Beach Access Plan-1982

4
a0
a°
oa
�7 p
CI
()CM LIBRARY
JUL 9 1982
y
DCM COPY DCM COPY
lease do not remove!!!!!
Division of Coastal Management
JOHN J HOOTON AND ASSOCIATES WILMINGTON, NC

•
•
FOREWARD
The continuing pressure for access to the shoreline from a growing leisure oriented
society requires that State and local governments take positive steps to mitigate the
conflict between oceanfront property owners and those seeking access to the shore.
This plan for Onslow County is such a step and represents an initiative by the County
toward planning for both its residents and visitors. Grateful appreciation is extended
to all members of the Onslow County Planning Department for their advice and assistance.
.The preparation of this plan was financed in part by a grant provided by the North Car-
olina Coastal Management Program, through funds provided by the Coastal Zone Management
Act of 1972, as amended, which is administered by the Office of Coastal Zone Management,
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
JOHN J HOOTON AND ASSOCIATES WILMINGTON, NC

L-'
� M
•
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
1.0
Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. 1
1.1 Purpose and History of the Beach Access Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . 1
1.2 Scope and Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . 3
2.0
Legal and Policy Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . 4
2.1 Federal and State Policies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . 4
2.2 Legal Tools for Beach Access Acquisition and Preservation . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . 6
3.0
Guidelines for Planning and Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . 12
3.1 Planning and Location . . . . . . . . . . . . .
12
3.2 Facilities. . .
13
3.3 Design. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . 14
3.4 Legal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . 15
4.0
Surveys and Projections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. • • • • • • • . 17
4.1 Physical Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . 17
4.2 Summary of Survey and Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . 17
4.3 Legal Status. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . 18
4.4 Projections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . 20
5.0
Summary and Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . 23
5.1 Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . 23
5.2 Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . 26
Bibliography
JOHN J HOOTON AND ASSOCIATES WILMINGTON, NC

1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 PURPOSE AND HISTORY OF THE BEACH ACCESS PLAN
The issue of public access to the beach arises for several reasons. The first is
demographic --that is, the Nation's population is becoming more and more concentrated
in coastal areas. Over 70 percent of the U. S. population is within 70 miles of the
coast (including the Great Lakes) and SO percent within 50 miles. The attractive-
ness of the beach as a recreational resource inevitably results in a demand for ac-
cess by the public. A second reason is legal. While the public owns the beach from
the mean high water mark seaward (actually it is held in trust by the State for its
public beneficiaries) from the mean high water mark landward is owned privately. The
following illustration describes.the typical pattern of beach ownership in North
Carolina and shows how the access problem arises.
PUBLIC PRIVATE PRIVATE PUBLIC PRIVATE
Ocean Wet Dry Upland Road It
.Sand Sand n
i
JE
\ \\
JOHN J HOOTON AND ASSOCIATES WILMINGTON, NC 1

A third reason is economic. Land prices of beach front property have accelerated
at a bewildering pace and the cost of providing access has increased correspondingly.
The U. S. Department of the Interior.estimated that in 1935 shorefront property
could have been purchased for $9,000 per mile, in 1955 for $110,111 per mile, and in
1975 at 1.5 million.dollars per mile. Today, just four years later, estimates in
terms of cost per mile are probably meaningless because of the amount of development
that has occurred. In the Wilmington area of North Carolina per front foot prices of
beach property range from $500 to $1,000 and every indication is that these prices will
continue to climb. Onslow County, and its oceanfront lands, are in no way removed
from any of these issues. As a growing county, located in a growing region of the
State, the pressures of increased and improved public access to the beach have been
felt from local, State and Federal sources. The county has responded by initiating
a program to increase and improve public access on its oceanfront lands. The program
•
began with the construction of 18 walkover structures providing access over as well
as protection for the dunes. While this action is a promising beginning, continued
and expanded opportunities will be necessary to provide the quantity and quality of
•
access needed by Onslow County residents and visitors, and also to insure compli-
ance with State and Federal policies. Accordingly, application was made to the
N. C. Department of Natural Resources and Community Development --Office of Coastal
Management for a grant to plan for improvements at existing access points and new
JOHN J HOOTON AND ASSOCIATES WILMINGTON, NC 2

•
r�
L
points that may be needed.. The county was awarded the grant and this plan is the
result of that award.
1.2 SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY
The ocean's beaches are only one of the areas held in public trust by the State.
Equally important but not subject to the same degree of pressure and urgency are
the estuarine areas --specifically the marshes and sounds. These areas will
eventually require the same attention as the beaches and for the same reasons this
plan will center on access to the shore. The area to be encompassed by the plan is
generally known as West Onslow Beach, an area of the county bounded by the Atlantic
Ocean on the east, New River Inlet on the North, the Intracoastal Waterway on the
west, and Pender County on the south. The purpose of this plan is to provide for
improvements to existing access points and development of new ones that will serve
the needs of county residents and visitors for the next ten years. Development of
this plan has proceeded in the following steps analysis of legal and policy
requirements (Section 2.0), establishment of planning and design standards (Section
3.0), a survey and evaluation of existing conditions (Section 4.0), and recommenda-
tions for needed improvements (Section 5.0).
JOHN J HOOTON AND ASSOCIATES WILMINGTON. NC 3

2.0 LEGAL AND POLICY CONSIDERATIONS
2.1 FEDERAL AND STATE POLICIES
Two major policies -one at the State level and one at the Federal level --have signif
icance for local governments in beach access planning. The first is the Federal
Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 (P. L. 92-583), and the regulations promulgated
thereunder. This Act established the beginning of coastal management in the United
States by providing grants to States to develop their own coastal programs. North
Carolina's Coastal Area Management Act is a result of this law. The Federal Act
was amended in 1976 to require that each recipient State define the term "beach"
and provide a planning process for the protection of, and access to, public beaches
and other public coastal areas of environmental, recreational, historical, esthetic,
ecological, or cultural value. The implementing guidelines require that plans should
consider the supply of existing facilities, demand for future use, and the capability
of existing areas to support" increased access. In addition consideration should be given
to visual as well as physical access. In defining the term "beach" states were directed
to do so in terms of physical and public characteristics but at a minimum the definition
must be as broad as allowed under existing State laws and constitutional provisions.
To implement these regulations Section 315(2) of the 1976 amendments provided authority
to make grants for up to 50 percent of the cost of land acquisition. Unfortunately,
no funds have ever been appropriated.
JOHN J HOC TON AND ASSOCIATES WILMINGTON, NC 4

The Federal Act provided the impetus for the enactment of the North Carolina Coastal
Area management Act. Generally, CAMA provides that the public's opportunity to en-
joy the physical, esthetic, cultural and recreational qualities of the State's
shorelines shall be preserved to the greatest extent feasible. This general legisla-
tive directive was more clearly spelled out in the "General Policy Guidelines for
the Coastal Areas." These Guidelines defined the term "beach" as required by the
Federal directive, to extend from the mean low to the mean high water line and beyond
to where (1) the growth of vegetation occurs, (2) a distinct change in slope or el-
evation occurs, or (3) riparian owners have specifically and legally restricted ac-
cess above mean high water. Development shall not interfere with the public's right
of access where acquired through public acquisition. The most significant policy
statement places the major responsibility of insuring adequate access to public
trust lands and waters on local government, but to be assisted by State and Federal
governments.. While, the extent of Federal and State assistance to be provided is
far from clear it is apparent that assistance for other beach projects (such as beach
renourishment) will be denied unless adequate access is provided. Further, this
access shall include not only access rights but adequate identification and parking.
To receive State or Federal funds for beach access localities must also provide for
protection of the frontal dunes. Land use plans must recognize the need of provid-
ing access to all socio-economic groups.
JOHN J HOOTON ANO ASSOCIATES WILMINGTON, NC 5.

These two legislative acts --Federal and State --with their implementing regulations
and guidelines form the policy basis for beach access planning by local governments
in North Carolina. Their net effect is a transfer of responsibility from the Federal
level to the State level and ultimately to the local level for providing public ac-
cess. Other than the inclusion of access rights, identification, and parking little
indication is given as to how local governments will provide access or the extent of
Federal and State participation..
2.2. LEGAL TOOLS FOR BEACH ACCESS ACQUISITION A14D PRESERVATION
There are three general approaches to obtaining beach access -legislative, protection
and perfection of existing access, and acquisition of new access. Within these three
general approaches the options run from purchase in fee simple to condemnation of
access easements. There are excellent references available on this subject and only
those tools considered to be of possible use for West Onslow Beach will be considered.
acquisition of fee simple interest - Purchase of fee simple title is the most direct
means of acquiring access but may also be an expensive method depending on the location
.and amount of land sought. North Carolina local governments are granted the authority
JOHN J HOOTON AND ASSOCIATES WILMINGTON, NC 6

rm
i
:m
to acquire real property in General Statutes 153A-158 and 160-11. Authority to pur-
chase property for parks and recreation purposes is granted in N. C. General Statutes
15A-444 and 160A-353. Purchase of a fee interest at the neighborhood scale would be
most appropriate for purchasing narrow strips for access to the beach or providing
limited parking. At a larger scale the fee simple purchase would most likely be
used to acquire a relatively large park for State or municipal use.
acquisition of less that a fee interest -easements - Easements, or the right to use
another's land in some specifically designated manner, may generally be acquired by
either purchase or prescription. Easements are most appropriate in acquiring walk-
ways from a public area, across a landowner's property to the beach. The primary
consideration in acquiring easements is to insure that the accessway leads from the
beach to an area accessible to the public. Thus, to be of use to the public, parking
of some sort must be available. Purchase of easements may be expensive or unavailable
but landowners may be persuaded to sell if they are allowed a reduction in property
taxes because of diminution in value. Another type of easement is the prescriptive
easement. This easement is acquired because of the continued use of the landowner's
property by some other party and the law will recognize that party's right to continue
JOHN J HOOTON AND ASSOCIATES WILMINGTON. NC 7

U]
that use. In the case of beach access the "other party" is the public. In many
beachfront communities, including West Onslow Beach, the public has continually used
certain areas to reach the beach. If such public use satisfies the requirements for
prescription, primarily as to duration of the use and prescription, then the public
has acquired a right to use that particular accessway irrespective of the desires of
the land titleholder. A prescriptive easement can be acquired only when it can be
shown that the use has been made by the public at large and to be legally recognized
must be established by litigation, followed by recordation of the encumbrance upon
title. The major stumbling block to establishing prescriptive easements in North
Carolina is the requirement of adverseness. Most cases have involved use of an access
road by a landlocked owner with adverseness won by a lack of overt permission. Thus
the use need not be hostile in the conventional sense, to be adverse. However if
permission is given by the servient owner the easement will be precluded and use of
vacant land is presumed to be with the permission of the owner.
land use controls - There are two basic tools that fall under the police power head-
ing available to local governments to acquire pedestrian access for the general
public. These are zoning ordinances and subdivision regulations. The simplest method
is to zone beachfront property recreational/residential with access provisions being
one of the requirements of the zone; this designation could apply to both commercial
JOHN J HOOTON AND ASSOCIATES WILMINGTON, NC 8

as well as residential uses. This approach has been utilized by Currituck-County
since October of 1971. Under that ordinance a Recreational Residential Zone requires
the provision of public accessways of not less than 10 feet in width, from a public
roadway to a recreation area, for each development involving more than 600 feet of
recreational resource (beaches or sounds) frontage. The authortiy for establishing
such requirements in local zoning ordinances exists under the zoning enabling leg-
islation for North Carolina counties, N. C. General Statutes 153A-340. This Section
states: Where appropriate, the conditions may include requirements that street and
utility rights -of -way be dedicated to the public and recreation facilities be pro-
vided. The question is whether the provision of beach access is an "appropriate"
situation for the imposition of requirements relating to recreational space and fa-
cilities. For the same reasonsdiscussed in the Introduction, a substantial case
can be made that the provision of access is "appropriate." The second land use
tool available to local governments is required dedication of roads to provide access.
Public access to beaches is afforded by requiring theextension of roads of rights -
of -way to the foreshore and dedication to the public. In application two require-
ments are necessary: (1) extension of all roads and rights -of -way not parallel to
,the beach down to the foreshore, and (2) public dedication of all such roads and
rights -of -way not parallel to the beach. The Currituck County ordinance previously
mentioned requires the extension of all roads and rights -of -way -not parallel to the
JOHN J HOOTON AND ASSOCIATES WILMINGTON, NC 9

Ui
[l
ocean down to the foreshore in all developments having a minimum of 600 feet of
frontage. The land Subdivision regulations adopted by the Town of Nags Head requires
public dedication of all roads in subdivisions developed within the Town-beachfront
and nonbeachfront. The authority for requiring such a dedication is contained in
N. C. General Statutes 153A-331 which states: A subdivision control ordinance may
provide for... the dedication or reservation of recreation areas serving residents
of the immediate neighborhood and of rights -of -way or easements for streets or utility
purposes. A third method directly related to the one just discussed is the required
provision of water access lots in new subdivisions. Generally, a municipality could
not require public dedication of an entire lot without just compensation. However,
there are two possible methods of achieving access without unreasonable cost to the
municipality or developer. First, dedication, through the subdivision control ordi-
nance, of water access lots could be required in any subdivision containing interior
lots; that is, access for the entire subdivision not the general public. While this
would provide access only to lot owners in the subdivision the municipality could
later acquire the lot through eminent domain if the need arose. Using the "before
and after" valuation method required in condemnation proceedings the cost of acquisition
would probably be relatively low due to the difficulty of transfer caused by the
many owners of the lot. The Carolina Beach Subdivision regulations require the
provision of water access lots for any subdivision adjoining the sound, the Cape Fear
JOHN J HOOTON AN13 ASSOCIATES WILMINGTON, NC
10

►�
•
•
L�
River, the intracoastal waterway, or the Atlantic Ocean if interior lots are in -
eluded. Lots must be a minimum of ten feet in width and provided at the ratio
of one lot per 600 feet of frontage. Access lots must adjoin a public street and be
either dedicated to the general public or transferred in fee to interior lot owners.
JOHN J HOOTON AND ASSOCIATES WILMINGTON, NC 11

3.0 GUIDELINES FOR PLANNING AND DESIGN
The following guidelines are based on several assumptions and concepts concerning
the planning and design of beach access points. First, access is intended only for
foot traffic, not vehicular, and includes adequate visual opportunity, parking,
legal protection, and modifications to accomodate persons of all ages and physical
capacities. Second, access is secondary or supportive of the recreational activity.
It is primarily a means of reaching the recreational area and is not intended for
active uses such as camping or picnicing.
3.1 PLANNING AND LOCATION
location near customary use area — Wherever possible access sites should be located
near or at areas that are normally used by the public if conflict with other planning
and design standards can be avoided.
avoid endangered species - The habitat, breeding or nesting areas of endangered or
rare plant, or animal species should be avoided.
dune height - Areas where the dune height is so low that the beach is visible from the
road or parking area should be avoided. This will encourage the use of walkovers and pro-
vide an opportunity for low or damaged dunes to rebuild. Slightly higher dunes (10 - 15
feet) will discourage climbing and increase visual opportunity. Lower areas may have to
be used as points selected for handicapped modifications to insure adequate ramp slopes.
JOHN J HOOTON AND ASSOCIATES WILMINGTON, NC 12

rM
L
r-ML
0
:_M
9
0
connection to public areas Access points must be provided directly from an area
open to the public such as a road or park.
sight distance - Where possible, adequate sight distances should be provided between
entry or parking areas and intersections or curves - a minimum line of sight of 300
feet of the entry should be provided in either direction..
required points - At lease one access point should be provided for each 1,000 users
using the average (not peak) seasonal population as a base. Parking for 120 cars
per 1,000 users should be provided within 100 yards of the walkovers structure.
These guidelines assume a visitor time of 3 hours, 2.5 persons per car,.and peak
usage of one-third or approximately 300 persons at any one time.
spacing - Access points should be located every one-half mile where feasible.
handicapped modifications - A minimum of one access point with handicapped modi-
fications (see 3.3 Design) should be provided with one additional such point per
20 standard points.
3.2 FACILITIES
bike racks One 10-bike rack should be provided at every other access point and at
all points with improved parking lots. Racks should be either located out of the
parking area or protected by ties or bollards.
JOHN J HOOTON AND. ASSOCIATES WILMINGTON, NC
13
LM

•
[7
r]
litter receptacles - Two 20 gallon enclosed receptacles at access entry and one 20
gallon receptacle at steps of walkover on oceanside. Pickup should be a minimum of
3 times per week during -peak season.
signs - Identification signs should be placed at entry from highway at steps of
.walkover on ocean and landside. Wooden signs are recommended for esthetics. Signs
should be 24" x 36" on 4 x 4 posts at a' heights. Signs should be double -sided with
the faces toward the direction of foot or vehicular traffic. Information signs
(concerning safety, surfing, litter) should be posted at walkover steps.
bathroom facilities - Recommended only in high use (over 1,000 visitors per day)
areas.
sand fences - Recommended for all walkover structures. Thirty feet of 4' high fencing
with posts every 10 feet on each side of walkover. Place on dune ridge.
3.3 DESIGN
The guidelines that follow consist of designs for a typical beach access point and
construction of a dune walkover. These are only guides and the specific design for
any access point must be matched to the site as well as legal and financial realities.
The following modifications for handicapped visitors should be provided at at least
one access point and at one additional point per 20 standard points.
JOHN . J HOOTON AND ASSOCIATES WILMINGTON, NC 14

0 0 •
ATLANTIC OCEAN
LITTERle ® ACCESS SIGN
W.
,dl.• .IV ,111,, - ..Ili. ,,II//., ..\I/�• ,.v, .•l. a ,. �� ..r. � .11r. arr. ,,1,, .1 ..
M.
11{b,•\ ,Illy,. ,I •71 :, .dlr, .dl(r,• ,II(!.. ,\ .. .Ilr• .,I r. r dr., ,,ui ,H,•. .�I/i. .dli
,Ir .Ilup, ..Ir. all/r. ..114r. .dlr. .•1r...�r ..\I/ lii., •.\1L,, Ir.. ..1/,. .,Nr.. .';1'• ,b. dL ` ..d/,, , /.,\
/., , ,11 L• .II/.. . t
' .lrl. .111l,. Il%r. .,L .I\11,. ..\l. .NII•: ..11 /.. �\ .11r. P14, .dl .. ..Vf, f. IL, .d!•, ..1
,1lr. ,' sooting
.IIL•, , •i1 >\I/, ..\l., ,•11/G. .I7r.,ar ,,11
,ar. •ting. ..Ir..
.dry,. II ,. Ir•,
,,l/,,• ..u, 4,...\116, .•d/i. .Ili.. ,Ilba .Ua /,w,� ,•b .d/.
sand fencing fsecing ' ptional deck.extensions 1f'''.,v,.''r'' :�1,'10--- r
ara,
•---,:►r,,=--�= �_ required for handicapped_
access poin
�Sr— • �^ •.
ts 1 .,1v, dr,, E, Iva• aw
11i. . .
1 ,\►rr,. a lu/, a/.
J/am-30 Ir,, ,Iv, .dr,, 11,.,
,/.. ,.Illy, ..\/,,
• .,1l:I L, .. r alir. ., . ., 4. •dlq. .a; .11 fr. a1
.d/•
.all,.;.. .Y{/J,•.1l,, .al/r. ,.111 � .nl•• II,. • „1/. ,II/ •' .,1
14...d..featinglZ u/,
IIf., •,1/• .,11 .11/r ..,11i ,,1/,. .dl/i .11 ,, .,\I! 4., ,.d/.. `. .,Illy • .,I/..
d/,. ,11•. •Ii4, ,J14,11/,. 11, ,III/. .II.. .AI/r...,.11/i .,II/, ar., .,lur, ,Ilrr., aL. .di .. •, ., ,Ivc I
111f,, v,,. ,r.. ,II/. .,li. ar/•, .Af.,
�,�,
d14. li .al/i, .111,. all.11 \/C .11�• 8�
'r•. a�b,. ,d[• .d/y •al.. Ili dtT,, 1// ram IJr...Ir.. ,,11i., •.Ir. 11/,, �.
PIlfi, .II/,,. .,Hr•, IL.
,,,.,�.It� .�."''. .dl/..,\l,,I/,�llr.• .III/� ,d1if., .,111,E .,v,• .dh,.,111/.. .,IL.ar,•.d7r,. ..aL, .a/,.dL, .a/.• .,1/.
1Ua ..11l,. .,1/,. •..,Ir,,. .IIf,.
4, .If
.d, r•.. u,, d.. .0
steps
} r
border
plantings
concrete
walk
� c
S
f 1 1
�•• ./•4A�i i� 54n
p'110�
AA'yei
J, .l
LITTER cgs
INFORMATION
f` '• t
SIGNS
C•.c'.i.er..ti.�saVS
ev
/
V V
RIME
HANDICAPPED PARKING
14=6 SPACES
standard 9'spaces
IIIIII IIIII
1�' ��.�,.., :;,•.::r� :raised median ENTRY (� %y:.. -,, •tiJ
®
PUBLIC ROAD ACCESS SIGN
SITE DESIGN FOR BEACH ACCESS POINT
ONSLOW CO BEACH ACCESS PLAN JOHN J HOOTON &.ASSOCIATES

Lv
Typical Beoch Profile
g' •bexisting
profile
co
4each
•
EXISTING DUNE
Storm Profile
Expected during a storm
—
CREST LINE
R/W
Varies
Varies
Varies
a
as Required
as Required 7
.as Required
nr
N
L
•
Seclonl-A Se �onh6
rr
Sect��nl-C
t
"
J
m
Pedestrian
Barrier
o
N
o
(Fence)
•
Note: Sections of Dune
Walkover structure should
be planned to the specific
profile of the area for
which it is desired.
Mg.I TYPICAL
PLAID and
ELEVATION VIES
Scale:
I" = 2d
--

Section 'I -A -Lands/de Section l-B - Deck Section /-C - Seoside
This Dimension Vries Depending M This Dimension Varies ' This Dimension Varies
Dropoff Beh nd Dune Depending on Width Depending on Dropoff in
of Dune Front of Dune Crest
Typical +/ p'
Beach
•
-
Refer tom
�Rarr�v Detail
;� .
e
O
1
%P�r�o�filje
7,- O„
7,_ 0„
6 - B„
to Typicottfo
Typical
to Typical
j
p
•
Fig.2 TYPICAL SECTION No. I
.E
MSL
Scale 1 = 5�
`
.
Note: Place steps on beach side
Beach Storrs Profile
o
to level of maximum beach
(Maximum Expected Recession)
•
recession during a severe
storm or tropical purr/cone

2 x 8
Trim
I/2"x 12 "Hex.
Excos,
- - -
bolts wlth Nuts
' --
on Bdt
i
Q hashers
_ (head countersunk) ,.
5, O„
Y
_
O
P
a
2 x 10 x 7' ✓olsf
2 x 6 x 6Dock'
2 x 10 Splice Board
Nallad
2 Ea. 1/2" x 12
Connection
Hex. B olt s wlth--<
Nuts a hashor
t_,2xlOx7'Stringor
x
2 x 10 Spllco Boards
2 x 10 x 6'
Bents, •
.
.0
_O
in
1 �
0a
CO'
Fig-3 TYPICAL SECTION I--B DECK
Sc a I e I I"_`011

�6" 0. D. Pile
7`_ On
\`V yL -
.�
2X0eck
,, Stringer
2lox / 0 _
SN
Notch Stringers in
Field to Rest On -- --
Bents
1/2" x 12"
Hex Head Bolts 2"x10"Bent!
------ - w Nuts B Washers
2x /O" Bents
Fig-4 TYPICAL RAMP DETAIL
Scale: I"= I'_ 0

2 x6
Deck
--- 6'-8" = 80" = 8 Steps /Section
01
Tread 2 x lO
2 x lO
Stringer _- ---_
2x1 O \\
Bents
2x 14 _ 112x 12"
Stringer ® Hex. Bolts
w/ Nuts B
6 Q Pile ® Washers
t
2xlO
Bents
JIJVI�
6 ,_ 8 to Pilings
Fig.5 TYPICAL STEPS DETAIL
Scale : I "= I'- 0"

LIM
7-0 Varies
7L O" Varies 7 $- o " Varies 6'-- 8"
Stringer Dimensions
---
A
-B
_2 x_ 10 x 7' ---- -
! "
C
_2x
2 x 10 x 8"
D
2 _x-1G'._ x 7'- 0"
E
2 x 10_ x 7_- 3"
F
2 x 14 x 9'-0" notchod for stt?P3
G
2 x 14 x _8'- 6" notchod for stun
H
2 x 14 x 8'- 9" notchod for stops
/
Sont_.Oimension
-_ 2 — � ..
S llce Dimonslon
K
Note.. Bill of Materials based on ramp
length of :21; deck lenc� th of 28' and 2
stair sections of 6'-8peach.
Fig.6 TYPICAL STRINGER LAYOUT DETAIL
Scale I " _ 50��
l J'
1JTL
l
Deck/Steps Steps
Note: All splice blocks to be nailed
to stringers to provide both lateral
support at joints and bearing support..
All pile bolted connections to be lit"
x12"hex. bolt with nut and washers.
B'
®von.
Item - Description
44
2 x 6 x 20'
drossed _
9
2 x 8 x 20'
dressed
5
2 x lox 20'
dressed _-
19
2 x 10x 2'
r i h
3
2 14 x 20'
rough
-x
—
100
Wk 12" hex. bolt trlth nut and rrashors
•

handicapped modifications *2 percent of total spaces reserved for handicapped.
*Handicapped spaces marked with international symbol
for handicapped and located immediately adjacent to
ramp or hardsurfaced walkway; spaces should be a min-
imum of 12' - 6' in width.
*Bollards, posts and other barriers to wheelchairs or
persons with walking aids should be removed.
*Dune walkovers should.have maximum slopes of 1:8
(12.5%) with steps eliminated or a ramp by-pass con-
structed. The transition from walkway to dune walkover
should be smooth and continuous.
`Walkovers should have a minimum of a 100 square foot
deck at top of structure.
*Highway entry sign to access points with handicapped
modifications should include the international symbol
for the handicapped.
3.4 LEGAL
The best planned and designed access points will be of little use unless the public's
right to use the points is adequately established. The basic standard is that the
general public.have an unrestricted right to travel from an accessible publicly
owned area (such as a park, parking lot, or road) to the beach. Section 2.0 consid-
ered several methods of acquiring these rights. The most important consideration is
that the.type of right to access be long term or perpetual and that the public,
JOHN J HOOTON AND ASSOCIATES WILMINGTON, NC 15

a public or governmental agency, hold title to the right. The most desirable
through P g g Y� g
protection is fee simple ownership through donation, dedication, condemnation or pur-
chase. If fee ownership cannot be obtained•permanent or long term (50 to 100 year)
partial interests such as easements or rights -of -way are the next best alternative.
Any type of ownership in which the general public's right of access can be revoked
or withdrawn is undesirable.
JOHN J HOOTON AND ASSOCIATES WILMINGTON, NC 16

f
0
4.0 SURVEYS AND PROJECTIONS
4.1 PHYSICAL CONDITI014S
In 11arch of this year a survey was conducted of the improved access points (those
with walkover structures) and the unimproved points (those currently being used by
the public but owned privately). The Guidelines set out in Section 3.0 were then
applied to evaluate the adequacy of each point not only for physical condition and
design but for level of legal protection. This survey and evaluation forms the base
for the recommendations included in this Section and Section 5.0. The following maps
identify the points surveyed and include recommendations for physical improvements.
4.2 SUMMARY OF SURVEY A14D RECOMMENDATIONS
All of the existing points have the similar deficiences and require similar improve-
ments. All lack adequate identification from the highway and at the land and ocean -
sides of the structures. Almost all lack sand fencing and considerable damage to the
dunes and wide breaches have occurred nearby. No litter receptacles are present at
any structure --land or oceanside. While three of the structures, points 2, 6, and
16 have extended decks none have adequate ramps or parking for the handicapped.
Points 2 and 6, because of the relatively gentle ramp grades, could be easily modified
by the addition of a stringer to widen the ramp widths to a minimum of 4 feet.
JOHN J HOOTON AND ASSOCIATES WILMINGTON, NC 17

LLi 1-1 i. " _.i_1_.1 �._L L...-
1
LL
1 ; i 1y u r, E - _ .- ........
r �..r_�..-..- •---j-..---+ter- �-.. �
2 �, 5
` POINTS 1 THROUGH 5
� I
EVALUATION: ALL WALKOVER STRUCTURES ARE IN GOOD CONDITION, WITH THE
EXCEPTION OF POINT 5 WHICH HAS MISSING AND DAMAGED RAILINGS. WITH THE
EXCEPTION OF POINT 1, ALL LACK ADEQUATE FENCING, PARKING, LITTER RECEPTACLES
AND IDENTIFICATION ON OCEAN OR LAND SIDES.
RECOMMENDATIONS: IDENTIFICATION SIGNS ARE NEEDED AT ENTRY POINTS FROM
HIGHWAY AND AT STEPS OF ALL WALKOVERS ON OCEAN AND LAND SIDES; ONE 20
GALLON LITTER RECEPTACLE SHOULD BE .PROVIDED ON BOTH LAND AND OCEAN
SIDES; ROAD SHOULDERS SHOULD BE WIDENED AND FIRMED TO ACCOMODATE A
MINIMUM OF 5 CARS AT EACH STRUCTURE. THE LOOKOUT AT POINT 2 SHOULD BE
l MODIFIED AS SOON AS POSSIBLE TO ACCOMODATE THE HANDICAPPED, IN ACCORD
WITH TH&STANDARDS FOR HANDICAPPED INCLUDED IN SECTION 3.0. DAMAGED
RAILINGS AT POINT 5 SHOULD BE REPAIRED.
ONSLOW COUNTY BEACH ACCESS PLAN
EXISTING CONDITIONS SURVEY MARCH IS7S
-1 INCH = 400.+ ' OF 6

210
__ ICI _LjL_LLj_LL --- L_j_L
WINTER 1\1
POINT
EVALUATION: STRUCTURE INCLUDES A DECK EXTENSION FOR OBSERVATION AND IS IN GOOD CONDI-
TION. THERE IS A TIE-IN BY AN ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNER ON THE NORTH, WHICH IS ENCOURAGED
TO MINIMIZE DUNE DAMAGE BY PROPERTY OWNERS. PARKING, IDENTIFICATION SIGNS ON OCEAN AND
LAND SIDES, AND LITTER RECEPTACLES ARE ABSENT; NO FENCING.
RECOMMENDATIONS: ROAD SHOULDERS SHOULD BE WIDENED AND FIRMED TO ALLOW PARKING FOR A
MINIMUM OF 10 CARS. IDENTIFICATION SIGNS FROM HIGHWAY 210, AT STEPS, AND ON OCEAN SIDE
SHOULD BE ERECTED. TWO LITTER BARRELS SHOULD BE PLACED ON THE LAND SIDE AND ONE ON THE
.00EAN SIDE.
THIRTY FEET OF SAND FENCING SHOULD BE ERECTED ON EITHER SIDE OF THE WALKOVER.

POINTS 7 THROUGH 9
EVALUATION: ALL STRUCTURES ARE IN GOOD CONDITION, BUT BECAUSE OF LACK OF FENCING, ALL
'♦ POINTS HAVE DUNE DAMAGE AND BREACHES ON BOTH SIDES. HEAVY SAND INHIBITS PARKING AT ALL
POINTS, PARTICULARLY POINT 9. NONE HAVE IDENTIFICATION SIGNS OR LITTER RECEPTACLES.
J RECOMMENDATIONS: BECAUSE OF THE WIDE AREA BETWEEN THE ROAD AND THE TOE OF THE FRONTAL
lli DUNE, POINT 9 SHOULD BE CONSIDERED FOR FURTHER DEVELOPMENT, PARTICULARLY PARKING. CON- f
SIDERATION SHOULD. BE GIVEN TO ACQUISITION OF ENOUGH SPACE ON EITHER SIDE FOR PARKING UP
TO 50 CARS, THIS WOULD REQUIRE APPROXIMATELY 20, 000 SQUARE FEET. AT A MINIMUM, THE
SHOULDER SHOULD BE WIDENED AND FIRMED AT ALL POINTS; IDENTIFICATION SIGNS ERECTED ON
HIGHWAY 210, AT THE WALKOVER STEPS (OCEAN AND LAND SIDES) ; AND LITTER RECEPTACLES PLACED
ON THE OCEAN AND LAND SIDES OF THE STRUCTURES. THIRTY FEET OF SAND FENCING ON BOTH
SIDES OF EACH STRUCTURE SHOULD BE ERECTED.
i.
I
� I

1�
•
cn
U)j
N
OLD SETTLERS BEAD 10 11 12
13 14
SE
y - POINTS 10 THROUGH 14
EVALUATION: ALL STRUCTURES ARE IN GOOD CONDITION, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF POINT. 10 WHICH T L
HAS MISSING PLANKS AT THE BEGINNING OF THE RAMP. PARKING IS DIFFICULT AT ALL POINTS DUE
TO DEEP SAND; LITTER RECEPTACLES, IDENTIFICATION SIGNS AND SAND FENCING ARE ABSENT AT
ALL POINTS. DUNE DAMAGE AND BREACHES HAVE OCCURRED AT ALL POINTS. I
1 t
RECOMMENDATIONS: MISSING STEPS AT POINT 10 SHOULD BE REPLACED. ROAD SHOULDERS SHOULD
BE WIDENED AND FIRMED AND CONSIDERATION GIVEN TO EXPANDED PARKING FACILITIES (25 TO 50
CARS) AT POINT 10. SAND FENCING (30 FEET ON EACH SIDE OF ALL STRUCTURES) SHOULD BE ERECTED,
LITTER RECEPTACLES PLACED ON OCEAN AND LAND SIDES OF EACH STRUCTURE, AND IDENTIFICATION
SIGNS ERECTED ON HIGHWAY 210 AND AT THE STEPS TO EACH STRUCTURE ON LAND AND OCEAN SIDES.
ONSLOW COUNTY BEACH ACCESS PLAN
t
i
EXISTING 'CONDITIONS SURVEY MARCH 1979
I INCH = 400. 4 OF 6

EVALUATION: ALL WALKOVER STRUCURES ARE IN GOOD CONDITION; POINT 16 HAS A DECK EXTENSION
Z
1 `! �i AND COULD POSSIBLY BE MODIFIED FOR USE BY THE HANDICAPPED. WITH THE EXCEPTION OF POINT 16,
ALL LACK SAND FENCING. ALL, INCLUDING POINT 16, LACK IDENTIFICATION SIGNS, LITTER RECEPTACLES ,
i AND ADEQUATE PARKING.
RECOMMENDATIONS: BECAUSE OF THE DECK EXTENSION, CONSIDERATION SHOULD BE GIVEN TO
• MODIFYING POINT 16FOR USE BY THE HANDICAPPED. SAND FENCING (30 FEET ON BOTH SIDES)
j SHOULD BE CONSTRUCTED AT ALL STRUCTURES. LITTER RECEPTACLES SHOULD BE PLACED ON
LAND AND OCEAN SIDES OF EACH STRUCURE, AND IDENTIFICATION SIGNS SHOULD BE ERECTED ON
HIGHWAY 210 AND AT THE STEPS OF EACH STRUCTURE ON BOTH THE LAND AND OCEAN SIDES.

19
POINT 19
{ EVALUATION: THIS STRUCTURE IS IN GOOD CONDITION AND HAS AN OBSERVATION DECK. THERE IS iER
NO SAND FENCING, AND DUNE DAMAGE IS APPARENT. WHILE PARKING IS AVAILABLE IN THE KOA PARKING
LOT, THE PUBLIC'S. UNRESTRICTED ACCESS TO THIS AREA IS QUESTIONABLE BECAUSE OF PRIVATE
OWNERSHIP OF THE LOT.
RECOMMENDATIONS: SAND FENCING, IDENTIFICATION SIGNS, AND INITIATION OF ACTION TO INSURE
CONTINUED AND UNRESTRICTED ACCESS BY THE GENERAL PUBLIC.
i
I
i
i
i

•
•
•
0
Smooth, hard surfaced transition surfaces should be provided at the ramp base from
the road and handicapped identification signs should be erected at the highway and
at the base of the ramp. At least one hard surfaced parking space 12' - 6' wide
should be provided immediately adjacent to the ramp. The space should be protected
with ties and identified as reserved for the handicapped. All walkovers should have
30 feet of sand fencing erected on either side and at least one litter receptacle on
both land and oceansides. Identification signs should be erected on Highway 210
and also at the steps of each structure --land and oceanside.
4.3 LEGAL STATUS
In order to determine the legal status of the existing access points in the subdivi-
sions of Ocean City, Sea Haven, Old Settler's Beach and Winter Haven, an examination
of the Onslow County Tax maps and records was made to determine ownership and select-
ed deeds of contiguous property owners and the original development plats were
searched for possible restrictive covenants. The Onslow County tax records show no
ownership of any of these areas in any of _the above subdivisions. In the Old Settler's
Beach subdivision the original developer, Carolina Foods, Inc,., included several deed
restrictions but none either restricting or protecting beach access (see, deed book
368 at page 202 for sample deed). The original plat to this subdivision mentioned
no restrictions but did show 20 foot walks at the existing access points (see Plat
JOHN J HOOTON AND ASSOCIATES WILMINGTON, NC 18
7

C'
�M
J
L]
Book 9, page 70). The remaining subdivisions showed no restrictions in the plat
books (Winter Haven --Plat Book 7 at -page 69, Ocean City --Plat Book 8 at page 48,
Sea�Haven--Plat Book 3 at page 38) or any restrictions in the deeds of owners with
contiguous land. In summary.it appears that while there has been no formal dedication
or transfer of ownership to the public, no restrictions in either the original plats
or deeds of nronerty owners exist. It thus annears that the accessways and connect-
ing streets were intended to be for the use of both the general public as well as
property owners in the subdivision. A second problem and potentially more serious
is the possible loss of access to the walkover structures because of abandonment of
the old N. C. 210 right-of-way by the N. C. Department of Transportation. Upon
abandonment the right-of-way reverts to the original property owners who may then
build upon it. Several houses -:are already completed with several more under con-
struction. Due to some inconsistencies in N. C. DOT highway maps the exact location
of the abandoned areas is difficult to determine. However, the following map
gives some indication of the extent of the problem. An additional segment, not shown
on the map, was abandoned several years ago before the most recent relocation of 210
to its more inland location. This is the 2.8 mile segment from the Pender-Onslow
line to the beginning of the most recent project. According to DOT plans all of the
old N. C. 210 right-of-way was abandoned. This road is now known as Shore Drive
JOHN J HOOTON AND ASSOCIATES WILMINGTON, NC 19
I

�. r 1553 t �,
Aw
m El
ra mN][
�r p,
Tr
14
1528 (210, s
1518
IStB 1529 r N ABANDONED
1531
r
6,tI 1544 rl ,
� rr
1544 1� . 1545 ,11530 ►r
1531 r, 7
r,
.1,0. ASH
• ISLAr
1534 �1
Thomas i 52$
f+ Lunding !J ABANDONED
:emu
1535
• - i U O ,
1534 /� D
,`Q � 52 iS83
1567
1537
Belhen
Morris 153R r,O.
landing
ABANDONED
i �r
b 1538 �� Q
1540 r i
�t
rI
PORTIONS OF OLD 210 RIGHT-OF-WAY
l--� ABANDONED BY N.C. DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
•P �
.o
• J)

� M
�m
•
}
Apparently the only reason construction has not taken place in this right-of-way
f
is that lots were originally laid out on either side of the highway and no right-
of-way was taken through the middle of any property. However, this right-of-way would
also have reverted to its original owners which in this case would probably be the
original developer that laid out the subdivision. The net result is that a consider-
able portion of shoreline (approximately 6 miles) has-been effectively closed to the
general public because of the loss of access from the old 210 rights -of -way; and, a
considerable portion at the remainder of the shoreline from SR 1568 south to the
county line has either been lost or has a questionable legal status because of
abandonment.
4.4 PROJECTIONS
To effectively plan for the expected future population estimates are required. A
precise projection of the user demand for access points is beyond the scope of this
plan, but "a figure reliable enough for planning purposes may be intuitively derived
using population projections for Vest Onslow Beach that were included in the Onslow
County Land Use Plan. The following table shows these projections.
JOHN J HOOTON AND ASSOCIATES WILMINGTON, NC 20

POPULATION PROJECTIONS -WEST ONSLOW BEACH
AVERAGE PEAK MAXIMUM
DATE PERMANENT---, SEASONAL SEASONAL 'POPULATION
1975 290 2,040 3,670 3,960
19a5 742 5,155 9,275 10,017
1995 1,430 9,827 12,869 19,299
The key projection is the average seasonal, not the peak seasonal or the maximum pop-
ulation. While these peak and maximum populations are significant in the design of
water and sewer facilities, it would not be cost effective to plan or design non-
critical facilities, such as access points, to these projections. The inconvenience
caused users at peak times (4th of July and Labor Day) does not justify additional
expenditures. By interpolation the 1990 average seasonal population is 7,491.
However, this figure is not representative of the user demand for public access
points since it includes overnight visitors and non-resident property owners who will
have parking facilities and may have access directly from their property. In addition
a portion of this seasonal population will seek access at private points such as
fishing piers and campgrounds. Based on field survey and interviews this figure
may be safely reduced by 25 percent to reach a maximum average seasonal population
with demand for public access of 5,625. If the occupant ratio of 2.5 persons per

car ds assumed, approximately 2,250 cars would need parking at some time during a 10
hour visiting period. If an average visitor's stay is approximately 3 hours the
maximum needed parking spaces'at-any one time would be 675 (2,250 : 10 hours x 3).
Thus for the year 1990 about 37 parking spaces per access point will be required
(675 18 access points). The conclusion is that while the number of points provided
is adequate to accomodate the expected foot traffic, parking spaces will fall con-
siderably short of the number required. At the present time not more than 10 cars
can safely park at any one walkover structure. Thus by 1990 at least 27 additional
spaces will be required. Even at present levels parking is inadequate. Using the
same methodology and assumptions the average seasonal population for 1980 is approxi-
mately 3,600C;• This generates a"demand for 1,808 cars or 18 spaces during peak visit-
ing hours. Thus even at present, or within one year, parking demand will be almost
twice existing space.
JOHN J HOOTON AND ASSOCIATES WILMINGTON, NC

i
i
t
5.0 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The recent construction of dune walkover structures at West Onslow Beach represents
a promising beginning but considerable improvements are needed to assure continued
quality public access. Several problems are apparent with the quality and quantity
of existing and needed access. First, there is no legally protected public access
North of the KOA campground. Second, the existing access points are poorly indenti
fied and there is a lack of adequate litter and parking facilities. No structures are
accessible to the handicapped because of narrow ramps. Third, the public's legal right
to unrestricted use of these areas needs to be resolved. The apparent lack of dedi-
cation of the accessways and abandonment of the old N. C. 210 right-of-way are potential
sources of conflict as the pressure for access to the beach increases.
5.1 IMPLEMENTATION
financing - Funds for improvements must come from eitherlocal or non -local sources.
WhileaAhe County should pursue all sources of Federal or State grants to assist in
financing, providing beach access should not be delayed if grants are not available.
There are three basic methods that North Carolina county governments may use to gen-
erate funds at the local level for beach improvement projects-- advalorem taxes, special
assessments, and county service districts. Advalorem or property taxes may be used
JOHN J HOOTON AND ASSOCIATES WILMINGTON, NC 23

�'
under a county's general taxing authority to make improvements or construct beach
erosion control and hurricane protection projects. Since the provision and main-
tenance at accessways has a major benefit ofprotecting the -frontal dunes which are
the first line of defense against hurricanes, this type of project would be eligible
for advalorem tax expenditures. Special assessments permit county governments to
assess property owners for projects on a front foot, valuation, or area basis;
however, if valuation is used as the assessment method only the value of the land,
without improvements, can be assessed. Further, no assessments can be levied until
the project is completed. Service districts permit the establishment'of special
taxing districts in which a tax in addition to the ordinary property tax is levied for
the purpose of providing services or facilities to a greater extent than provided
throughout the remainder of the county. Among the types of services and facilities
that may be provided under this legislation are beach erosion control and hurricane
protection projects, drainage projects., and off-street parking. However, services
must be provided.within a reasonable time after definition of the district, not to
exceed one year.
Presently, the most viable source of non -local funds for beach access improvements
appears to be the U. S. Department of Interior's Land and Water Conservation Fund
JOHN J HOOTON AND ASSOCIATES WILMINGTON, NC 24

Cl
administered by the Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service and the N. C. De-
partment of Natural Resources and Community Development. Under this program grants
are available to local governments to pay for up to 50 percent of the total cost of
recreation related projects. Under current guidelines the provision and improve-
ment of beach access is an eligible project. Under Section 315(2) of the Federal
Coastal Zone Management Act 50 percent grants are available to local governments for
the purpose of acquiring public access to beaches and other coastal areas. Although
funding was authorized for $25 million dollars per fiscal year through 1980 no funds
have ever been appropriated. Even though no appropriations have been made this program
has promise and should be closely watched for future appropriations. A third possible
source is the use of CETA funds. The source was utilized for the original construction
but due to the uncertain status of the CETA program in 0nslow County is should be
considered as a last alternative, if at all.
regulation - The most direct and inexpensive method of assuring beach access is
through land use regulation. Three different types of ordinances should be con-
sidered. First, the zoning ordinance should establish a residential access zone
requiring minimum access for developments within the zone. Second, the subdivision
regulations, when enacted, should provide for the dedication of public access as a
condition for final plat approval. Third, ordinances should be considered that
. L
JOHN J HOOTON AND ASSOCIATES WILMINGTONS NC 25

i
•
will prohibit any use of the dunes by pedestrian or vehicular traffic for access or
any other purpose except at designated public access points or approved private
points.
education and information - From the standpoint of dune protection and of utilization,
this is the most important of the three implementation methods. In addition to ade-
quate directional signs at appropriate points (land and oceanside of walkover, and
at main highway) information can be disseminated through such media as radio, tele-
vision, and brochures. Visitor "information points" could be developed with appro-
priate signs informing visitors of designated public access and various rules concern-
ing use of the dunes, litter, and swimming.
5.2 RECOHMDATIONS
existing access points - (1) all of the recommendations shown on the survey maps
in Section 4.0 should be completed as soon as feasible. Particular attention
should be given to the erection of identification signs at the intersection of
N. C. 210 and the road leading to the walkover. Double-faced signs at the ocean
and landside of the steps should receive second priority but should be erected as
soon -as possible. The walkovers at points 1, 2, 6, and 16 should be modified
to accomodate the handicapped in accordance with Section 3.0, Guidelines for Planning
Y vr1IY Y PfvY / Y/Y r IYV I I== WIVIVIIIVL7 I L.IIVI IV I.-
GV

:M
F-M
r,m
E
and Design. Road shoulders at all points should be widened and firmed and some
road maintenance should be undertaken on the portions of the old 210 right-of-
way used as access to walkovers.:
(2) The county should begin to take positive action toward asserting its dominion
and control over all existing access points and roads leading to them. Construction
of the walkovers is a first step and implementation of the recommendations above will
further indicate intent to preserve and protect this access for the public. Of par-
ticular importance is the erection of signs indicating that such areas are for public
access and the maintenance of access roads. An additional step thatcan be taken is
zoning of all accessways and roads to a "public access" zone in which the only use
permitted is'access by the public. The County Attorney's office should be consulted
for any additional steps necessary for perfecting the public's right of access to the
existing points from the new location of N. C. 210 and at the points themselves.
.(3) Three methods are suggested for implementation of the above recommendations.
First, The county can make application for a Land and Water Conservation Fund grant
through the Department of Natural Resources and Community Development. Some of the
costs, such as road maintenance, may not be eligible, and 50 percent of the total
JOHN J HOOTON AND ASSOCIATES WILMINGTON, NC 27
i

�_]M
project must come from local sources. Second, in lieu of, or in addition to, any
grants, the county can establish a service district encompassing the West Onslow
Beach area from the 210 bridge -south to the Pender County line. This may be parti-
cularly appropriate inlight of recent complaints concerning service levels in the area
and a proposed incorporation. An additional tax could be levied within the district
for road maintenance, dune protection (to include the recommended improvements at
accessways), and any facilities or services desired by residents. Third, a public
information program utilizing radio, television, newspapers, and brochures should be
conducted advising citizens of the availability and location of access points. A
brochure could be printed showing the location of access points and then distributed
to motels, piers, and other points open to the visiting public.
needed access -"(1) While the number of,access points provided is sufficient their
concentration entirely in the south portion of the beach may eventually deprive
the public of any access in the northern area --from the KOA campground to the New
River Inlet. Much of this area has already been closed off due to building in the old
210 right-of-way and development of the New River Inlet area. Additional access should
be provided at a minimum of 4 points between the N. C. 210 bridge and the inlet. These
points should be developed as soon as possible in accordance with the planning and
design guidelines in Section 3.0. At least one of these points should have handicapped
JOHN J HOOTON AND ASSOCIATES WILMINGTON� NC 28
i
i
MU

modifications and all should have parking for a minimum of 50 cars.
(2) The county subdivision regulations, as proposed, should be amended to require
the dedication of accessways to the public in all subdivision developments. Con-
sideration should also be given to zoning of access points and the existing 210
right-of-way to a -public access zone.
(3) The most feasible source of financing for the acquisition and development of
new access points is the Land and Water Conservation Fund grants discussed above
under existing access. Service districts or special assessments could be used but
because of the low population and lack of development would be difficult to apply
and generate relatively little revenue.
(4) An alternative to the acquisition and development of additional access in the
northern area in scattered locations would be the development of a county park in
the vicinity of the bridge. This could allow for additional recreational facilities,
provide more efficient maintenance and control, and should result in some economies
of scale in land acquisition; further, more and better parking could be provided and
damaged dunes along the road north would have the opportunity to recuperate.
s
JOHN J HOOTON AND ASSOCIATES WILMINGTON,WC 29
■

1
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Brower, D., Access to the Nation's Beaches, Legal and.Planning Perspectives, UNC-
SG-77-18, February,1978.
Brower, D. S., and Owens, D. W., Public Use of Coastal Beaches, Sea Grant Publi-
cation, UNC-SG-76-08, August 1978.
Methods of Financing Beach Preservation Projects for North Carolina Local Govern-
ments -Town of Wrightsville Beach, Department of Natural Resources and Com-
munity Development, September 1978.
N. C. Administrative Code, Title 15, Chapter 7, Coastal Resources Commission,
"General Policy Guidelines for the Coastal Area."
Onslow County Land Use Plan, Onslow County Planning Department, 1975.
Skinner, T. C., and Walton, T. L., Beach Dune Walkover Structures, Florida Sea
Grant Publication SUSF-SG-76-006, December 1976.
Standards for Outdoor Recreational Areas, American Society of Planning Officials,
Report No. 194, January 1965.
JOHN J HOOTON ANO ASSOCIATES WILMINGTON, NC