Estuarine/Shoreline Access Plan-1988

s?
DCM COPY
D CM COPY
lease do not remove!!!!!
Division of Coastal Management
ESTU,4R/NE/SHOf>'EL /NE
ACCESS PLAN
iP.4RUCO COUNTY, NORTf1 C,4ROUN.4
RIVER
Prepared By:
T. Dale Holland Consulting Planners
June, 1988

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
PAMLICO COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
ESTUARINE/SHORELINE ACCESS PLAN
PAMLICO COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Louise Muse
Patsy H. Sadler
Paul Johnson
Robert Paul
Nancy Smith
PAMLICO COUNTY PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
Odell Spain
Clifton Stowe
Frank Willis
David Simpson
Bob Cowden
Prepared By:
T. Dale Holland Consulting Planners
March, 1988
The preparation of this report was financed in part through a
grant provided by the North Carolina Coastal Management Program,
through funds provided by the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972,
as amended, which is administered by the Office of Ocean and
Coastal Resource Management, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration.

PAMLICO COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
ESTUARINE/SHORELINE ACCESS PLAN
TABLE OF CONTENTS
'
Page
'
I.
Introduction
and Purpose
1
II.
Inventory
and Analysis of Existing Sites
'
A.
General
3
B.
Analysis of Existing Water Access Sites
3
'
C.
Summary of Existing Sites
9
III.
Water
Access Needs: Existing and Projected Demand
A.
Population Overview
11
'
B.
User Analysis
13
C.
Minimum Access Needs
16
D.
Water Conditions
17
E.
Scenic/Natural Areas
17
F.
Future Site Development
18
G.
Priority Issues
22
H.
Site Facilities and Development Costs
23
I.
Operational and Maintenance Costs
25
'
IV.
Estuarine Access Policies and Implementation
Strategies
A.
Definition of Concerns/Issues
27
'
B.
C.
Policy Statements
Implementation/Work Schedule
27
28
TABLES
1. Summary Assessment of Existing Water
Access Facilities 9
2. Population Estimates for Pamlico County 11
3. Population Projections for Pamlico County 11
4. Subdivision Development Jan.185-Dec.187 12
5. Projected Minimum Acreage Needs: 2000 16
6. Inventory of Scenic and Historic Areas 19
7. Representative Beach Access Development Costs 23
8. Representative Boat Ramp Access Development Costs 25
i

Page
MAPS
1. Water Access Sites (Attached)
2. Development in Pamlico County (Attached)
3. Water Classifications & Depth Conditions (Attached)
4. Scenic Areas 19
APPENDICES
I. Questionnaire, Pamlico County Estuarine Access Survey
II. Land Acquisition Strategies
III. Access Funding Sources
- ii

TEN
GEORC
RIVER
O
co
Scale In Mile:
0 25 50 75 100
P�
PAM LICO COUNTY

' PAMLICO COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
' BEACH/WATERFRONT ACCESS PLAN
I. INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE
Pamlico County is one of Coastal North Carolina's major
water -oriented communities. It contains 151,000 acres of
water and 213,400 acres of land area. Much of the County's
'
economic base is directly related to its natural environ-
ment. Primary sources of income are food processing,
forestry, farming, fishing, and tourism. The long-term
protection of access to estuarine and shoreline areas will
be important.
This need has long been recognized. In 1974 the United
States Soil Conservation Service prepared the Appraisal of
'
Potentials for Outdoor Recreational Develo ment in Pamlico
County. This was o owe y t e preparation of the Pam ico
County Master Plan for Parks and Recreation in 1980. Most
'
recently, the Pamlico County Land Use Plan was updated in
1987. All of these documents recognized the increasing
infringement of development on shoreline areas and the
'
resultant decrease in public or quasi -public access areas.
As a recreation and open space policy, the 1987 Land Use
Plan stated the following: "Both the recreation Master Plan
and the previous County Land Use Plan have identified access
to the water as a critical and important recreational
resource for the County. In the future, the County will
'
work to expand water access points (for boating, swimming,
etc.). Future private development along the water should
also be required to incorporate, to the extent that this is
feasible, public access (or at least not foreclose opportu-
nities for public access). This policy is particularly
applicable to larger projects and developments."
'
The County goal of establishing and protecting estuarine
access is consistent with State policy. In 1981 and 1983,
the North Carolina General Assembly acted to create the
Coastal and Estuarine Waters Beach Access Program. This act
was based on the desire to provide North Carolina citizens
access to barrier island ocean beaches and estuarine shore-
lines. The program is administered by the Coastal Resources
Commission through the Division of Coastal Management. The
major purpose of the program is to assist local governments,
such as Pamlico County, in planning, acquiring, designing,
'
and constructing public access projects.

t t have i ,
Because Pamlico County does no h e any ocean shorelines or
barrier islands, this Plan will focus on estuarine, creek
and river access. Emphasis will be placed on protecting '
environmentally sensitive areas, while providing access
sites which will support tourism and local recreational
activities. This -Plan will consider both the number of '
sites required and their location/ease of access by the
public and will recommend priorities of acquisition basE:d on
survey results and availability. Finally, the need for '
access to points of interest, such as service or historic
areas, will be considered.
P
0
n
2

INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS OF EXISTING SITES
A. General
There are forty water access sites scattered throughout
Pamlico County. The sites are primarily informal loca-
tions, with most having at least some minor improve-
ments. The sites are used primarily for boating
access.
The North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission has two
(2) formal boating access ramps in the County, both with
parking. The non -State maintained boating access sites
in the County are located on private properties at the
ends of, or alongside, State road rights -of -way. They
normally do not have parking facilities or other
improvements. However, these facilities are common?y
recognized by the local citizenry as boating access
sites and utilized as such. There are also several
"private" access ramps in the County, usually, but not
always, restricted to property owners within a sub-
division or club.
Access sites were assessed by use and classified in one
of four categories:
1. N.C. Wildlife Access Ramps -- 2
2. Public/Informal -- 24
3. Private (i.e., use restricted) -- 7
4. Private - Fee (i.e., private with a fee charged to
the general public) -- 7
Map 1, "Water Access Sites," attached, shows the loca-
tion of all of the sites analyzed. A brief narrative
description of each site is presented in the following
section.
B. Analysis of Existing Water Access Sites
Site No. 1: Lees Landing. Access is provided by a
single lane dirt road and there is a 14' wide boat ramp.
The only improvement is some marl at the edge of the water.
The access is in poor condition. There could be a power
line right-of-way going through the site. The access rcad
parallels the power lines.
3

Site No. 2: Goose Creek. The site is accessed by a
two-lane dirt road. There is a 14' wide boat ramp with no '
improvements. It is in poor condition. There is a private
pier to the right of the boat ramp and a house to the left.
Site No. 3: Kennels Beach. A boat ramp is located next '
to a paved two-lane road, S.R. 1114. It is 12' wide and has
a pier at each side. The piers are 4' wide x 35' long; they
are built of treated lumber on creosote pilings. The boat '
ramp is in fair condition, and there is an area light for
night-time operation.
Site No. 4: Kennels Beach. This site provides public ,
beach access. There is a lumber bulkhead with a set of
concrete steps leading down to the river. It is in good
condition. There is a roped -off swimming area and a 6'x8' '
diving platform of treated lumber on creosote pilings in the
middle of the cordoned off area. At the end of the beach
access area, there are picnic tables, benches and trash '
cans, and three piers of treated lumber that appear to be in
fair condition.
Site No. 5: Beards Creek. A privately owned, two-lane '
dirt road access. There is a 9' wide concrete boat ramp
which is in fair condition. There is a pier of treated
lumber which appears to be in fair condition. Private ,
property and no -trespassing signs are posted.
Site No. 6: Bluffs Area, SR 1101. This is an unimproved '
beach access site. The shoreline rises 30 to 35 feet above
the waterline. There is not a dedicated public right-of-
way. '
Site No. 7: Camp Seafarer Beach, SR 1132. This is a
private restricted site with good improvements. The
facility provides both beach and boat access with a small '
marina.
Site No. 8: Minnesott Golf & Country Club. The concrete '
boat ramp is 12' wide and in good condition. It has a small
pier of treated lumber, and is next to a paved parking lot.
Site No. 9: Minnesott. This is an unimproved beach '
access site. The area appears to have quasi -public usage
without restrictions.
Site No. 10: Minnesott, Private Boat Ramp. There is a '
boat ramp constructed of lumber and it is in good condition.
There are signs posted listing prices for single use or
season use. '
4 '

F
Site No. 11: Minnesott. This site is the Minnesott Beach
and Yacht Basin. The facility offers both beach and boat
access. It is a private facility for use by members only.
Site No. 12: Camp Sea Gull. This is an improved
restricted private use facility. It provides both boat and
beach access.
' Site No. 13: SR 1304 Beach Access. This is a quasi -
public beach access site near a State-owned wooden bridge.
There is rip rap on the shore at both ends of the bridge.
' There are no improvements or signs indicating that this is a
public access.
Site No. 14: Boat Ramp at Janeiro. This facility appears
to be privately owned. There is some broken asphalt and
concrete pavement leading to ramp. The ramp itself is rough
concrete and is breaking up. The overall condition of the
site is fair. The site is not open to the public.
Site No. 15: Janeiro. This site is a grassy area with a
bulkhead and rip rap along the bulkhead. There are some
wooden stairs in fair condition leading to the water. The
rest of the area is in good condition.
Site No. 16: Wildlife Boating Access Area at Janeiro.
This ramp is maintained by the State Wildlife Division. It
is constructed of rough finished concrete and is in fair
condition. There is a small pier (41x501) built of treated
lumber on one side of the ramp. The boat ramp is approxi-
mately 15' wide. The access road is unimproved but in Rood
condition, and there is a parking area provided.
Site No. 17: Dawson Creek. There is a dirt boat ramp at
the end of S.R. 1306. It is approximately 9' wide and in
poor condition. Some asphalt has been dumped at the end of
the road, but it is in bad condition. There are two piers
at either side of the ramp, and both are in poor condition.
Access is limited by a barricade at end of road.
Site No. 18: Dead end of State Road 1310. This is a
beach access site with no improvements.
Site No. 19: Oriental. This is a small beach access
site. It is quasi -public; apparently available for use
without restriction.
5

Site No. 20: Lou -Mac Park. The park consists of a grassy
area with an area light, a drinking fountain, bulkhead with
rip rap, garbage can, and 2 service poles with electrical
supply panels. A privately -owned pier is located to the
left of site. There is not access to the water from the
park because of rip rap along the shoreline.
Site No. 21: Oriental Wildlife Boat Ramp. This site has
a large parking area, two concrete boat ramps about 12' wide
in good condition, and 3 small piers approximately 4' wide x
30' long built of treated lumber. An area light is provided
for nighttime operations.
Site No. 22: Boat Ramp at SR 1328. This is a privately -
owned ramp located beside Jims Paradise Shores Marina, with
a $3.00 ramp fee. The 12' ramp is constructed of concrete
and in good condition. There is a pier situated at each
side of the boat ramp. One side has a concrete overlay; the
other is treated lumber. There is similar concrete boat
ramp at the opposite end of the parking lot with a
"Keep -out, Private" sign.
Site No. 23: Day's Landing. This site is located on
Ball Creek. There is a concrete boat ramp approximately 15'
wide in good condition, with a treated wood bulkhead, two
piers, and an area light. It is privately owned, with a
$2.00 ramp fee.
Site No. 24: Bobby's Boat Landing. This is a privately -
owned concrete ramp in good condition, approximately 12'
wide. The site has floating treated lumber docks on either
side of the ramp and has gas service available. There is a
$2.00 ramp fee.
Site No. 25: Private Boat Ramp owned by Belva Radcliff.
There is a $3.00 ramp fee. The concrete boat ramp is adja-
cent to N.C. 55 at the east end of Bayboro city limits. It
is approximately 12' wide and in fair condition. There are
several private boats docked around the ramp. There is also
a pier of treated lumber at one side of the ramp.
Site No. 26: Old Ice House. This is an unimproved dirt
ramp. It is a deep water access point available to the pub-
lic for use without charge. The ramp is in poor condition.
Site No. 27: SR 1227, Bay River. This site is
at Petty Point. There are several private boat
ted at the end of Carrawan Road. These are not
the public.
located
ramps loca-
availble to
7
I

Site No. 28: Vandemere Boat Ramp. The site has a
' concrete ramp, approximately 10' wide and in fair condition,
at the end of a paved road. There is a small pier beside
the ramp in fair_ condition.
' Site No. 29: Boat Ramp at SR 1226. This site has a
dirt boat ramp at the end of S.R. 1226 with no improve-
ments.
'
Site No. 30: Gales Creek, Mesic. This is a dirt ramp
located next to NC 304. The ramp is unimproved and in very
poor condition. Boat access to Gales Creek is very diffi-
cult. It appears that there is very little usage of this
facility.
Site No. 31: Hobucken Marina Boat Ramp. This site is
located off of N.C. 33/304. There are 2 ramps; one approxi-
mately 15' wide, the other approximately 12' wide, con-
structed of rough finished concrete. The ramps are in fair
condition. There are facilities for fuel, food and
supplies.
'
Site No. 32: Mayo Fish Company. This site is located
at the end of SR 1240. The ramp is on the Intracoastal
Waterway. It is an unimproved dirt facility available to
the public for use without charge. There is a large dirt
parking lot adjacent to the ramp.
'
Site No. 33: Boat Ramp at SR 1228. This site has a
dirt boat with improvements.
ramp, no
Site No. 34: Part of the Goose Creek Game Lands. This
'
facility is owned by the N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission.
The access road is blocked with a bar gate. The site was at
one time leased for use by the forestry service. It is not
open to the public because of deed restrictions requiring
'
the State of North Carolina to continuously use the site for
the conservation of wildlife.
'
Site No. 35: Boat ramp at S.R. 1232. This site has a
private ramp. There are "no trespassing" signs and a locked
gate.
'
Site No. 36: Fulford Point. This site is located at
Earl Sadler's Marina. There is a boat basin with dirt ramp
for access. The ramp joins SR 1233. The ramp is unimproved
'
and in poor condition.
Fi

Site No. 37: Caroon Brothers Seafood. This site has a
concrete boat ramp. It is approximately 12' wide, in good
condition.
Site No. 38: Boat ramp at SR 1235. This site is loca-
ted about two tenths of a mile from Caroon Brothers Seafood.
It has a $3.00 ramp fee. Concrete has been poured at the
ramp but is in poor condition.
Site No. 39: Boat Ramp at Spring Creek on SR 1327.
This is an unimproved dirt ramp located on the edge of the
SR 1327 right-of-way.
Site No. 40: Alligator Creek Bridge. This is a quasi -
public boat ramp located adjacent to the Alligator Creek
Bridge. The ramp is in poor condition; primarily dirt with
some broken asphalt. There is not any parking area and the
ramp leads directly into NC 55. The facility is heavily
used. Parking along the road occasionally causes traffic
congestion.
0
H
1
F

Table 1: Summary
Assessment of Existing Water Access
Facilities
Site
*
**
Water
No.
General Location
Type
Typical Use
Condition
Ownership
Quality
'
1
Lees Landing, SR 1103
B
Boating/Fishing
UP
Pvt.
SC
'
2
Goose Creek, SR 1110
B
Boating/Fishing
UP
Pvt.
SC
3
Kennels Beach, SR 1114
B
Boating/Fishing
IF
Pvt.
SB
'
4
Kennels Beach, SR 1114
B
Beach Access
IG
Pvt.
SB
5
Beards Creek, SR 1005
C
Boating/Fishing
IF
Pvt.
SC
6
Bluffs Area, SR 1101
B
Boating/Fishing
UP
Pvt.
SB
7
Camp Seafarer Beach,
C
Beach Access
IF
Pvt.
SB
'
SR 1118
8
Minnesott Golf &
Country Club
C
Boating/Fishing
IG
Pvt.
SB
9
Minnesott
B
Beach Access
U
Pvt.
SB
10
Minnesott Private
C
Boating/Fishing
IG
Pvt.
SB
Boat Ramp
'
11
Minnesott
B
Beach Access
U
Pvt.
SB
12
Camp Sea Gull, Hwy. 306
C
Beach Access
U
Pvt.
SB
'
13
SR 1304
B
Beach Access
U
N.C.
SB
14
Janeiro Boat Ramp, SR 1302 B
Boating/Fishing
IF
Pvt.
SA
15
Janeiro Beach, SR 1302
B
Beach Access
IF
Pvt.
SA
16
N.C. Wildlife Boating
A
Boating/Fishing
IF
N.C.
SC
Access at Janeiro, SR 1302
'
17
Dawson Creek, SR 1306
B
Boating/Fishing
UP
Pvt.
SC
18
SR 1310
B
Beach Access
U
N.C.
SA
19
Oriental at Trawl Door
B
Boating/Fishing
IF
Pvt.
SA
Restaurant
'
20
Lou -Mac Park, Orientall
B
River View
IG
LG
SA
21
N.C. Wildlife Ramp
A
Boating/Fishing
IG
N.C.
SC
'
Oriental, SR 1311
No access to beach. Rip rap
along shoreline.
_
..
9

***
Site
*
**
Water
No.
General Location
TYpe
Typical Use
Condition Ownership
Quality
22
Jim's Paradise Shores
C
Boating/Fishing
IG
Pvt.
SA
Marina, SR 1328
23
Days La ding, Ball Creek
C
Boating/Fishing
IG
Pvt.
SA
24
Bobby's Boat Landing,
C
Boating/Fishing
IG
Pvt.
SA
SR 1330
25
Belva Radcliff's Ramp,
C
Boating/Fishing
IF
Pvt.
SC
NR 55
26
Old Ice House, NC 304
B
Boating/Fishing
U
Pvt.
SC
27
Bay River, SR 1227
B
Boating/Fishing
U
Pvt.
SA
28
Vandemere Boat Ramp,
B
Boating/Fishing
IF
Pvt.
SA
NC 307
29
Boat Ramp, SR 1226
B
Boating/Fishing
OF
Pvt.
SA
30
Gales Creek Mesic, INC 304
B
Boating/Fishing
U
Pvt.
SA
31
Hobucken Marina, NC 33/304
C
Boating/Fishing
IF
Pvt.
SA
32
Mayo Fish Company
C
Boating/Fishing
IF
Pvt.
SA
Inland Waterway
33
SR 1228
B
Boating/Fishing
U
Pvt.
SA
34
Goose Creek Game Lands
B
Game Preserve
U
N.C.
SA
35
Boat Ramp, SR 1232
C
Boating/Fishing
I
Pvt.
SA
36
Fulford Pt., SR 1233
B
Boating/Fishing
U
Pvt.
SA
37
Caroon Brothers Seafood
C
Boating/Fishing
IG
Pvt.
SA
38
Boat Ramp, SR 1235
C
Boating/Fishing
IP
Pvt.
SA
39
Boat Ramp,_SR 1327
B
Boating/Fishing
U
N.C.
SA
40
Boat Ramp, NC 55
B
Boating/Fishing
U
N.C.
SC
*A -
N.C. Wildlife Facility
**I -
Improved
B -
Public/Informal ("Traditional")
U -
Unimproved
C -
Private/Restricted
G -
Good
LG -
Local Government
F -
Fair
P -
Poor
***Water Quality Classifications
SA, SB: Body contact allowed.
SC: Should not have body
contact.
10

III. WATER ACCESS NEEDS: EXISTING AND PROJECTED DEMAND
A. Population Overview
Pamlico County has a 1988 population of approximately
11,000. This -population is widely dispersed over a
rural setting with seven small towns and a few unincor-
porated communities having concentrations of population.
Bayboro, the County seat, has 800 residents. Oriental
is the second largest town and the major shoreline
community.
The following tables provide population estimates and
forecasts for Pamlico County.
Table 2
Population Estimates for Pamlico
Percent Percent Percent
Change Change Change
1960- 1970- 1980-
1960 1970 1970 1980 1980 1987 1987
Pamlico
County 9,850 9,467 - 3.8 10,398 9.8 11,158 7.3
N.C. 4,556,155 5,084,411 11.6 5,881,766 15.7 6,403,426 8.7
Table 3
Population Projections for Pamlico County
1987 1990 2000
Pamlico County 11,158 11,448 13,096
Lvorth Carolina 6,403,426 6,601,815 7,262,895
Source: Neuse River Council of Governments
11

E
Map 2, taken from the 1987 Land Use Plan, indicates the
general pattern of development and concentrations of
population.- To that map have been added the locations
of subdivisions approved by the County between January
1985 and December 1987. All of the subdivisions have
had water oriented locations, most of which were in the
Oriental area. A total of 18 subdivisions including 339
lots were approved, with 241 of the lots in the Oriental
area.
The following table summarizes the subdivision
development:
No. of
Subdivision Title Lots
1.
Beards Creek Acres, Section III
14
2.
Buccaneer Bay West, Section I
37
3.
Buccaneer Bay West, Section II
23
4.
Buccaneer Bay West, Section III
32
5.
Buccaneer Bay West, Section 4
6
6.
Crayton Bay
24
7.
Dogwood Landing
8
8.
Dolphin Point
43
9.
Fork Point
4
10.
Fork Point, Phase II
7
11.
The Landings Hargett
52
12.
Orchard Creek Estates
32
13.
Osprey Point
25
14.
Otter Creek
14
15.
Pinedale, Section 8
3
16.
Pinedale, Section 8-Addition 2
5
17.
Spinnaker Point
9
18.
J. T. Taylor
1
339
Table 4
Location Town
Off SR 1334, Beards Creek Arapahoe
Off SR 1350, Green's Creek Oriental
n n n if IN
n n n of IN
n n n it if
Off SR 1302, Neuse River Oriental
Off SR 1324, Ball's Creek Florence
Off SR 1317, Pierce's Creek Oriental
Off SR 1321, Brown's Creek Pamlico
of if IN of to
Off Hwy. 55, Whittaker's
Creek
Oriental
Off
SR
1317,
Orchard Creek
Pamlico
Off
SR
1324,
Ball's Creek
Florence
Off
SR
1308,
Otter Creek
Oriental
Off
Hwy. 55,
Reelsboro
Reelsboro
of
it
,t
IN
Off
SR
1350,
Smith's Creek
Oriental
n
if
IN IN
n
rd
j
12

B. User Analysis/Survey Results
In order to insure citizen input and to obtain a compre-
hensive data_ base, Pamlico County undertook a survey of
County residents. The survey was distributed and
collected from December 1987 to February 15, 1988.
Questionnaires were included in the December 16, 1987
issue of the Pamlico News. Additional surveys were
distributed to civic groups, selected schools, realtors,
developers and elected officials. A total of 242 sur-
veys were returned, resulting in a survey of 2.2 percent
of the Pamlico County population. By most standards,
this represents a solid sampling of County residents'
opinions.
While the sampling was good, the survey results must be
carefully utilized. The following limitations must be
recognized:
-- The majority of the surveys were completed by resi-
dents of four areas: Oriental, Arapahoe/Minnesott,
Bayboro and Reel sboro/Olympia. By far the largest
interest was from Oriental residents, with 114
surveys having been submitted.
' -- There was not any survey control to insure that
individuals did not submit more than one
questionnaire.
-- There was not any survey control to insure that
questionnaires were completed by County residents.
The survey results indicate a general County reaction to
the questions. The strongest response was from Oriental
and Arapahoe/Minnesott. Minor numbers of responses were
scattered throughout the rest of the County.
The following provides a summary of survey results:
-- The majority, 75.6%, favored additional access
areas.
-- Approximately 46% believed that Pamlico County
should use local tax dollars to finance acquisition
of access areas. However, 17% did not have an
opinion on that question.
-- The majority, 76%, indicated that they would support
a user fee to aid in financing the acquisition of
sites.
13

-- In general, the respondents indicated that sites
should have multi -purpose usage with interest
expressed in having boat ramps, restroom facilities,
lighting, picnic facilities and natural areas.
-- Most respondents believed that developers should be
required to reserve areas for access.
-- The majority of those surveyed believed that both
visitors and County residents would benefit from
access sites.
-- There was a strong preference for access sites to be
located on a river or creek.
-- Most believed that State, Federal or local govern-
ment should be primarily responsible for providing
access sites.
-- In addition to increased recreational opportunities,
a large percentage believed that access areas will
enhance the County image and increase tax revenues
from tourism.
-- The primary negative concerns with respect to estab-
lishing access sites were: loitering, litter,
vandalism, supervision, liability, and decrease of
neighboring property values.
The complete tabulation of survey results is enclosed in
Appendix I.
In September 1986, the North Carolina Division of Coast-
al Management produced the results of a water access;
survey that it undertook in the 20 coastal counties. A
total of 2,800 questionnaires were distributed to busi-
ness leaders and government officials, not to the gen-
eral public. Many of the questions were identical to
those included in the Pamlico County survey. The
Pamlico County responses were compared to those received
in the State survey. The results were very similar and
are summarized as follows:
PAMLICO COUNTY SURVEY QUESTION #1
PROVISION OF ADDITIONAL PUBLIC ACCESS AREAS
(Percent Distribution of Respondents)
State Survey
Business Government Pamlico
Response Leaders Leaders County
Favor
Oppose
Undecided
80.7 85.6 75.6
10.3 7.8 23.2
8.9 6.6 1.2
'1
1
14

F
11
1
PAMLICO COUNTY SURVEY QUESTION #9
GROUPS THAT WOULD BENEFIT MOST FROM THE
PROVISION OF ADDITIONAL WATER ACCESS AREAS
(Percent Distribution of Respondents)
State Survey
Business Government Pamlico
Who Would Benefit Leaders Leaders County
Both visitors and County residents
77.6
67.8
71.5
County residents
13.1
17.8
12.8
Visitors to the County
8.2
13.3
10.7
No opinion/don't know
1.1
1.1
4.9
PAMLICO COUNTY SURVEY QUESTION #10
PREFERENCE FOR LOCATION OF ONE ADDITIONAL ACCESS AREA
(Percent Distribution of Respondents)
State Survey
Business Government
Leaders Leaders
Inland Inland
Counties Counties Paml:_co
First Choice Only Only County
On a river or creek
71.5
75.0
71.5
On a sound or estuary
22.9
19.4
23.9
On the oceanfront
3.2
2.8
0
Near an inlet
1.8
2.8
0
Other
0.6
0
4.5
PAMLICO COUNTY SURVEY QUESTION #11
FACTORS RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING PUBLIC ACCESS AREAS
(Percent Distribution of Respondents)
State Survey
Business Government Pamlico
Who Should Provide Access Leaders Leaders County
State government
85.3
95.4
70.7
Local government
71.1
59.8
40.5
Federal government
42.9
57.5
38.8
Businesses
16.4
34.5
10.7
Private citizens
13.5
11.5
9.9
Other
2.1
2.4
7.4
15

PAMLICO COUNTY SURVEY QUESTION #12
BENEFITS PROVIDED BY PUBLIC ACCESS AREAS
(Percent Distribution of Respondents)
State Survey
Business Government Pamlico
Benefits Leaders Leaders County
Increased recreation opportunities
Enhanced County image
Increased sales tax revenues
from tourism
Increased personal income
from tourism
Increased vacation home development
Preservation of land resources
Other benefits
83.4
78.0
78.5
56.1
58.5
61.2
52.8
42.7
51.7
44.3
31.7
37.2
42.4
29.3
17.8
28.9
37.8
46.7
1.4
0
7.4
In conclusion, both the Pamlico County and Division of
Coastal Management surveys indicate the need/support for
additional access areas. Management of the areas should
be the ongoing responsibility of local government, with
acquisition/development supported by State, Federal and
private funding sources. Pamlico County should work
with members of the business community to encourage
joint funding of new public access projects. The County
should consider requiring developers to provide access
in new subdivisions. Supervision and enforcement of
regulations governing the use of sites will be important
to their success, maintenance and use.
C. Minimum Access Needs
The North Carolina State publication, A Beach Access
Handbook for Local Governments, March 1985, provides
minimum recommended access needs. These needs are based
solely on population size and do not take into account
location or access. The following table summarizes
Pamlico County's access needs:
Table 5
Projected Minimum Acreage
Needs: 2000
,
Acreage/
2000
Acreage
Access Type 1,000 pop.
Population
Recommended
'
Boat Access Areas 1/2 Ac.
13,096
6.5 Ac.
Estuarine Waterfront Park 1 Ac.
13,096
13.09 Ac.
Visual Enhancement Areas 1/2 Ac.
13,096
6.5 Ac.
16 1

Presently, there are only two N.C. Wildlife boating
access ramps. Those ramps are centrally located to the
majority of Pamlico County's population. All other
access ramps.are private or quasi -public and perpetual
public access is not guaranteed. Only one public
waterfront park exists. That is Lou -Mac Park, which is
owned by the Town of Oriental. Pamlico County has not
taken any local actions to ensure that the minimum beach
access/acreage needs recognized by the State will be
met.
D. Water Conditions
Map 3 depicts water classification and depth conditions
along the bay, river, creek and estuary shorelines.
Generally, conditions are excellent for swimming and
boating. However, water depths limit the use of many
creeks and shoreline areas to small boats.
The following North Carolina Department of Natural
Resources and Community Development, Division of
Environmental Management, water conditions classifi-
cations were utilized:
Class SA: suitable for commercial shell fishing and all
other tidal salt water uses.
Class SB: suitable for swimming and primary recreation
and all class SC uses.
Class SC: suitable for secondary recreation and fish
propagation.
The majority of Pamlico County's water areas are classi-
fied either SA or SB. They readily lend themselves to
both fishing and general recreation. Because of the
miles of river, creek and estuarine shoreline, the
majority of the County shorelines join SC classified
waters.
E. Scenic/Natural Areas
Pamlico County is fortunate to have a number of scenic
areas. These are primarily natural areas which should
be valued for their aesthetic and scientific worth.
There are seven such areas in the County which should be
left in their natural undisturbed state. Several of the
areas are more accessible by water. Access to scenic
17

F.
areas should be considered in locating boat ramps and
access sites. The scenic areas are located on Map 4 and
summarized on Table 6. Those having water access
include: Bonner Bay - Maw Point, James Bay. Middle Bay
- Big Porpoise Bay, Piney Point Marsh, and Swan Creek
Marsh. Middle Bay - Big Porpoise Bay is the most
remotely located from a boating access point.
Future Site Development
There are presently only two access sites in Pamlico
County which can be considered preserved for future
public access. Those are the N.C. Wildlife boat access
areas at Oriental and Janeiro. The other sites identi-
fied in this report may not continue to provide public
and private access.
The North Carolina Beach Access Handbook minimun
standards recommend 1/2 acre of access area per 1,000
population. Thus, Pamlico County should have 6.5 acres
of access area by the year 2000. The existing wildlife
sites accommodate approximately 3 acres, or 1/2 of that
forecast demand. If an access site size of 1-1/2 acres
is assumed, then two additional sites would be
required.
While population size and demand is important, a more
significant concern for Pamlico County should be
accessibility of sites by the majority of the County's
population and accessibility to remote shoreline areas.
The existing N.C. Wildlife access areas are not easily
accessible to all Pamlico County residents.
Additionally, they do not provide easy access to all
shoreline areas..
Two additional boat access areas are recommended. One
site should be located immediately east of Bayboro, off
of NC 304. This site would provide access to the Bay
River area. A second site should be located in the
Hobucken area along the Intracoastal Waterway. This
location would provide water access to northeastern
Pamlico County including the areas of: Middle Bay - Big
Porpoise Bay, Jones Bay, Mouse Harbor, Fulford Point,
and the Pamlico River. An alternate site may be located
off of NC 304 with access to Jones Bay. However, this
location could interfere with natural and scenic areas
along Jones Bay.
18

M = M = = = = = = M M = = M M
Table 6
INVENTORY OF SCENIC AND HIS`DORIC AREAS
Identity of Area
Location
Map No.
Highway No.
or
or
Description
Present Use
Letter
Name
Type of Area
Other Landmark
Size of Area
of Area
of Area
1.
Bay City Pocosin
Scenic
Near Bayboro at SR 1002
10,000 Acres
Pososin
Wildlife
(Pocosin)
2.
Bonner Bay - Maw Point
Scenic
On SR 1327 at Spring Creek
1,400 Acres
Marshland
Wildlife
(Marsh)
3.
Jones Bay
Scenic
Near Hobucken at NC 304
2,400 Acres
Marshland
Wildlife
(Marsh)
r
4."
Light Ground Pocosin
Scenic
Near Bayboro at SR 1343
10,000 Acres
Pocosin
Wildlife
(Pososin)
and Sr 1300
5.
Middle Bay - Big
Scenic
Near Hobucken at SR 1228
2,100 Acres
Marshland
Wildlife
Porpoise Bay
(Marsh)
6.
Piney Point Marsh
Scenic
Near Whortonsville on
350 Acres
Marshland
Wildlife
(Marsh)
SR 1328
7.
Swan Creek Marsh
Scenic
Near Whortonsville on
500 Acres
Marshland
Wildlife
(Marsh)
SR 1328
*Source: An Appraisal of Potentials for Outdoor Recreational Development
in Pamlico County, North Carolina.

/ 4,.
�7
N
O
B E A U F 0 R T C 0 U N T Y /
.' 0 •
a.
.��•�B f.yY _C•• YP ��`�.�A�• : :•. •• • •
.
•• • ••
• • • •• ••• •:
•/••: ••.*.a.•:•:: . 0,100• • :• •Q •
1A •• , O 3 i N
Z N/
•••
/
a
.L 1 G W T;;;
u
•G R 0 U N D••
...............
...............
%
P 0 C 0 S I N
O ••••.•••••••••
BAY RIVER
MOUSE
HARBOR
Map 4
SCENIC AREAS
L BAY CITY POCOISH
Z BONNER DAY - MAW POINT
3. JONES BAY
4. LIGHT GROUND P00031N
5. MIDDLE DAY - BIG PORPOISE BAY
6. PINEY POINT MARSH
7. SWAN CREEK MARSH
1 O 1 2 3 ♦ MILLS
Approximais Scala

The primary area of concern is the provision of a beach
access site. Based on N.C. Beach Access Handbook
standards, Pamlico County should have 13 acres of
'
estuarine waterfront park by the year 2000. The
estuarine access survey results and analysis of Pamlico
County needs do not indicate that a passive waterfront
t
park area is needed. Such a facility currently exists
at Lou -Mac Park in Oriental. The County should consider
the need for a beach access facility. The location
1
should be central to the majority of the Pamlico County
population. A 13-acre site should be located on the
Neuse River between Janeiro and Oriental.
'
Pamlico County should carefully consider the potential
liabilities associated with the development of a beach
access site. The County would be responsible for main-
taining the facility in a reasonably safe condition for
public use. When a County -wide or regional facility,
such as a beach, is designed for the use of swimmers,
the conditions on the beach and in the water need to be
clearly indicated.
The following is an excerpt from the N.C. Beach Access
Handbook:
'
"At this point, no court has held that an oceanfront
community, simply because it is on the oceanfront,
has a responsibility to provide lifeguard service,
but a number of courts have held that a local govern-
ment can be liable for failure to adequately super-
vise parks and recreation facilities. Those two
facts combined indicate that the safest course is to
provide lifeguard service at regional access facil-
ities. If a community chooses not to provide life-
guard service, it should at least be aware of
conditions around the accessway and be prepared to
warn the public of any dangerous condition -- natural
or otherwise in the area.
In providing and maintaining public beach access
facilities, it is important for local governments
to err on the side of caution. Recreation liability
has recently become an active area of the law; a
large number of those cases have concerned injuries
sustained while using public beaches. This addi-
tional attention makes it even more necessary for
local governments to plan and act carefully in
establishing beach access facilities."
21

Prior to committing to
area, the County should
potential liabilities.
normally been adequate
limited to boat access
G. Priority Sites
the development of a beach access
thoroughly investigate the
For boat access areas, it has
to state that the facility is
and that swimming is prohibited.
The first priority will be the development of a beach
access facility on the Neuse River between Janeiro and
Oriental. A specific site is not recommended. Final
site selection should be accomplished through friendly
negotiation with property owners. One essential
prerequisite will be easy access to either SR 1302 or
SR 1310.
Other sites may be available through donation to the
County. However, the County must exercise care not to
simply accept sites on a random basis. Improperly
located sites may be a bigger liability than help.
The second priority for site development should be a
public access boat ramp at Bayboro. This is indicated
on Map 1. A potential location would be the area adja-
cent to Gaskill Seafood, off of SR 1209. This location
would provide immediate access to Bay River and its
tributaries. The County may investigate the purchase of
land and an existing parking area from Gaskill Seafood.
However, forced acquisition (condemnation) is not recom-
mended. Alternate sites in the immediate area could be
pursued with individual property owners. However,
direct access to a paved road is essential.
The third priority boat ramp access site will be at or
near the Goose Creek Wildlife Management Area. The
County should establish negotiations with the N.C.
Wildlife Resources Commission for the development of a
site in this area. There may be a concern over protec-
tion of wildlife, which could block use of the site. If
the County cannot succeed with the State, a site immedi-
ately south of NC 304 should be pursued. This might be
done cooperatively with the owner of the Mayo Fish
Company. Again, forced acquisition or condemnation is
not recommended.
22
J
G
R
L.

11
Site Facilities and Development Costs
' The Pamlico County Estuarine Access Survey provided
input on what facilities should be constructed at access
sites. There was strong interest in restroom facili-
ties, lighting, picnic tables, natural areas, and docks.
Additionally, security, maintenance and overall quality
of management were major concerns. These are also
facility needs/concerns identified in most shoreline
access standards. Figure 1 provides a representative
boat ramp access plan.
F
�I
F
The following tables provide representative development
costs for a beach access site and boat access sites:
Table 7
Representative Beach Access
Development Costs*
Item
Land Acquisition, 13 acres (minimum 600
linear foot frontage)
$357,500
2 - 1,000 sq.ft. Bath Houses with
Restroom Facilities (includes
septic tank)
40,000
Well
3,000
Lighting (15 lights)
4,500
Fencing Parking Lot
8,000
Landscaping
3,000
Shelters (10 with open sides)
35,000
15 Picnic Tables
4,500
Floating Dock (for swimmers)
2,000
Rope, Floats and Anchors to secure
swimming area
1,500
*Does not include the cost of an access road.
23
$459, 000

338'
Rl
2
LEGEND f < <
I. PICNIC TABLES
2. RESTROOMS BOAT RAMP ACCESS PLAN
3. HANDICAPPED SPACES
4. STANDARD VEHICLE SPACES FIGURE
5. VEHICLE WITH TRAILER SPACES
SCALE I" ■ 50'
G. WASH STAND
7. CONCRETE BOAT RAMP
8. PIER
9. BULKHEAD

I
I.
Table 8
Representative Boat Ramp
Access Development Costs*
Item
Land Acquisition (1.5 acres)
Parking Lot (marl/gravel)
Double Boat Ramp
Restrooms (building and
septic tank)
Lighting (5 lights)
5 Picnic Tables
Signage
Dock/Piers w/bulkhead
Landscaping
Trash Receptacles
1vell and Wash Stand
Fish Cleaning Stand
Bay River Intracoastal
Area Waterway
$ 37,500 $ 27,000
19,590 19,590
10,000 10,000
15,000
15,000
1,500
1,500
1,500
1,500
2,000
2,000
12,000
12,000
1,000
1,000
800
800
5,000
5,000
2,000
2,000
$107,890 $ 97,390
*Does not include the cost of an access road.
It is not recommended that Pamlico County establish any
visual enhancement areas. If needed, this responsi-
bility should be left to the individual incorporated
waterfront communities.
Operational and Maintenance Costs
Establishment of a beach access area will be a very
expensive undertaking. Not only will there be
substantial operating and maintenance costs, there will
also be liability expenses which cannot be precisely
defined. A beach access facility will require full-time
lifeguards during the summer months. Additionally,
because of heavy usage, maintenance personnel would have
to be assigned on a daily to weekly basis. The
following provides a projected month's operating cost.
Lifeguards @ $4.00/hr.
Average 12 hrs./day or 360 hrs./month $1,440.00
Maintenance personnel
$3.35/hr. for 20 hrs./week or
80 hrs./month 268.00
Trash collection/month 150.00
Sheriff's Department patrol @
2 hrs./day 900.00
Utilities per month 300.00
3,058.00
25

If the facility is open to the public for full-time
swimming during the months of June, July and August, the
summer months' operating costs would be $12,232.00.
Trash collection, security patrols, and lighting would
be required -during the winter months at an anticipated
monthly cost of $675.00. Thus, the annual operating
cost may be anticipated to be at least $18,300.00.
The total cost of improvements for a beach access
facility were forecast at $101,500. A 2% per year main-
tenance reserve would result in an annual maintenance
cost of $2,030.00. Because of heavy usage and more
sophisticated facilities, a higher maintenance reserve
than that for boat ramps will be required. Pamlico
County can anticipate an expenditure of at least $10,000
every five years for facility repairs.
Pamlico County prefers to have additional boat ramp and
access areas developed and maintained by the N.C.
Wildlife Commission. However, this may not be possible.
If developed by Pamlico County, the burden on local
operation and maintenance costs must be considered.
Boat ramp access areas will have low operational costs.
The principal costs would be "policing" of the sites for
trash removal and inspection to insure proper care of
facilities. Additionally, utility costs would be
incurred for lighting of the site. Monthly operating
costs should average $100.00 or less, which includes
$12.00 per month for trash removal.
Long term maintenance and repair will be the greatest
expense. It may be anticipated that 1% of initial
construction cost should be reserved annnually for site
maintenance or repair. The initial improvements
(excluding land) are expected to cost $70,390 in 1987
dollars. Thus, over a 5-year period, maintenance may be
expected to cost $3,500. This would require an annual
maintenance reserve of approximately $700.
26
7
C
�I
1
I

I
IV. ESTUARINE ACCESS POLICIES AND IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES
'
A. Definition of Concerns/Issues
The Pamlico'County shoreline is gradually being consumed
by private development. This continued trend will make
'
shoreline access increasingly difficult for the public -
at -large. Action should be taken by Pamlico County to
insure the continued existence of access points avail-
able for use by the general public. In addition, large
private developments which consume large areas of shore-
line should be required to provide common access points
for either the public -at -large or at least for residents
of those developments.
' The establishment of any beach or boat access areas by
the County will be expensive. Cooperative ventures with
the State government and/or private individuals should
be pursued.
' B. Policy Statements
' 1. Pamlico County recognizes that shoreline access
facilities will not be revenue producing. Develop-
ment should be undertaken with the clear understand-
ing that the facilities will be a perpetual expense.
The County will not attempt to collect user fees.
2. The County should seek donations of land, or grant
' funds, in order to obtain sites suitable for
development as a beach access or swimming area.
' 3. Pamlico County may consider having at least two
additional boat access ramps developed. One should
be in the Bay River area and the second along the
' Intracoastal Waterway.
4. Pamlico County should pursue obtaining authority to
establish an accommodations tax. This would be a
' legitimate source of access funding because tourists
will benefit from the establishment of access areas.
5. Pamlico County should investigate and utilize, when
feasible, all available means of acquiring shoreline
access sites before purchase of a site is considered.
A summary of land acquisition strategies is provided
' in Appendix II.
6. Pamlico County will utilize all available funding
' sources to acquire shoreline access sites. A suL-.wary
of potential funding sources is included in
Appendix III.
' 27

C.
Implementation/Work Schedule
1. In FY88-89, Pamlico County will contact the N.C.
Wildlife Resources Commission to begin negotiations
for establishment of a boat ramp access area at Goose
Creek Game Preserve. The County recognizes that
there may be a conflict with wildlife preservation.
If negotiations fail, the County will request th<<t
the N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission establish a
boating access area near N.C. 304 on the Intracoastal
Waterway. As a third option, the County will pursue
obtaining of a site for development at the local
level.
2. In FY88-89, Pamlico County will request the N.C.
Wildlife Commission to establish a boat ramp access
facility immediately east of Bayboro for access to
the Bay River area. If negotiations fail, the County
will pursue acquisition of a site for development in
FY89-90.
3. Pamlico County views the development of a beach
access area as a long-term project. In the FY88-89
to FY91-92 time period, Pamlico County will pursue
obtaining a 13-acre site with a minimum of 600 feet
of shoreline frontage on the Neuse River.
4. Pamlico County will continuously pursue land dona-
tions. Some sites may be obtained which are not
suitable for beach or boat access areas. Such sites
should be sold and the sale proceeds utilized to
obtain more desirable sites.
5. In FY88-89, Pamlico County will contact its State
legislators to investigate obtaining authority to
establish an accommodations tax. Revenues from the
tax would be utilized to purchase shoreline access
sites.
6. In its FY89-90 budget, Pamlico County will consider
establishing a capital reserve fund for the express
purpose of building funds for the purchase and
development of shoreline access sites.
28
d
n
U

IAPPENDIX I
' QOFSTIONNAIRE
FISCAL YEAR 1988
PAMICIO COOI!II'Y ESTUARINE ACCESS SURVEY
' (242 Total Responses)
' 1.
Do you believe Pamlico County
needs additional estuarine (beach/shoreline) access
areas?
Yes 183 No
56 No Response 3
' 2.
For what
uses do you think access areas should be established? No Response 23
105
Skiing
107 Shoreline fishing
186
Swimming
118 Picnicking
151
Boating
26 Other (identify)
5 None
' 3. Should Pamlico County be involved in financing with local tax dollars the acquisition
of land and/or rights -of -way for the establishment of these areas? Yes 112 No 89
No Comment 41
Should Pamlico County require developers to reserve areas and/or rights -of -way for
the establishment of estuarine (beach/shoreline) access areas? No response 53
For use by subdivision residents? Yes 128 No 30
For use by non -subdivision residents? Yes 155 No 58
5. Please identify locations which you currently consider provide estuarine (shoreline/
beach) access. These locations may be either publicly or privately owned. Please
identify these locations as precisely as you can using road numbers and locally
recognized features such as community names, stores, subdivisions, etc.
I A.
See Attached
' 6. What facilities (non -camping)
116 Boat Rang
71 Electrical Hookups
' 144 Restroom Facilities
4 Other
16 No Response
do you believe should be provided at access areas?
29 Shower Facilities 147 Picnic Tables
128 Lighting 139 Natural Areas
97 Shelters 7TO- Docks
' 7. would you support a user fee to aid in the financing of the acquisition/construction
beach access areas? Yes 185 No 50 No Response 7
' 8. where would you recommend, if any, beach access areas be established? Please be as
specific as possible with location referring to road numbers and locally recognized
features such as community names, stores, subdivisions, etc.
See Attached

9. Who do you think would benefit most from the provision of additional estuarine '
(shoreline/beach) access areas? No Response 15
173 Both Visitors and County.Residents 26 Visitors to the County
3 - County Residents —r2— No Opinion/Don't Know
2 Developers 1 Businesses '
1 Other
10. Please identify your preference for the
location of additional access areas.
42
On the Sound 173
On a River or Creek
'
16
On the Estuary 10
Other (identify)
20
No Response 1
Manmade lake
,
11. Who
should be responsible for providing
access areas? No Response 13
171 State Government
98 Pamlico County
9T- Federal Government
,
26 Businesses
24 Private Citizens
Other (identify)
'
12. Please identify the benefits which you believe would be provided by the provision of
estuarine (shoreline/beach) access areas. No Response 22 . All NR answered
'
190 Increased Recreational Opportunities no to Question #1
148 Enhanced County Image
1 Increased Tax Revenues from Tourism
90 Increased Personal Income from Tourism
,
43 Increased Vacation Home Development
= Preservation of Land Resources
18 Other (identify)
,
13. What, if any, negative concerns do you have with respect to the establishment. of
access areas? Draw wrong crowd; loitering; litter and maintenance; vandalism;
'
inadequate
supervision; expense; runoff and shoreline erosion; decrease of
neighboring property values; liability.
'
14. Area
of the County in which you live:
108
Oriental
47
Arapahoe/Minnesott
'
Bayboro
10
Grantsboro
7
Goose Creek Island (Hobucken/towland)
5
Merritt/Florence
'
22
Reelsboro/Olympia
4
Stonewall
2
Mesic
,
1
Vandemere
5
Pamlico
7
Alliance
'
4
Out of County
I-2 '

I
APPENDIX II
LAND ACQUISITION STRATEGIES
Continued acquisition of land is necessary if adequate public access
to the shoreline is to be maintained. There are generally two approaches
to acquiring access: direct acquisition techniques and land use controls
which incorporate public access requirements. The strategies presented
here can be used by local governments to assist in acquiring waterfront
property.
DIRECT ACQUISITION
• Purchase
The purchase of property at its fair market value is the simplest,
most direct means of acquiring land. A disadvantage of direct purchase is
that governmental agencies have limited financial resources. A further
disadvantage of direct purchase is that the seller's net profit from the
sale would be affected if the seller of the property is liable for income
tax on the capital gain of the appreciated value of the property. Other
purchase options, including bargain sale or installment sale, may benefit
the buyer and seller by stretching a land -acquiring agency's funds and
reducing immediate tax consequences.
In a bargain sale, the landowner sells the property to a governmental
' agency at less than fair market value. By doing so, the seller will be
able to receive some income from the sale of the land and will be eligible
to claim an income tax deduction for a charitable contribution on the
' difference between the bargain price received and the fair market value of
the land. Thus, the amount of the capital gain would be less and so would
the accompanying tax on that gain.
F
In an installment sale, an agreement is made between the landowner
and the purchaser whereby the purchaser agrees to pay for the land in
annual installments or agrees to acquire a portion of the total property
each year with an option to acquire the remaining tracts in future years.
By spreading the income gained from the sale of the property over a number
of years the seller may be able to spread taxable gains and any associated
taxes over an equal number of years.
An easement, or right to use private property in a specific,
designated manner, may also be purchased. The purchase of an easement
entitles the purchaser to use the property for a specific purpose, such as
conservation, passing over the land, or installing a water or sewer line.
The ownership of the land remains with the property holder, but the use of

I
a designated portion of the land for a specific purpose is transferred to
the acquiring agency.
Easements are typically purchased when it is not possible to buy the
land. although there. is no requirement compelling a landowner to sell an
easement, landowners .may be interested in the resulting tax benefits.
Where easements are sold, a decrease in property tax value would result.
• Donation
The donation of property or an easement involves a landowner deeding
the property to a government agency that has agreed to accept it. In a
donation, the donor receives no cash for the property although numerous
tax benefits are realized. These benefits include real estate, estate,
and income tax reductions as well as no capital gains tax that would
otherwise result from the sale of the property. If the recipient of the
land donation is a governmental agency, the donor can claim an income tax
deduction based on the market value of the land as determined by a
qualified appraiser. In the instance of an easement, the donor may take
the difference in the value of the land after the easement as a charitable
deduction. (See Appendix D, Tax Credits for Donated Properties.)
• Prescription
An easement can be established through prescription, the process by
which an individual or group obtains the right to use another's property
in a specific manner. In this instance, the courts recognize that a
prescriptive easement has been established if the following tests are met:
1)
the
use has been open;
2)
the
use is adverse or under
a claim of right;
3)
the
use has been continuous
and uninterrupted for 20 years;
4)
there has been actual use of the property by the general public;
and
5)
the
same path has been used
for 20 years.
Currently, North Carolina does not have any case law directly
addressing the establishment of a prescriptive easement in a beach access
context. It is difficult to establish a prescriptive easement because of
the requirement that the use of the property must be adverse. In this
case, "adverse" means that the user of the property did not have the
owner's permission and, instead, used the pathway in the belief that he
had a right to use it. Permissive use, no matter for how long, can never
be the basis for a prescriptive easement. A local government may want to
consider legal action to establish a public easement where it believes a
prescriptive easement for beach access exists across private property.
• Dedication
A dedication begins with an offer to dedicate the use of land. The
offer is made by the landowner to the public and must be followed by the
local government's acceptance of that offer on behalf of the public. A
II-2
n
L
H

dedication made orally or in writing is called an express dedication. A
'
"certificate of dedication" indicates an individual's express intention
to dedicate an area to the public.
'
An implied dedication is based on the property owner's intention to
dedicate as indicated by conduct. For instance, the owner's intentioa to
dedicate may be indicated by recognizing the rights of the public in a
deed or by the owner's actions with respect to permitting the public to
use the land. A 1970 Supreme Court case confirmed the public's right to
use two privately owned beaches in California. The court said that when
the public has used a beach for a long time without paying attention to
the fact that the beach is privately owned, the public acquires a legal
right to use that beach. The owner's intent to give the land to the public
may be implied from his conduct of not preventing public use of the beach.
'
And the public's acceptance of the dedication may be implied from public
use of the beach. Nothing need be written by either side -- the dedication
and acceptance is implied by conduct. With respect to beach access, a
public access sign at an accessway is one indication by a local government
'
of an express or implied dedication.
Cities and counties may accept dedication offers for the maintenance
'
of roads and pedestrian easements running to and along the beach. Before
accepting a dedication offer, it is recommended that a title search or
"chain of ownership" survey be conducted to ensure that the offer to
'
dedicate has at no time in the past been withdrawn.
Cities and counties may own, maintain and manage land for
recreational purposes including public access parking. Although it is
'
possible for cities to own public streets and roads, counties cannot. It
is possible, however, for counties to accept the dedication of certain
'
roads so long as they were dedicated to the public prior to 1975.
Although a county may accept such a dedication, a county is not authorized
to maintain or improve such roads.
'
In many local jurisdictions there may be a
number of accessways and
roads that have been dedicated by the developer
but not yet
accepted by
the county or municipality. These accessways represent opportunities
to
local governments that should not be neglected.
The actions
necessary to
'
show acceptance should be given high priority in
light of the
provision of
the state law allowing developers to withdraw
unaccepted,
unimproved
'
dedications after a period of 15 years (G.S. 136-96).
F
LAND USE CONTROLS
Local governments are able to use the police powers granted to them
by the state to protect the public's ownership of and right to use the
shoreline to the mean high water mark. As the beach erodes and the mean
high water mark moves landward, the boundary between public and private
property moves landward. Land use regulations or local ordinances can be
used to protect the public's ownership and right to use the shoreline.
When erosion or storms destroy structures, local ordinances can require
II-3

the property owner to remove, within a given time period, all debris which
may endanger public health, safety and welfare. This is particularly
important where remnant bulkheads, building foundations, pilings and
septic systems would be located below the mean high water mark or on the
public beach.
Local governments can also use land use controls to compel developers
to provide public beach accessways. Through zoning ordinances and
subdivision regulations, developers can be required to dedicate, vai a fee
or reserve access areas, as outlined below. (See Appendix E, Model Land
Development Regulation.)
• Dedication
State enabling legislation for county subdivision regulations (G.S
153A-331) provides that such ordinances may require "the dedication or
reservation of recreation areas serving residents of the immediate
neighborhood within the subdivision and of rights -of -way or easements for
street and utility purposes." The comparable legislation for cities (G.S.
160A-372) is virtually identical. Likewise, the zoning enabling
legislation for counties (G.S. 153A-340) and cities (G.S. 160A-381)
authorizes local regulations to provide for special use or conditional use
permits. The conditions for approval of these permits may include the
dedication of utility rights -of -way and of recreational space.
A local unit of government may require the compulsory dedication of
land for public recreational use consistent with local subdivision
regulations and/or as a condition of a special or conditional use permit.
In requiring a developer to dedicate recreational land, the local
government should ensure that the location of the access area will
adequately provide for the recreational needs of the residents in the
development as well as the residents of the immediate neighborhood within
the subdivision who might otherwise be precluded from general use of the
area.
Definitive standards for the size of such areas and the types of
facilities to be installed should be specified in local subdivision
ordinances. The regulations should specify why, when, where and how much
land will be required as well as criteria pertaining to the type of land
that may be offered for dedication. A formula for determining the amount
of land a developer must offer should be made explicit. The amount of
land to be dedicated should not be based on an arbitrary case -by -case
basis. Instead the amount of land to be required for dedication should be
related to recognized open space standards and should reflect the density
and type of development proposed.
As a condition to a special or conditional use permit, access should
be provided for when the permit is issued by the local governing board. At
that time, a plat should be prepared and incorporated by reference into
the terms and conditions of the permit. The plat should bear a
certificate of dedication and both the permit and plat should specify when
improvements by the developer will be completed.
I I -4
7
7

' State enabling legislation (G.S. 136-102.6) requires that
subdivision plats filed since 1975 designate all streets as being public
or private. Streets designated as public are presumed to be offers of
dedication.
Subdivision ordinances can also require that interior subdivision
streets be dedicated to the public. The subdivision enabling statutes for
both cities and counties allow local ordinances to provide for "the
' coordination of streets and highways within a proposed subdivision with
the existing or planned streets and highways and with other public
facilities." To make use of this authority, the subdivision ordinance
should clearly indicate that streets and roads running generally
' perpendicular to the beach be platted to extend to the mean high tide
line.
H
• Fee
County subdivision regulations provide the developer with the option
of paying a fee to the county in lieu of dedicating recreational land
(G.S. 153A-331). The developer may be required to pay an amount of money
equal to the value of the space required to be dedicated. This money
should be placed into a fund specifically designated for the acquisition
of access areas. The "fee in lieu" option is not available to
municipalities.
• Reservation
An. emerging land use tool allows both county and municipal
subdivision regulations to require developers to reserve land for
recreational purposes and for street and utility rights -of -way or
easements (G.S. 153A-331 and G.S. 160A-372). One advantage of such
reservations is that they do not impose dedication requirements in
instances that may amount to a taking without just compensation, yet they
give the local government time to acquire funds to purchase the property.
As this is a relatively new tool, its advantages and disadvantages have
not been evaluated.
Case law regarding the use of developer exactions to provide beach
access is poorly developed, particularly in North Carolina, and the
ability of local governments to use these techniques is not firmly
established. There are a number of questions regarding the implementation
of these measures for access purposes. As there are few court decisions,
these standards should be carefully studied before such measures are
attempted. A thorough reading and understanding of Dedicating and
Reserving Land to Provide Access to North Carolina Beaches (September
1982), by Richard Ducker of the UNC Institute of Government, is highly
recommended in addition to contacting and coasultiag one's local
government attorney.
II-5

APPENDIX III
.ACCESS FUNDING SOURCES
'
The- purchase of land and materials for the construction of access
sites can be funded not only by existing federal and
state grant programs
but also by drawing on other sources. Federal and state grant programs
are extremely competitive. By drawing on an array of funding sources, the
'
local government's chance of actually receiving a grant to construct a new
accessway is improved. Public accessways can be constructed as a
community -wide endeavor by developing local funding sources and utilizing
volunteer labor as well as private contributions and donations. This
'
section reviews available funding sources and programs and cites contacts
for further information.
'
FEDERAL FMING
The Land and Water Conservation Fund administered for the U. S.
'
Department of Interior through the N. C. Department of Natural Resources
and Community Development, Division of Parks and Recreation, makes funds
available on a 50 percent matching basis to local governments for outdoor
recreation planning, acquisition and development activities. Each year
grant criteria and the amount of available funds varies. The funds can be
used for the acquisition of land and the construction of public recreation
facilities including public access facilities. Past projects include
regional and neighborhood access facilities at Nags Head, a
regional
access project at Fort Fisher and the Wilmington waterfront development.
Contact:
Jack Frauson, Recreation Consultant
Division of Parks and Recreation
N.C. Department of Natural Resources and Community Development
7225 Wrightsville Avenue
Wilmington, NC 28403
Phone: [phone]
1

STATE FUNDING
The Coastal and Estuarine Water Beach access Program administered by
the Division of Coastal Management makes funds available to local
governments to acquire land and make public access improvements. The
amount of grant funds available varies from year to year. The division
has an annual project application and grant contract cycle. Past projects
include numerous neighborhood and regional access sites at Kitty Hawk,
Kill Devil Hills, Nags Head, West Onslow Beach, Surf City, Wrightsville
Beach, Fort Fisher and Long Beach.
Contact:
Kathy Vinson, Shorefront Access Coordinator
Division of Coastal Management
N.C. Department of Natural Resources and Community Development
P. 0. Box 769
Nbrehead City, NC 28557
Phone: [phone]
The Civil Works Program administered by the Office of Water Resources
makes funds available to local governments on a matching basis for the
following types of water resources development projects: general
navigation improvement; recreational navigation improvement; water
management (flood control and drainage); stream restoration (clearing and
snagging and limited channel excavation); beach protection; and land
acquisition and facility development for water -based recreation sites.
Contact:
John Sutherland
Office of Water Resources
N.C. Department of Natural Resources and Community Development
P. 0. Box 27687
Raleigh, NC 27611
Phone: [phone]
The Wildlife Resources Commission has constructed 145 public boat
launch areas throughout North Carolina. The commission makes its
technical services available to local governments that have secured a site
and funding for boat ramp construction. The commission may construct a
ramp on public property or on private property with at least a 20-year
lease to the commission.
Contact:
Dick Hamilton
Wildlife Resources Commission
N.C. Department of Natural Resources and Community Development
P. 0. Box 27687
Raleigh, NC 27611
Phone: [phone]
III-2

1
1
11
SURPLUS STATE PROPERTY
Real property no longer needed by state agencies is disposed of
either by the State Property Office or by the N. C. Department of
Transportation. The normal procedures for disposal of surplus state
property by the State Property Office (SPO) are set out in G. S. 146-27
through 146-30. In general, these procedures entail a declaration of the
property as surplus by the state agency managing the parcel; an appraisal
of the property by an appraiser hired by SPO; advertisement for public
bids; and selection of the highest bid, approval by the Council of State,
and title transfer with the aid of the Attorney General's office. While
there is no specific statutory program comparable to the federal program
for conveying properties at a discount to other governmental units for
specific purposes, G. S. 160A-274 generally authorizes the state to lease
or sell real property "with or without consideration" to any other
governmental units in the state. In the past, surplus properties which
other state agencies and local governments have shown interest in have
been conveyed to them by the State Property Office at discounts up to 100
percent.
The N. C. Department of Transportation is responsible for its own
property transactions. The disposition of surplus property depends upon
the nature of the title: most highway rights -of -way are only easements,
and when these parcels are abandoned, the Department of Transportation
simply quitclaims all interests it held in the property. Rights -of -way
owned in fee simple that are to be abandoned are usually put up for public
sale. If other state agencies or local governments are interested in the
property, it is possible for them to receive title from the Department of
Transportation at discounts up to 100 percent.
Contact:
N. C. Department of Administration
State Property Office
116 W. Jones Street
Raleigh, NC 27611
Phone: [phone]
' N. C. Department of Transportation
Division of Highways
Right -of -Way Branch
P. 0. Box 25201
Raleigh, NC 27611
Phone: [phone]
LOCAL FUNDING
Towns and counties have a wide variety of funding options to choose
from. Some of these options are described on the following page.

General appropriation
On an annual basis a town or county can appropriate a portion of its
recreation or public -works budget to general beach access development or
for the acquisition and construction of specific access projects.
Parking Meters
The revenues collected from parking meters during the peak tourist
season (or throughout the year) are an appropriate source of funds for
continued facility development and maintenance. Proceeds from off-street
parking facilities may be used for any public purpose, but those from on -
street parking must be used for enforcement and administration of traffic
and parking ordinances and regulations (G.S. 160A .301(a)).
• Water Fees
A percentage of the revenues collected from water usage
(particularly summer water usage as a result of peak seasonal use) could
be allocated to the development of access projects.
• Accomodatioas Tax
A percentage of the revenues collected from an accomodatioas tax
could be directed toward the development of increased public access
opportunities. In the coastal area, only New Hanover County, Ocean Isle
Beach, Topsail Beach and Surf City have authorization to levee an
accommodations tax. In New Hanover County, 80 percent of the revenue must
be spent on erosion control and 20 percent on promotion, travel and
tourism. Ocean Isle Beach, Topsail Beach, and Surf City have broader
authority to spend revenues.
Local citizens and civic groups can also be valuable resources. They
may donate materials or funds, volunteer labor, or act as coastal
watchdogs to ensure that beach access facilities are properly used. By
including. such groups in town or county access projects, community
involvement, participation and commitment can be strengthened. Retirees,
local scout troups, Kiwaais clubs, school clubs, university groups,
garden clubs, clean county groups, local civic and local or national
environmental organizations are among the numerous groups which would be
interested in such coastal activities. Several local groups include The
Neuse River Foundation, Carteret County Crossroads, Onslow County
Conservation Group, North Carolina Coastal Federation and the Pamlico -Tar
River Foundation.
Local corporations can also be valued supporters of public access.
Timber companies, for instance, have had a noted history of land and
material donations. Such donations, along with the contribution of funds
for access development, strengthens the corporation's support of the
community and its citizens.
III-4
k
LJI

0
NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS
The Trust for Public Land (TPL) conserves land as a living resource
for present and future generations and works closely with governmental and
nonprofit agencies to acquire and preserve open space to serve human
needs, share knowledge of nonprofit land acquisition processes, and
pioneer methods of land conservation and environmentally sound land use.
Because donations of land to the TPL are tax deductible, individuals
or corporations may be able to take advantage of substantial tax benefits.
Once the TPL acquires land through purchase or donation, the land is
conveyed to a government agency for public open space preservation.
Contact:
Kathy Blaha
Trust for Public Land
219 East Fifth Avenue
Tallahassee, Fla. 32303
Phone: [phone]
The Nature Conservancy is dedicated to identifying, protecting and
managing important natural areas throughout the state. The Conservancy
identifies land that supports the most significant examples of all
components of the natural world. It protects habitat and natural systems,
assists or advises government or conservation organizations, and
increases public awareness of the need to safeguard natural diversity. It
also manages numerous Conservancy -owned preserves in North Carolina.
Land donations to the Conservancy are tax-deductible and therefore
individuals or corporations may be able to take advantage of substantial
tax benefits. Once the Conservancy acquires land through purchase or
donation, the land is often conveyed to a public agency.
Contact:
Frederick W. Armand, Field Representative
North Carolina Nature Conservancy
209 N. Columbia Street
P.O. Box 805
Chapel Hill, NC 27514
Phone: [phone]
VOLUNTEER LABOR SOURCES
The Community Service Work Program is administered by the Division of
Victim and Justice Services under the Department of Crime Control and
Public Safety. Community service is work performed without compensation
by an offender for a governmental or nonprofit organization. Individuals
convicted of offenses commonly contribute 20 to 200 hours of community
service work. Services performed can include office work, construction,
clean-up or project design depending on the offender's background and
training. Contacts are listed in Appendix C.
III-5

I
POTENTIAL BEACH ACCESS SITE
POTENTIAL BOAT RAMP SITES
30AT RAMPS ipublic& private?
3EACH ACCESS
MLICO COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
MAP I

LEGEND
IM GENERAL PATTEPN OF DEVELOPMENT
NEW SUBDIVISIONS JAK 1985 - DEC. 1987
I BEARDS CREEK ACRES, SECTION N
10 FORK POINT. PHASE I
2 BUCCANEER DAY WEST, SECTION 1
11 THE LANDINGS HARGETT
C=;
3 BUCCANEER SAY WEST, SECTION 0
12 ORCHARD CREEK ESTATES
fV1
%
4 BUCCANEER DAY WEST, SECTION 111
13 OSPREY POINT
L
5 BUCCANEER BAY, 3ECTWH 4
14 OTTER CREEK
6 CRAYTON DAY
Is PINEDALE, SECTION 8
7 DOGWOOD LANDING
16 PMOALE. SECTION 8--ADDITION 2
a DOLPHIN POINT
17 SPMAKER POINT
I FORK POINT
is J. T. TAYLOR.
V1
6.
lb
41
A.
In's
AUA
DEVELOPMENT IN,
PAM-ICO COUNTY
NORTH CARCi-INIA
MAP 2
@[.A FM

\
\
SA s g
.. 'r z \
t.,.... •... . 10 $4 tl
s
Yn c q
6Y SAS ., ] 2
6 —.1 ft—
,ar i SA.
L.w 13
K�
5
,sr, ua
y
SA ,o
5
SA
/ \ _ SA s
] 2 H
. �/ P U L' t • •' A I v L' ! / • P 0 C 11 ! V ,�. •y ;ry , •� : 5 5 10
u.. tJ Jy PJ JFN •• 1t«
2 SA 4• W q 2 tq
a f 1 „>. -. �, .t ,°»,<1 J. Nb n" ,ru • 2 6 . +«' q13 1a 2
r •:h i 4w0re • �i • 6 J J 2— 9 11 r
1 „« st 10 n 2 2 G1Q
14
10
6 N U ✓ . \ .�. BM ) 2 t0
A
5• 2 1 �. C;, ,x, 31 11
s „. • • SA, SB, SC- WATER CLASSIFICATIONS
\ �ttJ 9CJ m 2 t�/ / 1, 6, 1Z' WATER DEPTHS
AAA..." P
\ 2 u,• tj /
� 5 -J �. 2 W71r14 q /
12
. 1 . 6 PAMLICO COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
,5 r MAP 3
J P \
r1»ESOT7 •
BEACH J wr,w•w w, , 14
131 SA
C
0
u
y r <