Land Use Plan Update-1986

1
1986
PENDER COUNTY
1
LAND USE PLAN
1�
1
17
1
Assistance by
1
TALBERT COX & ASSOCIATES INC.
1
LOCAL ADOPTION — YAV 879 1887
CNC CINTIPICATION — JUNE 8o 1887
PROPERTY OF
DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
'
PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE

� 1986
PENDER COUNTY
I LAND USE PLAN
Assistance by
TALBERT ,COX &ASSOCIATES INC.
ILOCAL ADOPTION - MAY 27, 1987
ICRC CERTIFICATION - JUNE 5, 1987
1

1986
PENDER COUNTY
LAND USE PLAN UPDATE
Prepared By
PENDER COUNTY PLANNING BOARD
and
PENDER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
' Assistance By
TALBERT, COX & ASSOCIATES, INC.
"The preparation of this report (map, document, etc.) 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."
I

1
r
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1986 Land Use Plan Update
for Pender County
I. Data Collection and Analysis
A. Information Base
B. Present Conditions
1. Present Population and Economy
2. Existing Land Use
a. Significant Land Use Compatibility
Problems
b. Major Problems Resulting from
Unplanned Development
C. Areas Experiencing or Likely to
Experience Changes in
Predominant Land Use
3. Current Plans, Policies, and Regulations
a. List and Summary of Existing Plans
(1) Transportation Plan
(2) Community Facilities Plan
(3) Utilities Extension Policies
(4) Open Space and Recreation
Policies
(5) Prior Land Use Plans and -
Policies
b. List and Brief Descri_Ation of
Enforcement
(1) Zoning
(2) Subdivision Regulations
(3) Flooding
(4) Building
(5) Septic Tanks
(6) Historic District
(7) Nuisance
(8) Dune Protection
(9) Sedimentation
(10) Environmental Impact Ordinance
Page
1
2
2
15
18
18
19
20
20
20
I

Paqe
C. Constraints - Land Suitability
23
1.
Physical Limitations for Development
23
a.
Hazard Areas, Including Man -Made
23
Hazards
b.
Areas with Soil Limitations
23
(1) Hazards for Foundations
(2) Shallow Soils
(3) Poorly Drained Soils
(4) Limitations for Septic Tanks
C.
Water Supply
24
(1) Groundwater Recharge Areas
(2) Public Water Supply Watershed
(3) Well Fields
d.
12% Slopes
24
2.
Fragile
Areas
26
a.
Coastal Wetlands
26
b.
Sand Dunes
27
C.
Ocean Beaches and Shorelines
27
d.
Estuarine Waters and Estuarine Shorelines
27
e.
Public Trust Waters
28
f.
Complex Natural Areas
28
g.
Areas that Sustain Remnant Species
29
h.
Unique Geologic Formations
29
i.
Registered Natural Landmarks
29
j.
Wooded Swamps -
29
k.
Prime Wildlife Habitat
29
1.
Scenic and Prominant High Points
30
M.
Archaeologic and Historic Sites
30
3.
Areas
with Resource Potential
30
a.
Productive and Unique Agricultural Lands
30
b.
Potentially Valuable Mineral Sites
30
C.
Publicly -Owned Forests, Parks, Fish and
31
Gamelands
d.
Prime Farmland
31
D. Constraints
- Capacity of Community Facilities
32
1.
Existing
Water and Sewer
32
2.
Design
Capacity for Water Treatment, Sewage
32
Treatment Plant, Schools, and Primary Roads

3.
Level of Utilization for Water System,
Sewage System, Schools, and Primary
Roads
4.
Capacity of Community Facilities to
Supply Existing and Anticipated Demand
E. Estimated
Demand
1.
Population Economy
and
a. Seasonal Population
b. Local Objectives Concerning Growth
C. Forseeable Social and Economic
Change
2.
Future Land Need
3.
Community Facilities Demand
II. Policy
Statements
A. Resource
Protection
1.
Areas of Environmental Concern
a. Coastal Wetlands
b. Estuarine Waters & Estuarine Shorelines
C. Public Trust Areas
d. Inlet Hazard Areas & Ocean Hazard Areas
e. Archaeological AEC
2.
Hazardous and Fragile Land Areas
a. Freshwater Swamps
b. Marshes
C. Maritime Forests
d. Cultural & Historic Resources
e. Man-made Hazards
f. Hurricane & Flood Evacuation Needs
g. Protection of Potable Water Supply
h. Use of Package Treatment Plants fo
Sewage Treatment Disposal
i. Storm Water Runoff from
Agriculture, Residential
Development, Phosphate or Peat
Mining and Their Impact on Coastal
Wetlands, Surface Waters or Other
Fragile Areas
j. Marine and Floating Home
Development
Paqe
33
33
35
35
35
35
35
35
38
38
39
41

7-1
B.
C.
k. Industrial Impacts on Fragile
Areas
1. Development of Sound and Estuarine
System Islands
Resource Production and Management - Discuss
43
Importance of Agriculture, Forestry, Mining,
Fisheries and Recreational Resources
Policy Statement on:
1. Productive Agricultural Lands
(Executive Order #96)
2. Commercial Forestlands
3. Existing and Potential Mineral
Production Areas
4. Commercial and Recreational Fisheries,
Including Nursery and Habitat Areas
5. Off Road Vehicles
6. Residential and Commercial Land
Development
7. Peat and Phosphate Mining and
Industrial Impacts on Resources
Economic and Community Development - Discuss 45
Types of Development to be Encouraged I,,
1.
Types and Locations of Industries
Desired
2.
Local Commitment to Provide Services to
Development
3.
Commitment to State and Federal
Programs Include Erosion Control,
Public Access, Highway Improvements,
Port Facilities, Dredging Military
Facilities
4.
Anticipated Residential Development,
Densities, location, Units Per Acre and
Services Necessary to Support
Development
5.
Types of Urban Growth Patterns Desired
- Redevelopment of Developed Areas
6.
Assistance to Channel Maintenance and
Beach Nourishment Projects, Including
Provision of Borrow and Spoil Areas,
Provision of Easement for Work
7.
Energy Facility Siting and Development
8.
Tourism and Beach and Waterfront
Access
9.
Coastal and Estuarine Water Beach
Access

t
1
1
1
1
1
Page
10. Local Land Use Planning Issues (Ranked 1
through 19 in local importance)
III. Land Classification System 63
IV. Storm Hazard Mitigation 69
V. Relationship of Policies and Land Classification 78
VI. Public Participation 79
Appendix
Tables
1
Population Growth 1970-1980
2
2
Changes in Population by Township
2
3
% Urban & Rural Population
3
4
Population Density
3
5
Persons Per Household
3
6
Employment by Industry Type
6
7
Retail Sales 1980-1985
7
8
Acres Harvested and Estimated Farm Income
8
9
Fish Caught & Value 1981-1984
9-10
10
Value of Forestry Products - 1983
11
11
Tourism Income
11
12
Per Capita Income
13
13
School Capacity and Utilization
32
14
Population Projections by Age Group
37
Maps -
Map showing townships with largest increase in population 4

I
1
1
1
I
A
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

IPENDER COUNTY LAND USE PLAN
A. Information Base
The 1986 Land Use Plan Update for Pender County has been
prepared in accordance with requirements of the North Carolina
Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA). Specifically, this document
complies with Subchapter 7B, "Land Use Planning Guidelines," of
the North Carolina Administrative Code, as amended, July , 1984.
The initial Land Use Plan was prepared for Pender County in
1976, and the first update in 1981. According to the Land Use
Planning Guidelines, the major purpose of periodic updating of
local land use plans is to identify and analyze newly emerging
community issues and problems. An additional element which was
not required in either the 1976 Plan or the 1981 Update is a
"Storm Hazard Mitigation, Post -Disaster Recovery, and Hurricane
Evacuation Plan," and is required to be included in the 1986
Update. This element is designed to help local governments coor-
dinate effective policies and actions relating to the impact of
hurricanes or other severe storms.
The guidelines further give the following objectives the
update should meet:
-- to further define and refine local policies and issues;
-- to further examine and refine the land classification
system and the land classification map;
-- to assess the effectiveness of the existing land use
- plan and its implementation;
to further explore implementation procedures, and;
-- to promote a better understanding of the land use plan-
ning process.
Both the 1976 Land Use Plan and the 1981 Update provided
much of the needed information base for this update. However, in
many cases, new information had to be developed or has become
available since the 1981 Plan was completed. A number of data
sources were used during the preparation of this plan to prepare
updated analyses of population, housing, economics, (including
agriculture, fisheries, and forestry), and existing land uses.
Most of the data came from primary and secondary sources in the
form of direct contacts with representatives of various state and
federal agencies and/or previously published documents or reports.
Also, "windshield" surveys were conducted to obtain data on exist-
ing land use patterns. Interviews were conducted with various
County officials, and extensive effort was made before beginning
the planning process to obtain citizen input on issues of local
concern.
t

a
B. Present Conditions
1. Present Population and Economy
The most current population information for Pender County is
the 1980 Census data and the North Carolina Office of State Budget
and Management estimates for 1985. As shown in the 1981 Land Use
Plan, Pender County had the following population in 1980 based on
Census information.
Table 1: Pender County
Population Growth
Population
% Increase, 70-80
1960
18,508
1970
18,149
1980
22,107
+21.8
*1985
24,114
+ 9.1 (5 years estimated)
Source: 1980 U.S. Bureau of the Census
*July 1, 1985 N.C. Office of State Budget and Management
As shown on Table 1, Pender County continues to experience a
steady rate of growth based on 1985 population projections, and
this trend will most likely continue.
Table 2 below reflects population changes by township for
1960, 1970, and 1980.
Table 2: Changes to Population by Township
% Change Ranking of
Township 1960 1970 1980 1970-80 Growth Rate
Burgaw
4,135
4,422
4,940
+11.7
8
Canetuck
466
256
330
+28.9
3
Caswell
1,171
1,023
996
- 2.6
Columbia
1,691
1,542
1,740
+12.8
7
Grady
1,148
1,264
1,360
+ 7.6
9
Holly
1,579
1,373
1,684
+22.7
4
Long Creek
1,045
886
1,158
+30.7
2
Rocky Point
1,728
1,616
1,941
+20.1
5
Topsail
2,431
2,860
4,515
+57.9
1
Union
3,114
2,907
3,443
+18.4
6
TOTALS
518,508
18,149
22,107
+21.8
Source: U.S. Census
Table 2
shows that
Topsail,
Long Creek,
Canetuck,
Holly, and
Rocky Point
Townships
have experienced the
largest increases in
r
population between 1970 and 1980. All of these areas continue to
t

TABLE 3
PENDER COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
% OF URBAN AND RURAL POPULATION
1950 1960 1970 1980
Urban - - - .9
Rural 100.0 100.0 100.0 99.1
Source: State Government Statistical Abstract, Fifth Edition,
1984, North Carolina
TABLE 4
PENDER COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
POPULATION DENSITY AND LAND AREA
1960 1970 1980 1983*
Land Area in Square Miles
875 22 21 21 26.7
Source: State Government Statistical Abstract, Fifth Edition,
1984, North Carolina; *September 1984 Profile of North
Carolina Counties
TABLE 5
PENDER COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS AND PERSONS PER HOUSEHOLD
1960 1970 1980
Number of Households 4,613 5,237 7,511
Persons Per Household 3.99 3.42 2.91
Source: State Government Statistical Abstract, Fifth Edition,
1984, North Carolina
3

TOWNSHIP MAP
POPULATION INCREASE 1970-1980
Jbb
PI
ncrease Lost
7.97%
30.7%
28.9%
22.7%
20.1%
2.6

grow in population. The significant population growth in
Topsail Township, 57.9% between 1970 and 1980, has continued since
1980 due to the very attractive developments along and adjacent to
the Intercoastal Waterway and within a relatively short drive to
Wilmington for urban services, such as shopping, entertainment,
etc. Large developments, such as Scotts Hill, Washington Acres,
Olde Point, Belvedere Plantation, and Deerfield, which have many
undeveloped parcels remaining, will most likely ensure that this
portion of the County will continue to grow. In addition -to these
developments, new areas that have recently opened between U.S. 17
and the Intercoastal Waterway, such as Bay Harbour, Virginia Creek
Forest, Gabes Point, Deer Run, Topsail Green, Cedar Landing, and
others, will provide additional single family lots for
development.
The Long Creek Township has experienced a 30.7% increase in
population between 1970 and 1980, with the Canetuck Township
experiencing a 28.9% increase in population for the same period.
Much of this development is most likely attributable to ease of
access to the County's major thoroughfare system and good access
to waterfront areas, such as the Cape Fear River, Black River, and
Long Creek. Assuming continued interest in waterfront access,
these areas will most likely continue to experience increases in
population.
The Rocky Point Township, between 1970 and 1980, experienced
the fourth largest increase in population. Again, this area has
good access to both U.S. 117 and N.C. 210 and, additionally,
access to the recently opened I-40. Since 1980, this area has
continued to grow with many mobile home developments being located
in this part of the County.
The Caswell Township is the only area of the County that has
lost population between 1970 and 1980. This 2.6% loss may be due,
in part, to the lack of good road access north and south and the
need to travel a fairly substantial distance to reach points, such
as Burgaw or Wilmington, to the south. This area has been, and
continues to be, very rural in character, other than the small
Town of Atkinson.
The township map, on the previous page, reflects the location
of the five townships with the largest increase in population
between 1970-1980, and the one township that has lost population
during that period.
Tables 3, 4, and 5 reflect how the County, in 1980, began in a
very small way to shift from a totally rural County to one with a
very small percentage in the urban classification. Also, as
reflected in Table 4, the population density in 1970 was 21 people
per square mile and 26.7 people per square mile in 1983. Although
the population density is increasing, it is still very rural and
considered a very low population density. Specifically, the 1984
Profile of North Carolina Counties ranked Pender County the 94th
county in population density, while New Hanover County was ranked
11

TABLE 6
PENDER COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
EMPLOYMENT OF PERSONS 16 YEARS OLD OR OLDER
BY INDUSTRY, 1980
2,229
Manufacturing
1,503
Wholesale and Retail Trade
881
Construction
768
Educational Services
669
Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Mining
660
Transportation, Communications, and
Other Public Utilities
536
Health Services
492
Public Administration
467
Finance, Insurance, Real Estate, Business, and
Repair Services
360
Personal, Entertainment and Recreational Services
129
Other Professional and Related Services
Source: Profile of North Carolina
6

� I
the 3rd highest density county in the State, with a 1983 density
of 589.7 people per square mile. As discussed earlier, because of
Wilmington's expanding economy, ease of access to Wilmington by
way of I-40, 421 and U.S. 17, and the availability of subdivisions
in a more rural setting, people have been and will probably con-
tinue to establish residence in Pender County.
Table 5 shows a substantial increase in the number of house-
holds established between 1970 and 1980, while at the same time,
the number of persons per household is dropping. Specifically,
during this 10-year period, 2,274 new households were established
in the County.
Both the 1976 and 1981 Land Use Plans discussed the fact that
Pender County's economy was based on agriculture and natural
resources, such as fishing, but the economy was experiencing
diversification at that time. This diversification of the economy
has continued, as shown in the following tables.
I
I
Total Gross Retail Sales
jj)od
Ireral Merchandise
os
ilding Material
Apparel, Furniture
Unclassified
etail Sales
TABLE 7
PENDER COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
RETAIL SALES 1980 - 1985
1980-81 1981-82 1982-83
1983-84 1984-85
$60,126,633 $61,540,329 $62,300,077 $73,958,036 $82,985,244
14,814,535 15,784,930 15,795,344 18,361,369 22,303,360
15,685,796 18,441,205 17,585,010 21,171,629 22,135,952
12,474,829 11,347,716 12,296,757 11,932,701 10,268,369
6,045,486 5,722,100 5,194,334 5,628,897
11,105,987 10,244,378 11,428,632 16,863,440
itource: Patty Chubb, North Carolina Department of Revenue
I
6
7,329,157
20,948,406
7

a
TABLE 8
PENDER COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
ACRES OF HARVESTED CROP LAND
AND ESTIMATED FARM INCOME
1980 1981 1982 1983 1984
Acres of Harvested 52,500 57,000 51,800 44,100 46,900
Crop Land
Estimated Farm Income 36,473,000 31,787,000 28,959,000 26,130,000 28,069,000
Source: September, 1984, Profile, North Carolina Counties 49-82
Table 6 shows that in 1980, over 4,613 jobs in the County were
in manufacturing, wholesale and retail trades, and construction,
with manufacturing leading with 2,229 jobs. This table also shows
that 669 jobs were in agriculture, forestry, fishing, or mining,
with other job opportunities showing a lesser amount. Retail
sales in the County have continued to increase, as shown in Table
7. Of particular interest is the sharp increase in retail sales
since 1980, specifically, from $60,126,633 in 1980 to $82,985,244
in 1985, which represents a 38% increase in that five-year period.
Much of that increase can be attributed to the continued growth at
the beach, Hampstead, and along major thoroughfares, and the
increase of tourist dollars being spent in the local economy.
As shown in Table 8, agriculture continues to be a major
economic factor in Pender County, although fewer acres are being
harvested each year and less revenue is being generated by farm
operations. Specifically, in 1980, 52,500 acres harvested gener-
ated a farm income of $36,473,000, while in 1984, 46,900 acres
harvested generated $28,069,000, which represents 5,600 fewer
acres harvested with $8,404,000 fewer dollars of estimated farm
income. Although the dollar amount has gone down, agriculture is
still a very important part of the Pender County economy.
1
n

n
TABLE 9
FISHING INDUSTRY IN PENDER COUNTY
POUNDS CAUGHT/VALUE
1981
SPECIES
POUNDS
VALUE
Bluefish
34,343
$ 5,210
Croaker
38,851
17,724
Flounders, Fluke,
21,327
16,492
Unclassified
Groupers
27,610
24,822
Harvestfish
1,586
286
King Mackerel
7,547
6,668
King Whiting
57,919
20,472
Mullet
50,222
11,668
Scups or Porgies
28,670
15,323
Sea Basses, Unclassified
24,489
19,441
Sea Trout, Grey
70,131
22,742
Snappers
49,642
95,397
Spanish Mackerel
2,756
1,102
Spot
32,725
9,050
Tilefish
1,045
888
Triggerfishes
582
146
Crab, Blue, Hard
100,264
21,162
Crab, Blue, Soft
1,005
1,759
Shrimp (heads on)
83,012
185,521
Clams, Hard (meats)
33,149
119,358
Oyster (meats)
17,669
27,671
COUNTY TOTAL 684,544 $622,902
1982
SPECIES
Bluefish
Croaker
Drum, Red
Flounders, Fluke,
Unclassified
Groupers
Grunts
Harvestfish
King Mackerel
King Whiting
Mullet
Pigfish
Scups or Porgies
Sea Basses, Unclassified
Sea Trout, Grey
Snappers
Spanish Mackerel
Spot
Tilefish
Crab, Blue, Hard
Crab, Blue, Soft
Shrimp (heads on)
Clams, Hard (meats)
Oysters (meats)
COUNTY TOTAL
POUNDS
54,811
38,726
1,118
35,270
29,479
1,265
3,313
12,848
17,336
79,354
1,457
36,101
25,685
70,301
21,903
2,388
39,357
3,692
239,733
3,333
252,580
55,095
21,124
1,046,269
VALUE
$11,467
21,244
252
26,574
23,534
437
817
12,033
6,563
15,736
286
25,981
20,268
30,113
38,712
836
11,765
16,908
37,881
6,666
553,806
185,267
37,276
$1,069,422

1983
SPECIES
Bluefish
Croaker
Drum Red
Flounders, Fluke,
Unclassified
King Whiting
Mullet
Pigfish
Sea Trout, Grey
o Spot
Crab, Blue, Hard
Shrimp (heads on)
Clams, Hard (meats)
Oyster (meats)
COUNTY TOTAL
TABLE 9
(Continued)
FISHING INDUSTRY IN PENDER COUNTY
POUNDS CAUGHT/VALUE
1984
POUNDS
VALUE
SPECIES
56,371
$ 9,907
Bluefish
47,205
20,517
Butterfishes
8,508
1,682
Croaker
44,236
34,774
Drum, Red
Flounders, Fluke,
35,834
13,711
Unclassified
54,889
12,321
Harvestfish
3,507
661
King Whiting
77,807
28,565
Mullet
51,687
15,261
Pigfish
118,326
34,487
Pompano
113,100
240,276
Scups or Porgies
92,540
346,285
Sea Basses, Unclassified
25,632
50,141
Sea Trout, Grey
Sea Trout, Spotted
Spanish Mackerel
Spot
Crab, ,Blue, Hard
Shrimp
Clams, Hard (meats)
Oyster, Public, Spring
(meats)
Oyster, Public, Fall
(meats)
Oyster, Private, Spring
(meats)
Scallop, Bay (meats)
729,642
$808,588
COUNTY TOTAL
POUNDS VALUE
32,892
$ 5,412
1,826
512
81,203
34,968
12,987
3,644
37,671
30,079
599
151
39,600
15,098
145,868
26,804
3,172
651
56
39
37
30
2,552
1,919
92,435
33,540
2,972
2,282
89
4 36
65,196
17,590
48,831
8,521
284,504
634,857
60,495
214,130
9,005
18,010
10,627
18,869
1,484
2,983
2,141
3,213
936,242 $1,073,338
M Mw Mw ow Mw

The fishing industry has been, and continues to be, a very
important part of the economy. Table 9 shows that in 1981,
684,544 pounds_of fish were caught with a value of $622,902; while
in 1984, 936,242 pounds were caught with a value of $1,073,338.
Although these dollar amounts appear to be relatively small com-
pared to retail operations in the County, the fishing industry,
both commercial and recreational fishing, is a very special and
important part of the local character and economy of Pender County
and continues to provide job opportunities through facilities such
as the Atlantic Seafood Company in Hampstead and others.
TABLE 10
PENDER COUNTY FORESTRY
1983
Estimated Value to Land Owner $5,414,000
*(Includes Public and Private Land)
Value of Logs Delivered to $8,727,000
**Point of Manufacturing
Source: *Commodity Survey from N.C. Division of Forest Resources
**Stump Value Composite, Division of Forest Resources
Like agriculture and fishing, the forestry industry continues
to be a very important part of the local economy. Table 10 shows
that in 1984, over $5 million was generated for local property
owners through the harvesting of trees, with over $8 million in
value being generated for logs delivered to points of
manufacturing.
Local companies, like Pender Lumber Company, Williams Lumber
Company, and Nunalee Lumber County, are able to use local forest
products, and thereby continue to provide local job opportunities
in Pender County.
TABLE 11
PENDER COUNTY TOURISM INCOME
1980-1985
1980 $ 5,787,000
1981 6,414,000
1982 7,710,000
1983 10,080,000
1984 18,264,000
r„ 1985 21,144,000
Source: N.C. Travel and Tourism Division, Department of Commerce
1 11

As shown in Table 11, one of the fastest growing segments of
the economy is tourism income. In 1980, $5,787,000 in tourism
dollars were spent in Pender County, primarily for restaurants,
gas, food, and lodging at the beaches. In 1985, tourism income
was $21,144,000, which represents a substantial increase in tour-
ist dollars being spent in the County. With the continued growth
at the beach, tourist attractions near Hampstead, and the opening
of I-40 between Raleigh and Wilmington during the planning period,
this segment of the economy will most likely continue to grow.
Also, with the work of the Economic Development Commission and
improved highway access during the five- to ten-year planning
period, the County will most likely experience continued growth of
industry, such as the Takeda Plant on 421 and other smaller indus-
tries that have located throughout the County since 1981.
J
F
I
i
1
12

State
Pender
r
Onslow
New Hanover
Wake
Durham
Mecklenburg
Guilford
Forsythe
TABLE 12
PENDER CDUNPY, NORTH CAROLING
PER CAPITA PERSONAL INCOME
1969 - 1981
0
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
2,999
3,220
3,410
3,789
4,241
4,587
4,860
5,350
5,770
6,475
7,125
7,780
8,656
2,034
2,357
2,495
2,808
3,203
3,462
3,765
4,031
4,380
4,901
5,485
6,054
6,892
2,828
3,314
3,339
3,931
4,341
4,851
4,661
4,834
4,499
4,934
5,401
5,989
7,089
3,175
3,396
3,555
3,970
4,386
4,677
4,966
5,497
6,002
6,728
7,591
8,339
9,158
3,677
3,962
4,182
4,563
5,018
5,465
5,922
6,459
7,026
7,835
8,851
9,633
10,623
3,376
3,680
4,072
4,460
4,711
5,176
5,711
6,225
6,744
7,498
8,333
9,158
10,095
4,066
4,305
4,622
5,091
5,542
5,974
6,381
6,954
7,592
8,490
9,523
10,335
11,460
3,864
4,154
4,444
4,920
5,381
5,890
6,179
6,708
7,274
8,204
9,045
9,913
10,943
3,705
4,025
4,243
4,652
5,182
5,654
6,101
6,776
7,459
8,198
8,958
9,912
11,014
Sources: September, 1984, Profile, North Carolina Counties

As more people locate
in the County, it is worth noting the
per capita personal income
for the County. Table 12 shows that
Pender County's per capita
personal income was approximately
$1,764 less.than the State
capita income continues to
average based on 1981 figures. Per
increase, although it is slightly less
than Onslow County to the
north and approximately $2,266 less than
New Hanover County to the
south of Pender County. With the recent
opening of better access to
Wilmington by way of I-40 and the very
attractive developments on
the water near Hampstead, it is likely
that many people working in
Wilmington will continue to choose to
live in Pender County because
of its many fine qualities and rural
atmosphere. If this trend
continues, the per capita income level
for the County may make even
larger gains in the future. As
reflected on Table 12 in 1981,
personal income was above
New Hanover County per capita
the State average by more than $500.00.
Overall, the economic
picture for Pender County looks very
bright during the five to
ten-year planning period.
H
C
Is
14
I.

2. Existing Land Use
Pender County is the seventh largest County in North Carolina
with 559,885 acres of land and water area. The County contains
the four municipalities of Surf City, Topsail Beach, Burgaw, and
Atkinson, with each of these municipalities recently preparing or
planning to prepare their own CAMA Land Use Plan Updates.
In preparing information on existing land use (see existing
Land Use Map) for Pender County, Talbert, Cox & Associates, Inc.,
first obtained copies of the updated Land Use Plan for Topsail
Beach, which was prepared in 1985. The plan reflects existing
land use for single-family residential, duplex, multi -family,
commercial, public, institutional, and vacant land. The Surf City
plan was prepared in 1981 and is currently being updated. The
1981 plan shows existing residential, commercial, and
institutional uses. For those interested in existing land use or
land classification information for the beach area, they are
referred to these two land use plans.
Existing land use for the remaining portion of the County was
obtained from a windshield survey, the use of 1984 Department of
Transportation photos, and a windshield survey for the area
between U.S. 17 and the Intercoastal Waterway using 660' scale
aerial photos as a base. This more detailed survey was conducted
' because of the very rapid growth rate between U.S. 17 and the
Intercoastal Waterway, as discussed in the population section of
this report, and in an effort to determine how extensive this
development is and what impact it might have on the ecosystem
along the Intercoastal Waterway.
Topsail Township
Based on the survey, we found that commercial development
continues to concentrate along U.S. 17 near Poplar Grove Planta-
tion, Hampstead, near Vista, and at the intersection of S.R. 1560
and U.S. 17. In addition to commercial uses along the U.S. 17
corridor, two public schools and a public library are located
between Hampstead and the Belvedere Plantation development.
Single-family residences are located along S.R. 1571 at Scotts
Hill, with water access for boats at Scotts Hill Marina. A large
area between Scotts Hill and Washington Acres is wooded and
undeveloped. Washington Acres has approximately 75 lots devel-
oped, with most of these developed lots being concentrated on or
near the water. Washington Acres also has a boat landing avail-
able. Deerfield, at the time of the survey in late 1985, had 21
developed lots, with most of those being located on the water.
Development along S.R. 1614 and 1616 between Hampstead and the
Intercoastal Waterway is a combination of conventional homes and
mobile homes.
15

Both Olde Point and Belvedere Plantation are very attractive
planned communities surrounding golf course facilities. The
development along S.R. 1575 at the waterfront is a relatively
high -density single-family development with rather small lots.
Also, at the waterfront, a marina is being developed as part of
the Belvedere community. Continuing north on U.S. 17, the next
major new development is Topsail Green, which is an attractive
mobile home development around an 18-hole golf course.
State Roads 1561, 1564, and 1578 have a combination of conven-
tional and mobile home development on single lots, with Bay
Harbour, north of S.R. 1561, in the early development stages with
only two developed lots in late 1985.
Virginia Creek Forest, off of S.R. 1560, and Deer Run and
Cedar Landing, near N.C. 50, are large, primarily mobile home
developments. Gabes Point is a larger residential development
with entrance from N.C. 50 at the entrance to the Surf City and
Topsail Beach Bridge. Lots on or near the water are developed,
with many of the interior lots undeveloped.
All of the remaining land areas between U.S. 17 and the Inter -
coastal Waterway are either forested or agricultural areas, uncul-
tivated fields, marsh, or bodies of water.
The remaining portion of Topsail Township between U.S. 17 and
the Topsail Township boundary consists of the Holly Shelter Game -
land, forested and agricultural areas, or strip residential devel-
opment along Highway N.C. 210 or S.R. 1002.
Holly Township
The Holly Township is a very rural part of the County, with
mostly residential and some commercial development being concen-
trated near Maple Hill. Additional residential development is
located along Highway 53, with a large blueberry farm located near
the center of the Township. The remaining land area is forested
areas, open fields, or agricultural land, and the Angola Bay Game
Land at the northern edge of the Township. This Township also
contains the Maple Hill quarry consisting of approximately eleven
acres and extensive forested areas that are subject to forest
fires as demonstrated by the Spring 1986 forest fires in the
vicinity.
Union Township
Union Township contains the communities
and Watha. Residential and commercial uses
U.S. 117 and along roads leading to or near
Penderlea, Willard, and Watha. A major new
recently opened I-40 thoroughfare, with an
at U.S. 117. The remaining portion of the
agricultural in use.
of Penderlea, Willard,
are concentrated along
the communities of
land use is the
access point to Willard
County is wooded or
1
1
1
fl
I
16

Burgaw Township
Burgaw, the County's largest municipality, is located near the
center of this Township. Residential, commercial, and institu-
tional land uses are concentrated inside the Town limits of
Burgaw, with strip residential and commercial development being
located along major thoroughfares, such as U.S. 117, N.C. 53, and
other state roads. I-40 and N.C. 53 intersect near Burgaw and
provide greatly improved access to Burgaw from the northern and
i southern part of the County and to adjacent New Hanover County and
■ Wilmington. The remaining land area is primarily agricultural and
forested areas, cultivated farmland, or fields.
In addition to the recent opening of I-40 to Burgaw, the area
is also in the process of opening a new shopping center at the
intersection of U.S. 117 and N.C. 53. Once this facility is in
operation, additional land use changes in this area can be antici-
pated, particularly along N.C. 53 between I-40 and its intersec-
tion with U.S. 117.
Rocky Point, Long Creek, Grady, and Canetuck Townships
These four townships are very rural in character, with res-
idential and some commercial land uses being concentrated along
the highway system, such as N.C. 210, U.S. 117, and U.S. 421. The
Rocky Point Township has N.C. 210 running east and west, with U.S.
117 and I-40 running north and south. I-40 has an access point to
Rocky Point at Highway N.C. 210. Each of these four townships is
primarily forested or in cultivated fields and each has exper-
ienced substantial population increases between 1970 and 1980.
This increase in population will probably continue because of
highway access, the relatively short travel time to Wilmington and
New Hanover County, and job opportunities available in that area.
Also, the proposed location of a Cape Fear'Technical School faci-
lity and the 1,000 acre + "Lane's Ferry" Industrial Park area and
residential development adjacent to the Cape Fear River on N.C.
210 will affect future land use in the area east of Rocky Point.
Columbia and Caswell Townships
Caswell Township contains the municipality of Atkinson, which
is located on N.C. 53. Again, residential and commercial uses are
concentrated in Atkinson and adjacent to the major thoroughfare in
this area. Columbia Township has most of its commercial land uses
along U.S. 421, which runs north and south between Wilmington and
Clinton to the north. This highway route is the primary access -
point between Wilmington and Raleigh and other Piedmont area com-
munities. Like other County townships, the remaining land uses
are primarily forested areas, fields, or cultivated fields.
17

In summary, Pender County has a very low density of develop-
ment with extensive forested areas and agricultural areas through-
out the County. Most residential and commercial development -is
located in municipalities or along highway thoroughfares leading
to municipalities or communities. The fastest growing portion of
the County is Topsail Township, including Topsail Beach, Surf
City, and the area between U.S. 17 and the Intercoastal Waterway.
The major land use change affecting the County and completed since
the 1981 Land Use Plan was prepared has been the completion and
opening of Interstate I-40.
a. Significant Land Use Compatibility Problems
In the conventional application of the concept, there are few
significant land use compatibility problems in Pender County. A
land compatibility problem is generally identified when two or
more land use types are adjacent to each other and one is somehow
restricted from expansion because of adverse conditions caused by
the other, thus discouraging additional investment in a particular
land use.
The 1981 Land Use Plan did not address significant land use
compatibility problems as such, but concentrated more on the vis-
ual qualities, or impressions, of the County. Because of the
County's primarily rural character, there are no significant land
use compatibility problems, with the possible exception of resi-
dential uses in areas not suitable for septic tank use. In many
cases where problems exist, they are due to older developments
that took place prior to the more restrictive State septic tank
regulations going into effect.
b. Major Problems from Unplanned Development
Again, the 1981.Land Use Plan did not address major problems
from unplanned development. However, based on a November 1985
windshield survey of the County, it was apparent that many
subdivisions have been developed over the years using dirt roads
that will probably not meet today's Department of Transportation
road standards. Although this may not be a major problem now for
the County, as these developments continue to have homes
developed, many of these roads may become maintenance problems
from additional use. If they were not originally constructed to
State DOT standards_ or have not been accepted for DOT maintenance,
this could become a major long-range problem for the County.
Adoption of subdivision regulations requiring roads to be
built to DOT standards will eliminate this problem in the future.
W.

c. Areas Experiencing or Likely to Experience
Changes in Predominant Land Use
The Topsail Township area, and specifically the Hampstead area
along U.S. 17, is continuing to change from a rural -type land use
to a community. Several new commercial businesses have opened to
serve the tourist traffic and residents of the area. One new bank
has been built in Hampstead and another is planned, and this
growth trend will most likely continue.
The intersection of U.S. 117 and N.C. 53 is changing from a
rural character to a shopping center use. Because this area is
close to Burgaw, at the intersection of two major highways with
access to I-40, this area will probably continue to experience
major changes in land use during the planning period. Also, the
area between this intersection and the intersection of I-40 and
N.C. 53 will probably change in predominant land use.
The location of the Takeda Plant on 421 at the Pender-New
Hanover County line may encourage other industry to locate in this
part of the County, which is considered a prime location for
industrial development because of four land road to State Ports,
railroad line access, and potential extension of the Lower Cape
Fear Waterline.
The Lane's Ferry area east of Rocky Point between I-40 and the
Cape Fear River has recently been changed to a transition class
1 for approximately 1,000 acres of industrial and residential
development. As I-40 opens to Raleigh and existing good access to
Wilminaton, this area will experience substantial qrowth.
L -1
1
1
t
I
19

3. Current Plans Policies and Regulations
a. List and Summary of Existing Plans-
1. Transportation Plan
Pender County does not have an adopted
transportation plan. However, the County
will work with DOT to prepare and adopt such
a plan.
2.
Community Facilities Plan
Pender County has a Community Facilities
Plan from the mid-1970's, which needs
updating.
3.
Utility Extension Policies
The County presently does not provide County
water or sewer services. A plan has been
prepared that discusses a water system in
the eastern part of the County.
4.
Open Space and Recreation Policies
The County has an old recreation and open
space plan, which is in need of updating in
order to be useful for current populations.
5.
Prior Land Use Plans and Policies
Pender County has prepared and adopted CAMA
Land Use Plans in 1976 and 1981. Both of
these plans included background land use
information and policies as required by the
CAMA regulations and both plans have been
used in the 1986 update.
b. List
and Brief Description of Enforcement
1. Zoning
There is no zoning ordinance at present;
however, the Planning Board is working to
present an adoptable zoning ordinance.
2. Subdivision Regulations
Draft subdivision regulations have been
prepared, but not adopted.
20

3. Flood Insurance Program
The County came under the Federal Flood
Insurance Program on February 15, 1985.
Inspections are conducted by the County
Inspection Department.
4. Building
The North Carolina Building Code is enforced
by the Pender County Building Inspection
Department.
5. Septic Tanks
Septic tanks are used extensively throughout
Pender County. Enforcement of septic tank
use is administered by the County Health
Department using applicable State
standards.
6. Historic District
Pender County has existing historic and
archaeological sites, but at present has no
Historic District Ordinance.
7. Nuisance
Pender County does not have an existing
Nuisance Ordinance.
8. Dune Protection
Dune protection is regulated through the
Coastal Area Management Act requirements.
Minor permits are administered by the
County's Permit Officer with major permits
being administered by the State Permit
Officer.
9. Sedimentation
Pender County adopted a Soil Erosion and
Sediment Control Ordinance effective
January 25, 1975. However, monies were not
budgeted to the Soil and Water Conservation
District to enact the ordinance and the
Department of Natural Resources and
Community Development is managing and
enforcing the ordinance.
21

10. Environmental Impact Ordinance
P.ender County does not have a local
Environmental Impact Ordinance. Major
projects must meet requirements of State and
Federal environment regulations administered
by State and Federal agencies.
Ll
I
1
1
11
1
u
1
22

C. Constraints - Land Suitability
This section of the Pender County Land Use Plan identifies
features of the land or landscape of the County which are or could
pose serious constraints to development. Under land suitability,
these constraints are generally considered under the broad cate-
gories of (1) physical limitations, hazardous (man-made or natur-
al) areas, areas with soil limitations, hazardous slopes, etc.;
(2) fragile areas, example. AECs, complex natural areas, or areas
with cultural (architectural or archaeological) significance; and
(3) areas with resource potential, i.e., productive or prime agri-
cultural or forestlands, or potentially valuable mineral sites
(peat, for example). These elements were not discussed in the
1981 Land Use Plan Update. However, because of the implications
for updating certain policies, they are discussed and presented
below.
1. Physical Limitations for Development
a. Hazard Areas, Including Man -Made Hazards
There are no identified man-made hazard areas.
b. Areas with Soil Limitations
The inherent soil characteristics of the coastal area, with
high water table elevations and susceptibility to flooding, can be
I a major limitation to development. Soils subject to flooding have
been identified using information provided by the Soil Conserva-
tion Service office in Burgaw. Specifically, the following soils
have been identified as soils that are frequently flooded:
Bohicket silty clay loam; Carteret fine sand, frequently flooded;
Croatan muck; Chewacla loam, frequently flooded; Dorovan muck,
frequently flooded; and Muckalee loam, frequently flooded. These
soils have such severe limitations (flooding, drainage, etc.) that
development for other uses would be impractical and ecologically
unsound.
As discussed in the 1976 Land Use Plan and is apparent by
looking at the Pender County Detailed Soil Survey, nearly 80% of
the County has high water table conditions which place limitations
on residential development.
Most of the soils in the County have either severe or moderate
limitations for development using septic tanks due to high water
table conditions. The wetness condition, without modifications,
causes wastewater to saturate the soil and pond on the surface.
The deep sandy soil on the beach area and adjacent to some rivers
and streams offer little filtration for wastewater due to the
rapid permeability rate. Developers will need to exercise caution
in developing these areas. Specific conservation soils are listed
on page 68 of the plan.
F-I
23
M

1
Although flooding is a constraint to development, it can be
avoided.by building structures above the 100-year flood, if
approved by local, State, and Federal agencies having regulatory
jurisdiction. The County also has two large pocosins in or near
the Angola Bay Game Land and Holly Shelter Game Land, with an
additional low, wet area in the southwestern corner of the County
near the Bladen, Columbus, and Brunswick County lines.
c. Water Supply
(1) Groundwater Recharge Areas
Wetlands regulate water supplies by retaining and delaying
floodwaters and may assist groundwater recharge in some instances
(U.S. E.P.A. 1978; Larson 1981). The U.S. Environmental Protec-
tion Agency (1978) indicates that wetlands aid in recharging
groundwater by channeling water into aquifers. Other sources
indicate that the relationship begween wetlands and groundwater
recharge is not clear (Larson 1981) or is limited to recharge of
surficial aquifers and streams or rivers in many cases (Charles
Daniels, U.S. Geological Survey, Raleigh). Pocosin wetlands in
Pender County that have peat soils and are elevated above the
surrounding terrain do recharge groundwater, but at very slow
rates (Daniel 1981). Pender County has 150,000 acres of pocosins
that could act as recharge areas.
(2) Public Water Supply Watershed
Groundwater comprises the sole source of water supply for both
public and private systems in Pender County. Subsurface water of
reasonable quality and quantity can be found throughout the
County, as the area is underlain_ by a vast aquifer system from
which potable water can be drawn at various depths. There are
four geologic strata occurring in the aquifer system underlying
the County.
Pleistocene and recent surficial sands cover most of Pender
County and constitute the principal water source for individual
wells and rural domestic supplies in the County (Von Oesen and
Associates, 1972). In the surficial sands, water usually occurs
under water table conditions within 15 feet of the land surface.
The productivity of this aquifer is limited primarily only by its
thickness; it is recharged directly by rainfall and is easily
subject to contamination. 'The surficial sands are the only pot-
able water supply between the Cape Fear and Black Rivers, where
the underlying strata contain brackish water.
u
24
n

I
The Yorktown clays, shell beds, and marls occur on a limited
J basis east of the Northeast Cape Fear River. This formation is
/ absent in the central and western parts of the County and, unlike
the other strata in this area, does not thicken toward the coast
(LeGrand, 1960). The Yorktown is rarely used as a source of water
supply.
The Castle Hayne limestone underlies the surficial sands in
the northeast and southeast sections of the County, outcrops in
the central portion of the County, and forms just a thin layer
between the surficial and Cretaceous sands in the south. The
Castle Hayne is absent from the western part of the County.
The Castle Hayne is not extensively used for water supply in
the County, but is potentially valuable as a large, long-term
supply, especially in the east. In the beach areas, the formation
begins at 35' below msl and its waters occur under artesian condi-
tions; its recharge area would, therefore, be expected to be
located elsewhere and not be vulnerable to contamination from the
immediate area. In most places where it occurs to the west of the
beaches, however, it begins less than 25' under highly permeable
surficial sands. Under these conditions, a high recharge rate
could be expected (Wiggins -Rimer and Associates, 1973).
The quality and quantity of water from the Castle Hayne
aquifer vary in different locations. It ranges from hard to very
hard, with a pH of 7-8. In the Surf City -Holly Ridge area, it is
low in chlorides and high in iron locally; and at Holly Ridge,
indications are that a specific capacity of 50-70 gpm/feet of
drawdown can be obtained (Laymon, 1965). Most attempts to obtain
good water from the Castle Hayne in the immediate beach areas have
proved unsuccessful thus far.
The Peedee Cretaceous sands, limestones, and marine clays
occur throughout Pender County. For the most part, west of the
Northeast Cape Fear River, the Peedee immediately underlies the
surficial sands. Toward the east, it occurs beneath, and is in
hydraulic connection with the Castle Hayne. In both cases, the
Peedee is recharged directly by rainfall. In the beach areas,
however, the formation occurs deep and its water is under artesian
conditions. Recharge to the Peedee, therefore, probably does not
take place in the immediate beach areas.
The Peedee furnishes water to many wells drilled west of the
Northeast Cape Fear River; wells in it vary from 50-200 feet deep
and yield up to 300 gpm (Wiggins -Rimer & Associates, 1973). In
the eastern part of the County, it is rarely used for water sup-
ply, as it can be high in chlorides and too deep to be used eco-
nomically.
Subsurface water quality and yields for specific locations in
Pender County can be determined only on an individual case basis
with a test well. Often, water obtained from shallow aquifers
25

will contain excessive amounts of iron. In some locations, local
people have become accustomed to iron or hydrogen sulfide concen-
trations that others would find objectionable. The quality that
can be expected can sometimes be estimated from the condition of
wells nearby.
'
In general, satisfactory water can be obtained from some depth
most anywhere in Pender County; and with the numerous existing
water table wells, most of the surficial sands throughout Pender
County function, to a certain degree, as recharge areas.
(3) Well Fields
Pender County does not have a County water system, therefore,
there are no public well fields. However wherever recharge takes
place for private wells, there are priva a well tields.
d. 12% Slopes
The soils of Pender County are predominately level or gently
sloping. However, a few areas of the County have slopes of up to
30%. The sandy areas east of US 17 and along the southern portion
of US 421 have slopes up to 6%. In the western part of the
County,'along the Black River and back toward US 421, slopes range
from less than 1% up to 12% slopes. The area along the northern
border of Pender has slopes %p to 12% along the Rockfish Creek.
bank
The Newhand soil of the outerarea has slopes ranging up to
30%. All soils that have been cleared have a tendency to erode.
The steeper slopes combined with loamy or clayey subsoils erode
faster than sloping sandy soils. However, the sandy soils will
experience wind erosion as well as water erosion if not protected.
2. Fragile Areas
These are areas which could easily be damaged or destroyed by
inappropriate or poorly planned development. There are several
fragile areas in Pender County including those areas identified as
Areas of Environmental Concern (AECs), including coastal wetlands,
estuarine waters, public trust waters, and ocean hazards areas.
The Countx also includes pocosins which are identified on the
ount s cietaiiLect soi s report an requlated Wetlands as
defined y the U.S. Army Corps ot Engineers.
a. Coastal Wetlands
Coastal wetlands are defined as any salt marsh or other marsh
subject to regular or occasional flooding by tides, including wind
tides (whether or not the tide waters reach the marshland areas
through natural or artificial watercourses), provided this shall
not include hurricane or tropical storm tides. Salt marsh or
other marsh shall be those areas upon which grow some, but not
necessarily all, of the following salt marsh and marsh species:
Smooth or Salt Water CordVrass (S artina alterniflora): Black
Needlerush (Juncus roemerianus); G asswort a icornia s .);
Salt - Meadow Grass artina Patens); Sea Lavender Limonium
s ); Bulrush (Scir us sSaw Grass (Cladium Jamaicense); and
a t Weed Grass Spartina cvnosuroides). Included in this efini-
tion of wetlands is any contiguous and as the Secretary of NRCD I
26 . I

reasonably deems necessary to affect by any such order in carrying
out the purposes of this Section." (G.S. 113-230(a]).
Pender County has jurisdiction over extensive wetland areas,
primarily between the mainland area and adjacent tributaries,
and the beach areas, and adjacent to the Intercoastal Waterway
from Onslow to New Hanover County.
These wetlands along our coast serve as a critical part of the
ecosystem. Estuarine dependent species like fish and shellfish
make up over 90% of the total value of North Carolina's commercial
catch, and therefore, it is necessary that any future adjacent
development be sensitive to this fragile environment and meet
applicable County, state or federal regulations for development.
Low tidal marsh also serves as the first line of defense against
shoreline erosion by dissipating wave action.
b. Sand Dunes
rSand dunes are defined as ridges or mounds of wind-blown
material, usually sand. These occur at Topsail Beach and Surf
City and would be addressed in their CAMA Land Use Plan.
c. Ocean Beaches and Shoreline
Ocean beaches and shoreline are defined as land areas without
vegetation covering and consist of unconsolidated soil material
that extends landward from mean low tide to a point where any one
or combination of the following occur: (1) vegetation, or (2) a
distinct change in predominant soil partical size, or (3) a change
in slope or elevation which alters the physiographic land form.
Sand deposits of ocean beaches and shorelines represent a
dynamic zone which does not afford long-term'protection for devel-
opment. The nature of tidal action and the force of storms is
such that they cause the beach areas to shift constantly. Lit-
toral drift is a natural phenomenon whereby sand is removed from
beaches by wave action and littoral currents and is deposited upon
a different stretch of the beach; this action also shifts the line
of high tide and low tide. Ocean beaches and shorelines are valu-
able for public and private recreation and are located within
natural hazard areas. Thus, development within these dynamic
zones may result in loss of property and possible loss of life.
Such areas much be preserved to the greatest extent feasible
with opportunity to enjoy the physical, aesthetic, cultural and
recreational qualities of the natural shorelines of the State.
Ocean beaches and shorelines occur at Topsail Beach and Surf City
and will be addressed in those plans. Ocean beaches and shore-
lines in the County's jurisdiction include Lea & Huta Is an s.
d. Estuarine Waters
Estuarine waters are defined as all water of the Atlantic
Ocean within the boundary of North Carolina and all the waters of
27

the bays, sounds, rivers and tributaries there to seaward of the
dividing line between coastal fishing waters and inland fishing
waters, as set forth in an agreement adopted by the Wildlife
Resources Commission and the Department of Conservation and Deve1=
opment filed with the Secretary of State entitled "Boundary Lines,
North Carolina Commercial Fishing -Inland Fishing Waters, revised
March 1, 1965" or as it may be subsequently revised by the Legis-
lature. In addition to estuarine waters AECs there are adjacent
estuarine s ore ine AECs as detined by CAMA regulations.
These areas are among the.most productive natural environments
of North Carolina, for they not only support valuable commercial
and sports fisheries, but are also utilized for commercial naviga-
tion, recreation, and aesthetic ?urposes. Species dependent upon
estuaries, such as menhaden, shrimp, flounder, oysters and crabs
make up over 90 percent of the total value of North Carolina's
commercial catch, and these species must spend all or some dart of
their life cycle in the estuary. The high level of commercial and
sports fisheries and the aesthetic appeal of coastal North
Carolina are dependent upon the protection and sustained quality
of our estuarine areas.
Pender County estuarine waters are located generally between
the mainland side of the Intercoastal Waterway and the Atlantic
Ocean.
e. Public Trust Waters
Public trust defined
waters are as all waters of the Atlantic
Ocean and the lands thereunder from the mean water mark to the
seaward limit of State jurisdiction, all natural bodies of water
subject to measurable lunar tides and lands thereunder to the mean
high water mark, all navigable natural bodies of water and lands
thereunder to mean high water mark or ordinary high water mark, as
the case may be, except privately owned lakes to which the public
has no right of access, all waters in artificially created bodies
of water in which exist significant public fishing resources or
other public resources, which are accessible to the public b
navigation from bodies of water in which the public has no rights
of navigation, all waters in artificially created bodies of water
in which the public has acquired rights by prescription, custom,
usage, dedication or any other means. Included in public trust
waters are areas such as waterways and lands under or flowed over
by tidal waters or navigable waters, to which the public may have
rights of access of public trust rights, and areas which the State
of North Carolina may be authorized to preserve, conserve, or
protect under Article XIV, Section 5, of the North Carolina
Constitution. Public trust waters in Pender County include the
Cape Fear River, Northeast Cape Fear River, Black River, and
Morgan, Long, and Turkey Creeks and other naturally flowing
streams.
f. Complex Natural Areas
Pender County has three areas that can be considered complex
natural areas, as discussed in the 1981 Land Use Plan.
28

Angola Bay has extensive tracts of tall evergreen shrub poco-
sins, mixed pond pine pocosin, and pond pine forests. It is
believed to serve as an important wildlife habitat for various
endangered or threatened species.
Holly Shelter is a 100-square mile wilderness which contains
both low and high pocosin wetlands. It serves as a habitat for
bear, alligators, red -cockaded woodpeckers, eastern diamondback
rattlesnakes, et al. There have been seven rare plant species
identified in this area. They include the venus flytrap, white
wicky (Kalmia cuneata), roughleaf loosestrife (Lysimachia
asperulaefolia), and others. There is also a 300-acre (sarracenia
flava) pitcherplant bog.
Near Rocky Point, there is a 40-acre, badly cut -over bottom -
land called the Rocky Point Marl Forest. It consists of a mixture
■ of pine and sweet gum trees and contains rare herbaceous species.
It also contains out-croppings of the Castle-Hayne limestone form-
ation marl. This is the only North Carolina location for the rare
carya myristicaeformis. Tie -Count Pl nning Board discussed
possible local regulation ot the com ex natural area u elt
there are adequate tederal and state regulations.
g. Areas That Sustain Remnant Species
Angola Bay, Holly Shelter, and the Rocky Point Marl Forest,
discussed above, sustain remnant species.
h. Unique Geologic Formations
As discussed in the 1981 Land Use Plan, an abandoned rock
quarry near Maple Hill has the best known exposure of the fossili-
ferous Castle-Hayne limestone formation, probably the most signif-
icant geologic layer in eastern North Carolina due to its water -
carrying capacity in this part of the State.
i. Registered Natural Landmark
Pender County does not have any Registered Natural Landmarks.
j. Wooded Swamps
Wooded swamps and seasonally flooded basins, as defined by the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Circular 39, "Wetlands of the
United States," occur in Pender County. Based on information from
the Soil Conservation Service, they can be identified by the
hydric soil types and by hydrophytic vegetative cover. It is
estimated that there are 80,000 acres of wooded swamps or season-
ally flooded basins in Pender County. Information on s ecific
locations can be obtained from the Soil Conservation ottice and
detailed soils maps.
k. Prime Wildlife Habitat
Game lands, such as Angola and Holly Shelter, provide excel-
lent wildlife habitat, as discussed under complex natural areas.
Also, the extensive marsh areas and large bodies of water through-
out the County also provide prime wildlife habitats.
t
29
�

1. Scenic and Prominent High Points
Although the County does not have any designated scenic or
high points, it does have an abundance of scenic areas throughout
the County and particularly along the waterfront areas and marsh
areas. Lea and Hutaff Islands are two specific scenic areas in
the County.
m. Archaeologic and Historic Sites
Specific information on the location of archaeological sites
cannot be given in this report at the request of the North
Carolina Department of Cultural Resources. The County presently
has six structures on the National Register, which include the
following (the County does not have any areas with groupings of
structures that could be considered for nomination of an historic
district):
National Register
Bannerman House, Player vicinity
Belvedere Plantation House (Merrick -Nixon House),
Hampstead vicinity
Moore's Creek National Military Park
Pender County Courthouse, Burgaw
Poplar Grove, Scotts Hill
Sloop Point, Vista
One structure on the study list, as provided by Renee 1
Gledhill -Early of the Division of Archives- and History, include
the following:
Study List
Burgaw Railroad Station and Depot
3. Areas With Resource Potential
a. Productive and Unique Agricultural Lands
The most productive agricultural lands in Pender County are
identified by the Pender Soil and Water Conservation District as
Prime Farmlands and Locally Important Farmlands. This list and
the soils maps of Pender County are available from the District
office (see Appendix).
b. Potentially Valuable Mineral Sites
Based on information from the Department of Natural Resources
and Community Development, Division of Land Resources, Pender
County currently has six mineral resource sites which contain
deposits of limestone.
I
30

Acres
Stocks Pit
9.0
Royal State Construction Company
Williams Pit
9.0
Prime Construction, Inc.
Cowan Mine
33.0
East Coast Limestone
Brickhowe Pit
3.0
Dickerson, Inc.
Rocky Point Quarry
246.0
Martin Marietta
Maple Hill Quarry
11.0
Holly Creek Limestone
c. Publicly -Owned Forests, Parks, Fish, and
Gamelands
Publicly -owned forests include the Angola Game Land and Holly
Shelter Game Land. Moores Creek National Battlefield, located on
Highway 210, is a federally -owned and operated park. Public trust
waters throughout the County provide both recreational boating and
fishing opportunities to residents, as well as visitors to the
area. If public access and facilities in publicly -owned forests,
Parks and gamelands would benefit the County, any federal or state
' grants for such development will be secured if possible.
d. Prime Farmland
F1
Prime farmlands have been identified by soil type and are
listed in the Soil Conservation Service - USDA office in Burqaw.
There are approximately 98,780 acres of prime farmland in Pender
County. Soil maps are available from the SCS office (see
Appendix.) These 98,780 acres are in varying forms of production
from farmland to timber production.
31

D. Constraints - Capacity of Community Facilities ,
1. Existing Water and Sewer
At present, the County does not have a County water or sewer
system. Each of the County's municipalities, with the exception
of Atkinson, has its own water system and details on each are
discussed in their respective CAMA Land Use Plans. Burgaw has a ,
sewage treatment facility; however, Topsail Beach does not have
central systems and must continue to use individual septic tanks
for sewage disposal. Surf City has a waste treatment facility
with a 550,000 gpd capacity w ich should be adegua a to serve the
area tor IU years.
2. Design Capacity for Water Treatment, Sewaae Treatment
Plant, coo s, an Fill, an Primary Roads'
As discussed in the previous section, Pender County does not
have a water or sewer system. The details of o eration for the
water system and sewer system at Lane s Ferr will be eci a in
e tuture by County of icia s and the industrial Par Deve oper.
Based on information from the Superintendent of Schools,
grades 9-12 are experiencing a decline
in student population
in
the western part of the County, with an
increase in the eastern
part of the County. Three
of the schools
in the system were
con-
structed prior to 1924. The following
list reflects design
capa-
city and school enrollment
in 1974-75,
1981-82, and 1985-86.
Table 13: School Capacity
and Utilization
Enrollment
Design
School Grades
Capacity 1974-75 1981-82 1985-86
Topsail High K-3 & 8-12
814
477 559
554
A
Topsail Middle 4-7
374
270 426
289
Rocky Point K-6
264
203 239
233
Elementary
Long Creek K-6
308
247 271
259
Elementary
Atkinson Junior 6-9
352
242 208
190
West Pender K-5
264
239 220
231
Elementary
Pender High 10-12
946
775 852 10,033
Burgaw Elementary K-6
�"T�
586 633 �6
Burgaw Junior 7-9
660
658 584
523
Penderlea Junior 4-9
616
426 397
293
Willard Elementary K-3
149 145T
Maple Hill K-6
154
136 133
139
Elementary
TOTAL
5,456 4,409
4,667 4,594
Table 13 shows that many
of the schools
are under design
capa-
city with Pender High being
87 students
over design capacity
with
Penderlee Junior High being
323 students under design capacity.
32

Primary roads include I-40, U.S. 117, U.S. 17, U.S. 421, N.C.
210, and N.C. 53. I-40 has recently been completed and will be
adequate to serve the area throughout the planning period. The
southern section of U.S. 421 is a four -lane facility and will be
adequate to serve this portion of the County for many years. A
four -lane facility between I-40 and the beach area of Pender
County would have an additional positive effect on the local
economy by encouraging more tourism. (See 1986-95 Transportation
Improvements Map in Appendix.)
3. Level of Utilization for Water System, Sewage System,
Schools, and Primary Roads
As discussed earlier, the County does not have a water or
sewer system. County residents must utilize individual wells and
septic tanks.
As reflected in Table 13, the design capacity of school facil-
ities is to accommodate 5,456 students. Presently, the school
system has approximately 4,594 students; however, Pender High
School is above design capacity as of the 1985-86 school year.
Primary roads appear to be adequate for the planning period.
I-40 is presently being under-utilized, but that will change
dramatically upon completion of this interstate highway connecting
southeastern North Carolina with the Piedmont and mountain sec-
tions of the state. U.S. 17 continues to carry substantial traf-
fic, and a U.S. 17 study had proposed widening of the facility;
however, this proposed widening is not reflected in the NCDOT
Transportation Improvement Plan.
4. Capacity of Community Facilities to Supply Existing
and Anticipated Demand
The planning questionnaire shows that of the 608 responses,
288 did not want the County to provide County water, 176 did, and
144 were not sure. Based on the present low density of the County
and a relatively slow growth rate, projected individual wells
should be adequate to meet current and anticipated demand.
When citizens were asked about a.County sewer system, of the
616 responses, 412 favored a County sewer system, 112 were not
sure, and 92 were against a County sewer system in rapidly growing
areas of the County. Again, because of relatively small popula-
tion projections and current low density of development, individu-
al septic tanks should be adequate during the planning period.
However, the County may begin to look at alternative ways to serve
the faster growing areas near the more ecologically sensitive
parts of the County.
33

Overall, schools are currently able to serve present student
populations, with the exception of Pender High School. Student
population appears to be increasing in the eastern part of the
County, and stable or decreasing in the central and western por-
tion of the County. Many of the schools are old and in need of
renovation or replacement. During the planning period, a bond
referendum may be used to generate needed funds to accomplish
school improvements.
7J
1
Ci
[l
I
34

E. Estimated Demand
1. Population and Economy
rTable 13 reflects continued population growth during the next
10 year planning period. Table 14 reflects projected population
' increases by age group, specifically the 40-54 age group is grow-
ing, while the 10-19 and 25-29 age group is projected to decrease
during the next 10 years. As the overall population increases,
the local economy continues to diversify and more tourists find
access to the area improved by way of I-40, the local economy
should continue to expand. At present, the economic future for
Pender County looks very bright.
a. Seasonal Population
Seasonal population increases occur primarily along the beach
area of Surf City and Topsail Beach. The 1981 Surf City Land Use
Plan projected a seasonal population by 1990 of 940 people with a
projected permanent population of 500 people by 1990. The 1985
Topsail Beach plan projects an average seasonal population of
10,072 people with an ultimate peak seasonal population of 14,528
using 7.5 persons per dwelling unit during peak vacation periods.
ib. Local Objectives Concerning Growth
The primary objective of County officials is to encourage
development and growth that does not adversely affect the
environment or other existing development. The County will
encourage and support growth and development that provides
improved job and housing opportunities for County citizens.
C. Forseeable Social and Economic Change
The County anticipates continued diversification of the County
tax base through the efforts of the Industrial Development Commis-
sion. The County also anticipates continued growth of the tourist
industry which will have a positive affect on many of the County's
citizens by providing expanded job opportunities and support for
existing businesses. The per capita income for County citizens
should continue to rise, having a positive impact on the social
and economic fabric of the County. As noted in Table 14, the
younger age groups, 20-29, are either decreasing or stable. This
age group represents those people forming new families, buying
houses, buying furniture, etc. If this trend continues, there
will be fewer dollars spent in establishing new homes; however,
the older age group, which is expanding, will most likely help
expand the economy as more people retire in Pender County or move
here to retire.
35

FUTURE POPULATION OF PENDER COUNTY
Based on the
North Carolina Office of State Budget and Management
projections,
Pender County can anticipate continued population
growth during
the planning period, as shown on Table 13
Table 13
28,000
,
27,464
27,000
j
26,000
/
25,914
25,000
i
i
i
24,114
24,000
23,0000
22,107
22,000
•
21,000
'
20,000
19,000
18,508
18,000
18, 149
'
r
17,000
,
16,000
15,000
'
1960 1970 1980 1985 1990 1995
,
Source: 1960,
1970, 1980 Census and 1985 Population Projections by
N.C.
Office of State Budget and Management
36

PENDER
COUNTY
POPULATION PROJECTIONS
BY AGE
GROUP
TABLE:
14
1985
1990
1995
AGE.
% of
% of
of
GROUP
TOTAL
COLUMN TOTAL TOTAL
COLUMN TOTAL
TOTAL
COLUMN TOTAL
0-4
1,680
6.97
1,758
6.78
1,762
6.42
5-9
1,804
7.48
1,764
6.81
1,953
7.11
10-14
1,886
7.82
2,003
7.73
1,853
6.75
15-19
1,748
7.25
11,972
7.61
1,817
6.62
20-24
2,052
8.51
1,556
6.00
1,898
6.91
25-29
1,783
7.39
1,951
7.53
1,737
6.32
30-34
1,886
7.82
1,963
7.58
2,110
7.68
w 35-39
1,787
7.41
2,033
7.85
2,051
7.47
40-44
1,458
6.05
1,872
7.22
2,098
7.64
45-49
1,186
4.92
1,522
5.87
1,893
6.89
50-54
1,192
4.94
1,238
4.78
1,610
5.86
55-59
1,234
5.12
1,294
4.99
1,288
4.69
60-64
1,269
5.26
1,282
4.95
1,314
4.78
65-69
1,093
4.53
1,275
4.92
1,205
4.39
70-74
881
3.65
1,005
3.88
1,108
4.03
75-79
580
2.41
729
2.81
820
2.99
80-84
358
1.48
421
1.62
559
2.04
85&UP
237
0.98
276
1.07
388
1.41
24,114
25,914
27,464
Source: North Carolina Office of State Budget and Management Based on 70-80 Census
Data Prepared November, 1985

2. Future Land Need
Between 1985 and 1990, the County is projected to grow by
1,800 people. Using the 2.91 persons per household, this repre-
sents an additional 618 households during this five-year period or
approxiamtely 123 new households per year.
Between 1990 and 1995, the County is projected to grow by ,
1,550 people or 532 households. Because of the County's low den-
sity, and the numerous lots already plotted, there should be no
problem accommodating an additional 1,150 households or more
during the ten-year planning period.
3. Community Facilities Demand
As discussed earlier, individual septic tanks and wells should
be adequate to continue to serve current needs and projected
needs. A new incinerator is being planned for the County, and
this facility should be adequate to serve the County during the
planning period. There is a need for improvements to schools in
the County's school system to accommodate growing population in
certain portions of the County and reduced population in other
areas of the County. Addressing this need is an ongoing responsi-
bility of the Pender County School Board. Adequate roads are of
great importance to the County, and working with NCDOT to improve
the County's road system will remain a high priority.
38 .I

1
1
lI
1
1
1
POLICY STATEMENTS
Fil'

i
1 II. POLICY STATEMENTS
I
1
1
11
1
1
1
A. Resource Protection
1. Areas of Environmental Concern
Pender County recognizes the primary concern of the Coastal
Management Program is to provide a means for planning sound eco-
nomic growth that is sensitive to the need to protect natural
resources. County officials share this concern for the protection
and sound management of these environmentally sensitive lands and
waters. As listed in the 1981 Land Use Plan, Pender County has
the following Areas of Environmental Concern (AECs):
(1) Coastal Wetlands
(2) Estuarine Waters
(3) Estuarine Shoreline
(4) Public Trust Waters
(5.) Inlet Hazard Areas and Ocean Hazards
In terms of developing policies, the estuarine system AECs,
which include coastal wetlands, estuarine waters, estuarine shore-
lines, and public trust areas, will be treated as one uniform
grouping since they are so closely interrelated. Another reason
for grouping these AECs together is the fact that the effective
use of maps to detail exact on -ground location of a particular
area sometimes poses serious limitations.
Pender County's overall policy and management objective for
the estuarine system is "to give the highest priority to their
protection and perpetuate their biological, social, economic, and
aesthetic values and to ensure that development occurring within
these AECs is compatible with natural characteristics so as to
minimize the likelihood of significant loss of private property
and public resources." (15 NCAC 7H. 0203) In accordance with
this overall objective, Pender County will permit those land uses
which conform to the general use standards of the North Carolina
Administrative Code (15 NCAC 7H) for development within the estu-
arine system. Generally, only those uses which are water depend-
ent will be permitted. Specifically, each use permitted in the
estuarine system is discussed below.
a. Coastal Wetlands
The first priority of uses of land in this area will be uses
which promote "conservation" of this sensitive area, with conser-
vation meaning the lack of imposition of irreversible damage to
the wetlands. Generally, uses which require water access and uses
such as utility easements, fishing piers, and docks will be
allowed, but must adhere to use standards of the Coastal Area
Management Act (LAMA: 15 NCAC 7H). These uses change from time to
time pursuant to current AEC Standards.
C'
39

b. Estuarine Waters and Estuarine Shorelines
Pender County officials are very much aware that protection of
the estuarine waters and adjacent estuarine shorelines is of para-
mount importance to fishing, both commercially and for recreation.
Pender County recognizes that certain actions within the estuarine
shoreline, which is defined as the area extending 75 feet landward
of -the mean high waterline of the estuarine waters, could possibly
have a substantial effect upon the quality of these waters.
In order to promote the quality of these estuarine waters,
Pender County officials will permit only those uses which are
compatible with both the estuarine shorelines and which protect
'
the values of the estuarine system. Residential, recreational,
marine -related facilities, and commercial uses may be permitted
within the estuarine shore, provided the deve�lo2er can demonstrate
through an engineer's report, submmitfed__Ed tie Planning mod,
that:
1. A substantial chance of pollution occurring from the
'
development does not exist
2. Development does not have a significant adverse impact
on estuarine resources
,
3. Development does not significantly interfere with
existing public rights or access to, or use of, navi-
gable waters or public resources
Also no develo ment or industry should be approved by the
Coun y or state a will lower a presentwater qualm in he
County.
,
County officials re uest review of criteria used b State
review agencies by tne ounty Planning—Boardraor d mtheea
ina recommen a ion or approval or oneand
'
Control Plan.
c. Public Trust Areas
Pender County recognizes that the public has certain estab-
lished rights to certain land and water areas and that these pub-
lic areas also support valuable commercial and aesthetic value.
Pender County will continue to promote the conservation and man-
agement of public trust areas. Appropriate uses include those
which protect public rights for navigation and recreation. Proj-
ects which would directly or indirectly block or impair existing
navigation channels, increase shoreline erosion, deposit spoils
below mean high tide, cause adverse water circulation patterns,
violate water quality standards, or cause degradation of shellfish
waters shall generally not be allowed. Allowable uses shall be
those which do not cause detriment to the physical or biological
f unctions of public trust areas. Such uses as navigational chan-
nels, drainage ditches, bulkheads to prevent erosion, piers or
docks, and bridges shall be permitted.
'
d. Inlet Hazard Areas and Ocean Hazard Areas
These areas, if applicable, would be addressed in the Surf
City and Topsail Beach Land Use Plans.
'
40

e. Archaeological AEC
Pender County contains 215 known archaeological sites. Pro-
tection or these sites is the responsibility or the N.C. Division
or Archives and History.
4. Hazardous and Fragile Land Areas
a. Freshwater Swamps
Pender County supports the CAMA program and the U.S. Corps of
Engineers 404 program, which has jurisdiction of regulating devel-
opment in designated freshwater swamp areas. All freshwater
swamps do not necessarily come under CAMA requ ations.
b. Marshes
Development in marsh areas is regulated by the local and State
CAMA Permit Officers in addition to Corps of Engineers.regula-
tions. Pender County's policy is to continue support of these
regulations in an effort to protect this sensitive natural envi-
ronment.
rc. Maritime Forests
Maritime forests are present in the Topsail Beach and Surf
' City area and wouid be covered under their plans.
d. Cultural & Historic Resources
' See list of properties on National Register. No regulations
or zoning to protect designated historic structures. The County
feels that their resources are adequately protected by the
Division of Archives & History.
e. Man -Made Hazards
There are no defined man-made hazard areas in the County.
However, military cargoes are transported along Highway 17 and
1-40.
Hurricane & Flood Evacuation Needs
An entire section within the Policy Statement discussions is
included separately for hurricane and flood evacuation, as well as
storm mitigation and post -storm redevelopment policies, beginning
on page 69.
g. Protection of Potable Water Supply
' As discussed earlier, Pender County does not have a water
system; however, land uses near groundwater sources are regulated
by the North Carolina Division of Environmental Management through
N.C.A.C., Subchapter 2L and Subchapter 2C.
Pender County recognizes the importance of protecting potable
water supplies and, therefore, supports the enforcement of these
' regulations if and when applicable.
41

h. Use of Package Treatment Plants for Sewage
Treatment Disposal
Package treatment plants are not being used very extensively '
in the County. If and when used, these facilities are regulated
through the health department using State guidelines. The County
will support the use of package treatment plants and enforcement
of appropriate regulations in issuing permits for their use as an
alternate means to treat sewage other than individual septic
tanks.
i. Storm Water Runoff from Agriculture, Residential '
Development, Phosp a e, or Peat mining
Through County support of the Division of Environmental
Management, County officials support efforts to regulate storm
water runoff through applicable State and Federal regulations and
support the new 575-foot regulation area by the Division of
Environmental Management.
County officials request review of criteria used by State
review agencies by the county Plan�nin� Board prior to the ate's
i� nai recommen a ion Fqr approval or denial of a e imen a ion and
Control Plan.
j. Marina and Floating Home Development
The development of marinas has significant commercial and '
recreational potential in Pender County. Therefore, the Count
supports the development of marinas, in compliance with ar1 icable
CAMA regulations, and in wa ers witn the -Lowest water quality in
existence as ot January 1 1987.—F`loating home development as
not taken place in Pender county, and County officials have deter-
mined that floating homes could have an adverse impact on water
ua i ere ore, oa ing omes willno a permitted in '
Fencer ccounty regulated waters.
k. Industrial Impacts on Fragile Areas
Pender County officials will continue to support applicable
State and Federal regulations as they relate to the siting of new
industry, or impact of new industry or environmentally sensitive
areas. Proposed locations of future industry will be reviewed by ,
the Economic Develo men Ottice, Planning or other agency or
board as designated e e County BoardotCommissioners. The
Tess n�a review body will make a tormal recommendation E-o-FHe
county commissioners on a appropriateness ot theproposed
oca ion. Zoning,_�once adopted, will also be used to direct the
location of industrial land areas.
1. Development of Sound and Estuarine System Islands
Many of the Sound and
estuarine system islands located in
Pender County are located
in the planning
jurisdiction of Topsail
Beach and Surf City. Islands like Hutaff
Island and Lea Island
'
have been discussed under
the Local Land
Use Planning Issues sec-
tion of this plan. Refer
to Issue #16 on
page 61.
42
I

11
iB. Resource Production and Management
1. Productive Agricultural Lands (Executive Order #96)
' Productive Agricultural Lands (Executive Order #96) have been
identified for Pender County as Prime and Locally Important Farm
and Forestland, as shown on the Pender County detail soils maps.
Executive Order #96 is supported by the Pender Soil and Water
Conservation District, and a list and soils maps are available at
the District Office. (See Appendix A for list of locally impor-
tant farmland soils and prime farmland soils, as identified by the
' Soil Conservation Service.) Prime agricultural lands and water
quality will benefit from newl -avai a e cos -s arin or agri-
cultural bes management practices.
2. Commercial Forestlands
The County's policy has been and will continue to be support
' of this natural resource through in -kind services to agencies
directly involved with the maintenance and support of this
resource. Specifically, the County will continue to support the
Extension Service, Soil Conservation Service and N.-C. Forest
Service in their efforts to encourage good forest management. The
County would encourage efforts to provide farmers financial
incentives to leave forested buffer areas between productive agri-
cultural areas and estuarine waters. The County will also contin-
ue to support CAMA and Federal Wetland Programs in an effort to
protect fragile areas adjacent to timberlands.
1
F
I i
ii
3. Existing and Potential Mineral Production Areas
Pender County presently has two large mining operations.
Rocky Point Quarry is a 246-acre site which has been and will
probably continue to be in operation for an extended period.
The East Coast Limestone Mine is 33.0 acres in size. The County
also has potential deposits of peat in several areas of the County
and this could be a future source of energy. Other mining sites
are listed on page 31 of this report.
The County will encourage the use of natural resources if
mining operations meet all State and Federal laws and create no
adverse impact on the environment. The County will continue to
support the enforcement of State mining regulations.
4. Commercial and Recreational Fisheries, Including
Nursery an Habitat Areas
The fishing industry, both
ing, has been and continues to
County's economy. The County
al fishing by encouraging the
development. The County will
Economic Development Grants to
operations, processing or any
commercial fishing industry.
improve the water quality in P
tive impact on recreational an
willalso wor to improve wa e
Qrants.
commercial and recreational fish -
be an important part of Pender
will continue to support recreation -
expansion of tourism and vacation
also support efforts to secure
assist local commercial fishing
other means to support the local
The Countv will support efforts to
envier county wnicn will nave a osi-
d commercial tishina. Tne County
ra
s
FA
1 43

5. Off -Road Vehicles
Off -road vehicles would be addressed in the Topsail Beach or
Surf City Land Use Plans. Off -road vehicle regulations for Lea '
and Hutaff Islands would come under the County jurisdiction, and
such policy will be formulated as future access and development of
these islands require. Holly Shelter and Angola Bay Gamelands are '
state controlled.
6. Residential and Commercial Land Development '
Pender County has been and continues to grow in population.
Current and future policy will be to allow the market place to
establish the need for and location of future residential and
commercial development. Current and future development must meet
all established health department regulations, building code regu-
lations, flood regulations, and all local, State and Federal
agency requirements. Consideration is now being given to review
and adoption of zoning and subdivisions regulations. Upon adop-
tion, these regulations would constitute County policy on all '
future land development and would be used to direct future land
use.
7. -Peat and Phosphate Mining 1
At present, there are no known phosphate deposits in Pender
County large enough to justify mining. However, peat is present
in the County, but due to current energy costs, peat mining does
not appear to be economically feasible on a commercial scale.
Pender County officials will address these two issues and estab-
lish policy if and when activity in one or both of these areas
appears feasible.
u
1
H
44

1
1
11
1�
C. Economic and Community Development
Issue: Types and Locations of Industries Desired
In 1981, the plan noted the fact that a full-time director for
the County Industrial Development Commission had been hired. The
plan discussed two potential industrial sites, one near Burgaw at
the proposed I-40 and N.C. 53 intersection, and the other near
Rocky Point at I-40 and 210 with good access to the State Ports in
Wilmington and the Piedmont area of North Carolina, upon opening
of I-40. The objective was to encourage balanced growth, support
existing industries such as manufacturing, forestry and farming
while working to continue the process of diversification of the
economic base.
In preparing the 1986 Land Use Plan Update, it is apparent
that tremendous progress has been made to expand the County's
industrial base since 1976. New facilities like Takeda, Inc.,
located on the Pender/New Hanover County line and others, show how
the County continues to grow. With projected increases in popula-
tion, improved highway access to Wilmington and to Raleigh in the
near future, the County can anticipate continued diversification
of the industrial or manufacturing base. Selecting the right
types of industry to market is the next step for Pender County in
establishing County policy for location and types of industry.
Based on the results of the 1986 Land Use Planning Questionnaire,
272 responding would like to see industry locate near I-40 at
Willard, Burgaw or Rocky Point, with 210 suggesting that industry
locate along the southern section of 421 near the recently opened
Takeda plant. 124 preferred the area along Highway 53 between
Burgaw and Jacksonville. Very few people, 45, responding to the
questionnaire, wanted to see industrial development along U.S. 17,
the Ocean Highway. Based on the current and projected growth
trends in this area and its use as access to the beach and water-
front development, not having industry in this area could help
preserve its lower density appearance and preserve this area for
tourist related uses.
Policy:
1. Continue to support the new industrial park on N.C. 210
near Rocky Point.
2. Encourage industrial development along US 421.
3. Support local industry, agriculture, forestry and others
in securing federal or State grants to develop or expand
industrial operations to utilize or process locally pro-
duced products.
45

4. Adopt a zoning ordinance that provides for the orderly '
location and development of individual industrial sites or
industrial parks with clustering of industrial uses.
5. Pursue federal or state grants to develop and provide
needed water, sewer, and other utilities to make indus-
trial development economically feasible.
6. Until adoption of the zoning ordinance, the updated Land
Classification map and Land Use Plan will be the only
planning tool available along with health department '
reLulati_ons to guide the location of future development.
1
1
1
46

Ll
L7
1
1
1
Issue: Local Commitment to Providing Services to Development -
Both the 1976 and 1981 Land Use Plans discussed the fact that
Pender County provided services such as fire protection, schools,
rescue squad, Sheriff's Department, and solid waste facilities.
These earlier plans also acknowledge the fact that neither water
nor sewer systems were available from the County. Specifically,
the 1976 Plan indicated that a "County -wide water and sewer system
is far beyond the financial capability of the County and exceeds
its needs." The 1976 Plan also stated that providing water and
sewer facilities was a municipal function.
The 1981 Plan listed septic tank problems as a #1 priority
problem and a County -wide water system as a # 5 class priority.
The plan discussed the problem of some septic tank failure and
impact on water quality of the estuarine system as well as poten-
tial pollution of the ground water system.
The 1981 Plan policy stated that because of the rural char-
acter and low density of the County, a County -wide water system
was not justified; however, a study of higher density areas was
justified.
The 1981 policy on septic tanks indicated that proper regula-
tion of septic tank placement would prevent ground and surface
water pollution. The 1981 Plan did not discuss a County sewer
system.
Based on the results of the 1985 land use survey, it is very
apparent that portions of Topsail Township are continuing to
experience rapid growth. For example, S.R. 1575 has approximately
45 residential units located along a 1-mile section of road and
' adjacent to the estuarine waters of the intercoastal waterway.
Each of these forty-five units has an individual septic tank and
is very typical of the higher densities being experienced along
1 the waterway with the potential for pollution of adjacent waters
by septic tanks.
Based on the results of the 1986 LUP questionnaire, the major-
ity of those answering did not want the County to consider pro-
viding a County -wide water system. Specifically, the question
was:
' Do you think the County needs to consider providing a County-
wide water system, if financially feasible?
' Yes 176 28.9%
No 288 47.4%
Not Sure 144 23.7%
Total 608 100.0%
J
' 47

When citizens were asked if the County should consider
'
providing sewage treatment facilities in rapidly growing areas to
protect water quality by eliminating the need for septic tank use
for sewage disposal., the County received the following responses:
'
Yes 412 66.9%
No 92 14.9%
Not Sure 112 18.2%
Total 616 100.0%
'
Based on the results of the questionnaire, there appears to be
little interest in a County water system with a great deal of
interest in a sewer system to serve rapidly growing areas. Based
on these results, concern for protection of the estuarine system,
ground water resources and the desire to provide services that are
financially feasible and desirable, the County must determine the
appropriate steps to take pertaining to providing water and sewer
'
services either in the near or distant future.
Policy:
'
°. Continue to regulate.septic tank use using applicable
local and State regulations.
,
° Based on increases in population now projected, the desire
to protect the County's natural resources, County policy
will be to begin the planning process for a County sewer
'
system and water system to serve the rapidly growing areas
of the county with potential for future expansion. The
County will pursue federal or state grants to conduct such
'
studies. Such studies and implementation will help
protect County water quality by elimination of the
widespread use of septic tanks.
1
1
1
48
�

1
1
1
Issue: Commitment to State and Federal Programs, Including
Erosion Control, Public Access, Highway Improvements,
Port Facilities, Dredging, Military Facilities
The County is committed to erosion control programs through
support of the State Sedimentation Control Act.
Public beach access has been and continues to be of great
importance to local officials. County officials will cooperate
with Surf City and Topsail Beach in efforts to secure additional
public beach access for public use and enjoyment. The County will
also pursue waterfront access in other parts of the County.
Highway improvements are considered a major factor in ensuring
the continued economic growth of the area. The 1985-86 North
Carolina Transportation Improvement Plan for Pender County
includes a road improvement near Moores Creek National Park and
bridge improvements throughout the County. Although all of these
improvements are important, none address the need to improve
access from I-40 to the beach areas of Pender County. When I-40
is completed between Wilmington and Raleigh, beach areas in Pender
County will have greatly improved access to the Piedmont region.
Tourism is becoming a very important part of Pender County's econ-
omy, but to take full advantage of this expanding market, Pender
County will need to provide better access to Pender County
beaches. Providing this improved access will be a very high
priority for Pender County during the five- to ten-year planning
period by working closely with the Department of Transportation to
improve access. (See current DOT planned highway improvements in
Appendix).
' Large port facilities do not presently exist in the County,
and any policy pertaining to any proposed facility would be con-
sidered on a case -by -case basis.
11
1
The County has and will continue to support efforts to dredge
areas along the Intercoastal Waterway and other major bodies of
water in the County to provide safe access for commercial and
recreational boating. Spoil will be placed in approved spoil
areas.
Pender County does not have any military facilities within the
County; therefore, no policy is necessary.
Policy:
Policy statements for all of the issues discussed above have
been given, with the exception of highway improvements. Highway
improvements are a very important part of the economic vitality of
an area, and the County has addressed this issue under the Local
Land Use Planning Issue section of this plan. Refer to page 60,
Issue #15.
49

Issue: Anticipated Residential Development, Densities, ,
Locations, Units Per Acre, and Services Necessary to
Support Development '
As discussed in earlier sections of the plan, Pender County
had a density of 26.7 people per square mile in 1983. Although
'
the County continues to grow in population, the County continues
to have a very low density of development. The only multi -family
or higher density developments in the County are located in
Topsail Township, with most of the higher density developments
,
being located in either Surf City or Topsail Beach. County offi-
cials anticipate other townships in the County remaining primarily
low density and rural in character during the five- to ten-year
planning period. At present, the location, density, and units per
acre are regulated by State health regulations due to the lack of
zoning or subdivision regulations. However, during the planning
'
process to prepare the 1986 Land Use Plan Update, it became very
apparent that many people in the faster growing areas of the
County want to see more growth management to avoid the mistakes
made in other parts of the state or nation. For this reason,
'
County officials are considering establishing zoning and subdivi-
sion regulations for use in some or all of the County. Also,
based on the results of the Land Use Plan questionnaire, the fol-
'
lowing was learned concerning the need for County provision of a
water or sewer system:
1. Do think the
you County needs to consider providng a
County -wide water system, if financially feasible?
176 Yes 288 No 144 Not Sure
'
2. Do you think County officials need to consider providing
sewage treatment facilities in rapidly growing areas to
,
protect water quality by eliminating the need for septic
tank use for sewage disposal?
412 Yes 92 No 112 Not
Sure
Of the 608 responses to Question #1, a clear majority did not
think the County should provide a water system. However, when
asked about the County's providing sewage treatment facilities in
rapidly growing areas to protect water quality by eliminating the
need for septic tanks, a clear majority of those answering the
'
questionnaire were in favor of the County considering providing
such a system.
In summary, Pender County remains a very rural county, with
'
primarily low -density development. Density and location of devel-
opment are based on health department requirements with no current
water or sewer system to serve current or future development.
'
50

I
Policy:
Density of development and location of development will be
' established upon approval of zoning for the County, as discussed
under the "Zoning" issue. Until zoning is approved, location and
density of development will continue to be based on local, State,
' and Federal regulations, as applicable.
11
1
1
51

Issue: Types of Urban Growth Patterns Desired - Redevelopment
of Developed Areas
The 1976 Land Use Plan indicated that Pender County citizens
and County officials desired modest growth near existing develop-
ment. In 1981, the adopted policy was to guide new growth through
the use of zoning and subdivision regulations. However, when
zoning and subdivision regulations were discussed at public meet-
ings many citizens, not favoring zoning and subdivision regula-
tions, expressed those opinions while those in favor of zoning did
not. As discussed in the population section of this plan, Pender
County had a density of 26 persons per square mile in 1983. In
1981, the County was 99.1% rural with very little urban develop-
ment. Because of the County's very low density, urban growth
patterns is not an issue; however, providing the planning tools to
guide growth is very much an issue as indicated during the public
information meetings held in Burgaw and Hampstead during the early
planning stages for this update. The growth pattern issue facing
Pender County is how to direct growth and prevent future problems
through good growth management.
Redevelopment of*developed areas is continuing in areas like Maple
Hill through the Community Development Block Grant program. The
County will continue this renewal process.
Policy:
° The County will prepare a zoning map and ordinance to
provide a growth management tool, as discussed under the
"Zoning" issue section of this plan on page 54.
° County policy will be to zone areas along U.S. 17 to pro-
vide for appropriate uses for this major tourist -oriented
highway corridor.
° County policy will be to determine the best location for
industrial development sites or industrial development
parks and zone areas accordingly.
° The County will continue to work to obtain grants to per-
mit the redevelopment of developed areas in need of such
action.
J
r] I
I
M
1

' Issue: Assistance to Channel Maintenance and Beach
Nourishment shment Projects, Including Provision of Borrow and Spoil
Areas and Provision of Easements for Work
' Channel maintenance of areas such as navigable rivers and
the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway is very important to Pender
County because of the positive impact on commercial and recrea-
tional boating. Continued maintenance of these waterways is a
high priority for County officials. Beach nourishment is dis-
cussed in the Topsail Beach and Surf City Plans.
' Polic : County officials will continue to work with the Army
Corps ngineers and any other State and Federal agencies to
ensure continued dredging and maintenance of channels and rivers
as needed to keep these facilities open to navigation. Providing
borrow or spoil areas and provision of easements for work will be
determined on a case -by -case basis. However, the County would
refer that known spoil areas with ex-1—sEing easements or suc
' purpose a used.
Implementation:
1. Maintain contact with congressional representatives and
Federal officials as dredging or other channel maintenance
operations are needed.
' 2. County officials will continue to assist local users of
these facilities as feasible, and as needs and concerns
for dredging or maintenance are brought before local offi-
cials or officials determine that a need for such assis-
tance exists.
Issue/Policy: Energy Facility Siting and Development
' At present, Pender County is not aware of any plans to con-
struct an energy facility in the County. County policy to deal
with such a facility will be formulated if such a facility is
proposed.
Issue/Policy: Tourism and Beach and Waterfront Access
' Tourism is a major economic benefit for Pender County business
and the Pender County tax base. However, providing public access
to beaches is the responsibility of Surf City and Topsail Beach.
County policy shall be to provide assistance to Topsail Beach and
Surf City in promoting tourism and in providing better beach and
waterfront access. The County will obtain grants when possible to
plan for and provide better beach and waterfront access.
1
Issue/Policy: Coastal and Estuarine Water Beach Access
As discussed above, providing estuarine water and beach access
for public use is a high priority for County officials. There-
fore, it shall be County policy to make every effort to provide
boating and pedestrian access to the County's estuarine areas and
other water courses. The County will coo erate with Topsail Beach
and Surf City in '15rovi Ing beachaccess it re5uestea to provide
assistance and will applZ for federal and state ran s to improve
wa er ront access. Subdivision re u a ions will include rovi-
sions tor tuture developments to provide public waterfront access.
53

LOCAL LAND USE PLANNING ISSUES
Local land use planning issues established by the Planning Board
and ranked from #1 through #19, with #1 being the most important
local issue.
1. ISSUE: Subdivision Regulations
The Pender County Planning Board and Planning Director have
been actively working on the preparation of subdivision regula-
tions for the County in 1986. As discussed in the 1981 Land Use
Plan, subdivision regulations, once adopted, will help ensure that
development does not occur haphazardly and that future development
will provide for future tie-in of roads with adjacent property
when appropriate. Also, subdivision regulations will provide
design standards for setbacks, road designs, buffering, etc., and
as also stated in the 1981 plan, subdivision regulations, after
adoption, will become a very important land use management tool
for Pender County. This regulation will also require public
access to the waterfront and funds for purchase of waterfront
access areas by the County.
POLICY:
It is Pender County's policy that subdivision regulations
become an important land use management tool for ensuring future
development is accurately surveyed for recording and engineered
following good planning design principles. County officials will
continue to work for adoption of a County -wide subdivision regula-
tion in the near future.
2. ISSUE: Zoning Ordinance
As discussed in the existing population and economy section
of the plan, Pender County has been and continues to grow in popu-
lation. As the County population grows and more and more homes
and businesses are being developed, it becomes more important that
local officials and County citizens have some means to direct and
influence the placement of different land uses in the County. The
1976 plan discussed the fact that over 80% of the respondents to a
planning questionnaire at that time desired County -wide zoning.
During 1986, the Planning Board and Planning Director have been
directed by the County Commissioners to prepare a County -wide
zoning ordinance for review and adoption.
POLICY:
County policy shall be to prepare and adopt a County -wide
zoning ordinance as soon as possible. Upon adoption, the zoning
ordinance will be used to direct and guide the location of future
land uses and will serve as a land use management tool in the
future.
1
I
L'
54

3. ISSUE: Sound Waters
Policy on sound waters has been addressed under AEC Estuarine
' Waters and Estuarine Shorelines on page 40.
4. ISSUE: Solid Waste
' Providing for solid waste disposal is a local responsibility
with technical assistance and licensing from the State. Pender
County has two landfills, with one near Surf City and the other
' being located approximately four miles from Burgaw. The County is
presently looking for another suitable landfill site and reviewing
the possible use of an incinerator for waste disposal.
iPOLICY:
County policy will be to continue to provide adequae sites
and facilities for solid waste disposal.
5. ISSUE: Economic and Community Development - Types and
' Locations of Industries Desired
The 1976 Land Use Plan discussed the lack of job opportunities
' in the County other than farming and forestry and the need to
expand other employment opportunities to keep young people in the
area. The 1976 plan also addressed the need for a full-time
industrial development director. The primary concern in 1976 was
the need for diversification of the economic base.
In 1981, the plan noted the fact that a full-time director for
' the County Industrial Development Commission had been hired. The
plan discussed two potential industrial sites, one near Burgaw at
the proposed I-40 and N.C. 53 intersection, and the other near
Rocky Point at I-40 and 210 with good access to the State Ports in
Wilmington and the Piedmont area of North Carolina, upon opening
of I-40. The objective was to encourage balanced growth, support
existing industries such as manufacturing, forestry and farming
while working to continue the process of diversification of the
economic base.
' In preparing the 1986 Land Use Plan Update, it is apparent
that tremendous progress has been made to expand the counties
industrial base since 1976. New facilities like Takeda, Inc.,
' located on the Pender/New Hanover County line and others, show how
the County continues to grow. With projected increases in popula-
tion, improved highway access to Wilmington and to Raleigh in the
near future, the County can anticipate continued diversification
' of the industrial and manufacturing base. Selecting the right
types of industry to market is the next step for Pender County in
establishing County policy for location and types of industry.
' Based on the results of the 1986 Land Use Planning Questionnaire,
1 55

272 responding would like to see industry locate near I-40 at
Willard, Burgaw or Rocky Point, with 210 suggesting that industry
locate along the southern section of 421 near the recently opened
Takeda plant. 124 preferred the area along Highway 53 between
Burgaw and Jacksonville. Very few people, 45, responding to the
questionnaire, wanted to see industrial development along U.S. 17,
the Ocean Highway. Based on the current and projected growth
trends in this area and its use as access to the beach and water-
front development, not having industry in this area could help
preserve its lower density appearance and preserve this area for
tourist related uses.
POLICY:
° Continue to support the new industrial park on N.C. 210
near Rocky Point.
° Encourage industrial development along N.C. 421.
° Support local industry, agriculture, forestry and others
in securing federal or State grants to develop or expand
industrial operations to utilize or process locally pro-
duced products.
° Adopt a zoning ordinance that provides for the orderly
location and development of individual industrial sites or
industrial parks with clustering of industrial uses.
6. ISSUE: Drainage
The 1981 Land Use Plan discussed the widespread occurrence of
drainage problems because of the high groundwater table and nearly
flat topography in the County. In 1986, the County, through the
Water Management Office and Community Development Office, has been
working to improve drainage in the Maple Hill area of the County.
Because drainage problems are a continuing problem, the County
will continue to identify specific drainage problem areas and then
work with other state, federal, or local agencies to resolve the
problems. The recently ado ted DEM regulations controllin storm -
water runott within 575 teetot water courses should also help
eliminate the adverse impact on the environment.
POLICY:
Pender County will identify areas of the County with drainage
problems and then prepare a water management County drainage plan
for review and approval by federal and state agencies to address
those identified problems. Using programs like the Community
Development Block Grant program, CAMA Planning & Management grant,
and other programs, the County wi -continue to work o resolve
these drainage problems when feasible.
7. ISSUE: Tax Mapping
The 1981 Land Use Plan discussed the fact that good tax map-
ping is essential for efficient and equitable property tax admini-
stration. Tax mapping can also serve as an excellent base of
r
56

information for land use planning and comprehensive land records
for public and private use. Recently, the County Commissioners
have been discussing the desirability of expediting development of
' a County -wide tax mapping system.
POLICY:
Establishing a comprehensive County -wide tax mapping system
for Pender County would be in the best interest of Pender County
citizens. County officials will seek technical and financial
' assistance to establish a County -wide tax mapping system.
8. ISSUE: Housing
Most of the housing stock in Pender County is either individ-
ual lot/conventional units or mobile homes on individual lots or
in mobile home parks. Since 1981, there have been several higher
density residential developments built at Old Pointe and
Belvedere, but most homes are still either mobile homes or conven-
tional stick -built housing units. The County is involved with the
Section 8 housing program in an effort to provide better housing
for low and moderate income families. The County also has a
County Housing Authority, which works to provide decent, safe, and
sanitary housing for low- and moderate -income families.
POLICY:
It shall continue to be
County policy to
assist, where pos-
sible, in the provision of decent, safe, and
sanitary housing for
County citizens with low and
moderate income.
The County will
continue to secure state and
federal funds to
improve or provide
better housing opportunities for low and moderate income citizens.
9. ISSUE: Development Pressure on Streams and Intracoastal
Waterway
As projected in the 1981 Land Use Plan, new developments
continue to be developed along the Intracoastal Waterway and along
streams and rivers throughout the County. Areas like Bay Harbor,
Virginia Creek Forest, Gabes Point, Cedar Landing, and Deer Run
all appear to be new developments with many lots remaining to be
sold or built on. This development pressure will most likely
continue because of the desirability of both the stream area and
Intracoastal Waterway area for residential development.
With completion of the County's detail soils report, the
County has designated soils subject to flooding in the conserva-
tion classification on the Land Classification Map. Also, the
Federal Flood Insurance Program helps regulate the location of
development in flood -prone areas.
57
L

POLICY:
Pender County anticipates continued development pressure in
areas adjacent to County streams and the Intracoastal Waterway. '
It shall continue to be County policy to permit development near
streams and the Intracoastal Waterway provided such development
does not adversely affect or endanger the environment and meets '
all local, state, and federal regulations.
10. ISSUE: Localized Development Conflicts
'
Like other coastal North Carolina counties, one of the pri-
mary development conflicts is the desirability of land adjacent to
the estuarine system for residential or marina development and the
impact that development can have on this environmentally sensitive
area. Another conflict or potential conflict is the mixing of
land uses due to the present lack of zoning in the County. At
present, marina development and regulation of waterfront develop-
ment is affected by state and federal regulations and local health
department requirements. Upon approval of a zoning ordinance and
map, the County will then have a better means to direct and guide
future development to prevent conflicts in the future.
POLICY: It will be the County's policy to adopt a County-
wide zoning ordinance and map to assist in eliminating development
conflicts in the future.
11. ISSUE: Waterway Access
The 1981 Land Use Plan discussed the fact that continued
private development along the County's coastal waters had the
potential of reducing the future opportunity for public access to
public waters. Presently, the County has public boat launching
facilities provided by the N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission at
the following locations: (1) end of White Stocking, SR 1512;
'
(2) Highway 11, Black River Bridge; and (3) Shaw Highway, SR 1520.
In an effort to continue to have more and better public
access to the water, the County will continue to work with citi-
zens, state and federal agencies, and any other interested groups
in providing future public access to the water.
POLICY:
It shall be Pender County's policy to work with local groups
and state and federal agencies to secure water access points
throughout the County. The County will consider any state or
federal financial assistance that may be available to increase the
inventory of public water access points.
58
i

I
I
F
12. ISSUE: Fishing Industry
Commercial fishing has been, and continues to be, an impor-
tant part of Pender County's economy and way of life. Recreation-
al fishing provides an important leisure time activity for County
residents and a major activity enjoyed by tourists visiting the
area. County officials know that to continue to retain this
renewable natural resource, it is important to protect nursery
areas like Old Topsail Creek, Virginia Creek, Bishops Creek, and
others so indigenous fish species will be able to spawn and multi-
ply, thus improving the conditions needed for successful commer-
cial and recreational fishing. (See Table 9, "Pounds
Caught/Value.")
POLICY:
The County will continue to support the ("AMA program and
other state and federal programs that protect water quality to
ensure the continuation of nursery areas in Pender County.
13. ISSUE: Inter -County Cooperation
Many, if not all, of the 20 coastal counties involved in the
North Carolina Coastal Management Program show some of the same
land use related problems, such as development pressure in areas
adjacent to environmentally sensitive areas. Economic development
opportunities are also of great importance to coastal counties
Me Pender County, but economic development that does not
adversely affect the environment must be a top priority. For
example, an area that can have a very positive effect on the local
economy while being designed to have minimal effect on the envi-
ronment would be improved access from I-40 to the beach areas of
Surf City and Topsail Beach. This improved access would have a
better chance for approval with the cooperative efforts of the
County and beach communities. Improved east -west road access
would also have a better chance for implementation in the State's
Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) if the County, Atkinson,
Burgaw, Surt City, and Topsail Beac could agree on the best east -
west route and then support efforts to have that route included in
the State's long-range plans. (See apeendix for list of projects
currently included in the State -IS TIP for Pender county.)
POLICY:
It shall be County policy to consult and cooperate with other
area local governments to identify and solve common problems.
14. ISSUE: Loss of Productive
IProduction an an
ar
ro
al Lands, Timb
As discussed in the economic section of this report, agri-
culture and timber production have been, and continue to be, a
very important part of the Pender County economy. Production and
management of productive agricultural lands and management of
productive forested areas will be assisted by the fact that Pender
59

County, through the Soil Conservation Office, has identified the
most productive agricultural land and prime farmland following
completion of the detail soil survey of the County. With this new
information, the County now has the ability to use this data as
part of the zoning ordinance that is currently being prepared.
Specifically, these productive agricultural areas could be placed
in an agricultural zone to help protect this natural resource.
POLICY.
The County will use the Soil Conservation Service soil types
,
for productive agricultural lands in preparing the County's zoning
ordinance. The County will continue to support and encourage good
timber production and management practices and, as stated under
the Economic Policy, Section 5, will continue to support local
industry, agriculture, forestry, and others in securing federal
and state grants to develop or expand industrial operations to
utilize or process locally produced products, be it agricultural
products or timber products.
15. ISSUE: Transportation - I-40, US 17, NC 421, and Improved
East-West Connection
As discussed under the section headed "Commitment to State
and Federal Programs," highway improvements are considered a major
factor in ensuring the continued economic growth of the area. The
1985-86 North Carolina Transportation Improvement Plan for Pender
County includes a road improvement near Moores Creek National Park
and bridge improvements throughout the County. Although all of
these improvements are important, none address the need to improve
access from I-40 to the beach areas of Pender County, widening of
US 17, widening of NC 421, and improved east -west access. When
I-40 is completed between Wilmington and Raleigh, beach areas in
Onslow, Pender, and New Hanover Counties will have greatly
improved access to the Piedmont region, with New Hanover County
having the best access because of I-40's termination in Wilming-
ton, with a short distance to Wrightsville Beach. Tourism is
becoming a very important part of Pender County's economy, but to
'
take full advantage of this expanding market, Pender County will
need to provide better access to Pender County beaches. Providing
this improved access will be a very high priority for Pender
County during the five- to ten-year planning period.
Like improved access to the beach area from I-40, the widen-
ing of US 17 and four-laning the remaining portion of NC 421 would
greatly improve the efficiency of these major thoroughfares.
Improvements to either NC 53 or NC 210 would provide needed
improved east -west access through the County, which has been a
concern for some time, as discussed in the 1981 plan.
POLICY: I
County policy will be to work with the Department of Trans-
portation to establish a four -lane thoroughfare between I-40 and
60 1

Surf City and Topsail Beach. The County will continue to work for
the improvement of NC 421 and US 17 as four -lane facilities and
for the improvement of NC 53 and NC 210 to improve the east -west
connection of the County.
16. ISSUE: Lea Island/Hutaff Island
- Lea Island and Hutaff Island have access only by boat.
Because of the sensitive nature of these two islands, the County
would prefer that any future development in these areas, if
permitted by CAMA, Corps of Engineers, and County and Local Permit
Office regulations, be of lower intensity development.
POLICY:
The County is aware that both Lea Island and Hutaff Island
are located in an environmentally sensitive area and, therefore,
would only encourage lower density development in the future if
all local, state, and federal regulations would permit such
development; as permitted by the zoning ordinance once adopted.
17. ISSUE: Water System
Both the 1976 and 1981 Land Use Plans acknowledge the fact
that neither water nor sewer systems were available from the
County. Specifically, the 1976 plan indicated that a "County -wide
water and sewer system is far beyond the financial capability of
1 the County and exceeds its needs." The 1976 plan also stated that
providing water and sewer facilities was a municipal function.
The 1981 plan listed septic tank problems as a #1 priority
problem and a County -wide water system as a #5 class priority.
The plan discussed the problem of some septic tank failure and
1 impact on water quality of the estuarine system, as well as
potential pollution of the groundwater system.
The 1981 plan policy stated that because of the rural char-
acter and low density of the County, a County -wide water system
was not justified; however, a study of higher density areas was
justified.
Based on the results of the 1986 LUP questionnaire, the major-
ity of those answering did not want the County to consider pro-
viding a County -wide water system. Specifically, the question
was:
Do you think the County needs to consider providing a County-
wide water system, if financially feasible?
Yes 176 28.9%
' No 288 47.4%
Not Sure 144 23.7%
Total 608 100.0%
' 61

Based on the results of the questionnaire, there appears to be
little interest in a County water system. Based on these results,
concern for protection of the estuarine system, groundwater
resources, and the desire to provide services that are financially
feasible and desirable, the County must determine the appropriate
steps to take pertaining to providing water services either in the
near or distant future. However, if County officials determine
that it would be in the County's best interest to develop a water
system, the County will pursue federal & state grants to develop
such a system. However, if County officials determine that it
would be in the County's best interest to develop a water system,
the County will pursue federal and state grants to develop such a
system.
POLICY:
As outlined in the section headed, "Commitment to provide
Services to Development," page 47, County policy will be to begin
the planning process for a County water system to serve the rapid-
ly growing areas of the County with potential for future expan-
sion.
18. ISSUE: Rural Crime
"Crime Watch" programs are being used in communities through-
out the County in an effort to help the Sheriff's Department
patrol the County. Citizens of the County will be encouraged to
become involved in the Crime Watch program, if they are not
already.
POLICY:
It shall continue to be County policy to provide protection
for County citizens and others through the County Sheriff's
Department. Citizens not involved in the "Crime Watch" program
will be encouraged to become involved through educational programs
conducted by the Sheriff's Department.
19. ISSUE: Aesthetics
County officials are aware that a clean community projects a
positive image for industry, new business, and visitors to the
area. The County also knows projecting that positive image takes
hard work and dedication of County citizens interested in having a
cleaner, more attractive county.
POLICY:
The County will review and discuss alternative methods to
establish an ongoing "clean community committee or commission" to
work toward the goal of improving the visual quality of Pender
County. The County will also use zoning
screening of storage areas and to control
boards along major scenic highway routes.
62
regulations to require
the location of bill-
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

SECTION III: LAND CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
The land classification system provides a uniform way of
looking at how the planned use of land interacts with environmen-
tally sensitive areas and with the development of a County or
Town. It is not a strict regulatory device in the sense of a
zoning ordinance or zoning map. It represents more of a tool to
understand relationships between various land use categories and
how these relationships help shape local policy. Particular
attention is focused on how intensely land is utilized and the
level of services required to support that intensity. Land
classification is also useful in the staging of services necessary
to support development. The regulations for the Coastal Area
Management Act state:
"The land classification system provides a framework to be
used by local governments to identify the future use of all
lands. The designation of land classes allows the local
government to illustrate their policy statements as to where
and to what density they want growth to occur, and where they
want to conserve natural and cultural resources by guiding
growth." (7B.0204) (b)
There are five general land use classifications under CAMA:
Developed; Transition; Community; Rural; and Conservation. In
applying the land classification system, each local government
should give careful consideration to how, where and when certain
types of, and intensity of "development," will be either encourag-
ed or discouraged. A brief summary of the five broad classifica-
tions, as contained in the CAMA rules, might illustrate this. For
example:
"Urban land uses and higher intensity uses which presently
require the traditional urban services should be directed to
lands classified developed. Areas developing or anticipated
to develop at urban densities which will eventually require
urban services should be directed to lands classified transi-
tion. Low density development in settlements which will not
require sewer services should be directed to areas classified
as community. Agriculture, forestry, mineral extraction and
other similar low intensity uses and very low density, dis-
persed residential uses should be directed to lands classi-
fied rural. Generally, public or private water or sewer
systems will not be provided in areas classified rural as an
incentive for intense development." (7B.0204) (c)
The purpose of the conservation class is to "provide for the
effective long-term management and protection of significant,
limited, or irreplaceable areas." Consequently, urban services
(whether public or private) should not be provided to those areas
as an incentive to "stimulate" more intense development. Each of
these classes must be represented on a Land Classification Map.
63

The five land classifications and Land Classification Map are
therefore intended to serve as a visual reflection of the policies
previously stated in Section II. Ideally, the map which depicts
these classifications should be as flexible as the policies that
guide them. (See attached Land Classification Map)
The five land use classifications, as they will be applied in
Pender County, are identified and defined below.
A. DEVELOPED
The developed class of land use provides for continued inten-
sive development and redevelopment of existing cities or munici-
palities. Areas to be classified as "developed" include lands
currently developed for urban purposes or approaching a density of
500 dwellings per square mile that are provided with usual munici-
pal or public services, police and fire protection. In other
words, such areas must currently be "urban" in character, i.e.
have mixed land uses such as residential, commercial, industrial
and institutional, or other uses at high to medium densities. For
purposes of the Pender County Land Use Plan, the municipalities of
Atkinson, Burgaw, Surf City, and Topsail Beach are considered
developed.
B. TRANSITION
Transition land is classified as those lands providing for
future intensive urban development within the ensuing ten years on
lands that are most suitable and that will be scheduled for provi-
sion of necessary public utilities and services. They may also
provide for additional growth when additional lands in the devel-
oped class are not available or when they are severely limited for
development.
Lands classified "transition" may include:
1. lands currently having urban services; j
2. lands necessary to accommodate the population and econo-
mic growth anticipated within the planning jurisdiction
over the next five to ten years;
3. areas which are in, or will be in, a "transition" state
of development, i.e. going from a lower intensity to a
higher intensity, of uses and will eventually require
urban services.
Transition lands must further: I
1. be served or be readily served by public water, sewer,
and other urban services including public streets, and
2. be generally free of physical limitations for urban
development.
64
�

The "transition" class should not include:
1. lands of high potential for agriculture, forestry, or
r mineral extraction, or land falling within extensive
rural areas being managed commercially for these uses,
when other lands are available;
2. lands where urban development might result in major or
irreversible damage to important environmental, scienti-
fic, or scenic values, cultural resources, or;
3. land where urban development might result in damage to
natural systems or processes of more than local concern;
and
4. lands where development will result in undue risk to life
or property from natural hazards or existing land uses.
1 The relationship between the "developed and transition" clas-
sification is important in predominantly rural counties like
Pender. The first class is meant to define the already developed
areas and/or those areas where public investment decisions will be
required to provide the necessary urban services. These become
important areas to closely monitor. The Coastal Resources Commis-
sion has further clarified this relationship as described below:
The Developed and Transition classes should be the only lands
under active consideration by the County or municipality for
intensive urban development requiring urban services. The area
within these classes is where detailed local land use and public
investment planning will occur. State and Federal expenditures on
projects associated with urban development (water, sewer, urban
street systems, etc.) will be guided to these areas. Large
amounts of vacant land suitable for urban development within the
Developed class should be taken into account when calculating the
amount of additional lands needed to accommodate projected
growth.
Transition areas include the following: along both sides of
NC 53 between the Burgaw extraterritorial limits and I-40; the
land area around the I-40/U.S. 117 interchange east of Willard; an
area with high industrial ppotential between Turkey Creek and the
Cape Fear River at U.S. 117/NC 133; north along both sides of
U.S. 117 up to Rocky Point; along either side of U.S. 421 from its
intersection with NC 210 south to the New Hanover County line;
and, also, both sides of NC 210 from U.S. 117 crossing I-40, east-
ward to the Northeast Cape Fear River have been designated transi-
tion.
For areas where "transition" is located on both sides of a
thoroughfare, the classification shall extend to 1,000 feet on
either side of the road right-of-way.
The Hampstead area has experienced significant growth since
the 1981 CAMA plan was completed, and this area will most likely
continue to grow. Portions of the Hampstead area has been desig-
nated as transition. Both sides of NC 210 at the entrance to Surf
City and extending approximately one-half mile along NC 210 has
been classified transition. Also, the waterfront area along NC
1538 west of NC 210 near the Surf City Bridge has been designated
transition. This transition area would not include any waterfront
property classified as conservation, and the final determination
of any potential conservation areas would be made based on a field
inspection by the appropriate regulatory agency.
r
11
1 65

C. COMMUNITY
The "Community" classification provides for clustered land
uses to meet housing, shopping, employment, and public service
needs within the rural areas of the County. It is usually charac-
terized by a small grouping of mixed land uses which are suitable
and appropriate for small clusters of rural development not
requiring municipal sewer service.
The "Community" classification includes Penderlea; Willard,
Currie, Scotts Hill, Maple Hill, Washington Acres, Deerfield, and
the Watts Landing area.
D. RURAL
The "Rural" class provides for agriculture and forest manage-
ment, mineral extraction and other low intensity uses on large
sites including residences where urban services are not required
and where natural resources will not be unduly impaired. These
are lands identified as appropriate locations for resource manage-
ment and allied uses; land with high potential for agriculture,
forestry or mineral extraction; lands with one or more limitations
that would make development costly and hazardous; and land con-
taining irreplaceable, limited, or significant natural, recrea-
tional or scenic resources not otherwise classified.
The majority of land within Pender County falls within the
"Rural" classification. This classification is very important in
Pender County, because of the economic importance of agriculture
and forestry activities.
_
Addition 1: The majority of land within Pender County falls with-
■
in the "Rural" classification. This classification is very impor-
tant in the County because of the economic importance of agricul-
ture and forestry activities. In addition to agriculture and
forestry, there may be areas within the "Rural" classification
suitable for industry. Decisions as to an area or site being
suitable would depend upon criteria developed by the County, and
state/federal regulation. Preliminary investigations by the
County's Economic and Planning offices will determine if a pro-
posed industry meets this criteria and regulations. If not,
recommendation for the needed corrections would be made. These
investigative reports will be presented to the Pender County
Commissioners for a decision following a formal notice of public
hearing to be advertised at least two weeks prior to the hearing.
The "Rural" classification includes all of the County not
designated "community," "conservation," "transition," -or the four
municipalities of Atkinson, Burgaw, Surf City, and Topsail Beach.
E. CONSERVATION
The final land use category, according to CAMA guidelines, is
the "Conservation" class, which provides for effective long-term
66

management of significant, limited, or irreplaceable resources.
However, beyond the presence of AECs, other areas within the
County, because of natural, cultural, recreational, productive, or
scenic value, may also require similar "effective long-term man-
agement." Examples could include major wetlands (other than sta-
tutorily defined coastal wetlands); essentially undeveloped shore-
lines that are unique, fragile, or hazardous for development;
lands that provide necessary habitat conditions (especially for
remnant species) or publicly -owned water supply watersheds and
acquifers.
The designation "Conservation" should not be misconstrued to
imply "non-use," but does imply a need for careful and cautious
management of any allowable use. For example, within a "conserva-
tion" area, there may be high ground areas which are suitable for
"development," in which case development should be allowed to take
place under carefully managed conditions. The term "preserva-
tion," on the other hand, implies total restriction on.all uses.
Within lands designated Conservation, each proposal, or applica-
tion for any "developed" use will be reviewed on a case -by -case
basis.
AEC areas, soils subject to flooding, and large natural
areas, such as Angola Bay Gameland and Holly Shelter Gameland, are
included in the conservation class. The overall premise for the
designation "Conservation" in Pender County will be to strike the
delicate balance between careful long-term management of sensitive
or valuable resources and the freedom of landowners to utilize
their properties.
L Since, as stated previously, "Conservation" does not imply "Pre-
servation," specific allowable uses in the Conservation class
shall include:
a 1. Drainage: Adequate drainage as permitted by County,
State, and Federal regulations.
2. Low density residential development in accordance with
future zoning ordinance, and as allowed by County, State,
and Federal regulatory aqencies. However, water and/or
sewer services will not be extended to such a residential
area.
3. Water -oriented uses such as piers and docks, and bulk-
heads, if they are shown not to cause detriment to estu-
arine waters and riverine waters or the Conservation
lands and if permitted by County, State, and Federal
regulations.
11 67
F�

4. Necessary utility service lines, such as water, sewer,
,
electrical, natural gas, etc., when it is demonstrated
that the ecological system of the Conservation area will
not be adversely altered.
5. Roadways, when construction of roadways can be conducted
without adversely altering the ecological system, and in
compliance with existing federal, state, and local regu-
lations.
6. Timber harvesting.
7. Barge landings.
8. Marinas (in compliance with Federal, State, and County
Regulations).
The conservation areas of Pender County include all soils in
the County that are subject to flooding,* as designated by the
Soil Conservation Service in Burgaw using the recently completed
detail soils survey maps of the County, or as defined by the
Federal Emergency Management Agency, specifically, land area
susceptible to being inundated by water from any source which is a
general and temporary condition of partial or complete inundation
of normally dry land areas from the overflow of inland or tidal
waters. In addition to soil types subject to flooding, the
"Conservation" classification includes all CAMA-regulated areas of
environmental concern, as discussed in the 1986 Land Use Plan and
Flood Insurance Plan, as applicable to Pender County.
In conjunction with the Policy Statements section of this
Plan, each application for a "developed" use in the Conservation
classification, shall be brought before the County Planning Board
and reviewed on a case -by -case basis prior to approval. The
County Planning Board may recommend modification of the Proposal.
The development proposal shall include the location of the
site on a detail soils map of the area, which can be obtained from
the Soil Conservation Service office in the Countv Administrative
Building in Burgaw, North Carolina.
*Specific soil types included in conservation area are:
Bohicket Silty Clay Loam
Carteret Fine Sand
Chewacla Loam
Croatan Muck
Dorovan Muck
Muckalee Loam
68 1

Storm Hazard Mitigation, Post -Disaster Recovery, and
Evacuation Plans
The entire North Carolina Coastal region, including Pender
County, faces strong threats of damage each year from hurricanes,
Northeasters, or other major storms. For nearly 20 years, there
was a marked "slowdown", or "lull", in hurricane activity along
the State's coast. Predictions were that a major storm could
strike the State at any time during the hurricane season, since
such a storm was "long overdue". And then, in September, 1984,
the "waiting" ended. Hurricane Diana, with some of the strongest
sustained winds ever recorded, rammed into the Southeast coast
near Wilmington. Although damage was extensive, the potential
destruction was much greater and the damage would have been great-
ly escalated had the storm hit land at a slightly different loca-
tion. This time the State and the Southeast coastal area were
relatively fortunate. Next time the coastal area may not be as
fortunate.
Notice the excerpt below from, Before the Storm: Managing
1 Development to Reduce Hurricane Damages, McElyea, Brower, &
Godschalk, 1982, concerning development in coastal communities:
"At the same time, development along the coast has grown
by leaps and bounds. Unless this development is wisely lo-
cated and built to withstand hurricane forces, North
Carolina's coastal communities will face massive destruction.
Local governments, as the primary protectors of the public
health, safety, and general welfare, have a responsibility to
reduce the risk of property damages and loss of life attend-
ing coastal development. They also have a responsibility to
ensure that reconstruction following a major storm can occur
quickly and leave the community safer from disaster in the
future. These are the goals of a hazard mitigation and
reconstruction planning." (p.iii)
The purpose of this section of the 1986 CAMA Land Use Plan
Update is to assist Pender County in managing development in
potentially hazardous areas, in cooperation with the communities
of Topsail Beach and Surf City, by establishing hazard mitigation
policies to reduce the risks associated with future hurricanes.
By developing post -disaster reconstruction/recovery policies, and
reviewing the adequacy of current evacuation plans, the County
will hopefully reduce the risks associated with future hurricanes.
"Hazard mitigation includes any activity which reduces
the probability that a disaster will occur or minimizes the
damage caused by a disaster. Hazard mitigation includes not
only managing development, in cooperation with the two coast-
al communities in Pender County, but also evacuation planning
and other measures to reduce losses of life and property.
Reconstruction involves the full range of repair activities
11
1
69

in the wake of a disaster which seek to return the community
to a "normal" level of operations." (McElyea, Brower, &
Godschalk, p.iii).
With this introduction, the following pages will present the
storm hazard mitigation and post -disaster recovery policies, and
review of the existing evacuation plan along with appropriate
discussions and maps.
1. Storm Hazard Mitigation: Discussion
Hazard mitigation, or actions taken to reduce the probability
or impact of a disaster could involve a number of activities or
policy decisions. The starting.point, however, is to identify the
types of hazards (including the relative severity and magnitude of
risks), and the extent of development (including residential,
commercial, etc.) located in storm hazard areas.
Hurricanes are extremely powerful, often unpredictable forces
of nature. The two most severe effects are fatalities and pro-
perty damage, which are usually the result of four causes: high
winds, flooding, wave action, and erosion, each of which are dis-
cussed briefly below:
a. High Winds
High winds are the major determinants of a hurricane, by
definition, i.e., a tropical disturbance with sustained winds of
at least 73 miles per hour. Extreme hurricanes can have winds of
up to 165 miles per hour, with gusts up to 200 miles per hour.
These winds circulate around the center or "eye" of the storm.
Although the friction or impact of the winds hitting land from the
water causes some dissipation of the full force, there is still a
tremendous amount of energy left to cause damage to buildings,
overturn mobile homes, down trees and powerlines, and destroy
crops. Also, tornadoes can often be spawned by hurricane wind
patterns. Wind stress is an important consideration in storm
hazard mitigation planning. Because of a hurricane's size and
power, it is possible that all of Pender County would be subject
to the same wind velocity in the event of a storm.
b. Flooding
Flooding, on the other hand, may not affect all areas with
equal force. The excessive amounts of rainfall and the "storm
surge" which often accompany hurricanes can cause massive coastal
and riverine flooding causing excessive property damage and deaths
by drownings. (More deaths are caused by drowning than any other
cause in hurricanes.) Flooding is particularly a problem in ocean
coastal areas because of the storm surge and low-lying areas.
However, flooding can cause extensive damage in inland areas also,
since many coastal areas have low elevations and are located in
high hazard or "Zone A" flood areas according to the Federal
70 1

Emergency Management Agency Maps. The County Planning Department
has chosen to use the detail soil maps of the County, prepared for
the Soil Conservation Service, to designate soils subject to
flooding, and this has been reflected on the Land Classification
Map as part of the conservation area.
Flooding can not only cause damage to buildings, but salt-
water flooding can cause serious damage to croplands. Considera-
tion of potential flood damage is important to Pender County's
efforts to develop storm mitigation policies.
c. Wave Action
Damage from wave action is connected very closely to the
storm surge, i.e., wind -driven water with high waves moving to
vulnerable shoreline areas. Areas most likely to be affected are
ocean hazard areas and estuarine shoreline areas. There are
extensive estuarine shoreline areas (75 feet inland from the mean
high water mark of estuarine waters) in the County and ocean
hazard areas along the outer banks. Wave action damage would have
the most significant impact along the Atlantic Ocean beach front
and Sound shoreline. As the existing land use map and the Flood
Hazard Boundary Map show, there is a significant amount of resi-
dential development in or near the estuarine shoreline area and
developed continuing at Topsail Beach and Surf City. Wave action
can cause erosion as well as push possible flood waters to areas
not reached by the storm surge itself. The estuarine shoreline
along Pender County's riverine shores are sufficiently inland from
an open coast so that the wave energy is dispersed and diffracted,
mainly by the proximity to forested areas.
d. Erosion
The final major consideration in storm hazard mitigation is
severe erosion, caused by high winds, high water, and heavy wave
action. Again, in Pender County, the area most susceptible to
storm -related erosion is the estuarine shoreline AEC along the
i Sound and the ocean front areas of Topsail Beach and Surf City.
■ This is essentially the same area potentially affected by the
action of damaging waves and described in part c, above. Shore-
line erosion could lead to loss of property through portions of
waterfront lots being washed into the Sound and ocean or even
actual structural damage to buildings. Erosion potential is an
important factor to consider in developing storm hazard mitigation
policies.
71

e. Summary: Storm Hazard Mitigation Considerations
In summary, all four of the major damaging forces of a hurri-
cane, i.e., high winds, flooding, wave action, and shoreline ero-
sion could have a potential impact upon Pender County in the event
of a major storm. The degree of susceptibility to losses and/or
damages was generally alluded to in the previous discussions.
However, Table XVII provides a better projection of the percent of
the County's building structures (residential and commercial,
etc., subject to the potentially devastating effects of a major
storm:
Table XVII *Percent of Structures Subject to Storm Damage
Factors, Pender County
Storm Impact Percent Structures Possibly Affected
1. High winds See Surf City and Topsail Beach LUP
2. Flooding
3. Wave Action See Surf City and Topsail Beach LUP
*Based on preliminary estimates derived from examination of the
1986 Existing Land Use Maps for Pender County and soil types
subject to flooding, as provided by the Soil Conservation Service
office in Burgaw.
The information in the Table above is an estimate and is not
intended to convey the impression that every single structure
possibly affected by damaging flooding would be affected, only
that the potential is there. Storm impact from high wind and wave
action would be covered in the Surf City and Topsail Beach LUP's.
Knowing that the potential is there forms the basis for setting
forth storm hazard mitigation policies, keeping in mind that
"mitigate" means actions which may reduce the probability of
disaster, or minimize the damage caused by a disaster (McElyea,
Brower, & Godschalk, p. iii).
f. Policy Statements: Storm Hazard Mitigation
In order to minimize the damage potentially caused by the
effects of a hurricane or other major storm, Pender County pro-
poses the following policies.
1. High Winds
Pender County enforces the N. C. State Building Code,
particularly requirements of construction standards
to meet wind -resistive factors, i.e., "design wind
velocity". The County also enforces provisions in
the State Building Code requiring tie -downs for
mobile homes, which help resist wind damage.
72

2. Flooding
Pender County is supportive of the hazard mitigation
1 elements of the National Flood Insurance Program.
Pender County also supports continued enforcement of
the CAMA and 404 Wetlands development permit process-
es in areas potentially susceptible to flooding.
3. Wave Action and Shoreline Erosion
Pender County is supportive of the CAMA development
permit process for estuarine shoreline areas and the
requisite development standards which encourage both
shoreline stabilization and facilitation of proper
drainage. The County is aware of potential overwash
areas at Topsail Beach and Surf City, and these areas
should be identified in the Topsail Beach and Surf
City CAMA plans.
1 g. Implementation: Storm Hazard Mitigation
1. Pender County has adopted an Emergency Management
Hurricane Response Plan, which requires coordination
with both Topsail Beach and Surf City.
2. The County will continue to support enforcement of
State and Federal programs which aid in mitigation of
hurricane hazards, including CAMA and the U. S. Army
Corps of Engineers 404 permit process.
3. The County is presently working on adoption of both
subdivision regulations and zoning ordinance. Both
of these planning tools will be used to direct growth
away from storm hazard areas.
3. Post -Disaster Reconstruction Plan
Pender County.recognizes that in the event of a major storm,
it will be very important to have, at a minimum, a general recov-
ery and reconstruction plan. This section of the Land Use Plan
Update will address this issue.
a. Appointment of a "Post Disaster Recovery Team"
In the event of a major storm having landfall in the vicinity
of Pender County, when evacuation orders are issued, the Chairman
of the County Board of Commissioners shall appoint a "Post -
Disaster Recovery Team". This team shall consist of all of the
members of the Control Group and Support Group as identified in
the Pender County Emergency Management Hurricane Response Plan,
and others whom the Chairman may appoint. The total team may
consist of the following:
1
73

1.
The Chairman of the Pender County Board of Commis-
sioners -
2.
Group Chairman
3.
The Mayors or their representatives of:
Surf City
Topsail Beach
Burgaw
Atkinson
,
4.
The Pender County Emergency Management Coordinator -
Advisor
5.
The County Attorney - Legal Advisor
6.
County Finance Officer - Group Chief of Support
Group
7.
Sheriff
8.
Director of Social Services
9.
Superintendent of Schools
10.
County Health Director
11.
County Tax Supervisor
12.
Burgaw Fire Chief
13.
County Public Information Officer
14.
Rescue Squad Representative
15.
State Highway Patrol Liaison Officer
16.
Red Cross Liaison Officer
17.
Building Inspection Department
18.
Local and State CAMA Permit Officers
The Emergency Management Coordinator will serve as the Group
Leader. The
base of operations will be the Emergency Operations
Center (EOC)
identified in the County Evacuation Plan. The
Disaster Recovery Team will be responsible for the following:
1.
Establishing
an overall restoration schedule.
2.
Setting restoration priorities.
3.
Determining requirements for outside assistance and
requesting such assistance when beyond local capabi-
lities.
4.
Keeping the appropriate County and State officials
informed.
5.
Keeping the public informed.
6.
Assembling and maintaining records of actions taken
and expenditures and obligations incurred.
7.
Recommending to the Chairman of the Board of Commis-
sioners to proclaim a local "state of emergency" if
warranted.
r
8.
Commencing and coordinating cleanup, debris removal
and utility restoration which would include coordina-
74

I
11
n
tion of restoration activities undertaken by private
utility companies.
9. Coordinating repair and restoration of essential
public facilities and services in accordance with
determined priorities.
10. Assisting private businesses and individual property
owners in obtaining information on the various types
of assistance that might be available to them from
federal and state agencies.
b. Immediate Clean -Up and Debris Removal
As soon as practical after the storm, the Disaster Recovery
Team will direct appropriate County personnel, in cooperation with
Topsail Beach and Surf City municipal personnel, and as necessary,
request State and/or federal assistance to begin clearing fallen
trees and other debris from the County and municipal roads and
bridges.
c. Long Term Recovery/Restoration
The Disaster Recovery Team will be responsible for overseeing
the orderly implementation of the
major storm or hurricane in accord
The County would contact State and
financial assistance to repair or
property.
1. Damage Assessments
reconstruction process after a
with the County's policies.
Federal agencies to request
reconstruct damaged or destroyed
Damage assessments will be necessary to determine as
quickly as possible a realistic estimate of the
amount of damage caused by a hurricane or major
storm. Information such as the number of structures
damaged, the magnitude of damage, and the estimated
total dollar loss will need to be developed.
As soon as practical after the storm, i.e., clearance
of major highways and paved roads in the County, the
Disaster Recovery Team Leader shall set up a Damage
Assessment Committee (DAC), consisting of the Build
ing Inspector, Emergency Management Coordinator, a
local realtor or building contractor, and appropriate
personnel from the Pender County tax department. The
DAC will immediately begin to make "windshield"
surveys of damaged structures to initially assess
damages and provide a preliminary dollar value of
repairs or replacement. The following general cri-
teria shall be utilized:
75

2.
a. Destroyed (repairs would cost more than 80
percent of value).
b. Major (repairs would cost more than 30 percent of
the value).
c. Minor (repairs would cost less than 30 percent of ,
the value, but the structure is currently uninhabit-
able) .
d. Habitable (some minor damage, with repairs less
than 15 percent of the value).
Each damage assessment will be documented according
to County tax records. Also, County tax maps (inclu-
ding aerial photographs) and/or records may be used
for identification purposes). The total estimated
dollar value of damages will be summarized and
reported to the Disaster Recovery Team Leader.
Reconstruction Development Standards
Reconstruction shall be held at least to the same
standards as before the storm. However, developed
structures which were destroyed and which did not
conform to the County's storm hazard mitigation poli-
cies, i.e., with basic measures to reduce damage by
high winds, flooding, wave action or erosion, must be
redeveloped according to those policies. In some
instances, this may mean relocation of construction,
or no reconstruction at all. Building permits to
restore destroyed or damaged structures, which were
built in conformance with the State Building Code and
County storm hazard mitigation policies, shall be
issued automatically, all structures suffering major
damage will be repaired according to the State Build-
ing Code. All structures suffering minor damage,
regardless of location, will be allowed to be rebuilt
to the original condition prior to the storm. The
County Sanitarian and Building Inspector will consid-
er permitting reconstruction (between 30-80% of value
of damaged homes requiring a septic tank) on a case
by case basis if soil type does not meet current
septic tank requirements as of the date damage or
destruction occurred.
Development Moratoria
Pender County, because
of a lack
of densely populated
areas, does not foresee
the need
to prohibit any and
all development for any
specified
period of time,
unless prohibited by applicable
State
or Federal
regulations. Residents
shall be
allowed to proceed
76
U

with redevelopment and reconstruction as soon as
practical and in accord with the various levels of
State and federal disaster relief provided to them.
The Disaster Recovery Team will coordinate with the
State Building Association and other home construc-
tion organizations in assembling a list of qualified
contractors interested in assisting with -reconstruc-
tion.
4. Repair/Reconstruction Schedule
The following schedule of activities and time frame
are proposed with the realistic idea that many fac-
tors of a hurricane may render the Schedule infeas-
ible.
Activity Time Frame
a) Appoint Damage Assessment 6 hours after storm
Committee
b) Complete and Report Damage Two weeks after storm
Assessments
c) Begin Repairs to Critical As soon as possible
Utilities and Facilities after storm
d) Permitting of Reconstruction Two weeks after damage
activities for all damaged assessments are
structures ("minor" to pre -storm complete
original status, "major" to State
building code and hazard
mitigation standards
5. Agency Responsible for Implementation
The Chairman of the Pender County Board of Commis-
sioners, as chief elected official of the County,
will serve as overall Chairman of Control Group. The
Board Chairman will delegate the oversight of the
reconstruction and recovery effort and implementation
of the plan.
6. Repair and Replacement of Public Utilities
Repair and replacement of public utilities at Topsail
Beach and Surf City will be the responsibility of
those municipalities.
4. Hurricane Evacuation Plan
Pender County has an official "Emergency Management and
Hurricane Response Plan," which was prepared in March 1984. A
brief review of this plan indicates that it is generally adequate.
77

Relationship of Policies and Land Classification I
As discussed in the data collection and analysis section of
the Land Use Plan, Pender County has been and remains a very rural
county. Based on 1983 estimates, Pender County had a population
density of 26.7 people per square mile, which is very low; how-
ever, portions of the County have been and continue to experience
a significant amount of development, particularly along the east-
ern mainland area between US 17 and the Intracoastal Waterway.
The primary policy adopted by Pender County and the one that
will have the greatest impact on future land use is the policy to
prepare and adopt both subdivision regulations and a zoning ordi-
nance. Also, the policy to begin the planning process to provide
water and/or sewer service in rapidly growing areas of the County
will impact on future development. Currently, the land use policy
is to permit development in the County if the proposed development
meets all Local, State, and Federal regulations. Upon approval of
the zoning ordinance, the County will have a better planning tool
to direct future growth.
To reflect these policies on the Land Classification Map, the
County has designated the area along both sides of NC 53 between
Burgaw at US 117 and I-40 as a transition area. Also, both sides
of NC 210 between I-40 and SR 1518 have been designated as transi-
tion due to the anticipated growth generated by the interstate
highway, the technical school planned for the area, and new
industry planned for the area.
The Hampstead area has experienced significant growth since
the 1981 CAMA plan was completed, and this area will most likely
continue to grow. All of the Hampstead area has been designated
transition. Both sides of NC 210 at the entrance to Surf City and
extending approximately one-half mile along NC 210 have been clas-
sified as transition. Also, the waterfront area along NC 1538
west of NC 210 near the Surf City Bridge has been designated
transition. This transition area would not include any waterfront
property classified as "Conservation," and the final determination
of any potential conservation area would be made based on a field
inspection by the appropriate regulatory agency.
The "Community" classification includes Penderlea, Willard,
Carrie, and Maple Hill.
The "Rural" classification includes all of the County not
designated transition, community, conservation, or the four muni-
cipalities of .Atkinson, Burgaw, Surf City, or Topsail Beach.
The conservation area includes all soils in the County that
are subject to flooding, as designated by the Soil Conservation
Service in Burgaw using the recently completed detail soils survey
78
�

maps of the County. In addition to soil types subject to flood-
ing, the "Conservation" classification includes all CAMA-regulated
areas of environmental concern, as discussed in the 1986 Land Use
Plan and as applicable to Pender County.
Public Participation
During the early planning stages, the Pender County Planning
Board held two public information meetings, one in Burgaw and one
in Hampstead. During these meetings, the Planning Director, Plan-
ning Board Chairman, and consultant discussed the purpose of the
Land Use Plan Update and received comment on local issues. The
Hampstead meeting was attended by over 100 interested citizens.
During the following months, the Planning Board held several work
sessions which were attended by interested citizens. The Land Use
Plan Update has also been on the agenda for regular Planning Board
meetings. In addition to public information meetings and regular
Planning Board meetings as a means to have input into the planning
process, the Planning Board prepared and distributed over 5,000
planning questionnaires and distributed them through the schools
I and two County libraries. Planning questionnaire responses were
tabulated and information used in preparing the Land Use Plan
Update.
Public participation will continue following submittal of the
draft plan to the Coastal Resources Commission for review and
comment. Following that review, the -plan will be presented at a
public hearing for review and comment by Pender County citizens
prior to formal adoption. Following adoption of the plan, it may
be modified or amended during the subsequent five-year planning
' period, as the need for such amendment may require.
The following public information meetings and Planning Board
meetings were open to the public:
October 23, 1985
January 24, 1986
February 10, 1986 (Burgaw Public Info. Meeting)
February 17, 1986 (Hamstead Public Info. Meeting)
February 27, 1986
March 20, 1986
July 3, 1986
August 23, 1986
November 17, 1986
January 12, 1987
January 19, 1987 (County Commissioners)
79
1

i
a
z
uj
IL
C�.

APPENDIX
SOIL SURVEY IDENTIFICATION LEGEND
PENDER COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
Locally Important Farmlands
AuB(BnB)
Autryville fine sand, 1 to 4 percent slopes
BaB(BmB)
Baymeade fine sand, 1 to 4 percent slopes
Gr
Grantham loam
Gr
Grifton loamy fine sand
InA(In)(Ip)
Invershiel-Pender complex, 0 to 2 percent slopes
KeB
Kenansville fine sand, 0 to 4 percent slopes
Ls(Li)
Liddell silt loam
Lu
Lumbee fine sandy loam, occasionally flooded
Pa
Pactolus fine sand, occasionally flooded
jPn
Pantego fine loam
mucky sandy
Ra
Rains fine sandy loam
To(Px)
Torhunta mucky fine sandy loam
Wo
Woodington fine sandy loam

APPENDIX
SOIL SURVEY IDENTIFICATION LEGEND
PENDER COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
Prime Farmland
AtA
Altavista fine sandy loam,
0 to 3 percent slopes
AyA
Avcock loam, 0 to 3 percent
slopes
AyB2
Aycock loam, 3 to b percent
slopes, eroded
EmA(ExA)
Exum loam, 0 to 2 percent
slopes
EuA(EU)(ExU)
Exum-Urban land complex, 0
to 2 percent slopes
Fo(FoA)
Foreston loamy fine sand
GoA
Goldsboro fine sandy loam,
0 to 2 percent slopes
Jo
Johns fine sandy loam
KaA(Ka)
Kalmia loamy fine sand, 1
to 3 percent slopes
McC(CrC2)(CrC)(MaC)
Marvyn and Craven soils, o
to 12 percent slopes
NoA
Norfolk loamy fine sand, 0
to 2 percent slopes
NoB
Norfolk loamy fine sand, 2
to & percent slopes
On
Onslow loamy fine sand

1 1986-95
� TRANSPORTATION
� IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
I
. I

_ 1
-` top. ..y :.11
'� Y„�xr�" •'' S PENDER COUNTY
015.�,1 to �
^/
.r II37
h�\t:K (..s _.' Ilo° Oar.• -,.,,,, '+5
t o ti MI#
outilttD �F
17,• 5 -
' w v
1 �Ky 1 �rWVh �i.
NC 210, i•IOORE'S CREEK NATIONAL MILITARY BATTLEFIELD,
PENDER COUNTY
T.io lane facility on new location.

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

8-132253
J •�
I ell � H
1 sov oN
eusj a j BURGAW
1,7 POI 1,7)!
+"
W.1k—
`I PENDER COUNTY
1 1.ro GIs:
rj 1 N 1"1e �
Mrlwlo \ r
T, 117 1e1" Y Cwk
•17
7 G
1315
O ✓ � 1111
rs� rq\ /
\ 1e7.
SR lull, BRIDGE #90, PANDER COUNTY
1 Replace fltidbe over Branch of
Northeast Cape Fear River. j

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
n f . y V r.-�•
B-2161 ��� ✓,� ,, „�
( PENDER COUNTY!
1 _ � ] • 1 +s•f B
\ Csoj�
s)t t
7f e
ol
ava+o
SVOf CITY'
a d.:
Wood ,/' e ro•+ �
•� nt i t• � a� �
•s
j TOPSML UACH .1i�
v) , u••
�fd /
SR 1561, BRIDGE #114, FENDER COUNTY
Replace bridge over Bekkie's Creek.

TALBERT, COX & ASSOCIATES, INC.
6527 NEW PEACHTREE ROAD
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30340
T R A N S M I T T A L L E T T E R
'Zr: `nth 491w"
UN 19 1987
DATE: J 4 b 7
JOB NO: 17 4 , 4o L
ATTENTION: 71 `�_
JOB: \.,JC11<< A 1 I-.
Dear Sir: We are sending you this ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS SHOP DRAWINGS
' date the following:
ENGINEERSNG DRAWINGS DENDA
`AD
SAMPLES Mi 4►w.
Imo,
Transmitted by: OUR MESSENGER FIRST CLASS MAIL
YOUR MESSENGER AIR MAIL
EXPRESS SPECIAL DELIVERY
PARCEL POST SPECIAL HANDLING
BUS
ORIGINAL
SUBJECT KATTER
DRAWING
NUMBER
LAST
DATE
COPIES
EACH
REMARKS
NOTE: A - Shop drawings marked "REVIEWED NO EXCEPT" give authority to proceed with the work
as shown, subject to the requirements of the plans and specifications.
B - Shop drawings marked "MAKE CORR. NOTED" give authority to proceed in accordance
' with notes, but corrected prints must be submitted. Only drawings without notes
shall be used for erection work in the field.
C - Shop drawings marked "AMEND AND RESUBMIT" and "REJECTED -RESUBMIT" do not give
authority to proceed with any por=ion of the work shown thereon.
CC:
Very truly yours,
TALBERT, COX & ASSOCIATES, INC.
BY: �.� 1

ADDENDUM NO. 1
January 14, 1987
Specifications for the Construction of Area I, Waller Park, City of Roswell,
Georgia identified as Project # CD-82-08A dated December, 1986. Bidders are
notified that above Specifications and accompanying Drawings are modified as
set forth below. All other provisions of the Specifications, Drawings and
other Contract Documents previously issued remain unchanged.
ITEMS:
1. On Drawing L5 at "Typical Roadway Section" and at "Asphalt Paving",
change to:
5" Base Course
1-1/2" Type "B" Bituminious Binder Course -
1" Type "E" Wearing Course
2. On Drawing L5 at "Handicapped Drop Curb & Gutter":
(a) Change 1'-6" base dimensions to 2'-0".
(b) Change 7" thickness to 6".
(c) Add dimension of 5-1/2 inches from top of curb to low point of
handicapped ramp at face of curb.
1574-402

ADDENDUM NO. 1
January 14, 1987
Specifications for the Construction of Area II, Waller Park, City of Roswell
Georgia identified as Project # CD-82-08A dated December, 1986. Bidders are
notified that above Specifications and accompanying Drawings are modified as
set forth below. All other provisions of the Specifications, Drawings and
other Contract Documents previously issued remain unchanged.
ITEMS:
1. On Drawing L4 at "Typical Roadway Section" change to:
5" Base Course
1-1/2" Type "B" Bituminious Binder Course
1" Type "E" Wearing Course
2. On Drawing L5 at "Handicapped Drop Curb & Gutter":
(a) Change 1'-6" base dimensions to 2'-07.
(b) Change 7" thickness to 6".
(c) Add dimension of 5-1/2 inches from top of curb to low point of
handicapped ramp at face of curb.
1574-402

O
i�
t 'V 3 ► 31L0' Z
IJ] Ilt J
MoPM ►
N.
11110
i7� • 1
ro NOLLy Rocs -
4L
i
C144 '
3493'
O
Z
\ <
HOMY SHELTER WED'_
GAME LAND
17
0
IBn
D U P l 1 N C O U N T Y
WALLACE
.p. 2.903
- O 3
MOF
LEIB _ �
I
ANGO
U GAME AND
•-- Deb � �
FWA
,4
7
i
01
Vq
i The preparation of _n:s 'AD vas
finance;: _ . tart _nrouan . arant
proviaaa .. sorts .'irol ina
C Jds t.l_ ".3 naaeme't pr3aram.
tnrouan __..,.- orov: aed oy the
Coasta! .a.~ _ �manaaement of
1972. )� ^:,enaea, In cn is
a am i n.i ate r-d by the ce of
Oc=an ir.a Coastal Re sO ur C�
Nanaaement, •;ationa1. Oceanic and
ALnospneric ;.aministra Cior.
330.0" 1 ■
—sa J ■
LEGEND MAN,
RESIDENTIAL
COMMERCIAL
INSTITUTIONAL
INDUSTRIAL
RECREATIONAL
DEVELOPING
OPEN SPACE
AREAS SUBJRCT TO FLOODING ARE BASED OM
SOIL TYPO! AS FURNISHED BY THE SOIL Mew
CONSERVATION SERVICE BY DISTRICT OFFICE.
LOCATION FOR GFNERAL USE ONLY. DETAIL
O LS WWb AVAILA59 AT DISTRICT SOIL
CONSERVATION SERVICE OFFICE IN BURGAN.
lose
EXISTING LANs USE PLAN
t PENDER
TM-1m
g
o 100, '
/ 1711
/ 13
O Y.
1717
A % f1• .
17n , n7
1715
.
Ifo.
. 1]
29 71
% NAM A
h �
/ 1 L
14
SP33'
- „ / •tt• � Cowl /
w /
.30
Pi.aT.JM1
IV
;K R
NTY
COU
�:• P o �7� �\
.��' '---= 34*20', NORTH CAROLINA
4 .4.
w 4 O j wi FBIPARBD BY DO
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
YN d; \ DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS —PLANNING AND RESEARCH BRANCH —
T , NH COOPERATION WITH "N
D y �� U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATIOP
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
m/
SPy` /• Ricti !I�E,O NOTE AW INCLUDES ONLY STATE MAfRAINIID ROAM SCALE
OR WPORTANT NON•SYSTEM ROADL
MRSAW NOT LIOWN ON PRONIAOE ROAD[ 0 I i 7 . Ron
ROADS SHOWN AS OF JW 1, IN• 0 Bs 1 .IRS
i
SCALE PM MRAROEIM[fM
PREPARED BY
Taloert Cox & Associates , Inc.
Law as 000 uHr Oo ral. Gn01r 11A.R cocaum" MO.
HOIKOK N7D1[RDN
-mm 3 -no I PENDER COUNTY "am Coosa I'M

M�.-L1
■ L D..M- -
ImAm
L i.o ON _
r
I '
)laew I ■
The preparation o`. tnls mao vas
`financed i❑ part tnrounn a ;rant
provided tv the North :aro Ll na
C pasta: •tanacement ?r o; ra.n,
throu;n :undo provided by the
Coa
astall Zone Management Act of
1972, as 3menae6
1
wnicn 15
administered by the Offlcn, of
Ocean ar, r, Coastal Resource
Management,. National oceanic and
A rmospneiic Ad^inistraticn.
NOTE
FOR PURPOSES Or FUTURE UTILITY METERSIONS
ALL CONSERVATION DISTRICT AREAS SSONM ON
LAND CLASSIFICATION MAP REGIS 100 FEET IM
EACH DIRECTION AS MEASURED FROM THE
CENTER LINE OF RXISTING ROADS SUM IN
CONSERVATION AREA. TEIS IS TO PERMIT
EXTENSION OF WATTR OR SEWER LINES WITHIN
100 FEET or EXISTING ROADS AND THROUGH
AREAS DESIGNATED AS CONSERVATION WITHOUT
REQUIRING AN AMENDMENT TO PLAN.
CONSERVATION AREA:
LAND CLASSIFICATION NAP Pon GENERAL USE
ONLY (FINAL DETERMINATION OF LOCATION
SMALL RE MADE BY RESPONSIBLE PRDEMAL,
STATE OR LOCAL OFFICIAL SAVING RRGULATORY
AUTSOR ITT AND SUCH DETERMINATION SMALL BE
MADE BASRD ON A ?I no
INVESTIGATION OF
THE AREA IN QUESTION)
LEGEND
® 100 YEAR
FLOOD ZONE
10 NO. UNITS
SU.BJ EGT TO
FLOOD] N*G
NOTE.
The municipalities of Atkinson, Surgaw, Sure city, and Topsail ,yam
Beach are not included as part of the Land Classification Map.
These municipalities are covered by their own Land Us* Plans.
1986
)SITE HAZARDS MAP
ENDER COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
►REPAREO /Y THE
H CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SION OF HIGHWAYS — PLANNING AND RESEARCH BRANCH —
IN COOPERATION VAT" 1101
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATIOP
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
SCALE
1 .NEAR
0.s I ffm
SCALE K* EPNARGIPA&M
PRE ARED BY
Talbert Cox Associates , Inc.
yj 0000 POW *so "NO ON ran" c.00:r nue cootwN $"no
t POIKOK NIOAL110M
oNwoM s oeRecr PENDER COUNTY MAIN can

RL- m—_
I— 1 0.000 —
Iweml 1 ■
The preparation- of this mew was
financed in part through a grant
provided by the North Carolina
Coastal Management Program,
throuah funds provided by the
Ccastal Zone Manaqement Act of
1972, as amended, which is
administered by the Office of
Ocean and Coastal Resource
Management, National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration.
NOTE:
FOR PURPOSES OF FUTURE UTILITY RXTENSION$
ALL CONSERVATION DISTRICT ARRAS $NUNN ON
LAND CLASSIFICATION NAP again 100 FEET IN
OCR DIRECTION AS NEASURED FROM THE
CENTER LINE OF EXISTING ROADS SHOWN IN
CONSERVATION AREA. "IS IS TO PERMIT
EXTENSION OF WATER OR SEWER LINES WITHIN
100 FEET OF EXISTING ROADS AM TRROUGW
AREAS DESIGNATED AS CONSERVATION WITHOUT
REQUIRING AN AHRRDNENT TO PLAN.
CONSERVATION AREA:
LAND CLASSIFICATION NAP FOR GENERAL USE
ONLY (FINAL DETERMINATION OF LOCATION
SHALL BE MADE BY RESPONSIBLE FERAL,
STATE OR LOCAL OFFICIAL HAVING REGULATORY
AUTHORITY AND SUCH DETERMINATION SHALL BE
MADE BASRD ON A FIELD INVESTIGATION OF
THE AREA IN OUBS'lION)
LEGEND
TRANSITION
COMMUNITY
RURAL
® CONSERVATION
NOTE:
The aunt cipalities of Atkinson. Surgew. Surf City, and Topsail Ha.»
Beach are not included as part of the Land Classification Nap.
These municipalities are covered by their own Land Use Plans.
111i
LAIII CLASSIFICATIIM MAP
ENDER COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
►RI►ARID IV DO
H CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
iION OF HIGHWAYS —PUNNING AND RESEARCH BRANCH
BM cooff"nom 1MTM TMI
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
SCALE
: 0 1 7 i .WA
0 03 1 IMBI
EiEeg
SCALE " WAANGWOITS
PRE ARED 6Y
Talbert , Cox Associates , Inc.
R 10 am Pow oae sow o. 4M CANXAw sow coosnrN snwe
_^ 101KO K AOIKRO+
onm ow s o1sRarl , PENDER COUNTY MOf1W CaROUM 141

P
f
1
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
1
t
1
1
1
1
is \
DCM COPY DCM COPY
lease do not remove!!!!!
Division of Coastal Management
Pender County, North Carolina
October 11, 2000 Draft

PENDER COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Carolyn H. Justice, Chair
F.D. Rivenbark, Vice Chair
James H. Faison
Stephen C. Holland
Dwight A. Strickland
Martin Beach, County Manager
LONG RANGE PLANNING COMMITTEE
Linda Brown
James Connor
Waitus English, III
Jennings Humphrey
Joab Johnson, Jr.
W.M. "Billy" King
Irene Lay
Marion Lomax
Edrington Maynard
Malvin Myers
Beverly Paul
Angus Phillips
Dianne Wells
Sidney Williams
Wilhelm Wolak
Angela Faison, Planning Director
CONSULTING PLANNER
Glenn Harbeck Associates
Wilmington, NC
The preparation of this document was financed, in part,
through a grant provided by the North Carolina Coastal
Management Program, through funds provided by the
Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended, which
Is administered by the Office of Ocean and Coastal
Resource Management, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration.

r
A
11
M
1
Pender County Growth Management Plan
Contents
Executive Summary
Historical Perspective
The Question is Not Whether Pender County Will Grow But How
How to Use the Policies
Growth Management Policies, Listed
Growth Management Policies, Including Narrative
Introduction to the Policies 1
A. GROWTH MANAGEMENT. GENERALLY
Policy Section 1:
Preferred Growth Pattern 3
Policy Section 2:
Regional Planning Coordination 3
B. INFRASTRUCTURE AND SERVICES
Policy Section 3:
Transportation 5
Policy Section 4:
Water and Sewer Services 8
• Potable Water Services
• Sewer Services
• Package Sewage Treatment Plants
• Growth Policies and Centralized Water and Sewer Services
Policy Section 5:
Stormwater Management, Drainage and Flooding 12
Policy Section 6: School Facilities 17
Policy Section 7: Parks, Recreation, and Water Access 20
Policy Section 8: Solid Waste Management 24
Policy Section 9: Paying for Infrastructure and Services 27
C. DEVELOPMENT TYPES
Policy Section 10: Industrial Development 32
• "Clean" Vs. "Dirty" Industry/Performance Standards
• Locational Criteria for Industry
• Mineral Production Industries
• Industrial Style Hog Farms
Policy Section 11: Commercial and Office Development 35

Policy Section 12: Housing and Neighborhood Development 37
Policy Section 13: Waterfront and Waterbome Development 43
• Marinas and Upland Excavation for Marina Basins
• Dry Static Facilities
• Floating Homes
• Moorings and Mooring Fields
• Bulkheads in Marsh Areas
• Docks and Piers
D. RESOURCE PROTECTION AND USE
Policy Section 14:
Agricultural and Rural Area Preservation
46
Policy Section 15:
Estuarine Area Resources
48
• Areas of Environmental Concern, Generally
• Coastal Wetland AEC's
• Estuarine Waters AEC's
• Public Trust Waters AEC's
• Estuarine Shoreline AEC's
• Ocean Hazard Areas AEC's
• Outstanding Resource Waters
• Turtle Nesting Areas
• Sound and Estuarine System Islands
Policy Section 16:
Significant Natural Areas
53
• Angola Bay Gamelands
• Holly Shelter Game Preserve
Policy Section 17:
Freshwater Resources, Surface and Ground
54
Policy Section 18:
Wetlands and Hydric Soils
56
Policy Section 19:
Historic Preservation and Revitalization
57
Policy Section 20:
Community Appearance
59
Appendix 1: Growth Factors Analysis
Population
GFA -1
Housing
GFA - 9
Economy
GFA-13
Appendix 2: Implementation Actions
Introduction
Actions-1
Implementation Actions Listed by Policy Section
Actions-1

11
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
This executive summary provides a brief introduction, a
user's guide, and a concise listing of all growth
management policies contained in the full plan.
1

tPender County Growth Management Plan Executive Summary
Executive Summary
Historical Perspective
Until the advent of Interstate 40 around 1990, Pender County was somewhat "off the beaten path'. While
US 421, 117 and 17 passed through the county, traffic in and out of the area was light and relatively few
people stopped on their way to Wilmington, Myrtle Beach or other points south.
With the coming of 1-40, however, much has changed. Pender County's connection to the Piedmont of
North Carolina including, particularly, the Research Triangle (Raleigh -Durham) and to a lesser extent, the
Piedmont Triad (Winston-Salem/Greensboro) is now very strong. Piedmont area residents, who may have
been indifferent as to whether they vacationed at the Outer Banks, the Shackleford Banks or Myrtle
Beach, now see Pender County and the Cape Fear region in general as a very convenient coastal
destination.
In addition, 1-40 and improvements to New Hanover International Airport, appear to have placed
southeastern North Carolina "on the map' as a national destination. Pender County is no longer a sleepy
coastal enclave but, rather, is rapidly emerging as a significant travel locale. Further, when people visit an
area on vacation, a certain percentage will decide to stay and make it their permanent home. Before long,
their friends and relatives are also moving to the area, and a growth explosion occurs. Such is the case
with Pender County.
While not all residents of Pender County agree on the merits of growth and development, few would argue
' about whether it is going to continue. Population projections for the next two decades show the County's
population continuing on its rapid growth pace of the 1990's, reaching 60,000 people by 2020, more than
doubling its 1990 population of 29,000.
The Question is Not Whether Pender County Will Grow But How
The question then becomes not whether the county is going to grow but how the county is going to grow.
Many residents are quick to describe the "unbridled" growth that has occurred in New Hanover County as
an example of what they don't want Pender County to become. Yet, many of the forces that have worked
to cause the present situation in New Hanover County are already at work in Pender. Centralized water
and sewer services are on the way. Industry is moving in along the 140/US 117 corridor. Relatively short
commuting times to jobs in northern New Hanover County are making much of the southern part of the
county attractive as a bedroom community. The Hampstead area, once primarily a haven for retirees, is
now seeing an influx of families with children. This residential growth, as well as the industrial growth
along 140, promises to become even more intense once water and sewer services are in place.
These developments need not be cause for alarm. The same forces that too often work to degrade the
quality of life in an area, can also be employed to enhance it. The difference lies not in whether such
forces exist, but how those forces are harnessed to manage and direct the kind of growth people would
like to see. New infrastructure, including particularly, highways and centralized water and sewer, are
powerful influencers of growth. When combined with sound land use planning, they can encourage growth
where it is most appropriate, and discourage it where it is not. Such infrastructure and land use planning
can also be used to cause compact development rather than sprawl. These forces can be used to create
walkable towns and villages surrounded by farms and woodlands or, if left to their own devices, they can
result in a "peanut butterization" of the landscape- an even spread of wall to wall subdivisions and strip
�. shopping centers the length and breadth of the county.
The policies set forth in this plan are intended to help Pender County avoid the mistakes of so many other
rapidly growing areas and set it upon a course that will preserve the character and quality of the area,
while accommodating the inevitable growth that is coming.
Pender County and Glenn Harbeck Associates Exec-1
r

Pander County Growth Management Plan
Executive Summary I
How To Use The Policies
F,
Example: Evaluation of a Rezoning Request
The Policies contained in the Growth Management Plan have been designed for regular use in making
both public and private decisions about growth and development. As officially adopted Policies of Pender
County,
they will serve as a basis for future decisions on capital improvements, ordinances, rezoning
requests, site plan and subdivision approvals, and other growth -related matters. To aid in the effective use
of the Policies, the following explains how different users can employ the Policies in deciding upon a
typical rezoning request
As Used by the Developer
The developer or property owner should consult the policies to formulate a rezoning request that is
consistent with County policy, thereby increasing the chances for rezoning, and minimizing guesswork and
wasted time.
As Used by the County Staff
The County staff will review the rezoning request in light of the adopted policies, pointing out those
policies: (1) that support the request, that in
(2) are conflict with the request, and (3) which, in the opinion
of staff carry the most weight, thereby shaping the overall staff recommendation.
As Used by the Planning Board
Before their regular meeting, each Planning Board member can make his or her own determination as to
the consistency of the rezoning with the County's adopted Growth Management Policies. As always, the
Planning Board should take into account the recommendation of the Planning Staff in interpreting the
Policies, but may choose to give different weight to different Policies, at times disagreeing with the Staff.
As Used by the General Public
Residents of Pender County can and should reference specific Growth Management Policy Statements,
when speaking in favor or in opposition to the rezoning request
As Used by Pender County Commissioners
In their authority to approve or deny the rezoning request, the County Commissioners have the final word
to
as whether the request is consistent with the County's Growth Management Policies. As customary, the
Commissioners should take into account and weigh the interpretation of Policy as employed by the
property owner, the County Staff, the Planning Board, and the General Public. Over time, a track record of
policy interpretation forms a consistent foundation for decision -making.
♦ Example: A request has been made to the County Commissioners to rezone a ten -acre site from
residential to commercial. The evaluation and decision may turn on a series of questions prompted by the
Growth Management Policies:
Question: See Policy Number.,
Will this rezoning request avoid a proliferation of strip development
along the County's roadways? 11.1, 11.5 and 11.8
Given the relatively large size of this commercial rezoning, is it located
at the intersection of two major roadways? 11.2
I
Pander County and Glenn Harbeck Associates Exec-2

1 Pander County Growth Management Plan
Executive Summary
I
Will the request, if approved, not encroach into an existing residential area? 11.3 and 12.3
If the site adjoins an existing residential area, will the requirements of the
proposed zoning district provide for adequate buffering? 11.9
If the property in question adjoins another commercial use or site, is there
a possibility that their parking lots could be connected? 3.7
Will the request, if approved, provide the opportunity for revitalization 19.2
and appropriate reuse of an historic or underutilized structure or site?
If the rezoning is located along a main travel corridor in the county,
will this action likely contribute to or detract from the community image? 20.1
Etc. Etc.
Once each of these questions has been satisfactorily answered in accordance with the County's
official policies, then a fair decision can be rendered with greater confidence and consistency.
Pander County and Glenn Harbeck Associates Exec-3

Pander County Growth Management Plan Executive Summary I
Growth Management Policies
Policy Section 9: Preferred Growth Pattern
Policy 1.1: Pender County shall encourage developments which contribute to a distinct "town and
country" or "village and country" growth pattern. The intent of this policy is to allow for the
preservation of true open space and productive farm and timberland, to coordinate and minimize
costs of extending infrastructure and services, to avoid higher taxes, and to minimize traffic
congestion associated with suburban sprawl.
Policy Section 2: Regional Planning Coordination
Policy 2.1: Coordinated inter -governmental planning for land use and development,
transportation, and centralized water and sewer services shall be among Pender County's highest
priority concerns.
Policy 2.2: Public involvement shall be encouraged in decisions on land use and development by
making the public aware of proposed developments at the earliest opportunity. The County shall
encourage communication between developers and the general public to resolve disputes.
Policy 2.3: Special planning for smaller areas of the county shall be employed, as appropriate, to
foster public involvement in the production of closely tailored, action oriented plans and
programs.
Policy 2A Plans for specific functions, such as transportation, parks and recreation, school
facilities, water and sewer services, and the like shall be implemented as part of a comprehensive
planning program and economic development strategy for the county.
Policy 2.5: The County shall actively pursue negotiated urban services agreements with area
municipalities.
Policy Section 3: Transportation I
Policy 3.1: Transportation planning shall be employed to promote a hierarchical, functional
transportation system and to promote the proper arrangement of land patterns by controlling the
location of streets, roads, rails, and other modes of transportation.
Policy 3.2: A program of improvements and maintenance to maximize the use of existing
roadways shall be employed as a cost effective and environmentally sound means of meeting area
transportation needs.
Policy 3.3: Pender County supports and shall fully participate in regional transportation and
lobbying efforts.
Policy 3A Sidewalks, trails, bikeways, public transit and other means of transportation shall be
encouraged.
Policy 3.5: The County shall support public transportation services as an alternative to the
Individual automobile. The special transportation needs of the elderly and disabled shall be
recognized. To make such services economical, the County shall encourage compact land
development patterns and housing forms that make public transit more cost effective.
Pender County and Glenn Harbeck Associates Exec-4

IPender County Growth Management Plan
Executive Summary
Policy 3.6: Pender County supports the development of the U.S.17 Bypass around Hampstead as
the best, long-term solution to the area's north -south travel demand. The County shall continue to
work cooperatively with NC DOT, area property owners and area citizens to select the best travel
corridor for the Bypass and to protect it from encroaching development.
Policy 3.7: The County shall encourage street connections between adjoining residential
neighborhoods, as well as connections between parking lots of adjoining commercial
developments.
Policy 3.8: Access to higher intensity development shall generally not be permitted -through an
area of lower intensity development. For example, access to a multi -family development, major
park facility or other large traffic generator shall not be permitted through a single-family
residential neighborhood.
Policy Section 4: Water and Sewer Services
Policy 4.1: Pender County shall continue to work with neighboring counties and municipalities on
regional solutions to water and sewer services.
Policy 4.2: Centralized water and sewer services should be concentrated within targeted service
areas, where development densities would make the provision of services economically efficient,
or where industrial development is to be encouraged.
Policy 4.3: Centralized sewer services shall generally avoid parts of the county intended primarily
for agriculture and to protect farmland from development pressures brought about by such
sewers. Exceptions to this policy may include extensions for major economic development
Initiatives, and extensions to address imminent public health problems or related environmental
hazards.
Policy 4.4: Major extensions of water and sewer services that could result in scattered, non -
directed development and costly provision of other urban services shall be discouraged.
Policy 4.5: The County shall support the provision and/or expansion of centralized sewer services
when such services:
(1) Will result in the development of new or expanded industry and the creation of permanent
jobs in numbers commensurate with the expenditure required.
(2) Will result in a positive payback to the county's taxpayers, in terns of the taxes generated
by the new development versus the costs incurred.
(3) Will encourage a more compact development pattern in areas adjoining existing urban
areas, thereby conserving farmland and other open spaces.
(4) Will serve to steer dense development away from environmentally sensitive areas, such as
fioodplains, water supply watersheds and fragile coastal ecosystems.
fPolicy 4.6: Greenspace development away from centralized sewage treatment facilities may
employ package sewage treatment plants or other alternative sewage treatment systems as a
means of achieving more efficient land use.
Policy 4.7: The County shall encourage the development of sewer services that employ water
reuse technologies for agriculture and other uses.
Pender County and Glenn Harbeck Associates Exeo-5

Pender County Growth Management Plan
Executive Summary I
Policy Section 5: Stormwater Management, Drainage and Flooding
Policy 5.1: Primary nursery areas shall be protected from undue encroachment, damage, or
pollution from direct water runoff or other causes. In areas adjacent to primary nursery areas,
allowable development densities and lot coverage should be kept low. Non -water dependent uses,
such as commercial development, should also be directed away from these areas, as appropriate.
Policy 5.2: Pender County will make a concerted effort to see that development is sensitive to the
problem of stormwater run-off. In this regard, the County may employ locally adopted rules more
stringent than the state sedimentation and erosion control regulations.
Policy 5.3: The costs of stormwater management, which are associated with an area's rapid
growth, will be equitably distributed.
Policy 5.4: The proponents (and beneficiaries) of development activity will be responsible for the
costs of stormwater management associated with their development projects.
Policy 5.5: Pender County will work, whenever possible, to require the retention and management
of natural vegetation in buffer areas along its creeks and rivers.
Policy 5.6: Pender County shall support a vegetated buffer program along area streams and other
water bodies to preserve, maintain, and protect the quality of area waters.
Policy 5.7: Pender County supports NC Division of Water Quality regulations regarding stormwater
runoff resulting from development activity. intensive growth and development will not be allowed
where poor drainage exists unless appropriate corrective improvements are to be completed as
part of the project.
Policy 5.8: Pender County shall give priority consideration to corrective measures to prevent the
flooding of roads, houses, and businesses following an intense rain event.
Policy 5.9: The County shall consult with the NC Department of Transportation and the NC
Division of Water Quality on all future public road projects so that successful solutions may be
shared.
Policy 5.10: Environmentally sound engineering solutions shall be employed to prevent
unacceptable stormwater ponding on area roadways.
Policy 5.11: A master drainage plan shall be employed to identify and implement detailed solutions
for specific problem areas threatened by flooding and to improve area water quality.
Policy 6.12: In
the review and approval of new development projects, post development runoff
shall not exceed the pre -development runoff rate.
Policy 5.13: Development activities in the 100-year floodplain or near water bodies shall be
carefully controlled. If development must occur, low intensity uses such as recreation and
agriculturally related activities (adequately buffered) shall be preferred.
Policy 5.14: Pender County shall discourage the placement of septic systems within the 100- ear
y
floodplain.
Pender County and Glenn Harbeck Associates Exec-6

IPender County Growth Management Plan Executive Summary
h'
I
1
Policy Section 6: School Facilities
Policy 6.1: The County supports advanced planning for the location of new public schools. Such
advanced planning shall incorporate age -specific population projections.
Policy 6.2: Pender County encourages offers of land for the siting of new schools, particularly in
conjunction with new development. Acceptance of such properties shall be based on approved
criteria and cooperative planning with the County school administration.
Policy 6.3: Site planning for traffic management and safety in the vicinity of public schools shall
be a priority.
Policy Section 7: Parks, Recreation and Water Access
Policy 7.1: Future park development and open space preservation shall be planned to provide for
the proper distribution of recreation and open space opportunities within the planning area.
Policy 7.2: In determining future sites for park, recreation and water access facilities, multiple
objectives for natural area conservation, visual enhancement, promotion of cultural and historic
preservation, watershed and flood prone area protection shall be considered.
Policy 7.3: Pender County supports short and long-term efforts to protect important natural
wildlife and recreation areas, including particularly the Holly Shelter Game Lands and the Angola
Bay Game Land, by directing growth to locations in or near existing urban areas.
Policy 7.4: The identification and appropriate recreational development of a system of open space
greenways and hiking trails within the county shall be encouraged. The use of (1) natural corridors
such as streams and floodplains, and (2) man-made corridors such as utility and transportation
rights -of -way and easements, shall be emphasized.
Policy 7.5: Land acquisition for new park, recreation, recreation and shoreline access sites in
advance of need shall be encouraged to achieve desirable locations at cost effective levels.
Policy 7.6: All new residential development should provide for adequate open space and
recreation area in proportion to the demand created by the development. This may be determined
according to the number of dwelling units in the development and/or by a percentage of the total
acreage in the development.
Policy 7.7: Pender County supports the co -location and joint development of public park facilities
In cooperation with public schools.
Policy 7.8: Given the limited number of water access sites in Pender County, a rapidly growing
population, extensive water resource areas, and a diminishing number of properties suitable for
water access, the County shall make the provision of additional water access areas a high priority
for property acquisition, particularly to the Intracoastal Waterway.
Policy Section 8: Solid Waste Management
Policy 8.1: Local area requirements for solid waste collection and disposal shall continue to be
anticipated through advanced, cooperative planning between the County, its municipalities, and
nearby local government jurisdictions.
Pender County and Glenn Harbeck Associates Exeo-7

Pender County Growth Management Plan
Executive Summary I
Policy 8.2: The County shall continue to pursue a variety of waste reduction strategies, including
waste prevention, recycling and reuse.
Policy 8.3: Pender County encourages residential composting and mulching.
,
Policy 8.4: Pender County supports educational programs that reduce litter and Illegal dumping,
encourage recycling and reuse, and encourage participation in programs such as Adopt -A -
Highway and the Governors Litter Sweep.
Policy 8A: Pender County supports solid waste program financing strategies that equitably
assess the costs of waste collection and disposal in accordance with the amount of waste each
generator produces.
Policy 8.5: County waste collection sites shall be located, graded, screened, improved and
properly maintained to facilitate their use and improved appearance. When such facilities are
located along major thoroughfares, traffic management and safety shall be a consideration,
including possible acceleration and deceleration lanes.
Policy Section 9: Paying for Infrastructure and Services
Policy 9.1: The County shall support planning and budgeting for capital facilities, with particular
'
emphasis on park land, storm water management facilities, schools, sewage treatment systems,
and airport development.
Policy
9.2: The costs of infrastructure, facilities and services related to new growth and
development shall be borne by those responsible for the new growth. This approach shall include
impact fees on new development and user fees for new facilities.
Policy Section 10: Industrial Development
Policy 10.1: The County shall encourage a public service and regulatory environment conducive to
industrial development, compatible with environmental quality considerations and the availability
of public financial resources.
Policy 10.2: Industrial development should not be located In areas that would diminish the
desirability of existing and planned non -industrial uses, nor shall incompatible non -industrial uses
be allowed to encroach upon existing or planned industrial sites.
Policy 10.3: Industrial development shall be located on land that is physically suitable and has
unique locational advantages for industry. Advanced planning for the identification of such land
shall be encouraged.
Policy 10.4: Heavy industrial uses shall be separated from incompatible, non -industrial areas by
natural and man-made features such as green belts, major transportation facilities, transitional
'
land uses, and/or other suitable means.
Policy 10.5: Light industrial uses may be located in or near existing built up areas to take
advantage of available services and to minimize home to work distances. Careful design and/or
buffering shall be required to ensure compatibility with surrounding areas.
Policy 10.6: Pender County welcomes industries that are compatible with the area's land, water '
and air quality resources, and that provide higher paying jobs to the existing labor force.
Pender County and Glenn Harberk Associates Exec-8

IPender County Growth Management Plan
Executive Summary
Policy 10.7: Warehousing, storage and distribution facilities shall have access to appropriate
thoroughfares, and shall be visually buffered according to their location.
Policy 10.8: New industrial development shall be encouraged to locate In existing and/or planned
mixed -use industrial parks.
Policy 10.9: Industrial development policies shall apply equally to industrial style operations such
as mineral extraction, large-scale hog and poultry production, and other forms of production that
fit the characteristics, if not the traditional definition of an "industry".
Policy Section 11: Commercial'and Office Development
Policy 11.1: Commercial and office development shall be encouraged to locate in planned
shopping centers and mixed use office parks to minimize the proliferation of strip development.
Policy 11.2: Large commercial centers should be located adjacent to the intersections of major
roadways and convenient to mass transit routes; planned concentrations of employment and
housing should be encouraged to locate convenient to these centers.
Policy 11.3: Incompatible commercial encroachment within or immediately adjoining existing
residential areas shall be prohibited. Such incompatible encroachments often include, but are not
limited to, automobile oriented uses such as service stations, car lots, convenient food marts, car
1 washes, drive through restaurants, and the like. However, mixed use developments, planned from
the outset, which allow for a compatible mixture of uses with a pedestrian scale and design, are
encouraged. Furthet, businesses may be located adjoining (and therefore convenient to) an
existing residential area, when such businesses can be shown to satisfy design considerations
similar to a newly planned, pedestrian -scaled, mixed use development.
Policy 11A: Neighborhood and convenience commercial centers should be encouraged to locate
at the Intersection of a collector street or secondary street with a street of equal or greater size.
They may also be near other neighborhood facilities such as schools and parks.
Policy 11.5: Highway oriented commercial uses should be clustered along segments of highways
and contain land uses which are mutually compatible and reinforcing In use and design; they
should be designed in such a way as to minimize signage, access points, and uncontrolled strip
development. (See esp., Policy 11.11 below concerning connected parking areas.)
Policy 11.6: Rural area commercial development should be limited to local convenience stores,
farm supply stores, and generally accepted rural business establishments.
Policy 11.7: Commercial uses shall be encouraged to develop by consolidation and expansion of
existing commercially zoned property, when such consolidation and expansion does not encroach
upon a viable residential area.
1 Policy 11.8: Strip development along the area's major streets and highways shall be discouraged.
Existing strip development shall be reduced and/or zoning should be made more restrictive when
redevelopment opportunities permit. New strip development on Isolated single lots along major
streets and highways shall be discouraged.
Policy 11.9: Attractive, environmentally beneficial landscaping shall be provided by new
commercial or office developments, and in the rehabilitation and upgrading of existing
developments. Effective buffering shall be provided when commercial or office development
adjoins existing or planned residential uses.
Pender County and Glenn Harbea Associates Exec-9

Pender County Growth Management Plan
Executive Summary I
Polio 11 y .10: Office and institutional development shall be encouraged to locate as a transitional
land use between residential areas and commercial and industrial activities of higher intensity,
"Activities
where appropriate. of higher intensity" are typically automobile oriented commercial
development but may also include heavily traveled thoroughfares.
Policy 11.11: Businesses shall be encouraged to coordinate their site designs with other nearby
businesses. Design factors should include, at a minimum, shared or connected parking and
access, convenient pedestrian and vehicular movement, and consistent sign standards.
Policy Section 12: Housing and Neighborhood Development
Policy 12.1: The County shall encourage development to occur at densities appropriate for their
location. Location factors shall include whether the development is within an environmentally
sensitive area, the type of sewage treatment available to the site, and the proximity of the site to
existing urban services.
Policy
12.2: All developments in the unincorporated county shall be encouraged to employ
greenspace development as an environmentally sound, economically cost effective, and visually
attractive alternative to large lot sprawl.
Policy 12.3: The protection and rehabilitation of viable neighborhoods shall be encouraged to
ensure their continued existence as a major housing source. Housing shall be encouraged to meet
or exceed minimum standards for health, safety and welfare.
'
Policy 12.4: Proposed residential development that would expose residents to the harmful effects
of incompatible development or to environmental hazards shall be prohibited.
Policy 12.5: Site development and appearance standards for manufactured housing shall be
largely equivalent to those of site built housing, when located in or near existing site built housing
of moderate or higher density. Such standards shall include requirements for doublewide size, a
'
permanent masonry foundation, and a pitched roof and overhang.
Policy 12.6: Innovative and flexible land planning and development practices shall be encouraged
to create neighborhoods which better safeguard land, water, energy and historic resources.
Policy 12.7: Factors in determining preferred locations for higher density residential development
shall include: close proximity to employment and shopping centers, access to major
thoroughfares and transit systems, the availability of public services and facilities, and
compatibility with adjacent areas and land uses.
Policy 12.8: The County
shall not allow significant (i.e. greater than 3 lots- total, not incremental)
new or expanded development to locate on new or existing unimproved, private roads.
Improvement of such roads to state standards, with provisions for long-term maintenance, shall
be required.
,
Policy 12.9: New developments shall provide for the installation of infrastructure (e.g. paved
roads, stormwater facilities, park and open space areas, etc.) at the time of development. This
policy is intended to prevent the creation of substandard developments which must later pay for
Infrastructure that should have been installed from the beginning.
Policy 12.10: While not precluding senior housing elsewhere, the County shall encourage housing
for retirees to be placed In locations (1) that are convenient to urban services, including medical
care, and (2) that allow for transportation alternatives to the automobile.
Pender County w d Glenn HarbeckAssodates Exec1g

APender County Growth Management Plan
Executive Summary
Policy12.11: All forms of housing development »
g elopment should be discouraged from leapfrogging into
the countryside, thereby destroying the rural character of Ponder County, breaking up farmland,
and making the provision of urban services more costly to homebuyers and taxpayers.
Policy 12.12: Ponder County shall seek to accommodate the development and appropriate
placement of a variety of housing types, including site built homes, apartments, townhouses,
granny flats, garage apartments, accessory living units, and manufactured homes.
Policy Section 13: Waterfront and Waterborne Development
Policy 13.1: There shall be no new marinas allowed in or adjacent to water designated Outstanding
Resource Waters, including adjacent to Futch Creek, Mill Creek and Old Topsail creek or in the
1,000 foot ORW area, which Includes water bodies within 1,000 feet of designated Outstanding
Resource Waters. All development proposals must be consistent with North Carolina .General
Statutes.
Policy 13.2: Because of the potential negative impacts marinas can have on environmentally
sensitive areas such as designated Outstanding Resource Waters (currently designated as being
between Rich's Inlet and New Topsail Inlet), the County will not permit new marina facilities in this
area. Such facilities must also be consistent with North Carolina General Statutes.
Policy 13.2: Upland excavation for marina basins adjacent to water bodies may be permitted from
the opening to Old Topsail Creek northwest to the Onslow County line. Upland excavation for new
marinas shall not be permitted along Futch Creek, Mill Creek, or Old Topsail Creek or along any
upland areas adjacent to Outstanding Resource Waters.
' Policy 13.3: To minimize "consumption" of valuable public trust surface waters, dry stack storage
marinas generally shall be preferred over wetslip marinas. Dry stack storage facilities shall be
evaluated for site -specific compatibility with surrounding land uses, as well as for aesthetic
concerns, parking, access, and available services.
Policy 13.4: Floating home development shall not be permitted within the County's planning
jurisdiction, including waterways, public trust waters, and along the shorelines of the county, so
as to prevent the unwanted "consumption" of limited surface waters.
Policy 13.5: The installation of freestanding moorings and mooring fields may be permitted only in
accordance with CAMA development standards, including consistency with the policy
recommendations of a water use plan. The unimpeded use of and navigation within public trust
surface waters by the boating public shall be of primary concern.
Policy 13.6: Ponder County shall allow the installation of bulkheads in freshwater swamps if all
necessary local, state and federal permits can be obtained and all applicable regulations to protect
freshwater swamps are followed.
Policy Section 14: Agricultural and Rural Area Preservation
Policy 14.1: Agriculture and very low -density residential activities shall be the preferred land uses
in rural and active agricultural areas.
Policy 14.2: Rural and active agricultural area lands having a high productive potential shall be
conserved, to the extent possible, for appropriate agricultural use.
Ponder County and Glenn HarbwAAssociates Exec11

Pender County Growth Management Plan
Executive Summary I
Policy 14.3: Farms and woodlands shall be recognized as an integral part of the planning area's
open space system.
Policy 14.4: County actions concerning infrastructure and regulations shall serve to direct new
development first to compact, targeted growth areas near existing towns. New development shall
be discouraged from "leapfrogging" to locations in the midst of family farmland, woodland or
other valuable open spaces.
Policy 14.5: County actions should provide protection to existing agricultural and silvicultural
activities from incompatible land uses.
Policy Section 16: Estuarine Area Resources
Policy 15.1: Pender County will support and enforce, through Its CAMA Minor Permitting capacity,
the State policies and permitted uses in the Areas of Environmental Concern (AEC's). Acceptable
uses within the individual AEC's of the estuarine system shall be those that require water access
and or cannot function elsewhere. Such uses shall be in accord with the general use standards for
coastal wetlands, estuarine waters, and public trust areas as stated in 15A NCAC Subchapter 7H.
Policy 15.2: Due to the critical role that wetlands play in protecting the quality of estuarine waters
and In providing habitat for fish and wildlife, the County strongly supports the designation and
preservation of all remaining coastal wetlands. Acceptable land uses may include utility
easements, fishing piers, and docks. Examples of uses NOT permitted include restaurants,
businesses, residences, apartments, motels, hotels, parking lots, private roads, and highways.
Policy 15.3(1) Appropriate uses within estuarine waters may Include simple access channels,
structures which prevent erosion, navigational channels, and private boat docks, piers, and
mooring pilings. Construction of new marinas is not permitted in or near Outstanding Resource
Waters. Piers and docks for non -water dependent commercial uses -are also prohibited.
Policy 15.3(2) Any development or activity that will profoundly and adversely affect coastal and
estuarine waters will not be allowed. In the design, construction and operation of water dependent
structures, efforts must be made to mitigate negative effects on water quality and fish habitat, as
determined by NCAC 15A Subchapter 7H and the Coastal Resources Commission.
Policy 15.4(1) Any use that significantly interferes with the public right of navigation or other
public trust rights shall be prohibited. Projects which would directly or indirectly block or impair
existing navigational channels, increase shoreline erosion, deposit spoils below mean high water,
cause adverse water circulation patterns, violate water quality standards, or cause degradation of
shellfish waters also shall be prohibited.
Policy 15.4(2) The County shall seek to ensure the responsible use of jet skis and other similar
"personal" watercraft within the public trust waters of Pender County. Responsible use shall mean
controlled, predictable movements similar to other powered watercraft while in navigation
channels, marinas, and other regularly trafficked areas, and their prohibition in marshes and other
shallow water estuaries, where damage to the resource is likely.
Policy 15.4(3) CAMA standards designed to limit the length of docks and piers as they project into
public trust waters shall be considered the minimum standards, with the County reserving the
right to be more restrictive where the use of public trust waters and environmental protection
Issues warrant.
Policy 15.5: Marina development shall be prohibited along estuarine shorelines bordering
Outstanding Resource Waters. Generally, only low density residential and water dependent land
It
r
LI
Pender County and Glenn Harbeck Associates Exec-12

IPonder County Growth Management Plan
Executive Summary
uses may be permitted along the estuarine shoreline, provided that all standards of NCAC 15
Subchapter 7H relevant to estuarine shoreline AEC's are met, and that the proposed use is
consistent with other policies set forth in this Plan.
Policy 15.6(1): The County supports State policies for ocean hazard areas as set forth in Chapter
15A, Subchapter 7H of the State CAMA regulations. Suitable land uses in ocean hazard areas
include ocean shoreline erosion control activities and dune establishment and stabilization.
Policy 15.6(2): The County supports the policies and regulations of State and Federal permitting
agencies concerning the development of ocean piers, and shall encourage the proper
maintenance and safety of such piers.
Policy 15.7: There shall be no new marinas allowed in or adjacent to waters designated ORW,
' including adjacent to Futch Creek, Mill Creek and Old Topsail Creek or within the 1000 foot ORW
buffer area, which includes water bodies within 1000 feet of designated ORW waters.
Policy 15.8:The County shall avoid undertaking any activity or approving of any activity that would
destroy remaining habitat for loggerhead turtle nesting.
Policy 15.9: Ponder County shall discourage the development of barrier islands within the
planning jurisdiction of the County including, particularly, Hutaff and Lea Islands. The County
encourages Initiatives at the local, state or federal government level to purchase these
environmentally sensitive areas for the benefit of all residents of the county, state and nation.
Policy Section 16: Significant Natural Areas
Policy 16.1: Ponder County supports the preservation, in perpetuity, of the Angola Bay Gamelands
and the Holly Shelter Game Preserve for the rare and valuable plants and animals they contain,
and for the vital role they play in recharging regional groundwater supplies.
Policy 16.2: The abundance and diversity of wildlife in Ponder County shall be preserved and
enhanced through protection of the unique coastal ecosystems, Including marshes, pocosins,
woodlands, open fields and other areas upon which they depend.
iPolicy Section 17: Freshwater Resources, Surface and Ground
Policy 17.1: Ponder County supports federal, state and local efforts to protect the quantity and
quality of water in the Cape Fear River, whether such protection involves controls over point
source discharges, surface runoff, inter basin water transfers, or other appropriate means,
Including upstream activities.
�- Policy 17.1: Ponder County supports federal, state and local efforts to protect the quantity and
quality of water in the region's groundwater system, whether such protection involves controls
over the location and management of activities involving hazardous substances, restrictions on
groundwater drawdowns, or any other activity which would jeopardize the short and long term
viability of groundwater resources.
Policy 17.1: Ponder County will continue with improvements to and expansion of the County's
potable, piped water supply system, with emphasis on the development of a self-supporting
operation, where costs are assigned in relative proportion to the benefits conveyed.
rPolicy 17.1: So as to facilitate the orderly development of the County and its water system, Ponder
County shall establish and maintain utility extension and tap -on policies designed to address the
Ponder County and Glenn Harbeck Associates Exea13

Pander County Growth Management Plan
Executive Summary I
timing, location, priorities and sequence, etc. of system expansion In coordination with specific
growth management objectives.
Policy Section 18: Wetlands and Hydric Soils
Policy 18.1: Pender County policy will be to permit development which is proposed to be located
outside hydric soil areas and meets all zoning, health department and flooding regulations as well
as other state or federal regulations.
Policy Section 19: Historic Preservation and Revitalization -
Policy 19.1: Local efforts to identify, designate and preserve sites, buildings and districts of
particular historic significance shall be supported as a means of enhancing their economic,
cultural and tourism value to the area.
,
Policy 19.2: Multiple and appropriate adaptive reuse of historic resources shall be encouraged.
Policy 19.3: Development of the tourism potential of the area's architectural and historic resources
shall be encouraged.
Policy 19A The destruction of significant architectural, historic and archaeological resources In
the planning area shall be discouraged.
Policy Section 20: Community Appearance
Policy 20.1: The important economic, tourism, and community image benefits of attractive major
travel
corridors through Pender County shall be recognized. Such entryway corridors shall receive
priority attention for improved appearance and development standards, Including landscaping,
signage and tree preservation.
Policy 20.2: Landscape
improvements at existing and new commercial developments, particularly
as related to breaking up and softening the appearance of expansive parking areas, shall be
encouraged.
Policy 20.3: The County shall discourage the inappropriate use of manufactured or site built
homes for storage or their abandonment without proper disposal.
Policy 20A:
New development, redevelopment, rehabilitation and maintenance of structures and
sites should be consistent and supportive of the neighborhood and architectural context of the
surrounding area.
Policy 20.5: The significance of street trees in providing visual relief, summer cooling, improved
air quality and livability shall be recognized through public policies to encourage their planting
and maintenance.
Policy 20.6: Sign policies and standards shall be periodically updated to enhance community
Identity and create a high quality business image.
Pender County and Glenn HarbeckAssociates Exec,14
.I

1
ri
1
L
GROWTH
MANAGEMENT
POLICIES
�1
This section contains a brief introduction to the policies and a full listing
of all policy statements, including supporting narrative.
I
1

IPander County Growth Management Plan Policy Statements
I
Growth Management Policies
Introduction to the Policies
How were the policy statements formed?
In March of 2000, the Pender County Long Range Planning Committee, appointed by the County
Commissioners, hosted a special county -wide public input meeting to identify citizen concerns about
future growth and development in Pender County. Following that meeting, the Committee met for
several months to go over the concerns voiced at that meeting and to put together a set of draft policy
statements for public review and comment. The policy statements developed by the Committee were
then reviewed by the public in an Open House, and at subsequent public hearings of the County
Commissioners.
tThe following pages contain the official County policies of the Pender County Growth Management Plan.
Some have been carried forward from the 1991 Pender County Land Use Plan. Still others reflect input
from specific plans such as the County's recently completed Solid Waste Management Plan, the on -going
M Stormwater Management Study, the County's 1998 Recreation and Open Space Plan, and numerous
other plans and policies. Hopefully, the Growth Management Plan serves to bring all of these various
studies and plans together into one coordinated planning document..
What is the format of the policy section?
Each major category of the Growth Management Policies is addressed according to the following
' format:
Discussion A summary of the issues and relevant findings.
rPolicy Statement Statement(s) of local government principal designed to
achieve legitimate public objectives related to the issue.
It is important to understand that the purpose of the narrative (discussion) is to provide background and
rationale for the ensuing policy statement. In most instances, the discussion serves to identify a problem
or issue, and may present a summary of findings from Growth Factors Analysis, other specific plans or
discussion points of the Planning Committee. Perhaps most importantly, the narrative can be consulted on
questions of "legislative intent".
The policy statements are presented in bold type and numbered for easy reference. These statements are
to be viewed as official policy positions of Pender County government. As such, the policies should remain
substantially unchanged over time. Frequent changes to the policies would undermine their effectiveness
in achieving intended growth management objectives. Indeed, the policies are designed to maintain a
consistent and predictable direction for local government decisions affecting local growth and
development over a period of many years. The policies provide a basis for future decisions regarding
general development, capital improvements such as water and sewer, rezoning requests, subdivision
approvals, and other related matters.
Do certain words, often used in the policy statements, have special meaning?
Certain key words are used frequently in policy statements. The following glossary is intended to convey
the specific meaning of these key words as used in the Growth Management Plan Policy Statements.
(1) adequate: sufficient to achieve the intended purpose or prevent harm
Pender County and Glenn Harbeck Associates Page 1

Pender County Growth Management Plan
Policy Statements
(2) allow, authorize, permit: official action to let something happen
(3) control: to regulate_
(4) discourage: to not favor in most situations
(5) encourage: to foster (also see su rt
(6) May: provides the option, but not required
(7) prohibit: not allowed, period
(8)Promote: to proactively encourage, to take positive steps
(9) reasonable, reasonably: practical, not extreme
(10) require: to mandate something
(11) shall: mandatory, not optional
(12) should: preferred or recommended but not mandatory
(13) significant determined by quantity or relative impact
(14) sup oo : to foster, may imply financial support
Pander County and Glenn Harbeck Associates page 2

1 Pander County Growth Management Plan Policy Statements
A. GROWTH MANAGEMENT, GENERALLY
rPolicy Section 1: Preferred Growth Pattern
Town and Country Growth Pattern Preferred.
It has been said that the best way to preserve the countryside in to build better towns. This means
providing infrastructure and services designed to attract the majority of new residents to locations in or
near existing urban centers. The resulting growth pattern might best be described as "town and country" or
"village and country". A review of the various sections of this plan will reveal that the intended cumulative
effect is to direct growth in a manner that focuses most new developments in compact, village -like
clusters, with surrounding farms, woodlands and open space. At the same time, truly rural development is
1 also to be encouraged; rural development that is of density low enough to preserve the countryside for
generations to come.
Town Living Isn't For Everyone, However.
Several Committee members noted that not everyone wants to live in a village or town. In fact, for the last
50 years, it can rightfully be said that most American families have chosen to live in the large lots of typical
suburban subdivisions. At the same time, it is accurate to observe that, for the past 50 years, few
alternatives to the large lot subdivision have been offered to the home -buying public. The truth is, the
compact, "front porch" neighborhood, so prevalent for a century before the Second World War, has been
made unlawful to build in most communities in America. The zeal of early zoning ordinances caused two
primary results: (1) the total separation of residential areas from non-residential areas, thereby making an
entire generation automobile dependent and (2) increasingly larger lots to create the illusion of "country
living" as a backlash against the industrial age. Local governments around the country are only now
beginning to go about the process of amending their zoning and subdivision regulations to allow forms of
development other than the large lot, single use subdivision. Therefore, this plan calls upon the County to
create opportunities for traditional "front porch" neighborhoods at a density more in keeping with a true
town (e.g., 5,000 to 7,000 square foot lots, with true community level open space). This is to be offered not
as a requirement, but rather as an alternative.
Also, this plan recognizes that many buyers will continue to prefer the large lot (e.g. 20,000 sq.ft.)
subdivision. Nothing in this plan would prohibit that type of development from continuing.
Policy on Preferred Growth Pattern
Policy 1.1: Ponder County shall encourage developments which contribute to a distinct "town and
country" or "village and country" growth pattern. The intent of this policy Is to allow for the
preservation of true open space and productive farm and timberland, to coordinate and minimize
costs of extending infrastructure and services, to avoid higher taxes, and to minimize traffic
congestion associated with suburban sprawl.
Policy Section 2: Regional Planning Coordination
As Ponder County continues to grow, the issues facing the county become larger and more complex with
each passing year. "Spillover growth" from New Hanover County, including continued urban expansion
into the Ponder County countryside, present greater challenges to serve the area's increasing population.
Public decision making on key issues such as land use and development, transportation, utilities, water
supply, water quality, law enforcement, schools, economic development, recreation and tourism
development require greater levels of advanced planning and coordination between the County, its
municipalities and adjoining local government jurisdictions.
Pander County and Glenn Harbeck Associates Page 3

Pander County Growth Management Plan
Policy Statements I
Cape Fear Regional Growth Team
1
Pender County recently joined with several other local governments in southeastern North Carolina to
form the Cape Fear Regional Growth Team. The "Growth Team" is comprised of elected officials from
Brunswick, Columbus, New Hanover,
and Pender Counties, as well as the City of Wilmington. The
purpose of the Growth Team is to identify important growth issues of common concern, and to work
together on plans of action to make those priorities happen. Most recently, the Growth Team has been
focusing its attention on regional transportation issues, with the idea of jointly lobbying the North Carolina
Department of Transportation to implement certain critical transportation improvements in the region.
It is hoped that through discussion, mutual support, and follow through, Growth Team Members will have
a greater impact and a better chance of achieving area goals. Through the policies in this plan, the Pender
County wishes to go on record as being strongly in favor of the concept of the Growth Team as well as
other local inter -governmental efforts to plan and provide for critical facilities and services. Of the
numerous common issues facing the region, the Pender County Long Range Planning Committee
believes the following are among the most critical. For an in-depth examination of each of these issues,
the reader is referred to the appropriate major sections of this plan.
Transportation
As noted above, Pender County has joined forces with other local governments in the region to present a
united front on behalf of important transportation projects. The Cape Fear Regional Growth Team has
agreed to jointly lobby State DOT officials in support of critical transportation projects in the Cape Fear
region. This group has collectively identified the Outer Loop around the north side of Wilmington as one of
two top priority transportation projects for the Cape Fear region.
Water and Sewer Utilities
Water and sewer services are two of the "big three" infrastructure improvements (roads being the third)
that have the greatest influence over the location, timing and type of development in a community. Given
the poor suitability of soils for septic tanks in most of Pender County, sewer service has emerged in recent
years as perhaps the most critical determinant of growth in the county. Efforts are underway to provide
centralized water and sewer service to the Rocky Point area and, in later phases, to other parts of the
County. Provision of these services has required intergovernmental cooperation involving the Town
Wallace (water) and the City of Wilmington (sewer).
Land Use and Development
This plan calls for an urban growth pattern that supports the placement of new development in or near
towns
existing and villages where services are available or can be provided economically. The
implementation of this pattern requires a high level of cooperation between the Pender County
government and its municipalities. Since "the best way to preserve the country side is to build a better
city", the County applauds municipal efforts to encourage infill development in or near the corporate
boundaries of existing towns in the county.
Policies for Regional Planning Coordination
Policy 2.1: Coordinated inter -governmental planning for land use and development,
transportation, and centralized water and sewer services shall be among Pender County's highest
priority concerns.
Policy 2.2: Public involvement shall be encouraged in decisions on land use and development by
making the public aware of proposed developments at the earliest opportunity. The County shall
encourage communication between developers and the general public to resolve disputes.
Policy 2.3: Special planning for smaller areas of the county shall be employed, as appropriate, to
foster public involvement in the production of closely tailored, action oriented plans and
programs.
Pender County and Glenn Hanbeck Associates page 4

IPender County Growth Management Plan
Policy Statements
J
i
n
1
L7
1
r
Policy 2.4: Plans for specific functions, such as transportation, parks and recreation, school
facilities, water and sewer services, and the like shall be implemented as part of a comprehensive
planning program and economic development strategy for the county.
Policy 2.5: The County shall actively pursue negotiated urban services agreements with area
municipalities.
B. INFRASTRUCTURE AND SERVICES
Policy Section 3: Transportation
1998 Thoroughfare Plan Study
The North Carolina Department of Transportation completed a Thoroughfare Plan Study for Pender
County in 1998. The plan recommended improvements felt to be essential for proper traffic circulation
within a 1995-2020 planning period. Most of the proposed improvements identified in the plan are to be
the responsibility of the NC DOT. However, the plan notes that Pender County can help implement the
plan through the effective use of the County's subdivision regulations and zoning ordinance.
Recommendations contained in the Pender County Thoroughfare Plan Study include the following:
Suggestions for Interstates and Arterial Highways
Interstate 40: Since the projected traffic on 1-40 through Pender County is less than the capacity, no suggestions are made for 1-40.
U.S. 17: A multi -lane section Is recommended for U.S. 17 from the New Hanover County line to the Onslow County line. A four -
lane divided cross-section is suggested for rural areas, with a five -lane curb and gutter section to be used in developed areas, due
to high turning traffic. (The proposed five -lane section through Hampstead was completed in August 1999). Bicycle improvements
were suggested where appropriate.
U.S. 17 Bypass: a bypass of Hampstead is recommended, and is included in the 1998-2004 TIP as programmed for planning and
environmental study. (See more on the Bypass in special section below.)
U.S. 421: current cross-section is adequate.
Suggestions for Major Collectors
U.S. 117:
- from Duplin County to SR 1318: Current cross-section is adequate. Turning lanes would be helpful at NC 11 and SR 1314.
- from Burgaw s southern planning limit to the New Hanover County line: This section should be widened to a multilane
section. A four -lane divided cross-section is suggested for rural areas, with a five -lane curb and gutter section to be used in
developing areas due to high turning traffic.
NC 11: current cross-section should be adequate.
NC 50: from Duplin County line to NC 210: This section should be widened to 24 feet to meet the minimum line width standards.
Ultimately, NC 50 will need to be multi-laned from NC 53 to 210. This also includes a replacement of the bridge south of NC 210.
NC 53: from Ward's Comer to the Onslow County line. This section should be widened to 24 feet to meet minimum lane width
standards. Ultimately, NC 53 will need to be multi-laned from 1-40 to NC 50.
NC 53 Bypass: From NC 53 west of 1-40 to NC 53 at SR 1340 (New Savannah Road). This project consists of a two-lane 24-foot
wide cross-section with 100 feet of right-of-way. Most of the project is on new location.
NC 210: from the Bladen County line to U.S. 17. This section should be widened to 24 feet to meet minimum lane width
requirements. Considerations should be made to accommodate bicycle traffic where appropriate.
Suggestions For Minor Collectors
C 133• from SR 1409 to U.S. 117. A 24-foot lane width is recommended.
Pender County and Glenn Hanbeck Associates Page 5

Pander County Growth Management Plan
Policy Statements I
SR 1001 (Willard Road): from the Sampson County line to U.S. 117. This section should be widened to 20 feet to meet minimum ,
lane width requirements.
SR 1120 (Malpass Comer Road): from SR 1121 to Burgads western planning limits. This section should be widened to 22 feet to '
meet minimum lane width requirements.
SR 1121 (Bell -Williams Road): From NC 11 to Yamacraw. This section should be widened to 20 feet to meet minimum lane width
requirements.
SR 1128 (Point Caswell Road): from the NC 11 to Murphy Cross Roads. This section should be widened to 20 feet to meet '
minimum lane width requirements.
SR 1201 (Beatty's Bridge Road): from the Bladen County line to Atkinson. This section should be widened to 20 feet to meet ,
minimum lane width requirements.
SR 1209 (Shiloh Road): from the Sampson County line to SR 1332. This section should be widened to 20 feet to meet minimum
lane width requirements.
SR 1216 (Piney Woods Road): from SR 1128 to Burgaw s western planning limit. This section should be widened to 20 feet to
meet minimum lane width requirements.
SR 1336 (Horse Branch Road): a realignment of SR 1336 at the Intersection with SR 1315 (Old Anderson Street) Is recommended. ,
This intersection provides little sight distance currently. Part of the alignment would utilize the old railroad bed. The other lot
affected is vacant.
Transportation Improvement Program and the Wilmington Outer Loop
In addition to the Thoroughfare Plan, Pender County also routinely participates in the preparation of a
Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), a cooperative effort between the State DOT and local
governments in the area. The TIP sets forth those transportation projects which, based on a variety of
criteria, are to receive priority for funding over the ensuing seven-year period.
Significantly, Pender County has come together with other local governments in the region to present a
united front on behalf of important transportation projects. The Cape Fear Regional Growth Team,
comprised of elected officials from Brunswick County, Columbus County, New Hanover County, Pender
County, and the City of Wilmington have agreed to jointly lobby State DOT officials in support of critical
transportation projects in the Cape Fear region. (Also see section on Regional Planning). This group has
identified the Outer Loop around the north side of Wilmington as one of two top priority transportation
projects for the Cape Fear region. (The other involves NC 130 in Brunswick and Columbus Counties.) The
Outer Loop, to be located in northern New Hanover County, will no doubt have an influence on growth
patterns in Brunswick, New Hanover and Pender Counties. Most often, such loop roads (or beltways) have
served to spur growth at intersections along their length and, eventually, the land areas between
intersections. It will no doubt serve to attract even more growth in the direction of Pender County.
The U.S. 17 Hampstead Bypass
Perhaps more so than any other roadway in Pender County, U.S. 17 through Hampstead has felt the brunt ,
of the county's tremendous growth rate: As traffic counts increased during the 1980's and early 90's, it
was becoming clear that something would have to be done to deal with the steadily mounting traffic
congestion. In 1993, Hampstead area residents overwhelmingly approved a non -binding referendum
asking the state to build a bypass around Hampstead, rather than widening the roadway through the
village. Despite local protests, the state went ahead with the $6 million widening project, citing the area's
immediate need for traffic relief. The newly widened U.S. 17 through Hampstead was completed in
August, 1999.
The Bypass project is not dead however. State traffic projections indicate that, even with the widening of
the roadway, US 17 through Hampstead will be over capacity within a couple decades, carrying an
estimated 33,000 vehicles per day by the year 2025. Meanwhile, NC DOT project planners have indicated
that, under the best -case scenario, it would take a minimum of 10 years to see the Bypass built. The most
recent DOT plans for the Bypass show a four -lane, limited access highway running west and north of the
Hampstead Village area. The ultimate location of the Bypass has been the subject of considerable study
Pender County and Glenn Hadwk Associates Page 6

Pender County Growth Management Plan
Policy Statements
over the past two years in particular. The Bypass must fit into a relatively narrow land area between
protected lands at the Holly Shelter Game Preserve and the rapidly developing Hampstead village area
along U.S. 17. Continued development in the area including, most notably, a sizable golf course
' community is making route options more difficult as time passes.
Other Transportation Priorities
In recent years, there has been a marked movement in some communities toward the preparation of
transportation plans, as opposed to more narrowly focused thoroughfare plans. In the latter case, the plan
is oriented almost exclusively toward streets and highways, while in the former, alternative transportation
' modes like bikeways, mass transit, water bome transportation, air travel, and pedestrian needs are given
consideration. In keeping with this broadened outlook, the Wilmington Urban Area Transportation Demand
Management Committee, comprised of representatives from Brunswick, Pender and New Hanover
' County, recently polled the Pender County Planning Board regarding the County's priorities for
transportation. The following items reflect the broad thinking of the Planning Board with regard to priority
transportation needs in Pender County:
(1) Transportation for senior citizens (i.e. vans, buses, taxis)
(2) Countywide transportation system
(3) A bike path on the shoulder of major roads
(4) A bypass around Hampstead for traffic to Wilmington
(5) A transportation system for travel along:
-U.S. 117 to Burgaw and to Wilmington
-U.S. 17 to Wilmington
(1) Provide specified transportation for the disabled
(2) Offer carpool incentives
The Issue of Paved Public Roads Versus Unpaved Private Roads
' Please see policy Section12 on Housing and Neighborhood Development for a detailed discussion of this
issue.
Consolidation of Driveways and Connection of Adjoining Parking Lots
From a policy standpoint, the number of driveways along the County's major roads has a direct impact on
the ability of the roadway to move traffic. Each turning movement (and there can be hundreds per
business during the course of the day) associated with an individual driveway slows traffic and creates the
potential for a- traffic accident.
One way to reduce this problem is to consolidate driveways as, for example, when three driveways can be
reduced to two. This can be as simple as a single business replacing the existing apron of an extra
driveway with a vertical curb. In other instances, it may call for two businesses coming together to share a
common driveway along their property line.
A second, even more effective way to reduce unsafe turning movements onto major roads is to encourage
adjoining businesses to connect their parking lots. This allows the motodstfshopper to visit more than one
business on the same side of the road without turning back onto the highway for short distances.
In summary, uncoordinated road access and unconnected parking lots hamper the traffic moving
capabilities of the county's roads. New County standards requiring shared driveways and connected
parking areas could do much to alleviate these problems.
Pender County and Glenn Harbeck Associates Page 7

Pander County Growth Management Plan
Policy Statements I
Transportation Policies
Policy 3.1: Transportation planning shall be employed to promote a hierarchical, functional
transportation system and to promote the proper arrangement of land patterns by controlling the
location of streets, roads, rails, and other modes of transportation.
Policy 3.2: A program of improvements and maintenance to maximize the use of existing
roadways shall be employed as a cost effective and environmentally sound means of meeting area
transportation needs.
Policy 3.3: Pender County supports and shall fully participate in regional transportation and
lobbying efforts.
Policy 3.4: Sidewalks, trails, bikeways, public transit and other means of transportation shall be
encouraged.
Policy 3.5: The County shall support public transportation services as an alternative to the
individual automobile. The special transportation needs of the elderly and disabled shall be
recognized. To make such services economical, the County shall encourage compact land
development patterns and housing forms that make public transit more cost effective.
Policy 3.6: Pender County supports the development of the U.S.17 Bypass around Hampstead as
the best, long-term solution to the area's north -south travel demand. The County shall continue to
work cooperatively with NC DOT, area property owners and area citizens to select the best travel
corridor for the Bypass and to protect it from encroaching development.
Policy 3.7: The County shall encourage street connections between adjoining residential
neighborhoods, as well as connections between parking lots of adjoining commercial
developments.
Policy 3.8: Access to higher intensity development shall generally not be permitted through an
area of lower intensity development. For example, access to a multi -family development, major
park facility or other large traffic generator shall not be permitted through a single-family
residential neighborhood.
Policy Section 4: Water and Sewer Services
Water and Sewer Services and Their Influence on Growth
It is a generally accepted planning principle that the provision of centralized water and sewer services are
a major determinant in the location, density, and timing of new development. During the 1950's, 60's, and
70's, federal and state governments heavily subsidized the extension of water and sewer services into
both suburban and rural areas. Viewed from the local government perspective, this "cheap" funding
source (nearly 90% of the cost came from grants in most cases) made the extension of water and sewer
services an attractive capital investment. The provision of such services helped encourage the widespread
suburbanization of the United States during this period.
Over the past two decades, however, local governments have witnessed a dramatic decline in the amount
of routine funding available from state and federal sources for programs and facilities of all kinds,
including water and sewer facilities. Local governments are finding it necessary to carefully plan for public
water and sewer services and to provide them only where such needs can be fully justified. At the same
time, water and sewer service extensions are being viewed increasingly as an effective growth
management tool. In fact, the °big three' of infrastructure improvements- water, sewer and roads- are
F
1]
a
1
Pender County and Glenn Harbeck Associates Page 8

IPender County Growth Management Plan
Policy Statements
generally viewed as far more powerful determinants of growth than local government control over zoning
and subdivision standards.
' Of course, water and sewer services usually have a strong influence on not only the location of new
development, but also the density of new development. In Pender County, the primary criterion for
determining permissible minimum lot size is the availability of centralized water and/or sewer. (See Policy
' Section 12 on Housing and Neighborhood Development for a full discussion of water and sewer services
and minimum lot sizes.)
Potable Water Services in Pender County
' At present, the unincorporated area of Pender County does not have a centralized water supply and
distribution system. Each of the County's municipalities, with the exception of Atkinson, has its own water
system. Atkinson relies upon individual wells and septic tanks. Also, the unincorporated community of
Maple Hill receives its water from the Chinquapin Water District in Duplin County.
County Initiative to Establish Centralized Water Supply System for Unincorporated Area
Recently, the County has embarked on a significant new initiative that could eventually bring several
million gallons of water per day into the County along the growing U.S. 117 corridor. The new line will be
the backbone of the County's first large-scale water system. Under the plan, the County has agreed
initially to buy 500,000 gallons of water per day from the Town of Wallace. Currently, the Town has a
sizable water surplus, due to the 1998 closing of a major textile plant there. Wallace now uses 350,000
gallons per day but has the infrastructure to pump up to 5 million gallons per day.
rAccording to the preliminary agreement between Pender County and the Town, the County will pay 85
cents per 1000 gallons for the first year. After the first year, the price will be based on any changes in the
cost of treating or transferring the water to the Pender County line. Also under the agreement, Pender
County will be responsible for building the water lines in Duplin County to the Pender County border.
Wallace will provide the land. The contract will be for ten years, with two five-year renewal options. Federal
and state financing for the $5.8 million first phase of the project, from Wallace south through Pender
' County to the New Hanover County line has already been secured. As of February 2000, nearly 1,000
customers had signed up for service in the Phase 1 (Rocky Point) area. To make the system self-
supporting, the County expects to charge residential customers about $25 per month.
Construction of Phase 1 is expected to take about a year to complete, with service beginning sometime in
2001.
' Second and Later Phases To Serve Coastal Area
A second phase of the project would expand services in the Rocky Point area, and extend another major
water distribution down NC 210 to serve part of the coastal area near Hampstead. For this phase, the
County has been pursuing a $3 million state loan to expand water service around the Rocky Point area,
and a $7 million loan from the U.S. Dept. of Agriculture to allow the County to serve the coastal area.
I
Subsequent phases of the water project would extend distribution lines to the balance of the coastal area
north of Hampstead and, potentially, to other areas west of U.S. 17. Since the County's water system is
meant to be user supported, any proposed expansion areas will have to be canvassed and an acceptable
number of customers signed up to make the project viable. The County's engineers have recommended
that no phase should go forward until at least 50 percent of potential customers in each area have signed
up. Customer interest also could determine how far up and.down U.S. 17 from the NC 210 intersection the
water system might be expanded.
Pender County and Glenn Harbeck Associates Page 9

Pander County Growth Management Plan
Policy Statements I
Discounts Offered for Ea►1y Water System Sign -Ups
To encourage early signups for the first phase of the water system, the County offered a $120 tap -in
special. When the tap -in special expired, the cost of hooking on jumped to $620. It is expected that future
phases of the system will have early signup discounts available also. At present, there are no plans to
make hooking onto the system mandatory.
Sewer Services in Pender County
A Lack of Sewers Constrains Growth
The unincorporated area of Pender County lacks centralized sewage treatment services. As development
has pushed into Pender County from the Wilmington urbanizing area, increasing pressures for
development of centralized sewage collection treatment and disposal have become more pronounced.
Business and industrial development, in particular, is often severely hampered by the constraints imposed
on business operations by the lack of centralized sewage treatment. Restaurants, dependent upon septic
systems, may be limited by law as to the number of customers they may serve. Industries producing
sewage that is not treatable by ground absorption may be precluded from locating in the area altogether.
State Grant Received to Establish a Sewer Line for Industry
To help remedy this situation, Pender County was the recipient of a $757,000 State grant for the purposes
of developing a sewer line to serve industrial and business development in the Rocky Point area.
Preliminary plans call for the development of a sewer line that will cross over the Pender County line into
New Hanover County, eventually emptying into the City of Wilmington's northside sewage treatment plant.
The primary incentive for developing the sewage treatment capacity is to facilitate the expansion of DEL
Labs, a cosmetic maker with a distribution operation in the Rocky Point area. County officials estimate that
once DEL Labs ties into the line, the industry would pump between 25,000 and 45,000 gallons of
wastewater per day into it. The line has been approved to pump up to 50,000 gallons per day, which could
potentially lend itself to other business or industrial development.
Other Sewer Service Area Possibilities Being Explored
Preliminary engineering work on the proposed industry -serving sewer line has prompted the County and
its consulting engineers to look into the feasibility of providing sewer service to other parts of Pender
County. Specifically, the preliminary engineering study is focusing on three areas:
Area 1: Rocky Point US 117/1-40 Corridor, Ashton to the New Hanover County line.
Area 2: Hampstead/Scotts HiIVUS 17 Corridor, Onslow County to New Hanover County line.
(Excludes Topsail Island)
Area 3: US 421 Corridor- NC 210 to the New Hanover County line.
Of the three areas, Area 1 is already moving forward, largely due to the known interest of DEL Labs, and
the requirement of the State grant that the line must serve industry. Area 1 also straddles both US 117
and Interstate 40, and is within a reasonable distance from Wilmington's northside sewage treatment
plant. This is also the part of Pender County that has already witnessed some industrial development.
Area 2, involving the Hampstead/Scotts HiIVUS 17 corridor, has experienced the most rapid residential
growth of any part of Pender County. Most of this growth, however, has occurred at a residential
development density that does not lend itself to the cost effective provision of centralized sewer services.
Preliminary budget estimates indicated that it might cost area homeowners as much as $75 monthly to
support a centralized sewage treatment system in this area. According to most observers, this cost level
would preclude the interest of most homeowners in joining the system.
Area 3, involving the U.S. 421 corridor, has historically been an industrial development area for Pender
and New Hanover Counties. (Before the advent of 1-40, it was the major highway route into Wilmington
C,
i
[l
1
Pander County and Glenn Harbeck Associates Page 10

Pender County Growth Management Plan Policy Statements
I
17
jl
u
from the Raleigh area.) Given Pender County's interest in industrial development, this would appear to be
the next logical priority area for sewage treatment services after the Rocky Point area. In any event,
Pender County is to be commended for analyzing its sewage treatment possibilities in a logical, goal
directed manner.
County -Wide Sewer Is A Misnomer
It should be noted that many citizens attending the major public input meeting for the Growth Management
Plan used the term "county -wide sewer" when describing the infrastructure needs of Pender County. The
term "county -wide sewer" is misleading in its suggestion that centralized sewer service can somehow be
provided to the entire county. Sewer systems are generally just too expensive to be justified outside of
urbanizing areas. Most of Pender County is neither urbanized nor urbanizing at a level of density sufficient
to justify the provision of centralized sewer services. Rather than using the term "county -wide sewer",
better terminology might include "sewage treatment development corridors" or "sewage treatment service
areas". This is the approach that the County and its engineers have rightly taken. The full preliminary
engineering report is expected to be completed by November 2000.
Affect of Water and Sewer Services on Commercial and Residential Growth, Taxes and Local
Govemment Service Costs
Continued rapid growth along the eastern coastal margin of Pender County has prompted debate over the
need for centralized sewage treatment there. On one hand, certain businesses in the Hampstead area
and elsewhere have voiced a need for centralized sewer to expand the commercial service offerings in the
area. On the other hand, some area residents have stated that centralized sewer often has the unwanted
consequence of increasing pressures for greater development density. Yet another perspective raises the
question as to whether the additional residential growth spawned by central sewers would pay for itself in
terms of taxes generated versus the cost of local government services it would demand. Each of these
questions warrants careful consideration before the County commits to one course of action or another.
(Also see Policy Section 9: Paying for Infrastructure and Services.)
Package Sewage Treatment Plants
Package treatment plants are normally small, independently owned sewage treatment systems. They
typically serve a single project or planned unit development. Package plants have been frowned upon for
many years by the State of North Carolina, largely due to the challenges involved in their proper operation
and maintenance. For many years now, the State has been pressing for package treatment plants to be
abandoned and their systems tied into a municipal system.
However, there are now new package plant treatment technologies and recommended operational
organizations being developed that offer hope in the use of package sewage treatment plants. Such
package plants have the potential to fill the technological void between the individual septictnitrification
field and the distant, very expensive centralized sewage treatment plant. In sensitive environmental areas,
as well as rural areas remote from centralized public sewer, package sewage treatment plants may offer
the best hope of allowing for greenspace residential development (See Section 12 on Housing and
Neighborhood Policies for a discussion of greenspace development.).
On balance, Pender County has elected to adopt a policy in support of the use of package treatment
plants, but only in the absence of centralized public sewers. Further, when such package plants are
designed, they should be constructed so as to allow for later abandonment and connection of system
collection lines to a centralized system.
Growth Policies and Centralized Water and Sewer Services
The policies set forth in this Growth Management Plan are designed to encourage efficient, cost effective
patterns of growth in or near existing urban areas, or altematively, where industrial development is most
likely to occur. At the same time, large areas of productive agricultural land and important, environmentally
Pender County and Glenn Harbeck Associates Page 11

Pander County Growth Management Plan
Policy Statements I
sensitive areas should generally not be provided with sewer service so as not to encourage their
development
Water and Sewer Service Policies
Policy 4.1: Pender County shall continue to work with neighboring counties and municipalities on
regional solutions to water and sewer services.
Policy 4.2: Centralized water and sewer services should be concentrated within targeted service
areas, where development densities would make the provision of services economically efficient,
or where industrial development is to be encouraged.
Policy 4.3: Centralized sewer services shall generally avoid parts of the county intended primarily
for agriculture and to protect farmland from development pressures brought about by such
sewers. Exceptions to this policy may include extensions for major economic development
Initiatives, and extensions to address imminent public health problems or related environmental
hazards.
Policy 4.4: Major extensions of water and sewer services that could result in scattered, non -
directed development and costly provision of other urban services shall be discouraged.
Policy 4.5: The County shall support the provision and/or expansion of centralized sewer services
when such services:
(1) Will result In the development of new or expanded industry and the creation of permanent
jobs in numbers commensurate with the expenditure required.
(2) Will result in a positive payback to the county's taxpayers, in terms of the taxes generated
by the new development versus the costs incurred.
(3) Will encourage a more compact development pattern in areas adjoining existing urban
areas, thereby conserving farmland and other open spaces.
(4) Will serve to steer dense development away from environmentally sensitive areas, such as
floodplains, water supply watersheds and fragile coastal ecosystems.
Policy 4.6: Greenspace development away from centralized sewage treatment facilities may
employ package sewage treatment plants or other alternative sewage treatment systems as a
means of achieving more efficient land use.
Policy 4.7: The County shall encourage the development of sewer services that employ water
reuse technologies for agriculture and other uses.
Policy Section 5: Stormwater Management, Drainage and Flooding
Stormwater Runoff Impacts on Water Quality and Flooding
North Carolina hydrogeologist Ralph C. Heath, when speaking about the coastal area, stated nearly fifteen
years ago that the... "construction ... of multi -story condominiums, motels and other vacation facilities, with
their parking lots, tennis courts, and swimming pools, is resulting in the creation of large expanses of
impervious areas. Disposing of the runoff from these areas during storms in a manner that is not
detrimental to the adjacent sounds and ocean is among the most pressing water management problems
now confronting the developer and the public officials in this area." (News: Water Resources Research
Institute of the University of North Carolina, November 1986).
More recently published findings by State and Federal researchers have confirmed Heath's concerns,
pointing increasingly to non -point source pollution (i.e. stormwater runoff) as the principal cause of the
Pender County and Glenn Harbeck Associates page 12
f]
1
11

1 Pender County Growth Management Plan Policy Statements
degradation of water quality nation-wide. The construction of large, impervious surfaces associated with
major commercial and residential development accelerates the rate at which rainwaters reach nearby
receiving waters. In coastal areas, this rapid influx of fresh water can change the natural salinity of the
' sound water and disrupt the biological balance of the natural system. The water can also cant' higher than
normal levels of nutrients and other biodegradable materials that can create excessive oxygen demand for
decomposing the material. Many of these factors have been witnessed in the continued rapid growth and
development of Pender County, and associated declines in area water quality. The closing of the some
estuarine waters for shellfishing is but one symptom of a much larger, multi -faceted problem.
At the same time, the County's recent experiences with a spate of hurricanes and associated flooding
' have heightened community concerns regarding proper drainage and management of floodwaters. In light
of the importance of these problems, the County has undertaken the preparation of an Overall Stormwater
Management Plan. The balance of this section will summarize the findings and recommendations of that
plan.
Overall Stormwater Management Plan Is In Development
' In the aftermath of Hurricane Fran, Pender County received a federal grant to prepare an Overall
Stormwater Management Plan. According to the introduction to the plan, the purpose of the plan is to
..assess the County's streams and rivers and develop a plan that will help drain water away from new
development, prevent flooding of existing development, and minimize the impacts of stormwater pollution.
A secondary product of the plan is to compile and establish a geographic information system (GIS)
database that can be used by the County to manage stormwater as the county grows.'
To oversee the work of consultants preparing the stormwater management plan, Pender County
established a Stormwater Ad Hoc Committee made up of representatives of the Pender County
administration, the Cape Fear Council of Governments, the Natural Resource Conservation Service, and
Cape Fear Resource Conservation and Development.
Public Input To The Stormwater Management Plan
During the early stages of plan development, the County's consultants conducted series a public meetings
around the County to allow citizens to identify stormwater management issues and problems. Foremost
among the many problems identified were:
(1) beaver dams causing water to back up in area streams
(2) drainage ditches that have not been maintained
(3) channels clogged by fallen trees and debris
' (4) improperly designed road crossings and drainage culverts
(5) logging practices which clear-cut areas, thereby increasing runoff
(6) subdivisions approved without proper drainage systems
Assessment of Existing Stormwater Regulations and Policies.
The stormwater management plan includes an assessment of existing federal, state and local stormwater
regulations and policies that influence stormwater management in Pender County. The following is a brief
summary of the findings of the assessment.
Forestry Activities: The North Carolina Sedimentation Pollution Control Act, passed in 1973, excluded
forestry activities. The 1989 North Carolina Legislature amended the Sedimentation Pollution Control Act
to require forestry activities to follow the Forest Practices Guidelines promulgated by the State (15 NCAC
11.0101-.0209). The guidelines are intended primarily to prevent soil and debris from entering area
waterways. They do not address the increase in stormwater runoff that occurs when a large amount of
tree cover is removed.
Pender County and Glenn Harbeck Associates Page 13

Pender County Growth Management Plan
Policy Statements I
Agricultural Activities: Unless covered by specific legislation for particular water bodies, agricultural
'
practices are not governed by regulations concerning stormwater runoff in North Carolina.
Stormwater Permit from the North Carolina Division of Water Quality A stormwater permit is required for
,
development that requires a Coastal Area Management Act Major Development Permit or a
Sedimentation Erosion Control Plan. The Stormwater Permit addresses only water quality and does not
address stormwater quantity. The State does not review construction plans for proper drainage system
design or protection from flooding.
Sedimentation Erosion Control Plan Approval from the North Carolina Division of Land Qualify; A
Sedimentation Erosion Control Plan must be approved for development activities that will disturb one or ,
more acres of land. The primary purpose of the sedimentation erosion control plan is to reduce sediment
runoff during and after construction. These regulations do not address the proper design of stormwater
facilities or potential on -site or off -site flooding.
NC Department of Transportation Requirements: The NC Department of Transportation has adopted
stormwater runoff standards for roadways that are to become part of the NC DOT right-of-way system.
These requirements address primarily the design capacity of culverts, storm sewers and roadside ditches. ,
NC DOT does not review proposed subdivisions for proper drainage or protection from flooding.
Pender County Subdivision Ordinance: The Pender County subdivision ordinance requires that any
subdivision plat within the unincorporated area must be approved the County Planning Board. The
ordinance includes a number of requirements pertaining to stormwater runoff. These requirements
include the identification of water bodies and other areas subject to known flooding, conformance with the
Pender County Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance, certain minimum drainage system standards, and a
prohibition regarding the blockage or obstruction of natural drainage from adjoining areas.
Pender County Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance: The Pender County Flood Damage Prevention
Ordinance is the standard Federal Emergency Management Agency floodplain ordinance. The ordinance '
defines what can and cannot be done in the Special Flood Hazard Areas as shown on Flood Insurance
Rate Maps and flood boundary and floodplain maps. These regulations generally require structures built
in the floodplain to be constructed at or above the Base Flood Elevation and to certain standards. These '
regulations also prohibit encroachments into the floodway unless it can be demonstrated that the
encroachment causes no increase in the flood level.
1991 Pender County Land Use Plan Update: The Land Use Plan contains a number of policy statements
'
and implementation actions related to stormwater management. The assessment of the land use plan
notes that the policy statements are "well-intentioned but not [necessarily] enforced". Among the various
policy statements are the following:
(1) The County will not permit development on hydric soils.
'
(2) New or expanded marinas shall not be allowed in or adjacent to Outstanding Resource Waters
(ORW s).
(3) Pender County shall establish a Conservation District, the intent of which is to preserve existing
,
wooded areas adjacent to rivers, creeks, tributaries, estuarine waters and ORW waters to serve
as a natural filter for stormwater runoff.
(4) Pender County supports the planting and harvesting of commercial forestlands in upland areas
and other areas away from the County's water bodies.
,
(5) Pender County will continue to identify areas with drainage problems and work to improve
drainage in those areas.
National Pollution Discharge Elimination System: The National Pollution Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) Phase 1 and 2 Stormwater Regulations cover stormwater runoff for construction activities of 1
acre or more, or a designated industrial activity, or large and small communities operating a municipal
separate storm sewers system (MS4). The NPDES storm water regulations are focused primarily on
,
stormwater quality and do not address stormwater quantity or flooding.
Pender County and Glenn Harbeck Associates Page 14

IPender County Growth Management Plan Policy Statements
Improvements To Stormwater Regulations
Following the review of existing regulations and policies, the plan sets forth several recommendations for
improving stormwater regulations as applied to development in Pender County. The plan's authors were
careful to note that the plan does not provide recommendations for activities associated with forestry and
agriculture. Because these two activities are governed by federal and state regulations, the County is not
in a position to influence changes in forestry and agricultural stormwater management practices. Further,
the plan makes no suggestions for changes in other state or federal regulatory programs. Rather,
recommendations for regulatory improvement are offered on just two sets of local government standards:
The Pender County Subdivision Ordinance and adoption of a local Stormwater Management Ordinance.
The recommendations are summarized below.
Amendments To The Pender County Subdivision Ordinance.
Recommendations include:
(1) That a separate drainage plan be submitted and approved prior to accepting the final development
plat.
(2) That stormwater conveyance systems be designed to handle the 10-Year storm event.
(3) That, depending on how much drainage area the system conveys, the 100-year flood elevation be
determined.
(4) That flood elevations for areas less than one square mile be determined.
(5) That the base flood elevation be estimated when building within the A zone.
(6) That specific guidelines and limitations be provided concerning the impact of developments on
downstream property owners and water quality.
' _The Adoption of a Local Stormwater Management Ordinance
Recommendations include:
(1) That Pender County adopt a Stormwater Management Ordinance to establish specific design
standards that must be satisfied prior to approval of any development. Such design standards should
' reduce the types of flooding problems and impacts on water quality from future development.
(2) That Pender County consider applying for a grant the North Carolina Coastal Area Management
Agency to prepare a Stormwater Management Ordinance And Design Manual.
Delineation of Flood Plaih&New Maps.
The plan makes note of the fact that the County's official floodplain maps are currently being restudied by
' FEMA. The authors observe that while there will continue to be problems and limitations associated with
these maps, it is nonetheless hoped that the newly delineated floodplain maps will be an improvement
over the old ones. In light of the history of flooding experienced during Hurricane Floyd, it is perhaps an
' understatement when the plan states "Given that Pender County is flat, the floodplain boundaries shown
on the [floodplain maps] should not be taken for granted when developing close to a [delineated
floodplain].
' Maintenance of Existing Channels
The plan notes that the two most common complaints of Pender County citizens during the public input
1 meetings held for the plan involved the accumulation of sediment and debris within channels and the
abundant population of beavers and beaver dams. While the plan affirms that efforts to correct these two
problems could be of benefit in some areas, other areas would find no relief, should another storm of
Hurricane Floyd's intensity come along again. This is because, fundamentally, many roadways and
' structures were simply constructed without accurately assessing the potential flooding of the county's
many low-lying areas.
Significantly, the plan notes that "The responsibility of keeping streams, floodplains, and storm drainage
systems free of debris and properly functioning lies with property owner. The County is not responsible for
maintaining these areas unless they are on County property or the County has accepted an easement that
Pender County and Glenn Harbeck Associates Page 15

Pender County Growth Management Plan
Policy Statements I
clearly defines the maintenance responsibility as being the County's. At this time, there are no drainage
easements with the County specifically identified as the responsible party."
Nonetheless, there are at least three activities underway to help address the problem of maintaining
drainage channels: (1) The County has been proactive in clearing and snagging numerous streams since
Hurricane Fran, despite the fact that the County is not responsible for maintaining drainage ways. To help
pay for these efforts, the County has been able to procure funding assistance through various government
programs (2) The NC DOT has been cleaning up the debris around road crossings; however, by law they
can only clean out 200 feet upstream and downstream of their structures, and (3) the County has
established a beaver dam removal program. The County has employed a full-time trapper that will trap the
beavers and blow up the dam.
Vegetated Buffers Along Area Streams
In recent years, much effort has gone into studying and analyzing factors contributing to the pollution of
coastal streams and waters. The factors are wide ranging and not limited to any single geographic area.
Many are upstream from Pender County. And, contrary to the conventional wisdom of past decades, it is
seldom a single major polluter that is responsible for most water quality problems today. (Most point
sources of pollutants, such as traditional blue collar industries, are regulated by wastewater discharge
permits.) Rather, it is usually an accumulation of non -point source pollutants — parking lot and roadway
runoff, commercial fertilizers and pesticides, sedimentation from construction sites, etc. — that account for
the majority of pollutants entering area streams.
A variety of actions have been suggested for implementation at the state and local government level to
deal with non -point source pollutants. Because the situation stems from an accumulation of problems, it
will require an accumulation of actions to correct the problem. Among all the possible actions which could
be taken, one that is often cited as being effective is to employ vegetated buffers immediately adjacent to
surface waters and their feeding streams and ditches.
Just as an artificial silt fence at construction sites works to prevent soil and sediment from leaving the site,
permanently vegetated buffers act to filter stormwater runoff headed for adjacent strains. Such a program
of stream buffers does not single anyone out but applies equally to residential subdivisions, farms, golf
courses, shopping centers, and state and local roads. Pender County can do its part by requiring
vegetated buffers in all new developments, and by encouraging existing property owners to allow such
buffers to grow up adjacent to rivers, lakes and creeks — even ditches.
On August 1, 2000, the NC Coastal Resources Commission implemented a new requirement for a 30 foot
buffer adjoining navigable streams (Le. able to float a canoe) in the 20-county coastal area. At the time of
this writing, discussions are underway which would modify the requirement to allow for exceptions for pre-
existing lots and other special situations. In implementing the new standard, the State has been working to
balance existing and future private property rights while protecting the public interest in the quality of
coastal waters. Pender County generally supports this initiative.
Stormwater Management Policy Statements
Appendix B of the Overall Stormwater Management Plan contains a number of suggested policy
statements that, if implemented, could help improve the stormwater management situation in Pender
County. Many of the following policy statements draw upon the intent, if not the exact language, of those
statements.
Policies for Stormwater Management, Drainage and Flooding
Policy 5.1: Primary nursery areas shall be protected from undue encroachment, damage, or
pollution from direct water runoff or other causes. In areas adjacent to primary nursery areas,
allowable development densities and lot coverage should be kept low. Non -water dependent uses,
such as commercial development, should also be directed away from these areas, as appropriate.
1
I
Pander County and Glenn Harbeck Associates page 16

IPender County Growth Management Plan
Policy statemems
1
1
Policy 5.2: Pender County will make a concerted effort to see that development is sensitive to the
problem of stormwater run-off. In this regard, the County may employ locally adopted rules more
stringent than the state sedimentation and erosion control regulations.
Policy 5.3: The costs of stormwater management, which are associated with an area's rapid
growth, will be equitably distributed.
Policy 5A: The proponents (and beneficiaries) of development activity will be responsible for the
costs of stormwater management associated with their development projects.
Policy 5.5: Pender County will work, whenever possible, to require the retention and management
of natural vegetation in buffer areas along its creeks and rivers.
Policy 5.6: Pender County shall support a vegetated buffer program along area streams and other
water bodies to preserve, maintain, and protect the quality of area waters.
Policy 5.7: Pender County supports NC Division of Water Quality regulations regarding stormwater
runoff resulting from development activity. Intensive growth and development will not be allowed
where poor drainage exists unless appropriate corrective improvements are to be completed as
part of the project.
Policy 5.8: Pender County shall give priority consideration to corrective measures to prevent the
flooding of roads, houses, and businesses following an intense rain event.
Policy 5.9: The County shall consult with the NC Department of Transportation and the NC
Division of Water Quality on all future public road projects so that successful solutions may be
shared.
Policy 5.10: Environmentally sound engineering solutions shall be employed to prevent
unacceptable stormwater ponding on area roadways.
Policy 5.11: A master drainage plan shall be employed to identify and implement detailed solutions
for specific problem areas threatened by flooding and to improve area water quality.
Policy 5.12: In the review and approval of new development projects, post development runoff
shall not exceed the pre -development runoff rate.
Policy 6.13: Development activities in the 100 year floodplain or near water bodies shall be
carefully controlled. If development must occur, low intensity uses such as recreation and
agriculturally related activities (adequately buffered) shall be preferred.
Policy 5.14: Pender County shall discourage the placement of septic systems within the 100 year
floodplain.
Policy Section 6: School Facilities
Population Growth and Demand for New Schools
When speaking of infrastructure related to growth, most people think about roads and utilities like water
and sewer lines. Yet schools are just as important in serving growth as pipes in the ground or pavement
on the street Schools, therefore, are now and will continue to be an important consideration in planning
for the infrastructure needs of Pender County, particularly in its fastest growing areas.
Pender County and Glenn Haibeck Associates Page 17

Pander County Growth Management Plan
Policy Statements I
The rapid growth of Pender County, ' p 9 ty, particularly during the 1990s, has placed a severe strain on capacity
of the County's public schools. While Pender County continues to attract a significant number of retirees,
there has been a shift in recent years, toward more families with children. Thus, while previous growth in '
the retirement population could be accommodated without placing additional burdens on the school
system, the more recent growth has clearly had an effect on the ability of the school system to serve the
population. The table below shows growth in the student enrollment in Pender County Schools during
various school years from 1981-82 to the present.
School Year
Enrollment
Increase/Decrease
1981-82
4,522
-
1884-85
4,254
(268)
'
1990-91
4,989
735
1994-95
1999-00
5,300
6,400
311
1100
,
Note that the school system actually lost enrollment during the early 1980's- the latter part of the "baby
bust" period in America. (The majority of the baby boom population had not yet entered their childbearing
years.) However, just five years later, rapid growth and an increasing birth rate pushed the county's
student enrollment up by over 700 to nearly 5,000 students. By 1994-95, enrollment had increased to an
estimated 5,300. During the latter half of the 1990's, the student enrollment again swelled, increasing by
more than 1,000 students. Conservative estimates from the NC State Department of Public Instruction, '
forecast over 6,700 students in Pender County schools by the 2002-2003 school year. At the same time,
the Pender County School Administration estimates that it will add between 300 and 400 new students
during the 2000-2001 school year alone, thereby reaching the State's estimate two years early. '
County Voters Respond to School Needs
In 1996, voters approved a $25 million school bond to address crowded conditions and overdue
'
renovations in the school system. A $13 million state grant was added to the local bond amount to create
a total capital improvement budget of $38 million. This capital budget was earmarked to build five new
schools and complete much needed renovations to others. More recently (2000), the County school
district has requested an additional $25 million for the construction of an elementary school in the Burgaw
'
area, and renovations and additions to a half dozen other schools. Details on both of these capital
improvement program initiatives follow.
Overview of 1996 Bond and Grant Money
Two new elementary schools, North Topsail and South Topsail were built in the Hampstead Area as the
first two
projects under the 1996 $25 million bond referendum and $13 million state grant. Topsail Middle
'
School was renovated as a third project. The remainder of the bond and grant money is being employed
to build a new elementary school, new middle school and a new high school in the Rocky Point area of the
county. Not coincidentally, Topsail Township and the Rocky Point Township have been the fastest growing
,
parts of Pender County for the past several decades.
The new elementary school in Rocky Point, to be named Cape Fear Elementary, is intended to alleviate
crowded conditions at Malpass Comer Elementary, and Rocky Point Elementary. Some students from '
Burgaw Elementary also may attend the new school. Rocky Point Elementary, which has more than 500
students, was built for about 400. Malpass Comer Elementary was built for 600 students but has more
than 800. To deal with these large numbers, Malpass has added nine mobile units. Five units house 150 '
fifth graders. Twenty kindergartners attend class in another unit. Three others are used for the school's
Exceptional Children's Program.
The new middle school, to be named Cape Fear Middle, will house students from West Pender Middle ,
and Burgaw Middle Schools.
Pender County and Glenn Hanbeck Associates Page 18

IPender County Growth Management Plan
Policy Statements
' The new high school, to be named Trask High, will relieve overcrowding at Pender High School. Pender
High, which was built for about 800 students, has about 1,300.
' Near Term Construction Plans Will Complete the Remainder of the 1996 Capital Program
The school system plans to have the new elementary and a new middle school completed by the 2001-02
school year. Cape Fear Elementary School and Cape Fear Middle School are being built on a single site
of 114 acres off NC 133. The County paid $650,000 for the 114-acre site in April of 1999. Combined, the
elementary and middle schools are expected cost about $13 million.
' The new $16 million Trask High School is to be built on a nearby site off NC 210. The new high school will
have a capacity of 800 students and is scheduled to open in 2002.
' Recent Budget Requests
For the 2000-2001 school year, Pender County school officials requested a 33% increase over the
previous year's budget. The total budget request was for $12.9 million with $8.5 million for current
' expenses and $4.4 million for capital projects. However, in light of a total County budget constrained by
recent hurricane activity, damage recovery expenditures, and losses in the tax base, the County
Commissioners approved only a 4.8% increase.
' In addition to the most recent combined operating/capital improvement budget, the school district also
submitted a longer range capital improvement needs report to the County Commissioners. The report
outlines a need for $25 million in capital improvements over the next three to five years. The requested
' capital funding would be used to build an elementary school in Burgaw and to renovate a half dozen other
schools.
Two Perspectives on Paying for Schools
' At the center of the school situation in Pender County is the question: "How do we pay for new schools
and renovations to existing schools?" There are fundamentally two perspectives on this question. Some
would argue, for example, that it is not fair to tax property owners in the more rural areas of western and
northern Pender County for new schools being built to serve the rapid growth areas of eastern and south
central Pender. Supporting this view is the fact that, of the $38 million spent during the recent capital
improvement program, nearly all of it went to the construction or renovation of schools in the rapid growth
' parts of the county.
Others would argue that schools benefit the entire county, regardless of their location and need. Of note,
' too, is the fact that under the most recent school district request for an additional $25 million, a substantial
part of the total budget would be spent on the renovation of schools in more rural areas.
The whole issue of paying for schools, as well as other "infrastructure' related to growth, is discussed in
Policy Section 9: Paying for Services and Infrastructure.
Traffic Access, Management and Circulation at Schools
Several committee members expressed concern regarding the adequacy of traffic management and site
planning at the County's schools. Today's school campuses are often overwhelmed in their ability to deal
with increasing numbers of automobiles. At the high school level, for example, greater numbers of
' students are driving to school. At the elementary level, greater numbers of parents are chauffeuring their
children to school. In addition, it is important that access drives into schools not be located on blind, inside
curves. (Committee members noted that this may be a problem, for example, at the new Cape Fear
Middle School in the Rocky Point area, which is nearing completion.) In summary, most school campuses
were not designed to address the vehicular traffic volumes and turning movements found today at these
schools. As a result, traffic tie-ups can be routinely lengthy, and motor vehicle accidents are a constant
concern.
Pender County and Glenn Harbeck Associates Page 19

Pander County Growth Management Plan
Policy Statements I
Co -location and Joint Development of Parks at Public Schools
(See Policy Section 7 on Parks, Recreation and Water Access.)
,
Policies for School Facilities
Policy 6.1: The County supports advanced planning for the location of new public schools. Such
,
advanced planning shall incorporate age -specific population projections.
Policy 6.2: Pender County encourages offers of land for the siting of new schools, -particularly in
'
conjunction with new development. Acceptance of such properties shall be based on approved
criteria and cooperative planning with the County school administration.
Policy 6.3: Site planning for traffic management and safety in the vicinity of public schools shall
'
be a priority.
Policy Section 7: Parks, Recreation and Water Access
Benefits of Having the Current Parks and Recreation Master Plan
,
Ponder County is fortunate to have had a Recreation and Open Space Plan prepared in 1998. The plan
includes demographic research, a needs assessment, proposed locations for future parks, and estimates
of funding needed for park development. One important benefit of having the master parks and recreation
,
plan is to identify in advance those areas of the county most in need of public park facilities. Then, if a
property owner steps forward with an offer to dedicate land for a park to the County, the plan is able to
confirm whether such an offering of land is in the right location to serve the needs of the county.
'
A key to the successful implementation of the master parks plan will be on -going citizen involvement, the
formation of public -private partnerships, and the need to balance park improvements around the county.
The 1998 Plan identified 11 public school sites and 17 park site locations (independent of schools)
available for recreation activities. Of the 17 sites that were independent of public school facilities, just two
were under the direct
authority of the Ponder County Parks and Recreation Department. They are
'
described following.
Ponder Central District Park '
The Pander Central District Park, located within the Town of Burgaw, consists of 80 acres of land leased
by the County from the Department of Corrections. As yet undeveloped, the property is currently being first
surveyed for Phase 1 improvements on approximately 20 to 25 acres of the site. Ultimately, the proposed '
site plan calls for a community building, restaurant/concession stands, eight tennis courts, four volleyball
courts, four basketball courts, four small ball fields, four softball fields, three football/soccer fields, two
youth soccer fields, an open air pavilion, a maintenance building, a walking trail, and necessary parking. '
Total funds available for initial park development are $380,000, broken down as follows: $190,000 grant
from the State of North Carolina, $150,000 matching funds from the County and $40,000 in matching
funds from the Town of Burgaw.
Miller's Pond Park '
Miller's Pond Park is a 33-acre site that was acquired from by the County from the NC Department of '
Transportation. The pond was reported to have been originally used as a borrow pit for road construction
materials. Future plans call for facilities to include a restroom, picnic shelter, walking trail, pond overlook,
Pander County and Glenn Hanbeck Associates Page 20

' Pander County Growth Management Plan
Policy statements
' fishing piers, and parking areas. There is no specific budget available for the park; the project is therefore
idle.
Relationship with County Schools
The Pender County Parks and Recreation Department has maintained a close working relationship with
the County's public school system. Recently, in fact, the school administration requested a specific
budget allocation from the County Commissioners to help offset the school system's costs of providing
recreation facilities to county residents. Through joint use of the school system's existing 11 school sites
and with plans for additional use of school sites presently under construction, the County is able to offer
' recreation services at very cost effective levels to the county's taxpayers.
Relationship to Community Recreation Organizations
Despite limited funding and just one full-time staff person, Pender County has been able to provide
considerable recreation activities to County residents through the Parks and Recreation Community
Partnership Program. Volunteer community recreation organizations that make these levels of recreation
' services available include but are not limited to: Dixie Youth Baseball, Topsail Ball Club, Inc., Pop Warner
Football -Central, Pop Warner Football -East, Pender Youth Basketball -Central, Pender Youth Basketball -
East, Pender Youth Soccer, Maple Hill Recreation, Pike Creek Civic Club, The Youth Civic Club, Willard
Outreach, Atkinson Youth Council, Pender County Track Club, and the Edgecombe Community Center.
The Need and Rationale for District Parks
' As noted above, Pender County has but one district park, and it is under the early stages of development
(Pender Central District Park in Burgaw). To provide for the equitable distribution of parks throughout the
County, and to make financing for park development more appealing to all citizens, it is suggested that a
total of five district parks be established to serve all of Pender County. By having a few larger parks rather
than many smaller ones, the County would be better able to manage and maintain the park facilities
entrusted to it Funding and development of each district park could proceed in accordance with revenues
generated by fees collected in each district as new subdivisions come in. (See below)
Dedication of Land or Funding for Parks and Open Space
State law allows counties to require new subdivisions to set aside or "dedicate" a certain proportion of a
subdivision development for open space and recreation. For example, a 810% dedication standard' would
require that five acres of a fifty acre subdivision be reserved for open space. Alternatively, a "1 acre per 20
housing unit' standard would require that a 100 housing unit development also set aside five acres for
open space. Either approach is acceptable under State enabling legislation.
Instead of setting aside land, an even better way to ensure that parkland keeps up with new growth, is to
require a "fee in lieu of land dedication'. Under this arrangement, fees paid by the developer are deposited
into a special trust fund set up by the County specifically for parks, open space and recreation. Further,
the County may set up several trust funds corresponding to the specific geographic area of the County
within which the funds are collected. In this way, monies available for park development are
commensurate with the level of demand created by new development
The fee in lieu of land dedication option is intended to correct for situations where a small subdivision
would not yield sufficient open space to be useful. Ten percent of the land area in a small, five -acre
subdivision, for example, would yield only one half acre of open space. Such a small acreage may not be
sufficient to allow for useful recreation facilities, and may also create maintenance difficulties. (Either the
open space would have to be maintained by just a few homeowners, or the County would have to spend
an inordinate amount of time traveling to and maintaining a large number of very small parks.) Another
advantage of the fee in lieu of dedication option is that it ensures that the small subdivision, not just the
larger ones, will provide for a proportionate share of the open space needs of area residents.
Pender County and Glenn Harbeck Aswdates page 21

Pender County Growth Management Plan
Policy Statements I
Pender County currently has no provision in its subdivision regulations regarding land dedication or fees in
lieu of land dedication. In light of the fact that there is only one district park currently in development, and
the County continues to grow at a brisk pace, this type of provision is something the County should
consider.
Water Access Facilities
Access to the Intracoastal Waterway
For a county so richly blessed with estuarine area resources, there is a surprising absence of water
access areas to the sound and Intracoastal Waterway. There is not one public boat ramp, for example, in
all of Pender County providing access to the Intracoastal Waterway. The closest public ramp is located in
Onslow County at the north end of Topsail Island; the next closest ramp is located well south of the
County at the Wrightsville Beach drawbridge in New Hanover County. (The boat ramp at Wrightsville
Beach is reportedly the most crowded in the State, offering little relief to New Hanover County residents,
much less Pender County residents.)
Recently, however, the Town of Surf City announced plans to buy a 2.7 acre site on the intracoastal
waterway for a waterfront park with boat ramps. The park will include a fishing pier, a dock and boat
ramps for small watercraft, picnic areas and restrooms. The estimated cost for the waterfront park is
$535,000. To pay for it, the Town has applied for a $115,000 Coastal Area Management Act grant and
has asked Pender County to contribute $120,000. In addition to the 2.7 acres for the park, the Town is
also buying nine acres of wetlands that surround the site. The County recently agreed to provide monies
for one-half the property acquisition cost, contingent upon the Town's commitment to safeguard access to
the facility by County residents.
Other potential locations mentioned as having potential for public boat ramps include a site at the end of
Watts Landing Road on the north side of Virginia Creek, and a site at the end of Sloop Point road on the
south side of Virginia Creek. Both sites are hampered, however, by shallow water and sand bars,
particularly at low tide.
One committee member also mentioned that there are certain locational drawbacks associated with public
ramps, based on their position north or south along the waterway. A public ramp located in the southern
half of the waterway would be close to an ocean inlet, for example, but would likely be inundated by
boaters from heavily urbanized New Hanover County. Conversely, a public ramp located in the northern
half of the waterway would be less prone to crowding by boaters from New Hanover, but would be
inconvenient to any ocean inlet. Regardless of where future ramps are located, it is apparent that there is
enormous demand for them.
Access to Area Rivers and Creeks
Public access to inland rivers and creeks in Pender County is not much better than boating access to the
Intracoastal Waterway. As is the case with the Waterway, there are no public access sites along Moore's
Creek, the Black River, and the Cape Fear River in Pender County. There are, however, three access
sites, managed by the Fish and Wildlife Service along the Northeast Cape Fear River in Pender County.
White Stocking Road, Holly Shelter Game Refuge, and Shelter Creek. Pender County residents may also
go into New Hanover County for another access to the Northeast Cape Fear River and into Bladen County
for one access to the Cape Fear River.
To help rectify the situation, the Pender County Commissioners have been pursuing the purchase of a
piece of property along NC 210 near Moore's Creek National Battlefield to create a public access to
Moore's Creek and the Black River. The property, just south of National Battlefield site, would be used to
replace a waterway access lost when NC 210 was rerouted decades ago. The old access site is now part
of the National Battlefield.* The County has reportedly approached the International Paper Co., owner of
the property, on more than one occasion regarding purchase of the site. The County Commissioners
1
Pander County and Glenn Had*& Associates paw IV

IPender County Growth Management Plan
Policy Statements
would prefer to reach an agreement with the company to purchase the site without having to go through
condemnation procedures.
' "Of note, park officials at the Moore's Creek National Battlefield have reported increasing requests for use of the
park site for recreational purposes. To date, the Park Service has resisted such requests, except for incidental uses
(such as picnicking) in association with regular visitations. (Also see Section 19, Historic Preservation and
Revitalization for a discussion of the need to preserve the rural character of the area in the vicinity of the Battlefield.)
Other Water Access Site Possibilities
The 1998 Pender County Recreation and Open Space Plan identified nine potential water resource
access sites at the County. Most are in private hands, so would require purchase and development.
(1) Black River at NC 210 Bridge. southwestern side of the River could be a waterfront Park for both
' boating at passive waterfront recreation.
(2) Long Creek at NC 210 Bridge: east side of Long creek has potential for small park with boat access.
' (3) Rockfish Creek at SR 1309 Bridge: the site for small boat or canoe access with small park.
(4) Holly Shelter Creek at SR 1520 Bridge: beautifully wooded high ground could be excellent location for
nature trail or possibly a state Park
(5) Holly Shelter Creek at SR 1520 Bridge: site conditions and potentials similar to site described
' immediately above.
(6) Northeast Cape Fear River at NC 53 Bridge : area has potential for a public boat access and passive
waterfront Park.
' (7) Paved Ramp at End of SR 1560: wide paved section of road right-of-way that is traditional location, for
launching small boats.
(8) Potential Regional Park Site Located Between SR 1561 and Virginia Creek: has excellent potential for
boat access as well as passive waterfront park.
(9) Open Field on SR 1563: good access to the intracoastal waterway with potential for a regional
waterfront park that could serve the entire eastern portion of Pender County.
Parks, Recreation and Water Access Policies
Policy 7.1: Future park development and open space preservation shall be planned to provide for
the proper distribution of recreation and open space opportunities within the planning area.
' Policy 7.2: In determining future sites for park, recreation and water access facilities, multiple
objectives for natural area conservation, visual enhancement, promotion of cultural and historic
preservation, watershed and flood prone area protection shall be considered.
' Policy 7.3: Pender County supports short and long-term efforts to protect important natural
wildlife and recreation areas, Including particularly the Holly Shelter Game Lands and the Angola
Bay Game Land, by directing growth to locations in or near existing urban areas. .
Policy 7.4: The identification and appropriate recreational development of a system of open space
greenways and hiking trails within the county shall be encouraged. The use of (1) natural corridors
such as streams and floodplains, and (2) man-made corridors such as utility and transportation
rights -of -way and easements, shall be emphasized.
Pender County and Glenn Harbeck,4ssmates Page 23

Pender County Growth Management Plan
Policy Statements I
Policy 7.5: Land acquisition for new park, recreation, recreation and shoreline access sites in
advance of need shall be encouraged to achieve desirable locations at cost effective levels.
Policy 7.6: All new residential development should provide for adequate open space and
recreation area in proportion to the demand created by the development. This may be determined
according to the number of dwelling units in the development and/or by a percentage of the total
acreage in the development.
Policy 7.7: Pender County supports the co -location and joint development of public park facilities
in cooperation with public schools.
Policy 7.8: Given the limited number of water access sites in Pender County, a rapidly growing
population, extensive water resource areas, and a diminishing number of properties suitable for
water access, the County shall make the provision of additional water access areas a high priority
for property acquisition, particularly to the Intracoastal Waterway.
Policy Section 8: Solid Waste Management
Pender County recently prepared a comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan (June 30, 2000). The
plan was prepared in accordance with State law to address local solid waste management plans and
goals for the period 2000 to 2010. Updates to the plan must be prepared every three years. The plan
includes all of unincorporated Pender County as well as the incorporated towns of Atkinson, Burgaw, St
Helena, Surf City, Topsail Beach, and Watha. Preparation of the 3-Year Update to the plan involved the
work of the Pender County Solid Waste Planning Advisory Committee. This 10-member committee was
made up of elected officials and administrators from Pender County and its six incorporated municipalities,
plus a representative from the County's solid waste contractor and Pender Watch and Conservancy. The
following information consists of excerpts and summaries from the Solid Waste Management Plan as may
be pertinent to the Growth Management Plan.
Solid Waste Tonnage and Goals for Waste Reduction
Pender County and its towns disposed of approximately 20,297 tons of waste in fiscal year 1998-99. Of
this total tonnage, approximately 75 percent of the waste was residential, 19 percent was from non-
residential sources and 4 percent was from construction and demolition debris.
Since fiscal year 1991-1992, Pender County has made a 12 percent reduction in solid waste disposal,
from .60 to .53 annual tons per capita. The decrease would have been larger except for the impact of
hurricanes in the area during the latter half of the 1990s. The County Solid Waste Management Plan calls
for an additional local goal of 10 percent waste reduction to be reached by June 30, 2005 and a further 10
percent reduction by June 30, 2010. Thus, the total waste reduction goals from the 1991-92 baseline year
to 2005 and 2010 are 22 percent and 32 percent respectively. The plan noted that a 32 percent reduction
is significant for a rural county like Pender. While this reduction is less than the State's 40 percent goal,
the County is not a large solid waste producer, so any reduction has a significant impact on the waste
stream. Even so, the county's per capita disposal rate of 0.53 tons per capita is considerably lower than
the state average of 1.22 tons per capita.
Collection Of Solid Waste
Solid waste in Pender County is collected and hauled by private enterprise. Garbage is collected by Waste
Industries, Inc., from 12 collection (convenience) centers located in rural areas of the County. The
collection centers currently are staffed through a contract with the same firm. The centers are open on
various days and times, Monday through Sunday. Residential solid waste is accepted at each center in an
enclosed compactor. A variety of recyclable materials are also accepted. The contractor hauls collected
waste to the County's transfer station in Hampstead, also operated by Waste Industries.
Fi
I
Pender county and Glenn HarbeckAssmates
Page 24

I
Pender County Growth Management Plan Policy statements
Committee members commented that, unfortunately, several of the County s collection centers have
unpaved surfaces, and are prone to unpleasant, messy, muddy conditions following a rain. Some are also
' visual eyesores. There are, however, plans to phase out and relocate several of the collection centers,
including the Hampstead site adjoining the high school. For this reason, there has been little investment in
improving and screening the sites that are about to close.
Based on population figures, Pender County does not anticipate the need to build any new collection
centers, but may consider extended daysthours in more heavily populated areas. Also of note, the County
recently explored the option of providing curbside garbage pickup to County residents. This alternative
was dropped from consideration soon after it became clear that there was insufficient interest from county
residents for the service. (A relatively small number of homeowners in the unincorporated area, however,
choose to contract with private haulers for curbside service.)
Disposal of Solid Waste
The Pender County landfill closed in 1994. (The facility is not being used for any other purpose at this
' time, although an animal shelter was built on an unused portion of the site in 1996.) Instead of disposing
of waste within the county, garbage is collected at a transfer station in Hampstead and is then transported
to a landfill in nearby Sampson County. Pender County has entered into a long-term renewable contract
with Waste Industries, Inc. to transport the county's waste to Sampson County. The County also has an
' agreement with Browning -Ferris International who operates the landfill under an agreement with Sampson
County. The contract with Waste Industries includes a clause allowing price increases based on the
Consumer Price Index.
The transfer station is expected to operate indefinitely because it is unlikely that Pender County will build
another landfill.
Recycling
Pender County has been working since late 1991 to establish a stable recycling program. In the fall of
' 1991 and during 1992, the "green box" open dumpster system was replaced by manned
conveniencetrecycling centers. In fiscal year 98-99, the County recycled about 7 percent of its residential
waste. Twelve collection centers have a variety of collection bins, including ten ton compactor units,
rollouts, and converted dumpsters. Ten recyclable materials are collected: newspaper, cardboard, plastic
' bottles, aluminum cans, steel cans, batteries, motor oil, tires, white goods, and clear, brown and green
glass. Collection center staff teach residents proper sorting and material preparation and are available to
answer questions.
Paper and cardboard are taken to Paper Stock Dealers, glass and aluminum and steel cans are taken to
Container Recycling Alliance, and metals were taken to Southern Iron and Metals (now metals and white
goods go to East Coast Recycling). An estimated one-third of county residents using the collection centers
also use the recycling bins.
Pender County has initiated plans to recycle magazines and color inserts as arranged with the Raleigh
News and Observer. To do this, Pender County will obtain five containers to distribute to the major
convenience sites before the end of 2000. In addition, the school and community education programs are
expected to increase recycling participation.
Hurricane Debris
In 1999, Pender County had to deal with debris from hurricanes Dennis and Floyd. The County set up a
site for emergency management of storm debris. The site was centrally located to manage excessive
amounts of debris. The selected site met all federal, state and local regulations concerning storage,
processing and potential controlled burning. Specific plans for controlled access and other issues were
Pender County and Glenn Hw beck Associates Page 25

Pender County Growth Management Plan
Policy statements
coordinated with County Emergency Management. This arrangement worked well, and will continue to be
used in the event of future storms.
Illegal Disposal of Solid Waste
Illegal disposal of solid waste is addressed in the Pender County Solid Waste Ordinance, and covers
requirements and penalties pertaining to illegal disposal. While illegal disposal undoubtedly occurs, it
does not appear to be a serious problem in Pender County. The County's Health, Sheriff, and Planning
Departments investigate illegal dumpsites when reported by concerned citizens. The County's newly hired
code enforcement officer will investigate dumpsites and other complaints.
Litter Management and Illegal Household Dumping
Pender County has no litter or illegal household dumping prevention program. However, the Pender
County code makes it illegal to do so, and establishes fines and provides for enforcement. Roadside litter
is a problem in Pender County, as it is elsewhere. Litter management and illegal household dumping
enforcement will continue. Programs such as the Adopt A -Highway program will be encouraged. The
County participates in semi-annual Governors Litter Sweep campaign by encouraging Adopt -A Highway
participants and community groups to select a road to dean up.
Solid Waste Management Program Costs and Financing Methods
Pender County operates a solid waste management cost program, while the incorporated towns of
Atkinson, Burgaw, St Helena, Surf City, Topsail Beach, and Watha contract out the programs to local
haulers.
The total budget for the County -operated solid waste program during fiscal year 1998-99 was $1,811,170.
This budget included funds for collection centers and collection from government operated facilities such
as schools, town hall, and the courthouse. The current solid waste program is funded largely through the
County household solid waste user fee, and to a lesser extent by property taxes, regular tipping fees,
construction and demolition tipping fees, state revenues, and the sale of recyclables. A tire recycling
program is paid for through the fire tax levied by the state. The towns pay for solid waste management
services through individual assessments.
The County's current financing methods generated enough revenue for the fiscal year 1998-99 solid waste
program for the first time with no supplement from general fund. However, due to explosive residential
growth and hurricane Dennis/Floyd debris, strong construction and demolition tonnages, and static
revenues, the County has included additional revenue subsidies from general fund to the solid waste
management budget for fiscal year 2000-01. As tonnages and inflationary costs increase, sources of
revenue will need to be expanded.
Currently County residents who do not contract with a private hauler pay the annual household waste fee
of $100. This fee, however, covers only about 70 percent of the total revenue for the solid waste
management program. The structure of the household fees may need to be modified to include a greater
charge to households that use private haulers (currently $40), and/or increases in the basic $100 per
household charge. The County is also exploring other sources of revenue.
Solid Waste Management Policies
Policy 8.1: Local area requirements for solid waste collection and disposal shall continue to be
anticipated through advanced, cooperative planning between the County, its municipalities, and
nearby local government jurisdictions.
Policy 8.2: The County shall continue to pursue a variety of waste reduction strategies, including
waste prevention, recycling and reuse.
Pender County and Glenn Harbeck Associates Page 26

Pender County Growth Management Plan Policy Statements
7
C
1
Policy 8.3: Pender County encourages residential composting and mulching.
Policy 8A: Pender County supports educational programs that reduce litter and illegal dumping,
encourage recycling and reuse, and encourage participation in programs such as Adopt A -
Highway and the Governors Litter Sweep.
Policy 8.4: Pender County supports solid waste program financing strategies that equitably
assess the costs of waste collection and disposal in accordance with the amount of waste each
generator produces.
Policy 8.5: County waste collection sites shall be located, graded, screened, improved and
properly maintained to facilitate their use and improved appearance. When such facilities are
located along major thoroughfares, traffic management and safety shall be a consideration,
including possible acceleration and deceleration lanes.
Policy Section 9: Paying for Infrastructure and Services
The Pender County Situation
Pender County is a fiscally conservative local government. To keep the tax rate as low as possible, the
County limits the services it provides. As noted in Policy Section 7, for example, Pender County has only
two County park sites, and no public access sites to the Intracoastal.Waterway, despite adjoining the
ICWW for its entire eastern length.
In the context of this tax and service environment, growth and development is spilling over into Pender
County from its urbanized neighbor to the south. This spillover effect can be no more evident than in the
Hampstead area of Pender County, which has rapidly become a major bedroom community for people
who work in Wilmington and New Hanover County but prefer to reside in Pender County.
While this growth provides construction jobs, and an increase in primarily the residential tax base for the
county, the actual benefits to the county tax base versus the costs associated with such growth are
debatable. Specifically, numerous studies in communities across the country have found that most
residential development does not pay for itself in terms of the services it requires versus the taxes it pays.
A recent study by the American Farmland Trust found for example that, on average, residential
development requires about $1.15 to $1.25 in services for every $1 it pays in taxes. (Farmland, in
contrast, requires only about 30 cents in service demands for every $1 it pays in taxes.)
Commercial and industrial properties, on the other hand, require less in the way of services and therefore
carry more than their burden of the county's operating costs. (The American Farmland Trust found that for
every dollar paid in taxes, commercial development requires only about 35 cents back in service costs.)
Thus, while a $1 million investment in housing and a $1 million investment in commercial property may
generate the same property tax revenues, the commercial property has no children to be educated, no
social services to be administered, and no health problems to be tended to. Commercial and industrial
developments generally provide for a favorable cosYbenefit analysis to the County's balance sheet, while
residential development does not
New Residents Create Demand for Services and Infrastructure
Pender County has grown at a brisk pace for the past several decades, easily outpacing the growth rate of
the State as a whole. State projections call for the county to continue to grow at a rapid pace for at least
the next twenty years. (See Growth Factors Analysis section on Population Growth). Of the projected
increases in population, the majority of such growth is from in -migration rather than births over deaths.
Fundamentally, this means that demand for new infrastructure is being driven largely by new residents
moving into the county, rather than by the offspring of long standing residents.
Pender County and Glenn Harbw* Associates Page 27

Pender County Growth Management Plan
Policy Statements I
In a general sense, new residents create demand for new housing that in tum, generates a demand for
infrastructure and services. While some of the costs of such infrastructure are paid in part by the
developer, (and then the homebuyer), a substantial portion of these up front capital improvement costs
are often absorbed by the entire tax base of the county. Thus, while the developer usually pays for water
and sewer lines and streets within or leading up to his subdivision, the general taxpayer often foots the bill
for the costs of major water and sewer trunk lines, new or expanded water and sewage treatment plants,
new schools, fire and rescue facilities, major roadway improvements, and so forth.
Alternatives for Paying for Services and Infrastructure
Many of the up front costs for new services and infrastructure must be absorbed before the new residents
have paid a significant amount of local property taxes. In the case of lower priced housing, such
developments may never generate sufficient taxes to pay for the services they demand, much less the
upfront capital improvement costs they generate. Communities, therefore, face difficulty financing
immediate start-up costs for capital improvements through existing general revenues. In addition, existing
residents end up paying for capital facilities that largely benefit the new residents. (Consider new residents
moving into the Hampstead or Rocky Point areas of Pender County, for example, and the new schools
that have been built and are yet to be built to serve the new population of kids there.) This capital financing
problem is worsened by the decreasing availability of Federal and State funds.
Communities like Pender County face three basic altematives to deal with the costs of growth:
(1) Raise taxes on everybody,
(2) Allow the quality of services to deteriorate by not matching new facilities with growth
(3) Use revenue sources tied more directly to the growth.
Typical Ways of Generating Revenues for Facilities and Services
Local govemments in North Carolina have several means of generating revenues to pay for govemment
services and capital facilities. Typical revenue sources include property taxestgeneral obligation bonds,
revenue bonds, sales taxes, special purpose taxes, district taxes, and State and Federal grants.
Property taxes are often the revenue -generating mainstay of most local govemments in North Carolina.
One advantage of property taxes is that the amount that residents are taxed generally corresponds with
their ability -to -pay, assuming that the value of property owned is an approximate measure of ability -to -pay
General Obligation Bonds are used by local govemments to borrow money now to be repaid over time.
They are not a tax per se, but rather a liability for which property taxes must typically be raised to pay off
the bond. As mentioned above, communities must often come up with the funding to build new
infrastructure before the growth that creates the demand for the infrastructure has paid a significant
amount of local property taxes. To address this problem of timing, one response of local governments has
been to issue bonds for the new infrastructure and facilities. Bonds spread the cost of the infrastructure
over a number of years, even decades. They also spread the cost of infrastructure over the entire tax
base of the community rather than just the newcomers who are most often generating the demand for the
infrastructure. (e.g. a new school, a new water treatment plant, a new wastewater treatment plant, etc).
Revenue bonds may also be used by local govemments to borrow money now to be repaid over time. The
difference between revenue bonds and general obligation bonds is that the money raised to pay off the
revenue bond can only come from the revenues (fees or income) of the project being funded. This means,
for example, that a revenue bond to fund the construction of a new wastewater treatment plant could only
be paid off by the ratepayers who are tied into the sewer system. The money to pay off the bond is
typically included in the monthly utility bills for the service being provided. This type of charge is also often
referred to as a user fee, because only the users of the facility are required to pay the fee. Residents in
parts of the local govemment jurisdiction not served by centralized water and sewer, therefore, would not
receive a monthly bill, and would therefore not pay a user fee for that service.
1
C
Pender County and Glenn Harbeck Associates page 28

IPender County Growth Management Plan
Policy Statements
�I
h
In Pender County, a solid waste management fee is charged to owners/occupants of all habitable
residential and non-residential buildings in the county. The fee is $100 for those who use the County's
contracted service and $40 for those who use a hauler of their own choice.
The 6% statewide sales tax fund is administered by the State. One third of the receipts are distributed to
counties and municipalities based on a pre -determined formula. Sales taxes are paid by everyone but are
generally considered "regressive, based on ability -to -pay. That is, low-income households tend to spend
a greater proportion of their income on sales tax than do high -income households. Residents of Pender
County who work and do much of their shopping outside the county (such as in New Hanover County)
reduce the amount of sales tax money coming back to the County from the State.
Special purpose taxes can be created for a wide variety of uses. One special purpose tax used in many
counties in North Carolina is the Room Occupancy Tax. Hotel, motel and other temporary lodging
businesses are charged a percentage tax on all room rentals, some portion of which is typically used for
promoting tourism. Special legislation must be requested from the General Assembly to enact this tax.
Special district taxes can be levied upon approval by the County Commissioners to provide a specific
servcice for which the districts are created. In Pender County, fire district taxes are collected from
properties not protected by a municipal fire department For the current tax year, fire district taxes have
been set at 4 cents per hundred valuation. Rescue district taxes range from 2 to 7 cents per hundred
depending upon the district, and are also levied in addition to the property tax.
State and Federal sources are often viewed as "free" money from the County's perspective, even though
their ultimate source is most often from income taxes paid by county. residents and others. These funds
generally must be used for a specific purpose. In addition, these funds often must be leveraged through
the use of County matching funds.
Revenue Sources Tied More Directly To Growth
In addition to the more typical ways of generating revenue to pay for the costs of growth, many local
governments employ other ways of generating revenue that are more closely tied to the growth itself.
These include mainly impact fees and excise taxes on land transfers.
Impact Fees
Impact fees can be defined as financial charges placed on new development, primarily for the purpose of
paying for capital facilities (infrastructure) needed as a result of growth. The use of these fees has varied
widely throughout the United States, with the fast growing states of Colorado, California, and Florida
leading the rest of the states in their use. North Carolina presently has several laws that allow the use of
some form of impact fee. Section 153A-274 allows for counties to construct and operate public enterprises
including sewer, solid waste systems, and airports. The County may collect rents, rates, fees (including
connection fees), or charges for the financing of these utilities. Most often, however, counties in North
Carolina seek special enabling legislation to employ their use.
Differing Views on Impact Fees
Opponents of impact fees would argue that such fees tax only a few residents to pay for facilities that
benefit everyone in the county. Proponents, on the other hand, would counter that a new school in a
rapidly growing area, filled entirely with students only from the rapidly growing area, does not benefit
county taxpayers in other parts of the county far removed from the new growth.
Opponents of impact fees would argue that they only hurt the first time homebuyer who is likely a resident
of the county anyway. Proponents, on the other hand, would counter that population increases in any
rapidly growing area are almost always due to the in -migration of new residents, rather than births over
deaths or relocation of existing residents.
Pender county and Glenn Herb&* Associates P&je 29

Pender County Growth Management Plan
Policy Statements I
Opponents of impact fees would argue that the developer already pays for his own infrastructure, so he
shouldn't be charged twice. Proponents, on the other hand, would counter that most of the infrastructure
installed by the developer relates only to the immediate confines of his own development, and does not
address 'big ticket" off -site infrastructure costs (i.e. schools, parks, sewer trunk lines, treatment plants,
etc.)
Opponents of impact fees would argue that they impose a cost on new homebuyers that previous
generations of homebuyers did not have to pay. Proponents, on the other hand, would counter that while
this is true, the era of "cheap" federal and state money for infrastructure has come and gone, and local
governments must adjust their ways accordingly. Further, proponents would ask whether long time
residents should keep paying over and over again for new infrastructure in other parts of the county. Many
times, these more rural, long-time residents are not the beneficiaries of new parks, new schools, new
central water and central sewer, because they live in an area with insufficient development density to
warrant their provision.
Finally, opponents of impact fees would argue that such fees are simply another way for local
governments to siphon more money from growth into the general revenue fund. Proponents, on the other
hand, would counter that impact fees should never be placed into general revenues. Rather, they are to be
deposited only in specially designated capital reserve accounts, with monies earmarked only for use on
the service or infrastructure for which the impact fee was collected. (i.e. school facilities fund, parks fund,
sewer fund, etc.) Further, in larger jurisdictions, impact fees are often set aside in area -based capital
reserve accounts, with monies to be spent only in the geographical area within which the fee was
collected. (i.e. northwest area park fund, central area park fund, etc.)
The Intended Effect of Impact Fees
The primary purpose of impact fees is to avoid burdening current residents and property owners with the
costs of providing infrastructure and services necessitated by new growth and development. To the extent
possible, impact fees are intended to make development pay its own way. Beyond the public finance
issues surrounding impact fees, however, they have two other effects.
(1) Impact fees place new housing on a more equal, price competitive footing with existing homes in
the area. This means that the developer and thus the potential homebuyer must factor in the up
front infrastructure costs in the price of a new home, compared to an existing home that already
has infrastructure in place. In the largest sense, impact fees can have the effect of encouraging
the restoration/slowing the abandonment of the'older housing stock in villages and towns.
(2) Impact fees may have the effect of placing new housing in one community on a more level, price
competitive playing field with housing in adjoining governmental jurisdictions. This means that the
developer and thus the potential homebuyer must factor in the true costs of doing business in one
community over another. The community that has no impact fees, for example, is no longer
"giving away the store" relative to its neighboring community that is seeking to recoup some of the
costs of growth through impact fees. (e.g. New Hanover County already has in place some forms
of impact fees.)
Excise Taxes
Excise taxes are similar in function to sales taxes in that they are based on a simple percentage of the
total value of the property being sold. Perhaps the most common form of excise tax used by counties in
North Carolina to help pay for the costs of growth is an excise tax on real property transfers. From the
local government perspective, an excise tax on real property transfers can be an effective source of
revenue for capital projects. Real estate transfer taxes have been shown to generate significant amounts
of revenue, particularly in counties where real estate values are high and property sales brisk. A 1 %
excise tax on real estate transfers in Pender County would likely generate many thousands of dollars a
year for the County for capital projects. (e.g. rapidly growing, coastal oriented Dare County, on the Outer
L
L
E
r
Pender CO-ih* and Glenn Harbeck Associates
Page 30 '

IPander County Growth Management Plan
Policy Statements
1
1
1
J
u
Banks of North Carolina, has employed a real estate transfer tax to generate substantial revenues for the
County's growth related infrastructure funding.)
Advantages of Excise Taxes
Excise taxes are different from impact fees in several ways. The amount of the excise tax, for example,
does not have to be tied to the specific costs of a capital improvement program. Excise taxes do not have
to be spent within a specified amount of time or be limited for use within any one part of the county. The
flexibility of excise taxes allows them to fund capital facilities that may serve the community at large.
Disadvantages of Excise Taxes
In several respects, the same differences between excise taxes and impact fees that make excise taxes
advantageous to local government, also make them less equitable, perhaps, to the excise taxpayer.
(1) Unless specifically exempted, excise taxes can hurt the "little guy" who just wants to do a simple
transfer of land to a friend or relative.
(2) Excise taxes do not have to be reserved for use in the same part of the county where they were
collected. Thus, they are more of a general tax, less targeted to the real impacts of growth and
development.
(3) Excise taxes, unlike impact fees, truly do fit the description of "a tax on few individuals for the
benefit of everyone." Thus, while the transfer of land in most cases is related to some form of
development, that is not always the case. Logically, therefore, a tax on all land transfers seems
less equitable than the impact fee.
Of note, Committee Members for the Growth Management Plan generally favored the establishment of
development impact fees, but had mixed views about establishing a real estate transfer excise tax.
Capital Improvement Planning
In the context of local government, "capital improvements" may be defined as major, non -recurring
expenditures related to the purchase or construction of a permanent or relatively long lasting asset.
Capital improvements may include, for example, land acquisition, construction or major rehabilitation of a
building or other facility, the purchase of major equipment, or any planning, feasibility, engineering or
design study related to a major capital project.
Given the range of capital improvement needs and expenses that the County will face in the next few
years, this plan suggests that a long and short range capital improvement plan be introduced as a routine
part of the annual budget setting process for the County. This plan should include a needs assessment
and long range plan for such things as schools, fire stations, vehicles, industrial parks, water treatment
and distribution, sewage collection, treatment and disposal, stormwater management infrastructure, parks
and the like. Cost estimates and sources of funding should be summarized in the plan for the approximate
year(s) in which expenditures are anticipated. Coordination with the county's municipalities will be critical.
Policies on Paving For Infrastructure and Services
Policy 9.1: The County shall support planning and budgeting for capital facilities, with particular
emphasis on park land, storm water management facilities, schools, sewage treatment systems,
and airport development.
Policy 9.2: The costs of infrastructure, facilities and services related to new growth and
development shall be borne by those responsible for the new growth. This approach shall include
impact fees on new development and user fees for new facilities.
Ponder County and Glenn Harbeck Associates Page 31

Ponder County Growth Management Plan
Policy Statements I
C. DEVELOPMENT TYPES
Policy Section 10: Industrial Development
Much of the area's present attitudes about growth stem from the economic history of the county over the
past 100 years. Until about the 1960's, most Pender County residents lived under a basic, subsistence -
level, resource -based economy (i.e. farming and fishing). And, despite the relatively recent industrial
growth experienced during the 1990's, county business and industry continue to pay an average wage
considerably lower than nearby urbanized areas and the State as a whole. (See Growth Factors Analysis)
Thus, many residents continue to place a high priority on economic growth and better paying jobs.
Pender County's competitive edge for industrial recruitment is derived in large measure from the county's
favorable position straddling Interstate 40, its favorable coastal living environment, and its good access to
employment centers, air, rail and port facilities in New Hanover County. Pender County is also just
beginning to tap into the available water and sewer infrastructure capabilities of the region. (See Section
4: Water and Sewer Services for more discussion of this issue.)
Pender County also has in place an Industrial Development Incentive Grant Program that offers financial
incentives to new and expanding industries considering a major capital investment in the county. The
program can provide for monetary grants to industries that meet prescribed thresholds for new jobs, wage
levels, property taxes, level of capital investment, etc. Grants may be use for a variety of purposes,
including site acquisition, site preparation, site infrastructure and improvements, job training costs, and
other purposes which leave value in the community. To date, the Development Incentive Grant Program
has not been used in Pender County.
During the countywide public input meeting for the Growth Management Plan, the need for additional
industrial development drew good support from area residents, provided that such industrial development
was appropriately located and supportive of environmental quality. It is apparent that Pender County
residents favor the economic growth that would occur as a result of new business or industry, but are
cautious about accepting just any industry in any location.
"Clean" Vs. "Dirty" Industry and the Use of Performance Standards
Regarding the issue of "clean" vs. "dirty" industry, County officials recognize that emerging new industries
are often difficult to characterize in today's rapidly changing national and global economy. Rather than
attempting to stereotype a particular industry as clean or dirty, it is more constructive to think in terms of
the actual impacts that any given industry may generate in terms of, for example, air particulate matter,
water contaminants, water consumption, solid waste produced, heavy truck traffic generated. etc. To
address these impacts, numerically based performance standards may be applied through the zoning
ordinance to spell out the reasonable limits that the County is willing to accept in each of these various
areas of impact.
Locational Criteria for Industry
Regarding the location of new industry generally, the accompanying Policies call for advanced planning to
identify future industrial sites. In terms of specific locational standards, the policies place industrial and
industrially related activities into one of four categories:
Heavy industries, for example, are generally characterized as having large physical plants, extensive land
requirements and low worker to land ratios. Due to their large land requirements and their higher potential
for adverse environmental impacts, heavy industries should be directed to locations remote from existing
incompatible, non -industrial land uses. As used here, incompatible, non -industrial uses may include
residential areas and certain types of office, institutional, commercial uses not related to the support of the
industry. At the same time, some forms of office and commercial development may serve as an
appropriate transitional land use between the heavy industry and nearby residential areas. Heavy
['I
7
1
I
Ponder County and Glenn Harbeck Associates Page 32

IPender County Growth Management Plan Policy Statements
industries should also have direct access (i.e. without passing through a residential or incompatible
commercial area.) to major transportation facilities, including highway and rail service. In addition to
providing convenient access to the heavy industry, such transportation facilities may also act as a buffer or
transitional land use between the heavy industry and non -industrial land uses on the other side of a major
(divided) highway or rail line.
Light industries are generally characterized as having smaller physical plants, lower land requirements
and higher worker to land ratios. light industries may also produce a product that has a higher value per
unit weight or volume compared to the products of heavy industry. Since light industries typically do not
require large land areas, and traditionally have a lower potential for adverse environmental impacts, they
can be more easily located within an urban area. Their flexibility in location enables them. to take
maximum advantage of available services and to minimize home to work travel distances. Even so, light
industries should have easy access to major highway facilities, and if possible, rail and air facilities. Care
should be taken to see that light industries are located so as not to introduce additional traffic onto
residential streets. When properly designed and sited, light industrial sites can be compatible with nearby
residential areas.
Warehousing, storage and distribution facilities are an essential component of most urbanizing areas and
have traditionally been accommodated within areas planned for both heavy and light industry. In the past
few decades, however, many new forms of warehousing, storage and distribution facilities have emerged
in the development marketplace. Mini -warehouses, for example, have become common features in nearly
all communities today. When these new warehousing facilities occur along major thoroughfares in a
community, it is important that they are properly landscaped and buffered so as not to detract from the
overall image of the area.
Business or Industrial Parks are typically carefully planned developments designed to accommodate
several businesses or light industries in a well organized setting. Such business parks should be
encouraged to allow for mixed uses, including commercial uses such as restaurants and drug stores. (If a
business park has no eating establishments, for example, workers are forced to get in their car just to buy
lunch.)
Mineral Production Industries
Historically, mineral production and mining interests in Pender County have involved primarily the
extraction of sand and gravel for construction purposes. There are known deposits of sand and gravel
scattered throughout the county. Such mining interests have ranged from relatively small borrow pits to
more extensive mining operations such as the Martin Marietta quarry in south central Pender County.
Interest in mining took on a new focus in 2000 when an application was filed with the Pender County
Commissioners to open a sand and limestone quarry on farmland in the Rocky Point area of the county.
Specifically, the application was for a special use permit to mine approximately 600 acres on land zoned
industrial located on NC 210 between Interstate 40 and the Northeast Cape Fear River. The proposal also
included another 360 acres to be used as buffers between the mining areas and wetlands, the river and
adjacent properties. According to the application, the proposed mining would take place to a depth of
about 30 feet, requiring pumps to drain the quarry pits below the water table.
Opposition to the proposal arose quickly, coming especially from residents of the nearby Moore Town
neighborhood. Objections were raised, based on alleged sinkhole and groundwater depletion problems
experienced as a result of the nearby Martin Marietta quarry. In addition, concerns were voiced about the
potential for objectionable truck traffic, noise, and vibration.
The Pender County commissioners unanimously rejected the application on April 18, 2000. As of this
writing, the applicant is reportedly appealing the decision of the County Commissioners in superior court.
IPander County and Glenn Harbeck Associates Page 33

Pander County Growth Management Plan
Policy Statements I
For the purposes of this plan, sizable mineral extraction sites usually have the operating characteristics of
a heavy industry as defined above, and shall be evaluated as such when considering the merits of a
particular proposal.
Industrial Style Hog Farms
Today, many hog farm operations no longer fit the image or nature of "farms" of past generations. While
farming has always involved the application of scientific principles to maximize crop yields and animal
husbandry, modern-day hog farm operations have developed the scientific approach to a level never
imagined by farmers of old. Today's hog "farms" involve huge numbers of hogs, requiring industrial -level
inputs as well as producing industrial -level outputs. Of the various outputs of hog farms, the most
controversial is the large volume of hog waste that must be disposed of. Opponents of hog farms cite the
damaging effects of hog waste lagoons in polluting streams. Neighbors of hog farms cite the intense odor
and ground water contamination. For these reasons, hog farms are often not welcome as neighbors.
At the same time, modem hog farms also have industrial -level economic benefits. The agricultural output
of many counties in eastern North Carolina, as measured in dollars of "farm" income, has grown
substantially with the advent of the modern day hog farm. Like any other major industry, income generated
by the hog industry infiltrates the local economy and often has multiplier effects throughout the community.
Rural counties that are struggling to maintain their economies may find hog farms an economically
attractive, if environmentally controversial, development opportunity.
Given these differing views, the economic benefits and environmental costs of hog farms/production
facilities in any community require careful evaluation. Regardless of -how one views the merits of this
industry, however, hog farms should be subject to the same performance standards and controls has any
other industrial operation wishing to locate or expand in the County.
Summary
In final analysis, factors used to identify land appropriate for industrial use need to focus on rail sidings,
road access, water, sewer, natural gas, electric utilities, soil suitability, topography, avoidance of the
floodplain, and other physical factors. Concern for compatibility with nearby residential development must
also be given priority consideration. The Growth Strategy Map accompanying this plan illustrates
graphically those areas of the county that, due to their proximity to water, sewer, rail, highways, or other
strategic assets, are most appropriate for industry.
Industrial Development Policies
Policy 10.1: The County shall encourage a public service and regulatory environment conducive to
industrial development, compatible with environmental quality considerations and the availability
of public financial resources.
Policy 10.2: Industrial development should not be located in areas that would diminish the
desirability of existing and planned nonindustrial uses, nor shall incompatible non -industrial uses
be allowed to encroach upon existing or planned industrial sites.
Policy 10.3: Industrial development shall be located on land that is physically suitable and has
unique locational advantages for industry. Advanced planning for the identification of such land
shall be encouraged.
Policy 10.4: Heavy industrial uses shall be separated from incompatible, non -industrial areas by
natural and man-made features such as green belts, major transportation facilities, transitional
land uses, and/or other suitable means.
F
F
Pander County and Glenn Harbeck Associates Page 34

1 Pender County Growth Management Plan
Policy Statements
Policy 10.6: Light industrial uses may be located in or near existing built up areas to take
advantage of available services and to minimize home to work distances. Careful design and/or
buffering shall be required to ensure compatibility with surrounding areas.
Policy 10.6: Pender County welcomes industries that are compatible with the area's land, water
and air quality resources, and that provide higher paying jobs to the existing labor force.
Policy 10.7: Warehousing, storage and distribution facilities shall have access to appropriate
thoroughfares, and shall be visually buffered according to their location.
1 Policy 10.8: New industrial development shall be encouraged to locate in existing and/or planned
mixed -use industrial parks.
Policy 10.9: Industrial development policies shall apply equally to industrial style operations such
as mineral extraction, large-scale hog and poultry production, and other forms of production that
fit the characteristics, if not the traditional definition of an "industry".
1 Policy Section II: Commercial and Office Development
' Input received at the countywide meeting held for the Growth Management Plan indicated that most
Pender County residents prefer less intensive levels of commercial development than found in their
neighboring county to the south. In fact, many area residents have chosen to live in Pender County
' precisely because of their desire to stay away from that level of commercialism. The end result is that
while most residents support the development of services nearby to meet their basic needs, they do not
favor the stripping of the county's roadways with commercial development from one end to the other.
Commercial strip development, with its traffic congestion, glaring plastic signs, lack of landscaping, and
' the "sea of asphalt parking lots adjoining the highway are characteristics of a style of commercialism that
most residents would rather do without.
Fortunately, from a planning perspective, beneficial commercial development can be accommodated in a
manner that adds value to a community, and avoids most of the pitfalls noted above. Positive measures
that can be taken include:
• Commercial development can be grouped in existing town and village centers or in newly planned
neighborhoods to avoid stripping the highways and destroying the rural, open character of the
county. Thus, when planning a new development from the outset, pedestrian scaled commercial
uses can be incorporated into the "village center" within walking and biking distance of most of the
homes in the development It is important, however, that any such commercial development be
designed with a pedestrian orientation, with residentially scaled architecture, buildings pulled up the
sidewalk and street, parking and other asphalt areas minimized, low key signage and lighting, etc.
• When commercial development must occur along a "country" highway, it should be clustered at the
intersection of two roads, thereby allowing for access from four directions. This also avoids
concentrating all vehicular turning movements on a single roadside, and over a period of years, will
eventually result in the need for fewer traffic signals.
• Commercial signage can be required to occur as ground level, monument style signs, rather than
plasticized, "in your face" pole mounted signs.
• Parking lots can be placed to the side or even the rear of commercial buildings, thereby bringing the
architecture rather than the asphalt closer to the traveling public. Parking lots of adjoining
businesses should also be connected so as to avoid a multitude of unnecessary and unsafe
vehicular turning movements in and out of businesses along a busy highway.
Pender County and Glenn Harbeck Associates Page 35

Pander County Growth Management Plan
Policy Statements I
• Given the high visibility of most commercial developments, it is reasonable to expect that a fair
amount of landscaping and trees should be required. Such landscaping can also double its value
by absorbing and retaining stormwater runoff from parking areas, thereby helping to prevent further
degradation of the county's surface and estuarine waters.
• A row of trees or other natural buffer strip can be left along both sides of the highway, thereby
creating the striking illusion of driving through a corridor of trees, rather than a corridor of asphalt.
This natural buffer area can also be instrumental in reducing stormwater runoff.
It is important to note that all of the above measures are fully within the planning enabling legislation for
local governments as authorized by the State of North Carolina. It requires only the resolve of the County
to put these measures in place through local zoning.
Regarding office and institutional development, this plan recommends that offices be used as a logical
buffer between large-scale commercial uses and residential uses. This may allow office and commercial
uses to be within walking distance of homes, a feature particularly beneficial to Pender County's growing
ranks of senior citizens, who will at some point in their lives, be unable to drive to basic services. It also
creates the opportunity for area residents to walk to places of employment, either in offices or at
commercial establishments. Implementing this policy of planned concentrations of commercial, office and
higher density residential development near major intersections will require amendments to the County
zoning ordinance and the provision of water and sewer service to these planned areas.
Commercial and Office Development Policies
Policy 11.1: Commercial and office development shall be encouraged to locate in planned
shopping centers and mixed use office parks to minimize the proliferation of strip development.
Policy 11.2: Large commercial centers should be located adjacent to the intersections of major
roadways and convenient to mass transit routes; planned concentrations of employment and
housing should be encouraged to locate convenient to these centers.
Policy 11.3: Incompatible commercial encroachment within or immediately adjoining existing
residential areas shall be prohibited. Such incompatible encroachments often include, but are not
limited to, automobile oriented uses such as service stations, car lots, convenient food marts, car
washes, drive through restaurants, and the like. However, mixed use developments, planned from
the outset, which allow for a compatible mixture of uses with a pedestrian scale and design, are
encouraged. Further, businesses may be located adjoining (and therefore convenient to) an
existing residential area, when such businesses can be shown to satisfy design considerations
similar to a newly planned, pedestrian4caled, mixed use development.
Policy 11.4: Neighborhood and convenience commercial centers should be encouraged to locate
at the intersection of a collector street or secondary street with a street of equal or greater size.
They may also be near other neighborhood facilities such as schools and parks.
Policy 11.5: Highway oriented commercial uses should be clustered along segments of highways
and contain land uses which are mutually compatible and reinforcing in use and design; they
should be designed in such a way as to minimize signage, access points, and uncontrolled strip
development. (See esp., Policy 11.11 below concerning connected parking areas.)
Policy 11.6: Rural area commercial development should be limited to local convenience stores,
farm supply stores, and generally accepted rural business establishments.
Policy 11.7: Commercial uses shall be encouraged to develop by consolidation and expansion of
existing commercially zoned property, when such consolidation and expansion does not encroach
upon a viable residential area.
I
u
I
Pender County and Glenn Harbeck Associates Page 36

1 Pender County Growth Management Plan
Policy Statements
Policy 11.8: Strip development along the area's major streets
is and highways shall be discouraged.
Existing strip development shall be reduced and/or zoning should be made more restrictive when
redevelopment opportunities permit. New strip development on isolated single lots along major
streets and highways shall be discouraged.
' Policy 11.9: Attractive, environmentally beneficial landscaping shall be provided by new
commercial or office developments, and in the rehabilitation and upgrading of existing
developments. Effective buffering shall be provided when commercial or office development
adjoins existing or planned residential uses.
Policy 11.10: Office and Institutional development shall be encouraged to locate as a transitional
land use between residential areas and commercial and industrial activities of higher intensity,
where appropriate. "Activities of higher intensity" are typically automobile oriented commercial
development but may also include heavily traveled thoroughfares.
Policy 11.11: Businesses shall be encouraged to coordinate their site designs with other nearby
businesses. Design factors should include, at a minimum, shared or connected parking and
access, convenient pedestrian and vehicular movement, and consistent sign standards.
iPolicy Section 12: Housing and Neighborhood Development
1 In large measure, the types of housing being offered in Pender County are determined by the unique
structure of the local economy, the area's proximity to job centers outside the county, and the
attractiveness of the county's coastal margin as a place to live and retire.
' Demand for °`Lower End" Housing
Pender County's generally modest pay scales have resulted in a niche in the development marketplace for
lower priced housing, particularly for manufactured housing. This demand is evidenced by the large
number of manufactured home placements in the county over the past several decades.
Some observers have noted that counties with industries paying hourly wages in the range of $15 per hour
or more tend to gravitate toward a site -built housing market, while industries in Pender County, oftentimes
paying $8 to $12 per hour, are more inclined to support a manufactured housing market. (See Growth
Factors Analysis for details.) It is apparent that the development community has responded to fill this
demand for relatively inexpensive living space.
In addition, Pender County has less strict development regulations and lower land prices than the more
urbanized New Hanover County to the south. Currently, doublewide manufactured homes are permitted in
every zoning district in Pender County. Singlewides are restricted only from the heavy industrial and
highway business districts. The placement of manufactured housing is largely controlled by restrictive
covenants associated with individual subdivisions.
' These factors tend to work in favor of manufactured housing placements in much of Pender County. In
fact, the Growth Factors Analysis section of this plan shows that in 1990, the most recent year for which
statistics are available, Pender County's housing stock was about 33% in manufactured homes, while
neighboring New Hanover County had only about 10% of its housing stock in manufactured homes.
Manufactured(Affordable Housing is Needed
Perspectives on manufactured housing vary tremendously. On one hand, there is general consensus that
manufactured housing fills a very real need for affordable housing for a substantial segment of the
population. Further, the manufactured home industry today is not the industry it once was. Manufacturing
Pender County and Glenn Harbeck Associates Page 37

Pender County Growth Management Plan
Policy Statements I
standards and methods have been upgraded, and the variety and quality of the end product has improved
markedly. Also, the manufactured home industry has had a very active, effective lobby in Raleigh and at
the local government level to change laws that would inhibit or exclude manufactured homes from an
Foremost
area. among these lobbying efforts has been the industry's successful campaign to see state
legislation passed which invalidates and prevents exclusionary zoning practices that would completely
prohibit the placement of manufactured homes in a community.
Manufactured Housing is Not Always Wanted "Next Door"
On the other hand, there is a long-standing stigma, whether based on real concerns or perceived ones,
that manufactured housing has dampening
a affect on property values in its vicinity. Further, because of
,
this stigma, manufactured homes have traditionally been placed on large lots out in the country or packed
together in manufactured home parks. In either situation, the end result has been that manufactured
homes often wind up being well removed from other developments and from services as well. This can
further contribute to a pattern of sprawl or result in "leapfrog" development patterns. Thus, manufactured
housing is often not favorably received by nearby, pre-existing, site -built neighborhoods. And, while most
rural farm areas are generally quite accepting of manufactured housing on isolated lots, this acceptance
can change if home
a manufactured park is placed in the middle of productive farmland and is occupied
by non -farming residents. The concern is that non -farm residents may complain about the noises, smells,
dust and fertilizers inherent in farming, and can eventually begin to interfere with customary farming
operations.' Finally, there is the local government financial side of manufactured housing to consider.
From a local govemment revenue standpoint, it is an often stated fact that manufactured housing seldom
generates enough revenue in property taxes to pay for what it costs to serve it.2
Future Demand: Smaller Homes, Close to Services
The irony in the previous discussion is that while manufactured housing tends to be placed in locations
well removed from urban services, future demand for such smaller homes will be very close to services.
Over the next several decades (through about the year 2030) the elderly population of the United States is
,
going to grow exponentially. As the baby boom generation, now middle aged, reaches its retirement years,
the ability of our society to deal with the living needs of the elderly will be severely stressed. If this trend
continues, suburban and rural homes, now occupied by baby boomers and their families, will eventually be
filled with elderly residents who can no longer drive their cars. Homes in these typical single-family
residential developments will be inconvenient to shopping and medical facilities. Despite the obvious need,
bus service, if available at all, will be very expensive to provide. This will be due to the inefficiencies and
high costs of serving these large lot and/or sprawling areas. Group housing and nursing homes, costly
even today, will likely be unable to meet the long-term care needs of the multitudes. Several solutions to
this potential problem are offered in the paragraphs immediately following.
Affordable Housing. Accessory and Infill Housing
The single-family house on the individual lot has been part of the American dream for at least the past fifty
years. But such housing, whether site built or manufactured, may not be the best form of affordable
housing available to meet the coming challenge of housing a burgeoning senior citizen population.
Addressing this problem may require some new, old ways of thinking about how neighborhoods are built.
Accessory or "infill" housing provides an opportunity to address this problem. Specifically, this term refers
to old notions of extended families sharing residency on a single property. granny flats, basement or
upstairs apartments, garage apartments, and ground level additions are all forms of accessory housing.
By the way, these same concerns would be true of a site built residential subdivision. It's just that you seldom see new
manufactured home parks locating within an existing, heavily urbanized city or town. More often, they are out in the country.
2 This has been shown to be especially true in the area of school costs. In fad, studies have shown that most forms of residential
development, including average, site -built single-family residences, 'don't pay their own way'. Most local governments generate a
favorable costfrevenue balance from their farmland, their commercial and industrial tax bases, and from their most expensive
residential areas. (See Policy Section 9: Paying for Growth for details.)
'
Pender County and Glenn Harbeck Associates Page 38

IPender County Growth Management Plan
Policy Statements
' Many residential lots in Pender County, for example, average 20,000 to 40,000 square feet per lot. The
size of these lots affords ample opportunity for attractively designed garage apartments or detached
granny flats. Small accessory apartments could also be built within the walls of the main house or built on
as an addition. Regardless of the approach used, such units would be highly affordable to build, because
there would be no additional land costs. In the event that the accessory unit were leased to a paying
tenant, rent from the accessory unit would absorb some of the land cost associated with the main house,
thereby making both housing units more affordable. (By the way, these are not new concepts by any
means. Consider the "carriage house* of one hundred fifty years ago.)
Other Advantages of Accessory and Infill Housing
' Accessory or infill housing offers several other•advantages, both social and economic. First, such housing
could provide for the healthy mixing of young and old. The once traditional supportive relationship between
the elderly, the middle aged, and the young would again be restored, passing the wisdom and experiences
of our elders onto the next generation. Second, public transit, now uneconomical to operate in the suburbs
and other low -density areas, could become more feasible to operate with the addition of more housing
units in the same area of land. Third, the addition of public transit would not only meet the needs of the
non -driving elderly population, but would also encourage working age people to use the bus system.
Fourth, from the developer's perspective, many more affordable housing units could be provided without
the cost of building expensive infrastructure (streets, sidewalks, water, sewer, power and telephone lines,
etc.) Fifth, from the property owner's perspective, supervision of a tenant, if applicable, would be relatively
automatic given the full time presence of the owner in the main residence. And sixth, the community's
costs of servicing the population and maintaining the infrastructure would remain relatively constant,
despite the larger numbers of people served.
' Trend Toward Higher Standards for Manufactured Housing
For the past several decades, the manufactured housing industry has been working to overcome its
former "tin can' image. In fact, it wasn't until 1976 when the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development set forth minimum standards for manufactured home construction that the Industry's image
began to change for the better. Since that time, the quality and appearance of manufactured housing has
' steadily improved and continues to move toward higher standards. In general, the manufactured housing
industry has recognized that it must do so to compete effectively in the marketplace for the housing dollar.
J
,,I
7
L
Recommendation Concerning Regulation of Manufactured Housing
As noted previously, Pender County allows both singlewide and doublewide manufactured housing
virtually anywhere in the county. This causes instability in property values due to the stigma, whether right
or wrong, of having lower value, singlewide manufactured housing placed adjoining higher value, single-
family site built homes. This plan therefore recommends that the County designate, through its zoning
ordinance, certain areas of the County for single-family site built housing, and compatible, doublewide
manufactured housing. Such compatible doublewide manufactured housing should have, at a minimum, a
permanent masonry foundation, pitched roof and overhang;. Areas outside the single-family site
built/double wide district would continue to be available for the placement of both doublewide and
singlewide manufactured homes.
'Studies have shown that a manufactured home on a permanent masonry foundation usually has a greater initial
value, and maintains its value much better than a manufactured home with only a temporary or vinyl skirt.
Permanent masonry foundations, along with other improved standards for roof pitch, eave overhang, siding
materials, building orientation and other factors help remove the stigma of manufactured housing. They also make
manufactured homes more compatible with nearby site built homes, and contribute in a positive way to the
stabilization of property values and the fiscal health of the County.
The Issue of Paved Public Roads Versus Unpaved Private Roads
One of the biggest issues concerning residential development in Pender County today is the debate over
public versus private roads. Currently, County subdivision regulations require that public roads must be
Pender County and Glenn Harbeck Associates Page 39

Pander County Growth Management Plan
Policy Statements I
paved and must meet NCDOT standards. Private roads, on the other hand, need not be paved, but must
meet NCDOT standards for minimum width and other factors. Subdivisions with private roads also must
have a homeowners association and they must be assessed for the maintenance of such roads.
Advocates on the side of allowing for unpaved roads argue that not everyone wants to live on a paved
road. They would also argue that unpaved roads help keep development costs down and therefore help
provide for affordable housing. (Some even argue that unpaved, private roads should not have to meet
Lny NC DOT standards.)
Opponents of unpaved roads argue that while they may sound good initially, too often they become
maintenance "headaches" over the longer term. It was noted, for example, that perhaps 25 percent of all
calls into the County Manager's office have to do with road maintenance and/or the desire to have the
State take over substandard roads in existing subdivisions. Complaints about school buses refusing to go
down rutted, unpaved roads after a rain are not unusual. Ambulance and fire truck access may also be
hampered.
,
Thus, while developers can save money by building unpaved roads, such developers are out of the picture
after they have sold the lots, and may then leave a legacy of poor roads to the residents of these
,
neighborhoods.
This plan holds that allowing for unpaved roads for anything other than the smallest of subdivisions (i.e. 3
lots) is
an example of failing to properly pay for infrastructure at the time of development and then
postponing the costs of such infrastructure to a later date. The policies of this plan state that developers
should bear the cost of infrastructure and services related to new development at the time of the initial
development Pender County is not doing itself or its residents any favors by allowing substandard
'
development into the County. Sooner or later such substandard development begins to deteriorate, taking
the neighborhood and the county's tax base down with it
Residential Lot Size and Development Density
Pender County currently has the following standards for residential lot sizes:
jM of Lot Water and Sewer Services Available Gross densib/dwellina unit
Conventional with Individual Well and Septic Tank 20,000 fe
Conventional with Community Well and Septic Tank 15,000 fe
Conventional Individual
with Well and Community Sewer 15,000 fe
Conventional with Community Well and Community Sewer 10,000 fe
Planned Development Flexible, depending upon services available
These basic
standards set the stage for any residential development in Pender County. From a planning
standpoint, it is important to note that such lot sizes (i.e. 10,000 to 20,000 square feet) are neither urban
(at least 6 units per acre) nor rural (not less than 5 acres per unit) in character. Rather, this type of
intermediate lot size has the unfortunate consequence of consuming a great deal of land per housing unit,
and therefore results in a wasteful, sprawling development pattern. The good aspect of this situation,
however, is that with such intermediate lot sizes, there is opportunity to encourage more desirable forms .
of development- that consume less land while maintaining a relatively low density. (See section below on
'
greenspace development.)
Greenspace Development
Greenspace development is a term used to describe a form of residential development that retains a large
proportion of its acreage in permanently dedicated greenspace (open space). In the Pender County
Zoning Ordinance, greenspace development may be accommodated under the Planned Development ,
District.
Pender County and Glenn Harbeck Associates Page 40

IPander County Growth Management Plan
Policy Statements
' Greenspace development achieves beneficial open space by clustering the homes of the development
into a compact area, leaving the balance of the property in its natural state, or in improved open space
such as a golf course. For example, if a developer had a five acre tract of land (about 217,800 square
feet), instead of carving out ten lots of about 20,000 square feet each, he could cluster the ten homes on
about one third of the land tract (about 71,874 square feet) and leave the remaining two-thirds of the tract
(about 145,926 square feet) in permanently dedicated open space. In summary, the numbers would look
like this:
Conventional Development Greenspace Development
' Total acreage available 217,800 square feet 217,800 square feet
Total homes built 10 10
Acreage cleared for development 217,800 square feet 71,874 square feet
Acreage left in open space 0 145,926 square feet
Advantages of greenspace development
Greenspace development can minimize the environmental impacts of new development on land and water
resources. This is especially important in the environmentally sensitive coastal environment of Pender
County. It can also reduce the costs of providing public services to an area, thereby conserving tax dollars.
From the private sector standpoint, greenspace development curtails many of the expenses associated
with extending infrastructure such as roads, water and sewer to conventional, sprawling development.
This reduces the developer's costs, ultimately making home ownership more affordable. Specific
advantages of greenspace development are outlined as follows:
' (1) Streets are shorter, resulting in less paving and less stormwater run-off.
(2) Water and sewer lines are shorter, making for less costly infrastructure development and
' subsequent less costly maintenance of such pipes.
(3) Other utilities, such as telephone, TV cable, electricity, natural gas, are all less costly to install and
maintain.
(4) Garbage collection is more efficient and therefore less costly.
(5) Mail delivery is more efficient and therefore less costly.
(6) School bus pickups are more efficient and therefore less costly.
(7) Greenspace development can help make alternatives to the automobile such as public transit,
possible.
(8) When developed in conjunction with neighborhood shops (such as a grocery store, drug store,
hardware store, etc.) other alternatives to the automobile such as a walking and bicycling also
become possible. If accomplished on a widespread basis, this can result in significant decreases
' in traffic growth and congestion on major roadways in the county.
(9) Greenspace development allows the developer to place homes on the portion of any site most
suited for development while leaving environmentally fragile or more costly areas (for example,
steep slopes, wet soils) in permanent open space.
' (10) Greenspace development draws neighbors closer together socially and provides for greater
security and safety.
(11) Greenspace development can provide potential recreational opportunities to residents living
within the neighborhood.
(12) Overall, studies have shown that greenspace development has a more favorable "tax to service
cost ratio" for local government than conventional large lot development. This translates into
greater efficiencies in local government service delivery, and ultimately, lower taxes for county tax
Payers.
Sewage Treatment and Greenspace Development
Some observers have noted that minimum land area requirements for septic tanks and their nitrification
fields may ultimately be the controlling factor in determining the feasibility of greenspace developments.
That is, 20,000 square feet is normally the minimum lot size needed for individual wells and septic tanks.
Pander County and Glenn Harbeck Associates Page 41

Pender County Growth Management Plan
Policy Statements I
On its face, this observation would seem to have merit. However, there are several ways of dealing with
this issue:
(1) Homes in a greenspace developments can be clustered in a compact grouping with each home's
nitrification lines leading outward and away from the grouping.
(2) Larger developments can employ package treatment plants to serve the development.
(3) Community based, common (shared) nitrification fields can be employed to serve several homes
via an interconnected collection system.
(4) Recent initiatives to provide central sewer service to the north end of the county would eliminate
the need for septic tanks there.
(5) Existing centralized sewer services are provided by some municipalities in the county, thereby 1
eliminating the need for septic tanks.
Surge of Housing Development in Hampstead and Rocky Point Townships
Recent years have witnessed the rapid growth and development of the southern and eastern portions of
Pender County where access to the job centers of Wilmington and New Hanover County are most
convenient. It comes as no surprise that a significant percentage of the county's labor force travels across
the county line to work. The pace of growth in housing in these two townships is rapidly turning these
areas into bedroom communities for the Wilmington urbanizing area. With this growth has come pressure
for commercial developments to serve these residents, and for infrastructure to support this growth (i.e.
enhanced water, centralized sewer, road improvements, schools and parks) The fiscal and service
implications of this area continuing to develop as a bedroom communityare more fully discussed under
the Growth Factors Analysis of this report.
Compact Growth Near Existing Community Centers Preferred
,
In keeping with the more compact "town and country* growth pattern recommended by this plan, the
County
should discourage the development of isolated residential areas, remote from services. Rather,
the County should encourage new residential development to locate in or near existing towns or other
community centers. Ideally, different parts of the county should have different housing types at different
densities to meet differing housing needs. Pender County policies should encourage the provision of many
housing types to accommodate a variety of buyers at various income levels and tastes. Within such areas,
the County should support a wide range of residential development forms, including site built single family
and multi -family units, as well as manufactured homes in well -planned developments.
As
stated in the first section of this plan, the issue is not whether people are going to continue to move to
Pender County, but how the county intends to accommodate them. The issue is not whether additional
residential development is going to happen, but rather, where the county chooses to encourage it and in
what form.
Housing and Neighborhood Development Policies
Policy 12.1: The County shall encourage development to occur at densities appropriate for their ,
location. Location factors shall include whether the development is within an environmentally
sensitive area, the type of sewage treatment available to the site, and the proximity of the site to
existing urban services.
Policy 12.2: All developments in the unincorporated county shall be encouraged to employ '
greenspace development as an environmentally sound, economically cost effective, and visually
attractive alternative to large lot sprawl.
Policy 12.3: The protection and rehabilitation of viable neighborhoods shall be encouraged to
ensure their continued existence as a major housing source. Housing shall be encouraged to meet
or exceed minimum standards for health, safety and welfare.
Pander County and Glenn Harbeck Associates Page 42

IPender County Growth Management Plan
Policy Statements
Policy 12A Proposed residential development that would expose residents to the harmful effects
of incompatible development or to environmental hazards shall be prohibited.
Policy 12.5: Site development and appearance standards for manufactured housing shall be
largely equivalent to those of site built housing, when located in or near existing site built housing
of moderate or higher density. Such standards shall include requirements for doublewide size, a
' permanent masonry foundation, and a pitched roof and overhang.
Policy 12.6: Innovative and flexible land planning and development practices shall be encouraged
' to create neighborhoods which better safeguard land, water, energy and historic resources.
Policy 12.7: Factors in determining preferred locations for higher density residential development
shall Include: close proximity to employment and shopping centers, access to major
thoroughfares and transit systems, the availability of public services and facilities, and
compatibility with adjacent areas and land uses.
Policy 12.8: The County shall not allow significant (i.e. greater than 3 lots- total, not incremental)
new or expanded development to locate on new or existing unimproved, private roads.
Improvement of such roads to state standards, with provisions for long-term maintenance, shall
be required.
Policy 12.9: New developments shall provide for the installation of infrastructure (e.g. paved
roads, stormwater facilities, park and open space areas, etc.) at the time of development This
policy Is intended to prevent the creation of substandard developments which must later pay for
Infrastructure that should have been Installed from the beginning.
Policy 12.10: While not precluding senior housing elsewhere, the County shall encourage housing
for retirees to be placed in locations (1) that are convenient to urban services, including medical
care, and (2) that allow for transportation alternatives to the automobile.
Policy 12.11: All forms of housing development should be discouraged from "leapfrogging" into
the countryside, thereby destroying the rural character of Pender County, breaking up farmland,
and making the provision of urban services more costly to homebuyers and taxpayers.
Policy 12.12: Pender County shall seek to accommodate the development and appropriate
placement of a variety of housing types, including site built homes, apartments, townhouses,
granny flats, garage apartments, accessory living units, and manufactured homes.
Policy Section 13: Waterfront and Waterborne Development
' Marinas and Upland Excavation for Marina Basins
' CAMA standards define marinas as any publicly or privately owned dock, basin or wet boat storage facility
constructed to accommodate more than ten boats and providing any of the following services: permanent
or transient docking spaces, dry storage, fueling facilities, haulout facilities and repair services. Excluded
from this definition are boat ramp facilities allowing access only, temporary docking and none of the
' preceding services.
Benefits of marina development include improved recreational access to area waters, often at no expense
to the taxpayer. Marinas also provide employment income and bring sales revenue into the local economy.
At the same time, marinas have been shown to have adverse impacts on water quality in their vicinity. It is
largely because of this concern that the County has elected to preclude new marinas and upland
Pender County and Glenn Harbw* Associates Page 43

Pender County Growth Management Plan
Policy Statements
excavations for marina basins from occurring in those parts of the County where estuarine water quality
remains quite pristine and the County is determined to keep it that way.
Policy 13.1: There shall be no new marinas allowed in or adjacent to water designated Outstanding
Resource Waters, including adjacent to Futch Creek, Mill Creek and Old Topsail creek or in the
1,000 foot ORW area, which includes water bodies within 1,000 feet of designated Outstanding
Resource Waters. All development proposals must be consistent with North Carolina General
Statutes.
'
Policy 13.2: Because of the potential negative impacts marinas can have on environmentally
sensitive areas such as designated Outstanding Resource Waters (currently designated as being
between Rich's Inlet and New Topsail Inlet), the County will not permit new marina facilities in this
area. Such facilities must also be consistent with North Carolina General Statutes.
Policy 13.2: Upland for
excavation marina basins adjacent to water bodies may be permitted from
the opening to Old Topsail Creek northwest to the Onslow, County line. Upland excavation for new
marinas shall not be permitted along Futch Creek, Mill Creek, or Old Topsail Creek or along any
,
upland areas adjacent to Outstanding Resource Waters.
Dry Stack Facilities
Dry
'
stack storage facilities can require substantial amounts of associated parking, are significant traffic
generators, and may contribute to boating congestion within the vicinity of the dry stack marina. On the
positive side, however, dry stack marinas can accommodate the boat storage needs of a large number of
"consuming"
boat owners, without valuable public trust waters. For this reason, the County views dry stack
marinas, on balance, as the preferable alternative to traditional wetslip marinas. Dry stack facilities shall
be permitted in Pender County as a Special Use and in accordance with the Pender County Zoning
Ordinance and not to exceed 35 feet in height. Dry stacking will not be allowed in areas adjoining ORW
waters.
Policy 13.3: To minimize "consumption" of valuable public trust surface waters, dry stack storage
marinas generally shall be preferred over wetslip marinas. Dry stack storage facilities shall be
evaluated for site -specific compatibility with surrounding land uses, as well as for aesthetic
concerns, parking, access, and available services.
Floating Homes '
According to CAMA guidelines, a floating structure is..."any structure not a boat, supported by a means of
floatation designed to be used without a permanent foundation, which is used or intended for human
habitation or commerce. A structure will be considered a floating structure when it is inhabited or used for
commercial purposes for more than 30 days in any one location. A boat may be deemed a floating
structure when its means of propulsion has been removed or rendered inoperative and it contains at least ,
200 square feet of living space area."
Floating home development is not viewed by area residents as having any significant benefit to the county.
The environmental, aesthetic and public trust area problems associated with such development are
deemed to far outweigh any potential economic benefits gained.
Policy 13.4: Floating home development shall not be permitted within the County's planning ,
jurisdiction, Including waterways, public trust waters, and along the shorelines of the county, so
as to prevent the unwanted "consumption" of limited surface waters.
U
Pander County and Glenn Harbeck Associates Page 44

IPender County Growth Management Plan
Policy Statements
IMoorings and Mooring Fields
According to CAMA Use Standards, a "free standing mooring' is any means. to attach a ship, boat, vessel,
floating structure or other watercraft to a stationary underwater device, mooring buoy, buoyed anchor, or
piling (as long as the piling is not associated with an existing or proposed pier, dock, or boathouse).
According to CAMA Standards, free standing moorings shall be permitted under two circumstances:
(1) to riparian property owners within their riparian corridors or
(2) to any applicant proposing to locate a mooring buoy consistent with a water use plan that may be
incorporated into either the local zoning or land use plan.
Until such time as the County and the various beach communities undertake the development of a water
use plan, and the issue can be addressed in a comprehensive manner, the granting of freestanding
moorings shall be deferred to CAMA standards as promulgated by the State.
Policy 13.5: The installation of freestanding moorings and mooring fields may be permitted only in
accordance with CAMA development standards, including consistency with the policy
recommendations of a water use plan. The unimpeded use of and navigation within public trust
surface waters by the boating public shall be of primary concern.
Bulkheads in Marsh Areas
Bulkheads are man-made structures (walls) that are intended to "fix" the shoreline's edge to a particular
location. Bulkheads often create a clear breakpoint between the dry land behind them and the water's
edge in front of them. Unfortunately, in doing so, they often destroy natural features which give the
shoreline its resiliency and environmental value. One such natural feature often found along the estuarine
' shoreline is salt marsh.
As research concerning shoreline management has advanced through the years, the many values of salt
marsh adjoining the waters edge have become better understood. First, marsh along the waters edge
helps stabilize the bank and prevents landside sloughing of the shoreline. Second, the marsh serves as a
buffer in preventing wave action from eroding the shoreline. Third, such marsh acts as an effective filter,
screening out pollutants contained in surface runoff entering the estuary. Finally, salt marsh provides
' important habitat for many creatures critical to the coastal ecosystem.
In light of the value of salt marshes, and the potential negative impacts of bulkheads on the marsh, CAMA
' development standards have been set forth which seek to minimize bulkhead damage, while still allowing
for their installation. In general, CAMA standards require that bulkheads be installed only along shorelines
which have no marsh vegetation or where their construction is to be accomplished landward of such
vegetation.
rPender County policy concerning bulkheads, however, distinguishes between bulkhead installation in or
near coastal (saltwater) wetlands and their installation in or near inland (freshwater) wetlands. Generally,
coastal wetlands are defined as any salt marsh or marsh subject to regular or occasional flooding by lunar
or wind tides. Freshwater swamps and inland wetlands are not covered by CAMA standards; however,
these areas are protected by the Clean Water Act and an Army Corps of Engineers permit is required to
work in such wetlands. Pender County policy is to allow the installation of bulkheads in freshwater swamp
areas, provided that all applicable permits can be obtained, and to prohibit installation of bulkheads along
estuarine shorelines.
' Policy 13.6: Pender County shall allow the Installation of bulkheads in freshwater swamps if all
necessary local, state and federal permits can be obtained and all applicable regulations to protect
freshwater swamps are followed.
Docks and Piers
See Section on Public Trust Waters concerning policies on the length of piers.
Pender County and Glenn Harbeck Associates Page 45

Ponder County Growth Management Plan
Policy Statements I
C. RESOURCE PROTECTION AND USE
'
Policy Section 14: Agricultural and Rural Area Preservation
9 ervatlon
Farm statistics nationwide reveal a long-term trend toward decreases in agricultural employment and
cropland acreage over many decades. Pender County is no exception to this trend. While the amount of
acreage in cropland has fluctuated somewhat from year to year, the overall trend over many decades is
toward declining acreage in farmland (US Census of Agriculture, various years). Over the past two
decades
in particular, the county has experienced the conversion of substantial amounts -of agricultural
land into residential and commercial development. Much of the dissolution of the countryside has been the
result of sprawling, leapfrog development in previously rural areas of the county. This is not surprising, in
that many of the same factors that make land good for farming, also make land good for development -
well drained, already cleared, relatively level, fertile for growing crops (or lawns and shrubbery), etc.
Farmland and Open Space Hold Value for All County Residents
County residents who participated in the countywide meeting for the Growth Management Plan, having
witnessed farmland losses first hand, expressed a consistent desire to see that the loss of rural and
agricultural lands be stemmed. Their comments reveal that the rural, agricultural, and other open space
areas of Pender County hold different values to different residents. For farmers in Pender County, the
preservation of agricultural land can mean the preservation of a livelihood and a way of life handed down
for generations. The active production of farmland also contributes to the economy of Pender County, the
State of North Carolina, and the nation. For urban dwellers, the preservation of farmland and woodland '
can mean the protection of open space and greenery, and the provision of visual relief to the more intense
development character of the county's towns. Regardless of the specific type of open space— agricultural,
rural, or wooded— such lands are becoming increasingly recognized across the country— and locally —for
the multiple values they hold.
Farmland and Open Space Pays for Itself
For county government, retention of farmland and open space offers the promise of a favorable balance I
sheet when comparing taxes generated versus service costs incurred. Various studies have shown that,
contrary to conventional wisdom, open space, farms, and woodlands have a more favorable ratio of taxes '
to service costs than most forms of residential development. (See Policy Section 9: Paying for Growth, for
more information.)
Compact Growth and a "Town and Country" Growth Pattern
,
The County believes that the best way to preserve the countryside is to do a better job of building distinct
towns and villages. This plan refers to such a development pattern as "town and country". (See Policy
Section
1 on Preferred Growth Pattern for details). This means new development in appropriate village or
town settings, rather than in indiscriminate, sprawling, suburban -style subdivisions. Growth management
policies that encourage a more compact urban growth pattern have the dual benefit of building a more
economically efficient, serviceable community while also conserving agricultural and rural land areas.
Foremost among the methods that can be employed to encourage the compact growth associated with a
"town
and country" pattern is the strategic placement of urban infrastructure, such as public water and
sewer, to direct growth away from prime agricultural lands, and open space, as well as environmentally
sensitive land and water areas.
,
Ability of the Farmer to Sell His Land for Development
The preservation of farmland and family farms raises the question of whether the policies of this Growth
,
Management Plan would constrain the ability of farmers to sell their land for development. The policies of
this plan are not designed to prevent the sale of land, but rather to discourage its premature conversion
'
Pender County and Glenn Harbeck Associates Page 46

IPender County Growth Management Plan
Policy Statements
from farming to development. In other words, this plan recognizes that as an area grows, development
has the tendency to expand into the countryside. The objective of this plan is not to halt such expansion,
but to consolidate it so as to prevent important farmland from being broken up by intrusive, leapfrog
development. By definition, leapfrog development passes over land that is ripe for development in favor of
cheaper land farther out of town. Unfortunately, such development typically places new subdivisions in the
midst of productive farmland and leads to conflicts between the new, non -farm residents, and the farmer
' trying to make a living. Soon after moving in, residents in these developments may complain about the
noise, smell, dust, mud on roads, etc. often associated with farming activities. Therefore, the theme of
these policies, to be simply put might be: "Not premature development, not leapfrog development, but
development in its time!
Farmland, Development Pressures, and Properly Taxes
Another reason to discourage leapfrog growth is to curtail the development pressures that can force a
farmer to "sell out to development' before he is ready to. When sprawling, leapfrog development places
pressure on farmland, and nearby sales reflect increased property values, the county tax office may reflect
this new value in the taxes assessed to the property. With the higher land value, an increasing portion of
' the farmer's income must then go to pay taxes that, in turn, become an important factor in selling the farm.
Agricultural and Silvicultural Districts
In recent years, several North Carolina counties have implemented agricultural preservation districts to
help protect farmland from premature development. Some programs include the placement of signs along
the roadside announcing to prospective developers and homebuyers that they are entering a designated
agricultural preservation district. The intent of the program and these signs is to forewarn prospective
homebuyers that if they build in this area, they should expect the types of activities associated with farming
(i.e. dirt and dust, livestock waste and odors, farm machinery on the highway, etc.). The programs are
thus designed to help warn off conflicts between new, non -farming residents and surrounding farming
' interests.
Agricultural and Rural Area Preservation Policies
Policy 14.1: Agriculture and very low -density residential activities shall be the preferred land uses
in rural and active agricultural areas.
Policy 14.2: Rural and active agricultural area lands having a high productive potential shall be
conserved, to the extent possible, for appropriate agricultural use.
Policy 14.3: Farms and woodlands shall be recognized as an integral part of the planning area's
open space system.
Policy 14.4: County actions concerning infrastructure and regulations shall serve to direct new
development first to compact, targeted growth areas near existing towns. New development shall
be discouraged from "leapfrogging" to locations in the midst of family farmland, woodland or
other valuable open spaces.
Policy 14.5: County actions should provide protection to existing agricultural and silvicultural
activities from incompatible land uses.
Pender County and Glenn Harbeck Associates Page 47

Pander County Growth Management Plan Policy Statements
Policy Section 15: Estuarine Area Resources I
Areas of Environmental Concern, Generally
The Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) of North Carolina calls for the identification of certain
environmentally fragile and important land and water areas that are judged to be of greater than local
significance. The Coastal Resources Commission (CRC), in cooperation with local governments in the
twenty county coastal area, has developed a program of permit review within these areas of environmental
concern (AEC's). The intent of the regulatory program is not to stop development but, rather, to insure the
compatibility of the development with the continued productivity and value of certain critical land and water
areas. Each basic AEC category is summarized below with the applicable policy statement immediately
'
following. The reader is urged to consult with the full definition and State -promulgated use standards of
each AEC category before contemplating development in these areas.
Policy 15.1: Pender County
will support and enforce, through its CAMA Minor Permitting capacity,
the State policies and permitted uses in the Areas of Environmental Concern (AEC's). Acceptable
uses within the individual AEC's of the estuarine system shall be those that require water access
and or cannot function elsewhere. Such uses shall be In accord with the general use standards for
'
coastal wetlands, estuarine waters, and public trust areas as stated in 15A NCAC Subchapter 7H.
Note: The first fourAEC's described below together make up the so-called estuarine system AEC's.
Coastal Wetlands, Estuarine Waters, Estuarine Shorelines, and Public Trust Waters. They are presented
as a system ofAEC's due to the strong degree to which they are ecologically interrelated.
Coastal Wetland AEC'S
,
Coastal wetland AEC's are marshes, subject to regular or occasional flooding by tides, including normal
wind tides. In Pender County, these are predominantly salt -water marshes associated with the sounds and
'
intracoastal waterway. These marshlands serve as a critical component in the coastal ecosystem. The
marsh is the basis for the high productivity of the estuary which is the primary input source for the food
chain of the entire coastal environment. Estuarine dependent species of fish and shellfish, such as
menhaden, shrimp, flounder, oysters, and crabs, contribute tremendous value to the economy of North
'
Carolina's commercial and recreational fisheries.
Marsh plants found in coastal wetlands include saltwater cordgrass S artina alterniflora , Black
Needlerush Juncus roemerianus), Glasswort Salicomia spp.), Salt Grass (Distichlis spicata), Sea
Lavender (Limonium, spp.), Salt Meadow Grass (Spartina patens), and Salt Reed Grass S artina
cynosuroides). The roots and rhizomes and seeds of the marsh grasses serve as food for waterfowl, and
the stems as wildlife nesting material. The tidal marsh also serves as the first line of defense in retarding
'
estuarine shoreline erosion. The plant stems and leaves tend to dissipate wave action while the vast
network of roots resists soil erosion. Coastal wetlands operate additionally as traps for sediments,
nutrients and pollutants originating from upland runoff. Siltation of the estuarine bottom is reduced, and
pollutants and excess nutrients absorbed by plants do not burden the coastal waters.
'
These marshes should be considered unsuitable for all development and for those land uses that would
alter their natural functions. '
Policy 15.2: Due to the critical role that wetlands play in protecting the quality of estuarine waters
and In providing habitat for fish and wildlife, the County strongly supports the designation and '
preservation of all remaining coastal wetlands. Acceptable land uses may include utility
easements, fishing piers, and docks. Examples of uses NOT permitted include restaurants,
businesses, residences, apartments, motels, hotels, parking lots, private roads, and highways. '
Pender County and Glenn Harbeck Associates Page 48

1 Pender County Growth Management Plan Policy Statements
Estuarine Water AEC'S
Estuarine Waters are found in semi -enclosed water bodies having free connection with the open sea and
within which seawater is measurably diluted with fresh water drained from the adjacent land. The
immense productivity of estuary waters results largely from unique circulation patterns, nutrient trapping
mechanisms, and the protective habitats they provide. Estuarine circulation, influenced by tidal currents,
fresh water influx, and shallow bottom depth, keeps the estuarine waters well flushed, dispersing nutrients,
juvenile stages, and wastes. In their natural state, these waters provide many diverse and productive
habitats. Common features in estuarine waters include mud flats, eel grass beds, clam and oyster beds,
and fish and shellfish nursery areas.
In Pender County, estuarine waters are found in the Intracoastal Waterway, and throughout the sound
areas, including numerous large and small creeks. All estuarine waters in the county are generally
classified SA, the highest (least polluted) water quality category, though sections of several creeks along
the mainland side of the sound area have been closed to shellfishing. The southernmost one third of the
county's sound area was nominated and designated as Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW's) by the
state. (See Policy Section on ORW s below for details). Virtually the entire estuarine area of Pender
County, between the barrier islands on the east and the mainland on the west, is considered a Primary
Nursery Area for marine life.
The high value of commercial and sports fisheries and the aesthetic appeal of coastal North Carolina,
including Pender County, are dependent upon the conservation and protection of its estuarine waters.
Appropriate uses in and around estuarine waters are those that preserve estuarine waters so as to
safeguard and perpetuate their biological, economic and aesthetic values.
' Acceptable uses should be water dependent uses such as navigable channels, piers and docks, and
mooring pilings, provided that they do not directly or indirectly block or impair existing navigation channels,
increase shoreline erosion, deposit spoils below mean high tide, cause adverse water circulation patterns,
violate water quality standards or cause degradation of shellfish waters. In keeping with this objective, the
County's policy statement concerning estuarine waters gives highest priority to conserving and protecting
their ecological value.
Policy 15.3(1) Appropriate uses within estuarine waters may Include simple access channels,
structures which prevent erosion, navigational channels, and private boat docks, piers, and
mooring pilings. Construction of new marinas is not permitted in or near Outstanding Resource
Waters. Piers and docks for non water dependent commercial uses are also prohibited.
Policy 15.3(2) Any development or activity that will profoundly and adversely affect coastal and
' estuarine waters will not be allowed. In the design, construction and operation of water dependent
structures, efforts must be made to mitigate negative effects on water quality and fish habitat, as
determined by NCAC 15A Subchapter 7H and the Coastal Resources Commission.
Public Trust Waters AEC'S
Pubic Trust Waters in Pender County generally are all ocean and estuarine waters from the mean high
' water mark to the seaward limit of State jurisdiction. The State of North Carolina supports the traditional
public rights of access to and use of Public Trust Waters for purposes including navigation, fishing, and
recreation. These areas support valuable commercial and sports fisheries, have aesthetic value, and are
important resources for economic development. Navigation channels, piers, and marinas are examples of
' uses which may be found acceptable in Public Trust Waters, provided they are consistent with all other
local growth management policies and use standards of the State.
An issue of growing concern in Pender County and on recreational waters throughout the nation has been
the advent of the jet ski and other similar personal watercraft Concerns have been raised regarding the
tendencies of jet skiers to operate these watercraft in a reckless manner. Other concerns relate to their
operation in marshes and other shallow water estuaries, where damage to the marsh may occur and
Pender County and Glenn Harbeck Associates Page 49

Ponder County Growth Management Plan
Policy Statements I
where wildfowl is disturbed. In recent years, efforts have been underway at the State and local level to
develop standards for the safe and environmentally acceptable operation of these watercraft.
A second issue of concern in Pender County, particularly along some of the creeks feeding into the
waterway, is the trend toward lengthy piers extending considerable distances out into public trust waters.
As prime waterfront sites —those with deep water close to shore have become developed, remaining
'Waterfront' sites have been building longer piers to reach water of adequate depth for boat dockage. This
oftentimes results in unsightly and environmentally damaging piers extending out into the coastal marsh.
And, while State regulations require that such piers shall not block stream channels, the effect in many
instances is to inhibit the movement of watercraft in the shallow water estuary. This is most evident at high
tide when small boats, which would normally have free movement through the estuary, must constrain
their navigation to limited pockets of open water, essentially fenced in by these long pier lengths. In the
case of small shallow draft sailing craft, the presence of these long piers may prevent tacking within the
creek area, effectively precluding the craft from sailing through the affected body of water. Thus, the
County's policy reserves the right to be more restrictive than the State's standards where the public's right
to the reasonable, unobstructed use of public trust waters is being compromised.
Policy 15.4(1) Any use that significantly interferes with the public right of navigation or other
public trust rights shall be prohibited. Projects which would directly or indirectly block or impair
existing navigational channels, increase shoreline erosion, deposit spoils below mean high water,
cause adverse water circulation patterns, violate water quality standards, or cause degradation of
shellfish waters also shall be prohibited.
Policy 15.4(2) The County shall seek to ensure the responsible use of jet skis and other similar
"personal" watercraft within the public trust waters of Ponder County. Responsible use shall mean
controlled, predictable movements similar to other powered watercraft while in navigation
channels, marinas, and other regularly trafficked areas, and their prohibition In marshes and other
shallow water estuaries, where damage to the resource is likely.
Policy 15.4(3) CAMA standards designed to limit the length of docks and piers as they project into
public trust waters shall be considered the minimum standards, with the County reserving the
right to be more restrictive where the use of public trust waters and environmental protection
issues warrant.
Estuarine Shoreline AEC'S
Estuarine Shorelines are non -ocean shorelines extending from the mean high water level along the
estuarine sound area for a distance of 75 feet landward. Although characterized as dry land and thus
potentially "developable", estuarine shorelines are considered a component of the estuarine system
because of the close association with adjacent estuarine waters. These shorelines may be especially
vulnerable to erosion, flooding, or other adverse affects of wind and water and are intimately connected to
the estuary.
Because development within the estuarine shoreline AEC can harm the marshlands and estuarine waters,
and because of the inherent dynamic and hazardous nature of coastal shorelines, specific restrictions,
limitations and standards have been adopted by the State for construction in these areas, as outlined in
15A NCAC 7H at .0209. By regulation, projects cannot weaken natural barriers to erosion, shall have
limited impervious surfaces, and shall take measures to prevent pollution of the estuary by sedimentation
and runoff. A CAMA (Coastal Area Management Act) permit must also be obtained for compliance with
these standards.
On August 1, 2000, the NC Coastal Resources Commission implemented a new requirement for a 30 foot
vegetated buffer adjoining navigable streams in the 20-county coastal area, including estuarine shorelines.
(See Policy Section 5)
77
�I
Ponder County and Glenn Harbeck Associates Page 50

IPander County Growth Management Plan
Policy Statements
' As in the case of estuarine waters, Pender County shall prohibit new marina development along estuarine
shorelines bordering Outstanding Resource Waters.
Policy 15.5: Marina development shall be prohibited along estuarine shorelines bordering
Outstanding Resource Waters. Generally, only low density residential and water dependent land
uses may be permitted along the estuarine shoreline, provided that all standards of NCAC 15
' Subchapter 7H relevant to estuarine shoreline AEC's are met, and that the proposed use is
consistent with other policies set forth in this Plan.
Ocean Hazard Area AEC'S
These are natural hazard areas along the ocean shoreline that are especially vulnerable to effects of
sand, wind, water and erosion. Ocean hazard areas include beaches, frontal dunes, inlet lands, and other
areas in which geologic, vegetative and soil conditions indicate a substantial possibility of excessive
erosion or flood damage, and where uncontrolled or incompatible development could unreasonable
endanger life or property. Improper development can also disturb the natural barrier island dynamics and
sediment transport, and can interfere with the beach's natural defenses against erosion. Furthermore,
there is considerable evidence that sea level has been and is expected to continue rising steadily. This will
result in higher water levels, inundation of wetland areas, and loss of beachfront area.
Within the Ocean Hazard Area AEC are four sub -areas as follows: (1) the ocean erodible area (2) the
high hazard flood area (3) the inlet hazard area and (4) the unvegetated beach area. Each may be
described as follows:
' • Ocean Erodible AEC. The ocean erodible area is generally the portion of a barrier island where there
exists a substantial possibility of excessive erosion and significant shoreline fluctuation. The ocean
erodible AEC is based on a setback from the first line of stable natural vegetation plus an additional area
' where erosion can be expected from storm surges and wave action. This area includes the ocean
beaches and the frontal dune system.
Ocean erodible areas are extremely dynamic lands highly susceptible to becoming displaced by the ocean
' due to erosion, storms, and sea level rise. The sand deposits of ocean beaches and shorelines represent
a dynamic zone that does not afford long-term protection for development. The nature of tidal action and
the force of storms is such that they cause the beach areas to constantly shift. In addition, littoral drift is a
natural phenomenon whereby sand is removed from beaches by wave action and littoral currents and is
' deposited upon a different stretch of the beach.
The major management objective is to avoid unnecessary hazards to life or property and to maintain
' reasonable requirements for public expenditures to protect property or maintain safe conditions. This area
must be preserved to the greatest extent feasible with opportunity to enjoy the ocean beaches of the
State. Appropriate development within the area must be that which will withstand the prevalent natural
forces, comply with CAMA and other state requirements, and not unreasonably interfere with the public's
' use and enjoyment of the beach area.
• H!gh Hazard Flood AEC. This is the area of the coast subject to high velocity wave action and storm
' surge during severe storms. This area typically extends along the shoreline and to some distance
landward of the frontal dune. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) identifies flood zones
for a "100 year" storm on the flood insurance rate maps (F.I.R.M.'s), and designates the high hazard flood
AEC as the V zone. Generally, those portions of the barrier island farther removed from the ocean's edge
' are in the A Zone, subject to washover and flooding, but not high velocity storm surge. The extent of flood
hazard areas in Pender County are currently being restudied by FEMA with new flood hazard maps due
out within the next year or so.
' • Inlet Hazard AEC. Inlet Hazard areas of environmental concern are especially vulnerable to erosion,
flooding, and other shoreline changes due to their proximity to extremely dynamic, migrating coastal inlets.
The inlet hazard area is defined to "extend landward from the mean low water line a distance sufficient to
Pander County and Glenn Ha►beck Associates Page 51

Pender County Growth Management Plan
Policy Statements I
encompass that area within which the inlet will, based on statistical analysis, migrate, and shall consider
such factors as previous inlet territory, structurally weak areas near the inlet (such as an unusually narrow
barrier island, an unusually long channel feeding the inlet, or an overwash area), and external influences
such as jetties and channelization." The State's original inlet hazard areas were identified in the report to
the CRC entitled "Inlet Hazard Areas" by Loie J. Priddy and Rick Carraway (September 1978). The inlet
hazard area "shall be an extension of the adjacent ocean erodible area and in no case shall the width of
the inlet hazard area be less than the width of the adjacent ocean erodible area."
In Pender County, areas adjacent to all ocean inlets, regardless of their navigability, are designated inlet
hazard areas.
• Unvegetated Beach AEC. These areas are fragile, unstable and unpredictable areas of the island. They
are subject to rapid changes from wind and wave action. They include the sand reaches often found near
inlets and undeveloped beach strands. As in other beach areas, the public maintains a right to access to
these beaches.
Policy 15.6(1):The County supports State policies for ocean hazard areas as set forth in Chapter
15A, Subchapter 7H of the State CAMA regulations. Suitable land uses in ocean hazard areas
Include ocean shoreline erosion control activities and dune establishment and stabilization.
Policy 15.6(2): The County supports the policies and regulations of State and Federal permitting
agencies concerning the development of ocean piers, and shall encourage the proper
maintenance and safety of such piers.
Outstanding Resource Waters
Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW s) are generally those waters having been identified as possessing
exceptional state or national recreational or ecological significance. In Pender County, the area of the
sound from Rich Inlet -at the New Hanover County line to New Topsail Inlet has been designated as an
outstanding resource water area. This area has excellent water quality with the presence of three inlets
within five miles each other that contribute to the excellent flushing of this estuary. The area also has
three adjacent creeks (Old Topsail, Mill and Futch Creek) with small watersheds that drain into these
ORW waters. Pender County supports state designation of these waters and wishes to protect this unique
natural resource area.
The water quality in designated ORW waters and in waters within 1000 feet of designated ORW waters
(the ORW buffer) shall be protected. Development density in proximity to designated ORW waters and
within the ORW buffer zone shall be only that allowed under applicable CAMA regulations or locally
adopted regulations.
Policy 15.7: There shall be no new marinas allowed in or adjacent to waters designated ORW,
Including adjacent to Futch Creek, Mill Creek and Old Topsail Creek or within the 1000 foot ORW
buffer area, which includes water bodies within 1000 feet of designated ORW waters.
Turtle Nesting Areas
The nesting habits of the loggerhead turtle are a unique natural phenomenon in some areas of coastal
North Carolina. Opportunities for the study of loggerhead turtle nesting are becoming more rare. In
keeping with the County's overall growth philosophy of preserving those natural features that are truly a
unique part of the heritage of the coast, the County wishes to make a strong policy statement in support of
preserving and protecting the habitat for loggerhead turtle nesting.
Policy 15.8:The County shall avoid undertaking any activity or approving of any activity that would
destroy remaining habitat for loggerhead turtle nesting.
f'
Pander County and Glenn Harheck Associates Page 52

IPender County Growth Management Plan Policy Statements
Sound and Estuarine System Islands
The unincorporated area of Pender County includes two barrier islands that are especially significant.
Hutaff Beach is a 300-acre barrier island with associated wetlands. It has well developed zonation of
marsh and dune communities. The island is noted for large lagoonal flat dominated by Spartina patens
(cordgrass) and Borrichia frutescens (sea ox-eye) and nesting Atlantic Loggerhead Sea Turtles. This area
contains natural communities and threatened animal habitat.
Lea Island is a 200-acre barrier island. It has an outstanding foredune and upper beach plant
communities, cordgrass marsh, nesting least turns and skimmers. The island marsh is heavily used by
herons and pelicans for roosting. Loggerhead turtle nesting also occurs on an island. Drummond's prickly
pear cactus and seashore amaranth is found on the island.
' Hutaff, Lea and other smaller barrier islands in Pender County that are not in either Topsail Beach or Surf
City remain essentially undeveloped. These barrier islands are currently zoned RA, which allows
residential development on 20,000 square foot lots. Since these islands are adjacent to ORW waters,
' contain endangered animal species and are subject to wind and wave action of the Atlantic Ocean, the
County would like to preserve these islands from development. The 1991 Land Use Plan recommended
that the County (or State) consider purchasing both of these barrier islands, perhaps with financial
' assistance from Nature Conservancy or Land Trust. In keeping with this recommendation, the State of
North Carolina recently made a commitment to purchase Lee Island to hold in trust for the public.
Policy 15.9: Pender County shall discourage the development of barrier islands within the
planning jurisdiction of the County including, particularly, Hutaff and Lea Islands. The County
encourages initiatives at the local, state or federal government level to purchase these
environmentally sensitive areas for the benefit of all residents of the county, state and nation.
' Polic
y Section 16. Significant Natural Areas
' According to the 1991 Pender County Land Use Plan, Pender County has three especially significant
natural areas (outside the estuarine system):
' The Angola Bay Gamelands, located in the northern part of Pender County and extending into Duplin
County, has extensive tracts of tall evergreen shrub pocosins, mixed pond pine pocosin, and pond pine
forests. It serves as an important wildlife habitat for various endangered or threatened species.
' Holly Shelter Game Preserve is a 100 square mile wilderness that contains both low and high pocosin
wetlands. It serves as habitat for deer, bear, alligators, red cockaded woodpeckers, eastern diamondback
rattlesnakes, and other wildlife. There have been seven rare plant species identified in this area. They
' include the Venous Flytrap, White Wicky (Kalmia cuneata), Roughleaf Loosestrife (Lysimachia
asperulaefolia), and others. There is also a 300-acre pitcher plant (sarracenia flava) bog.
' Near Rocky point, there is a 1000-acre, bottomland called the Rocky Point Marl Forest. It consists of a
mixture of pine'and sweetgum trees and contains rare herbaceous species. It also contains outcroppings
of the Castle Hayne limestone formation marl. This is the only North Carolina location for the rare Wet
Marl Forest Natural Community (carya myristicaeformis).
Committee members noted the vital importance of the Angola Gamelands and the Holly Shelter Game
Preserve in recharging the region's groundwater aquifers. As Pender County continues to develop over
time, these two naturally preserved areas may prove to be among southeastern North Carolina's most
important assets because of the water resources they hold.
Pender County and Glenn Harbeck Associates Page 53

Pender County Growth Management Plan
Policy Statements 1
Measures to protect wildlife and natural resource areas fall largely into one of two categories. First,
'
existing state and federal management policies for specifically designated preserves, sanctuaries and
other natural resource areas are instrumental in conserving habitat for wildlife. Second, this plan's
emphasis on policies and actions which encourage a distinct "town and country" development pattern can
'
be effective in conserving valuable open space for wildlife propagation by discouraging suburban sprawl.
Policy 16.1: Pender County supports the preservation, In perpetuity, of the Angola Bay Gamelands
and the Holly Shelter Game Preserve for the rare and valuable plants and animals they contain,
,
and for the vital role they play in recharging regional groundwater supplies.
Policy 16.2: The abundance and diversity of wildlife in Pender County shall be preserved and
enhanced through protection of the unique coastal ecosystems, including marshes, pocosins,
woodlands, open fields and other areas upon which they depend.
Policy Section 17: Freshwater Resources, Surface and Ground
Surface Waters
,
Best Management Practices for Protecting Water Quality
Fundamentally,
'
water quality can be impacted by two sources of pollution- point source and non point
source. Examples of point sources of pollution include outfalls from industrial operations and municipal
sewage treatment plants. Examples of non -point sources of pollution include stormwater runoff from urban
development (i.e. roads, parking areas and roofs), golf courses, farmland and harvested woodlots. Studies
have shown that while point sources of pollution occasionally have serious spills of pollutants into surface
'
waters, the most consistent sources of pollution in surface waters are from non -point sources. This is
because runoff from urban development and farmland is less easily monitored and controlled than point
'
sources of pollution. In fact, while point sources almost always require a special discharge permit (i.e. an
NPDES permit) for the point of outfall into the stream, no such similar permit is required for the multitude
of non -point sources feeding into the surface water system. The policies of this plan recommend,
therefore, that land use practices employ reasonable means to limit non -point source pollution into the
,
county's surface waters.
In the case of agriculture, the County supports efforts by farmers to retain vegetated buffers along streams '
to filter out fertilizers, pesticides and sediment from tilled soil. In the case of urban development, the
policies of this plan call for the use of best management practices to retain and filter pollutants from paved
surfaces, and fertilizers, pesticides and sediments from landscaped areas. In non -urban areas, this
includes the use of dry swales instead of curb and gutter to collect and retain stormwater rather than
directing it to piped stormwater systems.
Pender County Soil and Water Conservation District and USDA. ,
The Pender County Soil and Water Conservation District and the United States Department of Agriculture
- Natural Resources Conservation Service assist land users in the county in implementing best
management practices that will protect and improve water quality. These best management practices ,
reduce sediment and nutrient delivery to water bodies. Some examples of these best management
practices are animal waste management systems, conservation tillage systems, nutrient management
systems, streamside buffers, erosion and sediment control systems, and many others. The use of these '
best management practices is encouraged for agricultural producers through various State and Federal
cost sharing programs.
(Also See Policy Section 5 concerning Stormwater Management, Drainage and Flooding.) .
Pender County and Glenn Ha►beck Associates Page 54,

Pender County Growth Management Plan Policy Statements
IGroundwater
' Pender County Wll Soon Be a Major Provider of Potable Water
If plans proceed as expected, Pender County will soon position itself as a major provider of potable water,
with an expanding piped water supply system serving both unincorporated and incorporated areas.
(Details of this piped water supply system are further outlined in Section 4 of these Policies.)
Even so, a great many Pender County residents continue to rely on non -regulated, individual groundwater
wells as their only source of potable water. Such wells are not without their risks. Among problems
' associated with wells in low lying coastal areas are salt water intrusion, brackish water in heavy use areas,
reliance upon septic tanks on the same small lots with individual wells, and competition for such ground
waters among industrial, agricultural, and residential users.
Some engineering studies have predicted that as demand on groundwater resources continues to grow,
salt water infiltration of groundwater is most likely in the area from the ocean west to U.S. 17. Recently,
some Pender County residents, as well as the County Commissioners have indicated their concerns about
' the potential impacts of another major mining operation proposed in the south central part of the County.
(See Policy Section 10 for more details.) Included among the impacts are concerns that the particular type
of mining proposed would require significant draw downs of the water table, thereby jeopardizing the
' quantity and quality of groundwater for other users in that part of the County.
Groundwater Deserves a High Level of Protection
Pender County is correct in being extremely protective of the area's ground water resources. Like other
counties at the lower end of the Cape Fear River, Pender County is aware of the vulnerability of the river
as surface water supply source- the quality of the Cape Fear River water is dependent upon the duty and
' care of upstream water users. By the time the Cape Fear reaches southeastern North Carolina, the river
has received urban and agricultural area runoff, various pollutants, and effluent discharges from an area
that encompasses a large part of the heavily urbanized piedmont region of the state. At the same time,
there is a continuing concern that interbasin transfers, occurring upstream, will eventually diminish the flow
volume of the river, and further concentrate pollutants in the stream.
In other words, Brunswick, New Hanover, and Pender Counties are at the end of the pipe, in a manner of
' speaking, with regard to the quantity and quality of the water in the Cape Fear River.
For this reason, it may be just as well that Pender County has elected to tap into the Town of Wallace's
excess capacity- Wallace using a series of wells as its raw water source. Regardless of the source or
sources of water, protection of the County's raw water supply ranks as a very high priority concern for the
future growth and development of Pender County, and the whole lower Cape Fear region. The County is
vitally interested in state, federal, and local efforts to carefully monitor and control development activities
so as not to irreparably damage this important natural asset.
' Policies for Freshwater Resources. Surface and Ground
Policy 17.1: Pender County supports federal, state and local efforts to protect the quantity and
quality of water in the Cape Fear River, whether such protection involves controls over point
source discharges, surface runoff, inter basin water transfers, or other appropriate means,
including upstream activities.
' Policy 17.1: Pender County supports federal, state and local efforts to protect the quantity and
quality of water in the region's groundwater system, whether such protection involves controls
over the location and management of activities involving hazardous substances, restrictions on
groundwater drawdowns, or any other activity which would jeopardize the short and long term
viability of groundwater resources.
Pender County and Glenn Harbeck Associates Page 55

Pander County Growth Management Plan
Policy Statements I
Policy 17.1: Pender County will continue with improvements to and expansion of the County's
potable, piped water supply system, with emphasis on the development of a self-supporting
operation, where costs are assigned in relative proportion to the benefits conveyed.
Policy 17.1: So as to facilitate the orderly development of the County and its water system, Pender
County shall establish and maintain utility extension and tap -on policies designed to address the
timing, location, priorities and sequence, etc. of system expansion in coordination with specific
growth management objectives.
Policy Section 18: Wetlands and Hydric Soils
Wetlands are a Pervasive Feature of the Pender County Landscape
According to generalized soil mapping, Pender County contains literally thousands of acres of freshwater
swamps and marshes, including pocosins and so-called "404" wetlands. While many of these areas have
been specifically identified as being part of large natural areas like the Angola Bay Gamelands and the
Holly Shelter Game Preserve, there are many thousands more throughout the length and breadth of the
County. This situation goes hand -in -hand with the pervasive problem of finding land suitable for septic
tanks and building foundations.
Hydric Soils Is the Term Used to Describe Soils that are Frequently Wet
The discussion of swamps, marshes, and wetlands is consistent with a discussion of development on
"hydric soils". Hydric soils are classified as such for one of several reasons usually related to wetness.
These soils may be subject to frequent flooding, a high seasonal water table, and/or frequent ponding
during the growing season. In addition, they often support types of vegetation that thrive under wet
conditions.
Pender County Policy Prohibits Development on Hydric Soils
The 1991 Pender County Land Use Plan Update included a policy statement, the purpose of which was to
direct new development away from hydric soil areas. Further, the plan went on to refer to hydric soils as
specifically documented in the official Pender County Soil Survey.
Since the establishment of the "hydric soils policy', there has been opposition mounted against it from
time to time, by developers and homebuilders. Their argument is that the policy is too restrictive. One
proposal, for example, sought to reduce the number of soil types meeting the definition of hydric from over
20 to just 6. Opponents of this proposal argued that doing so would open the county to development
"...just about anywhere that was not under water or in a mucky condition most of the time". Extensive
flooding of homes in low-lying areas during hurricane Floyd seemed to quiet the opposition for a time.
Centralized Sewer Overcomes the Septic Tank Constraint of Hydric Soils- But Other Factors Remain
With the advent of centralized sewer, the natural constraint placed on development due to septic tanks will
soon go away. The political and monetary pressure for building on wet soils will undoubtedly increase.
The County must hold firm in directing new development way from hydric soils, not just to prevent cracked
foundations and settled floors, but also to prevent an even greater disaster the next time a hurricane Floyd
visits the area. This plan therefore supports the hydric soils policy.
An important note: The Growth Strategy Map that accompanies these policies directs new development to
general geographic areas of the county where water and sewer services are available, and secondly, to
speck "dryer" sections within the borders of these areas. Thus, even within these targeted growth areas,
the County recognizes that there may be areas of freshwater wetlands that cannot be developed without
great economic costs and environmental harm. Therefore, the Countys policies regarding targeted
I
-7
L
Pender County and Glenn Harbeck Associates Page 56

Pender County Growth Management Plan
Policy Statements
' growth areas should be considered entirely consistent with the hydric soils policy. A detailed listing of
hydric soil types meeting the definition of this policy is available from the Pender County planning
department.
Policies for Wetlands and Hvdric Soils
' Policy 18.1: Pender County policy will be to permit development which is proposed to be located
outside hydric soil areas and meets' all zoning, health department and flooding regulations as well
as other state or federal regulations.
' Policy Section 19: Historic Preservation and Revitalization
' Economic Value of Historic Preservation
Historic preservation is becoming increasingly associated with the image of quality communities across
the nation. Tangible evidence of a community's efforts to preserve its heritage often conveys to visitors
and prospective businesses a sense of pride in place. Historic preservation can also be a significant part
of a community's economic development strategy, particularly as it applies to tourism interest.
Increasingly, visitors to the coast come to the area not only to experience the beach and ocean, but also to
' see the rural charm and small town atmosphere found in many of the area's smaller towns and villages.
As an example, Burgaw, labeled by some as the "quintessentially Southern hamlet", has been used
several times as a backdrop for filmmaking in southeastern North Carolina because of its authentic charm
tand historic character.
Newly Designated Historic District in Burgaw
' Not coincidentally, historic preservation efforts today in Pender County are focused primarily within the
Town of Burgaw. In October 1999, the federal government (U.S. Dept. of Interior) approved the Town of
Burgaw's application to place the downtown business district on the National Register of Historic Places.
' The designation encompasses roughly 57 acres surrounding the Pender County Courthouse and takes in
an 11-block area bordered by Bridges, Cowan, Fremont and Dickson streets. While the approval calls
attention to the historic value of downtown Burgaw, the official designation also offers more tangible
benefits to property owners in the district. Such tangible benefits include tax breaks to owners who are
willing to renovate their building, as much as possible, in conformance with the original materials,
character and architecture of the structure. To qualify for a tax break, the rehabilitation must also cost at
least $25,000:
' Potential New Federal Tax Incentives for Rehabilitation of Owner Occupied Historic Homes
As noted above, US tax law has, for many years, provided tax incentives for the rehabilitation of historic
' properties. Such tax incentives, however, have been limited to income producing properties, and have
largely ignored the efforts of individual homeowners in restoring their own homes. Two federal bills,
currently in Congress, could change all that. These bills, if passed, would allow homeowners in designated
historic areas to recoup 20% of their remodeling expenses in the form of tax credits of up to $40,000 per
' home. These credits would be a dollar for dollar tax reduction in the homeowner's tax bill. Further, if the
homeowner cannot take advantage of the full amount in the first year, the balance can be rolled over to
the next year. Proposed options included in the bill would allow the homeowner to buy down mortgage
' rates with the credits, and for developers to buy and rehabilitate properties and then include the tax credits
as a bonus to the homebuyer. The only significant requirement is that the homeowner must stay in the
house for five years. If passed, these bills promise to be a major boon to historic preservation not only in
Pender County, but also in communities across the country.
Pender County and Glenn Harbeck Associates Page 57

Pander County Growth Management Plan
Policy Statements I
Other Historic Properties in Pender County
'
It should be noted that the Pender County Courthouse and the Burgaw Depot were already listed on
National
Register of Historic Places even before Burgaw's historic district was officially approved. Other
'
individual sites in Pender County already on the National Register include three former Navy structures on
Topsail Island once used in missile testing; four plantation houses and the Revolutionary War battlefield at
Moore's Creek National Military Park (See below). There is also an initiative underway to have the Old
Pender County Jail designated an historic site.
,
Moore's Creek National Military Park
'
Moore's Creek National Military Park commemorates the location of one of the earliest, strategic battles of
the American Revolutionary War. This 87-acre site is located on Highway 210 in the southwestem part of
the County. Concerns about the future of the park rest mainly with what may happen to properties in its
vicinity. (Several committee members noted the incompatible commercialization of properties within the
'
vicinity of other national battlegrounds such as, for example, Gettysburg.) Ideally, the park service would
prefer to see properties in the vicinity of the National Military Park retain a largely rural character. At
nearby land uses include
present, a church, and extensive land holdings of the International Paper Co. In
'
recent years, however, the area has also seen the advent of new residential subdivisions nearby, including
Patriots Watch and Battleground Estates. Park officials are particularly concerned about incompatible
commercial development eventually moving in, such as fast food franchises and chain stores. While such
commercial development may not be likely in the near term, park officials feel that now might be the time
'
to take appropriate action to ward off such development before pressures mount.
As a mitigating measure, the park has purchased a buffer strip on the opposite side of Highway 210 to '
prevent the possibility of incompatible development at the entrance to park. Currently, the parks charter,
as authorized by Congress, limits the total amount of acreage that may be included in the park to 100
acres. Thus, the park could conceivably acquire an additional 13 acres beyond the 87 acres it already '
encompasses. Unfortunately, 13 acres is not nearly enough property to ensure that the area around the
park retains a rural character.
This plan suggests, therefore, that the County consider preparing a "rural heritage highway corridor plan" '
for the Highway 210 corridor within the vicinity of the National Military Park. Such a plan should have as its
purpose the preservation of the rural heritage and character of Highway 210. Commercial signage, for
example, could be limited to ground level, monument style signage. Parking areas and loading docks
could be screened from view by appropriate landscaping. Outdoor lighting could be designed to prevent '
the type of glaring lights often associated with service stations, fast food restaurants and chain stores. All
of these measures could be implemented by the County through its existing zoning ordinance as
authorized by state enabling legislation. And, given the historic significance of the site, and the important '
role of tourism to the present and future economy of Pender County, such a plan would clearly be justified .
Downtown Revitalization Efforts
Burgaw
,
has also been the focus of downtown revitalization in recent years. Historic district designation
was just one of several actions that Town officials have taken to boost the revitalization of the downtown.
First, a series of streetscape projects were undertaken to enhance the streetside appeal of the downtown.
Second, the Town changed its ordinances to allow merchants to set up outdoor tables on downtown area
sidewalks. Perhaps most importantly, in the fall of 1998, the Town changed its zoning ordinance to allow
apartments to be placed on the second floors of downtown business buildings. With more residents living
downtown, more money is available to be spent in the area, and more service -oriented businesses move
'
in to serve the market. In addition to encouraging business downtown, the revitalization also enhances the
district's property values and, in turn, the Town's tax base. Providing leadership and support to most of
these actions have been many downtown area property owners and merchants, who now function
cooperatively under the banner of the Downtown Burgaw Association (1999).
'
1
Pander County and Glenn Harbeck As=lates Page 58

IPender County Growth Management Plan Policy Statements
Historic Preservation and Revitalization Policies
Policy 19.1: Local efforts to identify, designate and preserve sites, buildings and districts of
particular historic significance shall be supported as a means of enhancing their economic,
cultural and tourism value to the area.
' Policy 19.2: Multiple and appropriate adaptive reuse of historic resources shall be encouraged.
' Policy 19.3: Development of the tourism potential of the area's architectural and historic resources
shall be encouraged.
Policy 19.4: The destruction of significant architectural, historic and archaeological resources In
' the planning area shall be discouraged.
' Policy Section 20: Community Appearance
Many Pender County residents recognize that community appearance and image are important factors for
community growth and well being. An attractive community not only enhances the quality of life of existing
residents, but is also an important tool in attracting visitors and desirable businesses (i.e. jobs) to the area.
Components of community appearance can include a multitude of visual images including the control of
roadside litter, the presence or absence of street trees, the appearance of public and private signage,
' streetscape conditions, parking lot landscaping, architectural design and building form, public and private
outdoor art, the presence or absence of overhead wires, and the way in which local development practices
seek to preserve the natural features of land in the community.
' Special Highway Travel Corridors
Public attitudes about community appearance, as expressed during the county -wide public input meeting
' held for the Growth Management Plan, showed good support for maintaining and improving appearances,
particularly along the county's major highways. State enabling legislation allows local governments to
establish special controls and incentives for development along special highways of the community's
choosing. In the case of Pender County, those highways deserving of special treatment might include,
particularly Interstate 40, U.S. Highways 117 and 17, and State Highways 210 and 53. When implemented
through the Pender County zoning ordinance such standards might include special controls over signage,
parking lot landscaping and tree preservation among other features.
' In this regard, a special highway corridor zoning overlay district has been discussed for U.S. 17 in the
Hampstead area for a number of years. A 1993-94 draft overlay district was put before the public but failed
to generate sufficient support for the County Commissioners to vote in favor of its adoption. Most of the
' opposition to the overlay district reportedly was related to the issue of a reserved green strip on the private
property side of the highway right of way. Many business owners viewed this requirement for a natural or
artificially planted landscape strip to be a taking of their property without compensation. This plan
' recommends that the special highway corridor overlay district be revisited now that US 17 has been
widened to five lanes. There are undoubtedly some improvements that could be implemented that do not
require the involvement of land area. Such things as signage, building form, and parking area placement,
among other factors, have worked in other communities and may be worth pursuing in Hampstead.
' As an altemative to implementing special highway controls only along specially designated highways, the
County may wish to establish or improve general development standards that apply to commercial
' development anywhere in the county. Such general standards are addressed in the paragraphs below.
Pender County and Glenn Hadw-* Associates page 59

Pender County Growth Management Plan
Policy Statements 1
Commercial Landscaping
Pender County has no development standards for tree planting and landscaping of parking lots and
commercial development sites. Without such standards, landscaping budgets are often the first item to be
cut when commercial developers are looking to save on site development costs. Once the project is built,
the "sea of asphalt" look of many commercial developments becomes a permanent addition to the
community. This plan recommends that the County adopt at least minimal landscape standards to move
the County's requirements closer to those one would expect to find in a desirable destination area.
Substandard Mobile Homes Used for Storage
In recent years, Pender County has been experiencing a growing problem concerning the use of
substandard mobile homes for storage. In some instances, a substandard mobile home will be
abandoned, and the owner will move into another, newer mobile home placed on the same lot. In other
instances, an old mobile home will be placed in the back yard in much the same way a homeowner might
place a storage shed in back of the house. Such substandard mobile homes are unsightly at best, and a
health hazard at worst.
Building Appearances and Upkeep
Committee members noted that buildings throughout the County could stand to improve their overall
appearance, largely in the area of upkeep. While North Carolina state enabling legislation limits the
degree to which local governments can control building architecture (appearance not structure), other
communities have found incentive based awards and community service programs to be effective in
encouraging property owners to keep up their premises. Of note, citizens in attendance at the countywide
input meeting for the growth management plan identified County buildings as being particularly in need of
improved maintenance and appearance.
Signage
Poorly planned, overdone commercial signage can be one of the most dominant and unsightly aspects of
the built environment along a street. A garish mish-mash of competing, pole -mounted signs and billboards
does little to complement the coastal or rural landscape that so many of Pender County's residents have
come to appreciate.
Pender County adopted a sign ordinance as part of the zoning ordinance in _. It was updated in . A
lack of consistent enforcement of the ordinance has resulted in some locations in the county having an
abundance of overdone signage. Situations have arisen where illegally placed existing signage has
prevented the lawful placement of new signage along some county roads. Controversy has also revolved
around the placement of billboards along Interstate 40 through the county. A state imposed moratorium on
the erection of new billboards along the interstate has created some unusual legal maneuverings on the
part of the billboard industry.
To the County's credit, the Planning Board and County Commissioners are nearing completion on a new
set of sign standards, which may resolve the on -going difficulties with signage in Pender County.
Community Appearance Policies
Policy 20.1: The important economic, tourism, and community image benefits of attractive major
travel corridors through Pender County shall be recognized. Such entryway corridors shall receive
priority attention for improved appearance and development standards, including landscaping,
signage and tree preservation.
Policy 20.2: Landscape improvements at existing and new commercial developments, particularly
as related to breaking up and softening the appearance of expansive parking areas, shall be
encouraged.
�I
Pender County and Glenn Ha►beck Associates Page 60

Pender County Growth Management Plan Policy Statements
Policy 20.3: The County shall discourage the Inappropriate use of manufactured or site built
homes for storage or their abandonment without proper disposal.
Policy 20A New development, redevelopment, rehabilitation and maintenance of structures and
sites should be consistent and supportive of the neighborhood and architectural context of the
' surrounding area.
Policy 20.5: The significance of street trees in providing visual relief, summer cooling, improved
air quality and livability shall be recognized through public policies to encourage their planting
and maintenance.
k
Policy 20.6: Sign policies and standards shall be periodically updated to enhance community
identity and create a high quality business Image.
Pender County and Glenn Harbeck Associates Page 61

7
Appendix 1:
GROWTH FACTORS
ANALYSIS
This Growth Factors Analysis includes primarily statistical information
about Ponder County's population, housing and economy. The purpose of
the Growth Factors Analysis is to provide some understanding of the
context for growth in Pender County.
I

u
n
E
Contents
Population
GFA-page
Pender County Population Growth, Past and Projected,1960-2020...............................1
Population Growth of Pender County Compared to the State of North Carolina ............. 2
Population Change in Pender County, Adjoining Counties and the State of North
Carolina, 1970-2000 and Projections to 2020
3
Population Distribution by Township, Pender County, 1970-1990.................................... 5
Population by Age Groups, Pender County, 2000 to 2020.............................................. 7
Pender County Age Composition Compared to the State as a Whole .............................
8
Housing
Housing Units by Type, Pender County and Surrounding Counties .................................
9
Housing Units by Type by Township, 1990...............................................................:...10
Average Housing Value, 1990, Pender County and Adjoining Counties ........................11
Seasonal Dwelling Units, 1990......................................................................................11
Owner Occupancy Rates Among Counties Adjoining Pender County, 1990 .................12
Owner Occupancy Rates by Township, 1990................................................................12
Economy
Employment by Sector, 1996, Pender County and North Carolina................................13
Wage Comparison by Sector, 1996, Pender County and North Carolina .......................13
Average Annual Wage, 1996, Pender County, Adjoining Counties and NC...................14
Per Capita Income, 1996, Pender County and Surrounding Counties ...........................14
Gross Retail Sales, 1998, Pender County and Surrounding Counties . ..........................15
1998-99 Effective Tax Rates, Pender County and Adjoining Counties ..........................15
Travel and Tourism Spending, 1996, Pender County and Adjoining Counties...............16
Travel Related Employment, 1996, Pender County and Adjoining Counties . ................16
Farm Income Per Capita, Pender County, Surrounding Counties, and NC, 1996..........17
Educational Attainment, 1990, Pender County, Adjoining Counties, and NC.................18
Crime Rate, 1995, Pender County and Adjoining Counties...........................................18

Ponder County Growth Management Plan
Growth Factors Analysis
n
l�
Ponder County Population Growth, Past and Projected,1960 to 2020
Pender County's population changed very slowly until the 1970's. During the last three decades of the
20t' century, however, the County's population grew rapidly, with each subsequent decade surpassing the
previous in terms of absolute increases as well as percentages. State demographers are predicting that
the County will not sustain quite the same rate of growth during the first two decades of the new century.
Even so, population projections do show continued population increases approaching 10,000 new
residents for each of the next two decades.
Many local observers believe that State's population projections for the next two decades are too
conservative, given the surging growth in southeastern North Carolina in general and spillover effects
from the rapidly expanding Wilmington -New Hanover urban area immediately to the south. Further,
Onslow County. has been slated for rapid growth immediately to the north of Ponder County. (See
Population Growth.of Adjoining Counties)
Population Change in Ponder County
1960 2000 and Projections to 2020
Total Population
1960
18,508
1970
18,149
1980
22,107
1990
28,855
2000
40,329
2010
49,954
2020
59,298
Population Change
1960-1970
(359)
1970-1980
3,958
1980-1990
6,748
1990-2000
11,474
2000-2010
9,625
2010-2020
9,344
Percentage Change
1960-1970
-2%
1970-1980
22%
1980-1990
31%
1990-2000
400/6
2000-2010
24%
2010-2020
19%
Source: U.S. Census, NC Office of State Planning and Glenn Harbedc Associates
Pander County and Glenn Hadwk Associates GFA-1

Pender County Growth Management Plan
Growth Factors Analysis
Population Growth of Pender County Compared to the State of North Carolina
Population of Pender County 1960 - 2000
and Projections to 2020
70,000
60,000
50,000
40,000
- 30,000
20,000
10,000
1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Population of North Carolina 1960 -2000
and Projections to 2020
12,000,000
10,000,000
8,000,000
6,000,000
4,000,000
2,000,000
2020
.a W .a.v 1Vau IVVV GWV Lulu LULU
As illustrated in the slopes of the two graphs above, as well as the numbers presented below, the growth
rate of Pender County has been accelerating relative to the State as a whole. if official population growth
projections for the County are to be believed, however, the County's rate of growth is expected to slow
during the first two decades of the 21 '5t century. (This is shown by the less steeply inclined growth curve
for the County from 2000 to 2020.)
Population Totals Population Change as a
Pender North Percentage
County Carolina Pender North
1960 18,508 4,556,155 County . Carolina
1970 18,149 5,084,411 1960-1970 -2% 12%
1980 22,107 5,881,766 1970-1980 22% 16%
1990 28,855 6,632,448 1980-1990 31 % 13%
2000 40,329 7,734,401 1990-2000 40% 17%
2010 49,954 8,675,564 2000-2010 24% 12%
2020 59,298 9,600,054 2010-2020 19% 11 %
Source: U.S. Census, NC Office of State Planning and Glenn Harbedc Associates
Pender County and Glenn HarbeckAssociates GFA-2

Pander County Growth Management Plan
Growth Factors Analysis
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
1
A
1
1
1
1
Population Change in Ponder County, Adjoining Counties and the State of North Carolina
1970-2000 and Projections to 2020
Total Ponulation
Pender
County
Bladen
County
Brunswick
County
Columbus
County
Duplin
County
New
Hanover
County
Onslow
County
Sampson
County
N. Carolina
000's
1970
18,149
26477
24223
46937
38015
82996
103126
44954
5,084
1980
22,262
30491
3577
.51037.40952
103471
1127
-- 49687
5,881
1990
28,855
28663
50985
4958
3999
120284
149834
47297
6,632
2000
40,329
30,84
70,81
52,64
45,43
155,595
150.41
54,631
7,734
2010
49,9541
31,447
871371
53390
48,780
183,112
175,58
58
8 675
2020
59,2981
31,68N
102,621
53,420
52,o54
209,40
202,489
62,848,9,600
Ponulation Chanae
Pender
CountyCountyCountyCountyCountyCountyCountyCounty000's
Bladen
Brunswick
Columbus
Duplin
New
Hanover
Onslow
Sampson
N. Carolina
1970-19801
4,1131
4,014,
11,554
4,100
2,937
20,475
9,658
4,733
79
1980-19901
6,59
1 828
15,204
1 450
95
16 81
37,054
2 390
751
1990-2000
11,4
21
19,82
3,06
5,43
35,311
57
7
1,102
000-2010
9
60
16 5
741
3
27,51 A
251
4,27
941
010-2020
9
2
15,250
2A
3,26N
26291
26 901
3,94
92
Pnnulatinn Change as a Percentana
Pender
County
Bladen
County
Brunswick
County
Columbus
County
Duplin
County
New
Hanover
County
Onslow
County
Sampson
County
N. Carolina
1970-1980
23°/
15°!
48%
9%
8%
25%
9%
11 %
16%
1980-1990
30°/
-6%
43%
-3%
-20/
16%
33%
-50/
13%
1990-2000
400/
8%
39%
6%
140/
29%
0%
160/
170/
000-2010
24°/
2%
23%
1 %
70
18%
17%
8°/
120
010-2020
19°/
1 %
17%
0%
70
14%
15%
7°/
11
Source: U.S. Census, NC Office of State Planning and Glenn Harbeck Associates
Pander County and Glenn Harbeck Associates
GFA-3

Pander County Growth Management Plan Growth Factors Analysis
Population of Pender County & Surrounding Adjoining
Counties,1970-2000, & Projections to 2020
50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250.000
Pender County
Bladen County
Brunswick County
Columbus County
Duplin County
New Hanover County
Onslow County
Sampson County
■ 1970
E31980
®1990
02000
■2010
02020
Source (both charts): U.S. Census, NC Office of State Planning and Glenn
Harbeck Associates
% Change in Population, Pender County & Adjoining
Counties, 1970 2000 & Projections to 2020
-10% 0% 100/0 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
70-19s0
s0-1990
90-2000
90-2010
t 0-2020
Population Change,
Past and Projected,
Among Counties
Adjoining Pender
County
The population centers
of Wilmington (New
Hanover County) and
Jacksonville (Onslow
County) are evident in
the Total Population
chart to the left. The
continued rapid growth
of the four counties
bordering the Atlantic-
Pender, Brunswick,
New Hanover and
Onslow- may also be
contrasted with the
relatively limited growth
projected for the five
inland counties.
The % Change chart to
the left reveals the
especially rapid growth
of Pender County and
Brunswick County
compared to other
adjoining counties in the
region. State projections
for the period 2000 to
2020 call for a slow
down in the rate of
growth for nearly every
County in the region, as
well as the State as a
whole. One exception is
the projected rebound in
growth in Onslow County
during the first decade of
the new century; this,
despite a stagnant
period of little growth
during the 1990's.
n
Pander County and Glenn Harbeck Associates GF4-4
t

IPender County Growth Management Plan
Growth Factors Analysis
Population Distribution by Township, Ponder County, 1970 to 1990
The table and charts below reveal several significant trends in population distribution within Pender
County during the 20-year period from 1970-1990. First, the coastal oriented Topsail Township (see
Township map) outpaced every other township in the County, adding over 5,500 new residents from 1970
to 1990, more than the other nine townships combined. Second, the Rocky Point Township added nearly
1,800 residents during the 20-year period, in large measure due to the access of this area to major roads,
including most recently, Interstate 40. The Rocky Point Township is also well positioned relative to the
services and employment centers in the Wilmington urbanizing area to the south. When the year 2000
U.S. Census figures come out, this growth trend in the Rocky Point area is expected to be even more
' pronounced, as the effect of Interstate-40 on industrial growth and commuting patterns takes full effect
Third, Burgaw Township, just north of the Rocky Point Township, and also within the 1-40 corridor, saw
continued growth, adding over 1000 residents during the twenty year period.
Population Change Percent Change
1970 1980 1990
Population Population Population 1970-1980 1980-1990 1970-1980 1980-1990 1970-1990
Burgaw 4422 4940 5515 518 575 12% 12% 25%
Canetuclk 256 330 369 74 39 29% 12% 44%
Caswell 1023 996 1016 -27 20 -3% 2% -1 %
Columbia 1542 1740 1790 198 50 13% 3% 16%
Grady 1264 1360 1725 96 365 8% 27% 36%
Holly 1373 1684 2095 311 411 23% 24% 53%
' Long Creek 886 1158 1280 272 122 31% 11% 44%
Rocky Point 1616 1941 3377 325 1436 20% 74% 109%
Topsail 2860 4515 8403 1655 3888 58% 86% 194%
Union 2907 3443 3285 536 -158 18% -5% 13%
County Total 18149 22107 28855 3958 6748 22% 31 % 59%
I
E
Burgaw
Canetudk
Caswell
Columbia
Grady
Holy
Long Creek
Rocky Point
Topsail
Union
Source: U.S. Census, NC Office of State Planning and Glenn Harbeck Associates
Population by Township
1970,1980 and 1990
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000
1111970 Population
■ 1980 Population
O 1990 Population
Percent Change in Population
Ponder County Townships,
1970-1990
-50% 0% 50°% 100°% 150% 200°% 250%
B
Cai
C
Col
Long
Rocky
T
Ponder Coun
rgaw
25
Yo
tuck
%
swt%
mbia
16°
rady
°%
Holly
53°%
reek
°%
Point
109036
psail
194°%
nion
13°/
Total
59°%
Ponder County and Glenn Harbeclk Associates GFA-5

Pender County Growth Management Plan
Growth Factors Analysis
Percent of Total County Population by Township, 1970-1990
Percent of Total County
Population
1970 1980 1990
Burgaw
24%
22%
19%
Canetuck
1 %
1 %
1 %
Caswell
6%
5%
4%
Columbia
8%
8%
6%
Grady
7%
6%
6%
Holly
8%
8%
7%
Long Creek
50/0
5%
4%
Rocky Point
9%
9%
12%
Topsail
16%
20%
29%
Union
16%
16%
11%
Pender
County Total 100% 100% 100%
Source: U.S. Census, NC Office of State Planning and Glenn Harbeck Associates
Percent of Total County Population by Township, 1970-1990
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
Burgaw Canetuck Caswell Columbia Grady Holly
Long Rocky Topsail Union
Creek Point
Another way to examine population shifts within the county is to compare how each township's
percentage of the total county population has changed over time. The above chart clearly shows that
while Burgaw was once the predominant township in Pender County, the rapid growth of Topsail
Township has caught up with and surpassed Burgaw in this regard. (Note that while Topsail Township
had only about 15% of the total county population in 1970, this number had grown to nearly 30% by
1990.) Further, in future years, the up and coming Rocky Point Township may very well increase its rate
of growth and position as a population magnet for the County as a whole.
Pender County and Glenn Harbeck Associates GFA-6

Pander County Growth Management Plan Growth Factors Analysis
d
n
I
Population By Age Groups, Pender County, 2000 to 2020
The table and corresponding chart below illustrate that the County's population is growing older on
average as large numbers of baby boomers move through the various population groups on their way to
retirement. Note, for example, the rapidly increasing size of the 55 and over age groups beginning in the
year 2010 and increasing even more by 2020. If the numbers come out as projected, Pender County will
have nearly 10,000 more persons over the age of 55 in 2020 than are in those age cohorts today.
(Compare this with the number of all elementary, middle school, and high school aged children, which
are projected to increase by a total of only 3400 persons during the same two decades.) These numbers
speak dearly about the types of housing and services that will be In demand over the next two decades.
Pre-
Elementary-
High
College
New
Trained
Experienced
Pre -Retire
Younger
Older
Total
Schoolers Middle School
School
Age
Worker
Worker
Worker
Worker
Retiree
Retiree
County
0-4
5-14
15-18
19-24
25-34
35-44
45-54
55-64
65-74
75+
Population
2000 2,494
5286
2013
2609
5190
5980
5790
4678
3748
2541
40,329
2010 2,905
5969
2506
3330
5780
6608
7237
6854
5076
3689
49,954
2020 3,355
6802
2736
3818
6989
7181
7858
8295
7061
5203
69,298
Population by Age Group, Pender County, 2000 to 2020
9,000
8,000
7,000
6,000
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
0
off` '`� '`0 tip` �` �` `�`
cmy` ��\yt�`���.°jo0<<L o�` 00`�4 o e�
Q `aCP
a0 5 cI' �� c�a� ��
Source: U.S. Census, NC Office of State Planning and Glenn Harbeck Associates
Ponder County and Glenn Harbeck Associates GFA-7

Pender County Growth Management Plan
Growth Factors Analysis I
Pender County Age Composition Compared to the State as a Whole
The tables and chart below further illustrate the retirement -oriented nature of Pender County. Note, for
example, that through the year 2020, Pender County will continue to have fewer young people as a
percentage of its total population, compared to the state as a whole. (The County's school and college -
aged cohorts will make up 28% of the total population, compared to 31 % statewide.) At the same time,
the County's 55 and over age cohorts will comprise a larger percentage of the County's population
compared to the entire state. (In the year 2020, fully 35% of Pender County's population will be over 55
years of age, compared to 30% at the statewide level.)
Pender County Age Groups by Percent of Total County Population.
High
New
Trained
Experienced Pre -Retina Younger
Older
Preschool Elementary/Middle
School
College
Worker
Worker
Worker 45- Worker 55- Retiree 65-
Retiree
0-4 School5-14
15-18
19-24
26-34
35-44
54 64 74
75+ Totals
2000 - 6°% 13%
5%
6%
13%
' 15%
14% 12% 9%
6% 100%
2010 6°% 12°%
5%
7°%
12%
13°%
14°% 14°% 10°%
7% 100%
2020 6°% 11 °%
5°%
6°%
12%
12°%
13% 14% 12°%
9°% 100%
State Age Groups by Percent of Total State Population
High
New
Trained
Pre -Retire
Younger
Older
Preschool Elementary/Middle
School
College Worker 25-
Worker
Experienced
Worker 55-
Retiree 65-
Retiree
0-4 School 5-14
15-18
19-24
34
35-44 Worker 45-54
64
74
75+
Totals
2000 7°% 14%
5°%
8°%
14°%
16%
14°%
9°%
7°%
6°%
100°%
2010 6°% 13°%
5°%
9°%
13%
14°%
14°%
12%
8°%
6%
100°%
2020 6°% 12°%
5°%
8°%
13°%
12°%
13°%
13°%
10%
7°%
100°%
Percent of Pender County Population by Age Group
Compared to the State of North Carolina in the Year 2020
16%
14%
12%
10°%
8°%
6°%
4%
2%
0%
Q4hcr �0j �r� �`o �o 0c �o me �o e� �o 0c Q-0� `�ece
�aa .1� m4 �c� 9m� O�ae
o&I�� �cJc
F�
Q
Source: U.S. Census, NC Office of State Planning and Glenn Harbeck Associates
Pender County and Glenn Harbeck Associates
P
1

I
Pander County Growth Management Plan
Growth Factors Anatysis
I
Housing Units by Type by Adjoining Counties,
1990
60000 O MuRi-Unit Structures
50000 ■ Mobile Home, Trailer
40000 Wite Built, Single Family Detached
30000
20000
10000 r;
5 s:
0
IL
t
Jcc1 J4 J40 J4,Q J�c1 J40 40 J�r1
°cae�G° \�a0 c3� ecP JCO JQ\`CO CO G°J o cA
Q 0 o �-00�
' Source (Both Charts): Source: 1990 Census of Population and Housing,
Summary Population and Housing Characteristics, North Carolina, Table 8,
page 136 and Glenn Harbedc Associates
Percent Housing Units by Type by Adjoining
Counties, 1990
100%
90%
80%
70%
60% 50%-
n
40°i6
30%-- rcent MultWnit Structures
20°k ■ iircent Mobile Home, Trailer
10% t3 Percent Site Built, Single Family Detached
0%
Ce G CP G G Ga
Q°camc eo c�� �•'oJy JQ\c a ,ec y\°� c�`Q��°
�. CO ��� �� 5p
Housing Units by Type, Pender
County and Surrounding Counties
The accompanying charts compare
and contrast the similarities and
differences in housing types among
the various counties adjoining
Pender, at the time of the 1990 U.S.
Census. (Results of the 2000 Census
can be compared to -these numbers
when they are released.)
Interestingly, all of the inland counties
(that is, those counties not bordering
the Atlantic) had about 65% to 70%
of their total housing stock in
traditional single family, site -built
housing. This is not surprising, in that
the traditional single family home is
the predominant housing form in
North Carolina, as well as nationally.
'The Counties bordering on the ocean,
on the other hand, had smaller
percentages of single family, site built
housing, ranging from a low of just
over 50% in Onslow County, to a high
of about 60% in Pender County.
Regarding multi -family housing, only
two of the eight counties had more
than 10% of their total housing stock
in multi -family housing: New Hanover
and Onslow Counties. Both counties
are much more urbanized than the
other six. Pender County was about
average at about 8% in multi -family.
Finally, concerning manufactured
housing (mobile homes), every
county except New Hanover had from
25 to 40% of its housing stock in
mobile homes. Pender County was
second only to Brunswick County,
with about one of every three housing units in Pender a manufactured home.
New Hanover County's relatively higher land costs, tighter development controls and availability of water
and sewer services make manufacturing housing less feasible and multi -family housing more feasible
there, when compared to Pender County.
Pander County and Glenn Harbeck Associates GFA-9

Pender County Growth Management Plan
Growth Factors Analysis I
8000
7000
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
Housing Units by Type, By Township, 1990
❑ W timUnit Structures
■ Nbble Home, Trailer
p Site Built, Single Famly Detached
4 0,
��J G�y��o\J�.o� dp - op G�� Qom �oQya J��oo
G C,
Source (Both Charts): Source: 1990 Census of Population and Housing,
Summary Population and Housing Characteristics, North Carolina, Table 7,
page 128 and Glenn Harbedc Associates
Percentage of Housing by Type, 1990: By
Township
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%K.y
30% O Percent Multi -Unit Structures 4
20% ■ Percent Nbble Home, Trailer
10% +' l3 Percent Site Built, Single Family Detached 3
0%
P �61 \ o�` Jcco Jcc1
A,10
Quo
Housing Units By Type By Township,
1990 '
As shown in the chart on the left, the
more populated Burgaw and Topsail
townships contained the bulk of all
housing units in the county at the time of
the 1990 Census.
The chart below, left shows that only the ,
Burgaw and Topsail townships had any
significant numbers of multi -family
housing units, largely due to the ,
availability of centralized sewage
treatment systems in those areas.
Rocky Point township, on the other hand
had the largest percentage of its
housing stock in manufactured homes,
at over 50%. Other townships with more
than 30% of their housing made up of
mobile homes (manufactured housing)
were Canetuck, Caswell, Columbia,
Grady, Holly, Long Creek, and Topsail.
'
Only Union township, at the northern end
of the County had less than 30% of its
housing stock in manufactured homes.
'
It will be interesting to see if, upon
release of the 2000 Census data, the
fast growing southernmost townships of
Rocky Point and Topsail have become
more like their neighbors in northern
New Hanover County, with fewer
,
manufactured homes, percentage wise
and more site -built, single family
housing. (As the Rocky Point and
Topsail townships continue to be in
demand for spillover development from
Wilmington, and as land prices go up,
Will there be fewer manufactured homes
and more site -built homes added to the
housing stock there? Or, will Pender
County's relatively permissive
development controls combine with the
region's demand for affordable housing,
to bring even more manufactured
housing into this part of southeastern
North Carolina?)
Pender County and Glenn Hadvck Associates GFA-10

I
Ponder County Growth Management Plan
Growth Factors Analysis
I
I
I
Average Housing Value,1990
Pender County and Adjoining Counties
$100,000
$90000
$80:000 75,128
$70,000
$60,000 't8A Q79Z
$50,000
$40,000 " F.
$30,000
$20,000 a
$10,000
$0
oa�� amp �J5 oQ��Q oo�°� °� p
Source: North Carolina Office of State Planning, County Rankings
Profiles, Average Housing Values,1990 and Glenn Harbeck Associates
Seasonal Dwelling Units/1000 People
(1990)
Pender County and Adjoining Counties
Sampson County
Onslow County
New Hanover County
Duprin County
Columbus County
Brunswick County
Bladen County
Ponder County
3.1
312.5
1 26.5
2.7
6.5
249.8
L6.7
50 100 150 200 250 300
Source: North Carolina Department of Commerce,1998 County and
Regional Scans, and Glenn Harbeck Associates
Average Housing Value,1990, Pender
County and Adjoining Counties
Once again, the marked contrast between
inland counties and those bordering the
Atlantic is strongly reflected in the statistics
on average housing values. Pender County,
Brunswick County, New Hanover County
and Onslow County have average housing
values substantially higher than average
housing values of the counties farther inland.
While New Hanover and Onslow County
housing values may be attributed in large
measure to their urbanized character,
Brunswick and Pender County housing
values are largely attributable to their coastal
oriented properties.
Seasonal Dwelling Units,1990.
Brunswick County and, to a lessor extent,
Pender County, stand out among all eight
counties for the high proportion of seasonal
dwelling units relative to their permanent
populations. This is consistent with the
coastal -oriented, resort and second home
nature of these areas.
Significantly, seasonal dwelling units
typically offer a better "service to tax revenue
ratio" from a local government finance
perspective. This is because, on average,
the occupants of seasonal units generally do
not require as much in local government
services as the occupants of year round
housing units. This is largely due to the lack
of children to be educated, and the lack of
social services to be provided, two of the
largest expense items in the budgets of most
North Carolina counties.
Pander County and Glenn Had*& Assocaates GFA-11

Pander County Growth Management Plan
Growth Factors Analysis
Percent Owner Occupancy of Housing Units
by Counties Adjoining Pender County, 1990
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
North Carolina 461 %
Sampson County 67%
Onslow County
New Hanover County 53 0
Duplin County 69%
Columbus County 68%
Brunsw ick County 44%
Bladen County 66%
PenderCounty 59%
Source (Both Charts): Source: 1990 Census of Population and Housing,
Summary Population and Housing Characteristics, North Carolina,
Tables 8 and 9, and Glenn Harbeck Associates
Percent Owner Occupancy of Housing
Units by Township, 1990
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Pander County
_ 59%
Union
7 °k
Topsail
43%
Rocky Point
- 7
Long Creek
Holly
70°
Grady
Columbia
Caswell
< 65%
Cane -tuck
1.7717. 7,*u :x 64%
Burgaw
67%
Owner Occupancy Rates Among
Counties Adjoining Pender County,
1990
At the time of the 1990 U.S. Census,
Pender County was about average for the
State in terms of home ownership levels.
Fifty-nine percent of all housing units in
the county were owner -occupied. Further,
the County had a lower rate of owner
occupancy than the inland counties, but a
higher rate of owner occupancy than the
other counties bordering the ocean.
Owner Occupancy Rates by Township,
1990
All but one of Pender County's ten
townships had owner occupancy rates in
the range of 64-79% of all housing units.
Only resort and second home oriented
Topsail township had owner occupancy
levels below that range (43%).
Pander County and Glenn Harbeck Associates GFA-12

1 Pender County Growth Management Plan
Growth Factors Analysis
1996 Employment by Sector
Pender County and North Carolina
0 % of County Employment ■ % of North Carolina Employment
0%
5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%
Agriculture
Construction
Finance, Insurance, R.Estate
Government
4%
Manufacturing
15.1
Services
no
Wholesale Trade
Retail Trade
Transport, Communication & Utilities
o
%
J�4%
2
o
°
4.0%
t .6°�
21.
5.7°
5.1 °k
1
.0°k
4.7%
Source (both charts): North Carolina Department of Commerce,1998 County
and Regional Scans, and Glenn Harbeck Associates
Wage Comparison by Sector, 1996
Pender County and North Carolina
01996 Average Wage, County Workers ■ 1996 Average Wage, NC Workers
$5,0 $10, $15, $20, $25. $30, $35, $40,
$0 00 000 000 000 000 000 000 000
Agriculture
Construction
Finance, Insurance & R.Estate
Government
Manufacturing
Services
Wholesale Trade
Retail Trade
Transport, Communication & Utilities
Total
Employment by Sector, 1996
Pender County and North Carolina
In 1996, compared to the state as a
whole, Pender County had a larger
percentage of its workers in
agriculture, construction, and
government, and a smaller
percentage of its workers in
finanace, insurance; real estate,
manufacturing, services,
transportation, communication and
utilities. Pender County workers
closely matched the state in two
sectors: wholesale trade and retail
trade.
Wage Comparison by Sector,
1996
Pender County and North
.Carolina
In 1996, the average wage paid in
Pender County, regardless of
employment sector, was
substantially less than statewide
averages for the same employment
categories across the board. While
Pender County workers are paid
closer to state averages in
agriculture and retail trade, they are
well behind state averages in every
other category, and particularly
finance, insurance and real estate.
Pender County and Glenn Har6edr Associates GFA-13

Pender County Growth Management Plan
Growth Factors Analysis
Average Annual Wage,1996
Pender County, Adjoining Counties and NC
$
$5,000 $10,000 $15,000 $20,000 $25,000 $30,000
Pender County
$ 8116
Bladen County•.
,� �� 19,028
Brunswick County:
$ 3,294
Columbus County
$ ,333
Duplin County
T-W-7477W- ,465
New Hanover
r .• 24,205
Onslow County
- ,525
Sampson County
$20,2
North Carolina
.. . . u= $25,39
Source: North Carolina Department of Commerce, 1998 County and Regional
Scans, and Glenn Harbec k Associates
Per Capita Income, 1996 Pender County and
Adjoining Counties
$0
$5,000 $10,000 $15,000 $20,000 $25,000 $30,000
Pender County
$17
53
Source: North Carolina Department of Commerce,1998 County and Regional
Scans, and Glenn Harbedk Associates
Average Annual Wage,1996,
Pender County, Adjoining
Counties and NC
Among area counties, the average
wage paid to workers in Pender
County was lower than the average
wage paid in every county except
Onslow. Of note, the low average
wage of workers in Onslow County
may be attributed to the heavy
military presence there.
Per Capita Income,1996,
Pender County and
Surrounding Counties
Among area counties, Pender
County per capita income levels
are third from the bottom, with only
Brunswick County and Onslow
County lower. This is basically
consistent with the pattern of
average wage levels above.
Brunswick County per capita
income levels may be higher,
relatively speaking than average
wage levels due to the large
number of retirees with fewer
dependents (children) living there
Pander County and Glenn Harbeck Associates GFA-14

1 Pender County Growth Management Plan
Growth Factors AnaWs
1
Gross Retail Sales Per Capita, 1998 Ponder
County and
Adjoining Counties
$0
$5,000 $10,000 $15,000 $20,000
Pender County
$5,733
Gross Retail Sales,1998, Ponder
County and Surrounding Counties
Among area counties, gross retail sales
per capita in Pender County are
substantially below retail sales levels of
every other county in the area. Retail
sales per person in Pender County are
less than 40% of retail sales per capita
statewide. Further, they are less than
one third of per capita retail sales in
neighboring new Hanover County.
This suggests that Pender County
residents are making a substantial
volume of their retail purchases outside
the County. Consequently, businesses
in Pender County are losing the
economic benefit of such purchases to
businesses in other counties. Equally
Source: North Carolina Department of Commerce,1998 County and significant, County government is
Regional Scans, and Glenn Harbeck Associates losing the sales tax revenues, which
would otherwise accrue to the County's
tax coffers, thereby off setting other
taxes that must be paid by county
residents.
1998-99 Effective Tax Rates, Ponder
County and Adjoining Counties
For the 1998-99 fiscal year, Pender
County's effective tax rate was near the
bottom of all counties in the area,
except New Hanover. (The effective tax
rate, rather than the locally adopted tax
rate, is considered to be a more
accurate gauge of true tax burden,
because it takes into account the actual
assessed value at which a given
property is taxed. That is, some
counties do not tax at 100% of property
value, but rather at some percentage or
ratio of the actual value.)
At present, many residents choose to
live in Ponder County but commute to
jobs in New Hanover County. This
' Source: NC Association of County Commissioners,1998-99 Tax Rate "bedroom community' syndrome raises
Surrey significant issues regarding the
County's ability to generate tax
revenues based on a larger than normal residential tax base. Typically, residential properties at anything
less than "high dollar" homes (e.g. $300,000+ in year 2000 dollars) are a money loser for County
governments in terns of the costs of providing services versus the property tax revenues generated.
Pender County and Glenn Harbeck Associates GFA-15
1998-99 Effective Tax Rate, Ponder County and
Surrounding Counties
Effective Tax Rate per $100 Valuation
$0.00 $0.10 $0.20 $0.30 $0.40 $0.50 $0.60 $0.70
Ponder County 0.501
Braden County 0. 97
Brunswick County 0.506
Columbus County 0.606
Duplin County 0.5557
New Hanover 0 4678
Onslow County 5811
Sampson County 0.5 60

Pender County Growth Management Plan
Growth Factors Anatysis
Per Capita Travel Spending, 1996
Ponder County and Adjoining Counties
$- $1,000 $2,000 $3,000 $4,000
Fender County
Bladen County
Brunsw ick County
Columbus County
Duprin County
New Hanover
Onslow County
Sampson County
$1,33
95
$3,108
$630
$41
$
,684
$6
2
$45
Source (for both charts): NC Dept of Commerce, 1998 County and
Regional Scans and Glenn Harbeck Associates
Travel Employment/1000 People,1996
Ponder County and Adjoining Counties
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Pender County
Bladen County
Brunswick County
Columbus County
Duplin County
New Hanover
Onslow, County
Sampson County
Travel and Tourism Spending,1996
Ponder County and Adjoining Counties
Compared to surrounding counties,
Ponder County ranks third highest in
terms of travel spending per capita.
Brunswick County, with its extensive
beaches and plentiful golf courses, and
New Hanover County, with its convention
and entertainment centers, outdistance
Pender County's travel spending levels.
Travel Related Employment,1996
Ponder County and Adjoining Counties
Similarly, when compared to other
counties in the area, Ponder County
employs the third highest number of
workers per 1000 people, in the travel
and tourism industry.
Pender County and Glenn Hanbec k Associates GFA-16

Pender County Growth Management Plan
Growth Factors Analysis
Total Farm Income Per Capita, 1996
Ponder County and Adjoining Counties
Fender County
Bladen County
Brunsw ick County
Columbus County
Diplin County
New Hanover
Onslow County
Sampson County
North Carolina
$0 $5,000 $10,000 $15,000 $20,000 1
$2,
3
$6,320
$542
$2,
0
$15,599
$81
$561
$12,
13
$1,080
Source: NC Dept of Commerce, 1998 County and Regional Scans and
Glenn Harbedc Associates
(continued next page)
Farm Income Per Capita, Ponder
County, Surrounding Counties, and
the State of North Carolina,1996
Farm Income, when measured relative to
the population of the county, provides a
useful measure of the statistical degree
of importance of farming to the local
economy. With regard to Pender County,
farming ranks higher than in the other
counties bordering the Atlantic
(Brunswick, New Hanover, Onslow), but
lower than the more rural inland counties
of Bladen, Duplin and Sampson. Pender
County generates about two times the
state average for farm income per
person.
Pender County and Glenn Harbedc Associates
GFA-17

Pander County Growth Management Plan
Growth Factors Analysis
Educational Attainment, 1990
Pender County, Adjoining Counties
and North Carolina
■%AduRswIth High School Education
Adults with College Education
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 1
Pander County
Bladen County
County
Columbus County
Duplin County
New Hanover
Onslow County
Sampson County
North Carolina
65%
Source (both charts): NC Office of State Planning, County Rankings
Profiles
Major Offenses/1000 Persons, 1995 Pander
County and Adjoining Counties
0 20 40 60 80 1
Fender County
Bladen County
Brunsw ick County
Columbus County
Duplin County
New Hanover
Onslow County
Sampson
North Carolina Median
29.
47.7
7.8
51.
.6
42.8
42.1
82.4
Educational Attainment, 1990 Pender
County, Adjoining Counties and North
Carolina
At the time of the 1990 U.S. Census,
Pender County ranked higher than the more
rural, inland counties in terms of adults with
high school diplomas (65%). The County
was the lowest among the four counties
bordering the Atlantic, however, and also
lower than the State as a whole. In terms of
adults with college educations, Pender
County was third highest among the eight
counties, ranking above all other counties
except New Hanover and Onslow.
Crime Rate, 1995
Pender County and Adjoining Counties
In 1995, Pender County's crime rate was
easily the lowest among all eight counties
in the area. The County's crime rate was
also significantly lower than the State
median. The County's low crime rate is,
perhaps, one reason why people choose to
live in Pender County (and commute
outside the county for work).
Pender County and Glenn Harbeck Associates GFA-18

Willard
0
Pelbderl ea Ul1I0A
0
WatAa
4.1
r.
COLUMEIA
Bnrga
Atk6son
CASV= 53
BIJRCAY
Angola Ray
Careland
Y
117 /
21 LONG CR=
Moores Roc
Creek Poi
GRADY 1
CAOSiUC[ f ROCKY
POINT
Pender County Townships
e Hil
53
HOLLY
Ho11Y/elter
Ca}weland
TOPSAIL
17

F�
1
Appendix 2:
IMPLEMENTATION
ACTIONS
The implementation actions set forth in this section constitute a suggested
"to do list" for Pender County government in support of the Growth
Management Policies. Unlike the policy statements, which should remain
relatively constant over time, these implementation actions may change
from year to year to keep up with changing needs and priorities. They have
been compiled in this final section of the plan so that they may be updated
and the appropriate pages replaced on an annual basis.

' Pender county Growth Management Plan Implementation Actions
Implementation Actions
of the
Pender County Growth Management Plan
Introduction
' The following implementation actions are intended to carry out the policies of the Growth -Management
Plan. As such, they have been arranged to correspond to the 20 policy sections of the Plan. They
essentially function as a "to do list" for Pender County government. Unlike policy statements that can and
' should be used over and over again, most implementation actions, once completed, may be checked off
the list. A few, however, represent an on -going program of Pender County government designed to
support a broader policy of the Growth Management Plan.
' Customarily, implementation actions are intended to be carried out within the ensuing five-year period
following adoption of plan. Due to staff, board, and resource limitations, however, it is unlikely that all of
these implementation actions could be completed within the next five years. Therefore, each
' implementation action has been assigned a suggested priority from 1 to 3, with 1 being the highest.
Finally, unlike policy statements, which are intended to remain relatively unchanged for a period of
several years, implementation actions should be revisited each year as the county's work program and
budget process takes shape. Thus, these implementation actions are presented in a single, freestanding
section which may be removed, revised and replaced on an annual basis.
Implementation Actions Listed by Policy Section
Section 1: Preferred Growth Pattern
Priority.
A
The County shall consider the establishment of a new provision in its zoning ordinance
2
which would allow for the development of traditional, "front porch" neighborhoods at a
density in keeping with a true town (i.e., 5000 to 7000 square foot lots, with true
community level open space). Such traditional neighborhoods might also incorporate
pedestrian oriented and properly scaled commercial uses serving the neighborhood.
This would be offered not as a requirement, but as an altemative to the postwar large lot
suburban subdivision.
Section 2: Regional Planning Coordination
A
The County shall continue to participate in the Cape Fear Regional Growth Team to
2
identify important growth issues of common concern, and to work together on plans of
action to make those priorities happen.
B
Through its development review activities, and investment in infrastructure and services,
2
the County.shall support municipal efforts to encourage infill development in or near the
corporate boundaries of existing towns in the County,
Section 3: Transportation
A
The County's shall consider the establishment of new provisions in its subdivision
2
regulations and site plan review procedures regarding: (1) street connections between
adjoining residential neighborhoods at the time of development, (2) shared driveway
access for adjoining commercial properties, (3) the connection of parking lots of
adjoining commercial developments, and (4) the prohibition of access to higher intensity
development through a single-family residential neighborhood.
IPender county and Glenn HarbeckAssociates Acthons-1

Pender County Growth Management Plan Implementation Actions I
Section 4: Water. and Sewer Services
A
The County shall continue to cooperate with the Town of Wallace to provide for potable
1
water at affordable levels to some densely developed/developing parts of the County,
B
The County shall continue to cooperate with the City of Wilmington to provide for
1
wastewater treatment at affordable levels to some densely developed/developing parts
of the County, and to locations where industrial development is to be encouraged.
C
The County shall consider the development of water and sewer extension policies which
1
support compact development patterns, which steer inappropriate development away
from environmentally sensitive areas, and which discourage suburban sprawl into
primarily rural, agricultural areas.
Section 5: Stormwater Mana ement,, Drainage and Flooding
A
The County shall consider the addition of amendments to the Pender County
1
Subdivision Ordinance in keeping with the recommendations of the recently prepared
Overall Stormwater Management Plan. Adoption of such amendments would depend
upon review and approval of particular recommendations by the Planning Board and
County Commissioners.
B
The County shall consider the preparation of a Local Stormwater Management
2
Ordinance in keeping with the recommendations of the recently prepared Overall
Stormwater Management Plan. The two components of this recommendation include:
(1) That Pender County adopt a Stormwater Management Ordinance to establish
specific design standards that must be satisfied prior to approval of any development.
Such design standards should reduce the types of flooding problems and impacts on
water quality from future development.
(2) That Pender County consider applying for a grant the North Carolina Coastal Area
Management Agency to prepare a Stormwater Management Ordinance and Design
Manual
C
The County shall reexamine its zoning ordinance with regard to areas adjacent to
2
primary nursery areas, to allow for low overall development densities and low lot
coverage standards.
D
The County shall consider the establishment of requirements in its subdivision
2
regulations and site plan review standards calling for the retention of natural, vegetated
buffers along the coun s creeks and rivers.
E
The County shall participate in the state's water quality improvement initiative with
2
regard to buffer acquisition programs to protect the quality of the county's surface and
round waters.
F
The County shall consider the preparation of a Master Drainage Plan to identify and
2
implement detailed solutions for specific problem areas threatened by flooding and to
improve area water quality.
G
In evaluating on -site soil tests for septic system suitability, the County's health
1
sanitarians shall apply particular scrutiny to the approval of septic systems in locations
known to be within the 100-year floodplain. Questionable test results shall not be
approved within the 1 00-ear flood lain.
H
The County shall continue to implement its beaver -dam removal program, including the
2
employment of a full-time trapper.
Section 6: School Facilities -
A
The County shall consider establishing a list of school site selection suitability criteria for
3
use by the County Commissioners and Pender County school board in evaluating
potential sites, including offers to donate sites.
B
The County shall continue to prepare and consider long and short-range capital
1
improvement programs, including school facility needs.
C
In its review of site plans for new schools, the County shall pay particular attention to
1
traffic safety concerns.
LI
F—
L
H
Pender County and Glenn Harbeck Associates Actions-2 I

IPander County Growth Management Plan Implementation Actions
I
Section 7: Parks, Recreation and Water Access
A
The County shall use the 1998 Recreation and Open Space Plan for Pender County to
3
help determine the suitability of potential park and water access sites for acquisition or
donation.
B
The County shall continue to provide funding and/or seek grants for the development of
1
the Pender Central District Park located in Bur aw.
C
The County shall continue to provide funding and/or seek grants for the development of
1
Miller's Pond Park.
D
The County shall consider establishing a "fees in lieu of land dedication" provision within
1
the subdivision ordinance and other land development regulations. Fees collected
would be deposited in one or more capital reserve accounts set aside only for park -
development. Separate capital reserve accounts could be established for each of five
districts in the County with park development tied to the rate of growth in each district.
E
In preparing a long-range capital improvement plan for Pender County, consideration
2
shall be given to the establishment of five district parks, including the Pender Central
District Park already under development. Some portion of the funding for each district
park could come from a "fees in lieu of land dedication" provision within the County's
subdivision ordinance and other land development regulations.
F
Consistent with the level of need for public access to the intracoastal waterway, the
1
County shall continue to support the development of the recently approved park site and
boat ramp being developed in cooperation with the Town of Surf City.
G
The County shall support efforts to designate former railroad rights -of -way for public use
3
as pedestrian and bicycle trails, whether on a temporary or permanent basis.
Section 8 Solid: Waste Management.
A
In accordance with state law, the County shall continue to work cooperatively with other
3
local governments in Pender County to prepare an update to the Solid Waste
Management Plan every three years.
B
As the County's various solid waste collection sites are relocated and/or upgraded, the
2
County shall, through its waste management contractor, pay particular attention to the
appearance, maintenance, and utility of the sites.
C
The County shall consider reviewing its rate structure concerning charges for solid
2
waste collection and disposal with the twin objectives of (1) distributing the costs
equitably (in accordance with the volume and type of waste generated) and (2) making
the service self-supporting from a financial standpoint.
Section 9: Paying for4nfrastructure and; Services''
A
The County shall incorporate a long and short-range capital improvement plan into the
1
routine annual budget setting process for Pender County. Typically, such plans have a
15 to 20 year horizon with the most detail given to the one-year and first five-year
increments. The plan should include a needs assessment and long-range plan for
schools, fire stations, County vehicles, industrial parks, water treatment and distribution,
sewage collection, treatment and disposal, stormwater management infrastructure, and
parks, at a minimum. Cost estimates and sources of funding should be summarized in
the plan for the approximate year(s) in which expenditures are anticipated. Coordination
with the Countys municipalities will be critical.
B
The County shall explore the feasibility of instituting impact fees on growth and
1
development to help pay for the infrastructure and service demands generated by that
growth. First priority shall be given to impact fees for schools. (Parks and water access
needs shall be funded by the establishment of a "fees in lieu of land dedication
provision" (See Section 7 above) within the County's subdivision ordinance and/or other
development regulations.)
C
In identifying sources of funding for water supply and centralized sewage treatment, the
1
County shall look first to applicable state and federal grant programs, and secondarily to
revenue bonds, to be paid off by those users actually tied to the system.
IPonder County and Glenn Harbec Associates Actions,3

Pender County Growth Management Plan Implementation Actions I
Section 10: IndustrialDevelopment,
A
Pender County shall re-examine its zoning districts and map for consistency with the
3
policies and growth strategy map of this plan. Amendments to the ordinance shall be
considered as appropriate.
Section 11': Commercial and Office Development :
A
Pender County shall consider the preparation of a Special Highway Corridor Plan for
2
U.S. 17 from the New Hanover County line to the Onslow County line. The plan should
address measures to protect both the appearance and function of this highly visible
roadway through Pender County. Issues such as commercial signage, parking lot
location and landscaping, and parking lot connections may be included. Preparation of
the plan will require full participation and input from property owners adjoining the
roadwa .
B
Pender County shall consider the establishment of commercial landscaping and
1
buffering standards at a level of quality consistent with an attractive, coastal resort
setting.
C
Pender County shall consider the establishment of a mixed -use development provision
for inclusion in the Coun s zoning ordinance. See also Action Section 1 A
Section 12: Housing and Neighborhood Develo merit -
A
Pender County shall consider the establishment of one or more zoning districts or
2
zoning overlays designating some portions of the County for single-family, site built
housing and compatible doublewide manufactured housing. Such compatible
manufactured housing would have, for example, a permanent masonry foundation,
pitched roof and overhang. Areas outside the single-family site-built/double wide district
would continue to accept the placement of both double wide and singlewide
manufactured homes.
B
Pender County shall consider allowing accessory infill housing in some residential
3
districts. Such accessory housing might include, for example, granny flats, garage
apartments, accessory living quarters within or attached to the main house, etc. The
purpose of such accessory housing shall be primarily to meet the future demand for
elderly housing outside of retirement and assisted care institutions.
C
Pender County shall re-examine its requirements for paved roads (and exemptions
1
therefrom) with the purpose of tightening standards and closing loopholes which cause
ongoing maintenance problems for property owners, the County and the state.
D
Pender County shall consider the creation of a greenspace development provision
2
within the County zoning ordinance. Such a provision would allow for cluster
development and the associated preservation of permanent open space.
E
The County shall consider the establishment of a new provision in its zoning ordinance
2
which would allow for the development of traditional, "front porch" neighborhoods at a
density in keeping with a true town (i.e., 5000 to 7000 square foot lots, with true
community level open space). Such traditional neighborhoods might also incorporate
pedestrian oriented and properly scaled commercial uses serving the neighborhood.
This would be offered not as a requirement, but as an alternative to the postwar large lot
suburban subdivision. Same as Action 1A above
Section 13: Waterfront and Waterborne Development
A
Pender County shall consider the preparation of a surface water use plan outlining
3
policies and, perhaps, mapped water areas to govem the use the County's public trust
waters by competing users. Such users might include, for example, power boaters,
sailors, commercial fishermen, recreational fishermen, surfers, 'et skis, etc. the
(Continued on next page)
1
H
H
0
Pender County and Glenn Ha►heck Associates Actions-4 I

IPender County Growth Management Plan Implementation Actions
I
Section 14::A ricultural and Rural Area Preservation
A
Pender County shall consider designating some portions of the County's rural areas as
2
"agricultural preservation districts". Such designation involves notifying the public,
through public signage or other means, that certain parts of the County are reserved
first and foremost for farming. Non -farm homeowners are thus forewarned to expect the
odor, dust, movement of farm machinery on public roads, etc. typical of farming
activities.
B
Pender County shall consider creating agricultural and silvicultural zoning districts for
rural parts of the county in which approval of subdivisions would require a special use
2
permit.
Section'16: Estuarine Area Resources
A
Pender County shall consider the establishment of standards concerning limitations on
pier length and placement that are more restrictive than the minimum standards of the
3
State of North Carolina.
B
Pender County shall consider the establishment of standards concerning the
3
responsible use of jet skis and other similar personal watercraft that are more restrictive
than the minimum standards which may be promulgated by the State of North Carolina.
Section 16:Zi nificant Natural Areas::
A
Pender County shall continue to work cooperatively with state and federal officials
2
concerning the preservation in perpetuity of the Holly Shelter Game Preserve, the
Angola Bay Gamelands, and the Moore's Creek National Milita Battlefield.
Section:117::F"reshwater Resources` Surface and 'Ground
A
Pender County, along with New Hanover, Brunswick and other area counties, shall
monitor land and water use activities occurring upstream in the Cape Fear River basin
1
which would affect the quantity and quality of water reaching southeastern North
Carolina. The County shall pay particular attention to potential major polluters and
interbasin transfers of water which could degrade the quality or reduce the quantity of
this important water resource.
B
Pender County shall employ whatever lawful means are available to protect the quantity
and quality of groundwater resources within its governing jurisdiction, as tied to the
1
public health, safety and welfare of its citizens both current and future.
C
Pender County shall continue to pursue cooperative agreements with other local
1
governments, such as the City of Wilmington and the Town of Wallace, for the cost
effective provision of water and sewer services to Pender County residents and
businesses.
Section 18 WoUands and H dric-Soils
A
The Pender County Planning Department. Planning Board and County Commissioners
shall continue to employ the "hydric A soils" criterion as a controlling factor in approving
or disapproving the location of new development within the County's planning
1
jurisdiction. (Such "hydric A soils" were first listed in the 1991 Pender County Land Use
Plan Update as identified by the U.S. Dept of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service
under Technical Guide, Section II A-2, March 1990. .76-78
Section 196. Historic Preservation and Revitalization
A
Pender County shall consider the preparation of a NC 210 Heritage Corridor Plan with
the intent of preserving the rural character and tourism value of the part of the county
approaching the Moore's Creek National Battlefield Military Site.
3
(continued on next page)
I
Pender County and Glenn Harbeck Associates Actions-5

Pander County Growth Management Plan Implementation Actions
Section 20:Community Appearance
A
In addition to the Special Highway Corridor Plan suggested for U.S. 17 and the Heritage
2
Corridor Plan suggested for NC 210 in the vicinity of the Moore's Creek National
Battlefield Site, the County shall also consider, as time and resources permit, the
preparation of other special highway corridor plans involving Interstate 40, U.S. 117,
and NC 53.
B
Pender County shall consider the establishment of commercial landscaping and
1
buffering standards at a level of quality consistent with an attractive, coastal resort
setting. Same as Action 11 B
C
Pender County shall consider tightening up its regulations concerning the abandonment
2
of substandard mobile homes and/or their use for storage.
D
Upon adoption of the County's new signage regulations, the County shall institute a
1
concerted program to equitably enforce these standards.
r-,
I
Pender County and Glenn Harbecic Associates Actions-6 ,

t
1
1
1
1
PASQUOTANK COUNTY LAND USE UPDATE
JUNE, 1989
Ar
DCM COPY DCM COPY
lease do not remove!!!!!
Division of Coastal Management
PREPARED BY
THE
PASQUOTANK
COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS AND
THE
PASQUOTANK
COUNTY
PLANNING BOARD
Ratif ted by the North Caroftna Coastaf Resources Commtsston on
December 1, 1989
TechnizaC Assistance provided by the ALbemarfe Commission
Adopted by the Pasquotank County
Board of Commissioners on
October 16, 1989
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.

I . I
Pas quo tank, County Land Use Plan Update
June, 1989
Pasquotanl . County $oard of Commissioners
Jimmy Dixon, Chairman
Tommy If arris W.C. Owens, Jr.
Zee B. Lamb 3. Timothy Thornton
Patsy MZCee W.C. Witherspoon
Pasquotank,
County Planning $oard
David liarris, Chairman
Calvin Kirby, Vice Chairman
James Mtch.er Fred R.ifey
Rufus 3ack,son wifliam Smaff
Paul Staffings
3 ferbert T. nuffen, Jr., County Attorney
Randy Keaton, County nanager
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.

I
Preamble
It is the intent of the Pasquotank Board of Commissioners that this Land
Use Plan, as adopted, be utilized as a planning tool and not as a zoning
or regulatory document. It is not the intent of the Board of
Commissioners that the Land Use Plan be utilized by any agency,
federal or state, or by any court of law to restrict land use activities
otherwise approved by appropriate officials of the county. Therefore, to
the extent that there are legal requirements for utilization of this plan in
any regulatory or land use process before any agency or commission,
said agency or commission is instructed, to the extent allowed by law,
to interpret the provisions of this land use plan in the broadest possible
way so as not to restrict or impede the utilization of real property where
'
the utilization is in conformity with all applicable County ordinances.
The delineation of districts and the specifications of types of uses within
districts are not to be inclusive, and the Board of Commissioners
reserves the right to make changes, as determined by the Board of
Commissioners, in such boundaries or uses as long as the overall intent
of the plan as a development guideline for the entire community is not
transcended. Such variation or change shall not be considered as an
amendment of this plan, it being the intent of the Board of
Commissioners that this flexibility be an integrel provision of this Land
'
Use Plan.
It is the intent of the Board of Commissioners in adopting this Land Use
Plan to eliminate or restrict any innovative land use practices.
Therefore, nothing within this plan should be interpreted to restrict
special use planning, mixed -use planning or zoning, or mixed -use
property in planned unit development or other such forms of
development that are otherwise subject to specfic controls imposed by
zoning, subdivision or other ordinances adopted from time to time by
the Board of Commissioners.
The provisions contained within this section shall supercede, in case of
any conflict with any other provision of this land use plan, such other
provisions.
I
Pream6te

1
1
11
1-1
L
I
1
I
I
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ESTABLISHMENT OF INFORMATION BASE.............................................1
PRESENT CONDITIONS SUMMARY........................................................11
POPULATION GROWTH.......................................................................11
POPULATION DISTRIBUTION......................................................13
Townships........................................................................13
POPULATION COMPOSITION.......................................................14
RACIAL COMPOSITION......................................................14
AgeGroups.......................................................................15
SexDistribution..................................................................21
ECONOMY.........................................................................................22
............
TOTAL COUNTY OUTPUT .......................................... .....22
Landand Capital.................................................................
24
Labor..............................................................................26
Profits.............................................................................27
OutputSummary.........:.......................................................28
TOTAL COUNTY PERSONAL INCOME............................................28
FARM INCOME..........................................................................30
EMPLOYMENT ........ ......................................................31
MAJOR MANUFACTURING EMPLOYERS IN PASQUOTANK
COUNTY.........................................................................32
EXISTING LAND USE .......................................... .............................33
DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS ........................................ .................
33
DOMINANT LAND USES.............................................................33
LAND USE COMPATIBILITY PROBLEMS...............:........................33
Agricultural Lands...............................................................34
Residential Development........................................................34
Housing...........................................................................35
Areas Likely to Experience Growth...........................................35
Estimated Future Demand......................................................36
PROBLEMS WITH UNPLANNED GROWTH..............................................36
EXISTING LAND USE MAP...................................................................37
CURRENT PLANS, POLICIES, AND REGULATIONS...................................38
REGULATIONS.........................................................................38
POLICIES.................................................................................39
PLANS.....................................................................................39
STUDIES..................................................................................40
CONSTRAINTS TO DEVELOPMENT: LAND SUITABILITY............*................41
Soils........................................................................................41
WaterSupply..............................................................................42
Areas of Environmental Concern ( A.E.0 )...........................................43
PUBLIC TRUST WATERS...................................................43
ESTUARINE WATERS........................................................43
ESTUARINE SHORE..........................................................44
COASTAL WETLANDS.......................................................44
PUBLIC WATER SUPPLIES..........................................................44
FRAGILEAREAS.......................................................................44
The Great Dismal Swamp.......................................................44
ManMade Hazards.......................................................................44
Historical, Cultural, & Archealogical Sites............................................44
CONSTRAINTS TO DEVELOPEMENT:......................................................45
CAPACITY OF PUBLIC FACILITIES........................................................45
WaterSystem..............................................................................45
SolidWaste................................................................................46
FireProtection.............................................................................46
11
Tabce of Contents i.

TABLt OF CONTENTS
1
Emergency Services ........................................... ...........................47
Educational Facilities.....................................................................48
Impact of Seasonal Population..........................................................48
Policy Issues: Resource Protection.............................................................49
Issue: Soil Limitations..................................................................49
Issue: Flood Plain Development........................................................49
Issue: Septic Tank Limitations..........................................................50
Issue: Freshwater, Swamps, & Marshes..............................................51
Issue: Cultural and Historical Resources..............................................51
Issue: Manmade Hazards................................................................52
Issue: Protection of Potable Water Supply......................... ...................52
Issue: Stormwater Runoff --Agricultural Development ............................53
Issue: Stormwater Runoff -- Residential Development .............................53
Issue: Industrial Impact on Fragile Areas.............................................54
Issue: Development of Sound and Estuarine System Islands .......................54
Policy Issues: Resource Production.............................................................56
Issue: Productive Agricultural Lands..................................................56
Issue: Commercial Forest Lands.......................................................56
Issue: Commercial and Recreational Fishing.........................................57
Issue: Existing and Potential Mineral Production....................................57
Issue: Off- Road Recreational Vehicles................................................57
Issue: Residential and Commercial Development Impact on Any Resource ......58
Issue: Industrial Development Impact on Any Resource ............................58
Issue: Impact of Peat or Phosphate Mining on Any Resource ......................58
Policy Issues: Economic and Community Development......................................59
Issue: Types and Location of Industries Desired.....................................59
Issue: Local Commitment to Provide Services to Development.....................59
Issue: Types of Urban Growth Patterns Desired.....................................60
Issue: Redevelopment of Developed Areas...........................................61
Issue: Commitment to State and Federal Programs in the Area.....................62
Issue: Assistance to Channel Maintenance and Beach Nourishment............:..62
Issue: Energy Facility Siting and Development .................................. 63
Issue: Tourism, Waterfront, and Estuarine Access..................................63
Issue: Density and Location of Anticipated Residential Development.............64
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION.....................................................................65
STORM HAZARD MITIGATION, POST -DISASTER RECOVERY PLAN .............66
StormHazard Area.......................................................................67
Vulnerability...............................................................................67
Severityof Risk...........................................................................67
Magnitudeof Risk........................................................................67
RISK TABLE FOR HAZARD AREAS.......................................67
EstuarineShoreline..............................................................68
Flood Hazard Area...............................................................68
Public Trust Waters..............................................................68
Rest of the Community..........................................................68
Evacuability................................................................................68
PolicyStatement..........................................................................69
Issue: Mitigation of Storm Damage...........................................69
Post Disaster Recovery Plan.............................................................70
PURPOSE: .......................................................................
70
ORGANIZATION:..............................................................70
SUPPORTTEAM: ....................................................
70
SUPPORT TEAM COMPOSITION AND RESPONSIBILITIES: ........ 70
Schedule of Activities....................................................................71
1
I
1
1
1
I
I
1
[I
Table of Contents it

I TABLE OF CONTENTS
IMMEDIATE ACTION: ........................................................
71
Longterm Reconstruction Actions.............................................71
Damage Assessment.............................................................72
Damage Classification...........................................................72
Reconstruction Development Standards.......................................72
Development Moritoria..........................................................72
COMPOSITE STORM HAZARD MAP........................................................73
LAND CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM AND LAND USE MAP: ............................
74
PASQUOTANK COUNTY......................................................................74
Land Classification System..............................74
Land Classification Districts .............................................................74
Developed: ........................................................................
75
Transitional: ......................................................................
75
Community.......................................................................75
Rural Service: ....................................................................
76
Conservation: ..................................................................... 76
LAND CLASSIFICATION MAP...............................................................77
Relationship Between Local Policies and ................................................ 78
Inter -Governmental Coordination....................................................... 78
1
1
11
I
J
Table of Contents ii.i.

I
I ESTABLISHMENT OF INFORMATION BASE
' This 1987 Pasquotank County Land Use Plan Update relies heavily on the previous
land use planning documents prepared in cooperation with the N. C. Division of Coastal
Management. The 1976 Pasquotank County Land Use Plan, the initial Pasquotank
County CAMA Land Use Document, provides a basis for measuring changes in most of the
base studies. This plan provided a great amount of base study information concerning the
population, economy, and physical land use constraints. The 1981 CAMA Land Devel-
opment Plan Update for Pasquotank County presented the County's first attempt to ar-
ticulate local policies concerning specific land use issues. This document proved valuable in
helping to focus the planning process toward policy development.
Base information data was taken from a variety of State, Federal, and Local sources. Specific
quantitative data concerning land use and development changes were obtained from records
maintained by local county officials; particularly the records from the Pasquotank County Tax
Supervisor's office and the office of the Pasquotank County Building Inspector.
Interviews were conducted with the Pasquotank County Manager, the County Building Inspec-
tor, the County Water System Supervisor, the Superintendent of Schools, and various public
officials. The County Manager was particularly helpful in supplying information to fill the gaps
in local records.
Monthly meetings were held with the Pasquotank County Planning Board. Meetings were adver-
tised in the local newspaper in an effort to solicit citizen participation. The following section reports
on the accomjplishments the county has made in pursuing its policies set forth in the 1981 Land use
Update. In some cases, policies were not adopted for particular issues, yet the county took
' significant steps toward addressing some of these particular issues; the County's achievements in
these areas are included in this report..
PREVIOUS POLICY ACHIEVEMENTS: PASQUOTANK COUNTY
Issue: Soil Limitations
Previous 1981 Policy:
" There are existing policies related to physical and man-made constraints to
development. These are set forth in the County's subdivision regulations,
Articles VII and VIII, and in the County's septic tank ordinance and flood plain
ordinance. No other policies related to constraints to development are
considered necessary at this time." Cama Land Development Plan
Update for Pasquotank_ County. North Carolina. 1981. Ferren
Planning Group, Greenville, NC.
Current 1987 Policy:
The county shall rely on existing regulatory instruments and processes to insure
proper considerations of soil limitations to the intended development.
Achievements
The County still relies on the District Health Department for approval of septic systems.
The Health Department has been recommending a soil transplant type system for use on
I'Pricrnlntrin z. f'nu.nt» f nn.rf 1.1-a 'Pfnn Undfn.ty. 1 qR7
'Pnno. 1

provisional soils in the county. The District Health Department in cooperation with the
NC Agriculture Extension Service and the Albemarle Commission will undertake a ,
study on the effectiveness of this system and determine what improvements, if any, are
needed to the system so that land owners can be assured of use of these provisional
lands for residential purposes. '
Issue: Flood Plain Development
Previous 1981 Policy:
'
" There are existing policies related to physical and man-made constraints to
development. These are set forth in the County's subdivision regulations,
Articles VII and VIII, and in the County's septic tank ordinance and flood plain
ordinance.... No other policies related to constraints to development are
'
considered necessary at this time." Cama Land Development Plan
Update for Pasquotank County, North Carolina, 1981, Ferren
Planning Group, Greenville, NC
'
Current 1987 Policy:
The county will insure that development in flood hazard areas meet the
requirement of its flood plain ordinance.
Achievements
The county has entered into the regular phase of the National Flood Insurance Program.
Final maps of the flood hazard areas have been received, and the county has adopted an
ordinance to regulate development in flood hazard areas as recommended by the Federal
Emergency Management Agency.
Issue: Septic Tank Limitations
Previous 1981 Policy:
,
" There are existing policies related to physical and man-made constraints to
development. These are set forth in the County's subdivision regulations,
Articles VII and VIII, and in the County's septic tank ordinance and flood plain
'
ordinance. No other policies related to constraints to development are
considered necessary at this time.". Cama Land Development Plan
Update for Pasquotank County North Carolina 1981, Ferren
Planning Group, Greenville, NC.
'
Current 1987 Policy:
The county shall continue to rely on the District Health Departments septic tank
'
permitting process to insure proper development in respect to septic tank
limitations.
Achievements
'
The County still relies on the District Health Department for approval of septic systems.
The Health Department has been recommending a soil transplant type system for use on
provisional soils in the county. The District Health Department in cooperation with the
'
NC Agriculture Extension Service and the Albemarle Commission will undertake a
study on the effectiveness of this system and determine what improvements are needed,
if any, to the system so that land owners can be assured of use of these provisional
'
lands for residential purposes.
Prn.�qrnlntna". r..ountu f rind. Ura 'Pfnrt Undatn. 1 qR7 'Pnnv. 7 1

' Issue: Freshwater Swamps, &Marshes
Previous 1981 Policy:
' " There are existing policies related to physical and man-made constraints to
development. These are set forth in the County's subdivision regulations,
Articles VII and VIII, and in the County's septic tank ordinance and flood plain
' ordinance. No other policies related to constraints to development are
considered necessary at this time." Cama Land Development Plan
Update for Pasquotank County, North Carolina, 1981, Ferren
Planning Group, Greenville, NC.
Current 1987 Policy:
It shall be the policy of Pasquotank County to preserve the integrity of the
' swamp's ecological function.
Achievements
The fresh water swamps in the county are all located in a flood hazard area, develop-
ment in these areas are regulated by the counties Flood Hazard Area Development
Ordinance.
' Issue: Cultural and Historical Resources
Previous 1981 Policy:
' None
Current 1987 Policy:
The county will encourage the preservation of significant historical and cultural
artifacts. However, the county shall not pledge any general financial support to
such projects, and does not wish to establish any local regulatory controls on
these artifacts.
' Achievements
The county is now having a survey taken to identify and catalog all historically signifi-
cant structures and sites in the county.
Issue: Manmade Hazards
Previous 1981 Policy:
" To ensure safe operations of aircraft around the Coast Guard Base, the
County will consider the preparation of minimum height and hazard standards."
Cama Land Development Plan Update for Pasquotank County,
North Carolina, 1981, Ferren Planning Group, Greenville, NC.
Current 1987 Policy:
The same as the previous land use policy.
Achievements
Current regulatory authority over the Coast Guard Air Base Clear Zones and Approach
Zones is exercised by the City of Elizabeth City. City Zoning Regulations restricts
constriction to one foot in height for each 50 foot distance from the end of the runway.
New FAA regulations require that a Clear Zone to extend 3,000 feet from the end of the
runway with no permanent habitable structures allowed.Beyond the Clear Zone is the
Approach Zone that has a density restriction of no more than 25 persons per acre. The
I'Pncnu.ntsitik Pnuntu frinA 1.1ca Vein Unrdnta 14R7
Pnno. 3

1
County is working with the Coast Guard to facilitate their acquisition of easements or
lands within the identified Clear Zone. Density control in the Approach Zones is still ,
the jurisdiction of City of Elizabeth City through Local Legislation promulgated in 1969
Issue: Protection of Potable Water Supply '
Previous 1981 Policy:
None. '
Current 1987 Policy:
It is be the policy of Pasquotank County to protect the County's fresh water
supply by strictly enforcing the lot size requirements of the State Department of ,
Health on all developments in the county.
Achievements
The District Health Department which approves the placement and construction of sep-
tic systems in Pasquotank County is about to undertake a study in cooperation with the
NC State Agricultural Extension Service and the Albemarle Commission that will test
the effectiveness of the systems now being installed and their affect on groundwater '
supplies.
Issue: Stormwater Runoff -- Agricultural Development
Previous 1981 Policy:
None.
Current 1987 Policy:
It has always been the Policy of the Pasquotank County Board of
Commissioners to encourage use of the best management practices
recommendations of the U.S. Soil Conservation Service.
Achievements
In the 1987 program year Pasquotank County farmers received and allocation of
'
$81,951 through the North Carolina Department of Agriculture's Cost Share Program
for Non -Point Source Pollution Control.
Issue: Stormwater Runoff -- Residential Development
'
Previous 1981 Policy:
None.
Current 1987 Policy:
Pasquotank County shall continue its policy of requiring all proposed
subdivision plats to be first inspected by the District Health Department for
recommendation of drainage improvements and of permitting only those
subdivisions where needed improvements receive Health Department approval.
The County is amending their subdivision regulations to require developers to
submit comments and recommendations from the Land Quality Section,
Division of Land Resources as to sedimentation and erosion control
requirements and from the Department of Environmental Management as to the
applicability of state storm water drainage controls.
'
Achievements
The county's revised subdivision regulations require the receipt of comments from the
,
Land Quality Section, Division of Land Resources and from the Department of Envi
'Pricrntntrinh. rotint» rant!. i.L c, 'Pftin t.lnrfnto. 1 QR7 'Pnno. 4 1

n
I
ronmental Management as to the applicability of state regulations and as to the sug-
gested and required improvements needed for regulatory compliance.
Issue: Industrial Impact on Fragile Areas
Previous 1981 Policy:
None.
Current 1987 Policy:
The county shall continue to support industrial development and shall proceed
to make the needed improvements to properties it now owns to attract new
industries. All identified fragile areas along with all known AEC's are
classified as Conservation and thus are restricted from most industrial uses.
Achievements
The County has purchased a second industrial development site north of Elizabeth City
on US 17 to accommodate new industrial growth. This site is free of any fragile areas
or Areas of Environmental Concern.
Issue: Development of Sound and Estuarine System Islands
Previous Policy:
None.
Current 1987 Policy:
None.
Achievements
None
Issue: Productive Agricultural Lands
Previous 1981 Policy:
"It shall be the policy of Pasquotank County to include provisions in any future
land use regulations for the protection of the County's 'active' agricultural land
from indiscriminate development." Cama Land Development Plan
Undate for Pasnuotank County, North Carolina. 1981. Ferren
Planning Group, Greenville, NC.
Current 1987 Policy:
The county recognizes the danger of losing its best agricultural land to
development. However, the county also recognizes the right of an individual to
dispose of and to use his property as he desires. The county is unwilling at this
time to place any use controls on land.
Achievements
The County is reconsidering the prospect of imposing Zoning controls on at least a
portion of the county. It is anticipated that agricultural zones will an important devel-
opment control tool.
1 'Prtcrntntnnh. Pnuntu f nwf. 1.1¢0. 'Pfrin 1.lndritv. 1 Q87
'pang. 5

Issue: Commercial Forest Lands
Previous 1981 Policy:
None.
Current 1987 Policy:
Pasquotank Countywill encourage reforestation of clear cut timberlands as a
sound forest management practice. The County will continue to promote Best
Management Practices for forestry operations within the county.
Achievements
None
Issue: Commercial and Recreational Fishing
Previous 1981 Policy:
None.
Current 1987 Policy:
None.
Achievements
None
Issue: Existing and Potential Mineral Production
Previous Policy:
None.
Current 1987 Policy:
These peat deposits are located in the Dismal Swamp and therefore under
federal control. This is not an issue at this time.
Achievements
None
Issue: Off Road Recreational Vehi
Previous 1981 Policy:
None.
Current 1987 Policy:
None.
Achievements
None
Issue: Residential and Commercial Development Impact on Any Resource
Previous 1981 Policy:
None.
PCLCnilntjm*iL. rnun.tij f anlf llza 'Platt Unrfatr. 1 UR7 'Pnnv, A

Current 1987 Policy:
The county will rely on its existing regulatory tools and the permitting activities
of the various local state and federal agencies to prevent any harmful damage to
its resources. The County will consider the development of a county zoning
ordinance to regulate the impacts of commercial development on county
resources during the upcoming planning period.
Achievements
None
Issue: Industrial Development Impact on Any Resource
Previous 1981 Policy:
None.
Current 1987 Policy:
None
Achievements
None
Issue: Impact of Peat or Phosphate Mining on Any Resource
Previous 1981 Policy:
None.
Current 1987 Policy:
None.
Achievements
None
Issue: Types and Location of Industries Desired
Previous Policy:
" The County recognizes that due to the availability of water and sewer utilities
in and near Elizabeth City, the County supports efforts to locate new industries
in those areas where facilities are available. The County also supports industrial
development in other areas of the County where water service and
transportation access are available, and where limited sewage disposal is
required." CAMA Land Development Plan Update for Pasquotank
County, North Carolina , 1981, Ferren Planning Group,
Greenville, NC
Current 1987 Policy:
The County shall actively pursue the location and creation of new industries into
Pasquotank County so long as such industries do not degrade the quality of life.
The County has purchased two sites suitable for the location of new industries.
Achievements
The County has purchased a second tract of property to be developed as an indusrtial
park.
1 13ri-Q(3untnrih. Pnuntu f nnd. Uca 'Pfnn Undnta. 1 U7
Pruno. 7

I
Issue: Local Commitment to Provide Services to Development
Previous Policy:
"At the present time decisions as to whether or not service [water service] can
be provided to new developments will have to be made on a case by case basis.
" CAMA Land Development Plan Update for Pasquotank
County, NC,1981.The Ferren Group, Greenville, NC.
Current 1987 Policy:
Pasquotank County is committed to the policy of providing the highest quality
and the greatest quantity of public services that its revenues will allow.
Achievements j
The County has initiated two major improvement projects that will take approximately
5 years to complete: a water system improvement program that will double the capacity
of the present system and will require an investment of more than a million dollars and
a long-range education facility renovations and constructions program costing more
than $13,000,000.
Issue: Types of Urban Growth Patterns Desired
Previous Policy:
"The County will consider the preparations of a zoning ordinance which would
reflect the recommendations of this CAMA Plan Update, and which would
specify the types, locations, and densities of desired future growth." Cama
Land Development Plan Update for Pasquotank County NC,
1981, The Ferren Group, Greenville, NC.
Current 1987 Policy:
Pasquotank County, following the policy recommendations of the 1981 CAMA
Plan Update, initiated a planning study to develop a zoning ordinance for the
County. Due to a ground swell of citizen protest against land use zoning the
county decided not to pursue this legislation. The County, in light of recent
developments, is again considering the adoption of a County Zoning Ordinance
for at least centain areas of the county and is in the process of securing a
consultant to assist in the preparation of an ordinance. Thus the County's
current policy is the same as the policy stated in the 1981 Land Use Update.
Achievements
The county has developed a multi -family development ordinance, a mobile home park
ordinance, and has revised and updated their subdivision regulations; the county is now
in the process of securing consultant services for developing a zoning ordinance.
Issue: Redevelopment of Developed Areas
Previous Policy:
"... the County considers it unnecessary to take a policy initiation on this t
issue." Cama Land Development Plan Update for Pasquotank
County NC, 1981. The Ferren Group, Greenville, NC.
Current 1987 Policy:
The County shall pursue financial assistance from state and federal agencies for
the purpose of implementing its redevelopment plan for low income
neighborhoods adjacent to the city limits of Elizabeth City. Two phases of this
Prmnuntnnb, r'.mLnt» f nnrf. 1.1¢0. 'Pfnn Unrfn.tn. 1 qR7 'Puna R I

plan have been initiated. One is complete; the second is nearing completion.
The County plans to request funds from the NC Division of Community
Assistance for the Third Phase of this Program.
Achievements
The county has completed the redevelopment of one neighborhood near Elizabeth City.
Now streets and drainage were installed along with water and sewer lines. All struc-
tures were repaired to an acceptable standard. The County is now preparing a plan to
redevelop another county neighborhood.
Issue: Commitment to State and Federal Programs in the Area
Previous Policy:
"It shall be the policy of the County to cooperate with state and federal agencies
in the evaluation of proposed projects by such agencies which will impact the
County and to advise said agencies of the County's position on these projects
through the A-95 review process and/or the County Manager." Cama Land
Development Plan Update for Pasauotank County NC, 1981.The
Ferren Group, Greenville, NC.
Current 1987 Policy:
The County shall continue to participate in all state and federal programs which
in the County's opinion will be of benefit to its residents.
Achievements
The County relies heavily on state and federal programs. The state departments of
Human Resources, Natural Resources and Community Development have several divi-
sions whose consultation is essential to the County's land development process.
The State Department of Agriculture and its Agricultural Extension Service are heavily
used for erosion and non -source pollution control, well as research efforts into ground
water contamination prevention and into efforts to promote the .use of Best Management
Practices.
Issue: Assistance to Channel Maintenance and Beach Nourishment
Previous 1981 Policy:
" It shall be the policy of the county to support beach nourishment and channel
maintenance projects by state and federal agencies." Cama Land
Development Plan Update for Pasguotank County NC, 1981.The
Ferren Group, Greenville, NC.
Current 1987 Policy:
It shall be the county's policy to lobby vigorously to keep the Dismal Swamp
Canal open and functioning.
Achievements
The County along with other interested groups was able to convince the Corp of Engi-
neers to continue the operation of the Dismal Swamp Canal and to make needed im-
provements to the locks and to clear navigational obstructions from the canal.
1 Vimgnuntrink, r..n+in.t» f linrf 1,1cv. 'Pfrin. 1.lndsits 1 Q27
'Pena 9

Issue: Energv Facility Siting and Development
Previous 1981 Policy:
"This is not an issue." Cama Land Development Plan Update for
Pasquotank County NC, 1981.The Ferren Group, Greenville, NC.
Current 1987 Policy:
None.
Achievements
None
Issue: Tourism, Waterfront, and Estuarine Access
Previous 1981 Policy:
None
Current 1987 Policy:
The County will seek to acquire the right of way, title, or easement of property
that will provide public access to beach and waterfront areas.
Achievements
The county is participating in the continued funding of operations and staffing of a
Welcome Center located along US 17 south of the Virginia state line in Camden
County, just north of Pasquotank County
Issue: Density and Location of Anticipated Residential Development
Previous 1981 Policy:
"The county will consider the preparation of a zoning ordinance which will
consider the most appropriate locations and densities of waterfront subdivisions
and other developments." Cama Land Development Plan Update for
Pasquotank County NC, 1981.The Ferren Group, Greenville, NC.
Current 1987 Policy:
Same as the 1981 Policy
Achievements
The county initiated a study to prepare a zoning ordinance immediately after the preparation
of the 1981 Land -Use Update, but overwhelming citizen resistance convinced the
Commissioners that the time had not yet come for zoning. Recent events concerning
development in the county has made the county consider once again the preparation of a
zoning ordinance.
'Pacn,,ntnrth. rountu rnwd t kv. 'Pfnn t.tndnty. 1 Q117 'Pnnv. 1(1

I
PRESENT CONDITIONS SUMMARY
Population and economic growth have been stable and steady if somewhat slow in Pasquotank
County. The population growth rate since the end of the 1950's has averaged between 4% and
5% annually. The most significant factor in the population is its gradual aging. In 1970 the
number of persons over 65 years of age accounted for less than 10% of the county population;
in 1980 this percentage had grown to more than 11.5% and is projected to reach 15% by the
year 2000. The dependency ratio, the ratio between those population segments that are either
considered pre-school, school -age and elderly and the remaining part of the population, will
remain essentially the same during the planning period. The demands on the local community
will be altered, however, since the composition of the dependency group will shift from being
composed primarily of preschool and school age to made up of primarily elderly persons.
The total economic output of the county has demonstrated a slow steady growth similar to that
of the population. When measured in constant 1967 dollars the county's economic output has
grown at an annual rate of 3.11 % since 1967. This is slightly less the growth rate of the GNP
of the nation during much of this time period, but closely approximates the national economic
growth rate since 1980.
Generally speaking land use in the county has not changed significantly since 1981. The
county's principal land -use continues to be agricultural, forestry, and single-family residential
uses; however, . As was the case during the previous planning period, platting activity has
been much more active than actual building activity. The best housing data available is a
comparison between 1970 and 1980 census counts. The number of housing units during that
10-year period increased by 1,823 units, with mobile homes accounting for 535 units or 25%
of all new units. Recent reductions in the home mortgage interest rates along with the
completion of the new county water system has stimulated new housing construction in the
county. If interest rates remain at the current level land development and housing construction
will play a substantially greater role in the county's economy during the next five years.
POPULATION GROWTH
Except for two separate decades, population growth in Pasquotank County, since the turn of the
century has remained steady, but very slow. As the graph below indicates, the two decades from
1910 to 1920 and from 1940 to 1950 are obvious exceptional growth periods. Growth during these
two ten-year periods was 22.2% and 18.4%, respectively. It is not known what historical forces or
events led to the steep growth during the 1910 decade. The 1940 decade, of course, was the decade
of World War H, during which many persons and families relocated to areas containing military
training or production facilities; this was also a period of extreme fertility and the beginning of the
_ "baby boom."
The two obvious peaks in the graph below are separated by equally obvious periods of almost flat
growth rates. It is interesting to note that the earlier period of flat growth is at a consistently higher
level than growth since 1960. Growth during the earlier 1920 to 1950 period averaged 7.4% per
decade, while growth since 1960 has averaged only 5.4% per decade. Projected growth rates pre-
pared by the NC Office of Budget and Management indicate a still lower rate of growth in the
county for the future, with growth rates for the period from 1980 to 2000 projected at only 4.5%
per decade.
1 VrLcnuntnti. r'.nutttu f nruf 1,1co. 'P(rin 11n(irita 1 QR7
Puna 11

POPULATION GROWTH AND GROWTH RATE
POPULATION GROWTH 1900 - 2000
PASQUOTANK COUNTY
3 2 0 0 0
"" 1985
Population
0.25
28000
--❑--.
29,356
%
0.2
P
24000
E
>f?
C
R
20000
0.15 H
S
16000
A
O
12000
-
0.1 N
N
00
..p»':
G
S
8000
"a".�
C.`'
o::
05 E
0.0 5
4000
0
<°o€:>
0
1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980
1990 2000
0 TOTAL POP. -�- % CHANGE
ource
NC Department of Management and Budget Population Projections
for Counties 1980-2010
The table below presents the actual population counts for the designated census periods and the
projections prepared by the NC Office of Budget and Management. It. has taken eighty years for the
population in Pasquotank County to just more than slightly double in number. The county popula-
tion in 1900 was 13,660 persons; in 1980 the county's population reached 28,462, or 108% of the
turn -of -the -century population. This is the equivalent of investing $13,660 at 0.92% for eighty
years compounded annually.
POPULATION GROWTH PASQUOTANK COUNTY 1900 - 1980
1900
1910
1920
1930
1940
1950
1960
1970
1980
1990
2000
TOTAL
CHANGE
13,660
16,693
17,670
19,143
20,568
24,547
25,630
26,824
28,462
29,893
30,998
n a
22.20
5.85
8.34
7.44
19.35
4.41
4.66
6.11
5.03
3.70
source trio department of management ana t3uaget Population i-rojMlons for counties ly5u-zuiu
I
I
I
I
I
Vricntuntn.ttfb. rr)titttu f nttd.. Ucv. 'Pftin. Unrfrity. 1 QR7 'Pnno. 17

a
I POPULATION DISTRIBUTION
n
PASQUOTANK COUNTY: TOWNSHIPS
Newland
Alt. Herman
evidence
1
Elizabeth 0
Nixonton
Salem
Pasquotank County Township Population 1950-1980
:v1951)
1960
1970
1980
NEWLAND
-
1621
1716
1923
2059
PROVIDENCE
1235
1960
2819
3910
NIOUNT HERNIAN
1434
1594
2352
3403
ELIZABETH CITY
13836
15870
15507
14297
NIXONTON
2641
3063
3135
3591
Source: US Bureau or Census 1950, 1960, 1970, 1980
Townships
The Pasquotank County population has always been heavily concentrated in the Elizabeth City
township. However, since 1960, this concentration has diminished. In 1950, the Elizabeth City
township accounted for 65% of the county's total population; by 1980 this concentration had
dropped to just slightly more than 50%. Historically, the Elizabeth City township and the
Nixonton township were the county's most populous townships. Since 1970, however, the town-
ships of Providence and Mount Herman have shown the greatest amount of population growth.
Providence township now outranks Nixonton in total population, but it is still a distant second to
Elizabeth City. Population growth in Providence and Mount Herman townships has been
encouraged by the improved mobility of the general population and the improved transportation
linkage of highway US 17. The recent four-laning of this major transportation corridor has caused
an increased number of commercial and industrial establishments in these townships.
Nixonton, while losing to Providence its position as the second most populous township in the
county, has demonstrated steady, respectable growth . In the 1970 to 1980 period Nixonton grew
by 456 persons for a 15% growth rate. A great deal of this growth is due to new waterfront
subdivision development and housing construction along the Pasquotank and Little Rivers.
ASQUOTANK COUNTY TOWNSHIP GROWTH 1950 TO 1980
16000
P 12000
E
R
S 8000
O
N 4000
S
0
1950 1960 1970 1980
US CENSUS BUREAU
0 ELIZABETH
. CITY
® MOUNT
HERMAN
■ NEWLAND
0 PROVIDENCE
® NIXONTON
® SALEM
Pn.Cnuntn.ttE. r..nunt» f-ituf. 11,zv. 'Pfn.n. 11ncLato. 1 qR7
'Pnno. IX

1
POPULATION COMPOSITION
As is shown in the sections that follow, there are some significant and noticeable trends developing
in the composition of Pasquotank County's population. The number of residents who are 60 years
of age or greater continues to increase and to account for a greater share of the population. The
number of school age residents has decreased, particularly in the 5-year-old to 9-year-old age
group, and is projected to continue this trend into the near future. The number of females partici-
pating in the labor force is increasing, thus following the national trend of greater female participa-
tion. The sections that follow present information on the following specific components of the
county's population: racial composition, age group distributions, labor force composition, and sex
distribution.
RACIAL COMPOSITION
35,000
30,000
25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
RACIAL COMPOSITION
PASQUOTANK COUNTY 1970 - 2000
1970 1980 1985 1990 2000
'HITE
ON -WHITE
)TAL
Source NC Department of� Management and Budget Populrtiori AProjections for Counties 1980.2010
The non -white population in Pasquotank County increased in population from 1970 to 1980 but
remained rather static in its proportion of the county's total population. In 1970, non -white resi-
dents accounted for 38.01% of the county population and numbered 10,197 persons; by 1980, the
number of non -white residents had declined by 418 persons and made up 37.3% of the county
population. Projections provided by the N.C. Department of Budget and Management indicate that
this trend will continue at least through the five-year period covered by this document.
Projections for the year 2000 estimate that 11,644 non -whites will reside in Pasquotank County
and will account for 37.0% of the county population.
RACIAL COMPOSITION OF THE POPULATION
PASQUOTANK COUNTY 1970 TO 2000
1970
%
1980
%
1985
%
1990
%
2000
%
WHITE
NON -WHITE
16,627
10,197
61.99
38.01
17,847
10,615
62.70
37.30
18,287
11,069
62.29
37.71
18,515
11,378
61.94
38.06
19,354
11,644
62.44
37.56
TOTAL
26,824
100.00
28,462
100.00
29,356
100.00
29,893
100.00
30,998
100.00
Source NC Department of Management and Budget Population Projections for Counties 1980.2010
I
I
I
I
i
1
'PncnuntanL. r..nu nttj f nruf. l.tc�v. 'Pfau Unrfaty. 1 QR7 'Pnno. 14 1

1
r
I
I
Age Groups
The following sections discuss those age segments of the population that generally require special
or more frequent types of services both from the private and from the governmental sectors and
that in their own way create certain types of development and service demands.
These age groups are as follows:
The School -Age Group ( 5-19 years old)
This group naturally creates the demand for educational and recreational
facilities and services.
The Family -Forming Group ( 15-35 years old)
This group is generally responsible for new household formations and
new offspring, thus creating demands for new housing facilities and
fornung the base for future internal population growth.
The Potential Labor Force ( 16 years and older)
This group is usually responsible for all the goods and services
produced in an area; however, not everyone in this group participates in
the work force.
The Elderly ( 65 years and older)
This group spans the greatest number of years and could be segmented
further into additional age groups ranging from aged to infirm, with
each having very specialized and critical needs.
The Dependency Sector ( under 16 and over 65)
This group only generally measures those persons who are
considered dependent on someone else for the major portion of
their personal needs and economic support. There are, of
course, persons under 16 years of age and over 65 who are self-
sufficient; however, they generally are not numerous. There are
also many persons not in these age groups that are, in some
ways at least, dependent on outside support.
1 VriCnuntritil2. r'.nuntu f Hurl. Uqa 'Pfatt 1.lnrinty. 1 Q97 'Prinv. 15

School Age
SCHOOL AGE COHORTS
PASQUOTANK COUNTY 1970 -2000
NC OFFICE OF BUDGET & MANAGEMENT
3,500
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
N 5-9YRS
® 10-14YRS
El 15-19YRS
1970 1980 1985 1990 2000
Source NC Department of Management and Budget Population Projections for Counties 1980.2010
Projections indicate a decline in the school -age population cohorts (5 to 19 years old) during the
planning period. The persons in this cohort numbered 8,386 in 1970; by 1980, the number of
school -aged children had declined by more than 1,000 children to 7,375 persons and is estimated
to decline by more than another 1,000 children to 6,283 by the year 2000. The table below shows
the number of persons within the age group and the group's percentage share of the total popula-
tion. As can be seen in the table, the school -age cohort accounts for an increasingly smaller share of
the county's population.
SCHOOL AGE COHORT IN THE POPULATION
PASQUOTANK COUNTY 1970 TO 2000
1970
%
1980
%
1985
%
1990
%
2000
%
5-9YRS
2,683
31.99
2,057
27.89
2,054
30.33
1,829
27.72
1,768
28.14
10-14YRS
2,882
34.37
2,222
30.13
2,026
29.92
2,111
31.99
2,115
33.66
15-19YRS
2,821
33.64
3.096
41.98
2,692
39.75
2,658
40.28
2,400
38.20
TOTAL
8,386
100.00
7.375
100.00
6,772
100.00
6,598
100.00
6,283
100.00
aaurce ,Nt_ vepartment ut :vanagemem ana tsuaget roputanon rrojecuons for uounttes vv6u-lulu
'Pricntuntnvtfz. f'.ntivati f ntuf. 11w. 'Pfnn. llncfnta 1 QR7 'Pnnv. 1 Fi

Family Forming
35,000
30,000
25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
0
FAMILY FORMING COHORTS
PASOUOTANK COUNTY, 1970-2000
1970 1980 1985 1990 2000
® 15-24yrs E3 25.34yrs El FAMILY FORMING 4- TOTAL
POPULATION
Source NC Department of Management and Budget Population Projections for Counties 1980.2010
The family -forming cohort showed positive and substantial growth during the 1970 to 1980
decade. Present population estimates and projections for the future indicate a decline in this cohort
after 1980. This decline, together with the modern trend among young adults of postponing mar-
riage longer than previous generations had done and the trend toward smaller households, dimin-
ishes the likelihood that this cohort will generate any substantial growth rate during the planning pe-
riod.
FAMILY FORMING COHORTS IN THE POPULATION
PASQUOTANK COUNTY 1970 TO 2000
1970
%
1980
%
1985
%
1990
%
2000
%
15-19yrs.
2,821
10.52
3,096
10.88
2,692
9.17
2,658
8.89
2,400
7.74
20-24yrs.
2,551
9.51
3,186
11.19
3,242
11.04
2,908
9.73
2,786
8.99
25-29yrs.
1,591
5.93
2,320
8.15
2,365
8.06
2,208
7.39
1,985
6.40
30-34yrs
1,285
4.79
1,820
6.39
2,200
7.49
2,272
7.60
2,031
6.55
FAMILY
8,248
30.75
1 10,422
1 36.62
1 10.499
1 35.76
110,0461
33.61
1 9,202
29.69
TOTAL POP.
126,8241100.001
28.462
1100.00
29.356
100.00
29,893
100.00
30,998
1100.001
source ot- ueparcmenc or .vianagemenE ana uuugCE vopuauon vrojecuons ror wunues luau -lulu
'Pn_arnj.nta.n.&. r.nunt» f rittd. llrw. 'Pfnn. 1.Inrfxit� 1 QA7
Wino. 17

I
Potential Labor Force
20,000
16,000
12,000
8,000
4,000
0
POTENTIAL LABOR FORCE
PAS UOTANK COUNTY 1970 - 2000
NC OFFICE OF BUDGET & MANAGEMENT
1970 1980 1985 1990 2000
40,000 T
O
30,000 T
A
L
20,000 S
10,000
0 16 -64YRS 65+YRS POTENTIAL TOTAL
LABOR FORCE POPULATION
Source NC Department of Management and Budget Population Projections for Counties 1980.2010
The potential labor force generally includes all persons over 16 years of age. Of course, not all of
these persons actually participate in the work force. Many are enrolled in school; many are over 65
years of age and are retired; many are physically unable due to handicaps or poor health; and many,
particularly in agricultural areas such as Pasquotank County, are females who work on the farm or
in the home but are not counted as participating in the labor force.
The potential labor force in Pasquotank County grew at a much faster rate during the past census
decade than did the population as a whole; the population increased by only 6.1% while the poten-
tial labor force increased by more than 17%. The 16 years or older group accounted for 68.8% of
the 1970 population of Pasquotank County and numbered 18,473 persons. By 1980, this group
accounted for 76.0% of the county's population and numbered 21,462 persons. By the year 2000,
the potential labor force is projected to increase to 22,337 persons, but to account only for 72% of
the population.
POTENTIAL LABOR FORCE
PASQUOTANK COUNTY 1970 TO 2000
1970
%
1980
%
1985
%
1990
%
2000
%
16 -64YRS
15,881
59.20
18,341
64.44
19,165
65.28
14,957
50.04
17,624
56.86
65+YRS
2,592
9.66
3,287
11.55
3,764
12.82
4,212
14.09
4,713
15.20
POT.LABOR
18,473
68.87
21,628
75.99
22,929
78.11
19,169
64.13
22,337
72.06
TOTAL POP.
26.824
10 0.0 0
28,462
100.00
29,356
10 0.0 0
29,893
10 0.0 0
30,998
100.00
source iNt- lieparcmen of management ana uuaget ropulation rrolecnons tor t.ounnes ivau-tutu
Labor Participation
Labor force participation grew faster than the potential labor force. Between 1970 and 1980, the
number of persons actually working or seeking employment and living in Pasquotank County in-
creased by 634 persons or approximately 21.2%. Labor participation among male residents in-
creased from 6,512 persons in 1970 to 7,353 in 1980; the participation rate among males, however,
'PnCnljntnnk f'.rnintu f nrvL 11-w. 'Pfnn Ltnrfatn. 1 Q27 'Pnnc 1 R

1
decreased from more than 75% of all males in the potential labor force in 1970 to just slightly more
than 72% in 1980. Labor participation among females, on the other hand, increased by 1,353 per-
sons from 1970 to 1980. The labor participation rate increased from 39.29% in 1970 to 45.47% in
1980.
Females workers accounted for 41 % of the total county labor force in 1980; this is a substantial in-
crease from their 37% share in 1970. The number of males in the labor force increased from 1,967
persons in 1970 to 2,334 in 1980, an increase of 367 people or 18.6%. The increase in female
participation in the Pasquotank county labor force is typical of the national trend toward a greater
number of women and a greater proportion of women working outside of the home.
LABOR PARTICIPATION
PASQUOTANK COUNTY 1970 TO 2000
197n
TOTAL
MALE
FEMALE.
PERSONS 16 YEARS AND
OLDER IN THE COUNTY
PERSONS 16 YEARS AND
OLDER IN LABOR FORCE
18,473
8,656
9,817
10,369
6.512
3,857
LABOR PARTICIPATION
56.13%
75.23°Io
39.29%
source: Us Bureau of Census 1970, 1980
Elderlv
A
9
e
G
r
0
u
P
s
4,000
3,500
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
1980
TOTAL
MALE
FEMALE
21,628
10,171
11,457
12,563
7,353
5,210
158.09%1
72.29 %1
45:47%
ELDERLY PERSONS:
PASQUOTANK COUNTY 1970 - 2000
NC OFFICE OF BUDGET AND MANAGEMENT
1970 1980 1985 1990 2000
35,000
30,000
25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
0
® 65-74 YRS ED 75+YRS '0' TOTAL TOTAL
ELDERLY POPULATION
Source NC Department of Management and Budget Population Projections for Counties 1980.2010
The elderly age group is the fastest growing segment of the Pasquotank County population. In
1970, this group accounted for only 9.66% of the county's population. By 1980, this group com-
prised 11.55% of the county population and is projected to increase to 15.2% of the population by
the year 2000, with the greatest growth occurring In the over-75-years-old segment.
IPricn�tntr�rth, rn-n.t» f nwl. LLcv. 'Pfn.n. 1.1ndixtn. 1 Q117
'Pnnv. 14

The over-75-years-of-age cohort is expected to be almost as great as the 65-to-74-year-old cohort
by the year 2000.
ELDERLY COHORT IN THE POPULATION
PASQUOTANK COUNTY 1970 TO 2000
1970
%
1980
%
1985
%
1990
%
1 2000
%
65-74 YRS
1,654
6.17
2,194
7.71
3,657
12.46
2,502
8.37
2,444
7.88
75+YRS
938
3.50
1,093
3.84
1,542
5.25
1,710
5.72
2,269
7.32
TOT. ELDERLY
2,592
9.66
3,287
11.55
5,199
17.71
4,212
14.09
4,713
15.2a
TOT. POP.
26,824
10 0.0 0
28,462
100.00
29,356
100.00
29,893
100.00
30,998
100.0
bource ivc Department of Management ana lsuaget ropuianon 11rojecttons for counties 198u•2010
Dependency Sector
6,000
A 5,000
9
e 4,000
G 3,000
r
0 2,000
° 1,000
P
S 0
DEPENDENCY COHORTS
PASQUOTANK COUNTY 1970 - 2000
0J
NC OFFICE OF BUDGET & MANAGENfENT
1970 1980 1985 1990 2000
35,000
30,000 T
0
25,000 t
20,000 a
l
15,000 S
10,000
5,000
0
® 0.15 YRS 13 65+YRS '0' TOTAL '111' TOTAL
DEPENDENTS POPULATION
Source INC Department of Management and Budget Population Projections for Counties 1980.2010
The dependency group is the population sector that typically derives a major portion of its economic
support from sources other than direct participation in the labor force. For the most part,this
group includes dependent children under 16 years of age and persons over 65 years who are retired
and draw a major portion of their income from governmental transfer payments, such as Social
Security, and from pension programs. The dependency ratio is the ratio of persons in these age
ranges to those who are not.
Theoretically, the higher the dependency ratio the more self-sufficient is the area. This measure-
ment provides a general indication of the number of additional persons that must be supported by
the overall economy. This measurement, however, usually undercounts the number of persons
who may be in need of financial assistance or social services since it is based strictly on ages of in-
dividuals and not on specific economic or social conditions.
As the table below indicates, the number of persons in the dependent age category has not exhibited
13m<znu.ntczrth. Pntintn f nriA. tkv. 'Pfn.n l.lndfrity. 1 t1117 'Pnnv. in

u
any particular trend since 1970; it is presently at its greatest number. The 1990 projections indicate
a decrease of approximately 3.5% in this segment, while the year 2000 shows a slight increase of
less than 1 %. One particularly important phenomenon is the increasing proportion of the elderly
persons in this component. By 1985, the elderly accounted for more than half of the persons in this
population component; by 2000 the elderly will account for 55% of this component
The dependency ratio indicates that the ratio of non -dependents out numbers dependents at a ratio
of greater than 3 to 1 for all years shown
DEPENDENCY COHORTS IN THE POPULATION
PASQUOTANK COUNTY 1970 TO 2000
1970
%
1980
%
1985
%
1990
%
2000
%
0-15 YRS
5,565
20.75
4,279
15.03
4,080
13.90
3,940
13.18
3,883
12.53
65+YRS
2,592
9.66
3,287
11.55
5,199
17.71
4,212
14.09
4,713
15.20
TOT. DEPEND.
8,157
30.41
7,566
26.58
9,279
31.61
8,152
27.27
8,596
27.73
TOTAL POP.
26,824
100.00
28,462
100.00
29,356
100.00
29,893
100.00
30,998
100.00
LL' YIJPILl;iVl: Y
RATIO: 1: 3.3 1: 3.8
Source NC Department of Management and Budget Population Projections for Counties 1980-2010
Sex Distribution
The ratio of men to women in Pasquotank County is approximately one male to 1.004 females, a
percentage population split of 49.9% males and 50.1% females. Population projections from the
N.C. department of Budget and Management indicate a slightly less even distribution by 1990,with
males accounting for 50.63% of the population and females for 49.37%.
I
IrotLnt» f rirul. Uqg. Vfnn. Undnty. t GR7 'Pnno. 71

ECONOMY
The following section analyzes the Pasquotank County economy in terms of total county output,
total personal income, employment, and entrepreneurship.
TOTAL PERSONAL INCOME
Total Personal Income measures all of the income received by residents of Pasquotank County.
This measurement includes earnings received by county residents working outside the county and
adjustments to earnings of persons working in Pasquotank County but residing outside of the
county. Government transfer payments received by residents of the county are counted in the in-
come total, but social security contributions are not.
TOTAL COUNTY OUTPUT
Total county output is the measurement, in dollars, of the total earnings produced in Pasquotank
County and does not include earnings of county residents working outside of the county or pay-
ments received by county residents through government transfer payments such as Social Security
The output measurement, however, does include social insurance contributions made by persons
working in Pasquotank County and interest, rent, and dividends received by county residents.
EMPLOYMENT:
Employment measurements include labor force growth, participation and composition, employment
distribution by industry and job classification, the commuting work force, and job growth within
the county.
ENTREPRENEURSHIP:
Entrepreneurship is simply the measure of growth in local business activity. This includes the
growth in sales in the county, the increase or decrease in business establishments, and new job cre-
ation and payroll growth in the local business sector.
TOTAL COUNTY OUTPUT
Output of a given area is the sum of all dollars paid to the four factors of production: labor, land,
capitol, and profits.
Labor + land + capitol + profits = total county output
Labor, land, and capital are consumption factors; and profits are the residual or value added
through local entrepreneurial activities. The following sections discuss these four factors and pre-
sent historic data concerning their growth and the shift in the proportion each contributes to the
county's overall production.
The data used in these sections were compiled by the Bureau of Economic Analysis, U.S.
Department of Commerce, and are available on an annual basis from 1965 to 1984 and at three-year
intervals prior to 1965. For the purposes of this study, data for the years 1959, 1967, 1970, 1975,
1980, 1984 will be used. These years roughly approximate five-year intervals for trend identifica-
tion and include Census years for cross references (1970 &1980), the latest year for available in-
formation (1984), and the earliest year for which Consumer Price Index information is available
(1967).
'Pncnu.ntrnn&. P..nun.tu f anrf l.L-,v. 'Pfn.n. Unr%rita 1 qR7 'Puna 72

I
1
r
1
TOTAL COUNTY OUTPUT PASQUOTANK COUNTY 1967-1984
US Bureau of Economic Analysis
$280,000
$240,000
$ $200,000
1 $160,000
r
00 $120,000
0 $80,000
$40,000
$0
1967 ' 7 0
'75 180 ' 8 4 1967 ' 7 0 '75 180 ' 8 4
0 S.S.I. El PROFITS ® WAGES N CAPITAL
Source: Unpublished Local Area Personal Income Series; Regional Economic Information System; Bureau of
Economic Analysis, US Department of Commerce; April 1987; Distributed by NC Data Center
This analysis looks at output data from two perspectives: Total County Output as expressed in cur-
rent dollars and Total County Output expressed in constant 1967 dollars. Constant dollar mea-
surements describe the value of the total county output in what economist call real terms, as current
dollars are adjusted to the purchasing power of dollars in some preceding index year, in this case
1967 dollars. The Consumer Price Index information used to adjust this data was provided by the
N.C. Office of Budget and Management.
PASOUOTANK COUNTY TOTAL COUNTY OUTPUT 1967 - 19R4
1967
1970
1975
1980
1984
INT,DIV,RENT
WAGES
PROFITS
$7,729
$32,063
S8,610
S1,049
$10,021
$45,380
$10,288
S2,321
$17,224
S73,089
S13,742
$4,598
$32,280
$125,919
$10,191
$7,971
$53,973
$168,320
$20,243
$11,604
SOCIAL SECURITY
CURRENT DOLLARS
i$49,451
IS68,010
J$108,653
J$176,361
1 $254,140
INT,DIV,RENT
$7,729
S8,618
$10,679
$13,235
$18,351
WAGES
$32,063
$39,027
$45,315
$51,627
$57,229
PROFITS
S8,610
S8,848
S8,520
54,178
S6,883
SOCIAL SECURITY
S1,049
S1,996
S2.851
S3.268
S3,945
CONSTANT DOLLARS
S49,451
$58,489
$67,365
$72,308
$86,408
% ANNUAL CHANGE
CURRENT DOLLARS NA 37.537o 1 59.76% 1 62.32% 1 44.10%
CONSTANT DOLLARS NA 18.28% 15.18% 7.34% 19.50%
`7o TOTAL CHANGE 1967-1984
CURRENT DOLLARS 413.92%
CONSTANT DOLLARS 74.73%
Source: Data compiled from Unpublished Local Area Personal Income Series; Regional Economic Information
System; Bureau of Economic Analysis, US Department of Commerce; April 1987; Distributed by NC Data
IPricrnlntnrih, r..nutttu fn.nd. 11co. 'Plrin. 1.1nrLnto. 1 Q87 'Pena, *23

Center
The graphs and tables above present comparisons of the change in Pasquotank County's total
county output from 1967 to 1984 as expressed in current and 1967 dollars. As can be seen, there
are some striking differences. The double digit inflation rate in recent years has taken its toll in
the purchasing power of the dollar. The 1984 total county output expressed in constant dollars is
less than a third of its current dollar value and less than 28% greater than its constant value in 1975,
for a real annual increase of only 3.11% over the past nine years.
The most obvious and notable trends indicated by the data are the greater dependence of the
county's output on the labor factor, the increasing importance of the capital sector, and the rather
flat performance of the profit sector. Social Security contributions and other retirement contribu-
tions by local residents now consume almost 20% of the county's total output.
25000
20000
15000
10000
5000,
TOTAL COUNTY OUTPUT
Pasquotank County 1967 - 1984
(current dollars)
0 1967 1970 1975 1980 1984
WAGES 18 INT,DIV,RENT Z- PROFITS
US Bureau of Economic Analysi
Source: Unpublished Local Area Personal Income Series; Regional Economic Information System; Bureau of
Economic Analysis, US Department of Commerce; April 1987; Distributed by NC Data Center
Land and Capital
The Bureau of Economic Analysis provides data on income received in the county that is derived
through rents, dividends, and interest. This data is used here as the estimate of land and capital
consumed or generated in production in Pasquotank County. There is a separation problem with
this data. It is impossible to determine from the data available whether all of the interest, rents, or
dividends received as income in the county actually represents the investment of land and capital in
the county or investments at some other place. There is also no way to identify the amount of rents
and interest used in production in Pasquotank County that is supplied by firms and individuals
outside of the county.
For the purposes of this study it is assumed that a balancing out takes place. The amount of in-
vestment coming in to the county from non-residents is treated as equal to the amount of rents, in-
terest, and dividends earned by county residents through investments outside of the county, thus
making the earnings in the county through this factor equal to the amount consumed in the county's
output.
This assumption makes the figures expressed highly questionable, and they should not be viewed
as absolutely accurate. They are sufficient, however, to identify trends in the overall county econ-
'PrLCnlu,tnt k r..nutttu f nt ri ticv. Pfnn 11ndfntc 1 qR7 'pMo, 94

omy in terms of growth and of the changes in compositional factors.
300000
250000
200000
150000
100000
50000
0
TOTAL CAPITAL OUTPUT
PASQUOTANK COUNTY, 1967.1984
'1967 '70 '75 180 '84
0 CURRENT DOLLARS ® CONSTANT DOLLARS
Source: Unpublished Local Area Personal Income Series; Regional Economic Information System; Bureau of
Economic Analysis, US Department of Commerce; April 1987; Distributed by NC Data Center
The graph above and the table below show the steady increase in the importance of capital as a pro-
duction factor in Pasquotank County. In 1967, capital accounted for less than 15% of the
County's total output; by 1984, capital accounted for more than 21% of total output. Growth in the
capital production factor during the 17-year-period from 1967 to 1984 was almost 700% when
measured in constant dollars and more than 237% when measured in constant 1967 dollars. Capital
was the only production factor to more than double during this study period.
,i Total Land and Capital 1967-1984 ($1,000)
Land and Capital
1967
1970
1975
1980
1984
Current Dollars
$7,729
$10,021
S17,224
$32,280
$53,973
Constant Dollars
7,729
8,618
10,679
13,235
18,351
Total Output
48,402
65,689
104,055
168,390
242,536
Capital as a % of Output
15.96%
.15.25%
16.55%
19.17%
22.25%
Annual Change
Current Dollars
NA
23.45%
14.37%
17.48
16.80%
Constant Dollars
NA
3.68%
4.78%
4.49%
9.66%
Total Change(1967-1984)
Current Dollars
698.31%
Constant Dollars
237.43%
Source: Data Compiled from Unpublished
Local Area
Personal Income Series;
Regional
Economic
Information System; Bureau of Economic
Analysis, US
Department
of Commerce;
April
1987; Distributed by
NC Data Center
The growing importance of capital is a world-wide phenomenon and not peculiar to Pasquotank
County. Production increases are more and more dependent on the expansion of production facil-
ities and improved technology and equipment which increase land and capital requirements.
Vfzcrnj,ntnnf2. rnunt» f rind. 1.14,u 'Pfnn. Unrfrito. t AR7 'Pena. 7S

Labor
180000
160000
140000
$ 120000
1 100000
0
0 80000
o 60000
40000
20000
0
TOTAL SALARIES AND WAGES
PASQUOTANK COUNTY 1967 TO 1984
CURRENT AND CONSTANT DOLLARS
($1,000)
Mars
,320
229
'1967 '70 '75 '80 '84
® CURRENT DOLLARS 0 CONSTANT DOLLARS
Source: Unpublished Local Area Personal Income Series; Regional Economic Information System; Bureau of
Economic Analysis, US Department of Commerce; April 1987; Distributed by NC Data Center
Labor is represented by the total wages and salaries paid to persons working in Pasquotank County.
This includes wages earned by persons working but not living in Pasquotank County. For the pur-
poses of this study, it is assumed that all wages earned in Pasquotank County is from production in
the county.
Thus, if a travelling salesman headquartered in Pasquotank County makes sales to other parts of the
country of products produced in still other regions of the country, his wage is still counted as
Pasquotank County production.
During the seventeen-year period between 1967 and 1984, labor has fluctuated from slightly more
than 66% of total County output to almost 75% . Annual increases in the labor factor have averaged
less than 5%, when measured in real terms. The greatest percentage increase occurred during the
three -year -period from 1967 to 1970 when this factor increased by more than 7%. During the re-
maining fourteen years this factor increased at more modest rates of 2% to 3%.
Total Wages and Salaries 1967-1984 ($1,000)
Wages and Salaries
1967
Current Dollars
$32,063
Constant Dollars
32,063
Total Output
48,402
Wages as a % of Output
66.24%
Annual Change
Current Dollars
NA
Constant Dollars
NA
Total Change(1967-1984)
Current Dollars
424.97%
Constant Dollars
78.49%
Source: Data Compiled from Unpublished
Local Area
Information System; Bureau of Economic
Analysis, US
INC Data Center
1970
1975
1980
1984
$45,380
$73,089
$125,919
$168,320
39,027
45,315
51,627
57,229
65,689
104,055
168,390
242,536
69.08%
70.24%
74.78%
69.40%
13.84%
12.21%
14.46%
6.73%
7.24%
3.22%
2.79%
2.17%
Personal Income Series; Regional Economic
Department of Commerce; April 1987; Distributed by
'Pncnuntnnfi. f'.n+intu f nnrf. ll¢v. 'Pfritt Ltnrfnty. 1 tIR7 'Pnnv. 7fi I

i
1
I
I
Profits
25000
20000
15000
10000
5000
0
PROFITS OUTPUT
PASQUOTANK COUNTY 1967 TO 1984
US BUREAU OF ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
'1967 '70 '75 '80 '84
M CURRENT DOLLARS ® CONSTANT DOLLARS
Source: Unpublished Local Area Personal Income Series; Regional Economic Information System; Bureau of
Economic Analysis, US Department of Commerce; April 1987; Distributed by NC Data Center
The Bureau of Economic Analysis provides data on what is termed proprietor's income. This
represents the profits collected by business establishments in the county. These profits represents
the value added to intermediate products used or traded in local business activities.
The down turn in the profit sector from 1975 to 1984 can be almost totally attributed to declines in
farm commodity prices. The steady decline since 1975 reflects the inability of farm prices to keep
pace with rising production costs during the period, particularly increased capital costs, such as
increased machinery costs and higher interest rates. This cost squeeze creates the need for larger
production units and thus increased capital costs in the form increased costs for land and
machinery.
The table below presents the same information contained in the previous tables on the changes in
production factors . As can be seen in the table, the value added by entrepreneurial efforts is
Pasquotank County has fluctuated. Total profits are down in real terms but have increased in cur-
rent trems. In real terms profits decreased by an estimated $1,727,000 or over 20% from 1967 to
1984. In current terms, however, there was an increase of over 135%. Profits fell from a high of
17.9% of total output in 1967 to a low of 8.35% in 1980. ZP
Total Profits 1967-1984($1,000)
Profits 1967 1970 1975 1980 1984
Current Dollars $8,610 $10,288 S13,742 $10,191 $20,243
Constant Dollars 8,610 8,848 8,520 4,178 6,883
Total Output 48,402 65,689 104,055 168,390 242,536
Profit as a % of Output 17.79% 15.66% 13.21% 6.05% 8.35%
Annual Change
Current Dollars NA 6.50% 6.71% -5.17% 19.73%
Constant Dollars NA 0.92% -0.74%-10.19% 12.94%
Total Change(1967-1984)
Current Dollars 135.11%
Constant Dollars-20.06%
Source: Data Compiled from Unpublished local Area Personal Income Series; Regional Economic Information System; Bureau of Economic Analysis, US
Department of Commerce; April 1987; Distributed by NC Data Center
1 Pnca>ultnnh, f'.niintfj fnnrl. l.Lcv" Wcitt lindato. 1 qR7 'pnnv. 97

Output Summary
There has been very little value added as the result of entrepreneurial activities in the county since
1967. Much of the potential profits have been consumed by additional capital costs. A part of the
problem is the county's reliance on agriculture as its primary basic industry.
Agriculture is an extractive industry as are fishing, forestry, and mining; these industries are ex-
trememely volatile and susceptible to international economic trends and technological improvements
in production methods and equipment. Farm land represents a finite resource in Pasquotank
County which cannot be expanded. Increased production in this sector must rely on increased uti-
lization of this resource either through the cultivation of lands presently not in cultivation, increased
production from existing lands now being farmed, or improved farm prices for farm commodities.
Of these options, improved farm prices offer the greatest possibility of improved county output.
This is the one option over which the farmers in Pasquotank County have no control. The cultiva-
tion of marginally productive lands generally does not provide any great economic advantage unless
accompanied by improved prices.
It is doubtful that any great technological improvement will occur that will give the Pasquotank
County farmer an advantage over other farmers in the world. Technological improvements gener-
ally provide less productive areas of the world with a better means of competing with the American
farmer and generally result in lost jobs in the farming sector, fewer farmers and larger farms, and
greater capital requirements.
Increased county output will most likly require less reliance on the agriculture sector and the ex-
pansion or introduction of less resricted types of industries, such as manufacturing or wholesale
and retail trade. Increased development of tourism and commercial activities in the trade sectors of-
fers the best possibility of taking advantage of the abundant water resources in the county.
TOTAL COUNTY PERSONAL INCOME
$300,000
$250,000
$200,000
$150,000
$100,000
$50,000
$0
1967
TOTAL PERSONAL INCOME
PASQUOTANK COUNTY 1967-1984
1970 1975 1980 1984 1967 1970 1975 1980 1984
PROFITS 0 TRANSFER ® LAND & CAPITAL N LABOR
PAYMENTS
Source: Unpublished Local Area Personal Income Series; Regional Economic Information System; Bureau of
Economic Analysis, US Department of Commerce; April 1987; Distributed by NC Data Center
Van znij.ntn.nh. Pntintu 17 nwf. t.Lay. Vfrin tinrfnty. t qR7 'Pnnv. iR

A
I
i
I
1
Total personal income is a measure of all incomes received by residents of Pasquotank County,
regardless of where it is produced. This data includes earnings of residents commuting to work
outside of the county and government transfer payments, such as social security or military re-
tirement pensions. These two categories of income are added to the total county output data to pro-
vide the total income. Deducted from this total are the earnings of non-resident wage earners
working in Pasquotank County and social security contributions. The data on income are pre-
sented in a similar form as that of total county output with comparisons of income in constant as
well as current dollars.
As shown on the graph above and the table below, total personal income has steadily increased both
in constant dollars as well as in current dollars. In real terms, incomes have increased by approxi-
mately 5% annually since 1967. Labor still accounts for the lion's share of the County's total per-
sonal income. Government transfer payments and interest, dividends, and rents are the two fastest
growing segments of income earnings in the county, accounting for 17.5% and 18.4% respectively
of the county's 1984 total personal income. Proprietors' incomes generally reflect the volatility of
farm product prices. In real terms, proprietors' incomes peaked in 1970.
TOTAL PERSONAL INCOME : PASQUOTANK COUNTY 1967.1984
($1,000's)
1967
1970
1975
1980 1
1984
LABOR
$32,063
$39,027
$73,089
$122,026
$168,320
LAND & CAPITAL
$7,729
$10,021
$17,224
$27,195
$53,973
TRANSFER PAYMENTS
$5,722
$8,470
$21,156
1$195,945
$30,858
$51,431
PROFITS
$8,610
1 $10,288
1 $13,742
$15,866
$20,243
CURRENT DOLLARS
$54,124
1 $67,806
1$125.211
1$293,967
($1,000's)
1967
1970
1975
1980
1984
LABOR
$32,063
$33,563
$45,315
$50,031
$57,229
LAND & CAPITAL
$7,729
$8,618
$10,679
$11,150
$18,351
TRANSFER PAYMENTS
$5,722
$7,284
$13,117
$12,652
$17,487
PROFITS
$8,610
$8,848
$8,520
$6,505
$6,883
CONSTANT DOLLARS
$54,124
1 $58.313
$77,631
$80.337
1 $99,949
% ANNUAL CHANGE
CURRENT DOLLARS I NA 25.28% 1 84.66 % 1 56.49 % 50.03 %
CONSTANT DOLLARS NA 7.74% 33.13% 3.49010 24.41%
TOTAL CHANGE 1967-1
CURRENT DOLLARS I 443.1417b
CONSTANT DOLLARS 84.6717o
Source: Data Compiled from Unpublished Local Area
Information System; Bureau of Economic Analysis, US
NC Data Center
Personal Income Series; Regional Economic
Department of Commerce; April 1987; Distributed by
IPncnuntnnG. r..r»lntu f rind. 111cct Vfn.n 1 lncGitv. 1 QR7
'Pnno. 7 Q

FARM INCOME
TOTAL FARM INCOME
PASQUOTANK COUNTY 1975-1984
($1,00E
$35,000
$30,000
$25,000
$20,000
$15,000
$10,000
$5,000
$0
($5,000)
j 1975 1 1976 1 1977 1 1978 1 1979 1 1980 1 1981 1 1982 1 1983 1 1984 1
® TOTAL FARM
0 TOTAL FARM
0 ACCUMULATED
*- TOTAL FARM
REVENUES
EXPENSES
INVENTORY
INCObIE
Source: Unpublished Local Area Personal Income Series; Regional Economic Information System; Bureau of
Economic Analysis, US Department of Commerce; April 1987; Distributed by NC Data Center
While agriculture is one of the more dominant land uses in Pasquotank County, accounting for
more than 30% of all county land, it does not generate a similar percentage of personal income.
Since 1975, total farm income in Pasquotank County has fluctuated from a high of 6.2% of total
county income to a low of slightly more than 0.5% in 1980. Generally the trend seems to be
downward.
The diminishing importance of agriculture as a major source of income is a national trend and his-
torically has been occurring since the invention of the steam engine. Fewer and fewer farmers are
capable of producing more and more products.
Farm & Non Farm Income : Pamnotnnic Cnnntv 1975.19RJ
1975
1976
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
Non -Farm Income
$113,367
$127,133
$202,804
$224,942
$239,499
$261,621
$287,363
Farm Income
$7,487
$7,815
$1,185
$3,636
$5,462
$2,937
$8,392
% Farm Income
6.20 %
5.79 %
0.58 %
1.59 %
2.23 %
1.11 %
2.84 %
Total Personal Income
$120,854
$134,968
$203,989
$228,578
$244.961
$264,558
$295,755
(income measured in 51,000)
Source: Data Compiled from Unpublished Local Area Personal Income Series; Regional Economic
Information System; Bureau of Economic Analysis, US Department of Commerce; April 1987; Distributed by
NC Data Center
Pncrnantnnlz. f'.nu.timi f ritui l.Lcv. Wan. Llndnty i CIR7 'Pena. Zfl

1
r
u
EMPLOYMENT
Total Labc
Force
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
a
EMPLOYMENT, UNEMPLOYMENT, AND UNEMPLOYMENT RATE:
I97( '71 '72 '73 '74 '75 '76 '7'1 '78 '79 '80 '81 '82 '83 '84
E3 UNEMPLOYED ® EMPLOYED *- HATE OF UNEMPLOYMENT
Source: Unpublished Local Area Personal Income Series; Regional Economic Information System; Bureau of
Economic Analysis, US Department of Commerce; April 1987; Distributed by NC Data Center
The Pasquotank County labor force increased from 10,230 persons to 12,750 persons between
1970 and 1984. The number of county residents employed increased by 2,420 persons, while the
number of unemployed residents increased by 100 persons to 750, for'an average annual unem-
ployment rate of less than 6% during the fourteen -year interval.
LABOR FORCE AND EMPLOYMEr"17:
DACnTTnTAVY rill",'rV 109A 1094
EMPLOYED
1970
'71
'74
1 '75
'77
'78
'79
'80
'83
'84
9580
9800
10140
10590
11560
11660
11715
11560•
11520
12000
UNEMPLOYED
650
710
480
800
680
520
630
930
870
750
RATE OF LNEMPLOYti1F.\T
6.35%
6.76%
4.52%
7.02%
5.56%4
17%5.08.0
7.459,
02%
5.88%
TOTAL LABOR FORCE
10230
10510
1 10620
11390
f_12240T
12480
1 12409
1 124901
12390
12750
source: 1Jata l.ompima irom unpuwssnea LOCaI Area rersonal income beries; Kegional Economic
Information System; Bureau of Economic Analysis, US Department of Commerce; April 1987; Distributed by
NC Data Center
Employment in the county also grew substantially during the 1970 to 1984 period, increasing by
more than 34% or 2,692 new jobs. The table below presents 1970 and 1980 data from the US
Bureau of Census showing the employment changes in the various employment sectors in
Pasquotank County.
IPrLcn�lntnr>Fa. f'.niin.t» f rtn.d. 11-zv. 'Pfrin. l.lnrfrtty. 1 Q117
'pnnc'. A 1

PASQUOTANK COUNTY EMPLOYMENT BY INDUSTRY
1970 & 1980
Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing,
and Mining
552
478
-13.1
Construction
662
842
27.19
Manufacturing
1,764
1,635
-7.31
Non -Durable Goods 763
548
-28.18
Durable Goods 1,001
1,087
8.59
Transportation
188
243
29.26
Communications and Public
Utilities
330
411
24.55
Wholesale Traade
278
439
57.91
Retail Trade
1,800
1,971
9.50
Finance, Insurance, & Real Estate
275
412
49.82
Personal, Entertainment, and
Recreation
171
280
63.74
Professional and Related Services
1,798
2,577
43.33
Health 420
766
82.66
Education 1,043
1,447
38.73
Other 335
364
8.66
Public Administration
710
882
24.23
As the above table indicates, the fastest growing employment sectors in Pasquotank County are
Health Services, Business Repair Services, Wholesale Trade, and Educational Services. These
employment growth trends are an indication of the growing importance of the service sector as an
employer and the value of regionally oriented services to the local economy.. The table below lists
the major manufacturing employers in Pasquotank County.
MAJOR MANUFACTURING EMPLOYERS IN PASQUOTANK COUNTY
EMPLOYER
17 South Mfg
Elizabeth City Cotton Mill
Pell Paper Box Company
Sanders Co.,Inc.
IXL Furniture Co.,Inc.
J.W. Jones Lumber Co.
Pro-Gro
Leslie Co.
TCOM Corp.
*Chesapeake lumber
Animal Crackers
*Atlanta Knitting Mills, Inc.
Dolphin Systems
Davric, Inc.
Hockmeyer Equipment Corp
Airship Industries
Cabinet World
PRODUCTS /SERVICES
EMPLOYEES...
Children's wear
95
Cotton Yarn
115
Boxes,printing
40
Foundry
45
Cabinets
115
Lumber
62
Peat Moss
35
Control valves and repair
20
Airborn Comm. Systems
40
Lumber
140
Children's Wear
75
Children's Wear
75
Fuel System Components
25
Government Printing
110
Industrial Mixers
47
Blimps
60
Cabinets
15
* Since the preparation of this table Chesapeake Lumber and Atlanta Knitting Mills have announced that they would be
closing their operations in Pasquotank County.(Net Loss 215 Jobs)
Pricntlntrink. Pntinttj f rind. Llco. 'Pfntt 1.1nrJnty. 1 QR7 Vrinv. 37

_ -,0 ,,..,..
1
'
LEGEND
'
RESIDENTIAL i
' FOREST
'
AGRICULTURE
'
INDUSTRIAL
c
q
M
O
PASQUOTANK COUNTY
EXISTING LAND USE MOP
1987
O
/ U N
IT
i
The preparation of this map was financed in t \� ; e `•_ __
thrm%h 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 t
Office of Ocean and Coastal Resources
Management, National Oceanic and Atmospheric a a�
Administration. � B E

r
EMPLOYMENT SUMMARY
Even with the loss of the two industrial employers noted above the employment outlook is sta-
ble for Pasquotank County. The County has and continues to develop as a retail, financial,
medical, educational, and service center for the region. The annual average unemployment rate
during the past five years has been below the state rate. Efforts of the Pasquotank-Elizabeth
City Industrial Program are begining to produce results.
EXISTING LAND USE
DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS
Development outside of extra -territorial jurisdiction of Elizabeth City had all but ceased until the
construction of the county water system. Health department regulations coupled with the severe
limitations of Pasquotank County soils to septic tank suitability meant that almost all new residential
development required a minimum lot size of 40,000 square feet. The availability of a public water
supply reduced this land requirement to 25,000 square feet on provisionally suitable soils, which
are most of the soils in the county.
New development has generally been occurring as an outward expansion of the urban cluster of
Elizabeth City, and along the major arterial transportation routes leading away from the city --along
US 17 north toward the Tidewater area of Virginia, south toward Perquimans County, NC., and
east along NC 34 toward the Coast Guard Base and Weeksville. The most significant platting
activity is occurring along the US.17 Corridor.
DOMINANT LAND USES
AREA Thousands of Acres % QF TOTAL
LAND 146.1 77.70 %
WATER 42 2 %
TOTAL 188.1 100.00 %
MAJOR CATEGORIES OF LAND USE
FORESTRY 78.2 41.60 %
CROPLAND
AND PASTURES 57.1 30.40 %
URBAN AND
BUILT-UP 5.0 2.66 %
LAND USE COMPATIBILITY PROBLEMS
One new land compatibility problem has surfaced since the previous land use update: the siting of
solid waste transfer stations. The county planning board has recommended to the Pasquotank
County Commissioners an amendment to the county's subdivision regulations requiring subdivi-
sion developers to dedicate utility easements as dumpster sites to serve the needs of their particular
subdivision.
1 'Pncnu.ntn". rnunt» f ri,vf. l.Lco. 'Pfrnn. Unrfnta 1 QR7 'Prino. ?;A

Nuisances associated with farm operations and safety hazards associated with the air traffic in and
out of the Coast Guard base were thoroughly reviewed in the previous land use update. The county
has implemented height restrictions through their multi -family housing ordinance, but no locational
restrictions are enforced by the county.
An attempt was made by the planning board and the county commissioners immediately following
the adoption of the 19811Land Use Update to implement a zoning ordinance for the county . This
attempt met with such strong opposition from county residents that the county commissioners
elected to delay its implementation until county residents expressed the need for such locational
control. Due to recent developments and new interest expressed by a number of residents in the
county, the County Commissioners are proceeding with the development of a zoning ordinance for
those portions of the county most likely to experience growth pressures in the next ten -years.
Agricultural Lands
Agricultural land, next to forest lands, are the most dominant land use in the county. Approximately
30% of the county land area is devoted to crop production. Principal crops grown in the county are
corn, soybeans, wheat, irish potatoes, and various other truck crops.
As has been the general trend nationwide, the number of farms in the county has been diminishing
while the size of the farms has been increasing. Fewer farmers are farming more land. Overall,
farm acreage has fluctuated over the years; but according to the US Census of Agriculture, the
number of acres farmed in 1982 was greater than that farmed in 1964. The table below lists the uti-
lization of farm land during the years 1964, 1969, 1974, and 1982.
It seems that the amount of farm land that can be put into production has remained fairly constant
during the 18 years covered by the Census.
PASQUOTANK COUNTY : AGRICULTURE LANDS 1964,1969, 1974, 1982
1964 1969 1974 1982
FARM ACREAGE(acres) 73,400 67,500 63,000 73,766
NUMBER OF FARMS 446 379 304 - 253
TOTAL VALUE OF
FARM PRODUCTS($) 8,136,000 6,988,000 16,200,000 21,849,000
AVERAGE VALUE OF
PRODUCTS PER FAR;NI($) 18,242 18,438 53,289 86,360
AVERAGE SIZE OF FARM(acres) 164.6 178 207 291.6
Residential Development
Large lot requirements, high interest rates on home mortgages, high required equity contributions,
and the high cost of agriculture lands combined to all but halt residential development in the county
during the early 1980's. The construction of the county water system is 1981 reduced the large lot
requirement in most areas of the county , but it was not until 1986 after home mortgage rates had
fallen substantially that development activity showed a substantial upturn.
Subdivision platting activity increased substantially in 1986. Between January, 1982, and
'Pn.crn ntxinh, rnuntu fend 11.cv. 'P(rin Undrntn. 19R7 'Pena 34

1
r
December, 1985, the Pasquotank County Planning Board gave preliminary or final approval to
subdivisions containing a total 200 lots. In the eighteen months since January , 1986, the
Pasquotank County Planning Board has given approvals to subdivisions containing a total of 535
lots.
The demand for building lots and new homes seems to be strictly due to local growth. The county
does not seem to be affected by the burgeoning growth occurring in the Tidewater Virginia area.
Housing
The following table presents comparative housing data for the two previous census years 1970 and
1980. As can be seen the number of total housing units and occupied housing increased at more
than three times the rate of the county's total population. The county's population increased at
slightly more than 6% during this interval while occupied units increased by 22%.
1970 1980 %C HANCT .
TOTAL HOUSING UNITS 8634 10457 21%
OCCUPIED 7952 9723 22%
VACANT 682 734 8%
VACANCY RATE 7.90 % 7.02 % -11.27 %
TOTAL VACANT 682 734 22%
AVAILABLE FOR SALE 61 67 9.84%
AVAILABLE FOR RENT 251 248 -1.2%
UNITS UNAVAILABLE 370 419 13.24%
TOTAL OWNER UNITS 5155 6425 24.64%
OCCUPIED 5094 6358 24.81%
VACANT 61 67 9.84%
VACANCY RATE 1.18 % 1.04 % -11.9 %
TOTAL RENTAL UNITS 3109 3613 16.21 %
OCCUPIED 2858 3365 17.74%
VACANT 251 248 -1.2%
VACANCY RATE 8.07% 6.86% 14.99%
MOBILE HOMES 536 1171 118.47%
OCCUPIED NA 1061 NA
VACANT NA 110 NA
VACANCY RATE NA. 9.39% NA
Of particular concern is the falling vacancy rate among both owner and rental units . This decline
plus the high mortgage rates that have prevailed since 1980 have probably caused the vacancy rate
for rental units to fall below 5%, a threshold that indicates an extremely right housing market.
Another housing characteristic of particular interest is the increasing growth in the number of un-
available units. This characteristic usually indicates growth in second homes or vacation cottages.
Areas Likely to Experience Growth
The areas most likely to experience development growth are generally those areas in and around
Elizabeth City and principal transportation corridors leading out of the city, Highway US 17 both
north and south, and NC 34 to the east. Elizabeth City is now in the process of carrying out an
annexation study in the faster growing areas adjacent to its city limits. High density development
will most likely occur where public sewer service from Elizabeth City. The higher intensity uses
will most likely occur on land adjacent and with direct access to US 17.
I'Pn.cn»ntiinf&. rountu f rivuf 1.1¢0. 14sin 11ndnto. 1 AR7
'Puna A4

Estimated Future Demand
The North Carolina Office of Budget and Management estimates a population growth increase in
Pasquotank County of 2,536 persons by the year 2000. Using the 2.93 persons per household
rate of 1980 indicates that 865 more housing units will be occupied in the year 2000 than were oc-
cupied in 1980. Assuming a vacancy rate of 7% , identical to that of 1980, 926 new dwelling units
will be needed by the year 2000. This is a production rate of slightly more than 46 dwelling units
per year. Current production rates are sufficient to sustain this demand.
Assuming a water usage of 100 gallons per person per day, additional daily water production would
have to increase by 253,600gpd. This increased demand is well within the capacity of the planned
county water system improvements.
Assuming a solid waste generation of 6 cubic yard per week for each 13 households of 2.93
persons each, an additional 400 cubic yards of solid waste will have to collected and disposed of in
the City -County land fill each week. The new City -County land fill was opened in 1983 and has a
projected life of 27 years or until the year 2010.
According to the population estimates provided by the NC Office of Budget and Management, there
is a projected decline in the number of school age cohorts by the year 2000. No additional school
facilities will be needed once the present renovation plans are complete, and assuming the standards
for optimum facilities do not change.
Police protection in the county is provided by the county sheriffs office. The staffing needed is ba-
sically a function of the number of calls, the physical area to be covered and demands made on the
department rather than a set service ratio based on population. The saffing and equiping of the
sheriffs department will be based on this service demand criteria.
Fire protection in the county is provided by six organized units of volunteer firefighters and one unit
of paid firefighters. The most densely populated area of the county in and around Elizabeth City is
serviced by a paid staff on duty 24-hour per day. The combined firefighting force in the county is
244 persons. This available force yeilds a service ratio of one firefighter for every 44 housing
units. To maintain this service ratio the volunteer squads must recruit an additional fireman each
year to keep pace with housing growth. Historically, the volunteer squads have enjoyed excellent
participation from residents and feel they can maintain this service ratio. The county is presently
developing a 911 emergency communications system in cooperation with the City of Elizabeth City
and Camden County This system will provide these three local jurisdiction with a much more effi-
cient and immediate access to emergency services such as fire, police, and emergency medical ser-
vices.
PROBLEMS WITH UNPLANNED GROWTH
Unplanned growth problems in Pasquotank County mentioned in previous plans are predominantly
vestiges of the past. The platting and sale of lots now considered unbuildable by Health Department
standards and flood plain development are the two most significant problems. Future occurrences
of these problems are being prevented through the subdivision review process and the implementa-
tion of the county's subdivision regulations, the permitting policies of the District Health
Department, and the enforcement of the county's flood plain ordinance.
Pacrnuntnnk r..ountu f nwf. IZzr. 'Pfnn Unrfntr. 1 GR7 'Puna 3R

CURRENT PLANS, POLICIES. AND REGULATIONS
Pasquotank County relies on six basic regulatory tools to control development in the county.
These tools are based on minimum performance standards. The County does not attempt to control
land use by assigning particular uses to particular lands.
' REGULATIONS
Mobile Home and Mobile Home Park Ordinance
The Pasquotank County Mobile Home and Mobile Home Park Ordinance, adopted in August,
1980, is the County's first attempt at imposing locally mandated development controls. This ordi-
nance establishes specific development standards for siting mobile homes, including minimum lot
size, yard dimensions, access, and public utility services. The ordinance does not identify particu-
lar areas for mobile home development; the emphasis of the ordinance is orderly development
rather than any spatial arrangement.
North Carolina Building Code
In July of 1984, the County employed its first full-time building inspector to enforce all elements of
the North Carolina Building Code. The Building Code, of course, regulates all new construction
and the installation of electrical, plumbing, and mechanical services, as well as mobile home in-
stallations. This year,1987, the county employed its second full-time building inspector.
Pasquotank County is in the 100 mph wind velocity zone. Construction and mobile home installa-
tion standards for this zone are enforced.
Pasquotank County Subdivision Regulations, 1977
In June,1977, Pasquotank County adopted subdivision regulations. This ordinance, like the mobile
home park ordinance, emphasizes orderliness of development. The ordinance, in addition to as-
signing decision -making responsibilities, establishes applications and permit procedures and
amendment and appeal mechanisms; it defines the term subdivision and establishes minimum de-
velopment standards including lot size, set backs, lot width and dimensions, access, roadway stan-
dards, drainage requirements, and public facility services.
Pasquotank County Flood Plain Ordinance, 1986
Pasquotank County is participating in the Regular Phase of the National Flood Insurance Program
and enforces the required precautionary regulations required by this program. The County uses the
Special Flood Hazard Boundary Maps provided by the Federal Emergency Management Agency
and imposes specific construction standards in these flood hazard areas.
Multi -Family Dwellings Ordinance of Pasquotank County 1985
Adopted in December, 1985, this ordinance regulates the development of all structures containing
more than one living unit.
P2crnintsin&. rntintu f rind. i.Lcv. 14sin Unflnta 1 QR7 'Prince aft

POLICIES
Rules and Regulations of the Pasquotank County Water System 1981
The Rules and Regulations of the Pasquotank County Water System, in addition to governing the
operation of the system, formally state the County's policy concerning waterline extensions and ex-
pansion of water services. The system generally provides water service to all areas of the county.
These Rules and Regulations indirectly impose some spatial guidance for development intensity,
as the heavier users of water must be serviced by larger -sized water lines. These rules also provide
a method of controlling development timing by imposing limits to the number of customers of vari-
ous use intensities that can be served by a specific size of water line.
County Health Department Septic Tank Permits
The County Health Department, in addition to the subdivision regulations and the Mobile Home
Park Ordinance, regulates development density in Pasquotank County. The regulations of this
agency establish minimum lot sizes and minimum soil conditions for the installation of on -site
sewage disposal systems of less than 3,000 gallons. The minimum lot size for septic tank ap-
proval in the county is 15,000 to 25,000 square feet for lots served by public water and 20,000 to
40,000 square feet for those using on -site water supplies. These standards are county -wide mini-
mums and are contingent on certain soil conditions and drainage characteristics of the building site.
PLANS
CAMA Land Use Plan for Pasquotank County, 1976
The 1976 CAMA Land Use Plan was the initial county land use plan prepared under the Coastal
Area Management Act. The plan provides valuable base data for referencing changes in land uses,
development patterns, and development trends in Pasquotank County. The plan also provides a
land classification scheme for the county.
1981 CAMA Land Development Plan Update for Pasquotank County, North
Carolina, The Ferren Planning Group, Greenville, NC
The CAMA Land Development Plan Update for Pasquotank County was the first five-year update
of the 1976 CAMA Land Use Plan. The plan describes the changes that took place in the county
during the five years following the 1976 plan, updates the land classification map, and formally ar-
ticulates county policy concerning specific development issues.
An Appraisal of Potential for Outdoor Recreation, Pasquotank County Soil and Water
Conservation District.
This plan provides valuable data concerning the use of non -developed lands in the county. In
Pasquotank County, this represents most of the county's land area. The plan provides an inven-
tory of the agricultural and forested areas of the county, their productive potential, and their inherent
weaknesses. The plan also includes a general soils map of the entire county and addresses the
county's water management, erosion, and drainage problems.
Pasquotank County Water Improvements Plan, 1987
Outlines proposed improvements to the Pasquotank Water System to be completed in the next 5
years . The Plan calls for the doubling of plant capacity during the next 24 months with supply
wells added as needed.
Pncrnu�tnnh. r..nunt» f mid. tka 'Pfnn llwfatv. 1 QR7 'Pena IQ

r
[7
1
1
fl
I
i
Pasquotank County Long -Range Educational Facility Renovation and Construction
Plan 1987, Pasquotank County Board of Education.
This plan outlines the proposed renovation and construction plans proposed by the Pasquotank
County Board of Education for the period 1987-1993. The overall construction plans are extensive,
calling for an investment in new facilities of over $13,000,000. The Plan calls for the construction
of three new schools as well as extensive additions to and renovation of existing structures.
STUDIES
ELIZABETH CITY - PASQUOTANK COUNTY SCHOOL SURVEY REPORT
1984-1985, Department of Public Instruction, Division of School Planning.
Comprehensive survey performed on request from the Pasquotank County Board of Education.
The findings and recommendations found in this report is the basis for the Long Range Educational
Facility Renovation and Construction Plan now being undertaken by the County.
Pncnuntan&. rnu.ntu fnxui, 11a Vfnn l mfatA 1 G27 13ane. 411

CONSTRAINTS TO DEVELOPMENT: LAND SUITABILITY
Soils
Soils in Pasquotank County place severe constraints on development. The soils in the county ex-
hibit two seriously limiting characteristics: a high concentration of what the District Health
Department refers to as 2:1 clays, clays with a high shrink/swell capacity that are almost impervious
to water, and a very shallow depth to the seasonally high water table.
The high clay content requires large lot development in areas without public sewer and water facili-
ties; the shallow depth to water table demands extensive drainage facilities to maintain the minimum
separation between septic tank drain fields and the water table. The table below lists the minimum
lot sizes allowed by the District Health Department. These minimums are based on soil conditions.
As is indicated in the table, areas without public sewer assuredly will be developed at very low
densities.
PUBLIC WATER &
PUBLIC WATER OR
COMMUNITY WATER
NO SEWER
NO WATER
or SEWER
Suitable
Provisionally
Suitable
Provisionally
SEWER PROVIDED
Soils
Suitable Soil
Soils
Suitable Soil
Minimum Lot Area
15,000 sq,ft.
15,000
25,000
20,000
40,000
Lot Width
80 ft.
75
125
100
100 or 200
Front Yard Setback
30 ft.
30 ft.
30 ft.
30 ft.
30 ft.
Rear Yard Setback
20 ft.
20 ft.
20 ft.
20 ft.
20 ft.
Side Yard Setback
15 ft.
15 ft.
15 ft.
15 ft.
15 ft.
As may be evident in the table above, the construction of the Pasquotank County Water System was
a boon to development. The availability of public water reduces the minimum land requirement by
almost 40%.
The table below lists the various soil associations found in Pasquotank County and their limitations
for septic fields, light industry, and roads and streets. As is indicated in the table, at least 72% of
the land area in Pasquotank is rated as having severe or very severe limitations to these three devel-
opment factors.
Pacrnurtnnh. rnutttu fnttd. 111ca Pfnn. Unrfnto. 1 QR7 Pena 41

fJ
1
I
I
1
FJ
I
I
SOIL LIMITATIONS: PAQUOTANK COUNTY
of Soil
County Association
Pasquotank
8 %v
Barclay
Weeksville
Bertie
6 %
Othello
Othello
14 %
Bertie
Dragston
4%
Pokomoke
Portsmouth
12 %
Bayboro
29%
Elkton
Bladen
Mucky Peat
27 %
Swamp
Water Supply
Septic
Tank Light Roads and
Limitations Industry Streets
Moderate
Severe
Moderate
Moderate
Moderate
Moderate
Severe
Severe
Severe
Moderate
Moderate
Moderate
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Slight
Moderate
Moderate
Moderate
Moderate
Moderate
Moderate
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Very Severe
Very Severe
Very Severe
Very Severe
Very Severe
Very Severe
Typically water in Pasquotank County is drawn from the Upper Yorktown aquifer. This aquifer
underlays the water table aquifer and can generally be found from 5' to 13' feet below the ground
surface. This aquifer ranges to 130 feet in thickness.
Wells in this aquifer range from 35' to 80' feet in depth and generally produce yields from 1 to 100
gpm. Water in the Upper Yorktown is for the most part hard, alkaline, and tends to form scale.
This aquifer contains freshwater in all parts of the county, but is underlain by the more salty
Lower Yorktown aquifer. In areas of cone depression near major pumping points salt water intru-
sion may occur.
The Pasquotank County Water System pumps from the Upper Yorktown aquifer. The system is
now pumping from 9 wells with the maximum yield of any well being 100 gpm.
1
Pr1CllunrxiY1 . Pnutttu f jmnd. 111-,a Wn.n Unrffito. 1 q27
Pnnv. 42

Areas of Environmental Concern ( A.E.0 )
The Coastal Resources Commission has designated four categories of environmental concern in the
twenty coastal counties included in North Carolina Area Management Act:
1) The Ocean Hazard System
2) The Estuarine System
3) Public Water Supplies
4) Natural and Cultural Resource Areas
Two of these four categories, the Estuarine System and Public Water Supplies, pertain to
Pasquotank County. The Estuarine System category contains four components designated as areas
of environmental concern: Estuarine Shorelines, Public Trust Waters, Coastal
Wetlands, and Estuarine Waters. All four of these components are present in the County.
The Elizabeth City Well Field has been designated as a Public Water Supply A.E.C.
PUBLIC TRUST WATERS
Public Trust Waters are all waters and submerged lands in the twenty county coastal region where
the public has rights of use including rights of navigation and recreation. The Coastal Area
Management Act more specifically identifies Public Trust Waters as:
1) All waters of the Atlantic Ocean and the lands thereunder from the
mean high water mark to the seaward limit of State jurisdiction;
2) All natural bodies of water subject to measurable lunar tides, and all
lands thereunder the mean high water mark.
3) All navigable natural bodies of water, and all lands thereunder,
except privately owned lakes to which the public has no access;
4) All water in artificially -created bodies of water containing significant
public fishing resources or other public resources which are
accessible to the public by navigation from bodies of water in which
the public has navigation rights;
5) All waters in artificially -created bodies of water in which the public
has acquired rights by prescription, custom, usage, dedication, or any
other means.
PUBLIC TRUST WATERS
Public trust waters in Pasquotank County essentially include all navigable streams in the county.
The major components of this category in the county are the Albemarle Sound, the Pasquotank
River, the Little River, Big Flatty Creek, Little Flatty Creek, New Begun Creek, Knobb's Creek ,
and Symonds Creek.
ESTUARINE WATERS
The Pasquotank River downstream from the US 158 bridge from Elizabeth City to Camden County
to the Albemarle Sound; all waters of the Albemarle Sound; the Little River downstream from the
Narrows to the Sound, and in Big Flatty Creek from a line connecting Marston Creek and Davis
Creek to the Sound.
Vaar3untnnfi. rnuntu f nn.r! tbza 'Pfnn Unrfnto. 1 A27 'Pnnv. 4.4

1
FJ
ESTUARINE SHORE
A seventy-five foot buffer strip measured landward from the mean high water line of the estuarine
water. A landward measurement from the estuarine portion of the Pasquotank and Little Rivers,
and the Albemarle Sound.
COASTAL WETLANDS
Specie specific areas, identified by the presence of ten plant species used as indicators. Coastal
wetlands are found throughout the county and cannot be mapped.
PUBLIC WATER SUPPLIES
The Elizabeth City Well Field is one of only two well fields designated as an A.E.C. The wellfield
consists of 250 well points piped by a vacuum system. These are mostly shallow wells producing
yields of about 2 gpm each. There are 4 deep wells in the field producing yields of 400 gpm .
Total capacity of the well field is approximately 1.5 mgd.
FRAGILE AREAS
The Great Dismal Swamp
The Great Dismal Swamp comprises approximately 30,000 acres in northern Pasquotank County.
The area contains an abundance of wildlife and of aquatic and wetland plants. It also contains
abundant peat deposits that could become a valuable economic resource.
Man Made Hazards
Man made hazards affecting development have been thoroughly discussed in previous land use
updates and no new hazards have surfaced. Typically they are agricultural storage facilities,
petroleum storage facilities, and transportation facilities --particularly airports and railroads. Chief
among the man made hazards in the county is. the Coast Guard Air Station facility located on
Weeksville Road. At present development in the Clear Zones and the Approach Zones leading to
the runways is controlled by the Elizabeth City Zoning Ordinance. Even though the Air Station is
located outside the City's extraterritorial jurisdiction, this power and responsibility was granted the
City through special state legislation in 1969.
Historical, Cultural, & Archealogical Sites
The county has just had an inventory of all historical and culturally significant stuctures and sites
completed for them through a grant in cooperation with the NC Division of Archives and History.
This catalog of information provides an information base on which decisions concerning particular
sites or structures can be made should a time arise when the county feels compelled to take stronger
actions concerning these artifacts.
One reviewer requested that the historical structure and site report be included as an addendum to
this document. The historical structure and site report is a 106 page document, its length makes its
inclusion here impractical.
Pncrnuntnnk rnun.tu Land. 1.Lw.. Pfn.n Undntp. 1 qR7
Vnnv. 44

CONSTRAINTS TO DEVELOPEMENT:
CAPACITY OF PUBLIC FACILITIES
Water System
The Pasquotank Water System began operation in April, 1981, with approximately 2,900 cus-
tomers. The System consists of over 1,000,000 linear feet of water distribution mains, three
200,000 gallon elevated storage tanks, one 300,000 gallon elevated storage tank, 500,000 gallons
of ground storage for treated water, a 1.20 Mgd. water treatment plant served by nine wells pump-
ing 750,000 gpd. Maximum production of any well does not exceed 100 gallons per minute.
Water service is now available to practically all areas of the county, with interconnections with the
South Mills Water Association system and the Inter -County Water Association system in the eastern
portion of Perequimans County.
On January 6, 1987, the system was providing service to 4,370 connections. Thus, during the
system's first 68 months of operation 1,470 new customers were added to the system, a monthly
average of 21 new service connections per month.
In addition to the increase in water users, water usage per connection is increasing. Water usage
has increased from 3,897 gallons per month for each meter to 4,437 gallons per month per meter.
More customers and greater usage have resulted in the water plant nearing capacity on peak days.
According to the county's consulting engineers, a continuation of this trend will result in a maxi-
mum day use exceeding maximum theoretical plant capacity by 1990. The graph and table below
portray the six -year history of the water system's growth since it began operation in April, 1981.
T
h 2,000
0 1,800
u
S 1,600
a 1,400
n 1,200
d 1,000
G 800
a 600
1 400
1 200
0
n 0
S
1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987
M Average Day El Maximum Day '*- Total
T
25,000 h
0
20,000 u
S
15,000 a
d
10,000
5,000
0
G
a
1
1
0
n
S
Prncnuntank r'nuntu f ntuf. 11a 'Pfnn Unrfntn. 1 QR7 'Puna 4S

I
J
PASOUOTANK COUNTY WATER SYSTEM 1981-1987
APRIL WATER USAGE
1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987
Average Day 439 543 498 531 647 630 678
Maximum Day 633 795 624 654 1,884 846 953
Minimum Day 284 444 323 439 222 487 414
Total 7,469 16,293 14,948 15 955 19.421 19 213 20 341
The Pasquotank County Water System and the Pasquotank County Commissioners began planning
for a plant expansion in 1985. The Water System Improvement Plan calls for a doubling of treat-
ment capacity from 1.2 Mgd to 2.4 Mgd with a sufficient number of new wells to supply twice the
peak daily water usage. The new treatment plant will be operational in 1988. New wells will be
added as water demand increases.
ISolid Waste
Pasquotank County provides solid waste collection through thirty-one transfer points strategically
located throughout the county. The county contracts with Clean Sweep, Inc., of Elizabeth City to
transfer the waste from the dumpster sites to the landfill. Clean Sweep furnishes the trash recepta-
cles (either 8 cubic yard or 6 cubic yard green cans) and the compactors and other needed vehicles.
The county furnishes the sites to be used as collection points. The average weekly collection from
the thirty-one sites is 2,074 cubic yards. All sites are picked up at least once weekly; however, the
frequency of pick-up is determined by usage, the number of dumpsters, and the type of waste nor-
mally disposed of at the site; some sites are picked up as many as S a times week.
The county shares ownership of the landfill with Elizabeth City. Camden County contracts with
the county and Elizabeth City for use of the landfill. The present Pasquotank County/Elizabeth
City land fill became operational in 1981 and has an expected remaining life of 27 years. The land
fill serves Elizabeth City, Pasquotank County, and Camden County.
The contractural arrangements with Clean Sweep and with the city provide a cost effective means of
providing this service to county residents. Furnishing the transfer sites is the weak link in this ar-
rangement. The County actually owns only two of the transfer sites; the remaining sites are in use
on a non -lease basis and could be lost at any time. No one is anxious to have one of these sites lo-
cated near his or her home.
The Pasquotank County Subdivision Regulations now require subdividers to dedicate solid waste
utility easements of sufficient size to serve the residents of their development. The proposed Solid
Waste Utility Ordinance would require all new subdivisions with more than 6 lots to provide a
solid waste utility easement of sufficient size to serve the subdivision's potential residential demand.
The size of the easement is determined by the number of dumpsters required; one dumpster is re-
quired for each thirteen residential lots or any part thereof. Sites with more than three dumpsters
must be totally off street with sufficient space for the compactor vehicle to carry out all operations
off-street and to reenter the street system in a forward manner. The Ordinance requires that the util-
ity easements be screened from view. The County offers subdividers the option of constructing and
dedicating individual sites or of contributing to a county fund for the construction of a public site to
serve all subdivisions in a particular area of the county.
Fire Protection
Fire protection in the county is provided through seven organized fire districts, six of which are
staffed by volunteer fire fighters. One district, the Central district, serves the extra -territorial juris-
I'Pricnuntank rountu f ntuf. Lka 'Pffin 11ndatc. 1927
Pnno. 4 fi

diction of Elizabeth City and is staffed by the Elizabeth City Fire Department. Six of the districts are
rated and the seventh expects to receive rating soon. All volunteers are equipped with pagers with
the exception of the Inter -County fire district which serves the western section of Pasquotank and a
portion of Perquimans County. All Pasquotank members of the Inter -county volunteer staff are
equipped with pagers. The Central district, served by the Elizabeth City Fire Department, is staffed
by paid firefighters 24 hours a day and needs no pagers. The table below lists each of the fire dis-
tricts, their equipment, and their staffing.
DISTRICT
STAFF
MOBILE, EQUIPMENT
WEEKSVILLE
50 VOLUNTEERS
1# 1000 GPM PUMPER / 750 GAL.BOOSTER
(ALL WITH PAGERS)
1# 1250 GAL. TANKER / 450 GPM
1# BRUSH TRUCK / 250 GAL.
1# UTILITY VAN
PROVIDENCE
27 VOLUNTEERS
1# 1000 GPM PUMPER / 750 GAL. BOOSTER
(ALL WITH PAGERS)
1# 1250 GAL. TANKER / 350 GPM.
19 UTILITY VAN
NEWLAND
28 VOLUNTEERS
19 1000 GPM. PUMPER / 750 GAL.BOOSTER
(ALL WITH PAGERS)
1# 1250 GAL. TANKER / 450 GPM.
1# UTILITY VAN
1# UTILITY TRUCK
INTER -COUNTY
25 VOLUNTEERS
1# 750 GPM.PUMPER / 750 GAL. BOOSTER
( 15 WITH PAGERS)
1# 1250 TANKER / 500 GPM.
NIXONTON
29 VOLUNTEERS
1# 1250 GAL PUMPER/ TANKER 1000 GPM
(ALL WITH PAGERS)
1# 1500GAL. TANKER / 250 GPM
SOUND NECK
50 VOLUNTEERS
1# 750 GPM. PUMPER / 500 GAL. BOOSTER
(ALL WITH PAGERS)
1# 1250 GAL. TANKER / 250 GPM.
CENTRAL
35 PAID STAFFERS
1# 1000 GPM PUMPER / 750 GAL. BOOSTER
(ON DUTY 24 HOURS)
1# 1250 GAL. TANKER / 450 GPM.
Emergency Services
Emergency Medical Services are provided through a cooperative arrangement with Elizabeth City
and Camden County. The emergency medical service is staffed by seven paid, full-time personnel:
a director and six Emergency Medical Technicians. The Emergency Service owns three modular
ambulances and three vans, all fully equipped.
The full-time staff mans the service 10 hours per day / six days per week. Rescue Squad volunteers
fill-in the off -duty hours of the paid staff to provide 24 hour / seven day per week service; at least
two rescue squad members are on duty during the off -duty hours of the paid staff. Currently there
are 25 rescue squad members, 12 EMTs and 13 ambulance drivers. At present, both the
Emergency Medical Staff and the Rescue Squad have a Basic EMT rating.
During the coming year the staff and rescue squad volunteers will undertake new training to qualify
the Service for an Advanced -Intermediate EMT rating. An A -I rating will allow the qualified EMT
personnel to administer Cardiac drugs, infra -venous therapy, and to operate a defibulator. At least.
one A -I qualified technician would be on duty at all times.
The Rescue Squad is equipped with two dive boats and a crash truck with extriculation equipment.
VriSrnu►tnnh. rnu.ntu f nnrf. 1.Lco. Vfnn Unchitc 1 q.97 'Pena 47

J
1
1
[l
The Rescue is organized with a six -man dive team for water rescue.
The greatest limitation to providing emergency medical service is the lack of adequate communica-
tion equipment. Rescue Squad members and the Emergency Medical Staff do not have pagers. The
radio equipment in the vehicles and three walkie-talkies are the only communication equipment for
these emergency services.
The county, in cooperation with Elizabeth City and Camden County, attempted to secure state aid to
establish a centralized communication system and an emergency telephone number system similar to
a 911 system. The state denied the request; however, the county intends to continue to work toward
securing such a system.
Educational Facilities
The Pasquotank County Board of Education and the Pasquotank County Commissioners have initi-
ated a long range educational facility program aimed toward bringing all school facilities into com-
pliance with optimum state standards by 1993. Portions of this program have already begun, one
new elementary school is under construction and another has been approved for funding and will
begin early next year.
When fully implemented, every existing school campus will have received improvements. Old,
outdated, and structurally unsafe buildings will have been razed and in many cases replaced with
new facilities.
The construction plans call for the construction of three new schools and the renovation or expan-
sion of all usable existing facilities. Total cost of the program is estimated at over $13,000,000.
Impact of Seasonal Population
Seasonal population generated by Elizabeth City State University, Roanoke Bible College, and the
College of the Albemarle are important elements of the Pasquotank County economy. These sea-
sonal impacts have been rather consistant over the years and do not pose any great burden to ex-
isting public facilities.
'PncrnuAn.nb. f.nun.tu f rind. 11w. 'Pfrin Undritp. 1 QR7
Vona 4R

POLICY ISSUES: RESOURCE PROTECTION
Issue: Soil Limitations
Findings:
Most of the major soil associations in Pasquotank County have limitations to development,
the principal limitation to development being either a shallow depth to water table and high
clay content. There are areas with pockets of soil that display characteristics different from
that of the general soil association and these areas have been mapped. The principal limita-
tion to residential development is of course septic tank suitability. Low soil strength and se-
vere shrink swell characteristics pose limitations to road construction and light industries.
Severe slopes in excess of 12% do not exist in the county to any appreciable degree.
Previous 1981 Policy:
" There are existing policies related to physical and man-made constraints to development.
These are set forth in the County's subdivision regulations, Articles VII and VIH, and in the
County's septic tank ordinance and flood plain ordinance.... No other policies related to
constraints to development are considered necessary at this time." Cama Land
Development Plan Update for Pasquotank County, North Carolina, 7981.
Ferren Planning Group, Greenville, NC.
Current 1987 Policy:
The county shall rely on existing regulatory instruments and processes to insure proper con-
siderations of soil limitations to the intended development.
Implementation Strategies:
The county building inspector will enforce the provisions of the North Carolina Building
Code concerning construction on soils with structural limitations.
The Pasquotank County subdivision permitting process is based primarily on soil suitabil-
ity. All proposed developments must receive favorable recommendations from the
Pasquotank County Health Department before any permit shall be issued.
The county shall require the subdivider to submit comments, recommendations, and re-
quirements from the certifying officer of the Land Quality Section, Division of Land
Resources, as to proper sedimentation and erosion control.. I
Issue: Flood Plain Development
Findings:
Flooding is a potential problem in approximately 50% of the county according to the Flood
Plain Boundary maps prepared by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Flood plain
areas essentially ring the county along the shores of thePasquotank and Little Rivers , the
Albemarle Sound, and the extensive swamp areas in the northern and southern sections of
the county.
Pncrnintnn&, rountu f nttd Llca 'Pfn.n. Undata 1 AR7 'Prince 49 I

Previous 1981 Policy:
" There are existing policies related to physical and man-made constraints to development.
These are set forth in the County's subdivision regulations, Articles VII and VIII, and in the
County's septic tank ordinance and flood plain ordinance.... No other policies related to
constraints to development are considered necessary at this time." Cama Land
Development Plan Update for Pasquotank County, North Carolina 1987
Ferren Planning Group, Greenville, NC
Current 1987 Policy:
The county will insure that development in flood hazard areas meet the requirement of its
flood plain ordinance.
Implementation Strategies:
Pasquotank County is participating in the regular phase of the Federal Flood Insurance
Program. The required ordinance has been adopted and the standards are being enforced.
Subdivision regulations shall require elevation monuments to be erected in all new subdivi-
sions where no existing elevation monuments are nearer than 2500 feet in order to facilitate
the determination of proper first floor elevations.
Issue: Septic Tank Limitations
Findings:
Almost all General Soil Associations
or very severe limitations to septic tank
table and to high clay content in the soils
Previous 1981 Policy:
ul Pasquotank County are subject to either severe
use. Limitations are due primarily to a high water
" There are existing policies related to physical and man-made constraints to development.
These are set forth in the County's subdivision regulations, Articles VII and VIII, and in the
County's septic tank ordinance and flood plain ordinance. No other policies related to con-
straints to development are considered necessary at this time." Cama Land
Ferren Planning Group, Greenville, NC.
Current 1987 Policy:
The county shall continue to rely on the District Health Departments septic tank permitting
process to insure proper development in respect to septic tank limitations.
Implementation Strategies:
The installation of all septic systems shall require a permit from the County Health Officer,
who shall investigate the proposed site and make assessments as to soil suitability, space
requirements, construction requirements, and placement of the proposed system. The is-
suance of final Plat approval shall require the compliance of all restrictions mandated by
I'Prz-,auntmiL. f'.nuntu f n.nA 11ga 'Pfn.n Undrita 1 A87
Pena 5n

the permitting officer.
The county will work closely with the
District Health Department, the Soil Conservation Service and other agricultural agencies
to ensure the proper construction and placement of agricultural lagoons.
Issue: Freshwater. Swamps. & Marshes
Findings:
In Pasquotank County swamp and marsh cover 40% of the land area. These areas are
important in that they help to slow erosion and provide filtering for contaminates and re-
tainage basins for excess nutrients. These areas produce many organisms vital to the lower
order of the food chain. While these areas are not likely to experience any major develop-
ment pressures in the near future nor be the location for major residential development, they
are frequently drained and cleared for agricultural uses. However, the new "Swamp
Buster" regulations will. severely limit any development of swamp lands for agricultural
purposes.
Previous 1981 Policy:
" There are existing policies related to physical and man-made constraints to development.
These are set forth in the County's subdivision regulations, Articles VII and VIII, and in the
County's septic tank ordinance and flood plain ordinance. No other policies related to con-
straints to development are considered necessary at this time." Caina Land
Development Plan Update for Pasquotank County, North Carolina, 1981,
Ferren Planning Group, Greenville, NC.
Current 1987 Policy:
It shall be the policy of Pasquotank County to preserve the integrity of the swamp's ecologi-
cal function.
Implementation Strategies:
Wooded swamps shall be designated Conservation Areas on the Land Classification Map
and their use restricted to the same as those permuted in Areas of Environmental Concern.
I Ll
Issue: Cultural and Historical Resources
Findings: I
The county recently participated in a grant program with the Division of Archives and
History that inventoried historically significant structures throughout the county. This in-
ventory has been completed and all information concerning has been sent to the Division of
Archives and History in Raleigh. None of this information is available at the county.
Previous 1981 Policy: I
None I
Piz,zn ntrinh. rnuntu f nnd. 11-za Tfrin Unrintr. 1 qR7 'Pnno. %1 I

Current 1987 Policy:
The county will encourage the preservation of significant historical and cultural artifacts.
However, the county shall not pledge any general financial support to such projects, and
does not wish to establish any local regulatory controls on these artifacts.
1 Issue: Manmade Hazards
IFindings:
Primary manmade hazards and nuisances in Pasquotank County are the transportation net-
work, heavy air traffic in the corridors near the U.S. Coast Guard Air Station, and storage
1 facilities for fuel, fertilizers, chemicals, and grain.
The transportation network and the air traffic near the Coast Guard Base presents the great-
est hazard to life and limb. The county has no zoning ordinance and no controls governing
the number, width, or spacing of points of egress and access from properties to the
transportation system. The US Department of Transportation monitors and approves
construction in the designated AICUZ (Air Installation Compatible Use Zone) adjacent to the
Coast Guard Base. The City of Elizabeth City has zoning juristiction over these zones.
The county has adopted height restrictions for multi -family residential structures of two -sto-
ries or thirty-five feet, which ever is less, however, there are no height restrictions on any
other types of development. Development restrictions may be required for all construction
within 3,000 ft of the Coast Guard Station runways.
Previous 1981 Policy:
" To ensure safe operations of aircraft around the Coast Guard Base, the County will con-
sider the preparation of minimum height and hazard standards." Cama Land
Development Plan Update for Pasquotank County, North Carolina, 7981.
Ferren Planning Group, Greenville, NC.
Current 1987 Policy:
The County shall commission the preparation of a Zoning Ordinance for those portions of
the county in greatest need of increased development control.
Implementation Strategies:
The county shall commission the preparation of a Zoning Ordinance to control development
in the AICUZ Zones and other portions of the county
Issue: Protection of Potable Water Supply
Findings:
Protection of potable water supplies is of critical concern in Pasquotank County. Fresh
I'PricnuntrnttfQ. r.nun.tu f nwL tbza 'Pfnn. Unrfnto. 1 qR7
'nna 32

water supplies occupy a very narrow stratum of the watertable aquifer. Most wells over 50
feet in depth begin to draw salt water, making them unusable as a potable supply. The
County established a county wide water system in 1981 to ensure availability of safe water
to all residents; initial sign-up listed 3750 users. Since that time, over 1100 new users have
been added to the system.
Previous 1981 Policy:
None.
Current 1987 Policy:
It is be the policy of Pasquotank County to protect the County's fresh water supply by
strictly enforcing the lot size requirements of the State Department of Health on all develop-
ments in the county.
Implementation Strategies:
The County subdivision regulations now require a minimum lot size of 15,000 and 20,000
square feet. Typically the soils in the county will require lots to be larger than these stated
minimums.
Issue: Stormwater Runoff -- Agricultural Development
Findings:
Nutrient loading of the surface waters of the Pasquotank and Little Rivers from storm water
runoff from agriculture lands has generally not been a recognized problem in the county.
No studies are available that describe the scope and extent of this problem are available. In
general, the farmers in the county recognize the potential dangers to the surface waters in the
area from the rapid loading of fertilizer enriched Stormwater into the drainage basins of the
county and to a great extent have initiated best management recommendations of the Soil
Conservation Service
Previous1981 Policy:
None.
Current 1987 Policy:
It has always been the Policy of the Pasquotank County Board of Commissioners to en- 2
courage use of the best management practices recommendations of the U.S. Soil
Conservation Service.
(I
Issue: Stormwater Runoff -- Residential Development
Findings:
Development in Pasquotank County is mostly scattered rural residential development on lots
that generally average more than 25,000 square feet. Stormwater runoff from residential
'Pricnu.ntn.n&. Pountu f nruf 11a 'Pfnn Unrfnto. 1 GR7 'Pena i?i I

i
uses is not a significant problem. Present subdivisions regulations require at least 15,000
square foot lots for areas with available public water and sewer, minimum lot sizes in areas
with only public water available are 25,000. These large lot sizes should reduce the impact
of storm water runoff.
Previous 1981 Policy:
None.
Current 1987 Policy:
Pasquotank County shall continue its policy of requiring all proposed subdivision plats to be
first inspected by the District Health Department and of permitting only those subdivisions
where needed improvements receive Health Department approval.
Issue: Industrial Impact on Fragile Areas
Findings:
None of the major industries in Pasquotank County are located on areas that can be consid-
ered fragile. The County presently controls two areas for industrial development. These ar-
eas are on soils that are capable of supporting such development.
Previous 1981 Policy:
None.
Current 1987 Policy:
The county shall continue to support industrial development and shall proceed to make the
1 needed improvements to properties it now owns to attract new industries.
Implementation Strategies:
The county will take what steps are necessary to ensure that industrial development does
not severely damage fragile areas.
Tssue: Development of Sound and Estuarine System Islands
Findings:
Not an issue at this time.
Previous Policy:
None.
Current 1987 Policy:
None.
IPfizatintntiL. rount» LixnA 1.Lco.'Pfntt Undntn. 1.gR7
'Pena 54

1 ss awe,
LVb l TTUPE 7l "xrjct tqj yuv j rr;uncrj •yuv;irnuavd,
I
I
fl
I
P
I

I
1 POLICY ISSUES: RESOURCE PRODUCTION
Issue: Productive Agricultural Lands
Findings:
The 1982 Census of Agriculture reported that of Pasquotank County's approximately
188,000 acres, 73,500 acres were harvested cropland. Most of the county is suitable for
agricultural production. The best agricultural areas, according to the soil associations, oc-
curs in the south central area of the county. The least suitable areas are those in the swamps
and flood plains.
Previous 1981 Policy:
"It shall be the policy of Pasquotank County to include provisions in any future land use
regulations for the protection of the County's 'active' agricultural land from indiscriminate
development." Cama Land Development Plan Update for Pasquotank County,
North Carolina, 1981. Ferren Planning Group, Greenville, NC.
Current 1987 Policy:
The county recognizes the danger of losing its best agricultural land to development.
However, the county also recognizes the right of an individual to dispose of and to use his
property as he desires. The county is considering developing a zoning ordinance to control
development on these valuable lands.
Issue: Commercial Forest Lands
Findings:
Roughly 42 % of the land in Pasquotank County is forest land. Most of this area is located
in the swamp areas of the county. While a large percentage of the land is devoted to forest
or wooded areas, only 20% of this wooded land is actually suitable for conventional forest
production. The conversion of forested lands to agriculture production and the lack of re-
forestation have reduced the total acreage of wooded lands in the county; however,the
dominant land use in the county is still forest.
Previous 1981 Policy:
None.
Current 1987 Policy:
Pasquotank County will encourage reforestation of clear cut timber lands as a sound forest
management practice.
I'Pn.Cnu.ntxxnL. Rnuntu fntui tka Vbmtt Undnta 1 QR7
'Pena Sfi

Issue: Commercial and Recreational Fishing
Findings:
Commercial fishing has not been a significant factor in the Pasquotank County economy in
the past. Not an issue.
Previous 1981 Policy:
None.
Current 1987 Policy:
None.
Issue: Existing and Potential Mineral Production
Findings:
Approximately 17 to 25 million tons of moisture -free peat may be present in the county.
This is according to the 1980 Annual Report on Peat Resources in North Carolina. Yet,
regardless of the abundance of this resource, no mining activities are underway.
Previous Policy:
None.
Current 1987 Policy:
These peat deposits are located in the Dismal Swamp and therefore under federal control.
This is not an issue at this time.
Issue: Off- Road Recreational Vehicle!
Findings:
Not an issue.
Previous 1981 Policy:
None.
Current 1987 Policy:
None.
'Pa.crntntrn.nh. Pnunt» f xituf Llcv. Wrin Undatn. 1 AR7 'Pena W

1
Issue: Residential and Commercial Development Impact on Any Resource
Findings:
1 The most critical resources affected by new development are agricultural lands being taken
out of production and converted to a new use, the increased demands on the water supply.
Both of these resources are now in ample supply. This is not an issue at this time.
Previous 1981 Policy:
None.
Current 1987 Policy:
The county will rely on its existing regulatory tools and the permitting activities of the vari-
ous local state and federal agencies to prevent any harmful damage to its resources.
Issue: Industrial Develol2ment Tml2act on Any Resource
Findings:
None
Previous 1981 Policy:
None.
Current 1987 Policy:
None
Issue: Impact of Peat or Phosphate Mining on Any Resource
Findings:
While peat deposits in the Dismal Swamp provide a potential marketable natural resource,
the lands containing theses deposits are controlled by the federal government over which
Pasquotank holds no jurisdiction.
Previous 1981Policy:
Not an Issue.
Current 1987 Policy:
Same as the 1981 Policy.
'Pncnunr.mnh. f'.nu.n.tu f thud. I.lcv. %xin. Unrin.to. I A27 'Puna SR

POLICY ISSUES: ECONOMIC AND CON MUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Issue: Types and Location of Industries Desired
Findings:
For several years Pasquotank County and Elizabeth City have actively pursued and re-
cruited industries to locate into the county. The construction and subsequent expansions
of the county water system have made industrial development sites possible in most parts of
the county. The county has purchased two tracts of land as sites for industrial development.
With few exceptions, mostly agricultural operations and neighborhood commercial estab-
lishments, industrial development in Pasquotank County has occurred in or near Elizabeth
City or the Coast Guard base, areas that are served by public sewer. Because of the ex-
treme soil limitations, all industries requiring water in the manufacturing process would
have either to be located in close proximity to existing sewer lines or to provide its own
sewage treatment and disposal. Industries requiring only limited sewage disposal can be
located in other areas of the county, depending on soil conditions and appropriate and ap-
proved sewage systems.
Previous Policy:
" The County recognizes that due to the availability of water and sewer utilities in and near
Elizabeth City, the County supports efforts to locate new industries in those areas where fa-
cilities are available. The County also supports industrial development in other areas of the
County where water service and transportation access are available, and where limited
sewage disposal is required." CAMA Land Development Plan Update for
Pasquotank County, North Carolina , 7981. Ferren Planning Group,
Greenville, NC
Current 1987 Policy:
The County shall actively pursue the location and creation of new industries into Pasquotank
County so long as such industries do not degrade the quality of life.
Implementation Strategies:
To continue to support the Elizabeth City/Pasquotank County Economic Development
Authority.
Issue: Local Commitment to Provide Services to Development
Findings:
Water service is the only public service operated by revenues generated through user fees.
All other services provided by the County are available from general fund revenues to all
county residents.
Pncnimtnnk rnutttu f Hurl. 1.Lcv. 'Pfnn Unrfntr. 1 C187 'Puna SG I

Water service expansion will be dictated by economic feasability (ie., will user fees pay for
expansion). Subdividers are required to install water lines at their own expense and dedi-
cate these lines to the County.
A 1984-1985 School Survey Report prepared by the NC Deparment of Public Instruction,
Division of School Planning, for the Pasquotank County School System outlined an exten-
sive program of demolition, renovation, and new construction to bring the county's school
system up to minimum standards. Since the report was published, the county has lost one
elementary school building by fire and two have been closed because of safety hazards. The
county has begun a long-range, $13,000,000 construction and renovation program to up-
grade usable structures and construct needed additional facilities.
The
siting of solid waste transfer sites has become a serious problem for the County. The
County presently maintains thirty-one transfer sites but only owns two. This lack of site
control poses a serious threat to existing service .
Previous Policy:
1
"At the present time decisions as to whether or not service [water service] can be provided to
new developments will have to be made on a case by case basis..." CAMA Land
Development Plan Update for Pasquotank County, NC,1981.The Ferren
Group, Greenville, NC.
Current 1987 Policy:
fPasquotank
County is committed to providing the highest quality and the greatest quantity of
public services that its revenues will allow. The County has initiated two major improve-
ment projects that will take approximately 5 years to complete: a water system improve-
ment program that will double the capacity of the present system and will require an invest-
ment of more than a million dollars and a long-range education facility renovations and con-
structions program costing more than $13,000,000.
1
Issue: Tvnes of Urban Growth Patterns Desired
Findings:
Pasquotank County residents generally prefer low density, single-family developments of
i conventional homes. High intensity commercial and industrial uses are preferred along
major arterial roads and near available public sewer and water service.
The construction of the County water service in 1981 and subsequent expansions of the
system have made public water available to all areas of the County, thus making lower den-
sity, single family subdivision development feasible in all sections of the county.
Previous Policy:
"The County will consider the preparations of a zoning ordinance which would reflect the
recommendations of this CAMA Plan Update, and which would specify the types, loca-
tions, and densities of desired future growth." Cama Land Development Plan
Update for Pasquotank County NC, 1981, The Ferren Group, Greensville,
NC.
1 'Pricnu.ntnnk. rn+lntu f ri*iA.. 1.Lcv. 'Pfnn llndntn. 1 QR7
Pnno fin

Current 1987 Policy:
Pasquotank County, following the policy recommendations of the 1981 CAMA Plan
Update, initiated a planning study to develop a zoning ordinance for the County. Due to a
ground swell of citizen protest against land use zoning the county decided not to pursue this
legislation. Due to recent developments in the county an as increased display of interest
from various groups and individuals in the county, the County Commissioners are once
again considering the adoption of zoning controls over portions of the county.
The County's current policy is to rely on its existing land development regulations and to
commission the preparation of a zoning ordinance for identified areas of the county for
consideration and possible adoption.
Implementation Strategies:
1) A second building inspector has been hired to assist in the monitoring of existing
regulations.
2) Update existing development regulations to improve control of developments.
3) Amend existing regulations as needed to achieve specific public needs.
4) Commission the preparation of a zoning ordinance for designated portions of the
county for study and consideration.
Issue: Redevelopment of Developed Areas
Findings:
There are a number of low-income neighborhoods in Pasquotank County where housing
conditions and existing waste disposal systems do not meet the modern definitions of de-
cent, safe, and sanitary housing.
The County is committed to the redevelopment of these areas and shall continue to pursue
financial assistance from the various state and federal agencies to improve living conditions
in these areas.
Presently there are five Housing Rehabilitation Programs active in the County:
1. Roanoke Avenue Revitalization, CDBG
2. South Martin Street Revitalization, CDBG
3. Region R Housing Preservation Program, FmHA
4. Sections 504 Housing Rehabilitation Program, FmHA
5. Weatherizations and Energy Conservation Program, E.I.C.
Previous Policy:
"...the County considers it unnecessary to take a policy initiation on this issue." Cama
Land Development Plan Update for Pasquotank County NC, 1981, The
Ferren Group, Greensville, NC.
Va.CniintnYl . rnuntu fnruf 1.lcv,'Pfan. UnrLntu 1QR7 'PMW. R1

1J
Current 1987 Policy:
The County shall pursue financial assistance from state and federal agencies for the purpose
of implementing its redevelopment plan for low income neighborhoods adjacent to the city
Emits of Elizabeth City. Two phases of this plan have been initiated. One is complete; the
second is nearing completion. The County plans to request funds from the NC Division of
Community Assistance for the Third Phase of this Program.
Implementation Strategies:
The County will attempt to identify the extent and location of substandard housing in the
' county and seek state and federal assistance as it deems necessary. The County will continue
to enforce the NC Building Codes as a means to reduce the frequency of substandard hous-
ing.
i
Issue: Commitment to State and Federal Programs in the Area
Findings:
Pasquotank accepts financial and technical assistance from a variety of federal and state pro-
grams. It would be impossible for the County to provide the quantity of services now avail-
able to County residents without this financial assistance. Many of the programs are
mandatory and must be implemented by the County.
For non -mandatory programs, the County reserves the right to pick and choose the timing
and the extent of its participation.
Previous Policy:
"It shall be the policy of the County to cooperate with state and federal agencies in the evalu-
ation of proposed projects by such agencies which will impact the County and to advise said
agencies of the County's position on these projects through the A-95 review process and/or
the County Manager." Cama Land Development Plan Update for Pasquotank
County NC, 1981.The Ferren Group, Greensville, NC.
Current 1987 Policy:
The County shall continue to participate in all state and federal programs which in the
County's opinion will be of benefit to its residents.
Implementation Strategies:
Continue to support the NC Department of Transportation and intensify pressure to upgrade
US 17, US 158, and NC 34.
Issue: Assistance to Channel Maintenance and Beach Nourishment
Findings:
Channel Maintenance is of great importance to many of the county's manufacturing and
I'Pacrnu►tfinb. r..nuntu f nnd. 11a,a Vfn.n Undnty. 1 Q87 'Pena fi7

Ll
shipping concerns as well as to its boating and fishing interests. The county is particularly
concerned about the continued maintenance and operation of the Dismal Swamp Canal.
Almost annually, the residents of Pasquotank and Camden Counties muster as much politi-
cal pressure as possible to convince the US Army Corps of Engineers to continue to main-
tain the Canal locks and to keep the channel clear and operational.
Previous 1981 Policy:
" It shall be the policy of the county to support beach nourishment and channel maintenance
projects by state and federal agencies." Cama Land Development Plan Update for
Pasquotank County NC, 7981.The Ferren Group, Greensville, NC.
Current 1987 Policy:
It shall be the county's policy to lobby vigorously to keep the Dismal Swamp Canal open
and functioning.
Issue: Energy Facility i ina and Development
Findings:
Pasquotank County considers the possibility of an energy facility site developing in the
county to be very remote. Therefore, no policy on this issue is necessary. However,
should this become an issue in the future, a policy will be developed at the appropriate time.
Previous 1981 Policy: I
"This is not an issue." Cama Land Development Plan Update for Pasquotank
County NC, 1981.The Ferren Group, Greensville, NC.
Current 1987 Policy: I
None.
Issue: Tourism, Waterfront, and Estuarine Access
Findings:
Pasquotank County does not control any points of access to any beach or waterfront area.
However, there are several private access points and road ends controlled by the Department
of Transportation. The Pasquotank County Planning Board has designated four such areas
for possible development as public access areas. The four areas are located on or near road
ends at Morgan's Corner, Possum Quarter Road, Brickhouse Road, and at Glen Cove.
Tourism, at present, is not a major factor in the local economy. However, it is growing in
significance and holds a great deal of potential. The County supports the construction of a
tourist information center planned for construction along US 17 north of Elizabeth City.
The planned tourist center site fronts both the highway and the Dismal Swamp Canal and
will provide regional tourism information to travellers using either the highway or the canal. '
Pacnuntan6. rnu.ntu f n.nrL t.Lcg. 'pfn.n 1,1nrLnto. 1 A27 'pang. (M 1

The City of Elizabeth City presents an attractive, picturesque setting that could be capital-
, ized on if an extensive downtown revitalization program can be successful. The County
fully supports the City's efforts to improve its downtown waterfront and its attempt to have
a new Bed and Breakfast Inn constructed on the waterfront. The City has a large Historic
Preservation District where much renovation has already been accomplished and much is
now underway.
Previous 1981 Policy:
None
1 Current 1987 Policy:
The County will seek to acquire the right of way, title, or easement of property that will
provide public access to beach and waterfront areas.
Implementation Strategies:
The County will apply for a grant through the Division of Coastal Management to study the
possibilities of public waterfront access and boat ramps in the county.
Issue: Densitv and Location of Anticipated Residential Development
iFindings:
Development density in Pasquotank County essentially is controlled by Health Department
' Regulations governing septic tank installations. Generally speaking, the minimum lot size
in the county is 15,000 square feet for lots served by public water and sewer and 20,000
square feet for lots on suitable soils served only by public water. These minimums are
based on the general characteristics of soils in the county. Specific soil types and specific
sites may require additional land area for proper operation of the septic systems. If
additional land area is required for development, the lot size minimum almost doubles,
requiring 40,000 square feet for provisionally suitable lands not served by either public
sewer or water and to 25,000 square feet for those served by public water. Development
trends and recent subdivision platting activity indicate that new growth will likely occur as a
general expansion of the urban cluster of Elizabeth City, and along principal transportation
1 corridors, particularly US 17 and NC 34.
Previous 1981Policy:
None.
Current 1987 Policy:
It shall be the policy of Pasquotank County to rely on existing local regulations and the per-
mitting policies of the District Health Department to control residential densities. The county
believes that it is appropriate at this time to reconsider locational controls,such as zoning, on
development in specfic areas of the county.
1
I'Pncrnuntrink f'.nuntu fnruf 11--a 'Pfnn Undntc. 1CIR7 'Pnno. R4

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
Public participation was an ongoing feature during the development of this plan. Eleven regularly
scheduled monthly meetings were held before the Pasquotank County Planning Board at their reg-
ularly scheduled board meetings. The public was notified prior to each meeting through notices in
the local paper. Special meetings were held as different land use issues with a high degree of local
concern were realized.
Special meetings were held concerning the effectiveness of the septic systems currently being use in
the county that permits development on provisional soils. As a result of this discussion the County
and the District Health Department are participating in a research effort being carried out by the NC
State Agricultural Extension Service and the Albemarle Commission that will test the effectiveness
of this system and will develop alternative methods should they be required.
A special public meeting was held to allow the Coast Guard to present there operational and capital
improvement plans and to discuss what land use controls must be undertaken to control population
density in the Approach and Crash Zones of their Air Facility. These discussions have led the
county to reconsider the prospect of using zoning regulations as a possible development control.
Discussions of public service provisions led the planning board to recommend and have drafted re-
visions to the County's Subdivision Regulations and to have developed a Solid Waste Collection
Site Ordinance. These activities generated other public meetings where collection service providers
and developers eagerly expressed their views. Concern over the responsiveness of the County's
Emergency Services has led to the development of a 911 emergency communication network in co-
operation with Camden County and the City of Elizabeth City, additional public meetings
Two advertised Joint Public Meetings with the County Board of Commissioners and the Planning
Board were held to discuss the development of the planning document and the various issues that
were emerging.
One Workshop was held early on in the planning process where representatives from the Division
of Coastal Management presented an overview of the CAMA Planning Process and what the ex-
pectations were in the planning process.
F
L J'
1
1
Pncrnu.ntnnb. rnuntu f nnd. 1 Lca VP in Undatr. 1 AR7 'PflnO. AS I

fl
I
1 STORM HAZARD MITIGATION, POST -DISASTER RECOVERY PLAN
The purpose of this section is two fold:
1) to assist the county in managing development in those areas most likely to suffer
damages from a severe storm or hurricane; and
2) to reduce the risk to life and property from future hurricanes.
' High winds, flooding, intense wave action, and coastline erosion are the four physical forces of a
severe storm or hurricane that create threats to life and property. Flooding claims the most lives
during severe storms or hurricanes; high winds cause the most property damage. Only by identify-
ing those areas in the county most likely to suffer damage from any of these forces or combination
of these forces can a community develop a meaningful storm mitigation plan.
Mapping Hazard Area
Vulnerability
Assessment
Identify Severity of Risk Identify Magnitude of Risk
In Each Hazard Area in Each Hazard Area
'
Inventory Land Uses Assess
Evacuabilt
Inventory Structures
Identifying Mitigation Needs
Reviewing
FCurrent Measures
1 Poor Coverage Poor Enforcement
Reviewing
Alternative Measures
Implementation
Monitoring
Using the planning scenario recommended in BEFORE THE STORM: Managing Development
To Reduce Hurricane Damages, by McElyea, Brower,and Godschalk, the community can identify
the areas most likely to sustain storm damages and make a vulnerability assessment of the idend-
fied storm hazard area. The vulnerability assessment includes the severity and magnitude of risk in
each storm hazard area. The following chart taken from BEFORE THE STORM outlines the
Pricnuntrinh. f nii-vau rx ruf l.lcv. 'Pfrin. linrfnto. 1 CIR7 'Pnna fifi

procedure and the sequence of steps used in the storm hazard mitigation process.
Storm Hazard Area
The following Composite Hazard Map indicates those areas in Pasquotank County most likely to
sustain damage from flooding and other water related hazards, such as wave action and shore ero-
sion. The map is a composite of the flood hazard areas indicated on Slosh Maps prepared by NC
Division of Emergency Management and of identified Areas of Environmental Concern located in
the county. All of the county is assumed to be susceptible to wind damage, so this area is not
mapped.
Vulnerability
Vulnerability of an area is measured by both the severity and magnitude of risk. The severity rank-
ing is based on the number of physical forces likely to affect a particular identified storm hazard
area. The rankings suggested by McElyea, Brower, and Godschalk is a scale from 1 to 4. Areas
likely to receive damage from all four physical forces of a hurricane are ranked as 1; those receiving
only wind damage are ranked as 4. The magnitude of risk is based on the population and the num-
ber and value of developed properties in the storm hazard areas.
Severity of Risk
The table below ranks the severity of risk associated with the identified storm hazard areas in the
county and the physical forces affecting the different areas.
Magnitude of Risk
As the Risk Table below shows, severe storms and hurricanes most seriously affect the special
flood hazard areas in the county. The boundaries of these designated areas have been officially
designated by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). • Pasquotank County is in the
regular phase of the National Flood Insurance Program. The Federal Emergency Management
Agency has prepared Flood Hazard Boundary Maps for Pasquotank County; these maps establish
flood elevations for all sections of the county and are available from the County Building Inspector.
RISK TABLE FOR HAZARD AREAS
EXPOSURE TO DAMAGING FORCES
HAZARD AREA
SEVERITY
WAVE
HIGH
RANK
EROSION
ACTION
FLOODING
WIND
PUBLIC TRUST
WATERS
4
#
+
FLOOD HAZARD
AREA
3
+
+
+
+
REST OF THE
4
+
COMMUNITY
Exposure Level: (+) High, (•) Moderate, (#) Low
11
I
d
Pn.crn..ntnnb. rnttnt.0 f nnrl. I.Lcv. 'Pfatt Undato. 1 AR7 'Pnno. fi7 I

1
Estuarine Shoreline
The Estuarine Shoreline would be the AEC that would suffer the most damage. This area is subject
' to damage from wind, flooding, and from wave action in those areas fronting the Sound. There is
a substantial amount of recent residential development along the Pasquotank River. Most of this
development is north of New Begun Creek and would be sheltered from severe damage from wave
action. The main threat is high winds and flooding.
Flood Hazard Area
The special flood hazard areas designated by FEMA in Pasquotank County are the wooded swamps
and marsh areas along the Pasquotank River and the bottom land surrounding the major creeks and
streams in the county. These areas are essentially undeveloped except for an occasional
' abandoned agricultural building. Forests and forestry are the primary land uses and activities in
these areas. Occasional flooding will not damage the forests and will cause only minor inconve-
niencies or delay to most forestry activities.
Public Trust Waters
The Creeks and tributaries feeding into the Estuarine portion of the Pasquotank River and directly
into the Albemarle Sound are the most likely Public Trust Waters to suffer severe damage.
Flooding and high winds would inflict the greates damage.
Rest of the Community
High winds cause most of the property damage in Pasquotank County, simply because they affect
all properties. Damage is of two types:
' 1) direct wind damage, and
' 2) indirect wind damage from downed trees, wind -born debris, and downed utility
lines. Wind damage potential increases almost exponentially as the number of
mobile homes in the county increases.
IEvacuability
The county has adopted an evacuation plan . The plan establishes various teams, their respon-
sibilities and identifies team members and alternates. The Main evacuation routes are US 158,
US 17, and NC 34. Nine predetermined shelter sites have been established and their staffing
determined. Residents living south of New Begun Creek would need to begin evacuation early
since the creek may flood the highway.
Pncrn�ntnrih. rnttntu f and. Lka Vfan 1.1n(fatc 1 QR7 'Pena fiR

Policy Statement
Issue: Mitigation of Storm Damage
Findings:
County areas affected by the various storm hazards are as follows:
Hazard Area Affected
High Wind Entire County
Flooding 100-year Flood Hazard Area Public Trust
Waters
Erosion Shorelines of Public Trust Waters Flood
Hazard Areas
The greatest collective damage is from wind damage because the whole
county is affected. Most seriously affected developed areas are those with
property improvements in flood plains areas. Greatest risk potentials are the
Flood Hazard Areas.
Previous 1981 Policy:
None
Current 1987 Policy:
It will be the policy of Pasquotank County to enforce all controls and regulations it
deems necessary to mitigate the risk of severe storms and hurricanes to life and
property.
Implementation Strategies:
1) High Winds
Pasquotank County will follow and support the N.C. State Building Codes and their
requirements regarding design for high velocity winds. The County also supports
requirements for mobile homes such as tie -downs that help reduce wind damage.
Pasquotank County enforces construction and mobile home installation standards for
100-mph winds.
2) Flooding
Pasquotank County will support the hazard mitigation elements of the National
Flood Insurance Programs. Pasquotank County, which is in the regular phase
of this program, supports regulations regarding elevation and flood -proofing of
buildings and utilities. The county also supports CAMA and 404 Wetland
Development Permit processes.
I
1
C
'Pnenuntnrt&. r'.nuntu f aruf. tico. 'Pfrin Unrfaty. 1 QR7 'Pnno. fiQ

1
3) Wave Action and Shoreline Erosion
These are not issues.
' Post Disaster Recovery Plan
Pasquotank County proposes the following Disaster Recovery Plan as a general outline of the pro-
cedures the County will follow in the event of a major disaster. The plan includes a timetable for
carrying out recovery activities and a list of personnel who will be responsible for each component
of the plan.
PURPOSE:
This plan has been developed to provide for an orderly and coordinated recovery and reconstruc-
tion of areas of Pasquotank County suffering the effects of a major disaster. The underlying goals
of this plan are to minimize the hardships to affected residents, to restore and initiate reconstruction
in a timely manner, and to reduce or eliminate any bottlenecks in securing Federal or State Disaster
Assistance.
ORGANIZATION:
The Board of County Commissioners will function as the Pasquotank County Recovery Task
Force. The mission of the task force is to direct and control recovery activities and to formulate
recovery policies as needed.
SUPPORT TEAM:
' The County Commissioners will designate the following Recovery Support Team to assist in the
implementation of this plan. The mission of the support team is to provide personnel and resources
for the implementation of recovery activities as directed by the Recovery Task Force.
SUPPORT TEAM COMPOSITION AND RESPONSIBILITIES:
Pasquotank County Manager:
' To manage, control, and coordinate the efforts of the support team.
Sheriff:
To provide additional surveillance in the disaster area; to locate obstructions to traffic; and
to advise the County Manager of the location of downed transmission lines, ruptured water
lines, etc.
Tax Supervisor:
To provide and direct personnel in carrying out damage assessment; to prepare damage as-
sessment reports for the Recovery Task Force; and to revise property records.
' Building Inspector:
To assemble personnel and to conduct a survey of structural conditions in the disaster area;
to coordinate actions with the Tax Supervisor, and to prepare structural damage reports and
' classifications of damages.
Social Services Director:
' To provide personnel to assist in finding shelter for persons who are homeless; to assist ap-
plicants in requesting aid from various state and federal agencies providing disaster relief.
I'PncnuntmnL. rnuntu f nndf. 11-,a VP in Undlntc. 1 QR7
Puna 7f1

County Health Officer:
To conduct damage assessment of on -site water supplies and sewage disposal systems;
to prepare damage reports; and to make recommendations concerning restoration and reuse
of on -site systems.
Water Service Director:
To conduct assessment of public utilities; to assemble personnel for clean up; and to orga-
nize and direct the restoration of public utility service.
Schedule of Activities
Recovery activities will consist of two types: preplanned activities that can begin immediately or
as soon as is reasonably possible after the storm has passed; and long-term, permanent reconstruc-
tion activities that will be begun once the extent of the damage is known.
IMMEDIATE ACTION:
1) Declare a moratorium on all repairs and development
2) Begin clean-up and debris removal
3) Coordinate the restoration and repair of electrical service to affected areas
4) Begin Emergency repairs of essential public facilities
5) Maintain additional surveillance and extra security measures in affected areas
6) Deploy assessment teams
7) Prepare assessment reports
These immediate actions should be completed within ten days of the storm event.
Longterm Reconstruction Actions
8) Evaluate, classify, and map damages
9) Review of moratorium decision
10) Establish priorities for public facilities repair
11) Submit damage report to State and Federal agencies
12) Notify affected property owners of damage classifications and required repairs
13) Lift moratorium on repairs not requiring permits
14) Lift moratorium on siting of replacement mobile homes
15) Lift moratorium on conforming structures requiring major repairs
'Pnc1711ntan&. rount» f rmnd.. 1.1.¢a 'Pfan linrfaty. 1 4R7 'Penn. 71

1
1
I
11
1
16) Assist affected property owners with damage registration and filing request for dis-
aster relief
17) Negotiate with property owners needing improvements to on -site water and sewage
systems
18) Lift moratorium on repairs and new development
The duration of the reconstruction and recovery period will depend on the nature and extent of the
storm damage. Repairs of minor structural damages should be able to commence within two weeks
of the storm event.
Damage Assessment
As soon as possible after the storm, the assessment teams will be deployed to measure the extent
and nature of the damages and to classify structural damages to individual structures. The inspec-
tion teams will consist of the County Building Inspector, the County Health Officer, and the Direc-
tor of the County Water System. Before any new construction will be permitted in or adjacent to
any Area of Environmental Concern CAMA major and minor permit officers will be consulted.
The assessment will not be detailed, but will provide an initial overview of the scope of storm
damages, an inventory of affected properties, and preliminary assessments of the extent of damages
to individual structures. Detailed inspections are being sacrificed in an effort to save time in
beginning restoration activities and in securing disaster relief from various State and Federal
Agencies offering financial assistance.
Damage Classification
Structural damages will be classified in the following manner:
Destroyed - if estimated repair costs exceed 75% of assessed value
Major Repairs - if estimated repair costs exceed 30% of assessed value
Minor Repair - if estimated repair costs are less than 30% of assessed value
Reconstruction Development Standards
In general, all units requiring major repairs and all new construction shall comply with all devel-
opment regulations in force at the time repair or new construction is initiated. This shall include
compliance with all provisions of the building code governing construction in 100 mph wind ve-
locity zones. all regulations concerning development in designated Special Flood Hazard Areas,
and all Health Department Regulations regarding on -site septic systems.
The lone exception to this general rule concerns the application of development restrictions on
affected residential lots smaller than 15,000 square feet (the minimum lot size required by the
County Health Department). Where structures on these substandard sized lots have been classified
as either "destroyed" or requiring "Major Repair" as a result of the storm damage, the County shall
make a determination concerning reconstruction and reuse with or without improvements to the
on -site disposal system on a case basis.
Development Moritoria
' The immediate development moratoria will remain in effect until the assessment reports are
completed and the scope and nature of the storm damage has been fully reviewed by the County
Commission. The County Commission at that time may rescind or extend the duration of the
moratoria based on their assessment of the situation. Such decisions of the Commission may affect
all or any portion of the county.
1 'P(1Cn1LntAxv&. Pnuntu f nwf. 112w. 'Pfnn. Und.nto. 1 QR7 'Pena 72

1 r
1C Pasquotank County
A
M 1987
D �
aN Composite Hazard Map
)y)\Y.il
.O Su.Mgt \ 1. I)`�CM. u) .] ) 1S,% vu �\ ''•..•Y: '.4jy .• f:•::-:::: •.�` i.
14
114
` ...� ,..\ i.'.t •\tea. �'
•\ � .:�;•` '+'.i - : K ". *� /.ice\ `-- - _'
The preparation of this map was financed in part
1 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 Resources
Management, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration.
1 �-
N`Tygl: N j°oo`' ,)••� _ •ail'._ •�:y:: •..:::.. ..
_ ) ^ •/ '. T:.w ice• ....:. 'P
Al"
+11 ..'.., 1 , ,:. C 'ice' ,• ,:fit :..:.... ,
:
1 ).
LEGEND _ -. _ � �;•:'::.;='`:
1 STORM DAMAGE HAZARD AREAS - J - �• `;..::::';;: •:`.::.`!',;
1 CATEGORY I STORMIV
1 CATEGORY I I & III STORM - -_
a L Q E

LAND CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM AND LAND USE MAP:
PASQUOTANK COUNTY
Land Classification System
' The land classification system presented here provides the mechanism for implementing the
county's development policies according to geographical areas of the county. The Pasquotank
' County land classification system is based on the standardized CAMA land classification
system. Through this system, the the Pasquotank County Board of Commissioners have
designated general geographical areas of the county for anticipated or permitted development
' densities, for permitted or anticipated services to support development, and for anticipated
growth. The policy statements and implementation strategies stated in this plan are then
applicable to areas of the county containing resources that have been identified for protection
or development. The land classification system is not a regulatory instrument, but a general
application guide for the county's growth policy.
It is the intent of the Pasquotank County Board of Commissioners to view the boundaries as
flexible rather than intractible. The land use classification areas delineated on the Land
Classification Map should be viewed as approximate and general whereby slight intrusions by
developments permitted in areas designated for greater development densities and more
intensive infrastructure improvements into areas designated for lesser densities and minimal
' infrastructure improvements shall not be viewed as an amendment to the land classification
map.
' The County is classifing a large portion of its area as transitional . The purpose for this
classification is to permit developers to construct community waste disposable systems for
their individual developments. This classification does not increase the allowable density in the
area and does not mean that the County anticipates growth. Existing county development
regulations now permit single-family densities in excess of the 500 units per square mile
specified as a minimum for this classification. Due to the severe septic tank limitations of soils
in the county the county commissioners feel that by permitting developers to construct
community sewer systems housing may become more affordable and the threat of
contamination to the county's groundwater reduced.
r
1
Land Classification Map
The land classification map provided here gives local governments and the general public a
convenient reference for identifying those geographic areas of the county designated for speci-
fied types, levels, and patterns of development. The approximate location of the land
classification boundaries are indicated on the land classification map. These boundaries should
not be construed as being definite.
Land Classification Districts
The CAMA land classification system contains five broad development classes: developed,
transitional, community, rural, and conservation.This system emphasizes the timing of devel-
opment of growth rather than the establishment of severe use restrictions.
I'Pr-9-3 ntnn&. f outitu f rzwl. IJ ,c,. 'Pfnn Undxitp. 1 Q R7 'Pena 74

eveloped: The purpose of the developed classification is "to provide for
continued intensive development of existing cities" [NCAC
15: 7B .0204 (d)(1)(A)].
The regulations also establishes specific qualifying densities for
this district as well as specific land use characteristics.
The only area in Pasquotank County meeting the regulatory
description of this district is the incorporated town of Elizabeth
City. The developed land classification, then, is composed only '
of the incorporated area of Elizabeth City. Permitted
development is regulated by the Elizabeth City zoning ordinance.
Transitional: '
The stated purpose of the transition class is "to provide for fu-
ture intensive urban developments on lands that are suitable and
that will be provided with necessary urban services ." (NCAC '
15: 7B .0204 (d) (2) (A) ] -
Transition lands generally lie along either side of US 17, US '
158, and Main Street Extended through out the county extending
approximately one mile on either side of US 17 and Main Street
Extended, in the northern section of the county from a line one '
mile south and running parallel to SR 1001 and SR 1354
reaching northward to the County line, and forming a band of
land encirciling the southern half of the county and extending
approximately one -quarter mile to the inland side of the most '
obvious perimeter road shown on the land use classification map
Community
CAMA regulations define the community district as mixed use,
low -intensity, clustered development generally associated with
rural crossroads communities.
'
In Pasquotank County, the areas designated as community are
all existing crossroads communities that exhibit clustering; this
is essentially all land areas with more than three adjacent
minimum -sized lots of record. The minimum lot size in the
county is 15,000 square feet if served by public water and
20,000 square feet if an on -site water supply is used.
The community of Weeksville and its environs located in the
'
southern half of the county and totally surrounded by transitional
lands as indicated on the Land Classification Map.
1
1
Pmgnuntank rnu.n.tu f and. 111cv. 'Pfau Undaty. 1 QR7 1?nno, 73
1

I
11
I
Rural Service:
The stated purpose of the rural district is "to provide for agri-
cultural, forestry, mineral extraction, and various low -intensity
uses on large sites including low density dispersed residential
uses..." [NCAC 15: 7B .0204 (d)(4)(A)]•
The regulations indicate that development in these areas will
use on -site water supplies and waste -water disposal systems.
The County has made public water available to all of the county;
therefore, the county has created a rural service sub -district to
provide public water to the type development described in the
CAMA rural classification. The rural service district covers
most of the county.
The only area designated as Rural Service lies in the northern
pardon of the county in an area known as "the Desert" and
composed of lands generally associated with the Great Dismal
Swamp.
Conservation: The stated purpose of the conservation class is "to provide for
effective long-term management and protection of significant,
limited, or irreplaceable areas" [NCAC 15. 7B .0204 (d)
(5)(A)I-
In Pasquotank County, conservation areas include all areas of
environmental concern designated by CAMA and all 404
wetlands.
All land uses that can be permitted under the existing CAMA
regulations and US Corps of Engineers 404 Wetlands
regulations are allowed in the conservation district.
'Pnarn.1ntn.nh. r1111tttu f n.wl. 1.1co. 'Pfrltt Und%nto. 1 AR7 'Pang 76
I

N,
LAND CLASSIFICATION 7`LAP
PA
LEGEND
Developed
Transition
Community
Rural Service
Conservatiov
The preparation of this map 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
Costal Resource Management, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
SQLLO7a7N9G COL1NTt) - 1987

I
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LOCAL POLICIES AND
ILAND CLASSIFICATION
All policies developed during this planning process and formally stated in this document have con-
sistently emphasized the County's intent of relying on existing local development regulations
and on the various state and federal agencies with jurisdiction.
The land classification system provided in this document makes no restrictions on land use.
Any development is permitted on any site if such development complies with existing local regula-
tions and with the various permit requirements of the state and federal agencies with jurisdic-
tion.
Inter -Governmental Coordination
Pasquotank County has designated areas adjacent to Elizabeth City as transitional lands. Much of
this area is composed of the extra-tdrritorial jurisdiction of Elizabeth City. This designation gener-
ally reflects the land use plan prepared last by Elizabeth City. Growth trends indicate that this area
will receive a large portion of the new development expected to occur the five year planning period.
Any development densities greater than one dwelling unit per 20,000 square feet will have to occur
in these areas and is almost completely contingent of the City's sewer expansion plans.
Cl
PA
1
I
IPncnuntn.n . rnuntu fnxuf. LL¢v. 'Pfnn Unrfn.ty. 1 QR7 'Pnno.7R