CAMA Land Use Plan-2010

f
LAMA Land Use Plan
as certified by the Coastal Resources Commission on July 15, 2010
Prepared by: Cape Fear Council of Governments
A&UXE FEAR
COUNCIL Or G(ri't7 %MDrrM

Town of Sunset Beach
2010 CAMA Land Use Plan Update
_i'-,WN
I
as certified by the Coastal Resources Commission on July 15, 2010
Funding Acknowledgement
The preparation of this document 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.

The Town of Sunset Beach 2010 Land Use Plan Update
Town of Sunset Beach
700 Sunset Boulevard North
Sunset Beach, NC 28468-4337
Ph: 910-579-6297 Fax: [phone]
http://www.sunsetbeachnc.gov/
Town Council
Ronald Klein, Mayor
Lou Devita. Mayor Pro -Tern
Bob Bobinski
Karen Joseph
Carol Scott
Wilson Sherill
PlanningBoard
oard
William McDonald, Chairman
Russell Allen, Vice Chairperson
Al Siebert
Leon August
Sybil Kesterson
Town Administrator
Gary Parker
gparker(iDatmc.net
Town Attorney
Michael Isenberg
Town Clerk
Kim Cochran

North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
http://www.nccoastalmanag�ement.net/
Wilmington District
Serves Brunswick, New Hanover and Pender counties,
Onslow County south of the New River, and Topsail Island
District Manager
Jim Gregson
[e-mail]
District Planner
Mike Christenbury
[e-mail]
CAPE FEAR
COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS
Technical Assistance Provided By:
Cape Fear Council of Governments
1480 Harbour Drive
Wilmington, NC 28401
Ph: 910-395-4553 Fax: [phone]
www.capefearcofz.org
Scott Logel, AICP
Regional Planner/GIS
[e-mail]
Penny Tysinger, Planner -in -Charge
[e-mail]

Table of Contents
Phase I of the CAMA Land Use Plan:
Section 1. Executive Summary, Introduction to CAMA, and Public Involvement
1.1 Executive Summary...................................................................................................................I-XII
1.2 Introduction to the CAMA Land Use Plan Process.............................................................1
1.3 The Function and Utility of the Land Use Plan.....................................................................2
1.4 The CAMA Permit Process..........................................................................................................2
What is an Area of Environmental Concern?...............................................................3
What are the types of CAMA Permits...........................................................................4
1.5 Public Involvement........................................................................................................................4
1.5.1 Citizen Participation Plan (Appendix I1)..................................................................5
Section 2. Sunset Beach Community Issues and Vision............................................................. 6
2.1 Growth Related Concerns and Goals..................................................................................6
2.2 Key Planning Issues Impacting Sunset Beach....................................................................6
2.2.1 General Issues Identified...............................................................................................7
2.2.2 Priority Issues and Goals..............................................................................................7
2.2.3 Key Goals of CAMA to be Integrated With Town Goals...................................7
2.3 Vision Statement.........................................................................................................................9
Section 3. Analysis of Trends and Emerging Conditions...........................................................10
Population, Housing and Economy
3.1. Population Characteristics and Trends..................................................................................10
3.1.1 Current Seasonal Population Estimates..................................................................15
Peak Seasonal Population Estimate by Housing Unit.......................................15
Peak Seasonal Population Estimate by Water Consumption .........................16
Day-trip.Visitors...........................................................................................................18
3.1.2 Population Projections................................................................................................18
3.2 Housing Characteristics and Trends in Sunset Beach.......................................................20
3.3 Local Economy...............................................................................................................................25
BrunswickCounty Economy....................................................................................................27
Section 4. Natural Systems Analysis................................................................................................ 29
4.1 Defining Natural Features and Areas of Environmental Concern (AEC) ....................30
1) Coastal Wetland AEC.............................................................................................................30
2) Inlet Hazard Area AEC..........................................................................................................30
3) Estuarine Waters and Estuarine Shoreline AEC............................................................31
4) Ocean Erodible Area Setback AEC.....................................................................................31
5) Un-vegetated Beach Area AEC............................................................................................32
6) High Hazard Flood Areas AEC............................................................................................32
7) Public Trust Areas AEC.........................................................................................................33
Table of Contents

4.1.1 Additional Natural Features and Environmental Conditions....................................34
8) Water Quality Classifications.............................................................................................34
Regulations over SA Waters................................................................................34
Sunset Beach Stormwater Quality Management and
DischargeControl..........................................................................................34
Water Quality in Sunset Beach............................................................................35
Soils with Septic Limitations..............................................................................36
9) Special Flood Hazard Areas..................................................................................................37
10) Hurricane Storm Surge Inundation...................................................................................38
11) Non -coastal Wetalnds (North Carolina CREWS).......................................................39
12) Fish Nursery Areas.................................................................................................................40
13) Environmentally Fragile Areas...........................................................................................41
14) Closed Shellfishing Areas.....................................................................................................42
4.2 Natural Features and Environmental Conditions Inventory ...........................................43
4.3 The Environmental Composite Map.......................................................................................45
4.4 Land Suitability Analysis............................................................................................................46
Section 5. Existing Land Use Analysis.......................................................................................... 48
Definition of Land Use Related Terms...................................................................................48
Source of Existing Land Use Analysis and Map.................................................................49
Creation of the Existing Land Use Map................................................................................49
5.1 Existing Land Use in the Planning Jurisdiction...................................................................50
Land Uses Identified in the Planning Jurisdiction.............................................................51
5.2 Existing Land Use in Planning Jurisdiction Sub-Areas....................................................53
Sub -Area 1: The Island East of Sunset Boulevard South...................................................54
Sub -Area 2: The Island West of Sunset Boulevard South................................................58
Sub -Area 3: The Western End of Town Limits and ETJ...................................................61
Sub -Area 4: Sea Trail South of Calabash Creek, Shoreline Drive and Sunset
Boulevard................................................................................................................64
Sub -Area 5: Sea Trail North of Calabash Creek and the Eastern ETJ Area ................67
Sub -Area 6: Eastern Town. Limits and South of.Sunset.Boulevard...............................70
Sub -Area 7: Sandpiper Bay and Wyndfall Annex..............................................................73
Existing Land Use in the County Jurisdiction Adjacent to Sunset Beach ..................74
5.3 Identification of Significant Existing Land Use Effects on
SurfaceWater Quality................................................................................................................76
5.4 Identification of Land Use Conflicts with Class III Areas on the
Environmental Composite Map and Areas Described in the
Natural Systems Analysis Section...........................................................................................76
5.5 Projection of Future Land Needs.............................................................................................78
Section 6. Analysis of Community Facilities.............................................................................79
6.1 Water Supply System Status and Trends..............................................................................79
Water Supply System Expansion.............................................................................................84
Table of Contents

6.2 Wastewater System....................................................................................................................86
Concerns with Wastewater System Construction.............................................................87
SewerHook-up Limitation........................................................................................................87
Water Quality Issues During Septic System Removal.......................................................88
CostAllocation..............................................................................................................................88
6.3 Transportation Systems..............................................................................................................89
Annual Average Day Traffic Counts 1999-2005..................................................................92
6.3.1 Town Management of the Transportation System........................................................96
ZoningOrdinance........................................................................................................................96
SubdivisionOrdinance...........................................................................................................I....97
StreetMaintenance......................................................................................................................97
6.3.2 Transportation Projects in DOTs Transportation Improvement Plan
Affecting Transportation in Town....................................................................................98
6.4 Stormwater Management Systems..........................................................................................98
What is Phase II and what is required?..................................................................................98
Implementation of Phase II Stormwater Rules....................................................................101
6.5 Public Access Facilities...............................................................................................................102
Existing Public Access Sites......................................................................................................102
Section 7. Evaluation of 1997 Land Use Plan Update...................................................................104
Introduction: Assessment of the 1997 Land Use Plan Policy Effectiveness and
Implementation................................................................................................104
1997 Vision Statement..................................................................................................................104
1997 Future Land Classification System.................................................................................104
Key Policies in the 1997 Land Use Plan...................................................................................105
Summary of Town Implementation and Consistency With 1997 Land Use
PlanPolicies.....................................................................................................................................112
Phase II of the CAMA Land Use Plan:
Section 8. Plan-ForTheFuture-
Goals and Policy Statements for the Town of Sunset Beach..................................113
8.1 Land Use and Development related Goals of the Town....................................................113
8.2 Definitions of Action and Descriptive Words Used in Policies.......................................114
8.3 Policy Section Introduction and the Town of Sunset Beach Policy Statements ......... 115
I. Management Topic: Land Use Compatibility...........................................................117
II. Management Topic: Public Access................................................................................128
II. Management Topic: Infrastructure...............................................................................131
III. Management Topic: Natural Hazards Mitigation....................................................136
IV. Management Topic: Surface Water Quality..............................................................139
Section 9: Future Land Use Classification Map and Standards................................................143
9.1 Future Land Use Classification Area Development Standards Table ...........................143
Table of Contents

Section 10: Tools for Managing Development...............................................................................150
10.1 Role and Status of the Plan.....................................................................................................150
10.1.1 Intended Uses of the Plan......................................................................................151
10.1.2 Amendment of the Land Use Plan......................................................................152
10.2 Staff Flow Chart for Determining Consistency of Development Proposals and
OrdinanceAmendments..........................................................................................................153
10.3 Existing Development Program.............................................................................................154
10.3.1 Existing Development Program in Implementing the Policies and Goals of the
LandUse Plan............................................................................................................................154
10.4 Additional Tools for Managing Development..................................................................155
10.5 Action Schedule..........................................................................................................................156
Section11: Conclusion........................................................................................................................158
List of Tables and Charts
Table 1: Population Change from 1990 to 2004.............................................................................10
Table 1.1: Annexations 1990-1996..........................................................:...................................11
Table 1.2: Annexations 1997-2006............................................................................................11
Table 2: Population Growth Comparison for NC and SC Coastal Municipalities
1990-2004.................................................................................................................................12
Table 3: Population Demographics Comparison of All North Carolina "Municipalities
withBeaches" from Census 2000.......................................................................................13
' Table 4: Median Age in Sunset Beach and Adjacent Municipalities 1990-2005..................14
Table 5: Population by Age in Sunset Beach 1990-2005..............................................................14
Table 6: 2005 Estimate of Median Household Income and Per Capita Income in
Sunset Beach and Adjacent Areas......................................................................................15
Table 7: Water Usage in Peak Season Versus Usage in Off-Season........................................17
Chart 1: County Permanent Population Projections to 2010, 2020 and 2030.......................19
Chart 2: Sunset Beach Permanent Population Projections........................................................20
Table.8: Type of Housing Unit Comparison For.AllNC "Municipalities -:with -a Beach'..21
Table 9: Housing Occupancy For All NC Municipalities with "Beach Strand................... 22
Table 10: Median Year Built, Tenure, Number of Rooms, and Value Comparison of All
North Carolina Municipalities with "Beach Strand".................................................23
Table 11: Sunset Beach Building Permit Data from 2000-March 2006...................................24
Table 12: Sunset Beach Employment by Industry for Persons 16years and Over.................27
Table 13: Brunswick County Tourism Revenue (1990-2004)...................................................28
Table 13.1: Top 10 Tourism Revenue Generating Counties in 2004...............................28
Table 14: Vacant Lots Per Zoning District in the IHA.................................................................31
Table 15: Number of Lots and Structure Value in VE Flood Zone...........................................33
Table 16: Number of Lots and Structure Value in SFHA Flood Zones...................................37
Table 17: NFIP Claims and Payments Among NC Municipalities with a Beach .................
38-
Table IS: Natural Features Inventory ................................... .....:......................................................
43
Table 19: Planning jurisdiction Characteristics for Geography,
Hydrography, and Parcels.................................:................................................................51
Table 20: Existing Land -Use in the Planning jurisdiction ...........................................
Table of Contents

Appendix
Table 21: Existing Land -Use in Sub -Area 1.....................................................................................56
Table 22: Vacant Lots by Zoning District in Sub -Area 1............................................................57
Table 23: Existing Land -Use in Sub -Area 2....................................................................................59
Table 24: Vacant Lots by Zoning District in Sub -Area 2...........................................................60
Table 25: Existing Land -Use in Sub -Area 3...:...........................................................................62
Table 26: Vacant Lots by Zoning District in Sub -Area 3............................................................62
Table 27: Existing Land -Use in Sub -Area 4....................................................................................65
Table 28: Vacant Lots by Zoning District in Sub -Area 4............................................................66
Table 29: Existing Land -Use in Sub -Area 5....................................................................................68
Table 30: Vacant Lots by Zoning District in Sub -Area 5............................................................69
Table 31: Existing Land -Use in Sub -Area 6.....................................................................................71
Table 32: Vacant Lots by Zoning District in Sub -Area 6............................................................72
Table 32 (A): Existing Land -Use in Sub -Area 7............................................................................74
Table 33: Water Consumption in the "High-Season"..................................................................82
Table 34: Water Consumption in the "Low-Season"...................................................................83
Table 35: Annual Average Day Water Use Estimates..................................................................84
Table 36: DOTs Road Design Capacity Under a Level of Service D.......................................90
Table 37: 2005 AADT Counts Compared with Road Design Capacity..................................90
Table 38: 2006 Brunswick County Seasonal Traffic Counts Report.......................................91
Table 39: Consistency, Implementation and Effectiveness of the 1997 LUP Policies .........
106
Table 40: Future Land Use Classification Area Development Standards Table..................144
Table 41: Existing Development Program.......................................................................................154
Table 42: Schedule for Implementing Additional Management Tools...................................155
Table 43: Action Schedule....................................................................................................................157
Appendix I:
Appendix II:
Appendix III:
Appendix IV:
Appendix V;
Map Appendix
Community Land Use and Development Survey...........................................160
Citizen Participation Plan.....................................................................................169
County Water System Master Plan - Program of Construction Table 183
Policy Impact Analysis Table...............................................................................184
Existing Development Program in Implementing the Policies
and Goals of the Land Use Plan..........................................................................193
Map 1: Areas of Environmental Concern Map
Map 2: DCM Erosion Rate Map
Map 3: Water Quality Map
Map 4: Special Flood Hazard Areas Map
Map 5: Storm Surge Inundation Map
Map 6: North Carolina CREWS Wetland Areas Map
Map 7: Fish Nursery and Natural Heritage Areas Map
Map 8: Environmental Composite Map
Map 9: Existing Land Use Map
Map 10: Regional Wastewater Map
Map 11: Water and Wastewater Systems Facilities Map
Map 12: Transportation and Public Access Facilities Map
Map 13: Town Maintained Stormwater System Outfalls Map
Map 14: Land Suitability Analysis Map
Map 15: Future Land Use -Classification -Map
Table of Contents

Guide for Planning and &z Special Issues Committee Review of the Core Land Use Plan
Town of Sunset Beach Page (s)
Organization of the Plan. If document does not follow the outline of Rules, a matrix shall be
included showing the exact location of required elements.
Community Concerns and Aspirations: Key issues &z Vision statement:
Page 6-9
Analysis of Existing and Emer%Zing Conditions within the planning jurisdiction.
Section 3
Population, Housing, and Economy. Including 5 -10 — 20 year) projections.
Natural systems analysis.
Page 10-28
o Mapping and analysis of natural features.
o Composite map of environmental conditions: Breaks community into 3 classes of
Pg45 &C Mai 8
developability based on environmental conditions.
Page 45
o Description of Environmental conditions:
Analysis of Land Use and Development: Existing Land Use Map
Section 3
o Analysis of conflicts, trends, and areas expected to grow within next 5 years and areas
of any potential conflicts w/composite map.
o Projections of future land needs. Short term (5-10-20 year) projections population &t
land needs. May be increased up to 509b. Low or no growth projections of land needs
page 78
may consider economic strategies.
Analysis of Community Facilities. Existing/planned capacity, location, &z adequacy of key
facilities that serve community's existing/planned population and economic base including:
o Public and private water supply and wastewater systems.
Page 79
o Transportation systems.
Page 79-88
o Stormwater systems &z other systems &t services
Page 89-98
Land Suitability Analysis &c Map
Page 98-102
Review of Current CAMA Land Use Plan.
Map 14
Page 104-112
Plan for the Future: Land use and development goals &r Policies
Land Use Plan Management Topics
Public Access: Goal: Maximize public access/ Objective: Access opportunities for the public
Requirements: Establish local criteria -for frequency and type. of access facilities_&C criteria.for_.
areas targeted for beach nourishment.
Page 113-116
Land Use Compatibility: Goal: Ensure development/use of resources or preservation minimizes
direct &z secondary environmental impacts, avoids risks to public health, safety &z welfare &z is
consistent w/capability of the land based on considerations of interactions of natural &t
manmade features.
Objective: Policies balancing protection of natural resources/fragile areas w/economic
development; provides clear direction for local decision -making, consistency findings for zoning,
divisions of land, &r projects.
Requirements: Establish building intensity &r density criteria for each land use designation on
the FLUP Map; Establish local mitigation criteria and concepts.
Infrastructure Carrying Capacity: Goal: Ensure public infrastructure systems are appropriately
sized; located &t managed so quality &z productivity of AECs/fragile areas are protected or
restored.
o Objective: Establish level of service policies/criteria for infrastructure consistent
w/Projections of Future Land Needs.
Page 117
Page 118
Page 131
Table of Contents

o Requirements: Identify/establish service area boundaries; Correlate FLUPM categories
w/existing and planned infrastructure.
Natural Hazard Areas: Goal: Conserve/maintain barrier dunes, beaches, flood plains, &z other
coastal features for natural storm functions &r their natural resources w/recognition to public
health, safety, and welfare issues.
o Objective: minimize threats to life, property, &z natural resources from development Page 136
located in/adjacent to hazard areas.
o Requirements: density/intensity criteria for new/existing development &z redevelopment
including public facilities and infrastructure to better avoid or w/stand natural hazards;
Correlate existing and planned development with existing and planned evacuation
infrastructure.
Water Quality: Goal: Maintain/protect where possible enhance WQ in all coastal wetlands,
rivers, streams &z estuaries.
o Objective: help ensure that WQ is maintained if not impaired &s improved if impaired.
o Requirements: Policies that help prevent or control nonpoint source discharges; policies Page 139
&z land use categories aimed at protecting open shellfishing waters/restoring closed or
conditionally closed.
Local Areas of Concern: Goal: Integrate local concerns with the overall goals of CAMA.
o Requirements: Evaluate local concerns and issues for the development of goals, policies
and implementation strategies.
Future land use map. Depicts policies application for growth and development, desired future
Section 9
patterns of land use/development with consideration given to natural system constraints &c
infrastructure policies. Shall include at a minimum:
0 14-digit hydrological units encompassed by the planning area;
Page 143
o areas/locations planned for conservation/open space w/description of compatible uses
o areas/locations planned for future growth/development w/descriptions of:
o predominant &z supporting land uses that are encouraged in each area;
0 overall density/development intensity planned for each area;
o areas for infill, preservation, and redevelopment;
Page 144-149
o existing/planned infrastructure, including major roads, water, and sewer.
Map 15
Tools for Manal4ing Development. (initial five-year action plan for implementation)
Page lg 50
o Guide for land use decision- making
o Existing development program. This description of community's approach to
coordinating these codes and rules to implement the LUP.
Policy Impact Analysis
o Contain description of type/extent of analysis to determine the impact of Plan policies or.
Appendix V
management topics; both positive &r negative; description of policies/methods/programs
&t processes to mitigate negative impacts on applicable management topics.
o If local policies exceed the State and Federal requirements, such policies must be
Page 151-158
identified &z to what extent. If the local body intends to rely on Federal/State laws &z
regulations it shall reference in the plan.
❖ If development patterns/uses are not consistent w/natural systems analysis, or the LSA,
then includes description of steps local government will take to mitigate the impacts.
❖ Include estimate/cost of any facilities or services that shall be extended or developed.
❖ Amount of land allocated to various uses shall be calculated and compared to the
projection of land needs. The amount of land area thus allocated to various uses may not
exceed projected needs; except for slow growth communities.
Table of Contents

Section 1. Executive Summary, Introduction to CAMA, and Public
Involvement
1.1 Executive Summary
The purpose of the executive summary is to provide a brief overview of the main facts, figures,
policies, and recommendations found within the Town of Sunset Beach Land Use Plan.
Background on the Land Use Plan Process
The Town began the update of their Land Use Plan in March of 2006 under the guidance of the
Town Planning Board, the Town Administrator, the planning consultant, and citizen/property
owner input. The Plan was conducted through funding provided by the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration, Division of Coastal Management and the Town of Sunset Beach.
The Plan follows and adheres to the local government planning guidelines as required under the
North Carolina Administrative Code Title 15A, Chapter 7 and,the North Carolina Coastal Area
Management Act (CAMA).
The first step in creating the Land Use Plan (LUP) was to evaluate the growth in land use and
development over the past ten years from the time of the Town's last LUP update. The
evaluation included the identification of any impacts to the quality of life, property values,
public safety, environment, and infrastructure of the community. The impacts identified
included both those from -past development as well as any potential impacts anticipated from
future development. The second step in creating the Land Use Plan was to determine the.
mechanisms needed to best manage or resolve those impacts. Those mechanisms make up the
Townes development management program, which includes:
1. Ordinances and regulations establishing the standards and practices required of
development (e.g. zoning ordinance, stormwater ordinance, state and federal laws,
etc).
2. Official Town plans that evaluate a problem or issue and establish a recommended
set of actions to resolve the issue (e.g. Land Use Plan, Hazard Mitigation Plan,
etc.).
3. Town programs or services that are intended to aid in mitigating or managing the
impacts of development (e.g. utilities provision and maintenance, and capital
improvement programs to set budgeting priorities for needed infrastructure).
4. Official Town policy statements that are to provide overall guidance in the
decision making process when making revisions, updates and/or additions to the
Town's development management program.
Evaluation of Growth in Land Use and Development
Sunset Beach was incorporated in 1964. The -first Census for the Town was in 1970 and showed the population to be 108. In 1980 the population was 140, and in 1990 it was 311. It should be
noted that through these decades the jurisdiction of the Town included just the island and
limited areas on the mainland. More recently, Sunset Beach has increased notably from its 1990
population level in terms of relative percent growth. The 2000 Census population for the Town
was 1,852, which was a 495% growth from 1990. Much of the population growth during this'
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 1: Executive Summary and Introduction I

time was from annexation of areas that were developed, developing, and/or planned for
development. Tables 1.1 and 1.2 in the Land Use Plan list the annexations between the 1990-
2000 period which included 13 "tracts or developments" totaling 1,610 acres. This is a tripling of
the Town's size in area from its pre-1990 size. In addition, Tables 1.1 and 1.2 show annexations
from 2000 to 2006, which added an additional 146 acres. The Town also annexed, in June 2007, a
500-acre development on its northern boundary called Sandpiper Bay. The continued
annexations and infill of development have driven the Town's population growth to its 2005
certified estimate of just over 2,200 permanent residents. The Town's policy for annexations has
been and continues to be to strategically advance its management of growth and development in
its surrounding vicinity so as to ensure such development remains compatible with the Town's
infrastructure carrying capacity and community character and scale.
As described in Section 3 of the Plan, Sunset Beach has seen the same increased growth and
development as many, if not all, of the municipalities with a beach in southeastern North
Carolina. This growth is due to many factors, including the growth of the Myrtle Beach and
Wilmington urban areas, the relatively recent completion of road networks such as I-40 making
the area more accessible, the retiring baby boom population seeking warmer climates and lower
priced housing, and a general increase in economic and disposable income levels which has
allowed for more tourism and the construction of second or vacation homes. As mentioned
previously, the population of the Town has grown from 311 in 1990 to 1,852 in 2000, which was a
significantly higher growth rate as compared with all 20 municipalities with a beach strand in
North Carolina for the same time period. Again, this was primarily due to the Town's
annexation activity. The growth rate for the Town between the years 2000 and 2005 was
around 13%, which ranked 6th highest when compared with all 20 municipalities with a beach
strand in North Carolina for the same time period. It is difficult to accurately project the Town's
future population as it plans to retain its option of using annexation as a means to manage
growth in its surrounding area. Chart 2 in the Land Use Plan uses a simple population
projection method based on historic growth rates for the Town and County to establish
population projections for 2010, 2020 and 2025. Those figures include a population projection
approaching 3,400 around 2010 and ranging between 4,600 and 5,200 between 2020 and 2025.
In regards to peak season population for the Town, the majority (87% according to Census
2000) of single-family, duplex., andmultifamily. dwellings. on. theisland/mainlandare.prlmarily
used as housing for the seasonal population. In addition, several mainland multi -family resort
dwellings exist to serve the seasonal population. The seasonal population is estimated to boost
the Town's overall population to 6,000 to 13,000 in the summer (See Section 3.1.1 for more
detail).
As discussed in Section 4, past and continued impacts to local surface waters presents a limiting
factor in the types and scales of development that are appropriate in Sunset Beach without
increased standards for containing and treating both stormwater runoff and wastewater
generated from both new and existing development. Sunset Beach water quality classifications
are SA for the Intracoastal Waterway and all other waters surrounding the island, except the
ocean which is classified SB (See Water Quality Characteristics Map [Map 3]). Sunset Beach is
located in the Lumber River Basin, and falls within subbasin 03-07-59. This subbasin contains
the southwest corner of Brunswick County primarily east of Highway 17. There are no classified
surface waters impaired for aquatic life or recreation in subbasin 03-07-59. At the time of the
last Land Use Plan update in 1997, shellfishing had been an "impaired" use for all of the planning
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 1: Executive Summary and Introduction II

area's estuarine waters and it continues to be impaired as of the date of this 2006/2007 Land Use
Plan update (See Water Quality Characteristics Map [Map 3]). According to the Shellfish
Sanitation Branch of the North Carolina Division of Environmental Health, the permanent
closure and conditional approval of shellfishing areas in the jurisdiction has been attributed to
long-term septic system use in flood prone areas as well as existing manmade canals and
residential lawns with little or no vegetative buffers to filter stormwater runoff. Stormwater
runoff has been cited as the main contributor to shellfish closures. The conditionally approved
shellfishing sites in the planning jurisdiction (links Creek and Tubbs Inlet area) are closed
during every rain event causing .5 inch to 1.5 inches of rain primarily due to pollutants such as
fecal coliform (i.e. pet, animal and human [septic system] waste) in the runoff. Portions of Jinks
Creek and Tubbs Inlet were the only two areas conditionally open to shellfishing at the time of
the 1997 Land Use Plan update. Good tidal flushing from water moving through Tubbs inlet is
likely the reason these areas have remained conditionally open.
There is one Division of Water Quality (DWQ) water quality monitoring station (established in
1983) in the planning jurisdiction located near the Sunset Beach bridge. This station (Station
I198800) has shown that fecal coliform in the water exceeded safe levels for shellfishing as of the
1997 Lumber River Basin Water Quality Plan and as of the 2003 Lumber River Basin plan. The
DWQ's 2002 Lumber Basin Assessment also showed that there has been a statistically
significant and steady decrease in pH and Dissolved Oxygen (DO) at this monitoring station
since 1983 to the date of the report. While the Assessment could not pinpoint the source of the
decrease in DO and pH, those types of decreases likely can be linked to higher levels of fecal
coliform (septic waste) and phosphorus (fertilizers from lawns and golf courses and/or septic
waste).
As described in Section 5 of the Plan, nearly the entire island portion of the planning jurisdiction
is built -out with a majority of single-family detached homes. Some duplex, multi -family and
tourist related commercial and office uses exist on the island but are limited to the oceanfront
for duplex, and the street blocks bordering Sunset Boulevard South for multi -family and
commercial. Typical lot sizes are regulated to range from 4,500 to 7,500 on the island with a
density of 10 to 6 units per acre. The building height is strictly limited on the island which
keeps all structures uniform at 35 feet in.height. Much of the mainland portion of Sunset Beach
is also developed or in a development transition stage. The mainland has a full mix of residential
and commercial structures. Residential types include single-family, duplex, multi -family and
manufactured housing. Commercial structures include regional and local commercial services
including chain grocery stores, pharmacies, medical services, financial institutions, etc.
There are several 18-hole golf courses on the mainland which account for over 40% of the total
land use in the planning jurisdiction (See Table 20). Lot sizes typically range from 6,000-
9,00oft2 for manufactured housing areas, to 10,000-15,000 ft2 for single-family areas, to 40,000 ft2
for the primary multi -family areas. The Town also has mixed use districts that allow both
residential and commercial/office uses. Building height is limited on the mainland to a
maximum of 50 feet. A maximum of 35 feet in height for certain structures is also in effect on the
mainland.
As detailed in Section 6, the Town had owned and operated a potable water distribution system
servicing nearly the entire jurisdiction which purchased all of its water supply from Brunswick
County and its water treatment and storage plants. However, in July 2007, the Town turned -
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 1: Executive Summary and Introduction III

over the ownership and operation of the water system to Brunswick County. Wastewater
treatment in the Town is currently handled (as of September 2007) through individual private
septic systems, private package treatment plants, and limited County sewer service in some
commercial and multi -family areas. The Town, in conjunction with the County, is in the final
planning stages (as of September 2007) for construction of a sewer system to service the
remaining un-sewered portions of the planning jurisdiction. The design of the sewer system was
conducted to limit connections and capacity so as to avoid "induced development". The limited
design size of the sewer system will be a management measure to ensure that redevelopment to
higher densities would not be feasible or allowable without substantial system upgrades. The
Town plans to have the sewer system designed and built well within the five to ten year
planning period of the Land Use Plan.
Identification of Growth and Development Issues
The Town's evaluation of growth and development trends and the status of its environmental
state contributed to the identification of several issues the community felt should be addressed
within the Land Use Plan. Those issues include:
Priority Issues
• Expansion of Centralized Sewer/Elimination of Septic Systems
• Stormwater Runoff/Water Quality Improvement
• Proactively Managing Dimensional Size (lot size, density, and height) of Future
Development and Redevelopment
• Retaining and Enhancing Community Appearance (landscaping, signage, buffers)
General Issues
• Impacts Associated with High-rise Bridge
• What Housing Types Should be Allowed? (e.g. "Mega -structures", Single Family, Multi
Family)
• Types and -Scale of Commercial Growth
• Increasing Public Access/Boat Ramps
• Proactively Manage Intensity (building height and lot coverage) and Density (units per
acre) of all new Development
• Assess Potential Impacts from Surrounding Area Growth (Myrtle Beach, Brunswick
County and Wilmington)
• Assess Feasibility of More Parks/Recreation Opportunities in the jurisdiction
• Ensure Infrastructure Capacity will Meet Expected Growth
• Protect Quality Green Space/Open Space (Protect sensitive areas)
• What Level of Continued Annexation &t ETj?
• Define the Town's Character- Is it a Small Beach Town?
• Traffic/Transportation Issues and Needs
• Provide Adequate Public Parking/Restrooms for day trippers
• Town Responsibility for Remaining Consistent with Land Use Plan When Taking
Public Action
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 1: Executive Summary and Introduction IV

Mechanisms to Manage Impacts from Growth in Land Use and Development
The Town's evaluation of growth in land use and development trends, and its identification of
issues and impacts associated with such development, provided the basis for the establishment
of:
1. A community vision statement;
2. A set of development -related policy statements;
3. A growth map and development standards table for future land use, development and
redevelopment; and
4. A schedule of recommended actions to make the Town's existing development
management program consistent with the vision statement, the policy statements and
the future land use and development standards established under the Land Use Plan.
1. The vision statement was established during the beginning of the Land Use Plan process and
provided the overall tone and direction for the Land Use Plan. The vision statement follows:
"The Town of Sunset Beach intends to promote and support the orderly economic and
aesthetic growth and development of the community in accordance with its adopted
Land Use Plan and development -related ordinances. The Town of Sunset Beach desires
to maintain its unique coastal -town character by promoting lower -density and single-
family residential development as its primary growth pattern. The Town also
recognizes that it coexists with a fragile coastal environment, and it shall seek to
preserve and conserve the land and estuarine water, including its beach and golf course
amenities that have made this community a highly desirable place to live. Furthermore,
the Town values being responsive to the public and improving the quality of life for all
its citizens, to this end, the Town shall continually seek the involvement, input and
various viewpoints of its citizens during the Town's official consideration of land use
and development decisions".
2. Policy statements were established under the Land Use Plan to respond to the existing and
potential impacts identified during the evaluation of growth in land use and development. The
policy statements are designed to address specific issues, and provide overall guidance for
official Town decisions and actions so that those decisions and actions further the management
or resolution of impacts associated with land use and development. All Town policies in the
Land Use Plan are consistent with the minimum standards of the Coastal Area Management Act
(CAMA). Town policies # 5 (C)(i) and #66 exceed CAMA and/or state minimum standards.
The following policies are numbered according to their order in Section 8 of the Land Use
Plan. Some of the key policy statements for the Town include:
1. Areas of Environmental Concern
A) The Town will support and enforce through its CAMA minor permitting capacity
the state policies and permitted uses in Areas of Environmental Concern (AECs).
Such uses shall be in accord with the general use standards for coastal wetlands,
estuarine waters, estuarine shorelines, ocean hazard areas and public trust areas as
stated in 15A NCAC Subchapter 7H.
B) The Town supports the major and general permitting process as implemented by the
North Carolina Division of Coastal Management.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 1: Executive Summary and Introduction V

15. Annexation
The Town of Sunset Beach will institute annexation proceedings and the extension of the
extraterritorial limits in a timely manner in order to guide growth in the surrounding areas
adjacent to Sunset Beach.
16. Types, Density and Location of Anticipated Residential Development
The Town encourages both the development and preservation of a variety of housing types to
meet the needs and desires of current and future citizens. To meet those needs and desires,
the Town will administer the following policies:
Building Height Standards on the Island and Mainland
A) The Town shall retain a 35-foot height limitation for residential, commercial and
institutional structures on the island.
B) As specified by the current zoning ordinance, the building height on the mainland
will predominantly be 35-feet with the exception of a 50-foot building height
maximum limit for multi -family units in the MR-3 Zoning District. In specified
areas, single-family structures may be allowed to exceed 35 feet if 1 foot of additional
setback for every 2 feet in additional height can be achieved on the lot, but in no case
shall the structure exceed 50 feet in height.
C) No structure on the mainland shall be allowed to exceed 50 feet in height. This
restriction includes any and all uses and building types currently allowed in the
Town.
Protection of Single-family Areas
D) The Town shall maintain areas exclusively for conventional single-family dwellings
for the growing population on the island and the mainland (as shown on the Future
Land Use Map).
E) The Town shall retain and maintain the predominantly single-family residential
character of the island. Conversion of single-family homes to duplexes will be
restricted to the residential lots in the existing BR-1 and BB-1 Zoning Districts (as
shown on the Future Land Use Map and Town Zoning Map).
Multi -Family Areas
F) The Town shall allow multi -family development in designated and appropriate areas
within the "golf course oriented developments" (Sea Trail and Ocean Ridge
Plantation) and as permitted in the MR-3, MB-1 and BB-1 commercial districts (as
shown on the Future Land Use Map and Town Zoning Map).
Manufactured Housing Areas
G) The Town shall provide areas for mobile home and manufactured housing
development on the mainland (as shown on the Future Land Use Map and Town
Zoning Map).
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 1: Executive Summary and Introduction VI

H) Any redevelopment of existing manufactured housing areas shall only be allowed to
develop as single-family detached housing. Manufactured housing shall continue to
be an allowable housing type/use in these pre-existing areas.
18. Residential Density - Standards, Options and Mitigation of Environmental Impacts
A) The Planning Board and Town Council will study the feasibility of establishing
residential density limitations per acre, in addition to existing dimensional
standards, for each zoning district.
B) The Planning Board and Town Council will study the feasibility of revising the
subdivision, zoning and Planned Residential Development regulations to promote
greater conservation of natural areas. Cluster housing, with possible density bonus,
and/or Low Impact Development standards may be studied as such conservation
measures.
19. Potential For Transition of Golf Course Land to Residential Use
If any land currently utilized as a "golf course field of play" is requested to be transitioned to
a residential use, the only allowable housing -type permitted by the Town for those areas
shall be:
A) Single-family detached, with a minimum lot size of one acre per unit;
Or,
B) Planned Residential Development, as permitted in the Zoning Ordinance, if it is able
to retain an amount of open space superior to and an impervious lot coverage equal
to or less than that created by the development of single-family housing on one acre
lots as in option (A) above.
23. Density of Future Multi -family Developments
To assist in protecting its existing community character, scale and infrastructure
capabilities, Town policy shall be to reduce the currently allowed density for multi -family
structures below a gross of 21.7 units per acre.
30. Land Use and Development Decisions Consistent with the Land Use Plan
Any official Town land use and development related actions (e.g. re -zonings, text
amendments, stormwater rules, etc.) shall remain consistent with the policies adopted in the
Land Use Plan and any other applicable plan. Any Town actions that are inconsistent with
such plans shall require a statement from the Town body approving such decisions, as to
why those decisions are necessary and in the community's interest, and how any negative -
impacts will be mitigated.
34. Public Boat Launch and Access Site
The Town shall pursue the construction of a public boat launch and access site to replace the
boat launch removed due to the new bridge construction.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6107110 Section 1: Executive Summary and Introduction VII

36. Continuation of On -Street Public Parking
The Town shall continue to allow regulated public parking on public street shoulders as a means
to provide parking for beach access.
39. Development Encouraged to Use DOT's Access Management and Recommended Design
Standards
The Town supports the principles of Access Management and encourages the use of the
recommended street and driveway design standards found in the North Carolina
Department of Transportation's "Policy on Street and Driveway Access".
66. Stormwater Program
A) The Town shall continue to participate in an interlocal agreement with Brunswick
County for the implementation and administration of County stormwater
regulations by County staff within the Sunset Beach planning jurisdiction. The
Town shall be responsible for implementing legal proceedings for violations of the
stormwater regulations within its planning jurisdiction.
B) The Town supports the continuance of provisions in the Brunswick County
stormwater regulations which exceed state minimum requirements. Those
provisions include requiring stormwater management rules for all commercial
development regardless of site size, and rules for any development activity which
uses more than four inches of fill on the site.
C) The Town shall continue to update its stormwater ordinances to remain consistent
with changes in the County stormwater ordinance.
D) The Town shall retain the option of adopting additional local stormwater related
standards if it is deemed necessary to further protect surface water quality.
69. Low Impact Development (LID)
B) The Town intends to evaluate the results of Low Impact Development practices
implemented in the adjacent Lockwood's Folly watershed and other similar coastal
watersheds to determine its practicality for use in the Sunset Beach planning
jurisdiction. Such LID practices required may include retaining/infiltrating most of
the runoff on -site, maximizing the use of permeable pavements, reducing the
amount of impervious coverage, and clustering housing to allow a profitable
development density while maximizing open space.
C) Key to LID practicality and effectiveness, Town policy shall be to first seek to
establish coordination and interlocal agreement among local governments with
jurisdiction over land development affecting the local watershed to both support
and implement LID standards in their jurisdictions.
70. Elimination of Septic System Use
Town policy is to support the implementation of a sewer system and require the elimination
of septic system and package treatment plant use. See Policies 48,49 and 51.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 1: Executive Summary and Introduction VIII

71. Septic System Decommissioning and Encouraged Re -use for Stormwater
A) When central sewer service becomes available, the Town shall require all septic
systems in use in the Town's jurisdiction to be professionally pumped -out and
crushed, filled or retrofitted to be used as a "stormwater cistern".
B) The Town prefers the re -use of appropriate septic systems as "stormwater cisterns",
over crushing or filling, as an innovative method to help capture and retain
stormwater on -site. This practice is intended to help minimize the volume of
stormwater and pollutants entering local surface waters, streets and ditches.
C) To encourage (b) above, The Town shall provide owners of septic systems with
information on how to retrofit and re -use septic systems as stormwater cisterns.
D) If and when a stormwater utility is established under Phase II stormwater rules, the
Town shall encourage Brunswick County (Phase II stormwater administrator) to
apply "credits" on any stormwater utility fees to those property owners who re -used
their septic system as a stormwater cistern.
72. Retrofitting of Existing Stormwater Drainage Systems
A) The Town supports the eventual retrofit, or elimination (where complete detention
or infiltration is feasible), of Town -owned outfalls that are not able to treat
stormwater runoff during targeted storm events. Those outfalls which carry runoff
from existing development, including roads, through conveyances that may not
adequately handle the removal of pollutants during certain storm events shall
receive prioritization for retrofit. Testing of outfalls may be necessary to identify
pollutant load, runoff volume and appropriate retrofits.
B) Where complete retrofit or elimination of certain outfalls is not feasible, the Town
and Brunswick County (as Phase II stormwater administrator) shall encourage and
publicize private property practices that are intended to reduce stormwater volume
and pollutant load entering the Town's stormwater drainage system.
If the retrofit or elimination of certain outfalls is deemed feasible, the Town shall pursue
funding from the Clean Water Management Trust Fund, other water quality
improvement funding sources, or any other appropriate funding source to implement
and utilize new technology and/or install vegetated systems to provide greater
infiltration, filtration, retention and/or detention of runoff from existing development.
A complete listing of all the Town policies established in the Land Use Plan can be found
in Section 8.
3. The growth map and development standards table for future land use, development and
redevelopment can be found in Section 9 of the Land Use Plan. The growth map, which is
officially called the Future Land Use Classification Map (FLUCM), is meant to visually depict the
major land use and development goals and policies to be followed and implemented by the
Town. The Map is intended to show the community's planned future growth patterns in
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 1: Executive Summary and Introduction IX

distinct areas within the Town's planning jurisdiction. The Map also shows the planned future
boundaries of those respective areas to ensure that incompatible uses or types of development
do not encroach. The development standards table, which is officially called the Future Land Use
Classification Area Development Standards Table (Table 40) is to be used in conjunction with the Future
Land Use Classification Map. The table lists the desired predominant land uses and development
characteristics for each respective area, as well as the intensity and density goals and standards
for each area.
4. A schedule of recommended actions to make the Town's existing development management
program consistent with the vision statement, the policy statements, and the future land use and
development standards within the Land Use Plan, include the following:
Ordinances/Regulations ;
To be Done in
Fiscal Year,
Department ;
Responsibility
Zoning Ordinance Amendments*
FY 10-11
Administration
1. Re -zone parcels currently used in a golf course field of play from
MR-3 to "AF-l" or other zone with one acre minimum lot size,
with allowable Planned Residential Developments as a
Conditional Use if it meets the intent of Policy 19 (B) of the Land
Use Plan.
FY 10-11
Administration
2. Text Amendment to Section 151.191(B) to include allowing
duplex in the MR-3 zoning district.
FY 10-11
Administration
3. Text Amendment to Section 151.003 to change the definition of
multi -family to specifically refer to a structure as classified as
multi -family if it contains "three or more attached units" on a
single parcel.
FY 10-11
Administration
4. Text Amendment to Section 151.213 (B) (2) to add Section 151.195
(A) (1) to the listing of required standards for multi -family
developments inthe-MB-1 zoning.district.-
5. Text Amendment to Section 151.218 to add reference to Section
FY 10-11
Administration
151.195 (A) (1) as a requirement for multi -family developments in
the MB-2 zoning district.
6. Text Amendment to 4153.193 (I) to change density requirement
FY 10-11
Administration
to reference "net" property area instead of "gross" property area.
The definition of "net" property area shall exclude counting the
lot's required 35% open space as part of the total buildable lot
area when determining the required lot area per unit. Example: a
-
40,000 fe lot would have a total buildable lot area of 26,000fe when
factoring out the required open space lot area.
7. Establish standards for density, open space, access management,
FY 10-11
Administration
architectural, landscaping, and types of allowable uses to
establish an "island gateway" in the BB-1.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 1: Executive Summary and Introduction X

Ordinances/Regulations
To be Done in
Fiscal Year
Department '
Responsibility`
Stormwater Management Ordinance Amendments
FY 10-11
Administration
(in conjunction with County)
8. Incorporate Phase II NPDES coastal rules
9. Consider requiring use of permeable surfaces for driveways,
Parking spaces and other related structures
10. Consider Stormwater Utility
11. Consider using decommissioned septic systems as
stormwater/rain retention cisterns
12. Sewer Use Ordinance (in conjunction with County)
FY 10 -11
Administration
a. To include requirement that mandatory connection apply
for all private wastewater treatments stems in the Town.
Additional recommended and scheduled actions include:
Action
Management
To is Goal
Responsible
Entity
2007-
2008
2008-
2009
2010-
2011
2011-
2012
2012-
2013
1. Continue Expanding Public
Administration
Participation in Land Use Planning.
2. Revise portions of the Zoning
Land Use
Administration
Ordinance to address internal
Compatibility
consistency and to implement LUP
goals and policies. See Table 42 for
detailed list of recommended
amendments.
3. Construct sewer system to serve
Water Quality/
Administration
platted/developable areas (eliminate
Infrastructure
septic system and package treatment
use).
4. Revise stormwater management
Water Quality
Administration
regulations to incorporate Phase II
rules, and consider permeable surface
provisions, LID and other
management recommendations of
County stormwater planning.
5. Consider Establishing a Local
Water Quality
Administration
Watershed Planning Group.
Coordinate with adjacent
jurisdictions and state agencies.
'
7. Pursue mechanisms to preserve the
existing 18-hole golf courses.
Land Use
Compatibility
AdministrationW
O
'O
bOao
O
O
8. Conduct Bicycle and Pedestrian
facilities planning to increase
P go_
interconnectivity and access.
Land Use
Compatibility/
Infrastructure
Administration
w
co
on
on
en ,..
x o
9. Implement public parking and
public access enhancements as
required by beach nourishment
funding or other grant funding.
Public Access/
Land Use
Compatibility
Administration
on .="
o .:
O . ��`
qua.:
o '
�� 0,
..o
'o
°
O
ho
0
='b�°
O
rho
0
r, n
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 1: Executive Summary and Introduction XI

Conclusion
The Land Use Plan (LUP) contains the adopted goals and policies for the Town of Sunset Beach.
Those goals and policies are to be implemented and followed over the next five to ten year
planning period, and beyond if an update is not conducted within 10 years. The intent of the
policies and actions detailed in this plan are to be carried out in good faith by current and future
elected officials and Town staff. Any public decisions by Town officials regarding growth and
development (e.g. re -zonings, land use related ordinance revisions, conditional use permits,
capital improvement projects, public grants, etc.) are to remain consistent with the policies,
goals and objectives in this plan. To allow flexibility if circumstances or community preferences
change, the Land Use Plan can be updated or amended. Current Land Use Plan updates are
conducted through a grant from the Division of Coastal Management and are on a seven to ten
year cycle, which is primarily determined by funding availability. The Town may undertake an
amendment of the Land Use Plan at any time, but must follow the regulations found in North
Carolina Administrative Code Title 15A, Chapter 7, Subchapter 7B, Section .0900-.0901.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 1: Executive Summary and Introduction XII

1.2 Introduction to the CAMA Land Use Plan Process
The Town of Sunset Beach, like most coastal communities in southeast North Carolina and
northeast South Carolina, has seen steadily increasing growth and development in its
jurisdiction over the last fifteen years. This increase in development pressure has been primarily
attributed to increases in coastal tourism and increases in the nation-wide retirement age
population relocating to coastal areas. Other contributing factors include the development of
roads, highways and bridges that make the coast more accessible to the entire population. The
desire to live in and visit coastal areas has inevitably led to certain types of development and
land uses that stress and degrade some of the very characteristics that make the coast a desirable
place to be. Land use planning can be an integral part in avoiding or mitigating some of the
negative side effects of rapid development by anticipating potential problems and trying to
establish courses of action and management programs to handle those problems in advance.
The U.S. Congress initiated the first structured form of coastal land use planning in the country
with the passage of the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) in 1972. CZMA encouraged
coastal states to preserve their coasts by establishing programs to manage and protect coastal
resources. North Carolina passed its Coastal Area Management Act, known as CAMA, in 1974.
CAMA established the Coastal Resources Commission (CRC) to oversee the regulation of the
coast. CAMA also provided a program framework for regulating development activity in coastal
areas and required local land use planning in the 20 coastal counties. The required Land Use
Plan consists of policies, maps and relevant technical data that serve as a community's blueprint
for growth. Land Use Plans can provide guidance for both individual development projects and a
broad range of policy issues at the local level. Such policy issues could include creating Town
regulatory ordinances and prioritizing public investment programs.
CAMA also established the Division of Coastal Management (DCM), which is the official
government agency responsible for administering CAMA regulations and programs. DCM. uses a
jurisdiction's Land Use Plan in making decisions on whether to grant CAMA permits for
proposed development projects that are in that jurisdiction. Proposed projects and activities
must be consistent with the enforceable policies of the jurisdiction's land -use plan, or DCM
cannot permit.a project. to go forward.
More specifically, Land Use Plans include policies that address growth issues such as the
Town's desired types of economic and residential development. An important aspect of the
planning process is that the policies included in a Town's plan are those formulated and agreed
upon by the local government, and are not policies dictated by the state. In addition to
overseeing the land use planning process for the entire coast of North Carolina, DCM awards
grants for local planning and management projects, such as funding public access sites. DCM.
also has four technical assistance planners throughout its four NC coastal districts to assist local
governments with coastal planning and management issues._
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 1: Executive Summary and Introduction

1.3 The Function and Utility of the Land Use Plan
There are four key functions of planning and a Land Use Plan. First, a Land Use Plan provides a
source of information for basing public policy and governmental decisions. The planning process
helps provide knowledge and understanding of the local area's population, demographics,
economy, natural environment, community capacity for growth, and overall development trends.
Secondly, a plan's policies provide guidance for government decisions in formulating future
decisions on public and capital investment, as well as zoning and other development
regulations. The third function of a plan is to provide a preview or predictor of future
government action. The public, local government staff and developers are better informed and
able to understand and predict how a government will make decisions if a plan and its policies
are in place and followed. The fourth function of a plan and the on -going planning process is to
provide the general public, the Planning Board, staff, and elected officials the opportunity to
address and discuss issues important to the local area and to shape policies and regulations to
best meet the goals of the community.
NOTE: An additional important day-to-day function of a Land Use Plan is basing approval of
CAMA development permits for projects in the local community on whether the impacts and
purpose of the proposed project are consistent with the policies set forth in the plan. Types of
development projects that require CAMA permits are discussed later.
The following section provides background information on CAMA permitting for development
and the role the Land Use Plan plays in determining whether development permits will be
issued.
1.4 The CAMA Permit Process
The Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) requires permits for any development in specially
designated areas called Areas of Environmental Concern (AEC). In Sunset Beach, AECs are
generally those areas that are in close proximity to water (ocean, ICWW, creeks, etc.) or marsh
(wetlands). A CAMA permit must be acquired if a development project meets all of the
following conditions:
• The project is located within one of the 20 coastal counties of North Carolina
• The project is considered "development"under CAMA
• The project is within, or affects, an Area of Environmental Concern established by the
Coastal Resources Commission;
• The project does not qualify for an exemption.
What Qualifies as a CAMA Regulated Development Project?
Besides construction of residential and commercial buildings in an AEC, "development" also
generally includes activities such as dredging or filling coastal wetlands or waters, and
construction of marinas, piers, docks, bulkheads, oceanfront structures and roads. The Coastal
Area Management Act (NCGS 113A-103 (5) (a)) defines a development project as: "any activity in
a duly designated area of environmental concern ... involving, requiring or consisting of the
construction or enlargement of a structure; excavation; dredging; filling; dumping; removal of
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 1: Executive Summary and Introduction 2

clay, silt, sand, gravel or minerals; bulkheading; driving of pilings; clearing or alteration of land
as an adjunct of construction; alteration or removal of sand dunes; alteration of the shore, bank
or bottom of the Atlantic Ocean or any sound, bay, river, creek, stream, lake or canal'.
What is an Area of Environmental Concern?
According to DCM's CAMA Handbook for Development in Coastal North Carolina, protecting and
managing Areas of Environmental Concern is the basis for the CAMA permitting program. An
AEC is generally an area of natural significance, which requires special management because it
may be easily destroyed by erosion, flooding, or human activity; or it may have environmental,
social, economic or aesthetic values that make it a valuable resource. The CRC designates
particular areas as AECs to protect them from unmanaged development, which may cause
irreversible damage to property, public health or the environment. AECs cover almost all
`navigable' coastal waters and about 3 percent of the land in the 20 coastal counties. As
mentioned earlier, in Sunset Beach the AECs are generally those areas that are in close proximity
to water (ocean, ICWW, creeks, etc.) or marsh (wetlands).
The CRC has established the following four categories of AECs:
• The Estuarine and Ocean System (coastal wetlands, public trust and estuary waters, and
estuarine shoreline);
• The Ocean Hazard System (ocean erodible setback area, un-vegetated beach area, inlet
hazard area, and high hazard flood area);
• Public Water Supplies (small surface water supply watershed and public water supply
well -fields);
• Natural and Cultural Resource Areas (coastal complex natural areas, coastal areas that
sustain remnant species, unique coastal geologic formations, significant coastal
archaeological resources and significant coastal historical archeological resources).
A development project is likely in an AEC if it is:
• in, or on the shore of; navigable waters -within the 20 CAMA counties,
• on a marsh or wetland;
• within 75 feet of the normal high water line along an estuarine shoreline;
• near the ocean beach (e.g. within 60'-120');
• within an ocean high hazard flood area (VE Zones on official flood maps);
• near an inlet;
• within 30 feet of the normal high water level of areas designated as inland fishing waters
by the N.C. Marine Fisheries Commission and the N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission;
• near a public water supply;
• within 575 feet of Outstanding Resource Waters defined by the Environmental
Management Commission.
For more information on the CAMA Handbook for Development in Coastal North Carolina and for
mitigating steps required during development, see the following web -page;
. http://www.nccoastalmanagement.net/Handbook/contents.htm
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 1: Executive Summary and Introduction 3

What Are the Types of CAMA Permits?
There are currently three types of development permits: major permits, general permits and
minor permits. The Division of Coastal Management makes permit decisions after considering
agency and public comments, and after determining whether a proposed project meets CRC
rules and is consistent with the policies of the local government's Land Use Plan.
The CAMA permit system is divided into major and minor permits, based on the potential
impacts and size of a development project.
Major permits are necessary for activities that require other state or federal permits
(such as stormwater and sedimentation control), for projects that cover more than 20 acres or
for construction covering more than 60,000 square feet. Applications for major permits are
reviewed by 10 state and 4 federal agencies before a decision is made.
Minor permits are required for projects, such as single-family houses, that do not
require major permits or general permits. Permits are reviewed, issued and administered to CRC
standards by local governments under contract with the Division of Coastal Management.
The Town of Sunset Beach issues CAMA minor permits.
General permits are used for routine projects that usually have little or no threat to the
environment.
For detailed information on permit categories refer to Section 5: Applying for a CAMA Permit, located
at this web address htlp://www.nccoastalmanagement.net/Handbook/contents.htm.
Some development may be authorized by exemption certificate. Section 103(5)(b) of the Coastal
Area Management Act exempts the following activities from permitting requirements:
• road maintenance within a public right-of-way;
• utility maintenance on projects -that already have, CAMA permits;
• energy facilities covered by other laws or N.C. Utilities Commission rules;
• agricultural or forestry production that doesn't involve the excavation or filling of
estuarine or navigable waters or coastal marshland (Note: these activities are not exempt
from permitting requirements under the state's Dredge and Fill Law);
• agricultural or forestry ditches less than 6 feet wide and 4 feet deep;
• emergency maintenance and repairs when life and property are in danger;
• the construction of an accessory building usually found with an existing structure, if no
filling of estuarine or navigable waters or coastal marshland is involved.
1.5 Public Involvement
Formulating policies based on community consensus covering a wide range of issues relies on
adequate public involvement. In addition to providing the public an opportunity to provide
their concerns on growth and development, the Land Use Plan is intended to inform the public
on the importance of planning, the role their town government plays in managing development,
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 1: Executive Summary and Introduction 4

the possible impacts of un-managed development, and the utility of preserving natural
resources.
The 2006 Sunset Beach Land Use Plan Update established a Citizen Participation Plan (See
Appendix II) which provides the public with the Land Use Plan meeting schedule and the
methods by which the Town will use to distribute Land Use Plan materials to the public. Those
methods include: newspaper advertisements, Town website: http://www.sunsetbeachnc.gov/,
email list serve, and a hardcopy of materials available at Town Hall located at 700 Sunset Blvd.
N.
1.5.1 Citizen Participation Plan
The Town Council adopted Phase I of the Citizen Participation Plan in April 2006, and Phase II
in March 2007. See Appendix II for the Phase I and Phase II Citizen Participation Plans.
For detailed information on how to use the document see phase II `Tools for
Managing Development`, sections 10.1-10.2.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 1: Executive Summary and Introduction 5

Section 2. Community Issues and Vision
2.1 Growth Related Concerns and Goals
The identification of community concerns and goals by the public and local leaders helps to
identify the most problematic issues facing the community and what the community wants to
accomplish. The key issues facing the community are usually the result of growth related
conditions that are beginning to directly impact the quality of life of residents and property
owners. After key issues are identified and prioritized for action, a community `vision' and local
policies are established to guide growth in accordance with the Town's desired direction.
2.2 Key Planning Issues Impacting Sunset Beach
The list of dominant issues facing the Town were established from public meetings, staff input,
Planning Board and Town Council guidance, and from lingering issues from the 1997 Land Use
Plan.
Given the number and complexity of issues, and the Town's limited capacity to address them all,
the Town will likely only fully address or attempt to resolve a handful of community issues.
Therefore, a priority list of issues will be established. The prioritized issues are generally those
key issues that have recently emerged and those which the Town can proactively address. The
priority issues will be thoroughly addressed under the policy statements in this Land Use Plan
(to be established in phase II). Furthermore, a set of objectives will be established to adequately and
feasibly address the top issues. The objectives to accomplish will make-up the Town's
Implementation Schedule (to be established inphaseII). The Implementation Schedule is a list of
items to be carried out by the Town over a five-year period. The purpose of the Schedule is to
ensure that policies are actually implemented and town goals are being actively pursued.
Clarification Between Goals, Objectives and Policies
A Goal is a desired outcome. Ex. Improve surface water quality.
An Objective is a specific step or action taken to reach a goal. Ex. Implement specific
stormwater management measures to reduce runoff to surface water.
A Policy is an official course of action or guiding principle that is followed to ensure
actions taken are consistent with goals. Ex. The Town shall take steps to pursue the improvement
Of surface water quality in its jurisdiction.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 2: Community Issues and Vision

2.2.1 General Issues Identified
The following list is the complete list of growth related issues identified by the Town and
through public input. The list is not in any particular order.
• Storm Water Management
• Expansion of Sewer System
• Impacts Associated with High-rise Bridge
• What Housing Types Should be Allowed (e.g.
Family)
• Types and Scale of Commercial Growth
"Mega -structures", Single Family, Multi
• Increasing Public Access/Boat Ramps
• Proactively Manage Intensity (building height and lot coverage) and Density (units per
acre) of all new Development
• Assess Potential Impacts from Surrounding Area Growth (Myrtle Beach, Brunswick
County and Wilmington)
• Assess Feasibility of More Parks/Recreation Opportunities in the Jurisdiction
• Ensure Infrastructure Capacity will Meet Expected Growth
• Protect Quality Green Space/Open Space (Protect sensitive areas)
• What Level of Continued Annexation & ETJ?
• Define the Town's Character- Is it a Small Beach Town?
• Traffic/Transportation Issues and Needs
• Provide Adequate Public Parking/Restrooms for day trippers
• Town Responsibility for Remaining Consistent with Land Use Plan When Taking
Public Action
2.2.2 Priority Issues and Goals
• Expansion of. Centralized Sewer/Elimination.of Septic Systems....
• Stormwater Runoff/Water Quality Improvement
• Proactively Managing Dimensional Size (lot size, density, and height) of Future
Development and Redevelopment
• Retaining and Enhancing Community Appearance (landscaping, signage, buffers)
2.2.3 Key Goals of CAMA To Be Integrated With Town Goals
In addition to the Town's list of priority issues and associated goals, the Coastal Resource
Commission (CRC) and the Division of Coastal Management (DCM) have integrated a set of -
goals to assist the Town in meeting the planning requirements of the Coastal Area Management
Act (CAMA). These goals are related to five development -related "Management Topics"
established by the CRC. The Management Topic areas include:1) Public Access; 2) Land
Use Compatibility; 3) Infrastructure Carrying Capacity; 4) Natural Hazards; and 5) Surface
Water Quality. Consistency with the goals of the CAMA Management Topics is felt to be
. essential for the proper use, development, and protection of coastal resources.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 2: Community Issues and Vision 7

Many of the issues and goals identified and prioritized by the Town already address the broad
CAMA goals and will be integrated and combined where applicable. However, where Town
identified goals may lack, the Town is required to integrate and attempt to meet all the goals
under the Management Topics.
The additional goals under the CAMA Management Topics that are to be integrated with Town
goals include:
• Maximize public access to the beaches and the public trust waters of the jurisdiction.
• Ensure that development and use of resources or preservation of land minimizes direct
and secondary environmental impacts, avoids risks to public health, safety and welfare
and is consistent with the capability of the land based on considerations of interactions
of natural and manmade features.
• Ensure that public infrastructure systems are appropriately sized, located and managed
so the quality and productivity of areas of environmental concern and other fragile areas
are protected or restored.
• Conserve and maintain barrier dunes, beaches, flood plains, and other coastal features for
their natural storm protection functions and their natural resources giving recognition to
public health, safety, and welfare issues.
• Maintain, protect and where possible enhance water quality in all coastal wetlands,
rivers, streams and estuaries.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 2: Community Issues and Vision

2.3 Vision Statement
The Vision Statement of Sunset Beach is intended to be a general and brief statement about the
Town's main preferences for future growth. The Vision Statement should be based on a
consensus of the views of community citizens and community representatives.
The Town should establish a community vision that ..."consists of a description of the general
physical appearance and form that represents the local government's plan for the Town. The
community vision shall include statements of general objectives to be achieved by the plan.
These objectives shall serve as the foundation for more specific objectives and policies stated
elsewhere in the Land Use Plan. The objectives shall include changes that the local government
feels are needed to achieve the planning vision".
To maximize the utility and scope of the Vision Statement of Sunset Beach, community priority
issues, local citizen input, and the preferences of the local government were all considered
during the statement creation process.
2006/2007 Sunset Beach Vision Statement
The Town of Sunset Beach intends to promote and support the
orderly economic and aesthetic growth and development of
the community in accordance with its adopted Land Use Plan
and development -related ordinances. The Town of Sunset
Beach desires to maintain its unique coastal -town character by
promoting lower -density and single-family residential
development as its primary growth pattern. The Town also
recognizes that it coexists with a fragile coastal environment,
and it shall seek to preserve and, conserve the land and
estuarine water, including its beach and golf course amenities
that have made this community a highly desirable place to live.
Furthermore, the Town values being responsive to the public
and improving the quality of life for all its citizens, to this end,
the Town shall continually seek the involvement, input and
various viewpoints of its citizens during the Town's official
consideration of land use and development decisions.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 2: Community Issues and Vision

Section 3. Analysis of Trends and Emerging Conditions
The analysis of trends and emerging conditions section provides information on the population,
housing and economic characteristics of Sunset Beach. Such information is intended to allow
Town officials to make growth management decisions based on an understanding and
knowledge of where the Town has come from, where it is and where it may be heading.
The sources of data used include the 1990 and 2000 U.S. Census, U.S. Census 2004 municipal
estimates, NC State Demographer 2004 estimates and 2010 -2030 projections, and a 2005
Claritas, Inc. (www.Claritas.com) demographics projection for southeast Brunswick County and
northeast Horry County (South Carolina).
Population, Housing and Economy
The current population size, both permanent and seasonal, and the level to which it will change
during the planning period determines the amount of land that should be allocated for future
uses and the related pressure that may be expected on coastal resources. Also, demands placed
on community infrastructure (roads, sewer, stormwater, etc.) are directly related to growth in
population and development. Population characteristics such as age and income help predict
requirements for different types of housing and land uses. (NC DCM, Technical Manual for Coastal
Planning)
Information on the existing housing stock and related household information in the Sunset
Beach community provides a base for planning for future housing needs. Household size, the
types of housing units, and the number of owners and renters, can all be considerations when
formulating development policies.
3.1 Population Characteristics and Trends in Sunset Beach
Table 1: Population Change from 1990 to 2004
Source. U.S. Census 1990 and 2000, US. Census Estimatcs 2004, and NC Statc Demo a her
Municipality 1990 2000 %Growth' ' - 2001 2002 2003 . 2004 .0/0
Pop. "Pop. (1990= Pop. Pop. Pop. Pop. Growth Growth
2000) (1990- (2000
2004)- 2004
Sunset Beach 311 1,852 495% 1,942 2,018 2,098 2,095 573% 13%
Town Limits
ETJ* 370 418**
*Derived from counting population totals in the census blocks in the ETJ area. "Estimated applying the 13%
growth rate to the 2000 ETJ population.
Table 1 shows that the population of Sunset Beach has increased considerably from its 1990
level. However, it must be noted that several annexations of pre-existing housing units and
populations occurred on the mainland portion of Town between 1990 and 2000. Such
annexations help explain the substantial percent increase in population as compared to adjacent
municipalities which is seen in later tables. While there were additional annexations between
2000 and 2004, the percent growth of only 13% between 2000 and 2004 shows that the scale of
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07110 Section 3: Analysis of Exiting and Emerging Conditions 10

annexations decreased and therefore the scale of population growth decreased. The tables
below show the annexations between 1990 and 1996 and the annexations between 1997 and
2006. The 1990-1996 annexations included many developments/subdivisions with pre-existing
occupied housing units, or units which were subsequently developed and occupied before the
Census 2000 count. The only comparatively large annexation between 1997 and 2006 was part
of the Sea Trail golf course (Jones Byrd course), which did not contain many pre-existing
housing units and therefore did not increase the Town population as substantially as some of
the large annexations in the 1990's. However, portions of this annexation are currently being
subdivided and are planned for residential lots along the golf course, which could boost
population numbers again. The tables below list the Towns annexations over the last 16 years.
Table 1.1 Annexations 1990 -1996
Name
Year
Acres
Kin 's Trail
1990
25
Sea Trail Phase I and II
1990
210
Sugar Sands
1990
24
Oyster Point Phase I and II
1991
66
Colony
1991
21
Woodstork, Baroncy Place, Osprey Watch
1994
59
Seaside Station, Shoreline Woods, Oyster Bay Golf Course
1995
454
Planter's Ride
1995
108
TOTAL
967
Table 1.2 Annexations 1997-2006
Name
Year
Acres
Rice Mill Phase III & IV
1998
29
Seatrail at NC 179
1998
3.5
Discovery Lake at Seatrail Plantation
1998
11
Sea Trail
1999
592
Colony II
1999
8
Georgetown Estates
2001
32
Rice Mill Phase II
2003
20.5
Ransom Tract
2005
29
Lake Medcalf/Lake Shore
2005
45
Frink Property
2006 -
I&
Meyers Park
2006
2
TOTAL
790
Analysis using Geographic Information Systems (GIS) processing by the Cape Fear Council of
Governments shows that there is currently approximately 4,000 acres of total area in the Town
Limits. This total area not only includes land, but water, marsh, dunes and unvegetated beach as
well. The amount of land area* in the corporate limits is approximately 2,600 acres (2,300
mainland + 300 Island). By comparing the land area annexed over the last 16 years (approx.1,750
acs.) to the total land area in Town as of 2006 (2,600 acs.), shows that the Town has more than
tripled in land area size since its pre-1990 land area amount of approximately 750 acs.
`Land area in this case refers to land that is more likely to be suitable for development.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 3: Analysis of Exiting and Emerging Conditions 11

Table 2: Population Growth Comparison for NC and SC Coastal Municipalities 1990-2004
S --- U S Census 1990 and 2000 US Census Estimates 2004 NC State Demographer)
Municipality
1990
POP.
2000
Pop.
% Growth Rate
1990<2000
2004
Po
% Growth 'Rate .
; 2000-2004
Bald Head Island
78
173
121%
246
420/o
_Calabash
1,210
715
-40%
1,346
6%'
Carolina Beach
3,630
4,778
32%
5,192 1
8%
Caswell Beach
175
370
1110/o
457
23%
Holden Beach
626
792
26%
835
5%
Kure Beach..
619
1,512
144%
2,020
33%;
Oak Island
4,550
6,627
45%
7,281
90/0
Ocean Isle Beach
534
- 430:
-19% ":
483
12%
Shallotte
965
1,381
43%
1,533
11%
Southport
2,369
2,374
0%
2,612
10%
Sunset Beach
311
1,852
495%
2,095
13%
Surf City
970
1,413
46%
1,641
16%
Topsail Beach
362
473
31%
523
10%
Wrightsville Beach "
2,937
2,593
-11°Jo
2,539
-2qo
Emerald Isle
2,434
3,486
43%
3,648
4%
Kitty Hawk
" 1,937
2,991
54%
3,313
10%
Kill Devil Hills
4,238
5,897
39%
6,425
8%
Brunswick County
50,985
73,143
43%
85,034
-16%
SOUTH CAROLINA
Atlantic Beach
446
351
-21%
364
3%
North Myrtle Beach
8,636
11,121
29%
13,160
180/0
Myrtle Beach
24,848 -`
23,401
-.05%'
25,410
8%
Surfside Beach
3,845
4,439
15%
4,661
5%
Horry County
144,053
196,629
36%
217,608 ,.'
101)/0
Average
12%
Sunset Beach
er
RankHi
3 r
Lowest
11`
` Hi hest
Hi hest
g
12`
Highest-
6`
hest
*Ranking includes municipalities only. There are 21 municipalities in the ranking.
Table 2 shows the considerable growth rate that the Town experienced since 1990'ih
comparison with the growth rates of similar municipalities. Similar in this case refers to either
its similar coastal geography or its adjacency to the Sunset Beach area. In 1990, with limited
mainland territory and a small on -island permanent population, the Town's population was the
third lowest out of all the communities in the above comparison. Between 1990 and 2000, the
Town undertook several large-scale annexations of mainland golf communities which led to a
nearly 500% increase from its 1990 population. This growth rate far exceeded the growth rates
of other North Carolina beach communities. While the Town's growth rate was exponential, its
actual population in 2004 was still ranked only seventh highest among North Carolina
municipalities with a beach strand, behind Oak Island, Carolina Beach, Kill Devil Hills, Kitty
Hawk, Emerald Isle and Wrightsville Beach. Sunset Beach will likely surpass Wrightsville
Beach in the next few years as Wrightsville Beach is built -out and actually experiencing a
decline in population. Surf City may also rise much higher in the ranking as it continues to
accept a high-level of voluntary annexations and expands its mainland boundaries. The positive
and negative experiences with mainland expansion in Surf City may be a good case study for
Sunset Beach as it plans for further expansion. Despite its much higher growth rate during the
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 3: Analysis of Exiting and Emerging Conditions 12

1990's, the Sunset Beach growth rate from 2000 to 2004 became more in line with the other
community growth rates compared in the table above. The rate was only slightly above the 12%
average for all jurisdictions.
Table 3: Population Demographics Comparison of All North Carolina "Municipalities with
Beaches" from Census 2000
/Cnvrw• II S Canax 7(Nl(1 Pnhu)ntinn nn� Hnvcina rma ►LS Canax 7(1llf) Fmh)nvmvnt nnr� In�nmv)
Municipality
Median
Age
% in Labor Force
-
16 &r Over
Median
Household '
Income
Median Family
Income
Per Capita Income
Atlantic Beach
48.7
63.3%
$38,312
$52,411
$31,339
Bald Head Island
56.3
567%
$62,083 =
$56,964
$45,585'
Carolina Beach
43.6
68.0%
$37,662
$44,882 "
$24,128
Caswell Beach
59.9
39.9%
; $57,083
$63,750
` $41,731'
Emerald Isle
50.1
54.3%
$53,274
$60,257
$31,316
Holden Beach i
55.4
48.8%
$59,583 +
$70,000
$36,113
Indian Beach
58.8
52.7%
$47,250
$45,250
$25,826
Kill Devil Hills
36.7
76.6%
$39,712
$44,681
$20,679
Kitty Hawk
40.6
69.9%
$42,813
$48,656
$22,960
Kure Beach
50.5
60.8%
$47,143
$55,875
$26,759
Nags Head
42.7
67.0%
$53,095
$61,302
$30,157
North Topsail Beach
45.1
64 4%
$45,982 '
$53,125
$33,972
Oak Island
49.2
56.1%
$40,496
$48,775
$23,964
Ocean Isle Beach
53.4
49.6%
$67,639
$65,625
$42,605
Pine Knoll Shores
61.8
36.8%
$53,800
$60,662
$34,618
Southern Shores
51.4
51.3%
$61,676
$68,250
$35,933'
Sunset Beach
60.2
37.8%
$47,356
$57,019
$36,181
Surf City
48.1
61.7%
$40,521
$48,654
$25,242
Topsail Beach
55.6
53.7%
$55,750
$64,167
$35,838
Wrightsville Beach
37.1
65.6%
; $55,903 '
$71,641
$36,575
Brunswick County
42.2
57.7%
$35,888
$42,037
$19,857
North Carolina
35.3
65.7%
$39,184
, $46,335
$20,307
NC Beach
Municipal Average
50.26
56.7%
$50,356
$57,065
$32,118
Sunset Beach Rank
Among North
Carolina
Communities with
Beaches*
2nd
Highest
2nd
Lowest
11th
Highest -
10tth
--Highest
5 _
Highest
*Ranking includes municipalities only. There are 20 municipalities in the ranking.
Table 3 shows that according to Census 2000 information, the Sunset Beach population is on
average ten years older than the populations of the other North Carolina beach communities."
The Town also has a lower percentage of its population working in the labor force. Sunset
Beach is around the median (half of the other communities above and half below) in household
and family income levels in the table above. However; Sunset Beach was the 5th highest in per
capita income (total income divided by total population) in the 2000 Census. As housing costs
have substantially increased since 2000, it is likely that median income levels have also been
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 3: Analysis of Exiting and Emerging Conditions 13
J

increasing as the new residents coming in must have higher income levels to afford the housing.
The increase in the Market Value of housing in Sunset Beach is shown in Table 11.
Table 4: Median Age in Sunset Beach and Adjacent Municipalities 1990-2005
(Source: U.S. Census 1990 and 2000, 2005 Claritas Demographics Report)
Mtimcipahty
� 1990 .:.
MedianA e.1Vledian�A
2000
a
`.;� 2005�
Mediane estimate's
Sunset Beach
49.9
60.2
58.2
Calabash
63.6
57.9
59.7
Carolina Beach
37.6
43.6
N/A
Caswell Beach
44.5
59.9
N/A
Holden Beach
53.3
55.4
N/A
Kure Beach
44.9
50.5
N/A
Oak Island
N/A
49.2
N/A
Ocean Isle Beach
50.3
53.4
N/A
Sunset Beach Rank
P Highest
Highest
*Estimate part of 2005 Claritas Inc. Demographic Profile of Myrtle Beach and surrounding area.
Table 4 shows that the median age in Sunset Beach has increased by about ten years between
1990 and 2000. If the population was static this would be attributed to natural aging between
the ten year census, but due to the large increase in population between 1990 and 2000 we can
assume that it is the age of the residents moving into Sunset Beach which has become older. The
data in the table above and the table below show that the people who have recently moved into
the Town and those making up the majority of the Town's population are retirees or of
retirement age, and that the proportion of middle-aged people is decreasing.
Table 5: Population by Age in Sunset Beach 1990-2005
(Source U.S. Census I990 and 2000,1005'Claritas Demographics Report) "
1990
A
2000
A
--2005
d55or oveestimate)*_ ,
42%
64%
57%
;.. A �ed,35_to 54 �.:....
2000
� . to ed°35 fb54 _ .... ... ,
;� 2005
*.. A `ed 35ao54.: estimate �'._
33%
230/0
20%
-, 1990
A"ed 18 or less
777720W-77-
A` ed'18or Tess
2005
A ed 18 or;less estimate
13%
7%
100/0
*Estimate part of 2005 Claritas Inc. Demographic Profile of Myrtle Beach and surrounding area.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 3: Analysis of Exiting and Emerging Conditions 14

Table 6: 2005 Estimate of Median Household Income and Per Capita Income in Sunset.
Beach and Adjacent Areas*
(Source: 2005 Claritas Demographics Report)
Municipality` .
;;-Median Household Income
in2005: estimate .:.
, , Per Capita Income in 2005 .
estimate ....
Sunset Beach Area
$54,732
$38,882
Shallotte Area
$37,628
$19,835
Ocean Isle Beach Area
$45,124
$29,489
Calabash/Carolina Shores
Area
$42,424
$26,205
North Myrtle Beach Area
$41,418
$26,843
Little River Area
$44,361
$25,522
*Tabulation areas are done by zip code boundaries not municipal boundaries.
While Table 6 above is based on zip code boundaries instead of Town Limits for data gathering,
the zip code boundaries do not overlap municipal boundaries and are small enough so that the
data is still useful for comparison. Table 6 shows that the Sunset Beach area has considerably
higher median and per capita income than adjacent municipalities in Brunswick and Horry
counties. The income level of an area is likely to determine the types of housing and commercial
retail, service, and recreational development that seeks to enter the local market with the higher
income levels.
3.1.1 Seasonal and Peak Population Estimates
When planning for infrastructure, housing, commerce and recreation needs that may occur as a
result of permanent population growth, it is also necessary to consider the impact vacationers,
visitors and temporary residents present to the planning area on a seasonal basis.
Persons who reside in the planning area for the majority of the year, or refer to it as their primary
residence, make up the permanent population. Persons who temporarily vacation or visit for at
least one night in the.planning area -during thepeakseason comprise -the. seasonal population.
The permanent population plus the seasonal population make up the peak population. While
there is no standard method for tabulating seasonal population for a given jurisdiction, there are
a few methods that can be used to estimate the population. A frequently used way to estimate
seasonal populations is to use the number of housing units and occupancy rates to determine
how many people per housing unit occupy different types of housing units. A problem with
using housing units and occupancy rates to estimate population is that it is difficult to know the
true number of housing units being used and how many people are staying in each unit. There is
a wide variance in assuming three people per unit versus six people per unit in estimates, but
such wide variance exists from unit to unit.
Seasonal Estimate by Housing Unit
According to Census data there were approximately 2,000 vacant units categorized as seasonal
use in the year 2000. Census 2000 also shows that around 60% of the total housing in Town has
been used for seasonal use. Since Census 2000, there have been 828 total housing units built. If it
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 3: Analysis of Exiting and Emerging Conditions 15

is assumed that the 60% ratio for seasonal housing continues, it can be assumed 60% of the 828
new housing units will be used for seasonal use. 60% of 828 is 497. The 2,000 already existing
seasonal units plus 497 new units equals approximately 2,500 units for seasonal use today. To
try and account for variation in the number of persons per unit, it will be assumed that 50% of
the seasonal units have 3 persons and 50% has 6 persons. In addition, a low seasonal estimate
will be derived by assuming occupancy of only 75% of the seasonal units. A high seasonal
estimate will be derived by assuming 100% occupancy of the seasonal units. The permanent
population has been estimated to be 2,219 for 2006, which is shown in Chart 2 later in this
section.
High Estimate (100% Occupancy)
[1,250 units x 3 persons = 3,750] + [1,250 units x 6 persons = 7,500]=11,000 seasonal pop.
11,000 seasonal + 2,219 permanent=13,219 peak pop.
Low Estimate (75% Occupancy)
[(1,250 x .75) x 3 persons = 2,812] + [1,250 x .75 x 6 persons = 5,625] = 8,437 seasonal pop.
8,437 seasonal pop. + 2,219 permanent=10,656 peak pop.
Seasonal Estimate by Water Consumption
Another technique to estimate seasonal population is to compare the metered water
consumption rates in the off-season to the metered water consumption in the high season.
Water consumption totals during the off-season gives a base number that can be assumed to be
an amount consumed by permanent residents only. If it is known how much water the
permanent population alone uses in the off-season, it can be compared with how much water is
being used in the high season. For example, if there was a known permanent population of 1,000 ,
people using one million gallons per day in the off-season month of February, we could assume
that a 2 million gallon per day usage in July could infer that twice as many people were using
water, and therefore there could be 2,000 people in the Town. Using water consumption
comparisons is problematic if there is a large presence of private water wells in Town, which
would not show in the water use data. However, the Town of Sunset Beach estimates that near
100% of residences are connected to water service.
It is important to note that there are variables that could skew this simplified comparison
approach, and it is reiterated that seasonal and peak population figures are best -guess estimates.._
The water consumption comparison table follows. Peak season population estimates are in
the bottom row of the table.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 3: Analysis of Exiting and Emerging Conditions 16

Table 7. Water Usage in Peak Season Versus Usage in Off -Season
fSnurce: Tnwn of Sunset Reach Finance nenartment)
Peak Season
Low Season
Year
June
July
August
Febru
2005 Water Use
23,032,602
29,196,923
26,055,399
2006 Water Use
7,690,290 (.274
. I MGD)
8,239,596 (adjusted
for 30 days)
% Increase over
280%
354%
316%
February
Estimated
6,213*
7,855*
7,017*
2,219 (permanent
Population for the
residents)
Month
*Numbers are the peak population, they already include both seasonal and permanent pops.
The months used for comparison were February and the peak season months of June, July and
August. February was used because it has the least water usage of any month, meaning this
likely isolates the water consumption level for only the permanent or year-round population.
Three peak season months were used to get a range of peak populations over the summer. The
year 2005 water use data was used for the peak season months, because this data has not yet
been collected for 2006.
W Since February only has 28 days, an additional 2 days of water usage was added to the February
total to give a 30 day use period for comparison with the peak season months. It is therefore
inferred that the permanent population of 2,219 people uses 8,239,596 gallons of water in 30
days. The next step was to compare this monthly total consumption to the consumption level in
the peak season. As shown in Table 7 above, there is an increase in water use during the peak
season over the low season ranging between 280-354%. The "estimated population for the
month" numbers in the bottom row in the above table reflect increasing the population of 2,219
by the respective percent increase in water use for each peak season month. For example, a
population of 2,219 increased by 354% is 7,855. [2,219 x 3.54 (or 354%) = 7,855]
Using water consumption data, the peak seasonal over -night population estimate
ranges from 6,200 to 7,900 people.
It is also important to note that the 6,200 to 7,900 range could be overestimating the peak
population when you consider that during the summertime, extra consumption of water can be
caused from watering lawns, taking more showers after swimming or being in the heat, and
increased commercial and restaurant water usage in the summer, rather than from an increase in
population.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 3: Analysis of Exiting and Emerging Conditions 17

Summary of Peak and Seasonal Population Estimates
Two methods of estimating seasonal and peak populations have been used showing a wide
range of possible peak populations. Since there are several variables that could alter any of the
estimates, it may be best to use the entire range (6,000-13,000) or a mid -point (9,500) when
considering the Town's peak over -night population.
Day -trip Visitors
Another consideration when gauging seasonal population impact on community infrastructure
is the effect of `day-trippers'. Unlike estimates of overnight visitors above, `day-trippers' travel
for brief stays in the community, typically for recreation activities like going to the beach. `Day-
trippers' would primarily have an impact on traffic congestion and parking availability. Again,
there is no standard method for calculating `day-trippers'. One of the best indictors for the
number of day -trip visitors is the number of parking spaces available. The availability of public
parking in the Town has not changed significantly since the 1997 Land Use Plan update. The
1997 Land Use Plan estimated day-trippers as follows:
[3 shifts of parking x 433 parking spaces (283 public + 150 pay spaces at the fishing
pier)] x 2.8 persons per vehicle = 3,637 day -trip visitors per day
Again, many variables including fewer shift changes and more persons per car, and even illegal
parking could make the day -trip visitor total vary widely.
Peak Population and Day -Trip Visitors
Considering the peak over -night population estimates plus the day -trip visitor estimate, the
Town of Sunset Beach could have between 9,000 to 16,000 people in its jurisdiction on a peak
day. It is unlikely, given current road and bridge capacity, that these peak levels are sustained
constantly over the summer months, and are probably only reached during weekends with good
weather or holidays such as the 4th of July.
3.1.2 Population Projections
Much like seasonal and peak population estimates, population projections can vary widely due
to intervening factors such as the strength of the economy, availability of jobs, housing prices,
and the quality of life in the area. However, projecting potential population can create an
awareness of the potential challenges and needs that may confront the community in the near
future. Sunset Beach is a community with vacant land available for residential development and
annexation, as well as the potential for redevelopment and in -fill. Sunset Beach is located in
Brunswick County, which is one of the fastest growing counties in North Carolina, and has
recently been named one of the fastest growing counties in the United States. Sunset Beach is
also on the state border with South Carolina and the high growth area of North Myrtle Beach
and Little River. It is almost universally accepted that the Town will continue to grow over the
next twenty years. The question is how big will the population get in Sunset Beach. If it desires,
one way the Town can play a role in determining its future population is to place limitations on
the density of future development, or allowing dense development but requiring more open
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 3: Analysis of Exiting and Emerging Conditions 18

space dedication in Town as part of those developments. Open space dedication will remove
land for further development while also improving the quality of life and aesthetic value of the
community.
Population projections for the total population in the County are provided by the North
Carolina State Demographer. Municipal population projections are not done by the State
Demographer because of the difficulty in predicting things such as annexations. The State
Demographer's population growth for Brunswick County shows that the growth in population
will occur solely from migration into the county, while natural growth from births will be
offset by the natural population decline from deaths. It may also be assumed that this trend of
all in -migration growth and zero natural population growth will be the same for Sunset Beach.
Chart 1 below shows the State Demographer's projected population growth for Brunswick
County.
Chart 1: County Permanent Population Projections to 2010, 2020 and 2030
160,000
140,000
120,000
100,000
80,000
60,000
40,000
20,000
0
2005'
2010
BRUNSWICK
2020'
2030
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 3: Analysis of Exiting and Emerging Conditions 19

Chart 2 shows a projection of population growth in Sunset Beach from 2005 to 2020. An annual
growth rate of 3.2% was applied to Sunset Beach for the year 2010 estimate, which is in line with
the Town's growth rate trend from 2000-2004. In addition, the annex of the "Sandpiper Bay"
and "Wyndfall" tracts in June 2007 was also included in estimating the 2010 population estimate
(assumes 59%* of the 711 housing units in Sandpiper Bay and Wyndfall will be occupied by a
household of 2 permanent residents). An annual growth rate of 2.4% was applied to show
growth from 2010 to 2025, which is based on the projected growth rate of the County during
this time period.
*59% is the County's permanent resident to seasonal resident occupation rate as of the latest census.
Chart 2: Sunset Beach Permanent Population Projections*
Based on the estimates in Chart 2, the 2010 projection is a 84% increase from the Census 2000
Sunset Beach population of 1,854. Any variation in the population increase will likely be caused
by further annexations by the Town, infill of existing lots, and/or re -zonings allowing more or
less dense development.
3.2 Housing Characteristics and Trends in Sunset Beach
Analyzing the type of existing housing stock enables the community, elected officials and
planners to get an overall picture of the range of housing opportunities available or needed in the
jurisdiction. Other housing attributes such as the building year of the structure, owner versus
renter occupation, and value, act as indicators to the nature and characteristic of the existing
housing stock.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 3: Analysis of Exiting and Emerging Conditions 20

Table 8: Type of Housing Units Comparison For All North Carolina Municipalities with
"Beach Strand"
Source: U.S. Census 2ll00 Population and Housing)
Total
Number
% Single
Number of
o Multi-
%o Duplex and
% Manufactured
Number,
' of Units
Family out `
Units in -
Family
Townhome .
Housing out of
of
as
of Total ; ,
. Multi -Family
out of
out of Total
Total Housing,
Municipality
Housing
Single -
Housing -
'Developments'
Total
Housing Units
Units
Units
Family',
Housing
Units
Atlantic Beach
4,728
1,460
30.8%
1,002
21.1%
20.2%
27.9%
Bald Head
599
518
87.5%
27
4'.6%
7.8%
0.0%
Island .
Calabash
508
293
146
28.1%
1.5%
13.9%
Carolina
_;4,086
1,743
_42.8%
1,754
43.1%
11.6%
2.5% -
Beach
Carolina
838
817
20
2.4%
0.6%
0.2%
Shores
Caswell Beach
571
251
43.7%,
266
%463%
9.70o
0.30/0
Emerald Isle
6,017
3,505
58.7%
764
12.8%
11.6%
16.7%
Holden Beach
2,062
1,731
84.7%
53
2.6%
12.7%
0.0%
Indian Beach
1,218
34
2.7%
366
29.4%
0.2%
66.9%
Kill Devil Hills
5,302
4,383
82.9%
569
10.8%
4.1%
2.2%
Kitty Hawk
2,618
1,778
67.8%
264
10.10/0
9.2%
12.7%
Kure Beach
1,560
961
61.2% `
323
20.6%
13.6%
4.5%
Nags Head
4,149
3,459
83.3%
284
6.8%
7.5%
1.6%
North Topsail
2,085
533
25.7%
1,030
49.6%
19.0%
5.6%
:Beach
Oak Island
6,651
5,562
83.5%
132
2.0%
2.50,61
11.5%
Ocean Isle
2,507
1,743
69.3%
664
26.4%
4.2%
0.110
Beach
Pine Knoll
2,049
981
47.7%
758
36.8%
15.4%
0.1%
Shores
Southern
1,921
1,882
97.4%
3
0.2%
2.2%
0.2%
`Shores
Sunset
2,983
1,591
51.8%
652
21.2%
6.7%
20.3%
Beach
Surf City
2,578.
1,43T ,
55.6%...-...
245
9.59/G,..
_ .:: 6A%
28.5%
Topsail Beach
1,149
920
81.1%
79
7.0%
11.7%
0.3%
Wrightsville
3,050
968
31.3%
1,077
:34.8%
33.4%
0.5%
Beach
Brunswick Co.
55.6%
North
64.4%
Carolina
NC Beach
2,692
1,661
59.4%
476
19.3%
9.6%
9.8%
Municipal
Average
Sunset Beach
8
10`
13
8`
9,
-14-
=4`
Rank Among
Highest
Highest
` Highest
: Highest
Highest
Highest
Highest
.North-,
-.
- --- -
-
--
- -
- _
Carolina
Communities
,with.:
- --
Beaches*
- . a .
-
*Ranking includes municipalities only. There are 22 municipalities in the ranking.
NOTE: Calabash and Carolina Shores do not have a "beach strand" within their jurisdiction, but were added for
comparison because of their proximity to Sunset Beach.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 3: Analysis of Exiting and Emerging Conditions 21

Table 8 above shows that Sunset Beach is well above the "North Carolina municipalities with a
beach" average for the number of total housing units. However, this relatively large number of
housing units is concentrated on the mainland portion of the Town. The island contains 1,094
units (or 36%) of the housing units according to Census 2000. Sunset Beach is slightly below the
median for percentage of housing units in single-family, and slightly above the median for
percentage of housing units in multi -family. Meaning that slightly more than half of the other
beach communities have larger shares of single family housing in their housing stock, and Sunset
Beach has slightly larger shares of multi -family in its housing stock than over half of the other
North Carolina beach communities. The data also show that Sunset Beach is well below the
median for percentage of duplex and townhomes within the housing stock. According to Census
2000, the Town is 4t in the percentage of mobile homes in its housing stock. While this figure
will likely reverse as land values continue to increase and redevelopment of mobile homes occur,
there are still permits for new mobile homes being sought and issued within the Town.
Table 9: Housing Occupancy Comparison For All North Carolina Municipalities with
"Beach Strand"
LSnurrr II S Crnms (M Pnhula[ion and Housing)
Munici alit ,
Total Number
of Housing
Units
%Housing Units
Occupied All
Year
%Housing
Units Owner
Occupied
Number
of Vacant
Units
% of Vacant
Units Designated
as Seasonal,
Recreational or
Occasional Use
Atlantic Beach
4,728
20.5%
64.7%
3,757
92.0%
Bald Head Island
599
14.7%
87.5%
511
64.8% .
Calabash
508
74.2%
74.8%
131
67.2%
Carolina Beach
4,086
56.2%
65.7%
1,790 -
69.1% '
Carolina Shores
838
91.4%
97.5%
72
61.1%
Caswell Beach'
571
32.70/o`
89.80/o
384
86.7%
Emerald Isle
6,017
27.3%
80.2%
4,373
94.7%
Holden Beach
2,062 '
18.4%
87.3%
1,683
64.8%
Indian Beach
1,218
4.1%
82.00/o
1,168
98.0%
Kill Devil Hills
5,302
48.8%
67.4%
2717
96.1%
Kitty Hawk
2,618
48.3%
74.7%
1,353
94.8%
Kure Beach-'
1,560
46.3%
76.1%
837
42.0%
Nags Head
41-149.,._...
..... 27.4%.....
_ 73.6%...._ .
3,011-• ..
". 98.0% .
North Topsail Beach '
2,085
21.6%
61.4% " '
1,634
85.9%
Oak Island
6,651
46.2%
78.9%
3,575
91.2%
Ocean Isle Beach
2,507 .
8.3%
86.1%
2,298
64.0%
Pine Knoll Shores
2,049
37.9%
90.6%
1,273
98.7%
Southern Shores
1,921
49.2%
93.7%
975
98.3%
Sunset Beach
2,983
30.5%
90.3%
2,074
87.9%
Surf City . ,
2,578
26.7%
74.7%
1,889
92.8%
Topsail Beach
1,149
21.9%
78.2%
897
83.1%
Wrightsville Beach •
3,050
41.8%
55.00/o
1,775
62.0%
Brunswick County
59.2%
NC Beach
Municipal Average
2,692
31.4%
78.6%
1,735
81.5%
Sunset Beach Rank Among
Notch Caiolina
Communities with Beaches'
Highest
Highest
Highest -
Highest
-
Highest
*Ranking includes municipalities only. There are 22 municipalities in the ranking.
NOTE: Calabash and Carolina Shores do not have a "beach strand" within their jurisdiction, but were added for
comparison because of their adjacency to Sunset Beach.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 3: Analysis of Exiting and Emerging Conditions 22

Table 9 shows that Sunset Beach is around the median for all North Carolina municipalities
with beaches in the ratio of occupied to vacant housing. Implying that Sunset Beach is typical as
far as its availability of housing for seasonal visitors. The Town is also among the highest in the
amount of owner occupied units, meaning that of those units occupied year round in Town,
almost all are occupied by the owner of the unit rather than by a long-term renter. Sunset Beach
is the median of all North Carolina municipalities with beaches for the percentage of its housing
stock used for seasonal or recreational rentals, again implying that Sunset Beach sits in the
middle as a seasonal tourism focused community. Meaning that about half the other beach
communities draw or want to draw more seasonal visitors, and half of the other North Carolina
beach communities have a smaller portion of its housing available for seasonal visitors.
Table 10: Median Year Built, Tenure, Number of Rooms, and Value Comparison of All
North Carolina Municipalities with "Beach Strand"
Source U.S. Census 2000 Po ulation and Housin
Municipality,
Median"
Year Units
Built :
Median Year Householder
Moved Into Unit (Owner
Occupied)Housing
Median Number of :
Rooms in Units
Median Value of
Owner Occupied
Atlantic Beach
1979
1993
4.4
$207,800
Bald Head Island
1992
1996
5.3
$525,000
Calabash
1987
1994
4.9
$107,400
Carolina Beach
1983
1994
4.4
$156,000
Carolina Shores
1988
1993
6.1
$153,000
Caswell Beach
1986
1995
5.3
$242,300
Emerald Isle
1986
1994
5.2
$200,000
Holden Beach
1985
1994
5.7
$247,300
Indian Beach
1985
1992
4.1
$625,000
Kill Devil Hills
- 1983, '
1994
4.9
$104,500
Kitty Hawk
1985
1995
5.3
$144,600
Kure Beach
1983
1996 :'
4.9
$188,300
Nags Head
1985
1995
5.5
$143,900
North Topsail Beach
" 1986 '
1996
4.4'
=. $137,500
Oak Island
1983
1995
5.1
$119,400
Ocean Isle Beach
1987
1996
5.9
- $340,700
Pine Knoll Shores
1989
1993
5.8
$220,500
Southern Shores
'1991 <
1994
6.6
$221,500
Sunset Beach
1988
1995
5.3
$219,600
Surf City
1985
;1996
4.7
$177,100
Topsail Beach
1982
1993
5.3
$281,300
Wrightsville Beach
1978 '
1992
5.3
$480,600
Brunswick County
$95,200
North Carolina
$108,300
NC Beach
Municipal Average
1985
1994
5.2
$249,145
Sunset Beach Rank
Among North _T
Carolina
Communities with',
Beaches*
4
In -
Tied for 2n - in Most
Recent Move -ins _
Tied for Highest
in Number of Rooms
10`
Highest`
Newest
Units
*Ranking includes municipalities only. There are 22 municipalities in the ranking.
NOTE: Calabash and Carolina Shores do not have a "beach strand" within their jurisdiction, but were added for
comparison because of their proximity to Sunset Beach.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 3: Analysis of Exiting and Emerging Conditions 23

Table 10 above suggests that compared to the other beach communities, Sunset Beach is among
those with the newest housing stock. The trend coast wide is actually for beach community
housing stock to become newer, as older and smaller beach -box houses are either demolished
and the lot redeveloped, or are damaged over time by storms and are eventually replaced with
structures built to stricter standards. The Town is also tied for 2nd for having some of the most
recent move -ins, meaning those occupying the housing in Sunset Beach have typically only lived
in the Town for a short time. According to Census 2000 data, Sunset Beach sits around the
median of the beach communities for housing value.
Table 11: Sunset Beach Building Permit Data from 2000-March 2006
Source: Town of Sunset Beach Ins ections Department)
Year
Single
Average
Multi--
'Duplex
Manufactured
Commercial,
_Demolition''
Family
Market
Family
Home
Value of
SF
Home*
2000
54
$111,230
7
5
5
2001:
69
$120,335
i7
6
9
4
2002
70
$145,370
103
4
16
1
2003
62
$171,022
-; 5
2
2004
82
$182,030
84
1
13
2
3
2005
73 `
$185,480
60
10
1
8'
Through
17
$163,484
52
4
4
March
(On pace
2006
for 68)
TOTAL
427
' 323 `'
16
62
10
15
Total
Housing
828
Units
*Based on total market value of new housing divided by total housing units. Does not include land value.
Table 11 shows that single family homes represented 52% of the total housing developed since
the year 2000. This percentage is almost identical to the pre-existing town -wide ratio (as shown
by Census 2000 data) of single family to other housing types. Of the housing developed since
2000, multi family has made up 39% of the total. This number is higher than its Census 2000
town -wide share of only 21%, suggesting that multi -family unit development is increasing in
Town and taking some of the percent share of the housing stock once held by duplex and
manufactured homes. Duplex development has only accounted for 2% of the housing developed
in the last six years. Manufactured housing totals 7% of the housing developed since 2000.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 3: Analysis of Exiting and Emerging Conditions 24

3.3 Local Economy
Background
Like any smaller community with a beach strand, the traditional local economy is
predominantly driven by seasonal tourism and recreation. However, Sunset Beach's location
will play a major a role in the types of commercial activities that develop in the Town in the next
five to ten years. Sunset Beach is located within two miles of the Town of Calabash, which has
been and plans to continue to be a regional center for seafood restaurant activity. Sunset Beach
is also within ten miles of North Myrtle Beach, which is expanding as a regional commercial
center with large-scale retail, recreation, entertainment, and service industries. Sunset Beach's
proximity to other growing commercial centers plays a part in determining whether such
commercial activities are needed or desired in Town. Other quickly growing areas with
substantial commercial activities near Sunset Beach include Shallotte, which is about twenty
miles away, and Wilmington which is about sixty miles away. Sunset Beach is in a position to
determine its future by having the ability to choose to remain a largely residential community
because of a large supply of nearby commercial activity, or it may choose to take advantage of
the growth around it and encourage commercial development in Town to service its growing
population. Sunset Beach's Land Use Plan policies should reflect the Town's position on these
near future commercial development decisions.
As shown previously in Table 8, there is a relatively low full-time housing occupancy level of
around 30%. This implies that the local economy of Sunset Beach is still primarily dependent on
seasonal tourism, recreation and housing rental activity for generating the bulk of economic
revenue in the Town. However, the Town's growing permanent population (over 2,000) and the
growing permanent population in the immediate area suggest that within the next five to ten
years it is likely that the local economy could shift from seasonal services towards servicing
year-round residents. Such commercial activities are already occurring, with developments such
as a medical facility and chain grocery stores and pharmacies. Furthermore, as these
communities increase in full-time residents, primarily retirees, the local economy will likely
move away from solely serving vacationers to an economy specialized in serving full-time
residents who are typically, moderate to upper income and older in age.
The Town of Sunset Beach will begin to see development pressure in the next five to ten years
for chain and big -box developments as the population levels in the area continue to increase and
make those large-scale developments more feasible for year-round operation. These types of
developments are known for generating more traffic congestion, their unappealing architectural
design, and taking commerce away from local businesses, but these types of developments also
generate sales and property tax revenue, provide convenient shopping, and provide jobs (albeit
lower wage jobs). Sunset Beach will have to evaluate, create policy and plan for this type of
development pressure in the very immediate future.
Seasonal Accommodation Activity
While seasonal vacationers are substantial to the local economy, the Town does not have a large
presence of traditional motels, hotels, resorts or inns. The largest resorts in'Sunset Beach are the
Sea Trail Plantation Resort with 545 rooms and the Colony at Oyster Bay with 120 rooms. These
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 3: Analysis of Exiting and Emerging Conditions 25

resorts are located on the mainland portion of Town. There is also the Sunset Inn, which
contains 14 rooms. Most of the seasonal rental activity is of "beach box" houses, duplexes and
condos on the island portion of Town. According to the Census 2000 Population and Housing
report, there were over 2,000 housing units being used for seasonal, recreational or occasional
use with around 5 total rooms per unit (2-3 bedrooms or 4-6 persons per unit). With 828 new
units constructed since the Census in 2000, and 41% of those being multi -family and duplex, it
estimated that up to 60% of the 828 recently constructed units may be used for seasonal rental.
With the 2,000 existing units classified as seasonal or recreational use, there could be a total of
nearly 2,500 housing units used as seasonal rentals today.
The Town assesses a 6% accommodation tax on rental unit activity (5% Town and 1% County).
For comparison, the accommodation/occupancy tax rates of other Brunswick County
municipalities are listed below.
Brunswick 1%
Bald Head Island 5%
Caswell Beach 5%
Holden Beach 5%
Oak Island 5%
Ocean Isle Beach 3%
Shallotte 3%
Southport 3%
Sunset Beach 5%
As a way to provide an indication of growth in rental activity since the last Land Use Plan
update in 1997, below is a comparison of the total rental and accommodation tax revenue of
1995-96 to the total rental and tax revenue figures from 2004-2005 (most currently available).
The value of 1996 dollars was converted to the value of 2005 dollars using the Consumer Price
Index (CPI) for uniform comparison. Also, the tax rate in 1996 was 4% as compared to a 6% tax
rate in 2005. The additional 2% was factored into the 1996 amount for uniform comparison.
The accommodation tax total for 1995-96 was $400,472. In 2005 dollars that is $498,719, and
adding an additional 2% from total rental revenues in 1996 to match the tax rate of 2005
provides an additional $249,359 for a total of $748,078.
1996 Seasonal Rental Revenue Comparison to 2005 Rental Revenue
1996 Total Rental Revenue = $12,467,995 (already adjusted to 2005 dollars)
1996 Total Accommodation Tax Revenue = $ 748,078 (already adjusted to 2005 dollars and a
6% tax rate)
2005 Total Rental Revenue = $17,629,786
2005 Total Accommodation Tax Revenue = $ 1,057,787
The increase in rental revenue from the 1997 level to 2005 is 71%. Factors contributing to this
increase likely include development of additional units for rent over the years, annexations by
the Town which may have brought in rental units, or increased demand which may have driven
rental prices substantially higher than were asked in 1997. It is likely that it is a combination of
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 3: Analysis of Exiting and Emerging Conditions 26

all of the above, but it still shows a substantial rise not a decrease or flattening of seasonal rental
activity in the Town.
Employment Statistics
According to Table 3 previously, approximately 38% of the population 16 and over in Sunset
Beach was part of the labor force*. This percentage was the second lowest for all North Carolina
municipalities with a beach strand, and was 20% lower than Brunswick County and 300/0 lower
than the state percentage. This low number of 'workers' and the Town's comparatively high
median age suggests that the Town is predominantly inhabited by retired or semi -retired
persons. The table below shows the employment industry of those living in Sunset Beach and
part of the labor force. However, Census 2000 data also showed that 65% of those people living
in Sunset Beach and in the labor force, worked outside the Town jurisdiction.
*Labor force meaning those employed at a place of business or in private practice.
Table 12: Sunset Beach Employment by Industry for Persons 16 years and Over
,)ourtt: u.a census [uuu ro uiation ana nousin
Employment
IndustryEmployed
2000
Sunset Beach
% of Total
Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting
0
Mining
0.
Construction
62
10.0%
Manufacturing
21,
3.4%
Wholesale trade
18
2.9%
Retail trade
107 `
17.3%
Transportation and warehousing, and utilities
19
3.1%
Information
16,
2.6%
Finance and insurance
5
0.8%
Real estate and rental and leasing,,-,, .. ` _
63.
10.2%
Professional, scientific, management, administrative,
and waste management services
78
12.6%
Educational, health and social services
59"
9.5%
Arts, entertainment, and recreation
81
13.1%
Accommodation and food services
33 "
5.3%
Other services (except public administration)
40
6.5%
Public' administration
18 `'
2.9%
TOTAL Employed Persons 16+
_ .. 620.
_ _ 100%_ .
Brunswick County Economy
Tourism is the leading industry in the County generating $313.65 million in 2004 (latest
reporting year) and providing 4,750 jobs. Brunswick County ranked tenth out of North
Carolina's counties in tourism revenue (see table 12.1). Brunswick County was also ranked in
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 3: Analysis of Exiting and Emerging Conditions 27

the 100 fastest growing counties in the United States by the U.S. Census Bureau in its latest
population estimates (2004). Business and commercial development in the County is expected
to increase as the increasing population requires additional retail, entertainment and
professional services. Continued and sustainable growth in the County and its municipalities
relies on the ability to provide adequate water, sewer and stormwater infrastructure. The
County has placed water and sewer expansion as one of its top priorities in its Vision 2020 Plan.
The Town of Sunset Beach will need to continue to work with The County on the provision of
County infrastructure within the Town's jurisdiction. The Town's growth will be dependent on
the ability of County infrastructure to keep pace.
Table 13: Brunswick County Tourism Revenue (1990-2004)
Source: North Carolina Department of Commerce, I ourism Research
Year
Dollars in Millions
1990
$115.83
1991
$122.61
1992
$136.04
1993
$149.16
1994
$162.97
1995
$176.22
1996 $188.76
1997 ; $194.57 "
1998
$215.01
1999
$238.01
2000
$243.51
2001
$248.00
2002
$269.92
2003 .
$272.58
2004
$313.65
Table 13.1 Top 10 Tourism Revenue Generating Counties in 2004
Source: North Carolina Department of Commerce, 1 ounsm Kesearcn
County
Revenues"
($millions)
Payroll
($millions}.•
Employment
(thousands) ::
State Tax .
Receipts
$millions
Local Tact Receipts
($millions)
Mecklenburg
2,701.42
1,088.62
38.69
134.22
74.03
Wake
1136.58
422:19
17.0T
57 38
33.35
Guilford
894.35
259.00
12.85
48.43
22.20
Dare
- 619.14
152.08
10.91
3185
' 30.26
Buncombe
538.61
141.19
8.48
29.05
17.70
Forsyth
486:46
98.11
5.76
2952,
9.82
Durham
442.24
107.16
7.19
25.04
13.81
New
Hanover .
327.98
= ' 86.36
5.21'
17.02
13.18.
Cumberland_
316.73
72.64
4.10
17.78
7.16
Brunswick
313.65
' 70.28
4.75
' 15.62
20.91
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 3: Analysis of Exiting and Emerging Conditions 28

Section 4. Natural Systems Analysis
The Natural Systems Analysis section of the Land Use Plan is intended to define, describe and
analyze the natural features and environmental conditions found in the Sunset Beach planning
jurisdiction (Town limits and ETJ). There are a total of 14 natural features and environmental
conditions identified in this Land Use Plan that contribute to quality of life and property values
for residents, and could impact development suitability for certain types of new development
and redevelopment in Sunset Beach. A general assessment of the capabilities and limitations for
certain types of development, based on the presence or lack thereof of natural features and
environmental conditions, is depicted in the Town's Environmental Composite Map [Map 8].
This Section also contains a series of natural features maps and inventories used to visually
display the condition, location and extent of the natural environment in the planning
jurisdiction. The inventory (Section 4.2) in this section calculates an approximate acreage (from
the best available data) of natural features and environmental conditions in the planning
jurisdiction. This information can be used as a benchmark to track changes in these features in
future studies and land use plans. The maps associated with this section can be used by the
Town in situations such as deciding on what densities or land uses would be most compatible
within particular areas of its jurisdiction based on the natural environment.
The overall purpose of this section is to provide the Town and its decision -making officials with
insight on the presence and function of environmental characteristics that exist in the
jurisdiction. This information should be considered during Town land use decisions which
could increase density, impervious coverage, and/or stromwater runoff in environmentally
sensitive areas.
A primary goal of the Town of Sunset Beach found in previous Land Use Plans and as a part of
this Land Use Plan update is to preserve, conserve, and/or otherwise protect valuable and
beneficial natural resources. Those natural resources primarily being the "Areas of
Environmental Concern" (AECs), which include coastal wetlands, the vegetated dune system,
the unvegetated beach areas, and estuarine shorelines.
The Town also intends to preserve and improve surface water quality through the;
1) continued enforcement of its stormwater management ordinance,
2) on -going improvements in design and proper maintenance of its existing stormwater
management infrastructure (i.e: vegetated buffers, swales, ditches, outfall systems), and
3) through the elimination of septic systems in the planning jurisdiction. The elimination
of septic systems is a priority goal of the Town and will be done through the provision
of a county -operated centralized sewer system. Sewer will remove the wastewater
seepage and discharge associated with septic systems away from -coastal waters to a
Wastewater Treatment Plant in the interior portion of Brunswick County.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 4: Natural Systems Analysis 29

4.1 Defining Natural Features and Areas of Environmental Concern
As stated in the introduction to CAMA and the permit process, the Division of Coastal
Management places emphasis on protecting Areas of Environmental Concern (AECs).
Definitions for AECs can be found in the CAMA Guide to Development in Coastal North Carolina
htt-o:Hdcm2.enr.state.nc.us/Handbook/contents.htm
Features 1- 7 following are all considered and regulated as Areas of Environmental Concern.
1) Coastal Wetland AEC - Coastal Wetlands are any marsh (salt, brackish, or freshwater) in
the 20 coastal counties that regularly or occasionally floods by lunar or wind tides, and that
includes one or more of 10 plant species: Salt Marsh (Smooth) Cord Grass, Black Needlerush,
Glasswort, Salt (or Spike) Grass, Sea Lavender, Bulrush, Saw Grass, Cattail, Salt Meadow Grass,
Salt Reed or Giant Cord Grass.
Coastal Wetlands in Sunset Beach
The type of coastal wetlands found in the Sunset Beach planning jurisdiction is
Salt/Brackish Marsh primarily in the extensive tidal marsh and creek system surrounding
the island and running along the Intracoastal Waterway. There are approximately 1,863
acres of coastal wetlands in the planning jurisdiction. See the Areas of Environmental
Concern Map [Map 1] and natural features inventory table for additional information.
The Town of Sunset Beach supports the preservation of coastal wetlands for their
aesthetic qualities, flood and erosion prevention benefit, and for their water cleansing
ability. The Town supports state regulations {15A NCAC 7H .0205 - .0208} which limit
the use and disturbance of coastal wetlands.
2) Inlet Hazard Area AEC - These areas cover the lands next to ocean inlets. Inlet shorelines
are especially vulnerable to erosion and flooding and can move over relatively short time periods.
For each inlet along the coast, the Division of Coastal Management prepares a hazard area map.
Each area is mapped based on a statistical analysis of inlet migration, previous inlet locations,
narrow or low lands -near -the inlets and -the -influence of man -made -features;. such- as jetties and
channelization projects.
Inlet Hazards in Sunset Beach
Sunset Beach has two inlet hazard areas, Tubbs Inlet and Mad Inlet. Mad Inlet is closed
to water movement but remains a threat area. The closing of Mad inlet now connects the
state estuarine reserve of Bird Island to Sunset Beach. See the DCM Erosion Rate Map
[Map 2] for visual depiction.
Because of their dynamic and constant movement, dense or large-scale development
(such as multi -family or buildings in excess of 5,000 total square feet) should be
discouraged or not allowed by the Town in an inlet hazard area. Examples of dangers
from moving inlets to development can be seen in communities such as Ocean Isle Beach,
Wrightsville Beach and North Topsail Beach. In Sunset Beach, there are approximately
384 recorded lots totaling 93 acres intersected by the Inlet Hazard Area (IHA) in the
Town limits (Island). According to County Tax records, 65 of those lots totaling 37 acres
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 4: Natural Systems Analysis 30

are vacant. Current zoning in the IHA includes Beach Residential 1, Beach Residential 2,
Beach Residential 2A, and Conservation 1. Beach Residential 1 contains all the oceanfront
properties (28% of island). The vast majority of the interior of the island is zoned BR-2.
Overall, BR-2 makes up 65% of the island. These zoning districts allow only single family
units, with some duplex units depending on district, on already subdivided lot sizes of
4,500 - 7,500 square feet up to 1 acre. See table below for breakdown of vacant lots per
zoning district in the IHA.
Table 14: Vacant Lots Per Zoning District in the IHA
# of Vacant Lots,
Acres
Zoning District "_
Housing Types Allowed
Lot Size
4
4
BR-1
Single -Family and Duplex
7,500
51
10
BR-2
Single -Family
4,500
1
7
BR-2A
Single -Family and Duplex
7,500
10
16
CR-1
Single -Family
1 acre
Source: Brunswick County Tax Data and Cape Fear Council of Governments GIS
3) Estuary Waters and Estuarine Shoreline AEC - Estuarine Waters are oceans, sounds, and
tidal rivers and creeks (including the ICWW), which link to the other parts of the estuarine
system: public trust areas, coastal wetlands and coastal shorelines.
Estuarine Shorelines include all lands within 75 feet of the normal high water level of estuarine
waters. Development in this 75 foot "zone" must not cover more than 30% of the area with
impervious surface. Along Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW), this definition includes lands
within 575 feet of the normal high water level. There are no ORW waters in the planning
jurisdiction.
Estuarine Shoreline in Sunset Beach
The estuarine shoreline AEC in Sunset Beach extends 75 feet landward from the mean
high water line of all the shoreline of the Intracoastal Waterway, tidal creeks extending
into the mainland, and all the navigable creeks in the coastal wetlands surrounding the
Sunset Beach island (See the Areas of Environmental Concern Map [Map 1] for the
location of estuarine waters in the planning jurisdiction). Development in this 75 foot
"zone" must not cover more than 30% of the area with impervious surface, and
development within 30' of the high-water line must be water dependent (i.e. dock, pier,
etc.). Existing zoning in Sunset Beach along the Intracoastal Waterway estuarine waters
additionally prohibits no more than 30% impervious coverage for the entire lot. Existing
zoning in Sunset Beach on the island has varying lot coverage due to smaller lots (4,500
sq. ft.) and smaller property line setbacks, therefore impervious coverage per lot may
exceed 30% of the site in some zoning districts on the island. However, the 30%
impervious coverage for the estuarine shoreline 75' zone still applies.
4) Ocean Erodible Area Setbacks AEC — This area covers beaches and any other oceanfront
lands that are subject to long-term erosion and significant shoreline changes. The landward limit
of this AEC is measured from the first line of stable natural vegetation. The first line of stable
natural vegetation is the area on the oceanfront beach where natural dune -stabilizing plants are
present. Such plants include sea oats and American beachgrass.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 4: Natural Systems Analysis 31

The Ocean Erodible Area Setback AEC is determined by adding:
■ a distance equal to 30 feet (for small structures)* or 60 feet (for large structures)*
times the long-term average annual erosion rate for that stretch of shoreline.
*Small structures include single-family homes and other units under 5,000 square feet of total area. Large structures
generally include multi -family and commercial uses which are 5,000 square feet or more in total area.
Ocean Erodible Setback Area in Sunset Beach
Sunset Beach has an erosion rate of T per year on all stretches of beach in its planning
jurisdiction (including inlet areas). For Sunset Beach, the Ocean Erodible setback is 60'
back from the first line of stable vegetation for "small" structures and 120' for "large"
structures. All oceanfront property is currently zoned Beach Residential-1, with some
minimal Beach Business-1 zoned around the pier. BR-1 only allows single family and
duplex on minimum 7,500 square foot lots. Building height (35') and number of bedroom
(8) limitations regulate intensity of development in this zone.
The Town has additional setback limitations codified in its BR-1 zoning district which
limit seaward development to 150' from Main Street (most seaward road running parallel
to the ocean). Given the distance of the ocean and unvegetated beach from Main Street
(700' to 300'), the Town has seaward development restrictions that exceed the Ocean
Erodible AEC setback requirements. This regulation is a desired management tool in
Sunset Beach intended to provide long-term protection for existing properties and reduce
the need for public expenditures caused from the natural movement (erosion) of the
beach.
5) Un-vegetated Beach Area AEC — This area is the un-vegetated (sand) portion of the main
beach strand from the low tide level up to the fist line of stable vegetation.
6) High Hazard Flood Area AEC- (Combination of storm surge and flooding) - covers lands
subject to flooding, high waves and heavy water currents during a major storm. These are the
lands identified as coastal flood with velocity hazard, or "VF' zones,' on the Town's official flood
insurance rate maps (FIRMs). The high hazard flood AEC often overlaps with the ocean
erodible and inlet hazard AECs.
High Hazard Flood Areas in Sunset Beach
Sunset Beach's high hazard flood area (VE Zone) encompasses roughly 3,038 acres or
47% of the planning jurisdiction (See Special Flood Hazards Area Map [Map 41). This
total includes the extensive and undevelopable marsh system in the jurisdiction.
However, the area between Cobia Street to 2nd Street on the island is completely within
the VE zone from the ocean to the backside of the island. Also on the island, the areas
around 40th Street and Bay and Inlet Streets are within the VE zone: Overall,
approximately 60% of the island area is within the VE zone. As stated earlier, residential
zoning in these areas are primarily BR-1 and BR-2. On the mainland, the properties
immediately adjacent the Intracoastal Waterway and tidal creeks are within the VE
zone. Zoning in these areas include Mainland Residential 1(MR-1) and Mainland
Residential 2 (MR-2). MR-1 zoning allows single-family on 15,000 square foot lots (i.e
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 4: Natural Systems Analysis 32

2.9 units per acre density). MR-2 zoning allows single-family on 10,000 square foot
minimum lots (i.e. 4.3 units per acre density). See table below for approximation of total
home value in the planning jurisdiction within a VE zone.
Table 15: Number of Lots in VE Flood Zone
Total Number of Lots
Total Value of Homes does not include land .
1,000
$81.3 Million
Source: Brunswick County Tax Data and Cape Fear Council of Governments GIS
Sunset Beach is a participating community in the National Flood Insurance Program
(NFIP) and enforces a Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance through its Building
Inspections Department. The Flood Prevention Ordinance was adopted in the Spring of
2006 after completion of the North Carolina Floodplain Mapping Project for the Lumber
River Basin.
7) Public Trust Areas AEC - These areas include the coastal waters and submerged lands that
belong to the "public" to use for activities such as boating, swimming or fishing. These areas
often overlap and include estuarine waters. The following lands and waters are considered
public trust areas:
■ all waters of the Atlantic Ocean and the lands underneath, from the normal high water
mark on shore to the state's official boundary three miles offshore;
■ all navigable natural water bodies and the lands underneath, to the normal high
watermark on shore (a body of water is considered navigable if you can float a canoe in
it). This does not include privately owned lakes where the public doesn't have access
rights;
■ all water in artificially created water bodies that have significant public fishing
resources and are accessible to the public from other waters; and
• all waters in artificially created water bodies where the public has acquired rights by
prescription, custom, usage, dedication or any other means.
Public Trust -Areas in Sunset Beach
The public trust waters within or adjacent the Sunset Beach planning jurisdiction
include the Atlantic Ocean, the Intracoastal Waterway, all the navigable creeks
surrounding the Sunset Beach island, and coastal wetlands (if "navigable" at high tide).
Bird Island on the southeastern edge of the planning jurisdiction is a state estuarine
reserve in public trust.
Sunset Beach recognizes the rights of riparian property owners to access navigable
surface water from their riparian property. However, the Town will consider proactively
managing the construction of private piers and docks so as not to allow the creation -of
impediments to navigation in public trust areas. Such management can include
establishing limits on the length of private piers.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 4: Natural Systems Analysis 33

4.1.1 Additional Natural Features and Environmental Conditions
Other natural features and environmental conditions in the Sunset Beach planning jurisdiction
in addition to AECs are described below.
8) Water Quality Classifications - Definitions for Water Quality Classifications come from
the NC Division of Water Quality (htM://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/csu/swc.html). All surface waters
in North Carolina are assigned a primary classification by the NC Division of Water Quality
(DWQ). The tidal/salt water classifications that are applicable to the Sunset Beach planning
jurisdiction are SA and SB.
SB - Surface waters that are used for primary recreation, including frequent or organized
swimming. Stormwater controls are required under CAMA and there are no categorical
restrictions on discharges.
SA - Surface waters that can be used for shellfishing, and all SB uses. All SA waters are also
HQW by definition. Stormwater controls are required under CAMA. No domestic discharges
are permitted in these waters.
Regulations over SA waters
The North Carolina Sediment and Erosion Control Act has established additional design
standards for "sensitive watersheds" which can be found in 15A NCAC 4B .0124
(http://www.dlr.enr.state.nc.us/images/sedimentrules.doc). The Act applies to development
activities that disturb one acre or more of land, and is generally intended to protect water
quality during the construction stage. If a Sedimentation and Erosion Permit is required, a
Stormwater Control Permit is also required. The Stormwater Permit is intended to protect
water quality after the construction stage and through the life of the development. Stromwater
permits allow either a low or high -density development option. In a low -density development,
the amount of impervious surface is limited and vegetated buffers are required along shorelines.
In a high -density development, impervious surfaces can be increased but engineered stromwater
control systems (i.e. retention ponds) must be included to control runoff. The Stormwater
Permit rules can be found at 15A-NCAC 2H,d000: -
Sunset Beach Stormwater Quality Management and Discharge Control
The Town adopted a stormwater ordinance in 2006 based upon the Brunswick County
ordinance. The Town's stormwater ordinance will be enforced by Brunswick County through an
interlocal agreement. The ordinance requires Stormwater Management Plans and approved
control systems and BMPs to be developed for:
• any commercial development (includes developments of any lot size). This
requirement exceeds state stormwater regulations. _.
• any subdivision of a parcel into 6 or more residential lots (could include
residential development under one acre). This requirement exceeds state
stormwater regulations.
• any development that increases the original grade of the lot by 4 inches or more
(could include residential development under one acre). This requirement
exceeds state stormwater regulations.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 4: Natural Systems Analysis 34

Water Quality in Sunset Beach
Sunset Beach water quality classifications are SA for the Intracoastal Waterway and all other
waters surrounding the island, except the ocean which is classified SB (See Water Quality
Characteristics Map [Map 3]). Sunset Beach is located in the Lumber River Basin, and falls
within subbasin 03-07-59. This subbasin contains the southwest corner of Brunswick County
primarily east of Highway 17. There are no classified surface waters impaired for aquatic life or
recreation in subbasin 03-07-59. However, all waters are impaired for fish consumption.
Impaired fish consumption generally means there is an ongoing advisory (since 1996) regarding
mercury levels in tissue of certain fish species found east of Interstate 85 (piedmont area) which
exceeds state safety standards for large levels of consumption (added 9/20/06). For more
information on fish consumption impairment, visit:
http://www.epi.state.nc.us/epi/fish/info.html.
At the time of the last Land Use Plan update in 1997, shellfishing had been an "impaired" use for
all of the planning area's estuarine waters and it continues to be impaired as of the date of this
Land Use Plan update (See Water Quality Characteristics Map [Map 3]). According to the
Shellfish Sanitation Branch of the North Carolina Division of Environmental Health, the
permanent closure and conditional approval of shellfishing areas in the jurisdiction has been
attributed to long-term septic system use in flood prone areas as well as existing manmade
canals and residential lawns with little or no vegetative buffers to filter stormwater runoff.
Stormwater runoff has been cited as the main contributor to shellfish closures. The
conditionally approved shellfishing sites in the planning jurisdiction (links Creek and Tubbs
Inlet area) are closed during every rain event causing .5 inch to 1.5 inches of rain primarily due to
pollutants such as fecal coliform (i.e. pet, animal and human (septic system) waste) in the
runoff. Portions of Jinks Creek and Tubbs Inlet were the only two areas conditionally open to
shellfishing at the time of the 1997 Land Use Plan update. Good tidal flushing from water
moving through Tubbs inlet is likely the reason these areas have remained conditionally open.
There is one Division of Water Quality (DWQ) water quality monitoring station (established in
1983) in the planning jurisdiction located near the Sunset Beach bridge. This station (Station
1198800) has shown that fecal coliform in the water exceeded safe levels for shellfishing as of the
1997 Lumber River Basin Water Quality Plan and as of the 2003 Lumber Basin plan. The DWQ's
2002 Lumber Basin Assessment also showed that there has been a statistically significant and
steady decrease in pH and Dissolved Oxygen (DO) at this monitoring station since 1983 to the
date of the report
(http•//h2o enr state nc us/esb/Basinwide/Lumber%20River%20Basin%2O2002%2OReport.Final.pol).
While the Assessment could not pinpoint the source of the decrease in DO and pH, those types
of decreases likely can be linked to higher levels of fecal coliform (septic waste) and phosphorus
(fertilizers from lawns and golf courses and/or septic waste).
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 4: Natural Systems Analysis 35

Soils with Septic System Limitations
The following map graphic shows that the majority of the planning jurisdiction contains soils
with some type of limitation to the use of septic systems.
The Town of Sunset Beach has begun or will undertake certain activities that should reduce or
stabilize the contributing factors to the surface water quality problems in the jurisdiction.
Those activities include:
• replacing septic systems with centralized sewer
• requiring stormwater runoff controls and vegetative buffer and/or BMP
standards for new developments and substantial redevelopments
Additional steps that are recommended to help reduce runoff and improve water quality are
available, however, it should be noted that careful coordination and planning should be taken as
these steps may seem inconsistent with other Town goals, such as wanting to increase public
parking and maximizing bike/pedestrian interconnectivity. Some of those additional steps to
improve water quality in the planning jurisdiction could include:
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 4: Natural Systems Analysis 36

• requiring vegetated buffers in excess of the minimum 30 foot buffers required
by state legislation for estuarine waters
• minimizing impervious lot coverage allowances (25% maximum lot coverage is
used by the state for low -density stormwater thresholds)
• revising street standards to reduce number and width of residential streets or
commercial accessways, and limiting sidewalks to one side of the street
• minimize size of parking areas by requiring angled parking and/or narrower
spaces
• encourage the planting of vegetated buffer zones around existing developments
that have no stromwater controls and are adjacent to surface waters or connect
directly to the overall stormwater drainage system
9) Special Flood Hazard Areas (100-yr flood zones) - The SFHA is defined as an area of land
that would be inundated by a flood having a 1% chance of occurring in any given year
(previously referred to as the base flood or 100-year flood).
AE - Zone AE is the flood insurance rate zone that correspond to the 100-year floodplains that
are determined in a Flood Insurance Study by FEMA. -
VE - Zone VE is the flood insurance rate zone that corresponds to the 100-year coastal
floodplains that have additional hazards associated with wave action caused by storm events.
Flood Zones in Sunset Beach
According to the new NC Floodplain Mapping Program information, the 100-yr flood
zones in the Sunnet Beach planning jurisdiction are AE and VE. 99% of the island is
within either the VE or AE zone. The VE zone accounts for a little over 60% of that total
on the island. The AE zone encompasses 520 acres or 80/o of the total planning
jurisdiction (See Special Flood Hazards Area Map [Map 4]). The VE zone, as mentioned
earlier, encompasses roughly 3,038 acres or 47% of the planning jurisdiction (See Special
Flood Hazards Area Map [Map 4]). See table below for information on the number of
lots and home value intersecting the Special Flood Hazard Areas (AE and VE).
Table 16: Number of Lots in SFHA Flood Zones
;Flood Zone
Total Numberof Lots
A ' roximatel .
Total Value of Homes, _(does not
include land)
VE
1,000
$81.3 Million
AE
930
$78.2 Million
Source: Brunswick County Tax Data and Cape Fear Council of Governments GIS
Sunset Beach is a participating community in the National Flood Insurance Program - .
(NFIP) and enforces a Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance through its Building
Inspections Department. The Flood Prevention Ordinance was adopted in the Spring of
2006 after completion of the North Carolina Floodplain Mapping Program for the
Lumber River Basin. According to historical NFIP claims data from 1978 to 2006, Sunset
Beach has one of the lowest damage claim and damage payout levels for all North
Carolina communities with a beach strand (see the table following for comparison).
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 4: Natural Systems Analysis 37

Table 17: NFIP Claims and Payments Among North Carolina Municipalities with a Beach
Municipality
Total Claims' 1978-2006
Total Pa'ents'' 1978-2006
Atlantic Beach
623
$ 3,174,239.90
Bald Head Island
293
$ 2,001,376.87
Brunswick County
(Unincorporated Areas
346
$ 3,751,602.87
Carolina Beach
2,338
$ 30,399,551.88
Caswell Beach
129
$ 634,111.94
Emerald Isle
1,330
$ 7,577,616.07
Holden Beach
2,023
$11,405,465.37
Indian Beach
24
$ 69,021.26
Kill Devil Hills
1,259
$10,237,411.04
Kitty Hawk
947
$ 9,828,751.89
Kure Beach
472
$14,984,255.11
Nags Head
2,226
$ 21,671,368.28
North Topsail Beach
1,149
$12,088,871.35
Oak Island
2,168
$18,844,246.53
Ocean Isle Beach
1,534
$ 7,252,406.86
Pine Knoll Shores
231
$ 866,974.44
Sunset Beach
212
$ 292,587.00
Surf City
1,732
$15,238,558.78
Topsail Beach
2,134
$ 21,090,817.22
Wrightsville Beach
3,112
$ 45,468,942.76
Sunset Beach Rank
3 Lowest
2n Lowest
* Loss claims are for damages in excess of 25-50% of the property value
10) Hurricane Storm Surge Innundation Area (Fast Movin Storm) torm) - The National
Hurricane Center, in cooperation with the North Carolina Center for Geographic Information
and Analysis, developed the GIS data set, Hurricane Storm Surge Inundation Areas (1993), to
reevaluate the extent of the areas affected by hurricane inundation along the North Carolina
coast. The data depicts the extent of hurricane storm surge inundation areas based on SLOSH
(Sea, Lake, and Overland Surges from Hurricanes) models, for the North Carolina coast. The
FAST model depicts hurricanes with forward velocities greater than 15mph (See Storm Surge
Inundation Map [Map 5]) .
Storm surge is water that is pushed toward the shore by the force of the winds swirling around
the storm. This advancing surge combines with the normal tides to create the hurricane storm
tide, which can increase the mean water level 15 feet or more. In addition, wind driven waves are
superimposed on the storm tide. This rise in water level can cause severe flooding in coastal
areas, particularly when the storm tide coincides with the normal high tides. The storm surge
inundation area data used for the planning jurisdiction is based on the SLOSH Model developed
by NOAA's National Weather Service.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 4: Natural Systems Analysis 39

Storm Surge Inundation Areas in Sunset Beach
In Sunset Beach, approximately 735 acres or 15% of the planning jurisdiction is
considered outside of possible hurricane storm surge innundation. These areas are the
most inland portions of the Sea Trail development and the former Angel's Trace
development. 55% of the total area in the planning jurisdiction is likely to be innundated
during a Category 1 or 2 hurricane, 65% in a Category 3 hurricane, and 85% of the total
area in the corporate limits is likely to be inundated in a Category 4 or 5 hurricane (See
Storm Surge Inundation Map [Map 5]).
11) Non -coastal wetlands/propable 404 wetlands (NC -CREWS) —
Section 404 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act ("the Clean Water Act") defines
wetlands as "areas that are inundated or saturated by surface water or ground water at a
frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support,
a prevalence of vegetation adapted to life in saturated soil conditions."
"Any person, firm, or agency (including Federal, state, and local government agencies) planning
to work in navigable waters of the United States, or discharge (dump, place, deposit) dredged or
fill material in waters of the United States, including wetlands, must first obtain a permit from
the Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE)". If an activity requires an ACOE `404' permit, the state of
North Carolina requires that a `401' water quality certification be obtained as well. The `401'
certification is basically a verification by the state that a given project will not degrade waters of
the State or otherwise violate water quality standards.
The North Carolina Coastal Region Evaluation of Wetland Significance, or NC -CREWS, is a
watershed -based wetlands assessment model that assesses the level of water quality, wildlife
habitat, and hydrologic functions of individual wetlands. The primary objective of the NC -
CREWS wetland functional assessment is to provide local government planners with
information about the relative ecological importance of wetlands for use in land use planning
and the overall management of wetlands. NC -CREWS produces 3 possible overall wetland
rating scores: Exceptional Significance, Substantial Significance, or Beneficial Significance. NC -
CREWS also evaluates the potential risk to watershed integrity if identified wetlands were
"lost".
Non -Coastal Wetlands identified as NC —CREWS in Sunset Beach
The types of non -coastal wetlands located in the Sunset Beach planning jurisdiction are:
• Estuarine Shrub Scrub (13 acres)
• Estuarine Forest (1 acre)
• Managed Pineland (625 acres)
• Pine Flat (12 acres)
• Pocosin (52 acres)
• Bottomland Hardwood (30 acres)
• Swamp Forest (52 acres)
• "Human Impacted Wetlands" (32 acres)
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 4: Natural Systems Analysis 39

The bulk of the wetlands are located within or adjcent to the Sea Trail development and the
former Angels Trace development. In addition, the newly annexed (June 2007) "Sandpiper
Bay/Wyndfall" areas account for much of the jurisdiction's non -coastal wetland inventory. (See
The NC Coastal Resource Evaluation of Wetland Systems CREWS Map [Map 6]).
While most of these types of wetlands will be regulated by the Army Corps of Engineers 404
Permitting Unit and the State's 401 Water Quality Certification Program, the Town of Sunset
Beach can help protect these areas by not allowing future re -zonings to a more dense use in areas
where theses wetlands may be present. Allowing and retaining "planned or clustered unit
development" options in the zoning ordinance can also help by allowing the developer to
determine their own lot configuration and setbacks and stillachieve the allowable density or
number of units without having to disturb productive wetland areas on the site.
A description of the types of wetlands found in the planning jurisdiction are below.
Estuarine shrub scrub - Any shrub/scrub vegetation dominated habitat subject to
occasional flooding by tides, including wind tides (whether or not the tidewaters reach
the marshland areas through natural or artificial watercourses).
Estuarine Forest - Forested wetlands subject to flooding by tides.
Managed Pinelands - Seasonally saturated, managed pine forests occurring on hydric
soils. This wetland category may also contain non -managed pine forests occurring on
hydric soils. Generally these are areas that were not shown on National Wetland
Inventory maps. These areas may or may not be jurisdictional wetlands.
Pine Flats - Palustrine (non -tidal), seasonally saturated pine habitats on
hydric (saturated) soils that may become dry for part of the year, generally on flat or
nearly flat areas that are not associated with a river or stream system. This category does
not include managed pine systems.
Bottomland Hardwood - Riverine and non-riverine forested or scrub/shrub habitat that
are seasonally flooded.
Swamp Forest - Non-riverine forested or shrub/scrub habitat that are temporarily
flooded.
Human Impacted Wetlands - Areas of human impact have physically disturbed the
wetland, but the area is still a wetland. Impoundments and some cutovers are included
in this category, as well as other disturbed areas such as power lines.
For more information on wetland types go to:
http://www.nccoastalmanagement.net/Wedands/WTYPEMAPDOC.12
12) Fish Nursery Areas - Salt marshes and estuaries (salt and freshwater mix) along our coast
serve as nursery grounds for 90 percent of our fisheries.
Primary Nursery Areas are located in the upper portions of creeks and bays. These areas are
usually shallow with soft muddy bottoms and surrounded by marshes and wetlands. Lower
salinity and the abundance of food in these areas are ideal for young fish and shellfish. To protect
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 4: Natural Systems Analysis 40

juveniles, many commercial fishing activities are prohibited in these waters; including the use of
trawl nets, seine nets, dredges or any mechanical methods used for taking clams or oysters.
Marina activities that will require new dredging activities are not allowed in Primary Nursery
Areas.
Special Secondary Nursery Areas are located adjacent to Secondary Nursery Areas but closer to
the open waters of sounds and the ocean.
Fish Nursery Areas in Sunset Beach
There are 80,144 acres designated as Primary Nursery Areas in North Carolina, the
Sunset Beach planning jurisdiction contains 2,712 acres or about 3.4% of the states total.
There are 31,362 acres designated as Special Secondary Nursery Areas, the Sunset Beach
planning jurisdiction does not contain special secondary or secondary nursery areas. See
the Primary Nursery Areas and Significant Natural Heritage Areas Map [Map 7].
The Division of Marine Fisheries prohibits new dredging in waters classified as Primary
Fish Nursery areas. Areas where dredging has occurred in the past is grandfathered and
allowable with conditions. The new dredging prohibition includes any activity
including piers, docks and marinas. As with 404 wetlands, a final site survey is necessary
for verification of the area's environmental condition (e.g. whether the exact site is a
functional Primary Nursery or not).
13) Environmentally Fragile Areas (Significant Natural Heritage Areas) Significant Natural
Heritage Areas (SNHA) are areas identifying sites (land or water) that have special
environmental significance. A site's significance may be due to the presence of rare species, rare
or high quality natural habitat, or other important ecological features.
Significant Natural Heritage Areas (SNHA) in Sunset Beach
Bird Island
Bird Island (262 acs.) on the southwestern side of the Sunset Beach barrier island is
considered a Significant Natural Heritage Area. It was identified in. the Town's 1997 Land
Use Plan Update as a priority protection area and has since been acquired by the state as
an estuarine reserve. See the Primary Nursery Areas and Significant Natural Heritage
Areas Map [Map 7]
Bonaparte Landing Maritime Forest
The Bonaparte Landing Maritime Forest (55 acs.) in the westernmost portion of the
mainland Town limits is listed as an SNHA. The Bonaparte site is currently undeveloped
and largely unsubdivided, but privately owned and zoned by the Town as MR-1 and MR-
2. Those zones allow single family at 2.9 to 4.3 units per acre. If no vested rights are in _
place and the Town wished to better conserve this area, the Town could consider re-
zoning this area to AF-1 or CR-1 which would allow single family on minimum lot sizes
of one acre. See the Primary Nursery Areas and Significant Natural Heritage Areas Map
[Map 7]
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 4: Natural Systems Analysis 41

Wood Stork Ponds
The Wood Stork ponds area is 554 acres north of Shoreline Drive on the mainland, which
includes parts of Sea Trail (Clubhouse Dr.) and Lake Shore Dr. The area is subdivided
and developed as residential and golf course use. The existing zoning is primarily MR-2
(single family/4.3 units/acre) with some MR-3 (single family and multi family/21 units
per acre max.). See the Primary Nursery Areas and Significant Natural Heritage Areas
Map [Map 7].
14) Closed Shellfishing Areas —Closed shellfish areas are areas where shellfish harvesting is
prohibited by law due to unsafe levels of pollutants caused by conditions such as wastewater
discharge and non -point source stormwater run-off.
Closed Shellfishing Areas in Sunset Beach
Within the planning jurisdiction of Sunset Beach, all waters are classified as
permanently closed to shellfishing except conditionally open areas around finks Creek
and Tubbs Inlet (See #8 Water Quality in this section for more description on water
quality in the planning jurisdiction). Also See the Water Quality Characteristics Map
[Map 3]•
Hazard Mitigation Plan
The Town shall refer to its adopted Hazard Mitigation Plan for policy guidance and
recommendations on any Town restructuring, reorganizing or development of any
programs regarding the provision of emergency services, emergency services
preparedness, emergency command procedure, public awareness, or evacuation
procedure.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 4: Natural Systems Analysis 42

4.2 Natural Features and Environmental Conditions Inventory
The information on natural features and environmental conditions in the table below was
gathered by the Cape Fear Council of Governments through geo-processing and summarization
of geographic data using geographic information systems (GIS). The majority of spatial
(geographic) data used in this Land Use Plan was provided by the North Carolina Center for
Geographic Information and Analysis and the Division of Coastal Management.
The table below has similar information to what was just discussed in Section 4.1 and 4.1.1,
it is just presented in table format for quicker viewing.
NOTE: These acreage calculations are derived from generalized data and are for general planning
and informational purposes only.
Table 18: Natural Features Inventory
Acres in ` _ �
Acres in
Comments
Corporate Limits
Total Area in Planning Jurisdiction
Approx. 4,500
Approx.
Source: County GIS Corporate Limits Data
(Includes Sandpiper
2,500
and Town of Sunset Beach Jurisdiction
Bay annex)
Data
"Land above MHW"
3,000 (or 67%)
1,100
Totals are approximations using Aerial
"Water/Wet Marsh/Spoils"
1,500 (or 33%)
(44%)
Photography and Soils Data to establish
1,400
"dry land" versus `vet" areas.
56%
Natural Features and
Acres in Planning Jurisdiction
Comments
Environmental Conditions
Town Limits and E
Areas of Environmental Concern
AECs
Coastal wetlands
1,863
99.9% of wetland types are Salt/Brackish
Marsh in the Town Limits and ETI.
Estuarine waters
700 SA
All estuarine surface waters in the Town
Limits and ETJ (Intracoastal Waterway
and creeks between ICWW and barrier
island) are classified as SA by the NC
DW .
State, Federal or Institutional
1,228
The state of North Carolina and the Corps
Protected Areas (Land and wet areas)
of Engineers own portions of Bird Island
and much of the marsh system between
Bird island and the ICWW.
High hazard flood area
See comment and flood and
SFHA/100 Yr wave Velocity (VE) Flood
storm surge acreage
areas and storm surge areas are considered
High Hazard Flood Areas
Inlet hazard area
250
Of the total, 90 acres of the actual barrier
island land above MHW in the Town limits
is in the Inlet Hazard "area".160 acres of
Bird Island is also in the IHA.
Historic/Archaeological Area
Land inside HD
N/A
Land w/in 500' of historic area
N/A
Soils
Severe Septic Limitations
Almost Entire Jurisdiction
All soils within the entire jurisdiction have
severe septic limitations. (i.e. ponding, poor
filter, wetness) except approx. 260 acs. in
the Sea Trail development.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 4: Natural Systems Analysis 43

Natural Features -and '
' Acres in Planning Jurisdiction
Comments ;
Environmental Conditions
Town Limits andNon-coastal
wetlands (CREWS)
Wetlands not classified as "coastal
wetlands", but have hydric soils and/or land
cover conducive to wetlands.
Exceptional significance, high
90
In the jurisdiction, wetland type is
potential risk to watershed quality if
primarily "swamp forest" and "human
lost
impacted",with some "bottomland
hardwood".
Exceptional significance, not high
32
Wetland type is "managed pineland".
potential risk to watershed if lost
Substantial significance, high potential
46
Wetland types are primarily "managed
risk to watershed quality if lost
pineland" with some "pine flat", "swamp
forest" and "bottomland hardwood".
Substantial significance, not high
320
Wetland types are "managed pineland"
potential risk to watershed if lost
rimaril found in the former Angers Trace.
Beneficial, high potential risk
N/A
Beneficial, not high potential risk
45
These wetland types are "cutover swamp
forest" and cutover pine flat".
Natural Hazards
Within 100-yr flood
520 or 8% of the planning
AE and VE zones are considered to be
jurisdiction is in the (AE) zone;
Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHA).
3,038 or 47% of the planning
jurisdiction in the VE zone.
Inundated by Hurricane Storm Surge
2,780 acres of the planning
Fast Moving Hurricane Model used to
jurisdiction are in a Category 1
calculate inundation acreage.
Fsz 2 hurricane or 48% of the
jurisdiction. In addition to the
See Map 5 for inundation areas.
2,780 from the Cat.1 &2,
another 515 acres of the planning
jurisdiction are modeled to be
inundated during a Category 3
hurricane. For a total of 3,295
acres or 57% of the jurisdiction.
In addition to the 3,295 from the
Cat. 3, another 1,154 acres of the
planning jurisdiction are
modeled to be inundated during
a Category 4 &5 hurricane. For
a total of 4,449 acres or 78% of
the jurisdiction.
Hazardous Substance Disposal Site
N/A
NPDES
N/A
Water Quality
HQW/ORW watershed (drainage
See Comment
The entire planning jurisdiction drains to
basin
SA waters.
Water supply protection watersheds
N/A
Significant Natural Heritage Area
871
262 acs of "Bird Island". 55 acres of
Bonaparte Landing Maritime Forest.
554 acres of Wood Stork Ponds.
Fish Nursery Areas
2,712
All fish nursery areas in the planning
(out of approx. 2,800 acres of
jurisdiction are PRIMARY fish nurse

4.3 The Environmental Composite Map
The environmental composite refers to the geographic extent and overlap of the natural features and
environmental conditions described previously in this section. The Environmental Composite Map
categorizes the area of the planning jurisdiction into three classes of land based on the land's
suitability for various types of development. The "Class" a particular area of the jurisdiction is in is
based on the extent and the characteristics of natural features and conditions present in that
particular area. For example, land in the flood zone will be in a "Class" that has limited or restricted
development suitability. Table 1 below shows the three general but distinct classes of land
established for the composite map. The table also identifies the natural features and environmental
conditions that determine which "Class" the area will be placed.
Environmental Class
Mapping Symbol_
Natural Features and Hazards Constraints ,
Graduated Color Scale
Class I — Land containing only minimal
hazards and having only slight limitations
-Non-wetland area or wetland rated
that may be addressed by sound land
beneficial and not high potential risk (NC -
planning and development practices
CREWS)
-Land located outside 100 year flood hazard
area
-Land located outside storm surge area
Class II — Land containing development
-Estuarine shoreline
hazards and limitations that may be
-High hazard flood area.
addressed by methods such as restrictions
-Soils with moderate to severe septic
on types of land uses, special site
limitations
planning, or provision of public services
-Soils with moderate to severe erosion
hazards
- Non -coastal wetland area rated beneficial
and high potential risk or substantial
significance (NC -CREWS)
-Land located within a 100 year flood hazard
area
-Land located within storm surge area
Class III — Land containing serious
-Coastal Wetland
hazards for development or lands where
-Estuarine Waters
the impacts of development would cause
-Public Trust/Protected lands
serious damage to the values of natural
-Unvegetated beach area
systems
-Non-coastal wetlands rated as substantial
significance with high potential risk or
exceptional significance with or without
high potential risk (NC -CREWS)
-Significant Natural Heritage Area
-Inlet Hazard area
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 5: Existing Land Use Analysis 45

4.4 Land Suitability Analysis
The land suitability analysis is a CAMA required process for estimating the supply of land in the
planning area that is suitable for development. The supply of land and its suitability rating is
depicted in the Land Suitability Map (See Map 14). The overall purpose of the analysis is to provide
the local planning team with information on the apparent best and least suited areas for
development in order to guide the formulation of policies. The supply of land in the analysis
primarily refers to actual undeveloped land which may experience future development, but all land
in the planning jurisdiction was evaluated whether developed or undeveloped. Therefore, for the
purposes of describing the suitability process, we will from now on primarily refer to the evaluation
of land, as the evaluation of undeveloped land. As a result of the overall analysis process, the
undeveloped land was rated based on the degree to which it was suitable for future development.
The rating system for the analysis is based on the Division of Coastal Management's recommended
weights for each factor (See the Table following). The suitability ratings for undeveloped fall into
one of four categories ranging from Least Suitable for Development, Low Suitability, Medium
Suitability, and Highly Suited for Development
The suitability rating is based on several `factors' that may exist on or near the undeveloped land
which would affect its overall suitability. For example, consider an acre of undeveloped land which
has access to water and sewer infrastructure (a positive `factor' for development suitability), but
also has a wetland area present (a negative'factor' for development suitability), therefore the overall
rating of this land would probably be medium suitability. This example was a simplification
however, and each acre of undeveloped land was evaluated based on a number of `factors' in addition
to the `factors' of access to water and sewer, or presence of a wetland.
It is important to note that the coastal wetland, exceptional and substantial wetland, estuarine
water, protected lands, and state and federal land factors were automatically categorized as least
suited for development and were excluded from Town ranking. Also note that for the purposes of
measuring suitability across different areas or pieces of land, the land of the planning jurisdiction
was divided into one -acre grid cells. Each one -acre grid cell was measured for suitability based on
the totality of `factors' affecting it.
Some of the `factors' used to evaluate undeveloped land are generalized below:
• The presence or lack thereof of all the natural features characteristics that were included in
the Environmental Composite Map
• Proximity to existing development and man-made features (whether services are near and
other development has occurred in proximity)
• Compatibility with nearby existing land uses (proximity or presence of negative uses such as
NPDES site or WWTP, etc. to the undeveloped land)
• Potential impact of development on historically, culturally significant, or scenic
Sites (proximity or presence of such features to the undeveloped land)
• Availability and capacity of community facilities (proximity of the undeveloped land to
existing water and sewer, roads, and other adequately supporting infrastructure)
• Regulatory restrictions on land development (whether the undeveloped land is owned or
restricted from development by local, state, or federal governments)
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 5: Existing Land Use Analysis 46

The following factor criteria table shows the applicable factors found in the planning jurisdiction
and the relevancy weights that were assigned to each of these factors to produce the Town's Land
Suitability Map.
Factor Name
Least Suitable
Low Suitability
Medium
Suitability
High Suitability
Assigned
Weight
1, 2 or 3
Coastal Wetlands
Exclusion
An Area Inside
An Area Outside
Not Ranked
Exceptional and
Substantial
Noncoastal
Wetlands
Exclusion
An Area Inside
An Area Outside
Not Ranked
Estuarine Waters
Exclusion "
An Area Inside
An Area Outside
Not Ranked
Protected Lands
Exclusion
An Area Inside
An Area Outside
Not Ranked
Federal Lands'
An Area Inside
An Area Outside
Not Ranked
State Lands '
An Area Inside
An Area Outside
Not Ranked
Beneficial
Noncoastal
Wetlands
Weighted
An Area Inside
An Area Outside
1
High Quality
Waters
An Area Inside
An Area Outside
1
Storm Surge Areas
Weighted
An Area Inside
An Area Outside
2
100 Yr Flood Zones
Weighted
An Area Inside
An Area Outside
2
Significant Natural
Heritage Areas
Weighted
Area < 500' from
Area) 500' from
2
Hazardous
Substance Disposal
Sites
Weight d
Area < 500' from
Area > 500' from
I
NPDES Sites
Weighted
Area < 500' from
Area) 500' from
1
Wastewater
Treatment Plants
Weighted
Area < 500' from
Area > 500' from
1
Developed Land
Weight d
Area) 1 mi from
.5 -1 mi
(.5 mi
1
Primary Roads
Weighted
Area > 1 mi from
.5 -1 mi
(.5 mi
2
Water Pipes
Weighted
Area > .5 mi from
.25 -.5 mi
< .25 mi
3
Sewer Pipes
Wei hted
Area > .5 mi from
.25 -.5 mi
(.25 mi
3
ssi ned Weight: 1= Important 2 = Very important 3 = Highest importance for development
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 5: Existing Land Use Analysis 47

Section 5. Existing Land Use Analysis
This section provides the local elected officials, appointed boards, citizens and local planning staff
with an overall`picture' of the existing land use patterns in the planning jurisdiction. An
assessment of these patterns, and the identification of available areas for development, helps in
forecasting where, what type and how much development will and can occur. Part of the planning
and policy forming process will be to determine whether the forecasted types and quantities of
development are consistent with and desired under the Town's vision for growth.
This section will also assist in identifying current and potential land use conflicts, such as
residential uses in close proximity to environmentally sensitive areas or intense commercial areas.
This section will also identify areas in transition where new development is expected, and areas
where in -fill or redevelopment are feasible and/or desirable. The information in this Section will
also assist in establishing the Town's Future Land Use Map.
More specifically, included in this Section are:
■ An explanation of land use related terms and the creation of the existing land use
analysis and maps;
■ Tables listing existing land use statistics throughout the planning jurisdiction;
■ Graphics and maps showing the existing land use;
■ Identification of significant land use compatibility problems;
■ Identification of areas experiencing or likely to experience changes in the existing
predominant land uses;
■ Identification of areas expected to develop in the next five to ten years; and
■ Identification of significant land use effects on surface water quality.
Definitions of Land Use Related Terms
The following are definitions of terms used to describe the types of structures and land uses
discussed in this Section. Definitions were taken from Section 151.003 of the Sunset Beach `Zoning
Ordinance in order to remain consistent with Town standards.
Dwelling - a building or portion thereof designed, arranged or used for permanent living
quarters for one or more families. Dwellings do not include motel/hotels.
Single -Family - a detached building consisting of one dwelling unit, with the following
characteristics:
■ one water and one power connection:
■ served by one septic tank, the capacity of which cannot exceed the generated
waste capacity of a four -bedroom dwelling; and
.. ■ -one cooking facility.
Single -Family Attached (Townhouse)- a single-family dwelling unit constructed in a series
or group of attached units with property lines separating the units.
Duplex - a detached building, designed for two single-family dwelling units, divided
horizontally or vertically.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 5: Existing Land Use Analysis 48

Multi -Family- three or more separate dwelling units which may share means of egress and
ingress 'and other facilities.
Manufactured Housing (mobile home) - a residential dwelling unit that:
■ is not constructed in accordance with the standards set forth in the State
Building Code;
■ is composed of one or more components, each of which was substantially
assembled in a manufacturing plant and designed to be transported to the lot on
its own chassis; and
■ exceeds 40 feet in length and 8 feet in width.
The following terms are used in this Section but are not defined in the Towns Zoning Ordinance.
The definitions come from common usage of the terms in planning and real estate applications.
Common Area - an area which is mutually owned and for the private use of residents within
a development. Usually found as open land around a multi -family development which
individual residents can use in lieu of having a private yard.
Parcel - a single tract or plot of land with an official boundary established, usually for the
purpose of designating ownership.
Tract -a single piece of land that has not been subdivided, but is typically large enough to be
subdivided.
Plot/lot - a single piece of land that was created from the subdivision of a larger tract.
Plat - A map showing the property boundaries of land subdivided into lots, blocks and
streets from a larger tract.
Source of Existing Land Use Analysis and Map
The Existing Land Use Map and associated analysis and tables were created by the Cape Fear
Council of Governments using Brunswick County Tax Records updated on July 2006, full -color
orthophotos map quality aerial photos) taken in the winter of 2004, windshield surveys conducted
on August 10` and September 14`h, 2006, and a review of a land use survey conducted by URS
Corporation in 2005 as part of the Environmental Impact Report for the Town's Wastewater User
Rate Study.
Creation of the Existing Land Use Map
The Existing Land Use Map shows the primary land use identified on each parcel in the planning
jurisdiction. For parcels classified as "Residential", the Map shows the type of housing found on _
each parcel, such as single-family. The specific types of businesses found in the "Commercial" use
parcels were not identified (i.e. shopping center). The general classification of "Commercial" was
used for all of these parcels. Parcels that were used as parking lots for an associated commercial
parcel were classified as a commercial use. Parcels used as common areas for hotel/motel were also
classified as commercial use.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 5: Existing Land Use Analysis 49

Due to island characteristics such as erosion, accretion and inlet change, several parcels that may
have been subdivided and platted at a time when the area was dry land, now appear to be unsuited
for development, or at most only suited for development at a low density (i.e. single-family). This is
due to the current substantial presence of water, marsh, or unvegetated beach within the parcel.
These parcels are primarily located in the eastern tip of the island (east of 19th St.) and are classified
as "Marsh/Beach/Natural State" on the Existing Land Use Map and in a few Tables in this Section.
This classification is a generalization used in this Section, and does not infer that every one of these
parcels have been evaluated by state, federal or local officials to certify whether they are or are not
actually developable.
5.1 Existing Land Use in Planning Jurisdiction
Table 19 following re -caps the land, water and size characteristics of the planning jurisdiction,
which was previously discussed in Section 4. Table 19 shows that approximately 4,100 acres in the
entire planning jurisdiction (Limits and ETJ) are "above the mean high water (MHW) line",
meaning it is generally dry land and not inundated during high tide.
There are approximately 100 to 150 acres of inland waterbodies, which are primarily in the Sea
Trail and Sandpiper Bay developments as natural creeks, lakes and stormwater ponds. This
amount has been accounted for in reaching the 4,100 acres of land total.
Using the 4,100 acre total shows that 59% of the planning jurisdiction is land [4,100 dry land
acres divided by 7,000 total jurisdiction acres]. See Table 19 for percentages of land in the
Town Limits and ETJ individually. `
The 4,100 acre land total for the entire planning jurisdiction and the approximately 3,000 acres
of land counted in the Town Limits will be used for calculating population density later in this
Section. Note: In Table 20, the sub -total of acres of existing land use is 2,783, this amount plus
the ROW (street surface) total the approximately 3,000 acres.
While there may be acreage of land above the MHW in the spoil and marsh islands between the
mainland and the island, these areas were not included in the total because of their characterization
as highly unsuitable for development due to low elevation, isolation from infrastructure and
presence of coastal wetlands.
The parcel count totals in Table 19 are for all parcels found within the planning jurisdiction. Some
parcels included in the total may be of traffic islands or other rights -of -way. These parcels were
included because the intent is to calculate the gloss total of land in the jurisdiction. Calculating the
net total of "developable" land is a lengthy and difficult process, and could not be achieved unless
each parcel was evaluated and factored for characteristics such as regulated wetlands, zoning
setbacks, parking requirements, open space requirements, easements (private or public), planned
rights -of way, and other variables that would factor into producing a net total of acres for
developable land.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 5: Existing Land Use Analysis 50

Table 19: Planning Jurisdiction Characteristics for Geography, Hydrography and Parcels
iCnnrro• (-'ona Fcor ('nnnri� of (�nvvrntnrnrc (:TC Rnmcwir�r Cnnnty Tax RPrnrrlal
A reaarcels
P
Acrea e A roximations
Total Area in Planning jurisdiction Limits and E
5,380
6,500
Total Corporate Limits
4,852
4,500
"Land Above Mean High Water"
4,772*
3,000 (or 63%)
"Water/Marsh/Spoil"
80*'*
1,500 or 37%
Extraterritorial Jurisdiction
528
2,500
"Land Above Mean High Water"
523*
1,100 (or 44%)
"Water/Marsh/Spoil"
1 5**
1 1,400 or 46%
*This number includes all of the parcels with a portion of land within the parcel above MHW, a portion of the parcel still may
also be Water/Marsh/Spoil.
xk This number includes all of the parcels which are more or less completely inland waterbodies, marsh or spoil islands, or
otherwise unattached to other adjacent dry land.
Land Uses Identified in the Planning Jurisdiction
The existing land uses in the planning jurisdiction include:
■ Residential
1. Single -Family
2. Single -Family Attached (Townhouse)
3. Duplex
4. Multi -Family
■ Commercial
1. Retail shops/stores (incl. grocery stores, pharmacies, etc.)
2. Offices/Professional services (incl. medical, etc.)
3. Entertainment (incl. pier, arcade, planetarium, etc.)
4. Convenience stores
5. Restaurants (all food service)
6. Hotel/motel
■ Recreation (golf course, clubhouse and/or common area)
■ Vacant (undeveloped land, likely suitable for development)
■ Government (state, federal or local government owned)
■ Institutional (churches or cemeteries)
■ Marsh/Beach/Natural State (areas where development of the parcel is unlikely due to
environmental constraints)
■ Utilities
1. private maintenance facilities (Sea Trail) - - - -
2. public utilities (phone, electricity, etc.)
■ Road Rights -of -way
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 5: Existing Land Use Analysis 51

The Existing Land Use Table (Table 20 below) shows the breakdown of the planning jurisdiction based
on the identified land uses listed above. The three columns on the right in the table below show a
total for either parcels (Column 2), acres (Column 3) or percentage of acres (Column 4) for each
land use (Column 1). These three columns also show a breakdown of that total into the amounts
found in the Town Limits and ETJ individually. For example, "Single -Family" in Row 1 shows that
there are 2,826 total parcels in the entire jurisdiction being used for single-family residential. This
total amount is further broken down into the amount of that total in Town Limits, which is 2,675,
and the amount of that total in the ETJ, which is 151.
Column 4 compares the acreage for each land use to the total acres in the jurisdiction to calculate
the "percent of the total" [e.g. 763.5 acres of single-family divided by 4,100 land acres=18.6%]. For
the Limits/ETJ part of Column 4, the amount represents the acreage for that land use in the Town
Limits and ETJ, respectively, divided by the total land acres in the Town Limits and ETJ. For
example, 688.5 acres of single-family in Town Limits divided by 3,000 acres of land in Town Limits
equals 23%. For single -Family in the ETJ, it is 75 acres divided by 1,100 total land acres in the ETJ.
Table 20: Existing Land Use in the Planning Jurisdiction
(Source- Cane Fear Council of Governments GIS_ Brunswick Countv Tax Records. URS Corporation Land Use Survey)
Land Use
Parcels "'
Limits/ET . ;
"Acres :
Limits/E
% of Total's
"Limits/E
Single -Family
2,826
2,675 /151
763.5
688.5 /75
18.6%
230/o/70/o
Single -Family Attached
54
54/0
5.5
5.5/0
1 .1%
.20/o/00/o°
Duplex"
82
82/0
34
34/0
.80/0
10/0/0%
Multi -Family***
165
164/1
93.5
93/.5
2.2%
30/o/0%
Manufactured Housing
796
628/168
186
145/41
5.1%
60/o/40/0
Res. Common Area
38
36/2
19.5
14.5/5
.5%
.50/o/.50/o
Commercial
62
62/0
113
113/0
3%
50/b/0% '
Golf Course (includes
"course w/clubhouse" and
"course w/ common area"
27
25/2"
1,834.5
1,138/697
44%
38%/63%
Vacant
1,250
1,053/197
691
553/138
16.8%
18%/13%
Utilities
4
4/0
15
15/0
_.4%
..60/o/00/o'
Institutional
4
2/2
8.5
2.5/6
.2%
.10/o/.50/o
Government
3
3/0 !
4
4/0
L% _
.10/o/00/o
Sub -Total
5,295
4,772/523
3768
; 2,806/962
91.7%
Rights -of Way**** (e g. Y
road surface
__ _
332 (Approximately)
8 3%
TOTAL Land Use
5,295
4,772/523
4,100
1000/0
Marsh/Beach/
Natural _State
85 '
80/5
2,169
^
696 /1;473
Water****
730 (Approximately)
Total'jurisdiction
5,380
:4 852/528-
7,000
* Means % total of acres. Total acres is 3,600 acres. Limits/ETJ is percent that land use is of total land acres in Town Limts and ETJ, Respectively.
** Only counts the number of parcels with a duplex use. The number would have to multiplied by 2 to get a total number of units.
*"* Only counts the number of parcels with a multi -family use, not the number of units in the multi -family structure.
****The ROWS and water areas were generally not delineated as parcels with complete boundaries, therefore an approximate acreage calculation
was made.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 5: Existing Land Use Analysis 52

Table 20 above shows that the largest single land use for the entire planning jurisdiction is for golf
course related uses (44%). Single-family residential is the second largest land use, consuming 18.6%
of the land in the jurisdiction. Vacant land is the third largest `use', representing 16.8% of the total.
These three uses account for 79% of the total land use in the planning jurisdiction. Commercial use
represents only 3%, but will likely increase with the approximately 25 acres of road fronting vacant
tracts along Sunset Boulevard North, which are zoned Mainland Business (MB-2) Mixed Use
District which allows commercial activity. There are no industrial uses in the planning jurisdiction.
Other vacant tracts with major road frontage where development pressure for commercial activity
may occur are found in the ETJ along Highway 904 entering the Town from the north from
Highway 17. However, these tracts are zoned by the Town as Multi -Family Residential (MR-3),
which specifically prohibits commercial and industrial uses [Section 151.190 (B) (2) of the Town
Zoning Ordinance]. The zoning of land in the County jurisdiction adjacent to the Town's MR-3
tracts on Highway 904 is Medium Density Residential (6,000 sq2 lots). Therefore, it is likely that
the current zoning in place will prohibit commercial activity along this portion of Highway 904, as
it may conflict with residential uses by increasing traffic congestion, and noise and lighting
nuisances. Alternatively, mixing residential and commercial uses could increase pedestrian and
bicycle accessibility, and decrease the need for vehicle travel to commercial centers farther away.
These types of issues should be considered by the Town during the planning process, and this is an
area where policy could be formed addressing whether the current situation is desired and should
be maintained or whether these areas should be re-evaluated.
Also to consider as part of the potential for commercial expansion in Town, is the zoning for the
surrounding County Jurisdiction (See map graphic later in this Section). The County zoning north
of the Town's ETJ at the intersection of Highway 904 and Highway 179, is Commercial Low Density
(CLD), which is intended to allow commerce adjacent to major thoroughfares. This zoning
designation runs north from the 904/179 intersection along Highway 904 all the way to Highway 17.
5.2 Existing Land Use in Planning Jurisdiction Sub -Areas
For the purposes of providing more detail on the existing land use patterns discussed in this
Section, the Town's planning jurisdiction was divided into six sub -areas. These sub -areas were
established based on their location in generally uniform segments of the jurisdiction, and not
necessarily based upon common land use patterns, zoning or housing types. The Future Land Use
Map to be created later in the planning process can be used to establish sub -areas of the Town
based on similar desired development patterns such as land use, density and housing types.
The 6 sub -areas will show existing land use as well as existing zoning. Overlaying existing zoning
helps analyze what types of density and land use will occur on any vacant tracts and/or lots in each
sub -area. A similar process was conducted in 2005/06 by URS Corporation, an engineering firm
contracted by the Town to conduct an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and a Wastewater User
Rate Study for the planned Town sewer service. The purpose of the study was to establish a
number of sewer connections that should be provided. The number of connections was based on
build -out of vacant lots and redevelopment of housing and commercial units at a maximum
allowable density under the existing zoning ordinance. Information on vacant land and possible
build -out scenarios presented in this Section were checked with the results of the EIR to remain as
consistent as possible. Any differing information in this Section is not meant to replace the
recommended limitation of sewer connections presented in the EIR and Wastewater User Rate
Study.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 5: Existing Land Use Analysis 53

0
T,
Sub -Area I (East End of Island) e
. . . . . . . . . . .
ti
w
W
Z-V
qI
*W
7 1 -
4
Wre 7:�.-
MOM
on M on's
1111
Town Has Development Setback Limitation
Seaward From Main Street. Residential
or Commercial Development is not allowed
Seaward of Setback Line. This Map's Existing
Land Use classification shows the entire parcel
classified as the primary use, however, there are
I no structures used as a residence or commercial
activity on the parcel beyond the setback limitation.
LAWSPA"
Legend
Town Limits Commercial
ETJ Utilities
Single -Family O common Area
Duplex Vacant
Multi -Family Marsh/Beach/Natural State
WI
1­2
JI

The existing land use statistics for Sub -Area 1 are listed in the Table below.
Table 21: Existing Land Use in Sub -Area 1
Land Use
Parcels
Acres
Single -Family
556
765
Duplex*
64
23
Multi-Famil "
1
.3
Commercial
17
5
Res. Common Area
1
1.3
Vacant
220
45.3
Utilities
1
.1
TOTAL
847
148.5
Marsh/Beach/Spoil
35
20.5
* Only counts the number of parcels with a duplex use. The number would have to multiplied by 2 to get a total number of units.
**Only counts the number of parcels with a multi -family use, not the number of units in the multi -family structure.
As shown in the table above, the predominant use in the eastern end of the island is single-family
residential. Duplex structures are limited to oceanfront properties zoned Beach Residential 1
(BR-1). Multi -family is only allowed between the west side of 1" and the east side 27th Streets.
The BR-2A tract may be developed with multi -family quadraplex if approved by the Town as a
"planned residential development". Commercial activity is centered between 1st Street and 27th
Street, with the parking lot of the Gazebo at the terminus of Sunset Boulevard South, which
passes between 1st and 27th Streets.
All structures in this sub -area are elevated due to flooding risk, and there is a 35 foot building
height limit island -wide. There are a number of parcels classified as vacant, nearly all of these
vacant lots are buildable under CAMA and local setback rules. Current limitations on
developing these vacant parcels includes septic suitability. The vacant parcels that have septic
suitability problems, but can meet CAMA and local setbacks, will likely be developed when the
Town implements a central sewer system. Redevelopment of older structures and development
of vacant lots in the commercial BB-1 District will likely be developed to their highest allowable
use when sewer service is established. Prior to completing the planning for the -sewer system,
The Town should evaluate whether the current highest allowable use in the BB-1 District is
consistent with the Town's desired level of growth for that area of the jurisdiction.
There is no conflict in this area among residential uses and densities, although increased multi-
family development use is not desired outside its existing zoned area. Residential uses are on
relatively similar sized lots ranging from 4,500 ft2 on the interior of the island to lots 7,500 ft2 on
the oceanfront. 678 out of the 847 lots in this sub -area are between 4,500 ft2 and 7,500 ft2. 160 of
the lots are over 7,500 ft2. All buildings have a 35-foot height limitation. Some multi -family units
are present, but are relatively isolated along the entranceway of the island (Sunset Boulevard
South, and between lst and 27th Streets) which is zone Beach Business 1(BB-1). Commercial uses
and residential uses are not in conflict as the commercial uses are limited to smaller -scale tourist
and island residential related (i.e. gift stores, rental agencies, small food service, motel and
recreation retail). Heavy commercial and industrial uses are not allowed in the BB-1 district.
There have been some user conflicts among seasonal visitors, day visitors and permanent
residents resulting from lack of available parking spaces during the peak summer days.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 5: Existing Land Use Analysis 56

Table 22: Vacant Lots by Zoning District in Sub -Area 1
Zoning District
Vacant Parcels
Vacant Acres
BR-1
3
2.5
BR-2
199
33.3
BB-1
10
2.5
CR-1
8
7
TOTAL
207
42.3
The following map graphic shows the vacant lots in each zoning district in this sub -area. The
zoning district is shown on the labels in the map starting with the prefix "SB", which stands for
Sunset Beach.
Sub -Area 1 (East End of Island)
SB-CR-1
SB-BB-1 1 1 I 1 SB-BR-1
Town Has Development Setback Limitation
Seaward From Main Street. Residential
or Commercial Development is not allowed
Seaward of Setback Line. This Map's Existing
Land Use classification shows the entire parcel
classified as the primary use, however, there are
no structures used as a residence or commercial
activity on the parcel beyond the setback limitation.
W '
1 �
S
Legend
OTown Limits
ETJ
Vacant
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section ): Lxisting Lana Use Analysis �/

Sub -Area 2 (West End of Island)
TFIT
Y-
7�11
. �iF
LPa1 11
s, W.
H
ILL LI '11� Li L I
Town Has Development Setback Limitation
Seaward From Main Street. Residential
or Commercial Development is not allowed
Seaward of Setback Line This Man's Existing
Land Use classification shows the entire parcel Legend
classified as the primary use, however, there are
no structures used as a residence or commercial Town Limits Multi -Family
activity on the parcel beyond the setback limitation. ETJ commercial
Single -Family vacant
W,
1_7 Duplex Marsh/Beach/Natural State
4
I
0
Cn
O
Cn
0
rt

The existing land use statistics for Sub -Area 2 are listed in the Table below.
Table 23- Fxistinv Land Use in Sub -Area 2
Land Use
Parcels
Acres
Single -Family
531
85.5
Duplex*
18
11.5
Multi -Family"
6
.6
Commercial
8
4
Vacant
126
36
TOTAL
688
122.6
Marsh/Beach/Spoil
4
1 2
* Only counts the number of parcels with a duplex use. The number would have to multiplied by 2 to get a total number of units.
**Only counts the number of parcels with a multi -family use, not the number of units in the multi -family structure.
As shown in the table above, the predominant use in the western end of the island is single-
family residential. Duplex structures are limited to oceanfront properties zoned Beach
Residential 1(BR-1). Multi -family is only allowed between the west side of 1st and the east
side of 27th Streets. Commercial activity is centered between 1st Street and 27th Street, with
the parking lot of the Gazebo at the terminus of Sunset Boulevard South, which passes
between 1" and 27th Streets. Bird Island (not shown on Map of Sub -area) is a state owned
estuarine reserve and starts at the southwestern end of this sub -area in the Town ETJ.
Similar to sub -area 1, all structures in this sub -area are subject to flooding risk. However, the
west side of the island is higher in elevation than the east side and not all structures have been
elevated. Again, there is a 35 foot building height limit island -wide. There are a number of
parcels classified as vacant, nearly all of these vacant lots are buildable under CAMA and local
setback rules. Current limitations on developing these vacant parcels include septic suitability.
The vacant parcels that have septic suitability problems, but can meet CAMA and local setbacks,
will likely be developed when the Town implements a central sewer system. Redevelopment of
older structures and development of vacant lots in the BB-1 District will likely be developed to
the highest allowable use as sewer is established. Prior to completing the planning for the sewer
system, The Town should evaluate whether the current highest allowable use in the BB-1 District
is consistent with the Town's desired level of growth for that area of the jurisdiction.
Similar to sub -area 1, the residential uses and densities do not seem to be in conflict in this area
as all are on relatively uniform sized lots. It is generally not desired that multi -family use increase
outside of where it is currently zoned. There are only essentially two residential zoning districts
in this area of the island, and lot size ranges from 4,500 ft2 on the interior of the island to lots
7,500 ft2 on the oceanfront. 523 out of the 688 lots in this sub -area are between 4,500 ft2 and
7,500 ft2. There are 139 lots over 7,500 ft2. All buildings have a 35 foot height limitation. Some
multi -family units are present, but are isolated along the entranceway of the island (Sunset
Boulevard South, and between lst and 27th Streets) which is zone Beach Business 1(BB-1).
Commercial uses and residential uses island -wide are not in conflict as the commercial uses are
limited to smaller -scale tourist and island residential related (i.e. gift stores, rental agencies,
small food service, motel and recreation retail). Heavy commercial and industrial uses are not
allowed in the BB-1 district. Some user conflicts among seasonal visitors, day visitors and
permanent residents resulting from lack of available parking spaces during the peak summer
days.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 5: Existing Land Use Analysis 59

Table 24: Vacant Lots by Zoning District in Sub -Area 2
Zoning District
Vacant Parcels
Vacant Acres
BR-1
4
2
BR-2
101
14.5
BB-1
20
4.5
CR-1
1
15
TOTAL
125
21
The following map graphic shows the vacant lots in each zoning district in this sub -area. The
zoning district is shown on the labels in the map starting with the prefix "SB", which stands for
Sunset Beach.
Sub -Area 2 (West End of Island)
SE ER-2
L JU JUL
LL�
Town Has Development Setback Limitation
Seaward From Main Street. Residential
or Commercial Development is not allowed
Seaward of Setback Line. This Map's Existing
Land Use classification shows the entire parcel
classified as the primary use, however, there are
no structures used as a residence or commercial
activity on the parcel beyond the setback limitation.
Legend
QTown Limits
ETJ
Vacant
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 5: Existing Land Use Analysis 60

� I
G
Sub -Area 3 (West End of Town V�J,
>
Limits and Western Portion of ETJ)�� �� , • o "
a
r
Calabash River
100
yT
fp
l
RI ,.
�P �pBPS,
(�9 l oY" =
MI,
— d
r�r
pg' 1�" j �SEP� /ply i ✓
Town of CalabashN7,<,
vGZ Planning Jurisdiction a" \ • ! �� " \ \ m
e � O�
Legend
/ 1
// �,o, \' Town Limits - Multi -Family
ETJ ® Institutional
HARBoi)4_*—\
W E ��i�\ grey �'�'v. Single -Family Vacant
Vr11a°
S \ \ k Manufactured Housing
r--
'Ate
:..._ - ---

The existing land use statistics for Sub -Area 3 are listed in the Table below.
Table 25 : Existing Land Use in Sub -Area 3
Land Use
Parcels
Acres
Single -Family
151
75
Multi -Family*
7
5
Manufactured Housing
168
41
Institutional
1
.5
Vacant
195
150
TOTAL
522
271.5
* Only counts the number of parcels with a multi -family use, not the number of units in the multi -family structure.
This sub -area consists mostly of vacant land which will primarily be developed as single-family
residential on 10,000 ft2 lots in the Mainland Residential 2 (MR-2) zoning district. Other vacant
tracts and lots in this sub -area will be single-family on 15,000 ft2 lots in the Mainland Residential
1(MR-1) zoning district. Manufactured housing is also allowed in this sub -area in the
Manufactured Housing 1(MH-1) and MH-2 zoning districts. As shown in the table above, there
are some multi -family units on Resort Circle off Beach Drive SW (Hwy.179). The majority of
existing single-family and manufactured housing uses are one-story structures. Single-family
uses along the Intracoastal Waterway are usually elevated and two -stories in height. The
building height limit is 35 feet, with some exceptions for additional height for additional
setbacks from lot lines. Multi -family structures have a 50-foot height limit.
The residential uses and densities are not in conflict in this area as all are on relatively large lots.
405 out of the 522 parcels in this sub -area are at least 10,000 ft2. All structures in this area must
follow a 35-foot height limitation. Some multi -family units are present, but are relatively
isolated. There are no commercial uses in this sub -area but there is land zoned Mainland
Business 1(MB-1), which would allow uses such as professional offices, retail, multi -family and
hotel/motel. Heavy commercial and industrial uses are prohibited in this zoning district.
Table 26: Vacant Lots by Zoning District in Sub -Area 3
Zoning District
Vacant Parcels
Vacant Acres
AF-1
7
8.5
MR-1
5
5
MR-2
74
90
MR-3
18
6
MH-1
64
19
MH-2
18
3.5
MB-1
9
18
TOTAL
1 195
150
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 5: Existing Land Use Analysis 62

The following map graphic shows the vacant lots in each zoning district in this sub -area. The
zoning district is shown on the labels in the map starting with the prefix "SB", which stands for
Sunset Beach. The map for this sub -area is slightly different than for the previous two sub -areas.
Vacant lots are shown with just a gray outline, and zoning districts are shown in color instead of
just a black outline.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 5: Existing Land Use Analysis 63

Sub -Area 4 (South Side of Sea Trail, >
Sunset Boulevard, and Shoreline Drive)
4k IL/\
J 61
X ✓ / y.PLACE
Town of Calabash g
V
a
Planning Jurisdiction \ °gooKED CuLLeY - I I
SET LAKES
Calabash River
Calabash Creek e pU E _ Fg1RwAY
.P4EDCALF ,...� JCENI4
L
N
IVE OAK
m I_
DQGW
P ---
i
m
t
AZALEA
�VlRAIL
_ w
HICKO. RYA
71
mT ti,�, t 9T f SHORELINE ,
178c: 1 IN CANAL
i �Iljll( r
_ Intracoastal Waterway:'-=
Legend
r of
Town Limits Golf Course with Common Area
— ETJ ®Common Area
Government
u ; uSingle-Family
4�cemetery
N �;v� "=; -` ~'' . _ !y:.:z Multi -Family —
- -
_ >-
w t*_-
commercial vacant
E .... �; ._....�,� ^ •+�. ,�:. _.. � Golf Course „ °. Marsh/Beach/Natural State
Golf Course with Clubhouse

The existing land use statistics for Sub -Area 4 are listed in the Table below.
Table 27: Existing Land Use in Sub -Area 4
Land Use
Parcels
Acres
Single -Family
545
209
Multi -Family*
62
39
Res. Common Area
6
7.5
Golf Course
9
321.5
Commercial
13
7
Government
2
2.5
Institutional
1
.5
Vacant
244
145
TOTAL
882
732
* Only counts the number of parcels with a multi -family use, not the number of units in the multi -family structure.
The main use in this area is single-family residential. These areas are found in the Sea Trail
development and along the Intracoastal Waterway. The multi -family use is found within Sea
Trail plantation. The building height is limited to 35 feet, with an exception for additional
height for additional setback from lot lines. Multi -family structures have a 50-foot height limit.
The majority of single-family homes are one-story structures. Single-family along the
Intracoastal Waterway is typically elevated and one to two -stories.
Zoning in this area is primarily MR-2 which only allows single-family and has a minimum lot
size of 10,000 ft2, and Mainland Residential 3 (MR-3) which allows multi -family and single-
family and has a minimum lot size of 7,500 ft2 for single-family and 40,000 ft2 for multi -family
developments.
A large portion of the vacant land in this sub -area is along Sunset Boulevard and is zoned
Mainland Mixed Use (MB-2). This area is expected to develop as mixed -use and commercial
uses on 20,000 ft2 lots.
Land use conflicts resulting from residential densities in this sub -area have been associated with
the availability of use of community centers and common areas. As much of this sub -are is in the
private Sea Trail golf and residential development, the area has shared facilities among owners
and guests which become full and unavailable during peak season. Sea Trail Corporation has
development plans to continue to increase both residential units and community facilities and
common areas. Sea Trail Corporation plans to develop approximately 220 acres of land in 19
separate tracts which are currently unsubdivided. Sea Trail Corporation estimates, based on
current zoning and other land use regulations, that an additional 1,500 to 2,300 units could be
developed over the next ten years in Sea Trail. Sea Trail Corporation also estimates that there
are 235 platted but vacant lots in the Sea Trail development. Nearly all of these will be developed
with single-family homes.
There have also been some commercial and residential land use conflicts resulting from the
development of chain stores along the bridge entranceway to the island. Much of the conflict is
associated with traffic and signage, and the appearance of chain commercial structures
remaining compatible with the general community appearance.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 5: Existing Land Use Analysis 65

Tnhle 29: Vacant Lots by Zoning District in Sub -Area 4
Zoning District
Vacant Parcels
Vacant Acres
MR-1
7
5.5
MR-2
108
60
MR-3
119
45
MB-1
8
13.5
MB-2
2
21
TOTAL
244
145
The following map graphic shows the vacant lots in each zoning district in this sub -area. The
zoning district is shown color -coded and on the labels in the map starting with the prefix "SB",
which stands for Sunset Beach.
I
ub-Area 4 (South Side of Sea Trail,
unset Boulevard, and Shoreline Drive)
SB-MR-3
�P - OBEY PLA(:E.
y Town of Calabash e a
r 3Y Planning Jurisdiction ! O
SQ OOKEO GULLEY
1 �uNSET LAKES
3B;,MH-2 Calabash River
Calabash Creek 5
,P
10
N
� c y�P rCN N
MEDCALF
SB-MB 1 w''` SB-MR 2 SHORLI:IN
<oE.OAK
L:
SB
SB-_MR -2-A
SHORELINE
lJ� llrn (�J WCANjL;..
SB-MR-1 i
Intracoastal Waterway
SB-CR-1
OSB-MUD
� m a
Q 'S? FAIRIVAY �'.
SB-MH 1
AZALEA
Legend
Town Limits Vacant
ETJ
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 5: Existing Land Use Analysis 66

s✓
z
dSub
-Area 5 (North Side
_
904
of Sea Trail and
n9
OLD
,Q;--,
DFnL�
-\NYN
•�
Eastern Portion of ETJ)
G�3e
o
r
\
pwn,�
T:
N ti ^
A'
V
yYyY C
2 O— BFFZ�rGO
.=
I"4
DEACON
�
,
3
f
�yy�10
10
�r
i
+
`s`
r'4
7
9
rt
0
PI -ACE
g
--
7]
rD
Legend
Numbers 1 through 11 = Land that is planned for
residential subdivision by Land Owner.
N
QTown Limits
® Multi -Family
Golf Course
Utilities
Institutional
y
-
0
9
;� •• •�: ETJ
Existing Land Use
Golf Course with Clubhouse i Cemetery
Single-Family
- Common Area
Vacant
-
\
S
t !
-Single-Family Attached -Maintenance Facilities
I
�
oo� woos

The existing land use statistics for Sub -Area 5 are listed in the Table below.
Table 29: Existiniz Land Use in Sub -Area 5
Land Use
Parcels
Acres
Single -Family
313
106
Single -Family Attached
50
4.5
Multi -Family*
26
25
Res. Common Area
24
10
Golf Course
10
1,230
Institutional
2
7.5
Utilities
2
13
Vacant
233
146
TOTAL
660
1,542
'Only counts the number of parcels with a multi -family use, not the number of units in the multi -family structure.
Nearly the entire sub -area is designated as residential use associated with golf course recreation.
There is a mix of single-family, single-family attached and multi -family. As shown in the table
above, the predominant use is single-family, but more multi -family is likely to be developed as a
more affordable and convenient housing alternative, and because the land is zoned to allow
multi -family. This sub -area is zoned as Mainland Residential (MR-3), which is intended
primarily for multi -family and single-family. Minimum lot size for single-family is 7,500 ft2 and
40,000 ft2 for multi -family structures. The building height limit is 35 feet, with additional
height allowable for additional setback from lot lines. Multi -family structures have a 50-foot
height limit. As mentioned previously, the Sea Trail Corporation plans to develop an additional
220 acres of single-family and multi -family units. The landowners of the former Angels Trace in
the ETJ, now Ocean Ridge Plantation, have a two-year vested right to develop 1,130 single-family
and 180 multi -family units.
On the map graphic showing sub -area 5, the labels with numbers 1-11 show the generalized
locations of future residential subdivisions. Site 11 is the Ocean Ridge Plantation development.
The vested site development plan shows that the entire gross site acreage of +/- 678 acres will be
subdivided into individual lots or multi -family sites in seven phases. The 18-hole golf course will
remain intact and is included in the vested site development plan. Sea Trail has a total of 19
"tracts" planned for subdivision, but only the tracts over 5 acres (sites 1-10) were shown on the
map graphic and listed below. For sites 1-10, Sea Trail Corporation has provided the expected
size of the "tracts" for each respective future subdivision in their development. The "tract" sizes
for each site are as follows (the information in parenthesis is the ID number by Sea Trail):
• Site 1(Sea Trail ID Tract 1) =17.24 ac.
• Site 2 (Sea Trail ID Tract 4) =16.96 ac.
• Site 3 (Sea Trail ID Tract 5) = 7.62 ac.
• Site 4 (Sea Trail ID Tract 6) = 57.98 ac.
• Site 5 (Sea Trail ID Tract 7a) = 9.00 ac.
• Site 6 (Sea Trail ID Tract 9) =14.02 ac.
• Site 7 (Sea Trail ID Tract 13) =17.00 ac.
• Site 8 (Sea Trail ID Tract 15) = 26.39 ac.
• Site 9 (Sea Trail ID Tract 16) =17.61 ac.
• Site 10 (Sea Trail ID Tract 20) =16.31 ac.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 5: Existing Land Use Analysis 68

The total acreage of sites 1-10 equals 200 acres. The remaining 9 tract sites throughout Sea Trail
make up 20 acres. The average size of the 9 remaining sites is about 2.2 acres per site.
Existing land use conflicts resulting from residential densities in this sub -area have been
associated with the availability of use of community centers and common areas. As much of this
sub -area is in the private Sea Trail golf and residential development, the area has shared facilities
among owners and guests, which become full and unavailable during peak season. Sea Trail
Corporation has development plans to continue to increase both residential units, and
community facilities and common areas. Sea Trail Corporation estimates based on current
zoning and other land use regulations that an additional 1,500 to 2,300 units could be developed
over the next ten years. Sea Trail. Corporation also estimates that there ar .235 platted but -
vacant lots in the Sea Trail -development. Nearly all of these will be develojed with single fey
homes.
Table 30: Vacant Lots by Zoning District in Sub -Area 5
Zoning District
Vacant Parcels
Vacant Acres
MR-3
233
146
TOTAL
233
146
While there are only 146 acres identified as "vacant" according to existing parcels in this survey,
Sea Trail Corporation and Ocean Ridge Plantation intend to utilize land that is counted in the
"golf course" use total in Table 29. This does not necessarily mean the golf course is in -filled
with residential lots, it means the "golf course" use parcels contain both actual courses and
vacant land adjacent to the course. The parcel was classified as "golf course" because that is the
parcePs current principal use.
There is no map graphic showing vacant lots per zoning district as this entire sub -area is zoned
MR-3.
FINAL DR_1FT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 5: Existing Land Use Analysis 69

dSub -Area 6 (South of Sunset Boulevard
and Eastern Portion of Town Limts)
r. ,79 z rJ
U. C-
1-7
P
e0� EACH— a
SUNB
tC�
r � �
w O
rt
' O
STATIO =
�n
Cn
• -- .BRIGADIER �
it
ODELL
—AZALEA J 9 _ — GREAT -OAK
L i p
j
\ -'! A2,
/ 7LULA
r-- SHORELINE' -`'.'Ss`/
' � NOS R
Ist
GO ,
r a
LWATj, y`
PECrN SEPS�
P- Intracoastal Waterway
Legend
" " - �'' Q Town Limits; Manufactured Housing - Government
ETJ ® Multi -Family - Utilities
� / - " -� " � �;.�-:,• � Single -Family Common Area Vacant
Single -Family Attached Commercial ;. Marsh/Beach/Natural State

The existing land use statistics for Sub -Area 6 are listed in the Table below.
Table 31: Existing Land Use in Sub -Area 6
Land Use
Parcels
Acres
Single -Family
251
99
Single -Family Attached
4
.5
Manufactured Housing
628
145
Multi -Family*
5
7
Res. Common Area
1
1
Commercial
24
97
Government
1
1.5
Utilities
1
2
Vacant
190
73
TOTAL
1,105
426
*Only counts the number of parcels with a multi -family use, not the number of units in the multi -family structure.
The predominant land use in sub -area 6 is for manufactured housing residential. 57% of the
parcels and 34% of the land acreage is currently used for manufactured housing. The other
major uses in this sub -area are for single-family residential and commercial, accounting for 23%
and 22% of the land acreage, respectively. Vacant land accounts for 17% of the land acreage. The
majority of residential structures in this sub -area are one-story, with the multi -family structure
and single-family homes along the Intracoastal Waterway generally being two -stories. The
building height limit is 35 feet, with additional height allowable for additional setback from lot
lines.
The land in sub -area 6 allowing manufactured housing is zoned Mobile Home -Conventional
Home Residential District (MH-1). The minimum lot size for this district is 9,000 ft2, but the
actual average existing lot size is around 10,000 ft2. The other residential zoning districts in this
sub -area are Mainland Residential 2 (MR-2), Mainland Residential (MR-3) and Mainland
Residential 2A (MR-2A). These districts do not allow manufactured housing. The minimum
lot size for MR-3 is 7,500 ft2 for single-family and 40,000 ft2 for multi -family structures. The
minimum lot size for MR-2 and MR-2A is 10,000 ft2.
The vacant land along Sunset Boulevard is zoned Mainland Mixed Use Business 2 (MB-2).
These tracts are intended to be developed with residential and nonresidential complimentary
uses located in the same complex or building (Zoning Ordinance Section 151.215). The building
height limit is 35 feet, with additional height allowable for additional setback from lot lines.
Multi -family structures have a 50-foot building height limit.
While the housing types in this sub -area are varied, the lot sizes and building heights are
uniform and the multi -family structures and its zoning are relatively isolated from the larger
residential areas as a whole. No significant residential land use conflicts were noted.
Commercial uses in this area are of the type to generate more traffic and noise (i.e. shopping
centers, gas stations, and chain convenience stores), but these uses and their allowable zoning
are limited to the road frontage along the thoroughfares of Highway 904 and Sunset Boulevard
North. Conflicts with adjacent residential areas can be addressed by buffering and lighting
regulations.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 5: Existing Land Use Analysis 71

Table 32: Vacant Lots by Zoning District in Sub -Area 6
Zoning District
Vacant Parcels
Vacant Acres
MR-2
72
29
MR-2A
3
1
MR-3
6
13
MH-1
96
23
MB-2
7
5
MB-1
6
2
TOTAL
190
73
The following map graphic shows the vacant lots in each zoning district in this sub -area. The
zoning district is shown color -coded and on the labels in the map starting with the prefix "SB",
which stands for Sunset Beach.
S bu Area 6 (South of Sunset Boulevard
and Eastern Portion of Town Limts)
SB-MR-3
Y\�G�
N
SB-MUD
SB-M B-2
SB MH-1
-j Li ..._MAGNOLIA'
AZALEA .. _ 9nV _GREAT OqK .MILL•Sl0' UGH
1jORELINE
SB MR: Al a �/ f '
S&MR-2 �/ t wATERwnv p
Intracoastal Waterway
i
W
S LA
SB-MB 1
t�`PRK�j
+1�
EO-TUC=
L` t BRIGADIER
ODELL
LULA
K
SCHOONEl�S
3
�� Z
P,EGM sE P`�
SB-CR-1
Legend
MTown Limits Vacant
ETJ
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 5: Existing Land Use Analysis 72

•
Sub -Area 7 Sandpiper Bay
(Annexed June 2007)
W
Legend
M Town Limits Mufti -Family Utilities
.'ETJ Golf Course Institutional
Existing Land Use Golf Course with Clubhouse Cemetery
Single -Family Common Area vacant
Single -Family Attached maintenance Facilities
------
---
-041
NOFALL-M(FT

The existing land use statistics for Sub -Area 7 are listed in the Table below.
Table 32 (A): Existing Land Use in Sub -Area 7
Land Use
Parcels
Acres
Single -Family
479
112
Multi -Family*
58
16
Golf Course
8
283
Vacant
42
94
TOTAL
587
505
*Only counts the number of parcels with a multi -family use, not the number of units in the multi -family structure.
The predominant land use in sub -area 7 is for single-family residential. 82% of the parcels and 22% of
the land acreage is currently used for single-family housing. The other major uses in this sub -area are
for multi -family residential and golf course use, accounting for 3% and 56% of the land acreage,
respectively. Vacant land accounts for 19% of the land acreage. The majority of residential structures
in this sub -area are one-story.
As the sub -area was recently annexed by the Town, the area has not been rezoned to a Town Zoning
District. The existing zoning of the annexed area was County R-7,500, which is a mix of residential
with minimum 7,500ft2 lots. It should be noted that many of the lots were nonconforming to the
County zoning as it was enacted after much of the development in the sub -area. The Land Use Plan is
recommending the sub -area be zoned to MR-3 to include the associated updates to the MR-3 zone
regarding multi -family, open space and density.
Existing Land Use in the County Jurisdiction Adjacent to Sunset Beach
Identifying existing land use and zoning in the County jurisdiction surrounding the Town is
useful for seeing what types of development patterns are occurring outside the Town, and
evaluating whether these patterns will be compatible or in conflict with existing or future
development in Town. Town policy on annexation will also be impacted by the development
patterns that are happening in the areas surrounding the Town.
Sunset Beach is prohibited in expansion to the west and sections to the northwest of Town due
to other municipal jurisdictions (Calabash). The Town may only expand westward by annexing
the area currently in its western ETJ. Approximately one mile to the east of the Town is the ETJ
of Ocean Isle Beach. It is possible for the Town to expand eastward to the Ocean Isle Beach ETJ.
The area south of Beach Drive towards Ocean Isle Beach is the most densely populated area
surrounding the Town. This area includes a mix of manufactured housing and single-family with
some commercial activity along Beach Drive. The most likely expansion of Sunset Beach is
northward along Highway 904 towards Highway 17. This area is being developed with planned
residential communities and commercial shopping centers. This area is shown on the map
graphic following.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 5: Existing Land Use Analysis 74

Existing Land Use in the County. jurisdiction Adjacent to Sunset Beach
¶r County Existing Land Use
u� and Zoning
CO-CLD
lPRESTWICK
_ CO-R-7500 SUMM
904
4 9� P,
CO-R-7500� z O
J
l(REq T w: CO-CLD Op,
Q� ,
4L F RET' m- 4
Ohc) CEORGE.Tp L �� .-. CO-R-7500
wN 179 -
U
,III I .111.1(11 CHANN L II'''"='
�. II+ I ITrTI
W\ CO-
M Ili jER
!
o
CO-R-6000
qZ CO-R-7500
�, � •_.LEAK
m
- -
= z
j7 m z
o_ DALE _F_
Legend
.. . rYmd !n fIhf i1t1,f11r1414fIiliI'tIt�_Iv,<I, IiIWLES�TB
Town _disMITI�-AIlQLimits - Government rI �Il'II1wi1i11 �"_J�1
BEA
N1 ['-i
Et
Vacant -ETJ TA
Residential Institutional I;}4444Mff}i 4}
t � „-�i444i'r'r444444,P-F= o -
- Commercial LU114 T4"t x x
„�
LUE
�AT-OAK i - D -_ _ v Z
/� Fi �5>�LLLLi11U BAR r- 6 \ k � m r+
Z
SHORELINE -�%1111 c
OF- 0 O i
. E�f ALLRED
I IR u r Tt
1- .G111liu.
CO-R-6000
u,
FINAL_ DRAFT of I -UP 6/07/10 Section 5: Existing Land Use Analysis 75

5.3 Identification of Significant Land Use Effects on Surface Water Quality
Almost all land uses, which are in close proximity and drain to surface water bodies, can have an
effect on water quality. There are no land uses in Town which contribute significant point -
source pollution to surface water, such as wastewater treatment plants or industrial type
sources.. The wastewater treatment plant in Sea Trail is permitted to use its treated wastewater
byproduct for irrigation and spray field purposes on its golf courses. However, the town -wide
system of streets, parking lots, curbs, gutters, ditches and swales all convey non -point source
pollution to local surface waters from 25 piped outfalls. These outfalls were constructed prior to
Phase I point -source regulations and Phase II non -point source regulations, and were
constructed to drain storm water from properties and streets throughout the Town's jurisdiction
(See Map 13: Town Maintained Stormwater System Outfalls Map). Some of the conveyances of
non -point source pollution and some of the actual sources of the pollution will be managed and
regulated under new NPDES Phase II stormwater rules that will go into effect on July 1, 2007.
However, the existing system with its piped outfalls will largely continue to convey `untreated"
stormwater from existing impervious surfaces to area waters. Infill development of individual
residential lots not regulated by the stormwater ordinance will also contribute to the untreated
volume of stormwater runoff conveyed through the Town's stormwater system. While retro-
fitting the existing stormwater system by engineered solutions can be expensive and difficult to
apply equitably among existing development (i.e. having to evaluate what type of pollutant load
in the stormwater comes off different properties and at what volume), there are steps the Town
can take as part of its Phase II Permit Public Education and Outreach Program to inform citizens
of already developed properties how to better contain stormwater runoff on a site by site basis.
Such homeowner practices could include simple steps such as having "rain barrels" at the ends of
roof gutters to collect rain water, or diverting gutter spouts to drain over grass or other vegetated
areas rather than onto driveways or other impervious surfaces. Homeowner landscaping
practices, if applied at a sufficient scale, could have a beneficial impact on the volume and
pollutant load of stormwater runoff entering the Town maintained stormwater system.
The Town currently manages stormwater from new developments and major redevelopments
with a stormwater ordinance (See Section 4), but the new Phase II rules will require stronger
controls for new development in environmentally sensitive areas (land within one-half mile of
shellfish waters) and increases in programs to identify and eliminate existing sources of
pollution transported in stormwater. Fertilizers and pesticides used on the local golf courses
may also reach local surface waters if not properly managed and applied. Also, land uses along
waterfronts which do not have engineered stormwater retention or vegetated buffers of at least
30 feet (50-100 feet recommended by engineers) can also contribute to surface water pollution by
allowing stormwater runoff to reach surface waters untreated. See Section 4 for information on
the water quality in the Town's jurisdiction and possible sources of surface water pollution.
5.4 Identification of Land Use Conflicts with Class III Areas on the Environmental
Composite Map and Areas Described in the Natural Systems Analysis Section
This subsection identifies current and future land uses that may conflict with environmentally
sensitive areas. Identifying potential conflict with sensitive areas is done by comparing the
existing land uses identified in this Section with the natural features discussed in Section 4.
Most of the comparison is done by utilizing the Environmental Composite Map [Map S], The
Areas of Environmental Concern (AEC) Map [Map 1], and the North Carolina Coastal Resource
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 5: Existing Land Use Analysis 76

Evaluation of Wetland Systems Map [Map 6], which were discussed in Section 4. The
Environmental Composite Map shows areas classified as Class III, which imply that those areas
contain natural features that should be protected from intense development. The main Class III
natural features found in the Sunset Beach Planning Jurisdiction that may conflict with
development are non -coastal wetlands, coastal wetlands and estuarine waters.
As stated in Section 4, wetlands serve important and useful functions. Wetlands maintain water
quality by filtering pollutants and sediments, prevent erosion and flooding from plant root
systems that hold soils in place, and provide wildlife habitat and scenic areas that increase
property values and quality of life. The majority of the mainland areas identified as Class III on
the Environmental Composite Map [Map 8] are due to their classification as non -coastal
wetlands by the North Carolina Coastal Resource Evaluation of Wetland Systems [shown on
Map 6]. On the mainland, these Class III areas are mostly found in Sub -area 5 (Sea Trail North of
Calabash Creek and the Eastern ETJ) and Sub -area 7 (Sandpiper Bay and Wyndfall Annex).
These wetland areas are not automatically designated 404 wetlands and regulated by the Army
Corps of Engineers, but are areas where certain characteristics associated with wetlands, such as
soils and plant types, are present in that area. Except for the Calabash Creek Class III area, the
vast majority of the other Class III areas found in the Sea Trail development, the future Ocean
Ridge Plantation development, and the existing Sandpiper Bay development are classified as
"managed pinelands" type wetland areas and are rated as "not a high potential risk" to the
integrity of the watershed if lost. The Calabash Creek Class III area is classified as "swamp
forest" and does have a "high potential risk" to watershed quality if lost by filling or draining.
Calabash Creek is the headwater for the SA and shellfish classified Calabash River. The Creek
runs through areas which are surrounded by existing and/or planned development. As part of
this Land Use Plan update, the Town should evaluate its stormwater requirements in the
Calabash Creek area to ensure that stormwater impacts from future development along Calabash
Creek are minimized and do not overburden the water quality of the Creek or the Calabash
River.
The Class III area identified in the commercial area just south of the Ocean Ridge Plantation site
and just north of Sunset Boulevard is also classified as "managed pinelands and is rated as "not a
high potential risk" to the integrity of the watershed if lost. In fact, those pinelands are no longer
present in this area, and manmade wetlands in the form of stormwater retention ponds now
occupy much of this area as it has already begun to develop. Class III areas found in sub -area 6
are also classified as "managed pinelands", but have a "high potential risk" if lost or otherwise
destroyed. These pinelands in sub -area 6 are adjacent to the creek tributaries that are associated
with the Intracoastal Waterway. These areas are near Stokes Drive off Shoreline Drive East,
Water Oak Wynd off Shoreline Drive East, and the Millslough Lane area.
Other Class III areas can be found along the shoreline of the Intracoastal Waterway in Sub -areas
3 and 4. This classification is likely due to their close proximity to estuarine waters and coastal
wetlands. The one -acre resolution of the Class III areas on the Environmental Composite Map is
not accurate enough to automatically designate any of these properties as highly unsuited for
development. However, due to their proximity to estuarine water and coastal wetlands, it is
highly likely that any development on these properties would require a CAMA permit. -
Maintaining vegetative buffers at a minimum of 30 feet (50-100 feet recommended) would assist
in filtering pollutants and sediments in runoff from the property and adjacent roads. State law
currently requires a 30-foot buffer. Municipalities may increase this requirement if desired.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 5: Existing Land Use Analysis 77

These properties are zoned for single-family residential with a minimum lot size of 10,000ft2 for
most areas, up to one acre lot minimum for the lots on the western most end of the jurisdiction.
Class III areas on the island are also associated with close proximity to estuarine waters and
coastal wetlands. The majority of vacant lots that correspond with a Class III rating on the
Environmental Composite Map are those lots found east of 191h Street and north of the canal
channel inlet. These lots were discussed earlier in this section. As mentioned above, the one -acre
resolution of the Class III areas on the Environmental Composite Map is not accurate enough to
automatically designate these properties as unsuited for any type of development. However, due
to their proximity to estuarine water and coastal wetlands, any development allowed under the
Town Zoning Ordinance on these properties would also at minimum require a CAMA permit
and flood zone certification permit.
5.5 Projection of Future Land Needs
The CAMA planning guidelines [15A NCAC 07B .072 (c)(3)(D)] require an estimate of the land
needed for residential development to accommodate the expected growth in population over the
next twenty years. In Sunset Beach, the projected population growth is essentially dependent
and contingent upon the amount of vacant land within its jurisdiction. In other words, the
population will not grow substantially and the projected population growth will not be reached
if there is no vacant land available, if the vacant land is not being developed, or if the Town does
not annex existing population areas. Redevelopment and re -zoning of areas already currently
developed to allow substantial increases in population and housing density are not desired in the
Town. Furthermore, the Town will likely manage the amount of future growth that can occur by
establishing a maximum number of sewer connections that will be available for the upcoming
construction of the Town -wide sewer system.
The existing density within the Town Limits is .8 persons per acre. Density is derived by taking
the latest North Carolina State Demographer certified population estimate for the Town of
2,095, and dividing it by the total acres of land in the Town Limits, which is 2,500
[population/land area]. NOTE: This does not include the recently annexed area of Sandpiper Bay
and Wyndfall. The State Demographer has not updated the Town's population based on that
annexation. The Land Use Plan estimates the permanent population of -Sandpiper Bay and
Wyndfall to be approximately 960 (based on the County permanent resident occupation ratio of
59% and 2.3 persons per household). When including the Sandpiper Bay and Wyndfall annex
population and land area, the current population density is 1 person per acre [i.e. 3,055 pop/3000
acs].
When including the Sandpiper Bay and Wyndfall annex, the Town's population is expected to
reach 4,613 by 2020 and/or build -out. With no further annexations, the density would be 1.5
persons per acre. The Town would need approximately 1,500-1,600 additional acres of vacant
land to meet expected population growth and retain its existing population density of 1 person
per acre. As shown in Table 20, there are currently 691 acres of vacant land in the planning
jurisdiction. Therefore, it is projected that the Town will have a deficit of approximately 700
acres of vacant land, and the Town's population density will rise to 1.25 persons per acre.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 5: Existing Land Use Analysis 78

Section 6. Analysis of Community Facilities
The CAMA planning guidelines state that the "purpose of the analysis of community facilities is
to evaluate existing and planned infrastructure capacity, location and adequacy of key
community facilities that serves the community's existing and planned population and economic
base; that protect important environmental factors such as water quality; and that guide land
development in the coastal area" {15A NCAC 07B .0702 (c) (4)}. The key community facilities
typically found in coastal communities include:
1. water supply systems;
2. wastewater systems;
3. transportation systems;
4. stormwater systems; and
5. public access facilities.
These community facilities are considered key in land use planning because they can have a
significant impact on a local government's ability to allow for growth, while making sure it is
done in a managed and orderly way that protects property values, quality of life and the
environment.
The Town of Sunset Beach is in significant transition on several of its key community facilities.
The Town is finalizing an interlocal agreement with Brunswick County to transfer ownership
and operation of the Town's existing water distribution system to the County. The Town, also
in conjunction with Brunswick County, is in the planning process for providing a centralized
sewer system to replace the Towns current wastewater systems, which are individual septic
systems. The Town is working with the North Carolina Department of Transportation in
upgrading its transportation systems by replacing the one -lane swing bridge accessing the island
with an elevated two-lane bridge. The new bridge will allow a more constant free -flow of .
vehicular traffic on and off the island and boat traffic up and down the Intracoastal Waterway.
The Town is also transitioning its existing stormwater management systems to meet the
requirements of the 2006 Stormwater Management Act (Senate Bill 1566), which enacts the
federal NPDES Phase II Stormwater Rules.
6.1 Water Supply System Status and Trends
As of 2006, Sunset Beach is a wholesale water customer of the Brunswick County Water Supply
System. The Town currently purchases water from the County and distributes it to Town
customers within the Sunset Beach corporate limits. As stated above, the Town is planning to
transfer its water distribution system (i.e. water lines, meters and .2 MGD water tank) to the
County. The current transfer plans will become effective on July 1, 2007. Water users in the
Town will become retail (or direct) customers of the County water system. The water system
infrastructure in place is available to all areas in the Town Limits. There are no water wells in
use by the Town, all water is conveyed in from the Brunswick County water system.
Brunswick County obtains its water from the Cape Fear River at the Northwest Water
Treatment Plant (Northwest WTP) and groundwater wells at the 211 Water Treatment
Plant (211 WTP). Water supplied to the Northwest WTP is purchased from the Lower
Cape Fear Water Authority, which pumps surface water from the King's Bluff Reservoir,
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 6: Analysis of Community Facilities 79

located above Lock and Dam No.1 on the Northeast Cape Fear River. The 211 WTP obtains raw
groundwater from 15 wells that are tapped into the Castle Hayne Aquifer.
The Town has estimated that all existing structures (residential, commercial and institutional)
are connected to the water supply system. There are approximately 3,750 water connections as
of 2005/2006. Any new developments in the Town Limits are required to connect to the water
supply system, and any new developments in the ETJ are to connect directly to the County's
water system.
As a Water Supply System operator, the Town re-evaluates its water supply needs
approximately every 5 years by producing a Water Supply Plan. The last Water Supply Plan for
the Town was updated in 2002. This will likely be the last Water Supply Plan the Town
produces, as it will transfer ownership of the system to the County in 2007. The Water Supply
Plan is reviewed by the North Carolina Division of Water Resources to ensure adequate supplies
are being maintained to avoid shortages and to be available during emergencies (i.e. fires). The
Town does have a Water Shortage Response Ordinance found in Section 51.35 of the Town Code
of Ordinances. The purpose of the ordinance is to allow the Town to implement voluntary and/or
mandatory water conservation measures throughout the Town during a declared water shortage.
The ordinance states that whenever the governing body of the Town finds that a potential
shortage of water supply is imminent, it can adopt an ordinance that Voluntary Conservation
conditions exist. In this event, the Town can request all water customers to employ voluntary
water conservation measures, such as ceasing irrigation. The ordinance also states that
whenever the governing body of the Town finds raw water supplies (i.e., County supply systems
and its sources) to be consistently below averages, in decline and not adequate to meet normal
needs, the Town can adopt an ordinance that Mandatory Conservation conditions exist. In this
event, The Town will continue to encourage voluntary water conservation measures and impose
water use bans on certain Classes of water users and uses as defined in the Water Shortage
Response Ordinance.
Since the Town currently purchases water from the County on a monthly basis, the amount of
actual supply available to Town customers can vary based on the amount the Town actually
purchases and/or the amount the County has available to sell. According to the Town's 2002
Water Supply Plan and a 2006 Brunswick County Water Systems Master Plan, the Town will
likely have an annual average day demand of .86 to .93 Million Gallons per Day (MGD) between
the periods of 2010 and 2020. The Brunswick County Water Master Plan actually has an
expected average day demand of around 1.4 MGD for the Town after 2015, but this is a 300%
increase from current levels and is not likely unless the Town annexes surrounding populations,
which would increase its population to a level that could support a 300% water demand
increase. In addition, seasonal populations are also not expected to rise as dramatically as to
support a 300% increase in water demand given the Town's development regulations limiting
large multi -family or motel/hotel development on the island.
The month of July 2006 saw an average day demand of 1.06 MGD in.water consumption, but
when considering use over the entire year, high -season peaks are offset by the low -season which
brings the annual average day demand back to a lower number. However, having adequate water
supply is typically tied to the amount associated to a peak day demand as opposed to a lower
annual average demand. According to the water consumption data received from the Town's
Finance Department, the Town's typical annual average day demand between 2002 and 2005
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 6: Analysis of Community Facilities 80

ranges between .5 to .57 MGD, 2006 year to date is .59 MGD. To reach the 2010 and beyond
estimated demand found in the 2002 Water Supply Plan and County Water Supply Master Plan,
the annual average day water use of the Town would have to increase by around 57% from
current levels [(.93 - .59)/.59 = 57%].
Tying future water demand to future population growth, (refer to Chart 2 in Section 3 of this
Plan) the permanent population is expected to increase by 45% from 2,219 people in 2005 to
approximately 3,200 by 2020. This permanent population increase is short of the 57% increase in
water use expected. However, the 45% increase in permanent population does not include any
increases in seasonal populations over the next 15 years, which would be a factor in future water
demand. Therefore, an additional 10% in seasonal population over current levels could be
realized as the island is built -out and with some redevelopment of homes to slightly larger homes
that may have more capacity for seasonal visitors than previously existed. The 45% increase in
permanent population and the 10% increase in seasonal population equals a possible 55%
increase in population that would match the 57% increase in expected demand. The match is
based on per person water use averages remaining constant to today's levels (e.g. given someone
in 2020 would use roughly the same amount of water as someone uses today).
NOTE: The purpose of this Land Use Plan is not necessarily to identify and secure an exact
future water supply amount based on estimates, but rather to demonstrate the need to plan
ahead to locate and secure future additional water capacity as it will more than likely be needed.
As the main water supply distributor in the area, Brunswick County is the primary source for
securing future water capacity to meet expected demand. Assisting the County in increasing its
water supply capacity and infrastructure should be a policy of the Town to ensure that its own
future water supply demands can also be met.
Tables 33 and 34 following show the Town's monthly water demand since June of 2000. The
tables also show how much water was purchased from the County for each month to compare
with how much was actually used. Table 33 shows water use over six months of each year, which
includes the high -season. Table 34 shows water use over a six-month period, which includes the
low -season. An average Million Gallons per Day (MGD) amount is shown for each month, and
was found by dividing the total water use in the month by the number of days in the month.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 6: Analysis of Community Facilities 81

Table 33: Water Consumption in the "High -Season"
(Source: Town of Sunset Beach Finance Department)
A""r.`
Ma
June
ul
Au `
Se
YEAR
TOTAL For
Six Months
2000
Gallons Purchased
from County
N/A
N/A
28,399,600
22,503,300
20,890,200
' 14,099,400
Gallons Actually,
22,131,650
:28,143,196
18,928,756
11,627,011
Used
.73 MGD
.91 MGD
.6 MGD
:38 MGD
2001
Gallons Purchased
from County
14,866,600
22,009,700
24,398,700
25,764,100
24,002,300
15,907,700
Gallons Actually
12,935,160
21,659,810
20,169,610
27,741,570
21,723,882
13,713,870
117,943,902
Used
.43 MGD
.69 MGD
.67 MGD
.89 MGD
.72 MGD
.45 MGD
2002
Gallons Purchased
from County
16,6918,300
18,666,000
27,574,200
29,050,060
24,095,440
17,505,470
Gallons Actually
17,530,610
17,396,470
24,430,812
29,062,779
23,279,192
16,108,638
127,808,501
Used
.58 MGD
.56 MGD
.81 MGD
.93 MGD
.75 MGD
.53 MGD
2003
Gallons Purchased
from County
14,674,620
15,298,400
21,83.3,610
30,192,490
22,048,220
17,589,460
Gallons Actually
15,186,624
15,364,501
18,944,360
29,267,090
21,576,396
17,358,274
117,697,245
Used
.5 MGD
.49 MGD
.63 MGD
.94 MGD
.69 MGD
.57 MGD
2004
Gallons Purchased
from County
16,124,510
18,628,720
29,545,060
28,927,650
22,825,380
14,302,730
Gallons Actually
14,871,659
17,833,271
28,165,130,
26,0318,250
°22,900,789
12,416,640
122,225,739
Used
.49 MGD
.57 MGD
.93 MGD
.83 MGD
.73 MGD
41 MGD
2005
Gallons Purchased
from County
13,249,690
19,794,070
25,270,100
31,848,820
28,628,650
19,125,350
Gallons Actually
11,246,199
17,612,595
23,032,602
29,196,923
26,055,399
17,241,747
124,385,465
Used
.37 MGD
.56 MGD
.76 MGD
.94 MGD
.84 MGD
.57 MGD
2006
Gallons Purchased
from County
9,887,330
16,059,200
25,556,626
40,308,020
35,596,800 .
°116,821,902-1
without
Gallons Actually
16,218,610
19,531,262
22,045,350
33J59,730
25,866,950
N/A
September 06:
- Used -
.54:MGD
.63 MGD ..
.73 MGD .
1.06 MGD
' .83 MGD
Total
As shown in Table 33, July has been the month with the highest demand due to the influence. of
seasonal populations. Since 2000, the average day water use amount for July has been .93 MGD.
The highest average day amount for July over the last seven years was in 2006 with 1.06 MGD.
The July 2006 average day amount was a 14% increase from the regular July average of .93 over
the last 7 years.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 6: Analysis of Community Facilities 82

Table 34: Water Consumption in the "Low -Season"
(Source: Town of Sunset Beach Finance Department)
Oct.
Nov: "
Dec.
an.
Feb':
March
YEAR
TOTAL For
Six Month
Period
2000/2001,
Gallons
Purchased from
12,762,600
11,492,400
8,318,000
8,990,800
6,081,800
10,011,000
County
Gallons Actually
11,468,240
14,447,190
7,525,003
7,818,030
6,662,202
8,626,850
56,547,515
Used
:36 MGD
.48 MGD
.24 MGD
.24 MGD
.23 MGD
27 MGD
2001/2002
Gallons
Purchased from
16,733,700
15,301,500
9,378,600
8,608,100
8,151,600
12,097,400
County
-
Gallons Actually
17,603,735
13,577,353
8,024,440
8,014,170
8,447,288
8,564,132
64,231,118
Used
.56 MGD
.45 MGD
.26 MGD
.26 MGD
.48 MGD
.27 MGD
2002/2003
Gallons
Purchased from
14,445,660
11,512,500
8,254,450
9,064,250
7,714,310
10,375,840
County
Gallons Actually
12,290,784
8,369,924
9,912,272
6,906,950
6,905,070
8,908,502
53,293,502
Used
.39 MGD
.27 MGD
.31 MGD
.22 MGD
.24 MGD
.28 MGD
2003/2004
Gallons
Purchased from
14,031,880
9,856,820
10,638,030
9,096,220
7,947,260
11,272,320
County
Gallons Actually
11,850,660
12,257,630
6,388,990
7,471,170
7,711,840
10,113,360
55,793,650
Used
.38 MGD
.4 MGD
.2 MGD
.24 MGD
.27 MGD
.32 MGD
2004/2005
Gallons
Purchased from
13,236,080
12,636,080
9,005,430
10,290,800
8,395,840
11,066,030
County
Gallons Actually
11,789,029
10,971,299
7,292,628 :
8,065,709 -
7,613,380
9,767,360
55,490,405
Used
38 MGD
.36 MGD
.23 MGD
.26 MGD
.27 MGD
.31 MGD
2005/2006
Gallons
Purchased from
17,411,130
13,367,840
9,952,240
10,602,300
8,803,000
11,041,390
County
Gallons Actually
15,029,887
11,006,803
7,681,820
8,810,100
7,690,290
10,113,160
60,332,060
Used 1
1 148 MGD
.36 MGD
.24 MGD
.28 MGD
.27 MGD
132 MGD
Table 34 shows that December through February have been the months with the lowest water
use over the last seven years. The lowest use was .2 MGD in December 2003. The average day
use is around .26 MGD for these three months.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 6: Analysis of Community Facilities 83

As a comparison of water use among Brunswick County municipalities, the table below shows
the 2005 annual average day demand for each municipality that is a wholesale purchaser of water
from the County. NOTE: Sunset Beach is 100% supplied by Brunswick County with water, it is
not known if the other municipalities in the table below have municipal wells as part of their
water supply systems, such as Oak Island, which is 300% more populous than Sunset Beach but
only uses less than 50% more County water than Sunset Beach.
Table 35: Annual Average Day Water Use Comparison Among Brunswick County
Wholesale Water Customer Municipalities
Source: 2006 Brunswick Countv Water System Master Plan
IViuriicipahty
2005 °Annual Average Day; ,
:Water Use
2004 Certified`Population
Bald Head Island
.190
246
Boiling Spring Lakes '
.144
3,580
Caswell Beach
.148
457
Holden Beach
.117
835`
Oak Island
.990
7,281
Ocean Isle Beach
.567
483'
Shallotte
.269
1,533
Southport
.443
2,612
Sunset Beach
.565
2,095
According to the table, Sunset Beach is the third largest wholesale user (not including the North
Brunswick Sanitary District) of the County water supply system. This corresponds with Sunset
Beach's population among the wholesale municipalities as fourth largest. Other factors to
consider include Sunset Beach's seasonal population influence on boosting consumption rates as
compared to municipalities such as Boiling Spring Lakes and Shallotte, which likely have a
comparably smaller seasonal population influence.
Water Supply System Expansion
To prepare for future water supply demand, Brunswick County contracted the engineering firm
Hazen &r Sawyer, P.C. in 2005 to prepare a Water System Master Plan. The Master Plan
contains a list of prioritized improvements to the water supply system to prepare for demand
expected by 2015. More specifically, the Master Plan estimated current and future demands for
the service area, examined the existing infrastructure's ability to meet growing demands, and
identified and ranked required system improvements needed through 2015. The existing
Brunswick County water system includes two water treatment plants, transmission mains and
distribution pipelines, booster pumping stations and elevated storage tanks.
According to the Master Plan, the treatment plants currently have a combined rated capacity of _ -
30 million gallons per day (MGD), with about 8 MGD of excess capacity for the current
Maximum Day demand. The "Maximum Day" means the highest daily demand in a year. The
Maximum Day rate is the critical requirement for pumping and production capacity. As the
County grows, the Maximum Day rate will grow. The Master Plan's demand projections show
that the existing excess capacity available for the current "Maximum Day" rate will quickly
diminish in the immediate future. The Master Plan states that the County's water system plants ,
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 6: Analysis of Community Facilities 84

are expected to reach 80 percent capacity in 2007, and will be at 100 percent capacity by 2011. By
2015, the projected Maximum Day demand could have a production supply shortfall of 8 MGD.
The Master Plan established a "Program of Construction" Table (See Appendix III) to address
the immediate and near future needs of the County water system. The County Commissioners
adopted the Program of Construction (as well as the entire Master Plan) in July 2006. The
recommended improvements are divided into three phases. Phase I consists of immediate needs,
such as ensuring adequate flow to fight fires, and are recommended be constructed in the next
two years. Phase II improvements are to be completed before 2015 to meet projected water
demands.. Phase II projects are divided into Phase IIA, which addresses pipeline needs, and
Phase IIB, which addresses pumping station needs. Finally, Phase III improvements address the
requirement to increase the overall treatment capacity and supply of the Northwest WTP and
upgrade the 211 WTP facilities to meet the projected needs for the year 2015.
Other than increasing the overall treatment and supply capacity of the system, the improvements
that will affect the Town of Sunset Beach are items I-2, I-6 and IIB-5 on the Program of
Construction Table. The Phase I items are prioritized to be implemented in 2007. The County
Public Utilities Director estimates that funding will be available to begin the implementation of
item IIB-5 in 2008.
Item I-2 (Phase I Improvement)
The Master Plan identified inadequate fire flows and low pressures in the water system in the
Calabash area, which also includes portions of the Sunset Beach ETJ along Beach Drive. The
Master Plan attributed the low pressure to the distance the water has to travel to reach this
region and the undersized lines along Beach Drive. To increase pressure in this area, the Master
Plan recommends that the existing 8-inch pipeline along Beach Road be paralleled with a 12-inch
line from the Clariday Road/Old Georgetown Road intersection to the Sunset Beach meter vault
on Shoreline Road. The Master Plan states that piping across the waterway would not be
necessary and the total project amounts to approximately 8,300 LF of 12-inch pipeline.
Item I-6 (Phase I Improvement)
Item I-6 is not in the planning jurisdiction of Sunset Beach but is located immediately adjacent to
it in the Sandpiper Bay Development just across Old Georgetown Road (Hwy.179) from Sea
Trail and Angel's Trace. According to the Master Plan, Sandpiper Bay is a residential
development supplied from a single 8-inch pipe causing poor fire flows. The recommended
improvement is approximately 1,300 LF of 12-inch pipeline to complete a loop of the system in
the area.
IIB-5 (Phase II Improvement)
The Master Plan recommends additional elevated storage in the southwest region of Brunswick
County. A One Million Gallon elevated storage tank is recommended to be constructed on the
southside of Highway 904 off Highway 17, just north of the KOA campground and across from
Ocean Ridge Plantation. A lack of storage in this area is identified in the Master Plan as placing
greater dependency on the Bell Swamp Pump Station to supply the demand required during
Peak Hours and the addition of this new tank will help ensure Brunswick County's ability to
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 6: Analysis of Community Facilities 85

supply future Maximum Day and Peak Hour demand. The tank will also help buffer Brunswick
County's system against any lack of adequate storage found in the individual wholesale user
systems in the area. The County Public Utilities Director estimates that funding for the new 1
MG capacity elevated storage tank will be designated in 2008.
6.2 Wastewater System
The Town of Sunset Beach, in agreement with Brunswick County, is in the planning stages to
construct a wastewater collection system. The County will construct, own and operate the
system, and charge one-time assessments to properties and users of the system within the Town
to pay for the construction. Monthly utility charges to.use the system will also apply. The
purpose of the wastewater system is to provide sewer service to currently un-sewered areas
within the Town limits. The un-sewered areas include locations both on the mainland and
island. Most areas within the Town Limits are currently serviced by individual on -site septic
systems. Sewer service is currently available to portions of the Sea Trail development north of
Calabash Creek, in the commercial area along Sunset Boulevard North, and in the multi -family
units along Shoreline Drive West. These areas are serviced by a wastewater treatment plant
located in Sea Trail, which is operated by Brunswick County. The Plant is permitted to treat .5
MGD of wastewater a day but as of 2005 treated only around .1 MGD per day. The County Plant
in Sea Trail is planned to become a regional pumping station when the planned sewer system
comes on-line. Wastewater will be pumped through this station to the West Brunswick Water
Reclamation Facility near Bolivia, currently under -construction (See Map 10: 20 Year Regional
Sewer Collection System Infrastructure Map).
According to the Brunswick County Comprehensive Wastewater Master Plan conducted by the
engineering firm HDR, Inc., the capacity of the West Brunswick Facility under construction will
be 3.0 MGD. The current design of the facility allows for future expansion to replicate the 3.0
MGD facility and make it a 6.0-mgd facility. The Master Plan also states that the 275-acre West
Brunswick site has adequate land to support up to a 7.0 MGD facility to meet that facility's
expected service area needs in 2020.
As part of the Town's local sewer system planning process, the Town contracted with the.
engineering firm URS Corporation to conduct a Wastewater Feasibility Study (2004), an
Environmental Impact Report (2006), and a Wastewater User Rate Study (2006) to plan for the
construction of a sewer collection system within the Town Limits. As stated before, this system
would be connected to the County system for treatment at the West Brunswick Facility. The
Wastewater Feasibility Study conducted by URS was to evaluate and recommend alternatives
for wastewater collection systems for both the island and mainland portions of the Town. More
specifically, the Feasibility Study evaluated the existing wastewater facilities, wastewater flows,
collection system alternatives for the island and mainland, and construction financing
alternatives. At the time of the URS studies, the Town had around 3,750 water customers, of
which 675 were connected to the Brunswick County wastewater treatment plant in the Sea Trail
development. Based on these figures, the studies estimated that there were at least 3,075 existing
customers which would be connected to the wastewater collection system when constructed.
Numbers on total future wastewater customers is discussed later in this Section under the
"Concerns With Wastewater System Construction" subsection.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 6: Analysis of Community Facilities 86

Concerns With Wastewater System Construction
The Environmental Impact Report by URS included community concerns that would need to be
addressed as part of the construction of the wastewater collection system. The concerns that
will need to be addressed include:
• induced development;
• wetland impacts;
• stormwater and water quality issues; and
• cost allocation.
Induced development is made possible when infrastructure such as sewer is implemented and
now allows for development that was unable to occur prior to its implementation. As mentioned
in the Environmental Impact Report and in Sections 4 and 5 of this Plan, the development
potential in certain areas of Town is limited to an extent by the septic suitability of the soils and
low water table. This occurs mostly on the island where lots are relatively small, and individual
septic drainfield size cannot easily be adjusted to make up for the poor soils. The concern is that
when the sewer system is available, there will be development pressure to allow more dense and
intense uses on these smaller lots, which among other things could overburden the
environmentally fragile areas surrounding the island by increasing stormwater runoff. The Town
has shown that there is a consensus to manage development and maintain its relatively small-
town residential and low height profile characteristic. In order to maintain the desired
characteristic, Sunset Beach enforces and plans to maintain the regulatory strength of its zoning,
building, and other development -related ordinances. Those ordinances include a 35-foot height
restriction for all buildings on the island. This law can only be changed by public referendum or
by the Town Council submitting a request to the NC General Assembly that the law be deleted.
On the island, multi -family development is included in this height restriction and is limited to a
three block wide corridor at the main entrance to the island. The majority of the rest of the
island is zoned to allow only single-family, with some duplex allowed along the oceanfront lots.
There is a community desire to maintain this type of development pattern after the sewer system
is in place.
Sewer Hook-up Limitation
Another way to manage the level of potential induced development recommended by URS in
their Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is to set a limit on the total number of sewer
connections to provide for the existing corporate limits. As mentioned before, there is a
community concern that existing residential properties with septic capacities for only one
single-family unit would have the potential for constructing multi -family units on these
properties. URS recommended that this issue be addressed through the identification of a
maximum number of hookups that will be designed in the wastewater system as a condition of
the permit for the installation of the wastewater system.
URS Corporation in the Environmental Impact Report recommended that the wastewater
collection system have a design limitation of around 4,500* hook-ups (*NUMBER SUBJECT
TO CHANGE AS THE SYSTEM IS STILL CURRENTLY BEING PLANNED AND DESIGNED).
This number was based on estimating maximum build -out of vacant lots and redevelopment of
older structures to maximum density currently allowed in the zoning ordinance. This number
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 6: Analysis of Community Facilities 87

includes a maximum of around 1,950* hookups for the island, and a maximum of around 2,550*
hookups on the mainland. The approximately 4,500* total hook-ups include the around 3,050
existing Town water customers not connected to the Brunswick County Wastewater
Treatment Plant in Sea Trail, plus around 1,450* additional future units built on vacant lots and
as redevelopments.
NOTE: This total number of hook-ups applies to the planned wastewater collection system
service area only. The area of Town north of Calabash Creek is not included in the total number
of hook-ups to be allowed, as it is in the service area of the County treatment plant in the Sea
Trail development. Additional units will likely be developed north of Calabash Creek in Sea
Trail but will not be serviced by the new wastewater collection system.
Water Quality Issues During Septic System Removal
Associated with the construction of the wastewater collection system, the existing on -site septic
systems will be required to be emptied and removed all while avoiding spills and contamination
of adjacent water resources. This is particularly applicable on the island. The Environmental
Impact Report recommends that the septic system removal process be in accordance with the
guidelines in the `Recommended On -Site Wastewater System Abandonment Procedures'
(NCDENR 2006), which is produced by the On -Site Wastewater Section of the North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources' (NCDENR).
The guidelines suggest:
1) Pumping of tank by an approved hauler, removal or crushing of tanks, and
backfilling in place with clean fill material.
2) Disconnection of all power sources to the system.
3) Removal of all parts of the drainfield (valves, risers, etc).
4) Coating of surface areas exposed to effluent with hydrated lime and
reestablishment of vegetative cover.
5) No use of the former septic system area for at least 18 months.
URS stated that although no laws are in place to require the above guidelines, these guidelines
should be included as a condition of the permit.
Cost Allocation
The planned wastewater collection system is expected to come on-line approximately 2 years
after permits have been obtained and cost roughly $8,000 per individual user as a one-time
assessment (THIS FIGURE IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE AS THE SYSTEM IS STILL BEING
PLANNED AND DESIGNED).
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 6: Analysis of Community Facilities 88

6.3 Transportation Systems
To evaluate transportation and roadway deficiencies, the North Carolina Department of
Transportation (DOT) compares Annual Average Daily Traffic Counts (AADT) to a road's design
capacity. Traffic on key segments of various roadways is counted and calculated annually and
compared to a standard road design capacity based on that roadway's individual type. For
example, a two-lane roadway has a different design capacity than a roadway that has two -lanes
with a center turn lane.
The annual traffic count used for the comparison is called the AADT. The AADT is the number
of vehicles passing in both directions over a single point on a roadway over the course of a year
divided by the 365 days in a year. For example, if 50,000 vehicles pass a single point on the road
in a year, the AADT is 137 vehicles per day (50,000 / 365 =137). It must be noted that these
annual traffic counts are averages, and certain peak season days may produce traffic counts well
in excess of the AADT count (as is shown in Table 38).
Table 36 following shows DOT's general road design capacities for various types of roads with a
"Level of Service D". The "Level of Service D" capacity counts are the standard used by DOT to
evaluate whether road segments are near, or have the potential for nearing, their design capacity.
Typically, road segments are not prioritized for improvements (i.e. placed on DOT's
Transportation Improvement Plan) unless they are exceeding their "Level of Service D" design
capacities. DOT evaluates whether design capacity has been exceeded by comparing the AADT
counts on a given road segment with that road segment's design capacity (as shown in the table
below). The table also shows design capacities based on an area's level of development, such as
whether the road segment is in a rural, suburban or urban setting. Roads in Sunset Beach fall
under the design capacities listed in the "suburban" column in the table. The suburban
classification is due to the density of population and number of driveway cuts and intersections.
NOTE: When reviewing the capacity thresholds in the table below, DOT states that a given road
segment's `true' capacity threshold may be affected by the following factors: turn lanes at
intersections, separate left turn lanes at intersections, the degree of access -control along the
facility, parking, signals per mile, speed (both posted and observed), pedestrian crossings, and
roadside development. Generally, the numbers in the table below represent total vehicles per day
and traffic going in both directions along a generic road type, and the capacities given are for
planning purposes only. DOT states that to derive the most reliable capacity threshold along a
section of roadway requires the collection of detailed information to be used in coordination
with Highway Capacity modeling software. Generally, DOT must contract with local
governments to conduct such modeling.
The road design capacity thresholds in the table below may be used in combination with current
and estimated (future) AADT's for forecasting the traffic volume to road capacity ratio along
road segments in Town. This information can be applied to land use planning applications by
allowing prioritization of transportation improvement projects and/or form anaging
development to more closely control traffic generating land uses in certain congestion areas.
The design capacity counts shaded in gray in the table below represent the road types in Sunset
Beach that have corresponding annual traffic counts (AADTs). There are a total of 5 road
segments in Town that have 2005 AADTs.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 6: Analysis of Community Facilities 89

Table 36: DOT's Road Design Capacity Under a Level of Service D
(Source: DOT Transportation Plannine Branch)
Rural
Suburban '
Urban
Divided w/ median
4-lane
50,000
37,000-41,500
18,000-22,000
Undivided
3-lane
23,000
20,500-21,500
12,000-16,000
4-lane
48,000
33,500-39,500
18,000-22,000
5-lane
49,000
35,500-39,500
24,000-28,000
Two -Lanes
9' -lane
9,000
8,500
8,000
10' -lane
11,000
10,500
9,500
11' -lane
12,000
11,500
11,000
12'+ -lane
13,000
12500
12,000
Table 37 below compares the 2005 AADT counts with the design capacities of the road segments
found in Sunset Beach.
Table 37. 2005 Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) Counts Compared with Road
Design Capacity
Source: DOT Transportation Planning Branch and DOT Traffic Survey Unit
Count Location
2005 AADT Count
Design Capacity of Road
at Count Location
Sunset Boulevard North at
9,100
12,500
Seaside Station
Shoreline Drive near intersection
4,800
12,500
with Sunset Boulevard
Sunset Boulevard North at
3,000
8,500
Bridge
Main Street east of intersection
1,000
8,500
with Sunset Boulevard South
Highway 904 south of
13,000
12,500
intersection with Highway 179
The segment of Highway 904, south of its intersection with Highway 179, had an AADT count of
13,000 in 2005, which exceeded the design capacity of 12,500 for that segment of road. This
segment and adjacent segments of Highway 904 north of the 179 intersection are priority areas
for the County's Comprehensive Transportation Plan (CTP) which was initiated in conjunction
with DOT in 2006. The CTP will be a year to two-year process in which major road systems in
the county will be evaluated for current and projected design deficiencies, and will be
subsequently identified for inclusion on DOT's Transportation Improvement Plan.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 6: Analysis of Community Facilities 90

The area south of the 179/904 intersection is in the Town's ETJ, and the area north is in the
County's jurisdiction. The Town of Sunset Beach supports road improvements to make
applicable segments of Highway 904 four -lane. The Town also supports the development and
interconnection of parallel access roads to serve the traffic accessing the commercial areas along
Highway 904. The Town also supports limitations on driveway cuts, as well as the sharing of
driveway cuts. The Town does not support road improvements which would only add a center
turn lane for Highway 904.
As stated above, the 2005 Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) count for Highway 904 south of
the 179 intersection was 13,000. The table below shows the DOT's most recent 2006 seasonal
daily traffic counts, which will be included in the calculation of the 2006 AADT. The table
below shows that there was only one average daily count in July of 2006 for this segment of
Highway 904 that exceeded the road's design capacity of 12,500 vehicles. The traffic counts in
the table below which are bolded and underlined represent counts exceeding the daily design
capacity for that road segment. NOTE: The counts at Sunset Boulevard were taken at a road
segment which will no longer be used for through traffic after construction of the new Sunset
Beach Bridge.
Table 38: 2006 Brunswick County Seasonal Traffic Counts Report
(Source: North Carolina DOT, Traffic Statistics Division)
Count
Month
Sun.
Mon.
Tues.
Wed.
Thurs.
Fri..
Sat.
Location
Count
Count
Count
Count
Count
Count
Count
South of
Feb.
6,451
9,031
9,151
N/A
8,759
9,388
6,738
NC 179
and 904
South of
May
11,450
N/A
N/A
11,475
11,596
10,988
12,105
NC 179
and 904
South of
July
9,805
12,054
12,000
N/A
N/A
14,507
12,358
NC 179
(12,500
and 904
Capacity)
Sunset
Feb.
1,741
1,875
2,007
N/A
1,909
2,121
1,634
Blvd. At
Bridge
Sunset
May
5,529
N/A
N/A
5,040
5,294
8,439
6,288
Blvd. At
Bridge
Sunset
July
7,547
10,641
11,817
N/A
N/A
10,096
9,036
Blvd. At
(8,500
(8,500
(8,500
(8,500
Bride
Capacity)
Capacity)
Capacity)
Capacity)
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 6: Analysis of Community Facilities 91

Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) Counts Between 1999 and 2005
For comparison with the most recent traffic counts, and to show traffic trends over the last seven
years, the following graphics show the AADTs for Sunset Beach from 1999 to 2005. As shown in
the following graphics, traffic counts in key areas have shown both increases and decreases since
1999, with the exception of Highway 904 south of the intersection with Highway 179 which has
continuously increased since 1999. This section of Highway 904 had a traffic count of 7,400 in
2001, which increased to a count of 13,000 in 2005. Sunset Boulevard near Seaside Station has
fluctuated between a low of 6,800 in 2000 to a high of 9,100 in 2005. The available counts for
Main Street on the island east of Sunset Boulevard South actually shows a decrease in counts
from 4,000 in 1999 to 1,000 in 2005. The Bridge area on the mainland also showed a decrease
with a high of 7,100 in 2001 to a low of 3,000 in 2005. The road segment on Shoreline Drive west
of the intersection with Sunset Boulevard fluctuated between 4,600 and 6,000. The source of
the following graphics is the DOT Traffic Survey Unit. NOTE: The traffic count locations may
vary at certain locations each year.
1999 Annual Average Daily Traffic Counts
1
I
i
1
1
i
I
r
1 �
%
Lim
1
1 � ;
.............b pbo
1 •. ®r
I
'fit
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 6: Analysis of Community Facilities 92

2000 Annual
2001 Annual
Average Dailv Traffic Counts
Average Daily Trattic Counts
m
7Y00
w
mr
WAO
� \ 1
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 6: Analysis of Community Facilities 93

2002 Annual
nVULUVIC LA LUV 1EM11C k-UUMS
2003 Annual A
veraize Dailv Traffic Counts
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 6: Analysis of Community Facilities 94

2004 Annual
Average Dailv Traffic Counts
2005 Annual A
' moo
I
1 Ave
I�
I
1
r/
1
NO
12
(So0
verahe Daily l rattic Counts
6 coo
a ROO
4l�
UM
A. 4e00
�w
zn
loop
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 6: Analysis of Community Facilities 95

6.3.1 Town Management of the Transportation System
Zoning Ordinance
The Town Zoning Ordinance requires properties zoned either Mainland Business 1(MB-1),
Mainland Business 2 (MB-2) or Mixed Use District (MUD) that run along a "major collector"
route to adhere to a "Major Collector Plan'. The Town's ordinance in Section 151.214 (H) defines
a major collector as a heavily used radial route that carries a large amount of beach traffic in the
southern region of Brunswick County. This designation primarily refers to the properties along
the portion of Sunset Boulevard North that lies between its intersection with Highway 904 and
runs west towards the bridge and Intracoastal Waterway.
Generally, the intent of the Major Collector Plan is to ensure that the properties running along
thoroughfares in Town are developed in a manner that promote the public's health, safety and
welfare. More specifically, the Major Collector Plan seeks to coordinate development along
thoroughfares so traffic movement is more efficient and safe. The primary tool used to maintain
safe and efficient movement is by limiting the number of driveway cuts along the thoroughfare.
The Major Collector Plan requires:
1. Driveways connecting to a Major Collector, on the same side of the road, shall be no
closer than 200 feet from each other. joint use driveways must be provided. The
driveway centerline may be the common property line. Approval of driveway access
between a lot and the Major Collector at an interval less than those specified herein may
be granted only by review and approval of the Sunset Beach Planning Board.
2. When a joint access driveway is developed, the owners/developers of the affected
properties shall provide for mutually coordinated parking, access and circulation
systems, and shall provide design features as necessary to make it visually obvious that
abutting properties shall be tied together to create a unified system. If a site is developed
adjacent to an undeveloped piece of property, it shall be designed so that its parking,
access and circulation are easily tied together to create a unified system at a later date. If
the building site abuts an existing developed property it shall tie into the abutting
parking, access and circulation to create a unified system. Copies of the recorded access
easements and maintenance agreements must be provided to the Town.
3. joint access driveways shall be in accordance with design, construction, and
maintenance standards set forth in the North Carolina Department of Transportation's
Policy on Street and Driveway Access to North Carolina Highways or as amended.
Notwithstanding any other provisions of this section, the driveway access provisions
shall not be applicable to any lot where:
(a) The effect of such application would be to substantially diminish the value of the
tract or to deprive the lot of reasonable access; or
(b) Where the size of the tract being subdivided, or developed or lack of frontage on the
Major Collector, makes alternatives 1, 2, and 3 above infeasible.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 6: Analysis of Community Facilities 96

Subdivision Ordinance
Section 150.110 (B) of the Subdivision Ordinance contains standards for providing marginal
access streets to limit driveway cuts along major thoroughfares. This section of the ordinance
states:
Where a tract of land to be subdivided adjoins an existing major
thoroughfare, the subdivider will be required to provide a marginal access
street parallel to the major thoroughfare, or reverse frontage on a subdivision
street to be developed adjacent to the major thoroughfare. Where reverse
frontage is established, private driveways shall be prevented from having
direct access to the major thoroughfare. If it is demonstrated that a marginal
access or reverse frontage is not feasible, lots fronting on major thoroughfare
must be a minimum of 100 feet wide with a turning circle or a driveway with a
three-point turn.
Street Maintenance
The Town has a Public Works Department that conducts minor maintenance and repair (i.e.
pot -holes) of Town Streets. The Town receives around $100,000 annually in Powell Bill funds
which are intended for Street Maintenance. The amount of Powell Bill funds the Town receives
from the state are based on population and mileage of Town maintained roads in the Town
Limits. Both the Town population and the length of Town maintained road are expected to
increase in the future.
More substantial road maintenance projects such as surfacing and resurfacing roadways are
contracted -out by the Town. However, there is currently a Town moratorium on surfacing and
resurfacing streets as construction of a centralized sewer system is being planned. The Town
currently plans to keep the moratorium in place until the construction of the sewer system has
been completed to avoid damaging and duplicating resurfacing projects. Although paving
unpaved Town roads is not a priority issue identified in this Land Use Plan Update, a list of the
unpaved Town maintained streets is included for future consideration (Also See Map 12:
Transportation and Public Access Facilities):
• Blanc Court (Mainland)
• Hickory Street (Mainland)
Bartlett Lane (Mainland)
• 31st Street (Island)
28th Street (Island)
Ist, 2nd, 3� , 4th, and 5th Streets (Island)
Marlin, Sailfish, Dolphin and Cobia Streets (Island)
• North Shore Drive (Island)
16th,17th,18th, and 19th Streets (Island)
Riverside Drive and Cedar Point Drive on the island have platted rights of way for roads, but no
improvements (i.e. grading or paving) have been done at this time. Since these streets have not
been improved, they have not yet been dedicated to the Town.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 6: Analysis of Community Facilities 97

6.3.2 Projects in DOT's Transportation Improvement Plan Affecting Transportation
in Town
There is one project listed in the 2007-2013 Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) in the
planning jurisdiction of Sunset Beach. The TIP project is the removal of the existing bridge and
construction of a new high-rise bridge. The bridge project required the acquisition of rights -of
way/easements on eight separate properties in Sunset Beach. As of October 2006, DOT had
three remaining right-of-way/easement acquisitions. Public bids for construction of the bridge
are set for April 2007, and the DOT Division Engineer for this region estimates it will take two
full construction seasons to complete the bridge.
The bridge design will include lighting and bike and pedestrian access. Road shoulder
improvements will likely need to be done on the Sunset Boulevard South causeway entering the
island to accommodate the bike and pedestrian traffic. A portion of the old bridge entryway
extending into the Intracoastal Waterway will be left intact to be used as a public pier.
However, the "informal" boat launch currently used on the island causeway side of the bridge
will be permanently closed due to construction of the new bridge. DOT does not plan to provide
an alternate site for a boat launch in Sunset Beach, as a formal boating access area is being
constructed in Ocean Isle Beach. DOT will own lots and easements adjacent the future public
pier (See Map 12: Transportation and Public Access Facilities Map) and the Town has shown
interest in discussing with DOT, the Division of Coastal Management and the Wildlife
Resources Commission the possibility of utilizing these properties to create additional public
access sites and facilities (incl. boat launches and walkways) along the Intracoastal Waterway.
Other potential public access sites identified in Town are listed in Section 6.5: Public Access
Facilities.
6.4 Stormwater Management Systems
The Town's existing Stormwater Ordinance was discussed in Section 4 and will be applicable
until the Town receives its state approved NPDES Phase II Stormwater Permit. A Phase II
permit is required by the Town under the 2006 Stormwater Management Act. The Town must
obtain the permit because it is a regulated entity, which is determined by its operation of a
Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) and from the County's designation as urbanized
due to its rapid population growth. An MS4 designation can come from as simple as having a
system of streets which empty stormwater into ditches which eventually drain to surface
waters. The Town does in fact have a system of streets, ditches and piping which eventually
empty stormwater runoff into surface waterbodies, therefore it is a regulated entity.
. What is Phase II and What is Required?
Starting in the 1990's, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) adopted
regulations to require large municipalities to obtain a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) stormwater management permit for stormwater discharges from municipal
separate storm sewer systems. In 1999, under "Phase II of these regulations, EPA extended the
NPDES stormwater management permit requirements to small and medium sized communities.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 6: Analysis of Community Facilities 98

Using federal census data, EPA identified 123 cities and 33 counties in North Carolina (including
all areas in Brunswick County) that would be required to obtain permits for stormwater
management. In order to be permitted, the EPA regulations require a local government to
develop a stormwater management program that includes certain minimum stormwater
management measures and that is sufficient to control stormwater pollution to the maximum
extent practicable and to protect water quality standards.
In 1999, the implementation of "Phase II" was delegated by EPA to the states. In 2002, the state
Environmental Management Commission (EMC) adopted temporary stormwater rules and had
adopted permanent rules by 2003 that were to become effective August 1, 2004. In 2004, the
state Rules Review Commission (RRC) objected to the rules for failure to comply with the
Administrative Procedures Act and lack of statutory authority. The EMC challenged the
decision of the RRC in court. A Wake County Superior Court ruled in favor of the EMC and the
RRC subsequently approved the FMC's rules. While the case was pending, the state legislature
enacted a separate set of requirements in 2004 that were designed to replace the EMC rules.
The inconsistency between the legislative requirements and the EMC rules necessitated
consideration and eventual adoption of Senate Bill 1566 (the 2006 Stormwater Management
Act).
The 2006 Stormwater Management Act is effective July 1, 2007 and requires development
projects in "Phase II" municipalities and counties that cumulatively disturb one acre or more of
land to comply with the post -construction stormwater standards set out in the Act.
Unincorporated areas of counties are also be subject to "Phase 11" requirements, this includes
Sunset Beach's ETJ.
The Act sets out stormwater controls that are based on a development's level of density and its
proximity to Shellfish Resource Waters. Development is defined in the Act as any land
disturbing activity that increases the built -upon area or that otherwise decreases the infiltration
of precipitation into the soil. Shellfish Resource Waters are waters classified by the EMC as
Class SA waters (shellfish growing waters) that contain an average concentration of 500 parts
per million of natural chloride ion (saltwater).
Low -Density Projects
Development projects that cumulatively disturb one acre or more and are located within one-
half mile of and draining to Shellfish Resource Waters are considered low -density if they
contain no more than 12% built -upon area. A project that is not located within one-half mile of
Shellfish Resource Waters is a low -density project if it contains no more than 24% built -upon
area or no more than two dwelling units per acre. Low -density projects must use vegetated
conveyances (i.e. grass swales) to the maximum extent practicable to transport stormwater
runoff from the project.
High -Density Projects
Development projects that cumulatively disturb one acre or more and are located within one-
half mile of and draining to Shellfish Resource Waters are considered high -density if they
contain more than 12% built -upon area. A project that is not located within one-half mile of
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 6: Analysis of Community Facilities 99

Shellfish Resource Waters is a high -density project if it contains more than 240/6 built -upon area
or more than two dwelling units per acre. High -density projects must use structural
stormwater management systems that will control and treat runoff from the first one and
one-half inches of rain. In addition, projects that are located within one-half mile and draining
to Shellfish Resource Waters must control and treat the difference in the stormwater runoff
from the pre -development and post -development conditions for the one-year twenty-four hour
storm as well as meet certain design standards.
Additional Requirements under Phase II
Section 9 (e) of the Act requires the Town to have a fecal coliform reduction program
implemented in its jurisdiction that controls, to the maximum extent practicable, the sources of
fecal coliform (e.g. Wilmington provided pet waste disposal around certain surface water
bodies. Other programs could include monitoring areas with septic systems to detect common
signs of malfunction). Section 9 (g) of the Act requires the Town to require an operation and
maintenance plan for a regulated development that ensures the long-term operation of the
structural management system (BMP). An inspection report is required of the owner/operator of
the BMP to be submitted to the County (on behalf of the Town) annually.
The Town will also need to have education and outreach programs conducted in its jurisdiction
to inform the public on how to minimize pollution that is conveyed by stormwater runoff and
detect unauthorized discharges of pollution into the Town's stormwater drainage system.
Possible Exceptions to the Phase II Post -construction Stormwater Management Rules
1) The Act allows developments, which receive Town granted vested rights for a Town
approved site -specific development plan prior to July 1, 2007, to follow the existing stormwater
ordinance requirements and not the requirements of the 2006 Stormwater Management Act. A
site -specific development plan is defined in the Act as:
a plan which has been submitted to a Town by a landowner describing with
reasonable certainty the type and intensity of use for a specific parcel or parcels
of property. Such plan may be in the form of, but not be limited to, any of the
following plans or approvals: A planned unit development plan, a subdivision
plat, a preliminary or general development plan, a conditional or special use
permit, a conditional or special use district zoning plan, or any other land -use
approval designation as may be utilized by a city. Unless otherwise expressly
provided by the city, such a plan shall include the approximate boundaries of
the site; significant topographical and other natural features effecting
development of the site; the approximate location on the site of the proposed
buildings, structures, and other improvements; the approximate dimensions,
including height, of the proposed buildings and other structures; and the
approximate location of all existing and proposed infrastructure on the site,
including water, sewer, roads, and pedestrian walkways. A variance shall not
constitute a site specific development plan. Neither a sketch plan nor any other
document which fails to describe with reasonable certainty the type and
intensity of use for a specified parcel or parcels of property may constitute a site
specific development plan. A
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 6: Analysis of Community Facilities 100

The Towns vested rights procedure can be found in Section 151.018 of the Town Code of
Ordinances. The ordinance states that vested rights can be granted for two years, but allowance
of up to five years is available under certain conditions.
2) Developers and/or property owners may also request that certain waters classified as
shellfish waters be tested for adequate salinity levels (chloride ion) to determine the tested
water's ability to be a shellfish growing area. These waters are generally those waters classified
SA but are far enough inland that there is little tidal influence making the water inadequate for
shellfishing. Even if the water is determined to be not supporting of shellfish, the developer/land
owner must still follow the Act's requirements for the low or high -density developments outside
one-half mile of shellfish waters.
Implementation of Phase II Stormwater Rules
The Town of Sunset Beach has an interlocal agreement with Brunswick County for the creation
and implementation of a stormwater management program. This agreement holds that the Town
will adopt the County's stormwater ordinance and allow County staff to issue and inspect
stormwater permits in the Town's jurisdiction. The Town does retain the authority to enforce
and assess fines for stormwater permit violations in the Town's jurisdiction.
In accordance with the interlocal agreement, the Town of Sunset Beach will adopt the County's
stormwater ordinance and management program developed to meet the Phase II requirements..
As of the fall 2006, Brunswick County is in the process of updating their current stormwater
program to comply with the Phase II rules (also known as 2006 Stormwater Management Act
and Senate Bill 1566). More specifically, the County will update:
. The existing stromwater ordinance's impervious surface thresholds triggering
stormwater management requirements. This includes requiring engineered stormwater
systems for developments that have more than 12% impervious coverage and are within
V mile of SA classified shellfishing waters.
. Stormwater Management Education and Outreach programs in accordance with the
Phase II minimum measures.
The County's Stormwater Coordinator stated that components of the County's current
stormwater ordinance that exceed state requirements will be retained and used in addition to
the minimum requirements of the Phase II rules. Those components include:
. Requiring all commercial development, regardless of lot size, to have an engineered
solution to handle stormwater runoff from that property.
. Requiring that any development, regardless of lot size, that increases the grade of the
property by more than 4 inches to have an engineered solution to handle stormwater
runoff from that property.
• The authority for County stormwater staff to enforce state stormwater laws on
developments permitted prior to the County's current stormwater ordinance. NOTE:
This does not require the prior developments to meet current County stormwater
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 6: Analysis of Community Facilities 101

standards, but it allows County Staff to enforce the state rules that apply to those prior
developments. This is intended to assist a "short-staffed" state by allowing `local' County
staff to monitor and enforce state stormwater laws.
Stormwater Management Staff
The County currently has a staff of four to manage its stormwater program (which includes the
areas within the Town of Sunset Beach). The County's Stormwater Coordinator is the principle
contact for the Town. Any stormwater permitting or inspection issues identified by Town staff
(e.g. building inspectors) or citizens are reported to the County's Stormwater Coordinator for
investigation. Also included in the County's staff of four is a recently hired (November 2006)
stormwater engineer. The stormwater engineer's immediate responsibility is ensuring that the
update of the County's stormwater management program meets the requirements of Phase II.
The County plans to have their Phase II program's post construction requirements approved and
permitted prior to the Phase II laws July 1, 2007 effective date.
6.5 Public Access Facilities
The Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) considers public access facilities to be one of the
key components of a coastal community's infrastructure. The CAMA land use plan guidelines
require that a goal of the Town's Land Use Plan be to seek to maximize and maintain public
access to the beaches and public trust waters within the Town's jurisdiction. This Section of the
Land Use Plan will inventory existing public access facilities and identify potential public access
sights, so that the Town may discuss and establish policies and objectives to further the goal of
maximizing and maintaining public access.
Existing Public Access Sites
There are 33 existing public access sites along the approximately 2.3 miles of oceanfront beach in
the Town Limits (See Map 12: Transportation and Public Access Facilities Map). That averages
out to a public access site every 368 feet. There is one Regional Beach Access Site in Sunset
Beach located near the Pier. Regional sites are designated by having -25+ parking spaces, and
having additional facilities like restrooms, picnic tables and showers. The Regional Access Site
in Sunset Beach is handicapped accessible and has 75 Town parking spaces with additional pay -
parking available at the pier. There is a restroom at this Regional Site, but no showers or picnic
tables. The remaining 32 public access sites on the island are considered "local" sites used
primarily as dune crossovers and have limited, if any, on -site parking or other facilities. In
Sunset Beach, on -street parking is allowed on Main Street (main road parallel to beachstrand)
and portions of Sunset Boulevard in the commercial area. Public on -street parking is also allowed
on the shoulder rights -of -way of all side streets perpendicular to the beachstrand, provided
driveways are not blocked. The Town has evaluated parking needs on the island and
determined that except for a few peak days of the season, parking on side street shoulders and in
other allowable areas has more than adequately handled parking needs. Any additional public
parking facilities would likely be best located near the commercial and pier areas of the island, as
this is closest to the Regional Access Site.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 6: Analysis of Community Facilities 102

As mentioned in Section 4, the state owns the estuarine and nature reserve of Bird Island in the
southwest corner of the Town's ETJ. Bird Island is currently accessible by boat from the public
trust waters adjacent to it, or by the public beachstrand connecting Bird Island to the primary
beachstrand in the Town Limits.
There are no `formally' designated public access sites on the marsh side of the island, nor on the
waterway adjacent portion of the mainland. There is an `informal and undesignated' boat launch
site along the causeway leading to the bridge, but this site will subsequently be removed from
use when the new bridge is constructed. As mentioned earlier, there are no plans to replace the
informal boat launch site with an alternative site in the Town planning jurisdiction. However,
the Town has identified several sites on the mainland, which could be utilized as a formal boat
launch and public access facility (See Map 12:.Transportation and Public Access Facilities Map).
Included in these sites is a portion of the entryway to the old bridge, which is already being
planned by DOT and the Town to be left intact and used as a public pier. DOT will also own
properties and easements adjacent the old bridge area for the new bridge, and the Town is
interested in discussing with DOT, DCM and the Wildlife Resources Commission, the
possibility for further utilizing these areas as formal public access sites. Other potential public
access sites, which have been periodically used as informal boat access, include the street ends of
Park Road (eastern portion of Town Limits) and Beach Drive (western portion of Town Limits).
See Map 12: Transportation and Public Access Facilities Map. Property, right-of-way and/or
easement acquisition would likely need to be obtained to improve the access sites on Park Road
and Beach Drive, as they land is currently privately owned.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 6: Analysis of Community Facilities 103

Section 7: Review of the Current (1997) CAMA Land Use Plan
Introduction: Assessment of the 1997 Land Use Plan Policy Effectiveness and
Implementation
An assessment to determine whether the policy intent, and the associated objectives and goals,
adopted in the 1997 Land Use Plan have been reached is a useful exercise to identify any
strengths and/or weaknesses in the Town's existing "development management program". The
"development management program" is basically the Town's land -use related ordinances and
capital/infrastructure improvement programs. The purpose in assessing the outcomes of the 1997
CAMA Land Use Plan is for the Town to evaluate how effectively it has been able to implement
the policies and programs adopted in that Plan. A good place to look to see if the desired future
growth pattern adopted in the 1997 Plan was achieved, are the 1997 "Vision Statement", polices,
and "Future Land Classification" system. These items can be found in Sections 6.0 and 7.0 of the
1997 Land Use Plan, and are briefly summarized below. This assessment should help identify
where any adjustments to existing policies are needed, or where the creation of new policy may
be needed. Concurrently, the policies adopted in this Plan Update will provide guidance for
identifying and implementing changes to Town ordinances and programs to further the desired
growth pattern established in this Land Use Plan Update. The assessment of the policies in the
current Town Land Use Plan (1997) shall consider the following factors:
(A) Consistency of current land use and development ordinances with the existing CAMA
Land Use Plan (1997) policies;
(B) Implementation of the land use plan's polices by the Town; and
(C) Effectiveness of the policies in creating desired land use patterns and protecting natural
systems (i.e. water quality).
1997 Vision Statement
Before assessing the individual policies, the Vision Statement should be reviewed as it is
intended to set the general direction by which the policies should remain consistent. The Vision
Statement adopted in 1997, which was intended to state the desired character for the present
day (2007), is as follows:
"The residents, property and business owners of the Sunset Beach Planning
Area shall endea vor to preserve the small-town character of our community
with orderlygrowth which enhances its appeal as a familyresort and
retirement community. Ourgmd is to preserve and improve the quality of
the natural and manmade environment which has hecome the basis for our
quality oflife at Sunset Beach."
1997 Future Land Classification System
The Future Land Classification System and Map in the 1997 Plan are also useful in
evaluating whether desired land -use patterns were maintained and are today consistent
with what was intended. The Land Classification System identified three general
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 7: Review of Current 1997 Land Use Plan 104

categories of future land -use in Town:1) Conservation, 2) Developed, and 3) Urban
Transition. While the Land Classification System did not set criteria for density or scale
of development in various areas of the Town, it did outline the boundary between areas
that will develop along an urban -type pattern and areas that are to be protected from
intense development. The Town has implemented the desired growth pattern outlined
in. the 1997 Land Classification System for the areas classified as "Conservation" by
protecting them from intense development under the Town's Conservation Reserve
Zoning District (e.g. single-family on larger lots only). The areas classified as "Developed
and "Urban Transition" in the 1997 Land Classification System are currently zoned to
allow a mix of residential scales and types, with some corridor -type areas allowing
commercial uses. These zoning and development characteristics are consistent with the
intent of the 1997 Land Classification System.
Key Policy Statements in the 1997 Land Use Plan
The Summary ofPb cy Statements For Major Issues section in the 1997 Plan (Section 1.3)
showed that the major planning issues identified during that planning process that would need
to be addressed in the future included:
Growth Management (Policies 6.5.1, 6.5.3, 6.5.4, 6.5.5, 6.5.6, and 6.5.7)
Prevent High -Rise Development on the Island (Policy 6.5.4)
• Density of Residential Development (Policies 6.5.1, 6.5.4, and 6.5.6)
• Commercial Development (Policies 6.5.1, 6.5.2, 6.5.4, and 6.5.6)
Environmental Protection (Policies 6.3.1 6.3.13, and 6.4.1— 6.4.4)
• Conservation of Bird Island (Policy 6.3.2.2)
Coastal Infrastructure (Policies 6.3.1.1(2), 6.3.1.2, 6.3.2.7, 6.3.3, 6.3.5, and 6.5.8)
Stormwater Management (Policies 6.3.1.1(4), 6.3.6, and 6.3.7)
• One -Lane Pontoon Bridge (Policy 6.5.8)
The subsequent implementation and consistency of government action since 1997 with these
policies are the primary benchmarks for assessing the 1997 Plan's effectiveness. However, it is
important to realize that with any plan, evolving conditions always emerge that may delay,
prohibit, or require the altering of intended goals or actions.
While the Plan is intended to anticipate and prepare for ever -changing conditions, it is difficult
to gauge the extent to which those conditions will occur. Some important conditions and
factors that emerged and should be considered while evaluating the policies adopted in the 1997
Plan include:
1. The 1997 permanent population was 862 (pop. is 2,211 as of 2005).
2. The future population for 2007 estimated in the 1997 Plan was 1,369. The actual
population for the Town was 1,824 in the year 2000 and 2,211 in the year 2005.
3. There were 11 annexations since 1997 adding 790 acres to the Town planning area (See _
Table 1.2).
4. Growth in surrounding Brunswick County has continued to increase; between 1997 and
2005 the county grew by 43%. [90,000 (2005) — 63,000 (1997) / 63,000 = .43] Source:
North Carolina State Demographer.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 7: Review of Current 1997 Land Use Plan 105

5. As population has increased, land values have increased, causing development trends to
favor higher -density developments (i.e. development pressure has sharply increased for
increased building heights and multiple unit structures).
6. The South Brunswick Water and Sewer Authority (SBWSA) had been the lead entity
coordinating the planned provision of sewer and stormwater services to the Town at the
time of the 1997 Plan. SBWSA has since been dissolved as an organization (2002 - 2006)
7. While the new bridge and centralized sewer system were planned and discussed in the
1997 Plan, planning and funding issues have led to delays in implementation.
The Table below lists all the existing Town policies as adopted in the 1997 CAMA Land Use
Plan. The polices are evaluated on:1) whether the Town development ordinances/programs have
remained consistent with the policy; 2) whether the policy has been implemented by the Town
(if it calls for action to be taken); and 3) whether the policy has been effective in reaching its
intended goal. The policies are not listed in the order they are found in the 1997 Plan, but have
instead been categorized under the six Management Topics which are required under the new
CAMA planning guidelines governing the creation of this Land Use Plan Update (See Section
2.2.3 in this Plan). Categorizing the existing policies under the Management Topics will help in
creating and organizing the policy section of this Plan Update. Existing policies that are
adequate can be retained, policies that need adjustments can be updated, and areas where new
policy is needed can be inserted under its applicable Management Topic category.
Table 39: Consistency, Implementation and Effectiveness of the 1997 LAMA Land Use Plan
Policies
1997/Existing Policies
Have Town Development
Has the policy been
Has the policy been
(Organized Under Management
Ordinances/Programs remained
implemented by the
effective in reaching a Town
Topics)
consistent with policy?
Town?
oal?
1)"Public Access" Management
Topic
6.3.1.1. — (2) Estuarine Waters
Yes. Town follows CAMA rules.
Yes.
Yes. No major issues
Key issue policy in 1997 Plan
Allowed uses are consistent with
identified blocking public
LAMA standards. Uses (such as
access.
bridges or docks) may not
prohibit public access.
6.3.1.1. — (3) Public Trust Areas
Yes. Allowed uses are consistent
Yes. Town must
Yes. No major issues
with CAMA standards. Uses
coordinate with CAMA
identified blocking public
(such as bridges or docks) may
on any bridges built in
access.
not prohibit public access.
the CR-1 zone to ensure
public access across
water is maintained.
6.5.9 Coastal and Estuarine
Yes. Public Parking or access has
On -going. No public
Neutral, but on -going.
Beach Access and Parking
not been removed.
restroom on island, but
additional boat launch
and other public facilities
are being sought on the
mainland.
6.5.11 Commitment to Federal and
Yes. Town adheres to state and
Yes. Town administers
Yes. On -going. _
State Programs
federal standards, while some
minor CAMA permitting
ords. exceed standards (i.e.
and supports other state
stormwater)
and federal permitting.
Town is pursuing state
fundingfor public access.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 7: Review of Current 1997 Land Use Plan 106

1997/Existing Policies
Have Town Development
Has the policy been
Has the policy been
(Organized Under Management
Ordinances/Programs remained
implemented by the
effective in reaching a Town
Topics)
consistent with policy?
Town?goal?
2) "Land Use Compatibility"
Topic
—Management
6.3.1 Areas of Environmental
Yes. Required by state law.
Yes. Required by state
Generally Yes. However,
Concern (AECs)
law.
estuarine water quality has
Key issuepolicy in 1997 Plan
declined due to urbanization
and pollutants in stormwater.
6.3.1.1(1) Coastal Wetlands
Yes. Required by state law.
Yes. Required by state
Yes. Non -water dependent
Key issuepolicy in 1997PIan
law. Cstl. wetlands
structures are not allowed in
disturbed as part of the
coastal wetlands.
bridge const. will be
mitigated and/or
replaced.
6.3.1.1 2) Estuarine Waters
Yes. Required by state law.
Yes. Required by state
Generally Yes. However,
Key issuepolicy in 1997 Plan
law.
estuarine water quality has
declined due to urbanization
and pollutants in stormwater.
6.3.1.1(44) Estuarine Shorelines
Yes. Required by state law.
Yes. Required by state
law.
Generally Yes. However,
estuarine water quality has
Key issuepolicy in 1997 Plan
declined due to urbanization
and pollutants in stormwater.
Minimal vegetative buffers
not required until after the
year 2001.
6.3.1.2 Ocean Hazard Areas
Yes. Required by state law.
Yes. Required by state
Yes. No identified structures
Key issuepolicy in 1997P1an
Town zoning limits most
law.
at threat due to erosion.
dvlpmnt. to single-family in these
However, most of the
areas.
threatened land closest to
Hazard Areas has not yet
been developed (i.e. tip of east
end, and closed Madd inlet
6.3.2.2 Areas that Contain
Yes.
Yes.
Yes. Primary area of Bird
Remnant Species
Island has been acquired and
Key issuepolicy in1997Plan
protected.
6.3.2.3 Prime Wildlife Habitats
Yes. AECS are protected by state
Yes. AECS are protected
Yes. Primary area of Bird
Key issuepolicy in 1997 Plan
law.
by state law.
Island has been acquired and
protected.
6.3.2.4 Protection of Wetlands
Yes. Required by federal and
'state law.
Yes. Required by federal
and state law.
Generally Yes. However,
some limited filling or
Key issue policy in 1997 Plan
altering of wetlands may be
allowed under 404 rules.
6.3.2.5 Maritime Forests and Tree
Yes. Implementation of
Landscape and Tree Preservation
Yes. Implementation of
Landscape and Tree
Generally Yes. Other Ords.
may inhibit preservation of
Cover
Key issue policy in 1997 Plan
Ordinance.
Preservation Ordinance.
trees (i.e. parking provisions).
6.3.3 Constraints to Development
Yes. Flood Ordinance and Septic
Siting Requirements.
Yes.
Yes. Most areas in high flood
areas are elevated and limited
Key issuepolicy in 1997 Plan
to lower density
development. Provision of
sewer will negate septic soil
constraints.
6.3.3 Industrial Impacts on
Yes.
Yes.
Yes. No industrial sites, and
Fragile Areas
none are permitted in existing
Key issue policy in1997Plan
zoning.
6.3.9 Development of Sound and
Yes. These areas are zoned
"Conservation Reserve" and
Yes. However, due to
technicalities, the
Yes. Development on sound
or estuarine islands has been
Estuarine System Islands
Key issuepolicy in 1997 Plan
development activity is strictly
Conservation Reserve
non-existent and Bird Island
limited.
Zoning District is
has been acquired and
undergoing review and
protected. However, It is
formal adoption.
likely that one privately -
owned sound island will be
developed as single- family.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 7. Review of Current 1997 Land Use Plan 107

1997/Existing Policies
Have Town Development
Has the policy been
Has the policy been
(Organized Under Management
Ordinances/Programs remained
implemented by the
effective in reaching a Town
Topics)
consistent with policy?
Town?goal?
"Land Use Compatibility"
Topic Cont'd
-Management
6.3.11 Upland Excavation for
Yes.
Yes.
Yes. Not allowed.
Marinas
Key issue policy in1997Plan
6.3.12 Installation of Bulkhead,
Yes. Required by state law.
Yes. Required by state
law.
Yes.
Groins and Seawalls
Key issue policy in1997Plan
6.4.1 Productive Agriculture
Yes.
Yes.
Yes. Not allowed.
Lands, Commercial Forest Lands,
Existing and Potential Mineral
Production Areas
6.4.4 Residential and
Yes. Development Ords. primarily
Yes. Stormwater Ords.
Generally Yes. Extensive and
Commercial Land Development
discourage higher densities.
Stormwater Ord. exceeds state
continually strengthened,
will be strengthened
unique vegetated dune system
has been protected. Bird
on Any Natural Resource
Key issuepolicy in 1997Plan
standards. Island development
again for Phase II NPDES.
Island has been acquired and
primarily limited to single-family.
However, some re-
protected. Conservation
AEC regulation required by state
zonings to allow slightly
Reserve Zone will strictly
law. Vegetated dune setbacks
higher densities (i.e. one
limit development activity in
that exceed state standards.
acre min. lots to 10,000
that district. However,
sq. ft.)
estuarine water quality has
declined due to urbanization
and pollutants in stormwater.
6.5.1 Types of Development to Be
Yes. Zoning on the island has
generally remained intact to limit
Yes.
Generally Yes. Small-town
character has been retained
Encouraged
Key issuepolicy in 1997Plan
dense housing types and
by not allowing high-rise
buildings in excess of 35'. Zoning
development. Building permit
town -wide has been kept intact
data also shows that the ratio
with a 35' building height limit
of single-family and multi -
for single-family and 59 for
family construction has
multi -family on the mainland.
remained consistent with the
desired growth pattern.
However, stormwater and
transportation infrastructure
has been stressed from
increased growth.
6.5.3 Types of Urban Growth
Yes. Same Description as above.
Yes.
Yes. Same Description as
above.
Patterns Desired
Key issuepolicy in 1997P1an
Large intense big -box
commercial development has
not occurred.
6.5.4 Types, Density and Location
Yes. Same Description as above.
Yes.
Generally Yes. Same
Description as above. Policy
of Anticipated Residential
Development
called for studying feasibility
Key issuepolicy in 1997Plan
of establishing density per
acre limitations, but only min.
lot size and setback
requirements currently exist.
6.5.5 Types of Commercial and
Yes. Zoning has limited cmmrcl.
to specific corridors. Mixed -use
Yes.
Yes. Adequate land is zoned
to allow commercial uses to
Institutional Development
Desired
is encouraged in some zones and
ensure the needs of citizens
Key issuepolicy in 1997Plan
thoroughfare access mngmnt is
and seasonal visitors are met.
required to limit driveway cuts
Zoning also allows and
on roads. Consistent with 97
encourages mixed -use and
Plan, some of Hwy 904 entering
professional service -type
Town has remained in res. use
commerce, as opposed to big -
and does not allow commercial
box chain stores.
activity. The island business
district has not expanded in area.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 7: Review of Current 1997 Land Use Plan 108

1997/Existing Policies
Have Town Development
Has the policy been
Has the policy been
(Organized Under Management
Ordinances/Programs remained
implemented by the
effective in reaching a Town
Topics)
consistent with policy?
Town?goal?
"Land Use Compatibility"
Topic Cont'd
-Management
6.5.6 Redevelopment of
Yes. It is encouraged to an extent
Yes.
Yes. Some redevelopment
Developed Areas
and zoning allows the practice.
from single-family to duplex
Key issuepolicy in 1997 Plan
Redevelopment is most common
has occurred along the
on the island, and zoning
oceanfront row of properties
regulates the density of
consistent with the 1997 Plan,
replacement structures by
and the Town has been
allowing only a duplex
successful in limiting the area
replacement of a single-family
where this is allowed to
structure along the oceanfront
occur.
row of properties. The rest of the
island is zoned only to allow
single-family (with the exception
of the limited two block business
district which could allow
quadraplexes). The number of
bedrooms is also regulated for
new development s and
redevelopments.
6.5.7 Types and Location of
Yes. Zoning does not permit the
Yes.
Yes. None exists.
Industry Desired
use.
Key issue policy in1997Plan
6.5.13 Energy Facility Siting and
Yes. Zoning does not permit the
Yes.
Yes. None exists.
Development
use.
3) "Infrastructure Carrying
Capacity" Management Topic
6.3.4 Protection of Potable Water
N/A. Town has no local water
N/A. Town has no local
N/A Town has no local
supply
wells in use.
water wells in use.
water wells in use.
6.3.5 Use of Package Treatment
Yes. Zoning allows package
Yes.
Yes.
Plants
treatment, consistent with 1997
Plan. Town will require
discontinuation of Package
Treatment and require hook-up
to sewer system when it becomes
operational. County Health
Department rules are enforced.
6.3.6 Stormwater Runoff
Yes. County Stormwater
Generally Yes. However,
Indeterminate. While the
Key issuepolicy in 1997 Plan
Ordinance was adopted. Exceeds
the central sewer system
Town Stormwater Ordinance
current state coastal stormwater
believed to help remove
exceeds the minimum state
standards. Additional Phase II
pollutants that may be
requirements for new
NPDES rules will be adopted by
carried to surface waters
development, monitoring of
Town by July 1, 2007.
by stormwater has not
shellfish waters has shown a
been implemented.
continued decrease in water
quality leading to closure of
shellfishing waters. As the
waterfront and island areas
are essentially built -out,
pollutants from existing
development are a likely
major cause in water quality
problems.
6.5.8 Local Commitment to
Yes. Services mentioned in policy
Yes. SBWSA was
Generally Yes. Strmwter.
Providing Services
are either provided by Town or
dissolved, but Town
Ord. adopted, County will
Key issuepolicy in 1997P1an
are provided through an
transferred the
upgrade water system and
interlocal agreement with
ownership and operation
will construct and own future
Brunswick County (water,
of its water system and
Town -wide sewer system.
stormwater and future sewer).
stormwater permitting
Imprvmnts. to sewer system
and inspections to
are also scheduled by County.
Brunswick County.
DOT will begin cnstrction of
bridge in Summer 2007.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section T Review of Current 1997 Land Use Plan 109

1997/Existing Policies
Have Town Development
Has the policy been
Has the policy been
(Organized Under Management
Ordinances/Programs remained
implemented by the
effective in reaching a Town
Topics)
consistent with policy?
Town?goal?
4)" Natural Hazards"
Topic
—Management
6.3.10 Restriction of
Yes. New floodplain studies have
Yes. Town has
Indeterminate as of yet.
Development in Areas
updated base flood elevations,
implemented new Flood
Town does have a
Susceptible to Sea Level Rise
Town is NFIP member and has
Prevention Ordinance,
comparatively low loss and
adopted new Flood Prevention
claim statistic within the
Ordinance to include the new
NFIP program.
BFEs. Town requires 1-foot
freeboard.
6.7.1 Storm Hazard Mitigation
Yes. Same Description as above.
Yes.
Yes. Same description as
Town has also recently adopted a
above.
Hazard Mitigation Plan, policies
and recommendations of that
Plan will be included in the Land
Use Plan update. Zoning allows
limited density and scale in
hazard areas.
6.7.2 Evacuation
Yes. Zoning has limited density
Generally Yes. However,
Generally Yes. However, the
and scale of development on the
the new bridge has not
one -lane pontoon bridge
island, which has mitigated
been constructed but is
connecting the island to the
potential evacuation problems.
expected to be complete
mainland is a bottleneck.
b the summer 2009.
6.7.3 Post Disaster Recovery and
Yes. Town has established
Yes.
Yes.
Reconstruction Policies
procedures in the Hazard
Mitigation Plan and other
emergency plans to manage
recovery and reconstruction.
There are zoning and building
code regulations regarding the
reconstruction of non-
conforming structures.
5) "Water Quality"
Management Topic
6.3.2.7 Shellfishing Waters
Yes. Town has adopted a
Yes. On -going.
No. Shellfishing closures have
Key issuepolicy in 1997 Plan
Stormwater Ordinance that
increased/remained. Since
exceeds state standards regarding
water -adjacent areas are
new development. Town will
essentially built -out,
adopt new Phase II NPDEs post-
pollutants in Stormwater
construction rules by July 1, 2007.
runoff from existing
Town follows CAMA regs.
development and drainage
regarding development in AECs.
systems are contributing to
water quality problem.
Drainage system retrofits and
implementation of sewer
system could alleviate some of
the problem.
6.3.6 Stormwater Runoff
Mentioned earlier under
Mentioned earlier under
Mentioned earlier under
Key issuepolicy in 1997 Plan
Infrastructure Carrying Capacity.
Infrastructure Carrying
Infrastructure Carrying
Also, same description as above.
Capacity.
Capacity. Also, same
description as above.
6.3.7 Marina and Floating Home
Policy allows marinas and dry
stack storage in concept. Zoning
only allows a "marina" in a MUD
Generally Yes. No
marinas, moorings or dry
stack storage have been
Yes.
Development, Moorings, and Dry
Stack Storage
Key issuepolicy in 1997 Plan
mixed -use district if it is used in
developed.
a "mixed -use relationship". Dry
stack storage is not a permitted
use. Floating Homes are
prohibited.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 7: Review of Current 1997 Land Use Plan 110

1997/Existing Policies
Have Town Development
Has the policy been
Has the policy been
(Organized Under Management
Ordinances/Programs remained
implemented by the
effective in reaching a Town
consistent with policy?
Town?goal?
-Topics)
Water Quality Management
cont'd
-Topic
6.3.13 Surface Water Quality
Yes. The Town has strengthened
Yes. But the planned
No. Pollutant indicators in
Problems
its Stormwater Ordinance which
sewer system has been
the water (primarily those
Key issuepolicy in 1997 Plan
exceeds state minimum
delayed.
affecting shellfish) have
standards regarding new
continually increased since
development, and will strengthen
the 1980s.
it again with the new Phase II
Ordinances/programs should
rules.
address existing development
and drainage systems. Sewer
system will address some
existing development
pollutant causing problems,
but retrofitting of stormwater
drainage system may also be
needed.
6.4.2 Commercial and
Same description as above.
Same description as
Same description as above.
Recreational Fisheries
above.
Kcy issue policy in1997Plan
6) "Local Concerns"
Management Topic
6.3.2.6 Significant Archaeological
Yes.
Yes.
Yes. No identified issues.
Resources
6.4.3 Off -Road Vehicles
Yes.
Yes.
Yes. They are prohibited.
6.5.2 The Local Economy and
Yes. Zoning allows for
Yes.
Yes. Although as the
Tourism
commercial uses which enhance
permanent population
tourism.
increases, the local economy
will likely shift away from
being predominantly tourist -
oriented and driven.
6.5.10 Bicycle Traffic
Yes. Zoning and Subdivision
Yes. On -going.
Yes. On -going.
Improvements
Ordinances require sidewalk
provisions for appropriate areas.
Sunset Blvd. North has
implemented a sidewalk system
which was called for in the 1997
Plan. The new bridge area
(Sunset Blvd. South) will be
bicycle and pedestrian accessible.
Mixed -use is allowed and
encouraged along key
transportation corridors to lessen
automobile de endence.
6.5.12 Assistance to Channel
N/A.
Yes. Policy is statement
Yes. No identified issues.
Maintenance and Beach
of support.
Renourishment Projects
6.6.1 Continuing Public
Yes. Town Ordinances require
Yes.
Yes.
Participation
Town business to be open to the
public. Town maintains website
that posts official Town business
to provide easier access to
citizens.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 7: Review of Current 1997 Land Use Plan Ill

Summary of Town Implementation and Consistency With 1997 Land Use Plan Policies
In general, the Town has implemented and remained consistent with the main policies
regarding the desired future growth patterns and overall character of the Town. The main
policies that were implemented and followed include:
1. Maintaining building heights at 35' for the entire island and single-family on the
mainland, and 50' for multi -family on the mainland (i.e. small-town or small scale
character).
2. Maintaining the extent of the Beach Business Zoning District so as not to allow multi-
family to encroach on the predominant single-family character of the island.
3. Maintaining the Town -wide ratio of single-family to multi -family structures.
4. Allowing for commercial and mixed -use, but discouraging big -box and intense
commercial or industrial uses.
5. Limiting the redevelopment of single-family with duplex structures to only the
oceanfront row of properties.
6. Preservation of Bird Island through acquisition.
7. Strengthening stormwater regulations for new development.
8. Continuation of plans for a centralized sewer system.
9. Continuation of plans for a new bridge.
While a Town goal of the 1997 Plan was to preserve and/or improve surface water quality, water
testing by the North Carolina Shellfish Sanitation Branch, North Carolina Division of Water
Quality and University of North Carolina at Wilmington indicate that the water quality has
been declining in the jurisdiction (primarily due to the types of pollutants causing shellfish
closures). The Town has been proactive in regulating stormwater by adopting Brunswick
County's ordinance, which exceeds the state required standards regarding new development.
However, the existing drainage system and existing development have not yet been fully
addressed. Implementation of a sewer system may address some of the pollution sources found
in existing development (i.e. failing or improperly managed septic systems), but retrofitting the
existing Town -wide stormwater drainage system may be needed. One available option to
address stormwater from existing development would be to utilize the septic systems on
individual properties as "underground rain barrels". These rain barrels would catch stormwater
from rooftops via a simple gutter system and prevent the stormwater from carrying pollutants
through the Town -wide drainage system and into area waters. This may be an option to
consider in Sunset Beach due to the fact that a sewer system will eventually be built, and the
existing septic systems will be taken off-line. If the septic systems could be used as rain barrels,
the cost of removing them after the sewer system is constructed could be avoided in addition to
their functioning to remove stormwater loading into the Town drainage system. The North
Carolina State Biological and Agricultural Engineering extension service could advise on the
rain barrel option and other options for retrofitting the existing drainage system.
Many of the issues and associated policies in the 1997 Land Use Plan continue to be applicable
to the Town today. It is likely that many of the policy statements which reaffirm the Town
desired growth pattern will be retained or updated. New policy areas for this Land Use Plan
update may focus on addressing water quality problems caused not just from new development
but also from stormwater coming from existing development and the existing stormwater
drainage system. Other new policy areas maybe needed on the issues of transportation systems
and public access facilities, as they will be stressed from increasing populations.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 7: Review of Current 1997 Land Use Plan 112

Phase II of the CAMA Land Use Plan:
Section 8: Plan For The Future -
Goals and Policy Statements for the Town of Sunset Beach
8.1 Land Use and Development related Goals of the Town
Throughout the planning process, the Town identified several existing and emerging issues
facing Sunset Beach. From the needs and issues expressed by the community, staff, and Town
officials, the Town developed a core set of goals to seek to achieve within the planning period of
this Plan (i.e. next ten years). Some of the Town's key goals are outlined below (additional Town
and CAMA goals are listed at the beginning of each of the policy "Management Topic" categories
found later in this Section). The key Town goals include:
• Preserve the traditional character, intensity and density of the residential areas,
particularly the existing single-family neighborhoods and areas.
• Minimize the stress on Town and County infrastructure capacities (i.e. water, sewer,
transportation, stormwater, etc.) by encouraging lower densities in future development.
• Ensure that redevelopment of currently developed areas are compatible with its
surrounding areas, as well as other Town goals.
• Retain the existing low profile (i.e. building height) of the community, particularly the
limit of 35 feet in height for buildings on the island.
• Implement a sewer system designed with a primary purpose of protecting environmental
and human health, while minimizing the potential for "induced development" (i.e.
increased building densities and intensities).
• Create and implement development standards for the beach entryway that will focus on
clear, compatible, consistent, and comprehensive guidance for potential
development/redevelopment. This goal should be implemented in a prioritized
timeframe that will allow the Town to have plans and management programs in place
concurrent with the completion of the high-rise bridge.
• Reduce the negative effects of stormwater runoff and flooding.
• Ensure that adequate open space and/or recreational areas, including public trust areas,
are provided for and enhanced to serve the growing population
• Enhance and increase public parking and public access facilities.
• Preserve the current use of lands with existing golf course facilities (i.e. those areas
encompassing and needed for the traditional playing of professional and/or
championship level golf), and discourage future residential infill development of those
areas.
In addition to the Town's set of core goals, the Coastal Resource Commission (CRC) and the
Division of Coastal Management (DCM) have included a set of goals to assist the Town in
meeting the requirements of the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA). These goals are related
to five development -related "Management Topics" established by the CRC (discussed in Section
2.2.3 of this Plan). Consistency with the Management Topics was determined to be essential for
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 8: Land Use Plan Goals and Policy Introduction 113

the proper use, development, and protection of natural and manmade resources in coastal areas.
The Towns goals under the Management Topics are as follows:
• Ensure that development and use of resources or preservation of land minimizes direct
and secondary environmental impacts, avoids risks to public health, safety and welfare
and is consistent with the capability of the land based on considerations of interactions
of natural and manmade features.
• Ensure that public infrastructure systems are appropriately sized, located and managed
so the quality and productivity of areas of environmental concern and other fragile areas
are protected or restored.
• Maximize public access to the beaches and the public trust waters of the jurisdiction.
• Maintain, protect and where possible enhance water quality in all coastal wetlands,
rivers, streams and estuaries.
• Conserve and maintain barrier dunes, beaches, flood plains, and other coastal features
for their natural storm protection functions and their natural resources giving
recognition to public health, safety, and welfare issues.
8.2 Definitions of Action and Descriptive Words Used in Policies
The following is a list of definitions for the `action -words' used in the Town's policy statements.
This list is used to help in clarifying a policy's meaning and intent.
Shall: An obligation to carry out a course of action.
Should: An officially adopted course or method of action intended to be followed to implement
the community Goals. Though not as mandatory as 'shall', it is still an obligatory course of action
unless clear reasons can be identified that an exception is warranted.
May: Implies permission to pursue a course of action or implies that a course of action is
probable and likely. While "may" leaves room for flexibility for a range of choices, it does not
imply a "may" or "may not" status as used in policy statements.
Create: Bring about the desired goal, usually with Town staff and Planning Board involved at all
levels from planning to implementation. This could include financial support by the Town.
Continue: Follow past and present procedures to maintain desired goal, usually with Town staff
involved at all levels from planning to implementation.
Encourage: Foster the desired goal through Town regulation, staff recommendation and
decisions.
Discourage: Inhibit an undesired course or action through Town regulation, staff
recommendation and decisions.
Enhance: Improve current regulations and decisions towards a desired state through the use of
policies and Town staff at all levels of planning. This could include financial support by the
Town.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 8: Land Use Plan Goals and Policy Introduction 114

Identify: Catalog and confirm resource or desired item(s) through the use of Town staff and
actions.
Implement: Actions to guide the accomplishment of the Plan recommendations.
Maintain: Keep in good condition the desired state of affairs through the use of Town regulations
and practices by staff. Financial support by the Town should be provided if needed,
Prevent: Stop described event through the use of appropriate Town regulations, staff actions,
Planning Board actions, and Town finances, if needed.
Promote: Advance the desired state through the use of Town policies and codes and Planning
Board and staff activity at all levels of planning. This could include financial support by the
Town.
Protect: Guard against a deterioration of the desired state through the use of Town policies and
regulations, staff, and, if needed, financial support by the Town.
Provide: Take the lead role in supplying the needed financial and staff support to achieve the
desired goal. The Town is typically involved in all aspects from planning to implementation to
maintenance.
Support: Supply the needed staff support, policies, and financial assistance at all levels to achieve
the desired goal.
Sustain: Uphold the current state through Town policies, decisions, financial resources, and staff
action.
Work: Cooperate and act in a manner through the use of Town staff actions, and policies to
create the desired goal.
8.3 Policy Section Introduction and the Town of Sunset Beach Policy Statements
Within this Plan, the Town has established a set of land use and development related policies to
act as guidelines to be followed during any official decision making process of the Town. That
official decision -making process can include but is not limited to: zoning ordinance decisions;
grant application decisions; capital improvement budget decisions, and; any other Town
ordinance or program decisions that impact community development. The Town policies also
provide citizens, property owners and developers with a predictability of official actions. Town
policies in this Plan were established based on the Town's Vision Statement, goals set from the
identification of needs and issues facing the community, and the analysis of trends in local
demographics, environmental conditions, existing land uses, and availability of community
facilities.
For simplification in the organization and presentation of Town policies, all policies have been
separated by their subject matter into five general Management Topic area categories that relate
to each policy's respective subject matter. The five Management Topic area categories used in this
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 8: Land Use Plan Goals and Policy Introduction 115

Plan include;1) Land Use Compatibility; 2) Public Access; 3) Infrastructure Carrying Capacity;
4) Natural Hazards Mitigation, and; 5) Water Quality.
As stated above, each of the Town policies have been separated and categorized under one of the
five Management Topics. To avoid repetition, policy statements that may be applicable to
multiple Management Topics are only stated once under the Management Topic they apply to
the most, but are referred to under any subsequent Management Topics they may also apply.
The format used for listing policies consists of first identifying the Management Topic, and then
stating the Management Topic's Goal as established under CAMA. Also included in the format
may be a description of specific Town Goals that relate to the Management Topic, as well as a
brief Objectives and Background Discussion that provides a general introduction and context
for the policy statements. Sub -headings, or Policy Titles, (e.g. Areas of Environmental Concern)
are numbered and underlined, and were used under each respective Management Topic (e.g.
Land Use Compatibility) to further separate policy statements into more distinct subject topic
areas. Policy statements under the sub -headings directly relate to the sub -heading, and then more
generally to the Management Topic. In addition, Policy Notes may follow certain policy
statements. The Policy Notes are intended to provide the context and intent for which the policy
statement was created, or to help clarify terms used in the statement itself.
IMPORTANT NOTE: Any official land use or development related decisions made by
the Town after the adoption of this Land Use Plan are expected to be consistent with both
the policy statements in Section 8 and the Future Land Use Classification Map and Future
Land Use Classification Area Development Standards Table (Table 40) in Section 9. Any
official Town decisions that are inconsistent with the policy statements, Future Land Use
Classification Map and Future Land Use Classibcation Area Development Standards Table
must follow Policy # 30, and if substantially inconsistent, may require a Land Use Plan
amendment process with a public hearing, as well as a certification review by the Coastal
Resources Commission.
Policy 30 States:
30. Land Use and Development Decisions Consistent with the Land Use Plan
Any official Town land use and development related actions (e.g. re -zonings, text amendments,
stormwater rules, etc.) shall remain consistent with the policies adopted in the Land Use Plan and any
other applicable plan. Any Town actions that are inconsistent with such plans shall require a statement
from the Town body approving such decisions, as to why those decisions are necessary and in the
community's interest, and how any negative impacts will be mitigated.
For furtherguidanceon how to use the document see sections 10.1-10.2 under the Tools for Managing
Development section (section 10).
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 8: Land Use Plan Goals and Policy Introduction 116

I. Management Topic: Land Use Compatibility
CAMA Land Use Compatibility Goal:
"Ensure that development and use of resources or preservation of land minimizes direct and
secondary environmental impacts, avoids risks to public health, safety and welfare and is
consistent with the capability of the land based on considerations of interactions of natural and
manmade features".
Town Land Use Compatibility Goals:
■ Maintain and enhance quality of life (i.e. Town's environmental health, aesthetics,
amenities, and property values).
■ Preserve the traditional character, intensity and density of the residential areas,
particularly the existing single-family neighborhoods and areas.
■ Ensure that redevelopment of currently developed areas are compatible with its
surrounding areas, as well as other Town goals.
■ Maintain and enhance proactive management of all new development and redevelopment
regarding intensity (i.e. building height, lot coverage and bulk) and density (i.e. units per
acre).
■ Retain the existing low profile (i.e. building height) of the community, particularly the
limit of 35 feet in height for buildings on the island.
■ Create and implement development standards for the beach entryway that will focus on
clear, compatible, consistent, and comprehensive guidance for potential
development/redevelopment. This goal should be implemented in a prioritized timeframe
that will allow the Town to have plans and management programs in place concurrent
with the completion of the high-rise bridge.
■ Ensure that adequate open space and/or recreational areas, including public trust areas,
are provided for and enhanced to serve the growing population
■ Preserve the current use on those lands with existing golf course facilities, and discourage
future residential infill development of those areas. "Existing golf course facilities" means
those areas encompassing and needed for the traditional playing of professional and/or
championship level golf).
■ Develop (and redevelop) as a primarily residential community, with limitations on the
location and scale of commercial growth.
■ Encourage mixed -use development in appropriate areas as a way to increase efficiency of
land use and lessen the need for using automobiles for travel within Town.
■ Seek to increase the preservation and enhancement of environmentally sensitive areas
such as wetlands and Areas of Environmental Concern (AECs).
■ Increase bicycle and pedestrian interconnectivity and accessibility.
Objectives and Background Discussion
The policies listed below represent the Town's strategy for managing growth and development.
The policies provide guidance on setting criteria for development density, types of appropriate
land uses and structures, and the management of the CAMA Areas of Environmental Concern
(AECs). The Town of Sunset Beach has stated in its Vision Statement, goals and other sections of
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 8: Land Use Compatibility Policies 117

this Land Use Plan that its intent is to be proactive in managing growth and development in
order to maintain its high quality of life and Town character as a comparatively small-scale
residential and resort community. For the purposes of this Plan, small-scale means maintaining a
uniform height for structures (i.e. a maximum of 35 to 50 feet depending on the type and location
of the structure), and limiting the density and intensity of multi -family and commercial
developments.
Cross Reference Note to Land Use Compatibility Policy Statements: Section 9, following,
will detail the Town's standards for future development and redevelopment in the various
distinct areas of the planning jurisdiction. Those standards include density, intensity, and
appropriate land use types. Section 9 is to be used in conjunction with the Land Use
Compatibility Policy Statements following below.
Land Use Compatibility Policy Statements
1. Areas of Environmental Concern
A) The Town will support and enforce through its CAMA minor permitting capacity the
state policies and permitted uses in Areas of Environmental Concern (AECs). Such uses
shall be in accord with the general use standards for coastal wetlands, estuarine waters,
estuarine shorelines, ocean hazard areas and public trust areas as stated in 15A NCAC
Subchapter 7H.
B) The Town supports the major and general permitting process as implemented by the
North Carolina Division of Coastal Management.
2. Coastal Wetlands
A) The Town strongly supports the designation and preservation of all remaining coastal
wetlands and freshwater marshes.
B) It shall be the policy of Sunset Beach to restrict land uses in coastal wetlands and
freshwater marshes to those that ensure wetland conservation and which do not affect
their delicate balance.
C) Sunset Beach shall permit water dependent uses in coastal wetlands such as docks, boat
ramps, piers, utility easements, and culverts, consistent with the definition and use
standards of 15 NCAC 7H. Each proposed use will be evaluated for water dependency.
Unacceptable land uses in coastal wetlands may include, but would not be limited to,
restaurants, businesses, residences, apartments, motels, hotels, floating structures, private
roads, and parking lots. In some instances, it may be necessary and in the public interest
for public roads to transverse wetland areas. Where this is absolutely necessary, state
and federal regulations may allow such with certain safeguards and/or mitigation
measures.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 8: Land Use Compatibility Policies 118

3. Estuarine Waters
A) Sunset Beach shall promote the conservation and quality of estuarine waters.
Appropriate uses may include simple access channels, structures which prevent erosion,
navigational channels, boat docks, and piers which are consistent with 15 NCAC
7H.0208.
B) The development of boat launching and docking facilities shall be supported as a means
of providing public water access provided that their development shall not adversely
impact estuarine resources or Public Trust Areas.
C) Floating structures shall be banned in order to protect our estuarine and Public Trust
Areas.
D) The Town will support those projects which will increase the productivity of the estuary
such as oyster reseeding or dredging projects which will increase the flushing actions of
tidal movements in Jinks and Blane Creeks, and any other creeks or waterbodies which
may have the potential for shellfish harvesting.
4. Estuarine Shorelines
A) Within the Estuarine Shoreline Area, the Town of Sunset Beach believes that certain
developed uses should only be permitted which are consistent with CAMA's 15 NCAC
7H and as further defined by the Town's building, development and stormwater
ordinances, and which satisfy the following requirements:
i. Natural barriers to erosion are not weakened or eliminated;
ii. Development does not interfere with present public access;
iii. The amount of runoff is unchanged;
iv. No substantial or prolonged pollution is generated which would degrade surface
water;
v. Standards of the North Carolina Sedimentation and Erosion Control Act are
upheld, and;
vi. The construction of impervious surfaces and areas not allowing natural drainage is
limited to that necessary for development, and stormwater management provisions
of the Town Ordinances are upheld.
B) The most intense development of estuarine system islands allowed shall be for single-
family residential lots of one acre minimum (with a minimum of a half -acre of "upland"
area) and only if proper measures are taken by the developer to provide sufficient
hurricane evacuation, utilities provision, access on and off the estuarine island, pollution
control, and other design considerations that will ensure compatibility of the
development with the estuarine system.
5. Ocean Hazards Areas
A) Generally, all land uses in the area classified under the Oceans Hazards category which
are the ocean erodible, high hazard flood, and inlet hazard area for Sunset Beach shall be
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 8: Land Use Compatibility Policies 119

consistent with the requirements of existing state, federal and local regulations, and the
Sunset Beach Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Regulations, Dune Maintenance and
Protection Plan, the Town's requirements for the National Flood Insurance Program,
and the Town's building set back line.
B) Suitable land uses in ocean hazard areas are generally those which eliminate
unreasonable danger of life and property, and which achieves a balance between the
financial, safety, and social factors involved in hazard area development.
C) Residential and recreational land uses and parking lots for beach access are also
acceptable types of uses in ocean hazards areas provided that:
i. For all oceanfront residential structures, the allowable buildable area shall be
measured from the property line abutting Main Street heading oceanward a
maximum of 150 feet.
ii. Development does not involve the removal or relocation of frontal dune sand or
vegetation thereon.
iii. Mobile homes are not allowed within the high hazard flood areas on the island
and on the mainland must conform to federal flood insurance regulations and
standards established in the North Carolina Building Code.
iv. Development is consistent with minimum lot sizes and setback requirements
established by local regulations.
V. Development implements means and methods to mitigate or minimize adverse
impacts of the project on the environment and protect the habitat of threatened
and endangered plant and animal species.
D) Development of growth -inducing public facilities such as sewers, water lines, public
roads, bridges, and erosion control measures shall only be permitted in the cases where:
i. National and state interest and public benefits are clearly the overriding factor.
ii. Facilities would not exacerbate existing hazards or damage natural barriers.
iii. Facilities would be reasonably safe from flood and erosion related damage.
iv. Development will not create undue interference with the legal rights to public
access and the use of such areas.
E) Development of growth -inducing public facilities such as sewers, water lines, public
roads, and public bridges shall not be permitted in designated CBRA areas such as Bird
Island.
F) Sunset Beach continues to support comprehensive shoreline management such as the
Corps of Engineers beach renourishment projects as the preferred control measure to
combat oceanfront erosion. _
G) When existing dunes are "added to" this shall be accomplished in a manner which
minimizes damage to existing vegetation and which establishes one continuous dune line.
Any areas filled will be replanted immediately or stabilized temporarily until planting can
be successfully completed.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 8: Land Use Compatibility Policies 120

H) Prior to the issuance of any permit for development in the Ocean AECs, there should be
written acknowledgement from the applicant that they are aware of the risks associated
in that area and whether participation in the Federal Flood Insurance Program is
possible.
6. Areas that Contain Remnant Species
A) Areas that contain remnant species will be classified as Conservation. All development
plans for areas that contain remnant species will be carefully reviewed prior to the
issuance of development permits in order to protect the habitat.
B) The Town of Sunset Beach supports the efforts of the Twin Lakes Residents
Conservation Association to protect and enhance the Twin Lakes area.
7. Prime Wildlife Habitat Areas
The prime wildlife habitat areas in the Sunset Beach planning area are currently classified as
Areas of Environmental Concern. The Town will continue to protect its prime wildlife habitats
by enforcing the CAMA major and minor permitting program.
8. Protection of Wetlands
The Town of Sunset Beach supports the preservation of wetlands through the enforcement of
federal 404 regulations under the Army Corps of Engineers.
9. Maritime Forests and Tree Cover
The Town encourages efforts to preserve tree cover in new development and redevelopment.
10. Constraints to Development
A) Until such time as a central sewerage collection and disposal system is developed, growth
and development will be restricted to those which receive the appropriate septic permits
issued by the Brunswick County Health Department or are serviced by a private utility or
package plant.
B) All septic tanks must be in compliance with state health regulations as permitted by the
Brunswick County Health Department.
C) Off -site septic systems have been a longstanding development practice in Sunset Beach
and such systems will be permitted until such time that a sewer system is developed.
D) Development may be constructed in areas with limitations for building foundations only
if corrective measures for stabilizing foundations are incorporated into the building
design, and strictly adhere to applicable flood zone regulations and stormwater
regulations.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 8: Land Use Compatibility Policies 121

11.
E) All new construction and substantial improvements in the 100-year flood zones must
comply strictly to the Town's Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance with 1 foot freeboard
above the BFE which has been adopted in conjunction with Sunset Beach's participation
in the National Flood Insurance Program.
Upland Excavation for Marinas
Upland excavation for marinas will not be allowed.
12. Installation of Bulkheads, Groins and Seawalls
13.
14.
Bulkhead installation, groins, or seawalls must be built in compliance with CAMA's 7H and
other state guidelines. Maintenance and replacement of existing bulkheads will be permitted.
Residential and Commercial Land Development on Any Natural Resource
The land use controls of Sunset Beach are and will continue to be written and enforced to insure
that proper and adequate measures are incorporated into the design, construction, and operation
of residential and commercial development so that any substantial negative impact to the unique
coastal ecosystem is minimized.
Types of Development to Be Encouraged
A) Sunset Beach desires as much as practicable that all development be designed and placed
so as to be compatible with its existing coastal town and residential character.
B) All new development will adhere to the Town's building and development regulations
and to the density requirements set forth in the Zoning Ordinance. The Zoning
Ordinance shall support the existing growth patterns which limit height and density.
C) To protect the community from adverse development and growth, the Town staff and
policy makers will consider these factors when reviewing development plans:
i. The suitability of land to accommodate the use;
ii. The capacity of the environment;
iii. The compatibility of land use with the goals and objectives of the Town;
iv. The density of the development and the proposed height of the structures;
v. The capacity of community services in regard to the increasing demands imposed by
permanent and seasonal residents;
vi. The impact of the development upon Areas of Environmental Concern and other
special and sensitive areas, as reflected in the policies of the Resource Protection and
Resource Production Management; and,
vii. The location of hazardous areas where there is a tendency for septic tank problems,
flooding, and wash over.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 8: Land Use Compatibility Policies 122

15. Annexation
The Town of Sunset Beach will institute annexation proceedings and the extension of the
extraterritorial limits in a timely manner in order to guide growth in the surrounding areas
adjacent to Sunset Beach.
16. Types of Urban Growth Patterns Desired
The Town shall support an orderly growth pattern which reinforces the community's existing
coastal residential and commercial areas and protects the environment.
17. Types, Density and Location of Anticipated Residential Development
The Town encourages both the development and preservation of a variety of housing types to
meet the needs and desires of current and future citizens. To meet those needs and desires, the
Town will administer the following policies:
Building Height Standards on the Island and Mainland
A) The Town shall retain a 35-foot height limitation for residential, commercial and
institutional structures on the island.
B) As specified by the current zoning ordinance, the building height on the mainland will
predominantly be 35-feet with the exception of a 50-foot building height maximum limit
for multi -family units in the MR-3 Zoning District. In specified areas, single-family
structures may be allowed to exceed 35 feet if 1 foot of additional setback for every 2 feet
in additional height can be achieved on the lot, but in no case shall the structure exceed
50 feet in height.
C) No structure on the mainland shall be allowed to exceed 50 feet in height. This restriction
includes any and all uses and building types currently allowed in the Town.
Protection of Single-family Areas
D) The Town shall maintain areas exclusively for conventional single-family dwellings for
the growing population on the island and the mainland (as shown on the Future Land
Use Map).
E) The Town shall retain and maintain the predominantly single-family residential character
of the island. Conversion of single-family homes to duplexes will be restricted to the
residential lots in the existing BR-1 and BB-1 Zoning Districts (as shown on the Future
Land Use Map and Town Zoning Map).
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 8: Land Use Compatibility Policies 123

Multi -Family Areas
F) The Town shall allow multi -family development in designated and appropriate areas
within the "golf course oriented developments" (Sea Trail and Ocean Ridge Plantation)
and as permitted in the MR-3, MB-1 and BB-1 commercial districts (as shown on the
Future Land Use Map and Town Zoning Map).
Manufactured Housing Areas
G) The Town shall provide areas for mobile home and manufactured housing development on
the mainland (as shown on the Future Land Use Map and Town Zoning Map).
H) Any redevelopment of existing manufactured housing areas shall only be allowed to
develop as single-family detached housing. Manufactured housing shall continue to be an
allowable housing type/use in these pre-existing areas.
18. Residential Density - Standards, Options and Mitigation of Environmental Impacts
A) The Planning Board and Town Council will study the feasibility of establishing
residential density limitations per acre, in addition to existing dimensional standards, for
each zoning district.
B) The Planning Board and Town Council will study the feasibility of revising the
subdivision, zoning and Planned Residential Development regulations to promote greater
conservation of natural areas. Cluster housing, with possible density bonus, and/or Low
Impact Development standards may be studied as such conservation measures.
19. Potential For Transition of Golf Course Land to Residential Use
If any land currently utilized as a "golf course field of play" is requested to be transitioned to a
residential use, the only allowable housing -type permitted by the Town for those areas shall be:
A) Single-family detached, with a minimum lot size of one acre per unit;
Or,
B) Planned Residential Development, as permitted in the Zoning Ordinance, if it is able to
retain an amount of open space superior to and an impervious lot coverage equal to or less
than that created by the development of single-family housing on one acre lots as in
option (A) above.
20. Types of Commercial and Institutional Development Desired
The Town plans to enhance and promote quality commercial development through the
following:
A) Intense commercial development beyond that necessary to serve seasonal and year-round
population will not be encouraged. There is currently a sufficient amount of land zoned
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 8: Land Use Compatibility Policies 124

for commercial development in the Town planning jurisdiction and surrounding county
jurisdiction to meet the projected needs of the seasonal and year-round population
through 2015.
B) The Town will continue to enforce its current development ordinances and local building
permit process in order to achieve a desired balance between commercial and residential
development. Adequate buffering between residential and commercial development will
be required. Requests for additional mixed -use zoning will be carefully evaluated in terms
of the needs of the community for such development.
C) The Town will encourage commercial development to locate in designated commercial
nodes (as shown on the Future Land Use Map) in order to avoid strip commercial
development and traffic congestion. The designated commercial node on the island is the
BB-1 district bordering Sunset Boulevard, and on the mainland, the major commercial
node is the MUD commercial district at the North Carolina 904 and North Carolina 179
business intersection. Both areas are shown on the Future Land Use Map.
D) The appearance of commercial development will be enhanced by the enforcement of
stricter sign and landscaping regulations to maintain the existing residential, retirement
and small-scale resort characteristic of the community.
E) With the exception of places of worship, institutional use in Sunset Beach is now limited
to those government and utility sites necessary to provide adequate services to the Town
and its planning jurisdiction. It is desired that this land use pattern be maintained, and
that the Town encourage land use compatibility between any future institutional
development with neighboring residential and/or commercial development.
21. Redevelopment of Developed Areas
Provided the activities below are consistent with other Town policies regarding density, hazard
mitigation and environmental protection, the Town supports the following:
A) Redevelopment may be permitted as long as the activity complies with the spirit and
intent of existing regulatory requirements, meaning proposed redevelopment activities
which would require substantial changes to existing regulations shall be discouraged.
B) Town policy is to encourage and allow redevelopment of previously developed areas,
which may also include the relocation of endangered structures.
C) Sunset Beach supports replacement of aging structures as a positive reuse of land
resources which enhances the Town as a whole.
D) It is the Town's policy that density allowances for redevelopment conform to existing
Town building and zoning regulations. Requests for increases in zoning density is
discouraged
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 8: Land Use Compatibility Policies 125

22. Civic Efforts to Maintain the Town Character
The Town of Sunset Beach will continue to support the efforts of the Sunset Beach Beautification
Committee, a civic group who landscapes and beautifies public areas within the Town, and the
efforts of volunteers who pick-up litter on the beach and mainland.
23. Types and Location of Industry Desired
"Industry" in the traditional manufacturing/processing/production sense will not be allowed in
the Sunset Beach planning jurisdiction.
24. Productive Agricultural Lands, Commercial Forest Lands, Existing and Potential Mineral
Production Areas
Mineral production and extraction activities of any kind shall not be permitted within the
Sunset Beach planning jurisdiction.
25. Energy Facility Siting and Development .
The Sunset Beach planning area is not a suitable location for electric generating plants. The
Town of Sunset Beach discourages offshore continental drilling for gas and oil. Moreover, the
location of support facilities for offshore drilling at Sunset Beach would be inappropriate and is
strongly discouraged.
26. Swimming Pools on the Island
Swimming pools shall not be allowed on the south side (ocean -side) of Main Street on the island.
27. Clubhouse and Community Center Uses
Private clubhouse and community centers uses, as defined in the Zoning Ordinance, shall only be
allowed on the island in the designated commercial area (BB-1). Private clubhouses and
community centers on the mainland shall only be allowed if located within the development that
they are intended to serve.
28. Density of Future Multi -family Developments
To assist in protecting its existing community character, scale and infrastructure capabilities,
Town policy shall be to reduce the currently allowed density for multi -family structures below a
gross of 21.7 units per acre.
29. Bike and Pedestrian Interconnectivity
The Town supports and shall pursue efforts to increase bike and pedestrian pathways
connecting commercial areas with residential areas, as well as connecting the mainland areas
with the island and beach access sites.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 8: Land Use Compatibility Policies 126

30. Land Use and Development Decisions Consistent with the Land Use Plan
Any official Town land use and development related actions (e.g. re -zonings, text amendments,
stormwater rules, etc.) shall remain consistent with the policies adopted in the Land Use Plan
and any other applicable plan. Any Town actions that are inconsistent with such plans shall
require a statement from the Town body approving such decisions, as to why those decisions are
necessary and in the community's interest, and how any negative impacts will be mitigated.
Policy 30 states:
30. Land Use and Development Decisions Consistent with the Land Use Plan
Any official Town land use and development related actions (e.g. re -zonings, text amendments,
stormwater rules, etc.) shall remain consistent with the policies adopted in the Land Use Plan and any
other applicable plan. Any Town actions that are inconsistent with such plans shall require a statement
from the Town body approving such decisions, as to why those decisions are necessary and in the
community's interest, and how any negative impacts will be mitigated.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 8: Land Use Compatibility Policies 127

II. Management Topic: Public Access
CAMA Public Access Goal:
"Maximize public access to the beaches and the public trust waters of the jurisdiction."
Town Public Access Goals:
Recognize and prepare for land acquisition opportunities to enhance or expand the
Town's public access facilities.
Encourage and facilitate alternatives to traditional vehicular traffic to reach public access
sites and other destinations in Town (i.e. bicycle and pedestrian interconnectivity, and
public or private shuttle services).
Be prepared to conduct on -going beach preservation planning activities to secure beach
nourishment funding and to meet public access site provision requirements for funding.
Objectives and Background Discussion
The Town intends to proactively manage/regulate activities and impacts in the public trust areas
(i.e. public waters, beach and marsh) within its planning jurisdiction. The policy statements
below represent the Town's guiding principles in its future management of the public trust areas
within its planning jurisdiction. As detailed in Section 5 of this Plan, the Town has 33 existing
public beach access sites along the approximately 2.3 miles of oceanfront beach in the Town
Limits. That is an average of a public access site every 368 feet. There is one "Regional Beach
Access Site" in Sunset Beach located near the Pier. "Regional" sites are designated by having 25
or more parking spaces, as well as having additional facilities like restrooms, picnic tables and
showers. The "Regional Access Site" in Sunset Beach is handicapped accessible and has 75 Town
parking spaces with additional pay -parking available at the adjacent pier. There is a restroom at
this Regional Site, but no showers or picnic tables. The remaining 32 public access sites on the
island are considered "Local" sites used primarily as dune crossovers and have limited, if any, on -
site parking or other facilities. The Town plans to retain its ratio of access sites, with
enhancements and expansion of access site facilities possible as funding and/or beach
nourishment projects (and their associated access requirements) become available. In addition,
increased public access to the Intracoastal Waterway is planned as part of the bridge
replacement project (See Map 12: Transportation and Public Access Facilities Map).
In Sunset Beach, on -street parking on the island is allowed on Main Street (main road parallel to
beachstrand) and portions of Sunset Boulevard in the commercial area. Public on -street parking
is also allowed on the shoulder rights -of -way of all side streets perpendicular to the beachstrand,
provided driveways are not blocked. The Town has evaluated parking needs on the island and
determined that except for a few peak days of the season, parking on side street shoulders and
other allowable areas has adequately handled current public parking needs. Future growth in
Town and in the surrounding areas will more than likely increase the demand for additional
public parking and/or a private/public shuttle service (e.g. the Sea Trail shuttle). Any additional
parking facilities would likely be best located near the commercial and pier areas of the island, as
this is in close proximity to the existing Regional Access Site and to the only commercial area on
the island.
PRELIMINARY FINAL DRAFT of LUP Through 9/06/07 Section 8: Public Access Policies 128

Public Access Policy Statements
31. Public Trust Areas
A) In the absence of overriding public benefit, any use which significantly interferes with the
public right of navigation or other public trust rights which apply in the area shall not be
allowed.
B) Projects which would directly block or impair navigational channels, increase shoreline
erosion, deposit spoils below mean high tide causing adverse water circulation patterns,
directly cause a violation in water quality standards, or cause degradation of open
shellfish waters shall not be allowed.
C) For the Town of Sunset Beach, a navigational channel will be defined as any water
channel which is passable by high tide. Permanent obstruction of these navigational
channels will not be allowed. Improvements such as bridges and docks must be built to
allow boating access according to State regulations.
D) Uses allowed in Public Trust Areas shall be in accordance 7H.O208 (a) and (b) and shall
not be detrimental to the public trust rights and the physical functions of the estuary.
Examples of such uses include the navigational channels or drainage ditches, the use of
bulkheads to prevent erosion, building of piers or docks.
32. Support for Coastal and Estuarine Beach Access
The Town of Sunset Beach is committed to the public having access to the beach, shore or other
public trust land and waters, provided that such means do not conflict with the rights of
residents for the use and enjoyment of their property.
33. Support for State and Federal Access Programs
Sunset Beach supports the utilization of state and federal, as well as local resources, to develop
additional access areas.
34. Public Boat Launch and Access Site
The Town shall pursue the construction of a public boat launch and access site to replace the
boat launch removed due to the new bridge construction.
35. Preservation of Existing Public Access Sites
The Town shall not approve any development activity that would cause an existing public access
site to become permanently unusable without adequate and immediate replacement with an
equal and similarly located public access site.
PRELIMINARY FINAL DRAFT of LUP Through 9/06/07 Section 8: Public Access Policies 129

36. Continuation of On -Street Public Parking
The Town shall continue to allow regulated public parking on public street shoulders as a means
to provide parking for beach access.
37. Support for Shuttle Service to Public Access Sites
The Town supports the utilization of private (and potentially public) shuttle services to
transport mainland residents and guests to public beach access sites.
38. Enhancing Public Access Facilities
The Town shall pursue increasing the availability of public facilities including restrooms,
showers, parking, and bike racks on the island.
PRELIMINARY FINAL DRAFT of LUP Through 9/06/07
Section 8: Public Access Policies 130

III. Management Topic: Infrastructure
CAMA Infrastructure Goal:
"Ensure that public infrastructure systems are appropriately sized, located and managed so the
quality and productivity of areas of environmental concern and other fragile areas are protected
or restored."
Town Infrastructure Goals:
■ Maintain and enhance quality of life (i.e. Town's environmental health, aesthetics,
amenities, and property values).
■ In conjunction with Brunswick County and the Department of Transportation, alleviate
traffic congestion on local streets and thoroughfares by managing the number, design
standard, and location of driveway access points for commercial, subdivision or other
large developments.
■ In conjunction with Brunswick County, implement a sewer system for the purpose of
mitigating the environmental and human health risks to the jurisdiction from outdated,
failing or over capacity on -site wastewater treatment systems.
■ In conjunction with Brunswick County, establish and maintain an adequate and effective
stormwater management system and program.
■ In conjunction with Brunswick County, ensure a safe and sufficient supply of water for
both potable and firefighting uses.
■ Increase Town participation and contribution in Regional Growth Management (e.g.
County Transportation Systems, Potable Water System, Sewer System, Stormwater
Management and Environmental Management).
Objectives and Background Discussion
Sunset Beach can be characterized as a steadily growing but relatively small-scale
residential/resort community. The Town's commercial activity primarily serves local year-round
residents, as well as seasonal residents and tourists. The Town discourages large-scale or big -box
commercial development which would be intended to serve regional populations. The Town's
overall growth management policy is to maintain its existing mix of residential types, densities
and intensity, and to strictly limit any future residential redevelopment above existing densities
(Also see Future Land Use Map and Section 9 in this Plan for more detail). In the case of future
multi -family development, while many multi -family developments have been built well under the
current maximum allowable density, the Town plans to reduce its maximum density allowed for
multi -family to minimize the pace, scope and costs of needed infrastructure expansion. As
detailed in Section 6.2, the Town in conjunction with the County is pursuing the construction of
sewer lines to provide service to all applicable existing properties within the jurisdiction. The -- - - -
sewer lines will be owned, operated and maintained by the County. The design for the sewer line
capacity within the Sunset Beach jurisdiction was conducted under the supervision of the Town
and impacted parties to minimize or eliminate the potential for "induced development". Induced
development is the potential for increased density and intensity that sewer service can sometimes
provide. The Town's infrastructure -related policies listed below are consistent with their
approach to overall growth management and preservation of quality of life.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 8: Infrastructure Policies 131

Infrastructure Policy Statements
39. Development Encouraged to Use DOT's Access Management and Recommended Design
Standards
The Town supports the principles of Access Management and encourages the use of the
recommended street and driveway design standards found in the North Carolina Department of
Transportation's "Policy on Street and Driveway Access".
40. Access Management for Commercial and Mixed -use Developments
A) The Town shall continue to enforce its current design standards under the "Major
Collector Plan" requirements, as found in the Zoning Ordinance 5 151.395 (F) and
151.214 (H), for developments abutting a major collector street (i.e. Sunset Boulevard,
Highway 904) within the commercial Districts.
B) The Town encourages abutting mixed -used developments and/or commercial
developments to reduce driveway access points connecting to main roads by utilizing
shared (joint -access) driveways or creating internal (marginal) accessways to service
traffic moving among those types of highly trafficked developments.
41. Access Management for Residential Developments
The Town shall continue to enforce its current design standards regarding street access for
residential subdivisions under Section 150.110 (B) of the Subdivision Ordinance, which include
standards for the provision of marginal accessways, minimum lot sizes on frontages of major
collectors, and/or the prohibition of access to major collectors by individual private driveways.
42. Improvements to Highway 904 Needed
The Town supports immediate improvements to Highway 904 by the Department of
Transportation in areas where traffic volume has exceeded the design capacity of the road. The
Town supports the construction of left and right turn lanes on Highway 904, and does not
support the construction of a "center turn lane". Any conversion of existing center turn lanes
should be converted to a vegetated median.
43. Support for Corridor Development Standards of Highway 904
The Town supports the Corridor Development Standards in the Brunswick County Unified
Development Ordinance for Highway 904 from its intersection with Highway 17 to the Town's
planning jurisdiction border. If the Town annexes any portion of the 904 corridor, it intends to
continue to apply, at a minimum, the current Corridor Development Standards.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 8: Infrastructure Policies 132

44. Encouraged Street Design Within Major Developments
In addition to the minimum requirements for subdivision street design (4 98.22):
A) The Town encourages planned residential developments, mixed -use developments and
other applicable subdivision developments to implement street designs that maximize:
i. Bike and pedestrian accessibility and safety (i.e. sidewalks, bike lane, crosswalks,
etc.);
ii. Incorporation of effective and aesthetically appropriate street calming devices;
and
iii. Interconnectivity with existing local streets, bike and pedestrian pathways, as
well as any abutting commercial and recreational areas.
B) In the provision of sidewalks, bike lanes and roundabouts, and where uncontrolled
stormwater runoff may be increased by such infrastructure, the Town encourages:
i. The use of permeable (pervious) materials as approved by the North Carolina
Division of Water Quality, or, limiting sidewalks to one side of the street to
minimize impervious surfaces; and,
ii. The design of these features should utilize BMPs similar to those outlined in the
Brunswick County Low Impact Development (LID) standards to collect
stormwater runoff from the street surface.
45. Bike and Pedestrian Plan Update
The Town shall update its Bike and Pedestrian Plan to identify potential funding for
improvements, increase public awareness of the planned pathway, and take advantage of the
interconnectivity offered by the new bridge between the mainland and island. The Town
supports and will seek coordination with adjacent municipalities and the County on maximizing
regional bike path interconnectivity, as well as identifying cost -sharing opportunities (i.e. East
Coast Greenway project).
46. Unpaved Public Streets
A) Town policy is not to pave or otherwise improve any unpaved street or alley unless
petitioned by a majority of the property owners who represent a majority of the lineal feet
of frontage on the street proposed to be improved.
B) The Town shall review the feasibility of utilizing a "green street design", or, permeable
asphalt or other North Carolina Division of Water Quality approved pervious material
when paving any of the remaining public unpaved roads in the planning jurisdiction.
47. Resurfacing Improvements
Whenever it is necessary to resurface, fill potholes or repair cracks or other defects on any public
street due to normal traffic use, the Town shall undertake the resurfacing as funds are
appropriated.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 8: Infrastructure Policies 133

48. Crosswalks
The Town will consider increasing aesthetically appropriate crosswalks and signals to
accommodate and facilitate additional bike and pedestrian accessibility in Town.
49. Use of Package Treatment Plants
The Town shall temporarily allow package treatment plants where they are deemed necessary for
an allowable development project, and if they can be constructed with the overall intent of this
plan and meet all federal, state and County environmental health regulations. When sewer
system service becomes available, connection to the system and decommissioning of Package
Treatment Plants will be required.
50. Implementation of Sewer System Service
The Town supports and will continue to coordinate with Brunswick County Public Utilities and
all other applicable state agencies in the construction of a sewer system to serve all appropriate
properties within the Sunset Beach planning jurisdiction.
51. Mandatory Sewer System Connection
The Town shall require all existing development with on- and/or off -site wastewater systems in
the Sunset Beach planning jurisdiction, as well as any future developments, to connect to the
Brunswick County sewer system.
52. Ownership and Operation of Sewer System
The Town will not own or operate any portion of the planned sewer system within its planning
jurisdiction. Residents, business owners and other system users in the Sunset Beach Planning
jurisdiction will be retail customers of the Brunswick County Public Utilities sewer system.
53. Sewer System Designed to Limit "Induced Development Impacts"
A) The sewer system developed in the Town planning jurisdiction shall be designed to place
limitations on the number of future connections to the system. This is intended to both
manage density in the Town's planning jurisdiction and manage the long-term effects on
the carrying capacity of the County provided sewer system. Town policy is not to
eliminate growth, but to better anticipate and manage the scale of future growth so as not
to overburden the system and diminish the quality of service to existing customers.
B) The Town encourages other municipalities and customers of County public utilities to
establish design capacity thresholds for planned sewer systems in their jurisdictions, as is
Sunset Beach policy, to better maintain carrying capacity and ensure quality service to
existing residents, business owners and other current users.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 8: Infrastructure Policies 134

54. Ownership and Operation of Water System
The Town will not own or operate any portion of the water system within its planning
jurisdiction. Residents, business owners and other system users in the Sunset Beach Planning
jurisdiction will be retail customers of the Brunswick County Public Utilities water system.
55. On -going Coordination With Brunswick County Public Utilities
The Town shall continue coordination with Brunswick County to ensure that a County public
utilities capital improvement program is continually updated and adequately funded. In the
absence of adequate capital improvements timing or funding, Town policy is to insist County
water and sewer systems have adequate capacity to provide a quality service to existing Town
customers as a first priority, before committing to new growth and development.
56. Support for Public Utilities Board
The Town supports the Brunswick County public utility management policy calling for the
implementation of a countywide "public utilities board" which will include municipalities. The
"board" mission should be to improve management and oversight of the water and sewer system
by helping to better identify potential local system needs or problems, more accurately anticipate
future local demands, and equitably share system capacity.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 8: Infrastructure Policies 135

IV. Management Topic: Natural Hazards Mitigation
CAMA Natural Hazards Mitigation Goal:
"Conserve and maintain barrier dunes, beaches, flood plains, coastal wetlands and other coastal
features for their natural storm protection functions and their natural resources giving
recognition to public health, safety, and welfare issues."
Town Natural Hazards Mitigation Goals:
■ Continue to pursue the replacement of the island bridge to allow for better evacuation.
■ Reduce the erosion and flooding danger to property and human health by managing
density and structure setbacks in high hazard areas such as inlets and oceanfront beach
and dune areas.
■ Reduce flooding and water quality impacts associated with uncontrolled stormwater
runoff.
■ Reduce property damage from wind.
Objectives and Background Discussion
The jurisdiction of Sunset Beach contains both a barrier island and "mainland" or upland areas.
Given the location and elevation of barrier islands, that portion of the planning jurisdiction is at
particular risk to flooding, storm surge and wind damage. Sunset Beach is a participating
community in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) and enforces a Flood Damage
Prevention Ordinance through its Building Inspections Department. The Flood Prevention
Ordinance was adopted in the Spring of 2006 after completion of the North Carolina Floodplain
Mapping Program for the Lumber River Basin. According to historical NFIP claims data from
1978 to 2006, Sunset Beach has one of the lowest damage claim and damage payout levels for all
North Carolina communities with a beach strand. According to the new NC Floodplain
Mapping Program data, the 100-yr flood zones in the Sunset Beach planning jurisdiction are AE
and VE. Ninety-nine percent of the island is within either the VE or AE zone. The VE zone
accounts for a little over 60% of that total on the island. Throughout the entire Town
jurisdiction, the AE zone encompasses 520 acres or 7% of the total planning jurisdiction (See
Special Flood Hazards Area Map [Map 4]). The VE zone, as mentioned earlier, encompasses
roughly 3,038 acres or 43% of the planning jurisdiction (See Special Flood Hazards Area Map
[Map 4])•
In Sunset Beach, approximately 1,250 acres of the planning jurisdiction is considered to be
outside of the possible hurricane storm surge inundation area. These areas are the most inland
portions of the jurisdiction and include portions of the Sea Trail development, Ocean Ridge
Plantation and the newly annexed Wyndfall and Sandpiper Bay areas. Conversely, 40% of the
total area in the planning jurisdiction is likely to be inundated during a Category 1 or 2 hurricane,
47% in a Category 3 hurricane, and 63% of the total area in the corporate limits is likely to be
inundated in a Category 4 or 5 hurricane (See Storm Surge Inundation Map [Map 5]).
The policy statements below represent the Town's guiding principles in its future management
and pursuit of mitigating the impacts of natural hazards.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 8: Surface Water Quality Policies 136

Natural Hazards Mitigation Policy Statements
57. Hazard Mitigation Plan
The Town shall refer to its adopted Hazard Mitigation Plan for policy guidance and
recommendations on any Town restructuring, reorganizing or development of any programs
regarding the provision of emergency services, emergency services preparedness, emergency
command procedure, public awareness, or evacuation procedure.
58. Sea -level Rise
The Town of Sunset Beach will closely monitor research on sea level rise and its effects on coastal
areas. It is the policy of the Town to consider any State or Federal policies prior to issuing
specific statements regarding sea level rise and restriction of development in potentially
susceptible locations. Specifically, development within areas up to 5 feet above sea level may be
prone to sea level rise and wetland loss. The Town will respond to this issue through
implementation of Coastal Area Management regulations applicable to development within
Areas of Environmental Concern.
59. Beach Erosion
In addition to implementing its policy regarding oceanfront setbacks [See Policy 5], the Town
supports regular beach nourishment as the most practical means of balancing the public's
interest in the beach shoreline with the protection of private property investments. In the
absence of nourishment project opportunities, the Town's next policy. of choice is for the
relocation of threatened structures.
60. High Winds
Sunset Beach supports enforcement of the NC State Building Code. The Town will continue to
enforce the State Building Code for construction on barrier islands with the minimum design
standards to resist wind loads.
61. Flooding Mitigation
Sunset Beach shall remain an active participant in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP)
and is supportive of its hazard mitigation elements. Sunset Beach shall continue to enforce a
Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance in accordance with the NFIP, including a one -foot free
board requirement. Sunset Beach also supports continued enforcement of the CAMA and 404
wetlands development permit processes in areas potentially susceptible to flooding.
62. Wave Action and Shoreline Erosion
Sunset Beach supports the CAMA development setbacks for estuarine shoreline areas and the
required development standards which encourage both sustainable shoreline stabilization and
facilitation of proper drainage.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 8: Surface Water Quality Policies 137

63. Development in Hazardous Areas
The Town of Sunset Beach shall continue to discourage high -density uses, and large structures as
defined in the CAMA standards, from being constructed within the 100-year floodplain, erosion -
prone areas, and other locations susceptible to hurricane and flooding hazards.
64. Public Acquisition of Hazardous Areas
The Town of Sunset Beach shall consider purchasing parcels located in hazard areas or rendered
unbuildable by storms or other events, for the purpose of public water access and/or
conservation of open space.
65. Reduction of Yard and Construction Debris
The Town of Sunset Beach shall continue regulations requiring property owners to remove yard
debris and other loose materials, as well as requiring construction contractors to secure
unattached building materials to minimize the potential of damaging surrounding properties
during a high -wind storm event.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 8: Surface Water Quality Policies 138

V. Management Topic: Surface Water Quality
CAMA Surface Water Quality Goal:
"Maintain, protect and where possible enhance water quality in all coastal wetlands, rivers,
streams and estuaries."
Town Surface Water Quality Goals:
■ Maintain and enhance quality of life (i.e. Town's environmental health, aesthetics,
amenities, and property values).
■ Preserve, conserve, and/or otherwise protect valuable and beneficial natural resources (in
particular surface water and wetlands).
■ In conjunction with Brunswick County, implement a sewer system for the purpose of
mitigating the environmental and human health risks to the jurisdiction from out dated,
failing or over capacity on -site wastewater treatment systems.
■ In conjunction with Brunswick County, establish and maintain an adequate and effective
stormwater management system and program.
■ Evaluate, and if appropriate, incorporate Low Impact Development (LID) management
practices into Town ordinances and programs.
Objectives and Background Discussion
As discussed in the report and analysis sections of this Plan (Section 4 and Subsection 4.1.1), a
primary goal of the Town of Sunset Beach found in the 1997 Land Use Plan and as a part of this
Land Use Plan update is to preserve, conserve, and/or otherwise protect valuable and beneficial
natural resources. Policy in the Town's 1997 CAMA Land Use Plan states that the Town
supports the preservation of water quality in it estuarine and public trust waters. Town policy is
also to work with the North Carolina Division of Water Quality to identify and reduce or
eliminate the sources of pollution to area surface waters. The Town of Sunset Beach, in
conjunction with Brunswick County, has begun or will undertake certain activities that should
address some of the contributing factors to the surface water quality problems in the jurisdiction.
Those activities include:
Replacing septic systems and private package treatment plants with centralized sewer.
Requiring stormwater runoff controls and vegetative buffer and/or BMP standards for
new developments and redevelopments.
Providing education and outreach to homeowners on the effects of stormwater runoff and
how to prevent/minimize discharging pollutants on their property (i.e. resource guides on
the Town website, and public workshops).
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section S: Surface Water Quality Policies 139

Surface Water Quality Policy Statements
66. Stormwater Program
A) The Town shall continue to participate in an interlocal agreement with Brunswick
County for the implementation and administration of County stormwater regulations by
County staff within the Sunset Beach planning jurisdiction. The Town shall be
responsible for implementing legal proceedings for violations of the stormwater
regulations within its planning jurisdiction.
B) The Town supports the continuance of provisions in. the Brunswick County stormwater
regulations which exceed state minimum requirements. Those provisions include
requiring stormwater management rules for all commercial development regardless of
site size, and rules for any development activity which uses more than four inches of fill
on the site.
C) The Town shall continue to update its stormwater ordinances to remain consistent with
changes in the County stormwater ordinance.
D) The Town shall retain the option of adopting additional local stormwater related
standards if it is deemed necessary to further protect surface water quality.
67. Erosion and Sediment Control
A) The Town shall continue, at a minimum, to require the Erosion and Sedimentation
Control standards for construction activities found in the North Carolina Sedimentation
Pollution Control Act, as amended, and enforced by the North Carolina DENR, Land
Quality Section.
B) If Brunswick County implements erosion and soil standards for construction activities
that exceed the minimum requirements of the North Carolina Sedimentation and
Erosion Control Act the Town may adopt the County rules.
68. Exceeding Minimum Standards Related to Water Quality Rules
A) The Town encourages development in both the construction phase (i.e. erosion and
sedimentation control) and post -construction phase (i.e. stormwater control) to utilize
practices in excess of what is minimally required under state, federal and/or local
standards in order to maximize protection of local surface water quality.
B) To offer tangible encouragement of such development practices mentioned above, the -
Town in coordination with any interlocal agreement partner (Brunswick County) should
study the feasibility of implementing an incentive program (such as a fast -track review
and permitting process and/or waiving or reducing fees).
C) If minimum state, federal or local standards are demonstrated to be ineffective in
furthering the goal of protecting local surface water quality, and if new development fails
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 8: Surface Water Quality Policies 140

to respond to any incentives implemented to encourage exceeding minimum standards,
the Town in coordination with any applicable interlocal agreement partners shall
consider increasing the existing minimum standards required.
69. Low Impact Development (LID)
A) The Town intends to evaluate the results of Low Impact Development practices ,
implemented in the adjacent Lockwood's Folly watershed and other similar coastal
watersheds to determine its practicality for use in the Sunset Beach planning jurisdiction.
Such LID practices required may include retaining/infiltrating most of the runoff on -site,
maximizing the use of permeable pavements, reducing the amount of impervious
coverage, and clustering housing to allow a profitable development density while
maximizing open space.
B) Key to LID practicality and effectiveness, Town policy shall be to first seek to establish
coordination and interlocal agreement among local governments with jurisdiction over
land development affecting the local watershed to both support and implement LID
standards in their jurisdictions.
70. Elimination of Septic System Use
Town policy is to support the implementation of a sewer system and require the elimination of
septic system and package treatment plant use. See Policies 48,49 and Sl.
71. Septic System Decommissioning and Encouraged Re -use for Stormwater
A) When central sewer service becomes available, the Town shall require all septic systems in
use in the Town's jurisdiction to be professionally pumped -out and crushed, filled or
retrofitted to be used as a "stormwater cistern".
B) The Town prefers the re -use of appropriate septic systems as "stormwater cisterns", over
crushing or filling, as an innovative method to help capture and retain stormwater on -site.
This practice is intended to help minimize the volume of stormwater and pollutants
entering local surface waters, streets and ditches.
C) To encourage (b) above, The Town shall provide owners of septic systems with
information on how to retrofit and re -use septic systems as stormwater cisterns.
D) If and when a stormwater utility is established under Phase II stormwater rules, the Town
shall encourage Brunswick County (Phase II stormwater administrator) to apply "credits"
on any stormwater utility fees to those property owners who re -used their septic system
as a stormwater cistern.
72. Retrofitting of Existing Stormwater Drainage Systems
A) The Town supports the eventual retrofit, or elimination (where complete detention or
infiltration is feasible), of Town -owned outfalls that are not able to treat stormwater
runoff during targeted storm events. Those outfalls which carry runoff from existing
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 8: Surface Water Quality Policies 141

C)
development, including roads, through conveyances that may not adequately handle the
removal of pollutants during certain storm events shall receive prioritization for retrofit.
Testing of outfalls may be necessary to identify pollutant load, runoff volume and
appropriate retrofits.
Where complete retrofit or elimination of certain outfalls is not feasible, the Town and
Brunswick County (as Phase II stormwater administrator) shall encourage and publicize
private property practices that are intended to reduce stormwater volume and pollutant
load entering the Town's stormwater drainage system.
If the retrofit or elimination of certain outfalls is deemed feasible, the Town shall pursue
funding from the Clean Water Management Trust Fund, other water quality improvement
funding sources, or any other appropriate funding source to implement and utilize new
technology and/or install vegetated systems to provide greater infiltration, filtration,
retention and/or detention of runoff from existing development.
End ofPoAcy Statements
Section 8: Surface Water Quality Policies , 142

Section 9: Future Land Use Classification Map and Standards for the Town of Sunset Beach
The Future Land Use Classification Map is meant to visually depict the major land use and
development goals and policies to be implemented by the Town. The Map is intended to show
the community's planned future growth patterns in distinct areas (i.e. the "future land
classification areas") within the Town's planning jurisdiction. The Map also shows the planned
future boundaries of those respective areas to ensure that incompatible uses or types of
development do not encroach.
To be used in conjunction with the Future Land Use Classification Map (FLUCM) is the Future Land Use
Classification Area Development Standards Table (or FLU Table). The table lists the desired predominant
land uses and development characteristics for each respective area, as well as the intensity and
density goals and standards for each area. While the Future Land Use Classification Map and FLU
Table establish goals and policy direction for various areas in the Town's planning jurisdiction, it
shall be the Towns Official Zoning Map and Zoning Ordinance, and other supporting ordinances,
that codify the actual development regulations within the various areas of the planning
jurisdiction.
IMPORTANT NOTE: The FLUCM and FLU Table act as official Town policy statements just like
those found in Section 8. Any official land use or development related decisions made by the
Town after the adoption of this Land Use Plan are expected to be consistent with both the policy
statements in Section 8 and the development standards outlined in the FLUCM and FLU Table
(Table 40) in Section 9. Any official Town decisions that are inconsistent with the Future Land Use
Classification Map and Future Land Use Classification Area Development Standards Table must follow
Policy # 30, and if substantially inconsistent, may require a Land Use Plan amendment process
with a public hearing and a certification review by the Coastal Resources Commission.
Map 15: Future Land Use Classification Map
See Map Appendix: Map Number 15
9.1 Future Land Use Classification Area Development Standards Table
Table 40, following, outlines the key desired development standards for each individual future
land use classification area depicted on the Future Land Use Classification Map. In the FLUCM and
FLU Table, the Town has identified its standards for future growth, development and
redevelopment. Those standards include:
1. The predominant and planned land uses (i.e. residential, conservation, recreation, etc.) for
each classification area.
2. The planned density (i.e. dwelling units per acre) and intensity (i.e. height, setback, and
overall bulk) for development in each classification area.
3. The establishment of "conservation" areas and the compatible uses within those areas.
PRELIMINARY FINAL DRAFT of LUP Through 9/06/07 Section 9: Future Land Use Classification and Standards 143

Table 40: Future Land Use Classification Area Development Standards Table
■ Total Area in Planning Jurisdiction = Approximately 7,030 acres (includes recent annexation of the 530 ac Sandpiper/Wyndfall area).
■ Total Area of Planning Jurisdiction Est. to Be Above Mean High Water (MHW) Line ["not regularly inundated by tide and likely dry/buildable land"] = 4,130 acs.
■ Du/ac means the gross number of dwelling units possible/allowed per acre.
■ PRD is Planned Residential Development (PRD may allow changes in traditional lot configuration and setback to allow for avoiding sensitive areas and limiting
the scale of infrastructure needed). PRD requires a Special Use (SU) Permit.
■ SF is single-family (one unit) detached structure; DUP is Duplex (two attached units); MF is multi -family (three or more units) in a single or attached structure.
Classifi
May exceed 35 feet on the condition that it shall be set back, in addition to any other yard requirements, from the front and from each side lot line on a ratio of one
foot for every two feet of rise above 35 feet.
u L
L DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 9: Fand Use Classification and Standards 144
cation Area
.'Total Acres
Percent of Total
Permitted/
Min Lot Size
Residential Structure
Maximum
Percent of
In Classification
Planning Jurisdiction /
Spec. Uses ,
L Units per
Types Allowed
Structure
"Open Space"
Area !
Percent of Jurisdiction
(SU)
acre
Height
`Required on
Above MHW
Allowed
Development : ,
.
is
Lot
RESIDENTIAL
"Residential
19 ac
.3% of total jurisdiction;
Residential/43,560
ft /
Single-family
35 feet
85%
Very Low Density"
.5% of jurisdiction above
Agriculture/
1 du/ac
(AF-1)
estimated MHW line
Silviculture/
50 feet max.
Institutional/SU
for PRD
"Residential
50 ac
.7% of total jurisdiction;
Residential/15,000
ft /
Single-family
35 feet
35%for PRDs
Low Density"
1% of jurisdiction above
Institutional/2.9
du/ac
MR-1
estimated MHW line
SU for PRD
50 feet max.
"Residential
668* ac
9% of total jurisdiction;
Residential/10,000
ft /
Single-family
35 feet
35%for PRDs.
Medium
(Includes
13% of jurisdiction above
Institutional/4.3
du/ac
Density 1"
130 acres of inland
estimated MHW line
SU for PRD
50 feet max.
(MR-2 &z MR-2A)
water and areas
below MHW
"Residential
230 ac
3% of total jurisdiction;
Residential/
9,000 ft -
Single-family
35 feet
35%for PRDs
Medium
5% of jurisdiction above
SU for PRD
10,000 ft2 /
(including
Density 2" (MH-1)
estimated MHW line
4.3 du/ac
manufactured housing)
50 feet max.
"Residential
91 ac
1% of total jurisdiction;
Residential
SF = 7,500 ft /
Single-family/
35 feet
N/A
Medium -High
2% of jurisdiction above
5.8 du/ac;
Duplex
Density 1" (BR-1)
estimated MHW line
DUP = 7,500 ft2
11.6 du/ac
"Residential
16 ac
.2% of total jurisdiction;
Residential
9,000 ft -
Single-family
35 feet
N/A
Medium -High
.4% of jurisdiction above
10,000 ft2 /
(including
Density 2" (MH-2)
estimated MHW line
4.3-4.8 du/ac
manufactured housing)
50 feet max.

RESIDENTIAL CLASSIFICATION AREA CONT'D
!,Classification
Total Acres
Percent of Total
Permitted/ ;_
Min Lot Size / Units
Residential
Maximum
Percent of
Area,
In
Planning Jurisdiction /
Spec. Uses
per acre
Structure
Structure
"Open Space" .
,Classificcation
Percent +of Jurisdiction
(SU)
Types
Height
Required on
-• :-_.
" I
Area,
Above MHW
Allowed
Allowed
Development:
_
Lot
RESIDENTIAL
Continued
"Residential
220* ac.
3% of total jurisdiction;
Residential/
4,500 ft2 /
Single-family
35 feet
35% for PRDs
Medium -High
4% of jurisdiction above
SU for PRD
9.7 du/ac
Density 3"
(*Includes
estimated MHW line
(BR-2)
40 acres of
area below
MHW
"Residential
2,500* ac
35% of total
Residential/
SF = 7,500 ft /
Single-family/
SF =35 feet
35% for
High Density"
jurisdiction;
Institutional/
5.8 du/ac;
Duplex/
individual MF
(MR-3)
(*Includes
60% of jurisdiction
SU for PRD
Multi -family
developments
59 acres of
above estimated MHW
MF = 40,000 ft2 min.
MF = 50 feet
inland water)
line
lot, with 2,000 ft2 of
35% for PRDs
"net lot area" required
per dwelling unit /
14.7 du/ac
"Net lot area
excludes using
required 35% Open
Space oflot in
calculation oflot area
er dwe&ng unit.
TOTAL for
3 565tt ac
51% of total
RESIDENTIAL
jurisdiction;
Land Use
86% of jurisdiction
Classification
above estimated
MHW line
tt Total equals only the "land" and "area above MHW" in the areas classified residential above. The substantial inland water bodies and areas regularly
inundated by the tide were removed from the total. The formula used was 19ac + 50ac + 538ac + 230ac + 91ac +16ac + 180ac + 2,441ac = 3,565ac.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 9: Future Land Use Classification and Standards 145

MIXED USE CLASSIFICATION AREA
Classification
'Total Acres
Percent of Total
Permitted/
Min Lot Size /Units
May exceed 35 feet on the condition that it shall be set back, in addition to any other yard requirements, from the front and from each side lot line on a ratio of one foot for
every two feet of rise above 35 feet, or, may exceed 35 feet to accommodate the use of mansard, gambrel, gable, hip roofs and other architectural design without increased
setbacks.
AL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 9: Future Land Use Classification and Standards 146
per
Residential
Maximum
Percent of "Open .
ea". i i .;
In �
Planning Jurisdiction
Spec. Uses
acre
Structure
Structure
Space" Required; on '
Classification
/ Percent, of
Allowed
Types
Height
Development Lot
Aiea '
Jurisdiction Above
Allowed
MHW
MIXED USE
Mixed Use Area
36 ac
.5% of total
Commercial/20,000
ft lot per commercial
Single-
35 feet
NOTE: MF in this
(MB-2)
jurisdiction;
Office/
structure or non -multi -family
family,
district as of 2007
.9% of jurisdiction
Residential/residential
structure.
Duplex and
does not require open
above estimated MHW
Multi -family
50 feet
space (OS). The
line
Commercial/
ft MF = 40,000 2 min. lot, with
maximum
Land Use Plan is
Office and
2,000 ft2 of "net lot area"
height
recommending OS be
Residential
required per dwelling unit /
required for MF per 4
in common
14.7 du/ac
151.195 in the "Mixed
structure
Use Area" (MB-2).
"Net lot area "excludes
See Table 42 items 5 e'r 6.
using required 35% Open
Space oflotzn calculation of
lot area er dwellin unit.
Mixed Use
73 ac
1 % of total jurisdiction;
Commercial/No
minimum lot size (for
Single-
50 feet
35%for multi -family
District
2% of jurisdiction
Office/
flexibility in design)
family/
maximum
developments
(MUD)
above estimated MHW
Residential/Duplex/
height
line
Multi -family
Commercial/Office
and
Residential
in common
structure
TOTAL for
109 ac
1.5% of total
MIXED USE
jurisdiction;
Land Use
3% of jurisdiction
Cl

COMMERCIAL CLASSIFICATION AREA
Classification
:
Total Acres
Percent of Total
Permitted/
Min Lot Size / Units per
Residential
Maximum
Percent of "Open
Area
Iri }
Planning Jurisdiction
Spec. Uses
acre
Structure
Structure
Space" Required on
{
Classification
/Percent of
Allowed
Types
Height
Development Lot
Area
Jurisdiction Above
Allowed
MHW
,COMMERCIAL
"Tourist
18 ac
3% of total
Commercial
Comm. = 4,500 ft /
Single-
35 feet
NOTE: MF in this
Commercial
jurisdiction;
/Office/
9.7 u/ac
family/
district as of 2007 does
Area"
.4% of jurisdiction
Residential
Multi -family
not require min. lot size.
(BB-1)
above estimated MHW
SF = 4,500 ft2 /
The Land Use Plan is
line
9.7 du/ac north of Main St.
(MF restricted
recommending
5.8 du/ac south of Main St.
to areas north
potential MF density be
of Main St.)
reduced by requiring a
minimum lot size
and/or lot area per
dwelling unit in the
"Tourist Commercial
Area" (BB-1).
See Table 42 item 7.
"Regional/Local
67 ac
1% of total jurisdiction;
Commercial
Comm. = 6,000 ft /
Single-
35 feet
NOTE: MF in this
Commercial
1.6% of jurisdiction
/Office/
7.3 u/ac
family/
district as of 2007 does
Area"
above estimated MHW
Residential
Multi -family
not require open space
(MB-1)
line
SF=15,000 ft2 / 2.9 du/ac
50 feet
(OS). The Land Use
maximum
Plan is recommending
MF = 40,000 ft2 min. lot,
height
OS be required for MF
with 2,000 ft2 of "net lot
per 4151.195 in the
area" required per dwelling
"Regional/Local Comm.
unit /14.7 du/ac
Area" (MB-1).
"Net lot area" excludes
See Table 42items4& 6.
using required 35% Open
Space oflotin calculation of
lot area per dweNng unit.
TOTAL for
85 ac
1.3% of total juris.;
COMMERCIAL
2% of jurisdiction
Land Use
above estimated
Classification
MHW line
May exceed 35 feet on the condition that it shall be set back, in addition to any other yard requirements, from the front and from each side lot line on a ratio of one foot for
every two feet of rise above 35 feet.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 9: Future Land Use Classification
147

INSTITUTIONAL/RECREATIONAL CLASSIFICATION AREA and CONSERVATION CLASSIFICATION AREA
Classification Area Total Acres
In Classification,
Area 11
„I
J
INSTITUTIONAL/
Percent of Total Permitted/ Min Lot
Planning Jurisdiction Spec. Uses (SU) Size / Units
/ Percent of, Allowed per acre
Jurisdiction Above
MHW
Residential
Maximum Structure
Percent of
Structure
Height
"Open Space"
Types
Required on
Allowed
Development
Lot
Institutional and 7.5 ac .1% of total Institutional 15,000 ft` / N/A 35 feet T N/A
Recreational Area jurisdiction; Public Facilities/ 2.9 u/ac
(RI-1) .2% of jurisdiction Recreation/ 50 feet maximum height
above estimated SU for
MHW line Telecomm
Utilities
t May exceed 35 feet on the condition that it shall be set back, in addition to any other yard requirements, from the front and from each side lot line on a ratio of one foot for
every two feet of rise above 35 feet.
Classification Area
:Total Acres
Percent of Total
Permitted/
Min Lot Size /
Residential
Maximum.
-Percent of
'
' In Classification
Planning Jurisdiction
Spec. Uses
Units per acre
Structure
Structure Height
"Open Space"
Area
/ Percent of
Allowed
Types
Required on
Jurisdiction Above
Allowed
Development
MHW
Lot
CONSERVATION
Conservation
2,725 ac
38% of total
Habitat
*43,560 ft /
Single-
35 feet
30% of lot
Reserve
jurisdiction;
Conservation/
1 du/ac
family
must be left
(CR-1)
(Of which,18.5 ac
.4% of jurisdiction
Residential
uncovered
estimated above
above estimated
*Must include a
from
MHW)
MHW line
minimum of Y
impervious
acre of net
surfaces
buildable area per
lot.
OTHER CLASSIFICATION AREA
Rights -of Way (e.g.
340 ac
1% of total
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
streets)
jurisdiction; 8% of
jurisdiction above
estimated MHW line
DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Section 9: Future Land Use Classification
148

Breakdown of the percent of land in the jurisdiction allocated to the various land use
classification areas identified in the Future Land Use Classification Area Development Criteria Table:
Classification Area by General Land Use
Percent of Land Use in Area of
jurisdiction Above MHW
Residential
86.3%
Mixed Use
3%
Commercial
2%
Institutional/Recreational
0.2%
Conservation
0.4% (does not include public beach
strand
Rights -of -Way
8.10/0
TOTAL
100%
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Section 9: Future Land Use Classification and Standards 149

Section 10: Tools for Managing Development
The Tools for Managing Development Section provides:
1) A description of the role the policies and goals of the Land Use Plan shall play in determining
the approval, rejection and/or scale of development projects;
2) A description of the Town's current development management and regulation program;
3) A description of additional tools used to implement the polices of the Land Use Plan; and
4) An Action Schedule for setting an implementation timeframe for the Town's priority goals
and policies.
10.1 Role and Status of the Plan
The Town Land Use Plan is a guiding tool that establishes the desired direction for land use and
development in the community. Although the statements and policies in the Land Use Plan do not
have the authority of an ordinance or regulation, many state and federal decisions on permitting local
actions/projects rest on a determination of consistency with the Town's Land Use Plan. Such state
permitting decisions include CAMA major permits (see Section 1.4) issued by the Division of Coastal
Management. The Town's securing of state or federal grant/loan funding may also be contingent
upon review of consistency with the Town's Land Use Plan, and to whether the Town's policies are
adequate to meet state and federal standards regarding funded projects (e.g. beach nourishment and
public access).
In addition, any future Town zoning ordinance and/or map amendments to accommodate
development projects must also be evaluated for their consistency with this Land Use Plan. Any
Town decisions to amend zoning regulations must be evaluated, even if they do not relate to a land
use, dimensional standard, or area that is not under the purview of state or federal permitting.
Section 7 of Session Law 2005-426, which amended North Carolina General Statute 160A-383,
requires that planning board review of zoning amendments include a written statement on the
consistency of the proposed amendment with the Land Use Plan, as well as any other relevant plans
(such as a small area plan, transportation plan, stormwater master plan, etc.) that have been adopted
by the Town's governing board. The statute does include provisions that allow the Town's governing
board to proceed and adopt proposed zoning amendments in which the planning board may
determine to be inconsistent with adopted plans, if the Town governing board can provide a
statement as to why the action taken is reasonable, necessary and in the public interest. The Town's
governing board is required to adopt such a statement on plan consistency or inconsistency before
adopting or rejecting any zoning amendment.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Phase II Section 10 Tools for Managing Development 150

10.1.1 Intended Uses of the Plan
In addition to the above in 10.1, when adopted by the Town governing board and certified by the
Coastal Resources Commission, the Land Use Plan shall also be used for the following:
• The approval of routine and major developments (including redevelopments) shall be
consistent with the policy direction and goals of the Land Use Plan.
• Amendments to development related ordinances (e.g. rezoning petitions), conditional
use permit review, as well as creation and approval of new ordinances shall be consistent
with the policy direction and goals of the Land Use Plan.
• The approval of capital improvements (e.g. water, sewer, and stormwater systems, etc.),
and related projects, shall be consistent with and prioritized based on the policy
direction and goals of the Land Use Plan.
• Town Administration/Planning Staff shall consult the Plan and use it as a basis for
making recommendations to the planning board and the Town governing board in such
actions as development approval and ordinance amendments. If the proposed
development or amendment is in conflict with the policy direction or goals of the Land
Use Plan, staff shall notify the planning board and the Town governing board of the
possible inconsistency. [See also the discussion of Session Law 2005-426
previously].
In reference to carrying out the above, the policy statements andgoals of the Land UsePlan can be found in Sections
S. 0 - 8.3. Also refer to Section 9 and Map 15 The Future Land Use Classi cation Map for policy
guidance. In addition, a moregeneral statement of policy direction can be found in Section 2.3.Town's Vision
Statement
In addition to the Town Planning Board and Town Council, the Land Use Plan may also be
used by:
The Public - The Land Use Plan shall be available to any interested member of the public.
The Plan can inform the public of the direction and future of their community and give
them a sense of knowing and understanding what is going on. Public knowledge of the
goals and policies of the Land Use Plan will also assist the public in forming support or
opposition for actions in their community.
■ Landowners and Developers - The Land Use Plan provides developers and landowners
with guidance and expectations on the types of land uses and development that are
desired by the community. Knowledge of expectations and possible requirements of
development will aid developers and land owners in preparing sound proposals and plans
which will be more likely to be approved by Town officials in a more time -efficient
manner. The Land Use Plan and its mapping and analysis can also provide landowners
and developers with general information that could make them aware of possible
capabilities and limitations of their property.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Phase II Section 10 Tools for Managing Development 151

Town Staff - Town staff, beyond the Administration/Planning Department, can use the
plan as a tool for evaluating project proposals (such as new public access sites or bike
paths) and for preparing plans for public facilities and infrastructure (such as
stormwater system upgrades). Town Staff could also use the plan and its policies and
goals when preparing its budget requests and recommendations, and make reference to
the plan when preparing applications for grants and other assistance.
Area jurisdictions - Local jurisdictions that may be affected, either positively or
negatively, by actions of Sunset Beach can use the plan to understand and predict the
intents and purposes behind such actions. Area jurisdictions may also want to
coordinate with the Town on achieving certain common goals, or in implementing
similar policies. Such common goals could be the improvement of surface water quality in
the local watershed which includes multiple jurisdictions.
10.1.2 Amendment of the Land Use Plan
In addition to amending Town zoning regulations, the Town's Land Use Plan may be amended if
situations arise where the Land Use Plan becomes in conflict with new local, state or federal policy
needs (consult NCAC 7B Section .0900 for Amendment Rules, which can also be found at
http://dcm2.enr.state.nc.us/Rules/Text/tl5a-07b.0900.pdf ). The scope of the amendment procedure is
related to the scope of the amendment. In other words, minor updates or minor changes in policy
require minor amendment procedures, whereas substantial amendments to Town policy will require
substantial amendment procedures such as public hearings, review by the Division of Coastal
Management and other agencies and jurisdictions, and recertification by the Coastal Resources
Commission.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Phase II Section 10 Tools for Managing Development 152

10.2 Staff Flow Chart for Determining Consistency of Development Proposals and Ordinance
Amendments
The following flow chart is an example of the process by which Town Staff may determine
consistency of local development and regulatory decisions with the policy direction and goals of
the Land Use Plan.
Staff receives request to review
development proposal or amendment
1
Staff identifies which policies and/or goals (Sections 8, 9 and Map 16) are key
(both pro and con) to the development proposal or ordinance amendment
Staff determines based on available information and direction derived
from the Plan, whether the development proposal or ordinance
amendment is consistent or in conflict with the intent of the Land Use
Plan. (Staff discretion in interpreting consistency may be necessary in
cases where adequate information is lacking and/or in cases where
policy direction may be open-ended with the intent of allowing
flexibility for case -by -case determinations on unique development
proposals or ordinance amendments)
Staff documents in their Staff reviews Policy Impact Analysis
recommendation report the key (both (See Appendix IV) to determine if the
pro and con) policies and goals key policies in support of the
development proposal or ordinance
amendment will negatively Impact
any other goals or policies
Staff documents in their recommendation report any
applicable mitigation measures that may need to be
considered if the proposal is approved .
Staff recommendation report goes to Planning Board and/or Town
governing board (whichever is applicable) for decision -making
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Phase Il Section 10 Tools for Managing Development 153

10.3 Existing Development Program
The Town Code of Ordinances contains all the local ordinances and many of the regulations used by
the Town to manage growth and development. Some of the primary ordinances, regulations and
plans regarding land use management are listed in Table 41 below.
Table 41: Existing Development Program
Ordinances/Regulations
Responsible Department
Zoning Ordinance
Administration/Planning/Inspections*
■ Land Use and Structural Dimension
Standards
■ Density and Intensity Restrictions
■ Open Space Requirements
■ Landscape/Tree Removal Restrictions
■ Parking Regulations
Subdivision Ordinance
Administration/Plannin Ins ections*
Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance
Administration/Plannin Ins ections*
CAMA Local Permitting Officer Authority
Inspections
Building Code (State Building Code)
Inspections
• Filling, Grading and Excavating
• Relocation/Demolition of Structures
Water and Sewer Use Ordinance
Administration
Stormwater Regulations
Administration/Planning/Inspections*
• Stormwater Management
• Illicit Discharge
Beaches and Waterways Regulations
Administration/Planning/Inspections'
• Dune Protection
• Personal Watercraft Safety
• Obstruction of Canals
• Unattended Property on Beach Strand
Nuisance Ordinance
Administration
• Noise and Weeds, Grass and Refuse
Adopted Plans
CAMA Land Use Plan
Administration/Plannin Ins ections*
Hazard Mitigation Plan
Administration /Contains Implementation
Measures for All Departments
Emergency Operations Plan
Administration /Contains Implementation
Measures for All Departments
1 he 1 own of Sunset beach currently does not have a tormal Planning Department. The planning duties (including
development plan review, zoning administration, code enforcement, and building inspections, etc.) are carried out by the
Town Administrator, Town administration staff and the Building Inspector.
10.3.1 Existing Development Program in Implementing the LUP Policies and Goals
See Appendix V for a table describing how the existing ordinances and plans will assist in
implementing the policies and goals of CAMA and the Land Use Plan.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Phase II Section 10 Tools for Managing Development 154

10.4 Additional Tools for Managing Development
In addition to the existing development management program described in subsection 10.3, the
Town may seek to establish additional programs or plans, or amend existing ordinances, to address
currently unmet and/or future needs. Acquisition programs for the purchase of land for public uses
or for infrastructure improvements may also be used as an additional tool for managing
development. Some of those additional tools, their estimated implementation date and the
responsible department for overseeing the development of those tools are listed in Table 42 below.
Tnl,lP fnr TmnlPmPntinor Additional Manauement Tools
Ordinances/Regulations
To be Done in
Fiscal Year
Department
Responsibility
Zoning Ordinance Amendments*
FY 10-11
Administration
1. Re -zone parcels currently used in a golf course field of play
from MR-3 to "AF-1" or other zone with one acre minimum
lot size, with allowable Planned Residential Developments
as a Conditional Use if it meets the intent of Policy 19 (B) of
the Land Use Plan.
2. Text Amendment to Section 151.191(B) to include allowing
FY 10-11
Administration
duplex in the MR-3 zoning district.
3. Text Amendment to Section 151.003 to change the
FY 10-11
Administration
definition of multi -family to specifically refer to a structure
as classified as multi -family if it contains "three or more
attached units" on a single parcel.
4. Text Amendment to Section 151.213 (B) (2) to add Section
FY 10-11
Administration
151.195 (A) (1) to the listing of required standards for multi-
family developments in the MB-1 zoning district.
5. Text Amendment to Section 151.218 to add reference to
Section 151.195 (A) (1) as a requirement for multi -family
FY 10-11
Administration
developments in the MB-2 zoning district.
6. Text Amendment to 4153.193 (I) to change density
requirement to reference "net" property area instead of
F' 10-11
Administration
"gross" property area. The definition of "net" property area
shall exclude counting the lot's required 35% open space as
part of the total buildable lot area when determining the
required lot area per unit. Example. a 40,000 f tZ lot would have a
total buildable lot area of 26,000ft when factoring out the required
open space lot area.
7. Establish standards for density, open space, access
management, architectural, landscaping, and types of
allowable uses to establish an "island gateway" in the BB-1.
10-11
Administration
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Phase II Section 10 Tools for Managing Development 155

Ordinances/Regulations
To be Done in
Fiscal Year
Department
Responsibility
Stormwater Management Ordinance Amendments
FY 10-11
Administration
(in conjunction with County)
S. Incorporate Phase II NPDES coastal rules
9. Consider requiring use of permeable surfaces for
driveways, Parking spaces and other related
structures
10. Consider Stormwater Utility
11. Consider using decommissioned septic systems as
stormwater/rain retention cisterns
12. Sewer Use Ordinance (in conjunction with County)
FY 10-11
Administration
b. To include requirement that mandatory
connection apply for all private wastewater
treatments stems in the Town.
10.5 Action Schedule
The Action Schedule is a listing of the priority actions the Town has set to accomplish in the planning
period of this Land Use Plan (typically 5-6 years). The `actions' to implement are derived from the goals
and policy statements of the Land Use Plan. Actions may be added to the list in the future if situations
change or new needs arise. The Action Schedule should be referenced with subsection 10.4: Additional
Tools for Managing Development and Table 42: Scheduled Additional Management Tools which show the
expected ordinance amendments intended to assist in reaching the goals and policies found in the
Action Schedule and the Land Use Plan in general. Finally, the Action Schedule will be used as the
benchmark to prepare a CAMA required implementation status report every two years for the life of
the plan, beginning upon the Coastal Resources Commission's certification of the Town's Land Use
Plan (see North Carolina Administrative Code 15A 7L .0511).
Note: A 2-year implementation status report must be submitted to the NCDCM (North Carolina
Division of Coastal Management) within two years following certification by the Coastal Resources
Commission.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Phase II Section 10 Tools for Managing Development 156

Tnhle 41- Artinn Srheclnle
Action
Management
Responsible
2007-
2008-
2010-
2011-
2012-
To is Goal
Entity
2008
2009
2011
2012
2013
1. Continue Expanding Public
Administration
-
Participation in Land Use Planning.
2. Revise portions of the Zoning
Land Use
Administration
Ordinance to address internal
Compatibility
consistency and to implement LUP
goals and policies. See Table 42 for
detailed list of recommended
amendments.
3. Construct sewer system to serve
Water Quality/
Administration
platted/developable areas (eliminate
Infrastructure
septic system and package treatment
Carrying
use).
Capacity
4. Revise stormwater management
Water Quality
Administration
regulations to incorporate Phase II
rules, and consider permeable surface
provisions, LID and other
management recommendations of
County stormwater planning.
5. Consider Establishing a Local
Water Quality
Administration
Watershed Planning Group.
Coordinate with adjacent
jurisdictions and state agencies.
7. Pursue mechanisms to preserve the
Land Use
Administration
' ;'
N''R
existing 18-hole golf courses.
Compatibility
0 = ..
0
0
0.
O
8. Conduct Bicycle and Pedestrian
Land Use
Administration
oo
eo "
eo
to`
facilities planning to increase
Compatibility/
o
0
0
0
0
interconnectivity and access.
Infrastructure
Carrying
O
O
O
O
O
Capacity
9. Implement public parking and
Public Access/
Administration
p ublic access enhancements as
Land Use
",
o'o
b
required by beach nourishment
Compatibility
bo `
funding or other grant funding.
O
O
O
0
O
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Phase II Section 10 Tools for Managing Development 157

Section 11: Conclusion
This Land Use Plan (LUP) contains the adopted goals and policies for the Town of Sunset Beach which
are to be implemented and followed over the next five to ten year planning period (from the date of
LUP certification by the CRC), and beyond if an update is not conducted within 10 years. The intent of
the policies and actions detailed in this plan are to be carried out in good faith by current and future
elected officials and Town staff. Any public decisions by Town officials regarding growth and
development (e.g. re -zonings, land use related ordinance revisions, conditional use permits, capital
improvement projects, public grants, etc.) are to remain consistent with the policies, goals and
objectives in this plan. To allow flexibility if circumstances or community preferences change, the Land
Use Plan can be updated or amended. Current Land Use Plan updates are conducted through a grant
from the Division of Coastal Management and are on a seven to ten year cycle, which is primarily
determined by funding availability. The Town may undertake an amendment of the Land Use Plan at
any time, but must follow the regulations found in North Carolina Administrative Code Title 15A,
Chapter 7, Subchapter 7B, Section .0900-.0901.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Conclusion 158

Town of Sunset Beach CAMA Land Use Plan
Appendix
Appendix I: Community Land Use and Development Survey
Appendix II: Citizen Participation Plan (Phase I and II)
Appendix III: County Water System Master Plan - Program of Construction Table
Appendix IV: Policy Impact Analysis Table
Appendix V: Existing Development Program in Implementing the Policies and
Goals of the Land Use Plan
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Appendix 159

Appendix I: Community Land Use and Development Survey
TOWN OF SUNSET BEACH CAMA LAND USE PLAN SURVEY
The Town of Sunset Beach is currently updating its 1997 CAMA Land Use Plan with a grant received from
the NC Division of Coastal Management. This opportunity allows town officials and citizens to plan for the
future of Sunset Beach. As a first step in this process, the Town Council and Land Use Plan Steering
Committee are surveying all residents and property owners to gather opinions on the desired direction for
the community. Your opinion could help shape the future of the Town. UPON COMPLETION OF THE
SURVEY, PLEASE PLACE IN A STAMPED ENVELOPE AND MAIL BY DECEMBER 15, 2006 TO
"TOWN OF SUNSET BEACH SURVEY", 700 SUNSET BOULEVARD N., SUNSET BEACH, NC 28468,
OR YOU MAY ALSO DROP OFF THE SURVEY AT TOWN HALL. Information on the progress of the
CAMA Land Use Plan can be found at Town Hall or the Town website: http://www.sunsetbeachnc.gov/.
1. Please check your residency status and state the number of months of the year that you live at
your Sunset Beach residence.
Type of Residency
(Please check the most applicable
status)
Check
Residency
Status
Number of Months
Reside At
Sunset Beach
Average Number of
Household
Residents/Occupants
Year-round Resident
Seasonal/Second Home
Property Owner or Resident
Business Owner/Resident
Business Owner/Non-Resident
2. Do you feel that growth and development in Sunset Beach is happening...
1) Too fast 2) Just about right 3) Too slow 4) Sunset Beach has had enough growth
Why? (briefly)
3. Do you feel that the summer seasonal population and tourist population...
1) Exceeds town capacity 2) Is about right 3) Is low compared to other coastal towns
Why? (briefly)
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Appendix I: Community Land Use and Development Survey 160

4. The Town is made up of two distinct geographic areas (island and mainland), what type of
development should be encouraged or discouraged on the island and mainland portions of Town?
Please leave blank if you have no preference.
Type of Development
ISLAND
MAINLAND
Encouraged
Disco ura ed
Encoura ed
Discouraged
Single-family Residential
Duplexes
Multi-family/Condominiums
Mobile Homes
Hotels and Motels
Restaurants
Retail and Services
Recreation
5. What do you think are the most important issues facing Sunset Beach? Rank each item
according to the following scale: 5 = Major Issue 3 = Minor Issue 0 = Not an Issue
Type of Buildings Allowed on the Island Redevelopment of Existing Structures
Growth Management and Regulation Traffic Congestion and Management
Environmental Protection Beach Renourishment
Housing Types Being Developed (e.g. Multi family) Beach Access and Parking
Types of Commercial Development Public Boat Access
Sewer and Water Capacity Annexation
Managing Stormwater Runoff Other Issues:
Density of Development
6. What in your opinion is the most important issue facing the Town of Sunset Beach and why
(briefly)?
7. What is your vision for Sunset Beach by 2015? (Please Circle One Choice)
To develop as a small -scaler residential community
To develop as a large-scale2 residential community
To develop as a small-scale tourist resort area
To develop as a large scale tourist resort area
To develop as a small-scale golfing/retirement community
To develop as a large-scale golfing/retirement community
Other/Combination or variation of
above:
'Small-scale means allowing for limited population growth through lower density residential and commercial buildings,
and limited height of buildings.
2Large-scale means allowing for higher population growth through higher density residential and commercial buildings,
and a wider range of height in buildings.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Appendix I: Community Land Use and Development Survey 161

Original Memo Sent on Company Letterhead
MEMO
To: Linda Fluegel, Town Administrator
From: Scott Logel, Cape Fear Council of Governments
Date: February 22, 2007
Re: 2006/2007 CAMA Land Use Plan Survey Tabulated Responses
Attached are the tabulated responses of the 2006/2007 Land Use Plan survey.
The following pages contain:
1. The tabulated responses of all survey responses received (pages 1 and 2)
2. The tabulated responses of the surveys received from year-round residents (pages 3
and 4)
3. The tabulated responses of the surveys received from non-residents (pages 5 and 6).
Summary of Survey Highlights
• The survey was mailed to all properties (tax parcels) in the Town limits and ETJ between November
and December 2006.
• The total number of surveys mailed was 3,656.
• There were 1,146 surveys returned (31% return rate).
• There were 427 surveys returned from year-round residents (37% of the total
returned). 427 is approximately 20% of the Town's total permanent population.
Note: Only one survey sent per household/address not per person. In other words, 427 surveys
likely means 427 households with one or more people contributing to the completion of the survey.
• There were 719 surveys returned from non-residents (63% of the total
returned).
• The surveys were'voluntary response' and were intended to be a wide -spread method
of gathering public opinion on a few key land -use and growth related topics.
• The results on the following pages indicate that there was a substantial majority
opinion among those who responded to the survey for discouraging multi -family
housing.
• The results on the following pages indicate that there was a substantial majority
opinion among those who responded to the survey for developing the Town over the
next ten years with structures and amenities that are consistent with a "small-scale"
Town characteristic.
• The results on the following pages also indicate that there was a substantial majority
opinion among those who responded to the survey for closely managing growth and
development which includes building heights, uses and densities.
Please see the following pages for a tabulation of the responses.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Appendix I: Community Land Use and Development Survey 162

Results of All Surveys (Both Resident and Non -Resident)
Question: Do you feel that growth and development in Sunset Beach is happening...
Too Fast
479
42%
just About Right
333
29%
Too Slow
31
3%
Town Has Had Enough Growth
280
24%
No Response to Question
18
20/6
TOTAL
11,146
Question: Do you feel that the summer seasonal population and tourist population...
Exceeds Town Capacity
437
38%
just About Right
620
54%
Is Low In Comparison to Other Beaches
41
40/6
No Response to question
48
(40/6)
TOTAL
11,146
Question: What type of development should be encouraged or discouraged on the island and mainland
portions of Town?
Island
Mainland
Type of
Development
Encouraged
Discouraged
No
Response
Encouraged
' Discouraged
No
Response
Single-family
Residential
855 (75%)
129 (11%)
162 (14%)
875 (76%)
53 (5%)
218 (19%)
Duplexes
300 26%
670 59%
176 15%
409 360/6
439 ° 38%
298 26%
Multi -family
54 5%
920 80%
172(15%)
221 19%
649 57%
276(24%)
Mobile Homes
6 0.5%
966 849/6
174 15%
76 70/6
789 69%
281(24%)
Hotels and
Motels
84 (7%)
-888 (77%)
174 (15%)
254 (22%)
595 (520/by
297 (26%)
Restaurants
415 36%
516 45%
215 19%
792 69%
134' 12%
220 19%
Retail and
Services
284 (25%)
J90_(529/q)_
272 (24%)
718 (63%) __
163 (14%)_
265_(23%)
Recreation
538 47%
"36T 329/0 "~""
241(21%)
771 67%
`118` 10% ":'.
257 (22%
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Appendix I: Community Land Use and Development Survey 163

Question: What in your opinion is the most important issue facing the Town of Sunset Beach and
why?
Densi /Hei ht and Growth Management
Question: What is your vision for Sunset Beach by 2015?
END OF QUESTIONS
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Appendix I: Community Land Use and Development Survey 164
536
47%
Sewer
167
15%
Bride
125
11%
Traffic
65
6%
Environmental Protection and Stormwater
47
(4%)
Infrastructure in General
23
2%
Beach/Water Access and Parkin
25
2%
Community Cooperation
17
1.5%
Fire/Emergency Services
6
0.5%
Town Fiscal Responsibility
3
0.3%
Re -development of Run-down Structures
3
0.3%
More Input from Non -Residents
3
0.3%
Code Enforcement
2
0.2%
Fairly Promoting Growth
2
0.2%
Morejobs
2
0.2%
Impact Fees
2
0.2%
Trash Pick-up
1
0.05%
No Response to Question
117
10%
TOTAL
1,146
Small-scale Residential
434
38%
Small-scale Retirement/Golfing
192
17%
Small-scale Tourist Resort
185
16%
Small-scale Residential and Tourist
106
9%
Small-scale Residential and Retirement
72
6%
Small-scale
Residential/Retirement/Tourist
47
(4%)
Large-scale Retirement/Golfing
33
3%
Large-scale Residential
28
2%
Large-scale Tourist Resort
12
1%
Medium Scale Residential
5
0.4%
Large-scale Residential and Retirement
4
0.4%
No Response to Question
28
2%
TOTAL
1,146

Year -Round Resident Responses Only
Question: Do you feel that growth and development in Sunset Beach is happening...
Too Fast
225
53%
just About Right
108
25%
Too Slow
10
2%
Town Has Had Enough Growth
79
19%
No Response to Question
5
(1%)
TOTAL
427
Question: Do you feel that the summer seasonal population and tourist population...
Exceeds Town Capacity
161
37%
just About Right
238
56%
Is Low In Comparison to Other Beaches
17
4%
No Response to question
11
(3%)
TOTAL
1427
Question: What type of development should be encouraged or discouraged on the island and mainland
portions of Town?
Island
Mainland
Type of
Development
Encouraged
Discouraged
No
Res onse
Encouraged
Discouraged
No
Res onse
Single-family
Residential
294 (69%)
59 (14%)
74 (17%)
336 (79%)
27- (6%)
64 (16%)
Duplexes
124 29%
193 45%
110 26%
142 33%
181 42%
104 25%
Multi -family
23 50/6
339 79%
65 16%
42 10%
299 70%
86 20%
Mobile Homes
4 1%
349 82%
74 (17%)
21 5%
314 74 0
92 21%
Hotels and
Motels
42 (10%)
312 (73%)
73 (17%)
80 (19%)
236`(55%)
111(26%)
Restaurants
174 41%
163 38%
90(21%)
280 66%
63` 15%
84 19%
Retail and
Services
123 (29%)
_191(459/6) _ µ.
111(26%)
251(59%) _
_7.1_(17%)� wT
105 (24%)
Recreation
1228 53%
7103" 240/6_
96 23%
298 70%
-39 90/6.;
90 21%
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10

Question: What in your opinion is the most important issue facing the Town of Sunset Beach and
why?
Density/Height and Growth Management
181
42%
Sewer
72
170
Traffic
38
9%
Bride
29
7%
Environmental Protection and Stormwater
17
(40/6)
Infrastructure in General
17
40/6°
Beach/Water Access and Parkin
10
2%
Community Cooperation
9
2%
Fire/Emergency Services
4
10/6
Town Fiscal Responsibility
3
10/6
Re-development of Run-down Structures
3
10/6
Fairly Promoting Growth
2
.5%
Morejobs
2
.5%
Impact Fees
2
.5%
No Response to 2uestion
38 (9%)
TOTAL
1427
Question: What is your vision for Sunset Beach by 2015?
Small-scale Residential
151
35%
Small-scale Retirement/Golfing
114
27%
Small-scale Tourist Resort
38
9%
Small-scale Residential and Retirement
34
8%
Small-scale Residential and Tourist
28
7%
Small-scale
Residential/Retirement/Tourist
18
(40/6)
Large-scale Residential
15
3.5%
Large-scale Retirement/Golfing
10
2%
Large-scale Tourist Resort
4
10/6
Large-scale Residential and Retirement
2
0.5%
No Response to question
13
(3%)
TOTAL
1427
END OF QUESTIONS
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Appendix I: Community Land Use and Development Survey 166

Non -Resident Responses Only (seasonal residents property owners, and business owners)
Question: Do you feel that growth and development in Sunset Beach is happening...
Too Fast
254
35%
just About Right
225
31%
Too Slow
21
3%
Town Has Had Enough Growth
201
28%
No Response to 2uestion
18
(30/6)
TOTAL
719
Question: Do you feel that the summer seasonal population and tourist population...
Exceeds Town Capacity
276
38%
just About Right
382
53%
Is Low In Comparison to Other Beaches
24
3%
No Response to question
1 37
(5%)
TOTAL
1719
Question: What type of development should be encouraged or discouraged on the island and
mainland portions of Town?
Island
Mainland
Type of,
Development
Encouraged
Discouraged
No
Encouraged
Discourage,
d
No
Response
.Response
Single-family
Residential
561(78%)
70 (10%) '
88 (12%)
539 (75%)
26 (4%) =
154 (21%)
Duplexes
176 24%
477 66%
66 9%
267 37%
258, 36%
194(27%)
Multi-famil
31 40/6
581 81%
107 15%
179 25%
350 49%
190 26%
Mobile
Homes
2 (0.3%)
617, (86%)
100 (13%)
55 (80/6)
475 (66%) ''
189 (26%)
Hotels and
Motels
42 (60/0)
576 ,(800/o), . ,
101(14%)
174 (24%)
359 (50%)
186 (26%)
Restaurants
241 34%
35__ 49%a _
125 17%
512 71%
Zl 1Q%
136 19%
Retail and
Services
161(22%)
397; (550/p) ,
161(22%)
467 (65%)
92 (130/b)
160 (22%)
Recreation
310 43%
264 37% :$.
145 20%)
473 66%
79,(11%
167 23%)
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
APPCHU1X 1. %-U1LU11U111LY L"d11U UJC A11U 1lCVC1U1J111C11L Jul VCy 1v/

Question: What in your opinion is the most important issue facing the Town of Sunset Beach and
whys
Density/Height and Growth Management
355
49%
Bride
96
13%
Sewer
95
130/6
Environmental Protection and Stormwater
30
40/6
Traffic
27
40/6
Beach/Water Access and Parkin
15
20/6
Community Cooperation
8
10/0
Infrastructure in General
6
0.8%
More Input from Non -Residents
3
0.40/6
Fire/Emergency Services
2
0.2%
Code Enforcement
2
0.2%
Trash Pick-up
1
0.10/0
Town Fiscal Responsibility
0
No Response to question
79 (11%)
TOTAL
719
Question: What is your vision for Sunset Beach by 2015?
Small-scale Residential
283
39%
Small-scale Tourist Resort
147
20%
Small-scale Retirement/Golfing
78
110
Small-scale Residential and Tourist
78
11%
Small-scale Residential and Retirement
38
50/6
Small-scale
Residential/Retirement/Tourist
29
(40/6)
Large-scale Retirement/Golfing
23
3%
Large-scale Residential
13
2%
Large-scale Tourist Resort
8
10/0
Medium-scale Residential
5
0.7%
Large-scale Residential and Retirement
2
0.2%
No Response to Question
15
(2%)
TOTAL
1719
END OF QUESTIONS
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Appendix I: Community Land Use and Development Survey 168

Appendix II: Citizen Participation Plan
CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PLAN
TOWN OF SUNSET BEACH
CAMA CORE LAND USE PLAN
PHASE I
I. Introduction
The Town of Sunset Beach is beginning the development of a Core Land Use Plan (LUP) under the
North Carolina Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA). Land use planning provides one of the best
opportunities for public involvement in the NC Coastal Management Program, and the CAMA planning
program emphasizes public participation in the planning process. Interested citizens and nonresident
property owners will have an opportunity to help shape the policies that will impact the growth of the
Town in the future and guide CAMA permit decisions in the community.
Coordination and discussion with other municipalities and County officials on policy matters will be a
part of this process. All socio-economic, ethnic, and cultural viewpoints will be considered through the
plan review and revision process. To the fullest extent possible, persons representing diverse
viewpoints will be identified and specifically notified and asked for their input.
II. Purpose of Citizen Participation Plan
This Citizen Participation Plan (CPP) has been prepared to describe a process by which the public will
be encouraged to participate in the planning process leading to the revision of the Town of Sunset Beach
CAMA Core LUP. This Citizen Participation Plan has been designed to meet the requirements for
public participation as outlined in 15A NCAC 7L.0506. It is the intent of the process described herein
that the public would have ample opportunity to become a meaningful part of the planning process.
This plan addresses the following objectives.
1. To share information about the CAMA planning process and its requirements;
2. To increase the community's understanding of the impact that land use and development
issues have on quality of life;
3. To provide opportunities for the residents and property owners to participate in the
identification of land use and development policies and to assess the impact of the policies
on the community; and
4. To provide a forum where all economic, social, ethnic and cultural viewpoints will be
considered throughout the land use process.
Views gathered as a part of this process will be informative and instructional for citizens of the Town of
Sunset Beach, interested parties, and the Town's elected and appointed Boards. Interested citizens shall
have an opportunity to participate in the development of the CAMA Core LUP through oral and written
comments as provided for in the Citizen Participation Plan. Copies of informational CAMA Core LUP
materials shall be provided at all meetings, available at a designated area of Town Hall, via an email list
serve or upon request by members of the public. The Citizen Participation Plan shall be available to the
public throughout the planning process. The CPP is a working document, and may be amended on an as
needed basis.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Appendix 11: Citizen Participation Plan Phase 1 169

III. Designation of Lead Planning Group and Points of Contact
By designation of the Mayor and Town Council, the principle local board responsible for supervision of
the planning process will be the Town of Sunset Beach Planning Board. The principal points of contact
for land use plan preparation shall be Al Seibert, Chairman of the Planning Board; Penny Tysinger,
Planner in Charge; and Linda Fluegel, Town Administrator. The names and contact information for the
Planning Board and Town Council are listed in Attachment A, attached hereto and made a part of by
reference.
The Planning Board is responsible for providing overall leadership and guidance for preparation of the
land use plan. The members of the Planning Board have the following specific duties and
responsibilities:
1. Faithfully attend Planning Board meetings and provide overall direction for development of
the draft land use plan;
2. Serve as a public contact to make it easier for citizens to get information and to make
comments on the plan;
3. Review technical planning materials provided by staff to help ensure that they accurately
represent the current situation and recent trends in Sunset Beach;
4. Assist the Town's planning advisors (Administrator, Public Works, etc.) with preparation of
major plan elements, which includes identifying concerns and key planning issues, developing
community vision, developing goals, and preparing draft policies and the future land use map;
5. Assist with organization, management, and facilitation of public participation events;
6. Help publicize public participation events in the community and recruit residents and
property owners to attend; and I
7. Recommend and present a complete land use plan to the Town Council at the end of the
planning process.
IV. Public Information and Public Input
Planning Board Meetings
The Planning Board meets regularly on the Third Thursday of each month at 9:00 AM in the Council
Chambers of Town Hall. Workshops on the Land Use Plan will be held on the First Thursday of each
month at 9:00 AM in the Council Chambers of Town Hall. Special meetings may be called as necessary.
In order to comply with the NCGS 143-318.9 to 143-318.18, a schedule of the Planning Board's meetings is
available from the Town Administrative Department. This schedule is also provided to the Town Clerk
for posting and distribution of the required notices. The Planning Board Chairman will notify Town staff
of any changes to the schedule and of any special meetings so that proper notice may be given.
All Planning Board agendas will allocate time to hear comments on the land use plan from the public.
The Town will keep a record in the minutes of all residents, property owners, and others who speak at
any of the Planning Board meetings or other events and will retain any land use plan comments that it
receives. The names of speakers and written comments will be kept in a file maintained by the planner in
charge and will be provided to the NC Division of Coastal Management District Planner during draft
plan review. Attachment B provides a general outline of the meeting schedule and gives a purpose for
each meeting.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Appendix II: Citizen Participation Plan Phase 1 170

Initial Public Information Meetin
The initial public information meeting (Community Meeting), which is a required portion of the CAMA
planning process, will be held on April 6, 2006. The Town will conduct a second public information
meeting (Open House) in the late Fall of 2006. The Town must give two public notices of the initial
public information meeting. The first notice must appear not less than 30 days before the meeting and
the second must appear not less than 10 days before the meeting. Affidavits of publication will be kept as
evidence that this requirement has been met. In addition to the public notices, the CAMA grant requires
the Town to notify the Coastal Resources Advisory Council area representative(s) and the NC Division
of Coastal Management District Planner of the date, time, and place of the public information meeting.
The planning team (Town staff, Planning Board members and planner in charge) will periodically issue
press releases and make efforts to notify the local media of available information on the Town's land use
planning program.
The purpose of the initial public meeting will be to inform citizens about the purpose of the CAMA land
use plan, to solicit public input in the identification of key growth and development issues facing the
Town, and to solicit public input in the creation of a Town Vision Statement.
V. Participation Methods
The Town will use two methods of public participation in the preparation of the land use plan. The first
method will be to hold a Community Meeting that will allow residents and property owners to express
concerns about land use and development and to set priorities for development of the land use plan. The
second method will be to hold a community Open House where the community can review and comment
on the complete first phase (Phase I) draft of the land use plan.
Community Meeting
The Planning Board will conduct a facilitated Community Meeting to assist in identifying a broad range
of land use issues, concerns, and opportunities within the community. The Community Meeting will be
held in April of 2006. At this meeting, residents and property owners will create a single list of issues and
opportunities about which there is a high level of agreement among those attending. The Community
Meeting will be conducted in two parts. The first part will include a brief introduction to the CAMA
planning process and background planning materials. The second part may involve small group brain
storming sessions, depending on number of citizens in attendance, on land use planning concerns, issues,
and opportunities. After the small group sessions, the entire group will generate a single list of the most
important issues and opportunities within the community. After the top issues have been identified, the
participants of the Community Meeting will review a draft Vision Statement. The Vision Statement is
intended to briefly describe the desired characteristics and growth patterns the Town wishes to pursue
in the near future (5-10 years).
The Planning Board Chairman will chair the meeting. Town staff and the planner in charge will provide
background information and will facilitate the overall group exercise. Planning Board members may
assist as facilitators for the small group exercises.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Appendix II: Citizen Participation Plan Phase I 171

The Community Meeting will be publicized through the local media, informational flyers, posting on the
Town's web page (if applicable), and through "recruiting" and "word of mouth" by members of the
Planning Board and other interested citizens.
The intended audience for this public participation opportunity may include residents, and nonresident
property owners, business owners and operators, real estate professionals, members of Town committees
and associations and other parties with a stake in the Towns land use plan.
Community Open House
The Town of Sunset Beach will hold a community Open House near the end of Phase I of the land use
planning process. The Open House will be held in the late Fall of 2006. The Open House may be held on
a Saturday to allow nonresident property owners a convenient opportunity to attend.
The Open House will provide residents with an easy opportunity to review all the information (tables,
summaries, maps, etc) prepared as part of the first phase (Phase I) of the planning process. By review of
the material presented, residents will be able to assess trends, find out about their community, and to
express support or recommend adjustments. An introduction of the second phase (Phase II) of the Land
Use Plan will also be included in the Open House. At the Open House, the attendees will be able to
interact informally with members of the planning team. A Joint Meeting with Town Council may be
held immediately after the Open House, where Council is presented with a draft plan of Phase I and may
wish to formally comment on the direction of the Plan.
VI. Citizen Participation Plan Evaluation
The Planning Board will conduct an on going evaluation of the Citizen Participation Plan and will make
amendments to this plan as it becomes necessary. It is expected that Phase II of the LUP will begin at
the beginning of calendar year 2007. A major review of the process and a reevaluation will be conducted
at that time. Any amendments will be reviewed by the Planning Board and recommended to the Town
Council for adoption.
This Citizen Participation Plan is adopted this the day of , 2006 at the Town of Sunset Beach,
North Carolina.
By s/
Ron K1ein,Mayor
Town of Sunset Beach
ATTEST:
- By s/
Kim Allen, Town Clerk
By s/
Linda Fluegel, Town Administrator
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Appendix I1: Citizen Participation Plan Phase 1 172

Attachment A
Sunset Beach Town Council
Members Term Expires
Ronald Klein, Mayor
December 2007
952 Oyster Pointe Drive
Sunset Beach, NC 28469
579-1354 (H)
W. Carl Bazemore, Mayor Pro-Tem
December 2007
407 Shoreline Drive West
Sunset Beach, NC 28468
579-0261(H)
Ron Watts, Councilman
December 2009
421 Shoreline Drive West
Sunset Beach, NC 28469
579-3452 (H)
Bob Bobinski., Councilman
December 2007
155 Edgewater Circle
Sunset Beach, NC 28468
579-3866 (H)
Lou DeVita, Councilman
December 2009
223 Crooked Gulley Circle
Sunset Beach, NC 28468
579-2780 (H)
Len Steiner, Councilman
December 2009
613 Kings Trail
Sunset Beach, NC 28468
579-4949 (H)
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Appendix 11: Citizen Participation Plan Phase I 173

Sunset Beach Planning Board/Board of Adjustment
Members
Al Selbert, Chairperson
731 Longleaf Drive
Sunset Beach, NC 28468
579-9889
Eddie Walters, Vice Chairperson
643 Shoreline Drive West
Sunset Beach, NC 28468
579-5968
Fred Abernethy
219 Barony Place Drive
Sunset Beach, NC 28468
579-9179
Carol Santavicca (ETJ Alternate Member)
9109 Forest Drive SW
Calabash, NC 28467
579-7868
Shirley Shape
8916 Bonaparte Drive SW
Sunset Beach, NC 28468
579-7821
Linda Thole
642 Oyster Bay Drive
Sunset Beach, NC 28468
575-3240
Leon August (Alternate Member)
279 Heather Drive
Sunset Beach, NC 28468
575-0751
Term Expires
August 2006
August 2008
August 2007
August 2006
August 2006
August 2007
August 2008
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Appendix II: Citizen Participation Plan Phase I 174

Attachment B
ITEMS COVERED IN MEETING (SUBJECT TO CHANGE)
Meeting Items Covered
February/March 2006 meeting Hold Orientation session with Planning Board. Presentation of
Citizen's Participation Plan (adoption by Council at April
meeting). Discussion of CAMA regulations, planning process,
& key growth issues & planning issues. Begin to create vision
statement.
April 2006 (Community Meeting) Initial public information meeting.
Discussion of existing & emerging conditions, and Vision
Statement
April 2006 meeting
May 2006 meeting
June 2006 meeting
July 2006 meeting
September/October 2006 meeting
No Meeting
Discussion of Population, Housing and Economy. Discussion of
Natural Systems Analysis. Discussion of Land Use &
Development (including existing land use map)
No Meeting
Discussion of Community Facilities.
Environmental Composite Map and Land Suitability Analysis
(LSA)
Community Open House. Joint meeting/public hearing with
Council to discuss plan elements. Phase I completed and
recommended to Council.
FINAL DRAFT' of LUP 6/07/10
Appendix II: Citizen Participation Plan Phase I
175

CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PLAN
TOWN OF SUNSET BEACH
CAMA CORE LAND USE PLAN
PHASE TWO
I. Introduction
The Town of Sunset Beach is beginning development of a Core Land Use Plan under the North
Carolina Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA). The CAMA planning program emphasizes
public participation in the planning process and land use planning provides one of the best
opportunities for public involvement in the NC Coastal Management Program. Interested citizens
and non resident property owners will have an opportunity to help shape the policies that will
guide CAMA permit decisions in the community and the growth of the Town in the future.
Coordination and discussion with area/island municipalities and County officials on policy matters
will be a part of this process. All socio-economic, ethnic, and cultural viewpoints will be
considered through the review and revision process. To the extent possible, persons representing
diverse viewpoints will be identified and specifically notified and asked for their input.
II. Purpose of Citizen Participation Plan
This Citizen Participation Plan has been prepared to describe a process by which the public will
be encouraged to participate in the planning process leading to the revision of the Town of Sunset
Beach CAMA Core LUP. This Citizen Participation Plan has been designed to meet the
requirements for public participation as outlined in 15A NCAC 7L.0506. It is the intent of the
process described herein that the public would have ample opportunity to become a meaningful
part of the planning process. This plan addresses the following objectives.
1. To share information about the CAMA planning process and its requirements;
2. To increase the community's understanding of the impact that land use and development
issues have on quality of life;
3. To provide opportunities for the residents and property owners to participate in the
identification of land use and development policies and to assess the impact of the policies
on the community; and
4. To provide a forum where all economic, social, ethnic and cultural viewpoints will be
considered throughout the land use process.
Views gathered as a part of this process will be informative and instructional for citizens of the
Town of Sunset Beach, interested parties, and the Town's elected and appointed Boards. Interested
citizens shall have an opportunity to participate in the development of the CAMA Core LUP
through oral and written comments as provided for in the Citizen Participation Plan. Copies of
informational CAMA Core LUP materials shall be provided at all meetings. The Citizen
Participation Plan shall be available to the public throughout the planning process. All socio-
economic, ethnic and cultural viewpoints will be considered through the review and revision
process. To the extent possible, persons representing diverse socio-economic, ethnic and cultural
viewpoints will be identified and specifically notified and asked for their input. The CPP is a
working document, and may be amended on an as needed basis.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Appendix II: Citizen Participation Plan Phase II 176

III. Designation of Lead Planning Group and Points of Contact
By designation of the Mayor and Town Council, the principle local board responsible for supervision
of the planning process will be the Town of Sunset Beach Planning Board. The principal points of
contact for Land Use Plan preparation shall be Al Seibert, Chairman of the Planning Board; Penny
Tysinger, Planner in Charge; and Linda Fluegel, Town Administrator. The names and contact
information for the Planning Board and Town Council are listed in Attachment A, attached hereto
and made a part of by reference.
The Planning Board is responsible for providing overall leadership and guidance for preparation of
the Land Use Plan. The members of the Planning Board have the following specific duties and
responsibilities:
8. Faithfully attend Planning Board meetings and provide overall direction for development
of the draft Land Use Plan;
9. Serve as a public contact to make it easier for citizens to get information and to make
comments on the plan;
10. Review technical planning materials to help ensure that they accurately represent the
current situation and recent trends in Sunset Beach;
II. Assist the Town's planning advisors (Town Administrator, planning consultants and
other staff) with preparation of major plan elements, which includes identifying concerns
and key plan issues, developing community vision, developing goals, and preparing draft
policies and the future land use map;
12. Assist with organization, management, and facilitation of public participation events;
13. Help publicize public participation events in the community and recruit residents and
property owners to attend; and
14. Recommend and present a Land Use Plan to the Town Council.
IV. Public Information and Public Input
Planning Board Meetings
The Planning Board meets regularly on the first and third Thursdays of each month at 9:00 AM in
Town Hall. Workshops on the Land Use Plan updatewill be held on the first Thursday of each
month at 9:00 AM in Town Hall. Special meetings may be called as necessary. In order to comply
with the NCGS 143-318.9 to 143-318.18, a schedule of the Planning Board's meetings is available from
the Town Administration Department. This schedule is also provided to the Town Clerk for posting
and distribution of the required notices. The Planning Board Chairman will notify Town staff of any
changes to the schedule and of any special meetings so that proper notice may be given.
All Planning Board agendas will allocate time to hear comments on the Land Use Plan from the public.
The Town will keep a record of all residents, property owners, and others who attend any of the
Planning Board meetings or other events and will retain any written Land Use Plan comments that it
receives. Any written comments received will be kept in a file and will be provided to the NC Division of
Coastal Management District Planner during draft plan review. Attachment B provides a general outline
1 of the meeting schedule and gives a purpose for each meeting.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Appendix II: Citizen Participation Plan Phase II 177

Initial Public Information Meeting
The initial public information meeting, which is a required portion of the CAMA planning process, was
held on April 6, 2006. The Town conducted a second puhlic information meeting on FehruxX-1,
2007 The Town gave two public notices prior to the public information meetings, and must give two
public notices prior to any other scheduled public information or public hearing meetings. The first
notice must appear not less than 30 days before the meeting and the second must appear not less than 10
days before the meeting. Affidavits of publication will be kept as evidence that this requirement has
been met. In addition to the public notices, the CAMA grant requires the Town to notify the Coastal
Resources Advisory Council area representative(s) and the NC Division of Coastal Management District
Planner of the date, time, and place of the public information meeting.
The planning team will periodically issue press releases and make efforts to notify the local media of
available information on the Town's land use planning program.
The purpose of the initial public meeting was to inform citizens about the purpose of the CAMA Land
Use Plan and the steps that will be taken to update it. The purpose of the second public information
meeting was to solicit additional public comment and formally conclude the first phase and enter the
second and final phase of the Land Use Plan Update.
V. Participation Methods
The Town will use three methods of public participation (or public information meetings) in the
preparation of the Land Use Plan. The first method was to hold a community meeting that allowed
residents and property owners to express concerns about land use and development and to set priorities
for development of the Land Use Plan. The second method was to hold a community open house where
the community could review draft information available as a part of phase I of the Land Use Plan
preparation. The third method will be to hold a public hearing in which the Town Council will allow
additional public comment and will adopt the Land Use Plan Update by formal resolution.
Community Meeting
The Planning Board conducted a facilitated community meeting to assist in identifying a broad range of
land use issues, concerns, and opportunities. At this meeting residents and property owners created a
single list of issues and opportunities about which there is a high level of agreement among those
attending. The community meeting was conducted in two parts. The first part included a brief
introduction to the CAMA planning process and background planning materials. The second part
involved small group brain storming sessions on land use planning concerns, issues, and opportunities.
After the small group sessions, the entire group generated a single list of the most important issues and
opportunities.
The Planning Board Chairman chaired the meeting. Town staff and the planner in charge provided
background information and assisted with the overall group exercise. Planning Board members assisted
as facilitators for the small group exercises.
The community meeting was publicized through the local media, information flyers, posting on the
Town's web page, and through recruiting by members of the Planning Board and other interested
citizens.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Appendix II: Citizen Participation Plan Phase II 178

The intended audience for this public participation opportunity included residents, resident and
nonresident property owners, business owners and operators, real estate professionals, members of
Town committees and associations and other parties with a stake in the Town's Land Use Plan.
Community Open House
The Town of Sunset Beach held a community open house near the end of phase I of the land use planning
process. The open house was held on Fehruaryl, 2007. The open house provided residents with an
easy opportunity to review the information prepared as a part of the planning process. By review of the
material presented, residents were able to assess trends, find out about their community, and to express
support or recommend adjustments. The attendees were able to interact informally with lay and
professional members of the planning team.
Public Hearing
The Town of Sunset Beach will hold a public hearing at the end of phase II of the land use planning
process. The public hearing will be publicized by two public notices in a locally circulated newspaper.
The first notice must appear not less than 30 days before the hearing and the second must appear not less
than 10 days before the hearing. Affidavits of publication will be kept as evidence that this requirement
has been met. The purpose of the public hearing is to allow final public comment on the draft Land Use
Plan Update and for the Town Council to adopt the Land Use Plan Update by formal resolution.
VI. Citizen Participation Plan Evaluation
The Planning Board will conduct an on going evaluation of the Citizen Participation Plan and will make
amendments to this plan as it becomes necessary. It is expected that phase II of the LUP will begin at
the beginning of calendar year 2007 and end in late summer of 2007. A review of the process and a
reevaluation will be conducted at that time. Any needed changes will be reviewed by the Planning Board
and recommended to the Town Council.
This Citizen Participation Plan is adopted this the 2nd day of April , 2007 by the Town of Sunset
Beach, North Carolina.
By s/.
Ronald Klein,
Mayor, Town of Sunset Beach
ATTEST:
By s/ By s/
Kim Cochran, Town Clerk Gary Parker, Town Administrator
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
II: Citizen Participation Plan Phase II 179

Attachment A
Members
Ronald Klein, Mayor
952 Oyster Pointe Drive
Sunset Beach, NC 28469
579-1354 (H)
W. Carl Bazemore, Mayor Pro-Tem
407 Shoreline Drive West
Sunset Beach, NC 28468
579-0261(H)
Ron Watts, Councilman
421 Shoreline Drive West
Sunset Beach, NC 28469
579-3452 (H)
Bob Bobinski, Councilman
155 Edgewater Circle
Sunset Beach, NC 28468
579-3866 (H)
Lou DeVita, Councilman
223 Crooked Gulley Circle
Sunset Beach, NC 28468
579-2780 (H)
Len Steiner, Councilman
613 Kings Trail
Sunset Beach, NC 28468
579-4949 (H)
Sunset Beach Town Council
Term Expires
December 2007
December 2007
December 2009
December 2007
December 2009
December 2009
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Appendix II: Citizen Participation Plan Phase II 180

Members
Ronald Klein, Mayor
952 Oyster Pointe Drive
Sunset Beach, NC 28469
579-1354 (H)
Lou DeVita, Mayor Pro-Tem
233 Crooked Gulley Circle
Sunset Beach, NC 28468
579-2780 (H)
Karen Joseph, Councilwoman
915 Sandpiper Bay Drive
Sunset Beach, NC 28468
579-4891(H)
Wilson Sherrill, Councilman
1112 Park Road
Sunset Beach, NC 28468
575-3083 (H)
Carol Scott, Councilwoman
1214 East Main Street
Sunset Beach, NC 28468
579-9104 (H)
Bob Bobinski, Councilman
155 Edgewater Circle
Sunset Beach, NC 28468
579-3866 (H)
Sunset Beach Town Council (2010)
Term Expires
December 2011
December 2013
December 2013
December 2011
December 2013
December 2011
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Appendix II: Citizen Participation Plan Phase II 181

Sunset Beach Planning Board/Board of Adjustment 2010)
Members Term Expires
William (Bill)McDonald, Chairperson August 2010
7487 Balmore Dr
Sunset Beach, NC 28468
Russell Allen, Vice Chair
9048 Sea Lane SW
Sunset Beach, NC 28468
Al Siebert
731 Longleaf Drive
Sunset Beach, NC 28468
Leon August
279 Heather Drive
Sunset Beach, NC 28468
Sybil Kesterson, Alternate ETJ Member
8975 Woodbine Rd SW
Sunset Beach, NC 28468
Eddie Walters, Alternate Member
10020 Beach Dr SW
Calabash, NC 28467
August 2010
August 2011
August 2007
Febuary 2012
August 2011
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Appendix II: Citizen Participation Plan Phase II 182

Sunset Beach Planning; Board/Board of Adjustment
Members Term Expires
Al Selbert, Chairperson
August 2009
731 Longleaf Drive
Sunset Beach, NC 28468
Eddie Walters, Vice Chairperson
August 2008
643 Shoreline Drive West
Sunset Beach, NC 28468
Fred Abernethy
August 2007
219 Barony Place Drive
Sunset Beach, NC 28468
Carol Santavicca
August 2009
9109 Forest Drive SW
Calabash, NC 28467
Leon August August 2007
279 Heather Drive
Sunset Beach, NC 28468
Bob Perry (Alternate Member) August 2009
932 Oyster Point Drive
Sunset Beach, NC 28468
T.S. Childers (ETJ Alternate Member) August 2009
9097 Forest Drive SW
Calabash, NC 28467
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Appendix II: Citizen Participation Plan Phase II
183

Attachment B (Subject to Change)
Meeting
December 2006 meeting
January 2007 meeting
February 2007 meeting
March 2007 meeting
April 2007 meeting
May 2007 meeting
Items Covered
Review of the 1997 Plan &r Evaluate implementation of Policies
to date.
No meeting.
Begin establishing LUP policy. "Land Use Compatibility".
Continued discussion of LUP Policies.
Continued discussion of LUP Policies.
Discussion of Future Land Use Map
June 2007 meeting Discussion of Development Management tools and policy
implementation actions.
Analysis of developed policies for compliance with management
topics.
July 2007 meeting Review of Draft Plan.
Public Information meeting.
Submit to DCM Staff for review.
Submit to adjacent jurisdictions for review.
August 2007 meeting Revise plan as needed per comments and recommendations
received from DCM.
September 2007 meeting Final review by the Planning Board.
Conduct public hearing and Council adoption.
October 2007 meeting Submit planfor CRC Certification
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Appendix II: Citizen Participation Plan Phase II 184

Appendix III: County Water System Master Plan - Program of Construction Table
Prooram of Construction
Map
Ref.
No.
Location
Size(in)
or No.
Items
Length
feet
Estimated
Cost
Totals Reason for Improvement
Phase 1 - Immediate Needs
1-1
Bethel Road Loop pipeline
12
10,000
$475,000
Poor Fire Flow
1-2
Beach Road parallel line in Calabash
12
8,300
$395.000
Poor Fire Flow
1-3
Shallotte Interconnection
16
6,600
$495,000
Poor Fire Flow
1-4
Dutchman's Acre Tie -In
12
100
$5,000
Poor Fire Flow
1-5
River Road/Southport Connection
24
425
$61,000
12-inch bottleneck
1-6
Sandpiper Bay Loop Tie-in
12
1,300
$62,000
Poor Fire Flow
1-7
Caswell Meter/Piping Modifications
$25,000
High head loss through
Phase 1 - Subtotal
Phase 2A - Pipeline Improvements Needed By 2016
IIA-1 Northwest Loop Pipeline from Leland Tank to Highway 17 36
along US 74/76, Malmo Loop, Colin -Mintz Rd and Maco
Road INC 87)
IIA-2 Northwest Loop Pipeline to tie-in with 36-inch pipeline 12
following NC 74176 and Maco Road (NC 87)
IIA-3 Parallel 30-inch line from NC 17 and NC 87/17 Intersection 30
to Bell Swamp Pumping Station
IIA-4 Hwy 211117 area to Stone Chimney Line 16
IIA-5 Bell Swamp BPS parallel line to Hwy 211117 Intersection 30
following Highway 17 Bypass
IIA-6 Parallel Line from Boiling Spring Lakes Tank to Boiling 24
Spring Lakes meter vaults
Phase 2A - Subtotal
Phase 213 - Pumping Station/Storage Improvements Needed By 2016
II13-1 Additional NW WTP Finished Water Pumps 2
IIB-2 Replace BPS10 pumps with higher rapacity and higher 2
head pumps
IIB-3 Additional Bell Swamp Southwest Booster Pumps 2
11B4 Replace 2 pumps with higher rapacity and higher head 2
pumps at BPS6
IIB-5 New 1 MG Elevated Storage Tank southwest of BPS6 1
Phase 2B - Subtotal
Phase 3 - WTP Improvements Needed by 2008
III-1 Upgrade Existing Northwest WTP by adding 8 MGD to firm 1
rapacity of 24 MGD including conversion to Superpulsators,
additional dewatering building, filters and clearwell storage,
yard piping, electrical, I/C, chemical, and contingency
pipe/meters
$1,518,000
45,700
$13,500,000
Low Pressures in 2015
31,400
$1,500,000
Low Pressures in 2015
20,000
$4,250,000
Low Pressures in 2015
2,500
$188,000
70,000
$17,875,000
Low Pressures in 2015
12,100
$1,750,000
Low Pressures in 2015
$39,063,000
$150,000 Need increased capacity 2015
$150,000 Need Increased capacity 2015
$150.000 Need Increased capacity 2015
$150,000 Need Increased rapacity 2015
$1.750,000 Need increased capacity 2015
$2,350,000
$20.000,000 Need increased capacity 2015
1
III-2 Upgrade Existing 211 WTP $6,000,000 Regulatory/Upgrades
Phase 3 - Subtotal $26,000,000
Grand Total (2006 US Dollars) $68,931,000
Source: Brunswick County, North Carolina: Water System Master Plan. July 2006. Prepared by Hazen &z Sawyer, P.C.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Appendix III: Program of Construction
185

Appendix IV: Policy Impact Analysis Table
The policy impact analysis is intended to identify any potential negative, neutral, or positive impacts
to CAMA Management Topic goals by the implementation of Town policies. The Town of Sunset
Beach drafted their policy statements specifically to remain consistent with and further the goals of
the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA). There were no negative or neutral -negative impacts to
CAMA management Topic goals identified from the policies established in this Land Use Plan. The
following list defines the impact designations that may be used in the analysis:
Negative - Implementation of the policy will more than likely have an immediate or long-range
negative impact on the Management Topic goals. The policy could conflict with the
attainment of other goals.
Neutral - Implementation of the policy will more than likely not have any impact on the
Management Topic goals. The policy will probably not effect the attainment of other
goals.
Positive - Implementation of the policy will more than likely have an immediate or long-range
positive impact on the Management Topic goals. The policy could foster the attainment
of other goals.
Neutral -Negative - Implementation of the policy could range from no impact to an immediate or
long- range negative impact on the Management Topic goals. The policy may not effect
the attainment of other goals if carried -out with other polices or goals in mind, or the
policy could conflict with the attainment of other goals if carried -out without mitigation
or management activities.
Neutral -Positive - Implementation of the policy could range from no impact to an immediate or
long- range positive impact on the Management Topic goals. The policy may have no
effect on the attainment of other goals or the policy could foster the attainment of other
goals if actions are coordinated or expanded.
For simplification, a cross-referenced table (matrix) was used to list the potential impact of each
policy in boxes under each Management Topic. If a policy has the potential to have a negative impact
on a goal or goals of any of the Management Topics, a course of action or policy must be established to
mitigate the negative impacts.
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Appendix IV: Policy Impact Analysis 186

'Now -Now
Management Topics
Land Use Compatibility
Infrastructure
Public Access
Water Quality
Natural Hazards
Reduction in Habitat Loss and
Water, Sewer and Other Key
More Planned Access
Land Use and
Land Lases and Development Patterns
Fragmentation Related to Impacts of
Community Facilities and Services
Locations
Development Criteria and
That Reduce Vulnerability to Natural
Use and Development
Being Available in Required Locations
Measures That Abate
Hazards
HazardsLand
at Adequate Capacities to Support
Upgrades to ExistingAccess
Impacts That Degrade
Reduction of Water Resource and
Planned Community Growth and
Locations
WaterQuality
Land Uses and Development Patterns
Water duality Degradation
Development Patterns
That Take Into Account the Existing and
Planned Capacity of Evacuation
In astructure
ILUP,Policies: <Land
�
Use'Com atibilit
Policy l
Positive
Neutral
Neutral -Positive
Positive
Positive
Areas of Environmental
Concern in General
Policy 2
Positive
Neutral -Positive
Neutral -Positive
Positive
Positive
Coastal Wetlands
Policy 3
Positive
Neutral
Positive
Positive
Positive
Estuarine Waters
Policy 4
Neutral -Positive
Neutral
Neutral -Positive
Neutral -Positive
Neutral -Positive
Estuarine Shorelines
Policy 5
Positive
Neutral
Positive
Positive
Positive
Ocean Hazard Areas
Policy 6
Positive
Neutral
Neutral -Positive
Positive
Positive
Areas that Contain
Remnant Species
Policy 7
Positive
Neutral
Neutral -Positive
Neutral -Positive
Neutral -Positive
Prime Wildlife Habitat
Areas
Policy 8
Positive
Neutral
Neutral
Positive
Positive
Protection of Wetlands
,Policy9
Positive
Neutral
Neutral
Positive
Positive
Maritime Forests and
Tree Cover
Policy 10
Neutral -Positive
Neutral -Positive
.Neutral
Neutral -Positive
Neutral -Positive
Constraints to
Development
Policy 11
Positive
Positive
Neutral
Positive
Positive
Upland Excavation for
Marinas
Policy 12
Neutral -Positive
Neutral
Neutral -Positive
Neutral
Neutral -Positive
Installation of
Bulkheads, Groins and
'Seawalls
Policy 13
Positive
Positive
Positive
Positive
Positive
Residential and
Commercial Land
Development on Any
Natural Resource

Management Topics
Land Use Compatibility
Infrastructure
Public Access
Water Quality
Natural Hazards
Reduction in Habitat Loss and
Water, Sewer and Other Key
More Planned Access
Land Use and
Land Uses and Development Pattern
DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 A IV: Policy Impact Analysis 188
s
Fragmentation Related to Impacts
Community Facilities and Services
Locations
Development Criteria and
That Reduce Vulnerability to Natural
of Land Use and Development
Being Available in Required Locations
Measures That Abate
Hazards
atAdequate Capacities to Support
Upgrades to ExistingAccess
Impacts That Degrade
Reduction of Water Resource and
Planned Community Growth and
Locations
Water duality
Land Lases and Development Patterns
Water duality Degradation
Development Patterns
That Take Into Account the Existing and
Planned Capacity of Evacuation
Infrastructure
,LUPaPolicies: Land Use
Comp atibili
Polity 14
Positive
Positive
Neutral -Positive
Positive
Positive
Types of Development to
be Encouraged
Policy 15
Positive
Neutral
Neutral -Positive
Positive
Positive
Annexation
Policy 16
Positive
Neutral -Positive
Positive
Positive
Positive
Types of Urban Growth
Patterns Desired
Polity 17
Positive
Neutral -Positive
Neutral -Positive
Neutral -Positive
Neutral -Positive
Types, Density and
Location of Anticipated
Residential Development
Policy 18
Positive
Neutral -Positive
Neutral
Positive
Neutral -Positive
Residential Density —
Standards, Options and
Mitigation of
EnvimnmentalImpacts
Polity 19
Positive
Neutral -Positive
Neutral
Positive
Neutral
Potential for Transition
of Golf Course Land to
Residential Use
Policy 20
Positive
Neutral -Positive
Neutral -Positive
Neutral
Neutral -Positive
Types of Commercial and
Institutional
Development Desired
Policy 21
Positive
Neutral -Positive
Neutral
Positive
Positive
Redevelopment of
Developed Areas
Policy 22
Positive
Neutral -Positive
Neutral
Positive
Neutral -Positive
Civic Effo

Management Topics
Land Use Compatibility
Infrastructure
Public Access
Water Quality
Natural Hazards
Reduction in Habitat Loss and
Water, Sewer and Other Key
More Planned Access
Land Use and
Land Uses and Development Patterns
Fragmentation Related to Impacts
Community Facilities and Services
Locations
Development Criteria and
That Reduce Vulnerability to Natural
of Land Use and Development
Being Available in Required Locations
Measures That Abate
Hazards
at Adequate Capacities to Support
Upgrades to Existing Access
Impacts That Degrade
Reduction of Water Resource and
Planned Community Growth and
Locations
Water Quality
Land Uses and Development Patterns
Water Quality Degradation
Development Patterns
That Take Into Account the Existing and
Planned Capacity of Evacuation
Infrastructure
'LUP Policies: Land Use
-1
Compatibility
Policy 24
Positive
Positive
Positive
Positive
Positive
Prod. Agri. Lands,
Comm. Forests Lands,
and Potntl. Mineral
Areas
Policy 25
Positive
Positive
Positive
Positive
Positive
Energy Facility Siting
and Development
Policy 26
Positive
Neutral
Positive
Positive
Positive
Swimming Pools on the
Island
Policy 27
Positive
Neutral -Positive
Neutral -Positive
Neutral -Positive
Neutral -Positive
Clubhouse and
Community Center Uses
Policy 28
Positive
Positive
Neutral
Positive
Positive
Density of Future Multi-
family Developments
Policy 29
Positive
Positive
Positive
Positive
Neutral
Bike and Pedestrian
Interconnectivity
Policy 30
Positive
Positive
Positive
Positive
Positive
Land Use and
Development Decisions
Consistent with the
Land Use Plan
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Appendix IV: Policy Impact Analysis
189

Management Topics
Land Use Compatibility
Infrastructure
Public Access
Water QualityNatural
Hazards
Reduction in Habitat Loss and
Water, Sewer and Other Key
More Planned Access
Land l.Iseand
Land LIsesand Development Patterns
L DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 A dix IV: Policy Impact Analysis 190
Fragmentation Related to Impacts of
Community Facilities and Services
Locations
Development Criteria and
That Reduce Vulnerability to Natural
Land Use and Development
Being Available in Required Locations
Measures That Abate
Hazards
atAdequate Capacities to Support
Upgrades to Existing Access
Impacts That Degrade
Reduction of Water Resource and
Planned Community Growth and
Locations
Water Q,uality
Land Uses and Development Patterns
Water Quality Degradation
Development Patterns
That Take Into Account the Existing and
Planned Capacity of Evacuation
Infrastructure
LUP Policies: Public
Access
�
Policy 31
Positive
Neutral
Positive
Positive
Positive
Public Trust Areas
Policy 32
Positive
Neutral
Positive
Neutral -Positive
Neutral
Support for Coastal and
Estuarine Beach Access
Policy 33
Positive
Neutral
Positive
Positive
Positive
Support for State and
Federal Access
Programs
Policy 34
Neutral -Positive
Neutral
Positive
Neutral
Neutral
Public Boat Launch and
Access Site
Policy 35
Positive
Neutral
Positive
Neutral
Neutral
Preservation of Existing
Public Access Sites
Policy 36
Neutral
> Neutral
Positive
Neutral
Neutral
Continuation of On -
Street Public Parkin
Policy 37
Positive
Positive
Positive
Positive
Positive
Support for Shuttle
Service to Public Access
Sites
Policy 38
Neutral
Neutral
Positive
Neutral
Neutral
Enhancing Public
Access Facilities

Management Topics
Land Use Compatibility
Infrastructure
Public Access
Water Quality
Natural Hazards
Reduction in Habitat Loss and
Water, Sewer and Other Key
More Planned Access
Land Use and
Land Uses and Development Patterns
Fragmentation Related to Impacts
Community Facilities and Services
Locations
Development Criteria and
That Reduce Vulnerability to Natural
of Land Use and Development
Being Available in Required Locations
Measures That Abate
Hazards
at Adequate Capacities to Support
Upgrades to Existing Access
Impacts That Degrade
Reduction of Water Resource and
Planned Community Growth and
Locations
Water Quality
Land Uses and Development Patterns
Water Quality Degradation
Development Patterns
That Take Into Account the Existing and
Planned Capacity of Evacuation
In rastructure
LUP.Policies:.. ; 9
Infrastructure
Policy 39
Positive
Positive
Neutral
Neutral
Positive
Development
Encouraged to use DOTs
`Access Management and
Design Standards
Policy 40
Positive
Positive
Neutral
Neutral
Positive
Access Management for
Commercial and Mixed -
use Developments
Policy 41
Positive
Positive
Neutral
Neutral
Positive
Access Management for
Residential
Developments
Policy 42
Neutral
Positive
Neutral
Neutral
Positive
Improvements to
Highway 904 Needed
Policy 43
Positive
Positive
Neutral
Neutral
Positive
Support for Corridor
Development Standards
Policy 44
Positive
Positive
Neutral
Positive
Positive
Encouraged Street
Design Within Major
Developments
Policy 45
Neutral
Positive
Positive
Positive
Neutral
Bike and Pedestrian Plan
Update
Policy 46
Positive
Positive
Neutral
Positive
Neutral
Unpaved Public Streets
Policy 47
Neutral
Positive
Neutral
Neutral
Positive
Resurfacing
Improvements
Policy 48
Neutral
Positive
Positive
Neutral
Neutral -Positive
Crosswalks
Policy 49
Neutral -Positive
Positive
Neutral
Positive
Positive
Use of Package
Treatment Plants
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10
Appendix IV: Policy Impact Analysis
191

Management Topics
Land Use Compatibility
Infrastructure
Public Access
Water unlit
Natural Hazards
Reduction in Habitat Loss and
Water, Sewer and OtherKey
More Planned Access
L DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Amradix IV: Policy Impact Analysis 192
Land Use and
Land Uses and Development Patterns
Fragmentation Related to Impacts
Community Facilities and Services
Locations
Development Criteria and
That Reduce Vulnerability to Natural
of Land Use and Development
Being Available in Required Locations
Measures That Abate
Hazards
at Adequate Capacities to Support
Upgrades to Existing Access
Impacts That Degrade
Reduction of Water Resource and
Planned Community Growth and
Locations
Water Quality
Land Uses and Development Patterns
Water duality Degradation
DevelopmentPatterns
That Take Into Account the Existing and
Planned Capacity of Evacuation
Infrastructure
LUP Policies: ,'1
I
dnfrastiuctiire_`.
Policy 50
Positive
Positive
Neutral
Positive
Neutral
Implementation of Sewer
Service
Policy 51
Neutral
Positive
Neutral
Positive
Neutral
Mandatory Sewer
System Connection
Policy 52
Neutral
Neutral -Positive
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Ownership and
Operation of Sewer
System
Policy 53
Positive
Positive
Neutral
Positive
Positive
Sewer System Designed
to Limit "Induced
Development"
Policy 54
Neutral
Neutral -Positive
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Ownership and
Operation of Water
System
Policy 55
Neutral -Positive
Positive
Neutral
Neutral -Positive
Neutral
On -going Coordination
with Brunswick Coun

Management Topics
Land Use Compatibility
Infrastructure
Public Access
Water Quality
Natural Hazards
Reduction in Habitat Loss and
Water, Sewer and Other Key
More Planned Access
Land Use and
Land Uses and Development Patterns
Fragmentation Related to Impacts
Community Facilities and Services
Locations
Development Criteria and
That Reduce Vulnerability to Natural
of Land Use and Development
Being Available in Required Locations
Measures That Abate
Hazards
at Adequate Capacities to Support
Upgrades to.ExistingAccess
Impacts That Degrade
Reduction of Water Resource and
Planned Community Growth and
Locations
Water duality
Land Uses and Development Patterns
Water duality Degradation
Development Patterns
That Take Into Account the Existing and
Planned Capacity of Evacuation
Infrastructure
"LUP Policies: Natural
Hazards Miti ation
1 �:
Policy 57
Positive
Positive
Neutral
Neutral -Positive
Positive
Hazard Mitigation Plan
Policy 58
Positive
Positive
Positive
Positive
Positive
Sea -level Rise
Policy 59
Positive
Positive
Positive
Positive
Positive
Beach Erosion
Policy 60
Positive
Neutral -Positive
Positive
Neutral
Positive
High Winds
Policy 61
Positive
Positive
Neutral
Positive
Positive
Flooding Mitigation
Policy 62
Positive
Positive
Neutral
Positive
Positive
Wave Action and
Shoreline Erosion
Policy 63
Positive
Positive
Neutral -Positive
Positive
Positive
Development in
Hazardous Areas
Policy 64
Positive
Neutral -Positive
Positive
Neutral -Positive
Positive
Public Acquisition of
Hazardous Are

Mona ement Topics
Land Use Compatibility
Infrastructure
Public Access
Water Quality
Natural Hazards
L DRAFT IV: Policy Impact Analysis 194
Reduction in Habitat Loss and
Water, Sewer and Other Key
More Planned Access
Land Use and
Land Llsesand Development Patterns
Fragmentation Related to Impacts
Community Facilities and Services
Locations
Development Criteria and
That Reduce Vulnerability to Natural
of Land Use and Development
Being Available inRequired Locations
Measures That Abate
Hazards
at Adequate Capacities to Support
Upgrades to Existing Access
Impacts That Degrade
Reduction of Water Resource and
Planned Community Growth and
Locations
Water duality
Land Uses and Development Patterns
Water Quality Degradation
Development Patterns
That Take Into Account the Existing and
Planned Capacity of Evacuation
In astructure
tLUaPbPolicies: Water
Policy 66
Positive
Positive
Neutral
Positive
Positive
Stormwater Program
Policy 67
Positive
Positive
Neutral
Positive
Positive
Erosion and Sediment
Control
Policy 68
Positive
Positive
Neutral
Positive
Neutral
Exceeding Minimum
Standards Related to
Water Quality Rules
Policy 69
Positive
Neutral -Positive
Neutral
Positive
Neutral -Positive
Low Impact
Development
Policy 70
Positive
Positive
Neutral
Positive
Positive
Elimination of Septic
System Use
Policy 71
Positive
Positive
Neutral
Positive
Positive
Septic System
Decommissioning and
Encouraged Re -use for
Stormwater
Policy 72
Positive
Positive
Neutral
Positive
Positive
Retrofitting of Existing
Stormwater Drainage
Systems

Appendix V• Existin1l Development Program in Implementing the Policies and Goals of the Land Use Plan
Existing Management
Program
Land Use Compatibility
Infrastructure
Public Access
Water Quality
Natural Hazards
Reduction in Habitat Loss and
Water, Sewer and Other Key
More Planned Access
Land Use and Development
Land Uses and Development
Fragmentation Related to Impacts of
Community Facilities and
Locations
Criteria and Measures That
Patterns That Reduce
Land Use and Development
Services Being Available in
Abate Impacts That Degrade
Vulnerability to Natural Hazards
Required LocationsatAdequate
Upgrades to Existing
Water Quality
Reduction of Water Resource and
Capacities to Support Planned
Access Locations
Land Uses and Development
Water Quality Degradation
Community Growth and
Patterns That Take Into Account
Development Patterns
the Existing and Planned Capacity
of Evacuation Infrastructure
Ordinances/Regulations ,
Zoning Ordinance
Management of density and
Density and intensity
Density and intensity
Management of density and
Zoning in coordination with the
intensity standards in traditional
standards provide greater
standards prohibit
intensity standards in
Flood Prevention Ordinance
residential areas provide less
anticipation of capacity needs
-walling-off" public trust
traditional residential areas
require structural elevations or
impact on habitat. Zoning
and ensures infrastructure
areas with mega
provide less impact on habitat.
flood -proofing and other
environmentally sensitive land as
improvements can better keep
structures.
Zoning environmentally
development standards in
"Conservation" also aids in
up with growth.
sensitive land as Conservation
floodways. Density and intensity
protecting habitat and protecting
also aids in protecting habitat
standards minimize the size of
water quality.
and protecting water quality.
structures and population
exposed to erosion, storm surge
and flooding.
Subdivision Ordinance
Same as above. Planned
Same as above. Developer
Subdivisions may have
Same as above. Planned
Same as above (base zoning and
Residential Development (PD)
pays for additional
conditions that new
Development (PD) projects can
flood ordinance will apply).
projects can be clustered/designed
infrastructure needed to serve
public access be provided
be clustered/designed to avoid
Planned Residential
to avoid sensitive areas while still
subdivision.
in proportion to the
sensitive areas while still
Development (PD) projects can
reaching the allowable
density of the subdivision.
reaching the allowable
be clustered/designed to avoid
development density.
development density. Any
flood prone areas while still
future subdivisions would
reaching the allowable
likely be subject to stricter
development density.
regulations regarding
sedimentation and erosion
control, and stormwater
management which are
intended to protect/restore
shellfish waters.
Flood Damage Prevention
Prohibits substantially altering
N/A
Properties that may be
Prohibits substantially altering
Zoning in coordination with the
Ordinance
natural drainage and floodways.
unbuildable or
natural drainage and
Flood Prevention Ordinance
repetitively damaged may
floodways, and limits the
require structural elevations or
be identified for
placing of structures/materials
flood -proofing and other
acquisition by the Town
in floodways which could add
development standards in .
for use as public access,
pollutants to surface water if
floodways. Density and intensity
parking or other related
flooded.
standards minimize the size of
use.
structures and population
exposed to erosion, storm surge
and flooding.
'FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Appendix V: Existing Management Program in Implementing the LUP 195

Existing Management Program
Land Use Compatibility
Infrastructure
Public Access
Water Quality
Natural Hazards
Reduction in Habitat Loss and
Water, Sewer and
More Planned Access Locations
Land Use and
Land Uses and
Fragmentation Related to Impacts of
Other Key
Development Criteria and
Development Patterns
Land Use and Development
Community Facilities
Upgrades to ExistingAccess Locations
Measures That Abate
ThatReduce Vulnerability
Being Available in
Impacts That Degrade
to Natural Hazards
Reduction of Water Resource and Water
Required Locations at
WaterQuality
and Take Into Account the
Quality Degradation
Adequate Capacities
Existing and Planned
to Support Planned
Capacity of Evacuation
Growth and
Infrastructure
Development
Ordinances/Regulations Cont'd
Building Code (State Building
In conjunction with Zoning Ord., it
N/A
N/A
Regulates the removal of
In conjunction with
Code)
regulates the removal of
trees/vegetation during
Flood Ordnance, requires
• Filling, Grading and
trees/vegetation during development to
development to minimize
structures to be built to
Excavating
minimize impacts to wildlife habitat,
impacts to wildlife
the state minimum
• Abandoned
Town aesthetics, and to lessen erosion
habitat and Town
standards regarding
Structures/Demolition
and sedimentation of soil associated
aesthetics, and to lessen
wind and flood
with stormwater runoff.
erosion and
resistance. Includes
sedimentation of soil
provisions to condemn
associated with
and remove abandoned
stormwater runoff.
or dangerous structures
which may cause damage
to adjacent properties
during storm events.
Water and Sewer Use
Zoning and other development
Regulates and
N/A
N/A
N/A
Ordinance (under County
ordinances, in conjunction with the
manages the uses
authority)
water use ordinance, limit the locations
and standards for
where water infrastructure can be
utilizing the County
installed and provided.
water distribution
system.
Stormwater Regulations
Seeks to provide for the proper
N/A
N/A
Seeks to provide for the
Requiring development
management of stormwater on -site or
proper mngmnt. of
to increase its control of
• Stormwater
through a stormwater system that can
stormwater on -site or
stormwater volume and
Management
retain/detain, treat and
through a stormwater
velocity of discharge can
• Illicit Discharge
discharge/recharge in a controlled
system that can
minimize flooding and
manner to avoid flooding and water
retain/detain, treat and
erosion risks during
quality degradation.
discharge /recharge in a
storm events.
controlled manner to
avoid flooding and water
quality degradation.
Beaches and Waterways
Seeks to provide for the proper
N/A
Seeks to provide for the proper
N/A
Protection of the dune
Regulations
management of environmentally
management of environmentally
system provides better
sensitive and public trust areas so as to
sensitive and public trust areas so as
protection from erosion
• Dune Protection
avoid user conflicts and disturbance of
to avoid user conflicts and
and storm surge.
• Personal Watercraft
critical habitat.
disturbance of critical habitat.
Safety
Intends to protect the long-term
viability of the dune system and
• Obstruction of Canals
public beach strand from erosion by
• Unattended Property
protecting stabilizing vegetation.
on Beach Strand
DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Appendix V: E�ng Management Program in Implementing the LUP 196

W -Now
Existing Management Program
land Use Compatibility
Infrastructure
Public Access
Water Quality
Natural HazardsReduction
in Habitat Loss and
Water, Sewer and Other KeyMore
Planned Access Locations
Land Use and Development
Land Uses and Development
Fragmentation Related to Impacts of
Community Facilities and
Criteria and Measures That
Patterns That Reduce
Land Use and Development
Service Being Available in
Upgrades to Existing Access Locations
Abate Impacts That Degrade
Vulnerability to Natural
Required Locations at
Water QualityHazards
Reduction of Water Resource and
Adequate Capacities to
Water QualityDegradation
Support Planned Community
Land Uses ave nd Delopmrnt
Growth and Development
Patterns That Take Into
Patterns
Account the Existing and
Planned Capacity of
Evacuation In astructure
i Official Plans'
1 � �
CAMA Land Use Plan
Policies and goals set desired
Policies and goals set
Policies and goals further the
Policies and goals seek
Policies and goals
development patterns that seek
direction for the design,
expansion of public access by
to protect wetlands and
establish development
to avoid sensitive areas, retain
capacity, and management
actions such as identification of
address stormwater
density and intensi

Town of Sunset Beach CAMA Land Use Plan
Map Appendix
Map 1: Areas of Environmental Concern Map
Map 2: DCM Erosion Rate Map
Map 3: Water Quality Map
Map 4: Special Flood Hazard Areas Map
Map 5: Storm Surge Inundation Map
Map 6: North Carolina CREWS Wetland Areas Map
Map 7: Fish Nursery and Natural Heritage Areas Map
Map 8: Environmental Composite Map
Map 9: Existing Land Use Map
Map 10: Regional Wastewater Map
Map 11: Water and Wastewater Systems Facilities Map
Map 12: Transportation and Public Access Facilities Map
Map 13: Town Maintained Stormwater System Outfalls Map
Map 14: Land Suitability Analysis Map
Map 15: Future Land Use Classification Map
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 Map Appendix 198

END OF DOCUMENT
FINAL DRAFT of LUP 6/07/10 END OF DOCUMENT 199

BRUN�WICE� f�ILMINGTON
COU �Y 1 „ ,
BRUNS CK
17
COUNTY
17
87 133
904 SMALLOTTE
130
11
179 904
133
SUNSETBEACH
1 inch equals 2,000 feet
1 inch equals 0.38 miles
Map is to be used for general
informational purposes only.
Spatial data used to generate this
map was gathered from disparate
sources and represent a condition
at a fixed period in time.
100% accuracy of spatial data to
current circumstances cannot be
- guaranteed.
Am CUE FGR
COUNM OF Gd+ IO.. '7'S
Town of
Sunset Beach
'+�` F.� � r�at� ys„re�a`*�Y�11�`����� ��� �` � _ '• � sai 2006/2007 CAMA
-
,:;,!► Land Use Plan
t". s?.sew 7�/fJ!/N'�1(zal ":l ,.1`�� �,caP_'IR• h v ti •• ' ��',''I
w I
A, y �� Areas of
]r Environmental
Concern (AEC) Map
lob 0,
Legend
c-Au «sllriv�F �L. 1T Primary Road
Roads
Parcels
Cat• •'°� �i'i+i;� Pak r a, ` Cjw. � } i�: ti4�r *+ S1. _ -
�� �•.; �� �• tie" �_ Planning Jurisdiction
h u,iRa, a�i«aKat aC`lash w rra;,s. Y rvP,,�.t�t r QTownLimits
+url on�a.�i� • t ��'All
..
N l .,I;fliji/� ril7 fli 'r' r �,':�, •r`..�,,•- u w _ a'& ", _ 1 _�� QETJ
.. ?'� i1St Shady .'QR ttlC-.. �PE(Ir y.4t: IIRth ".,r .,«'.,v! • 7 n -.r ;aw.> r'�°sKQn �i.? (�. 3;E
�, .ar��iR l�iir",�Ittlt� ,1,. ,It�31 .�i• `tint tlr � _ , • N �r� t a s n a
'Ilu7ai�� �
• �, " t�i,Y � s SA Class Estuarine Waters
ij�.;L,�•� "r" ►�'��� l,�i91!' r�� cr �� ttiiHlf�ltrtltrtl+ ��`- s *'N: _ '7 S�'....: 75' Estuarine Shoreline AEC
�; it '!i■il� I.li31i r W1N aS�e�.�,t1 � � .ia-3 �v�d�air:.��.c,• �� • `� Coastal Wetlands
+f � r+ 't' •'air ��{�. '�s7a '�22'r � I _ �t� � � S � llttile
%: fed �ii•frv.7i `t , . 3 lr w.0��3ii a!�Uif� z �.
1:.�y+ ' ..�tF . � py'F.j?3j",�•r `�:t + till r"1HAII 7 bRT-W�-.�"43Fl.Illlt%•71i♦i °il!'i1m11�t11PlI'L'ill'J41�Sa'k711R.±r �lilli111iE _
� g s :. 4y. _ FI'Ft a f/� ,: ,"U ate. '• 1,-atl �iri►4ii S ,`�' o�ll i1:IG�0`.` .1111.t9«"1:>1B+y91._eci.1�SL•�I L:'.my'LSIIA/Cail�I'E".`: .•
{{ . i' L■,4s. p c. ti s�..aa c . a r a s i Ne+ dia
ji i'{ wfNeFlta • ,;T15��, � Ir.i... "AZ{..�1P __ '°��p3 � � -t Ll::WlrertA7ltI71N11 e s o iai �1i17.it` i1A r.■�,tlli� l s�J{111iillllr Il� elid'Do�owodl eaa•.rw..l f
Wet' 1 xiialu07in'
tit {{9.2� w t, ` W a. • � +k r' R 19� is"jtlnl� i { s 9 i pl3lll?I�ls ! f IE 1�67®Ro lil�l �SIU41 iiHlfll' r ••
'j$11 Mt �Y� a aKs ! •tfiu aU e i.
?ISSIE►magkivY 'eat,f'!tFlil63 3' " iii:illldaA1111RO1 BsllL¢y�trtl�73r'N17111+j!- •l+w� ■ ..xr«�e
•' ti�J�3li 711P
.1� aRll!■«tai79:i!a►
t . •' n I s F gil3$ ' �i01-lf
.41� '$tC�r�: �.1../ ��$�r< �..,�`«..� �. " r t �7. r+ate ae9..�t=/S a elfin �'-tTh_i€�.ile�r7R F_ ��•>`"' Ba ;aK9ti`.--I �r
t
"`"^ � ,ice✓ � }",r':."'rr �i1 � .r I►i�1t XL r`7�w�g _ .r�...�.ec s'r 's"'._�--•� Aj�.tG''.. E •'^a!'• h�try 1'� iitPefj h�!�.'k
�\ :�-�'� `..,e'..� r��w . ~C� S��Fi I.In©^ k�l►Yi'+e Jh�iiiR�r'}t i' �•(F''S,,,�P'!�' �.Qdi�zti/`1j{ y� p� f
m'�.• � ,�' �./ �r>��+�� .y�'•'J�'=i'_/.,�',�'; 11 Fa�i,�c.
a?yb�"y; ,�+�f ',,�+/.,-.a■`P '�--" .�` xS�ai:•w'��ICX4'f��a,�al1,��' M�'�,!.��rp:�S"a- �►FI'`�`�!i.,�
I\c Cn-51'AI. WA7E111 1 rf, fi,• �
f� �� �f/�,.,• .'' f r r,. The preparation of this map was financed
` i'
_,. �.•""�� ,,,+�� /! .>�'"�r- r, r�: -,_ " - j _. � -'" • „J`• � in art through a rant provided b the
P 9 9 P Y
/,�/I �%�/•/� y North Carolina Coastal Management
l///i ..�, r' F,'. _, .// /;�/ _fir *'..� '�- ,''.+ ;✓' �t� Program, through fundsprovided by the
•*�/ s','y' ! ,// / •�� "� r .r+" �� P t •e Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972,
��-' i r/��,.� ✓ 'f rr - �' t % ,- .��-- as amended, which is administered
r `' r by the office of Ocean and Coastal
/'+,,�� ✓° yj i' ,! ,. / Resources Management, National
r~- ,
+yam®Io�. ��///�� - �� �'�' . �' �/` ,r/J'/'" i ._ .^rj% "" ay �. //� � ''� ���' ;��///" �'�,./•/-✓'� � ` - Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
/ �i 1� r� ItA�jlk�d"i Ej4plVzrrar - _. '�n,' J -- Y.
fii /sj/,� /r t s oce ho
'- i•'r/�.r'',/'/' j J..r�y/ �G: N 4f l _�.
.s izs4e i s ShY�re ti Sl;tt�� _ �`�
r
�' 3 ci.r ic`a�;•�wurt. S'3'�.=��'Lewr�L .cct � � xri
U,/ / [��iR`-r.f rn�. tj, •�iit t- �mvKr;.n, +y y {�.. 'Main^rvw"-a z".�f:
� I l e
,:It- liti k
Map prepared by: 0 2,500 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000
Scott Logel Feet
Cape Fear Council of Governments
1480 Harbour Drive 0 0.5 1 2 3 4 MAP
Wilmington, NC 28401 Miles NQR�• Map Created
N 7/20/06

•
•
Intracoastal Waterway t
Intracoastal Waterway
Crt 0
O
j}t(
SET B
A H1
rI -+� � re r ' -I •V 'r4r h r }1 Er� t'r Inr tt � rJ ;
]� 2.0 12 ^O� EAN /5LE BEACH
2.0 "t 2.0 UBBS INLET 1
2.0 MAD INLET (CLOSED) 2.0 2.0
LITTLE RIVER IN t
Atlantic Ocean
N
s Scale 1:25,000
Sunset Beach
Lon_g-Term Average Annual Shoreline Change Study & Setback Factors
Updated Through 1998
REGIONAL MAP
1_­1J %- _ JONES
DUPLLIN r �-
BLADEN FENDER r
r orth Topsail Beach
_
�
uACity
74 W• ANOVER
COLUMBUS
rightsNllo Beach
' ~ 1 17 \
Atlantic Ocean
s,
Carolina Beach
Kure Beach
Fort Fisher
Legend
Eean Isle
Primary Road
inset Beach
0 CAMA County (Study Region)
, CAMA County
L—county Boundary
Scale 1:2,000,000
= P—an, Map Vicinity
North Carolina
Division of Coastal Management
This map is for general information only. The map illustrates
1998 Long-term average annual shoreline change rate
average rates of shoreline change over approximately 50 years.
developed by:
The information presented here is not predictive nor does it
NC State University's Kenan Natural Hazards
reflect the short-term erosion that occurs during storms. This
map may not be suitable for property -specific determination of
Mapping Program and North Carolina Division of Coastal
erosion rate factors due to its small scale. For a site -specific
Management
determination contact your CAMA Local Permit Officer or the
regional field office of the North Carolina Division of Coastal
Management.
For more information contact:
NC Division of Coastal Management:
Funding for this project was provided by:
1638 Mail Service Center
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Federal
Raleigh, NC 27699-1638
Emergency Management Agency, and North Carolina
(919) 733 - 2293
Division of Emergency Management
Or visit:
www.nccoastalmanagement.net
Scale of Feet
0 1,250 2,500 5,000
0 0.25 0.5 1
Scale of Miles
How to read Setback Factors
"2.0" Indicates a 1998 Setback (Erosion) Factor of 2.0 Feet / Year
1998 Setback Factor
2.0 Ft. / Yr.
2.5 - 3.0 Ft. / Yr.
3.5 - 4.0 Ft. / Yr.
4.5-5.0Ft. /Yr.
5.5 - 6.0 Ft. / Yr.
,{ 6.5-7.0Ft. /Yr.
® 7.5 - 8.0 Ft. / Yr.
- > 8.0 Ft. / Yr.
Legend
Inlet Hazard Area (Slight color transparency)
— — - Inlet Hazard Area Boundary
Setback Factor Boundary
--- Roads
This general area has been
influenced by beach nourishment
* either for beach protection or
dredge disposal. This action
artificially lowers the erosion
rate in this area.
Pagel of 60

Town of
Sunset Beach
a�fTr
�. a 2006/2007 CAMA
BRUNSWICK ILMINGTON y
COUNTY F _ S`.� ♦ • �Rt Land Use Plan
'•�fso ��, `l�°;;4�d4rf� + o '`•' `'`a'�,,,�,,�� � 904
Water Quality Map
} la7 Tat 17 s3 �Its
w� o Legend
anur:s.vcF ; wi'''� � � .1 � a �'N�1Mu{k� �, •- ,
cc.iN v o„! rsrrj►_ e` tT.� �e,va.,m ¢ " _,i� �.
�� � �^ .. - .,� Primary Road
17 la7 133 C w� t• t p;\L`,, — Roads
-I'LLCTIE v'z�J � `-:-
904
Planning Jurisdiction
130
Town Limits
179 90n4 k �fS n pr
�,133 TJ
5 Parcels
SUNSET BEACHAQ
1qy�'+j� y �� •..t a _ -
a
Closed Shellfish Areas
C-AVI 'l5HR11'ER
r SA Class Estuarine Waters
:M
14 Digit Hydrologic Units
ens Watershed
Kilb 'Slough,
t --_�� �-- u*� �� arICWW
'ti ^�s '�rt1 r+i �p�� BoOaPafte_ Ca a�`f�
���•�1', a9ii4iitit, txae.rn�lfltette+fr rr S�fLake y:
!t ; m�Shad "F• 1-.O�r + I ri- q<` r .��/,': - -� - ti Calabash Creek
y d est +r u .aft r re
T r �C �u �l rl� fit11 ra t t 1i871ktat+ti f'7'1 li ✓s
1 v �/ .tr�,t„ causnsHCREen 4i ICWW, Atlantic Ocean
� ` `y fl ,hgr iav�i•, ,tom P� rrrf�n,fy °"t ;t< �q � � : � '. -a �
Z•..�
-.,, 179 i•V' ��. _ l� ..+alfla�' lied. Yt��� ♦ ��.ey6� t'�` m r<� r, ��� L'�
* `-'1 •. � roi ;�r�Tii'r:'!i 1Fr�% i5l3j � : �+" `s. ,.... r..� .;� ,,�,,.
s
u
i dam,) / ���p 1tr �d r i N1 rIF a �n•�rtaf ! p PPti1111tltlntUlntt• A: 1.7. tt t t[ it : i tgaug!
Ze Oak s-,
uri_��• - ri;:irua;attinefdrv?tiv_tii„fL•.,fr,•,..,i.,�ttrf,=a.,ud`ulr
,. r11: 1. - enta9�s; a l:: `%' ��"� CE S J tlycfef •� ��e tij oq r rnr. r
r,l �t. _ H „,,•z, , r��. ..,. ,..a ss'"O y a �rirnnnnr�nrurntq!� �3 ursanlannn,nauruwrrufnnxur rautr�;;p. � ,i• g a ��: _ , ; ash .
• Slfl:•a9115V19tt: tr, .� 1��ei�$� _ g_: a .lj�� �' `�•- �nntxt�"irmtTt'' ancim n nuunnxrtrinniuintnuirrr r..., t i � I m. 1
a ,et ��:. �tlk 0 X --:. , t�a• �•,• •.I_l'•t4�! .�." � ..� o !�.. a FatlO'rtlltrM .,nteAt•a'l�r�^9`ail!utaei�mammwr•t^�.•n�•i�+am7�urrnrn�a .", , .,; � �F•p_ __I_,t.�.. + 1"1i♦:r',
r�s,0e. vr, '�, a a •_ agnl:
_ „ip...o i • war c:.i ��,o :�., �.L- eRiW.•, ��ercrn�uef�Mtl/.lp,{.4I.� •r't>�n4n'uwmiantrt��r—.r1►s .ol9io Ei3{,Rr�`rx+1.:��'.
saa !e _.<� ?.\� a Earliila; grsaijfarr sub' ��+�cF,.n ;'I�s• �.S,n/:{,yl,4Qhn,r�ir , f p ¢ or m, � -�, t =a
. %.?itr`w 4s '� „ 1• f' .!Ofiit f�� t�;S��'I�inrt'tAyf/ d /�.� ;i l� fir. !. I -„ <c.e- at! � �' ,�'i'j -.. i' c
!. f •star sxr •. + -
nM
.. ri>`: w' r.. � 1�e;-�� , \ �,fiIL�!!t! �f� m. � �r � � }. §gSS1 T � k A.tr /v r ar r a se:,�r' _ �:_- •+�.` �
a.N .a1!. { ,3 � // +� r. 4 j'"%_. l! a Y }.S 'r':.7tySt@y d+r 'x Al�!?il�t/ �� ! • �a."l/:'�+�-"_"-t�.� al7i":.?8 -� :�-,-':r i
fir_• "a��. _.__`-- li'�- �TE�i�-�{'� 1,��fi 3 Iie�i, f.al'`SF� V° €eF� Y r�=F! t
"9�i �,�� r I �� +tdl:J �.�„a' ��'L
jr1�d !► �� preparation of this map was financed
n7Raccas aL VA -r•>, , r��1(�(�• - x-j�; '�Ie in part through a grant provided by the
•ttfn�ei�!•�•: +� r pg 1 dm+
North Carolina Coastal Management
F a C^REE 11 Program, through fundsprovided by the
Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972,
1 inch e uals 2,500 feet as amended, which is administered
q by the office of Ocean and Coastal
1 inch equals 0.47 miles �� - t _ cRE-�
� � Resources Management, National
° Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
Map is to be used for general 5
E ISOL SG'Rt"F_'k
informational purposes only. f o aRs �Ra ¢RceK
Spatial data used to generate this C• a„ov -REEK
map was gathered from disparate lttl f t irtkt „tA II N"aith' Shbr
' r— , 9 °1.. a rtltfl+
sources and represent a condition 1 � J.tocfh9��oFe
at a fixed period in time. w Lk tq
100%accuracy of spatial data to SALrE3�IL•cR c-GrcK n w N ., " ,• -.
ma ,,,„„ 6t SCR1 C-rr.1vvcL '.,i •„'Ocean 151e
rM$r t xur t rt u n . t
current circumstances cannot be �� --=,--,,, IN,nnrr I�IL F •
guaranteed.ilitl
"PC= CAW. FEAR
-•ti•+ ru re •Eav
�oLNCILOFG IS h DRAFT
Map prepared by: 0 2,500 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000
Scott Logel
Cape Fear Council of Governments Feet
1480 Harbour Drive 0 0.5 1 2 3 4 5 4 MAP
Wilmington, NC 28401 A Map Created
Miles r/•/ 8/20/07 3

B
_......crir L l8'
SUNSETBEACH
What is a Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA)?
In accordance with the National Flood
nsurance Program (NFIP), FEMA has
undertaken flood hazard identification and
mapping to produce Flood Hazard Boundary
Maps, Flood Insurance Rate Maps, and Flood
Boundary and Floodway Maps. Several areas
of flood hazards are commonly identified on
these maps. One of these areas is the Special
Flood Hazard Area (SFHA), which is defined
as an area of land that would be inundated by
a flood having a 1 % chance of occurring in any
given year (previously referred to as the base
flood or 100-year flood). The standard
constitutes a reasonable compromise
between the need for building restrictions to
minimize potential loss of life and property
and the economic benefits to be derived from
floodplain development. Development may
take place within the SFHA, provided that
development complies with local floodplain
management ordinances, which must meet
the minimum Federal requirements. Flood
insurance is required for insurable structures
within the SFHA to protect federally funded or
federally backed investments and assistance
used for acquisition and/or construction
purposes within communities participating in
the NFIP.
Source: www.fema.gov/fhm/fq_term.shtm
Map is to be used for general
informational purposes only.
Spatial data used to generate this
map was gathered from disparate
sources and represent a condition
at a fixed period in time.
100% accuracy of spatial data to
current circumstances cannot be
guaranteed.
0
CAIt t'E�lt
CDUVCQ. OF G(ATRXIENTS
Map prepared by:
Scott Logel
Cape Fear Council of Governments
1480 Harbour Drive
Wilmington, NC 28401
� a�� 5c fey ,r `►c'
W
Town of
Sunset Beach
2006/2007 CAMA
Land Use Plan
Special Flood Hazard
Area Map
M '
Legend
'�t�tl►r t ,
--�����....�.�... Primary Road
Tin' F,twm'I.n+a+.
Roads
l Planning Jurisdiction
Town Limits
ETJ
Parcels
AE
VE
iFi'M.�JS.f a ' rf dsup; �rroUk?�fix,'.;-`W' i
nl 0. ft 1111E I�Jq Yf. L'�'e"`-Oak'��Ixlelltll �'��=�•'41: �`If 1 UIII.Ny ems' pk -�7��m
ISiHIjZ .! llirtat �In-.tls;. sstasseG REl'1EiMj�� , �—".r � r,C 9 cf a7 � i � � 1 d , t��c��•�
aalnuanilttlllnlr a is 1 >tnnml I ti� y� in ' •y} !i.
119 1f'Ef111�iT76�sY1 aP s t ^+ 1 4nawt`,•ti �Y�'R US{!u 111 i �.. "C. � � 1 inch equals 2,500 feet
min wuitZ UQ; urr� ' lKk t 1f1.>u°a
Oa' !I o ry tea s �3Y
a1t1WlFt• ' b h FI "gr _, ! �r '� 1 rpe-1l.� .'���A sue. a
N�. _ rn ' 1 inch equals 0.47 miles
E rc �a e e• t "`-�j�'�i Bartle je � �� Y r'I
preparation of this map was financed
in part through a grant provided by the
�»• ;K,��s > `' w North Carolina Coastal Management
Program, through fundsprovided by the
$ Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972,
i as amended, which is administered
e by
the office of Ocean and Coastal
Resources Management, National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
SiILL'�GI.Eck � -
DRAFT
0 2,500 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000
Feet
0 0.5 1 2 3 4 5 NQ, Map Created MAP
Miles Rty 8/20/07 4

0
f
3RUi !SVVlCK—J i_ ;VdILM1 4GTOf'! .'.
JI 'TY� :
AQ
_ � Late � �!,�• .F �r ECarl��le
87 1
...
17�/
,_,
133�-37
`
11g04,
�i211
J
f p/
r.
SUNSET BEP.Cl-
Hurricane Storm Surge Innundation Area (Fast
Moving Storm) The National Hurricane Center,
in cooperation with the North Carolina Center
for Geographic Information and Analysis,
the GIS data Hurricane SterT-
'
I
caveloped set,
p
Surge Inundation Areas (1993), to reevaluate the
extent of the areas affected by hurricane
inundation along the North Carolina coast.
The data depicts the extent of hurricane storm
surge inundation areas based on SLOSH (Sea,
Lake, and Overland Surges from Hurricanes)
models, for the North Carolina coast. The FAST
model depicts hurricanes with forward velocities
greater than 15mph. Storm surge is water that is
pushed toward the shore by the force of the
This
winds swirling around the storm. advancing
surge combines with the normal tides to create
the hurricane storm tide, which can increase the
m:
mean water level 15 feet or more. In addition,
wind driven waves are superimposed on the
storm tide. This rise in water level can cause
severe flooding in coastal areas, particularly
when the storm fide coincides with the normal
high tides. The storm surge inundation area data
used for the planning jurisdiction is based on the
SLOSH Model developed by NOAAS National
Weather Service.
Map is to be used for general
informational purposes only.
Spatial data used to generate this
map was gathered from disparate
sources and represent a condition
at a fixed period in time.
100% accuracy of spatial data to
current circumstances cannot be
guaranteed.
Gll'r hr:+a
r uurn;u. IN u .rx` 1rx!l
Map prepared by:
Scott Logel
Cape Fear Council of Governments
1480 Harbour Drive
Wilmington, NC 28401
i
Qy�
r f
�*'niftp� iT:sn�
�it;3t8�''f 1 it Sa"t 'r•'C'a:
179
RAI
S� u_ Sy ec
S-
a..� . ,.
ra
71.
r� i« —� E it �a 'h19 .V � J7' S PiG•�j
,'r'i•^'�__•.,_,��..,u 1rr:y lytii Hickoa.
Waterway
Town of
904 Sunset Beach
Z.
j 2006/2007 CAMA
'u Land Use Plan
ru
3
Storm Surge
Inundation Map
Legend
=--- Primary Road
Roads
Planning Jurisdiction
Town Limits
ETJ
i
1 �
V
Parcels
Storm Surge
Hurricane
{
aslli
Categord 1 & 2
r$I
atMti:ijir
Category 3
4n�� ea•ewsr,:: •
Category 4 & 5
i u'#`c r
13 3
ram: ,.
-? 1 inch equals 2,000 feet
1 inch equals 0.38 miles
The preparation of this map was financed
in part through a grant provided by the
North Carolina Coastal Management
Program, through fundsprovided by the
Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972,
as amended, which is administered
by the office of Ocean and Coastal
+' Resources Management, National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
_—
Er
.. DRAFT
0 2,500 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000
Feet
0 0.5 1 2 3 4 /I/®eT Map Created M5 P
Miles n 8 8/20/07
0
/ I m
v
i` co
E y
11=.inMain
..
nth rAlain F gain f•.4zin — - ';

0
�lT� �. t: tlNttl'3 3
�• �,•�=ate ` ,e, � Town of
3 Sunset Beach
�• a it 4nFcrum 3
2006/2007 CAMA
Land Use Plan
BRUr4 WICK ILMINGTON
COUNTY
North Carolina Coastal
r
B 0ou
.a t����� Resource Evaluation of
/f a :� .rsFSc • `
6 rr"lyrt-'� t�`':,- ,� 2 Wetland Systems
74 \"y a3`t's., �AM< �-, �rY IdGeor a :j;.,.,,6,� 3 3 NC -CREWS Map
ss8'C� ` ♦ - O g tpW '3 2j
(\87 74 17 'aQ� F� tygd a �"' a �+.. ., A" lts=• "yi. n 179 3 ' ; g Le end
2Primary Road
2foil.
+'.:.�♦:�`'�� se+ iS+„ iy��cK. � ' d i �'/v5,y m - d,7�r f F!� Iii �t�n�Yirlrllti�p Roads
133 .sue+, 6 �..,. 1 ' �`.• s t o� 2 !`'{•• i-• ; ,'►tiM� 1NINRtt[!
n g„ �cr=arm'1 k se < I t c,h t Planning Jurisdiction
z E yytlE..,d , Ft {t
soa 1 Y•'ia F Y t „> ,. !r►` 2 rn tra QTown Limits
13°J 'i4" •s� L :,, rr- _ :,,__i_ _ r � �. is !D �8;
QETJ
NC CREWS Wetlands
SUNSETBEACH 3 t'Rs va 1 4` �h9ef' 2 Type
/ o'S r iY�i y�'s'" .,. _3 ,..,• 2 C/Ub a Bottomland Hardwood
r i, z 2
Non -coastal wetlands/propable 404 wetlands 2 F , ��s: _ � g Estuarine Forest
(NC -CREWS) - Section 404 of the Federal , z Estuarine Shrub -Scrub
Water Pollution Control Act t W Cle
an ean Water a p' 2 _-
( .� re`�` 3 z 2 3 Hardwood Flat
Act) defines wetlands as areas that are �r. �{',, r •` ,�,�. ;, z 2
inundated or saturated by surface water or ��' Human Impacted
ground water at a frequency and duration w w ha? r'ttE ,� w Ca E
sufficient to support, and that under normal .:h Bcrapaile abash —+ dear/ �tt9llM'rnpl a ray s Managed Pineland
htln►lnlri�
circumstances do support, a prevalence of "'►+rn +.► "' �u� i ftitlf[4! E 3
PPo P "� ` �l7iFlf[tlR,l► i - �'•` �° s Pine Flat
arM+r�..r,,r t rei+�NlHttf1i 1fr Se4Lakes 2 z +
vegetation adapted to life in saturated soil � � ,., •�,. I�'p $
conditions. The North Carolina Coastal �'y�;@F� ►Sha�y�Forest sF �'tr FI {rr 5° tr ,,, 3 Kirn
�+++=►�'i{ ffltF�rri(!iN' 'u- 'tq.71t11ntt,m .1+ ry+r.� l .. 1,. 9s � Pocosin
Region Evaluation of Wetland Significance,
~
eg 9 t✓yf',�_» n,Lifi'.,�:,,ti� , , tv� r,�1 • �'... r►.n,F, ,c1 c,._ic.• s� c- � _
or NC -CREWS, is a watershed -based rtS'�lf FII lttiiliNflll111.1►311, IrirNf�and'ggi „ Medcalf -- `rI , ,3 J5e r z 2 ��' Swamp Forest
wetlands functional assessment modelt1�re� drobN°
179 �o * 1,} J •a _ , aa`.v.4.•iF. - ay k,.0 ..
that usesgeographic informations stems ,; Sea �:` ! a ga> °" r a r5lf _ : - F _ �; i Parcels
Y .�' � - - t� kgas "- a 1� I
ter. [ —�, P f 11' n
uwsn �i^^,l 3 �. '► Nro,,,,.,_,,,wtiR'r.�1�: rAiJrllinititr:Flll FViN."V�llM11 I_ z� R �r; m hn oM,_ B a '+, '", ti a'+"nn- Label Key:
(GIs) software and data to assess the level r: fib• _ � _ -
a.a. :Heritage 5+ •a n ;,,_;R' 4.
of waterquality,wildlife habitat, and ,,.._. 1. r. y kE .- ii " ;,r,.:.dwtla• . ,, pon I F f iatlt l !° )M: .r °.1•f "u 'Newton"�x_x:ry: krE' : ust ,ob son::' •, The number label on the wetlands refers to
<3ml R fF iFF.. iUF m- a17NIFN I Fd a :FRDogwood aii �.:. . •a .,..Et:: .9 ': ti F.:, ;l r, - , a
Ii 1, rrmrur•i{I+�{ir y ii tc�� . fir
hydrologic functions of individual wetlands. ' y-d<F 1 ,��. 3!' U*� L'J c ho ': j! -nt3n► oAalcnmwmtflr mxu. ans,watnr +:r .,,._,�i., n ',��, �(+ NnFrc L a -{� �, potential risk factor to watershed integrity if
et3rIM1'' q�? _- - t' rK7 3 - ado .�`. ' _ SlailO �,rr..r.:,!mur"i+r' .RC?I[►,161E11 iF!'Ipri d,l ti"-r"•x• !81'l/1C/771HAir umi'r ,-. ;, U
The primary objective of the NC -CREWS r Forest _Sw t 4aanolia-- Maonolia — �++ .ni wetland is destroyed.
►t -r.. AI'ih.....�,... 3 FBffiUm!tlFiuFt ..:au
wetland functional assessment is to provide i r ` th.r �f TJBHUI�I�. Mon,f `y1FFi�N�iR 3 t1 n Ode !' r p�r o + o•. �- -y '� o
,, Camelliaiia► i M+i 3 S ,.w V• c1r��a ,_ts ;[ e
users with information about the relative Schuyler ncac �.. =1lrF�1[jj,[,, a•1�, l: ti,Y F a o . � :.�,� _';�;� ; -.._ 3 = High Risk; 2 = Not High Risk; 0 = Not Rated
gyp. ill::if: ✓•'.:?//i8lf C r 'J/B Nurg n 0 a .0 =i c
ecological importance of wetlands for use in 'r —Sho,zl new [T✓AtYtii •K ��xr�l F.;F yr! _ Barr e r r -- ei yir =s . _ ��4 0 v
t1� `} fi` ` — ♦Iti�.°n fii.1�!vi;i ."milli R at y ,I� �6�e. l'�. ��le ai c " iq fr
tannin and the overall management of -1 t r SI orehne � �� .. _ .t ., t • n
planning 9 �� � 1i � .� rix ,Kw S��At �=tc, aim +•p
wetlands. NC -CREWS produces 3 possible �,r� .� IyF Conal 1 okes'''ri , • r[tr + '� °* N c ti r The preparation of this ma was financed
• k, _ �A:�'�irc. • • e ��.(iti �= r t -� i cT � `F o P P P
overall wetland rating scores: Exceptional r, j jjjjj 1 r �/� �in,Ti F 4 of ♦, ; �ll�
in part through a grant provided by the
Significance, Substantial Significance, or ► 1{j,{ �-: �! � it1l ar
Beneficial Significance. NC -CREWS also —` '� ,. i„ :! ,o-Attred�!'i ; ! T�� 7�FD North Carolina Coastal Management
evaluates the potential risk to watershed X EK 0 ° ' t •taw; Mtn "ldProgram, through fundsprovided by the
integrity if identified wetlands were "lost". C Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972,
as amended, which is administered
Source: http://dcm2.enr.state.ne.us/ ncrews.htm BONA ARTEC•REEK eU� -REEK - by the office of Ocean and Coastal
Wetlands/nccrews.htm
i cam•;Mc EEK Resources Management, National
Map is to be used for general - Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
informational purposes only.
Spatial data used to generate this ti
y. ' ° ° CRSE FERD CREEK
map was gathered from disparate c- a,-oN •REEK daf �,,,:
sources and represent a condition da„ �r0 ,•. -�ti
at a fixed period in time. n nfA, 88 iN111' Nor,h Shor �`
P Shcre e rc..'a ■ .�
100% accuracyof s atial data to ~o r t Shoff + 1 `;,i11w.wttA 1 •
P AL (J RCREEK +7w - ca 'm` a p. +Glf E.'lli `
current circumstances cannot be _r 4 a oo U x -Er, a "an Isle
guaranteed. .1s
. •,,,.�, u:. ,.,, t
'' ���� 1!� S .r f�ii17�ii ' , +r nr� it'll::. ' 1' •11� /, .. K� .W ++i r+T. A-
M
,
°,r�LOFG1E� DRAFT
Map prepared by: 0 2,500 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 1 inch equals 2,500 feet
Scott Logel
Cape Fear Council of Governments140 Harbour Drive Feet 1 inch equals o.a7 miles
WtBmi gton, NC 28401 0 0.5 1 2 3 4 5Miles /(/ Map Created M6P
Rty 8/20/07

17
,i
I.Tr
17 `, 'a7
BEACH
Significant Natural Heritage Areas (SNHA) are
areas identifying sites (terrestrial or aquatic)
that have particular biodiversity significance.
A site's significance may be due to the
presence of rare species, rare or high quality
natural communities, or other important
ecological features.
Bird Island is one of the few remaining
undeveloped barrier islands in North Carolina.
•
The Federal and State Threatened loggerhead sea
turtle nests on the island. The Federal and State
Threatened seabeach amaranth grows on the upper
beach. Natural communities found here include Salt
Marsh, Upper Beach, Dune Grass, and Maritime
Shrub. Bird Island is owned by the Division of
Coastal Management, and is a Dedicated State
Nature Preserve.
Sunset Beach Wood Stork Ponds has many
ponds and impoundments which support the
northem-most post -breeding site for the
Federal and State Endangered wood stork.
Before the area was developed into
residential and recreational uses, it
supported Coastal Fringe Evergreen Forest.
This site is privately owned.
Source: "An Inventory of the Significant Natural
Areas of Brunswick County, North Carolina".
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program
Map is to be used for general
informational purposes only.
Spatial data used to generate this
map was gathered from disparate
sources and represent a condition
at a fixed period in time.
100% accuracy of spatial data to
current circumstances cannot be
guaranteed.
C.SP. FTAR
CYAIhYJI. Ci rA?e7JvA'L•�7S
Map prepared by:
Scott Logel
Cape Fear Council of Governments
1480 Harbour Drive
Wilmington, NC 28401
a
BONAPARTE LANDING MARITIME FOREST
BIRD ISLAND.
j
SUNSET BEACH WOOD STORK PONDS
4Wv
Town of
179''• 904 Sunset Beach
r
�.7�?Vr r .: z tw7i,�
lip„ ':•� r tf.i niiirriwu. uN�x'
2006/2007 CAMA
Land Use Plan
4a'P4F� , Primary Fish Nursery
and Significant Natural
�•f ' Heritage Areas Mafia
t
!1r s
Legend
Primary Road
-
3 r• �' e Roads
Planning Jurisdiction
9
ir.> -�' To�nm Limits
E T J
Parcels
Fish Nursery Area
uy Significant Natural
fi) R
Heritage Area
tt tN_�si' ''fT'E;�Nr lr t11F 9to11 'Ij,^!`'VISM r2 s, wt nutl'uttfo n'
.au6l +odCr711!'�'�i(rl t>itt tN :: �� kf,�T� h''.. tttt ticat6j+ifM— ..=ru Prima Nurse Areas are located in the
�ifA717itP EF_ oD7st - .. 16 ictr t. 1N7tlFUktrtlll�: ,dDrsftSRL fr�11 „,tN�iea� .t rY Nursery
1"� ` °d6� attlNl! { Ill t 2r 7i i[IiltOtAt+» t�7 ci(t [Irit �••+ r upper portions of creeks and bays. These
"'�°111tt`1;t-',rys*r, _�_sic�gfEtnelitlZ�ln_�►°t�t. t�t_«It�E7t11nrtfillE"nu t�ttt�.hititi[tt r"`� 9:r• areas are usually shallow with soft muddy
21,
}'afrT% I:1 IiR CisdfEq <<'� dr'P'+► '•rti°a:'r+ bottoms and surrounded by marshes and
..ecr ':'1..L':ii._ IiStIRi T 0 •: aren rc
iRFsaui�9Pd� *� k! wetlands. Low salinity and the abundance of
.� F-iil�'C�r,_'+ `'�NNn .y +• �A . '<�r" r�f'rrn arir Ott { -
ood in these areas are ideal for young
er ! �►•a S�ie.ehr. nsh and shellfish. to protectjuveni!es. many
•nr agtr,t'-
i 11 —1 �fe m+ y:l►_=, , ti ��u',.� t�t�,� err[ — commercial fishing activities are prohibited
�t1�r �,� r %irk t . for 'f� (�¢ , r in these waters; including the use of trawl
j3gal �►� +^ r "' —i= nets, seine nets, dredges or a mechanical
POOL
f rs rn J ; *.�a methods used for taking clams or oysters.
s
1
}/ The preparation of this map was financed
in part through a grant provided by the
North Carolina Coastal Management
ter Program, through fundsprovided by the
po/
rt� Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972,
JINK$ c-FE as amended, which is administered
�f by the office of Ocean and Coastal
' Resources Management, National
r' Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
R t rntltli n �, t
�Idh `�i'...: i � , soar- r.•u,h
P 1 3✓zT SAID 2 v-. �,
F � S �* : 7 n ,tY 7 .. �'� } '•'^yS1M+ _"i b'trA_�.. .. _-"rtrgrrn,Rh L- ` f.
ATLS N'IEE��E.: `l.
DRAFT
0 2,500 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 1 inch equals 2,000 feet
Feet 1 inch equals 0.38 miles
0 0.5 1 2 s 4 N®4
r Map Created
Miles 7/20/06
MAP
7

Y
5-i
17
Aso.
74
87 74
,17
13
17 87
ET BEACH
Map is to be used for general
informational purposes only.
Spatial data used to generate this
map was gathered from disparate
sources and represent a condition
at a fixed period in time.
100% accuracy of spatial data to
current circumstances cannot be
guaranteed.
CAPE FEAR
CCITINUL QI :-Oil UCIA�I
Map prepared by:
Scott Loge[
Cape Fear Council of Governments
1480 Harbour Drive
Wilmington, NC 28401
RM,
A, "Clld
17
M
F,,r',St n K '179 Sea
V,
AN
YX
N�
2�
�a 0, -7
Town of
Sunset Beach
2006/2007 LAMA
Land Use Plan
7
4Y Suns -at
bve Oak
47 Nemon
X Dociwood
alion _f: v 1 inch equals 2,500 feet
lagnol4r,
Camellia
F
1 inch equals 0.47 miles
0
M
%
Y)
D ..IThe preparation of this map was financed
17% T-RA C: C A S L WA 7 L R VVA S
AQ in part through a grant provided by the
a I'll North Carolina Coastal Management
Fay C CRE_
REFJ, Program, through fundsprovided by the
Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972,
as amended, which is administered
C,EEKA* by the office of Ocean and Coastal
c
CREEK
Resources Management, National
C Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
"Vol,
...........
Shore
-D
in
........... . _,*.'.-,,_(`,'.'.-;
44W
2 ocean Is c
st
El
0 2,500 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000
Feet
4 IV
0 0.5 1 2 3 4 5 04 8r
Map Created
Miles
7/20/07
MAP
8

I
Y—� ' ,
ERIJ SWICI., I" t!IN�IICrd
74 `<
87 74 17 '
4 � �
17 133
_ 87
904 \
4
lull.,�211
179 9 4 1338.. .,
2EACH
Map is to be used for general
informational purposes only.
Spatial data used to generate this
map was gathered from disparate
sources and represent a condition
at a fixed period in time.
100% accuracy of spatial data to
current circumstances cannot be
guaranteed.
CCAINCIL nF G(TVF-H N1F.N'TS
Map prepared by:
Scott Logel
Cape Fear Council of Governments
1480 Harbour Drive
Wilmington, NC 28401
m.
904 Town of
tIl-;;LL Sunset Beach
2006 CAMA
Land Use Plan
Existing Land Use Map
Legend
Land Use
7.
s Single -Family
Single -Family Attached
Duplex
- GAX: RIDGE PLANiATIGN �."!_`_-a1= Multi -Family
ltWi: D NV Ia5 E7 LAKES � � w
�r sHAOY.FrJPE�T N - ,'. Manufactured Housing
s cek Common Area
�-..
L o t - .c =+ /- - .. " Golf Course
i.
Golf Course with Clubhouse
�e'`�1 - �t Commercial
r[P
TL.TI- Il- !u�.L?OG'AOGD a 1
Utilities
1�OL'FJGL� �• 2., - � ��I I � I f I.Ii L 7 I' 1. i �V... I f �, !' i
aAN .,Rr.FA,R R Institutional
LE Y• I 1 i �• wit r r - \ / ! ��. , .45y LULA..
E, %%/ iEl�Sx� r �P��' r w� sr '^</ 5', rL 7 Cemetery
I L }1�� '� RATER `�,AYr ��0 _2 ._i Institutional
.. %: 2 CJ Vacant
2.
T. Marsh/Beach/Natural State
The preparation of this map was financed
in part through a grant provided by the
North Carolina Coastal Management
Program, through fundsprovided by the
Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972,
as amended, which is administered
I + by the office of Ocean and Coastal
Resources Management, National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. O os h n.
-- ,: .. - . / ,. ,/ ;, .,,, c.-.' x• �-��_'_+- � y
r
1• 'i1�. I i f i IV i I III .; �'Y 1 1 i`''"`�
/ lC �( L •Jr. '.l I :Ii j i II -I �, I li I
- 11y 111f ., J
77"M DRAFT
`` --' � �.x '� `' ram" . �, _ A-s,n^C C/EE.;n•
0 2,500 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 1 inch equals 2,000 feet
Feet 1 inch equals 0.38 mile:
0 0.5 1 2 3 4
Miles n/afi%,i
Map Created MAP
10/22/06 9

Brunswick County
• ! Comprehensive
Wastewater Master- Plan i
.�0-Year Regional
Sewer Collection System
Infrastructure
•
2"
16"
1 g"
20"
r.:aca 24„
Local Collection System
Southwest Region
Northeast Region
Southeast Region
West Region
Highways
Municipal Boundaries
10000 0 10000 20000 30000 Feet
•
ti Southwest Regional
Service Area
NC 904�
us 17
(20,000 LF) n
Carolina Shor
Shallotte
Water I
Facility
(33,200 LF) 1
Calabash - Ocean We Beach
Sunset Beach
West R
Water F
Facility
(15,6001
1 r��
O�
Holden Beach
Northwest ---
Northeast Regionall
Service Area
`Qi l Northeast Regional
Water Reclamation
Sandv Creek (56400 G Facility
Leland
— ti NavA'ssa \ B ville
ca
i"
1 J
O
R
Vest Regional 1 v
Service Area
Bolivia �11
Southeast
)nal ��e� Regional
Motion (33,60o LF) Service
/ (13,000 � Area
Fy
s (4,500 LF) �p
T
(73,0p0 ) (6,600 LF) Southeast Regional;
cF Boiling Spring Lake Water Reclamation;;
ay Nc?i� Facility
(4)
hS dp-
61)
Varnamtown ^�� NGT,\,\
I -
+talc Island /
Southport
Bald Head Island

1 Si
E TVVICK
psk7 IS Town of
Sunset Beach
'M 2006/2007 MAMA
Land Use Plan
904 Water and Wastewater
Systems Facilities Map
� c �
im

•
I Y p
r_'i vl /J �-�HAD FGPEST-
� Z
-i
i
74I`
_. --
1 �87_
14,� _
13J
13
SLINSET BEACH
Map is to be used for general
informational purposes only.
Spatial data used to generate this
map was gathered from disparate
sources and represent a condition
at a fixed period in time.
100% accuracy of spatial data to
current circumstances cannot be
guaranteed.
Map prepared by:
Scott Loge]
Cape Fear Council of Governments
1480 Harbour Drive
Wilmington, NC 28401
TLAKES,
Q
ram_ 'LAB pm�
-i jT
E 3yOR
2C AKEs E_ __/
• gMEP,
w
z
m O J
OAK 2
._.SHORELINE
17
".CANAL
.,i 6���cyp�ocs
DOL�v
zi
�n
LIVE OAK--- --
T 2
DOGWOOD-- - 41-- OOGWOGD--
STATION jpy
MAGNOLIA.__.._.._ .
—AZALEA. - O GREAT O ��,\LLSX-OLJGH 11 K. _
01,
Ak y
h
tF-SHORELINE
ISTEOO - �ti0 .,
2006 Seasonal
Traffic Count Station
v
M
in
w
z
- �HLET- OPR.PT
G
_ ._RIVERSIDE -
x .. -a S 7.7 z y ¢
zI
---- - "4 RTH SHORE I —I
I i I Z
I
w _ ..� ro N iv F ' K a m rr
W. MAIN=�.—._�C__L (—[_L k m mLo -_
- CA,NAL-
^—E MAIN
0 1,500 3,000 6,000 9,000 12,000
I Feet
0 0.25 0.5 1 1.5 2
- - --- - — Miles
Town of
Sunset Beach
2006/2007 CAMA
Land Use Plan
Transportation and
Public Access
Facilities Map
Legend
Primary Road
Roads
--
Unpaved Roads
Town Limits
ETJ
_Ta
Potential Public
Access Sites
Public Beach
Access Sites
DOT Properties and
Easements for Bridge
Parcels
The preparation of this map was financed
in part through a grant provided by the
North Carolina Coastal Management
Program, through fundsprovided by the
Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972,
as amended, which is administered
by the office of Ocean and Coastal
Resources Management, National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
DRAFT
1 inch equals 1,442 feet
1 inch equals 0.27 miles
Map Created
®��'�/ 8/22/07

L
3PIJPlS'.NI
i17
�74
a��1 74S
�- 17 '87 'I33
s�
surisE EEPCH
Map is to be used for general
informational purposes only.
Spatial data used to generate this
map was gathered from disparate
sources and represent a condition
at a fixed period in time.
100% accuracy of spatial data to
current circumstances cannot be
guaranteed.
Map prepared by:
Scott Logel
Cape Fear Council of Governments
1480 Harbour Drive
Wilmington, NC 28401
SEW.
III -ET
_ f
e�
Hr:pl y13E
� U
y
J
J
n
iIGH '.AkF.Y ET Town of 1
_ Z r
Sunset Beach
41
_ I
2Q06/2007 CAMA
Land Use Plan
Town Maintained
Stormwater System
'v ®utfall Map
F Legend
F„° --- Primary Road
Stormwater Conveyance
and OUtfall Locations
® Town Limits
ETJ
NORTH SHOFE
0 1,250 2,500 5,000 7,500 10,000
Feet
0 0.25 0.5 1 1.5 2
Miles
The preparation of this map was financed
in part through a grant provided by the
North Carolina Coastal Management
Program, through fundsprovided by the
Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972,
as amended, which is administered
by the office of Ocean and Coastal
Resources Management, National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
I rr.
I
DRAFT
1 inch equals 1,190 feet
1 inch equals 0.23 miles
Map Created MAP
N®Rty 10/30/06 13

_--
T \:4. HARRs Town of
4.
'�. Sunset Beach
d.
.%=—� tPA
I''4ESTlY!CK q 111 006/2007 CAMA
BRUKSWICK� j y1NILMINGTON m
»IJNTY
Land Use Plan
< ",PUSH
c
s�
�04
1 `- o > Land Suitability
0 h74 G4E4I
Analysis (LSA) Map
„� � . F• r-. E7 �
co
/ 44
\, 7 741 p . V,INS
1,171
17 L O %STLEUO
-L•D GF'd'L G-�
c l ="—s r°'•ti'" °� Legend
DEACON _ i GULLEY P' CNA"NFL I
17• (87 '•133f ` MEARES �Fg,R O,F� '�j I Primary Road
f Z O
¢ �Ej�Y UFO �_ 'A C�9NNE: I
I
1 kP,KER Roads
211 ;, 1 OJ-P
9 90 \33 T A ^' ! a�� Planning Jurisdiction
SUNSET BEACH 5 ���t -', Q Town Limits
Q ETJ
iN J RIC
The Data below was used in creating the LSA. Each r �� Land Suitability
dataset was placed into a "suitability" category base Least Suitable
on its characteristic as either supporting or limiting p ER
development activity. 5�
--Criteria and Rating----- Jr 3r 0 Low Suitability
g I
Layer Name sanabla smrabmry Sultab(ary Sultabillty BONA, eo E GALA .Y 2� 'A LEAK
.TE I' BASH Medium Suitability
Coastal Wetlands inside Outside � �i� 'tGD r'UL� � y Q
Substantial Noncoaslet w SHADY FOREST I m SET LAKFS n 1 2 Y
Watlnn ti Inside Outside F r 0 Medium -Highest Suitability
m
hest Suitabili Hi 0 Estuarine Waters Inside Outside ¢ `0 LANDING O \NGS c� to g ty
Protected Lands Inside Outside
IJEDCALF m rn p Z
Outside179 m J\EW 'n `4i W n HALE,
Federal Lands Inside Outside
SEA RK' aPy F ��`E- ? AY a n z
State Lands Inside Outside CpQ- <q G G BEACH
Bene icial oncoastal '� kE SHORE ;<`
HERITAGE R ,`' T K LIVE OAK r� 'EARL
Wetlands Inside Outside FS O 5 �
ORT DOGWOOD Cp BO-TUCK p
High Quality Waters Inside Outside EST ,o Z o1 inch equals 2,500 feet
Storm Surge Areas Inside Outside FOp' Z �yP MAGNOLIA U BRIGADIER
Flood Zones Inside Outside SCHUYLER ¢ SEA TRAIL AZALEA :d = O J 1 inch equals 0.47 miles
Significant Natural PEAKW OOD bCSf+OP W LULA O O _
Heritage Areas <500' >500• ELINE HICKORY O 7' iE00PK ,Y BAprt.ET u z O ¢
Hazardous Substance - 2' tt"5 `1 {T Z I- ,- Z ul
Disposal Sites <500' >500' W CANAL �P � Q // Z O ¢ s J U
NPDES Sites <soo' > soo• I N z z o The preparation of this map was financed
Wastewater Treatment"-~'.• PECAN
< sTH in part through a grant provided by the
Plants <500' > 500• North Carolina Coastal Management
M nicipal sewer ALLRED Program, through fundsprovided by the
Discharge Points <500' >500, 1S7
Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972,
Airports <500• >500
Developed Land >1mI .5-1 mi <.s mi as amended, which is administered
Primary Roads > t ml .5 - 1 mI <,5 mi e) by the office of Ocean and Coastal
Water Pipes >.5 mi .25-.5 mi <.zs mi m Resources Management, National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
Map is to be used for general
informational purposes only. BAY
Spatial data used to generate this
map was gathered from disparate RIVERSIDE -�
PER
sources and represent a condition Z x oP
at a fixed period in time.
100% accuracy of spatial data to current circumstances cannot be = w MAINE. w _ CANAL WEST SECOND
guaranteed. MAINCANALIS
CCL'NCIL 147 UN E'RNhIEN
1:30,000 DRAFT
Map prepared by: 0 2,500 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000
Scott Logel Feet ,
Cape Fear Council of Governments
1480 Harbour Drive 0 0.5 1 2 3 4 5
Wilmington, NC 28401 MAP
9 Miles No Map Updated
RTC 8/1/07 14

��KILMINGTON
COUNTY S (
m
�n
1
➢1�
I
m P
O
PA`\BRUNSWICK
5\ `\�\ i+
7 i `\,V�
m
p THRUSH
O
Z
��.
iL
('\ 74
Q
/
OF
87 74 17
i
i `,c O
��y/STLECOWNS
PON
�
1 17 133
87
m
�
� A
y
F6U R
----
/�
pnEARES
a
� PE
130 211
t,
r
v
m
�
A
'
179 904 133
MA
of
li
INSET BEACH
m
OZ
✓�ti2
E
NOTE:
This map is to be used in
conjunction with the "Future
Land Use Classification Area
Development Standards Table"
(Table 40) in Section 9 of the
Land Use Plan.
Map is to be used for general
informational purposes only.
Spatial data used to generate this
map was gathered from disparate
sources and represent a condition
at a fixed period in time.
100% accuracy of spatial data to
current circumstances cannot be
guaranteed.
CAFE ITAR
COUNCIL OF GON?RATEVIS
Map prepared by:
Scott Logel
Cape Fear Council of Governments
1480 Harbour Drive
Wilmington, NC 28401
BONAPC.RTE
N SHADY
a
O LANDING
OWN
jM HERITA
41
2�
i E. CALABASH.--
���
EST- _ _ .. _ _ M �yS T-LAKES
OUNB Ir0RR/S 9�A
%�o
I
Q� 6qZ� I P
cKM -
L
O GU LLEY=i 9J'� CHANNEL I
G� q MARKER CHI NNEL II
Z
o� RICE
LEAK
0
-: h-ED GULLEY
W w
m w
179EA M y: .: - ��1EW - A Fq/RwAY L w DALE
Q
- --
4gkESHORE- m � } 'y�ilMIlt�dt�lii�'cjt EACH 1
` w
LIVE OAK - _. �
DOG'
1,1OOD BO-TUCK o
co
w 3P .. MAGNOLIA -¢ BRIGADIER s O Q
SEA�TRAIL� AZALEA z
ER Q _
0 O
�. m� LULA o O
HORELINE \ HICKORY BART
_ LE,rlr, W
W CANAL�01 �j� " a� N� 0 3
z W
Z
pEGA Q
U
r
E�Y
W MAIN
E NIA(Nmail 'lull Cl7VAL - -"-OCEAN ISLE \NEST
0 2,500 5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
!M Feet
Town of
Sunset Beach
2006/2007 CAMA
Land Use Plan
Future Land Use
Classification Map
Legend
Primary Road
-- Roads
own Limits
J
M.Adjacent Planning Jurisdiction
Future Land Use Classification
"Residential Very Low Density "
"Residential Low Density "
= "Residential Medium Density 1"
0 "Residential Medium Density 2"
® "Residential Medium -High Density V
= "Residential Medium -High Density 2"
"Residential Medium -High Density 3"
"Residential High Density"
® "Mixed Use Area"
"Mixed Use District"
o ='Tourist Commercial Area"
g M "Regional/Local Commercial Area"
z "Institutional and Recreational Area"
0 "Conservation Reserve"
PEARL _ = Parcels
1 inch equals 2,500 feet
I 1 inch equals 0.47 miles
2
O W
Z o The preparation of this map was financed
F in part through a grant provided by the
sT I North Carolina Coastal Management
ALLRED s i Program, through fundsprovided by the
f Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972,
as amended, which is administered
by the office of Ocean and Coastal
1 Resources Management, National
I Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
I
I
i� p IPER 1
s
W. SECOND
0 0.5 1 2 3 4 5
Miles
1:30,000I DRAFT
/1/Map Updated MAP
RTN 8/16/07 15