Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992 Land Use Plan-1992c 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