Land Use Plan Update-1991

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
LAND USE PLAN UPDATE
TOWN OF MOREHEAD CITY
NORTH CAROLINA
cif
�y
v
mac. ia5%
Prepared by
THE WOOTEN COMPANY
Engineering • Planning • Architecture
Raleigh/Greenville, North Carolina

LAND USE PLAN UPDATE
TOWN OF MOREHEAD CITY
NORTH CAROLINA
Adopted by the Morehead City Town Council: November 26, 1991
Certified by the Coastal Resources Commission: December 13, 1991
Prepared by
THE WOOTEN COMPANY
Engineering • Planning • Architecture
Raleigh/Greenville, North Carolina
The preparation of this report was financed in part through a grant provided by the North Carolina Coastal
Management Program, through funds provided by the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended,
which is administered by the Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration.

1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.000 INTRODUCTION ............................................ 1
1.100 Purpose ............................................. 1
1.200 Summary ............................................ 1
2.000 DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS ............................
5
2.100 Existing Conditions
.....................................
5
2.110 Population
.....................................
5
2.111
Population Size and Growth Trends ...............
5
2.112
Age Composition and Distribution ...............
7
2.113
Racial Composition .........................
7
2.114
Household Population .......................
8
2.120 Economy
......................................
8
2.121
Employment .............................
8
2.122
Income Characteristics .......................
9
2.123
Trade and Services .........................
9
2.124
Tourism ................................
10
2.125
Commercial Fishing ........................
12
2.126
Port of Morehead City .......................
13
2.130 Existing Land
Use ................................
13
2.131
Neighborhood 1 ...........................
13
2.132
Neighborhood 2 ...........................
16
2.133
Neighborhood 3 ...........................
17
2.134
Neighborhood 4 ...........................
19
2.135
Neighborhood 5 ...........................
20
2.136
Neighborhood 6 ...........................
22
2.137
Neighborhood 7 ...........................
23
2.138
Summary of Existing Land Use Conditions ..........
25
2.140 Current Plans, Policies, and Regulations Affecting Land Use .....
29
2.141
Thoroughfare Plan .........................
29
2.142
Storm Hazard Mitigation and
Post Disaster Reconstruction Plan ................
29
2.143
Zoning Ordinance ..........................
29
2.144
Subdivision Regulations ......................
29
2.145
Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance ..............
29
2.146
Water and Sewer Impact Fee Ordinance ............
30
2.147
Water and Sewer Extension Policy ...............
30
2.148
Building Codes ............................
30
2.149
Capital Facilities Plans .......................
30
2.150
Downtown Improvement Program ...............
30
2.151
Governor Martin's Coastal Initiative ..............
30
Table of Contents i

L
2.200 Constraints to Land Development .............................
31
2.210 Land Suitability ..................................
31
2.211 Physical Limitations for Development .............
31
2.211.1 Hazard Areas ...........................
31
2.211.2 Soil Limitations ..........................
33
2.211.3 Availability and Quality of Water Supply .........
33
2.211.4 Areas with Excessive Slope and High Erosion Potential
35
2.212 Fragile Areas .............................
35
2.212.1 Areas of Environmental Concern ...............
36
2.212.2 Other Fragile Areas .......................
36
2.213 Areas with Resource Potential ..................
37
2.220 Carrying Capacity Analysis ...........................
37
2.221 Urban Services ............................
37
2.221.1 Water Service ...........................
37
2.221.2 Sewer ................................
39
2.221.3 Police Protection .........................
41
2.221.4 Fire Protection ..........................
41
2.221.5 Emergency Medical Services .................
41
2.221.6 Solid Waste Collection and Disposal ............
42
2.221.7 Recreation .............................
42
2.221.8 Education .............................
42
2.221.9 Public Administration Ability .................
43
2.222 Transportation Services ......................
43
2.230 Estimated Demand .............................
44
2.231 Population Projections .......................
44
2.232 Economic Outlook .........................
44
2.233 Future Land Needs .........................
44
2.234 Summary of Community Facilities Needs ...........
45
3.000 POLICY STATEMENTS ....................................... 46
3.100 Analysis Of Policy Statements In The 1986 CAMA Plan ..............
46
3.110
Resource Protection ...............................
46
3.120
Resource Production and Management ....................
47
3.130
Economic and Community Development ..................
47
3.200 Resource Protection Policies ................................
48
3.210
Constraints to Land Development .......................
49
3.211 Flood Hazard Areas ........................
49
3.212 Soil Suitability/Septic Tank Use .................
49
3.220
Areas of Environmental Concern .......................
49
3.221 Coastal Wetlands ..........................
49
3.222 Estuarine Waters and Public Trust Areas ...........
50
3.223 Estuarine Shoreline .........................
50
3.230
Other Fragile Areas ...............................
51
3.231 Sound and Estuarine System Islands .........:....
51
3.232 Freshwater Wetlands ........................
51
3.233 Historical and Archaeological Sites ...............
51
Table of Contents ii

r
3.240
Hurricane and Flood Evacuation Needs and Plans ............
51
3.250
Potable Water Supply Protection .......................
52
3.260
Use of Package Treatment Plants .......................
52
3.270
Stormwater Runoff ................................
52
3.280
Marina and Floating Home Development ..................
53
3.290
Industrial Impacts on Fragile Areas ......................
53
3.290.1 Sea Level Rise Impacts ......................
53
3.290.2 Bulkhead Installation Damage to Marshes ...........
54
3.300
Resource Production and Management Policies ....................
54
3.310
Productive Agricultural Lands .........................
54
3.320
Commercial Forest Lands ............................
54
3.330
Mineral Production Areas ............................
54
3.340
Commercial and Recreational Fisheries ...................
54
3.350
Off -Road Vehicles ................................
55
3.360
Residential, Commercial, and Industrial
Land Development Impacts on Resources ..................
55
3.370
Peat or Phosphate Mining Impacts on Resources .............
55
3.400
Economic and Community Development ........................
55
3.410
General Land Development Policies .....................
56
3.420
Desired Types of Urban Growth Patterns ..................
56
3.430
Local Commitment to Providing Services to Development .......
58
3.440
Redevelopment of Developed Areas .....................
58
3.450
Commitment to State and Federal Programs ................
58
3.460
Assistance to Channel Maintenance Projects ................
59
3.470
Energy Facility Siting and Development ..................
59
3.480
Tourism .......................................
59
3.490
Coastal and Estuarine Water Beach Access .................
59
3.490.1 Anticipated Residential Development and
Requisite Support Services ....................
60
3.490.2 Other Identified Local Land Development Issues ......
60
3.490.21 Neighborhood 1 ..................
60
3.490.22 Neighborhood 2 ..................
61
3.490.23 Neighborhood 3 ..................
61
3.490.24 Neighborhood 4 ..................
61
3.490.25 Neighborhood 5 ..................
62
3.490.26 Neighborhood 6 ..................
62
3.490.27 Neighborhood 7 ..................
62
3.500
Continuing Public Participation Policies .........................
63
3.600
Storm Hazard Mitigation, Post -Disaster Recovery, and
Evacuation Plans .......................................
63
3.700
Proposed
Implementation Methods ............................
67
4.000 LAND CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM ............................... 68
4.100 Land Classifications ..................................... 68
4.110 Developed Classification ............................ 68
4.120 Urban Transition Classification ........................ 68
4.130 Limited Transition Classification ....................... 69
ITable of Contents
Im

Table
1
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
4.140
Community Classification ............................
69
4.150
Rural Classification ................................
69
4.160
Rural with Services Classification .......................
69
4.170
Conservation Classification ...........................
69
4.200 Uses Included
In Each Classification ...........................
70
4.210
Developed Classification ............................
70
4.220
Urban Transition Classification ........................
70
4.230
Limited Transition Classification .......................
70
4.240
Conservation Classification ...........................
71
4.300 Land Classification
Map ...................................
71
4.310
Developed Classification ............................
71
4.320
Urban Transition Classification ........................
71
4.330
Limited Transition Classification .......................
71
4.340
Conservation Classification ...........................
73
4.400
Relationship of Policy Statements and Land Classifications .......
73
4.410 Developed Classification ......................
73
4.420 Transition Classifications .....................
73
4.430 Conservation Classification ....................
73
LIST OF TABLES
Page
Population Size, Population Growth Rates
Population By Neighborhood Planning Area
Travel -Related Employment and Expenditures ..............................
Tourist Visitation By Month, 1988.....................................
Commercial Seafood Landings For Estuarine and
Offshore Waters, Carteret County .....................................
Existing Land Use, Neighborhood 1....................................
Existing Land Use, Neighborhood 2....................................
Existing Land Use, Neighborhood 3....................................
Existing Land Use, Neighborhood 4....................................
Existing Land Use, Neighborhood 5....................................
Existing Land Use, Neighborhood 6....................................
Existing Land Use, Neighborhood 7....................................
Land Use By Type and Acreage, Morehead Planning Jurisdiction,
5
10
11
12
15
17
18
20
22
23
24
1991........................................................ 25
14 Percentage of Developed Acreage by Neighborhood .......................... 27
15 Groundwater Sources, Town of Morehead City, 1989 ......................... 35
16 Average Daily Traffic, U.S. 70....................................... 43
17 Description of Hurricane Categories ..................................... 64
ITable of Contents
iv

J
k
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
1 Location Map .................................................. 2
IAZoning Map ................................................... 3
2 Neighborhood Planning Areas ........................................ 14
3 Existing Land Use ............................................... 26
4 Fragile Areas Including the Estuarine Shoreline AEC ......................... 33
5 Soil Limitations ................................................. 34
6 Existing Community Facilities ........................................ 38
7 Water and Sewer Service Areas ....................................... 40
8 Composite Hazards Map ........................................... 65
9 Land Classification Map ............................................ 72
LIST OF APPENDICES
A
Index of Data Sources .............................................
74
B
Population Size and Growth Rates .....................................
77
C
Comparison of Population Growth Rate of Similar -Sized Towns ..................
78
D
Comparison of Growth Rate of Coastal Municipalities .........................
79
E
Comparison of Growth Rate of Municipalities In the Region .....................
80
F
Population Density ...............................................
81
G
Age Distribution .................................................
82
HMedian
Age .................................................
84
I
Racial Composition ...............................................
85
J
Housing Characteristics ............................................
86
K
Employment by Industry Group
88
L
Major Manufacturing Employers ......................................
90
M
Per Capita Income ...............................................
91
N
Income Characteristics .............................................
92
O
Retail Sales ....................................................
93
P
Service Industries ................................................
95
Q
Seafood Landings and Vessel Licenses
96
R
Port Authority ..................................................
97
S
Distribution of Total Acreage by Land Use Category and Neighborhood .............
98
T
Distribution of Housing and Commercial Establishments by Neighborhood ...........
99
U
Housing and Population Density by Neighborhood ..........................
100
V
Authorized Construction By Building Permit/Subdivision Lot Approval .............
101
W
Soil Limitations For Selected Uses ....................................
103
X
Population Projections ............................................
104
Y
Future Residential Land Needs ......................................
105
Z
Summary of Alternative Policy Statements ...............................
106
AA
Public Participation Process ........................................
108
BB
Citizen Survey .................................................
113
CC
Summary of Storm Hazard Mitigation and Post -Disaster Reconstruction Plan Policies ....
128
ITable of Contents
v

0
0
0

I
1.000 INTRODUCTION
1.100 Purpose
Land development generally involves a series of decisions by both private individuals and the
public sector. In order to promote the public interest in the land development process, the North
Carolina Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) requires that local governments prepare, adopt, and
keep current a land use plan. The land use plan is intended to provide a framework that will guide
local governmental officials as they make a day-to-day and long-range decisions that affect land
development. The land use plan will also be used by state and federal agencies in making project
consistency, project funding, and CAMA permit decisions.
CAMA regulations require that an update be made of land use plans every five years. The
Town of Morehead City's previous land use plan was updated in 1986. The update is designed to
ensure that all current land development issues are reviewed and reflected in the land use plan. The
land use plan update also provides an opportunity to evaluate policy statements and to determine their
effectiveness in implementing the land development objectives of the community. The study area for
this land use plan update is the Morehead City Planning Jurisdiction which includes the Town of
:Morehead City and its one mile extraterritorial planning and zoning jurisdiction (see Figures 1 and
IA). The planning period for the land use plan update is ten years.
1.200 Summary
This land use plan update for Morehead City follows the methodology recommended by
CAMA in its Land Use Planning Guidelines (Subchapter 7B of the North Carolina Administrative
Code). Section 2.00 of this land use plan involves an analysis of existing conditions in Morehead
City including population, economy, and land use as well as an analysis of plans and regulations that
affect land use. Demographic, economic, and land use trends are identified and their implications
for the future use of land are analyzed. Section 2.000 also provides a description of the major
constraints to land development in the Morehead City area. The general suitability of land for
development is analyzed and includes a discussion of physical limitations for development, fragile
land and water areas, and areas with resource potential. The analysis of land suitability is particularly
useful in preparing the land classifications which are discussed in Section 4.000. Existing community
facilities and municipal services are also reviewed and summarized in Section 2.000. An evaluation
of Morehead City's ability to provide basic municipal services is made following an analysis of .
population projections and future land demands. The data analyzed in Section 2.000 provide
important information upon which policy decisions are based. Data sources utilized in the preparation
of this land use plan update are summarized in Appendix A.
Section 3.000 contains an evaluation of the 1986 Land Use Plan policy statements and outlines
policies designed to address land development and growth management issues identified through the
analysis of existing factors that affect land use. Policy statements concerning resource protection,
resource production and management, economic and community development (including
neighborhood -oriented land use policies), public participation. and storm hazard mitigation, post -
disaster recovery, and evacuation are delineated in this section. The policies are intended to establish
guidelines to be utilized by the town in making day-to-day local planning decisions and by state and
federal agencies in project consistency, project funding, and permit decisions. The policy statements
were developed based upon the previously described analysis of existing conditions, land use trends,
and constraints to land development as well as citizen input obtained through the town's public
participation process.
1.000 Introduction

N
N.T.S.
Bogue Sound
A T L A N T I C
O C E A N
FIGURE 1
LOCATION MAP
MOREHEAD CITY
MAY 1991
The preparation of this map was financed in part throuy; I
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.
H RKER ;
ISLAND ~�
— — — E.T.J. BOUNDARY

r r r
r r Tire preparation of thin map was financed in part through
a grant provided by tt►e North Carotin Coastal
Management Program. through funds provded by the
�o Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended,
yo which is administered by the Otllce of Gcean and
Lei coastal Resource Management. National f?cearric and %. Atmosphoric Adwinimation.
N
N.T.S.
Bogue Sound
® Morehead City
Beaufort
Atlantic Beach
© Pine Knoll Shores
ENewport
0 Carteret County
Figure 1A
ZONING JURISDICTIONS
MOREHEAD CITY AREA
OCTOBER 1991

The land classification system described in Section 4.000 provides a means of assisting in the
implementation of the land development policy statements. The land classification system provides
' a basic framework for identifying the future use of land and illustrates the town's policies as to where
and to what density it wants growth to occur. The land classification system also delineates where
the town wants to conserve natural and cultural resources. Section 4.000 provides a description of
r
k
the land uses proposed within each land classification. The land classification map presented in this
section graphically illustrates the land classification system as applied to the Morehead City Planning
Jurisdiction.
1.000 Introduction 4

2.000 DATA COLLECTION
AND ANALYSIS
H

' 2.000 DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
' The data collected and analyzed in this chapter are designed to provide an information base which will
be helpful in making policy decisions about future land use and land development in the Morehead City
Planning Region. Existing conditions regarding population, the local economy, land use, and current plans
and policies that affect land use are described in Section 2.100. Constraints to land development are
discussed in Section 2.200 which includes an analysis of land suitability, the capacity of Morehead City to
provide basic community services, and the anticipated demand on community services.
2.100 Existing Conditions
2.110 Population. Population characteristics which are analyzed in this land use plan update
include population size and growth trends, age distribution, racial composition, and household
population.
u
2.111 Population Size and Growth Trends. The 1990 U.S. Census count for
Morehead City was 6,046. The total population for the town and the current planning
jurisdiction is estimated to be 10,506. Table I below provides a comparison of the
population size and rates of population growth for Morehead City with those of
Carteret County and the state:
TABLE 1
POPULATION SIZE
1960 1970
1980
1990
Morehead City
5,583 5,233
4,359
6,046
Carteret County
27,438 31,603
41,092
52,556
North Carolina
4,556,155 5,084,411
5,880,095
6,628,637
POPULATION GROWTH RATES
1960-1970
1970-1980
1980-1990
Morehead City
-6.3 %
-16.7 %
38.7 %
Carteret County
15.2 %
30.0 %
27.9 %
North Carolina
11.6 %
15.6 %
12.7 %
Source: U.S. Census of Population 1960 - 1990.
A review of the town's population from 1910 to 1990 indicates a steady, though
' fluctuating pattern of growth until 1960 [see Appendix B]. Morehead City's population
decreased in size between 1960 and 1980, from 5,583 in 1960 to 4,359 in 1980. Since
1980, however, the town's population has increased to 6,046, a growth rate of 38.7
' percent. While precise data on the population increase attributable to annexation are
not available, annexations since 1980 have resulted in large increases in the size of the
population.
2.000 Data Collection and Analysis 5

u
1
When compared to eleven municipalities of similar size in North Carolina,
Morehead City's 1980-1990 growth rate is higher than nine (82 percent) of those
communities and lower than two (18 percent) [see Appendix C]. The town's 1980-
1990 growth rate of 38.7 percent is the second highest among ten selected coastal
municipalities and the seventh highest among nineteen cities in the immediate region
surrounding Morehead City [see Appendices D and El. Carteret County's growth rate
between 1980 and 1990 placed it as the 5th fastest growing county in North Carolina.
In 1980, Morehead City contained 2,180 persons per square mile. This
population density was greater than the median density of all selected municipalities in
the region [see Appendix F]. The population density figure in 1980 statewide was 120
persons per mile and for Carteret County, 78 persons per square mile.
While seasonal and recreational population is an important part in the overall
population of Carteret County, it does not have a significant impact on the total
population of Morehead City. According to the 1980 U.S. Census, Morehead City had
only 22 vacant seasonal and migratory housing units. By comparison, Carteret County
had 3,142 such units in 1980. Based upon a windshield survey conducted in November
1990 of the town and its planning region, seasonal housing was determined to be an
insignificant portion of the total housing stock, and thus the population as well. Non-
permanent population is perhaps more a factor in Morehead City in the form of motel
population as opposed to seasonal housing population. The motel population for
Morehead City is estimated to be approximately 1,500 people.` Such overnight
recreational population fluctuates with the tourist season but does have some influence
on the overall population impacts on public facility needs and public services.
Based upon the estimated number of housing units located in each neighborhood
planning area, the following table provides a breakdown of the total population of the
Morehead City Planning Region:
'Based upon an estimate utilizing motel population data for Carteret County contained in the
"Characterization of Baseline Demographic Trends In the Year -Round and Recreational Population in
the Albemarle -Pamlico Estuarine Study Area", Paul D. Tschetter, May 1989.
2." Data Collection and Analysis 6

k
H
TABLE 2
POPULATION BY
NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING AREA
Estimated
Percentage of
Neighborhood
Population
Total Population
1
1,399
13.3 %
2
1,449
13.8 %
3
1,111
10.6 %
4
1,492
14.2 %
5
2,690
25.6 %
6
1,075
10.2 %
7
1,290
12.3 %
TOTALS
10,506
100.0 %
Source: The Wooten Company, 1991.
Neighborhood planning areas are described more fully in Section 2.130,
Existing Land Use.
2.112 Age Composition and Distribution. The age composition of Morehead City's
population in 1980 varied from that of the County and the state [see Appendix G].
Morehead City had a much higher proportion of retirement -aged persons (65 years and
older) and a lower proportion of college -aged persons (20 - 24 years) than both
Carteret County and the state.
Long-term demographic projections by the North Carolina Office of State
' Budget and Management indicate that the share of the population under the age of 16
years has historically declined while the elderly share has grown. This trend is
projected to continue, although the proportion of the elderly population should stabilize
' during the late 1990's because of the low birth rate during the Depression years. The
anticipated aging of the population will have long-term implications for health care
services as well as for the housing industry. A greater demand for medical care, in -
home services, institutional care, and housing tailored for the elderly can be expected
in future years.
' The population of Morehead City, reflective of the current national trend, is
aging. The median age in Morehead City in 1970 was 30.5 years compared to a
median age of 37.8 years in 1980. The town's median age in 1970 and 1980 was
considerably higher that the national, state, and county medians [see Appendix HI.
The town's higher median age is attributable to a variety of factors including the
natural aging of the population and an influx of retirement -aged persons.
2.113 Racial Composition. Racial composition data for Morehead City in the 1980
census indicate that the town is 80.9 percent white, 18.1 percent black, and 1.0 percent
all other races. The town's minority population is lower that of the state as a whole
(23.4%) but considerably higher than that of Carteret County (10.3%). The trend
since 1960 indicates that the minority population in Morehead City has remained
relatively constant, comprising about 17 percent of the town's total population in 1960
and 19 percent in 1970. Long-term projections forecast a declining minority
2.000 Data Collection and Analysis 7

population for Carteret County and a slightly increasing minority population statewide
[see Appendix I].
2.114 Household Population. Morehead City's household population size, like that
on the national level, has been steadily decreasing. In 1970, Morehead City had an
average of 2.99 persons per household. By 1980, the figure had decreased to 2.44
persons, a lower household population average than Carteret County (2.66 persons) and
the state as a whole (2.78 persons). Preliminary 1990 U.S. Census figures indicate an
average of 2.15 persons per occupied household in Morehead City. The average
household population is projected to decline even further as the overall family size
decreases and the number of single -person households increases [see Appendix J].
Single -person households in Morehead City in 1980 comprised over 28 percent of the
town's total occupied housing. The continued trend of fewer persons per household
will have an impact on the future types and sizes of dwelling units.
2.120 Economy. The economy of Morehead City and Carteret County is based largely on
retail trade, services, tourism, commercial fishing, port activities, manufacturing, and
agriculture. Morehead City is the largest municipality in Carteret County and is the retail and
commercial services center for the county. The economic indicators reviewed in this section
include employment, income, trade and services, tourism, commercial fishing, port activities,
and manufacturing.
2.121 Employment. In 1980, the services and wholesale and retail trade sectors
accounted for over 50 percent of Morehead City's total employment [see Appendix K].
Other large employers were the government, manufacturing, and transportation,
communication, and public utilities sectors. The largest employment sector in Carteret
County in 1980 paralleled those of Morehead City (wholesale and retail trade, services,
government, and manufacturing). When compared to the state, Morehead City's
proportion of workers in the wholesale and retail trade, services, construction,
transportation, and finance/real estate sectors is higher and lower in the agriculture,
manufacturing, and government sectors.
Governmental employment in the Carteret County area includes municipal and
county employment, state employment, and federal employment. State employment
consists largely of the county school system, a variety of university and state
government marine research facilities, and Carteret Community College. Federal
employment in Carteret County included federal service employees and military
employees. An estimated 1,500 persons in Carteret County are civilian employees of
the Cherry Point Marine Air Corps Station located in nearby Craven County. Civilian
employment data for Camp Lejeune Marine Corps Base in nearby Jacksonville are not
available.
Manufacturing employment in Morehead City in 1980 accounted for just over
11 percent of all employed persons, slightly lower than the county figure of almost 14
percent and substantially lower than the statewide average of approximately 28 percent.
Major manufacturing employers in the Morehead City area are delineated in Appendix
L.
2.000 Data Collection and Analysis 8

' According to data from the 1980 census, over 25 percent of all workers
commuted out of Carteret County to their workplace. The majority of out -commuters
' traveled to Craven County (70 percent) and Onslow County (15 percent). In -
commuters came primarily from the same two counties: Craven County (59 percent)
and Onslow County (13 percent). Carteret County had more workers leaving the
' county (4,080) than it had coming into the county (1,379).
Projections made by the North Carolina Office of State Budget and Management
' (NC Long -Term Economic -Demographic Projections, 1987) indicate that, statewide,
the rate of increase in employment will decline in future years. The largest
employment gains are anticipated in the non -manufacturing sector, particularly the
trade and services sectors. Specific employment projections for Carteret County by
' Woods and Poole Economics [see Appendix K] indicate increases in the wholesale and
retail trade and the finance, insurance, and real estate sectors from 1990 and 2000.
Employment decreases are anticipated in the same time period for the agriculture,
manufacturing, services, and government sectors. Wholesale and retail trade is
projected to continue as the largest single employment sector, followed by the services
and finance, insurance, and real estate sectors.
' 2.122 Income Characteristics. In 1985, the per capita income in Morehead City was
$8,265 compared to $9,296 for all of Carteret County and $9,517 statewide. Appendix
M shows that Morehead City's per capita income level is lower than all other
municipalities in Carteret County. Although projected data is not available for
Morehead City, projections made for Carteret County provide a good indication of
future incomes that can be expected in the area. Appendix N delineates per capita
projections for Carteret County and North Carolina through 2010. These projections
indicate that while the per capita income in Carteret County will increase in the future
years, it will continue to remain below that of the state as a whole. Mean household
income data are also provided in Appendix N.
2.123 Trade and Services. According to the 1987 Census of Retail Trade, retail sales
' in Morehead City totaled $145,897,000 or 44 percent of Carteret County's entire retail
sales volume. As shown in Appendix O, Morehead City accounted for 35 percent of
all retail establishments in the county and 44 percent of all persons employed in the
' retail sector. Morehead City's position as the largest retail center in Carteret County
is evidenced by it's dominance in several retail categories, particularly furniture/home
furnishings, drug stores, general merchandise, apparel and accessories, building
I
material/hardware, and eating and drinking places.
Retail sales projections by Woods and Poole Economics for Carteret County
' indicate that, while there will be sizeable increases in the volume of retail sales, the
rate of retail sales growth will decrease in future years. Retail sectors projected to
show increases in total sales include building materials/hardware, gasoline service
stations, apparel and accessories, furniture/home furnishings, and eating and drinking
places. These projections are consistent with long-term forecasts by the North Carolina
2.000 Data Collection and Analysis 9

Office of State Budget and Management which predict somewhat slower economic
growth through the end of this century.
Morehead City's role as the major services center is also confirmed by data
presented in Appendix P. In 1987, Morehead City accounted for 47 percent of all
services establishments in Carteret County, 49 percent of all service industry receipts,
and 56 percent of all paid service industry employees. The service industry sectors
particularly strong in Morehead City included health services, engineering/research,
legal services, business services, and personal services. The services sector in
Morehead City also includes a large number of persons employed in the restaurant and
accommodations businesses (see Section 2.124, Tourism). Morehead City also
dominated the wholesale trade sector of the local economy as evidenced by the fact that
the town accounted for 34 percent of all wholesale establishments in Carteret County,
45 percent of all wholesale sales, and 25 percent of all wholesale employment'
2.124 Tourism. Travel and tourism contribute substantially to the economy of
Morehead City and Carteret County. The table below shows a comparison of travel -
related employment and expenditures in 1988 for Carteret County, selected coastal
counties, and the state:
TABLE 3
TRAVEL -RELATED
EMPLOYMENT & EXPENDITURES
Percent of Total
County Private
Expenditures
Percent of
Employment
Employment
(1,000)
NC Total
Beaufort
928
6.91 %
5,819
0.09
Brunswick
1,336
12.97 %
145,695
2.36
Carteret
2,534
20.89 %
171,326
2.78
Craven
2,504
13.72 %
41,142
0.67
Dare
2,751
33.76 %
440,921
7.15
New Hanover
6,150
14.07 %
252,588
4.10
Onslow
3,561
18.89 %
53,597
0.87
Pamlico
116
7.60 %
757
0.01
North Carolina
217,860
9.10%
6,166,870
100.00
Source: 1988 N.C. Travel Study, N.C. Division of Travel and Tourism.
'North Carolina Long -Term Economic Demographic Projections, Office of State Budget and
Management, 1987.
11982 Census of Wholesale Trade, Census Bureau.
2.000 Data Collection and Analysis 10
I

1
In 1988, Carteret County ranked loth in the state in travel -related expenditures
and 19th in travel -related employment. Of the 1988 travel -related employment, 73
percent was involved in the restaurant sector, 19 percent in the accommodations sector,
and 8 percent in the amusements sector. Travel -related expenditures in Carteret
County increased 10.4 percent from 1987 to 1988; the statewide increase during the
same period was 8.2 percent.
The secondary effects of travel and tourism also has a major impact on the local
economy of Morehead City and Carteret County. Each travel -related dollar enters the
economy and creates secondary economic impacts. Travel -related expenditures become
wages and salaries, capital to purchase other goods and services, sales tax, and income
tax. The additional travel -related spending results in the creation of other jobs in the
community. The 1988 North Carolina Travel Study by the North Carolina Division
of Travel and Tourism estimated that the travel -related expenditures in Carteret County
created 2,635 additional jobs which resulted in $38,710,000 in personal income and
$4,669,000 in secondary sales tax.
The majority of tourists visit Carteret County between April and August, with
the peak visitation occurring in July. The Carteret County Economic Development
Council has estimated that over 1,750,000 tourists visited the county in 1988. The
table below provides a breakdown of tourist visitation by month:
TABLE 4
Tourist Visitation By Month
1988
MONTH
JAN
FEB
MAR
i
APR
I i I
MAY
I I I
JUN
I I I I
JUL
AUG
i
SEP
I I
OCT
I
NOV
DEC
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
Percent of Total Tourist Visitation
Source: Carteret County Economic Development Council
2.000 Data Collection and Analysis 11

2.125 Commercial Fishing. Carteret County led the state in 1989 in total seafood
landings, total value of seafood landings, and number of commercial fishing vessels
[see Appendix Q]. Carteret County has consistently been the statewide leader in total
seafood landings since 1977. The county's share of 1989 seafood landings represented
over 27 percent of the entire state's total commercial dockside value. Carteret County
also accounted for almost 20 percent of the state's commercial fishing fleet and
approximately 25 percent of all full- and part-time fishing vessels. Like the tourism
industry, commercial and sport fishing also have a economic multiplier effect that
impacts other sectors of the local economy.
In addition to the commercial dockside value of seafood landings, the value of
industrial menhaden and thread herring landings is a significant part of the overall
fishing economy. According to data from the North Carolina Division of Marine
Fisheries, Carteret County's share of industrial landings (61,528,110 pounds) amounted
to over 92 percent of the statewide total and the county's value of industrial landings
($1,557,000) accounted for 86 percent of the statewide value. Since the only active
menhaden processing plant is located in Carteret County, the economic impact on the
local manufacturing sector is also positive.
Commercial seafood landings of finfish and shellfish by water source are
delineated below in Table 5.
TABLE 5
COMMERCIAL SEAFOOD LANDINGS
FOR ESTUARINE AND OFFSHORE WATERS
CARTERET COUNTY
Percentage of Finfish and Shellfish
Total Finfish
and Shellfish
Landings by Water Source
Landings
By Water Source
Finfish Shellfish
Year
Estuarine
Offshore Total Estuarine Offshore
Total Estuarine
Offshore
Total
1980
22.5%
77.5% 100.0% 57.5%- 42.5%
100.0%
31.7%
68.3%
100.0%
1981
23.9 %
76.1 % 100.0% 47.8 % 52.2 %
100.0%
33.2 %
66.8 %
100.0%
1982
19.5%
80.5% 100.0% 58.6% 41.4%
100.0%
33.5%
66.5%
100.0%
1983
24.2%
75.8% 100.0% 61.1% 38.9%
100.0%
35.8%
64.2%
100.0%
1984
24.3 %
75.7 % 100.0% 57.9 % 47.1 %
100.0%
32.6 %
67.4 %
100.0%
1985
18.5%
81.5% 100.0% 52.1% 47.9%
100.0%
30.4%
69.6%
100.0%
1986
18.7%
81.3% 100.0% 56.8% 43.2%
100.0%
27.5%
75.5%
100.0%
1987
18.5%
81.5% 100.0% 47.5% 52.5%
100.0%
27.2%
72.8%
100.0%
1988
18.6%
81.4% 100.0% 51.5% 48.5%
100.0%
28.5%
71.5%
100.0%
Source:
North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries.
2.000 Data Collection and Analysis 12

11
I
2.126 Port of Morehead City. Data obtained from the North Carolina State Ports
Authority indicate that approximately 175 persons are employed at the Morehead City
port facility and, of that total, about 100 reside in the Morehead City area. It has been
estimated that, in fiscal year 1989/1990, the port facility contributed over $14 million
to Carteret County in economic benefits and $209.5 million to North Carolina's
economy (see Appendix R]. According to information provided by the Carteret County
Tax Office, the privately -owned portion of the port facility located in Morehead City
has an assessed valuation of over $25 million or 9.5 percent of the town's total tax
base of approximately $266 million.
The port facility occupies approximately 178 acres in Morehead City including
the 62-acre Marsh Island (also referred to as Annex Island). The terminal includes
5,300 feet of deep water and 1,000 feet of barge dockage space. Gross tonnage
handled at the port decreased slightly from 1988 to 1989 but has remained relatively
stable since 1986, averaging approximately 2.66 million tons annually. The major
commodities handled at the facility include phosphate, wood chips, liquid fertilizer,
heating oil, lumber and wood products, tobacco, and urea. Of the approximate
1,691,430 short tons delivered to the port in fiscal year 1989/1990, 76 percent was
transported by barge, 14 percent by truck, and 10 percent by rail.
The port facility is currently involved in a channel deepening project to increase
' the current shipping channel depth of 40 feet to 45 feet. The $11 million dollar
project, which is expected to begin in 1993, will enable ships to be loaded to capacity
and will reduce the ocean freight rate from $4.00 to $2.00 per ton. Dock and storage
C
F
improvements are also being made on Radio Island to enable the port facility to
increase it's container cargo handling capabilities.
2.130 Existing Land Use. In order to provide a more meaningful analysis of existing land
use conditions in Morehead City and it's extraterritorial planning jurisdiction, the study area
was subdivided into seven neighborhood planning areas. The seven neighborhoods (see Figure
2) represent distinct areas of the study area which have different land use patterns, constraints
to development, potential for growth, and land development concerns. A discussion of land
use conditions in each neighborhood follows as well as summary evaluation of the overall land
use conditions.
2.131 Neighborhood 1. Neighborhood 1 is basically the eastern end of the peninsula
created by Calico Bay, the Newport River, and Bogue Sound. Neighborhood 1
consists of the central business district (CBD), the state port facility located east of
downtown, and the established residential area north of downtown. Subareas of
Neighborhood 1 include (i) the commercial core of the CBD located on the north and
south sides of Arendell Street (US 70), (ii) the waterfront commercial district,
(iii) the port facility, (iv) the mixed -use Bridges Street corridor, (v) the residential area
between Bridges Street and Calico Bay, and (iv) the islands in the Newport River and
Bogue Sound.
2.000 Data Collection and Analysis 13
1

Neighborhood 1 contains approximately 650 residential units which include a
variety of housing types: single-family detached, single-family attached, and low and
high rise multi -family. Retail, commercial service, and office establishments comprise
the CBD area. The waterfront commercial district on Bogue Sound includes marinas,
fish markets, restaurants, charter fishing boat docks. and general retail. The Morehead
City Yacht Basin is located on Calico Creek just northeast of the CBD. The only
major industrial use in Neighborhood 1 is the state port facility which occupies
approximately 150 acres at the extreme eastern end of the peninsula. A smaller
industrially -used area is located just northeast of the CBD. Public and institutional
located in this neighborhood include the municipal building and administrative offices,
the Morehead Elementary School, two parks, the U.S. Army Reserve Center, the
public library, a post office, and numerous churches. The table below summarizes the
general land use patterns in Neighborhood 1:
Neighborhood 1 contains very little vacant land (approximately 3 acres) that is
not located within a floodplain. Consequently, there is very little potential for new
construction. Growth potential in Neighborhood 1 centers primarily around conversion
of existing structures to different uses. Sugarloaf and Phillips Islands are both vacant
and, due to flood hazard and their current use as major heron nesting areas, will most
likely remain in an undeveloped state. Annex Island (also known as Marsh Island),
which is owned by the N.C. State Ports Authority, is also vacant and is used for as a
dredge spoil site and for wetlands mitigation purposes.
TABLE 6
EXISTING LAND USE
NEIGHBORHOOD 1
Percent of
Percent of
Land Use
Acres Developed Acreage
Total Acreage
Residential
64 23.0 %
22.8 %
Commercial
39 14.0 %
13.9 %
Public/Institutional/Recreational
7.5%
Industrial
154 55.4 %
54.8 %
Vacant'
3 ---
1.0 %
Totals
281 100.0 %
100.0 %
'Does not include Sugarloaf, Annex, or Phillips
Islands which total approximately 168 acres.
Source: The Wooten Company, 1991.
2.000 Data Collection and Analysis 15

k
Reflective of the current land use pattern, Neighborhood 1 contains a variety
of zoning classifications. The downtown business area is zoned for a variety of
commercial retail, marine commercial, professional uses. The Bridges Street corridor
is zoned primarily for office and professional service uses. The port facility and a
three -block area between 4th and 5th streets from the Norfolk -Southern Railroad to
Calico Bay is zoned for port industrial. Neighborhood 1 residential areas are
predominantly zoned R5 which permits a maximum density of eight dwelling units per
acre. The existing high rise structures located on small tracts on the waterfront east
of the CBD are zoned PD which allows a much higher residential density than the R5
classification. Sugarloaf and Phillips Islands are zoned for floodplain; Annex Island
is zoned for industrial port use. With the exception of Annex Island, the zoning
classifications in Neighborhood 1 generally parallel current and anticipated patterns.
Although Neighborhood 1 is almost totally developed, continuation of existing
land uses or conversion to new land uses are influenced by several existing natural and
man-made features. Influencing features include the Norfolk -Southern Railroad, US
70, Bridges Street, the port facility, and Bogue Sound and Calico Bay, including their
floodplains. All of these features play an important role, either positively or
negatively, in the future development or redevelopment of the neighborhood.
2.132 Neighborhood 2. Neighborhood 2 is generally located south of the Norfolk -
Southern Railroad tracts from 9th Street westward to 34th Street. This neighborhood
planning area is overwhelmingly residential in nature and consists of three subareas:
(i) the waterfront along Bogue Sound, (ii) the south side of the US 70 corridor, and
(iii) the interior blocks between (i) and (ii).
Neighborhood 2 contains some 675 residences, the vast majority of which are
' single-family detached structures. A few low density multi -family units are scattered
throughout the neighborhood. The only nonresidential uses in Neighborhood 2 are
seven commercial establishments scattered along Arendell Street in the vicinity of the
' Atlantic Beach Causeway and on Evans Street near the CBD, a private school, and
several churches. As in Neighborhood 1, there is very little vacant land. The vacant
land that is present consists primarily of small building -size lots. Consequently, the
' growth potential of Neighborhood 2 basically involves the renovation of existing single-
family residences. Table 7 below illustrates the general land use pattern in
Neighborhood 2.
� I
2.000 Data Collection and Analysis 16

TABLE 7
EXISTING LAND USE
NEIGHBORHOOD 2
Percent of
Percent of
Land Use
Acres Developed Acreage
Total Acreage
Residential
70 88.6 %
85.4 %
Commercial
2 2.5 %
2.4 %
Public/Institutional/Recreational
7 8.9 %
•8.5 %
Industrial
0 0.0 %
0.0 %
Vacant
3 ---
3.7 %
Totals
82 100.0 %
100.0 %
Source: The Wooten Company, 1991.
The zoning pattern in Neighborhood 2 reflects the existing land use scheme in
that almost the entire area is zoned R5S. Single-family residences at a maximum
density of eight dwelling units per acre are permitted by the R5S zoning category. The
small, scattered existing commercial land uses are commercially zoned.
' The existing natural and man-made features that influence Neighborhood 2
include Bogue Sound (including the floodplain), the Norfolk -Southern Railroad, US 70,
the causeway to Atlantic Beach, and the proximity of the central business district.
1
2.133 Neighborhood 3. The area general bounded on the south by the Norfolk -
Southern Railroad tracts, on the west by Barbour Road, on the north by Calico Creek,
and on the east by 14th Street comprises Neighborhood 3. This neighborhood contains
a variety of land uses including single- and multi -family residences, businesses,
industrial establishments, and public and institutional facilities. The subareas of
Neighborhood 3 include: (i) the US 70 corridor, (ii) the Bridges Street corridor, and
(iii) the residential areas between Bridges Street and Calico Creek.
Approximately 525 residences are situated in Neighborhood 3, three -fourths of
which are single-family detached housing units. Multi -family residences, including
some public housing units, comprise the remainder of residential structures. Several
large medium -density apartment developments are scattered throughout this
neighborhood. Commercial establishments, which total about 70, are concentrated on
the north side of the Arendell Street (US 70) corridor and in the Bridges Street
corridor. The three industrial uses in Neighborhood 3 are located on Bridges Street
between 16th and 17th Streets and along the railroad spur north of Bridges Street.
Public and institutional uses are scattered throughout the neighborhood and include 3
large cemeteries, a middle school, municipal facilities, churches, and recreational
facilities. Vacant land consists chiefly of scattered lots and small parcels, the largest
2.000 Data Collection and Analysis 17

1
vacant tract is an approximate 10-acre parcel located west of 25th Street between Avery
Street and Myrtle Street. Other undeveloped land within Neighborhood 3 is floodable
land located along the south banks of Calico Creek. The table below delineates the
general land uses in this neighborhood:
TABLE 8
EXISTING LAND USE
NEIGHBORHOOD 3
Percent of
Percent of
Land Use
Acres
Developed Acreage,
Total Acreage
Residential
78
44.1%
31.2%
Commercial
27
15.3 %
10.8 %
Public/Institutional/Recreational
68
38.4%
27.2%
Industrial
4
2.2 %
1.6 %
Vacant
73
---
29.2%
Totals
250
100.0 %
100.0 %
Source: The Wooten Company, 1991.
The zoning pattern in this neighborhood is more varied than those previously
discussed. This variety is directly attributed to the multitude of land uses in
Neighborhood 3. Residential zoning classifications include R5 for the majority of the
area and R7 and R10 for small portions of the neighborhood. The density permitted
by these zoning classifications range from a low of 4 units per acre (R10) to 8 units
per acre (R5). Commercial zoning is found in the Arendell Street and Bridges Street
corridors and includes community shopping, neighborhood commercial, and office and
professional categories. Interestingly, the commercial zoning pattern along Bridges
Street is in a nodal pattern rather than a continuous strip pattern as in that portion of
Bridges Street located'in Neighborhood 1. The three small industrial sites are zoned
_for.unoffensive _industriaL use.
' Due to the unavailability of vacant developable land, the growth potential of
Neighborhood 3 is limited. The major vacant parcels in the neighborhood are zoned
for residential use (R5 and R7 classifications). Consequently, the potential for future
development appears to be primarily for multi -family residences and, to a lesser extent,
institutional uses and commercial services.
The natural and man-made features which impact this neighborhood include
Calico Creek and it's floodplain, US 70, Bridges Street, the Norfolk -Southern
Railroad, Morehead Middle School, cemeteries, and the proximity to the Morehead
Plaza shopping center.
2.000 Data Collection and Analysis 18

2.134 Neighborhood 4. Neighborhood 4 is generally bounded on the east by Barbour
Road, 28th Street between Bridges Street and Arendell Street, the Norfolk -Southern
Railroad, and 34th Street; on the south by Bogue Sound; on the west by Lockhart Road
and Friendly Road; and on the north by the Carolina Power and Light Company
transmission line right-of-way. this neighborhood planning area contains a wide variety
of land uses including large -tract public and institutional, commercial, single-family
and multi -family residential, manufactured home, and, industrial uses. Subareas of
Neighborhood 4 include: (i) the US 70 corridor, (ii) the institutional and professional
office complex centered around 35th Street, (iii) the Morehead Plaza shopping center
area, and (iv) the Bridges Street corridor.
The estimated 600 residential dwelling units that are located in Neighborhood
4 consist primarily of multi -family residences and manufactured homes. This
neighborhood contains the largest number of multi -family developments which are
concentrated in the Bonner Avenue and Guardian Avenue/Symi Circle areas. Two
large manufactured home parks, containing about 180 units, are situated on the north
side of Bridges Street north of the Camp Glenn School. Scattered manufactured homes
on individual lots are also found throughout Neighborhood 4, particularly in the Maple
Lane area. Single-family detached residences, located in relatively small pockets of
development, round out the residential uses in this neighborhood. Commercial land
use consists of the Morehead Plaza shopping center, retail and services in the US 70
and Bridges Street corridors, and the professional office/services concentration located
north of the hospital between Penny Lane and North 35th Street. A small number of
light industrial land uses are located in the vicinity of the Bridges Street and US 70
intersection. Major public and institutional uses consist of the Carteret General
Hospital, Carteret Community College, the North Carolina Division of Marine
Fisheries complex, the N.C. State Seafood Laboratory, Camp Glenn Elementary
School, nursing and health care facilities, the National Guard Armory, a small park
with boat ramp, and an electrical substation. Approximately 120 acres of vacant land
are located in Neighborhood 4 in four general areas: a large tract north of US 70 and
east of Friendly Road, an area west of North 35th Street south of the Carolina Power
and Light Company transmission line right-of-way, a tract located on the north side of
Bridges Street between the Glen Grove and Willis Mobile Home Parks, and a tract
located north of Bridges Street and west of Barbour Road. The general land uses in
Neighborhood 4 are described in Table 9:
2.000 Data Collection and Analysis 19

TABLE 9
EXISTING LAND USE
NEIGHBORHOOD 4
Percent of
Percent of
Land Use
Acres Developed Acreage
Total Acreage
Residential
129 43.7 %
31.2 %
Commercial
78 26.5 %
18.9 %
Public/Institutional/Recreational
80 27.1 %
19.4 %
Industrial
8 2.7 %
1:9 %
Vacant
118 ---
28.6 %
Totals
413 100.0 %
100.0 %
Source: The Wooten Company, 1991.
As in Neighborhood 3, the zoning pattern in Neighborhood 4 is varied due to
the wide array of existing land uses. Overall, the zoning pattern parallels the existing
land use pattern. Residential zoning is comprised of the R15M, R5, R10, and a limited
amount of the R20 classifications. The major multi -family developments are located
in areas that are zoned either R5 or Office and Professional. The residential density
permitted in Neighborhood 4 ranges from about 2 units per acre to 8 units per acre.
Commercial zoning consists primarily of the office and professional, community
shopping, and highway commercial classifications. The major vacant parcels in
Neighborhood 4 which were described earlier are zoned primarily for residential
(chiefly R15M), office and professional, and industrial use.
The undeveloped land in this neighborhood has good potential for medium -
density residential and office and professional uses. Light industrial or intensive
commercial service land uses are also potential uses on the large vacant tract north of
US 70 and east of Friendly Road. Given the relatively large amount of vacant,
developable land, the existing supporting infrastructure, and good vehicular
accessibility, Neighborhood 4 appears to have a strong potential for future growth.
Neighborhood 4 is influenced by a variety of natural and man-made factors
including US 70, the Norfolk -Southern Railroad, Bridges Street, Bogue Sound, the
CP&L transmission right-of-way, Morehead Plaza shopping center, the community
college, Carteret General Hospital, and the Camp Glenn School. The presence of
wetlands in the western and northwestern portions of the neighborhood will also have
an impact on future land development.
2.135 Neighborhood 5. Neighborhood 5 is overwhelmingly a single-family detached
residential area consisting of both mature and newly developing subdivisions. This
neighborhood is generally bounded on the north by the Newport River, on the east by
residential subdivisions abutting Country Club Road, on the south by the CP&L
transmission line right-of-way and the Norfolk -Southern Railroad, and on the west by
the town's western extraterritorial planning and zoning jurisdictional boundary which
basically runs north from Country Club Road east of the West Carteret High School
2.000 Data Collection and Analysis 20

to the Newport River. Unlike the previously described neighborhood planning areas,
Neighborhood 4 has no distinctive subareas other than the individual residential
subdivisions and the Morehead City Country Club area.
Neighborhood 5 contains some 1,350 residences, 70 percent of which are
' single-family detached dwellings. Major residential subdivisions include, Mandy
Farms, Country Club East, Hedrick Estates, Westhaven, Lake and Shore Estates,
Northwoods, Oaksmith Acres, West Car Meadows, and Creek Pointe. Approximately
300 multi -family residences are located in apartment developments which are generally
concentrated in two areas: adjacent to North 35th Street south of Mandy Lane and on
the north side of Country Club Road west of West Carteret High School. Ten to
' fifteen manufactured homes on individual lots are scattered throughout the
neighborhood. Major commercial development is basically limited to the
neighborhood -oriented businesses located in the Mandy Park Shopping Center on North
35th Street at Old Gate Road and to the office development on the north side of Mandy
' Lane in the 35th Street Extension intersection area. A small commercial area has
recently developed on Friendly Road just north of the Norfolk -Southern Railroad.
Public, institutional, and recreational uses in this neighborhood include the Morehead
' City Country Club and Golf Course, a county -owned park (Swinson Park), a nursing
care facility, and several churches. There are currently no industrial land uses in
Neighborhood 5.
Neighborhood 5 contains more vacant land than any of the other six planning
areas. Approximately 965 undeveloped acres (or 65 percent of all vacant land within
the study area) are in this neighborhood. However, this figure includes the 520-acre
nature preserve located in the extreme northwestern corner of the neighborhood as well
as several hundred acres of land where wetlands have been identified. Consequently,
the vacant land data presented here does not provide an accurate total of vacant
buildable or developable land. However, it is estimated that about 445 acres or 30
percent of all vacant land in Neighborhood 5 is suitable for development purposes.
These developable, vacant tracts are distributed throughout the neighborhood with the
larger tracts located between Swinson Park and Friendly Road adjacent to the Norfolk -
Southern Railroad, west of Swinson Park and north of the Norfolk -Southern Railroad,
north of Tootle Road east of the Country Club East Subdivision, and in the southwest
corner of the Mandy Lane and North 35th Street intersection. The table below
---describes 5:
2." Data Collection and Analysis 21

r
TABLE 10
EXISTING LAND USE
NEIGHBORHOOD 5
Percent of
Percent of
Land Use
Acres Developed Acreage
Total Acreage
Residential
630 62.6 %
32.0 %
Commercial
12 1.2 %
0.6 %
Public/Institutional/Recreational
365 36.2 %
18.5 %
Industrial
0 0.0 %
0.0 %
Vacant
964
48.9 %
Totals
1,971 100.0 %
100.0 %
Source: The Wooten Company, 1991.
The majority of land in this neighborhood is zoned for low -density, single-
family and duplex uses (R20). A small amount of property is zoned R5 and R7 which
would permit a higher density of up to 8 units per acres. Commercial zoning is
basically limited to those areas that are currently developed for business purposes.
Industrial zoning is found on the north side of the Norfolk -Southern Railroad on both
the east and west sides of Friendly Road. While most of this particular area is vacant,
some commercial development has recently occurred there. The majority of vacant
land in Neighborhood 5 is zoned for residential use, chiefly R20 which allows 2
dwelling units per acre.
The growth potential is high in Neighborhood 5 given the large amount of
vacant, developable land. Low -density residences are the most probable type of future
land uses. Potential also exists for future light industrial or intensive commercial
development in the area north of the Norfolk -Southern Railroad on the east and west
sides of Friendly Road.
Thenatural.and_manmade features-thaLinfluenre_the-cnntinuation.of. existing
land uses and the development of future land uses include Country Club Road, the
Barbour Road extension, the Norfolk -Southern Railroad, the Newport River and it's
floodplain, wetlands, and the country club and golf course.
2.136 Neighborhood 6. The area generally bounded on the north by the Norfolk -
Southern Railroad, on the east by Lockhart Road, on the south by Bogue Sound, and
on the west by Rochelle Drive comprises Neighborhood 6. This neighborhood can best
' be characterized as two subareas - one a strip commercial area adjacent to both the
north and south sides of US 70 and two, an older, established residential area located
on the east and west sides of Peletier Creek.
' Neighborhood 6 contains as estimated 500 residences, three-quarters of which
are single-family detached dwellings. Multi -family residences are generally located in
1 relatively small developments scattered throughout the neighborhood. Three small
2.000 Data Collection and Analysis 22
r�l
�J�

H
u
F
manufactured home parks are located within the US 70 corridor. Commercial
development is extensive and includes most parcels adjacent to US 70 throughout the
neighborhood. The approximate 75 to 80 businesses located in this neighborhood
include single -lot development, strip shopping centers, and marinas. Institutional and
recreational uses include 2 small parks and a church. No industrial land uses are
located in this neighborhood. Vacant land consists primarily of subdivided building
lots and a few scattered small parcels between US 70 and the Norfolk -Southern
Railroad. The table below delineates the general land uses in Neighborhood 6:
TABLE 11
EXISTING LAND USE
NEIGHBORHOOD 6
Percent of
Percent of
Land Use
Acres Developed Acreage
Total Acreage
Residential
100 38.9 %
35.3 %
Commercial
150 58.4 %
53.0 %
Public/Institutional/Recreational
7 2.7 %
2.5 %
Industrial
0 0.0 %
0.0 %
Vacant
26 ---
9.2 %
Totals
283 100.0 %
100.0 %
Source: The Wooten Company, 1991.
Because Neighborhood 6 is comprised of two basic use groups, the zoning in
the area consists of two general zoning classifications - commercial and residential.
Commercial zoning includes shopping center, highway commercial, and marine
commercial classifications. Residential zoning on the north and east sides of Peletier
Creek involves primarily the R10 classification (maximum 4 units per acre) with some
R7 (maximum 6 units per acre) and PD (maximum 36 units per, acre). The vast
majority of the west side of Peletier Creek is zoned for a maximum of 3 and 4 units
—per.acre (R20 and .R15) auithsomelimited.R5..4maximum-off units.per acre) and PD.
Most of the vacant land in Neighborhood 6 is zoned for residential use (primarily R10
and R7) and highway commercial use. The greatest potential for growth in this
neighborhood is low -density residential development.
This neighborhood is most noticeably influenced by US 70, the Norfolk -
Southern Railroad, Bogue Sound, and Peletier Creek and it's floodplain.
2.137 Neighborhood 7. Like Neighborhood 5, Neighborhood 7 is chiefly a single-
family residential area that consists of both mature and developing subdivisions. This
neighborhood planning area is generally bounded on the north by the town's
extraterritorial planning and zoning jurisdictional northern boundary, on the east by the
Newport River and Calico Bay, on the south by Calico Creek, and on the west
primarily by subdivisions that have direct access to either Crab Point Road or to
Mayberry Loop Road. Subareas of Neighborhood 7 include: (i) the individual
2.000 Data Collection and Analysis 23

L
1
subdivisions adjacent to Crab Point Road, (ii) Crab Point Neck, and (iii) the Willis
Creek area.
An estimated 695 residences are located in this neighborhood, 50 percent of
which are single-family detached dwellings. Major residential subdivisions include
Keeter Park, Dill Creek, and Sunrise Point. Approximately 150 multi -family
residences and condominiums located are located on the south side of Mayberry Loop
Road and on Crab Point Road at the Haystacks. An estimated 160 manufactured
homes are situated in Neighborhood 7, three -fourths of which are located in the Apple
Mobile Home Park on Crab Point Road. A small mobile home park is also located on
Oglesby Road. A small number of manufactured homes on.individual lots are scattered
throughout the area. Commercial development in this neighborhood is limited to about
5 businesses located in the Crab Point Road, Oglesby Road, and Mayberry Loop Road
intersectional area. Public and institutional land uses are comprised of a small park,
the town's wastewater treatment plant, and a church. Neighborhood 7 does not contain
any industrial land uses.
This neighborhood contains the second highest amount of vacant land (285
acres) of all seven neighborhood planning areas. Vacant land consists of many large
tracts scattered throughout the entire neighborhood. Several of the vacant tracts,
however, are subject, in part, to flood hazards as well as being identified as wetlands.
Poor soil conditions limit development of must of the vacant tracts in the Crab Point
Neck and Willis Creek areas (see Section 2.211.2). Generally, the largest developable,
vacant tracts are located in the Mayberry Loop Road area, east of the Apple Mobile
Home Park, and in the extreme northwest corner of the neighborhood planning area
on the west side of Crab Point Road. The table below describes the general land use
patterns in Neighborhood 7.
TABLE 12
EXISTING LAND USE
NEIGHBORHOOD 7
Percent of
Percent of
Land Use
• •Acres-- -Developed
.Aruaaee -
Total-Acrea¢e
Residential
263
95.0 %
46.8 %
Commercial
2
0.7 %
0.4 %
Public/Institutional/Recreational
12
4.3 %
2.1 %
Industrial
0
0.0 %
0.0 %
Vacant
285
50.7 %
Totals
562
100.0 %
100.0 %
Source: The Wooten Company, 1991.
2.000 Data Collection and Analysis 24
1

L
The majority of land, developed and vacant, in Neighborhood 7 is zoned for
residential use. The residential zoning classifications range in maximum permitted
density from 2 to 36 units per acre, with the lower density zoning being placed on
most of the land. This neighborhood also contains the largest amount of R15M zoning
which permits manufactured home parks and manufactured homes on individual lots.
Commercial zoning is basically limited to the area where the existing businesses are
located: the Crab Point Road, Oglesby Road, and Mayberry Loop Road intersectional
area.
Growth potential in Neighborhood 7 is good provided the constraints to
development can be overcome. Because of the large amount of vacant land, A would
appear that this neighborhood has the ability to accommodate growth, particularly low
density residential development. However, developmental constraints such as flood
hazard, poor soil conditions, wetlands, and the lack of support infrastructure limit the
location and intensity of future development (see Section 2.211).
Neighborhood influences impacting this area, in addition to the developmental
constraints discussed above, include Calico Creek, the Newport River, Crab Point
Road, and the Barbour Road extension.
2.138 Summary of Existing Land Use Conditions. As indicated in Figure 3,
Existing Land Use, the majority of the developed land in the Morehead City area is
used for residential purposes. Public, institutional, and recreational land uses account
for over 23 percent of all developed land. Commercial and industrial uses comprise
' 13 and 7 percent, respectively, of all developed acreage. As shown in Table 13,
vacant land makes up well over one-third of the total acreage of the Morehead City
planning jurisdiction:
1
TABLE 13
LAND USE BY TYPE AND ACREAGE
MOREHEAD PLANNING JURISDICTION
1991
_
Percent of
Percent of
Land Use
Acres Developed Acreage
Total Acreage
Residential
1,334 56.3 %
34.7 %
Commercial
310 13.1 %
8.1 %
Public/Institutional/Recreational
560 23.6 %
14.6 %
Industrial
166 7.0 %
4.3 %
Vacant'
1,472
3 8.3 %
Totals
3,842 100.0 %
100.0 %
'Includes developable land as well as land subject to flood hazard, wetlands, etc.
Source: Estimated from existing land use maps prepared by The Wooten Company..
2.000 Data Collection and Analysis 25

I
iii
lie. * , ®Westinghouse Landmark GIS
ROGUE SOUND
RESIDENTIAL
COMMERCIAL
■ PUBLIC, INSTITUTIONAL& RECREATIONAL
INDUSTRIAL
Z_—
.Jr, -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
CALICO AAy
W
W W-A
1-4 WIN I
WQ
mop si:i V,4PFH
nut*
pl"
&now
f9r- W4
la MUZZ9,Mmogn =
Koo
The
EXISTING LAND USE FIGURE 3 C
MOREHEAD CITY
NOVEMBER 1990
ILW Ftrl

1
h
I
Neighborhoods 2, 5, and 7 are the areas in which residential uses occupy the
highest percentage of developed land. Because of the large amounts of vacant land in
Neighborhoods 5 and 7, these two neighborhoods have the greatest potential for future
residential development, particularly low -density, single-family development. As
shown in Table 14, the greatest amount of commercially -used land is found in
Neighborhoods 1, 4, and 6. Neighborhoods 3, 4, and 5 appear to contain the future
commercial growth areas. Industrial land uses are primarily located in Neighborhood
1 (the state port facility). Future industrial development can most likely be
accommodated in portions of Neighborhoods 4 and 5.
TABLE 14
PERCENTAGE OF DEVELOPED ACREAGE
BY NEIGHBORHOOD
Total
Morehead City
Planning
Land Use
1
2
3 4
5
6
7
Jurisdiction
Residential
23.0 %
88.6 %
44.1 % 43.7 %
62.6 %
38.9 %
95.0 %
56.3 %
Commercial
14.0 %
2.5 %
15.3 % 26.5 %
1.2 %
58.4 %
0.7 %
13.1 %
Public/Institutional/
7.6 %
8.9 %
38.4 % 27.1 %
36.2 %
2.7 %
4.3 %
23.6 %
Recreational
Industrial
55.4 %
0.0 %
2.2 % 2.7 %
0.0 %
0.0 %
0.0 %
7.0 %
TOTALS
100.0 %
100.0 %
100.0 % 100.0 %
100.0 %
100.0 %
100.0 %
100.0 %
Source: The Wooten Company, 1991.
Appendix S provides a summary of the distribution of total acreage by land use
category and neighborhood. Neighborhood 5 contains over 47 percent of all land used
for residential purposes. Neighborhood 5 also contains the largest amount of public,
institutional, and recreational land, due primarily to the location of the country club
and golf course in that neighborhood. The greatest number of commercially -used
acreage is found in Neighborhood 6. Because of the port being situated in
Neighborhood 1, that neighborhood accounts for almost 93 percent of all industrial
acreage. Neighborhoods 5 and 7 contain the greatest amount of vacant acreage.
A closer evaluation of residential uses indicates that two-thirds of all dwelling
units are single-family detached structures [see Appendix T]. Multi -family residences
(including group quarters) make up 26 percent of the total housing stock and
manufactured homes, 8 percent. The overwhelming majority of manufactured homes
are located in manufactured home parks. Single-family detached residences are
concentrated in Neighborhoods 2, 3, 5, and 6. Neighborhood 2 is almost exclusively
a single-family detached area.
2.000 Data Collection and Analysis 27

h
Appendix T also shows the distribution of businesses by neighborhood planning
area. Neighborhoods 1, 3, and 6 account for over 80 percent of all commercial
establishments in the Morehead City planning jurisdiction. In terms of specific
location, it is estimated that 60 percent of all commercial establishments are situated
in the US 70 corridor and about 30 percent in the central business district.
Based upon recent estimates of population, dwelling units, and acreage, the most
densely populated areas are Neighborhoods 1, 2, and 3 [see Appendix U]. The highest
housing and population densities are found in the older, established sections of town.
Densities basically decrease as the distance from the central business district increases.
Recently, the major land use compatability problem has centered around land
development in areas classified as freshwater wetlands. The exact delineation of
wetlands boundaries is often controversial and their presence can alter or preclude land
development proposals. Consequently, the goal of preservation of fragile areas often
conflicts with economic development objectives. Earlier coordination of local land
development proposals with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is perhaps one method
for helping to resolve this compatiability issue. No other significant land or water use
problems existing in the study area. Some nonconforming land uses are scattered
throughout town but their continued operation does not present a problem to existing
surrounding land uses. Unplanned development is not an issue in the Morehead City
area since land development has been subject to land use controls prior to inclusion in
either the town's extraterritorial planning and zoning jurisdiction or the town's
corporate limits. Most general land uses are segregated into compatible groupings that,
while often in close proximity to each other, function without having negative impacts
on surrounding land uses.
There have been no significant changes in land use since the 1986 CAMA Land
Use Plan Update. The town has expanded its extraterritorial planning jurisdiction,
principally to the north and northwest, to encompass significantly more acreage than
was studied in the 1986 Plan. Building permits issued since 1986 indicate a
continuation of residential development that is largely single-family in nature. As
shown in Appendix V, 56 percent of all residential units authorized since 1986 are
single-family residences. Multi -family building permits totaled 17 percent of all
residential permits and manufactured homes, 27 percent. Ninety percent of all non-
residential permits were for commercial establishments.
' From 1986 to 1990, the Town of Morehead City approved twenty-one land
subdivisions that created 279 new residential building lots. Sixty-six percent (175 lots)
of all newly created lots were located within the town's extraterritorial planning and
' zoning jurisdiction. The majority of new subdivision lots were located in two zoning
districts: 161 lots or 60 percent of all new lots were located within R-20 zoning
districts which allow a maximum of 2.1 dwelling units per acre and 89 lots or 33
' percent of all new lots were located within R-5 zoning districts which permit a
maximum of 8.7 dwelling units per acre. Appendix V provides a complete breakdown
of new subdivision lot activity.
2.000 Data Collection and Analysis 28

u
L
2.140 Current Plans, Policies, and Regulations Affecting Land Use. The Town of
Morehead City has prepared various plans and has developed policies and regulations that have
significant implications for land use planning. The following sections provide a brief
description of these plans, policies, and regulations.
2.141 Thoroughfare Plan. In 1971, a Thoroughfare Plan was developed by the
North Carolina Department of Transportation for Morehead City, Beaufort, and
Atlantic Beach. This plan has been updated and a new plan was adopted in February
1991. The 1991 Thoroughfare Plan, which covers Morehead City and Beaufort, is a
guide to the future development of the town's street system and has as its major
objective improving operational efficiency through street system coordination and
layout. Proposals in the updated plan are concerned with several major issues
including: (i) a new east -west road in the Crab Point area, (ii) an extension of Barbour
Road northward to Tootle Road, (iii) an extension of Bridges Street westward past the
US 70/NC 24 intersection, and (iv) a new street tying Country Club Road to Arendell
Street west of the Swinson Park area.
2.142 Storm Hazard Mitigation and Post Disaster Reconstruction Plan. This plan
provides for the mitigation of hurricane hazards and establishes guidelines for
evacuation and reconstruction following a major storm. A more detailed description
of storm hazard mitigation, evacuation, and post -disaster recovery policies is provided
in Section 3.600.
2.143 Zoning Ordinance. The town's current Zoning Ordinance was adopted in May
1983. This ordinance provides use, dimensional, and developmental standards for all
new construction within the town and its one -mile extraterritorial planning jurisdiction.
The ordinance establishes 21 zoning districts including 9 residential, 8 commercial, 2
industrial, I institutional, and 1 floodplain. Residential classifications permit maximum
densities that range from 2 to 36 dwelling units per acre. The majority of land,
however, is zoned for densities that range from 2 to 8 dwelling units per acre.
Provisions in the ordinance governing planned unit developments generally allow
higher residential densities. Residential classifications allow a variety of housing types
including single-family detached, multi -family, congregate, and manufactured
residences. Commercial zoning classifications permit a wide variety of retail,
wholesale, office, and business service uses. Industrial zoning restrictions distinguish
between general manufacturing -uses and port -related industrial -uses.
2.144 Subdivision Regulations. The existing Subdivision Regulations, which were
adopted in 1972, basically provide platting procedures and developmental standards for
residential subdivisions. The Subdivision Regulations are also administered within the
town's corporate limits and the extraterritorial area. Subdivision plat review affords
the town an opportunity to coordinate street and utility layouts in emerging residential
areas. The Subdivision Regulations are currently being updated and revisions are
expected to be adopted in the spring of 1991.
2.145 Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance. Morehead City has adopted a model
Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance which was prepared by the Federal Emergency
Management Agency. Adoption and enforcement of this ordinance permits the town
to participate in the National Flood Insurance Program. The ordinance delineates flood
hazard areas and establishes developmental standards within those areas. Most uses
2.000 Data Collection and Analysis 29

are prohibited within designated floodways. Building development in other identified
flood hazard areas is basically permitted as long as the lowest floor elevation of
' structures is one foot above the base flood elevation.
2.146 Water and Sewer Impact Fee Ordinance. Adopted in 1984, this ordinance
' provides a method for financing the expansion of the capacity of water and wastewater
facilities. As new development creates a need to expand facilities, the user -oriented
fees provide a mechanism to help finance such capital improvements. Since 1986,
' approximately $490,000 in impact fees has been received by the town.
2.147 Water and Sewer Extension Policy. Water and sewer extensions to major
developments outside of the town's corporate limits are generally paid for by the
developer, but the town, at its discretion, may participate in the cost of such
extensions. Prior to receiving water and sewer service, however, developments outside
of the corporate limits must petition for annexation to the town. Utility extensions
' must conform to the town's specifications and standards. The majority of major water
and sewer extensions in recent years has been to provide service to residential
developments.
1 2.148 Building Codes. The town administers the state building code throughout the
entire planning and zoning jurisdiction. The building code establishes minimum
' building and plumbing construction standards for new buildings. The town also
administers nationally recognized electrical and mechanical codes.
2.149 Capital Facilities Plans. As part of the town's public improvements
programming, municipal departments prepare 5-year capital facility plans. These plans
are utilized to project capital needs and improvements. Such capital facility planning
' permits the opportunity to better coordinate the development of major municipal
facilities and services.
2.150 Downtown Improvement Program. The Town embarked upon this
improvement program in 1990 with the primary goal of linking the waterfront area
with Arendell Street both visually and physically. The program calls for the
establishment of a downtown business group, a review of the zoning districts located
in the downtown area as well as a landscaping scheme.
2.151 Governor Martin's Coastal Initiative. In 1991, Morehead City was designated
as a coastal initiative community. The purpose of this program is threefold —to
increase protection of ecologically fragile and environmentally significant areas;
promote the State's marine waterways system and stimulate investment in existing
towns and villages. As a coastal initiative community, the Town hopes to complete
Phase 2 of the downtown waterfront improvements along Evans Street specifically
between Seventh Street and Ninth Street, look into the possibility of dredging Calico
Creek, construct a 400-foot fishing pier at the Recreation Center, implement the
Downtown Improvement Program and prepare a waterfront access plan. Phase 1 of
the downtown waterfront improvements included .landscaping improvements along
Evans Street between Fourth Street and Seventh Street.
2.000 Data Collection and Analysis 30
1

2.200 Constraints to Land Development
'
This section of the land use plan update analyzes the general suitability of land within the
Morehead City Planning and Zoning Jurisdiction. Also included within this section is a discussion
of Morehead City's capacity to provide basic community services as well as the projected demand on
'
community services.
2.210 Land Suitability. The analysis of land suitability includes a discussion of physical
limitations for development, the location of environmentally fragile areas, and the location of
'
areas with resource potential.
'
2.211 Physical Limitations for Development.
2.211.1 Hazard Areas. Man-made hazard areas in Morehead City include the
Norfolk -Southern Railroad, bulk petroleum products storage facilities, and the
port facility. The port facility is identified as a hazard area due to the nature
of some of the cargo handled such as bulk oil and aviation fuel. It is
recommended that the town, in conjunction with designated military and Port
Authority representatives, develop a specific disaster plan to address the
movement of hazardous waste materials through the town by road, rail and
water.
Natural hazard areas include floodable areas. The following description
of the principal flood problems in Morehead City is from the "Flood Insurance
Study, Town of Morehead City" which was prepared by the Federal Emergency
Management Agency in April 1983:
' "the principal source of flooding in Morehead City is
storm surge generated in the Atlantic Ocean by tropical
storms and hurricanes. This storm surge passes through
Beaufort Inlet and the Morehead City Channel into Bogue
Sound and Peletier Creek. The storm surge extends
further up the Harbor Channel and into the Newport
' River, Calico Bay, Calico Creek, and Crab Point Bay.
In addition to the tidal surge, high winds associated with
tropical storms can -produce -high waves."
Flood hazard areas have been delineated by the Federal Emergency
Management Agency and are identified in Flood Insurance Rate Maps. The
latest maps, dated October 18, 1983 and numbered 370048, are available for
' review at the Morehead City Inspections Department. The maps delineate the
100-year and 500-year flood boundaries and provide base flood elevation data.
Areas of the 100-year coastal flood with velocity (3 feet or more of wave
' action) are also depicted on the flood hazard maps as Velocity Zones. The 100-
year flood area is the base flood for purposes of floodplain management
measures. Base flood elevations within the 100-year flood area range from 7
' to 10 feet. The general location of the 100-year flood hazard area is shown in
Figure 4. The 500-year flood area is utilized to show additional areas of flood
risk.
2.000 Data Collection and Analysis 31

<•; '•
f1: i / /�..,�
11 //� _. I 44y /,
I i �` •/ � `�/ �I ��yyyMM
��1� i�%
��t���

While much uncertainty exists about the rate and extent of sea level rise,
there is a general consensus that a sea level rise of 1.6 to 6.6 feet will occur
over the next century." Areas in the Morehead City planning jurisdiction that
would be susceptible to a sea level rise are located within the 100-year flood
hazard area. Much of the land subject to a five-foot sea level rise is currently
wetlands, particularly in the Calico Creek and Crab Point Neck areas.
However, the waterfront area along Bogue Sound, which is intensively
developed, and Calico Bay would be susceptible to a five-foot rise in sea level.
All development on land in identified flood hazard areas, including areas
susceptible to sea level rise, is regulated by the town's Flood Damage
Prevention Ordinance which requires that new buildings be elevated above the
base flood elevations.
2.211.2 Soil Limitations. The study area consists of five general soil map
units: (i) Lafitte-Hobucken-Carteret, (ii) Leon-Murville-Mandarin; (iii) Wando-
Seabrook-Kureb, (iv) Baymeade-Onslow-Lynchburg, and (v) Altavista -Augusta -
State. Appendix W delineates the soils within these five general map units and
shows the limitations of each soil type for building site development and
subsurface sewage disposal. Figure 5 shows the general location of soil types
that have overall severe limitations for site development and septic system use.
The limiting characteristics include wetness, flooding, ponding, low soil
strength, rapid permeability, and slope.
A detailed soils analysis (Soil Survey of Carteret County, North
Carolina; U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, 1978) is
available which highlights limitations and hazards inherent in the various soils.
The Soil Conservation Service, located in Beaufort, can provide more detailed
information about specific soil types. Because the Carteret County
Environmental Health Department determines the suitability of each site for
septic tanks and absorption fields on a case -by -case basis, it should be consulted
to obtain a specific site evaluation and permit.
2.211.3 Availability and Quality of Water Supply. Morehead City receives
its water supply from four deep wells which are located at Arendell and 5th
Streets, 24th and Fisher Streets, Bridges Street and Bald Drive, and North Gate
and Tootle Roads. The town has always depended on deep wells for its water
supply and, to date, has faced no major shortage. If all four wells were
allowed to pump 24 hours a day, the total pumping capacity would be over 4.0
MGD. However, because state law allows pumping for only 12 hours per day,
the present pumping capacity is about 2.0 MGD. The table below provides
basic information about each well.
4R. Paul Wilms, "The Effects of Global Warming and Sea Level Rise on Coastal North Carolina", Carolina
Planning, Fall 1990, Volume 16, Number 2, Department of City and Regional Planning, University of North
Carolina.
2.000 Data Collection and Analysis 33

L
TABLE 15
GROUND WATER SOURCES
TOWN OF MOREHEAD CITY
1989
Well
Well
Casing
Screen Depth Average Daily
Pumping
No.
Depth
Death
Top
Bottom Diameter Withdrawal
Capacity
Aquifer
1
100,
389'
364'
389' 6" 0.200 MGD
0.921 MGD
Castle Hayne
2
90,
410'
370'
410' 6" 0.150 MGD
0.878 MGD
Castle Hayne
3
100,
375'
340'
370' 8" 0.300 MGD
1.152 MGD
Castle Hayne
4
100,
375'
340'
370' 8" 0.300 MGD
1.065 MGD
Castle Hayne
Source:
Water and Sewer Department, Town of Morehead City, 1990.
The town adds chlorine and fluoride to the water at each well site. The
town also monitors total coliform bacteria and other organic, radiological, and
inorganic parameters as required by the state. The town complies with the
standards of the Drinking Water Act and standards for trihalomethanes. The
problem associated with trihalomethanes is not an issue in Morehead City.
The present water supply is considered adequate to serve the anticipated
water needs throughout the study period. The town's water and sewer
department has projected the average water usage to increase to 1.080 MGD in
1995 and 1.230 MGD in 2000. Water levels in Morehead City have not
changed significantly over the last ten years. The Castle Hayne Aquifer
underlying Morehead City has been designated as a capacity use area by the
state due to large groundwater withdrawals by the Texas Gulf phosphate mine
located near Aurora. A capacity use area is an area where the use of water
resources threatens to exceed the replenishment ability.
2.211.4 Areas with Excessive Slope and High Erosion Potential. Morehead
City lies on a peninsula with elevations which range from sea level to
approximately 25 feet. A portion of the western peninsula is characterized by
steeply sloping waterfronts as is the Bogue Sound Waterfront immediately north
and south of Peletier Creek. The eastern portions of the peninsula are relatively
flat. Northward from the Newport River Bay area, the topography is generally
flat. Excessive slope is defined as an area where the predominant slope exceeds
12 percent. Within the study area, there are no areas with excessive slope.
Consequently, excessive slope is not a constraint to land development.
2.212 Fragile Areas. Fragile areas within the Morehead City planning jurisdiction
which could easily be damaged or destroyed by inappropriate or poorly planned
development include the state -designated areas of environmental concern, sound and
estuarine system islands, and freshwater wetlands.
2.000 Data Collection and Analysis
35

7
2.212.1 Areas of Environmental Concern. Areas of environmental concern
(AECs) include coastal wetlands, estuarine waters and public trust areas, and
the estuarine shoreline. Coastal wetlands are defined as any marshes subject to
regular or occasional flooding by lunar or wind tides. Estuarine waters are
defined by the Coastal Management Act as all the waters of the Atlantic Ocean
within the boundary of North Carolina and all the water of bays, sounds, rivers,
and tributaries thereto seaward of the dividing line between coastal fishing
waters and inland fishing waters. Public trust areas include waters and
submerged lands in the coastal region where the public has rights of use and/or
ownership, including rights of navigation and recreation. The estuarine
shoreline area of environmental concern is all shorelands within 75 feet
landward of the mean high water level, or normal water level, of the estuarine
waters.
Development within the designated areas of environmental concern is
limited by CAMA regulations and development guidelines. Generally, the
development standards for coastal wetlands, estuarine waters, and public trust
areas permit only water -dependent uses such as navigation channels, dredging
projects, docks, piers, bulkheads, boat ramps, groins, and bridges. Priority is,
however, given to the conservation of these AECs. CAMA standards for
estuarine shoreline development generally require that (i) the development not
cause significant damage to estuarine resources; (ii) the development not
interfere with public rights of access to or use of navigable waters or public
resources; (iii) the development preserve and not weaken natural barriers to
erosion; (iv) impervious surfaces not exceed 30 percent of the lot area located
within the AEC boundary; (v) the development comply with state soil erosion,
sedimentation, and stormwater management regulations; and (vi) the
development comply with the Morehead City CAMA Land Use Plan. Specific
CAMA development standards for AECs can be found in 15 NCAC 7H.
Figure 4 shows the general location of the estuarine shoreline. Other AECs are
not mapped. The precise location of coastal wetlands must be determined by
field investigation; therefore, they are not included in Figure 4.
2.212.2 Other Fragile Areas. Morehead City has identified the sound and
' estuarine system islands and freshwater wetlands as other fragile areas.
Sugarloaf Island, Phillips Island, and the Newport Marshes have been designed
as fragile areas. Annex (or Marsh) Island is owned by the N.C. Ports
' Authority and because it is in public ownership and is used for mitigation
purposes, it is not considered a fragile area that could be negatively impacted
by development.
E
Freshwater wetlands include all other wetlands not classified as coastal
wetlands. These freshwater wetlands are not covered by CAMA regulations but
are protected by the Clean Water Act. Consequently, the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers is responsible for regulating these `404' wetlands. Permits must be
obtained from the Corps prior to disturbing any freshwater wetlands. As with
coastal wetlands, the precise location of freshwater wetlands can only be
determined through a field investigation and analysis. Consequently, freshwater
wetlands are not included in Figure 4. However, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
2.000 Data Collection and Analysis
36

Service has, through it's National Wetlands Inventory, identified the general
location of wetlands. The National Wetlands Inventory Maps are available from
'
the U.S. Department of the Interior and the N.C. Department of Environment,
Health, and Natural Resources, Division of Soil and Water Conservation. The
wetlands maps are not intended to be utilized for regulatory purposes.
' 2.213 Areas with Resource Potential. Areas with resource potential within the
Morehead City planning jurisdiction include the 520-acre privately -owned nature
preserve located off of Country Club Road northwest of the West Carteret High School
' and productive agricultural lands.
The nature preserve is owned by a non-profit corporation, The Nature
E
C
F
Conservancy. The preserve is located within the designated 100-year flood hazard area
and is identified as wetlands area. Productive agricultural lands consist of several
relatively small farms located in the Crab Point area. The agricultural lands are not
currently within the town's extraterritorial planning and zoning jurisdiction but are in
an area in which Morehead City will most likely expand its ETJ boundaries in the near
future.
2.220 Carrying Capacity Analysis. The following analysis provides an evaluation of the
ability of Morehead City to provide the basic community services necessary to meet the
current and anticipated demand for such services. The existing community services are
reviewed as well as the demand for services based upon population and land use projections.
Major existing community facilities are shown in Figure 6.
2.221 Urban Services. Urban services evaluated in this section include water and
sewer services, police and fire protection, emergency medial services, solid waste
collection and disposal, recreation, education, and administrative services.
2.221.1 Water Service. In 1989, Morehead City provided water service to
3,089 customers. Of that total, 80 percent were residential customers. The
town's water supply is from four deep wells [see Section 2.211.31. The
average annual daily water use in 1989 was 0.95 MGD; the maximum daily
water use was 2.353 MGD. The average monthly water use for 1989 was as
follows:
MONTH
USAGE
MONTH
USAGE
January
0.815 MGD
July
1.112 MGD
February
0.809 MGD
August
1.012 MGD
March
0.798 MGD
September
0.970 MGD
April
0.881 MGD
October
0.916 MGD
May
0.995 MGD
November
0.892 MGD
June
1.118 MGD
December
1.050 MGD
The largest water user in 1989 in Morehead City was the Carteret
General Hospital which utilized an average of 52,000 gallons per day. Other
major users and their average consumption included the N.C. Ports Authority
(28,000 GPD), Owens Corning (23,000 GPD), Culligan (18,000 GPD), and
Morehead Nursing Home (15,000 GPD).
2.000 Data Collection and Analysts
37
F

I
The town has approximately 40 miles of water mains with waterlines that
range in size from 2-inch to 12-inch and a 1.0 million gallon water storage
capacity in 2 elevated storage tanks. The town currently complies with state
standards that require the storage capacity of one day's average usage (the 1990
usage was 0.974 MGD). However, with the normal annual growth in water
usage, the town anticipates adding a 500,000 gallon elevated storage tank in the
next several years. Morehead City also projects the need for an additional
1.152 MGD well to serve the expanded customer base. The town's existing
and projected water service area is delineated in Figure 7.
There is one private, community water system located in the town's
extraterritorial planning jurisdiction. The H&M Water Company serves a
portion of the Mansfield Park Subdivision located in the vicinity of Mansfield
Parkway. Private wells are utilized for water supply by those persons that are
not served by the Town of Morehead City.
2.221.2 Sewer. The town has approximately 40 miles of sewer mains, ranging
in size from 4-inch to 20-inch, that provide service to over 2,400 customers.
The town operates 12 sewage pump stations that are either recently constructed
or renovated. The wastewater treatment plant, located north of Calico Creek
on Mayberry Loop Road, has a permit capacity of 1.7 MGD and a design
capacity of 3.4 MGD. Recent improvements have been completed which
double the facility's capacity. The average annual daily discharge in 1990 was
0.995 MGD. Overall, the capacity of the facility is considered sufficient to
handle demand during the study period. The town's existing and projected
sewer service area is delineated in Figure 7.
The wastewater treatment facility includes an aerated grit removal tank,
primary clarifiers, trickling filters, secondary clarifiers, chlorinator tanks,
aerobic digesters, and drying beds. The discharge from the plant flows into
Calico Creek. The average daily wastewater discharge by month in 1989 was
as follows:
MONTH
DISCHARGE
MONTH
DISCHARGE
January
0.969 MGD
July
1.159 MGD
February
0.961 MGD
August
1.420 MGD
March
1.433 MGD
September
1.717 MGD
April
1.662 MGD
October
1.582 MGD
May
1.238 MGD
November
1.148 MGD
June
1.155 MGD
December
1.221 MGD
Since the capacity of the plant is 1.7 MGD, most flow above that
amount may overflow manholes and flow into Calico Creek without treatment.
The only time these overflows occur is when the town receives heavy rainfalls
of over 4 inches in a 24-hour period. Water enters the facility by way of old
lines that are cracked or disjointed due to the age of some of the lines. The
town will need to continue funding repair programs and also expand the
wastewater treatment plant to allow the high flows to be pumped through the
2.000 Data Collection and Analysis 39

treatment facilities. The town regularly meets monitoring and compliance
standards for the wastewater treatment plant as set forth by the state.
'
As more stringent water quality standards are mandated, Morehead City
anticipates wastewater treatment plant improvements which will include
nitrogen, phosphorous, and chlorine removal. The town also plans to expand
'
its wastewater treatment plant laboratory in order to meet state requirements for
increased monitoring of the wastewater treatment facility as well as monitoring
'
of water from the town's wells.
Morehead City is committed to the long-term goal, as outlined in the
'
Carteret County Sewer EIS, of eliminating its estuarine discharge into Calico
Creek. However, the town is under no state mandate at this time to do so nor
does the EIS mandate such. The town will investigate alternatives to its
estuarine discharge and will comply with any future state mandates. However,
'
at this time, there has been no decision to abandon the estuarine discharge nor
to implement alternative sewage disposal methods. Long-term solutions may
or may not include elimination of the estuarine discharge.
The only private sewage collection and disposal system in the study area
is a 22,000 gallon per day package treatment plant at the Haystacks residential
'
development located north of Calico Bay on Country Club Road.
- -
- - 2.221.3 -Police Protection. The Morehead City Police -Department provides
police protection services to the town; police protection services outside of the
'
town limits is provided by the Carteret County Sheriff's Department which is
located in Beaufort. The Morehead City Police Department, with a staff of 24
full-time personnel, appears to have adequate manpower to provide police
'
services to the community. National law enforcement standards recommend
two police officers per 1,000 population.
' 2.221.4 Fire Protection. The Morehead City Fire Department provides
prevention and fire suppression services to the town as well as a fire district that
encompasses the entire study area. The department currently has 13 full-time
' and 19 volunteer firefighters and responds to over 300 calls per year. Two fire
stations are located in the community, one on Evans Street in the municipal
building and one in west Morehead City on Arendell Street. All firefighting
equipment meets the National Fire Protection Association's standards.
The fire insurance rating within Morehead City is a 5 and a 9 within the
' county portion of the fire district located outside of the Morehead City
corporate limits. As the town expands it's corporate limits, an additional fire
station may be required to maintain the current insurance rating and to meet the
Insurance Service Organization's standards.
2.221.5 Emergency Medical Services. The Morehead City Rescue Squad
' provides emergency medical services to the town and a service district (which
parallels the fire district). The rescue squad, with 3 full-time and 13 volunteer
personnel, responded to approximately 1,100 calls in 1990. Basic emergency
' medical treatment and transportation to hospitals are the general services
2.000 Data Collection and Analysis 41
F 1
L

' provided by the rescue squad. The equipment and staffing of the rescue squad
appear adequate to provide emergency medical services through the study
period.
2.221.6 Solid Waste Collection and Disposal. Solid waste collection services
' to the town are provided through a contract with a private garbage collector.
Brush and yard debris are collected by the town. No deficiencies with the
existing collection system have been identified. Solid waste is currently
' disposed of in a county -maintained landfill, located on Hibbs Road in the
Newport area, which is scheduled to close within the next several years. A new
regional landfill near New Bern, which will serve Carteret, Craven, and
Pamlico counties, will be the future location for disposal of solid waste from
Morehead City. The town is currently being assessed tipping fees and the town
will meet this cost either through increased property taxes or solid waste user
fees. To date, no decision has been made. The anticipated life of the regional
' landfill is 20 years. However, this will be extended due to the fact that there
are plans to purchase additional land at a later date.
' Carteret County operates a system of greenbox collection sites
throughout the county portion of the study area. County residents are
responsible for private disposal of solid waste.
2.221.7 Recreation. The Morehead City Park and Recreation Department
provides -recreational services to the town and many of the county residents in
' the vicinity of Morehead City. The department maintains park facilities, which
total about 20 acres, and operates an extensive organized recreational and
special events program. The department provides the only indoor recreational
' facility in Carteret County; the Morehead City Community Center includes a
gym, weight room, game room, and meeting rooms. Based upon national
outdoor recreational space standards of six to ten acres per 1,000 population,
16 to 40 additional acres of outdoor recreational space is needed. Bike trails
have been identified as a specific recreational need.
2.221.8 Education. Carteret County operates two elementary schools and one
' middle school in the study area. Enrollment data for the schools is provided
below:
'
1984
1990
Camp Glenn Elementary
682
609
'
Morehead Elementary
546
873
Morehead Middle
453
569
' Morehead Elementary is currently operating beyond its capacity and is
scheduled to be replaced within two to three years. Neither of the other two
schools are experiencing capacity problems. Projections by the N.C.
' Department of Public Instruction indicate that student enrollment in Carteret
County will increase about 1.0 percent per year through 1993 and then will
grow at a slower pace as the school -age population declines.
2.000 Data Collection and Analysis 42
F1
L

Morehead City is also the location for Carteret Community College
which is a fully accredited institution specializing in vocational, technical, and
' general education programs.
2.221.9 Public Administration Ability. The Town of Morehead City operates
' under a council-manager form of government. The town has a municipal staff
of 90 employees that perform general administration, public works, public
utilities, police, fire protection, emergency medical, recreation, planning, and
building inspection services. The current staffing level is considered sufficient
to provide the level of municipal services necessary to meet current and
anticipated demand.
As part of the town's public improvements programming, municipal
departments prepare 5-year capital facility plans. These plans are utilized to
project capital needs and proposed improvements. Such capital facility planning
enables the town to better plan and budget municipal facilities and services.
2.222 Transportation Services. The Town of Morehead City maintains over 26 miles
of streets within its corporate limits. Major thoroughfares and other streets outside of
the town limits are maintained by the N.C. Department of Transportation. The state
also has maintenance responsibility for all bridges in the area.
Based upon the Morehead City 1991 Thoroughfare Plan, five streets within the
study area are at or are exceeding their practical capacity.These-streets include
Arendell Street (US 70), Bridges Street, North 35th Street, 20th Street, and Country
Club Road from US 70 to Tootle Road (the remaining section of Country Club Road
is classified as near its practical capacity.) The Causeway from Morehead City to
Atlantic Beach is also classified as at or exceeding its practical capacity. The table
below shows the rapid increase in traffic volumes on US 70, the major arterial highway
in Morehead City:
TABLE 16
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC
US 70
LOCATION 1980 1989
East of the US 701NC 24 Intersection 21,600 ADT 34,700 ADT
West of the Atlantic Beach Causeway 16,100 ADT 30,000 ADT
Central Business District 15,100 ADT 19,800 ADT
Source: N.C. Department of Transportation.
The North Carolina Department of Transportation's Transportation
Improvements Program (TIP) includes plans for a third bridge to Bogue Banks. The
new bridge, proposed to be located west of Morehead City, would provide much
needed relief for the US 70 corridor through town. The proposed bridge project
(including approaches), estimated to cost over $73 million, is currently scheduled in
2.000 Data Collection: and Analysis 4.3
1

the TIP for right-of-way protection. To date, no funds have been allocated for the
project. The Morehead City Thoroughfare Plan, available from the town or the N.C.
' Department of Transportation, outlines recommendations for local street improvements.
The major recommendations are listed in Section 2.141.
' Air service to Morehead City is provided by the Michael J. Smith Field located
in Beaufort. Commercial airports are located in nearby New Bern and Jacksonville.
Primary rail service to the area is provided by the Norfolk -Southern Railroad Company
through a leasing arrangement with the N.C. Railroad Company. Secondary rail
services are provided by the Beaufort -Morehead City Railroad Company which
operates east of the port, and the N.C. Port Railway Commission which operates the
port railroad. The Port of Morehead City provides water transportation services [see
' Section 2.1261.
2.230 Estimated Demand. In order to effectively address land development issues and to
formulate community policies, it is necessary to project population and economic change.
Such projections are the basis for determining community facility and land use needs.
Consequently, the following sections discuss population projections, local economic forecasts,
' future land needs, and demands on community facilities and services.
2.231 Population Projections. The town's population is projected to increase during
the ten-year planning period from 6,046 in 1990 to 7,425 in 2000. This projection is
based upon a growth rate that is comparable to that projected for Carteret County by
the N.C. Office of State Budget and Management. -Morehead City's projected growth
' rate is slightly higher than that anticipated for the state as a whole. Appendix X
provides historical and projected population data through 2010 for Carteret County and
Morehead City. Population growth has, in the past, resulted largely from annexation.
Given the town's current policies on expansion of the corporate limits and growth of
the community, it is expected that annexation will continue to play a large role in the
town's future population increases.
2.232 Economic Outlook. No significant economic changes are forecast during the
planning period. The economy of Morehead City and Carteret County is expected to
remain based on retail trade, services, tourism, commercial fishing, and manufacturing.
Morehead City's. employment is expected to continue to be centered around the
services, retail trade, government, manufacturing and transportation sectors of the
economy. Overall, long-term employment growth in future years is anticipated to be
concentrated in non -manufacturing sectors of the economy. Tourism and commercial
fishing are expected to continue to play a prominent role in the local economy.
Consistent with long-term forecasts by the N.C. Office of State Budget and
' Management, Morehead City's economic growth is, however, projected to be
somewhat slower through the end of this century than it was during the 1980s.
2.233 Future Land Needs. Based upon the anticipated population increase of 1,379
persons by 2000 and the average household population size in the 1990 U.S. Census
of Population (2.15 persons per household), it is projected that an additional 640
residential units will be needed through the end of the 10-year planning period.
Assuming that future residential construction will basically follow the existing housing
distribution pattern, approximately 425 single-family units, 165 multi -family units, and
50 manufactured homes will be added to the existing housing stock. Assuming also
2." Data Collection anal Analysis 44

that current density levels will not be significantly changed in the future, new single-
family residential uses are projected to account for 100-200 acres of land, multi -family
residential 20-30 acres, and manufactured homes 18-20 acres [see Appendix Y1.
Sufficient vacant land exists in the study area to accommodate the projected residential
growth.
The demand for additional nonresidential land is also expected to increase
during the planning period. Given the availability of commercially -zoned vacant land,
it is anticipated that new commercial development can be primarily accommodated in
existing commercial areas. In the 1986 CAMA Land Use Plan, about 5 percent of the
study area's total acreage was used for commercial purposes. By 1990 this amount had
increased to an estimated 8 percent, attributable in part to the expansion of the town's
extraterritorial jurisdiction of US 70 West rather than an absolute increase in new
commercial establishments. Future commercial development is projected to locate in
the US 70 corridor, the Bridges Street corridor, and in the office and professional
services area located in the vicinity of the Carteret General Hospital. Future industrial
development also can be easily located in existing industrially -zoned areas.
2.234 Summary of Community Facilities Needs. Based upon population projections
and estimates of land needs, no additional major community facilities will be required
during the 10-year study period to accommodate the anticipated growth. Public water
system improvements which will be needed include a 500,000 gallon elevated storage
tank and a new 1.152 MGD well. Public sewer improvements planned during the
study period include improvements to the wastewater treatment plant for nitrogen,
phosphorous, and chlorine removal and space additions to the laboratory. The town
is committed to the long-term goal of eliminating its estuarine discharge into Calico
Creek. The town will investigate alternatives to its estuarine discharge and will comply
with any future state mandates. To date, no decision has been made to abandon the
estuarine discharge nor to implement alternative sewage disposal methods. Depending
upon the direction of future annexations, the town may need to provide a new fire
station to maintain its present fire insurance rating. In order to provide outdoor
recreation space, as recommended by national standards, the town currently needs an
additional 16 to 40 acres of outdoor space to meet existing demand and 8 to 14 acres
to meet the outdoor space needs of the projected population increase during the study
period.
2.000 Data Collection and Analysis 45

1 3.000 POLICY STATEMENTS
The primary purpose of the land use plan update is to develop policy statements on those land use
issues which will affect the Town of Morehead City during the ten-year planning period. Previous sections
of this update have addressed (i) existing conditions such as population, the local economy, natural
features, and current land use; (ii) constraints to land development; and (iii) the projected demand on
services. This section of the update provides policies designed to address land development growth
management issues.
' The policy statements are particularly important not only for use by the town but by other
governmental agencies as well. Specifically, policy statements have implications for: (i) local land
' planning in Morehead City, (ii) CAMA development permits, and (iii) the review of projects utilizing state
or federal funds as well as state and federal projects that may not be located with the town but which may
have a direct impact on Morehead City. Policies must be developed which are, at a minimum, equal to
and consistent with CAMA's guidelines and use standards for Areas of Environmental Concern. The town
' may, however, develop policies which exceed the minimum standards established by CAMA for Areas of
Environmental Concern.
Policy statements are useful to the town in establishing guidelines for day -today planning
endeavors such as rezoning requests, site plan review, subdivision plat review, zoning text amendments,
and requests for variances. Therefore, policy statements can serve as the basis for decision -making by the
' Morehead City Town Council, Planning Department staff, Planning Board, and Board of Adjustment.
Policy statements will also be utilized by CAMA to review requests for development permits in areas of
environmental concern. Consequently, land development projects that are not consistent with the town's
' policy statements will not be approved by CAMA. Similarly, projects which propose to utilize state or
federal funds will be reviewed for consistency with the policy statements.
This section provides an analysis of previous policy statements outlined in the town's 1986 land
use plan and includes policy statements on resource protection, resource production and management,
economic and community development (including neighborhood -oriented land use policies), public
' participation, and storm hazard mitigation, post -disaster recovery, and evacuation. These policy statements
have been developed based upon the previous analysis of existing conditions, land use trends, and
constraints to land development. Citizen input through public meetings, a citizen survey, and the Citizen's
Advisory Committee was also instrumental in formulating the policy statements. Various alternatives were
considered by the town. Alternative policies which were discussed but not adopted are summarized in
Appendix Z.
3.100 Analysis Of Policy Statements In The 1986 CAMA Plan
The 1986 CAMA Land Use Plan Update policy statements have been reviewed. This
1 section provides a summary evaluation of the major policies and recommendations delineated in
the 1986 Plan.
3.110 Resource Protection. The previously developed resource protection policies
were consistent with CAMA policies and use standards. Preservation of coastal wetlands
was encouraged as was the conservation of estuarine and public trust waters. Sound and
' estuarine system islands and freshwater wetlands were recognized as important natural
areas. The town, in reviewing specific requests for land development, has approved land
development projects which were consistent with its resource protection policies. Some
3.000 Policy Statements 46
J

' zoning classification changes have been made in order to keep zoning provisions
consistent with the policies of the land use plan.
The town's policies recognized the importance of controlling stormwater runoff
and proposed the consideration of a local soil erosion and sedimentation ordinance. To
date, the town is continuing to require the preparation of soil erosion and sedimentation
plans in accordance with the requirements of the N.C. Sedimentation Control
Commission but a local ordinance has not been developed.
Policies concerning septic tank suitability, the use of package treatment plants,
and flood hazard areas have been taken into consideration as new development projects
' have been proposed. Morehead City has continued to enforce its water and sewer
ordinance as well as the town's Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance. The town is
continuing to use its water and sewer impact fee ordinance to assist in financing the
expansion of the capacity of the water and sewer facilities.
In general, areas in the Morehead City Planning Jurisdiction with significant
physical limitations have not been developed. Development within areas of
' environmental concern has been compatible with CAMA regulations and the town's land
use controls.
' 3.120 Resource Production and Management. The previous policies recognized the
value of commercial and recreational fisheries to the area. The town has strived to
approve land development projects which were consistent with its policy of allowing only
' water -dependent uses in coastal and estuarine waters which had no major significant
adverse impact on water quality and fish habitats.
1
3.130 Economic and Community Development. Previous policies addressed the
town's commitment to provide and improve services to existing and future development.
Morehead City has planned for the expansion of its water and sewer system through its
capital facility planning and budgeting. Water and sewer extensions have been made to
primarily residential areas located on the fringes of the town. Annexation and the
provision of all municipal services has often accompanied utility extensions.
The 1986 CAMA Plan recommended the preparation of a specific disaster plan
which would address the movement of hazardous materials through Morehead City by
road, rail and water. This objective has not, to date, been accomplished. The previous
plan also recommended that a comprehensive recreation plan be prepared. The
Recreation Department has prepared a 20-year Capital Facilities Plan and additional
recreational facilities have been scheduled pending the availability of funding.
The town's policies concerning industrial development centered around
(i) encouraging light industry with limited off -site impacts, (ii) encouraging a mix of non-
hazardous/non-polluting bulk, break -bulk, and container cargo at the State Port, and (iii)
encouraging greater barge transportation at the State Port. The town, through its Zoning
Ordinance, has permitted only general industrial uses to locate in the area. The State
Port, primarily due to economic and market conditions, now handles very little coal and,
therefore, the adverse impacts from coal handling have been eliminated. The majority
of bulk cargo is currently delivered to the port by barge.
3.000 Policy Statements
47

' The 1986 Plan encouraged orderly growth adjacent to existing developed areas.
Development since that time has occurred chiefly to the northwest and west of Morehead
' City and has been consistent with the land classification system as well as the town's
subdivision regulations. Redevelopment of the downtown area was also promoted in the
previous plan. Since 1986, the town has supported the restoration of the downtown area
and has developed a downtown improvements program. Components of the
improvements program are being implemented as funding is available.
' Three issues related to commercial development were highlighted in the 1986
plan: (i) signs, (ii) strip development along U.S. 70, and (iii) commercial encroachment
into existing residential areas. The town has made some revisions to its Zoning
' Ordinance which address the first two issues but comprehensive amendments have not
been made. Specific zoning actions to manage commercial encroachment into residential
areas, such as requiring site plan review, have not been undertaken.
The update of the town's Thoroughfare Plan was recommended in the previous
land use plan. A new Thoroughfare Plan, which has as its major objective the
improvement of the operational efficiency of streets, was adopted in February 1991. The
new Thoroughfare Plan addressed street coordination and layout issues identified in the
1986 Land Use Plan.
The town's policies concerning waterfront access included keeping existing
access points, particularly street ends and alleys, open. The town has adhered to this
policy by not closing street ends and alleys that terminate at a waterfront. In addition,
the town, through its Recreation Capital Facility Plan, has identified potential water
access points.
3.200 Resource Protection Policies
The major issues discussed in the formulation of resource protection policy statements
include the following topics (not presented here in any priority order):
• the designation of a portion of Calico Creek as a primary nursery area.
• the potential economic and environmental impacts of deepening Calico Creek.
• water quality of surface and ground waters.
• stormwater runoff impacts.
• long-term solutions to wastewater treatment and disposal.
• the demand for and impacts of marinas.
• the conservation of Sugarloaf and Phillips Islands and the Newport Marshes.
• preservation of wetlands.
• the implications of anticipated sea level rise.
After a discussion of resource protection issues, the policy statements delineated in
Section 3.210 through Section 3.290.2 were developed.
3.000 Policy Statements 48

' 3.210 Constraints to Land Development.
3.211 Flood Hazard Areas.
Policy l: The town will continue to enforce the Flood Damage
Prevention Ordinance which requires new construction to be elevated more than
'
one foot above the established 100-year flood elevation.
3.212 Soil Suitability/Septic Tank Use.
Policy 1: Major development in areas identified as having soils with
severe limitation for urban development shall be required, prior to approval, to
present data indicating how the limitation can be mitigated. Major development
'
is defined as shopping centers, office parks, planned unit developments, multi-
family complexes, industrial parks, and any residential subdivision that includes
more than 5 acres.
Policy 2: Public water and sewer will be required for all new
development occurring within the town's corporate limits.
'
Policy 3: Within the corporate limits, extension of water and sewer
to areas in which poor soil conditions create septic field problems shall have the
highest priority when the town undertakes system extensions.
Policy 4: The town will review and evaluate its current water and
sewer extension policies to determine if revisions are necessary to better
'
encourage new development located outside of the existing service area to utilize
the town's water and sewer system.
Policy 5: Septic tank installation, where permissible, shall be in
accordance with applicable county health department regulations.
'
Policy 6: The minimum lot area requirement for parcels utilizing a
subsurface sewage disposal system shall be 20,000 square feet (or 15,000 square
feet with an approved public or community water system) unless a larger size
is required by the county health department.
' 3.220 Areas of Environmental Concern.
The Town of Morehead City concurs with the CAMA 7H Use Standards for
each of the Areas of Environmental Concern delineated below. If the town's policies are
more restrictive than CAMA's use standards, that fact is noted.
' 3.221 Coastal Wetlands.
Policy 1: The highest priority will be given to the conservation of
coastal wetlands.
Policy 2: Only water -dependent uses will be permitted in coastal
wetlands. Water -dependent uses include navigation channels, dredging projects,
docks, piers, bulkheads, boat ramps, groins, and bridges.
3.000 Policy Statements 49

1
'
Polig 3: Marina construction will not be permitted in coastal
wetlands except in the case of an upland marina site requiring access dredging
only and causing no significant adverse impact on the wetlands.
Policy 4: Coastal wetlands should only be filled in connection with
activities or projects that are directly related to erosion control or water
'
dependent uses. However, coastal wetlands should only be filled in extreme
cases when a permit applicant has exhausted all means of avoiding coastal
wetlands in development of his project plans, and only in cases where the filling
of coastal wetlands would have an overwhelming public benefit and proper
mitigative measures are to be incorporated in the project.
'
3.222 Estuarine Waters and Public Trust Areas.
Policy 1: The highest priority will be given to the conservation of
estuarine waters.
Policy 2: Only water -dependent uses will be permitted in estuarine
'
waters.
Policy 3: Marina construction will not be permitted in estuarine
waters which are classified as primary nursery areas. This policy is more
restrictive than the CAMA 7H Use Standards in that CAMA may allow marinas
in primary nursery areas under certain conditions_
Policy 4: Activities in estuarine and public trust waters shall not
permanently or significantly affect the functions, cleanliness, salinity, or
circulation of such waters.
3.223 Estuarine Shoreline.
Policy 1: Development shall not cause significant adverse impact on
estuarine resources.
'
Policyy. 2: Development shall not interfere with existing public rights
of access to or use of navigable water or public resources.
'
Policy 3: Appropriate land uses within the estuarine shoreline
include any permissible land uses authorized by the Morehead City Zoning
Ordinance and Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance that conforms to CAMA
development standards.
Policy 4: Estuarine shoreline development shall be designed to
adequately provide for stormwater runoff in accordance with state regulations.
3.000 Policy Statements

11
3.230 Other Fragile Areas
' 3.231 Sound and Estuarine System Islands.
Policy 1: Sugarloaf Island contains wetlands or land subject to flood
' hazard and should, therefore, be designated as conservation on the Land
Classification Map. Urban services should not be provided to this area as a
catalyst to stimulate intensive development. Any use or development should be
in accordance with applicable CAMA standards and should be done so in an
extremely limited and cautious fashion. Any use of this area will be subject to
the provisions of the town's flood damage prevention ordinance and the
Floodplain Zoning District provisions of the town's zoning ordinance.
Policy 2: Phillips Island and the Newport Marshes, in addition to
being largely classified as wetlands and land subject to flood hazard, are
' important heron nesting areas and should be designated as conservation areas.
Annex (or Marsh) Island is owned by the N.C. Ports Authority and since it is
in public ownership and is used for wetlands mitigation purposes, it is not
' considered as a fragile area that could be negatively impacted by development.
Policy 3: The town encourages the public or private land trust
purchase and conservation of sound and estuarine system islands.
3.232 Freshwater Wetlands.
' Policy 1: The town will coordinate the review of land development
plans with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers when site plans indicate
' development activities in areas identified as wetlands.
Policy 2: The town prohibits any filling of freshwater wetlands
' except as permitted by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
3.233 Historical and Archaeological Sites.
The study area contains no sites listed in the National Register of
Historic Places nor any sites on the Study List for future inclusion in the
National Register. While numerous recorded sites having archaeological
significance are located in Carteret County, none are known to be located within
' the study area. Information regarding locations for archaeological significant
sites is not available.
' Morehead City does, however, contain sites which are of local
historical and architectural significance. The town will consider undertaking an
historical survey to identify and evaluate such sites.
3.240 Hurricane and Flood Evacuation Needs and Plans.
(See Section 3.600)
3.000 Policy Statements
51

1 3.250 Potable Water Supply Protection.
' Policyy. 1. The town, through its Zoning Ordinance, will discourage the location
of large water -using industries in the Morehead City planning jurisdiction which would
utilize more water than could be treated by the town's wastewater treatment facility.
PoUgy-2: The town will coordinate land development activities involving
hazardous chemical or petroleum storage and disposal with the appropriate county and
state regulatory agencies. The town also supports management practices which address
the incidental use of hazardous materials such as insecticides, herbicides, fertilizers, etc.
' Policy 3. The Town of Morehead City will support State monitoring of the
existing Castle Hayne Aquifer Capacity Use Study Area and enforcement of limiting the
use of the aquifer. The Town of Morehead City also supports and encourages the State
' to update the Castle Hayne Aquifer Capacity Use Study.
Policy 4. The town supports the use of water conservation practices and
groundwater protection measures in order to prevent lowering the water table, to limit the
quantity of wastewater generated, and to protect the quality of water.
3.260 Use of Package Treatment Plants.
Policy 1: Package treatment plants may be permitted in areas outside of the
town's public sewer service area provided that they conform to state permitting
requirements and are designed for compatibility with the Morehead City sewer system in
the event of ultimately tieing into the town's system.
' Policy 2: The town will require, through its Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision
Regulations, that a land development project proposing the use of a package treatment
plant shall include (i) the formation of a legal, private entity to properly operate and
maintain such package treatment plant and (ii) the development of a contingency plan to
own and operate such package treatment plant should the private operation fail.
3.270 Stormwater Runoff.
Policy 1: Morehead City will promote the use of best available management
practices to minimize the threat of pollution from stormwater runoff; examples of these
practices include using pervious or semi -pervious materials for driveways and walks,
retaining natural vegetation along marsh and waterfront areas, and allowing stormwater
to percolate into the ground rather than discharging it directly to coastal waters.
Policy 2: The town will coordinate its approval of land development projects
with (i) the permitting requirements and stormwater regulations of the North Carolina
Division of Environmental Management, Water Quality Section, and (ii) the soil erosion
and sedimentation control regulations of the Land Quality Section of the North Carolina
Division of Land Resources.
3.000 Policy Statements 52

' Policy 3: The town will investigate developing an ordinance which would
require a drainage plan for any land development project, except a bona fide agricultural
' project, that involves or would create more than 20,000 square feet of impervious ground
cover.
3.280 Marina and Floating Home Development.
' The town concurs with the CAMA definition and use standards for marinas
except as noted in Policy 1.
' Policy 1: Marina construction, except for marinas requiring only access
dredging, will not be allowed in wetland areas. Marina construction will not be permitted
in estuarine waters which are classified as primary nursery areas. This policy is more
restrictive than the CAMA 7H Use Standards in that CAMA may allow marinas in
primary nursery areas under certain conditions.
Policy 2: Upland marina construction will not be permitted in areas located
adjacent to primary nursery areas and where channel dredging for access to deeper waters
would be through primary nursery areas.
tPolicy 3: Only docks and piers serving single-family residential uses shall be
allowed in primary nursery areas. Commercial docks, fish houses, etc. are not allowed
in primary nursery areas.
-- - - Policy 4: The town will continue to enforce the zoning ordinance provisions
regarding docks, piers, and floating structures. Such provisions limit the use of a dock
' located in residential zoning districts to residential purposes only and also limit the
duration of mooring a floating structure. Floating structures are also required to have a
sewage hookup.
' Policy 5: Dry stack storage boat facilities, either in conjunction with or
independent of marina development, may be permitted in accordance with provisions of
I
the Zoning Ordinance. Water access to such facilities shall not, however, create
significant adverse impacts on active shellfishing areas.
' 3.290 Industrial Impacts on Fragile Areas.
Policy 1: Industrial land uses shall be allowed to locate on lands classified as
tfreshwater wetlands only if there is no significant adverse impact on the wetlands.
' Policy 2: The town, through its Zoning Ordinance and site review procedures,
will ensure that industrial development does not adversely impact identified fragile lands.
3.290.1 Sea Level Rise Impacts.
Policy 1: Due to the uncertainty surrounding the extent and magnitude of sea
level rise, the Town of Morehead City does not feel it is in a position at this time to
' develop a specific policy statement.
1 3.000 Policy Statements
53

Ll
Policy 2: The town supports continued state research into the problems
associated with sea level rise and will consider the development of policies to address sea
level rise as more data concerning problem definition and alternative solutions are made
available.
3.290.2 Bulkhead Installation Damage to Marshes.
Policy 1: Morehead City will permit bulkhead installation provided that all of
the use standards of 15 NCAC 7H.0208(b)(7) are adhered to.
3.300 Resource Production and Management Policies
The major issues discussed in the development of resource production and management
policy statements centered around the following topics:
' • the designation of a portion of Calico Creek as a primary nursery area.
• the impact of land development activities on marine fisheries.
• off -road vehicle use in fragile environments.
' • the presence of prime agricultural land and commercial forest land in the Morehead
City Planning Jurisdiction.
' Following a discussion of the above issues, the resource production and management
policies outlined in Section 3.310 through Section 3.370 were formulated.
3.310 • Productive Agricultural Lands. No productive agricultural lands are located
' within the Morehead City planning area. Therefore, no policy statement is necessary.
3.320 Commercial Forest Lands. No commercial forest lands are located within the
' Morehead City planning area. Therefore, no policy statement is necessary.
3.330 Mineral Production Areas. No existing or potential mineral production areas
' are located within the Morehead City planning area. Therefore, no policy statement is
necessary.
3.340 Commercial and Recreational Fisheries.
Policy 1: Morehead City will allow in coastal wetland areas only those
developments which are water -dependent and which will not have a significant adverse
effect on coastal and estuarine water fish habitats.
Policy 2: The town will cooperate with the Water Quality Section, N.C.
Division of Environmental Management to preserve and improve riverine and estuarine
water quality.
' Policy 3: Morehead City will ensure that developments locating adjacent to
coastal waters make every effort to mitigate any adverse effects on riverine and estuarine
' water quality and on primary nursery and fish habitat areas.
' 3.000 Policy Statements
54

Policy 4: Marina construction will not be permitted in estuarine waters which
are classified as primary nursery areas.
' PolLcy L Trawling activities in estuarine waters are not opposed by the town
as long as there is no significant adverse impact on the estuarine waters.
t3.350 Off -Road Vehicles.
Policy 1: Off -road vehicles will not be permitted on any sound and estuarine
' system islands. Off -road vehicle use in other sections of the planning area is not
considered an issue.
I
3.360 Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Land Development Impacts on
Resources.
Policy 1: Only water -dependent uses will be permitted in coastal wetlands.
Policy 2: Residential, commercial or industrial land development in the
estuarine shoreline will be allowed only if there is no significant adverse impact on
estuarine resources and water quality.
' Policy 3: Marina construction will not be permitted in estuarine waters which
are classified as primary nursery areas. This policy is more restrictive than the CAMA
7H Use Standards in that CAMA may allow marinas in primary nursery areas under
certain conditions.
' 3.370 Peat or Phosphate Mining Impacts on Resources.
Policy 1: Peat or phosphate mining operations are not now nor are they
anticipated to be located in the Morehead City planning area. Such mining operations
would, however, not be permitted within the town's planning jurisdiction under the
' current zoning restrictions.
3.400 Economic and Community Development
' A wide array of issues were identified as economic and community development policy
statements were being formulated. The major issues involved the following topics:
'
the potential economic impact of future development on Calico Bay.
• maintaining low residential densities.
limiting high-rise development and protection of views and breezes.
redevelopment of the downtown area.
• managing infill development in established residential areas.
'
commercial land use encroachment in residential areas.
• the economic impact of the N.C. State Port.
• managing strip commercial development adjacent to U.S. 70.
• the impact of tourism on Morehead City.
• improvements to major thoroughfares.
' 3.000 Policy Statements
55

' protection of the Norfolk -Southern Railroad corridor.
• provision of waterfront access.
' annexation of outlying, developed areas.
After a discussion of economic and community development issues, the policy statements
delineated in Section 3.410 through Section 3.490.27 were formulated.
3.410 General Land Development Policies.
' Policy 1: Morehead City considers growth of the community a desirable
objective. Further, the town will promote only those types of development that do not
significantly impact natural resources and which retain and maintain the town's present
character.
Policy 2: The town will encourage land development in areas that currently
have the necessary support infrastructure or where these services can readily be made
available. Land development will be guided to areas that have public water and sewer
services and an adequate street system to accommodate increased land development.
' Policy 3: The town will promote the continued low -density residential
development character of areas located on the fringes of the extraterritorial jurisdiction
and in locations adjacent to identified fragile areas.
' - Policy 4: _-Morehead City will promote the diversification of housing in varying -
types and costs to meet the demands of all income levels and age groups.
' Policy 5: The town will strive to provide a safe, efficient, and well -maintained
street system consistent with the town's adopted thoroughfare plan.
Polic The town will strive to implement the projects discussed under the
Coastal Initiative Program.
Policy 7: Morehead City will continue to improve its downtown area and will
work towards implementation of the Downtown Improvement Program.
Policy g: The town will support local intergovernmental cooperation with
regard to land use planning issues.
Polio The town encourages the establishment of bike trails within its
jurisdictional area.
t3.420 Desired Types of Urban Growth Patterns.
' Policy 1. Morehead City will continue to promote a variety of land uses which
complement the residential, commercial, institutional, recreational and industrial needs
of the community.
Police 2: Current residential densities will be maintained in order to preserve
the overall low -density character of Morehead City's residential sector.
' 3.000 Policy Statements 56

'
P to icy The residential integrity of existing neighborhoods will be maintained
by discouraging the encroachment of non-residential uses into such areas.
'
Policy 4: Multi -family and higher density residential development will be
encouraged at a moderate density range of six to eight dwelling units per acre. Such
development will be guided to locations in which adequate water and sewer services and
'
a sufficient street system are available.
Policy 5: In -fill development in existing residential areas will be encouraged
only if it is compatible in density and scale to that in the surrounding area.
Policy • Morehead City will encourage the redevelopment and restoration of
the central business district as a retail, business and professional services, office, and
commercial marine center of the community. The town will encourage uses which
provide for a multi -purpose central business district which includes living space as well
as shopping and services. The town will promote the adaptive reuse of buildings in the
central business district. The town will strive to implement the Coastal Initiative Program
and the Downtown Improvement Program.
Policy 7: The town will encourage future commercial development along major
highway corridors to locate in a nodal pattern rather than a linear strip pattern. The town
'
will also encourage planned commercial development rather than small, individual lot
development.
P li • Neighborhood -oriented commercial development will be encouraged
only in areas where such use is compatible with existing surrounding and anticipated
residential areas and where the street system is adequate to accommodate commercial
vehicular traffic.
'
Policy 9: Morehead City will encourage the type of light industrial development
that is consistent with the community's present manufacturing base and which has limited
'
off -site impacts.
Policy 10: Light industrial development will be encouraged only in those
'
sections of town with adequate public water and sewer services and vehicular access to
a major arterial highway.
Policy 11: The town encourages the continued operation and expansion of the
Port of Morehead City at its present location and within its current property boundaries.
Policy 12: The town will promote the location of office and professional land
uses in transitional areas between intensive nonresidential uses and residential
neighborhoods.
' Policy 13: Intensive urban development in rural outlying areas of the planning
area that lack the necessary support utilities and public services to accommodate such
development will be discouraged.
' 3.000 Policy Statements
57

3.430 Local Commitment to Providing Services to Development.
'
Policy 1: Morehead City has the current capacity to provide water and sewer
service to anticipated future development through the planning period. Therefore, the
town will encourage new development to locate within its water and sewer service area.
'
Policy 2: Any development located outside of the corporate limits requesting
sewer service from the town will be required to petition for voluntary annexation to the
town.
Policy 3: Any development occurring within the corporate limits will be
required to connect to the town's water and sewer systems.
rPolicy
4: Expansion of and improvements to the town's water and sewer
systems will be planned through a capital improvements program and budget. Water and
sewer impact fees will be utilized to assist in the financing of water and wastewater
facility improvements.
' 3.440 Redevelopment of Developed Areas.
Policy 1: The town encourages the redevelopment of older, established
' residential neighborhoods at the same density and intensity of scale as that currently
existing in the neighborhoods. Consequently, rezoning of such areas for higher densities
and/or more intensive use should be avoided.
F
Policy 2: The town will continue to seek revitalization grants from the
Community Development Block Grant Program to assist in the financing of housing and
neighborhood improvements in low- and moderate -income areas and economic
development grants to assist commercial and industrial development.
Policy 3: Morehead City encourages continued efforts to redevelop the central
business district as a retail, business and professional services, office, and commercial
marine center. The town will investigate possible zoning ordinance amendments which
will allow residential uses and well as mixed uses. Off-street parking requirements for
the central business district will also be reevaluated to ensure equity for all land uses.
Policy 4: The town will continue to cooperate with and assist the Morehead
City Downtown Business Council.
Policy • Replacement of existing structures within AECs shall be permitted
in accordance with the CAMA requirements of 15 NCAC 7J.0210 and .0211.
3.450 Commitment to State and Federal Programs.
Policy l : Morehead City will evaluate state and federal programs which impact
the town's development. The town's policy has generally been to assist and cooperate
with state and federal offices in local development programs. This policy will be
continued as the town is involved in such state and federal programs as highway, rail, air,
and water transportation improvements, solid waste disposal, water quality, community
development, stormwater management, and military facilities.
3.000 Policy Statements
58

'
Policy 2: Morehead City supports the state port facility and efforts by the N.C.
State Ports Authority to improve port facilities for cargo handling as well as its channel
'
deepening project.
3.460 Assistance to Channel Maintenance Projects.
'
Policy 1: Morehead City will cooperate and assist the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers in its efforts to maintain channels.
'
Policy 2: The town will assist in channel maintenance projects by helping to
locate spoil sites.
3.470 Energy Facility Siting and Development.
Because no electric generating plant other than a Carolina Power and Light
Company emergency standby generating facility is currently located or proposed to be
located in the Morehead City area, a policy statement concerning such facilities is not
applicable.
'
Policy 1: The Town of Morehead City does not oppose offshore exploratory
drilling for oil or gas nor the onshore development necessary to support offshore drilling
as long as (i) the activities have illustrated that there is no significant adverse
environmental impact and (ii) any identified adverse economic impacts on Morehead City
can be mitigated or negated.
'
3.480 Tourism.
Policy 1: The town supports efforts by the Chamber of Commerce, Tourism
Development Bureau, and Economic Development Council to promote the area for
tourism development.
Policy 2: Morehead City will continue to provide assistance to upgrade and
improve the downtown waterfront district.
CI
Policy 3: Morehead City will promote tourist support businesses and services
in its highway -oriented and downtown commercial areas.
3.490 Coastal and Estuarine Water Beach Access.
Policy 1: The town will continue to encourage public water access to the
maximum extent feasible.
Policy 2: Morehead City will include public water access in its plans to
redevelop the downtown waterfront district.
Policy 3: The town will continue to ensure that existing water access points,
including street ends and alleys, are not closed.
Policy 4: The town will seek funding assistance to develop the potential water
access points identified in its Recreation Department Capital Facility Plan.
3.000 Policy Statements
WE
t

' Policy • The town will investigate possible amendments to the current
Subdivision Regulations and Zoning Ordinance to include provisions for common water
' access in waterfront subdivisions and public water access for major residential
developments which adjoin a waterfront for excessive distances.
3.490.1 Anticipated Residential Development and Requisite Support Services.
Residential development which is projected for future years will primarily involve low -
density single-family residences at a density of 2 to 4 dwelling units per acre. Such
development is anticipated principally in the western and northern portions of the town's
planning jurisdiction. Multi -family residential development is projected to occur, for the
most part, at a moderate -density of 6 to 8 dwelling units per acre. Multi -family
development is expected to locate in areas currently zoned for such use (R5 District by
special use permit), principally the older residential areas surrounding the central business
district and areas along the Bridges Street corridor. Existing public facilities and services
are generally considered adequate to serve the projected residential development through
the planning period. Recreational space is the only service need that might be generated
by increased residential development.
Policy- l: The town will promote residential densities as outlined above. Higher
densities will be permitted only in areas with public water and sewer services and with
a street system that has the capacity to sufficiently handle increased vehicle trips.
Policy 2: The town will investigate a possible amendment to its subdivision
regulations to include provisions for the mandatory dedication of recreational space or
' payment of an in -lieu of fee in major residential subdivision developments.
3.490.2 Other Identified Local Land Development Issues. In addition to the general
community development issues and policies discussed previously, a variety of land
development concerns exist that are centered more around particular sections of town than
the town as a whole. Consequently, the following policies are developed to address those
issues and are presented by neighborhood planning area.
' 3.490.21 Neighborhood 1.
Policy 1: High-rise construction will be discouraged adjacent to the
waterfront by avoiding the rezoning of waterfront property to zoning districts
which permit a greater building height or residential density.
Policy 2: The town will cooperate with and assist the NCDOT and
the Norfolk -Southern Railroad in preserving U.S. 70 and the railroad as a vital
' transportation corridor.
Policy 3: The development of the Ninth Street waterfront park will
be a top priority as funding for recreational facilities become available.
Policy 4: The town will support the redevelopment of the Morehead
City waterfront.
1 3.000 Policy Statements 60

1
3.490.22 Neighborhood 2.
Policy 1: The town will prohibit any commercial rezoning in the
Evans and Shepard Street areas in order to limit commercial encroachment into
residential areas.
Policy 2• The creation of additional commercial districts on Arendell
Street in Neighborhood 2 will also be discouraged by avoiding the rezoning of
existing residential areas to commercial zoning districts.
Policy • The current use, density, and building height requirements
of the R5S classification will be maintained to ensure the existing character of
the neighborhood.
Policy 4: Street and alley ends that terminate at Bogue Sound will
be kept open as public water access points.
3.490.23 Neighborhood 3.
Policy 1: The town will consider amendments to the zoning
ordinance which would provide for greater screening and buffering between
nonresidential uses and adjacent residences.
- - Policy 2: The highest priority for the development of major vacant
parcels located north of Avery Street will be given to residential use .
Policy • Future commercial rezoning requests on the north side of
Bridges Street will be encouraged to include land that abuts Bridges Street only
in order to prevent commercial encroachment onto Fisher Street.
3.490.24 Neighborhood 4.
Policy 1: The review of development plans for tracts where potential
wetlands have been identified will be coordinated with the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers.
Policy 2: Morehead City will continue to promote development in
' this neighborhood which is comprised of a variety of land uses --office and
professional, medium -density residential, light industrial, and commercial.
Policy 3: The town will strive to maintain the Barbour Road
extension as a local north -south collector street and will discourage abutting
development that negatively impacts the functional capacity of the street.
' PoliiU 4: Morehead City will cooperate with the NCDOT in
improving the Bridges Street and Arendell Street intersection area.
1 3.000 Policy Statements
61

t3.490.25
Neighborhood 5.
'
Policy 1: The review of development plans for tracts where potential
wetlands have been identified will be coordinated with the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers.
Policy 2: Low -density residential development will be promoted in
those areas lacking public water and wastewater facilities.
Policy Medium -density residential development will be
encouraged in those areas with public water and sewer, with vehicular access to
major streets, and in transitional locations between intensive nonresidential uses
'
and existing low -density residential areas.
3.490.26 Neighborhood 6.
'
Policy 1: The town will discourage nonresidential development
adjacent to the Bogue Sound waterfront.
'
Policy 2: Morehead City will investigate possible zoning
amendments which will address sign control, landscaping and buffering, and
commercial curb cuts.
Policy 3: The current use, density, and building height requirements
'
of the residential zoning classification in this neighborhood will be maintained
to ensure the existing character of the area.
3.490.27 Neighborhood 7.
' Policy 1: The review of development plans for tracts where potential
wetlands have been identified will be coordinated with the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers.
Policy 2: Low -density residential development will be promoted in
those areas lacking public water and wastewater facilities.
Policy 3: Medium -density residential development, including
' manufactured home park development, will be encouraged to locate in those
areas with public water and sewer and with vehicular access to major streets.
Il
n
Policy 4: Development plans for tracts where severe soils limitation
have been identified shall include information and plans to mitigate such soils
limitations.
3.500 Continuing Public Participation Policies
The Town of Morehead City recognizes the importance of providing citizens with
opportunities to participate in the community's planning process. The town also recognizes that
citizen participation and citizen education must be made available on a continuing basis. To that
end, the town adopted a citizen participation plan during the initial stages of the CAMA Land Use
3.000 Policy Statements
62

Plan Update process. The Citizen Participation Plan provided for (i) the appointment by the
Town Council of a 12-member citizens advisory committee composed of citizens that represent
a cross-section of the community; (ii) meetings of the advisory committee at strategic points in
the land use update process; (iii) dividing the town into seven neighborhood planning areas and
having two public meetings that concentrated on the neighborhood planning areas; (iv) a citizen's
' survey distributed through the local newspaper and made available at public buildings and to civic
organizations; (v) a public meeting with the Morehead City Planning Board to review the draft
land use plan update, (vi) newspaper releases concerning the land use planning process,
preliminary plan, and final plan; (vii) a public hearing before the Town Council to review and
adopt the Land Use Plan Update; and (viii) public notices in the local newspaper of meetings and
the availability of the draft plan. A complete listing of activities which implemented the town's
citizen participation plan is provided in Appendix AA. Results of the citizen survey are provided
in Appendix BB. The citizen survey was not a scientific survey and was undertaken as an
informational device and as a means of encouraging broader citizen participation.
The town has assessed the effectiveness of its citizen participation plan and has determined
that the process permitted broad public participation at key formulative stages in the preparation
of the land use plan update. In addition to allowing citizen input, the process also helped to
' educate the public about land use planning and the management and protection of natural
resources.
The town will ensure a continuous planning process by conducting periodic reviews of
the Land Use Plan's policies. This review will be the responsibility of the Morehead City
Director of Planning who will coordinate such reviews with the_ Planning Board and Town
Council.
' 3.600 Storm Hazard Mitigation, Post -Disaster Recover and Evacuation Plans
g � Y�
The Morehead City Town Council adopted a Storm Hazard Mitigation and Post -Disaster
Recovery Plan in 1984. The plan, prepared by George Eichler and Associates and Satilla
Planning, Inc., is available for review at the Morehead City Planning Department. The purpose
t of the plan is to (i) assist the town in managing land development in identified hazard areas and
(ii) provide a program that enables the town to coordinate an organized and efficient
reconstruction in the aftermath of a storm.
The Storm Hazard Mitigation Plan defines the storm hazard areas as the estuarine
shoreline AEC and the 100-year flood hazard area, discusses the development within the hazard
areas, and estimates the severity of potential hazard area damages. Existing and recommended
storm hazard mitigation policies are outlined on pages 8-10 in the plan and are reproduced in
Appendix CC of this land use plan update. The Post -Disaster Reconstruction Plan (pages 11-22)
provides for the organization of a local damage assessment team, outlines damage assessment
procedures and regulations, delineates an organization of recovery operations, and recommends
reconstruction policies (the Post -Disaster Reconstruction Plan and policies are reproduced in
' Appendix CC of this land use plan update). The town will continue to evaluate its Storm Hazard
Mitigation and Post -Disaster Recovery Plan to ensure that the plan's objectives are being
implemented.
r-,
' 3.000 Policy Statements
63

1
n
U
In the interim following the preparation of the 1984 Plan, Storm Surge Inundation Areas
have been delineated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers as part of the Eastern N.C. Hurricane
Evacuation Study (1987). While the storm surge areas generally parallel the 100-year flood
hazard areas shown in Figure 4 (p.30), there are some additional parts of the study area that are
subject to hurricane -induced flooding. These areas are primarily (i) the eastern end of the
Morehead City peninsula between Bogue Sound and Calico Bay from about 17 Street to 4th
Street; (ii) the northeastern portion of the Morehead City Country Club Golf Course and the
abutting residential areas west of Country Club Road; and (iii) the residential areas located
generally north of Bogue Sound between Peletier Creek and Rochelle Drive. Of these three
areas, the most intensely developed is the eastern peninsula area which includes portions of
Neighborhoods 1, 2 and 3 as described on pages 12 through 17. This area contains a portion of
the central business district, commercial establishments along the Arendell and the Bridges Street
corridors, and a mixture of residential and institutional uses. It is estimated that the area contains
approximately 1200 dwelling units and numerous commercial and institutional uses. The area
west of Peletier Creek is predominantly residential, containing an estimated 250 dwelling units.
Storm surge areas are shown in the Composite Hazards Map (Figure 8).
Flooding as well as high winds would impact the Morehead City area during a major
coastal storm. The table below describes the impact of the various categories of hurricanes:
TABLE 17
DESCRIPTION OF HURRICANE CATEGORIES
Category
Winds
Storm>Surge
Damage Expected .. .
Category 1
74-95 MPH
4-5 Feet
Minimal Damage
Category 2
96-110 MPH
6-8 Feet
Moderate Damage
Category 3
111-130 MPH
9-12 Feet
Extensive Damage
Category 4
131-155 MPH
13-18 Feet
Extreme Damage
Category 5
155+ MPH
18+ Feet
Catastrophic Damage
The following policies are developed to mitigate the effects of high winds, storm surge,
and flooding.
Policy 1: Morehead City will continue to enforce the state building code
requirements that relate to wind -resistant construction standards.
Policy 2: Morehead City will continue to participate in the National Flood
Insurance Program and to enforce the flood damage prevention ordinance.
PoliU 3. Morehead City will avoid zoning areas susceptible to storm surge for
higher density residential uses and intensive nonresidential uses.
1 3.000 Policy Statements
C"

Policy 4: Morehead City will continue to support and cooperate with Carteret
County and other local units of government in emergency management planning and
'
training.
Policies to discourage development, particularly high -density or large structures in the
'
most hazardous areas include the following previously outlined policies:
- Section 3.211, Policy 1. The town will continue to enforce the Flood Damage
Prevention Ordinance which requires new construction to be elevated more than one
'
foot above the established 100-year flood elevation.
- Section 3.410, Policy 3. The town will promote the continued low -density residential
development character of areas located on the fringes of the extraterritorial jurisdiction
and in locations adjacent to identified fragile areas.
'
- Section 3.420, Policy 2. Current residential densities will be maintained in order to
preserve the overall low -density character of Morehead City's residential sector.
'
- Section 3.490.21, Policy 1. High-rise construction will be discouraged adjacent to the
waterfront by avoiding the rezoning of waterfront property to zoning districts which
permit a greater building height or residential density.
'
The town's policy concerning the public acquisition of land in the most hazardous areas
is not to acquire such lands.
Morehead City adopted the Hurricane Evacuation Plan, prepared for Carteret County by
the Carteret County Office of Emergency Management, in July 1988. The Evacuation Plan
provides evacuation guidance to governmental officials and emergency service organizations and
'
assigns specific responsibilities for implementing the plan in the event of a hurricane. The plan
includes provisions for the organization of a decision making control group, development of a
'
warning and alerting systems, delineation of evacuation routes, identification of emergency
shelter locations, and development of re-entry procedures. The Hurricane Evacuation Plan can
be reviewed at the Carteret County Emergency Management Office in Beaufort or at the
'
Morehead City Department of Planning. The town will continue to support the Hurricane
Evacuation Plan by providing assistance and participation as required by the plan. Morehead City
also supports the continuation of hurricane awareness programs.
' 3.700 Proposed Implementation Methods
In order to implement the previously outlined policies, the Morehead City Town Council
' and Planning Board will utilize the policy statements as one of the bases for decision -making
when land development requests are made. Policy statements will be taken into consideration
when reviewing rezonings, zoning text amendments, special use permits, and subdivision plats.
I
The Morehead City Board of Adjustment will also review policies outlined in this plan prior to
making decisions on variances and special uses.
' 3.000 Poli Statements
�Y
66

Morehead City will continue to administer and enforce its land use regulatory tools
particularly the Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Regulations, and Flood Damage Prevention
Ordinance. The town will review the current regulatory tools to eliminate inconsistencies which
may exist between the tools and the policies outlined in this plan. Specifically, Zoning Ordinance
and Subdivision Regulations amendments which will be investigated in order to implement the
policy statements involving the following topics:
• site plan review procedures.
• drainage plan preparation.
• maintenance of package treatment plants.
• provision of soils data.
• coordination of development in potential freshwater wetlands areas with the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers.
• mandatory dedication of recreational space or payment of an in -lieu of fee.
• mandatory provision of water access in large waterfront divisions.
• residential uses in the downtown area.
In addition, the town will review its current water and sewer extension policies for
inconsistencies and to ensure the implementation of the adopted land use policies.
3.000 Policy Statements
67

4.000 LAND CLASSIFICATION
SYSTEM
L

' 4.000 LAND CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
The land classification system was developed as a means of assisting in the implementation of the land
development policies. The land classification system is intended to be supported and complemented by
zoning, subdivision regulations, and other land management tools. The land classification system is not a
regulatory mechanism but is, rather, a tool to help implement land development policies.
The land classification system provides a framework to be used by the town to identify the future use
' of land. The designation of land classes allows the town to illustrate its policy statements as to where and
to what density it wants growth to occur, and where it wants to conserve natural and cultural resources by
guiding growth.
4.100 Land Classifications
The CAMA regulations delineate seven land classes: developed, urban transition, limited
' transition, community, rural, rural with services, and conservation. In applying the land classification
system, the town has placed particular attention on how, where, and when land development of
certain types and intensity will be encouraged or discouraged.
4.110 Developed Classification. The purpose of the developed land classification is to
provide for continued intensive development and redevelopment of existing towns and their
' urban environs. Urban land uses and higher intensity uses, which presently require the
traditional urban services, should be classified as developed. Areas included in the developed
classification are currently urban in character, have minimal undeveloped land remaining, and
' have in place or are scheduled to have in place municipal or public services. Urban in
character includes mixed land uses such as residential, commercial, industrial, institutional,
and other uses at high to moderate densities. Services include water, sewer, recreational
' facilities, streets, and police and fire protection. Areas developed for predominantly
residential purposes meet the intent of this classification if they exhibit:
' (i) a density of 3 or more dwellings per acre; or
(ii) a majority of lots of 15,000 square feet or less which are provided or scheduled
to be provided with the traditional urban services; and/or
(iii) permanent population densities are high and seasonal population may swell
' significantly.
4.120 Urban Transition Classification. The purpose of the urban transition classification
is to provide for future intensive urban development on lands that are suitable for development
and that will be provided with the necessary urban services to support intensive urban
development.
Included in the urban transition classification are areas presently being developed for
urban purposes or areas which will be developed in the next five to ten years. These areas
are in an urban "transition" state of development, going from lower intensity uses to higher
intensity uses and as such will eventually require urban services. Examples of areas meeting
the intent of this classification are lands included within municipal extraterritorial planning
boundaries and areas being considered for annexation. Areas classified as urban transition will
provide lands for intensive urban growth when lands in the developed classification are not
available. The urban transition classification includes mixed land uses such as residential,
4.000 Land Classification System 68

L
U
CIS
commercial, industrial, institutional and other uses at or approaching high to moderate
densities. Areas that are predominantly residential meet the intent of this classification if.
(i) they are approaching three dwelling units per acre, or
(ii) a majority of the lots are 15,000 square feet or less and will be provided with
essential urban services to support this high density development, or
(iii) are contiguous to existing developed municipal areas.
4.130 Limited Transition Classification. The purpose of the limited transition classification
is to provide for development in areas that have some services but are suitable for lower
densities than those associated with the urban transition classification and/or are geographically
remote from existing towns.
Areas meeting the intent of this classification will experience increased development
during the planning period and will be in a state of development necessitating some municipal -
type services. These areas are of modest densities and are often suitable for the provision of
closed water systems rather than individual wells. The limited transition classification is
intended for predominantly residential development with a density of three units per acre or
less, or the majority of lots are 15,000 square feet or greater. Clustering or development
associated with planned unit developments may be appropriate in the limited transition class.
' 4.140 Community Classification. The purpose of this classification is to provide clustered,
mixed land uses at low densities to help meet the housing, shopping, and employment and
other needs in rural areas. Since this classification is usually associated with "crossroads
development" in counties, it has been determined not to be applicable to the Morehead City
Planning Jurisdiction.
' 4.150 Rural Classification. The rural classification is intended to provide for agriculture,
forestry, mineral extraction, and other allied uses traditionally associated with an agrarian
region as well as uses that, due to their hazardous or noxious nature, should be located in a
' relatively isolated and undeveloped area. Very low density dispersed residential uses on large
lots with on -site water and sewer are consistent with the intent of this classification. Because
there are no large agricultural and/or forestry areas within the Morehead City Planning
Jurisdiction, the rural classification has been determined not to be applicable.
' 4.160 Rural with Services Classification. The rural services classification is intended to
provide for very low density land uses including residential use where limited water services
are provided in order to avert an existing or projected health problem. Because this
classification is concerned with predominantly agrarian areas with known or anticipated water
quality problems, it has been determined not to be applicable to the Morehead City Planning
' Jurisdiction.
4.170 Conservation Classification. The purpose of the conservation classification is to
I
provide for the effective long-term management and protection of significant, limited, or
irreplaceable areas.
Areas meeting the intent of this classification include Areas of Environmental Concern
(AECs) as defined by CAMA and other similar environmentally sensitive lands. The
conservation classification is intended to be applied to areas that, because of their unique,
productive, limited, cultural, or natural features, should be either not developed at all
4.000 Land Classification System 69
1

r_
(preserved), or if developed, done so in an extremely limited fashion. Urban services, public
or private, should not be provided in areas classified as conservation as a catalyst to stimulate
intense development. It is intended that limited, on -site services will adequately support any
restricted development within this classification. While AEC standards will occasionally
permit urban -type development and limited services on a lot -by -lot basis within various AECs,
it should be noted that this is the exception rather than the rule. The primary intent of the
conservation classification is to provide protection for the resources included therein.
4.200 Uses Included In Each Classification
The following general land uses are allowed within the land classifications applicable to the
Morehead City Planning Jurisdiction:
4.210 Developed Classification. Mixed land uses (residential, commercial, industrial, and
institutional) are included in the developed classification. Residential densities generally range
from a maximum of two to eight dwelling units per acre. Higher densities are permitted
within planned development zoning districts. Residential uses include single-family detached
and attached dwellings, multi -family structures, congregate facilities, and manufactured home
parks. Commercial land uses include a wide variety of retail, service, and office and
professional uses. Major shopping facilities, concentrated clusters of free-standing retail
establishments, and commercial marine establishments are included. Industrial land uses
include port -related as well as traditional manufacturing establishments. Institutional land uses
include intensive uses such as the hospital and community college as well as governmental,
semi-public, and private institutional land uses.
4.220 Urban Transition Classification. Land uses in this classification may include mixed
land uses but they are not as intensively developed as in the previous classification. The areas
classified as urban transition in the Morehead City Planning Jurisdiction are predominantly
residential with scattered, low -intensity commercial and institutional land uses. Residential
uses include a greater preponderance of single-family detached dwellings than in the developed
classification. Residential densities are also lower than in the developed classification and
range from a maximum of two to three dwellings per unit.
The urban transition classification is subdivided to include one subclass --urban
transition/port. This subclass has been created to distinguish Annex Island from the other
areas designated as urban transition. It is anticipated that a portion of Annex Island, which
is currently owned by the N.C. Ports Authority, will be used for port -related activity and,
thus, is a potential growth area for the port facility. Services which may be extended to
Annex Island will be dependent upon the ultimate use of the island. Portions of the island will
not be suitable for intensive development because of the presence of coastal wetlands and flood
hazard areas.
4.230 Limited Transition Classification. Residential and institutional land uses are included
in the limited transition classification. Residential densities are very low for single-family
detached dwellings which are the predominant land use. A maximum of 2 units per acre is
allowed in the majority of the classification. However, a higher density may be allowed in
planned developments in which adequate services are provided.
4.000 Land Classification System 70

' 4.240 Conservation Classification. The conservation classification includes identified AECs
(coastal wetlands, estuarine waters, public trust waters, estuarine shoreline), sound and
' estuarine system islands (Sugarloaf Island, Phillips Island, and the Newport Marshes), and
concentrated areas of freshwater or "404" wetlands protected by the Clean Water Act. No
development other than water -dependent uses is allowed in coastal wetlands and estuarine and
public trust waters. The town concurs with CAMA AEC Standards for properties located in
the conservation classification.
Development within the estuarine shoreline must be in accordance with CAMA
regulations and guidelines and the applicable Morehead City Zoning Ordinance provisions.
Permits must be obtained from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers prior to disturbing any
' freshwater wetlands. Most of the land areas classified as conservation are zoned as floodplains
and permissible land uses are, therefore, restricted to those which create no significant adverse
impact on base flood levels.
' 4.300 Land Classification Map
The land classification map (see Figure 9) includes four land classifications: (i) developed;
' (ii) urban transition (including an urban transition/port subclass); (iii) limited transition; and (iv)
conservation. The land classification map graphically illustrates the locations of the various
classifications. Because of the scale of the land classification map, the conservation classifications
' can not be mapped with any degree of accuracy. Precise locations for some areas classified as
conservation must be determined by field investigation. The general locations of the various land
classifications are described below.
' 4.310 Developed Classification. The developed classification generally includes all of the
land within the current corporate limits of the Town of Morehead City with the exception of
' Annex Island. Also included is the intensively developed residential and commercial area
between the town limits at Peletier Creek and the extraterritorial jurisdiction boundary at
Rochelle Drive. The developed area currently includes a wide variety of residential,
' commercial, industrial, and institutional zoning districts. Municipal services are currently
provided to the overwhelming majority of the developed area.
' 4.320 Urban Transition Classification. This classification includes the predominantly
residential areas (both existing and emerging) located on the fringes of the current Morehead
City corporate limits. The urban transition area generally extends from US 70 at the west
extraterritorial jurisdiction to the Crab Point area west of Calico Bay. The urban
transition/port subclass includes Annex Island which is anticipated to be used, in part, for port -
related activity. Annex Island is currently zoned for industrial use and is being used as a
dredge spoil site. The majority of the area classified as urban transition is currently zoned R-
20 or R-15M. Portions of the urban transition area are potential annexation areas. Municipal
services are expected to ultimately be extended into such areas.
4.330 Limited Transition Classification. The limited transition classification includes the
Morehead City Country Club and Golf Course area, the majority of the eastern portion of the
peninsula between Calico Creek and Dill's Creek, and the easternmost portion of the Crab
Point Neck area. Currently, these areas are zoned R-20, R-15M, and PD.
4.000 Land Classification System 71

t, I
---
I ho Iveparatwrt "I th.+ map r. htr W m pan through a grant
\,•nA Cn ohtta C.uwl Marugrrnerrt Program, through tomb
proadcd M the
pl—kd M the
{;•
RI✓® :r 1 - -, s
I
t ,u to l.w %I—igernte Act of I9":. u an.enled. which is admrmstrred
h. the
r
0.1.uur
� :.q„
r ttli.c .•1 Ocean ant C..a" It-- Management. Nath.-I
ltm, �phctrr Admtm—,.—
—1
M ___.__
iiuGuE SuuNu ^
ti�
1 � -
0 1 l• .
I 1
til l� O 10X 2000
BAR SCALE IN FEET
he
"ten
DEVELOPED LIMITED TRANSITION
Cow
HGI RF l�
URBAN TRANSITION CONSERVATION
F cI 4F'+1 NG
LAND
CLASSIFICATION'11 1
SEE NOTE 1
®wostinyhouso landmark GIS
(ZZ7 URBAN TRANSITION/PORT
—" G
&KNIrEC1UE
MOREHEAD CITY
. .i... .. ......,..�.....r.a.. �r ...na. aa...
.... ».
�„tn,•tr
DECEMBE.R IQt)I

4.340 Conservation Classification. This classification includes the 520-acre Nature
Conservancy tract located in the northwest corner of the planning region as well as adjacent
' wetland areas east of this tract, Sugarloaf Island, the Newport Marshes, and AECs delineated
in Section 4.240. Because of the map scale, the conservation classification can not be
accurately mapped. The precise location of coastal wetlands, freshwater wetlands, and the
' estuarine shoreline must be determined by field investigation. The town concurs with CAMA
AEC standards for properties located in the conservation classification.
4.400 Relationship of Policy Statements and Land Classifications
The following sections discuss how the land use policy statements contained in Section 3.000
'
apply to each of the classifications delineated on the land classification map (Figure 9).
4.410 Developed Classification. Policy statements have been formulated which encourage
a variety of land uses to meet the housing, employment, shopping, recreation, and cultural
'
needs of the citizens of the Morehead City Planning Jurisdiction. Policy statements have also
been developed which encourage land development that has or can readily obtain adequate
support infrastructure. Higher residential densities (6 to 8 dwelling units per acre) and light
industrial uses are promoted in areas with sufficient water and sewer service and an adequate
street system. Multi -family development is promoted in areas currently zoned R-5.
Redevelopment and restoration of the CBD, waterfront, and older, established residential
'
neighborhoods are encouraged. Tourist support businesses and services are encouraged in the
existing CBD and along major highway corridors. Improvements to the port facility are
supported.
'
4.420 Transition Classifications. Policy statements have been developed which apply to the
urban transition and limited transition classifications. These policies address the provision of
urban services and the density of development. Intensive urban development is discouraged
'
in outlying areas that do not have adequate utility services. Low -density residential uses is
promoted as are the current maximum densities of approximately 2 to 3 dwelling units per
acres. New development is encouraged to locate within existing town water and sewer service
areas. Requests for water and sewer services in areas outside of the current town limits will
be required to petition for voluntary annexation. Policy statements have been developed which
'
support the continued operation and expansion of the port facility.
4.430 Conservation Classification. Policy statements which apply to areas within the
conservation classification are concerned with the appropriate use and management of AECs
and other fragile areas and the protection of water quality. Policy statements have been
developed which give priority to the conservation of coastal wetlands. Water -dependent uses
are the only uses which are allowed in wetlands and estuarine waters. Sugarloaf and Phillips
'
Islands and the Newport Marshes are identified as fragile areas. Development within the
estuarine shoreline is allowed only if it has no significant adverse impact on estuarine
resources and water quality. Marina and floating home development is restricted in primary
nursery areas. Industrial development is excluded from coastal wetland areas. Off -road
vehicles are prohibited on sound and estuarine system islands. Major concentrations of
freshwater wetlands have been designated as conservation areas on the land classification map.
4.000 Land Classification System 73
1

m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m

APPENDIX A
INDEX OF DATA SOURCES
During the preparation of this land use plan update, a wide variety of data sources
were utilized. The general data sources are outlined below as are specific reference
materials.
Town of Morehead City Department of Parks and Recreation.
Town of Morehead City Department of Public Works.
Town of Morehead City Fire Department.
Town of Morehead City Inspections Department.
Town of Morehead City Planning Department.
Town of Morehead City Police Department.
Town of Morehead City Rescue Squad.
Town of Morehead City Water and Sewer Utility Department.
Carteret County Economic Development Council.
Carteret County Office of Emergency Management.
Carteret County Planning Department.
Carteret County Schools.
N.C. Department of Economic and Community Development, Division of Travel and
Tourism.
N.C. Department of Environmental Health and Natural Resources, Division of Coastal
Management.
N.C. Department of Environmental Health and Natural Resources, Division of Marine
Fisheries.
N.C. Department of Environmental Health and Natural Resources, Division of Parks and
Recreation.
N.C. Department of Environmental Health and Natural Resources, Division of Soil and
Water Conservation.
N.C. Office of State Budget and Management, State Data Center.
N.C. State Ports Authority , General Manager's Office, Morehead City Terminal.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Farmers Home Administration.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Services.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census.
IAppendix 74

11
1
APPENDIX A
(Continued)
"Albemarle -Pamlico Estuarine System, Preliminary Technical Analysis of the Status and
Trends," N.C. Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources,
December 1989.
"Authorized Construction By Building Permit," Bureau of Census, Construction and
Statistics Division, Building Permits Branch, 1986-1989.
"Carteret County Hurricane Evacuation Plan", Carteret County Office of Emergency
Management, July 1988.
"Census of Population, Housing, Retail Trade, Service Industries, and Wholesale Trade,"
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Census, 1960-1980.
"Characterization of Baseline Demographic Trends In The Year -Round and Recreational
Population In The Albemarle -Pamlico Estuarine Study Area," Paul D. Tschetter,
East Carolina University, Greenville, NC, May 1989.
"Downtown Improvement Program for Morehead City, North Carolina," McKim and
Creed Engineers, Wilmington, NC, July 1990.
"Flood Insurance Study, Town of Morehead City, N.C.," Federal Emergency
Management Agency, April 1983.
"Land Use Plan Update," Satilla Planning, June 1986.
"Morehead City Thoroughfare Plan Alternatives, Interim Report," N.C. Department of
Transportation, Planning and Research Branch, Statewide Planning Group, June
1989.
"Morehead City Land Use Plan," November 1980.
"North Carolina Long -Term Economic -Demographic Projections," N.C. Office of State
Budget and Management, April 1987.
"North Carolina Municipal Population, 1989," N.C. Office of State Budget and
Management, January 1990.
"North Carolina Population Projections: 1988-2010," N.C. Office of State Budget and
Management, June 1988.
"North Carolina Travel Study," N.C. Department of Economic and Community
Development, Division of Travel and Tourism, June 1989.
IAppendix
75

APPENDIX A
(Continued)
North Carolina State Profile, February 1990, Woods and Poole Economics, Washington,
DC.
Soils Survey of Carteret County, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation
Service, September 1978.
Statistical Abstract, N.C. Office of State Budget and Management, 1984.
"Storm Hazard Mitigation Plan and Post Disaster Reconstruction Plan," George Eichler
& Associates and Satilla Planning, Inc., June 1984.
"The Effects of Global Warming and Sea -Level Rise on Coastal North Carolina," R. Paul
Wilms, Carolina Planning, Fall 1990.
"The Blueprint Study, Strategic Planning for the 21st Century, Carteret County, North
Carolina," Neuse River Council of Governments, New Bern, NC, 1989.
"Trends In North Carolina's Commercial Fisheries," 1965-1988, N.C. Dept. of
Environment, Health and Natural Resources, Division of Marine Fisheries, 1989.
Subdivision Regulations, Town of Morehead City, N.C. Department of Natural and
Economic Resources, Division of Community Services, 1972.
Zoning Ordinance, Town of Morehead City, Municipal Code Corporation, 1989.
1
C
1 Appendix 76

m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
APPENDIX B
POPULATION SIZE AND GROWTH RATES
MOREHEAD CITY, CARTERET COUNTY, AND THE STATE
1910 -1990
Population Size
1910
1920
1930
120
19550
960
1970
1980
1990
Morehead City 2,039
2,958
3,483
3,695
5,144
5,583
5,233
4,359
6,046
Carteret County 13,776
15,384
16,900
18,248
23,059
27,438
31,603
41,092
52,556
North Carolina 21206,287
2,559,123
3,170,276
3,571,623
4,061,929
4,556,155
5,084,411
5,880,095
6,628,637
Population
Growth Rates
1 10-1 20
1 29 0-1930
0-1 40
1 40-1 0 1
0-1 60
1960-1970
1 79 0-1980
1 80-19 0
Morehead City 45.1 %
17.7 %
6.1 %
39.2 %
8.5 %
-6.3 %
-16.7 %
38.7 %
Carteret County 11.7 %
9.9 %
8.2 %
26.1 %
19.0 %
15.2 %
30.0 %
27.9 %
North Carolina 16.0 %
23.9 %
12.7%
13.7 %
12.2 %
11.6 %
15.6 %
12.7 %
Sources: U.S. Census of Population, 1920-1990
14
v

APPENDIX C
COMPARISON OF MOREHEAD CITY'S POPULATION GROWTH RATE
WITH THAT OF NORTH CAROLINA TOWNS
OF SIMILAR
SIZE'
TOWN
COUNTY
1980
1990
% Chanize
Wake Forest
Wake
3,780
5,769
52.6%
Lincolnton
Lincoln
4,879
6,847
40.3 %
Morehead City
Carteret
4,359
6,046
38.7%
Hamlet
Richmond
4,720
6,196
31.3 %
Archdale
Guilford/Randolph
5,326
6,913
29.8%
Clemmons
Forsyth
4,842
6,020
24.3 %
Hendersonville
Henderson
6,862
7,284
6.1%
Mount Airy
Surry
6,862
7,156
4.3 %
Waynesville
Haywood
6,765
6,758
-0.1 %
Roxboro
Person
7,532
7,332
-2.6%
Forest City
Rutherford
7,688
7,475
-2.8%
Williamston
Martin
6,159
5,503
-10.6%
15,500-7,500 population in 1990.
Source: U.S. Census,
1980 and 1990
Appendix
78

APPENDIX D
COMPARISON OF MOREHEAD CITY'S POPULATION GROWTH RATE
WITH SELECTED COASTAL MUNICIPALITIES
Municipality
COUNTY
1980
1990
% Change
Jacksonville
Onslow
18,259
30,013
64.4 %
Morehead City
Carteret
4,359
6,046
38.7%
Wilmington
New Hanover
44,000
55,503
26.1 %
New Bern
Craven
14,557
17,363
19.3 %
Hertford
Perquimans
1,941
2,105
8.4 %
Washington
Beaufort
8,418
9,075
7.8%
Elizabeth City
Pasquotank
14,004
14,292
2.1 %
Beaufort
Carteret
3,826
3,808
-0.5 %
Edenton
Chowan
5,357
5,268
-1.7 %
Southport
Brunswick
2,824
2,369
-16.1 %
Source: North Carolina Municipal Population, 1989.
Office of State Budget and Management, January 1990.
U.S. Census, 1980 and 1990.
Appendix
79

APPENDIX E
COMPARISON
OF MOREHEAD CITY'S POPULATION GROWTH RATE
WTrH
SELECTED MUNICIPALITIES IN THE REGION
MunicipaI4
Count}
1980
1990
% Change
Indian Beach
Carteret
54
153
183.3 %
Emerald Isle
Carteret
865
2,434
181.4%
Pine Knoll Shores
Carteret
646
1,360
110.5%
Atlantic Beach
Carteret
941
1,938
106.0%
Jacksonville
Onslow
18,259
30,013
64.4%
Oriental
Pamlico
536
786
46.6%
Morehead City
Carteret
4,359
6,046
38.7%
Newport
Craven
1,883
2,516
33.6%
Cedar Point
Carteret
479
628
31.1 %
Richlands
Onslow
825
996
20.7%
Swansboro
Onslow
976
1,165
19.4%
New Bern
Craven
14,557
17,363
19.3 %
Havelock
Craven
17,718
20,268
14.4 %
Cape Carteret
Carteret
944
1,008
6.8%
Maysville
Jones
877
892
1.7 %
Beaufort
Carteret
3,826
3,808
-0.5 %
Bayboro
Pamlico
759
733
-3.4 %
Alliance
Pamlico
616
583
-5.3 %
Trenton
Jones
294
248
-15.6%
Source: U.S. Census, 1980 and 1990.
Appendix
80

APPENDIX F
POPULATION DENSITY
MOREHEAD CITY AND SELECTED MUNICIPALITIES IN THE REGION
1960-1980
Persons Per Square Mile
Municipality
1960
1970
1980
New Bern
6,287
3,858
2,510
Morehead City
3,722
3,489
2,180
Jacksonville
4,352
3,815
2,159
Beaufort
5,844
3,062
1,594
Havelock
1,217
1,506
979
Median Density of all 4,284 3,146 1,884
Selected Municipalities
Carteret County 52 59 78
North Carolina 93 104 120
PROJECTED POPULATION DENSITY
1990-2010
Persons Per Square Mile
1990 2000 2010
Carteret County 103 126 148
North Carolina 135 149 159
Sources: North Carolina State Government Statistical Abstract,
North Carolina State Data Center, 1984.
North Carolina Office of State Budget and Management.
Appendix
81

APPENDIX G
AGE DISTRIBUTION
1980
Morehead City
Carteret
North
Age Category
Number
% of Total
County_
Carolina
0 - 4 Years
241
5.5 %
6.8 %
6.9 %
Preschool Age
5 - 19 Years
897
20.6 %
21.4 %
25.4 %
School Age
20-24 Years
285
6.5 %
11.2 %
9.9 %
College Age
25-64 Years
2,082
47.8 %
49.0 %
47.5 %
Working Age
65+ Years
854
19.6%
11.6%
10.3 %
Retirement Age
Totals 4,359 100.0 % 100.0 % 100.0 %
Sources: U.S. Census of Population, 1980.
Appendix
82

APPENDIX G (continued)
AGE DISTRIBUTION PROJECTIONS
1990-2010
1990
2000
2010
Carteret
Carteret
Carteret
Age Category
County
NC
County
NC
County
NC
0 - 4 Years
6.8%
6.6%
6.0%
5.8%
5.7%
5.3%
Preschool Age
5 - 19 Years
17.7 %
19.3 %
17.1 %
18.1 %
15.9 %
16.7 %
School Age
20-24 Years
8.9 %
10.2 %
7.9 %
8.8 %
8.1 %
8.6 %
College Age
25-64 Years
52.5 %
51.5 %
53.6 %
53.6 %
53.9 %
54.2 %
Working Age
65+ Years
14.1 %
12.4%
15.4%
13.7%
16.4%
15.2%
Retirement Age
Totals
100.0 %
100.0 %
100.0 %
100.0 %
100.0 %
100.0 %
Sources: Office of State Budget and Management.
w

APPENDIX H
MEDIAN
AGE OF THE POPULATION
1970-2010
Median Age In Years
1970
1980 1990
2000
2010
Morehead City 30.5
37.8 N/A
N/A
N/A
Carteret County 28.3
31.4 34.7
37.8
40.0
North Carolina 26.5
29.6 33.2
36.4
38.3
United States 28.0
30.0 32.9
35.7
37.0
Sources: U.S. Census of Population, 1970 and 1980
Woods and Poole Economics, North Carolina State Profile, 1990.
Appendix 84

Morehead City
Carteret County
North Carolina
Carteret County
North Carolina
APPENDIX I
RACIAL COMPOSITION OF THE POPULATION
1980
White
Black
All Others
Totals
No. %
No. %
No. %
No. %
3,528 80.9%
789 18.1 %
42 1.0%
4,359 100%
369871 89.7%
3,859 9.4%
362 0.9%
41,092 100%
4,457,507 76.6%
1,318,857 22.7%
40,866 0.7%
5,817,230 100%
1970
White Non -White
88.6% 11.4%
76.8% 23.2%
RACIAL COMPOSITION TRENDS
1970 - 2010
1980
White Non -White
89.7 % 10.3 %
76.6 % 23.4 %
1990
White Non -White
91.6% 8.4%
75.6% 24.4%
Sources: U.S. Census of Population, 1960-1980
Woods and Poole Economics, North Carolina State Profile, 1990.
2000 2010
White Non -White White Non White
92.8% 7.2% 93.8% 6.2%
75.3 % 24.7 % 74.9 % 25.1 %

APPENDIX J
HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS
General Household Characteristics
1980
Morehead
Carteret
North
City
County
Carolina
Total Housing Units
1,979
20,668
2,274,737
Occupied Housing Units
1,698
15,128
2,043,291
% Occupied
85.8 %
73.2 %
89.8 %
No. Owner -Occupied
1,107
11,394
1,397,425
No. Renter -Occupied
591
3,734
645,866
% Owner -Occupied
65.2 %
75.3 %
68.4 %
% Renter Occupied
34.8 %
24.7 %
31.6%
% Lacking Complete Plumbing
1.8 %
1.7 %
4.1 %
% W/ 1.01 or More Persons Per Room 2.8 %
2.8 %
4.5 %
Median Value
$30,400
$36,900
$36,000
Household Population
(Persons Per Occupied Dwelling)
1970
1980
1985
Morehead City
2.99
2.44
NA
Carteret County
3.13
2.66
2.49
North Carolina
3.24
2.78
2.64
Sources: U.S. Census of Housing, 1970-1980
N.C. Statistical Abstract, 1984
County and City Data Book, 1988.
Appendix
86

APPENDIX J (continued)
HOUSEHOLD PROJECTIONS
1980
1990
2000
Persons
Persons
Persons
Total
Per Total
Per
Total
Per
Households'
Household Households'
Household
Households'
Household
Carteret County
15.20
2.67 22.12
2.39
27.02
2.24
North Carolina
2,054.64
2.78 2,541.44
2.56
3,026.93
2.43
United States
80,836.01
2.74 94,321.72
2.61
106,452.42
2.52
2010
Persons
Total
Per
Households'
Household
Carteret County
32.48
2.01
North Carolina
3,656.98
2.23
United States
123,430.14
2.35
'In Thousands
Source: Woods and Poole Economics, North Carolina State Profile, 1990.
00
v

APPENDIX K
EMPLOYMENT BY INDUSTRY GROUP
PERSONS 16 YEARS AND OLDER
MOREHEAD CITY, NC
1980
Industry Number
Percent
Agriculture, Forestry, Fisheries 43
2.4 %
Mining 0
0.0 %
Construction 125
7.0%
Manufacturing 202
11.3 %
TCPU' 162
9.1 %
Wholesale/Retail Trade 409
22.9 %
FIRE2 112
6.3 %
Services 501
28.0 %
Government 233
13.0 %
TOTAL 11787
100.0 %
'Transportation, Communication and Public Utilities
2Finance, Insurance, and Real Estate
Source: U.S. Census of Population, 1980
Appendix
W

r M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M
APPENDIX K
EMPLOYMENT BY
INDUSTRY GROUP
(continued)
1970
1980
1990
2000
2010
Carteret
Carteret
Carteret
Carteret
Carteret
County
NC
County
NC
County
NC
County
NC
County
NC
TOTAL EMPLOYMENT 10.29
2431.52
16.66
3012.45
23.54
3807.97
27.91
4388.97
30.99
4834.45
(ma's)
Agriculture
9.9%
8.6%
10.6%
5.7%
8.3%
3.6%
7.2%
2.8%
6.6%
2.4%
Mining
0.0%
0.1 %
0.1 %
0.2%
0.0%
0.1 %
0.0%
0.1 %
***3
0.1 %
Construction
5.5%
5.3%
5.6%
5.3%
7.2%
6.4%
7.1%
6.3%
6.9%
6.3%
Manufacturing
16.0%
30.1%
13.6%
27.8%
8.6%
23.8%
7.1%
22.9%
6.5%
22.3%
TCPU'
5.9%
4.1%
3.5%
4.3%
2.8%
4.3%
2.1%
4.3%
1.8%
4.4%
Wholesale/
22.6%
16.4%
25.3%
18.6%
28.4%
21.0%
30.7%
22.7%
31.3%
23.2%
Retail Trade
FIR82
2.7%
3.8%
4.9%
4.7%
10.1%
5.6%
15.1%
5.8%
18.4%
5.81/o
Services
20.2%
14.7%
19.1%
16.0%
19.2%
19.8%
16.9%
20.9%
16.0%
22.2%
Government
17.2%
16.9%
17.3%
17.4%
15.4%
15.4%
13.8%
14.2%
12.5%
13.3%
TOTALS
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
' Transportation, Communication, & Public Utilities
Y Finance, Insurance, & Real Estate
Less than 0.1 %
Sources: U.S. Census of Population, 1970
and 1980.
Woods and Poole Economics, North Carolina State Profile, February 1990.
b

Name
Beaufort Fisheries
Hudson MFG. Co.
Standard Products
APPENDIX L
MAJOR MANUFACTURING EMPLOYERS
MOREHEAD CITY AREA
1989
Products/
Servim Employees
Fish meal 100
Apparel 100
Fish meal 67
Down East Togs Apparel 175
Garner, Inc. Hospital uniforms 75
Hankison Corporation Air dryers 50
Diversified Concrete Products Precast/Structural concrete 100
Owens-Corning Fiberglas Roofing products 125
Cross Creek Apparel, Inc. Apparel 200
Parker Marine Enterprises, Inc. Fiberglass boats 50
Source: Carteret County Economic Development Council
Appendix
1$

APPENDIX M
PER CAPITA INCOME
CARTERET COUNTY MUNICIPALITIES
1985
Municipality
Pine Knoll Shores
Cape Carteret
Emerald Isle
Atlantic Beach
Beaufort
Indian Beach
Newport
Morehead City
Carteret County Average
North Carolina Average
Source: County and City Data Book, 1988.
Per Capita Income
$16,775
$13,480
$13,395
$12,666
$ 9,788
$ 9,296
$ 9,009
$ 8,265
$ 9,296
$ 9,517
Appendix
91

APPENDIX N
INCOME CHARACTERISTICS
CARTERET COUNTY
Per Capita Income
(In 1982 Dollars)
Carteret County as a
Carteret
Percentage of the State
County
North Carolina
Per Capita Income
1970
$ 6,596
$ 7,712
85.5%
1980
$ 8,896
$ 9,302
95.6%
1990
$ 9,962
$11,634
85.6%
2000
$129183
$14, 811
82.3 %
2010
$14,712
$18,275
80.5%
Mean Household Income
(In 1982 Dollars)
Carteret County as a
Carteret
Percentage of the State
Coun1y
North Carolina
Mean Household Income
1970
$20,922
$25,354
82.5 %
1980
$23, 823
$26,032
91.5 %
1990
$23,914
$29,940
79.9%
2000
$27,430
$36,184
75.8 %
2010
$29,993
$40,929
73.3 %
Source: Woods & Poole Economics, North Carolina State Profile, February 1990.
Appendix
92

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
APPENDIX O
RETAIL SALES
MOREHEAD CITY AND CARTERET COUNTY
1987
Morehead City's
Carteret
Morehead
Percentage of the
Counjy
cityCounty's
Total
Total Establishments
467
165
35 %
Sales ($1,000)
$331, 635
$145, 897
44 %
Paid Employees
4,079
1,802
44 %
Bldg. Materials, Hardware, SIC 52
34
14
41 %
General Merchandise, SIC 53
13
6
46 %
Food Stores, SIC 54
58
13
22%
Automotive Dealers, SIC 55,
37
10
27 %
except554
Gasoline Service Stations, SIC 554
36
9
25%
Apparel & Accessories, SIC 56
44
19
43 %
Furniture, Home Furnishings, SIC 57
36
20
55 %
Eating & Drinking Places, SIC 58
107
38
35 %
Drug Stores, SIC 591
15
8
53 %
Miscellaneous Retail, SIC 59
87
28
32 %
except 591
Source: 1987 Census of Retail Trade, Bureau of Census
Appendix
93

M
APPENDIX 0
(continued)
RETAIL SALES
CARTERET COUNTY
1970
1980
1990
2000
2010
Percent
Percent
Percent
Percent
Percent
Total
of
Total of
Total
of
Total
of
Total
of
RETAIL CATEGORY
Sales'
Total
Sales' Total
Sales'
Total
Sales'
Total
Sales'
Total
Building Materials, Hardware
9.93
7.9%
24.26 12.3%
33.72
11.1%
53.08
12.0%
80.52
12.9%
General Merchandise
7.65
6.1 %
16.75 8.5%
29.61
9.8%
42.37
9.6%
58.38
9.4%
Food Stores
35.37
28.3 %
46.82 23.7 %
78.12
25.8 %
112.39
25.4 %
156.64
25.1 %
Automobile Dealers
18.71
15.0%
25.99 13.1 %
58.64
19.4%
78.32
17.8%
97.79
15.7%
Gasoline Service Stations
13.04
10.4%
19.96 10.1 %
15.48
5.1 %
27.12
6.1 %
46.06
7.4%
Apparel & Accessories
5.59
4.5%
4.75 2.4%
11.31
3.8%
17.02
3.9%
24.76
4.0%
Furniture, Home Furnishings
5.34
4.3%
10.39 5.3%
16.16
5.3%
24.17
5.5%
34.90
5.6%
Eating & Drinking Places
10.23
8.2%
22.48 11.4%
33.98
11.2%
50.54
11.4%
72.78
11.7%
Drug Stores
5.06
4.1 %
6.15 3.1 %
10.48
3.5%
14.74
3.3%
20.06
3.2%
Miscellaneous Retail Stores
14.06
11.2%
20.02 10.1 %
15.09
5.0%
22.06
5.0%
31.23
5.0%
TOTAL RETAIL SALES
124.98
100.0%
197.57 100.0%
1 302.59
100.0%
441.81
100.0%
623.12
100.0%
' In Millions, 1982 Dollars
Source: Woods and Poole Economics, North Carolina State Profile, February 1990.

APPENDIX P
SERVICE INDUSTRIES
MOREHEAD CITY AND CARTERET COUNTY
1987
Morehead City's
Carteret
Morehead
Percentage of the
County
Ci1y
County's Total
Total Establishments
321
152
47 %
Receipts ($1,000)
$64,075
$32,261
49%
Paid Employees
1,789
1,007
56%
Hotels/Lodging Places, SIC 70,
43
12
28 %
except704
Personal Services, SIC 72
38
17
45%
Business Services, SIC 73
28
13
46%
Automotive Repair, SIC 75
24
9
38 %
Miscellaneous Repair, SIC 76
19
7
37 %
Amusement/Recreational,
32
13
41 %
SIC 78, 79, 84
Health Services, SIC 80
58
42
72%
Legal Services, SIC 81
24
13
54 %
Social Services, SIC 83
17
5
29 %
Engineering/Accounting/Research,
33
21
64 %
SIC 87, except 873
Source: 1987 Census of Service Industries, Bureau of Census.
Appendix
95

APPENDIX Q
SEAFOOD LANDINGS AND VESSEL LICENSES
SELECTED COASTAL COUNTIES
1989
Commercial
Commercial
Commercial
Statewide
Dockside
Statewide`
Vessel
Statewide
Full-time
Statewide.:
Part-time
Statewide
For -Hire
Statewide
County
Pounds
Rank
Value
Rank.. :
Licenses
Rank
Vessels
Rank
Vessels
Rank..;
Vessels
Rank
Beaufort
2,632,337
8
E 1,675,668
8
1,070
6
324
S
289
6
0
Brunswick
2,407,246>.
.10
3,914,106
6
1,682
4
381
4
345
5
16
3
Carteret
26,713,806:
1
23,626,913
1
2,924
1
1,268
1
11090
2
48
2 .
Chowan
3,012,743
. .
686,692
13
169
13
79
13
76
13
0
Craven
271,090:
:<]5
123,679
15
1,012
7
96
10/11
178
8
3
7
Dare
24,739,171>
2
15,597,018
2
18283
5
644
2
406
4 -
60
1
Hyde
13,925,983
. 3
6,819,235
4
442
10
296
6. .<
102
11
4
6
New Hanover
2,030,091
1.1
2,916,644
7
2,251
2
282
7
1,164
1
5
5
Onslow
3,401,553
5
4,083,848
5
1,728
3
494
3
553
3
12
4
Pamlico
9,457,998
4
8,312,504
3
728
8
275
8
92
12
0
Pasquotank
3,170,757(
6
1,375,860
9
209
12
56
14
110
10
0
•-
Pender
831,723
14
1,078,680
10
689
9
96
10/11
255
7
0
--
TOTAL
98,441,191
71,148,701
15,415
4,575
5,023
150
NC Coastal
Counties
'Data presented here do not include landings of menhaden and thread herring which are categorized under industrial landings.
'Dockside value is the price paid to fishermen and does not include any value added by handling, shipping, processing, etc.
Source: Preliminary Statistics, North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries
b
O�

APPENDIX R
MOREHEAD CITY PORT ACTIVITY
FY 1986 - 1990
19 6/87 1987/88 1988/89 1989/90
Ship Traffic
General Cargo
70
59
50
41
Bulk Cargo
101
106
112
109
US Navy
80
49
56
48
TOTAL .
251
214::
218
I98
Tonnages
Break Bulk
6.08 %
5.63 %
Container
0.05 %
0.01 %
Dry Bulk
72.55 %
75.38 %
Liquid Bulk
21.32 %
18.99 %
TOTAL
100.00 %
100.00 %.
Economic Benefits (Million $)
Carteret County
North Carolina
$17.755 $16.217
$212.820 $226.848
Source: North Carolina State Port Authority.
3.93%
4.14%
0.00%
0.00%
74.62 %
74.77 %
21.45%
21.09%
100.00% .
100.00%
$15.652 $14.157
$235.612 $209.590
Appendix
97

APPENDIX S
DISTRIBUTION OF
TOTAL ACREAGE BY LAND USE CATEGORY
AND NEIGHBORHOOD
Neighborhood
Land Use Category 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 TOTALS
Residential Acreage
64
70
78
129
630
100
263
1,334
% of Total
4.8%
5.2%
5.8%
9.7%
47.3%
7.5%
19.7%
100.0%
Residential Ac.
Commercial Acreage
39
2
27
78
12
150
2
310
% of Total
12.6%
0.6%
8.7%
25.2%
3.9%
48.4%
0.6%
100.0%
Commercial Ac.
Public/Institutional/
21
7
68
80
365
7
12
560
Recreational Acreage
% of Total
3.8 %
1.3 %
12.1 %
14.3 %
65.1 %
1.3 %
2.1 %
100.0%
Public/Inst/Rec. Ac.
Industrial Acreage
154
0
4
8
0
0
0
166
% of Total
92.8%
0.0%
2.4%
4.8%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
Industrial Ac.
Vacant Acreage
3
3
73
118
964
26
285
1,472
% of Total
0.2%
0.2%
5.0%
8.0%
65.4%
1.8%
19.4%
100.0%
Vacant Acreage
Total
281
82
250
413
1,971
283
562
3,842
Neighborhood Acreage
% of Total Acreage
7.3 %
2.1 %
6.5 %
10.7 %
51.4 %
7.4 %
14.6 %
100.0%
' Appendix 98

= = =
APPENDIX T
DISTRIBUTION OF HOUSING AND COMMERIAL ESTABLISHMENTS
BY NEIGHBORHOOD
Housing Type
1
No.
%
2
No.
%
3
No.
%
4
No.
%
5
No.
%
6
No.
%
7
No.
%
Total
No.
%
Single -Family
376
58%
648
96%
397
77%
104
17%
941
75%
364
73%
384
55%
3,214
66%
Multi -Family
275
42%
26
4%
120
23%
293
49%
300
24%
116
23%
150
22%
1,280
26%
Manufactured Home
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
204
34%
10
1%
20
4%
160
23%
394
8%
TOTAL Residences
651
100%
674
'100%
517
100%
601
100%
1,251 ;
100%
500
;100%
694.100%
4,888 :
100%
PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL HOUSING STOCK
BY NEIGHBORHOOD
Single -Family
12%
20%
13%
3%
29%
11%
12%
100%
Multi -Family
21%
2%
9%
23%
24%
9%
12%
100%
Manufactured Home
0%
0%
0%
52%
2%
5%
41 %
100%
% of Total Residences
13%
14%
11 %1
12'0
26%
104ii :
14%
100%
DISTRIBUTION OF COMMERCIAL ESTABLISHMENTS
BY NEIGHBORHOOD
No. Commercial Uses 80 5 70 35 7 80 5 282
% of Total Commercial
Establishments 28% 2% 25% 13% 2% 28% 2% 100%
Source: Estimated from field observations, The Wooten Company, 1991.
b

APPENDIX U
HOUSING AND POPULATION DENSITY
BY NEIGHBORHOOD
MOREHEAD CITY PLANNING JURISDICTION
1991
Total
Total
Dwelling Units.;
Total
Persons::
Neighborhood
Residences
Acreage
Fer Acre
Population
Per Acre:
1
651
281
2.32:
1,399
498
2
674
82
8.22:
19449
1767
3
517
250
2:07
1,111
4 44>
4
601
413
1.46
1,290
3.12:
5
1,251
1,971
0 63
2,690
1 36
6
500
283
. 1.77 `
1,075
3.80:
7
694
562
1.23`
19492
2 65
TOTAL
4,888
3,842
1.27
10,506
2 73
Source: The Wooten Company, 1991.
Appendix 100

APPENDIX V
AUTHORIZED CONSTRUCTION
BY BUILDING PERMIT
MOREHEAD CITY
1986 - 1989
1986 1987 19888
19899
TOTAL
Single -Family Unit 181 96 74
47
398
Duplex Units 0 0 2
0
2
3-4 Units 4 0 0
0
4
5 + Units 80 0 0
36
116
Manufactured Homes 64 43 40
43
190
TOTAL RESIDENTIAL UNITS 329 139 116
126
710
RESIDENTIAL DEMOLITIONS 16 5 2
3
26
(UNITS)
Commercial 10 10 30
10
60
Institutional 1 1 0
2
4
Industrial 1 0 1
0
2
Sources: Bureau of Census, Construction and Statistics Division, Building Permits Branch.
Town of Morehead City Inspections Department
Appendix
101

APPENDIX V (Continued)
SUBDIVISION LOT APPROVAL
MOREHEAD CITY PLANNING AND ZONING JURISDICTION
MOREHEAD CITY
1986 - 1990
Subdivisions Approved
Total New Lots Created
Percent
of
1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 Total Total
5 4 3 1 8 21 100%
60 62 72 27 58 279 100%
RESIDENTIAL LOTS CREATED 59 61 63 27 57' 267 100%
In -Town
32
33
0
0
27
92
34 %
Within ETJ
27
28
63
27
30
175
66%
Zoning of Residential Lots
R-20 (2.1 DU/AC Max)
18
28
63
27
25
161
60 %
R-15M (1.9 DU/AC Max)
14
0
0
0
0
4
6%
R-7 (6.2 DU/AC Max)
0
0
0
0
3
3
1%
R-5 (8.7 DU/AC Max)
27
33
0
0
29
89
33 %
COMMERCIAL LOTS CREATED 1 1 0 0 91 11 100%
Zoning of Commercial Lots
OP (Office and Professional) 1 1 0 0 6 8 73 %
CH (Highway Commercial) 0 0 0 0 3 3 27%
INDUSTRIAL LOTS CREATED 0 0 9 0 0 9 100%
'Includes subdivisions involving both residential and commercial lots.
Source: Town of Morehead City Planning Department, 1991.
Appendix 102

M M M M M M M M i M M M i M M M M M M
APPENDIX W
SOIL LIMITATIONS
FOR SELECTED LAND USES
Dwellings
Dwellings
Small Commercial
Local Roads
Septic Tank
Soil Name/Symbol
Without Basements
With Basements
Buildings
and Streets
Absorption Fields
Alta Vista, AaA
Moderate
Severe
Moderate
Moderate
Severe
Augusta, Ag
Severe
Severe
Severe
Moderate
Severe
Arapahoe, Ap
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Autryville, AuB
Slight
Slight
Slight
Slight
Slight
Baymeade, ByB
Slight
Moderate
Slight
Slight
Slight
Carteret, CH
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Conetoe, CnB
Slight
Slight
Slight
Slight
Slight
Corella, Cu
Severe
Severe
Severe
Moderate
Severe
Deloss, De
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Hobucken, HB
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Kureb, KuB
Slight
Slight
Slight
Slight
Severe
Leon, Ln & Lu
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Mandarin, Mc
Moderate
Severe
Moderate
Moderate
Severe
Murville, Mu
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Newhan, Nd
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Seabrook, Se
Moderate
Severe
Moderate
Moderate
Severe
State, StA
Slight
Moderate
Slight
Moderate
Moderate
Tomotely, Tm
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Wando, WaB & WuB
Slight
Slight
Slight
Slight
Severe
Source: Soil Survey of Carteret County, NC; September 1978.
w

APPENDIX X
POPULATION PROJECTIONS
TOWN OF MOREHEAD CITY
1990-2010
HISTORICAL
PROJECTIONS
1950 1960
1270 1980
1990 19955 2000 2005 2010
Carteret County 23,059 27,438
31,603 41,092
52,5561 58,8251 64,5491 70,3451 75,7261
Morehead City 5,144 5,583
5,233 4,359
6,0462 6,7673 7,4253 8,0923 8,7103
11990 - 2010 projections by N.C. Office of State Budget and Management, July 1988, adjusted downward
based upon 1990 U.S. Census count.
21990 population based upon Morehead City's 1990 U.S. Census count.
3Based upon an identical 1990-2010 rate as projected for Carteret County by the N.C. Office of State
Budget and Management (1990-1995: 11.93%; 1995-2000: 9.73%; 2000-2005: 8.98%; 2005-2010: 7.65%).
Source: The Wooten Company, 1990.

,1a
APPENDIX Y
FUTURE RESIDENTIAL LAND NEEDS
1990 - 2000
TOTAL PROJECTED RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS:' 640
DISTRIBUTION OF PROJECTED DWELLING UNITS? 423 Single-family
166 Multi -family
51 Manufactured Homes
TOTAL PROJECTED RESIDENTIAL LAND NEEDS: 100-200 Acres Single -Family (2.1 to 4.3 DU/AC)
(Anticipated Density Levels in Parenthesis) 20-30 Aces Multi -Family (6.2 to 8.7 DU/AC)
18-20 Acres Manufactured Homes (2.9 DU/AC)
'Based upon a population increase of 1,379 persons and an average household population size of 2.15 persons per household.
2Based upon the same distribution pattern found in the 1990 land use survey: single-family, 66 percent; multi -family, 26 percent; and
manufactured home, 8 percent.
Source: The Wooten Company, 1991.

APPENDIX Z
SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVE POLICY ISSUES
WHICH WERE CONSIDERED BUT NOT DEVELOPED INTO
POLICY STATEMENTS
1. Resource Protection Policies
• Prohibiting marinas including dredging for marinas in coastal wetlands.
• Allowing marina maintenance dredging in designated primary nursery areas.
• Designating Annex (or Marsh) Island as a conservation area and limiting its use to
exclude port -related activities.
• Maintaining the current boundary of the primary nursery area on Calico Creek.
• Developing a local soil erosion and sedimentation control ordinance.
2.
93
• Limiting well permits and withdrawal from the Castle Hayne Aquifer.
• Banning bulkheads.
• Developing greater restrictions on Bogue Sound bulkheads.
Resource Production and Management Policies
• Developing a policy on productive agricultural and commercial forests.
• Developing an ordinance to ban off -road vehicle use.
Economic and Community Development
• Discouraging the long-term operation of the port facility.
• Discouraging the expansion of the port facility.
• Considering zoning Annex Island to a less intensive use classification.
• Developing additional building height restrictions for the Calico Creek area.
• Developing a public transportation system.
Preparing greater building setback and height restrictions for all waterfront areas.
• Development of an appearance code.
Appendix
106

l
1
1
1
1
1
• Wastewater treatment and disposal alternatives to the present wastewater treatment
plant located on Calico Creek.
Appendix 107

APPENDIX AA
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROCESS
A. CITIZEN ADVISORY CONMTTEE
The Morehead City Town Council, on October 25, 1990, appointed the following
persons to the Morehead City Land Use Plan Update Committee:
Curtis A. Oden, Jr.
1312 Avery Street
Morehead City, NC 28557
(Member of Planning Board)
David Engel
Route 2, Box 376
'
Morehead City, NC 28557
(Member of Planning Board)
' Marie McCann
1312 Shepard Street
Morehead City, NC 28557
' (Member of Board of Adjustment)
'
Earle Burnette
112 Calico Drive
Morehead City, NC 28557
'
(Member of Board of Adjustment)
Roy A. Stevens
Route 2, West Car Meadows
Morehead City, NC 28557
(Port Related)
'
David R. Walker
P. O. Drawer M
Morehead City, NC 28557
(City Manager)
Doug Brady, Meridian Seafood, Inc.
Post Office Box 3576
Morehead City, NC 28557
(Downtown Merchant)
Ms. Alida Willis
1306 Shepard Street
Morehead City, NC 28557
(At large member)
Sarah Hamilton
2002 Shepard Street
Morehead City, NC 28557
(At large member)
Floyd M. Chadwick, Jr.
2001 Evans Street
Morehead City, NC 28557
(Town Commissioner)
Bill Ward, Morehead City Floral
911 Arendell Street
Morehead City, NC 28557
(Downtown Merchant)
W. C. Horton
1012 Bay Street
Morehead City, NC 28557
(Town Commissioner)
Appendix 108

B. MEETING DATES
(1) Advisory Committee
November 19, 1990
January 28, 1991
January 29, 1991
March 4, 1991
March 18, 1991
April 22, 1991
May 2, 1991
May 20, 1991
(2) Public Meetings
January 28, 1991 Neighborhood Planning Areas
(Attendance: 16 citizens)
January 29, 1991 Neighborhood Planning Areas
(Attendance: 10 citizens)
June 20, 1991 Planning Board
July 25, 1991 Town Council
(3) Public Hearing
November 26, 1991
(4) Meetings with Civic Groups
C. COPIES OF PRESS RELEASES, NOTICES, ETC.
Appendix
109

City%starts
land -use
plan work -
Morehead City is in the process of
updating its land -use pia», a coopera-
tive project involving the city and
CoasW Aria Matrsgenent Act
(CAMA) officials.
Ilse city is Finuired by CAMA to
update the plant every fire years. Ttte
last update was in 1986.
The purpose of the apdate is to
evaluate the 1986 plan, address cur-
rent laud dcvel%nrrcnt iUues and
adopt policies that will enable the
city to guide Morcbeal City's devel-
opment. The plan will serve as the
basic policy stalctrrent concerning
hind use and land derclopn=L
The plan will be used by elected
officials in making decisions Effect-
ing the developrn d of the coma u-
nity. The plan will also be used by
state turd federal ptxmitling agencies
in tlxir rt;viesv of pmnit requests for
various types of development- .
CAMA, in its review of devekrp~
mutt peanuts, respires [bat proposed
(See Work Slants Pg. 3A)
Newspaper Article, Carteret County News Times
December 21, 1990
Work staris
(Coatlnued from Pg. !A)
deveioprnc,rt be consistent with the
latui-use plan. Development projects
�T using stave or fedcral funds and pro- -
jocts being undertaken by state and
fedcral agenxies tuust also be consis-
tent with the land -use plan.
Abe city planning dcparunent Is
s primarily:responsible for coorditrat-
4 ing the plan update171te city council
1 has eanpioyui a &Kmultani, Woolen
Co., of ltaacigh, to assist in prcixua-
o Lion of the Iarui-use plan update. Tbc
rt;ity council has also appointed an
11-nternlxs eununlitee of citizens to
save in an advisory role.
Tn addition to biput from the citi-
zen advisory committee, ibe city wiU
soel citizen participa0att by holding
a series ;of publle " mrctings. The
meetings, scheduled for January, will
be orgmized by neighborhood plan
ring arras.
The city. for the purpose of the
plan.. has been divlded into seven
planning neighborhoods. Infonnation
cat neighborbood moedngs • will be
available by the end of December.
-(knee a draft of the land -use plan
update is prepared, it will be pre-
sented to the planning board for its
review. A public hearing, tentatively
scheduled for June 1991.r will give
all citizcans as opportunity to com•-
[Hutt.
• For more infort atian, call Linda
Staab at the city ptanr ing dcpanoieu ,
726-5243. .
0

SENT BY:Xerox Teleccoier 7020 :10-14-91 :1.0:52AM 9197262267- 9198343589:= 3
CITY C
N 0 R T H C A A O L i N A = a
;K ' DALANTI3. Mayor Pro 7&1 708 ARENDELL ST. •a
C°°'""ffi0ni* P. 0. DRAWER AA
FLOYD M. CHADWICK. 4R. MOREHM CITY. NC 28667
PAUL W. CORDOVA TEL (0101 72Q.86ad DAVID A. WALKER
P. H.
IEEA FAX [phone] Q:y �^a0N
W. QPublic Notice, Carteret County News Times
Published January 23 and 27, 1991
' NOTICE OF Z'EIGIDORHOCD ,LTETI!,GS
TOWN OF MOP.MAD CIiY
Monday, January 28, 1991
Tuesday., January 29, 1991
Council Chambers, Municipal. Building
Soutiz Eighth Street
' 7:00 p.m.
t Are you interested in helping Morehead City develop policies for growth
and land development for the next five years? If so, please plan to attend
one of the neighborhood meetings listed above.. The purpose of these meetings
' is to receive input from property owners in the various neighborhoods on land
use issues whicZ are and *rill be affecting each individual neighborhood over
the ne.� five year planning period. r"=ples of land use issues include, but
are not limited to: high-rise development, -port development, encroachment of
business into neighborhood districts, transportation issues, water quality
issues, etc. Information gathered during t'nese meetings will be used in the
1991 Morehead City CA14A Land Use Plan Update. The map below reflects the
' boundaries of each neighborhood district.
Neighborhoods 1, 2, 3 and 4 will be discussed during the Monday, Janua_y 28,
' 1991, meeting.
Neighborhoods 5, 6 and 7 Will be discussed during the Tuesday, laanuary 29,
1991, meeting. -
If you will be unable to attend the meetings, and would like ;.o cc=eu: on
land use issues, please contact the Morehead City Planning Department at (9'9)
726-5243.
n
11
' EOEIP Equal Opportunity Employer Provider
Appendix 111

' SENT BY:Xerox Teiecopier 7020 :10-14-91 :10:51AM : 9197252267-
9198343589:4 2
Public Notice, Carteret County News Times, June 19, 1991
MOREHEAD CITY..
REVIEW GF.DRA�',-.-1991.� LAMA
LAND -USE: LAN
Tne Towrj,�o , lJlorehead,,Qlt has completed.
he. 0teliminary;:draft .of the 1991 CAMA
w�+,
Land:Use: P�( rt�7hi":document is available
for public inspection. at the Planning Office
or the Office'"of -the City Clerk, 706 Arendeil'
Street:` Verbai'` and'`'written . comments con-
cerning 'the 'preliminary draft 1991 LAMA
Land. Use_Plan.W'4ll be' accepted through July
25,
The do.curhe' nt-:.Will be. --'reviewed by the
=tilo:refea- :City Planning" Board June 20
`'7991; .:Y d'b the`6 Council on,:July'`25
.•,. :._ :, fir... Y: n•,
1991T:`;;Bath meetings:: are;open to the public.
IAppendix
112

APPENDIX BB
CITIZEN SURVEY
A. SURVEY ANALYSIS
As 'plan,
part of the public participation the Town of
Morehead City's Land Use Plan Update Committee developed a
survey which addressed land use and development issues facing
'
Morehead City over the next five to ten years. Respondents
were asked to check whether they strongly agreed, agreed,
disagreed, strongly disagreed or had no opinion with 31
'
statements. In addition, the respondents were asked to
identify in which neighborhood they lived and what they felt
were the five most important land use issues facing the Town.
The survey was distributed to various civic organizations,
including the Rotary, Kiwanis, Chamber of Commerce, Women at
Work, 6-W Club, Masons and Port Committee. The survey was
also distributed at the front desk of City Hall to those
residents who paid their water bill in Additionally,
person.
the Town took out a three-quarter page advertisement which
contained the entire survey.
A total of two hundred and fifteen responses were
received. Of this total, one hundred and sixty-two
respondents actually lived in the Morehead City Planning
'
Area. This totals 1.5 percent of the 1991 estimated
population of the planning area. The majority of those
responding lived in Neighborhoods 5, 6 and 7. Neighborhood 3
had the least number of respondents.
The purpose of the survey was to acheive a greater
'
amount of public participation during the update process,
and, also, to educate the public about land use issues in
Morehead City. Although the response was lighter than the
Town would have liked, it is felt that the purposes have been
met.
Questions in the survey addressed such issues as the
'
environment, public water access, historic preservation, the
downtown area, commercial development, multi -family housing,
zoning issues, the port and industrial development.
'
The results of the survey indicated that 95 percent of
those who responded stated that the quality of the local
environment was a prime concern. The answers revealed that
'
eighty-four percent (84%) of those surveyed wanted to see
Sugarloaf Island stay in its natural state. However, when
asked about other environmental issues, the responses were
'
not as certain. When asked about dredging Calico Creek (a
primary nursery area) and whether or not marinas should be
encouraged, the answers varied. Forty eight percent (48%) of
'
the respondents supported dredging Calico Creek while thirty
three percent (33%) disagreed with supporting the dredging
Appendix 113

project. Forty seven percent (47%) of the responses received
indicated that they felt that marinas should be encouraged in
Morehead City while forty-four percent (44%) disagreed.
' Most of the respondents (53%) felt that Morehead City
did not have a sufficient number of parks or public water
accesses. It was also felt by the majority (70%) that the
' street and alley ends should remain open for public use.
Many respondents (72%) supported the idea of bicycle trails.
The survey asked how people felt about historical
'
preservation. Ninety-one percent (91%) of the respondents
thought that preserving historical structures was a good
'
idea, although many asked if Morehead City had any
"historical structures".
There were a number of questions in the survey which
'
referred to the downtown area. For instance, is traffic and
parking a problem in the downtown area? Fifty-four percent
(54%) of those who responded did not think that traffic was a
problem downtown, however, forty-four percent (44%) felt that
there was a parking problem. When asked if downtown
revitalization should be a priority, seventy-five percent
(75%) agreed. The respondents also thought that a local
'
bus/trolley should be encouraged by a wide margin (74%).
Sixty-eight percent (68%) of those answering the survey
thought that Morehead City was adequately served by the
'
existing retail establishment. When asked if commercial
development should be limited, fifty percent (50%) thought it
should while forty-three percent (43%) thought it should not.
Realizing that there are a number of vacant structures
located in commercially zoned areas, a question was asked to
find out people's views on allowing flexibility of Town
'
regulations to encourage the use of the vacant structures.
Overwhelmingly, (84%) of the respondents thought that this
should be allowed. When asked if the buffering between
commercial and residential uses was adequate, forty-six
'
percent (46%) of those responding thought that it was.
Thirty-five percent (35%) thought that the buffering
requirement should be stricter.
The survey revealed that forty-eight percent (48%) of
those surveyed disagreed that multi -family development should
be encouraged in Morehead City. Thirty-six percent (36%)
'
thought that multi -family development should be encouraged.
The survey split the respondents when asked if highrise
development should be encouraged if water access and views
were not obstructed. Forty-six percent (46%) agreed with the
statement while forty-seven percent (47%) disagreed. Almost
everyone who responded (79%) thought that every type of use,
'
including commercial and industrial, should have some type of
height limitations.
' Support for the port was great as evidenced by the
eighty-seven percent (87%) of the respondents who agreed that
Appendix 114

' Morehead City should continue supporting its growth. Eighty-
three percent (83%) of the responses were in favor of
encouraging light industry.
' The respondents were split when asked if they were happy
with the way Morehead City land use planning is practiced.
Thirty-four percent (34%) agreed with the statement while
' thirty-five percent (35%) disagreed. The responses indicated
that most people (55%) agreed that zoning regulations did
protect their property values. Ninety-five percent (95%) of
' the respondents thought that there needed to be more
cooperation between Carteret County and towns located within
the County.
' As part of the survey, respondents were asked to list
the top five goals they felt Morehead City should have
concerning development over the next five (5) years. A.
review of all the responses received from people living in
the Morehead City Planning Area revealed that downtown
improvements and revitalization was the prime concern. The
other four highest goals were: improvement of traffic flow
and control; water and sewer upgrading which includes working
with the County in developing a countywide water/sewer
system; encouraging light industry and tourism; and improving
the quality of the environment.
Downtown revitalization and improvement was the prime
' concern of those who responded to the survey. A number of
comments were received pertaining to this issue. Many people
want to see the continuation of the waterfront improvements.
' Also, there were comments suggesting that beautification of
the downtown area would be beneficial, as well as linking
north side of Arendell Street with the waterfront area. Many
respondents want to see flexibility in the zoning Ordinance
' which would allow housing and the reuse of vacant structures
downtown.
' Traffic flow and control was also a major concern. Many
comments were received concerning the congestion on Highway
70, west of the Bridges Street intersection. A number of
respondents voiced concern over the number of curb cuts which
have been allowed on the highway.
A third major goal for development was the present water
and sewer situation. Comments were received indicating that
Morehead City should work with the County in developing some
type of countywide water/sewer system. It was also stated
' that Morehead City should work to get the waste treatment
plant pipe out of Calico Creek.
Encouraging light industry and tourism was a major goal
' echoed throughout all the responses received from the
Morehead City Planning Area. People wanted to see better
jobs for the population, providing year-round employment,
' higher wages and benefits.
Appendix 115

' The last goal which made the top five was preserving the
environment. Maintaining and improving water quality as well
as limiting shoreline development to residential were two of
the comments received. Encouraging citywide recycling was
also supported.
' The results of this survey were used in establishing the
policy statements contained within this document. The
statistics used in this analysis do not include the responses
received from people who live out of Morehead City's Planning
' Area.
Appendix 116

'
APPENDIX BB
(Continued)
'
B. COPY OF SURVEY INSTRUMENT
TOWN OF MOREHEAD CITY
'
1991 LAND USE PLAN UPDATE CITIZEN SURVEY
'
Please answer the following questions by marking the
which best reflects your opinion. This questionnaire
box
is
designed to sample the public's opinions on
the future
direction of Morehead City. Any questions should
be directed
- -
- - - to the Morehead -City Planning Department
at-(919)-726_5243.-
Strongly
No
Strongly
'
Agree Agree
Opinion
Disagree
Disagree
1.
I am happy with Morehead City
and the land use planning as
it is practiced currently. 2% 32%
30%
28%
7%
2.
The Zoning regulations protect
'
my property values. 7% 48%
21%
15%
5%
3.
Morehead City has a sufficient
'
number of City parks and pub-
lic water accesses. 5.5% 28%
4%
43%
20%
4.
Bike trails would be an asset
to Morehead City which would
'
be utilized. 34% 39%
15%
8%
3%
5.
All street and alley ends
should remain open for public
use. 37% 33%
11%
15%
4%
'
6.
Preservation of historic struc-
tures should be encouraged. 40% 51%
6%
3%
0%
7.
The quality of the local envir-
'
onment in the future is a prime
concern to me. 68% 27%
2%
1%
0%
'
8.
I would support a voluntary
recycling program. 59% 39%
.5%
.5%
.5%
9.
Sugarloaf Island should remain
'
in its natural state. 65% 19%
10%
5%
2%
'
10.
I support the dredging of
Calico Creek.
22% 27%
16%
14%
19%
11.
Marinas should be encouraged
'
in Morehead City. 16% 31%
8%
25%
19%
'2.
Morehead City should encourage
'
growth and development. 46% 45%
5%
14%
8%
117
Appendix

Strongly
No
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Opinion
Disagree
Disagree
_3.
Revitalization and beautifica-
tion of the downtown should
be a top priority.
37%
38%
6%
12%
6%
14.
Traffic is a problem downtown.
11%
21%
9%
4416
13%
15.
Parking is a problem downtown.
14%
30%
8%
21%
8%
16.
A local bus/trolley or other
transit system should be
encouraged.
44%
30%
20%
22%
9%
17.
The community is adequately
served by the existing retail
establishments.
16%
52%
10%
17%
5%
18.
Commercial development should
be limited.
17%
33%
7%
33%
10%
19.
Town regulations should be flex-
ible and encourage the use of
vacant structures.
31%
5416
8%
4%
2%
20.
The buffering between businesses
and residential areas is ade-
quate.
5%
41%
17%
22%
13%
21.
Morehead City should encour-
age multifamily housing
(condos, apartments, etc.)
5%
31%
15%
31%
17%
22.
Highrise development should
be continued provided it does
not obstruct water access and
views.
14%
32%
7%
24%
23%
23.
All structures should have
height limitations. (Some
commercial and industrial
structures do not have height
limitations.)
38%
41%
7%
9%
4%
24.
Morehead City should extend
its zoning regulations into
Crab Point to Newport River.
21%
46%
20%
4%
9%
25.
Tourism is vital to Morehead
City and should be promoted.
48%
42%
3%
3%
4%
26.
The State Port is an important
facility to Morehead City and
the City should continue
supporting its growth.
52%
35%
2%
4%
6%'
Appendix 118

Strongly
No
Strongly
27.
Light industrial should be
Agree
Agree Opinion
Disagree
Disagree
encouraged in Morehead City.
39%
44%
5%
7%
4%
28.
Morehead City should limit
'
the number of new driveways
and streets entering Hwy 70,
to the maximum extend possible.
36%
41%
11%
9%
3%
'
29.
The sign ordinance is too
strict.
5%
5%
27%
31%
31%
30.
There should be more coopera-
tion between the municipalities
in the County in planning for
future growth.
52%
43%
3%
1%
.5%
31.
Overall, the quality of life
in Morehead City is good.
27%
64%
3%
5%
1%
'
Please list the top five goals .you
feel
Morehead
City should
have concerning development in
the next
five (5)
years.
1.
2.
'
3.
4.
5.
- - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - -
- - - - -
- - -
- - - -
- - - - -
Additional
comments:
Appendix
119

a.
b.
C.
d.
Based on the attached map, please indicate in which neighborhood
you live.
1. Neighborhood 1 5. Neighborhood 5
2. Neighborhood 2 6. Neighborhood 6
3. Neighborhood 3 7. Neighborhood 7
4. Neighborhood 4
I own the following type of property:
1. Developed/built upon
2. Undeveloped/vacant
3. Both developed and undeveloped
4. None.
I can be best described as a:
1. year round resident property owner
2. year round resident renter
3. non-resident property owner
4. part-time property owner
5. business owner
6. business leasee
7. other
My age group is:
1) under 18 0
2) 18-34 15
3) 35-49 58
4) 50-64 49
5) over 64. 31
Appendix
120

'
APPENDIX. BB
(Continued)
C.
SURVEY RESULTS
RESULTS
OF LAND USE PLAN UPDATE
SURVEY
'
AS
OF MAY 1, 1991
'
1
2
3
4
5
6 7 M Total
afOthers
1.
SA
11
:0
..0
..0
"1
4.1 _.0 '1
4
2
0
A
12
4
1
1
15
10 9 0
52_
32
21
NO
4
8
3
4
10
12 ::2
48
30
23
.i5
D
5
4
2
6
14
8 5 2
46
28
7
SD
0
2
0
2
5
2 1 0
12
7
2
2.
SA
2
0
0
1
4
2 2 1
12.
7
0
A
9
8
5
6
27
17 4 11
77
48
26
NO
5
5
0
3
7
7 7 0
34
21
19
4
D
5
1
3
5
4 0 3
25
15
77
SD
1
1
0
0
2
3 1 0
8,
5
1
3.
SA
2
2
1
0
2
0 2 0
9
5.5
0
'
A
6
5
2
3
12
12 3 3
46
28
17
NO
1
2
0
0
3
1 0 0
7
4
9
'
D
11
6
3
6
21
13 10 0
70
43
19
'
SD
2
3
0
4
7
7 4 2
32
20
8
4.
SA
5
4
2
6
19
12 5 2
_55
34
20
A
10
8
4
6
16
11 7 1
63
39
20
NO
3
2
0
1
5
7 7 0
25
15
9
D
1
3
0
0
4
3 0 2
13
8
5
SD
2
1
0
0
1
0 1 0
.5;
3
:0
'
S.
SA
15
8
2
5
8
14 5 3
60
37
13
1
A
5
3
3
3
18..
12 9 0
53
33
26
NO
1
2
0
2
9
2 2 0
18
11
6
'
D
1
3
1
2
8
4 4 2
25
15
6
SD
0
2
0
1
2
1 0 0
6
4
2
1,
i
Appendix
-
121

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
M
Total.
p
Others
6.
SA
15
:.7
1
6
15
13
4
4
65
40
22
A
7
10
4
7
23
17
14
1
83
51
26
NO
0
1
0
0
5
3
1
0
10
6
5
D
0
0
1
0
3
0
1
0
5
3
0
SD
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7.
SA
19
10
2
12
28
22
13
5
111
68
29
A
3
6
4
1
14
10
6
0
44
27
24
NO
0
2
0
0
1
1
0
0
4
2
0
D
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
2
1
0
SD
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8.
SA
15
10
1
10
25
20
13
2
96
59
24
A
7
8
4
2
20
13
6
3
63
39
25
NO
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
.5
4
D
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
.5
0
SD
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
.5
0
9.
SA
18
12
1
11
23
23
13
4
105
65
29
A
1
3
1
1
12
7
5
0
30
19
11
NO
1
0
1
1
7
3
2
1
16
10
11
D
0
2
3
0
3
0
0
0
8
5
0
SD
2
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
4
2
2
10.
SA
6
3
2
2
10
3-
7
2
35
22
13
A
4
5
2
3
14
11
5
0
44
27
19
NO
1
6
1
3
6
9
4
0
26
16
13
D
4
2
1
3
8
5
0
0
23
14
4
SD
7
2
0
2
7
5
4
3
30
19
4
Appendix 122

'
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
M
Total
p
Others
'
11.
SA
5
1
1
1
8
3
7
1
26
16
11
A
6
7
3
1
19
10
3
1
50
31
25
NO
0
1
0
4
1
4
3
0
13
8
9
D
2
4
1
4
11
10
5
3
40
25
7
'
SD
9
5
1
.3
6
6
1
0
31
19
1
12.
SA
7
4
1
3
18
6
3
2
75
46
20
'
A
7
7
.5
4
19
16
15
0
73
45
22
1
NO
1
3
0
1
1
2
1
0
9
5
3
D
6
3
0
3
4
3
1
3
23
14
1
'
SD
1
1
0
2
3
6
0
0
13
8
1
13.
SA
9
7
0
4
19
14
5
3
61
37
17
'
A
8
4
3
5
17
15
10
0
62
38
31
'
NO
0
0
1
1
6
0
1
0
9
6
4
D
3
4
1
3
2
3
4
0
20
12
0
'
SD
2
3
1
0
1
1
0
2
10
6
0
14.
SA
2
2
0
3
3
5
3
0
18
11
6
'
A
1
8
1
3
14
7
0
0
34
21
18
'
No
3
2
0
1
4
1
3
0
14
9
6
D
12
4
3
2
20
18
10
2
71
44
22
'
SD
4
2
1
4
3
2
2
3
21
13
1
15.
SA
1
3
0
4
4
7
2
2
23.'
14
7
'
A
4
7
4
2
16
11
5
0
49
30 _
23
NO
1
1
0
0
5
3
3
0
13
8
4
D
13
5
1
5
19
10
8
3
64
21
18
'
SD
3
2
1
2
1
2
2
0
13
8
1
'
Appendix
123

'
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
M
Total.
p
Others
16.
SA
5
4
0
2
12
5•
4
0
72
44
6
'
6
4
6
8
49
A
2
10
12
1
30
19
110
4
6
0
1
10
5
5
1
32
20
15
D
4
1
2
3
10
9
3
3
35
22
6
SD
3
3
2
1
3
2
0
0
14
9
6
17.
SA
0
2
1
3
10
4
4
2
26
16
3
t
25
A
16
8
5
4
17
23
9
2
84
52
'
NO
2
4
o
2
4
1
3
1
17
10
6
D
2
4
o
3
12
2
4
o
27
17
19
SD
2
0
0
1
2
3
0
0
8
5
0
18.
SA
2
4
1
4
7
7
0
2
27
17
1
'
12
A
10
6
1
5
15
9
8
o
54
33
NO
1
3
0
1
0
2
4
o
11
7
8
D
9
3
3
13
17
11
5
..2
53
33
23
SD
0
2
1
0
6
4
3
-1
17
10
9
19.
SA
10
6
2
'4
12
8
6
.'2
50
31
15
34
A
9
10
3
6
27
22
10
1
88
54
NO
2
1
0
1
1
3
3
2
13
8
4
D
0
0
1
1
4
0
1
0
7
4
0
'
SD
1
1
0
1
1
0
0
0
4
2
0
20.
SA
0
0
1
1
1
4
1
0
8
5
2
'
A
12
8
3
3
15
12
13
2
66
41
24
'
NO
2
3
1
2
8
5
4
2
27
17
14
D
:5
5
0
3
13
9
1
0
36
22
11
1
SD
3
2
1
4
6
3
1
1
21
13
1
'
Appendix
124

I
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
M
Total.
_p
Others
21.
SA
0
0
1
0
3
2
2
0
8
5
5
A
3
5
2
3
20
12
0
0
51
31
20
NO
4
1
1
3
6
5
4
0
24
15
18
D
9
7
1
3
12
11
7
1
50
31
7
SD
6
5
1
4
4
3
1
4
28
17
3
22.
SA
4
1
2
1
7
4
2
1
22
14
8
A
6
4
3::
3
14
14
8
0
52
32
23
NO
1
2
0
0
6
2
1
0
12
7
9
D
4
4
0
5
11
10
5
0
39
24
9
SD
7
7
1
4
7
3
4
4
37
23
2
23.
SA.
11
10
2
8
12
11
6
1
61
38
7
A
6
7
1
5
19
16
10
3
67
41
30
NO
1
0
0
0
6
3
1
1
12
7
9
D
3
1
1
0
6
2
2
0
15
9
4
SD
1
0
2_,.
0
2
1
1
0
7
4
2
24.
SA
3
3
0
5
10
9
4
0
34
21
9
A
12
G
2
5
25
13
10
1
74
46
26
NO
3
6
0
3
8
8
2
3
33
20
13
D
1
1
2
0
1
1
0
0
6
4
3
SD
3
2
2
0
1
2
3
1
14
9
1
25.
SA
9
8
3
7
24
17
6
3
77--
48
35
A
11
6
2
3
18
15
11
2
68
42
18
NO
0
2::
0
1
1
0
1
0
5
3
0
D
0
0
0
1
21
1
0
5
3
0
SD
2
2
1
1
0
0
1
0
7
4
O
' Appendix
125

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 M Total.. p Others
26.
SA
8
9
4
7
26
17
10
3
84
52
38
A
10
5
1
5
14
13
9
0
57
35
13
NO
0
2
1
0
0
0
0
0
3
2
1
D
2
1
0
0
1
1
0
2
7
4
0
SD
2
1
0
1
4
1
1
0
10
6
0
27.
SA
7
6
3
5
20
11
9
2
63
39
19
A
6
10
2
4
23
17
8
1
71
44
26
NO
3
1
0
2
1
2
0
0
9
5
8
D
3
0
1
1
0
2
3
2
12
7
0
SD
3
1
0
1
1
1
0
0
7
4
0
28.
SA
9
6
1
9
16
9
6
3
59
36
15
A
12
7
3
2
18
17
7
0
66
41
22
NO
0
3
1
2
7
2
3
0
18
11
13
D
'1
2
1
0
2
3
3
2
14
9
1
SD
0
0
0
0
2
2
1
0
5
3
2
29.
SA
0
0
2
1
4
0
2
0
9
5
4
A
1
1
0
0
3
1
2
1
9
5
7
NO
6
4
2
2
13
9
6
2
44.
27
24
D
7
7
2
2
14
14
4
0
50
31
10
SD
8
6
0
8
11
9
6
2
50
31
8
30.
SA`
11
10:
0
7
25
17
11
3
84
52
23
A
9
8
6
6
16
16
.7
2:'
70
43
21
NO
1
0
0
0
2
0
2
0
5
3
9
D
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
2
1
0
SD
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
.5
0
Appendix
126

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
M
Total.
p
Others
31. SA
8
5
1
4
9
8
5.
3
43
27
6
A
10
10
4
7
33
23
15
2
104
64
34
NO
1
2
0
0
2
0
0
0
5
3
9
D
2
1
1
1
1
2
0
0
8
5
3
SD
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
2
1
1
AGES 1
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
2
1
2
-2
1
2
2
24
3
3
1
38
23
3
10
9
2
5
14
7
8
0
55
34
4
5
1
1
4
1
15
5
4
36
22
5
, 5
7
1
2
41
8
4
0
68
42
Appendix 127

APPENDIX CC
SUMMARY OF
STORM HAZARD MITIGATION AND
POST -DISASTER RECONSTRUCTION PLAN POLICIES
The following pages are reproduced from the Storm Hazard Mitigation and Post -Disaster
Recovery Plan which was prepared by George Eichler and Associates and Satilla Planning, Inc.
in 1984:
• Pages 8-10 Recommended Hazard Mitigation Policies
• Pages 11-22 Post -Disaster Reconstruction Plan
Appendix
128

STORM HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
AND
POST -DISASTER RECONSTRUCTION PLAN
Prepared for
THE TOWN OF MOREHEAD CITY, NORTH CAROLINA
By:
George Eichler & Associates
and
Satilla Planning, Inc.
June 1, 1984
The preparation of this report was financed in part
through a grant provided by the North Carolina Coastal Man-
agement 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, N.O.A.A.
Appendix
129

G. Recommended Hazard Mitigation Policies
The entire Town of Morehead City is susceptible to
significant storm damage from a hurricane or a storm of
similar magnitude. About one-half of the Town's planning area
is located in AEC's or in areas susceptible to flooding
associated with the 100-year storm. However, most of the
Town's vacant land that is available for development is above
the 100-year flood level. The entire town is susceptible to
wind damage. In general, the Town's existing mitigation
N
130 --

policies meet the requirements for hazard mitigation-. planning
-
outlined in Before the Storm. Specificallv:
'
1. The Town's policies support and are consistent with State
policies and regulations for development in Areas of
Environmental Concern.
'
2. All new development must conform with the provisions of
the N.C. Building Code.
'
3. The Town's floodplain development policies conform with
all Federal and State requirements.
'
4. The Town does a good job of controlling mobile home
developments in order to minimize hazard damages. Mobile
homes are restricted to a specific district and must conform
'
with elevation and other requirements.
5. Subdivisions must be designed to minimize flood damage.
'
The general conclusion is that Morehead City is already
doing a good job to mitigate future storm damages, and that
the Town's policies meet both the requirements and
'
philosophical objectives delineated in Before the Storm.
Further, Morehead City does not face the threat of extensive
property destruction from hurricanes or the phenomenal growth
rate being experiened by Carteret County's Bogue Banks
communities. The Town's inland location affords it some
protection from the direct assault of a hurricane and vast
majority of the Town's housing stock is located above the 100-
year flood plain.
The only recommended modification of the Town's policies
concerns the non -conforming uses and structures section of
'
the Zoning Ordinance. First, Section 4-2, Repairs and
Maintenance, should be amended to include non -conforming
structures. Secondly, the non -conforming structures Section
(4-3) should be amended to delete reference to 75 percent of
the assessed value in determining at which point of
destruction a non -conforming structure cannot be re -built.
The reference to 50 percent of replacement value or cost is
the recommended determining factor. If such a structure is
damaged beyond this point, it should only be rebuilt if it is
brought into compliance with all applicable provisions of the
'
Zoning Ordinance, Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance and the
N.C. Building Code. Finally, the non -conforming use
Section(4-3) should be amended to prohibit continuance or
rebuilding if the structure is damaged beyond 50 percent of
its replacement value. Again, continuance after such damage
should only be allowed if all applicable regulations can then
'
be met. To assist in making these revisions, the definitions
Section (Two) should be amended to include a definition for
"non -conforming structures".
IAppendix 9 131

The rationale behind these recommended changes is that
_ if a building is destroyed that did not formerly comply with .
local codes, it should not be rebuilt unless it does meet all
existing requirements.
10
Appendix
132

U
III. MOREHEAD CITY POST -DISASTER RECONSTRUCTION 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, procedures, 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:
o The emergencv period is the reconstruction phase
' immediately after a storm. The emphasis is on re-
storing public health and safety, assessing the
nature and extent of storm damage, and qualifying
for and obtaining whatever federal and state as-
sistance might be available.
o The restoration period covers the weeks and months
t following a storm disaster. The emphasis during
this period is on restoring community facilities,
utilities, essential businesses, etc. so that
the community can once again function in a normal
manner.
'
o 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 damages 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 available. The
'
requirements are generally delineated in the Disaster Relief
Act of 1974 (P.L. 93-288) which authorizesa 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 the
County, and the nature and extent of damage is re-
ported to the North Carolina Division of Emergency
' Management (DEM).
1 Appendix 11
133

3. DEM compiles local data and makes recommendations
'
to the Governor concerning state actions.
4'. The Governor may request a Presidential declaration
'
of "emergency" or "major disaster". A Presidential
declaration 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 de—
claration. 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.
Federal disaster assistance programs previously provided
aid for communities to rebuild in the same way as existed
before the disaster occurred. This policy tended to foster
recurring mistakes. However, recent federal policy has
started to change the emphasis of disaster assistance
programs. Specifically,
o Executive Order 1198 (Floodplain Management) directs
all federal agencies to avoid either directly or in—
directly supporting future unwise development in
floodplains (e.g. through sewer grants in locations
that foster floodplain development).
o Section 406 of the Disaster Relief Act can require
communities, as a prerequisite for federal disaster
assistance, to take specific actions to mitigate
future flood losses.
'
The Town has been provided a comprehensive listing of
the Federal Disaster Assistance Programs that may be
available following a major storm. The programs fall into the
categories of Temporary Housing, Individual Assistance and
'
Assistance to Local and State Governments. The listing is
comprehensive and therefore all the programs listed may not
be applicable to Morehead City.
The remainder of this chapter presents recommended
recovery procedures in the general sequence of response by
the Town. While damage assessment (Sections B and C) will be
the first operations conducted by the Town after a disaster,
it should be realized that the recommended recovery
operations (Section D) will begin simultaneously. The
'
remainder of this chapter is, therefore, organized as
follows:
12
1 Appendix 134

1) Procedures that Morehead City should follow to carry
out its damage assessment program to meet all
federal and state requirements including organi-
zation of the damage assessment team and recom-
mended damage assessment procedures.
2) An overall organizational framework for restoration
operations after the emergency period.
3) Replacement/Reconstruction policies that the Town
should adopt to insure that future development that
does occur in local hazard areas is constructed in
a manner consistent with sound land use planning,
public safety considerations, and existing and evol-
ving federal and state policy.
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 description of the repairs (and
costs) that will be needed to rebuild each structure.
Following is a listing of Morehead City personnel available
to assume these responsibilities.
Administrative
' City Manager
2 Building Inspectors
' Town Officials
1 Mayor
S Council Members
Public Works
1 Director
Public Utilities
1 Director
1 Labor Supervisor
Rescue
1 Captain
20 Volunteers
Police
1 Police Chief
14 Officers
Fire
1 Chief
12 Engineers
20 Volunteers
Streets & Sanitation
1 Superintendent
1 Labor Supervisor
Recreation
1 Director
The Chief Building Inspector should head the Damage
Assessment Team. Other members of the team should consist of
the Fire Chief, volunteers recruited from the community, and
I
13
Appendix 135

' the other Building
Inspector. The Building Inspectors, Fire
Chief and volunteers must be recruited, organized and trained
' prior to a storm occurrence. There should also be back-ups or
alternates to ensure the availability of adequate -resources.
The suggested make-up of the Morehead City Damage
Assessment Team is as follows:
' o Building Inspector (Team Chief)
o Fire Chief
o Building Inspector
o Local Property Appraiser (MAI or qualified broker) #
o Building Contractor #
o Architect *
' # Community Volunteer
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 Requirements
'
Damage assessment is defined as a rapid means of
determining a realistic estimate of the amount of damage
caused by a natural or man-made 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 prior to deployment. 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.
14
Appendix
136

' Damaged struc
tures ctures should be classified in accordance
with the suggested State guidelines as follows:
' o Destroyed (repairs would cost more than 80 percent
of value).
o Major (repairs would cost more than 30 percent of
the value).
o Minor would
(repairs o ld cost less than 30 percent of
the value, but the structure is currently unin-
habitable).
o Habitable (some minor damage, with repairs less than
' 15 percent of the value).
It will be necessary to thoroughly document each
' assessment. In many cases, street signs, house addresses 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 Clerk.
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:
o A set of property tax maps identical to those
' utilized by the damage assessment field team.
o 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 es-
' sence, it is recommended that the Town immediately
commence a project listing the property values of
existing structures 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 1 to 2 month period. The infor-
mation will prove invaluable if a storm disaster
does occur. This set of tax maps should be updated
annually prior to the hurricane season.
15
Appendix.
137

'
Additionally, the average value of flood insurance
coverage that is carried by program participants needs to be
determined. County officials recently polled local mortgage
'
institutions to determine the average flood insurance policy
coverage and the estimated number of property owners in flood
hazard areas that carry the insurance. The results of this
May, 1984 survey were that 75% of the homeowners with
mortgaged property in the floodplain have 75% to 80%
coverage. Overall, it was estimated that only 10%-15% of all
homes in the flood plain have insurance covering 75%-80% of
-the improvements. The Town should verify these estimates and
update this information annually before the hurricane season.
'
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.
2. The value of each damaged structure should be
obtained from the marked set of Town tax maps and
'
multipled by the following percentages for approp-
riate damage classification category.
' o Destroyed - 100%
o Major Damage - 50%
o Minor Damage (uninhabitable) - 25%
o 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.
Appendix 16 138

'
D. Organization of Recovery Operations
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 Morehead City, the Mayor and
'
Town Council should assume the responsibilities of such a
Task Force with the City Manager directing day-to-day
operations based on the policy guidance received from the
'
Mayor and Town Council. The following must be accomplished:
1. Establishing reentry procedures for secured areas
'
such as the waterfront and areas that were
evacuated.
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 Reports.
'
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 undertaken by private
utility companies.
10. Undertaking repair and restoration of essential
public facilities and services in accordance with
priorities developed through the situation eval-
uations.
' 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 reconstruction needs will not be known until
17
Appendix
139

' after a storm hits and the magnitude of the damage can be
g g
assessed. The following sequence of activities and schedule
is submitted as a guide which should be reconsidered by the
Mayor and Town Council and revised as necessary after the
damage assessment activities are completed.
Activity Time Frame
1. Complete Initial Damage Immediately after storm
Assessment passes
' 2. Complete Second Phase Completed by second week
Damage Assessment after the storm
F
3. Prepare Summary of Re-
construction Needs
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
Completed one week after
damage second phase
is completed.
One week after second phase
damage assessment is
completed
Completed one week after
summary of reconstruction
needs is completed
As soon as possible
after disaster
7. Permitting of Recon- One week after second phase
struction Activities damage assessment is
for all Structures complete
Receiving Minor Damage
Not Included in Develop-
ment Moratorium Areas
8. Permitting of Recon-
struction Activities
for all Structures
Receiving Major Damage
Not Included in Develop-
ment Moratorium Areas
9. Initiate Assessment of
Existing Mitigation
Policies
10. Complete Re-evaluation
of Hazard Areas and Miti-
gation Policies in Areas
Subjected to Development
Moratorium
Two weeks after second
phase damage assessment is
complete
Two weeks after second
phase damage assessment is
complete
The length of the period
for conducting re-evalu-
ation and receiving input
from the State should not
exceed two months.
18
Appendix
140

Activity
Time Frames
11. Revise Mitigation Policies Two months after Temporary
and Development Standards Development Moratorium
for Areas Subjected to De- is imposed. (Subject to
velopment Moratorium and change based on circum-
Lift Development Moratorium stances encountered)
12. Permit New Development Upon suspension of any
temporary development
moratorium
E. Recommended Reconstruction Policies
All the following policies have been designed to be
1) considered and adopted by the Mayor and Council of
Morehead City prior to a storm; and 2) implemented, as
appropriate, after a storm occurs.
Reentry
1. Reentry of secured areas or evacuated areas by property
owners shall not be permitted until 1) the critical
damage assessment has been completed; 2) the Mayor
proclaims such areas of the Town safe to re-enter.
2. A list of Morehead City property owners and business
proprietors shall be maintained at the Emergency
Operations Center. Valid identification must be shown
in order to proceed into evacuated or secured areas.
Passes shall be issued and displayed at all times until
the State of Emergency is officially lifted.
Permitting
1. Building permits to restore structures located outside of
designated AEC areas that were previously built in con-
formance 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 re-
built to conform with the provisions of the North
Carolina Building Code, the Morehead City Zoning Ordin-
ance, and the Morehead City Floodplain Management Regu-
lations, and State regulations for development in
'
AEC's, if applicable.
3. All structures suffering minor damage as defined in the
1
Morehead City Damage Assessment Plan shall be permitted
to be rebuilt to their original state before the storm
condition.
19
Appendix
141

4. For all structures in designated AEC's 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, and the Morehead City Flood -
plain Management Regulations appeared adequate in mini-
mizing storm damages. For areas where the construction
and use requirements appear adequate, permits shall be
issued in accordance with permitting policies 1, 2 and
3. For AEC's where the construction and use require-
ments 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.
S. Permits shall not be issued in areas subject to a Tem-
porary Development Moratorium until such a moratorium
is lifted by the Mayor and Council.
Utility and Facility Reconstruction
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 con-
struction being certified by a'registered professional
engineer.
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 Morehead City will suffer
significant and serious damages should a major storm have 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
Morehead City, such a situation is most likely to occur along
the waterfront and in flooded areas.
11
20
i
Appendix
142

The Morehead City policy regarding the proclamation of
temporary development moratoriums shall be:
1. To determine for each AEC whether the provisions
of N.C. Building Code, the State Guidelines for
' Areas of Environmental Concern, and the Morehead
City Floodplain Management Regulations appeared
adequate in minimizing storm damages. For AEC's
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. After imposing a Temporary Development Moratorium
for an AEC, the Town of Morehead City shall request
that the Coastal Resources Commission conduct a
' special analysis for the Town and all other com—
munities so similar, in order to determine how
local regulations for those hazard areas, which are
' based on State and or Federal guidelines or require—
ments, should be improved or modified. A response
from the State within a reasonable time period as
' determined through negotiations should be requested.
3. The Temporary Building Moratorium in all AEC's shall
be lifted after local ordinances and regulations
have been revised after receiving recommendations
from the State or at the discretion of the Mayor
and Council if a response is not made within a
' reasonable period of time. In the latter case, recon—
struction shall be permitted in accordance with
existing regulations and requirements.
Wind Damage
' It is assumed that many structures constructed to
conform with the provisions of the North Carolina Building
Code will not be able to withstand the accompanying winds if
' a major hurricane hits the N.C. coast. It is stated in
Before the Storm that "the State Building Code, as it now
stands, falls short in adequately protecting buildings from
the damaging forces of hurricanes and other coastal storms.
' The Building Code Council, in seeking to maintain uniformity
of regulation across the state, has been resistant in the
past to allowing more stringent local standards. Another
' problem small coastal communities are likely to face is a
lack of fiscal and staff resources to sponsor the engineering
and architectural studies that the Building Code Council
' requires to justify any local variations to the Code."
While Morehead City has no technical studies to indicate
that the provisions of the Code are inadequate as they effect
' the Town, the Town should have some flexibility in imposing
stricter standards if it desires. This is a problem that the
21
' Appendix
143

' Coastal Resources Commission must face if it expects local
communities to take the initiative in developing effective
storm mitigation programs. The Town policy shall be to
' request the Coastal Resources Commission to carefully assess
this problem which is common to all coastal communities.
1
n
1 Appendix 22 144