.
c.
d.
e.
Commercial Land Uses
The majority of commercial land uses is concentrated
within the Cities of New Bern and Havelock, in shop-
ping centers, malls, or the immediate environs adja-
cent to the Cities. Out in the County, however, com-
mercial land uses are mostly scattered, with few con-
centrations. In other areas of the County, especially
at crossroads communities, it is common to find small
grocery stores with gasoline service pumps along major
thoroughfares, such as U.S. Highways 17 and 70 and
N.C. Highway 55.
Industrial Land Use
Outside of New Bern, off Highway 70, there is an
industrial park, currently consisting of four indus-
tries. Other small industrial tracts are located in
and around New Bern, Vanceboro, and Havelock. A large
Weyerhauser plant is also located in the County.
There is a proposal pending to develop a cogeneration
power plant, using peat as the source of power within
the City of New Bern. Also, a new 20,000 S.F. agri-
culture extension building is proposed to be located
in the industrial park.
Institutional Land Uses
Institutional land uses generally consist of govern-
ment uses, such as military installations, or reli-
gious and civic uses such as churches, cemeteries or
clubs, or public recreational areas. The most signif-
icant tract of government -owned land beyond the imme-
diate environs of Havelock is the Croatan National
Forest, which consists of 157,000 acres. Other insti-
tutional uses, like commercial uses, are mostly con-
centrated within the municipalities or scattered
throughout the County.
Land Use Summary
While the land use changes in Craven County since the
1982 Land Use Plan Update have not been dramatic,
there are some additional emerging trends. Increasing
residential development in Townships 6, 8, and 7,
respectively, is continuing as expected. However,
both Townships 1 and 9 have witnessed growth in the
number of small -lot subdivisions. Mobile home place-
ment has not become a significant factor over the past
few years in the County. Although there has been some
conversion of farmland into non -farm uses, the amount
of land is not overwhelming, but still indicates a
modest trend. Generally, existing land use patterns,
as discussed above, are projected to continue through- '
20

out the period covered by this 1987 Plan Update, i.e.,
5-10 years. However, other factors affecting land
use, such as the absence of centralized sewer and
septic tank limitations, the provision of water in
previously unserved areas (most notably Townships 1,
3, and 9 in the mostly rural western end of the
County), the absence of, or possible introduction of
zoning and other regulatory devices, could easily
affect existing patterns. Another important factor
affecting land use in the County is the growing
interest on the part of the larger municipalities,
i.e., New Bern, Havelock, and River Bend, in exercis-
ing their respective one -mile extra -territorial juris-
"urban
dictions to better manage adjacent fringe"
growth. These issues, along with continuing coastal
water quality concerns, will be addressed in other
parts of this plan.
Ci
1
h
21

2.
3.
Significant Land Compatibility Problems
In the conventional application of the concept, there are few
significant land compatibility problems in Craven County. A
land compatibility problem is generally identified when two or
more land use types are adjacent to each other and one is
somehow restricted from expansion or existing in its present
state or condition, because of adverse conditions caused by
the other, thus discouraging additional investment. In the
1982 Plan Update, land compatibility problems were identified
in specific areas, i.e., Townships 5, 6, 7, and 8. Each of
these townships have development potential, but are subject to
problems caused by proximity to rivers and to lands owned by
the federal government. Development in some areas adjacent to
the Neuse and Trent Rivers is somewhat restricted by soil con-
ditions, and development in some areas adjacent to the Croatan
National Forest and Marine Corps Air Station, Cherry Point, is
restricted by efforts of the federal government to prevent or
reduce encroachment upon those lands. As development con-
tinues, conflicts over land use may become more apparent and
Craven County will need to coordinate land use activities with
MCAS, Cherry Point, Havelock, and the Croatan National Forest.
The presence of restricted military airspace and military
overflights might also be considered under the general heading
of land use compatibility problems. In some areas near the
vicinity of MCAS Cherry Point, residential and other types of
development might be discouraged because of this proximity.
Major Problems From Unplanned Development
Problems from unplanned development mentioned in the 1982 Plan
Update include nuisance -type problems (e.g., inappropriate
uses locating in residential areas and noise complaints in
areas away from the Air Station). The deteriorating water
quality of the Neuse and Trent Rivers also was cited as having
an adverse impact upon local waste treatment discharge capa-
city, thereby hindering development activities. To some
extent, these issues still are relevant. The County feels
that the majority of water quality problems are derived from
upstream sources. However, another problem is that since more
development is taking place near already developed areas in
Townships 6, 7, and 8 (i.e., New Bern, River Bend, and Trent
Woods), it is becoming more and more difficult to distinguish
which governmental jurisdiction actually has the land develop-
ment "problem." For example, land uses on U.S. Highway 17
south near New Bern could conceivably be within close proxim-
ity to the fringe areas of both Trent Woods and River Bend.
With development, especially new residential development, tak-
ing place in the south Highway 17 area, it will become more
crucial than ever for all four jurisdictions to work coopera-
tively in order to assure well -managed and orderly growth.
Thus, the question of appropriate regulatory jurisdiction has
itself emerged as a problem from unplanned developments.
22 1

n
4. Areas Experiencing or Likely to Experience Major Land Use
Changes
As cited earlier in this section, the more intense urban
development in Craven County is taking place in Townships 6,
8, and 7, respectively, and will likely continue. However,
more smaller subdivisions have been developing in the more
rural Townships of 1 and 9. With the promise of centralized
water in these two Townships (along with Township 3), low -
density, large lot, but small subdivisions could develop.
Township 2, principally because of the increased pace of
development at Fairfield Harbour, will also experience
continued major land use changes during the planning period.
5. Identification of Areas of Environmental Concern (AEC's)
Among the four broad categories of statutorily defined Areas
of Environmental Concern (AEC's) for Coastal North Carolina,
i.e., Estuarine System AEC's and Ocean Hazards AEC's, only the
Estuarine System is applicable to Craven County. Although
these AEC's have not changed, it may be useful to define these
important areas prior to listing them again in this Update.
a. Coastal Wetlands
Coastal wetlands or marshlands are defined as any salt
marsh or other marsh subject to regular or.occasional
flooding by tides, including wind tides (whether or not
the tide waters reach the marshland areas through natural
or artificial watercourses), provided this shall not
include hurricane or tropical storm tides.
Coastal marshlands also contain some, but not necessarily
all, of specific marsh plant species. There are no coast-
al wetlands or salt marshes of any major significance in
Craven County. Although a significant amount of the
County is traversed or bordered by two major rivers, the
occurrence of statutorily defined CAMA "wetlands" is not
very extensive. However, there are some technical "wet-
lands" along the upper reaches of the Neuse River and some
adjacent creeks, and possibly along narrow segments of the
Trent River. Most of what could be termed "wetlands"
actually consists of a few areas of wooded swamps in the
lowlands near the two rivers. (It should be noted that
for CAMA permit granting purposes, actual on -site investi-
gations are required in order to determine the extent of
technical "wetlands.")
b. Estuarine Waters and Estuarine Shorelines
Estuarine waters are defined in G. S. 113A-113(b)(2) as
"all the water of the Atlantic Ocean within the boundary
of North Carolina and all the waters of the bays, sounds,
rivers, and tributaries thereto seaward of the dividing
line between coastal fishing waters and inland fishing
1 23

c.
waters, as set forth in an agreement adopted by the Wild-
life Resources Commission and the Department of Natural
Resources and Community Development filed with the Secre-
tary of State, entitled "Boundary Lines, North Carolina
Commercial Fishing -- Inland Fishing Waters," revised to
March 1, 1965."
Estuarine Shorelines are those non -ocean shorelines which
are especially vulnerable to erosion, flooding, or other
adverse effects of wind and water and are intimately con-
nected to the estuary. These shorelines can be wetlands
as well as dry land. This area extends from the mean high
water level or normal water level along the estuaries,
sounds, bays, and brackish waters as set forth in an
agreement adopted by the Wildlife Resources Commission and
the Department of Natural Resources and Community Develop-
ment, for a distance of 75 feet landward. It should be
noted, however, that for Craven County and all coastal
counties, Estuarine Shorelines are only located adjacent
to coastal or joint waters, and not inland waters.
As an AEC, estuarine shorelines, although characterized as
dry land, are considered a component of the estuarine sys-
tem because of the close association with the adjacent
estuarine waters. Estuarine Waters and adjacent Estuarine
Shorelines make up the most significant components of the
Estuarine System in Craven County. The significance of
the Estuarine System is that it is one of the most produc-
tive natural environments of North Carolina. It not only
supports valuable commercial and sports fisheries, but is
also utilized for commercial navigation, recreation and
aesthetic purposes. Species dependent upon estuaries in-
clude menhaden shrimp, flounder, oysters and crabs. These
species make up over 90 percent of the total value of
North Carolina's commercial catch. These species must
spend all or part of their life cycle in the estuary. The
preservation and protection of these areas are vitally
important. In addition to portions of the Neuse and Trent
Rivers, the Estuarine Waters and adjacent Estuarine Shore-
lines in Craven County include the following or portions
thereof: Adams, Back, Clubfoot, Gulden, Mitchell, and
the Upper Broad creeks.
Public Trust Waters
Public trust waters are partially defined as all waters of
the Atlantic Ocean and the lands thereunder from the mean
high water mark to the seaward limit of state jurisdic-
tion; all natural bodies of water subject to measurable
lunar tides and lands thereunder to the mean high mark;
all navigable natural bodies of water and lands thereunder
24
1

to the mean high water level or mean water level, as the
case may be. In other words, public trust areas are
waters and adjacent lands, the use of which, benefits and
belongs to the public.
-- In Craven County, all of the waters listed as
Estuarine Waters and inland waters are considered
Public Trust Waters.
Currently, all development and development -related activi-
ties within the designated AEC's in Craven County are
regulated by the CAMA permit process and are guided by
local policy (Regulations allow a local government to
develop its own use standards for AECs if they are more
restrictive than the States, e.g., through zoning or
subdivision regulations, etc.). It is important to under-
stand the distinction between Estuarine Waters and Public
Trust Waters because of the different CAMA enforcement
jurisdictions. For all Estuarine Waters, the area of CAMA
permit jurisdiction includes the water and the 75-foot
inland Estuarine Shoreline area. However, the permit
jurisdiction for the Public Trust Waters includes only the
water itself and lands thereunder. Also, if an undesig-
nated creek empties into either Estuarine Waters or Public
Trust Waters, for permit purposes, it receives the same
designation as the water into which it empties.
D. REVIEW OF CURRENT PLANS, POLICIES, REGULATIONS
1. Local Plans, Studies and Regulations
Since completion of the 1982 Plan Update, except for entry
into the "regular phase" of the Federal Flood Insurance
Program and adoption of a new flood damage prevention
ordinance, no major policy or regulatory changes have taken
place. The County did prepare a draft zoning ordinance for
y� consideration of adoption. The proposed ordinance, however,
was not approved by the County Commissioners.
a. Craven County Land Use Plan, 1975
Prepared under CAMA, this initial Plan provides a
description of the then present conditions of population,
economy, and land use constraints to development. It dis-
cussed fragile and hazard areas, areas of environmental
concern, areas with resource potential, and community
facilities. It estimated future needs and set out
policies and objectives related to implementing those
needs.
25

b. Craven County Land Use Plan Update, 1982 1
This was the first 5-year update of the initial CAMA Plan
(1975) and contains a re -assessment of existing conditions
and projections of population, land use and economic con-
ditions. Updated policy statements on various development
issues and implementation strategies are also in the Plan
Update.
C. Hurricane Evacuation, Hazard Mitigation and Post -Disaster
Reconstruction Plan, 1984
This report, funded through the North Carolina Division of
Coastal Management as a demonstration project, was an
attempt to assess the various risk factors affecting the
County in the event of a hurricane or major storm, and to
develop policies aimed at lessening the potential damaging
effects. The report also included policies on evacuation
and rebuilding after such storms. Current planning guide-
lines, however, require that these policies and those on
reconstruction, be included in this present update.
d. Craven County Subdivision Regulations, 1982
Craven County utilizes subdivision
regulations as its
major land development regulatory
device. Revised in
1982, these regulations govern the
transition of raw land
into new residential subdivisions
and set out criteria for
required facility improvements and
general design stan-
dards. The subdivision ordinance
is administered by the
Craven County Planner, along with
the Planning Board. All
development proposals are reviewed
against the standards
set out therein and coordinated with
other agencies such
as the health department.
e. Federal Flood Insurance Program
The Federal Flood Insurance Program in Craven County offi-
cially moved from the Emergency Phase to the Regular Phase
as of May 4, 1987, and is in effect throughout the
County.
f. State Building Code
The County also adopted and actively enforces the State
Building Code through its Building Inspections Depart-
ment.
g. Septic Tank Regulations
Septic tank regulations are administered by the County '
Health Department.
26 1

h. County Recreation Plan
A recreation plan was prepared for the County prior to the
1982 Land Use Plan Update, which noted then that the plan
needed to be updated. Concurrent with the 1987 Land Use
Plan Update, both a new recreation plan and an "Estuarine
and Beach Access Plan" were prepared for the County, which
focused on locations and ways to improve water and other
recreational access for the County's citizens.
2. State Agency Plans
a. Transportation Improvement Program, 1986-1995
This plan, prepared by the N. C. Department of Transporta-
tion and updated annually, is a statewide schedule of
highway and bridge improvements to be undertaken during a
10-year period. Major projects proposed for completion in
Craven County include the relocation of U.S. Highway-70
around Havelock, bridge replacements, and minor improve-
ments proposed for several secondary routes in the County.
3. Local Regulations
' In addition to the regulations listed under Local Plans, i.e.,
subdivision regulations, State Building Code, flood insurance,
and septic tank regulations, mobile home parks, the CAMA major
and minor permit process are also enforced in the County.
However, Craven County does not have and does not enforce
other ordinances such as zoning, historic districts, nuisance,
sedimentation and erosion control, or on local environmental
impacts.
4. Water and Sewer Policies
In recent years, there have been major studies and reports
prepared on extending centralized water services to all of the
County's townships. The County has taken the position that
water should be provided to all of the County, as funds become
available.
While
centralized sewer services are currently limited
outside
of the
municipalities, the County encourages developers
to
build
small systems which may eventually tie together.
The
legal
structure for developing centralized sewer is already
in
place,
since all of the existing "water districts" are
also
"sewer
districts."
5. Federal and State Regulations
In addition to the local ordinances and regulations discussed
above, there are also various State regulations which could
also affect land development in Craven County, most notably,
the Corps of Engineers 11404" wetlands permit process.
1 27

E. CONSTRAINTS: LAND SUITABILITY I
This section of the Craven County Land Use Plan proposes to
identify features of the land or landscape of the County which
are or could pose serious constraints to development. Under
land suitability, these constraints are generally considered
under the broad categories of 1) physical limitations, i.e.
hazardous (man- made or natural) areas, areas with soil
limitations, hazardous slopes, etc., 2) fragile areas, i.e.
AECs, complex natural areas, or areas with cultural
(architectural or archaeological) significance, and 3) areas
with resource potential, i.e. productive or prime agri-
cultural or forest lands, or potentially valuable mineral
sites (peat, for example). These elements were not discussed
in the 1981 Land Use Plan Update. However, because of the
implications for updating certain policies, they.are discussed
and presented below.
1. Physical Limitations
a. Man -Made Hazards
Airports, tank storage farms, bulk petroleum storage
areas, hazardous waste disposal areas, etc., are all
examples of what might be considered man-made hazard
constraints to land.development. The 1982 Plan Update
also cited the Marine Corps Air Station at Cherry Point as
a man-made hazard, because of the presence of air
operations over developing areas. Air operations at the
Simmons -Knott Airport have also increased since the 1982
Plan Update, thus increasing the Airport's potential as a
man-made hazard. There are no tank farms or bulk
petroleum storage facilities within the County's
jurisdiction. Another problem or potential problem cited
in the 1982 Plan concerned the hauling of military
ordnance and/or jet fuel by rail through Craven County. A
substantial amount of railroad tracks coming through the
County has been taken up and subsequently, a reduction in
rail traffic has also.resulted.
b. Natural Hazard Area
1. Flood Hazard Area:
Since the 1982 Land Use Plan Update was prepared,
another detailed Flood Insurance Study showing
elevations and flood hazard areas, has been prepared
for Craven County. The Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) completed a study in 1986, with the
final maps being effective as of May 4, 1987. The
study, which consists of a report and a series of maps
of all of the unincorporated area of the County shows
28

P_
n
11
11
2.
1
I
1
the areas which are subject to inundation by the
100-year flood (zone "A"s) along with elevations, as
distinguished from areas subject to minimal flooding
dangers (Zone "C"). Not surprisingly, the detailed
study shows that substantial sections of Craven County
are subject to the 100-year flood. However, a sub-
stantial amount of land is included in the "Zone C"
classification, i.e., in the 500-year flood area and
subject to minimal flooding. Most of the flood -prone
areas, i.e., "Zone All areas subject to a 1 percent
change of flooding during any given year, are located
along areas adjacent to the Neuse and Trent Rivers,
and major creeks, such as Brice, Adams, Broad, or
Northwest Creek. The most extensive flood -prone areas
are located in the western portions of the County.
(See Map 5, 100-Year Flood -Prone Areas, attached.)
Although there are "pockets" of minimally -flooded
areas (i.e., Zone C) throughout the County, the larger
Zone C areas are in the west and southwestern parts of
Craven County. It should be noted that the County has
adopted a newly revised Flood Damage Prevention
Ordinance, which is enforced through the Building
Inspections Department, and actively participates in
the Federal Flood Insurance Program.
Estuarine Erosion Area:
Eroding shorelines along the coastal sounds and rivers
in North Carolina has long been a major concern of
soil and water conservationists. In October 1975, the
results of a study involving 15 counties, and which
was conducted by the USDA Soil Conservation Service,
were published in a report titled "Shoreline Erosion
Inventory, North Carolina." This is still the most
recent "official" data available. Estuarine erosion
rates were determined for several points or "reaches"
along the Neuse River shoreline, using aerial photo-
graphs covering 32 years. The Neuse River average
annual erosion rate for Craven County was determined
to be 3.8 feet per year, which was next to the highest
rate among all 15 counties in the Study (Bertie
County's rate was 0.92 feet per year, compared to 4.5
feet for Washington County, which had the highest
rate). The Craven County study covered 47.41 miles
and showed 46.56 miles were eroding (see Map 6), for a
total loss of nearly 650 acres over the 32-year per-
iod. The average width of the eroded area was 121
feet.
Although the above -cited study is somewhat dated, and
measures may have been taken to mitigate such erosion,
potential estuarine erosion is still of significant
concern in Craven County.
29

f I A u• O l t C O u "IT
` [ - t t —
"�` ".,. .....,. � j MAP 6 �
S M /
ESTUARINE EROSION AREAS
.; LEGEND
REACH
— I !tip � ��Uily �� •t•.
-... 1. �, ti —1 ' — —..n\ � � / ••
'co
rAN9-
_
�.:. f ---_- _ ---- —
— s-�- .. /
100,
Coss _
� AN it.tgN � J
i
\ 1 O R E S T
N A T I O N A L
c
o�
CRAVEN COUNTY
\ NORTH CAROLINA
NORTH CAROLINA M ARTAIEIR OF TRANSPORTATION
• � m,;,-r' �� / �, j,,, l • • ona,w o. N�uw�n�rw...° AN°.a�un, rN,w
_ • u. soe�utw.rt ar t•AM•OftAt,ON
a� nolw ,.c„-rr ADIYi4tWgN

CHART 1:
ESTUARINE EROSION AREAS IN CRAVEN COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
vFAru Wn 1
Av. width lost to erosion 87.6 feet
Av. height of bank 3.0 feet
Length of shoreline eroding 7.7 miles
Length of shoreline accreting 0 miles
Total length of shoreline 7.7 miles
REACH NO. 2
Av. width lost to erosion 69.4 feet
Av. height of bank 23.2 feet
Length of shoreline eroding 3.8 miles
Length of shoreline accreting 0 miles
Total length of shoreline 3.8 miles
REACH NO. 3
Av. width
lost to erosion
147.1
feet
Av. height
of bank
20.3
feet
Length of
shoreline eroding
7.6
miles
Length of
shoreline accreting
0
miles
Total length
of shoreline
7.6
miles
REACH NO. 4
Av. width lost to erosion 175.0 feet
Av. height of bank 11.1 feet
Length of shoreline eroding 10.5 miles
Length of shoreline accreting 0 miles
Total length of shoreline 10.5 miles
REACH NO. 5
Av. width
lost to erosion
115.3
feet
Av. height
of bank
8.5
feet
Length of
shoreline eroding
5.5
miles
Length of
shoreline accreting
0
miles
Total length
of shoreline
6.3
miles
REACH NO. 6
Av. width lost to erosion 119.2 feet
Av. height of bank 9.0 feet
Length of shoreline eroding 5.1 miles
Length of shoreline accreting 0 miles
Total length of shoreline 5.1 miles
REACH NO. 7
Av. width lost to erosion
37.7
feet
Av. height of bank
7.5
feet
Length of shoreline eroding
1.6
miles
Length of shoreline accreting
0
miles
Total length of shoreline
1.6
miles
REACH NO. 8
Av. width lost to erosion
95.0
feet
Av. height of bank
5.1
feet
Length of shoreline eroding
4.8
miles
Length of shoreline accreting
0
miles
Total length of shoreline
4.8
miles
1 Source: Shoreline Erosion Inventory, North Carolina,
U.S. DA. Soil Conservation Service, Raleigh, NC,
October 1975. 31

C.
Areas with Soils Limitations '
Updated and detailed mapping of various soil types and '
survey interpretations were not available for Craven
County during the development of the 1982 Land Use Plan
Update. However, an updated, although unpublished soil ,
survey has been completed in preliminary form. The report
was prepared by the USDA Soil Conservation Service. The
report includes detailed descriptions of the soil types ,
and properties for Craven County with discussion of the
suitability for various uses, such as croplands, urban
development, septic tank placement, and recreation. The
most important feature or property of soils to consider in
nearly any location is the drainage capability, since
well -drained, stable soils can be used for a variety of
"development" purposes, i.e. croplands or residential '
(septic tank suitability).
Generally, most of the soils in Craven County have limita-
tions for many uses because of wetness, too rapid perme-
ability, too slow permeability, or low strength. Of the
47 mapped soils classifications contained in the Soil
Survey Report, 34 were characterized as being "poorly
drained" with limitations for urban development uses; 7
'
were described as "well -drained" to "excessively" well -
drained; and 5 were characterized as "moderately -well
drained." Most of the soil types, however, are suitable
,
for various agricultural uses if the proper drainage is -
provided. Regarding septic tank suitability, only five
soil types appeared to have good placement potential. Two
'
soil types, i.e., Autryville and Conetoe, were described
as having "slight" limitations, while three soil types,
i.e., State, and two Norfolk soils, were listed as having
"moderate" limitations. Although several soil types in
'
Craven County consists of highly decomposed organic
matter, there are no substantial deposits of peat in
Craven County of sufficient quality for mining purposes.
'
With the well -established trend of population growth, as
well. as the absence of centralized sewer facilities in
most of the County's jurisdiction, a very important con-
sideration is the extent of soils suitable for urban
development, i.e., septic tank placement. Map 7, '
attached, shows the general area in the County with septic
tank and building development limitations due to soil
classifications. This representation, however, is gen-
eral, and specific determinations must be based on indivi-
dual on -site analysis and testing.
32 1

I
i_l
d. Sources and Estimated Quantity of Water Supply
1. Groundwater
The Craven County water system consists of several
water and sewer districts which serve one or more
Townships, and all are based on groundwater sources.
The newest system, which is presently being developed
to serve Townships 1, 3, and 9, in the northwest por-
tion of the County, will have wells based in the Fort
Barnwell area and drawing from the Black Creek aqui-
fer. A hydrogeologic evaluation of northwest Craven
County, prepared in 1985, concluded that for the new
system designed to serve those three principally rural
Townships, the Black Creek aquifer is currently being
developed by the City of New Bern, Jones County,
Onslow County, the City of Jacksonville, and the City
of Kinston. This aquifer is an important water
source. Its location in the rural,portions of western
Craven County does not present a constraint to most
land uses in this low -density area. Initially, two
wells will serve these three townships. Two test
wells, one near the Fort Barnwell area and another in
the Wintergreen Church area, north of Cove City,
showed that each could yield from 750 to 1,000 gallons
of water per minute (gpm). When both of these test
wells are developed into production wells, they will
each be pumped at 700 gpm, or 500,000 gallons per
12-hour day (gpd). Both wells, however, will have the
maximum potential capacity to be pumped at a million
gallons per day. Because of the size of the aquifer,
as water demand increases, additional wells can be
developed.
Large quantities of groundwater can be obtained from
' other wells in other parts of Craven County. However,
its usefulness is limited by the chemical quality of
the water, i.e., iron, hardness, and possibly
manganese. The general quality of groundwater in the
County is good, but some degree of treatment is neces-
sary to make it meet the U.S. Public Health Service
standards for public water supplies. Also, hydrolo-
gists have noted that in supplying the County with
water, there is a need for well separation.
In summary, most of Craven County's water supply comes
from below the "unconfined" aquifers, i.e., the gener-
al water table. Because of the depth of this water
supply, it is unlikely that above -ground activities
will produce adverse impacts.
2. Surface Water Quality:
The quality of the surface water in Craven County,
especially the Neuse River, has been of special con-
33

2.
cern to North Carolina environmental officials for t
many years. State agencies have been involved in dis-
cussions and projects to locate and identify sources '
of the serious algae bloom and related problems which
have occurred over the years in their attempts to
develop solutions. In 1987, the entire Neuse River '
Basin was nominated to be declared as "Nutrient -
Sensitive Waters" by the North Carolina Environmental
Management Commission. This special designation
(there were only two in the State as of 1986) requires '
specific actions to help minimize point and non -point
sources of pollution, such as upgrading wastewater
treatment systems to reduce the discharge of phos-
phorus and nitrogen.
In January 1988, the entire lower Neuse River Basin
was officially designated as "nutrient sensitive"
,
waters. As a result, 27 sewer treatment plants along
the river with discharges in excess of .5 MGD
(including three in Craven County --New Bern, Havelock,
'
and MCAS Cherry Point) will be required to remove
phosphorus from effluent prior to discharging into the
river. All new plants and any expansions of existing
plants, regardless of capacity, will have to meet
phosphorus reduction requirements. The 27 existing
plants will have five years to bring their plants into
compliance.
,
The North Carolina Agricultural Non -Point Cost -Share
Program, for nutrient -sensitive waters, begun in 1984,
is designed to assist farmers to develop management
practices which will reduce non -point pollution and
sedimentation ,in sensitive waters --mainly from phos-
phorus and nitrogen. Technical assistance is provided
to aid farmers in terracing, developing filter strips,
and cultivation in tillage and non -tillage. Craven ,
County has been active in the program since its begin-
ning. These practices, undertaken as a result of the
water quality concerns and the Nutrient -Sensitive
Waters designation, should, over a period of time,
contribute to the Trent and Neuse Rivers' potential
for improved recreational and commercial fishing
utility. I
e. Slopes in Excess of 12%
The elevations in all of Craven County are all very '
low and there are no steep slopes in excess of 12%
anywhere in the County.
Fragile Areas ,
These are areas which could easily be damaged or destroyed by
inappropriate or poorly planned development. There are not
34

k
f'
many fragile areas in Craven County, which include those areas
previously identified and discussed as Areas of Environmental
Concern (AECs). These included estuarine waters, public trust
areas, and estuarine shorelines (see pages 23-25, this sec-
tion). However, there are other fragile areas in the County
which are not classified as Areas of Environmental Concern,
(such as primary nursery areas), but nevertheless, due to
either natural or cultural significance, are environmentally
sensitive. Some of these areas will be identified and dis-
cussed below as either "Natural Resource Fragile Areas, or
"Cultural Resource Fragile Areas."
a. Natural Resource Fragile Areas
Natural resource fragile areas are generally recognized to
be of educational, scientific, or cultural value because
of the natural features of the particular site. Features
in these areas serve to distinguish them from the vast
majority of the landscape. These areas include: complex
natural areas, areas that sustain remnant species, unique
geologic formations, pocosins, wooded swamps, prime wild-
life habitats, or registered natural landmarks. With the
exception of the Croatan National Forest and wooded
swamps, none of the above -listed natural resource fragile
areas have been identified in Craven County. It is
unlikely that any substantial area in Craven County would
be classified as a "complex natural area." These areas
are defined as "lands that support native plant and animal
communities and provide habitat conditions or character-
istics that have remained essentially unchanged by human
activity." These areas are to.be determined to be rare
within the County or to be of particular scientific or
educational value. Complex natural areas are often sur-
rounded by landscapes that have been modified but still do
not drastically alter the conditions within the natural
areas or their scientific or educational value.
b. Cultural Resource Fragile Areas
Fragile areas may be particularly important to a locale
either in an aesthetic or cultural sense. Fragile coastal
cultural resource areas are generally recognized to be of
educational, associative, scientific, aesthetic, or cul-
tural value because of their special importance to our
understanding of past human settlement of and interaction
with the coastal zone. Their importance serves to distin-
guish the designated areas as significant among the his-
toric architectural or archaelogical remains in the
coastal zone, and therein establish their value.
Although no comprehensive archaeological or architectural
investigation of Craven County has been completed, the
State Division of Archives and History has recorded sever-
al sites in the County. Also, it should be noted here
35

3.
"Craven is
1
that a County Historic Resources Inventory"
currently being prepared by the N.C. Division of Archives
and History. When this study is complete, additional
structures with historic/architectural significance will
,
be identified and possibly a rural historic district added
to the State's study list. There are several sites within
the incorporated municipalities which have been placed on
the National Register of Historic Places. Significant
historic and/or architectural resources outside of these
areas within the County include:
,
- Clear Springs Plantation
- Bellair Plantation
- Dr. Earl S. Sloan House
Study List Property (1)
'
- Dudley House
Areas With Resource Potential
a. Agricultural and Forest Lands
The primary areas with resource potential to be considered
'
in this 1987 update of the Craven County Land Use Plan are
agricultural and forest lands. As discussed under exist-
ing economic conditions (pages 8 through 11), agriculture
and commercial forestry are substantial income producers
for Craven County and therefore cannot be under -estimated
in value. In August, 1983, the Governor of North Carolina
'
issued a formal policy declaration (Executive Order 96)
concerning the State's desire to promote the "Conservation
of Prime Agricultural and Forest Lands" in support of and
to assist with compliance of the Federal Farmland Protec-
tion Policy Act of 1980. The declaration of Executive
Order 96 recognized the fact that in many areas of the
State, prime agri- cultural and forest lands are being
,
converted to other uses at such a significant rate that
these irreversible uses may ultimately reduce the capacity
of food and fiber production. Prime agricultural and
forest lands were defined as those lands " ..which possess
the best combination of physical and chemical characteris-
tics for producing food, feed, fiber (including forest
products), forage, oilseed, and other agricultural
'
products (including livestock), without intolerable soil
erosion."
The Governor directed the Secretary of the State Depart-
ment of Natural Resources and Community Development to
assume the responsibility of carrying out the Order. The
program proposed in the Executive Order involved the iden-
'
tification of and mapping of prime agricultural and forest
lands by the Soil and Water Conservation Commission
through the assistance of local Soil and Water Conserva-
36 1

tion Districts. Also, by means of the existing State
Clearinghouse review process, the impact of any develop-
ment proposed on prime agricultural or forest lands would
have to be assessed beginning January 1, 1984.
However, as of the writing of this report, prime agri-
cultural or forest lands have not been identified or map-
ped in accordance with Executive Order 96, in Craven
County. The most productive farmland and commercial
forests are located in the western part of the County.
With appropriate drainage facilities, most of the soil
types in Craven County yield very productive farmland.
Productive farmland is located in various portions of the
ous portions of the County, intermingled with forestlands
'
scattered across most of the County's landscape. (See
Existing Land Use Map, attached.)
'
b. Productive Water Bodies
Because of the significance of commercial and recreational
fishing in Craven County,. the primary fishing areas should
also be considered as an area with -resource potential. In
1985, Craven County ranked 15th among the State's coastal
counties in terms of overall fish catches, up to 16th in
1983 and 1984, and 17th in 1981 and 1982. This indicates
'
that in spite of previously cited surface water quality
concerns, substantial landings are still being drawn from
both the Neuse and Trent Rivers. These areas are vital
productive resources. Also, there are several fishery
'
processing businesses in the County, providing employment
and income to some of the County's residents. Implementa-
tion procedures over the next few years of the recent
(January 1988) designation of "nutrient sensitive" waters
'
for the lower Neuse River Basin should also help improve
the productivity of these waters.
c. Mining Lands
Craven County does not have a substantial peat reserve
capable of being mined for commercial or industrial pur-
poses like several other coastal counties. However,
review of detailed soils classifications maps prepared by
the U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service, -indicates that
soil types with highly decomposed organic matter as sur-
face layers and underlayed by decayed logs, etc. may sig-
nify the presence of peat. These types of soils can be
found in various pockets in the County, usually coinciding
with very poorly drained soils. The County has a major
rock quarry, which provides rock aggregate material for
most of eastern North Carolina, and a few small sand pits.
There are no other known areas in the County which contain
marketable mineral resources, such as phosphate.
Lands
d. Outdoor Recreation
'
Lands used for hunting, fishing, boating, hiking, camping,
and other outdoor recreational uses are also important
resources to consider in the development of land use poli-
cies. In Craven County, because of two major -productive
water bodies, and expansive woodlands, as well as the
'
extensive Croatan National Forest, recreational fishing
and hunting opportunities, within the appropriate seasons,
abound.
37

F.
'
CONSTRAINTS: CAPACITY OF COMMUNITY FACILITIES
1. Water
,
As discussed under "Sources and Quantities of Ground Water,"
Craven County currently does not have a single, unified,
County -wide water system. The County water service outside of
,
the municipal areas, which have their own systems, currently
consists of several sub -autonomous "sanitary districts," serv-
ing portions or all of several Townships. The largest system.
,
is under construction as of the writing of this report and is
scheduled to be operational by the Fall of 1988. This system,
developed under the authority of the Northwest Craven Sanitary
,
District, will serve the north and western Townships 1, 3, and
9. (See Map 8, attached.) The projected capacity, based on
two wells, will be approximately 1,000,000 gpd, with an
estimated initial demand of roughly one-half of capacity,
'
i.e., 550,000 gpd. Also, water from these new wells will be
pumped to Townships 6; 7, and 8., which are currently being
served by water purchased from the City of New Bern. The
County will eventually stop purchasing water from the County.
Portions of Township 2 are currently served by the independent
First Craven Sanitary District, which also has two wells each
,
with rated capacities of 300,000 gpd for a total capacity of
600,000 gpd. Currently, the peak demand is about 350,000 gpd
for 1,100 customers, which leaves considerable excess capac-
ity. Fairfield Harbor, also located in Township 2, has its
own water system and also has plans to expand the capacity as
development and demand increases.
'
.The system serving Township 7 (the James City area), has a
capacity of 400,000 gpd. Township 6, primarily the Pembroke
area, is scheduled to be served by a new system which is set
to begin construction in late 1987. The Township 6 system
will have an initial capacity of 150,000 gpd. Although the
County has long-range plans for serving the entire County,
'
there are no sanitary districts currently serving Townships 8
and 5, although some portions of Township 8 receive water from
the City of New Bern.
In addition to water supply, the quality of drinking water is
also an issue in Craven County. There are both concentrations
of iron and sulfur in some areas. One of the major reasons
'
the County sought to develop the County -wide water system was
to improve the quality of water for its residents. To extend
the water lines into predominantly rural areas, the 1982 Land
'
Use Plan had to be amended.
A summary of the existing and proposed water system capacities
'
in Craven County (excluding the municipal systems and
Fairfield Harbor) is shown in Table 21, below.
38 1

1
C�
Table 21: Non -Municipal Water Service in Craven County
Township Current Capacity (gpd)
*1, 3 and 9 1,000,000
2 600,000
5 -0-
*6 150,000
7 400,000
8 -0-
Total 2,150,000 gpd
*Proposed, or under consideration.
Within their existing service areas, the current water capac-
ity is adequate, and the County has already had studies pre-
pared on expanding the system as the demand dictates and funds
become available. The primary need for centralized water is
rin portions of Township 8, and all of Township 5.
2. Sewer
'
The only centralized sewer system in the County outside of the
municipal systems (including a privately operated system in
River Bend), and Fairfield Harbor, is located in Township 7
and serves the James City area. Also, in the Carolina Pines
area, a privately owned system is.being developed which has
the capacity to expand. Although most of the County has soil
types which are not conducive for placement, the majority of
the non -municipal residents in Craven County utilize septic
tanks for wastewater disposal. The County does have long-
range plans for developing public centralized sewer service
outside of the municipalities, because, centralized sewer is
recognized as an eventual need. All of the sanitary districts
'
are water and sewer authorities.
3. Solid Waste
Craven County operates a sanitary landfill for the disposal of
solid waste. Collection is done by the "greenbox system," and
there are approximately 200 of these boxes at 54 sites located
' throughout the County. Some individual customer collection is
done by private contractors who also utilize the County land-
fill. The County landfill is projected to have a useful life
until the year 2000, and should be adequate throughout the
planning period.
4. School Enrollments and Facilities
' The general trend in most of North Carolina reflects a decline
in school -age populations, as demonstrated in Table 6, page 6,
for Craven County. Demographic projections should steadily
decline in the 5-19 year -old age group. In Craven County,
however, school enrollments have fluctuated, and according to
39

projections prepared by the School Planning Division of the
State Department of Public Instruction, are forecast to
increase through 1991. Craven is one of only 20 of the '
State's 100 counties projected to experience an increase in
enrollments between 1985-1991. Notice the enrollment trends
and projections in Table 22, below. I
Table 22: Total School.Enrollments: Craven County K-12
%
Year Enrollments Change
1977-78 14,340
1981-82 13,993 -2.4%
1985-86 13,587 -1.9%
*1986-87 13,905 +2.3%
**1990-91 14,407 +3 .6 %
,
Source: New Bern -Craven County Board of Education.
*Based on first enrollment month figures.
**Projections by State of North Carolina.
From 1985-86 through 1990-91, a total of 820 aditional pupils
is forecast by State school planners, 226 of which should be
,
in grades 9 through 12. As for school facilities, the 1982
Plan Update showed that several of the County's 20 schools
were then operating at near or above capacity levels. And
even with 125 temporary classrooms, in 86 mobile units, there
still appears to be a demand for more school space. A new
elementary school did open in the Fall of 1986, and one new
school is scheduled to be complete in 1988 to replace the
Jasper and Fort Barnwell schools.
An important state-wide policy which affects the local demand
r
for classroom space is the mandated reduction in average
classroom size. As the enrollment numbers increase, and the
classroom sizes decrease, more classrooms may be needed.
'
5. Transportation
There are several major thoroughfares in Craven County. U.S.
Highway 17 bisects the County from southwest to northeast;
U.S. 70 runs through the County from west to east; and several
State highways, i.e., N.C. 55 , 43 , 118, 306, and 101 criss-
'
cross portions of the County. Also, there are many State
maintained secondary roads -- paved and unpaved. Table 23,
below, summarizes the highway mileage as of 1984.
�
.o
1

1
Table 23: Craven County Highway Mileage - 1984
' Primary 140.72
Secondary 583.33
Total 742.05
Paved 538.00
Unpaved 186.05
' Source: Profile of North Carolina Counties, 1986.
A little more than 74% of the County's roads were paved, while
26% were unpaved in of 1984. the County is included in the
State Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) and about 5 miles
per year are to be paved, according to the Plan. The major
improvement called for in the TIP is the relocation of U.S.
Highway 70 around Havelock in the mid-1990s. In addition to
relatively minor pavings of several secondary roads, the
long-range plan also calls for the replacement of several
small bridges in the County.
Average daily traffic (ADT) volumes have also likely increased
' in Craven County, as the population and tourism have both
increased. However, outside of the municipalities, mainly New
Bern and Havelock, traffic congestion does not appear to be a
problem. Notice Table 24, below, which shows ADTs for several
locations outside of the municipalities.
ITable 24: Average Daily Traffic, Selected Locations
Roadway
'
Location
Volume
Capacity
- U.S.,70
@ Trent River
Bridge
26,000
48,000
- U.S. 70
east of S.R.
1225
6,500
24,000
'
- U.S. 17
south of New
Bern
11,700
48,000
- U.S. 17
north at Bridgeton
limits
- U.S. 17
north
north: Neuse
River Bridge
9,800
20,000
24,000
Source: N.C. DOT, Division of Highways
! Aviation transportation is also an increasingly important
factor in Craven County. Now with two commuter airlines with
four scheduled flights per day at Simmons-Nott Airport,
enplanements went up dramatically from 6,753 in 1983 to 41,418
in 1986 -- an increase of over 500%. Enplanements are
projected to be substantially higher in 1987.
! As airport operations and related facilities expand, land use
compatibility -near the airport may become an issue --
41

especially since the airport is located in one of the faster '
growing townships.
6. Medical Services ,
Generally, medical services are adequate in Craven County. ,
The County maintains a primary care facility, Craven County
Hospital, which is owned by the County. The hospital has a
local Board of Directors, which is appointed by the County
Board of Commissioners. The hospital serves Craven County and '
several surrounding communities. There are also many
physicians in priate practice in the cities of New Bern and
Havelock, as well as dentists and pharmacists. A public ,
health clinic is also operated by the Craven County Health
Department. Additional specialized medical services are
available in Greenville, 40 miles north and which hosts the ,
East Carolina Medical School.
7. Emergency and Protective Services
As in the case with medical services, emergency and protective
services for Craven County are also primarily based in the
municipalities. Law enforcement in the county is primarily
the responsibility of the County Sheriff and a staff of depu-
'
ties and dispatchers. Recent consultations with the N.C.
Institute of Government, indicated that Craven County's 41
sworn officers were within the normal range of officers, con-
sidering its population. Emergency medical rescue is provided
for the County by six volunteer rescue squads located through-
out the County and all of which can be dispatched through the
911 number through the County Sheriff's Department (except for
the Dover area). There are still some areas in the County,
mainly the eastern portion near Harlowe and Adams Creek, and
Dover in the west, which are not within the state -approved
30-minute response range. These areas are attempting to
establish "First Response Teams" with the capacity to provide
services until the regular Rescue Squad arrives. These teams
,
are to be in place sometime during 1987. Fire protection out-
side of the municipalities is provided through a total of
seven volunteer fire departments, located in Townships 6, 7,
and 8.
G. ESTIMATED DEMAND
1. Population and Economy
According to projections in Table 1, page 2, Craven County's
population in 1996 will be 101,656, an increase of 19,096
persons over the 1986 estimate of 82,560. (Both estimates
were provided by the North Carolina Office of State Budget and
Management.) This growth rate (23.1%) implies a strong growth
trend and should be a cause for concern over the resultant
impact upon existing facilities and services. If current
42 1

I
1
trends continue, the County can expect to gain about 50%, or
9,548 of these additional persons, while the other half will
likely reside in the municipalities. (This is based on the
municipal proportions of the County's 1980 population and not
the most recent - 1984 - State estimate for municipalities,
assuming the proportion holds steady and the Towns do not
annex.) Again, on the basis of current trends, most of the
9,548 additional persons in the County will reside in Town-
ships 2, 6, 7, and 8. Also, there appears to be a trend
toward smaller households (e.g., the average household size in
1970 was 3.30 persons, but only 2.83 in 1980), the average
household size in Craven County by 1996 could be 2.5 persons.
Thus, assuming an average of 2.5 persons per household in
1996, the increased population by that time could result in
3,819 additional households each for the municipalities and
for the unincorporated portions of the County.
The total 9,538 projected additional households will place
certain demands upon goods, services, and facilities in the
entire County. However, as stated above, only one-half of
these households are forecast to locate in the unincorporated
portion of the County. It should also be noted here that, as
tourism increases, there may be an appreciable seasonal popu-
lation developing in Craven County.
Based on recent trends, it is likely that the impact of the
population increase upon the local economy will be felt more
within and near the incorporated municipalities than.in the
unincorporated portions of Craven County. Both Havelock and
New Bern are growing commercial and service centers. There-
fore, it is more likely that increased commercial activities
and other services, as well as employment, will likely concen-
trate in Craven.
2. Future Land Need
'
Most of the land required to acommodate additional residential
growth in Craven County consists of vacant, undeveloped land
and vacant lots in previously platted subdivisions. Even if
the projected 9,548 total additional persons by 1996 (approxi-
mately 3,819 households at the assumed average household size
of 2.5 persons) resided on one -acre tracts, at least 3,819
acres of additional developable land would be needed. This is
a very conserative estimate of land needed, since additional
lands will be required for commercial, industrial, institu-
tional, governmental, and recreational areas. Also, a signif-
icant amount of land will be needed for roadways, easements,
etc. However, with centralized water to be provided during
the planning period in Townships 1, 3, 9, and 6, full, one -
acre tracts may not be needed for much of the County, provided
the areas are suitable for septic tank placement. This pro-
jection does not include the projected growth for the incorpo-
rated municipalities.
43

With more than 363,800 acres of forests and farmlands, an ,
additional 3,819 acres of residential acreage is not signifi-
cant. Land availability, except for possible septic tank ,
limitations in some areas, should pose no major problems.
3. Community Facilities Needs
The additional population increase by 1996 outside of munici-
palities of 9,548 persons, or 3,819 households, will require
more water from the Craven County water system. However, as ,
discussed under "Community Facilities Constraints," the County
has plans to continually expand the water system (primarily
because of water quality concerns), and should be able to
handle additional customers throughout the planning period.
Several existing Bystems have -considerable excess capacity.
Outside of Township 7 and the municipalities, additional resi-
dents will have to continue to rely on septic tanks for dis-
posal of sewage. With the availability of suitable, well -
drained soils and/or the installation of modified septic sys-
tems in certain soil types, and as approved by the County
Health Department, septic tank placement may not pose major
problems. ,
The County's solid waste disposal system, using the landfill
near Tuscarora, has a projected useful life through the year '
2000 and should be adequate throughout the planning period.
The only other major facilities which may need expansion are
school facilities, based on State projections for increased
enrollments.
1
1
44 1

SECTION 11 :
Policy Statements

SECTION II: POLICY STATEMENTS
The formulation of specific policies regarding growth and
management objectives is perhaps the most important part of this
updated Land Use Plan. A "policy" may be defined as an executive
or legislative statement of a governing principle or intent,
implying certain actions to be taken to achieve certain desired
results. These desired results become the County's goals and
objectives for future development. Those policies must, in some
cases, strike a delicate balance between objectives of the Coastal
Resources Commission and the desires and objectives of the citi-
zens of Craven County. Most of the trends identified in the 1982
Plan are still continuing, and in some cases, intensifying, (popu-
lation growth, for example), so in many instances, policies set
forth in the 1982 Plan will not require significant modification.
However, new policies must be developed in order to address issues
which have become significant since 1982. As the analysis of
existing conditions showed, the emerging trends include: a rapid-
ly growing population, a relatively strong and expanding economy,
and increased residential development in the unincorporated areas
near New Bern and Havelock.
The Coastal Resources Commission, recognizing the diversities
which ,exist among the Coastal counties and communities, required
the County to specify particular development policies under four
rather broad topics in 1982. For the 1987 Update, however, the
CRC has added a fifth issue, i.. e. , "Storm Hazard Mitigation." In
most cases, policies developed under these topics will cover most
of the local development issues, but in some cases, they do not.
In the latter case, Craven County has the flexibility to address
its own locally defined issues. The five required broad topics
are:
° Resource Protection
Resource Production and Management
° Economic and Community Development
° Continuing Public Participation
° Storm Hazard Mitigation
After an analysis of the existing conditions and trends and
input from the County's citizens, the foregoing policies were
developed to provide an overall framework for guiding growth and
development in Craven County throughout the current planning
period, i.e., through 1996.
A. RESOURCE PROTECTION
1. Areas of Environmental Concern: Development Policies
Craven County recognizes the primary concern of the Coastal
Resources Commission, in terms of protecting resources, as man-
aging Areas of Environmental Concern (AECs). The County also
45

shares this concern for the protection and sound management of
these environmentally sensitive land and waters. The AECs which
occur in Craven County were identified in Section I of this Plan
on pages 23 through 25. All of these areas are within the Estu-
arine System. In terms of developing policies, the Estuarine
System AECs, which include Coastal Wetlands, Estuarine Waters,
Estuarine Shorelines, and Public Trust Areas, will be treated as
one uniform grouping since they are so closely interrelated.
Another reason for grouping these AECs together is the fact that
the effective use of maps to detail exact on -ground location of a
particular area, poses serious limitations.
Craven County's overall policy and management objective for
the estuarine system is "to give the highest priority to the pro-
tection and coordinated management of these areas, so as to safe-
guard and perpetuate their biological, social, economic, and aes-
thetic values and to ensure that development occurring within
these-AECs is compatible with natural characteristics so as to
minimize the likelihood of significant loss of private property
and public resources." (15 NCAC 7H. 0203) In accordance with this
overall objective, Craven County will permit only those land uses
which conform to the general use standards of the North Carolina
Administrative Code (15 NCAC 7H) for development within the
Estuarine System. Generally, only those uses which are water
dependent will be permitted. Specifically, each of the AECs
within the Estuarine System is discussed below according to
definitions derived from 15 NCAC 7H. It should be noted, however,
that occasionally portions of the Administrative Code change,
which may affect definitions and use.standards.
Wetlands
a. Coastal
By technical definition, there is very little "coastal
wetland", i.e., regularly flooded salt marsh areas containing
certain plant species in Craven County. The technical "coastal
wetlands" occur along the upper reaches of the Neuse River and
some adjacent creeks, and possibly along relatively narrow
segments of the Trent River. Most of what could be termed "wet-
lands" in the County consists of "wooded swamp" areas in the
lowlands near the two rivers. The more sensitive "wet" areas are,
obviously, those closest to the water. The wooded swamps in
Craven County's jurisdiction could also possibly contain areas
that sustain remnant species, and wildlife habitats, all of which
are important to Craven County. However, the County does not
believe that all land uses in these areas should necessarily be
prohibited. The first priority of uses of land in these areas
should be the allowance of uses which promote "conservation" of
the sensitive areas, with conservation meaning the lack of
imposition of irreversible damage to the wetlands. Generally,
uses which require water access and uses such as utility ease-
ments, fishing piers and docks, will be allowed, but must adhere
,
to use standards of the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA: 15
46 1

11
1
NCAC 7H) and/or as permitted by the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
for areas determined to be 11404" wetlands.
b. Estuarine Waters and Estuarine Shorelines
The importance of the estuarine waters and adjacent estuarine
shorelines in Craven County was discussed in Section I of this
document on pages 23-25 and under "Estuarine Erosion Area," pages
29-31. Craven County is very much aware that protection of the
estuarine waters and adjacent estuarine shorelines -- both vital
components of the estuarine system -- is of paramount importance
to fishing, both commercially and for recreation and for the
essential maintenance and enhancement of the Neuse River. As
discussed in Section I, the Neuse River has been included in the
"National Rivers Inventory" by the U.S. Parks Service, and is
thereby a candidate for designation as a "National Wild, Scenic,
and Recreational River." Less than 2% of all streams in the
nation have even qualified to be included in the Inventory:
Craven County is very much aware of the important recognition of
the Neuse River.
Craven County recognizes that actions within the estuarine
shoreline, which is defined as the area extending 75 feet landward
of the mean high waterline of the estuarine waters, could have a
substantial effect upon the quality of these waters. This area is
subject to erosion and occasional flooding, which could not only
affect the quality of the adjacent estuarine life, but also
threaten the security of personal property from developments
located therein. The estuarine erosion rates cited in Section I
of this report indicate that certain land areas in the County have
historically lost land to erosion at an average rate of 3.8 feet
per year. If a waterfront lot were to be located in such an area
without stabilization measures, 38 feet of the lot could possibly
be lost to erosion over 10 years.
In order to promote the quality of the estuarine waters as
well as minimize the likelihood of significant property loss due
to erosion or flooding, Craven County will permit only those uses
which are compatible with both the dynamic nature of the estuarine
shorelines and the values of the estuarine system. Residential,
recreational, and commercial uses may be permitted within the
estuarine shoreline, provided that:
° a substantial chance of pollution occurring from the
development does not exist;
° natural barriers to erosion are preserved and not sub-
stantially weakened or eliminated;
the construction of impervious surfaces and areas not
allowing natural drainage is limited only to that neces-
sary for developments;
standards of the North Carolina Sedimentation Pollution
Control Act 1973 are met;
47

development does not have a significant adverse impact on
estuarine resources;
development does not significantly interfere with existing
public rights or access to, or use of, navigable waters or
public resources (except in the case of private
property).
c. Public Trust Areas
Craven County recognizes that the public has certain
esta-
blished rights to certain land and water areas. (For definitions
and geographic locations of public trust areas, see page
24,
Section I). These public areas also support valuable commercial
and recreational fisheries, waterfowl hunting, and also
contain
significant aesthetic value. Craven County will promote
the con-
servation and management of public trust areas. Appropriate
uses
include those which protect public rights for navigation
and
recreation. Projects which would directly or indirectly
block or
impair existing navigation channels, increase shoreline
deposit spoils below mean high tide, cause adverse water
erosion,
circula-
tion patterns, violate water quality standards, or cause
degrada-
tion of shellfish waters, shall generally not be allowed.
Allow-
able uses shall be those which do not cause detriment to
the
physical or biological functions of public trust areas.
Such uses
as navigational channels, drainage ditches, bulkheads to
prevent
erosion, piers, docks, or marinas, shall be permitted.
d. Policy Alternatives: Development in AECs
Sections a, b, and c of this Part have presented details of
Craven County's position on land uses in the statutorily defined
Areas of Environmental Concern (AECs). Policy alternatives
include:
(1) Revising and strengthening the existing Subdivi-
sion Regulations, to impose stricter design stun- '
dards, particularly in waterfront areas, or areas
with water accessibility.
(2) Adopt either a County -wide Zoning Ordinance, to
establish certain "zones," or districts with
specified uses and restrictions, or develop for
adoption a zoning ordinance which covers current
and projected developing areas of the County,
e.g., Fairfield Harbor, and possibly other areas
in close proximity to New Bern and Riverbend, but
outside of their planning jurisdictions.
(3) Continue to utilize current management tools and
enforcement system, i.e., existing Subdivision
Regulations (with no modifications), along with
48 1

7
L
I
1
1
1
1
n
r]
Federal and State permit and review processes,
i.e., 404, and CAMA.
e. Policy Choices
Craven County will continue to utilize the existing regulatory
system, i.e., existing Subdivision Regulations, along with Federal
and State permit and review processes, i.e., 404, and CAMA along
with updating and strengthing existing local regulations.
2. Development in Areas with Constraints
The constraints to development in Craven County were discussed
in Section I (pages 28-44) and relate to both physical constraints
and limitations of community facilities. The physical constraints
include man-made hazards such as the Simmons -Knott Airport area,
and the air operations area for the Marine Corps Air Station at
Cherry Point, as well as natural hazards such as high hazard flood
areas, estuarine erosion areas, soils limitations, and natural and
cultural resource fragile areas. (See Map 8, "Composite
Hazards.")
The high hazard flood areas, i.e., areas susceptible to the
100-year flood, is not as extensive in Craven County as it is in
some other coastal counties (based bn revised Flood Insurance Rate
maps, prepared by the Federal Emergency Management Administra-
tion). As the attached Map 5 indicates, although significant por-
tions of the County are considered to be in the "Zone A" category,
according to maps prepared by the Federal Emergency Management
Agency, the majority of the County is classified as "Zone C",
i.e., minimally flooded areas susceptible to a 500-year flood.
The areas with the highest risk appear to be some of the estuarine
shoreline areas along the Neuse and Trent Rivers' shores and
several interior creek lowland areas. Although most of the County
is not flood prone, it is still not realistic that all development
should be prohibited from such areas.
Estuarine erosion areas, as a physical constraint to develop-
ment, often correlate to the high hazard flood areas. Soils
limitations for development also usually relate to flood -prone
areas. Some of the soil types have limited permeability or too
rapid permeability, making septic tank placement a problem. Also,
pockets of muck or silt -type soils cannot support septic tanks nor
bear the construction of heavy foundations.
Other than the Neuse River and lands within the Croatan
National Forest, there are no other extensive or major natural
resource fragile areas in Craven County. Those which do exist are
closely linked with the previously identified AECs. The County
does, however, have extensive wooded swamps, which may come under
the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 404 permit
process. The cultural resource fragile areas were discussed on
page 35).
71
49

1
a. Policy Alternatives '
Possible policy alternatives regarding managing growth and
development in areas with identified constraints include:
(1) Amend subdivision regulations to include stricter
design standards.
(2) Develop and adopt additional regulations, or modi-
fy existing ones, such as a Zoning Ordinance for
specified areas or utilize the existing Flood Dam-
age Prevention Ordinance to regulate or prohibit
all development in areas with identified physical
constraints.
(3) Permit development in those areas, utilizing cur-
rent state, federal and local regulatory process-
es, i.e., CAMA, flood ordinance, current subdivi-
sion regulations, stormwater run-off requirements,
and Corps of Engineers 404 permits, and zoning, if
adopted, where adequate protective measures have
been taken.
b. Policy Choices
Craven County adopts the following policies regarding develop-
ment in areas with constraints.
(1) Development will be permitted in some areas sub-
ject to erosion, provided proposals comply with
provisions outlined for development within the
estuarine shorelines (see page 4, this section).
(2) Craven County realizes the inevitability of some
'
development occurring in flood prone areas.
Therefore, the County will continue to participate
in the National Flood Insurance Program and en-
,
force its "regular" Flood Damage Prevention Ordi-
nance through the County Building Inspection Pro-
gram. Proposed developments which are not other-
wise damaging to AECs may be permitted, provided
protective measures which comply with flood in-
surance requirements are imposed.
(3) Development in areas where soil types have limited
bearing capacity will not be encouraged. However,
the County will permit development in such areas,
as long as such development complies with other
local, state, and federal environmental regula-
tions.
(4) In areas with possible septic tank limitations,
Craven County will remain committed to decisions
rendered by the Craven County Health Department's
Sanitarian.
50

C. Implementation Schedule
Craven County will continue to support enforcement of existing
regulatory controls.
3. Hurricane and Flood Evacuation Needs and Plans
An extensive and detailed "Hurricane Evacuation, Hazard
Mitigation, Post -Disaster Reconstruction Plan" was prepared for
Craven County in June 1984, and contains specific information and
policy statements. However, since the CAMA Planning guidelines
now require that such policies be incorporated into the land use
plans, some information, along with the relevant policy statements
from the 1984 document, will be summarized in this report, begin-
ning on Page 70.
4. Protection of Potable Water Supply
As discussed in Section 1, pages 32 and 34, Craven County's
water distribution system, both the existing and proposed expan-
sion, is based on groundwater drawn through a series of wells as
the supply source. Land uses near groundwater sources are regu-
lated by the North Carolina Division of Environmental Management
through N.C.A.C. Subchapter 2L and Subchapter 2C. Craven County
recognizes the importance of protecting potable water supplies and
therefore supports the enforcement of these regulations. Also,
the County will discourage, through development controls, any
development which may encroach upon these wells.
5. Use of Package Treatment Plants
Currently, centralized sewer outside of the municipalities is
provided only in Township 7 (the James City area, primarily). The
use of small package treatment systems has generally been viewed
as acceptable in Craven County as an aid to orderly growth and
development, provided necessary environmental permits can be ob-
tained. Although the County does consider the eventual provision
of County -wide sewer service to be desirable, realistically, even
on a limited Township basis, the costs would be prohibitive.
Therefore, package treatment plants in "growth" areas are an
acceptable alternative. It is not the County's desire, however,
to see a proliferation of small package treatment systems which
bear no relation to each other. Developers will be encouraged to
cooperate so that any such system (each to be reviewed on a case -
by -case basis) can be developed in some pattern of uniformity.
6. Stormwater Runoff Associated with Agriculture, Residential
Development, Phosphate or Peat Mining, and Its Impact on
Coastal Wetlands, Surface Waters, or Other Fragile Areas
Stormwater runoff is basically the same issue as surface
drainage in Craven County. Policies on surface drainage are
addressed in other areas of this Plan. (See Part B, this section,
"Resource Production and Management Policies", for policies relat-
ing to agriculture, [B.1], residential development [B.6], and peat
51

mining [B.31, and discussion of related impacts. Phosphate mining
is not an issue in Craven County.
Home Development
7. Marina and Floating
There are extensive estuarine waters and shorelines in Craven
County; therefore, the development of marinas has both significant
commercial and'recreational potential. The County supports the
development of marinas in compliance with existing environmental
regulations. The County believes that additional studies of the
County's needs are required in order to indicate possible sizes or
locations of marinas. (A separate "Estuarine Access Plan" is
being prepared concurrently with the Land Use Plan Update.) So-
called "floating homes," to date, have not been an issue or prob-
lem in Craven County's jurisdiction. However, it is quite pos-
sible that during the planning period, this issue could arise.
The County will allow marinas to be developed in compliance with
State, Federal, and local environmental and health regulations.
Also, in cases where there are more than 30 boat slips provided,
the developer shall be required to provide pump -out facilities for
the disposal of wastewater. Also, the County believes that as
long as all requirements are complied with, marinas should be
allowed in any land classification, except within the Rural -
General Classification.
8. Industrial Impacts on Fragile Areas
Part C.1, "Types and Locations of Desired Industry", contains
specific policy statements on industry. (See pages 58-60). In
general, however, the County believes that industrial development
should not be allowed if it is clearly deleterious to sensitive
environmental areas.
9. Development of Sound and Estuarine System Islands
There are no estuarine system islands of any significance in
Craven County's jurisdiction. The few small riverine islands are
likely natural fragile areas and not developable. It is the
County's policy, therefore, that these areas should be protected
from any environmentally adverse development. Such areas should
be classified as "Conservation" in the Craven County Land Classi-
fication System. (See Map 10, attached.)
52 1

B. RESOURCE PRODUCTION AND MANAGEMENT POLICIES
Appropriate management of productive resources is very
important to any locality. In Craven County, as with many coastal
counties, the productive resources are -intricately tied to the
predominant economic sectors of the County which makes the
necessity of balanced management policies of paramount importance.
The major productive resources to be considered relate to
agriculture, commercial forestry, commercial and recreation
fisheries, and recreational land uses.
1. Agriculture
Agriculture, as discussed under analysis of existing economic
conditions, though declining in recent years, is still a very
important income source in Craven County. More of the County's
income still comes from this sector than from any other sectors
except manufacturing. The importance of farming and its
supportive activities cannot be overestimated in Craven County.
Executive Order 96, "Conservation of Prime Agricultural and Forest
Lands", was supposed to have led to the identification of "prime
areas," in both agriculture and forestry, by the soil and water
conservation districts. However, this identification has not
occurred in Craven County. Nevertheless, according to the County
Agricultural Extension Agent, the most productive farmlands are
located in the northern and western sections of the County.
a. Policy Alternatives
(1) Do not impose any additional land use controls or
restrictions on agricultural practices.
(2) Consider developing a county -wide, or sub -county
zoming ordinance and zone certain lands as
"agricultural," with use restrictions and
limitations.
(3) Continue to support and encourage use of the U.S.
Soil Conservation Service's "Best Management
Practices" program and the Non -Point Pollution
Agricultural Cost -Share Program.
b. Policy Choice
(1) Craven County, in recognition of the importance of
agriculture to the County's economy, believes that
existing federal and state permitting procedures
(CAMA and Corps of Engineers) pose enough
limitations to the use of farmland in the County.
Because of the soil types and topography, the
County recognizes that proper drainage is essen-
tial and must be allowed to continue as needed,
1 53

and as it does not result in irreversible damage ,
to environmentally sensitive areas. Therefore, no
additional limitation or policies will be adopted.
However, the County will support and encourage the
identification of "prime" farmland in Craven
County and participation in the Non -Point Pollu-
tion Agricultural Cost -Share Program, including
the S.C.S. , use of the "Best Management Prac-
tices". These programs are designed to balance
proper agricultural management with protection of
nutrient -sensitive waters from agricultural run-
off.
C. Implementation Schedule I
(1) Leave the existing process as is.
( 2 ) Encourage the Regional Soil and Water Conservation
District to identify prime agricultural lands by
FY 88, so that these areas can be mapped.
(3) Continue to support State Clearinghouse review of
impact of development on prime agricultural
lands.
2. Commercial Forestry
Woodlands and forests cover most of Craven County's landscape.
Substantial amounts of income are generated annually from forest
products, mainly from saw timber. Weyerhauser Corporation, one of
the largest manufacturers of wood products in the world, has a
major facility in Craven County. "Prime" forest lands, as defined
in Executive Order 96, have not as yet been identified for mapping
in Craven County. "Productive" forest lands, however, are found
in many sections of the County.
a. Policy Alternatives
(1).The County could, through the adoption and en-
forcement of local ordinances, impose restrictions
on timbering practices and require commercial
loggers to replant and reclaim timbered areas.
(2) The County could leave current practices as they
are without imposing additional restrictions.
b. Policy Choice
(1) The County believes that imposing additional
restrictions are not necessary at this time nor
should be throughout the planning period. How-
ever, Craven County will encourage reforestation
54

whenever feasible, as a sound timber management
practice.
C. Implementation Schedule
(1) Leave the existing process as is.
(2) Encourage the Regional Soil and Water Conservation
District to identify prime forestlands by FY 88,
so that these areas can be mapped.
(3) Continue to support State clearinghouse review of
the impact of development projects on prime
forestlands.
3. Mining Resource Areas
Unlike some other coastal counties, Craven County does not
have vast reserves of some mineable resources, i.e., peat or
phosphate. The only presence of peat or phosphate of any
significance (as reported in the 1982 plan) is located with the
jurisdiction of the U. S. Forest Service, i.e., in the Croatan
National Forest. However, there are some sand mining areas in the
County and there may be potential for others. Martin -Marietta
Corporation has a stone mining operation in the County, which is
sjubject to state and federal regulations. As a policy, Craven
County believes the existing rock and sand pits, and possibly
others, should continue operate as long as they are in compliance
with federal, state, and local environmental regulations.
4. Commercial and Recreational Fisheries
The productive water bodies in and around Craven County, i.e.,
Neuse and Trent Rivers, have been steady and valuable contributors
to the local economy as well as provided many opportunities for
recreational fishing. With increasing annual catches over the
last several years, it appears that commercial fishing has the
potential to expand in Craven County. It is, therefore, very
important to continue those actions and programs which enhance and
protect the water quality of productive fishing areas, i.e., the
Neuse and Trent Rivers. In recent years, concern has been raised
by commercial fishermen along North Carolina's Coast and the State
Division of Marine Fisheries, that freshwater run-off
(particularly from agricultural drainage) has been detrimental to
estuarine waters by altering the salinity content. Concern also
has been raised because of incidences of fecal coliform, coming
from septic tank seepage, showing up in primary shell -fishing
waters and forcing the "closing" of such waters. Craven County
would like to see water quality in all of the productive water
bodies improved and maintained.
1 55

As discussed previously, water quality has long been of con-
cern in Craven County. Fishing can be detrimentally affected by
poor water quality. Although significant strides have been made
in recent years, the Neuse River has in the past experienced seri-
ous problems associated with "cultural entrophication," i.e.,
algae blooms. A number of positive actions have been taken to
reduce both point and non -point sources of pollution into the
waters, including the Neuse River being declared "nutrient sensi-
tive" by the State Environmental Management Commission in January
1988. Craven County has been and remains supportive of these
actions. It should be noted that in 1985, fish landings were
higher than in many previous years, reaching near record levels.
a. Policy Alternatives
(1) Not impose additional local restrictions on land
clearing, but continue to support existing State
and local efforts to improve and maintain water
quality, including the 404 permit process,
enforcement of septic tank placement regulations,
particularly in areas with unsuitable soils and
high erosion areas, and the Agricultural Non -Point
Cost Share Program.
b. Policy Choices
(1) The County will support enforcement of current
State, federal and local regulations as well as
support those activities undertaken to improve
water quality in the Neuse-Trent Rivers, by state
agencies.
(2) Continue to enforce the County's subdivision regu-
lations, possibly requiring larger lot sizes for
residences in areas where soils are not as well
suited for septic tank placement in accord with
rules enforced by the County Health Department.
c. Implementation Schedule
(1) Continue to support enforcement of existing regu-
latory provisions as outlined in b. above.
5. Off -Road Vehicles
The mention of "off -road" vehicles in coastal North Carolina
usually conjures ideas of four-wheel drive type vehicles running
up and down sandy beaches. However, there are no ocean beaches in
Craven County. Nevertheless, off -road vehicles are important in
some sections of the County because of the necessity for landown-
ers or hunters to travel in wooded or swampy areas. As this
property is private and not available to the public as public
beaches are, the use of these vehicles is acceptable in these
56

11
ri
1
cases. No other policy discussion on this issue is deemed
necessary.
6. Residential and Commercial Land Development
Craven County, as discussed -under sections of this report
analyzing existing population and economic trends, Craven County
is growing at a relatively rapid pace, with population growth from
1980-86 exceeding the pace from 1970 to 1980. The growth trend .is
projected to continue through the planning period and the County
could face a "rapid growth" situation in which it will have to
address issues resulting from increased residential, commercial,
or industrial uses of land. Without ignoring the limitations
presented in other policy discussions in this report Craven County
would like to be in a position to accommodate additional growth
and development as well as increasing tourism.
Additional development particularly commercial and industrial
development, is regarded as desirable because of the important
local revenue and employment generating impacts. The other policy
statements regarding resource protection adequately voice the
County's concerns regarding these resources. However, land
development, whether for residential, commercial or industrial
uses, compatible with existing constraints, (i.e., poor soils,
flood hazards, etc.), and in conformance with existing regulatory
controls, will be encouraged in Craven County.
A more detailed discussion.of the specific types of
development along with relevant policy statements are included in
the following section, "Economic and Community Development
Policies".
57

C. ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT POLICIES
The analysis of overall existing conditions and trends for
this 1987 Update of the Craven County Land Use Plan has shown
some emerging trends which will lead to modifying some of the
general economic and community development policies contained
in the 1982 Plan. Some relevant trends which have been
identified include:
°
t
An increasing rate of population growth in the County,
especially in Townships 6, 8, and 7.
° Growth and/or stability of basic resource extraction eco-
nomic activities, i.e., fishing and forestry, the decline
of farming, and the increasing importance of manufacturing
and tourism.
° Continuing improvement of the Neuse River's water quality.
° Increasing attractiveness of the County as a recreation and
retirement area.
° Provision of centralized water services in currently low-
denisty, relatively rural areas.
Craven County is very much concerned about the future growth
of its economy and overall community development. As the
population gradually increases, the economic base expands, and
more dwelling units constructed, some additional pressures
will be placed on community facilities. Sound public invest-
ment decisions on.the part of the County will also have to be
made. All of these issues and others are important in'the
formulation of land use policies. Particular required and
other issue areas and policy statements are discussed below.
1. Types and Locations of Desired Industry
Although there are several significant industrial concerns
located in the County outside of the incorporated munici-
palities, and the County has a relatively low unemployment
rate, as the population increases, there will be a need
for increased job opportunities. Manufacturing and indus-
trial development could help provide these opportunities
as well as aid in the expansion of the County's tax base.
Craven County would like to see industry developed which
could expand upon the current major industries in the
County. The County would like to attract industries which
would not require excessive amounts of water and sewer
facilities. Such industries would all be considered
desirable as long as the integrity of environmentally
sensitive areas could be assured of maintenance and
stability. Also, other low -pollution, light manufacturing
and/or assembly industries would be desirable.
�
58

Ll
a. Locations and Standards
The County would like to see industry locate, if
feasible, in industrial parks such as the existing
park on Highway 70 West, or others, which could be
developed in suitable locations in the County. The
existing industrial park is serviceable with water and
sewer, and the County would prefer to place industries
near established water and sewer services. Conse-
quently, the "Committee of 100" has identified several
potential sites adjacent to the incorporated munici-
palities. All industrial prospects will be required
to comply with general development standards which are
designed to protect environmentally sensitive areas,
including:
(1) Providing an assessment of the impact of the
development of the industry and be required to use
the best available technology to avoid pollution
of air or water during construction or operation.
(2) Be located on land having stable, well -drained
soils. The sites should be located in areas ade-
quately protected from flooding and be accessible
to existing public utilities and transportation
routes.
Some industries such as boat or ship maintenance and
repair, may need to be close to water areas, or have
adequate water access. Likewise, aviation -related
industries may need to be located near the Simmons -
Knott Airport.
b. Policy Alternatives
Possible policy alternatives concerning industrial
development in Craven County include:
(1) Continue to support the active industrial recruit-
ing program conducted by the Craven County
Committee of 100
(2) Conduct studies to see which industry types may
want to locate in the County, and assess possible
environmental impacts
(3) Seek funding and technical assistance to develop
an additional industrial park or parks within the
County, such as an "Air Industrial Park" for
aviation -related concerns, at or near Simmons -
Knott Airport.
59

2.
C. Policy Choices I
As Craven County recognizes the need for continued
economic expansion and the fact that industrial
development can greatly enhance this expansion, the
County hereby adopts. the following position. r
(1) The County, in cooperation with the incorporated
municipalities, will continue to support an active
industrial recruitment program, as currently
conducted by the Craven County Committee of 100,
seeking low -pollution, light manufacturing
industries and those which do not require large
commitments of water and/or sewer.
(2) Craven County should seek technical assistance and
financial help to develop another industrial park,
if the need dictates. The County also supports
the eventual. development of an Air Industrial Park
near the Airport, for aviation -related concerns.
(3) The County believes that all industrial prospects
should be given a fair, case -by -case assessment in
order to carefully compare possible economic bene-
fits with possibly negative environmental effects..
Such reviews will be coordinated by Craven County
through various County agencies and departments.
(4) The County will continue to seek to provide water
and/or sewer through existing systems according to
current policies, i.e., encourage new industries
to pay their own costs of water and/or sewer
extensions by offering to pay a portion of the
potential tax revenues the industry may generate
for five years.
d. Implementation Schedule
The County will continue to support existing efforts
and maintain active contact with the State Department
of Commerce industrial development representative for
the region. The County will also support efforts to
develop an industrial park near Simmons -Knott
Airport.
Local Commitment to Service Provisions
Currently, the major service to development provided by
the County is water, through the County -wide water system
which is being provided through independent "sanitary
districts" in several Townships. This system, independent
of the municipal systems, is projected to eventually serve
60
L

L J I
all residential areas of the County. The capacity of the
County water system should be adequate to meet projected
demand based on population growth trends throughout the
planning period (through 1996). A County -wide sewer
system has been shown to be economically infeasible at the
present time.
Craven County is committed to providing basic services
such as water and, where feasible, sewer, to serve
increased development in the County. The current develop-
ment of water services in Townships 1, 3, and 9, is not
being done with.the intent of stimulating growth in these
relatively low -density areas.
Other support facilities and services provided by or with-
in the County such as police and fire protection, health
services, social services, solid waste collection, and
transportation facilities, may have to be increased gradu-
ally in order to be adequate throughout the planning
period. As development occurs and the local tax base
expands accordingly, increased levels of County -provided
services will be more feasible.
a. Policy Alternative
(1) Encourage extension and expansion of needed ser-
vices as much as feasible, to accommodate new
residential, commercial, or industrial develop-
ment.
b. Policy Choice
(1) Craven County will remain committed to providing
needed services, as economically feasible, to
accommodate new residential, commercial, and
industrial development in the County.
C. Implementation Schedule
(1) The County will work with existing agencies and
the incorporated municipalities throughout the
period to encourage the provision of services
where needed and as feasible.
3. Desired Urban Growth Patterns
Craven County is an urbanizing County, i.e., transitioning
from a predominantly low -density rural, agricultural
County to one with growing residential subdivisions of
increasing densities. Historically, the density patterns
of new extra -urban or suburban residential patterns were
closely allied to the extent of water and/or sewer provi-
1 61

sions adjacent to already developed areas. This has also
been true in Craven County. Development was attracted to
the outskirts and fringes of New Bern, Havelock, Trent
Woods, and more recently, River Bend. These incorporated
areas are all located in Townships 6, 7 and 8. These
Townships have continued to attract most of the residen-
tial growth in the County, primarily because of the prox-
imity of urban services. Because of the development of
Fairfield.Harbor, Township 2 has also attracted more dense
development in recent years. The other Townships,
however, and as discussed previously, have not experienced
substantial concentrations of growth.
In the near future, Townships 1, 3, and 9, encompassing
the western more rural, low -density parts of the County,
will be receiving centralized water service. Although *the
water system, which is to be quite extensive (see Map 8),
is being developed with the expressed intent of not
purposing to stimulate growth or density of development,
just the presence of water services in a growing County
could easily affect older, established density patterns.
However, the presence of a relatively high concentration
of soils with septic tank limitations and the absence of
centralized sewer services will serve to somewhat limit
densities in Townships 6, 7, and 8, even with centralized
water. The enforcement of subdivision regulations, but no
zoning, could also affect density in the area. Therefore,.
for a period of time, the residential urbanizing patterns
will not change"significantly. Major commercial land uses
will continue to be primarily based on the patterns of
thoroughfare and thoroughfare access, with some smaller
"convenience" service centers developing to serve limited
neighborhood needs. The County's policies on industrial
land uses were presented in the preceding section.
The County has an actively enforced Mobile Home ordinance
and mobile home has not presented many problems to -date.
Also, all future subdivisions will continue to have to
comply with formal orderly development design standards in
accord with the County Subdivision Regulations.
a. Policy Alternatives
(1) Craven County could encourage the continuation of
existing residential development patterns through
enforcement of the existing subdivision regula-
tions and adoption and enforcement of a County-
wide zoning ordinance.
(2) The County could modify the existing development
patterns by developing a zoning ordinance which
62

could specify minimum lot sizes for certain
districts and thereby affect density.
(3)
Leave the existing development review process as
is.
b. Policy Choices
(1)
The existing low density rural communities which
are scattered throughout the County are a long
established residential pattern in Craven County.
This pattern will continue to be encouraged by the
County. However, the County will not encourage
"new" developments in areas with identified limi-
tations such as soils, flood hazards, or proximity
to AECs.
(2)
All newly developing subdivisions will have to
adhere to the standards of the County subdivision
regulations.
( 3 )
Because of the expanding water service in previ-
ously unserved areas (Townships 1, 3, and 9), and
the increasing potential for additional residen-
tial growth, it may become necessary to develop
additional land development controls such as
zoning to ensure orderly and well -managed growth.
(4)
The County believes that dense urban development
should only take place where both adequate water
and sewer facilities are provided. This is
especially true for commercial and industrial land
uses.
.c. Implementation
Schedule
(1)
In FY 87, assess existing development review
_
process to determine if modifications are
necessary, i.e., in subdivisions and mobile home
park plat reviews.
(2)
In FY 87, review the previously prepared draft
zoning ordinance for adoption and any possible
application to'
growth areas.
4. Redevelopment of Developed Areas
"Redevelopment" usually implies the refurbishing or reha-
bilitation of deteriorating areas already concentrated
with development. Although there are a number of sub-
standard structures located throughout Craven County,
there are also several substantial concentrations or
63

"neighborhoods," with substandard conditions. Areas such
as James City, Pembroke, North Harlowe, and some of the
neighborhoods near Vanceboro, are all examples of areas
with sufficient concentrations of substandard conditions,
requiring redevelopment activities such as funded through
a community development block grant. (See Map 8-A, page
64(a), for a graphic portrayal of these locations.) In
such cases, it shall be the County's general policy to
support applications for needed federal or state financial
assistance. It should be noted that the County has
received three previous block grant awards, two of which
have been utilized in the James City area. The most
recent grant award will be used to address conditions in
the Pembroke area. Also, some redevelopment activities in
the City of New Bern, such as along the waterfront, for
example, may be of mutual benefit and/or interest of the
County. Again, it shall be the County's position to
support such activities.
a. Policy Alternatives
(1) Continue to seek funding through the State -
administered Small Cities Community Development
Block Grant Program to establish housing and
public facilities improvements programs in
identified needed areas as feasible.
(2) Continue to work with the City of New Bern and
other municipalities in redevelopment projects of
mutual concern and benefit, such as along the
waterfront. The enhancement of the waterfront
park at Union Point is a specific example.
b. Policy Choices
(1) Craven County would like to see redevelopment/
rehabilitation activities occur in communities
identified as having concentrations of substandard
housing and other neighborhood conditions. The
County will try to link various redevelopment
activities together where feasible.
(2) The County will continue to work with the City of
New Bern in encouraging redevelopment activities
of the waterfront area, such as Union Point Park,
and other projects of mutual interest and concern.
C. Implementation Schedule
(1) In FY 87 and subsequent years, the County will
apply for funds under the Small Cities Community
Development Block Grant Program, to help rehabili-
tate and redevelop certain substandard areas.
64

m

(2) In FY 88, apply for a Community Development Plan-
ning Grant in order to clearly identify neighbor-
hood conditions, and to develop a County -wide
"Community Development Plan."
5. Commitment to State and Federal Programs
Craven County is generally receptive to State and Federal
programs, particularly those which provide improvements to
the County. The County will continue to fully support
such programs. The North Carolina Department of Transpor-
tation road and bridge improvement programs are very
important to Craven County. In fact, Craven County would
like very much to see U.S. Highway 17 four-laned through-
out the County and adjacent communities. A new bridge
across the Neuse River is also seen as a necessity, both
1
for Craven County and neighboring Pamlico County as well.
With well over 20,000 vehicles per day, boat traffic and
vehicular traffic often conflict. The issue of a new
bridge should be seriously studied by the State.
Examples of other State and Federal programs which are
important to and supported by Craven County include:
drainage planning and erosion control activities carried
out by the U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service and the
Agricultural Non -Point Pollution Control Cost Share Pro-
gram, which is valuable to farmers; dredging and channel
maintenance by the U.S. Army Corps *of_Engineers; and.
Federal and State projects which provide efficient and
safe boat access for sports fishing. The County also
supports Federal and State projects which enhance economic
development and tourism.
All of these programs and others are important to Craven
County, and the County is committed to their continued
support.
6. Assistance to Channel Maintenance
Proper maintenance of channels, including periodic dredg-
ing, is important to Craven County, mainly because of the
economic impact of commercial fisheries. If 1985 is taken
as an indication, then water quality in the Neuse River is
improving and commercial fishing is also increasing in the
County's waters. If silt or other deposits fill in the
channels, this could impede efficient mobility and docking
of commercial and recreational vessels. With adequate
channel maintenance, Craven County can make better utili-
zation of its waterways for water transportation and
recreation purposes.
I
1 65

7. Facilities Siting
Energy
In some coastal counties, the siting or location of energy
facilities relates to either peat mining or phosphate min-
ing, or off -shore oil exploration. However, in the
absence of significant peat reserves, phosphate, or oil
resources within the County's jurisdiction, no specific,
detailed policies in this area can be formulated at this
time. As was noted in the 1982 Plan Update, the only de-
posits of peat or phosphate of any significance are
located in the Croatan National Forest. In recent years,
there was a proposal to develop a peat -fired power gener-
ating plant within the City of New Bern, with peat being
brought in from Hyde County. However, the proposal has
not been carried through. Nevertheless, should the siting
of an energy facility become a realistic possibility for
Craven County, it shall be the policy of the County to
carefully review each such project and require strict
adherence to federal, state, and any local environmental
regulations.
8. Tourism and Beach and Waterfront Access
As discussed under the economic analysis section, tourism
income has been steadily increasing and will likely have a
significant impact upon Craven County's economy in the
future. Although- much of the tourist economy revolves
around "Historic" New Bern,'the County is becoming more
attractive as a recreational area for boating and golfing.
Craven County does support tourism and is aware of its
potential economic benefit. As reported earlier, the
County will employ a full-time director of its Tourism
Development Authority, as of July 1, 1987. The County has
also joined the "Keep America Beautiful" campaign, with
plans to employ a Coordinator beginning January 1988. The
importance of tourism is obviously recognized by County
officials.
The provision of adequate access is an important concern
of Craven County. To provide the County guidance for
future development of access areas, a separate, detailed
"Estuarine Access Development Plan" is being prepared
coterminous with this Land Use Plan Update. Although
policies concerning access development are contained in
that document, it is important to include the policy
discussion taken from that report.
a) Policy Alternatives
1. To ensure access in newly developing subdivisions
along the waterways, the County could assume responsi-
bility for maintenance and upkeep of these accessways
66 1

and provide free and open access to the general
public.
2. The County could seek donations of land, bargain
sales, or grant funds in order to obtain sites suit-
able for development as a water park or swimming
area.
3. In the long term, Craven County would like to see an
additional boat access ramp developed along the Neuse
River that is free and open to the public.
4. Generally, the County is committed to pursuing devel-
opment of at least one waterfront park, or similar
facility, suitable for swimming, prefereably along the
shoreline of the Neuse River.
b) Implementation Strategies
1.
Craven County will, in FY 87-88, seek grant funding
through the Coastal Resources Commission's Beach and
Estuarine Access Program and/or other identified grant
sources (see Appendix 1, "Potential Funding Sources")
to acquire and develop a public swimming beach/
estuarine park. This will constitute the County's
priority pursuit, in termsof access development.
2.
In later years, FY 89 and beyond, the County will seek
funding assistance to develop a riverine beach and
visual enhancement area.
3.
Also, as a long-term project, the County will request
that the N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission develop a
third public boating access ramp in the County.
4.
Craven County will continue to maintain contact with
and seek to work with appropriate agencies in order to
develop adequate public water access sites in the
County.
below:
The County's tourism policies are shown
a)
Policy Alternatives
1. The County could work independently of the other
municipalities to promote tourism.
2. Craven County could work with the other municipal-
ities and its Tourism Development Authority, as
well as the Keep America Beautiful campaign, to
promote the area's attractiveness.
1 67

9.
Development Authority as a focal point, to promote the
area and the economic importance of tourism. Promo-
tion of the County's attractiveness will also be
coordinated with the Keep America Beautiful campaign.
c) Implementation Schedule
In FY87-88, the County will hire its first staff for
its Tourism Development Authority, and a coordinator
for the Keep America Beautiful campaign.
Density of Development
Recently, overly dense development is not a problem in
areas under Craven County's jurisdiction, but could become
a problem during the period covered by this plan update.
With an anticipated population growth of 19,096 persons
between 1986 and 1996, (an increase of 23% over the 1986
estimate), the rate of growth, if continued in the cur-
rently developing Townships (6, 7, 8, and possibly 2)
could not push developed densities,to undesirable levels
-- especially in the absence of adequate regulatory con-
trols. However, a substantial amount of this population
increase for the County will occur in the existing incorp-
orated communities. As presented in other discussions in
this report, the physical constraints to development are
few, i.e., there are soils for suitable residential
development in most of the County, and most of the County
is not classified as frequently flooded areas according to
the Flood Insurance Maps prepared by the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). (See Maps 5, 6, and
9, attached). Also, centralized water service is to be
provided to the relatively undeveloped Townships of 1, 3,
and 9. All of these are important factors affecting
density policies in Craven County.
(a) Policy Alternatives
(1) The County could take a "hands off" approach and
not have any policies on development densities,
assuming that existing practices will "balance
out" the County's'growth.
(2) Strictly enforce the existing Subdivision Regula-
tions, as well as the to -be -adopted Zoning ordi-
nance, which will contain specific density con-
trols, i.e., lot sizes, etc., and support deci-
sions of the County Health Department concerning
septic tank placement.
68 1

b) Policy Y Choices
(1) Craven County, generally, would like to see devel-
feas-
opment continue in areas considered as most
ible to accommodate the anticipated growth and
development, where support services such as water,
sewer (including septic tanks where necessary) are
feasible and where practical to provide.
(2) The County would like to see continued enforcement
of existing density and development controls,
i.e., subdivision regulations and septic tank per-
mits, and will consider the adoption of additional
controls such as a County -wide Zoning Ordinance.
(c) Implementation Schedule
(1) The County will continue to enforce and support
existing density and development controls.
(2) In FY 87-88, Craven County will review and update
its previously prepared County -wide Zoning ordi-
nance for consideration of adoption.
D. CONTINUING PUBLIC PARTICIPATION POLICIES
Craven County recognizes that an important element in develop-
ing and implementing, any local policies or plans regarding the
use of land in the County, is involvement of the County's
citizenry. From the initial stages of development of this
1987 update of the County's CAMA Land Use Plan, Craven County
has sought to provide open opportunities for citizen input. A
"Public Participation Plan" was developed for the plan updat-
ing process, outlining the methodology for citizen involve-
ment. The plan stated that public involvement was to be
generated primarily through the County Planning Board and
through "public information" meetings, advertised in local
newspapers and open to the general public. The Planning Board
meetings also were advertised to the public and open to the
general public. Specifically, such meetings were held on the
following dates: July 24, August 28, and December 19, 1986;
February 26, March 26, and April 23, 1987. As an ongoing part
of its Planning program, the County will continue to publish
notices of meetings.
1 69

E. STORM HAZARD MITIGATION, POST -DISASTER RECOVERY, AND
EVACUATION PLANS
The entire North Carolina Coastal region, including Craven
County, faces strong threats of damage each year from hurricanes,
Northeasters, or other major storms. For nearly 20 years, there
was a marked "slowdown", or "lull", in hurricane activity along
the State's coast. Predictions were that a major storm could
strike the State at any time during the hurricane season, since
such a storm was "long overdue". And then, in September, 1984,
the "waiting" ended. Hurricane Diana, with some of the strongest
sustained winds ever recorded, rammed into the Southeast coast
near Wilmington. Although damage was extensive, the potential
destruction was much greater and the damage would have been great-
ly escalated had the storm hit land at a slightly different loca-
tion. Again, a little over a year later in late September, 1985,
coastal North Carolina faced another serious threat from Hurricane
Gloria. Fortunately, this storm veered off the coast, took a
northerly turn, and left no more than a good drenching for some
areas. For two consecutive years, the State and the coastal areas
were relatively fortunate. But what about next time?
Notice the excerpt below from, Before the Storm: Managing
Development to Reduce Hurricane Damages, McElyea, Brower, &
Godschalk, 1982, concerning development in coastal communities:
"At the same time, development along the coast has
grown by leaps and bounds. Unless this development is
wisely located and built to withstand hurricane forces,
North Carolina's coastal communities will face massive
destruction. Local governments, as the primary protect-
ors of the public health, safety, and general welfare,
have a responsibility to reduce the risk of property
damages and loss of life attending coastal development.
They also have a responsibility to ensure that recon-
struction following a major storm can occur quickly and
leave the community safer from disaster in the future.
These are the goals of hazard mitigation and reconstruc-
tion planning." (p.iii)
The purpose of this section of the 1987 CAMA Land Use Plan
Update, is to assist Craven County in managing development in
potentially hazardous areas through establishing hazard mitigation
policies and to reduce the risks associated with future hurricanes
by developing post -disaster reconstruction/recovery policies, and
reviewing the adequacy of current evacuation plans. As stated
previously, unlike many other coastal counties, Craven County
developed a separate policy document in 1984. While it is not
necessary to reproduce the entire report here, it is useful to
include relevant policies in this 1987 Plan Update. I
70 1

1. Storm Hazard Mitigation: Discussion
t Hazard mitigation, or actions taken to reduce the probability
or impact of a disaster could involve a number of activities or
policy decisions. The starting point, however, is to identify the
types of hazards (including the relative severity and magnitude of
risks), and the extent of development (including residential,
commercial, etc.) located in storm hazard areas. This information
is presented in some detail in the County's separate mitigation
policy report.
Hurricanes are extremely powerful, often unpredictable forces
of nature. The two most severe effects are fatalities and pro-
perty damage, which are usually the result of four causes: high
winds, flooding, wave action, and erosion, each of which were
described in the report previously referenced and are discussed
brief ly below:
a. High Winds
High winds are the major determinants of a hurricane, by
definition, i.e.,.a tropical disturbance with sustained winds of
at least 73 miles per hour. Extreme hurricanes can have winds of
up to 165 miles per hour, with gusts up to 200 miles per hour.
These winds circulate around the center or "eye" of the storm.
Although the friction or impact of the winds hitting land from the
water causes some dissipation of the full force, there is still a
tremendous amount of energy left to cause damage to buildings,
overturn mobile homes, fell trees and powerlines, and destroy
crops. Also, tornadoes can often be spawned by hurricane wind
patterns. Wind stress is an important consideration in storm
hazard mitigation planning. Because of a hurricane's size and
power, it is likely that most of Craven County, except the north-
ern and westernmost parts of the County, would be subject to the
high wind velocity in the event of a storm.
b. Flooding
Flooding, on the other hand, may not affect all areas with
equal intensity. The excessive amounts of rainfall and the "storm
surge" which often accompany hurricanes can cause massive coastal
and riverine flooding causing excessive property damage and deaths
by drownings. (More deaths are caused by drowning than any other
cause in hurricanes.) Flooding is particularly a problem in ocean
coastal areas because of the storm surge and low-lying areas.
However, flooding can cause extensive damage in inland areas also,
since many coastal areas have low elevations and are located in
high hazard or "Zone A" flood areas according to the Federal
Emergency Management Agency Maps. Based on the most recent flood
insurance maps prepared for Craven County (which were not avail-
able in 1984), the majority of the County is not classified as
being in the 100-year "high hazard" flood zone, or Zone "A."
71

Substantial portions of the County are classed as Zone "C," i.e.,
minimally flooded. (See Map 5.) However, because of low eleva-
tion, the majority of the County could be subject to flooding dur-
ing a severe hurricane. Although there are areas classified as
"Zone C", i.e., in the 500-year "minimally flooded" area, in
severe storms, Zone "C" areas would also likely be flooded. The
risks, however, are not as severe as for Zone "A" areas. (See Map
9, "Composite Hazards Map," attached.)
1
1
1
72 1

c. Wave Action
Damage from wave action is connected very closely to the storm
surge, i.e., wind -driven water with high waves moving to vulner-
able shoreline areas. Areas most likely to be affected are ocean
erodible areas and estuarine shoreline areas. There are no ocean
erodible areas in Craven County, but there are extensive estuarine
shoreline areas (75 feet inland from the mean high water mark of
estuarine waters) in the County. However, wave action damage
would have the most significant impact along the Neuse River
shoreline.
d. Erosion
The final major consideration in storm hazard mitigation is
severe erosion, caused by high winds, high water, and heavy wave
action. Again, in Craven County, the area most susceptible to
storm -related erosion is the estuarine shoreline AEC along the
Neuse River.
e. Summary: Storm Hazard Mitigation Considerations
In summary, all four of the major damaging forces of a hurri-
cane, i.e., high winds, flooding, wave action, and shoreline ero-
sion could have a potential impact upon Craven County in the event
of a major storm. The degree of susceptibility to losses and/or
damages was generally alluded to in the previous discussions.
However, the 1984 hazard mitigation plan noted that approximately
30% of all of the County's housing units, representing 282.8 mil-
lion dollars of value, were subject to damage under "worst" condi-
tions (page 14-15, Hazard Plan).
f. Policy Statements: Storm Hazard Mitigation
In order to minimize the damage potentially caused by the
effects of a hurricane or other major storm, Craven County pro-
posed the following policies.
(1) High Winds: Craven County supports enforcement of
the N. C. State Building Code,;, particularly requirements of con-
struction standards to meet wind -resistive factors, i.e., "design
wind velocity". The County will also support provisions in the
State Building Code requiring tie -downs for mobile homes, which
help resist wind damage.
(2) Flooding: Craven County is supportive of the
hazard mitigation elements of the National Flood Insurance Pro-
gram. Currently, Craven County is actively participating in the
regular phase of the insurance program and has adopted and en-
forces a Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance. Craven County also
supports continued enforcement of the CAMA and 404 Wetlands devel-
opment permit processes in areas potentially susceptible to flood-
ing.
1 73

3. Wave Action and Shoreline Erosion: Craven County
is supportive of the CAMA development permit process for estuarine
shoreline areas and the requisite development standards which en-
courage both shoreline stabilization and facilitation of proper
drainage.
g. Implementation: Storm Hazard Mitigation
(1) Craven County has an established County -wide
building inspection program, including the
services of a building inspector to enforce
provisions of the N. C. State Building Code for
new construction. These provisions include design
requirements for wind resistance and mobile home
tie -downs for newly placed mobile homes.
(2) Craven County has also adopted and enforces
through its building inspection program, a Flood
Damage Prevention Ordinance for the Regular Phase
of the National Flood Insurance Program. This
ordinance which requires basic floodproofing for
all new construction, including all first floor
elevations being at or above the base flood eleva-
tions, will continue to be enforced as part of the
County's building inspection program. The base
flood elevation, as shown on the flood insurance
maps, is the elevation of the 100-year flood.
(3) The County will continue to support enforcement of
State and Federal programs which aid in mitigation
of hurricane hazards, including CAMA and the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers 404 permit process.
2. Post -Disaster Reconstruction Plan
Craven County recognizes that in the event of a major storm,
it will be very important to have, at a minimum, a general recov-
ery and reconstruction plan. A very detailed and specific plan is
contained in the previously referred to 1984 document. The 1984
plan contains detailed provisions for"damage assessments, and
lines of authority. However, it should be noted that Craven
County provides a number of emergency services, including disaster
management. These services are coordinated by a full-time
Emergency Services Coordinator. All of the County's emergency and
disaster plans, including those dealing with the effects of a
hurricane, are maintained by the Emergency Services Coordinator.
All of the actions are coordinated with the incorporated
municipalities.
Although many elements of "Post -Disaster Recovery" are already
addressed in existing plans, some useful issues are not addressed.
This section of the Land Use Plan Update will address these
issues.
74 1

a.
Appointment
of a Recovery Task Force
Prior
to a
major storm having landfall in the vicinity of
Craven County,
when evacuation orders are issued, the County shall
appoint a
"Recovery
Task Force". This team shall consist of the
following:
(1)
Craven County Manager
(2)
Assistant Manager
(3)
County Tax Assessor
(4)
Emergency Service Coordinator
(5)
County Finance Officer
(6)
County Planning Director
The Emergency Preparedness Coordinator will serve as the Team
Leader and will
be responsible to the Chairman of the Board of
Commissioners.
The base of operations will be the Emergency Oper-
ations Center (EOC) identified in the County Evacuation Plan. The
Recovery Task Force will be responsible for the following:
(1)
Establishing an overall restoration schedule.
(2)
Setting restoration priorities.
(3)
Determining requirements for outside assistance
and requesting such assistance when beyond local
capabilities.
(4)
Keeping the appropriate County and State officials
informed.
(5)
Keeping the public informed.
(6)
Assembling and maintaining records of actions
taken and expenditures and obligations incurred.
(7)
Recommending to the Chairman of the. Board of
Commissioners to activate the local "state of
emergency" ordinance if warranted.
(8)
Commencing and coordinating cleanup, debris
removal and utility restoration which would
include coordination of restoration activities
undertaken by private utility companies.
(9) Coordinating repair and restoration of essential
public facilities and services in accordance with
determined priorities.
(10) Assisting private businesses and individual prop-
erty owners in obtaining information on the var-
ious types of assistance that might be available
to them from federal and state agencies.
1 75

b. Immediate Clean -Up and Debris Removal
Coordination of this activity will be the responsibility of
the Recovery Task Force.
c. Long Term Recovery/Restoration
The Recovery Task Force will be responsible for overseeing the
orderly implementation of the reconstruction process after a major
storm or hurricane in accord with the County's policies.
(1) Damage Assessments: Damage assessments will be
necessary to determine as quickly as possible a realistic estimate
of the amount of damage caused by a hurricane or major storm.
Information such as the number of structures damaged, the magni-
tude of damage, and the estimated total dollar loss will need to
be developed.
As stated previously, Craven County already has a detailed "Damage
Assessment Plan," which was prepared in accordance to guidelines
provided by the N.C. Division of Emergency Management. In the
Plan, certain personnel are assigned to two Damage Assessment
Teams (one for private property and one for public property). The
damage assessment activities are to be coordinated by the Emer-
gency Services Coordinator.
Also, the Plan includes a Damage Assessment Guide, which provides
a rule -of -thumb for estimating damages to real property and plac-
ing the damage in one of the four categories below:
HABITABLE 10%
MINOR DAMAGE - UNINHABITABLE 25%
MAJOR DAMAGE - UNINHABITABLE 50%
DESTROYED - UNINHABITABLE 100%
(2) Reconstruction Development Standards: Generally,
reconstruction shall be held at least to the same standards as
before the storm. However, developed structures which were
destroyed and which did not conform to the County's storm hazard
mitigation policies, i.e., with basic measures to reduce damage by
high winds, flooding, wave action or erosion, must be redeveloped
according to those policies. Non -conforming uses in areas subject
to the zoning ordinance will comply with provisions of the ordi-
nance if destroyed. In the event the loss of property containing
shoreline structures is substantial enough to prohibit the reissu-
ing of a septic tank permit, the County will support the decision
of the Sanitarian. In some instances, this may mean relocation of
construction, or no reconstruction at all. To the extent feas-
ible, when relocation is required, such relocation will be placed
76 1

in less hazardous -areas. Building permits to restore destroyed or
damaged structures, which were built in conformance with the State
Building Code and County storm hazard mitigation policies (includ-
ing the subdivision regulations and, where applicable, the zoning
ordinance), shall be issued automatically. All structures suffer-
ing major damage will be repaired according to the State Building
Code. All structures suffering minor damage, regardless of loca-
tion, will be allowed to be rebuilt to the original condition
1 prior to the storm.
(3) Development Moratoria: Craven County, because of
a lack of densely populated areas, does not foresee the need to
prohibit any and all development for any specified period of time.
Residents shall be allowed to proceed with redevelopment and re-
construction as soon as practical and in accord with the various
levels of State and federal disaster relief provided to them.
Damage to the properties in some areas of the County may indicate
a higher susceptibility to storm damage than other areas. If the
County determines that some areas are more vulnerable to storm
damage than others, then the Board of Commissioners may declare a
development moratorium, prohibiting all redevelopment for a
specified period of time. This will allow the County time to
assess previous damage mitigation policies for their effectiveness
and possible modification.
(4) Repair/Reconstruction
Schedule: The following
schedule
of activities and time frame
are proposed with the
realistic
idea that many factors of a
hurricane may render the
Schedule
infeasible.
Activity
Time Frame
(a)
Complete and Report Damage
Two weeks after storm
Assessments
(b)
Begin Repairs to Critical
As soon as possible
Utilities and Facilities
after storm
(c)
Permitting of Reconstruction
Two weeks after damage
activities for all damaged
assessments are
structures ("minor" to pre -storm
complete
original status, "major" to
State
building code and hazard
mitigation standards
(5) Agency Responsible for Implementation: The Chair-
man of the Craven County Board of Commissioners, as chief elected
official of the County, will be the chief responsible authority in
implementing these policies. The Board Chairman will delegate the
oversight of the reconstruction and recovery effort and implemen-
tation of the plan.
77

(6) Repair and Replacement of Public Utilities: If
water lines or any component of the water system are damaged and
it is determined that the facilities can be relocated to a less
hazardous location, then they will be relocated during reconstruc-
tion. Damage to other utilities, such as electric lines or tele-
phone lines, will be the responsibility of the appropriate private
utility company.
3. Hurricane Evacuation Plan
Craven County, as stated previously, has an official "Hurri-
cane Evacuation Plan" which was prepared in June, 1984. A review
of this plan indicates that it is generally adequate for the
County's needs.
4. Re -Entry
Factors regarding re-entry are also included in the Hurricane
Evacuation Plan. Because of the possibility of fallen power
lines, or telephone lines, re-entry will be closely coordinated
with the appropriate private utility companies.
The Craven County Plan has been reviewed by the North Carolina
Division of Emergency Management and meets the agency's approval.
The evacuation plan will be incorporated into the Land Use
Plan by reference.
78 1

ILI
SECTION III :
Land Classification System
f
I i
1
1
f

1
SECTION III: LAND CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
The land classification system provides a uniform way of looking
at how the planned use of land interacts with environmentally
sensitive areas and with the development of a County or Town. It
' is not a strict regulatory device in the sense of a zoning ordi-
nance or zoning map. It represents more of a tool to understand
relationships between various land use categories and how these
relationships help shape local policy. Particular attention is
focused on how intensely land is utilized and the level of
services required to support that intensity. Land classification
is also useful in the staging of services necessary to support
development. The regulations for the Coastal Area Management Act
state:
"The land classification system provides a framework to be
used by local governments to identify the future use of all
lands. The designation of land classes allows the local
government to illustrate their policy statements as to where
and to what density they want growth to occur, and where they
want to conserve natural and cultural resources by guiding
growth.." (7B.0204) (b)
' There are five general land use classifications under CAMA:
Developed; Transition; Community; Rural; and Conservation. In
applying the land classification system, each local government
should give careful consideration to how, where and when certain
types of, and intensity of "development," will be either encourag-
ed or discouraged. A brief summary of the five broad classifica-
tions, as contained in the CAMA rules, might illustrate this. For
example:
"Urban land uses and higher intensity uses which presently
require the traditional urban services should be directed to
lands classified developed. Areas developing or anticipated
to develop at urban densities which will eventually require
urban services should be directed to lands classified transi-
tion. Low density development in settlements which will not
require sewer services should be directed to areas classified
as community. Agriculture, forestry, mineral extraction and
other similar low intensity uses and very low density, dis-
persed residential uses should be directed to lands classi-
fied rural. Generally, public or private water or sewer
systems will not be provided in areas classified rural as an
incentive for intense development." (7B.0204) (c)
The purpose of the conservation class is to "provide for the
effective long-term management and protection of significant,
limited, or irreplaceable areas." Consequently, urban services
(whether public or private) should not be provided to those areas
as an incentive to "stimulate" more intense development. Each of
these classes must be represented on a Land Classification Map.
79

The five land classifications and Land Classification Map are
therefore intended to serve as a visual reflection of the policies
previously stated in Section II. Ideally, the map which depicts
these classifications should be as flexible as the policies that
guide them. (See Map 10, attached, Land Classification Map)
The five land use classifications, as they will be applied in ,
Craven County, are identified and defined below.
A. DEVELOPED
The developed class of land use provides for continued inten-
sive development and redevelopment of existing cities or
municipalities. Areas to be classified as "developed" include
lands currently developed for urban purposes or approaching a
density of 500 dwellings per square mile that are provided
with usual municipal or public services, police and fire
protection. In other words, such areas must currently be
"urban" in character, i.e. have mixed land uses such as
residential, commercial, industrial and institutional, or
other uses at high to medium densities.
In Craven County, the principal areas meeting this criteria
are incorporated municipalities of New Bern, Havelock, Trent
'
Woods, and River Bend. The Town of Vanceboro is also
approaching this level of development density. All of these
municipalities provide the usual urban services such as water
and sewer. In some instances, water and sewer services are
provided on a limited basis to areas outside of the municipal
boundaries, but within the immediate environs. These areas
'
also should be considered "developed." These municipalities,
with the exception of Vanceboro, have their own local land use
plans, which may be consulted for details on the respective
development policies. (It should be noted that New Bern,
Havelock, and Trent Woods, but not River Bend, all exercise
the up -to -one -mile extraterritorial jurisdiction.)
As noted previously, within the County, beyond close proximity
to municipal boundaries, water service is to be provided on a
rather extensive basis to Townships 1, 3, and 9. However, the
provision of water was not intended to be an impetus to spur
intense development in these areas. Therefore, the areas
served by these new waterlines, as shown on Map 8, attached,
will not generally be classified under the higher intensity
categories; i.e., "developed or transition."
However, the James City area and portions of Township 7 within
the County's jurisdiction, have both water and sewer, and will
be classified as "developed."
B. TRANSITION
Transition land is classified as those lands providing for
future intensive urban development within the ensuing ten
80 1

1
1
A
D
1
1
A
years on lands that are most suitable and that will be
scheduled for provision of necessary urban utilities and
services (whether from public or private sources). They may
also provide for additional growth when additional lands in
the developed class are not available or when they are
severely limited for development.
Lands classified "transition" may include:
° lands currently having urban services;
• lands necessary to accommodate the population and economic
growth anticipated within the planning jurisdiction over
the next five to ten years;
• areas which are in, or will be in, a "transition" state of
development, i.e. going from a lower intensity to a higher
intensity, of uses and will eventually require urban
services.
Transition lands must further:
° be served or be readily served by water, sewer, and other
urban services including streets, and
• be generally free of severe physical limitations for urban
development.
The "transition" class should not include:
° lands of high potential for agriculture, forestry, or
mineral extraction, or land falling within extensive rural
areas being managed commercially for these uses, when other
lands are available;
° lands where urban development might result in major or
irreversible damage to important environmental, scientific,
or scenic values, or;
° land where urban development might result in damage to
natural systems or processes of more than local concern;
and
• lands where development will result in undue risk to life
or property from natural hazards or existing land uses.
The areas to be classified as "transition" in Craven County
include some areas which were noted as such in the 1982 Plan
and some areas which have started developing since then. The
current transitioning areas include rather extensive areas in
Townships 6 and 7, especially along a "corridor" either side
of U.S. Highway 70 east from New Bern toward Havelock. This
area has seen and is seeing increasing development since 1982.
Also, of significance since the 1982 Plan, is the approval of
new subdivisions in Township 5 east of Havelock. Some of
these areas also will be classified a "transition." In Town-
ship 2, primarily because of the intensified rate of growth in
Fairfield Harbor, the amount of transition lands have been
81

expanded, compared to the 1982 Land Classification Map. Other
notable "transitionary" areas include new residential areas
along U.S. Highway 17 south near River Bend, and a few small
subdivisions in Township 8.
Most of the "transition" areas in Craven County have, or will
receive during the planning period, centralized water
services. Therefore, the County proposes to establish transi-
tion "corridors" along major secondary routes in Townships 1,
3, and 9 where water will be available during the planning
period. These corridors, as shown on Map 10, will extend
approximately 500 feet on either side of the roadways. It
should also be noted that while some of the transition areas
are located in the-100-year flood zone, the County actively
participates in National .Flood Insurance Program and regulates
building and development in these areas through enforcement of
its Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance.
The relationship between the "developed and transition" clas-
sification is important in "urbanizing" rural counties like
Craven. The first class is meant to define the already devel-
oped areas and/or those areas where public investment deci-
sions will be required to provide the necessary urban
services. These become important areas to closely monitor.
The Coastal Resources Commission has further clarified this
relationship as described below:
The Developed and Transition classes should be the only
lands under active consideration by the County or
municipality for intensive urban development requiring
urban services. The area within these classes is where
detailed local land use and public investment planning
will occur. State and Federal expenditures on projects
associated with urban development (water, sewer, urban
street systems, etc.) will be guided to these areas. Large
amounts of vacant land suitable for urban development
within the Developed class should be taken into account
when calculating the amount of additional lands needed to
accommodate projected growth.
C. COMMUNITY
The purpose of the community class is to provide for clus-
tered, mixed land uses at low densities to help meet the
housing, shopping, employment, and other needs in rural areas.
Areas meeting the intent of the community class are presently
developed at low densities which are suitable for private
septic tank use. These areas are clustered residential and/or
commercial land uses which provide both low intensity shopping
and housing opportunities, and provide a local social sense of
"community." Very limited municipal- type services, such as
fire protection and community water, may be available, but
1
1
A
1
1
82

municipal -type sewer systems are not to be provided as a
catalyst for future development. In some unusual cases, sewer
'
systems may be possible, but only to correct an existing or
projected public health hazard. Areas developed at low den-
sity in a cluster meet the intent of the community class if
'
they exhibit characteristics, such as:
° densities of less than 500 dwellings per square mile, or
residential development densities which meet or exceed
'•few
three dwellings per acre, or
° residential lot sizes of 15,000 square feet or greater,
and/or
'
° low population densities such as 640 persons per square
mile (one person per acre)
This is, and has been historically, an important classifica-
tion in Craven County, since most of the County's population
not residing in the areas classified previously as either
"Developed" or "Transition," live in such clusters. There are
'
many small communities located along the primary roads in the
County. Areas classified as "Community" include: Jasper, Ft.
Barnwell, Askin, the area south of and adjacent to Cove City,
North Harlowe, and the Riverside area in the northwest sector
of the County. Nearly all of these areas currently are to be
serviced by the County water system during the planning peri-
od. However, as noted previously, the water service was not
11
1
1
intended to be a catalyst for intense developments.
D. RURAL
The Rural classification in Craven County will be subdivided
into two subclasses --Rural Services and Rural General. These
are described below:
1. Rural General
The purpose of the "Rural General" class is to provide for
agriculture, forestry, mineral extraction, and various
other low intensity uses on large sites, including low
density dispersed residential uses where urban services
are not and will not be required. Any development in this
class should be compatible with resource production and
should not significantly impair or permanently alter
natural resources. Areas meeting the intent of this clas-
sification are appropriate for or presently used for agri-
culture, forestry, mineral extraction, and similar allied
uses. Very low density dispersed, single-family residen-
tial uses are also appropriate within rural areas where
lot sizes are large and where densities do not require the
provision of urban -type services. Private septic tanks
and wells are the primary on -site services available to
support residential development, but fire, rescue squad,
and sheriff protection may also be available. Population
densities may be very low, possibly less than one person
per acre.
83

The majority of land within Craven County's jurisdiction '
falls within the "Rural General" classification. This
classification is very important in Craven County, because '
of the continuing economic importance of agriculture and
forestry activities.
2. Rural Services District I
This district is very similar in use and purpose to the
"Rural General" classification, except for the "services"
distinction. The basic purpose of the Rural Services
'
District is also to provide for agriculture, forestry,
mineral extraction, and various other low -intensity uses
on large sites. Low -density residential uses can be
developed with access to water and/or sewer service. The
residential lot sizes may be smaller than those found in
the rural classification. Private septic tanks and wells
'
have been replaced, or are in the process of being
replaced, by water and sewer facilities. These services
are intended to help mitigate soil and water quality prob-
lems and/or in order to correct threats to health or sani-
tary conditions. Population densities may be 2 to 3 per-
sons per acre. Craven County will aggressively extend
water and sewer services into rural services areas.
'
Also, as is the case with the "Community" classification, the
extension of centralized sewer service may be necessary in
order to correct threats to health or sanitary conditions..
E. CONSERVATION
'
The final land use category, according to CAMA guidelines, is
the "Conservation" class, which provides for effective long-
term management of significant, limited, or irreplaceable
'
resources, specifically, and at minimum, all of the statuto-
rily defined AECs. However, beyond the presence of AECs,
other areas within the County, because of natural, cultural,
'
recreational, productive, or scenic value, may also require
similar "effective long-term management." Examples could
include major wetlands (other than statutorily defined coastal
wetlands); essentially undeveloped shorelines that are unique,
'
fragile, or hazardous for development; lands that provide
necessary habitat conditions (especially for remnant species);
pocosins; special cultural, architectural, or archeological
,
resources; or publicly owned water supply watersheds and
acquifers.
The designation "Conservation" should not be misconstrued to
imply "non-use," but does imply a need for careful and cau-
tious management of any allowable use. For example, within a
"conservation" area, there may be high ground areas which are
'
suitable for "development," in which case development should
t
84
1

I It
'
be allowed to take place under carefully managed conditions.
The term "preservation," on the other hand, implies total
'
restriction on all uses. Within lands designated Conserva-
tion, each proposal, or application for any "developed" use
should be reviewed on a case by case basis.
Other than the statutorily -defined Areas of Environmental
Concern, there are not many land additional areas in Craven
County that have been specially identified as having special
'
features conducive to being placed in the Conservation classi-
fication. Although the State Division of Archives and History
has identified some general areas as having "high probability"
as archeologically sensitive areas, no detailed comprehensive
surveys have been completed which documents these areas.
Three historic properties, however, have been placed on the
National Registry of Historic Properties, and one additional
'
property is on the State study list. The overall premise for
the designation "Conservation" in Craven County will be to
strike the delicate balance between careful long-term manage-
ment of sensitive or valuable resources and the freedom of
landowners to utilize their properties.
'
Therefore, in Craven County, the environmentally sensitive
areas identified as Areas of Environmental Concern (AECs),
i.e.,. Estuarine Waters, Estuarine Shorelines, and Public
Trust Areas are classified as "Conservation." There are some
coastal wetlands, or "salt marshes" present in Craven County
although these areas are not as extensive as in some other
Coastal conties. However, outside of these Areas of Environ-
mental Concern, the primary designation of "Conservation"
areas in Craven County will be for the purpose of sustaining
shoreline stability, protecting water quality, along the
County's estuarine waterways, and protecting certain wooded
swamp areas from the encroachment of improper development.
Since, as stated previously, "Conservation" does not imply
"Preservation," specific allowable uses in the Conservation
class shall include:
° Drainage: Adequate drainage is essential to the economic
vitality farming in some parts of Craven County; therefore,
drainage facilities over and through these areas, but not
with the intent of draining the Conservation areas for
'
"developed" purposes, will be allowed. Such facilities may
include diking, tiling, and piping systems.
'
Low density residential development if and as allowed by
the County Health Department and not opposed by the U. S.
Soil Conservation Service. However, water and/or sewer
'
services will not be extended to such a residential area
merely to stimulate additional growth and development.
On -site sewer services will be required and must be
'
feasible.
11
WI

11
° Water -oriented uses such as piers, docks, and marinas, if
they are shown not to cause detriment to the estuarine
waters or the Conservation lands.
° Necessary utility service lines, such as water, sewer,
electrical, natural gas, etc., when it is demonstrated that
the ecological system of the Conservation estuarine area
will not be significantly altered. (As noted in Item 2
above, development of and/or extension of necessary utili-
ties and services will not be done merely as a stimulus for
additional growth and development, only to the extent
needed).
° Roadways, when construction of roadways can be conducted
without significantly altering the ecological system, and
in compliance with existing federal, state, and local
regulations.
° Timber harvesting with approved management practices.
° Barge landings.
° Marinas (upon careful determination that substantial pollu-
tion will not occur).
In conjunction with the Policy Statements section of this
Plan, each application for a "developed" use in the Conserva-
tion classification, shall be brought before the County Plan-
ning Board and reviewed on a case -by -case basis, with possible
technical advice from the County Health Department, Building
Inspector, CAMA Permit Officer, U.S. Soil Conservation
Service, and possibly other specialists, prior to approval.
The County Planning Board may recommend modification of the
Proposal.
F. LAND CLASSIFICATION SUMMARY
The proposed classification of land for varying levels of
intensity and provision of public services in Craven County
were presented in parts A through E, above. These classifica-
tions relate directly to the "policy statements" contained in
Section II of this Plan. Additional information on the rela-
tionship between the land classification system and policies
will be presented in the following Section IV.
d
LI
m
1

SECTION IV
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN
POLICIES AND LAND CLASSIFICATION

' SECTION IV: RELATIONSHIP OF POLICIES AND LAND CLASSIFICATIONS
' As required by the Coastal Area Management Act, the land use plan
must relate the policies section to the land classification map
and provide some indication as to which land uses are appropriate
' in each class.
A. DEVELOPED AND TRANSITION CLASSES
' As mentioned in the discussion of existing conditions, most of
the County's growth will occur in and around currently devel-
oped and developing areas, i.e., Townships 6, 7, 8, and 2.
1 These are areas where basic services such as water and commu-
nity support services are available or might be feasible with-
in the planning period. The developed and transition classes
' were specifically designated to accommodate these more inten-
sively developed areas and land uses, including residential,
commercial, industrial parks and open space, community facili-
ties and transportation. Hazardous or offensive uses such as
' land application systems, power plants, and bulk chemical
storage facilities will be located away from these classes.
' B. COMMUNITY CLASS
Intensive development will not be encouraged in this class due
' to the lack of urban services and/or physical limitations.
The general range of acceptable uses are limited to resi-
dences, isolated general and convenience stores and churches,
and other public facilities. These areas are usually found at
' crossroads within the "rural" classification. Most of these
areas will be served by the County water system, and because
of the low -density development, do not require centralized
' sewage collection and disposal.
C. RURAL CLASS
' The rural class is the broadest of the land classes and is
designated to provide for agriculture, forest management,
mineral extraction and other low intensity uses. Residences
may be located within the rural class where urban services,
other than the County water system, are not required and where
natural resources will not be permanently impaired. Some
' large developments may be encouraged in the rural class when
there is an absence of otherwise suitable land within the
development and transition classes and/or when there is a
possible threat to the urban populace., Such large develop-
ments or uses include airports, land application sewer
systems, and power plants. The County also reserves the
privilege of allowing specific types of industrial development
' in the rural areas if in the opinion of the aovernment there
will be no harmful or adverse effects from such a location.
AN

D. CONSERVATION CLASS
1
The conservation class is designated to provide for effective
long-term management of significant limited or irreplaceable
'
areas which include Areas of Environmental Concern (undevel-
oped shorelines that are unique, fragile, or hazardous for
development), and publicly owned gamelands and parks and
,
cultural and historical sites. Development in the estuarine
system should be restricted to such uses as piers, bulkheads,
marinas, and other water -dependent uses. Policy Statements
'
under Resource Protection, and Resource Production and Manage-
ment in Section II of this plan address the County's inten-
tions under this class. Also, a more detailed discussion of
the Conservation classification, along with permissible uses,
is included in the preceding Section III. Additionally,
Craven County believes that uses such as roadways, utility
lines, and water and sewer lines are appropriate in the
'
conservation class, provided they comply with other
appropriate regulatory agencies.
E�3

1
F
SECTION V:
It N It I
l.MTERGouEHmviEMTAL

1
ISECTION V: INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION
'
Throughout the development
of this Plan, effort was made
to make
the policies consistent and compatible with other local,
State,
and Federal requirements.
At various stages during the
Plan's
development process, contact was made with the New Bern,
Havelock,
'
and River Bend -in order to
coordinate certain policy issues.
Implementation of the Plan
will likewise follow the same
inter-
governmental concern.
1
7
1
1
:•

W
U
H
z
w
a
a
4
i .M m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m

B E A U F O R T
C O LI N T Y
` ` \
—10 Gomm
�,a r-S O+
- i
MEE
yNb
'l +
.O
G _
LAW
1!M
1!R
•'
1..
OL
VLR
AAU
'
ILN
— IlN
n.
1>yF
•� . .a'
• •~
IJ.
/.titi'
�
IJN'• -�, 1
Si: 1 �•
.y�l
v
,
_ 09
IA
I W4
1W
�� •.
•••� \.
� % LAM•
me
Liff
J
1A
Clip
•
IYI
T'y
`p
1fN
llii
A
;O
•::I
: •}: •.••.._ Am
JA 115i i
L�l:
..
140
...
CIL
,
t'
1,
LM a
Inv
11-9
COVE CRY
POP. N1.
1 LAIR
ME
A
Down OL
PM
"
UK
11
S O N E S
P O C O S I N Im
17
C O U N T Y
V•
CIL be
MAP 3
EXISTING LAND USE MAP
'9TMT►�,
\1
\
1 •
r�
R
FA
e
1
\1k
>�'�"•.`::� RESIDENTIAL
GOVERNMENT
AGRICULTURAL OR FORESTED
COMMERCIAL
INDUSTRIAL
//////W��lfNi✓%tF�' A
1 O N A
/ 4E
t
c0
/ 1 Lai
Am
im
If
13!\ MIA
JIM
14
V11 �3. rse
•'V11 1,1 � ,�
0
0 t
�J
J
C 0
CRAVEN
COUNTY
�LE
L /TT
J
NORTH CAROLINA
►OBAOED OY n1E
'(
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
KE
EWS
SaN
/
Q
The n«p,rat,an o: this map was
tina noin part tnrounn a arant
DMSION OF HIGHWAYS -rlArMlNdC AND RESEARCH BRANCH
-
'A
pr0viaen ev the North Carolina
Coastal Manaaement Proaram,
IN COOPERATION WN THE
TT
V
t rough tunas provided by the
Cogs en[ Act of
Mna,,
U.S. DEMRTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
19;2, as a-lenaea,
,,. a1, ,
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADM"STRATION
, c,
aaarnlster Pll by the O"ice c!
—ice
Ocean and Coasta: Resource
Management, National Oceanic and
Atmospneric Aaministra tlon.
SCALE
MGM
AW 94CLWM ONLY STATE MAMAOM OOMDS
1 0 1 E 3 4mm
OR WMANT NONdYST&A OOAD6,
Q_r 03 1 .IOE
MILEAGE NOT 94OW14 ON FWWACE OOADL
ROADS SHOWN AS OF AAK 1, 19 O4
SCALE FOR NM.AO[iE/MBiTS
wMON 1 111111111111111713 CRAVEN COUNTY mom cA cum 00

s ! E A U F O R T C O U N T Y
1-lea IAM Im im
n
�
4� �.
��/ OuA G.vw ';� 'jam.• i ' / 1221
r' ,' .> / I Code No .
�:
N 0,�w a, _ _ No. Subdivision of Lots
28, River Valley
1. Briarcliff Estates 13 29. Rivershore Parks, Phase I
2. Carolina Pines, Sct. IV 21 30. Sand Ridge
'Ty 3. Carolina Pines, Sct, V 19 31. Sellhorn Heights
1 4. Carolina Pines, Sct. VII 24 32. Spring Garden, Sct. I
J A% ttl} 1� '}'# m / 5. Norbury Park 10 33. Spring Hope
}Ul 4 IY �
6.
O �� j 7 • o r� t� ` 7Craven t. III 21 35. Stately Pines, Sct. III
. Woods
ods 20 35. Stately Pines, Sct, II
Lai, IA 1 w a n tin c .I a" 1 ' a� 88. Eastwood 12 36. Ten Tall Pines
9. Golden Gate 10 37, Waterwood, Phase I
_ a
Iw w a T �. a y
}». u - 10. Godfrey
Creek Estates, Sct. II 11 38. Waterwood, Phase II
v v; 0
s J'r, t"1 atyF► r<<, "' 11. Haywood Farms, Sct, I 25 39. Westbrooke, Sct, V
A.+r« , y Ra. ` E1�.1 •+�� 12. Haywood Farms, Set. II 13 40. Westbrooke, Sct. VI
j 13. Haywood Farms, Sct. III 17 41. Beaver Dam, Sec. I
� IrI 1� � il = IaEI " 4. f � �� ,���, 1� I}� I.a 14. Haywood Farms, Sct. IV
14M y, ,, vw+Ot q ' ' ` 22 42. Cherry Branch Phase I
-/1 ! - ; `�' • '' }►' �, +4 ' 14u 140 gdYNET __ � � � 'll! 1 15. Holly Hills Estates 43. Cherry Branch Phase II
IelF � .a , sM+q 7 c,. 31 y
,1 14 a9 01 "4 - 1 / 1� - ��. 16. Lakes 36 44. Cleve Land Estates
:•cawae ^� '� ••, Iy} u ` �'"� ' •17• Laughinghouse, Sct. II 27 45. Harbour Pointe II, Sec. 5
140 4" I}Il ,#o '� 18. Manley Fields 15 46. Harbour Pointe III
a °ANU Rk I -P of l- �S.ao 19. Meadows at Gracie Farms 31 47, Harbour Pointe
!4! 140,l 20. Northwoods 10 48. Heather Downs
•` so ,� " a t1«I }» < 1+ }„ �„ "- X 21. Oakview, Sct. I Revised 32 49. Hickory Woods
sale.•1• 7 °
/ \ 22. Carolina Pines, Sct. VI 28 50. Lilliput Landing, Sec. I
w 1� ' { 23,Owip Oakview, Sct, V 11 51, Links Townhomes, Sec. I
71 .J 147} t.}t eq ;; a t}, z �°'"" 24. Granada, Sct. I 163 52. Long Creek Estates Add. I
e• A--ch 25. Rawley Hills 53. Marmann Terrace Sec, III
12 +
• / AEUSE "" �` 'a11 r' 26. Ridgewood, Sct. I 17 54. Oakview, Sec. II
•�.+,� 10 1 �J 27. River Trace 39 55, Oakview, Sec, III & IV
1 •jl l4L IUI
14" I•}p r}p t: 1411 e-�'�`��• Broad
1 +� • „ 1.7 ,.P1i 7 Ii,ppr. \__\ TOTAL
,ems �tGb7 .}o . �Ii7
:.. L.,\ •f}II ,,. ay ,lop
sa ! lad R/VER / L to
1262 'AI
� Ipl r
13 MAP 4
16
14 LOCATIONS OF MAJOR
14
10
20 SUBDIVISIONS: 1980 -1986
11 BY TOWNSHIP
11
33
97
27
53
15
14
18
222 I� } DESIGNATES TOWNSH
15
20
10
17
10
27
68 C -4
i
1,544
t
/
/ CO
r ,� • Ilse 17}7 Q' ,}» 142#�• - - Q F \qy V I r r
lYl » 't•a _ too �► II•] I \ E' MDf ON
1 fII1 a I.13 1 •II a I•aoeli`;i/
y Itel I##} 1#a] 17N _ j• � Y°d' �w°"a a mAMbl r e.. • A.
~ Aeb.V 01 3' tin RelAar, • s tart / Wa 4a.<' I Ca10
V ,w
1 Ia7 170 Ito CA sa +r 1 ; 0 +ea •.��,••� " Ito -
!1l ..y
1252 y In ,5 �T : v N I M( ` O
1 • le ss /
will/r Green (]...�i I]a a I]u y I . I,g• .. �. ,✓ `° NE ERN C 1
lR3#Jl rT, s,
\�-'� IYL II33� • Y 'Ly 041 0^ •+ •pi 7 u O 1
P Mlp g.n Kn J -
r
a .�
1 '� a laoa � �
j
Qt o II57 u» rns I 0 111a \ o �Q•, I�71 , \\` �\ \, �w� /
wo ^ ' t ' ,,,+ too. 4J n7. ,e 70 ( lal • ory17a7 , Al a ti C.4a I S.bwn_ Mall.
O I .I 1211 flMl w /I Argon
'n. I Pop P
Z 7/Jp �} •� t e '
e 13 r , 1 `` . 12R Vlgiw 11� , I•
1
] (
Cwa '� a / a . .✓� `' Lo .l NEUSE � SH! �
- .. r.•reatr,,:e, 1iL
I n'o n,s
As `
}OP I.oes
.a Ijt� Willr}pl - C�4 } 7 ° Imo% T'_V��
At
-•� ' , I \ a _ 11 •]
oAIDT O 4S � • � gp1L]
;\ sI e , }1 } ' •�` Q MARINE CORPS
\?uol t w� AIR STATION 17s• �T
� o +e `
'vyCHERRY POINT
J O N E S , °.,,� '` croala I ,19, �' J.
70 a - O Ir
Ile] \\ lie,
1 V vi,� v�l vl
C O U N T Y \
, II}} �� ,a , 1SI
*+ � � 1 • }Aa NwM lol
\a w.reloCa COW ueut ;� ', T• 16111'011"tttl'
,A X C R O A T A N 4.111SnON `/ ' 'b
a:
11�
\
\a
CATFISH
\a CROATAN
\\\ COOPERATIVE
WM FE
!I�
1 I M \ MANAGEMENT
r a
, r \ AREA
>. \
F`1. G.ow
F6_1
N A T, 1 O N A L
LAKE �
LITTLE
GREAT LAKE 1
1 r
4 /
Io1
7•I ° - ��:..,:: F O R S Tj /
17
1747
17 717N • , I /•
17.1
HAVELOCK 70 �•
' S y
-a
/' Co
O
/.\ CRAVEN
t
COUNTY
� NORTH CAROLINA
KE /� S
( ELLJS
S MDR
L '`Q• Tne preparation of Ln:s moo -as
financed in Dart throunn a arant
provided L• the North :irolina
/ Coastal Mandaement ?roara.n,
/ th f rouan unas orovt aed ny the
Coastal Zonr Manaaement Act of
i 972. as imenaed, I+h: cn as
1 aaministered by the O_ ic^ of
NOTE MAP NCLU7RS ONLY STATE ANNTARM ROADS C' c P e n and Coastal R e s o u r e+
% • OR M04MAW NOWSYSTEM ROADS. Manac _nt, vtional Oceanic and
MAIAGA,OT SOWN O,I FWWAGI ROADS Atmosoneric Acstnistraticr.
ROADS SHOWN AS OF MA 1, IV K
KIY TO COURY ROAD NUAIAS
►RI►ARID RY TIIE
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS -PLAN NJG AND RESEARCH NRANCH
N COOPERATION WTTN TIE
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
SCALE
I 0 1 2 I . ors
FL_� -Im OA 1 AEA
SCAU FOR MIAROIMINTS
r4aa} POW � rM am mom CriOlwe won coommt1 wow
\ \ ""Cow ,ROMCROII \ \
IP
INOT 1 OF I
ovum 1 ewa 2 CRAVEN COUNTY IQIII cmoLm 0491

6 E A U F O R T
I /
C O LI N T Y
—TO OWN"
B I G
• 1f21 tAs `
GO 1 _
P O C O S I N Im
•,�F ,
,, '�•
Ilk
fib `� �,''� �� � ., _ -• �
VMS \\ i
1A
a /
RWA
�. yq3• �� 1� 1�
L1T14d• y
1�1 OOV�
400
1 0 N E S f
-T M
p
C O U N T Y
P
aEw 14W
• Iw
E.aA1l'w p
Y 11.11.
•Af j]17
am m m
•p IAuf
A31. ga01
1� XA
..,�
A
MAP 5
CRAVEN COUNTY
100—YEAR FLOOD ZONE
ZONE A - AMIN
BASED ON FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP, MAY 0411987
CRAVEN COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
4.
��
vEe►Apo �r THE
---
G AY E
-\
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
1
�1
s i E
RESEARCH ANCH
OMSION OF H*HWAYS—P AW64 RANCH
awATAN
\
N COOPMATION M111M TW
COOPMATM
`
��
The preparation of this map Was
financed in Dart throuah a scant
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
�M
L �
provided by the North Carolina
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMRVISTRATION
Coastal Management Prooram.
AAANACiif6AAA91W
throuah funds provided by the
Coastal Zone Manaaepant Act of
AMA
19;2, as amenaed', .n,on is
\
administered by the Ofice of
fCAtE
Ocean and Coastal Refsource
Manraement. \atiomai Oceanic and
1 0 1 ! S •AA
\
NCN6 AW NOIOi(MY STAR AAAWAOM ROADi
Atmospneric Aaministration.
%f
CAE YM/ORTAM NON$YSmm mum
O 0! ICY
NEfAa NOY INOWN CH MONTAGE OOADS.
IIOADi ENOwN AS CM lA1l 1, 1• K
SCALE KX 94RAMOGN WS
IM 10 CDUWY ROAD NIMAE�S
....�. .1�
1,...1..1ONMOM ca.a.I.fto.�.�,.NA..
CRAVEN COUNTY NDEM cmou M 049

9 E A U F O R T C O LI N T Y
at
at
J
•O
—W 6�
I
ME
0F Oak Gran
O.a/0
Im
Im
JML
it G P O C o s I N nx
\ V
I/ ram, � I' ®i�— - %Ic':,•�
• -.
r�I� e� ! � ' � \�`/ ///'�� `ter �'• I `
I �
�'•��,, �i,. �Q�A •� ` - r� ��'�/,r/i � lea ��� `©`fly
i
yIL
DOM d
FOP, aw 1
's"p � e
J O N E S 1
1-1-. '*Based on current soil survey reports on soil tvpes with
-'-" moderate to slight limitations. However, final determination
1-1-Y
can be made only upon on -site investigation by the County
Health Deoartment.
1-1-s
i/
K• Swe'P Opp
a
. ILE Inc Cw•ar ([! )
I' AMh�I OL JN1
tD
lllL \ ♦�� itl!- i -�� IYA. "" >s►a.. �..�
1
MAP 7
GENERAL SOILS LIMITATIONS
FOR SEPTIC TANKS
POTENTIALLY FEASIBLE FOR PLACEMENT�`
O GENERALLY SEVERE LIMITATIONS
C 1 .
.Uff
Avvse u O
? Nso A f ( err
1k 4-, v`YE`fi
Ida
R..�i..... a� ' A
FOAM 1� c.•. �.
A nx'
� 141
0.
� �r
y
.o v �
t
LO
,\ CROATAN \l.. EyplbN Q-
COOPIRATry! T'�e preparation o! 7nas Sao vas
', tananrnS an r•i rt throuanWLDLrE /nantar •.or., _n rn: :
coastal proviatd t
an, G nManaaement ?raaraa,
MANAOEMMT e� throuon tunas nrovad�d ... tde
Coastal ZonC Manaa.ment of
�. AREA �•/ 1972. as inenaea, vnach as
ad.m inasterCn nv t.ne Cc:ac..
ocean ana °f
�Od5t.1 �r Sn UC Ce
Management, taonal Oceanic and
HOMMMNCUMONLY STAR MANUDRIDROADR Atmospneric ha-anastrataca.
OR RIArORTANT NOH4TS1RM DOADa
M1RAM NOT SHOWN ON 1RONTAM ROADS,
ROADS SHOWN AS OF AAII I, 19 K
Im TO CDIRAY ROAD" AMM
.W Mui IRSI, Ir. lrL, IW
r
CRAVEN COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
FMFAMD N THE
NORTH CAROUNA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DMSION OF HIGHWAYS—RAMM AND RESEARCH BRANCH
N COOAATION WIIN THE
U.S. DEMRTMENT OF TRANSKMAnON
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADM MSTRADON
WAN
1 • 1 S S aAlm
• 4! I GARS
SCALE FOR 04AND A WS
16AM POW aM) aaa. aM MM Gi mm AM C••MM� N�
�Q1�t 1•D�L7101
ARYRKRI S IWAM a CRAVEN COUWY NR cmam 049

Now-
E A U f O R T � C O U N T Y
_V0 am""
id
• r
�j2m
�,e Gi own
no
F� l
a
of mm
a
!!d
RE. tJ J
OQ
A I G
I 7
-- —
'"'
"
r.,aa.• '". �.
1� `A dww
4
•
Um 1S1!
w IjN
/
�
1 j
S
Airy a<
Ht t7N
tt
It4f
p L
i
I.
1»
1
�— COyE a"
.;:.ylam Lm
1lRF. M• ) .�• \
I 3tw
a
17:t
A1tM•R 7>l
Gw GwA
DOMPop.� Wit
CA
Im
0 a
1 0 N E S y
w'f
0
I O C O J 1 N Im
cB•1i tyt
. ,
� I,M r
,w
Mdt I1tw� Q �
1w
C O U N T Y
`tr
I. �� 4
0
0
MAP 8
WATER & SEWER SERVICE
AREAS
-- — WATER ONLY
• : • •' ; • • ; , WATER & SEWER
A
CSOATAN
\ COOPERATIVE
\ AMAGMEW
AA �!,
I
RSIAN
E
a`
Thepreparation of this map vas
financed in part throuan a arant
provided by the North Carolina
Coastal Manaaement Froaram,
ASIA
\
throuan runes provided by the
Co35 tat Zone Management Act of
197 as amended, which is
y
\
,/•�
S
NO76
AW VACLUDet OK► STATE AIAWfAbW ROADS
OR WOMAM NO"TSTM1 ROADS.
dministered by the office of
aOcear, and Coastal Resource
Management, Nat tonal Oceanic and
Atmospneric Administration.
MW10E NOT 00" ON AONIA01 BOOM
BOARS BMOMM AS OF AW 1, 19 K
MY TO Couwrr ROAD mumm t
IYO fft� 1M1, 1.r. AK. Im
C,4
F4
E l
CO
�N
r
F' 144m
CRAVEN COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
► OABED BY THE
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS —PLANNING AND RESEARCH BRANCH
IN COOMATION WRN TI!
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADM"STRATION
SCAT[
1 0 1 7 7 amm
O O3 1 A1B!
SCAB FOR 04ANG&AWTS
rMTCC C PROA N 9MT I OF ]
N•UDII t $now 2 CRAVEN COUNTY 7ABONM 049

1
rra
SAM
8s�
r
R
p -4 o•• Q1.1.
ON
.K
o .c .•
co .
�
:r
4.1
m
E A U F O R T C O U N T Y
f I c
► O C 0 8 I N WK
i,
AN
WOO
lli4
FA
1� -
_� —✓i�
ice— --•
i
A
�•
Ire"Adff
�i
lg`i
•.. S.
.: COMPOSITE HAZARDS MAP. 9
SOILS WITH. SEPTIC TANK FEASIBILITY 1
y 100-YEAR FLOOD ZONE
•
ti:• . EROSION AREAS .
f.
•� SOILS WITH GENERALLY SEVERE
u z
,y SEPTIC TANK LIMITATIONS
r �
c
M•IN CPT • •
0 c
1r
� •
J. I
• • •
• All •
•
� •
II
'•
= •
•
• •
• • •
41
•
•
, • •, •
•• •
• �l
`
•�
•.
00.
-
� CO.
• 11� ; . u AIR STATION /
Z O N E S 1 •.O+1ERRr PONT "—
17 . •• ' •1• U&I �• .. '
C O U N T Y •• t�•' : •
• • • • : LLf l T • .•
• • • : j : • Cam LOW •
. C
Y••• ••••••�•N • •w
• ••
•••1 • N.•... A ,
l3/ -00
• ,••• • A • i1� ••�• y • • 0
�• i• •• •• • i• 1 • tln �/ •�• • •� 1 ,•
• •
;• • • /
koe
0 0
-
• •• • .: \-.
• ••• • i•• %go b
• • •• •. ••• , 1
• • • ••• •• 1• �l NA /
\� •• • • • 000 • • • . i 00 : so
i rM ror i • • S `l
• v
• •_•••••• . • G O
l .... • •. . •. . •i.
• . : . : . . • •
•
• •
r • • • • i •
414040
0 0110 0 .:-
.�• , R •% E
• • •� •. • -Thy
%COO�ATIVE • •• • •• '. preparation o? c91s cao was
\ f • • •.'0 . • lna ncCa In n.^n throuan ,1 arant
• WaOl1E • • ••
(� ?rovl oea b•: ':ortn_a rel tna
•• • / Coastal Manaaemenc Proa ra,,n,
•
MANKIE*1�w • • • . • � through iunos orovlded by [he
• •• • ..• 'p Coastal ,Zone 'Man oPment of
• ANA • � . •_/ 1972, s »enaeo. wnl�ch� 's
\ ••• •.• //// aam'n'sterca ry the C`°tc� of
• • 000
• Ocean and ;:Od SCa ae Sour C9
*Based on current soil surveyreports on soil tvpes with • Management, •::clonal Cceantc and
\ MOIa CM ��10SONltAW �ArIR •oAK n11es Atmosonenc qa-lniscrauc,.
moderate to slight limitations. However, final determination �,IM EI�1AN p1 MAGI woos.
can be made only upon on -site investigation by the County \• NOAM 810 AS OF y1I.1.1•.•
Health Deoartment.
or 10 Co1.wv Wow I mh1
�£ ......OR$
•
CRAVEN COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
NORTH CAROB " WMTMEW OF MANSPORTATKM
DMSION OF H*HWAYS—FIMMRHiG 00 FMA" MAMCM
.• COOPE ARM WHIM TA
U.S. DO"ThiEMT OF TRAMPOMDON
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADWAM RAnON
1 • 1 E > • rEs
• u - 1 atE
KALE PON SMIAMMONAWs
1••M ••w r� W loom COMMON •r•
•1 a ego. CROAK couwy I 1aE11nM

r ♦ r r r
r
O r ti l�
t
r
_ q
o
b
V .
b E A U F O C O U R T-
- N T Y
L
ww
- � V
V
_ -1987
_ 1
1121
. 1
Vi N
_
y
y
LANDCLASSI FICATION MAP
O-A GS
z _
_ Eti
\ -
Im
1 _
_. 1
�
JI—
UAL'ot lot
403
Im
r_ B,
MAP..
I
off S P O C ! N _
f r
Bri
. _ 1 }M
'O
_ ..
._..
Lin
IU4
7
CRAVEN COUN
TY mom cAwm"