1992 Land Use Plan-1992

c
a
U
�
_
A
o
�
i
boy
~
cl
cl
o
o
O
�
c
U
A

EMERALD ISLE, NORTH CAROLINA
1991 LAND USE PLAN
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION I: ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS
Page
MA. Establishment of Information Base I-1
B. Population and Housing
I-4
1. Population
I-4
a) Permanent Population Growth, 1970-1990
I-4
b) Composition and Age
I-8
2. Housing Characteristics
I-9
3. Summary
I-13
C. Economy
I-14
D. Existing Land Use
I-19
1. Introduction
I-19
2. Urban and Developed Land
a) Residential
I-19
I-21
b) Commercial
I-25
c) Public/Semi-Public
d) Utilities, Communications
I-28
I-28
e) Areas of Environmental Concern
I-29
3. Summary
I-29
4. Development Potential
I-30
5. Existing Ordinances and Land Use Controls
I-30
a) Emerald Isle Coastal Area Management Act
Land Use Plan Update, January 23, 1987
b) Zoning Ordinance
I-31
I-31
c) Subdivision Ordinance
I-34
d) Drainage Master Plan
I-34
I
e) Stormwater Control Ordinance
I-34
f) Dunes and Vegetation Protection Ordinance
I-35
g) Emerald Isle Mobile Home Park and
Travel Trailer Park Ordinance
I-35
h)
Floodplain Development
I-35
i)
Building Code
I-36
j)
Storm Hazard Mitigation and Post -Disaster
Reconstruction Plan
I-36
k)
Emerald Isle Shoreline Access Plan
I-36

Page
E.
Development Constraints: Public Facilities
I-37
1. Water Supply
I-37
2. Sewage Disposal
I-37
3. Drainage
I-41
4. Solid Waste Disposal
I-41
5. Schools
I-45
6. Transportation
I-46
7. Police
I-46
8. Fire
I-46
9. Emergency Services
I-47
10. Recreation
I-47
11. Electrical Distribution
I-53
12. Administration
I-54
F.
Development Constraints: Land Suitability
I-55
1. Topography/Geology
I-55
2. Flood Hazard Areas
I-58
3. Soils
I-60
4. Manmade Hazards/Restrictions
I-6.3
5. Fragile Areas
I-67
a) Coastal Wetlands
I-67
b) Estuarine Waters
I-67
�{
c) Estuarine Shorelines
d) Public Trust Areas
I-71
I-71
e) Ocean Hazard Areas
I-72
f) 404 Wetlands
I-72
g) Maritime Forests
I-73
h) Outstanding Resource Waters
I-75
i) Slopes in Excess of 12%
I-75
j) Excessive Erosion Areas
I-75
k) Historic and Archaeological Sites
I-75
SECTION
II: PROJECTED LAND DEVELOPMENT ANALYSIS
A.
Projected Demand for Development
II-1
1. Demographic Trends
II-1
2. Commercial and Industrial Land Use
II-5
3. Housing Trends
II-6
4. Public Land Use -
II-7
5. Areas Likely to Experience Major Land Use Changes
II-7
Summary
II-7
B.
Projected Public Facilities Needs/Availability
II-8
C.
Redevelopment Issues
II-9
D.
Intergovernmental Coordination and Implementation
II-9
E.
Shoreline Access/Off-Street Parking
II-10
1

I
1
i
1
t
1�
1
t
1
SECTION III: SUMMARY OF TOWN OF EMERALD ISLE
1990 LAND USE PLAN SURVEY
SECTION IV: EMERALD ISLE LAND CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
SECTION V: EMERALD ISLE POLICY STATEMENTS
A. Resource Protection Policy Statements
B. Resource Production & Management Policies
C. Economic and Community Development Policy
Statements
D. Continuing Public Participation
Storm Hazard Mitigation Plan
A. Existing Development
B. Emerald Isle Flood Hazard Areas
C. High Winds
D. Estimated Severity of Possible Hazard Area Damages
E. Anticipated Development in Hazard Areas
F. Existing Emerald Isle Hazard Mitigation
Policies and Regulations
G. Policy Statements: Storm Hazard Mitigation
Post -Disaster Reconstruction Plan and Policies
A. Introduction
B. Organization of Local Damage Assessment Team
C. Damage Assessment Procedures and Requirements
D. Organization of Recovery Operation
E. Recommended Reconstruction Policies
SECTION VI: RELATIONSHIP OF EMERALD ISLE POLICIES AND
LAND CLASSIFICATIONS
Page
III-1
IV-1
V-1
V-1
V-7
V-9
V-14
V-15
V-15
V-15
V-16
V-16
V-16
V-16
V-18
V-20
V-20
V-21
V-22
V-24
V-26
VI-1

u
APPENDICES
Appendix IA&B
Methodology Used For Estimating 1990 Carteret County
Permanent Population By Township
Methodology Used For Estimating 1990 Carteret County
Seasonal Population By Township
�■
Appendix II
Land Use Policies, 1986 -Land Use Plan Update
Appendix III
Policy Statements Considered, But Not Adopted
LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table 1: Total Year -Round Population Projections
by Township and Municipality, Carteret County 1960-1990 I-5
Table 2: Peak Seasonal Population and Percent Increase
by Township and Municipality - Carteret County, 1970-90 I-6
Table 3: Total Peak Population and Percent Change
by Township and Municipality, Carteret County, 1970-87 I-7
Table 4: Population Characteristics by Age Group,
Emerald Isle, 1970-1990 I-8
Table 5:
Percentage Change in Population by Sex,
Emerald
Isle, 1970-1990
I-8
Table 6:
LINC Building Permits Survey Report for
Permit Issuing Place
I-10
Table 7:
Emerald Isle Housing Summary, Tenure and
Vacancy,
1970, 1980 and 1990
I-11
Table 8:
Emerald Isle, 1980 Housing Conditions
I-12
Table 9:
Town of Emerald Isle, Labor Force Statue - 1980
I-14
Table 10:
Per Capita Income, 1979-1985,
Emerald
Isle, Carteret County, North Carolina
I-14
Table 11:
Employed Persons 16 years and Older by
Industry, Town of Emerald Isle, 1980
I-15
Table 12:
Employment by Class of Worker,
Town of
Emerald Isle, 1980
I-15
Table 13:
Poverty Status, Town of Emerald Isle, 1980
I-16

11
11
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Table 14: Town of Emerald Isle
Revenues/Expenditures, 1984-1989
Table 15: Town of Emerald Isle, Land Use By Acreage
Table 16: Private Package Treatment and Disposal
Systems in Emerald Isle
Table 17: Town of Emerald Isle
Synopses of Existing Ocean Accessway Facilities
Synopses of Existing Sound Accessway Facilities
Table 18: Town of Emerald Isle, Minimum Recreational
Facility Needs
Table 19: Soil Susceptibility to Flooding
Table 20: Soil Associations, Degree and Kind of
Limitation for Stated use
Table 21: Land Use Compatibility in Noise Areas
Table 22: Maritime Forest Area
Definition, Function and Management
Table 23: Total Year -Round Population Projections
by Township and Municipality, Carteret County, 1990-2000
Table 24: Peak Seasonal Population Projections
by Township and Municipality,' Carteret County, 1990-2000
Table 25: Total Peak Population by Township and
Municipality, Carteret County, 1990-2000
Table 26: Total Population by Age and Percent Change
1990 to 2000
Page
I-17
I-20
I-37
I-48
I-53
I-61
I-62
I-64
I-74
II-2
II-3
II-4
II-5

1
LIST OF MAPS
Town
of
Emerald
Isle Location Map
Maps
1A,
1B, 1C
- Town of Emerald Isle Existing Land Use
Map 2
-
Noise Impacts Bogue Field Aircraft operations ,
Maps
3A,
3B, 3C
- Town of Emerald Isle, Existing Water Lines
Maps
4A,
4B, 4C
- Town of Emerald Isle, Storm Water Drainage
Problem Areas
Maps
5A,
5B,.5C
- Town of Emerald Isle, Ocean and Sound
Public Access Sites
Maps
6A,
6B - Town of Emerald Isle, General Soil Conditions
Map 7
-
Emerald
Isle, General Delineation, Flood Hazard Areas
Maps
8A,
8B, 8C
- Town of'Emerald Isle, Areas of Environmental
Concern
Maps
9A,
9B, 9C
- Town of Emerald Isle, Land Classification
Maps
10A, 10B, 10C - Town of Emerald Isle, Flood Hazard Areas
1

I
SECTION I
ANALYSIS OF EXISTING. CONDITIONS
1
1-7,

iSECTION I: ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS
A. ESTABLISHMENT OF INFORMATION BASE
This 1991 Land Use Plan Update for the Town of Emerald Isle is
prepared in accordance with requirements of the North Carolina
Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA). Specifically, this document
complies with Subchapter 7B, "Land Use Planning Guidelines," of the
North Carolina Administrative Code, as amended, November 1, 1989.
The 7B guidelines define the following intent of land use plans:
"Local governments, through the land use planning process,
\�
address issues and adopt policies that guide the development
of their community. Many decisions affecting development
are made by other levels of government, and local policies
must take account of and coincide with established state and
federal policies. Most decisions, however, are primarily of
local concern. By carefully and explicitly addressing these
issues, other levels of government will follow local poli-
cies that deal with these issues. State and federal agen-
cies will use the local land use plans and policies in
making project consistency, funding, and permit decisions.
l:
Policies which consider the type of development to be
encouraged, the density and patterns of development, and the
methods of providing beach access are examples of these
local policy decisions.
The land use plan shall contain the following basic elements:
(1) a summary of data collection and analysis;
(2) an existing land use map;
(3) policy discussion, including storm hazard mitigation;
' (4) a land classification map."
The policy section of the plan is the most important part of the
document. The 7B guidelines dictate that policies must be included
to address:
1. Resource Protection
-- Constraints to development (e.g., soils, flood prone
areas);
-- Specific local resource development issues relative to
areas of environmental concern designated under
15A NCAC 7H; and land uses and development densities in
proximity to ORWs;.
- - Fragile land areas, including but not limited to fresh-
water swamps and marshes, maritime forests, pocosins and
404 wetlands, ORW areas, shellfishing waters, water supply
areas and other waters with special values, cultural and
historic resources, and manmade hazards;
_- Hurricane and flood evacuation needs and plans;
- Protection of potable water supply;
I-1

2.
KP
4.
-- The use of package treatment plants for sewage treatment
disposal;
-- Stormwater runoff;
-- Industrial impacts on fragile areas;
-- Development of sound and estuarine system islands;
-- Restriction of development within areas up to five feet
above mean high water that might be susceptible to sea
level rise and wetland loss;
-- Upland excavation for marina basins;
-- Damaging of existing marshes by bulkhead installation.
Resource Production and Management
-- Local governments shall discuss the importance of agri-
culture, forestry, mining, fisheries and recreational
resources to the community;
-- The plan shall contain policy statements on the following
resource production and management issues (if relevant):
(i) productive agricultural lands;
(ii) commercial forest lands;
(iii) existing and potential mineral production areas;
(iv) commercial and recreational fisheries, including
nursery and habitat areas, ORWs, and trawling
activities in estuarine waters;
(v) off -road vehicles;
(vi) residential, commercial and industrial land develop-
ment impacts on any resources; and
(vii) peat or phosphate mining's impacts on any resource.
Economic and Community Development: To include a basic
statement of the community attitude toward growth.
-- Types and locations of industries desired;
-- Local commitment to providing services to development;
-- Types of urban growth patterns desired;
-- Redevelopment of developed areas including relocation of
structures endangered by erosion;
-- Commitment to state and federal programs;
-- Assistance to channel maintenance and beach nourishment
projects;
-- Energy facility siting and development to include specific
reference to electric generating plants, both inshore and
OCS exploration or development;
-- Tourism;
-- Coastal and estuarine water beach access;
-- Types, densities, location; units per acre, etc., of
anticipated residential development and services necessary
to support such development.
Continuing Public Participation
-- Description of means to be used for public education on
planning issues;
-- Description of means to be used for continuing public
participation in planning;
I-2

1
-- Description of means to be used for obtaining citizen
input in developing land use plan policy statements.
5. Storm Hazard Mitigation, Post -Disaster Recovery and
Evacuation Plans
-- A description of the effects of coastal storms the commu-
nity will be subjected to; e.g., high winds, storm surge,
flooding, wave action, erosion, etc.;
A composite hazards map;
- An existing land use inventory for each of the most
hazardous areas;
-- Policies intended to mitigate the effects of high winds,
storm surge, flooding, wave action, erosion, etc.;
-- Policies intended to discourage development in the most
- hazardous areas;
Policies dealing with public acquisition of land in the
most hazardous areas;
-- Policies dealing with evacuation;
-- Post -disaster reconstruction policies.
Listed below are some of the sources and documents utilized during
preparation of this Land Use Plan:
-- Carteret County 1986 Land Use Plan Update
-- Town of Emerald Isle 1981 Land Use Plan Update
Town of Emerald Isle 1986 Land Use Plan Update
USDA, Soil Conservation Service, Carteret County
-- NCDOT, Planning and Policies Section
Town of Emerald Isle Staff
Carteret County Schools
-- North Carolina Office of State Budget and Management
-- North Carolina Division of Archives and History
-- Flood Insurance Study, Town of Emerald Isle
-- Town of Emerald Isle Zoning Ordinance
-- Town of Emerald Isle Subdivision Ordinance
-- Town of Emerald Isle Mobile Home Park and Travel Trailer Park
Ordinance
-- Town of Emerald Isle Ocean and Sound Public Access Plan, 1988
Drainage Master Plan, Town of Emerald Isle, North Carolina
Environmental Impact Statement, Carteret County Wastewater
Treatment and Disposal, 1988
-- An Assessment of Maritime Forest Resources on the North
Carolina Coast, November 1988
-- North Carolina Division of Community Assistance
-- North Carolina Division of Coastal Management
-- North Carolina Department of Economic and Community
Development
-- Town of Emerald Isle Storm Hazard Mitigation Plan and Post
-_Disaster Reconstruction Plan, 1984
Carteret County Thoroughfare Plan
These sources were supplemented by "windshield" surveys conducted in
October, 1990, to obtain data on existing land use patterns.
t I-3

B. POPULATION AND HOUSING
1. Population
a) Permanent Population Growth, 1970-1990
Emerald Isle is located in Carteret County on the southern
end of Bogue Banks. Since 1970, Carteret County has experienced
tremendous population growth. In fact, through 1988, Carteret
County was the fourth fastest -growing CAMA-regulated county and
was fifth in the entire state, ranking only behind Dare,
J.
Brunswick, Wake and Currituck counties. This growth is the result
of a number of factors, including the following: growing retire-
ment and recreation centers, increased military and industrial
presence, peak population growth, and a national trend of migra-
tion to non -metropolitan areas. The overall growth of Carteret
County has served to support and stimulate the growth of Emerald
Isle and other county municipalities.
During the 70s and 80s, the Carteret County municipalities
experienced a 479% increase in population, while the unincorpo-
rated areas experienced an 84% increase. Emerald Isle had major
growth from 1970 to 1980, with the permanent population increasing
from 122 to 865, a 609% increase. Strong growth continued through
the 80s with an increase to a 1990 permanent population of 2,434,
a ten-year growth of 181%. In fact, from 1980 to 1988, the
Emerald Isle rate of growth ranked sixth in the state for towns in
the 1,000 to 2,500 population range. Table 1 provides a summary
of Emerald Isle and Carteret County population growth from 1960 to
1990.
Emerald Isle's permanent year-round population is supple-
mented by a very large peak seasonal population. This has large
implications to the town for service delivery and other operating
expenses. Tables 2 and 3 define the town's peak seasonal popula-
tion and relationship to the permanent population. Emerald Isle
is second only to Atlantic Beach in peak seasonal population with
a 1990 total of 16,642. This peak population count does not
include day visitors.
Day visitors greatly increase the population in Emerald
Isle during the tourist or summer season. On July 4, 1990, the
Emerald Isle Police Department estimated a total population of
60,000. With a peak population of 18,653 (Table 3), the total day
visitor population would have been approximately 41,000 people.
In 1989, the average daily traffic count for vehicles crossing the
Langston Bridge into Emerald Isle was 9,200 vehicles. If each
vehicle had an average occupancy of only two persons, 18,400
people would have entered Emerald Isle. This number could easily
increase 2 to 2.5 times during a peak summer season day. Thus,
the Police Department estimate is very credible. This volume of
day visitors has as much impact on the town as does the peak
"overnight"
population.
I-4 1

Township Municipality or Area
1) Atlantic
2) Beaufort
3) Cedar Island
4) Davis
5) Harkers Island
6) Harlowe
7) Marshallberg
8) Merrimon
9) Morehead City
10) Newport
11)
Portsmouth
12)
Sea Level
13)
Smyrna
14)
Stacy
15)
Straits
16)
White Oak
Total
Beaufort
Unincorporated Areas
Total Township
Total Township
Total Township
Total Township
Total Township
Total Township
Total Township
Atlantic Beach
Morehead City
Indian Beach
Pine Knoll Shores
Unincorporated Areas
Total Township
Newport
Unincorporated Areas
Total Township
Total Township
Total Township
Total Township
Total Township
Total Township
Cape Carteret
Emerald Isle
Cedar Point
Unincorporated Areas
Total Township
TABLE 1
TOWN OF
EMERALD ISLE
Total Year -Round
Population Projections
by
Township
and Municipality
Carteret County, 1960-1990
Year -Round Population
1960
1970
1980
1990[1]
902
814
810
847
2,922
3,368
3,826
3,808
3,324
2,779
3,166
3,531
6,246
6,147
6,992
7,339
255
290
333
372
446
456
492
537
1,362
1,639
1,910
2,150
629
762
956
1,109
416
525
580
638
344
330
426
498
76
300
941
1,938
5,583
5,233
4,359
6,046
0
0
54
153
0
0
646
1,360
4,395
6,396
9,803
12,126
10,054
11,929
15,803
.21,623
861
1,735
1,883
2,516
1,783
2,191
3,586
4,517
2,644
3,926
5,469
7,033
8
2
0
0
389
347
540
670
597
517
637
733
291
257
322
373
1,070
1,166
1,520
1,785
52
616
944
1,008
14
122
865
2,434
0
0
0
628
1,719
1,758
2,493
2,779
1,785
2,496
4,302
6,849
Percentage
Change
Overall
60-70
70-80
80-90
60-90
-9.8%
-0.5%
-4.6%
- 6.1%
15.3%
13.6%
-0.5%
30.3%
-16.4%
13.9%
11.5%
6.2%
-1.6%
13.7%
5.0%
17.5%
13.7%
14.8%
11.7%
45.9%
2.2%
7.9%
9.1%
20.4%
20.3%
16:5%
12.6%
57.9%
21.1%
25.5%
16.0%
76.3%
26.2%
10.5%
10.0%
53.3%
-4.1%
29.1%
16.9%
44.8%
294.7%
213.7%
105.9%
2450.0%
-6.3%
-16.7%
38.7%
8.3%
-
-
183.3%
-
-
-
110.5%
-
45.5%
53.3%
23.7%
176.0%
18.6%
32.5%
36.8%
115.1%
101.5%
8.5%
33.6%
192.2%
22.9%
63.7%
26.0%
153.3%
48.5%
39.3%
28.6%
166.0%
-75.0%
-
-
-
-10.8%
55.6%
24.1%
72.2%
-13.4%
23.2%
15.1%
22.8%
-11.7%
25.3%
15.8%
28.2%
9.0%
30.4%
17.4%
66.8%
1084.6%
53.2%
6.8%
1838.5%
771.4%
609.0%
181.4%
17285.7%
2.3%
41.8%
11.5%
61.7%
39.8%
72.4%
59.2%
283.7%
Total Municipalities 9,508 11,374 13,518 19,891 19.6% 18.9% 47.1% 109.2%
Total Unincorporated Areas 17,930 20,229 27,574 32,665 12.8% 36.3% 18.5% 82.2%
Total County 27,438 31,603 41,092 52,556 15.2% 30.0% 27.9% 91.5%
Sources: North Carolina State Data Center, Office of State Budget and Management; 1990 Census;
T. Dale Holland Consulting Planners
[1] See Appendix lA for explanation of how 1990 populations by township were estimated.

TABLE 2
TOWN OF EMERALD ISLE
Peak Seasonal Population and Percent Increase
by Township and Municipality
Carteret County, 1970-1990
Township
Municipality or Area
Peak Seasonal Population
Percent Change
Overall
1970
1980
1990
70-80
80-90
70-90
1)
Atlantic
Total
179
412
760
130.2%
84.5%
324.6%
2)
Beaufort
Beaufort
843
1,704
2,821
102.1%
65.6%
234.6%
Unincorporated Areas
559
664
940
18.8%
41.6%
68.2%
Total Township
1,402
'2,368
3,761
68.9%
58.8%
168.3%
3)
Cedar Island
Total Township
71
131
218
84.5%
66.4%
207.0%
4)
Davis
Total Township
115
249
447
116.5%
79.5%
288.7%
5)
Harkers Island
Total Township
767
1,555
2,718
102.7%
74.8%
254.4%
6)
Harlowe
Total Township
170
356
632
109.4%
77.5%
271.8%
7)
Marshallberg
Total Township
137
263
447
92.0%
70.0%
226.3%
8)
Merrirron
Total Township
67
133
230
98.5%
72.9%
243.3%
9)
Morehead City
Atlantic Beach
5,475
13,017
21,721
137.8%
66.9%
296.7%
Morehead City
1,384
2,109
4,024
52.4%
90.8%
190.8%
Indian Beach
0
4,470
10,044
-
124.7%
-
Pine Knoll Shores
0
3,227
6,116
-
89.5%
-
Unincorporated Areas
3,540
1,109
1,369
-68.7%
23.4%
-61.3%
Total Township
10,399
23,932
43,724
130.1%
82.7%
320.5%
10)
Newport
Newport
352
503
1,217
42.9%
141.9%
245.7%
Unincorporated Areas
445
1,483
2,318
233.3%
56.3%
420.9%
Total Township
797
1,986
3,535
149.2%
78.0%
343.5%
11)
Sea Level
Total Township
74
87
105
17.6%
20.7%
41.9%
12)
Smyrna
Total Township
113
207
343
83.2%
65.7%
203.5%
13)
Stacy
Total Township
52
66
86
26.9%
30.3%
65.4%
14)
Straits
Total Township
248
328
435
32.3%
32.6%
75.4%
15)
White Oak
Cape Carteret
346
960
4,389
177.5%
357.2%
1168.5%
Eme,-alA Isle
975
8,628
16,642
784.9%
92.99d
1606.9%
Cedar Point
0
0
887
-
-
-
Unincorporated Areas
408
1,279
4,263
213.5%
233.3%
944.9%
Total Township
1,729
10,867
26,181
528.5%
140.9%
1414.2%
Total Municipalities
9,375
34,618
67,861
269.3%
96.0%
623.9%
Total Unincorporated Areas
6,945
8,322
15,311
19.8%
84.0%
120.5%
Total County
16,320
42,940
83,172
163.1%
93.7%
409.6%
Sources: Carteret County 1985 and 1989 Land Use Plans; T. Dale Holland Consulting Planners; Tschetter, Paul D.,
"Characterization of Baseline Demographic Trends in the Year -Round and Recreational Populations in the
Albemarle -Pamlico Estuarine Study Area"
a8 an an so AM am, am Im" aw 4ft am MW M6 ow Mw aw- a 4 1

TABLE 3
Total Peak Population and Percent Change
by Township and Municipality
Carteret County, 1970-2000
Township
Municipality or Area
POPULATION
PERCENT INCREASE
Overall 1970-1990
19 0 P u at on
1980 Population
1990 Population
1970-1980
1980-1990
Permanent
Peak
Rat o(1]
Permanent
Peak
Ratio
Permanent Peak
Rat o
Permanent
Peak
Ratio
Permanent
Peak
Ratio
Permanent
Peak
Ratio
1) Atlantic
21Beaufort
Total
Beaufort
814
3,368
993
4,211
1.22
810
1,222
1.51
808
1,568
1.94
-0.5%
23.1%
23.7%
-0.2%
28.3%
28.6%
-0.7%
57.9t
59.1%
Unincorporated Areas
2,779
3,338
1.25
1.20
3,826
3,166
5,530
3,830
1.45
1.21
4,398
3,366
7,219
4,306
1.64
1.28
13.6%
31.3%
15.6%
15.0%
30.5%
13.6%
30.6%
71.4%
31.3%
Total Township
6,147
7,549
1.23
6,992
9,360
1.34
71764
11,525
1.48
13.9%
13.71k
14.7%
24.0%
0.7t
9.0%
6.3%
11.0%
12.41
23.19#
5.7%
10.9%
21.1%
26.3%
29.0%
52.7%
6.5%
20.9%
3) Cedar Island
4) Davis
Total Township
Total Township
290
456
361
1.24
333
464
1.39
355
573
1.61
14.8%
28.5%
11.9%
6.0
23.5%
15.8%
22.4%
58.7%
29.7%
5) Harkers Island'
Total Township
1,639
571
2,406
1.25
1.47
492
1,910
741
3,465
1.51
1.81
511
2,050
958
4,768
1.87
2.33
7.9%
16.5%
29.8%
20.3%
3.9%
29.31F
24.5%
12.1%
67.8%
49.7%
6) Harlowe
Total Township
762
932
1.22
956
1,312
1.37
1,056
1,688
1.60
25.5%
44.0%
40.8%
23.6%
12.2%
7.3%
10.5%
37.6%
28.71;
28.2%
16.5%
25.1%
38.6%
98.2%
81.1%
58.4%
30.7%
7) Marshallberg
8) Merrimon
Total Township
Total Township
525
330
662
397
1.26
580
843
1.45
608
1,055
1.74
.10.5%
27.3%
15.3%
4.8%
25.1%
19.4%
15.8%
59.4%
37.6%
9) Morehead City
Atlantic Beach
300
5,775
1.20
19.25
426
941
559
13,958
1.31
14.83
475
1,732
705
23,453
1.48
13.54
29.1%
213.7%
40.8%
141.7%
9.1%
-22.9%
11.5%
84.1%
26.1%
68.0%
13.1%
-8.7%
43.9%
477.3%
77.6%
306.1%
23.4%
-29.7%
Morehead City
5,233
6,617
1.26
4,359
6,468
1.48
6,453
10,477
. 1.62
-16.7%
-2.3%
17.3%
48.0%
62.0%
9.4%
23.3%
58.3%
28.4%
Indian Beach
Pine Knoll Shores
0
0
0
0
-
54
4,524
83.78
67
10,111 150.91
-
-
-
24.1%
123.5%
80.1%
Unincorporated Areas
6,396
9,936
-
1.55
646
9,803
3,873
10,912
6.00
1.11
963
11,560
7,079
12,929
7.35
1.12
-
53.3%
-
9.8%
-
-28.3%
49.1%
17.9%
82.81k
18.5%
22.6%
0.5t
80.7%
30.1%
-28.0%
r+
10) Newport
Total Township
Newport
11,929
1,735
22,328
1.87
15,803
39,735
2.51
20,775
64,499
3.10
32.5%
78.0%
34.3%
31.5%
62.3%
23.5%
74.2%
188.9%
65.9%
V
Unincorporated Areas
2,191
2,087
2,636
1.20
1.20
1,883
3,586
2,386
5,069
1.27
1.41
2,782
4,305
3,999
6,623
1.44
1.54
8.5%
63.7%
14.316
5.3%
47.7%
67.6%
13.4%
60.3%
91.6%
19.5%
11) Sea Level
Total Township
Total Township
3,926
347
4,723
1.20
5,469
7,455
1.36
7,087
10,622
1.50
39.3%
92.3%
57.8%
17.5%
13.3%
20.1%
29.6%
30.7%
42.5%
8.8%
10.0%
96.5%
80.5%
151.3%
124.9%
27.9%
24.6%
12) Smyrna
Total Township
517
421
630
1.21
1.22
540
637
627
844
1.16
639
744
1.16
55.6%
48.9%
-4.3%
18.3%
18.7%
0.3%
84.1%
76.7%
-4.0%
13) Stacy
Total Township
257
309
1.20
322
388
1.32
1.20
699
1,042
1.49
23.2%
34.094
8.7%
9.7%
23.5%
12.5%
35.2%
65.4%
22.3%
14) Straits
Total Township
1,166
1,414
1.21
1,520
1,848
1.22
356
1,702
442
2,137
1.24
1.26
25.3%
30.4%
25.6%
30.7%
0.2%
0.3%
10.6%
12.0%
13.91k
15.6%
3.0%
3.3%
38.5%
46.0%
43.0%
51.1t
3.3%
3.5%
15) k1hite Oak
Cape Carteret
Emerald Isle
616
122
962
1.56
944
1,904
2.02
1,370
5,759
4.20
53.2%
97.9%
29.2%
45.1%
202.5%
108.4%
122.4%
498.6%
169.2%
Cedar Point
0
1,097
0
8.99
865
9,493
10.97
2,011
18,653
9.28
609.0%
765.4%
22.1%
132.5%
96.50 -15.5%
1548.4%
1600.4%
3.2%
Unincorporated Areas
Total Township
1,758
2,496
2,166
4,225
-
1.23
0
2,493
0
3,772
-
1.51
549
2,649
1,436
6,912
2.62
2.61
41.'B%
74.1%
22.8%
6.3%
83.2%
72.5%
50.7%
219.1t
111.8%
1.69
4,302
15,169
3.53
6,579
32,760
4.98
72.4%
259.0%
108.3%
52.9%
116.0%
41.2%
163.6%
675.4%
194.2%
Total Municipalities
Total Unincorporated
Areas
11,374
20,229
20,749
27,174
1.82
1.34
13,518
48,136
3.56
20,325
88,186
4.34
18.9%
132.0%
95.2%
50.494
83.21k
21.8%
78.7%
325.0%
137.8%
Total County
31,603
47,923
1.52
27,574
35,896
1.30
31,139
46,450
1.49
36.3%
32.1%
-3.1t
12.9%
29.4%
14.6%
53.9%
70.9%
11.0%
41,092
84,032
2.04
51,464
134,636
2.62
30.0%
75.3%
34.9%
25.2%
60.2%
27.9%
62.8%
180.9%
72.5%
Source: T. Dale Holland
consulting Planners
(1] Ratio of Peak/Pe=mnent Population

b) Composition and Age
The N.C. State Data Center does not estimate population by
race, sex, or age for municipalities for intercensal years.
Tables 4 and 5 were completed using 1970 and 1980 U.S. Census data
for Emerald Isle. To estimate 1990 population in terms of race,
sex, and age, it was assumed that various segments of the town's
population continued the same relative pattern of composition from
1980-1990 as was displayed from 1970-1980, with some adjustments
made to ensure consistency with Carteret County data.
Table 4
Population Characteristics by Age Group
Emerald Isle
1970-1990
Percentage of Total Population
Age Group 1970* 1980** 1990***
Under 5
3.3
4.7
5.2
5-14
20.5
8.4
7.2
15-24
14.8
17.0
19.5
25-34
7.3
17.6
15.0
35-44
.21.3
9.7
8.4
45-54
14.8
15.7
16.7
55-64
12.3
16.6
17.0
65 and over
5.7
10.3
11.0
Total 100% 100% 100%
Sources: *1981 Emerald Isle Land Use Plan
**1980 U. S. Census
***Estimate provided by T. Dale Holland Consulting Planners
Male Population
Female Population
Total Population
Table 5
Percentage Change in Population by Sex
Emerald Isle
1970-1990
Emerald Isle Carteret County
1970* 1980* 1990** 1970* 1980* 1990**
54% 51% 50% 49% 50% 50%
46% 49% 50% 51% 50% 50%
100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Sources: *1970 and 1980 U. S. Census
**Estimates provided by T. Dale Holland Consulting Planners

5,
Since 1970, the age of the Emerald Isle population has
increased significantly. This is consistent with trends through-
out Carteret County and is indicative of the attractiveness of the
Bogue Banks area as a retirement center. In 1970, only 18% of
Emerald Isle's population was 55 years old or older. By 1990, it
is estimated that the percentage of those 55 years old or older
had increased to 280. This was slightly higher than the county s
percent of population over 55, which was approximately 24%.
However, the town's percentage of population over 65 was approxi-
mately the same, 11%, as those for the state and the county in
1990, which were estimated to be 12% and 11%, respectively.
Thus, by 1990, over one -quarter (28%) of the town's
population was over 55 years old. A majority of this population
was in the 60 to 70 year old age group. The increasing age of the
population should impact upon the town's planning for medical,
housing, and other service needs of the elderly.
The town's population composition by sex has remained
fairly constant from 1970 to 1990. From 1970 to 1990, the
male/female percentages changed only 4% each to reach an even
50/50% distribution in 1990. This division of the town's sexes
agreed with the male/female distribution within the county as a
whole.
Emerald Isle has had a very small non -white population.
The 1980 census indicated only four Black, two Filipino, and eight
Asian Indian residents. While the 1990 detailed census data was
not available during plan preparation, it is not believed that the
non -white population had significantly increased by 1990. The
non -white population can be expected to remain low. From 1970 to
1990, the total non -white population in Carteret County has grown
at a rate well below the White population growth rate, which was
over 67%.
2. Housing Characteristics
Since 1970, Emerald Isle has experienced tremendous residen-
tial construction. In 1970, there were only 304 permanent dwell-
ing units. By 1980, the number had jumped to 2,433 dwelling
units. The preliminary 1990 census data indicated a total of
4,569 dwelling units. Thus, from 1970 to 1990, there was a 1503%
increase in dwelling units.
Complete detailed historical data is not available for the
twenty year period 1970-1990. However, Table 6 provides detailed
building permit data for the years 1985 1989. During these five
years, 897 residential building permits were issued, of which 640
or 71% were for single-family residential dwelling units. The
annual value of residential construction has remained fairly
constant, with a high value of $8,499,300 in 1987 and a low of
$7,485,070 in 1988.
I-9

TABLE 6
TOWN OF EMERALD ISLE
LINO Building Permits Survey Report for Permit
Issuing Place
Coverage notes for Carteret County: All of the land area in the county has been completely covered by
building permit system(s) since
1983. Carteret County Unincorporated Area - Permit system also covers Beaufort and Cape Carteret (December 1982).
1Nbrehead City -
Permit system also covers a 1-mile radius beyond
the town limits.
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
Total
Number Months Reported
12
12
12
12
12
60
Number of Units:
One Family Residential
146
143
143
109
99
640
Two Family Residential
50
30
0
0
0
80
Three -Four Family Residential
16
0
8
28
0
52
Five or More Family Residential
120
0
5
0
0
125
Total Residential
332
173
156
137
99
897
Building Cost:
One Family Residential
$ 8,194,191
8,105,914
8,499,300
7,485,070
7,794,510
40,078,985
Two Family Residential
$ 2,754,327
1,502,626
0
0
0
4,256,953
Three -Four Family Residential
$ 1,494,500
0
746,000
1,492,000
0
3,732,500
Five or More Family Residential
$ 5,030,000
0
205,100
0
0
5,235,100
Total Residential
$17,473,018
9,608,540
9,450,400
8,977,070
7,794,510
53,303,538
Permits:
Residential Additions & Alterations
15
27
31
15
11
99
Cost
$ 195,530
413,870
196,670
207,460
260,040
1,273,570
Number of Roams:
Hotels, Motels, etc.
9
0
77
0
0
86
Other Non -Housekeeping Shelter
0
0
0
0
0
0
Cost:
Hotels, Motels, etc.
$ 97,568
0
4,659,298
0
0
4,756,866
H Other Non -Housekeeping Shelter
$ 0
0
0
0
0
0
Demolition Permits:
Residential
0
0
0
0
0
0
Nonresidential
0
0
0
0
0
Number of Buildings:
Amusement & Recreation
1
1
2
0
0
4
Churches & Religious
0
0
0
0
0
0
Industrial
0
0
0
0
0
0
Parking Garages
0
0
0
0
0
0
Residential Garages
4
4
15
10
1
34
Service Stations
0
0
0
0
0
0
Hospitals & Institutional
0
0
0
0
0
0
Office, Bank, and Professional
1
6
0.
0
0
7
Public Work and Utility
0
1
1
0
0
2
School & Educational
0
0
0
0
0
0
Stores and Other Mercantile Buildings
4
1
2
0
1
8
Other Nonresidential
2
1
8
1
2
14
Number of Non -Building Structures
0
0
2
2
0
4
Building Cost:
Amusement & Recreation
$ 87,200
49,500
204,000
0
0
340,700
Churches & Religious
$ 0
0
0
0
0
0
Industrial
$ 0
0
0
0
0
0
Parking Garages
$ 0
0
0
0
0
0
Residential Garages
$ 21,952
18,810
101,990
26,630
14,900
184,282
Service Stations
$ 0
0
0
0
0
0
Hospitals and Instutitional
$ 0
0
0
0
0
0
Office, Bank, and Professional
$ 46,000
559,960
0
0
0
605,960
Public Work and Utility
$ 0
5,440
5,000
0
0
10,440
School & Educational
$ 0
0
0
0
0
0
Stores and Other Mercantile Buildings
$ 622,000
272,000
4,486,200
0
240,000
5,620,200
Other Nonresidential
$ 18,096
2,800
38,600
1,600
31,300
92,396
Non -Building Structures
$ 0
0
50,000
48,500
0
98,500
Nonresidential Additions & Alterations
6
11
6
2
0
25
Cost
$ 17,432
75,460
17,000
94,200
0
204,092

1
A
171
11
1
Housing tenure and vacancy statistics have changed little
since 1970, as indicated by Table 7.
Item
Table 7
Emerald Isle Housing Summary
Tenure and Vacancy
1970, 1980, and 1990
1970 1980 1990 *
Total Units
304
2,433
4,569
Total Year -Round Units
76
610
1,142
Occupied Units
50
402
874
Renter
7
88
126
Owner -occupied
43
314
748
Vacant Units
26
208
268
For Sale
-
58
-
'For Rent
-
88
-
Seasonal Units
228
1,823
3,427
Source: 1970 and 1980 U. S. Census
*Estimate by T. Dale Holland Consulting Planners.
Detailed statistics for housing conditions in 1990 were not
available. However, the Emerald Isle housing stock is very young,
with the majority of the units having been constructed since 1950.
Only 19 units were constructed prior to 1950. Table 8 provides a
summary of housing conditions based on the 1980 census. While not
current, this data does provide an indication of the quality of
the Emerald Isle housing stock.
1

Table 8
Emerald Isle
1980 Housing Conditions
Condition and Age Number
Total Year -Round Units 1,261 (100%)
Age
0-4 yrs.
459
(36.4%)
5-9 yrs.
528
(41.9%)
10-19 yrs.
215
(17.1%)
20-29 yrs.
40
( 3.1%)
30-39 yrs.
17
( 1.3%)
40 yrs. and older
2
( .2%)
Condition
Lacking complete bathroom facilities
6
( .5%)
Lacking complete kitchen facilities
7
( .6%)
Lacking central heating equipment
6
( .5%)
Type
Total Year -Round Units
1,261
(100%)
Single
family, detached
479
(38.0%)
Single
family, attached
6
( .5%)
Duplex
158
(12.5%)
3- and
4-unit
9
( .7%)
5-unit
or more
9
( .7%)
Mobile
home
600
(47.6%)
Source: 1980 U. S. Census
Table 8 data indicates virtually no substandard housing in
Emerald Isle. A large portion, 47.6%, of the housing stock is
mobile homes. However, this percentage is not necessarily high
for a beach community. Many of the mobile homes situated on
single-family lots have been secured on -foundations and
"added -on -to" so as to have the appearance of permanent
structures.
The mixture of housing types had changed slightly by 1990. A
field count of dwelling units in October, 1990, indicated
approximately 1,041 mobile homes and 907 multi -family units.
Thus, the percentage of mobile homes had decreased from 24.6% to
22.7% in 1990. Many of these mobile home units are seasonally
occupied and located in mobile home camp/parks. The multi -family
units had increased from 176 units (7%) in 1980 to 907 units
(19.9%) in 1990. The multi -family increase was primarily in
seasonal units, indicating Emerald Isle's attractiveness as a
recreation/tourist center.
I-12

3. Summary
The following provides a summary of significant demographic
and housing findings:
-- Since 1970, Emerald Isle has experienced a huge population
increase, 1, 8 95 % .
-- Since 1970, Emerald Isle's population over 55 years old has
increased significantly from 18% to 28%.
-- Less than 2% of Emerald Isle's population is minority.
-- Emerald Isle experienced a 1,503% increase in its total
residential units for 1970 to 1990.
-- Since 1985, 897 residential building permits were issued,
of which 640, or 71%, were for single-family dwelling
units.
-- Emerald Isle has virtually no -substandard housing.
1
1
1
1
1

Pi
C. ECONOMY I
Emerald Isle appears to have an extremely strong local economy.
Based on 1980 census data (the most current detailed economic
data), only 4%, or 17, of those people actively in the labor force
were unemployed. There were 771 people of age for inclusion in
the labor force. Of that total, 345, or 44.7%, were not active in
the labor force. They were either disabled, retired by choice, or
females not working. Additional labor force data is provided in
Table 9.
Table 9
Town of Emerald Isle
Labor Force Status - 1980
Total: Male
Labor Force
Female Total
Armed Forces 25
0 25
Civilian Labor Force:
Employed 244
140 384
Unemployed 8
9 17
Not in Labor Force 125
220 345
Total 402
369 771
White:
Labor Force
Armed Forces 25
0 25
Civilian Labor Force:
Employed 242
140 382
Unemployed 8
8 16
Not in Labor Force 125
215 340
In 1979, the town's population had a per capita
income of $9,038.
This was well above the per capita income levels
for both the
state and Carteret County. By 1987, the town's
per capita income
had increased to $15,390. Table 10 provides additional income
data.
Table 10
Per Capita Income, 1979-1985,
Emerald Isle, Carteret County, North Carolina
1979
1987
Town of Emerald Isle $9,038
$15,390
Carteret County $6,146
$ 9,296
North Carolina $6,132
$ 91517
Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, City and County Data
Book, 1988
Emerald Isle's relatively high per capita income is concentrated
in the sales and services industries. In fact,
over 46% of the
town's employed persons worked in retail/wholesale
trade, finance,
real estate, education, or other professional services.
Retail
trade was the largest employment category with
21.1% of the town's
total employed. Table 11 provides detailed data
for employment by
industry.
I-14

I
1
11
1
I
1
Table 11
Employed Persons 16 Years and Older by Industry
Town of Emerald Isle, 198.0
Occupation
Agriculture, forestry, fisheries, mining*
Construction
Manufacturing:
Nondurable goods
Durable goods
Transportation
Communication, other public utilities
Wholesale trade
Retail trade
Finance, insurance, and real estate
Business and repair services
Personal, entertainment, and recreational services
Professional and related services:
Health services
Educational services
Other professional and related services
Public administration
Number
Employed
23 ( 6.0%)
43 (11.2%)
14 ( 3.6%)
26 ( 6.8%)
7 ( 1.8%)
9 ( 2.3%)
2 ( .5%)
81 (21.1%)
38 (10.0%)
3 ( .8%)
23 ( 6.0%)
8 ( 2.0%)
45 (11.7%)
8 ( 2.1%)
54 (14.1%)
TOTAL EMPLOYED 384 (100%)
Source: N.C. State Data Center, 1980 U.S. Census Tape File 3A
*While these are grouped together, this category is primarily
limited to fisheries employment within Emerald Isle.
The Emerald Isle labor force had heavy dependence on government
employment: A total of 109, or 28%, of those employed were
employed in either federal, state or local jobs. This distribu-
tion tends to add stability to local employment and income. Table
12 provides a complete distribution of employment by'class of
worker.
Table 12
Employment by Class of Worker
Town of Emerald Isle, 1980
Private Wage and Salary Worker 195
Federal Government Worker 38
State Government Worker 42
Local Government Worker 29
Self -Employed Worker 75
Unpaid Family Worker 5
384

Because of the strength of Emerald Isle's local economy and
employment, the town has few people considered to be below the
poverty level. In 1980, approximately 7% of the town's population
was below poverty level. Over 69% of the town's population had
incomes 200% of the poverty level and above. Table 13 provides
detailed 1980 poverty level data.
Table 13
Poverty Status
Town of Emerald Isle, 1980
Income Level Individuals
Income below 75% of poverty level 36 ( 4.2%)
Income between 75 and 124% of poverty level 53 ( 6.1%)
Income between 125 and 149% of poverty level 64 ( 7.4%)
Income between 150 and 199% of poverty level 109 (12.6%)
Income 200% of poverty level and above 603 (69.7%)
Total enumerated by poverty status 865 (100%)
Source: N.C. State Data Center, 1980 U.S. Census Tape File 3A
In addition to the private economy, the Town of Emerald Isle has
an economically sound local government. Table 14 provides a
summary of Emerald Isle's revenues/expenditures for 1984 through
1989. Town revenues have steadily increased and have, except for
1989, exceeded expenditures. Except for 1987, the town did not
have any deficit service expenditures.
Tourism and recreation are major factors in Emerald Isle's econ-
omy. The area's extensive shoreline resources make it a primary
vacation area for the entire east coast of the country. While the
greatest tourist impact on the local economy occurs from May to
September, visitation figures maintained for the county by the
Carteret County Economic Development Council indicate a substan-
tial year-round economic impact from both day and overnight visi-
tors. Restaurants and motels, sport fishing, retail trade, serv-
ices, construction, real estate, and finance industries all bene-
fit from overnight and day visitors.
While tourism employment figures are not available for Emerald
Isle, it is estimated by the N.C. Division of Travel and Tourism
that in 1986, approximately 19.8% of Carteret County's employed
work force was directly or indirectly employed as a result of
tourism activities. .
1
1

M so MVP
mum
TABLE 14
TOfnEQ OF EMERALD ISLE
-Revenues/Expenditures, 1984-1989
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
Total Revenues (000s) $
1,143
1,224
1,410
1,556
1,526
1,707
Ad Valorem Tax Revenues
569,833
602,983
727,851
794,076
702,811
735,340
Local Option Sales Tax Revenues
151,757
224,529
238,558
321,763
392,652
433,229
Other Tax Revenues
29,100
36,902
39,884
53,010
54,738
49,320
Federal Intergovernmental Revenues
25,957
26,713
32,856
15,242
0
0
State Intergovernmental Revenues
128,983
147,248
159,811
194,578
221,412
148,190
Local Intergovernmental Revenues
0
0
0
0
0
102,054
Permits and Fees Revenues
1251938
109,389
98,651
113,842
50,725
89,603
Sales and Services Revenues
0
5,487
0
3,155
0
2,085
Utility Revenues
0
0
0
0
0
0
Miscellaneous Revenues
111,366
70,485
88,111
60,657
104,053
147,565
Other Financing Sources
0
0
24,010
0
0
0
Total Expenditures (000s)
1,028
1,107
1,175
1,346
1,473
2,443
General Government Expenditures
135,597
627,168
517,896
572,095
418,165
1,108,410
Public Safety Expenditures
421,991
351,639
417,050
519,168
649,347
1,003,320
Transportation Expenditures
279,127
127,878
239,953
198,244
212,163
84,877
Environmental Protection Expenditures
93,813
0
0
0
193,010
203,323
Economic & Physical Development Expenditures
3,426
0
0
0
0
4,965
Human Services Expenditures
0
0
0
0
0
0
H Culture and Recreation Expenditures
7,534
0
0
0
0
26,276
«� Utility Expenditures
0
0
0
0
0
0
-4 Debt Service Expenditures
0
0
0
56,711
0
0
Nondepartmental Expenditures
0
0
0
11,427
Social Services Intergovernmental Expenditures
Public School Intergovernmental Expenditures
Community College Intergovernmental Expenditures
Other Intergovernmental Expenditures
0
0
0
0
0
0
Total Property Valuation (000s)
198,748
236,547
259,770
292,591
288,467
Personal Property Valuation (000s)•
12,418
21,159
19,059
15,733
14,692
Real Property Valuation (000s)
221,276
235,489
269,844
268,888
567,564
Tax Rate
$.30/$100
$.30/$100
$.30/$100
$.25/$100
$.25/$100
$.21% /$100
Valuation
Valuation
Valuation
Valuation
Valuation
Valuation
Year of Latest Revaluation

The following provides a summary of significant economic data:
-- Emerald Isle has an extremely low rate of unemployment.
-- The town's per capita income is well above that of both
the state and the county.
-- The town's labor force is primarily employed in service
related jobs with a heavy dependence on federal, state,
and local government employment.
-- The Town of Emerald Isle appears to have a financially
stable local government.
-- Tourism is a major factor in the strength of Emerald
Isle's local economy.
1
1
1

D. EXISTING LAND USE
1. Introduction
Land subdivision within Emerald Isle has an interesting
history. Prior to the town's 1957 incorporation, property owners
agreed to divide the town into fifty-four (54) 1,100 foot wide
blocks, each of which extended from the ocean to the sound. The
blocks were numbered consecutively from east to west. The first
development was residential and it occurred in Block 1 on the
eastern end of the town. This was the first development because
the town's sole vehicular access was by the Morehead City -Atlantic
Beach Bridge and Salterpath Road (N. C. 58). Residential develop-
ment then spread slowly westward.
In 1962, ferry service was established to the western end of
Bogue Banks in Block 38. This was a major stimulant to growth,
and development proceeded at a much faster pace. Residential
development continued to be the primary land use. A heavy influx
of mobile homes occurred, especially near the ferry terminal. In
the mid to late 160s, commercial development began to occur along
U. S. 58 in the Block Drive to Holly Street area.
In 1971, the Cameron Langston Bridge was opened and easy
vehicular access to both the east and west ends of the town was
established. By the early 1970s, residential development had
spread to the western end of the town at Bogue Inlet in Blocks 52
and 53.
The original "block" division of Emerald Isle continues to
have a strong influence on the appearance of the Emerald Isle
landscape. Many subdivisions, commercial, and multi -family
developments have their east and west boundaries defined by the
original block boundaries. Many local people refer to the
locations of landmarks or developments by the number of the block
in which they are located. In most cases, the town's remaining
vacant land is easily defined by block boundaries. For example,
Block 47 remains completely vacant.
Since the early 1970s, development in Emerald Isle has rapidly
accelerated. However, the types of land use have remained limited
to commercial, single-family residential, multi -family residen-
tial, and mobile home parks or campgrounds. The overall appear-
ance of the town is one of low density development with, except
for the commercial areas, a quiet single-family residential
atmosphere. It should be noted that Emerald Isle does not have
any extraterritorial planning jurisdiction.
2. Urban and Developed Land
Table 15 provides a summary of existing land use by developed
and vacant categories. A comparison of changes from 1985 to 1990
is provided. The developed land dominates in Emerald Isle with

.
r
2,378.8 acres, or 71% of
the town's land area;
being classified as
developed in 1990. Overall, from 1985 to 1990,
there was an
increase of 671.acres in
developed.land area.
The result was that
by 1990 approximately 293
acres of developable
land remained
uncommitted to development. That is, subdivision plats or other
specific development proposals had not been approved by the town
for those vacant lands.
In addition, development of this land
would be subject to septic
tank permit approvals. An additional
665 acres of vacant land
remained which was considered to include
areas of environmental concern,
and therefore not available for
development.
Town
Table 15
of Emerald Isle
Land Use By Acreage
Change
%
1985 in Acres-
1990 Change
Residential
Mobile Home Park
130.65 --
130.65 --
Single Family
1,272.7 +430.5
1,703.2 + 33.8%
Multi Family
27.6 + 31.8
59.4 +115%
Residential
Transitional
167.3 +156.4
323.8 + 93%
Total Residential
1,598.25 +618.7
2,217.05
Non -Residential
Commercial
66.55 + 52.3
118.85 + 79%
Public/Semi-public
38.5 --
38.5 --
Utilities,
Communications
4.4 --
4.4 --
Approximate Areas of
Environmental Concern
(does not include
maritime forests)
665.5 --
665.5 --
Vacant
964.5 -671.1
293.4 - 70%
Total Non -Residential
1,739.45
11,120.65
TOTAL
3,337.7
3,337.7
I-20
r

a) Residential
Residential land use is the dominant land use in Emerald
Isle and has been the fastest growing land use throughout the
town's history. Growth was strong from 1985 to 1990, with a total
increase in residential acreage of approximately 618 acres. Most
of that growth was in single-family residential development which
had an increase of 430 acres. The existing land use is shown on
Maps 1A, 1B and 1C.
From 1985 to 1990, a total of 603 residential units were
completed at an average residential density of .71 dwelling units
per acre. In 1985, the average density for the entire town was
.48 dwelling units per acre. Thus, it appears that the trend is
toward decreasing residential density. This trend is supported by
increasing lot sizes in the newer subdivisions such as Emerald
Landing (Block 40), Osprey Ridge (Block 43), Bogue Landing (Block
44), Cape Emerald (Block 45), and Royal Oaks and Dolphin Ridge
(Block 46): In all of these subdivisions, the lots are normally
12,500 square feet or larger. The average residential density is
less in the western one-fourth of Emerald Isle than in the rest of
the town. The highest residential densities occur in the multi-
family and the mobile home zones. Most of the multi -family devel-
opment is concentrated on the southern end of Blocks 42, 40, and
13. The mobile homes are concentrated in Blocks 36, 37, and 42.
Their locations are indicated by a "dot" shading pattern on the
existing land.use map. In the blocks having the "oldest" residen-
tial development, Blocks 1 through 10, the average residential
density is approximately .45 acre per dwelling unit..
As stated in the housing section, Emerald Isle's housing
stock is extremely young. Most development has occurred during
the 170s and 180s under the influence of both state and local land
use controls. As a result, development has progressed in a more
orderly manner than it has in many older North Carolina coastal
communities. However, some problems do persist with residential
development. Many residential areas continue to experience severe
storm drainage problems. The locations of the storm drainage
problem areas are discussed in the public facilities section of
this plan. There have been some concerns expressed over conflicts
between shoreline access areas and the adjacent residential land
uses. Many of these concerns have focused on the provision of
parking for the access areas. The shoreline access area locations
and facilities are described in the public facilities section of
the plan.
As residential development has continued, there have been
intrusions of development into maritime forest areas. This has
been particularly evident in: Block 46 on both sides of Coast
Guard Road; Blocks 44 and 43 on the north side of Coast Guard
Road; and Blocks 39, 40 and 41 on the north side of U.S. 58.
(Refer to the Areas of Environmental Concern Map 8.) Neither the
Town of Emerald Isle nor the Coastal Resources Commission have
developed clear policies to deal with controls for the development
of maritime forest areas. However, at its December, 1990, meet-
ing, the Coastal Resources Commission decided to give the local
I-21

m ango ra m m m m m r "no Mao m m��
r
x
u r-
A • D� rn .; •...�•••. ,
0 0 0 mo .. . `� • • .
m
o
AD
• .,,.•• •oft � ;� :..
Z 0
ti O
glQisga ��� ''ti••
slain
ye � • 41
M '
0. 2 O p •• ••••••• • • '•'
^'n �np ow '--�—_--__��..._-, •�••^' u'r /na'wvr ,•tip•..
o
.•.•� �•a !��
Irs
Rl`2+c'24 •1.30
_ 1.17 SIT cci c
m to m
rr� t
sp
• ,raj, .•�.• 2
C71—
O 0
�8
10
�uN,.a. • ... • 1
• i • L O
ihw
8 7 Atarcry

i
a
1
• MI
If M/ I
IIIMI
V
M einw
•
�w MqM
•w Ilr.f
R
V
I w.LVI
�
.wnn
•
•
•w low
'1
•
w lr.r.
Q
v
°
O
0
h
N
v
o
O
�
Q
G
0
G
O
0
�4
0
ti
O
o
�
o
0
O
s�1►af�it
Ej3Ra��
:sE�9.�11

N
4000UIC
s0uNo L
•
_� •I I 1 t
I I t
� I
i
1
�i (
,
I
Allow
-'
• • •
t•
.. r ° Yoss lei
••••iQIiR!
_ t •
.��
t t.
t
MOW Mme
t
'
•
• ��'
• •• •• • •�• as
- • • •
s_1
�
••
`•
N•
• �
•.••
�
�
•
••
•: •• ••
•
t
• :
•
•
YosiLti
•
•
MQIEiAmami
•N•
W 9
••••
• •
•
••••••
• • •
••••••w•
•• • •••
•
•
N••
• ••
••
•
•;•• Y•• •••••.a.w•••
t:•t 1 =
.••. �••�•
' �'M�•�•tl N•1• •� • '
_.
.r�-�� •firw
no
•••�•••�
••w«•
•••••
•••••••
N1N••
••.•••
••
••••••
•••••.
•«••••
••••••
• ••
•••
••••• ••N ••
N••
w•••• • •
•«.•
•
AP ( Ar ! p ( ,. j ,.
A
( , . 1 Al ( J,I
,
t I !
A TL .4NT/C
MW of this M o .as fbwKod
O CEAN
A, port ttroegh d grad t>alwod by the
NWM CWG&W Caasmt Mssa9W—d
LEGcM
pfogrWL through funds pranasd by the
- • REsvENnAL UNMS)
Co," Zooms Mom9emad Ad of 1972
as a.a , ♦ryC1f Ls GowAwerld by Ihs
COMMUCSAL
oftim of Ocsm and Coasral Rosourm
MOBILE MOW cowmapATM"
Mmeganrarrt. Nakano Ocsarc and
ptegspnsrw Awnwestrutioa
COASTAL WETLAM
1 - 34 BLDOC towdem
T O W N
O F
ENE'R.4 L 0
/ S L E
-
/990
ZUSTiMG LAND USE
woo
50 o
590_ 1000 1500_ _ 2500
I" =
500'
NAP 1C
I-24

units of government time to deal with the maritime forest issue at
the local level. Under some conditions, development may be
compatible with maritime forest areas. The policies section of
this plan will define the town's position on maritime forest
areas. The town supports the concept that the maritime forest
development guidelines should be dictated at the local level.
Septic tank usage continues to be a problem. Many of the
soils in Emerald Isle are considered to have moderate to severe
limitations for septic tank usage. Residential sewage disposal
problems will not abate until central sewage collection and dis-
posal is provided. Continued residential development will inten-
sify the need for central sewer service.
Many residential areas are subject to flooding resulting
from storm drainage problems. These areas are identified and
discussed in the public facilities section of the plan.
Finally, residential usage is subjected to regular over-
flights by aircraft operating out of Bogue Field. This problem is
discussed in detail in the manmade hazards section of the plan.
However, residential development located primarily in Blocks 27 to
38 is regularly subjected to aircraft overflights which raise
impacts adverse to normal residential usage. Map 2 provides a
general delineation of the primary overflight areas.
Ample space is available for continued residential devel-
opment. In 1990, 2,720 acres were zoned for residential develop-
ment and 60 acres for multi -family development, including mobile
home campgrounds. Approximately 1,762 acres are developed. Thus,
960 acres of residentially zoned land remains for development.
One-third of the vacant land, 323 acres, have been subdivided for
single-family residential development and are classified as resi-
dential transitional. At an average density of .60 dwelling units
per acre, the available vacant land will accommodate an additional
1,600 dwelling units.
b) Commercial
In 1985, approximately 66 acres had been developed for
commercial usage. This included over 17 acres of B-3 commercial
recreational campgrounds. By 1990, the commercial usage had
increased to almost 119 acres. A substantial portion of the
increase was the result of the development of the Emerald
Plantation shopping center. The remaining increase was the result
of the construction of retail stores, offices, and restaurants
along N.C. 58, primarily in Blocks 42, 41 and 40.
The town adopted a Stormwater Control Ordinance in July,
1989, which imposed specific stormwater controls on commercial
development. However, all commercial development occurring from
1985 to 1990 took place prior to the addition of stormwater
regulations to the town's Zoning Ordinance.
1 I-25

MAP 2 The preparation of this map was
financed in part through a grant
provided by the North Carolina
NOISE IMPACTS 80GUEFIELO Coastal Management Program, through
funds provided by the Coastal Zone
AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS Management Act of 1972, as amended,
* which is administered by the Office
NOTE: Numbers 60, 65, 70, of Ocean and Coastal Resources
75 and 80 indicate IDN day/ni Management, National Oceanic and
noise levels which are explain Atmospheric Administration.
in the manmade hazards section
of this plan. 60
This map provides only general dD
delineation of the LDN noise level
areas. Refer to page I-63 for
detailed definitions of the LDN
areas.
1500 6000
0 3000 9000
SCALE FEET
CAPE 1
CARTERET
EMERALD ISLE
to
so
75
70
60
7
0

The overall appearance of the town's commercial develop-
ment is good. The town's Zoning Ordinance has stringent sign
regulations that prohibit temporary signs, flashing signs, and
moving signs. In addition, sign size regulations are fairly
restrictive. For example, in the town's B-1 zoning district, the
maximum free-standing identification sign size is 60 square feet.
The B-2 and B-3 districts have maximum free-standing sign sizes of
80 and 100 square feet, respectively. These controls have helped
to minimize the impact of commercial development on non-commercial
areas and to reduce the appearance of strip commercial development
along N.C. 58.
In 1990, a total of 266 acres were zoned for commercial
development. Thus, approximately 147 acres of vacant commercially
zoned property remained for development. Of that total, over 90
acres were zoned B-3 and had special use permits issued for camp-
ground or travel trailer park development. A residual of approxi-
mately 57 vacant acres of property remained which was zoned for
commercial development. The majority of this land was located in
scattered sites along N.C. 58 in Blocks 37 through 41.
One commercial marina exists in Emerald Isle. The marina
property is zoned for business and is located on Bogue Sound in
Block 38. The issue of marina expansion and/or additional marinas
has been extensively discussed. Existing Emerald Isle zoning,
CAMA regulations, and ORW regulations will make the permitting and
development of additional marinas extremely difficult to
accomplish.
Several problems exist within the commercially developed
areas. First, there is a belief by some Emerald Isle residents
and/or property owners that additional commercial development
should not be allowed. This issue is one which is addressed in
the Policy Section of this plan, page V-12. The percentage of
land committed to commercial usage varies greatly. However,
Emerald Isle has 266 acres, less than 8 percent of its total area,
zoned for commercial development. A total of 110 acres of the
commercial land is committed to campground development. Thus, 156
acres, or less than 5 percent of the town's land area, is zoned
for retail, office, or service commercial uses. By almost any
comparison with other coastal communities, this is a very
conservative amount of land area committed to commercial
development.
A second concern associated with commercial development is
traffic control and congestion on U.S. 58 in the commercially
developed areas. Stop lights were installed in 1988 at the inter-
section of U.S. 58 with Bogue Inlet Drive and Loon Drive. Some
sentiment exists that these stop lights have simply added to the
commercial area traffic congestion and complicated turning move-
ments onto and off of N.C. 58. This problem is also addressed in
the Policy Section of the plan, page V-12.
I-27

The provision of parking at ocean access areas in commer-
cially developed or zoned areas has been a concern. The town's
previous policy (1985 Land Use Plan) on shoreline access parking
states that "whenever possible such public facilities [parking]
would be located within commercial zones to avoid potential con-
flicts. However, the town will continue to consider all other
areas for public access facilities when deemed appropriate pro-
vided such locations can meet certain site planning requirements
such as suitable vegetative buffers, etc." There is limited
vacant commercial land available which is suitably located or
sized for ocean shoreline access. In addition, the vacant commer-
cial land may be too expensive to be utilized for ocean access
parking.
c) Public/Semi-Public
There is limited public/semi-public land use in Emerald
'
Isle. Most of the land in this category is owned by the Town of
Emerald Isle, the U. S. Coast Guard, and the Chapel By The Sea
Church, and general recreational field property. There are no
significant problems associated with existing public/semi-public
land uses. The town's facilities are located at the Municipal.
Building complex on U.S. 58 and at the fire department substation
on the eastern end of town. These facilities include administra-
tive offices, police and fire facilities, maintenance facilities,
a small passive park, and tennis courts. In late February, 1991,
the town started construction of a three -building expansion of the
municipal complex. This will include a new fire station, public
works building, and community center.
The biggest deficiency in
that may exist public/semi-
public land use is the lack of year-round and organized recre-
ational opportunities that are available to the residents of
Emerald Isle. Recreational needs will be discussed -in the
community facilities section of the plan.
d) Utilities, Communications
The actual acreage, excluding roads, committed to the
transportation, utilities and communications category is only 4.4
acres. No apparent change has occurred since the 1985 Land Use
Plan was prepared. All of the acreage in this category is
utilized for electric and gas utility stations, the telephone
company field office and microwave tower, water supply towers, and
sewage treatment facilities.
While overhead power lines and utilities are not repre-
sented in the acreage total, these facilities should be a major
concern. In the event of a major hurricane, substantial damage
would occur. The town should investigate the options for
requiring destroyed overhead utilities to be replaced underground
following destructive storms.
I-28

While limited area is utilized for sewage treatment facil-
ities, the question of sewer service may be the greatest issue
facing Emerald Isle. The lack of central sewer service will limit
growth. However, failure to establish central sewer service may
lead to increasing ground and surface water pollution problems.
Policies defining the town's position on the provision of central
sewer service are included on page V-9.
e) Areas of Environmental Concern
There are 665.5 acres of Areas of Environmental Concern
(not including maritime forest areas). These are specifically
shown on the Areas of Environmental Concern Map and discussed in
detail in the section of the plan addressing fragile areas.
3. Summary
Emerald Isle's planning efforts have had a favorable impact on
growth and development. This is reflected by the town's overall
positive appearance and the low density of residential
development. However, the following summarizes the land use
related issues which should be addressed by the town:
-- Residential development and/or land subdivision has
occurred in most of the town's maritime forest areas. The
town does not have policies dealing with development in
maritime forest areas.
-- Some residential areas are affected by overflights and
noise from aircraft operating out of Bogue Field.
-- Septic tank usage and the need to develop central sewer
service continued to be an issue. Many soils in Emerald
Isle are considered to have moderate to severe limitations
for septic tank usage.
-- Questions exist concerning the proper placement of parking
facilities to provide shoreline access parking for both
day visitors and residents.
-- Flooding occurs in many areas of town resulting from
stormwater runoff problems.
-- Traffic congestion problems on U.S. 58 in the commercial
areas continue to exist during peak population periods.
-- Policies concerning continued commercial development
should be developed.
-- More specific policies addressing marina development would
help clarify the town's position on marina construction.
-- Year-round recreational needs should be defined and
addressed by the town.
I-29

4. Development Potential
There is great potential for development in Emerald Isle.
However, the issue of continued septic tank usage versus central
sewer service must be addressed. As stated earlier, continued
reliance on septic tanks and some package treatment plants will
curtail the density of development. This is a decision on growth
policy that must be made by the Town of Emerald Isle.
The following circumstances exist which should stimulate
growth:
-- Approximately 1,600 additional dwelling units may be
constructed in Emerald Isle.
-- While the ORW regulations in Bogue Sound and 575 feet
landward of MHW do impose some development restrictions,
the regulations serve to protect a valuable natural
resource and tourist attraction.
-- A Storm Drainage Management plan was adopted in 1989 which
should, if implemented, lead to a reduction in flooding
resulting from inadequate stormwater drainage.
-- Growth within Carteret County has been strong -- 84%
population growth since 1960. In fact, from 1970-87,
Carteret County was the fourth fastest growing CAMA-
regulated county, and from 1980-87, it was the fifth
fastest growing county within the state.
-- Since 1970, Emerald Isle has been the fastest growing town ,
in Carteret County.
-- Emerald Islets natural attractiveness and outdoor recre-
ational opportunities are strong stimulants for growth.
-- Emerald Isle has a strong and expanding retirement
population.
-- Emerald Isle has a fiscally sound local government.
-- The Emerald Isle ocean shoreline has been one of the least
susceptible to storm damage on the North Carolina coast.
5. Existing Ordinances and Land Use Controls '
The Town of Emerald Isle has had an active land use management
program which is supported by a number of local codes, ordinances,
and plans. These are managed by the town's Board of Commissioners
and Planning Board with the administrative support of the town's
staff. The town does not have any extraterritorial jurisdiction.
However, the northern corporate limit line extends 1,200 feet into
Bogue Sound and parallels the Bogue Banks shoreline. Beyond this
corporate limit line, Carteret County has jurisdiction over the
waters and islands in Bogue Sound. The exact location of the
I-30 1

northern Emerald Isle corporate limit line must be verified
through in -field analysis and verification. Because of map size
and scale and the dynamic nature of the shoreline, the northern
corporate limit line cannot be accurately mapped in this plan.
a) Emerald Isle Coastal Area Management Act Land Use
Plan Update, January 23, 1987
Through its participation in the Coastal Area Management
Act planning program, the town maintains a current Land Use Plan.
The 1985 plan was prepared in conformance with the-15 NCAC 7B
planning guidelines which were in effect at the time. The plan
addressed existing land use, demographic data, and economic condi-
tions. Forecasts through a ten-year planning period were made.
Policy statements are included which address the following subject
areas: resource protection, resource production and management,
economic and community development, public participation, and
storm hazard mitigation planning.
Appendix I includes a summary of the policy statements
' that were included in the 1985 plan. The town believes that it
effectively implemented the majority of those policies. However,
the following defines the areas in which policy implementation
needs to be evaluated during development of the 1991 Land Use
Plan.
-- Policies addressing provision of central sewer service
ior continued reliance on septic tanks.
-- The intent of the town's marina policies have been
questioned and should be clarified.
-- The town did not accomplish adoption of a stormwater
management ordinance until 1989. It is too early to
assess its effectiveness.
i-- The town has not developed a thoroughfare plan, either
with or independent of Carteret County.
-- The policies dealing with shoreline access and the pro-
vision of parking for those areas need to be
clarified.
b) Zoning Ordinance
Emerald Isle has had a Zoning Ordinance in effect continu-
ously since the late 1950s. The current ordinance is a comprehen-
sive document which includes the tools necessary to regulate
growth and development. Current zones include the following:
SDistrict Purpose
Residential 1 (R1) A single family residential district
allowing a single family dwelling on a
lot.
Residential 2 (R2) A residential district allowing a
single family dwelling, or a two
family dwelling on a lot.
I-31

District Purpose I
Residential MF (RMF)
A residential district allowing a
single family dwelling, a two family
,
dwelling, or a multi -family dwelling
on a lot.
Residential MH (RMH)
A residential district allowing a
single family dwelling, a two family
dwelling, a multi -family dwelling, a
motel or hotel on a lot.
Mobile Home (MH)
A mobile home district allowing mobile
homes.
Institutional (Inst.)
A residential district allowing
institutional and office uses, not
including the sale of merchandise.
Business 1 (B-1)
A business district allowing a
moderate variety of retail trade.
(Ord. of 3/8/83) [The B 1 district is
slightly more restrictive than the B-2
district in uses allowed.]
'
Business 2 (B-2)
A business district allowing a
moderate variety of retail trade.
(Ord. of 3/8/83)
Business 3 (B-3)
A business district allowing a general
and wide variety of retail trade.
'
(Ord. of 3/8/83)
Camp (C)
A recreational district allowing
travel trailers, campers and tents.
Coastal Wetlands (CW)
An overlay district which may overlay
any of the zoning districts so estab-
lished as a part of this ordinance,
requiring that development within such
districts be consistent with the
Coastal Wetlands standards of the
North Carolina Coastal Area Management
-
Act of 1974 as amended. (Ord. of
3/10/79)
Estuarine Waters (EW)
An overlay district which may overlay
any of the zoning districts so estab-
lished as a part of this ordinance,
requiring that development within such
districts be consistent with the
Estuarine Waters standards of the
North Carolina Coastal Area Management
Act of 1974 as amended. (Ord. of
3/10/79)
I-32

District Purpose
Public Trust Areas An overlay district which may overlay
(PTA) any of the zoning -districts so estab-
lished as a part of this ordinance,
requiring that development within such
districts be consistent with the
Public Trust Areas standards of the
North Carolina Coastal Area Management
Act of 1974 as amended. (Ord. of
3/10/79)
Ocean Beaches (OB) An overlay district which may overlay
any of the zoning districts so estab-
lished as a part of this ordinance,
requiring that development within such
districts be consistent with the Ocean
Beaches standards of the North
Carolina Coastal Area Management Act
of 1974 as amended. (Ord. of
3/10/79)
Frontal Dunes (FD) An overlay district which may overlay
any of the zoning districts so estab-
lished as a part of this ordinance,
requiring that development within such
districts be consistent with the
Frontal Dunes standards of the North
Carolina Coastal Area Management Act
of 1974 as amended. (Ord. of
3/10/79)
Inlet Lands (IL) An overlay district which may overlay
any of the zoning districts so estab-
lished as a part of this ordinance,
requiring that development within such
districts be consistent with the Inlet
Lands standards of the North Carolina
Coastal Area Management.Act of 1974 as
amended. (Ord. of 3/10/79)
Ocean Erodible An overlay district which may overlay
Areas (OEA) any of the zoning districts so estab-
lished as a part of this ordinance,
requiring that development within such
districts be consistent with the Ocean
Erodible Areas standards of the North
Carolina Coastal Area Management Act
of 1974 as amended. (Ord. of
3/10/79)
For each district, the ordinance establishes yard, area,
height, or open space requirements.
I-33

c) Subdivision Ordinance
Emerald Isle first adopted a
March, 1974. The ordinance has been
periodically updated since then. The
purposes of the ordinance:
Subdivision Ordinance in
continuously maintained and
following are the stated
(1) To provide for economical and sufficient streets with
adequate widths and with proper alignment and grade;
(2) To provide space for safe and sanitary dwelling
accommodations within the corporate limits of the
town;
(3) To provide for suitable residential neighborhoods
with adequate streets and utilities and appropriate
building sites;
(4) To save unnecessary expenditure of public funds by
studying space and recommending from time to time the
purchase of such space for public lands and buildings
and by initial proper construction of streets and
utilities;
(5) To provide proper land records for the convenience of
the public and for better identification and
permanent location of real estate boundaries.
All land subdivisions within Emerald Isle must be
consistent with the ordinance.
d) Drainage Master Plan
In July, 1989, the Town of Emerald Isle adopted a Drainage
Master Plan. The plan is designed to provide a comprehensive,
rational drainage master plan for programming needed future
improvements to the town's existing drainage systems and for the
orderly development of new drainage systems in future areas of
development. The study deals with both piped systems and open
"natural" systems including canals and creeks within the town's
corporate area.
e) Stormwater Control Ordinance
In July, 1989, the town adopted the Emerald Isle Storm -
water Control Ordinance. The ordinance is based on and intended
to aid in the implementation of the town's Master Drainage Plan.
Stormwater runoff management requirements are included which are
intended to accomplish the following objectives as stated in the
ordinance:
1. Protect the absorptive, purifying and retentive func-
tions of natural systems including the unique inter-
dunal trough groundwater recharge areas that may exist
on the site of a proposed development at Emerald Isle;
and,
7�
Ll
�J
1
J
I-34
17
L

1
n
2. Provide for post -development stormwater runoff
characteristics that resemble the conditions that
existed before the site's alteration.
The Stormwater Control Ordinance is
to the unique characteristics of the Town of
The regulatory approach and the means that a
accomplish stormwater runoff control in the
greatly facilitate the creation of effective
where no controls presently exist and to mee
the Coastal Area Management Act.
designed to be adapted
Emerald Isle, NC.
re formulated to
ordinance should
controls in areas
t the requirements of
f) Dunes and Vegetation Protection Ordinance
In 1980, the town adopted the Dunes and Vegetation Protec-
tion Ordinance, Chapter 19, Article X, of the Emerald Isle Codifi-
cation. The following is the stated purpose of the ordinance:
" .. to preserve and promote the protection of
the sand dunes within the town by maintaining
the basic existence of natural or constructed
dunes and the vegetation thereon, so as to
protect the natural banks topography which
provides a protective barrier from the actions
of .sand, wind, and water. Flagrant destruc-
tion of existing topography and vegetation
greatly alters the maintenance and continuity
of the banks, increases problems of erosion,
and lessens the scenic and tax value of prop-
erty within the town."
The ordinance applies to all sand dunes, dune ridges, dune
systems (new and old), and the vegetation growing thereon. The
ordinance= -requires that 45% of the lot remain with vegetative
cover. However, many other requirements are included, and
affected property owners should carefully review the ordinance.
The ordinance was updated and readopted on August 13, 1991. This
plan and the policies contained herein are consistent with the
revised ordinance. Copies are available for review at the Emerald
Isle Municipal Building.
g) Emerald Isle Mobile Home Park and Travel Trailer Park
Ordinance
In March, 1976, the Emerald Isle Board of Commissioners
adopted the Emerald Isle Mobile Home Park and Travel Trailer Park
Ordinance. The ordinance is designed to regulate development and
use of mobile home and travel trailer parks within Emerald Isle.
h) Floodplain Development
The Town of Emerald Isle participates in the National
Flood Insurance Program and complies with all related regulatory
requirements. Development proposals and subdivision plats are
reviewed to ensure consistency with the flood insurance program.
' I-35

i) Building Code
The Town of Emerald Isle enforces the North Carolina State
Building Code.
j) Storm Hazard Mitigation and Post -Disaster
Reconstruction Plan
In June, 1984, the Town of Emerald Isle adopted a detailed
Storm Hazard Mitigation and Post -Disaster Reconstruction Plan.
The plan has satisfactorily served the town and will continue to
be utilized as the town's storm mitigation plan.
k) Emerald Isle Shoreline Access Plan
In 1988, Emerald isle adopted the Ocean and Sound Public
Access Plan. Preparation of the plan was financed in part with a
grant provided by the North Carolina Coastal Management Program.
The plan inventoried existing shoreline access areas and
recommended both new sites and improvements to existing
facilities.
I-36

E. DEVELOPMENT CONSTRAINTS: PUBLIC FACILITIES
' 1. Water Supply
The Town of Emerald Isle is supplied water by the Bogue Banks
' Water and Sewer Corporation, which also serves Indian Beach and
the unincorporated area of Salter Path. Water lines serving the
Emerald Isle area are shown on Maps 3A, 3B and 3C. These combined
areas are served by seven wells with a total capacity of 2,580
gpm. Water storage is provided by three reservoirs -- one 300,000
gallon, one 500,000 gallon, and one 1,000,000 gallon. According
to annual reports for 1989, the system served 3,262 residential
and 139 commercial meters (these figures are totals for all three
areas; no separate figure is available for Emerald Isle).
Water usage for 1989 ranged from0.285 million gallons per day
to a peak of 0.435 million gallons per day. The following
provides the system capacity by well..
' Well No./Capacity
1 / 300 gpm* 5 / 400 gpm
2 / 400 gpm 6 / 400 gpm
3 / 230 gpm 7 / 450 gpm
4 / 400 gpm Total 2,580 gpm
Water supply continues to be adequate to support Emerald.Isle;
the town has never experienced a water restriction situation while
being served by the Bogue Banks Water and Sewer Corporation.
2. Sewage Disposal
Emerald Isle does not have its own central sewage system.
Rather, -residences and businesses are served by either individual
septic tanks or package treatment plants. Table 16 provides a
list of private package treatment plants in Emerald Isle:
Table 16: Private Package Treatment and
Disposal Systems in Emerald Isle
' Design Flow
Name (gal/day) Type
Cape Emerald 50,000 Treatment Plant/Rotary Distributor
Pebble Beach_ 70,000 Treatment Plant/Rotary Distributor
Point Emerald Villas 52,950 Treatment Plant/Rotary Distributor
Queens Court 24,000 Treatment Plant/Rotary Distributor
Emerald Plantation 55,000 Treatment Plant/Low Pressure
Sound of the Sea 40,000 Treatment Plant/Rotary Distributor
Emerald Bay Villas 3,840 Treatment Plant/Low Pressure
Source: Draft Environmental Impact Statement, Carteret County
Wastewater Treatment and Disposal, McDavid Associates, Inc.;
North Carolina Department of Health and Natural Resources,
Division of Environmental Management, October, 1989;
Town of Emerald Isle staff.
' *gpm: gallons per minute.
I-37

.3tf7 N,71M
%ly hl 4.o rX
1
1Y{, Jr YJ)a� , � 1 I it JL..w •44
J rr ■■ rl • Ul
off t I Mr Yr purr • Z
, Ow
Zj
cr
tV
W
to
Ica
IZI
mw-
ANIAM
14
14
e
• Y �Y Y[
t t ■)w
;�..'r.' :.,iuwr-�oivm�ii s`�-_i•1888OdxoZ{r
1
;'::•'• tea, � — — — _ _ •
m Q
r �
�1
b
in
n

�r rr rr rr rr r rr rr r�.rr r� rr rr r r ■r rr rr rr
I-+
I
W
to
to
`E
VArCN ZAW
Pi
< n m
v :0 ;u
Oo=x [MLs2 plait ----
z Z Z
—1 m m
Y
4
ti
a fit
Z
ti
a=
a
8{je.'34 .
ggppi�;4
eMs�•#�
O �
n
a
A
o �{
- p
u
o rn
o ?< ----
cn
o —� _ O
a Z ZD
O ----
0
y
rn
o a
z p
m
N in
N
0
G A^
MAMLY/ ZAW
a
.s
w
m
O

aj oft a" was fWAnc*4
"I poewwod by The
N"fl, cwoam coossim ucmqenmm
=
I I'd Imods provided by the
Zmw Mongwmief Ad of 1972.
as A .. . Is adminWom4 by the
otfka of Ocsomi mW Caessd Rejowce
Maw"woorA. PWIMW OCs4rWC GOW
Atmospheric A4mWA@hvtlM
ro wN Oic' EMERA L V ISL E
S;rO,SW W.4rE,9,OR.4hVA6,F
ARVOUN AREAS
logo 54o 0 SRO 1000 1500 2500
500*
MAP 4C
I
I
ROGUE
SOUND..........
L
I
.
....
......
...
.....
.. .....
.........
...... ... ..
Q-
M
4r
.4 rZ .4,V r1C
0 c 4,14 IV
LEGM
2. DkAWAGE— BMIN
C=n MOM AMID (010A Mass ZRrM COUTAL WCTIJUICS
j. ZRM STLZ/DCLMNM MINOR AMM
3: CRC=W 2X:TVX (C=RA TAM TO PWT OMZM
O=W cam (STS M ins STXMM
s. Sam oxnz (POSIMICNIM To SEA aumm
s. sacm arx" nowIlls ZMLXT TO LZVX am
T. S® cm sarnown
g. CMUT CONVII JuSlill (23LAIIIII CZN'f
1-44

r r r r r r rr r r■ r ri rr r■ rr r r r ri �r
WMwN•f W
•O•fI IR
�� Ibl� •';•fMA c � MaMUY JR
Ar AM
at
11CGUi IMLLt fI4 --�__ rwlf PI[i M
1lur• ,.�
(f fAltp/
•nf JN I/i �
f1•I IR
Iflf p
41
�, .
Y.- .,
�• L IISfI p X%
• M 1! ` afej,�`la••
Op
del dr
w KMIv
14 r•f1 M.f f '
w �•w�n. u=a�+ �1 � � QQ�
Otto gWi
..YM Pf •i •1• M �i= — i
pgg
At
cr
1 ••
•3 Ico.fwr • •'•, �
I.1•. ••,•!•••
Q yy r_
V _7
1/ O
a 4
— — — _ ['I _
1✓ Ian• p � 9 `.
1
tint/ N til
O
v / O
• O
�-��
' l'• — — ��''� — — — O
8 fi ;;•,1., ••• G
IR A411gy Litif<'
a ./

tea?

Based on the Carteret County Draft Environmental Impact State-
ment for Wastewater Treatment and Disposal, centralized wastewater
disposal for Emerald Isle appears to be economically feasible only
as a part of a future county -wide system.
3. Drainage
In November, 1985, Emerald Isle experienced heavy rains which
caused severe flooding wherein some areas of town were inundated
for several days. The severity of the flooding problems prompted
the Town Board to have a Drainage Master Plan prepared which would
identify major problem areas and suggest recommendations for
solving or alleviating those problems. The Drainage Master Plan
was presented in August, 1987 (revised February, 1988) by Henry
von Oesen and Associates, Inc., with accompanying topographic maps
prepared by Landmark Engineering, Inc. The plan identified exist-
ing drainage structures, 191 drainage subbasins, interdunal trough
groundwater recharge areas, and prioritized recommendations for
eight major problem areas (presented in order of descending
priority) :
1.
Coast
Guard
Road (near Reed Drive)
2.
Sand
Castle/Doe/Deer Horn Area
3.
Ocean
Drive
(Cedar Tree to Matt Drive)
4.
Ocean
Drive
(Fifth to Eighteenth Streets)
5.
Sand
Castle
(Pinewood to Sea Dunes)
6.
Sound
Drive
(Bogue Inlet to Live Oak)
7.
Reed
Drive
(at Bayberry)
8.
Coast
Guard
Road (Island Circle)
The drainage problem areas are indicated on Maps 4A, 4B and
4C.
' Criteria for priority assignment was based on public safety,
property damage potential, impact on receiving waters, and public
nuisance factors. Recommended solutions included a combination of
such improvements as new ditch construction; raising of existing
roads; and installation of force mains, temporary disposal mains,
and storm drain pipes. The implementation schedule was suggested
at one or two, at the most three, projects per fiscal year. To
date, none of the proposed improvements have been designed or
constructed.
' In accordance with further suggestion in the master plan, the
town adopted a Stormwater Control Ordinance on July 12, 1989.
Briefly, the ordinance requires submittal of a stormwater manage-
ment plan for each major development which disturbs more than one
contiguous acre of land or for single residential lots containing
interdunal troughs.
4. Solid Waste Disposal
The town contracts with a private refuse collection firm for
solid waste disposal. Twice per week pick-up service is provided
for residences year-round, and three times per week service is
provided for businesses year-round.
I-41

we-
9" WATER LINE M yarl w6b"s . asom aw„eeo er In. % 0 W/�/ Q F EMERALD /SL E
A TL-.4 N T/C pnw `. tfw `°Nhe "`"'"""" OCEAN.
Prograw, tnrwgn Iwws aa..eoa a. ono
Ceotlr ton. MaMq"neM XI el 197t - I O
111� 6" wATER LINE os a.ew.a -ncn ,. oan.rsle..e a, 'he
• =!RE HYDRANT vgpegoffice elJetanone Oct aose EXISTING WATER LINES
flenoq.menl, tleiWn" Jce".c ana
Aknewme n: A4Mftsl tf".
MAP 3C IOQQ 200 0 500 1000 1500 2500
1" 2 500'
"MV1

1
1
1
I
i
I
1
1
Waste is disposed of in the Carteret County Landfill on Hibbs
Road. There is a 16-mile round trip to the landfill from Emerald
Isle. Barring any unforeseen major changes in federal or state
laws governing solid waste disposal, the county will have to
expand its existing landfill, or construct another landfill, by
the fall of 1991. The replacement landfill may be a regional
facility located in Craven County. Pamlico, Carteret, and Craven
counties will participate in the development of the facility. The
location of the facility and its anticipated life expectancy have
not yet been determined.
5. Schools
The Town of Emerald Isle is served by the Carteret County
school system. White Oak Elementary School, which serves kinder-
garten through 5th grade, is located across the B. Cameron
Langston Bridge approximately four miles away in Cape Carteret.
Grades 6 through 8 attend Broad Creek Middle School, about 15
miles away in Broad Creek. Ninth through twelfth graders attend
West Carteret High School in Morehead City, about 30 miles away.
Swansboro High School, part of the Onslow County school system, is
located approximately 15 miles from Emerald Isle. Because it is
closer, some residents pay to have their high schoolers attend
Swansboro High. White Oak Christian Academy, a private school, is
located in nearby Cape Carteret and serves grades kindergarten
through 12. The following provides a summary of 1990 school
enrollment versus capacity:
Enrollment
Over/Under
Capacity Capacity
White Oak Elementary School 567 750 -32%
Broad Creek Middle School 664 800 -20%
West Carteret High School 1,439 900 +37%
The following excerpt from the draft 1990 Carteret County Land
Use Plan describes the status of the county's school system:
"According to the Carteret County Board of Education,
capacity for each school in the county system is defined by
the state basic education plan, and can vary significantly
year to year by classroom and school. In general, all
county schools in the western part of the county* -- in
particular, Beaufort and Morehead Elementary and West
Carteret High -- are.currently overcrowded. While less
crowded than the western township schools, the schools
serving the eastern part of the county are also technically
at or over capacity according to strict classroom require-
ments included in the basic education plan.
*The western part of the county refers to all areas of Carteret County
to the west of a line connecting Adams Creek and the North River.
I-45

In response to the obvious need for expansion of the county
school system, the Carteret County Board of Education
adopted a 15-Year Long Range Facilities Plan in 1988. The
plan established ranges of desirable enrollments and out-
lined construction costs and schedules through the year
2003. Completed and/or ongoing components of the plan
include completion of Broad Creek Middle School, major
improvement projects at Beaufort and Morehead Middle
Schools, and Newport Elementary School, and purchase of
land for replacement of the Morehead Elementary School." '
Beyond the public school level, there are two community
colleges located in reasonably close proximity to Emerald Isle;
Carteret Community College in Morehead City, and the Coastal
Carolina Community College in Jacksonville.
6. Transportation
Generally, streets in Emerald Isle are in good condition.
There are a few unimproved roads, but they are not through
streets. Powell Bill funding figures indicate 42.506 miles of
surfaced roads in town. N.C. Highway 58 runs through town on an
east -west axis; this road is the only "major" thoroughfare in
Emerald Isle. The town is linked to the mainland over Bogue
Sound by B. Cameron Langston Bridge.
In April, 1990, the North Carolina Department of Transporta-
tion (NCDOT) prepared a preliminary thoroughfare plan for Carteret
County. Included in the plan were traffic counts and projections
for the bridge from Emerald Isle to Cape Carteret. (This was the
only N.C. 58 traffic count taken within Emerald Isle.) In 1986,
an actual count of 11,300 vehicles was taken on an average summer
weekday (this count was reported to be low, as on this particular
day there was a hurricane over the Atlantic Ocean causing
inclement weather for would-be beachgoers). Average summer
weekday was used for the model instead of average yearly or summer
weekend to avoid under or over -design. NCDOT staff has projected
40,000 vehicles for an average summer weekday in 2010. According
to these traffic projections, NCDOT is recommending that the
B. Cameron Langston Bridge be widened to four lanes over the next I
20 years.
7. Police Emerald Isle maintains a fully- staffed police department which
serves all areas within the town. The staff consists of 12 offi-
cers, including the police chief. Twelve patrol cars are main-
tained. The police department maintains training programs.
Police services are considered adequate to service the town's
needs. I
I-46 r

8. Fire
. The town operates a full-time fire department staffed by the
fire chief and nine fire fighters and volunteers. There are two
fire stations in town -- the main station located at the town hall
and a substation at the eastern end of town near the Emerald Isle
Pier. The department is equipped with three pumpers, one mini --
pumper, a staff truck, and a staff car. The department ISO rating
is six (6). Fire protection is considered adequate to serve
Emerald Isle's needs.
9. Emergency Services
The Emerald Isle Volunteer Rescue Squad provides ambulance
services for the town. Currently, the squad is staffed with 15
Emergency Medical Technicians and three trainees, and is equipped
with three ambulances, a four-wheel drive vehicle, and a motor
boat. The town considers these emergency services adequate to
meet the town's needs.
10. Recreation
In April, 1988, the Ocean and Sound Public Access Plan for
Emerald Isle was prepared by Planning South, Inc. The plan
identified 58 public street rights -of -way and 78 non -street
rights -of -way. Of the 58 public street rights -of -way, 40 are open
for access, 10 have crossovers, and all are signed. Fewer than 10
of the rights -of -way have a basic full complement of improvements
including street and water's edge signage, decks or crossovers,
safety lights, and trash cans. Public access points, both open
improved and open unimproved, are shown on Maps 5A, 5B and 5C.
Synopses of the existing ocean and sound accessway facilities are
found on the following page on Table 17.
I-47

TABLE 17
TOWN OF EMERAIU ISLE
I •:. �1 • D+1 LMOQOID ii I " @#100 V 10.
Acoessway
Type
Open to
Public
Cross-
overs
Decks
Docks
Handicapped
Accessible
Signed
Lighted
Off-
Street
Parking
Street
R/W
Non-
.Street
R/W
Paved
Easements
Local
83
29
—
—
—
83
14
—
30
74
—
3
Neighborhood
1
1
1
—
1
1
1
1
—
—
—
—
Regional
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
OCEAN
TOTALS
84
30
1
—
1
84
15
1
30
74
—
3
Accessway
Type
Opera to
Public
Cross-
overs
Decks
Docks
Handicapped
Accessible
Signed
Lighted
Off-
Street
Parking
Street
R/W
Non-
Street
R/W
Paved
Easements
Local
31
3
1
—
1
31
1
1
28
4
6
26
Neighborhood
1
—
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
—
1
—
Regional
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
SOUND
TOTALS
32
3
2
1
2
32
2
2
29
4
7
26
Source: Ocean and Sound Public Access Plan, Town of Emerald Isle, Planning South, Inc., 1988.
� � � wr �wr �■r � ar �s s■f �■�a � wr -ter �r■r r �. �

1
Nin O''nu O G i
j w :z $
1,:N� B g
tt
[•1 O � H t K Q
Big. NNO
fu cn "1 71 N
N
09
t'IN AN
Cy HA O ...
H N tno
N
•! N
0 N
A hl
.+y
lu N
Ny ,
•I"nw (, fir
Ln
1 .00 "� •
Ac
A"Ir 11.

The preparation of this map was financed
in part through a grant provided by the
North Carolina Coastal Management
Program, through funds provided by the
Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972.
as amended. which is administered by the
Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource
Management. National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration.
T O W N O F EOER.4 L O /S L E
O CCAVAW s04-W RUWx
14ccz"- S✓TES
logo S44 0 500 1000 1500 2500
I" = 500'
I I
� I � I i ' I • I / '
� t 1 I acre x I
I i I I J~ e..t ..r. •o.r
W amo
c..� � ..•.- =C .:..- - :•:._� '" ��' .-ram a.. ,
• r----L( r �r
r
? 1 I . &.e.
.osre rou. s.r
i 3 •; a it p fro I = la S E �� i t e i 1 • t I i I RS 1 ; t
a t. a 3 isT� : 1z d..�. �-• t a 1,•,
•war 1 yl'
� 1 R 1� t i Door lae I I 3 ' -I mrr a..i
1 t 1 �.Lit
.x I A`. ' 1 ' I
2; x
a 9 n 0 x
Z, t• ■ ■ ■ , I , Z? I t
,x I D ( Jr ( X X ' = ' X I d I JII ( I) X I !! I N t! I Jr ' 1V /!
v
.4 r4 ANT/C OCEAN
3 =
LFGc�VD
OPO 3611PROM
OPO UWAFIRav©
'* PARKM
1. BOARDWALK BY THE SEA (275+ SPACES)
2. EAST SEA VIEW AND BLOCK DRIVES (40 SPACES)
3. CEDAR STREET (7 SPACES)
4. OCZ1!L1 DRIVE BETWEEN 3RD AND 4TH STREETS (12 SPACES)
S. COMMERCIrU AREA SOUTH OF RATERS EDGE MOBILE HCME ?ARK
(50 SPACES)
6. :SL= HARBOR MARINA (75 SPACES)
7. rMFRALD :SLE P-r=R (74 SPACES)
I-50
N
C �

Eli
i
1
I
�
�
I
1
1
1
1
The preparation of this map was financed
in port 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.
TOWN O F f"W ER.4 L D I S L E
OCE" aW 504W to"ar.V
.4CC�S S✓TE.S'
iogo 590 O spo IOoo moo 2500
t" = 500'
MAP 5A
ROGUE SOUND
I j
I I I
i
4
u I s I I I I 1 I I
*7 1 I I I I 1 f I I
.4 TL ANT/C 0CE.4N
LEGEND
OPEN IMPROVED
OPEN UNIMPROVED
PARKING
1. BOARDWALK BY TEE SEA (275+ SPACES)
2. EAST SEA VIEW AND BLOCK DRIVES (40 SPACES)
3. CEDAR STREET (7 SPACES)
4. OCZ;6'4 DRIVE BE,AEEN 3RD AND 4TH STREETS (12 SPACES)
5 . CCMb!ERCIAL AREA SOUTH OF WATERS EDGE MOBI:. HOME PARK
(50 SPACES)
6. :SLe,.W HARBOR wARINA (75 SPACES)
7. EP4ERAL3 ISLE PIER (74 SPACES)
I-49

There are six privately owned recreational facilities in
Emerald Isle (five on the ocean side; one on the sound side).
Ocean -side facilities include:
-- pier, west of 25th Street
_=motel and pier, end of Bogue Inlet Drive
commercial/recreational facility, end of East View Street
Boardwalk by the Sea, Motel Drive (motel, showers, grille,
arcade, gift shop, parking)
-- Pages (surfers) parking lot
The facility on the sound includes the marina facility at Old
Ferry Road, with a fishing and boat supply concession, boat ramp,
docking facilities, and boat slips for rent.
There are three town -owned recreational facilities. One, a
beach accessway between 3rd and 4th Streets, includes parking for
12 automobiles, a bicycle rest, a treated wood handicap ramp to a
picnic table, and is lighted.' The Merchants Association 27-space
parking area at Lamroc Drive includes five picnic tables, two area
lights, restrooms, and a water fountain. Blue Heron Park, com-
pleted in September of 1989, is located behind the Town Hall. The
park contains tennis courts, lighted basketball courts, two play-
ground units, restrooms, picnic shelters, volleyball courts, and
is fenced. Year-round comprehensive recreational facilities will
be substantially improved with the completion of the community
center and gymnasium that is being constructed at the municipal
building complex. The community center will include meeting rooms
and the gymnasium will include a basketball court, weight room,
and bathroom/shower facilities.
Off-street parking in Emerald Isle consists of seven lots:
-- Commercial area south of Waters Edge Mobile Home Park -
50+ cars (this area may be closed to parking for
development).
-- Boardwalk by the Sea (off Reed Drive, east of the
Islander) - 275+ cars
-- East Sea View and Block Drives (Merchants Association) -
-- 40 cars
Cedar Street on Sound - 7 cars
-- Ocean Drive between 3rd and 4th Streets - 12 cars
-- Island Harbor Marina - 75 cars
-- Emerald Isle Pier - 74 cars
These areas are also shown on Maps 5A, 5B and 5C. Two of the
parking areas (Boardwalk by the Sea and west of 25th Street)
require a fee; the rest are town -owned and require no fee.
The shortage and unfavorable distribution of parking facil-
ities in Emerald Isle -are major problems. Many day visitors are
forced to park on the street, sometimes paying a fine. Increasing
the parking inventory in order for the public to enjoy the many
access points is an important planning issue.
1 I-52

important
Another planning consideration is regional
access.
The closest public regional accessways are Ft. Macon,
a state-
owned facility 2.3 miles to the east of Atlantic Beach; Hammocks
Beach, another state-owned facility 12 miles south of
Emerald Isle
near Swansboro; and Theodore Roosevelt Park, a county -maintained
facility 1% miles away near Salter Path and Hoffman Beach.
'
The North Carolina Division of Parks maintains recreation
facilities standards. The following table provides a
comparison
of town supported facilities and the state standards:
Table 18
Town of Emerald Isle - MinimL n Recreational Facility Needs
(Based on Year -Round Population)
N.C. Division
of Parks and Emerald Isle
Existing
Facility Recreation Standard Facilities Need
Facilities
(Facilities (Based on 1990
Population) year-round
population of
2,011)
Football/Soccer Field 1/10,000 <1
None
Softball Field 1/ 3,000 <1
None
Baseball Field 1/ 6,000 <1
None
Swimming Pool - 25 yard 1/10,000 <1
None
Swimming Pool - 50 meter 1/20,000 <1
None
Tennis Courts 2/ 4,000 2
Municipal Building
Tot Lots/Playgrounds 1/ 1,000 6
1 Municipal Building
Playground
1 Chapel By The Sea
Recreation Field
Conumity Center Gym 1/25,000 1
None
Neighborhood Center 1/10,000 <1
None
* < = less than
Once the community center and gymnasium are completed, the
Town of Emerald Isle will meet or exceed the state recreation
standards for tennis courts, playgrounds, community centers and
gymnasiums. The town does not have sufficient population to
support football/soccer field, softball field, baseball field or
swimming pool. Also, because of the outdoor water activities that
exist in Carteret County, it should not be necessary for Emerald
Isle to provide swimming pools.
11. Electrical Distribution
The Town of Emerald Isle is provided electrical service by the
Carteret -Craven EMC. During the mid 1980s, the town was
experiencing some "brown -outs" during summer usage. However, the
EMC undertook a program of installing individual energy management
switches and overall system improvements. It appears that the
power shortage problem has been alleviated.
L
I-53 1

12. Administration
The Town of Emerald Isle maintains a complete staff for
management of a wide range of urban services. The administrative
and service staff includes the following positions:
Administration 3
Building Inspections 2
Recreation and Parks 2
Tax Collector 1
Maintenance 5
The town maintains a Mayor -Board of Commissioners form of
government with a Town Administrator employed to supervise all
departments. The Board includes five commissioners. The Town
Administrator is assisted by the Town Clerk. The town is also
served by a seven -member Planning Board, a Board of Adjustment
consisting of five regular and two alternate members, and a
10-member Recreation Advisory Committee. Emerald Isle's adminis-
trative capabilities are adequate to serve the town's needs.
I-54

P,
F�
F. DEVELOPMENT CONSTRAINTS: LAND SUITABILITY
1. Topography/Geology
The land within Emerald Isle ranges from flat along shorelines
and some interior areas to rolling, undulating topography within
the dune areas. Elevation generally ranges from 0 to 25 feet
above sea level. Normally the highest elevations above sea level
are found in the Newhan soil associations. The soil association
locations are provided on Maps 6A & 6B. The majority of the
town's land has slopes within the 2 to 7 percent range. However,
within some dune areas, slopes may be as great as 30 percent or
more.
Carteret County is underlain by an eastward -thickening wedge
of sedimentary deposits of Pleistocene -age, ranging from 2,000
feet thick in the northwest portions of the county to almost 7,000
feet thick beneath the easternmost sections of offshore strand.
Because of the depth of the surficial sand/silaceous deposits,
little is known of the composition of underlying deposits. Well
logs indicate that shell fragments and calcareous material are
consolidated into a limestone at a depth of less than 120 feet
west of Morehead City, and at increasing depths further eastward.
Microfossils obtained from some well samples indicate that the
uppermost consolidated limestone is probably part of the Yorktown
formation.
The Bogue Banks Water and Sewer Corporation obtains water from
wells that are supplied by an aquifer which extends westward under
Carteret County. The town has never experienced a water supply
shortage. However, salt water intrusion may be an increasing
concern as demand for water grows. About 2,500 square miles of
the Castle Hayne aquifer, including the portion underlying
Carteret County, have been designated as a capacity use area by
the N.C. Groundwater Section due to large (68 MGD in 1986) ground-
water withdrawals by the Texas Gulf phosphate mine near Aurora. A
capacity use area is defined as an area where the use of water
resources threatens to exceed the replenishment ability to the
extent that regulation may be required.
The United States Geological Survey would be willing to
undertake a two to three-year study of the limestone aquifer in
Carteret County if requested to do so by the Carteret County Board
of Commissioners or one or more of the county's towns. The cost
would-be shared 50% by the federal government and 50% by local
government(s). The cost of the study could be $500,000 or higher,
depending on time and drilling demands. Information from this
study would be extremely useful in determining optimum locations
for future water wells, and estimating whether or not the ground-
water supply within Carteret County will meet demand throughout
the planning period.
I-55 1

TOWN OF EMERALD ISLE
GENERAL SOIL CONDITIONS
0 660 1320 1980 2640 3300 4620
SCALE IN FEET
The preparation of this map was financed
in part through a grant provided by the
North Carolina Coastal Management
Program, through funds provided by the
Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972.
as amended. which is administered by the
Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource
Management, National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration.
CL
CARTERET SOILS, LOW
Co
COROLLA FM'.kM SAND
Cs
COROLLA URBAN LMD CCNPLEX
ou
DUCSSTON ?Ilm SAND
Fr
FRIPP eMW SAM
NC
NEWHM-COROLLA COMPLEX
No
NEWHAN-UP2M LAW COWLEX
Nh
NENHAN
SEPTIC TANK
SUIMBILITT
VERY SEVERE
VERY SEVERE
VERY SEVERE
SEVERE
SEVERE
SEVERE
SLIGHT
SLIGHT
SLIGHT
SEVERE
NOTE: THIS NAP IS 3A= 011 IIfORMATION FROM THE SOIL SURVEY OF
THE OUTER 9ANRS. `tORTH CAROLINA, 1977, PRODUCED 97 :HZ
USDA SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE.

TOWN OF EMERALD ISLE
GENERAL SOIL CONDITIONS
0 660 1320 1980 2640 3300 4620
SCALE IN FEET
The preparation of this map was financed
in part through a grant provided by the
North Carolina Coastal Management
Program, through funds provided by the
Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972,
as amended, which is administered by the
Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource
Management, National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration.
CH
CARTERET SOILS, HIGH
CL
CARTERET SOILS, LOW
Co
COROLLA FIRE SAND
Cu
COROLLA URBAN LAND COMPLEX
Du
DV646D ger FINE SAND
rz
rRIPP me SAND
Ne
NLUMN-COROLLK COMPLEX
No
NEWIM-URSAN LAND COMPLEX
)m
KF9�At7
'IC TANK .
'ABILITY
' SEVERE
VERX SEVERE
VERY SEVERE
SEVERE
SEVERE
SEVERE
SLIGHT
SLIGHT
SLIGHT
SEVERE
NOTE: THIS NAP IS BjLS= ON INFORMTION rROH THE SOIL SURVEY OF
THE OUTER BANKS. NORTH CAROLINA,• 1977, PRODUCED BY :HE
USDA SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE.
I-56

2. Flood Hazard Areas
While large areas of Emerald Isle lie within the 100-year
flood plan, the greatest threat is flooding resulting from storm
surge and local ponding of water. Approximately 20 percent of the
town's land area lies at ten feet above mean sea level or less and
is potentially subject to flooding.
The greatest storm surge impact will occur from hurricanes.
Map 7 shows the general areas of Emerald Isle that may be affected
by hurricane -generated storm surge. The various categories of
storm surge areas are defined as follows:
Category 1. Winds of 74 to 95 miles per hour. Damage pri-
marily to shrubbery, trees, foliage, and unanchored mobile
homes. No appreciable wind damage to other structures.
Some damage to poorly constructed signs. Storm surge pos-
sibly 4 to 5 feet above normal. Low-lying roads inundated,
minor pier damage, some small craft in exposed anchorage
torn from moorings.
Category 2. Winds of 96 to 110 miles per hour. Consider-
able damage to shrubbery and tree foliage; some trees blown
down. Major damage to exposed mobile homes. Extensive
damage to poorly constructed signs. Some damage to roofing
materials of buildings; some window and door damage. No
major wind damage to buildings. Storm surge possibly 6 to 8
feet above normal. Coastal roads and low-lying escape
routes inland cut by rising water 2 to 4 hours before
arrival of hurricane center. Considerable damage to piers.
Marinas flooded. Small craft in unprotected anchorages torn
from moorings. Evacuation of some shoreline residences and
low-lying island areas required.
Category 3. Winds of 111 to 130 miles per hour. Foliage
Y t ?
torn from trees; large trees blown down. Practically all
poorly constructed signs blown down. Some damage to roofing
materials of buildings; some window and door damage. Some
structural damage to small buildings. Mobile homes des-
troyed. Storm surge possibly 9 to 12 feet above normal.
Serious flooding at coast and many smaller structures near
coast destroyed; larger structures near coast damaged by
battering waves and floating debris. Low-lying escape
routes inland cut by rising water 3 to 5 hours before
hurricane center arrives. Approximately 30% of Emerald Isle
could be flooded.
Category 4. Winds of 131 to 155 miles per hour. Shrubs and
trees blown down; all signs down. Extensive damage to roof-
ing materials, windows, and doors. Complete failure of
roofs on many small residences. Complete destruction of
mobile homes. Storm surge possibly 13..to 18 feet above
normal. Major damage to lower floors of structures near
shore due to flooding and battering by waves and floating
I-58

H
to
The preparation of this map was financed
In part through a grant provided by the Nam' This n-eP may not be
North Carolina Coastal Management used for exact locations.
Program, through funds provided byy the In -field verifications of
Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, flood hazard areas are
as amended, which Is administered by the required.
Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource
Management, National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration.
B. CAMERON LANGSTON BRIDGE
BOGUE SOUND
d�
fl o CZ, ox C3
.-.. I M. v%.CH14
LEGEND
_ CATEGORY I-2 SURGE AREA
CATEGORY 3 ADDITIONAL SURGE AREA
CATEGORY 4-5 ADDITIONAL SURGE AREA
b
(:n=> Q %
EMERALD ISLE
GENERAL DELINEATION
FLOOD HAZARD AREAS
MAP 7
H
J
W
Q
crr
R
It
O
U
i
2
SCALE IN MILES

debris. Low-lying escape routes inland cut by rising water
3 to 5 hours before hurricane center arrives. Major erosion
of beaches. Over 60% of Emerald Isle could be flooded.
Category 5. Winds greater than 155 miles per hour. Shrubs
and trees blown down; considerable damage to roofs of build -
ings; all signs down. Very severe and extensive damage to
windows and doors. Complete failure of roofs on many resi-
dences and industrial buildings. Extensive shattering of
glass in windows and doors. Some complete building fail-
ures. Small buildings overturned or blown away. Complete
destruction of mobile homes. Storm surge possibly greater
than 18 feet above normal. Major damage to lower floors of
all structures less than 15 feet above sea level. Low-lying
escape routes inland cut by rising water 3 to 5 hours before
hurricane center arrives. Over 70% of Emerald Isle could be
flooded.
The town also suffers from intermittent flooding from rainfall
and storm water runoff. The soil associations shown on Map 6
provide an indication of the locations of high water table areas.
The water table depths, flooding frequency, and permeability rates
are provided in Table 19.
Flooding resulting from sea level rise may be a long-term
problem. Over the last 100 years, the sea level has risen approx-
imately one foot. Most experts agree that the rate of sea level
rise will increase over the next one hundred years. The maximum
increase has been forecast to be as much as four to seven feet.
An increase of that magnitude would be disastrous to Emerald Isle.
Approximately 20 to 25% of the town could be inundated. The
impact of sea level rise has serious adverse transportation and
access implications for Emerald Isle. Many inland Carteret County
roads could be inundated and impede access to Emerald Isle. The
rate of rise should be carefully monitored.
3. Soils
A detailed soils survey of Carteret County has been completed
by the Soil Conservation Service. Based on that survey, there are
ten different soil associations located within Emerald Isle.
These associations are delineated on Map 6 and their conditions
for site development are provided in Table 20. Most soils within
Emerald Isle have some limitations to development.
1
0
1 I-60

Table 19
Soil Susceptibility to Flooding
Depth to Seasonal
Soil Types High Water Table
Beach-Foredune Beach - 0 to 3.0'
Association Foredunes 6.0'
Carteret soils, 0 to 3.0'
low
Corolla fine sand 1.5 to 3.0'
Duckstone
fine sand
Fripp fine sand
Carteret soils,
high
Newhan fine sand
Newhan-Corolla
Complex
Corolla Urban
Land Complex
Newhan Urban
Land Complex
1.0 to 2.0'
6.0'
1.0 to 3.0'
6.0'
Flooding
Frequent
Rare
Frequent (daily)
Rare to Common
Storm Tides
Rare to Common
Storm Tides
Rare Storm Tides
Frequent (monthly)
None
Permeability
Rapid 6.311/hr.
Rapid 6.311/hr.
Very rapid
20"/hr.
Very rapid
20"/hr.
Rapid 6.311/hr.
Rapid 6.311/11r.
Very rapid
20"/hr_
See ratings for individual soil
See ratings for individual. soil
See ratings for individual soil
Source: 1985 Emerald Isle Land Use Plan
I-61

I
1
U
Soil Types
Beach-Foredune
Association
Carteret soils,
low
Corolla fine sand
Corolla fine
sand, forested
Duckstone
fine sand
Fripp fine sand
Carteret soils,
high
Newhan fine sand
Newhan-Corolla
Ccmplex
Corolla Urban
Land Corrplex
Newhan Urban
Land Complex
Table 20
Soil Associations
Degree and Kind of Limitation for Stated Use
Dwellings
Very severe/
flooding
very severe/
flooding/wet
Severe/wet
Severe/wet
Severe/wet
Streets & Roads
Very severe/
flooding
Very severe/
flooding/wet
Severe/wet
Severe/wet
Severe/wet
Severe floods Moderate floods
Very severe/ Very severe/
flooding/wet flooding/wet
Slight Slight
See ratings for individual soil
See ratings for individual soil
See ratings for individual soil
Septic Tank
Filter Field
Very severe/
flooding
Very severe/
flooding/wet
Severe/wetl
Severe/wetl.
Severe/wetl
Slightl
Very severe/
flooding/wet
Slightl
1 The sandy soils are highly pervious with questionable filtering capacities.
Thus, contamination of groundwater is possible.
Source: Soil Survey of Carteret County, North Carolina,
United Stated Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service.
I-62

4. Manmade Hazards/Restrictions I
The only major manmade hazard within Emerald Isle is the
aircraft operations/flight pattern area for Bogue Field which is
located adjacent to Bogue Sound on the Carteret County mainland.
The airfield is approximately three miles northeast of Emerald
Isle. Aircraft regularly fly over the town at low altitudes.
Map 2 provides an indication of noise levels resulting from
aircraft operating in existing flight patterns. The noise levels
indicated are provided by the Bogue Field Air Installation
Compatibility Use Zone (AICUZ) Program. Based on identified noise
levels, the AICUZ recommends areas where certain types of land
development should be restricted.
Compatibility with the day/night noise levels indicated on
Map 2 is defined in Tables 21 and 22 which were provided by the
Guide for Air Installations Compatible Use Zones. As a general
definition of noise level, a 65 Ldn is the noise level at which
normal conversation becomes difficult to hear.
The AICUZ also establishes accident potential zones for
aircraft operations. However, Emerald Isle is not located within
any Zone I (highest) accident potential zones. Through 1990, 18
aircraft crashes had occurred in the vicinity of Bogue Field. One
occurred in Emerald Isle on the shore of Bogue Sound. In spite of
the prior crash, the hazard potential from aircraft crashes is
considered minor. High noise level impact is a much more serious
problem.
Bogue Field is open for flight operations from 9:00 a.m. to
4:00 p.m. Monday through Thursday, 9:00 a.m.- to 12:00 Noon on
Friday, and is closed on Saturday, Sunday and holidays.
Operations normally include practice landings and touch and go's
for student pilots and proficiency training.
The only other manmade hazards within Emerald Isle are under-
ground storage tanks for gasoline being sold at retail stores,
underground storage tanks at the Emerald Isle Town Hall, and
above ground tanks at the marina.
1
I-63

Table 21
LAND USE COMPATIBILITY Noise Zone
IN NOISE AREAS 1 2 3
8LUCM Day -Night Auerage Sound Level [Ldn]
LAND USE CATEGORY Code 60 65 70 75 80 85
Rualduntlal - singlu Family. lla
oupluu
Residential - Mu t l ami y • a. 12. 11,
ra orlud etc.
Redldentlal Mublia Homed 14
Transient Lodging 15
Industrial- Service latrl ut ve •,
a
HIndustrial-Hanufactur
rn
iD.
I ilg
}.•
Induatrlal - Nanu acturlllg (Naive
7S
�•'•�a•
��`;���;`•y:
::'1_<::i:'a
Sullaltive)
.f3'.�.�.'; 1 .
5'
Commercial - Malusula Trade
S1. 64. 66
:,. •,
,_';.• ;
semis buYlllubd tlurvicuu
Co:a.urclal - kutall Trade. 110vly
1'lluutere, Latins Drinking
52S8
W �Ma5%.aaa — Q"Mu wa.Yaa gamma Ja
(Ilot 1�O�tld YeiltlltlVe) •-tr•::t:��
Office Buildings (1'ortlullal. Business. 61-63. 65. 69 •^ ,•• '_.
a11J Pruleualonul Serviced)
,.E I
.'
Clearly Compatible t-•� Clearly Incompatible
Normally Commpatible Normally Incompatible
Source: Guide for Air Installations Compatible Use Zones.

Table 21 (Cont 'd)
LAND USE COMPATIBILITY
IN NOISE AREAS
LAND USE CATEGORY
• SLUCM
Code
arrrooma. Librarluo. C wrc our
III
Ibrpitale. Ha•JICaI i'aclllt tar.
Huruing Iluwr (241ir occupancy)
sSl
Auditorlumr. Concert Ilalis
I!1
Outdoor Hodle 51soilr
Jdl
Outdoor Slw►IN Arenam. Outdoor
Spectator Spdrtr
Ali
1' uygrounJr. Hafghborhot9d NOW,
Active S rort Nuercatlunal .Anima
lhl. 161
W If Cuureue, N1Jing Stubles, Nater
.Nucreatlun
Mai 741. 14
out Jour - iraqusnt Speech Commioni-
catiun '
Outdoor - Intrequaent Speech Communi-
gstiun
Iu Ord eKCupt vertock).
Hining, Plaiting
81-85
Livestock Farming, Animal Breeding
815-817
Clearly Compatible
Normally Compatible
Clearly Incompatible
Normally Incompatible'
Source: Glide for Air Installations Cbpatible Use Zones.

NOTES FOR TABLE 21
LAND USE COMPATIBILITY IN NOISE LEVELS
1. CLEARLY COMPATIBLE: The noise exposure is such that the
activities associated with the land use may be carried out
with essentially no interference from aircraft noise.
(Residential areas: both indoor and outdoor noise environ-
ments are pleasant.)
2. NORMALLY COMPATIBLE: The noise exposure is great enough to be
of some concern, but common building construction will make
the indoor environment acceptable, even for sleeping quarters.
(Residential areas: the, outdoor environment will be reason-
ably pleasant for recreation and play.)
3. NORMALLY INCOMPATIBLE: The noise exposure is significantly
more severe so that special building construction is often
necessary to minimize adverse impacts on people and reduce
interference with performance of normal activities.
(Residential areas: barriers are sometimes erected between
the site and prominent noise sources to improve the outdoor
environment; sound attenuation is recommended in some
buildings.)
4. CLEARLY INCOMPATIBLE: The noise exposure at the site is so
severe that construction costs to make the indoor environment
acceptable for performance of activities is significantly more
expensive. (Residential areas: the outdoor environment would
be significantly impacted for normal residential use.)
5. SLUCM: Standard Land Use Coding Manual. "x" represents SLUCM
category broader or narrower than, but generally inclusive of,
the category described.
6. The compatibility matrix has been determined by a number of
noise sensitivity factors including: speech communication
needs; subjective judgments of noise compatibility and
relative noisiness; need for freedom from noise intrusions;
sleep sensitivity criteria; accumulated case histories of
noise complaint experience; and typical noise insulation
provided by common types of building construction.
7. For many land uses, higher levels of exterior noise exposure
may be acceptable provided there is a proper degree of build-
ing noise insulation. Such tradeoffs are possible for land
uses where indoor activities predominate.
1 I-66

5. Fragile Areas
In coastal North Carolina, fragile areas are considered to
include coastal wetlands, ocean hazard areas, shorelines,
estuarine waters and shorelines, public trust waters, complex
natural areas, areas sustaining remnant species, unique geological
formations, registered natural landmarks, swamps, prime wildlife
habitats, areas of excessive slope, areas of excessive erosion,
scenic points, archaeological sites, historical sites, and 404
wetlands. While not identified as fragile areas in the
15A NCAC 7H Use Standards, maritime forests and outstanding
resource waters (ORWs) should also be considered fragile areas.
Emerald Isle's planning jurisdiction includes or is adjacent to
estuarine waters and shorelines, coastal wetlands, public trust
waters, ocean hazard areas, maritime forests, ORWs, 404 wetlands,
archaeological sites, excessive slopes, and excessive erosion
areas. Map 8 provides a delineation of the Fragile Areas. These
are areas which could easily be damaged or destroyed by
inappropriate or poorly planned development.
a) Coastal Wetlands
The coastal wetlands are generally delineated on Map 8, Areas
of Environmental Concern. However, it is emphasized that the
specific locations of coastal wetlands can be determined only
through on -site investigation and analysis. Coastal wetlands are
defined as salt marshes regularly- or irregularly -flooded by tides
including wind tides, provided this shall not include hurricane
or, tropical storm tides. These areas must contain at least
one, but not necessarily all of the following marsh plant species:
Cordgrass, Black Needlerush, Glasswort, Salt Grass, Sea Lavendar,
Bulrush, Saw Grass, Cat -tail, Salt Meadow Grass, and Salt Reed
Grass. The coastal wetlands are vital to the complex food chain
found in estuaries. They provide marine nursery areas and are
essential to a sound commercial fishing industry. Coastal
wetlands also serve as barriers against flood damage and control
erosion between the estuary and uplands.
b) Estuarine Waters
Estuarine waters are generally those waters found in
estuaries, sounds, bays, and salt water shorelines. They are the
dominant component and bonding element of the entire estuarine
system, integrating aquatic influences from both the land and the
sea. The estuarine waters are among the most productive natural
environments within Emerald Isle. The waters support the valuable
commercial and sports fisheries of the coastal area which are
comprised of estuarine dependent species such as menhaden,
flounder, shrimp, crabs, and oysters.
I-67

lj
I
1
Uj
n
A TL ANT/C O CEAN
The Part
throatgn ofthismoo was financed T O if'N O f E�ftIER A L D I S L E
in part throe a hi oroo wa the
North Carotina Coastal Management
Program, through tunas provided by the I99C
Coastal Zane Management ist by of Et FRAGILE AREAS
as amenaed, rnicn is odmRnRstered by the
Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource
Management. National Oceanic and IOQQ 590 0 504 1000 ISOO 2500
Atmospneric Adtimstration
I" = BOU
h • :
ARCHAEOLOGICALLY SENSITIVE AREAS
COASTA
L WETLANDS
(ppreAmiaau lxstionat
exact loeaciona must be
determined Lnrouqu in -field
Verifications.)
NARITZMK roltim
LApprexiaace SocationaN
exact locations must be
deterained throw" in -field
• varifidations.A
1. ISTUARIHE SHORELINE AREAS - IN SROREI.Dat
AREAS NOT CONTIGUOUS TO WATERS CLAS31-
rIED As OUTSTANDING RESOURCE WATERS BY
THE zWvTR W0:HYAL MANAGEMENT COMISSION,
ALL LAND 75 FEET LANDWARD rROM THE NEAN
HIGH WATER LEVEL OR NORMAL WATER LEVEL
ARE: CONSIDERED TO HE I3TUARSR:E SHORE -
In=. IN snow=NE AREAS CONTIGUOUS TO
WATERS CLASSIrIED AS OUTSTANDING
RESOURCE WATERS BY THE IINVIROMIL.WTAL
MAMAGF»R COMMISSION. ALL LAND 575 FEET
LANDWARD FROM THE WEAN RICH WATER LEVEL
OR NORMAL WATER LEVEL ARE CONSIDERED TO
BE ESTUARINE SIWRSLINE3.
2. OCEAN RAZARD AMU - OCEAN HAZARD AREAS
ARE TR03Z AREAS DETINED BY 1SA NCAC 7H
SECTION .0300. THESE AREAS. INCLUDE ALL
SrAC W. PRIMARY OUNES, AND FRONTAL
AS DUNES AND OTHER AREIN WHICH GEOLOGIC.
VEGETATIVE AM SOIL CONDITIONS INDICATE
A SUBSTANTIAL POSSIBILITY Or ROLCESsm
EXPANSION OR FLOOD DAM=.
I. INLET RA7ARD AREAS - rnrT RAZARD AREAS
INLET HAZARD AREAS ENE -ROSE DEFINED BY
15A WCAC 7R.0304. THESE AREAS :NCIADE.
LANDS THAT ARE NATURAL RAIARD AREAS THAT
ARE &SPECIALLY VULUSAABL& TO EROSION.
rLDODING, AND OTHER ADvERsI Errw s or
SAND, WIND AND WATER BECAUSE Or THEIR
PROXIMITY TO DYNAMIC OCEAN INLETS.
MI%C- LOCATIONS MUST BE DETERMINED
THROUGH IN -FIELD VERIFICATIONS.
N. PUBLIC TRUSY AND ESTUARINE WATERS AREAS
- ALL WATERS UNDER THE msvzC:ON Or
EMERALD ISLE ARE EITHER ESTUARINE WATERS
OR PUBLIC TRUST AREAS AS DEFINED IN
15 NCAC 7H.0206 ESTUARINE WATERS AND
• .0207 PUBLIC TRUST AREAS. OUTSTANDING
RESOURCE WATERS AREAS ARE PUBLIC TRUST
AREAS Or DMROID(ENTAL CONCERN. OROI
AREAS ARE ALSO ESTUARINE WATERS AEC'S.
S. OUTSTANDING RESOURCE MATE" -(ORW) - ALL
WATERS Or BOGUS BOOM ADJACENT TO AND
WITHIN EMERALD ISLE ARE DESIGNATED AS-
ORW. PORTIONS Or PINtT CREEK ARE
DESIGNATED AS URN, AND ARE DELINEATED ON
THE INSERT To THIS MAP. OTHER CRzExS
AND STREAMS IN EEUOULO ISLE ARS NOT
DESIGNATED AS ORN: _ . ...
6. THE EMERALD ISLE CORPORATE LIMIT LINE
EXTENDS 1,20E FEET INTO BoGoX SOUND AND
PARALLELS THE SHORILINS:
I-70

1
i
1
1
1�
1
1
1
1
1
1
* TM APC14AEOL000M AREA 15
ALSO A MARNIMIE FOREST SITE
ORw I
1
• I..i'�',,�-•;•)jai..
TIN
� :�rI•.�.e;.,,y,�.
� d
,lam•.
�,
---I!
_
1r
1
►
�
� 13 n 1�
M
�� .erir«
R
A t
1
1
t
1
1
i
i j
I I
I
u
I �
N
z
_
I
90GUE:
I
I
nn. r.i� I cer.wesn
I � 1
� t �
1
1 1 1
i I I I
1 � ;
A T[ ANT/C
I
I
1
I
a
The preparation of this moo was financed
in part through o grant provided by the
North Carolina Coastal Management
Program, through funds provided by the
Coastal Zone Management Act of 197Z
03 amended, which is administered by the
Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource
Management. Notional Oceanic and
Atmospneric Administration.
1
SALTERS
GRAVEYARD
SOUND
I I
I BELL CI
1 SE-TLE
GRl
-..a. I 1Y air►::•9
1r I •� ; I� a : 1 '
3a It eaa!� ► ia1 7 ��
r I ,
I —
I
I I I I I
OCEAN
ARCXAWI=ICXLLY SENSITIVE AREAS
Go1LSSAL Waco los
(Approxiaau locations:
exact locations axwt be
• determined throo9b la -field
WreriSicauoaa.) -
MARITIME FORESTS
h..
• ,t ,=,'.'j;!' (A"roaiaate locations:
• exact locations mast be
deterained throe" Sn-field
verification.)
1. ESTUARINE SHORELINE AREAS - IN SHORELINE
AREAS NOT C014TIC000S TO WATERS CL A.SSI--
TIED AS OUTSTANDING RESOURCE WATERS M
THE ENVIRONMENTAL IUWAG NZKT COMMISSION.
ALL LAND 75 rEET LA►m1ARD TACK THE M AW
HIGH WATER LEVEL OR NORMAL WATER LEVEL
AM C' IDUM TO RE ESTUARINZ SHORE -
In=. IN SHORELINE AREAS CONTIGUOUS TO
WATERS C.U3XrlZD AS OUTSTANDING
RESOURCE NATERS BY THE 321VIROM MENTAL
- HANA6TJmR COMMISSION. ALL LAND 575 TEST
LANDWARD rROM THE MEAN HIGH WATER LEVEL
OR Nora" WATER LEVEL ARE CONSIDERED TO
BE ESTUARINE SHORELINES.
2. OCEAN HAZARD AREAS - OCEAN HAZARD AMU
ARE THOSE AREAS DETINLD BY SSA NCAC 7H
SECTION .0300. THESE ARrA.S. INCLUDE ALL
BEACHES, PRIMARY DUNES. AND FRONTAL
DUNES AND OTHER AREAS IN WHICH GEOLOGIC.
ORW
VEGETATIVE AND SOIL CONDITIONS INDICATE
A SUBSTANTIAL POSSIBILITY or EXCESSIVE
EXPANSION OR rL000 DAN=.
t
'
I Y
I I
3. INLET HAZARD AREAS - INLET HAZARD AREXS
INLET HAZARD AREAS ARE THOSE DEFINED BY
!
N ISA NCAC 7H.0304. THESE AREAS INCODE.
I j !
LANDS THAT ARE NATURAL HAZARD AREAS THAT
BI
ARE ESPECIALLY VWMERABLE TO EROSION.
•.. •:•: =: • : :
FLOODING. AND OTHER ADVERSE WrECTS Or
-:•: , ..• _
'• 1 :
;:;fi •?:
SAND. WIND AND WATER BECAUSE OF THEIR
:=1=???:[ .:,�';;?} ....
�" i :}.:v '--•.iaisy;;r: ::.:r:: -
PROXIMITY TO DTHAVIC OCEAN INLETS.
.�. ss,,.
.�"'`.. 1
,I
EXALT LOCATIONS MIST BE DETE KrNED
EE3
III;= 9f IN-rIEw vsniri LTIONs.
6. PUBLIC TRUST AND ESTUARINE WATERS AREAS
ALL WATERS UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF
MRALD ISLE ARE EITHER tSTUARINE WATERS
OR PUBLIC TRUST AREAS AS DEFINED IN
15 NCAC 78.0206 ESTUARINE WATERS AND
t I I
0207 PUBLIC TRUST AREAS. OUTSTANDING
• '
1REs00RICS WATERS AREAS ARE PUBLIC TRUST
AREAS OF ENVIRON=rrAL CONCERN: ORW -
I I S
AREAS ARE ALSO ESTU)MRE WATERS AEC'S. -
' I I
S. OUTSTANDING RESOURCE WATERS-(ORW) - ALL
WATERS Or 9=9 SOUND ADJALTRT TO AND
3
WITHIN INCRALD ISLE ARE DESIGNATED AS
am PORTIONS Ot PINEY CHEER ARE
DESIGATED AS ORN. AND ARE DELINEATED ON
THE INSERT TO THIS MAP. OTHER CREEKS
AND STREAMS IN ZNZR= ISLE ARE NOT
DZSIOtATto AS ORN
6. THE EMERALD ISLE CORPORATE LIMIT LINE
SXTENDS 1,200 FEET INTO BOGUS SOUND AMID
PARALLELS THE SXOtRX1J= '
TOWN OF E'A(Z-R.4 L D ISLE'
1990
FRAGILE AREAS
10 500 1000 1500 2500
i" = 500'
123I 241 25 I 2e IO NI
.,MaWorsr�W-ot
1312 11 10 e • T t S 4 3
ORW
VIAP
x -�
� Al
X
0 SO t0a ISO 200
pmry CAyca pR/IvAVSERT
$CAL& FEET
I-69

ORW:.�1 1•• •'.' .• 1 '/ �::. <.• I I. ORW
�" — �✓ I ) SOUND
I B O G UEI I I 1 l'•
CIS ARCHAEOLOGIC-L AREA IS t I I 1 1 I I
ALSO A MARITSAE FCREST SITE 1 • 1 ! ! I
I _ 1 I t t Q 1
I`
N
t
I
_ �n
1 1
•i ,1
r, =1. it
r
>3
:t
) �1
t �•
- I x
•i
I
r
t.�•
i a�
i 1 I � 1_K - •'7 `e'W I ' 1 ,r # )
:j::�'� i! i"�•� "I iwnel + 'a:.1t ..� .•+ir 1 t )I ) ---� I 1 � tl ..a. c... ...r
•� I N �✓ I t a I:;�`;::�>';�::_:I•^�• � 1 1 1 � 1 yam) 11 I 1 ! c
•) • Im.,. 1 1 „rf. r � ►,:z.' :•'.':�'a.�r • •: I 1 1 -•1 1 -'" I 1 ' ,,,,,
t 1 oe pp
) 1 I ....+o a" I::.:. c.:) . ; •r;•,'.� � � � a � 1 � 1 1 I 1 + ( t ....... I r 1
_ t -
1 I I 1 I IC
J 1 , o
`` I 1 � ` `ray Irf:s•''-K: -i;.1- / � 3 � 1 � � I # � i 1 ►).,+- J ) � Ir-- 1 a a ) a
1 p ! I s 1 1 t 1► f it a N 1
INLE- I �F i 1 I '� a -.+. a( ': (� 1 1 a l t 1 d 1 I ► 1 I 1 ► i ,►
HAZARD 1 Y d 1
AREAS!
TL.4NT%COCEANI I )
! 1 ( I
I!�
The preparation of this moo was financed
in port through a grant provided by the
North Carolina eadl Management T O W N O F £&£R.Q L D /S L .E
Programm,.through
fun
tunas provided by the
Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972.
as amended, which is administered by the 1990
Office of Oceanic
and Coastal Resource FRAGILE AREAS
Management. National Oc and
Atmospheric Administration.
" 1Og0 5 0 0 500 101000 1500 2500
1"=500'
MP 8A
I-68
ARCHAEOLOGICALLY SENSITIVE AREA
COASTAL 1111MA1Ds
_-i:- •: (Approximate locations:
exact locations moot
detarained through in -field
verifications.)
•
•-.^.,.�:.::- MAAITEM PORLSTS
(Approulaate location.,
-••�,'•--.w,.,•
• wMat locations (east be
deteralned thro"n in -field
• verifications.)
1. ESTUARINE SHOR£LDM AREAS - IN SHORELI=
AREAS NOT CONTIGU= TO WATERS CLASSI-'
rIED As ouTs?ANDINc RLEotn= wATERs DT
"
THE OfvIROWWWYAL MANAGEMENT COMISSION.
ALL LAND 75 FEET LANDWARD rRON THE MEAN
HIGH WATER LEVEL OR NORMAL WATER Wral,
�+
ARE CONSIDERED TO BE ESTUARINE MILE -
LINES. IN SMIDRELINE AREAS CONTIGUOUS TO
WATERS CIASSIrIEo AS OUTSTANDING
RESOURCE WATERS BY THE MWIRONIa7PtAL
HAHAGr,N4Xr COM(ISSION. ALL LAND 575 FEET
LANDWARD FROM THE MRAN HIGH WATER LEVEL
OR NORMAL KILTER LEVEL ARE CONSIDERED TO
BE ESTUARINE SMORELITRS.
2. OCEAN A.i RA7ARD ARL- OCEAN RA2ARD AREAS
N ARE THUS£ AREAS DETINEO BY NSA NCAC 711
SECTION .0300. THESE AREAS. INCLUDE ALL
BEACHES. PRIMARY DUNES. AND FRONTAL
OTHER AREAS IN WHICH GEOLOGIC. DUNES AND LOGIC
VEGETATIVE AND SOIL CONDITIONS INDICATE
A SUBSTANTIAL POSSIBILITY Or EXCESSrVE
EXPANSION OR FLOOD DAMAGE.
3. INLET HAZARD AREAS - INLET HAZARD AREAS
�-
INLET HAZARD AREAS AM THOSE DEFINED DT
NSA NCAC 711.11304. THESE AREAS INCIJ)DE.
LANDS THAT AM NATURAL HAZARD AREAS MAY
ARE ESPECIALLY VWJaRM" To EROSION.
FLOODING. AMD OTHER ADVERSE- EEFECTS OF
SAND. WIND AND KILTER BECAUSE OF THEIR
PRoximiTY TO DYNIU[IC OCEAN INLETS.
VULCT LOCATIONS MUST at DETERMINED
THROUGH IN -FIELD VERIFICATIONS.
t
4. POELIC TRUST AND ESTUARINE WATERS AREAS
a
- ALL wATER3 UNDER THE JURISDICTION Or
EKCFI ISLE ARE EITHER ESTUARINE WATERS
OR PUBLIC TRUST AREAS AS DEFINED IN
15 NCAC 711.0206 ESTUARINE WATERS AND
• 0207 PUBLIC TRUST AREAS. OUTSTANDING
RESOURCE WATERS AREAS ARE PUBLIC TRUST
AREAS OF EIMADIRIZI TAL CONCERN. ORN
AREAS ARE ALSO £SRARIKE KAYERS AEGIS.
j�
v
S. OUTSTANDING RESOW= WATERS (ORV) - ALL
WATERS Or ROGUE SOUND ADJACENT TO AND
wITHIN ZmEPALD ISLE ARE DESIGNATED AS-
CS
S
ORN. PORTIONS Or PINEY CREEK ARE
Y
DESIGNATED AS ORN. AND ARE DELINEATED ON
THE INSERT TO THIS ZAP. OTHER CREEKS
AND STREAMS IN EMERALD ISLE Alt£ NOT
DESIGNATED AS ORW
S. THE EMERALD ISLE CORPORATE LIMIT LINE
EXTENDS 1.200 FEET IN" Down: SOUND AND
PARALLELS THE SRORELIME: '

c) Estuarine Shorelines
Estuarine shorelines are those non -ocean shorelines which are
especially vulnerable to erosion, flooding, or other adverse
effects of wind and water. They are intimately connected to the
estuary. The 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. Development within the
estuarine shorelines influences the quality of estuarine life and
is subject to the damaging processes of shorefront erosion and
flooding. Estuarine shorelines areas of environmental concern
which are adjacent to outstanding resource waters extend 575 feet
landward from the mean high water level or normal water level.
Within ORW estuarine shorelines, no CAMA permit will be approved
for any project which would be inconsistent with use standards
adopted by the Coastal Resources Commission, the Environmental
Management Commission, or the Marine Fisheries Commission.
d) Public Trust Areas
�j
!
Public trust areas are 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 there-
under 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 rights of navigation; and
all waters in artificially created bodies of water in which the
public has acquired rights by prescription, custom, usage, dedica-
tion, or any other means. In determining whether the public has
acquired rights in artificially created bodies of water, the
following factors shall be considered:
(1) the use of the body of water by the public,
(2) the length of time the public has used the area,
(3) the value of public resources in the body of water,
(4) whether the public resources in the body of water are
mobile to the extent that they can move into natural
bodies of water,
(5) whether the creation of the artificial body of water
required permission from the state, and
(6) the value of the body of water to the public for
navigation from one public area to another public area.
These areas are significant because the public has rights in
these areas, including navigation and recreation. The public
trust areas also support valuable commercial and sports fisheries,
have aesthetic value, and are important resources for economic
development.
It is impossible to map the public trust area. The areas must
be determined through in -field analysis and definition.
'
I-71

e) Ocean Hazard Areas I
Ocean hazard areas consist of ocean erodible areas, high
hazard flood areas, inlet hazard area, and unvegetated beach area.
Ocean hazard landforms include ocean dunes, beaches, and shore-
lines. Ocean dunes include both primary dunes and frontal dunes.
Primary dunes are the first mounds of sand located landward of the
ocean beaches having an elevation equal to the mean flood level
(in a storm having a one percent chance of being equaled or
exceeded in any given space) for the area plus six feet. The
primary dune extends landward to the lowest elevation in the
depression behind that same mound of sand. In areas where there
is a primary dune, that dune shall be deemed to be the frontal
dune. Where there is no primary dune, the frontal dune is deemed
to be the first mound of sand located landward of the ocean beach
having sufficient vegetation, height, continuity and configuration
to offer protective value. The dunes are essential to the protec-
tion of oceanfront areas.
Ocean beaches and shorelines are lands consisting of unconsol-
idated soil materials that extend from the mean low water line
landward to a point where either (1) the growth of vegetation
occurs, or (2) a distinct change in slope or elevation alters the
configuration of the land form, whichever is farther landward.
The entire southern length of Emerald Isle is an ocean beach.
Emerald Isle contains ocean erodible areas and high hazard flood
areas, an inlet hazard area, but no unvegetated beach area (a
dynamic area that is subject to rapid unpredictable landform
change from wind and wave action). Unvegetated beach areas are
only designated following detailed studies by the Coastal ,
Resources Commission.
f) 404 Wetlands
404 wetlands are areas covered by water or that have
waterlogged soils for long periods during the growing season.
Plants growing in wetlands are capable of living in soils lacking
oxygen for at least part of the growing season. 404 wetlands
include, but are not limited to, bottomlands, forests, swamps,
pocosins, pine savannahs, bogs, marshes, and wet meadows.
'
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act requires that anyone inter-
ested in depositing dredged or fill material into "waters of the
United States," including wetlands, must apply for and receive a
permit for such activities. The Wilmington office of the U. S.
Army Corps of Engineers has regulatory authority in Emerald Isle.
While there may be scattered wetland areas located within Emerald
Isle, the specific locations of wetlands areas must be determined
through on -site analysis. It should be noted that in some Areas
of Environmental Concern, both the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
and the. regulatory requirements of the Coastal Area Management Act
may have overlapping jurisdiction.
I-72 '

g) Maritime Forests
The preservation of maritime forests has become an increas-
ingly significant issue in coastal North Carolina. For a number
of years, the Coastal Resources Commission (CRC) has debated the
establishment of state -imposed use standards (regulations) for the
protection of maritime forest areas. In 1990, the CRC decided to
delay state action and afford local governments an opportunity to
establish regulations.
Establishing a clear definition of what constitutes maritime
forest areas and defining which areas should be protected has been
difficult. Generally, maritime forests are areas containing
native salt tolerant vegetation. Exposure to salt spray causes
the vegetation to have a sheared appearance that is shaped
according to contours of adjacent land forms. The forests contain
loblolly pine, sweet gum, live oak, and red maple as the dominant
tree types. The trees grow slowly because of very low available
water capacity, occasional salt water flooding, and exposure to
salt spray. The forests are important animal habitats.
Map 8 provides a general delineation of Emerald Isle's mari-
time forest areas. However, it is emphasized that exact locations
must be determined through in -field verification. Most of Emerald
Isle's maritime forest areas have already had subdivision plats
approved for their development: Only the maritime forest area in
Block 47 remains unsubdivided.
Table 22 provides a further definition of maritime forest
areas, their ecological significance, and some basic management
criteria. It should be noted that, with proper controls, develop-
ment may occur within maritime forest areas.
U
I
1 I-73

a
an
Table 22
Maritime Forest Area
Definition, Function and Management
sown
.. ...... ...
woo
III I I
MsuRaa
WrERM DWE i SVMLE FOREDO E
wRIM
POnaSTED wwnARDS
HMRoos FORM
sAt7 smut scraae DUM T"CKVT
Wax wa
un oak
Loblotlp Ph»
Live Osk
Yaupon Hottp
o
Yaupon HoW
Lobiolly Pkw
Rod Bap
Rad Cedar
Lie oak
o
kmeNmrd bw donee
American H*
Wax to ft
Expoaad brat an
Pad Cedar
U
aw Waft
snift -tan1, N
ForaaadheshwRstar
6SIwM o
oomr*orK&
W
wbroodarldiflda
MtlandsiniroAme
swala
rjoadedbatdfawaaltpW
Sonnprortetlon
%%Vw; 9taFilm
WAiratinsw n qw tq
Ddemsaltsprap
Pik.w7 clures or+
Widita
IatQtdsta6iftatlort
Shdma*mw
Sbnnraa* - F
I dmkx bratbuRar
32
V*WbLOw
CijflM'. trDl
�
Nwiantapein0
Fighsest kwhra
NWknqckV
2
Nuaiarr qd kv
r�
Ma:mit as
Avoid tootatlartp aoaa
Na Olrq of
Avoid Irrridrrp an
W disarbetwoof
�s
aurdeveloped mkv
d-
wetlands
sbmovw4o%
iaa6npadga
s
w—;N
�swmwssrb
PasomvftpianitpaRim nbroadwd
``
Claarlaraeasaottlp
aim
+E
9r�0 a Plr oAe1
� s�
Aimcm
�hrs.niotu
d4r*nkwDa
"�'
Source: Protecting Maritime Forests Through Planning and Design,
_Division of Coastal Management, North Carolina Department
of Environment, Health and Natural Resources.
I-74

�-
h) Outstanding Resource Waters
In 1989, the North Carolina Environmental Management
Commission designated certain waters within North Carolina as
Outstanding Resource Waters (ORWs). These areas were designated
because they were considered to be significant marine resource
areas having relatively clean and pristine waters, and having
significant value as recreational and natural resource areas.
Western Bogue Sound was designated as an ORW. Special development
controls were imposed, and each ORW has a state management plan.
Controls include, but are not necessarily limited to, increasing
the estuarine shoreline width to 575 feet. The Outstanding
Resource Waters areas are shown on Map 8, Fragile Areas.
i) Slopes in Excess of 12%
In Emerald Isle, slopes of 12% or greater are normally found
only in the ocean dune areas. However, some scattered slopes in
excess of 12% do exist in the maritime forest areas. Excessive
slope has not been a deterrent to development in Emerald Isle.
j) Excessive Erosion Areas
Excessive erosion areas include ocean, sound, and inlet
erodible areas. Permanent construction within those areas should
be limited unless stabilization along the affected shoreline can
be accomplished.
k) Historic and Archaeological Sites
There do not appear to be any nationally significant historic
or archaeological sites within Emerald Isle. However, at least 20
historic and prehistoric period archaeological sites have been
recorded within Emerald Isle since the 1960s. Most of the sites
were recorded by local amateurs and artifact collectors.. Few have
been evaluated by an experienced archaeologist and only a small
portion of the area has been systematically surveyed for sites.
Based on the available information, prehistoric activities in
the area primarily involved the seasonal exploitation of shellfish
and other marine resources. Sites associated with these activi-
ties tend to be relatively small, characterized by accumulations
of discarded shell (referred to as shell midden), broken bits of
pottery vessels, and stone tools. Such sites are easily disturbed
by contemporary land use activities and natural shoreline erosion.
Of the known sites, most have been disturbed and are not consid-
ered significant. However, several sites may contain significant
information and warrant further investigation.
1 I-75

The North Carolina Division of Archives and History files are
incomplete and no in-depth historical research has been conducted
for Emerald Isle. The records do indicate that several old grave-
yards and possible early settlement areas exist. Map 8 generally
includes areas which can be considered archaeologically sensitive.
These areas either contain known sites or are considered to have a
particularly high probability for containing sites. Any develop-
ment planning within those areas should be reviewed for their
possible impacts on potentially significant archaeological sites.
If significant sites are identified within the area, efforts
should be made to protect them from unnecessary or avoidable
adverse impacts. Any development activity in those areas should
be coordinated with the Division of Archives and History.
I-76

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
1
1
SECTION II
PROJECTED LAND DEVELOPMENT ANALYSIS

I
SECTION II: PROJECTED LAND DEVELOPMENT ANALYSIS
A. PROJECTED DEMAND FOR DEVELOPMENT
'
1. Demographic Trends
Coastal Area Management Act planning guidelines require that
population projections prepared by the N. C. State Data Center,
Office of State Budget and Management be utilized in projecting
year-round population for Land Use Plans from 1990-2000. Table 23
outlines estimated 1990, and projected 1995 and 2000 year-round
population for Emerald Isle and Carteret County townships and
municipalities, based on State Data Center data. Individual
township and municipal projections are based on the assumption'
that the relative growth rates by specific area will remain the
same from 1990-2000 as estimated for 1980-1990. (Similar
methodology was used to calculate township populations for the
base year of 1987 - see Appendix 1A.)
Emerald Isle's population should comprise a slightly higher
percentage of the county's total population by 2000. In 1990,
Emerald Isle contained approximately 4.6% of the county popula-
tion. This percentage is expected to increase slightly to 5% by
2000. Emerald Isle will continue to be the largest beach
community within Carteret County. The town will maintain its
position as the fourth largest municipality in the county behind
Morehead City, Beaufort, and Newport.
While detailed demographic statistics are difficult to
forecast, it is believed that the 60 year old and older age group
will comprise an increasingly large segment of Emerald Isle's
population. This is based on both national demographic trends and
Emerald Isle's attractiveness as a retirement community. The town
should be conscious of this trend and begin planning to meet the
health and service needs of an increasingly older population.
Development will continue in and near fragile areas. As this
occurs,.resource protection will assume greater significance for
the residents of Emerald Isle. In addition, the increase in
population will strain the capacity of the existing transportation
system; increase the demand for water supply; increase the need
for central sewage disposal; increase demand on recreation and
shoreline access facilities, law enforcement services, fire pro-
tection, emergency medical services, and administrative services.
Population forecasts are particularly complicated in Emerald
Isle because of the seasonal fluctuations in population and the
impact of day visitors. Table 24 provides a forecast of peak
seasonal population. The ratio of the peak population to the
permanent population is provided by Table 25.

Table 23: Total Year-round Population Projections
by Township and Municipality
Carteret County, 1990-2000
Township
Municipality or Area
Year-round Population
Percentage Change
Overall
1990
1995
2000
1990-1995
1995-2000
1990-2000
1)
Atlantic
Total
847
873
893
3.0%
2.3%
5.4%
2)
Beaufort
Beaufort
3,808
31796
31786
-0.3%
-0.3%
-0.6%
Unincorporated Areas
3,531
31784
31980
7.2%
5.2%
12.7%
Total Township
71339
71579
7,766
3.3%
2.5%
5.8%
3)
Cedar Island
Total Township
372
399
420
7.3%
5.3%
12.9%
4)
Davis
Total Township
537
568
592
5.8%
4.3%
10.3%
5)
Harkers Island
Total Township
21150
21316
2,445
7.7%
5.6%
13.7%
6)
Harlowe
Total Township
1,109
1,215
11297
9.6%
6.8%
17.0%
7)
Marshallberg
Total Township
638
678
709
6.3%
4.6%
11.2%
8)
Merrimon
Total Township
498
548
587
10.0%
7.1%
17.8%
9)
Morehead City
Atlantic Beach
1,938
2,628
31165
35.6%
20.4%•
63.3%
Morehead City
61046
71214
81121
19.3%
12.6%
34.3%
Indian Beach
153
222
275
44.8%
24.0%
79.6%
H
Pine Knoll Shores
11360
11854
21238
36.3%
20.7%
64.6%
ra
Unincorporated Areas
121126
13,734
14,984
13.3%
9.1%
23.6%
Total Township
21,623
25,652
28,783
18.6%
12.2%
33.1%
10)
Newport
Newport
21516
21954
31295
17.4%
11.5%
31.0%
Unincorporated Areas
41517
51161
51662
14.3%
9.7%
25.4%
Total Township
71033
81116
8,957
15.4%
10.4%
27.4%
11)
Sea Level
Total Township
670
760
830
13.4%
9.2%
23.9%.
12)
Smyrna
Total Township
733
799
851
9.1%
6.5%
16.1%
13)
Stacy
Total Township
373
408
436
9.5%
6.7%
16.8%
14)
Straits
Total Township
11785
11968
21111
10.3%
7.2%
18.3%
15)
RAte Oak
Cape Carteret
10,008
1,052
1,087
4.4%
3.3%
7.8%
[1]
Enrald Isle
2,434
3,520
4,364
44.6%
24.0%
79.3%
Unincorporated Areas
31407
41040
4,531
18.6%
12.2%
33.0%
Total Township
61849
81612
91983
25.7%
15.9%
45.8%
Total Municipalities
19,891
24,303
27,732
22.2%
14.1%
39.4%
Total Unincorporated Areas
32,665
36,189
38,928
10.8%
7.6%
19.2%
Total County
52,556
60,492
66,660
15.1%
10.2%
26.8%
Sources: North Carolina State Data Center, Office
T. Dale Holland Consulting Planners
[1] "Unincorporated Areas" includes Town of Cedar
of State Budget and Management; 1990 Census;
Point, incorporated in 1988.
M M= w r r M W M M= M W W r= err

Table 24: Peak Seasonal Population Projections
by Township and Municipality
.Carteret County, 1990-2000
Township Municipality or Area Peak Seasonal Population
1990 1995 2000
Percentage Change
Overall
1990-1995 1995-2000 1990-2000
1)
Atlantic
Total
623
i,000
11235
60.5%
23.5%
98.2%
2)
Beaufort
Beaufort
21401
31645
41422
51.8%
21.3%
84.6%
Unincorporated Areas
843
1,163
11362
37.9%
17.2%
61.3%
Total Township
31244
41808
51784
48.2%
20.3%
78.7%
3)
Cedar Island
Total Township
185
281
342
52.1%
21.4%
84.8%
4)
Davis
Total Township
370
586
721
58.4%
23.0%
94.3%
5)
Harkers Island
Total Township
21270
31547
41344
56.2%
22.5%
91.4%
6)
Harlowe
Total Township
525
827
11015
57.5%
22.8%
93.7%
7)
Marshallberg
Total Township
377
581
708
54.0%
21.9%
87.2%
8)
Merrimon
Total Township
193
300
367
55.5%
22.3%
90.2%
9)
Morehead City
Atlantic Beach
18,434
28,105
34,144
52.5%
21.5%
85.2%
Mrehead City
31261
51318
6,602
63.1%
24.1%
102.3%
H
Indian Beach
7,681
13,414
16,993
74.6 %
26.7%
121.4 %
w
Pine Knoll Shores
51546
91686
12,271
74.7%
26.7%
121.3%
Total Township
36,205
•58,117
71,797
60.5%
23.5%
98.5%
10)
Newport
Newport
1,053
21035
2,648
93.3%
30.1%
151.1%
Unincorporated Areas
2,011
2,954
3,542
46.9%
19.9%
76.0%
Total Township
3,064
41989
6,190
62.8%
24.1%
102.2%
11)
Sea Level
Total Township
99
120
134
21.6%
11.1%
35.4%
12)
Smyrna
Total Township
292
444
539
52.0%
21.4%
84.7%
13)
Stacy
Total Township
79
102
117
29.4%
14.2%
47.8%
14)
Straits
Total Township
401
531
613
32.5%
15.3%
52.3%
15)
White Oak
Cape Carteret
2,560.
51417
7,200
111.6%
32.9%
181.8%
[1]
mid Isle
13,435
22,017
27,376
63.9%
24.3%
103.6%
Unincorporated Areas
3,160
61518
8,615
106.3%
32.2%
172.5%
Total Township
19,155
33,952
43,191
77.3%
27.2%
125.1%
Total Municipalities
54,289
89,410
111,336
64.7%
24.5%
105.4%
Total Unincorporated
Areas
12,793
20,775
25,759
62.4%
24.0%
101.4%
Total County 1
67,082
110,185
137,095
64.3%
24.4%
104.4%
Sources: Tschetter, Paul D., "Characterization of Baseline Demographic Trends
in the Year -Round and
Recreational Populations in the Albemarle -Pamlico Estuarine Study Area
T. Dale Holland Consulting Planners
[1]
"Unincorporated Areas" includes Town of Cedar Point, incorporated in 1988

Table 25: Total Peak Population
by Township and Municipality
Carteret County, 1990-2000
Township
Municipality or Area
1990 Population
1995
Population
2000
Population
Permanent
Peak
Ratio (1)
Permanent
Peak
Ratio
Permanent Peak
Ratio
1)
Atlantic
Total
847
1,470
1.74
873
1,872
2.15
893
2,127
2.38
2)
Beaufort
Beaufort
3,808
6,209
1.63
3,796
7,441
1.96
3,786
8,208
2.17
Unincorporated Areas
3,531
4,374
1.24
3,784
41946
1.31
3,980
5,342
1.34
Total Township
7,339
10,583
1.44
7,579
12,387
1.63
7,766
13,550
1.74
3)
Cedar Island
Total Township
372
557
1.50
399
680
1.71
420
762
1.81
4)
Davis
Total Township
537
907
1.69
568
1,154
2.03
592
11313
2.22
5)
Harkers Island
Total Township
2,150
4,420
2.06
2,316
51863
2.53
2,445
6,789
2.78
6)
Harlowe
Total Township
1,109
1,634
1.47
11215
21042
1.68
1,297
2,312
1.78
7)
Marshallberg
Total Township
638
11015
1.59
678
1,259
1.86
709
1,417
2.00
8)
Merrimon
Total Township
498
691
1.39
548
848
1.55
587
954
1.63
9)
Morehead City
Atlantic Beach
1,938
20,372
10.51
2,628
30,734
11.69
31165
37,308
11.79
Morehead City
6,046
13,727
2.27
7,214
20,628
2.86
81121
25,115
3.09
Indian Beach
153
3,414
22.31
222
5,539
25.00
275
6,877
25.02
Pine Knoll Shores
1,360
6,906
5.08
1,854
11,541
6.22
2,238
14,510
6.48
Unincorporated Areas
12,126
13,409
1.11
13,734
15,328
1.12
14,984
16,772
1.12
Total Township
21,623
57,828
2.67
25,652
83,769
3.27
28,783
100,581
3.49
10)
Newport
Newport
2,516
31569
1.42
2,954
4,989
1.69
3,295
5,943
1.80
Unincorporated Areas
4,517
6,528
1.45
5,161
8,115
1.57
51662
9,205
1.63
Total Township
7,033
10,097
1.44
8,116
13,104
1.61
8,957
15,147
1.69
11)
Sea Level
Total Township
670
769
1.15
760
880
1.16
830
964
1.16
12)
Smyrna
Total Township
733
1,025
1.40
799
1,243
1.56
851
11390
1.63
13)
Stacy
Total Township
373
452
1.21
408
511
1.25
436
552
1.27
14)
Straits
Total Township
1,785
2,186
1.22
1,968
2,500
1.27
2,111
2,724
1.29
15)
White Oak
Cape Carteret
11008
31568
3.54
1,052
61469
6.15
1,087
8,287
7.63
(1]
Emerald Isle
2,434
15,869
6.52
3,520
25,538
7.25
4,364
31,740
7.27
Unincorporated Areas
3,407
6,567
1.93
4,040
10,558
2.61
4,531
13,146
2.90
Total Township
61849
26,004
3.80
8,612
42,565
4.94
9,983
53,173
5.33
Total Municipalities
19,891
74,180
3.73
24,303
113,712
4.68
27,732
139,067
5.01
Total Unincorporated
Areas
32,665
45,458
1.39
36,189
56,965
1.57
38,928
64,688
1.66
Total County
52,556
119,638
2.28
60,492
170,677
2.82
66,660
203,755
3.06
Source: T. Dale Holland Consulting Planners
[1] Ratio of Peak/Permanent Population
M r ■w M= M= M ■r M M= err M= M= M=

1
P
1
I
I
Overall population growth in Emerald Isle will: be impacted by
overall population growth in Carteret County and in the nearby
municipalities. Despite the expected decrease in*annual growth
rate over the 1990s, the population growth rate in Carteret County
will still be more than double the North Carolina.,rate over the
next ten years. From 1990-2000, the state population is estimated
to show a 9.8% increase. The Carteret County population is
anticipated to grow 22.7% over the same period.
Emerald Isle's growth rate for year-round population will be
over twice that of the county. However, the overall total peak
population growth will be approximately the same as.that of the
entire county. This does not reflect population increases result-
ing from day visitors. Based on 1990 peak day visi:�or estimates
of 41,000 people (increased for growth consistent with county
growth rate), 1995 and 2000 peak populations with -day visitors
would be approximately 69,900 and 83,750, respect'-ely. These
figures -reflect more accurately the service demangs that may be
placed on Emerald Isle.
It is believed that through the planning period, the age
distribution of Emerald Isle's population should change to more
closely resemble the age distribution for the total Carteret
County population. Table 26 provides an estimata of 1990 and 2000
populations by age group.
Table 26 l
Total Population by Age and Percent Change
Age
Population by
Age Group
1990
2000
Under 5
66
197
5-14
412
398
15-24
298
420
25-34
147
467
35-44
428
490
45-54
298
439
55-64
247
356
65 and over
115
512
2 0011
3,279
2. Commercial and Industrial Land Use
�C
191g0 to 2000
-s
Pf,,,rcent Change
1990-2000
Ct.
i_ +198%
3%
+ 41%
!r+217%
15 0
a 7 + 47%
+ 44%
y} +345 a
Commercial development should occur gradually during the ten-
year planning period. If commercial development agntinues at the
same rate at which it occurred during the 1980s, and additional
areas are not zoned for commercial usage, by 2000 a total of
approximately 40 to 50 acres of commercially zoned property would
remain vacant. This assumes that approximately 100 additional
acres of commercially zoned property will be developed during the
1990s. Thus, it appears that there is an adequate amount of
vacant commercially zoned land available to accommodate antici-
pated growth.

During thc;.19;90s, the problems confronting commercial develop-
ment will include:
-- Increasing land values,
-- Provision:.of adequate storm drainage facilities,
-- Increasing traffic congestion on N.C. 58 (Emerald Drive),
-- Increasing problems with the provision of adequate sewage
disposal.
A major question will continue to be the development of com-
mercial marina facilities. Currently only one marina exists. No
other areas are appropriately zoned for marina development. The
town will be subjected to great pressure for the development of
marinas and'.other shoreline related commercial uses.
Industrial development is not expected to occur within Emerald
Isle. Not only is land area limited and expensive, industrial
development would-be incompatible with land use patterns in
Emerald Isle.
3. Housing Trends
Emerald Is.le.:w.ill continue to be a predominantly low -to -
moderate density -single-family residential area. Residential
growth will continue. As property values increase, the demands
for "high-rise':' development should increase. This may result in
pressure being:placed on Emerald Isle to decrease the restriction
'
on building heights. In 1990, the maximum height limitations were
40 feet for wood frame structures and 100 feet for concrete, steel
or other non -wood frame structures.
Residential development will continue to occur in maritime
forest areas that have been subdivided. As discussed in the
fragile areas section of this plan, a substantial area of unsub-
divided maritime forest remains in Block 47. Without local
controls to _regulate the development of maritime forest areas, it
should be assumed that Block 47 will be subdivided and developed
consistent with the Emerald Isle zoning and subdivision regula-
tions being applied through Emerald Isle.
From 1985.to.;1990, an average of 180 residential building
permits were issued per year in Emerald Isle. This rate of
residential development is expected to decrease somewhat during
the 1990s -- especially in the early 1990s -- as the county and
the southeastern United States labor to overcome an economic
slowdown. If.one assumes an average of 135 residential permits
per year, a total of 1,350 residential units could be constructed i
from 1990 to 2000. This rate of growth would place Emerald Isle �l
close to residential "build -out" by 2000 unless allowable
densities are increased.

4. Public Land Use
With the exception of the construction of the community center
and recreational facilities at the municipal building complex,
public land use is not expected to change substantially during the
planning period. Except for shoreline access facilities, no major
acquisitions of public property are anticipated in 1991. The town
is in the process of establishing a regional shoreline access
facility to provide immproved off-street parking. The facility is
located across U.S. 58 from the fire station. Emerald Isle is
purchasing the site in stages. Ultimately, the site will contain
1.5 acres and provide ocean frontage. Stage one will provide 50
off-street parking spaces. The completed facility will include
155-160 off-street parking spaces.
' 5. Areas Likely to Experience Major Land Use Changes
No major changes in existing land use patterns or zoning are
expected. The town's zoning ordinance and an active planning
program will continue to control and limit incompatible land uses.
It is expected that Emerald Isle will resist development pressures
and continue to limit high density development.
Summary
The greatest obstacle to continued growth in Emerald Isle may
be the lack of a central sewage collection and treatment system.
As development continues, ground and surface water pollution could
become a problem. Plans for the development of a system must be
closely coordinated with Carteret County and other Carteret County
municipalities.
Development issues that will confront Emerald Isle during the
planning period are summarized as follows:
-- Continuing congestion and strip commercialization along
N. C. 58.
-- Provision of off-street parking for shoreline access
facilities.
-- Elimination of storm drainage (flooding) problem areas.
-- Protection of dunes and vegetation.
-- Preserving low -to -moderate density residential development.
-- Improving mainland access.
-- Reducing the impacts of aircraft operations from Bogue
Field.
-- Maintaining adequate water supply.
-- In cooperation with Carteret County, pursuit of the
development of a regional sewer system.
II-7

-- Maintaining municipal al services at a level sufficient to
accommodate peak seasonal population.
-- Continuing protection of Areas of Environmental Concern.
-- Maintaining adequate planning for storm hazard mitigation
and post -disaster recovery planning.
B. PROJECTED PUBLIC FACILITIES NEEDS/AVAILABILITY I
The projected population growth will place increased demands on
community facilities and services during the planning period. By
2000, the peak seasonal population is expected to be 9.35 times
the permanent year-round population. In most cases, community
facilities and services must be designed to accommodate peak
seasonal population.
The Bogue Banks Water and Sewer Corporation's water system supply
and capacity should be adequate to serve demand through the
planning period. If water usage increases commensurate with
population growth, the system would be at approximately 25 percent
of capacity by 2000. The greatest water supply concern may be
salt water intrusion. The ability of the aquifer systems to
supply ground water to accommodate the growth expected to occur
within Carteret County should be carefully monitored.
The town's storm drainage problems will intensify as development
continues. Compliance with the town's Storm Drainage Master Plan
and enforcement of the Storm Water Control Ordinance are essential
to reducing the problem. The requirements for improved drainage
design that will be imposed on commercial development should be a
significant help in reducing the magnitude of the problem..
Transportation needs will continue to be a major need. It is
expected that by 2000, over 30,000 vehicles will cross the
B. Cameron Langston Bridge on an average summer weekday. (2010
estimate is 40,000 vehicles per day.) This volume of traffic will
require.improved mainland access, improvements to Emerald Drive
(N. C. 58), and an improved plan for signalization on Emerald
Drive. Plans by the NCDOT to expand the B. Cameron Langston
Bridge to four lanes during the next 20 years should be
expedited.
Central sewer service will continue to be a need that will
increase as the town's population increases. Concurrent with the
preparation of this plan, Carteret County was evaluating the
alternatives for a county central sewer system. Significant
interest in county -sponsored central sewer service had been indi-
cated by Cape Carteret and Cedar Point, but only slight interest
had been indicated by Emerald Isle and Pine Knoll Shores.
II-8

1
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
If Emerald Isle declines to pursue development of a central sewer
system, it will necessitate a policy of low -to -moderate density.
However, it will be difficult, if not impossible, to control the
demands placed on sewage disposal facilities by day visitors. A
clear sewer policy developed in concert with policies for growth
density is essential.
Adjustments to Emerald Isle's administrative, police, fire and
rescue services will be necessary as growth occurs. Personnel
needs should be monitored annually and appropriate adjustments
made. During the 1995-2000 period, some adjustments to fire and
rescue services may be needed. A capital facilities plan for
those services should be developed. The town should carefully
consider services and facility needs for the elderly portion of
its population. By 2000, over 26 percent of the town's population
is expected to be 55 years old or older. Elderly population needs
should be accommodated in planning services such as garbage
collection. Also, the town does not have any elderly health care
facilities. Year-round recreational facilities will be adequate
to meet the needs of the year-round residents through 2000.
C. REDEVELOPMENT ISSUES
Almost all development in Emerald Isle is less than 30 years old
and in`standard condition. Therefore, there is not a need for
redevelopment of existing areas.
The greatest redevelopment concern in Emerald Isle will be
reconstruction following a major storm. A particular concern
should be damage to mobile homes. In 1990, mobile homes comprised
approximately 30 percent of the town's housing stock. Any
Category 3 or greater storm would cause substantial damage to the
mobile home stock. Not only would there be a major loss of
housing stock and real estate values, but the cleanup costs will
be substantial. Policies governing how and where mobile homes
will be allowed to be replaced should be carefully constructed.
There are no major infrastructure maintenance problems. The Bogue
Banks water system is in good repair. The town is supplied elec-
tric service by the Carteret -Craven Electric Membership Corpo-
ration. This system is also in good repair. However, the town
should consider policies to require the placement of utilities
underground following a major natural disaster.
D. INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION AND IMPLEMENTATION
This plan was reviewed by the Carteret County Planning Department
prior to certification by the Coastal Resources Commission. This
review was provided to help ensure consistency of this plan with
Carteret County's planning efforts. Intergovernmental coordi-
nation and cooperation will continue through the ten-year
II-9

planning period. This will be essential to accomplish effective t
planning for public utilities, thoroughfare projects, community
facilities, housing needs, and environmental protection. The
Emerald Isle Board of Commissioners and Planning Board will be
responsible for ensuring adequate coordination with Carteret
County, Bogue Banks and mainland municipalities, and other govern-
ment entities as may be required. '
E. SHORELINE ACCESS/OFF-STREET PARKING
Shoreline access and the demand for off-street parking is dis-
cussed separately from the projected public facilities needs/
availability section because of the public interest in and concern
'
with the provision of off-street parking facilities. The demand
for shoreline access off-street parking is primarily generated by
day visitor traffic. The population forecasts indicate peak day
populations (including day visitors) of 69,900 and 83,750 in 1995
'
and 2000, respectively. State shoreline access standards
(15A NCAC 7M) suggest that the total number of beach access park-
ing spaces correspond to approximately three percent of the commu-
nity's peak season population. Based on this standard, a total of
2,097 spaces would be required in 1995 and 2,512 spaces in 2000.
The 1988 Shoreline Access Plan forecast a demand for off-street
parking of 8,433 to 11,244 spaces by 2000. It is believed that
the state standards provide for a more reasonable measure of off-
street parking demand.
'
In 1988, the Town of Emerald Isle adopted an Ocean and Sound
Public Access Plan. That plan identified 49 public off-street
shoreline parking spaces and 1,300 commercial/privately provided
off-street parking spaces. Only 80 of these spaces (75 at Island
Harbor Marina) appeared to be located at soundside access sites.
Based on a 1990 peak population of 41,000, and the state's off-
street parking standard, a total of 1,230 spaces should have been
available to satisfy the 1990 demand. Thus, the town's 1990
inventory of off-street parking should have been sufficient.
However, the 1988 access plan found that the distribution of
spaces was inadequate. Off-street parking deficiencies exist at
soundside locations and at oceanside sites in both the eastern and
western sections of town. Most parking was concentrated in
'
commercial areas in blocks 40,.41, and 42.
From 1985 to 1990, a considerable amount of attention was devoted ,
to the provision and location of shoreline off-street parking
spaces. The 1985 Land Use Plan included a policy of locating off-
street parking in commercial zones wherever possible. However,
the plan indicated that other areas could be considered. By 2000,
an additional 1,163 off-street parking spaces could be required to
meet the recommended state standard. The town must carefully
assess its locational policies on shoreline access and associated
off-street parking facilities.

The 1991 citizen attitude survey results (see Section III)
indicated that 59.7% of'the residential respondents and 55.3% of
the total respondents believed that off-street parking at shore-
line access areas should be provided. In addition, 69.9% of the
residents and 63.1% of the total respondents believed that the
town should provide off-street parking for day visitors and perma-
nent visitors. Of the resident respondents, 57.4% indicated that
off-street parking should be provided in both residential and
commercial areas. While this is certainly not a mandate forwider
distribution of off-street parking, the responses seem to indicate
a public understanding of the need to disperse shoreline off-
street parking. Both parking and shoreline access were ranked as
two of the top five problems in Emerald Isle. The survey results
'
indicated a willingness by the taxpayers to support parking for
shoreline access sites. Both the resident and overall respondents
gave parking the highest preference for the utilization of local
'
tax dollars to provide recreational facilities.
1

I
u
1
11
SECTION III
SUMMARY OF TOWN OF EMERALD ISLE
1 1990 LAND USE PLAN SURVEY
I
11
11

1
1
I
11
1
SECTION III: SUMMARY OF TOWN OF EMERALD ISLE
1990 LAND USE PLAN SURVEY
In an effort to incorporate as much citizen input as possible
into its FY90 Land Use Plan update, the Town of Emerald Isle
developed a citizen survey including 21 questions on a diversity
of land use issues, and distributed the survey to approximately
5,090 resident and non-resident property owners and renters. The
level of citizen interest in the land use planning process in
Emerald Isle is very high, as evidenced by the fact that 1,655 of
the survey forms were filled out and returned, a 33% response
rate. Additionally, where comments were solicited, citizen
responses were numerous and often very detailed. A number of
respondents included letters with their completed survey forms.
Those responses are on file in the Municipal Building and are
available for public review.
In order to allow efficient tabulation of the responses, a
computer database was compiled using Foxpro database management
software. An input screen was developed and the survey forms
were input into the database. Comments were abbreviated at input
time to allow subsequent segregation of comments by category.
Following input, an analysis program tabulated the surveys and
three reports were produced -- summaries of resident, non-
resident, and total responses, respectively.
The survey instrument with responses is provided below. The
total responses for each question have been broken down into
resident and non-resident responses. Two important notes: On
question 8, where respondents were asked to list the top five
problems, no attempt was,made to categorize the responses with
respect to relative importance (1-5). Instead, all responses on
lines 1-5 were counted and identified. On questions 4 and 19,
where respondents were asked to provide ranked numeric responses,
a weighted tabulation system was utilized. Basically, if no
response was entered for a given choice, the computer changed the
'0' for that choice to a 121'. Since that number is higher than
the highest possible numeric response for either question 4 or
19, the choice with the lowest average response for questions 4
and 19 is the most significant.
u

SUMMARY OF RESPONSES
R - Resident, NR s Non -Resident, A11 a A11 Responses
R NR All
TOTAL RESPONSES 534 (32%) 1121 (68%) 1655 (100%)
1. Which of the following describes your residential property status in Emerald Isle?
2.
3.
1
Year -Round Resident Property Owner 440/534 (82.4%) 0/1121 (0%) 440/1655 (26.5%)
Year -Round Resident Renter 85/534 (15.9%) 0/1121 (0%) 85/1655 (5.1%)
Non -Resident Residential 16/534 (3.0%)[1] 1092/1121 (97.4%) 1108/1655 (66.9%) '
Property Owner
[1] These 16 respondents include 7 residents who checked both "resident owner" or ,
"resident renter" and the "non-resident" space (perhaps resident investor -owners).
Also included are 9 respondents who did not list themselves as resident residential
owners in question 1 but listed themselves as resident commercial property owners or
renters in question 2 (perhaps believing that working on the island during the day
gave them "resident" status). '
Which of the following describes your co®mercial property
status in Emerald Isle?
R
NR
All
Non -Resident Commercial Owner
6/534
(1.1%)[2]
60/1121 (5.3%)
66/1655
(3.9%)
Resident Commercial Property Owner
31/534
(5.8%)
0/1121 (0%)
31/1655
(1.8%)
Non -Resident Commer. Property Renter
9/534
(1.6%)[2]
25/1121 (2.2%)
34/1655
(2.0%)
Resident Commercial Property Renter
25/534
(4.6%)
0/1121 (0%)
25/1655
(1.5%)
[2] These individuals indicated non-resident status
here,
but indicated that
they
were residents in question 1.
If you are a residential rental property owner,
please answer the following:
-- Total number of rental uriit(s) owned
in Emerald Isle.
R
NR
All
'
Responses/Owners
68
310
378
Total Units
97
381
478
Average # of Units/Owner
1.43
1.23
1.26
'
-- List the months in which the unit(s)
is (are)
occupied
50% or more of the
total time.
Month
Number
of Responses
R
NR
All
January
23
28
51
February
23
28
51
March
27
36
63
'
April
32
52
84
May
42
124
166
June
57
272
329
July
62
271
333
'
August
61
262
323
September
50
144
194
October
38
69
107
November
31
37
68
December
26
30
56
,

.1
tj
4. Please rate town services and facilities. Ranked from 1 - 15 with 1 being the
highest rated choice. The weighted average -- changing 101 or no response to 121' --
is in parentheses.
Service/Facility Rankin
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
Garbage and Refuse Service
Police Protection
Street Maintenance
Street Lighting
Overall Town Management
Fire Protection
Rescue Service
Drainage
Recreation
Day Visitor Parking
Planning
Zoning
Building Inspection
Ocean/Sound Related Activities
Other
R
NR
Al
2
(2.98)
1
(5.70)
1
(4.82)
1
(2.87)
2
(5.78)
2
(4.84)
5
(3.67)
3
(6.06)
3
(5.29)
6
(3.98)
4
(6.72)
4
(5.84)
7
(4.04)
5
(6.95)
5
(6.01)
3
(3.49)
6
(7.34)
6
(6.10)
4
(3.59)
7
(7.40)
7
(6.17)
9
(5.08)
8
(7.64)
8
(6.81)
8
(4.75)
9
(7.82)
9
(6.83)
12
(5.40)
10
(7.93)
10
(7.12)
10
(5.24)
11
(8.48)
11
(7.43)
13
(5.67)
12
(8.49)
12
(7.58)
11
(5.28)
13
(9.00)
13
(7.80)
14
(6.64)
14
(9.37)
14
(8.49)
15
(18.30)
15
(18.10)
15
(18.16)
5. Please answer the following
concerning commercial development in
Emerald
Isle.
a) I am (am not) familiar
with the areas of
Emerald Isle that are
zoned
for
commercial development.
R
NR
All
Familiar
265/534
(49.6%)
309/1121
(27.5%)
574/1655
(34.7%)
Not Familiar
242/534
(45.3%)
744/1121
(66.4%)
986/1655
(59.6%)
No Response
27/534
'(5.1%)
68/1121
(6.1%)
95/1655
(5.7%)
b) Areas actually used for commercial development should increase,
decrease,
or
remain the same.
R
NR
All
Increase
65/534
(12.2%)
81/1121
(7.2%)
146/1655
(8.8%)
Decrease
115/534
(21.5%)
285/1121
(25.4%)
400/1655
(24.2%)
Remain the Same
311/534
(58.2%)
545/1121
(48.6%)
856/1655
(51.7%)
No Response
43/534
(8.1%)
210/1121
(18.8%)
253/1655
(15.3%)
c) The overall appearance
of the commercial
areas is:
good or
poor.
1 s.
R
Good 432/534 (80.9%)
Poor 49/534 (9.1%)
No Response 53/534 (10.0%)
NR
770/1121 (68.7%)
118/1121 (10.5%)
233/1121 (20.8%)
All
1202/1655 (72.6%)
167/1655 (10.1%)
286/1655 (17.3%)
The Town of Emerald Isle currently has an overall town -wide residential density
ceiling of 8 dwelling units/acre. Do you believe that this limit should increase,
decrease, or remain the same?
Increase
Decrease
Remain the Same
No Response
R
14/534 (2.6%)
199/534 (37.3%)
299/534 (56.0%)
22/534 (4.1%)
20/1121 (1.8%)
469/1121 (41.8%)
561/1121 (50.0%)
71/1121 (6.4%)
All
34/1655 (2.0%)
668/1655 (40.4%)
860/1655 (52.0%)
93/1655 (5.6%)

7. Please indicate which of the following statements you
agree with
concerning
residential development.
'
R
NR
All
° Emerald Isle should encourage
apartment complex development
Agree
24/534
(4.5%)
16/1121
(1.4%)
40/1655
(2.4%)
No Response
510/634
(95.5%)
1105/1121
(98.6%)
1615/1655
(97.6%)
° Multi -family residential develop-
ment could increase without
'
damaging town's atmosphere.
Agree
41/534
(7.7%)
52/1121
(4.6%)
93/1655
(5.6%)
No Response
493/534
(92.3%)
1069/1121
(95.4%)
1562/1655
(94.4%)
° The overall quality of
'
residential development in
Emerald Isle is good.
Agree
269/534
(50.4%)
576/1121
(51.4%)
845/1655
(51.0%)
No Response
265/534
(49.6%)
545/1121
(48.6%)
810/1655
(49.0%)
'
° Single-family residential areas
should be protected from intru-
sions of multi -family and
commercial development.
'
Agree
427/534
(80.0%)
955/1121
(85.2%)
1382/1655
(83.5%)
No Response
107/534
(20.0%)
166/1121
(14.8%)
273/1655
(16.5%)
° Additional (new) mobile home
parks should be restricted
by the town.
Agree
387/534
(72.5%)
829/1121
(74.0%)
1216/1655
(73.5%)
No Response
147/534
(27.5%)
292/1121
(26.0%)
439/1655
(26.5%)
8. Please list the top five problems that currently exist in Emerald Isle.
Type of Problem
1. Traffic
2. Parking
3. Rapid Development
4. Protecting Environment (dunes,
maritime forests, sound)
5. Shoreline Access
6. Town Management
7. Drainage
8. Lack of Sewer System
9. Street Maintenance/Lighting
10. Mobile Home Parks
11. Vehicles on Beach
12. Garbage Collection
13. Lack of Adequate Zoning
14. Commercial Development
15. Litter
16. Lack of Recreational Facilities
17. Water Supply
18. Leash Law/Dogs/Cats
19. Taxes
20. Evacuation Plan
21. Beach Music Festival
22. Need for Bike/Walk Path
23. Police Department
24. Lack of Adequate Property Maint.
Number of Comments '
R NR Al
(534) (1121) (16 )
128
220
348
132
173
305
65
207
272
107
143
250
84
136
220
73
66
139
62
75
137
54
76
130
55
75
130
46
80
126
38
72
110
39
61
100
32
62
94
21
66
87
20
48
68
36
32
68
31
36
67
20
38
58
9
27
36
9
24
33
13
11
24
10
13
23
14
8
22
11
9
20
1

1
'
8. (Continued)
R
NR
All
25.
26.
Beach Erosion
Airfield Noise
6
12
13
6
19
18
27.
Vandalism/Trespassing
3
15
18
28.
Commercial Fishermen
2
13
15
29.
Need to Recycle
8
7
15
30.
Billboards/Signs
6
8
14
'
31.
Fire Department
7
4
11
32.
Lack of Insect Spraying
7
3
10
33.
Building Inspector
2
8
10
'
34.
Need More Businesses/
Restaurants/Hotels
3
6
9
35.
Tourist Crowds
5
4
9
36.
More Lifeguards Needed
5
4
9
37.
Alcohol & Drugs
2
5
7
38.
Power Lines
1
5
6
39.
Waterway Traffic/Jet Skis
2
3
5
40.
Need More Mobile Home Parks
3
0
3
41.
Keep Piers Open All Year
0
3
3
42.
Lack of Medical Facilities
0
2
2
43.
Surfers
0
2
2
'
44.
Fishing Laws Too Restrictive
0
2
2
45.
Rescue Service
0
2
2
9. Please answer the following concerning the town's
Dune
and Vegetation
Protection Ordinance.
a)
I am (am not) familiar with the
Emerald
Isle Dune
and Vegetation
Ordinance.
'
R
NR
All
Familiar
339/534
(63.4%)
529/1121
(47.2%)
868/1655
(52.4%)
Not Familiar
165/534
(30.9%)
621/1121
(46.5%)
686/1655
(41.5%)
No Response
30/534
(5.7%)
71/1121
(6.3%)
101/1655
(6.1%)
b)
The ordinance is being adequately enforced.
R
NR
All
'
Yes
161/534
(30.1%)
253/1121
(22.6%)
414/1655
(25.0%)
No
182/534
(34.1%)
233/1121
(20.8%)
415/1655
(25.0%)
No Response
191/534
(35.8%)
635/1121
(56.6%)
826/1655
(50.0%)
'
c)
The Dune and Vegetation Ordinance currently
should be left in natural vegetation. Should
requires
this
that 45%
be increased,
of a residential lot
decreased, or
left the same?
R
NR
All
Increased
100/534
(18.7%)
181/1121
(16.1%)
281/1655
(17.0%)
Decreased
23/534
(4.3%)
27/1121
(2.4%)
50/1655
(3.0%)
Left the Same
No Response
272/534
139/534
(50.9%)
(26.1%)
504/1121
409/1121
(45.0%)
(36.5%)
776/1655
548/1655
(46.9%)
(33.1%)
d)
The ordinance should be revised
to aid in
preserving
maritime
forest
areas.
'
R
NR
All
Yes
326/534
(61.0%)
584/1121
(52.1%)
910/1655
(55.0%)
No
70/534
(13.1%)
72/1121
(6.4%)
142/1655
(8.6%)
'
No Response
138/534
(25.9%)
465/1121
(41.5%)
603/1655
(36.4%)
11

10. As the Town of Emerald Isle continues to grow, a central sewer system may be needed to '
prevent environmental problems. Would you vote in favor of a bond referendum for a
sewer system if you knew that ad valorem taxes would remain at the current level and
the monthly sewer bill would be less than $25/month/household?
R
Yes 342/534 (64.1%)
No 146/534 (27.3%)
No Response 46/534 (8.6%)
NR
687/1121 (61.3%)
332/1121 (29.6%)
102/1121 (9.1%)
All
1029/1655 (62.2%)
478/1655 (28.9%)
148/1655 (8.9%)
11. Should a third bridge be constructed from Bogue Banks to the mainland for improved
access and evacuation?
R NR
Yes 355/534 (66.5%) 585/1121 (52.2%)
No 164/534 (30.7%) 481/1121 (42.9%)
No Response 15/534 (2.8%) 55/1121 (4.9%)
12. What type of growth should be encouraged or discouraged in Emerald Isle?
R NR
Permanent Residential
Encouraged 472/534 (88.4%) 925/1121 (82.5%)
Discouraged 17/534 (3.2%) 38/1121 (3.3%)
No Response 45/534 (8.4%) 158/1121 (14.1%)
Seasonal Residential
Encouraged
Discouraged
No Response
Single-Familv Dwellinas
Encouraged
Discouraged
No Response
Multi -Family Dwellinas
Encouraged
Discouraged
No Response
Condominiums
Encouraged
Discouraged
No Response
Permanent Mobile Homes
Encouraged
Discouraged
No Response
Mobile Home Parks
Encouraged
Discouraged
No Response
Commercial Development
Encouraged
Discouraged
No Response
338/534 (63.3%) 798/1121 (71.2%)
78/534
(14.6%)
89/1121
(7.9%)
118/534
(22.1%)
234/1121
(20.9%)
442/534
(82.8%)
935/1121
(83.4%)
15/534
(2.8%)
29/1121
(2.6%)
77/534
(14.4%)
157/1121
(14.0%)
89/534
(16.7%)
135/1121
(12.0%)
303/534
(56.8%)
642/1121
(57.3%)
142/534
(26.6%)
344/1121
(30.7%)
53/534 (9.9%) 90/1121 (8.0%)
360/534 (67.4%) 758/1121 (67.6%)
121/534 (22.7%) 273/1121 (24.4%)
112/534 (21.0%) 149/1121 (13.3%)
323/534 (60.5%) 750/1121 (66.9%)
99/534 (18.5%) 222/1121 (19.8%)
52/534 (9.791) 54/1121 (4.8%)
390/534 (73.0%) 840/1121 (75.0%)
92/534 (17.3%) 227/1121 (20.2%)
159/534 (29.8%) 212/1121 (18.9%)
246/534 (46.1%) 588/1121 (52.4%)
129/534 (24.1%) 321/1121 (28.7%)
940/1655 (56.8%)
645/1655 (39.0%)
70/1655 (4.2%)
All
1397/1655 (84.4$)
55/1655 (3.2%)
203/1655 (12.3%)
1136/1655 (68.6%)
167/1655 (10.1%)
352/1655 (21.3%)
1377/1655 (83.2%)
44/1655 (2.7%)
234/1655 (14.1%)
224/1655 (13.5%)
945/1655 (57.1%)
486/1655 (29.4%)
143/1655 (8.6%)
1118/1655 (67.6%)
394/1655 (23.8%)
261/1655 (15.8%)
1073/1655 (64.8%)
321/1655 (19.4%)
106/1655 (6.4%)
1230/1655 (74.3%)
319/1655 (19.3%)
371/1655 (22.4%)
834/1655 (50.0)
450/1655 (27.2%)
III-6

12. (Continued)
Day Visitors
Encouraged
Discouraged
No Response
' Marinas
Encouraged
Discouraged
No Response
' Recreational Vehicle Camp Grounds
Encouraged
Discouraged
No Response
13.
14.
R
282/534 (52.8%)
129/534 (24.2%)
123/534 (23.0%)
212/534 (39.7%)
211/534 (39.5%)
111/534 (20.8%)
135/534 (25.3%)
304/534 (57.0%)
95/534 (17.7%)
NR
444/1121 (39.6%)
345/1121 (30.8%)
332/1121 (29.6%)
531/1121 (47.4%)
315/1121 (28.1%)
275/1121 (24.5%)
202/1121 (18.0%)
651/1121 (58.1%)
268/1121 (23.9%)
Which of the following statements best describes growth in Emerald Isle?
R
NR
Growing
Too Fast
134/534
(25.1%)
315/1121
(28.1%)
Growing
Too Slowly
32/534
(6.0%)
14/1121
(1.2%)
Growing
At The Right Pace
240/534
(44.9%)
443/1121
(39.5%)
Emerald
Isle Has Grown Enough
152/534
(28.5%)
384/1121
(34.3%)
Should Emerald Isle support beach renourishment?
All
726/1655 (43.9%)
474/1655 (28.6%)
455/1655 (27.5%)
743/1655 (44.9%)
526/1655 (31.8%)
386/1655 (23.3%)
337/1655 (20.4%)
955/1655 (57.7%)
363/1655 (21.9%)
All
449/1655 (27.1%)
46/1655 (2.8%)
683/1655 (41.3%)
536/1655 (32.4%)
R
NR
All
Yes
276/534
(51.7%)-
561/1121
(50.1%)
838/1655
(50.6%)
No
218/534
(40.8%)
437/1121
(39.0%)
655/1655
(39.6%)
No Response
40/534
(7.5%)
122/1121
(10.9%)
162/1655
(9.8%)
'
If yes, should local tax dollars be used to help defray the cost?
R
NR
All
(348 responses)* (698
responses)*
(1046 responses)*
Yes
175/348
(50.3%)
394/698
(56.4%)
569/1046
(54.9%)
No
173/348
(49.7%)
304/698
(43.6%)
477/1046
(45.6%)
*Number of responses indicated is the
total number of
respondents
surveyed
who selected
'
either yes or no.
15. Keeping in mind that public shoreline
non -waterfront residential properties,
access areas serve both day visitors and
please indicate which of the following statements
you agree with concerning shoreline access.
R
NR
All
Off-street Parking at shoreline
access areas should be provided.
Agree
319/534
(59.7%)
597/1121
(53.3%)
916/1655
(55.3%)
'
No Response
° There are too many pedestrian
215/534
(40.3%)
524/1121
(46.7%)
739/1655
(44.7%)
ocean access areas.
Agree .
43/534
(8.M
68/1121
(6.1%)
111/1655
(6.7%)
No Response
491/534
(92.0%)
1053/1121
(93.9%)
1544/1655
(93.3%)

15. (Continued)
° There are too many vehicular
ocean access areas.
Agree
87/534
(16.3%)
192/1121
(17.1%)
279/1655
(16.9%)
No Response
447/534
(83.7%)
929/1121
(82.9%)
1376/1655
(83.1%)
° There are too many sound
access areas.
Agree
42/534
(7.9%)
51/1121
(4.5%)
93/1655
(5.6%)
No Response
492/534
(92.1%)
1070/1121
(95.5%)
1562/1655
(94.4%)
° More ocean and sound access areas
should be improved to include
facilities such as restrooms,
showers and lighting.
Agree
240/534
(44.9%)
372/1121
(33.2%)
612/1655
(37.0%)
No Response
294/534
(55.1%)
749/1121
(66.8%)
1043/1544
(63.0%)
° Maintenance of shoreline access
areas should be improved.
Agree
196/534
(36.7%)
397/1121
(35.4%)
593/1655
(35.8%)
No Response
338/534
(63.3%)
724/1121
(64.6%)
1062/1655
(64.2%)
° Local tax dollars should be spent
to provide/improve shoreline
access areas.
Agree
193/534
(36.1%)
361/1121
(32.2%)
554/1655
(33.5%)
No Response
341/534
(63.9%)
760/1121
(67.8%)
1101/1655
(66.5%)
16. Should Emerald Isle provide off-street
parking
for day
visitors and permanent
visitors?
R
NR
All
Yes
373/534
(69.9%) ,
671/1121
(59.9%)
1044/1655
(63.1%)
No
132/534
(24.7%)
360/1121
(32.1%)
492/1655
(29.7%)
No Response
29/534
(5.4%)
90/1121
(8.1%)
119/1655
(7.2%)
If yes, where?
R
NR
All
(385 responses)* (68
-responses)*
(1065 responses)*
In Residential Areas
11/385
(2.9%)
16/680
(2.4%)
27/1065
(2.5%)
In Commercial Areas
153/385
(39.7%)
326/680 (48.0%)
479/1065
(45.0%)
In Both Residential and
Commercial Areas
221/385
(57.4%)
338/680 (49.6%)
559/1065
(52.5%)
*Number of responses indicated
is the total number
of respondents surveyed
who
selected any one of the three
possible choices.
III-8

'
17. Are there any natural features within
adequately
Emerald
Isle which.you believe are not being
protected?
Total Comments
Feature/Category
R
NR
All
(�_(1121)
(1655)
1. Maritime Forests
102
136
238
t
2. Dunes (erosion, development,
4 WD vehicles)
50
120
170
3. Beaches (erosion, litter, vehicles) 32
49
81
4. Vegetation/sea oats
25
45
70
5. Trees
18
24
42
6. Wildlife (birds, deer, turtles)
20
19
39
7. Water quality/sound
12
24
36
B. Wetlands/marsh
10
11
21
9. Canals (drainage into)
7
5
12
10. Coast Guard Road
0
3
3
11. Fish
0
3
3
'
12. Open Space
0
2
2
13. Archer's Creek
0
2
2
14. Access areas
1
0
1
15. Air quality
1
0
1
'
16. Bell Cove Cemetery
0
1
1
18. Is there a traffic congestion problem
on U. S.
58 in
Emerald Isle?
'
R
NR
All
Yes
334/534
(62.5%)
685/1121 (61.1%)
1019/1655
(61.5%)
No
137/534
(25.7%)
259/1121 (23.1%)
396/1655
(24.0%)
'
No Response
63/534
(11.8%)
177/1121 (15.8%)
240/1655
(14.5%)
If yes, plase indicate how congestion
might be decreased.
R
NR
All
'
(389 responses)*
(788 responses)*
(1177 responses)*
° Widen Langston Bridge to
'
four lanes.
° Widen U. S. 58 to provide
113/389
(29.0%)
154/788 (19.5%)
267/1177
(22.7%)
turn lanes.
201/389
(51.7%)
459/788 (58.2%)
660/1177
(56.1%)
Widen U. S. 58 to four lanes.
128/389
(32.996)
230/788 (29.2%)
358/1177
(30.4%)
° Construct a third bridge between
Bogue Banks and the mainland..
246/389
(63.2%)
430/788 (54.6%)
676/1177
(57.4%)
° Increase traffic signals.
53/389
(13.6%)
96/788 (12.2%)
149/1177
(12.7%)
° Decrease traffic signals
56/389
(14.4%)
92/788 (11.7%)
148/1177
(12.6%)
'
° Other (See below for summary)
59/389
(15.2%)
132/788 (16.8%)
191/1177
(16.2%)
*Most individuals checked more than one response. The number of responses
indicated
is
the number of respondents surveyed who checked one or more of the possible
choices.
U

1
° "Other" responses for Question #18: '
Number of Responses
Suggestion
R
NR
All
1.
Synchronize traffic lights
14
27
41
2.
Police control/traffic cop
7
22
29
3.
Limit development
4
18
22
4.
5.
Add turn lanes
Increase # of lights
5
3
17
7
22
10
'
6.
Eliminate beach music festival
4
5
9
7.
Decrease # of lights
3
6
9
8.
Third bridge
5
4
9
9.
Increase speed limit
1
8
9
10.
Build Route 24/58 cloverleaf
0
6
6
11.
Hire consultant
0
4
4
12.
Open closed streets
4
0
4
13.
Add jogging/bike path
1
2
3
14.
Add light at Mangrove/US 58
0
3
3
15.
Decrease speed limit
0
3
3
'
16.
Make US 58 one way
0
2
2
17.
Add pedestrian crossing w/lights
0
2
2
18.
Use DOT resources
1
0
1
19.
Keep speed limit consistent
0
1
1
'
20.
Bypass Indian Beach
0
1
1
19. From the following recreational facilities, please select and rank those that you think '
should be provided utilizing local tax dollars for all or a portion of the cost.
(Ranked from 1 - 11 with Ill being the highest rated choice. The weighted average --
changing 10' or no response to 121' -- is in parenthesis.)
Recreational Facilit
1. Parking for Shoreline Access
2. Jogging and Walking Paths
3. Bikeways
4. Public Boat Access
5. Picnic Facilities
6. Playgrounds
7. Bath Houses
8. Tennis Courts
9. Convention and Meeting Hall
10. Ball Fields
11. Handball Courts
R
NR
All
1
(10.77)
2
(12.69)
1
(12.07)
2
(11.63)
1
(12.55)
2
(12.26)
3
(11.79)
3
(12.86)
3
(12.51)
4
(13.23)
4
(13.28)
4
(13.26)
5
(13.67)
5
(15.45)
5
(14.88)
7
(15.42)
6
(16.25)
6
(15.98)
6
(15.19)
8
(16.80)
7
(16.28)
9
(16.94)
7
(16.53)
8
(16.67)
8
(16.08)
9
(18.18)
9
(17.50)
10
(17.45)
10
(18.75)
10
(18.33)
11
(18.33)
11
(19.45)
11
(19.09)
20. In 1987, Emerald Isle adopted a Master Drainage Plan. Drainage improvements are
identified that need to be made to correct existing problems. What do you feel is the
most equitable means of paying for such improvements?
R
NR
All
Front Foot Assessments
278/534
(52.1%)
512/1121
(45.796)
790/1655
(47.7%)
Special Taxes
64/534
(12.0%)
156/1121
(13.9%)
220/1655
(13.3%)
Other
72/534
(13.5%)
151/1121
(13.5%)
223/1655
(13.5%)
No Response
120/534
(22.4%)
302/1121
(26.9%)
422/1655
(25.5%)
° Summary of "Other" Responses:
1. Local taxes (ad valorem)
14
55
69
2. Development fees
18
18
36
3. Available town funds
12
13
25
4. Front foot assessments
9
16
25
5. Bond issue
10
14
24

6. Combination assessment and
special taxes
4
9
7. State funds
2
7
8. Federal funds
2
6
9. Sales tax
0
5
10. Special tax
1
3
11. Visitor fees
2
2
12. Use street maintenance budget
1
1
13. Bridge toll.
bills
14. Prorate water0
1
0
1
'
15. Regulator tax
0
1
16. Hotel tax
1
0
21.
Are you affected by noise from aircraft operation out
of Bogue Field?
R
NR
Yes
369/534
(69.1%)
613/1121
(54.7%)
1
No
122/534
(22.8%)
379/1121
(33.8%)
No Resposne
43/534
(8.1%)
129/1121
(11.5%)
If yes, please answer the following:
R
NR
(411 responses)*
(724 responses)*
° Noise is not offensive.
86/411
(20.9%)
192/724
(26.5%)
* Noise is occasionally offensive.
220/411
(53.5%)
401/724
(55.4%)
* Noise is regularly offensive.
43/411
(10.5%)
64/724
(8.8%)
Noise is highly disruptive
to Emerald Isle's day-to-day
lifestyles.
62/411
(15.1%)
67/724
(9.3%)
13
9
8
5
4
4
2
1
1
1
1
All
982/1655 (59.3%)
501/1655 (30.3%)
172/1655 (10.4%)
All
(113�sponses)*
278/1135 (24.5%)
621/1135 (54.7%)
107/1135 (9.4%)
129/1135 (11.4%)
' *Number of responses indicated is the number of respondents surveyed who selected any of
the four possible responses.
1
1
f
1
1
1
1
1

SECTION IV
EMERALD ISLE
1
LAND CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
1
1
1
I

a
'
SECTION IV: EMERALD ISLE LAND CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
The CAMA regulations require the establishment of a specific land
classification system to support the local government's policy
statements. This system should reflect developing land use
patterns within the town and provide a framework to be utilized by
Emerald Isle to identify future land uses.
The 15A NCAC 7B requirements provide for the following land clas-
sifications: developed, urban transition, limited transition,
community, rural, rural with services, and conservation. In
applying these classifications, Emerald Isle should carefully
consider where and when various types of development should be
encouraged. Additionally, the areas of environmental concern
requiring protection should be recognized by the land classifica-
tion system. Each applicable land classification must be repre-
sented on a land classification map.
The following land classifications will apply in Emerald Isle's
jurisdiction:
Developed areas included in the developed land classification
are currently urban in character, with no or minimal undevel-
oped land remaining. Municipal types of services, with the
exception of central. sewer service, are in place or are
expected to be provided within the next five to ten years.
Land uses include residential, commercial, public/semi-public,
and other urban land uses at the following densities which are
prescribed by 15A NCAC 7B:
° 500 dwelling units per square mile, or
° three dwelling units per acre, or
° where a majority of lots are 15,0.00 square feet or less.
Emerald Isle was well below these urban densities in 1990,
having an average town -wide residential density of just under
.50 dwelling units per acre.
Within Emerald Isle, the developed classification is sub-
divided into the following sub -classifications:
° Developed Residential (DR) - These are areas where water,
electrical, police, fire, sanitation, recreation and other
municipal services are provided. The major land use is
residential development. The maximum height for residen-
tial structures is 40 feet for wooden structures and 100
feet for concrete, steel, or other non -wood frame struc-
tures. This restriction will aid in limiting residential
density. Very little vacant land remains to be developed
or subdivided. Specific densities in the various areas of
the town shall be dictated by the Emerald Isle Zoning
Ordinance.
IV-1

Those densities are: 12,500 square feet for a single- '
family lot; 15,000 square feet for a duplex; and a maximum
of 8 dwelling units per acre for multi -family development.
Developed Commercial (DC) - These are areas where water,
police, fire, sanitation, recreation and other municipal
services are provided. Most developed commercial property
borders Emerald Drive (N.C. 58). Almost all developed
commercial classified land has either been built upon or
has had proposals approved for its development. The few
scattered parcels that have not been developed should be
approved for development within the planning period.
Developed Public (DP) - These are areas committed to public
use where water, electrical, police, fire, sanitation,
recreation and other municipal services are provided. This
category is very limited in Emerald Isle and includes only
the Town of Emerald Isle property located at the Municipal
Building Complex.
Urban Transition (UT) - Areas included in the urban transition
classification are presently being developed for urban
purposes, or will be developed in the next five to ten years. '
These areas should require complete urban services within the
planning period, with the possible exception of central sewer
service. This classification includes areas with partial
municipal facilities and which are usually adjacent to devel-
oped residential areas. These areas are or will be primarily
residential in nature, with some scattered commercial develop-
ment. Major concentrations of urban transition land are found !�
in Blocks 49, 48, 47, 25, 18, 15 and 14. Development will
occur at densities consistent with the developed classifica-
tion and as allowed by the Emerald Isle Zoning Ordinance.
Conservation (CON) - The following areas of environmental
concern and 11404" wetlands (not an area of environmental
concern) are included in the conservation classification:
Coastal Wetlands: This classification includes all
areas of salt marsh or other marsh subject regular or
occasional flooding by tides, including wind tides. How-
ever, tidal flooding is understood not to include hurri-
cane or tropical storm tides. Development which meets
the minimum use standards of 15A NCAC 7H, Emerald Isle
zoning, and the policies contained in this plan shall be
allowed in areas classified as coastal wetlands.
Estuarine Shoreline: All areas lying 0-75 feet land-
ward of the mean high water level of estuarine waters not '
designated as Outstanding Resource Waters are classified
as estuarine shorelines. Because of map size and scale,
Ir-
L_,_
IV-2 I

these areas cannot be accurately mapped. Precise loca-
tions must be determined in the field. Except for
maritime forest areas, uses consistent with Emerald Isle
zoning, the policies contained in this plan, and the
15A NCAC 7H use standards shall be allowed in estuarine
shoreline areas. Within maritime forest areas, minimum
design standards shall apply which exceed 15A NACA 7H.
Estuarine and Public Trust Waters: All public trust
areas and estuarine waters are included in this classifi-
cation. All waters in Emerald Isle's planning jurisdic-
tion are classified as estuarine waters as described by
15A NCAC 7H.0206 or public trust areas as described by
15A NCAC 7H.0207. Uses permitted by the policies con-
tained in this plan and 15A NCAC 7H shall be allowed.
The policies dealing with floating structures and signs
are more restrictive than the 15A NCAC 7H.
ORW Estuarine Shorelines: All areas lying 0-575 feet
landward of the mean high water level of estuarine waters
designated as Outstanding Resource Waters are classified
as ORW estuarine shorelines. Because of map size and
scale, these areas cannot be accurately mapped. Precise
locations must be determined in the field. Uses permit-
ted by the Town of Emerald Isle's Zoning Ordinance, the
Bogue Sound ORW Management Plan, 15A NCAC 7H,. and the
policies contained in this plan shall be allowed. The
policies dealing with floating structures, signs, and
maritime forest design standards are more restrictive
than the ORW Management Plan and 15A NCAC 7H.
Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW): This area
includes all waters of Bogue Sound in and adjacent to
Emerald Isle and a portion of Piney Creek which have been
designated by the North Carolina Environmental Management
Commission as Outstanding Resource Waters. The ORW
locations are indicated on Maps 8A, 8B and 8C. Allowed
uses will be those permitted. by the use standards
included in the Bogue Sound ORW Management Plan,
15A NCAC 7H, and the policies contained in this plan.
The policies dealing with floating structures and signs
are more restrictive than the ORW Management Plan and
15A NCAC 7H.
Ocean Hazard Areas: This classification includes all
ocean hazard areas. These areas include lands along the
Atlantic shoreline where, because of their special vul-
nerability to erosion or other adverse effects of sand,
wind and water, uncontrolled or incompatible development
could unreasonably endanger life or property. These
areas include beaches, frontal dunes, inlet lands, and
other lands with excessive erosion or flood damage.
Development shall be permitted which is allowed by the
policies contained in this plan, the Emerald Isle Zoning
Ordinance, and 15A NCAC 7H.0306.
IV-3

I
404 Wetlands: This classification includes areas of
404 wetlands which meet the wetlands definition contained
in Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Only uses consis-
tent with the policy statements section of this plan and
the Emerald Isle Zoning Ordinance will be allowed. These
areas are not delineated on the Land Classification Map.
Specific locations must be determined in the field by
representatives of the Wilmington office of the U. S.
Army Corps of Engineers. The town concurs with the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' standards and does not
intend to develop more restrictive standards.
1
I
I
1
I
fl
IV-4 I

TO w1v OF ewhR.4L,0 ISLE
LAND CLASSIFICATION MAP
1090 5p0 O 500 1000 1500 2500
1" = 500'
CQN
i
I
I 80GUE
SOUND
DC
DC
UT
D R
r..Ww Its"
I
�,
I. ,��
1
It
��
I ;�
E
a
a
�
R a a
4 aDR
'
DR
�DR i UT
i UT
�; DR
�, DR
aa�a
i
► 1 '
i
I -
n , �i
� it � �' � it
� it �'
u � �r ( r
� � I r � • I s I r � s � i I r � r � i
•no pltrooraft" of Ina lnep "a h.gnca.
w DWI INOV9a a w1 l 11I" Ity
A TL AN T/C
"ar'" ` IM* ` fultd "°"'9""'"' O CE.4 N
Ilregfalw, INOapt Iurwa ae�aw a1 Ina
Coastal ions As"o nant Act of 1972.
as atlle"I ar-c" .s aallalastaso by he
Office al OCR"a" Coastal Resewce
1A.."a""I Netleey Ocaaac we
Allnaspiw-c Aanswslraws.
LEGEND
OR DEVELOPED RESIDENTIAL
DC DEVELOPED COMMERCIAL
OP DEVELOPED PUBLIC
UT URBAN TRANSITION
CON CONSERVATION
BECAUSE OF MAP SCALE. THE
CONSERVATION AREAS CANNOT BE
ACCURATELY MAPPED. PRECISE LOCATIO113
MUST BE DETERMINED IN THE FIELD.
IV
t
A
IV-7

/r
+I•M
Ir
•'
_RW7 Nx09Y
JJ•nI,I
/r
-aW7 N7lO7Y
o
h
C41
MR-7
V
O
y
rk
d
O
1r�9
•�r••
;
_V
0
r
I MlA/i,
j
11
Or /rYry
� Y� •wn.rr
,rp
1
Z
V
y
fi
V
1i11 �i � I,Iw J/I
s�
ji,
41 A.I
.
~v
z�•S
W m!r
7
Y/ O"lM
V
10 YM/.r1
-
O
Jr •
IJW
mAll
IIYJ
low
N,wr rJ.rr
IS
rRY9
AWJ
JJAVr
- - -
/w,rv.
U
i
JJr
•i
H
`1 t�l� p
Iw r,wK ✓l.i
LO 1 .a � •l •••
�
�1%A_
J,rr Jrrw
,r Jrk .
Yr .a, /,,,
- ---•
F" E)
W W
V
Z
F- W w
Z V T
-
U
vQi
J
o
E
z su 1-
--- in�a
:tvu tnx»
W o
�cqq 3
>r w.J,IY/J
r,q
O C
C
Q
v Q W
wrrlrr
All .,•Yr.
W W
W
Q
~
W
Q r% W d 2
All r v
O O
J
O
QQQa
W
►e xlr..r
.*wr,
J
W W
J
W
2
7zxw
V21
%r
J`
> >
>
mQ1L�?-W
C I'
.tAlaw w
��r✓tl.rx., -
'S
w O O
O
O
V
_W7 OV)IM
/r /mJ.rl
,c .A, IJr.
7 /17.I
W
J
O r
%r rJ w
,o r/Io r7r
.,7N'
Y
O
O
O
V m v Q i
%f MJl it
W JI/X/A
1
r,l IYYM•IA
/f fNMI/
M JVW1,1,
ti

t
•1:
I JL/.per J� I
l � !DR AMill�J7
� � 1
� I �
LEGEND
OR DEVELOPED RESIDENTIAL
DC DEVELOPED COMMERCIAL
DP DEVELOPED PUBLIC
' UT URBAN TRANSITION
CON CONSERVATION
BECAUSE OF MAP SCALE, THE
CONSERVATION AREAS CANNOT BE
ACCURATELY MAPPED. PRECISE LOCATIONS
MUST BE DETERMINED IN THE FIELD.
TO /YN Of EMERALD ISLE'
LAND CLAn FICAT10N MAP
1000 500 0 500 1000 1500 2500
I"=500'
B. CABLE LANGSTON
.COS!-
BOGUEI I 1 SOUND ,
• r 1
CO i I ► i DC
CO
�sJtr'a , Mir
! J«
1 r DR Y. >, +) i= __t• rl zliDR t i a t Ala
UT DR 11
"mr,I....a. / ' $ j h� _ _ 1 ,tali /e" fr! _ ! 1 1 �r _ 1011, t
r
' er� D 11 .eaepm, u� f
1 ! , !
1 '
1 kk
er ,j i f S i I l C j i T--- 4..:�,.. ! Ir
t 1 E I 3 f! I 1 r 1 1 r r
DR J
�DRi�ii DC
't� i ► ' I; ! IIDR� t 1
�t Iswor 1 r I 1 r I I I
law
DR r l
,1
A TL ANT/C i I OCEAN, I t
1
/l�r/u Crssr C.wl. �y
" sm'l Z... slw�.wr Ad N HT7;
ow
011oce N Oc.w aM C..sr A"~
AIwassawc A...wsrwsal
k

1
r
1
1
r
i
1
I
I
r
r
SECTION V
EMERALD ISLE
POLICY STATEMENTS

1
SECTION V: EMERALD ISLE POLICY STATEMENTS
This section of the plan provides policies which will address
P P
growth management and protection of Emerald Isle's environment.
The policies should be based on the objectives of the citizens of
Emerald Isle and satisfy the objectives of the Coastal Resources
Commission. The results of the 1991 citizen attitude survey has
influenced but not dictated the development of these policy
statements.
It is emphasized that the policy statements are extremely
important and have a day-to-day impact on individual citizens
within Emerald Isle's planning jurisdiction. The statements have
an impact in several areas, including:
-- CAMA minor and major permitting as required by N.C.G.S.
113A-118 prior to undertaking any development in any area
of environmental concern.
-- Establishment of local planning policy.
-- Review of proposed projects requiring state or federal
assistance or approval to determine consistency with local
policies.
Based on the analysis of existing conditions and trends, results
of the citizens' attitude survey, and discussion with the town's
Planning Board.and Board of Commissioners, the policies outlined
in the following section have been formulated to provide a guide
for advising and regulating development of available land
resources in Emerald Isle throughout the current planning period,
i.e., 2000. Policies which were considered, but not adopted, are
provided in Appendix III.
A. RESOURCE PROTECTION POLICY STATEMENTS
1. Physical Limitations
Soils: To mitigate existing septic tank problems and other
restrictions on development posed by soil limitations, Emerald
Isle will:
(a) Enforce all current regulations of the N.C. State Building
Code and Carteret County Health Department for all matters
relating to septic tank installation/replacement in areas
with soils restrictions.
(b) Coordinate all development activity with appropriate county
and state regulatory personnel.
(c) Cooperate with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in the
regulation/enforcement of the 404 wetlands permit process.
I V-1

1
(d) Emerald Isle will maintain low -density residential develop-
ment (8 dwelling units/acre or less) in order to decrease
soil contamination and groundwater pollution from septic
tanks. J
(e) Emerald Isle opposes the installation of package treatment
plants and septic tanks or discharge of waste in any areas
classified as coastal wetlands or fresh water wetlands
(404) .
(f) Support and cooperate with the efforts of Carteret County to
develop a central sewer system to serve the developed areas
of the county, including the municipalities.
Flood Hazard Areas:
(a) Emerald Isle will coordinate any development within the
special flood hazard area with the North Carolina Division of
Coastal Management, FEMA, and the U.S. Corps of Engineers.
(b) Emerald Isle will continue to enforce its existing zoning and
flood damage prevention ordinances and follow the storm
hazard mitigation plan. (See Subsection D, Storm Hazard
Mitigation, Post -Disaster Recovery, and Evacuation Plans).
Groundwater/Protection of Potable Water Supplies:
(a) Emerald Isle will strive to conserve its surficial ground-
water resources by supporting CAMA and N.C. Division of
Environmental Management stormwater run-off regulations.
(b) Emerald Isle will implement the recommendations contained in
the Town of Emerald Isle 1989 Drainage Master Plan and
enforce the Stormwater Control Ordinance adopted in July,
1989.
Manmade Hazards:
(a) Emerald Isle will support the technical requirements and
state program approval for underground storage tanks (Chapter
40 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Parts 280 and 281),
and any subsequent state regulations concerning underground
storage tanks adopted during the planning period.
(b) Emerald Isle recognizes that some adverse noise impacts will
result from the operation of Bogue Field. The town will
cooperate with the U. S. Marine Corps to educate the public
of efforts being undertaken by the military to mitigate
adverse noise impacts resulting from aircraft operations at
Bogue Field.
(d) With the exception of bulk fuel storage tanks used for retail
and wholesale sales, and individual heating fuel storage
tanks, Emerald Isle opposes the bulk storage of manmade
hazardous materials within its jurisdiction.
V-2

r
(d) Emerald Isle is opposed to the establishment of toxic waste
dump sites within Carteret County.
Solid Waste:
(a) Emerald Isle supports efforts by Carteret County to pursue a
regional multi -county approach to solid waste management.
(b) Emerald Isle supports the maximum extension of the life of
the county's Hibbs Road Landfill through waste reduction and
recycling efforts. The town will cooperate with any efforts
to educate people and businesses on waste reduction and
recycling. The town vigorously supports recycling by all
users of the county landfill and supports setting up practi-
cal collection methods and education efforts to achieve a
high degree of county -wide recycling.
(c) Emerald Isle supports the siting of recycling centers within
public and commercial land classifications.
Cultural/Historical Resources: There do not appear to be any
nationally significant historic or archaeological sites within
Emerald Isle. However, at least 20 historic and prehistoric
period archaeological sites have been recorded within Emerald
Isle. In order to protect these areas, Emerald Isle will:
(a) Coordinate all housing code enforcement/redevelopment
projects with the N.C. Division of Archives and History, to
ensure that any significant architectural details or build-
ings are identified and preserved.
(b) Coordinate -all county and town public works projects with the
N.C. Division of Archives and History, to ensure the identi-
fication and preservation of significant archaeological
sites.
Industrial Impacts on Fragile Areas: No industrial development of
any type shall be located within Emerald Isle's planning juris-
diction.
'A 2. Miscellaneous Resource Protection
Package Treatment Plant Use: Emerald Isle will support the
construction of package treatment plants which are approved and
permitted by the State Division of Environmental Management and by
the Carteret County Health Department/Division of Health Services.
If -any package plants are approved, Emerald Isle supports require-
ment of a specific contingency plan specifying how ongoing private
operation and maintenance of the plant will be provided, and
detailing provisions for assumption of the plant into a public
system should the private operation fail.
1
i V-3

Marina and Floating Home Development: Emerald Isle will enforce
the following policies to govern floating homes and both open
water and upland marina development. Marinas are considered to.be
any publicly or privately owned dock constructed to accommodate
more than ten boats, as defined by 15A NCAC 7H.208(b)(5).
(a) Emerald Isle will permit the construction and expansion of
both open water and upland marinas which meet local zoning
ordinance requirements, the requirements of the 15A NCAC 7H
use standards, and the Bogue Sound ORW Management Plan.
(b) Emerald Isle will allow the construction of dry stack storage
facilities which meet 15A NCAC 7H use standards, all local
applicable code requirements, and the Bogue Sound ORW
Management Plan.
(c) Emerald Isle supports the restriction of floating structures
in all public trust areas and estuarine waters. Floating
structures are defined as any structure or vessel used,
designed, and occupied as a permanent dwelling unit, busi-
ness, office, or source of any occupation or any private or
social club, which floating structure or vessel is primarily
immobile and out of navigation or which functions substan-
tially as a land structure while moored or docked on waters
within county jurisdiction. Floating structures shall not be
used commercially or inhabited in one place for more than 15
days. The town will develop and adopt an ordinance designed
to enforce this policy.
Development of Sound and Estuarine Islands: Emerald Isle desires
to restrict any construction on sound or estuarine islands. The
town will review its zoning ordinance to incorporate controls to
regulate development on sound and estuarine islands. Until the
zoning ordinance is revised, the town will support development on
islands which satisfies the 15A NCAC 7H use standards.
Ocean Hazard Areas:
(a.) Emerald Isle will support only uses within.the'ocean hazard
areas which are allowed by 15A NCAC 7H and are consistent
with the town's zoning and dune and vegetation protection
ordinances.
(b) Emerald Isle supports beach nourishment and relocation as the
preferred erosion control measures for ocean hazard areas.
(c) The town objects to the construction of permanent shoreline
stabilization structures in ocean hazard areas and any
changes in state standards which would allow such
structures.
V-4

Inlet Hazard Areas: The Town of Emerald Isle will allow uses
within the inlet hazard areas which are consistent with the town's
zoning ordinance, 15A NCAC-7H use standards and the following use
standards:
(1) All development in the inlet hazard area shall be set back
from the first line of stable natural vegetation a distance
equal to the setback required in the adjacent ocean hazard
areas;
(2) Permanent structures shall be permitted at a density of no
more than one commercial or residential unit per 15,000
square feet of land area on lots subdivided or created after
July 23, 1981;
(3) Only residential structures of four units or less or non-
residential structures of less than 5,000 square feet total
floor area shall be allowed within the inlet hazard area;
(4) Established common-law and statutory public rights of access
to the public trust lands and waters in inlet hazard areas
shall not be eliminated or restricted. Development shall not
encroach upon public accessways nor shall it limit the
intended use of the accessways;
(5) Shoreline stabilization structures shall be permitted only as
a part of a publicly supported project;
(6) All other rules in this subchapter pertaining to development
in the ocean hazard areas shall be applied to development
within the inlet hazard areas;
(7) The following types of development shall be exempted from
these inlet hazard area setback requirements:
-- campgrounds that do not involve substantial permanent
structures;
-- parking areas with clay, packed sand or similar surfaces;
-- outdoor tennis courts;
-- elevated decks not exceeding 500 square feet;
-- beach accessways consistent with 15A NCAC 7H use
standards;
-- unenclosed, uninhabitable gazebos with floor areas of 200
square feet or less;
-- uninhabitable storage sheds with floor areas of 200 square
feet or less;
-- temporary amusement stands; and
-- swimming pools.
In all cases, this development shall only be permitted if it
meets other applicable 15A NCAC 7H use standards; is landward
of the vegetation line; involves no significant alteration or
removal of primary or frontal dunes or the dune vegetation
V-5

has.overwalks to protect any existing dunes; is not essential
to the continued existence and/or use of an associated prin-
cipal development;is not required to satisfy minimum require-
ments of local zoning, subdivision or health regulations; and
meets all other non -setback requirements of this subchapter.
Bulkhead Construction: Emerald Isle will support the construction
of bulkheads in estuarine shorelines and ORW estuarine shorelines
which satisfy the following specific use standards as specified in
15A NCAC 7H.0206(b)(7) and 7H.1100, Bulkheads and Shoreline
Stabilization Measures:
(1) Bulkhead alignment, for the purpose of shoreline stabiliza-
tion, must approximate mean high water or normal water
level.
(2) Bulkheads shall.be constructed landward of significant marsh-
land or marshgrass fringes.
(3) Bulkhead fill material shall be obtained from an approved
upland source, or if the bulkhead is a part of a permitted
project involving excavation from a non -upland source, the
material so obtained may be contained behind the bulkhead.
(4) Bulkheads or other structures employed for shoreline stabili-
zation shall be permitted below approximate mean high water
or normal water level only when the following standards are
met:
-- the property to be bulkheaded has an identifiable erosion
problem, whether it results from natural causes or adja-
cent bulkheads, or it has unusual geographic or geologic
features, e.g., steep grade bank, which will cause the
applicant unreasonable hardship under the other provisions
of this regulation;
-- the bulkhead alignment extends no further below approxi-
mate mean high water or normal water level than necessary
to allow recovery of the area eroded in the year prior to
the date of application, to align with adjacent bulkheads,
or to mitigate the unreasonable hardship resulting from
the unusual geographic or geologic features;
-- the bulkhead alignment will not result in significant
adverse impacts to public trust rights or to the property
of adjacent riparian owners;
-- the need for a bulkhead below approximate mean high water
or normal water level is documented in the Field Investi-
gation Report or other reports prepared by the Division of
Coastal Management; and
-- the property to be bulkheaded is in a non -oceanfront
area.
(5) Where possible, sloping rip -rap, gabions, or vegetation may
be used rather than vertical seawalls.
V-6 I

1
Sea Level Rise:
(a) Emerald Isle will continuously monitor sea level rise and
revise as necessary all local building and land use related
ordinances to establish setback standards, long-term land use
plans, density controls, buffer vegetation protection.
requirements, and building designs which will facilitate the
movement of structures.
(b) Emerald Isle will allow the construction of bulkheads to
protect structures and property from rising sea level.
Maritime Forests: Maritime forest areas are not designated as a
conservation land classification. However, Emerald Isle desires
to control the development of maritime forest areas. The town
supports the design recommendations contained in the Guide to
Protecting Maritime Forests Through Planning and Design, 1990, as
prepared by the Division of Coastal Management, North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources, for the
development of maritime forest areas which are located in areas of
environmental concern and for projects subjected to the
consistency review process.
B. RESOURCE PRODUCTION AND NT POLICIES
Recreation Resources:
(a) All lands classified as conservation areas are considered
valuable passive recreation areas. Except as otherwise pro-
vided for in these policy statements, these areas should be
protected in their natural state, and development should not
be allowed except for public shoreline access including dune
crossover structures and boardwalks in ocean hazard areas.
(b) Emerald Isle supports the preservation and development of
estuarine and ocean shoreline access areas to ensure adequate
shoreline access within all areas of the town.
(c) Emerald Isle supports the development of off-street parking
facilities in both commercial and residential areas to serve
shoreline access facilities. The town will review the impact
of off-street parking on adjacent areas on a case -by -case
basis.
(d) Emerald Isle will implement the shoreline access site
improvements as recommended by the 1988 Ocean and Sound
Public Access Plan. However, the town believes the
recommendations for spaces required are excessive. The town
will accept as its goal for off-street parking spaces the
numbers recommended in Section II.E. of this plan.
V-7

(e) The Town of Emerald Isle will attempt to secure funding for
the development of shoreline access sites through the state
shoreline access grant program.
(f) During the ten-year planning period, the town will focus on
improving the following recreational facilities with funding
support from local tax dollars: parking for shoreline
access, jogging and walking paths, bikeways, public boat
access, and picnic facilities.
Productive Agricultural Lands: There are no productive agricul-
tural lands found in Emerald Isle; therefore, no policy statement
is necessary.
Productive Forest Lands: There are no productive forest lands
found in Emerald Isle; therefore, no policy statement is
necessary.
Aquaculture Activities: Aquaculture is considered the cultivation
of aquatic plants and animals under controlled conditions. The
following policies shall apply.
(a) Emerald Isle encourages all aquaculture activities which meet
applicable federal, state and local policies and permit
requirements. Emerald Isle reserves the right to comment on
all aquaculture activities which require Division of Environ-
mental Management permitting.
(b) Emerald Isle objects to any discharge of water from aquacul-
ture activities that will degrade in any way the receiving
waters. The town objects to withdrawing water from aquifers
or surface sources if such withdrawal will endanger water
quality or water supply from the aquifers or surface
sources.
Residential_, Commercial, and Industrial Development Impacts on
Resources:
(a) Residential and commercial development which meets 15A NCAC
7H use standards, Emerald Isle zoning requirements, where
applicable the Bogue Sound ORW Management Plan, and the
policies contained in this plan will be allowed in estuarine
shoreline, ORW estuarine shoreline, estuarine water, and
public trust areas. Industrial development will be pro-
hibited within Emerald Isle. Marinas and bulkheads shall be
allowed when consistent with the other policies contained in
this plan.
(b) Emerald Isle opposes the construction of any signs, except
for regulatory signs, in the coastal wetlands, estuarine
waters, and public trust areas.
V-8

I
Marine Resource Areas:
(a) With the exception of the construction of signs (excluding
regulatory signs), Emerald Isle supports the use standards
for estuarine waters and public trust areas as specified in
15A NCAC 7H.0207, and the management plan for the Bogue Sound
outstanding resource waters.
(b) Emerald Isle reserves the right to review and comment on
policies and requirements of the North Carolina Division of
Marine Fisheries which govern commercial and recreational
fisheries and activities, including trawling activities.
(c) The Town of Emerald Isle supports the designation of its
beach area as a sea turtle sanctuary by the State of North
Carolina.
Peat or Phosphate Mining: There are no peat or phosphate
deposits located within Emerald Isle's planning jurisdiction.
Off -Road Vehicles: Emerald Isle allows off -road vehicles in the
beach area, under the terms of a town ordinance adopted
December 9, 1990.
C. ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT POLICY STATEMENTS
General: Emerald Isle will support growth and development only at
low to medium densities, consistent with the town's goal of main-
taining a town -wide residential density ceiling of 8 units/acre.
The. town will not permit any industrial development. Emerald Isle
will maintain commercial development in areas zoned for commercial
development in 1991.
Water Supply: There are no significant constraints to development
or land development issues relating to the town's potable water
supply. The Bogue Banks Water and Sewer Corporation water system
should continue to provide adequate water supply throughout the
planning period. Developers will continue to install waterlines
at their own expense.
Sewer System:
(a) Emerald Isle supports the development of a sewage collection
system. The town would support treatment of waste in a
centralized Carteret County sewage treatment system. In the
absence of a county treatment plant/system, the Town of
Emerald Isle may pursue development of its own waste treat-
ment system and treatment plant.
(b) In the absence of a waste treatment plant and collection
system, Emerald Isle will support the issuance of permits for
the construction of septic tanks for residential, commercial,
and public/semi-public land uses.
1 V-9

1
Stormwater•
(a)
Emerald Isle will cooperate with the NCDOT, the North
Carolina Division of Environmental Management, and other
state agencies in mitigating the impact of stormwater runoff
on all.conservation classified areas. The town will support
the Division of Environmental Management stormwater runoff
retention permitting process through its zoning permit
system.
(b)
The town will enforce the stormwater control ordinance which
was adopted by the town in July, 1989.
Energy
Facility Siting and Development:
(a)
There are no electric generating or other power generating
plants located in or proposed for location within Emerald
Isle's planning jurisdiction. The town will not support the
location of permanent energy generating facilities within its
jurisdiction.
(b)
Emerald Isle supports Carteret Countyr s policy of reviewing
proposals for development of electric generating plants
within Carteret County on a case -by -case basis, judging the
need for the facility by the county against all identified
possible adverse impacts. The town reserves the right to
comment on the impacts of any energy facility proposed for
location within Carteret County.
(c) In the event that offshore oil or gas is discovered, Emerald
Isle will not oppose drilling operations and onshore support
facilities in Carteret County for which an Environmental
Impact Statement has been prepared with a finding of no
significant impact on the environment. Emerald Isle supports
and requests full disclosure of development plans, with miti-
gative measures that will be undertaken to prevent adverse
impacts on the environment, the infrastructure, and the
social systems of Carteret County. Emerald Isle also
requests full disclosure of any adopted plans. Offshore
drilling and the development of onshore support facilities in
Carteret County may have severe costs for the town and county
as well as advantages. The costs must be borne by the
company (ies) with profit (s) from offshore drilling and
onshore support facilities.
Redevelopment of Developed Areas: The only significant redevelop-
ment issue facing Emerald Isle through 2000 will be reconstruction
following a hurricane or other natural disaster. The town will
allow the reconstruction of any structures demolished by natural
disaster which will comply with all applicable local and state
regulations and the policies contained in this plan. The town
will not spend any local funds in order to acquire unbuildable
lots but will accept donations of such unbuildable lots. Emerald
V-10 I

1
Isle will work with any owners who may have to move any threatened
structures to safer locations. The town will support reconstruc-
tion only at densities specified by current zoning regulations.
Types and Locations of Desired Industry: Emerald Isle opposes
industrial development of any type. This policy is supported by
the Emerald Isle zoning ordinance.
Community Facilities: Emerald Isle considers its existing commu-
nity facilities, including the community center which was under
construction at the time of plan preparation, to be adequate to
serve the town's needs during the planning period. This policy
statement does not apply to sewer facilities, shoreline access,
outdoor recreation, and associated parking.
-
Commitment to State and Federal Programs: Emerald Isle is recep-
tive to state and federal programs, particularly those which pro-
vide improvements to the town. The town will continue to support
fully such programs, especially the following: North Carolina
Department of Transportation road and bridge improvement programs,
the CAMA planning process and permitting programs, the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers regulatory and permitting efforts, the North
Carolina Shoreline Access Grant program, dredging and channel
maintenance by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and federal and
state projects which provide efficient and safe boat access for
yAssistance
commercial and sport fishing.
in Channel Maintenance: Emerald Isle will support
efforts of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and state officials to
provide proper channel maintenance. However, the town opposes the
establishment of any dredge spoil sites within its jurisdiction,
with the exception of usable spoil material for beach
nourishment.
Tourism: Tourism is extremely important ortant to Emerald Isle and will
be supported by the town. Emerald Isle will implement the follow-
ing policies to further the development of tourism*:
(a) Emerald Isle will support North Carolina Department of
Transportation projects to improve access to and within
Carteret County.
(b) Emerald Isle will support projects that will increase public
access to shoreline areas.
(c) Emerald Isle will continue to support the activities of the
North Carolina Division of Travel and Tourism; specifically,
the monitoring of tourism -related industry, efforts to
promote tourism -related commercial activity, and efforts to
r
enhance and provide shoreline resources.
(d) Emerald Isle will continue to support the activities of the
Carteret County Tourism Development Bureau.
V-11

Transportation:
(a) Emerald Isle supports the development of a detailed
thoroughfare/transportation plan for the U.S. 58 (Emerald
Drive) corridor.. This plan should focus on problems in the
area included in blocks 42, 41, 40, 39 and 38. Assistance
for preparation of the plan will be sought from the North
Carolina Department of Transportation. This plan should be
coordinated with a specific and detailed land use/zoning plan
for the U.S. 58 corridor.
(b) The Town of Emerald Isle supports the following specific
transportation improvements:
-- The widening of U.S. 58 to provide turn lanes, with
primary focus on the area from the bridge to the municipal
building complex.
-- State acceptance of maintenance of Coast Guard Road. This
may require some town improvements prior to acceptance.
-- The construction of a third bridge between Bogue Banks and
the mainland.
-- Emerald Isle supports the provision of off-street parking
for day visitors and permanent residents in both commer-
cial and residential areas.
-- The town supports improved synchronization of all traffic
lights on U.S. 58 within Emerald Isle and the light at the
U.S. 58/N.C. 24 intersection. It also supports the use of
other traffic techniques which will improve traffic flow
on U.S. 58. This should include consideration of the
construction of an overpass with a -clover leaf interchange
at the N.C. 24/U.S. 58 intersection. At a minimum, an at
grade diamond shaped intersection should be constructed to
provide isolated turn lanes with yield signs and lanes to
aid merging traffic.
(c) The Town of Emerald Isle reserves the right to comment on
other specific transportation improvements following
completion of the U.S. 58 corridor transportation plan.
Development/Growth Objectives: Through enforcement of local
ordinances including zoning, subdivision and the dune and
vegetation ordinance, the Town of Emerald Isle will strive to
accomplish the following growth objectives:
-- Maintain commercial zoning in areas identified in the
October 6, 1983, commercial zoning plan. .
V-12

1
-- Maintain overall town -wide average density at 8 dwelling
units/acre or less.
-- Except for approved special uses, protect single-family resi-
dential areas from intrusions of multi -family and commercial
development.
-- Restrict the rezoning of any additional property for the
development of new mobile home parks.
-- Strive to protect the dunes and vegetation.
-- Improve enforcement of the dune and vegetation ordinance.
-- Encourage the growth of permanent residential development,
seasonal residential development, single-family dwelling
units, and day visitor traffic.
-- The town will support the long-range commercial planning for
the B-1, B-2 and B-3 zoning which was adopted on October 6,
1983.
THESE DEVELOPMENT/GROWTH POLICIES WILL ONLY BE SUPPORTED AND
ENFORCED THROUGH LOCAL ORDINANCES AND CONTROLS. The town will
review all local ordinances to ensure consistency with these
policies.
Land Use Trends: The town's land use trends have been thoroughly
discussed in other sections of this plan. Those trends include:
-- Increasing infringement of development in maritime forest
areas.
-- Development of and traffic congestion along the U.S. 58
corridor.
-- Increasing pressure for the development of central sewer
service.
-- Increasing peak population with associated traffic congestion
and demand for off-street parking facilities.
-- The rate of development within Emerald Isle is rapidly
increasing with associated increases in demand for local
services.
-- -Stormwater/drainage problems have increased with development.
-- All Areas of Environmental Concern face the threat of damage
resulting from the increasing development.
These land use trends should be monitored by the town and con-
trolled through existing local, state, and federal land use regu-
lations including CAMA, 11404" regulations, sanitary regulations,
and the town's subdivision and zoning ordinances and building
inspection program.
V-13

During the ten-year planning period, the town will focus on
reducing and/or eliminating problems in the following areas:
(1) Traffic congestion;
(2) Provision of off-street parking;.
(3) Protecting the environment with emphasis on dunes,
vegetation, and sound areas;
(4) Improvement of shoreline access facilities;
(5) Drainage;
(6) Provision of a central sewer system;
D. CONTINUING PUBLIC PARTICIPATION POLICIES
As the initial step in the preparation of this document,
Emerald Isle prepared and adopted a "Public Participation Plan."
The plan outlined the methodology for citizen involvement. Public
involvement was to be generated through public information
meetings, advertising in local newspapers, and development of the
plan by the Town of Emerald Isle Planning Board.
A public information meeting was conducted at the outset of
the project on September 24, 1990, at 7:00 p.m., at the Emerald
Isle Town Hall in Emerald Isle. Also, a description of the land
use plan preparation process and schedule was published in the
Carteret County News and Times. Subsequently, meetings of the
Planning Board were held on October 19, 1990; November 19, 1990;
January 9, 1991; February 6, 1991; March 18, 1991; April 10, 1991;
April 22, 1991; and May 15, 1991. All meetings were advertised
and open to the public. The Board of Commissioners conducted a
public information meeting for review and comment on the plan on
June 11, 1991. The meeting was advertised in the Carteret County
news and Times on May 27, 1991.
The preliminary plan was submitted to the Coastal Resources
Commission for comment on September 25, 1991. Following receipt
of CRC comments, the plan was amended, and a formal public hearing
on the final document was conducted on January 14, 1992. The
public hearing was advertised in the Jacksonville Daily News on
December 13, 1991. The plan was approved by the Emerald Isle
Board of Commissioners on January 14, 1992, and submitted to the
Coastal Resources Commission for certification. The plan was
certified on January 23, 1992. V
Citizen input will continue to be solicited, primarily
through the Planning Board, with advertised and adequately publi-
cized public meetings held to discuss special land use issues and
to keep citizens informed.
V-14 I

EMERALD ISLE
STORM HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
A. EXISTING DEVELOPMENT
Section D of the 1991 Emerald Isle Land Use Plan addresses exist-
ing land use in detail. In 1990, a total of 2,378.8 acres were
developed. Ninety three percent, or 2,217.15 of the developed
acres, were utilized for residential development. The residential
development included 4,569 dwelling units. Of that total, approx-
imately 500 dwelling units, or almost eleven percent of the town's
housing stock, was located within the 100-year floodplain. All
structures would be subject to damage from high winds.
B. EMERALD ISLE FLOOD HAZARD AREAS
The following Emerald Isle areas are subject to flood hazards:
(1) ocean erodible areas of environmental concern (AECs),
(2) inlet hazard AECs, (3) estuarine shoreline and ocean shoreline
AECs and flood hazard areas. The AECs are not developed and are
delineated on Map 8 in the 1991 Land Use Plan. Map 7 in the 1991
Land Use Plan provides a general delineation of areas that would
be subjected to flood hazard from storm -related "storm surge."
Storm flooding is potentially more extensive in the areas included
in the 100-year floodplain. These 100-year floodplain areas are
defined through the National Flood Insurance program.
The National Flood Insurance Program defines V-zones, which refer
to flood prone areas that are also susceptible to high velocity
wave surges. Emerald Isle was converted to the Regular Phase of
the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) in 1977 with the
issuance of Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMS). Town officials
received updated maps in 1984 and 1985. Data is provided by
Map 10. This map defines the relationship of existing land use to
flood hazard areas.
Flood crest elevations in the "V" zones range from 11 to 16 feet
AMSL. Areas along Bogue Sound are not within "V" zones. The "V"
zones basically parallel the ocean to a depth of approximately
100' to 250' inland from mean high water. Less than 8% of the
town's area lies within the 'IV" zones. The "V" zones are not
developed.
The balance of the flood prone areas include the portion of the
100-year floodplain area that is not within the "V" zone. Again,
Map 10 portrays the area subject to flooding during the 100-year
storm in accordance with the FIRM. The FIRM designates these
areas as "A" zones. Approximately 15 percent of the town is
within "A" zones. The "A" zone includes the approximately 500
dwelling units subject to flooding from a 100-year flood.
Commercial development is not significantly affected by the
100-year floodplain.
V-15

C. HIGH WINDS
High winds are the major determinants of a hurricane, by defi-
nition, i.e., a tropical disturbance with sustained winds of at
least 73 miles per hour. Extreme hurricanes can have winds of up
to 165 miles per hour, with gusts up to 200 miles per hour. These
winds circulate around the center or "eye" of the storm. Although
the friction or impact of the winds hitting land from the water
causes some dissipation of the full force, there is still a tre-
mendous amount of energy left to cause damage to buildings, over-
turn mobile homes, down trees and powerlines, and destroy crops.
Also, tornadoes are often spawned by hurricane wind patterns.
Wind stress, therefore, is an important consideration in storm
hazard mitigation planning. (Refer to Section E.2. Flood Hazard
Areas of the 1991 Emerald Isle Land Use Plan.)
D. ESTIMATED SEVERITY OF POSSIBLE HAZARD AREA DAMAGES
The 1988 Emerald Isle real property tax valuation was
$268,888,000. Structures constitute about $107,555,200 of the
total tax digest. This ratio of structure value to property
represents the high value and quantity of undeveloped land.
Additional property at risk during a major storm includes roads,
public buildings and facilities, public utilities, and tax exempt
property. Potential worst case flood damage to privately. owned
structures in Emerald Isle from a 100-year storm event is esti-
mated to be approximately $11,800,000. This does not include any
damage from wind, which may be significant.
E. ANTICIPATED DEVELOPMENT IN HAZARD AREAS
Approximately 293 acres of developable land remains vacant in
Emerald -Isle; i.e., the land has not be. -.an subdivided for develop-
ment. The majority of this land lies above the 100-year flood -
plain and significant areas are also above the 500-year event.
F. EXISTING EMERALD ISLE HAZARD MITIGATION POLICIES
AND REGULATIONS
Emerald Isle regulates development in hazard areas primarily
through its zoning ordinance, dunes and vegetation control
ordinance, and floodplain management regulations. Development in
AEC areas must conform with state guidelines and land use plan
policies. The primary provisions of Emerald Isle zoning, dunes
and vegetation control and floodplain management regulations
related to hazard area development are summarized below:
Emerald Isle Zoning Ordinance
1. Single-family residences, duplexes and multi -family
structures are allowed in the town's residential districts
as permitted uses regardless of whether such districts are
located in hazard areas.
V-16

2. Mobile home parks are permitted only in MH mobile homes
districts and subject to special development standards.
3. Non -conforming structures (i:e., those not meeting setback
or other similar requirements) are not specifically dealt
with by the Emerald Isle zoning ordinance.
4. Non conforming uses can generally be rebuilt unless
destroyed or damaged beyond 50% of value or if the use is
abandoned for 180 continuous days, provided however no
provision of the zoning ordinance shall prevent the
reconstruction by the owner of a non -conforming residence
r
occupied by its owner at the time of destruction.
Dunes and Vegetation Protection Ordinance
At least 45% of the natural vegetation must be left in place
on residential lots and 15% or 25% on commercial lots, depend-
ing on zoning, under the terms of this ordinance.
Floodplain Management Regulations
The floodplain ordinance is part of the town's zoning ordi-
nance (Article I). It is designed to meet requirements of the
National Flood Insurance key provisions, including:
1. All new residential construction or substantial
improvements (repairs or reconstruction worth 50 percent
of market value) must be elevated to or above the base
flood level elevations.
2. Commercial buildings located in either the "V" or "A"
zones must be elevated to the base flood level or
.floodproofed.
3. Open space or breakaway walls must be used below base
flood elevation in the "V" zones.
4. The design and installation of anchorings and pilings must
be certified by a registered engineer or architect.
5. No alteration of dunes or use of fill for structural
support shall occur in the "V" zone.
Mobile Home Regulations
The town's zoning ordinance establishes mobile home placement
and design standards. Flood hazard design considerations are
included in the zoning ordinance floodplain regulations.
Those regulations require elevation above the 100-year flood
elevation, tiedowns, and place a prohibition on mobile homes
locating in "V" zones.
V-17

1
G. POLICY STATEMENTS: STORM HAZARD MITIGATION 1,
In order to minimize the damage caused by the effects of a
hurricane or other major storm, Emerald Isle proposes the
following policies:
High Winds
Emerald Isle supports enforcement of the N. C. State Building
Code. The town will enforce the State Building Code on wind
resistant construction with design standards of 120 mph wind
loads.
Flooding
Emerald Isle is an active participant in the National Flood
Insurance program and is supportive of hazard mitigation
elements. Emerald Isle is participating in the regular phase
of the insurance program and enforces a Flood Damage Preven-
tion Ordinance. Emerald Isle also supports continued enforce-
ment of the CAMA and 404 Wetlands development permit processes
in areas potentially susceptible to flooding. When reviewing
development proposals, the town will work to reduce density in
areas susceptible to flooding. In addition, the town will
encourage the public purchase of land in the most hazardous
areas.
Evacuation Plans
Emerald Isle will coordinate evacuation planning with the
Carteret County Emergency Management Coordinator. The town
will encourage motels, condominiums, and multi -family develop-
ments (five or more dwelling units) to post evacuation
instructions that identify routes and the locations of avail-
able public shelters. The town will update an evacuation
route map annually. Copies will be kept at the town's
municipal building for free distribution to the public.,
,
Implementation: Storm Hazard Mitigation
1. Emerald Isle will continue to enforce the standards of the
State Building Code.
2. The town will continue to support enforcement of State and
Federal programs which aid in mitigation of hurricane
hazards, including CAMA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engi-
neers 404 permit process, FEMA, as well as local ordi-
nances such as zoning and flood damage prevention
regulations.
3. The town will discourage high density development in high
hazard areas through implementation of the townfs Zoning
Ordinance.
V-18 I

4. The Town of Emerald Isle
supports the public acquisition
of high hazard areas with
state and federal funds when
voluntary acquisition can
be accomplished. The town
discourages condemnation
of land for this purpose.
5. The town does a good job of controlling mobile home devel-
-opments in order to minimize hazard damages. Mobile homes
are restricted to a specific
district and must conform
with elevation and other
requirements.
1
1
1
1
1
11 V-19

1
POST -DISASTER RECONSTRUCTION PLAN AND POLICIES' I
(This is an update of the plan included in the
1986 Emerald Isle Land Use Plan)
A. INTRODUCTION
A post -disaster plan provides a program that
will permit
a local
government to deal with the aftermaths of a
storm in an
organized
and efficient manner. The plan provides the
mechanisms,
proce-
dures, and policies that will enable a local
community to
learn
from its storm experiences and to rebuild the
community
in a wise
and practical manner.
A post -disaster reconstruction plan encompasses three distinct
reconstruction periods:
° The emergency period is the reconstruction phase immediately
after a storm. The emphasis is on restoring public health
and safety, assessing the nature and extent of storm damage,
and qualifying for and obtaining whatever federal and state
assistance might be available.
° The restoration period covers the weeks and months following
a storm disaster. The emphasis during this period is on
restoring community facilities, utilities, essential busi-
nesses, etc., so that the community can once again function
in a normal manner.
° The replacement reconstruction period is the period during
which the community is rebuilt. The period could last from
months to years depending on the nature and extent of the
damaged incurred.
It is important that local officials clearly understand the joint
federal -state -local procedures for providing assistance to rebuild
after a storm so that local damage assessment and reconstruction
efforts are carried out in an efficient manner that qualifies the
community for the different types of assistance that are avail-
able. The requirements are generally delineated in the Disaster
Relief Act of 1974 (P.L. 93-288) which authorizes a wide range of
financial and direct assistance to both local communities and
individuals. The sequence of procedures to be followed after a
major storm event is as follows:
1. Local damage assessment teams survey storm damage within
the community and report this damage to the County
Emergency Services Coordinator.
2. Damage information is compiled and summarized by Carteret
County, and the nature and extent of damage is reported to
the North Carolina Division of Emergency Management.
V-20 I

3. DEM compiles local data and makes recommendations to the
Governor concerning state action.
4. The Governor may request a Presidential declaration of
"emergency" or "major disaster." A Presidential declara-
tion makes a variety of federal resources available to
local communities and individuals.
5. Federal Relief assistance provided to a community after an
"emergency" has been declared typically ends one month
after the initial Presidential declaration. Where a
"major disaster" has been declared, federal assistance for
"emergency".work typically ends six months after the
declaration and federal assistance for "permanent" work
ends after 18 months.
B. ORGANIZATION OF LOCAL DAMAGE ASSESSMENT TEAM
A local damage assessment team should include individuals who are
qualified to give reliable estimates of the original value of
structures, an estimated value of sustained damages, and a des-
cription of the repairs and costs that will be needed to rebuild
each structure. The total team may consist of the following:
Administrative
Town Administrator
Building Inspector
Assistant Building Inspector
Part-time Building Inspector
Police Chief
Police Officers
Fire Chief
Mayor
Members of the Board of Commissioners
Street Maintenance Supervisor
Assistant Street Maintenance Supervisor
The Building Inspector should head the Damage Assessment Team.
Other members of the team should consist of the Assistant Building
Inspector, the Maintenance Supervisor, and volunteers recruited
from the community. Town personnel and volunteers must be
recruited, organized and trained prior to a storm occurrence.
There should also be back-ups or alternates to ensure the avail-
ability of adequate resources.
The suggested make-up of the Emerald Isle Damage Assessment Team
is as follows:
Building Inspector
Assistant Building Inspector
Local Property Appraiser (MAI or qualified broker)
Maintenance Supervisor
Mayor and members of the Board of Commissioners
Town Administrator
Building contractors
V-21

The Mayor should immediately undertake a recruitment effort to
secure the necessary volunteers and to establish a training
program to familiarize the members of the damage assessment team
with required damage classification procedures and reporting
requirements. In doing so, it must be recognized that it might be
very difficult to fill certain positions, such as the building
contractor position, because the services of individuals with such
skills will likely be in a great demand after a storm disaster.
C. DAMAGE ASSESSMENT PROCEDURES AND REQUIRENENTS
Damage assessment is defined as rapid means of determining a real-
istic estimate of the amount of damage caused by a natural or
manmade disaster. For a storm disaster, it is expressed in terms
of 1) number of structures damaged; 2) magnitude of damage by
structure type; 3) estimated total dollar loss; and 4) estimated
total dollar loss covered by insurance.
After a major storm event, members of the Damage Assessment Team
should report to the Emergency Operations Center for a briefing
prior to deployment. There are about 4,500 dwelling units in the
town. The extent of damage will depend on the magnitude of the
storm and where landfall occurs along the Atlantic coast. Because
of the potentially large job at hand, the limited personnel
resources available to conduct the assessments, and the limited
time within which the initial assessment must be made, the first
phase of the assessment should consist of only an external visual
survey of damaged structures. A more detailed second phase
assessment can be made after the initial damage reports are
filed.
The initial damage assessment should make an estimate of the
extent of damage incurred by each structure and identify the cause
(wind, flooding, wave action, combination, etc.) of the damage to
each structure.
Damaged structures should be classified in accordance with the
suggested state guidelines as follows:
° Destroyed (repairs would cost more than 80 percent of
value) .
° Major (repairs would cost more than 30.percent of the
value) .
° Minor (repairs would cost less than 30 percent of the value,
but the structure is currently uninhabitable).
° Habitable (some minor damage, with repairs less than 15
percent of the value).
V-22

It will be necessary to thoroughly document each assessment. In
many cases, mail boxes and other information typically used to
identify specific structures will not be found. Consequently, the
Damage Assessment Team must be provided with tax maps, other maps,
and photographic equipment in order to record and document its
field observations. Enough information to complete the Damage
Assessment Worksheet must be obtained on each damaged structure.
The second phase of the Damage Assessment Operation will be to
estimate the value of the damages sustained. This operation
should be carried out in the Emergency Operations Center under the
direction and supervision of the Town Administrator. Specific
administrative employees in Town Hall should be assigned to assist
in carrying out this task.
In order to estimate total damage values, it will be necessary to
have the following information available for use at the Emergency
Operations Center.
° A set of property tax maps identical to those utilized by
the damage assessment field team.
° Copies of all town property tax records. This information
should indicate the estimated value of all commercial and
residential structures within the town. Because time will
be of the essence, it is recommended that the town immedi-
ately commence a project listing the property values of
existing structures in Carteret County on the appropriate
lots of the property tax maps that will be kept at the
Emergency Operations Center. While somewhat of a tedious
job, it should be manageable if it is initiated now and
completed over a 2 to 3 month period. The information will
prove invaluable if a storm disaster does occur. This set
of tax maps should be updated annually prior to the
hurricane season.
r
The town should update property tax information annually before
■
the hurricane season. This information should then be kept avail-
able in the Emergency'Operations Center for estimating the value
of sustained damages covered by hazard insurance.
I
I
In order to produce the damage value information required, the
following methodology is recommended:
1. The number of businesses and residential structures that
have been damaged within the town should be summarized by
damage classification category.
V-23

2. The value of each damaged structure should be obtained
from the marked set of town tax maps and multiplied by the
following percentages for appropriate damage classifi-
cation category:
° Destroyed - 100%
° Major Damage - 50%
° Minor Damage (uninhabitable) - 25%
° Habitable - 10%
3. The total value of damages for the town should then be
summarized and reported, as required to the County
Emergency Operations Center.
4. The estimated value loss covered by hazard insurance
should then be determined by: 1) estimating full coverage
for all damaged structures for situations where the
average value of such coverage exceeds the amount of
damage to the structure; and 2) multiplying the number of
structures where damage exceeds the average value of
insurance coverage by the average value of such coverage.
The Damage Assessment Plan is intended to be the mechanism for
estimating overall property damage in the event of a civil
disaster. The procedure recommended above represents an approach
for making a relatively quick, realistic "order of magnitude"
damage estimate after a disaster.
D. ORGANIZATION OF RECOVERY OPERATION
Damage assessment operations are oriented to take place during the
emergency period. After the emergency operations to restore
public health and safety and the initial damage assessments are
completed, the state guidelines suggest that a Recovery Task Force
to guide restoration and reconstruction activities be created. In
Emerald Isle, the Mayor and Commission will assume the responsi-
bilities of such Task Force with the Town Administrator directing
day-to-day operations based on the policy guidelines received from
the Mayor and Commission. The following must be accomplished:
1. Establishing re-entry procedures.
2. Establishing an overall restoration schedule.
3. Setting restoration priorities.
4. Determining requirements for outside assistance and
requesting such assistance when beyond local
capabilities.
5. Keeping the appropriate county and state officials
informed using Situation and Damage Report.
V-24

1
1
t
1
i
1
1
U
6. Keeping the public informed.
7. Assembling and maintaining records of actions taken and
expenditures and obligations incurred.
8. Proclaiming a local "state of emergency" if warranted.
9. Commencing cleanup, debris removal and utility restoration
activities which would include coordination of restoration
activities undertaken by private utility companies.
10. Undertaking repair and restoration of essential public
facilities and services in accordance with priorities
developed through the situation evaluations.
11. Assisting private businesses and individual property
owners in obtaining information on the various types of
assistance that might be available to them from federal
and state agencies.
In Before the Storm, a sequence and schedule for undertaking local
reconstruction and restoration activities is presented. The
schedule was deliberately left vague because specific reconstruc-
tion needs will not be known until after a storm hits and the
magnitude of the damage can be assessed. The following sequence
of activities and schedule is submitted as a guide which should be
considered by the Mayor, Town Administrator, Commissioners, and
Damage Assessment Team, and revised as necessary after the damage
assessment activities are completed.
Activity
1) Complete initial damage
assessment.
2) Complete second phase damage
assessment
3) Prepare summary of
reconstruction priorities
4) Decision with regard to
imposition of temporary
development moratorium
5) Set reconstruction
priorities and prepare
master reconstruction
schedule
6) Begin repairs to critical
utilities and facilities
Time Frame
Immediately after storm
passes.
Completed by second week
after the storm.
Completed one week after
second phase damage
assessment is completed.
One week after second
phase assessment is
completed.
Completed one week after
summary of reconstruction
needs is completed
As soon as possible after
disaster.
I V-25

Activity
7) Permitting of,reconstruction
activities for all structures
receiving minor damage not
included in development
moratorium areas
8) Permitting of reconstruction
activities for all structures
receiving major damage not
included in development
moratorium areas
9) Initiate assessment of existing
mitigation policies
10) Complete re-evaluation of
hazard areas and mitigation
policies in areas subjected to
development moratorium
11) Review mitigation policies and
development standards for areas
subjected to development
moratorium and lift development
.moratorium
12) Permit new development
E. RECObIlENDED RECONSTRUCTION POLICIES
Time Frame
One week after second
phase damage assessment
is completed
Two weeks after second
phase damage assessment
is completed
Two weeks after second
phase damage assessment
is completed
The length of the period
for conducting reevalua-
ations and receiving
input from the state
should not exceed two
months
Two months after temporary
development moratorium is
imposed. (Subject to
change based on circum-
stances encountered)
Upon suspension of any
temporary development
moratorium
All the following policies have been designed to be 1) considered
and adopted by the Mayor and Commissioners of Emerald Isle prior
to a storm, and 2) implemented, as appropriate, after a storm
occurs:
Re-entry
1. The town will prepare a list of individuals (by name and
address) who.should be allowed to return to Emerald Isle
in the event of an evacuation and subsequent blockade.
These people would be allowed to return to aid with
clean-up operations. The list should include but not
necessarily be limited.to people such as pharmacists,
electricians, town employees, etc.
V-26

2. Re-entry of Emerald Town residents and/or property owners
shall not be permitted until 1) the critical damage
assessment has been completed; 2) the Mayor proclaims the
town safe to re-enter, after the Carteret County Control
Group issues an overall re-entry order.
3.
A list of Emerald Isle property owners and residents shall
be maintained at the bridge entrances to the Bogue Banks.
Valid identification must be shown in order to proceed on
to the island. Passes shall be issued and displayed at
all times until the State of Emergency is officially
lifted. (This procedure will require cooperation and
reciprocal assistance from all Bogue Banks towns and
unincorporated Salter Path. The towns of Emerald Isle and
Atlantic Beach should take the lead in establishing such
procedures as each has jurisdiction at each of the two
bridges.)
Permitting
1.
Building permits to restore structures located outside of
designated AEC areas that were previously built in confor-.
mance with local codes, standards, and the provisions of
the North Carolina Building Code shall be issued auto-
matically.
2.
All structures suffering major damages as defined in the
Town's Damage Assessment Plan shall be repaired or rebuilt
to conform with the provisions of the North Carolina
Building Code, the Emerald Isle Zoning Ordinance, and the
Emerald Isle Floodplain Management Regulations.
3.
All structures suffering minor damage as defined in the
Emerald Isle Damage Assessment Plan shall be permitted to
be rebuilt to their original state before the storm
condition.
4.
For all structures in designated AECs and for all mobile
home locations, a determination shall be made for each AEC
as to whether the provisions of the N.C. Building Code,
the state regulations for Areas of Environmental Concern,
the Emerald Isle Floodplain Management Regulations
appeared adequate in minimizing storm damages. For areas
where the construction and use -requirements appear ade-
quate, permits shall be issued in accordance with permit-
ting policies 1, 2 and 3. For AECs where the construction
and use requirements do not appear to have been adequate
in mitigating damages, a Temporary Development Moratorium
for all structures located within that specific AEC shall
be imposed. If mobile home damage is extensive, a mora-
torium on the rebuilding or replacement of mobile homes
should be imposed in order for the town to decide whether
this should remain a permitted use.
V-27

5. Permits shall not be issued in areas subject to a tempo-
rary development moratorium until such a moratorium is
lifted by the Emerald Isle Board of Commissioners.
Utility and Facility Reconstruction
1. All damaged water systems components shall be repaired so
as to be elevated above the 100-year floodplain or shall
be floodproofed, with the methods employed and the
construction being certified by a registered professional
engineer.
2. Overhead power lines and utility poles along Highway 58
present the greatest obstacle to the safe evacuation of
residents in the event'of a major storm disaster.
Relocating these lines underground or moving them away
from rights -of -way would be very costly at this time.
However, if major damage occurs as a result of a storm,
the cost effectiveness would improve and public safety
considerations might override economic considerations.
Emerald Isle encourages the relocation of overhead power
lines underground or away from evacuation routes if
substantial damage to the existing system is sustained
during a major storm.
Temporary Development Moratorium
Under certain circumstances, interim development moratoriums
can be used in order to give a local government time to assess
damages, to make sound decisions and to learn from its storm
experiences. Such a moratorium must be temporary and it must
be reasonably related to the public health, safety and
welfare.
There is no doubt that Emerald Isle will suffer heavy and
serious damages should a major storm make its landfall in its
vicinity. Consequently, the town should be prepared to issue
temporary development moratoriums as appropriate.
It is not possible to determine prior to a storm whether a
temporary development moratorium will be needed. Such a
measure should only be used if damage in a particular area is
very serious and if redevelopment of the area in the same
manner as previously existed would submit the residents of the
area to similar public health and safety problems. In Emerald
Isle, such a situation is most likely to occur in one or more
of the AECs.
The Emerald Isle policy regarding the proclamation of
temporary development moratoriums shall be:
V-28

1. To determine for each AEC whether the provisions of N. C.
Building Code, the state guidelines for AECs, and the
Emerald Isle Floodplain Management Regulations appeared
adequate in minimizing storm damages. For AECs where the
construction and use requirements do not appear adequate,
a temporary development moratorium for all structures
located within that specific AEC shall be imposed.
2. To assess the overall damage to mobile homes within one
week of the storm occurrence and to determine whether a
temporary moratorium on the rebuilding of mobile homes
suffering major damage should be imposed.
3. After imposing a temporary development moratorium for an
AEC, the Town of Emerald Isle shall request that the
Coastal Resources Commission conduct a special analysis
for the town and all other communities so similar in order
to determine how local regulations for those hazard areas,
which are based on state and/or federal guidelines or
requirements, should be improved or modified. A response
from the state within a reasonable time period as deter-
mined through negotiations should be requested.
4. The temporary building moratorium in all AECs shall be
lifted after local ordinances and regulations have been
revised based on state recommendations or decisions of the
Mayor and Board of Commissioners. Reconstruction shall be
permitted in accordance with existing regulations and
requirements.
5. If a temporary moratorium on the rebuilding of mobile
homes is imposed, the Board of Commissioners shall within
one month determine whether the Emerald Isle Zoning
Ordinance should be revised so that mobile homes are no
longer a permitted use in any town zoning district. If
such a policy decision is made, based on a review of the
magnitude of damages sustained, all existing mobile homes
would be treated as non -conforming uses in accordance with
the recommended revision of the Emerald Isle Zoning
Ordinance.
Destructive Weather Plan
The Town of Emerald Isle maintains a destructive weather plan
that provides instructions for the organization and operation
of the Town of Emerald Isle during destructive weather condi-
tions. This plan is updated annually prior to each hurricane
season. Therefore, the plan is not included. However, a copy
of the current plan is available for public review at the
Emerald Isle Municipal Building.
V-29

0
U)
M W
Q Z
WO
r N
O %1
o�
O Q
u °-
J O
M lt,
< Z
QO
W N
O
O5 Q
U_ 7-
0
LL;
Q.
<L O
O
m U-
r
r
.. O
0—
U- Z
Cl N
Q
t� Ltt
.ItL t
�1
LL ,
I�
I r O
a:W
<Z
L•_' _ >- N
,) 04
.. b U„ Z
� O Q
. ' U1 a
U
� Q O
m LL
0
O
O j
W W
Z
� N
N >
=v
=v
04
=a
0
M
m m m m m m oor m m m moo m m

TOWN OF e0rf !GD /SLE
TL � t/ tW r w tbtwcM �
FLOOD HAZARD AREAS
cowm
. t..rtt, •�.a + •s tr forQ,Iylq_o end iaoo aoo
are ofot.� .r Ce.r bttvts —��
mw"w...6 ww.r oo..t ow
BALANCE OF 100 YEAR mwAmpoox r t'o4
FLOOD PLAIN ("A" ZONES) iv
MAP 10B
BALANCE OF 100 YEAR
w t DPW=... • • , , sovvo FLOOD PLAIN ("A" ZONES) I
wt � • � .ram 1 i i 1 (' ...y.� �,..:.,.
' •r t•• I• 'I•• •1. I� 1 .
it • iiil�'%�'i��J jyii►il�►'ii�i.�.i' iiJlri%ice% ' �►' ii.
:t I � t i f l � I i , � , , �• a�w
A rG AN r/C O CEAN 1
HIGH HAZARD FLOOD
A.E.C. ("V" ZONES)
V-31
HIGH HAZARD FLOOD
A.E.C. ("V" ZONES)

BALANCE OF 100 YEAR
Ft nnn ai AN ("A" '7nN;Zcl
N
BALANCE OF 100 YEAR I
FLOOD PLAIN ("A" ZONES)
HIGH HAZARD FLOOD an ft--4 - - - H.c.�. k V 1.V1-4c:
A.E.C. ("V" ZONES) .0 sp-wo
cart z= sw=Xr tar
.;
r arrr< war r r>•araM wr faa
off." of osr aM Carat Mare
Yrrfrmo.L!Mier Odra Rr
if....arr 411a�1/YA
T O WN OF IWICRA L D /SL E
AM
FLOOD HAZARD AREAS
1004- 14_o s i�oo isoo ssoo
r a aotr
V-32 NAP loc

1
L
I
1
SECTION VI
RELATIONSHIP OF EMERALD ISLE POLICIES
I
AND LAND CLASSIFICATIONS
1
I
I
Uj
1

1
The 15A N
plan rela
and provi
each land
ordinance
supports
SECTION VI:
CAC 7B planning
to the policies
de an indication
classification.
is consistent w
the distribution
RELATIONSHIP OF POLICIES AND
LAND CLASSIFICATIONS
guidelines require that this land'use
section to the land classification map
as to which land uses are appropriate in
The Town of Emerald Isle zoning
ith the land classification map and
of land uses shown on that map.
A. DEVELOPED CLASS
Emerald Isle's developed land classification is divided into the
categories of residential, commercial, and public. The developed
commercial category will continue to exist along U.S. 58 in blocks
15, 34, 35, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41 and 42. Further commercialization
consistent with the October 6, 1983, commercial zoning plan will
be allowed. Commercial, service, office -institutional, and
commercial campgrounds consistent with the town's zoning ordinance
shall be allowed.
The developed residential classification will allow single-family
and multi -family development which is consistent with the town's
zoning ordinance. Through the planning period, the overall
average residential density shall be maintained at eight dwelling
units per acre. The developed public category is limited to town -
owned property and includes only the Emerald Isle municipal build-
ing complex. The lands classified as developed will require basic
urban services. These lands either are developed or will be
developed during the planning period.
B. URBAN TRANSITION CLASS
The urban transition classification will provide lands to accom-
modate future urban growth within the planning period. The over-
all average densities will be allowed up to eight dwelling units
per acre. The urban transition lands are limited to blocks 14,
15, 18, 25, 47, 48, and 49. Most development within this classi-
fication will be single and multi -family, residential and special
uses as allowed by the Emerald Isle zoning ordinance. In blocks
14 and 15, some commercialization may occur within the urban tran-
sition classification. Complete urban services will be required
during the planning period.
1
I VI-1

Ij
C. CONSERVATION CLASS
The conservation classification will provide for the long-term
management of Emerald Isle's areas of environmental concern.
Development within the conservation classification must be con-
sistent with the policies contained in this plan. Except for the
town's dunes and vegetation protection ordinance, the town's beach ,
and shore regulations ordinance, the policy opposing the location
of floating structures within Emerald Isle, the maritime forests
policy supporting design standards in maritime forest areas,
signs, and local zoning restrictions on commercial development,
the policies contained in this plan are not more restrictive than
the 15A NCAC 7H use standards.
D. SUMMARY
The Town of Emerald Isle enforces both zoning and subdivision
ordinances. The zoning ordinance is consistent with this land use
plan and includes 17 separate zoning categories. The developed
commercial category is an appropriate location for all zones
except residential districts. The town's overlay districts which '
are designed to protect AECs may limit development in some devel-
oped commercial classified areas. Within the developed residen-
tial classified areas, only R-1, R-2, RMF, RMH and MH zoned uses
and associated special uses should be allowed. The AEC overlay
district may restrict residential development in some areas.
�l
LJ
1
I
1
VI-2

l.T
0
w r m w= m o m= m m r= m m m m r m

1
I
U
APPENDIX IA
Methodology Used For Estimating 1990 Carteret County,
Permanent Population By Township
APPENDIX IB
Methodology Used For Estimating 1990 Carteret County
Seasonal Population By Township

IA: METHODOLOGY USED FOR ESTIMATING 1990 CARTERET COUNTY
PERMANENT POPULATION BY TOWNSHIP
Carteret County municipal population estimates for 1990 are avail-
able from the State Data Center. However, estimates by township
for 1990 are unavailable. 1990 estimates for unincorporated areas
by township were based on the following methodology:. 1) The ratio
of each individual unincorporated area population increase by
township to the total unincorporated population for Carteret
County from 1970-80 (7,345) was calculated. That ratio was then
applied to the total increase in unincorporated population`for the
county from 1980 to 1990 (3,565, based on N. C. Data Center infor-
mation for 1990). The resulting number was then added to the
respective 1980 population, resulting in an unincorporated popula-
tion estimate for each township for 1990. The basic assumption of
this methodology is that the relative growth rates of the unincor-
porated areas were the same for the period 1970-80 and 1980-87.
This assumption is considerably strengthened by the availability
of municipal population figures for 1990. Factors such as annex-
ation and overall rural/urban migration factors from 1980-90 were
already accounted for prior to the calculation of unincorporated
population by township.

An
example of this methodology is shown below:
P gY
Township - Harlowe
1)
1970-80 population increase, Harlowe Township = 194
2)
Harlowe Township's Percentage of total 1970-80
unincorporated population increase: 194/7,345 .02641
3)
Times total increase in county unincorporated
population, 1980-87 x 3,474
4)
Equals increase in population,
Harlowe Township, 1980-87: 91
5)
Plus 1980 population - Harlowe Township 956
6)
Assumed 1990 population: 11047
NOTE: Prior to utilizing the methodology above for all Carteret
County townships, it was utilized to calculate the 1990
unincorporated population for White Oak Township. The 1990
population of Cedar Point (549) was then deducted from the
1990 unincorporated total for White Oak Township. The
methodology above was then used to calculate unincorporated
population for the remaining townships, with one change --
White Oak Township's unincorporated increases from 70-80
and 80-90 were subtracted from the county -wide unincor-
porated area increases prior to performing each township's
calculation.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

IB: METHODOLOGY USED FOR ESTIMATING CARTERET COUNTY
SEASONAL POPULATION BY TOWNSHIP
1970 and 1980 seasonal populations by township were derived using
Carteret County Planning Department figures for seasonal housing
units distributed by township included in the 1985 Land Use Plan,
and total seasonal unit (including marinas, hotels, and campgrounds)
analysis included in an ECU seasonal housing study (Tschetter, Paul
D., "Characterization of Baseline Demographic Trends in the Year -
Round and Recreational Populations in the Albemarle -Pamlico
' Estuarine Study Area").-
1990 seasonal population estimates by Carteret County township were
derived as follows. First, the increase in seasonal population by
township from 1970-80 was divided into the total seasonal population
increase for Carteret County from 1970-80 (26,620). The resultant
ratio for that township was then applied to the increase in seasonal
population for the entire county from 1980-90 (40,232). The result
was then added to the 1980 seasonal population for that township to
obtain estimated 1990 seasonal population. This methodology assumes
that the relative growth rates of seasonal population by township
were the same from 1980-90 and 1970-80. (The overall county season-
al population annual growth rate from 1970-80 was actually almost
. twice as high as the annual rate from 1980-90.)
Seasonal increases by municipality/unincorporated area from 1980-90
for Beaufort,. White Oak, and Newport townships were calculated by
assuming that seasonal growth in those three townships from 1980-90
paralleled permanent geographic population trends depicted in
Table 2 (this has the added benefit of accounting for changes in
seasonal population growth patterns due to annexation)-. Therefore,
the percentage of total increase in each of these township's perma-
nent population from 1980-90 attributable to individual municipali-
ties and unincorporated areas was applied to the corresponding total
seasonal population increase by township in Table 2. The result was
a seasonal population increase from 1980-90 for each municipality
and unincorporated area in those three townships.
In Morehead City Township, however, it is probable that the percent-
age of the new seasonal population impacting the beach communities
from 1980-90 was much higher than the percentage of permanent town-
ship population moving to the beach communities over the same
period, since Morehead City and its outlying areas do not have as
high a seasonal/ permanent population ratio as the beach communi-
ties. It was therefore assumed that the seasonal population grew at
the same rate as permanent population in Morehead City and unincor-
porated areas of Morehead township from 1980-90. Once increases for
those two areas were entered in Table 2, the seasonal increases for
each of the three Morehead City beach communities were calculated.
This was based on the ratio of individual beach community permanent
population increase to total beach community permanent population
increase from 1980-90, multiplied by the total seasonal- increase for
all three beach communities from 1980-90; i.e., the same method-
ology used for Newport, Beaufort, and White Oak townships was
applied to only a portion of Morehead Township.

1
1
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
APPENDIX II
Land Use Policies, 1986 Land Use Plan Update
(NOTE: These are previous policies and are no longer applicable.
This appendix has been included for information purposes
only.)

APPENDIX II
LAND USE POLICIES
1986 LAND USE PLAN UPDATE
SECTION 5: LOCAL POLICIES ON LAND USE ISSUES
5.1 RESOURCE PROTECTION
5.1.1 Constraints to Development
i--
No policy statement.
5.1.2 Specific Local Resource Development Issues Relative to
AEC' s
-- The town believes appropriate uses such as piers and
boat docks are reasonable, but not dredging for commer-
cial marinas.
'
-- The town believes that the only appropriate uses of
estuarine waters are piers, boat docks, boat housing,
-
marinas, sports fishing, commercial fishing, and recre-
ation. It also believes that town, state and federal
protection of these waters are needed.
-- It is the policy of the town to advise property owners
through the Building Inspector upon the request of a
building permit of the hazards of constructing in the
Inlet Hazard Area. The town believes that both the
town and state should protect this area from inappro-
priate development.
-- Should these lots be threatened by a future inlet
migration to the east, the town's policy will be to
encourage homeowners to relocate their structures
outside of the inlet hazard area at their own expense.
'
-- It is the town's policy to allow development within the
High Hazard Flood Area, consistent with AEC regula-
tions, Federal Insurance regulations and the Zoning
Ordinance.
-- It is the town's policy to allow development of the
Ocean Erodible Areas consistent with AEC regulation.
-- It is the town's policy to prevent any development
which will damage this important dune system. Both
'
commercial and residential development is allowed
provided that the development will not involve signifi-
'
cant (other than minor disturbances for dune walkovers,
etc.) removal or relocation of the frontal dune sand or
vegetation thereon.

-- It is the town's policy to continue to work toward the
development of a municipal sewage collection, treatment
and disposal facility.
5.1.3 Other Fragile Land Areas (Maritime Forest)
-- It is the town's policy to encourage all future devel-
opers of land within the affected area (Blocks 43 to 47
- see Map 5.1.3.1) to use the planned unit development
approach.
5.1.4 Hurricane and Flood Evacuation Plans
-- See Section 2.1.6.
5.1.5 Protection of Potable Water Supply
-- It is the policy of the Town of Emerald Isle to work
closely with the state regulatory agencies to protect
the integrity of the potable water supply.
5.1.6 Stormwater Runoff/Drainage
-- It is the Town of Emerald Isle's policy to support the
intent of the NCEMC stormwater control regulation to
• protect water quality and the integrity of shellfishing
waters.
5.1.7 Marinas
-- It is the policy of the Town of Emerald Isle to encour-
age the developers of marinas to abide by the NCDCM
regulations and the associated anti -degradation poli-
cies now in effect relative to marina siting and devel-
opment.
5.2 RESOURCE PRODUCTION AND MANAGEMENT
5.2.1 General
-- It is the town's policy to continue to encourage use of
this recreational resource.
5.2.2 Commercial, Sports and Recreational Fisheries Including
Nursery Areas
-- It is the policy of the Town of Emerald Isle to support
the development of commercial, sports and recreational
fishing in area waters with the caveat that this policy
excludes the development of seafood processing facili-
ties within town limits.
-- The -Town of Emerald Isle supports the efforts of the
state agencies to preserve the integrity of primary
nursery areas for fisheries production..

5.2.3
Off -Road Vehicles
-- It is the town policy of discouraging off -road vehicles
from its dune system.
5.2.4
Sound and Estuarine Islands
-- It is the policy of the Town of Emerald Isle to dis-
courage any and all development of these islands by
private interest and to encourage the preservation of
the areas as wildlife sanctuaries and conservation
areas.
5.3
ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
5.3.1
Local Commitment to Provide Municipal Services to
Development
-- The Town of Emerald Isle is committed to providing
municipal level services to future development.
-- It is a policy of the Town of Emerald Isle to require
future developers to secure a letter from the Bogue
Banks Water and Sewer Corporation (BBWSC) stating water
needs for the proposed development will be met before
the development is approved.
5.3.2
Urban Growth Patterns/Types Desired
-- High intensity development should be located near the
bridge. As the distance from the bridge increases, the
intensity of development should decrease.
'
5.3.3
Redevelopment of Developed Areas
--, No policy statement.
'
5.3.4
Commitment to State and Federal Programs
-- Emerald Isle is interested in greater participation in
federal and state programs, including highway, recre-
ation and beach renourishment programs as appropriate.
5.3.5
Assistance to Channel Maintenance and Beach Renourishment
Projects
-- It is the town's policy to continue to support channel
maintenance and appropriate beach nourishment.
5.3.6
Tourist Access to Beach and Sound
-- It is the town's policy to provide public parking
throughout the town.

-- It is.the town's policy to'continue to develop suitable
public parking facilities to accommodate the increasing
flow of day visitors to Emerald Isle.
-- Wherever possible such public facilities would be
located within commercial zones to avoid potential
conflicts.

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
APPENDIX III
Policy Statements Considered, But Not Adopted

APPENDIX III
POLICIES CONSIDERED BUT NOT ADOPTED
A. RESOURCE PROTECTION POLICY STATEMENTS
Manmade Hazards:
(b) Emerald Isle will consider developing sound attenuation
zoning requirements for the areas affected by the aircraft
operating patterns at Bogue Field. The zoning for Bogue
Field should be coordinated with Carteret County.
2. Miscellaneous Resource Protection
Package Treatment Plant Use:
Option 1
Emerald Isle opposes the permitting and construction of any
'
package treatment plants within its jurisdiction.
Marina and Floating Home Development:
I(a) Emerald Isle opposes the construction of both upland and open
water marinas within its planning jurisdiction.
Option 2
(a) Emerald Isle will permit the construction of marinas
containing up to 20 slips (may establish slip size/
length or change maxinum number of slips) which
otherwise meet local zoning ordinance requirements,
the requirements of the 15A NCAC 7H use standards, and
the Bogue Sound ORW Management Plan..
Option 3
(a) Add following to either Option 1 or 2: However,
marina construction and associated dredging shall not
result in the loss of or damage to coastal wetlands or
subaquatic vegetation. No dredging for marinas shall
be allowed.
(b) Emerald Isle opposes the construction of dry stack storage
facilities for boats associated with or independent of
marinas.
V

Inlet Hazard Areas:
Option 1
With the exception of shoreline stabilization structures,
the Town of Emerald Isle will allow uses within the inlet
hazard areas which are consistent with the town's zoning
ordinance, 15A NCAC 7H use standards, and the Bogue Sound
ORW Management Plan.
Option 2
The Town of Emerald Isle objects to any construction/
development.within inlet hazard areas.
Bulkhead Construction:
Option 1
Emerald Isle does not oppose bulkhead construction within
its jurisdiction as long as construction fulfills the use
standards set forth in 15A NCAC 7H and the Bogue Sound ORW
Management Plan.
Option 2
Emerald Isle does not oppose the construction of bulkheads
along estuarine shorelines and ORW estuarine shorelines
which meet 15A NCAC 7H use standards and the Bogue Sound
ORW Management Plan. The town opposes the construction of
bulkheads in ocean hazard and inlet hazard areas.
Sea Level Rise:
(b) Emerald Isle opposes the construction.of bulkheads which
would prohibit migrating shorelines, including bulkhead
construction behind coastal wetlands.
C. ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT POLICY STATEMENTS
Energy Facility Siting and Development:
(c) Emerald Isle opposes any offshore drilling for either
exploration for or production of oil or gas.

11
Development/Growth Objectives:
-- Discourage apartment complex development.
-- Support the development of a town -wide sewer system if ad
'
valorem taxes would remain at the current (1991) level and the
monthly sewer bill would be less than $25/month/household.
-- Discourage the growth of multi -family dwelling units, condo-
miniums, permanent mobile homes, mobile home parks, commercial
development, and recreational vehicle camp grounds:
'
Land Use Trends:
Duringthe ten-year planning period, the town will focus on
Y
reducing and/or eliminating problems in the following areas:
(3) Controlling rapid development;
(8) Control of mobile home parks.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1