CAMA Land Development Plan Update-1981

CAMA
dLa�]D
�C��IC�dCOD'TIE,
[��C�`
pC�Qa
FOR
GATES COUNTY,
N0117N CAROLINA
1
DCM COPY DCM COPY
lease do not remove!!!!!
Division of Coastal Management
PREPARED BY
FEROVIN PLANNING GROUP
GroinvtNeo N.C.

4
Y
PREFACE
The preparation and successful completion of a county -wide plan
such as this requires the close coordination of many individuals and
organizations. The Gates County Planning Board acted as the central
working body during the preparation of this plan and provided local
input regarding all aspects of the plan preparation. The Board of
County Commissioners, as the final decision -making body, provided the
necessary local political decision -making required to finalize the all-
important policy section statements of this document. To these two
bodies, especially, and to all of the other state and local.agencies
who contributed their time and source data, we at the Ferren Planning
Group express our sincere appreciation.
C. Sherwood Eason
Troy A. Greene
GATES COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Lamar A. Benton, Chairman
GATES COUNTY
PLANNING BOARD
R.E. Miller, Sr.
Bobby Hollowell, Jr.
Mack Eason, Chairman
Abrom Saunders W.J. Sawyer Robert Lee
Walter Harlow Murray Parker Nina Williams
A special thanks goes to Wanda B. Askew, Secretary at the County
Manager's Office, whose coordinating efforts greatly assisted in the
preparation of this plan.

SUMMARY OF PLAN
INTRODUCTION
This planning report contains a comprehensive update of Gates County's
CAMA Land Use Plan, a plan which was originally drafted and adopted in
1976. Both the land use plan update and the 1976 plan were prepared in
accordance with the land use planning guidelines established by the N.C.
Coastal Area Management Act of 1974, although it should be pointed out the
guidelines have been amended significantly since 1976. It is expected
that Gates County will update its CAMA plan once again in 1986.
Perhaps some of Gates County's residents wonder why the County has a
land use plan. The most important reason is that the plan gives all the residents
of Gates County the chance to manage the ever increasing development pressures
which are being placed on the lands of eastern North Carolina. By
carefully managing land development pressures, Gates County will be able to
head -off problems that have occurred in other parts of the country, such as
ground water or surface water pollution, inadequate community facilities,
or pre-emption of productive land when other lands were available.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
Successful planning for any unit of government must include the citizens
for which the plan is being prepared. During the update of the Gates County
Land Use Plan citizen participation was solicited through two structured
forms: a survey questionnaire and public information meetings. Input was
also obtained through meetings with the planning board and discussions with
local officials and.residents.
A total of 2,500 questionnaires, soliciting citizen attitudes on a number
of topics, were mailed to Gates County residents. The questionnaire
respondents were asked to list according to priority a number of issues.
In general, the respondents agreed that new job opportunities and economic
development should be encouraged but not at the expense of the County's
rural character.
POPULATION AND ECONOMY
An examination of Gates County population trends showed that a population
increase of 3.4% was experienced from 1970 to 1980, which is in contrast
to the population declines experienced in the 1950's and 1960's. It also
showed a 22t increase in the number of housing units, most of which were
mobile homes.
Employment records indicate that the economic situation remains largely
unchanged since 1976. Agricultural employment, much like other areas of
the State, continued to decline while the number of County residents commuting
to jobs in surrounding counties increased. On the positive side, there was
an increase in trade, finance, insurance and real estate, and government
r employment.
EXISTING LAND USE
The rural character of Gates County's land use has not changed
significantly since 1976. Roads and highways are the largest urban type
i

land use, followed by residences and commercial operations. Generally,
residences are found clustered in communities such as Gates, Roduco,
and Eure or in strip fashion along state roads and highways. Farm
service businesses, small grocery stores, and service stations are the
predominant commercial land uses. As a result, many shopping trips take
residents outside of the County.
Forest lands occupy more acreage than any other land use in the County,
but 40% of the forestland is in either the Dismal or Chowan River Swamps. r
The amount of land in forest or agricultural use has been declining in the
recent past, perhaps an indication that some lands are not being actively
cultivated.
CONSTRAINTS TO DEVELOPMENT
Consideration of development constraints is an important aspect of a
land use plan, since it establishes a locality's ability to accomodate future
land development. Soils constitute one of the major limitations to
development in Gates County because many have poor drainage, high water table
and periodic flooding. Soils with these characteristics are often
unsuitable for septic tank use or cultivation. Flood hazard areas and
wooded swamps are two additional major constraints to development in Gates
County.
The schools, roads, and water system in Gates County were all found to
be adequate and therefore do not act as a constraint to development. However,
there is no sanitary sewer system in the County, which limits the types and
density of development that can locate in the County.
ESTIMATED GROWTH DEMAND
Based on the analysis of Gates County's population and economy,
it was predicted that moderate population and economic growth could be
expected during the planning period. Population growth from 8,800 in 1980 to
9,400 in 1990 was projected, an increase similar to that which was experienced
in the 1970's. Growth in employment was predicted, especially with the
increased possibility of industrial development now that the county -wide
water system is in operation. Yet, from a broad perspective, major
population or economic changes are not foreseen, nor are undue demands on
existing community facilities.
DEVELOPMENT ISSUES AND POLICY STATEMENTS
Although Gates County considered many different development issues,
there was little cause for the County to adopt substantial policy changes
or initiatives as part of this plan update. This was primarily because of the
moderate amoVnt,,of economic and population growth that has been occurring in
Gates County, plus the amount which is expected to occur during the planning
period. Some of the issues addressed by Gates County include pollution of
the Chowan River, loss of productive lands to urban purposes, and commercial
forest lands.
ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS
r
w
SUMMARY OF PLAN
CHAPTER I - INTRODUCTION
..Purpose of Study
..The Study Area
..Citizen Participation
..Review of 1976 Land Use Plan and Its Effectiveness
..Current Plans and Policies
CHAPTER II - ANALYSIS OF CHANGE
..Introduction
..Population
..Economy
..Socio-Economic Summary
..Land Use Analysis
CHAPTER III - CONSTRAINTS TO DEVELOPMENT
..Introduction
..Soils
..Public Facilities
CHAPTER IV - ESTIMATED GROWTH DEMAND
..Introduction
..Estimates of Population Growth
..Employment
CHAPTER V - DEVELOPMENT ISSUES
..Introduction.
..Resource Protection and Management
...Economic and Community Development
CHAPTER VI - LAND CLASSIFICATION
..Introduction
..Land Classifications
Appendix A
Land Classification Map
PAGE
i
1
1
2
3
7
8
11
11
11
14
15
15
24
24
24
26
30
30
30
31
32
32
33
35
39
39
39

LIST OF EXHIBITS
PAGE
Exhibit
1 -
Location of Gates County to State and
Surrounding Counties
2
Exhibit
2
- Planning Area Map
4
Exhibit
3
- Township Boundaries
13
Exhibit
4
- Existing Land Use
16
Exhibit
5
- Limitations of Soils for Development
25
Exhibit
6
- Water System Map
27
ff

CHAPTER I
I
PURPOSE OF STUDY
Gates County prepared a Land Use Plan in 1976 in response to the
Coastal Area Management Act, passed by the North Carolina Legislature in
1974. The purpose and intent of the act is best described in Section .0101
"Introduction to Land Use Planning" Subchapter 7B - Land Use Planning
Guidelines (as amended 9/l/79):
.0101 Introduction
(a) The Coastal Area Management Act of 1974 establishes a cooperative
program of coastal area management between local governments and
the state. Land use planning lies at the center of local
government's involvement, as it gives the local leaders an
opportunity and responsibility to establish and enforce policies
to guide the development of their community.
(b) The purpose of these state guidelines is to assist local
governments in each of the 20 coastal counties with the preparation
of their own individual land use plans. Each county and the
municipalities within the coastal counties are encouraged to
develop a plan which reflects the desires, needs and best
judgment of its citizens. The land use plans prepared under these
guidelines, when considered together, form the basis for "a
comprehensive plan for the protection, preservation, orderly
development and management of the coastal area of North Carolina,"
which is the primary objective of the Coastal Area Management
Act of 1974.
Further in the guidelines in Section .0201 (c), the heart of why North
Carolina communities and counties need to prepare land use plans is
described.
.0201 Introduction
(c) Local governments, through the land use planning process, address
issues and adopt policies that guide the development of their
community. Many decisions affecting development are made by other
levels of governments, and local policies must take account of
and coincide with established state and federal policies. Most
decisions, however, are primarily of local concern. By carefully
and explicitly addressing these issues, other levels of
government will follow local policies that deal with these issues.
Policies which consider the type of development to be encouraged,
the density and patterns of development, and the methods of providing
beach access are examples of these local policy decisions.
1

More significant even than the "requirement" that communities prepare
Land Use Plans every five years is the uses that are made of the local
plans once they have been completed. In the publication, The Impact
of State Regulation of Coastal Land in North Carolina, prepared by
Charles D. Liner of the Institute of Government at Chapel Hill, he noted the
impact of local land use plans on state and federal decisions:
...Land -use plans have a potential effect on (local) land use because:
(a) CAMA Permits may not be issued for development that is
inconsistent with land -use plans (since CAMA permits are required
only in AEC's, this effect is limited to land within AEC's).
(b) Local ordinances and regulations that apply to AEC's must be
consistent with the land -use plan; local ordinances and regulations
affecting land outside AEC's are subject to review by the Coastal
Resources Commission, which is authorized to recommend modifications
to the local government.
(c) Federal actions involving grants, licenses, permits and develop-
ment projects must be consistent with local land -use plans, as
required by Section 307 of the FCZMA.
(d) In accordance with the Governor's Executive Order Number 15, certain
state agency actions and policies must be consistent with land -use
plans.
THE STUDY AREA
Gates County is located in the northeastern corner of North Carolina
on the state line between North Carolina and Virginia. The County's location
within the state and its region is shown on Exhibit 1.
Exhibit 1... Location of Gates County to State and Surrounding Counties
r
t
Fa

The area to be studied in this plan includes all of Gates County, as
well as the Town of Gatesville. The study area is shown on Exhibit 2.
CITIZEN PARTICIPATION
Successful planning for any unit of local government must include the
involvement of the citizens for which the plan is being prepared. The
necessity of citizen participation in the planning process is recognized
by the State of North Carolina and is, therefore, one of the requirements
of the Land Use Planning Guidelines of the CAMA Act.
There are various forms citizen participation can take. Some are more
successful than others. During the preparation of the 1976 CAMA Plan for
Gates County a questionnaire was developed. It was decided that this format
would enable the participation of more people than other forms.of citizen
participation. These questionnaires were mailed to every household in the
County and the response rate was good.
The 1976 survey showed that Gates County citizens were most concerned
about the needs for adequate medical facilities, better law enforcement,
public recreational facilities, adequate community facilities (including
a county water system), better educational opportunities and the
development of new jobs in Gates County. Since that survey was made and
the CAMA Land Development Plan was completed in 1976, the County has been
able to accomplish the following:
Rural Medical Facility
Community Center
County -wide Water System (Phase I)
Participation in the Tri-County Career Education Center
Fire Department Renovations
Improved Rescue Squad Efforts
Improved Police Protection & Equipment
Rather than trying to use a different format, it was decided that using
a similar questionnaire to that used in 1936 would provide a good comparison
of the opinions of county residents about various issues. Therefore, another
questionnaire was sent to county residents. The results of this survey
are discussed in following paragraphs.
It should be noted that, while the questionnaire was considered
appropriate for determining concerns of county residents about development
issues, it was also considered appropriate to offer more opportunities for
public involvement during the preparation of the Plan. Therefore, two
public information meetings were held during the course of the planning
period. The results of those meetings are discussed later in this plan.
. Results of the Land Use Plan Survey, 1980
A total of 2500 questionnaires were sent out to county residents in the
v Spring of 1980. Of these, 553 were returned, representing a 22% response.
While this is not a sufficient response rate to be statistically
representative of all of the citizens of the County, the tabulated results
can provide at least an indication of the concerns and opinions of those
who did respond to the survey.
3

EXHIBIT 2
Va. _
0
PLANNING AREA MAP
Gates County Planning Area
Gatesville City Limits
CAMA LAND DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Gates County, N.C.
1980

Characteristics of the Respondents
More than 76% of all persons responding to the survey had completed
high school or gone to college. They were 67% female and 33% male. Over
50% of the respondents were non -white and the rest were white. Only 15%
stated that they lived on farms. It can be assumed that the rest live
in either rural areas or in the various communities around the County.
More than 85% of the respondents were between the ages of 17 and 55.
Almost 48% of the respondents reported having individual incomes of less
than $9,000 per year. Of the others, 35% reported incomes of $9,000 or
more. There was no response by 13% on the question of income. Almost
30% stated that they derived most of their income from Tidewater Virginia.
Another 17% said they worked outside of Gates County in other North
Carolina counties. This amounts to more than 46% of the respondents
working outside Gates County, yet living there. There was no response to
this question by 21%. This may be explained by the fact that 25% of the
respondents said they were unemployed. However, it must be remembered
that 67% of the respondents were women, many of whom may be housewives.
Attitudes Toward Existing Conditions
The respondents were asked to rank, according to the degree of need
(as
they perceived it),
the areas of concern they felt needed improvement.
The
top ten issues are
listed in priority order
below as determined by the
survey respondents.
1..
Unemployment
6.
Lack of Shopping Facilities
2.
Law Enforcement
7.
Lack of Industries
3.,
Recreation
B.
Transportation
4.
Drugs
9.
Fire Protection
5.
Housing
10.
Schools
As can be seen, the respondents considered unemployment to be the most
severe problem in Gates County. Considering the fact that 25% of them
were unemployed and 27% were students, this is not a surprising result.
The perceived need for better law enforcement and the related problems of
drugs in the County are apparently stimulated by an increase in rural
crimes in the County over the past few years. And while these are serious
issues in Gates County, it is beyond the scope of this plan to investigate
the relative deficiencies, whether real or perceived, that may exist in the
County.
The other'issues listed above are most definitely ones which are
germane to this study. Unemployment, lack of job opportunities, housing,
etc. are all elements of the physical and economic development of Gates County.
Throughout the rest of this plan, an attempt will be made to determine
how serious these problems really are. Those that we found in fact to be
problems will be analyzed and alternative approaches to solving them will be
y explored.
In general, the respondents felt that the County should encourage the
development of new job opportunities, but most stated that they wanted to
maintain the rural character of the County. For example, over 60% felt
that the population should remain the same size or grow at a slow rate.
5

Around 50% stated that the County should try to attract small industries,
and particularly ones which'would have no problems of associated pollution.
REVIEW OF 1976 LAND USE PLAN AND ITS EFFECTIVENESS
Throughout this docui:qentjcomparisons will be made between conditions
as they existed in 1976 and conditions in 1980. These comparisons serve
to assess areas where changes have occurred. Specifically, they serve to
point out problem areas, whether they are problems of public concern or of
major concern to a few.
It must be stressed that the guidelines under which the 1976 Plan was
prepared were more general than those used for the preparation of this plan.
As a result, direct comparisons are not always possible. In some cases,
issues related to public policies on various development problems, etc.
were not required parts of the 1976 Plan. Therefore, determining the
effectiveness of that Plan in those areas is not possible.
Assessments of changes related to the population and economy are
discussed in other sections of this report. It is sufficient to note here
that the decreasing trends in the County's population and absence of "real"
economic growth were noted in the 1976 Plan. Statements related to future
growth.were directed more toward improving the living conditions of the
existing County population in the future rather than toward how to cope with
increased development of land. The reasons for this direction were based
ori: 1) a decline in population; 2) an absence of new residential (or any
other) land use developments and 3) a generally pessimistic view of future
growth of the County. In this respect, the 1976 Plan identified the
negative trends and made recommendations to accommodate negative growth.
Many of these recommendations have been implemented.
For example, a public health hazard associated with individual shallow
wells in most of the County's communities was noted. While shallow wells
are not in themselves a health hazard, they can become polluted by infiltration
of septic tank overflows in areas where the density of residential develop-
ment is moderate to high. Such was the case in 1976. As a result, the
need for a county -wide water system was stated. Provision of public water
would make individual shallow wells unnecessary and therefore, reduce the
potential health hazard of polluted drinking water. In 1980 the county-
wide water system is a reality. Phase I of the system has been completed,
and as of this writing, Phase II has been approved by the Farmers Home
Administration. The completed system will provide safe drinking water to
most of the County's residents.
The county -wide water system proposed in the 1976 Plan was also
recommended to improve the desirability of Gates County for future
industrial development, thereby stimulating the County's economy. Because
the water system has been funded and designed primarily for use by homes
and small businesses, the potential for new industrial development has not
been improved significantly by its existence. This is not to say that small
t industries requiring minimal amounts of water could not locate in Gates County.
They could. In that respect, the chances for future employment opportunities
have been enhanced.
Another problem noted in the 1976 Plan was the sizable increase in the
number of mobile homes in the County between 1970 and 1974. The Plan noted
7

that a Mobile Home and Mobile Home Park Ordinance was adopted by the.
County in 1973. To this date, this ordinance has not been enforced.
A windshield survey of the County showed that mobile homes have continued
to increase in the County. With permanent housing costs continuing to
increase, the popularity of mobile homes, as a relatively low-cost housing
alternative, is expected to increase in Gates County.
Other issues discussed in the 1976 Plan, such as land classification,
areas of environmental concern, etc. are discussed in the appropriate
sections of this plan, especially where changes have occurred or may occur
in the future. Overall it can be stated that, based on the planning
regulations required at that time, the 1976 Plan has been as effective as
many of the other plans prepared At that time for the coastal counties in
North Carolina. However, problems still remain. Those continuing problems
are discussed in 1980 terms in the remaining chapters of this report.
CURRENT PLANS& POLICIES
It is necessary to review any current plans which have been prepared
for Gates County in order not to duplicate any efforts which have already
taken place. Also, it is necessary to look at any current policies used
by the County to guide or otherwise encourage new developments. Besides
local'plans and policies, it is always wise to examine the plans and policies
of other units of government which may have a direct impact on future growth
and/or development in Gates County. It is therefore the purpose of this
section to examine local, state and federal plans and policies which have
direct or indirect application to Gates County.
Rules and.Regulations of the Gates County Water System - The county -wide
water system is only one year old. The rules and regulations which govern
the operation and maintenance of the system were adopted by the County
Board of Commissioners in April of 1980, when the system officially opened.
These rules also contain rate schedules, tap -on fees, installation procedures,
the county's responsibilities and the consumers' responsibilities, billing
and collection procedures and the reasons why service may be discontinued
to any customer. The significance of these rules and regulations.will be seen
in other sections of this report. However, it can be noted here that they
provide the only real tool for controlling future development in the County.
This is true because the rules and regulations specify the distances from
lines, line sizes required for various densities of development and they
explain the amounts of water that can be made available to new industries,
should they locate in the county. More discussion of this will follow in
later sections.
Mobile Home and Mobile Home Park Ordinance - Adopted by the Gates County Board
of Commissioners in 1973, the purpose of this ordinance was to develop mobile
homes and moible home parks according to a specified set of standards. It
includes requirements of minimum lot sizes according to the location and
according to whether or not a mobile home is on a single lot or in a mobile
home park. This ordinance, although adopted, has not been enforced due
to a lack of personnel to administer it. Should this ordinance be enforced,
it would serve a very useful purpose in guiding the development of new
mobile home settlements throughout the County. As noted in later sections,
mobile homes appear to be the predominant type of new residential develop-
ment taking place in Gates County in recent years.
w
Vq
8

Other Plans - Other plans have been prepared for Gates County in recent years.
They include various feasibility studies prior to the construction of the
county -wide water system, an appraisal of potential for outdoor recreation,
and, of course, the CAMA Land Use Plan, published in 1976. The,CAMA Land
Use Plan was discussed earlier in this chapter. The other studies, for the
most part, were prepared in the early 1970's and are therefore out of date.
However, various recommendations from these studies are included in later
' sections of this report.
Besides local plans related to development, there are several state
and federal laws which may be applicable to potential development in Gates
County. These are listed below along with very brief descriptions of the
types of developments for which each law, statute or regulation applies.
Department of Natural Resources and Community Development, Division of
Environmental Management:
..Permits to discharge to surface waters op operate water treatment plants
or oil discharge permits; NPDES Permits, (G.S. 143-215)
..Permits for septic tanks with a capacity over 3000 gallons/day (G.S.143-215.3)
..Permits for withdrawal of surface or ground waters in capacity use
areas (G.S. 143-215.15)
..Permits for air pollution abatement facilities and sources (G.S. 143-215.108)
..Permits for construction of complex sources;.e.g. parking lots, subdivisions,
stadiums, etc. (G.S. 143-215.109)
..Permits for construction of a well over 100,000 gallons/day (G.S. 87-88)
Department'of Natural Resources and Community Development, Office of Coastal
Management:
..Permits to dredge and/or fill in estuarine waters, tidelands, etc.
(G.S. 113-229)
..Permits to undertake development in Areas of Environmental Concern
(G.S. 113A-118) Note: Minor development permits are issued by the local
government. However, the Office of Coastal Management usually issues them
for Gates County).
Department of Natural Resources and Community Development, Division of
Earth Resources:
..Permits to alter or construct a dam (G.S. 143-215.66)-
..Permits tc mine (G.S: 74-51)
:.Permits to drill an exploratory oil or gas well (G.S. 113-381)
..Permits to conduct geographical exploration (G.S. 113-391)
..Sedimentation erosion control plans for any land distrubing'activity of
over one contiguous acre (G.S. 113A-54)
Department of Natural Resources and Community Development, Secretary of NRCD:
..Permits to construct an oil refinery
Department of Administration:
..Easements to fill where lands are proposed to be raised above the normal
high water mark of navigable waters by filling (G.S. 146.6(c))
9

Department of Human Resources:
..Approval to operate a solid waste disposal site or facility
(G.S. 130-166.16)
..Approval for construction of.any public water supply facility that
furnishes water to ten or more residents (G.S. 130-160.1)
Army Corps of Engineers (Department of Defense):
..Permits required under Sections 9 and 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act
of 1899; permits to construct in navigable waters;
..Permits required under Section 103 of the Marine Protection, Research
and Sanctuaries Act of 1972
..Permits required under Section 404 of the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act of 1972; permits to undertake dredging and/or filling activities
Coast Guard (Department of Transportation):
..Permits for bridges, causeways, pipelines over navigable waters;
required under the General Bridge Act of 1946 and the Rivers and Harbors
Act of 1899
..Deep water port permits
Geological Survey, Bureau of Land Management (Department of Interior):
..Permits required for off -shore drilling
..Approvals of OCS pipeline corridor rights -of -way
Nuclear Regulatory Committee:
..Licenses for siting, construction and operation of nuclear power plants;
required under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 and Title II of the Energy
Reorganization Act of 1974
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission:
..Permits for construction, operation and maintenance of interstate
pipelines facilities required under the Natural Gas Act of 1938
..Orders of interconnection of electric transmission facilities under
Section 202(b) of the Federal Power Act
..Permission required for abandonment of natural gas pipeline and
associated facilities under Section 7C (b) of the Natural Gas Act of 1938
..Licenses for non-federal hydro -electric projects and associated
transmission lines under Sections 4 and 15 of the Federal Power Act
2
10

CHAPTER II
Ulu
INTRODUCTION
The primary purpose of this chapter is to examine what changes have
occurred, if any, since the publication of the CAMA Land Use Plan in 1976.
As will be seen in the following pages, the changes in land'use, population
growth and in the economy have been minimal. However, recent trends indicate
that there is a potential for future residential growth in the areas of the
County near employment centers outside of the County, i.e. the Virginia
Tidewater area, Ahoskie and Edenton. This potential development will be
discussed in the next chapter. The following is a discussion of Gates
County's population, economy and existing land use.
POPULATION
Table l shows the population trends for Gates County from 1950 to
1980. As one can see, there was a population loss for the county from
1950.to 1970. The preliminary 1980 Census counts show, however, that the
loss has changed to one of growth between 1970 and 1980. While the 3.4%
growth in the past decade may not be considered large in and of itself,
it does show that the mass outmigration which has been occurring over the
preceding 20 years has been "stemmed".
Table 1 ... Population Trends, 1950-1980
PERCENT NO. OF POP./
YEAR NUMBER CHANGE HOUSEHOLDS HOUSEHOLD
1950 9,555
1960 9,254 (6.5)
1970 8,524 (8.2) 2,622 3.52
1980 8,813 3.4 3,203 3.01
Source: 1950-1970, U.S. Bureau of the Census
1980, Census Preliminary Population Counts
f
The most significant fact on Table 1 is that the number of households
between 1970 and 1980 increased by 581. If the persons per household were
multiplied by this number, there would logically have been an increase of
1749 new residents in Gates County. In fact, there was an actual increase
11

of population of 581. This suggests that outmigration has not really been
"stemmed", but rather outmigration is continuing at the same time as inmigration
is increasing. The preliminary Census figures show that of the seven
townships located in Gates County, only Gatesville, Halls and Haslett,
showed increases in population. This shows that while these townships
were increasing in population and household formation, the other five
townships were continuing to experience the mass outmigration of the
previous two decades.
In an effort to better understand what is actually happening within
Gates County, two additional data sources were used. Exhibit 3 shows the
number of mobile home permits issued by the County by township since 1976.
Table 2 shows this in tabular form. As can be seen, Reynoldson, Gatesville
and Hall townships have experienced the growth of 257 mobile homes (60%
of the total growth) over the last five years.
Table 2... Mobile Homes as Percentage of Total Housing Units by Township, 1980
Total
Mobile
Percentage
Township
HU's 1
Homes 2
Mobile Homes
Gatesville
617
73
11.9
Hall
434
106
24.5
Haslett
306
35
11.7
Holly Grove
513
58
11.4
Hunters Mill
466
43
9.5
Mintonville
357
32
8.9
Reynoldson
510
78
15.9
TOTAL
3203
425
13.5
11980 Preliminary U.S. Census
2Gates County Tax Office
Table 3 shows the total number of septic tank permits issued in Gates
County since 1976. (Records for septic tank permits are not kept on a
township basis). Except for 1978, the number of septic tank permits has
remained relatively constant. Probably the most significant point to be
made about this data is that it does not show only new home development.
It also includes septic tank permits issued for older homes which have
installed indoor plumbing facilities. This trend, along with the
development of the county -wide water system means that fewer households
are subject to the problems of septic tank infiltration into neighboring.
private shallow wells. It also shows that development, even remodeling,
is taking place in the County.
ti
12

e
Va.
TOWNSHIP BOUNDARIES
EXHIBIT 3
7
PLANNING AREA MAP
GATES COUNTY PLANNING AREA
GATESVILLE CITY LIMITS
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
MH PERMITS: MOBILE HOME PERMITS ISSUED BY COUNTY TO TOWNSHIPS
CAMA LAND DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Gates County, N.C.
1980

Table 3... Septic Tank Permits Issued, 1976-198Q',
YEAR
NUMBER
1976
125
1977
132
1978
175
1979
137
1980 (6 mos.)
56
Source: Hertford -Gates County Health Department, Winton, N.C.
ECONOMY
There are several accepted data sources which can be used to assess the
economic strength of a locality, but perhaps the most widely used is
employment data by employment sector. Table 4 gives a good indication
of the types of jobs held by Gates Countians. These jobs are not necessarily
held in Gates County, rather the table shows employment trends of the residents
of Gates County, no matter where they work, i.e. in the Tidewater area,
Chowan County, Ahoskie or elsewhere. Table 4 also shows the trends in
employment from 1970 to.1978, and six months of 1980. As can be seen,
Gates Countians have been employed in agriculture less and less during
the period shown. Apparently, as they left the farm, they found employment
in other economic sectors. Unemployment during this time period has
fluctuated, generally downward, from an unemployment rate of 5.4% in 1970
to a low of 3.7% in 1978. The unemployment rate shown for 1980 is due most
likely to a seasonal condition of unemployment and therefore cannot be
compared to the other years.
Table 4... Civilian Labor Force Estimates, 1970-1980
1970
1975
1978
June 1980
Employment - Total
2,780
2,770
2,890
2,580
Agricultural
510
460
370
N/A
Nonag. Wage & Salary
2,040
2,090
2,280
N/A
All Other Nonag.
230
220
240
N/A
Unemployment - Total
160
120
110
120
Rate
5.4
4.2
3.7
4.4
TOTAL CIVILIAN LABOR FORCE
2,940
2,890
3,000
2,700
Source: 1970-178 Estimates from "N.C. Labor Force Estimates, 1979"
N.C. Employment Security Commission
1980, Estimates for month of June only
Note: All estimates are based on Place of Residence
Now that we know what types of jobs are held by Gates County residents,
it is necessary to look at the types of employment that are available
in Gates County itself. Table 5 provides this information. It shows
employment by industry by "place of work". As can be seen, there have been
losses in manufacturing employment between 1970 and 1978, as well as losses
in other employment sectors. Notably, gains in employment have been registered
in wholesale -retail trades, transportation, communications and public utilities
14

r
and in government employment —especially in government employment. No
other single employment sector showed greater numerical gains during the
eight year period. This alone would indicate that Gates County residents
are requiring more government services, although there has not been a
substantial increase in population, which would normally be associated with
such an increase in public jobs. It can be stated then, that federal, state
and local agencies located in Gates County provide more jobs than any
private sector of the local economy.
Table 5 ... Employment by Industry by Place of Work, 1970-1978
INDUSTRY
% Change
% Change
1970
1975
'70-'75
1978
'75-'78
Manufacturing
240
180
(25.0)
140
(22.2)
Nonmanufacturing
680
780
14.7
960
23.1
Construction
-
10
100.0
10
-
Transp., Comm.,
& Pub. Util.
-
70
75.0
Trade
160
210
31.3
220
4.8
.Finance, Ins. &
Real Estate
60
90
50.0
110
11.1
Services
60
40
(33.3)
50
25.0
Government
360
390
8.3
500
28.2
Source: "N.C. Labor Force Estimates", 1979, N.C. Employment Security Commission
SOCIO-ECONOMIC SUMMARY
The socio-economic conditions described in the 1976 CAMA Plan appear to
be substantially unchanged. from then to now. There is still a large out -
migration of Gates County residents, traveling to employment centers outside
Gates County on a daily basis. Since 1976 there have been no private
employment opportunities developed in the County and government employment
provides the largest number of jobs of any sector in the local economy. The
thrust of the rest of this document will therefore be directed toward an
examination of the quality of life within Gates County so that a program
can be developed to ensure improvement, or at least maintenance of that
life in the future.
LAND USE ANALYSIS
Ferren Planning Group personnel conducted a "windshield survey" of
Gates County in early September, 1980. Particular attention was given to
crossroads settlements and any notable changes that may have occurred since
1976, such as new or abandoned homes, mobile homes, farm buildings, warehouses,
or other significant activities. The data base for this survey were composite
U.S.G.S. 7} minute quadrangle field sheets compiled from 1974 photography
and follow-up field surveys. There were some minor differences in the
windshield survey data from the quad sheets -- a mobile home here, a dirt road
there, but they are considered a more than adequate survey base. Exhibit 4
portrays existing land use county -wide. The changes in land use in Gates County
since 1975-76 are imperceptable on a county -wide map. For this reason, they
are presented narratively in the following discussion.
15

GATES
COUNTY
..� ►
vim\K
9
• ,, • ,,.��` ��
EXISTING LAND USE
-1981-
EXHIBIT 4
FORESTS DEVELOP}: FE\RMq
WOODED SWAMPS , WETLANDS 7 WATER
f
SOURCE: Land Usc and Land Cover, Nor Folk Va.,N.C., UnLt.ec. Mates
Geoloyi c,11 Survey, Operr Fi.l.(2 77-7,89-1, Lan(? Use Series.
NOTE: The source map frog, which this lane: use n:.l) was taken was
based on updated 1.972 data. This riap is being updated further i
tdilulty at .East Carolina Universit.'.' in r3reenville, N.C. 'Ujpull r(ai-
1 or: the updated maps, Gates County should obt.a l n a print
in "-:-:i('r t(> come ar e, growth i.n (!('Ve ed aY'(:tiS and forest areas
��1e.:1r(::d• .�

Again in early October, FPG personnel conducted a follow-up field
survey to review the earlier work and concentrate on photographing elements
of the countryside. Several impromtu interviews were also conducted with
"old-timers" to get a feel for their perceptions of Gates County -- where it's
at and where it's going. These discussions largely hit on the local economy,
farming and the poor peanut crop this year, where residents work and shop,
mobile homes and the recent abandonment of the Seaboard Coastline Railroad line.
General
Outside of the eastern and western county hardwood swamps, Gates County
is a mixture of open countryside and forests. Northern sections of Gates
County generally have larger farm fields than the east central area. Peanut
fields and soybeans are the predominant cash crops in Reynoldson and Haslett
tonwships, while Hunters Mill and Gatesville townships appear to have more
corn and soybeans. These latter two townships exhibit a gently rolling
topography uniquely diverse from the dominantly flat terrain of northeastern
North Carolina. Interesting, horse ranches are located in Hunters Mill
Township. Enclosed with white board fences, the rolling countryside and
pastoral scene resembles some of the blue grass country near Lexington, Kentucky.
It is not hard to notice that the county has an abundance of roads --
a network of 358 miles of primary and secondary roads all total in 1977.
Vehicular access in and out of Gates County is severely limited in the west
by the Chowan River and Dismal Swamp to the east, but north -south access is
very good. U.S. Highway 13 provides the major tourist route across the county.
Driving into the county from Hertford County on U.S. Highway 13 presents
a beautiful visual first impression of the Chowan River and the nearby
unbroken panoramic view of level -- but tall cypress spreading out to the north
and south. Vacation homes are located on the high western bank of the Chowan
River in Hertford County and only a few roads are even present for access
through the two to four mile wide hardwood Chowan River swamp. The Chowan
River Inn probably saw more prosperity in the days before it was by-passed
just to the north by the new bridge.
Eure is an interesting community of about 85 houses and trailers found
along N.C. 137. Several late 19th century commercial buildings cluster near
the crossroads of N.C. 137, S.R. 1126, and the abandoned railroad tracts --
the former hub of local farm -to -market commerce centered on rail transport.
Eure is a stable little rural community where most of the working people
are employed in Suffolk, Norfolk, and Ahoskie. Since 1974, approximately
6 new single family homes and 8 mobile homes have located in Eure. A new
8 space mobile home park is also under development -- made practical by the
county -wide water system. Mobile home parks come under the county's ordinance
and this one will be served by underground electric utilities. Most mobile
homes in the county are located on individual lots and not in mobile home parks.
Table 8, in a later section describing residential land use, presents a town-
ship breakdown of mobile home concentration in the county.
Several miles to the northeast of Eure is the small crossroads community
of Roduco. This settlement of less than sixty households was established
a hundred years earlier when the railroad came through as a shipment point
for locally grown crops (principally peanuts in recent decades) but more
importantly as a storage -transport site for agricultural lime and finished
goods for the local farm population. The railroad is gone -- tracks pulled up.
17

_-�y.",�..� _ ` �s�- :�:=.-ram.-�•i•. ��. - .._
��...--- ' _ .ram--`.,!- _ "�•�...
EURE COMMUNITY... Future telephone
poles ready for shipment. Located
on abandoned Seaboard Coastline
Railroad. Pole company will be
shipping poles to Virginia via
truck at higher costs than that
of Railroad. One of about
6-10 county businesses affected.
CHOWAN RIVER-HERTFORD COUNTY
SIDE ... Just off U.S. 13 bridge,
pulpwood being loaded on barges
for shipment. Many Gates County
residents are employed in Hertford
County by the large commercial
wood companies.
GATES COMMUNITY... Fertilizer
dealer located next to
abandoned railroad. Now ships
and receives by truck.

A country store is the center of daily activity and N.C. Highway 158 has
replaced the train as a transport corridor. Roduco is a quaint settlement
with one and two story white frame houses built largely before the 20's.
No new construction has been apparent near the old railroad line for some
time.
The Gates community is also an old farming settlement that came with
the railroad and until recent injections of a handful of new houses and three
mobile homes the settlement is little changed from that described in the
1976 CAMA Plan. The several businesses and warehouses in Gates are farm
service and supply type dealers and feed/fertilizer supply operators that serve
area farmers.
Between Gates, Roduco, and Easons Crossroads to the southeast the
cultivated fields are larger than in southern portions of the county.
Gatesville is the largest community in Gates County and it is the county
seat. Many of the homes are of the same vintage as in other Gates County
communities. But in Gatesville, as well as Sunbury, newer homes have been
built in recent years. As the county seat, Gatesville probably has the most
diverse land use pattern of any other community in the County, with banks,
grocery stores, schools and public buildings. Most of these non-residential
land uses are concentrated near the intersection of S.R. 137 and N.C. 37
and along N.C. 37 north and south of that intersection. Similarly,
development in Sunbury is concentrated in "strip development" fashion
along N.C. 32. Both of these communities can expect some development due
to their locations in the County along major transportation routes.
Forests
In 1979, Gates County was reported by the N.C. Forestry Service to have
156,206 acres of forest lands. This is by far the dominant land use
covering 71% of the county's land area. Table 6 indicates, however, an
alarming decrease of 9,430 acres in forest lands in the twelve year period
following 1967, when 165,636 acres were reported by the U.S. Census of
Agriculture. This 5.7% decrease in timberland acreage may be partially
explained by differing inventorying methods employed by the two reporting
agencies. Such a decrease would be the most significant recent change in
county land use, especially when compared to the single largest (by acreage)
man-made land use category -- roads, they take up only 2,604 acres by comparison.
Roughly 60,000 acres, or 2/5 of all forest lands are located in the
Dismal Swamp and Chowan River Swamp. These two areas seem little threatened
by over clearing, poor management, or deforestation because of their natural
water defenses, while better drained sections of the county will continually
undergo some annual shifting from forest cover to agricultural usage as demands
for wood and agricultural products vary with time.
Despite an apparent decrease in forest cover, Table 6 reveals that lands
under cultivation are not increasing as a result. Some of the acreage
seems to have gone into pasture land, a category that increased by 1,000 t
acres from 1969 to 1974, but a direct comparison of the data through 1979 is
not possible at this writing because the most recent Census of Agriculture
has not yet been published. A large proportion of the depleted timber land
may be simply unmanaged "scrub" land that is not being recycled into active
farming of tree growing enterprises.
20

F.
Table 6... Agricultural/Forestry Acreages 1967-1979
1967
1969
1974 1979
Acres in Farms
86,312
82,858
Avg. Size (acres)
141
192
Percent of Land
Area
40.0%
38.4%
Cropland
44,265
44,095
Pasture
2,368
3,360
Forests
165,636
156,206
Source: U.S. Census of Agriculture, 1967, North Carolina Forestry Service
Estimate
Table 7... Acreage of Major Crops and Inventories of Livestock for North
Carolina and Area Counties, 1977
ACRES HARVESTED IN 1977
INVENTORY NOS.
Corn for
Soybeans
Cattle
Hogs
Grain
for beans
Peanuts
Tobacco
Cotton 1/1/77
12/l/76
Gates
19,500
11,400
7,400
180
- 3,100
29,500
Perquimans
22,800
29,850
3,200
-
- 2,000
39,000
Bertie
37,750
17,500
23,400
3,950
270 4,900
31,000
Hertford
19,900
9,800
14,650
2,200
540 1,200
10,400
Chowan
13,700
12,900
6,250
360
580 1,700
20,000
STATE
TOTAL
1,690,000
1,320,000
166,000
392,600
83,000 1,940,000
1,080,000
Source: N.C. Department of Agriculture, Crop
and Livestock
Reporting Service
Agriculture
The central and northern sections of Gates County are well drained and
principally under cultivation, but farming takes place throughout all drained
sections of the county with roughly 44,000 acres reported both in 1969 and
1974. Reports from 1978 indicate a total of 46,400 acres in production...
an increase of 2,400 acres since 1974.
Corn for grain, soybeans and peanuts remain the three major cash crops
by acreage raised in Gates County. Table 7 gives acreages of major crops
harvested and livestock production in 1977 for Gates and several nearby
counties. According to FPG staff conversations with several local farmers,
all three crops took a beating in 1980, because of the extended dry weather
that plagued area farmers. Peanuts seemed particularly hard hit as evidenced
by one local warehouse operator who did not even open for business as usual in
September of 1980.
21

Livestock production is another farming activity that shows up on the
county landscape. Hogs in hand in 1976 totalled 29,500 and modern hog
parlors dot the land with the most notable concentrations in northwestern
Gates County.
Average farm size in Gates County is increasing along with established
trends on the state and national level. Between 1969 and 1974, average
farm size increased from 141 to 192 acres.
RPCiiapntiAl
Housing in Gates County appears mainly as single family site -built homes,
but there is a growing number of mobile homes. The FPG land use surveys
uncovered no subdivisions of greater than 10 houses outside of Gatesville
and the several largest crossroads communities . Recently added homes or
trailers are locating on isolated home sites or in small clusters of two to
four lots fronting on existing state roads.
The major change in housing that has come to Gates County is the
increasing proportions of mobile homes as a percentage of total housing.
The table below illustrates the increase in mobile homes over the last
twenty years and particularly during the 1970 to 1980 decade. The influx
is even more dramatic when noting that 309 out of 544 housing units (57%)
added during the decade were mobile homes. Increasing concern by local
officials over the numbers of mobile homes appearing in the county led to
the adoption of mobile home and mobile home park regulations in 1973.
Table 8... Mobile Homes in Gates County, 1960-1980
MOBILE TOTAL HOUSING % MOBILE HOMES
YEAR HOMES UNITS TO TOTAL
1960 8 2456 0.3%
1970 116 2615 4.4%
1980 425 3159 13.5%
Source: U.S. Census of Population; the 1980 total unit count is from the
Preliminary Census and mobile home figure was obtained from county
tax records.
The flow of mobile homes into the county's housing picture has been
precipitated by a number of factors that seem unlikely to change in the next
decade. Some of these factors are the sharply rising site -built housing
cost, improved mobile home size, quality, availability, and long term
financing in a price range that matches Gates County's substantial low and
moderate income population.
As with the placement of site -built single family homes, people opting
for mobile home living will predominately locate on individual lots in
singles or small groups of two or three instead of larger subdivisions or
mobile home parks.
With time, there is a distinct possibility that mobile homes could constitute
forty to fifty percent of all housing units, matching the relative percentage
of low and moderate income population, increasing smaller family size, and
a
11
22

elderly population. Substantial thought by county residents and local
officials should be directed at the implications of such a large proportion
of the county's housing stock in mobile homes. Some implications are:
reduced taxes, abandonment, shorter life of unit, etc.
Commercial/Industrial
• There is very little commercially developed land in Gates County.
Smaller grocery stores and service stations are located at larger cross-
roads communities. Major shopping trips for groceries and consumer goods
take residents out of county. Farm service related businesses form the
largest commercial land use category. Lane's Farm Supply, Priddy's
Fertilizer Warehouse and Seed Company, and several farm equipment and truck
dealers are examples.
Summary
Gates County's rural character has not significantly changed in the
past five years. There have, however, been changes with more mobile homes,
less forest cover, more hog parlors, a few more abandoned 19th Century
buildings, a new county medical center, and an abandoned railroad.
There is a continuing movement from farm to non -farm rural settlement
and in -migration of housing and particularly mobile homes that are filtering
their way into the countryside and crossroads communities almost unnoticed.
Adding 534 housing units in ten years is certainly not a rush, but when compared
to less than 160 units added the previous decade and a nearly stable population
base for the entire first half of this century...it is significant.
There seems to be plenty of room and the local populace's attitude is one of
acceptance, a good sign. One of the interesting aspects of the non -farm
rural residential "growth" in Gates County that distinguishes it from some
of its neighbors is the lack of recreational community growth and the accom-
panying problems. Inmigration is a positive sign that rural living is becoming
more popular and Gates County is located such that a family can live in a good
rural atmosphere and yet be within a brief 20-minute drive of several towns
and cities -- taking advantage of both.
23

CHAPTER III
F
CON
�TTO
INTRODUCTION
There are many constraints to future growth and development in Gates
County. Not all of them are physical constraints. The loss of population
over the past 30 years is, in itself, a major constraint to development
of any kind. However, it is the intent of this section to discuss only
physical constraints to development. Those "non-physical" constraints are
discussed in other sections of this report.
Physical constraints to development in Gates County were discussed
at length on pages 31-45 in the 1976 Plan. Since no changes have occurred
they are summarized in this plan update in order to prevent duplication
of previous efforts. The major exception is the discussion of the impact
of the county -wide water system, which is discussed in some detail as it
relates to future growth and development.
SOILS
The suitability of the land or soils to accept human developments is one
of the most important subjects one can discuss in a land development plan.
As stated above, the limitations of the soils in Gates County were
discussed in detail in the 1976 Plan.
There are six major soil associations in Gates County, each with its
own characteristics which determine whether or not it is suitable for
developmental activities. Generally, it can be stated that there are severe
limitations in all six soil associations for septic tanks due to poor drainage,
high water table and periodic flooding in some areas. Exhibit 5 shows a
composite of the soil associations which contain the most severe limitations
for septic tanks, residential or industrial developments, roads and streets
and almost any other type of development. In fact, most of the land shown
as "areas with severe constraints" for development are only marginally
suitable for general agriculture. This land makes up 39 percent (86,000
acres) of all the land in Gates County. Included in these areas are the flood
plains of the Chowan River and other major streams in the County, as well as
the Great Dismal Swamp in the eastern end of the County.
Fortunately, almost all of the County's communities have been established
on soils which have only slight to moderate limitations for development.
24

Va
EXHIBIT 5
a]
LIMITATIONS OF SOILS FOR DEVELOPMENT
Areas with severe constraints
Areas with few constraints
CAMA LAND DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Gates County, N.C.
1980

It should be noted that, within those areas shown on Exhibit 5 as having
severe constraints, there are pockets of land which may not contain the same
severity of limitations for development. Conversely, there are pockets of
land in the rest of the County which may have worse limitations than
surrounding lands. For that reason, future developers should be encouraged
to seek advice from the local Soil Conservationist prior to construction to
ensure soil suitability for whatever purpose the development is intended.
PUBLIC FACILITIES
The only county -wide public facility is the water system. It was
completed in April, 1980 and therefore has had only a few months of operation
time. As of August, 1980 the system was serving 1,357 customers. This
number includes residential, commercial and industrial users, although the
commercial and industrial users do not make substantial demands on the system.
The N.C. Department of Corrections (prison camp) is the largest user, using
approximately 515,000 gallons of water per month.
The system contains 3 wells and one treatment plant with a 1,000 gpm
pumping capacity. It also has 3 elevated storage tanks, with a total
storage capacity of 600,000 gallons. Water lines range in size from 1i inches
to 8 inches. The smaller lines generally are located in the more remote
parts of the County. Exhibit 6 shows the 4"-8" lines and other system
components as they exist now. The system will be increased somewhat with
the construction of Phase II, recently approved by the Farmers Home
Administration.
Water usage records to date show that the system is meeting demand
without any problems. This is due in part to the very good pumping capacity
of the system's wells, adequate storage capacity and the fact that there are
only a few customers which use more water on a daily basis than a typical
residential customer. This is certainly enough excess capacity to accomodate
new residential growth as well as industrial growth, as long as the potential
industry is not water -intensive.
More than just providing potable water to Gates County residents, this
county -wide water system represents Gates County's commitment to utilize
government programs and funds to provide needed services to its residents
as these programs become available. There is no sewer system in Gates County.
SCHOOLS
The Gates County school system consists of four elementary schools,
one high school and one junior high school. The 1979-80 school year
enrollment for all schools was 1,853. This represented a five percent decrease
in enrollmentX from the 1978-79 school year and is part of a downward trend
which began several years ago. The State Department of Public Education has
projected this trend to continue at least through the 1983-84 school year.
According to the County Board of Education all school facilities are in good
physical condition with the exception of the Sunbury School. This school was
built in the early thirties and due simply to age will require major renovation
or replacement during the next 10-15 years.
ROADS
As mentioned in earlier sections, Gates County has 84 miles of primary
roads, including U.S. 13, and 275 miles of rural - secondary roads. Of the
26

EXHIBIT 6
4•' h f�nr
TP
as �
41
U
N
'G' D�smAi
G• 41'•i 5f • `- •ate f �'
-rr ry
}' 4 O
" C—Uk5v ale i
N O
HG• G �" tic SwgnP
tff cNoy we
3
otd
4^ ��
4•
u�n`ans
Co `" ` er4 Coun�l
County
,pan
Gro
oe
WATER SYSTEM MAP
Water Lines & Sizes
T P Treatment Plants & Wells
Elevated Storage Tanks
CAMA LAND DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Gates County, N.C.
1980

total 359 miles of roads, 246 or 69%, are paved. According to officials
at the North Carolina Department of Transportation, all of the roads in
Gates County are utilized well below design capacity. In terms of economic
development potential, the major constraint lies in the fact that there
is no major east -west highway which can provide the same carrying capacity
as U.S. 13 to the north and south.
G()T.Tn WASTF.
Solid waste collection is accomplished through placement of dumpsters
at strategic locations throughout the county. Residents are allowed to
dispose of their solid wastes at these various sites. The county, via
contracted services, empties the dumpsters twice a week and takes the refuse
to the county landfill, which is also operated through a contractor. The
landfill is located off U.S. 158 two miles west of Sunbury. Estimated
remaining useful life of this landfill site is three years, or approximately
1984.
EXCESSIVE SLOPE (12%
The topography of Gates County is generally gently sloping. There are,
however, some areas where slopes equal or exceed 12% (drops in elevation of
12 feet per hundred linear feet). However, all of these areas are located
in major drainage areas in the County and are within the areas shown on
Exhibit 5 as having severe limitations for urban -types of development.
FRAGILE AREAS - NATURAL
The Chowan River has been designated as an "area of environmental concern"
because it is an estuarine stream. Also included as an AEC is the River's
coastline to a point 75 feet from the mean high water mark. Regulations
of the Coastal Area Management Act and the U.S. Corps of Engineers specify
the types of development which may be permitted along its banks. These
were generally any development which is water -related and which will neither
restrict navigation, nor cause any negative environmental impact on the stream
or on land upon which access to the development would be required. These
restrictions also apply to "public trust waters" (all navigable, public waters
in the county), which are also classified as AFC's.
The vastness of the great wooded swamps along most of the county's side
of the Chowan River prohibit access to the river and therefore act as a
constraint to developments on it. The swamps themselves, while not
declared "areas of environmental concern", are believed to provide two very
important natural functions for Gates County. One is that surface runoff from
agricultural activities, which contains varying degrees of nutrients from
fertilizers, are filtered by the wooded swamps, thereby preventing surface
runoff pollution of the river. The second function of the wooded swamps is
to act as a barrier against floods by diffusing both the velocity of flood
waters and by dispersing them over the large areas of the swamps themselves.
Development within these swamps is impractical at best and regulated anyway
by the U.S. Corps of Engineers through "dredge and fill" restrictions.
There are no unique geological formations, nor are there any other
types of registered natural landmarks within Gates County. Also, there are
no known marketable mineral resources in Gates County.
28

FRAGILE AREAS - MAN-MADE
There are only two registered historical sites in Gates County... the
Elmwood Plantation near Vivian and the old Gates County Courthouse located in
downtown Gatesville. There has been no detailed investigation of archeological
sites in the County. While no major developments are expected during the
planning period, should one or more occur, the County should ask the State
Division of Archives and History to verify that no archeological sites would
be disturbed by such development(s).
FLOOD HAZARD AREAS
Gates County is participating in the Federal Flood Insurance Program
and administers this program through the Tax Supervisor's Office. The Federal
Flood Insurance Administration has identified 100-year flood elevations on
maps it prepared in 1978. To date, no applications for flood insurance
for new structures within the 100-year hazard area have been applied for.
The reason is that new homes and commercial buildings are not being built
within these areas. Therefore, flood hazard areas and the County's
participation in its flood insurance program appear not to represent any
constraints on development in Gates County.
BULK STORAGE FACILITIES
No hazardous bulk storage facilities were identified in Gates County
through either this land use survey or from knowledge of local officials.
Therefore, such facilities do not act as a constraint on development in Gates
County.
Summary
The physical constraints to development (flood plains, severe limitations
for septic tank usage, etc.) are not so severe as to limit any new development
within Gates County. However, they are severe enough to require careful pre -
development investigations, including seeking advice from the local Soil
Conservation Service and other state and federal agencies in order to ensure
proper site planning and to ensure that all state and federal regulations
are complied with.
Public facilities, especially the county water system have some excess
capacity to accomodate neW growth. New industrial growth will require that
they be non -water -intensive.
Neither roads, schools or natural or man-made fragile areas should present
major constraints to developments over the next ten years, due to the fact
that this development is expected to be limited in degree. Should any major
development occur, however, such as the location of an energy facility within
the County, it would become necessary to ensure that neither natural nor
man-made fragile areas would be negatively impacted.
29

CHAPTER IV
ESTIMATED
GROWTH
INTRODUCTION
Thus far in this report existing conditions and changes in conditions
which have taken place since the last CAMA Land Use Plan was prepared have
been analyzed. Also, note has been made of the capacity of the land and
public facilities to accomodate new growth. It was noted, however, in the
second chapter that population and employment growth in Gates County has not
been at a rate that Gates Countians would like to see. It is in this chapter
that an analysis will be made of the potential growth which may occur in
the County over the next ten years.
ESTIMATES OF POPULATION GROWTH
The State of North Carolina, Department of Administration makes
periodic estimates of population growth for every county in North Carolina.
These estimates are derived from mathematical models which include variables
such as location within the State, past population growth and new industrial
locations. The most recent estimates made by the State indicate that Gates
County should not experience the population losses of the past, yet they do
not indicate any notable increases in population. The State's 1979
estimate of population for Gates County for the year 1990 is 8,100.
Recalling that the preliminary Census count for 1980 was over 8,800, the State
may want to revise its estimate in the very near future. At this writing
they have not revised their estimate. Even so, it is reasonable to assume,
based on the 1980 Census figures, that Gates County will experience an
increase in population by 1990 at least as large as it did in the 1970-1980
decade.
Assuming, then, a 1990 population of 9,400 for Gates County, it seems
unlikely that such an increase, would cause undue development pressures on the
County as a whole. However, the increased activity in the Reynoldson,
Gatesville and Hall townships noted in the number of mobile home permits
indicates that it is reasonable to expect this trend to continue into the
near future. The summary at the end of the existing land use analysis noted...
"There is a growing physical evidence that non -farm rural development will
continue to increase in Gates County...". The fact that mobile homes appear
to,be the only realistic, affordable form of single family housing available
to large numbers of families in this area indicates that this type of
non -farm rural development is the "form" that future development will take
in Gates County. With an increase of ±100 new people in the County each year
for the next ten years, it can be stated that the public facilities can
30

accomodate that growth. It can also be stated that neither roads, schools,
fragile areas nor the solid waste collection and disposal systems will present
any constraints to this level of development.
EMPI.nvMRMT
As noted in Chapter II, employment opportunities within Gates County
remained fairly stable during the last decade. For that reason many county
residents have sought employment outside of the County. Without a detailed
economic base study it is impossible to forecast the number of jobs which
may exist in Gates County ten years from now. But as one local official
noted, it would only take the location of one small to medium sized industry
in Gates County to make percentage increases in employment seem very large.
For example, in 1978 the N.C. Employment Security Commission reported 140
manufacturing jobs in Gates County. If an industry which would employ
100 were to locate in Gates County, that figure would represent an increase
of 75% over the 1978 total. While this possibility may seem remote to some
Gates Countians, it is not at all "impossible". The County's water system
could accomodate such an industry as long as it did not require large
amounts of water as part of its manufacturing process. Also, it could not
require treatment of toxic wastes or wastes in sufficient quantity to require
a sewer system or treatment plant.
Summary
Population and employment growth in Gates County over the next ten years
is expected to, at least, repeat the growth of the last ten years. While
no new industries have located in Gates County in the past ten years,
it is not impossible that new industry could locate in the County during
the next ten years. The questions for the County to consider are...If a new
industry did locate in Gates County, where would be the best location?...
If large numbers of mobile,homes began to develop in the County, what would
be the County's best course of action to ensure that those developments would
be assets, rather than unsightly liabilities to the County? ... What if Tidewater
developers, for example found the state -line communities of Gates County
attractive for workers in the Tidewater area, what would the County's position
be on large mobile homes parks, or even subdivisions? These and many other
questions are discussed in the following chapter under "Development Issues".
31

CHAPTER V
X
DEVELOPMENT ISSUES
INTRODUCTION
The questions raised in the last chapter, and preceding chapters,
are those that most of the coastal area counties and towns are asking. Because
of this the Coastal Area Management Act of 1974 (and amendments thereto)
requires each locality preparing such a plan as this to discuss these various
development issues and make decisions as to what direction that locality
will take in response to those issues. It is the purpose of this chapter to
discuss those issues and to examine the alternative approaches that Gates
County might take to either resolve existing problems, "head off" potential
new problems or to maintain the "status quo". The following, then, represents
the consideration of those issues required in the CAMA Act by Gates County.
It also presents the County's choice of approaches to each problem and,the
policies it has adopted relative to each issue.
Issue - Pollution of Chowan River
Problem - Excessive algae bloom in river annually due to pollution from
identified point sources and unidentified non -point sources.
Situation Statement - Gates County's shoreline on the Chowan River is made
up almost totally of broad swamps. Because of this, access to the river is
limited to a few points. Commercial fishing activities.by residents of
Gates County is insignificant. The river's value to Gates County as a natural
resource is therefore limited to its use for recreation purposes. Local
technical advisors such as local soils scientist, health department staff, etc.,
state that pollution of the Chowan River by non -point sources (agricultural
run-off, etc.) by Gates County residents is in their opinion minimal to
non-existent, due to the buffer provided by the broad swamps all along the river.
Policy Statement - It has been the policy of Gates County to cooperate with
` other local units of governments and with state and federal agencies in efforts
to identify sources of pollution which result in the annual algae bloom and
its inherent problems. Gates County shall continue this policy even though
little or none of the pollution problem is believed to originate from Gates
County. This policy is considered in the best interest of Gates Countians
because of the Chowan River's value to the County as a natural resource and
for its recreation potential for the residents of Gates County.
32

Issue - Impact on U.S. 13 from four-laning of U.S. 17
Problem - The Coastal Resources Commission has requested each of the units
of government in the twenty coastal counties to discuss what impact(s), if
any, would take place if U.S. 17 were to be widened to 4 lanes in their.
vicinity.
Situation Statement - The closest access to U.S. 17 from Gatesville is at .
Edenton - some 28-30 miles distance. U.S. 13 via N.C. 158 and N.C. 32 from
U.S. 17 in Edenton is approximately 40 miles away. While both highways serve
as north -south access to the Virginia -Tidewater area, U.S. 17 carries much
larger volumes of traffic each day, especially tourist traffic. Because
of this', very little impact on U.S. 13 can be foreseen should U.S. 17 be
widened to 4 lanes. Gates County recognizes the obvious benefits which would
occur in those counties and communities presently served by U.S.17 should it
be widened. The County therefore endorses this project so that its
neighboring counties can reap the economic benefits which are inherent
in such an expenditure of public funds. However, because no direct or indirect
impact is expected in Gates County, no policy statement is considered necessary
at this time.
Policy Statement - None
RESOURCE PROTECTION AND MANAGEMENT
Issue - Loss of Productive Agricultural Lands to Urbanization
Problem - Unlike more urbanized counties, Gates County has not experienced
any significant loss of productive agricultural lands to urban development.
Moreover, none is expected during the next five to ten years.
Situation Statement - While productive agricultural lands are not being lost
to urban development in Gates County, there has been a reduction of the total
number of acres in farm land over the past 10-20 years. This trend is also
apparent in neighboring counties, reflecting the national trend of farmers
seeking new full-time employment off the farm. This is also due to the fact
that many small farm owners (predominant in Gates County) cannot afford the
high costs of mechanization required to use modern farm technology, thereby
increasing productivity. The loss of productive agricultural lands in .
Gates County is due to the changing economy rather than urban development.
While Gates County encourages investment by farmers in modern farm technology,
where feasible, it does not consider it necessary to adopt a policy in that regard.
Policy Statement - None
Issue - Commercial Forest Lands
Situation Statement - The North Carolina Forest Service reports that at the
end of 1979 approximately 156,206 acres of land in Gates County were being
used for commercial forest production and public and private woodlands. This
represents approximately 71% of the total area of the County. Forest lands,
while a valuable natural and economic resource, are taxed at very low rates
and therefore contribute only minimal real property tax revenues to the
County. Each year more productive farm land in Gates County is placed into
33

A
forest production, thereby decreasing tax revenues. The protection of
commercial forest lands is not considered to be a worthwhile goal by
Gates County because a large portion of the 156,206 acres in forest lands
are held by large wood and pulp corporations. The County believes that
these corporations will protect these lands as a matter of good business
practice. While these lands produce very few jobs within the County,
the large wood and pulp corporations do employ Gates Countians in other
counties. Therefore, some income is derived from these lands in an indirect
manner. Because the County does not consider protection of these forest lands
a priority consideration, it has chosen not to adopt a policy on this issue.
Policy Statement - None
Issue - Existing and Potential Mineral Protection
Situation Statement - No existing or potentially marketable deposits of any
minerals have been identified in Gates County. Therefore, no policy statement
on this issue is needed.
Policy Statement - None
Issue - Commercial & Recreational Fisheries
Situation Statement - There are no commercial fishing operations in Gates
County. The only commercial fishing is done on a part-time basis by a few
Gates Countians. This consists of herring fishing in the Chowan River during
a 30-40 day period each year. There are no commercial fishing facilities
located in Gates County. Recreational fishing does take place in the County,
but access to the Chowan River is limited due to the sizable swamps between
the river and higher land. There is one public boat ramp, near Gatesville
on the Chowan River. It was built by the N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission.
Because of the amount of fill which would be required to construct another
boat ramp in any of the swamps along the Chowan River, and because fill in
swamps is contrary to Corps of Engineers regulations,, the potential for
new boat ramps is slight, at best. Because of this recreational fishing is not
expected to increase during the planning period. Although no policy statement
on this issue is considered necessary, the County passively encourages commercial
fishing.
Policy Statement - None
Issue - Off -road Vehicles
Situation Statement - Off -road vehicles in Gates County are used off -the -road
on private property, generally during hunting season. They pose no threat
to the environment of Gates County, therefore no policy statement is considered
necessary.
Policy Statement - None
34

Hurricane & Flood Evacuation Plan
Because of its distance from the coast.and because of the historically
few hurricane or flood emergencies which have occurred over the past several
years, Gates County does not consider a hurricane or flood emergency
evacuation plan necessary. Therefore, no policy on this issue is considered
necessary.
Policy Statement - None
Merchants Millpond
V.
Merchants Millpond lies near the geographic center of Gates County,
between Gatesville and Sunbury. Approximately 3,000 acres, including the
Millpond, Lassiter Swamp and adjoining lands are under consideration
for natural area designation. The North Carolina Department of Natural
Resources and Community Development has already acquired approximately
2,100 acres, which now forms Merchants Millpond State Park. Most
of the area is standing water, swamp, or upland hardwood forest.
The area is significant because of the diversity of aquatic and
wetland plants and the abundant wildlife. Probably the largest
bdldcypress trees in the state are located within this area as well as
a number of other outstanding tree types. The N.C. Natural Heritage
Program lists five species of endangered or threatened plant species,
nine species of endangered or threatened birds, and fourteen species
of birds of special concern in the proposed natural area. Wintering
waterfowl, bobcat, river otter, mink, muskrat, deer, gray fox, raccoon
and beaver are found within the park area.
Although most of the area is protected by its State Park status,
silt and nutrients from adjoining farm fields and timber tracts
greatly accelerate eutrophication of the Millpond. Better agricultural
and timber harvesting practices could remedy this problem. Presently,
the predominant use of the area is by fishermen. However, the master
plan for the state park proposes facilities to accommodate 1,750 day users
and 800 overnight users per day. It is expected that heaviest use
will occur in spring and fall seasons on the weekends.
Policy Statement - Gates County recognizes the natural, recreational
and tourist value of the Merchants Millpond area,. and supports preservation
of its natural features as well as development of its recreational
and tourist features. Yet, in view of the State's plans to acquire
and protect the area, it shall be the County's policy to support the
State's plan for Merchants Millpond.
K
ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Issue - Types of development to be encouraged and capacity of the county- ,
wide systems to service new development.
Situation Statement - Gates Countians have, through the survey results,
stated that they wish to preserve the rural character of Gates County.
Past trends would indicate that future development will most likely
take place as it has in the past. However, the county -wide water system
is now operational along many roads. The traditional patterns of linear
35

I#
development along county roads would appear to be inappropriate along
those roads not presently served by the water system.
Ideally, new developments should be located in or near existing communities
such as Gatesville, Eure, Corapeake, Sunbury, Roduco and Gates.
Realistically, only new development will take place in those communities
near the Virginia state line, like Corapeake, Wiggins Crossroads,
Gates and Reynoldson and near Chowan and Hertford County lines. While
the existing water system capacity is sufficient to accommodate new
growth, a major development, such as a large mobile home park or
subdivision, might cause problems in water line pressures, especially
near the ends of lines and on lines which are less than 6 inches in
size. Therefore, there are restrictions on the number of mobile homes
which can develop along the various water lines. The County's position,
then,is not to discourage mobile home development (although very little
tax revenues are produced when compared to a single family home).
However, due to necessity, the County has set limitations on large
concentrations of mobile homes in its "Rules and Regulations of Gates
County Water System", 1980. There are no constraints to development
caused by other systems within Gates County. Roads, schools, solid
waste and other such systems have sufficient capacity to accommodate
the growth expected over the next ten years.
Policy Alternatives - Gates County could choose to discourage all types
of development. But discouraging potential industry would not fulfill
the needs for employment for county residents. Also those future
residents who chose to reside in Gates County and work elsewhere
would not be permitted to enjoy the County's rural character, which is
so treasured by existing residents.
Gates County could choose to control any future development through
enforcement of the existing Mobile Home Ordinance and by adopting
subdivision regulations and a zoning ordinance. Any of the three
regulations would require additional County personnel to administer
them. The County is aware that. it must adopt state building codes in
the near future. Enforcement of these codes will require a building
inspector, who could also be utilized to act as administrator of one
or more of the ordinances named above.
The County could choose to maintain the "status quo" by neither encouraging
nor discouraging growth, with the exception of trying to attract small
industries. This would include not enforcing the mobile home ordinance,
but enforcing the water system rules and regulations. The result of
this alternative would, five years from now, be an extension of existing
development patterns.
Alternative Choice - The County has chosen a combination of two alternatives
given above. Because of the slow development rate in Gates County,
the County does not feel there.is now, nor will there be in the 5-year
planning period, sufficient need for either subdivision regulations or
a zoning ordinance. However, as soon as a building inspector has been
appointed, he will also act as the administrator of the Mobile Home
Ordinance. The County ManaVer will continue to administer the "Rules
& Regulations of Gates County Water System". The combination of these
three codes, when fully enforced, should provide the County adequate
control over future development to meet the growth objectives expressed
92

by county residents through the land use survey.
Policy Statement - It has been the unofficial policy of Gates County to
encourage new developments within the County. However, it shall be the
policy of Gates County henceforth to encourage single-family subdivisions
of 5 or more homes in or near existing communities where water lines
are of sufficient size to accommodate them. Individual new homes will
be served by existing water lines, where available. While mobile homes
and mobile home parks are neither encouraged nor discouraged, any new
such developments must conform to the County's mobile home ordinance
and the water system rules and regulations. Small, non -water, intensive
industries are actively encouraged to locate in or near existing
communities so they may also be served by existing water lines. When
a new industry considers a site more suitable where no water lines
exist, it must bear the cost of providing a water line from such a
site to the nearest 6 inch water line. The County especially encourages
new industries which would use forest or agricultural products.
Issue - Redevelopment of Developed Areas
Situation Statement - Because of the very low density of developments
within Gates County, and, because of the limited financial resources
available for any redevelopment projects, the County does not intend
to redevelop any developed areas within the County. Therefore, no
policy statement will be made. However, the County does encourage
individual property owners to maintain their homes, out buildings,
businesses and/or rental property in such condition and appearance
that Gates County will project a positive image to travelers through
the County. Maintenance of property is also encouraged to protect
the health, safety, and general welfare of the residents of Gates
County.
Policy Statement - None
COMMITMENT TO STATE AND FEDERAL PROGRAMS
Gates County has availed itself of various state and federal programs
in the past, the most recent being the participation by the Farmers
Home Administration in the development of the county water system.
It shall be the policy of Gates County to continue its commitments to
state and federal programs in the area (i.e., channel maintenance,
dredge and fill operations, highway improvements and erosion.control)
wherever applicable.
M
WATER ACCESS «
As discussed in various preceding sections of this document, {
there are only a few points of access to the Chowan River due to the
expanse of the wooded swamps along its banks. Where access is
available, it is available to the public. Therefore, Gates County
considers it unnecessary to adopt a policy on water access.
37

ENERGY FACILITY SITING
Gates County considers the possibility of the siting of an energy
facility to be very remote. Therefore, no policy on this issue is
considered necessary. however, should this become an issue in the
future, a policy will be developed at the appropriate time.
CITIZEN PARTICIPATION POLICY
When Gates County updates its Land Use Plan in the future, an appropriate
r citizen participation plan will be developed and carried out. Since few new
development issues are expected until then, ongoing public participation
will occur through regular and special planning board and county commissioner
meetings.
0

CHAPTER VI
r
LAND CLASSIFICATION
INTRODUCTION
A land classification system has been developed by the North Carolina
Coastal Resources Commission as a means of assisting in the implementation
of the policies developed within local CAMA Land Use Plans, such as this one.
By showing land classifications on a map and describing them in narrative
form, Gates County specifies those areas where the policies described in the
last chapter will apply. It should also be noted that the various land
classifications also show areas which come under the purview of various
state and federal statutes and regulations. (See "Current Plans and Policies".)
Although certain areas are outlined on the Land Classification Map, it must
be remembered that land classification is merely a tool to help implement
policies and not a strict regulatory mechanism.
The designation of land classes permits Gates County to illustrate
its policy statements as to where and to what density it wants growth to occur,
and where it wants to conserve natural and cultural resources by guiding growth.
LAND CLASSIFICATIONS
There are five'broad classes 'within the land classification system.
These are used by all 20 coastal counties. They are defined as follows:
Developed Land - Areas classified as developed include those lands already
developed for urban purposes with a density at or approaching 500 dwelling
units per square mile. These areas usually have already been provided
with typical urban services (i.e., public water, recreational facilities,
police and fire protection).
There are no areas within Gates County which meet the density criteria stated
in the definition above. Therefore, no land areas are so classified on the
Land Classification Map.
Transition Land - Land classified as transition are those developable lands
which -will be needed to meet anticipated population and economic growth. These
areas must either be served or be readily served by public water, sewer and
other urban services including public streets, and be generally free of
severe physical limitations for urban development. Lands classified as
transition are the only areas which would be under active consideration by Gates
County for intensive urban development requiring urban services. These are
the areas where detailed land use and public investment planning will occur.
39

State and federal expenditures on projects associated with urban development,
such as water, sewer, urban streets,' etc., would be guided to these areas
by the County. There are no areas within the planning jurisdiction of Gates
County which meet any of the criteria of the transition classification.
Therefore, none are shown on the Land Classification Map.
Community Land -Lands classified as community are those areas within the
planning jurisdiction needed to provide for clustered land development to
help meet housing, shopping, employment and public service needs within the
rural areas of the County. These areas are characterized by small groupings
of mixed land uses, such as residences, small stores, churches, schools, etc., ti
which are suitable for small clusters of rural development not requiring public
sewer service.
The areas so designated in Gates County are shown on the Land Classification
Map. While almost all of the areas shown as community are already served
by the county water system, none of them meet both the density criteria of
500 dwelling units per square mile and the need for public sewer service.
Rural Land - Lands classified as rural are all other agricultural and forested
areas which are not classified as either transitional, community or conservation.
These lands are best suited for agriculture, forestry management and other
low intensity uses. Residences may be located within "rural" areas where
urban services are not required and where natural resources will not be
permanently impaired. Areas classified as rural are shown on the Land
Classification Map.
Conservation Land - Lands classified as conservation are those lands which
contain: major wetlands, wooded swamps, essentially undeveloped shorelands
that are unique, fragile or hazardous for development, necessary wildlife
habitats,,publicly owned water supply watersheds and aquifers and forest lands
that are undeveloped and will remain undeveloped for commercial purposes.
While lands classified as conservation are generally not considered suitable
for urban development, there are certain uses which may be permitted. It
must be pointed out that because of the small scale of the Land Classification
Map shown in this document, it is impossible to pinpoint each parcel of land
which may exist within the conservation areas that may not meet the criteria
of the conservation classification. Therefore, determination of whether
or not a certain parcel of land meets this classification should be made
by determining that it is not: 1) in the flood plain of a continuously
flowing stream of water; 2) on soils which have severe limitations for septic
tanks, building foundations or poor drainage; 3) in an area considered to be
an unique natural or cultural resource which would suffer irreparable damage
as a result of development and/or in areas which would otherwise be
hazardous to developments, or which would be detrimental to the surrounding
environment. If a parcel has all of these characteristics, it will be identified
as in the conservation land class. If a parcel has no more than one of these
characteristics, it will be identified not to be in the conservation land class.
These determinations will be made on a case -by -case basis, should they arise.
The Planning Board will have the responsibility of making these determinations
with the advice and assistance of the local Health Department, Soil Conservation
Service and the Office of Coastal Management. References will be made to the
most recent detailed soils analysis, flood.plain studies and local, )state and
federal regulations.
40

Summary
IV
All land in Gates County has been classified in this chapter and on
the Land Classification Map. These classifications will remain in effect
until such time as this document is updated (roughly 5 years from the date
of publication). The land classification and the other parts of this study
will be used in making decisions regarding future development proposals.
It will also be used by state and federal agencies in making determinations
on funding requests made by the County or municipalities therein. Should
a major event take place during the next five years which has not been
anticipated (i.e., location of a major industry, discovery of a major mineral
deposit, etc. ) as part of this study,application for funds to update this
document will be sought in order to maintain its validity and utility as
local guide for development decision -making.
41

GATES COUNTY
Circle one please
CHARACTERISTICS OF PERSON FILLING OUT QUESTIONNAIRES
1. Male Female
33% 67 ;
2. White Non -White
40% 52% No response - 8% 26-40 41-55 56+
3. Age - 17 or below 17-25
S 8% 23% 44s. 19$ 4� No response 28
4. Do you live on a farm? Yes No
15% 85$
6-8 9+
5. Number of family living at home 1-2 3-5
10% 58% 27% 0% No response 4%
6. Education Grammar School 10%
Junior High 4%
High School 67%
College 8%
No response 10%
7. Income (your income per year) Under 3,000 - 23%
3,000 - 4,999 - 8%
5,oO0 - 6,999 - 13%
7,000 - 8,999 - 8%
9,000 - 10,999 - 4%
11,000 - 12,999 - 4%
13,000 - 15,000 - 8%
Over 15,000 - 19%
No response - 13%
8. In which community do you live? Not tabulated
9. Where is most of your income derived from:
a. Gates County - 23%
b. Gatesville` - 10%
c. AJacent counties - 9%
d. Tidewater Virginia - 29%
e. Other - 8%
No response - 21$
student retired unemployed
10. Are you employed
46$ 27%0� 258 No response 2�k
it. Have you ever used the North Carolina Employment Security Commission's'
Services? Yes 13% �j 75% Were you satisfied Yes No
No response - 12%
LAW ENFORCEMENT
12. is fire protection adequate? No problem - 27%
Slight problem - 27%
Moderate problem - 23%
Severe problem - 19%
No response - 5%
13. Are drugs a problem in your community or schools?
No problem - 21%
Slight problem - 42%
Moderate problem - 31%
No response - 6%
14. Is police and sheriff protection adequate?
No problem - 33%
Slight problem - 25%
Moderate problem - 19%
Severe problem - 17%
No response - 7%
15. Is youth counseling service adequate?
No problem - 27%
SiighL problem - 33%
Moderate problem - 8%
Severe problem - 17%
No response - 13%

-2-
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
16. is pollution a problem in the county? No problem - 40%
$light problem - 23%
Moderate problem - 2%
Severe problem - 21%
No response - 15`t
If so, where
17.
Should pollution be regulated? Agree Disagree
75% 10% No response - 15%
18.
I prefer Jobs over clean air and water Agree Disagree
44% 42% No response -
15%
19.
Large developments should be required to file an environmental impact
statement. Agree Disagree
73% 6% No response - 21%
20.
Do you agree that all precautions must be taken to keep the water quality of
the Chowan River at its best even if it.is very costly? Yes No
79% 4
LAND USE PLANNING No response - 17%
21.
Is long range planning in the county adequate? No problem - 16%
Slight problem - 34%
Moderate problem - 11%
Severe problem - 17%
No response - 23%
22.
Future development should be planned for. Agree Disagree
86% 0% No.response -
14%
23.
Growth should occur at a controlled rate. Agree Disagree
65% 19% No response -
17%
14.
A person should be able to do anything with his land no matter how it
affects those around him. Agree Disagree
13% 71% No response - 17%
25.
There is danger In rapid development. Agree Disagree
56% 29% No response - 15%
16.
Nome development should be controlled. Agree Disagree
54% 29% No response - 17%
17.
Should there be some restrictive zoning of land in parts of the county?
Yes No
50% 31% No response - 17%
28.
The present population should be maintained. Agree Disagree
49% 31% No response -
22%
29.
What size community do you prefer? Country -
23%
Near small town of 10,000 -
34%
Near small town of 10,000 - 50,000 -
11%
Near medium sized town 50,000 - 200,000-
16%
Near metropolitan area over 200,000 -
0%
No response -
16%
30.
In your opinion, which of the following should the county adopt as its
policy for county population? Remain the same size in population -
21%
Small increase in population -
38%
Substantial increase population -
17%
Reduce population -
4%
No response -
21%
31.
Where do you prefer your home to be located?
Near downtown - 8%
In City limits - 12%
In 15 minutes of town - 34%
Over 15 minutes away - 18%
Over 30 minutes away - 13%
32.
No response - 15%
In choosing a community in which to live, how important would the availability
of shopping facilities be?
No importance - 8%
Slight importance - 13%
Moderate importance - 29%
Great importance - 33%
No response - 16%
It

-3-
33.
Do
A%
D%
48%
34%
1)
45%
35%
2)
32%
42%
3)
y
35%
32%
4)
27%
19%
5)
41%
23%
6)
7)
18%
42%
11%
22%
3)
9)
50%
23%
27%
45%
10)
11)
27%
38%
30%
27%
12)
13)
27%
25%
14)
31%
23%
15)
23%
36%
1 L. f 11 i are a -ate in Gates County
you fee t e o ow ng
Road maintenance b upgradin
q
Agree
Strongly
A ree
Neutral
Disa .
Disagree
Strongly
z
Water facilities
Sewer facilities
Fire protection
13%
Historic preservation
Electrical utilities
8%
33%
Storm water drainage b
flooding control
%
14%
Community appearance.
1%
10%
33$
4$
8 %
Protection of the natural
environment E wildlife
6%
44%
3$
$
ro er 2H' I ng
6%
21%
14%
Planning b community
development
6%
21%
178
9%
€
on n 6 land use controls
20
25%
23$
%
Relationship between the
county b towns
6$
21%
12%
5
%
To —de enforcement b
Inspection
10%
21%
23%
7%
Refuse collection or
disposal
7%
16,
21$
23%
13%
34. Regarding county and town as a place to work -- indicate the degree of
encouragement or discouragement you believe should be given the following:
4o Res.10,
4o Res. 11
4o Res.15
4o Res.16
4o Res.27
4o Res.21
No Res.15
No Res.32
No Res.15
No Res.26
No Res.17
No Res.23
No Res.23
No Res.23
No Res.20
Encourage
Encourage
No
Discourage
E%
D%
Strongly
ModeratelyChan
a Moderatel
Strongly
;No
54%
7%
1)
Agriculture s Related
23%
31%
17$
1%
221;
2)
Fishing Industry 6
41%
9%
Related
12%
29
25$
24%
33%
16%
3)
our sm s Related
12%
21%
31%
1$
19%
42%
15%
4)
forestry e ate
17%
25%
23%
8%
7%
21%
48%
21%
5)
Construction b Related
21%
27%
12%
8%
3$
19%
6)
Research Development
45%
11%
Industry
25%
20%
19%
0%
11$
25%
7)
Light industry ware-
housing, assembly,
50%
14%
etc.
23%
27%
19%
1$
3�
18$
8)
Heavy Industry con-
37%
23%
version of raw
materials
21%
16$
23%
16%
EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES
35.
Are schools adequate? No problem
- 25%
Slight problem
- 33%
Moderate problem - 6%
Severe problem
- 6%
No Response
- 29%
36.
Is
the kindergarten program adequate?
No problem
48%
Slight problem -
Moderate problem -
6%
Y
Severe problem -
7%
No Response -
16%
37.
Is
vocational education adequate?
No problem -
31%
Slight problem -
32%
Moderate problem -
15%
Severe problem -
11%
No Response -
11%
38.
Is
the adult education program adequate? No problem -
- 38%
Slight problem
- 26%
`
Moderate problem
- 16%
Severe problem
- 8%
No Response
- 11%

-4-
COMMUNITY FACILITIES
39. is garbage collection and disposal adequate? No problem - 33%
Slight problem - 29%
Moderate problem - 4%
Severe problem - 32%
No Response - 2%
CULTURAL ACTIVITIES
40. Are cultural opportunities adequate? No problem - 18%
Slight problem - 35%
Moderate problem - 15%
Severe problem - 25%
No Response - 7%
41. Should more or less cultural programs and activity benefits be
organized for retirement aged persons?
More Less Same If more, What type?
46% 10% 29% No response - 14%
SOCIAL SERVICES
42. Are the following social service functions adequate?
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
YES
NO R
Medicaid
50%
31%
Transportation Social Services
and Health related
52%
31%
Homemaker In -home care
40%
41€
Placement of child custody in
the county35
43g
Food Stamps - do they reach the
41$
46�
ublic adequately
County Poor 6 Emergency fund
27%
48%
Aid to families with dependent
children AFDC
47%
33%
an ca sery ces
8%
-Elderiv
29%
50%
services
If you have any recommendation to the county concerning Social Services
please comment:
43. Are Social Services to children and youth adequate?
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
No
esponse
19%
17%
19%
22%
Health
Yes
No
Transportation
Family Planning
Da Care
Foster Care
Adoption
Child abuse
Child neglect
12'!,
25%
20%
22%
21%
No
Response
27%
32%
25%
28%
34%
37%
31%
32%
44. Do you think that Public Housing is needed in Gates County.
Yes 48% No 35% No response - 17%
GENERAL QUESTIONS
45. Are Water Services adequate? No Problem - 25%
Slight Problem - 33%
Moderate Problem - 10%
Severe Problem - 17%
No Response - 58
46. Are the present individual septi-c tanks adequate? flo problem - 27%
Slight problem - 31%
Moderate problem - 6%
Severe problem - 21%
No Response - 15%

-5-
It
47. Are libraries adequate?
No problem - 40%
Slight problem - 34%
Moderate problem - 4%
Severe problem - 15%
48. Should the Trash Disposal System be improved
If yes, what could be done to improve it?
- 8%
in the county? Yes No
54% 34%
No
Response
12%
49. Do you believe that the water lines in Gatesville and Gates County are
sufficient or would you like to see the system expanded. Sufficient Expanded
If so, where? Sufficient - 31%, Expanded - 46%, No Response - 23%
RECREATION
50. Are tourist facilities adequate? No problem - 21%
Slight problem - 19%
Moderate problem - 15%
Severe problem - 35%
No Response - 10%
51. Are recreation facilities adequate? No problem - 18%
Slight problem - 29%
Moderate problem- log
Severe problem - 31%
No Response - 11%
52. When choosing a community in which to live, how important would the
availability of recreational facilities be?
Not important - 11%
Slight importance - 27%
Moderate Importance - 25%
Great Importance - 25%
No Response - 12%
53. Should recreation be expanded to develop more public recreation facilities
and programs? Yes No If yes, what should be done?
54% 29% No Response - 17%
54. Should more or less development of the public parks
ithe county be developed?
More Same LessResponse
69% 15% 4% 12%
55. Should more or less funds be spent to develop tourist attractions in the county?
More Same Less No Response
44% 29% 11% 17%
56. Should more or less restrictions be placed in the county for preservation of
wildlife? More Same Less If more, then what
17% 60% 45k No Res onse - 19�
57. Should more or less attention and funds be given for the preservation of historic
sites? More Same Less No Response
29% 46% 10% 15%
58. Should more or less support be given to public libraries and museums?
More Same Less No Response
48% 35% 1`k 16%
59. What, if any, recreational facilities would you like to s— in Gates County?
(Please list)
Not tabulated
60. Do you think that a boat ramp with adequate parking should be provided to
Gates County on the Chowan River? Agree - 81%
Disaqree - 8%
No Response - 11%

-6-
INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND EMPLOYMENT
61.
Are employment opportunities adequate?
No problem -
13%
Slight problem -
17%
Moderate problem -
17%
Severe problem -
44%
62.•
Is unemployment a problem?
No Response
No problem -
12%
Slight problem -
16%
Moderate problem -
21%
Severe problem -
38%
No Response -
13%
63.
Is industrial development adequate?
No problem -
21%
Slight problem -
17%
Moderate problem -
14%
Severe problem -
40%
No Response -
9%
64.
When choosing a community in which to
live, how important would Job
opportunities be?
No importance
- 1%
Slight importance
- 13%
Moderate importance
- 12%
Great importance
- 58%
No Response
- 16%
65. If given the choice, I would choose Jobs over clean air and water.
Agree Disagree No Response
38% 48% 15% No
66. Some industries are not worth the problems they bring. Agree Disagree Respons
77% 12% 11%
67. Economic development is more Important than environmental considerations.
Agree Disagree No Response
27% 56% 17%
68. More industry will Improve the life quality. Agree Disagree No Response
54% 29% 17%
69. There'is enough economic development in the county. Agree Disagree No Respon_
21% 60% 19%
70. Should the county work toward some greater degree of industrial development?
Yes 73% No 15% No Response - 12%
71. Should better private or public agricultural production and market areas be
provided? Yes 71% No 12% No Response - 17%
72. Should more effort be made by the State Employment Security Commission to
help in finding Jobs for Gates County residents? Yes 79% No 8% No Responst
13%
COMMUNITY RESPONSIBILITY AND PRIDE
73. Is government responsiveness a problem? No problem - 16.8%
Slight problem - 27.2%
Moderate problem - 15%
Severe problem - 12.6%
No Response - 16%
74. Is community pride and spirit adequate? No problem - 17%
Slight problem - 38%
Moderate problem - 15%
Severe problem - 19%
No Response - 12%
75. Is community participation adequate? No problem - 16%
Slight problem - 39%
Moderate problem - 17%
Severe problem - 17%
No Response - 10%
76. If you had the opportunity, how would you feel about leaving Gates County?
Never leave - 31%
Reluctant - 25%
No difference - 13%
Happier elsewhere - Ohs
Like to leave - 21%
No Response - 10%
t
I

-7-
MEDICAL FACILITIES
s
It
77. When choosing a community in which to live, how important would the
quality of medical facilities be? Not important - 8%
Slight importance - 9%
Moderate importance - 19%
Great importance - 54%
No Response - 10%
78. Are medical facilities and staff adequate? No problem - 31%
Slight problem - 33%
Moderate problem - 12%
Severe problem - 10%
No Response -
TRANSPORTATION
79. Is transportation adequate in the county?
Yes No
1) For all _persons 27*. 52%
2) Handicapped
3) Elderly
4) Low Income 11% 54%
80. Should public money be spent for airport facilities in the county?
Yes NO No Response
16% 66% 17%
81. Should the county have better access to bus and taxi services?
Yes No No Response
75% 13% 1.2%
82,. Are there any recommendations for better county transportation methods.
Not tabulated
83. If U.S. Highway 17 Is constructed Into a four lane highway, the impact of
such an action on U.S. 13 will certainly Vfect the residents of Gates
County in a positive or a negative result. Do you agree or disagree that
U.S. 17 should be four-laned and do you have any other comments?
Agree Disagree No Response
42% 27% 31%
84. According the the progress that Gates County has made, number each block from
#1 through #16 with the lowest numbers being those that you feel need improve-
ment.
1.
Recreation
2
2.
Cultural Activities
8
3.
Land Use Planning
7
4.
Environmental Considerations
4
5.
Community Facilities
9
6.
Medical Facilities
11
7.
Law Enforcement
3
8.
Social Services
10
9.
Industrial Development
_. 5
10.
Employment
__ 1
iI.
Educational Facilities
6
12.
Others (List)
13.
14.
( )
15.
16.
( )
85. What do you like most about Gates County? (Please list)

LAND CLASSIFICATION MAP
GATES COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
►{ E R T F
O R
O
V i> M a— a V v
Community
Rural
Conservation Prepared by:
FERREN PLANNING GROUP
Greenville, N.C.
� � o
COUNTY
�O�pN
t==
N.0 ^
li)!
% L I