CAMA Land Use Plan-1981

C A M A
LAND USE PLAN UPDATE
FOR
HYDE. COUNTY
1 DCM COPY DCM Copy
lease do not remove!!!!!
I
Division of Coastal Management
1981
KENNING T CA
OE.IGN
CON.ULTING
Talbert , Cox & Associates , Inc.

L,
THIS DOCUMENT HAS BEEN PREPARED FOR THE RESIDENTS
OF
J. B. Cahoon
HYDE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS:
J. B. Berry, Chairman
Irving Garrish
Clifford Swindell, County Manager
LAND USE PLANNING ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Delbert Armstrong
H. L. Ballance
Rebecca Bryant
Dr. Martha Cottrell
Thomas Davis, Jr.
Phillip Green
Tom Hampton
Harold Harris
Bill Roach
Ross Smith
Ray Spencer
Roland Stokesberry
Frank Wardlow
Doris Weston
Sigma Willis
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PROVIDED BY:
TALBERT, COX & ASSOCIATES, INC.
P. 0. BOX 3333
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28406
T. Dale Holland, Planner -In -Charge
Kenneth Weeden, Project Planner
The preparation of this report was financially
aided through a federal grant from the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The
grant was made through the North Carolina
Department of Natural Resources and Community
Development.

�I
HYDE
COUNTY
Scale in Miles
0 25 50 75 I00
MAP i

HYDE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
LAND USE PLAN
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART I: MAINLAND
PAGE
SECTION
I: DATA ANALYSIS
A.
Establishment of Information Base
1
B.
Present Conditions
3
1.
Population
3
2.
Economy
8
a. Agriculture
8
b. Commercial Fishing
9
c. Commerical Forestry
10
d. Tourism
10
e. Employment and Income
11
3.
Housing
12
4.
Impact of Seasonal Population
13
5.
Existing Land Use Analysis
13
a. Current Conditions
13
b. Land Compatibility Problems
15
c. Problems From Unplanned Development
16
d. Identification of Areas Experiencing or
Likely to Experience Changes in Predominant
Land Use
17
e. Areas of Environmental Concern
17
6.
Current Plans, Policies, and Regulations
20
C.
Constraints: Land Suitability
29
1.
Physical Limitations
29
2.
Wellfields
29
3.
Fragile Areas
29
4.
Areas with Resource Potential
31
D.
Constraints: Capacity of Community Facilities
32
1.
Water System
32
2.
Sewage Disposal
32
3.
Solid Waste Disposal
33
4.
Schools
33
5.
Transportation
33
6.
Medical Services
34
7.
Emergency and Protective Services
34
E.
Estimated Demand
35
1.
Population and Economy
35
2.
Future Land Need
35
3.
Community Facilities Need
35
F.
Summary: Section I
37
ii

SECTION II: POLICY STATEMENTS
38
A.
Resource Protection
38
1. Areas of Environmental Concern
38
2. Natural and Cultural Resources
42
3. Constraints to Development
43
4. Hurricane and Flood Evacuation Needs
45
5. Excessive Slopes
45
B.
Resource Production and Management
46
1. Agricultural Production
46
2. Commercial Forestlands
47
3. Commercial and Recreational Fisheries
48
4. Existing and Potential Mineral Production
Area 50
5. Off -Road Vehicles
52
C.
Economic and Community Development
53
1. Types and Locations of Desired Industry
53
2. Local Commitment to Service Provisions
55
3. Desired Urban Growth Patterns
56
4. Redevelopment of Developed Urban Areas
57
5. Commitment to State and Federal Programs
57
6. Assistance to Channel Maintenance
58
7. Energy Facility Siting
58
8. Tourism
59
D.
Continuing Public Participation
61
E.
Additional Specified Local Issues
62
F.
Implementation Assignment Schedule
65
SECTION III: LAND CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
67
A.
Developed
67
B.
Transition
68
C.
Community
69
D.
Rural
69
E.
Conservation
70
SECTION IV: RELATIONSHIP OF POLICIES AND LAND
CLASSIFICATIONS 71
A. Developed and Transition Classes 71
B. Community Class 71
C. Rural Class 71
D. Conservation Class 71
iii

PART II: OCRACOKE
PAGE
SECTION
I: DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
73
A.
Establishment of Information Base
73
B.
Ocracoke Present Conditions
74
1.
Population
74
2.
Seasonal Population
74
3.
Economy
75
4.
Housing
76
5.
Existing Land Use Analysis
76
a. Current Conditions
76
b. Land Compatibility Problems
78
c. Problems From Unplanned Development
78
d. Identification of Areas Experiencing or
Likely to Experience Changes in Predominant
Land Use
79
e. Areas of Environmental Concern
79
6.
Current Plans, Policies, and Regulations
81
C.
Constraints: Land Suitability
83
1.
Physical Limitations
83
2.
Fragile Areas
83
3.
Areas with Resource Potential
84
D.
Constraints: Capacity of Community Facilities
84
1.
Existing Water Service Areas
84
2.
Sewer Service Area
85
3.
Schools
86
4.
Transportation
86
E.
Estimated Demand
87
1.
Population and Economy
87
2.
Future Land Need
88
3.
Community Facilities Need
89
SECTION II: POLICY STATEMENTS
90
A.
Resource Protection
90
1.
Natural Resource Areas
90
2.
Cultural Resource Areas
90
3.
Constraints to Development:Physical Limitations
91
4.
Constraints to Development:Community Facilities
91
5.
Hurricane and Flood Evacuation Needs
92
B.
Resource
Production and Management
93
1.
Commercial and Recreational Fisheries
93
2.
Off -Road Vehicles
94
C.
Economic and Community Development
95
1.
Local Commitment to Service Provisions
96
2.
Desired Urban Growth Patterns
96
3.
Redevelopment of Developed Urban Areas
97
4.
Tourism
98
D.
Continuing Public Participation
99
iv

SECTION III: LAND CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM 100
A. Developed 100
B. Transition 100
C. Conservation 101
SECTION IV: RELATIONSHIP OF POLICIES AND LAND
CLASSIFICATIONS 102
A. Developed and Transition Classes 102
B. Conservation Class 102
APPENDIX:
I. Prohibited Shellfish Area Maps 105
II.Pungo River Phosphate Formation Maps 111
v

HYDE COUNTY
LAND USE PLAN
LIST OF TABLES AND MAPS
TABLE NUMBERS
PART I - HYDE COUNTY
PAGE
1.
Hyde County Population 1900-1990
3
2.
Hyde County Racial Composition: 1970, 1980, and 1990
4
3.
Population Projection, Age, Race and Sex, 1980
5
4.
Population Projection, Age, Race and Sex,.1990
6
5.
Population Distribution by Townships
8
6.
Crop Production Income
8
7.
Livestock Income
9
8.
Finfish and Shellfish Landings
9
9.
Commercial Forestlands
10
10.
Annual Employment: 1972, 1979, 1980
11
11.
Per Capita Personal Income
12
12.
Land Use Changes 1967-1980
14
13.
Federal, State and Local Controls
24
14.
State Licenses and Permits
25
15.
Federal Licenses and Permits
27
16.
Primary Road Traffic Counts: 1974-1980
33
17.
Federal and State Wildlife Refuge Areas
63.
PART II - OCRACOKE
18. Ocracoke Population 74.
19. Commercial Establishments in Ocracoke 77.
20. Water Use and Capacity: Ocracoke village 85
21. Average Annual Daily Traffic: Ferry Service
to Ocracoke 86
MAPS
1. Locational Map 1
2. Hyde County Townships 7
3. Ocracoke Land Use Map 103
4. Ocracoke Land Classification Map 104
5. Hyde County Land Classification Map 115
6. Hyde County Land Use Map 116
vi

PART I
SECTION I
DATA COLLECTION
AND ANALYSIS

A. ESTABLISHMENT OF INFORMATION BASE
This Land Use Plan Update for Hyde County has been prepared
in accordance with requirements of the North Carolina Coastal Area
Management Act (CAMA). Specifically, this document complies with
the Land Use Planning Guidelines, as amended, September 1, 1979.
The initial Land Use Plan was prepared for Hyde County in
1976. According to the Land Use Planning Guidelines, the major
purpose of periodic updating of local land use plans is to identi-
fy and analyze emerging community issues and problems.
The guidelines further give the following objectives the up-
date should meet:
-- to further define and refine local policies and issues;
-- to further examine and refine the land classification
system and the land classification map;
-- to assess the effectiveness of the existing land use
plan and its implementation;
-- to further explore implementation procedures, and;
to promote a better understanding of the land use plan-
ning process.
The 1976 Land Use Plan provided much of the needed informa-
tion base for this update. However, in many cases new information
had to be developed, particularly for Ocracoke, which is being ad-
dressed primarily as Part II of this plan. Part I will address
primarily the mainland portion of the County. A number of data
sources were tapped during the preparation of this plan in order
to'obtain updated population, housing, economic, (including agri-
cultural, fisheries, forestry, and tourism), and land use informa=
tion. Most of the data came from primary and secondary sources in
the form of direct contacts with representatives of various state
and federal agencies and/or previously published documents or re-
ports. Efforts were made to obtain data that was as up to date
and accurate as possible.
The data analysis showed that in some cases, the changes
since 1976 have been dramatic, while in other cases, changes have
been minimal or non -existing. The major conclusions of the updat-
ed land use plan are:
1. Hyde County's population grew between 1970 and 1980, re-
versing a five decade old trend of population losses.
Population growth is projected to continue trough 1990,
with some notable shifts in racial and age groups.
2. The economic importance of agriculture will remain domi-
nant in the County throughout the next 10 years, but
tourism, as an economic activity, will increase in sig-
nificance (particularly on Ocracoke). The mining of
peat will also become significant within the next 10
years.
1

3. The overall land development pattern, being one with a
predominantly rural, scattered, character, will likely
continue. The rapid clearing of forest land for conver-
sion into agricultural use will continue to be an issue
requiring policy attention;
4. The major community facility need in Hyde County will be
some alternative to on -site waste water disposal facili-
ties in developed and developing communities;
5. In order to provide, for economic expansion for the bene-
fit of the overall populace, some form of industrial de-
velopment needs to be pursued, and;
6. Growth pressures in Ocracoke will all but necessitate
the development of some form of local land use controls.
0
2

B. PRESENT CONDITIONS
1. Population
-The historical nature of Hyde County's population has been
and remains today that of a scattered, rural populace dominated by
agriculture. With one of the smallest county populations in all
of North Carolina, Hyde experienced population losses in six of
the first seven decades of this century, i.e., from 1900 through
1970. A small gain was noted between 1920 and 1930. However, the
1980 U. S. Census population figures also show for the second time
in the century, a small decennial gain. The 1980 population cen-
sus may well indicate that the trend of population loss for the
county is being supplanted by a growth trend. Notice Table 1,
below.
* HYDE
YEAR
POPULATION
1900
9,27
1910
8,840
1920
8,386
1930
8,550
1940
7,860
1950
6,579
1960
5,765
1970
5,571
1980
5,873
1990
6,386
TABLE 1
COUNTY POPULATION 1900-1990
NUMERICAL CHANGE PERCENTAGE CHANGE
-483
-4.72
-454
-4.13
+164
-1.96
-690
-8.07
-1,281
-16.30
-814
-12.34
-194
-3.37
302
5.42
513
8.73
Sources: U. S. Census of Population, 1980 Advance Reports
N. C. Office of State Budget and Management
* All of the figures were provided by the N.C. Office of State
Budget and Management, except for 1980. The 1980 figure is the
actual final count provided by the U.S. Census.
The projections for 1990 show a substantial increase of 8.73
percent, which represents a numerical increase of 513 persons.
This turnaround from the downward population trend, which was
noted in the 1976 plan, may be attributed to several causal fac-
tors. The main factor, however, is a net gain in migration. No-
tice Table 2, Page 5, which shows the 1980 population estimates
according to age, race and sex as projected by the N.C. Office of
State Budget and Management. Between 1960 and 1970, the County
experienced a net migration rate of -9.53 percent. From 1970 to
1980, however, the net migration rate was a positive 2.15 percent.
Fewer people are leaving the County and some which previously mi-
grated away may be returning. The negative net -migration rates
for non -whites, however, continued between 1970 and 1980 and is
projected to continue through 1990. This is also indicated in
Tables 2 and 3, Pages 5,6. The'out migration of non -whites is a
very significant trend and has altered and will continue to
3

alter, the County's racial composition. Notice Table 4, below.
The non -white population is declining in the County, while at the
same time the white population is increasing.
TABLE 4
HYDE COUNTY RACIAL COMPOSITION: 1970, 1980, and 1990
WHITE
YEAR
NO.
PERCENT
1970
3,272
59.0
1980
3,777
64.3
1990
4,844
76.0
NON -WHITE
NO.
PERCENT
TOTALS
2,299
1.0
5,571
2,096
35.7
5,873
1,542
24..0
6,386
Source: U. S. Census: N. C. State Office Budget and Management
The 1980 census projections provided by the State also show a
shift in the age groups of Hyde County's population since 1970.
As the 1976 plan noted, (p.12), the 1970 census indicated that
over 50 percent of the County's population was perhaps dependent
on others for their support. This estimation was based on the
number of persons under 17 and over 60. However, an examination
of Table 2, shows a slight decrease in the dependent population
groups to about 46 percent of the total. The middle group, (from
20 to 44) increased during the 1970's from 22.3 percent to 30.5
percent. This implies a trend of a younger population for the
County. School age groups, compared to the 1970 census, appear to
be stablizing with a steady but slight decline continuing through
1990. (See Table 3, Page 6) The 1990 projections also indicate
that the middle group (ages 20-44) will continue to increase dur-
ing the 19801s. Since this group presents perhaps the most pro-
ductive portion of the population, its growth is likely to have
substantial impact upon future land use decisions. The formation
of new households will increase the demand for housing; the em-
ployment base will need to expand in order to provide more job op-
portunities, and, some community services may have to expand.
There are five Townships in Hyde County, as Map 2,Page 7
shows. An examination of the population totals by Township for
1980, reveals the same overall pattern as was noted in the 1976
plan with one notable exception. The Ocracoke Island Township
grew at a faster rate than the other four. Table 5, Page 8 shows
the population totals by Township for 1980 according to the U.S.
Census compared to the 1970 figures. Lake Landing, though still
the most populous Township, experienced the most significant nu-
merical loss.' The communities of Engelhard, Gull Rock and Ne-
braska are located in this Township. Many of these residents may
have moved to either the Swan Quarter or Currituck Townships,
which experienced the most population increases. In terms of per-
centages, Ocracoke Township, which consists solely of Ocracoke
Village grew at the fastest rate during the period.
4

Ln
,
Table 2
HYnE
PROJECTED PCPULATInN,
APRIL
1, 19n0, BY AGE,
RACF, AND
SEX
NHITF.
NnNNHITE
AGE
TOTAL
TOTAL
WALE
FEMALE
TOTAL
MALE
FENALF
TnTAL
5797
3873
1n61
7012
197.4
903
1021
C-4
390
237
174
113
153
71
76
5-9
453
292
t7.9
t7.3
201
109
92
10-14
516
295
14n
14T
221
ll4
t07
15-19
538
315
t47
169
223
113
lt0
20-24
394
286
161
125
109
48
60
25-79
440
333
152
181
107
51
56
30-34
364
258
137
126
106
31
75
35-39
297
2l7
111
106
80
43
37
40-44
2T5
188
93
105
87
30
57
45-49
280
200
96
104
90
30
50
50-54
270
184
9T
87
86
36
50
55-59
298
221
102
119
T7
37
40
60-64
367
271
17.6
145
96
49
48
65-69
344
221
104
117
123
60
61
70-74
253
176
74
107.
7T
28
49
75-79
135
A6
32
.54
49
29
20
80-84
82
65
16
49
17
8
9
A5CUP
101
68
7.7
41
33
it
7.2
PFRCENT CF
COLUMN
TOTAL
,
0-4
6.T3
6.12
6.66
5.62
7-95
8.53
7.44
5-9
7.nl
6.51
6.93
6.11
10.45
t2.n7
9.01
10-14
8.90
7.62
7.95
T.31
11.49
12.62
10.48
15-19
9.78
9.13
7.90
A.35
11.59
12.51
tC.77
70-24
6.80
7.38
8.65
6.21
5.61
5.32
5.88
25-29
7.59
8.60
8..17
9.00
5.56
5.65
5.48
30-34
6.78
6.66
7.09
6.26
5.51
3.43
7.35
35-39
5.12
5.60
5.96
5.7.7
4.16
4.76
3.62
40-44
4.74
4.85
4.46
5.22
4.52
3.32
5.9R
45-49
4.83
5.16
5.16
S.tT
4.16
3.37
4.90
50-54
4.66
4.75
5.21.
4.32
4.47
3.99
1.90 '
55-59
5.14
5.71
5.48
5.91
4.00
4.10
3.92
60-64
6.33
7.00
6.TT
7.21
4.99
5.32
4.70
65-69
5.93
5.71.
5.59
5.82
6.39
6.64
E.17
70-74
4.16
4.54
3.98
5.07
4.00
3.10
4.90
75-T9
2.33
7..22
t.72
2.68
2.55
3.21
1.96
80-A4
1.41
I.6A
C.A6
2.41.
0.68
0.89
C.8A
A9&UP
1.74
1.76
1.45
7.04
1.72
1.22.
2.t5
ESTIMATFn
RATE
OF NET
MIGRATION
196n--1970
-9.53
-0.4.1
-n.56
-0.30
-t9.93
-2t.05
-18.86
1970-1980
2.15
23.46
77..77
74.58
-24.19
-25.69
-22.A3
SOUPCF - STATE
OF NGRTH
CAPCLINA
BASED nN
197T FINAL
ESTIMATE
OFFICE
OF STATE
RUCGFT AND
MANAU MFkT
PRFPARFO APRIL,
t980

Table 3
NYDE
PROJECTE.I) POPULPTIONr APRIL It 1990, BY AGFr RACFr AND SEX
'. WHITE NnN11HITE
AGE TOTAL
TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE
TOTAL 6386 4844 2309 2535 1542 703 939
0-4 532 433 7?.T 206 99 50 49
5-9 451 330 169 161 121 66 55
10-14 441 300 150 150 141 73 68
15-19 475 314 147 167 161 83 T8
70-24 364 291 144 147 73 30 43
25-7.9 437 359 154 2C5 78 41 37
30-34 522 437 74T 190 85 2Q 56
35-39 SID 427 196 231 83 39 44
40-44 388 300 144 156 88 2.4 64
45-49 331 258 139 119 T3 36 37
50-54 304 21T 88 12Q 87 28 59
55-59 2Q3 228 108 120 65 25 40
60-64 326 236 118 Il8 90 39 51
65-69 290 200 87 113 90 43 47
70-74 295 223 82 141 72 31 41
75-79 199 131 57 74 68 40 2R
80-84 115 66 28 58 29 12 1T
.85CUP 113 74 74 50 39 14 25
PERCENT CF COLUMN TOTAL
0-4 8.33 8.94 9.83 8.13 6.42 7.11 5.84
5-9 7.06 6.81 7.32 6.35 7.85 9.39 6.56
1D--14 6.91 6.19 6.50 5.92 9.14 10.38 A.10
15-19 7.44 6.48 6.37 6.59 10.44 II.81 ;.TO '
70-24 5.70 6.01 6.24 5.80 4.73 4.27 5.13
25-79 6.84 T.41 6.6T 0.09 5.06 9.R3 4.41
30-34 8.17 9.02 10.70 7.50 5.51 4.13 6.67
35-39 7.99 8.82 P.4Q q.11 5.38 5.55 5.24
40-44 6.08 6.19 6.24 6.155.T1 3.41 7.63
45-49 5.19 5.33 6.02 4.69 4.T3 5.l?_ 4.41
5J-54 4.76 4.48 3.81 5.09 5.64 3.98 7.03
55-59 4.59 4.71 4.68 4.73 4.22 3.56 4.77
60-64 5.10 4.87 5.11 4.65 5.84 5.55 6.08
65-69 4.54 4.13 3.T7 4.46 5.84 6.12 5.60
70-74 4.62 4.60 3.55 5.56 4.6T 4.41 4.89
75-79 3.12 2.T0 2.47 7.92 4.41 -5.69 3.34
89-84 1.80 1.78 1.21 2.29 1.88 1.71 2.03
85CUP 1.77 1.53 1.04 1.97 2.53 1.99 2.a8
ESTIMATEn RATE OF NET MIGRATION
1970-1980 2.15 23.46 22.77 24.59 -24.19 -25.69 -22.83
1990-1990 10.79 28.15 2P.71 28.09 -22.28 -73.67 -21.07
SOURCF - STATE OF NCRTH CARCLINA PASED ON 19T7 FINAL ESTIFATF
OFFICE nF STATE PUCGET AND MANAGEMENT PRFPARFO APRI;Lr 19P0

CD,
Curri 'uck I Lake Landing
_--�-
••� , t t,
I • 6 I • . r r • la L• I ■ I I r �, •\ t
Te ritor - _ 1
CD
I r r ` '
MAP �'. �w,J .� - -- '- . Ocracoke
..r.
TOWNSHIPS
HYDE COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA •`� M ��� �_ � � ' / .

TABLE 5
HYDE COUNTY POPULATION DISTRIBUTION BY TOWNSHIPS: 1970-1980
Num.
%
TOWNSHIP
1970
1980
Change
Change
Cur�rit�uck
1 ,133
1 ,302
169
14.9
Fairfield
541
582
41
7.6
Lake Landing
2,377
2,217
-160
-6.7
Ocracoke
541
658
117
21.6
Swan Quarter
958
11098
140
14.6
Lake Mattamuskeet
21
16
- 5
-13.8
TOTAL
5,571
5,873
302
5.T
Source: 1980 U.S. Census of Population and Housing; Advance Report
2. Economy
a. Agriculture
As noted in the 1976 plan, during the 1970's the economic
picture of Hyde County improved significantly. Total retail sales
for the County in Fiscal Year 1970-71 was $5,801,429. The esti-
mate for Fiscal Year 1980-81 is $16,000,000--which is nearly tri-
ple the total ten years ago. Though price inflation is a factor
in this increase, there are other indicators of increased spending
in the County, notably, the increase in tourism on Ocracoke
Island, for example. However, agricultural production has been
and remains the major element in the County's economic base and is
steadily growing. For example, in 1970, crop production income in
the County was $4,495,000. In 1979, income from crop production
totaled $15,589,650, which was an increase of 247 percent over the
nine-year period. Table 6 below shows crop production income by
crop harvested for 1979.
TABLE 6
HYDE COUNTY CROP PRODUCTION INCOME: 1979
CROP
DOLLAR VALUE
1979
Soybeans
$ T-,,695,000
Corn
71247,000
Wheat
452,500
Sorghum
1531,500
Hay
47 ,500
Oats
4,150
TOTAL
$15,589,650
Source: Agricultural Statistics: North Carolina Crop and Live--;
stock Reporting Service.
Although production yields and price increases have accounted
for some of this increase, the most significant factor is the con-
version of forest land into productive crop lands. The 1974 U.S.
Department of Commerce Census of Agriculture, showed that there
C1

was a total of 54,750 acres of farm land in crops. The 1978 Cen-
sus of Agriculture figures showed 65,300 acres as being in crop
land. The North Carolina Division of Soil and Water Conservation
estimated the total crop land acreage to be 80,000 acres in 1980.
This seems to be a continuing trend. (See Table 12, and discus-
sion of Existing Land Use, Pages 13-20).
Income from livestock production also increased substantially
during the 1970's, deriving from hogs, beef cattle, and dairy cat-
tle. Notice the income comparison between 1970 and 1979 as is
shown in Table 7, below.
TABLE 7
HYDE COUNTY LIVESTOCK INCOME: 1970 and 1979:
YEAR DOLLAR VALUE
1970 �1,567,000
1979 2,497,250
Source: 1976 Land Use Plan
Hyde County Agriculture Extension Office
A significant feature in the growth of the agriculture sector
of Hyde County's economy is the development of so-called "super -
farms". The term "superfarm" lacks any clear and precise defini-
tion, but generally refers to large, highly mechanized farming
operations with a corporate or conglomerate ownership. These
farms, mainly because of mechanical sophistication, have the capa-
city to rapidly alter the landscape by clearing and draining new
farmland on a massive scale. These farms, perhaps more than any
other entity, have been a major factor in the conversion of wood-
lands into productive agricultural land during the last 10 years.
Economically, these so-called superfarms are also quite signifi-
cant, providing nearly 15 percent of the County tax base in 1980,
according to the Hyde County Tax Office.
b. Commercial Fishing
Commercial fishing is also an important sector of Hyde Coun-
ty's economy. Both finfish and shellfish landings in the County's
waters contribute significantly to the County's economic base each
year. Table 8 below shows fish landings and values for the years
1979 and 1980.
TABLE 8
HYDE COUNTY: FINFISH AND SHELLFISH LANDINGS:
COMPARISION 1979-1980
1979 1980
POUNDS VALUE POUNDS VALUE
Finfish 3,222,,800 $1,,003,6405,752,304 , ,
Shellfish 4,792,000 1,036,681 7,303,380 2,801,423
TOTAL 8,01 ,800 2,040,321 13,055,684 4,181 ,970
Source: N.C. Division of Marine Fisheries, Washington, N.C.
0J

From 1979 to 1980, total fish landings increased by about 63
percent. The total value of the catch in 1980, however, more than
doubled the 1979 dollar figure. This is reflective of the in-
creased 1980 shrimp harvest and the continuing price inflation.
C. Commercial Forestry
Commercial Forestry ranks third in importance among the re-
source extraction industries in Hyde County. Estimated acreage
and dollar values for 1977 and 1978 are indicated in Table 9,
below.
TABLE 9
COMMERCIAL FORESTLANDS IN HYDE COUNTY
ACREAGE INCOME
1977 188,394 $1,056,000
J978 188,394 $1,590,000
Source: Report on North Carolina Farm Income, 1976-1978
Pamlico Soil and Water Conservation District.
Many of the County's residents are employed in the forestry
industry. Income from forest products, as indicated in Table 9,
is valuable to the County's economy.
d. Tourism
The fourth major element in the Hyde County's economy, and
one that is increasing in importance, is tourism. Ocracoke Island
sportfishing, waterfowl hunting, deer hunting, and the wildlife
refuge areas, provide strong attractions for thousands of visitors
each year. The appeal of the natural resources of the County are
generators of vital income for many businesses, providing jobs and
increased sales receipts. Ocracoke is almost totally reliant upon
tourism for its economic survival. (See Part II, for a more com-
plete discussion of Ocracoke, and Section II, Part I, C, 8, Page
59, "Policy Statements")
The tourist season extends throughout the late spring and
summer months, and through the autumn and early winter hunting
seasons. Since the County receives revenue from the State on the
basis of total retail sales, the continued vitality of tourism is
important to the County, both on the mainland and in Ocracoke.
Figures from the State Ferry Traffic Report for July 1, 1978 to
June 30, 1979, indicated that 917,641 passengers used the ferries
going to and from Ocracoke. Of a total of 270,313 vehicles using
the ferries during the period, 52 percent (140,700) were from out-
of-state. Many of these transient visitors spend money in the
County and particularly on Ocracoke. The North Carolina. Depart-
ment of Commerce, Division of Travel and Tourism estimated that in
1979, tourism accounted for $7,705,OOO in expenditures in Hyde
County. In fiscal year 1978-79, the North Carolina Department of
10

Revenue reported that total retail sales in Hyde County was
$15,286,250. Assuming that tourism income in 1978 was similar tc
the 1979 figure, it can be projected that tourism accounted for
slightly more than half (50.4%) of total retail sales during Fis-
cal Year 78-79. The impact of tourism, obviously, is no small
matter in Hyde County. In 1976, the Division of Travel and Tou-
rism reported tourist expenditures in Hyde County to be
$2,309,000, less than one-third of the 1979 total. Tourism ap-
pears to be a growing sector of Hyde County's economy.
e. Employment and Income
Overall employment has also increased in the County since
1976 and the, preparation of the County's first Land Use Plan.
Figures in Table 10 below, which were obtained from the North
Carolina Bureau of Employment Security Research, indicate that em-
ployment increased slightly faster than the growth in the labor
force from 1972 to 1979. However, from 1979 to 1980, both the
labor force and overall employment declined, which caused the un-
employment rate to increase.
TABLE 10
HYDE COUNTY ANNUAL EMPLOYMENT, 1972, 1979, and 1980.
YEAR
LABOR FORCE
EMPLOYED
UNEMPLOYED UNEMPLOYMENT RATE
T9 2
— ,
--f ,T4_d_
176 9.9
1979
2,680
2,520
160 6.0
1980
2,571
2,341
226 8.8
Source: N. C. Bureau of Employment Security Research, 1980.
The Bureau also reported monthly employment figures in 1980
which show the wide seasonal fluctuation in employment in the
County. For example, the unemployment rate in February was 14.6,
but down sharply to 4.5 in September. This fluctuation is very
much indicative of the seasonal ties in Hyde County's economy.
The four major segments of the economy, Agriculture, Commercial
Fisheries, Commercial Forestry and Tourism, all have significant
seasonal links. Manufacturing employment has not been historical-
ly significant in Hyde County. The Employment Security Research
Bureau's preliminary figures for 1980 showed that only 7.1 percent
of the County's work force was employed by manufacturing indus-
tries within Hyde County. However, some County residents are em-
ployed in manufacturing in nearby surrounding counties, such as
Washington and Beaufort.
Income in Hyde County, compared to both North Carolina and
the United States is low. According to data compiled by the U.S.
Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA), the
personal per capita income for Hyde County in 1978, was only 41
percent of the national per capita income, and only 48 percent of
the States. By 1979, per capita income had grown by 14 percent
in the County, but still at a much slower pace relative to North
11

Carolina and the United States. The 1979 per capita personal in-
come in the County increased only to 50 percent and 45 percent of
State and National figures, respectively. Notice Table 11 below.
The major employment sectors in Hyde County, i.e., farming, fish-
ing, forestry, and tourism generally do not provide for high -pay-
ing jobs.
TABLE 11
HYDE COUNTY PER CAPITA PERSONAL INCOME, 1977-1978;
NORTH CAROLINA AND UNITED STATES COMPARISONS
1978 1979
Hyde Co. $3,222 $3,677
N. C. 6,660 7,832
U.S. 7,846 8,757
Source: U.S. Department of Commerce Bureau of Economic Analysis,
1981.
To summarize Hyde County's economic conditions, it can be
stated that the resource extraction industries continue to retain
their historical significance to the County's economy. Tourism,
however, is an increasingly important economic sector for the
County. The future will also see peat mining grow in economic im-
portance. Hyde County has an estimated 80,640 acres of peat de-
posits containing about 70 million tons of moisture -free peat.
when peat is mined on a significant scale, the employment and in. -
come potential for the County could be substantial. (The impact
of Peat Mining is discussed in greater detail in Section II, Part
I, "Resource Production and Management", B, 4, Page 50). Finally,
since income in the County is generally low, coming from the
existing major employment sectors discussed above, any major ex-
pansion in both jobs and income will likely have to come from in-
creased manufacturing activities within the County. This is an
issue which will be addressed in Section II, of this part under
"Economic and Community Development", beginning Page 53.
3. HOUSING
The major concerns in the area of housing in Hyde County was
adequately addressed in the 1976 Land Use Plan (Pages 53-54).
However, the 1976 plan was based on the 1970 census of housing and
population. Since 1970, the number of housing units have increas-
ed in the County. Although 1980 census figures do not indicate
the types of new units developed since 1970, land use surveys in-
dicate that nearly all of the units are single-family detached
dwellings. No multi -family units have been developed on the main-
land since the 1976 plan. Mobile home units, however, appear to
be increasing throughout the County. As housing costs rise and
incomes remain generally low, mobile homes are becoming more and
more a viable and inexpensive housing alternative for many County
residents. As was noted in the 1976 plan, the absence of a cen-
tral sewage collection and disposal system in the County, combined
with the limitation of the peat -type soils in many areas present a
12

serious constraint to the development of multi -family housing.
The 1976 plan noted that figures from the 1970 census indicated
that nearly one third of the 1970 occupied housing units were con-
sidered to be substandard, (Page 53). The plan also indicated a
need for housing rehabilitation activities for units which could
be economically repaired. It is significant to note that since
1976, Hyde County has operated three housing rehabilitation pro-
grams with Federal Community Development Block Grant Funds. At
the end of 1980, a total of 101 formerly substandard units had
been brought up to a standard condition.
Another significant occurrence since 1976 is the initiation
of a County -wide building permit program. In 1979, the County
employed a Building Permit Officer and began enforcing the North
Carolina Uniform Building Code. All new construction or
substantial remodeling projects are required to have permits prior
to the initiation of any construction activity.
4. IMPACT OF SEASONAL POPULATION.
As noted under the discussion on current economic conditions
(Page 10) the major impact of the thousands of visitors who come
to the County each year, is upon the economy. Most of the tour-
ists on the mainland are "day visitors", who come to hunt, fish,
or visit the wildlife refuge areas. On Ocracoke, many tourists
are transients who spend more time in the Village than day visi-
tors do on the mainland. Ocracoke, however, also attracts sub-
stantial numbers of day visitors during the tourist season. (More
details on Ocracoke's seasonal population are included in Part II
of this plan, beginning on Page 74).
It is difficult to assess or estimate the number of tourists
frequenting the mainland at any one time. However, the impact of
these visitors on the mainland are the same as noted on Pages 13-
16 of the 1976 plan, mainly inadequate parking for sports fisher-
men and hunters. Tourism does not have as significant an impact
upon the mainland as it does on Ocracoke.. This was also pointed
out in the 1976 plan. Because of the tremendous importance of
agriculture in the County, migrant farm workers also constitute a
seasonal population in Hyde County. However, as noted in the 1976
plan (Pages 15-16) their impact is minimal and the major concern
is for adequate housing. Two group housing facilities for migrant
workers are located in Swan Quarter and one. is located in Fair-
field. All three of these facilities are privately owned. The
two facilities at Swan Quarter have been upgraded since 1976 and
are considered by the area office of the Migrant and Seasonal Farm
Workers Association to be adequate.
5. EXISTING LAND USE ANALYSIS
a. Current Conditions
The overall land development pattern on Hyde County's main-
land is essentially the same as it was when it was mapped for the
13

1976 Land Use Plan. The residential patterns are still the same,
with most of the dwelling units being located along the frontage
of primary and secondary roads (Pages 23, 1976 Plan and the 1976
Existing Land Use Map). Although according to the 1980 U. S.
Census of Population and Housing, the total number of housing
units increased substantially from 1970 to 1980, the pattern of
development which was noted in 1976 was only reinforced. Hyde
County is a predominantly rural County and as pointed out in the
discussion on its economy, is dominated by agriculture and re-
source extraction activities. (See Pages 8-11, this section).
The overall land use pattern is reflective of the County's econo-
mic base. This is noted on both the 1976 Land Use Map and the up-
dated Land Use Map attached to this updated plan. In fact, the
only major land use changes since 1976 concerns the conversion of
forest land into productive agricultural land and other uses.
This has occurred mostly in the Ponzer, Fairfield and Engelhard
areas.
The land use data contained in the 1976 plan was not adequate
enough to sufficiently address the trend of land use conversions.
In order to obtain as clear a focus as possible on this trend,
statistical data from several sources had to be compiled and care-
fully analyzed. This analysis was supplemented by discussions
with.Soil and Water Conservation Officials, and the County Agri-
cultural Extension agent. Base land use acreages were obtained
from a 1971 publication by the U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil
Conservation Service, titled: Conservation Inventory Needs: 1967,
and updated projections for 1980 were obtained trom The Long
Range Conservation Program for the Pamlico Soil and Water Conser-
vation District, 1981", an unpublished paper prepared by a field
representative of the North Carolina Division of Soil and Water
Conservation. Additional acreage figures were obtained from the
U.S. Department of Commerce 1978 Census of Agriculture, Prelimi-
nary Report, for Hyde County, 9980. The 1970 U. S. Censuses Land
and Water Areas for Hyde County, was also examined. The 1986 U.S.
Census of Land and Water Areas is not expected to be published un-
til late 1983, according to the North Carolina Division of Forest
Resources. All of the statistics from the various sources were
refined by Talbert, Cox & Associates, Inc., in order to show
changes from 1967 to 1980. Table 12 below shows these changes.
TABLE 12
HYDE COUNTY LAND USE CHANGES: 1967-1980
LAND USE
1967
1980
CHANGES (ACRES)
Federal
76,403
76,403
N C
State
12,850
18,856
6,006
Urban & Built Up
2,630
2,730
100
Small Water Area
133
133
N/C
Cropland
54,750
79,187
24,437
Pasture Land
1,000
1,000
N/C
Forest Land
215,866
188,911
- 26,955
Other (ditchbanks,
28,688
25,100
- 3,588
roadways, etc.)
14

Sources: 1970.U.S. Census of Land and Water Areas
Pamlico Soil and Water Conservation District, Washington,
N.C.
U.S. Dept. of Commerce, 1978 Census of Agriculture, Pre-
liminary Report, Hyde County, 1980.
Notice that the State's ownership of land increased during
the period. The State of North Carolina, which manages the Gull
Rock Wildlife Area, through its Wildlife Resources Commission sold
some timber out of the area in exchange for land, thus expanding
the size of Gull Rock. There were no changes in the small water
areas or pasture lands.. The change in urban and built-up land re-
flects the relative slow pace of development in Hyde County. The
most significant change to note is the dramatic increase in crop-
land compared to the equally dramatic decrease in forest land.
The decline in forest acreage is only slightly higher than the in-
crease in cropland. This is indicative of a trend of which local
residents are well aware --the rapid clearing of large tracts of
land. The figures in Table 12, Page 14, show that since 1967,
26,955 acres, which is equivalent to about 42 square miles of for-
est land, have been cleared, mostly for agriculture purposes. It
is also interesting to note that more than half of the estimated
additional 24,437 acres of cropland developed since 1967, was
cleared in the two-year period from 1978 to 1980. For 1978, the
U. S. Census of Agriculture reported that there was 65,300 acres
of cropland in Hyde County, compared to the 1980 estimate of
79,187 acres. This is a two-year increase of 13,887 or about 22
square miles, which is equivalent to the entire land area within
the City of Wilmington, North Carolina.
This appears to be a continuing trend, as the 1976 plan
pointed out (Page 140). The large farms have the capacity and me-
chanical sophistication for rapid clearance of large tracts of
land. However, as was thoroughly documented in the.1976 plan
(Page 101 through 108), surface water drainage is virtually essen-
tial for all crops in Hyde County because of the low, flat topo-
graphy and high water table. Drainage of large tracts of land in-
crease the surface run-off of freshwater into many'of the estua-'
ries which border much of the mainland, causing a decrease in the
salinity level. The effect of this extensive drainage is discuss-
ed in the following subsection under "Land Compatibility Pro-
blems".
b. Land Compatibility Problems:
Within the conventional concept of land use planning, there
are no significant land compatibility problems on Hyde County's
mainland. As stated on Page 34 of the 1976 Land Use Plan, "nor-
mally —compatibility problems are identified as those where two
or more land use types are adjacent to each other and one is re-
strained from expansion due to adverse conditions, thus new in-
vestment is discouraged".' A specific example might be the intru-
sion of an industrial development into a residential area. How-
ever, in a broader sense of land use incompatibility, adverse en-
15

vironmental effects can also be a major consideration. In Hyde
County, these adverse environmental effects involve two areas, (1)
septic tank suitability and (2) agricultural freshwater drainage.
Although both of these problems were addressed on Pages 34-36 of
the 1976 Land Use Plan, updated information is provided'for each:
1. Septic Tank Suitability: Hyde County does not have a
central sewage system, and the feasibility of developing a County-
wide system is not promising. A 201 Waste Water Facilities Plan
for Hyde County was completed in 1978. The plan indicated that
due to the lack of significant population concentrations, the
costs of such a system would be prohibitive and user charges.would
have to be excessive. This plan did not include Ocracoke. In
many areas of the County,`the high water table impedes the proper
functioning of septic tanks. On the other hand, other areas have
high organic soils containing peat, which in some cases have a
consistency similar to sawdust. These soils conditions also are
not supportive of proper septic tank functioning. The basis for
the environmental incompatibility is that currently on the main-
land, septic tanks provide the only means for waste water dispos-
al..
2. Agriculture Freshwater Drainage: The North Carolina
Division of Marine Fisheries began conducting a study in 1977, on
the effect of freshwater drainage into primary estuarine nursery
areas in Hyde County. This study is still in progress but there
are.some clear preliminary findings. According to Marine Fisher-
ies officials at the Washington, North Carolina, Regional Office,
increasing levels of freshwater intrusion into the estuarine nur-
sery areas, i.e., the bays and creeks along Hyde County's border
with the Pamlico Sound, has caused "drastic fluctuations" in the
salinity content. In proper concentrations, salt content is es-
sential for the.growth and development of many species of shell-
fish and finfish in the estuaries, including spot, flounder,
shrimp, oysters, and crabs. The Marine Fisheries.study showed, by
comparing some estuaries which received drainage'to some which did
not receive direct run-off, that productivity levels were signifi-
cantly lowered in the drainage receptive areas. This was demon-
strated through a process of taking frequent samplings from both
nursery areas. Lower productivity in the nursery areas will even-
tually mean lower catches for fishermen. Drainage, as documented
in the 1976 plan, is virtually essential for farming in Hyde Coun-
ty. Commercial and sports fishing is also important in the Coun-
ty. However, in some cases, the effects of agricultural run-off,
particularly from the clearing of large tracts of land, is detri-
mental to important fish nursery areas. This environmental incom-
patibility is an important land use issue in Hyde County.
C. Major Problems From Unplanned Development
As population projections indicate, Hyde County is not in a
"rapid growth" situation, particularly on the mainland. The most
extensive use of land is for agriculture and forestry, neither of
which connotes "development". Although Hyde County has not his-
16

torically emphasized County -wide planning controls, no major prob-
lems from unplanned development have resulted on the mainland.
Lack of a centralized sewage facility and continued reliance upon
septic tanks, however, have caused many individual homeowners pro-
blems with improperly functioning on -site systems. Some on -site
systems, though not all, can be modified in order to function.
However, because of the high -organic content of the soils, even
modifications such as mound systems, sometimes do not.funtion pro-
perly.
d. Areas Experiencing or Likely to Experience Change in
Predominant Land Use
The major land areas experiencing change on the mainland as
pointed out on Page 37 of the 1976 plan, involve the conversion of
forests and woodlands into agricultural land. This activity ap-
pears to be occurring most significantly in the northern sections
of Lake Landing and Currituck Townships. The impact of this con-
version was discussed under item (b) 2, Page 12.- The overall re-
sidential and development pattern will likely remain the same on
the mainland, unless local land use controls such as zoning or
subdivision regulations are imposed. Also, if a limited -area sew-
age system were to be developed, a change in the development pat-
tern might also result. However, the realization of either of
these occurences are currently conjectural.
e. Areas of Environmental Concern
Most of the Areas of Environmental Concern (AECs), which oc-
.cur in Hyde County were identified in the 1976 Land Use Plan
(Pages 82-91 and 155-160). In 1976, however, these areas were de-
signated as "Interim Areas of Environmental Concern". Since that
time, these areas have been officially designated by the Coastal
Resources Commission and defined within the North Carolina General
Statutes. The statutorily defined AECs are described within two
broad categories, i.e., Estuarine System AECs, and Ocean Hazards
AECs. All of th AECs on Hyde County's mainland are included with-
in the Estuarine System Category. The Ocean Hazards AECs were not
identified in the 1976 plan, but apply only to the Ocean side of
Ocracoke Island which is under Federal control as part of the Cape
Hatteras National Seashore Recreation Area. There is no need for
detailed discussion of the Ocean Hazards AECs since they are not
within the County's jurisdictional control. The Estuarine System
AECs, however, will be defined and described below:
1. Coastal Wetlands
Coastal wetlands or marshlands are defined as any salt marsh.
or !other marsh subject to regular or occasional flooding by tides,
including wind tides (whether or not the tide waters reach the
marshland areas through natural or artificial watercourses), pro-
vided this shall not includelhurricane or tropical storm tides.
Coastal marshlands contain some, but not necessarily all, of
the following marsh plant species:

(a) Cord Grass (Spartina alterniflora),
(b) Black Needlerush (Juncus roemerianus),
(c) Glasswort (Salicornia spp.),
(d) Salt Grass (Distichlis spicata),
(e) Sea Lavender (Limonium spp.),
(f) Bulrush (Scirpus.spp.),
(g) Saw Grass (Cladium jamaicense),
(h) Cat -tail (Typha spp.),
(i) Salt Meadow Grass (Spartina patens),
(j) Salt Reed Grass (Spartina cynosuroides).
Included in this definition of coastal marshlands is "such
contiguous land as the Secretary of NR&CD reasonably deems neces-
sary to affect by any such order in carrying out the purposes of
this Section". [G.S. 113-230(a)]
Hyde County prefers to use the term "marshlands", instead of
wetlands. Since the County has a low, relatively flat topography
and high water table, the general use of the term "wetlands" could
be applicable almost anywhere in the County. "Marshlands" is more
descriptive of the area included as an,Area,of Environmental Con-
cern. The marsh areas are an essential element of the estuarine
,system. Without the marsh, the high productivity levels and com-
plex food chains typically found in the estuaries could not be
maintained. The 1976 Land Use Plan noted that there were both
regularly flooded and irregularly flooded marsh areas in Hyde
County (pp. 83-87). The regularly flooded salt marsh is located
on the Sound side of 'Ocracoke Island within area under the control
of the National Park Service as part of the Cape Hatteras National
Seashore. On the mainland, there is approximately 36,500 acres of
irregularly flooded salt marsh, and about 3,400 acres of fresh-
water marsh. The irregularly flooded salt marsh of the County
provides not only nutrients for shell and fin fish, but also pro-
vides habitats for racoon, muskrat, otter and black duck. In ad-
dition, these same areas serve as .a deterrent -to shoreline ero-
sion, especially in marshes containing heavily rooted species of
Juncus roemerians, known as Black Needlerush.
The location of the irregularly flooded salt marsh is exten-
sive and found continuously from the mouth of the Long Shoal River
to a point near Able Bay in Currituck Township. -Refer to Map 7,
Page 84, 1976 CAMA Plan, for a graphic illustration. The location
of the freshwater marsh is principally along the western boundary
of the County, on the banks of the Pungo,River. Fresh water marsh
may also be located at the intersection of N. C. 94 and the intra-
coastal waterway. (See Map 6, attached).
2. Estuarine Waters
. Estuarine waters are defined in G.S. 113A-113(b)(2) as "all the water of the Atlantic Ocean within the boundary of North Caro-
lina and all the waters of the bays, sounds, rivers, and tributar-
ies thereto seaward of the dividing line between coastal fishing
waters and inland fishing waters, as set forth in an agreement
18

adopted by the Wildlife Resources Commission and the Department of
Natural Resources and Community Development filed with the Secre-
tary of State, entitled "Boundary Lines, North Carolina Commercial
Fishing -- Inland Fishing Waters," Revised to March 1, 1965."
Hyde County contains vast areas of estuarine waters, as was
documented on Pages 88-90 of the 1976 plan. Estuarine waters in-
clude the waters of the Pamlico Sound, Pungo River and Alligator
River, which are adjacent to the land area of the County. The
most complex area of estuarine waters on the mainland, is the
southwest quadrant of the County, due to the numerous small tribu-
taries which flow into either the Pungo River or the Pamlico
Sound, and includes Swan Quarter Bay and Rose Bay.
The significance of the estuarine system is that it is one of
the most productive natural environments of North Carolina. It
not only supports valuable commercial and sports fisheries, but is
also utilized for commercial navigation, recreation and aesthetic
purposes. Species dependent upon estuaries include menhaden
shrimp, flounder, oysters and crabs. These species make up over
90 percent of the total value of North Carolina's commercial
catch. These species must spend all or some part of their life
cycle in the estuary. The preservation and protection of these
areas are vitally important, as was noted in the discussion of
"Land Compatibility Problems", on Page 15 of this section. Prime
fishing and spawning areas for shellfish and fin fish were identi-
fied in the County on Map 4, Page 56, of the 1976 plan. The ex-
tent of the estuarine system in Hyde County is vast, extending
from the mouth of the Long Shoal River at the Dare County line in
the Northeast and extending westward to the waters of the Pungo
River in the northwestern portion of the County. In addition to
that area, the waters of the Alligator River from Cherry Point
Landing to the Albemarle Sound are part of the estuarine system.
The Pamlico Sound, for example, is approximately 48,000 acres,
measured from Wysocking Bay to Rose Bay and extending an average
width of two miles.
3. Public Trust Areas
Public trust areas are all waters of the Atlantic Ocean and
the lands thereunder from the mean high water mark to the seaward
limit of state jurisdiction; all natural bodies of water subject
to measurable lunar tides and lands thereunder to the mean high
water mark; all navigable natural bodies of water and lands there-
under to the mean high water level or mean water level as the case
may be, except privately -owned artificially created bodies of
water containing significant public fishing resources or other
public resources which are accessible to the public by navigation
from bodies of water in which the public has rights of navigation;
and all waters in artificially created bodies of water in which
the public has acquired rights by prescription, custom, usage, de-
dication, or any other means. In determining whether the public
has acquired rights in artificially created bodies of water, the
following factors stall be considered:
19

(a) the use of the body of water by the public,
(b) the length of time the public has used the area,
(c) the value of public resources in the body of water,
(d) whether the public resources in the body of water are
mobile to the extent that they can move into natural
bodies of water,
(e) whether the creation of the artificial body of water
required permission from the State and,
( f ) the value of the body of water to the public for naviga-
tion from one public area to another public area. The
public has rights in these areas, including navigation
and recreation. In addition, these areas support valu-
able commercial and sports fisheries, have aesthetic
value, and are important resources for economic develop-
ment.
In addition to the waters listed as Estuarine Waters (Page
19) this section, Lake Mattamuskeet is also a public trust area on
Hyde County's mainland.
4. Estuarine Shorelines:
Estuarine shorelines are those non -ocean shorelines which are
especially vulnerable to erosion, flooding, or other adverse ef-
fects of wind and water and are intimately connected to the estua-
ry. This area extends from the mean high water level or normal
water level along the estuaries, sounds, bays, and brackish waters
as set forth in an agreement adopted by the Wildlife Resources
Commission and the Department of Natural Resources and Community
Development [described in Regulation .0206(a) of this Section] for
a distance of 75 feet landward.
As an AEC, Estuarine Shorelines, although characterized as
dry land, are considered a component of the estuarine system be-
cause of the close association with the adjacent estuarine
waters.
Although Estuarine Shorelines were not defined as an Area of
Environmental Concern in the 1976 plan, most of this area was
identified and mapped as the "Estuarine Erodible Area". (pp.20-
22, 1976 CAMA Plan). The majority of Hyde County's boundary, from
the northeastern tip, southward and around and up to the north-
western portion of the County, is the Pamlico Sound. The land area
along the Sound and the shores of the many creeks and bays con-
necting to it, all make up the estuarine shorelines in Hyde Coun-
ty. This area is subject to erosion and occassional flooding,
which could not only affect the quality of the adjacent estuarine -
life, but also threaten the security of personal property from de-
velopments located within this area.
Currently, all development and development -related activities
within the designated AECs in Hyde County are regulated by the
CAMA.permit process.
6. CURRENT PLANS, POLICIES AND REGULATIONS
20

Most of the County's local plans, policies and regulations
which impact upon present and future land uses, were identified
and discussed on Page 39 through 49 of the 1976 Land Use Plan.
Several of these policies and plans have been updated since 1976
and will be discussed below:
a. Community Facilities
1. Water Distribution
Water is the major utility provided by Hyde County. As noted
in the 1976 Land Use Plan (Pages 39-40), the County water system
was based on the combining of two former independently developed
water associations' systems at Swan Quarter and Engelhard. .Since
1976,.however the County has developed a well field, treatment fa-
cility and 100,060 gallon elevated water tower at Fairfield. The
Fairfield facility was connected to both the Engelhard and Swan
Quarter systems to provide water for most of the County. The
areas delineated on Map 3, Page 42 of the 1976 plan as "Existing.
Service Area" and "Extension System Service Area", are the current
water service areas in the County. The major population area not
served by the existing water system is along U. S. 264 Northwest
of the Intracoastal Waterway Bridge.
The wells at Fairfield are the major source of raw water in
the County, with the capacity to produce over 500,000 gallons per
day (gpd) of moderately hard water, with some manganese and iron.
Otherwise, the water is of an excellent quality as noted in a re-
cent overview study of the system by the County's consulting engi-
neers. However, due to limitations on pumping and treatment fa-
cilities, only 250,000 gpd is currently being pumped.. The County
is planning to update the pumping capacity to 500,000 gpd within
the next five years. Because of the threat of salt water intru-
sion, the Engelhard facility has temporarily ceased operating.
The consulting engineers' brief report noted that due to the pro-
hibitive costs of desalinization, further development of the En-
gelhard water source should be deferred until the demand exceeded
the capacity of the Fairfield system. The report recommended that
the Fairfield system be relied upon as the major resource of raw
water in the County for the next five years, with some improve-
ments to increase the productive rate, dependability, and delivery
system. ("Hyde County Water System", TCA Project #280, Talbert,
Cox & Associates, Inc., Consulting Engineers and Planners.)
2 Sewer
A 201 Waste Water Facility Plan was completed for. Hyde County
in 1978. However, the implementation of the plan, i.e., the de-
velopment of a County -wide system would have been cost -ineffec-
tive. The population density was insufficient to support "reason-
able" user fees. In the future the County may pursue the develop-
ment of central sewer services for limited population clusters.
Until this becomes a reality, however, on -site septic systems are
the only waste water disposal alternative in Hyde County.
21

b. Transportation
1. Ferry Service
Since 1976, the North Carolina Department of Transportation
has initiated a ferry service from Swan Quarter to Ocracoke. For
the first time in the County's modern history, beginning in 1977,
the mainland had direct ferry service to the island and vice
versa. Figures for July, 1978, through June, 1979, showed that a
total of 34,679 passengers used the Swan Quarter — Ocracoke Ferry
during that 12 month period. Ocracokers attending to business and
other pursuits on the mainland have a significant reduction in the
former travel time of from 6 to 8 hours, via the Hatteras Ferry
and driving through Dare County, to a two-hour 40 minute trip
across the Pamlico Sound. There has been discussion by State of-
ficials concerning reducing the current twice daily runs from Swan
Quarter to Ocracoke. Such a reduction will have some impact upon
the County and will be discussed in greater detail in Section II,
Policy Statements, under "Economic and Community Development",
Page 53.
2. Roads and Bridges
The North Carolina Department of Transportation's Secondary
Road Improvement Program has provided for improvements for many
roads in the County. However, most of these improvements have
been relatively minor ones, such as spot stabilization with stone,
and minor widening and paving.
One of the more significant transportation features in the
County since 1976 is the construction of the Wilkerson Creek
Bridge over the Intracoastal Waterway in the northwest section of
the County. The bridge is being constructed by the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers and is expected to be completed by late summer,
1981. After completion, it will be turned over to the State of
North Carolina. This high-rise span will replace an old, narrow
bridge across the waterway and greatly facilitate traffic flows in
the County.
3. Airports
In late 1980, the first paved air landing strip on the main-
land was completed near Engelhard. Eventually, the County plans
to develop a small airport terminal building near this site. Pri-
vate air traffic will likely increase throughout the 10-year plan-
ning period. Policy decisions regarding land uses near the air-
port approaches will need to be addressed.
C. Other Policies
The County has not developed any additional policies other
than those listed in the 1976 Land Use Plan (Pages 39-49), for;
utilities extension, open space, or recreation. The 1976 Land Use
Plan'is the only prior land development document in the County.
22

d. Regulations and Enforcement Provisions
The major land use control regulations in Hyde County are the
CAMA major and minor development permits. The Assistant County
Manager is also the CAMA minor permit officer.
Septic tank regulations and mobile home placement design
standards are enforced by the County Health Department through the
local Sanitarian. The County did adopt in 1979, a Building Permit
Ordinance, and established a permit program, enforced by a build-
ing permit officer.
Hyde County also has a County -wide Agricultural Canal Permit
Program which allows local farmers to apply for canal maintenance
permits locally, rather than directly to the U. S. Corps of Engi-
neers. This program is designed to speed up the application ap-
proval time from both Federal and State agencies for maintenance
of existing drainage canals.
There are no other local regulatory controls concerning land
use in Hyde County, (See Pages 48-49, 1976 CAMA Plan).
e. Federal and State Regulations
In addition to the local ordinances and regulations discussed
above, there are also various State and local regulations which
could also affect land development in Hyde County. A summary of
these regulations is included in Tables 13 through 15, beginning
on Page 24.
23

FEDERAL, S'PA'I'J' AND LOCAT, C0N1r!;or. ;
FEDERAL
National historic Preservation Act of 1966
The Archeological and Historic Prescrv:tt:i.on Act of 1974, Public Law 93-291 .
Executive Order 11593, Protection and.Enhancc-ment of the Cultural
Envixoiunont, 16 U.S.C. r110 (Supp. 1, 1970
National Environmental Policy Act, Public. Ldw 91-190, 42 U.S.C.
4321 EL. Seq. (1971;) i
Community Development Act of. 1974, Public Law 93-383: Environmental
Review Procedures for th(.! Commnunity Deve'opmont. Block Grant Program
(40 CFH Part 58)
Procedures for the Protection of historic and Cultural Properties
(36 CFR Part 800)
Comprehensive Planning Assistance Program (701) as Amended by Public
Law 93-393
The Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Public Law 89-670
Identification and Administration of. Cultural Resources: Procedures
of Individual Federal Agencif:.�s
STATE
G.S. 121-12(a) Protection of Properties in the National Register
State Environmental Policy Act-, Article 1 of Chapter 113A of the
General Statutes
Executive Order XVI
Indian Antiquities, G.S. 70.1-4
Salvage of Abandoned Shipwrecks and Other Underwater Archeological
Sites: G.S. 121-22, 2.1; 143B-62(1) g, (3)
Archeological Salvage in highway Construction, G.S. 136-42.1
Provisions for Cultural Resource: in Dredging and Filling
Operations, G.S. 113-229
24

_ Table.14
STATE LICENSES AND PERMITS
Agency
Licenses and Permits
Department of Natural.. Resources and Community
- Permits to discharge to surface
Development
waters or operate waste water
Division of Environmental Management
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 abate-
ment facilities and sources
(G.S. 143-215.108').
- Permits for construction of com-
plex 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
- Permits to dredge and/or fill in
Community Development
estuarine waters, tidelands, etc.
Office of Coastal Management
(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.
Department of Natural Resources and
Community Development.
Division of Earth Resources.
- Permits to alter or construct a
dam (G.S. 143-215.66).
- Permits to mine (G.S. 74-51).
- Permits to drill an exploratory
oil or gas well (G.S. 113-381).
- Permits to conduct .geophysical
exploration (G.S. 113-391).
25

Department of Natural Resources and
Community Development
Secretary of NRCD
- Sedimentation erosion control
plans for any land disturbing
activity of over one contiguous
acre (G.S. 113A-54).
- Permits to construct an oil refinery.
Department of Administration - Easements to fill where lands are
proposed to be raised above the
normal high water mark of navigable
waters by filling (G.S. 146.6(c)).
Department of Human Resources - Approval to operate a solid waste
disposal site or facility (G.S.130-
166.16).
- Approval for construction of any
public water supply facility that
furnishes water to ten or more
residences (G.S. 130-160.1).
26

. Table 15 _r _
FEDERAL LICENSES AND PERMITS
Agency Licenses and Permits
Army Corps of Engineers
(Department of Defense)
Coast Guard
(Department of Transportation)
Geological Survey
Bureau of Land Management
(Department of Interior)
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
- Permits required under Sections 9
and 10 of the Rivers and Harbors
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.
- 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.
- Permits required for off -shore
drilling.
- Approvals of OCS pipeline -corridor
rights -of -way.
- 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.
- Permits for construction, operation
and maintenance of interstate pipe-
lines facilities required under the
Natural Gas Act of 1938.
- Orders of interconnection of elec-
tric transmission facilities under
Section 202(b) of the Federal Power
Act.
27

- Permission required [or abandonment
of natural gas pipeline and asso-
ciated facilities under Section 7C
(b) of the Natural Gas Act of 1938.
- Licenses for non-federal hydro-
electric projects and associated
trarismission lines under Sections
4 and 15 of the Federal Power Act.

C. CONSTRAINTS: LAND SUITABILITY
1. Physical Limitations
Physical limitations to development, which include man-made
and natural hazards, soils suitability, and water supply sources,
are basically the same in Hyde County as was noted in the 1976
CAMA Plan (Pages 69-81). One notable addition to man-made hazards
is the new, paved airstrip near Engelhard. The natural hazards,
as noted in the 1976 plan, are mostly on Ocracoke Island (See
Part II). The soils map and conditions ratings, along with the
discussion of soils limitations (Pages 74-78, 1976 plan), are es-
sentially the same in Hyde County, today. These soils limit both
septic tank installation and structural foundations.
2. Wellfields
The wells which supply the County's raw water are all deep
wells, which are not significantly affected by land development
around them. Thus, the wellfields pose no constraint to land de-
velopment.
3. Fragile Areas
These are areas which could easily be damaged or destroyed by
inappropriate or poorly planned development. There are several
fragile areas in Hyde County including those areas previously
identified and discussed as Areas of Environmental Concern (AECs).
These included, coastal wetlands (or marshlands); estuarine
waters, public trust areas, and estuarine shorelines (See Pages 17
through 20, this section). However, there are other fragile areas
in the County which are not classified as Areas of Environmental
Concern, but nevertheless, due to either natural or cultural
significance, are environmentally sensitive. Some of these
fragile areas were identified in the 1976 CAMA Plan, and some were
not. All of these areas will be identified and discussed below as
either "Natural Resource fragile areas, or "Cultural Resource
fragile areas.
a. Natural Resource Fragile Areas
Natural resource fragile areas are generally recognized to be
of educational, scientific, or cultural value because of the na-
tural features of the particular site. Features in these areas
serve to distinguish them from the vast majority of the landscape.
These areas include: complex natural areas, areas that sustain
remnant species, unique geologic formations, pocosins, wooded
swamps, prime wildlife habitats, or registered natural landmarks.
Areas that sustain reminant species and complex natural areas
were described in the 1976 CAMA Plan, (Pages 94-96). These have
not changed since 1976. The specific environments of the endan-
gered species in Hyde County, which include the brown pelican, the
bald eagle, peregrine falcon, american alligator, red cockaded
woodpecker, loggerhead turtle, and the short -nosed sturgeon, have
29

not been studied enough in detail to provide land use policy im-
plications. This was noted in the 1976 plan (Page 95).
Complex natural areas are defined as "lands that support na-
tive plant and animal communities and provide habitat conditions
or characteristics that have remained essentially unchanged by hu-
man activity." These areas are to be determined to be rare within
the County or to be of particular scientific or educational
value.
There are two such areas which have been identified within
Hyde County. One area is known as Salyer's Ridge Natural Area,
located within the Mattamuskeet National Wildlife Refuge. The
area is approximately 75 acres in size and includes stands of Lob -
lolly Pine averaging 100 feet in height and Sweet Gum averaging 40
feet in height and 50 years in age. The area is located south of
the Refuge's West Main Canal, in the extreme southwest portion of
the Refuge.
The other area is located in Lake Landing Township, northeast
of Engelhard. The site is owned by Pamlico, Incorporated and is a
Cypress swamp. The stand is unique to the County, with some trees
exceeding eighteen (18) feet in diameter.
There are no registered natural landmarks, or unique geologic
formations, in Hyde County.
b. Cultural Resource Fragile Areas
Fragile areas may be particularly important to a locale
either in an aesthetic or cultural sense. Fragile coastal cultur-
al resource areas are generally recognized to be of educational,
associative, scientific, aesthetic, or cultural value because of
their special importance to our understanding of past human set-
tlement of and interaction with the coastal zone. Their impor-
tance serves to distinguish the designated areas as significant
among the historic architectural or archaelogical remains in the
coastal zone, and therein establish their value.
Although there has been no systematic archeological investi-
gation of Hyde County, the State Division of Archives and History
has recorded 12 such sites in the County, including one pre -his-
toric site on Ocracoke. None of these sites have been -investi-
gated for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places.
However, there are several areas which have historic and architec-
tural value beyond local significance. Since 1976, six historic
places in Hyde County have been placed on the National Register of
Historic Places. These are identified by location, below.
1. Inkwell (Octagon House) --Amity Vicinity
2. C1ai�ke House (Wynn's Folly)
3. Hyde County Courthouse --Swan Quarter
4. Ocracoke Light Station --Ocracoke
5. Mattamuskeet Lodge --Lake Mattamuskeet area
6. Ocracoke Lighthouse/Keepers Quarter --Ocracoke
30

In addition to these six properties, five additional ones
have been placed on a "study list" for possible inclusion on the
National Register. These five properties include:
1. Fairfield Methodist Church, Fairfield
2. Laura Blackwell House, Fairfield
3. Amity Methodist Church, Amity
4. St. George Episcopal Church, Amity
5. Hyde County Plantation District (which is located gen-
erally along U.S. 264, however the exact boundaries of
this area have not been identified by the North Carolina
Division of Archives and History)
In addition to the properties discussed above, all of Ocra-
coke Village, which is presented as Part II of this plan, can be
considered a cultural resource beyond local significance (See Part
II, Ocracoke). Also, a compresive survey titled "Comprehensive
Historical Inventory of Hyde County", was completed in 1980. This
report will be used to help identify other potentially fragile
historic properties.
4. Areas With Resource Potential
A primary area with resource potential in Hyde County con-
cerns productive agricultural lands. These lands were identified
and discussed at length on Pages 98-113 of the 1976 plan. The im-
portance -of drainage in relation to agriculture was also discussed
in detail in that section of the 1976 plan. Other areas of re-
source potential which were listed in the 1976 plan included the
four wildlife refuge areas on the mainland, and the Cape Hatteras
National Seashore Recreation Area on Ocracoke, which are publicly
owned forests, parks and fish and gameland areas (Pages 114-116,
and Map 10, Page 115, 1976 plan).
Although mineral sites were also discussed in the 1976 plan
(Page 112-113), the mineral with perhaps the highest potential
value to the County--peat--was not discussed.
Hyde County, along with several other coastal counties along
the Pamlico Basin, are known to have substantial deposits of peat.
According to a document titled 1980 Annual Report on Peat Re-
sources in North Carolina by Lee T. Otte, and Roy L. Ingram, No-
vember, 1980, there are two significant peat deposits located in
Hyde County. The first is known as the Pamlimarle Peninsula,
which also lies in parts of Washington, Tyrrell and Dare counties.
It is estimated that approximately 120 square miles of this depos-
it, which contains about 70 million tons of moisture -free peat,
lies in Hyde County. A second, much smaller deposit is located in
the Gull Rock Wildlife Area, currently under state control, cover-
ing a six square mile area. These two deposits encompass an esti-
mated 80,640 acres of land, or 126 square miles. Productive water
bodies, particularly those designated as primary nursery areas,
are also significant natural resource areas in the County.
31

D. CONSTRAINTS: CAPACITY OF COMMUNITY FACILITIES
The capacity of Hyde County's community facilities, with the
exception of water have not changed significantly since 1976. The
major community facilities and their capacities were described on
Pages 118 through 125 of the 1976 CAMA Plan. In addition to the
water systems, there has been some changes in the County's commu-
nity services. These changes will be listed and discussed below.
1. Water System
In 1976, Hyde County's water system consisted of a combina-
tion of two formerly independent water associations, one at Engel-
hard and one at Swan Quarter. The combined capacity of these two
facilities was 294,000 gallons per day (gpd). When the Fairfield
well and pumping facility opened in 1977 with a total capacity of
250,000 gpd, the County's total water capacity was boosted to
544,000 gallons per day. However, the Engelhard facility which
had a capacity of 144,000 gpd, had to be closed down due to salt
water intrusion in 1980. The capacity of the Swan Quarter facili-
ty has also been reduced since 1976, from 150,000 gpd, to about
90,000 gpd. Currently, the County's capacity is about 340,000 gpd
a reduction of 204,000 gpd since 1976.
Peak demand for water, according to the County water superin-
tendent ranges from 280,000 to 290,000, which is from 50,000 to
60,000 gpd less than the current capacity. So, although the Coun-
ty's water capacity has been reduced, water utilization peaks at
only 85 percent of that capacity. Water demand peaks during the
summer when cucumbers are being processed, migrant laborers are
present and the shrimp boats are in. Off-peak demand ranges from
80 to 90 thousand gallons per day.
As the County grows during the next 10 years, the provision
of adequate amounts of water should pose no serious constraint to
development. Water quality, however, may be of some concern. The
County might consider discussing,a regional water system if the
quality of its water becomes unacceptable. Also, it should be
noted that the County intends to upgrade the pumping capacity of
the Fairfield facility to 500,000 gallons per day during the next
five years. And, although the western portion of the County is in
a State -designated "capac,ity use area", i.e., requiring permits if
more than 100,000 gpd are extracted from either ground or surface
water, this is not a constraint since no permits are currently
required. Fairfield sits on the eastern boundary of this area.
2. Sewage.Disposal
The County still does not have a centralized collection and
disposal system. Septic tanks are the sole means of waste water
disposal. (See Item b.1, Page 16, this section).
32

3. Solid Waste Disposal
Solid waste disposal is still a problem for Hyde County's
mainland. Because of the high water table and low topography,
State regulations prohibit the establishment of a landfill on the
mainland. The County does have a garbage and trash collection sy-
stem with public dumpsters. However, all of the waste must be
trucked over to a landfill in nearby Washington County. As long
as the County is unable to obtain permits to establish its own
landfill, this expensive practice will have to continue. This
factor, however, should not be considered as a serious constraint
to development during the next 10 years.
4. Schools
Although the school facilities in Hyde County have not chang-
ed since the 1976 plan, overall enrollment has declined (See Pages
120-123, 1976 plan). The 1976 plan reported that total County
school enrollment was 1,231 students. All but 67 of these stu-
dents were on the mainland. Figures for school year 1980-81 show
total enrollment to be 1,159 which is a decrease of 72 students or
six percent. Enrollment on Ocracoke, however, increased during
the period. On the mainland, enrollment levels appear to.be sta-
bilizing. The excess capacity reported in the 1976 plan for the
schools on the mainland have increased slightly due to declining
enrollments. In 1976, the total excess classroom capacity could
handle 344 additional students (33 at Ocracoke, 311 on the main-
land). With Ocracoke's enrollment gain of 57 students, there was
a net loss of 115 students on the mainland. During the next 10
years, enrollments will gradually increase, then level off. The
increase, however, should not be burdensome to mainland schools.
5. Transportation
There are now three primary roads in.Hyde County instead of
two. In addition to U. S. 264 and N. C. 94, N. C. 45 now runs
from near Plymouth in Washington County, southward through Beau-
fort County and east to Hyde County, and intersects with U. S.
264. The designation of N. C. 45 is the result of re-classifying
several existing Secondary Routes and the new construction of a
4.1 mile connector in Hyde County. As noted in the 1976 plan
(Page 124), the traffic capacities of both U. S. 264 and N. C. 94.
greatly underutilized. In relation to the capacities of these
roads, traffic volumes have not changed significantly since the
1974 figures reported in the 1976 plan. No counts are available
for N. C. 45.
TABLE 16: PRIMARY ROAD TRAFFIC COUNTS: 1974: 1980
*Volumes
LOCATION 197T - 1980 CHANGE
N.C. 94 North of U.S. 264 850 700 -150
U.S. 264 East of N.C. 94 1,050 900 -150
U.S. 264 West of N.C. 94 1,200 1,500 300
33

Source: N.C. Department of Transportation, Planning and Research
Branch, Raleigh, N.C.
* vehicles per day
On N.C. 94 north of U.S. 264 and U.S. 264 east of N.C. 94,
traffic volumes have declined. Volumes have increased on 264 west
(toward Swan Quarter), which is perhaps reflective of ferry -gene-
rated traffic.
The capacities of both of these roads range from 5,700 to
8,200 vehicles per day, posing no constraint to future develop-
ment.
6. Medical Services
Professional medical services have improved dramatically on
Hyde County's mainland since 1976. A Rural Health Corporation was
formed in the County, and in 1978 a physician was hired. With
support of federal funds, a new Rural Medical Center building was
constructed and opened its doors to the County's citizens in 1979.
In addition to a part-time,physician, the medical center is adja-
cent to a new pharmacy. Also, there is now a full-time dentist in
Swan Quarter and a full-time physician and pharmacist in Engel-
hard.
7. Emergency and Protective Services
Since 1976, Hyde County has developed its own Emergency Medi-
cal Service Team, complete with ambulance, certified Emergency Me-
dical Technicians, and 24-hour dispatch service.
Also, since 1976, three fire stations in the County have be-
come rated by the North Carolina Department of Insurance. One of
these fire stations is a new one, developed at Scranton, and one
is on Ocracoke Island.
r
34

E. ESTIMATED DEMAND
1. Population and Economy
According to projections in Tables 1 and 3, Hyde County can
anticipate a population of 6,386 persons by 1990. This projec-
tion, provided by the North Carolina Department of Administration,
would be an increase of 513 persons over the 1980 U.S. Census of
Population total for the County. This growth rate (8.73 percent)
does not imply that rapid growth is likely to occur in the County
within the next ten years. Based upon the 1970-80 population in-
crease, approximately 38.7 percent of the 1980-90 increase will
reside in Ocracoke. This means that of the projected net increase
of 513 persons by 1990, 314 can be expected to live on the main-
land, while 199 will probably live in Ocracoke.
Most of the new mainland residents will likely continue the
growth trends in the Currituck and Swan Quarter Townships. The
314 new persons, at an average household size of 2.7 persons per
household (interpolated from the 1980 U.S. Census), would create
116 new households. These' new households would place added de-
mands upon the County in terms of land and community facilities.
2. Future Land Need
The 1980 population of Hyde County, minus Ocracoke Village,
was 5,215 (See Tables 1 and 5, Pages 3 and 8, respectively). The
"Urban and Built-up" acreage in Hyde County (not including the 775
acres in Ocracoke) was 1,985 acres in 1980. (See Table 12, Page
14, this section). The population density in the "Urban and
Built-up"acres on the mainland was 2.62 persons per acre. If the
population does increase ,on the mainland by 314,persons in 1990,
then an additional 120 acres of Urban and Built-up land will be
needed. Part of this addtional acreage will be in the form of re-
sidential lots, but additional commercial developments --with pro-
per parking facilities, etc., can also be expected. If all of the
projected 116 families build homes or place mobile homes on one-
half acre lots, then 58 additional acres would be needed for resi-
dential use by 1990. It is unlikely, however, that additional re-
sidential development will deviate from previous patterns. The
scattered, single-family detached dwellings, which are spread
across the County's rural landscape will probably still be the
dominant residential type. The availability of land will not be a
problem in Hyde County, since in 1980, there were 188,911 acres of
forest land in the County.
3. Community Facilities Need
As noted in the discussion of "Constraints" (Part D, Pages 32
through 34, this section), all of the basic services which the
County currently provides, except one, are projected to be ade-
quate throughout the 10 year planning period. The County is pre-
sently seeking funds to upgrade the Fairfield water facility's
pumping capacity up to 500,000 gallons per day. This would make
09

the Fairfield well the major source of raw water in the County.
Hopefully the system will be upgraded by 1985. The current daily
per capita consumption rate ranges from 65 to 136 gpd. With an
upgraded capacity in Fairfield, combined with 90,000 gpd from the
Swan Quarter well, Hyde County would have a total capacity of
590,000 gpd. This capacity could support a population of up to
9,080 persons at current consumption rates.
Continued reliance upon septic tanks, however, may cause
problems in areas with unsuitable soils during the period. Some,
type of centralized sewage collection and disposal systems may
need to be developed --even if only for the population clusters in
the Currituck and Swan Quarter Townships..
Solid waste disposal, as the population increases, will con-
tinue to be a problem. Because of the County's inability to ob-
tain permits for landfill sites, the current practice, of taking
refuse to a Washington County landfill may continue to be the most
practical method of disposal during the planning period.
other facilities and, services, such as schools, roads, medi-
cal, protective and emergency services, are projected to be ade-
quate on the mainland throughout the planning period.
36

F. SUMMARY: SECTION I
This section has focused on analyzing the existing conditions
on Hyde County's mainland, as they may affect the formulation of
land use policy. Various issues which do have policy implications
have been presented in this section. In the following section,
however, specific Policy Statements as they relate to the issues
will be presented.
37

PART I
SECTION II
POLICY STATEMENTS

SECTION II: POLICY STATEMENTS:
The formulation of specific policies regarding growth and
management objectives is perhaps the most important part of this
updated Land Use Plan. Those policies must, in some cases, strike
a delicate balance between objectives of the Coastal Resources
Commission and the desires and objectives of the citizens of Hyde
County. As the analysis of existing conditions showed, there are
some emerging trends in the County which were not evident during
the preparation of the 1976 CAMA Plan. These trends will obvious-
ly impact the policy directives of Hyde County. For example, the
population is growing, reversing an almost century old trend. The
economy, particularly the agricultural and tourist sectors, is
growing. The potential for the mining of peat in the County has
emerged as a reality. And the continual growth and development of
Ocracoke Village could threaten the historic quaintness and charm
of this community.
The Coastal Resources Commission, recognizing the diversities
which exist among the Coastal counties and communities, requires
the County to specify particular development policies under four
rather broad topics. In most cases, policies developed under
these topics will cover most of the local development issues, but
in some cases they do not. In the latter case, the locality has
the flexibility to address locally defined issues or issues speci-
fically assigned by the Coastal Resources Commission. The four
required broad topics are:
-- Resource Protection
Resource Production and Management
-- Economic and Community Development
-- Continuing Public Participation
In addition to these four required issue areas, the Coastal
Resources Commission assigned other "special issues" which also
must be addressed in this section of the Land Use Plan. .These
issues are:
-- Peat Mining
-- Superfarms/Freshwater Drainage
-- Second-home/Waterfront Development
-- Airport Industrial Park
-- Impact of Wildlife Refuge Areas
-- Ocracoke: Development v: Historical Character
After an analysis of the existing conditions and trends input
from the County's citizens, the foregoing policies were developed
to provide an overall framework ,for guiding growth and development
in Hyde County throughout the 10-year planning period.
A. RESOURCE PROTECTION:
1. Areas of Environmental Concern: Development Policies.
Hyde County recognizes the primary concern of the Coastal
cm

Resources Commission, in terms of protecting resources, as being
management of Areas of Environmental Concern (AECs). The County
also shares this concern for the protection and sound management
of these environmentally sensitive lands and waters. The AECs
which occur in Hyde County, as noted on Page 17, Section I, were
identified in the 1976 Plan, (pp. 155-160) as "proposed" areas of
environmental concern. Since then those interim areas have been
officially designated as AECs by the Coastal Resources Commission
and statutorily defined. All of these areas are within the Estua-
rine System. The Ocean Hazards AECs, as noted previously, is un-
der the control of the U. S. Park Service on Ocracoke Island. In
terms of developing policies, the Estuarine System AECs, which in-
clude Coastal Wetlands, (or marshlands), Estuarine Waters, Estua-
rine Shorelines, and Public Trust Areas, will be treated as one
uniform grouping since they are so closely interrelated. Another
reason for grouping these AECs together is the fact that the ef-
fective use of maps to detail exact on -ground location of a parti-
cular area, pose serious limitations.
Hyde County's overall policy and management objective for the
estuarine system is "to give the highest priority to the protecti-
on and coordinated management of these areas, so as to safeguard
and perpetuate their biological, social, economic, and aesthetic
values and to ensure that development occuring within these AECs
is compatible with natural characteristics so as to minimize the
likelihood of significant loss of private property and public re-
sources." (15 NCAC 7H. 0203) In accordance with this overall ob-
jective, Hyde County will permit those land uses which conform to
the general use standards of the North Carolina Administrative
Code (15 NCAC 7H) for development within the Estaurine System.
Generally, only those uses which are water dependent will be per-
mitted. Specifically, each of the AECs within the Estuarine Sy-
stem is discussed below.
a. Coastal Wetlands: In line with the CAMA definitions,
Hyde County pre ers to use the term "Marshlands" instead of Wet-
lands. Since the County has a low, relatively flat topography and
high water table, the general use of the term "wetlands" could be
applicable almost anywhere in the County. "Marshlands" is more
descriptive of the area included as an Area of Environmental Con-
cern, which are regularly flooded marsh areas often containing
specific marsh plant species. This AEC category recognizes the
importance of Coastal Marshlands as an essential element of the
Estuarine System, contributing significantly to the biological,
social, economical, and aesthetic value of the system. Therefore,
the first priority for land use in these areas will be the allow-
ance of uses which promote conservation of the existing marsh-
lands. Second in priority will be uses which require water ac-
cess. All acceptable uses such as utility easements, fishing
piers, and docks, will be required to adhere to the use standards
under the North Carolina Administrative Code (15 NCAC 7H). Geo-
graphic descriptions of marshlands are contained on Page 18, Sec-
tion I, of this document, and Page 84, 1976 CAMA Plan.
39

b. Estuarine Waters:
Estuarine waters are defined in G. S. 113A-113(b) (2) as "all
the water of the Atlantic Ocean within the boundary of North Caro-
lina and all the waters of the bays, sounds, rivers, and tributar-
ies thereto seaward of the dividing line between coastal fishing
waters and inland fishing waters, as set forth in an agreement
adopted by the Wildlife Resources Commission and the Department of
Natural Resources and Community Development filed with the Secre-
tary of State, entitled "Boundary Lines, North Carolina Commercial
Fishing -- Inland Fishing Waters," Revised to March 1, 1965."
Hyde County is clearly aware that protection of the estuarine
waters is of paramount importance to fishing -- both as an indus-
try and for recreation. The aesthetics of the County's estuarine
waters is also an important consideration. Therefore, the County
shall promote the conservation and quality of this important re-
source. The estuarine waters which empty into the Pamlico Sound
and form the many creeks and bays in the County, are primary nur-
sery areas for several important species of fin fish and shell
fish. Activities in these areas will be limited to those which do
not permanently or significantly affect the function, cleanliness
and circulation of the estuarine waters in a negative manner.
Highest priority will be given to uses which are geared to the
conservation of estuarine waters. Second in priority will be uses
which require appropriate water access. Such uses may include
simple navigational channels, boat docks, marinas, and piers.
Dredging operations which are designed to provide better channel
access or increase the flushing action of tidal movements, will
also be permitted. Estuarine waters are described geographically
on Page 19, Section I, of this plan.
c. Public Trust Areas:
Hyde County recognizes that the public has certain establish-
ed rights to certain land and water areas. (For definitions and
geographic locations of public trust areas, see Pages 19-20, Sec-
tion I). These public areas also support valuable commercial and
recreational fisheries, waterfowl hunting, and also contain signi-
ficant aesthetic value. Tourism has increased over the years and
is becoming more and more important to the County. Public trust
areas are an important attraction to tourists as well as the local
citizens. Hyde County will promote the conservation and manage-
ment of public trust areas. Appropriate uses include those which
protect public rights for navigation and recreation. Projects
which would directly or indirectly block or impair existing navi-
gation channels, increase shoreline erosion, deposit spoils below
mean high tide, cause adverse water circulation patterns, violate
water quality standards, or cause degradation of shellfish waters,
shall generally not be allowed. Allowable uses shall be those
which do not cause detriment to the physical or biological func-
tions of public trust areas. Such uses as navigational channels,
drainage ditches, bulkheads to prevent erosion, piers, docks, or
marinas, shall be permitted.
40

d. Estuarine Shoreline:
Hyde County recognizes that actions within the estuarine
shoreline, which is defined as the area extending 75 feet landward
of the mean high waterline of the estuarine waters, could have a
substantial effect upon the quality of these waters. Although es-
tuarine shorelines were not defined as such in the 1976 Plan, most
of this area was identified and mapped as the "Estuarine Erodible
Area". (pp. 20-72, 1976 CAMA Plan). The majority of Hyde Coun-
ty's boundary, from the northeastern tip, southward and around and
up to the northwestern portion of the County, is the Pamlico
Sound. The land area along the Sound and the shores of the many
creeks and bays connecting to it, all make up the estuarine shore-
lines in Hyde County. This area is subject to erosion and occa-
sional flooding, which could not only affect the quality of the
adjacent estuarine life, but also threaten the security of person-
al property from developments located therein.
In order to promote the quality of the estuarine waters as
well as minimize the likelihood of significant property loss due
to erosion or flooding, Hyde County will permit only those uses
which are compatible with both the dynamic nature of the estuarine
shorelines and the values of the estuarine system. Residential,
recreational, and commercial uses may be permitted within the es-
tuarine shoreline, provided that:
1. a substantial chance of pollution occurring from the de-
velopment does not exist;
2. natural barriers to erosion are preserved and not sub-
stantially weakened or eliminated;
3. the construction of impervious surfaces and areas not al-
lowing natural drainage is limited to only that necessary
for developments;
4. standards of the North Carolina Sedimentation Pollution
Control Act 1973 are met;
5. development does not have a significant adverse impact on
estuarine resources;
6. development does not significantly interfere with exist-
ing public rights or access to, or use of, navigable
waters or public resources;
e. Policy Alternatives: AEC Development:
The discussions presented in Parts A, 1 and 2, in this sec-
tion, detail the County's position on allowable uses in Areas of
Environmental concern, including natural and cultural resource
areas. Alternative policy choices for Hyde County could be the
development of local land use controls, such as zoning or subdivi-
sion regulations in order to enhance federal and state regula-
tions; or nominating additional uses other than those generally
permitted by the State Administrative Code (15 NCAC 7H). However,
Hyde County does not wish to take either of the above actions at
this time.
41

f. Implementation Strategy:
Hyde County does not currently enforce local land use con-
trols such as zoning or subdivision regulations. The major con-
trols over development in Hyde County are the CAMA development
permits, septic tank placement regulations, and the County's
building permit program. The County, in carrying out its policies
on managing development within the AECs, will continue to support
uses which are permitted under the State Administrative Code.
However, it is the belief of Hyde County that variances to the re-
strictions of uses within the AECs should be permissable on the
basis of a case by case review if an applicant for a proposed de-
velopment can clearly demonstrate that no major or irreversible
damage would result. To help determine the "clear demonstration"
of no major or irreversible damage, the County Board of Commis-
sioners will appoint a Development Review Board. This Board,
working with the County Manager, the local CAMA Implementation and
Enforcement Officer, and the Building Inspector, shall review each
proposal for development within an AEC or natural or cultural re-
source area. The Board shall report its findings and recommenda-
tions to the County Board of Commissioners. The commissioners
shall notify the appropriate State and/or Federal review and per-
mit agencies of the County's position.
2. Natural and Cultural Resource Areas: Development Policies
a. Natural Resource Areas:
Some areas in the County are not statutorily defined AECs,
but should be recognized because of educational, scientific, or
cultural value. The areas in this category in Hyde County include
those which sustain remnant species, (p. 94, 1976 CAMA Plan), and
complex natural areas, (p. 95, 1976 CAMA Plan). All of these na-
tural resource areas except one, as noted in the 1976 Plan (p.
96), are located in areas under either Federal or State control.
The wildlife refuge areas contain these areas and the responsibi-
lity for their management is currently not with the County. (See
Pages 29-30, Section I, this plan). The Swan Quarter National
Wildlife -Refuge,, Mattamuskeet National Wildlife Area, Pungo Na-
tional Wildlife Area, and the Cape Hatteras National Seashore Area
on Ocracoke Island, are all under Federal control. The Gull Rock
Wildlife Area is under State control and management. All of these
areas are important, both socially and economically, to Hyde Coun-
ty in that they are major attractions for tourists in the County.
Tourism is becoming a significant element in the local economy.
The County believes that the management and control of the State
and Federal areas are adequate. Therefore, the County will not
propose any additional policies for these areas, but continue to
support Federal and State management of natural resource areas
within the County.
b. Cultural Resource Areas
Cultural Resource Areas in Hyde County were identified in
Section I. Pages 30-31 of this plan. These historical and/or ar-
chitecturally significant structures are valuable educational and
42

aesthetic resources which cannot be duplicated. It is the goal of
the County to protect those identified cultural resources and
others which may be noted in the future. Therefore, it is the in-
tention of the County to not permit development in or near areas
of historical or architectural significance which may cause major
or irreversible damage. Generally, any permitted development
shall be consistent with and shall preserve the value of any iden-
tified cultural resource. Also, prior to development in or near
archeological sites, the County will seek investigative assistance
to help determine the significance of the site.
C. Implementation Strategy:
Requests for development permits in or near natural or cul-
tural resource areas in Hyde County, shall be reviewed on a simi-
lar basis as such requests in AECs. (See Page 42, Part f, this
section).
Additionally, the County will pursue the development of other
means of preventing development from encroaching upon local and
national historic places and structures. (See Section I, Part I,
Pages 30-31). Specifically, the County will seek to establish an
Historic Properties Commission. This Commission will have the au-
thority to take necessary steps to protect properties of historic
or architectural significance. Prior to developing such a Commis-
sion, the County will consult with the N.C. Department of Cultural
Resources.
3. Constraints to Development:
The constraints to development, as noted in the 1976 CAMA
Plan (pp. 75-81) and in Section I, Part I, Pages 29-34, of this
update, relate to both physical constraints and limitations of
community facilities. The physical constraints in Hyde County in-
clude soils, flood prone areas, and areas subject to man-made con-
straints such as airports. Most of Hyde County's soil types have
limited absorption capacity which restricts septic tank placement
in many areas. This is particularly true in Ocracoke Village
where muck and silt soil 'types are extensive. Also in many areas
;on the mainland, peat -type soils, which in some cases have a con-
sistency similar to sawdust, cannot support septic tank placement
nor bear the construction of heavy structures. This is notably
true in the Engelhard vicinity. However, with proper modifica-
tions some septic tanks, though not all, can function effective-
ly. Detailed descriptions of the soil types, including a County
wide soils map, are on Pages 74-79, of the 1976 Plan. These de-
scriptions are based on a 1973 soil survey. Hyde County recog-
nizes the fact that soil conditions pose a serious constraint to
development and would like to see an updated soil survey program
initiated. However, the County presently lacks the resources
needed to start such a program. In relation to the flood hazard
constraints, again most of Hyde County ,is located in a flood prone
area subject to the effects of the 100-year surge. The areas more
susceptible to flooding are those previously defined in this sec-
tion as estuarine shorelines. Since flood -proneness affects most
43

of the County, it i
within theseareas.
to those which are
s not realistic to disallow all development
Areas subject to erosion are closely related
more susceptible to flooding.
The most significant man-made constraints in the County are
the small airports located at Fairfield, Ocracoke and most recent-
ly at Engelhard. There are also some small agricultural chemical
storage facilities in the County, but none -pose constraints to de-
velopment. The capacity of the County's water system is adequate
within the current service areas and should remain so throughout
the planning period.
a. Policy Alternatives:
Possible policy alternatives regarding managing growth and
development within the identified constraints include:
1. Adopting local regulations through ordinances to prohibit
all development in areas with physical constraints.
2. Permit development in those areas when adequate protec-
tive measures are taken.
b. Policy Choices:
The County adopts the following policies regarding develop-
ment in areas with constraints:
-- Development will not be encouraged in areas subject to
erosion. Proposals must comply with provisions outlined
for development within the estuarine shorelines. (See
Page 41) .
-- The County will discourage development in high -flood -
prone areas. However, Hyde County will continue to par-
ticipate in the Federal Flood Insurance Program. Propos-
ed developments which are not otherwise damaging to other
AECs, may be permitted in some flood -prone areas, provid-
ed protective measures which comply with flood insurance
requirements.
-- Development in areas where the soil types have limited
bearing capacity, will not be encouraged.
-- In areas with septic tank limitations, the County will
remain committed to compliance with requirements contain-
ed in the State Health Regulations and as enforced by the
County Sanitarian. Where required, modifications such as
suitable fill to elevate nitrification lines will be
encouraged.
-- Although the capacity of the County's water system is not
projected to pose a serious constraint to development
during the planning period, Hyde County will continue to
encourage residential and commercial development within
existing water servic44areas.

-- Since a County -wide sewage collection and disposal system
was shown to be economically infeasible (1978 201
Facilities Study), Hyde County will explore the
feasibility of developing "limited -area" sewer systems
which would coincide with existing population clusters
and the current water service area.
-- The County will not encourage residential or commercial
development within airport approach zones.
c. Implementation Strategies:
As discussed previously, the County does not have County-
wide land use controls such as zoning or subdivision ordinances.
In order to implement its policies on development in areas with
constraints, the County will support the state CAMA permit process
where applicable. Support of the Federal flood insurance program
will continue. Hyde County will also continue to support the en
forcement and permit authority of the County Sanitarian concerning
the placement of septic tanks.
4. Hurricane and Flood Evacuation Needs and Plans:
Hyde County is aware of the potential danger to life and pro-
perty in the event of a hurricane or 100-year flood. In 1976, the
County adopted two plans which contain means of assisting citizens
living in particularly hazardous areas to move to safer territory.
A "Civil'Preparedness Plan" was adopted in February, 1976, and in
June, 1976, the County adopted a "State of Emergency Plan". These
documents, which would be put into effect by the County officials
if needed, are adequate evacuation plans at this time.
5. Excessive Slopes:
Due to generally low elevation and relatively flat terrain in
Hyde County, no excessive slopes exist on the mainland.
45

B. RESOURCE PRODUCTION AND MANAGEMENT:
The Coastal Resources Commission properly recognizes the im-
portance of sound management of productive resources in coastal
communities. Production of these resources forms, in many cases,
the economic foundation of these communities. Sound management
policies are crucial since these economic resources are usually
either extractions from lands or waters, or aesthetically valued
for recreational uses or as tourist attractions. In Hyde County
these resources are productive agricultural lands; commercial for-
estlands; commercial fisheries; recreational fisheries, and; peat
mining. The importance of,the sustained vitality of each of these
resources, and the County's policies are contained below.
1. Agricultural Production:
As noted and documented in the 1976 plan (p. 98) the most im-
portant resource production area in Hyde County is agriculture.
In fact, agricultural production has been and remains the major
element in the County's economic base and is steadily growing.
For example, in 1970, crop production income in the County was
$4,495,000. In 1979, income from crop production totaled
$15,585,500, which was an increase of 247 percent over the nine-
year period. Although production yields and inflation have ac-
counted for some of this increase, the most significant factor is
the conversion of. forest land into productive crop lands. The
1974 U.S. Department of Commerce Census of Agriculture showed
that there were a total of 54,750 acres of farm land in crops.
The 1978 Census of Agriculture figures showed 65,300 acres as
being in 'cropland'. The North Carolina Division of Soil and Water
Conservation estimated the total cropland acreage to be close to
80,000 acres in 1979. This seems to be a continuing trend. The
1976 Plan also noted the locations of the most productive agricul-
tural lands (p. 99).
Because of soil conditions and a high water table, agricul-
tural drainage is extremely important to crop production in Hyde
County. An extensive discussion on the importance of artificial
drainage in the County, along with illustrations of the drainage
system was included on Pages 101 through 111 of the 1976 Plan.
Large corporate farms, or "superfarms", as they are sometimes
called, possess the financial resources and mechanical sophistica-
tion for rapid land clearing and subsequent transformation of for-
ested acres into productive agricultural land. As noted, however,
artificial drainage is essential to crop production. Clearing and
drainage of huge tracts of land increases the rate of surface
run-off and lowers the water table.
Freshwater drainage, particularly if discharged directly into
estuarine waters such as the bays near the Pamlico Sound, can.af-
fect another important resource area for the County --commerical
and recreational fishing. A negative effect can result when
freshwater intrusion alters salt content of the nursery areas.
The effect of freshwater intrusion would be minimal if more drain-
age could be directed into water areas of high salt concentrations
46

such as the Pamlico Sound near the Outfall Canal, for example.
This area is not a productive nursery area. With its substantial
economic impact upon the bounty, both in terms of employment and
taxes, agricultural production is of paramount importance to Hyde
County.
,(a) Policy Alternatives:
Possible policy,alternatIves include; developing local
regulations to restrict land clearing activities; monitoring land
clearing by requiring local "clearance permits"; encouraging
farmers to develop crops which require less drainage activities;
continue to support maintenance of existing drainage rights -of -way
and encouraging all new drainage to empty directly into the
Pamlico Sound, or freshwater bodies.
(b) Policy Choices:
Because of its continuing importance to the County's economy,
Hyde County will not seek to impose severe restrictions on agri-
cultural production through drainage controls. However, the Coun-
ty.is aware of some of the negative effects of poor or improperly
managed drainage activities. Therefore, Hyde County adopts the
following policy positions.
(1) The County will continue to support the maintenance of
existing drainage rights -of -way for farm drainage, in-
cluding the use of the County -wide Agricultural Drainage
Permit process.
(2) Hyde County will continue to support the clearing of
land for agricultural uses.
(3) The County will encourage, as much as feasible, drainage
to empty directly into the Pamlico Sound, or freshwater
bodies.
(4) Hyde County will continue to support State and Federal
programs which promote stabilization of productive agri-
cultural land.
(c) Implementation Strategies:
Although the Soils Map contained in the 1976 Plan gave some
indication of which areas in the County were more suitable for
certain crops, the identification of what could be considered the
most "productive" agricultural lands was not made. The County
will seek assistance from State and Federal agencies to help iden-
tify these lands. Also, the County will request assistance from
the U. S. Soil Conservation Service to help identify feasible ways
of redirecting existing drainage and guiding new drainage directly
into the Pamlico Sound, or freshwater bodies.
2. Commercial Forest Lands:
Forestry is an important industry in Hyde County. In fact,
according to figures taken from the North Carolina Farm Income
1976-1978, report, forest products accounted for the third largest
source of income in the County for 1978. The importance of this
sector of the County's economy is recognized,by Hyde County. The
County also recognizes the relationship between commercial
47

forestry and agricultural products. For example, some of the cur-
rent land clearing activities initially results in income from
timber products. Eventually, much of the land is drained in order
to develop productive agricultural land. As agricultural land
production increases, forestry income declines. This is particu-
larly true when the transfer of land use is from commercial forest
to cropland. As Table 12, Page 14, Section I, depicts, there is
approximately 188,911 acres of commercial forestlands in Hyde
County. A substantial amount of these lands is located in the
Currituck Township (See Attached Land Use map). The economic im-
portance of commercial forestry in Hyde County is likely to con-
tinue throughout the next 10 years. The County generally supports
the maintenance of its commercial forestlands in line with its
support of productive agricultural land.
(a) Policy Alternatives
The County could encourage the maintenance of its most pro-
ductive commercial forests by discouraging non-commercial land
clearing except for agricultural land development. The County
could seek to identify its most productive areas and classify the
areas,as "conservation" on the Land Classification Map for long-
term maintenance.
(b) Policy Choices
Hyde County will encourage and support the maintenance of its
most productive commercial forests by discouraging land clearing
except for commercial purposes or the development of productive
agricultural lands.
(c) Implementation Strategy
The County will seek Federal, State and private assistance to
help identify its most productive commercial forests, in order for
these areas to be properly mapped and additional management poli-
cies developed.
3. Commercial and Recreational Fisheries:
The historical importance of fishing remains a significant
feature in Hyde County's economy. Much of the County's jurisdic-
tion --including Ocracoke Island, encompasses significant water
areas. (These areas have previously been discussed as Estuarine
Waters and/or Public Trust Waters). Commercially, fishing. ranked
second only to agriculture as a chief source of income for many of
the County's residents. The processing of much of the County's
fish landings is also a significant employment segment for many
lower -skilled workers.
The many creeks and bays, along with the Pamlico Sound and
the Federal and State w,ildlife areas, also provide strong attrac-
tions for sports and recreational fisheries. Thousands of sports
fishermen visit the County each year, contributing significantly

to the local,economy by adding to the total retail'',sales. As Ta-
ble 8, Page 9, Section I, indicates, there was a significant in-
crease in the total commercial catch from 1979 to 1980 (an in-
crease of 63%) and the dollar value doubled. There are also many
privately used oyster beds in the County either owned in fee, or
held through private leases.
According to the North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries,
one of the major problems associated with the decrease in commer-
cial fishing is the decline in the oyster and brown shrimp popula-
tions. Decreasing salinity levels of vital nursery areas is a
most serious problem. This is because shrimp, oysters and other
species use these nursery areas for feeding and protection. These
creatures require a certain minimum salinity level. Monitoring by
government agencies show salinity levels have been lowered (many
times far below the 10 parts/1000 parts base level) over a period
of years and this trend is continuing.
The decreasing salinity levels can be attributed mostly to
fresh water drainage. It should be pointed out that fresh water
drainage does have an adverse effect but this is not the sole
cause. Land development of any type, in which the vegetation is
cleared, increases freshwater runoff. Salinity levels also are
naturally unstable, fluctuating with seasonally high or low runoff
periods.
Actual harvesting techniques by the fishermen themselves can
crack oyster shells, tear up oyster beds, and churn the river bot-
tom, choking out fish and other aquatic life by stirring sediments
into solution. In Hyde County it may be noted that the size of
fishing boats are increasing while the size of many of the con-
necting channels appear to be getting smaller. This implies a
need for increased channel maintenance and dredging activities.
Pollution of shellfish fishing waters is also a significant
factor in the declining fish landings. Currently, six water areas
in Hyde County are classified by the Division of Health Services,
Shellfish Sanitation unit, as "Prohibited Shellfish Areas". This
means that, due to documented pollutants or the presence of human
diseases 'in the.shellfish, taking of oysters and clams from these
waters for human consumption is prohibited. (See Appendix I for
descriptions of these waters). The County is interested in and
supports steps to revitalize these currently closed areas.
Both commercial and recreational fisheries are important to
Hyde County and the County wishes to see the continued enhancement
and growth of these resources.
(a) Policy Alternatives:
Possible policy alternatives to enhance sport and commercial
fishing include encouraging fresh water drainage away from primary
nursery areas, by taking steps to assist farmers in guiding drain-
age directly into the Pamlico Sound or Lake Mattamuskeet; support
any State or Federal programs aimed at cleaning up currently pol-
luted and closed shellfishing areas; seek Federal and State assis-
49

tance for channel maintenance in order to provide adequate access
to fishing vessels to and from docks; encourage tourists to con-
tinue to come to Hyde County for recreational fishing.
(b) Policy Choices:
(1) In order to support fishing both as an industry and as
recreation/tourist attraction, Hyde County will seek to
maintain primary nursery areas (estuarine bays and
creeks) by discouraging direct fresh water runoff into
these areas.
(2) The County will encourage, as much as is feasible, agri-
cultural drainage to run directly into Lake Mattamuskeet
or some of the canals which drain the lake and which emp-
ty directly into the Pamlico Sound.
(3) The County will seek Federal and State,aid to have the
outfall Canal (See Attached Land Use Map) cleaned and
maintained. This is a major drainageway running south-
ward from Lake Mattamuskeet directly into the Pamlico
Sound which could be very useful in the drainage network
to get freshwater directly into the Sound.
(4) Hyde County will continue to support recreational fishing
both for local citizens and for tourists.
(5) The County will support any private, State, or Federal
activities aimed at cleaning up polluted shellfish areas.
(6) The County will provide adequate spoil areas for Federal
and State supported channel maintenance activities.
(c) Implementation Strategies:
The County Administration will work with appropriate State
and"Federal agencies in seeking assistance to re -channel fresh-
water drainage into areas other than primary nursery areas. Agen-
cies such as the U. S. Soil Conservation Service, the North Caro-
lina Division of Soil and Water Conservation; the State Division
of Marine Fisheries; the State Division of Health and Human Ser-
vices, Shellfish Sanitation Unit, as well as private fishery asso-
ciations, will be contacted.
The County also will seek to develop artificial reefs to ex-
tend outward into the Pamlico Sound, in order to enhance recrea-
tional fishing.
4. Existing and Potential Mineral Production Areas:
Hyde County, along with several other counties along the Pam-
lico $asin, are known to have substantial deposits of peat.
According to a document titled 1980 Annual Report on Peat Re-
sources in North Carolina by Lee T. Otte, and Roy L. Ingram,
November, 1980, there are two significant peat deposits located in
Hyde County. The first is known as the Pamlimarle Peninsula,
which also lies in part of Washington, Tyrrell apd Dare Counties.
It is estimated that approximately 120 square miles of this
deposit,.whichcontains about 70 million tons of moisture-
50

free peat, lies in Hyde County. A second, much smaller deposit is
located in the Gull Rock Wildlife Area, currently under State con-
trol, covering a six square mile area. These two deposits encom-
pass an estimated 80,640 acres of land.
Peat has tremendous potential in Hyde County and this is rec-
ognized by County officials. Moisture -free peat can be converted
into a useful energy source. and used for industrial, residential
or commercial fuel. As'of the writing of this report three corpo-
rations have obtained permits to mine a total of more than 6,000
acres. The projected uses from the operations include the manu-
facture of charcoal briquettes, mixing peat with sand to form a
high -organic horticulture product, and use as an industrial fuel
by First Colony Farms, Inc. The charcoal briquette operation
plans to employ 25 persons within a year. No employment estimates
are available from the other two corporations. However, as mining
operations gear up and other corporations obtain mining permits,
the economic impact upon Hyde County could be significantly posi-
tive. Increased employment and an expanded tax base will be the
principal economic benefits. However, all of the impacts will not
necessarily be positive. The transporting of the peat will in-
crease traffic on the limited road network in Hyde County. The
mining of peat is similar to strip mining. The land is "torn up"
by the stripping activity. Obviously, this would affect the
land,'s appearance. The State of North Carolina, however, does re-
quire -land reclamation activities to be conducted after mining is
completed. Perhaps the most practical reclamation use in Hyde
County would be for agriculture. First Colony Farms, Inc., a
large corporate farming entity, conducted an experimental reclama-
tion project, and converted land which had been mined for peat
into productive farmland. The land yielded a higher than average
yield of 50 bushels of soybeans per acre. To date, it is not
clearly known what effect strip mining peat would have on the hy-
drology of an area with a high water table. According to the N.C.
Office of Coastal Management, one group of scientists have postu-
lated that salt water intrusion would occur, which would pose ser-
ious environmental implications. Another group suggests that the
groundwater would simply fill up the mined sites, thus forming new
shallow "lakes". These ideas, however, are still under debate.
It might be stated that the positive aspects of the potential of
peat possibly outweighs the negative, but it is not feasible to
project all of the factors involved. Nevertheless, Hyde County
recognizes this potential as•an important consideration in the
formulation of its land development policies.
Also, according to the North Carolina Geological Survey,
there are indications of significant deposits of phosphate in Hyde
County. These deposits range in depth from 150 to 250 feet and
are located mostly in the western portion of the County (west of
Lake Mattamuskeet). Within the realm of currently available tech-
nology, it may not be economically feasible to mine phosphate at
these depths. However, if technological advancements increase the
feasibility of mining, then Hyde County's phosphate deposits may
assume economic importance in the future. However, this is not
51

expected to take place within the time -frame of this land use
plan. Peat mining , by far, has the more immediate potential.
(See Appendix,II, attached).
(a) Policy Alternatives
The County could seek to discourage peat mining activities
until more information on the impact is known. The County could
also support and encourage peat mining for the economic poten-
tial.
(b) Policy Choices:
Because of the potentially favorable economic and employment
benefits, Hyde County encourages and supports the development of
peat mining. Since mining operations are relatively new, the
County will seek to develop more information on the various im-
pacts of peat mining. It is the desire of the County that mining
activities cause no major or irreversible damage to any Area of
Environmental Concern, or significant cultural or natural re-
source. Also, the County will encourage and support Federal and
State regulations requiring land restoration and reclamation.
(c) Implementation Strategy:
The County will seek Federal and/or State assistance to have
more detailed impact studies conducted. The County will support
the current permitting process for potential mine developers.
5. Off -Road Vehicles
The only area where off -road vehicles would be of concern is
on Ocracoke Island in the Cape Hatteras National Seashore Area.
This area, as stated previously, is under the management and con-
trol of the U.S. Park Service.
. Thus, the issue of off -road vehicles is not a relevant one to
Hyde County at this time.
52

C. ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT:
The projections for growth in economic and community develop-
ment, as contained in the 1976 Plan, were noted as being moderate
for Hyde County. The changes which have occurred since 1976 have
borne out these projections, although in some areas the changes
have been more rapid than previously projected. The 1980 popula-
tion projection by the North Carolina Office of State Budget and
Management shows a slight increase over the 1980 figure projected
in the 1976 Plan (Page 129). This new figure was shown in Table
1, Page 3, Section I. Nearly 40 percent of the population growth
has occurred in Ocracoke Village, as more permanent residents lo-
cate there and more native young people decide to stay in the Vil-
lage (See Part II: Ocracoke, for detailed discussions of economic
and community development issues for the Village). Population in
mainland communities also increased somewhat and followed the al-
ready established rural dispersed pattern with some clustering
around Swan Quarter, Engelhard, and Fairfield. As the projections
in Table 5, Page 8, show, four of the six townships on the main-
land exhibited slight population gains. Population losses were
noted in the Lake Landing and Lake Mattamuskeet townships.
Some other changes and trends which have occurred and which
have implications for the development of land use policy in rela-
tion to economic and community development, include:
Increase in the size of the labor force (See Section I,
Page 11).
-- Increased tourism on the mainland and in Ocracoke.
Continued growth in the County's three basic industries
(farming, fishing, and forestry).
-- Prospects for mining peat on a substantial scale.
-- Three successful applications for HUD Community Develop-
ment Block Grant Programs.
Application for and designation as a "Growth Center" un-
der the State's Balanced Growth Policy Act.
Development of a new, paved airstrip near Engelhard.
-- Initiation of, and possible cutbacks in Ferry Service
from Swan Quarter and Ocracoke.
Hyde County is very much concerned about the future growth in
economic and community development. As the population gradually
increases, the economic base will need to expand, more housing
will be needed, and increased pressure will be placed on community
facilities. Sound public investment decisions will also have to
be made. All of these issues, and others, are important in the
formulation of .land use policies. Particular issue areas, and po-
licy statements are discussed below.
1. Types and Locations of Desired Industry:
Although employment has been increasing in Hyde County on an
annual basis, the County is still subject to wide seasonal fluctu-
ations. For example, unemployment figures from the North Carolina
53

Bureau of Employment Security Research for 1980 show a peak unem-
ployment -rate in February of 14.6 percent. The rate gradually -de-
clined as more agricultural jobs opened in the spring, fishing and
fish processing increased, and the tourist season commenced, to a
low of 4.5 percent in September. After September, the numbers of
unemployed workers in the County began to rise again. This fluc-
tuating pattern is reflective of the County's basic natural re-
source extraction industries, agriculture, fishing and forestry,
all of which have strong seasonal ties. Hyde County needs more
stable employment for its citizens in the form of new jobs. These
new jobs will have to come from the manufacturing sector. The
Bureau of Employment Security Research also noted that in 1980, on
an annual average, only 7.1 percent of all workers who worked in
Hyde County, were employed in manufacturing.
Hyde County would like to see industry developed which could
take advantage of existing natural resources and/or expand upon
the current three major industries in the County. Industries such
as seafood processing, food canneries, paper and wood manufacture,
and marine -related industries would all be considered desireable
as long as the integrity of environmentally sensitive areas, such
as marshlands, could be assured of maintenance and stability. Al-
so, other low -pollution, light manufacturing and/or assembly in-
dustries would be desireable.
(a) Locations and Standards
The County would like to see industry locate, if feasible, in
industrial parks which could be developed in suitable locations in
the County. All industrial prospects will be required'to comply
with general development standards which are designed to protect
environmentally sensitive areas, including:
1. Providing an assessment of the impact of the development
of the industry and be required to use the best available
technology to avoid pollution of air or water during con-
struction or operation.
2. Be located on land having stable, well -drained soils.
The sites should be located in areas adequately protected
from flooding and be accessible to existing public utili-
ties and transportation routes.
Some marine -related industries may need to be close to water
areas, or have adequate water access.
(b) Policy Alternatives:
)Possible pol',icy alternatives concerning industrial develop-
ment in Hyde County include; the development of an active indus-
trial recruiting program within the County; conducting studies to
see which industry types would want to locate in the County, and
assessing possible environmental impacts; and seeking funding and
technical assistance to develop an industrial park, or parks with-
in the County.
54

(c) Policy Choices
As Hyde County recognizes the need for economic expansion and
the fact that industrial development can greatly enhance this ex-
pansion, the County hereby adopts the following position.
1. The County will seek to develop an active industrial re-
cruitment program, seeking low -pollution, light manufac-
turing industries.
2. Hyde County will seek technical assistance and financial
help to develop at least one industrial park, to be
located near the new airport at Engelhard.
3. The County believes that all industrial prospects should
be given a fair, case -by -case assessment in order to
carefully compare possible economic benefits to possibly
negative environmental effects.
4. The County will provide, as much as is locationally and
economically feasible, basic support services such as
water, and if developed, sewer, to newly locating major
industries.
(d) Implementation Strategy
The County will establish more active contact with the
State's industrial development representative for the region, and
revive or make reappointments to its existing industrial develop-
ment committee. This will be done in order to develop an indus-
trial "sales team" approach. The County will actively explore
funding assistance to develop an industrial park near the airport
at Engelhard. Also, Hyde County will conduct a detailed study of
all of its capital facilities and community services in order to
determine strengths and deficiencies, and to aid in making public
investment decisions over a period of time. Such a study will be
helpful in assessing some industrial location factors.
2. Local Commitment to Service Provisions
The main service which the County currently provides is
water. The water service areas generally includes those areas
classified as either Developed, Transitional, or Community in the
076 Plan, i.e., the cluster communities of Swan Quarter, Fair-
field, Engelhard, Sladesville, Ponzer, and Scranton. Most new de-
velopment, which has been primarily residential, has taken place
where the waterlines currently are. Hyde County would like to see
a continuation of the existing development patterns as well as at-
tract industrial prospects. The County will consider the feasibi-
lity of developing sewer services, on a limited basis, to the most
concentrated areas of population. Such service, if developed,
will be made available along with the water system, to prospective
industrial developments. The County will, therefore encourage the
continuation of the existing patterns by extending water and/or
sewer services to new areas as5the demand dictates.

3. Desired Urban Growth Patterns:
Although, as noted previously and in the 1976 Plan, there are
community clusters in the County, there is no area on the mainland
that resembles an "urban", i.e., dense or compact pattern. Even
the cluster communities are widely separated, spaced out along
U.S. 264, and major paved secondary routes. This type of develop-
ment pattern, which consists mostly of low -to -moderate income sin-
gle-family homeowners, some scattered mobile homes on individual
lots, and scattered commercial developments, is likely to continue
in Hyde County. There are no subdivision communities currently in
the County. As the population on the mainland increases, as it is
projected to do through 1990, the areas with the water service
will likely take in this growth. The conditions of the soils and
the absence of a central sewage facility in the County present
serious constraints to increased development. Nevertheless, as
some residents who formerly migrated in search of job opportuni-
ties return to Hyde, and as more and more of the younger people
decide to remain in'the County, the demand for adequate sewage
disposal will gradually increase.
Although the County has participated in three separate Com-
munity Development Block Grant Programs aimed at rehabilitating
many substandard dwelling units, there is still a significant por-
tion of the population residing in substandard housing. Since in-
comes are generally low in the County, there will be a need
throughout the next 10 years for lower income housing. However,
as of the writing of this report, the cost of housing particularly
financing, is steadily increasing. The definition of what consti-
tutes "lower -income" housing during the planning period may be a
subject of local, state and national debate. An important consid-
eration in the total cost of housing is the location and availabi-
lity of basic services such as water and sewer. Since there is
no central sewer in the County, the location of water services, as
a factor in housing location becomes all the more crucial. This
is a factor which is recognized by Hyde County.
a. Policy Alternatives:
The policy alternatives for the County, in order to help
shape the desired growth patterns, are limited because of the lim-
ited services which the County provides. However, relating public
investment decisions to water extensions are a viable policy al-
ternative. Another viable alternative would be the development of
local land use restrictions such as zoning or subdivision regula-
tions, even if they are limited to certain areas in the County.
b. Policy Choices:
Hyde County generally would like to see a continuation of the
existing growth patterns on the mainland, therefore, the County
will seek to:
56

1. Encourage residential and commercial development in and
around existing "core" cluster communities through limit-
ing water extensions to these areas.
2. Encourage both single-family and multi -family residential
development in areas where septic tank placement is suit-
able and in compliance with State Health Regulations.
This will include both mobile and modular structures.
c. Implementation Strategy:
Hyde County will continue to provide new water service tap-
ons to areas presently served. This will be both economical and
foster growth in already established communities. The County will
also explore the feasibility of developing limited sewer services
to certain areas of the County where development may concentrate.
4. Redevelopment of Developed Urban Areas:
The only area worthy of consideration under this issue in
Hyde County is the area around Silver Lake on Ocracoke Island.
Policy discussions for Ocracoke are contained in Part II of this
up -date. As noted previously, however, the County has operated
several projects under the HUD -sponsored Community Development
Block Grant Program. Since 1976, 101 substandard houses have been
rehabilitated. Also a community building and fire station were
constructed at Engelhard with block grant funds. A substantial
number of substandard dwellings, notably around the New Holland
and St. Lydia Communities, remain in the County. As block grant
funds are available, Hyde County will continue to apply for such
funds in order to help alleviate the substandard housing condi-
tions of many of its low and moderate -income citizens. Since
there are no significantly developed urban areas in the County, no
additional policy discussion of this issue is necessary.
5. Commitment to State and Federal Programs:
Hyde County is generally receptive to State and Federal pro-
grams, particularly those which provide improvements to the Coun-
ty. The County will continue to fully support such programs. The
North Carolina Department of Transportation road and bridge im-
provement program are very important to Hyde County. The Wilker-
son Creek Bridge project, which is to be completed by the summer
of 1981, will greatly facilitate traffic in the northwest portion
of the County. The bridge is federally funded, but after con-
struction will be turned over to the State.
The Soil Conservation Service office of the U. S. Department
of Agriculture in Hyde County provides valuable assistance to
farmers in helping to plan proper drainage, and erosion control
activities such as wind breaks. Currently, two major drainage
projects are being constructed in the eastern portion of the Coun-
ty with support from the U. S. Department of the Interior. These
57

projects will be very helpful to area farmers and also involve the
local U. S. Soil Conservation Service office. Dredging and chan-
nel maintenance by the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers is also sup=
ported by the County.
Public access to waterways.is not a significant problem on
the mainland. Since there are two public boat lauching areas, and
several private ones located in Ponzer, Sladesville, and Swan
Quarter. However, Hyde County does support Federal and State pro-
jects which provide efficient and safe boat access for sports
fishing.
The extensive water areas in Hyde County also contribute to a
significant mosquito problem during the summer months. Mosquitoes
can be a deterrent to tourism. The County has a mosquito control
program, which is also partially aided by State financial assis-
tance. Hyde County will continue to support this program also.
All of these programs are important to Hyde County and the
County is committed to their continued support.
6. Assistance to Channel Maintenance:
Proper maintenance of channels is very important in Hyde
County, mainly because of the substantial economic impact of com-
mercial fisheries. Commercial fishing is increasing in the County
and many of the commercial boats are getting larger. If silt or
other deposits fill in the channels, this could impede efficient
docking of the commercial vessels. With adequate channel mainten-
ance, Hyde County could begin to make more utilization of its ex-
tensive waterways for water transportation purposes. Since there
are no railroads in the County, water transportation (particularly
along the Intracoastal Waterway) could be useful for bulk ship-
ments in the County. The County is quite aware of this situation.
As of the writing of this report, the County had made requests to
the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers for assistance in dredging both
the Engelhard and Swan Quarter Channels. Currently, the Corps is
conducting a feasibility study on deepening the Swan Quarter Chan-
nel. The County is also seeking a State permit to have Gull Rock
Creek dredged. Hyde County provides assistance to the Corps and
State officials by either helping to obtain or providing spoil
sites. The County will remain committed to providing such assis-
tance.
7. Energy Facility Siting:
In Hyde County, the siting or location of energy facilities
relates almost solely to peat mining. The nature of peat mining
is such that there is little choice about particular extraction
sites.
�:�

Peat mining, like strip -coal mining, must be done where the miner-
al is. It is always an on -site operation, yet the conversion or
processing of it can occur somewhere else. The County believes
that off -site processing should not occur in environmentally sen-
sitive or hazardous areas,,or in any area where it is known that
major or irreparable environmental damage will result. In the fu-
ture, if the prospect of mining or processing other energy re-
sources arises, Hyde County will then establish policies after
conducting appropriate impact assessments.
8. Tourism:
Water fowl hunting, sportsfishing, the Wildlife Refuge areas,
and Ocracoke Island provide strong attractions for the influx of
thousands of visitors to Hyde County each year. The.natural re-
sources of the County are important generators of income for many
businesses, (particularly on Ocracoke), providing jobs and in-
creased sales receipts for,Hyde County. The tourist season in
Hyde County covers a good portion of two seasons. The summers see
thousands upon thousands of visitors boarding the ferries from Ce-.
dar Island, Hatteras and Swan Quarter to the Village of Ocracoke.
Figures from the State Ferry Traffic Report for July 1,,1978 to
June 30, 1979, indicated that 917,641 passengers used the ferries
going to and from Ocracoke. Of a total 270,313 vehicles using the
ferries during the period, 52 percent (140,700) were from out-of-
state. Many of these transient visitors spend money in the County
and particularly in Ocracoke. The North Carolina Department of
Commerce, Division of Travel and Tourism estimated that in 1979,
tourism accounted for $7,705,000 in expenditures in Hyde County.
In Fiscal Year 1978-79, the North Carolina Department of Revenue
reported that total retail sales in Hyde County was $15,286,250.
Assuming that tourism income in 1978 was similar to the 1979 fig-
ure, it can be projected that tourism accounted for slightly more
than half (50.4%) of total retail sales during Fiscal 'kear 78-79.
The impact of tourism, obviously, is no small matter in Hyde Coun-
ty. In 1976, the Division of Travel and Tourism reported tourist
expenditures in Hyde County to be $2,309,000, less than one-third
of the 1979 total. Tourism is a growing sector of Hyde County's
economy and the County would like to protect and enhance those at-
tractions and related facilities which help make tourism effec-
tive. The continued operation of the ferry services, particularly
when the number of annual passengers is considered, is obviously
crucial to a sustained tourist economy on Ocracoke. On the main-
land, the waterfowl and deer hunting, sportsfishing, and wildlife
observations, do not depend upon the ferry. Nevertheless, these
activities also add to the County's economy. Since the County re-
ceives revenue from the State on the basis of total retail sales,
the vitality of Ocracoke'.s economy is important to the County as a
whole. Any reduction in the ferry services would have a non -posi-
tive impact upon the County's economy.
, As a matter of policy alternatives, the County could continue
to support tourism by seeking to develop increased opportunities
59

on the mainland. The County could also request that the State not
reduce ferry services to Ocracoke, which would have negative rami-
fications for both the Village's and the mainland's economy. Tou-
rism in Hyde County, as in other coastal counties is vital. The
policy alternatives are limited. Therefore, the County will, as a
matter of policy, continue to support and promote tourism, both on
the mainland and on Ocracoke. (For implementation Strategy, see
Implementation Assignment Schedule beginning on Page 65).

D. CONTINUING PUBLIC PARTICIPATION:
Hyde County recognizes that an important element in develop-
ing. and implementing any policies or plans regarding the use of
land, is citizen participation. Throughout the development of
this plan update, citizens have been given an opportunity for
meaningful participation in the process. During the first quarter
of the preparation of this plan, the Hyde County Board of Commis-
sioners developed and adopted a Citizen Participation Plan. The
stated purposes of this plan were to "provide a fair and adequate
opportunity for the citizens of Hyde County to participate in the
planning and decision -making process" in the CAMA plan update, and
to "actively encourage and solicit such participation from as wide
a cross section of the County's citizenry as possible". (Page 1,
Hyde County Land Use Plan Update Citizen Participation Plan). Al-
so, during the first quarter, a public meeting was held on the
mainland, and two citizens' attitude questionnaires, to aid in
identifying key land use issues and problems, were developed and
distributed. One each was developed for the mainland and for
Ocracoke.
At the beginning of the second quarter (January, 1981) the
County Board of Commissioners appointed a Land Use Advisory Com-
mittee consisting of a cross section of 15 citizens, including
three from Ocracoke. The Advisory Committee met with the planning
staff three times during the quarter on the mainland. Committee
members on Ocracoke met with the Planning staff once during the
second quarter, and twice during the third quarter.
It is the belief of the Hyde County Board of Commissioners
that all citizens be afforded adequate opportunities for partici-
pating in the governmental and planning decisions which affect
them. Therefore, the County will maintain the Land Use Advisory
Committee even after the updated plan is completed. This will
provide continuous citizen review and comment on development pro-
posals and useful input into governmental decisions.
61

E. ADDITIONAL SPECIFIED LOCAL ISSUES:
The Coastal Resources Commission has specified that certain
issues, which it viewed as having particular significance in Hyde
County, be addressed in the land use plan update. These issues
are: (1) Peat Mining; (2) Superfarms-Freshwater Drainage; (3)
Second -Home Water Front Development; (4) Airport -Industrial Park;
(5) Wildlife Refuge Impact, and; (6) Ocracoke, Development v:
Historical Character. Discussion and policy implications for some
of these issues were presented under the. other policy statement
areas, and Part II of this Update is devoted entirely to Ocracoke.
For proper reference, all of these issues will be discussed be-
low:
1. Peat Mining:
The impact and potential of peat mining in Hyde County was
addressed in Part B, 4, Pages 50 through 52, under "Existing and
Potential Mineral Production Areas", of this Section. Policy al-
ternatives and policy choices were included in the discussion.
Also, peat mining was discussed under Part C, 7, Page 58 of this
section under "Energy Facility Siting". Please refer to these
pages for more detailed information.
2. Superfarms/Freshwater Drainage:
As noted in the policy discussion concerning agriculture,
commercial fisheries, and commercial forestlands, (Pages 46-50
this section) Hyde County recognizes the potential for detriment
to the estuaries by improper management of agricultural drainage.
Furthermore, the County is aware that the so-called "superfarms"
have the capacity and mechanical sophistication for rapid clear-
ance of relatively large tracts of land. Such extensive clearing,
if not managed properly, could speed up the time it takes storm -
water to reach the County's creeks and bays, which are primary
nursery areas for marine life vital to both commercial and recrea-
tional fisheries, and possibly lower salinity levels. However,
since both agriculture and fishing (commercial and recreational)
are important economic assets to the County, Hyde County feels a
responsibility for the maintenance, as much as is feasible, for
both. For example, as noted in Tables 6 and 7, Pages 8-9, Section
I, farm income in Hyde County in 1979, was more than 15 million
QVl1dC50 Tduie o, rage y, Snowea tnat in
million pounds of fish were landed from Hy(
of more than two million dollars. Therefor
of supporting the maintenance of agricultui
way and encouraging direct run-off into the
viewed as equitable. The large, so- caller
bute substantially to the County's economic
jobs and taxes. With the implementation of
management practices, it is in the interest
these farms and smaller ones be allowed to
management practices. In order to maintain
dustry, "sound drainage management" implies
,fa
yiy more tnan eignt
e's waters for a value
e, the policy positions
al drainage rights -of -
Pamlico Sound, is
"superfarms" contri-
base in the form of
proper water run-off
of the County that
continue sound drainage
the vital fishing in -
encouraging freshwater

drainage to run directly in the Pamlico Sound or a body of fresh-
water, e.g., Lake Mattamuskeet. The discussion of policies in
this Section under Agricultural Production (pp. 46-47); Commercial
Forestlands (pp. 47-48), and Commercial and Recreational Fish-
eries, (pp. 48-50), sufficiently addresses the County's position
on these issues.
3. Second-Home/Water-Front Development
This issue does not have much relevance on the mainland of
Hyde County and does not need to be addressed here. However, this
issue is of some importance to the Village of Ocracoke, particu-
larly the land area adjacent to Silver Lake. Ocracoke is address-
ed in more detail in Part II of this plan Update.
4. Airport -Industrial Park:
Adequate transporation is absolutely essential if industry is
to develop on any significant scale in Hyde County. An airport
was recently developed near Engelhard. How this airport relates
to the County's concern for industrial development --including in-
dustrial parks, was presented under C. 1. Page 53, of this Sec-
tion, under "Types and Locations of Desired Industry". Note in
particular the policy choices and implementation strategy, on Pages
54-55.
5. Impact of the National Wildlife Refuge:
Approximately 100,000 acres of land and water within the
County's jurisdiction are under state or federal control as either
national parkland, or Wildlife Refuge Areas. All of these are on
the mainland except for the Cape Hatteras National Seashore on Oc-
racoke Island. The Wildlife Refuge Areas are listed in Table 17
below.
TABLE 17
F,ed ral and State Wildlife Refuge Areas
Wildlife Refuge Acres Primary Uses
Mattamuskeet 50,000 Waterfowl Hunting,
Fishing
Swan Quarter 15,500 Fishing, Wildlife
Observation
Pungo 7,000 Hunting, Fishing,
Wildlife Observation
Gull Rock 17,113 Wildlife Observation
These,areas attract thopsands of visitors to the County each
year. The tourists.and day visitors have a significant impact
upon the businesses in Hyde County and are important to the local
63

economy. Generally, the impacts of these areas and the tourists
they attract are favorable, as noted in the 1976 Land Use Plan
(Pages 113-116) and C. 8, "Tourism" Page 59, of this Update. How-
ever, some of the effects of increased traffic have not been so
favorable. This is of particular note near the Pungo Wildlife
area. State Road 1338, which is unpaved and maintained by the
State, runs through the Park. The effect of the many four wheel
drive vehicles on this road have been detrimental. Hyde County
would like to see this road paved. However, the County does not
have the financial resources to pay for it. Therefore, the County
will seek assistance from the State Department of Transportation
for the paving of the road. As noted under C. 8, "Tourism" (Page
59, this Section), the most important impact of these refuge areas
is upon the economy. The policies discussed on Pages 59-60, in C.
8, this Section, indicate the County's support for these areas.
6. Ocracoke: Development v: Historical Character
Although Ocracoke is jurisdictionally a part of Hyde County,
the complexity of issues surrounding the Village is too broad to
be briefly dismissed. Therefore, a detailed discussion of Ocra-
coke is presented as Part II of this updated plan, beginning Page
73.
64

F. IMPLEMENTATION ASSIGNMENT SCHEDULE:
In order to effectuate the implementation strategies discuss-
ed in this section, the following steps will be taken:
1. Resource Protection
(a) During Fiscal Year 1981-82, the County Board of Commis-
sioners will appoint the Land Use Advisory Committee to
serve as a citizens' Development Review Board for the
County. This citizens' board will work directly with the
County Manager, local CAMA minor permit officer, and the
regional CAMA major permit officer, in reviewing each de-
velopment proposal within an AEC, or natural or cultural
resource area. This board shall report its findings
and/or recommendations to the County Board of Commission-
ers. The commissioners shall notify the appropriate
State or Federal review or permit agencies of the Coun-
ty's position.
(b) During Fiscal Year 1981-82, the County's Civil Prepared-
ness Officer will conduct a review and assessment of the
the "Civil Preparedness" and "State of Emergency" Plan
for Hyde County. Particular attention will be placed on
the hurricane and flood evacuation needs of the County,
and where necessary, provisions of the plan will be up-
dated and revised.
(c) Throughout the first four years.of the planning period,
(Fiscal Years 1981-84) Hyde County will continue to sup-
port the existing CAMA development process and other
State and Federal regulatory controls. During the fifth
year (FY 1985-86), of the planning period, the plan will
again be reviewed and updated.
2. 'Resource Production and Management
(a) The County Manager will study the possibility of
requesting, during Fiscal Year 1982, assistance from the
U. S. Soil Conservation Service and the U. S. Department
of the Interior to study ways of redirecting existing
drainage, and ways of guiding new drainage directly into
the Pamlico Sound or freshwater bodies.
(b) In Fiscal Year 1982, the County Manager will study the
possibility of consulting with the North Carolina Divi-'
sion of Marine Fisheries to obtain information and gui-
dance on the feasibility of developing artificial reefs
extending outward into the Pamlico Sound. This may be
done, if feasible, to enhance recreational fishing oppor-
tunities.
65

(c) In Fiscal Year 1983, the County Manager will look into
the possibility of seeking assistance from the U. S. Soil
Conservation Service and the North Carolina Division of
Soil and Water Conservation to help identify for mapping,
the most productive farmlands in the County.
(d) During Fiscal Year 1984, the County Manager will study
the possibility of seeking State, Federal, and private
assistance, to help identify the most productive commer-
cial forestlands. This will help in the formulation of
additional management policies.
3. Economic and Community Development
(a) During Fiscal Year 1981-82, the County Manager will study
the possibility of initiating a more active contact with
the Washington Regional office representative of the
North Carolina Department of Commerce, responsible for
industrial developement.
(b) The County Board of Commissioners will look into the re-
activation of the currently inactive Industrial Develop-
ment Committee. This action, to be taken in Fiscal Year
1981-82, will help Hyde County develop an industrial
"Sales Team" approach in attempting to recruit appropri-
ate industrial prospects.
(c) In Fiscal Year 1981-82, Hyde County will submit a preap-
plication to the U. S. Department of Housing & Urban De-
velopment for financial assistance to alleviate substand-
ard housing conditions in several low-income communi-
ties.
(d) In Fiscal Year 1982-83, the County Manager will study the
possibility of conducting a detailed study of all of the
County's capital facilities and community services. This
will be done to identify strengths and weaknesses, and
thus aid in public investment decisions.
(e) By Fiscal Year 1983-84, the County Board of Commissioners
will study the possibility of requesting the U. S. Army
Corps of Engineers to widen and deepen the Atlantic In-
tracoastal Waterway in Hyde County. This will facilitate
water access for commercial bulk cargo shipments.
4. Continuing Public Participation
(a) Throughout the planning period, the County Commissioners
will continue to provide citizens with adequate published
notices of meetings and hearings on planning issues and
governmental decisions which will affect them. (See Part
D, Page 61).
66

PART
SECTION
LANE CLASSIFICATION
SYSTEM

SECTION III:
LAND CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
The land classification system provides a uniform way of
looking at how the planned use of land interacts with environmen-
tally sensitive areas and with the development of a particular
locality. It is not a strict regulatory device in the sense of a
zoning ordinance or zoning map. It represents more of a tool to
understand relationships between various land use categories and
how these relationships help shape local policy. Particular at-
tention is focused on how intensely land is utilized and the level
of services required to support that intensity. The regulations
for the Coastal Area Management Act state:
"The land classification system provides a framework to be
used by local governments to identify the future use of all
lands in each county. The designation of land classes allows
the local government to illustrate their policy statements as
to where and to what density they want growth to occur, and
where they want to conserve natural and cultural resources by
guiding growth.: (7B.0204) (a)
The five land classifications and land classification maps
are therefore intended to serve as a visual reflection of the po-
licies previously stated in Section II. Ideally, the map which
depicts these classifications should be as flexible as the poli-
cies that guide them. (See the attached Land Classification Map)
The five land.classifications in Hyde County are identified
and defined below.
A. DEVELOPED
The developed class of land use provides for continued inten-
sive development and redevelopment of existing cities. Areas to
be classified as "developed" include lands currently developed for
urban purposes or approaching a density of 500 dwellings per
square mile that are provided with usual municipal or public ser-
vices including at least public water, sewer, recreational facili-
ties, police and fire protection. Areas which exceed the minimum
density but which do not have public sewer service may best be di-
vided into a separate class to indicate that although they have a
developed character, they will need sewers in the future.
Within Hyde County, the developed areas complying with the
above definition are Swan Quarter, Engelhard, Fairfield, and Ocra-
coke Village. Most of the population growth projected by 1990
will occur in and around these areas. Adequate water supplies are
currently provided to these areas and will continue to be provided
throughout the planning period. Septic tanks are the major source
of waste water disposal in these areas.
67

B. TRANSITION
Transition land is classified as those lands providing for
future intensive urban development within the ensuing ten years on
lands that are most suitable and that will be scheduled for provi-
sion of necessary public utilities and services. They may also
provide for additional growth when additional lands in the devel-
oped class are not available or when they are severely limited for
development.
Lands classified "transition" may include:
1. lands currently having urban services, and
2. other lands necessary to accommodate the urban popula-
tion and economic growth anticipated within the planning
jurisdiction over the next ten years.
Lands classified for the latter reason must:
a. be served or be readily served by public water, sewer,
and other urban services including public streets, and
b. be generally free of severe physical limitations for ur-
ban development.
The "transition" class should not include:
1. lands of high potential for agriculture, forestry, or
mineral extraction, or land falling within extensive ru-
ral areas being managed commercially for these uses,
when other lands are available;
2. lands where urban development might result in major or
irreversible damage to important environmental, scienti-
fic, or scenic values, or;
3. land where urban development might result in damage to
natural systems or processes of more than local concern,
and
4. lands where development will result in undue risk to
life or property from natural hazards or existing land
uses.
The lands in Hyde County that will be classified "transition-
al" are those areas adjacent to the identified developed clusters
of Swan Quarter, Engelhard, Fairfield and Ocracoke Village. If an
industrial park is developed near the new airport at Engelhard,
this land will also be classified as transitional.
The relationship between the "developed and transition" clas-
sification is important in predominantly rural counties like Hyde.
The first class is meant to define the already developed areas
and/or those areas where public investment decisions will be re-
quired to provide the necessary urban services. These become im-
portant areas to closely monitor. The Coastal Resources Commis-
sion has further clarified this relationship as described below.
68

A Walking Tour of
Portsmouth Village
to
beach
OCRACOKE INLET
WELCOME
As you go ashore at Haulover point (1), you will be
standing where wharves, warehouses and lightering craft
once serviced large sailing ships of early North Carolina.
Proceed up the road in front of you. The dark scaly -
barked evergreen trees are red cedar. The shrubs with
small oval, glossy leaves and saw -like edges are yaupon
holly. The early Portsmouth villagers made a purgative
tea from yaupon leaves. The shrub with long, slender
leaves is wax myrtle, a relative of bayberry. Break off a
leaf, crush it and smell the bay.
",
umiu
1 Haulover point
2 The crossroads
3 Community cemetery
4 Schoolhouse
5 Methodist church
6 Babb/Dixon cemetery
7 Life -Saving Station
The first two houses you come to on the right are rather
recent buildings and are now used as fishing and hunting
cabins.
The former U. S. Post Office is the small white building at
the crossroads (2). This was the social and information
hub of the village in its heyday. A general store used to
be attached. Down the road behind the Post Office
about 40 yards is the community cemetery (3). It is the
largest of five cemeteries in the village and contains 35-40
graves.
From the crossroads a foot path leads south across the
marsh to the former schoolhouse (4). Classes were
taught in this one room school until 1943.
Proceed down the main road to the east. You may
notice small burrows or holes beneath your feet. These
are made by (idler crabs. Stop on the first bridge across
Doctor's Creek. Looking to the north you will see the
Yell- cottage formerly owned by Henry Pigott, Ports-
mouth's last male resident. After regular mail service to
Portsmouth ended, Pigott poled his skiff out to meet the
mail boat sailing between Cedar Island and Ocracoke.
Across the second bridge and to the left is the church (5).
Inside, the bell still operates and an old pedal -powered
organ sits next to the pulpit. Please do not play the
organ as it is very old. Behind the church about 50 yards
is the Babb/Dixon family cemetery (6). Henry Pigott is
buried there. When he died in 1971, Portsmouth's last
two women residents left the island.
Return to the church and proceed west on the main
road. Past the last four houses is a long, unoccupied
stretch of road bordered by red cedar, wax myrtle,
yaupon holly and loblolly pine.
Beyond the road lies the landing strip, and the former
U. S. Life -Saving Station and its outbuildings (7). Note
the watchtower on top and the ramps leading up to large
doors on the big building. Surf rescue boats were kept
behind the doors and in an emergency these boats were
easily taken down the ramps and out to sea. The station
was built in 1894, and remained in commission until 1937.
It was briefly reactivated during World War II.
About 100 yards south of the station, surrounded by
vegetation, is the cistern of the old marine hospital. The
cistern was built about 1853, to provide fresh water for
sick seamen, but it was used by villagers as well. The
hospital burned down in 1894, and the cistern remains as
one of the oldest structures we know of in Portsmouth
Village.
You may now choose to continue on past the station and
go to the beach (a long one mile walk), or you may want
to explore Portsmouth further. Good luck, and meet
your return ride on time.

CAPE LOOKOUT NATIONAL SEASHORE
PORTSMOUTH
VILLAGE
t
PLEASE NOTE
During the summer, Portsmouth is very hot and insect
infested. Be sure to bring plenty of repellent, drinking
water, suntan lotion, a hat and sturdy walking shoes.
The beach is a one mile hike from the Village, over a hot
and dry sand flat (which is sometimes cold and wet). The
shoreline is exposed to strong currents and rip tides.
—USE CAUTION!
All the structures, with the exception of the church, are
occupied by the holders of NPS leases and their privacy
should be respected. Please do not look in windows or
try to enter the structures.
Pets must be kept under physical restraint at all times.
"NT OF r
1;
o
ISO
The 250 acre historic district of Portsmouth Village is on
the National Register of Historic Places. The register is
the national honor roll that recognizes outstanding
historic buildings and districts throughout the United
States which are so significant that their protection is
important to the nation. Portsmouth is part of Cape
Lookout National Seashore which is administered by the
National Park Service. Planning for the future of Ports-
mouth is underway.
If you have any questions, please contact a Park Ranger,
or write to:
Cape Lookout National Seashore
P. O. Box 690
415 Front Street
Beaufort, North Carolina 28516
PORTSMOUTH VILLAGE
As you draw close to Portsmouth Village in your journey
across Ocracoke Inlet, you may well wonder "what is a
village doing on the tip of this lonely and windswept
island?" What compelled the North Carolina General
Assembly before the Revolutionary War to authorize
and lay out a town on Core Banks at Ocracoke Inlet?
The Inlet itself holds the answer. Long known as a
dependable route of trade through the Outer Banks to
early North Carolina ports such as New Bern and Bath,
Ocracoke Inlet was, however, too shallow to allow
heavily laden ships to proceed even a short distance into
Pamlico Sound. Lighter shallow draft boats were
required to meet the cargo vessels in Ocracoke Inlet and
take the cargo to the ports across Pamlico Sound. A
village and warehouses at the inlet meant the lighter
boats could transfer the cargo a shorter distance for
storage. Goods could then be taken to New Bern or
Bath at a later time. Portsmouth was established to
meet these needs.
From its beginning in 1753, Portsmouth grew rapidly in
importance as a transshipment point for goods entering
Ocracoke Inlet. The Village reached its heyday during
the decade before the Civil War. In 1860, Portsmouth
and neighboring Shell Castle Island in Ocracoke Inlet
had a total population of nearly 600 persons. Besides
about 100 residences, the Village had a church, taverns,
warehouses, shipbuilding yards, a post office, many
vegetable gardens and abundant livestock.
The Civil War, however, spelled doom for Portsmouth
Village. Legend has it that all the residents but one left in
the face of advancing Federal troops. The one
remaining citizen was too fat to fit through the doorway
in her house, and so she had to stay. When villagers re-
turned after the War, the legend goes, the woman was
still there and she claimed the Northern soldiers had
treated her well. In truth, only a fraction of the villagers
returned after the Civil War, and although attempts were
later made to revive the sagging economy of the town,
the population steadily declined.

The Developed and Transition classes should be the only lands
under active consideration by the County or municipality for in-
tensive urban development requiring urban services. The area
within these classes is where detailed local land use and public
investment planning will occur. State and Federal expenditures on
projects associated with urban development (water, sewer, urban
street systems, etc.) will be guided to these areas. Large
amounts of vacant land suitable for urban development within the
Developed class should be taken into account when calculating the
amount of additional lands needed to accommodate projected growth.
C. COMMUNITY
The "community" classification provides for clustered land
uses to meet housing, shopping, employment, and public service
needs within the rural areas of the County. It is usually charac-
terized by a small grouping of mixed land -uses which are suitable
and appropriate for small clusters of rural development not re-
quiring municipal sewer service.
This is an important classification in Hyde County, since
nearly all the rest of the County's population not residing in the
areas classified previously as either "developed" or "transition-
al", live in such clusters. There are no incorporated municipali-
ties in Hyde County, but many small communities are along the pri-
mary roads in the County. Areas classified as "Community" in-
clude: Ponzer, Scranton, Sladesville, Rose Bay, Lake Comfort, New
Holland, Nebraska, Gull Rock, Middletown, and the area along S.R.
1304, northwest of Fairfield.
D. RURAL
The "rural" class provides for agriculture and forest manage-
ment, mineral extraction and other low intensity uses on large
sites including residences where urban services are not required
and where natural resources will not be unduly impaired. These
are lands identified as appropriate locations for resource manage-
ment and allied uses; land with high potential for agriculture,
forestry or mineral extraction; lands with one or more limitations
that would make development costly and hazardous, and; land con-
taining irreplaceable, limited, or significant natural, recrea-
tional or scenic resources not otherwise classified.
The majority of land within Hyde County falls within the "ru-
ral" classification. This classification is very important in
Hyde County, because of the economic importance of agriculture and
other resource extraction activities. Throughout the planning
period, mining of peat deposits within the County is also expected
to assume increased significance.

E. CONSERVATION
The "conservation" class provides for effective long-term
management of significant limited or irreplaceable areas. This
management may be needed because of its natural, cultural, recrea-
tional, productive or scenic values. This class should be limited
to lands that contain: major wetlands; essentially undeveloped
shorelands that are unique, fragile, or hazardous for development,
wildlife management areas or areas that have a high probability
for providing necessary habitat conditions; publicly owned water
supply watersheds and aquifers. However, there may be high ground
areas within the conservation class that may be suitable for de-
velopment. Each application for development shall.be reviewed on
a case by case basis.
In Hyde County, the environmentally sensitive areas identifi-
ed as Areas of Environmentally Concern (AECs) i.e., Coastal Marsh-
lands, Estuarine Waters, Estuarine Shorelines, and Public Trust
Areas, are classified as "conservation". Also included in this
classification are the State and Federally owned and managed wild-
life refuge areas, gamelands, and the Cape Hatteras National Sea-
shore Recreation Area.
70

PART f
SECTION IV
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN POLICIES
AND LAND CLASSIFICATIONS

SECTION IV
RELATIONSHIP OF POLICIES AND LAND CLASSIFICATIONS
The Coastal Resources Commission requires each land use plan
to relate the policies section to the land classification map and
to provide some indication as to which land uses are appropriate
in each class.
A. DEVELOPED AND TRANSITION CLASSES
As mentioned in the discussion of existing conditions, most
of the County's growth will occur in and around the developed com-
munities of Swan Quarter, Engelhard, Fairfield, and Ocracoke Vil-
lage where basic services such as water and community support ser-
vices are available. The developed and transition classes were
specifically designed to accommodate these more intensively devel-
oped areas and land uses, including residential, commercial, in-
dustrial parks and open space, community facilities and transpor-
tation. Hazardous or offensive uses such as land application sy-
stems, power plants, airports and bulk chemical storage facilities
will be located away from these classes.
B. COMMUNITY CLASS
Intensive development will not be encouraged in this class
due to the lack of urban services and/or physical limitations.
The general range of acceptable uses are limited to residences,
isolated general and convenience stores and churches and other
public facilities. These areas are usually found at crossroads
within the "rural" classification. Some of these areas are not
currently served by the County and because of the low -density de-
velopment, do not require centralized sewage collection and dis-
posal,
C. RURAL CLASS
The Rural�Class is the broadest of the land classes and is
designated to provide for agriculture, forest management, mineral
extraction and other low intensity uses. Residences may be locat-
ed within the Rural Class where urban services are not required
and where natural resources will not be permanently impaired.
Some large developments may be encouraged in the Rural Class when
there is an absence of otherwise suitable land within the Develop-
ed and Transition Classes and/or when there is a possible threat
to the urban populace. Such large developments include airports,
power plants, and hazardous materials storage. The County also
reserves the privilege of allowing specific types of industrial
development in the rural areas if in the opinion of the government
there will be no harmful effects from such a location.
D. CONSERVATION CLASS
The Conservation Class is designated to provide for effective
long-term management of significant limited or irreplaceable areas
71

which include coastal marshlands, undeveloped shorelines that are
unique, fragile, or hazardous for development, wildlife habitat
areas, publicly owned gamelands and parks and undeveloped forest
lands and cultural and historical sites. Development in the estu-
arine system should be restricted to such uses as piers, bulk-
heads, marinas, and other water -dependent uses. Policy Statements
under Resource'Protection, and Resource Production and Management
in Section II, Part I, of this plan address the County's inten-
tions under this class.
72

C A M A
LAND USE PLAN -UPDATE
FOR
HYDE COUNTY
PART II: OCRACOKE
/CANNING TCA
CONa UL�ING
Talbert, Cox & Associates -, Inc.

PART II
SECTION
DATA COLLECTION
AND ANALYSIS

A. Establishment of Information Base:
Although it is a political subdivision of Hyde County, Ocra-
coke Village is located approximately 23 miles across the Pamlico
Sound near the southern end of a 15 mile long barrier island. All
of the island, except for the 775 acres which comprise the Vil-
lage, is part of the Cape Hatteras National Seashore Recreation
Area and forms a part of North Carolina's Outer Banks. The Vil-
lage is a peninsula located on the southwestern side of the is-
land, extending out into the Pamlico Sound, and situated around
Silver Lake. Silver Lake is one of the finest natural harbors
for small vessels along the Atlantic Coast.
Ocracoke Village remained relatively removed from the rest of
the world until the 19501s, with the advent of State -supported
ferries. At first hundreds, then thousands, of tourists began
visiting the Village each year because of its unique historic and
aesthetic appeal. The growth in tourism, spurred primarily be-
cause of the quiet, fishing village appeal, now threatens the re-
tention of that appeal. The consideration of land use management
policies is essential.
In developing the analysis of conditions on Ocracoke, various
data sources were tapped. A number of primary sources were useful
including: personal interviews with some of the Village's citi-
zens; public meetings for additional local input; information ob-
tained from citizens' survey questionaires; local land use sur-
veys, and; interviews with local and State government officials.
Discussions with representatives of the Office of Coastal Manage-
ment, the N. C. Division of Marine Fisheries, and the Shellfish
Sanitation Unit of the State Department of Human Resources were
quite helpful in identifying land use constraints. Major secon-
dary sources included: the Hyde County Land Use Plan, CAMA, 1976;
Ocracoke Village, Land Use-Deve opment Potential, East Carolina
University, Regional De ve opment Institute, 1972; "Growth Manage-
ment Strategies for Ocracoke, N.C.," and "Development Summary and
Recommendations for Ocracoke," published papers by Todd Miller,
UNC-Chapel Hill, Center for Urban and Regional Studies.
Major conclusions of the data analysis are:
-- The population, both permanent and seasonal, will con-
tinue to increase, along with more vacation cottages and
second homes, in spite of constraints;
-- Unsuitable soils for septic tanks, and the lack of cen-
tral sewage facilities pose serious development con-
straints;
-- The absence of County -wide land use controls has fostered
the growth of incompatible land uses, and;
-- Local citizens are concerned about balancing the economic
base (tourism) with retention of the Village's character.
73

B. Ocracoke Present Conditions:
1. Population
Although it is under the political jurisdiction of Hyde
County, Ocracoke Village represents a unique entity as far as land
use development and policy planning is concerned. Ocracoke Is-
land's population is concentrated in the Village of Ocracoke. The
1970 U.S. Census population figure for Ocracoke was 541 persons.
The Village is not incorporated so annual estimates are not made
by the N.C. State Office of Budget and Management. The Village
Water superintendent estimated the year-round population to be 500
in 1978, and 600 in 1980, based on the number of active water
users.
The 1980 Census of Population and Housing Advance Reports
show Ocracoke's population to be 658 for 1980, an increase of 117
new permanent residents, or 21.6 percent. By comparison the
County's overall rate of population growth during the 1970-80
period was only 5.4 percent. Ocracoke's rate of growth was four
times faster than the County's total. Notice the figures in Table
18, below:
TABLE 18 OCRACOKE POPULATION
Year Population Percent Change Housing Units Percent Change
1970 541 -- 305 --
1980 658 21.6 471 54.4
Source: U.S. Census, 1970, 1980; Ocracoke Sanitary District Water
Association
The 1980 estimate represents an increase of 21.6 percent over
the 1970 figures, making the village the fastest growing area in
Hyde County. If the 1970-1980 growth rate remains constant, the
1990 permanent population could exceed 800 persons. This increase
could have significant impacts on Ocracoke, both from the stand
point of affecting its historically quiet, Village character and
exerting new demands on the provision of basic services, mainly
water and sewer.
2. Seasonal Population
The seasonal population flows have always been significant in
Ocracoke, but took on added meaning beginning in 1977 with the de-
velopment of the Swan Quarter to Ocracoke Ferry Service. For the
first time in the County's modern history, the island had direct
ferry service to the mainland part of the County, and vice versa.
The number of people visiting Ocracoke by means of the 2 hour, 40
minute ferry ride across the Pamlico Sound, increased substantial-
ly fom 1977 through 1980. Figures for July, 1978, through June,
74

1979, showed that a total of 34,679 passengers used the Swan Quar-
ter to Ocracoke Ferry during that 12 month period. Peak usage oc-
curred from May through August, which is usually the height of the
tourist season. With the two other ferries, i.e., Cedar Island
and Hatteras Inlet, the Swan Quarter ferry brings hundreds of
thousands of transient visitors and a few thousand summer dwellers
to Ocracoke each year. Since the island is geographically isolat-
ed, the ferry services are very important to Ocracoke.
In 1980, when the approximate 208 cottages and second homes
as well as the 177 motel rooms were filled, it is estimated that
nearly 3500 persons were inhabiting the island at any given time.
Transient "day -visitors" account for a few thousand more. Such an
influx of people obviously has a substantial impact upon the Vil-
lage. One of the most important impacts is the demand for water.
During the summer months of 1980 the monthly demand for water
nearly tripled from 1.03 million gallons in January, to 3.62 mil-
lion gallons in August.
Since June of 1977, however, Ocracoke has experienced few
problems in meeting peak water demands. In June, 1977, the Ocra-
coke Sanitary District Water Association began operating the first
centralized water system on the island. The system consists of
two 600 feet deep wells, which tap a Castle Hayne acquifer. Be-
cause of salt intrusion along with other materials, the water must
be desalinized and only about 45 percent of the total water pumped
is yielded as usable. Desalinization is accomplished through the
Reverse Osmosis (R.O.) process, which currently involves three
R.O. machines. These machines produce up to 162,000 gallons of
usable water per day (gpd). The seasonal peak demand in August of
1980, averaged about 121,500 gpd or about 75 percent of capacity.
January 1980, usage for permanent residents was only 42,250 gpd,
or about 26 percent of current capacity. At a seasonal peak popu-
lation of 3,500 daily per capita water use was about 46 gpd. This
figure is somewhat less than the average consumption rate for the
permanent population, i.e., 600 persons and 70 gpd.
There is no central sewage collection and disposal system on
Ocracoke Island. Waste water is disposed of through individual
on -site systems, i.e., septic tanks. The use of septic tanks has
serious limitations on Ocracoke because of the general soil condi-
tions. The limited capacity of the soils to absorb effluent is
also taxed heavily during the seasonal population peaks. Although
there has been no documentation of pollution problems resulting
from effluent, Ocracoke could benefit from the development of a
central sewage collection and treatment system.
3. Economy
Another major impact of the seasonal population is the effect
upon the island's economy. Ocracoke's economy is mostly a season-
al one. There are no manufacturing industries and no agricultural
activities on the island. The economic base is dependent largely
75

upon the tourist income. Commercial fishing plays a smaller role
in the economy, serving mostly as a supplementary source of in-
come. But, by and large, it is revenues generated by the motels,
gift and specialty shops, rental cottages, and restaurants that is
the backbone of Ocracoke's economy. Ocracoke contributes perhaps
more than a fair share in the total annual retail sales for Hyde
County, although no total figures are available for the Village.
Table 19, Page 77 shows a list of the businesses located on Ocra-
coke.
4. Housing
The 1980 Census Advance Reports show that the number of hous-
ing units increased from 305 in 1970 to 471 in 1980, an substan-
tial increase of 54.4 percent (See Table 18, Page 74). This in-
crease reflects the increasing attractiveness of the Village as a
place for summer cottages an& second homes. The projected 1980
average household size in Hyde County is 2.5 persons, based upon
the 1970 occupancy rate of 84 percent, applied to the 1980 total
housing count. Assuming Ocracoke's average household size is the
same as the rest of Hyde County's, then its 658 citizens occupy
only 263, or about 56 percent of the total 471 units. The rest,
208 units, would be either rental cottages or second homes. The
1980 Census of housing conditions have not been published.
On the surface, it appears that the total supply of suitable
dwelling units are adequate on the island. However, as more of
the island's young people remain in the Village after completing
high school to work in the tourist industry, there will gradually
be a need for more affordable housing. The pressures for second
home and tourist development have caused land prices to increase
rapidly in recent years. The prices are such that young, native
Villagers who remain to work in tourism or fishing, cannot afford
to purchase lots for homesites on land which their grandparents
may have sold. While there is currently not an acute housing
shortage, as land values increase, many native Villagers may be
priced out of their own housing market.
5. Existing Land Use Analysis
a. Current Conditions
Ocracoke Island is 15 miles long and two to three miles wide
in some areas, and contains a total of 5,535 acres. Of the total
acreage, the Village of Ocracoke takes up only 775 acres (1.21
square miles), which is only 14.0 percent of the total. The re-
maining 4,760 acres is all under government ownership and control
as part of the Cape Hatteras National Seashore and Recreation
Area. Since the County cannot exercise any control over the fed-
erally owned land, only the 775 acres composing Ocracoke Village can be considered in relation to the formulation of land use poli-
cy by Hyde County.
76

TABLE 19: COMMERCIAL ESTABLISHMENTS IN OCRACOKE:
1. Blackbeard's Lodge --Motel
2. Blackbeard's Service Center
3. Bluff Shoal Motel
4. Captain Ben's Restaurant
5. Cockle Crick Cage Shop
6. Community Store
7. East Carolina Bank
8. Edward's Motel
9. Garrish Cottages
10. Harborshide Motel
11. Island Inn
12. N.C. State Highway Office (Ferry)
13. N.C. State Highway Office (Reservations)
14. Ocracoke Gas Company
15. Ocracoke Water Association
16. Ocracoke Variety Store
17. Pelican Restaurant
18. Pony Island Motel
19. Pony Island Restaurant
20. Sand Dollar Motel
21. South Point Fish & Crab
22. Spencer Cottages
23. Tradewind's General Store
24. Trolley Stop -One: Fast Foods
25. Jack C. Willis' Grocery Store
26. Howard's Pub
27. Yaupon Tree: Motel, Gift Shop
28. Boyette House: Motel
Source: Tideland Electric Membership Corporation: Ocracoke Office
77

Since 1976, the overall land development patterns have re-
mained the same. The most significant change has been in the num-
ber of second homes and cottages developed. The land use patterns
in the Village of Ocracoke lacks definite uniformity. Residential
areas are adjacent to commercial areas in an inconsistent pattern.
This is largely due to the fact that Hyde County has never adopted
any locational land use control devices such as zoning or subdivi-
sion ordinances. Such unregulated development, if continued,
could lead to significant and perhaps detrimental problems related
to land use incompatibility. These problems generally necessitate
public investment before they can be corrected.
b. Land Compatibility Problems
Perhaps the most significant land compatibility problem on
Ocracoke is the inconsistent land use patterns. In the absence of
local land use controls, commercial and residential developments
have occurred, in a sense, "in spite of each other", with little
regard for the incompatibilty.
Silver Lake, perhaps the most scenic attraction at Ocracoke,
is considered by many island residents to be over developed. The
shores of the lake are currently dotted with various residential,
commercial and governmental developments. Concern has been raised
over possible problems of public access to the lake if intensive
private development continues. The natural aesthetic beauty of
the lake is thus threatened by unregulated development.
Since septic tanks are the sole means for waste water dispos-
al in Ocracoke, intensive development along the lake front could
lead to the seepage of effluent into its waters. Such pollution
would seriously threaten the life of the lake itself. With the
specter of pollution, lack of public access, and destruction of
its natural beauty hanging over Silver Lake, regulation of adja-
cent development is a matter for serious concern.
C. Problems From Unplanned Development
Ocracoke Village remained in relative isolation from the rest
of the world until the late 1950's. In 1957, when State supported
ferries first began operating, an almost immediate demand for
tourist -related activities resulted. The limited services in
Ocracoke were not able to handle the seasonal influx of people who
were now "discovering" the island. Through the years, however,
motels, restaurants, rental cottages, and vacation homes were de-
veloped, but at a faster pace than community facilities. The Vil-
lage water system was not initiated until 1977 and there is still
no central sewage system. The low topography of the island com-
bined with soils generally unsuited for septic tank installation,
has led to the pumping in of sand as fill to build up developable
land. In the early 1960's developers pumped sand onto the marshes
on the Sound side of the island to make room for new residential
development. The residential structures which currently exist in
these "made -land" areas stand in locations which were once vir-
tually submerged by storm surges, which provided a natural storm
78

buffer for the Villagers. These residents, like the ones in the
Oyster Creek area, are particularly susceptible to storm damage
(See Map 3 Page 102). The destruction of the Sound side marsh
areas by dredge and fill and the subsequent construction of houses
are major problems caused by unplanned development.
The lack of subdivision regulations have eliminated controls
` over design standards for streets or the provision of utilities.
Thus, most of the new residential development, though consisting
of large and expensive homes, is poorly designed with inadequate
road and bridge access in some cases. Responsibility for mainten-
ance of these new access roads have not been determined.
d. Areas Likely to Experience Change in Predominant Land
Use
The land development pattern in Ocracoke, though as noted
earlier has not been controlled by land use regulations, is never-
theless an established one. The overall developable acreage is
not extensive but the recent development trends are likely to con-
tinue. This means that the newer residential areas on the back
side of the island, such as the ones in the Oyster Creek area, the
Jackson Dunes, and Trent Woods area, will likely continue the cur-
rent residential development trend (See Map 3 Page 102). Existing
commercial uses are also likely to remain and expand along N.C.
Highway 12 southward in the direction of the Cape Hatteras Nation-
al Seashore area. There are no areas expected to experience major
changes in predominant land use in Ocracoke..
e. Areas of Environmental Concern (AECs)
In the 1976 Hyde County Land Use Plan, specific proposed
Areas of Environmental Concern were not delineated for Ocracoke
Island but described generally for the whole County. The desig-
nated Areas of Environmental Concern (according to 15NCAC 7-H) in
Ocracoke need to be pointed out separately from the mainland,
though they are the same. Below are the AECs for Ocracoke:
1. Coastal Wetlands, which are defined as any salt marsh or
other marsh subject to regular or occassional flooding by tides,
including wind tides (whether or not the tide waters reach the
marshland areas through natural or artificial watercourses), pro-
vided this shall not include hurricane or tropical storm tides.
Coastal marshlands also contain certain marsh plant species.
Ocracoke Island contains about 1,600 acres of regularly flooded
salt marsh area. This area is located on the Pamlico Sound side
of the island and most of it is under the jurisdiction of the U.S.
National Park Service as part of the Cape Hatteras National Sea-
shore.
2. Estuarine Waters, are defined as "all the water of the
Atlantic Ocean within the boundary of North Carolina and all the
water of the bays, sounds, rivers, and tributaries thereto seaward
to the dividing line between coastal fishing waters and inland
fishing waters (N.C.G.S. 113A-113(b) (2)). The estuarine waters
79

are very important for a number of reasons, mainly because they
serve as the birth place and nursery areas for many species of
fish and shellfish. Estuarine waters support the valuable commer-
cial and sports fisheries of the coastal area which are comprised
of estuarine dependent species such as menhaden, flounder, shrimp,
crabs, and oysters. These species must spend all or some part of -
their life cycle within the estuarine waters in order to mature
and reproduce. Estuarine waters in Ocracoke include Silver Lake,
the Pamlico Sound, and Northern Pond. Both Hatteras Inlet and _
Ocracoke Inlet are also part of the estuarine system.
3. Public Trust Areas, which are partially defined as all
waters of the Atlantic Ocean and the lands thereunder from the
mean high water mark to the seaward limit of state jurisdiction;
all natural bodies of water subject to measurable lunar tides and
lands there under to the mean high mark; all navigable natural
bodies of water and lands thereunder to the mean high water level
or mean water level, as the case may be. In other words, public
trust areas are waters and adjacent lands, the use of which, bene-
fits and belongs to the public. Public trust areas are used for
both commercial and recreational purposes. In Ocracoke, Hatteras
Inlet, Ocracoke Inlet, the Atlantic Ocean adjacent to the beaches,
Pamlico Sound, Silver Lake, are all major public trust AECs.
These areas support recreational uses such as swimming, boating,
water skiing and sportsfishing and some commercial fishing. Most
of the Public Trust Areas are under the jurisdiction of the U.S
Park Service.
.4. Estuarine Shorelines are defined as non -Ocean shorelines
which are especially vu nera le to erosion, flooding, or other ad-
verse effects of wind and water and are intimately connected to
the estuary. This area extends from.the mean high water level or
normal water level along the estuaries, sounds, bays, and brackish
waters for a distance of 75 feet inland. These areas are signifi-
cant because development within the shorelines can influence the
quality of estuarine life and is subject to the damaging process
of shorefront erosion and flooding. The shorelines of the estua-
rine waters listed on Page 80, Item e. 2, above, and 75 feet land-
ward are the estuarine shorelines in Ocracoke.
Areas of Environmental Concern within the Ocean Hazard Areas
Category are those areas considered to be natural hazard areas
along the Atlantic Ocean shoreline where, because of their special
vulnerability to erosion or adverse effects of sand, wind and
water, uncontrolled or incompatible development could unreasonably
endanger life or property. Ocean hazard areas include beaches,
frontal dunes, inlet lands, and other areas in which geologic, ve-
getative and soil conditions indicate a substantial possibility of
excessive erosion or flood damage.
All of the Ocean Hazard Area AECs are included within the
Cape Hatteras National Seashore under the control of the U.S. Park
Service. Since land development will not affect these areas,
these AECs will not be discussed in this plan.

6. Current Plans, Policies, Regulations
a. Transportation
No transportation or thoroughfare plans have been developed
for Ocracoke. As noted previously, the State -supported Swan Quar-
ter to Ocracoke ferry began operation in 1977 providing the first
such direct link from the mainland to the island. Nearly 35,000
passengers used the ferry from July, 1978 to June, 1979. The fer-
ry, which uses the same docking facilities as that provided for
the already existing Cedar Island and Hatteras ferries, has had an
impact upon tourism and has made mainland services more accessible
to the Villagers. Although no definite policies have been adopted
as of the writing of this report, State DOT officials have recent-
ly discussed possible reductions in the operation of ferry ser-
vices. Any cut -backs would have a substantial impact upon Ocra-
coke, which has a tourist -based economy. The economic ramifica-
tions of a reduction in ferry service, is a consideration which
State officials need to take prior to any final decisions.
As noted in the discussion of "Tourism" in Part I, Section
II, Page 59, 917,641 passengers used the ferries to and from Ocra-
coke between July, 1978 and June, 1979.
Road improvements in Ocracoke include minor repairs to S.R.
1134, 1335, and widening of S.R. 1341.
b. Community Facilities
1. Water Distribution Plan: Since the Village water system
began operating in June, 1977, several areas were subdivided for
development which were not included in the initial water service
area. These areas will receive water from the central system as
it expands. According to the water superintendent, the entire
Village area will be included within the water service area by
1987.
2. Waste Water Treatment Plans: Ocracoke was not included
in a 201 Facilities Plan prepared in 1978 for Hyde County. The
Ocracoke Sanitary District, which operates the water system, has
discussed the feasibility of a 201 study. Preliminary discussions
with State officials, however, indicate that if a waste water col-
lection•and disposal system were to be developed, the individual
user costs would be excessive. Nevertheless, the island could
greatly benefit from the preparation of some type of preliminary
waste water treatment study or plans.
3. Solid Waste Disposal: The Ocracoke Sanitary District,
which operates the water system, has a contract with Dare County
for solid waste collection and disposal for the Village. Dare
County maintains a truck in the Village, which makes daily pick-
ups. When the truck is filled, it is ferried across the Hatteras
Inlet and disposes of the refuse at the Dare County landfill.
This system is quite adequate for the present permanent and sea-
81

sonal populations. However, if both the permanent and seasonal
populations continue to increase during the 10-year planning per-
iod, another refuse dump truck may become necessary.
4. Police and Fire Protection: Police protection on Ocra-
coke is provided y t1fie Hy a County Sheriff's Department. Two de-
puties are stationed full-time at Ocracoke, although there is no
jail or incarceration facility on the island. Currently, crime is
not a major problem in Ocracoke Village, and when_ incarcerations
are necessary, persons in•custody are taken either to Dare County
or to Swan Quarter on the mainland. Although these two deputies
appear to provide adequate police service to the Village now,
studies for more urban areas indicate that in order for one offi-
cer to be "on the street" 24 hours a day, a force of at least five
is -needed. As more urban development occurs at Ocracoke, more po-
lice officers and'some type of detention facility may be needed.
Fire protection in the Village is considered adequate and is
provided by a volunteer department. There is a modern -equipped
fire house located near the center of the Village.
c. Utilities Extension Policy
The Ocracoke Sanitary District Water Association, which oper-
ates the water system, requires all owners of new development to
finance the cost of extending and tapping onto the existing water-
lines. The extensions must meet previously set engineering speci-
fications and must comply with County Health Department standards.
After the extension has been completed, ownership of the lines is
turned over to the Sanitary District.
d. Recreation Plans or Policies
There are no public recreation plans or policies which have
been developed which include Ocracoke. The miles of ocean beaches
maintained as part of the Cape Hatteras National Seashore Recrea-
tion Area, as well as the Pamlico Sound, two inlets and Silver
Lake, provide ample recreation opportunities for residents and
visitors alike. Camping facilities are also provided by the U.S.
Park Service on Ocracoke. Public recreation plans, as such, may
not be needed for the Village.
e. Prior Land Use Plans
Ocracoke, although somewhat isolated geographically from the
mainland, is still a very important part of Hyde County. The 1976
County Land Use Plan did include Ocracoke, but not in terms of
specific policy and development issues which were of particular
relevance to the Village and not the County in general. In 1972,
the Regional Development Institute of East Carolina University
prepared a study titled Ocracoke Village: Land Use —Development.
Potential, April, 1972. This document focused on the prospects
or deve opment and potential problems for the Village, including
land use implications.
m

f. Regulations and Enforcement Provisions
All of the regulations and enforcement provisions which are
applicable to Hyde County also include Ocracoke Village. Refer to
part I, Section I, Item 6 (d),Page 23 for a full discussion and
listing of these provisions.
C. CONSTRAINTS: LAND SUITABILTY
There is relatively little developable land remaining within
the Village of Ocracoke. Of the Village's 775 acres, the Ocracoke
Sanitary District estimates that only about 62 acres of develop-
able land remains. Therefore, it becomes all the more imperative
that Villagers and County officials become aware of the existing
limitations to development. Physical limitations are important to
recognize both from the standpoint of guiding land use decisions
and in protecting the health, safety, and welfare of the general
public. Below is a list of the physical limitations to develop-
ment in Ocracoke:
1. Physical Limitations
Most of the physical limitations to development were noted in
the 1976 plan. These included one man-made hazard, i.e., a small
airport with a paved landing strip, and the natural hazard areas
which coincide with the designated Areas of Environmental Concern
(AECs). Perhaps the most serious physical limitation to develop-
ment in the Village, as was pointed out in the 1976 plan, is the
condition of the soils. An updated soil survey of the Outer Banks
was published in 1977, but showed the same overall conditions for
the island. The area is, for the most part, of low terrain, poor-
ly drained, and without the addition of sand as fill, unsuitable
for septic tanks. In the absence of a central sewer system, this
is a severe constraint. The two dominant soil types around Silver
Lake, Carteret Low and Corolla fine sands, are rated as having se-
vere limitations for both dwellings and as septic tank filter
fields, according to the USDA Soil Conservation Service
The current source of water for the Village does not pose a
serious physical limitation to development. The deep wells from
which the water is pumped does contain some salt intrusion, but is
desalinized through a reverse osmosis process.
There are no areas in the Village where the slope exceeds 12
percent.
2. Fragile Areas
These areas are ones which could easily be damaged or de-
stroyed by inappropriate or poorly planned development. Most of
the fragile areas coincide with the AECs which were discussed in
Part II, Page 79-80, of this Section. In addition to the AECs,
Silver Lake and the Old Lighthouse might both be considered as
scenic and prominent high points which need protection from impro-
83

per development. The Lighthouse is also on the National Register
of Historic Places. The Village of Ocracoke does not contain any
of the following fragile areas: complex natural areas; areas that
sustain remnant species; areas containing unique geologic forma-
tions; registered natural landmarks; wooded swamps, prime wildlife
habitats, archeologic sites, or maritime forests.
There are, however, several other properties of historic sig-
nificance in the Village. The Ocracoke Light Station and Keepers
Quarters, which is located on the banks of Silver Lake, were plac-
ed on the National Register of Historic Places, in November, 1977.
Additionally, the Hyde County Historic Society, with the aid of a
planning consultant, has identified three other places in Ocracoke
which have the potential for placement on the National Register.
They are: (a) the Lela Howard house, (b) the Blanch Howard house,
and (c) the Beverly Moss, or Big Ike O'Neal house. Land use poli-
cies for Ocracoke should take into consideration the protection of
these culturally significant resources.
3. Areas With Resource Potential
There are no significant productive or unique agricultural
land in Ocracoke. Neither are there any potentially valuable min-
eral sites. However, as noted previously, most of the island is
part of the Cape Hatteras National Seashore, which includes the
entire land area adjacent to the ocean side of the island. The
National Seashore area is a prominent tourist attraction for vari-
ous types of non- intensive outdoor recreation activities. The
estuarine waters on the Sound side of the island are important
breeding areas for both finfish and shellfish, and need to be pro-
tected from unsound development practices. Silver Lake is cur-
rently considered to be a "prohibited shellfish area", by the
shellfish sanitation unit of the State Division of Health and
Human Services.
D. CONSTRAINTS: CAPACITY OF COMMUNITY FACILITIES
1. Existing Water Service Areas
The Village water system currently has a design capacity of
154,000 gallons per day (gpd) of potable water after desaliniza-
tion, on the basis of a 22-hour operating day. Two hours are gen-
erally allowed as maintenance time. If the system operated a full
24-hours, up to 162,000 gpd could be produced.
The current water service area, which was delineated with the
system's initial operation in June of 1977, does not include four
newly developing areas. Two developments near the Oyster Creek
area on the Village's northeast side have begun developing since
1977. Also, one developing area on the southeast side of Ocracoke
is outside of the existing water service area, as well as a devel-
opment in the southwestern portion of the island. If these areas
overcome other constraints, including septic tank suitability,
then the Sanitary District estimates that there would be poten-
84

tially 270 additional water users by 1987. The district has
already developed plans to expand the system over a period of six
years to include this area. Table 20 below shows the current
capacity of the water system. Per capita consumption drops
sharply during the seasonal peak demand, perhaps reflective of
cottage and motel occupants who are not washing clothes, cars,
watering lawns, etc.
TABLE 20 WATER USE AND CAPACITY: OCRACOKE VILLAGE
*Excess
No. * Total * Peak * Per Capita Percent Total
Residents Capacity Demand Consumption Utilization Capacity
600 162,003- _U=1 `26.6 — TF,-,Tg'o
**3,500 162,000 121,500 35 75.0 40,500
Source: Ocracoke Water Association; and Talbert, Cox & Associa-
tion, Inc., Wilmington, N. C.
* measured in gallons per day (gpd).
If the average year-round per capita consumption were assumed
to be 53 gallons per day, then at the current total capacity of
162,000 gpd, a maximum population of only 3,057 persons could be
sustained. However, consumption rates do fluctuate. Neverthe-
less, it would appear that if the seasonal population continues to
increase, Ocracoke's total water capacity will need to expand.
* permanent
** seasonal
2. Sewer Service Area
Septic tanks are the only means for waste water disposal on
Ocracoke at this time. The installation of septic tanks is regu-
lated by the Hyde County Health Department through the County San-
itarian. According to the County Sanitarian, as of the writing of
this report, there are no areas in the Village which are suitable
for septic tank installation without the addition of sand to build
up the area sufficiently above the water table. However, the San-
itarian also noted that sand of sufficient quality is not avail-
able in the Village. Thus, new development, except for areas.
which have been built up previously, is at a virtual standstill
unless developers are willing to go through the expense of pur-
chasing and ferrying in sutiable fill. Septic tank permits, ac-
cording to the County Sanitarian, cannot be issued unless the re-
quirements for adequate drain fields are met.
The lack of adequate waste water disposal facilities and sep-
tic tank limitations pose the most severe constraint to future de-
velopment in Ocracoke. If future development is to be sustained,
then the development of a central sewer facility is imperative.
Both permanent and seasonal populations are projected to increase
during the planning period.
M

A short-term solution may be for the County to obtain permis-
sion from the U.S. Park Service to utilize some of the sand from
the dredging of Hatteras Inlet, which is located on the northern
end of the island, for lot -filling purposes. The County Sanitar-
ian stated that this sand would be suitable. Otherwise, it will
continue to ,be quite expensive to have sand towed onto the island
from somewhere else.
3. Schools
There is only one school in Ocracoke. Ocracoke School con-
tains grades K through 12, and had a 1980-81 enrollment of 110
students.' The design capacity of the basic school facility is 60
students. However, two temporary modular buildings have been add-
ed in recent years to provide additional space. Although the Vil-
lage's population is expected to increase, it is not likely that
the number of school -age children will increase in proportion to
the overall population growth. Many new residents, for example,
will be retirees who will have no school -age children. Neverthe-
less, if school age children increase throughout the planning
period at one-half their current ratio to the population, then the
total pupils would be 134. This increase of 24 additional stu-
dents would be substantial enough in Ocracoke to require an expan-
sion of facilities and the employment of one or more teachers.
4. Transportation
Transportation to and from Ocracoke is conducted almost to-
tally by the three State -operated ferries. The main road on the
island is N.C. 12, which begins at the ferry docking facilities at
Silver Lake, and ends on the northern end of the island at -the
Hatteras Inlet ferry station. Although N.C. 12 is generally ade-
quate, it is listed in the State's Transportation Improvement Pro-
gram as a possible project if funding becomes available. All ve-
hicular traffic, regardless of which ferry traveled on, must tra-
vel on N.C. 12. Traffic counts, in terms of volume, are not
available for N.C. 12 from the State Department of Transportation.
Daily average traffic counts for the three services, however, are
available, as indicated in Table 21, below:
TABLE 21: AVERAGE ANNUAL DAILY TRAFFIC: FERRY SERVICE TO
OCRACOKE-
Vehicles
Ferry Per Day *Average Schedule
Hatteras -to -Ocracoke 500- Every 40 minutes
Cedar Island -to -Ocracoke 150 Twice Daily
Swan Quarter -to -Ocracoke 40 Twice Daily
N.C. DOT Planning and Research Division
* Subject to change on demand.
It is difficult to assess the capacity of the ferries since
the capacity of individual ferries vary and the schedules are sub-
Im

ject to change. However, if the ferry services are reduced, par-
ticularly the one from Hatteras to Ocracoke, then such a reduction
could become a constraint to development. The impact would be
felt most notably in the economy which is tourist -based. Projec-
tions for traffic increases, like population projections, are sub-
ject to various factors. Vacation traffic is highly subject to
overall economic conditions, particularly the cost of fuels. If
it is assumed that economic conditions will improve or remain
fairly stable, then traffic increases will be likely. The current
ferry service and N.C. 12 should have the capacity to handle pro-
jected increases.
E. ESTIMATED DEMAND
1. Population and Economy
The impact of population increases and the need for develop-
able land and community services in Ocracoke must be examined from
two perspectives. First, the impact of increases in the number of
year-round, permanent residents must be considered. Second in
consideration but at least of equal importance, is the growth in
the seasonal population. The analysis of conditions on the island
and in the Village, which has been discussed throughout this Sec-
tion, has pointed out some rather serious constraints to future
development. Unless the constraints are somehow overcome, mainly
the lack of sanitary and environmentally sound waste water dispos-
al facilities, then all projections for future development and in-
creased demand are irrelevant. The unofficial but realistic
"moratorium" on substantial new development, because of the in-
digenous soils and the unavailability of suitable fill locally for
septic tank placement, could continue indefinitely. Despite the
presence of prohibitive constraints, the alluring charm of the
quiet, rustic, sea Village, will continue to attract thousands of
tourists each year to Ocracoke. Thus, in making projections for
increased demand three significant assumptions must be made:
(1) The dissolution of the waste water disposal problems,
(2) Continued generally favorable economic conditions, and,
(3) Stable ferry service operations.
With these assumptions in mind as cautions, below are projec-
tions for increases in'both the seasonal and permanent populations
and an examination of the impacts of both on the Village.
a. Permanent Population: Projections to 1990:
As was noted in Part II, Page 74, of this section, between
1970 and 1980 Ocracoke's,permanent population 9rew at a rate of
21.6 percent from 541 to 658. If this rate were to remain con-
stant for the next 10 years, 800 persons will be residing in the
Village year-round by 1990. This increase of 147 persons would be
substantial in Ocracoke. For example, such an increase could re-
quire the formation of from;40 to 60 new households, placing added
burdens upon the demand for adequate and affordable housing. The
87

current water system has adequate capacity to serve this projected
growth, however, (see Table 20, Page 85). Sewage disposal, on the
other hand, could become a matter for more serious consideration.
Solid waste disposal would also present obstacles, since it is
currently being ferried over to Dare County. Alternatives need to
be explored since the expense of this practice will gradually in-
crease.
The overall economy will expand somewhat, as the demand for
goods and services will lead to more businesses remaining open all
year-round, thus providing more jobs and an increase in annual re-
tail sales.
b. Seasonal Population
In 1970, according to a report compiled by the Regional De-
velopment Institute of East Carolina University, the seasonal pop-
ulation at Ocracoke averaged 1,267 persons. In 1980, as discuss-
ed, the seasonal population averaged around 3,500 persons, a 10-
year increase of 176 percent. It should be noted that in 1970,
the water system had not been developed, the Swan Quarter- Ocra-
coke Ferry was not operational, and the Hatteras Seashore Camp-
grounds had not been improved. These developments, undoubtedly
helped boost the substantial increase in tourism between 1970 and
1980. For the next 10 years, however, it is unlikely that the
seasonal population will again more than double. A more likely
increase would probably double to the permanent population's in-
crease from 1970 to 1980,' i.e., about 43 percent. At this rate,
Ocracoke could,anticipate a seasonal population of 5,005 by 1990.
This increase would have a significant effect upon the demand for
water. (See Table 20, Page 84). The total water capacity, in or-
der to serve the projected 1990 seasonal population at the 1980
per capita seasonal consumption rate of 35 gpd, would need to be
175,175 gpd. This would be 13,175 gpd more than the current. maxi-
mum capacity of 162,000 gallons per day.
2. Future Land Need
Because of the limitations on septic tank placement in Ocra-
coke, it is difficult to assess the amount of land that is actual-
ly available for development within the Village. However, the
1980 population density for year-round residents (658 persons; 775
acres) was .85 persons per acre. The 1980 seasonal peak density
was about 4.5 persons per acre. At the 1990 year-round population
estimate of 800 persons, the density would be 1.03 persons per
acre. A seasonal average by 1990, of 5,005 persons would cause
the density to increase to 6.5 persons per acre. Under normal ur-
banizing conditions, all of these density levels would be accept-
able. However, land availability without the provision of basic
infrastructure, cannot provide adequate support for even low -den-
sity development. Higher densities must be supported by adequate
community facilities or else controlled or restricted.
W.

3. Community Facilities Need
In summary, if projected increases, both seasonal and perma-
nent, become realities, then Ocracoke will need to expand its ser-
vice capabilities in the following areas:
-- water system capacity
-- sewage disposal (See Page 85)
-- police protection (the possible addition of one or two
more officers for efficient law enforcement (See Page 82)
and
-- school facilities ( See Page 86) .
Under generally favorable economic conditions the attraction
to Ocracoke is likely to continue. However, three main issues,
i.e., the encroachment of development upon the Village's historic
and aesthetic character, problems resulting from lack of land use
controls, and inadequate provision of community facilities, sewage
disposal in particular, form a basis for serious consideration of
policy development by Hyde County. Policy implications have been
presented in this Section. Actual policy discussion, with alter-
natives and specific choices, will be presented in the following
Section.

PART 11
SECTION II
POLICY... STAT.EMENTS

PART II: HYDE COUNTY LAND USE PLAN: OCRACOKE
SECTION II: POLICY STATEMENTS:
Ocracoke as a jurisdictional entity of Hyde County, is gener-
ally included under the policies stated under Section II, Part I
of this plan. However, because of the presence of natural and
cultural resources on Ocracoke which are not generally located on
the mainland, the development of additional policies are appropri-
ate. All of the four broad policy development areas, i.e.,
Resource Protection, Resource Production and Management, Economic
and Community Development, and Continuing Public Participation,
will be addressed in this Section as they apply to Ocracoke.
A. RESOURCE PROTECTION
1. Natural Resource Areas
In the Village of Ocracoke, the major natural resource areas
which need protection are the identified Areas of Environmental
Concern (AECs). The AECs in Ocracoke which are within the Coun-
ty's jurisdiction include: Coastal Wetlands; Estuarine Waters;
Public Trust Areas, and; Estuarine Shorelines. These areas were
defined and identified geographically on Pages 17 through 20 in
Section I, of Part I. All of these areas, which are part of Hyde
County's Estuarine System, are important natural resources to both
Ocracoke and the mainland. Therefore, the same development poli-
cies and standards for Areas of Environmental Concern set forth
for the mainland, will apply to Ocracoke. These policies, includ-
ing possible alternatives and implementation strategies, were dis-
cussed on Pages 41 through 43 of Section II, Part I.
2. Cultural Resource Areas:
In some ways, it is difficult to define all of the culturally
significant areas in Ocracoke. Because of its unique historic
character, the entire Village itself could be considered a cul-
tural resource of more than local significance. Hyde County re-
cognizes,the historic significance of Ocracoke Village and the
value of protecting the Village as a significant coastal cultural
resource in general. The Ocracoke Light Station and Keepers
Quarters, are on the National Register of Historic Places. Three
other properties in the Village have been identified as having the
potential for National Register Nonmination. These properties,
which were identified as "Fragile Areas", in Section I, Part II,
Page 83, are: the Lela Howard House; the Blanch Howard House,
and; the Beverly Moss, or Big Ike O'Neal House.
.In order to protect these areas from the encroachment of po-
tentially damaging development, the policy statement by Hyde Coun-
ty on "Cultural Resource Areas", (Page 43, Section II, Part I),
shall also apply to these specific properties on Ocracoke and to
.o

others which may be identified during the planning period. The
proposed implementation strategy will also apply to the Ocracoke
properties (See Page 43, Section II, Part I).
3. Constraints to Development: Physical Limitations
The physical limitations to development in Ocracoke, as noted
on Pages 82 through 84 of Section I, Part II, include both natural
hazards and man-made hazards. The primary man-made hazard on
Ocracoke Island is a small paved airplane landing strip. However,
this airstrip is located outside of the Village area and is within
the Cape Hatteras National Seashore Recreation Area. Natural haz-
ard areas which present constraints to development are the pre-
viously identified Areas of Environmental Concern (AECs).
Perhaps the most serious physical limitation to development
in Ocracoke is the condition of the soils in and around the Vil-
lage. An updated Soil Survey of the Outer Banks, which was pub-
lished in 1977, showed that there were several -soil types in Ocra-
coke which had "severe" limitations for both structural founda-
tions and septic tank placement. This is particularly true around
Silver Lake, which is dominated by Carteret Low and Corolla fine
sands. Both of these soils have been identified by the USDA Soil
Conservation Service as being severely limited, without proper
modifications for septic tank placement and structural founda-
tions.
In recognition of these physical constraints to development
in Ocracoke, the Hyde County Commissioners will apply the same
policies on constraints which were stated for the mainland, to the
Village. These policies, including alternative considerations and
implementation strategies, were discussed on Pages 44-45, Section
II, Part I.
4. Constraints to Development: Capacity of Community
Faci ites
The major community facility in Ocracoke is the central water
system. The system's capacity and service area was discussed on
Page 84, Section I, Part II, of this plan. The current capacity
of the water system is adequate to serve the needs of the project-
ed 1990 permanent population. However, if the seasonal population
continues to grow as it is expected to do during the period, then
the actual pumping and treatment capacity of the system will need
to expand by more than 13,000 gallons per day.
Because of the soil limitations discussed above, the absence
of a central sewage collection and disposal system is also a con-
straint of important consideration. Even with suitable sand as
fill material, the generally small lots at Ocracoke could lead to
an overloading of effluent from the ground absorption systems
(septic tanks). This effluent could eventually reach the Estua-
rine Waters around the Village.
91

a
In addition to the County's general policies on "Con-
straints", contained in Sections -II, Part I, the following policies
are set forth for Ocracoke.
a. Septic tank placement will be limited to compliance with
State Health regulations as enforced by the County Sani-
tarian. In order to help make lots which would other-
wise be unusuable useable, modifications such as the use
of suitable fill to elevate nitrification lines, or the
installation of low-pressure mound systems, will be en-
couraged.
b. If water demands exceed the systems's current capacity,
the Ocracoke Sanitary District should seek to increase
its pumping capacity and obtain another reverse osmosis
desalinizing machine.
C. Alternative means of solid waste diposal, such as the
development of high-pressure incinerators on the island,
need to be explored.
d. Capacity of other community facilities and services,
such as schools, police and fire protection, and road
capacity, should be expanded as growth takes place and
as needed.
To implement the above listed policies, the Hyde County Com-
missioners and the Ocracoke Sanitary district will: (1) Continue
to support local and state regulations regarding septic tank
placement, and; (2) With assistance from the County Manager's
office, contact State and Federal agencies for planning and
financial assistance to develop alternative means of solid waste
disposal on Ocracoke.
5. Hurricane and Flood Evacuation Needs and Plans
In 1976, the County adopted two plans designed to help mini-
mize the danger to life and property in the event of hurricane or
100-year flood. Both of these plans apply to Ocracoke (See Page
45, Section II, Part I). These plans have been evaluated by the
County Civil Preparedness Coordinator, and are currently being up-
dated.
92

B. RESOURCE PRODUCTION AND MANAGEMENT
Policy Statements on the production and management of re-
sources usually are concerned with the extraction of economically
valuable resources from the lands.or waters of Coastal Communi-
ties. This policy area was discussed for the County as a whole in
Item B, Section II, Part I, Pages 46-52. -Of the major issues dis-
cussed, i.e., agricultural production, commercial forest lands,
commercial and recreational fisheries, and existing and potential
mineral production areas, only commercial and recreational fisher-
ies is a relevant issue in Ocracoke.
1. Commercial and Recreational Fisheries
As presented in the discussion on present economic conditions
in Ocracoke, commercial fishing as an economic activity has great-
ly declined in importance in the Village. Tourist -related busi-
ness is the most important employment segment in Ocracoke. How-
ever, some commercial fishing activity and considerable amounts of
sports and recreational fishing is still being conducted in and
around the island's waters.
The Hyde County Commissioners and the residents of Ocracoke,
would like to see productive fishing areas maintained and develop-
ed in order to further support fishing as an industry and as a re-
creational activity. Silver Lake, as of the writing of this plan,
is classified as a "Prohibited Shellfish Area", by the N.C. Divi-
sion of Health Services, Shellfish Sanitation Unit. This means
that -due to the documented presence of certain pollutants, or the
presence of diseases in marine life, the extraction of shellfish
from the lake for human consumption, is prohibited.
Except for those statements dealing with agricultural drain-
age, the same policies for the support of fishing which were de-
veloped for the County is a whole, shall also apply to Ocracoke.
In particular reference to Ocracoke, the County will:
a. Support any private State or Federal activities aimed at
cleaning up polluted areas which are currently closed,
and;
b. Seek to protect and maintain primary nursery areas
(Ocracoke's Estuarine Waters) from the negative effects
of development, particularly effluent pollutions, by
strict enforcement of the septic tank placement regula-
tions, and the County Building Permit Program.
The implementation strategy, supervised by the County Manager
and coordinated on Ocracoke with the Sanitary District, will be to
begin contacting State and Federal agencies, such as the State Di-
vision of Marine Fisheries and the Shellfish Sanitation Unit, for
assistance in cleaning up and revitalizing polluted fishing
waters. This activity will be initiated in Fiscal Year 1982, with
follow-up activities continuing throughout the planning period.
93

2. Off -Road Vehicles
Off -Road Vehicles is an issue relevant to the ocean side
beach areas on Ocracoke Island. This area as noted previously, is
under the control of the U.S. Park Service as part of the National
Seashore Recreation Area. (See Item 5, Page 52, Section II, Part
I) .
94

C. ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
The land development issues involving economic and community
development in Ocracoke are vastly different from similar issues
on Hyde County's mainland. Major factors such as the economic
base of the Village, its l4nd development pattern and density, and
faster population growth rate, are all responsible for this dif-
ference.
Other changes and trends in Ocracoke also have serious impli-
cations for economic and community development land use policies.
They include:
-- Increase in permanent population from 541 in 1970, to
658 in 1980, with a projection by 1990 of from 800 to
850 persons;
-- Increase in the seasonal population from 1,267 in 1970.
to 3,500 in 1980, with 1990 projections of 5,005 per-
sons;
-- Increase in the number of vacation cottages and second
homes, (from about 146 in 1970, to 208 in 1980), in
spite of identified constraints (See Page 76, Section I,
Part II).
-- Initiation of and proposed reduction of the State oper-
ated ferry services to and from the island; (The Swan
Quarter ferry was started in 1977).
-- Development in 1977 of a central water system by the
Ocracoke Sanitary District;
-- Continued growth and development in the absence of local
land use controls (such as zoning and subdivision regu-
lations), and;
-- The growing importance of tourism.
These are factors which must be given serious consideration
before adopting land use policies for Ocracoke Village. Some of
the issues which communities are required to address, according to
the Coastal Resources Commission's Land Use Planning Guidelines,
are not relevant in Ocracoke. These are, "types and locations of
desired industries", and "energy facility siting". Other issues
which are relevant to Ocracoke but were covered under the County's
general policies in Section II; Part I. include "Commitment to
State and Federal Programs", and "Assistance to Channel Mainten-
ance".
Relevant issues and policy statements are discussed below:
95

1. Local Commitment To Service Provisions
a. Water
Currently, the only local service provided is water. The
Village Water Association, under the auspice of the Ocracoke Sani-
tary District, intends to serve developing areas within the cur-
rent water service area as a first -priority. Areas which are de-
veloping outside of the current service area will be served over a
period of years during the planning period.
b. Sewer
The provision of services such as water and sewer is impor-
tant to the economy of the Village, i.e., tourism. A 201 waste
water facilities study has never been conducted for Ocracoke. Al-
though preliminary discussions between the Ocracoke Sanitary Dis-
trict and State Officials indicate that if a central sewage col-
lection and disposal system is developed in the Village, user
charges would be too expensive for the system to be supported by
the current population. Such a system, nevertheless is needed.
Therefore, the Sanitary District will, with assistance from the
County Manager's office, begin in Fiscal Year 1982-1983 seeking
State and Federal assistance to have a waste water facilities plan
prepared for Ocracoke.
In Fiscal Year 1984-1985, funding assistance will be sought
to help develop a central waste water. collection and disposal sy-
stem on the island, with the aim of reducing.the burden on user
charges.
C. Solid Waste Disposal
Throughout the planning period, the Sanitary District will
continue to contract with Dare County for solid waste disposal.
As.the need dictates, this contract may be expanded.
2. Desired Urban Growth Patterns
Ocracoke is the most densely populated settled area in Hyde
County. The compact development pattern in the Village makes no
distinction between residential, commercial or institutional uses.
This incompatibility of land uses has resulted from a lack of en-
forcement of local land use controls. As development continues in
response to the Village's appeal as a tourist attraction, contin-
ued expansion of incompatible land uses will prove to be quite
limited and undesirable. Therefore, the development and enforce-
ment of local land use controls will be studied for feasible ap-
plication in Ocracoke.
Possible alternative means to develop such local controls, in-
clude:
a. The incorporation of Ocracoke as a Town under N.C. Sta-
tutes, giving it locaale authority to protect and promote

the health, safety and welfare of the Village residents,
and;
b. Requesting that the County develop and adopt needed lo-
cal controls, after conducting a feasibility study of
the impact of such controls, for the Village.
Policy choices and implementation strategy shall include:
a. In Fiscal year 1981-1982, Hyde County through the County -
Manager's Office will apply for funds from the N.C. Of-
fice of Coastal Management to conduct and prepare a pre-
liminary zoning study for Ocracoke Village.
The desired urbanizing uses of land within Ocracoke must also
coincide with limitations of service provisions, and be consistent
with policies regarding protecting natural and cultural resources
(See Ocracoke's Policies under "Resource Protection", Pages 89
through 91, this section).
3. Redevelopment of Developed Urban Areas
The area around Silver Lake is almost completely developed.
Silver Lake is perhaps the most scenic attraction in the Village.
The lake -front development currently consists of a mixture of land
uses, including residential, commercial and government and insti-
tutional. (See the Ocracoke Land Use Map, attached to this plan).
All of this development is not desireable from an aesthetic view-
point. The broad, sweeping vista which Silver Lake has the poten-
tial to offer, is somewhat obscurred by much of the current water-
front development.
It is the belief of the Hyde County Board of Commissioners
and the residents of Ocracoke that the natural aesthetics of Sil-
ver Lake should be maintained and enhanced as much as possible.
Therefore, the following policy statements are set forth:
a. Only development which does not cause major or irreversi-
ble damage to the natural beauty and aesthetics of Silver Lake
should be allowed along the Lakefront.
b. Land uses which are supportive of the desire to maintain
open enjoyment of the Lake's attractiveness will be encouraged.
In order to help implement�'the above mentioned policy objectives
during the planning period the following actions will be taken: .
a. The County Commissioners, through the County Manager's
Office, will seek assistance from the N. C. Department of Natural
Resources and Community Development (NRCD) to provide information
on funds for preparing water -front design alternatives.
Contacts with the Washington, N. C. office of NRCD will be made in
Fiscal Year 1982.
97

b. The County Commissioners, through the County Manager's
Office will, in Fiscal Year 1982, seek funding from the N. C.
Office of Coastal Management to conduct a preliminary zoning study
for Ocracoke Village. Part of this study will show the potential
impact of zoning as a land development control device around
Silver Lake.
4. Tourism:
Ocracoke Island continues to be a strong attraction for thou-
sands of visitors each year. Thousands upon thousands of visitors
board the ferries from Cedar Island, Hatteras and Swan Quarter to
the Village of Ocracoke. Figures from the State Ferry Traffic Re-
port for July 1, 1978 to June 30, 1979, indicated that 917,641
passengers used the ferries going to and from Ocracoke. Of a
total 270,313 vehicles using the ferries during the period, 52
percent (140,000) were from out-of-state. Many of those transient
visitors made substantial .expenditures in the County and particu-
larly on Ocracoke. The North Carolina.Department of Commerce, Di-
vision of Travel and Tourism estimated that in 1979, tourism ac-
counted for $7,705,000 in expenditures in Hyde County. Although
no separate figures are available, the majority of these expenses
were likely generated by Ocracoke. Tourism is steadily growing in
Ocracoke, and is the backbone of the Village's economy.
Hyde County recognizes this importance and would like to see
those attractions and services which help make tourism effective,
enhanced and protected. This concern is particularly true regard-
ing the continued operation of a viable and dependable ferry ser-
vice. It is the County's policy, therefore, to continue to sup-
port and promote tourism as a vital economic activity on Ocra-
coke.

D. CONTINUING PUBLIC PARTICIPATION:
The importance of continued involvement by the citizens of
Ocracoke Village in land use planning and government decisions is
a factor recognized by the Hyde County Commissioners. One of the
five County Commissioners is a resident of Ocracoke Village.
During the development of this updated Land Use Plan, the
County Commissioners developed and adopted a "Citizen Participa-
tion Plan." (See Page 61, Section II, Part I). As part of this
plan, 15 citizens from all over the County, including three from
Ocracoke, were appointed to the Hyde County Land Use Advisory Com-
mittee. Two sets of Citizen Attitude survey forms --one each for
the mainland and Ocracoke --were developed and distributed. A
series of meetings were held with the Advisory Committee through
the development of the updated plan. Separate meetings were held
on Ocracoke Island with the Committee members who lived in the
Village. Also, prior to the submission of the preliminary draft
of the updated plan to the Coastal Resources Commission, a sepa-
rate public hearing with adequate notices and public postings, was
held in Ocracoke. The Ocracoke public hearing was open to all of
the Village residents.
It is the policy of the Hyde County Commissioners to help
keep Ocracoke Village residents informed and involved in planning
and governmental decisions which affect them. The on -going public
and private communications activities will continue, and include
the following actions throughout the planning period:
a. Publish notices of hearings and meetings of local impor-
tance in the Coastland Times, or other newspapers which circulate
generally in Ocracoke;
b. Make public announcements on the public education radio
station, which broadcasts from Mattamuskett High School on the
Mainland, but with a signal that reaches Ocracoke Village;
c. Continue to send notices of meetings, hearings, etc. to
leaders of Civic Clubs in Ocracoke and have them posted on the
Community Bulletin Board.
d. Encourage the Village residents to relate particular con-
cerns to the County Commissioners by contacting the Commissioner
who lives in the Village, and;
e. The County Commissioners will continue its practice of
conducting at least two of its regular monthly meetings during the
year, in Ocracoke Village.
99

I
•
PART It
SECTION III
LAND CLASSIFICATION
SYSTEM

SECTION III: LAND CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM:
The five Land Classifications of the Coastal Resources Com-
mission were defined in Section IV, Part I, of this plan, which
focused on the mainland. (See pages 67-70). In Ocracoke Village,
three of these classifications will be established. They are de-
sribed below.
A. DEVELOPED:
The developed class of land use provides for continued inten-
sive development and redevelopment of existing cities. Areas to
be classified as "developed" include lands currently developed for
urban purposes or approaching a density of 500 dwellings per
square mile that are provided with usual municipal or public ser-
vices, police and fire protection. Areas which exceed the minimum
density but which do not have public sewer service may best be di-
vided into a separate class to indicate that although they have a
developed character, they will need sewers in the future.
Ocracoke, as discussed previously, does not have a central
sewage collection and disposal system. However the 775 acres in
the Village is a total of only 1.21 square miles. The projected
number of dwelling units will increase during the planning period
beyond the 1980 level of 471 units. Most of the Village already
has a "developed" character, in that, due to physical constraints
of soil conditions, some areas cannot be developed further. This
classification includes all of the currently developed or develop-
ing areas in the Village, with the exception of the land area own-
ed by the U. S. Coast Guard, the State Department of Transporta-
tion (Ferry Office and Docking Facilities), and the U. S. park
services; and the border around Silver Lake.
B. . TRANSITION:
Transition land is classified as those lands providing for
future intensive urban development within the ensuing ten years on
lands that are most suitable and that will be scheduled for provi-
sion' of necessary public utilities and services. They may also
provide for additional growth when additional lands in the devel=
oped class are not available or when they are severely limited for
development.
Most of the land area adjacent to the portion of the Village
classified as "developed", will be classed as "Transitional". As
the Village population grows, both permanent and seasonal, the
transitional areas will be needed to accommodate the additional
growth. Present constraints, such as septic tank limitations,
would be largely overcome if a centralized sewage collection and
disposal system were, developed. The Village water system's lines
are also accessible to these areas. This area includes lands
North of the Old Cuttin Sage Lake area, and the lands south of the
currently developed lands, to the Cape Hatteras National Seashore
Recreation area.
100

C. CONSERVATION:
The "conservation" class provides for effective long-term
management of significant limited or irreplaceable areas. This
management may be needed because of its natural, cultural, recrea-
tional, productive or scenic values. This class should be limited
to lands that contain: major wetlands; essentially undeveloped
shorelands that are unique, fragile, or hazardous for development,
necessary wildlife habitat or areas that have a high probability
for providing necessary habitat conditions; publicly owned water
supply watersheds and aquifers; and forest lands that are undevel-
oped and will remain undeveloped for commercial purposes.
In Ocracoke, the conservation class shall include the land
area generally bordering Silver Lake, the State and Federally own-
ed land to the North of the Lake. Also, the Estuarine Shorelines
will be classified as conservation, and the land area around and
adjacent to the Ocracoke Light Station and Keepers Quarters.
101

PART II
SECTION IV
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN POLICIES
AND LAND CLASSIFICATIONS

SECTION IV: RELATIONSHIP OF POLICIES AND LAND CLASSIFICATIONS
After the Land Classification System is developed, the Coas-
tal Resources Commission requires each land use plan to relate the
Policy Section to the land classification map and to provide some
indication as to which land uses are appropriate in each class.
A. DEVELOPED AND TRANSITION CLASSES:
The Developed and Transition classes should be the only lands
under active consideration by a county or municipality for inten-
sive urban development requiring urban services. The area within
these classes is where detailed local land use and public invest-
ment planning will occur. State and Federal expenditures on pro-
jects associate with urban development (water, sewer, urban street
systems, etc.) will be guided to these areas.
As Ocracoke grows throughout the planning period, the pro-
jected development will take place in these areas. Appropriate
land uses will be residential, commercial and government and in-
stitutional. As is fiscally feasible, municipal services will be
extended or made accessible to these areas as growth and develop-
ment guides.
B. CONSERVATION CLASS:
The Conservation Class is designated to provide for effective
long-term management of significant limited or irreplaceable areas
which include wetlands, undeveloped shorelines that are unique,
fragile, or hazardous for development, wildlife habitat areas,
publicly owned watersheds and acquifers and undeveloped forest
lands and cultural and historial sites. In the Estuarine System,
development should be -restricted to water-dependent.uses such as
piers, bulkheads, marinas, etc. Policy Statements under Resource
Protection, and Resource Production and Management issues, for
both Ocracoke and the Mainland, address Hyde County's intentions
concerning the use of land within the conservation class.
102

The preparation of this map -was financially
aided through a federal grant from the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The
grant was made through the North Carolina
Department of Natural Resources and Comm unity J ��-
Development.
sp+inya i
Pant
cap
�hlst
LEGEND
RESIDENTIAL
CONUERCIAL'
�� 0 C oft� J GOVERUMENT
1� Le INSTITUTIONAL
UNDEVELOPED
v PAVED'
.-ROADC
UNSHAVED ROADU
}
1
dip
_-
_ MAP 3
LAND USE MAP
CAFE y1ASTERAS
UUHACOKE VILLAGE
myce COum-f b9moMod
- _ sas . nrsa vae
-- NOMH CAROLWA

�The preparation of this map was financially cap
aided through a federal grant from the National P0101
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The LEGEND
grant was made through the North CarolinaNOrinsr,
Department of Natural Resources and Community I ftnd
Development. � � ti;'•1►*�-?�,� :, , �� � • �, ✓ �
-� >z'`n�'i: ~ , / �� E DEVELOPED
OIJARD
TRANSITION
CONSERVATION
CIO
SILVER LAKE PAVED ROAD$
UNPAVED ROADS
4 .....
Point . . .. .
.7.
J
J.
W;F
yj X iz
J...W 4
J
.� ) �,• ,I -�"'� j
-_J S I-
.4. j I J.
j
S
EA
j, J,
SNORf
J. ir✓
j;)
-r-TERAS NATIONALNATIONAL%
cjLPE 14,
OCRACC3K
HYDE COUNTY
MAP 4
_LAND CLASSIFICATION MAP
E VILLAGE
0 t 1 7 NOM CAWxff"

XION3ddV

APPENDIX I _
PRON181TE0 AREA MAP
MOCKING BAY AREA HYDE COU14TY
W�50CKtNl K
Bs�
w
L
I � '
A,-"W
Ile
Ch
era&
t
No person shall take or attempt to take any oysters or clams or possess, sell, or offer for
sale any oysters or clams taken from the following areas,, at any time:
(7) (b) Wysocking Bay Are :'
.All those waters in Wysockinq Bay, upstream of a straight line drawn from a point
on the northeast shore at 350 26r 08" N - 760 031 10" W; thence across the Bay to
a point on the southwest shore at 350 25' 44" N - 760 031 27" W.
105

PROHIBITED AREA MAP
GELHARD AREA HYDF COHNi
�A -
Sti '
J
d
kl
PROHI SITEDCreeK `
A REAS�
PAMIICO SOUND
O F!
1.
S
Ole-
r,,. m usc 4G s*#- 8 9 7 3
4 ;~ Gibbs Pf. Oo o Y
S.
No person shall take or attempt to take any oysters or clams or possess, sell, or offer
for sale any oysters or clams taken from the following areas, at any time:
10. Middletown Creek Area:
In Far Creek, all those waters ypstream from a line drawn from the eastern point
of Gibbs Point at 350 29' 37" N - 750 57' 42" W, across Far Creek to a point 350
31' 2 1 " N - 750 57' 17" W.
9/29/72
106

PP01!1BITED SHELLFISif TERP.IT0PY
MIDDLETOWN CREEK AREA
Iarea 0-5
LiaeK Creek
(Rev.) 11/1'7ho
froil, U. S. C. ;i, maps
Creek
HYPE COUM
PA M L I C.0 5o Ut(:�
41 9 G b3 'r Y.
Ji
::o person shall take or attempt to take any oysters or clmns or posess, sell, or
offer'for sale, any oysters or clams taken -from -the following area, at any ti:.
Mdddletown (' .'eek Ay ea
All those.waters in h1iddletown Cree upstream from a _line beginning at
a point on the north shore at 350 281 20" N - 760 00' 08" W; thence in a
straight line to a point on the sou.-.sou.-.1 shore at 35' 28' 10" N - 760 00'
08" W.
f

No person shall take or attempt to take any oysters or clams or possess, sell, or. offer for
sale any oysters or clams taken from the following areas, at anv time:
Swaquarter Area
Inl��Swanqu.arter Bay:
Beginning at a point on land at 350 21+' 20T' N - 76020T 1+611 W; thence
in -southeasterly direction to a point at, Channel Marker AM,. 351 23"
55" �J - 760 20' 30" W; thence in an easterly direction "o a point on
the d.hore at 350 24' Ol" rr - 760 20' 16" W.
In Pose Bay:.
All �, hosa waters bounded by a line bagirn:in; at a point on the shore at
350 P61 16t1 11, 760 2/+' 3.0" W; thence 300 yards :�n a 1'S:i cliraction Eo a
poin, in -the Bay at 350 26, 10" N. 760 24' 1111 V; thence 825 yrrda in
a SSA: direction to a point in tine Day at 350 25' 52" N, 76e 2.3' 59" W
x , �
thence 300 yards RIB to a Point on. she short. a�� 351> ?_51 5.F" 1., 760 23_�' •
4.911 W; •thenec along the :ihore baclK to the point Ci i oullln ng. 108

M<<co
/
,/
RIVFR
vl f or d D}.
c,�tr
n
0
rl�
Cl. pick
00
pilot, at..
J""Mc
t
Scale
QCoo yds.
t�
c,
Q`
a
fir o7n CiSC4 6S . 1-131
F.ev. felt.' opr—
PROHIBITED SHELLFISH TERRITORY
W�JGHT & OYSTER CREEKS AREA P:. "�.:CO-9EAUFO RT-NYDE COUNTY
Arta- G-2 -o
t
2
�0
r". >XGt°3" sti
4
Scot.• ii W Jia a �,� _. -.. c
i
'i p g
Q�'�
R
-.d�s1 PbSPtticor` L
to lot ft.
W:i•N fi-
f! R
ti
i
f
f
fla..*0 FY.
rt
I
Rev. 8/14/80
�a:�,`Rev. 8-10-78 gh�
No person snaii take or attempt to take any oysters or clams or possess, sell, or offer
for sale any oysters or clams taken from the following areas, at any time:
• (8) (b) Wright Creeks ;rea:
All waters upstream from a straight line beginning at Grassy Pt. 35° 25' 31i"
N - 760 35' 14" W. thence through Channel harker "2" to the South Shore of
Wright Creek at 350 24' 48" N - 76° 35' 06-' W.
(9) (c) Oyster Creek Area:
All waters upstream from a line across Oyster Creek beginning at a point at 3 o 19/
32" N - 760 32' 53" W on the north shore; thence to a point at 350 19' 16" Ni - 760
32' 54" W on the south shore.
109

s
69/1
4*4 W" "Nis As t Ama tt AOS i " A }r M 4* tut r attq r1i ri rr�li +trs it rout er4rl104 6%
14=00 UP410i (WaW00)
V"Ir anyl ilAilt
1 1• 1 1 a 1 3 1 O l l 1 I I I I g 1

r
UNGO RIVER FORMATION IN NORTH CAROLINA

4
•
I
•
t i
i
f
EXPLANATION
----- - 500
Depth Below Mean Sea Level
1 of Base of Pungo River
Non -solid Lines Indicate
Extent of Underlying Units
e -Data Point �f
5 0 5 10 15 20
d �
MILES
scale, 1 r 500,000
Contour Interval a 50 feet i
Isolated Area$ are Outliers
i
_ I �•0016gQ5 00 ton l�F�t':Urt(�'v-A-tj •
30 1 76000' !
E PUNGO RIVER FORMATION IN NORTH CAROLINA
112

t
It
,v
L"A•
• pbe/ps
• 1
•� No w\.C-I i
Lokc
/ •T-3 OT-!
,� — 7 (%e
i • •y e C 10
3
i•1 \
i,T; 5
1'
s
a
i
EXPLANATION
• - Data Point
A - Auger Hole
C - Core Hole
i OT-011 Test Well V
P- Production Well (Water)
T-Test Well
A —A - Line of Section
Q - Well Used on Section
S O S t0 15 20
1 1
MILES
Scale 1,500,000
I
I I
/A ruirj I J ANU LINMO ur otu I wi4
113

• r oho ` - - - - - - - - - p-_-_-. '- _ J. _ _ �
— _ - ------ _--- _ h
�- - �!t
_-
A.
��Ir_ ; _ �. _ _ _ _ __ _ . (. ::t�:•. E -N._
=--_ _ -- _ _ -__
.�,s _ _ _�___ __ _ _____ _ _____ __ �- ter- _ • •=- ��•�
57
` - -7- - -
— --= v: _ 2�' EXPLANATION
- CARS HATE
75 25
— J _ 22 os
! CLAY— 75 j 50 25 SAND
250
Thickness of Pungo River
o-Dato' Point Used for Thickness
•-Dula Point Used for Thickness and Llthoto
PUNGO RIVER FORMATION
5 0 5 10 15 20
• 4 J ,
MILES
Scala, 1!500,000
Contour InIorval + 50 feet
t Isolated Afoot are outilere
760 00• 3
IN NORTH CAROLINA
114

I W A S H I N C1 1 .1 'I '1
E T O N
U N T Y ! C
_ f T Y E/ ! E l l (�
WK
Not
ZF
fi$ \ �,
P A M A
THE PREPARATION OF THIS MAP WAS FINANCIALLY O
AIDED THROUGH A FEDERAL GRANT FROM THE NATIONAL
c
OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION. THE
O
_WANT WAS MADE THROUGH THE NORTH CAROLINA (�
MPARTMENT.OF NATURAL RESOURCES AND COMMUNITY
�/ELOPYENT.
L
J
C
N'.
p •�
t�
m q C01fIlY tote MY`uCW��r
V
nE'Prf �
LEGEND
DEVELOPED
TRANSITION
COmVIO m
OUNAL
®
CONSERVATION
MAP 5
HYDE COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
LAND 'CLASSItICATION_ W",' "
1981
SCALE: - = 8,16
Ir
WAR ICA MAAONORt

W A 5 H I N GI T O N
e
o
Z
O
V
O 1
' -ro
7-
;fir
P A A/
N I V 6 •�
AL L
L �
0
THE PREPARATION OF THIS MAP WAS FINANCIALLY
AIDED THROUGH A FEDERAL GRANT FROM THE NATIONAL
OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION. THE
GRANT WAS MADE THROUGH THE NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF NATUF RESOURC:S %•I:
DEVELOPMENT.
L
I
\\\ C O
L Gala g
fa'f5'
WYESOCKINC O SAT
LEGEND
RESIDENTIAL
® COMMERCIAL
INDUSTRIAL
GOVERNMENTAL & INDUSTRIAL
® CULTURAL.ENTEATAINMENT,&RECREATIONAL
O UNDEVELOPED LAND
O
G FORESTLAND
"�—
AGRICULTURE
® WETLAND
Z
� BARREN
MAP 6
HYDE COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
LAND USE MAP
1981
SCALE: r B.DBG
l PW B1NG MMfS