Land Use Plan-1980

DCM COPY ` DCM COPY
lease do not remove!!!!!
Division of Coastal Management Cope
BEAUFORT LAND USE PLAN
OCTOBER, 1980
r

TABLE OF CONTENTS
•
•
Page #
INTRODUCTION .. . . . . .. . . .
1
I.
DATA COLLECTION & ANALYSIS . . . . . , •
3
Present Population
3
Economy. . . . . . . . . .
6
Existing Land Use. . . . . • • • • •
8
.Current Plans, Policies and Regulations. . . .
13
Hazard Areas . . . . . . . . .
19
Soils. . . . . . . . .
21
Constraints: Capacity of Community Facilities
28
Estimated Demand . . . . . . . . . . . . .
30
II.
POLICY STATEMENTS. '. ..
32
Resource. Protection.
32
Resource Production and Management . . . .
-30
Economic and Community Development . . . . . . .'
41
Continuing Public.Participation. . . . . . . .
45
•
Attachment B Issues... . . . . . . . . . .
45.
III.
LAND CLASSIFICATION. . . . . • • • •
53-
Beaufort's Land Classification . . . . . .
57
IV.
APPENDIX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
61
Soil Interpretations . . . ... . ..
61
Infiltration/Inflow Analysis..
79

LIST OF MAPS AND TABLES
Title Page #
Minority Areas . . . . . . . 4
Housing Types. . . . . . . . . . 6
Existing Land Use (town limits). . 10
Existing Land Use (extra -territorial area) . . . . 11
Soils. ... . . . . .. . . . . . 26
Population Estimates . . . . . . . . 29
�f Land Classification (town limits). . .. . 59
Land Classification (extra -territorial area) . . . 60
Soil Interpretations Records,. . . . . . . . 61
Wastewater Collection System . . .. . 90

INTRODUCTION
The Town of Beaufort has prepared this update of the original
•. CAMA Land.Development Plan through direction and assistance of the
Town Planning Board. .The plan was prepared in compliance with land
use planning guidelines set forth under the.Coastal Area Management
Act of 1974. The Act established a cooperative program of control
area management between local and state governments.
The purpose of a land use plan for Beaufort is to achieve the
goals of acceptable Coastal Area Management. The goals are:
1) To provide a management system capable of preserving and managing
the natural ecological conditions of the estuarine system, the
t
barrier dune system, and the beaches, so as to safe guard -and
perpetuate their natural productivity and their biological,
"1
..economic and aesthetic values.
2) To insure that the development or preservation of.the land and
water resources of the.coastal area proceeds in a manner consis
tent with the capability of the land and water for development,
use, or preservation based on ecological considerations.
3) To insure the orderly and balanced use and preservation of our.
-coastal resources on behalf of the.people of North Carolina'
and the 'nation.
4) To establish policies, guidelines and standards for the conser-
vation of resources; the economic development.of the coastal area;.
the use of recreational lands and tourist facilities; the wise
development of transportation and circulation patterns; the
preservation and enhancement of historical, cultural and scientific
aspects of the region, and the protection of common law and public
rights in the land and waters of the coastal area.
1

This land use plan as stated earlier is an.update of the
plan completed in 1976. The plan contains four basic sections, (1)
data collection and analysis, (2) existing land use, (3) policy
discussion and.(4) a land classification map. Basic data was updated
a
where relevant and possible. Primary emphasis in the update was.placed
on defining the land use policy objectives of the town.
46,

0202 Data Collection and Analysis
(a) Establishment;of-Information Base
Since 1980 census figures were not available as of this writing,
population estimates and projections were taken from the N.C. Department
of Administration and the revised edition of the Carteret County Comp:.ex
201 Facilities Plan (December 1979) which were compiled from N.C. DEM-
DNRCD figures -completed in 1978.
Growth and demand estimates were based on a number of factors such
as population estimates,.201 planning projections, building permits issued,
annexation patterns/policy and economic conditions.
(b) Present Conditions
(1) :Present Population
A review of the Coastal Area Management Plan completed in 1976
summarizes population trends and conditions up to that time primarily
utilizing 1970 Census information. (pages-6-8 of initial plan)
As stated earlier 1980 census figures are not available. As
a result estimates have produced the following trends.
From 1970 to 1978 Beaufort's population has increased from
3,368 to 3,710 or an increase 10.2-percent.
The 201 Facilities plan estimates the 1980 population of
Beaufort at 3,950 or an increase of 17.3 percent above the 1970
census figure.
Both estimates indicate a continued reversal of declining
population which was evident from 1940 through 1960
The 1970 census indicated that Beaufort has a significant
black population which comprises 30 percent of the total population
The black population is generally located in the geographical area
bounded by Cedar Street on the South, Mulberry Street on the north,
Live Oak Street on the east and Turner Street in the west with some
exceptions. 3

Q?� Bea.. fcib''eere`+ead City .`
hiltips i 4 _ o.
.\ower
�` 7
Stack er a ` + r % •~
am
ORock is f +� 1 J10•f -j ork . .
67.
�! `,•. �� Y�ti� tint .�:.•�• -. ..j
US MMrint
Biological Sta x BM r �: •��,•' .. `
i.+ . •. s• �+ � �t7 ' ..tier.: ; •.�. a ••
lol
s :♦ _ c
A D t o ��. Island t.'BEALFORT�•` `•t'''
�� air ?ar4 •• -
r6werOlght y' '�.. .' .« •.'�' ,.ram Oa
t_ % t�10 �, •, •; � .p = !•� ....• x - `'o T aht
Town .titarah
Minority Area
Added 12/79
Scale: 111 = 20001
NM. F. FREEMAN: ASSOCIATES._'
4 AKN(IE(iS• ENWNEENS ?tANNENS-SURYEYOIS i
'Source: Carteret County Community Action Office. miss P6101. Move C1MMLIU �` '
i

Seasonal Population
As stated in the original CAMA land use plan. Beaufort`s historical,
scenic and climatic assets -attract visitors. -throughout the nation.- It.is
reasonable to assume greater numbers of tourists will come to Beaufort.with
" the completion of the waterfront -development area,.including additional
restaurants, gift shops and increased over night boat traffic. ,
However, the deficiency of motel and rental homes accomodations,will .
still mean the majority of people will only spend the day and depart in the
evening.
The need for additional parking is probably the only major demand that
may be placed on town facilities.
Housing Stock
In 1975 there were 1,140 single family units in Beaufort. From 1976
1979 sixty-two additional single family homes were constructed and eight were
demolished for a net gain for fifty-four homes.
Multi -family units in 1975 totaled thirty and twenty-three additional
buildings were added in the four year period for a current total of fifty=
three.
Mobile homes previously totaled eighty in number.with thirty more
being added for a total of one hundred ten.
According to building permit records there were no additional motel
units or housing authority units added during this period..

Types of Dwellings In Town of Beaufort
Number Percentage'
Type 1975 1976 1979 1975 thru 1979*
Single Family 1,140 54 1,194 86.4 83.7
Multi -Family 30 23. - 53 2.3 .3.7
Mobile Homes 80 30 •--. 110 6.1 7.7
Motel Units 14 0 - 14 1.1 1.0
Housing Authority 55 0 - 55 4.1 .. 3.9
Totals 1,319 107 1,426 ,100.0 100.0
NOTE: 1978 & 1979 totals include construction added in one -mile area.
* (% includes 1976 thru 1979 construction).
Economy
The economy of Beaufort still orients around fishing,boating, and water -
related activities.
There are three large plants within Beaufort's jurisdiction that employ
substantial numbers of people. They are follows: Atlantic Veneer,
Beaufort Fisheries and Standard Products.
Additionally a substantial' number of Beaufort's labor force is still
employed by Cherry Point Marine Air Station. Prospects for future stability
of this installation appear to be good.
There are several other large employers outsid eof Beaufort's jurisdic-
tion that employ a number of Beaufort's residents. They are as follows:
N.C. State Port Aurhority, Carteret Manufacturing, Blue Bell, Inc., Owens -
Coming Fiberglass Corp., and Hankison Corp.
Farming is also a significant factor affecting Beaufort's economy.
Much of the agricultural land is located in Beaufort township but the farmer's-
income.is.often spent in Beaufort. Additionally much of Beaufort's unskilled.
labor.is employed on these farms.
6
R
R

(2) Existing Land Use
As in 1975 Beaufort has continued to develop and expand -both to
the north and east dub to the location of natural water:barriers,of
Taylor's Creek. Beaufort Channel and Town Creek.
The town limits of Beaufort contained 1535 acres in 1975. By June
of 1980 the size had increased to 1652 acres for a gain of 117 acres
which was accomplished through several annexations.. However, the
largest increase in Beaufort's planning area has come about through
adoption of the town's one -mile extraterritorial jurisdiction ordinance.
This has approximately doubled the size of the town's planning jurisdic
tion from 1652 acres to 3304 acres.
The predominant land use is still residential. An examination
s
of building permits from 1976 through 1979 indicates 194 new units
were constructed in.Beaufort and its extraterritorial jurisdiction
:(extraterritorial jurisdiction included for 1978 'and 1979 only).
Additionally 30 mobile homes were located in the Beaufort Planning area
during the same time frame.
Commercial -and other non-residential building permits numbered
30 for the same corresponding time. Since 1975 commercial development
has increased in two main areas of town. The downtown waterfront section
has continued to grow and the highway 70 corridor from its intersection
with highway 101 to the northern edge of the town limits. The latter
section includes the development of a sizable shopping center complex.
Also some commercial continues to be located along Cedar Street (US 70),
}
West Beaufort Road, Lennoxville Road and Live Oak Street
8

Industrial land use within the town limits of Beaufort is still
very small comprising only about ten acres. However within the one
mile extraterritorial jurisdiction limits are two large fish processing
plants, Beaufort Fisheries and Standard Products and Atlantic Veneer
Corporation, all of which are located off Lennoxville Road east of the
town limits.
Transportation, communication, and utilities still comprise a
sizable amount of acreage inside Beaufort. This amount was 145 acres
in 1976 and is now slightly higher due to annexations. The one -mile
extraterritorial jurisdiction area would of course boost this figure
even higher.
Government and institutional is still estimated to cover around
40 acres as was the total in 1976.
Total undeveloped land in Beaufort itself has decreased slightly .
due to additional construction. However the extraterritorial area has
a considerable amount of land in this category.
Agricultural land in town is found in the north section. However
the majority of land devoted to agriculture is found .in the one -mile
extraterritorial area between highways 101 and 70. This acreage is
beginning to dwindle as increased development occurs.along highway
70.
The.majority of wetlands are located along the dredge -spoil islands,
Y
commonly known as Bird Shoal, Carrot Island, and Town Marsh.
Barren lands include the dunes and other high ground found on Town
Marsh, Bird Shoal, and Carrot Island. There are approximately 250 acres
classified as barren.
9

GENERALIZED EXTRA.TP-991TOIRIA.L-EXISTING LAMP U6P-
c E-1
Mot=
TOWN
4
uv0�,
' C
Ro
Lie'.
Rrwoum-rIAL
JM- CC*AMr&RC-IAL-
PATIO
*AT

(A)
Land Use Compatibility Problems
The majority of land use compatibility problems in Beaufort are con-
sidered to be minor such as scattered businesses mixed with residential
dwellings.
However,,there is an odor compatibility problem of some significance
caused by two fish processing plants that are located on Lennoxville Road
outside the eastern edge of town and from a third plant located on West
Beaufort Road.
Residents located near Beaufort Fisheries, Standard Products, and Sea
and Sound Processing,Company have complained of unpleasant odors associated
with the operations of the plants. Future expansions or developments_ of this
type should address this problem.
(B)
Problems From Unplanned Developments
:
Residential development located near Beaufort Fisheries and Standard .
Products fish processing plants is an example of unplanned development.that
has occured outside of Beaufort's town limits.
Future development policy for this area should consider enactment
of better pollution controls for the fisheries plants. Additionally.
residential areas should have a buffer zone between them and any industrial
zone.
(C)
Changes In Predominant Land Uses
Vacant and agricultural land uses in the northern part of the extra-
territorial limits, between and along highways 101 and 70 are likely to
continue to experience development pressure in the future.. Commercial
activity is especially 'significant along highway 70 and will probably con-
tinue in the next few years as demand arises.
Additionally vacant land located east of the proposed light indus-
trial park will probably come under some development pressure in the
future simply because of its close proximity to the town and its services.
12

(D) Areas of Environmental Concern
See description under Policy Statements and locations on the land
classification map.
(3) Current Plans, Policies and Regulations
Beaufort first initiated a landplanning program in 1962 through .
a federally assisted grant from the Urban Renewal Administration. This
plan provided Beaufort with its first policy guide in .determining how
the town wanted to develop in the future.. Since then,numerous
updates and revisions have occurred. Listed below is a summary of
the existing plans, policies and regulations which has affected
land development in the town.
1. Plans and Policies
A. Transportation Plans: The existing transportation 'plan=for
Beaufort is the Proposed Morehead'City,-Beaufort, Atlantic
Beach Thoroughfare Plan, 19.71. It has, however, never been
adopted.
B. Community Facilities Plan: 1) Community Facilities Plan
and Public Improvement Program, 1962 This study undertook
an initial look at the community's facilities and services.
An analysis was made of the facilities and services with
specific recommendations given periodically. 2) Community
Facilities Plan, 1970. This report was an update and re-
vision of the 1962 plan.
C. Utilities Extension Policies: Beaufort's policy is to
extend and provide services whenever new development dictates
it.
D. Open Space and Recreation Policies: At this time, no formal
policy exists. It should be noted that this issue has been
addressed in this plan with objectives focused towards
recreation.
13
Ir

E. Prior Land Use Plan and Policies: a, Land Use Survey
Land Use Plan- Population and Economy; 1962:. This document
represented the first attempt by the town to develop a state-
ment of objectives'and policies for the future development
of the community. b. Land Use Survey - CommunityFacilities
Plan - Land Development Plan 1970: This report was an -update
and revision of the 1962 Plan.
F. Others: a. Neighborhood Analysis, 1970: THis was a study
of the housing conditions; description'of neighborhoods;
analysis of problems affecting each neighborhood and respec-
tive recommendations. b: Beaufort, North Carolina,- 1970:
This was a study funded by the General Assembly of the
historical resources in Beaufort. The author, Tony Wrenn,
provided the basic historical and architectural information
on which long range preservations plans could be based. c.
Community Assistance Program: 1971: This program was first
enacted under the Urban Renewal Program which was later
absorbed by the Community Assistance Program. The principle
objective of this program is the rehabilitation of the
Downtown Central Business District. d. Community.Develop
went Block Grant Program, 1974: The purpose of the 'Community
Development Program is to aid in the elimination of.the.blight-
ed areas in town and to benefit low and middle income families.
2. Local Land Use Regulations:
A. Subdivision Regulations - Beaufort's subdivision regulations
were adopted in June, 1962 and updated in 1979. These regula-
tions have provided for the orderly development of land in town
and have contributed to the public health, safety, and welfare
of the community. The Planning Board of Beaufort is responsi
14

ble for the 'tentative approval of the subdivision plan while
the Town Board gives final approval.`
B. Zoning Ordinance - A new zoning ordinance was completed and
adopted on August of 1977. The ordinance contains the cri-
teria for use of all land within the Town of Beaufort and
its one mile jurisdiction along with requirements for land
use, setback, different type uses, special requirements,
etc. Enforcement is carried out by the Building,Inspector.
The appeals process is carried out by the Board of Adjustment.
Appeals from the Board of Adjustment are made to the
Carteret County Superior Court.
C. Flood Plain Ordinance - The Flood Plain Ordinance of Beaufort
was adopted in December, 1974. This ordinance established
land use control.measures in the flood plains and flood
hazard areas within Beaufort. The zoning enforcement officer
is responsible for the enforcement of this ordinance.
D., Building Code - Beaufort has adopted the Southern Standard
Building Code and the North Carolina Building Code. The
Building Code is designed to protect the safety and welfare
of the public. The building inspector enforces the.build
ing code.
15

E. Septic Tank Regulations - The Carteret County Board of Health
has regulations governing design, construction, installation,
cleaning and use of sewage disposal systems in Carteret
County._, An Improvement Permit for septic tanks must be
obtained from the -Health -Department before any construction
permits are issued. The permit is based upon soil suitability
for septic tank systems. It applies to conventional homes or.
mobile homes outside of mobile home parks in areas not served
by public or community sewage systems and generating less than
.3,000 gallons of affluent per day.
Additionally any -problem -areas with septic tank systems
in the extraterritorial area involving expansion of the
central sewerage system will be coordinated with town
officials and engineers for the 201.plan:
In Beaufort, municipal water and sewer services the
population. These facilities are regulated by the State of
North Carolina Health Department.
16

F. Historic District: Beaufort's Historic:District was established
in'1965 and is incorporated in the zoning ordinance. The pur-
pose of the historic district is to promote the educational,
cultural, and g^:.eral welfare of the public -through the
preservation and protection of historical buildings, places,.
and areas. The Board of Architectural Review's duties are to
pass upon the appropriateness of altering, demolishing, or
building within the historic district. Appeals from any action
by the Board of Architectural Review may be taken to the Board
of Commissioners. The zoning enforcement officer is' `respon-
sible for the enforcement of this ordinance.
The Town of Beaufort is fully aware of the significance
of all structures and properties located in the Beaufort
Historic District andwill ensure that all protective measures
and safeguards are taken regarding any proposed action involving
them.
Current applicable ordinances and protective mechanisms
include the Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Regulations The
Land.,Use Plan, Board of Architectural Review, The Historic
Association and the Beaufort Town Board.
Additionally, Beaufort will contact the Division of
Archives and History regarding any proposal which may
potentially disturb any archaeological sites in town.
17
.R
t

3. Federal and State Regulations
The following State and Federal Regulations affecting
coastal land and water will be complied with and it is recom-
mended that before development takes place, and investigation
of these regulations should be made to avoid any conflict or
violation.
FEDERAL
National Historic Preservation Act of 1966
The Archeological and.Historic Preservation Act of 1974,
Public Law 93-291
Executive Order 11593, Protection and Enhancement of the Cultural
Environment, 16 U.S.C. 470 (Supp. 1, 1971)
-. National Environmental Policy Act, Public Law 91-190, 42 U.S.C.
4321 Et. Seq. (1970)
Community Development Act of 1974, Public Law 93-383: Environ-
mental Review Procedures for the Community Development Block
Grant Program (40 CFR Part 58)
Procedures for the Protection of Historic and Cultural Proper-
ties (36 CFR Part 800)
Comprehensive Planning Assistance Program (801) as Amended by
Public Law 93-393.
The Department of Transportation Act of 1955, Public Law 89-670
Identification and Administration of Cultural Resources: Pro-
cedures of Individual Federal Agencies.
STATE
G.S121-12(a) Protection of Preperties in the National Register
State Environmental Policy Act, Article 1 or Chapter 113A of
the General Statutes
Executive Order XVI
Indian Antiquities, G.S. 70.1-4
Salvage of Abandoned Shipwrecks and Other Underwater Archeological
Sites: G.S. 121-22, 23; 143B-52(1) g, (3)
Archeological Salvage in Highway Construction, G.S. 136-42.1
Provisions for Cultural Resources in Dredging and Filling
Operations, G.S. 113-229. 18

f
(C)" Physical'Constraints to Development.
(1) Physical Limitations for Development
Physical limitations for development within the confines of the town limits
have largely been identified in the initial CAMA Land Use Plan (Seepages
37-55) Areas than have not been identified as having physical limitations
for development are chiefly in the one -mile extra territorial area and will
be discussed later.
(A)' Hazard Areas
For identification of areas within the town limits please refer to
pages 37 thru 39 in the original CAMA plan.
However the Beaufort - Morehead City Airport is'a man-made hazard
area that is located in the one -mile extraterritorial area and there-
fore presents a hazard to the area north of the airport along highway
101. Development in this vicinity near the northern end of runway 21
should be kept to a minimum to avoid obstructions in the flight path
of aircraft using this runway.
One other area that could possibly be considered a man-made hazard
area is the large.wood stowage area associated with the Atlantic Veneer
Corporation located outside the east end of town. The large supply
of wood could present a fire hazard and development immediately
adjacent to this plant should be kept to. a minimum.
A natural hazard area that affects Beaufort is.the coastal flood plain
which has already been discussed at length for.the town limits (pages
38-3.9). As of this writing the extraterritorial limits are currently
being mapped.
r

(2) Flood Potential
(A) General
Over the past three or four decades numerous studies have been made
by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the U.S. Coast and Geodetic
Survey concerning the flooding potential in the study area. The
principal flood threat to the area derives from hurricanes and tidal
flood surges associated with severe coastal storms. The most recent
analysis has been prepared by the Army Corps of Engineers for the
Federal Insurance Administration (Department of Housing & Urban
Development) associated with that agency's flood insurance program.
The Corps completed a study of this nature for the Carteret County -
area in August 1973. The following information is based on the find-
ings of this study.
(B) .Beaufort Area
The Corps of Engineers' study indicated that the 100-year base flood
elevation for the area in the general vicinity of the existing plant
site is 7.6 feet MSL. The area is also located in a "synamic water
action area", which implies that some wave phenomena may be expected.
above the aforementioned static water elevation due to wind -driven
waves that will occur when associated with major storms.
In vied of the fact that.the plant site is located about 7,000 feet
inland frprh any nearby open water area, this factor may not be too
significant #t this case.'
More important lB the fact that the existing -Beaufort wastewater facility
site is located of land with an elevation of 10.1 feet, therefore, it
may be concluded t4at the facility is not highly vulnerable to the
predicted 100-year flood level. Nevertheless, precautions must be taken
to protect existing and proposed mechanical equipment installations'
from any potential flood hazard. 20

SOILS
(B) Beaufort is on a peninsula that ranges from sea level to about 18 feet in
elevation. The soils have formed in sandy and loamy coastal plain sediment.
Soils at the lowest elevation are in Brackish marshland that is a critical com-
ponent of the coastal eco-system. In upland areas, the main limitation to urban
use is wetness. The soils that -are in depressions or at low elevations have a
seasonal high water table and are subject to flooding during severe storms.
Response.to artificial drainage is usually good if suitable outlets are available.
Other soil properties are generally favorable for urban use. The well drained
soils in the higher, more convex areas are well suited for urban use.
The five soil association areas are shown on the general soil map. Each
of these soil associations has one to three major soils which occur, together
in a characteristic and repeating pattern. Other soils also occur but are of
c
minor extent. This general map is suitable only for general information. De-
tailed soil maps and interpretations are available at the Carteret Soil and
Water Conservation District Office in Beaufort. Detailed soil information is
necessary for the planning of specific sties. Descriptions of the major soils
in the area follow:
1. CARTERET
This mapping'unit consists of nearly level, poorly drained sandy soils
in coastal marshes. The water table is at or near the surface continuously and
they are subject to tidal flooding. These soils are a critical component of
the coastal eco-system and are unsuited for urban use.
2. NEWHAN - CARTERET
These are nearly level to sloping areas where sandy dredge spoil has been
placed on marshland. About 90 percent of the area has been filled with 1 to
about 20 feet of sand. The filled areas Consist of the excessively drained
21

Newhan soils. Depth to the water table depends on the depth of fill. About 10
percent of the area is poorly drained Carteret soils in small areas of marsh.
This unit reflects urban development and channel maintenance at the expense
of coastal marshland. The suitability for further urban development of this
mapping unit should be determined at specific sites.
3. LEON - MANDARIN - WANDO
This unit consists of nearly level to gently sloping somewhat excessively
drained to poorly drained sandy soils. Low areas also flood occasionally. It is
r, about 70 percent Leno soils, 20 percent Mandarin soils and 10 percent Wando soils.
The poorly drained Leon.soils are in smooth areas and depressions.
The seasonal high water table is within 1.0-foot of the surface during
winter and spring and during rainy periods. There is a weakly cemented, organic
stained hardpan within 2.5 feet of the surface. This layer interferes with drainage
and temporarily perches the water table during rainy periods. These wet sandy soils
are poorly suited for most urban uses unless adequate artificial drainage is in-
stalled. Response to drainage is fair to good if an adequate outlet is available.
Caving ditchbanks.is also a problem because of the sandy texture.
The moderately well drained Mandarin soils are on low ridges. These soils
have a perched water table at depths of 2 to 3.5 feet during rainy periods. This
is caused'by anorganic stained, weakly cemented hardpan. Response to artificial
drainage is very good, although ditchbanks cave easily in the sandy soil. Also,
these soils are extremely droughty and lawns and shrubs are often difficult to es-
tablish. Otherwise, Mandarin soils are suited for most urban uses.
The somewhat excessively drained Wando soils are on the higher ridges. The
seasonal high water table is below 6 feet in these deep sandy soils. They are well
suited for most urban uses.
22

4. ALTAVISTA - AUGUSTA - TOMOTLEY
These are nearly level, moderately well drained to poorly drained loamy soils.
They are on broad, smooth to slightly convex areas near drainage -ways. This unit
is about 30 percent Altavista soils, 40 percent Augusta .soils and 15 percent
Tomotley soils.
The moderately well drained Altavista soils are on .the higher, slightly convex
areas nearest to the drainage ways. They have a seasonal high water table at
depths of 2.0 to 2.5 feet. Wetness is the main limitation for urban use. Response
to artificial drainage is good. Undrained areas have severe limitations for septic
tank absorption fields and moderate limitations for most other urban uses. Drained
areas are well suited for most urban uses.
The somewhat poorly drained Augusta soils are on smooth areas, slightly lower
than Altavista soils. The seasonal high water table is 1.0 to 2.0 feet.below the
surface. Wetness, is the main limitation for urban use. Response to artificial
drainage is good. Undrained.areas have severe limitations for most urban uses.._.
Drained areas are suited for urban use.
The poorly drained Tomotley soils are in depressions. The seasonal high water
table is with 1.0 feet of the surface in the winter and spring and during rainy
periods... Wetness is the main limitation for urban use. Response to drainage is
good if adequate outlets are available. Undrained areas have severe limitation for
urban use. Drained.areas have fair suitability for some urban uses. Failure of
septic systems and flooding is more likely for tomotley soils than for the other
soils in this unit.
5. ARAPAHOE - TOMOTLEY
This unit consists of poorly and very poorly drained loamy soils on flat in-
ter stream areas. This unit is about 60 percent Arapahoe soils and about 35
percent Tomotley soils. These soils are subject to flooding during severe storms.
The very poorly drained Arapahoe soils are in the lowest palces.. The seasonal
high water table is at or near the surface in winter and spring and during rainy
23

periods. Flooding is frequent especially in depressions. Wetness is the main
limitation for urban use. Response to artificial drainage is good if adequate
outlets are available. Undrained areas are poorly suited for urban use.
The poorly drained Tomotley soils are in slightly higher, nearly level areas.
The seasonal high water table is within 1.0 foot of the surface in the winter
and ,spring and during rainy periods. Wetness is the main limitation for urban.
use. Response to drainage is good if adequate outlets are available. Undrained
areas have severe limitations for urban use. Drained areas have fair suitability
for some.urban uses.
24

GENERAL SOIL AREAS
BEAUFORT, N.C. -
1. CARTERET: ,Nearly level, poorly drained sandy soils.in coastal.marshes.-
2. NEWHAN-CARTERET: Nearly level to sloping, excessively drained areas where
sandy dredge spoil has been placed on coastal marshes.
3. LEON-MANDARIN-WANDO Nearly level to gently sloping, somewhat excessively
drained to poorly drained sandy soils on uplands.
4. ALTIVISTA - AUGUSTA - TOMOTLEY: Nearly level, moderately well drained to
poorly drained loamy soils on uplands.
5. ARAPAHOE - TOMOTLEY: Nearly level, poorly and very poorly drained loamy `
soils on uplands.
M
Y

(C) Sources of water supply
Water for the area is acquired from deep wells into the Castle Hayne
aquifer and Beaufort is in the process of planning for expansion is
• the next six months to include and additional_300,000 gallon elevated
tank and a 200,000 gallon ground storage tank. Also,,a new deep well
with a 500 gallon per minute service pump is planned to accomodate
additional growth to the year 2000.
There is still a concern over the possibility of cantamination by
septic tanks when individuals wells are relied on in the area out
side of the town limits.
(D) Topography
See page 43 of the Land Use Plan.However the predominant slope of.
the land surrounding Beaufort does not exceed twelve percent.
(2) Fragile Areas
Fragile areas have largely been identified in the areas of Environmental
concern section located under policy statements of this update and the
section by the original land use .plan found on. pages 43 thru 46.
(3) Areas with Resource Potential
Under the original land use plan Town Marsh was the only area identified
with resource potential and it has been used as a non -intensive recreation
area, accessible only.by boat. Since the Town exercised its one -mile.
t extraterritorial jurisdiction, Carrot Island and the Bird Shoal area come
under the same catagory as Town Marsh.
There is also some productive agricultural land located at the northern
end of one -mile extra -territorial area largely between highways 101 and 70.
27

(E) Constraints - Capacity of Community Facilities
(1) Existing Sewer Service Capacity.
The present Waste Water Treatment Facility of the Town of
Beaufort is .75 MGD, and with 201 facility approval the
treatment facility will be increased to MGD. Included in
improvements are 1.68 MG retention pond and dual gravity
filters.
Due to the increased growth of Beaufort since the initial
planning of 201 the consulting engineers are considering
increasing plant capacity even greater.
The 201 Facility Plan for Carteret County ia on file with
the Division of Environmental Management. This Plan gives
cost effective analysis on inflow study for the Beaufort
Treatment area. Sub -area 2 (lift sta 2 collection area)
showed "possible excessive" inflow. A sewer system evaluation
survey recently completed by consulting engineers, Von Oesen
& Assoc., reveals that sub -area 2 has some inflow due to ground
water and storm line cross connection.The Study recommends
that the Town continue to treat the inflow, this being the
most cost effective solutions. Also the Town has initiated a
program to alleviate some of the cross connections within
its own maintenance personnel:
Additional information on the infiltration/inflow
analysis can be found in the appendix and by referring to the.
Carteret County Complex 201 Facility Plan.
28

Water System
Beaufort's water is supplied and managed by the town. The water system-
had been operated by the Carolina Water Company, until 1975, when it was sold
to the town.
The water supply is obtained from two deep wells, located at the corner
of Hedrick and Pine Streets,and between Fulford and Carteret Streets, and
stored in a newly constructed 200,000 gallon tank.. These wells furnish 600
and 400 gallons of water per minute, respectively. Water, is obtained from
the Castle-Hayne Acquifer which also supplies the water needs for a large
portion of eastern North Carolina.
Total capacity,of the water system is estimated at 800,000 gallons per
day with a daily use approximately 200,000 gallons per day, a utilization
rate of 25 percent. There are approximately 1300 customers being billed.
by .the town for use of its water services.
As stated above, water for the area is acquired from deep wells into
the Castle Hayne acquifer and Beaufort is in the process of planning for ,
expansion in the next six months to include an additional 300,000 gallon
elevated tank.and a 200,000 gallon ground storage tank. Also., a new deep.
well with a 500 gallon per minute service pump is planned to accommodate
additional growth to the year 2000.
Additionally, the Town of Beaufort is under strong consideration for a
new seafood processing plan similar to the one located in Wanchese. The Town
.will apply for a Clean Water Grant and hold a bond referendum for a total
package cost of approximately $728,000.
29

(F) Estimated Demand
Population
The population projection for 1990 is taken from the most current
revision of the Carteret County.Complex 201 Facility Plana (Revisions
asofDecember, 1979)
It is important to note that the projections are for permanent
population only and seasonal variations are not included.
1977 1980. 1990
Beaufort 3,830 3,950 4,300
A comparison of the above figures with projections provided in the
initial CAMA Plan indicate that Beaufort is growing slightly faster
than 1975 projections indicated. The original plan projected a 1980
population of 3,831 as compared to 3,950 listed above, for a difference
I
of 119 people. There was no projection for 1990 provided, but for the
year 2000, there was a projection of 4,183 which is already surpassed.by
the above 1990 figure of 4,300.
The overall comparisons are not significantly apart although pre-
vious estimates should be adequate to handle projected demands for
services. For more current information on population consult the
1980 census which was not available at the time of this update.
Economy
Even though the national economy has been down, Beaufort's
economy is looking up. The waterfront renewal area is virtually"
complete and attracting increased numbers of tourists and added
businesses. Also, a large new shopping center -complex has recently -
opened on Highway 70 which should help the town gain a larger share
of retail sales in the county.
30

The future looks bright for Beaufort with its Historic attractions,
waterfront renewal area and new shopping attractions. Barring any major
unforseen economic setback such as a major cutback at Cherry Point
or several bad fishing seasons, Beaufort should continue to thrive
and increase its economic position in Carteret County.
Future Land Need/Community Facilities Demand
Ten year population projections indicate there will be an increase
of 350 people above the 1980 figure of 3,950.
There is more than adequate acreage available in the one mile
extraterritorial area of Beaufort to accommodate the increased numbers
of people projected for the next ten years.
The 201 Plan was ready to be approved by the State as of this
writing to provide for increased sewer capacity required to accommodate
additional growth.
Additionally, Beaufort is currently in the process of planning for
expansion of its water system to include an additional 300,000 gallon
elevated tank and a 200,000 gallon ground storage tank. Also a new
deep well with a 500 gallon per minute service pump is planned to:.
accommodate additional growth to the year 2000. Beaufort may also
apply for a Clean Water Grant and hold a -bond referendum for a total
package cost of approximately $728,000.I
31

..0203 POLICY STATEMENTS
(1) Resource Protection
(A) Areas of Environmental Concern
All areas of AEC's within the confines of.the Beaufort
Planning area come under the broad class of the Estuarine
System.
Coastal Wetlands
Coastal Wetlands or marshlands are defined as.any salt
marsh or other marsh subject to regular or occasional flooding -
by tides, including wind tides (whether or not the tide waters
reach the marshland areas through natural or artificial water-
courses), provided this shall not include hurricane or tropical
storm tides. Marshlands shall be those.areas upon which grow
some, but not necessarily all, of the following marsh grass
species: Smooth or salt water Cordgrass (Spartina alterniflora);
Black Needlerush (Juncus roemerianus); Glass wort (Salicornia spp.);
Salt Grass (Distichlis Spicata); Sea Lavender.(Limonium spp.);
Bulrush (Scirpus spp.); Saw Grass (Cladium Jamaicense); Cat Tail
(Typha spp.); Salt -Meadow Grass (Spartina Patens); and Salt Reed
Grass (Spartina cynosuroides). Marshlands are located along
Taylors Creek which parallels Beaufort's waterfront development
area on the north side and town marsh, Bird Shoal, and Carrot
Island on the south side of Taylor's Creek.
Significance
This marshland type is essential in that it performs a
limited function in shoreline protection of the area.
32

This marshland area along Taylor's Creek also contributes
to the detritus supply which is necessary to the highly productive
estuarine system essential to North Carolina's economically valuable
commercial and sports fisheries.
Policy Objectives
To essentially preserve as much marsh as possible.
The marsh serves as shoreline protection from boat traffic but
may also require some fill due to the results caused"by boat traffic.
Any other project related fill should be directly related to erosion
control or water dependent activities.
Appropriate Land Uses_
Appropriate land uses shall be consistent with the policy
objectives.
Marinas would be placed in the marsh.area if they were consistent
with the town Zoning Ordinance. An example of a possible marina
location would be the harbor refuge area.
Carrot Island, Town, Marsh, Bird Shoal and all marsh should be
basically left in it's natural state. The only possible exception
should be as a last resort for future mainenance of Taylor's Creek
excavation (spoils) necessary to maintain the creek.
Additionally the Carrot Island complex has been nominated as
an AEC natural area.
It is recommended that public.access to Carrot Island, .,Town
Marsh and Bird Shoal be by private, personal boat only. No commer-
cial ventures of any type should be allowed. Also no off -road
vehicles including mini bikes or any type of motorized vehicles
should be allowed in these areas as the vegetation'is fragile and
off -road vehicles could cause damage to natural areas.
33

The harbour refuge area south of the airport.should be developed
and maintained as a safe refuge for boating and given priority as an
important, safe refuge in the event of stormy weather.
Basically other marsh areas. should be left in their natural
state unless there is a water dependent activity which compliments
the existing land use character. The emphasis however should still
be on keeping the marsh in it's natural state.
ESTUARINE WATERS AND PUBLIC TRUST AREAS
Estuarine waters are defined in G.S. 113A-113(b)(2) as, "all the water 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
Conservation and Development filed with the Secretary of State entitled 'Bound
ary Lines, North Carolina Commercial Fishing - Inland Fishing Waters', revised
March 1, 1965."
1
34

Public trust areas are "All waters of the Atlantic"Ocean and the
lands thereunder from the mean high water mark to the seaward limitof
State jurisdiction; all natural bodies of water'subject to measurable
lunar tides and lands thereunder to the mean high water mark all navi-
gable natural bodies of water and 'lands thereunder to the mean or ordinary '
high water mark as the case may be, except privately owned lakes 'having
no public access; all waters in artificially created bodies of -.water in
which exists 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; all waters in
artificially created bodies of water in which the'public has acquired
rights by prescription, custom, usage, dedication or any other means.
In determining whether the public has acquired rights, in artificially
created bodies of water, the following factors shall be considered:
(i) the use of the body of water by the public-(ii) the length of time
the.public has used the area; (iii) the value of public resources in the
body of water; (iv) whether the public resources in the body of water
are mobile to the extent that they can move into natural bodies of
water; (v). whether the creation of the artificial body of water required
permission from the State; and (vi) the value of the body of water to the
public for navigation from one public area to another public area.
Although estuarine waters and public trust areas are treated separ-
ately in the CAMA Guidelines, they will be considered as one for the pur-
pose of this update. The distinction drawn between them in the guidelines
is an artificial one and has no basis other than as a political division
between the commercial and sport fisheries interest. The significance of
both areas is identical as are the appropriate land uses.
35

Significance
The estuaries are among the most productive natural environments of
North Carolina. They support valuable commercial and sports fisheries of
T the coastal area and are utilized for 'navigation, recreation and aesthetic
purposes.
In Beaufort, Taylor's Creek is an example of a navigable channel that
is important for commercial, sport and recreational boating. The creek
also serves as a major link to the economic development of the Town's
revitalized waterfront area.
Policy Objectives
To preserve and manage the public trust areas and estuarine waters
so as to safe guard and perpetuate their biological, -social, -economic'and .
aesthetic values.
Appropriate Land Uses
Appropriate uses shall be consistent with the above policy objectives.
Highest priority shall be given to the protection of public trust rights
and the conservation of estuarine waters. The development and maintenance
of Taylor's Creek as a navigable channel and the promotion of the harbor
refuge area are activities that are appropriate uses and important to the
town's well-being. Other water dependent activities such as piers, marinas,
and fish houses are examples of appropriate uses provided they will not
be detrimental to the public trust rights and physical estuarine
functions, and are compatible with the town's zoning ordinance and flood
plain ordinance.
36

Estuarine Shorelines
Estuarine shorelines are those non -ocean shorelines which are especi-
ally vulnerable to erosion, flooding, or other adverse effects of wind and
water and are intimately connected to the estuary.. This area extends from
the mean high water level or normal water level along the estuaries, sounds,
bays, and brickish waters as set forth in an agreement adopted by the
Wildlife Resources Commission and the Department of Natural Resources and
Community Development (described in Regulation .0206(a) for a distance of
75 feet landward.
Signif icance
Development within estuarine shorelines influences the.quality of
estuarine life and is subject to the damaging processes of shore front.
erosion and flooding.
Policy Objective
To ensure shoreline development is compatible with both the dynamic
nature of estuarine shorelines and the values of the estuarine system.
Appropriate Land Uses
Appropriate uses shall be consistent with the above policy objective.
Specifically all development located in Zone,A on the Flood'hazzard.zone
should be elevated and conform to the Beaufort Flood Ordinance:
All development should be compatible with existing land uses. }
All areas shoul& be able to handle surface run off and connected
to town sewer when possible. In the one mile extra-territorial,juris-
diction area, septic tanks should be located as far away from S.A. waters
as feasible.
All development located in the historic section of the estuarine
shoreline area of Beaufort shall conform to the Architecture Board of
R i 37

(i) Constraints to Development
Soils Policy
An assessment of soil types should be done in conjunction with any development
activity in the Beaufort area, especially in the one -mile extra -territorial area
~ where town water and sewer are not available. This is most important because
generally all of the soil types in the Beaufort Area have severe limitations due
to the shallow depth of the ground water table and/or potential flooding.
Individual lots will probably need to be sampled and/or analyzed by the Soil.:
Conservation Service.
Flood prone areas - Policy
All development shall be in compliance with Beauforts Flood plain ordinance.
This includes elevating all structures that are located in the A zone according
to the flood insurance rate map.
(ii) Local Resource Development Issues.- Policy
The primary resources are found in the area of non -intensive outdoor recreation
land. Carrot Island. Town Marsh and Bird Shoal are all resources that should be
basically left in their natural state.
For'more detail on these areas refer to the earlier section on areas of en
viroamental concern.
(iii) Hazardous or Fragile Land Areas - Policy
w The identification and policy ideas on hazard areas have been discussed under
ka physical constraints to development. The fragile lands have been identified and
policy statements made in the areas of Environmental Concern Section.
It should be emphasized. that development and protection of structures in
Beauforts historic District should be closely coordinated through the Board of
Architectural Review and Beauforts' Zoning Ordinance. The Historic heritage of
Beaufort is among its most valued and important assets and as such it should always
38
be. emphasized.

Additionally all efforts will be made to 'safeguard any known or
potential archaeological sites which exist in the town's jurisdiction.,
Coordination and contact with State Archives and History officials will
be carried out regarding any activity which has the potential to disturb
an archaeological mite.
(iv) Hurricane and Flood'Evacuation
Plans - Policy
Under North Carolina General Statutes, Chapter 166 the Carteret
County _Civil Preparedness Agency was organized and coordinates all
hurricane and flood evacuation and emergency plans.
Beaufort is located in Area II of Carteret.County with the primary
shelter being the Beaufort Elementary School.
All hurricane and flood evacuation plans should be coordinated
through the Carteret County Civil Preparedness Office.
(2) Resource Production and Management.
The resource of importance to Beaufort is commercial and recreational
fisheries with agriculture having some importance in the one -mile
extra -territorial area.
(i) Productive Agricultural Lands - Policy
The areas of productive agricultural lands are located
in the northern portion of the one -mile jurisdiction area
along highways 101 and 70. The agricultural activities are of
some importance but the amount of land available within the
one -mile area is being taken over by development and will
undoubtedly come under increasing pressure within the next
ten -years and agriculture will probably have even a smaller
impact in the one -mile area.
39

The land mentioned above is zoned R-20 and will probably
be residential although the town will consider selected light
industry if and when one would like to locate there.
(ii) Commercial Forest Lands - Policy
Not applicable
(iii) Mineral Production Areas - Policy
Not applicable
(iv) Commercial and Recreational Fisheries - Policy
Commercial and recreational fisheries are extremely
important to the town and area. The town is interested in.
protecting the fishing and boating industry in any way it
can.
The establishment and promotion of the harbor refuge
area will continue to be emphasized toprovide a.safe harbor
during inclement weather conditions.
The Town desires to _encourage the continuing establishment
of small boat maintenance facilities and additional launching
ramps for small boats.
(v) Off -Road Vehicles - Policy
.. The town recommends restricting the use of off -road
vehicles entirely, including trail bikes or mini -bikes, on
Bird Shoal, Carrot Island and Town Marsh..
40

(3) Economic and Community Development
Beaufort is mainly committed to residential development primarily.
due to the availability and amount of land and a desire to retain the
colonial atmosphere of the town. However the town would be.interested
in obtaining a light industry of some type for their proposed industrial
park at the.eastt- n end of town which is located on both sides of _
Lennoxville Road. Another potential industrial location would be
adjacent to the southwestern side of the airport.
Economic development efforts in and around the airport will be
coordinated with the Carteret Economic Development Commission. Addi-
tionally the Town of Beaufort plans to cooperate with Carteret County,
airport officials, DOT, and the FAA in establishing any.height
restrictions around the airport area.
The downtown waterfront is a successful example of redevelopment
of an older business district. All new sub -divisions would have to be
located in the one -mile extra -territorial area which is largely zoned
for residential development. The proposed industrial park has pre-
viously been discussed.
The Town of Beaufort feels that the lack of public transportation
is becoming more of a problem and would like to consider having a bus
service in the future. This service could make trips to and from
Morehead City and possible runs all the way to the community of
Atlantic.
Public transportation should be studied as an alternative to
meet the needs of all citizens high travel costs. If and when this
is feasible, perhaps a joint effort with Morehead City and Carteret
County sharing the costs would insure a better chance of success.
41

There are currently plans under way to expand water and sewer
capacity to accomodate additional growth to the year 2000.Water
capacity is to be increased with additional storage tanks and a new
well. The 201 Facilities Plan will permit further' expansion of the
waste treatment facilities within the town and growth area surrounding
' the present town limits.
Additionally, Beaufort has applied for a "Community Employment'
Center" designation under the North Carolina Balanced Growth Program.
This designation should assist in obtaining grants necessary to
fund public facilities and help promote economic and community
development.
(i) Industries - Types - Locations - Policies
This was discussed above. Light industries are desired
that are clean and do not pollute the surrounding area.
(ii) Local Commitment to Providing Services to Development.- Policy
The commitment has been made to provide necessary services
for development which is geared primarily for residential with
some light industry as discussed previously:
Additionally, the Town of; Beaufort is under strong con-
s deration for a new seafood processing plant similar -to the one
located in Wanchese. The Town will apply for a Clean Water
Grant and hold a bond referendum for a total package cost of
approximately $738,000.
(iii) Urban Growth PatternsPolicy
This is not necessarily applicable to Beaufort. The
growth of the downtown area is almost completed. Future de-
velopment will mainly have to occur in the one -mile extra
territorial area and will most likely be residential with
some commercial development along the highways 70 and 101.
42 _:

(iv) Redevelopment of Developed Areas Policy
The redevelopment efforts of Beaufort have resulted
in a highly successful and visible example of waterfront
improvement. It is the town's desire that this effort
- shall al---:�ys be considered as an ongoing project and will
continue to be updated in the future as needed.
There is however a parking problem, especially in
the tourist season. The town recognizes this and will make
efforts to alleviate this problem in the near future. -
(v) Commitment to State and Federal Programs Policy
Beaufort is committed to utilizing State and Federal
Programs such as participation in the Federal Flood Insurance
Program, support of the Beaufort Thoroughfare Plan and co-
operation with N.C. Wildlife officials in providing boating
access ramps etc.
Beaufort supports the continued development of the State
Port facilities.
Dredging for maintaining safe passage of channels is
vital to the town's commercial and recreational boating
`industry.
There is a mutual aid agreement with Cherry Point Marine
Air Station for fire, rescue and medical emergencies.
(vi) Assistance to Channel Maintenance and Beach Nourishment Projects
Policy
Beaufort vitally supports and cooperates with any effort
that is necessary for channel maintenance and beach nourishment
projects. The town realizes the channels, marshlands and
estuarine system -are all most important to the welfare of
Beaufort.
43

V
(vii) Energy Facility - Policy
The Town of Beaufort does not have a policy on an energy
facility or refinery. Existing zoning does not allow an
energy facility/refinery. It is not a permissible use in any
zoning district. Any energy facility would have to be considered
under a special use by the town planning board and board of
adjustment.
Additionally, the Town of Beaufort does not have or desire
to make.a policy on an OCS base at this time.
(viii) Tourism Beach/Waterfront Access - Policy
Tourism is recognized as economically important to the
area. The Town has supported a policy to make waterfront access
available to the public where possible.
The Town of Beaufort owns two public docks for water
access located at the foot of. Turner Street and at the
foot of Queen Street.
There is a boat ramp leased to the Wildlife Resources
Commission for a period of twenty years. However, improvements
are .needed and only very minor ones have"been made.
The Town would like to see the establishment of additional
boat ramps for small boats which could be funded through
grants or funds raised by .civic organizations.
The town does not have a policy on a proposed boat access
area on the State Ports Authority spoil area because it is not
in the jurisdiction of the Town of Beaufort. The Town does,
however, encourage and support Carteret County to establish
boating access in the SPA spoil area.
44

(4) Continuing Public Participation
(i) Public participationin the update process has taken several
forms. Initially articles were written in the Carteret County
News -Times explaining to the public that a land use update was
to be done c_.d the public was requested to provide.input in the
plan.
A citizen questionnaire (survey) was also published in the
newspaper to be clipped out, answered. and sent in.. The ques-
tionnaires were also distributed at the town hall.
Additionally a public meeting was advertised.and.held at
the town hall with the Beaufort Town-Board/Planning Board, and
was well attended. The input received was very.valuable for
use in the policy statements..
Two additional meetings were held with the town board and
were open to the public.
(ii) Continuing public participation will be accomplished.primarily
through public meetings. The Town Commissioners and planning
boards meet on a regular basis. Citizens can request in
advance to be on the agendas, to speak or inquire on any issue
involving the towns land use plan or CAMA in general.
(5)
(b) Attachment B Issues.
1. Waterfront redevelopment
2. Historic preservation
3. Impacts of Cape Lookout National Seashore
4. Annexation - ability of town .to provide services.

(1) Definition of Issues
1. Waterfront Redevelopment
This project has been a success and is considered a model
for other communities to follow judging by the number of inquiries
received by the town concerning its development.
However, waterfront redevelopment will be an ongoing process
and be continually updated as the need arises.
Additionally the redevelopment area has created other problems
such as higher taxes, a demand for increased services and a need
for additional parking spaces.
The town recognizes the need for parking and is -currently
working on this problem.
Co -related to the parking issue is the concern of any propose
filling and extension of waterfront parking near the Post Office.
It is town policy that.all improvements in the two blocks will go
through the necessary permits that are required.
Hopefully sound planning such as in the Land Use Plan will help
Beaufort meet its tax requirements and demand for services.
2. Historic Preservation
Historic preservation in the words.of the President of the
Beaufort Historical Association, "is going great".
There currently exist adequate controls and protection for
structures located within the Beaufort Historic District.. The
zoning ordinance and Board of Architectural Review provide sound
guidelines for historic preservation in Beaufort.
The Town of Beaufort should, however, decide on how much tourism
they want and determine what the saturation point is.
Additionally Beaufort may wish to encourage and plan for possible
locations of overnight accommodations. Perhaps an Inn could be
46

located within the Historic District or a motel site could be
located near the shopping centers along highway 70.
An Inn is definitely needed in the overall picture of tourism
for the Town of Beaufort. Any proposed Inn should be compatible in
appearance, size,.number of rooms and with the architecture of the
area. The Archit-e tural Review Board �s well aware of its -
responsibilities to approve a compatible Inn and any such venture
will be closely coordinated with this board and the Town Board
of Commissioners and the Historic Association.
Future plans for the Historic District should consider providing
for pedestrian traffic only on Front Street or at least on other street
to achieve a setting such as the Duck of Gloucester Street in Colonial
Williamsburg.
Compatible uses in the Historic District should be closely coordinated
with the Zoning Ordinance, Architectural'Review Board, Historic Association
and the Town Planning Board.
3. Impacts of Cape Lookout National Seashore
The impacts of Cape Lookout National Seashore was viewed by
public survey as very important to moderately important to the future
of Beaufort.
There were two main issues identified with the Cape.
(1) What is going to happen to the Cape?
(2) Concern over the possibility of a bridge being built
from the Beaufort area to Cape Lookout.
4. Annexation
Citizen views on annexation were mixed with respondents slightly
favoring annexation.
47

There is no long range policy on annexation due to.the high
cost of, providing services. The current town position on annexation
is not to annex unless requested to do so. Future annexations
should be carefully considered since there is much concern over the
Town of Beaufort growing too large.
(2) Policy Alternatives
1. Waterfront Redevelopment
As stated under definition of issues, the town feels that water-
front redevelopment in Beaufort has been a success and is
considered to be an on -going project. There is, however, a
parking problem in this area which is being studied at the
present time.
2. Historic Preservation
The Historic Preservation program is considered to be in
good shape for now and the future with the historic district,
zoning ordinance and Board of Architectural Review providing
sound guidelines for any alterations or development activities.
The population of the Beaufort planning area is only expected
to increase by 350 in 1990.. Current preservation regulations
appear more than adequate to handle this projected increase.
However, seasonal increases in tourism may warrant additional
parking above and beyond what is available in the waterfront
area `of the historic district. Therefore if parking in the
vicinity of the waterfront is filled to capacity, the town
should consider fringe parking with the possibility of using
open tram -type vehicles for transporting people to and from
points of interest. This effort would probably have to be
coordinated with the private sector through a lease arrangement
between the town and the owner/operator of the vehicle who
48

could in turn charge a fee for a riding tour of historic
homes, gift shops, restaurants and the museum, etc.
(3) Impacts of Cape Lookout
The main issue concerning Cape Lookout and any impact on Beaufort -
would be if a bridge were built near Beaufort to connect with.the Cape.
Traffic would undoubtedly increase along with increased tourism to
Beaufort itself.
Future planning should include keeping -abreast of any projected
bridge or ferry service to the Cape Lookout area through coordination
with state and federal transportation and park officials.
(4) Annexation
Beaufort's annexation plans are to annex by request only with
proper considerations given to providing required services such as
water, and sewer, any waste treatment would be guided by the 201
Facilities Plan.
49

The alternative would be not to annex additional land. However,
Beaufort will grow some according to the 201 population projections.
By the year 1990 the population should increase by approximately 350
people. Therefore some annexation may be necessary to accomodate this
increase in population.
I (3) C:_oice of Policies
1. Waterfront Redevelopment
The waterfront redevelopment will be anon-going.process and
be continually updated as the need arises. There is a plan to
t
expand the number of boat ramps which is being coordinated with
North Carolina Wildlife officials.
2. Historic Preservation
Policies on historic preservation have already been stated
under policy alternatives.
3. Impacts of Cape Lookout
The best alternative for Beaufort in preparing for possible
impacts created by Cape Lookout is one of coordination with State
and Federal agencies directly involved. At this time it is diffi-
cult to predict what will even happen to Cape Lookout with .its -
erosion problems.
4. Annexation
The town policy has been set as annexation only upon request,
based on having adequate services, capacity, etc.
(4) Implementation Methods
1. Waterfront redevelopment
Waterfront redevelopment has been accomplished through urban
renewal and community development'fundings but will continue to be
updated as the need arises.
01M

2. Historic preservation
Historic preservation is and has been accomplished through
coordination of the Beaufort Historic Association, the Town of
Beaufort and individual property owners. '
The historic district is protected by enforcement of the
town's zoning ordinance, Board of Architectural Review, land use
plan and CAMA regulations.
3. Impacts of Cape Lookout
Policy implementation would include coordination and cooper-
ation with state and federal officials on any plans for bridge
or ferry service connecting the Beaufort area. This process will
be.on-going.
4. Annexation
Future annexations should carefully consider the concerns that
Beaufort's citizens have towards additional growth and expansion since '
the town's size is thought by many to be ideal.
Annexations should follow an orderly process based on a combina-
tion of factors such as demand, ability to provide services, the
land use plan and the will of the town's citizens.
(b) Consistency of plan and ordinances
A discussion of all relevant plans relating to the land use plan
can be found on pages 19 thru 23 of the original CAMA plan completed
in 1976.
Since 1976, however, the town's Zoning Ordinance has been updated
to include the one mile extra -territorial jurisdiction and -the proper
CAMA consistency language was added by the town attorney.
Additionally Beaufort's Subdivision Regulations have been revised
to include the CAMA consistency requirements.
51

The Carteret County Complex 201 Facilities Plan, 1975 including
1979 revisions was reviewed and found_to not be inconsistent with any
goals, policies, etc. of'the local CAMA plan. The 201 plan did state
that the protection of valuable estuarine resources from septic tank
pollut{on is especially critical.
(C) Review of Current and Related Plans
All current and related plans were reviewed and appropriate consistency
language was added to the zoning and subdivision regulations.
Additionally,meetings discussing the growth and planning process
were held with Morehead City and Carteret County officials.
(D) Local government - CRC consistency
All policies adopted by the local government shall be consistent
with the overall coastal policy adopted by the Coastal Resources
Commission.
52.

Description of Land Classification System
The land calssification system for the coastal area and Beaufort
consists of five classes listed as follows:
(1) Developed
(A) Purpose: The purpose of the developed class is to provide
for continued intensive development and redevelopment of
existing cities.
(B) Description. Areas to be classified developed include
lands currently developed for urban purposes at or`approach-
ing a density of 500 dwellings per square mile that are
provided with usual municipal or public services including
at least public water, sewer,.recreational facilities,
police And "fire protection. Areas which exceed the minimum
density but which do not.have public sewer service may best
be divided into a separate class to indicate that although
they have a developed character, they will need sewers in
the future.
(2) Transition
(A) Purpose. The purpose of the transition class is to provide
for future intensive urban development within the ensuing
ten years on lands that are most suitable and that will be
scheduled for provision of necessary.public utilities and
services. The transition lands also provide for additional
growth when additional lands in the developed class are not
available or when they.are severly limited for development.
53

(B) Description.
Lands to be classified transition may include: (1)
lands currently having urban services, and -(2) other
land necessary to accomodate the urban population and
economic growth anticipated within the planning
jurisdiction over the ensuing ten year period.
(ii) Lands classified transition to help meet the demand for
developable anticipated population and economic growth
must: (1) be served or be readily served by public water,
sewer, and -other urban services including public streets,
and (2) be generally free of severe physical limitations
for urban development. In addition, the Transition class
should not include: (1) lands of high potential for
agriculture, forestry, or mineral extraction, or land
falling within extensive rural areas being managed com-
mercially for these uses, when other lands are available;
(2) lands where urban development might result in major
or irreversible damage to important environmental
scientific, or scenic values or (3) land where urban
development` might result in damage to natural systems or
processes of more than local concern. Lands where develop-
ment will result in undue risk 'to life or property from
natural hazards (including inlet hazard areas and ocean'
erodible"areas as defined in 15 NCAC 7H.) or.existing land
uses shall not be classified Transition.
54

(iii) If any designated area.of environmental concern is
classified transition, an explanation shall be included
stating why the area is felt to be appropriate for high
density development.
(iv) In determining the amount of additional transition lands
necessary to meet projected urban population .and economic
growth, the county may utilize estimates of average future
urban population density that are based upon local land
policy, existing patterns and trends of urban development
within the.county, and densities specified in local
zoning, if any; and estimate of additional Transition
class lands should be based upon a guideline density of
2,000 persons or 500 dwellings per square mile.
(3) Community
(A) Purpose. The purpose of.the community class is to provide
for clustered land development to help meet housing, shopping,
employment, and public service needs within the rural areas
of the county.
(B) Description. Lands to be classified community are those
areas within the rural areas of planning jurisdictions
characterized by a small grouping of mixed land uses,
(residences, general stgre, church, school,.etc.), and which
are suitable and appropriate for small clusters of rural
development not requiring municipal sewer service.

(4) Rural
(A) Purpose. The purpose of the rural class is to provide for
agriculture, forest management, mineral extraction and other
low intensity uses. Residences maybe located within "rural"
areas where urban services are not required and where natural
resources will not be permanently impaired.
(B) Description. Lands that can be identified as appropriate for
resource management and allied uses include lands with high
potential for agriculture, forestry, or mineral extraction;
lands with one or more limitations that would make development
costly and hazardous; and lands containing irreplaceable,
limited, or significant natural, recreational, or scenic
resources not other wise classified.
(5) Conservation
(A) Purpose. The purpose of the conservation class is to provide
for effective long-term management of significant limited or
irreplaceable areas. This management may be needed because of
its natural, cultural, recreational, productive or scenic values.
These areas should not be identified as transition lands in the
future.
(B) Description. The conservation class should'be applied
to lands that contain: major wetlands; essentially undeveloped
shorelands that are unique, fragile, or hazardous for
development; necessary wildlife habitator areas ,that have
a high probability for providing necessary habitat conditions;
publicly owned watersupply watersheds and aquifers; and
forest lands that are undeveloped and will remain undeveloped
for commercial purposes. 56

Beaufort's Land Classification
Beaufort's Land Classification has taken into consideration the
needs of Carteret County and is consistent with the county's classification.
Developed -
The majority of Beaufort has been classified developed since water
and sewer services are available throughout town as they were in the
initial CAMA plan. An estimated population increase of 350 people is
expected during the next ten years according to 201 projections. This
increase should occur primarily in the northern section of town, with
some growth at the eastern end of town also.
Transition
Most of the areas classified as transition.are in the north and east
section of the one mile planning area, near the town limits. It has
been determined that those areas will most likely receive water and
sewer services in the next ten years.
It is difficult to project the amount of area need for residential
development as the extraterritorial area has only come tinder Beaufort's
planning area during the last couple of years and building permit
information was only available for 1978 and 1979 that included the
one mile area.
From 1976 thru 1979, there were building permits for approximately
194 units including mobile.homes. If 194 is multiplied times 2.9, (average
number of people per household) there should have been an increase of
562.6 people in the Beaufort Planning Area.
57

Population projections for Beaufort itself indicate an increase
i
of 350 people is expected by 1990, which would require a need of 121
residential units of all types.
An exact estimate i:, difficult to determine but the area designated
on the classification map as transitional hopefully is adequate ,for
any additional growth in the next ten year period.'
Conservation
The coastal floodplain, wetlands, estuarine waters, and the dredge -
spoil islands (Carrot Island, Town Marsh, and Bird Shoals) are identified
as conservation areas. The only population. expected to reside in these
areas should occur within the coastal floodplain, where development
should conform with the standards of the Federal Insurance Administration
for coastal high hazard areas and safety during the flood surge from `a 100
year storm. The conservation classification of -the wetlands, estuarine
waters, and dredge -spoil islands was also established to implement Beaufort's
stated policy objectives.
Rural
The areas classified as rural are the areas in the one mile planning
area which are not classified developed, transition, or conservation.
These areas are generally where no subdivisions have begun, open spaces
and farm lands.
58

CITY LIMITS
ification
imits is .
and in .
ction of
and Use
in 1976.
eveloped
ronsitional
;ommunity
Iural
Conservation
LAND CLASS MAP
PREPARED BY THE CARTERET
COUNTY PLANNINS DEPARTMENT. _
►URSUANT TO THE COASTAL
AREA MANAGEMENT ACT OF 1/74. - -

EXTRATERRITORIAL
CLASSIFICATION
F
G
H
K
•
4
m
Ora
So
• 0 0
%,AVIS
rl 0 1, AT
00
�D • + • O �7
" LINT, are
TOWIV MARSH
4
A RRO
SO C: t
t So
St., ofteft"80.0 0
IS 9
Io
IS
DEVELOPED
go --TRANSITION
F-M-6-fl,

SOIL INTERPRETATIONS RECCRO
ALTAVISTA FINE SANDY LOAM. 0 TO 2 PERCENT SLOPLS
AIlAJIWA. U#Wof LAND CompiEr,0 To y pERef-ol OLDPI`I, AI-TAvSSTA PgRr
I-------------- ----
-------------- ----_ _ ..
_.I
IDEPTHI.- - I I - IFRAC71PERCENT OF MATERIAL LESS ILIUU(U IPLAS I
I(IN.)I USDA TEXTURE I UNIFIED 1 AASHTO 1>3 INI..I1iAtl_j= PASSING S/EYE NU• I LIMIT ILJCItYl
_1 0-9 IFSL
19-461CL. SCL. L
_146-621VAR
• I
----1—_— __--- 1 -- 1(PCT) 1 4—��9-1�L���n__.L_--11rtt x . i
IML. CL-ML• SM. SM-SCIA-4 1 0 195-100 95-100 65-95 35-60 1 <23 INP-7 I
ICL. CL-ML IA-4. A-6. A-7 1 0 1-,5-100 95-100 60-9S 50-75 120-45 1 5-26 j
i I 10 I. 1 1
1 i 1 i i I 1
i I I I I I 1
IDEPTHICLAY 1140IST SULKI PERMEA- I AVAILABLE I SOIL I SALINITY I SHRINK- IERCSIONIWIAD ICRGANICI CORROSIVITY 1
I(IN.)I(PCT I DENSITY 1131LITY (WATER CAPACITYIREACTIONI(MMHUS/CM11 SWELL IFAUQUIEROD.IMATTER
I_.___1.SZn�L1SILLti:L_1_tttlLl�1I —i1N/IN) _—L(P:u I IPQAL MjI1—K_1 T 1GROUPI (PCT) I STEEL ,j"tj(.k ETEI
1 0-9 1 5.15 1 1 2.0-6.0 1 0.12a0.15 14.5-6.0 1 - I LOW_ 1.201 4 1 I InQaERATELeQQEr_+AIEI
1 9-46116.351 1 0.6-2.0 .1 0-IA-O.1a 14.5-6.0 1 - -I LOW 1.241 1 1 1
146-621 1 1 1
I 1 I i I I I I 1
I FLOODING I--tljjld-W&Ua-TABLE 1 CEMENTED PAN-_(jLMQL&_—j2QBSIDENCI`IHYDIPOTEN T-LI
I - - _I DEPTH I KIND IMONTHS IDEPTHIHARONESSIDEPTH IHARONESSIINIT.ITOTALIGRPI FROST .1
I__>BEQQEtl!`Y--I—ORBATILd__-111�C1It1s--1Ei1-1 1__-- ItIN) 1 1 (IN)I UIN) I(IN) I _I ACTIQN__I
y2' IAPPARENTIOEC-MARL - 1 1 >60 1 --1 - I 1_C 1 _ - I
_ SANIIAU-MiLLjiES--_---.____
_
_GIitlSIBS1GTION MAIEBLAL—
I - 1 SEVERE -WETNESS -
1I
I FAIR'WETNC3S, I-o J 5TkEN6TH i
(SEPTIC TANK 1
II
I 1
AtlSORPTION (
- II ROADFILL
FIELDS I
II
1
1 (SEVERE -WETNESS
I I
I IMPR08A9LE-EXCESS SINES - I
I SEWAGE i
it
I LAGOLN I
I I SAND
AREAS
SEVERE-WETNESS.SEEPAGE -
II -
I rMPAOIAILE-EXCESS FINES I
..SANITARY
.LANDFILL I -
-_ I1 GRAVEL
(TRENCH).
SEVERE-WETNESS.SEEPAGE
I I
( 0000.
SANITARY
LANDFILL 1 - -
I I TOPSOIL
(AREA) i
I1
I 1
GOOD
Ii
DAILY I
I I_—_---___--�yATEg-MANAGEMENT - —,
(.COVER FOR I
I I.
I MODERATE -SEEPAGE - �I
1 LANDFILL I
I I POND
RESERVOIR
..AREA
1 SEVERE-WEINESS.CUTBANKS CAVE
- Ii
I MODERATE- WETNb55 I
I SHALLOW I
- I(EMBANKMENTS
I
.(EXCAVATIONS 1 -
11 DIKES AND
1
LEVEES
1 1
I MODERATE -WETNESS .
- .. 11 -
I MODERATE -DEEP TO WATER..SLOW REFILL I
DWELLINGS - 1
11 EXCAVATED
WITHOUT 1
11 PONDS-
I.BASEMENTS -1 -
IIADUIFER FED
I 1
1 (
11
1 (
I
SEVERE -WETNESS
I I I
FAVORABLE - 1
DWELLINGS
I. -. WITH I
-
- -.. 1I DRAINAGE 1
-
BASEMENTS I
-
MODERATE -WETNESS
II I
WETNESS i
SMALL . I
Ii
COMMERCIAL 1
II IRRIGATION
BUILDINGS
-
_-
I
M66t:RATE - W&TMASS Low
DY,rtLN6711 I I i
NOT NEEDED 1
LOCAL 1
-
I I TERRACES I
-
ROADS AND 1
I I AND
1 STREETS 1
I1 DIVERSIONS 1
J LAWNS.
FAVORABLE
- ILANOSCAPING I
-
I I GRASSED I
I
AND GCLf I
I i WATERWAYS I
1
I FAIRWAYS I
II 1
1
---------------BES1sbeL_tnlE
I 1 1
61
I--------1—-------- -----------------------=1

I i MODERATE-%kTNESS - --�-------- I II I MODERATE -WETNESS
I
CAMP AREAS 1. IIPLAYGROUNUS I I.
1-----------------------------1-------------- ----I,
I I MoDE�tATE' WLTNE54 I I I SLIGHT 1
1 I II PATHS I
IPICNIC AREASI It AND - . I. 1
1I TRAILS I 1
—LAPA81L1IY_AtlQ11ELOs_eEs.ISHE_nE_LBQP.5_ABIZPASTURE (HIGHyEYEL_MM,8fiFbEUU
CAPA i. CORN I OATS I WHEAT Ir TOBACCO 'i ,GRAIN ! SOYBEANS I PASTURE I
.I I SILITY I I I �dU% I I I SORGHUM
1 --- Lou) ---- 1--talu---1--- --- illsiI _1—_ tW) __teU -1
_j1HB,_jbjM_j18Ba INIRR IIRR._JNIR _liBR,_jIj s_I..IBR..N I R 11 B:_I
1 2W 1 1 120 1 1 10 1 1 55 1 12600 1 1 55 1 1 45 1 1 9.0 1 1
1 I i I I I I I 1 I 1 I I 1
i I 1 1 I i i I I I• I I I I 1
i I I I I I I 1 I I I I i I I 1
1 I I I ! I I I I I 1
1 I 1 I 1 I I i I I I i I 1
I_—__---_--I.ORO I--_—___NANAGEMFNIPRGfiLEll4-----I PQj0:E.UL_B@OQUCTIY1IY_I - '1
1 I SYM I EROSIUNI EOU1P. ISEEDLINGI WINOTH.1 PLANT I COMMON TREES ISITEI TREES TO PLANT I
1_--_--_--_-1_—_LnAiesp_islnl?—LEWsrIal-IIAU82_ 1 CONPEI.1—_ _—_lidlusL----- _ 1
1 I2W I SLIGHT IMODERATEI SLIGHT I I ILOBLOLLY PINE 191 4ILOSLCLLY PINE I
1 1 1 1 ( I 1 I I IYELLOW-POPLAR I
1 I I 1 I I I I YEJ-LOW,PoP1.A9 I- IBLACK WALNUT I
I ISWEETGUM 184 ISWEETGUM -.. - I
i I I I I I IrHITE OAK i- IAMERICAN SYCAMORE I
I 1 I I I I REP MAM, I-- ICHERRYBARK OAK I
I I I I I I I I4ODTHBAN Ago OAK I" 1 I
1 I I I I I I I WATER OAK I- I
1 I I I I I I f
1 I I 1 I I I I 1
1 I 1 I i i 1
i i I 1 1 I 1
_-1'1CIQ9BE�lSs------------------- «
(—---_1—_—PESIES---1ti11_--sEEL1Es_—,lHli_—�2EL1Es _�tiSl SPECIES IHTI
NONE i 1 I I I I 11
I I I I I I
WIL"IFE HABITAI_$yjjA9jljjY--_---__
t _-- 1 — --111IEUUAL_.UR HA131TAT fLEMENTj____ ___ I -POTENTIAL A3 HABITAT EQR: I
I IGRAIN GIGRASS 91 WILD IHAROWD ICONIFERISHRUSS IWETLAHOISHALLOWIOPENLD IWOOOLD IWETLANDIRANGELDI
SEESZ—LL&fiU Lj_1EBHa_L_jRUS IPLANTS I IPLANIS 1 WATER IkLLOLF IWILDLF )WILQLF IrJULF-
GOOD I GOOD 1 GOOD I GOOD 1 GOOD I - I POOR i POOR I GOOD I GOOD I POOR I -
1 I I J t I I t 1
i I I I I I I I 1 1
I I I I 1 I I I I 1
—_EDjfb j8"ATIVE-PLDliISQpMUNITY IgANjEL,AND QH FOREST UNOERZ.UHY_(EStEIATICN)
1 — I PLANT I_—_ PERC&hj"f_fjHeQjjMN (DRY rE1SdiI)
1 COMKiN PLANT NAME I SYMBOL
F(.oWeQIAG Do6w)0OA I COFLz 1 ( 1 I I I
1 gwesrRRv I VA141
I Rea eAv I Peso I 1
1 seuRvJenO agAR I 1 1 I I 1
SWEET CLAL3
A rI•f1?C rm"' ity 1 iL.4L 1
I WAKMvaT1.% I MYce I
1 GIeEr-N(srtlee I SMiLA-L 1 I 1 I I
awvur*AY 1 MAVzt I I I I I I
1 HoNE�(sUCkL>! I LoNic I 1 I ( 1. i
5Wke.rL6AF 1 -
('
iL----i__
I POTENTIAL PRODUCTI6N (LSS./AC. DRY WT)1
I FAVORABLE YEARS
i NORMAL YEARS 11 I I i 1
1—_------5lnEtYOset3LE1EA8sr—.-1---- I--- I I r I
• SITEINOEK IS A SUMMARY OF 5 OR*MORE MEASUREMENTS UN THIS SOIL. -
62

a u a a. a A a w r w m I w I a .. n w. . .. w ......
ARAPAHOE FINE SANDY LOAN - -
EITI
IDEPTHI I I . IFRACTIPERCENT OF MATERIAL LESS ILIOUID IPLAS- I
Il1N.)I USCA TEXTURE I UNIFIED I AASHTO 1>3 ZNI_IllaN3- PASSING SIEVE tQ&_I LIMIT ITICITYI
1,-------j__— 1 ItPci11 a 1 10 1--se 12a6 1 _IINpFX I
* 1 0-171FSL ISM IA-2.`A-4 1 0 1 100 95-100'70-16 20-49 ( - 1 NP I
117-421FSL. L. SL ISM 1A-2. A-4. 1 0 1 100 05-100 70-85 20-49 ) - I NP I
142-801 SR-L.S - SCL ISM. SP-SM SC I A-2.' A-3 j A-4o A -A 1 0 1 100 95-100 65-85 S- 19 ( - 1 NP
I 1 I I 1 1 1I
1
IDEPTHICLAY 114OIST SULKI PERMEA- I AVAILABLE I SOIL .1.SALINITY I SHRINK- IERCSICNIVINO.IORGANICI CORROSIVITY I.
I(IN.JI(PCT I DENSITY i BILITV IMATER CAPACITY IREACTIONI(MMHOS/CMJI SMELL ItASIORSIERGO. IMATTER I
I I<2KMII lG/LM31 I IIWHRI 1 _LLudjII__„j (PH) I_ IPOTENTIALI KK I T 1GROUP1 IPCT) I STEEL IC13NCRETEI
1 0-171 3-151 1 2.0-6.0 .I 0.11-0.15 13.6-5.5 1 I Low 1.161 a I I i _ttIGH I HIGH I
It?- 421 5-161 1 2.0-6.0 I 0.10-0.14 13.6-7.6 1 . - { Low 1.1.51 I' 1 1
-BSI i 2.0-20 0.0�'0.14 ia•6-7.8 i - _ i LOW 1.101 1 1
I I I I i J 11
FLOODING -_ I- HIGH WATER TABLE I CEM&KffQ PAN 1 _AEQB"_ I3UESIDENCE_IHVDIPOTENT6LI
DEPTH I KIND I&OWNS I DEPTH IHARDMESS I DEPTH 1NARDNFOSIINIT.ITOTAL IGRPI FROST I
1 cowniopmev 1 DUYATIDN IMONTHS I IFT1 I __ I 1IINI I 1 /INI 1 MINI- MINI I I AcumL I
� ..
�AMjjeBY PA[ Llil[S -
-
COMSTRUC:TIOM NAT!'�ILL
1
i
SEVERE-p6NDSd6.FLOODS
II
I POOR -WETNESS I
ISEPTIC
TANK I
11
ABSORPTION 1
II ROADFILL
1
FIELDS
I
I
SEVERE-SEEPAGE.Ao MU(m .PLOODS
I I
IZMfROIBYIALr-.—Q 994* F%d93
1
SEWAGE
LAGCCN I
II SAND
AREAS
1
I I
SEVERE-PrwAOW .FL000S.SECPAGE
II
tfMPKe6AItE -EXCESS PINES
SANITARY
I
II
I. LANOFILL.
I - -
I I GRAVEL.
(TRENCH)
i
11
1
I
13EVERE- AFWAZV6,.FL000S.SEEPAGE If I POOR -WETNESS
SANITARY
I
II
I
i
LANDFILL
( -
I I TOPSOIL
i
(AREA)
I
II
I
1
I�
I POOR- Pe.YPOO
,I DAILY
J COVER FOR
(
I I
WATF��MAilNlNT
; SEVERE -SEEPAGE
;
LANDFILL
;
POND
1� RESERVOIR
!
1 I AREA
-
BUILDING SITE DEVELOPMENT
I
I SEVERE- 0QNASNO.,FLo00S.CUTEANKS CAVE
II
I SEVERE- FONALVG
J
SHALLOII
1
IIEMBANKMENTS
I
EXCAVATICNS
II DIKES AND
1
{
i
II LEVEES
I
I
1 I
SEVERE- eONAIN6.PL000s
II I SLIGHT 1
DWELLINGS I
II EXCAVATED 1 1
WITHOUT I
it PONDS
BASEMENTS I
IIAOUIPER FED I'.. - -
I I
SEVERE- POWJVA .FLOODS
II I CU18MKS CAVB.FLOODS {
DWELLINGS (
t1
WITH. I
1I DRAINAGE
VASEMENT3 1
I1
1 I
SEVERE- f0AwXW*FLOODS
e _�
II 1�iVOSN&, FLOODS
1 SMALL 1
COMMERCIAL I
II I 1
II IRRIGATION I {
BUILDINGS
I (
SEVERE- -ovA>A►t FLOODS
I I NOT NEEDED
LOCAL 1.
I) TERRACES I
ROADS AND I
I1 AND 1 1
I STREETS I
I 1
11 DIVERSIONS
1
LAWNS.' I SEVERE - OONRTMb FLOODS
11 I WETNesS 1
ILANDSCAPING I
II GRASSED I I
AND GOLF i
I) HATERWATf
J FAIRWAYS-
1
REGICNAL INTERERETATION1
1 �
63
I

ARAPAHCE FINE SAND♦ LOAM
USDA-SCS
•....__—�---HEtBEATIONAL..121:YE41iP14€Nl -^---^�---- -
SEVERE-YETNESSFLOODS II
I SEVERE-YETNESS
1 11 1 i
CAMP AREAS I I IPLAYGAOUNOS I I
SEVERE -WETNESS If
I SlVEAE-WETNESS 1
1 I . PAYNS
1
IPICNIC APEASI :. 11.... AND
TRAILS
CAPeBILITY AND VIEW$-PEACRE
OF CRDPi AND PASTU
-IN f:N LEVEL NAND+ MTI _ 1
CAPA- 1
COFN !
SOYBEANS "(
6HEAT
( OATS I PASTURE I CApOn&e I POTATOEi 1
1 BIL1Tr
(ButI
_ 1
tSUJ I
t6U2
I 1 I 1 1'!
I 16U) � tAurl �CRArEs) I lcWr.I_I
11RR. 1t11RA
IIRR. IMIRA
IIRA.
1MIR8 IJRR. IN RQ ISBR, INIRR IIRAA INIRA IIR$a_I
" I I NIARItRR.IKjRRR
I ISO 1
I I 1
f 40 1
1
t 1
I atA1A�D i 3" 1
i
so 1
1 66 1 1 IQ•0 1 t 406 I 12251 1
1 ,1
i 1 1
I I
I
1
i 1
1 I 1 1 I I I I t
WDOD�AND Syy1ey�yITY
t .. I ORD I - M e nla.Elrai- �..�:.�._:.
POTENTIAL P=nUCIM13LI
I I SYA 1 EROSIONI EQUIP* ISEeOL1NGI WINOTH.1 PLANT
I COMMON TREES ISITEI TREES TO PLANT 1
t I I.HAZARD I LIMIT I NTOY.I HA2ABII_L COMPET,
I - 1thoml t
1 12V 1 SLIGHT I,SEVERE I SEVERE I (
ILOSLOLLY P114E 190 ILOCLOLLT PINE "I
1 I I I I I !
I I ISLASH PINE. "I
1 I I I I I I
ISWEETGLM 190 ISWEETGUM 2/1
I I I. I I I t
IRED NAME I IAMERICAN SYCAMORE 2/I
I 1 I I
I WATER OAK I
IBALOCYPPESII: I
i I I 1 i L I
(POND PINE I I 1
i 1 1 1 1
1YELLOW�PaPLAR I 1
i 1 I 1
16LACK GUM
1 1 i
IswAMP CHWHOT OAK 1 1• 1
ArlgWit wNiTE cFDAR 1 I 1
--- rINQ�eNB
�SPECIEj-_ IHTI SPECIE! lHTI
SPECIES IHTI smelts ,,11Yji
1 NONE I.11 1
I 1 I 1 1
1 I
- - MILQ1�j�j HAB IiAT SJIITABILITY
-
--- _
I 1— P TENT Ls FOR Hj"j ZLucNj8
1 POTENTIAL AS HANITAT FDRt I
1 IGRAIN SIGRASS LI WILD. IHARDWO ICONIFERISHRUBS
IWETLAND ISHALLOWIOPENLO INOQOLO IMTLANDIRANSELDI
- t �1_91IEO I LEGUNE I IiRR, I TA ES IP ,ANTS 1
1 PUTS 1 WATER I WILCLF - 1 WILQLF 1 WILDLP i WtLDLI� j
1 I FAIR ) GOOD - I GOOD ) GOOO I GOOD
POOR I POOR 1 GOOD I 0000 1 FAIR I -
1
1 I 1 I
1 1 I I I 1 t
PQTENTIAIL KATI VE PLANT COMMUNITY tRANGELAND OR FOREST
UNOERSTQLY METATIONI
I PLANT I PE8UNIA0E COMPOSITION
1081 WEIQHTI - I
J CONNDN PLANT NAME I SYMBOL
1 J_IWSPNI 1 I
1 1 t 1
swlr<HCAMe~" 1 AATE4 I 1
I 1 I 1
gLum lbefiRY 1 VAcc> I I
I I I 1
1 Fo rERllOSH L OMIA I LyLuB I I
I I I I
WAXmgotTLE I MY1 I
1 1
1 1
CrItt9HOKIEQ SM1LA21
j 13TrTaR GA"O t16tY j TLGL
REb SAY 1 PE so 1 i
1 i
1 SWEET P�PPG`rt�usN I CLAL$ ( I
I 1
SwErAAy. j. MAV1t.
I NDNE,�SpcKLE I LoN1G 1 1
I I 1 1-
1 Swl»sTt.e�� 1 i I
I I I 1
PA�Sr'rc I - I 1
I 1
i POTENTIAL PRODUCTION (LSS./AC. DRY WT)2 1
1 FAVORABLE YEARS
NORMAL YEARS
-- S bMfA"MBACLE.YEARS
2 ADEQUATE SURFACE DPAINAGE SHOULD SE PROVIDED FOR BEFORE PLANTING TREES..
64

1. O 1L I NT E N P.R E TAT T U N S k h L.0 A L -
AUGUSTA FINE SANDY LUAM. .
--------- ----------- _.._-----_-�------_---
1------------- —--------------------- ----itnells_snlees:eisitEs------------------------------------- -- 1
IDEPTHI - - I I IFRACTIPERCLNT OF MATERIAL LESS ILIQLIO IPLAS- I
IIIN-II' USDA TEXTURE I UNIFIED I AASHTU 1>3 INI-Tt-lrn�:��SLNL_5LLYL-bQs_I LIMIT ITICITY;
' 1-----1-----------------1------------1----- Lte�1L_i__1—!s__1_s�1_zs4--1-----111r�Ex_.I
1 0-161FSL ISM. SM-SC IA-2. A-+ 1 O 190-100 75-100 50-80 30-50 1 <25 INP-7 I
116-611SCL. CL. L ILL. CL-ML IA-4. A-6. A-7 -.1 0 190-100 75-100 75-95 51-80 1 20-4t 1 5-2b j
141-721CUSL. L. -LS 1501. SP-5M. ML IA-2. A-4. A-1 1 0 175-100 55-100 30-90 10-70 1 <25. INP-5 I
1 1 I I I I 1 I 1
1 I i i I 1 1 1
IDEPTHICLAY IMOIST 11ULKI PERMEA- I_ AVAILABLE I SOIL. I SALINITY I SHRINK- IEROSIGNI\IND IONGANICI COR111VITY 1
I(IN.)IIPCT I DENSITY I BILITY IrATER CAPACITYIREACTIONI(MMHUS/CM)I SWELL JE65Tjj7�IEROD.IMAIIER 1___—_____:..........I
I_,__lsflSn11-i4tStl31-1�itlLr81__1_—itntltlL—_i—iPrt--L--____--1P..QIiNI1161�i_1-L14RQQP.1_1SI!_1_53€li!<-1SL^ckE i_ i
1 o-16I s-15 I 12.o-wu 1 0.10-0.15 14.5-6.0 1 - I LOW I.I51.4 I- I I—rts:+!-1MlgtEmTLI
116-61116451 1 0.6-2.0 1 0.12-0.18 14.5-6.0 I - I LOW I•z+l I I I
161-721- - 1 - 1 2.0-6.0 I 0.06-0.12 14.5-6.0 I - I LOW
I FLOODING - I_—_tltittl_i�iLli_I�l —�_LFM NF_ 7ED_e6n_.I.—_@S�QSIS-_ ISUBS1D&r"_I HYD I POTENT-L
1—__--_----- --1 DEPTH I KIND IMONTHS I DEPTH I HARDNESS I DEPTH. IHARDNESSIINIT.ITOTALIGRPI. FROST I
I_�P.EA)l CLGY �_—!?SgieI1QL_JMUNTHS J_IFT) L 1— ILINI I_�ltrlJ_—_—I(INLILIL+1_i_�_LCTI0--I
I�.....1�11R�.:1122--2.101APPARfbjJ04''t> 1=--1L--1_t¢sz��--1-=L____1_S
__§A*tUUARl_fAUL1I LL-------------- �Qf15IBldI1QJ! tlAIESteL-_ -"—_-----
I 15:V5Rt - wErr1l65 I I l FAIR-WETNESS.LOI/ STRENGTH I
(SEPTIC TANK
ABSORPTION 1 II ROADFILL 1
1 FIELDS'' I 11 1 i
I I SFVr09 -WiT99f6 (1 IMPAOSAsu- EXcttf rINo I
SEWAGE I 1
I. LAGOON I - - I I SAND
+ 1 AREAS I 11
i 13kVE1le - WSTNels i i i IMPROGAGLF-EXC995 rtMES 1
SANITARY I 1
LANDFILL I II GRAVEL I 1
(TRENCH)
1 StVe)(L- WF*rf06t
SANITARY 1 11
LANDFILL 1 - II TOPSOIL 1 1
(AREA) I II
i 11
I DAILY 1 PvoR-vJIM1%Lr ___—_—NATER MANAGEMLNi —
COVER FOR I II I MODERATE -SEEPAGE
LANDFILL I - - II POND.( _
RESERVOIR 1
II AREA 1
__lLV1LQtnSL.51I€.J2ESELDPnEaI^M__���1_ ��_-- — _ I
i--r--- j SeV&,ce - ►VerNe� I I 1 drAyEAE - WOTNESS I
I $HALLLW I IIEMBANKMENTS I
IEXCAVATIUNS I II DIKES AND
II LEVEES i
SCveR/?- w[-rNtss, pl.oeos LI 1 3tIdXT I
DWELLINGS :1 - - - 1I EXCAVATED
WITHOUT I I 1 PONDS I _
BASEMENTS.( IIAOUIFER FED(
1---_=--A ----------
7 1 sle vex - WETNe5s, P/-OODS i i i FAVORABLE
i DWELLINGS
WITH I it DRAINAGE I. 1
BASEMENTS
I—__------1---- ------
-- — 1
I S12VE1te-w1ITNeK, Fl-ooaS I I i WETNESS
1 SMALL I 11
I COMMERCIAL I II IRRIGATION i
BUILDINGS
I_—_---�__—______--_------_____—_—__
I I MooEltAYe.-►dETNeSs, Low STitEg6tM I
I.- NOT NEECED
LOCAL I II TERRACES i
ROADS AND I II AND I 1.
STREETS I II DIVERSIONS
LAWNS, 1 MODLACATE.' vJYT)AEfS GRASSED f WETNESS
ILANDSCAPING I - I
I AND GOLF ( 1I WATERWAYS I
I FAIRWAYS
---�:sllQneL_tniEtlP►sEialtna�--------- .
---- --- i - i 65
I

AuGoSTA FIRE SANDY LOAM
,----.---------------------^--------HFSHEAS1ndSL_QEYEL9P.1lElll---------------------------------------"---
, I SGuaRe - WeTNau, EtI-ooga 1 I 15EvEaE - we:Ness
II I I
' CAMP WAS I IIPLAVGRDUNDS I
1 II I 1
- ----1--------------------------_ -__---- ----'-----11------
---_1-._�_.�._.-______- ---------- -_I
ImaDertArlE-YJtTDlE% II I MOCERATI:^WET NESS
PATHS I- 1
PICNIC ARCASI It AND .:I` - I
II TRAILS 1
Sa _-----EafULITY A !Q_ICUU;j_P_.GSO _dSflEESfl_PS AN Pd;iUBL-
------- L1Stl l fl_M�tl EM II------------------
! 1 CAPA- I CORN I SOYBEANS I TALL I GRASS- I WHEAT 1 OATS ITo6A-0 1
I BILITY i I I FESCUE ILEGUME HAY 11 - L (�,
-------1
1__---_l-1flStL--1---tflStL_l-l�sltll_=1SI9b51_-_LL__«'�---1---i'�u)_-_1 --I.
----_-_1NIRRI5K1ri1RB_lIHB._jyIRR IIRR.,1NIRR URBi-itlIBP-1f39.a_IhtSS-LIBBa_1NIRR IIR2(s_IIi1RB_.uBf3a_I'
1 1 3r I Ila I 1 Ao 1 110.0 1 I 6.0 1 1 -j 1 i 80 1 126001 1.
I I ) 1 I I I ► I I I I I I I
1 I I I I I I I 1 I I I I i I I I i
1 I 1 I I I i I I I i i i I I I I I
I I I 1 t I 1 I I I i I I I 1
_ ICODLAN0 SUITA211,1---
1-- ORD I_--- _.J1eI9Q�iEllF.iiI PROBLEMS ----J-iQIECIISA6-EHn1iSIS1lJCS1Y_I 1
1 SYM I EROSIONI EQUIP. ISEEDLINGI VINOTH.1 PLANT i .. COMMON TREESISITEI TREES TO PLANT 1
1_-__---1----1-tiezatlf�l_Llnu-1_dnei�xAl_neiean�sanertsl_----^ _J.tnQxL_ - i
1 — 1211 I SLIGHT IMODERATEI SLIGHT I 1 ILOBLCLLY PINE 192 ILOBLOLLY PINE I
1 1 1 i i IsbEETGUM 190 _ISLASH PINE i
I I i I i 1 1 1 I (SYEETGUM I
1 1 I ( ( I I (WHITE CAK I80 IAMERICAN SYCAMORE
I 1 1 1 I t 1 ISOUTHERN RED GAK 180 IYELLOW-POPLAR
I I I I t 1 I IYATER OAK I- ICHERRYBARK OAK 1
1 i I 1 i I ! iR�D MAP1-E i- I 1
I I i I I I 1 I✓ELtow-PePLRk
1 1 I 1 i I I BLALK6UM I_ I-
I
I I I 1 I I I I I 1 1
1 1 I I i 1 1 I 1 1 i
I I I I 1 1 I 1 I I 1
1 I 1 I I I i 1 I I i
------— - -
- ----j------- I
_—yI NDBR EAK5 '
�e>:slfes—r-Inll sPgsll a IHTI---iPfSIEB—___.I HT SPIECIE§_ IHTI
1 I NONE, 1 I I l 11 I i
I I'
I i I I 1
1 i I I 11 11 1
—
I----�-^ ---1 _—_ QQTE,NTIAL FOR HABITAT ELEMTS _ —_1 POTENTIAL AS Hj1BITAT FOR; 1
I - IGHAIN 6IGRASS 61 MILD IHARDYD ICONIFERISHRUBS IYETLANDISHALLOWIOPENLD IYOOQLD IMETLANDIRANGELD1
j_LCM I TREES IeLANT S I _—IEJLANTS 1 WATER LjaLM IVILQLF IYILDLF IYILDLF_
I I FAIR 1 GOOD ) GOOD t GOOD 1 GOOD I 1 FAIR I FAIR ( GOOD 1 GOOD 1 FAIR
1 i I I 1 I 1 I I I I I 1 1
__WF.bUAL NATI VEHLAtll CON yNITY (RANGE►,AND OBPQEESIPl=UlCf1Y_YU &l=N1
I I PLANT IPERC�PNTAG"nMPOSITIUN SpgLiElS,tflL_-- 1
I COMMON PLANT NAME I SYMBOL
-----�-
6ITMR GAtt$AItAy I T-L61.
awlTCHcAIJE I AR'frq I I I 1 I i
Sixf8apAy 1 VAcci 1 1
I VVAFMYAJLe 1 MYcr 1 1 I I I
1 Goter-w "16A. - 1 sMli.A7-
6" ($4y PEf90 j j j I 1 I
I Swk�T P.er�ERBuSIr 1 eLALs 1 1 I I t 1
1 3WeFT,*AY I MAvIs I I 1
I SWF.rGBGLe�EitRY I x�co I 1 I I 1 1
I FLOuJERtRG Do&%4&&b I CaFi-Z I I 1 1
� 50UICwoOD � o%AIC 1 1 '! I t
I Fs:TTeaeoaH LYONZA 1 Lv�U3 I 1 I 1 I 1
I POTENTIAL PRUJUCTIU.N ILBS./AC. DRY UT):---
1 FAVORABLE YEARS
-1 NORMAL YEARS
I•--------------.�nl_eYaaeal.�e6�---' - ---1--.1___. __.1_
FCOTNOTES -
66

CARTERET-SOILS
NEW MAA - CART"Er COMF{ rcx/ c To'60 P6RuCr/T SLopkS, CA RTF,tCT PART
ESTIII�EQ�IL-P$�f.R11E5
IDEPTHI I- I IFAACTIPERCENT OF MATERIAL LESS — ILl OUIDIPLAS- I
111N.)I USCA TEXTURE I UNIFIED 1 AASHTO 1>3 INI•ItlSd_12 PASSLtSi_SIEVE hOA-1 LIMIT ITICITYI
1L-� ( 1(PCTII-J' 1 1" LO 1 200 I _--__.ItNDEX I
I 0-601LS ISI(• SP-SH IA-29 A-3 ) 0-3 195-100 90-100 50-75 5-25 I - I NP I
IDEPTHICLAY (MOIST SULKI PERMEA- I AVAILABLE I SOIL I SALINITY I SHRINK- (ERCSIONIWIhD ICRGANIC) CORROSIVITY I
I(IN.)I(PCT I DENSITY I BILITY IWATER CAPACIfYIREACTIONI(MMMOS/CM)I SWELL IfACTOR IERCO.INATTER I __ )
(-_.-1S214M),I._(G/CM3) , I IIN(HRI I Halms I —.(PHI 1 __ IPOTENTIALI K 1 T If.B UPI IPCTI t S7EEL IL00=1
I o-aoI 1 1 )16.0 I 0.02-0.10 15.6-8.4 I >16 1 LOW 1.161 B 1 1110— 1 HIGH I
1 I I I 1 I 1 I I I I 1 1
FLOODING
09PTH I KIND, IMONTHS
DEPTH
I I SEVERE-rONlSNG,Fl.00D5 � PooR Fll.'r ( 11 I POOR-W[TNEBS
13EPTIC TANK I II
ABSORPTION I II ROADFILL
FIELDS
I I SEVER E-&WpVj6 . FLOODS. 3E9 PAGE II ifADBAB1.6
SEWAGE
1 LAGCCN I II SAND
AREAS 1
I I SEVER0003 SEE PAGE, oNcm-6f OLT 11 mv4P6
SANITARY
LANDFILL I II GRAVEL
. (TRENCH(
SEVER!- 0 OL:/L�.FLOODi.SEEPAGE —_ I ( I POOR- CW.9 is OA4T .WETMnS.TO0 &AMY
SANITARY 1 1I
LANDFILL I II TOPSOIL
(AREA) I �l
POTENTOLI
FROST 1
ACTION I
—1
1
I
1
1
1
1 I POOR- 014b3W( .TOO SANDY � E,•�Cs� SALT-
11
j COVER FOa j.
_ WATER MANAGEMENT
11 i SEVERE -SEEPAGE
LANDFILL
voMD
RESERVOIR i
II AREA i 1
BULL DING SITE OEV96OPME y* T
I SEWERE- MopI&I *FLOODS .CUTBANKS CAVE
I I - ) SEVERE -SEEPAGE (cG.f_63 SALT
• I SHALLOW I
IIENBANKMENTS I. -
IEXCAVATICNS i
II DIKES AND
I I
LEVEES
11
1 I SEVERE- llj;j;&, .FLOODS
11 1 5ILV&AL- 54L1Y UTATBR
DWELLINGS I
II EXCAVATED
WITHOUT I
II PONDS
BASEMENTS
AGUIFER FED
—w-I
. I SEVERE- AAd1 4•FLODOS
I i IPoNpZp((, .FLOODS. E.A&&4 SAL1
(' DWELLINGS I
I I.
-I
WITH I
II DRAINAGE -
BASEMENTS I
II I _
I SEVERE-16111101%*FLOODS
II I ONOSNb.EXCESS SALT
SMALL I
11 i
COMMEPCIAL I
11 IRRIGATION I
BUILDINGS-
11 1 I
1
-I I SEVERE
' I LOCAL 1. ,
ROADS AND I
-! STREETS ( -
• 1
*FLOODS
I) -- 1 NOT NEEDED
If TERRACES 1
I1 AND
II DIVERiIDNi 1
�.1 I
( LARn7. 1 519VGfkc FAAPSNI., •, F'Vovo', =7' .G
(LANDSCAPING`) I) GRASSED I
I AND GOLF 1 I( WATERWAYS I
I FAIRWAYS I 11
—_�Cfilt�IdL_1tlIE8PeEIAI1G�l.5�_— �i 67
ly— 1 1
NOT

usaA-scs
I I SEVERE PONp=Nb•FLOODSEHclS S �6A&-T II I SEVERE-(ONpVJG FLOOD$, ExLES3 SAI,z `�-
i I II
i CAMP AREAS I 11PLAYGROUNDS i t
---� SEVERE- 1'aIUDZNb.FL0005� Qrcaft g1IpT - � I I .I SEVERE-PONAIN& •FLCCDS
1 I 1( PATHS i
-(PICNIC AREAS( - - I 1 AND 1 1
II TRAILS 1
_ "eA1L1TY fiN0 YIELDS PER ACE OF CROPS AND PASTURE _IHIGH LEVEL MANAGEMENTI f
1 I CAPA-
SILL Tr
INIRRIIRR,INjRR IIR@,_lNIRR IIRR_INIBa IIRR. lNIRR 11RR.M,• IMIRR_"89.JNIRR 1188. lblaa— IHa I
I I I I 1 11 1 1 I 1 t 1 t
i I I I 1 i I i I I I I I I I 1 I i
I I 1 i I 1 i I I 1 1 i I 1 I I I i
J J J�l�J
jWA Ab0 SUITARILITY-
- ( 0RO.1 „_ MANAGIEI�HT PROECEMS.. 1�_EGI%AIIlAL..PROOUCTIVITY 1 -- -- ---
( I SYM I EROSION( EOUIP. ISEEOLINGI rINDTH.I PLANT 1 COMMON TREES ISITEI TREES TO PLANT I
1 I HAZARD 1 LIMIT I MORIOX-1 HAZARD I COMPEJ-1 1INDXI I
� I 1 i 1 NONE i 1 I
I I I I 1 I i 1 i
I 1 1 I 1 I 1 I ( ( I
I I I I 1 I 1 I i 1 1
I i I i 1 1 I 1 I i
- �l SPlClE��, IHTI SQECIES —� IHTI ,AMIf-4 IHTI �f,'fi IHTI
( NONE
I I I I 1 I 1
_ r1LOLIFE NAe[TAT AU TARILITY
I ( POTENTIAI FOR NA�AT !S_ rE n3 1 POTBiTIAL Ai H,�14AT FOdE
IGRAIN &[GRASS 91.MILD INAROMD 1CONIFERISHRUBS IWOTLAND ISHALLOW IOPEMLD IIIOOOLD IrETLANOIRANM"I
[. - 1 SEED ILEGLIIf iWoo- 1 TRPFR I PLAtaA I,— IELAI'I1I 1 rAT-r Irli_nLF,jy11_ w IrILOL_w 1r1 =Lw-1
FAIR i GCCD _ I I 1 FAIR '
1
1 1 I I I I I I l
�_I!MNTI L MAT[ VE--PLAUX COMMUNITY IQARM6NO OR FORFST UODERjITIIfi_,Xi69XA,TIDNI
- - — ( PLANT ,�-,� PFRRCENTAGE COMPnSIT�ION._ IDRLIIEIGHT)
COMMON PLANT NAME i SYMBOL
I Nl spH l
ISLACKNMILE RuSI{ i Sulto I I 1
SPA
( f3lb coRocsRnes 3PcY
I MARS► 0AY C0404 A56 SPPA j 1 I 1 1 1
t GLAas WORT i SA LTC
I
1
i
1 1 1 1 l I I I
POTENTIAL PRODUCTION (LBS./AC. DRY wrl! I 1
FAVORABLE YEARS
NORMAL YEARS I I I I
--DTNOTES
68
ti,

SOIL INTERPRETATIONS RECORD
- LE014 SAND
LEAN-• MADAM L0I4D CoMVLE'A , LEoN PART
--
-
--_ --
1
ESTIMATED
SOIL PROPERTIES
---__ _-_-__
IOEP7HI -
-___--�
-
I
-
I
IFRACTIPERCENT Of MATERIAL LESS - IL10U1D JPLAS-
I(IN.)I USDA
TEXTURE
1
UNIFIED
_
J AASHTO
1>3 1NI TNAII 3-_PASSlhfi-21UF NO, I LIMIT ITICITYI
j__
(
(1PCT)1 A 1 10 1 40 1 200 _1_ j"wfA_I
1 0-151S
----�--
ISP.
SP-SM
JA-3. A-2-4
1 0 1 1D0- 100 80-100 2-12 I - I NP I
I15^-301S. FS
ISM.
SP-SM. SP
JA-3. A-2-4
1 0 1 100 100 80-100 3-20 J - J NP I
I30-7515.'FS
J i
ISP.
I
SP-SNjSM
JA-3. A-2-4
1
I 0 1100 100 80-100 2-;to I - I NP
J I
1 I
I
1
IDEPTHICLAV
INGEST BULK)
PERMEA--r
II AVAILABLE
( SOIL I SALINITY
I SHRINK- JEROSIONJMIND JORGANICI CORROSIVITY I
((IN.11(PCT
I DENSITY I
BILITY
IVATEA CAPACITYIREACTIONI(NMHOS/CN)) 'SWELL IFACT BZJ EAGO. I MATTER
J_ IS2MM)j-j,¢[C,jQj__
I
(IN/HR)
I )IN/IN) I (Pdj- 1
IPOjFYT1AL1 K i T IGROUPI _(PCTl 1 STEEL lCoNcelul
1 0-151 1-6
11.40-1.65 1
6.0-20
i 0.0E-0.08
13.6-5.5 1 -
IVERY LOW 1.201 5 1 - 1 .5-1 I HIGH 1 HIGHI
115-301 2-8
11.50-1.70 1
0.6-6.0
( 0.05-0010
J3.6-5.5 1 -
IVERY LOW 1.201 1 '1 I
130-751 1-6
11.40-1.65 i
>20
I 0.02-0.09
13.6-5.5 J -
IVERY LOW 1.171-
I I
I
I 1
I J I
FLOODING I HIGH WATER TABLE _j,-GgMEbjED PAN i BEDROCK ISUBSIDENCE IHYDIPOTENT•L
DEPTH I KIND JMONTHS IDEPTHIMAROMESSIDEPTM INARONESSIINIT.ITOTALIGRPI FROST
I I SEVERE -WETNESS, esmsm ED PAN 1 I 1
(SEPTIC: TANK
I ABSORPTION i I1 ROADFILL I
FIELDS
I I SEVERE-SEEPAGE.WETNESS) CBMLN'TED PAW I 1
A J SEWAGE I 11
J LAGOON I ji SAND
J AREAS
I I SEVERE-SEEPAGE.WETNESS.TOD SANDY II
I SANITARY 1 11
LANDFILL I II
R J (TRENCH) i
� 11
POOR -WETNESS THIN LAYER I
1
1
IMPROBABLE EXCESS FINES t
1
i
i
IMPROBABLE - BXCESS FINES i
1
GRAVEL I 1
I SEVERE -SEEPAGE. WETNESS, CEMfPAN
II
J POOR -TOG SANDY. WETNESS, AREA RECLAIM I
SANITARY
I
JI
I 1
J LANDFILL
1
II TOPSOIL
I 1
I
(AREA)
I
Il
1
POOR-SEEPAGE.TOO SANDY.WETNESS,TNIN LAY/<fj,
I)
I DAILY
I AI( R,G4A%?^ 1
11
YATERN&Ufi1EMENT
I COVER FOR
POND
i SEVERE -SEEPAGE , CEMINTID PAN
LANDFILL
RESERVOIR
11 AREA
1 I SEVERE-CUTBANKS CAVE, WETNESS,GIMENTED PAN 11 1 SEVERE -SEEPAGE. PIPE NGs1(ETNE53, IMIN LAYEK i
SHALLOW ) ((EMBANKMENTS
1EXCAVATIONS 1 11 DIKES AND I I
J 11 LEVEES
11 1 1
SEVERE -WETNESS - I I J SIVA81 - CUTOANKS CAv1
DWELLINGS I II EXCAVATED I j
WITHOUT
I PONDS
BASEMENTS I IIAOUIFERFED I 1
I I SEVERE -WETNESS, GAMENT90 PAN
DWELLINGS
J WITH
BASEMENTS
I 1 SEVERE -WETNESS
I SMALL I
COMMERCIAL I
BUILDINGS I'
II I CU79ANKS CAVE ,CPMENTID PAN ;
11
11 DRAINAGE i 1
I
11
II
I1 IRRIGATION
II
1
WETNESS.FAST INTAKE, OROVaNTY, C1ME1VT/0 PAN J
i
J I SEVERE -WETNESS
II
I NOT NEEDED ;
LOCAL 1
I1 TERRACES
I ROADS AND I
II AND
J 1
STREETS I
DIVERSIONS
I LAWNS. I StVE1tE-WET(JK63,TNIN LAYLA
j W[TNfff, DRDvsHTY, C[MINTER PAN J
ILANDSCAPING I-
GRASSED
J AND GOLF J
IJ WATERWAYS
1 I
1
I FAIRWAYS I
__U"Qt"_jftTERPRE ATION
I 69
I 1
1

-- - --_ -- _.--•---- _------• -- — --------__-___8JS8F�AI1LDtAt._QEYtLQPllttli_------------• -_------- -. __ _ _ _. _ _
1 I A VLRL-ftLTNEA5.700 SANDY, 6EMENTEP PAN I I I SEVERE -TOO 5ANDV.bE1Nt:!.S G[M[NTlD PAN �
II I is
I LAMP AREAS I IIPLAYGROUNOS I I
1 1 II
------- ---1----------_ LL-----_1 _------------- ------=--- ----- 1
I I SEVERE-IBETNESS.TOO SANDY, CGMENTED PAN 11 I SEVERE-%E111ESS.TOU SANDY 1
1 1 11 PATHS I
IPICNIC AI4EASI . "1 I AND I
11 .TRAILS I 1
_SAPAJUULY_MQ-YLGLQS PER ACBE_DE_SBQPj-AW_MTUFE._._Ltl1Sd7_Lfl(EL_21ehdS7E14Ehll-__•.--_--____.
I CAPA- I GoRN I COMMIri I OANIAC.R/155 I I I 1 I
1 BILITY 1 IIIiRMu►AC.AASSI I I I
I—_�__—_._—_—._____�tl1BB.11B8altllBB_11Bt3a_1lLLHF�18Ba_1tl188_111i�i1118H_11BAa_1H1HC.11PPa_.LN1PP_11P8a_1r1EP_�1P +)i.l '
I4wI I5o I 11 1 1-76I
1 I I 1 I 1 I I I I I I I 1 I I I 1
1-
1 I I I I I I 1 1 1 1 ! I I t
1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I 1
1 I I 1 1 1 I I 1 I { 1 I I I t
1 I I I I 1 I I I t I is
1 I I 1 I I 1 I 1 I I I I f
I [)AD I_ MANeM=a PRO LENS I—PQIm1.ei.iBllQm1Y1.LY_I
1 I SYM I EROSIONI EQUIP. ISEEDLIMGI NINOT04.1 PLANT I COMMON TREESI, ISITEI TREES TO PLANT I
I HAZARD 1 LJMIT I nORi-Y.l HAZARD I COMPE1j) _-UNDAI _•_,_,I
1 I Pvv I 544HT I MODRRATE I MDonst4 :I MoOSRRfi! I MODE(tRT)c
1 1 I 1 1 Lo14GLEAf= PIMA ! !+5 1'
I 1 I I 1 1 1 I Pa ND P1Ne I GO I I
1 1 I 1 1 I I I.oBLPLLY PINE I I I"
1
l I 1 I 1 I I 1 I 1 i
1 1 1 1 1 I 1 I I t
L t I 1 1 I 1 1
1--- -- —1--- 1-----1-----1- I I— 1 — L__-A_
SPECIES_--IHTI —SPECIES _. .__�IZ[1—___•`�PEi, [ES _ IHTI— SPECILA—•-•—RaI
NONE
I I 1 1 I t 11
1 I I I I 11 11
1 I I 1 1 I i I 1
1
----------------------------------- ---- --- —
P.QIEtlj--1AL..E11a NABITA7 ELEMENTS _ ---I �PQj ENilAL AS HAB Ijei1:12@.>,--I
1 IGRAIN &IGRASS 61 WILD IHARDMD ICONIFERISHRUBS IMETLANOISHALLOYIOPENLD IMOOOLD IMETLANDIRANGELDI
1 SEED ILEGUME-j_nEQBa-1 TREES ]PLANT 5_I—_, lEl.AM-J-&AjER IVILOLF 1)ILOLF IWI1D_LF INJLQLE_)
I 1 1 I 1 ! t I t I I I
I 1 I I I 1 t I I 1 I I I t
1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I ( 1 1 I I {
1 I I I I 1 I 1 1 I I 1 1
I -----1--1--�--1 I _•jr_ I 1 I --1—_ 1 1 1�._._ 1
_ i-POTE):{1jAL NAILVE PLANT COMMUNITY IRAMGELAND OR fIlRESI UNDERSTCRY VEGETATIOtU --�—_
I I PLANT I PERCENTAGE QPQSITION jDU Yj]ftlT1--_—_--
COMMON PLANT NAME I SYMBOL I 1 1 I I I
1 l
.WLREGRA55 ^� I� A•Idl S
t BITTER GALLBERRY I ILGL 1 I I 1 I 1
SWEET GALLBERRY 1 LOCO I 1
13LUE BERRY 1 VARY I I I I I I
I t.
I Fe f'YRiSUSN . WoN[A I LYLUY I I I 1 1 1
SWEET PEPPE'RBUSH I CLALS I
WAAMYArL.E I Mvcg
1 3w1TtrNCANE 1 ARTE¢ 1 1 1 1
SWEETbAY I MA VIZ
I( 1 eo t3AY 1 pE
GReENOA.IER I SMILH2I I I I I
I POTENTIAL PRODUCTION (LtiS./AC. DRY YT)S
1 FAVORABLE YEARS I I I I I 1
1 NORMAL YEARS I I I I 1 1
1_-- — ilbFAVORAEILE XLARS 1 _�-_ �(�-- I•_ _I 1 1
FOOTNOTES
70

b U 1 L IMI C M P N E JAI JUNO HCLLPU
"
-
MANOMIN SAND
MANOAiZIN .Uo(6AN i-ArtA CeMPI-EK, MANDAASN PARE
IDEPTHI
IFRACTIPERCEN7 OF MATERIAL LESS-ILIQUID IPLAS- I
141N.11 U5CA TEXTURE I UNIFIED
I AASHTO 1>3 INI_jY13D-3_ PASSING SIEVE NOjL_I LIMIT ITICITTI
I.._.I�—_-------I� —
1 �.1.t CT1.1.� 4 _1_19 1 0 1 200 1 _--ll11Q&2LI
♦
1 0-261 S 'ISP. SP-SM
IA-3 - -1 0 1 100 100 90-100 2-10 I - ( NP I
126-40IFS. S ISP-SM. SM
IA-3. A-2-4 1 0 1 100 300 90-100. 5-15 NP I
140-73IFS. S ISP. SP-SM
IA-3 I 0 1 100 100 90-100 2-7 1 - I NP
173-801F5. '- ISP. SP-SM
IA-39 A-2-4 1 0 1 100 100 90-100 3-12.I - 1 .NP I
I
• I I I
r 1—THICL---------1----
� _ i L 1
- — 1
IOCPTHICLAY (MOIST BULK( PERMEA- 'I AVAILABLE
I SOIL I SALINITY 1 SHRINK- IEFCS[CNIWINO (ORGANIC( CORROSIVITY I
I(IN.)I(PCT I DENSITY I BILITY IWATER CAPACITYIREACTIONI(MMHOS/CM)1 SWELL IfACT CRJ EROO.IMATTER
I_—�1521�11 (G/CM3) (IN4MR) 1 (Ik,*IN)
l (PHI 1 IPOTENTIALI K 1 T IGRCUPI (PCT) I STEELjCNF,ul
-1
1 0-261 1 16.0-20 1 0.03-0.07
13.6-6.0 1 - I LOW 1.151 5 1 2 I IMUDERATEI _HjfiH1
126-401 . 1 10.6-2.0 I 0.10-0.13
140-731 1 16.0-20 1 0.03-0-07
13.6-6.0 1 .- I L06 1.201- 1 1 1
15.6-7.3 1 - 1 LOW 1.1G1--- _1
173-001 1 10.6-2.0 1 0.10-0.15
15.6-7.3 1 - I LOW I.151
1 FLOODING I--_IjQH-/AEFaR TAByE - t CEMENTED PAN 1 BEQgQ __ (SUBSIDENCE IHYOIPOTENT'LI
DEPTH I
KIND (MONTHS IDEPTHINARONESSIDEPTH INARDNESSIINIT.ITOTALIGRPI FROST I
I — _I
i_Faul:Hl:i--A--QuIlalJGN IN THS 1 (PTI I 1 IIINI 1 1 tlN) 1 I1IN) I/IM) 1 I ACTION I
----- I —J1 _3, fS 1 APeAMNI1jUN-DEC
1 - 1 1 jQ��-- 1 - 1 1 A/OI = 1
-- CCIjITRUCTION MATCHIAL
1 ( SEVERE -WETNESS
11 I FAIR -WETNESS
ISEPTIC TANK 1
11
I ABSORPTION I
II ROADFILL I
I FIELDS 1
II
----_
--
_
I i SEVERE-SEEPAGE.WETNESS
II I/AOBASLS
I SEWAGE 1 -
I( I
C
I LAGOON. I
I I SANG.
1 AREAS
I---
I I SEVERE-SEEPAGE.WETNESS.TOC SANDY
II IJAPROSAELE. TOO SANDY I
SANITARY
LANDFILL I
1I GRAVEL
-
(TRENCH)
A I (_SEVERE-WETNESS.SEEPAGE
�i i POOR -TOO SANDY
1 SANITARY 1
i LANDFILL 11I
TOPSOIL 1 -
(AREA) I
II
POOR-100 SAVOYl)gs" PAGE
WATER MANAGEMENT
DAILY
1 COVER FCR (
II i SEVERE -SEEPAGE
' 1 LANDFILL 1
I1 POND
RESERVOIR I ..
1
II AREA I
SITE 2XUOP, ENT
—_RULDING
I I SEVERE-WETNESS.CUTBANKS CAVE
II I SEVERE-SEEPAGE.PIPING
SHALLOW I
IIEMBANKMENTS
(EXCAVATIONS 1
11 DIKES AND I
I 1
11 LEVEES I
I--_-1----- ---
I I MODERATE -WETNESS
11 - 1
1I I MODERATE -DEEP TO WATER
I DWELLINGS 1
11 EXCAVATED I
I WITHOUT I'
11 PONDS i
BASEMENTS )
IIAGUIFER FED I 1
w
-- 1 SEVERE -WETNESS II
DWELLINGS
WITH 1
1 BASEMENTS 1 If
CUTBAN)15 C.AYE
DRAINAGE I
( I NODENATE-WETN[SS
1 SMALL
1=COMMERCIAL I II IRRIGATION
BUILDINGS 1 II
tl 1
I I MODERATE -WETNESS II I NOT NEEDED
LOCAL I I I TERRACES '
1 ROADS ANC I II AND
STREETS I II DIVERSIONS
I I --
I LAWNS. I 6FvERE-DAcu4HTj II
(LANDSCAPING I
I AND GOLF
I FAIRWAYS 1 II
I—------- -_ __--_---_----J t
------�fJL�d1_1HIE8E8IIIdIIDNS _--
I � I
I 1
I
i
WETNESS 9OROUGHTV.FAST INTAKE I
1
1
I ypo u -"Ty
GRASSED I
WATERWAYS
71

USDA-bt.S
-------- _BESBEeI11+NAL DEV "PMENT — --------------__ -- - --- _ --
l I $LiVEREi-TOO SANDY 11 I SEVERE-100 SANDY 1
II I I
I CAMP AREAS I IIpLAYGRCUNOS
I I SEVERE -TOO SANDY II I SEVERE-100 SANDY I
II PATHS i
(PICNIC AREASI II AND
1 1 ITRAILS I I
_WaEILXfV-e14j?—j eLas-PER ACRE Cf_�pS (
AND EeSIURE PIGH lEVU MANAGEMENT) —_..— _--_.—
1-� --- - I CAPA- i BAHI AGRASS I 11 I ( I--
BILIFY I I I 1 I I I 1 •
—Ilix &LLfSBalt 8a-Al6Ha_1LiBB-11B8`INtAR IIBR- Iy1B8_11BB.@-JbMB_.I.IBe._1tl1BB1Sss.`1nL88_1185,_1
6S I 6.0
I 1 I I 1 L 1 I I 1 ! 1 I I I 1 I 1
I I I I 1 I 1 I I I 1 1 I I 1 I I
l I 1 I I I I 1 I I 1 I 1 I I I
i I I i I I I 1 i I I I i 1 I I i 1
i-
i
I I I 1 I I 1 1 I I I 1 1
1 ____�--- 1 1 -1 1 i 1 I �1��----L---•1--- 1 1---1--.1--_ 1
.�9!?LetllZ.SSIJI
I_ — --� Opc I--_______KAbAQE EtlI_EBOJ36E!lS----.-1_�9IE1lIIdLEBBQStGIlY11]LI I
I I SYM I EROSIONI EQUIP. ISEEDLINGI YINOTH.1 PLANT I CCMMCN TREES ISITEI TREES TO PLANT
I��——1___—LdezeB�l.litlll 1 MCRT*Y.1_tihLal) I G M[PET.1 II OXI --I
I4S I SLIGHT IMODERATEI SEVERE SLIGHT INODERATEI - - I - ISLASH PINE
1 I ( 1 1 I (LONGLEAF PINE 160 (SAND PINE
1 I I I I I I1-rve oAK I I 1
I 1 I I I I 1 I)„oB�.-oI.LY PINE I
I I I I I I 1 i I 1 1
I I I I 1 I 1 I I I I
I 1 I I I 1 I I 1 1
11 1 I I 1 I I I I i
I I I 1 I 1 1 ! I 1 I
I i I I 1 1 1 I I I i
1 1 1 I I 1 I 11 I
I I I I I i I I I 1 I
I 1 I i I 1 I 1
SPA Imo_-_ IHTI SPECIES --IHTI
1 ISLASH PINE 1401CAPOLINA LAURELCHY 1301JAPANESE PRIVET 13018ANSOO 1251.
I 1 I I I I I 1 I
•--"---------------- ---- - -- r I L DuE�tjeB1IAI_s utlenuuz_-------------^•-------.-=
I _—_—.---•-- _—� —_—_.—QSTENT1AL_E128.�eElIAI�E.IiEljla�--_---____—.I._ PDTFMTIAL AS HABLULFOR: - I
IGRAIN &IGRASS &I MILD IHAROMD ICONIFERISHRUBS IMETLANDISHALLOMIOPENLD IMDOOLD IYETLANDIRANGELDI ►
PLANi_�j�( 1P�N�SS 1_11ATER IMILDLE IYILDLF IMILD� JWILDLF 1.
eLlIEJ�lE8Ala I TREES)
1 -- IV. POURIPOOR (POOR ( POOR I FAIR I - IV. PCORIV. VCCRIPCCR..`I POOR- IV. POORI - I
1 ( 11 1 I I 1 1
I I 1 I 1 1 I I I 1 I i 1
1
I CCMI[;N PLANT NAME
I ►✓As-requA KC D WMDAet
WA)(MYRTLE
1 �.VLRE`RASS
1 i3j.LEhEKK�I
� �LTTi:R GALS S1;RRy
REn PLAY
i
1
I PLANT I.
I SYMBOL I
Lf.WEBI L
13UVS I
I Myc g I
j A91ST j
1 We. % I
I F� So I
I t
1 I
1 I
I POTENTIAL PROOUCTICN ILBS./AC. DRY WTI:-
1 FAVORABLE YEARS I ( 11 1
I NCFMAL YEARS I I I 1
1 ---_-- UbFAVORABLE_YEARS
FOOTNOTES
72

S O I-L -I N T E R'P R E T A T-I O N S RECCAD
USDA-SCS
r
A
f1EWHAN• CAATERET c♦MPLYd, o T• a PERcENr ScoPEs , NEt✓NAN PRCT '��4
ESTIMATED SOIL PRLPL8TjES
IDEPTHI I i IFRACTIPERCENT OF MATERIAL LESS.+ILIOUID JPLAS- I
1(IN.)1 USCA TEXTURE I UNIFIED I AASHTO 1),3 1NI„In$y-3:�i$iNL SIIYp NDiI LIMIT ITICITYJ
I I— ^ I I I (PCT) 1 a 1 U- I 41 1 Q00 1 IINDFX 1
10-64IFS ISP IA-3 10 195-100 9S-100 60-75 0-5 1 - I NP 1
1 1 I 1
11 I i 1 1
IDEPTHICLAV (MOIST BULKI PERMEA- I AVAILABLE I SOIL I SALINITY I SHRINK- IERCSIONIWIND JORGANICI. CORROSIVITY I
141N.)I(PCT I DENSITY I SILITY (WATER CAPACITY IREACTIONIIMMHOS/CM)I SWELL jfffffp1ER00.IMATTER I I
1<2MM)�fflC)Llf 1 (IN/MR) 1 (I N/IN) 1 (PN) 1 (POTENTIAL( K 1 7 IGRDUPI (PCT) I STEEL IM'PrTEi
1 0-641 1 1 >20 1 <0.06 I6.6-7.4 1 - 1 LOW 1.101 5 1 - .1 I NIGH 1 Lax —I
1 I 1 1 I I 1 I 1
FLOODING I Nliw ATGo TABLE I EMlNIEa PAN -1 BEDRDCK ISURSI N[FiIHVDIPOTENTOLI
I DEPTH I KIND INONTHS I DEPTHI HARDNESS I DEPTH IHARONESSIINIT.ITOTALIGRPJ FROST I
&UTARY FMI`ITI,ES
CONSTBULTION MATERIAL -
1-r I SEVERE-. PaaR 0ZLYrA
11
I GOOD
ISEPTIC TANK 1
i 1
11
I ABSORPTICN I
1I ROADFILL
J 1
FIELDS '
1
11
I I SEVERE -SLOPE. SEEPAGE
II
I G000
SEWAGE I
I(
I I
I
LAGCCN J
II SAND
I
AREAS I
11
1 I
jSEVERE -SEEPAGE) 70o SAWAY
1 I
ITMPRoBnBcB •T�� SA/v6v
SANITARY 1
II
i
1 LANDFILL 1
1 ( GRAVEL
1 [TRENCH)
I I SEVERE•. SEEPAGE
II
I POOR -TOO SANDY
SANITARY I
11 I
1 -
LANDFILL 1
II TOPSOIL
J (AREA) 1
iI
FOCR TOO SANDY WWA66
I DAILY I 11
WATER MANAGEWENT
I COVER FOR I II ) iEVERE-SEEPAGE
LANDFILL i II POND
11 RESERVOIR I
II AREA BUILDING SITEDEVELOPMENT
I I SEVERE- CUTBANKS CAVE
I SHALLOW i
I ON CA VAT[CMIS 1
II I SEVERE-SEEPAGE)P=Q=t4G
((EMBANKMENTS I
II DIKES -AND
If
LEVEES
SL1bNT II
I SEVERE- WO WATER
ON ELL INGS 1
-
II EXCAVATED I -
I WITHOUT I
It
PONDS
EASEMENTS
IJAGUIFER
FED I
I1 1
-
SLYvHT
II I NOT NEEDED
DWCWITHGS
II
I
I1
DRAINAGE I
ISASE14ENTS I
11
I I
SLICsHT
51-o1�
11 I FAST IN?AKE.DROU4NTYpSMALL
I COMMERCIAL I
11
If I
IRRIGATION I ,
i BUUD1;NGs I
1 1"
II
1—' I
Su4F17,
11 I NOT NEEDED
I LOCAL I
II TERRACES
ROADS AND
J I AND
STREETS
I 1
I) DIVERSIONS
11 1
{ LAWNS. I'5r_VCRE
-bRouGNTy
II 1 •�ReuGmY
ILANDSCAPINf. 1
II GRASSED I -
AND GOLF I
If WATERWAYS
i FAIRWACS
11
_ RE j[jjjlej twTwROBE TATIDNS 73
1 I I
1 _ I

---- i---- i
--------------
-----------
-----
-------
--------
--a-------
- ------
IL
--
--------- - -
-
-----------
----
--
--------------
>------------
a
y
r
— — — — — — — — — — —
r
a
J
d
___________IL
Fm
a
>
--
— — — — — — — — —
--------------
— — — — —
—
— — — — —
N
N
r
< < !L
----------
u
a r
I
—
__
----------_
p
.�,.
p
_
_____________
0
-----------
—
v
--------------
°
�
g
_
--
— — — — — — — — — — —
—
--------------
'^
--------------
z
-
=
<
--
i
=
aJ c
— — — — — — — — — — — 'A
--
-------------
_�
IZO
J
2
t
IL
m
d
I
li;n
J.
�
oV_
t{I
V
N
R
-------------------------------------
he
a

1 u/ L 1 m I c" W. �. c. A. A V . a - L 1 .
TOMOTLEV FINE SANDY LOAM.
ERiIts
�IDEPTHI
1 I
IFRACIIPEPCENT OF MATERIAL LESS-ILIDUIO
JPLAS- I
111N.11 USDA lexTUML
I UNIFIED I AASHTO
1>3 INI-IpA- PAS SjNG SIEVE NOy_I LI,0411
ITICITYI
1----1-----------------1 — ,1 1tp"ll A__L.to 1_491 200
1
1 INDIEX i
I 0-131PSL'
ISM. SO -SC IA-29 A-4
1 0 I90-100 95-100 75-98 26-50
1 <30
IMP-? I
113-44IF3L. SCL. CL
ISM -SC. SC. CL-ML. CLIA-As A-4. A-6
1 0 196-100 05-100 75-90 30-70
-1 20-40
I 6-16 i
1+4-591FSL.. SCL. SC.
ISM -SC. SC. CL-IIL. CLIA-4, A-6..A-7
1 0 196-100 99-100 76-96 36-75
1 20-45
1 6-92 1
159-AOIFSL.-LFS
IS* -SC. SM IA-2. A-♦
1 0 196-100 95-100 75-98 15-50
1 <30
IMP-? I
IDEPTHICLAY IMOIST BULKI
PERMEA- I AVAILABLE I SOIL I SALINITY I
SHRINK- JEROSIONIWINO JORGANICI
CORROSIVITY' i-
IIIN.IIIPCT I DENSITY I
BILITY IWATER CAPACIIYIREACTIGNI(MMMOS/CM)I
SWELL IFACTORSIEROO.IMATTER I
.1
I__.._ISa"AI 1G/CM3j 1_IIN/lRL I LUZIN) _-1—IPMI 1 IPoIFN71ALI
K 1 T Ifi80UP1 (PCTj I
STEEL ISONCREiTEI
1 0-131 -r-)f 1 1
2.0-6.0 1 0.I0-0.15 13.6-5.6 1 - 1
LOW 1.171 5 1 - I 1
HIGH I
HIGH ,I
113-44110-'301 1
0.6-2.0 1 0.12-0.18 13.6-3.5 1 - 1.
LOW 1.201 1 1 1
144-59116-K01 1
0.2-2.0 1 0.12-0.18 13.6-6.0 1 - 1
LOW 1.201
155-60) t-A0 I 1
�•p-6.0 1 0.08-0.12 13.6-6.0 1 - 1
LOW 1.201
•
-
1 L—_._I _
1.-.. FLOODING I_— MIGjj-WATER
I I -
TABLE 1 CEMENTED PAN I _:�EOROCK ISUBSIDENCE JMYDIPOTENTsLJ
I DEPTH I
KIND INONTHS IDEPTHIHARDNESSIDEPTH IHARDNESSIINIT.ITOTALIGRPI FROST I
(_r=jjENCY ��DURATION IMONINS 1 [FII L
1 �•�,jJ',(jl 1 1 tINJ_) ItIN1 ]Elm) I 1 A[TIGN j
1 RARE 1 1 1 0-1.61APPARENTljlgf-NARI
- 1 I jjo 1 1 - I 1B/OI - 1
SANITARY FACILITIES
CCNSi113C•ZIDN ILATERI AL
- 1 ( SEVERE -WETNESS.
II L.POOR-WETNESS,"%q 3TRElJGTtf 1
ISEPTIC TANK 1
I ABSORPTION I
I I ROADFILL
{ FIELDS I
II I
I
1 I.SEVERE-WETNESS
I1 I IMPKOGASLI- Ext.ESS FINES
i SEWAGE 1
II I i
1 LAGCCN 1
II SAND 1
1 AREAS I
II
1 I SEVERE-VE7NESS
I I 'IMPROBABLE'�KCE as hZ rl tcb
SANITARY
)LANDFILL I -
II GRAVEL.
(TREHCN )
11
'
i
- —
1 1SEVERE-WETNESS
II I POOR -WETNESS'(
1 SANITARY I
I I I
I LANDFILL I -
- II TOPSOIL
(AREA) i
1J 1
1
-i '- i POOR -WETNESS
1I
1 DAILY, I
II — YATER NANAGENEM
~I
I COVER FOR 1
II I MOOERATE-SEEPAGE
i. LANDFILL I
II FOND I
{
RESERVOIR 1
11 AREA I- -
- �I�ltlfi_.ilI�QEYELOE!!L`tlL-_-
11 1
- - 1 SEVERE -WETNESS
I ( I $IVSRE- Mil -Nils
{
1 SHALLOW I
IIEMBAHKMENTS I
I.
IEMCAVATIONS 1 -
- I1 DIKES AND
J 1
LEVEES
1 I SEVERE-WETNESS.FLOODS
II I SLIGHT
I DWELLINGS I
II EXCAVATED
i WITHOUT I
II PONOS (
1
BASEMENTS I -
I_ 1
I IAOUIPER FED
It - 1
i I SEVERE-WETNESS.FL0(J0S
II I FAVORABLE
DWELLINGS
1 WITH J
II DRAINAGE
J BASEMENTS
I..—
{
1 1 SEVERE-WETNESS.FLDODS
II I WETNESS
1 SMALL 1
II
1 COMMERCIAL i
I) IRRIGATION I
I
1 BUILDINGS 1
11 1
1
I I SEVERE -WETNESS ) LOW STAGM6Th
I I I NOT NEEDED
{
j LOCAL J
II TERRACES 1
{
ROADS AND I - -
if AND
1 STREETS 1
II DIVERSIONS i
1
i LAWNS. I SevERG - Wr'fA1f:SS
- I I I WETNift;
ILANOSCAPING I
II GRASSED I
I
J AND GCLF J
II WATERWAYS I
FAIRWAYS I
1I I
j
—__UGICNAL INTERPRE,TATIOt�j'
� 75
1

TOMOTLEY.FINE SANDY LOAM USDA-StS
__ R EQW.AI i�iiEL-=ELIIPMF. NT
I — I SEVERE-rETNESS,Ft000l II I. SEVERE -WETNESS
I I 1I 1
CAMP AREAS 1 IIPLAYGROUNOS I I
11 1 1
( - I SEVERE -WETNESS I( I SEVERE -WETNESS I
1 1 II PATHS I 1
IPiCNIC, AIIEASI 11 AND I 1
1 I II TRAILS I 1
_ ___ WAAL61TY AND-XjE Z_PFR ACRE IF CROiPB �N�PASTURE INIr_u IEVZL MANJEER Njl —
I -- I.CAPA- I CORN ! SOYBEANS I OATS ( CABBAGE I- WHEAT ISAHIAGRASS I� J:
BILITY I I 1 I I I
1 j; Eau) 1 (But _I lout I ICRATES) I - (Bu)_ I IAUMi 1 I
I—�Ji—------- INI^- jB&�LNIAR „iLR$A INIM IIRR INABB [IRA, 1n18R IIRR. INj$$-1jM, INI R IIRR. INIR_R I IRR. I
1 p1�q>;Nf:D I 3w 1 1 120 I 140 I 1 TO 1 1 350 1 160 1 I to 1 I I I
I I I 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 t I 1 I I I 11
I I I 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I 1 I 1 I 1 1
I I 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 I I 1 I 1 I 1 I
I 1 1 I 1 I 1 I I 1 1 1 1 I !
1 I I l 1 I 1 1 I 1 I I I I 1
I CPO I MANAraCARKT F•N�j
I SYM I EROSIONI EQUIP. (SEEDLINGI
'I I HAZARD 1 LIMIT 1 MORTIY-1
120 ( SLIGHT I SEVERE I SEVERE I
L_ SEFUE: jrT I_ _-
NONE I 1
j 1 I
I 1
WINOTH.1 PLANT
HAZARD I CONPE
a
I----
I POTENTIAL
FOR Na=lAL,-Z6LB9ZlA
I
-" -
IGRAIN SIGRASS tl WILD
1 SEED ILFGUME. 1 bgRe
(HARDWO ICONIFERISHRUBS
1 TRFEA jPl ♦NTe 1
I
I FAIR I.FAIR ' -) FAIR
I GOOD I GOOD 1 -.
NATIVE PLANT COM jWTV /RANGELAND ga-EOR
I-- -----eglgNJAL
I PLANT I_-�
PERCijj,TAG_F [ ELO pO�IT
I COMMON PLANT
NAME I SYMBOL I
I ItLSPNI_j_
I
IISwSTCNCAi/E
I PRTr I
I. RED enr
1 I
1
I, F6T7ER13USH J^yeNlJk �
I I.YL.U9 I
1
fW1SBTgAY
I MAJIZ I
I
GRE�t.NBRJER
I $MtLAZ
SWEET PEPPCRBgsH
1 Cl-AL-L
I. BIrru 6ALL86RRY
1 TLGL 1
I SWFEr 6ALLBIRRY
I ILC4 I
1 WAXMVRTI-E
! MVCE
9LuadeARy
I VACM 1
I IioNEYtucKLE,`
I I.ON� I
—L
I POTENTIAL PRODUCTION ILBS./AC. DRY WTt: I
-
FAVORABLE YEARS _ I.
-
NOSMAL YEARS -
I
uNFAVORA0 F YEARS_ 1
--1------
roDTNotes
76
L --l=lA1. PR000ClWlX-I.
I
I COMMON TREES
ISITEI TREES TO PLANT I
11NOXI
(
ILOBLOLLY PINE
_I
194 ILOBLOLLY PINE I
SvAffif CMBSTNOTOAK
I ISLASH PINE
(EWEETGUM
190 ISIIEEtGUM I
( IIEll MAPIA
I- IAMERICAN SYCAMORE
wATOR 0A K
y>`LLow-PoPcgt
i_ l
ISLAGKGUM
1
i- i i Y
1 1 1 •
1 1
1 I I
A
I PBX tTAT F= - I
IWETLANOISHALLCWIDPENLD IWOOOLD (WETLANDIRAMSELDI
LPLANTSIJ<AIER INILCLF IMILDLr 139ll = 'I'LaLl 1
I GOOD 1 GDDD I FAIR j 0000 ( GOOD
I I 1 t I 1 1
I 1 1 1 I 1 1
! I I I I 1
ST Ut6^IRSTORY VEGETATION
ON 10s7L-IlZIGHIL_— 1
f 1
1 I:
I I I 1
I I
I I I 1
I I
I I I 1

w
A
411NP0 PING a". 0 TO S PtACeNT 9LOPE5
WOOD-UABApi•{.AND COMP"A,OTe Cl PEAGERT 71.00 wANOn PART
sail PROPERTIES__
IDEPTHI ^i I I _ IFRACTIPERCENT OF MATERIAL LESS ILIOUID IPLAS- I
I(IN.11 LSDA TEXTGRE I UNIFIED. I AASHTC' 1>3 INI_Il+dLi 3" PA"IHG-_S]EVE NO, I LIMIT ITICITVI
Itp _ILA—�_1A 40 1 200 1 - I INDEX)
1 0-5tIFS ISP-SM.'Sr IA-2. A-3 �- 1 0 196-100 95-100 60-9! 5-25 I. NP I
151-721S..F5 (SP• SP-SM. SM IA-2. A-3, 1 0 196-100 98-100 51-98 2-20 I - NP I
IDEPTHICLAY IMOIST BULKI PERMEA- ' I AVAILABLE I SOIL I SALINITY I SHRINK- IERCS10NIr(ND ICRGANICI GORROS(VITY 1-
I(1N.)I(PCT I DENSITY I BILITY (WATER CAPACITYIREACTIONI(M01HOS/CM11 SWELL I FACTORS I ERCO. I MATTER I 1
I - l,<2MnljICICNA) 1 (IN/NR1 .1 liffliN) _i—iml I._ IPOTENTIdL.I-m-A T !Gnat! (PCII I STEEL lCONCRETEI.
1 0-511 1 ) 6.0-20 1 0.00-006 15.6-7.3 1 - IVERY LOW 1.101 3 I - I I LOr I1100ERATE1
151-721 1 16.0-20 1 0.03-0.07 15.6-7.3 1 IVERY LOW 1.101 1
E r IS BSID NCE
FLOODING I.. HIGH WATER TAO�._1��N?�PA)y�l,., B��• k���'IHY0IPOTENT•LI
DEPTH I KIND (MONTHS IDEPTH IHARDNESS IDEPTH IHARDMESSIINIT.ITOTALI4RPI FROST I
A I
»_ »_ sAwtMv rAcji tT1Es_ -
1 SEvtR[ - POOR FUTIA j I 1 G0O0 1
ISEPTIC TANK I 11
(ABSORPTION I II ROADFILL
1 FIELDS I
I__-_..
SEVERE-SEEPAG! 11 i PROBABLE
1 SEWAGE 1 1I SAND
1 LAGCCN I I
AREAS
I SEVERE-SEEPAGE.TOD SANDY ; i ' rMPROSASt6-?e0 'SANDY
SANITARY 1
LANDFILL. 1 - - I 1 GRAVEL 1 _
I(TRENCH)
SEVERE -SEEPAGE -
i; ; POOH -TOO SANDY
SANITARY
11 TOPSOIL I
LANDFILL
I
1
1 (AREA!
I
1I i
I
I POCK- SEEPAGE #TOO SANDY
II
' rATEA NAIL nErlu±T
I DAILY
I
If
11 1 SEVERE-SEEEPAGE
I COVER FOR
I
I1 POND 1
LANDFILL
I
I I RESEA VOIR I
I
11 AREA I
- M"TE.OINtC SITE DEVE amid __
11 I
I
I, - I SEVERE-CUTBANKS CAVE
II 1 SEY[Re- sccrwrr.rarwu a
IIEMBANKMENTS I
SHALLOW, 1
IZXCAVATICNS (
- II DIKES AND
t I I.EVEEsIf 1
I SEVERE- NO WAT[R
SLIGHT
EXCAVATED 1 I
DWELLINGS
II PONDS
1 WITHOUT 1'
IIAOUIFER FED I I
I BASEMENTS I
I !' SLIGHT
NOT NEEDED .
I {
1 DWELLINGS I
II
II DpAtNAGE I {
WITH 1
I
BASEMENTS
—i
r
DROUGHTT.PAST IMTAKE.SLOP&
SLIGHT
I SMALL I
11
II IRRIGATION I
COMMERCIAL (
I
If
1 BUILDINGS I
I
SLIGHT
TOO SANDY
I
1
LOCAL I
If TERRACES
I ROADS AND {
II AND
11 DIVERSIONS
1
STREETS 1
I LAWNS* I M0014ATI - PAOUANTY , Too SANDY
pRO1°NrY
1
ILANDSCAPING I
I I GRASSED
1
I AND GOLF { _
If WATERWAYS I
I. FAIRWAYS I
II I
It
INTERPRET T1�l��_.-_--_�
77
1
I

USDA--SCS
—--_BECEEATIONAL _ OEVELOV,REIJT•-_
I� I SEVLRE•TO0 SANDY II ! SLfVERF- TOO W40Y�T
1 I II ! !
'(CAMP AREAS I IIPLAYGROUNUS I 1.
( I II
I SlVtltL -TOO SANDY
II I §EVlRfi -T00 SANDY _ -
1 I II PATHS I 1
(PICNIC AREA.) II AND I I
CAPABILITY AND YIELDS PER ACRE EF CROPS AND PASTURE -,(jW ULL MAftM9uNTI - —�
--- I CAPA- I CORN I SOYbEANS ) 1 1 I IMPROVED
-- 1131LITY- I I I I- i IBERMUDAGR. I I
-----_ L_i13111_Liau) 1 ► _1. ^1 _ I ! AUM 1 I I
1 ---—�jRgl,j$gyltlj,8(j�j$Rs INIRR IIRRi INIRR IIRR. INIRR IjB8"NIRR IIRRw IHIRR IIRR. INIER IIRpj—I _
3C. 1 ! 55 I 1 20 1 I
I I I I I I I I ! I I 1 I I l ! ! I
I I I I I 1 I I i 1 1 1 I I I 1
-- - - _ ■QQQ�,S(�Q—iU ITABIL IIY
1 ORO I MAHaGEMENT PRQBLEMS _ I PpTEN "L PEJQ(,IUCTIYITY I (
I I SYM I ERDSIONI EQUIP. ISEEDLINGI WINDTH.1 PLANT I COMMON TREES ISITEI TREES TO PLANT I
- - HAZARD I LIMIT I MORTvY,I MA94RD I COMP,ET.1 -- -. lilkoz I
13s I SLIGHT I MODERATE I MODERATE I I (LONGLEAF PINE. 170 ILOBLOLLY PINE I
i i I 1 1 I ILOBLOLLY PINE 180 ILONGLEAF PINE' I
1 I 1 I I I ! eurNl OAK 1 (SLASH PINE
i I 1 I 1 I I Ig i 1 t
1 I I 1 I 1 I i N1VAF1. OAK I I !
I;JVle ORIc I 1
1 I I I 1 1
I I ! I I 1 I I I I !■
1 I 1 I 1
_ 111TfQ3tBdA5s K
1 Y. 1 SPECIES IHTI -- SPECIES--, Illfl—sPEcjEA—„� IN1j saECIEs IH71
! I NONE t I 1 1 I 1 l!
1 I I I I I 11 1
JLIU&SPE tJABITAI—,SUlIA51LITY —
1 I—_ • POTENTIAL FOR HABITAT ELEMENTS 1 POTENTIAL As NA_BITAT EOIId I
I IGRAIN LIGRASS 61 WILD INARDWO ICONIFERISHRUBS IWETLANDISHALLOMIOPEMLD IWOODLD IVETLANDIRAMiELDI
1 yes` ILEGUME 1 HgRB, 1 TREES Ig,ANTS I - 1PLANTS 1 ■ATER INIL= IWjIQU 111 P !I! LO F I
I I POOR ( POOR ! FAIR I POOR I FAIR 1 I1V- PODRIV- PCCRI POOR I FAIR IV. POORI 1
I 1 1 I 1 1 I I I 1 I 1 !
i I I I I 1 1 I I I I I 1 i
POTENTIAL NATIVE _PLANT —CON UNITY (RANGELAND_OR FOREST U119EMETORY=GETATIOR)
PLANT (— PERCENTAGE COMPOSITION IQRY—JILT I I — 1
COMIOH PLANT NAME I SYMBOL
LMAPNI
( Wt�[EGac�ls I AtL+R t
SASSRPrtAb I vxA�c!g I I I I I 1
Se�tw.oe ,
I �,NE�ttc�� ,eBAurY,sE4Ry 1 cu�ArA• I. 1 I ! f
SLACK?iu-K OAK
'fURXL 1 OAfc Qu1,lI
� F2.w,L:Rirla DeLwaaA � Ce'FLZ 1 1 I � � �
1 jr.tcsxMMon I bsv15 I I I I I i
1 I I I I I I 1
I POTENTIAL PRODUCTICN MLBS-/AC. DRY VT)d
FAVORABLE YEARS I 1
! NORMAL YEARS
I —-�+PAYOBABLF YEARS
FCCTNOTES
1 RAPID PERMEABILITY MAY CAUSE POLLUTION OF GROUND WATER.
78

TOWN OF BEAUFORT - INFILTRATION/INFLOW ANALYSIS
8. A. 1 General
An infiltration/inflow study was conducted in Beaufort to determine
the eirect of infiltration and inflow of groundwater and stormwater.
runoff on flows at the wastewater treatment facility. The study
consisted of collection and analysis. of data on wastewater flows,
determination of flow volumes attributed to infiltration/inflow
(1/1), and an economic evaluation of treating or reducing those
flows attributable to infiltration/inflow.
The analysis of the 1/1 study consists of two parts.. The first
part, trend analysis, includes system descriptions. By investigating
trends within the Beaufort system, areas can be noted where infiltra-
tion or inflow problems might exist. Fluctuations in wastewater
flows are related to daily water demand, rainfall, groundwater
fluctuations, and tidal variations. Probable causes for the flow
variations are investigated.
The second part, the overall system analysis, quantifies the volumes
of infiltration and inflow based on a study of metered water usage
versus wastewater flow. The effect of rainfall during the study
period is an important factor. The results of the system analysis
are then evaluated to determine if existing infiltration orbinflow
is to be considered excessive, and if so, whether a.more detailed
study of the system is to locate major problem areas is warranted.
79

Finally, if further study is the determined action, the results of
the trend analysis are used to indicate the areas where additional
detailed study is warranted.
8. A. 2.. Study Procedure
The Beaufort colt^:tion system was first divided into six subsystems,
based on the service areas of the six major pump staions in the town.
(Map 8.A.2.1). Timers were used to record the daily amount of
pumping time for each station.. Using an average pumping rate
determined by direct observation of the station, the daily pumping
station flow was calculated. The resulting flows were compared
with metered daily water flow, daily rainfall, groundwater fluctuations,
and tidal variations. Figures 8.A.4.1. through 8.A.4.6 illustrate
the relationships between the variables during the study period.
Daily water consumption was estimated from monthly consumer billings
and from daily water pump records supplied by the operator of.the
town's water system. The difference between daily metered water flow
and dry weather wastewater flow is defined as infiltration, although
inflow could be a factor if the system is receiving water from the
sound
The second study variable, 24-hour rainfall, was determined from
measurements made with a standard 8-inch rainfall guage located at
the treatment plant. The difference between wet -weather wastewater,
flow and dry -weather flow is generally defined as inflow..
80
x

r
A
i
41
A
Two additional variables, groundwater fluctuation and tidal variation
were also studied. Groundwater changes were measured with a guage at the
treatment plant. Increasing flows with rising water tables would indicate
the presenc- of infiltration. In addition to relating wastewater flows
to records of maximum daily tide levels, anlytical testing was conducted
to determine if tidal variations influenced the chemical characteristics
of the wastewater. A correlation in this phase of the study would be an
indication of inflow.
8.A.3 Collection System Overview
.The wastewater collection system in Beaufort can be divided into two parts -
the or system (a combined sanitary storm sewer system serving the down-
town area) and the extended system (a recently installed sanitary sewer
system serving the remainder of the population within the town limits). The
total system is comprised of 16.7 miles of primarily vitrified clay pipe
(sized from 6" to 16" diameter), with some recent extensions of PVC pipe.
Of the system total, approximately 44 percent of the sewer lines were designed
to carry combined sanitary and storm sewer flows.
The original sewer system was installed in Beaufort during the 1920's. The
layout included outfalls into Taylor's Creek at (1) Front and Turner Streets,
(2) Front and Marsh Streets, and into Town Creek (now the Beaufort Channel)
at (3) the foot of Broad Street, (4) the head of Moore Street near the Town
Creek Bridge, and (S) at the head of Queen Street. The only existing maps
of the system are schematic and do not include accurate locations of
connections, nor are they complete in elevation information. System
maintenance records are incomplete or nonexistent.
81

A sewer renovation project in 1969 closed all but one of the combined
outfalls (at the foot of Broad Street) and diverted their flows to the
new 750,000 gal treatment facility. In addition to sewer renovation and
construction of the new treatment plant, the 1969 project included
extension of the sewer system to provide service to most of the town's
residents not then served. The new service extension excluded storm -
water drainage. Ten new lift stations (ranging from 50 gpm to 550 gpm)
were installed. Accurate system plans and maintenance records have been
kept for the new lines.
For the most part, collection lines in the original sewer system are relatively
shallow, with observed lines being no deeper than 8 feet., However, the
collection lines in the new system are somewhat deeper, to more than 18
feet in some places. A system average would place the collector lines 7
to 9 feet below the ground surface. Groundwater levels in the Beaufort
area are generally less than five feet below the ground surface, so that
much of the system is below water most of the time.
The major source of inflow into the system is the combined sewer system in
the downtown area. The roof drain connections and street inlets contribute
heavily to the flows, with some minor contributions through open laterals suspect-
ed that roof drains have been illegally connected in some instances. In
addition, several isolated.street inlets have been connected to sanitary
sewer manholes. Infiltration into the system is not so readily isolated
although it is evident in varying degrees throughout the entire system. The
old system is responsible for much of the infiltration, supposedly due to the
age of the sewers. However, a significant portion of the infiltration can be
attributed to sections of the new system where poor bearing subsurface soils
have allowed settling of manholes which results in misalignment of joints at ,
92

manhole walls.
Considering the age of the old section of .the system, it is in fair
structural condition. Leaky pipe joints and manhole walls are common,
but no areas of gross pipe deterioration or collapse were observed in
random investigation.
With the exception of the areas of manhole settling, the new system is
in good to excellent structural condition.
8.A.4 Trend Analysis
A. Area No. 1: Marsh Street Station (Station No. l)
Study Area No. 1 is located east of the central business district and serves
y a portion of the old residential section of Beaufort. The collection system
within the area consists of approximately 2400 linear feet of 8" (vitrified
4 clay) sanitary sewer main along Front Street.. All lines.known to carry
'wastewater were connected to the -new main, while known storm sewers were
allowed to continue untreated discharge into Taylor's Creek. A new lift
station was installed at the Marsh Street outfall. The prefabricated
Gorman Rupp underground unit is equipped with duplex 150 gpm (at 66 feet TDH)
"T" series sewage pumps. An emergency overflow in the station_wetwell is
designed to provide system relief in emergency situations, but there is no
record of overflow operation since the station was installed. There are no
other known bypasses or overflows in Area No. 1.
The': 'average depth of the sewer lines in Area No. 1 is five to six feet, with
the average groundwater table estimated at about 3.5 feet below the ground
surface. Consequently, much of the system is below water most of the time.
Manholes in the new section of the system are precast sections, with little
observed leakage through joints. By contrast, manholes in the old portion
83

of the system are constructed of brick, and infiltration through deteriorat-
ing joints was observed in most of the manholes checked. In addition, random
visual inspection of sewer lines revealed infiltration through leaky
joints and broken pipe, -costly in the old sections of the system.
Variation in wastewater flow during the study period is indicated in
Figure 8.A.4.1. An apparent correlation between flow and groundwater
fluctuation indicates area -wide infiltration. During the dry -weather
period late in the study period, the daily flow curve appeared to approach
the consumption curve, graphically indicating the presence of infiltration.
Comparison of estimated daily water demand and average daily wastewater
flow indicates that infiltration contributed heavily to the flow from
Area No. 1, averaging,about 45 percent of daily flow. Area 1 infiltration
is estimated at 2000 gallons/inch of pipe diameter/mile/day, with most of
it contributed by the older sections of the system. `
Likewise, a correlation between rainfall and daily flow is immediately obvious.
Most of the excess flow created by a one -inch rainfall, estimated at 150
percent of average daily flow, is assumed to be contributed by inflow from
the old combined sewer section of the system.
It appears that tidal variations might influence the flows from Area No. 1.
To substantiate this apparent correlation, analytical testing during the
times of high and low tides was conducted. The results of this testing show
an increase in chloride content of the wastewater during high tide, indicat-
ing probably presence of saline water, but the amount of excess flow has
not been determined.
84
r
T

B. Area -No. 2: Front Street Station (Station No. 2)
Study Area No. 2 is a primarily residential area west of Area No. 1.
The collection system within.the area consists of approximately 1.4 miles
of 6" and 8", and 10" vitrified clay pipe. Approximately 85 percent of
the service lines were installed in the 1969 project. A Gorman -Rupp
underground lift station, equipped with duplex 125 gpm (at 59 feet TDH) pumps
serves the area. An overflow in the station wetwell is designed to provide
system relief in emergency situations, but records indicate that it has
never been used. There are no other known bypasses or overflows.
Average depth of the sewers in Area No. 2 is four to five feet, with the
G
,. groundwater table 3.5 to 4`feet below the ground surface. Like Area No. 1,
infiltration is evident in manholes and lines in the old system, but is
not as prevalent in the new lines.
Variations in flow are shown in Figure 8.A.4.2. Fluctuations with rainfall
is evident, with a flow increase of 200% after a one -inch rainfall. Most of
the excess wetweather flow is thought to be contributed from inflow into
the old system in Area No. 2. The infiltration problem in Area No. 2 is not
as severe as in Area No. 1, but nonetheless, it accounts for approximately 40%
of the average daily flow. Area 2 infiltration is estimated at 1100 gallonst
inch diameter of pipe/mile/day, with most of it attributed to the old system.
40
Analytical testing of flow Area No. 2 during high and low tide periods indicates
that tidal variations do not significantly influence daily wastewater
flows.
85

C. Area No. 3: Sunshine Street Station (Station No. 3)
Area No. 3 is a waterfront residential area in the southeastern section of
Beaufort. The one and one-half miles of 8 inch vitrified clay pipe in
the area were installed during the 1969 project, with an average depth '
of four to five feet. A Gorman -Rupp underground lift station, equipped
with duplex 150 gpm (at 38 feet TDH) pumps, serves the area. A smaller
Flygt '.'manhole" station (50 gpm at 14 feet TDH) in the eastern section of
Area No. 3 discharges into the gravity system tributary to Station No. 3.
An overflow in the larger station allows system relief in emergency situations
but there is no record of operation. There are no other known bypasses or
overflow in the area.
As shown in Figure 8.A.4.3. infiltration does not appear to be a significant
problem in Area No. 3. 'Inspection of manholes and pipe in the area
revealed infrequent small leaks, mostly at pipe joints. Infiltration
r
in Area 3 accounts for an average of 20% of the daily flow, and is estimated
at 230 fallons/inch of pipe/diameter/mile/day. Storm water flows has, for the
most part, been excluded from the sewer system. However, surface drainage
from one area in the northeastern section of Area No. 3 has been connected
into the sanitary sewer system. As indicated in Figure 8.A.4.3, rainfall
has a marked influence on the system, presumably due to the storm drainage
connection. Tidal variations do not appear to influence the daily. flow
pattern...
D. Area No. 4: Cedar Street Station '(Station No. 6)
Area No. 4, encompassing the entire west and central sections of Beaufort, is
served by about 5.6 miles of 6" to 16" sewer pipe, mostly vitrified clay, 91%
of which is the old system. An above -ground lift station, equipped with
duplex 550 gpm (at 69 ft. TDH) Gorman -Rupp "T Series" centrifugal self -
priming pumps, was installed during the 1969 project, at the Moore Street
86

outfall. A smaller (200 gpm at 27 ft. TDH) station, built at the Turner
Street outfall and serving the Central Business District, discharges
into the gravity system tributary to Station No. 6. Overflows in the
wet wells of both stations provide emergency system relief, but no.
operations have been reported. There are bypasses at the head of Queen. Street
(into Taylor's Creek) and at the head of Ann Street (into the Beaufort
Channel), but efforts to establishe the quantity of bypassed flow were un-
successful. In addition, the Queen Street by-pass is suspected of allowing
inflow into the system.
Like Area No. 1, inspection of manholes and sewer lines in Area No. 4
revealed some areas of constant infiltration through breaks in sewer lines
and leaky pipe and manhole joints. On the average, it is'estimated that
infiltration accounts for 60% of daily flow, or an Area 4 average of
2700 gallons/inch of pipe diameter/mile/day. System inspections indicated
that the infiltration problem is areawide rather than confined to specific
locations within the area. Figure 8.A.4.4. shows the influence of rainfall
on the area, estimated to result in a 75% flow increase after a 1" rainfall.
Analytical testing of flow from Area No. 4 indicates that tidal variations
do influence flows, but this influence has not been quantified.
E. Area No. 5: Queen Street Station (Station No. 7)
Area No. 5 includes the northern and western portions of Beaufort, a relatively
new residential and school area. The sewer system in Area No. 5 includes
1.0 mile of vitrified clay pipe, 30% of which is combined sewer. The area
is served by a Gorman -Rupp underground lift station, equipped with duplex
150 gpm (at 66 feet TDH) centrifugal, self priming pumps. A smaller (75gpm
at 17 ft. TDH) station in the western section of the area serves an industrial
plant which operates on a non -regular schedule. There are no known by-passes
or overflows in the system tributary to Station No. .7.
87

Average depth of the sewer lines in Area No. 5 if 8 to 9 feet, with
the groundwater table at some 3.5 feet below ground level. Inspection
of the system reveals infiltration through leaky joines in parts.of the
area, mostly in the uld system. Area 5 infiltration is severe, amounting_
to some 34% of the average daily flow, or some 1050 gallons/inch of pipe
diameter/mile/day. Most of the infiltration is presumed to be contributed
by the old system. As shown in Figure 8.A.4.5, there is,a wide variation
in the effect of rainfall on the system in Area No. 5. However, the peak
on May 18, supposedly due to a 1 1/2" rainfall, has been determined to be due
to instrumentation error. Based on the remaining rainfall data, it is
estimated that a 1" rainfall will result in. an 180% increase in flow. Like
infiltration, -inflow is suspected to be contributed mainly by the old
system.
F. Area No. 6: Carteret Street Station (Station No. 8)
Area No. 6, which includes the northeastern section of Beaufort, is served
by approximately 5.5 miles of 8" to 12" vitrified clay and PVC pipe. Nearly
all of the system in Area No. 6 was installed during or following the 1969
project.- An above -ground lift station is equipped with duplex 350 gpm
(at 58 ft. TDH) Gorman -Rupp "T-Series" centrifugal; self priming pumps.
A smaller (200 gpm at 22 ft. TDH) station in the north section of the area
pumps ,into the gravity system tributary to Station No. 8. There are no
known bypasses in the system. The smaller lift station has an over -flow to
a roadside drainage ditch, but .there is no record of operation.
88

In some parts of the system in Area No. 6, inadequate bearing capacity of
subsurface soils has resulted in settling of manholes. Visual inspection
of the system revealed considerable infiltration at joints between pipe and
manholes in those areas. The remainder of the system is in good to
excellent condition. Infiltration in Area 6 is not severe, accounting for
less than 16% of average daily flow, or estimated at 275 gallons/inch of
pipe diameter/mile/day. However, it is thought that most of the infiltration
is occuring in thos areas where manholes have settled and pipe -to -manhole
joints have failed. Figure 8.A.4.6 illustrates the cross connections
between sanitary and storm sewer.systems, it is thought that the increased
flow, an expected 75% flow increase after a one inch rainfall, results
• mainly from the rise in groundwater (and resulting infiltration) rather
than inflow. Again, broken joints between the pipe and manhole are suspect-
ed -to be responsible for most of the increase in flow.
8.A.5 Overall System Analysis
Figure 8.A.5.1. shows the relationship of wastewater flows and the four study
variables. Comparison between daily metered water consumption and treat-
ment plant wastewater flows, and an -analysis of the influence of rainfall
will allow. approximation of the extent of extraneous flow into the Beaufort
collection system.
Daily water demand curves were based on monthly water billing records and
daily ;well pump operation records (supplied by Carolina Water Company,
operator of the Town's Water System) for the study period. Demand during
the study period averaged some 320,000 gallons per day, of which 70%, or
220,000 gallons per day was estimated to reach the sanitary sewers as
domestic sewage. (Demand reduction factor from Fair, Gayer, and Okun;
Elements of Water Supply and Wastewater Disposal; John Wiley and Sons; 1971,
pg.37). 89

4
4
K
0
Olt.
/ - EDPp[
MAP* 8.A-21
. ............
TOWN OF BEAUFORT
-J�
L
WASTEWATER COLLECTION SYSTEM,
_j /
SCALE IN FEET
110 T PEW
C FT
d 200 4cd GW Bad
/ ^ J- o .` ^ P �'/ Jr.
OW - SEw A
VkccJ,,E-LEGEND
EXISTING MANHOLE 8
'7 %f SEWER LINE
r:
.1 EXISTING FORCE MAIN.
/' 1 PCB t:"j 1 J'/ ;' w. �� / ` c ❑ EXISTING LIFT STATION
INFILTRATION INFLOW it
STUDY AREA
,: j Jl l! I D y '� i My
A4 4040 .7 8
lot.
it
a voKEME
1, Ofkl
all
.4
It
1312
,rill
01 - 17,1L Ji
--- 117
IT
Ir 'w
6�Mq;K ST
J.
pl. J
Tj.YLORS CRE E'K
90
BEAUFORT
MOREHEAD CITY
AIR PORT
V F I - ��T�
" T4,
HENRY VON OE$ENGASSOCIATES-CONSULTING ENGMERSOPLANNERS, WCI*�NORTH CAROLINA
WM.FFREEMAN ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS ENGINEERS PLANNERS,HIGHPOINT. NORTOCAROLINA

day.with a daily use approximately,200,000 gallons per day, a utilization
rate of 25'.percent. There are approximately 1300 customers being billed
by the town for use of 4ts water,services.
As stated above, water for the area is acquired from deep wells into the
Castle Hayne acquifer and Beaufort is in the process of planning for
expansion in the next.six months to include an additional 300,000 gallon
elevated tank and a 200,000 gallon ground storage tank. Also, a new deep well
with'a 500 gallon per minute service pump is planned to accommodate additional
growth to the year 2000.
1
Additionally, the Town of ,Beaufort is under strong consideration for a
new seafood processing plan similar to the one located in Wanchese. The
Town will apply for a Clean Water Grant and hold a bond referendum
for a total package cost of approximately $728,000.
92

Treatment plant flow records during the study period indicate that total
:dry weather" wastewater flow averaged some 430,000 gallons per day. Compar-
ing the actual treatment plant flow with estimated domestic sewage flow of
220,000 gpd yields on average system wide infiltration rate of 210,000
gallons per day, or almost M of normal daily flows. System -wide inf iltration
averages some 1,500 gallons/inch of pipe diameter/mile/day.
Comparison of dry -weather flow and flow during rainfall periods indicated
inflow which is quite extensive. Based on analysis of flow variations during
rainfall periods, it is estimated that a one -inch rainfall will result in an
increased plant flow of some 290,000 gallons per day.
on a system -wide basis, normaltidalvariation does not appear to significantly
t
t influence total wastewater flow. During extreme storm tides, increases in
chlorides level of the wastewater have been noted, but due to.the constant
excess flow due to infiltration and inflow, it is not possible to quantify
this influence.
Water System
Beaufort's water is supplied and managed by the town. The water system had
been operated by the Carolina Water Company, until 1975, when it was sold to
the town.
The water supply is obtained from two deep wells, located at the corner of
Hedrick and Pine Streets and between Fulford and Carteret Streets, and stored
in a newly constructed 200,000 gallon tank. These wells furnish 606 to 400
gallons of water per minute, respectively. Water is obtained from the Castle -
Ha yne Acquifer which also supplies the water needs for a large portion of
Eastern North Carolina.
Total capacity of the water system is estimated at 800,000 gallons.per
91