Land Use Plan Update-1998

t
1
1
1
1
1
DCM COPY DCM COPY
lease do not remove!!!!!
Division of Coastal Management Copy
LAND USE PLAN UPDATE
TOWN OF CAPE CARTERET
NORTH CAROLINA
Adopted by the Cape Carteret Town Board: October 20, 1997
Certified by the Coastal Resources Commission: January 22, 1998
Prepared by
THE WOOTEN COMPANY
Engineering -Planning -Architecture
Raleigh/Greenville, North Carolina
The preparation of this report was financed in part through a grant provided by the North Carolina Coastal
Management Program, through funds provided by the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended,
which is administered by the Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration.

I
TABLE OF CONTENTS
'
1.000 INTRODUCTION AND EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................... 1-1
1.100
Purpose.......................................................................................... 1-1
'
1.200
1.300
Overview of the Land Use Plan Update .................................................. 1-1
Summary of Land Use Issues............................................................... 1-3
1.400
Summary of Data Collection and Analysis ............................................... 1-4
'
1.500
1.600
Summary of Policy Statements............................................................. 1-5
Summary of Land Classifications.......................................................... 1-7
1.700
Implementation and Management Strategies ............................................. 1-8
'
2.000 DATA
COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
'
2.100
Existing Conditions.......................................................................... 2-1
2.110 Population...........................................................................2-1
2.111 Population Size and Growth Trends ..............................
2-1
1
2.112 Age Composition and Distribution ...............................
2.113 Racial Composition ..................................................
2-2
2-3
2.114 Household Population ...............................................
2-3
'
2.120 Economy............................................................................
2.121 Employment...........................................................2-3
2-3
2.122 Income Characteristics ..............................................
2-4
2.123 Trade and Services ...................................................
2-4
'
2.124 Tourism................................................................
2-5
2.125 Commercial Fishing .
. 2-5
2.130 Existing Land Use.................................................................
2-6
2.131 Residential Land Use ...::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.
2-7
'
2.132 Commercial Land Use ..............................................
2-9
2.133 Public/Institutional Land Use ......................................
2-9
2.134 Industrial Land Use ......................
2-9
'
2.135 Vacant Land ...........................................................
2-9
2.140 Current Plans, Policies, and Regulations Affecting Land Use ...........
2-10
'
2.141 Storm Hazard Mitigation and
Post Disaster Reconstruction Plan ...............................
2-10
2.142 Zoning Ordinance...................................................2-10
2.143 Subdivision Regulations...........................................2-10
2.144 Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance ...........................
2-10
2.145 Building Codes......................................................2-10
'
2.146 1990 Public Sound Access, Parks and Recreation
and Town Beautification Plan....................................2-11
2.147 1980 Shoreline Access Study.....................................2-11
'
2.200
Constraints to Land Development........................................................2-11
2.210 Land Suitability...................................................................2-11
2.211 Physical Limitations for Development ..........................
2-11
'
2.211.1 Hazard Areas .............................................
2.211.2 Soil Limitations . .
2-11
2-12
2.211.3 Availability and Quality of Public Water Supply..2-12
A
Table of Contents -January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update

0
2.211.4 Water Quality Conditions..............................2-15
2.211.5 Water Quality Classes and Standards................2-18
2.211.6 Water Quality Use -Support Ratings..................2-18
2.211.7 Areas with Excessive Slope and High Erosion
Potential ..................................................
2-19
2.212
Fragile Areas .........................................................
2-19
2.212.1 Areas of Environmental Concern .....................2-20
2.212.2 Other Fragile Areas .....................................
2-20
2.213
Areas with Resource Potential ....................................
2-21
2.220 Carrying Capacity Analysis ....................................................
2-21
2.221
Urban Services......................................................2-21
2.221.1 Water Service ............................................
2-22
2.221.2 Sewer......................................................2-22
2.221.3 Police Protection.........................................2-22
2.221.4 Fire Protection ...........................................
2-23
2.221.5 Emergency Medical Services ..........................2-23
2.221.6 Solid Waste Collection and Disposal ................2-23
2.221.7 Recreation.................................................2-23
2.221.8 Education..................................................2-24
2.221.9 Public Administration Ability .........................2-24
2.222
Transportation Services............................................2-24
2.230 Estimated Demand...............................................................2-24
2.231
Population Projections.............................................2-26
2.232
Economic Outlook ..................................................
2-26
2.233
Future Land Needs.................................................2-26
2.234
Summary of Community Facilities Needs......................2-27
3.000 POLICY STATEMENTS.............................................................................. 3-1
3.100 Analysis Of Policy Statements In The 1992 CAMA Plan .............................
3-1
3.110
Former Resource Protection Policies ..........................................
3-1
3.120
Former Resource Production and Management Policies ...................
3-3
3.130
Former Economic and Community Development Policies ................
3-3
3.200 Development of Updated Resource Protection Policies ................................
3-4
3.210
Constraints to Land Development ..............................................
3-4
3.211 Flood Hazard Areas .................................................
3-4
3.212 Soil Suitability/Septic Tank Use ..................................
3-4
3.220
Areas of Environmental Concern ...............................................
3-4
3.221 Coastal Wetlands .....................................................
3-5
3.222 Estuarine Waters and Public Trust Areas .......................
3-5
3.223 Estuarine Shoreline ..................................................
3-5
3.224 Outstanding Resource Waters ......................................
3-6
3.230
Other Fragile Areas ...............................................................
3-6
3.231 Sound and Estuarine System Islands .............................
3-6
3.232 Freshwater Wetlands ................................................
3-6
3.233 Historical and Archaeological Sites ..............................
3-6
3.240
Hurricane and Flood Evacuation Needs and Plans ..........................
3-6
3.250
Potable Water Supply Protection ...............................................
3-7
3.260
Use of Package Treatment Plants ..............................................
3-7
Table of Contents -January 22, 1998 ii
Cape Carteret CAAL9 Land Use Plan Update

3.270
Stormwater Runoff, Water Quality Problems, and
Management Measures...........................................................
3-7
3.280
Marinas, Piers, Docks, and Floating Home Development ................
3-8
3.290
Industrial Impacts on Fragile Areas ............................................
3-9
3.290.1 Sea Level Rise Impacts .............................................
3-9
3.290.2 Bulkhead Installation Damage to Marshes ......................
3-9
3.300
Development of Updated Resource Production and Management Policies.........
3-9
3.310
Productive Agricultural Lands .................................................
3-10
3.320
Commercial Forest Lands......................................................3-10
3.330
Mineral Production Areas ......................................................3-10
3.340
Commercial and Recreational Fisheries......................................3-10
3.350
Off -Road Vehicles................................................................3-11
3.360
Residential, Commercial, and Industrial
Land Development Impacts on Resources ...................................
3-11
3.370
Peat or Phosphate Mining Impacts on Resources ..........................
3-11
3.400
Development of Updated Economic and Community Development Policies .....
3-11
3.410
General Land Development Policies..........................................3-12
3.420
Desired Types of Urban Growth Patterns ...................................
3-12
3.430
Local Commitment to Providing Services to Development ..............
3-13
3.440
Redevelopment of Developed Areas ..........................................
3-13
3.450
Commitment to State and Federal Programs ................................
3-13
3.460
Assistance to Channel Maintenance Projects ................................
3-13
3.470
Energy Facility Siting and Development....................................3-14
3.480
Tourism............................................................................
3-14
3.490
Coastal and Estuarine Water Beach Access .................................
3-14
3.490.1 Anticipated Residential Development and
Requisite Support Services........................................3-14
3.490.2 Other Identified Local Land Development Issues .............
3-15
3.500
Development of Updated Continuing Public Participation Policies ................
3-15
3.600
Storm Hazard Mitigation, Post -Disaster Recovery, and
EvacuationPlans.............................................................................
3-16
3.700
Proposed Implementation Methods.......................................................
3-21
3.800
Intergovernmental Coordination and Implementation .................................
3-21
4.000 LAND CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM..............................................................
4-1
4.100 Land Classifications..........................................................................
4-1
4.110
Developed Classification.........................................................
4-1
4.120
Urban Transition Classification.................................................
4-1
4.130
Limited Transition Classification ...............................................
4-2
4.140
Community Classification.......................................................
4-2
4.150
Rural Classification...............................................................
4-2
4.160
Rural with Services Classification .............................................
4-2
4.170
Conservation Classification......................................................
4-3
4.200 Uses Included
In Each Classification......................................................
4-3
4.210
Developed Classification.........................................................
4-3
4.220
Urban Transition Classification.................................................
4-3
4.230
Conservation Classification......................................................
4-3
4.300 Land Classification Map.....................................................................
4-4
Table of Contents January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAM Land Use Plan Update
ut

1
1
1
1
1
1
Table
1
2
4
5
6
Figure
4.310 Developed Classification......................................................... 4-4
4.320 Urban Transition Classification................................................. 4-4
4.330 Conservation Classification...................................................... 4-4
4.400 Relationship of Policy Statements and Land Classifications .......................... 4-4
4.410 Developed Classification......................................................... 4-6
4.420 Urban Transition Classification................................................. 4-6
4.430 Conservation Classification...................................................... 4-6
LIST OF TABLES
Page
Population Size, Population Growth Rates.............................................................. 2-1
Travel -Related Employment, Expenditures, & Tax Receipts ........................................ 2-5
Commercial Seafood Landings............................................................................. 2-6
Land Use By Type and Acreage, Cape Carteret Planning Jurisdiction, 1996 .................... 2-7
Water Classifications for the Town of Cape Carteret ................................................. 2-19
Description of Hurricane Categories..................................................................... 3-17
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
1 General Location Map....................................................................................... 1-2
2 Existing Land Use Map..................................................................................... 2-8
3 Fragile Areas Including the Estuarine Shoreline AEC...............................................2-13
4 General Locations of Soils with Severe Limitations .................................................. 2-14
5 Water Classification Map..................................................................................2-17
6 1995 Average Annual Daily Traffic Counts............................................................2-25
7 Composite Hazards Map...................................................................................3-18
8 Land Classification Map..................................................................................... 4-5
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix
Page
AIndex of Data Sources....................................................................................... A-1
B Comparison of Growth Rate of Municipalities In the Region........................................A-3
C Components of Population Change........................................................................ A-4
D Age Distribution, Historical and Projected.............................................................. A-5
E Median Age of the Population............................................................................. A-7
F Racial Composition of the Population.................................................................... A-8
G Housing Characteristics, Household Population........................................................A-9
H Employment by Industry Group, Cape Carteret...................................................... A-10
ICommuting Patterns........................................................................................ A-11
J Employment by Industry Group, Carteret County ................................................... A-12
K Income Characteristics..................................................................................... A-13
Table of Contents January 22, 1998 iv
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update

LRetail Sales................................................................................................... A-14
M Housing by Structure Type............................................................................... A-15
N Authorized Construction By Building Permit......................................................... A-16
O Soil Limitations For Selected Land Uses.............................................................. A-17
P Soils with Severe Limitations for Septic Tank Absorption Fields ................................ A-18
QPopulation Projections..................................................................................... A-19
R Future Residential Land Needs.......................................................................... A-20
S Summary of Alternative Policy Issues.................................................................. A-21
T Public Participation Process.............................................................................. A-22
UGlossary ...................................................................................................... A-25
Table of Contents —January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAAM Land Use Plan Update
v

7
1.000 INTRODUCTION AND
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

H
0
1.000 INTRODUCTION AND EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1.100 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 a day -today 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 in 1992. 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 1992 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 one mile extraterritorial planning and zoning jurisdiction (see Figure 1). The planning
period for the land use plan update is ten years.
1.200 Overview of the Land Use Plan Update
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). Section 2.00 of this land use plan involves an analysis of existing conditions in Cape
Carteret including population, economy, and land use as well as an analysis of plans and
regulations that affect land use. Demographic, economic, and land use trends are identified and
their implications for the future use of land are analyzed. Section 2.000 also provides a description
of the major constraints to land development in the Cape Carteret area. The general suitability of
land for development is analyzed and includes a discussion of physical limitations for development,
fragile land and water areas, and areas with resource potential. The analysis of land suitability is
particularly useful in preparing the land classifications which are discussed in Section 4.000.
Existing community facilities and municipal services are also reviewed and summarized in Section
2.000. An evaluation of Cape Carteret's ability to provide basic municipal services is made
following an analysis of population projections and future land demands. The data analyzed in
Section 2.000 provide important information upon which policy decisions are based. Data sources
utilized in the preparation of this land use plan update are summarized in Appendix A.
Section 3.000 contains an evaluation of the 1992 Land Use Plan policy statements and
outlines policies designed to address land development and growth management issues identified
through the analysis of existing factors that affect land use. Policy statements concerning resource
protection, resource production and management, economic and community development (including
neighborhood -oriented land use policies), public participation, and storm hazard mitigation, post -
disaster recovery, and evacuation are delineated in this section. The policies are intended to
1.000 Introduction and Executive Summary —January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update
1-1

The preparation of this map was financed in pait::::: ::::: i :• :::::
through a grant provided by the North Carolina'::; ;: ::;: :::;:-:::•::•:::'r:::•:::•:
i s:.:.::::.-:.: •.:•.: •.•:.•:.•.•:.•:.•.•..•.•:.::.•::.:.•:.•:
Coastal Management Program, through the,funds::::-:::::::: •:::::::::::�:� � :::
Provided by the North Carolina Coastal Management.Act ::::::;: )
of 1972, as amended, which Is administered by th
)Officelof_Ocean and Coastal'Resource Management, )
National oceanic nic and Atmospheric Administration. \
.................::::::::::::::.....
P
................. ........................ ..
/ I
.'tCiao d: Gr:eelc ... r
?. \
:B
i 1
1
L
v
a e
• ,
��--
�� < \
.................. ': `' :....!. .f . �i 1 R(1QlIP
Bogue
Airfield
r
Legend
— — — — — Planning Jurisdiction
-- Watershed
Boundary
general Location M
own of Cape Carte
&11
,:1...........
:....:...Surrounding
.Communities::::*

establish guidelines to be utilized by the town in making day -today local planning decisions and by
state and federal agencies in project consistency, project funding, and permit decisions. 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.
The land classification system described in Section 4.000 provides a means of assisting in
the implementation of the land development policy statements. The land classification system
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 land classification system also
delineates where the town wants to conserve natural and cultural resources. Section 4.000 provides
a description of the land uses proposed within each land classification. The land classification map
presented in this section graphically illustrates the land classification system as applied to the Cape
Carteret Planning Jurisdiction.
' 1.300 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):
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.
1.000 Introduction and Executive Summary —January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update
1-3

H
• Annexation by adjoining municipalities of Cape Carteret's ETJ.
• Incorporation of new municipalities within the town's future growth areas.
1.400 Summary of Data Collection and Analysis
The data analyzed in Section 2.000 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:
• The town's population is 1,179, an increase of over 16 percent since 1990.
• 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 commercially use land is located in the northeastern corner of the NC
Highway 24/58 intersection and adjacent to the NC Highway 58 corridor north of
Pettiford Creek.
• There are currently no traditional industrial nor manufacturing land uses within the
town's planning region.
• The town's planning jurisdiction is located within two 14-digit watersheds, Pettiford
Creek and Deer Creek.
• Within the Cape 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 Division of Water Quality (formerly DEM) has classified Western Bogue Sound
and parts of Pettiford Creek as SA waters. In addition, the western part of Bogue
Sound that is within the town's planning jurisdiction has also been designated as an
Outstanding Resource Water (ORW).
• The surface waters in the Cape Carteret planning jurisdiction are classified as `fully
supporting' except for Pettiford Creek, a small area on Deer Creek, and two small
areas on Bogue Sound which are rated as `partially supporting'.
• Identified fragile areas within the Cape Carteret planning jurisdiction include the state -
designated Areas of Environmental Concern (AFC's), Hunting Island, and freshwater
wetlands.
• 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, along with eight other municipalities and Carteret County, has recently
completed the first phase of an interlocal sewer study that evaluated the possibility of
land application methods of wastewater treatment. The second phase of the study will
examine the possibilities of increasing the permitted discharge at each of the three
existing wastewater treatment plants in Carteret County and will explore funding
alternatives for the construction of a county -wide sewer system_ Cape Carteret is also
participating in a four -county (Carteret, Onslow, Craven, and Pamlico) study that is
exploring long-term regional solutions to wastewater needs.
• The town has a municipal staff of 8 employees that perform general administration,
public works, public utilities, planning, and building inspection services. The current
' 1.000 Introduction and Executive Summary —January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret C4A14 Land Use Plan Update
1-4

H
staffing level is considered sufficient to provide the level of municipal services
necessary to meet current and anticipated demand
• According to the North Carolina Department of Transportation's 1995 Transportation
Improvement Program Document, the only improvement or construction project
currently underway for the Town of Cape Carteret is the widening of NC 24 from
Swansboro to Morehead City.
• The town's population is projected to increase during the ten-year planning period from
approximately 1,180 in 1995 to 1,341 in 2005.
• Cape Carteret's projected growth rate is slightly higher than that anticipated for the
state as a whole.
• The economy of Cape Carteret and Carteret County is expected to remain based on
retail trade, services, and tourism. Cape Carteret's employment is expected to continue
to be centered around the services and retail trade sectors of the economy.
• Based upon the anticipated population increase of 161 persons by 2005 and the average
household population size in the 1990 US Census of Population (2.29 persons per
household), it is projected that an additional 70 residential units will be needed through
the end of the 10-year planning period.
• 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 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.
1.500 Summary of Policy Statements
The issues delineated in Section 1.300
statements which are outlined in detail in Section
that imposes additional local requirements for A
more restrictive than the CAMA minimum use
drystack storage facilities (Section 3.280, Policy
are more restrictive than the CAMA regulations.
plan (1992 Land Use Plan Update) have beer
concerning resource protection is to give the higl
the area's natural resources, to safeguard and p
aesthetic values, and to ensure that developm
comnatihle with the characteristics of the natL
were discussed in the formulation of policy
3.00. The town developed two policy statements
-eas of Environmental Concern which would be
standards. The town's policies of prohibiting
7) and floating homes (Section 3.280, Policy 8)
Many of the policy statements from the previous
retained. The town's overall general policy
est priority to the protection and management of
:rpetuate their biological, social, economic, and
mt occurring within natural resource areas is
ral 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
1.000 Introduction and Executive Summary —January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAAM Land Use Plan Update 1-5

' 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.
• 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.
• 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.
1.000 Introduction and Executive Sununary—January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update
1-6

• 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 nor 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.
• 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.
1.600 Summary of Land Classifications
The Land Classification Map (see Figure 8) includes three land classifications: (i)
Developed; (ii) Urban Transition, and (iii) Conservation. The Land Classification Map graphically
illustrates the locations of the various classifications. Because of the scale of the Land
Classification Map, the Conservation classifications can not be mapped with any degree of
accuracy. Precise locations for some areas classified as Conservation must be determined by field
investigation by the appropriate permitting agency. The general location of the various land
classifications are described below.
Developed Classification. The Developed classification generally includes land that is being
used for urban purposes. The Developed area generally includes Old Cape Carteret,
1.000 Introduction and Executive Summary —January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update
1-7

n
Country Club Point Subdivision, Bayshore Park Subdivision, Star Hill Subdivision, Fox
Forest Subdivision, Quail Wood Acres Subdivision, strip residential areas abutting Taylor
Notion Road and NC Highway 58, and a small subdivision along Pettiford Park Circle.
Commercial areas included in the Developed classification are located primarily in the
northeastern corner of the NC Highway 24/58 intersection and along the NC 24 and NC 58
corridors. Municipal services are currently provided to the overwhelming majority of the
Developed area.
Urban Transition Classification. This classification includes the predominantly vacant,
undeveloped areas located on the northern and northeastern fringes of the current Cape
Carteret corporate limits; a large undeveloped area generally in the triangle formed by
Taylor Notion Road, NC Highway 58, and NC Highway 24; and an undeveloped area
located on the south side of NC Highway 24 between Yaupon Drive and Bogue Sound
Drive. The majority of the area classified as Urban Transition is currently zoned either R-
20 or R-30. Portions of the Urban Transition area are potential annexation areas.
Municipal services are expected to ultimately be extended into such areas.
Conservation Classification. This classification includes Hunting Island and AECs
1 delineated in Section 4.230. Much of the area designated as Conservation is within
identified flood hazard areas. Because of the map scale, the Conservation classification can
not be accurately mapped. The precise location of coastal wetlands, freshwater wetlands,
' and the estuarine shoreline must be determined by field investigation. The town concurs
with CAMA AEC standards for properties located in the Conservation classification and
with the US Army Corps of Engineers regulations for `404' wetlands.
The major Land Classification Map change from the town's 1992 plan involves the three
land classifications delineated above whereas the former plan contained only two classifications --
Urban Transition and Conservation. The updated plan recommends that existing developed areas
be classified as Developed and that large, undeveloped areas be classified as Urban Transition.
The former plan did not include a Developed classification within the Cape Carteret planning
jurisdiction.
1.700 Implementation and Management 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.
' 1.000 Introduction and Executive Summary —January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update
1-8

' The town will ensure a continuous planning process by conducting periodic reviews of the
Land Use Plan's policies. This review will be the responsibility of the Cape Carteret Planning
Board who will coordinate such reviews with the Town Board.
P
1.000 Introduction and Executive Summary —January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update
1-9

u
it
Ll
2.000 DATA COLLECTION
AND ANALYSIS

L
' 2.000 DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
The data collected and analyzed in this chapter are designed to provide an information base which
' will be helpful in making policy decisions about future land use and land development in the Cape Carteret
Planning Region. Existing conditions regarding population, the local economy, land use, and current
plans and policies that affect land use are described in Section 2.100. Constraints to land development are
discussed in Section 2.200 which includes an analysis of land suitability, the capacity of Cape Carteret to
provide basic community services, and the anticipated demand on community services.
1 2.100 Existing Conditions
2.110 Population. Population characteristics which are analyzed in this land use plan
' update include population size and growth trends, age distribution, racial composition, and
household population.
u
1
2.111 Population Size and Growth Trends. Cape Carteret's 1994 population as
estimated by the North Carolina Office of State Planning is 1,179. Table 1 below
provides a comparison of the population size and rates of population growth for Cape
Carteret with those of Carteret County and the state:
Table 1
POPULATION SIZE
60<:.:;:......:....:......;:;:>.«;<::l'Q
4.;:::.:::::.....:::::.....:198f2.:::.:::::::::.:..:...............:::::::::::::::::::.:.::::.:..:...:::.
>«`4
Cape Carteret
52
................................................................................................:::::::1
616
944 1,013
179
Carteret County
27,438
31,603
41,092 52,553
56,624
North Carolina
4,556,155
5,084,411
5,880,095 6,632,448
7,064,470
POPULATION GROWTH RATES
............................: :.......................::.:::::::::::::::::::::::::.::::.::::::::.:::::.:....................
::>::><: < :::::: 80:1:990.>::`.;::::.::>::>199Etri.994':;'>:.>::;:<
Cape Carteret
1,084.6 %
53.2 %
7.3 %
16.4 %
Carteret County
15.2 %
30.0 %
27.9 %
7.7 %
North Carolina
11.6 %
15.6 %
12. 8 %
6.5 %
Sources: US Census of Population 1960 - 1990; NC Municipal Population, NC Office of State Planning, 1995
A review of the town's population since its incorporation in 1957 indicates a
steady, though fluctuating pattern of growth. The town's greatest growth occurred
between 1957 and 1980 when it's rate of growth greatly exceeded that of Carteret
County and the state. Between 1980 and 1990 however, the town's growth rate fell
below that of the county and the state. Projections by the NC Office of State
Planning indicate that the town's growth rate since 1990 is exceeding the growth rate
of both Carteret County and the state.
2.000 Data Collection: and Analysis January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update 2-1

The town's 1980-1990 growth rate of 7.3 percent was among the lowest of
' selected coastal municipalities in the immediate region surrounding Cape Carteret
[see Appendix B]. Since 1990, however, Cape Carteret's growth rate ranking has
improved to the fifth highest among the nineteen cities in the immediate region.
Carteret County's growth rate during the 1980-1990 time period placed it as the 5th
fastest growing county in North Carolina. As seen in Appendix C, Carteret
County's growth is attributable in large part to heavy migration into the area. In
' 1990, the county's net migration rate of 21.5 % was substantially higher than that of
counties in the region and that of the state. Projections by the NC Office of State
Planning indicate that Carteret County's net migration rate, while remaining higher
than the statewide and regional rates, will decrease in future years.
In 1990, Cape Carteret contained 480 persons per square mile The
population density figure in 1990 statewide was 136 persons per square mile and for
' Carteret County, 99 persons per square mile.
While seasonal and recreational population is an important part in the overall
' population of Carteret County, it does not have a significant impact on the total
population of Cape Carteret. According to the 1990 US Census, Cape Carteret had
102 vacant seasonal and migratory housing units. By comparison, Carteret County
' had 10,138 such units in 1990. Based upon a January 1996 windshield survey of the
town and its planning region, seasonal housing was determined to be an insignificant
portion of the total housing stock, and thus the population as well. Non -permanent
' population in the form of motel population is also a relatively minor addition to the
seasonal housing population given the fact that only one 43-unit motel is located in
Cape Carteret. Seasonal and recreational population fluctuates with the tourist
�I
1
season but does have some influence on the overall population impacts on public
facility needs and public services.
2.112 Age Composition and Distribution. The age composition of Cape Carteret's
population in 1990 varied from that of the County and the state [see Appendix D].
Cape Carteret had a much higher proportion of retirement -aged persons (65 years
and older) and a lower proportion of school -aged persons (18-24 years) and working -
aged persons (25-64 years) than both Carteret County and the state.
Long-term demographic projections by the North Carolina Office of State
Planning for Carteret County (see Appendix D) indicate that the share of the
population under the age of 18 years will decrease slightly, the school -age and
working -age population will increase slightly, and the elderly population will
experience the largest growth rate. The anticipated aging of the population will have
long-term implications for health care services as well as for the housing industry.
A greater demand for medical care, in -home services, institutional care, and housing
tailored for the elderly can be expected in future years.
The population of Cape Carteret, reflective of the current national trend, is
aging. The median age in Cape Carteret in 1990 was 52.6 years. The town's
median age in 1990 was considerably higher that the national, state, and county
2.000 Data Collection and Analysis January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update
2-2

11
medians [see Appendix E]. The town's higher median age is attributable primarily
to an influx of retirement -aged persons into the community.
2.113 Racial Composition. Racial composition data for Cape Carteret in the 1990
census indicate that the town is 99.3 percent white and 0.7 percent all other races.
The town's minority population is lower that of the state as a whole (24.5%) but
considerably higher than that of Carteret County (9.7%). Long-term projections
forecast a declining minority population for both Carteret County and the state [see
Appendix F]
2.114 Household Population. Cape Carteret's household population size, like that
on the national level, has been steadily decreasing. In 1980, Cape Carteret had an
average of 2.63 persons per household. By 1990, the figure had decreased to 2.29
persons, a lower household population average than Carteret County (2.43 persons)
and the state as a whole (2.54 persons). The average household population is
projected to decline even further as the overall family size decreases and the number
of single -person households increases [see Appendix G]. Single -person households
in Cape Carteret in 1990 comprised over 18 percent of the town's total occupied
housing. The continued trend of fewer persons per household will have an impact
on the future types and sizes of dwelling units.
' 2.120 Economy. The economy of Carteret County is based largely on retail trade,
services, tourism, commercial fishing, port activities, manufacturing, and agriculture. Cape
Carteret is a commercial services and retail center for the southwestern portion of the
fI
11
county. The town is primarily a residential-resort/retirement community and has no
industrial base. The economic indicators reviewed in this section include employment,
income, trade and services, tourism, and commercial fishing.
2.121 Employment. As shown in Appendix H, over 56 percent of the town's
civilian labor force in 1990 was employed in two employment categories, the
services sector and wholesale/retail trade sector. The construction and public
administration sectors were the next largest employment categories. Although
employment in Cape Carteret is centered around the services and retail trade sectors,
many residents in the working -age category are employed in Carteret County and the
surrounding area. The largest employment sectors in Carteret County in 1990 were
the services, trade, and governmental sectors. When compared to the state, Carteret
County's proportion of workers in the wholesale and retail trade, services,
construction, and finance/real estate sectors is higher and lower in the agriculture,
manufacturing, and government sectors.
Governmental employment in the Carteret County area includes municipal and
county employment, state employment, and federal employment. State employment
consists largely of the county school system, a variety of university and state
government marine research facilities, and Carteret Community College. Federal
employment in Carteret County includes federal service employees and military
employees.
2.000 Data Collection and Analysis —January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update
2-3

iAccording to data from the 1990 census, over 27 percent of all employed
residents commuted out of Carteret County to their workplace. The majority of out -
commuters traveled to Craven County (62 percent) and Onslow County (19 percent).
In -commuters came primarily from the same two counties: Craven County (45
percent) and Onslow County (26 percent). Carteret County had more workers
leaving the county (6,828) than it had coming into the county (2,785). A more
detailed explanation of commuting patterns can be found in Appendix I.
Projections made by the North Carolina Office of State Planning indicate that
' North Carolina's employment growth is expected to continue to be consistently
higher than the national average through the year 2000. The largest employment
gains are anticipated in the non -manufacturing sector, particularly' the services and
trade sectors. The local and state government sector is also expected to grow
significantly as decentralization of the federal government increases. Specific
employment projections for Carteret County by Woods and Poole Economics [see
Appendix J] indicate increases in the wholesale and retail trade, government, and
construction sectors from 1990 and 2010. Employment decreases are anticipated in
the same time period for the agriculture, manufacturing, and services sectors.
Wholesale and retail trade is projected to continue as the largest single employment
sector, followed by the services and government sectors.
' 2.122 Income Characteristics. In 1989, the per capita income in Cape Carteret
was $16,697 compared to $13,227 for all of Carteret County and $12,885 statewide.
Although projected data is not available for Cape Carteret, forecasts made for
Carteret County provide a good indication of future incomes that can be expected in
the area. Appendix H delineates per capita projections for Carteret County and
North Carolina through 2010. These projections indicate that while the per capita
' income in Carteret County will increase in the future years, it will continue to
remain below that of the state as a whole. Mean household income data are also
provided in Appendix K.
2.123 Trade and Services. According to the 1992 Census of Retail Trade, retail
sales in Carteret County totaled $441,389,000. In 1992 the county contained 551
retail establishments that employed 4,844 persons. As shown in Appendix L, the
leading retail categories with the largest sales in 1990 were food stores, automobile
dealers, general merchandise, and eating and drinking places.
Retail sales projections by Woods and Poole Economics for Carteret County
indicate that, while there will be sizeable increases in the volume of retail sales, the
rate of retail sales growth will decrease in future years. Retail sectors projected to
show proportional increases in total sales include general merchandise, automobile
dealers, eating and drinking places, and miscellaneous retail stores. These
projections are consistent with long-term forecasts by the North Carolina Office of
1 State Planning which predict somewhat slower economic growth through the end of
this century.
' 2.000 Data Collection and Analysis January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update
2-4

' The service industry sectors particularly strong in Cape Carteret include
educational, health, and other related professional services; personal services; and
' business and repair services
2.124 Tourism. Travel and tourism contribute substantially to the economy of Cape
' Carteret and Carteret County. The table below shows a comparison of travel -related
employment and expenditures in 1995 for Carteret County, selected coastal counties,
and the state:
I
�7,
iJ
Table 2
TRAVEL -RELATED EMPLOYMENT, EXPENDITURES, & TAX RECEIPTS
Selected
Coastal Counties
1995
Local
Expenditures
Payroll
Tax Receipts
Employment
($ Millions)
($ Millions)
($ Millions)
Beaufort
410
38.19
5.50
1.86
Brunswick
3,260
176.22
36.08
9.96
Carteret
3,430
187.26
37.82
9.57
Craven
950
60.01
14.25
1.19
Dare
7,750
349.82
80.00
15.21
New Hanover
4,380
220.91
56.23
7.56
Onslow
1,370
87.2
20.34
2.60
Pamlico
80
9.84
1.21
0.86
North Carolina
161,000
9,195.33
2,590.56
244.61
Source: Economic Impact of Travel and Tourism on North Carolina, US Travel Data Center, 1996.
In 1995, Carteret County ranked llth in the state in travel -related
expenditures and in travel -related employment. The economic impact of travel and
tourism in Carteret County increased 48 percent from 1989 to 1994; the statewide
increase during the same period was 32 percent. The greatest effect of travel
spending throughout North Carolina is felt in the foodservice, lodging, public
transportation, and automobile transportation sectors of the economy.
The secondary effects of travel and tourism also has a major impact on the
local economy of Cape Carteret and Carteret County. Each travel -related dollar
enters the economy and creates secondary economic impacts. Travel -related
expenditures become wages and salaries, capital to purchase other goods and
services, sales tax, and income tax. The additional travel -related spending results in
the creation of other jobs in the community.
2.125 Commercial Fishing. Carteret County led the state in 1995 in total seafood
landings and total value of seafood landings. Carteret County -has consistently been
the statewide leader in total seafood landings since 1977. The county's share of
1995 seafood landings represented over 23 percent of the entire state's total
2. 000 Data Collection and Analysis January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update 2-5

commercial dockside value and 45 percent of the statewide landings. Like the
tourism industry, commercial and sport fishing also have a economic multiplier
effect that impacts other sectors of the local economy.
Commercial seafood landings and commercial dockside value data for selected
coastal counties are delineated below in Table 3.
Table 3
COMMERCIAL SEAFOOD LANDINGS
Selected Coastal Counties
1995
Beaufort
10,341,860
$ 9,017,387
Brunswick
3,713,685
5,335,044
Carteret
80, 721,183
26, 029, 720
Craven
526,009
512,115
Dare
39,350,171
27,537,823
New Hanover
2,269,979
3,277,344
Onslow
3,419,286
5,529,096
Pamlico
8,673,935
11,018,915
North Carolina
177,705,558
112,214,663
Source: Commercial Landings Statistics, North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries.
2.130 Existing Land Use. While the predominant land use in Cape Carteret is residential,
' the public/institutional/recreational land use category contains the greatest amount of
developed acreage. As indicated in Table 4, residential uses account for almost 37 percent
of the developed acreage but public/institutional/recreational uses encompass over 51
percent of the developed acreage. The largest single use within the
public/institutional/recreational category is the Star Hill Golf and Country Club which
accounts for approximately 90 percent of the total acreage in this category. A considerable
' amount of vacant land remains throughout the town's planning region, estimated at
approximately 61 percent of the total acreage within the town's corporate limits and its
extraterritorial planning and zoning jurisdiction. Figure 2 delineates the existing land use
patterns with the Cape Carteret planning jurisdiction. The Cape Carteret planning
jurisdiction is located within two 14-digit watersheds (Pettiford Creek, #03020106020030
and Deer Creek, #03020106020040) as delineated by the US Natural Resource Conservation
' Service. These two watersheds are located with subbasin 030501 and 030503, respectively
of the White Oak River Basin. The boundaries of there two watersheds are delineated on
Figures 1-12.
' 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
2.000 Data Collection and Analysis January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update 2-6

�I
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. 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, Bayshore
Park, Fox Forest, and Quail Wood Acres Subdivisions. Commercial and institutional land
uses within this watershed are chiefly located along the NC Highway 24 corridor and in the
northeast corner of the NC Highway 24/58 intersection. Institutional land uses within this
watershed include the White Oak Elementary School and the Cape Carteret Town Hall
facilities. The majority of the vacant, undeveloped land in this watershed is located along
the north and south sides of NC Highway 24. Many vacant lots are also located within the
residential subdivisions delineated above.
' 2.131 Residential Land Use. The overwhelming majority of residential land uses
are situated within six areas: (i) the Country Club Subdivision located west of Deer Creek
between NC Highway 24 and Bogue Sound, (ii) the Country Club Point Subdivision located
' east of Deer Creek and north of Bogue Sound, (iii) the Bayshore Park Subdivision located
north of the Country Club Point Subdivision and south of NC Highway 24, (iv) the Star
Hill Subdivision located on the northeast side of Taylor Notion Road generally between NC
' Highway 24 and Pettiford Creek, (v) the Fox Forest Subdivision located southeast of Star
Hill Drive and north of NC Highway 24, and (vi) the Quail Wood Acres Subdivision
k
Table 4
LAND USE BY TYPE AND ACREAGE
CAPE CARTERET PLANNING JURISDICTION
1996
Percent of
Percent of
Land Use Acres Developed Acreage
Total Acreage
Residential 196 36.6%
14.2%
Commercial 64 12.0 %
4.7 %
Public/Institutional/Recreational 275 51.4&
20.0%
Industrial 0 0.0 %
0.0 %
Vacant' 841 0.0 %
61.1 %
Totals 1,376 100.0 %
100.0 %
1 Includes developable land as well as land subject to flood hazard, wetlands, etc.
Source: Estimated from existing land use maps prepared by The Wooten Company.
2.000 Data Collection and Analysis January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update
2-7
E

I
The preparatlon•dithls map -was financed in part
✓
by;the North Carolina
through a gr(ant-provided
V/�✓✓ ra �
ICoastallManaugementlPro gram, throughlthe funds
provided by the-Nortrth-Carolina Coastal Management Act
of 1972, as amended Wh cl h is administered by the
Office of Ocean -and -Coastal Resource Management,
nd.Atmospheric
am
National_O ec Administration.
acam
,
PETTTPORD RAY
WHITE OAK RIVER
o °1
�o a
0
O
f
WHOAK
'
RI
RIVER
BOA7X0(1EE coa
1
s-
WHITE OAK RIVER
N
S .
o
o.
` r �� � i � Imo' 1 ��♦
Figure 2
Existing Land Use Map
Cape Carteret, NC
Land Use Legend
- - _ _ _ _ ;
Residential
F1100IIM
Commercial
�fUA
Public, Institutional,
& Recreational
Undeveloped
Town Limits
_ _ _
ETJ
/
Watershed Boundary
WOhelen
Company
1 /22/98 — _

'
located east of Star Hill Road at the terminus of Pine Lake Road. All other residential land
uses are strip residential areas abutting Taylor Notion Road and NC Highway 58 and a
small subdivision along Hopeland Road.
Well over three -fourths of the residential land uses are comprised of single-
family detached dwellings on lots generally ranging from 10,000 square feet to one -acre.
As seen in Appendix M, of the 566 dwelling units in Cape Carteret in 1990, over 77
percent were single-family residences, less than 2 percent were multi -family dwellings, and
about 21 percent were manufactured homes. Cape Carteret's proportion of single-family
'
dwellings is considerably higher than that found throughout Carteret County and that
statewide. The town's proportion of manufactured homes is lower than the county
percentage but higher than the statewide percentage. The majority of manufactured homes
'
are located within the Bayshore Park Subdivision and in the strip residential areas along NC
Highway 58 and Hopeland Road. As shown in Appendix N, the overwhelming majority of
recent residential construction has been single-family residential.
The majority of future residential land uses are expected to be infill
development within the existing subdivisions delineated above as well as new residential
'
developments on vacant land located on the periphery of the current town limits.
2.132 Commercial Land Use. Most of the commercially -used land is located in the
'
northeastern corner of the NC Highway 24/58 intersection and adjacent to the NC Highway
58 corridor between Pettiford Creek and the northernmost boundary of the town's ETJ.
Smaller commercial areas are located the south NC Highway 24 corridor between Bonita
Street and Anita Forte Drive and along the north NC Highway 24 corridor between Fox
'
Drive and Taylor Notion Road. The existing commercial land uses are primarily retail,
professional service, and business service establishments.
'
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, between Channel View Court
'
and Bayshore Drive, and along the NC Highway 58 corridor north of Pettiford Creek.
' 2.133 Public/Institutional/Recreational Land Use. As noted earlier, the majority
of the town's developed land is contained within this land use category primarily due to
large acreage of the Star Hill Golf and Country Club. Other land uses within this category
' include the Cape Carteret Town Hall facilities, the White Oak Elementary School, churches,
and privately -owned dockages. The privately -owned air strip located within the Star Hill
Subdivision is also included in this land use category.
2.134 Industrial Land Use. There are currently no traditional industrial nor
manufacturing land uses within the town's planning region. Several heavy commercial uses
are, however, located within the town's B-30, Light Industrial zoning classification.
Currently, no large tracts nor large amounts of acreage are zoned for light industrial use.
2.135 Vacant Land. 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 and along the northern and northeastern periphery of
' 2.000 Data Collection and Analysis January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update 2-9

' the town's ETJ. Many vacant lots are located within the existing residential subdivisions
described in Section 2.131.
' 2.140 Current Plans, Policies, and Regulations Affecting Land Use. The Town of Cape
Carteret has prepared various plans and has developed policies and regulations that have
significant implications for land use planning. The following sections provide a brief
description of these plans, policies, and regulations.
2.141 Storm Hazard Mitigation and Post Disaster Reconstruction Plan. This
' plan provides for the mitigation of hurricane hazards and establishes guidelines for
evacuation and reconstruction following a major storm. A more detailed description
of storm hazard mitigation, evacuation, and post -disaster recovery policies is
I
provided in Section 3.600.
2.142 Zoning Ordinance. The town's Zoning Ordinance was adopted in 1974.
' This ordinance provides use, dimensional, and developmental standards for all new
construction within the town and its one -mile extraterritorial planning jurisdiction.
The ordinance establishes 7 zoning districts including 4 residential, 2 commercial,
' and 1 industrial. Residential classifications permit maximum densities that range
from 2.1 to 5.5 dwelling units per acre. The majority of land, however, is zoned for
single-family residential use at a density of 2.1 dwelling units per acre. The R-10M
district allows a variety of housing types including single-family detached, multi-
family, congregate, and manufactured residences. Manufactured home parks are
permitted in the B-30 district. Commercial zoning classifications permit a wide
' variety of retail, wholesale, office, and business service uses. Light manufacturing
uses are permitted in the B-30 district.
' 2.143 Subdivision Regulations The existing Subdivision Regulations, which were
originally adopted in 1985, basically provide platting procedures and developmental
standards for residential subdivisions. The Subdivision Regulations are also
' administered within the town's corporate limits and the extraterritorial planning and
zoning jurisdictional area. Subdivision plat review affords the town an opportunity
to coordinate street and utility layouts in emerging residential areas.
2.144 Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance Cape Carteret has adopted a model
Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance which was prepared by the Federal Emergency
' Management Agency. Adoption and enforcement of this ordinance permits the town
to participate in the National Flood Insurance Program. The ordinance delineates
flood hazard areas and establishes developmental standards within those areas. Most
' uses are prohibited within designated floodways. Building development in other
identified flood hazard areas is basically permitted as long as the lowest floor
elevation of structures is above the base flood elevation.
' 2.145 Building Codes The town, through the county building inspection
department, administers the state building code throughout the entire planning and
zoning jurisdiction. The building code establishes minimum building and plumbing
' construction standards for new buildings. The town also administers nationally
recognized electrical and mechanical codes.
' 2.000 Data Collection and Analysis January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update 2-10

0
' 2.146 1990 Public Sound Access, Parks and Recreation and Town Beautification
Plan This plan identified public access areas on Bogue Sound as well as potential
' town and neighborhood park sites throughout the community. The plan also
delineated a recommended priority schedule and cost estimates for implementing the
plan.
2.147 1980 Shoreline Access Study This plan identified areas of recreational
improvements and outlined methods to carry out the recommended improvements.
' 2.200 Constraints to Land Development
This section of the land use plan update analyzes the general suitability of land within the
' Cape Carteret Planning and Zoning Jurisdiction. Also included within this section is a discussion
of Cape Carteret's capacity to provide basic community services as well as the projected demand on
community services.
2.210 Land Suitability. The analysis of land suitability includes a discussion of physical
limitations for development, the location of environmentally fragile areas, and the location
' of areas with resource potential. The Cape Carteret planning jurisdiction is located within
two major watersheds: #03020106020040 and #03020106020030. The general boundaries
of these watersheds are delineated on Figures 1-8.
' 2.211 Physical Limitations for Development
' 2.211.1 Hazard Areas. Man-made hazard areas in Cape Carteret include the
Star Hill Airport, the Bogue Airfield US Military Reservation, and NC 24.
The airport facilities are identified as hazard areas due to the general nature of
airport operations. Flights into and out of these two airfields pose a hazard to
Cape Carteret and its' citizens. NC 24 is listed as a hazard to the Town due
to the risks associated with its use as a strategic military highway. The
' constant movement of troops and materiel to and from the Camp Lejeune
Marine Corps Base increases the risks associated with living in close
proximity to a major roadway.
' Natural hazard areas include floodable areas. The following description of
the principal flood problems in Cape Carteret is from the "Flood Insurance
Study, Town of Cape Carteret" which was prepared by the Federal
Emergency Management Agency in 1974:
"Cape Carteret is vulnerable to flooding from storm
tides generated in the Atlantic Ocean by hurricanes and
other severe wind storms. Because of the Town's
proximity to Bogue Inlet, the tide level in the Atlantic
Ocean directly affects the level of both Bogue Sound
and Pettiford Creek, creating a twofold flood problem.
The sound shore is subject to flooding and direct wave
attack by storm tides in Bogue Sound. Property
bordering on Pettiford Creek is subject to flood damage
2.000 Data Collection and Analysis January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update
2-11

n
' from storm tides propagated up the White Oak River
from Bogue Inlet."
' Flood hazard areas have been delineated by the Federal Emergency
Management Agency and are identified in Flood Insurance Rate Maps
(FIRM). The latest update for the FIRM was conducted in 1983 and is
' available for review at the Cape Carteret Town Hall. The maps delineate the
100-year and 500-year flood boundaries and provide base flood elevation
data. Areas of the 100-year coastal flood with velocity (3 feet or more of
1 wave action) are also depicted on the flood hazard maps as Velocity Zones.
The 100-year flood area is the base flood for purposes of floodplain
management measures. Base flood elevations within the 100-year flood area
' are minimal and are not valid here. The general location of the 100-year
flood hazard area is shown in Figure 3.
' All development on land in identified flood hazard areas, including
areas susceptible to sea level rise, is regulated by the town's Flood Damage
Prevention Ordinance which requires that new buildings be elevated above the
' base flood elevations.
2.211.2 Soil Limitations. The study area consists of four general soil map
units: (i) Lafitte-Hobucken-Carteret, (ii) Wando-Seabrook-Kureb, (iii)
Baymeade-Onslow-Lynchburg, and (iv) Leon-Murville-Mandarin. Appendix
O delineates the soils within these four general map units and shows the
' limitations of each soil type for building site development and subsurface
sewage disposal. Figure 4 shows the general location of soil types that have
overall severe limitations for site development and septic system use. The
' limiting characteristics for septic tank absorption fields, which include
wetness, flooding and ponding, low soil strength, rapid permeability, and
slope, are shown in Appendix P.
' A detailed soils analysis (Soil Survey of Carteret County, North
Carolina; US Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, 1987) is
available which highlights limitations and hazards inherent in the various
soils. The Soil Conservation Service, located in Beaufort, can provide more
detailed information about specific soil types. Because the Carteret County
' Environmental Health Department determines the suitability of each site for
septic tanks and absorption fields on a case -by -case basis, it should be
consulted to obtain a specific site evaluation and permit.
2.211.3 Availability and Quality of Public Water Supply. Cape Carteret
receives its water supply from the West Carteret Water District. Water is
stored in a 600,000 gallon elevated tank. Currently, the Water District
' pumps about 366,000 gallons of water per day. Thus, they comply with the
State mandated water storage requirement. Cape Carteret presently uses
approximately 74,000 gallons per day. The current system has the capacity
1 to triple that level should there be an increase in demand. There are no
plans for major improvements or additions to the water system at this time.
' 2.000 Data Collection and Analysis January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update 2-12

Coastal Manage
provided by the
of 1972, as amei
Offlewof Ocean
National Oceani
0
MIII18 DA[
Arm
by the
BOAT..ou" CRE
13
N
8Ta
BOCUa SOUND
t
N
9
R aoc
3-11
01
..�.;. ,
0
BOTTYmscpBB%
(INMZWrL 'D'=W-Q
Figure 3
Fragile Areas
Including the Estuarine Shoreline
AEC
Cape Carteret, NC
0 100-Yr. Flood Hazard Area
ED Primary Nursery Areas
Estuarine Shoreline *
--------- Anadromous Fish Spawning Areas
Town Limits
T
----- Watershed Boundary
----- . ETJ
Sound and Estuarine System Islands:
- Hunting Island
Other AEC and Fragile Areas
Not Mapped:
- Coastal Wetlands
- Estuarine Waters
- Public Trust Waters
- Freshwater Wetlands
*Note:
Western Bogue Sound is designated as an Outstanding Resource Water by the
North Carolina Environmental Commission. As such, property within
575 feet of the mean high water line must abide by the development standards
set forth in the CAMA legislation. Within all non-ORW areas, the estuarine
shoreline AEC is 75 feet of the mean high water line.
N Wole
oden
Company
W E
S
Scale: 1" = 2,000' 1/22/98 __

2.211.4 Water Quality Conditions. The northern portion of the Town of
Cape Carteret's planning jurisdiction is located within Subbasin 030501
' (White Oak River and tributaries) of the White Oak River Basin. This
subbasin includes portions of Onslow, Jones, Craven, and Carteret Counties.
Most of this subbasin is 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
I River, and Most of Queen Creek and Bear Creek. Other than the Town of
Maysville, the majority of major development within the subbasin is located
along the coast at the Towns of Swansboro and Cape Carteret. There are no
' major dischargers in the subbasin. The largest discharger, the Swansboro
wastewater treatment plant, discharges 0.3 million gallons per day into Foster
Creek.
tThe southern portion of the Town of Cape Carteret's planning
jurisdiction is located within Subbasin 030503 (Newport River and tributaries
' including Bogue Sound) of the White Oak River Basin. This subbasin
includes the central portion 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.
Other than the Town of Newport, the majority of major development within
the subbasin is located along the coast at Morehead City, Beaufort, Atlantic
' Beach, and Bogue Banks. There are four major dischargers in this subbasin.
The Newport wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) discharges to the Newport
River, the Morehead City WWTP discharges into Calico Creek, and the
' Beaufort Fisheries and Beaufort WWTPs both discharge into Taylors Creek.
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
I
associated with nonpoint source pollution. Unlike point source pollution,
2.000 Data Collection and Analysis January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update 2-15

nonpoint pollution sources are diffuse in nature and occur at random intervals
depending on rainfall frequency and intensity.
' Within the Cape 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. Because of the large number of Outstanding Resource Water areas
within the 030503 subbasin, water quality, according the draft "White Oak
River Basinwide Water Quality Management Plan" prepared by the NC
Division of Water Quality, Water Quality Section in July 1996, in the sounds
is considered to be generally excellent due largely to good tidal flushing.
Water quality concerns have arisen since a bridge was built across the White
I Oak River in the mid-1930's. It has been suggested that bridge development
has decreased tidal flushing in the river which has resulted in elevated
coliform and decreased salinity levels. During the planning of road
' improvements in the area, the NC Department of Transportation has been
investigating potential ways to improve hydraulic exchange upstream and
downstream of the bridge.
iThe main reasons for closures in shellfish waters in the 030501
subbasin appear to be related to land disturbing activities, agriculture, and
large marinas. Within the 030503 subbasin, development and marinas are the
main reasons for closures of shellfish waters. The activities that contribute to
this condition include, but are not limited to, construction, urban stormwater,
failing septic systems, and agricultural activities. Control of these types of
' activities include a wide variety of state agencies, local health departments,
local 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 5.
In 1990, the Division of Water Quality (formerly DEM) 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
1 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.
2.000 Data Collection and Analysis January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update
2-16

preparation of this map was financed In part
ugh a grant provided by the North Carolina
stal Management Program, through funds
riled by the Coastal Zone Management Act
37Z as amended, which is administered by
7f"e of ocedh and Coa$taf ]too"
y
sh,
11
0
I
N
e
0
MIR
We
�1cp
lip 'The
precise location of Coastal Wetlands, Freshwater Wetlands
-Estuarine Waters or Public
_.
Figure 5
Water Classification Map
Cape Carteret, NC
Legend
Estuarine Shoreline
- Town Limits
�---- Watershed Boundary
y
----- ETJ
® SA Water Closed to Shellfishing
® Partially Supporting Water
Notes:
Bogue Sound and Pettiford Creek are both categorized as SA Class Waters.
Western Bogue Sound, which includes the portion of the Sound adjacent to
Cape Carteret, is also designated as an Oustanding Resource Water (ORW)
by the NCDEM.
All waters within the Cape Carteret planning jurisdiction are rated as fully
supporting except as noted hereon.
N
W E
o S
Mies
The
Wooten
Company

'
The NC Division of Water Quality's monitoring program integrates
biological, chemical, and physical data assessment to provide information for
basinwide planning. The seven major monitoring programs utilized by DWQ
'
include the following:
• Benthic macroinvertebrate monitoring
'
• Fish population and tissue monitoring
• Lakes assessment
• Aquatic toxicity monitoring
• Special studies and chemical/physical water quality investigations
• Sediment oxygen demand monitoring
• Ambient water quality monitoring
Each of these monitoring programs is described in more detail in the White
'
Oak River Basinwide Plan.
2.211.5 Water Quality Classes and Standards. All surface waters in North
Carolina are assigned a primary water classification, and they may also be
'
assigned one or more supplemental classifications. Figure 5 shows the water
quality classifications for waters in the vicinity of Cape Carteret. The
Division of Water Quality (formerly DEM) has classified Western Bogue
Sound and parts of Pettiford Creek as SA waters. In addition, the western
part of Bogue Sound that is within the town's planning jurisdiction has also
been designated as an Outstanding Resource Water (ORW). An
'
accompanying description of some of the regulations governing the use of
these waters is given in Table 5.
' 2.211.6 Water Quality Use -Support Ratings. Another important method
for assessing water quality is to determine whether the quality is sufficient to
support the uses for which the waterbody has been classified by the state.
The word `uses' refers to activities such as swimming, fishing, aquatic life
protection, and water supply. All surface waters are rated as either `fully
supporting' (S), 'support -threatened' (ST), `partially supporting' (PS), or
' `nonsupporting' (NS). The terms refer to whether the classified uses of the
water are being fully supported, partially supported, or are not supported. As
an example, saltwaters classified for commercial shellfish harvesting would be
' rated as fully supporting if bacterial levels in the water were low enough to
allow harvesting. However, if fecal coliform bacterial levels were too high to
allow shellfish to be harvested, but not too high to prevent swimming, then
' the waters would be rated as partially supporting since they only support the
swimming. If the waters were impacted to the point that even swimming was
disallowed, the waters would be rated as nonsupporting. The surface waters
' in the Cape Carteret planning jurisdiction are classified as 'fully supporting'
except for Pettiford Creek, a small area on Deer Creek, and two small areas
on Bogue Sound which are rated as `partially supporting' (see Figure 5).
r
' 2.000 Data Collection and Analysis January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update
2-18

L
I
Table 5
WATER CLASSIFICATIONS FOR THE
TOWN OF CAPE CARTERET
D,�r��a�::ot':Viater n alit Omar :C1ass�C�catans .>:
SA
*Commercial
*The Sedimentation
Low Density Low Density Option Low
shellfish
Control Commission has
Option 25% � Density
harvesting;
as many as 5 increased
30 ft. from Eneineered Option
*plus SC and
design standards for
surface waters. Controls 1/3 acre
SB Best Uses
projects in all HQW
i • N/A Eneineered
!
zones. See
' ': Controls
Sedimentation Control
i• N/A
Rules for Design
i
Standards in Sensitive
Watersheds (15A NCAC
4B.0024).
i
D pision:ii#`:Waier . ualit ecouda...Class,..
s.......... .. ....... .......................
Outstanding Resource
*Excellent
The Sedimentation New developments located within 575' of the mean
Waters (ORW)
quality
Control Commission has i high water level of ORW class waters must meet, at a
saltwater and;
as many as 5 increased E minimum, the Low Density Options specified in the
*Outstanding
design standards for Coastal Stormwater Management Rules for SA class
Fish Habitat; or
projects in all HQW I waters. Specific stormwater control strategies for
*High Existing/
zones. See protecting ORW class saltwaters are developed during
Attainable
Sedimentation Control the process to reclassify waters with the ORW
Recreation; or
Rules for Design supplemental classification.
•Special
Standards in Sensitive
Federal or
Watersheds (15A NCAC
State
4B.0024).
designation; or
•Part of a
State/National
j
Park/Forest; or
j
•High
j ecological/
j
scientific
significance.
I
Source: A Guide to North Carolina's Tidal Saltwater Classifications, Cape Fear Council of Governments 1994.
2.211.7 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.
2.212 Fragile Areas. Fragile areas within the Cape Carteret planning jurisdiction
which could easily be damaged or destroyed by inappropriate or poorly planned
2.000 Data Collection and Analysis January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update
2-19
LI

i
I
development include the state -designated areas of environmental concern, sound and
estuarine system islands, and freshwater wetlands.
2.212.1 Areas of Environmental Concern. Areas of environmental concern
(AEC's) 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,
' 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.
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 AEC's. 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 25 percent (30 percent for non-
ORW areas) 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 Cape
Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan. 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. Specific CAMA development standards for AEC's can
be found in 15 NCAC 7H. Figure 3 shows the general location of the
estuarine shoreline. Other AEC's are not mapped. The precise location of
' coastal wetlands must be determined by field investigation; therefore, they are
not included in Figure 3.
' 2.212.2 Other Fragile Areas. This section describes areas of particular
concern not covered under the AEC designation. Estuarine system islands
and freshwater wetlands fall into this category and are present in the Cape
' Carteret area. The shorelines of estuarine islands are, however, classified as
areas of environmental concern. Freshwater wetlands include all other
' 2.000 Data Collection and Analysis January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plat: Update 2-20

E
wetlands not classified as coastal wetlands. These freshwater wetlands are not
covered by CAMA regulations but are protected by the Clean Water Act.
Consequently, the US Army Corps of Engineers is responsible for regulating
these ' 404' wetlands. Permits must be obtained from the Corps prior to
disturbing any freshwater wetlands. As with coastal wetlands, the precise
location of freshwater wetlands can only be determined through a field
investigation and analysis. Consequently, freshwater wetlands are not
included in Figure 3. However, the US Fish and Wildlife Service has,
through it's National Wetlands Inventory, 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 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.
' 2.213 Areas with Resource Potential. Areas with resource potential within the
Cape Carteret planning jurisdiction include (i) a designated Primary Nursery Area
' (PNA), (ii) game land, and (iii) a wildlife sanctuary.
(i) PNA areas have been designated by the State as being highly productive for
juvenile habitat of marine species. Pettiford Creek and Bay are the only areas
identified by the NC Marine Fisheries Division fulfilling this criteria.
(ii) One parcel within 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.
(iii) The McLean Sanctuary, also known as Hunting Island, is owned and managed
by 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.
' 2.220 Carrying Capacity Analysis. The following analysis provides an evaluation of the
ability of Cape Carteret to provide the basic community services necessary to meet the
' current and anticipated demand for such services. The existing community services are
reviewed as well as the demand for services based upon population and land use projections.
' 2.221 Urban Services. Urban services evaluated in this section include water and
sewer services, police and fire protection, emergency medical services, solid waste
collection and disposal, recreation, education, and administrative services.
2.000 Data Collection and Analysis January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update
2-21
P

'
2.221.1 Water Service. As previously mentioned, Cape Carteret receives
water from the West Carteret Water District. Water is drawn from the Castle
Hayne Aquifer and distributed to the various localities. In 1995, the Cape
Carteret portion of the water district included approximately 540 customers.
The average annual daily water use by these customers in 1995 was 0.074
MGD. The average monthly water use for 1995 was as follows:
t►1 >.... .... .
:::,.......,.. ,.
0.087 MGDJanuary:::::...... 0.052 MGD::::::.::::: July
'
0.075 MGD February 0.054 MGD August
0.086 MGD March 0.054 MGD September
0.072 MGD April 0.066 MGD October
0.079 MGD May 0.065 MGD November
'
0.067 MGD June 0.068 MGD December
The largest water user in 1995 in Cape Carteret was the White Oak
'
Elementary School which used an average of 49,000 gallons of water per
month. There are no other significant water users in the Cape Carteret area.
'
2.221.2 Sewer. The Town of Cape Carteret does not currently have a
municipal sewer system in place. Wastewater disposal is provided by
' individual subsurface disposal systems or by privately -owned package
treatment plants. The town, along with eight other municipalities and
Carteret County, has recently completed the first phase of an interlocal sewer
' study that evaluated the possibility of land application methods of wastewater
treatment. The study indicated that land application methods alone could not
adequately handle the total wastewater needs of all of the municipalities and
' the county, primarily due to the unavailability of a sufficient supply of
suitable land. However, the study did indicate that land application methods
could handle a large portion of the existing and projected wastewater
' treatment needs of the participating cities and the county. The second phase
of the interlocal study, which was funded in part through a regional planning
grant provided by the Division of Coastal Management, is currently
underway. This phase of the study will examine the possibilities of increasing
' the permitted discharge at each of the three existing wastewater treatment
plants in Carteret County and will explore funding alternatives for the
construction of a county -wide sewer system. Cape Carteret is also
participating in a four -county (Carteret, Onslow, Craven, and Pamlico) study
that is exploring long-term regional solutions to wastewater needs.
' 2.221.3 Police Protection. Cape Carteret receives police protection from the
Cape Carteret Police Department which is located on W.B. McLean Drive.
The Cape Carteret Police Department, with a staff of 5 full-time personnel,
' appears to have adequate manpower to provide police services to the
community. The current ratio of police officers to Town population is 1
officer per 236 residents. National law enforcement standards recommend
two police officers per 1,000 population.
' 2.000 Data Collection and Analysis January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update
2-22

2.221.4 Fire Protection. The Cape Carteret Volunteer Fire and Rescue
District provides prevention and fire suppression services to the Town as well
as a fire district that encompasses areas outside the corporate limits of Cape
' Carteret. The fire insurance rating within Cape Carteret fire district is a 9.
Correspondingly, the volunteer fire department must retain a minimum of 22
active firefighters. In 1995, the District responded to approximately 50 calls.
' The fire station is located just off NC 24 in Cedar Point. All firefighting
equipment meets the National Fire Protection Association's standards.
2.221.5 Emergency Medical Services. The Cape Carteret Fire and Rescue
District also provides emergency medical services to the town and a service
district (which parallels the fire district). The rescue squad, with 15
volunteer personnel, responded to approximately 150 calls in 1995. Basic
emergency medical treatment and transportation to hospitals are the general
services provided by the rescue squad. The equipment and staffing of the
' rescue squad appear adequate to provide emergency medical services through
the study period.
' 2.221.6 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 twice a year. No deficiencies with the existing collection system
' have been identified. Solid waste is currently disposed of in a tri-county
regional landfill, located at Tuscarora in Craven County.
1 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.
' 2.221.7 Recreation. The Town of Cape Carteret does not own, operate, or
manage any recreational programs or facilities. Until recently, the Town had
been leasing two tracts of land from the original developer of the area for
waterfront access. However, both leases have expired and a renewal
agreement has not been reached. As a result, the Town has no public
waterfront access. The only recreational facility located in the Town is a
' public golf course located in the Star Hill neighborhood. A boat access is
located within Cape Carteret's ETJ on Hunting Bay Drive. This area, located
adjacent to Bogue Sound, is managed by a local civic recreation association.
' A 1990 study on sound access, parks, and recreation identified water
access and other recreational needs. To date however, no public water access
I
areas nor recreational sites have been developed by the town. Based upon
' 2.000 Data Collection and Analysis January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update
2-23
C�

' national outdoor recreational space standards of six to ten acres per 1,000
population, 7 to 12 acres of outdoor recreational space is currently needed.
2.221.8 Education. Carteret County operates one school, White Oak
Elementary School, in the Cape Carteret area. Enrollment data for the 1995-
1996 school year indicates that there are currently 637 students attending
' White Oak Elementary. The school is presently operating beyond its
capacity.
' Carteret County has proposed to begin construction by the end of 1996
of an elementary and high school in the Broad Creek area located east of Cape
Carteret. These additional schools will help to alleviate capacity problems at
the White Oak School.
2.221.9 Public Administration Ability. The Town of Cape Carteret
operates under a mayor -council form of government. The town has a
municipal staff of 8 employees that perform general administration, public
works, public utilities, planning, and building inspection services. The
' current staffing level is considered sufficient to provide the level of municipal
services necessary to meet current and anticipated demand.
2.222 Transportation Services. The Town of Cape Carteret maintains about 16
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.
Currently, there is no Thoroughfare Plan for the Cape Carteret area.
However, traffic counts provided by NCDOT in 1995 for major roadways are shown
in Figure 6. Because of Cape Carteret's location in relation to vacation destinations
along the barrier islands of North Carolina such as Emerald Isle and Atlantic Beach,
these numbers are skewed somewhat due to the inability to reflect the variation in
traffic loads between the heavily traveled "beach season" and the rest of the year.
Thus, roadways may be over capacity during some months and at or below vehicle
load capacity during others.
According to the North Carolina Department of Transportation's 1995
Transportation Improvement Program Document, the only improvement or
construction project currently underway for the Town of Cape Carteret is the
widening of NC 24 from Swansboro to Morehead City.
Air service to Cape Carteret is available through commercial airports located
in nearby New Bern and Jacksonville.
2.230 Estimated Demand. In order to effectively address land development issues and to
formulate community policies, it is necessary to project population and economic
change. Such projections are the basis for determining community facility and land
use needs. Consequently, the following sections discuss population projections, local
2.000 Data Collection and Analysis January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update
2-24

The preparation of this map was financed in part
through a grant provided by the North Carolina
Coastal Management Program, through funds 7
provided by the Coastal Zone Management Act
of 1972, as amended, which Is administered by
the Office of Ocean and Coastal Res�p��ce agerr
National Oceanic and Atmosphencgdmini tion.
17,800
! U
15,500
1
o,
j 14000
j
.000
Source: NCDOT
Figure 6
1995 Average Annual Daily
Traffic Counts
N
W E
S
Scale: 1" = 2,000'
Cape Carteret, NC
LEGEND
ETJ
City Limits
1 /22198
WThe
ooten
Company

economic forecasts, future land needs, and demands on community facilities and
services.
' 2.231 Population Projections. The town's population is projected to increase
during the ten-year planning period from approximately 1,180 in 1995 to 1,341 in
2005. This projection is based upon a growth rate that is comparable to that
projected for Carteret County by the NC Office of State Budget and Management.
' Cape Carteret's projected growth rate is slightly higher than that anticipated
for the state as a whole. Appendix Q provides historical and projected population
data through 2010 for Carteret County and Cape Carteret. Population growth has,
' in the past, resulted largely from in -migration.
Given the town's current policies on expansion of the corporate limits and
growth of the community, it is expected that annexation will play a larger role in the
town's future population increases.
2.232 Economic Outlook. No significant economic changes are forecast during the
planning period. The economy of Cape Carteret and Carteret County is expected to
remain based on retail trade, services, and tourism. Cape Carteret's employment is
' expected to continue to be centered around the services and retail trade sectors of the
economy. Overall, long-term employment growth in future years is anticipated to be
concentrated in non -manufacturing sectors of the economy. Tourism is expected to
' continue to play a prominent role in the local economy. Consistent with long-term
forecasts by the NC Office of State Budget and Management, Cape Carteret's
economic growth is, however, projected to be somewhat slower through the end of
this century than it was during the 1980s.
2.233 Future Land Needs. Based upon the anticipated population increase of 161
' persons by 2005 and the average household population size in the 1990 US Census of
Population (2.29 persons per household), it is projected that an additional 70
residential units will be needed through the end of the 10-year planning period.
Assuming that future residential construction will basically follow the existing
' housing distribution pattern, approximately 53 single-family units, 2 multi -family
units, and 15 manufactured homes will be added to the existing housing stock.
Assuming also that current density levels will not be significantly changed in the
' future, new single-family residential uses are projected to account for 19 to 26 acres
of land, multi -family residential 1 to 2 acres, and manufactured homes 3 to 5 acres
[see Appendix R]. Sufficient vacant land exists in the study area to accommodate the
projected residential growth.
The demand for additional nonresidential land is also expected to increase
' during the planning period. Given the availability of commercially -zoned vacant
land, it is anticipated that new commercial development can be primarily
accommodated in existing commercial areas on NC Highways 24 and 58.
' 2.000 Data Collection and Analysis January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update
2-26

' 2.234 Summary of Community Facilities Needs. 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. However, in
order to provide outdoor recreation space, as recommended by national standards, the
town currently needs 7 to 12 acres of outdoor space to meet existing demand and 1 to
2 acres to meet the outdoor space needs of the projected population increase during
the study period. Long-term wastewater treatment is a need that the town is
evaluating along with neighboring municipalities, Carteret County, and surrounding
counties. To date however, no definitive solution nor facilities plan has evolved from
' the studies. As new land development increases the town's wastewater disposal needs
and as existing subsurface disposal systems begin to fail, water quality will 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.
2.000 Data Collection and Analysis January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update
2-27

H
Z
W
a�
off
a�
0
0
0
M
r = m = r m r = m = = = m = = = r = =

1 3.000 POLICY STATEMENTS
The primary purpose of the land use plan update is to develop policy statements on those land
use issues which will affect the Town of Cape Carteret during the ten-year planning period. Previous
sections of this update have addressed (i) existing conditions such as population, the local economy,
natural features, and current land use; (ii) constraints to land development; and (iii) the projected
demand on services. This section of the update provides policies designed to address land development
growth management issues.
The policy statements are particularly important not only for use by the town but by other
governmental agencies as well. Specifically, policy statements have implications for: (i) local land
planning in Cape Carteret, (ii) CAMA development permits, and (iii) the review of projects utilizing
state or federal funds as well as state and federal projects that may not be located with the town but
which may have a direct impact on Cape Carteret. Policies must be developed which are, at a
minimum, equal to and consistent with CAMA's guidelines and use standards for Areas of
Environmental Concern. The town may, however, develop policies which exceed the minimum
standards established by CAMA for Areas of Environmental Concern.
Policy statements are useful to the town in establishing guidelines for day -today planning
endeavors such as rezoning requests, site plan review, subdivision plat review, zoning text
amendments, and requests for variances. Therefore, policy statements can serve as the basis for
decision -making by the Cape Carteret Town Board, building inspectors and zoning administrators,
Planning Board, and Board of Adjustment. Policy statements will also be utilized by CAMA to review
requests for development permits in areas of environmental concern. Consequently, land development
projects that are not consistent with the town's policy statements will not be approved by CAMA.
Similarly, projects which propose to utilize state or federal funds will be reviewed for consistency with
the policy statements.
This section provides an analysis of previous policy statements outlined in the town's 1992
land use plan and includes policy statements on resource protection, resource production and
management, economic and community development, public participation, and storm hazard
mitigation, post -disaster recovery, and evacuation. These policy statements have been developed based
upon the previous analysis of existing conditions, land use trends, and constraints to land development.
Citizen input through public meetings and the Planning Board, which served as the Land Use Plan
Advisory Committee, was also instrumental in formulating the policy statements. Various alternatives
were considered by the town. Alternative policies which were discussed but not adopted are
summarized in Appendix S.
3.100 Analysis Of Policy Statements In The 1992 CAMA Plan
' The 1992 CAMA Land Use Plan Update policy statements have been reviewed. This
section provides a summary evaluation of the major policies and recommendations delineated
in the 1992 Plan.
1 3.110 Former Resource Protection Policies. Resource protection policies in the
1992 plan addressed coastal wetlands, estuarine waters and estuarine shoreline,
outstanding resource waters, flood hazard areas, estuarine erosion areas, areas with
soil limitations, primary nursery areas, use of package sewage treatment plants,
3.000 Policy Statements January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update 3-1

marina and floating home development, drystacking facilities, upland excavation for
marina basins, bulkhead construction, and development of sound and estuarine system
islands.
The previously developed resource protection policies were consistent with
CAMA policies and use standards except for a more restrictive policy concerning
development of the estuarine shoreline contiguous to waters classified as Outstanding
Resource Waters. The policy in the 1992 plan stated that the town should be more
protective than the CAMA regulations.
The conservation of coastal wetlands was encouraged as was the conservation
of estuarine waters and public trust areas. Development of the estuarine shoreline was
allowed provided that there were no significant adverse impacts of estuarine resources
and provided that development was consistent with CAMA and applicable town
regulations. Specifically, it was the town's policy to allow residential, commercial,
and recreational land uses if natural barriers to erosion were not weakened or
eliminated, development did not interfere with existing public access, natural drainage
was unchanged, no pollution was generated, and the development conformed with
state soil erosion and sedimentation control regulations.
The town's policy on package treatment plants was to allow them were
deemed appropriate and to specifically require, in the absence of a centralized sewer
system, a package treatment plant for all new commercial development.
' Stormwater management policies supported the strict enforcement of existing
sedimentation and pollution control measures. The town proposed to investigate the
need for a local soil erosion and sedimentation ordinance. Such an ordinance has not,
to date, been adopted.
The 1992 plan also promoted the development of marinas and docking
1 facilities to serve individual residential lots. Floating homes or boats used for long-
term occupancy were not permitted within the Cape Carteret planning area. Such a
policy is more restrictive than the CAMA policy regarding floating homes in that the
' CAMA policies allow floating homes within marinas. Dry stack storage boat facilities
were also not allowed with the town's planning jurisdiction, a policy which is also
more restrictive than the CAMA requirements.
Policies allowed bulkhead installation provided CAMA use standards were
adhered to and there was no irreversible damage to existing sensitive marshes.
The town, in reviewing specific requests for land development, has approved
land development projects which were consistent with its resource protection policies.
Cape Carteret has continued to enforce its Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance.
1 In general, areas in the Cape Carteret Planning Jurisdiction with significant
physical limitations have not been developed. Development within areas of
environmental concern has been compatible with CAMA regulations and the town's
land use controls.
3.000 Policy Statements --January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update
3-2
I

3.120 Former Resource Production and Management Policies. The policies in
the 1992 plan recognized the value of commercial and recreational fisheries to the
area. -Specific policy. statements were developed .which concerned commercial and
recreational fisheries and development impacts on resource areas.
Policies encouraged the reduction of stormwater run-off into pristine and
productive waters, supported the regulation of the density of development and the
placement of septic systems in areas adjacent to productive water bodies, encouraged
the provision of adequate public access to Bogue Sound for recreational purposes for
residents and property owners, and recommended that non -buildable lots be acquired
by the town for recreational use.
The town has striven to approve land development projects which were
consistent with its policy of allowing only water -dependent uses in coastal and
estuarine waters which had no major significant adverse impact on water quality and
fish habitats.
3.130 Former Economic and Community Development Policies. Previous
policies addressed the town's commitment to manage and direct growth in balance
with available municipal services and soil suitability and to guide new development
away from AECs and hazardous areas. Specific policy statements addressed general
land development, desired types of urban growth patterns, local commitment to
providing services to development, redevelopment of developed areas, commitment to
state and federal programs, assistance to channel maintenance projects, energy
facilities siting, tourism, estuarine beach access, and anticipated residential
development.
The town's general land development policies stated that growth should be
managed and guided by the suitability of the land to accommodate the use, the
capacity of the environment, compatibility with the goals and objectives of the town,
density, and the availability of support facilities and services. Policies also stated that
industrial development was not desirable nor compatible with the town's character and
capacity to provide municipal services; that the town would maintain areas for
exclusive use of conventional single-family dwellings, provide an area to
accommodate manufactured homes, and encourage additional areas for multi -family
dwellings; and that the town would retain a 40-foot building height limitation.
Policies also encouraged commercial development to cluster in the northeast
quadrant of the NC Highway 24/58 intersection, discouraged strip highway
commercial development, and required access roads for new commercial development
on NC Highways 24 and 58 and on Taylor -Notion Road.
Policies encouraged the development of public estuarine access opportunities
as described in the 1990 Public Sound Access, Parks and Recreation and Town
Beautification Plan. To date, no new public water access areas nor recreational areas
have been developed by the town.
3.000 Policy Statements January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update
3-3

I
I
I
I
A wide variety of local community development policies concerning town
appearance and cleanliness, public works and services, traffic circulation and
transportation, public safety and security, culture and recreation, town administration,
and economic and community development were also included in the 1992 Plan.
Cape Carteret has striven to adhere to the community development policies of
the 1992 Plan and has made several amendments to its zoning ordinance to address
some of the issues delineated in the previous plan.
3.200 Development of Updated Resource Protection Policies
The major issues discussed in the formulation of resource protection policy statements
include the following topics (not presented here in any priority order):
• the demand for and impacts of marinas.
• stormwater runoff impacts.
• surface and ground water quality.
• long-term solutions to wastewater treatment and disposal.
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 for the town's policies
concerning drystack storage facilities (Section 3.280, Policy 7) and floating homes (Section
3.280, Policy 8) which are more restrictive than the CAMA use standards. After a discussion
of resource protection issues, the policy statements delineated in Section 3.210 through
Section 3.290.2 were developed.
3.210 Constraints to Land Development.
3.211 Flood Hazard Areas.
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.
3.212 Soil Suitability/Septic Tank Use.
Policy 1: Septic tank installation, where permissible, shall be in
accordance with applicable county health department regulations.
3.220 Areas of Environmental Concern.
The Town of Cape Carteret concurs with the CAMA 7H Use Standards for
each of the Areas of Environmental Concern delineated below.
3.000 Policy Statements —January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update
3-4

J
1
3.221 Coastal Wetlands.
- Poli 1: . The town will restrict land uses in coastal wetlands to
those uses that support wetlands conservation and which do not adversely
affect their delicate balance. 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 those uses which require water access and cannot
function elsewhere will be permitted in coastal wetlands consistent with
CAMA 7H Use Standards and local development regulations. Such uses
include utility easements, navigation channels, dredging projects, docks,
piers, mooring pilings, boat ramps, navigational aids, groins, culverts, and
bridges. Each proposed use shall be evaluated for compliance with state
standards.
Policy 3. Marina construction will not be permitted in coastal
wetlands except as may be allowed by CAMA 7H Use Standards.
Policy 4: Coastal wetlands should only be filled consistent with
the CAMA 7H Use Standards.
3.222 Estuarine Waters and Public Trust Areas.
Polio The town's policy is to restrict development in
estuarine waters and public trust waters to those uses which will not cause
significant degradation of the natural function nor condition of the estuarine
waters and public trust areas.
Polio 2: Only those uses which require water access and cannot
function elsewhere will be permitted in estuarine waters and public trust
waters consistent with CAMA 7H Use Standards and local development
regulations.
Policy 3: 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.
3.223 Estuarine Shoreline.
Policy 1: The town will permit residential, commercial, and
recreational development with concurrent attention to the prevention of
erosion, preservation of public access, provision of proper drainage, and
prevention of pollution.
3.000 Policy Statements —January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update
3-5

1
Policy2. 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
1 _ development standards. ,
3.224 Outstanding Resource Waters.
1 Policy 1: 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.
3.230 Other Fragile Areas
3.231 Sound and Estuarine System Islands.
Policy 1: It is the town's policy that these 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.
Policy 2: Any permissible use or development shall be in
accordance with applicable CAMA standards and local land development
regulations.
3.232 Freshwater Wetlands.
Polly 1: 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.
Poll 2: The town prohibits any filling of freshwater wetlands
except as permitted by the US Army Corps of Engineers.
3.233 Historical and Archaeological Sites.
The study area contains no sites listed in the National Register of
Historic Places nor any sites on the Study List for future inclusion in the
National Register. Archaeologically sensitive sites have, however, been
identified in the Cape Carteret planning area. All of these sites have been
1 previously disturbed by urban development. Therefore, no policy statement
is necessary.
1 3.240 Hurricane and Flood Evacuation Needs and Plans.
(See Section 3.600)
1 3.000 Policy Statements —January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update 3-6

3.250 Potable Water Supply Protection.
Polio The town will coordinate land development activities involving
hazardous chemical or petroleum storage and disposal with the appropriate county and
i state regulatory agencies. The town also supports management practices which
address the incidental use of hazardous materials such as insecticides, herbicides,
fertilizers, etc.
Police 2: 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.
3.260 Use of Package Treatment Plants.
Policy_]: 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 requirements.
Policy 2: The town will require, through its zoning ordinance and
'
subdivision regulations, that a land development project proposing the use of a
package treatment plant shall include (i) the formation of a legal, private entity to
properly operate and maintain such package treatment plant and (ii) the development
of a contingency plan to own and operate such package treatment plant should the
private operation fail.
3.270 Stormwater Runoff, Water Quality Problems, and Management
Measures
jPolicy_].
Cape Carteret will promote the use of best available management
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 percolate into the ground rather than discharging it
directly to coastal waters.
Policy 2: 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 3: The town promotes the coordination with adjoining local
government jurisdictions of comprehensive stormwater management practices and
policies to enhance water quality.
3.000 Policy Statements —January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update
3-7

Policy 4: The town will continue to participate in the Carteret County
Interlocal Agency and the Regional Wastewater Task Force to develop solutions for
' discharge alternatives for treated wastewater.
3.280 Marinas, Piers, Docks, and Floating Home Development.
1 Policy 1: The town encourages the establishment of attractive,
environmentally -responsible marina, boat storage, and water access facilities for
residents and vacationers consistent with CAMA regulations and local zoning and
other regulations.
Policy 2: Marina construction will not be permitted in coastal wetlands
1 except as may be allowed by CAMA 7H Use Standards. Marina construction will be
permitted in estuarine waters which are classified as primary nursery areas in
accordance with the CAMA 7H Use Standards and local land development
Iregulations.
Policy 3: Upland marina construction will be permitted in areas located
' adjacent to primary nursery areas and where channel dredging for access to deeper
waters would be through primary nursery areas in accordance with the CAMA 7H
Use Standards and local land development regulations.
Policy 4: The town will permit the development of noncommercial docking
facilities to serve individual residential lots in accordance with CAMA 7H Use
IStandards.
Policy S: Piers serving residential uses and nonresidential uses allowed by
zoning shall be permitted in primary nursery areas.
Policy 6: The town encourages the construction of boat docking facilities by
I landowner or homeowner associations that are designed to service only lots within a
designated subdivision.
Policy 7. 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 8: Floating structures will not be 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
3.000 Policy Statements January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update
3-8

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.
Policy 9.• Public mooring fields shall be permitted in accordance with
CAMA regulations.
Policy 10: The town encourages marina siting and design which promotes
proper flushing action. Such design features include locating marinas near inlets,
maximizing the opening of entrance channels, and minimizing stagnant corners by
using rounded corners, level bottoms sloping towards the entrance, and avoiding
bends.
3.290 Industrial Impacts on Fragile Areas.
Policy 1: The town, through its Zoning Ordinance, will ensure that
industrial development does not adversely impact identified fragile lands.
3.290.1 Sea Level Rise Impacts.
Policy 1: Due to the uncertainty surrounding the extent and magnitude of
' sea level rise, the Town of Cape Carteret does not feel it is in a position at this time to
develop a specific policy statement.
Policy 2: The town supports continued state research into the problems
associated with sea level rise and will consider the development of policies to address
sea level rise as more data concerning problem definition and alternative solutions are
1 made available.
3.290.2 Bulkhead Installation Damage to Marshes.
Policy 1: Cape Carteret will permit bulkhead installation provided that all of
the use standards of 15 NCAC 7H.0208(b)(7) are adhered to.
3.300 Development of Updated Resource Production and Management Policies
The major issues discussed in the development of resource production and
management policy statements centered around the following topics:
the impact of land development activities on marine fisheries.
the provision of public recreational space and water access.
The town's overall general policy concerning resource production and management is
I 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.
he 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.
3.000 Policy Statements January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update 3-9

1
It is the town's intent that its policies concerning resource production and management be
consistent with CAMA 7H Use Standards. Following a discussion of the above issues, the
resource production and management policies outlined in Section 3.310 through Section 3.370
Iwere formulated.
3.310 Productive Agricultural Lands. No productive agricultural lands are located
1 within the Cape Carteret planning area. Therefore, no policy statement is necessary.
3.320 Commercial Forest Lands. No commercial forest lands are located within
the Cape Carteret planning area. Therefore, no policy statement is necessary.
3.330 Mineral Production Areas. No existing or potential mineral production
areas are located within the Cape Carteret planning area. Such mining operations
would, however, not be permitted within the town's planning jurisdiction under the
current zoning regulations. Therefore, no policy statement is necessary.
3.340 Commercial and Recreational Fisheries.
Polio- 1: Cape Carteret will allow in coastal wetland areas only those
developments which require water access and cannot function elsewhere and which
will meet state and/or federal permitting requirements for acceptable impacts on
' coastal and estuarine water fish habitats.
Police 2: The town will cooperate with the Water Quality Section, NC
I Division of Environmental Management to preserve and improve riverine and
estuarine water quality.
Policy 3: 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 it's current low density zoning classifications and will ensure that subsurface
sewage disposal systems are permitted only in conformance with county health
department regulations.
Polig 4 Marina construction will be permitted in accordance with the
CAMA 7H Use Standards and local land development regulations.
Policy 5: Trawling activities in estuarine waters are not opposed by the
town as long as such activities meet state and/or federal permitting requirements for
acceptable impacts on the estuarine waters.
Polio, 6: The town will strive to provide or purchase adequate public access
to Bogue Sound for recreational purposes for residents and property owners.
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.
3.000 Policy Statements —January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update
3-10
I

I�
3.350 Off -Road Vehicles.
Police 1: Off -road vehicles will not be permitted, through the town's-
general ordinance powers, on any sound and estuarine system islands. Off -road
vehicle use in other sections of the planning area is not considered an issue.
3.360 Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Land Development Impacts on
Resources.
Police 1: Only those uses which require water access and cannot function
elsewhere will be permitted in coastal wetlands consistent with CAMA permitting
requirements.
Polia 2: Residential, commercial, and industrial land development in the
'
estuarine shoreline will be allowed only if the applicable permitting agency has
determined that such development meets state and/or federal permitting requirements
for acceptable impacts on estuarine resources and water quality.
'
Policy-3- Marina construction will be permitted in accordance with CAMA
7H Use Standards and local land development regulations.
3.370 Peat or Phosphate Mining Impacts on Resources.
Policy P Peat or phosphate mining operations are not now nor are they
anticipated to be located in the Cape Carteret planning area. Such mining operations
would, however, not be permitted within the town's planning jurisdiction under the
current zoning regulations.
3.400 Development of Updated Economic and Community Development Policies
A wide array of issues were identified as economic and community development
policy statements were being formulated. The major issues involved the following topics:
• maintaining low residential densities.
• the impacts of commercial development.
• commercial land use encroachment in residential areas.
• annexation by adjoining municipalities of Cape Carteret's ETJ.
• incorporation of new municipalities within the town's future growth areas.
• managing strip commercial development adjacent to NC 24/58.
• the impact of tourism on Cape Carteret.
• improvements to major thoroughfares.
• provision of waterfront access.
• promoting marina development.
• minimum lot area requirements for lots of record.
• congestion at the intersection of NC Highways 24 and 58.
• signs and billboards.
3.000 Policy Statements —January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update
3-11

d
J
P
I
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. After a discussion of
economic and community development issues, the policy statements delineated in Section
3.410 through Section 3.490.2 were formulated.
3.410 General Land Development Policies
Polio : Cape Carteret supports managing and directing the town's growth
and development in balance with the availability of municipal services. Further, 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 2: 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 an adequate street system to accommodate increased land
development.
Polio 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.
Poliev 4: The town will support local intergovernmental cooperation with
regard to land use planning issues, such as ETJ areas, annexation agreements,
thoroughfare planning, and regional sewage systems.
3.420 Desired Types of Urban Growth Patterns.
Polio 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 nor
compatible with the town's character and ability to provide municipal services.
Poliev 2: Current residential densities will be maintained in order to
preserve the overall low -density character of Cape Carteret's residential areas.
Poliev 3: Multi -family residential development will be encouraged at a
moderate density range of approximately five dwelling units per acre. Such
development will be guided to locations in which adequate utilities and a sufficient
street system are available.
Policy 4: Cape Carteret will maintain residential areas that are used
exclusively for conventional single-family dwellings.
3.000 Policy Statements —January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update
3-12

I
1
I
Policy 5: The town will continue to enforce the requirement that new
subdivisions provide lands for neighborhood recreation use.
. Polia 6: Cape Carteret will encourage the development of attractive
commercial and professional buildings along the NC Highway 24 and 58 corridors.
Policy 7. The town will continue to enforce zoning ordinance standards for
the control of screening and buffers in commercial areas.
3.430 Local Commitment to Providing Services to Development.
Policy 1: Cape Carteret will remain committed to providing appropriate
municipal services to support additional development.
Policy 2: The provision of basic municipal services shall be based upon the
town's financial capacity and the economic feasibility of providing the municipal
service.
Policy 3: The town supports the current four -county study that is
investigating long-term regional solutions to wastewater needs.
Policy 4: The town will consider amending the subdivisions regulations and
other applicable town codes 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.
3.440 Redevelopment of Developed Areas.
Policy P 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.
Policy 2: Replacement of existing structures within AECs shall be permitted
in accordance with the CAMA requirements of 15 NCAC 7J.0210 and .0211.
3.450 Commitment to State and Federal Programs.
Policy 1, Cape Carteret will evaluate state and federal programs which
impact the town's development. The town's policy has generally been to assist and
cooperate with state and federal offices in local development programs.
3.460 Assistance to Channel Maintenance Projects.
Policy-]: Cape Carteret supports the US Army Corps of Engineers in its
efforts to maintain the Intracoastal Waterway.
3.000 Policy Statements --January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update
3-13

3.470 Energy Facility Siting and Development.
Polia 1 • Since industrial development is generally considered not
' desireable nor compatible with the town's character and ability to provide municipal
services, electric generating plants, onshore refineries, storage facilities, and related
onshore support facilities are not considered desireable land uses within the Cape
Carteret planning jurisdiction.
Policy 2: The Town of Cape Carteret does not oppose offshore exploratory
drilling for oil or gas as long as the activities meet state and/or federal permitting
requirements for acceptable impacts and any identified adverse economic impacts on
Cape Carteret can be mitigated or negated.
3.480 Tourism.
Policy 1 Cape Carteret supports efforts to promote the area for tourism
development which is consistent with the town's land use policies.
Policy 2: The town will promote tourist support businesses and services in
its highway -oriented commercial areas.
' 3.490 Coastal and Estuarine Water Beach Access.
Polia 1: The town will continue to support the exploration, assessment,
and development of estuarine access opportunities.
Policy 2: The town will continue to require, through its Subdivision
Regulations, provisions for common water access in waterfront subdivisions.
3.490.1 Anticipated Residential Development and Requisite Support Services.
Residential development which is projected for future years will primarily involve
low -density single-family residences at a density of approximately 1 to 3 dwelling
units per acre. Such development is anticipated principally in the northern and eastern
portions of the town's planning jurisdiction. Multi -family residential development is
projected to occur, for the most part, at a moderate -density of 3 to S dwelling units
per acre. Multi -family development is expected to locate in areas currently zoned for
such use, primarily in the northeastern portion of the planning area. Existing basic
public facilities and services are generally considered adequate to serve the projected
residential development through the planning period. However, recreational space
and long-term wastewater treatment are needs that will be generated by increased
residential development.
Policy 1: The town will promote residential densities as outlined above.
I 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.
3.000 Policy Statements —January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update
3-14
I

' Policv 2: 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.
' 3.490.2 Other Identified Local Land Development Issues. In addition to the
general community development issues and policies discussed previously, a variety of
' local land development concerns exist that are important to the town. Consequently,
the following policies are developed to address those issues.
' Polio Cape Carteret will strive to improve and enhance the town's visual
quality and attractiveness.
Police 2: The town will seek to improve its capacity to provide municipal
services.
' Policy 3: It is the overall policy of the town to meet the increasing need to
move people and goods from place to place conveniently, safely, quickly, and
efficiently.
Policv 4: It is the town's policy to provide the highest level of safety
possible for people and property in response to growth and development.
' Policy 5: The town will seek to maintain an environment where cultural and
recreational activities can flourish.
Policy 6: The town will seek to monitor and manage growth by monitoring
staff and development service needs in planning, engineering, and inspection to
' maintain and improve quality development as growth increases.
Policy 7: Cape Carteret will consider annexing areas within the existing ETJ
as these areas meet the statutory qualifications for annexation.
Policy 8: In order to keepits land development regulator tools current and
Y
to ensure that such tools are effectively implementing the policies of this Updated
Land Use Plan, the town will investigate opportunities for grant assistance from the
Division of Coastal Management to update and revise its zoning ordinance and
subdivision regulations.
3.500 Development of Updated Continuing Public Participation Policies
The Town of Cape Carteret recognizes the importance of providing citizens with
opportunities to participate in the community's planning process. The town also recognizes
that citizen participation and citizen education must be made available on a continuing basis.
To that end, the town adopted a citizen participation plan during the initial stages of the
CAMA Land Use Plan Update process. The Citizen Participation Plan provided for (i) the
designation by the Town Board of the Planning Board as the advisory committee responsible
' for drafting an update of the land use plan (the Planning Board is composed of citizens that
represent a cross-section of the community); (ii); a joint meeting of the Town Board and the
3.000 Policy Statements —January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update
3-15
11

' Planning Board to serve as both an orientation meeting and an educational opportunity to
inform the general public of the purposes of the CAMA Land Use Plan and the process for
updating the plan (iii) meetings of the Planning Board at strategic points in the land use
update process; (iv) a .second public -information meeting following the completion of a
preliminary draft land use plan; (v) newspaper releases concerning the land use planning
process, preliminary plan, and final plan; (vi) a public hearing before the Town Board to
review and adopt the Land Use Plan Update; and (vii) public notices in the local newspaper of
meetings and the availability of the draft plan. An intergovernmental coordination meeting,
sponsored by the Carteret County Mayor's Association, was held with Carteret County and
' the municipalities within the county. The purpose of the meeting was to identify and discuss
significant land use issues of common concern. A complete listing of activities which
implemented the town's citizen participation plan as well as a copy of the Citizen
Participation Plan adopted by the Town of Cape Carteret is provided in Appendix T.
The town has assessed the effectiveness of its citizen participation plan and has
determined that the process permitted broad public participation at key formulative stages in
the preparation of the land use plan update. In addition to allowing citizen input, the process
also helped to educate the public about land use planning and the management and protection
of natural resources.
The town will ensure a continuous planning process by conducting periodic reviews of
' the Land Use Plan's policies. This review will be the responsibility of the Cape Carteret
Planning Board and Town Board.
1 3.600 Storm Hazard Mitigation, Post -Disaster Recovery, and Evacuation Plans
The Town of Cape Carteret adopted the Hurricane Evacuation Plan, prepared for
' Carteret County by the Carteret County Office of Emergency Management, in July 1985.
The Evacuation Plan provides evacuation guidance to governmental officials and emergency
service organizations and assigns specific responsibilities for implementing the plan in the
event of a hurricane. The plan includes provisions for the organization of a decision making
control group, development of a warning and alerting systems, delineation of evacuation
routes, identification of emergency shelter locations, and development of re-entry procedures.
The Hurricane Evacuation Plan can be reviewed at the Carteret County Emergency
Management Office in Beaufort or at the Cape Carteret Town Hall. The town will continue
to support the Hurricane Evacuation Plan by providing assistance and participation as
required by the plan. Cape Carteret also supports the continuation of hurricane awareness
programs.
' Storm Surge Inundation Areas have been delineated by the US Army Corps of
Engineers as part of the Eastern NC Hurricane Evacuation Study (1987). While the storm
surge areas generally parallel the 100-year flood hazard areas shown in Figure 3, there are
some additional parts of the study area that are subject to hurricane -induced flooding. These
areas are primarily (i) the area east of Deer Creek and south of NC Highway 24 and (ii) the
area immediately north of Pettiford Creek. Of these three areas, the most intensely developed
is the area east of Deer Creek which includes the Bayshore Park and Country Club Point
Subdivisions. It is estimated that the area contains approximately 100-150 dwelling units.
The area immediately north of Pettiford Creek is largely undeveloped with a few scattered
' 3. 000 Policy Statements --January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update 3-16

' single-family dwellings. Storm surge areas are shown in the Composite Hazards Map (Figure
7).
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:
Table 6
DESCRIPTION OF HURRICANE CATEGORIES
Category
Winds
Storm Surge
Damage Expected
Category 1
74-95 MPH
4-5 Feet
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
The following policies are developed to mitigate the effects of high winds, storm
' surge, and flooding.
Policy 1: Cape Carteret will continue to enforce the state building code
' requirements that relate to wind -resistant construction standards.
Policy 2: Cape Carteret will continue to participate in the National Flood
Insurance Program and to enforce the flood damage prevention ordinance.
PolicZ Cape Carteret will avoid zoning areas susceptible to storm surge
' for higher density residential uses and intensive nonresidential uses.
Policy 4: Cape Carteret will continue to support and cooperate with Carteret
County and other local units of government in emergency management planning and
training.
' Policies to discourage development, particularly high -density or large structures in the
most hazardous areas include the following previously outlined policies:
' • Section 3.211, 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.
3.000 Policy Statements —January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update 3-17

preparation of this map was financed In part
ugh a grant provided by the North C-j
a
stal Management Program, through funds
Tided by the Coastal Zone Management Act
??Z as amended, which is administered by
PBT77POBD BAT ;
FZMFORD CP"K
Q o0
_ o
W= OAK
BDBB
V OAF PJM
$UMWAT
BOAfHO(SB
BOQUB S7UM
®�. %�.-r�-.,- -VA
-
JII� ♦ ,
G
Figure 7
Composite Hazards Map
Cape Carteret, NC
Fill
MNO
N -2 Surge Areas
Category I
Category 3 Additional Surge Area
Category 4-5 Additional Surge Area
Town Limits
ETJ
1• �.gga�� �� 1/ ,i
Watershed Boundary
�� ♦ e•.-� . J� pi« w �. end ,�, �,� ar,��di aw
i � �� ��i� �� a'�� and E ���� '��•ft"+���
1 ♦ r� a, s. `.,,, ►ffi �Source: Eastern N.C. Hurricane Evacuation
Study, US Affny Corps of ,�
• A��•'r`�♦.� ��r Engineers, pp.���_,'Qr7�1]
W `fig/��� i��!►�-'.v'�.!!p//%�rl!>v� t-+-'
�� �� �fly i $ ties
JARTI
♦ ♦ `, ••� Ar ,ice • � .�� ♦ d` � � (31 � .
XXOP
RONNI
1 � `��� ��I� ���,����� Wit/ P• 9,y -- b�.' �� . ! I11%�'�fr,A•,
o�� �►� 7G i�♦�\s!r♦�� .a �d �'°s �•'�n!�tts�yt`�t�d�9�` � ,.
e.
The
v Wooten
jCompany,
�w
Mies
1/22/98
�,,��

• Section 3.231, Policy 1. It is the town's policy that sound and estuarine system
islands not be considered for development.
• Section 3.410, -Policy 3. 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.
• Section 3.420, Policy 2. Current residential densities will be maintained in order
to preserve the overall low -density character of Cape Carteret's residential areas.
' The town's policy concerning the public acquisition of land in the most hazardous
areas is not to acquire such lands.
' In the aftermath of a major storm, Cape Carteret recognizes that the reconstruction
process occurs in four periods which overlap yet follow each other in sequence after a disaster
strikes. These periods are as follows:
' 1. Emergency Period. The initial days or weeks after the disaster when social and
economic activities are most seriously disrupted and attention focuses on the dead,
' injured, missing, and homeless.
2. Restoration Period. The first weeks or months after the disaster when attention
focuses on debris removal and the rapid repair of damaged utilities, housing, and
' commercial structures. This period marks the transition from the response phase
to the recovery phase.
' 3. Replacement Reconstruction Period. Several weeks after the disaster and possibly
continuing for several years with concentration placed on reconstruction of those
buildings and utilities which were damaged beyond repair.
' 4. Commemorative, Betterment, and Developmental Reconstruction Period. Usually
several years after the disaster when attention is directed toward the
I
memorialization of the disaster and to mark the town's post disaster improvements
and/or to enhance future growth.
The actual amount of time it takes to recover from a natural disaster depends primarily
upon the extent of damages incurred. During the restoration period, the town staff will
evaluate the condition of damaged or destroyed public facilities and submit a report to the
' town board. At that time, consideration will be given to relocating any destroyed facilities
out of high risk damage areas. Such relocation shall occur only when more satisfactory or
lower risk locations are both feasible and readily available.
' During the emergency period, public safety will be the primary concern. Debris
removal, securing power lines, assessing potable water quality , and opening lines of
' transportation and communication are actionsto be. taken by the county, EMC, FEMA,
NCDOT, health department, NC National Guard, Civil Air Patrol, and local law enforcement
t3.000 Policy Statements —January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update
3-19

agencies. These agencies, with assistance from the mayor and town staff, will be responsible
for organizing volunteers and utilizing available resources in clean-up activities.
' Immediately following a natural disaster, during which substantial physical damage
has incurred, the Cape Carteret Town Board will enact a post disaster reconstruction
' moratorium. This moratorium should remain in place until heavily damaged areas can be
cleared and mapped for detailed review. At that time, the town board should consider the
following:
1 1. Should there be changes in land use densities, locations, etc.?
2. Are modifications needed in the local building codes?
3. What kinds of efforts and financial commitments are necessary to make the town
more effective and more attractive?
' 4. Should there be any local compensation or special financial assistance for private
property losses?
' 5. How should the necessary increased local public expenditures be financed?
I
6. Should normal or extraordinary decision -making mechanisms be used to guide
post -disaster recovery?
The town board will establish a Recovery Task Force to assist in overseeing the
reconstruction process and to recommend any necessary policy changes. This task force will
be comprised of citizens of varied backgrounds who are familiar with the Town of Cape
Carteret. Individual members should be appointed by the town board in a manner similar to
the appointment of other advisory board members, with special emphasis placed upon
obtaining a variety of expertise. The task force will consist of no less than eight and no more
' than fifteen members.
The following guidelines will be followed for post -disaster repairs and reconstruction:
' 1. Timing and Completion of Damage Estimates. The preliminary damage
assessment will be completed by the building inspector within the first five days
after the disaster. This assessment will be submitted to the town board. Damage
survey reports will be completed by the building inspector within three months of
the disaster.
' 2. Timing and Completion of Temporary Development Moratoria. The town board,
upon receipt of the building inspector's damage report, shall decide if damage is
' substantial enough to warrant a temporary development moratorium. If so,
development will be suspended in affected areas until redevelopment policy is
established (within six months).
' 3. Post Disaster Development Standards. Development standards for post -disaster
reconstruction will follow established state building codes and any other policies
3.000 Policy Statements January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update 3-20

enacted by the town board during the moratorium. Where nonconforming
structures have suffered damage exceeding 60 percent of the structure's value,
they may be rebuilt only in conformance with the current standards.
During the restoration period, the any town -owned public utilities will be repaired to
an operational level. During the reconstruction period, utility reconstruction and relocation if
feasible and necessary, will take place. The Cape Carteret Town Board will make all policy
decisions concerning the Town of Cape Carteret and its extraterritorial planning jurisdiction.
' The town will be responsible for implementation of those policies and for compliance with the
policies.
' 3.700 Proposed Implementation Methods
In order to implement the previously outlined policies, 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, and subdivision plats. The Cape
Carteret Board of Adjustment will also review policies outlined in this plan prior to making
decisions on variances.
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. Specifically, Zoning
I
Ordinance and Subdivision Regulations amendments which will be investigated in order to
implement the policy statements involving the following topics:
0 permitting retail sales in marinas.
• addressing minimum lot area requirements for lots of record in the R-20 zoning
district.
• sign regulations.
• requiring mandatory water connections for new construction.
3.800 Intergovernmental Coordination and Implementation
In developing the update to it's land use plan, the Town of Cape Carteret, in
1 conjunction with Carteret County and all of the municipalities within the county, held an
intergovernmental coordination meeting in August 1996 to identify land use and development
issues of mutual concern. The meeting was held to ensure that land use issues and concerns
of adjoining planning jurisdictions were discussed. Regional issues and concerns identified
by the Town of Cape Carteret which were discussed at the meeting included the following:
(1) Expansion of municipal ETJ areas.
(2) 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.
3.000 Policy Statements —January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update
3-21

' (3) Annexation/delineation of future growth area agreements with the Towns of Cedar
Point and Bogue.
' (4) Billboard control along the causeway to Emerald Isle.
(5) Traffic congestion at the NC Highway 24/58 intersection.
(6) Coordination of comprehensive stormwater management practices and policies
with adjoining local governments.
(7) Regional solutions to wastewater disposal needs.
' Other joint meetings to discuss development issues of regional significance include the
North Carolina Municipalities meeting held in Emerald Isle in November 1996, meetings of
the Carteret County Interlocal Agency (consisting of nine Carteret County municipalities) to
' assess long-term wastewater management alternatives, and meetings of the Regional
Wastewater Task Force which has been evaluating long-term options for wastewater treatment
in Carteret, Craven, Onslow, and Pamlico Counties.
3.000 Policy Statements —January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update
3-22

[J
I
1
Ll
4.000 LAND CLASSIFICATION
SYSTEM

1
I
4.000 LAND CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
The land classification system was developed as a means of assisting in the implementation of the
land development policies. The land classification system is intended to be supported and complemented
by zoning, subdivision regulations, and other land management tools. The land classification system is
not a regulatory mechanism but is, rather, a tool to help implement land development policies.
The land classification system provides a framework to be used by the town to identify the future
use of land. The designation of land classes allows the town to illustrate its policy statements as to where
and to what density it wants growth to occur, and where it wants to conserve natural and cultural
resources by guiding growth.
4.100 Land Classifications
The CAMA regulations delineate seven land classes: Developed, Urban Transition, Limited
Transition, Community, Rural, Rural with Services, and Conservation. In applying the land
classification system, the town has placed particular attention on how, where, and when land
development of certain types and intensity will be encouraged or discouraged.
4.110 Developed Classification. The purpose of the Developed land classification is to
provide for continued intensive development and redevelopment of existing towns and their
urban environs. Urban land uses and higher intensity uses, which presently require the
traditional urban services, should be classified as Developed. Areas included in the
Developed classification are currently urban in character, have minimal undeveloped land
remaining, and have in place or are scheduled to have in place municipal or public services.
Urban in character includes mixed land uses such as residential, commercial, industrial,
institutional, and other uses at high to moderate densities. Services include water, sewer,
recreational facilities, streets, and police and fire protection. Areas developed for
predominantly residential purposes meet the intent of this classification if they exhibit:
' (i) a density of 3 or more dwellings per acre; or
(ii) a majority of lots of 15,000 square feet or less which are provided or
scheduled to be provided with the traditional urban services; and/or
(iii) permanent population densities are high and seasonal population may swell
significantly.
n
4.120 Urban Transition Classification. The purpose of the Urban Transition classification
is to provide for future intensive urban development on lands that are suitable for
development and that will be provided with the necessary urban services to support
intensive urban development.
Included in the Urban Transition classification are areas presently being developed
for urban purposes or areas which will be developed in the next five to ten years. These
areas are in an urban `transition' state of development, going from lower intensity uses to
higher intensity uses and as such will eventually require urban services. Examples of areas
meeting the intent of this classification are lands included within municipal extraterritorial
planning boundaries and areas being considered for annexation. Areas classified as Urban
Transition will provide lands for intensive urban growth when lands in the developed
4.000 Land Classification System January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Update
4-1

classification are not available. The Urban Transition classification includes mixed land
uses such as residential, commercial, industrial, institutional and other uses at or
' approaching high to moderate densities. Areas that are predominantly residential meet the
intent of this classification if-
(i) they are approaching three dwelling units per acre, or
(ii) a majority of the lots are 15,000 square feet or less and will be provided with
essential urban services to support this high density development, or
(iii) are contiguous to existing developed municipal areas.
' 4.130 Limited Transition Classification. The purpose of the Limited Transition
classification is to provide for development in areas that have some services but are suitable
for lower densities than those associated with the Urban Transition classification and/or are
geographically remote from existing towns.
' Areas meeting the intent of this classification will experience increased development
during the planning period and will be in a state of development necessitating some
municipal -type services. These areas are of modest densities and are often suitable for the
' provision of closed water systems rather than individual wells. The Limited Transition
classification is intended for predominantly residential development with a density of three
units per acre or less, or the majority of lots are 15,000 square feet or greater. Clustering
' or development associated with planned unit developments may be appropriate in the
Limited Transition class. In the case of the Cape Carteret Planning Jurisdiction, it has been
determined that no areas would fall within this classification.
' 4.140 Community Classification. The purpose of this classification is to provide
clustered, mixed land uses at low densities to help meet the housing, shopping, and
employment and other needs in rural areas. Since this classification is usually associated
with `crossroads development' in counties, it has been determined not to be applicable to the
Cape Carteret Planning Jurisdiction.
4.150 Rural Classification. The Rural classification is intended to provide for agriculture,
forestry, mineral extraction, and other allied uses traditionally associated with an agrarian
' region as well as uses that, due to their hazardous or noxious nature, should be located in a
relatively isolated and undeveloped area. Very low density dispersed residential uses on
large lots with on -site water and sewer are consistent with the intent of this classification.
Because there are no large agricultural and/or forestry areas within the Cape Carteret
Planning Jurisdiction, the Rural classification has been determined not to be applicable.
' 4.160 Rural with Services Classification. The Rural Services classification is intended to
provide for very low density land uses including residential use where limited water services
are provided in order to avert an existing or projected health problem. Because this
' classification is concerned with predominantly agrarian areas with known or anticipated
water quality problems, it has been determined not to be applicable to the Cape Carteret
Planning Jurisdiction.
4.000 Land Classification System —January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Update
4-2

n
P
4.170 Conservation Classification. The purpose of the Conservation classification is to
provide for the effective long-term management and protection of significant, limited, or
irreplaceable areas.
Areas meeting the intent of this classification include Areas of Environmental
Concern (AECs) as defined by CAMA and other similar environmentally sensitive lands
such as `404' wetlands (wetlands other than statutorily defined coastal wetlands). The
Conservation classification is intended to be applied to areas that, because of their unique,
productive, limited, cultural, or natural features, should be either not developed at all
(preserved), or if developed, done so in an extremely limited fashion. Urban services,
public or private, should not be provided in areas classified as Conservation as a catalyst to
stimulate intense development. It is intended that limited, on -site services will adequately
support any restricted development within this classification. While AEC standards will
occasionally permit urban -type development and limited services on a lot -by -lot basis within
various AECs, it should be noted that this is the exception rather than the rule. The
primary intent of the Conservation classification is to provide protection for the resources
included therein.
4.200 Uses Included In Each Classification
The following general land uses are allowed within the land classifications applicable to the
Cape Carteret Planning Jurisdiction:
4.210 Developed Classification. Mixed land uses (residential, commercial, industrial, and
institutional) are included in the Developed classification. Residential densities generally
range from a maximum of two to five dwelling units per acre. Higher densities, up to a
maximum of 8 units per acre, are permitted within planned residential developments.
Residential uses include single-family detached (including manufactured homes on individual
lots) and attached dwellings, multi -family structures, retirement facilities, and manufactured
home parks. Commercial land uses include a wide variety of retail, service, and office and
professional uses. Major shopping facilities, concentrated clusters of free-standing retail
establishments, and commercial marine establishments are included. Industrial land uses
include light manufacturing establishments. Institutional land uses include uses such as the
White Oak School as well as governmental, semi-public, and private institutional and
recreational land uses.
4.220 Urban Transition Classification. Land uses in this classification may include
mixed land uses but they are not as intensively developed as in the previous classification.
The areas classified as Urban Transition in the Cape Carteret Planning Jurisdiction are
predominantly undeveloped lands on the periphery of the existing developed areas.
4.230 Conservation Classification. The Conservation classification includes identified
AECs (coastal wetlands, estuarine waters, public trust waters, estuarine shoreline) Hunting
Island, and `404' freshwater wetlands protected by the Clean Water Act.. No development
other than those uses which require water access and cannot function elsewhere is allowed
in coastal wetlands and estuarine and public trust waters. The town concurs with CAMA
AEC Standards for properties located in the Conservation classification and with the US
Army Corps of Engineers regulations for `404' wetlands.
4.000 Land Classification System January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAAM Land Use Update
4-3

' Development within the estuarine shoreline must be in accordance with CAMA regulations
and guidelines and the applicable Cape Carteret Zoning Ordinance provisions. Permits must
t be obtained from the US Army Corps of Engineers prior to disturbing any freshwater
wetlands. Most of the land areas classified as Conservation are within identified flood
hazard areas and permissible land uses are, therefore, restricted to those which create no
' significant adverse impact on base flood levels.
4.300 Land Classification Map
The Land Classification Map (see Figure 8) includes three land classifications: (i)
Developed; (ii) Urban Transition; and (iii) Conservation. The Land Classification Map graphically
illustrates the locations of the various classifications. Because of the scale of the Land
Classification Map, the Conservation classifications can not be mapped with any degree of
' accuracy. Precise locations for some areas classified as Conservation must be determined by field
investigation by the appropriate permitting agency. The general locations of the various land
classifications are described below.
' 4.310 Developed Classification. The Developed classification generally includes land that
is being used for urban purposes. The Developed area generally includes Old Cape
' Carteret, Country Club Point Subdivision, Bayshore Park Subdivision, Star Hill
Subdivision, Fox Forest Subdivision, Quail Wood Acres Subdivision, strip residential areas
abutting Taylor Notion Road and NC Highway 58, and a small subdivision along Pettiford
' Park Circle. Commercial areas included in the Developed classification are located
primarily in the northeastern corner of the NC Highway 24/58 intersection and along the
NC 24 and NC 58 corridors. Municipal services are currently provided to the
' overwhelming majority of the Developed area.
4.320 Urban Transition Classification. This classification includes the predominantly
vacant, undeveloped areas located on the northern and northeastern fringes of the current
Cape Carteret corporate limits; a large undeveloped area generally in the triangle formed by
Taylor Notion Road, NC Highway 58, and NC Highway 24; and an undeveloped area
located on the south side of NC Highway 24 between Yaupon Drive and Bogue Sound
Drive. The majority of the area classified as Urban Transition is currently zoned either R-
20 or R-30. Portions of the Urban Transition area are potential annexation areas.
' Municipal services are expected to ultimately be extended into such areas.
4.330 Conservation Classification. This classification includes Hunting Island, `404'
' freshwater wetlands protected by the Clean Water Act, and AECs delineated in Section
4.230. Much of the area designated as Conservation is within identified flood hazard areas.
Because of the map scale, the Conservation classification can not be accurately mapped.
The precise location of coastal wetlands, freshwater wetlands, and the estuarine shoreline
must be determined by field investigation. The town concurs with CAMA AEC standards
for properties located in the Conservation classification and with the US Army Corps of
Engineers regulations for `404' wetlands..
' 4.400 Relationship Y of Policy Statements and Land Classifications
The following sections discuss how the land use policy statements contained in Section
3.000 apply to each of the classifications delineated on the Land Classification Map (Figure 8).
4.000 Land Classification System January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAAM Land Use Update 4-4

e preparation of this map was financed in part
ough a grant provided by the North Carolina
astal Management Program, through funds �
7vided by the Coastal Zone Management Act /
1972, as amended, which is administered b
/qD 0 -
O \\ ❑
0
N
S kv/ /
P",Fc*o
6e
G
NOTE 1:
Due to the map scale, the conservation classification
can not be accurately mapped. The conservation
classification includes, Coastal Wetlands, Estuarine
Waters, Public Trust Waters, the Estuarine Shoreline,
and identified Fragile Areas.
See section 4.340. The precise location of Coastal
and Freshwater Wetlands and the Estuarine Shoreline
must be determined by field investigation.
NOTE 2:
Western Bogue Sound is designated as an Outstanding
Resource Water by the North Carolina Environmental Commission.
As such, property within 575 feet of the mean high water line
must abide by the development standards set forth in the CAMA legislation.
Within all non-ORW areas, the estuarine
shoreline AEC is 75 feet of the mean high water line.
Figure 8
,\ Land Classification
Map
Cape Carteret, NC
!_ Developed
Urban Transition
Conservation
City Limits SEE NOTE 1
--- ETJ
T
---- Watershed Boundary
Boundary of Western
Bogue Sound ORW
weo1on Estuarine Shoreline AEC
Company
1 /22/98

The Town of Cape Carteret does not propose to impose any additional local requirements for Areas
of Environmental Concern which are more restrictive than the CAMA 7H Use Standards
administered by the NC Division of Coastal Management with the exception that the town's policy
for drystack storage facilities (Section 3.280, Policy 7) and the town's policy for floating homes
(Section 3.280, Policy 8) are more restrictive than CAMA standards in that drystack storage
facilities and floating homes are not permitted within the Cape Carteret planning jurisdiction.
CAMA use standards will allow floating homes within marinas.
4.410 Developed Classification. Policy statements have been formulated which encourage
a variety of land uses to meet the housing, employment, shopping, recreation, and cultural
needs of the citizens of the Cape Carteret Planning Jurisdiction. Policy statements have also
been developed which encourage land development that has or can readily obtain adequate
support infrastructure. Moderate residential densities (5 dwelling units per acre) are
promoted in areas with sufficient utilities and an adequate street system. Multi -family
development is promoted in areas currently zoned R-10M. Commercial development and
professional services are encouraged along the NC Highway 24 and 58 corridors. The
redevelopment of older, established residential neighborhoods is encouraged at the same
density and intensity of scale as that currently existing within such neighborhoods.
4.420 Urban Transition Classification. Policy statements have been developed which
apply to the Urban Transition classification. These policies address the provision of urban
services and the density of development. Intensive urban development is guided to areas
that currently have the necessary support infrastructure or where these services can readily
be made available. Land development will be guided to areas that have public water and an
adequate street system to accommodate increased land development. Low -density
residential uses are promoted as are the current maximum densities of approximately 2 to 3
dwelling units per acres. Policy statements have been developed which continue a
commitment to provide, within the town's financial capacity, appropriate municipal services
to support additional development.
4.430 Conservation Classification. Policy statements which apply to areas within the
Conservation classification are concerned with the appropriate use and management of
AECs and other fragile areas and the protection of water quality. Policy statements have
been developed which give priority to the conservation of coastal wetlands. Water -
dependent uses are the only uses which are allowed in coastal wetlands, estuarine waters,
and public trust waters. Hunting Island is identified as a fragile area. Development within
the estuarine shoreline is allowed only if it meets state and/or federal permitting
requirements for acceptable impacts on estuarine resources and water quality.
Developments locating adjacent to coastal waters are encouraged to make every effort to
mitigate any adverse effects on estuarine water quality and on primary nursery and fish
habitat areas. Off -road vehicles are prohibited on sound and estuarine system islands.
Policies have been developed that promote the use of best available management practices to
minimize the threat of pollution from stormwater runoff. The town encourages the
coordination with adjoining local governments of comprehensive stormwater management
practices and policies that enhance water quality.
' 4.000 Land Classification System —January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Update
4-6

m m m m m r m m m m m m m m m r m m m

APPENDIX A
INDEX OF DATA SOURCES
During the preparation of this land use plan update, a wide variety of data sources were utilized.
The general data sources are outlined below as are specific reference materials.
GENERAL DATA SOURCES
Town of Cape Carteret.
West Carteret Water District.
Carteret County Inspections Department.
Cape Carteret Volunteer Fire and Rescue District.
Carteret County Economic Development Council.
Carteret County Office of Emergency Management.
Carteret County Planning Department.
Carteret County Schools.
N.C. Department of Commerce, Travel and Tourism Division.
N.C. Department of Environmental Health and Natural Resources, Division of Coastal Management.
N.C. Department of Environmental Health and Natural Resources, Division of Marine Fisheries.
N.C. Department of Environmental Health and Natural Resources, Division of Parks and Recreation.
N.C. Department of Environmental Health and Natural Resources, Division of Soil and Water
Conservation.
N.C. Office of State Planning.
N.C. State Ports Authority.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Farmers Home Administration.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Services.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census
REFERENCE MATERIALS
Albemarle -Pamlico Estuarine System, Preliminary Technical Analysis of the Status and Trends, N.C.
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, December 1989.
Authorized Construction By Building Permit, Bureau of Census, Construction and Statistics Division,
Building Permits Branch, 1991-1994.
Carteret County Hurricane Evacuation Plan, Carteret County Office of Emergency Management, July
1988.
Census of Population, Housing, Retail Trade, Service Industries, and Wholesale Trade, U.S.
Department of Commerce, Bureau of Census, 1960-1990.
Characterization of Baseline Demographic Trends In The Year -Round and Recreational Population In
The Albemarle -Pamlico Estuarine Study Area, Paul D. Tschetter, East Carolina University,
Greenville, NC, May 1989.
AppendixA—lanuary 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update A-1

1
1
I
Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan, Technical Document, Albemarle -Pamlico
Estuarine Study, November 1994.
Draft White Oak River Basinwide Water Quality Management Plan, NC Division of Water Quality,
Water Quality Section, July 1996.
Economic Impact of Travel and Tourism on North Carolina, N.C. Department of Commerce, Division
of Travel and Tourism, 1995.
Flood Insurance Study, Town of Cape Carteret, N.C., Federal Emergency Management Agency, 1974.
Land Use Planning Information Packet, Carteret County, N.C. Division of Coastal Management, 1995.
Town of Cape Carteret Land Use Plan Update, Ken Weeden and Associates, 1992.
North Carolina Municipal Population, 1994, N.C. Office of State Planning, 1995.
North Carolina Population Projections, N.C. Office of State Planning, 1995.
North Carolina State Profile, February 1995, Woods and Poole Economics, Washington, DC.
Soils Survey of Carteret County, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service,
September 1987.
Storm Hazard Mitigation Plan and Post Disaster Reconstruction Plan, George Eichler & Associates
and Satilla Planning, Inc., June 1984.
"The Effects of Global Warming and Sea -Level Rise on Coastal North Carolina," R. Paul Wilms,
Carolina Planning, Fall 1990.
Transportation Improvement Program, N.C. Department of Transportation.
Subdivision Regulations, Town of Cape Carteret, N.C.
Zoning Ordinance, Town of Cape Carteret, N.C.
Appendix A —January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update A-2

nI
u
APPENDIX B
1 COMPARISON OF CAPE CARTERET'S POPULATION GROWTH RATE
WITH SELECTED MUNICIPALITIES IN THE REGION
_..:::.:..._...........:...........................
Jacksonville
..............................................................
Onslow
18,259
.......................................................................
30,398
75,230
.... _... ................
64.5%
................. _.....
147.5%
Richlands
Onslow
825
996
1,252
20.7 %
25.7 %
'
New Bern
Craven
14,557
17,363
219285
19.3%
22.6%
Atlantic Beach
Carteret
941
1,938
2,267
106.0%
17.0%
Cape Carteret
Carteret
944
1,013
1,179
7.3 %
16.4%
Indian Beach
Carteret
54
153
177
183.3 %
15.7 %
'
Emerald Isle
Carteret
865
2,434
2,798
181.4%
15.0%
Pine Knoll Shores
Carteret
646
1,360
1,543
110.5%
13.5%
Swansboro
Onslow
976
1,165
1,321
19.4 %
13.4 %
' Newport Craven 1,883 2,516 2,778 33.6% 10.4%
Cedar Point Carteret 479 628 688 31.1 % 9.6%
Oriental Pamlico 536 786 857 46.6 % 9.0 %
Maysville Jones 877 892 952 1.7 % 6.7 %
Morehead City
Carteret
4,359
6,046
6,384
38.7%
5.6%
Beaufort
Carteret
3,826
3,808
3,997
-0.5%
5.0%
'
Bayboro
Pamlico
759
733
750
-3.4 %
2.3 %
Havelock
Craven
17,718
20,300
20,700
14.5%
2.0%
tAlliance
Pamlico
616
681
699
10.5 %
-1.8 %
Trenton
Jones
294
230
224
-21.8%
-2.6%
1 Sources: U.S. Census, 1980 and 1990; North Carolina Municipal Population, Office of State Planning, 1995.
Appendix B-January 22. 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update A-3

APPENDIX C
COMPONENTS OF POPULATION CHANGE
- CARTERET-COUNTY AND NORTH CAROLINA
1980 TO 1990
Population Change
11,461
752,353
Births
6,983
901,708
Deaths
4,345
527,545
Natural Increase
2,638
374,163
Net Migration
8,823
378,190
Migration Rate'
21.5%
6.4%
'Migration rate is the difference between in -migration and out -migration expressed as a percentage of the total
population.
COMPONENTS OF POPULATION GROWTH
SELECTED COUNTIES IN THE REGION
1980-2010
Beaufort
4.8
2.9
1.9
4.7
2.1
2.6
2.0
0.0
2.0
Carteret
27.9
6.4
21.5
22.2
2.6
19.6
15.7
0.4
15.3
Craven
14.9
14.5
0.4
15.1
11.4
3.7
12.0
8.7
3.3
Onslow
32.9
23.8
9.1
13.2
18.3
-5.0
17.1
17.2
-0.2
Pamlico
9.3
2.4
7.0
8.7
-0.3
9.0
5.3
-2.5
7.8
NC
12.8
6.4
6.4
12.3
6.0
6.3
8.4
3.9
4.5
Source: N.C. Population Projections, Office of State Planning, 1995.
Appendix C-January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAM Land Use Plan Update
A-4

Age Category
Under 18 Years
School Age
18-24 Years
College Age
25-64 Years
Working Age
65 + Years
Retirement Age
Totals
APPENDIX D
AGE DISTRIBUTION
1990
Number
% of Total
% of Total
% of Total
163
16.2 %
22.4 %
24.2 %
46
4.6%
9.3%
11.8%
495
49.1 %
54.0 %
51.9 %
304
30.1 %
14.3 %
12.1 %
1,008 100.0 % 100.0 % 100.0 %
Source: U.S. Census of Population, 1990.
Appendix D—January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update
A-5

M M r M M M r M M M M M M M M M M M M
Age Category
Under 18 Years
School Age
18-24 Years
College Age
25-64 Years
Working Age
65 + Years
Retirement Age
Totals
APPENDIX D (continued)
HISTORICAL AND PROJECTED AGE DISTRIBUTION
1990-2010
Carteret
North
Carteret
North
Carteret
North
County
Carolina
County
Carolina
County
Carolina
22.4 %
24.2 %
20.5 %
24.3 %
18.4 %
23.1 %
9.3%
11.8%
8.4%
9.9%
8.2%
10.4%
54.0 %
51.9 %
54.7 %
52.9 %
55.0 %
52.5 %
14.3%
12.1 %
16.4%
12.9%
18.4%
14.0%
100.0 % 100.0 % 1 100.0 % 100.0 % 1 100.0 % 100.0 %
Source: North Carolina Projections, Office of State Planning, 1995.
Appendix D-January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update A-6

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
APPENDIX E
MEDIAN AGE OF THE POPULATION
1970-2010
Cape Carteret
1970
n/a
1980
n/a
1990
52.6
2000
2010
N/A
N/A
Carteret County
28.3
31.4
35.8
39.8
43.9
North Carolina
26.5
29.6
33.0
36.2
38.5
United States
28.0
30.0
32.8
35.7
37.5
Sources: U.S. Census of Population, 1970-1990.
Woods and Poole Economics, North Carolina State Profile, 1995.
N.C. Population Projections, N.C. Office of State Planning, 1995.
Appendix E—January 2, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update
A-7

= M M M M M M M M M M M M M = M M M M
APPENDIX F
RACIAL COMPOSITION OF THE POPULATION
1990
Cape Carteret
1,001
99.3%
0
0.0%
7
0.7%
1,008
100.0%
Carteret County
479445
90.3%
4,385
8.3%
726
1.4%
529556
100%
North Carolina
5,008,491
75.5%
1,456,323
22.0%
163,823
2.5%
6,628,637
100%
Carteret County
North Carolina
RACIAL COMPOSITION TRENDS
1970-2010
............
... .................. . ....... ': . ...... .... ........... ............. .3 . ....................
.. 0R(i.... .... ........ x
a...�.x.x....:..:X.."........
.... ...... X,
. ....
2 , .
........................................
.... .... ........... ..
:::::"'N
........ . ... . ......
........
..........
. ..........
. ..........
... Wh't:
..........
....
. ....
:Wh e:::::
.. ............ ...........
... .........
..............
....................
... ..........
Wh
.......
..............................
............
................
.....................
M.:* ........
........... -J
........
......
Idt :::N
..
....
-W
....... .. ........
-h
88.6%
76.8%
11.4%
23.2%
89.7%
76.6%
10.3%
23.4%
90.3%
75.5%
9.7%
24.5%
92.0%
77.8%
8.0%
22.2%
91.2%
75.1%
8.8%
24.9%
Sources: U.S. Census of Population, 1970-1990.
NC Population Projections, NC Office of State Planning, 1995.
Woods and Poole Economics, North Carolina State Profile, 1995.
Appendix F-January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAAM Land Use Plan Update A-8

APPENDIX G
HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS
General Household Characteristics
1990
Total Housing Units
580
34,576
2,818,193
Occupied Housing Units
441
21,238
2,517,026
% Occupied
76.0 %
61.4 %
89.3 %
No. Owner -Occupied
383
15,761
1,711, 817
No. Renter -Occupied
58
5,477
805,209
% Owner -Occupied
86.8 %
74.2 %
68.0 %
% Renter Occupied
13.2 %
25.8 %
32.0 %
% W/ 1.01 or More Persons Per Room
1.1 %
2.0 %
2.8 %
Median Value, Owner -Occupied Units
$94,800
$73,100
$65,800
Total Vacant Units
139
13,338
301,167
For Seasonal, Recreational Use
102
10,138
98,714
Homeowner Vacancy Rate
2.8 %
3.4 %
1.8 %
Rental Vacancy Rate
13.4 %
23.9 %
9.2 %
Household Population
(Persons Per Occupied Dwelling)
Cape Carteret n/a 2.63 2.29
Carteret County 3.13 2.66 2.43
North Carolina 3.24 2.78 2.54
Sources: U.S. Census of Housing, 1970-1990
Appendix G January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAAL4 Land Use Plan Update
A-9

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
APPENDIX H
EMPLOYMENT BY INDUSTRY GROUP
- --PERSONS 16 YEARS AND OLDER
CAPE CARTERET
1990
Agriculture, Forestry, Fisheries
Mining
Construction
Manufacturing
TCPU t
Wholesale/Retail Trade
FIRE'
Services
Public Administration
TOTAL
Transportation, Communication and Public Utilities
2Finance, Insurance, and Real Estate
Source: U.S. Census of Population, 1990
Appendix H—January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update
.........................................................................................................................
12
3.3 %
2
0.6%
39
10.9 %
27
7.5 %
11
3.1%
94
26.3 %
29
8.1 %
108
30.2%
36
10.0 %
358 100%
A-10

APPENDIX I
COMMUTING PATTERNS
CARTERET COUNTY
1990
-COMMUTERSIN-COMMUTER52
No. % No. %
Craven County
4,237
62.1%
Craven County
1,268
45.5%
Onslow County
1,303-
19.1 %
Onslow County
750
26.9%
Wake County
223
3.3%
Lenoir County
75
2.7%
Beaufort County
71
1.0%
Pitt County
68
2.4%
Durham County
67
1.0%
Pamlico County
45
1.6%
Pitt County
65
0.9%
New Hanover
44
1.6%
Jones County
55
0.8%
Jones County
31
1.1 %
All Other Destinations (76)
807
11.8%
All Other Destinations (50)
504
18.2%
TOTAL
6,828
100.0%
TOTAL
2,785
100.0%
PERCENT OF 27.3 % — PERCENT OF 13.3 % ---
EMPLOYED RESIDENTS EMPLOYED PERSONS
WHO ARE OUT- WHO ARE IN -
COMMUTERS COMMUTERS
'Persons traveling from Carteret County to places of employment located outside of Carteret County.
2Persons traveling to jobs located in Carteret County from areas located outside of Carteret County.
Source: 1990 Census of Population and Housing.
Appendix I —January Z 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update
A-11

1
i
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
APPENDIX J
EMPLOYMENT BY INDUSTRY GROUP
CARTERET COUNTY
TOTAL EMPLOYMENT (0001s)
10.29
16.66
24.12
27.68
30.97
Agriculture
9.9%
10.6%
6.3%
6.0%
5.4%
Mining
0.0%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Construction
5.5%
5.6%
6.3%
7.4%
7.4%
Manufacturing
16.0%
13.6%
7.5%
6.0%
5.2%
TCPU'
5.9%
3.5%
3.4%
3.5%
3.3%
Wholesale/Retail Trade
22.6%
25.3%
29.7%
31.9%
35.4%
FIREZ
2.7%
4.9%
7.5%
7.0%
7.4%
Services
20.2%
19.1 %
23.1 %
21.2%
19.6%
Government
17.2 %
17.3 %
16.2
17.0 %
16.3 %
TOTALS
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
'Transportation, Communication & Public Utilities.
2Finance, Insurance & Real Estate.
Sources: U.S. Census of Population
Woods and Poole Economics, North Carolina State Profile, 1995.
Appendix J-January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update
A-12

APPENDIX K
INCOME CHARACTERISTICS
CARTERET- COUNTY
Per Capita Income
(In Current Dollars)
1970
$2,759
$3,228
85.5 %
1980
$7,571
$8,002
9.4 %
1990
$14,233
$16,275
87.4 %
2000
$20, 899
$25,068
83.4 %
2010
$32, 876
$41, 611
79.0 %
Mean Household Income
(In Current Dollars)
1970
$8,751
$10,612
82.5 %
1980
$20,274
$22,392
90.5 %
1990
$34, 680
$41, 695
83.2 %
2000
$50,642
$63,877
79.3 %
2010
$79,255
$105,478
75.1%
Source: Woods & Poole Economics, North Carolina State Profile, 1995.
Appendix K—January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update A-13

APPENDIX L
RETAIL SALES
CARTERET COUNTY
1990-2010
Building Materials, Hardware, SIC 52
37.11
10.5%
48.94
10.9%
60.86
10.9%
General Merchandise, SIC 53
47.01
13.2 %
74.06
16.5 %
96.03
17.3%
Food Stores, SIC 54
89.86
25.3 %
95.20
21.2 %
107.58
19.3 %
Automobile Dealers, SIC 55
59.70
16.8%
77.56
17.3%
96.42
17.3%
Gasoline Service Stations, SIC 554
18.95
5.3%
20.19
4.5%
24.29
4.4%
Apparel & Accessories, SIC 56
13.37
3.8%
15.62
3.5%
19.25
3.5%
Furniture, Home Furnishings, SIC 57
16.20
4.6 %
19.52
4.3 %
24.18
4.3 %
Eating & Drinking Places, SIC 58
42.88
12.1 %
58.11
13.0
77.96
14.0%
Drug Stores, SIC 591
12.82
3.6%
15.73
3.5%
20.29
3.6%
Miscellaneous Retail Stores, SIC 59
16.95
4.8%
23.69
5.3%
29.82
5.4%
354.85
100.0%
448.62
100.0%
556.68
100.0%
TOTAL RETAIL SALES
tIn millions, 1987 dollars.
Source: Woods and Poole Economics, North Carolina State Profile, February 1995.
Appendix L January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAAM Land Use Plan Update
A-14

APPENDIX M
HOUSING BY STRUCTURE TYPE
CAPE CARTERET
Single -Family
438
77.1 %
1 Unit Detached
434
76.7 %
1 Unit Attached
4
0.7%
Multi -Family
11
1.9 %
2-4 Units
11
1.9%
5-9 Units
0
0.0%
10+ Units
0
0.0%
Manufactured Home
117
20.7 %
TOTAL UNITS
566
100.0%
COMPARISON OF
HOUSING BY STRUCTURE TYPE
1990
Single -Family
Multi -Family
Manufactured Home
TOTAL
Source: U.S. Census of Housing, 1990.
Appendix M--January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update
77.4%
54.1 %
67.6%
0.7%
18.0%v
16.3%
20.7%
27.9%
16.1 %
100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
A-15

M
APPENDIX N
AUTHORIZED RESDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION
BY BUILDING PERMIT
CAPE CARTERET
1991-1995
Single -Family Units
Duplex Units
3-4 Units
5+ Units
Manufactured Homes
TOTAL RESIDENTIAL UNITS
RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISIONS APPROVED
6 6
14
49
75 96%
0 0
0
0
0
3 0
0
0
3 4%
0 0
0
0
0
9 6 14 49
Sources: Town of Cape Carteret and Carteret County Inspections Department.
78 100%
Appendix N—January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update A-16

M M M M M r M M M M M M M M M M M M M
APPENDIX O
SOIL LIMITATIONS
FOR SELECTED LAND USES
Soil Name/Symbol
Dwellings
Without Basements
Dwellings
With Basements
Small Commercial
Buildings
Local Roads
and Streets
Septic Tank
Absorption Fields
Arapahoe, Ap
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Baymeade, ByB
Slight
Moderate
Slight
Slight
Slight
Carteret, CH
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Hobucken, HB
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Kureb, KuB
Slight
Slight
Slight
Slight
Severe
Leon, Ln
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Masontown, MA
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Murville, Mu
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Newhan, Nd
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Onslow, On
Moderate
Severe
Moderate
Moderate
Severe
Seabrook, Se
Moderate
Severe
Moderate
Moderate
Severe
Wando, WaB
Slight
Slight
Slight
Slight
Severe
Source: Soil Survey of Carteret County, NC; September 1987.
Appendix O—January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAAM Land Use Plan Update A-17

I
IAPPENDIX P
SOILS WITH SEVERE LIMITATIONS FOR
-SEPTIC TANK ABSORPTION FIELDS
I
I
Ap X
X
.............. .......... ...... ..
........ . ........ ... . .. ............
................... ...... ..... .......... ......
... ............... ..... .
............ ....... ...................
X
Carteret CH X
.......... ................................................ .................... ............ . .. .
............................................... ...... ......
.............. . ....... . .....
. ..............
........................ ..
.. ............ ... .............. ..................... ...... . ................. .....
.. ....... ........................... .. . . ...........................................
.. ........ ........ ....... . ...... .
X
....................
....... ...........
.......... ..........
..........
. ..........................
......................................
...............................
.... ........
...... .......
Kureb, KuB .... .......... ................................................ ...... ... .. ....
... ......... . . . . . ...............
................ .... ...............
.............................. .. .................. . . ................... ......
Masontown, MA X .............................. ......
............................................................. ..... ...........
.. ..... ..... .......................X............; ............................................................ ..
...­...­... ... ....... ­­.. . ....... ........ ........
.. ....... .. ... ..... ...............
....... ... . ... ..... *­...... .:.:..:
rv.t j .... . ..... ............... . . .............. . .............................. ....... ... ......... .. ..
.. ... ..... .. ......... ..... .
.......... o...­.........­ ...... M:.% ..... 1. ......... ....... .....
....
..........................
. .....
...
Newhan, Nd X
. .......................... ................ .:%.: ................................. ..........
...........
........... ...... ........... ................. ...... .
. ............... .......................
...................... ­ .... ... x:, ................................. . ..................... ........................ ........... ........ ................
06"':
X
......................... ............. ...........
........... .....
............ ... ....... .......
..........................
Seabrook, Se
................... *** .... ­:'
..... . ... ... :­ .................. ........
............................ ................
............................ ...... ...... ....................... ..........
........... . ... ....................... ........... ....................
w. ........... ..............
... . . ....... "s ...................................................................... ......... . ..................... ..... .... ...... .
Source: Soil Survey of Carteret County, NC. September, 1987.
.............
. . . ..............
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
Appendix P—January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAAM Land Use Plan Update
A-18
I

M r M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M r
Carteret County
Cape Carteret
APPENDIX Q
POPULATION PROJECTIONS
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2005 2010
23,059 27,438 31,603 41,092 52,553 64,209' 69,543' 74,280'
n/a 52 616 944 1,013 1,2382 1,3412 1,4322
12000-2010 projections by NC Office of State Planning, NC Population Projections, 1995.
2Based upon an identical 1990-2010 growth rate as projected for Carteret County by the N.C. Office of State Planning
(1990-2000: 22.2%; 2000-2005: 8.31 %; 2005-2010: 6.81 %).
Source: The Wooten Company, 1996.
Appendix Q— Ianuary 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update A-19

M = = = M r M = = = = M = r = = = M
APPENDIX R
FUTURE RESIDENTIAL LAND NEEDS
1995- 2005
TOTAL PROJECTED RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS: ' 71
DISTRIBUTION OF PROJECTED DWELLING UNITS:2 54 Single-family
2 Multi -family
15 Manufactured Homes
TOTAL PROJECTED RESIDENTIAL LAND NEEDS:
(Anticipated Density Levels in Parenthesis)
19-26 Acres Single -Family (2.1 to 2.9 DU/AC)
1-2 Acres Multi -Family (2.9 to 8.0 DU/AC)
3-5 Acres Manufactured Homes (2.9 to 5.5DU/AC)
'Based upon a population increase of 162 persons and an average household population size of 2.29 persons per household.
2Based upon the same distribution pattern found in the 1990 Census of Population and Housing: single-family, 77 percent;
multi -family, 2 percent; and manufactured home, 21 percent.
Source: The Wooten Company, 1996.
Appendix R—January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update A-20

APPENDIX S
SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVE POLICY ISSUES
-WHICH WERE CONSIDERED BUT -NOT DEVELOPED INTO
POLICY STATEMENTS
1. Resource Protection Policy Issues
• Prohibiting marinas, including dredging for marinas, in coastal wetlands.
• Prohibiting marina development in designated primary nursery areas.
Establishing more stringent requirements than the CAMA regulations for development
within the estuarine shoreline.
Requiring package treatment plants for all commercial development.
2. Resource Production and Management Policy Issues
Developing a water use ordinance.
3. Economic and Community Development Policy Issues
Requiring that existing development with private wells connect to the public water system.
• Development of an appearance code.
Developing more stringent sign regulations.
Increasing residential densities for multi -family development.
Allowing drystack storage facilities in conjunction with marina development.
Eliminating the current 40-foot height limitation for residential structures.
Appendix S—January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update
A-21

APPENDIX T
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROCESS
A. CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMITTEE
The Cape Carteret Town Board, on November 20, 1995, designated the Planning Board as the
Cape Carteret Land Use Plan Advisory Committee. The Planning Board is composed of the
following persons:
Fred Grube, Chairman
Jerry Gowan, Vice Chairman
Denny DelMauro, Secretary
Ed Petrilli
Lenny Pelletier
Kevin White
John Yenkowsky
B. MEETING DATES
(1) Advisory Committee
November 20, 1995
February 6, 1996
May 9, 1996
June 4, 1996
July 2, 1996
October 14, 1996
(2) Public Meetings
November 20, 1995,Town Board Public Informational Meeting
October 21, 1996, Town Board Public Informational Meeting
February 10, 1997
October 20, 1997
(3) Intergovernmental Coordination Meeting
August 21, 1996. Meeting sponsored by the Carteret County Mayor's Association.
Representatives from Carteret County and the municipalities within Carteret County met to discuss
land use planning issues that had been identified during the land use plan update process. Elected
officials,local government staff, consultants, and the general public participated in the meeting.
(4) Public Hearing
October 20, 1997
C. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PLAN
A copy of the Citizen Participation Plan adopted by the Town Board is attached.
Appendix T—January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update
A-22

CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PLAN
CAMA Land Use Plan Update
Town of Cape Carteret
November 20, .1995
' Subchapter 7B of the North Carolina Administrative Code, Land Use Planning Guidelines, requires the
P g q
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 land use plan development. It is therefore the responsibility of the town
to involve, inform and educate a broad cross-section of the town's populace. It is the town's intent to
have a continuous citizen participation process that achieves these purposes.
The following steps will be taken to provide information to the public and to encourage citizen
' involvement:
1. Designation of an Advisory Committee
' The Board of Commissioners of the Town of Cape Carteret will designate the
Planning Board as the agency responsible for drafting an update of the land use
plan. The Planning Board will serve in a review and advisory capacity to the
Town Board and the town's Planning Consultant, The Wooten Company. The
Planning Board will meet on a periodic basis with the Planning Consultant to
review draft materials prepared by the Planning Consultant, assist the Planning
Consultant with defining land use issues and concerns, and provide general
input. The Planning Board will keep the Town Board apprised of its activities
and progress through regular oral and/or written reports to the Town Board.
' The Planning Board is composed of citizens that represent a broad cross-
section of the population of the Town of Cape Carteret and its extraterritorial
planning jurisdiction.
i2. Initial Public Information Meeting
A joint meeting of the Town Board and the Planning Board will be held in
1 November 1995 to serve as both an orientation meeting for the Town Board
and the Planning Board and an educational opportunity to inform the general
public of the purpose of the CAMA Land Use Plan and the process for
updating the Plan, to review the policy statements contained within the 1992
Land Use Plan, and to outline the town's public participation process.
' 3. Periodic Planning Board Meetings
It is anticipated that the Planning Board will meet at strategic points throughout
the land use planning process to provide general input into the plan
1 development and to review materials prepared by the Planning Consultant.
Meetings will be held to identify goals and objectives; identify land use issues;
review a summary report on existing conditions, constraints to land
' development, and estimated demands on land and community facilities and
services; review draft policy statements; and review a draft of the entire land
use plan update. Planning Board meetings will be conducted from January to
Appendix T—January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update
A-23

' July 1996 and will be held as part of the regularly scheduled Planning Board
meeting or as a special meeting. Notices will be published prior to each
' meeting. An opportunity for public comment and input will be afforded at
each meeting.
4. Public Information Meeting on the Preliminary Draft Plan
Following the completion of a preliminary draft Land Use Plan Update, a
second public information meeting will be held jointly by the Town Board and
the Planning Board. The purpose of this meeting will be to review the draft
Plan, particularly the policy statements that have been developed and the
proposed land classifications. The meeting will afford another opportunity for
public involvement prior to a formal public hearing on the adoption of the
' updated Plan. The meeting date is projected to be in September 1996. Copies
of the preliminary draft Land Use Plan will be available at the town hall.
' 5. Public Hearing
A formal public hearing will be held by the Town Board to review the final
draft Plan and to solicit citizen comments on the update of the Land Use Plan.
' Following the public hearing, the Town Board 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 December 1996. Notice of the public hearing will also be posted at the town
hall. Copies of the final draft Land Use Plan will be available for review at the
town hall.
6. Additional Means of Soliciting Public Involvement
In addition to the meetings outlined above, the town will utilize the following
' means to increase public involvement and information:
• news releases prior to the public information meetings and the
' public hearing. It is anticipated that the news releases will lead to
newspaper articles and public service announcements.
H
• presentations by Town Board and/or Planning Board members to
civic, business, church, and similar groups.
• summary report on existing conditions, constraints, and estimated
demands.
• summary report on preliminary draft policy statements.
The summary reports will be available for public review at the town hall.
Copies of the reports will also be made available to the media.
Appendix T—January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAAL4 Land Use Plan Update
A-24

IAPPENDIX U
I
GLOSSARY
Anadromous. Ascending rivers from the sea for breeding. Fish species, such as shad, herring, and
striped bass, migrate from their primary habitats in the ocean up freshwater rivers and streams to
spawn.
Areas of Environmental Concern. The Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) designates four
categories of areas of environmental concern (AEC's): the estuarine system, the ocean hazard system,
' public water supplies, and natural and cultural resource areas. These AEC's, and the standards for
development within them, cover almost all coastal waters and three percent of the land in the twenty
coastal counties in North Carolina.
' Coastal Complex Natural Areas. Lands that support native plant and animal communities and
provide habitat qualities which have remained essentially unchanged by human activity.
Coastal Wetlands. Any salt marsh or other marsh subject to regular or occasional flooding by tides,
including wind tides (whether or not the tide waters reach the marshland areas through natural or
' artificial watercourses), provided this shall not include hurricane nor tropical storm tides. Coastal
wetlands contain some, but not necessarily all, of the following marsh plant species:
Cord Grass . Bulrush
Black Needlerush . Saw Grass
Glasswort . Cat -tail
' Salt Grass . Salt Meadow Grass
Sea Lavender . Salt Reed Grass
Also included in this definition is such contiguous land as the Secretary of the NC Department of
1 Environment , Health and Natural Resources reasonably deems necessary to affect by any such order
in carrying out the purposes of the CAMA regulations.
Estuarine Shorelines. Those non -ocean shorelines which are especially vulnerable to erosion,
flooding, or other adverse effects of wind and water and are intimately connected to the estuary. This
area extends from the mean high water level or normal water level along the estuaries, sounds, bays
' and brackish waters for a distance of 75 feet landward. For those estuarine shorelines immediately
contiguous to waters classified as Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW), the estuarine shoreline extends
575 feet landward from the mean high water level or normal water level.
' Estuarine System. The coast's broad network of brackish sounds, marshes, and the shorelines
surrounding them. The following components of the estuarine system have been designated as AEC's:
' estuarine waters, public trust areas, coastal wetlands, and estuarine shorelines
Estuarine Waters. All the waters of the Atlantic Ocean within the boundary of North Carolina and all
' the waters of the bays, sounds, rivers, and tributaries thereto seaward of the dividing line between
coastal fishing waters and inland fishing waters, as set forth in an agreement adopted by the Wildlife
Resources Commission and the Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources.
Appendix U—January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAAM Land Use Plan Update A-25

' Estuary. A semi -enclosed body of water where fresh water draining from the mainland mixes with
salt water from the ocean.
' Floating Structures. 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 is 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.
Freshwater Wetlands. Swamps and inland wetlands that are not covered by the Coastal Area
Management Act, unless the Coastal Resource Commission designates them as a natural resource AEC.
Freshwater wetlands are protected by the Clean Water Act and a US Army Corps of Engineers permit
' is required for work in them.
Freestanding Moorings. Any means to attach a ship, boat, vessel, floating structure or other water
craft to a stationary underwater device, mooring buoy, buoyed anchor, or piling (as long as the piling
is not associated with an existing or proposed pier, dock, or boathouse).
Marinas. Any publicly- or privately -owned dock, basin, or wet boat storage facility constructed to
accommodate more than 10 boats and providing any of the following services: permanent or transient
docking spaces, dry storage, fueling facilities, haulout facilities, and repair service. Excluded from
this definition are boat ramp facilities allowing access only, temporary docking, and none of the
preceding services.
Natural and Cultural Resource Areas. Areas containing environmental, natural or cultural resources
of more than local significance in which uncontrolled or incompatible development could result in
major or irreversible damage to natural systems or cultural resources; scientific, educational, or
1 associative values; or aesthetic qualities.
Normal High Water. The ordinary extent of high tide based upon site conditions such as presence
and location of vegetation, which has its distribution influenced by tidal action, and the location of the
apparent high tide line.
Normal Water Level. The level of water bodies with less than six inches of lunar tide during periods
of little or no wind. It can be determined by the presence of such physical and biological indicators as
erosion escarpments, trash lines, water lines, marsh grasses, and barnacles.
Ocean Beaches. Lands consisting of unconsolidated soil materials that extend from the mean low
water line landward to a point where either the growth of vegetation occurs or a distinct change in
slope or elevation alters the configuration of the landform, whichever is farther landward.
Ocean Hazard Areas. Beaches, frontal dunes, inlet lands, and other areas along the Atlantic Ocean
shoreline in which geologic, vegetative, and soil conditions indicate a substantial possibility of
excessive erosion or flood damage. The ocean hazard system of AEC's contains the following areas:
ocean erodible areas, high hazard flood areas, inlet hazard areas, and unvegetated beach areas.
Appendix U—January 22. 1998
Cape Carteret CAMA Land Use Plan Update A-26

11
Outstanding Resource Waters. Estuarine waters and public trust areas classified by the NC
' Environmental Management Commission as waters of exceptional state or national recreational or
ecological significance.
Primary Nursery Areas. Areas in the estuarine system where initial post larval development of
finfish and crustaceans takes place. They are usually located in the uppermost sections of an estuarine
system where populations are uniformly early juvenile stages.
Public Water Supplies. Public water supply AEC's include small surface water supply watersheds
and public water supply well fields. Small water supply watersheds are catchment areas situated
entirely within the coastal area which contain a water body classified as A -II by the Environmental
Management Commission. Public water supply well fields are areas of well -drained sands that extend
downward from the surface into the shallow ground water table which supplies the public with potable
water.
Public Trust Areas. All waters of the Atlantic Ocean and the lands thereunder from the mean high
water mark to the seaward limit of state jurisdiction; all natural bodies of water subject to measurable
' lunar tides and lands thereunder to the mean high water mark; all navigable natural bodies of water and
lands thereunder to the mean high water level or mean water level as the case may be, except privately -
owned lakes to which the public has no right of access; all water in artificially created bodies of water
' containing significant public fishing resources or other public resources which are accessible to the
public by navigation from bodies of water in which the public has acquired rights by prescription,
custom, usage, dedication, or any other means. Public trust areas overlap with the estuarine waters
AEC, but they also cover inland fishing waters that are not in the estuarine waters AEC.
Significant Coastal Archaeological Resources. Areas that contain archaeological remains (objects,
' features, and/or sites) that have more than local significance to history or prehistory.
Significant Coastal Historic Architectural Resources. Districts, structures, buildings, sites or
objects that have more than local significance to history or architecture.
Unique Coastal Geologic Formations. Sites that contain geologic formations that are unique or
' otherwise significant components of coastal systems, or that are especially notable examples of
geologic formations or processes in the coastal area.
Water -dependent Uses. Uses that must be located near or in water to accomplish their intended
purpose. Examples include navigation channels, drainage ditches, docks, wharfs, piers, utility
easements, revetments, culverts, mooring pilings, boat ramps, groins, bridges, and bridge approaches.
Appendix U—January 22, 1998
Cape Carteret CAAM Land Use Plan Update A-27

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
LEGEND
Estuarine Waters
Estuarine Shoreline
Public Trust Waters
�--
Coastal WeNands
�� :. Mi i. tJl�t. �•�
FISHING 1NATEItS
-
It4LAt`ID
VyATfR
:::...
FISHING
CO p57AE
v
:
X•
AEC BOUNDARY 75'
-*
_ Y
r Y
i � T
MEAN HIGH WATER
Concern.
ESTUARINEOF ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN
(Typical Creek, N.C.)
7V
Estuarine System Areas of Environmental

CAMDEN COUNTY
PROPOSED LAND CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
/ � ' Y / '.,.,. .. .•. . C�
�° .dry • ,•,.,• • •,•,•,•,•, �
;r Existing Land Use Map Past and Present Land Use Conditions and Trends �'������:�:�;�;�;�:�% ;�` Land Classification Map Land Class CAMA Requirements Area Description
...... ...........:ice
:f �� � � � ;��►, Camden County has been and remains a predominantly • • • •.;,�;
1.`�.• • .. • . • • .. • • . • .... • .
501:� .',g agricultural area. Also, as in the past, large portions of the county • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • �yF COMMUNITY
..
" .. S
are still used for timber production. These trends should ' ' ' ° ' ' '•?�' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '
ti p ..,. }........... .
�� , .•.•...,•.: ,; .,.,.• ,.,.1F Developed Currently supplied with Not Applicable
.ti continue into the future. Most residential and commercial • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •;�:• • • • • ° • • CONSERVATION '•'•'
••••••••••••• •• •••••••••• ••.....
... • • • • • • • • • • •r:.•::.•.•...•.•:.•:. ,hy/ necessary public
development is concentrated in the six communities with some ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '
' - • • • • • • • • • • • • - b facilities and services.
� �o additional housing scattered along major highways throughout •.•.•:.•:.•..•.•::.�::.•.•:.•.•:.•.•:.•.•.•.�ti
fi N •••... RURAL RURAL Development and
the count Camden Point Shores is a large recreational ••• •••••••• •••••••••••••°•••••••
g �- Redevelopment Recom-
..•... ............. .......•....•.,•,•
> community that has been developed at the south end of the • • • • • • • •...............................••••••••••••••••••••• • mended.
....... ....
••••••••••°•°•°"°•°"CAMDEN COUNTY DOES NOT HAVE AN AREA THAT MEETS THE
county. Although this development has taken in a large land •..• •..•.•.•a •.•.• •.•.•..•.•.•. ••.•. ••: •••••�• : •°••••••••�• • •�•
a the construction of recreational homes has been very slow. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •>r ....... .... °'?�• CRITERIA FOR THE DEVELOPED OR TRANSITION CLASSIFICATION.
area, ... ........ ............ .
,as r •• •••:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•.:•�•.•::•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•�•:•:•{:•::•:•:•:•:•:•:•::•:.•:.'��� a Existing rowth
The State of North Carolina has recently obtained ownership of a ............................................::. Transition O g g Not applicable
large portion of the Dismal Swamp. This area is presently been •••• •••••••••••• '•'�••••••••••••••••••••••• areas in need of public
¢, planned for a State Park and Welcome Center area in conjunction 1•.•••: ••••:: ••: ••••••••:: ••••: •• •••••••••••••••••••••••°� •°•'•'•'•'•' \ services (water and/or
... ... ............ ..................... � sewer b Existing
;'. ,� with the improvement of U.S. 17 to a four lane facility. This activity :..................... �b ) O g
.. . .... ... .... . . .. . .. .... ..
h.
�n „� can be expected to bring about some additional growth in the .......................... • • •.'s, growth areas with public
' South Mills area. �•••••••••••••••••••••••••••• �•••••••••• "' utilities where growth is
�" ti 1•:::::: ••.'•'.•::.•:::::: ••: ::.•.•e':: • '.•.': •.': ••.•.•.•Q
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •4 w °•°!.;.;.••
{
:.•.•.•:.•:.•.•.•.•:.•:.•:::.•::.•:.•:.•:.•.•.•. •.•:•.•.•.•.•.• 9 ti ..•: to be encouraged
....... ....................... ....•... ..:::: (c) New growth areas
M.ti
,' �:::::::::•::::::;: ' :::::::•::::�'•:::' that will require public
Y
a, ......... . ......�•-.�:.•:.•: -:::..... .. services.
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
'• • • • • ; • • • • • �:• • • o �:�:•:•:•:� Community (a) Existing cluster of
South Mills
`.> o ti one or more land uses
� -� " - . '� Community Camden
!$'1 � ro w • • • • • . • • • • requiring Community, Belcross
a
w 7 • • ?e .P uirin limited or little Commune Shiloh
`'•'•'•'•' public services. y'
b Rural growth with I Community,
�� �••.;.;.• � �' .. ..� O 9 t of Texaco
��..•.. ,7 �� ' - size of ten acres or less Beach Community,
(c) Areas requiring Camden Point Shores
4
, � 9 ••;•;•;•, '/ •;•;•;•;•;;.� limited or no public
i�
X;�so
y� ,{� \-,',•,•. ?70 /JJQ s \'f 3 9.. /'::° •, •,.� services.
4'"' 0' ;;fiw ,7 . >$' ,fib /)• •••'••� .n //1. ••: •'. • • o h
a Fragile or critical
�af�k � � �, � . ; sc �'�'�'�'•'� � N "' � ' •'�' '� � ^ Large forested area
,V �,�?, ° 7!J ' �' .... .•.•::� Conservation () g g
?/ l°' of �'•:•::•:•.`:•' environments as well as
....,...•. -P,D ., W .3 .2 .•...�.; adjacent to North
S w �,, ti tit :::•:'::':''• •;J - ' F�5 ,'•'�f •.•'•'•':. 36'0 River between Broad
'7 r:•'•:•:•::•:�:•: % •:•::•:.•:•:•'• hazard areas to be left
��� - .�, primarily in their natural Creek and
`=L•'•'� •' J '� ' ' ' ' ' state with limited or no '......: :
f . • �Q ,, _••,•; ,•,•••..� Indiantown creek
N U • • development (b) Areas south of 158. Dismal
�+'` ,6 1 F .,7 `,,,J Him ....;:;.•.;;;;;;; _ utQ' t�� ;�,•:F recognized as natural
e ?,
, � ` E",� �o �► J 1 u Swamp area at
�s. ., ... .5 : S �1 ,,�,��/e c resources where Bevel- northwestern corner
o ?/ 7J 3 S o ment should proceed
J o , ,} with caution. p of county including all
of Dismal Swam
� �'... o J, r p
r9 p State Park. Forested
-ar
�;:.::: �T ?" area along North
Zll,d y
Carolina/Virginia
I -° �eFl � .•:: •:.•.•. 3 State line and also
.��:' '•'::•:•; :•: s i forested area along
C13A9
o � Y �;. :: \, Camden/Currituck
'''
' °�:• q 1 County line. Forested
s � z ::.:.•.•.•:.•. area along
asquotank River
,• • - from South Mills,
�� ,� ' •• q i Morgans Corner and
D x t h 1 _ r down to Camden
4,;, -' County Bridge at
is
Z 0JIV
°� ncludes all tynatuhal
Z F, `J �� areas that have not
2 �► .•.;.;., �.;.;.,.•.•. S
��E� �. J6°J ;.;.;.•: R' ' ?Oe� ,6 c been developed as of
8
R R " " R,vE / �s, the adopting of the
_ �9 . a� 6J�°,� Land Classification
`' ° ;.• ;., l °� Map in 1975. River
9"
1°6�' .as4' n :•;•;;;: fAs 1.9 1.6 erosive area on
1 ,
b Pasquotank River.
High marsh areas or
-No - _ � tributaries feeding in
.To CURA1= — 1b •°'.'.•.''� P '*J \ • ? 'oa ('�
1.9' ..i ,'4 .g of .2 8 q
the Pas uotank and
�, ' FA TOCuRRITUCK
North Rivers Camden
•'.'• •'•••' �J 1.9 � '•' j.2 i � S
yo `?o
AP - . • • County Courthouse
Via'' U =� " 7 \' '„�, Ft • .•.,., •,.,.,., J\� •' 'y _/70/ \ q r
F� • • • • • • , • ;� 1 F _ 7 6 �?O �+' FYI F'Y , Q
JJ \ ,•,•,• Rural
' BFIti _�� FxP.o j�.. t gaFT ?� ,oQ lF continuing agricultural z (a) Areas primarily in (a) All areas of the
>' 6 .. . Lo
�•'� �T ,. F F� k? EeN ';'� `�.,:a de FA To AARfO..-i �7Sp �A J4 'l c�\';';' J r 2 'Ik fqP'•' .6/a To g g county not included in
J,,�&O, -%� r; " > gr Sou`" s ( .. ,. a, ,.,... s use (b) Areas set aside h `t
b
-• ,,�*
RESIDENTIAL
r _ r
Xov
UC COMMERCIAL
b roy ,.
U I INDUSTRIAL4011
' �.D . Aim• �F � /Q s �`. � 3: ,
TRANSPORTATION c ��
UT COMMUNICATIONS
UTILITIES 6,` C
) �. \ r � � •� � � fir^
U G GOVERNMENT ) il '° 0
INSTITUTIONAL '` �' (�� �• "�°
jy Cowl °•
CHURCH p {f
t �
CULTUR
AL 1
UE ENTERTAINMENT ` !
.,
RECREATION
� , 1
C� AGRICULTURAL
FORESTLAND2,41
�f k
�.
WATER 1:'
�ll�/ILL WETLANDa, � �
T
> 2
ss,
a, O /,O' -'
. 00 /, \
s � t
3Q ) P
ro
It
„t
I #
n
❑�
EO
Z
i. /� A, .� 5 FA t"ER • • •••'. J v ••• • FAP &ARCO
b
'�O,�f SOS •:::::: •, •,• •••.
�� , • • , J • • • •�•F-F
is ,',, � • -• • • •. 5 Q !i, '�J ''• • •►
/ FAS
`1 i it '-+ �• ? , t �
' 1 •' / '�JJ ' • °.Cis N . /0,
\ i .2 �' , • •••• '•
Q
...•_•
j �� J ° S ••'• ••
h � Leh `� /,,a •••••'•••••••••••
,i i / ale{ C '�s� �'! /'� \ � /J , •'•';:::::•
01>
X.
12
10
�( � 1 �. ,, a/p� J • •. .•••
..
. ..... .....
/ ••
I /, _.• •,•,. • Z,, • ,• . .;.�.�.;.�.•. •. •.•.•.• / �it
•• • • .,• t. •,•••,• ••::::: r III 1
� .•. y�•.•..,.,.,.;.•.• � ' � of r
.i
P )dic Review
't I
The Land Classification Map, which is a local planning tool, \ •..� �• ';
will be reviewed on an annual basis by the Planning Board. They
will make recommendations for revisions if the need should arise
prior to the required five-year review.
Cr
n
9
C
Z
t e commune y or
for resource manage- conservation classes.
ment (c) Areas (b) Areas where little
requiring limited to no or no growth is
public services. anticipated and
where public services
will be minimal
(c) Areas presently
in agricultural or rural
use.
Land Classification System
/
Orderly growth and development within the coastal area of
North Carolina is the major intent of the Coastal Area
Management Act. The Land Classification System is a tool which
local government can use to guide future development in the
county. This system offers the following advantages:
First, the land classification system is a method of linking
local land use plans and State land use policies. Lands are
classified by local government, with a review process to ensure
conformance with minimum guidelines for the system.
Second, the system provides a guide for budgeting and
planning for public investments in land. The Conservation class
should alert State and local agencies to areas that should be
n
given high priority for purchase as public outdoor recreation
lands. Similarly, the Transition class should alert local and state
officials to begin acquiring land and easements necessary for
schools, recreation, streets and other public purposes. By
O
identifying such lands early, State and local governments can
more easily work together toward common ends.
Third, the system should provide a useful framework for
budgeting and planning for community facilities. Resources of
c
many State and Federal agencies are expended through grant
programs to assist with construction of water, sewer and many
other community facilities. The State -local system of land
classification will help achieve a coordination of these diverse
programs.
Z
Fourth, the system will provide a framework for
coordinating regulatory policy. For example, lands classified
Conservation deserve special attention from state regulatory
agencies.
Fifth, the system may help provide a framework for more
equitable distribution of the land tax burden.
In summary, land classification is a system for joint
local -state involvement in land use planning and management. It
provides a wide range of choices for local government in
deciding its own future. At the same time, it provides increased
assurance that basic land use needs are met across the state.
County Land Classification Map
In determining the land classification for the county, a
population projection of 120 additional people over the next ten
years was used. Because of the low population projection and
the lack of communities that could be designated as either
developed or in transition, it was assumed that most of the
additional people will be locating in or adjacent to existing
communities.

'puel wiel woJJ lsol
saxes eql lasllo ueo sesn puel jaglo aql 1! auop aq Aluo pinoys
slgl -saxes puel wiel awed bulonpai of uolleJaplSuoo aAl6
pinotas Alunoo aql 'aseq xel aql bu!slei 'aoeld say el luawdolanap
lepiawwoo jo leulsnpu! pouad 6uluueld jean( ual aql 6uunp 11 -V
: ani3*a(g0
-asn jagwil pue leanpoite
jol paloaloid aq pinoys Alunoo aql to uoiliod abieq :-1VIOD
•g1Moa6 palloiluooun io paloulsajun
wojl paloaloid aq pinoys aoinosai leanleu lueliodwl slgl
•aseq olwouooe s,Alunoo aql of eoueliodwl leai6 to s! ainllnou5V
-puel jagw!l pue lemllnou6e 10 UojleAJasaJd :3f1S3i 'S
•saxel Ieool u! uollonpaa e aol pajap!suoo eq pinoys
al!s ouolsly ue se pajolsaa bu!aq ale 1eg1 sainlonuls 01Jo1S!H -8
S�Jewpueq ouolslH leuolleN se luawliedaa
Joualul aql 10 uo1ss1wwo0 ouols!H eu!IoJe3 ylJoN eql Aq bu!ls!l
Jol pajap!suoo sainlonuls asagl aneg pue ease aql of aoueoipubis
to ale saanlonils goigM aulwaalap pinoys *Alunoo aql .V
anlloafg0
-S� Jewpuel ouolslq 6ullslxe aAaasaid pinogs Alunoo aql :IVOD
'uolleAJasajd
jol pajap!suoo aq pinoys sells esegl 'Sailsep uaz11!0
uo paseq eaae eql to lsed ouolsly aql ql!M � u!l e luesajdai
goigm sells ouolslg lueoll!u61s to jagwnu a6rel a Seq Alunoo aql
.S�Rwpuel ouolsly 10 uolleAAasaJd :3f1SSl -tp
-�jed alelS dweMS lews!a aq1 bulpnloui sall!l!oel
leuolleajoaj ainlnl Aue pue sells ouolsly se Bons 'Alunoo atal ul
lsaialul to slulod bulleolpul pedolanap aq pinoys ajngoaq V 'D
asn leuolleajoa> >ol Alunoo eql ul sells buldolanap
to Al!l!q!seal agl aulwjalep of palonpuoo aq pinoys AaAjns V -8
,asn
leuolleajoaa ollgnd jol Aliadoid aj!nboe pinoys Alunoo aql •V
: anlloa(g0
aseq olwouooa aql puedxa of wsunol pue
le!luelod leuolleaJoaJ )SEA sll dolanap pinous Alunoo aql :�VOD
'uoisuedxa oiwouooe awos buimolle awll awes 9q1 le pue
ajagdsowle leinj aql bu!loaloid to AeM auo se uaas S1 eaie aq1
to lellualod lsunol pue uolleaaow aql -sapunlaoddo luawAoldwa
leuoll!pPe 4M pawaouoo osle ale Aagl 'eaje leinj Allueulwopajd
e ulewai eaje aql aas of aalsap Alunoo eql to suazll!o gbnogllV
ease aql 30 lellualod leuolleajoai pue lsunol :3f1SSi 'E
•luawdolanap col algel!eAe
aJe pue 'sluawailnbai 6uiuoz sluawaiinbei uoilelooiad
laaw legs sells alowoad of pajedaid aq pinoys aingoojq V p
-asn legs jol pasegoind seM 1! I!lun eons se paxel
aq sou pinoM asn leulsnpui jo leloaawwoo jol pauoz pue-1 -0
•al!s luawdolanap e
se palowojd pue kessaoau 1! asn-lllnw pauoz-ai pue uollelooiad
jol palsal aq pinoys luawdolanap leulsnpu) jo leioJawwoo
jol elgellns pue alge11eAe se pall!luaP! Senn Mull pue-1 •8
•luawdolanap leulsnpue
) jo leloaawwoo jol algellns pue algel!eA
aae legl sa!liacloid to Isis e ajedaid pinotas Alunoo aql :V
: an1loafgO
•sall!unwwoo
builslxe of lueoefpe jo ul Alleollloads 'Ajunoo aql ul aleool of
pa6eanooua aq pinous k1snpul lg6ll pue sseuisnq IlewS :-lVOD
luawdolanap 10 uollealuaouoo e sl aaagl 1! elq!seal
eaje ue olul saull aaleM sII!W g1noS aq1 to uolSualxa a� PUJ
pinoM slut -Sell!unwwoo bullslxa jeau Jo Ul palealuaouoo
aq pinous Alunoo agl ul eoeld bui� el luawdolanap aofew ajnln3
-Alunoo ay1 ui luawdolanap aofew ainlnl to uolleoo-i :3f1SSl 'Z
•sall!I!oel aaleM pue abeMas Iea1u80 col ap!Aad
of pajlnbai aq pinoys aaow jo shun Og to luawdolanaQ .8
•Sall!unwwoo 6ugslxe ul paleilueouoo aq pinoys ajow io shun
09 g1!M luawdolanap 'aoueulpjo 6uluoz aql to asn A8 .V
: aA1loafg0
Sawoq
allgow ao buisnoq aaglp to luawdolanap 8le0s-a6Jel 131JlS0.11
pinogs Alunoo eql pue 'Apapio aq pinogs g1Moj6 ajnln3 :,lVOD
pau!elulew aq Alunoo aql to aaagdsowle
leinj aql legs pawaouoo osle aje Aagl •r(uapio aq pinoys Alunoo
ag1 to luawdolanap ainlnl legs laal Aluno0 uepwe0 to suazll!0
Alunoo aql ul luawdolanap asn puel ainln3 :3f1SSl 'l
-lno pauaeo aq
sleo0 pue s010110d asagl ueo lioddns pue lsaialul inoA g6noagl
Alu0 •sleo0 pue salollod peoiq esegl bulluawaldwl ul sisegdwa
rlagl Ind pinogs Aagl eaje go1gM ul Moue sle!olllo paloala inoA
191 ll!M nog( legs pedoq sl 11 -auo 6uol e uaaq seq 'uolssiwwoo
aql Aq uolldope of sleo6 pue salollod papuawwooai 01 Suazll!o
10 swaouoo 6ulgsllge1sa wojl 'ssaooid aql -sleo0 pue salollod
6uiMollol eql paldope sjauolsslwwo0 aql 'bulleaw aeln6aa e le
suoilepuawwooaJ aql 6ulMalA9a aallV -sjauoissiwwo0 to pjeo8
Alunoo aql of wnl ul pue 'pjeog 6uluueld eql of papuawwooaj
uagl eJGm sleo0 pue salollod aseq) •SleoO pue Sal0110d
papuawwooaa olul wagl palelsueil 'swalgojd pue sanssl asagl
6UlM0lA0J J01le 'pjeo8 kOSlnPV g1MoJ0 UapweO aql
sleoD 96uea 6uo-1 ;o luawdolanaQ
,iterim Areas of Environmental Concern
The 1974 Legislature found that "the coastal area, and in
particular the estuaries, are among the most biologically
productive regions of this State and of the nation." Unless these
areas are controlled by coordinated management, the very
features of the coast which make it economically, aesthetically
and ecologically rich will be destroyed. The Coastal Resources
Commission (CRC) has the responsibility of identifying types of
areas and designating specific areas in which uncontrolled or
incompatible development might result in irreparable damage.
They also must determine what types of use or development are
appropriate within such areas. Prior to designation of Areas of
Environmental Concern by the CRC, local government has been
given the option to delineate, for the CRC, specific AEC's within
the county. This has been done to assist the CRC in identifying
where potential AEC areas exist in the county. Once the final
designations are made by the CRC, it will be necessary to obtain
a permit for minor development from the county, or the Coastal
Resources Commission for major development.
The following information includes seven eligible Areas of
Environmental Concern that were found to exist in the county.
Potential Interim Areas of Environmental Concern
The Camden County Board of Commissioners
recommended the following areas to the Coastal Resources
Commission (CRC) as Potential Interim Areas of Environmental
Concern (IAEC's). Their recommendation was based on
information from the Camden County Planning Board.
COASTAL WETLAND
Description - Marshland containing specific species of salt marsh
or other marsh vegetation.
Significance - Marshland type vegetation and environment
contributes to food supply and habitat of water fowl, fish and other
wildlife within the productive estuarine system.
Policy Objective - Preservation and management to safeguard
and perpetuate biological, economic and aesthetic values.
Appropriate land uses - Conservation of existing marshland is
highest priority with second priority being water related
recreational activities within the capacity of the area to sustain
recreational development, if such development cannot function
anywhere else.
Location - Tributaries adjacent to North River portion of Raymond
Creek.
ESTUARINE WATERS
Description - Coastal waters or tributaries seaward of the dividing
line between coastal fishing waters and inland fishing waters (G.S.
11.3-229 (n) (2)).
Significance - Among the most productive natural environments
within the State and used for fishing, recreational, economical,
navigational and aesthetic purposes.
Policy Objective - Preservation and management to safeguard
and perpetuate their biologic, economic, and aesthetic values.
Appropriate Land Uses - Conservation of estuarine waters is
highest priority with second priority being development of
navigational channels, bulkheads to prevent erosion, provided
that such activity will not be harmful to the biological and physical
estuarine functions.
Location - All waters of the Pasquotank River Basin downstream
of the Highway 158 Bridge between Elizabeth City and Camden
County. The Albemarle Sound and all waters of the North River
south of the dividing line between coastal fishing waters and
inland fishing waters.
NATURAL HAZARD AREA- - ESTUARINE AND RIVER
ERODIBLE AREAS
Description - Estuarine area above ordinary high water where
excessive erosion has a high probability of occurring based upon
reasonable 25-year recession line.
Significance - Natural hazard area of estuarine system especially
vulnerable to erosion damage.
Policy Objective - Insure development is responsive to erosion
limitations to avoid property loss.
Appropriate Land Uses - Recreational, rural and conservation
activities represent appropriate land uses. Permanent or
substantial residential, commercial, institutional or industrial
structures are not appropriate unless stabilization has been
achieved along the affected reach.
Location - Note Areas that presently have stabilization such as
bulkheading would not be included in the AEC area.
-s8!1!I!0e; pue swej6ojd leuo!leajoaj avow paaN •z
seaae buldweo pue bui� o!uo!d 's�jed ajow dolanap 01 paaN 'I
uolleaaoad
•palowojd aq pinoys eaje eql to le!lualod wsunol •5
-sai1pnuoddo qof jo noel e si aaaq •t
papaau saulsnpu! palelai leinllnoul5e ajow .E
•papaau saulsnpui leo!uyoal avow Z
•aseq o!wouooe
leinllnoube builslxa luawelddns of papaau si k1snpu! ajow • L
44MOJD oiwou033
•luawdolanap
leulsnpui jo le!ojawwoo Iei1uap!saj poweilsaaun wojl
paloaloid aq lsnw pue lueliodwl keA We spuel leinljnou6V -E
•paAJasaj-d aq pinoys Slasse ouo1SIH Z
-paloeloid aq pinoys al!lpl!M pue saoinosai leinleN • L
Ie1u8wu0J1Au3
•sall!unwwoo ui paleiluaouoo aq pinoys g1Moi6 ajnln3 •t,
•panojdwl aq of spaau Al!unwwoo aql to aouejeadde agl .E
•papaau sl luawdolanap puel uo IOJJUO0 aaow •Z
•pauueld aq lsnw luawdolanap ainln3 • L
luawdolanap kunoD
•pall!luap! alaM swalgojd pue sanssl 6u!Mollol ayl ljolle
sly) to sllnsai aql uo pase8 -Alunoo eql to ylMoi6 ainlnl aql uo
suoluldo Jlegl ane6 S1oluas Ioogos gblq OJ 'oslV -Suaa3uo0 a!agl
ssajdxe of Al!unlioddo ue uaA16 OJGm splogasnog 000,e jaAO
•swalgojd pue sanssl asn puel bulu!wialep ul ai!euuo!lsanb
6uluueld e to sllnsai aql pue suezil!o ql!M loeluoo leuosiad
pazll!ln pjeo8 AjosIAPV g1Moj0 Alunoo uapwe0 aq I
Ajuno0 a41 ui swalgojd ao sanssl asn puel jofeW
•eulloJeO u1JON lelseo0 10
uoiliod e to luawa6euew pue luawdolanap Apapio 'uo1leA esaid
Uolloaloid aql jol slseq eql wjol of papualui osle si ueld
agl •suezll!0 Aluno0 uepwe0 to spaau pue sailslp atal uo paseq
g1Moa6 ainlnl jol uolloajlp ap!Aoid of sl sluawala aaJul asagl
to asodmd aql •waouoo IeluawuoJIAu310 seaJV wualul alq!bil3
pasodoid aql pue walsAS uo!leo!llSselO pueq agj 'SaA!1oafg0
pue sleo0 aql apnloul sluawala jolew aaJgl aql veld asn pueR
Aluno0 uapwe0 aql do a� ew legl sluawala jolew aq1 ul!M Alunoo
aql 10 suaz11!0 ap!Aoid of s1 sisdouAs s!gl to asodand aql
sisdouAS ueid asn pueq ;o asodind
-leaf ajenbs 000,09 to ssaoxa ul eaae ue aneg legl sainlonils
ajow jo auo to uollonjlsuoo aAlonul g011LIM asogl 'jalemiepun ao
puel uo saoinosai leanleu 6u11eneoxa ao 6Ulllup anlonU1 ley) asogl
'azis ui sajoe 0z uegl jale6i6 to asogl 'Sl!twad alels bulpeau
Alluaiino sloaloid asogl :luawdolanap aofew aol Sauo anl6
II!M uo1SSlwwoO saoinosad lelseo0 agl •luawdolanap Joulw col
sllwjad 6ulAi6 jol alglsuodsai aq ll!M Aluno0 uapwe0 -waouoo
12JUGWUOJIAUG 10 seaae ap!slno luawdolanap jol 1!waad e aiinbai
sou saop 30V eql -1!waad e aneu lsnw waouoo Ieluawuonnua
to eaje ue uigl1M luawdolanap AuV - walsAS 1!wjad
'U61S 6UIU1eM
e sl 11 -eaae ley) to asn 1!q!gojd Aluessaoau sou seop waouoo
IeluawuoalAua 10 auo se ease ue 10 u01leu6ls9a •eoueliodwl
leouolslq to seaae pue spied alels pue leuo!leu 'sialeM
alge6lneu 'spuelgsjew se eons seaae apnlcul Aegl •uo!sslwwo0
saoinosad lelseo0 aql Aq paleu6lsap aq ll!M sauepunoq
alagl pue Seaje asagl - uaa0uo0 IeluawuoJ1Au3 10 SeaaV
•1! ql!M owbe isnw Aluno0 uapwe0
ul puel aql to asn 'paldope sl ueld slgl legl MON -algel!ene
saoinosai aql ql!M sleo6 asagl 6ulgoeaa Aol Bled algeuoseaa
)sow aql pue 'Alunoo aql ul algellene saoinosai ag1 'Alunoo
aql ul aldoad aql to sleo6 aql uo paseq aae sueld aql -ueld
asn puel e pajedaid seq Alunoo goe3 - sueld asn pueq
-ueld alagl bu!lelnwiol ul sjauoissiwwo0 Aluno0
uopwe0 aql Aq pasn pue '11!q aql Aq paleaao slool luawa6euew
asn puel aofew aajgl ale buiMollol aql •luawdolanap
pue y1Moi6 aininl a!agl aol sueld ajedaid of eulloae0
glaoN lelseo0 ul sallunoo 0z ul luawwano6 leool Seise legs
Mel alels e sl bL6 L 1010V 1uaw06euew eaaV lelseo0 aql
.10V luawa6euew
eajV lelseo0 aql passed AlgwassV lejau% bL6 L a1­11 'eaae 01-11
to saoinosai leanleu lueliodwl to uo!loaloid pue g1Moi6 Apapio
algeua of •uo!leajoaj pue k1snpul 'aojawwoo to uo!suedxa
ainlnl 'uollonpoid pool aol salelS Pal!un aql ul suol6aa lueliodw!
)sow aql 10 auo sl eulloae0 g1JoN 10 ease lelseoo aql
ur-tnpoalul
Based on a Soil Conservation Study conducted ova 31-year
period the following 25-year recession lines have been
established.
Along the North River from Broad Creek up to the intersection of
State Road 1101 on the Pasquotank River. 95-foot recession line.
Along the Pasquotank River from State Road 1101 north along the
river approximately 2 miles. 50-foot recession line.
Along the Pasquotank River from Areneuse north along the river
approximately 31/2 miles. 46-foot recession line.
FRAGILE, HISTORIC OR NATURAL RESOURCES AREAS -
COMPLEX NATURAL AREAS
Description - Lands that support native plant and animal
communities and provide habitat conditions or characteristics
essentially unchanged by human activity.
Significance - Provide example of conditions existing prior to
coastal settlement by western man, also irreplaceable as
scientific, educational and ecological resources.
Policy Objectives - Preservation of natural conditions.
Appropriate Land Uses - Uses consistent with policy; lands shall
not be developed so as to jeopardize natural character; also,
adjacent lands should not be developed so as to endanger the
recognized value of the complex natural area.
Location - Large forested area west of North River from Broad
Creek north to the intersection of Indiantown Creek and U.S. 158.
Forested area adjacent to the Pasquotank River from the Camden
County Bridge of U.S. 158 up to the northern corner of the County.
This does not include areas that were developed as of the
adoption November 1975. Dismal Swamp State Park Area and
adjacent forested areas at northern end of county.
FRAGILE, HISTORIC OR NATURAL RESOURCE AREAS -
AREAS THAT SUSTAIN REMNANT SPECIES
Description - Areas that support native plants or animals that are
either rare or endangered. Areas that provide habitat conditions
necessary for the survival of existing population of rare or
endangered species.
Significance - Survival of certain native plants and animals that
are now rare or endangered cannot be assured unless areas
providing necessary habitat conditions are protected from
development or land uses that might affect these conditions.
Policy Objective - Preservation of habitat conditions necessary to
the continuing survival of rare or endangered plants and animals.
Minimize development or land uses that might jeopardize areas
that support remnant species.
Appropriate Land Uses - Land uses shall be those consistent
with the policy objective. Land uses shall not be planned that will
unnecessarily jeopardize the habitat conditions responsible for
the continued survival of respective plants and animals.
Location - Large forested area west of North River from Broad
Creek to the intersection of Indiantown Creek and U.S. 158.
Forested area adjacent to the Pasquotank River from the Camden
County Bridge of U.S. 158 up to the northern corner of the County.
This does not include areas that were developed as of adoption
November, 1975. Dismal Swamp State Park areas and adjacent
forested areas at northern end of county.
Camden Count
land use plan
DCM COPY
DCM COPY
lease do not remove!!!!!
Division of Coastal Management Copy
SYNOPSIS
AR. ; SUBJECT TO PUBLIC RIGHTS - CERTAIN PUBLIC
TRUST AREAS
Description - All waterways and land under to which the public
may have rights of access or navigation as authorized by State
Constitution. (Article XIV, Section 5)
Significance - Public rights include navigation and recreation, as
well as fishing, aesthetic and economic purposes or values.
Policy Objective - To insure public rights and protect or preserve
value.
Appropriate Land Uses - Uses consistent with policy; water
related land uses allowed if consistent with policy objective.
Location - Pasquotank River, North River and Albemarle Sound
and all tributaries that have public access by navigation.
FRAGILE, HISTORIC OR NATURAL RESOURCE AREAS -
EXISTING NATIONAL OR STATE PARKS
Description - Existing sites that have been acquired for use as
National or State parks.
Significance - Existing National or State parks are areas
containing environmental or natural resources of more than local
significance.
Policy Objective - To protect and preserve the scenic, historic,
cultural, scientific and natural values of National or State parks.
Appropriate Land Uses - Those consistent with above policy
objective. All development in parks shall be planned and
executed so as to in no way impair, damage or detract from the
values for which the areas were established to preserve and
protect.
Location -The Dismal Swamp State Park is located at the northern
end of the county adjacent to the Dismal Swamp Canal and along
the North Carolina -Virginia state line.
Capability to Sustain Growth
As can be seen by past population trends and projected
population growth, very little growth has or is expected to take
place during the next 5 to 50 years. Based on population
projections, there should be no problem accommodating the
expected growth with existing zoning and subdivision regulations
used as planning tools. Also, implementation of several of the
objectives as stated in the plan should assure no problems with
future development. One of the strongest deterents to problems in
the future is the enforcement of septic tank regulations by the
County Health Department.
Desired Change in Population
The County Growth Advisory Board received responses on
the planning questionnaire pertaining to desired growth in the
county. The information as outlined in the plan was made available
to the County Commissioners. They determined that the majority
of the people in the county would like to see a small increase in
population, which is also indicated by the population projection.
Cost of Services to Accommodate Projected Growth
The cost for providing existing and projected population
with services will depend upon the demands citizens of the county
place on their county government. Most citizens are aware of the
fact that, like most things, providing county services is costing
more each year. However, the county's tax rate is low, which gives
cou, government the flexibility to increase taxes if demand for
sere,. s by citizens requires such action.
•ir 'swelll!M 1 .O swe!II!M 'l aluugo(, uew� unoA •a pjegoiH
S661L1 -8 a6Joa0 u01sleM •3 SalJeg0 IlaMod IleysJe.A
su!ii�ad •O .M U11aew .3 .M •AGH Ao00W '1 PA01R
sagao3 •w we!ll!M IlaB '0 alPp3 jS `uallnW 'l 'H
lloggV .O ulA*ew S� Ue8 uewaagS MOIO '>I .V
pueog tiosinpV 41moiD /4uno0 uapwe0
sweill!M Apued
uosJagdow new eaoN
uewjleg0 - s6u11SUH Ilassna
paeog 6uluueld A(lunoD uapwe0
�Ja10 'keel �oer
UOSUL40P uooew
uewJ1e40-90lA 'Swe!II!M UINIJEJ3
uewj!et40 'kea-1 •3 •1
sJeuoissiwwo0 ;o pieole 14uno0 uepwe0
VL61. ;0 10V luawa6euew eaiV lelseoD
04101 luensind peiec!Wd
sisdouAS ueid asn pue-i
/4uno3 uapwe0
How to make it work
The plan for Camden County is comprehensive. It can
help retain the fine qualities of the County, while at the same time
provide guidance for future growth. But before any real benefit
can be gained, citizens as well as elected officials must carry out
certain activities.
The following are suggested methods to bring about
implementation of the plan:
1) Revise zoning ordinance or subdivision regulations to require
larger developments. 50 units or more to locate in existing
community areas.
2) Revise subdivision regulations to require developments of 50
units or more to provide central sewage and water facilities.
3) Prepare a list of properties that are available and suitable for
commercial or light industrial development.
4) Land that has been identified as available for commercial or
industrial development should be tested for percolation and
rezoned if necessary.
5) Prepare brochure to promote sites that are available for
industrial or commercial development.
6) Conduct survey to determine feasibility of sites in county for
recreational purposes.
7) Investigate acquisition of property for recreational use.
8) Prepare brochure that points out interesting areas in the
county.
9) Determine which structures in the county should be
preserved.
10) Consider reduction of property tax for owners of structures
that are undergoing restoration.
1 1) County must adopt implementation and enforcement plan for
AEC area by July 1, 1977.
The complete Camden County Land Use Plan is available
to citizens at the Zoning Officer's Office in the County
Courthouse. The plan contains, in addition to the information
provided in the synopsis, detailed information on natural
resources, population, economy, existing land use and
community facilities. You are invited to review this plan and
forward your questions or comments to any member of the
County Commissioners, Planning Board or Camden Growth
Advisory Board. Again, you are urged to become involved in
local decisions that will affect your future.
Technical Assistance by
Howard T. Capps, ASLA
Landscape Architect • Planning Consultant
Elizabeth City, North Carolina
and
North Carolina Department of Natural and Economic Resources
Division of Community Assistance
Thomas B. Richter, Field Office Chief
Howard T. Capps, Senior Planner
Dee Holmes, Planner Technician
Wilber Walker, Draftsman
Peggy Sawyer, Secretary (ARPDC)
Debbie Branch, Secretary (ARPDC)
The preparation of this report was financially assisted by grants
from the State of North Carolina, National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration and Coastal Plains Regional
Commission.