Core Land Use Plan-2007

i
1
1
Town of Cape Carteret
.I
i North Carolina
r
-
Core Land Use Plan
Adopted by the Cape Carteret Town Board:
February 19, 2007
Certified by the Coastal Resources Commission:
May 18, 2007
Prepared by:
4 "7
THE WOOTEN COMPANY
ENGINEERING! PLANNING ;ARCHITECTURE
'
The preparation of this report was, financed in part through a grant provided by the North Carolina
Coastal Management Program, through funds provided by the Coastal Zone Management Act of
1972, is by Office Ocean Coastal Resource Management,
as amended, which administered the of and
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

1
u
1
I
1
1
1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLEOF CONTENTS...............................................................................2
SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION AND EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .....................7
1.1 Purpose...................................................................................................................7
1.3 Executive Summary................................................................................................10
1.3.1 Summary of Land Use Issues...................................................................10
1.3.2 Summary of Data Collection and Analysis.................................................11
1.3.3 Summary of Policy Statements.................................................................14
1.3.4 Summary of Future Land Use Projections.................................................16
1.3.5 Summary of Implementation Strategies.....................................................16
SECTION II COMMUNITY CONCERNS AND ASPIRATIONS..................18
2.1 Significant Existing and Emerging Conditions.........................................................18
2.1.1 Land Use.................................................................................................18
A. General Development Trends...........................................................18
B. Land Suitability and Natural Constraints on Development.................18
C. Housing Trends................................................................................18
2.1.2 Economic Conditions...............................................................................18
A. General Economic Conditions...........................................................18
B. Population Growth.............................................................................19
2.1.3 Transportation..........................................................................................19
A'. Interconnection of Local Streets........................................................19
B. Pedestrian Circulation.......................................................................19
C. NC Highway 58/24 Interchange........................................................19
2.1.4 Infrastructure............................................................................................19
A. Water and Sewer Utilities..................................................................19
B. Municipal Staffing..............................................................................19
2.1.5 Water Quality...........................................................................................20
A. Stormwater Management..................................................................20
2.1.6 Other Environmental Concerns................................................................20
A. Accessibility while Protecting Public Trust Waters .............................20
2.2 Key Planning Issues...............................................................................................20
2.3 Vision Statement....................................................................................................21
SECTION III ANALYSIS OF EXISTING AND EMERGING CONDITIONS 22
3.1 Population, Housing, and Economy........................................................................22
3.1.1 Population Analysis..................................................................................22
A. Permanent Population Growth Trends..............................................23
B. Population Characteristics.................................................................24
3.1.2 Housing Stock..........................................................................................27
A. Building Permits Issued and Subdivision Lots Created......................29
B. Seasonal Housing.............................................................................29
3.1.3 Local Economy........................................................................................30
3.1.4 Permanent and Seasonal Population Projections.....................................31
A. Permanent Population Projections....................................................31
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Page 2 of 171
Table of Contents
May 18, 2007

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
B. Seasonal and Peak Population Projections.......................................32
3.2 Natural Systems Analysis.......................................................................................33
3.2.1 Inventory of Natural Features...................................................................33
A. Areas of Environmental Concern.......................................................33
B. Soil Characteristics...........................................................................34
C. Water Quality Classifications and Use Support Designations ............
35
D. Flood Hazard Areas..........................................................................40
E. Storm Surge Areas............................................................................40
F. Non -coastal Wetlands.......................................................................43
G. Public Water Supply Watersheds......................................................43
H. Primary Nursery Areas......................................................................43
I. Other Environmentally Fragile Areas..................................................43
3.2.2 Composite Environmental Conditions Map...............................................44
3.2.3 Assessment of Environmental Conditions................................................46
A. Water Quality Assessment................................................................46
B. Impaired Waters................................................................................48
C. Closed Shellfishing Areas.................................................................49
D. Natural Hazards................................................................................49
E. Natural Resources............................................................................50
F. Sources of Pollution..........................................................................50
G. Construction and Stormwater Issues................................................51
H. Septic System Impacts.....................................................................51
I. Wellhead Protection...........................................................................52
3.2.4 Summary of Limitations on and Opportunities for Development...............52
3.3 Analysis of Land Use and Land Development........................................................53
3.3.1 Existing Land Use Analysis......................................................................53
A. Description of Land Use Patterns within Watersheds ..........................53
B. Description of Existing Land Uses...................................................55
C. Historic, Cultural, and Scenic Areas ................... ...........................57
D. Estimates of Land Area by Existing Land Use Category
57
3.3.2 Description of Land Use and Land UseMater Conflicts ...........................57
3.3.3 Description of Development Trends.........................................................58
3.3.4 Projections of Land Needs.......................................................................58
3.3.5 Description of Conflicts with Class II and Class III Lands .........................60
3.4 Analysis of Community Facilities............................................................................60
3.4.1 Water System..........................................................................................60
3.4.2 Wastewater System.................................................................................61
3.4.3 Stormwater System..................................................................................61
3.4.4 Transportation System.............................................................................64
A. Proposed Highway Improvements.....................................................64
B. Major Streets with Capacity Deficiencies...........................................64
C. Traffic Volumes.................................................................................64
3.4.5 Police Protection......................................................................................65
3.4.6 Fire Protection and Emergency Medical Services....................................66
3.4.7 Solid Waste Collection and Disposal........................................................66
3.4.8 Recreation................................................................................................66
3.4.9 Education.................................................................................................67
3.4.10 Public Administration Ability...................................................................67
3.5 Land Suitability Analysis.........................................................................................67
3.6 Review of Current Land Use Plan...........................................................................70
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Table of Contents
Nfay 18, 2007
Page 3 of 171

1.1
A. Consistency of Existing Ordinances with the Current Land Use Plan
Policies...................................................................................................70
B. Adoption of the Current Implementation Measures ............................72
C. Effectiveness of the Current Policies.................................................72
SECTION IV PLAN FOR THE FUTURE...................................................73
4.1
Land Use and Development Goals.........................................................................75
4.2
Land Use Development Policies.........................................76
4.3
Analysis of the Impact of Policies on Management Topics ...................................... 81
4.4
Statement of Local Support Regarding Areas of Environmental Concern ...............83
4.5
Future Land Use Map.............................................................................................84
A. Residential Classifications.................................................................86
B. Commercial Classification.................................................................87
C. Public, Institutional, and Recreational Classification ..........................88
D. Conservation/Open Space Classification..........................................88
4.6
Cost Estimates for Planned Community Facility Improvements..............................89
4.7
4.8
Consistency with Natural Systems and Land Suitability Analyses ...........................89
Comparison of Future Land Use Allocations and Projected Land Needs ................91
4.9
Use of the Future Land Use Plan to Guide Development........................................92
SECTION V TOOLS FOR MANAGING DEVELOPMENT ..........................95
5.1 Guide for Land Use Decision-making.....................................................................95
5.2 Existing Land Use and Development Management Program..................................95
5.3 Additional Implementation Tools.............................................................................96
5.3.1 Amendments or Adjustments to Existing Land Development Ordinances
96
5.3.2 Capital Improvements..............................................................................96
5.4 Implementation Plan and Schedule........................................................................96
5.4.1 Public Water Access Implementation Actions...........................................96
5.4.2 Land Use Compatibility Implementation Actions.......................................96
5.4.3 Infrastructure Carrying Capacity Implementation Actions .........................97
5.4.4 Natural Hazard Areas Implementation Actions.........................................97
r
5.4.5 Water Quality Implementation Actions......................................................97
5.4.6 Areas of Environmental Concern Implementation Actions: .......................
98
5.4.7 Areas of Local Concern Implementation Actions: .....................................
5.5 Description of Public Participation Activities to Assist in Monitoring Plan
98
Implementation..............................................................................................................98
APPENDICES..........................................................................................100
AppendixA.............................................................................................................................101
'
Index of Data Sources.................................................................................................101
Appendix B...............................................................................................................................102
Summary of Land Use Issues, Goals, and Objectives
...................................................102
Identified in the 1998 Cape Carteret Land Use Plan......................................................102
AppendixC.............................................................................................................................104
Housing Characteristics...............................................................................................104
AppendixD.............................................................................................................................105
SoilCharacteristics......................................................................................................105
AppendixE.............................................................................................................................130
Water Quality Classifications.......................................................................................130
AppendixF..............................................................................................................................141
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Page 4 of 171
Table of Contents
May 18, 2007

1
Natural Area and Rare Species Inventory....................................................................141
Carteret County...........................................................................................................141
AppendixG.............................................................................................................................151
Hazardous Weather affecting Cape Carteret since October 1998................................151
AppendixH..............................................................................................................................152
Summary of Policy Statements.....................................................................................152
from the 1998 Cape Carteret Land Use Plan................................................................152
AppendixI...............................................................................................................................155
Impact of Policies on CRC Land Use Plan Management Topics....................................155
AppendixJ..............................................................................................................................158
Maps and Land Use Plan Data Available at the Town Clerk's Office at the Cape Carteret
TownHall....................................................................................................................158
AppendixK.............................................................................................................................159
Summary of CRC Land Use Plan Management Topic Goals and Objectives.................159
AppendixL..............................................................................................................................160
Storm Drainage Problem Areas, May 2001...................................................................160
AppendixM.............................................................................................................................163
Population Projections.................................................................................................163
AppendixN.............................................................................................................................164
Citizen Participation Plan.............................................................................................164
List of Figures
Figure 1: General Location Map................................................................................................
8
Figure 2: Environmental Composite and Natural Features Map...............................................42
Figure3: Existing Land Use Map.............................................................................................54
Figure4: Water System Map....................................................................................................62
Figure 5: Stormwater Management System Map.....................................................................63
Figure6: Land Suitability Map..................................................................................................71
Figure 7: Future Land Use Map...............................................................................................85
List of Tables
Table 1: Population Size and Growth Rates Cape Carteret, Carteret County, and the State ....
23
Table 2: Comparison of Cape Carteret's Population Growth Rate............................................24
Table 3: Age Distribution 2000.................................................................................................25
Table 4: Distribution of Males and Females in the Total Population 2000.................................25
Table 5: Race and Hispanic or Latino Origin 2000...................................................................26
Table 6: Components of Population Change Carteret County and North Carolina ...................27
Table 7: Housing by Structure Type Cape Carteret..................................................................28
Table 8: Comparison of Housing by Structure Type.................................................................28
Table 9: Residential Building Permits Cape Carteret................................................................29
Table 10: Subdivision Lots Cape Carteret................................................................................29
Table 11: Seasonal Housing 2000...........................................................................................30
Table 12: Employment by Industry Sector, Carteret County.....................................................30
Table 13: Valuations and Tax Rates for 2002-2003.................................................................31
Table 14: Permanent Population Projections...........................................................................32
Table 15: Seasonal and Peak Population 2000........................................................................32
Table 16: Seasonal and Peak Population Projections..............................................................33
Table 17: Soils in the Cape Carteret Planning Jurisdiction.......................................................35
Table 18: North Carolina Water Quality Classifications............................................................36
Table 19: Overview of SA, HQW, and ORW Water Quality Classifications...............................38
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Page S of
171
Table of Contents
May 18, 2007

1
1
Ll
Table 20:
Use Support Ratings for Monitored Waters..............................................................39
Table 21:
Description of Hurricane Categories............................................41
Table 22:
Storm Surge Flooding ................... .............................
41
Table 23:
Environmental Features within Land Classes...........................................................45
Table 24:
Overview of the White Oak River Subbasins............................................................46
Table 25:
Risk Level Rating of Weather Events ................................................ ...............49
Table 26:
Existing Land Use By Type and Acreage Cape Carteret Planning Jurisdiction ............
57
Table 27:
Land Needs Projections Cape Carteret Planning Jurisdiction...................................59
Table 28:
2002 Average Daily Traffic.......................................................................................64
Table 29:
Public Schools within the Cape Carteret Planning Jurisdiction.................................67
Table 30:
Land Suitability Model..............................................................................................69
Table 31:
Land Suitability Ratings............................................................................................70
Table 32:
Land Use Issues and Management Topics...............................................................74
Table 33:
Land Use and Development Goals...........................................................................75
Table 34:
Land Use and Development Policies........................................................................76
Table 35:
Impact of Local Policies on CRC Land Use Plan Management Topics .....................82
Table 36:
Acreage by Land Suitability Rating...........................................................................89
Table 37:
Future Land Use Map Calculations...........................................................................91
Table 38:
Comparison of Future Land Allocations with Projected Land Needs .........................92
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Page 6 of 171
Table of Contents
May 18, 2007

I
1
I
I
1
I ' SECTION IINTRODUCTION AND EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1.1 Purpose
Land development generally involves a series of decisions by both private individuals and the
public sector. In order to promote the public interest in the land development process, the North
Carolina Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) requires that local governments prepare, adopt,
and keep current a land use plan. The land use plan is intended to provide a framework that will
guide local governmental officials as they make day-to-day and long-range decisions that affect
land development. The land use plan will also be used by state and federal agencies in making
project consistency, project funding, and CAMA permit decisions.
CAMA regulations require that an update be made of land use plans every five years. The Town
of Cape Carteret's previous land use plan was updated and certified in 1998. The update is
designed to ensure that all current land development issues are reviewed and reflected in the land
use plan. Also, the Coastal Resources Commission (CRC) recently adopted revised planning
guidelines which include requirements not addressed in the town's 1998 plan. The land use plan
update also provides an opportunity to evaluate policy statements and to determine their
effectiveness in implementing the land development objectives of the community.
The study area for this land use plan update is the Cape Carteret Planning Jurisdiction which
includes the Town of Cape Carteret and its extraterritorial planning and zoning jurisdiction (see
Figure 1, General Location Map). The plan includes both a short term (5-10 year) and long term
(20-year) evaluation of land use and land development. Implementation activities are based upon
a five-year action plan.
The goals and objectives of the land use plan are to:
• Identify and analyze new and emerging land use issues and concerns.
• Reexamine existing land use policies to determine their effectiveness.
• Revise existing land use policies and develop new policies that address current
land use and land development issues and concerns.
• Re-examine the existing land use maps to determine what revisions are necessary
to address new land use issues and concerns as well as revised and newly
developed policy statements.
• Further develop implementation strategies and an implementation schedule.
• Promote a better understanding of the land use planning process.
• Promote citizen involvement in the process of preparing the updated land use plan.
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Section I Communin, Concerns and Aspirations
May 18. 2007
Page 7 of 171

mm�m mmm mmm m men m
.6 JA
THE
WOOTEN
COMPANY
October 25. 2004
Figure 1:
General Location
The gepaml of his mepwa, M-oed k, pan th—gh 8g— provided by the Nddh
, P-,—, through fd. provided bytheCmelel Z..
Gamine ,n,, :��
1 'i* r ended, � m ed,nlni-�-d bY IleoWl- f 0—n-m
��'t � .
C—lal R.-- M.ne,e—1, Nelbn.l Oeeenk and Atna h.ft Mrnini..0-
PITT
i VT-) T-
COUNTY
Vanmboro BEAUFOW1 'Ora Lowland
A
* COUNTY %•
Ernul •Hoo-ken
V.1d.mere
•
Bayboro Florence
0
Bndq lon PAMLICO •
New Berr COUNTY
.lames city
Onerdal
tc
Pollwksville' •Arapahoe S'4
Roe
•
•
Merriman
C 0 u
COUNT`!
fisk Loh
Maysville
Atlantic
Sm,-p L,A,') Havelock
•
•
th OveA (Gi—r /.,A,
Davis
Newport Otway
'0 n '�)
•
vb
ONSL&I Morehead! CIty6m&O-tRi Marehallberg
Broad Creek
COUN'cgm=Bog "soudn •
Swansbom
0s'Aler Path
nu
& A 1,,,,d 0--.4—, Cape Carteret,

11
Ll
1
1
1
1
1
1.2 Overview of the Plan
This land use plan update for Cape Carteret follows the methodology recommended by CAMA in
its Land Use Planning Guidelines (Subchapter 7B of the North Carolina Administrative Code).
This Plan is organized to adhere to the format outlined in Subchapter 7B. In addition to
requirements for land use plan format and content, the guidelines also require that the land use
plan update process include a variety of educational efforts and participatory techniques to
assure that all segments of the community have a full and adequate opportunity to participate in
all stages of the preparation of the land use plan. A formal Citizen Participation Plan (see
Appendix N) was developed to involve, inform and educate a broad cross-section of the
community's populace. Section 4.9 provides specific information concerning use of the future
land use plan in guiding decisions about future development.
An Advisory Committee representing a cross-section of the community was appointed to serve as
the body responsible for guiding the land use plan formulation effort. The Advisory Committee
served in a review and advisory capacity to the elected officials of the Town of Cape Carteret and
to the project planning consultant, The Wooten Company. The Advisory Committee met on a
periodic basis with the planning consultant and local staff to assist the planning consultant in
defining land use and development issues and concerns, review draft land use plan components
prepared by the planning consultant, provide recommendations regarding land use plan content,
and provide general input. The public involvement activities undertaken during the preparation of
this plan are described in the Citizen Participation Plan, a copy of which is provided in Appendix
N. No written comments, including comments regarding the review of the preliminary draft land
use plan by adjoining jurisdictions, were received by the Town of Cape Carteret.
Section I of the plan includes introductory material and an executive summary of the plan
document. It is possible that this section of the plan can be reformatted into a simplified brochure
that could be utilized for general public informational purposes.
Section II of this land use plan involves an analysis of community concerns and aspirations in
Cape Carteret including existing and emerging conditions related to population, economy, land
use, water quality, and transportation. Key planning issues are identified in Section II. These
issues concern public access, land use suitability, infrastructure, natural hazards, and water
' quality. How these issues are implicated with the future use of land is identified as well. A vision
statement, included in Section II, sets the tone for the community's goals and desires for the
future.
J
1
Through an, analysis of existing and emerging conditions in Section III, an assessment of the
general suitability of land for development and a discussion of physical limitations for
development, fragile land and water areas, and areas with resource potential are provided. The
analysis of conditions is particularly useful in preparing the land classifications, goals and
objectives, and the future land use map which is discussed in Section IV. Section III also contains
an evaluation of the 1998 Land Use Plan policy statements and evaluates the consistency of the
policies with local land use and development ordinances. Action Plan implementation techniques
designed to address land development and growth management issues are reviewed. The
efficacy of the current policies in creating the desired land use patterns and protecting natural
systems is evaluated. The policy statements were developed based upon the previously
described analysis of existing conditions, land use trends, and constraints to land development as
well as citizen input obtained through the town's public participation process.
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Section t Connnunity Concerns and Aspirations
Mav 18, 2007
Page 9 of 171

A plan for the future is developed in Section IV. Land use goals and objectives and development
policies are created as the basis of the plan. Consistency of the future policies and an analysis of
the impact of these policies on the management topics are provided in Section IV. A statement of
local support for Areas of Environmental Concern (AECs) expresses the intent of the Town of
Cape Carteret to develop in a manner that is cognizant of sensitive environmental areas. The
future land use map described in Section IV assists local planning officials in the implementation
of the land development policy statements. The future land use map provides a basic framework
for identifying the future use of land and illustrates the town's policies as to where and to what
density it wants growth to occur. The future land use map also delineates where the town wants
to conserve natural and cultural resources. Section IV provides a description of the land uses
' proposed within each future land use classification. The future land use map presented in this
section graphically illustrates the land classification system as applied to the Cape Carteret
Planning Jurisdiction. Section 4.9 provides information concerning use of the future land use map
in guiding decisions about future development.
Tools for managing land development are outlined in Section V of the plan. A description of the
specific management tools that the Cape Carteret will utilize to implement the plan are provided in
Section V as is a five-year implementation plan and schedule. This section of the plan also
includes a description of the public participation activities that will be used to monitor
' implementation of the land use plan.
1�
1.3 Executive Summary
1.3.1 Summary of Land Use Issues
The major land use and development issues identified during the preparation of this land
use plan update that will affect Cape Carteret during the next ten year period include the
following (not presented here in any priority order):
Public Access
• Provision of waterfront access.
• The provision of public recreational space and water access.
Land Use Compatibility
• Maintaining low residential densities.
• Managing infill development in established residential areas.
• Commercial land use encroachment in residential areas.
• Managing strip commercial development adjacent to NC Highways 24 and
58.
• Guiding growth to areas best suited to accommodate development.
Infrastructure Carrying Capacity
• Connectivity of subdivisions and access to thoroughfares
• Proposed highway improvements to NC 58 and NC 24
Natural Hazard Areas
• Zoning for intensive uses in areas susceptible to storm surge
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Section 1 Community Concerns and Aspirations
May 18, 2007
Page 10 of 171

' Water Quality
• Regional solutions to wastewater disposal needs.
' • Coordination of comprehensive stormwater management practices and
policies with adjoining local governments.
• Stormwater runoff impacts.
' Water quality of surface and ground waters.
• Long-term solutions to wastewater treatment and disposal.
Areas of Environmental Concern
• The impact of development on water quality and marine fisheries
Areas of Local Concern
• Expansion of municipal ETJ areas.
• Incorporation of new municipalities without regard to the new town's
capability to provide municipal services or the adverse impact of the new
' town on existing municipalities.
• Annexation/delineation of future growth area agreements with the Towns of
Cedar Point and Bogue.
' Coordination of comprehensive stormwater management practices and
policies with adjoining local government
1.3.2 Summary of Data Collection and Analysis
'
The data analyzed in Section III were collected from a wide variety of sources (see
Appendix A, Index of Data Sources) including published documents, governmental and
private organizations, and individuals. Printed and digital map data were utilized in the
preparation of this section of the plan. The major conclusions resulting from the data
collection and analysis include:
Population
• The town's 2003 population is 1,283, an increase of over 26 percent since
1990.
• The town's population is projected to increase from approximately 1,283 in
'
2003 to 1,442 in 2010.
• The 2005 peak population (total permanent and seasonal population) is
estimated to total 1,816 for the Cape Carteret planning jurisdiction and is
projected to increase to 2,646 by 2025.
• Cape Carteret's projected growth rate is slightly higher than that anticipated
for the state as a whole.
Housing
• Town data indicates that 110 permits were issued for new residential
dwellings since 1998. Of those permits, 102 were issued for single-family
detached dwellings and 8 were issued for mobile homes. Building permit
data since 1998 indicate that Cape Carteret has averaged about 18 new
residential dwellings per year —approximately 93 percent of those were
single-family dwellings.
• Based upon the anticipated population increase of 116 persons by 2010
and the average household population size in the 2000 US Census of
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Section 1 Community Concerns and Aspirations
,Clay 18.2007
Page I 1 of 171

Population (2.69 persons per household), it is projected that an additional
43 residential units will be needed through the end of the 10-year planning
period.
' Economy
• The economy of Cape Carteret and Carteret County is expected to remain
based on retail trade, services, and tourism.
• Employment in Cape Carteret is almost entirely in the non -manufacturing
sector.
' • Cape Carteret's employment is expected to continue to be centered on the
services and retail trade sectors of the economy.
1
1
1
1
1
11
I
J
Natural Constraints for Development
•
The AEC areas in Cape Carteret are primarily located in the Pettiford Creek
vicinity and along the Bogue Sound and Deer Creek shorelines. They
include estuarine waters, public trust waters, estuarine shoreline, and
coastal wetlands.
•
Generally, most of the soils in the Cape Carteret planning jurisdiction have
limitations for many urban uses due to wetness, low strength, and restricted
permeability. One hundred percent of the Cape Carteret planning
jurisdiction contains soils that are rated as having severe limitations for
septic tank absorption fields.
•
The waters in the Cape Carteret area are classified as SA, HQW, and
ORW.
•
Approximately 20 percent of the Cape Carteret planning area is within the
100-year floodplain.
•
Generally, the parcels adjacent to the shorelines of Bogue Sound, Deer
Creek, and Pettiford Creek are the areas within the 100-year floodplain.
The floodplain surrounding Deer Creek is the most expansive area of
floodplain and reaches inland from the sound across NC Highway 24.
•
Approximately 19 percent of the Cape Carteret planning jurisdiction is
susceptible to flooding from Category 1 and 2 hurricanes. Storm surge
flooding resulting from the most intensive hurricanes (Categories 4 and 5)
is projected to inundate almost two-thirds of the planning jurisdiction.
•
Based upon the analysis of natural features and environmental conditions,
the overwhelming majority (98.9%) of the land area in the Cape Carteret
planning jurisdiction falls into Class III, serious hazards and limitations.
Class II lands (moderate hazards and limitations) account for approximately
1.1 percent of the Town's land area. No land area is classified as Class I,
minimal hazards and limitations.
•
Closed shellfishing areas in the Cape Carteret vicinity include Pettiford
Creek located adjacent to the northern boundary of the town's planning
jurisdiction and Hunting Island Creek located west of Cape Carteret in the
Town of Bogue.
•
Within the Cape Carteret planning jurisdiction, the primary water pollution
sources of estuarine waters are estimated to be multiple nonpoint sources
including agriculture, forestry, stormwater runoff, septic tank runoff, and
marinas.
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Section 1 Community Concerns and Aspirations
May 18, 2007
Page 12 of 171

1
1
1
li
1
1
Identified fragile areas within the Cape Carteret planning jurisdiction include
all state -designated Areas of Environmental Concern (AEC's) such as
wetlands and ORW.
The land suitability analysis classifies land as High Suitability, Medium
Suitability, Low Suitability, and Least Suitable. In general, the majority of
the Cape Carteret planning jurisdiction is within the higher suitability ratings
(High and Medium Suitability). Lower suitability ratings (Low Suitability and
Least Suitable) are found in areas subject to flooding and in wetlands
areas, particularly south of Pettiford Creek and along the Bogue Sound and
Deer Creek shorelines.
Existing Land Use
• Cape Carteret is primarily a residential-resort/retirement community that is
also a commercial services and retail center for the southwestern portion of
Carteret County.
• The predominant land use in Cape Carteret is single-family residences.
• Most of the commercial land uses are located in the northeastern corner of
the NC Highway 24/58 intersection and adjacent to the NC Highway 58
corridor.
• There are currently no traditional industrial or manufacturing land uses
within the town's planning region.
• The Town of Cape Carteret is surrounded on its northwestern, western and
eastern boundary by other municipalities (Peletier, Cedar Point, and
Bogue) and by Bogue Sound on its southern boundary. - Consequently, any
future expansions of the Cape Carteret corporate area will be limited to the
northeast.
• Future growth and development will primarily be the result of infill
development on undeveloped tracts within the current corporate limits and
redevelopment of existing developed properties.
• The largest tracts available for infill development are located within the
triangle formed by Taylor Notion Road, NC Highway 24, and NC Highway
58.
• It appears that sufficient undeveloped land and redevelopable tracts
currently do not exist within the current Cape Carteret planning
jurisdictional area to meet projected residential land needs through 2020.
Because the possibilities for expansion of the town's planning jurisdictional
area are limited, residential growth will most likely peak out between 2015
and 2020.
' Community Facilities
• Public water service in Cape Carteret is provided by the West Carteret
Water District.
• Wastewater disposal in Cape Carteret is provided by individual subsurface
disposal systems or by privately -owned package treatment plants.
• The town has a municipal staff of 9 full time and 2 part time employees
(and 4 reserve police officers serving on an as -needed basis) that perform
general administration, public works, law enforcement, and planning and
zoning services. With anticipated development and growth in population,
Cape Carteret CA,MA Land Use Plan Page 13 of 171
Section 1 Commzaiity Concerns and Aspirations
.May 18, 2007

1
1
I
1
1
the current staffing level may need to be increased to meet future demand
on municipal services.
According to the North Carolina Department of Transportation's 2004-2010
Transportation Improvement Program, the only improvement project
directly impacting Cape Carteret is the conversion of the at -grade
intersection at NC 24 and NC 58 to an interchange. This project is
currently listed in the TIP as an unfunded project.
Based upon population projections and estimates of land needs, no
additional major community facilities will be required during the 10-year
study period to accommodate the anticipated growth.
As new land development increases the town's wastewater disposal needs
and as existing subsurface disposal systems begin to fail, water quality will
most likely be adversely impacted. Consequently, the provision of
adequate wastewater treatment is a paramount concern to the Town of
Cape Carteret and all of western Carteret County.
1.3.3 Summary of Policy Statements
The formulation of land use and development policies is based upon a review and
analysis of policy statements contained in the 1998 Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use
Plan; an evaluation of identified concerns and aspirations (Section II) and the needs and
opportunities identified in the analysis of existing and emerging conditions (Section 111);
input from the Land Use Plan Advisory Committee, local planning board, and elected
officials; and input obtained through citizen participation efforts including public
informational meetings, public forums, and Land Use Plan Advisory Committee
meetings.
The town developed four policy statements that impose additional local requirements for
Areas of Environmental Concern which would be more restrictive than the CAMA
minimum use standards. The town's policies (Section 4.2) regarding drystack storage
facilities, marinas, commercial docks, and floating homes are more restrictive than the
CAMA regulations.
Many of the policy statements from the previous plan (1998 Land Use Plan Update) have
been retained. It is the town's intent that its policies concerning resource protection
policies be consistent with CAMA 7H Use Standards, except as noted above. New policy
statements and amendments to policy statements were developed which address a
variety of issues and include:
IIPublic Access to Public) II
Trust Waters
Marina construction is limited in Cape Carteret's planning
AMENDED jurisdiction according to town ordinances and CAMA 7H Use
Standards. This policy exceeds CAMA 7H use standards.
Public mooring fields are not permitted in Cape Carteret's
NEW POLICY planning jurisdiction. This policy exceeds CAMA 7H use
standards.
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Section t Conzznunity Concenzs mzd Aspirations
May 18, 2007
Page 14 of 171

The town does not permit commercial uses in connection with
NEW POLICY
marinas and docking facilities. This policy exceeds CAMA 7H
use standards.
No boat rigged for commercial purposes shall dock at a marina or
boat dock or be launched or recovered from a boat ramp within
NEW POLICY
the town, except, such boats may be launched or recovered from
boat ramps owned and operated by state or local government
agencies. This policy exceeds CAMA 7H use standards.
The town encourages the establishment of attractive,
environmentally -responsible marinas and water access facilities
AMENDED
for residents and vacationers consistent with CAMA regulations
and local ordinances. This policy exceeds CAMA 7H use
standards.
DELETED
Public mooring fields shall be permitted in accordance with CAMA
regulations.
Infrastructure Carrying
Capacity
The provision of basic municipal services shall be contingent
AMENDED
upon the town's needs, financial capacity, and the economic
feasibility of providing the municipal service.
Areas of Environmental
Concern
Coastal Wetlands
Only certain uses which require water access and cannot function
elsewhere will be permitted in coastal wetlands. Such uses
include utility easements, navigation channels, dredging projects,
marinas, piers, boat ramps, noncommercial docks, navigational
AMENDED
aids, groins, culverts, and bridges. Each proposed use shall be
evaluated for compliance with the CAMA 7H Use Standards and
town ordinances. Mooring fields, mooring pilings, and
commercial docking facilities are not permitted in the Cape
Carteret planning jurisdiction.
Marina construction will not be permitted in coastal wetlands
except as may be allowed by CAMA 7H Use Standards and local
land development regulations. Marina construction will be
AMENDED
permitted in estuarine waters which are classified as primary
nursery areas in accordance with the CAMA 7H Use Standards
and local land development regulations.
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Page 15 of 171
Section 1 Community Concerns and Aspirations
Mm 18, 2007

1.3.4 Summary of Future Land Use Projections
The Future Land Use Map for the Cape Carteret planning jurisdiction encompasses the
Cape Carteret corporate limits and the Town's extraterritorial planning and zoning
jurisdiction. The Town's Future Land Use Map classifications include the following
categories and subcategories:
• Residential
o Low Density Single-family Residential
o Medium Density Single-family Residential
o Medium Density Multi -family Residential
• Commercial
• Public, Institutional, and Recreational
• Conservation/Open Space
Generally, growth and land development is anticipated to occur in all future land use
categories except for the Conservation/Open Space classification. The type and
intensity of projected development varies within each future land use map classification.
Future Land Use projections are delineated in Figure 7.
Low density (1 to 2 dwelling units per acre) single-family residential use is expected to
continue to remain the dominant land use in future years. Nonresidential land uses are
projected to cluster along the NC 24 and NC 58 corridors.
The land use patterns depicted on the Future Land Use Map are consistent with the
analysis of natural systems and the analysis of land suitability. The Future Land Use
Map depicts very generalized patterns of projected land use. The intent of the map is to
' illustrate a typical pattern of use for a general area and not the specific use of an
individual parcel. The Future Land Use Map is not intended for site -specific land
planning or for regulatory purposes.
Based upon the analysis of existing land use patterns, natural developmental
constraints, and projected land use, the anticipated 2015 residential land needs can not
be met with the estimated amount of available developable acreage in the current Cape
Carteret jurisdiction.
1
r
1.3.5 Summary of Implementation Strategies
In order to implement the policies outlined in the Land Use Plan Update, the Cape
Carteret Town Board and Planning Board will utilize the policy statements as one of the
bases for decision -making when land development requests are made. Policy
statements will be taken into consideration when reviewing rezonings, zoning text
amendments, special use permits, and subdivision plats. The Cape Carteret Board of
Adjustment will also review policies outlined in this plan prior to making decisions on
variances and special use permit requests.
Cape Carteret will continue to administer and enforce its land use regulatory tools
particularly the Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Regulations, and Flood Damage
Prevention Ordinance. The town will review the current regulatory tools to eliminate
inconsistencies which may exist between the tools and the policies outlined in this plan.
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Section l Community Concerts and Aspirations
May 18, 2007
Page 16 of 171

1
1
' In order to assist with the implementation of the updated Land Use Plan, an amendment
to the subdivision ordinance regarding street connectivity is anticipated.
' The town will ensure a continuous planning process by conducting periodic reviews of
the Land Use Plan's policies and implementation strategies. This review will be the
responsibility of the Cape Carteret Planning Board which will coordinate such reviews
' with the Town Board.
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Section l Community Concerns and Aspirations
,Play 18. ?007
Page 17 of 171

1
SECTION II; COMMUNITY CONCERNS AND ASPIRATIONS.
This section of the Plan is organized in accordance with the requirements of Subchapter 7B
.0702(b). Section II includes a description of the dominant growth -related conditions that
influence land use, development, water quality, and other environmental concerns within the
Cape Carteret planning jurisdiction. Descriptions of the land use and development topics most
important to the future of the town as well as a community vision statement are also provided in
Section Il.
2.1 Significant Existing and Emerging Conditions
2.1.1 Land Use
A. General Development Trends
Cape Carteret is primarily a low density residential community. The majority of the
developed residential land within the Cape Carteret planning jurisdiction is located
within eight major subdivisions. With the exception of the Star Hill Country Club and
Golf Course located in the north central portion of the Cape Carteret planning
jurisdiction, nonresidential development is concentrated along the NC Highway 24
corridor.
Recent growth includes additional low density residential subdivisions that have
developed along the northeast fringe of the Town's current ETJ, the only direction
that the town can expand its ETJ since it is bounded on all other sides by other
municipalities and Bogue Sound. Very few large acreage, undeveloped tracts exists
within the Cape Carteret planning jurisdiction. The largest mass of undeveloped land
is located within the triangle formed by Taylor Notion Road, NC Highway 24, and NC
Highway 58. Some subdivision development is beginning to occur in this area.
B. Land Suitability and Natural Constraints on Development
The entire Cape Carteret planning jurisdiction has significant soil limitations for septic
tank drainfields. Also, approximately 20 percent of the land area in the planning
jurisdiction lies within the 100-year floodplain designation based upon Flood
Insurance Rate Maps prepared by FEMA.
C. Housing Trends
In Cape Carteret, new home construction shows modest growth and the vacancy
rate of residential units is low. The town is interested in maintaining its low density
residential character and does not intend to encourage high density residential
development. This is consistent with the inability to provide adequate sanitary sewer
service for higher density development.
2.1.2 Economic Conditions
A. General Economic Conditions
The town has identified the corridors along highways NC 24 and NC 58 as the areas
most suitable for economic development related to commercial land uses. Due to
the character of the town, a slow economy nationwide, and labor trends, new
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Page 18 of 171
SectionIf Community Concerns and Aspirations
May 18. 2007

manufacturing and industrial uses are not anticipated in the planning jurisdiction
within the planning period.
t B.- Population Growth
Cape Carteret's total population increased 19.8% from 1990-2000. Carteret
County's population growth rate during the same time period was 13.0%. The
' statewide average was 21.4%. The Town's and County's growth rates since 1990
are about average compared to other coastal North Carolina communities. The
estimated 2003 population for Cape Carteret is 1,283. The town's planning
jurisdiction population is projected to increase to 1,455 in 2010 and 1,756 in 2020.
Projections indicate that the population growth rate of Carteret County and the entire
state will slow over the next 25 years.
Population growth will result in increased demand for additional goods, services, and
housing as well as public services —utilities, roads, schools, police and fire
protection, parks, etc.
An aging population, approximately one-third of which is over 65 years of age, is
slightly increasing due primarily to in -migration. The school -aged population
represents less than twenty percent of the population while more than eighty-one
' percent of the population is over 25 years -of -age.
2.1.3 Transportation
' A. Interconnection of Local Streets
Although only a small number of large, undeveloped tracts exist within the current
planning jurisdiction, the town feels that it is important to ensure an interconnection
between developing properties and existing developed areas.
B. Pedestrian Circulation
Improving pedestrian circulation through a sidewalk or trail system, particularly along
the NC Highway 24 and Taylor Notion Road corridors, is a growing concern.
C. NC Highway 58/24 Interchange
' The impact of the proposed conversion of the current at -grade intersection of
Highway 24 and 58 to an interchange can have a significant effect on commercial
development in this area.
Ll
�1
2.1.4 Infrastructure
A. Water and Sewer Utilities
Potable water service to Cape Carteret is provided by a private utility, West Carteret
Water Corporation. Public sewer service is not available in Cape Carteret. The town
supports efforts for a long-term solution to regional wastewater needs. A regional
wastewater facility would alleviate concerns for on -going maintenance of septic
systems and their longevity, as well as the impacts these systems may have on
water quality.
B. Municipal Staffinq
Cape Carteret continues to monitor the need for additional staff according to the rate
of development in order to maintain quality service as the town grows.
Cape Carteret LAMA Land Use Plan 1.
Section 11 Community Concerns and Aspirations
May 18, 2007
Page 19 of 171

2.1.5 Water Quality
A. Stormwater Management
Cape Carteret is committed to maintaining water quality and the implementation of
' Best Management Practices as land is developed. The town promotes coordinated
stormwater management with neighboring communities. The town recognizes the
importance of ensuring proper operation of on -site sewage disposal systems.
' 2.1.6 Other Environmental Concerns
A. Accessibility while Protecting Public Trust Waters
The Town has recently provided public access to Bogue Sound at seven street dead -
ends. Marina development is allowed but is limited to noncommercial operations.
Floating homes are not permitted within the Cape Carteret planning jurisdiction.
' 2.2 Key Planning Issues
' The major land use and development issues identified during the preparation of this land use plan
update include the following (not presented here in any priority order):
1
Public Access
• Marina development has been an issue and the town allows limited
marina construction.
• The provision of public recreational space and water access.
Land Use
• Maintaining low residential densities is a primary objective in Cape
Compatibility
Carteret.
• Managing infill development in established residential areas is a
concern.
• Commercial land use encroachment in residential areas.
• Managing strip commercial development adjacent to NC Highways
24 and 58.
• Guiding growth to areas best suited to accommodate development.
Infrastructure
• Connectivity of subdivision streets and access to thoroughfares.
Carrying Capacity
Feel a need for thoroughfare planning.
• Proposed interchange improvements at the intersection of NC 58
and NC 24.
Water Quality
• Regional solutions to wastewater disposal needs.
• Coordination of comprehensive stormwater management practices
and policies with adjoining local governments.
• Stormwater runoff impacts.
• Water quality of surface and ground waters.
• Long-term solutions to wastewater treatment and disposal.
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Section I/ Community Concerns and Aspirations
May 18, 2007
Page 20 of 171

Areas of • The impact of development on water quality and marine fisheries.
Environmental
Concern
Areas of Local • Traffic congestion at the NC Highway 24/58 intersection.
Concern • Provision of sidewalks along NC 24 and Taylor Notion Road.
• Feasibility of a pedestrian bridge over NC 24. 11
Many of the important land use and land development issues delineated in this updated Land
Use Plan have also been identified in previous land use plans. A summary of the land use and
development issues contained in the previous 1998 Town of Cape Carteret Land Use Plan is
provided in Appendix B.
2.3 Vision Statement
Cape Carteret is primarily a low -density single-family residential community that offers some
municipal urban services and public and private community facilities. It is the Town's desire to
maintain the low -density residential character of the community as well as the high quality of life.
Residents and officials of Cape Carteret favor moderate growth and development that is
environmentally responsible and that is in keeping with the current character of the town. The
majority of future growth and development is anticipated to be residential in nature while some
commercial development is desired. Residential densities are expected to range from one to
two dwelling units per acre. Improvements to municipal services and facilities are anticipated in
order to meet current and projected demand for such services. The provision of these services
shall be contingent upon the town's needs, financial capacity and the economic feasibility of
providing the municipal service.
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Section 11 Community Concerns and Aspirations
May 18, 2007
Page 21 of 171

SECTION III "ANALYSIS OF EXISTING AND EMERGING CONDITIONS
This section of the Plan is organized in accordance with the requirements of Subchapter 7B
.0702(c). The purpose of this section is to provide a sound factual and analytical base to
support the land use and development policies formulated in this Plan. Specific elements of
Section III include
• Population, housing, and economic analysis
• Natural systems analysis
• Environmental conditions analysis
• Land use and development analysis
Community facilities analysis
'
• Land suitability analysis
• Review of the current CAMA Land Use Plan
'
3.1 Population, Housing, and Economy
3.1.1 Population Analysis
• Cape Carteret's population in 2002 was 1,243, an increase of over 22
percent since 1990. The estimated total 2002 population for the Cape
Carteret planning jurisdiction is 1,254.
• The estimated 2005 population of the Cape Carteret corporate area is 1,
322.
• The county's population growth rate since 1990 was 14.2%. The
statewide average was 25.5%.
• The town's growth rate since 1990 is about average compared to other
coastal North Carolina communities of similar size.
• Between 1990 and 2001, Cape Carteret's total population increased more
by migration than by natural increase. In 2000, there were 296 people
that did not live in the county five years earlier. The total increase in
population from 1990-2001 was 204.
• Cape Carteret's 2001 population density was 513 persons per square
mile. In comparison, some regional population densities in 2001 were:
Swansboro 1,165, Bogue 224, Cedar Point 388, and Peletier 151. These
'
figures are rounded to the nearest whole figure and reflect persons per
square mile. In 1990, Cape Carteret's population density was 478
persons per square mile. There was a net increase in density of 35
persons per square mile between 1990 and 2001. Cedar Point
'
experienced a similar trend, as their population density in 1990 was 331
persons per square mile and increased by 51 between 1990 and 2001.
• Cape Carteret's age distribution differs from that of the county and the
'
state. In 2000, only 66.56% of Cape Carteret's population was under 65
years of age while the county and state populations under the age of 65
were 82.78% and 87.96%, respectively. Cape Carteret's over-65
'
population comprises 33.44% of the population while, in 2000, the county
and state were at 17.22% and 12.04% respectively. The over-65
'
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Page 22 of 171
SectionIll Community Concerns and Aspirations
'
'Way 1& 2007

�1
population of neighboring towns, Bogue (14.92%) and Cedar Point
(22.3%), more closely reflects that of the state and county.
• The estimated 2005 seasonal population of Cape Carteret is 479. The
2005 peak population, which is the sum of the permanent population and
the seasonal population, is estimated to be 1,801.
• Projections indicate that the peak population for the Cape Carteret
planning jurisdiction will increase to 1,982 in 2010 and 2,392 in 2020.
Complete population projections are provided in Section 3.1.4.
A. Permanent Population Growth Trends
While Cape Carteret's population has increased steadily since 1980, its rate of
growth is below that of Carteret County and the statewide average. The following
table provides a comparison of the town's recent growth trends with those of the
county and the state.
x�,3j '2 a �3 t' :.. t?. F d •.s , e 1`` , i '�' §`3
Population Size__
1980 -�
— 1990
2000
__ -- 2002
Cape Carteret— 944
__....._..._.__....__._.._.....-_-...._._....._......._..............._... ...._..
1,013
.._.-.-.__...._...---.._.._._...._._.._.._._._.__....._.._...._....._...__._.._....._.__._.__.................
1,214
_
^1,243
..... ........ .... ---......... _._..... _..... _..._._._
Carteret County 41,092
^_North
52,553
59,383
60,064
Carolina 5,880,095
—
_6,628,637
8,046,962
8,323,375
Population Growth Rates
1980-1990
1990-2000
2000-2002
Cape Carteret
7.3%
19.8%
2.4%
.._.......- ------........... .-..-._...._...__.._..._._..-- --....--..._._.....-..--
Carteret County
- -----...._._..._....
__..._....-.
13.0%
_...----._..._.......-----..........._.-..._.__........__..._..._..-.._..__....._....
1.1 %
North Carolina
_27.9%
13.0%
21.4%
3.4%
Sources: U.S. Census of Population, 1980-2000, NC State Data Center
In 2002, the municipal population of Cape Carteret, one of eleven incorporated
municipalities within Carteret County, comprised approximately 2 percent of the total
county population.
The following table provides a comparison of Cape Carteret's population growth
rates with those of selected municipalities in coastal North Carolina.
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Section Ill Community Concerns and Aspirations
Ilay 18, 2007
Page 23 of 171

1
I
ll
I
I
���.wix�'a�,$g� t1F :,� ,' ":�". m' �I .v I-• t � AC A J � ��art.; � ��.
Municipality
County
1980
1990
2002
1980-1990
% Change
1990-2002
% Change
Alliance
Pamlico —
616
-- 681
798
10.55%
�17.18%
Atlantic Beach
Carteret
941
1,938
1,780
105.95%
-8.15%
Bayboro
—Pamlico
! 759
733
743
-3.43%
1.36%
Beaufort
Carteret
3,826
3,808
3,787
-0.47%
-0.55%
Cape Carteret
Carteret
944
1,013
— 1,243
— 731 %
22.70%
!— Cedar Point— -
Emerald Isle
Havelock
-- Carteret —-
Carteret
Craven
479
865
17,718
- 628
2,434
20,300
950
3,564
22,463
31.11 %
181.39%
14.57%
51.27%
46.43%
10.66%
Indian Beach
Carteret
54
153
93
183.33%
-39.22%
—Jacksonville
Maysville
Onslow
Jones
18,259
877
30,398
892
68,356
993
— 66.48%
1.71%
124.87%
11.32%
Morehead City
Carteret
4,359
6,046
7,726
38.70%
27.79%
New Bern
Craven
14,557
17,363
23,415
19.28%
34.86%
Newport
Carteret
1,883
2,516
3,428
33.62%
36.25%
Oriental
Pamlico
536
786
870
46.64%
10.69%
Pine Knoll Shores
—Carteret
646
1,360
1,534
110.53%
12.79%
Richlands
Onslow
825
996
909
20.73%
-8.73%
^Swansboro
......
Trenton
Onslow
__......._..._--------
Jones
976
294
1,165
230
1,457
— -.-_-...--------.
240
19.36%
..... _._._._........_..--
-2 /6
25.06%
----- -
4.35%
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, North Carolina State Data Center, Office of State
Budget and Management, 2003
B. Population Characteristics
' 1. Age Characteristics
Cape Carteret's age distribution differs from that of the county and the state.
In 2000, only 66.56% of Cape Carteret's population was under 65 years of
age while the county and state populations under the age of 65 were 82.78%
and 87.96%, respectively. Cape Carteret's over-65 population comprises
33.44% of the population while, in 2000, the county and state were at 17.22%
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Page 24 of 171
Section 11l Community Concerns and Aspirations
May 18, 2007

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
t
and 12.04% respectively. The over-65 population of neighboring towns,
Bogue (14.92%) and Cedar Point (22.3%), more closely reflects that of the
state and county.
+r• ;`<s�rtN*
Cape
Carteret
North
Carteret _
_ County.__
_ Carolina
Age Category __ Number —
_%° of Total _
_ % of Total
%of Total___
Under 18
Years 178
14.66
20.71
24.40
School Age
18-24 Years
4'5
3.71
6.44
10.02
College Age
25-64 Years
585
48.19
55.63
53.54
Working Age
65+ Years
Retirement
406
33.44
17.22
12.04
Age
Totals
1,214
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
Source: North Carolina State Data Center, Office of State Budget and Management,
2003.
2. Distribution of Males and Females
Cape Carteret's proportion of males and females is similar to the Carteret
County and statewide averages.
.8« z S ��. 8> elk � R ! ♦.:
Via, .tin Y n �
Male
Percent
Female
Percent
Total
Cape Carteret
594
48.9%
620
51.1 %
1,214
Carteret County
29,041
48.9%
30,342
51.1%
59,383
North Carolina
3,940,711
49.0%
4,108,602
51.0%
8,049,313
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Section Ill Community Concerns and Aspirations
Mav 18, 2007
Source: US Census, 2000
Page 25 of 171

1
1
3. Racial Characteristics
Racial composition data for Cape Carteret indicate that 97.3% of the
population is white and 2.7% all other races. The town's minority population
is lower than the Carteret County and statewide averages.
%< s'.
Cape Carteret
Carteret County
North Carolina
Race Category
White
Number
1,181
Percent
97.3%
Number
Percent
90.0%°
Number
5,802,165
Percent
72.1 %
—� —��
Black/African American
^
18
— 1.5%
—53,443
4,191
7.1%
1,734,154
—21.5%
American Indian/Alaska Native
3
0.2%
341
0.6%
100,956
1.3%°
Asian
4
0.3%
253
0.4%
111,292
_ 1.4%
Hawaiian/Pacific Islander
0
0.0%
29
0.0%
— 3,699
0.0%
_ u2.3%
Other Race --_ �—
�_-8
— 0.7%
_-_—392.
—_— 0.7%
185,138
Two or More Races
0
0.0%
734
1.2%
111,909
1.4%
Total
1,214
100.0%
59,383
100.0%
8,049,313
100.0%
Hispanic or Latino Origin
27
2.2%
929
1.6%
372,964
4.6%
' Source: US Census, 2000
4. Components of Population Change
In migration of population accounted for the majority of Carteret County's
' growth between 1990 and 2000 resulting in over 88 percent of the total
increase in population. While Carteret County's 1990 to 2000 migration rate
was among the highest in the region, it was below the statewide average of
15.1 percent.
Cape Carteret LAMA Land Use Plan Page 26 of 171
SectionIII Community Concerns and Aspirations
Play 18, 2007

L�
1
1
1
1
I
I
1
I
I
1
1
F # '+: .1•"*iwf k'� ��.��� 'O� � �� 4`�� �'�..� � d��at� � $=Xa%YA�Y' ;.,.. �`�.$."i� .Fp "� ��r r�A
,fit i �t,� �..g�y�fy`,�• �. +ey t K y'J '�f�ky � �>R 'H� '} $ tl.c:.
`,O �r �.. f��p��' ,:. `,.
� � % � t ���r
eb ���qr,i
� �,3
air°'#y"�q
y w q'L •
;'i
Carteret County
North Carolina,
_
Population Change
6,976
1,4i6,865
Birth_s__ �
_6,438
1,054,045
5,660
_Deaths _
Natural Increase
778
415,874!
Net Migration
6,198
1000,991
Migration Rate'
11.8%
15:1%
Source: NC State Data Center
'Natural increase is the difference between total births and total deaths. Net migration is the
difference between total population change and natural increase. Migration rate is the difference
between in -migration and out -migration expressed as a percentage of the base year total
population. It is calculated by dividing net migration by the base year total population.
5. Income Characteristics
Cape Carteret's 2000 per capita income of $26,806 was 132 percent of the
statewide per capital income of $20,307. The 2000 per capita income level in
Carteret County of $21,260 was 104.7 percent of the North Carolina average.
Cape Carteret's median household income of $44,514 was considerably
higher than the Carteret County average of $38,344 and the North Carolina
average of $39,184. Carteret County's 2000 median household income of
ranked it as 38th statewide.
According to data from the 2000 U.S. Census, the percentage of families
below the poverty level in Cape Carteret was 2.6 % compared to the
statewide rate of 9.0% and the Carteret County rate of 8.0%.
3.1.2 Housing Stock
The predominant housing type in Cape Carteret is the single-family detached dwelling.
Of the 711 housing units in Cape Carteret, approximately 82% are single-family
detached dwellings. Cape Carteret has a much lower number of multifamily dwellings (3)
than manufactured housing units (122). They represent 0.42% and 17.16% of the
housing stock respectively. Slightly more than 88 percent of housing units are owner
occupied and almost 12 percent are renter occupied.
Cape Carteret LAMA Land Use Plan
Section III Community Concerns and Aspirations
Mav 18, 2007
Page 27 of 171

1
1
1
1
1
1
I
U
1
% � �
?'- � �•+$ w���wif43 `a 7 ! � rX� 4i� q�'�c �' �" . � .. r ,e k a :$,+, r
Type of Structure
No.
% of Total
Single-Family•—��-
1 Unit Detached
575
81.45%
_._....... _._.____....._._..._.............
1 Unit Attached
6
..._.. _ __.
0.85%
Multi -Family
2-4 Units
3
0.42%
5-9 Units
0
_ 0.00%
10+ Units
0
0.00%
Manufactured Home
122
17.28%
TOTAL UNITS
706
100.00%
Cape Carteret Carteret County North Carolina
Single -Family 82.30% 59.72% 67.48%
Multi -Family Y0.42% 14.54% 16.11%
Manufactured Home 17.28% 25.74% 16.41 %
TOTAL 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
Source: U.S. Census of Housing, 2000.
Household population of housing units in Cape Carteret in 2000 was 2.23 persons per
unit while the household population for the county and state were 2.31 and 2.49 persons
per unit respectively. Cape Carteret has a homeowner vacancy rate (2.63%) similar to
the county (2.92%) and higher than the state (1.2%). The rental vacancy rate in Cape
Carteret (0.3%) is lower than both the county (5.39%) and the state (2.6%). The 2000
Census reported 166 vacant units and 136 intended for seasonal use. Appendix C
provides a summary of housing characteristics for the Town, Carteret County, and the
State.
According to the 2000 Census, the median value of owner -occupied homes in Cape
Carteret is $141,000 which is higher than both the county and state medians of
$106,400 and $95,800 respectively.
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Section ill Community Concerns and Aspirations
May 18, 2007
Page 28 of 171

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
A. Building Permits Issued and Subdivision Lots Created
Town data indicates that 110 permits were issued for new residential dwellings since
1998. Of those permits, 102 were issued for single-family detached dwellings and 8
were issued for mobile homes. Building permit data since 1998 indicate that Cape
Carteret has averaged about 18 new residential dwellings per year —approximately
93 percent of those were single-family dwellings.
Source: Town of Cape Carteret
Subdivision lot approvals in Cape Carteret since 1999 have resulted in the creation
of an average of 14 new building lots per year.
Year
Residential
Nonresidential
Totat
1999
44
0=44
2000
_
0
0
0
2002
2
0
2 J -'
2003
0
24
Total —
_24
70 �-
------_a_ -
::70 -
Average
14.0
0.0
.14.0�....
Source: Town of Cape Carteret
B. Seasonal Housing
The majority (96.8 percent) of seasonal housing units in Cape Carteret is composed
of seasonal dwellings. Hotel, motel, and bed and breakfast units comprise the
remainder of the town's seasonal housing.
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
SectionIll Community Concerns and Aspirations
Mc y 18, 2007
Page 29 of 171

1
11
1
ry 5 � 9 4• kfp, � 'i1 3
� ,A"'}+ �Y6�1 pal+_ eN✓a� vFfi
�� �, � �,,'� ���C`� � .¢�:,� "�sA '��7�r���� �, ,, �
^� . � °gyp ��' �
✓. � '�����
'4`,W2•s't ..a-.., ,' i. '8d-%�.,.` � JM.+ec... .. Peaii.�`..
Town of Cape Carteret Total Seasonal Housing % of Seasonal Housing w/i
Units
Jurisdiction
__.T---.---..._.__..._.....__.___.-._._._.._..._
Seasonal Dwellings
142
_..__..._.._...
96.8%
Hotel, Motel, B&B
7
-Campsites �`--._
--
—_ 0-
_3.2%
-^-- 0.0%
...................._._....................._..._......__..........-_......__
Transient Marina Slips
.._..............._.................._._...._....._......._.__....._........-----..__....__..._.........._
0
__._...._........._._._._............._.__._....._....._...._._.._......_..._._._._.............._._..
0.0%
Totals —�
+--149
-�'
_
— 100.0%
Source: US Census, 2000
3.1.3 Local Economy
Employment in Cape Carteret is almost entirely in the non -manufacturing sector. Non -
manufacturing industries include agriculture, forestry, fishing, mining, construction,
transportation/communications/public utilities, wholesale trade, retail trade, information,
finance/real estate, service professions, and public administration. In the 2000 census,
453 people were reported to be employed in non -manufacturing sectors. The wholesale
and retail trade; educational, health, and social services; and public administration
categories accounted for over 52 percent of all employment. Only 7 people in Cape
Carteret were employed in the manufacturing sector in 2000. The vast majority of jobs
' in Cape Carteret will most likely be provided by the non -manufacturing sector for the
foreseeable future. Presently, there is no indication of additional manufacturing jobs
coming to Cape Carteret. The following table presents employment data for
employment by major sector for Carteret County. Employment by sector for Carteret
County is provided to gain a better sense of employment trends in the region.
11
LJ
1
'I
T
Persons Employed
8,346
Sector
Service Professions
Finance/Insurance/Real Estate
2,710
Retail
7,671 — �^
Wholesale
996
Transportation
1,147
Manufacturing--T-_� �-_--� -
—�-------- 1,945------- --
Construction
Mining
2,996
15
AgriculturaVForestry/Fishing/Other
1,329
Source: Federal Agency Data: Bureau of Economic Analysis
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Section 111 Communin, Concerns and Aspirations
Play 18, 2007
Page 30 of 171

1
1
1
11
The total valuation of real, personal, and public service company property in Cape
Carteret totaled $181,239,601.00 in 2003. Real property constitutes approximately 91
percent of the town's total valuation. Cape Carteret comprised approximately 2.5
percent of the total Carteret County. valuation.
�4-�'"`�, yY ;.p ,��°'S �fa p�..y y",a t�
;tea 's a • � ��s'" �` �.t,��' •' ,��_>��� ,fwi � °Y.
Total Assessed Valuatlon
Tax Rate
(per $100)
Carteret County
7,330,795,475
$0.420
Atlantic Beach
_
826,469,876
$0.230
Beaufort
373,038,454
$0.360
Rogue
37,752,442
$0.050
Carteret
^� 181,239,601
— $0.230
_Cape _
Cedar Point
160,316,119
$0.050
Emerald Isle
1,361,208,559
_$_0.185
_
Indian Beach
163,317,742
-
_ $0.160
Morehead City
899,596,917
_
$0.380
Newport
161,283,726
$0.430
Peletier
_
`— 34,048,700
$0.050
Pine Knoll Shores
538,823,834
$0.170
Source: NC Department of Revenue, Tax Research Division
3.1.4 Permanent and Seasonal Population Projections
A. Permanent Population Projections
Projections provided by the NC State Data Center indicate that the Carteret County
population will continue to increase through the next several decades but at a slower
rate. This projected trend of decreased growth rates also holds true for the
neighboring counties as well as the entire state.
Permanent population projections for Cape Carteret are based upon the average
rate of growth and the ratio of the town's population to Carteret County's population
for the 1970-2000 period. Appendix M provides more detailed information regarding
population projections.
The following table provides projected population figures for the County, the Town of
Cape Carteret and the Cape Carteret planning jurisdiction.
Cape Carteret CAMA land Use Plan
SectionIll Community Concerns and Aspirations
Nay 18, 2007
Page 31 of 171

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
t
1
1
1
1
'� � YiE' S �q;+,yMl�4$ f' �yya .� Tom` ' L � `µ�I.¢ i" 2aR �. t s fp(i L ✓ T' $, "ate :, Min,
$ � 1
21-
us
Certified
Projections
Census
Estimate
2000
July 2002
2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
Carteret
County
59,383
60,064
61,636
63,939
66,026
67,762
69,042
69,962
-Cape
--
----
—
—
Carteret
Corporate
1,214
1,243
1,322
1,442
1,593
1,740
1,925
2,106
Area
Cape
Carteret
Planning
1225-
1,254"
1,333
1,455
1,607
1,756
1,942
2,125
Jurisdiction
*Estimates by the Wooten Company.
Sources: US Census, 1970-2000. 2002 Certified Population Estimates, NC State Data Center,
October 2003. County Population Growth 2000-2030, NC State Data Center, July 2004.
B. Seasonal and Peak Population Projections
The current estimate of the seasonal population of Cape Carteret is 440. The peak
population, which is the sum of the permanent population and the seasonal
population, is estimated to be 1,654.
x
Cape Carteret Corporate
Total
PPH
Pop
Seasonal DU
142
3
426
Hotel, Motel, B&B
7
2
14
Campsites
0
na
0
Transient Marina Slips
0
na
0
Totals
149
440
Seasonal Population 2000 — —
- 440
Permanent Population 2000
1,214
.... ... ... _.........
--_ _
Peak Population 2000
—
1,654
Peak to Permanent Ratio
136.24%
Sources: US Census Summary File 3, Table HI, Housing Summary and Table H33,
Population by Units in Structure by Tenure. Estimates by The Wooten Company.
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Section Ill Community Concerns and Aspirations
Mav 18, 2007
Page 32 of 171

1
I
1
11
Based upon the estimated 2000 seasonal and peak population as delineated
above and the assumption that the ratio of seasonal population to permanent
population will remain constant, the following projections have been prepared for
the Cape Carteret corporate area and for the Cape Carteret planning jurisdiction.
2005
2010
2015
2020
2025
2030
Cape Carteret
Corporate Area
Permanent Population
1,322
1,442
1,593
1,740
1,925
2,10
Seasonal Population--
— 479
— 523
577
631
698
130
Peak Population
1,801
1,965
2,170
2,371
2,623
2,236
Cape Carteret
Planning Jurisdiction
Permanent Population
1,333
1,455
1,607
1,756
1,942
2,125
Seasonal Population
48
527
582
636
704
770
Peak Population
1,8161—
1,982
— 2,189
2,392
_ 2,646
2,895
Source: The Wooten Company, August 2004
3.2 Natural Systems Analysis
Subchapter 7B .0702(c)(2) requires that the land use plan describe and analyze the natural
features and environmental conditions within the Cape Carteret planning jurisdiction and to
assess their capabilities and limitations for development. Section 3.2 provides an inventory of
natural features; a description of a composite map of environmental conditions that shows the
extent and overlap of natural features; and an assessment water quality, natural hazard, and
natural resource conditions and features and their limitation or opportunity for land development.
3.2.1 Inventory of Natural Features
The inventory of natural features includes a description of Areas of Environmental
Concern (AECs), soil characteristics, water quality classifications and use support
designations, flood hazard areas, storm surge areas, non -coastal wetlands, water supply
watersheds, and other environmentally fragile areas. Fragile areas within the Cape
Carteret planning jurisdiction that could easily be damaged or destroyed by inappropriate
or poorly planned land uses include: freshwater marshes, saltwater and brackish
marshes, beneficial non -coastal wetlands, and estuarine waters.
A. Areas of Environmental Concern
Areas of environmental concern (AECs) include coastal wetlands, estuarine waters
and public trust areas, and the estuarine shoreline. Coastal wetlands are defined as
any marshes subject to regular or occasional flooding by lunar or wind tides.
Estuarine waters are defined by the Coastal Management Act as all the waters of the
Atlantic Ocean within the boundary of North Carolina and all the water of bays,
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Page 33 of 171
Section III Conan unity Concerns and Aspirations
Vqy 18, 2007

I
1
sounds, rivers, and tributaries thereto seaward of the dividing line between coastal
fishing waters and inland fishing waters. Public trust areas include waters and
submerged lands in the coastal region where the public has rights of use and/or
' ownership, including rights of navigation and recreation. The estuarine shoreline
area of environmental concern in Cape Carteret is (i) all shorelands within 75 feet
landward of the mean high water level, or normal water level, of the estuarine waters
and (ii) for those shorelands adjacent to Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW) in the
Western Bogue Sound, 575 feet landward of the mean high water level, or normal
water level, of the estuarine waters.
' The AEC areas in Cape Carteret are primarily located in the Pettiford Creek vicinity
and along the Bogue Sound and Deer Creek shorelines. They include estuarine
waters, public trust waters, estuarine shoreline, and coastal wetlands. All of these
areas are subject to stricter regulations controlling development. Priority is, however,
given to the conservation of these AECs. CAMA standards for estuarine shoreline
development generally require that (i) the development not cause significant damage
to estuarine resources; (ii) the development not interfere with public rights of access
to or use of navigable waters or public resources; (iii) the development preserve and
not weaken natural barriers to erosion; (iv) impervious surfaces not exceed 30
percent of the lot area located within the AEC boundary; (v) the development comply
' with state soil erosion, sedimentation, and stormwater management regulations; and
(vi) the development comply with the CAMA Land Use Plans. Specific CAMA
development standards for AECs can be found in 15 NCAC 7H. Additional use
standards for development projects within the ORW estuarine shoreline include (i)
having no stormwater collection system and (ii) providing a buffer zone of at least 30
feet from the mean high water line. Development within the designated Areas of
' Environmental Concern is restricted by CAMA regulations and development
guidelines. Specific CAMA development standards for AECs can be found in 15
NCAC 7H.
1
B. Soil Characteristics
The majority of soils in Cape Carteret's planning jurisdiction are hydric soils. Hydric
soils often contain an abundance of moisture and generally lack oxygen. According
to the Soil Survey of Carteret County, North Carolina, soils such as Leon sand,
Wando fine sand, and Hoboken muck are the predominant soils and they are hydric.
Other soils that are not entirely hydric yet include hydric soils or have wet spots are:
Kureb sand, Baymeade fine sand, and Seabrook fine sand. All of these soils present
limitations to development, particularly, where a septic system is needed. Generally,
many soil limitations can be overcome with special engineering considerations. For
instance, a severe limitation precluding septic systems can be overcome by
extending public sewer to the affected area. While engineering can often work
around problems presented by soil conditions, there are soils and habitats that are
not suited for development regardless of engineering capabilities. Soil conditions
should be taken into consideration when planning for land use.
Generally, most of the soils in the Cape Carteret planning jurisdiction have limitations
for many urban uses due to wetness, low strength, and restricted permeability.
Overall, for septic tank use, the soil types in the town's jurisdictional area have
substantial limitations. One hundred percent of the Cape Carteret planning
jurisdiction contains soils that are rated as having severe limitations for septic tank
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Section III Community Concerns and Aspirations
May I8, 2007
Page 34 of 171

1
absorption fields. Site -specific soil analyses are required by the Carteret County
Environmental Health Services to evaluate the suitability of a particular parcel for a
septic system. Centralized sewer facilities are needed to support intensive urban
' development. The table below describes the soils within the Cape Carteret planning
jurisdiction and the specific limitations for septic system use.
1
�9 ^,^'.�`b � ''-`� 5}, S .-
i.Z.
�
I �.i9gf L
.M'�l 1fi k''�#tE'•h"� � 5eN2t��i�`� �.
511101
>p,j.4 �-A• �� �. .
• I
ti xr i i+�k�.T' 4.dYM �a'�'q`�°�v�t96 6j='_
Limitation for Septic
Symbol Soil Description —
Acres
Percent Systems
KuB
Kureb sand-0 to 6 percent slopes
517.7
34.0%
Severe: poor filter
__.._.._
Wa6
._._..__..._... _.._—........._...._._...__......_ __ _ ....__.._.._...._.___....._. — __.._ .._.._..
Wando fine sand-O to 6 percent slopes
_.__._._._ _
426.2
_..__....__....._.._
28.0%
..._...............___._.......-_.._.__......_..._�_..._._..._..__..__.
Severe: poor filter
ByB
_
Baymeade fine sand-1 to 6 percent slopes
240.9
15.8%
Severe: poor filter
Ln
Leon sand
149.4
9.8%
Severe: wetness/poor filter
Se
Seabrook fine sand
84.3
5.5%
Severe: wetness/poor filter
HB
flooded
41.8
2.7%
Severe: flooding/pondin_g
_
Nd
_Hobucken_muck-frequently _
Newhan fine sand-dredged-2 to 30 percent
38.3
2.5%
Severe: poor filter/slope
slo es
�14.1
_
CL
Carteret sand -low -frequently flooded
0.9%
Severe:
�— ��—
flooding/ponding/poor_
mucky sand
6.8
0.4%
ponding/poor filter
CH
_Murville
Carteret sand -frequently flooded
_
3.9
0.3%
_Severe:
Severe:
_
_
flooding/pondingpoor
Totals
1-15 2_3.3
100.0.
Source: Natural Resources Conservation Service, USDA.
Specific soil limitations data for sewage disposal, dwellings, and small commercial
buildings are provided in Appendix D.
Hydric soils are soils that formed under conditions of saturation, flooding, or ponding
long enough during the growing season to support the growth and reproduction of
hydrophytic vegetation. Hydrophytic vegetation along with hydric soils and wetland
hydrology are considered the three essential characteristics of wetlands.
Consequently, the presence of hydric soils is one indicator of probable wetlands
locations. The precise location of wetlands must, however, be determined through
field investigation. Soils that are classified as hydric are also delineated in Appendix
D.
More detailed data regarding the criteria for defining hydric soils as well as
information regarding measures for mitigating particular soils limitations can be
obtained at the local office of the Natural Resources Conservation Service.
C. Water Quality Classifications and Use Support Designations
Water Quality Classifications. All surface waters in North Carolina are assigned a
primary water quality classification by the North Carolina Division of Water Quality
under the authority of the Environmental Management Commission. Classifications
are designations applied to surface water bodies that define the best uses to be
protected within these waters, as required by the Clean Water Act. The most
common primary classification within North Carolina is Class C, which protects
waters for the propagation of aquatic life and for secondary recreation. Other
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
SectionIll Community Concerns and Aspirations
May 18, 2007
Page 35 of 171

primary freshwater classifications provide for additional levels of protection for uses
consisting of water supplies (Class WS-1 through Class WS-V) and for primary
recreation (Class B). Saltwater primary classifications are denoted as SC, SB, and
SA.
In addition to the primary classification, one or more supplemental classifications
may be assigned to specific surface waters to provide additional protection to waters
with special uses or values. North Carolina's supplemental classifications include
NSW (nutrient sensitive waters), Tr (trout waters), HQW (high quality waters), ORW
(outstanding resource waters), and Sw (swamp waters).
All primary and secondary water quality classifications are described in the following
table:
+L-2 •+K2 t'u%['. t xx „y' r k` sx't • • ;'' .k ° �� p- 'k�+ xh _
�'.^'.i `�Z, ,x.21�� .� 'k.�"$l-S", „jlgxzA-. ."P^ I � ! P i ♦ � 5� '
Freshwater Primary Classifications
Classification
Best Usage of Waters
C
Aquatic life propagation and maintenance of biological integrity (including fishing, and fish),
wildlife, secondary recreation, agriculture and any other usage except for primary recreation or
as a source of water supply for drinking, culinary, or food processing purposes. All freshwaters
shall be classified to protect these uses at a minimum.
B
Primary recreation (which includes swimming on a frequent or organized basis) and any other
best usage specified for Class C waters.
WS I - WS V
Source of water supply for drinking, culinary, or food -processing purposes for those users
desiring maximum protection of their water supplies and any best usage specified for Class C
waters.
-Saltwater Primary Classifications
Classification
Best Usage of Waters
Sc
_
Aquatic life propagation and maintenance of biological integrity (including fishing, fish and
functioning primary nursery areas (PNAs)),wildlife, secondary recreation, and any other usage
except primary recreation or shellfishing for purposes.
SB
_market
Primary recreation (which includes swimming on a frequent or organized basis) and any other
usage specified for Class SC waters.
_
for market purposes and any other usage specified for Class SB or SC waters.
_ _SA _Shellfishing
Classifications
_Supplemental
Classification
Best Usage of Waters
HQW
High Quality Waters. Waters which are rated as excellent based on biological and
physical/chemical characteristics through Division monitoring or special studies, native and
special native trout waters (and their tributaries) designated by the Wildlife Resources
Commission, primary nursery areas (PNAs) designated by the Marine Fisheries Commission
and other functional nursery areas designed by the Marine Fisheries Commission.
NSW
Nutrient Sensitive Waters. Waters that experience or are subject to excessive growths of
microscopic or macroscopic vegetation. Excessive growths are growths which the Commission
determines impair the use of the water for its best usage as determined by the classification
applied to such waters.
ORW
Outstanding Resource Waters. Unique and special surface waters of the state that are of
exceptional state or national recreational or ecological significance that require special
protection to maintain existing. uses.
SW
Swamp Waters. Waters which are topographically located so as to generally have very low
velocities and other characteristics which are different from adjacent streams draining steeper
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
SectionIll Community Concerns and Aspirations
May 18, 2007
Page 36 of 171

topography.
Tr
Tr Trout Waters. Waters which have conditions that shall sustain and allow for trout propagation
and survival of stocked trout on a year-round basis.
Source: NC Division of Water Quality
The waters in the Cape Carteret area are classified as SA, HQW, and ORW. Appendix E
includes a listing of the water quality classifications for the various water bodies. in the Cape
Carteret area. The following table summarizes some of the major characteristics and
development regulations for SA, HQW, and ORW waters.
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Section III Community Concerns and Aspirations
May 18, 2007
Page 37 of 171

M
Saltwater Quality Characteristics
Classification
Best Uses
Erosion and Sedimentation Control
Rules _._... ..... ..... ...... _.......__.._........
_._..... ..... __... _. ...... .. .. . ....
Division of Water Quality: Primary
Classifications
_—__.._._...._...._..._.......... ......... __.
Shellfish Harvest Areas
• Commercial shellfish
• The Sedimentation Control Commission
(SA)
harvesting-,
has as many as 5 increased design
• Primary recreational
standards for projects in all HOW zones.
activities; and
See Sedimentation Control Rules for
• SC Best Uses.
Design Standards in Sensitive
• All SA waters are
Watersheds (15A NCAC 413.0024).
_ . ...
HOW.
__._.__ .. ..
_.... _..... ..... ._._...__............ ...._._.__....... ......... ....._........ ........ ..
Division of Water Quality: Supplemental Classifications
wality Waters • Excellent quality
(HQW) saltwater.
• All SA waters, ORW,
and PNAs are also
HOW
Outstanding Resource
Waters (ORW)
• Excellent quality
saltwater; and
• Outstanding Fish
Habitat or fisheries; or
• High existing
• recreation; or
• Special Federal or
State designation; or
• Part of a
State/National
Park/Forest; or
• High ecological/
• scientific significance.
• ORW are also HOW.
• The Sedimentation Control Commission
has as many as 5 increased design
standards for projects in all HOW zones.
See Sedimentation Control Rules for
Design Standards in Sensitive
Watersheds (15A NCAC 48 0024)
• The Sedimentation Control Commission
has as many as 5 increased design
standards for projects in all HOW zones.
See Sedimentation Control Rules for
Design Standards in Sensitive
Watersheds (15A NCAC 4B.0024).
Stormwater Control'
Low Density High Density Option
• 30' minimum • Systems must control runoff from 1.5" of
buffer.
rainfall and be designed for 85% TSS
.25%
removal.
maximum
• Refer to Stormwater Management Rules
built -upon
15A NCAC 2H .1000 for specific design
area.
information.
• Stormwater management measures are the same as the
primary classification requirements.
• Refer to the Stormwater Management Rules for specific
stormwater control requirements in the 20 coastal NC
counties.
• New developments located within 575' of the mean high
water level of ORW class waters must meet, at a minimum,
the Low Density Options specified in the Coastal
Stormwater Management Rules for SA class waters.
Specific stormwater control strategies for protecting ORW
class saltwaters are developed during the process to
reclassify waters with the ORW supplemental classification.
*Stomavater controls are applicable only when a CAMA Major Development Pennit or a Sedimentation
and Erosion Control Pennit is required and the impacted area is more than one acre in size.
Source: General Overview of North Carolina Tidal Saltwater Classification System, DCM.
Cape Carteret CAMA Lurid Use Plan Page 38 of 171
Section 111 Analysis of Existing and Emerging Conditions
44-.. 10 ')N1

1
1
Use Support Designations. Surface waters are classified according to their best
intended uses. Determining how well a waterbody supports its uses (use support
status) is an important method of interpreting water quality data and assessing water
quality. Surface waters are currently rated supporting and impaired. These ratings
refer to whether the classified uses of the water (such as water supply, aquatic life
protection and recreation) are being met. For example, waters classified for fish
consumption, aquatic life protection and secondary recreation (Class C for
freshwater or SC for saltwater) are rated Supporting if data used to determine use
support meet certain criteria. However, if these criteria were not met, then the
waters would be rated as Impaired. Waters with inconclusive data are listed as Not
Rated. Waters lacking data are listed as No Data.
In previous use support assessments, surface waters were rated fully supporting
(FS), partially supporting (PS), not supporting (NS) and not rated (NR). FS was used
to identify waters that were meeting their designated uses. Impaired waters were
rated PS and NS, depending on their degree of degradation. NR was used to
identify waters lacking data or having inconclusive data. The 2002 Integrated Water
Quality Monitoring and Assessment Report Guidance issued by the EPA requested
that states no longer subdivide the impaired category. In agreement with this
guidance, North Carolina no longer subdivides the impaired category and rates
waters as Supporting, Impaired, Not Rated or No Data.
In the White Oak River Basinwide Water Quality Plan, which was prepared by the
NC Division of Water Quality in September 2001, the waters within subbasin 03-05-
01 and 03-05-03 were rated as follows:
°-�*a _ ♦
% a �`'4i.yz"�Ar
�r�=--u
to___
m
Subbasin 03-05-01
Use Support
Fully
Partially
Not
Not Rated
Total
Category
Supporting
Supporting
Supporting
Aquatic
21.3 mi
0
0
19.0 mi
40.3 mi
Life/Secondary
5,772.6 ac
0 ac
5,772.6 ac
Recreation
_
8 coastal mi*
8 coastal mi*
Fish
0
8 coastal mi*
0
0
8 coastal mi*
Consumption
Primary
0
0
0
6.6 mi
6.6 mi
Recreation
7,298.7 ac
3,940.4 ac
11,239.1 mi
8 coastal mi
8 coastal mi*
Shellfishing
0
_
1.4 mi
_
5.3 mi
0
6.7 mi
Harvesting
4,609 ac
3,581 ac
3,049 ac
11,239 ac
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Section 111 Analysis oj'Eristing and Emerging Conditions
May 18, 2007
Page 39 of 171

1
;y;
Subbbbasin 03-05-03
Use Support
Fully
Partially
Not
Not Rated
Total
Category
Supporting
Supporting
Supporting
Aquatic
0 mi
0
0
21.6 mi
21.6 mi
Life/Secondary
31,113.4 ac
0 ac
31,113.4 ac
Recreation
........_.._......._._...__..._._.._._
................. -----....._..........._
... _........... ....... --.........
25 coastal mi*
25 coastal mi*
Fish
0
..... __..
25 coastal mi*
_- -._._ _............._ ....._
0
--._....._._ .... ... --- ......... __..._._....
0
25 coastal mi*
Consumption
Primary
22,895.0 ac
0
0
0
22,895.0 ac
Recreation
25 coastal mi*
25 coastal mi*
Shellfishing
0
_
2.0 mi
15.7 mi
0
17.7 mi
Harvesting
26,683 ac
2,763 ac
4,700 ac
34,146 ac
Coastal mi =miles of Atlantic coastline
Source: White Oak River Basinwide Water Quality Plan, September 2001
D. Flood Hazard Areas
The 100-year floodplain is land subject to a one percent or greater chance of flooding
in any given year. Generally, the parcels adjacent to the shorelines of Bogue Sound,
' Deer Creek, and Pettiford Creek are the areas within the 100-year floodplain. The
floodplain surrounding Deer Creek is the most expansive area of floodplain and
reaches inland from the sound across NC Highway 24. Approximately 20 percent of
' the Cape Carteret planning area is within the 100-year floodplain. An additional 4
percent of the town's planning area is within the 500-year floodplain. Floodplains are
delineated in Figure 2.
1
National Flood Insurance Program repetitive loss claims in Carteret County are in the
range of $2.5 million to $25 million according the Federal Emergency Management
Agency and the Federal Insurance Administration. The definition of a repetitive loss
property used by the Federal Insurance Administration is: "any insured structure with
at least two flood insurance losses, each of at least $1,000, in any rolling 10-year
period". During this 10-year period, Cape Carteret had 9 repetitive loss properties
with 23 reported losses at a cost of $1,345,602.
E. Storm Surge Areas
Maps delineating hurricane surge inundation areas have been provided to Cape
Carteret by the Division of Coastal Management. Storm surge is the rise in sea level
caused by water being pushed towards land by hurricane winds. The storm surge
inundation areas are based upon National Hurricane Center model maps and have
been recompiled by the North Carolina Center for Geographic Information and
Analysis. Surge inundation areas have been mapped to illustrate the extent of
hurricane -induced flooding based upon slow moving (forward velocity less than 15
mph) and fast moving (forward velocity greater than 15 mph) category 1 and 2,
category 3, and category 4 and 5 hurricanes.
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Page 40 of 171
Section 1l1 Analysis of Existing and Emerging Conditions
,Clay 18, 2007

Storm surge areas for fast moving hurricanes are shown in the Figure 2. The areas
' subject to storm surge inundation delineated on this map are based upon the most
intense storm intensity and storm speed. Under this worst -case scenario,
approximately two-thirds of the Cape Carteret planning jurisdiction land area is
' subject to flooding from a storm surge. More detailed storm hurricane surge maps
are available for review in the offices of the Town of Cape Carteret Town Clerk.
' Flooding as well as high winds would impact the Cape Carteret area during a major
coastal storm. The table below describes the impact of the various categories of
hurricanes:
it
D
11
;+ Y�' t'. Y.i, A 1.,$' : '� .. v ,. n 1, '; y, f , � f
Al
r�""•., aye .: ^� � : • � I � � ' • ! � � 9"'¢�� p
Category
Winds
Storm Surge
Expected
Category 1
74-95 MPH
4-5 Feet
_Damage
Minimal Damage
Category 2
96-110 MPH
6_8 Feet
Moderate Damage—�
Category 3
111-130 MPH
9-12 Feet
Extensive Damage
Category 4
131-155 MPH
13-18 Feet
Extreme Damage
Category 5
155+ MPH
18+ Feet
Catastrophic Damage
While the identified hurricane storm surge inundation areas resulting from Category 1
and 2 hurricanes often parallel the 100-year flood hazard area shown in Figure 2,
there are some additional portions of Cape Carteret that are particularly subject to
more intensive hurricane -induced flooding. Such areas are generally located south
of Pettiford Creek and between NC Highway 24 and Bogue Sound. The Star Hill
Golf Club vicinity is the only area projected to remain above the storm surge of major
hurricanes. The table below delineates storm surge flooding by hurricane category.
.y 4•- f$� .; {.,�'-. W y, Y •. a{n :_ tF R'➢ t �`C'.' i�i' iy,..�<"4
k . :� . i f, t�'�' ;r �!¢rz�� �24�s •. ter.
i
% of Total
_ Category
Acres Inundated
Planning Jurisdiction
Category 1 and 2
294.4
�19.0% �!
Category 3
195.9
12.7%
Category 4 & 5
525.8
34.0_%
Totals
1,016.1
_ _
u 65.7%�
Source: The Wooten Company
Cape Carteret LAMA Land Use Plan
Section 111 Analysis of Existing and Emerging Conditions
May 18, 2007
Page 41 of 171

Environmental Conditions Composite
Peletier
�Cap�
Clerte ei „J.
58 +`r• ••�'� '�•• ••• �`ti, �, star Hhr Nor", a,V'•
C, HITf-OAN S� -
�. ETJ eP '
l
St."H I
.r
-1 et...�Kear
- -
Cedar 06026e30
Point 0300,O�JGod ryOQpO m�sE�,..O�fcle"P
�60 De
GO =ORF
T , ETJ
el, Bogue
WAIL —
Cape relit( Q; $ B
a
`�s J as shore Park a
ap `ll0")R Country Club Pornt. y ; �^
OE la f
cZ vv c7JCoGE
Tr a, - REFK"l
Deer Creek k'sa voR
l>ua Cape Carteret(:acFecK°F
OSt
4 0
a r
1 bpi V,
O J
9 x n
FN a>
o
Hsland
Features & Boundaries
Water Bodies
USDA HU Code
Roprr SomIJ Cape Caderel City LlrniLs
1' O Cape Carteret ETJ 10
sI�B Environmental Composite
Class I: M n mat Hazards & L m lauons
Bogue Sound Class II Moderate Hazards & L milafions
Class III'. Serous Hazards & Limlations
Storm Surge
^�e/etier_
Cap,
Ca, V 0
0' O,
' x",
fir•<�EaR
;2a
Gk 1 B
P�
Storm Surge
ETJ Categories 1 & 2
sa Category 3
Bogue Sound Categories 4 & 5
Natural Features
Peletier
Cape
* r
Canat&e}ef 1�•
����urtfuzlCarrk r �� //�/i
PINE LAKE `
Zak ._ s.
Z y '
en R1
Cedar. Point ^
�tt� \po
o.(..'
F
0
a \ Fm
m z oa\
F
gue sound
0
11 Bogue
� h 4/ r
Wetlands 8 OMer Natural Features
- NPpES
Natural Herlage Areas
Oo H She ff- Harvest Areas
P—m n.4lery Nurwry Ama
Coastal watl do
_ Be k 1 Non Coastal w1l"'s
QCa C larel ETJ
E 1 Waters
Ex ption Weu,.A,
Rotecletl La,Ms
+ .x� N b'
Figure 2
Envrionmental Composite & Natural Features
W< �F
`Iv'
S
THE WOOTEN COMPANY
ENGINEERING PLANNING! ARCHITECTURE
October 26, 2004
The preparation of this map was financed in part through a grant provided by the North
Carolina Coastal Management Program, through funds provided by the Coastal Zone
Management Act of 1972, as amended, which is administered by the Office of Ocean and
Coastal Resource Management, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
Floodplains
Peletier
C Y ire( �L<
e
r —7
58
Hm r (:,rek l i
ETJ
- h GOGUEN RDI Cedar v
Point
l y
VFly Rq R
• 1 1,24 .. -...
ue
�'N
2004 LIDAR Floodplains
100 Year Floodplain
S O U n d ® 500 Year Floodplain
Lie

u
L�
F. Non -coastal Wetlands
Non -coastal wetlands include all other wetlands not classified as coastal wetlands.
These non -coastal wetlands are not covered by CAMA regulations (unless the
Coastal Resource Commission designates them as a natural resource AEC) but are
protected by the Clean Water Act. Consequently, the US Army Corps of Engineers
is responsible for regulating these '404' wetlands. Authorization must be obtained
from the Corps prior to disturbing such wetlands.
As with coastal wetlands, the precise location of non -coastal wetlands can only be
determined through a field investigation and analysis. However, the US Fish and
Wildlife Service, through its National Wetlands Inventory, has identified the general
location of wetlands. The National Wetlands Inventory Maps are available from the
US Department of the Interior and the NC Department of Environment, Health, and
Natural Resources, Division of Soil and Water Conservation. The wetlands maps
are not intended to be utilized for regulatory purposes.
The Pettiford Creek vicinity is the area where freshwater wetlands are primarily found
in Cape Carteret. The general location of coastal and non -coastal wetlands is shown
on the Figure 2. Non -coastal wetlands account for approximately 9 percent of the
total Cape Carteret land area.
G. Public Water Supply Watersheds
There are no public water supply watersheds in the Cape Carteret planning
jurisdiction.
H. Primary Nursery Areas
Primary Nursery Areas are identified by the Marine Fisheries Commission. PNA
areas have been designated by the State as being highly productive for juvenile
habitat of marine species. The North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries is
responsible for preserving, protecting, and developing Primary Nursery Areas for
commercially important finfish and shellfish. The NC Marine Fisheries Division has
identified the portion of Pettiford Creek downstream of Starkey Creek as the only
primary nursery area within the Cape Carteret planning area.
I. Other Environmentally Fragile Areas
' Significant Natural Heritage Areas
The NC Natural Heritage Program compiles a list of natural heritage areas based
upon an inventory of natural diversity across the state. Natural areas are evaluated
on the basis of the occurrences of rare plant and animal species, rare or high quality
natural communities, and geologic features. Designation as a Significant Natural
Heritage Areas does not imply that any protection or public access exists.
The NC Natural Heritage Program compiles a list of natural heritage areas based
upon an inventory of natural diversity across the state. Natural areas are evaluated
on the basis of the occurrences of rare plant and animal species, rare or high quality
natural communities, and geologic features. Designation as a Significant Natural
Heritage Area does not imply that any protection or public access exists. Cape
Carteret contains portions of two significant natural heritage areas: they are the
Croatan National Forest Megasite and the Bogue Inlet Macrosite. One parcel within
Cape Carteret LAMA Land Use Plan
Section 111 Analysis of Eiristing and Emerging Conditions
May 18. 2007
Page 43 of 171

[I
1
Cape Carteret's planning jurisdiction is part of the Croatan Game Land. The game
land is located on both sides of US 58, north of NC 24.
The McLean Sanctuary, also known as Hunting Island, is owned and managed by
1
The National Audubon Society. The sanctuary is located within the designated 100-
year flood hazard area and contains some wetlands areas. This is the only sanctuary
located in the Cape Carteret planning area.
'
The general locations of Natural Heritage Areas are shown in Figure 2. Appendix F
contains an inventory of natural areas and rare species found in Carteret County.
'
Areas with Excessive Slope and High Erosion Potential
The topography of Cape Carteret rises fairly rapidly from the sound shore to a
maximum elevation of about 40 feet above mean sea level (msl). In the area
between NC 24 and the shoreline, the maximum elevation is approximately 25 feet
msl. North of NC 24, elevations generally are above 20 feet msl with one area
reaching nearly 40 feet msl. Along most of the northern town limits, Pettiford Creek
'
is characterized by a bluff which rises sharply to above 10 feet msl.
3.2.2 Composite Environmental Conditions Map
The environmental composite map must show three categories of land based upon
'
natural features and environmental conditions:
• Class 1 is land that contains only minimal hazards and limitations for
'
development which can be addressed by commonly accepted land
planning and development practices. Class I land will generally support
the more intensive types of land uses and development.
'
• Class II is land that has hazards and limitations for development that can
be addressed by restrictions on land uses, special site planning, or the
provision of public services, such as water and sewer. Land in this class
'
will generally support only the less intensive uses, such as low density
residential, without significant investment in services.
1
• Class III is land that has serious hazards and limitations. Land in this
class will generally support very low intensity uses, such as conservation
and open space. The table below delineates the environmental features
which are included in each land class:
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Section 111 Analysis of Existing and Emerging Conditions
May 18, 2007
Page 44 of 171

J
1
1
1
1
1
1
°`��,.&h"k.•r4,wT:fi t :�rA i ,
19
if ,.j5ozc`z�-�-(
Layer
Class I
Class II
Class III
Coastal Wetlands
X
Exceptional or Substantial Non-
X
Coastal Wetlands
Beneficial Non -Coastal Wetlands
X
Waters
...__._.__._.__._..Estuarine
. A__.._____.__....--....._______.__...._X
Public Trust Areas
X
Soils with Slight or Moderate Septic _
�-X__.__
Limitations
-
...... ....... _._..---..---- ------ — -_....._._...... ......_.._
Soils with Severe Septic Limitations
............ ......... _._........ _.....
._..._..-__.... ..... ........ ..._.__..._...._......
_....... __.--.............. _... _................... _.._._..._..-.
X
Flood Zones
X
Storm Surge Areas
_
X
Wellhead Protection Areas
_
X
Water Supply Watersheds
X
_ Significant Natural Heritage Areas
X
Protected Lands
X
HOW/ORW Watersheds
X
Based upon the environmental conditions assigned to each land class as delineated in
the above table, the overwhelming majority (98.9%) of the land area in the Cape
Carteret planning jurisdiction falls into Class III, serious hazards and limitations. Class II
lands (moderate hazards and limitations) account for approximately 1.1 percent of the
Town's land area. No land area is classified as Class I, minimal hazards and limitations.
Land classes within Cape Carteret are shown in Figure 2, Environmental Composite and
Natural Features Map.
The Environmental Composite and Natural Features Map is a very general depiction of
the three land classes as defined above. The model utilized to produce this map uses
one acre of land area to delineate a pixel or cell on the map. Consequently, the
information provided by this map is intended to show generalized patterns and is not
intended for permitting or regulatory purposes. Based upon an evaluation of the
individual environmental features included within each individual land class category, it
appears that soils with severe limitations for septic systems skews the composite
analysis since so much land area contains soils with severe limitations. However,
severe soil limitations for septic systems can be mitigated by establishing a public sewer
service. The impact of adequate infrastructure to overcome environmental limitations is
demonstrated in Section 3.5, Land Suitability Analysis; Figure 6, Land Suitability Map;
and Section 4.7, Consistency with Natural Features and Land Suitability Analyses.
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Section 111 Analysis of Eristing and Emerging Conditions
May 18, 2007
Page 45 of 171

1
1
1
1
1�
1
1
C'
3.2.3 Assessment of Environmental Conditions
A. Water Quality Assessment
White Oak River Basin Overview. Preparation of a basinwide water quality plan is a
five-year process. While these plans are prepared by the North Carolina Division of
Water Quality, their implementation and the protection of water quality entail the
coordinated efforts of many agencies, local governments and stakeholder groups in
the state. The first cycle of plans was completed in 1998, but each plan is updated
at five-year intervals. Much of the information in this CAMA land use plan regarding
water quality has been obtained from the DWQ and the White Oak Basinwide Water
Quality Plan.
The White Oak River Basin lies entirely within the southern coastal plain, and
includes four separate river systems: the New River and its tributaries; the White Oak
River and its tributaries; the Newport River and its tributaries, and the North River in
the eastern area of the basin. The basin also includes the Bogue, Back, and Core
Sounds, as well as portions of the Intracoastal Waterway.
Cape Carteret is within subbasins 03-05-01 (White Oak River) and 03-05-03
(Newport River) of the White Oak River Basin. Cape Carteret comprises
approximately 0.19% of the White Oak River Basin's geographical area. The Town's
population comprised 0.38% of the population present in the river basin in 2001.
rtz' .#v
M0-40M
Subbasin 03-05-01 at a Glance
Subbasin 03-05-03 at a Glance
Land and Water Area (sq. mi.)
Land and Water Area (sq. mi.)
Total area: 351
Total area: 228
Land Area: 322
Land area: 168
Water Area: 2.9
W_ater area: 60
_ _
Population
Population Statistics
1990 Est. Pop.: 39,388 people
1990 Est. Pop.: 11,404 people
Pop. Density: 122 persons/mil
Pop. Density: 68 persons/mi2
Land Cover (%)
Land Cover (%)
Forest/Wetland: 76
Forest/Wetland: 59
Water: 8
Surface Water: 26
Urban: 1
Urban: 4
Cultivated Crop: 11
Cultivated Crop: 6.5
Pasture/
Pasture/
Herbaceous: 3
Managed Herbaceous: 4
_Managed _
Water Area
Water Area:
Stream Miles:116
Stream Miles: 18
Estuarine Acres: 11,567
Estuarine Acres: 34,723
Coastal Miles: 8
Coastal Miles: 25
Shellfish Harvest Acres: 11,239
Shellfish Harvest Acres: 34,146
Source: Draft White Oak River Basinwide Water Quality Plan, September 2001
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Section 111 Analysis of Existing and Emerging Conditions
May 18, 2007
Page 46 of 171

1
I
11
1
1
White Oak River Subbasin 03-05-01. This subbasin consists of the White Oak River
and its tributaries in Onslow, Jones, Craven, and Carteret counties. Most of this
area, including its two lakes (Catfish Lake and Great Lake), lies within the Croatan
National Forest and Hoffman State Forest and is relatively undisturbed. A significant
portion of waters in this subbasin are estuarine, including the waters around
Hammocks Beach State Park, the intracoastal waterway, Bogue Sound, much of the
White Oak River, and most of Queens Creek and Bear Creek. With the exception of
Maysville, most development is on the coast near the towns of Swansboro and Cape
Carteret. There are no major dischargers in this subbasin. Swansboro WWTP is the
largest discharger of wastewater and discharges 0.3 million gallons per day into
Fosters Creek.
A stretch of approximately two miles of the White Oak River between Spring Branch
and Hunters Creek has been classified as High Quality Waters and it is a primary
nursery area (PNA) designated by the Division of Marine Fisheries. Two other areas
have been classified as Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW) based on the
existence of excellent water quality and significant aquatic resources. The first are
the waters between Bear Island (Hammocks Beach State Park) and the Intracoastal
Waterway (ICW). The second area and larger of the two extends from Bogue Inlet
eastward including all of Bogue Sound within this subbasin. This area includes
Taylor Bay, but excludes all other creeks and bays. Water quality in the sound is
considered to be generally excellent due largely to good tidal flushing.
Newport River Subbasin 03-05-03. This subbasin lies in the center of Carteret
County, extending from the Croatan National Forest to Beaufort and Beaufort Inlet.
Most of this subbasin is estuarine with the Newport River as the only major source of
freshwater. With the exception of Newport, most of the development in this subbasin
is along the coast; Morehead City, Beaufort, Atlantic Beach, and Bogue Banks. The
most significant discharger in this subbasin is the Morehead City WWTP (3.4 MGD)
which discharges into Calico Creek.
There are two Outstanding Resource Waters in this subbasin. The larger area is the
western half of Bogue Sound, and the smaller is the swamp and salt waters of the
Theodore Roosevelt State Natural Area.
Land Cover. The White Oak River Basin contains some of the most biologically
significant habitats along the eastern Atlantic Coast, including longleaf pine, pocosin,
limesinks, freshwater tidal marsh and swamp communities, tidal red cedar forest,
and extensive marsh and tidal creeks. Only 1 percent of the White Oak River
subbasin is covered by urban use; while, 4 percent of the Newport River subbasin is
under urban use. Forests and wetlands account for most of the land cover in both
subbasins.
Water Quality. According to the White Oak Basinwide Assessment Report, all rivers
in the basin have periods of anoxia, as well as incidents of high fecal coliform counts
and turbidity levels. Water quality problems in the basin include fecal coliform
bacteria contamination affecting shellfish harvesting. Fecal contamination in the
basin is largely attributed to nonpoint source pollution. Additionally, many of the
basin drainages are classified as nutrient sensitive waters. Nutrient loading,
channelization, habitat removal and degradation, beach closures and shellfish
harvesting closures are among the water quality concerns in the basin.
Cape Carteret CAMA Laic! Use Plan
Section ll/ Analysis of Existing and Emerging Conditions
May 18, 2007
Page 47 of 171

1
E
i�
Lei
Basinwide Goals. The DWQ goals of basinwide management are to:
• Identify water quality problems and restore full use to impaired waters;
• Identify and protect high value resource waters;
• Protect unimpaired waters while allowing for reasonable economic
growth;
• Develop appropriate management strategies to protect and restore water
quality;
• Assure equitable distribution of waste assimilative capacity for
dischargers; and
• Improve public awareness and involvement in the management of the
state's surface waters.
' In addition, DWQ is applying this approach to each of the major river basins in the
state as a means of better identifying water quality problems; developing appropriate
management strategies; maintaining and protecting water quality and aquatic habitat;
assuring equitable distribution of waste assimilative capacity for dischargers; and
' improving public awareness and involvement in management of the state's surface
waters.
' The NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP) is a nonregulatory program
established by the NC General Assembly in 1996 to restore wetlands, streams and
streamside (riparian) areas throughout the state. The goals of the NCWRP are to:
' • Protect and improve water quality by restoring wetland, stream and
riparian area functions and values lost through historic, current and future
impacts.
• Achieve a net increase in wetland acreage, functions and values in all of
North Carolina's major river basins.
• Promote a comprehensive approach for the protection of natural
resources.
• Provide a consistent approach to address compensatory mitigation
requirements associated with wetland, stream, and buffer regulations,
' and to increase the ecological effectiveness of compensatory mitigation
projects
' B. Impaired Waters
Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act requires states to develop a list of waters not
meeting water quality standards or which have impaired uses. Listed waters must be
prioritized and a management strategy or total maximum daily load must
' subsequently be developed for all listed waters.
The 2004 North Carolina 303(d) Impaired Waters List includes 35.2 acres of Pettiford
Creek, located within subbasin 03-05-01, from its source to the mouth of Pettiford
Creek Bay. Waterbodies within subbasin 03-05-03 listed as impaired include
portions of Bogue Sound and Hunting Island Creek (2.7 acres) from its source to
' Bogue Sound. The impaired use is shellfish harvesting and the reason for the
listings is elevated fecal coliform levels. These particular waterbodies have been
listed as impaired since 2002.
' Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Page 48 of 171
Section III Analysis of Existing and Emerging Conditions
,Nay 18, 2007

7I
L�
C. Closed Shellfishinct Areas
' The North Carolina Shellfish Sanitation and Recreational Water Quality Section of
the Department of Environment and Natural Resources is responsible for protecting
the consuming public from shellfish and crustacea which could cause illness. Rules
and regulations following national guidelines have been implemented to ensure the
safety of harvesting waters and the proper sanitation of establishments which
process shellfish and crustacea for sale to the general public. Waters are sampled
regularly and closed if levels of fecal coliform indicate that harvesting shellfish from
those waters could cause a public health risk.
' Closed shellfishing areas in the Cape Carteret vicinity include Pettiford Creek located
adjacent to the northern boundary of the town's planning jurisdiction and Hunting
Island Creek located west of Cape Carteret in the Town of Bogue. Closed
shellfishing areas are delineated in Figure 2, Environmental Composite and Natural
Features Map.
Land uses that potentially adversely impact shellfishing waters include the
' conversion of undeveloped and underdeveloped land to more intensive land uses.
Increased stormwater runoff from developed uses also can adversely impact
shellfishing waters.
1
D. Natural Hazards
Generally, severe thunderstorms producing lightning, high velocity winds, and hail
are common in eastern North Carolina. In addition to the hazards posed by
thunderstorms, seven categories of hazardous weather have been identified by the
North Carolina Division of Emergency Management: earthquake, landslide,
hurricane, nor'easter, tornado, severe winter weather, wildfire, and flood. As
described in the Draft North Carolina Natural Hazards Mitigation (Section 322) Plan,
each of the one hundred counties in North Carolina was categorized into one of three
levels of risk, 'Low,' 'Moderate', and 'High' for these seven natural hazards. The
table below indicates how Carteret County rates in terms of the risk of damage from
natural hazards.
ad.
Weather Event
Moderate
High
Earthquake
_Low
X
_
_
Landslide_——.—X
--
-----_---._-.-
Hurricane
Nor'easter
— X
X
Tornado
X
Severe Winter Weather
X
Wildfire
_
Flooding
_X
X
Appendix G describes hazardous weather events that have affected Cape Carteret
since the adoption of the previous land use plan. Information contained in Appendix
G includes: type of event, magnitude, property damage, crop damage, and deaths.
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Section III Analysis of Eristing and Emerging Conditions
Mav 18, 2007
Page 49 of 171

' In addition to the hurricane and tropical storms that have impacted the Carteret
County area since 1950, other major weather -related events include tornados,
thunderstorm wind and high winds, waterspouts, hail, winter storms, and floods.
Wildfires are a moderate risk for Cape Carteret and Carteret County in general.
' Wildfires have occurred in the Croatan National Forest and adjacent forest lands
within the last 15 years.
Cape Carteret participates in the National Flood Insurance Program by adopting and
'
enforcing a floodplain management ordinance to help reduce future flood damage.
In exchange, the National Flood Insurance Program makes Federally -backed flood
'
insurance available to homeowners, renters, and business owners. As of December
2003, there were 134 National Flood Insurance Program policies in force within Cape
Carteret totaling over $26.9 million. According to loss statistics data from the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for the period January 1978 to December
'
2003, 70 claims were filed and the amount of payments made totaled approximately
$565,000.
' E. Natural Resources
Environmentally fragile areas and natural resource areas that may be impacted as a
result of incompatible development are delineated in Section 3.2.1. Identified
environmentally fragile areas include AECs, flood hazard areas, storm surge areas,
and non -coastal wetlands. Natural resource areas include Significant Natural
Heritage Areas.
' F. Sources of Pollution
Water pollution is caused by a number of substances including sediment, nutrients,
bacteria, oxygen -demanding wastes and toxic substances such as heavy metals,
' chlorine and pesticides. Sources of these pollutants are divided into two general
categories: point sources and nonpoint sources.
' .Point sources are basically discharges that enter surface waters through a pipe,
ditch, or other well-defined point of discharge and often include discharges from
wastewater treatment plants or large urban and industrial stormwater systems.
Within the Cape Carteret planning jurisdiction, there are no major point source
dischargers.
Nonpoint sources generally include stormwater runoff from small urban areas (less
' than 100,000 population), forestry, mining, agricultural lands and other. Examples of
the types of land use activities that can serve as sources of nonpoint pollution
include land development, construction, crop production, animal feeding lots, failing
' septic systems, landfills, roads, and parking lots. Fecal coliform bacteria and
nutrients are major pollutants associated with nonpoint source pollution. Unlike point
source pollution, nonpoint pollution sources are diffuse in nature and occur at
random intervals depending on rainfall frequency and intensity. Within the Cape
t Carteret planning jurisdiction, the primary water pollution sources of estuarine waters
are estimated to be multiple nonpoint sources including: agriculture, forestry, urban
runoff, septic tank runoff, and marinas.
The DWQ has determined the activities that contribute to the closure of shellfish
harvesting areas include, but are not limited to, construction, urban stormwater
runoff, failing septic systems, and agricultural activities. Control of these types of
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Section III Analysis of Existing and Emerging Conditions
Mav 18, 2007
Page 50 of 171

activities includes a wide variety of state agencies, local health departments, local
t municipal and county governments, and private property owners. There is no
prescriptive remedy to solve the problem of closed shellfish waters; rather, it will
require a great deal of collaboration and coordination to achieve the common goal. of
' protecting and restoring shellfish waters. Areas closed to shellfishing in the Cape
Carteret planning jurisdiction are delineated in Figure 2.
In 1990, the Division of Water Quality reported findings of a special study of marinas
in coastal North Carolina. Eleven marinas were the subject of the study and five of
these were located in Bogue Sound. While the primary objective of the study was to
characterize the water quality of marinas relative to ambient waters, there was no
evidence that the marinas in the study were a source of pollutants to ambient
monitoring stations. Dye tracer studies suggested that the transport of pollutants
from marinas might be concentrated near shore instead of in open waterways where
' the ambient stations were located. The report recommended that marina siting and
design use features which promote flushing such as locating marinas near inlets,
minimizing the restriction of entrance channels, and minimizing stagnant corners by
using rounded corners, level bottoms sloping towards the entrance, and avoiding
bends.
' G. Construction and Stormwater Issues
According to the White Oak Basinwide Assessment Report no development
threshold can be identified at present and it is apparent that closings throughout the
state have increased despite the management policies currently in place. The
' reasons for this are not clear. There are many aspects of the development process
that relate to factors influencing fecal coliform export from urban areas. These
aspects include size of disturbed area, length of non -vegetated stage, size of
vegetated buffer, amount of impervious surface, and design of sediment or
stormwater control devices.
Shellfish closures and draining developed areas may be related to buffers and
sediment control best management practices (BMPs) not being properly maintained
or ditching/piping being installed inappropriately. The density levels allowed without
stormwater BMPs may be too high or required buffers for low density development
' may be too small. Buffers for high density projects or the cumulative impact of the
numerous small projects that are not subject to the regulations may partially relate to
closures. Closures may also be related to the lack of vegetative buffers or stringent
' revegetation schedule during the construction phase. Most likely it is some
combination of these factors, but adequate information does not exist to confirm this.
DEH shoreline surveys, for example, can be suggestive, but often do not verify
' specific causes of contamination or identify specific aspects of stormwater
management or erosion/sediment control which may need attention. Shellfish
closures can also occur adjacent to agricultural or forested areas. Animal
populations (both wildlife and livestock), timber cutting and associated land
I
disturbance, and crop preparation all may contribute to fecal coliform bacteria levels
in adjacent waters.
H. Septic System Impacts
Septic systems are common throughout North Carolina. Most are located in rural or
small town areas that fall outside of a regional wastewater treatment plant's service
area. Unfortunately, many citizens fail to properly care for their septic systems.
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Section III Analysis of Existing and Emerging Conditions
May 18, 2007
Page 51 of 171

Improper maintenance leads to failing systems that may pollute nearby waters. A
' regular maintenance program benefits the effort to preserve water quality. Regular
inspections by local governments can encourage proper maintenance.
' I. Wellhead Protection
In 1986, Congress passed amendments to the Safe Drinking Water Act that
established requirements for states to develop Wellhead Protection (WHP)
' Programs. These programs were intended by Congress to be an integral part of a
national ground water protection strategy to prevent the contamination of ground
waters that are used as public drinking water supplies. The North Carolina WHP
Program is part of this national strategy. The West Carteret Water Corporation has
completed a Wellhead Protection Plan and it was approved by the Public Water
Supply Section of the NCDENR in November of 2001.
3.2.4 Summary of Limitations on and Opportunities for Development
Land development activity within most environmentally fragile areas is subject to local,
state, and/or federal restrictions. Local land use regulations such as the zoning
' ordinance, subdivision ordinance, and flood damage prevention ordinance include
specific standards for land development activities. Site -specific soil analyses are
required by the Carteret County Environmental Health Services to evaluate the suitability
of a particular parcel for a septic system. Encouraging good site planning principles and
best management practices can assist with mitigating the impacts of land development
on environmentally fragile areas.
Development within the designated Areas of Environmental Concern is limited by CAMA
regulations and development guidelines. Generally, the development standards for
coastal wetlands, estuarine waters, and public trust areas permit only water -dependent
uses such as navigation channels, dredging projects, docks, piers, bulkheads, . boat
ramps, groins, and bridges. Priority is, however, given to the conservation of these
AECs. CAMA standards for estuarine shoreline development generally require that (i)
the development not cause significant damage to estuarine resources; (ii) the
development not interfere with public rights of access to or use of navigable waters or
public resources; (iii) the development preserve and not weaken natural barriers to
erosion; (iv) impervious surfaces not exceed 30 percent of the lot area located within the
AEC boundary; (v) the development comply with state soil erosion, sedimentation, and
stormwater management regulations; and (vi) the development comply with the CAMA
Land Use Plans. Specific CAMA development standards for AECs can be found in 15
NCAC 7H.
The US Army Corps of Engineers is responsible for regulating non -coastal or '404'
wetlands. Authorization must be obtained from the Corps prior to disturbing such
wetlands.
Opportunities exist for the conservation of fragile areas and natural resource areas
through both private and public means. Private land trusts and conservancies are tax-
exempt organizations that acquire and preserve natural areas, open spaces, and
historical properties. Such organizations offer mechanisms such as conservation
easements to protect natural resources (natural habitats, places of scenic beauty, farms,
forestlands, floodplains, watersheds, etc.) while also providing compensation and
possible tax incentives to private property owners. Tax incentive programs, such as the
North Carolina Conservation Tax Credit Program, provide opportunities for property
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Section 111 Analysis of Existing and Emerging Conditions
May 18, 2007
Page 52 of 171

Ll
1
owners donating land for conservation purposes to receive tax credits. State and local
governments may also accept land donations for conservation purposes.
Public land use regulations, such as conservation design subdivision requirements,
can be developed to assist with the conservation of environmentally sensitive
areas and open space as land is being subdivided into building parcels.
3.3 Analysis of Land Use and Land Development
3.3.1 Existing Land Use Analysis
The predominant land use in Cape Carteret is residential, accounting for almost 32
percent of the total land area of the town's planning jurisdiction and over 57 percent of the
total developed acreage. Public and institutional land uses comprise the second largest
land use category in Cape Carteret. The largest single use within the public and
institutional land use category is the Star Hill Golf and Country Club which accounts for
approximately 90 percent of the total acreage in this category. Commercial land uses
make up approximately 11 percent of the developed land area.
A considerable amount of vacant land remains throughout the town's planning region,
estimated at approximately 45 percent of the total acreage within the town's corporate
limits and its extraterritorial planning and zoning jurisdiction. Figure 3 delineates the
existing land use patterns with the Cape Carteret planning jurisdiction.
A. Description of Land Use Patterns within Watersheds
The Cape Carteret planning jurisdiction is located within two 14-digit watersheds
(Pettiford Creek, #03020106020030 and Deer Creek, #03020106020040) as
delineated by the Natural Resource Conservation Service of the U.S. Department of
Agriculture. These two watersheds are located with subbasin 030501 and 030503,
respectively of the White Oak River Basin. The boundaries of these two watersheds
are delineated on Figure 3.
The Pettiford Creek watershed encompasses roughly the northern one-half of the
Cape Carteret planning jurisdiction. The predominant land use within this watershed is
low density single-family residences, but the largest, single land use is the Star Hill
Golf and Country Club. Several large, undeveloped tracts are within this watershed
and are located primarily in the northern and northeastern portions of the town's ETJ
area on the immediate periphery of the corporate limits. More of this land has recently
been developed as residential single family homes and additional subdivisions are
anticipated. The Star Hill North II Subdivision, currently under construction northeast
of the country club, will continue the trend of residential development in this area.
Some of the land in this area is held by a land trust and, therefore, will not be
developed in the foreseeable future. The NC Highway 58 corridor is perhaps the most
heavily developed portion of this watershed and includes a mixture of commercial,
residential, and institutional land uses.
The Deer Creek watershed encompasses the most intensively developed portions of
the Cape Carteret planning jurisdiction. Again, the predominant land use is low
density single-family residences and includes the Country Club, Country Club Point,
Cape Point, Bayshore Park, Fox Forest, and Quail Wood Acres Subdivisions.
Commercial and institutional land uses within this watershed are chiefly located along
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Section III Analysis of Existing and Emerging Conditions
May 18, 2007
Page 53 of 171

9
F Peletier 0
A 6p Ni
e \e
n WHITCHOUSC FORI(RO
PEI(IFI RCP MGIR `
4
^/�
I,gt J ...i
Prrr� rd Crack i '•� •'••� .�. •l `• ^:>,>o( 1
�•9
I WHITEt AKSA
lot
t 4
i
K
O
�n DpEN SAY GH a
�IICKORv !i1LLS RR a
Cedar 7
Point
ETJ
r3~
D, „e
FTJ
? Star Hill
P
P
SY H16pp6Cw.Mry GM yt� to
tP
1
r.,4pc,i TECR
Cr IINI DR `OMN CREse'r
Rye o �
a A
Figure 3:
Existing Land U��
♦
Fe WFes & Boundanes
E04ing Land Use
aa
` i Y
t�=�� Cape Canard Cl7 L..
f WU1c ralYulknald Rgveatbrel
1
Hr
WOOTEN
welb weld Accaa.
Cvnme�ad
dee'!D G Cmaan Ndbnd FwaA
GDMoIINY
odge.r28.moa
�r�m aqua. +.S66ree1
_ ..�.
0 0.05 01 02
0.3 Oa .mom OS
Mlbs
10
l
i Star Hill North 11
Itlwa�Y
µ
Fam �schmi �c`<PNO
N(e -
QUNL RUNw
J' {
C �.. inr t�o
•, xCY�E rpe �' J '
o �
s ``NOP t R x p i
J
eK GT
roll
c'A
wA Deer Creek
1 -+ LRLD POR Cape Carteret ,EPRGFIEE11
Y � LOMA Z <
v
PSVNEoil
n�
71, O�1 �,pT\INEOR r<
p o p Z
(� dOOVG LN�` m
*O'er `••` �^r%il•�
vm'7/ _\
I,PMEI,AMF. RC `
iQuadmdAcres 9 a,
_ 1
r OUgILWOOD CIR p°A
ape
SM ,
'L
P �
� O
�y r
r'
Bogue
1° `
E O(
$ . pN grYE
rci...r�l M�Fo(R,
r i LrR
Orr PARK AVE CS
h.
�-
Country Dub Pool Bayshore Park �
4 x j SAYVIEW CT
J0 �YEnVE:YA TER O
?p W 1 11INl\11Ge
w 3 r `
m
P
Hunting
Island
c"+C IFN RCl
Bogue Sound ETJ

not limited to: restaurants, grocery stores, convenience stores, gift shops, and
professional service establishments. Most of the commercially -used land is located in
the northeastern corner of the NC Highway 24/58 intersection and adjacent to the
north side of the NC Highway 24 corridor. Smaller commercial areas are located along
the south side of the NC Highway 24 corridor between Bonita Street and Anita Forte
Drive and in the intersection area of Taylor Notion Road NC Highway 24.
The town's current zoning patterns indicate that future commercial areas are
anticipated to be located along the NC Highway 24 corridor between the Taylor Notion
Road/NC 24 intersection and the White Oak School property and between Channel
' View Court and Bayshore Drive.
Public/Institutional/Recreational. Public, institutional, and recreational uses include
recreational uses, waterfront access sites, parks, government offices, schools,
' churches, and government owned open space.
The majority of the town's developed land contained within this land use category is
primarily due to large amount of acreage (approximately 240 acres) within the Star Hill
Golf and Country Club in north central Cape Carteret. Other land uses within this
category include the Cape Carteret Town Hall facilities and police station, the White
1 Oak Elementary School, the Western Carteret Library, churches, privately -owned dock
facilities, and publicly -owned sound access sites. The privately -owned air strip located
within the Star Hill Subdivision is also included in this land use category.
' Industrial Land Use. There are currently no traditional industrial or manufacturing land
uses within the town's planning region. Limited light industrial and heavy commercial
uses are, however, permissible within the town's B-30, Light Industrial zoning
classification. Currently, no large tracts or large amounts of acreage are zoned for
light industrial use.
Agriculture. There are no agricultural land uses within the Cape Carteret planning
jurisdiction.
Forestry. There are no commercial forestry land uses within the Cape Carteret
planning jurisdiction. However, two small Croatan National Forest tracts are located
on the east side of NC Highway 58.
Undeveloped. Land classified as vacant is land that currently is not under cultivation,
used as a tree farm, or utilized on a regular basis for any other purposes. Vacant,
developable land is scattered throughout the planning region, but the largest tracts are
' located within the triangle formed by Taylor Notion Road, NC Highway 24, and NC
Highway 58; along the northeastern periphery of the town's ETJ; adjacent to the north
side of NC Highway 24 between the Taylor Notion Road intersection and the White
Oak Elementary School; and between NC Highway 24 and the Country Club Point
' Subdivision. Vacant building lots are located within the existing residential
subdivisions located throughout the jurisdiction.
The overwhelming majority of the vacant tracts and lots are currently zoned for
residential use, either R-20, Single-family Residential or R-30, Single-family
Residential. R-10, Single-family Residential zoning is limited to the southeastern
portion of Cape Carteret in the Bayshore Park Subdivision area. The only multifamily
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Section 111 Anahsis of Existing and Emerging Conditions
May 18, 2007
Page 56 of 171

I�7
Ll
L
zoning of vacant land is one tract located northeast of the intersection of Starhill Drive
and NC Highway 24. The majority of the vacant tracts have potential for low density
residential development. Several residentially -zoned vacant tracts directly abutting the
south side of Pettiford Creek are wetlands areas that have low development potential
and are best suited for conservation or open space uses.
Commercial development is anticipated on the vacant parcels located along the NC
Highway 24 corridor east of the White Oak Elementary School and in the northeast
quadrant of the intersection of NC Highways 24 and 58. Both of these areas are
currently zoned B-20, Retail Sales and Shopping Centers. Approximately 6 vacant lots
located in the southeast quadrant of the intersection of NC Highways 24 and 58 are
zoned B-10, Business and Professional Offices.
C. Historic. Cultural, and Scenic Areas
The Cape Carteret planning area contains many archaeologically sensitive sites. The
North Carolina Division of Archives and History has identified 11 sites that they deem
significantly important. All of these sites have been disturbed by urban development.
However, artifacts from the various Indian tribes that inhabited the region could still be
found and as a result, the NC Division of Archives and History has recommended that
plans for further development in these areas be carefully reviewed. The policy of the
Office of State Archaeology is not to disclose the location of such sites in public
documents. Any further development that would adversely impact the sites is subject
to applicable state and/or federal laws and regulations.
D. Estimates of Land Area by Existing Land Use Category
�
v {
. 9.�
Percent of
Percent of
Land Use
Acres
Developed Acreage
Total Acreage
Residential
491.3
57.5%
31.7%
Commercial
90.5
10.6%
5.8%
—Public/Institutional/Recreational -V
272.0
31.9%
17.5%
— Industrial _ .-_�----
-T-_ 0.0
—_—_.�— 0.0%-
----0.0%
Agricultural
0.0
0.0%
0.0%
— Dedicated Open Space
0.0
0.0%
0.0%
— Undeveloped'
697.3
0.0%
45.0%
Totals
1,551.0
100.0%
�! 100.0%°
Includes vacant developable land as well as land subject to flood hazard, wetlands, etc.
Source: Estimated from existing land use maps prepared by The Wooten Company.
3.3.2 Description of Land Use and Land Use/Water Conflicts
The following have been identified as existing conflicts in Cape Carteret:
• Loss of natural buffers as land is developed into more intensive uses.
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Section llf Analysis of Existing and Emerging Conditions
Afav 18, 2007
Page 57 of 171

L
LI
Land development occurring without a coordinated comprehensive
stormwater management plan.
Uncoordinated street planning that hinders interconnection between
existing developed and developing areas.
3.3.3 Description of Development Trends
The Town of Cape Carteret is surrounded on its northwestern, western and eastern
boundary by other municipalities (Peletier, Cedar Point, and Bogue) and by Bogue
Sound on its southern boundary. Consequently, any future expansions of the Cape
Carteret corporate area will be limited to the northeast. Future growth and development
will primarily be the result of infill development on undeveloped tracts within the current
corporate limits and redevelopment of existing developed properties. The largest tracts
available for infill development are located within the triangle formed by Taylor Notion
Road, NC Highway 24, and NC Highway 58.
Most of the recent development within Cape Carteret has been low density residential in
nature. Nonresidential development has occurred primarily along the NC 24 corridor and
adjacent to the south side of Taylor Notion Road.
3.3.4 Projections of Land Needs
The following table provides short and long-term projections of land area needed to
accommodate the projected future permanent and seasonal population projections. The
residential land needs projections are based, in part, upon permanent population
projections for Carteret County prepared by the NC State Data Center (Section 3.1.4 A)
and seasonal and peak population projections made by The Wooten Company (Section
3.1.4 B.). The commercial and public/institutional land needs projections are based
upon the proportional relationship that the current acreages of these two land use
categories represent of the total existing residential acreage (i.e., existing commercially -
used land represents about 19 percent of the existing residential acreage and
public/institutionally-used acreage represents about 7 percent). The nonresidential land
needs projections assume that these proportional ratios will remain constant in future
years. The 7B Guidelines allow the projections of land needs to be increased by up to
50 percent to account for unanticipated growth and to provide market flexibility.
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Section III Analysis of Existing and Emerging Conditions
Mav 18, 2007
Page 58 of 171

I
I
I
I
1
I
I
11
9 C �� � ���ye'�°�r1 � ��y'2 fwiy. yt&'"�Yw3 �{ti 8y . / � k. Si•�M�'4 �e� 3 � �,pr �.i��+�j �} �, ��e-pe�,h�t�ycy��ai A ���"� qi�•
��� ��� ,zpT�i" � ti' � �- � ii 1+4� �f
f`�'hM1
���,�r9 �*[ii+
� 'T�j`lii��
/ r - �� i �T' 4 � �'}���s`Y%aa"yM'ry}f✓d .
'� +ty�} y¢s' d °y;q'"dr'"S i : 71 7 I ! ♦ ♦ "��i .r- F°,c^ ,�'z�, ,ey.n` '
h 8.£.,i� -
----------...._......__..._.........-..........._...................... _..__.._..._.._...__._................._............._...._................__._....._..._Total
._._....__..__._.-.._........._._..........._........__............_......._......_......... -----........_ ._._..
2000-2005 2005-2010 2010-2015 2015-2020 2020-2025 2000-2025
.._..._._._..... ... _......... _. __ _._.__...................._ _. _..._.__.__......-..._.--__.___......__._..._._..___._.....-_................._ ___._..-_...._..
Projected 1,333 1,455 1,607 1,756 1,942 ---
Permanent
Population
Permanent 108 122 152 149 186 717
Population
Increase
Permanent
49
55
68
67
84
322
Dwelling
Unit
Increase_*
Seasonal
42
42
54
52
�— 65
255
Dwelling
Population
Increase
._.Seasonal �
14
— 14 .._—.
18..
---_ 17 .._----�--22
85..
Dwelling
Unit
Increase**
Total
63
69
86
84
105
407
Dwelling
Unit
Increase
Residential
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
---
Acres Per
Dwelling
Unit***
Additional
75.2
81.9
103.1
100.3
125.6
486.0
Residential
Acres
Needed
Additional
14.3
15.6
19.6
19.1
23.9
92.3
Commercial
Acres
Needed
Additional
5.3
5.7
7.2
7.0
8.8
34.0
Public and
Institutional
Acres
Needed
* Assumes 2.2275 persons per household _
** Assumes 96.8% of the seasonal population will be in seasonal dwelling units_
—
*** Assumes 0.5 acre per person
Source: The Wooten Company, July 2006
' Based upon the existence of almost 700 undeveloped acres within the Cape Carteret
planning jurisdiction, it appears that sufficient undeveloped land currently exists within
the planning jurisdiction to meet projected land needs through 2025.
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Page 59 of 171
Section III Analysis of Existing and Emerging Conditions
Mav 18, 2007
r

1
1
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
3.3.5 Description of Conflicts with Class II and Class III Lands
Almost the entire Cape Carteret planning jurisdiction, including existing developed
properties, is classified as Class III lands as defined in Section 3.2.2 and as shown of
the Environmental Conditions Composite Map. Many of the potential conflicts with Class
III lands can be mitigated through the provision of public utilities and careful site
planning. Wetlands and/or flood hazard can be conserved as part of any development
proposals through such techniques as conservation subdivision design, buffering and
open space requirements, etc. Effective site planning techniques, buffering, and
conservation of natural vegetation can possibly ensure compatibility of new
development.
3.4 Analysis of Community Facilities
Subchapter 7B .0702(c)(4) requires that the land use plan include a community facilities
analysis that evaluates the existing and planned capacity, location, and adequacy of key
facilities and services that serve the community's population and economic base; that protect
important environmental factors such as water quality; and that guide land development.
Section 3.4 provides an analysis of water and wastewater systems, stormwater systems,
transportation systems, and other municipal services.
3.4.1 Water System.
Cape Carteret receives water from the West Carteret Community Water Corporation, a
nonprofit community water association that provides water service to a total of
approximately 4,512 customers, over 95 percent of which are residential users. Water is
drawn from the Castle Hayne Aquifer and distributed to the various localities situated .
along NC Highways 58 and 24. The water system consists of four 10-inch wells located
in the Croatan National Forest. The system has a current available supply of 1.706
MGD and a total water treatment capacity of 1.700 MGD. The average daily use in 2002
was 0.800 MGD with a peak daily use of 1.176 MGD. The total treated water storage
capacity is 1.35 MG in two elevated storage tanks. The system consists of
approximately 101 miles of distribution line primarily along the NC Highway 24 and 58
corridors in the White Oak Township of Carteret County.
According to the West Carteret Water Corporation, the total number of meter
connections in the Cape Carteret corporate limits in 2004 is 837. Some of these meter
connections are not being utilized year-round. This is primarily due to the seasonal
nature of this area or because of the customers' wishes to suspend billing on their
account. West Carteret Water Corporation is a voluntary system so homeowners can
utilize their meter or a well. The average annual daily water use by these customers in
2003 was 0.074 MGD. The largest water user in 2003 in Cape Carteret was the Cape
Carteret Aquatic and Wellness Center. The existing West Carteret Water Corporation
water system in the Cape Carteret area is delineated in Figure 4, Water System Map.
According to the West Carteret Water Corporation's 2002 Water Supply Plan, four
additional wells with a total supply of 1.540 MGD are planned between 2006 and 2021 to
augment the existing available water supply, thereby increasing the total available
supply to 3.246 MGD. Projected average daily demand is expected to increase from the
current level of 0.800 MGD to 1.640 MGD by 2030 or 51 percent of the total available
supply. Average daily water demand is not projected to exceed 80 percent of available
water supply through 2050.
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Page 60 of 171
Section III Analysis of Existing and Emerging Conditions
Ma_v 18, 2007

7
Based upon the estimated peak population in the Cape Carteret planning jurisdiction and
' an average consumption rate of 60 gallons of water per person per day, the projected
future water demand totals 118,920 gpd in 2010; 143,520 gpd in 2020; and 173,700 gpd
in 2030.
Water system extensions are anticipated in the area bounded by Taylor Notion Road,
NC Highway 58, and NC Highway 24 where the largest amount of new development is
expected to occur. Also, water system extensions are projected along the northeastern
boundary of the existing ETJ as new residential developments are built in this area.
3.4.2 Wastewater System
Cape Carteret does not have access to a public sewer system; thus, public wastewater
treatment facilities are not available. Wastewater disposal is provided by individual
subsurface disposal systems or by privately -owned package treatment plants. There are
no pending plans for public wastewater collection and treatment facilities to be
constructed in the Cape Carteret area. Information regarding private wastewater
systems in the Cape Carteret planning jurisdiction is not available.
' Based upon the estimated peak population in the Cape Carteret planning jurisdiction and
an average consumption rate of 50 gallons of wastewater per person per day, the
projected future wastewater demand totals 99,100 gpd in 2010; 119,600 gpd in 2020;
and 144,750 gpd in 2030.
3.4.3 Stormwater System
' The existing drainage facilities within the Town of Cape Carteret consist of a system of
small (12-inch diameter and smaller) corrugated plastic piping, catch basins, and
drainage ditches and swales (See Figure 5, Stormwater Systems Map).
1
1
In 2001, the Town of Cape Carteret undertook a stormwater mapping project to address
issues related to water quality and flooding of property. The first phase of this project
involved the accurate mapping of the existing stormwater facilities and the identification
of potential problem areas. The second phase of the project involved reviewing the
identified problem areas with the Town staff and outlining a course of action to address
each problem area. Recommendations for piping and ditching improvements were
made for 15 problem areas. As of December 2004, approximately 60 percent of the
recommendations have been implemented since the preparation of the report,
specifically on Star Hill Drive, Sutton Drive, Pine Lake Road, Gemini Court, Park
Avenue, and Sound View Court. Additional improvements are planned on Pine Lake
Cape Carteret CAMA Lain Use Plan
Section 111 AnalYsis of Existing and Emerging Conditions
May 18, 2007
Page 61 of 171

Figure 5: Stormwater Systems
■ Inlet Structures Elevation
?eleue y torn s High:46'
_—•••—•••— Ditches orSwaty
Rd
THE Water Features Low: -1'
WOOTEN
y_ GOMPA"rY 0 HUC Watersheds
Ca pe
Carteret pFa„pR,
0 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 04 0.5
i Mlles
58
NO,m _
i1 f
� N
�Ar
�a
s ,
e A
a 1 l r
Hunti;c;
0
_ „ 1 `j Island
`i'� I 1 me aRreraoRa nl. R�RRwa:r;a,ceo Roa, moimae�ncmnam ovma rvonn
r'`�' �_� I � �� M�AAwn�a..ivai�izaaa��Re�Reeo wnnn�aaRe�mmwRe� neoRrrm�eao�R a,a
e ,fi" _ coven wmac. rnarewRan na�an oce..ic ana nmo.o�aronm+Ravxnn

6
Figure 4: Water Systems
P-letier v
-_
Features 8 Boundarlos Waler Pipes by Diameter
M. Bones - 1--3-
r
'eFaa
�No
s
THE
WOOTEN
�o•
,z
2
t`
,F
.tl>
'
rMAMNY
:•
Ifel ,�-�3 ap
�'
Q
�
.•
pfo9ar 19. 300a
t�.tl�e9wb t,565leer
•. .., .
0 0.05 0.1 O.i 0.3 OA O.
MYe9
4'.
y
-o
6
4
0
•'`•
nJ li lili(llil'J'1LLI.:J3
l
r
., r.
Cedar
0 6
6
Point
asp+iu: Dtz 2 - s'e
3
G
� z
c
..
24
Xe
;'
�- Bogue
(a
�
b
b i4
I
t
S`
6
4
0
0
rr�snv�/
NI.4
4
6
`
4
a
Hunting
Island
R"
1
Bogue Sound

1
1
11
ii
I
1
Road, Loma Linda Court, and Channel View Drive. A complete listing of the stormwater
problem areas identified in the 2001 report is provided in Appendix L.
3.4.4 Transportation System
The Town of Cape Carteret maintains over 17 miles of streets within its corporate limits.
Major thoroughfares and other streets outside of the town limits are maintained by the
NC Department of Transportation. The state also has maintenance responsibility for all
bridges in the area. The major road system is delineated on Figure 4.
The Carteret County Transportation Committee, on which Cape Carteret had
representation, identified priorities and made recommendations for transportation
improvements within Carteret County. This committee produced a document in 1999
entitled Transportation Improvement Program Priorities for Carteret County. The priority
of particular concern to Cape Carteret is the construction of an overpass at the
intersection of NC Highway 24 and NC Highway 58. The overpass was proposed due to
the current and projected traffic volumes on Highway 24 which exceed the capabilities of
the current at -grade intersection. The overpass is also considered necessary to facilitate
evacuations from Bogue Banks during storm threats.
A. Proposed Highway Improvements
Transportation improvement projects, as determined by the NCDOT, are cataloged
in the 2004-2010 Transportation Improvement Program. There is currently one
transportation improvement project directly impacting the Town of Cape Carteret.
This project (R-4721) is the conversion of the NC 24 and NC 58 at -grade intersection
to an interchange. This project is currently listed as an unfunded project.
B. Maior Streets with Capacity Deficiencies
The Transportation Improvement Program Priorities for Carteret County identified NC
24 and portions of NC 58 at or over capacity in 1996. Streets with projected 2025
traffic volumes that would be near or exceed practical capacities also include NC 24
and NC 58. The 2025 average summer weekday traffic count on NC 58 at the
Bogue Sound bridge was projected to total 26,200 ADT.
C. Traffic Volumes
As would be expected, the heaviest traffic volumes are on the major4and NC
numbered thoroughfares (NC 24 and NC 58). The following table summarizes the
2002 traffic volumes on major streets in the Cape Carteret area.
"U'A"M
c♦ ... .%.!F'�3
�1{"T.a.vv
Highway
ADT
Location
-� NC 24
20,000
West of NC 58 intersection
___........--.-.---------......._._..__...__
16,000 ....... _..._._.....---.-----__._.._._._..-------.---._.____..._._........_..._..._.__._..__._._.__.__...._.__..
_
- East of Taylor Notion Road intersection
15,000
East of NC 58 intersection
_ NC 58
_
South of NC 24 intersection
_15,000
— 8,500
_ _
North of Pettiford Creek —
Source: 2002 Average Daily Traffic, Cape Carteret, NCDOT
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Section ILL Analysis of Existing and Emerging Conditions
May 18, 2007
Page 64 of 171

11
1
1
The Town of Cape Carteret recognizes the need to improve vehicular circulation
within the corporate limits. To that end, the Town stresses the need for developing a
local street system that promotes interconnection between developed and
developing properties. One area of town where this is particularly important is the
area bounded by Taylor Notion Road, NC 24, and NC 58. This area contains the
largest amount of undeveloped land which is expected to develop in the near future.
As each individual tract is developed, it is critical to ensure that the proposed streets
within the new development allow for a connection to adjoining properties. Such
connections will ultimately result in a new local street which ties all of the developing
properties with the existing major street network. NC Highway 24 has been
designated a Strategic Highway Corridor by the North Carolina Department of
Transportation and in the future is expected to be developed as an expressway with
high mobility and low access. Land use policy guidelines for mobility protection
recently developed by the North Carolina Department of Transportation should be
adhered to as land development occurs along this major highway corridor.
Other areas where improved street connectivity is proposed include the Quailwood
Acres and the Star Hill North II Subdivisions. Quailwood Court is proposed to be
extended from its southern terminus southward to NC Highway 24. A street
connecting Bahia Lane in the Star Hill North II Subdivision to NC Highway 24 is also
proposed. Both of these proposed street connections would traverse the Town of
Bogue planning jurisdiction. Consequently, coordination with Bogue will be
necessary to ensure the feasibility of such future street connections.
.The Town is also interested in developing a sidewalk or trail system to improve
pedestrian circulation between residential areas, commercial areas, and community
facilities. A sidewalk or pedestrian trail along the NC 24 and Taylor Notion Road
' corridors is particularly desirable. In August 2006, the Town of Cape Carteret
amended its Subdivision Regulations and Zoning Ordinance to require pedestrian
improvements in all new subdivisions and commercial developments as well as in
' the redevelopment of subdivisions and commercial developments. Specifically, the
Town requires a sidewalk with a minimum width of five feet to be installed adjacent to
the south side of NC Highway 24 and the east side of Taylor Notion Road. Along the
west side of Taylor Notion Road, a hike -bike trail of at least eight feet in width is
' required. Sidewalks with a minimum width of six feet and a hike -bike trail of at least
eight feet in width are required along the north side of NC Highway 24.
1
7
L
A hike -bike trail linking the West Carteret Library with the White Oak Elementary
School is also proposed.
The general location of the proposed street extensions, sidewalks, and hike -bike
trails are delineated in Figure 7, Future Land Use Plan. The proposed alignments
shown in Figure 7 are conceptual only and are intended to illustrate the general
locations of these proposed street, trail, and sidewalk improvements.
Air service to Cape Carteret is available through commercial airports located in
nearby New Bern and Jacksonville.
3.4.5 Police Protection
Cape Carteret receives police protection from the Cape Carteret Police Department
which is located on 204 W.B. McLean Drive. The Cape Carteret Police Department, with
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Section W Analysis of Existing and Emerging Conditions
May 18, 2007
Page 65 of 171

a staff of 5 full-time, 3 part-time, and 4 reserve personnel, appears to have adequate
manpower to provide police services to the community.
3.4.6 Fire Protection and Emergency Medical Services
The Western Carteret Volunteer Fire and Rescue District provides fire prevention and
suppression services, as well as, emergency medical services to the Town and a fire
district that encompasses areas outside the corporate limits of Cape Carteret. The fire
' insurance rating within Western Carteret fire district is a 6. Correspondingly, the
volunteer fire department must retain a minimum of 20 active firefighters. In 2003, the
District responded to approximately 171 fire calls. Along with 15 volunteer rescue
personnel, the 20 fire personnel also respond as emergency medical technicians;
combined, the staff responded to approximately 700 emergency medical and rescue
calls in 2003. Basic emergency medical treatment and transportation to hospitals are
the general services provided by the fire and rescue squad. The equipment of the fire
and rescue squad appears adequate to provide fire and emergency medical services
through the study period. All firefighting equipment meets the National Fire Protection
Association's standards. There is a projected need for additional personnel. The District
' estimates a need for 6 additional fire/EMT personnel which will permit staffing three
shifts with 2 additional personnel each. The fire station is located just off NC 24 in Cedar
Point.
' 3.4.7 Solid Waste Collection and Disposal
Solid waste collection services for the town are provided through a contract with a
private garbage collector. Unlike county residents, Cape Carteret residents are not
required to pay an annual waste collection fee. Rather, this service is funded through
the Town's property tax collections. Currently, curbside garbage collection occurs once a
week. The frequency of brush and yard debris collection is determined by seasonal
demands. A curbside recycling program is also in place and collections are made once
every two weeks. White goods are collected once a year. No deficiencies with the
existing collection system have been identified.
' Refuse is disposed of in the Tuscarora Regional Landfill located in the Craven County
and operated by the Coastal Regional Solid Waste Management Authority (CRSWMA).
According to a landfill capacity study prepared by the NC Division of Waste Management
' in 2003, CRSWMA had 37.41 years of remaining landfill capacity under permit as of July
1, 2002. With an additional approximate 100 acres owned and available for future
permitting, the CRSWMA's Ten -Year Solid Waste Management Plan 2003-2013 (June
' 2003) estimates that the Authority can meet its solid waste needs for the next 50 years
or more.
Carteret County operates a system of greenbox collection sites throughout the county
' portion of the study area. County residents are responsible for private disposal of solid
waste.
' 3.4.8 Recreation
The Town of Cape Carteret currently maintains seven public waterfront accesses to
Bogue Sound (see Figure 3, Existing Land Use Map for the location of each access
' point). The major private recreational facility located in the town is a public golf course
located in the Star Hill neighborhood. An aquatic and wellness center has recently been
constructed on Taylor Notion Road.
iCape Carteret LAMA Land Use Plan Page 66 of 171
Section III Analysis of Existing and Emerging Conditions
Ma_v 18, 2007

A 1990 study on sound access, parks, and recreation identified water access and other
' recreational needs. To date however, no major recreational sites have been developed
by the town. However, public water access points have been developed at.
seven
streets that terminate at the Bogue Sound shoreline.
1
3.4.9 Education
Carteret County operates four schools in the Cape Carteret area. All four schools are
located along highway NC24. White Oak Elementary is located in Cape Carteret while
the other schools are located east of Cape Carteret. Data for the 2004-2005 school year
is provided in the table below.
tnyy e A }rr i,qR• til ! :.
€
School Name
Staff
Enrollment
Grades
White Oak Elementary
76
500
K-5'
School
Bogue Sound
57
432
K-5
Elementary School
Broad Creek Middle
58
490
6-8
School
Croatan High School
76 _
�770
9-12
' 3.4.10 Public Administration Ability
The Town of Cape Carteret operates under a mayor -council form of government. The
town has a municipal staff of 9 full time and 2 part time employees (as well as 4 reserve
police officers) that perform general administration, public works, law enforcement, and
' planning and zoning services. With anticipated development and growth in population,
the current staffing level may need to be increased to meet future demand on municipal
services.
3.5 Land Suitability Analysis
' Subchapter 76 .0702(c)(5) requires that the land use plan include a land suitability analysis to
determine the community's supply of land suited for development based upon the following
considerations:
' • Natural system constraints
• Compatibility with existing land uses and development patterns
• Existing land use and development criteria of local, state, and federal
agencies
• Availability and capacity of water, sewer, stormwater management
facilities, and transportation systems
' The primary purpose of the land suitability analysis is to provide the local government with
information regarding the best areas for development in order to guide the formulation of
' policies and the preparation of the future land use map.
' Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Page 67 of 171
Section III Analysis of Existing and Emerging Conditions
Mqy 18, 2007

The following factors must be considered to assess land suitability:
• Water quality
• Land Classes I, II, and III
• Proximity to existing developed areas and compatibility with existing land
uses
• Potential impact of development on areas and sites designated by local
historic commissions or the NC Department of Cultural Resources as
historic, culturally significant, or scenic
• Land use and development requirements of local development
regulations, CAMA Use Standards and other applicable state regulations,
and applicable federal regulations
• Availability of community facilities, including water, sewer, stormwater and
transportation
The development of a Land Suitability Map is required as part of the suitability analysis. The
Land Suitability Map is intended to illustrate the degree to which land within the planning area is
suitable for development. The Division of Coastal Management and the NC Center for
Geographic Information and Analysis have jointly developed a GIS-based land suitability
analysis model for analyzing and mapping land suitability. The suitability criteria, ratings, and
weight factors used in this model to prepare the Land Suitability Map are delineated in the
following table.
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Section 111 Analysis of Existing and Emerging Conditions
Mav 18, 2007
Page 68 of 171

y f
11",
--------------Criteria and Rating ----- -----
_................__..._..._......__.-.._....__............._.._._.__.-..-..__..__._.-......._._._....._.........._..................._
Layer Name
Least Low Medlum High
.......
Assigned
_.__...... - ... -.----...
Percent
........ _................._._-
Multiplier
Suitable Suitability Suitability Suitability
Weight
Weight
_....__.................._._..._.._...__._...__.__.-.----.-.----.—__._—.._.
Coastal Wetlands
_._.__..._.__.__...
Inside
Outside
__._...._._...__...........
_........ _._...... _.
Exceptional and Substantial
Inside
Outside
Noncoastal Wetlands
Estuarine Waters
Inside
Outside
Protected Lands
Inside
Outside
Federal Lands
Inside
Outside
State Lands
Inside
Outside
.__-___----.__.____..__._._.._----.-.-_---_...__-----._.._...—.___..
Beneficial Noncoastal Wetlands
__..
Inside
_._._.__._-__._..._
_..-.------._.....___.
Outside
__.___.-.__.._............_..-----...---..._..
1
4.348
.. ......_...._
0.04348
High Quality Waters
Inside
Outside
1
4.348
0.04348
Storm Surge Areas
Inside
Outside
2
8.696
0.08696
Soils with Septic Limitations
Severe
Moderate
Slight—
— 1
4.348
0.04348
Flood Zones
Inside
Outside
2
8.696
0.08696
Significant Natural Heritage Areas
Hazardous Substance Disposal
< 500'
> 500'
— 1
4.348
0.04548
Sites
-NPDES
Sites
< 500'
> 500'
1
4.348
0.04348
Wastewater Treatment Plants
< 500'
> 500'
1
4.348
0.04348
Municipal Sewer Discharge Points
_
< 500'
> 500'
1
4.348
0.04348
Airports
< 500'
> 500'
1
4.348
0.04348
Developed Land
> 1 mi
.5 - 1 mi
< .5 mi
1
4.348
0.04348
Primary Roads
> 1 mi
.5 -1 mi
< .5 mi
2
8.696
0.08696
Water Pipes
> .5 mi
.25 - .5
< .25 mi
3
13.043
0.13043
_mii_
Sewer Pipes—� > .5 mi .25 - .5 < .25 mi—+ 3
13.043
0.13043
mi
Totals 23
100.000
1.00000
—._..._.._.._._---_.___..._.-.._..._____...-_----._.___._.._......____._.....---..._..... _.-_---_.._...... __._.__.__.__._.__._ . ....... ._._.—_.._._.....__._._.---.-..______.__..........._
Assigned weight: 1 = Important 2 = Very important 3 = Most important for development
Inside' = physically located within the layer. 'Outside' = not physically located within the layer. — —
' Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Section 111 Analysis of Existing and Emerging Conditions
May 18, 2007
Page 69 of 171

Sources: William B. Farris; Frederick Steiner, The Living Landscape; Carteret County Land Suitability Analysis; Kaiser et al,
Urban Land Use Planning; review by Onslow County Planning Department. The DCM model default settings were utilized in this
analysis. Layers Not Used in Cape Carteret: Land Application Sites and Water Supply Watersheds
The Land Suitability Map produced through this modeling process classifies land as High
Suitability, Medium Suitability, Low Suitability, and Least Suitable. In general, the majority of the
Cape Carteret planning jurisdiction is within the higher suitability ratings (High and Medium
Suitability). Lower suitability ratings (Low Suitability and Least Suitable) are found in areas
subject to flooding and in wetlands areas, particularly south of Pettiford Creek and along the
Bogue Sound and Deer Creek shorelines. Figure 6, Land Suitability Map graphically illustrates
the suitability ratings.
X&
r
s� PV
'r,¢�os� ;ym i i s ! fp. / i `4- A. *. 8d 3•J <a=L'S" '.. $5�,,
T
Suitability Rating
Acres
Percent
High Suitability
1,117.8
72..2%
Medium Suitability
232.7
-
15.0%
Low Suitability
0.0
0.0%
Least Suitable
197.2
12.7%
Source: The Wooten Company
A comparison of Figure 3, Existing Land Use Map with the Land Suitability Map reveals that a
considerable number of vacant/under-utilized tracts are located within the areas with the higher
suitability ratings.
' 3.6 Review of Current Land Use Plan
' Subchapter 7B .0702(c)(6) requires that the preparation of the land use plan update include an
evaluation of the community's success in implementing the policies and programs adopted in
the current land use plan as well as the effectiveness of those policies in achieving the goals of
the plan. The current Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan was certified in January 1998. A
' summary of ordinance consistency, implementation actions taken, and overall effectiveness of
current land use plan policies follows.
A. Consistency of Existing Ordinances with the Current Land Use Plan Policies
Cape Carteret's land use and land development ordinances include a zoning
ordinance, subdivision ordinance, flood damage prevention ordinance, sign
' ordinance, and waterways ordinance. The Town considers their existing ordinances
to generally be consistent with the 1998 Land Use Plan Policies. Ordinance
revisions/adoptions that have been made to ensure consistency with the 1998 Plan
policies include:
' Adoption of a Waterways Ordinance in 2000.
• Adoption of a revised Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance in 2003.
• A subdivision ordinance revision regarding connections to a potable water
supply.
• A zoning ordinance revision regarding driveway regulations.
' Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Page 70 of 171
Section 111 Analysis of Existing and Emerging Conditions
May 18, 2007
1

rr Peletier
d � 1M.a grre� a`va`
i��� FANV`pR kQJ
r..
r
n
w� e
THE
WOOTEN
COMPANY
ome..ze xms
r nm wa.a+merew
Figure 6: Land Suitability
Weter Bodies Land Suitability
rZ �j Cape Ca eretCiyLimds HghS iabilily
Cape Caderel ETJ ® Medium Suilablltty
Low Sulability
_ Least Suiable
0 0.05 0.1 U 0.3 0.4 0.5
Mae$
71711,
7
'Nil p 9
x EG
pltiFk'P
u � �F
R�Rk AVE
3
BAYIA .' E
Bogue Sound
Is
0
mo Pepardrbn a me mao waa n�r.a n
�olke Com�al Mana9e„anr Pmgran, irn
gamer ict art 9�1 aaameiaea v.�l
fnnra Heaece MaregereH. Naamal O
eocl EN nD

B. Adoption of the Current Implementation Measures
Major implementation activities undertaken by Cape Carteret since the preparation of
the 1996 Land Use Plan include:
' Adoption of a Waterways Ordinance in 2000.
• Adoption of a revised Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance in 2003.
• Expansion of the corporate limits through annexation of urbanizing areas.
• Storm drainage improvements in various sections of Town (see Appendix
L).
' C. Effectiveness of the Current Policies
Cape Carteret considers that their current Land Use Plan policies are generally
achieving the desired land use patterns and protecting natural systems. However,
additional and/or revised policies are needed to ensure continued effective land use
planning and protection of fragile natural environments. General policy areas that
will be considered for revision of existing policies or development of new policies
include:
' Intergovernmental cooperation and coordination.
• Stormwater management.
• Development principles and techniques to better ensure land use
compatibility with land suitability.
• Local street planning to ensure connectivity between new and existing
developments.
• Pedestrian circulation.
I
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Page 72 of 171
Section III Analysis of Eristing and Emerging Conditions
Mav 18, 2007

1
SECTION IV PLAN FOR THE FUTURE<
This section of the Plan is organized in accordance with the requirements of Subchapter 7B
.0702(d). Section IV includes goals, land use and development policies, and a future land use
map. This portion of the Plan is intended to guide the development and use of land within the
Cape Carteret planning jurisdiction in a manner that achieves the community's goals as well as
the goals of the Coastal Area Management Act program.
Within this section specific definition of terms used in the goals and policies are as follows:
Continue: Follow past and present procedures to maintain desired goal, usually with Town
elected officials, appointed officials, and staff involved at all levels from planning to
implementation.
Encourage: To stimulate or foster a particular condition through direct or indirect action the
' private sector or through Town regulation, staff recommendation and decisions.
Enhance: Improve existing conditions by increasing the quantity or quality of desired features or
current regulations and decisions towards a desired state through the use of policies and Town
elected officials, appointed officials, and staff involved at all levels of planning. This could
include financial support.
' Implement. Actions to guide the accomplishment of the Plan recommendations.
Prevent. Stop a described event through the use of appropriate Town regulations, staff actions,
' permit -issuing authority actions, and Town finances, if needed.
Promote: Advance the desired state through the use of Town policies and codes and elected
' officials, appointed officials, and staff involved at all levels of planning. This may include
financial support.
' Protect. Guard against a deterioration of the desired state through the use of Town policies and
regulations, staff, and, if needed, financial assistance.
Provide: Take the lead role in supplying the needed financial and staff support to achieve the
' desired goal. The Town is typically involved in all aspects from planning to implementation to
maintenance.
Support. Supply the needed staff support, policies, and financial assistance at all levels to
achieve the desired goal.
Work: Cooperate and act in a manner through the use of Town elected and advisory boards,
staff, actions, and policies to create the desired goal.
During the course of the preparation of the land use plan update, specific issues have been
' identified that the Town's goals and policies strive to address. The following table summarizes,
by CRC land use plan management topic, those issues.
' Cape Carteret CAMA land Use Plan Page 73 of 171
Section IV Plan for the Future
j1'lav 18, 2007
r

11
1
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
1
d< ,r h1i�Yr µsrt.°.'—'�X. 8^ �,,,,4Er?�#vF`. CPbf i5"'•'YTM �'�w�^' +4� � S �+3''� Ja�� � TA �"fey ,ZY��} hJ
Management
Issue
Topic
Public Water
• Providing for public water access to all segments of the community,
Access
including persons with disabilities.
• Development of comprehensive policies that provide access
opportunities for the public along the shoreline within the planning
jurisdiction.
Land Use
Compatibility
• Development of local development policies that balance protection of
natural resources and fragile areas with economic development.
• Development of policies that provide clear direction to assist local
decision making and consistency findings for zoning, divisions of land,
and public and private projects.
• Compatibility of Town land use regulations in future utility service areas.
• Development of land use and development policies that minimize
adverse impacts on Areas of Environmental Concern (AECs) and which
support overall CAMA goals.
Infrastructure
Carrying Capacity
• Establishment of service area boundaries for existing and future
infrastructure.
• Development of infrastructure service policies and criteria consistent
with future land needs projections.
• Correlating future land use map categories with existing and planned
infrastructure such as water, sewer, and transportation facilities.
• Ensuring that public infrastructure systems are appropriately sized,
located, and managed so that the quality and productivity of AECs and
other fragile areas are protected or restored.
Natural Hazard
Areas
• Development of policies that minimize threats to life, property, and
natural resources resulting from land development located in or
adjacent to hazard areas such as those subject to erosion, high winds,
—storm surge, flooding, or sea level rise.
• Development of location, density, and intensity criteria for new, existing
development, and redevelopment (including public facilities and
infrastructure) so as to avoid or better withstand natural hazards.
• Ensuring that existing and planned development is coordinated with
existing and planned evacuation infrastructure.
Water Quality�u
• Development of policies to prevent or control nonpoint source
discharges (sewage and storm water) such as impervious surface
limits, vegetated riparian buffers, wetlands protection, etc.
• Establishment of policies and land use categories for protecting open
tCape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Section IV Plan for the Future
May 18, 2007
Page 74 of 171

1
shellfishing waters and restoring closed shellfishing waters.
• Adoption of policies for coastal waters within the planning jurisdiction to
help ensure that water quality is maintained if not impaired and
improved if impaired.
Areas of Local • Identify and address local concerns and issues, such as cultural and
Concern historic areas, scenic areas, economic development, or general health
and human service needs.
' 4.1 Land Use and Development Goals
The formulation of land use and development goals is based upon Cape Carteret's evaluation of
its identified concerns and aspirations (Section II) and the needs and opportunities identified in
the analysis of existing and emerging conditions (Section III). These land use plan goals were
formulated after a review and analysis of the development issues, goals ,and objectives
contained in the 1998 Town of Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan (see Appendix B) and the
t Coastal Resource Commission (CRC) management goals and planning objectives (see
Appendix K). Delineation of goals is a foundation upon which policy statements can be built.
I
1
1
The following table summarizes the land use and development goals, organized by CRC land
use plan management topic, that have been formulated by Cape Carteret.
`.�u,Y b x y'.W n. vp %+, 4 d w ,yid k'b3ftJsi`Ig;1.A��>
-
A§ 403�
r5:'i!i SM. Seel
xi..�Rk��' ;,i ;®
Management Topic
Cape Carteret Land Use and Development Goals
Public Water
• Provide adequate opportunities for public access to coastal waters
Access_
Land Use
• Balance growth and development and conservation/preservation of
Compatibility
natural resources
• Promote land use and public infrastructure development that is
compatible with land suitability as well as capabilities to provide
requisite public services
• Promote land use and land development compatible with the functional
_purposes of Areas of Environmental Concern_
Infrastructure
• Promote land use and public infrastructure development that is
Carrying Capacity
compatible with land suitability as well as capabilities to provide
requisite public services
Natural Hazard
• Conserve and maintain natural hazard areas
Areas
Water Quality
• Maintain and enhance the water quality of coastal waters
—...._...__..__........ __.._._..----._..__._._______....-.-------..__._......_---.______.------_.__..__
Areas of Local
• Preserve historic and cultural resources
Concern
• Provide a variety of housing opportunities
• Promote diversified economic development
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Section IV Plan for the Future
May 18, 2007
Page 75 of 171

1
1
1
1
1
F
1
4.2 Land Use Development Policies
The formulation of land use and development policies is based upon a review and analysis of
policy statements contained in the 1998 Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan (see Appendix H
for a summary of policies from this former plan); an evaluation of identified concerns and
aspirations (Section II) and the needs and opportunities identified in the analysis of existing and
emerging conditions (Section III); input from the Land Use Plan Advisory Committee, local
planning board, and elected officials; and input obtained through citizen participation efforts
including public informational meetings, public forums, and Land Use Plan Advisory Committee
meetings.
v°"tT,r§- ibw i3 f"r.'``i l..z try �'dr......aAl,4 day )`.9'{ '3 °°'4', . i ITT
`sib M,Ta sbd E c4x ?�iF: 1 • Q • • L .., c 3 aia
Management
Topic _
Ca_pe Carteret Policies
_
4.2.1 Public Access to Public Trust Waters
Policy 1: It is the policy of the Town of Cape Carteret to ensure a variety of
opportunities for access to public trust waters to all segments of the
__—
community, including persons with disabilities. _ —___�__
__
Policy 2: The town will continue to support the exploration, assessment,
--
and development of estuarine access opportunities;__
Policy 3: The town encourages the establishment of attractive,
environmentally -responsible marinas and water access facilities for
residents and vacationers consistent with CAMA regulations and local
—�
ordinances._
Policy 4: The town will continue to require, through its TSubdivision
Regulations, provisions for common water access in waterfront subdivisions.
Policy 5: The town encourages the construction of boat docking facilities by
landowner or homeowner associations that are designed to service only lots
within a designated subdivision.
4.2.2 Land Use Compatibility
_ —
Policy 1: The town will continue to enforce the Flood Damage Prevention
Ordinance which requires new construction to be elevated above the
established 100-year flood elevation.
Policy 2: The town, through its Zoning Ordinance, will ensure that industrial
development does not adversely impact identified fragile lands.
Policy 3: The town will promote only those types of development that will
meet state and/or federal permitting requirements for acceptable impacts on
natural resources and which retain and maintain the town's present
character.
Policy 4: The town will encourage land development in areas that currently
have the necessary support infrastructure (water, streets, etc.) or where
these services can readily be made available. Land development will be
guided to areas that have public water and a street system with the capacity
to accommodate increased land development_
Policy 5: The town will promote the continued low -density residential
development character of areas located on the fringes of the extraterritorial
jurisdiction and in locations adjacent to identified fragile and hazard areas.
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
SectionIV Plan for the Future
May 18, 2007
Page 76 of 171

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Policy 6: The town will support local intergovernmental cooperation with
regard to land use planning issues, such as ETJ areas, annexation
qats,. thand regional
_q�9!40t�K planning, sewage - e I s I vstems.
Policy 7: Cape Carteret will continue to promote a variety of land uses
which complement the residential, commercial, institutional, and recreational
needs of the community. Industrial development is generally considered not
to be desirable or compatible with the town's character and ability to provide
municipal services.
_'­_8:_Current
Policy residential densities will be maintained in order to
preserve the overall low -density character of Cape Carteret's residential
areas. Low density areas will require a minimum lot area of 20,000 square
feet. Medium density single-family areas will require a minimum lot area of
.........
15,000 square feet.
olicy 9: Multi -family residential development will be encouraged at a
moderate density range of approximately five dwelling units per acre.
Residential densities in approved Planned Residential Developments will be
allowed at a maximum density of 8 dwelling units per acre and a minimum
development area of 6 acres. Such development will be guided to locations
in which utilities and a street system are capable of accommodating higher
densities.
Policy 10: Cape Carteret will maintain residential areas that are used
_exclusively for detached 'stick -built' single- amily dwellings.
Policy 11: The town will continue to enforce the requirement that new
subdivisions provide lands for neighborhood recreation use.
Policy 12: Cape Carteret will encourage the development of aesthetically
pleasing commercial and professional buildings along the NC Highway 24
and 58 corridors. Commercial land uses will require a minimum lot area of
20,000 square feet. The maximum ground coverage for retail sales and
shopping center uses will not exceed 40 percent of the gross land area.
Intensive commercial uses must be located on a major or minor
thoroughfare. The streets providing access to commercial uses shall have
_to capacity adequatelv accommodate anticipated traffic volumes.
Policy 13: The town will continue to enforce zoning ordinance standards for
screening and buffering L'q commercial areas.
Policy 14: The town will evaluate staff and development service needs in
planning, engineering, and inspections to maintain and improve quality
development as growth increases.
Policy 15: The town will continue to require, through its subdivision
regulations, provisions for the dedication of community service facilities or
payment of an in -lieu of fee in residential subdivision developments of four
or more lots.
Policy 16: Where infill development opportunities exist the Town shall
support best management practices (BMP) and impervious surface limits for
stormwater.
....... . .......... .
Policy 17: Cape Carteret will only allow development activities in
estuarine and public trust waters that are associated with water -dependent
uses, consistent with state and federal standards, and meet all local
policies_contained in this p qq._
Policy 18: Marinas and other docking facilities may be permitted
is consistent with local zoning and must be constructed in accordance
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
SectionIV Plan for the Future
Xfeq 18, 2007
Page 77 of 171

1
1
1
1
I
..........._........___......... the Division of Coastal Management.guidelines......._.-............ .._._........ ..__............. ..................................._......__.
4.2.3 Infrastructure Carrying Capacity
---._ ____......_ _ _.. __-_........... _._ _ _.._.. _....-_._.. _ ____....._.. _ ... _.._ _ ...............
Policy 1: Cape Carteret supports managing and directing the town's growth
and development in balance with the availability of municipal services.
Policy 2: The provision of basic municipal services shall be contingent
upon the town's needs, financial capacity, and the economic feasibility of
--._ ... ........ ._._._. _._- .................. _. _providing the_municipal service._..._.._..._.__...._._..__._._.__.._.._....._.............__...__......_._.._..._......-.___....._......_...._......__..._
Policy 3: Currently the Town of Cape Carteret does not provide utilities
such as water or sewer. Water is provided by an independent entity.
Wastewater disposal is either on individual septic systems or small package
treatment systems. Cape Carteret remains committed to providing
appropriate municipal services to support additional development. However,
the Town does not anticipate providing sewer or water services in the future.
The Town would be supportive of a regional sewer service.
Policy 4: The town will promote residential densities as outlined in section
4.5. Higher densities will be permitted only in areas with adequate utilities
and with a street system that has the capacity to sufficiently handle
increased vehicle trips.
Policy 5: Package treatment plants may be permitted in areas in which
public sewer service is currently unavailable and where the sewer service
utility has determined that the municipal sewer system is not likely to be
extended in the future provided that the treatment plants conform to state
_._._. _.__. __ ._._. __._._..__......_.Permitting_requirementsu__._._.._._.__.---_.___.____...._.----._.___.____.__._..__._._...._._._._......_..._....___..._.
4.2.4 Natural Hazard Areas
_
Policy 1: It is the policy of Cape Carteret to conserve the natural resources
and fragile environments that provide protection from such natural hazards
as floods and storm surges by using local zoning and DCM guidelines for
_
d_evelopment.
Policy 2: Cape Carteret will continue to support and cooperate with
Carteret County and other local units of government in emergency
___....._management-.planning_and
training. _ _ _____.._._._...—....._.___._.__...__..._.._._..
Policy 3: Cape Carteret will continue to enforce the state building code
requirements that relate to wind -resistant construction standards;
Policy 4: Cape Carteret will continue to participate in the National Flood
Insurance Program and to enforce theflooddamage prevention ordinance. _
Policy 5: Cape Carteret will avoid zoning areas susceptible to storm surge
for higher density residential uses and intensive nonresidential uses. The
Town does not have any high density residential areas designated on the
Future Land Use Map and intensive non-residential classifications are
located along Hwy 24, away from high storm surge areas. It should be
noted that in case of a class 4 or 5 hurricane, the majority of the Town will
be inundated.
4.2.5 Water Quality
__.._._._..._.__._.._._._..._._...-- ............. ---....._..... ..... ._..._..............__......_.._...._...._._..__........_....._._....__....__.....-........_._._.........._.-_._._.._........_.__.........__._._..........._.............._...__._.
Policy 1: Cape Carteret will ensure that developments locating adjacent to
coastal waters make every effort to mitigate any adverse effects on riverine
and estuarine water quality and on primary nursery and fish habitat areas.
The town will maintain its current low density zoning classifications and will
ensure that subsurface sewage disposal systems are permitted only in
_.. _. _...-......._.._._. _...__.....___.....conformance with county department regulations._...........__._.___.........._.__....._._...._._...._._.....
...... .........
Policy 2: Cape Carteret will promote the use of best available management
Cape Carteret CAMA land Use Plan
Section lV Plan jor the Future
Afeq 18, 2007
Page 78 of 171

I
1
,7
1
practices to minimize the degradation of water quality resulting from
stormwater runoff; examples of these practices include using pervious or
semi -pervious materials for driveways and walks, retaining natural
vegetation along marsh and waterfront areas, and allowing stormwater to
._p..ercolate into the ground rather than discharging it directly to coastal waters.
Policy 3: The town supports the use of water conservation practices and
groundwater protection measures in order to prevent lowering the water
table, to limit the quantity of wastewater generated, and to protect the quality
of water.
—.._ ....... — ----- -_
Policy 4: The town will coordinate its approval of land development projects
with (i) the permitting requirements and stormwater regulations of the North
Carolina Division of Water Quality, Water Quality Section, and (ii) the soil
erosion and sedimentation control regulations of the Land Quality Section of
the North Carolina Division of Land Resources.
Policy 5: The town promotes the coordination with adjoining local
government jurisdictions of comprehensive stormwater management
and policies „to enhance water.gq lity-......._____...__._____...__._.___—_____.___.__.
Policy 6: The town will cooperate with the Water Quality Section, NC
Division of Environmental Management to preserve and improve riverine
_and estuarine water qualm -
Policy 7: The town will coordinate land development activities involving
hazardous chemical or petroleum storage and disposal with the appropriate
county and state regulatory agencies. The town also supports management
practices which address the incidental use of hazardous materials such as
insecticides, herbicides, fertilizers, etc.
_—
Policy 8: Cape Carteret encourages the design and construction of
subdivisions that limit surface runoff through natural topographic features,
drywells, landscaping, and natural vegetation_
Policy 9: Cape Carteret will consider amending theirdevelopmental
regulations to include stormwater design standards in order to limit nonpoint
sources discharges.
of Concern---._...._.----._._....___.__.-.--.-.—_—.------.-.--.----__......_._____.:......---____._._.___._.._.
_4.2.6 _Areas -Environmental
Coastal Wetlands Policy 1: The town will restrict adverse land uses in coastal wetlands
through local zoning laws. The highest priority will be given to the
conservation of coastal wetlands identified as of the highest functional
significance on maps supplied by the Division of Coastal Management.
Policy 2: Only certain uses which require water access and cannot function
elsewhere will be permitted in coastal wetlands. Such uses include utility
easements, navigation channels, dredging projects, marinas, piers, boat
ramps, noncommercial docks, navigational aids, groins, culverts, and
bridges. Each proposed use shall be evaluated for compliance with the
CAMA 7H Use Standards and town ordinances.
Policy 3: Coastal wetlands should only be filled consistent with the CAMA
7H Use Standards.
4.2.6 Areas of Environmental Concern
Estuarine Waters Policy 4: The town's policy is to restrict development in estuarine waters
and Public Trust and public trust waters to those uses which will not cause significant
Areas degradation of the natural function nor condition of the estuarine waters and
public trust areas. Any development within estuarine or public trust waters
must be consistent with CAMA 7H Use Standards and local development.,
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Section IV Plan for the Future
Miley I8, 2007
Page 79 of 171

1
1
._.._.......9
re ulations
................. ....._.........._..._.._..... ........ _._....._.._... _......_... ....... _..... ... _..... ......... __.......__....__.............. -__...................... ........... _........... ....... _..._._......... .._.
Policy 5: Appropriate land uses within the estuarine shoreline include any
permissible land uses authorized by the Cape Carteret Zoning Ordinance
and Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance that conform to CAMA
__..._...__..._.._.-_._. ___._._...._......_development
standards:__.___._..._....__......__._..__._..___..._.._.__...__..__._..._..._._..._._...._._.___....-........._.__.............._._._.:._.._...
Policy 6: Marina construction may be permitted in estuarine waters
including those which are classified as primary nursery areas in accordance
with the CAMA 7H Use Standards and local land development regulations.
The Town will not permit commercial uses in connection with marinas and
docking facilities. This policy exceeds CAMA 7H use standards since
._CAMA regulations will allow commercial activities with marina development.
Policy 7: Cape Carteret recognizes the significance of the western Bogue
Sound ORW designation. The town's development policies for the estuarine
shoreline contiguous to waters classified as ORW shall be consistent with
the CAMA 7H Use Standards.
Policy 8: The town will permit the development of noncommercial docking
facilities to serve individual residential lots in accordance with CAMA 7H Use
and town ordinances.
_Standards
Policy 9: The Town of Cape Carteret does not permit dry stack boat
facilities within its planning jurisdiction. This policy is more restrictive than
CAMA minimum use standards since the CAMA regulations will allow
drystack storage facilities with marina development.
Policy 10: Public mooring fields and mooring pilings are not permitted in
Cape Carteret's planning jurisdiction. This policy exceeds CAMA 7H use
standards.
Policy 11: It is the town's policy that sound and estuarine system islands
not be considered for intensive urban development. The town encourages
the public or private land trust purchase, ownership, and conservation of
sound and estuarine system islands. Any permissible use or development
shall be in accordance with applicable CAMA standards and local land
_....._...---._....._._.__..___ .___-
development regulations.
.-.--_.._.__._.._. ___ ____.._._._.._...—. ......
4.2.6 Areas of Environmental
Concern
Estuarine Waters
Policy 12: Floating structures will not be permitted within the Cape Carteret
and Public Trust
planning jurisdiction. This policy is more restrictive than CAMA minimum
Areas
use standards for floating homes since the CAMA regulations will allow
_floating homes within marinas.
Policy 13: The town prohibits any filling of freshwater wetlands except as
_
permitted by the US Army Corps of Engineers.
General
Policy 14: Replacement of^existing structures within AECs shall be
permitted_in accordance with CAMA requirements.
Policy 15: In regard to freshwater wetlands, the town will coordinate the
review of land development plans with the US Army Corps of Engineers
when site plans indicate development activities in areas identified as
wetlands.
_
Policy 16: Cape Carteret will permit bulkhead installation provided that all
___._._........_._...._ _._..___.._-_..._.__... -
of the use standards of 15 NCAC 7H.0208 b 7 are adhered to.
._ . _ .__..__._.._._...----------._.._.___...._... _____._-__._
4.2.7 Areas of Local
Concern
Policy 1: The town encourages the redevelopment of older, established
residential neighborhoods at the same density and intensity of scale as that
currently existing in the neighborhoods. Low density classified areas will
Cape Carteret CAMA Lind Use Plan
Section IV Plan for the Future
May 18, 2007
Page 80 of 171

__........__.._._—._._.__..__...___--..--..-------.._.................._........__._.__..._._._....._..._.-.--.--.--_...._..___..__.___._...---------__......._...__..__._
....__.._._.___......_._ __ ..___.
require a minimum lot area of 20,000 square feet. Medium density classified
__
areas will require a_minimum lot area of 15,000are feet.
square
Policy 2: Cape Carteret supports the US Army Corps of Engineers. in its
efforts to maintain the Intracoastal Waterway_____
Policy 3: Cape Carteret supports efforts to promote the area for tourism
development which is consistent with the town's land use policies. The town
will promote tourist support businesses and services in its highway -oriented
commercial areas.
Policy 4: Cape Carteret will strive to improve and enhance the town's visual
_quality_and attractiveness__
Policy 5: The Town supports the development of a regional wastewater
.........__._..._ ...............
__collection._and treatment._system........... ......... ........... _....... _._...._._..... _...... _......_........ ........ _._................... __............. .... __.---.—_.......... .
Policy 6: In order to keep its land development regulatory tools current and
to ensure that such tools are effectively implementing the policies of this
updated Land Use Plan, the town will investigate opportunities for grant
assistance to update and revise its zoning ordinance and subdivision
regulations.
Policy 7: Cape Carteret supports the development of a sidewalk or
pedestrian trail system along the NC Highway 24 and Taylor Notion Road
corridors. Sidewalks and/or hike -bike trails shall be required in new
subdivisions and commercial developments and in the redevelopment of
existing subdivisions and commercial developments in accordance with the
Town's Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances. The Town also supports a
hike -bike trail connecting the West Carteret Library with the White Oak
_ _
Eleme_ntarr r School.
Policy 8: The town encourages the interconnection of streets between new
developments located within the triangle formed by NC 58, NC 24, and
Taylor Notion Road. New streets should interconnect Taylor Notion Road
with extensions of existing Cape Carteret streets. The.. town also
encourages new streets connecting the Quailwood Acres and Star Hill North
II Subdivisions with NC Highway 24. Cooperation and coordination with the
Town of Bogue.is encouraged to ensure improved street c_onnectivit .
Policy 9: The Town encourages all property owners and developers to limit
_ --
site clearingof natural vegetation and trees to the minimumpracticable.
Policy 10: The Town encourages the replacement of dead and diseased
trees with a species natural to the area or otherwise suitable for the coastal
environmental.
Policy 11: The Town shall discourage any development or activity that wiI
have a negative impact on historical, cultural and/or archeological resources.
4.3 Analysis of the Impact of Policies on Management Topics
The following table summarizes the general impact of the Cape Carteret land use and
development policies on the CRC land use plan management topics.
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
SectionIV Plan for the Future
May 18, 2007
Page 81 of 171

40. i ?�S `i� AiW
s'f..y*�F tfw� bsA z jti_xfnr {' y"rbga »f"12,ttX�YSF}.�'a ¢'mY-it ,.. OR!
! ! f�1 ♦ 9+.,
,.r`"8.`s
CRC Land Use Plan Mana 3ement Topics
Public
Land Use
Infrastructure
Natural
Water
Local
Policies
Water
Compatibility
Carrying
Hazard
Quality
Areas of
Access
Areas
Concern
Public Water Access
Positive
—Capacity
Land Use Compatibility_
Positive_
Positive
Positive
_
Infrastructure Carrying
_
Positive
— _ _
Positive
.Positive
Positive
Positive
Positive
— —
Natural Hazard Areas
Positive
Positive
Positive
Positive
Water Qualij —
Positive
Positive
_Positive
Areas of Environmental
Positive
Positive
Positive
Positive
Positive
Concern
Areas of Local Concern
I
I Positive
Positive
I
Positive
Note: Blank space in table indicates neutral impact. All local policies have been determined to have
either a positive or neutral impact on CRC management topics. No specific actions or programs are
required to mitigate negative impacts.
' A more detailed analysis of the impact of Cape Carteret's policies on the CRC land use plan
management topics is provided below and in Appendix 1.
4.3.1 Public Water Access
' Very little opportunities exist within the current or future Cape Carteret planning jurisdiction for
the development of additional public water accesses. There are no major undeveloped land
areas located adjacent to public waterways. The Town's ability to expand its planning
' jurisdiction is severely limited since it is bounded on three sides by the municipalities of Bogue,
Peletier, and Cedar Point. Consequently, expansion of the town's jurisdiction into undeveloped
waterfront areas where additional public water access opportunities may exist is not feasible.
' Seven public water access points have been developed at streets that terminate at the Bogue
Sound shoreline. Since the Bogue Sound shoreline is almost completely developed, no
additional public water accesses are anticipated. The existing public water accesses are
' deemed sufficient given the Town's current and projected population and its limited waterfront
areas.
The Town's policies encourage the provision of public water access and the continued
assessment of its water access needs and opportunities for improving public water access. The
Town's policies have a positive impact on the CRC public water access goals and objectives.
4.3.2 Land Use Compatibility
Cape Carteret is primarily a low density residential community. Because a public sewage
collection and disposal system is not available in Cape Carteret, the intensity and density of
land development is restricted. The Town's existing building intensities and densities are
consistent with infrastructure availability and land suitability.
The Town's policies provide for a balance of growth and the preservation of fragile
environments. Development with acceptable impacts on natural resources and which is in
harmony with the Town's existing character is encouraged. Town policies concerning Areas of
Environmental Concern support state and federal law regarding development with AECs.
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Section !V Plan for the Future
May 18. 2007
Page 82 of 171

Development is encouraged in those portions of the Town's planning jurisdiction that possess
the support infrastructure necessary to sustain that growth. Maintenance of and compatibility
with the low density character of the community is a major objective of the Town's policies. The
Town's policies have a positive impact on the CRC land use compatibility goals and objectives.
4.3.3 Infrastructure Carrying Capacity
Cape Carteret supports managing and directing development in balance with the availability of
municipal services. The most intensive land uses and highest residential densities are guided
to those portions of the Town's planning jurisdiction that possess the support infrastructure
necessary to sustain that level of development. The majority of the Town's future land
development will be infill development in areas that currently have most of the necessary
infrastructure in place.
The Town's policies ensure that public infrastructure is located and managed in harmony with
fragile environments and natural resource areas. Cape Carteret's policies have a positive
impact on the CRC infrastructure carrying capacity goals and objectives.
4.3.4 Natural Hazard Areas
Town policies encourage the conservation of natural resources and fragile environments that
provide protection from natural hazards. Intensive nonresidential development and high density
residential development is discouraged within areas susceptible to storm surge and flooding.
Flood damage prevention policies encourage compatible development and redevelopment
within flood hazard areas. The Town's policies have a positive impact on the CRC natural
hazard areas goals and objectives.
4.3.5 Water Quality
The Town's policies support the maintenance, protection, and enhancement of water quality.
Cape Carteret's policies support land development that has minimal adverse impacts on water
quality. Best management practices are encouraged to minimize stormwater impacts.
Coordination of comprehensive stormwater management practices and policies with adjoining
municipalities is encouraged. Town policies support the continued use of land in conservation -
designated areas for appropriate land uses that are compatible with their fragile nature. Cape
Carteret's policies have a positive impact on the CRC water quality goals and objectives.
' 4.3.6 Local Areas of Concern
Cape Carteret's policies regarding local areas of concern support and have a positive impact on
the CRC land use compatibility and infrastructure carrying capacity goals and objectives. The
' Town's policies encourage compatible infill development, street connectivity, and the provision
of pedestrian facilities. Policies also encourage improvement and enhancement of the Town's
visual quality and attractiveness.
4.4 Statement of Local Support Regarding Areas of Environmental Concern
The Town of Cape Carteret supports state and federal law regarding land use and development
' in Areas of Environmental Concern (AECs). Specific policy statements have been developed
that support the general use standards of the North Carolina Administrative Code (15 NCAC
71-1) for development within the estuarine system (see Section 4.1). Policy statements have
' been developed which exceed the requirements of CAMA regarding land use and development
within AECs include the following items:
' Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Page 83 of 171
Section IV Plan for the Future
' May 18, 2007

• Marina construction. The Town will not permit commercial uses in connection with
marinas and docking facilities. This policy exceeds CAMA 7H use standards since CAMA
regulations will allow commercial activities with marina development.
• Dry Stack Facilities. The Town of Cape Carteret does not permit dry stack boat facilities
within its planning jurisdiction. This policy is more restrictive than CAMA minimum use
standards since the CAMA regulations will allow dry stack storage facilities with marina
development.
• Public Mooring Fields. Public mooring fields and mooring pilings are not permitted in
Cape Carteret's planning jurisdiction. This policy exceeds CAMA 7H use standards since
CAMA regulation will allow public mooring fields.
• Floating Structures. Floating structures are not permitted within the Cape Carteret
planning jurisdiction. Floating structures are defined as any structure, not a boat,
supported by a means of flotation, designed to be used without a permanent foundation,
which is used or intended for human habitation or commerce. A structure will be
considered a floating structure when it is inhabited or used for commercial purposes for
more than thirty days in any one location. A boat may be deemed a floating structure
when its means of propulsion has been removed or rendered inoperative and it contains at
least 200 square feet of living space area. A boat is defined as a vessel or watercraft of
any type or size specifically designed to be self-propelled, whether by engine, sail, oar, or
paddle or other means, which is used to travel from place to place by water. This policy is
more restrictive than CAMA minimum use standards for floating homes since the CAMA
regulations will allow floating homes within marinas.
4.5 Future Land Use Map
The Future Land Use Map for the Cape Carteret planning jurisdiction encompasses the Cape
Carteret corporate limits and the Town's extraterritorial planning and zoning jurisdiction. The
Town's Future Land Use Map classifications include the following categories and subcategories:
• Residential
o Low Density Single-family Residential
o Medium Density Single-family Residential
o Medium Density Multi -family Residential
• Commercial
• Public, Institutional, and Recreational
• Conservation/Open Space
Generally, growth and land development is anticipated to occur in all future land use categories
' except for the Conservation/Open Space classification. The type and intensity of projected
development varies within each future land use map classification. Future Land Use projections
are delineated in Figure 7.
' Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Section IV Plan for the Future
May 18, 2007
Page 84 of 171

Figure 7: Future Land Use
d �
i F°a�reF a eou^aane. F--Vaa
Peletier .f;� ro _.,� • /�`�'� ... P,w°.ew.°.e.�r�°sn.,.i.• Wdc���urn°ia ,°°eo��
3' 3P� � � \ r.°wma seat cd.reemr —_ _—__I Lw owoiry sF n.:^.nai
Q .S �� p°Can°:°t UVLxMs M°Eium DmeiY MF Pesa°mai
N° THE p v,°�^wHFT, ® Da m• W
,' Ak WO COMPAN
a
0 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
�\ Miles
- WHITEFKI "FoRKRo
c .....` •\• �.'••1\ Star Hdl PAnth 11
Py- lhM1fITE °AK a{ Vµ \�
41
a- Star Hill �sP a nrb T��w- ,,\ •..`o
P
hY R^
DR ,c0 v�•NE LAKE
MIH:ENI? �J'�' 2r `PP
� _s G}uadvnod Acres
C ,UxDR' Ro s RD . �' s, _ eh
�
Cedar `•� : P.P cis '-s :`
Point
6EMINIDR RoehCR
��• F � � • c _ i3 26
S � f
f•�� a .1 " F Bogue
L
i" z w d
i � • � .� (h1A!L auN
� z °
e s - o• a a _ Y;
.r:�...
F a _ � �► � Ca in! C 'c
�L F :�;'� LPN\ j • o' `�O _� 4h �
o Riys^D/e Perk
10 W
F C<uniry CIUD Po"'f
.p a �:LR ChI j; w
1 fV
PPNOP 1 ty
9 rfT.
�GR CRF.F.RC(
r
t�
y
?
1 DR
Cape Cii•tarE!
Kp
LNon
N \DMh
p
Y,—
r
�PSUyEOR
•� ,�
i `�
,BAR DR 9.
z
Hunting
m
vlem oR
x
Island
cN
E.TJ
Bogue Sound
"Alignment of proposed stre t extensions, hike & r
bike trails, and sidewalks are onceptual only. �•.P.�:mar•a •KP�-�-z- �m� ^ti^^m^ °

E
A. Residential Classifications
' The Residential classification is subdivided into three subcategories: Low Density
Single-family Residential, Medium Density Single-family Residential, and Medium
Density Multi -family Residential.
Low Density Single-family Residential Classification. The Low Density Single-
family Residential classification encompasses approximately 1.36 square miles (870
acres) or about 56.2 percent of the Town's planning jurisdiction. The majority of the
' residential properties within the Cape Carteret jurisdiction are classified as Low
Density Single-family Residential including the Star Hill, Quailwood Acres, Fox
Forest, Cape Carteret, Deer Creek, Country Club Point and Cape Point Subdivisions.
The Low Density Single-family Residential classification is intended to delineate
lands where the predominant land use is low density detached residences. The
' residential density within this classification is generally 1 to 2 dwelling units per acre.
Single-family detached residences on individual lots are the predominant types of
dwellings within these areas. The minimum lot size is 20,000 square feet unless a
' larger minimum lot area is required by the health department for land uses utilizing
septic systems. Land uses within Low Density Single-family Residential areas are
compatible with the R 20 and R 30 zoning district classifications. Public water
service is widely available throughout the Low Density Single-family Residential -
classified areas.
The Town's goals and policies support the continued use of land in Low Density
Single-family Residential -classified areas for low density dwellings and for public and
institutional land uses that support and that are compatible with this type of
residential development. Future development is projected to be no more than 2
dwelling units per acre.
Medium Density Single-family Residential Classification. The Medium Density
Single-family Residential classification encompasses approximately 0.14 square
' miles (92 acres) or about 5.9 percent of the planning jurisdiction. The properties
classified as Medium Density Single-family Residential are located in the southeast
portion of the Town's jurisdiction and includes the Bayshore Park Subdivision.
' The Medium Density Single-family Residential classification is intended to delineate
lands where the predominant land use is higher density single-family residential
developments and manufactured homes on individual lots. The residential density
' within this classification is generally 2-3 dwelling units per acre. The minimum lot
size is 15,000 square feet unless a larger minimum lot area is required by the health
department for land uses utilizing septic systems. Land uses within Medium Density
' Single-family Residential areas are compatible with the R-10 zoning district
classification. Public water service is widely available throughout this classification.
The Town's goals and policies support the use of land in Medium Density Single-
family Residential -classified areas for single-family detached dwellings,
manufactured homes, and for public and institutional land uses that support and that
are compatible with this type of residential development.
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Page 86 of 171
SectionIV Plan for the Future
May 18, 2007
1

11
11
Medium Density Multi -family Residential Classification. The Medium Density
Multi -family Residential classification encompasses approximately 0.03 square miles
(17 acres) or about 1.1 percent of the planning jurisdiction. Two small areas are
classified as Medium Density Multi -family Residential. One is located north of NC
Highway 24 between the Fox Forest Subdivision and NC 24. The second area is
located in the southeastern portion of the jurisdiction adjacent to Bogue Sound at the
end of Live Oak Drive.
The Medium Density Multi -family Residential classification is intended to delineate
lands where the predominant land use is higher density residential developments,
including apartments. The maximum residential density within this classification is
approximately 5 dwelling units per acre. The minimum development area is 5 acres
and a minimum of 7,920 square feet per dwelling unit is required unless a larger
minimum lot area is required by the health department for land uses utilizing septic
systems. Land uses within Medium Density Multi -family Residential areas are
compatible with the R-10M zoning district classification. Public water service is
widely available throughout this classification.
The Town's goals and policies support the use of land in Medium Density Multi-
family Residential -classified areas for single-family detached and multifamily
developments and for public and institutional land uses that support and that are
compatible with this type of residential development.
' B. Commercial Classification
The Commercial classification encompasses approximately 0.28 square miles (181
acres) or about 11.7 percent of the total planning jurisdiction. The properties
' classified as Commercial are located primarily along major road corridors including
NC Highway 24 and NC Highway 58.
r
11
The Commercial classification is intended to delineate lands that can accommodate
a wide range of retail, wholesale, office, business services, and personal services.
Areas classified as Commercial may also include public and institutional land uses.
The minimum lot size is 20,000 square feet unless a larger minimum lot area is
required by the health department for land uses utilizing septic systems. The
maximum ground coverage for retail sales and shopping center uses is 40 percent of
the gross land area. Land uses within Commercial areas are compatible with the B-
10 and B-20 zoning district classifications. Public water service is needed to support
the land uses characteristic of this classification. Streets with the capacity to
accommodate higher traffic volumes are necessary to support commercial
development.
Commercial -classified areas are anticipated to accommodate the most intensive land
uses found in the Town's planning jurisdiction. The Town's goals and policies
support the use of land in Commercial -classified areas for a wide variety of retail and
commercial services uses where adequate public utilities and streets are available or
can be upgraded to support the intensity of development encouraged in this
classification. Public and institutional land uses that support and that are compatible
with this type of commercial development are also encouraged.
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Section IV Plan for the Future
:Nay 18, 2007
Page 87 of 171

C. Public, Institutional, and Recreational Classification
The Public, Institutional, and Recreational classification encompasses approximately
0.41 square miles (265 acres) or about 17.1 percent of the planning jurisdictional
area. The properties classified as Public and Institutional are scattered throughout
' the Town's planning jurisdiction. The largest individual tract within the: Public,
Institutional, and Recreational classification includes the Star Hill Golf and Country
Club property located in the northern portion of Cape Carteret.
1
1
The Public, Institutional, and Recreational classification is intended to delineate large
land areas that are used for intensive governmental, recreational, and educational
purposes. Land uses within this classification include primarily government buildings
and service facilities, public recreational facilities, public educational facilities, and
large private institutional uses. Minimum lot sizes typically range from 20,000 to
40,000 square feet for low intensity uses to over 5 acres for more intensive land
uses. Generally, public water service is needed to support the land uses
characteristic of this classification. Streets with the capacity to accommodate higher
traffic volumes are necessary to support the intensity of development expected within
the Public, Institutional, and Recreational Classification.
D. Conservation/Open Space Classification
Conservation/Open Space areas include coastal wetlands, estuarine waters,
estuarine shoreline, public trust areas, and '404' wetlands. Due to the small size of
such areas, they are not individually identified on the Future Land Use Map.
Generally, the precise location of such areas must be determined by field
investigation. Conservation/Open Space areas that are delineated on the Future
Land Use Map include Hunting Island and marshes in Bogue Sound, the NC Coastal
Land Trust tract located on the northeast periphery of Cape Carteret, marshland
south of Pettiford Creek, and two small Croatan National Forest tracts located on the
east side of NC Highway 58. These Conservation/Open Space -designated areas
encompass approximately 122 acres or approximately 7.9 percent of the planning
jurisdictional area.
The Conservation/Open Space classification is intended to delineate areas where
traditional land uses are not desirable or expected to develop. Land development
may, however, include public building and facilities necessary to support any existing
land uses within the areas classified as Conservation/Open Space. Public utilities
are not needed to support the types and intensities of land uses in these areas.
Extensions of utilities into these areas are not expected or encouraged.
The Town's goals and policies support the continued use of land in
Conservation/Open Space -classified areas for appropriate uses that are compatible
with the fragile nature of the Conservation/Open Space areas. Traditional urban
growth and development in such areas is discouraged. Conservation/Open Space
areas are expected to retain their existing character over time.
E. In -fill, Preservation, and Redevelopment Areas
The Town of Cape Carteret has not designated any specific areas for
redevelopment. The areas classified as commercial along Hwy 24 may experience
occasional redevelopment. The Town supports the rejuvenation of commercial
business. However, the Town does not have any policies that address the issue.
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plat
SectionIV Plan for the Future
May 18, 2007
Page 88 of 171

Infill within existing residential neighborhoods shall be consistent with the established
' patter of development that gives the neighborhood its character. Due to the lack of
available sanitary sewer, increasing the densities of existing residential
neighborhoods is limited.
' The Town does not have any historic neighborhood or historic properties.
' 4.6 Cost Estimates for Planned Community Facility Improvements
No major capital improvements are anticipated during the planning period.
4.7 Consistency with Natural Systems and Land Suitability Analyses
The land use patterns depicted on the Future Land Use Map are consistent with the analysis of
natural systems and the analysis of land suitability. The Future Land Use Map depicts very
generalized patterns of projected land use. The intent of the map is to illustrate a typical pattern
of use for a general area and not the specific use of an individual parcel. The Future Land Use
Map is not intended for site -specific land planning or for regulatory purposes. There are areas
where development may not be of highest suitability. Development constraints can be mitigated
' with utilities such as water and sewer.
The northern portion of the Town's planning jurisdiction adjacent to Pettiford Creek and the
Bogue Sound and Deer Creek shorelines in the southern section of the planning jurisdiction
contain the greatest concentrations of natural constraints, primarily floodplains and wetlands.
Major undeveloped areas with significant natural constraints and low suitability ratings within the
Cape Carteret jurisdiction are designated as Conservation/Open Space on the Future Land Use
' Map. The majority of developed areas with significant natural constraints and low suitability
ratings are designated on the Future Land Use Map for low density residential use.
fl
Other Conservation/Open Space areas are scattered throughout Cape Carteret and include
coastal wetlands, estuarine waters, estuarine shoreline, public trust areas, and '404' wetlands.
Due to the small size of such areas, they are not specifically identified on the Future Land Use
Map. Other areas with significant natural constraints and low suitability ratings are designated
on the Future Land Use Map for low intensity land uses such as those anticipated to occur in
the Low Density Residential classification.
The table below illustrates the amount of land area within the Cape Carteret planning jurisdiction
by land suitability rating.
'
r�'.
-�,k .eg a +a, R t
r ., t !. ' r � } � � • . `�xtTL ''&�3. ''fib`
Suitability Rating
Total Acres
Percent
High --______-----
Medium
232.7
15.0%
Low
_
0.0
0.0%
_
_
197.2 ----
12.7%
Totals
1,547.7
100.0%
Cape Carteret LAMA Land Use Plan
SectionIV Plan for the Ftttttre
May 18, 2007
Source: The Wooten Company
Page 89 of 171

1
d
I
I
I
Some portions of the projected use classifications shown on the Future Land Use Map may
include land which is designated as having moderate or serious natural limitations or land which
is rated as having low suitability for development. Inclusion of such areas within a specific
projected future use classification does not denote a recommendation for future development..
Rather, it means that while such areas are located within a broader general use pattern, their
ultimate future use may be different from other properties because of their natural constraints
and regulatory limitations. Some of the designated fragile areas may always remain in their
current natural state or, if permitted by regulatory authority, may be altered and any negative
impacts overcome through approved mitigation measures. Some of the areas currently
designated as having low suitability for development may lose that rating over time as, for
example, public utilities are installed and roads are constructed. Consequently, the future use
of such areas, if the low suitability conditions are eliminated, will be in accordance with the
broader general use classification.
Land development activity within most environmentally fragile areas is subject to local, state,
and/or federal restrictions. Local land use regulations such as the Town's zoning ordinance,
subdivision ordinance, and flood damage prevention ordinance include specific standards for
land development activities. Site -specific soil analyses are required by the Carteret County
Environmental Health Department to evaluate the suitability of a particular parcel for septic
system suitability. Encouraging good site planning principles and best management practices
can assist with mitigating the impacts of land development on environmentally fragile areas.
Development within the designated Areas of Environmental Concern is limited by CAMA
regulations and development guidelines.. Generally, the development standards for coastal
wetlands, estuarine waters, and public trust areas permit only water -dependent uses such as
navigation channels, dredging projects, docks, piers, bulkheads, boat ramps, groins, and
bridges. Priority is, however, given to the conservation of these AECs. CAMA standards for
estuarine shoreline development generally require that (i) the development not cause significant
damage to estuarine resources; (ii) the development not interfere with public rights of access -to
or use of navigable waters or public resources; (iii) the development preserve and not weaken
natural barriers to erosion; (iv) impervious surfaces not exceed 30 percent of the lot area
located within the AEC boundary; (v) the development comply with state soil erosion,
sedimentation, and stormwater management regulations; and (vi) the development comply with
the CAMA Land Use Plans. Specific CAMA development standards for AECs can be found in
15 NCAC 7H.
The US Army Corps of Engineers is responsible for regulating non -coastal or '404' wetlands.
Authorization must be obtained from the Corps prior to disturbing such wetlands.
Opportunities exist for the conservation of fragile areas and natural resource areas through both
private and public means. Private land trusts and conservancies are tax-exempt organizations
that acquire and preserve natural areas, open spaces, and historical properties. Such
' organizations offer mechanisms such as conservation easements to protect natural resources
(natural habitats, places of scenic beauty, farms, forestlands, floodplains, watersheds, etc.)
while also providing compensation and possible tax incentives to private property owners. Tax
' incentive programs, such as the North Carolina Conservation Tax Credit Program, provide
opportunities for property owners donating land for conservation purposes to receive tax credits.
State and local governments may also accept land donations for conservation purposes.
Public land use regulations, such as conservation design subdivision requirements, can be
developed to assist with the conservation of environmentally sensitive areas and open space as
land is being subdivided into building parcels.
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
SectionIV Plan for the Future
,Nay 18, 2007
Page 90 of 171

1
1
u
1
1
1
The timing of the provision of infrastructure improvements, particularly water service and roads,
will also have a tremendous impact on the rate and location of growth and development.
Development will occur where infrastructure is available or can readily be made available to
sustain that development. Consequently, achieving the Future Land Use Map land use
projections will depend in large part upon if and when infrastructure is provided. The provision
of public infrastructure generally depends upon capability to provide the service and demand for
the service. Economic climate will be a major factor in the capability to make infrastructure
available as well as the level of service demand.
4.8 Comparison of Future Land Use Allocations and Projected Land Needs
The following table provides estimates of the acreages within each Future Land Use Map
classification. In addition to providing total acreage within each classification, the table also
shows estimated acreage with natural constraints (100-year floodplains and wetlands), and
probable developable acreage (total acreage less acreage with natural constraints. It should be
noted, however, that existing development currently exists in some areas identified as
floodplains and wetlands, particularly along the Bogue Sound shoreline. Also, some
developmental limitations created by natural constraints, such as location within a 100-year
floodplain, can be mitigated (for example, by elevating a structure). Consequently, 'acreage
with natural constraints' does not equate with 'undeveloped' or 'undevelopable' land.
Total
% of Total
Acreage w/
Probable
Developable
Classifications
Acres
Acres
Natural
Developable
Acres as a %
Constraints
Acres
of Total
Acres
Low Density Single-family Residential
570.39
204.9
666
_
— 76.5%
Medium Density Single-family
92.04
—56.2%
5.9%
33.3
59
Residential
Medium Density Multi -family
17.23
1.1%
6.6
11
-Y_-- 61 8%
Residential
Commercial
181.19
11.7%
22.5
159
87.6%
Public, Institutional, and Recreational
264.89
17.1%
10.8
254
95.9%
_..---... -.................. .......... -_.---------------.
Conservation/Open Space
-- ----
121.80
---------
7.9%
-------..._.._—_
104.0
—_--.........
18
--------..
14.6%
Totals
1,547.54
100.0%
1,166
— 75.3%
Source: The Wooten Cotnpany
As shown in the above table, approximately 25 percent of the total Cape Carteret jurisdiction
contains natural constraints that present limitations for future land development. If this acreage
is deducted from the total land acreage within each jurisdiction, the resultant probable
developable acreage is land that is, generally, most readily available to accommodate future
land development. As previously stated however, some developmental limitations created by
natural constraints can be mitigated. Consequently, a larger amount of acreage is available for
development purposes than is portrayed here as 'probable developable acres'.
The following table provides a comparison of the amount of projected future residential land
area with projected residential land needs:
Cape Carteret CAMA land Use Plan
Section IV Plan for the Future
Mav 18, 2007
Page 91 of 171

11
1
1
Existing
Acres Needed
Developed
Gross
Through 2025
Gross Acres Allocated on the
Acres on the
Undeveloped
Based on
Future Land Use Map
Land Use
Acres*
projected pop.
Map
growth
Residential" 979 ac
491
488
486
Commercial 181 ac
90
91
92
Pubic and Institutional"** 265 ac
272
-7
34
Source: The Wooten Company
* Gross Future Land Use Map Residential Acres less Existing Residential Acres.
** Includes all future land use map residential classifications delineated in Section 4.5, A.
** The future land use map depicts the conversion of existing institutional use acreage to commercial
acreage based upon its existing location in commercially -zoned areas. Some existing institutional uses
are classified in the future land use map as residential due to its location in residentially -zoned areas and
its compatibility with residential uses.
Based upon this comparison, the projected 2025 residential land needs can be met with the
estimated amount of available developable acreage in the current Cape Carteret jurisdiction. It
should be noted, however, that this comparison assumes that all existing residential acreage
does not contain natural constraints which, in reality, is not the case since some existing
residential development is located within floodplains. Also, some vacant land within the Town's
jurisdiction containing developmental constraints can be utilized by employing mitigative
measures.
The future land use map totals 1,547 acres. Only 1,425 acres are actually developable due to
'
dedicated open space/conservation classification acreage (121 acres). Of the 1,425 acres, 854
acres are already developed (491 residential, 91 commercial, 272 public/institutional). The
'
remaining undeveloped land totals approximately 572 acres. The projected permanent and
seasonal residential land needs for the Cape Carteret planning jurisdiction through 2025 totals
486 acres (see Table 27). As shown in Table 38, the projected residential land needs can be
met with the estimated amount of available developable acreage in the current Cape Carteret
planning jurisdiction. The projected total 2025 commercial land needs of 92 acres can also be
met with the amount of current available developable commercial land. It is anticipated that
future public and institutional land needs through 2025 (34 acres), which are expected to be low
intensity, small -acreage uses, can be accommodated in residentially and commercially -
'
designated areas.
' 4.9 Use of the Future Land Use Plan to Guide Development
In preparing the Future Land Use Map, consideration was given to land development objectives
and policies, land suitability, and the ability to provide the infrastructure to support growth and
1 development. The Future Land Use Map depicts the general location of projected patterns of
future land uses. The Future Land Use Map is a plan or guideline for the future.
The ultimate use and development of a particular parcel of land will be determined by property
owners' desires, overall market conditions, implementation tools employed by the Town to
regulate land use and development (such as the Town's zoning ordinance, subdivision
regulations, flood hazard regulations), the absence of specific natural constraints to
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Page 92 of 171
Section IV Plan for the Future
May 18. 2001

1
1
k
,J
development, and the availability of the necessary infrastructure (water, sewer, roads, etc.) to
support development. Consequently, even though the Future Land Use Map may indicate a
specific projected use in a particular location, many factors come into play to determine if the
projected use is appropriate and the land can be developed as projected. Also, formal
amendments to the zoning. ordinance and subdivision ordinance will be required to specifically
authorize the type of mixed use development envisioned in this Land Use Plan.
In the way of an example, the Cape Carteret Future Land Use Map indicates Commercial use in
the vicinity of the NC 24 and NC 58 intersection. Thus, it has been determined through the
Land Use Plan that the commercial use of property in this area is desirable and is expected to
occur. However, the actual commercial use of a specific piece of property in this generally -
identified area will depend upon the following:
• Is the property owner willing to use or sell the parcel for the proposed
commercial use? Change of use or change of development intensity is,
in most cases, initiated by the desires of the property owner.
• Is the parcel properly zoned for commercial use? If not, a rezoning must
be requested and approved by the Town Board of Commissioners. In
reviewing the rezoning request, the Board of Commissioners will
determine if commercial use is appropriate and desirable for the parcel.
• If the parcel is already zoned for commercial use, a zoning and building
permit must be requested and approved by the Town. The proposed use
and layout of the proposed building will be reviewed to determine
conformance with the Town's land use and development regulations and
standards. Water supply and sewage disposal systems must be
approved.
• In reviewing rezoning requests and zoning and building permit
applications, site characteristics of the parcel will be a major
consideration by the review and approval authority. Are site
characteristics such that the parcel can be physically used for the
proposed commercial use? Do poor soils, poor drainage, wetlands, flood
hazards, etc. limit the use of all or a portion of the parcel for commercial
development? Can adverse site conditions be overcome or mitigated in
accordance with Town, County, State, and Federal regulations? The
allowable building intensity and density of development may need to be
reduced to ensure compatibility with existing site conditions.
• Are adequate utilities in place to support the proposed commercial use?
If adequate utilities are not in place, improvements will have to be
planned, approved, and extended to the parcel in accordance with Town,
County, State, and utility provider standards and regulations. Are
improvements and extensions economically feasible?
• Are adequate roads in place to provide access to the parcel? If new
roads or improvements to existing roads are needed, they will have to be
planned, approved, and constructed in accordance with Town and
NCDOT standards.
Achieving the projected patterns of land use indicated by the Future Land Use Map will be
' greatly impacted by timing. Much of the projected land use indicated on the Future Land Use
Map will not come to fruition without market demand. Therefore, market and economic
conditions must be conducive for growth and development. While the Land Use Plan attempts
Cape Carteret LAMA land Use Plan Page 93 of 171
Section lV Plan for the Future
Ahq 18, 2007

to provide a general expectation of growth based upon projected population change, it simply
cannot predict the economic future. The demand for houses, businesses, industries, etc. will
fluctuate widely with economic conditions.
' The timing of the provision of infrastructure improvements, particularly water and sewer services
and roads, will also have a tremendous impact on growth and development. Development will
occur where infrastructure is available or can be made available to sustain that development.
I
1
Consequently, achieving the Future Land Use Map land use projections will depend in large part
upon if and when infrastructure is provided. The provision of public infrastructure depends upon
capability to provide the service and demand for the service. Economic climate will be a major
factor in both the capability to make infrastructure available and the level of service demand.
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
SectionIV Plan for the Future
May 18, 2007
Page 94 of 171

1
SECTION. V TOOLS FOR MANAGING DEVELOPMENT
This section of the Plan is organized in accordance with the requirements of Subchapter 7B
.0702(e). Section V includes a description of the Town of Cape Carteret land management
tools and programs as well as the actions and strategies that the Town will use to implement the
Land Use Plan.
5.1 Guide for Land Use Decision -making
The Land Use Plan, as adopted by the elected officials of the Town of Cape Carteret and as
may be amended from time to time, will serve as the primary guide upon which to make land
use policy decisions. Every land use policy decision, such as a rezoning request or approval of
a conditional or special use permit, will be measured for consistency with the goals, policies,
and recommendations of the Plan. The elected officials, Planning Board, Board of Zoning
Adjustment, and Town staff should utilize the Land Use Plan as the basic policy guide in the
administration of the zoning ordinance, subdivision regulations, and other land development
regulatory tools. Persons involved in the land development business as well as the general
public can also utilize the Land Use Plan to guide private decisions regarding land use and land
development.
The policy statements and recommendations of the Land Use Plan can also be of assistance to
the elected officials in making long-range decisions regarding such matters as the provision of
municipal services, thoroughfare planning, stormwater planning and management,
implementation of economic development strategies, recreational facility planning, and
preparation of capital and operating budgets.
It should be noted, however, that the Land Use Plan is one of a variety of guides in making a
public policy decision. The Plan should be viewed as a tool to aid in decision making and not as
the final decision.
Additional information regarding utilizing the Land Use Plan to guide development is provided in
Section 4.9.
5.2 Existing Land Use and Development Management Program
Cape Carteret's existing land development management program includes the following land
regulatory ordinances and related plans:
• Zoning Ordinance
• Subdivision Ordinance
• Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance
• Sign Ordinance
• Waterways Ordinance (regulating marinas and boating)
• CAMA Land Use Plan Update, Certified in January 1998
The Town's land development management program is administered primarily by the Town
Clerk and a part time Zoning Officer. The Town's land development regulations are applicable
to all land areas located within the Cape Carteret planning and zoning jurisdiction.
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Section V Tools for Managing Development
May 18, 2007
Page 95 of 171

The Town Clerk serves as staff support for the Cape Carteret Planning Board and the Cape
Carteret Board of Adjustment. The Planning Board serves primarily in an advisory capacity,
making recommendations to the Town Board of Commissioners on zoning and subdivision
matters. The Board of Adjustment is responsible for hearing requests for special use permits as
well as requests for appeals and variances from the zoning ordinance. The Town Board of
Commissioners' responsibilities in the zoning process include adopting and amending the
zoning ordinance text and map and making approval decisions regarding applications for
planned residential developments. The Town Board of Commissioners is also responsible for
making approval decisions on all preliminary and final subdivisions.
Building inspections throughout the Cape Carteret jurisdiction are administered by the Carteret
1 County Building Inspections Department.
5.3 Additional Implementation Tools
5.3.1 Amendments or Adjustments to Existing Land Development Ordinances
Amendments to land development ordinances necessary to ensure consistency with the
Land Use Plan include the following:
• Amendment to the Subdivision Ordinance to better ensure connectivity
between developing tracts and existing development.
5.3.2 Capital Improvements
'
No major capital improvements are anticipated during the planning period.
5.4 Implementation Plan and Schedule
Cape Carteret has developed the following action plan and schedule to implement the Land Use
Plan.
5.4.1 Public Water Access Implementation Actions
1. Ongoing: Review, through the subdivision plat and site plan review and
approval process, proposed waterfront land development projects to
ensure consistency with the Town's public access goals and policies.
5.4.2 Land Use Compatibility Implementation Actions
'
1. FY06: Review the zoning ordinance, subdivision regulations, and other
Town land use and development regulations to ensure that residential
densities and building intensities are consistent with the Town's land
suitability goals and policies. Prepare revisions and updates as
determined appropriate. Coordinate the review with the Carteret County
Health Department.
2. FY08: Review, and revise as determined appropriate, the Town land use
and development regulations to include development principles and
'
techniques that promote land use compatibility as open space subdivision
design, clustering, innovative stormwater management design, etc. Seek
financial assistance from DCM for a planning and implementation grant
for a comprehensive update of the Town's zoning ordinance and
subdivision regulations.
Cape Carteret CAMA Lanni Use Plan Page 96 of 171
Section V Tools for Managing Development
May 18, 2007

1
I
5.4.3 Infrastructure Carrying Capacity Implementation Actions
1. Ongoing: Utilize the Land Use Plan, zoning ordinance, subdivision
regulations, and water extension policies to guide public infrastructure
and services to areas where growth and development are desired.
2. FY06: The Town will investigate the feasibility of utilizing drywells to
assist with alleviating surface drainage problems.
5.4.4 Natural Hazard Areas Implementation Actions
1. Ongoing: The Town will review its zoning ordinance, subdivision
regulations, and flood damage prevention ordinance to determine if more
specific locational and density regulations regarding development or
redevelopment activities within identified flood hazard areas and storm
surge areas are warranted. Issues to be addressed include restrictions
on land uses that utilize or store hazardous materials on -site,
establishment of riparian buffers, increasing the minimum freeboard
height above base flood elevation, etc.
2. Ongoing: The Town will avoid zoning areas susceptible to storm surge
for high density residential or intensive nonresidential use.
3. Ongoing: Based upon the availability of federal and state grant funds,
land acquisition programs will be utilized in the most hazardous areas to
minimize future damage and loss of life.
4. Ongoing: If any portion of the Town's public infrastructure is significantly
damaged by a major storm, consideration will be given to the feasibility of
relocating or modifying the affected facilities to prevent the reoccurrence
of storm damage.
5. Ongoing: Coordinate the review and approval of development plans for
major subdivisions, multifamily developments, and large public and
institutional uses located within identified natural hazard areas with the
County Emergency Management Agency. Continue the active
enforcement of the State Building Code provisions regarding wind -
resistance requirements and participation in the National Flood Insurance
Program.
5.4.5 Water Quality Implementation Actions
1. FY06: The Town will investigate the feasibility of developing and
implementing a stormwater management plan and coordinating such
management plan with adjoining municipalities and Carteret County.
2. FY06: The Town will review its zoning ordinance and subdivision
regulations to determine if revisions are needed to include additional
measures, such as the use of riparian buffers, the use of pervious
materials for driveways and sidewalks, and the restriction of impervious
surface coverage, to control stormwater discharges.
3. FY07: The Town will review the subdivision regulations to determine if
revisions are needed to encourage the design and construction of
subdivisions that limit surface runoff through natural topographic features,
drywells, landscaping, and natural vegetation.
4. Ongoing: The Town will continue to require, through its subdivision
regulations, adequate stormwater drainage systems for new
developments. The Town will continue to promote the use of best
management practices to minimize the degradation of water quality
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Section V Tools for Managing Development
May 18, 2007
Page 97 of 171

resulting from stormwater runoff. The Town will continue to coordinate
the approval of land development projects with the applicable State
agencies.
5.4.6 Areas of Environmental Concern Implementation Actions:
1. FY06: The Town will review its zoning ordinance and subdivision
regulations to determine if revisions are needed to include additional
protective measures for AECs.
5.4.7 Areas of Local Concern Implementation Actions:
1. FY06: The Town will investigate a possible amendment to the subdivision
regulations to ensure street connectivity between new developments and
the existing street network, particularly in the triangle formed by Taylor
Notion Road, NC 24, and NC 58.
2. FY07: The Town will investigate funding alternatives for the development
of a sidewalk or pedestrian trail along NC Highway 24 and Taylor Notion
Road.
3. FY07: The Town will investigate a possible amendment to eliminate the
clear cutting of lots, restrict the cutting of healthy indigenous species, and
encourage the replacement of trees proposed to be removed from a
construction site.
5.5113escription of Public Participation Activities to Assist in Monitoring Plan
Implementation
Cape Carteret has developed the following action plan to assist in monitoring
implementation of the Land Use Plan.
Annual Performance Review
The Town of Cape Carteret Planning Board will undertake an annual review of the
proposed implementation activities delineated in Section 5.4 to determine the following:
The status of the implementation actions proposed during the previous
fiscal year.
If the implementation action has been completed, evaluate the general
effectiveness of the implementation action taken and make
recommendations on any follow-up action deemed necessary to assist in
implementing the goals, objectives, and policies of the Land Use Plan.
If the implementation action has not been undertaken, assess the
reasons that the action has not been completed, evaluate the current
need to undertake the action, and make recommendations regarding a
revised schedule for carrying out the action.
In addition to reviewing specific implementation actions outlined in Section 5.4, the
Planning Board will also undertake an assessment of the general effectiveness of the
policies outlined in Section 4.2 and make recommendations on any follow-up action
deemed necessary to improve the effectiveness of the policies.
The Planning Board will forward its evaluation and recommendations to the Town of Cape
Carteret Board of Commissioners. The Board of Commissioners, following a review of the
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Section V Tools for Managing Development
May 18, 2007
Page 98 of 171

' Planning Board's recommendations, will make a determination of what action, if any,
should be taken to ensure implementation of the Land Use Plan. All Planning Board and
Board of Commissioner meetings are open to the public and citizen comments are
welcomed. If a formal amendment to the Land Use Plan is deemed necessary, such
amendment shall be processed in accordance with the requirements of NCAC 7B.0900.
I
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Section V Tools for Managing Development
May 18, 2007
Page 99 of 171

d
r
LI
I
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Appendices
Ma_y 18, 2007
APPENDICES
Page 100 of 171

n
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Appendix A
Index of Data Sources
• United States Bureau of Census, 2000 Census of Population and Housing
• North Carolina State Data Center, Office of State Budget and Management
• Division of Coastal Management, Subchapter 7B, Land Use Planning Guidelines
• Division of Coastal Management, Subchapter 7H, State Guidelines for AECs
• North Carolina Division of Coastal Management, Technical Manual for Coastal Land Use
Planning, Version 2.0, July 2002
• White Oak River Basinwide Water Quality Plan, North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality, September, 2001
• Soil Survey of Carteret County, North Carolina, US Department of Agriculture , Natural
Resources Conservation Service (formerly the Soil Conservation Service)
• United States Bureau of Economic Analysis
• North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries
• North Carolina Natural Heritage Program
• North Carolina Division of Archives and History
• Draft North Carolina Natural Hazards Mitigation (Section 322) Plan
• White Oak Basinwide Assessment Report, North Carolina Department of Environment
and Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality.
• A Guide to North Carolina's Tidal Saltwater Classifications, Cape Fear Council of
Governments, 1994
• NC Wetlands Restoration Program
• North Carolina 2004 Impaired Waters List, April 26, 2004, DWQ
• Ten -Year Solid Waste Management Plan 2003-2013, Coastal Regional Solid Waste
Management Authority, June 2003.
• Town of Cape Carteret Zoning Ordinance.
• Town of Cape Carteret Subdivision Ordinance.
• Town of Cape Carteret Waterways Ordinance.
• Town of Cape Carteret Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance.
• Town of Cape Carteret Sign Ordinance.
• 1998 Land Use Plan Update, Town of Cape Carteret (certified in January 1998), The
Wooten Company.
• Carteret County Transportation Improvement Program Priorities for the 2002-2008
Transportation Improvement Program, Carteret County Transportation Committee,
November 1999.
Cape Carteret CAMfA Land Use Plan
Appendices
,May 18, 2007
Page 101 of 171

Appendix B
Summary of Land Use Issues, Goals, and Objectives
Identified in the 1998 Cape Carteret Land Use Plan
'
Summary of 1998 Land Use and Development Issues
The major land use and development issues identified during the preparation of the 1998 land use
plan update that will affect Cape Carteret during the next ten year period include the following (not
presented here in any priority order):
'
Resource Protection Issues
• Stormwater runoff impacts.
• Water quality of surface and ground waters.
• Long-term solutions to wastewater treatment and disposal.
• Guiding growth to areas best suited to accommodate development.
• The impacts of floating homes.
• The demand for and impacts of marinas.
Resource Production and Management Issues
• The impact of land development activities on marine fisheries.
• The provision of public recreational space and water access.
Economic and Community Development Issues
•
Maintaining low residential densities.
•
Managing infill development in established residential areas.
•
Commercial land use encroachment in residential areas.
•
Managing strip commercial development adjacent to NC Highways 24 and 58.
•
Coordination of comprehensive stormwater management practices and policies with
adjoining local governments.
•
Regional solutions to wastewater disposal needs.
•
Provision of waterfront access.
•
•
Promoting marina development.
Signs and billboards.
•
Annexation by adjoining municipalities of Cape Carteret's ETJ.
•
Incorporation of new municipalities within the town's future growth areas.
Summary of Goals and Objectives from the 1998 Land Use Plan
1 Resource Protection
• The town's overall general goal concerning resource protection is to give the highest
priority to the protection and management of the area's natural resources, to safeguard
and perpetuate their biological, social, economic, and aesthetic values, and to ensure that
development occurring within natural resource areas is compatible with the characteristics
of the natural areas so as to minimize the likelihood of significant loss of private property
and public resources.
• It is the town's intent that its policies concerning resource protection policies be consistent
with CAMA 7H Use Standards except for the town's policies concerning drystack storage
Cape Carteret CAMA land Use Plan Page 102 of 171
Appendices
Mav 18, 2007

I
I
1
I
facilities (Section 3.280, Policy 7) and floating homes (Section 3.280, Policy 8) which are
more restrictive than the CAMA use standards.
Resource Production and Management
• The town's overall general policy concerning resource production and management is to
support the effective management of the area's natural resources so as to ensure the
continued environmental and economic well being of the Cape Carteret planning
jurisdiction.
• The town will continue to consider the impacts on local and regional natural resources in
all land development decisions and will seek to improve the cooperation and coordination
with other public and private agencies involved with natural resource production and
management. It is the town's intent that its policies concerning resource production and
management be consistent with CAMA 7H Use Standards.
Economic and Community Development
• Cape Carteret's overall general policy concerning economic and community development
is to consider growth of the community as a desirable objective.
• Further, the town will promote only those types of development that do not significantly
impact natural resources and which retain and maintain the town's present character.
Public Participation
• The town will ensure a continuous planning process by conducting periodic reviews of the
Land Use Plan's policies.
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Page 103 of 171
Appendices
blay 18,1007

I
1
Appendix C
Housing Characteristics
Total Housing Units
711
40,947
3,523,944
.____-_
Occupied Housing Units
.._.......... ---...----._................ _........ _..---.._._................ _ _..__.__....--
% Occupied
__..
545
--._...__._._...._.__....__...._._..._...
76.65%
_
25,204
_.---' - ' ' '-'-—._._..._._.
61.55%
_ -___
3,132,013
-_ _...-'---._..._._._...
88.88%
No. Owner -Occupied
481 T
19,316
2,172,355 -
No. Renter -Occupied
64
5,888
- 959,658
—% Owner -Occupied
88.26% -
76.64%
69.56%
% Renter Occupied
11.74%
23.36%
30.72%
% W/1.01 or More Persons Per Room
�0%
-1.75%
_ 3.01% -
Median Value, Owner -Occupied Units -
$141,000
$106,400
$95,800 -
Total Vacant Units
166
15,743
391,931
For Seasonal, Recreational Use --
_ -136
- 13,537
134,870
Homeowner Vacancy Rate`
- 2.63%
2.92%
1.2%
Rental Vacancy Rate
.3%
5.39% -
. 2.6%
Household Population
(Persons per Occupied Dwelling)
A��n`ai t�.;t'e.
E' � � .t� �
y
$d s..'�._ � $w�j'�'?'`�'j�
y ,gip
SA, A�sM f % 193'?�..
Cape Carteret
— 2.64
2.21
2.23 ._
Carteret Counter _ _
_ 2.66
2.43
2.31 _
North Carolina i
2.78
- 2.54
2.49-
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau; North Carolina State Data Center, Of of State Budget and
Management, 2003.
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Appendices
.Yfav 18, 2007
Page 104 of 171

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1-1
1
Appendix D
Soil Characteristics
This Appendix contains the following Carteret County soils data prepared by the Natural
Resources Conservation Service, US Department of Agriculture:
D1 Map Unit Legend. A description of soil name by soil map symbol.
D2 Sewage Disposal. Rating classes and limiting features for septic tank absorption
fields and sewage lagoons.
D3 Dwellings and Small Commercial Buildings. . Rating classes and limiting features
for dwellings without basements, dwellings with basements, and small commercial
buildings.
D4 Hydric Soils. Delineates soils that are classified as hydric soils.
The Carteret County soil survey was published in 1987. Soils maps have been digitized.
Soils maps are available at the offices of the Natural Resources Conservation Service
located at:
New Bern Field Office
302 Industrial Drive
New Bern, NC 28562-5434
Telephone: [phone] or 252-637-2642
Fax: [phone]
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Appendices
May 18. 2007
Page 105 of 171

1
1
i
1
1
1
1
Map
symbol
AaA
Ag
Ap
AuB
Be
Bf
BH
Bn
ByB
Cd
CH
CL
CnB
Co
CrB
CT
Cu
DA
De
Dm
DO
Du
Fr
GoA
HB
KuB
LF
Ln
Lu
Ly
MA
Mc
Mn
Mu
Nc
Nd
Ne
Nh
NoA
NoB
On
Pa
PO
Ra
Ro
Se
StA
Tm
To
Appendix D1
Map Unit Legend
Carteret County, North Carolina
Altavista loamy fine sand, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Augusta loamy fine sand
Arapahoe fine sandy loam
Autryville loamy fine sand, 0 to 6 percent slopes
Beaches, coastal
Beaches, storm tidal
Belhaven muck
Beaches-Newhan complex, 0 to 30 percent slopes
Baymeade fine sand, 1 to 6 percent slopes
Corolla-Duckston complex
Carteret sand, frequently flooded
Carteret sand, low, frequently flooded
Conetoe loamy fine sand, 0 to 5 percent slopes
Corolla fine sand
Craven loam, 1 to 4 percent slopes
Croatan muck
Corolla -Urban land complex
Dare muck
Deloss fine sandy loam
Deloss mucky loam, frequently flooded
Dorovan muck, frequently flooded
Duckston fine sand, frequently flooded
Fripp fine sand, 2 to 30 percent slopes
Goldsboro loamy fine sand, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Hobucken mucky fine sandy loam, frequently flooded
Kureb sand, 0 to 6 percent slopes
Longshoal muck, very frequently flooded
Leon sand
Leon -Urban land complex
Lynchburg fine sandy loam
Masontown mucky loam, frequently flooded
Mandarin -Urban land complex
Mandarin sand
Murville mucky sand
Newhan-Corolla complex, 0 to 30 percent slopes
Newhan fine sand, dredged, 2 to 30 percent slopes
Newhan-Urban land complex, 0 to 8 percent slopes
Newhan fine sand, 2 to 30 percent slopes
Norfolk loamy fine sand, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Norfolk loamy fine sand, 2 to 6 percent slopes
Onslow loamy sand
Pantego fine sandy loam
Ponzer muck
Rains fine sandy loam
Roanokeloam
Seabrook fine sand
State loamy fine sand, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Tomotley fine sandy loam
Torhunta mucky fine sandy loam
Map unit name
USDA Natural Resources
Tabular Data Version: 3
Conservation Service Tabular Data Version Date: 12/10/2004
Page 1 of 2
Ci

Map
symbol
W
Wa6
Ws
Wu6
I
1
1
1
11
Map Unit Legend
Carteret County, North Carolina
Water
Wando fine sand, 0 to 6 percent slopes
Wasda muck
Wando-Urban land complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes
USDA Natural Resources
Conservation Service
Map unit name
Tabular Data Version: 3
Tabular Data Version Date: 12/10/2004
Page 2 of 2

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Appendix D2
Sewage Disposal
Carteret County, North Carolina
[The information in this table indicates the dominant soil condition but does not eliminate the need for onsite
investigation. The numbers in the value columns range from 0.01 to 1.00. The larger the value, the greater the
potential limitation. The table shows only the top five limitations for any given soil. The soil may have additional
limitations]
Map symbol
and soil name
AaA:
Altavista
Ag:
Augusta
Ap:
Arapahoe, undrained
Arapahoe, drained
AuB:
Autryville
Be:
Beaches
Bf:
Beaches
Pct.
Septic tank absorption fields
Sewage lagoons
of
map
unit
Rating class and
Value
Rating class and
limiting features
limiting features
80
Very limited
Very limited
Depth to saturated 1
Seepage
zone
Depth to saturated
Seepage 1
zone
Restricted 0.5
permeability
85 Very limited
Depth to saturated
zone
Restricted
permeability
80 Very limited
Depth to saturated
zone
Seepage
Flooding
10 Not rated
85 Somewhat limited
Restricted
permeability
Depth to saturated
zone
95 Not rated
95 Not rated
Very limited
1 Depth to saturated
zone
0.5 Seepage
Very limited
1 Depth to saturated
zone
1 Seepage
0.4 Flooding
Not rated
Value
1
1
1
0.5
1
1
0.4
Very limited
0.5 Seepage 1
0.4
Very limited
Flooding 1
Seepage 1
Depth to saturated 1
zone
Very limited
Flooding 1
Seepage 1
Depth to saturated 1
zone
USDANatural Resources This report shows only the major soils in each map unit Others may exist.
Tabular Data Version: 3
Conservation Service Tabular Data Version Date: 12/10/2004 Page 1 of 10

1
1
1
1
t
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Sewage Disposal
Carteret County, North Carolina
Map symbol
and soil name
Pct.
of
map
unit
Septic tank absorption fields
Sewage lagoons
Rating class and
Value
Rating class and
Value
limiting features
limiting features
BH:
Belhaven, undrained
80
Very limited
Very limited
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
1
zone
zone
Seepage
1
Seepage
1
Restricted
1
Flooding
0.4
permeability
Flooding
0.4
Belhaven, drained
10
Not rated
Not rated
Bn:
Beaches
65
Not rated
Very limited
Flooding
1
Seepage
1
Depth to saturated
1
zone
Slope
0.08
Newhan
30
Very limited
Very limited
Filtering capacity
1
Seepage
1
Seepage
1
Slope
1
Slope
0.84
Flooding
0.4
Flooding
0.4
ByB:
Baymeade
Cd:
Corolla
Duckston
85 Very limited Very limited
Seepage 1 Seepage 1
Depth to saturated 0.84 Slope 0.32
zone Depth to saturated 0.17
zone
60 Very limited
Depth to saturated
zone
Filtering capacity
Seepage
Flooding
30 Very limited
Flooding
Depth to saturated
zone
Filtering capacity
Seepage
Very limited
1
Seepage
Depth to saturated
1
zone
1
Flooding
0.4
Slope
Very limited
1
Flooding
1
Seepage
Depth to saturated
1
zone
1
1
1
0.4
0.08
1
1
1
USDANatural Resources This report shows only the major soils in each map unit. Others may exist.
Tabular Data Version: 3
Conservation Service Tabular Data Version Date: 12/10/2004 Page 2 of 10

1
1
1
1
1
1
i
1
I
1
i
t
1
1
1
Map symbol
and soil name
CH:
Carteret, high
CL:
Carteret, low
CnB:
Conetoe
Co:
Corolla
CrB:
Craven
CT:
Croatan, undrained
Croatan, drained
Sewage Disposal
Carteret County, North Carolina
Pct.
Septic tank absorption fields
Sewage lagoons
of
map
unit
Rating class and
Value
Rating class and
Value
limiting features
limiting features
95
Very limited
Very limited
Flooding
1
Flooding
1
Depth to saturated
1
Seepage
1
zone
Depth to saturated
1
Seepage
1
zone
95
Very limited
Very limited
Flooding
1
Flooding
1
Depth to saturated
1
Seepage
1
zone
Depth to saturated
1
Seepage
1
zone
90
Very limited
Very limited
Seepage
1
Seepage
1
Slope
0.08
90 Very limited
Depth to saturated
zone
Filtering capacity
Seepage
Flooding
85 Very limited
Restricted
permeability
Depth to saturated
zone
Seepage
80 Very limited
Depth to saturated
zone
Restricted
permeability
10 Not rated
Very limited
1 Seepage 1
Depth to saturated 1
1 zone
1 Flooding 0.4
0.4
Very limited
1 Depth to saturated
zone
1 Seepage
Slope
1
Very limited
1 Depth to saturated
zone
0.68 Seepage
Not rated
1
1
0.08
USDANatural Resources This report shows only the major soils in each map unit. Others may exist
Tabular Data Version: 3
Conservation Service Tabular Data Version Date: 12/10/2004 Page 3 of 10

Map symbol
and soil name
Cu:
Corolla
Urban land
DA:
Dare, undrained
Dare, drained
De:
Deloss, undrained
Deloss, drained
Dm:
Deloss, undrained
Sewage Disposal
Carteret County, North Carolina
Pct.
Septic tank absorption fields
Sewage lagoons
of
map
unit
Rating class and
Value
Rating class and
Value
limiting features
limiting features
50
Very limited
Very limited
Depth to saturated 1
Seepage
1
zone
Depth to saturated
1
Filtering capacity 1
zone
Seepage 1
Flooding
0.4
Flooding 0.4
Slope
0.08
35
Not rated
Not rated
80 Very limited
Depth to saturated
zone
Subsidence
Seepage
Flooding
10 Not rated
80 Very limited
Depth to saturated
zone
Seepage
Ponding
Restricted
permeability
10 Not rated
80 Very limited
Flooding
Depth to saturated
zone
Seepage
Ponding
Restricted
permeability
Very limited
1 Depth to saturated
zone
1 Seepage
1 Content of organic
0.4 matter
Flooding
Not rated
Very limited
1 Seepage
Depth to saturated
1 zone
1 Ponding
0.5
Not rated
Very limited
1
Flooding
1
Seepage
Depth to saturated
1
zone
1
Ponding
0.5
1
1
1
0.4
1
1
1
1
USDANatural Resources This report shows only the major soils in each map unit. Others may exist
Tabular Data Version: 3
Conservation Service Tabular Data Version Date: 12/10/2004 Page 4 of 10

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Sewage Disposal
Carteret County, North Carolina
Map symbol
and soil name
Pct.
of
map
unit
Septic tank absorption fields
Sewage lagoons
Rating class and
Value
Rating class and
Value
limiting features
limiting features
DO:
Dorovan
90
Very limited
Very limited
Flooding
1
Flooding
1
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
1
zone
zone
Subsidence
1
Seepage
0.5
Restricted
0.5
permeability
Du:
Duckston
90
Very limited
Very limited
Flooding
1
Flooding
1
Depth to saturated
1
Seepage
1
zone
Depth to saturated
1 =
Filtering capacity
1
zone
Seepage
1
Fr:
Fripp
90
Very limited
Very limited
Seepage
1
Seepage
1
Slope
1
Slope
1
GOA:
Goldsboro
90
Very limited
Very limited
Depth to saturated
1
Seepage
1
zone
Depth to saturated
1
Restricted
0.5
zone
permeability
HB:
Hobucken
90
Very limited
Very limited
Flooding
1
Ponding
1
Ponding
1
Flooding
1
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
1
zone
zone
Seepage
1
Seepage
1
Content of organic
1
matter
KuB:
Kureb
80
Very limited
Very limited
Seepage
1
Seepage
1
Slope
0.08
USDANatural Resources This report shows only the major soils in each map unit. Others may exist.
Tabular Data Version: 3
Conservation Service Tabular Data Version Date: 12/10/2004 Page 5 of 10

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Map symbol
and soil name
LF:
Longshoal
Ln:
Leon
Lu:
Leon
Urban land
Ly:
Lynchburg
MA:
Masontown, undrained
Mc:
Mandarin
Urban land
Sewage Disposal
Carteret County, North Carolina
Pct.
Septic tank absorption fields
Sewage lagoons
of
map
unit
Rating class and
Value
Rating class and
Value
limiting features
limiting features
90
Very limited
Very limited
Flooding 1
Flooding 1
Depth to saturated 1
Content of organic 1
zone
matter
Subsidence 1
Depth to saturated 1
Seepage 1
zone
Seepage 1
80 Very limited
Depth to saturated
zone
Restricted
permeability
40 Very limited
Depth to saturated
zone
Restricted
permeability
35 Not rated
85 Very limited
Depth to saturated
zone
Restricted
permeability
80 Very limited
Flooding
Ponding
Depth to saturated
zone
Seepage
50 Very limited
Depth to saturated
zone
Restricted
permeability
35 Not rated
Very limited
1 Seepage 1
Depth to saturated 1
0.5 zone
Very limited
1 Seepage
Depth to saturated
0.5 zone
Slope
Not rated
Very limited
1 Depth to saturated
zone
0.5 Seepage
Very limited
1
Ponding
1
Flooding
1
Depth to saturated
zone
1
Seepage
Very limited
1
Seepage
Depth to saturated
0.5
zone
Not rated
1
1
0.08
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
USDANatural Resources This report shows only the major soils in each map unit. Others may exist
Tabular Data Version: 3
Conservation Service Tabular Data Version Date: 12/10/2004 Page 6 of 10

Sewage Disposal
Carteret County, North Carolina
Pct.
Septic tank absorption fields
Sewage lagoons
Map symbol
of
and soil name
map
unit
Rating class and
Value
Rating class and
Value
limiting features
limiting features
Mn:
Mandarin
80
Very limited
Very limited
Depth to saturated
1
Seepage
1
zone
Depth to saturated
1
Restricted
0.5
zone
permeability
Mu:
Murville, undrained
85
Very limited
Very limited
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
1
zone
zone
Seepage
1
Seepage
1
Ponding
1
Ponding
1
Nc:
Newhan
60
Very limited
Very limited
Filtering capacity
1
Seepage
1
Seepage
1
Slope
1
Slope
1
Flooding
0.4
Flooding
0.4
Corolla
30
Very limited
Very limited
Depth to saturated
1
Seepage
1
zone
Depth to saturated
1
Filtering capacity
1
zone
Seepage
1
Flooding
0.4
Flooding
0.4
Slope
0.08
Nd:
Newhan
75
Very limited
Very limited
Filtering capacity
1
Seepage
1
Seepage
1
Slope
1
Slope
1
Flooding
0.4
Flooding
0.4
Ne:
Newhan
60
Very limited
Very limited
Filtering capacity
1
Seepage
1
Seepage
1
Slope
0.68
Urban land
30
Not rated
Not rated
Nh:
Newhan
85
Very limited
Very limited
Filtering capacity
1
Seepage
1
Seepage
1
Slope
1
Slope
1
Flooding
0.4
Flooding
0.4
USDANatural Resources
This report shows only the major soils in each map unit Others may exist.
Tabular Data Version: 3
Conservation Service
Tabular Data Version
Date: 12/10/2004
Page
7 of 10

Sewage Disposal
Carteret County, North Carolina
Map symbol
and soil name
Pct.
of
map
unit
Septic tank absorption fields
Sewage lagoons
Rating class and
Value
Rating class and
Value
limiting features
limiting features
NoA:
Norfolk 85
Somewhat limited
Very limited
Depth to saturated 1
Seepage 1
zone
Depth to saturated 0.71
Restricted 0.5
zone
NoB:
Norfolk
On:
Onslow
Pa:
Pantego, undrained
Pantego, drained
PO:
Ponzer, undrained
Ponzer, drained
Ra:
permeability
85 Somewhat limited
Depth to saturated
zone
Restricted
permeability
90 Very limited
Depth to saturated
zone
Restricted
permeability
85 Very limited
Depth to saturated
zone
Restricted
permeability
Flooding
10 Not rated
80 Very limited
Restricted
permeability
Depth to saturated
zone
10 Not rated
Very limited
1 Seepage 1
Depth to saturated 0.71
0.5 zone
Slope 0.32
Very limited
1 Seepage
Depth to saturated
0.5 zone
Very limited
1 Depth to saturated
zone
0.5 Seepage
Flooding
0.4
Not rated
Very limited
1 Depth to saturated
zone
1 Content of organic
matter
Seepage
Not rated
1
1
1
1
0.4
1
1
0.32
Rains, undrained 80 Very limited Very limited
Depth to saturated 1 Depth to saturated 1
zone zone
Restricted 0.5 Seepage 0.5
permeability
Rains, drained 10 Not rated Not rated
USDANatural Resources This report shows only the major soils in each map unit Others may exist.
Tabular Data Version: 3
Conservation Service Tabular Data Version Date: 12/10/2004 Page 8 of 10

Map symbol
and soil name
Ro:
Roanoke, undrained
Roanoke, drained
Se:
Seabrook
StA:
State
Tm:
Tomotley, undrained
Tomotley, drained
To:
Torhunta, undrained
Torhunta, drained
W:
Water
Sewage Disposal
Carteret County, North Carolina
Pct.
Septic tank absorption fields
Sewage lagoons
of
map
unit
Rating class and
Value
Rating class and
Value
limiting features
limiting features
80
Very limited
Very limited
Restricted 1
Depth to saturated 1
permeability
zone
Depth to saturated 1
Seepage 1
zone
Seepage 1
10
Not rated
Not rated
90 Very limited
Depth to saturated
zone
Seepage
90 Very limited
Seepage
Depth to saturated
zone
Restricted
permeability
80 Very limited
Depth to saturated
zone
Seepage
Restricted
permeability
10 Not rated
80 Very limited
Depth to saturated
zone
Seepage
10 Not rated
100 Not rated
Very limited
1
Seepage 1
Depth to saturated 1
1
zone
Very limited
1
Seepage 1
1
Depth to saturated 0.71
zone
0.5
Very limited
1 Depth to saturated 1
zone
1 Seepage 1
0.68
Not rated
Very limited
1 Seepage 1
Depth to saturated 1
1 zone
Not rated
Not rated
USDANatural atural Resources This report shows only the major soils in each map unit Others may exist.
Tabular Data Version: 3
Conservation Service Tabular Data Version Date: 12/10/2004 Page 9 of 10

15
The following is a listing of certain factors which may impact upon the future growth of the
Town and the formulation of a future growth strategy. These are listed in no particular order.
• The Recent Growth Trend Northward on US Highway 70, The Town of Beaufort is
essentially situated in the end of a peninsula. As the older part of Town has become
built -out, growth has moved northward up the peninsula along US 70 and to a lesser
extent northward along NC 101. With no other direction to grow and with service
available along the highways, the demand for growth is expected to continue in the
same direction.
• The Projected Construction of a New Bridge to Replace the Existing Gallant Channel
Drawbridge and the Relocation of US 70. After the final design for this project is
completed, the potential effects of the project can better be projected. However,
based upon the alternate routes being considered, the following factors present
themselves:
• The essentially undeveloped area between the current US 70 and NC 101 will
be bisected by the right-of-way of the New US 70. There will be significant
limits of access to the new facility.
• Property acquisition and demolition for highway construction could be
necessary in the Turner Street - West Beaufort Road vicinity.
• The traveler -oriented commercial facilities on portions of the existing US
70, particularly the western end of the Cedar Street section, will likely need
to be adapted to other uses. The current street cross-section in that area will
appear to be obsolete.
• Access to the older part of Town (probably via Pollock Street) from the New
US 70 facility will be necessary.
• An intersection with the new facility in the area between NC 101 and the
existing US 70 will likely be necessary in order for traffic to have access to
existing US 70 in the area from the Campen Road intersection to the vicinity
of the Pinner Point Road intersection. .
• Attraction of Beaufort as a Retirement Community. As the State and National
populations continue to age the demand for retirement homes and elder care will
continue to increase. In Carteret County, for example, the 1990 Census reports that
23% of the population is 62 years of age or more as compared to the State's

Sewage Disposal
Carteret County, North Carolina
Map symbol
and soil name
Pct.
of
map
unit
Septic tank absorption fields
Sewage lagoons
Rating class and
Value
Rating class and
Value
limiting features
limiting features
WaB:
Wando
90
Very limited
Very limited
Seepage
1
Seepage
1
Depth to saturated
0.4
Slope
0.08
zone
Ws:
Wasda, undrained
80
Very limited
Very limited
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
1
zone
zone
Seepage
1
Content of organic
1
Restricted
0.5
matter
permeability
Seepage
0.5
Flooding
0.4
Flooding
0.4
Wasda, drained
10
Not rated
Not rated
WuB:
Wando
50
Very limited
Very limited
Seepage
1
Seepage
1
Depth to saturated
0.4
Slope
0.08
zone
Urban land
35
Not rated
Not rated
USDANatural Resources This report shows only the major soils in each map unit Others may exist
Tabular Data Version: 3
Conservation Service Tabular Data Version Date: 12/10/2004 Page 10 of 10

1 Appendix D3
' Dwellings and Small Commercial Buildings
Carteret County, North Carolina
1 [The information in this table indicates the dominant soil condition but does not eliminate the need for onsite investigation. The numbers in the value
columns range from 0.01 to 1.00. The larger the value, the greater the potential limitation. The table shows only the top five limitations for any given
soil. The soil may have additional limitations]
1
1
Map symbol
Pct.
of
Dwellings without basements
Dwellings with basements
Small commercial buildings
and soil name
map
unit
Rating class and
limiting features
Value
I
Rating class and
limiting features
Value
I
Rating class and
limiting features
Value
Aak
Altavista 80
Somewhat limited
Very limited
Somewhat limited
1
Depth to saturated
0.39
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
0.39
zone
zone
zone
Ag.
Augusta 65
Somewhat limited
Very limited
Somewhat limited
Depth to saturated
0.98
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
0.98
zone
zone
zone
1
Ap:
Arapahoe, undrained 80
Very limited
Very limited
Very limited
Flooding
1
Flooding
1
Flooding
1
'
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
1
zone
zone
zone
1
Arapahoe, drained 10
Not rated
Not rated
Not rated
AuB:
Autryville 85
Not limited
Somewhat limited
Not limited
Depth to saturated
0.15
1
zone
Be:
Beaches 95
Very limited
Very limited
Very limited
1
Flooding
1
Flooding
1
Flooding
1
Depth to saturated
0.95
zone
'
Bf:
Beaches 95
Very limited
Very limited
Very limited
Flooding
1
Flooding
1
Flooding
1
1
Depth to saturated
0.95
zone
BB
'
Belhaven, undrained 80
Very limited
Very limited
Very limited
Flooding
1
Flooding
1
Flooding
1
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
1
zone
zone
zone
'
Subsidence
1
Subsidence
1
Subsidence
1
Belhaven, drained 10
Not rated
Not rated
Not rated
1
USDA Natural Resources
This report shows only the major soils in each map unit Others may exist.
Conservation Service
Tabular Data
Version: 3
Tabular Data
Version
Date: 12/10/2004
Page
1 of 8
1

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Dwellings and Small Commercial Buildings
Carteret County, North Carolina
Map symbol
Pct.
of
Dwellings without basements
Dwellings with basements
Small commercial buildings
and soil name
map
unit
Rating class and
limiting features
Value
Rating class and
limiting features
Value
Rating class and
limiting features
Value
Bn:
Beaches 65
Very limited
Very limited
Very limited
Flooding
1
Flooding
1
Flooding
1
Depth to saturated
0.95
zone
Newhan 30
Very limited
Very limited
Very limited
Flooding
1
Flooding
1
Flooding
1
Slope
0.84
Slope
0.84
Slope
1
ByB:
Baymeade 85
Not limited
Somewhat limited
Not limited
Depth to saturated
0.35
zone
Cd:
Corolla 60
Very limited
Very limited
Very limited
Flooding
1
Flooding
1
Flooding
1
Depth to saturated
0.98
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
0.98
zone
zone
zone
Duckston 30
Very limited
Very limited
Very limited
Flooding
1
Flooding
1
Flooding
1
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
1
zone
zone
zone
CH:
Carteret, high 95
Very limited
Very limited
Very limited
Flooding
1
Flooding
1
Flooding
1
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
1
zone
zone
zone
CL:
Carteret, low 95
Very limited
Very limited
Very limited
Flooding
1
Flooding
1
Flooding
1
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
1
zone
zone
zone
CnB:
Conetoe 90
Not limited
Not limited
Not limited
Co:
Corolla 90
Very limited
Very limited
Very limited
Flooding
1
Flooding
1
Flooding
1
Depth to saturated
0.98
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
0.98
zone
zone
zone
USDANatural Resources
This report shows only
the major sods in each map unit Others may exist.
Conservation Service
Tabular Data Version: 3
Tabular Data
Version
Date: 12/10/2004
Page
2 of 8

Dwellings and Small Commercial Buildings
Carteret County, North Carolina
' Map symbol
and soil name
Pct.
of
map
Dwellings without basements
Dwellings with basements
Small commercial buildings
unit
Rating class and
limiting features
Value
Rating class and
limiting features
Value
Rating class and
limiting features
Value
'
C Craven
85
Somewhat limited
Very limited
Somewhat limited
Shrink -swell
0.5
Depth to saturated
1
Shrink -swell
0.5
zone
t
Shrink -swell
0.5
CT:
Croatan, undrained
80
Very limited
Very limited
Very limited
Subsidence
1
Subsidence
1
Subsidence
1
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
1
zone
zone
zone
Croatan, drained
10
Not rated
Not rated
Not rated
Cu:
Corolla
50
Very limited
Very limited
Very limited
'
Flooding
1
Flooding
1
Flooding
1
Depth to saturated
0.07
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
0.07
zone
zone
zone
'
Urban land
35
Not rated
Not rated
Not rated
DA:
Dare, undrained
80
Very limited
Very limited
Very limited
Subsidence
1
Subsidence
1
Subsidence
1
Flooding
1
Flooding
1
Flooding
1
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
1
'
zone
zone
zone
Content of organic
1
Content of organic
1
matter
matter
Dare, drained
10
Not rated
Not rated
Not rated
De:
Deloss, undrained
80
Very limited
Very limited
Very limited
'
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
1
zone
zone
zone
Ponding
1
Ponding
1
Ponding
1
'
Deloss, drained
10
Not rated
Not rated
Not rated
'
Dm:
Deloss, undrained
80
Very limited
Very limited
Very limited
Flooding
1
Flooding
1
Flooding
1
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
1
zone
zone
zone
Ponding
1
Ponding
1
Ponding
1
USDA Natural Resources
Conservation Service
This report shows only the major sods in each map unit Others may exist.
Tabular Data Version: 3
Tabular Data Version Date: 12/10/2004 Page 3 of 8

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Dwellings and Small Commercial Buildings
Carteret County, North Carolina
Map symbol
Pct.
of
Dwellings without basements
Dwellings with basements
Small commercial buildings
and soil name
map
unit
Rating class and
limiting features
Value
Rating class and
limiting features
Value
Rating class and
limiting features
Value
DO:
Dorovan 90
Very limited
Very limited
Very limited
Subsidence
1
Subsidence
1
Subsidence
1
Flooding
1
Flooding
1
Flooding
1
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
1
zone
zone
zone
Du:
Duckston 90
Very limited
Very limited
Very limited
Flooding
1
Flooding
1
Flooding
1
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
1
zone
zone
zone
Fr:
Fripp 90
Very limited
Very limited
Very limited
Slope
1
Slope
1
Slope
1
GOA:
Goldsboro 90
Not limited
Very limited
Not limited
Depth to saturated
1
zone
HB:
Hobucken 90
Very limited
Very limited
Very limited
Ponding
1
Ponding
1
Ponding
1
Flooding
1
Flooding
1
Flooding
1
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
1
zone
zone
zone
KuB:
Kureb 80
Not limited
Not limited
Not limited
LF:
Longshoal 90
Very limited
Very limited
Very limited
Subsidence
1
Subsidence
1
Subsidence
1
Flooding
1
Flooding
1
Flooding
1
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
1
zone
zone
zone
Content of organic
1
Content of organic
1
Content of organic
1
matter
matter
matter
Ln:
Leon 80
Very limited
Very limited
Very limited
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
1
zone
zone
zone
USDANatural Resources
This report
shows only the major soils in each map unit. Others may exist.
Conservation Service
Tabular Data Version: 3
Date:
Page
4 8
Tabular Data
Version
12/10/2004
of

1
A
1
1
1
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
i
1
Dwellings and Small Commercial Buildings
Carteret County, North Carolina
Map symbol
Pct.
of
Dwellings without basements
Dwellings with basements
Small commercial buildings
and soil name
map
unit
Rating class and
limiting features
Value
I
Rating class and
limiting features
Value
I
Rating class and
limiting features
Value
Lu:
Leon
40
Very limited
Very limited
Very limited
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
1
zone
zone
zone
Urban land
35
Not rated
Not rated
Not rated
Ly:
Lynchburg
85
Very limited
Very limited
Very limited
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
1
zone
zone
zone
MA:
Masontown, undrained
80
Very limited
Very limited
Very limited
Ponding
1
Ponding
1
Ponding
1
Flooding
1
Flooding
1
Flooding
1
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
1
zone
zone
zone
Mc:
Mandarin
50
Not limited
Very limited
Not limited
Depth to saturated
1
zone
Urban land
35
Not rated
Not rated
Not rated
Mn:
Mandarin
80
Not limited
Very limited
Not limited
Depth to saturated
1
zone
Mu:
Murville, undrained
85
Very limited
Very limited
Very limited
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
1
zone
zone
zone
Ponding
1
Ponding
1
Ponding
1
Nc:
Newhan
60
Very limited
Very limited
Very limited
Flooding
1
Flooding
1
Flooding
1
Slope
1
Slope
1
Slope
1
Corolla
30
Very limited
Very limited
Very limited
Flooding
1
Flooding
1
Flooding
1
Depth to saturated
0.07
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
0.07
zone
zone
zone
USDANatural Resources
This report
shows only the major sods ineach map unit Others may exist
Conservation Service
Tabular Data Version: 3
Tabular Data
Version
Date: 12/10/2004
Page
5 of 8

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Dwellings and Small Commercial Buildings
Carteret County, North Carolina
Map symbol
Pct.
of
Dwellings without basements
Dwellings with basements
Small commercial buildings
and soil name
map
unit
Rating class and
limiting features
Value
I
Rating class and
limiting features
Value
I
Rating class and
I limiting features
Value
Nd:
Newhan
Ne:
Newhan
Urban land
Nh:
Newhan
NoA:
Norfolk
NoB:
Norfolk
On:
Onslow
Pa:
Pantego, undrained
Pantego, drained
PO:
Ponzer, undrained
Ponzer, drained
75 Very limited
Flooding
Slope
60 Not limited
30 Not rated
Very limited
1 Flooding
1 Slope
Not limited
Not rated
Very limited
1 Flooding
1 Slope
Somewhat limited
Slope
Not rated
1
1
0.13
85
Very limited
Very limited
Very limited
Flooding
1
Flooding
1
Flooding
1
Slope
1
Slope
1
Slope
1
85
Not limited
Somewhat limited
Not limited
Depth to saturated
0.61
zone
85
Not limited
Somewhat limited
Not limited
Depth to saturated
0.61
zone
90
Somewhat limited
Very limited
Somewhat limited
Depth to saturated
0.07
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
0.07
zone
zone
zone
85
Very limited
Very limited
Very limited
Flooding
1
Flooding
1
Flooding
1
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
1
zone
zone
zone
10
Not rated
Not rated
Not rated
80
Very limited
Very limited
Very limited
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
1
zone
zone
zone
Subsidence
1
Subsidence
1
Subsidence
1
10
Not rated
Not rated
Not rated
USDANatural Resources This report shows only the major soils in each map unit Others may exist
Tabular Data Version: 3
Conservation Service Tabular Data Version Date: 12/16/2004 Page 6 of 8

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Dwellings and Small Commercial Buildings
Carteret County, North Carolina
Map symbol
Pct.
of
Dwellings without basements
Dwellings with basements
Small commercial buildings
and soil name
map
unit
Rating class and
limiting features
Value
Rating class and
limiting features
Value
Rating class and
limiting features Value
Ra:
Rains, undrained
80
Very limited
Very limited
Very limited
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
1
zone
zone
zone
Rains, drained
10
Not rated
Not rated
Not rated
Ro:
Roanoke, undrained
80
Very limited
Very limited
Very limited
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
1
zone
zone
zone
Shrink -swell
0.5
Shrink -swell
0.5
Shrink -swell
0.5
Roanoke, drained
10
Not rated
Not rated
Not rated
Se:
Seabrook
90
Somewhat limited
Very limited
Somewhat limited
Depth to saturated
0.39
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
0.39
zone
zone
zone
StA:
State
90
Not limited
Somewhat limited
Not limited
Depth to saturated
0.61
zone
Tm:
Tomotley, undrained
80
Very limited
Very limited
Very limited
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
1
zone
zone
zone
Tomotley, drained
10
Not rated
Not rated
Not rated
To:
Torhunta, undrained
80
Very limited
Very limited
Very limited
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
1
Depth to saturated
1
zone
zone
zone
Torhunta, drained
10
Not rated
Not rated
Not rated
W:
Water
100
Not rated
Not rated
Not rated
WaB:
Wando
90
Not limited
Somewhat limited
Not limited
Depth to saturated
0.15
zone
USDANatural Resources
This report shows only
the major soils in each map unit Others may exist.
Conservation Service
Tabular Data
Version: 3
Date:
Page 7 8
Tabular Data
Version
12/10/2004
of

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Dwellings and Small Commercial Buildings
Carteret County, North Carolina
Map symbol
Pct.
of
Dwellings without basements
Dwellings with basements
Small commercial buildings
and soil name
map
unit
Rating class and
limiting features
Value
Rating class and
limiting features
Value
Rating class and
limiting features
Value
Ws:
Wasda, undrained 80
Very limited
Very limited
Very limited
Flooding
1 Flooding
1 Flooding 1
Depth to saturated 1 Depth to saturated
1 Depth to saturated 1
zone
zone
zone
Wasda, drained 10
Not rated
Not rated
Not rated
WuB:
Wando 50
Not limited
Somewhat limited
Not limited
Depth to saturated
0.15
zone
Urban land 35
Not rated
Not rated
Not rated
USDA Natural Resources
This report shows only the major soils in each map unit. Others may exist.
Conservation Ser-dee
Tabular Data Version: 3
Tabular Data Version Date: 12/10/2004
Page 8 of 8

1
Appendix D4
1 Hydric Soils
Carteret County, North Carolina
1 (This report lists only those map unit components that are rated as hydric. Dashes (—) in any column indicate that the data were not included in the
database. Definitions of hydric criteria codes are included at the end of the report]
1
r�
Map symbol and
Component
Percent
of map
Landform
Hydric
Hydric
map unit name
unit
rating
criteria
Ag:
Augusta loamy fine sand
Tomotley, undrained
5
Depression, Flat
Yes
2B3
1
Ap.
Arapahoe fine sandy loam
Arapahoe, undrained
80
Flat
Yes
2B3
1
Arapahoe, drained
10
Flat
Yes
2B3
AuB:
Autryville loamy fine sand, 0 to 6
Muckalee, undrained
2
Flood plain
Yes
2B3
1
percent slopes
Be:
Beaches, coastal
Beaches
95
Barrier beach, Barrier
Yes
2B1
1
flat
Bf:
Beaches, storm tidal
Beaches
95
Barrier beach, Barrier
Yes
2B1
'
BH:
flat
Belhaven muck
Belhaven, undrained
80
Pocosin
Yes
1
'
Belhaven, drained
10
Pocosin
Yes
1
Bn:
Beaches-Newhan complex, 0 to 30
Beaches
65
Barrier beach, Barrier
Yes
2B1
percent slopes
flat
ByB:
Baymeade fine sand, 1 to 6 percent
Leon
5
Fiat
Yes
2B3
'
slopes
Cd:
Corolla-Duckston complex
Duckston
30
Barrier island,
Yes
2B1
'
CH:
Depression, Flat
Carteret sand, frequenUy flooded
Carteret, high
95
Tidal marsh
Yes
2B1
'
CL:
Carteret sand, low, frequently flooded
Carteret, low
95
Tidal marsh
Yes
281
Co:
1
Corolla fine sand
Duckston
5
Barrier island,
Yes
261
Depression, Flat
Carteret, high
2
Tidal marsh
Yes
2B1
1
'
USDA Natural Resources
Conservation Service
Tabular Data Version: 3
Tabular Data Version
Date: 12/10/2004
Page 1 of 5

Hydric Soils
Carteret County, North Carolina
Map symbol and
Component
Percent
of map
Landform
Hydric
Hydric
map unit name
unit
rating
criteria
CT:
Croatan muck
Croatan, undrained
80
Pocosin
Yes
1
Croatan, drained
10
Pocosin
Yes
1
Cu:
Corolla -Urban land complex
Duckston
5
Barrier island,
Yes
2B1
Depression, Flat
DA:
Dare muck
Dare, undrained
80
Pocosin
Yes
1
Dare, drained
10
Pocosin
Yes
1
De:
Deloss fine sandy loam
Deloss, undrained
80
Depression, Flat
Yes
2B3
Deloss, drained
10
Depression, Flat
Yes
2B3
Dm:
Deloss mucky loam, frequently flooded
Deloss, undrained
80
Depression, Flat
Yes
2B3
DO:
Dorovan muck, frequently flooded
Dorovan
90
Flood plain
Yes
11,4
Du:
Duckston fine sand, frequently flooded
Duckston
90
Barrier island,
Yes
2B1
Depression, Flat
Fr.
Fripp fine sand, 2 to 30 percent slopes
Conaby, undrained
5
Depression, Pocosin
Yes
2B3
GoA:
Goldsboro loamy fine sand, 0 to 2
Rains, undrained
5
Carolina bay,
Yes
2B3
percent slopes
Depression
Muckalee, undrained
1
Flood plain
Yes
2B3
HB:
Hobucken mucky fine sandy loam,
Hobucken
90
Tidal marsh
Yes
2B3, 3
frequently flooded
KuB:
Kureb sand, 0 to 6 percent slopes
Leon
5
Flat
Yes
2B3
LF:
Longshoal muck, very frequently
Longshoal
90
Marsh
Yes
1, 4
flooded
USDA Natural Resources
Tabular Data Version: 3
Conservation Service Tabular Data Version Date: 12/10/2004
Page 2 of 5

Hydric Soils
Carteret County, North Carolina
Map symbol and
Component
Percent
of map
Landform
Hydric
Hydric
map unit name
unit
rating
criteria
Ln:
Leon sand
Leon
80
Flat
Yes
2B3
Lu:
Leon -Urban land complex
Leon
40
Flat
Yes
2B3
Ly:
Lynchburg fine sandy loam
Rains, undrained
5
Depression
Yes
2B3
Woodington, undrained
2
Depression
Yes
2B3
MA:
Masontown mucky loam, frequently
Masontown, undrained
80
Flood plain
Yes
2B3, 3,4
flooded
Mc:
Mandarin -Urban land complex
Leon
5
Flat
Yes
2B3
Mn:
Mandarin sand
Leon
5
Flat
Yes
2B3
Murville
2
Depression
Yes
2B3
Mu:
Murville mucky sand
Murville, undrained
85
Depression
Yes
2B3
Nc:
Newhan-Corolla complex, 0 to 30
Duckston
5
Barrier island,
Yes
2B1
percent slopes
Depression, Flat
Ne:
Newhan-Urban land complex, 0 to 8
Duckston
5
Barrier island,
Yes
2B1
percent slopes
Depression, Flat
Nh:
Newhan fine sand, 2 to 30 percent
Beaches
5
Barrier beach, Barrier
Yes
2B1
slopes
flat
NoB:
Norfolk loamy fine sand, 2 to 6 percent
Woodington, undrained
3
Depression
Yes
2B3
slopes
Muckalee, undrained
1
Flood plain
Yes
2B3
On:
Onslow loamy sand
Rains, undrained
5
Carolina bay,
Yes
2B3
Depression
USDA Natural Resources
Conservation Service
Tabular Data Version: 3
Tabular Data Version
Date: 12/10/2004
Page 3 of 5

Hydric Soils
Carteret County, North Carolina
Map symbol and
Component
Percent
of map
Landform
Hydric
Hydric
map unit name
unit
rating
criteria
Pa:
Pantego fine sandy loam
Pantego, undrained
85
Flat
Yes
283
Pantego, drained
10
Flat
Yes
283
PO:
Ponzer muck
Ponzer, undrained
80
Flat, Pocosin
Yes
1
Ponzer, drained
10
Flat, Pocosin
Yes
1
Ra:
Rains fine sandy loam
Rains, undrained
80
Carolina bay,
Yes
2133
Depression
Rains, drained
10
Carolina bay,
Yes
283
Depression
Ro:
Roanoke loam
Roanoke, undrained
80
Depression, Flat
Yes
2B3
Roanoke, drained
10
Depression, Flat
Yes
283
Se:
Seabrook fine sand
Nimmo, undrained
5
Depression, Flat
Yes
283
Leon
2
Flat
Yes
2133
Tm:
Tomotley fine sandy loam
Tomotley, undrained
80
Depression, Flat
Yes
283
Tomotley, drained
10
Depression, Flat
Yes
2133
To:
Torhunta mucky fine sandy loam
Torhunta, undrained
80
Flat
Yes
2133
Torhunta, drained
10
Flat
Yes
2133
WaB:
Wando fine sand, 0 to 6 percent slopes
Leon
3
Flat
Yes
2B3
Muckalee, undrained
2
Flood plain
Yes
2B3
Ws:
Wasda muck
Wasda, undrained
80
Depression, Flat
Yes
2133
Wasda, drained
10
Depression, Flat
Yes
283
USDA Natural Resources
Tabular Data Version: 3
Conservation Service Tabular Data Version Date: 12/10/2004
Page 4 of 5

Hydric Soils
Carteret County, North Carolina
Map symbol and
Component
Percent
of map
Landform
Hydric
Hydric
map unit name
unit
rating
criteria
WuB:
Wando-Urban land complex, 0 to 6 Leon 3 Flat
percent slopes
Explanation of hydric criteria codes:
1. All Histels except for Folistels, and Histosols except for Folists.
2. Soils in Aquic suborders, great groups, or subgroups, Albolls suborder, Historthels great group,
Histoturbels great group, Pachic subgroups, or Cumulic subgroups that:
A. are somewhat poorly drained and have a water table at the surface (0.0 feet)
during the growing season, or
B. are poorly drained or very poorly drained and have either:
1.) a water table at the surface (0.0 feet) during the growing season if textures are
coarse sand, sand, or fine sand in all layers within a depth of 20 inches, or
2.) a water table at a depth of 0.5 foot or less during the growing season if permeability
is equal to or greater than 6.0 in/hr in all layers within a depth of 20 inches, or
3.) a water table at a depth of 1.0 foot or less during the growing season if permeability
is less than 6.0 in/hr in any layer within a depth of 20 inches.
3. Soils that are frequently ponded for long or very long duration during the growing season.
4. Soils that are frequently flooded for long or very long duration during the growing season.
USDA Natural Resources Tabular Data Version: 3
Conservation Service Tabular Data Version Date: 12/10/2004
Yes 2B3
Page 5 of 5

Appendix E
Water Quality Classifications
White Oak River Subbasins 03-05-01 and 03-05-03
Source: NC Division of Water Qttaliry
L�
' Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Appendices
May 18, 2007
Page 130 of 171

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Report Date: 02104105
North Carolina Waterbodies Listed by Subbasin Records Found: 75
Note: Waterbodies are listed in more than one subbasin if they cross subbasin boundaries.
Search Parameters:
Subbasin: 03-05-01
Class:
Name:
Desc:
Index#:
Name of Stream Description Curr. Class Date Prop. Class Basin Stream Index #
Subbasln# 03.05-0 t
Intracoastal
From New River to
SA;HQW
06/01/56
White
Oak
19-41-(0.5)
Waterway
northeast mouth of Goose
Creek
Banks Channel
From Browns Inlet to
SA;HQW
06/01/56
White
Oak
19-41-6
Intracoastal Waterway
Browns Inlet
From Atlantic Ocean to
SA;HQW
06/01/56
White
Oak
19-41-7
Intracoastal Waterway
Browns Creek
From source to
SA;HQW
06/01/56
White
Oak
19-41-8
Intracoastal Waterway
Shacklefoot
From Bear Creek to
SA;HQW
06/01/56
White
Oak
19-41-9
Channel
Intracoastal Waterway
Bear Creek
From Shacklefoot Channel
SA;HQW
06/01/56
White
Oak
19-41-10
to Intracoastal Waterway
Bear Creek
From source to
SA;HQW
06/01/56
White
Oak
19-41-11
Intracoastal Waterway
Mill Creek
From source to Bear Creek
SA;HQW
06/01/56
White
Oak
19-41-11-1
Saunders Creek
From Bear Creek to
SA;HQW
06/01/56
White
Oak
19-41-12
Intracoastal Waterway
Bear Inlet
From Atlantic Ocean to
SA;HQW
06/01/56
White
Oak
19-41-13
Intracoastal Waterway
Goose Creek
From source to
SA;HQW
06/01/56
White
Oak
19-41-14
Intracoastal Waterway
Intracoastal
From the northeast mouth
SA;ORW
01/01/90
White
Oak
19-41-(14.5)
Waterway
of Goose Creek to the
southwest mouth of Queen
Creek
Cow Channel
From Bogue Inlet to
SA;ORW
01/01/90
White
Oak
19-41-15
Intracoastal Waterway
Intracoastal
From the southwest mouth
SA;HQW
06/01/56
White
Oak
19-41-(15.5)
Waterway
of Queen Creek to Whiteoak
River
Queen Creek
From source to
SA;HQW
06/01/56
White
Oak
19-41-16
Intracoastal Waterway
Bell Swamp
From source to Queen Creek
SA;HQW
06/01/56
White
Oak
19-41-16-1
Pasture Branch
From source to Queen Creek
SA;HQW
06/01/56
White
Oak
19-41-16-2
Page I of 5

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Name n( Stream Description
Corr. Class Date Prop. Class F3asin Sit -cam Index #
Halls Creek
From source to Queen Creek
SA;HQW
06/01/56
White
Oak
19-41-16-3
Parrot Swamp
From source to Queen Creek
SA;HQW
06/01/56
White
Oak
19-41-16-4
Dicks Creek
From source to Queen Creek
SA;HQW
06/01/56
White
Oak
19-41-16-5
Bogue Inlet
From Atlantic Ocean to
SA;ORW
O1/01/90
White
Oak
19-41-17
Intracoastal Waterway
Bear island ORW
All waters within an area
SA;ORW
O1/01/90
White
Oak
19-41-18
Area
north of Bear Island defined
by a line from the western
most point on Bear Island
and running along the
eastern shore of Sanders
Creek to the northeast mouth
of Goose Creek on the
mainland, east to the
southwest mouth of Queen
Creek, then south to green
marker #49, then northeast
to the northeastern most
point on Huggins Island,
then southeast along the
shoreline of Huggins
Island to the southeastern
most point of Huggins
Island, then south to the
northeastern most point on
Dudley Island, then
southwest along the
shoreline of Dudley island
to the eastern tip of Bear
Island, then to the
western most point on Bear
Island including Cow Channel
WHITE OAK RIVER
From source to Spring Branch
C
06/01/56
White
Oak
20-(1)
North Fork
From source to White Oak
C
06/01/56
White
Oak
20-2
White Oak River
River
South Fork
From source to White Oak
C
06/01/56
White
Oak
20-3
White Oak River
River
Barnes Branch
From source to South Prong
C
06/01/56
White
Oak
20-3-1
White oak River
Chinkapin Branch
From source to South Prong
C
06/01/56
White
Oak
20-3-2
White Oak River
Great Branch
From source to White Oak
C
06/01/56
White
Oak
20-4
(Grape Branch)
River
Fork Branch
From source to White Oak
C
06/01/56
White
Oak
20-5
River
Mundine Branch
From source to White Oak
C
06/01/56
White
Oak
20-6
River
Gibson Branch
From source to White Oak
C
06/01/56
White
Oak
20-6.5
River
Page 2 of 5

' Vmne of Stream
Description
Curr. Cla,,s
Date Prop. Class
Basin
Stream Index #
Mirey Branch
From source to White Oak
C
06/01/56
White
Oak
20-7
River
' Brick Kiln Branch
From source to White Oak
C
06/01/56
White
Oak
20-8
River
Black Swamp Creek
From source to White Oak
C
06/01/56
White
Oak
20-9
River
Catfish Lake
From source to Black Swamp
C
06/01/56
White
Oak
20-9-1
Creek
Starkeys Creek
From source to White Oak
C
06/01/56
White
Oak
20-10
River
' Gravelly Branch
From source to White Oak
C
06/01/56
White
Oak
20-11
River
Holston Creek
From source to White Oak
C
06/01/56
White
Oak
20-12
'
River
Mulberry Creek
From source to White Oak
C
06/01/56
White
Oak
20-13
River
'
Spring Branch
From source to White Oak
C
06/01/56
White
Oak
20-14
River
' Grants Creek
From source to Spring Branch
C
06/01/56
White
Oak
20-14-1
Halls Branch
From source to Grants Creek
C
06/01/56
White
Oak
20-14-1-1
(Cummins Creek)
' WHITE OAK RIVER
From Spring Branch to
C;HQW
08/01/90
White
Oak
20-(14.5)
Hunters Creek
Calebs Creek
From source to White Oak
C
06/01/56
White
Oak
20-15
River
Freemans Creek
From source to White Oak
C
06/01/56
White
Oak
20-16
'
River
Hunters Creek
From source to White Oak
C
06/01/56
White
Oak
20-17
(Great Lake)
River
Wolf Swamp
From source to Hunters Creek
C
06/01/56
White
Oak
20-17-1
WHITE OAK RIVER
From Hunters Creek to
SA;HQW
06/01/56
White
Oak
20-(18)
Atlantic Ocean, including
the Intracoastal Waterway,
with exception of restricted
shellfish area adjacent to
Swansboro
Webb Creek
From source to White Oak
C
06/01/56
White
Oak
20-19
River
Taylor Creek
From source to White Oak
C
06/01/56
White
Oak
20-20
River
Pitts Creek
From source to White Oak
SA;HQW
06/01/56
White
Oak
20-21
'
(Hargetts Creek)
River
Cales Creek
From source to White Oak
SA;HQW
06/01/56
White
Oak
20-22
River
Page 3 of 5

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Name of Stream De�.,rription Ci.irr. Class Date Prop, Class Basin Stream Index #
Hadnot Creek
From source
to
White Oak
SA;HQW
06/01/56
White
Oak
20-23
River
Schoolhouse
From source
to
Hadnot Creek
SA;HQW
06/01/56
White
Oak
20-23-1
Branch
Steep Hill Branch
From source
to
Hadnot Creek
SA;HQW
06/01/56
White
Oak
20-23-2
Caleb Branch
From source
to
Hadnot Creek
SA;HQW
06/01/56
White
Oak
20-23-3
(City Weeks
Branch)
Godfry Branch
From source to White Oak
SA;HQW
06/01/56
white
Oak
20-24
River
Hargetts Creek
From source to White Oak
C
06/01/56
White
Oak
20-25
River
Holland Mill
From source to White Oak
SA;HQW
06/01/56
White
Oak
20-26
Creek
River
Cartwheel Branch
From source to Holland
SA;HQW
06/01/56
White
Oak
20-26-1
Mill Creek
Hampton Bay
Entire Bay
SA;HQW
06/01/56
White
Oak
20-27
Stevens Creek
From source to White Oak
SA;HQW
06/01/56
White
Oak
20-28
River
Pettiford Creek
Entire Bay
SA;HQW
06/01/56
White
Oak
20-29
Bay
Pettiford Creek
From source to Pettiford
SA;HQW
06/01/56
White
Oak
20-29-1
Creek Bay
Mill Creek
From source to Pettiford
SA;HQW
06/01/56
White
Oak
20-29-1-1
Creek
Starkey Creek
From source to Pettiford
SA;HQW
06/01/56
White
Oak
20-29-2
Creek Bay
Mullet Gut
From source to Starkey Creek
SA;HQW
06/01/56
White
Oak
20-29-2-1
Dubling Creek
From source to White Oak
SA;HQW
06/01/56
white
Oak
20-30
River
Boathouse Creek
From source to White Oak
SA;HQW
06/01/56
White
Oak
20-31
River
White Oak River
That portion of White Oak
SC
06/01/56
White
Oak
20-32
Restricted Area
River within an area bounded
by a line running in an
easterly direction from a
point below Foster Creek
to east end of Swansboro
Bridge (N.C. Hwy. 24),
thus across bridge to west
end of bridge, thus
running along shore line
to a point below Foster
Creek
Ward Creek
From source to White Oak
SC
06/01/56
White
Oak
20-33
River
Page 4 of 5

Name of Stream
Description
Curr. Class Date
Prop. Class Basin
Stream Index
Dennis Creek
From source to White Oak
SC 06/01/56
White Oak
20-34
(Demkis Creek)
River
Foster Creek
From source to White Oak
SC 06/01/56
White Oak
20-35
River
Goose Creek
From source to Bogue Sound
SA;HQW 06/01/56
White Oak
20-36-4
Atlantic Ocean
The waters of the Atlantic
SB 07/01/73
White Oak
99-(4)
Ocean contiguous to that
portion of the White Oak
River Basin that extends
from the northern boundary
of White Oak River Basin
(southwest side of Drum
Inlet) to the southern
boundary of White Oak
River Basin (northern
boundary of Cape Fear
River Basin at the southwest
side of the mouth of Goose
Bay in the Intracoastal
Waterway.
Page 5 of 5

Report Date: 02104105
North Carolina Waterbodles Listed by Subbasin Records Found: 91
Note: Waterbodies are listed in more than one subbasin if they cross subbasin boundaries.
Search Parameters:
Subbasin: 03-05-03
Class:
Name:
Desc:
Index#:
Name of Stream Description Curr, Class Date Prop. Class Basin Stream Index #
Subbasln# 03-05-03
Intracoastal
From the southwest mouth
Waterway
of Queen Creek
to Whiteoak
River
WHITE OAK RIVER
From Hunters Creek
to
Atlantic Ocean,
including
the Intracoastal Waterway,
with exception
of restricted
shellfish area
adjacent to
Swansboro
Bogue Sound
From Bogue Inlet (from a
(Including
line running from the
Intracoastal
eastern mouth of Bogue Inlet
Waterway)
to SR 1117 on the
mainland) to a
line across
Bogue Sound from the
southwest side
of mouth of
Gales Creek to
Rock Point
Deer Creek
From source to
Bogue Sound
Hunting Island
From source to
Bogue Sound
Creek
Taylor Bay
Entire Bay
Goose Creek
From source to
Bogue Sound
Sanders Creek
From source to
Goose Creek
Archer Creek
From source to
Bogue Sound
(Piney Cr.)
Sanders Creek
East Prong
Sanders Cr.
Sikes Branch
From source to
East Prong
Broad Creek
West Prong
Broad Creek
Hannah Branch
Sandy Branch
SA;HQW 06/01/56
SA;HQW 06/01/56
SA;ORW 01/01/90
SA;ORW 01/01/90
SA;HQW 06/01/56
SA;ORW
01/01/90
SA;HQW
06/01/56
SA;HQW
06/01/56
SA;ORW
01/01/90
From source to Bogue Sound SA;ORW 01/01/90
From source to Sanders Creek SA;HQW 06/01/56
Sanders Creek
From source to Bogue Sound
From source to Broad Creek
SA;HQW 06/01/56
SA;HQW 06/01/56
SA;HQW 06/01/56
From source to West Prong SA;HQW 06/01/56
Broad Creek
From source to Hannah Branch SA;HQW 06/01/56
White Oak 19-41-(15.5)
White Oak 20-(18)
White Oak 20-36-(0.5)
White
Oak
20-36-1
White
Oak
20-36-2
White
Oak
20-36-3
White
Oak
20-36-4
White
Oak
20-36-4-1
White
Oak
20-36-5
White
Oak
20-36-6
White
Oak
20-36-6-1
white
Oak
20-36-6-1-1
White
Oak
20-36-7
White
Oak
20-36-7-1
white
Oak
20-36-7-1-1
White
Oak
20-36-7-1-1-1
Page l of 6

Name of Stream Description Curr. Cla>s Date Prop. Class Basin Stream Index #
Wolf Branch From source to West Prong SA;HQW 06/01/56 White Oak 20-36-7-1-2
Broad Creek
East Prong From source to Broad Creek SA;HQW 06/01/56 White Oak 20-36-7-2
Broad Creek
Gales Creek From source to Bogue Sound SA;HQW 06/01/56
East Prong From source to Gales Creek SA;HQW 06/01/56
Gales Creek
Bogue Sound From a line across Bogue SA;HQW 06/01/56
(Including Sound from the southwest
Intracoastal side of mouth of Gales Creek
Waterway to to Rock Point to Beaufort
Beaufort Inlet) Inlet
Jumping Run From source to Bogue Sound SA;HQW 06/01/56
Roosevelt Natural All of the fresh waters C;Sw,ORW 06/01/88
Area Swamp within the property
boundaries of the natural
area including swamp forest,
shrub swamp and ponds
Roosevelt Natural All of the saline waters SA;Sw,OR 06/01/88
Area Swamp within the boundaries of the W
natural area including
brackish marsh and salt
marsh
Spooner Creek From source to Bogue Sound SA;HQW 06/01/56
Peltier Creek From source to Bogue Sound SB:# 06/01/92
Hoop Pole Creek From source to Bogue Sound SA;HQW 06/01/56
Money Island Bay Entire Bay SA;HQW 06/01/56
Money Island From source to Money SA;HQW 06/01/56
Slough Island Bay
Allen Slough From source to Money SA;HQW 06/01/56
Island Bay
Harbor Channel Entire Channel SC 06/01/56
Tar Landing Bay Entire Bay SA;HQW 06/01/56
Fishing Creek From source to Tar Landing SA;HQW 06/01/56
Bay
Fort Macon Creek From source to Bogue Sound SA;HQW 06/01/56
NEWPORT RIVER From source to Little C 06/01/56
Creek Swamp
Northwest Prong From source to Newport River C 06/01/56
Newport River
Little Run From source to Northwest C 06/01/56
Prong Newport River
Cypress Drain From source to Northwest C 06/01/56
Prong Newport River
White oak 20-36-8
White Oak 20-36-8-1
White Oak 20-36-(8.5)
White Oak 20-36-9
White Oak 20-36-9.5-(1)
White Oak 20-36-9.5-(2)
White
Oak
20-36-10
White
Oak
20-36-11
White
Oak
20-36-12
White
Oak
20-36-13
White
Oak
20-36-13-1
White Oak 20-36-13-2
White Oak 20-36-14
White Oak 20-36-15
White Oak 20-36-15-1
White Oak 20-36-16
White Oak 21-(1)
White Oak 21-2
White Oak 21-2-1
White Oak 21-2-2
Page 2 of 6

Name of Stream Description
Curr. Class Date Prep. Class Basin Stream Index #
Southwest Prong
From
source
to
Newport River
C
06/01/56
White
Oak
21-3
Newport River
Mairey Branch
From
source
to
Southwest
C
06/01/56
White
Oak
21-3-1
Prong
Newport River
Millis Swamp
From
source
to
Southwest
C
06/01/56
White
Oak
21-3-2
Prong
Newport River
Juniper Branch
From
source
to
Southwest
C
06/01/56
white
Oak
21-3-3
Prong
Newport River
Peak Swamp
From
source
to
Southwest
C
06/01/56
White
Oak
21-3-4
Prong
Newport River
Jasons Branch
From
source
to
Southwest
C
06/01/56
White
Oak
21-3-5
Prong Newport River
East Prong Jasons
From
source
to
Jasons Branch
C
06/01/56
White
Oak
21-3-5-1
Branch
Milldam Branch
From
source
to
Southwest
C
06/01/56
White
Oak
21-3-6
Prong Newport River
Big Ramhorn
From
source
to
Newport River
C
06/01/56
White
Oak
21-4
Branch
Little Ramhorn
From
source
to
Big Ramhorn
C
06/01/56
White
Oak
21-4-1
Branch
Branch
Meadows Branch
From
source
to
Newport River
C
06/01/56
White
Oak
21-5
Shoe Branch
From
source
to
Newport River
C
06/01/56
White
Oak
21-6
Cedar Swamp Creek
From
source
to
Newport River
C
06/01/56
White
Oak
21-7
School House
From
source
to
Newport River
C
06/01/56
White
Oak
21-8
Branch
Smiths Swamp
From
source
to
Newport River
C
06/01/56
White
Oak
21-9
slakes Branch
From
source
to
Smiths Swamp
C
06/01/56
White
Oak
21-9-1
Smiths Swamp
From
source
to
Newport River
C
06/01/56
White
Oak
21-10
Branch
Deep Creek
From
source
to
Newport River
C
09/01/74
White
Oak
21-11
Laurel Branch
From
source
to
Deep Creek
C
09/01/74
White
Oak
21-11-1
Little Deep Creek
From
source
to
Deep Creek
C
09/01/74
White
Oak
21-11-2
Snows Swamp
From
source
to
Newport River
C
06/01/56
White
Oak
21-12
Branch
Sandy Branch
From
source
to
Newport River
C
06/01/56
White
Oak
21-13
Lodge Creek
From
source
to
Newport River
C
06/01/56
White
Oak
21-14
Hull Swamp
From
source
to
Newport River
C
06/01/56
White
Oak
21-15
Black Creek (Mill
From
source
to
Newport River
C
06/01/56
White
Oak
21-16
Pond)
Main Prong
From
source
to
Mill Pond,
C
06/01/56
white
Oak
21-16-1
Black Creek
Ghouls Fork
From
source
to
Main Prong
C
06/01/56
White
Oak
21-16-1-1
Money Island
From
source
to
Mill Pond,
C
06/01/56
White
Oak
21-16-2
Swamp
Black Creek
Page 3 of 6

tName
of Stream
Description
C LHr. Class
Date Pi -op. Class
Basin
Stream Index #
Billys Branch
From source to Mill Pond,
C
06/01/56
White
Oak
21-16-3
'
Black Creek
NEWPORT RIVER
From Little Creek Swamp to
SA;HQW
06/01/56
White
Oak
21-(17)
Atlantic Ocean with
exception of Morehead City
'
Harbor restricted area
Little Creek
From source to Newport River
SA;HQW
06/01/56
White
Oak
21-18
Swamp
'
Mill Creek
From source to Newport River
SA;HQW
06/01/56
White
Oak
21-19
Big Creek
From source to Newport River
SA;HQW
06/01/56
White
Oak
21-20
'
Little Creek
From source to Newport River
SA;HQW
06/01/56
White
Oak
21-21
Harlowe Creek
From source (at N.C. Hwy.
SA;HQW
06/01/56
White
Oak
21-22
# 101) to Newport River
'
Harlowe Canal
From Neuse River Basin
SA;HQW
06/01/56
White
Oak
21-22-1
Boundary (at Craven -Carteret
County Line) to Harlowe
'
Creek (at N.C. Hwy. # 101)
Alligator Creek
From source to Harlowe Creek
SA;HQW
06/01/56
White
Oak
21-22-2
'
Oyster Creek
Core Creek
From source to Newport River
From Neuse River Basin
SA;HQW
SA;HQW
06/01/56
06/01/56
White
White
Oak
Oak
21-23
21-24
(Intracoastal
boundary to Newport River
Waterway Adams
Creek Canal)
Eastman Creek
From source to Core Creek
SA;HQW
06/01/56
White
Oak
21-24-1
'
Bell Creek
Ware Creek
From source to Core Creek
From source to Newport River
SA;HQW
SA;HQW
06/01/56
06/01/56
White
White
Oak
Oak
21-24-2
21-25
Russell Creek
From source to Newport River
SA;HQW
06/01/56
White
Oak
21-26
wading Creek
From source to Newport River
SA;HQW
06/01/56
White
Oak
21-27
Gable Creek
From source to Newport River
SA;HQW
06/01/56
White
Oak
21-28
Willis Creek
From source to Newport River
SA;HQW
06/01/56
White
Oak
21-29
'
Crab Point Bay
Entire Bay
SA;HQW
06/01/56
White
Oak
21-30
L
Page 4 of 6
1

Naine of Stream Description
Cu-r. Class Date Prop. Clasp Basin Stream Index #
Newport River
All waters within a line SC 06/01/56 White Oak 21-31
Restricted Area
beginning at a point of land
(Morehead City
near the south end of llth
Harbor)
street in Morehead City at
Lat. 34 43, 08, Long. 76
43, 04; thence in straight
line to the western end of
Sugarloaf Island; thence
along the north shore of the
Island to the eastern end of
the Island; thence in a
straight line to Channel
Marker C 1 near the
western end of the Turning
Basin; thence in a
straight line to a point
in the Turning Basin at Lat.
34 42150, Long. 76 41, 36;
thence in a northerly
direction to a point in
Intracoastal Waterway at
Lat. 34 43, 25, Long. 76
41' 40 adjacent to the
channel leading to
Morehead City Yacht Basin;
thence in a straight line in
a westerly direction to a
point of land on the
Morehead City Mainland at
Lat. 34 43, 23, Long. 76
42, 24.
Calico Creek
From source to Newport River SC;HQW 06/01/56 White Oak 21-32
(The mouth of Calico Creek
is defined as beginning at a
point of land on the north
shore at Lat. 34 43, 46,
Long. 76 43, 07, thence
across the creek in a
straight line to a point
of land on the south shore
at Lat. 34 43' 36, Long.
76 43, 05)
Town Creek
From source to Newport River SC 06/01/56 White Oak 21-33
(The mouth of Town Creek
is defined as beginning at a
point of land on the north
shore at Lat. 34 43, 41,
Long. 76 40' 04, thence
across the creek in a
straight lire to a point
of land on the south shore
at Lat. 34 43' 23, Long.
76 40' 04)
Page 5 of 6

Name of Stream Description
Curr. Class Date Prop. Class Basin Stream Index #
Taylor Creek From source to Newport River SC 06/01/56
(The mouth of Taylor Creek
is defined as beginning at a
point of land on the north
shore at Lat. 34 43' 07,
Long. 76 40, 13, thence
across the creek in a
straight line to a point
of land on the south shore
at Lat. 34 42' 55, Long.
76 40' 10)
Back Sound From Newport River to a SA;HQW 06/01/56
point on Shackleford Banks
at lat. 34 40'57 and long 76
37,30 north to the western
most point of Middle Marshes
and along the northeast
shoreline of Middle
Marshes to Rush Point on
Harkers Island
Atlantic Ocean The waters of the Atlantic SB 07/01/73
Ocean contiguous to that
portion of the White Oak
River Basin that extends
from the northern boundary
of White Oak River Basin
(southwest side of Drum
Inlet) to the southern
boundary of White Oak
River Basin (northern
boundary of Cape Fear
River Basin at the southwest
side of the mouth of Goose
Bay in the Intracoastal
Waterway.
White Oak 21-34
white Oak 21-35-(0.5)
White Oak 99-(4)
Page 6 of 6

Appendix F
Natural Area and Rare Species Inventory
Carteret County
Maior Grouo
Scientific Name
Common Name
State
Status
Federal
a=
State
Rank
Global
Rank
County - Status
Eastern Woodrat - Coastal Plain
T
_
S1
G5T5
Carteret -
Mammal
Neotoma floridana floridana
Population
Historic
Mammal
Puma concolor couguar
Eastern Cougar
E
E
SH
GSTH
Carteret -
Obscure
Mammal
Sciurus niger
Eastern Fox Squirrel
SR
-
S3
G5
CarterObscure
MammalMammal
Trichechus manatus
West Indian Manatee
E
E
Si N
G2
Carteret -
Current
Bird
Aimophila aestivalis
Bachman's Sparrow
SC
FSC
S3B,S2N
G3
Carteret -
Current
Bird
Ammodramus henslowii
Henslow's Sparrow
SR
FSC
S2B,S1 N
G4
Carteret -
Current
Bird
Anhinga anhinga
Anhinga
SR
S2B,SZN
G5
Carteret -
Historic
Bird
Botaurus lentiginosus
American Bittern
SR
-
S1 B,S3N
G4
Carteret -
Current
Bird
Charadrius melodus
Piping Plover
T
T
S2B,S2N
G3
Carteret -
Current
Bird
Charadrius wilsonia
Wilson's Plover
SR
-
S3B,SZN
G5
Carteret -
Current
Bird
Circus cyaneus
Northern Harrier
SR
-
S1B,S4N
G5
Carteret -
Current
Bird
Coturnicops noveboracensis
Yellow Rail
SR
-
S2N
G4
Carteret -
Current
Bird
Dendroica virens waynei
Black -throated Green Warbler -
SR
-
S3B,SZN
GSTLI
Carteret -
Current
Coastal Plain Population
Bird
Egretta caerulea
Little Blue Heron
SC
-
S3B,S3N
G5
Carteret -
Current
Bird
Egretta thula
Snowy Egret
SC
-
S3B,S3N
G5
Carteret -
Current
Bird
Egretta tricolor
Tricolored Heron
SC
-
S3B,S3N
G5
Carteret -
Current
Bird
Falco peregrinus
Peregrine Falcon
E
-
S1B,S2N
G4
Carteret
Current
Cape Car7eret CAMA Land Use Plan
Appetulices
May 18, 2007
Page 141 of 171

M M M M M M r== M= a M M M r= M
Maior Group
Scientific Name
Common Name
State
Status
Federal
t"
State
Rank
Global
Rank
County - Status
Bird
Himantopus mexicanus
Black -necked Stilt
SR
S213
G5
Carteret
Bird
Ictinia mississi iensis
PP
Mississippi Kite
PP
SR
-
S2B
G5
Carteret -
Current
Bird
Lanius ludovicianus ludovicianus
Loggerhead Shrike
Sc
-
S3B,S3N
G4T4
Carteret -
Current
Bird
Laterallus jamaicensis
Black Rail
SR
FSC
S3B,S2N
G4
Carteret
Bird
Passerina ciris ciris
Eastern Painted Bunting
SR
FSC
S3B,SZN
G5T3T4
Carteret -
Current
Bird
Pelecanus occidentalis
Brown Pelican
SR
-
S3B,S4N
G4
Carteret -
Current
Bird
Picoides borealis
Red -cockaded Woodpecker
E
E
S2
G3
Carteret -
Current
Bird
Plegadis talcinellus
Glossy Ibis
SC
-
S2B,SZN
G5
Carteret
Bird
Rynchops niger
Black Skimmer
Sc
-
S3B,S3N
G5
Carteret -
Current
Bird
Sterna antillarum
Least Tern
Sc
-
S3B,SZN
G4
Carteret -
Current
Bird
Sterna dougallii
Roseate Tern
E
E
SAB,SZN
G4
Carteret -
Historic
Bird
Sterna hirundo
Common Tern
Sc
-
S3B,SZN
G5
Carteret -
Current
Bird
Sterna nilotica
Gull -billed Tern
T
S38,SZN
G5
Carteret -
Current
Reptile
Alligator mississippiensis
American Alligator
T
T(S/A)
S3
G5
Carteret -
Current
Reptile
Caretta caretta
Loggerhead
T
T
S3B,S3N
G3
Carteret -
Current
Reptile
Chelonia mydas
Green Turtle
T
T
S1 B,SZN
G3
Carteret -
Current
Reptile
Crotalus adamanteus
Eastern Diamondback Rattlesnake
E
-
S1
G4
Carteret -
Current
Reptile
Crotalus horridus
Timber Rattlesnake
Sc
-
S3
G4
Carteret -
Current
Reptile
Deirochelys reticularia
Chicken Turtle
SR
-
S3
G5
Carteret -
Obscure
Reptile
Dermochelys coriacea
Leatherback
E
E
SAB,SZN
G2
Carteret -
Cape Carteret CAAIA
!.rind Use Plan
Page 142 of 171
Appendices
May 18, 2007

M M r M M M M M M M M M a M s M i M M
Maior Group
Scientific Name
Common Name
State
Status
Federal
S a us
State
Rank
Global
Rank
County - Status
Current
Reptile
p
Eretmochel s imbricata
Y
Hawksbill
E
E
SZN
G3
Carteret -
Historic
Reptile
Neterodon simus
Southern Hognose Snake
SC
FSC
S2
G2
Carteret -
Obscure
Reptile
Lampropeltis getula sticticeps
Outer Banks Kingsnake
Sc
-
S2
G5T2O
Carteret -
Historic
Reptile
Lepidochelys kempii
Atlantic Ridley
E
E
SAB,SZN
G1
Carteret -
Historic
Reptile
Malaclemys terrapin centrata
Carolina Diamondback Terrapin
SC
-
S3
G4T4
Carteret -
Current
Reptile
Masticophis flagellum
Coachwhip
SR
-
S3
G5
Carteret -
Obscure
Reptile
Nerodia sipedon williamengeisi
Carolina Water Snake
SC
-
S3
G5T3
Carteret -
Current
Reptile
Ophisaurus mimicus
Mimic Glass Lizard
SC
FSC
S2
G3
Carteret -
Current
Reptile
Regina rigida
Glossy Crayfish Snake
SR
-
S2S3
G5
Carteret -
Obscure
Reptile
P
Seminatrix aea
PYg
Black Swam Snake
P
SR
-
S2
G5
Carteret -
Obscure
Reptile
Sistrurus milianus
Pigmy Rattlesnake
SC
-
S3
G5
Carteret -
Current
Amphibian
Rana capito
Carolina Gopher Frog
T
FSC
S2
G3
Carteret -
Current
Fish
Acipenserbrevirostrum
Shortnose Sturgeon
E
E
S1
G3
Carteret -
Historic
Fish
Eleotris pisonis
Spinycheek Sleeper
SR
-
S2
G5
Carteret -
Obscure
Fish
Evorthodus lyricus
Lyre Goby
SR
-
S2
G5
Carteret -
Historic
Fish
Fundulus confluentus
Marsh Killifish
SR
-
S2
G5
Carteret -
Historic
Fish
Fundulus luciae
Spotfin Killifish
SR
-
S2
G4
Carteret -
Obscure
Crustacean
Procambarus plumimanus
Croatan Crayfish
SR
FSC
S3
G4
Carteret -
Historic
Insect
Amblyscirtes reversa
Reversed Roadside -skipper
SR
-
S3
G3G4
Carteret -
Current
Cape Carteret CAMA
Lind Use Plan
Page 143 of 171
Appendices
May 18, 2007

M = = M M i M M M M i i� M M�! M
Maior Group
Scientific Name
Common Name
State
S us
Federal
Igo
State
Rank
Global
Rank
County - Status
Insect
Atrytone arogos arogos
Arogos Skipper
SR
FSC
S1
G3G4T1T2
Carteret -
Current
Insect
At tono sis s 1
ry p p
an undescribed skipper
PP
SR
FSC
Si?
G1?
Carteret -
Current
Insect
Calephelis virginiensis
Little Metalmark
SR
-
S2
G4
Carteret
Insect
Doryodes sp 1
a new owlet moth
SR
-
SP
G3G4
Carteret -
Obscure
Insect
Dysgonia similis
an owlet moth
SR
-
S2S3
G3G4
Carteret -
Obscure
Insect
Euphyes berryi
Berry's Skipper
SR
-
Si?
G3G4
Carteret
Insect
Euphyes bimacula
Two -spotted Skipper
SR
-
S2
G4
Carteret -
Current
Insect
Fixsenia favonius ontario
Northern Oak Hairstreak
SR
-
S3?
G4T4
Carteret -
Obscure
Insect
Hemipachnobia subporphyrea
Venus Flytrap Cutworm Moth
SR
FSC
S1?
G1
Carteret -
Obscure
Insect
Meropleon cinnamicolor
an owlet moth
SR
S2S3
GU
Carteret -
Current
Insect
Papilio cresphontes
Giant Swallowtail
SR
-
S2
G5
Carteret
Current
Insect
Phragmatiphila interrogans
an owlet moth
SR
-
S2?
G3G4
Carteret -
Obscure
Insect
Satyrium kingi
King's Hairstreak
SR
-
S2S3
G3G4
Carteret -
Obscure
Insect
S artini ha a carterae
P p 9
Carter's Noctuid Moth
SR
FSC
S2S3
G2G3
Carteret -
Historic
Insect
Zale declarans
an owlet moth
SR
-
S2S3
G5
Carteret -
Obscure
Lichen
Teloschistes flavicans
Sunrise Lichen
SR-P
-
Si
G3G4
Carteret -
Current
Liverwort
Lejeunea bermudiana
a liverwort
SR-P
-
SH
G3G4
Carteret -
Historic
Liverwort
Lejeunea dimorphophylla
a liverwort
SR-L
-
S1
G2G3
Carteret -
Historic
Liverwort
Plagiochila miradorensis var miradorensis a liverwort
SR-P
-
SH
G4?T4
Carteret -
Historic
Moss
Campylopus carolinae
Savanna Campylopus
SR-T
FSC
S1
GlIG2
Carteret -
Cape Carteret CAN1A
Lund Use Plan
Page 144 of 171
Appemliees
May 18, 2007

M! M! M M a= i M M i! M!� M!
Maior Groug
Scientific Name
Common Name
State Feder
Sta us , ; a us
State
Rank
Global
Rank
County - Status
Current
Moss
Sphagnum fitz eraldii
9
Fitz erald's Peatmoss
9
SR-T -
S2S3
G2G3
Carteret -
Historic
Vascular Plant
Agalinis aphylla
Scale -leaf Gerardia
SR-P -
S3
G3G4
Carteret -
Current
Vascular Plant
Agalinis virgata
Branched Gerardia
SR-P -
S2
G3G4Q
Carteret
Vascular Plant
Amaranthus pumilus
Seabeach Amaranth
T T
S2
G2
Carteret -
Current
Vascular Plant
Asclepias pedicellata
Savanna Milkweed
SR-P -
S2
G4
Carteret -
Current
Vascular Plant
Ceratophyllum muricatum ssp australe
Southern Hornwort
SR-P -
S1
G5T?
Carteret -
Historic
Vascular Plant
Cirsium lecontei
Leconte's Thistle
SR-P -
S2
G4G5
Carteret -
Current
Vascular Plant
Cladium mariscoides
Twig -rush
SR-0 -
S2
G5
Carteret -
Current
Vascular Plant
Cyperus tetragonus
Four -angled Flatsedge
SR-P -
S1
G4?
Carteret -
Historic
Vascular Plant
Dichanthelium caerulescens
Blue Witchgrass
SR-T
S1
G5T?
Carteret -
Historic
Vascular Plant
Dichanthelium sp 5
Nerve -flowered Witch Grass
SR-D -
S1
G5?
Carteret -
Historic
Vascular Plant
Dionaea muscipula
Venus Flytrap
SR-L, SC FSC
S3
G3
Carteret -
Current
Vascular Plant
Eleocharis cellulosa
Gulfcoast Spikerush
SR-P -
S1
G4G5
Carteret -
Current
Vascular Plant
Eleocharis robbinsd
Robbins's Spikerush
SR-P -
S2
G4G5
Carteret -
Current
Vascular Plant
Eleocharis rostellata
Beaked Spikerush
SR-0 -
S2
G5
Carteret -
Current
Vascular Plant
Erythrina herbacea
Coralbean
SR-P -
S1
G5
Carteret -
Historic
Vascular Plant
Helianthemum carolinianum
Carolina Sunrose
SR-P -
S1
G4
Carteret -
Historic
Vascular Plant
Helianthemum corymbosum
Pinebarren Sunrose
SR-P -
S1
G4G5
Carteret -
Current
Vascular Plant
Helianthemum georgianum
Georgia Sunrose
SR-P -
S1
G4
Carteret -
Historic
Cape Carteret CAMA
Lind Use Plan
Page 145 of 171
Appendices
htay 18, 2007

M M M M M M M M! M M M� M i M M M M
Major Grouo
Scientific Name
Common Name
State
Status
Federal
S a us
State
Rank
Global
Rank
County - Status
Vascular Plant
Hibiscus aculeatus
Comfortroot
SR-P
-
S1
G4G5
Carteret -
Historic
Vascular Plant
Ipomoea imperati
Beach Morning-glory
SR-P
-
S1
G5
Carteret -
Current
Vascular Plant
Litsea aestivalis
Pondspice
SR-T
FSC
S2
G3
Carteret -
Current
Vascular Plant
Ludwigia alata
Winged Seedbox
SR-P
-
S2
G4
ret
CarteCurrent
Vascular Plant
Ludwigia lanceolate
Lanceleaf Seedbox
SR-P
-
S1
G3
Carteret -
Current
Vascular Plant
Ludwigia linifolia
Flaxleaf Seedbox
SR-P
-
S2
G4
Carteret -
Current
Vascular Plant
Ludwigia ravenii
Raven's Seedbox
SR-T
-
S2?
G2?
Carteret -
Current
Vascular Plant
Lysimachia asperulifolia
Rough -leaf Loosestrife
E
E
S3
G3
Carteret -
Current
Vascular Plant
Ma/axis spicata
Florida Adder's Mouth
SR-P
-
S1
G4?
Carteret -
Current
Vascular Plant
Myriophyllum laxum
Loose Watermilfoil
T
FSC
S1
G3
Carteret -
Current
Vascular Plant
Panicum tenerum
Southeastern Panic Grass
SR-P
S3
G4
Carteret -
Current
Vascular Plant
Parietaria praetermissa
Large -seed Pellitory
SR-P
-
S1
G3G4
Carteret -
Current
Vascular Plant
Peltandra sagittifolia
Spoonflower
SR-P
-
S2S3
G3G4
Carteret -
Current
Vascular Plant
Pinguicula pumila
Small Butterwort
SR-P
-
S2
G4
Carteret -
Current
Vascular Plant
Platanthera integra
Yellow Fringeless Orchid
T
S1
G3G4
Carteret -
Current
Vascular Plant
Polygala hooked
Hooker's Milkwort
SR-T
-
S2
G3
Carteret -
Current
Vascular Plant
Polygonum glaucum
Seabeach Knotweed
SR-T
S1
G3
Carteret -
Current
Vascular Plant
Polygonum hirsutum
Hairy Smartweed
SR-P
-
S1
G4G5
Carteret -
Historic
Vascular Plant
Ponthieva racemosa
Shadow -witch
SR-P
-
S2
G4G5
Carteret -
Current
Vascular Plant
Rhexia cubensis
West Indies Meadow -beauty
SR-P
-
S1
G4G5
Carteret -
Cape Carteret CA6/A
Land Use Plan
Page 146 of 171
Appetulires
May 18, 2007

�! M M M M M M M M! M om' M M M M
Major Group
Scientific Name
Common Name
State
Status
Federal State
S a s Rank
Global
Rank
County - Status
Current
Vascular Plant
Rhynchospora breviseta
Short -bristled Beaksedge
SR-P
S2
G3G4
Carteret
Vascular Plant
Rhynchospora globularis var pinetorum
Small's Beaksedge
SR-T
- S1
G5?T3?
Carteret -
Current
Vascular Plant
Rhynchospora harped
Harper's Beaksedge
SR-P
S1
G4?
Carteret -
Current
Vascular Plant
Rhynchospora macra
Southern White Beaksedge
E
Si
G3
Carteret -
Current
Vascular Plant
Rhynchospora odorata
Fragrant Beaksedge
SR-P
- S1
G4
Carteret -
Current
Vascular Plant
Rhynchospora oligantha
Feather -bristle Beaksedge
SR-P
- S2S3
G4
Carteret -
Current
Vascular Plant
Rhynchospora pleiantha
Coastal Beaksedge
SR-T
- Si
G2
Carteret -
Current
Vascular Plant
Rhynchospora scirpoides
Long -beak Baldsedge
SR-O
- S2
G4
Carteret -
Current
Vascular Plant
Sabal palmetto
Cabbage Palm
SR-P
- S1
G5
Carteret -
Historic
Vascular Plant
Sageretia minutillora
Small -flowered Buckthorn
SR-P
- S1
G4
Carteret -
Current
Vascular Plant
Sagittaria graminea var chapmand
Chapman's Arrowhead
SR-P
- S1
G5T3?
Carteret -
Current
Vascular Plant
Schoenoplectus acutus
Hardstem Bulrush
SR-P
- SH
G5
Carteret -
Obscure
Vascular Plant
Scleria baldwinii
Baldwin's Nutrush
SR-P
- S1
G4
Carteret -
Current
Vascular Plant
Scleria georgiana
Georgia Nutrush
SR-P
- S2
G4
Carteret -
Current
Vascular Plant
Scleria verticillata
Savanna Nutrush
SR-P
- S1
G5
Carteret -
Current
Vascular Plant
Solidago leavenworthii
Leavenworth's Goldenrod
SR-P
- S1
G3G4
Carteret -
Historic
Vascular Plant
Solidago pulchra
Carolina Goldenrod
E
- S3
G3
Carteret -
Current
Vascular Plant
Solidago verna
Spring -flowering Goldenrod
SR-L
FSC S3
G3
Carteret -
Current
Vascular Plant
Spiranthes laciniata
Lace -lip Ladies' -tresses
.
SR-P
- S1
G4G5
Carteret -
Current
Cape Carteret CAMA
Lund Use Plan
Page 147 of 171
Appendices
Alty 18, 2007
I -

I
1
1

w=1 M s M M M M M M M M i M M i M M M
Major Group
Scientific Name
Common Name
State
Igo
Federal State
algilLs Rank
Global
Rank
County - Status
Vascular Plant
Spiranthes longilabris
Giant Spiral Orchid
SR-T
- S1
G3
Carteret
Current
Vascular Plant
Trichostema sp t
Dune Bluecurls
SR-L
FSC S2
G2
Carteret -
Current
Vascular Plant
Utricularia olivacea
Dwarf Bladderwort
T
- S2
G4
Carteret -
Current
Vascular Plant
Xyris brevitolia
Shortleaf Yellow -eyed -grass
SR-P
- S2
G4G5
Carteret -
Current
Vascular Plant
Xyns stricta
a yellow -eyed grass
SR-P
- S1
G3G4
Carteret -
Current
Vascular Plant
Yucca gloriosa
Moundlily Yucca
SR-P
- S2?
G4?
Carteret -
Current
Natural
Brackish Marsh
- S5
G5
Carteret -
Current
Community
Natural
Coastal Fringe Evergreen Forest
- S1
G3?
Carteret -
Current
Community
Natural
Community
Coastal Fringe Sandhill
-
- S1
G3?
Carteret -
Current
Natural
Coastal Plain Semipermanent
-
- S4
G5
Carteret -
Community
Impoundment
Current
Natural
Coastal Plain Small Stream Swamp
_
-
- S5
G5
Carteret -
Community
(Blackwater Subtype)
Current
Natural
Community
Dune Grass
-
-
- S3
G3G4
Carteret -
Current
Natural
Community
Estuarine Fringe Loblolly Pine Forest
-
- S3
G3?
Carteret
Current
Natural
Community
High Pocosin
-
-
S4
G4
Carteret -
Current
Natural
Community
Interdune Pond
-
-
S1 S2
G2?
Carteret -
Current
Natural
Community
Low Pocosin
-
-
S2
G3
Carteret -
Current
Natural
Community
Maritime Dry Grassland
S2
G3
Carteret
Current .
Natural
Community
Maritime Evergreen Forest
- Si
G2G3
Carteret -
Current
Natural
Community
Maritime Shrub
- S3
G4
Carteret -
Current
Natural
Maritime Shrub Swamp
-
-
- S1
G1
Carteret -
Cape Carteret CAMA
Land Use Pkai
Page 148 of 171
Appendices
May 18, 2007

1
I
L
F
1

Maim GroupScientific
Name Common Name State
Status
Federal State
a us Rank
Global
Rank
County - Status
Community
Current
Natural
Maritime Swamp Forest -
S1 S2
G1
Currentt
Community
Natural
Maritime Wet Grassland -
S2?
G3?
Carteret -
Current
Community
Natural
Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest (Coastal _
- S4
G5T5
Carteret -
Community
Plain Subtype)
Current
Natural
Mesic Pine Flatwoods
- S3
G5
Carteret -
Current
Community
Natural
Nonriverine Swamp Forest - -
- S2S3
G2G3
Carteret -
Historic
Community
Natural
Nonriverine Wet Hardwood Forest -
- S1
G1
Carteret -
Current
Community
Natural
Pine Savanna -
- S2S3
G3
Carteret -
Current
Community
Natural
pine/Scrub Oak Sandhill
- S3
G4
Carteret -
Current
Community
Natural
Community
pond Pine Woodland -
- S4
G4G5
Carteret -
Current
Natural
Salt Flat -
- S4
G5
Carteret -
Current
Community
Natural
Salt Marsh - -
S5
G5
Carteret -
Current
Community
Natural
Community
Salt Shrub - -
S4
G5
Carteret -
Current
Natural
Community
Small Depression Pocosin -
- S3
G2?
Carteret -
Current
Natural
Community
Small Depression Pond - -
- S3
G3
Carteret -
Current
Natural
Community
Tidal Cypress --Gum Swamp - -
- S3
G4
Carteret -
Current
Natural
Community
Upper Beach -
- S3
G4
Carteret -
Current
Natural
Community
Wet Pine Flatwoods - -
- S3
G3
Carteret -
Current
Natural
Community
Xeric Sandhill Scrub -
- S4
G5
Carteret -
Current
Special Habitat
Gull'Tem*Skimmer Colony Colonial Waterbirds Nesting Site -
S3
G5
Carteret -
Current
Cape Carteret CAMA Lind Use Plan
Page 149 of 171
Appendices
May 18, 2007

i M= M= M M M= r M M M M M w w
Maior Group
Scientific Name
Common Name State FederalState
Status Status Rank
Global
Rank
County - Status
Special Habitat
p
Marsh Bird Nesting Area
g
S4
G5
Carteret -
Historic
Special Habitat
Shorebird Foraging Area
- - - S3
G5
Carteree tt
Special Habitat
Wading Bird Rookery
S3
G5
Carteret
Source: NC NHP database updated: January, 2004.
Search performed on Friday, 4 February 2005 @ 11:11:58 EST
Cape Carteret CAMA Lind Use Plan Page 150 of 171
Appendices
May 18, 2007

' Appendix G
Hazardous Weather affecting Cape Carteret since October 1998
1
1
1
1
! '
i
r 11K.,_'
"'.�y'�A'�s5,re
yy
♦ %
12/16/1998
Nor'easter
84 kts.
0
0
Carteret
0
0
County -
Eastern
8/30/1999
Hurricane
Category II
0
0—
0
0
North
Carolina
Eastern
9/14/1999
Hurricane
Category II
13
0
410.6M
413.6M
North
_Carolina
Eastern
10/16/1999
Hurricane
Category 1
1
0
0
0
North
Carolina_
Cape
11/2/1999
Thunderstorm
52 kts.
0
0
0
_
0
Carteret
Wind
^Cape
_
4/15/2000
Tornado
FO
0
0 —
20K
0
Carteret
Carteret
12/16/2000
Nor'easter
62 kts.
0
2
0
0
County
Carteret
3/13/2001
Nor'easter
55 kts.
0
0
20K
0
Carteret
3/20/2001
Nor'easter
52 kts.
0
0
15K
0
County
Cape
4/1/2001
Tornado
FO
0
0
0
0
_Carteret
Cape
4/17/2001
Thunderstorm
— 55 kts.
0
0
0
0 —
Carteret
Wind
Cape
_
8/28/2001
Thunderstorm
52 kts.
0
0
0
0
_Carteret
Carteret
1/6/2002
_Wind
—High Wind
62 kts.
_
0 _
0
0
0
County
i
Carteret
2/4/2002
High Wind
53 kts.
0
0
0
0
Count ry
Carteret
10/15/2002
High Wind
50 kts.
0
0
0
0
_ County
—
Carteret
12/24/2002
High Wind
50 kts.
0
0
0
0
County
Carteret
5/23/2003
High Wind
54 kts.
0
0
0
0
v
Eastern
9/17/2003
Hurricane
Category II
0
0
435.6M
14.3M—
North
Carolina
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Appendices
May 18, 2007
Source: National Climatic Data Center
Page 151 of 171

' Appendix H
Summary of Policy Statements
from the 1998 Cape Carteret Land Use Plan
' The town developed two policy statements that impose additional local requirements for Areas of
Environmental Concern which would be more restrictive than the CAMA minimum use standards.
' The town's policies of prohibiting drystack storage facilities (Section 3.280, Policy 7) and floating
homes (Section 3.280, Policy 8) are more restrictive than the CAMA regulations. Many of the
policy statements from the previous plan (1992 Land Use Plan Update) have been retained.
' The town's overall general policy concerning resource protection is to give the highest priority to
the protection and management of the area's natural resources, to safeguard and perpetuate their
' biological, social, economic, and aesthetic values, and to ensure that development occurring
within natural resource areas is compatible with the characteristics of the natural areas so as to
minimize the likelihood of significant loss of private property and public resources. It is the town's
intent that its policies concerning resource protection policies be consistent with CAMA 7H Use
' Standards, except as noted above.
The town's overall general policy concerning resource production and management is to support
the effective management of the area's natural resources so as to ensure the continued
environmental and economic well being of the Cape Carteret planning jurisdiction. The town will
continue to consider the impacts on local and regional natural resources in all land development
' decisions and will seek to improve the cooperation and coordination with other public and private
agencies involved with natural resource production and management. It is the town's intent that
its policies concerning resource production and management be consistent with CAMA 7H Use
Standards.
' Cape Carteret's overall general policy concerning economic and community development is to
consider growth of the community as a desirable objective. Further, the town will promote only
' those types of development that do not significantly impact natural resources and which retain and
maintain the town's present character.
' New policy statements were developed which address a variety of issues and include:
Resource Protection and Resource Production and Management Policies
• Restricting land uses in coastal wetlands to only those developments which are water -
dependent and which will meet state and/or federal permitting requirements for acceptable
impacts.
• Prohibiting the filling of freshwater wetlands except as permitted by the US Army Corps of
' Engineers.
• Permitting marina construction in coastal wetlands and in primary nursery areas in
accordance with the CAMA 7H Use Standards, local zoning, and other land use
regulations.
• Excluding development from sound and estuarine system islands.
• Making local development restrictions for that portion of the estuarine shoreline which is
' contiguous to waters classified as ORW no more restrictive than the CAMA 7H Use
Standards.
' Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Page 152 of 171
Appendices
' May 18.2007

• Requiring that a land development project proposing to use a package sewage treatment
plant include (1) the formation of a legal, private entity to properly operate and maintain
such package treatment plant and (2) the development of a contingency plan to own and
operate such treatment plant should the private operation fail.
'
• Continuing to participate in meetings of the Regional Wastewater Task Force.
t Promoting the coordination with adjoining local government jurisdictions of comprehensive
stormwater management practices and polices to enhance water quality.
• Promoting the use of best available management practices to minimize the degradation of
water quality resulting from stormwater runoff.
• Encouraging marina siting and design which promotes proper flushing action.
• Permitting the development of noncommercial docking facilities to serve individual
residential lots in accordance with CAMA 7H Use Standards.
• Prohibiting dry stack storage boat facilities, in conjunction with marina development, in
accordance with the provisions of the town's marina ordinance.
' • Opposing the location of floating structures within the Cape Carteret planning jurisdiction.
' • Allowing public mooring fields in accordance with CAMA Use Standards.
Economic and Community Development Policies
• Supporting the management and direction of the town's growth and development in
balance with the availability of municipal services.
• Promoting a variety of land uses which complement the residential, commercial,
institutional, and recreational needs of the community. Industrial development is generally
considered not to be desirable or compatible with the town's character and ability to
provide municipal services.
• Maintaining current residential densities in order to preserve the overall low -density
character of Cape Carteret's residential areas.
• Supporting local intergovernmental cooperation with regard to land use planning issues,
such as ETJ areas, annexation agreements, thoroughfare planning, and regional sewage
systems.
• Remaining committed to providing appropriate municipal services to support additional
land development.
• Seeking to improve the town's capacity to provide municipal services.
• Considering an amendment to the town's subdivision regulations to require that new
development be connected to a public water system whenever such water system is
readily available to the property at the time of development.
Cape Carteret CAMA Laird Use Plan
Appendices
May 18, 2007
Page 153 of 171

• Continuing to support the exploration, assessment, and development of estuarine access
opportunities.
• Considering annexing areas within the existing ETJ as these areas meet the statutory
' qualifications for annexation.
n
LI
' Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Appendices
May 18. 2007
Page 154 of 171

r lip M1111111110 M M= M w M= M r r M= lip = M
Appendix
Impact of Policies on CRC Land Use Plan Management Topics
Public Water
Land Use
Access
Compatibility
• Improvements
• Reduce the
to existing
placement of
access
incompatible
locations
land uses
• Development
Preservation
of new access
of existing
Land Use and
areas
character
Development
Policies
(see Table 34
for the details
of each policy_.. ..
_ _. _._.
4.2.1 Public Water
Access Policies:
........._Policy ._1_......_._..............--
2
-Beneficial .__....__......
_.... _
..... _........ -....... _... ..... .._..
._'-..._...Policy -__._ _ __._Beneficial
Beneficial
Beneficial
.*...-.-Policy _3_ -_
• Policy 4
Beneficial
Beneficial
• Policy 5 1.
Beneficial
4.2 2 Land_Use
.
Compatibility Policies_
• Policy 1
Beneficial
• Policy 2
Beneficial
_ __
• Policy 3
Beneficial
Policy 4
Beneficial
• Policy 5
Beneficial
_ _
• Policy 6
Beneficial
Policy 7
• Policy 8
_...__._Beneficial
Beneficial
Infrastructure
Carrying
Natural Hazard
Local Areas of
Capacity
Areas
Water Quality..
Concern
_....._.
• Water, sewer,
• Land uses and
• Land use and
•
Encourage
and other
development
development
redevelopment
services being
patterns that
measures that
•
Improve
available in
reduce the
abate impacts
aesthetics
required
vulnerability to
that degrade
e
Improve
locations at
natural hazards
water quality
pedestrian
adequate
facilities
capacities to
• Planning for
•
Promote the
support
adequate
interconnection
development
evacuation
of streets
infrastructure.
•
Preserve
natural
........................................
Beneficial
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Page 155 of 171
Appendices
May 18, 2007

li­.
.icial
...........
.e.....n.ef
. .... ....... ..
f...i.c....i. a....-..l .......
..
.c­.y
PoIcY10
Beneficial
....
....
Beneficial
..
-
• Policy 11
.....B......
Beneficial
......­.
............
..
. I. ............
... ....
Beneficial .
. . .. ... .... . . .B.-en....e...
-o--. ...---
-... • Policy12
...
Beneficial ...
.Beneficial
Beneficial
.........I......................
.......
....
................................... ........... .. ............
Beneficial
... .. ..
.- ...-..-.-.-.--.-.P..---
__..._...Policy 13
...............
....
Beneficial
eneficial
Beneficial ..
PoIicy14
.............
.........
Beneficial
Beneficial
...
Beneficial
. .......................... .
• Policy 15
...
........ ..........
..... ...............
Beneficial
. ............ - ----- 1 ­1 ­1 ... .......... . ......
.............. . ..... -­­­­...............
Beneficial
.........
..
. ........... ..... . ....... . .......... . ........... .. ......
........... .. . - ..
... ........
.. ..... . ...... ....
• Policy 6 .. ..........
.....
1.�.-...-�-.-.--.-...-.---....-........ . ..... . ... ..........
Beneficial
....... ... ........ ... ...... -­­­ . ......... ...
. ........... . ........ . ...... . ..... .
... ...........
Beneficial
. ...... I . ..... . ..... .. ... .. . ... . ­....­­­­­­.-
Beneficial
.1 ..... ..... . .... .............. - .. .. .. ...........
• Polic 17
. ...........
Beneficial
Beneficial
........ . ... . ... .............................. .
....... . . . ...... . ...... ... ..
• P�qlicy.18
Beneficial
Beneficial
Beneficial
.......... . . .... ....... ......
4.2.3 in'fra's"'t'r--uct'u-'r'*e-,-C-a-r--r-y*i,n--g*-,Capacity
' Policies '' '-,­ -' .
..... .............. ... .
....... .. ...
. ....... ......
..... ...... ­-­­ ..... ...... . . I ......... .
. . . ........... . . . .... . . ...... .. ..
. . .. . ........... ...... ..... ... .... .. .. ........ ..... ..
0 Policy 1
Y
Beneficial
. . ........
Beneficial
Beneficial
•Policy 2
.. ....................
Beneficial
... . .. .... . ...... ............. .. .. ......
..... .. ........... . ... .... .... - . ... ...... .
...... .... ..... . ......... . ....... .. .. .
c 3
.­­P�qli y.-"""**
............ . . ........ .... . ....... ......... ...... -­-­....
---­--"-'--­-­---­-"
... . ... . .. . ..... . ................ ..... . .............. . ........ .........
Beneficial
- .--.
. ..... . .... ..
Beneficial
...... .. . ........ I ..... .. . ... . ........ . .
.. ... . ........ ..... ...
... ........ . ...... ...... ..
....... ....
• Policy 4
Beneficial
Beneficial
Beneficial
Beneficial
PoliCY5
. ...... ..... .
..... . ........
1.­­­.Beneficial
..... .. .. . ..... ......... - �. I ..........
Beneficial
.... .... ....... .. I .... .... .... .... ..
... . .... . ............
4.2.'.......Policy.... . ...... ....
-'Natural Hazard
.......... ­­ . ... ... ­­ .... ,-.
Areas Policies:
........ ..... ........ ... . ...
...... ....... ......... . . ....... ... . .. .........
. . ........ -.1 .. .
- ... ....... ...
........ .......... . ... . ..... .... ... . ........
. . ...... .......
........... ......
. ................. .....
...... ...... ­.--­.-­..­­..'
BeneficialBeneficial.----...
.......... ........... .. ................
........
• 2
........ .. .... . ..... ...
Beneficial
Beneficial
------ - . .. . ... .. ........ 11, ...... .. . .. . .. .. .......... ­­ . ..
. ..... ............ .. . .... . . ..... . .. .
. . .... ......... ....
3
Beneficial
... . .. . .. . . . ......... . .
• Policy 4
y
... .......... ­­.­.... ........ .. ... ­..'
Beneficial
............. . ......
.. . .... ......... . . ........ . .. . ....... ­­.-­--­-­
Beneficial
. ........
Policy �qlic 5
Beneficial
............
Beneficial
Beneficial
.. -
4.2.5 Water Quality
Policies:
...
. ....... ... .
....
... ....
*­.... Policy. 1
Beneficial
Beneficial
Policy 2
..... . . ...... . ......
Beneficial
....... . . . . . .. . . . .
... . ................... .................. . .............. . ... ........
.. .... .. . .................. ..
- . ...... .. ............. . .......... ... .
. . .. . ............
0­­Policy.�
------------
...................... ...
.--­..­­ . .. . ....... . ......... .
...... .......Beneficial .. ....
Beneficial
........ ............ ...
. ............
• Policy 4
- .- ­ .. ...... ..... .. . ..... ....
Beneficial
-­ ...... .....
.. ... ....... ... ............
• Policy 5
....... ......
. . ........ ........ . ....... .
.......... . . . . .........
Beneficial
................ .. ..... .. .. -
• Policy 6
. . ....... .
. .. ......... ............ ­­-­ .
... ... -­­-­­ ... .... . ... ... .... ..........
Beneficial
......... . . ........... .. .... .... . ........
Policy 7
....... ... . .... . - ..... .. .... .......... .. ...
Beneficial
...... . ........... ........... I ........... .
....... -.1 . ....... . ...... . .......
........... ........... .. ...... . . .. . - - ­.
Beneficial
.... ........... ............. .. I.- ..........
• Policy-8
.. ...... .. .... ...... . ..... ........ .
­­-.1 . . . ....... 11 .. ... .. ... . ... . .......... . ... ....
Beneficial
........ .. .. ... ..... ........... ...... ..... .....
. .......... ... .. .. .................... .. .. .. ....
... . ..... . .. . -
Beneficial
----- ------- - ----
• Policy 9
........ . .......... .......... . ...
.. . .... .......... . ....... . ........ ....
Beneficial
.............. .. .......
......... ........... .. .
. ..... . ....... . . ......... .
Beneficial
...... . ....... ...... . .... -
.­...2- .....Y. ...­.--­.­­ .. .........
4.2.6 Areas of Environmental Concern
kifi­` --"*--,-*,- *­*
Policies.
. . . . ........
.... .... ..... ....
Cape Carteret CAAIA Land Use Plan Page 156 of 171
Appewlices
May 18,2007

M M M M M M r w M M= M MI r IMI M M r
• Policy 1....
...._....._ _...._ . _ - -
--..._.......... .....................
Beneficial
__ . _ .........
_...
..... ..... ... ...... . _ - - ___ _
_.- ------_......
Beneficial
_... -- ._...
.
_
Policy 2
Beneficial
-._------------- _..........._...-----.
Beneficial
_..___....
------...
._.._...._._.__..........._.._..--_.._
-----..._
_----- -_.. ..
_..___........-_
• Policy_ 3
......_ ..........__..._.. ---
Beneficial
_.._.__._. _ —.
_ _---- ... _
..__ ....
Beneficial
_ ....
• Policy 4
Beneficial
Beneficial
• Policy 5
Beneficial
Beneficial
• Policy 6
Beneficial
--- --_ —
Beneficial
—.__
.._.....
.......... ._... ..............
...
..... -........... ......... _ . __ ..
• Policy 7
Beneficial
Beneficial
• Policy.8
Beneficial
Beneficial
.....
Beneficial
.__ __
• Policy 9
Beneficial
Beneficial
- -
_.-_-
• Policy..1.0...._.
-----._. _._.
Beneficial
-------
------- _ .. _. _.. ....
Polic 11
-------
Beneficial
Beneficial._._._.
' Policy 12 _
_. _.
_._......_..__._..__._.
Beneficial
_--..._._..
__.._.-.---._.___... ____
..._.....__.._.._..____..._.__-_.-.___._-.-
__--- _.__._ ...__._.
• Policy 13
Beneficial
Beneficial
• Policy 14
Beneficial
Beneficial _
.....
• Policy 15
- -
-
Beneficial
_._......_...........
- --------.. .._..--...
_
Beneficial
_. .
'..... Policy..16......
Beneficial
- _
..._
4.2.7 Areas of
Local Concern Policies:
.
.._ . - - ....
-
• Policy 1 _
__..__
Beneficial
_...__._._..--.--------.--._.._._..
_..--.___._____._..__..__._._.._.___...__.
_..._...
....Beneficial
• Poli. ............
- -
---..._..
_._ ..
.. .
Policy 3
' Y ......
_........ _.
Beneficial
-.
Beneficial
Policy 4 _
_.... _.__.
.. _ ...._....__._....- -
Beneficial
- --..—
_._._._..
_.._...-----..........---- - ..._.._..---
Beneficial
• Policy 5
Beneficial
Beneficial
Beneficial
___.._..._
Policy 6...__._..._
-..._.._._.____..----_---
.___.. . _..__ ..........
__--
---..__
Beneficial
Po.icy_7
__..__
_._.....__Beneficial_
Beneficial
Beneficial
-
• Policy 8
-_.._.._.._.__.._._......._.___.._.._._
Beneficial
Beneficial
_ ..
Policy. 9
...._ ..... .......... __ - --- -
-- _
Beneficial
_ - ----_ _
.._.. _. _.... -- - --
Beneficial
..
Beneficial
Policy 10
------._._-._. _..._ -.---
__---------
---._............._._...__.._
-- - ---- .._.. ...... _ ._...
Beneficial.
• Policv 11
--- _.._...__._._.. _.._..---.._.. _
__—.. _ . .. _
Beneficial
_....
Beneficial
Note: Blank space in table indicates neutral impact. All local policies have been determined to have either a positive or neutral impact on CRC
management topics. No specific actions or programs are required to mitigate negative impacts.
Cape Carteret CAMA land Use Pktn Page 157 of 171
Appendices
May 18, 2007

Appendix J
Maps and Land Use Plan Data Available at the Town Clerk's Office
at the Cape Carteret Town Hall
1
Maps
•
Natural Features Map
1
•
Composite Environmental Conditions Map
•
Wetlands
•
Floodplains Map
•
Storm Surge Map
•
Existing Land Use Map
•
Water System Map
•
Stormwater Management System Map
•
Soils with Septic System Limitations
•
Land Suitability Map
•
Future Land Use Map
Data
•
Cape Carteret Land Use Plan Update, 2005
' Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Appendices
Alay 18, 2107
Page 158 of 171

I
1
1
Appendix K
Summary of CRC Land Use Plan Management Topic Goals and Objectives
r,?Va�ozf
Maximize public access to the beaches and the public trust waters of the coastal
Goal
.._region _..__._._---__.___.-___._._..._.................._._._._.____._._.._....--.-.---_.....___..._._._..._...._......___...._.._.._._.___._._..__..__.._.____._....._.._.
Objective
Develop comprehensive policies that provide access opportunities for the public
along the shoreline within the planning jurisdiction
X-/.v Rom, i
Goal
Ensure the development and use of resources or preservation of land minimizes
direct and secondary environmental impacts, avoids risks to public health, safety and
welfare, and is consistent with the capability of the land based on considerations of
interactions of natural and manmade features
Objective
Adopt and apply local development policies that balance protection of natural
resources and fragile areas with economic development_
_._._....------- ---.__ .._---------- ----
Policies should provide clear direction to assist local decision making and
consistency findings for zoning, divisions of land, and public and private projects
t4-------------
.f .• ! . •Yk
F% '✓egy,,y}`9' �y,pt°% 'i^'4.` $i 'r $X pte t✓M 5�{F ,a'V,. hY¢ �F.
'as.� �RSan� ^� � 4' k� ���� S. � a ��.�. it i.PS` �+i.$LLl3L"w,,'M�*'. �' 7'
Goal
_
Ensure that public infrastructure systems are appropriately sized, located, and
managed so that the quality and productivity of AECs and other fragile areas are
_protected or restored
Objective
Establish level of service policies and criteria for infrastructure consistent with future
land needs ro'ections
ffift
Goal
Conserve and maintain barrier dunes, beaches, floodplains, and other coastal
features for their natural storm protection functions and their natural resources giving
-- _ --
recognition to public health,, safety, and welfare issues -
Objective
Develop policies that minimize threats to life, property, and natural resources
resulting from development located in or adjacent to hazard areas such as those
subject to erosion, hi h winds, storm surge, flooding, or sea level rise
M_
Maintain, protect and, where possible, enhance water quality in all coastal wetlands,
Goal
rivers, streams, and estuaries
Objective
_
Adopt policies for coastal waters within the planning jurisdiction to help ensure that
water quality is maintained if not im aired and im roved if im aired
Integrate local concerns with the overall goals of CAMA in the context of land use
Goal
_
planning
Objective
Identify and address local concerns and issues, such as cultural and historic areas,
scenic areas, economic development, downtown revitalization or general health and
human service needs
ISource: LAMA Land Use Planning Guidelines, Subchapter IH .U/U2(d)(J)
' Cape Carteret CAAfA Land Use Plan
Appendices
:Nay 18, 2 00 7
Page 159 of 171

Appendix L
Storm Drainage Problem Areas, May 2001
1. Star Hill Dr. between Middle Ct. and Apollo Dr.
Problem: Catch basin is an open box (no grate) which is a safety hazard and requires
regular maintenance to keep box clean. Also, it appears the joints for the pipe under the
road are failing creating sink holes in the road.
Action: Town is planning to replace the open box with a new catch basin with a
standard grate and to replace the pipe under the road with a 24-inch pipe (or largest pipe
which will physically fit) laid in the proper direction. Also, ditches east of catch basin
need to be regraded down to the low point on each side of Star Hill Drive once new
basin and pipe work has been completed.
2. Intersection of Star Hill Dr. and Apollo Dr. (south side of Star Hill Dr.).
Problem: Water stands after rain events along the south side of the road and there are
water valves and lines outside of the road making it difficult to construct drainage
facilities in the right-of-way.
Action: Grade area to a low point, pipe under Star Hill Drive, and then pipe down the
north side of Apollo Drive to the existing ditch. Recommended starting pipe at
downstream ditch and utilizing the largest pipe system which will allow sufficient cover
under Star Hill Drive and provide maximum drainage capacity.
3. Mercury Ct. off of Star Hill Dr.
Problem: Water stands after rain events in the cleared area which will.be paved in the
future.
Action: Town plans to ditch down both sides of right-of-way from Mercury Ct. to
existing ditch which discharges to existing ditch on Star Hill Drive. Ditch on Star Hill
Drive may need to be regraded along west side of road north to an existing 15-inch CPP
which discharges under road.
4. Sutton Dr. between Sutton Place and Quail Neck Ct.
Problem: Standing water after rain events in the northeast quadrant of the Quail Neck
Ct. and Sutton Dr. intersection and along both sides of Sutton Dr.
Action: Town has placed a 12-inch CPP under Quail Neck Ct. to drain the northeast
quadrant of the intersection and regraded ditches along Sutton Dr. down to where 6-inch
PVC pipe crosses Sutton Dr. and then drains through a ditch to a piping system which
goes across the golf course. According to the Town, this appears to have helped
drainage in the area. However, if drainage problems persist on the south side of Sutton
Dr., the 6-inch PVC should be replaced with a larger pipe.
5. Northeast end of Fairway Ln. (north side of the street).
Problem: In past the few years it has been noted that water stands in a low area after
large rain events. Looks as if area lots were built up and water has nowhere to flow.
Action: Determined not to be significant problem at this time. If it becomes a more
regular occurrence and a solution becomes necessary, an engineering study would be
needed to determine where to go with the water.
6. Intersection of Pine Lake Rd. and Fore Lane Dr. (both sides of Fore Lane Dr. and both sides
of Pine Lake Rd. north of the intersection).
Problem: Standing water in areas listed above. There are no ditches along the roads or
piping in this area.
Action: A detailed engineered solution is needed to solve drainage problem in this
area. Just moving the water downstream may overload the downstream system. See
number 7 below.
Cape Carteret CAMA land Use Plan Page 160 of 171
.appendices
May 18, 2007

I
J
1
7. North and south of intersection of Gemini Dr. and Pine Lake Rd. along the west side of Pine
Lake Rd.
Problem: The existing 8-inch piping is too small to carry the flows coming to it.
Action: Recommend getting a detailed engineered solution in order to size system to
help solve problems listed in number 6 above. Otherwise, replace 8-inch piping system
with as large as pipe that will physically fit all the way to the pond north of Taylor Notion
Road.
8. North side of street on Gemini Ct. (between intersection with Pine Lake and cul-de-sac).
Problem: Pond on golf course overflows and drains through residential yard and over
the road. Water stands on north side of Gemini Ct.
Action: Town thinking of putting in basin on north side of Gemini Ct. in drainage
easement and then piping to existing 12-inch pipe going down Pine Lake Dr. It is
recommended that an engineering study be completed to determine if such piping would
overwhelm the downstream drainage system creating another problem.
9. Area behind houses (along the back of the property) bounded by Lousan Dr., Fox Dr.,
Starlight Dr., and Weeks Blvd.
Problem: Standing water after rain events. Ditch had been filled -in and water had no
where to drain.
Action: Town has placed approximately 200 feet of 12-inch CPP including 2 clean
outs with grates in a 10-foot storm drainage easement along the back of the properties
to an existing open ditch. According to Town, improvement seems to be working at this
time.
10. North end of Loma Linda Ct. (along the property line on the west side of cul-de-sac).
Problem: Area flooded a couple of times in the last few years. Lots around area have
been built up creating a low area which can hold water.
Action: Could possibly ditch or pipe from low area through easement beside of
church to one of the ponds located in front of the church. Grades need to be shot along
the proposed alignment to determine if ditching or piping is possible.
11. Just south of intersection of Quail Run and Channel View Ct. on the west side of Channel.
View Ct.
Problem: Water stands after rain events on the west side of Channel View Ct. just
south of intersection with Quail Run because the water does not have an outlet.
Action: Town planning on piping from the west side to the east side of Channel View
Ct. to an existing pond. No smaller than a 12-inch pipe should be used but recommend
using a 15-inch pipe. Also recommend that the Town pursue their efforts in obtaining
permission from the pond owner to clean out the existing pond.
12. South side and east side of Club Ct. just west of intersection with Bogue Sound Dr.
Problem: Water stands after rain events on the east side of Club Ct. and extends out
onto a vacant lot because the water does not have an outlet. Existing right-of-way not
wide enough to construct a ditch.
Action: Recommend that Town acquire an easement on the east side of Club Ct.,
grade a ditch to a low point, and then pipe (12-inch minimum) water to the channel under
the road to a channel located to the west of Club Ct. CAMA should be consulted before
starting any of this work. Most likely a CAMA permit would be needed to pipe any water
to the channel in question. Note that Engineer could be helpful in obtaining any
necessary permits.
13. Intersection of Park Ave. and Bayshore Dr. and extending north on east side of Bayshore
Dr.
Problem: All 4 quadrants of the Park Ave. and Bayshore Dr. flood and hold water
during large rain events and water stands along the east side of Bayshore Dr. because
there is no drainage system in area.
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Appendices
.Ylav 18, 2007
Page 161 of 171

1
I
I
I
LJ
I
I
Action: Town is planning to construct a catch basin in each quadrant of the
intersection and then pipe the water to the west down the north side of Park Ave. to an
existing 15-inch RCP which crosses under Park Ave. to a ditch. In the field it was
recommended that the Town use a 12 to 15-inch pipe and start at the downstream end
at the existing culvert and lay pipe on as steep a grade as possible while maintaining
sufficient cover under Bayshore Dr. However, after looking at the complexity of how the
proposed system could affect the existing drainage system in the area, I would
recommend having an Engineer study the area and design a system which would
ensure that the downstream landowners would not be affected by the increase in runoff
from the new upstream drainage system.
14. Both sides of Sound View Ct. north of intersection with Kear Dr. and north side of Kear Dr.
from just west of intersection with Sound View Ct. to intersection with Youpon Dr.
Problem: Water stands in the area and does not have an outlet.
Action: Town has placed a 10-inch PVC pipe under Sound View Ct. (north side of
intersection with Kear Dr.), ditched down both sides of Kear Dr. to existing ditch, and
placed 10-inch PVC pipe under Kear Dr. Town says that this has solved problem along
Kear Dr. The Town is planning on regrading the ditches along Sound View Ct. north of
the intersection with Kear Dr. to drain to the existing piping system at the north end of
Sound View Ct. which discharges into Deer Creek. Town should make sure regrading
ditch will not overload downstream system to the point that it negatively affects any
downstream landowners.
15. Both sides of Neptune Dr. east of Holly Ln. (Neptune Dr. closest to Bogue Sound).
Problem: Existing 4-inch pipe east of intersection of Neptune Dr. and Holly Ln. is too
small which causes water to backup into the street. The portion of Neptune Dr. which
runs north/south does not have a drainage system and water stands in the area.
Action: Town is presently working with CAMA to get approval to replace the 4-inch
pipe which discharges into the sound with a larger pipe (preferably a 12-inch pipe). This
would definitely help relieve flooding in the area of the small pipe. For the other area
along Neptune Dr., the Town is planning on extending the 12-inch pipe down from the
existing system which discharges into Deer Creek to the area ponding water and putting
in a catch basin. Again, the Town should make sure adding to the existing system will
not negatively effect downstream landowners.
Source: Storm Drainage Report, The Wooten Company, May 2001.
Implementation: The Town of Cape Carteret has implemented the recommendations listed
above for items 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 9, 13, and 14. Items 7, 10, and 11 are proposed for future
implementation. The recommendations for items 5, 12, and 15 are either not feasible to
undertake at this time or will not be implemented. For item 15, the Town could not get DCM
approval for the recommended increase in pipe size.
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Page 162 of 171
Appendices
Mav 18, 2007

LI
1
1
I
Appendix M
Population Projections
a '*" ^Awt z' A�. A#.{m ` d}a^i`
'�€��� ���w•Y"�?i��i*b
k,,iq,'I- '".
'FF �.i
♦. 4
'iFY
q +L .5'r' y �+'u 3 fS,Zn'Sat qt?�.,.w .y.d yr¢
`'"44Y��*:v �+) dr �y:'i X �' ba t*��i"� �2f to K'`''
Census
July
2000
2002
2005
2010
2015
2020
2025
2030
_.
Carteret County___-
_
59,383
._._.._._-
_ 60,064
__.._........._._..._......
61,636
63,939
66,026
._---....._...._.__.......__--.
67,762
69,042
69,962
Cape Carteret
Corporate Area _
_1,214
1,243
-T
Average rate of growth
1970-2000
1,214
1,243
1,410
1,606
1,865
2,125
2,469
2,813
_Town to county ratio _
1,214
1,243
_ 1,233
_ 1,279
1,321_
-1,355
1,,381
1,399
Average _ _- _
1,214
1,243
_ 1,322
1,442
1,593
_1,740
1,925
2,106_
Cape Carteret
1,225"
1,254*
1,333
1,455
1,607
1,756
1,942
2,125
Planning Jurisdiction
Sources: US Census, 1970-2000. 2002 Certified Population Estimates, NC State Data Center, October
2003. County Population Growth 2000-2030, NC State Data Center, July 2004. Block 2000
US Census data for the ETJ area.
*2000 and 2002 estimates for the Cape Carteret planning jurisdiction by The Wooten Company.
Carteret County projections by the NC State Data Center.
Cape Carteret corporate and planning jurisdiction projections by The Wooten Company.
Cape Carteret Planning Jurisdiction population projections based upon the average of two the
methodologies delineated above for the Cape Carteret corporate area.
Assumptions:
1. The average rate of growth (3.2% annualized rate) for the period 1970-2000 will remain
constant through 2030.
2. The average ratio (2.0%) of the town's population to the Carteret County population for
the period 1970-2000 will remain constant through 2030.
3. The ratio (100.9%) of the estimated 2000 planning jurisdiction population to the 2000
Cape Carteret corporate population will remain constant through 2030.
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Appendices
May 18, 2007
Page 163 of 171

1
1
i
1
I
1
Appendix N
Citizen Participation Plan
Subchapter 7B of the North Carolina Administrative Code, Land Use Planning Guidelines,
requires that the Land Use Plan update process include a variety of educational efforts and
participation techniques to assure that all segments of the community have a full and adequate
opportunity to participate in all stages of the preparation of the land use plan. It is therefore the
responsibility of the Town of Cape Carteret to involve, inform and educate a broad cross-section
of the community's populace. It is the intent of the Town of Cape Carteret to have a continuous
citizen participation and education process that achieves these purposes.
The following steps will be taken to provide information to the public and to encourage citizen
involvement:
1. Establishment of Land Use Plan Advisory Committee
An Advisory Committee representing a cross-section of the community
will be organized to serve as the body responsible for guiding the Land
Use Plan formulation effort. The Advisory Committee will serve in a
review and advisory capacity to Town of Cape Carteret Mayor and Board
of Commissioners, the Town of Cape Carteret staff, and the project
Planning Consultant, The Wooten Company.
The Advisory Committee will meet on a periodic basis with the Planning
Consultant and Town staff to assist the Planning Consultant in defining
land use and development issues and concerns, reviewing draft land use
plan components prepared by the Planning Consultant, providing
recommendations regarding land use plan content, and provide general
input. The Advisory Committee members will keep the Cape Carteret
Board of Commissioners apprised of their activities and progress through
regular oral and/or written reports. The composition of the membership of
the Advisory Committee is delineated in Attachment A.
The local staffing of the Advisory Committee will be handled through the
staff of the Town of Cape Carteret. The Town of Cape Carteret Town
Clerk will serve as the local coordinator of the CAMA Land Use Plan
project.
2. Land Use Plan Advisory Committee Orientation
An orientation meeting of the Land Use Plan Advisory Committee will be
held in September 2003. The meeting will focus on the purposes of the
CAMA Land Use Plan Update, the process and schedule for preparing
the plan, an overview of the 7B Land Use Planning Guidelines, the recent
changes to the guidelines, and a review of the draft Citizen Participation
Plan. This meeting will be open to the public and its time and location will
be advertised in the local media. It is anticipated that this meeting will be
held prior to the initial public informational meeting.
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Appendices
Mai• 18, 2007
Page 164 of 171

r3. Initial Public Informational Meeting
A meeting of the Land Use Plan Advisory Committee will be held in
' October 2003 to serve as an educational opportunity to inform the general
public of the purpose of the CAMA Land Use Plan and the process for
preparing the Plan and an opportunity to solicit citizen comments. In
addition, the following specific topics will be discussed:
• The local policy statements contained in the current CAMA land
use plans.
• The effect of those policies on the community.
• Ways the current CAMA land use plans have been used to guide
development during the past planning period.
• The methods to be utilized to inform the general public of the plan
preparation process and to solicit the views of citizens in the
development of updated policy statements.
• Key planning concerns and issues regarding public access to
public trust waters, land use compatibility, infrastructure carrying
capacity, natural hazard areas, water quality, and other growth
and land development issues of local concern.
• Community aspirations and visions for the future.
Notification of the meeting will be achieved through local newspaper
notices and the preparation and distribution of public service
announcements to local radio and television stations.
Written notice of the public informational meeting will be published in a
local newspaper twice prior to the meeting date. The first notice will be
published not less than 30 days prior to the public informational meeting
and the second notice, not less than 10 days prior to the meeting. Notice
of the meeting will also be provided to the Coastal Resources Advisory
Council member and the Division of Coastal Management District
Planner.
4. Periodic Land Use Plan Advisory Committee Meetings
It is anticipated that the Land Use Plan Advisory Committee will meet at
' strategic points throughout the land use planning process to provide
general input into the plan development and to review materials prepared
by the Planning Consultant. Meetings will be held to identify project goals
and objectives; identify key planning and land use issues and concerns;
review an analysis of existing and emerging conditions; review draft policy
statements, land use suitability analyses, and future land use maps;
review land use management implementation plans and schedules; and
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Page 165 of 171
Appendices
IMay 18, 2007

11
review a draft of the entire land use plan document. Advisory Committee
meetings will be held from September 2003 to March 2005. Newspaper
notices and public service announcements to radio and television stations
will be prepared and distributed prior to each meeting. An opportunity for
' public comment and input will be invited and encouraged at each
meeting.
1
I
Ll
1
1
1
1
ri
1
It is anticipated that at least six Advisory Committee meetings will be held.
The location for Advisory Committee meetings will be the Board of
Commissioners Room at the Cape Carteret Town Hall, 102 Dolphin
Street. The regularly scheduled Advisory Committee meetings will, be
held during the second week of the month that a meeting is scheduled. A
tentative meeting schedule of the Advisory Committee is attached as
Attachment B.
At all regular meetings of the Advisory Committee, time will be provided
on the meeting agenda for public comment. A list of the names of the
speakers providing public comment and a copy of any written comments
provided will be kept on file by the Town of Cape Carteret. A copy of the
written comments will also be provided to the Division of Coastal
Management District Planner for use in the CAMA land use plan review
process.
5. Public Informational Meeting on the Preliminary Draft Land Use Plan
Following the completion of a preliminary draft Land Use Plan Update, a
public informational meeting will be held by the Advisory Committee. The
purpose of this meeting will be to review the draft Plan, particularly the
land use and development policies, future land use map, and
implementation plan and schedule. The public informational meeting date
is projected to be held in August 2004. Copies of the full preliminary draft
Land Use Plan as well as executive summaries will be available at Town
facilities. Notification of the meeting will be achieved through local
newspaper notices and the preparation and distribution of public service
announcements to local radio and television stations. Notice of the
meeting will also be provided to the Coastal Resources Advisory Council
member and the Division of Coastal Management District Planner.
7. Planning Board Review Meeting
The purpose of this meeting is to provide a review of the draft land use
plan by the Cape Carteret Planning Board and to provide another
opportunity for general public comments.
8. Board of Commissioners Review Meeting
The purpose of this meeting is to provide a review of the draft land use
plan by the Cape Carteret Board of Commissioners and to provide
another opportunity for general public comments.
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Appendices
May 18, 2007
Page 166 of 171

L
1
1
1
I
1
F1
1
1
9. Public Forum on Final Draft Land Use Plan
The purpose of this meeting is to provide public information regarding the
final draft land use plan document and a formal opportunity for general
citizen review and comments on the final draft land use plan. The
meeting will afford another opportunity for public involvement prior to a
formal public hearing on the adoption of the Land Use Plan.
10. Public Hearing
A formal public hearing will be held by the Cape Carteret Board of
Commissioners to review the final draft Plan and to solicit citizen
comments. Following the public hearing, the Board of Commissioners will
consider action on adoption of the Plan. The public hearing will be
advertised by newspaper notice at least 30 days prior to the date of the
public hearing which is anticipated to be held in May 2005. Notice of the
public hearing will also be posted at municipal facilities. Additional means
of public notification will include radio and television public service
announcements. Copies of the final draft Land Use Plan and executive
summaries will be available for review at municipal facilities and at the
local public library.
11. Additional Means of Soliciting Public Involvement
In addition to the meetings outlined above, Cape Carteret will utilize the
following means to increase public involvement and to disseminate public
information:
• Quarterly project progress reports will be made available to the
local media.
• Presentations by representatives of Town of Cape Carteret
staff and/or Advisory Committee members to civic, business,
church, and similar groups, as requested.
Use of local CATV for meeting schedules, meeting notices,
project progress reports, plan drafts, and other public
educational materials.
12. Additional Meetings
In addition to the meetings outlined above and in Attachment B, The
Town of Cape Carteret may elect to hold additional meetings if it is
determined that more meetings are needed to provide project information
and/or provide additional opportunities for soliciting citizen comments and
public participation in the Land Use Plan preparation process.
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Appendices
Mav 18, 2007
Page 167 of 171

' 13. Stakeholder Groups
During the Land Use Plan preparation process, specific stakeholder or
interest groups may be identified. Such groups or individuals will, if
requested, receive mailed meeting notices and will be specifically
encouraged to participate at all stages of the Land Use Plan preparation
' process.
14. Amendment to the Citizen Participation Plan
' This Citizen Participation Plan will be reevaluated at the end of Phase I of
the project (May 2004) by the Town of Cape Carteret staff and
amendments may be recommended. Any amendment to the Plan will be
approved by the Town of Cape Carteret in the same manner as adoption
of the original Plan.
1
I
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Appendices
May 18, 2007
Page 168 of 171

1
1
1
P,
F
1
L7,
Attachment A
Advisory Committee Membership
Town of Cape Carteret Land Use Plan Update
i, WWMI
252-393-2339
Sara Earnhardt
209 Neptune Court
Ole Cape Carteret —
Gordy_Eure __
207 Dolphin Street —
Planning Board --_
252-393`6131__ _
Linnie Dawsey
209 Taylor Notion
Board of Commissioners
252-393-6185
Road
Fred Grube
117 Clubhouse Drive
Star Hill
252-393-8409
Lenore
205 LeJeune Road
Board of Adjustment/Bayshore
252-393-6430
_Hellwege_
John Provetero
211 Channel Drive
Country Club Point
252-393-2087
_Kevin White _
550 Neptune.Drive_—
Board of Commissioners
_
252-393-2519
Karen Zornes 102 Dolphin Street Town Clerk/Local Project 252-393-8483
Iconsultants
Coordinator
The following will provide technical planning assistance to the Advisory Committee:
Alex Fuller
_Greenville, NC
The Wooten Company
252-757-1096
Buddy
Raleigh, NC
The Wooten Company
919-828-0531
Blackburn
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Appendices
' ,Nay 18, 2007
Page 169 of 171

1
I
Attachment B
Tentative Meeting Schedule
Town of Cape Carteret Land Use Plan Update
t?'. i - � gggg ,,dd
'* � F fT`'3 � '�% k� t✓ ' �bt e ed-Y ✓ �� ,� yY`kq,H �1'.'"�' � st a4,r,
_ September 2003
Advisory Committee Orientation Meeting___
October 2003
Initial Public Informational Meeting
November 2003
#2 re Community Concerns and Aspirations_
_ January 2004
_
_Advisory_Committee
Advisory Committee �#3 re_Analysis of Existing And Emerging Conditions
March 2004
Advisory Committee #4 re: Plan for the Future _^ _
May_2004-_._-._..__
-_AdvisoryCo.mmittee #5 re Management Tools
_ August 2004
Second Public Informational Meeting
_November 2004
Planning Board review of draft document
January 2005
Board of Commissioners review of draft document
March 2005
Advisory Committee #6 re: final review of draft document and
_recommendation for approval___..._--.----_.____.._-_---___.____.____.___.�.__.-__.__...._......
April 2005
�May
Public Forum re: final draft document_—
2005
Public Hearing
May 2005
Board of Commissioners meeting re: adoption of plan _
_
Post May 2005
CRC review and approval
' Committee meetings will b held h Board fCommissioners Regularly scheduled Advisory Co ttee eet gs e e d at the oa d o
Room at the Cape Carteret Town Hall, 102 Dolphin Street, Cape Carteret, NC. The location of
all other meetings will be determined at a later date. Meeting dates are tentative and are
subject to change. Notification of the meetings will be achieved through local newspaper
notices and the preparation and distribution of public service announcements to local radio and
television stations. Notice of the meetings will also be provided to the Coastal Resources
Advisory Council member and the Division of Coastal Management District Planner.
fl
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Appendices
May 18, 2007
Page 170 of 171

C
ii
1
F
1
I

Attachment C
'
Local Media Resources
1.
Tideland News
'
2.
Local Public Access CATV station: Channel 10
3.
Local radio stations: WRHT-FM
WJNC-AM
W BTB-AM
WRNS -FM
'
4.
Local television stations: WYDO
W ITN
WNCT
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan
Appendices
May 18, 2007
Page 171 of 171