CAMA Land Use Plan 1997 Update-1998

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
TOWN OF AURORA
CAM -A ]LAND USE PLAN
1997 UPDATE
Q
� o
DCM COPY
` Please do not remove. --
Division of Coastal Management Copy
AV
(1' VIVII
Adopted by the Aurora Town Council on arch 2. 1998
Certified by the North Carolina Coastal Rcsources Commission on March 26, 1998
The preparation of this report and accompanying maps was financed in part through a grant provided by the North Carolina Coas:sl
Management Program, through funds provided by the Coastal Zane Mutagement Act of 1972, as amended, which is administered by the Ofiire
of Ocean and Coas;W Resource hlamgemer t, National O:eanic ani Atmo,pheric Administration

TOWN OF AURORA
CAMA LAND USE PLAN
1997 UPDATE
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Prepared for the Aurora Town Council
Joe Hooker, Mayor
Etles Henries, Jr. Brad Lee
Mike Patterson Jeff Peed
Sandra Sartin, Town Clerk
Prepared by the Aurora Planning Board
Bessie LaVictoire, Chairman
Burton Gray Bill Herwig
Duke Jennings Marvin Sartin, Vice Chairman
With Technical Assistance from
The Mid -East Commission
P.O. Box 1787
Washington, NC 27889
[phone]
Robert J. Paciocco, Planner -in -Charge
Kevin Richards, Principal Planner
Ed Lynch, Land Use Planner

1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVESUMMARY
................................................................................................................................. 2
I.
INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................................................... 5
A.
LAND USE PLANNING......................................................................................................................:...... 5
'
B.
GEOGRAPHIC AND HISTORICAL CONTEXT....................................................................................... 6
II.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS................................................................................................. 8
'
A.
B.
POPULATION............................................................................................................................................. 8
HOUSING................................................................................................................................................... 9
C.
ECONOMY................................................................................................................................................10
D.
E.
LAND USE CONSTRAINTS....................................................................................................................13
EXISTING LAND USE............................................................................................................................. 20
F.
COMMUNITY FACILITIES..................................................................................................................... 22
G.
SUMMARY................................................................................................................................................25
III.
1991 POLICY ASSESSMENTS.............................................................................................................. 27
A.
RESOURCE PROTECTION...................................................................................................................... 27
'
B.-
C.
RESOURCE PRODUCTION AND MANAGEMENT.............................................................................. 29
ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT............................................................................. 29
D.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION....................................................................................................................... 31
E.
IV.
STORM HAZARDS MITIGATION, POST -DISASTER RECOVERY AND EVACUATION PLANS.. 31
1997 POLICY STATEMENTS................................................................................................................ 34
A.
RESOURCE PROTECTION...................................................................................................................... 35
B.
RESOURCE PRODUCTION AND MANAGEMENT.............................................................................. 46
'
C.
ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT............................................................................. 51
D.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION.......................:............................................................................................... 60
E.
F.
CONTINUING PUBLIC PARTICIPATION............................................................................................. 61
STORM HAZARDS MITIGATION, POST -DISASTER RECOVERY AND EVACUATION PLANS.. 64
V.
LAND CLASSIFICATION...................................................................................................................... 74
'
A.
DEVELOPED.............................................................................................................................................74
B.
URBAN TRANSITION
C.
COMMUNITY...........................................................................................................................................75
'
D.
E.
RURAL.......................................................................................................................................................75
CONSERVATION..................................................................................................................................... 76
F.
RELATIONSHIP TO POLICIES............................................................................................................... 76
VI.
INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION.................................................................................... 79
VII.
SUMMARY...............................................................................................................................................83
'
APPENDIX A PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN .......................
APPENDIXB MAPS........................................................................................................................................ 87
F-j

I

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Town of Aurora, North Carolina is situated on South Creek, a tributary of the Pamlico
River, in southern Beaufort County. It is a Town which, until the early 1960s, existed primarily as a
fishing and farming community. The estimated 1995 population was 640. This represents about 1.5%
of the county's 1995 population of 43,330. Aurora's population experienced a 2.1% decline between
1990 (654) and 1995 (640).
Aurora recognizes the need to protect its natural and cultural resources. Development should
be targeted to areas where it is not likely to jeopardize or be jeopardized by the natural system. Since
management of productive resources is very important to Aurora, it is wise to manage these resources
to the best of their productivity and to ensure their existence for future generations. The major
productive resources in Aurora are related to agriculture, mining, commercial and recreational fisheries,
and commercial forestry.
Aurora is very concerned about future growth in economic and community development.
Possible hindrances to development may be lack of adequate housing, lack of recreational facilities and
limited retail opportunity.
The Town views itself as being in a position to accommodate growth and development. The
Town is pro -growth as long as the development is not environmentally degrading. The limitations
imposed by the Town's policies on the protection of sensitive natural and cultural resources should not
be violated in order to accommodate any type of growth. Residential, commercial, and industrial land
uses should meet the goals of the Town. Continued Public Participation policies provide ample
opportunities for the public to know about and express their opinion in local matters relating to growth
and development. Storm Hazard Mitigation policies addresses the discouragement of high -density
development in Hazardous areas.
In the planning area, most of the land within the Aurora Town limits is classified as Developed.
Exceptions include the forested wetland area north of the downtown area and the wetlands along South
Creek. The Urban Transition classification includes the areas located adjacent to the transportation
routes that run through Aurora. A small area of urban transition land is located due west of the Town
limits and south of Aurora along SR 1939 and SR 1925. Outside the Town limits, but within the
extraterritorial jurisdiction, the majority of land is designated as Rural. These areas are located all
around Aurora; and consist of agricultural, forest, and low intensity uses. In addition, the Rural
classification is particularly important for the extension of phosphate mining operations. The smallest
amount of land in any classification around Aurora is the Community class. Only one small area is so
7

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
designated. In the extreme southeast portion of the ETJ is the community of Royal/St. Peter's Church.
All land adjacent to South Creek and Bailey Creek is classified as Conservation. This area includes
AEC lands, waters, and wetlands, and is deserving of the strictest development regulations in order to
protect the natural environment. The Conservation class does not imply "non-use." It is intended to
provide for careful and cautious management of the uses allowed.
3
J

n
I. INTRODUCTION
A. LAND USE PLANNING
Land Use Planning has a. long history in the Town of Aurora. This document represents the
fifth land use planning process undertaken by the Town of Aurora in an effort to adhere to the
regulations of the Coastal Area Management Act. The amendments to the land use planning guidelines,
' effective March 1996 are taken into consideration within this document. This document, as all previous
land use plans, serves as a blueprint for future development.
According to the Land Use Planning Guidelines issued by the North Carolina Department of
'
Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), the major purpose of periodic updating of local land use
help local
plans is to identify and analyze emerging community issues and problems, and governments
establish and enforce policies to guide the development of their Counties and municipalities.
The Guidelines further define the following objectives the update should meet:
'
1. to further define and refine local policies and issues;
2. to further examine and refine the land classification system and the land classification map;
3. -to assess the effectiveness of the existing land use plan and its implementation;
4. to further explore implementation procedures; and
5. to promote a better understanding of the land use planning process.
CAMA 1976
Because the preceding objectives reflect a continuing refinement of the original
Plan, that original plan is utilized as a base for all updates. This is logical since some of the data
Thus, this refer to
incorporated into previous plans are still applicable today. update will periodically
'
the 1976 CAMA Plan and its updates, dating 1981, 1986, and 1991.
for local to in land use
The Land Use Plan is an instrument units of government use addressing
'
issues and developing local policies to guide in the development of their communities.
the Land Use Guidelines state that
In order to fulfill and promote the preceding objectives,
eleven basic elements must be addressed. The basic elements are:
1. Executive Summary;
2. Introduction;
'
3. Goals and Objectives;
4. Data Collection and Analysis;
'
5. Present Conditions;
6. Constraints;

7. Estimated Demands;
Policy Statements;
9. Land Classification;
'
10. Intergovernmental Coordination and Implementation; and
11. Public Participation.
These eleven (11) represent a minimum level of planning necessary to fulfill the objectives of
the Coastal Area Management Act. Counties and municipalities shall use these minimum guidelines as
'
a foundation from which to establish a more comprehensive planning and management process.
B. GEOGRAPHIC AND HISTORICAL CONTEXT
Aurora's historyls tied to farming, fishing, and phosphate mining. Indians made use of the
abundant fish and have been in the area for hundreds of years. The first immigrants to the area made
'
use of the rich farmland by growing potatoes and other crops. Phosphate has been a relatively recent
phenomenon. The first mine opened in the mid-1960s, and such mining will probably be affecting
'
Aurora for the next hundred years.
The Reverend W.H. Cunningham, a Methodist clergyman, moved into the area in the mid-
'
1800s. He named the town Aurora, and some interpret it to mean a new land in the East, due to the
fertile land; while others say that it was such a dark, dismal place, it needed light. He built a church and
'
school and laid off the first streets. The Town was incorporated in 1880.

II. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

' II. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
' A. POPULATION
' Aurora is one of seven incorporated areas in Beaufort County. The county occupies about 827
square miles of eastern North Carolina and is the eighth largest county in the state with the second
largest population in Region Q (Figure 1).
The Town of Aurora, North Carolina is situated on South Creek, a tributary of the Pamlico
' River, in southern Beaufort County. It is a Town which, until the early 1960s, existed primarily as a
fishing and farming community.
' Over the last few decades the Town of Aurora has witnessed two different population trends.
In the early 1960s the Town was primarily a fishing and farming community. During the mid-60s,
'
TexasGulf, now PCS Phosphate, located a phosphate plant near Aurora. As a result, there was an
increase in traditional residential and economic growth.
Between 1960 and 1970 the Town experienced its greatest growth in population at a rate of
24.2% (Table 1). During that period there was a rise in residential and service industry development.
'
Between 1970 and 1980 population has increased slowly but steadily at a rate of 12.6% for the
decade. This growth is due, in part, to PCS Phosphate employees locating closer to work. According to
'
the US Census counts, between 1980 and 1990, growth declined slightly by 6.3% and may reflect the
Census
differential in the birth and death rate. However, the Town does not agree with the count and
believes it to be inaccurate. The population between 1990 (654) and 1995 (640) experienced a slight
decline 2.1%.
of
'
from 1970 1995, Aurora Beaufort County.
TABLE 1. Population Change to and
% Population Change
1970 1980 1990 1995 % Change % Change % Change
70-80 80-90 90-95
AURORA 620 698 654 640 12.6% -6.3% -2.1%
'
BEAUFORT COUNTY 35,980 40,385 42,283 43,330 12.2% 4.8% 2.5%
Source: US Census Bureau, Office and State Planning
Seasonal population changes are not substantial enough to pose excessive demands on public
'
services, town facilities, or other resources. Recreational activities such as hunting and fishing attract a
very small number of tourists and summer residents to the area.

1
According to the 1990 Census, the population of Aurora is composed of 60% white and 40%
' non -white. Beaufort County has a population which is 68% white and 32% non -white. In 1988 the
estimated median age of Beaufort County was 32.6 years. When compared to the 1990 census, which
' reflected a median age of 35.7 years, this shows an aging trend throughout the county. Future
projections also agree with the aging trends of Beaufort County.
' Table 2 shows the 1990 age breakdown of Aurora, Beaufort County, and North Carolina.
Aurora has a higher percentage than both the County and State for ages 1-4 and 5-19. The 20-24 age
' group percentage is lower than the State average, but higher than the County average. This may be an
indication of some out migration of adults in search of job opportunities elsewhere. Aurora has a
significantly lower percentage of 25-44 year olds than both the State and County. The percentage of
' 45-64 year olds is slightly lower than the State and County. For the ages 65 and over, Aurora has a
' much higher percentage than both the State and County. This disproportionately large percentage
indicates that future emphasis should be placed on providing cultural and recreational programs
designed for older adults.
1
TABLE 2. Age Breakdown
1990
Aurora
Beaufort County
State
Age Structure Number
%
%
%
'
1-4 years
48
7.3%.
6.5%
6.9%
5-19 years
154
23.6%
22.2%
20.7%
20-24 years
43
6.6%
5.8%
8.4%
'
25-44 years
171
26.1%
29.3%
32.5%
45-64 years
124
19.0%
21.2%
19.4%
'
65 and older
114
17.4%
14.9%
12.1%
TOTAL
654
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
'
Source: 1990 Census
' B. HOUSING
In 1990, Aurora had 260 households (Table 3); 73 (28.1%) of these were single person
' households. The population was housed among 296 dwelling units. Single family units made up 188
(63.5%) of these. There were 36 (12.2%) vacant units in 1990. Renter occupied homes in Aurora were
' 110 (37.2%) as compared to 21.3% for Beaufort County. The Town also had 25 mobile homes (8.5%).

'
TABLE 3. 1990 Housing Data
'
Characteristic Comparison
Town of Aurora
1990
%
Beaufort County
1990 %
Total Households
260
100.0%
16,157
100.0%
'
Single -Person Households
73
28.1%
3,915
24.2%
Total Housing Units
296
100.0%
19,598
100.0%
Single Family Units
188
63.5%
13,131
67.0%
'
Vacant Units
36
12.2%
3,441
17.6%
Renter Occupied
110
37.2%
4,184
21.3%
'
Mobile Homes
25
8.5%
4,850
24.7%
Persons Per Household
2.52
------
2.58
------
'
Median Unit Value
$46,000
$52,600
Median Rent
$154
N N-=
$191
'
Source: 1990 Census
' C. ECONOMY
Although Aurora's per capita income and median family income increased significantly
' between 1980 and 1990, both fell short of Beaufort County and the State. The Town's per capita
income rose 70% from $5,534 in 1980 to $9,428 in 1990. Beaufort County and the State rose 91.8%
and 103.4%, respectively (Table 4). Aurora's median family income increased 51.1% from $14,792 in
1980 to $22,344 in 1990. This compares to a 79.9% increase for Beaufort County and an 87.9%
' increase for the State. The Bureau of Economic Analysis has estimated that the county's income has
been increasing from the last census, showing a bright future for the economy in the area. The increase
' in income resulted in a decrease in the Town's poverty level from 28.65% in 1980 to 24.59% in 1990.
'
TABLE 4. Income 1980-1990
Per Capita Income
Median Family Income
Area 1980 1990 % Increase
1980 1990 % Increase .
'
Aurora $5,534 $9,428 70.4%
$14,792 $22,344 51.1%
Beaufort County $7,348 $14,094 91.8%
$14,461 $26,010 79.9%
tNorth
Carolina $8,000 $16,275 103.4%
$16,792 $31,548 87.9%
'
Table 5 shows 1990 employment in Aurora by persons 16 years and older by industry. This
table shows that the economy is mixed. Thirty-one percent (31%)
of those employed in 1990 were in
' 10

manufacturing.. Retail trade (23.7%) and Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing, and Mining (10.6%) ranked
second and third respectively.
TABLE 5. Employment in Aurora by Persons 16 Years and Over by Industry.
INDUSTRY TOTAL PERSONS PERCENT
Agriculture, forestry, fishing, and mining
26
10.6
Construction
14
5.7
Manufacturing
77
31.4
Transportation
8
3.3
Communications and other public utilities
0
0
Wholesale trade
10
4.1
Retail trade
58
23.7
Finance, insurance, and real estate
15
6.1
Business and repair services
7
2.9
Personal, entertainment, and recreation services
1
0.4
Health services
9
3.7
Education services
14
5.7
Other professional and related services
4
1.6
Public administration
2
0.8
TOTAL 245 100.0
JUU[GG: 177V l.GI1JUJ Vl r VFJulaulJu auu iavuau�s
PCS Phosphate, formerly TexasGulf, is located just outside the municipal planning area.
Aurora's economy is highly dependent on the phosphate mining industry for both jobs and revenue. The
plant employs approximately 1,200 full time workers and is one of the largest employers in Beaufort
County. Coastal Carolina Health Care, through Beaufort County Hospital and Clinic, Is another large
employer. Table 6 shows the Beaufort County employment by sector for 1980; 1990, and 1994.
11

TABLE 6. Beaufort County Employment
Rmnlnvment by Sector
Year
1980
1990
1994
Total Employment
20,902
23,537
23,744
Wage and Salary Employment
17,117
19,483
19,155
Total Proprietors
3,785
4,054
4,589
Farm Proprietors
1,176
680
632
Non -farm Proprietors
2,609
3,374
3,957
Farm Industry Employment
1,961
1,189
1,130,
Non -farm Industry Employment
18,941
22,348
22,614
Private Industry Employment
16,541
19,356
19,446
Agricultural Service/Forestry/Fishing/Other Employment
394
516
842
Mining Industry Employment
0
0
0
Construction Industry Employment
932
1,032
0
Manufacturing Industry Employment
5,490
5,651
6,515
Transportation and Public Utility Employment
519
808
938
Wholesale Trade Employment
990
1,118
926
Retail Trade Employment
2,821
3,791
3,661
Finance/Insurance/Real Estate Employment
926
692
723
Service Industry Employment
0
0
0
Government Employment
2,400
2,992
3,168
Federal Civilian Government Employment
127
134
141
Military Employment
140
160
165
State/Local Government Employment
2,133
2,698
2,862
Note: Zero represents suppressed data.
' The fishing and seafood industry is an important component of the economy due to the large
number of people it employs. There are currently three seafood processing plants in Aurora, which
employ over one hundred people during the peak season. These seafood businesses deal with .crab,
shrimp, and various types of finfish.
Recreational fishing and boating provide an unknown but suspectedly large boost to the Aurora
economy. Fuel, food, beverages, bait, and marine supplies are items commonly purchased by these
' seasonal recreators. Of particular note are the waterfowl hunters who travel through Aurora heading to
hunting areas east of Town. These hunters have a definite, if brief, impact on the local businesses.
Table 7 lists Aurora area manufacturing firms. PCS Phosphate employs a significant number.
' of workers. Most other local industries are reliant on the seafood industry for their existence. Aurora
has become a good site for industrial location because of the extensive amount and types of raw
' material it can provide for manufacturing.
' 12

'
TABLE 7. Aurora Area Manufacturing/Industrial Firms
Business , Location Product/Service # of Employees
'
Aurora Industrial Supplies NC 33 Industrial Supplies 15
Aurora Packing Co. NC 33 Crab Processing 12-40
Bay City Crab Co. NC 306 Crab Processing 10-95
Carolina Seafood Co. Muddy Creek Road Crab Processing. 30
Central Transport NC 33 Trucking Company (Purified Acid) 20
CMF Inc. NC 33 ----- 60
t
Cryotech Inc. Deal Road Crab Processing 10-200
PCS Phosphate North of Aurora Planning Area Phosphoric Acid, Phosphate Products 1200
Potter Oil & Tire Co. NC 33 Fuel / Tires 17
'
TOTAL - 9 1027-1677
Source: Telephone survey, Mid -East Commission, March 1997. Includes only manufacturinglindustrial. Primarily
commercial operations were deleted.
D. LAND USE CONSTRAINTS
f Natural resource protection in conjunction with economic development is the primary function
of this land use plan. Water and air quality are directly affected by man's interaction with the
'
environment. Planning allows the land user to identify features that require special attention.
Topographic, geologic, hydrologic, and meteorologic features, all interact to form present conditions.
'
A change in one or more features can be a result of a revision in land use. The following sections
describe features that may need special attention.
'
1. Fragile Areas
The Aurora area is rich in natural resources. The extent and location of these resources should
be considered as development decisions are made. Four categories of Areas of Environmental Concern
have been classified: Estuarine Waters, Public Trust Areas, Coastal Wetlands, and Estuarine Shorelines.
All four of the AEC categories fall inside the Town's planning jurisdiction.
a. Estuarine Waters
'
Estuarine waters are the most extensive component of the estuarine system: the State's
sound and tidal rivers link the wetlands, estuarine shorelines, and public trust areas. The
'
Coastal Area Management Act defines estuarine waters as: "all the waters of the Atlantic
Ocean within the boundary of North Carolina and all the waters of the bays, sounds, rivers, and
tributaries thereto seaward of the dividing line between coastal fishing waters and inland
fishing waters, as set forth in an agreement adopted by the Wildlife Resources Commission and
'
the Department of Natural Resources and Community Development (now DENR)." Contact
the nearest Division of Coastal Management office for the specific boundaries of estuarine and
'
inland waters.
13

The highest biological productivity of the estuarine system depends on the unique
water circulation patterns of the estuarine waters. These patterns are caused by tidal energy,
mixtures of saltwater and freshwater flows, and shallow water depths. The circulation of
'
estuarine waters transports nutrients and plankton, spreads young fish and shellfish, flushes
plant and animal wastes, cleanses the system of pollutants, controls salinity, shifts sediments,
'
and mixes the water to create a multitude of productive habitats. These habitats include nursery
areas, mud and sand flats, salt marshes, submerged vegetation beds, and shellfish bed. The
'
estuaries are also an important economic resource because they support boating, fishing,
swimming and other recreational activities. They also have considerable value for education
'
and personal enjoyment.
The Estuarine waters located inside the Aurora planning jurisdiction are located on the
'
northern side of South Creek. Areas down stream of Whitehurst Creek along South Creek, and
areas north of Deephole point, have been designated as Estuarine Waters for this plan. Actual
'
delineation requires on -site investigation by the proper authorities.
b. Public Trust Areas
Public trust AEC's cover waters and submerged lands in the coastal region where the
These
public has rights of use and/or ownership, including rights of navigation and recreation.
'
areas support valuable commercial and recreational fisheries and are important resources for
development. The following lands
economic and waters are public trust areas:
• all waters of the Atlantic Ocean and the land thereunder from the mean high water
to the limit
mark seaward of state jurisdiction;
• all natural bodies of water, and all lands thereunder, except privately owned lakes to
the has
which public no right of access
• 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 rights of navigation; and
• all waters in artificially created bodies of water in which the public has acquired rights
by prescription, custom, usage, dedication, or any other means.
'
These areas overlap with the estuarine waters AEC, but they also cover inland fishing
waters that are not in estuarine waters AEC.
Development in public trust areas must be properly managed in order to protect public
rights for navigation and recreation, and to perpetuate the biological and economic benefits
'
these areas provide to the people of the state. Projects which would directly or indirectly block
14

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 are generally considered incompatible with the management .
'
policies for public trust areas. The development of navigation channel or drainage ditches, the
use of bulkheads to prevent, erosion, and the building of piers, wharves, and marines are
'
examples of uses that may be acceptable within public trust areas, provided they will not be
detrimental to public trust rights and the ecological functions of the areas.
'
Public Trust Area in the Town of Aurora's planning jurisdiction include all of South
Creek and upstream along Whitehurst, Bailey, and Broomfield Swamp Creeks. The boundaries
'
of Public Trust Areas were represented for planning purposes only, on -site investigation by the
proper authorities is required for exact delineation.
'
C. Coastal Wetlands
The Coastal Area Management Act defines a coastal wetland as any marsh subject to
'
regular or occasional flooding by lunar or wind tides. Freshwater swamps and inland wetlands
are not covered by the Act, unless the CRC designates them as a'natural resource AEC'. They
'
are, however, protected by the Clean Water Act and a Corps of Engineers permit is required for
work in them. Coastal wetlands contain certain plant species.
The roots, stems, and seeds of marsh plants provide high quality feed and nesting
materials for waterfowl and other wildlife. Plant leaves and stems also tend to dissipate waves
' while their extensive root systems bind soil; thus, marsh plants reduce the erosion of estuarine
shorelines and help guard against flood damage. The unique productivity of the estuarine
system is supported by the nutrients and decayed plant material (or detritus) that the marshes
' produce; these nutrients and detritus support marine life. The marsh also traps nutrients by
slowing the water, which flows over it. In this manner, the level of nutrients supporting life in
' the estuaries is maintained, and sediments harmful to marine animals are removed. Without
coastal wetlands, the complex food chains and high productivity levels typically found in the
testuaries could not be maintained.
That productivity is of great importance to North Carolina's economy. Ninety-five
' percent of the commercial and recreational seafood species (including shrimp, flounder,
oysters, crabs, and menhaden) depend on coastal wetlands for part of their lives. The Town has
wetland areas along both sides of all creeks located in the Towns planning jurisdiction.
d. Estuarine Shorelines
15

The CRC has designated as an AEC all shorelines within 75 feet landward of the mean
' high water level, or normal water level, of the estuarine waters. Estuarine shorelines, though
typically dry land, are an important part of the estuarine system because of their connection to
the estuarine waters. Improper development along the estuarine shoreline can pollute or
' destroy adjacent waters and wetlands. Estuarine shorelines are also vulnerable to erosion,
' flooding, and other natural hazards found in the estuarine system.
Development along estuarine shorelines must not. damage these natural barriers to
erosion, nor should development harm documented historic architectural or archeological
' resources. It is also important for construction of projects to avoid causing sedimentation of
estuarine waters, and to avoid covering the shoreline within impervious surfaces. Buffers of
tnatural vegetation between the shorelines and development provide additional protection for
estuarine resources. The Estuarine Shorelines that are in the Town's planning jurisdiction are
' along each side of the South Creek where the Estuarine Waters are, from Deephole point
downstream, and from Whitehurst Creek downstream.
' 2. Topographic Features
The level terrain of Aurora and the surrounding area has played an important part in
' community development. Farming is easier and less costly when compared with other areas of the
State. Many parcels of vacant or agricultural land possess natural amenities conducive to a desirable
' living environment.
Excessive slope is not a problem in the Aurora area; the lack of slope is more of a problem.
' Slopes that exceed 12 percent, i.e., where the change in elevation is 12 feet or more per one hundred
feet of horizontal run, are considered excessive. Seventy-five percent of the land in the Aurora
' planning area is less than 10 feet above sea level. The higher ground is mostly on the west and
southwest sides of the planning area.
' The natural vegetation for the Aurora area is marshland and mixed forest. Changes in drainage
patterns have reduced the amount of marsh. The natural forestland has been replaced with pine forest.
3. Geologic Features
Any land use plan must consider soil types and subsurface geology in making future plans.
' Soil types and suitability classifications are important factors in determining land use. Soils in the
Aurora planning area have been mapped by the Beaufort County Soil Conservation Service. The soil
' survey is used to determine which soils present developmental limitations due to wetness or high
shrink -swell potential.
' 16

The local soils are composed mostly of Tomotley and Arapahoe fine sandy loams, Portsmouth
'
loams, and Dragston loamy sand. Approximately 60 percent of the planning area is covered by
Tomotley soil association. This type soil is poorly drained and creates severe limitations on septic tank
placement because of their slow permeability, poor filtering ability, and wetness. In addition, although
not normally a problem, soil shallowness may be a constraint for some types of development within the
'
Tomotley association.
In summary, all soils in the Aurora area have limitations for the efficient placement of septic
'
tanks and the Tomotley association may cause problems for the stability of some building foundations.
The overall development implications will translate into higher overall costs per unit.
'
One of the major factors affecting future land use patterns in and around Aurora will be the
phosphate deposits located in the planning area and the surrounding region. The quality and quantity of
'
the phosphate ore plays a significant role in forming future land use patterns.
The first consideration is the quality of the ore and the specific effects it has on land use. The
quantity, thickness, and boundaries of the deposits were a major consideration prior to PCs Phosphate's
investment in an operation. Measurements, analyses, and feasibility studies were made before any
'
mining began. Estimates were made that reserves would last well into the 21st Century based on
levels
current of production.
'
The availability of the phosphate ore affects the area by reducing land speculation. PCs
Phosphate in former farmland woodland lying idle
ownership may result or until excavation occurs.
The land could be productive in a variety of ways if it was not mined. Urban -type development may be
slow in coming to an area that could be eventually mined.
' 4. Hydrologic Features
Wetlands, floodplains, groundwater, and estuaries are all features that must be constantly
monitored and are easily affected by changes in land use. These features help provide habitats for
' various types of wildlife, drinking water, and sources of commercial activities.
Inland and coastal wetlands are areas that have been identified by the US Fish and Wildlife
Service as being important for water quality. These areas contain types of plants, soils, and water
coverage that make them unique. Activities within the wetlands are governed by regulations enforced
by the Army Corps of Engineers and the Division of Coastal Management (DCM). Inland wetlands
may not be connected to a major body of water. They could be natural depressions or land surrounding
' manmade ponds. Many of the natural areas may have been altered by changes in drainage patterns.
Coastal wetlands are of particular importance as fish hatcheries, also known as nursery areas. In the
17

Aurora area the nearest fish hatchery areas are in Jacks1, Jacob,s, Drinkwater and Tooley Creeks. All
'
are located at least one (1) mile downstream from the Town. Many of these areas have been designated
Areas of Environmental Concern (AEC).
'
The dynamic nature of the AECs prevents an accurate mapping. South Creek, north of
Deephole Point, is designated as coastal waters and its banks are not necessarily considered coastal
'
wetlands. On -site investigation is required for proper delineation. The area of South Creek
downstream from Whitehurst Creek has been classified as estuarine waters. This area and the adjoining
shoreline for a distance of 75 feet landward from the mean high water mark have been designated as an
AEC. Development within the AEC is closely regulated by DCM.
'
The area was mapped in 1989 as part of the Wetlands Inventory Mapping program. According
to this data, South Creek from the Pamlico River to Deephole Point is classified Estuarine, sub tidal
with mud bottom. From Deephole Point the classification for South Creek and its tributaries changes to
Riverine, tidal with unconsolidated bottom. The wetlands bordering South Creek and its tributaries
'
generally fall into two classifications. Those wetlands immediately boarding South Creek are
Palustrine, wetlands further inland Palustrine,
emergent, semi -permanent tidal;. and those are scrub or
'
shrub, broad -leafed deciduous or evergreen, semi -permanent tidal. In the upper reaches of the
tributaries is Palustrine, forested, broad deciduous
the classification usually -leafed or needle -leafed, or
evergreen, and in a flood subclass that is either permanently, semi -permanently, temporarily, or
'
seasonally flooded. Less than fifty (50) acres of land bordering South Creek is classified as Upland,
non -wetland. The Division of Coastal -Management has. mapped areas of probable wetlands for
'
planning purposes only. Property owners are required to contact appropriate authorities for review of
any proposed use that may -affect coastal wetlands.
'
South Creek, itself, covers approximately 2,500 acres. Of this, municipal source point pollution
.
(waste discharge) impacts about 500 acres of the creek, while point source pollution impacts the
remainder. The largest areas impacted by non -source point pollution are as follows:
• 800 acres - agricultural run-off
• 600 acres - forest run-off
• 200 acres - feed lot run-off
'
100 acres - urban run-off
One of the most important factors to consider when determining the suitability of land for
future urban development is the possibility of periodic flooding. Land adjacent to South Creek and its
tributaries is subject to flooding during severe storms. Data collected and published by the Army Corps
'
18

of Engineers has established the area below the 10-foot contour as being in the 100-year flood plain.
This means the chance of a major flood in any one year, is one in one hundred.
Approximately two-thirds of the planning area is below the 10-foot contour. This includes
most of the area within the Town limits. Building restrictions on floor elevation in accordance with the
National Flood Insurance Program exist in these low-lying areas.
Aurora obtains its drinking water from wells tapped into a groundwater source known as the
Castle Hayne Aquifer. This aquifer is also used by the other communities in the region and is the most
productive aquifer in North Carolina. The aquifer is found at common depths of 200 feet and well
yields range from 200 to 500 gallons per minute. PCS Phosphate is required to pump out large amounts
of the water as part of their mining operations. This initially.lowered the water table for Aurora and the
surrounding
' S. Water Quality
The Town of Aurora and its planning jurisdiction are divided by two 14-digit hydrologic units
within the Tar -Pamlico watershed. The planning jurisdiction occupies very small percentages of each
hydrologic unit, making up not more than 1.1 percent of any one total unit area. The hydrologic units
influenced by Aurora are 03020104060010 (South Creek) and 03020104060020 (Whitehurst Creek,
Pamlico River). The South Creek unit contains 72.5% of the Town, while the Whitehurst Creek,
Pamlico River unit contains 27.4% of the Town. The major water body in Aurora is South Creek,
which lies on the eastern border of the Town. All waters in Town are a Use Class SC Stream with a .
supplemental classification of Nutrient Sensitive Waters (NSW). The Use Class (SC) indicates salt
waters protected for secondary recreation (swimming on infrequent or unorganized basis), aquatic life
propagation and survival. The supplemental class of NSW indicates that these streams and their
receiving waters have a history of algae blooms, contributing to fish kills, anoxia, odor and taste
problems. Sources of these nutrients is believed to be runoff from the drainage area of fertilizers,
animal waste, and wastewater treatment outfall.
Water quality information provided by the state is predicated on the Division of Water Quality,
"Use Support" data, which indicates the classes of uses that are being or should be supported in each
water body. There are four categories of Use Support: Full, Threatened, Partial, and Non -supporting.
The Use Classes for freshwater are: WS, B, C, SW, HQW, NSW, and ORW. Class WS waters are
designated to support withdrawal for public water supply. Class B waters should support primary
recreational uses (swimming on an organized or frequent basis) plus C activities. Class C waters should
support secondary recreation (swimming on an unorganized or infrequent basis), aquatic life
19

propagation and survival, agriculture, and other non -water supply or non-food related .uses. The
supplemental classes of SW (Swamp Waters), HQW (High Quality Waters), NSW (Nutrient Sensitive
Waters), and ORW (Outstanding Resource Waters) may apply to open water areas where these
'
descriptions are appropriate. Stormwater Disposal Rules apply to development that requires a CAMA
disturbs than 1 land Class B C in the
major permit or more acre of along all and waters coastal region.
'
At specified sampling stations, water is tested for dissolved oxygen, temperature, acidity (pH),
fecal bacteria, lead,,
turbidity, coliform chlorophyll a, ammonia, arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper,
nickel, mercury, zinc, chloride, fluoride, and selenium. To be deemed "Fully supporting" the standard
'
criteria for any one pollutant cannot be exceeded in more than 10% of the measurements. "Partially
Supporting" status applies to those areas in which any one pollutant exceeds standard criteria in 11-25%
'
of the measurements. "Non -supporting" status applies to areas in which any one pollutant exceeds the
criteria in more than 25% of the measurements. South Creek is shown as Partially Supporting.
'
6. Meteorological Features
Ambient air monitoring in the past revealed a hot spot of sulfur dioxide in the vicinity of PCS
Phosphate. Actions have been taken to the Recent has
reduce concentration. monitoring not revealed
any violations of acceptable standards.
Other air quality pollutants such as carbon monoxide. lead, ozone, and particulate matter have
not been detected in the Aurora area. The Division of Environmental Management (DEM) will
continue monitoring these pollutants at stations in Washington and at PCS Phosphate.
'
E. EXISTING LAND USE
The Aurora planning area includes land within the Town's limits and the land surrounding the
Town a distance of about one mile. Total area is slightly more than eight square miles, with only thirty
(30) percent being inside the corporate limits. About twelve (12) percent of this land is developed for
'
urban purposes, the majority of which is within the incorporated area.
Agricultural land uses cover large portions of total land area within Aurora's planning
'
jurisdiction. Crops most widely grown are corn, soybeans, and wheat. Aquaculture, also known as fish
farming is an emerging industry in the Aurora area.
'
Much of the land adjoining the one -mile limit is in forest, with most of these areas lying around
South Creek and the extreme southern and northern areas.
Aurora is bordered to the North by Bailey Creek which is classified SC from the railroad
is CSW.
crossing west of Town to South Creek. West of the railroad crossing the stream classified
South Creek forms the eastern border of Aurora and is classified SC from Deephole Point upereek
20

almost to SR 1924. From Deephole Point to the Pamlico River the creek is classified SA. All waters in
'
the area are classified as NSW (Nutrient Sensitive Waters).
The existing land use map shows that most land uses within the Town limits are residential and
'
commercial. Residential development is concentrated in the areas south of NC Highway 33, the blocks
surrounding Main Street, and in the blocks between Main Street and NC Highway 33.
'
Between 1991 and 1996, fifty-three (53) building permits were issued. Twenty-five (25)
permits were issued for mobile homes, fourteen (14) for improvements to existing structures, eleven
'
(11) for commercial uses, and three (3) for houses. These numbers reflect a substantial increase from
the twenty (20) permits issued from 1986-1990.
'
Public housing appears to be a trend, attracting low-income persons from surrounding areas to
locate in Aurora. Current public housing includes Fisher Village, Village Green, Mallard Creek, and
'
Pamlico Court. There are plans to demolish Pamlico Court and build single family units in its place.
There is also a possibility that a new low-income single-family public housing development will be
'
located in Aurora.
Outside the Town's limits, various traffic arteries seem to be catalysts for housing
development. Residential land uses continue to occur along State roads surrounding the Town.
Within the planning area, several concentrations of commercial uses exist. These are located in
'
the downtown business district, the Fifth. Street blocks, and the strip development along NC Highway
33. The NC Highway 33 corridor serves as a bypass around the Town and has attracted numerous
commercial establishments in the past few years. The block made up by NC Highway 33 to the south,
Third Street to the east, Fifth Street to the west, and Main Street to the north has grown into an
'
institutional/office center. It contains the Town Hall, churches, a dentist's office, a public works
facility, bank, health It is future institutional,
a and a community center. expected that commercial, and
'
office space needs will be met in existing commercial areas. Expansion of the NC Highway 33 strip
development is
also expected.
Within the Town's jurisdiction, there are no apparent conflicts between land and water uses.
Traffic ingress and egress from the commercial development along Highway 33 may become a
problem. As the demand for residential and commercial uses increase; the agricultural land along NC
'
Highway 33 may be exposed to development pressure. The zoning ordinance is designed to prevent
land use compatibility problems in Aurora's jurisdiction. There are no major problems that have
'
resulted from unplanned development and that have implications for future land and water use.
21

F. CONIIVIUNITY FACILITIES
1. Existing Plans and Regulations
Aurora presently has the following plans and regulations, in addition to State and regional
'
documents that address Aurora's development issues:
a. 1976, 1981, 1986, and 1991 Aurora Land Use Plans
'
b. Zoning Ordinance
C. Subdivision Ordinance
'
d. Flood Insurance Program
e. Nuisance Ordinances.
'
f. 1996-2006 Beaufort County Planning Area Solid Waste Plan
g. Water Supply Plan
' These regulations and plans are kept at the Town Hall, most'of which are included in their
original form in the Town's Code of Ordinances. The Code was adopted in 1979 and is enforced by
the building inspectors, the Town police, and the zoning administrator. Subdivision regulations were
adopted in 1993 and are enforced, but are not included in the Town's Code of Ordinances.
Before anyone can develop or alter property within the Town's jurisdiction, they must apply
for a zoning compliance permit. Uses such as multi -family dwellings, petroleum storage, and
clothing manufacturing.require detailed special permits.
The Town has adopted the North Carolina building, plumbing, heating, and electrical codes.
Some inspection services for these codes are performed by Beaufort county officials. Minimum
housing standards for residential uses apply.
The Town's property owners of pre-existing properties, to which water and/or sewer service
was made available, are expected to tap onto Town lines. All new structures are required to tap onto
'
water and/or sewer service if it is available.
A large part of Aurora is in flood plain areas. Finished floor levels for all new structures in
these areas are required to be one foot above the projected 100-year flood elevation. Placement,
safety standards, and renovation standards for mobile homes are also listed in the Code.
2. Existing Facilities
Development is often encouraged because of the increased tax base it brings. Eventually,
however, the local government must spend some of its tax dollars to upgrade and expand the existing
facilities to accommodate such growth. The land use planning process allows officials to assess
development trends and analyze the requirements placed on the community facilities. The following
22

k
section discusses the existing conditions of the water and wastewater treatment facilities, the schools,
and the roads.
The design capacity of the water system is 288,000 gallons per day (gpd) and consists of two
(2) wells. There is also a 100,000 gallon elevated storage tank. The Town currently uses
approximately 75,000 gpd, which is about twenty-six (26) percent of the system's capacity. The
current water system began operation in the mid-1960s.
For the purposes of this plan, and estimate of the average usage rate is measured. This is
calculated by the total gallons used daily based on the number of people living in the area using the
system. Given the present population and usage rate, theoretically, the average Aurora water
customer utilizes 115 gallons per day (gpd). Assuming this theoretical constant usage rate, this
system can accommodate approximately 1,850 additional customers. Any peak load brought on by a
population surge could easily be accommodated with the existing facilities. Additional residential,
commercial, and industrial growth equal to 1,850 persons could occur without causing undue stress
on the system.
The sewage treatment system's design capacity is 120,000 gallons per day. The average use is
85,000 gpd, which represents a seventy-one (71) percent usage rate. During times of heavy rainfall,
the flow rate may exceed the design capacity; however, with normal operations and the projected
population, the system should adequately handle Aurora's needs. To better handle their current
treatment process, the Town completed a constructed wetlands system. This does not add to the
design capacity, but makes the effluent more acceptable to the Division of Environmental
Management. At the present, about sixteen (16) homes are not connected to the system; however, as
their septic systems fail, they are tapping on. All new construction is required to tap onto the system..
There are no plans for a major upgrade or expansion of treatment processes.
The school facilities are often an item of concern for the local residents. Aurora's schools,
under the jurisdiction of the Beaufort county School System, include Snowden Elementary and
Aurora High School. The Elementary School is operating a approximately seventy-eight (78)
percent of its capacity (Table 5). The school was constructed in 1953. The school now has air
conditioning, and added a new library in 1992.
TABLE 5. Public School Facilities
PupiU
Enroll- Teacher ' Teacher Grade Year
School Capacity • ment Allotment Ratio Taught Built Additions
S.W. Snowden
23

Elementary 650 510 29 1:17.6 Pre-K-8 1938 1953*
Aurora High 350 167 17 1:9.8 9-12 1954 1976, 87, 90
'
School
'
*Addition of air conditioning, 1990.
The High School is currently operating at forty-eight percent (48%) capacity. The original
band built in 1987 and
building was constructed in 1954 with an addition in 1976. A room was a
'
vocational building was completed in 1990. The pupil/teacher ratio is considered to be quite good,
indicating being
that no problems exist with attention given to each student.
Beaufort County plans to build a new high school off Highway 33, south of Chocowinity, to
'
Southside High School is
consolidate the Aurora and Chocowinity High Schools. The new
scheduled to open for classes in July 1999. Current planning has the existing high schools in both
'
Aurora and Chocowinity becoming middle schools serving grades 6-8.
On February 2, 1998, the Town Board of Aurora created a Recreation Advisory Committee.
'
This committee will aid the Town in identifying needs and possible solutions to promoting a
comprehensive Recreation Program. The Town of Aurora plans to apply for a Parks and Recreation
'
Trust Fund (PARTF) grant in the near future. The lighting and improving of the ball fields will be
one of the top priorities. In the past, when the fields were lit, this area was a center of Town activity.
'
The Town of Aurora feels that the lighting and improvement of the ball fields would be an important
recreational and cultural opportunity for its residents and the surrounding communities.
'
Since 1987, Town Hall has been located in a house on Main Street; which was built in the
early 1900s. This building houses offices for the Town Clerk/Finance Officer and a general
'
administrative office. One (1) full-time employee assists the Town Clerk. The Town has seven (7)
full-time employees.
'
The old Town Hall is home to the Public Works Department and the Police Station. Two (2)
full-time employees work with the Public Works Director.
.'
Police service is provided for all persons located within the planning area. The police force
consists of one (1) Police Chief, one (1) officer, one (1) cruiser, and one (1) Blazer. In addition, the
Beaufort County Sheriff's Department assists in servicing the Community. All have jurisdiction
within the Town limits.
'
The Fire Department and Rescue Squad serve the entire Richlands Township, and is funded
through a Township tax. The Aurora Fire Department is manned by nearly thirty (30) certified
volunteers. The equipment includes three (3) pumpers, and equipment van, a brush truck, and two
'
24

(2) tankers. The Rescue Squad maintains two (2) vehicles and has approximately fifteen (15)
certified volunteers. In the event of a large fire, other departments can be called in for firefighting
' assistance due to mutual aid agreements with nearby towns. The Fire Department and Rescue Squad
completed construction of a new station along NC 33, in 1990. A fire department satellite station is
' at Edward, located seven miles west of Aurora. In 1997 the Town received 125 calls related to fire,
' and 600 rescue calls.
Smithton Sanitation Service provides garbage collection and trash disposal within the Town
limits. Collection takes place one time per week and is taken to the Beaufort County Transfer
Facility. The Town charges $7.00 per month for curbside garbage collection.
The road system in Town is currently sufficient for any traffic peaks which may occur. The
' North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) estimates that Highway 33 is underutilized.
It is expected that any additional growth could be accommodated by the present road system.
' According to the NC Department of Transportation's Transportation Improvements Program 1986
1995, there are no plans for any major improvements in the Aurora area. Some secondary roads may
' become paved under the priority system the Department uses, but no major improvements will be
made to the area roads.
' G. SUMMARY
' This section was generated by gathering and analyzing related data, seeking technical advice
from several state agencies, interviews with local officials and citizens, and working with the Town
' Planning Board.
The result shows a Town that is experiencing little growth and developing in an organized
manner with the resources available.. The economy could be more varied inasmuch as heavy
dependence now rests with PCS Phosphate employment. Agriculture, fishing and forestry are also
an important part of Aurora's economy.
Natural resources are plentiful and add to the attractiveness of the Town and surroundings.
Aurora is committed to the protection of these valuable resources.
' The Town anticipates the decline in population over the past five years to continue. The
population as of 1995 is 640. At the present rate, between 1990 and 1995, of -2.1%, the population
projections in the year 2000 will be 575, and in 2005 the population will be 517. Due to the lack of
growth the current capacity of all facilities and services is adequate and, in some cases, far more than
adequate to meet anticipated growth over the next five years, at least.
t25

IV. 1991 POLICY ASSESSMENTS

1
III. 1991 POLICY ASSESSMENTS
The 1991 Land Use Plan Update enumerated policy statements and implementation
'
strategies on resource protection issues, resource production and management issues, economic and
community development issues, continuing public participation issues, and storm hazard mitigation
'
issues.
An analysis of current policies must be accomplished before any new policies can be
adopted. This gives planners and local officials an understanding on how well the Town has
implemented the 1991 Policies. This section includes an evaluation of the policies addressed in the
'
1991 Aurora Land Use Plan Update. Each policy was analyzed for its content, means of
enforcement, and implementation strategy effectiveness. Each implementation strategy was
'
evaluated using the following criteria:
+ = Action completed
'
- = Action not completed
NA = Action not applicable
A. RESOURCE PROTECTION
1. Development in Areas with Constraints
'
+ The Town should review the zoning ordinance to insure compliance with adopted
policies.
+ Areas of the Town within flood zones will be reviewed for conforming uses.
+ The Town should consider the adoption of Subdivision Regulations.
2. Areas of Environmental Concern Development
+ Current State permit and review processes will be employed to determine viable
'
development types in AECs.
+ The land classification system will restrict development within the buffer zone.
t3.
Other Fragile Areas
N/A Work with building permits officer to require thorough investigation of site before
permit is granted.
+ Continue to classify areas within 75 feet of marsh's edge and water line as
"Conservation" on land classification map.
- Review zoning ordinance for necessary changes.
4. Hurricane and Flood Evacuation
27

'
N/A Adhere to plan designated by Beaufort County and other procedures adopted by the
Town Council,
'
5.
Means of Protection of Potable Water
+ Continue to support the Division of Environmental Management Groundwater Section
'
efforts to protect water in the Aurora Use Area.
'
6.
Use of Package Treatment Plants
N/A Enforcement will remain the responsibilities of the Building Inspector and the County
'
Health Department, with grants permits for septic tanks.
Management improve
+ Continue to work with the Division of Environmental to the
'
7.
wastewater treatment facility
Stormwater Runoff
+ Continue to employ. efforts of the CAMA permitting system and the Army Corps of
'
Engineers 404 permitting system in determining development types which do not
violate water quality.
'
N/A Development in Conservation zone will be reviewed on a case -by-case basis by the
Town Planning Board.
'
N/A Regulate land uses within conservation buffer zone.
8.
Marina, Floating Home, and Dry Stack Development
'
N/A Continue working with zoning ordinance, CAMA, and 404 permitting systems in
regulating siting of marinas.
'
N/A The Town Planning Board will examine each marina and dry stack_ development
request on a case -by -case basis.
9.
Industrial Impacts Around Fragile Areas
+ Continue support of CAMA and 404 permitting systems, Building Inspector and
'
County Building Requirements.
+ The Town Planning Board and Town Council will review each application for siting of
'
industries on a case -by -case basis.
10.
Sound and Estuarine System Islands
'
Aurora has no estuarine or sound islands; therefore, no policy will be considered.
11.
Areas Affected by a Five-foot Rise in Sea Level
'
- Update zoning ordinances to make necessary changes in industrial permitted uses.
12.
Upland Excavation for Marina Basins
'
N/A Enforce local zoning ordinance and require compliance with State standards.
'
28.

13. Damage to Existing Marshes by Bulkhead Installation
'
+ The Town will support the enforcement of existing State and Federal regulations.
B. RESOURCE PRODUCTION AND MANAGEMENT
'
1. Productive Agricultural Land
+ Continue to work with Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service and Soil
'
Conservation Service workers in getting farmers to adopt Best Management
Practices
'
2. Existing and Potential Mineral Production Areas
+ Continued review process of applications for special use permits by the Town Planning
'
Board.
+ Support State regulations on mining industries.
'
3. Commercial and Recreational Fisheries
+ The CAMA and 404 permitting systems, as well as the Town's zoning ordinance will
'
provide sufficient enforcement for this policy.
+ The County Health Department, largely responsible for the safe placement of septic
tanks, will be responsible for minimizing the likelihood of contamination of
fishing waters from the effluent of septic systems in unsuitable soils.
4. Commercial Forest Lands
+ Continue to work with the Extension ,Service, Soil Conservation Service, and NC
'
Forest Service in their efforts to encourage good forest management.
5. Off -Road Vehicles
'
- Cooperation with Town employees during time of vehicle registration.
- Work with Town Policemen to enforce this policy
'
C. ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
1. Location and Types of Industries Desired
'
+ The Town will establish more active contact with the State's industrial development
representative for the region, making certain that the representative is aware of the
Town's stated policy choices on economic development.
N/A Zoning ordinance, CAMA and,404 permitting systems will regulate the development
'
of industry in specific.areas.

1
'
ices 2. Commitment of Providing Sery ,
'
+ First priority in delivery of services is to areas classified as "Developed" on the Land
Classification Map. Second priority is to "Transition" areas.
'
+ Residential customers will be served first.
+ Industrial uses will be examined on a case -by -case basis by the Town Council and
'
Planning Board.
3. Desired Urban Growth Patterns
'
+ Urban growth patterns and densities will be limited by the County Health Department
and the zoning ordinance.
'
4. Redevelopment of Developed Areas
+ The Town will coordinate with private individuals and organizations to secure
financial support for downtown beautification efforts.
+ The Town will consider the feasibility of applying for appropriate grants to assist with
'
redevelopment. Grant programs that could be utilized include the Community
Development Block Grant for.Community Revitalization, Economic Development
and Urgent Needs; Farmers Home Administration; Economic Development
Administration's Sudden and Severe Damage program; and North Carolina's
water and sewer grants programs.
'
5. Commitment to State and Federal Programs
+ The Town of Aurora is receptive to State and Federal projects which provide
'
improvements to the Town. Aurora will continue to fully support such programs
that provide necessary resources to meet identified community needs that
'
compliment the economic and community development goals of the Town.
6. Assistance to Channel Maintenance
'
+ Aurora will support channel maintenance projects, but discourage excessive dredging
because of its effect on fish habitat. Financial aid for channel maintenance will be
'
make available when possible. Efforts will be made to provide spoil and borrow
sites within the planning area.
7. Energy Facility Siting
N/A Update zoning ordinance to reflect possibility of energy generating facilities.
'
8. Tourism and Beach/Water Access
+ The Town will encourage acquisition of undevelopable waterfront properties for public
taccess
sites.
'
- - 30

L
N/A Work with the Division of Coastal Management in developing a program of
"donations" of waterfront property for public use.
+ Continue support for the Fossil Museum, downtown revitalization efforts, and other
methods to increase tourism.
9. Types, Densities, and Location of Anticipated Development
+ Continue to enforce the subdivision ordinance with minimum lot size of 20,000 square
feet for lots with public water and sewer.
+ Continue with efforts to upgrade sewage treatment plant to accommodate additional.
customers.
+ Ensure that future growth is consistent with the above policies in Resource Protection,
Resource Production and Management sections. Also, the growth must be
consistent with the zoning ordinances and additional goals of the community.
D. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
'
+ It is the belief of the Aurora Planning Board and Town Board that all citizens should be
provided adequate opportunity to participate in the governmental and planning
'
decisions which affect them; therefore, the Town's policy will be to continue to
solicit citizen input, primarily through the Planning Board. All upcoming
'
meetings will be advertised and adequately publicized to help keep citizens
informed about the land use changes occurring in their community.
'
E. STORM HAZARDS MITIGATION, POST -DISASTER RECOVERY AND
EVACUATION PLANS
'
1. Policies To Mitigate Storm Damage
+ The Town will encourage the building of structures that will stand `against the high
'
winds, flooding and other damaging effects of severe storms.
N/A The Town will discourage high -density development and large structures in the most
hazardous areas.
+ The Town will seek an educational program warning its citizens of the dangers of
'
severe storms and evacuation procedures in the event of a severe storm.
2. Policies Related to Post -Disaster Recovery
'
+ The Town will support and enforce The Beaufort County Disaster Relief and
Assistance Plan.
- - 31

11 3.
The Town will appoint and educate a Recovery Task Force to work cooperatively
with the County during a disaster. This Recovery Task Force will include the
Mayor,. Town Engineer, Town Planning Board, Rescue and Fire Squad
Volunteers, and the Medical Board.
N/A The Town will encourage the relocation of structures out of the hazardous areas.
N/A The Town will encourage the rebuilding of structures in hazardous areas only if
reconstruction includes measures to protect against recurring damage.
N/A The Town will consider relocating their public utility facilities to a safer location if
reconstruction is required.
N/A The Town will impose a moratoria on general reconstruction after a disaster.
Reconstruction will follow the schedule listed in paragraph 4 above.
Policies Related to the Evacuation Plan
+ The Town will seek to educate citizens about evacuation procedures and their
responsibilities in any severe storm situation.
32

IV. 1997 POLICY STATEMENTS

' IV. 1997 POLICY STATEMENTS
The setting'of goals, objectives, policy statements, and implementation procedures are the
' most essential elements of any developmental plan. The formulation of goals and objectives should
reflect sound planning principles and most importantly, express the values of the area's citizens.
' Thus, the declaration of a community's values sets the tone for the design of the development plan.
During this five year planning period, the Coastal Resources Commission (CRC) gives the
' Town of Aurora the opportunity to address land use issues which impact on Resource Protection,
Resource Production and Management, Economic and Community Development, Continued Public
Participation, and Storm Hazard Mitigation, Post Disaster Recovery and Evacuation Plans. Some of
these issues are of continuing concern in land use plans. Those will be re -addressed in this current
3
update.
The policy statements for 1997-2002 are the results of recommendations, local input, and the
Planning Board's experience in Aurora's needs. These statements define the problem or opportunity,
possible alternatives for action, the selected alternatives and the means to implement the alternative.
It must be noted that some issues are of such great importance that appropriate alternatives are
obvious and non-negotiable. Many others in the discussion required by CAMA guidelines are only
vaguely applicable in Aurora at this time.
Generally speaking, Aurora embraces a pro -growth philosophy. Economic needs have
' contributed to this point of view. Nevertheless, if the Town were faced with over -abundant or
adverse development pressure, policies would revert to quality of life criteria as a guiding principle
to control development.
There are three basic approaches to resource issues: Preservation, Conservation, and
' Exploitation. A preservation approach attempts to prohibit use altogether in order to save the
resource in its natural state for future generations to enjoy. This approach requires adoption and
strict enforcement of protective laws. An example might be prohibiting development in a known
habitat for an endangered species. If applied to privately owned property, such restrictions are
subject to legal challenge as a "taking" of property rights.
A conservation approach attempts to use resources sparingly in order to prolong their
usefulness over a long period of time. This approach uses regulations, restrictions, and incentives to
control the rate at which or the way in which a resource is used. In a sense, it controls the "supply"
regardless of the "demand."
34

'
An exploitation approach attempts to use resources in an uninhibited way in direct response
P PP P Y P
to demand. It has a relatively short-term focus and relies on the availability of development of
substitutes when the resource is depleted. This approach thrives in the absence of regulation or
'
enforcement and may be desirable where resources are overabundant or substitutes are readily
available.
Any of these approaches is an alternative open to Aurora as it explores policy options. The
conservative approach probably describes most chosen implementation strategies in Aurora. The
'
following section represents the Town of Aurora's best effort to adopt policies for the next five (5)
years. Each policy is realistic for Aurora.
'
VISION STATEMENT
Aurora will strive to preserve its natural environment as a valuable physical and economic
'
asset. The Town would like to see an expansion of all economic sectors in order to increase the tax
base and to enhance employment opportunities. While the Tow_ n is supportive of community and
'
economic development it does not support industry which compromises the quality of the
environment or quality of life in Aurora.
As a foundation for overall growth, The Town will work to improve its educational,
recreational, and cultural opportunities. Aurora will strive to become a more stable, diversified, and
'
attractive community.
Aurora hopes to see a reverse in population declines of recent years and to experience
moderate growth. The Town feels that the water and wastewater system will continue to improve
public health and provide an incentive for development in the Town's planning area over the next ten
'
years.
A. RESOURCE PROTECTION
Aurora recognizes the need to protect its natural and cultural resources. It is understood that
these are an irreplaceable asset which require protection. Often, these resources represent an economic
return to the area's residents through their use. It is in the best interest of all citizens of eastern North
Carolina that these resources be protected and managed to their highest potential.
rThe
natural and cultural resources of the Aurora area have been identified in the Inventory and
Analysis section of this plan. Development should not occur at the expense of the natural system.
'
Conversely, the Town feels development should not be impaired by the characteristics of the natural
system. For these reasons, development should be targeted to areas where it is not likely to jeopardize
35

li
[A
or be jeopardized by the natural system. The following section details the issues concerned with
development and its relationship with the ecosystem.
1. Development in Areas with Constraints
Applicability
The constraints to development in. Aurora relate to both physical constraints and limitations of
community facilities. Physical constraints include man-made fuel storage areas, high hazard flood
zones, Military Operating Airspace and areas with soil limitations. All of the soils in the Aurora
planning area are not well suited for the safe placement of septic tanks. No soils are extremely
hazardous to building foundations. The Town recognizes the importance of safe septic tank placement
to prevent groundwater and well contamination and also realizes its inability to change or correct the
characteristics of the soil.
' Fuel storage facilities are located along Highway 33 west of Town. The Town acknowledges
that any adjacent development would be subject to a fire risk and well contamination from tank
seepage. Also at risk is development located within the flood plain of South Creek. Water from the
' 100-year flood would inundate about two-thirds of the land in Town). Since most of the Town is
subject to flooding, it is not realistic that all development should be prohibited from these areas.
' Alternatives
• Redrafting of subdivision regulations to include stricter design standards.
' • Develop and adopt additional regulations in a flood damage prevention ordinance and
zoning ordinance to regulate or prohibit all development in areas with physical
constraints.
• Permit development in those areas, utilizing current State, Federal, and local regulatory
' processes, i.e., CAMA, flood insurance, subdivision regulations and Corps of
Engineers 404 permitting system.
' Policy Choices
Aurora recognizes the inevitability of some development occurring in high hazard flood
' areas due to the prevalence of flood -prone land in the area. Therefore, the Town will
continue to participate in National Flood Insurance Program and promote .enforcement
through the County Building Inspection Program. Proposed large-scale developments,
such as housing subdivisions and industry, will be discouraged from locating in the
flood prone area.
• The Town recognizes that it is unable to change the condition of the soils to accommodate
development. It will continue to support the County Health Department and its
' 36

' decisions on septic tank placement. Aurora will continue to support regulations which
' decide where construction can occur based on soil characteristics.
• Only industrial land uses will be encouraged around the fuel storage sites.
Implementation Strategies
• The Town should review the zoning ordinance within the planning period to ensure
compliance with adopted policies. Areas of the Town within flood zones will be
reviewed for conforming uses.
• The Town will continue to monitor their Subdivision Regulations and update them as is
necessary.
2. Local Resource Development Issues Relative to AECs
' Applicability
Aurora recognizes that a primary concern of the Coastal Resources Commission (CRC) is to
'
protect our coastal resources, especially Areas of Environmental Concern (AECs). The Town also
shares this concern for the protection and sound management of these environmentally sensitive lands
'
and waters. The AECs in the Aurora planning area include estuarine waters, the estuarine shoreline,
public trust waters, and coastal wetlands.
Aurora shares the State's policy and management objective for the estuarine system "to give the
highest priority to the protection and coordinated management of these areas so as to safeguard and
perpetuate their biological, socio-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, Aurora 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 estuarine system.
The maintenance of the AECs is considered to be a top priority by the Town.
Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW) are not present in the Aurora planning area. Policies will
be considered when the ORWs become an issue.
'
Alternatives
• Continue to utilize the NCAC guidelines for permitted uses in AECs.
'
• Prohibit all development in AECs.
• Establish 75-foot conservation buffer zone from water or marsh's edge where no
development. shall be permitted. Classify this area as "Conservation" according to
Land Classification system.
'
Policy Choices
. 37

' The Town of Aurora will continue to utilize the currents stem for permitted uses in all
' Y
tAECs taking advantage of State permit and review processes.
•. The Town will take added precautions by continuing to use a 75-foot conservation buffer
zone adjacent to the public trust waters where coastal wetlands do not exist. In this
buffer zone only those uses will be allowed that are allowed in coastal wetlands. This
' buffer zone is intended to be a device of the local government to show added
protection for the resource. To function most effectively, disturbance of this buffer
' should be kept to an absolute minimum, leaving natural tree and shrub vegetation
intact to hold soil, increase infiltration, and slow and filter runoff. This area will
remain in the jurisdiction of the Town and will preclude all forms of development,
' except for several restricted uses. These areas are ideal for natural areas and/or parks.
r Implementation Strategies
' • Current State permit and review processes will be employed to determine viable
development types in AECs.
• The land classification system will restrict development within the buffer zone.
3. Protection of Wetlands Identified as of the Highest Functional Significance
' Applicability
The Division of Coastal Management is charged with developing these maps, and no such map
thas been provided for this update.
4.. Hazardous and Fragile Areas
' Applicability
In addition to the AECs, other fragile areas in Aurora warrant special considerations. These
' fragile areas include those covered directly by State and Federal authorities and those requiring local
attention. These include undesignated primary nursery areas, archaeological sites listed by the North
' Carolina Department of Cultural Resources, historic structures listed on the State and National
Registers of Historic Places, freshwater swamps, marshes, maritime forests, pocosins, 404 wetlands,
' ORW areas, shellfishing waters, water supply areas, other waters of special values and manmade
hazards. The Aurora area is also known locally to serve as a habitat for the endangered American Bald
Eagle.
A significant archaeological site has been located in the vicinity of Whitehurst Creek on the
' fringes of the planning area. The NC Department of Cultural Resources made several
recommendations for management of these prehistoric sites: effective treatment of known or
' discovered archaeological sites may be accomplished through survey, mitigative recovery of significant
38

data, avoidance or preservation in place. Efforts will also be made to provide recognition and
protection through such means as the National Register of Historic Places, if appropriate, and through
adherence to regulatory programs administered by the North Carolina Division of Archives and History.
The Town recognizes the historical and scientific importance of this archaeological site and is
committed to preserving the valuable information it may contain.
Several historically significant structures are located in the planning area and the downtown
area for their unique architectural style. The Town recognizes that the historical integrity of the Town
is a part of its heritage. All efforts should be taken to preserve this bit of history. According to the
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer, these areas "are potentially eligible for inclusion in the
National Register of Historic Places."
The nursery areas in South Creek and its tributaries are critical for the full development of
several species of fish. Protection of these nursery areas is a high priority for the Town. Adjoining the
nursery areas are swamps, marshes, and wetlands. These low-lying areas act as flushing agents,
protecting nursery areas from stormwater runoff. The swamps are also wildlife habitats for a variety of
species.
The Aurora area also houses several endangered American Bald Eagles. The need for the
' protection of these predators is widely, recognized. The protection of these resources is of such
importance that no real alternatives exist except to offer protection for the nesting sites if they are
' located.
Outstanding Resource Waters, shellfishing waters, maritime forests, and pocosins are not
twithin the Aurora planning area. Policies are not needed for these issues at this time.
Alternatives
' As with the AECs, these fragile areas are of such importance that no reasonable alternatives
exist but to offer protection for these sites. The amount of protection is reflected in these policy
' alternatives:
• Prohibit development over archaeological sites listed by NC Department of Cultural
Resources.
• Acknowledge that nursery areas are critical to the local economy and work to limit runoff
into them by prohibiting development in swamps and wetlands.
• Develop a program of "donating" historic properties to the Town and work to set up an
historic district.
• If an eagle nesting site is detennined,'the NC Wildlife Resources Commission must
conduct a thorough examination of the site.
39

• Discourage development in all fragile areas.
• Protect all wetlands, swamps and marshes.
Policy Choices
• If an archaeological site is identified, a thorough .investigation must be conducted by NC
Department of Cultural Resources before any building permit is granted.
• Encourage preservation of historic sites by providing Town assistance in locating funds for
historic preservation efforts.
• If an eagle nesting site is determined, the NC Wildlife Resources Commission must
conduct a thorough examination of the site.
• Implement changes in the zoning ordinance to limit land use choices in wetlands, swamps
and marshes.
Implementation Strategies
• Work with building permits officer to require thorough investigation of site before permit
is granted.
• Continue to classify areas within 75 feet of marsh's edge and water line as "Conservation"
on land classification map.
• Review zoning ordinance for necessary changes.
5. Means of Protection of Potable Water
Applicability
The availability of potable water is a critical concern because of the large drawdown resulting
from nearby phosphate mining operations. There are no alternatives other than protection of the water.
The Town recognizes the importance of the limited regional supply of groundwater and the need for its
protection.
Policy Choices
• Discourage activities which dangerously draw down the water supply.
• Encourage the Town Planning Board to keep informed about the availability and quality of
water from the Castle Hayne Aquifer.
Implementation Strategy
• Continue to comply with the Division of Environmental Management Groundwater Section
efforts to protect water in the Aurora Use Area.
6. Use of Package Treatment Plants
Applicability
40

Soils are largely unsatisfactory for the safe placement of septic tanks in the planning area.
Most soils are too wet. Unless care is exercised, this could present problems for the health and safety of
area residents. Unsatisfactory performance of soils around septic tanks could contaminate groundwater
wells. The Town recognizes that it has little power over the soils. Because of these restrictions, little
be done for The be have
can policy. optimal solution would to all area residents connected to the
municipal wastewater treatment plant, or encourage the use of package treatment plants in suitable
Given Aurora's for facility
situations. poor soils septic tanks, a central sewage treatment is very
important, and package treatment plants offer developers an alternative that would allow them to limit
lot These special by State local
size and reduce costs. systems require care and monitoring and
regulators.
Policy Alternatives
• Require larger than average lot sizes.
• Where use of septic tanks is unavoidable, Town supports implementation of techniques to
improve the efficiency of septic tanks, i.e.. mound systems and waterless systems.
'
• Any septic tank installation application must meet State and County regulations.
• Encourage everyone in "developed" and "transition" zones to connect to the Town's
wastewater treatment facility.
• Support the use of package treatment systems in rural and community areas.
'
Policy Choices
• Where the use of septic tanks is unavoidable, the Town supports the implementation of
techniques to improve the efficiency of septic tanks, i.e., mound systems and waterless
systems.
• All septic tank applications must pass requirements set forth by the Beaufort County Health
Department.
'
When able, Aurora will require residents of "developed" and "transition'.' areas, as shown
on the Town's Land Classification Map, to hook on to the wastewater treatment
facility.
• Allow the use of package treatment plants where feasible and practical.
'
Implementation Strategies
• Enforcement will remain the responsibilities of the Building Inspector and the County
Health Department, which grants permits for septic tanks.
• Continue to work with the Division of Environmental Management to improve the
wastewater treatment facility.
1
41
--

7. Stormwater Runoff
Applicability
is
Non -point source pollution considered a high priority for the Town of Aurora. The amount
'
of fertilizers, pesticides, oil contaminants, and litter which eventually enter the river system is increased
by heavy The located
significantly a rain. marshes and other wetlands along creeks and rivers offer. a
'
water filtering system that works naturally to sift out or uptake any pollutants before they can enter the
Stormwater to the discussed by
system. runoff contributes water quality problems often commercial
toccasionally
fishermen and recreational boaters in the Aurora area. Several days after a heavy rainfall, a fish kill
in the Pamlico River. Blame for the kill be largely the
occurs creeks and can placed .on
bottom water anoxia resulting from stormwater runoff. Stormwater runoff and flooding problems are
'
connected and often aggravated by the same land use practices.
The Town has selected policy options to mitigate stormwater runoff. Several techniques that
'
have been proven effective in slowing down runoff are costly and because of the limited amount of
funds available for this issue, the methods must be passive. Aurora has decided to work to solve this
'
problem by continuing to utilize the natural system for passive control of non -point source pollution.
Several methods are effective in minimizing the creation of runoff. It can be done throughout
'
the Town by minimizing impervious surfaces, draining streets and parking lots to grassed swales, and
maintaining or planting as many trees and shrubs as possible to maximize evapotranspiration. The
'
Town has found that land uses will be reviewed within 75 feet of the estuarine shoreline and the review
process should consider the effects of runoff in judging what uses will be allowed.
Policy Choices
• Control, treat, and mitigate any stormwater runoff in Town.
'
• Encourage development and maintenance of riparian vegetation.
• Development adjacent to AEC must be designed so that runoff will not violate water
'
quality standards.
• Limit impervious surfaces to thirty percent (30%) of the lot.
.
Implementation Strategies
• Continue to employ efforts of the CAMA permitting system and the Army Corps of
Engineers 404 permitting system in determining development types which do not
violate water quality.
'
Regulate land uses within conservation classification area.
8. Marina, Floating Home, and Dry Stack Development
Applicability
'
_ 42

'
Marinas for boaters. benefit Town
are an essential convenience Economically, they may a
'
through slip rental, repairs, and gasoline sales. Ecologically, marinas may degrade the water in which
they located. Aurora has boat Dry
are currently a publicly -owned ramp and a private marina. stack
storage takes the boats out of the water. This permits a reduction in the number of slips in the water.
Floating homes are not currently regulated by any agency. The possibility of water pollution can make
these homes an environmental risk.
'
Policy Alternatives
• Encourage the development of marinas.
'
• Discourage the development of marinas and location of floating homes in light of their
contribution to water quality degradation.
'
Policy Choices
• Support marina and dry stack development exclusively in the vicinity of the two canals.
'
• Allow marinas, but encourage their design and size not to violate water quality standards
and the integrity of coastal wetlands.
'
Implementation Strategies.
• Continue working with zoning ordinance, CAMA, and 404 permitting systems in
regulating siting of marinas.
• The Town Planning Board will examine each marina and dry stack development request on
'
a case -by -case basis.
9. Industrial Impacts Around Fragile Areas
Applicability
The policies above address development of all types in and around fragile areas. Industry,
' another form of development, should be exposed to no different standards than the other types of
development. In any location decision, the industry must comply with the policies stated above.
' It has been demonstrated that the Town wants to mitigate the effects of all development on its
natural and cultural resources. It wants to make all efforts to try to protect these resources. Therefore,
' in an effort to maintain consistency in the policies, the Town must work toward attracting economic
growth while encouraging the protection of the environment.
' Policy Choices
• Location of industries in and around fragile areas shall be discouraged, except
' water -dependent industries, i.e., commercial fishing.
• Industry shall be discouraged near wetlands.
43

L
including fertilizer
• Industries which produce toxic or hazardous substances operations will
'
not be located near surface waters or groundwater recharge areas.
Implementation Strategies
• Continue. support of CAMA and 404 permitting systems, Building Inspector and County
Building Requirements.
• The Town Planning Board and Town Council will review each application for siting of
'
industries on a case -by -case basis.
10. Sound and Estuarine System Islands
Aurora has no sound or estuarine system; therefore, no policy will be considered.
11. Areas Affected by a Five-foot Rise in Sea Level
'
Applicability
Water levels change over time. Any rise in sea level will inundate areas in the Aurora planning
'
area that are currently developed or may be developed in the future. Preparation for this event requires
looking at current land uses and projections.
'
Policy Alternatives
• Locate hazardous development outside of low-lying areas.
'
• Locate all development outside low-lying areas.
• Do not restrict development in low-lying areas.
'
Policy Choice
• Locate hazardous development, which includes fertilizer plants, outside of areas that may
'
be affected by a five-foot rise in sea level.
Implementation Strategy
• Update zoning ordinance to make necessary changes in industrial permitted uses.
12. Upland Excavation for Marina Basins
Applicability
According to CAMA standards, the highest preference for marina development site alternatives
is "an upland site requiring no alteration of wetlands or other estuarine habitats and having adequate
water circulation to prevent the accumulation of sediment and pollutants in boat basins and channels."
Policy Alternatives
• Allow upland sites requiring dredging only.
• Allow deepwater sites located away from primary nursery areas and requiring no
excavation.
Policy Choice
44

'
The Town will restrict marina basins in accordance with State standards.
'
Implementation Strategy
• Enforce local zoning ordinance and require compliance with State standards.
'
13. Damage to Existing Marshes by Bulkhead Installation
Applicability
'
Aurora is bordered to the north and east by a combination of wetlands and marshes extending
landward almost 1000 feet in most places. Most of these locations are not suitable for development.
'
Bulkheads and other shoreline stabilization methods must meet standards listed in Title 15, Subchapter
7H' Section .0208(b)(7) of the North Carolina Administrative Code. Among these standards is a
requirement that bulkheads must be constructed landward of significant marsh areas. Bulkheads
constructed within a marsh interfere with the natural exchange of inflow of tidal nutrients and outwash
of pollutants.
Policy Alternatives
• The Town may choose to preserve the marshes and allow no bulkheads.
• The Town the by bulkhead development in
may wish to protect marshes controlling such a
'
way as to minimize negative impacts.
Policy Choice
• The Town's policy shall be to protect the marshes by carefully controlling bulkhead
'
development.
Implementation Strategy
'
• The Town will support the enforcement of existing State and Federal regulations.
14. Water Quality Problems and Management Measures Designed to Reduce or Eliminate.
Local Sources of Surface Water Quality Problems
Surface water quality on South Crest is reported as "Partially Supporting" at this time. Aurora
'
does not have adequate staff or finances to initiate local programs that protect water quality, but the
Town favors agricultural Best Management Practices, local citizens monitoring programs, and other
State measures based on sound science to reasonably protect present and future water quality in the
South Creek drainage area.
'
B. RESOURCE PRODUCTION AND MANAGEMENT
Appropriate management of productive resources is very important to any locality. In most
cases, the productive resources are intricately tied to the economic fabric of the area. It is, therefore,
wise to manage these resources to the best of their productivity and to ensure their existence for future
' _ _ 45

generations. The major productive resources in Aurora are related to agriculture, mining and
commercial and recreational fisheries and commercial forestry.
' 1. Productive Agricultural Land
Applicability
Agriculture, as discussed in the Inventory and Analysis section of this plan, is an important
component of the local economy. Farming brings in a great amount of income to the area through the
actual sale of farm commodities, farm supplies and equipment. A large portion of the planning area is
currently or has been under cultivation. The Soil Conservation Service has identified and mapped the
soils in the planning area which are considered to be some of the best in the County for agricultural
productivity. These soils occupy a large amount of land in the planning area.
In principal, the Town could opt to conserve these farm soils for future use by restricting any
development from occurring on them. Aurora realizes how important agriculture is to the economy,
' but it feels that there is an excess of land under cultivation already. This glut in farmland, and
subsequently, farm products, has caused farm prices to fall and foster economic hardship for the family
' farmer. The Town feels that it should not contribute to an already bad problem by requiring that certain
agricultural soils be restricted from any other uses.
Policy Alternatives
• Protect agricultural lands identified as "prime" by the SCS and Division of Soil and Water
'
Conservation.
• Prohibit any land use other than agriculture, forestry or conservation on prime agricultural
isoils.
• Promote conservation of these lands by encouraging owners of these tracts to implement
'
Best Management Practices.
• Classify lands as Conservation -A, meaning that these are agricultural areas which should
1
be precluded from development.
• Take no additional measures to preserve agricultural lands.
'
Policy Choices
• The Town will not take additional measures to encourage the preservation of "prime"
agricultural soils. Any types of development, pending consistency with the zoning
ordinance, will be permitted on these soils.
'
Encourage owners of these lands labeled as "prime" and other cultivated areas to
implement Best Management Practices.
46 -

' Implementation Strategy
• Encourage farmers to work with Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service and
' Soil Conservation Service workers and to adopt Best Management Practices.
' 2. Commercial Forest Lands
Applicability
Commercially -owned forest lands cover several tracts in the Aurora area. In addition, timber
companies have harvesting rights on tracts of land owned by PCS .Phosphate. This natural and
renewable resource provides jobs, an aesthetic quality to the area, a natural habitat for wildlife, and
improved air quality. Forestry activities utilize the same resources as farming and mining.
' Policy Alternatives
• Support forestry industry in Aurora area.
• Discourage forestry activities that includes clear -cutting.
' • Encourage use of Best Forestry Management Practices.
• Support retention of buffer adjoining marshland and water bodies.
' Policy Choices
• Support forest industry provided Best Forestry Management Practices are used and a buffer
' is retained along water bodies.
• Encourage reseeding of existing forested areas with natural growth trees.
' Implementation Strategy
• To allow the Extension Service, Soil Conservation Service, and NC Forest Service to
' continue their efforts towards good forest management.
3. Existing and Potential Mineral Production Areas
' Applicability
Open -pit mining has been the economic mainstay of Aurora and Beaufort County since the
' PCS Phosphate mining operations came to this County in 1965. The environmental and economic
effects of the phosphate mining have been witnessed by Aurora area residents. Peat mining has also
' become an issue within recent years, but there are currently no known "prime" sites for peat mining in
the Aurora area. All peat soils are low BTU and would be uneconomical to mine at this time.
' In 1981, a policy was adopted which discouraged open pit mining within the one -mile
extraterritorial area of Town. Any mining activities proposed were required to apply for.a special use
' permit which was to be granted on a case -by -case basis. The Town has decided that this policy is still
applicable.
Policy Alternatives
47

1
• Alternatives include prohibiting all mining or allowing mining on case -by -case basis as it
meets local, state and federal criteria.
Policy Choice
• The Town is cautious of any type of open -pit mining within the one -mile jurisdictional
limit of Town. Any mining activities proposed must apply for a special use permit
'
which will be granted on a case -by -case basis. The applicant must meet certain
to
requirements receive the needed permit.
'
Implementation Strategies
• Continued for by the Town Planning
review process of applications special use permits
Board.
'0
Support State regulations on mining industry.
I
4. Commercial and Recreational Fisheries
'
Applicability
The commercial fishing industry is vital to the local economy. Several independent full-time
'
commercial fishermen live and work in the Aurora area, plus four crab processing plants are located in
or near the planning area. South Creek and its tributaries also serve as nursery areas for several species.
Concern has been raised by commercial fishermen and the Division of Marine Fisheries technicians
about the effect of runoff on the fisheries industries. Freshwater runoff from drainage ditches and
non -point source pollution has been detrimental to the fishing waters by altering the salinity content and
adding pollutants to the estuarine system. Concern has also been raised over incidences of fecal
coliform, largely from septic tank seepage, being identified in shellfish beds in other parts of the State.
In order to support the commercial and recreational fishing industries, the Town needs to implement
techniques to maintain water quality.
To remain consistent with the aforementioned Resource Protection policies, the Town has
'
elected to protect the fisheries. Although the Division of Environmental Management has not
designated any waters close to Aurora as Outstanding Resource Waters, the Town has chosen to protect
'
the commercial and recreational fishing areas within the Town's jurisdiction and to take special care in
protecting the nursery areas and other waters in the South Creek system. Trawling activities are not
' currently conducted within Aurora's jurisdiction. Policies are not needed at this time.
Policy Alternatives
' The only alternative that Aurora will consider is to protect commercial and recreational
fisheries areas within the Town's jurisdiction.
1 48

Policy Choice
• The Town will protect commercial and recreational fisheries areas within the Town's
' jurisdiction. Also, those areas unofficially recognized by the Division of Marine
Fisheries as significant resource areas will be treated as such. These include all
tributaries of South Creek.
Implementation Strategies
' • The CAMA and 404 permitting systems, as well as the Town's zoning ordinance will
provide sufficient enforcement for this policy.
' • The County Health Department, largely responsible for the safe placement of septic tanks,
will be responsible for minimizing the likelihood of contamination of fishing waters
' from the effluent of septic systems in unsuitable soils.
5. Off -Road Vehicles
' Applicability
The mention of "off -road' vehicles in coastal North Carolina, typically conjures ideas of
' four-wheel drive type vehicles driving up and down the sandy beaches of the ocean front. In Aurora,
there is no problem with these vehicles operating on the beaches. They most often operate illegally
' along the roadsides, frequently causing significant amounts of soil and vegetation loss, plus creating a
nuisance from their noise. Many local residents have expressed a concern over these vehicles, ranging
' from complaints about noise to legitimate questions about their safety.
The Town is able to do very little to prohibit these vehicles, as they are most frequently
operated on private property.
Policy Alternatives
' Require that all off -road vehicle owners register their property at the Town Hall at the time
of vehicle registration.
' Prohibit the use of these vehicles from the planning area.
• Restrict their use to areas classified as "Rural."
• Discourage use of off -road vehicles in planning area.
Policy Choices
' • The Town could require that all off -road vehicle owners register their property at the Town
Hall at the time of vehicle registration.
' • Prohibit use of four-wheel vehicles on public roads.
Implementation Strategies
• Work with Town Policemen to enforce this policy.
49

6. Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Land Development Impacts on any Resources
Applicability
'
At this time, the Town is prepared to accommodate any reasonable estimates of new
tdoes
development over the five-year update period. Utilities are adequate at this time, and stormwater runoff
to Local determine
not appear pose significant. water quality problems. zoning.patterns will the
proximity of new development to fragile areas.
'
Policy Alternatives
Alternatives are to strengthen subdivision ordinance with regard to a developer's responsibility
'
for provision of infrastructure or to monitor future development to determine any individual or
cumulative impacts on local resources.
'
Policy Choice
The policy shall be to rely on current local ordinances and State or Federal protective
'
regulations to adequately mitigate development impacts on resources.
Implementation Strategy
'
Implementation shall occur by regular review and standard enforcement of existing and
proposed development and update of the local zoning ordinance, as necessary to keep development
'
requirements effective.
7. Peat or Phosphate Mining's Impact on any Resource
Applicability
Presently there is phosphate mining but no peat mining in the Aurora area. PCS Phosphate,
'
formerly TexasGulf, has been mining phosphate in the Aurora ar-ca since 1965. An important concern
is the effect on the Castle Hayne Aquifer.
'
Policy Alternatives
Alternatives include prohibiting all mining or allowing mining on a case -by -case basis as it
'
meets local, state, and federal criteria.
Policy Choice
'
Any mining activities proposed must apply for a special use permit which will be granted on a
case -by -case basis.
'
Implementation Strategy
• Continued review process of application for special use permits by the Town Planning
'
Board.
• Support State and Federal regulations on mining industry.
50

' C. ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
The analysis of the present conditions of the population and economy of the Aurora planning
area revealed no alarming changes in the general economic atmosphere of the area. Aurora is very
' concerned about future growth in economic and community development. Since PCS Phosphates'
location to the area in 1965, the Town has had the potential for explosive growth. An immediate
' increase in population was spurred by PCS Phosphates, but in proportion, this growth represented a
small number of persons. Most PCS Phosphates employees live in other counties and towns in eastern
North Carolina. Aurora serves as a part-time convenience center for the PCS Phosphates employees.
Aurora, as discussed in the Inventory and Analysis section of this plan, is currently not
' undergoing large amounts of growth like some other eastern North Carolina cities. It is, therefore, not
experiencing the same levels of development pressure as other towns. Several factors have been
' suggested for this stunted growth: lack of adequate housing, lack of recreational facilities, poor
' schools, limited retail opportunity, and lack of full-time pastors in the church facilities. Whatever the
'
reason, or combination of reasons, the potential exists for an explosion of growth in Aurora. Policies
to be in to this it
need place accommodate growth, when occurs.
'
The Town views itself as being in a position to accommodate growth and development.
Consistent the the Town is long the development is
with aforementioned policies, pro -growth as as not
environmentally degrading. The limitations imposed by the Townes policies on the protection of
sensitive natural and cultural resources should not be violated in order to accommodate any type of
growth. Residential, commercial and industrial land uses should meet the goals of the Town. The
following section outlines growth policies which have an impact on land use decisions. These policies
define the goals Aurora has set for where it would like to be in the next ten years. Particular issues,
related to growth and the Town's commitment to economic development, are discussed below.
1. Location and Types of Industries Desired
'
Applicability
Aurora, as discussed in the preceding section, is blessed with several natural and cultural
resources. It sits on one of the world's largest phosphate deposits; is situated on South Creek; and has
some of the County's most productive agricultural soils.
'
Manufacturing in the area takes advantage of these resources. The phosphate mining industry,
one of the largest operations in eastern North Carolina, employs about 1,200 persons. Three seafood
'
processing operations are located within a five mile radius of the area. Farming is also an economic
1
51

1
Iactivity. in the region, employing dozens of persons through farm labor or through the sale of farming
' equipment and supplies. r
Aurora encourages the continued development or expansion of these types of resource -
intensive industries. Aurora would also like to invite industry which takes advantage of the abundant
supply of low -skilled workers. In particular, there is an abundant supply of low -skilled female workers.
Expansion of the phosphate mining operations, additional seafood processing industries or light
' assembly manufacturing would be welcome in Aurora. A sewing factory, or similar activity, could
' provide employment for the low -skilled female workers in the area.
All industries considering locating in the Aurora planning area must be low -pollution, light
manufacturing industries in order to remain consistent with the aforementioned resource policy
' statements. All industries must be consistent with the Town's policies to protect its water quality and
wetlands.
' Several sites are available in the planning area for industry. The Town would like to see
industry locate in two specific sites. The northeastern quadrant, currently undeveloped, would be well
suited for a seafood processing firm or some other type of water oriented industry. Another area, along
Highway 33 west of Town is zoned for industry. The Town feels that this site would be best suited to
' .all other industrial types. It has good access and is currently served by the water and sewer system.
Policy Alternatives
'
Prohibit new industry
• Allow industries that do not degrade the environment
• No regulation of new industries
Policy Choices
iEncourage
industry types which take advantage of the natural resource base and existing
labor supply.
'
Encourage low -pollution, light manufacturing type industries which are compatible with
resource protection, production and management goals and policies.
tEncourage
low waste industries to prevent contributing to wastewater treatment problems.
• Encourage seafood -related industries to locate in northeastern quadrant of Town, providing
'
they are consistent with resource protection goals of the Town.
• Encourage industry which employs low -skilled workers, particularly women.
Assembly -type manufacturing and a garment factory would be well suited for this
purpose.
' 52

1
I
• Industrial sites will be confined to areas zoned for manufacturing along Highway 33 and in
the northeastern section of Town.
Implementation Strategies
• The Town will .establish more active contact with the State's industrial development
representative for the region, making certain that _the representative is aware of the
Town's stated policy choices on economic development.
• Zoning ordinance, CAMA and 404 permitting systems will regulate the development of
industry in specific areas.
2. Local Commitment to Providing Services
Applicability
The Town is committed to providing wastewater treatment to any potential customer. The
limiting factors are the cost of line extension and the plant capacity. Currently less then 300 additional
customers could use the system. This is not a problem for anticipated residential growth, but could be
for a large user. The Town does not have the financial resources to extend lines to sparsely populated
areas.
Currently, nearly 100 percent of the area's residents are hooked up to the water system. This
represents a 35 percent usage rate for that facility. Nearly 1,350 more persons could be served by this
system.
Aurora acknowledges that the regions, soils are not conducive to septic tank usage and the
optimal solution to this problem is to provide wastewater treatment service to all residents in the
planning area. This is a very expensive and currently infeasible proposition.
Policy Alternatives
Aurora is committed to providing basic services to serve increased development in the area.
Industrial requests will be examined on an individual basis. In this issue, there are no alternatives; it is
more of a question of scale.
Policy Choices
• First priority in delivery of services is to areas classified as "Developed" on the Land
Classification map. Second priority is to "Transition" areas.
• Residential customers will be served first.
• Industrial uses will be examined on a case -by -case basis by the Town Council and Planning
Board.
Implementation Strategy
The Town will provide services as funds are available and the need for services arise.
53

3. Desired Urban Growth Patterns
'
Applicability
In 1981, considerable debate was held over the anticipated growth rates and size of Aurora. It
'
was decided at that time to limit the population, no matter what trends might take place. Town officials
decided that 1,500 persons is a good limit, based on the design capacities of the water and sewer
'
systems. Aurora's 1990 population is one-half of this intended goal. Projected population figures
suggest that the slow, but steady growth rates that Aurora has experienced in the past will continue for
the next ten years.
Another.trend in the planning area which may affect urban growth patterns is the increasing
'
number of mobile homes scattered throughout residential areas.
Policy Alternatives
'
• Limit growth to 1,500 persons. Urban patterns will be limited by zoning ordinance.
Consider developing for homes.
zoning ordinance exclusively mobile
• Urban growth patterns will remain consistent with zoning ordinance.
Policy Choice
• Limit growth to 1,500 persons. Urban patterns will be limited by zoning ordinance.
'
Implementation Strategy
•. Urban growth patterns and densities will be limited by the County Health Department, and
the zoning ordinance.
4. Types, Densities, and Location of Anticipated Development
Applicability
Overly. dense development is not a problem in Aurora, nor is it anticipated to become a
problem during the next ten years. Within the past five years, the land use trends have shown
residential growth to occur in areas south of Highway 33, and commercial growth has expanded along
' Fifth Street and Highway 33 west. Aurora would like to see continued development in areas which are
best able to accommodate growth and where support services, like sewer and water, are feasible and
' practical to provide. Much of the growth in recent years has been outside the hazard areas. Industrial
growth will be targeted to the land along Highway 33 west and in the northeastern quadrant of Town.
' Policy Alternatives
The only alternative is to rely on the zoning ordinance to help provide for orderly growth.
' Policy Choices
• Continue to enforce the subdivision ordinance with minimum lot size of 20,000 square feet
' for lots without public water and sewer.
' 54

Continue with efforts to upgrade sewage treatment plant to accommodate additional
'
customers.
• Ensure that future growth is consistent with the above policies in Resource Protection,
'
Resource Production and Management sections. Also, the growth must be consistent
with the zoning ordinance and additional goals of the community.
'
Implementation Strategy
• Aurora will update its zoning and subdivision ordinances and participate in the Beaufort
'
County Planning Area Solid Waste Management Plan.
5. Redevelopment of Developed Areas
Applicability
The Town of Aurora's policy on redevelopment of developed land was discussed in the 1981,
• 1986, and 1991 land use plan updates. At that time, the Town was concerned mainly with improving
local
tourism through several redevelopment projects. The Aurora Library, Community Center, Fossil
'
Museum, Civic Center, and marina were projects associated with this community facilities development
The facilities are Town's to
program. establishment of these proof of the commitment redevelopment
of older areas.. Downtown revitalization has been encouraged for the past several years, but a limited
has been toward this The Town feels to
amount of progress made goal. still committed this effort.
About two-thirds of the Town would be wiped out in the event of a devastating storm. In this
'
case, all structures would be rebuilt to conform to the land use types according to the zoning ordinance.
All non -conforming uses would not be permitted for reconstruction.
'
Erosion is not a problem in the Aurora area due to its low topography.
Policy Alternatives
'
• The alternative is that the Town could prohibit any redevelopment or limit redevelopment.
Policy Choices
'
• Continue support of downtown beautification efforts. The Town will work to help secure
funds for rehabilitation projects.
'
• In the event of destruction by a storm, redevelopment will occur in accordance with the
prescribed land uses of the zoning ordinance. Non -conforming uses will not be
'
permitted.
• The Town supports the replacement of substandard housing with standard housing within
the Town limits.
• Encourage the removal of dilapidated buildings in downtown area.
t•
Reconstruction will be permitted on lots that meet minimum size standards.
55

' Implementation Strategies
• The Town will coordinate with private individuals and organizations to secure financial
support for downtown beautification efforts.
' • The Town will consider the feasibility of applying for appropriate grants to assist with
redevelopment. Grant programs that could be utilized include the Community
Development Block Grant for Community Revitalization, Economic Development and
' Urgent Needs; USDA Rural Development; Economic Development Administration's
Sudden and Severe Damage program; and North Carolina's water and sewer grants
' programs.
6. Commitment to State and Federal Programs
Applicability
The Town of Aurora is receptive to State and Federal Programs which provide improvements
' to the Town. Aurora will continue to fully support such programs that provide necessary resources to
'
meet identified community needs that compliment the economic and community development goals of
Town. Of is NC Department Transportation
the particular significance the of Road and Bridge
'
Improvements program. The Pamlico River ferry system is also important to the economic health of
Aurora. The Town honor financial
will support these programs and will assistance requests when
financially able and when the proposed project is in compliance with the Town's goals for economic
'
development.
The Erosion Control program, carried out by the Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation
'
Service and the Soil Conservation Service is especially important to the farming community in the
planning area. The Town supports the efforts of these agencies, including the implementation of Best
Management Practices to mitigate soil loss through erosion. In addition, the Town has established a
policy for a 75-foot conservation buffer zone to reduce the sediment load from entering the system (See
'
Resource Protection policy statements).
There has been continued debate over the expansion of the Military Operating Airspace in
tBeaufort
County. Aurora is opposed to this expansion because of the restrictions it would impose on
the local air traffic community. Noise levels were an additional concern for the discouragement of this
airspace expansion.
Policy Alternatives
'
Alternatives include complete commitment to State and Federal programs; limited support of
these programs; or opposition to the programs.
Policy Choices
56

The policy will be general commitment to state and federal programs.
tImplementation
Strategies
The Town will continue to endorse and enjoy the advantages of higher agency programs which
can enhance the quality of life for local area residents. Some of those programs are geared toward
individuals, and the Town has limited direct interaction in those cases. To the extent possible, the
Town will partner with state and federal agencies to enforce restrictions or review projects which
impact the planning area. The Town would consider distributing information regarding issues such as
vegetative buffers or conservation measures to persons seeking zoning permits if such information is
available to them.
7. Assistance to Channel Maintenance
Applicability
'
Proper channel maintenance is important in Aurora, mainly because of recreational boating and
fishing industry. Special be to the dredging
the commercial attention should given amount of that
'
occurs, because excessive dredging can be just as damaging as none at all. Dredge lines often disrupt
fish habitat the bottom thereby the its
valuable on of rivers, robbing river of some of economic value
and important fish habitat.
Policy Choice
Aurora will support channel maintenance projects, but discourage excessive dredging because
'
of its effect on fish habitat. Financial aid for channel maintenance will be made available when
possible. Efforts will be made to provide spoil and borrow sites within the planning area.
Implementation Strategy
The Town will comply with the U.S. Corps of Engineers on channel maintenance projects.
'
8. Energy Facility Siting
Applicability
At present there are no energy facilities in the Aurora area. The need for new facilities may
change in coming years as energy demand changes. The location of any type facility will have a.
positive impact on the tax base. At the same time, potential exists for a negative environmental impact.
The general public can partly control the need for these facilities by limiting the demand for
energy. Changes in production requirements at PCS Phosphates may also affect the need for electricity.
Conservation of electricity and oil can eliminate the need for new sites. Conservation will require an
'
educational process that will take time to implement.
57

New energy facilities take years to get permitted and built. Electric generating plants in the
'
Aurora area should be small enough to be environmentally acceptable. Oil exploration or refining is
not anticipated at this time for Aurora. Policies on this will be adopted when a.need occurs.
'
Policy Alternatives
The Town can prohibit or encourage energy siting facilities on a case -by - case basis.
'
Policy Choices
• Energy generating facilities will be subject to a special use permit, granted by the Town
Planning Board.
• Restrict energy facilities to Rural areas on land classification map.
Implementation Strategy
• Update zoning ordinance to reflect possibility of energy generating facilities.
'
9. Tourism
Applicability
The Town is committed to increasing tourism in the area. Efforts to increase tourism were
brought Fossil Museum Aurora included Historic
on when the was opened, and when was as part of the
'
Albemarle Tour Highway. The annual Aurora Fossil Festival has also increased tourism.
Policy Alternatives
• The Town should continue to pursue tourism.
'
Policy Choices
• Continue support for the Fossil Museum, downtown revitalization efforts, and other
'
methods to increase tourism.
Implementation Strategy
'
Implementation shall occur through improved efforts at publicizing the Town, it natural
assets, and local events
'
10. Public Beach and Water Access
Applicability
Aurora has demonstrated its commitment to public access of public waters by having
developed the Town boat ramp in 1982.
Alternatives
• The Town could establish no additional policies or courses of action for development of
these industries assuming that the existing facilities are sufficient.
• The Town could encourage acquisition of undevelopable waterfront properties for public
'
access sites.
' 58

• The Town could encourage "donations" of waterfront property for public use.
Choices
• The Town will encourage acquisition of undevelopable waterfront properties for public
access sites.
• Work with the Division of Coastal Management in developing a program of "donations" of
waterfront property for public use.
Implementation Strategy
• The Town will work with the Division of Coastal Management in developing a program of
"donations" of waterfront property for public use. Aurora will continue providing
water access through the Town boat ramp.
D. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
The preparation of Aurora's Land Use Plan was the responsibility of the Aurora Planning
Board. The Planning Board, a five -person group appointed by the Town Council, represents a wide
range of ages, backgrounds, and interests. A workshop session introducing Board members to the
planning process was held in March 1997 and the group then agreed to meet on the second Thursday
of each month to work on the plan. A work schedule of public meetings held as part of the land use
planning program was also approved in March 1997.
At their first meeting, the Planning Board agreed that soliciting public input would be an
important goal of the planning process. In 1997 the Planning Board prepared a citizen questionnaire
and the Planning Board personally attempted to encourage public participation. The survey was
mailed to each home in the planning area and 53 responses were received. Word-of-mouth was
perhaps the most effective communication method utilized to keep the public informed. As issues
arose, Planning Board members would informally contact local citizens involved in those issues for
information. Notices of Board meetings and anticipated topics were submitted to the Washington
Daily News and the Pamlico News.
The Planning Board and Town Council will be the primary groups through which public
input will be accepted, as the planning program continues over the next five years. The Planning
Board will continue to meet as needed to assist the Council in implementing the strategies for
attaining policy objectives on resource protection, production, and economic and community
development proposed in the 1997 Land Use Plan. Following the example of the current planning
program, soliciting public input will be a primary goal of all future planning endeavors.
59

' The Planning Board and the Council recognize the importance of keeping the citizenry
informed of current planning concerns and of receiving the comments and concerns of local
residents.
' E. CONTINUING PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
1. Public Education on Planning Issues
Applicability
Public participation is an important element of the planning process. Because of Aurora's
' long history of planning, the public participation process within the Town is an ongoing, viable
process. The Aurora Planning Board, being an extension of the Town Council, is charged with the
' responsibility of keeping the public informed on all relevant planning issues.
Alternatives
' All Planning Board meetings are open to the general public and provide the opportunity for
public involvement. Meetings are publicized in the local newspaper.
Policy
During this update process, citizen input was requested by a citizens' survey. The citizen
' opinion questionnaire and its results follow this section.
2. ' Continued Public Participation In Planning
Applicability
Continuing public participation in the planning process is desired but sometimes difficult to
inspire in Aurora. Except when faced with highly controversial issues, citizens are generally content
with land use policies in the Town, and will not routinely participate.
Alternatives
The Planning Board could consider developing a "speakers bureau" to speak to civic
organizations about planning issues. Periodic citizen opinion questionnaires could also be
administered such as the one conducted in conjunction with this plan update. The Planning Board
could place news items in local papers concerning each Planning Board meeting. New items on local
radio stations concerning planning are to be encouraged as well.
Policy
' The policy shall be to make regular efforts to draw more public participation.
Strategy
iImplementation shall occur through attempting some of the options listed above in
"Alternatives" above.
1
60

1
3. Method of Obtaining Citizen Input
Applicability
During this plan update, several efforts were made to obtain citizen input. Response was
'
average. Articles regarding the Land Use Planning Process were printed in the local newspaper. A
fifty-three were
citizen survey wasmailed out, and (53) responses received. Planning Board
'
meetings were publicized in the newspaper. Targets for citizen input were all residents living in the
Aurora Planning Area.
'
Alternatives
The Town its information Openness to
could and should continue public campaign efforts.
public comment and reasonableness of effort may be the best we can hope for when dealing with the
'
issue of public input.
Policy
'
It should be noted that average citizens tend to play a prominent role in. Aurora's
government. The Town does not employ a large number of technical experts to support appointed
'
citizen boards. While sometimes a drawback, perhaps this practice causes decisions to be made,
which most accurately reflect the will of the people and most closely satisfy their needs. Aurora
trespects
and encourages the opinions and ideas of its citizens in all land use issues and will continue
to provide ample opportunity for those who so desire to participate.
'
Strategy
Implementation shall occur through attempting the option listed in "Alternatives" above.
' - 61

AURORA PUBLIC SURVEY
' RESULTS
The Town of Aurora issued a survey for public input. Distribution was by direct mail to each household in the Town limits.
' Fifty-three (53) surveys were returned out of 300 printed, for a return rate of about 18%. Each entry received a weighted score based
on all responses to the question. If the issue was rated as a No. 1 priority, it received a weighted score of 3 points and so on. For
example, Question #1 received 52 ratings of #1 priority, and one rating of #2 priority. The weighted score was 158 because each #1
' rating was worth 3 points and a response of 2 was worth 2 points. A response of 3 was worth 1 point, and 4 was worth zero (0) points.
By this method, all opinions are factored into the overall score, regardless of the priority level each respondent gave the issue.
' RANKINGS:
3 pts=High priority; 2pts=Medium Priority; 1 pt=Low Priority; O=Unimportant Now
SCORE RANK
' 1. Ensure safe and adequate drinking water supply. 158 1
2. Protect and maintain air quality. 142 2
' 3. Protect surface water quality in the Pamlico River and its tributaries 139 3
' 4. Encourage development of shopping centers or other commercial use along major highways. 138 4
5. Promote services and facilities for the elderly. 128 5
' 6. Recruit only non-polluting industry. 125 6
7, Restrict intensive livestock operations such as hog and poultry operations. 122 7
' 8. Improve storm drainage. 115 8
' 9. Improve solid waste management/recycling efforts. 114 9
10. Expand cultural and recreational facilities 114 9
' 11. Promote new residential development inside town limits. 113 11
12. Improve existing housing conditions. 112 12
13. Improve pedestrian walkways throughout town. 96 13
' 14. Protect prime farmland from conversion to uses such as sub -divisions or commercial. 92 14
15. Limit development near wetlandslareas of environmental concern. 88 15
' 16. Recruit ANY kind of industry. 83 16
17. Extend the extraterritorial jurisdiction past the current 1 mile. 70 17
18. Promote historic preservation. 66 18
' 19. OTHERS (Write In):
Improve roads; protect taxpayers' rights; limit government interference; promote recreational facilities for residents; update and enforce zoning; build
sidewalks on Main Street; establish Boys & Girls Club; continue to keep drugs out of Aurora; promote businesses for growth, ex. restaurant and motel; keep
drainage ditches clean; demolish vacant/abandoned structures; work programs for welfare recipients; and enforce littering fines.
* Indicates tied scores
1 - 62

F. STORM HAZARDS MITIGATION, POST -DISASTER RECOVERY AND
'
EVACUATION PLANS
The type and location of development in and around Aurora is directly tied to topographic,
'
hydrologic, and geologic features described earlier. The vulnerability of development to natural
disasters is a byproduct of these features. The number of people and the value of property that would
'
be affected by a storm is an important part of this plan.
1. Land Uses in Hazard Areas
The areas most vulnerable to the devastating effects of a hurricane or other major coastal
storm are identified in Map 4. This map is the product of a computer model called SLOSH (Sea,
ILake, and Overland Surge from Hurricanes). The SLOSH model was developed by the US Army
Corps of Engineers to simulate the height of the storm surge from hurricanes of a predicted severity
' within a particular area. The National Weather Service ranks hurricanes into Categories 1 through 5
based on their wind speeds. The SLOSH model analyzes each hurricane category scenario and
' provides theoretical area boundaries where flooding is expected to occur. For example, the Category
1 and 2 hurricanes, with wind speeds up to 110 mph, would probably produce a storm surge that
twould flood a small stretch of land along the South Creek. - The Category 3 storm, defined by winds
up to 130 miles per hour, would inundate points further landward than the Category 1 and 2 storms.
' The category 4 and 5 storms, the highest intensity storms possible, would push the water to areas still
further landward. Since the Category 1, 2, and 3 storms are more common, the discussion will be
I
limited to their impact on the planning area.
In Aurora, the Category 1 and 2 flood zone incorporates a large portion of the eastern section
of Town as well as all incorporated areas of South Creek. The flood boundary approximately
coincides with Third Street. The limited development in this flood zone includes about one -eighth of
' the Town's residences. No major commercial establishments are located here. The new Hudson
Manufacturing building and the new fire station are located in this area. Development also includes
the public boat ramp, several homes along East Main Street, plus an apartment complex located on
' First Street. Within 75 feet of the shoreline, development is limited because much of the area is in
undevelopable marshes.
The area, which would be inundated by the Category 3 storm is far more monetarily valuable
to the Town. The boundary for the Category 3 storm goes beyond the Category 1 and 2 storm line
1 and approximately coincides with the 100-year flood plain. A much greater amount of development
is located in this area. Approximately 150 conventional homes, 25 commercial establishments, 4
' 64

double -wide and 17 single -wide mobile homes are locate here (Town Clerk, 1997). The municipal
' wastewater treatment facility is also located in this flood zone. Consideration should be given to its
relocation to a less hazardous site.
' Although many structures would be at risk from a storm, the areas which would be most
seriously affected would be the AECs in the planning area. These include estuarine waters, estuarine
shorelines, coastal wetlands, and public trust waters. Of these, the estuarine shoreline and coastal
' wetlands AECs will bear the greatest risk of destruction because they lie directly on the land -water
' interface and are among the most dynamic features of the coastal landscape. Shoreline erosion is a
day -to -day phenomenon that is accelerated greatly with the energy of a major storm. Destruction
'
that may take years to occur along a normal low -energy shoreline can occur in a matter of several
hours during be directly impacted by
a strong storm. The shoreline area will severe erosion and
'
scouring, direct wave action, high winds, and complete inundation by storm surge accompanying the
Development be
storm. adjacent to the shoreline would obviously at a great risk.
'
During the 1996 Hurricane season, the coast of Eastern North Carolina was impacted by two
hurricanes In July 1996 Hurricane Bertha had 7.2'
(2) and a tropical storm. a storm surge, while
Hurricane Fran, in September of the same year, had an 8.45' surge, in Beaufort County. The Town
'
of Aurora fortunately did not have severe damages due to either Hurricane. Flooding was minimal
due to well maintained and clean drainage ditches. There were a few structures damaged due to tree
'
and limbs that had fallen. Most of the severe flooding and wind damage was along the Northern side
of the Pamlico River.
2. Storm Hazard Mitigation
Hurricanes are extremely powerful, destructive meteorological events which are often
'
unpredictable. Destruction is typically the result of the combined energy of which winds, storm
surge, flooding, erosion, and wave action. Of these, the two most damaging components of any
'
hurricane striking Aurora is the high winds which define it and flooding from excessive rains. In
addition to these two forces, wave action and erosion are two byproducts of the wind and rain along
'
the land/water interface. Inasmuch as Aurora is located about 8 miles from the Pamlico River, 30
miles form the mouth of the Pamlico Sound, and 55 miles from the Atlantic Ocean, the threat of
tstorm
surge damage is minimized and will not be discussed further. The following section discusses
the effect of each of these storm components on the planning area and delineates the sites which are
most vulnerable to their forces.
1
65

IHigh winds
' High winds are the greatest risk factor associated with hurricanes. Hurricanes are, in fact,
defined in severity by their wind speeds. The entire planning area would be subject to the winds
brought on by a hurricane making landfall nearby. Again, the areas most seriously impacted would
' be the shoreline areas, the wetlands, and other areas in the 100-year flood plain. Sites that
' experience backwash such as open field ditches would also be impacted. The high winds would
result in flooding. Building restrictions concerning wind stress should be applied in areas closest to
'
the shore.
• Flooding
Unlike high winds, floodwaters may not impact all areas hit by.a storm. According to the
SLOSH model map, most of the planning area would be subject to flooding from a Category 4 or 5
'
storm. The frequency of a hurricane of this magnitude is less than a one percent chance in any given
More flood
year. common storms, like the Category 1 through 3 hurricanes, would nearly two-thirds
of the area in Town. This is a substantial portion of the Town's tax base.
• Wave Action '
'
Damage from wave action is very strongly correlated to wind speed and direction. Most
damage caused by be in immediate the the
waves will the zone of water along estuarine shoreline
and coastal wetlands. Development adjacent to or included as part of the estuarine shoreline would
'
be to battering by Since large the little
subject waves. marshes occupy a very segment of shoreline,
would be at risk. In Town, the public boat ramp plus its pavement and docking would be at risk from
'
wave action. Other structures are located at a safe distance from the shoreline.
'
• Erosion
The high water, is The likely
product of severe winds, and wave action erosion. areas most
to be impacted by erosion are the shoreline areas within the planning jurisdiction. Riggs, Bellis,
O'Conner (1979) studied shoreline types and their vulnerability to erosion. They concluded that the
areas most likely to erode were the low bank, marsh and high bank forms of shoreline. The low bank
'
and marsh are the most common shoreline types in the Aurora area. Marsh shorelines are generally
characterized by vertical scarps which drop abruptly into one to eight feet of water. Much of the
Aurora shoreline is in marshes. Further downstream, the low bank shoreline dominates.
• Summary
In summary, all four of the major damaging forces of a hurricane would negatively impact
Aurora. The areas most likely to receive damage are the sites located along the shoreline. The
'
66

i.
i cumulative bse impacts of wind, water, waves, and subsequent erosion will cause the most destruction.
P q
The waste water treatment plant is located in a high risk zone. Relocation of this facility could be a
ipriority for the Town of Aurora.
3. Policies To Mitigate Storm Damage
ia. The Town will encourage the building of structures that will stand against the high
winds, flooding and other damaging effects of severe storms.
ib. The Town will discourage high density development and large structures in the most
hazardous areas.
iC. The Town will seek an educational program warning its citizens of the dangers of
severe storms and evacuation procedures in the event of a severe storm.
i4. Post -Disaster Recovery
A post -disaster recovery plan allows the Town to deal with the aftermath of a storm in an
iorganized
and efficient manner. The plan provides for the mechanisms, procedures, and policies that
iA
will enable the Town to learn from its storm experience and to rebuild in a practical way.
has five to Before the Storm: Avoiding
recovery plan typically purposes, according
Harm's Way (McElyea, Brower, and Godschalk, 1982). It usually outlines procedures and
irequirements
before damages occur, establishes procedures for putting storm mitigation measures
into effect after the disaster, analyzes information about the location and nature of hurricane
idamages,
assesses the community's vulnerability, and guides reconstruction to minimize the
vulnerability.
iIn
1982, Beaufort County adopted The Beaufort County Disaster Relief and Assistance Plan,
a post -disaster recovery and reconstruction plan. As a municipality in Beaufort County, Aurora is
icovered
by this plan. The disaster relief plan, in concert with Before the Storm in Beaufort County:
Avoiding Harm's W Harm's WM provides Beaufort County with the tools necessary to serve all of
iits
communities during the recovery phase of a hurricane. Copies of these plans area available at the
Beaufort County Emergency Management Office in Washington, North Carolina.
iIt
is important that officials clearly understand the joint Federal/State/local procedures for
providing assistance to rebuild after a storm, so that local damage assessment and reconstruction
iefforts are carried out in an efficient manner, that qualifies the community for the different types of
assistance that are available. The requirements are generally delineated in the Disaster Relief Act of
1974 (P.L. 93-288) which authorizes a wide range of financial and direct assistance to local
communities and individuals.
1.
i67

During reconstruction after a disaster, two phases of action are usually undertaken;
immediate post -disaster clean-up, and clean-up and' repair over a longer period. Although these
guidelines are directed for the County level, the Town of Aurora may take additional steps to
complement this work. The following section discusses guidelines set forth for reconstruction in the
' County plan.
5. Immediate Clean -Up
' The Disaster Relief and Assistance Plan, includes a program for immediate clean-up and
debris removal from roads, beaches, and other areas where public health and safety may be
' jeopardized. The responsibility for completing these duties will be a combined effort by several
agencies from the public an private sectors. The Department of Transportation will be .responsible
' for clearing debris from roads and the Forest Service will remove fallen trees from the area, if
necessary. In addition, the County Emergency Management Office will provide names of volunteers
to call upon for assistance in the immediate clean-up efforts.
While clean-up efforts are taking place, a damage assessment team will be sent out to
'
evaluate the extent of the damage in the area. Damage assessment is defined as a rapid means of
determining a realistic estimate of the amount of damage caused by a natural or manmade disaster.
'
For a storm disaster, it is expressed in terms of: 1) the number of structures damaged, 2) magnitude
of damage by type of structure, 3) estimated total dollar loss, and 4) estimated total dollar loss
'
covered by insurance.
After a major storm event, members of the Damage Assessment Team should conduct two.
types of surveys: one which roughly estimates the extent and type of damage, and a more detailed
second phase assessment after the initial damage reports are filed. The initial damage assessment
'
should include an estimate of the extent of damage incurred by each structure and identify the cause
such as wind, flooding, or wave action of the damage of each structure. Rapid and general, initial
damage assessment reports are to be submitted by radio within one hour. Within six hours, private
property summaries and more detailed reports should be nearly complete. The format for damage
'
assessments will be conducted in accordance with Annex F of the Disaster Relief and Assistance
Plan.
' Under certain circumstances, interim development moratoria can be used to give a local
government the time to assess damages, make sound decisions, and to learn from storm experiences.
' Beaufort County can impose a development moratorium if it gets disaster declaration from the
appropriate Federal authorities. This disaster declaration must stipulate the type and extent of
t
1-
68

' reconstruction that will be aid for b the Federal Insurance Agency. The length of the moratorium
P Ygt
t will depend on the extent of the damage. A decision will be made at that time.
Damage assessment operations are oriented to take place during the emergency period.
' After the emergency operations to restore public health and safety and the initial damage
assessments are completed, the guidelines suggest that a recovery task force be appointed to guide
restoration and reconstruction activities during a post -emergency phase, which could last from weeks
' to possibly more than a year. The County has formed a group with members from all areas of the
County to serve as a task force for recovery.
tThe responsibilities of this task force are to review the nature of damages in the community,
establish an overall restoration schedule, identify and evaluate alternative approaches for repair and
' reconstruction, and make recommendations for community recovery. The task force will work with
State and Fede4al representatives on the Interagency Regional Hazard Mitigation Team and also the
Section 406 Hazard Mitigation Survey and Planning Teams. Members of the recovery -task force
will include:
' • Beaufort County Commissioners
• County Engineer and Building Inspector
'
• County Manager
• City Managers and Engineers from each municipality
'
• County Emergency Management Coordinator
• County Health Department.
tThe
Mayor of Aurora will be called upon to serve on this task force. The Public Works
Director will also serve. Although this task force will review damages, the authority to approve or
'
deny permits will remain the responsibility of the appropriate authorities.
6. Long Term Recovery
'
The procedures listed above, deal directly with policies for clean-up immediately after a
storm or disaster. In conjunction with the policies stated above on storm hazard mitigation,
'
consideration should be given to long-term recovery. Formulation of more stringent building
standards should be considered to prevent the destruction form recurring.
'
In the aftermath of a disaster, reconstruction efforts will be rampant. A plan for the long-
term recovery is essential. In order to handle the rush, a priority system has been designed to stage
'
and permit repairs. Staging and permitting repairs and construction for the County are as follows:
69
�

L
I�
FIRST PRIORITY: Replacement of essential services such as power, water, telephone,
and streets and bridges;
SECOND PRIORITY: Minor repairs;
THIRD PRIORITY: Major repairs;
FOURTH PRIORITY: New development.
In efforts to streamline the permitting process for the large number of applications for
building permits, a policy has been established by the County to repair and rebuild essential service
facilities first. Second priority is to repair other public facilities as necessary for shelter. A triage
(worst damage) approach will be instituted for staging the reconstruction efforts. Properties with
little damage would be permitted immediately if they were in compliance with permit regulations
before the storm.
The schedule for permitting other properties is as follows:
• Moderate damage, meeting permit regulations;
• Moderate damage, requiring permit decisions;
• Extensive damage, requiring permits.
This system was established to avoid interference with the reconstruction of public utilities
and facilities. The top priority in post -disaster reconstruction is the replacement of services.
The development standards for reconstruction will be in accordance with the Storm Hazard
Mitigation policies set forth by the Town. As a minimum, the State Building Code will be enforced
as well as building restriction imposed by the Federal Flood Insurance Program. The County
commissioners will be the legislative body to enforce these policies.
Consideration of the possible relocation of public facilities to safer locations was not
undertaken by the County. Since the Aurora wastewater treatment plant is located in the hazard area,
this should be a priority for the decision -makers.
7. Policies Related To Post -Disaster Recovery
a. The Town will support and enforce The Beaufort County Disaster Relief and
Assistance Plan.
b. The Town will appoint a Recovery Task Force to work cooperatively with the
County during a disaster. This Recovery Task Force will include the Mayor, Town
Public Works Director, Rescue and Fire Squad Volunteers, and the Police
Department.
C. The Town will encourage the relocation of structures out of the hazardous areas.
0
70

d. The Town will encourage the rebuilding of structures in hazardous areas only if
'
reconstruction includes measures to protect against recurring damage.
e. The Town will consider relocating their public utility facilities to a safer location if
'
reconstruction is required.
f. The Town will impose a moratoria on general reconstruction after a disaster.
1
Reconstruction will follow the schedule listed in paragraph 4 above.
g. The Town has signed an Emergency Mutual Aid Agreement, and will participate as
a member of the NC Disaster Recovery Task Force via the same.
'
8. Evacuation Plan
'
According to Before the Storm in Beaufort County, the. current evacuation routes in the
for location. This
Aurora area are sufficient. Highway 33 is the principal route evacuation to a safer
highway serves all of the Aurora area plus those persons living near the Pamlico County line.
'
The planning area is broken into two evacuation. zones: Zones VI and VII. Since such a
small portion of the planning area is located in Zone VI, this discussion will be limited to Zone VII.
'
The Zone VII evacuation route is Highway 33 North from the Pamlico County line to Highway 17
near Chocowinity. There are no surge inundation points along this route. Highway 33 has adequate
'
capacity, but safe evacuation will depend on the amount of warning time provided and the
willingness of the inhabitants to evacuate. Based on the model in the Beaufort County Disaster
'
Relief and Evacuation Plan, it would take less than seven hours to evacuate the estimated 1,000
people in Aurora and its vicinity. The 1,200 PCS Phosphate employees, located outside of Aurora,
'
could also be safely accommodated by this route. This time figure is well within the twelve-hour
warning time period provided by the National Weather Service. Highway 33 can accommodate
'
approximately 455 vehicles per hour at 35 miles per hour. During a twelve-hour period, 5,460
vehicles could be relocated. This value is far above the calculated volume of traffic estimated in the
'
model.
Aurora area evacuees can find shelter at Aurora High School. The High School is located at
'
a higher elevation. A full description of the capacity and adequacy of this shelter is provided in the
Beaufort County Disaster Relief and Evacuation Plan.
9. Policies Related To The Evacuation Plan
a. The Town will seek to educate citizens about evacuation procedures and their
'
responsibilities in any severe storm situation.
' 71

10. Reports.
' The Town of Aurora is responsible for reporting all of its activities concerning storm hazard
mitigation and hurricane preparedness with the following agencies:
' NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
State Office: Division of Coastal Management
' Department of Environment and Natural Resources
P.O. Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
' [phone]
'
Field Office: Division of Coastal Management
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
943 Washington Square Mall
Washington, North Carolina 27889
[phone]
' NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT'
State Office: Division of Emergency Management
' Department of Crime Control and Public Safety
116 West Jones Street
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
' [phone]
Regional Office: Area Emergency Management Coordinator
' NC Division of Emergency Management
P. O. Box 424
Winton, North Carolina 27986
' [phone].
(National Flood Insurance Program Information)
' Division of Emergency Management
Department of Crime Control and Public Safety
116 West Jones Street
' Raleigh, NC 27611
[phone]
1 72

FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY
National Office: Federal Emergency Management Agency
500 C Street, SW
Washington, DC 20472
Public Information: [phone]
Publications: [phone]
Regional Office: Federal Emergency Management Agency
Region IV
1375 Peachtree Street, NE
Atlanta, Georgia 30309
Public Information: [phone]
Disaster Assistance Program: [phone]
Flood Insurance Program: [phone]
73

V. LAND CLASSIFICATION

' V. LAND CLASSIFICATION
The completion of the Inventory and Analysis section and the Policy Statement section allows
' for development of the land classification plan. The use of a land classification system in conjunction
with a land classification map provides local officials the opportunity to designate areas for future
' growth. The classification provides the opportunity to anticipate how planned land use interacts with
environmentally sensitive areas. The focus of the land classification plan is to evaluate the intensity of
' land utilization and the level of services required to support that intensity.
The CAMA guidelines include seven land classifications for use on the land classification map:
' Developed, Urban Transition, Limited Transition, Community, Rural, Rural with Services, and
Conservation. The definitions for each reflect the suggested level of development. Five of the ' land
' classifications are used in the Aurora planning area (Map 5). Described below will be the description of
each land classification, how the policies relate to each class, the type of land use in each class, and the
' location of each class.
A.. DEVELOPED.
' The "Developed" land classification is intended for continued intensive development and
redevelopment of urban areas. It includes areas already developed as urban or those areas with a
' density of approximately 1,920 dwellings per square mile. In Aurora's case, the density is not present
but is obtainable if buildable lots were used.
' In the planning area, most of the land within the Aurora Town limits is classified as Developed.
Exceptions include the forested wetland area north of the downtown area and the wetlands along South
' Creek. Approximately 97 percent of the persons living within this boundary are served by sewer
service. All residents are provided water service.
' B. URBAN TRANSITION
"Urban Transition" land is categorized as the lands providing for intensive urban development
' within the ensuing ten years. These areas will be scheduled for provision of water and sewer in the
future. They will also serve as the overflow sites for development when additional lands are needed to
taccommodate growth. They will eventually become a part of the urban area.
The Urban Transition classification includes the areas located adjacent to the transportation
troutes that run through Aurora. An additional concentration of this class exists in the western section of
Town near the High School. This is the site of the new crab processing plant, as well as other
74

commercial enterprises. Since 1981, much of the development located along Highway 33 West has
' been commercial. Trends over the past five years have shown most of . the Town's residential
development to occur in the area south of Highway 33 near the Town limits in an existing residential
' area. The land use analysis showed that although the soils are generally unsuitable for septic tanks,
much of this area is not within the hurricane hazard zone.
' The relationship between the Developed and Urban Transition classes is important in a
predominantly rural area like eastern Beaufort County. The area within these classes is where detailed
local land use and public investment planning will occur. 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.
tThe local zoning ordinance recognizes this by specifying each particular land use and intensity
of use in both the Developed and Urban Transition land classes. The.Developed areas are zoned for
commercial, industrial, and residential uses and are currently served by the Town's facilities. The
Urban Transition areas are recognized on the zoning map as having potential for future growth. The
' zoning ordinance shows some of these areas as rural; but areas along traffic arteries are zoned for
commercial and residential uses. The zoning ordinance recognizes that future development will be
' located in these areas.
' C. COMMUNM The Community" classification is usually characterized by a small cluster of mixed land uses
' in a rural area which do not require municipal services. It usually serves to meet the housing, light
shopping, employment, and public services needs of a rural area. The Community classification
' typifies crossroads areas along primary and secondary roads.
In the Aurora planning area, only the Royal/St. Peter's Church area is classified as Community.
' The Royal community includes a small cluster of homes, a church, and a country store. It is not
anticipated that Aurora's municipal services will be extended to this community. Wells and septic tanks
currently serve the basic needs of this community, and there is a limited need to provide additional
' services to Royal.
' D. RURAL
The "Rural" classification is designed for agriculture, forestry, mineral extraction, and other
low intensity uses. Urban services are not required because of the great dispersion of development in
these areas. These are lands identified as appropriate locations for resource management and related
' 75

uses; agricultural, mineral, or forest lands; and areas with enough limitations to make developmpnt
hazardous or economically infeasible.
The majority of the land within the planning area falls within this classification and is under
agricultural production. In addition, the Rural classification is particularly important for the extension
of phosphate mining operations. It should be emphasized that development should not be precluded
from the agricultural lands located in this classification; this designation implies that urban services are
not planned to accommodate future development.
E. CONSERVATION
The "Conservation" class provides for the effective long-term management of significant,
limited or irreplaceable resources. This includes, as a minimum, all of the statutorily defined AECs
such as the estuarine waters, the public trust waters, the estuarine shoreline and coastal wetlands. .
The Conservation class does not imply "non-use." It is intended to provide for careful and
cautious management of the uses allowed. Preservation, on the other hand, implies total restriction of
all uses in an effort to keep the natural environment intact. Through conscientious management, the
Conservation class requires all uses to be as inoffensive as possible. The intention of the Conservation
class is to strike a balance between careful long-term management of sensitive natural and cultural
resources and the freedom of landowners to utilize their property to its best use.
In order to protect its natural integrity, various types of land uses should be prohibited from the
Conservation classification. The Town has decided that the NCAC permitted uses for
statutorily -defined. AECs are consistent with the Town's long-term goal of resource protection. The
Town does not feel the need to add specific uses to this already satisfactory list of restrictive uses. All
uses permitted by the State will be considered consistent with the Town's objectives.
F. RELATIONSHIP TO POLICIES
Within the Town of Aurora there are only two land classifications - Developed and
Conservation. The extraterritorial jurisdiction includes all five classifications discussed in Section IV
and shown on Map 5.
1. Developed Class
The majority of land within the Town Limits of Aurora is classified as developed. This
includes both commercial and residential areas that currently can be characterized as being intensely
developed according to small town standards. Municipal services exist in Aurora and development is
controlled by a local zoning ordinance.
M

tThe policies of the Town take into account the slow growth and minimal development
pressured that now exist. The Town's policies also reflect their desire to see growth managed so as to
' protect natural resources as well as economic and community development. While growth has been
minimal, both policies and public infrastructure are in place to handle a rapid rate of growth.
Aurora would welcome more growth, so long as it is compatible with their policies, is practical
and feasible, and will not harm the environment.
'
2. Conservation Class
All land adjacent to South Creek and Bailey Creek is classified as Conservation. This area
development in
includes AEC lands, waters and wetlands and is deserving of the strictest regulations
'
order to protect the natural environment. The Town of Aurora has developed policies that are
federal the
consistent with most state and regulations protecting such areas, and supports enforcement
'
of permitting procedures and restrictions.
Rural Class
3.
Outside the Town limits, but within the extraterritorial jurisdiction, the majority of land is
'
designated as rural. These areas are located all around Aurora; and consist of agricultural, forest and
low intensity uses. Special use relates to the extension of phosphate mining operations. Accordingly,
'
policies have been made that will permit development consistent with state and federal regulations.
Aurora wishes to encourage growth while protecting prime rural lands.
'
4. Urban Transition Class
A small area of urban transition land is located due west of the Town limits and south of
Aurora along SR 1939 and SR 1925. The area along NC 33 West will probably develop commercially,
with the other urban transition areas experiencing residential growth for the most part. Industrial
'
growth could take place in several locations within this area. The Aurora zoning ordinance will control
this development.
'
Policies support Aurora's desire to encourage controlled growth that will reinforce the local
economy.
'
5. Community Class
The smallest amount of land in any classification around Aurora is the community class. Only
'
one small area is so designated. In the extreme southeast portion of the ETJ is the community of
Royal/St. Peter's Church.
'
Aurora's policies do not specifically deal with this area. Indirectly, policies imply the Town is
not planning to extend utility services to such crossroads communities unless it is cost effective.
'
- 77

VI. INTERGOVERNMENTAL
COORDINATION

VI. INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION
tThe land use plan is a tool for coordinating numerous policies, standards, regulations, and other
governmental activities. The plan provides the framework for budgeting, planning, and the provision
' and expansion of community facilities such as water, sewer, school, and road systems. It is the
principal policy guide for governmental decisions and activities which affect land use in the Aurora
area. The implementation of policies in the land use plan requires coordination between the local
government and the State and Federal governments. A copy of this plan will be given to Beaufort
County officials upon certification by the Coastal Resources Commission. - During its developmental
,period, the plan was continuously evaluated for its consistencies between State and Federal regulation.
' Enforcement of the policies and goals requires a consistency with the higher levels of government. The.
formation of a policy without means of enforcement defeats the intention of the land use plan update.
' Aurora has worked to ensure compatibility between the Beaufort County and Aurora Land Use
Plans. There appeared to be no inconsistencies between the policies in each plan. A good working
' relationship exists between the Town of Aurora and Beaufort County. '
. The Town of Aurora intends to foster intergovernmental coordination by working with State
' and Federal agencies to implement policies to improve water quality, as well as carry out goals for the
agriculture and commercial fishing industries. In addition, Aurora will work with the North Carolina
Department of Cultural Resources in protecting and enhancing its heritage. Coordination between the
Division of Coastal Management and US Army Corps of Engineers will be. maintained in .the permitting
process for development in areas classified as wetlands. All additional efforts will b made to promote
cooperation between the State, Federal, County, and Aurora governments:
Listed on the following pages are Federal and State agencies with the licenses and permits for
which they are responsible:
�, 79

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
FEDERAL DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS
AGENCY LICENSES AND PEFMTS
Army Corps of Engineers - Permits required under Sections 9 and 10 of the Rivers and Harbor Act
(Department of Defense) of 1899; permits to construct in navigable waters.
- Permits required under Section 103 of the Marine Protection, Research
and Sanctuaries Act of 1972.'
- Permits required under Section 404 of the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act of 1972; permits to undertake dredging and/or filling
activities
Coast Guard (Department of
Transportation)
Geological Survey Bureau of Land
Management (Department of
Interior)
Nuclear Regulatory
(Department of Energy)
- Permits for bridges, causeways, pipelines over navigable waters
required under the General Bridge Act of 1946 and the Rivers and
Harbors Act of 1899.
- Permits required for off -shore drilling. .
- Approvals of OCS pipeline corridor rights -of -way.
- Licenses for siting, construction and operation of nuclear power plants;
required under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 and Title II of the
Energy Reorganization Act of 1974.
Federal Energy Commission - Permits for construction, operation and maintenance of interstate
(Department of Energy) pipeline facilities required under the Natural Gas Act of 1938.
- Orders of Interconnection of electric transmission facilities under
Section 202(b) of the Federal Power Act.
- Permission required for abandonment of natural gas pipeline and
associated facilities under Section 7C(b) of the Natural Gas Act of 1938.
80

STATE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS
AGENCY LICENSES AND PERNIITS
Department of Environment, Health - Permits to discharge to surface waters or operate or oil discharge
and Community Development permits; NPDES Permits (G.S. 143-215).
Division of Environmental
Management
Division of Coastal Management
Division of Land Resources
Department of Administration
Department of Human Resources
- Permits for septic tanks that serve industrial process water flow or are
community owned. Such systems owned by the State or Federal
Government are under the jurisdiction of the Health Department,
(G.S. 143-215.108).
- Permits for air pollution abatement facilities and sources (G.S. 143-
215.108).
- Permits for construction of complex sources; e.g., parking lots,
subdivisions, stadiums, etc. (G.S. 143-215.109).
- Permits for construction of a well over 100,000 gpd (G.S.87-88).
- Permits to dredge and/or fill in estuarine waters tidelands, etc.(G.S.113-
229).
- Permits to undertake development in Areas of Environmental Concern
(G.S. 113A-118).
NOTE: Minor development permits are issued by local government.
- Permits to alter or construct a dam (G.S. 143-215.66).
- Permits to mine (G.S.74-51).
- Permits to drill an exploratory oil or gas well (G.S. 113-39 1).
- Permits to conduct geographic exploration (G.S. 113-391).
- Sedimentation erosion control plans for any land -disturbing activity of
over one contiguous acre (G.S. 113A-54).
- Permits to construct an oil refinery.
- Easements to fill where lands are proposed to be raised above the
normal high water mark of navigable waters by filling (G.S.146.6(c)).
- Approval to operate a solid waste disposal site or facility (G.S.130).
- Approval for construction of any public water facility that furnishes
water to ten or more residences (G.S. 130-160.1).
- Permits for septic tank systems of 3,000 gpd or less capacity (G.S. 130-
160).
81

� � � � � � � � � r � � � � � �r �r � �

VII. SUMMARY
The completion of the Aurora Land Use Plan update does not end the planning process for the
Town. The plan is based on data and regulations in effect at the time of its adoption. Changes in
regulations may necessitate changes in the plan. In order to have an effective plan and implement its
policies, a considerable amount of work will be required. Further, active citizen participation will help
ensure successful implementation.
The continued use of this land use plan will be part of the planning process. By updating
ordinances and regulations the Town will achieve the goals of the plan. Leadership by the Town Board
will be needed to provide growth management. The update five years from now will hopefully analyze
a land use plan that has been well used.. .
83

J
W
U
Z
W
a
/ y ..

r
R
k
00

AURORA LAND USE PLAN UPDATE
' PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN
1997
In accordance with subchapter 7B of the North Carolina Administrative Code,
Land Use Planning Guidelines, the planning process for the Aurora Land Use Plan Update
is to be conducted in the public arena in order to involve, inform and educate a maximum
cross-section of the population of the Town of Aurora. The following structured plan is
'
intended to continuously reach out and invite diversified segments of this community to
participate in the update process.
Steps to accomplish maximum citizen involvement
1. The Town of Aurora's Planning Commission, consisting of five members, has been
designated as the appointed citizen advisory committee that. will work on the
'
Aurora Land Use Plan Update. - This commission is familiar ,with the land use
process (and has been informed of newly adopted CAMA' land use planning
guidelines).
'
Regularly scheduled monthly night meetings of the Planning Commission are open
to the public and will be published in advance in the Pamlico News and the
'
Washington Daily News.
'
2. Members of the media will be invited to attend and participate in all work sessions
and regularly scheduled committee meetings held concerning the Land Use Plan
Update.
'
3. Regular press releases of meetings with summaries of the project, its progress, and
place and time of meetings will be sent to the media as soon after each meeting as
'
possible.
4. A citizen opinion survey will be administered, requesting input on a variety of land
use and resource issues. The results of the survey will be reported in the plan and
will be considered when developing updated poli
cy statements.
This public participation plan is adopted by the Aurora Planning Commission on March
1997. .
Chairman

� � � � � � � � � ■■� � � � � � � r � ��

Town of
-�-�� -Aurora
03020104060020
I Y�fr Hydrological Unit car011na
North
� ��.v "i� y �' .r .adz-''�z ' ■ ■
ljl,il►, t�t �j� _ Existin
Land Use
1997
-
-y SwF a 0 Undeveloped
I 'I I ,,,;� �y �wr•, xT � 1x r
� I II IIIII !ill I - � �•ea+r.. ,� Xr
C II Illj ( � . ,rlllllltrll (III ' � � f � e � 7�
o ® commercial
4 r ^+�^i r
l i I'li. yl I I I r. ex
( ® Industrial
!Illllijliil;ll;j
l x� ® Public and Institutional
-.IIrII III�I 11 -brill' I' i;
r
Recreational
l�jllil i!ill;il lilt i it iilli ill Illjll 1
Illiihi I LI.! 1' I III'; Town Limits Residential
I►,L,II I,,iIII ..I I �,,��I ,: ....
III I II II'Ih I I 1' i 11,. �
i1i,41�lliljllilll i ji I i l lull; (illilll !� II'I ;
500 0 500 1000 Feet
t 0 0104060 10
y rological nit
1 dd I I Ihll I I II II j i - The prepare G.n of this map was financed in part
r
II I I ! ill i l II li, through a gra" brcnded by the North Carolina Coastalr
I (. 1 Ill rll hll� Ill,h ManagementProgram. through funds provded by the
'r rr i� �I 1 1 I. , u.l i�lli� i;• - - Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972• as amended.
-
which is admm•stered by the office of Ocean and
Coastal Resource Management National Oceanic
and Atmosph•r� Administration -

~"'_
hiehc7rSt "' .�` South Creek
1 a
1
t ek •
1 x
'03020104060020
1 'Hydrological Unit'- " 4 z
w
it
i
t j t
1 � � L C
V • — � i � yaYy ,ma.y. ,t
1 HWY eat
a ice:
woo
z
a t
1 N
1 " t 03020104060010
t Hydrological Unit ,
' L
L Swa Creek
°pm`eld
Town of
I�
Aurora
North Carolina
t
f
Existin
g
Land Use
1997
0 Undeveloped
Commercial
® Industrial
Public and Institutional
Recreational
Residential
-,ETJ Boundar
y
-Town Limits.
900 0 900 1800 Feet
Dated: February 8, 1998
V V V The Preparation d map was financed in part
through a gent pwideide 0 by the North Carolina Coastal
Management Propam• Through funds provided by the
Coastal Zone lvl ogement AR of 1972. as amended•
which is ad —seed office
by the of Ocean and
Coastal Resou"Management. National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Admnrshauon

ZIMMER= Mai jog
/.lelvi■■■ll■i■e■■► .■eN■e■■■■■■■b.�.
31/■■■►\t►!ii■■\ii/i/iii■ram%■/■ii■■■■■■i■■■//■■■►�-�
i!'1■■■■l'■►�>ti■11■■i■ii■R�■■■■/ii■■■■■■■■■■r■■■ii■■C`
_ Illi■■■1■11■■■►'■e!'1■//Iti■/■/i■iii■■■■i■/■■�/■■■i�■tl■■■\
■■[a■ill■■■/��o/■IOWL
i■■■ii■■■■■■■■■i■■■■/ \■■\�
tl■■LSili■ii�/■�■■■i/ii■■■ ■■/■■i■/■■■il
,Nor /■►\.
►�■i■■ell■er�l.11■r.e•�■i>•a■■iiii■■e■■r::=�e■r •■a.019
/
;`� i■i��i■il4r.■i9■■■u■■ill■u■■i■■ist!■■■eir �■\�.
�i■■■nr■■■■■■■/iis■s►a■■■/e�e■�ee■■■r \ .■■■amomr
\tlil■■e■i■■ie■l'■■■■ieii■■iiiil � ..
Ill■/■t■■■■/■■i\�ii■i■i■■■■\■■■ ` •■■NONEIMME
a�i.`•!•�`a;���. ♦ • .♦ '■/�■■■■■■■■■■/■■/ate!\■/■■■e■e► \` �• �-
��.iiieiniiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii►i✓ioiiiiii�, ii , i •
/■11■■■' ` IN■/■1■■i■r■■■■■iI.lei ■a..e.:I■■■1
`■■■■tl==■■■■■►•ram■/■■►�■■■■■■■l■■■--
.Z�.u- � ��■■■■iiG r■�■■,tterai►�■a■■■■■■■r�e■■■■■■■■■■■111■■■■
�r.■r- t -� 'a■r■■�■■nl■■lt■■■�aae■r■■■■■rr■■■■■■■■■■■■�r■■■■■r
.ire :� ti` •..■..��.--it■■■■►■rt■■■■w�=��■■■■■■■■■e■� e■■■■r
�1tl��r■■llll■■G/ ��; �, �'� ®I.111■■Ilil■■■■■■■1i■■■■■■\�■■■■■■!;%■■r' mm�����
IlIts
\�\ \����\ ■■ ■�'■■Ile■■/ ■/■It■
■■
■
■
0

a■fi.s■.a :.. 1/af. .. ■1
......:,i1,1 laa aIsre !is.
ll/■af.
• 1uu/rua .Ionul uuu■auon■e.
.stoa.lon.1u1.■aononW:.UH:/• I:■1
u1a
■■f..■s 1.s1
• /
.tll.laaaMaa. ..iaslt. ■■a■a•
Ia■ 1ae/fa 1■11 Gall llaaaa■/` .Mf .
....■r..I..;arl'.s/.t'.■M■...aafnallll)sta,a' .ew�IaM/fifMIaH.aHfL: u■fM.MM•o
■.a
MMwonItuaro.aa
au.■
•u7uu-Ova. . aa1■.
a.a\.NUonaaa'
•i.
Aurora
,o■!1i ■.
.■t..e.a..,
faraIS•.:aM•■ amonaffedwo
•►
.rroe.luu
� ■■f.fafi■on.■aeMaonr.a■■f/t/a1au.aaataal1 l. M■,iM■a.■..■aaaaaa.. •■.
\ 1/.
_
North Carolinw-
MUN ■f
UMUMMMUMM:
"IN M.W.
• • • • :uaau.-�.u■._wuu.HalHt. duo. •�
.u:ue.c.ue■uuon.: uassronuw Mono. .•
oEmNm
u'.s
IMEMO
/ •H■gri Hat, U,aaHMU.��M/■,i •' .UH,■.. 1I
■v.H■on■.asonaauo.. von.ona.
MM
uuuuonon■onf.uuu. •uonuu
Land
u1 ■vuonuuuuauouo. v■.■■.e01
/ a.maauonuuu.■uueuu■ ■on. •onwan Classificatio,
�V,
kw�-70 toon "goose so
i .a. w.1•.aaraar�.�.�.�♦�0���•� �:::::: is:\ •' �:::■IaM■:aa.• 11
a■s.on,■ue .:.a.• -, ♦ .. 1 /lam �J _ _'- — - �-
1997
non:■■.... �_L ■. .::::a _..auu.■■..
..::,:i- -�� �� ► ��► ��' �' ► ■uu. ■...0 ion a/•�
1/aa./.MOd
'�....� '�♦�.�.����_S+�i'� •1•�—�:.:uaaau ■Ulas_ Ita a,uf�•/
I'�=J�q!►J�����,►.rid• i;!i;!ii'►Zap►J�1...... ... ; ..0 . /
_.■■.... ■../FA
.�.�.�.—._,�5:1•:'/154,34 ♦ •I'1 .1..... ♦ /
donammomm:
IMH a,
Community
W WE mass winim:
conservation
�JJJJJ��►WE W- �JJJ��JJJJJ��•:::::::::1 famonsosums-
NII
Nr
momMeImmomsommumumat
�JJJJJJ� �i ••:::.-. .::::::::: :::::::::::: ...Developed
.- .Maoara,f .LSMMaoaM,aaoo rrla- •.
- • .•�J'L' .uue ■Honaauuuu' ► .one.

si
hkeh�►
a
9
� l —
r
3 1
1,
1
r''
1
! 0302010406002,
1 Hydrological Un
!
!
1
RM
=:
,�,vve
R5rologioal Unit
� South Creek Town of
Aurora
� North Carolina
s
Land Use
Constraints
F
'The upper limits oft public Trust Areas
are not indicated on, ap. For exact
delineation consult the Aper authorities.
1997
UM f
Estuarine Waters I
i
Historic Area
® Public Trust Waters
® Wetlands
Estuarine Shoreline
1200 0 1200 2400 Feet
Dated: February 8, 1998
The preparation of this map was financed in part
through a grant provided hr funds
the fCarolina Coastal
Management Program, Through IunOs 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