Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLand Use Plan-1980DCM 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