CAMA Land Use Plan Update-1985

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
TYRRELL COUNTY, N.C.
CAMA LAND USE PLAN
1985 UPDATE
17
PREPARED BY
TALBERT, COX & ASSOCIATES
ADOPTED BY TYRRELL COUNTY: JANUARY 8, 1986
CERTIFIED BY THE CRC: FEBRUARY 7, 1986
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
adminiatered by the office of
Coastal Management, National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Admini-
stration.
PROPERTY OF
DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
TYRRELL COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
LAND USE PLAN: 1985 UPDATE
PREPARED FOR
TYRRELL COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
TYRRELL COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Durwood Cooper, Chairman
Haywood Davenport
Joseph Landino
Joseph T. Liverman, Jr.:
T. J. Spencer
PREPARED BY TYRRELL COUNTY PLANNING BOARD
Jacob J. Parker
Romlus Rickard, Jr.
Dan E. Davis, Jr.
Roy Sawyer
Lindley Windley
AND
TYRRELL COUNTY FINANCE OFFICE
J. D. Brickhouse, Finance Officer -
Kim Suter, Clerk to the Board of Commissioners
PLANNING ASSISTANCE PROVIDED
BY
T. Dale Holland, AICP Project Manager
Talbert, Cox & Associates, Inc.
Kenneth Weeden, APA Project Planner
Talbert, Cox & Associates, Inc.

m m== m .m m m= m m m m m= m m m m
H.
TVRR=i i .•.,��.��..
Scale In Miles
0 25 50 75 100
MAP 1
Location Map

TYRRELL COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
LAND USE PLAN: 1985 UPDATE
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
SECTION I: Analysis of Existing Conditions
A.
Establishment of Information Base
1
B.
Present Conditions
3
1. Population
3
2. Economic Analysis
9
a. General
9
b. Agricultural
9
c. Commercial Forestry
12
d. Commercial Fishery
13
e. Other Commercial Income
13
f. Peat Mining
14
g.. Tourism
14
h. Employment and Income
14
3. Housing
17
C.
Existing Land Use Analysis
20
1. Current Conditions: General Patterns
20
2. Significant Land Compatibility Problems
21
3. Major Problems from Unplanned Development
22
4. Areas Experiencing or Likely to Experience
Major Land Use Changes
22
5. Identification of Areas of Environmental Concern
23
D.
Review of Current Plans, Policies, and Regulations
26
E.
Constraints: Land Suitability
28
1. Physical Limitations
28
2. Fragile Areas
33
3. Areas with Resource Potential
35
F.
Constraints: Capacity of Community Facilities
37
1. Water
37
2. Sewer
37
3. Solid Waste
38
4. School Enrollments
38
5. Transportation
39
6. Medical Services
39
7. Emergency and Protective Services
39
8. Other Facilities -
40
G.
Estimated Demand
41
1. Population and Economy
41
2. Future Land Need
41
3. Community Facilities Need
41
SECTION II: POLICY STATEMENTS 43
A. Resource Protection 43
1. Areas of Environmental Concern: Development Policies 43
2. Development in Areas with Constraints 46
ii

PAGE
3. Hurricane and Flood Evacuation Needs
48
'
4. Other Resource Protection Policy Areas
48
B.
Resource Production and Management Policies
50
1. Agriculture
50
'
2. Commercial Forestry
51
3. Mining Resource Areas
52
4. Commercial and Recreational Fisheries
53
5. Off -Road Vehicles
54
6. Residential and Commercial Land Development
54 _
C.
Economic and Community Development Policies
55
1. Types and Locations of Desired Industry
55
'
2. Local Commitment to Service Provisions
57
3. Desired Urban Growth Patterns
58
4. Redevelopment of Developed Areas
5. Commitment to State and Federal Programs
60
61
6. Assistance to Channel Maintenance
61
7. Energy Facilities Siting
61
8. Tourism and Beach and Waterfront Access
62
9. Density of Development
63
10. Land Use Trends
64
D.
Continuing Public Participation Policies
64
E.
Storm Hazard Mitigation, Post -Disaster Recovery, and
Evacuation Plans
66
1. Storm Hazard Mitigation: Discussion
67
a. High Winds
67
b. Flooding
67
c. Wave Action
70
d. Erosion
70
'
e. Summary: Storm Hazard Mitigation Considerations
70
f. Policy Statements: Storm Hazard Mitigation
71
g. Implementation: Storm Hazard Mitigation
72
2. Post -Disaster Reconstruction Plan
73
3. Hurricane Evacuation Plan
77
4. Re -Entry
77
SECTION
III: LAND CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
78
A.
Developed
79
B.
Transition
79
'
C.
Community
81
D.
Rural
81
E.
F.
Conservation
Land Classification Summary
82
84
SECTION IV: RELATIONSHIP OF POLICIES AND LAND
' CLASSIFICATIONS 85
A. Developed and Transition Classes 85
B. Community Class 85
C. Rural Class 85
D. Conservation Class 86
SECTION V: INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION 87
iii

' TYRRELL COUNTY
LAND USE PLAN: 1985 UPDATE
' LIST OF TABLES AND MAPS
'
TABLE NUMBERS
PAGE
1.
Tyrrell County Population 1900-1980,
'
2.
with Projections to 1995
Historical and Projected Racial Composition
3
of Tyrrell County
4
3.
Population Projection, Age, Race and Sex, 1985
5
4.
Population Projection, Age, Race and Sex, 1990
6
5.
Tyrrell County Township Population
7
6.
Tyrrell County Agricultural Income: 1980-83
11
7.
Farmland Summary in Tyrrell County: 1978-82
12
8.
Size of Farms with Harvested Acres
12
9.
Tyrrell County Forestry Income: 1980-83
13
'
10.
11.
Tyrrell County Commercial Fishery Income 13
Tyrrell County: Establishments and Payroll: 1980-82 14
12.
Tyrrell County Unemployment Rate: 1979-83
15
13.
Families Below Poverty Level: 1969-79
16
'
14.
Persons with Incomes Below Poverty Level: 1969-79
16
15.
Per Capita Money Income: 1969-79
16
16.
Tyrrell County Housing Summary
17
17.
Housing Conditions Summary, 1980 Census
18
'
18.
Mobile Home Placement by Township: 1975-84
19
19.
Major Land Use Categories in Tyrrell County
21
20.
Tyrrell County Water System Capacity, 1984
37
21.
Town of Columbia Sewage Treatment Capacity, 1984
38
22.
Tyrrell County School Enrollments, 1980 and 1984-85
38
23.
Selected Primary Road Traffic Volumes
39
24.
Percent of Structures Subject to Storm Damage Factors
71
MAPS
1.
Location Map
i
2.
Tyrrell County Townships
8
3.
Existing Land Use Map
(Attached)
1
4.
General Flood Hazard Areas
(Attached)
5.
Tyrrell County Shoreline Erosion
30
6.
General Soil Suitability
(Attached)
7.
Composite Hazards
(Attached)
'
8.
Land Classification Map
(Attached)
' FIGURES
1. Flooding in the Albemarle Sound from Hurricanes
Hazel, Connie, Diane, and Ione (1954-55) 69
I
iv
1

SECTION 1
Analysis of Existing Conditions
and
Projected Demand

1
ITYRRELL COUNTY LAND USE PLAN
A. Establishment of Information Base
This 1985 Land Use Plan Update for Tyrrell County has been
' prepared in accordance with requirements of the North Carolina
Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA). Specifically, this document
complies with Subchapter 7B, "Land Use Planning Guidelines," of
the North Carolina Administrative Code, as amended, July 9, 1984.
The initial Land Use Plan was prepared for Tyrrell County in
1976, and the first update in 1980. According to the "Land Use
Planning Guidelines," the major purpose of periodic updating of
local land use plans is to identify and analyze newly emerging
community issues and problems. An additional element which was
not required in either the 1976 Plan or the 1980 Update is a
"Storm Hazard Mitigation, Post -Disaster Recovery, and Hurricane
Evacuation Plan," and is required to be included in the 1985
Update. This element is designed to help local governments coor-
dinate effective policies and actions relating to the impact of
hurricanes or other severe storms.
' The guidelines further give the following objectives the
update should meet:
to further define and refine local policies and issues;
to further examine and refine the land classification
system and the land classification map;
-- to assess the effectiveness of the existing land use
' - plan and its implementation;
to further explore implementation procedures, and;
-- to promote a better understanding of the land use plan-
ning process.
Both the 1976 Land Use Plan and the 1980 Update provided
much of the needed information base for this most recent update.
However, in many cases, new information had to be developed. A
number of data sources were tapped during the preparation of this
plan in order to prepare updated analyses of population, housing,
economics (including agriculture, fisheries, and forestry), and
existing land uses. Most of the data came from primary and
secondary sources in the form of direct contacts with represen-
tatives of various state and federal agencies and/or previously
published documents or reports. Also, "windshield" surveys were
conducted to obtain data on existing land use patterns. Inter-
views were conducted with various County officials. Efforts were
made to obtain data that was as up-to-date and accurate as
possible.
The data analysis showed that in most cases, the changes
since 1980 (the last update year) have not been dramatic, while in
' 1

1
other cases, some trends appear to be emerging. Some major con-
clusions of the updated land use plan are:
1. Tyrrell County's population grew between 1970 and 1980,
reversing a three -decade -old trend of population losses.
Population growth is projected to continue through 1995,
' with some notable shifts in age and sex ratios. The
Columbia and Scuppernong Townships are projected to
receive most of this growth.
2. The economic importance of agriculture is firmly esta-
blished and will remain dominant in the County through-
out the next 10 years. The mining of peat still has the
potential to become significant during the next 10
years.
' 3. The overall land development pattern, being one with a
predominantly rural, scattered character, will likely
continue. The rapid rate of clearing forest land for
conversion into agricultural use, highlighted as a major
issue in 1976 and 1980, has leveled to a slower pace.
4. With a growing population and expanding labor force, it
' will be necessary perhaps to pursue economic expansion
in the form of industrial development.
Some of the data sources utilized in preparing this document
include:
1.
U. S. Census of Population and Housing, 1980, U. S.
'
Department of Commerce.
2.
N. C. Office of State Budget and Management, Demographic
'
Section.
3.
1976 Tyrrell County CAMA Land Use Plan.
4.
1981 Tyrrell County Land Use Plan.
5.
"A Survey of Natural Areas in Tyrrell County, North
Carolina," for N. C. Natural Heritage Program, Coastal
Area Inventory Project, by Drs. Andrew N. Ash and
Charles B. McDonald, E.C.U., January, 1981.
i6.
"Tyrrell County Statistical Report," FY 84-85.
7.
Before the Storm: Managing Development To Reduce
Hurricane Damages, McElyea, Brower, & Godschalk, 1982.
1

B. Present Conditions
1. Population:
Tyrrell County, located in rural Northeast North Carolina on
the north side of the Pamlimarle peninsula, has the smallest
county population of all of the State's 100 counties. This dis-
tinction has been held by the County for quite some time. Notice
Table 1, below, which shows the decennial population of Tyrrell
County from 1900 to 1980, with projections for 1985, 1990, and
1995.
TABLE 1: Tyrrell County Population:
1900-1980, With Projections to 1995
Num. Pct.
' Year Population Change Chancre
1900 4,980 - -
1910 5,219 +239 + 4.8
1920 4,844 -375 - 7.2
1930 5,164 +320 + 6.6
1940 5,556 +392 + 7.6
1950 5,048 -508 - 9.1
1960 4,520 -528 -10.5
1970 3,806 -714 -15.8
1980 3,975 +169 + 4.4
*1985 4,134 +159 + 4.0
*1990 4,249 +115 + 2.8
' *1995 4,398 +149 + 3.5
Source: U. S. Census (Provided by Albemarle Commission)
* Projections by the N. C. Office of State Budget & Management
. The population trends in Tyrrell County have been erratic
since the turn of the century. As Table 1 shows, population
increased from between the years 1900 to 1910, but fell sharply
between 1910 and 1920, rising again during the 120s and 130s, and
peaking in 1940 with 5;556 persons. However, from 1940 to 1970,
the County lost population rather dramatically, having a total
decline of 1,750 persons or 31.5% over the 30-year period. The
most severe population decrease occurred between 1960 and 1970,
with a total decline of nearly 16%. However, beginning with the
1980 Census, the County appears to be in a gradual growth pattern.
This pattern of increased population within Tyrrell County is
supported by recent projections made by the North Carolina Office
of State Budget and Management. Growth, though small, continued
from 1980 to 1985, and is projected to continue through 1995.
11

-7
a. Composition
Table 2: Historical & Projected Racial Composition
Tyrrell County
White Total M Non -White Total M
Year M F M_ F
1960 1,259 1,285 2,544 (56%) 995 981 1,976 (44%)
1970 1,034 1,119 2,153 (57%) 804 849 1,653 (43%)
1980 1,167 1,251 2,418 (61%) 706 851 1,557 (39%)
*1985 1,258 1,321 2,579 (62%) 702 853 1,555 (38%)
*1990 1,343 1,383 2,726 (64%) 682 841 1,523 (36%)
*1995 1,431 1,471 2,902 (66%) 661 835 1,496 (34%)
' Sources: U. S. Census; N. C. Office of State Budget & Management
*Projections by Office of State Budget & Management
The racial composition of Tyrrell County's population has
been shifting gradually since 1960. Blacks, who comprise almost
all of the non -whites in Tyrrell, have been steadily declining in
both numbers and percent of the total population. This decrease
is attributable, to a large extent, to a constant out -migration of
younger people who seek employment and educational opportunities
outside of Tyrrell County. This is likely to continue through the
1995 planning period, as the projections in Table 2 show. On the
other hand, the white population, except for a decline between
1960 and 1970 has increased and is projected to continue this
trend throughout the forecast period.
The following Tables 3 and 4, which depict the projected
population of Tyrrell County for both 1985 and 1990 by age, race
and sex, show that females outnumber males in the County, and will
likely continue to do so through the planning period (through
1995). This is partially due to the somewhat longer average life -
span for females than males, resulting in more widows. These
tables show also that the overall age groups in Tyrrell County are
not projected to change significantly percentage -wise: However,
it is quite interesting to note that the number and percent of
white females in the age range from 20 to 54 is projected to
increase from about 44% of the total white female population in
1985, to about 51% by 1990. During the same time period, there
will be a decrease in the percent of white females in the 55 and
over age ranges, although the number will remain about the same.
In general, the trend appears that Tyrrell County's older popula-
tion (55 and over) is gradually declining as a percent of the
total population, while the middle and perhaps more productive age
groups of from 20 to 54, will increase their percentages.

Table 3
TYRR ELL
PROJECTED
PnPULATIONt JULY
1, 19859
BY AGES
RACE• AND SEX
WHITE
OTHER
AGE
TCTAL
TOTAL
MALE
FEMALE
TOTAL
MALE
FEMALE
TOTAL
4134
2579
1258
1321
1555
702
853
0-4
342
ISO
102
88
152
65
87
5-9
347
196
105
91
151
64
87
'10-14
313
I.E9
101
88
124
51
73
15-19
259
154
71
83
105
42
63
20-24
312
1f 5
70
95
147
68
79
25-29
335
1S2
101
91
143
68
75
30-34
321
2C7
98
109
114
53
61
35-39
244
lE9
83
96
75
42
33
40-44
204
138
76
62
66
29
37
45-49
191
124
59
65
67
33
34
50-54
192
124_
57
67
68
34
34
55-59
208
1:1
66
65
77
41
36
60-64
222
158
64
94
64
26
38
65-69
221
14-5
68
77
76
38
38
70-74
183
121
62
59
62
27
35
75-79
125
E8
38
50
37
12
25
80-84
79
EL
23
38
18
6
12.
85CUP
36
27
14
13
9
3
6
PERCENT
CF COLUMN
TOTAL
0-4
8.27
7.17
8.11
6.66
9.77
9.26
10,,20
5-9
E.39
7.E0
8.35
6.89
9.71
9.12
10.20
10-14
7.57
7.3:3
8.03
6.66
7.97
7.26
8.56
15-19
6.27
5.S7
5.64
6.28
6.75
5.98
7.39
20-24
7.55
6.40
5.56
7.19
9.45
9.69
9.26
25-29
8.10
7.44
8.03
6.89
9.20
9.69
8.79
30-34
7.76
H. C 3
7.79
8.25
7.33
7.55
7,0
35=39
40-44
5.90
4.93
6.55
5.:5
6.60
6.04
6.51
4.69
•4.82
4.24
5.98
4.13
3.87
4.34
45 49
4.62
4. E 1
4.69
4.92
4.31
1..70
3,99
50-54
4.64
4.E1
4.53
5.07
4.37
4.84
3.99
55-59
5.J3
5.C8
5.25
4.92
4.95
5.84
4.22
60-64
r.37
6.13
5.09
7.12
4.12
___3.70
k,45
65-69
5.35
5.E2
5.41
5.83
4.89
5.41
4.45
70-74
4.43
4.E9
4.93
4.47
3.G9
3.85
4.13
75-79
?.02
3.41
3.02
3.79
2.38
1.71
2.93
80-84
1.91
2.:7
1.83
2.88
1.16
0.85
1.41
85CUP
C.67
I.C5
1.11
O.SB
0.58
0.43
0.70
SOJkCE
- N(IRTH CAF ;I VJA -F FI CF
CF
BASED rN
73-10 CEASUS DATA
STATE
& NAnar;E"E,%T
PRIPAPED
MAY
139 1983
5

Table 4
PROJECTED POPULATION APRIL 1
I990
BY AGE RACE AND SEX
WHITE
OTHER
AGE
TOTAL
TOTAL
MALE
FEMALE TOTAL
MALE
FEMALE
Total
4249
2726
1343
1383
1523
682
841
0-4
346
201
108
93
145
62
83
5-9
321
187
100
87
134
57
77
10-14
359
212
115
97
147
60
87
15-19
305
199
106
93
106
42
64
20-24
217
137
61
76
80
28
52
25-29
273
163
66
97
110
52
58
30-34
333
200
105
95
133
70
63
35-39
373
255
122
133
118
54
64
40-44
45-49
249
219
175
141
87
78
88
63
74
78
43
32
31
46
50-54
196
127
61
66
69
37
32
55-59
194
130
57
73
64
31
33
60-64
214
139
71
68
75
41
34
65-69
195
142
54
88
53
19
34
70-74
203
135
67
68
68
32
36
75-79
140
99
52
47
41
17
24
80-84
79
60
21
39
19
3
16
85&UP
33
24
12
12
9
2
7
PERCENT OF COLUMN TOTAL
0-4
8.14
7.37
8.04
6.72
9.52
9.09
9.87
5-9
7.55
6.86
7.45
6.29
8.80
8.36
9.16
10-14
8.45
7.78
8.56
7.01
9.65
8.80
10.34
15-19
7.18
7.30
7.89
"6.72
6.96
6.16
7.61
20-24
5.11-
5.03
4.54
5.50
5.25
4.11
.6.18
25.29
30-34
6.43
7.84
5.98
7.34
4.91
7.82
7.01
6.87
7.22
8.73
7.62
10.26
6.90
7.49
35-39
8.78
9.35
9.08
9.62
7.75
7.92
7.61
40-44
5.86
6.42
6.48
6.36
4.86
6.30
3.69
45-49
5.15
5.17
5.81
4.56
5.12
4.69
5.47
50-54
4.61
4.66
4.54
4.77
4.53
- 5.43
3.80
55-59
4.57
4.77
4.24
5.28
4.20
4.55
3.92
60-64
5.04
5.10
5.29
4.92
4.92
6.01
4.04
65-69
4.59
5.21
4.02
6.36
3.48
2.79
4.04
70-74
4.78
4.95
4.99
4.92
4.46
4.69
4.28
75-79
80-84
3.29
1.86
3.63
2.20
3.87
1.56
3.40
2.82
2.69
1.25
2.49
0.44
2.85
1'.90
85&UP
0.78
0.88
0.89
0.87
0.59
0.29
0.83
DECADE
ESTIMATED RATE
OF NET MIGRATION (IN PERCENT)
80-90
3.21
12.27
16.08
8.81
-9.83
-10.73
-9.08
'
SOURCE
NORTH CAROLINA
STATE BUDGET
OFFICE OF
& MANAGEMENT
BASED ON 70-80 CENSUS
PREPARED MAY,
DATA
1983
6

I
is interesting to that from 1985
to 1990, the
It also note
school -age population in the County (from 5-19) is
projected to
increase only by 1.4% per year, for a total of only
66 potential
students. The Office of State Budget and Management's
projections
by age, race and sex for 1995 are not shown in this
report. How-
ever, the patterns identified in the projections from
1985 to 1990
are likely indicative of trends through 1995.
b. Dispersal
There are five (5) Townships in Tyrrell County, as Map 2,
page 8 shows. The County's population is dispersed
throughout the
Townships, with the largest concentrations being in
the Columbia
and Scuppernong Townships. Most of the rest of the
population is
"pocketed" in rural communities along the two major
highways
(U.S.64 or N.C.94) or paved secondary routes in areas
such as Gum
Neck, Alligator, Travis, Goat Neck, and Kilkenny.
Table 5, below,
shows the population within each township from 1960
to 1980.
Table 5: Tyrrell County Township Population:
1960-80
Township 1960 1970 1980 Pct./Num.Change 70/80
Alligator 613 482 477 - 5
(-1.0%)
Columbia 2,212 1,910 2,098 +188
(+9.8%)
- Columbia Town (1,099) (902) (758) -144
(-16.0%)
Gum Neck 732 523 474 - 49
(-9.4%)
Scuppernong 901 838 864 + 26
(+3.1%)
South Fork 62 53 62 + 9
(+17.0%)
ISources: U. S. Census; N. C. Office of State Budget & Management
Columbia Township, which includes the Town of Columbia,
gained 188 persons between 1970 and 1980. Ironically, the Town of
Columbia lost 144 persons during the period. This is perhaps
indicative of new residences being developed near, but outside of
the Town limits of Columbia, as well as net out -migration from the
Town. It appears that the growth trend of the Columbia Township
will likely continue. .Both the Scuppernong and South Fork Town-
ships also experienced population gains during the 1970-80 decen-
nial period, while Alligator and Gum Neck Townships both lost
population.
c. Seasonal Population
Although there are a growing number of second 'homes being
developed along the Albemarle Sound, seasonal population changes
are not dramatic in Tyrrell County. In the absence of a strong
tourism element in the economy, there are no major fluctuations in
the population which would exert undue pressures on the provision
of public facilities or services.
i7
1

i
•\ BULL BAY wait W, W "" DAMP
ai
M'r uv P 1IG 1AY11YMAM W %1 J • �0
' • '`•�• 1� +/
I
..
C B A T LUM
/ • . r
°�� ��;;,�;••• A.
,. ALLIGATOR T P g 1
/�
MoUGW G"UND
SWAMI _ (J
-A (.
11 GUM NECK T P n.,•� r t �1
S O U T•H
j coo
%i FORK I 1. tau
I T W P
CRAPVVINX
j
The preparation of this map was �,
financed in part through a grant i
/
';
provided by the North Carolina
Coastal Management Program, �\
through funds provided by the f \{a1 ;
Coastal Zone Management Act. of / \
1972, as amended, which is , administered by the Office MAP P A
ManagementAL
Coastal , National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Admini-
stration- / -
y TYRRELL COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
a
a!
TOWNSH IPS
8

Id. Population Summar
The analysis of existing and projected population in Tyrrell
County suggests the following trends:
1. A three -decade -old trend of population losses ended in
1980 and has been replaced by a gradual growth trend,
projected through 1995. The non -white population is
projected to decline, while the white population in the
County will continue to increase. Also, females will
continue to outnumber males throughout the planning
period.
2. Overall, the older segment of the population (55 and
over), is projected to decline as a percent of the total
population, while the middle -age ranges (from 20-54)
will increase through 1995. The largest age shift
appears to be in the 35-39 age group -- particularly
among white females. The increased size of the young
adult to middle age groups suggests additional household
formations and a need for jobs and adult education or
job training opportunities. Although the elderly popu-
lation is not projected to increase substantially, there
is still suggested a need for elderly care facilities.
3. There should be no major shifts in the school -age popu-
lation throughout the planning period. Therefore, it is
suggested that there will be no need for expanded educa-
tional facilities on the basis of increased population.
2. Economic Analysis
a. General
The economic picture for Tyrrell County has steadily been
improving, as was noted in the 1980 Land Use Plan Update (pp.
6-10). The County's economic base continues to be overwhelmingly
agricultural. Other significant elements of Tyrrell County's
economy include commercial forestry, commercial fishing, and manu-
facturing. Existing economic conditions are discussed in more
detail, below.
b. Agricultural
Farm income has steadily increased since the 1980 Land Use
Plan Update, as Table 6, page 11, shows. From 1980 to 1983, regu-
lar farm income increased at an annual average rate of more than
1.2 million dollars. When government payments, particularly the
Payment -in -Rind (PIK) program, which was a one-year program in
1983, are taken into account, total farm income increased by near-
ly 2.0 million dollars per year. Field crops, most notably soy-
beans, corn, Irish potatoes, and wheat, produce the most farm

1-1
I
1
1
1
1
I
income. Livestock production, mostly hogs, accounts for the
majority of the rest of farm income. Income from hog production
grew by 73% from 1980 to 1983, or at an annual average rate of
24.5%, while income from beef production declined during the same
period.
As noted in the 1980 Land Use Plan Update, during the mid-
1970s, large tracts of previously forested land were cleared for
agricultural production, with most of this activity being
conducted by large corporate farms. The 1978 U. S. Census of
Agriculture noted that Tyrrell County then had 38,492 acres of
harvested cropland. However, the estimated harvested cropland in
1982, according to the U. S. Census of Agriculture, 1982, was
50,859 acres, an increase of 32% in four years.
10

[l
1
1
1
i
[1
1
u
I
Table 6:
Tyrrell County Agricultural Income: 1980-83
Agricultural Income (000's)
Field Croos 1 1983 1 1982 1 1981
1.
Corn (for grain)
4,151.0
4,928.1
6,111.8
2.
Soybeans
6,571.1
4,597.7
4,562.0
3.
Irish Potatoes
2,264.0
1,988.2
2,834.7
4.
Wheat
556.5
711.3
600.0
5.
Peanuts
39.3
39.3
108.0
6.
Other Grains (oats, rye,
14.4
65.6
60.8
barley, grain sorghum)
7.
Vegetables Fruits &
227.5
77.5
158.6
Berries (incl. sweet
potatoes)
Sub -Total
Livestock and Other
13,823.8 1
12,407.7 1
14,435.1 1
4,920.0
5,792.2
1,595.3
697.8
44.7
25.0
1,042.0
14 ,120.0
1. Hogs
10,375.2
12,253.1
8,230.4
5,983.0
2. Cattle
155.0
197.3
214.6
401.4
3. Sheep and Lambs
9.0
6.4
5.4
5.4
4. Wool
.7
.5
.4
.4
5. Honey
55.7
53.7
61.7
83.7
Sub -Total
10,595.6
12,511.0
8,512.5
6,474.0
Regular Income Sub -Total
24,419.4
24,918.7
22,947.6
20,594.0
Government Payments
*1,844.6
82.9
61.0
33.5
Total
26,264.0
25,001.6
23,008.6
20,627.5
Source: N. C. Agricultural Extension Service - Annual Estimate
of Cash Farm Income
* Includes Payment -in -Kind (PIK) Program income
**Exceptional Year for Cucumbers, Leafy
Greens, Tomatoes & Peppers
During the same period,
the number of farms
actually
decreased, while the average size of farms increased substantial-
ly, somewhat reflective of the large corporate ownership. Notice
Table 7, below:

Table 7: Farmland Summary in
Tyrrell
County: 1978-82
Number/
1978
1982
Pct. Change
Land in Farms (ac.)
56,492
68,370
11,878/ 21%
Number of Farms
173
141
-32/-18%
Avg. Size of Farms
327
485
158/ 48%
Total Croplands
43,350
55,064
11,714/ 27%
- Harvested Cropland
38,492
50,859
12,367/ 32%
- Cropland Used Only for
2,275
204
-2,071/-91%
Pasture or Grazing
- Other Cropland
2,583
4,001
1,418/ 55%
Woodland on Farms
10,727
9,688
-1,039/-9.7%
S. Census
Agriculture,
1978 -
1982
Source: U. of
Although land clearing
was quite
significant
from the mid
70's through around 1982,
indications
are now
that
the rate of
clearing new farmland has
dropped substantially.
This trend is
expected to continue. (Additional
discussions
on
land use changes
are included in Part C of
this section,
which
addresses
existing
land use and land use trends).
Table
8 also
gives
an indication
of the growth of the size
of farms in
Tyrrell
County
from 1978 to
1982.
Table 8: Tyrrell County:
Size of Farms with Harvested Acres
1978-82
No. Farms
Size Range (Acres)
1978
1982
1 - 9
11
11
10 - 19
23
5
20 - 29
18
12
30 - 49
20
19
50 - 99
25
15
100 - 199
200 - 499
16
16
14
27
500 - 999
14
15
1,000 +
12
14
Source: U. S. Census of
Agriculture,
1982
C. Commercial Forestry
Forestry income continues to be significant in Tyrrell
County, as Table 9, below, indicates.
12
1

I
1
Table 9: Tyrrell County Forestry Income, 1980 - 1983
1980 1981 1982 1983
Pulpwood $ 25,200 $ 110,143 $ 162,809 $ 178,135
Lumber 2,193,750 1,281,560 1,479,296 1,459,757
Total $2,218,950 $1,391,703 $1,642,105 $1,637,892
Source: N. C. Agricultural Extension Service, Annual Estimates
of Cash Farm Income
Overall forestry income in the County declined between 1980
and 1983, with all of the decline coming from net losses in lumber
income. Of the County's 254,360 land acreage (excluding water
acres), approximately 183,790 acres are in forestlands. This is
about 72%-of the total land acreage. Nearly all of the commercial
forestlands in the County are owned by large, corporate landholders.
The most significant among these are First Colony Farms, Inc.,
Weyerhauser, and Butler Lumber Company.
d. Commercial Fishing
Most of the commercial fishing occurs in the Albemarle Sound
and the Alligator Rivers. According to the North Carolina
Division of Marine Fisheries, the commercial catches steadily
increased from 1980 through 1983. Notice Table 10, below:
Table 10: Tyrrell Count Commercial Fisher Income, 1980-1983
Y Y
1980
1981
1982
1983
% Value
Change
Species
Pounds Value
Pounds Value
Pounds Value
Pounds Value
80 - 83
Total Fish
319,876
116,796
614,010
174,423
478,357
160,075
520,803
228,751
+ 96%
Total
656,246
111,057
852,173
153,532
1,057,401
201,284
1,116,299
226,720
+104%
Shellfish
976,122
228,303
1,466,183
327,955
1,535,758
361,359
1,637,102
455,470
+99.5%
Source: N. C. Division of Marine Fisheries
e. Other Commercial Income
Other commercial income for Tyrrell County includes income
from manufacturing as well as from commercial wholesale and retail
13
1

trade. According to the U. S. Bureau of the Census' County Busi-
ness Patterns, 1982, the annual business payroll dropped slightly
from 1980 to 1982. Notice Table 11, below:
Table 11: Tyrrell County: Establishments & Payroll, 1980-82
1981 1982
No. Establishments 67 66
Annual Payroll 3,858,000 3,298,000
Source: County Business Patterns, 1982, U. S. Bureau of the
Census
The County has very little industrial development with only
one major manufacturing concern, located on U. S. 264 on the east-
ern outskirts of the Town of Columbia. There is also a small
crab -pot manufacturer in the County. Additional industrial/manu-
facturing development could greatly aid the growth of income in
Tyrrell County as well as reduce unemployment.
f. Peat Mining
The economic potential for the commercial mining of peat was
discussed extensively in the 1980 Land Use Plan Update. However,
the proposed development of peat mining operations failed to
materialize because of various factors. Peat mining has not had
an economic impact upon the County to date. However, this
material, which lies in vast reserves under large portions of the
County, still holds much promise for commercial development within
the next 10 years (See Appendix A, attached to this Plan).
g. Tourism
Income from tourism historically has not had a substantial
impact upon Tyrrell County's economy: However, motorists on their
way to or from the beaches of Dare County occasionally stop for
gasoline or other small purchases. Perhaps the County can encour-
age the development of businesses which can capitalize on this
substantial summer traffic.
h. Employment and Income
1. Employment
Overall employment in Tyrrell County has been declining since
1979, even in the face of a slightly expanding labor force.
Notice Table 12, below, which shows the general employment pattern
from 1979 through 1983.
1 14
1

I
Table 12: Tyrrell
County
Unemployment
Rate, 1979-83
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
Civil. Labor Force
1,440
1,450
1,450
1,460
1,470
No. Employed
1,280
1,250
1,260
1,170
1,180
No. Unemployed
160
200
190
290
290
Unemployment Rate
11.1
13.8
13.1
19.9
19.7
N. C. Unemp. Rate
4.8
6.5
6.4
9.0
8.9
Source: N. C. Employment
Securit Commission
Y
As the data in Table 12 shows, Tyrrell County's average
annual unemployment rate substantially exceeded the rate for North
Carolina. From 1979 to 1983, the County's labor force increased
by only a net of 30 persons, or by 2%. However, during the same
period, the number of unemployed increased from 160 to 290
persons: In 1983 (the latest year for annual statistics), Tyrrell
County had one of the highest County unemployment rates in North
Carolina. However, statistics for 1984 are expected to show
marked improvement in the local employment picture.
In 1980, the largest occupational categories of the civilian
labor force, according to the N. C. Employment Security Commis-
sion, Bureau of Labor Market Research, were service occupations
(299), farming, forestry, and fishing occupations (296), and
operators and fabricators (287). Other major employment categor-
ies included: managerial and professional specialty occupations
(164), precision production, craft, and repair occupations (151),
handlers, equipment cleaners, helpers and laborers (130).
2. Income
1' Although the income picture in Tyrrell County has been
improving, there are still a substantial number of families and
individuals below the poverty income level. As the 1980 Land Use
Plan Update reported, the 1970 U. S. Census data showed that 355
(or 37.9%) of the County's 936 families (enumerated in 1969) had
below poverty incomes. This percentage more than doubled the 1970
census poverty percentage for the State (16.3%). By -the 1980
census (enumerated in'1979), although the number of "families"
increased, the number of families with incomes below poverty
decreased from 355 in 1970 to 219 in 1980. Notice Table 13,
below:
1
1 15
I

Table 13: Tyrrell County: Families Below Poverty Level,
1969-79
1969 1979
No. Percent No. Percent
Tyrrell County 355 37.9 219 20.2
N. C. - 16.3 - 11.6
Source: U. S. Census, 1970, 1980
According to the 1980 Census, Tyrrell County's percentage of
families with below poverty incomes was no longer double that of
the State's percentage. Likewise, this improvement was true for
individuals with incomes below the poverty level, as noted in
Table 14, below:
Table 14: Tyrrell County: Persons With Incomes Below Poverty
Level, 1969-79
1969 1979
! No. Percent No. Percent
Tyrrell County 1,702 44.8 1,001 25.2
N. C. 20.3 14.8
1
1
1
Source: U. S. Census, 1970, 1980
Percentage -wise, the improvement in Tyrrell County was great-
er than for the State as a whole. This was also true for the
growth in per capita money income between the 1970 and 1980 Census
periods. Notice Table 15, below:
Table 15: Tyrrell County: Per Capita Money Income, 1969-79
1969
Tyrrell County $1,562
N. C. 2,492
$Tyrrell of N. C. 63%
1979 Percent Change
$4,139 165.0
6,133 146.-0
6 7 %
Source: N. C. Statistical Abstract, 1984
Despite gains, per capita income in Tyrrell County is still
only about two-thirds the per capita rate of the State as a whole.
This is indicative of a need for economic development in the
County.
16
1

Ig. Economic Summar
The analysis of current economic conditions indicates the
following trends:
1. Agriculture will still dominate the County's economic
base, with all other income sources rating distant
seconds. Although the rate of land clearing appears
to have slowed down, there is still a pattern of fewer
f but larger farms which will likely continue.
2. Additional economic development potential appears to be
in commercial forestry, commercial fishing, and perhaps,
industrial development. Peat mining, heralded in the
1980 Land Use Plan for its potential economic contribu-
tion to the County, was not developed, but still has
potential to be developed over the next 10 years.
3. Overall, income increased in Tyrrell between 1970 and
1980 with agricultural income accounting for the ".lion's
share" of this gain, again pointing to the importance of
farming to the County. Nevertheless, it appears that
some additional economic activity will be needed during
the next 10 years if previous income gains are to be
maintained.
3. Housing
Major issues concerning housing in Tyrrell County were
covered thoroughly in the 1980 Land Use Plan Update in two
separate appendices (Appendices C and D, pages 91-110). The
issues discussed concerned the tax revenue impact that the housing
mix, i.e., "stick -built" units versus mobile homes, would have on
the County. However, 1980 Census information on housing was not
then available. Noticethe summary below in Table 16:
Table 16: 1980 Census Tyrrell`County Housing Summary
Item No
Total Units 1,766
Vacant, -Seasonal, Migratory 164
Year -Round Units 1,602
Vacant Year -Round Units 221
Occupied Year -Round Units 1,381
Persons in Occupied Units 3,975
Average Household Size 2.88
Source; U. S. Census, 1980.
The average household size declined significantly from 4.0
persons in 1970 to 2.88 according to the 1980 Census. It should
17
1

I
be noted that the 1980 Census data did not
report on the recently
developed low-income public housing project
in Columbia, Secota
Village. This project, which consists of
17 structures and 35
dwelling units, was developed by the Mid -East
Regional Housing
Authority after Tyrrell County became part
of the Authority's
service area in 1980. These units are completely occupied and
began occupancy in 1983. Additional information from the 1980
Census, some of which gives an indication
of housing conditions,
are shown in the following Table 17:
Table 17: Selected Housing Conditions
Summary, 1980 Census:
Tyrrell County
Item
No.
Units with Public Water
664
Units with Public Sewer
327
With Complete Kitchen Facilities
1,314
With Central Heat
496
With Air Conditioning
656
One or More Complete Bathrooms
1,110
Built Before 1939
538
Source: 1980 U. S. Census
During land use surveys conducted in late 1984, it was noted
that there was a significant number of units which appeared to be
substandard scattered around the County. However, concentrations
of substandard dwellings were noted in the Goat Neck and Fort
Landing areas, with lesser concentrations in the communities of
Alligator and Gum Neck. Most new construction appears to be
taking place in the Scuppernong Township and in the Columbia
Township -- particularly in the Rider's Creek area.
Another notable housing trend is the continuing growth of
mobile homes, as noted in the 1980 Plan. Notice Table 18, below.
As the Table shows, mobile home placement has increased since
1975, with the greatest gains being in the Columbia and Scupper-
nong Townships. This trend, although leveling since 1980, will
likely continue somewhat, as mobile homes become more and more a
viable standard 'housing alternative for Tyrrell County citizens.
11
1 18
I

11
C. Existing Land Use Analysis
1. Current Conditions: General Patterns
The general land use pattern in Tyrrell County has changed
very little since the 1980 Land Use Plan Update -- or even since
the initial CAMA Land Use Plan in 1976. The County's land area,
exclusive of the substantial water acreage, is overwhelmingly
forestland. Although the most significant land use changes during
the past decade have been the conversion of forest lands into
agricultural lands, the overall pattern has varied little. The
County is very sparsely populated, with Columbia its only munici-
pality, being the only "urban -built-up" area. In fact, according
to the 1980 U. S. Census, Tyrrell County is 99th in population
density of all of North Carolina's 100 counties with an average
density of 10 persons per square mile. Hyde County, Tyrrell's
neighbor to the south, has nine persons per acre and is ranked 100
in population density. Nearby Washington County has a density of
45 persons, and Dare County has a density of 34 persons per square
mile. The pronounced rural nature of the County's development
pattern is reflected in the fact that outside of Columbia, resi-
dential development is scattered along paved secondary routes with
few concentrations. As noted in the 1980 Land Use Plan Update,
subdivisions have begun to develop along the Albemarle Sound (in
the northwest sector of the County), mainly in the Scuppernong
Township. Other concentrations occur in the rural communities of
Travis, Goat Neck, Alligator, Gum Neck, and Kilkenny. (See exist-
ing Land Use Map, attached to this Plan Update as Map 3).
Large farms and timber tracts still account for the majority
of the land acreage in Tyrrell County. The largest concentration
of commercial land uses is located within the Town of Columbia,
with small country stores located in some of the rural communi-
ties. Industrial land uses are almost exclusively near Columbia.
Recreational land uses, as was pointed out in the 1980 Land Use
Plan Update (p.14), includes Gum Neck Landing boat ramp, Columbia
boat ramp, Norman Smith Memorial Beach, Pettigrew State Park,
Sawyers Marina, Scuppernong Community Center, and Travis
Playground.
A general summary of the major land uses in Tyrrell County
are listed below in Table 19:
I
1 20
r

I
Table 19:
*Major Land Use
Categories in Tyrrell
County
Major
Category
Acres
% of Total
Water
109,224
30.0
Land
254,360
70.0
-
Forestland
183,790
-50.5
-
Farms
68,370
-19.0
-
Urban & Built Up
2,200
.6
TOTAL
363,584
*Estimated, based on assessment of various sources, including the
U. S. Census of Agriculture, 1982; the N. C. Statistical Abstract,
1984, and the Tyrrell County Statistical Report, FY 84-85.
It should be noted here that one additional major land use
change that will have some effect on usage within the planning
period (1985-1995) is the recently designated Alligator River
National Wildlife Refuge. In March of 1984, Prudential Insurance
Company donated approximately 120,000 acres of land bordering the
Alligator River in both Tyrrell and Dare Counties to the U. S.
Department of the Interior. Nearly all (94%) of the area is in
Dare County, with only 7,500 acres in Tyrrell. The Tyrrell County
portion of the Wildlife Refuge consists of three separate parcels,
all located north of and bordering The Frying Pan. Most of the
land consists of wooded swamps and pocosins, some of which has
been and will continue to be commercially timbered, because of
previous contractual obligations. An office, with a park ranger
and staff, will be opened in Manteo, beginning January, 1985.
However, it will take several years to develop a Master Plan for
the refuge which would have detailed proposals for land use and
restrictions (See Map 3).
2. Significant Land Compatibility Problems
In the conventional application of the concept, there are no
significant land compatibility problems in Tyrrell County. A land
compatibility problem is generally identified when two or more
land use types are adjacent to each other and one is somehow
restricted from expansion because of adverse conditions, thus
discouraging additional investment. This situation simply has not
been a major problem in Tyrrell County. Although the high pres-
ence of mobile homes adjacent to conventional dwellings was men-
tioned in the 1980 Land Use Plan Update, very little concern over
incompatible uses is apparent. Because of the aged housing stock
and high degree of substandard housing, mobile homes have become
accepted as a viable housing alternative in the County. The only
significant land compatibility problem noted in the 1980 Plan was
21
11,

Table 18: Mobile Home Placement by Townshi
Tyrrell
County 1975-1984
Num .
Year
Allig.
Col.
Gum Neck
Scup.
*S.F.
Totals
Change
1975
32
176
29
68
4
309
-
1976
35
185
36
76
5
337
+28
1977
34
193
39
76
6
348
+11
1980
40
239
48
81
8
416
+68
1981
47
238
45
86
7
423
+ 7
1982
49
2313
48
87
9
431
+ 8
1983
47
263
45
79
10
444
+13
1984
42
274
45
85
10
456
+12
Source: Tyrrell County Statistical Report: FY 84-85
* Double wides
I
f]
1
1
1
19

A
the operation of large-scale hog operations, which produce strong
unpleasant odors in the rural environs. In some areas of the
County, this is still a nuisance.
3. Major Problems From Unplanned Development
Prior to the adoption of a subdivision ordinance by the Coun-
ty in 1973, the major problem from unplanned development was the
propagation of uncoordinated, poorly designed subdivisions along
the Albemarle Sound. Some of the problems associated with poor
subdivision design included lack of adequate potable water supply,
inadequate sanitary sewer disposal due to septic tank placement
limitations, and lack of public access to waterfront areas. The
County -wide water system has removed concerns over potable water
supply and lot size requirements, combined with enforcement of
health regulations, have helped decrease incidences of septic
tanks being placed in unsuitable soils. As was noted in the 1980
Plan Update, many septic tank problems in subdivisions were caused
by small lots (prior to adoption of subdivision regulations).
However, the issue of providing general public access to the
waterfront in subdivided areas is still a concern. Continued
residential development along the Scuppernong River and the Albe-
marle Sound, which appears to be a steady trend, may lead to fur-
ther public inaccessibility to waterfront areas unless planning
policies, or some regulatory devices are developed and imple-
mented.
4. Areas Experiencing or Likely to Experience Major Land Use
Changes
In the 1980 Land Use Plan Update, the main projected land use
change involved the anticipated mining of peat resources in
Tyrrell County and the possible resultant impacts upon water
transportation facilities near Columbia. However, as stated pre-
viously, the projected peat mining developments did not material-
ize, but may hold some promise during this current planning
period. The peat reserves are located primarily in the southern
half of the County, from the Alligator River westward to Washing-
ton County. If peat mining becomes a reality, portions of this
area could undergo some significant changes (See Appendix A,
attached to this Plan). Another anticipated major land use change
in the 1980 Plan Update was the continued massive clearance of
forestlands to be converted into farmlands. While woodland clear-
ance is still ongoing in the County, it appears that since 1981
the rate of such clearance has greatly declined. Several factors
have been involved in this deceleration. According to the Assoc-
iate Agricultural Extension Agent, a major reason is that lands
which are more feasible or easiest to convert into farm usage have
already been cleared. Economic factors have also been important.
For example, the cost of clearing new cropland can be very expen-
sive (about $1,000 per acre in 1984, according to the Extension
Agent), particularly for smaller operators, who do not own their
equipment. Proper drainage is also expensive. The Extension
22

Agent theorizes that the potential croplands, which are the most
economical to drain, have already been developed. Another impor-
tant factor reducing the rate of land clearing in the County has
been the active enforcement by the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
of the 404 permit process concerning any "development" in desig-
nated "wetland" areas. Also, since January, 1984, the impact of
any proposed development on "Prime Agricultural and Forest Lands"
was incorporated into the State Clearinghouse project coordination
review process as a result of Executive Order 96 by the Governor
of North Carolina. This review process requires local Soil and
Water Conservation District representatives to review development
proposals in their areas from the standpoint of assessing the
impact upon prime agricultural and forest lands. This review
process reduces the rate of land to be cleared.
Residential development will likely continue in the two
"growth" townships of Columbia and Scuppernong. (See Table 1,
page 3, and Table 5, page 7). However, the current overall
pattern will likely not be altered significantly.
The final area likely to experience major land use changes
will be the three sites designated as part of the Alligator River
National Wildlife Refuge. Portions of the combined total of 7,516
acres contains lands which have been and will be timbered through
1995. A small tract of experimental cropland is also located on
one of the parcels (See Map 3, attached). However, when a master
Plan is developed by the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, it is
likely that no agricultural or commercial forestry operations will
be allowed on these lands, particularly after the expiration of
G the current timbering contract.
5. Identification of Areas of Environmental Concern (AECs)
Of the two broad categories of statutorily defined Areas of
Environmental Concern (AECs) for Coastal North Carolina, i.e.
Estuarine System AECs and Ocean Hazards AECs, only the Estuarine
System is applicable to Tyrrell County. All of the AECs in
Tyrrell County's estuarine system were listed in the 1980 Land Use
Plan Update. Although these AECs have not changed, it may be
useful to define these important areas prior to listing them again
in this Update.
a. Coastal Wetlands
Coastal wetlands or marshlands are defined as any salt marsh
or other marsh subject to regular or occasional flooding by tides,
including wind tides (whether or not the tide waters reach the
marshland areas through natural or artificial watercourses), pro-
vided this shall not include hurricane or tropical storm tides.
r23
0

11
' Coastal marshlands also contain some, but not necessarily
all, of specific marsh plant species. There are no coastal wet-
lands or salt marshes in Tyrrell County of any significance.
However, the general term "wetlands" can be used to describe most
of the low-lying "wooded swamp" areas in the County. The "wooded
swamp" areas are located primarily along the low-lying land near
the Alligator and Scuppernong Rivers, and minor occurrences along
the Albemarle Sound.
b. Estuarine Waters and Estuarine Shorelines
Estuarine waters are defined in G. S. 113A-113(b)(2) as "all
the water of the Atlantic Ocean within the boundary of North Caro-
lina and all the waters of the bays, sounds, rivers, and tribu-
taries thereto seaward of the dividing line between coastal fish-
ing waters and inland fishing waters, as set forth in an agreement
adopted by the Wildlife Resources Commission and the Department of
Natural Resources and Community Development filed with the Secre-
tary of State, entitled "Boundary Lines, North Carolina Commercial
Fishing -- Inland Fishing Waters," revised to March 1, 1965."
Estuarine shorelines are those non -ocean shorelines which are
especially vulnerable to erosion, flooding, or other adverse
effects of wind and water and are intimately connected to the
estuary. These shorelines can be wetlands as well as dry land.
This area extends from the mean high water level or normal water
level along the estuaries, sounds, bays, and brackish waters as
set forth in an agreement adopted by the Wildlife Resources Com-
mission and the Department of Natural Resources and Community
Development, for a distance of 75 feet landward. It should be
noted, however, that estuarine shorelines are only located adja-
cent to coastal or joint waters, and not inland waters.
As an AEC, estuarine shorelines, although characterized as
dry land, are considered a component of the estuarine system
because of the close association with the adjacent estuarine
waters. Estuarine waters and adjacent estuarine shorelines make
up the most significant components of the estuarine system in
Tyrrell County. The significance of the estuarine system is that
it is one of the most productive natural environments of North
Carolina. It not only supports valuable commercial and sports
fisheries, but is also utilized for commercial naviga-tion, recrea-
tion and aesthetic purposes. Species dependent upon estuaries
include menhaden shrimp, flounder, oysters and crabs. These
species make up over 90 percent of the total value of North Caro-
lina's commercial catch. These species must spend all or part of
their life cycle in the estuary. The preservation and protection
of these areas are vitally important. The estuarine waters and
adjacent estuarine shorelines are vast in Tyrrell County, as noted
in the 1980 Plan Update, and include the following:
-- The Albemarle Sound from the County boundary near Bull's
Bay to Long Shoal Point
24
i

1
' -- Scuppernong River to Riders Creek, 1 mile south of
Columbia
-- Frying Pan Creek to Lyons Point
-- Alligator River to Cherry Ridge Landing
-- The Frying Pan
C. Public Trust Waters
Public trust waters are partially defined as all waters of
the Atlantic Ocean and the lands thereunder from the mean high
water mark to the seaward limit of state jurisdiction; all natural.
bodies of water subject to measurable lunar tides and lands there-
under to the mean high mark; all navigable natural bodies of water
and lands thereunder to the mean high water level or mean water
level, as the case may be. In other words, public trust areas are
waters and adjacent lands, the use of which, benefits and belongs
to the public.
-- In Tyrrell County, all of the waters listed as Estuarine
Waters and Lake Phelps, as well as inland waters, are
r considered public trust waters.
Currently, all development and development -related activities
within the designated AECs in Tyrrell County are regulated by the
CAMA permit process and are guided by local policy (Regulations
allow a local government to develop its own use standards for AECs
if they are more restrictive than the State's).
r
25

U
11
0
7
j
D. Review of Current Plans, Policies, Regulations
1. Local Plans, Studies and Regulations
No additional plans or regulations have been developed or
adopted by Tyrrell County since the preparation of the 1980 Land
Use Plan Update. However, in September, 1982, the County was
presented with the Preliminary Engineering Report for Phase II of
the Tyrrell County Water System. This report contained details,
cost estimates, and projected funding sources for completion of
the County water system to serve an additional 80 users. Other
local plans and regulations are listed below:
a. Tyrrell County Land Use Plan, 1976.
Prepared by DNRCD under CALMA, the Plan provides a description
of present condition of population, economy, and land use con-
straints to development. It discusses fragile and hazard areas,
areas of environmental concern, areas with resource potential, and
community facilities. It estimates future needs and sets out
policies and objectives related to implementing those needs.
b. Tyrrell County Land Use Plan Update, 1980.
This was the first 5-year update of the initial CAMA Plan
(1976) and contains a re -assessment of existing conditions and
projections of population, land use and economic conditions.
Updated policy statements on various development issues and imple-
mentation strategies are also in the Plan Update.
c. Comprehensive Water and Sewer Study, Tyrrell County,
1971.
Prepared by Rivers and Associates, analysis of water and
sewer needs and possibilities.
d. 201 Facility Study, 1977.
Prepared by Von Oesen and Associates, determined that a
regional sewer facility to serve a broad area surrounding Columbia
was not feasible.
e. Subdivision Regulations, 1973.
The Tyrrell County Planning Board
undertake comprehensive planning. The
administered by the Board which reviews
against standards set out therein.
26
was organized in 1973 to
subdivision ordinance is
development proposals

r
f. Federal Flood Insurance Program
The Federal Flood Insurance Program, now in the Emergency
Phase and scheduled to move into the Regular Phase in 1985, is in
effect throughout the County.
g. State Building Code
The County has adopted the State Building Code. The services
of an inspection officer and a regular inspection program began in
1985.
h. Septic Tank Regulations
All Septic tank regulations are administered by the Health
Department.
2. State Agency Plans
a. Transportation Improvement Program, 1980-1986.
This plan, prepared by the N. C. Department of Transporta-
tion, is a statewide schedule of highway improvements to be under-
taken during the seven-year period 1980-1986. The only project
included for completion in Tyrrell County was minor improvements
along State Road 1209.
b. North Carolina Airport System Plan, 1979.
Recommended that Tyrrell County construct a minimum airport
facility to implement State policy of having an airport within a
30-minute drive of 95% of State's population. However, because of
severe military -imposed airspace restrictions, this has not been
feasible in Tyrrell County.
c. North Carolina Water Resources Framework Study, 1977.
This study, completed by N. C. Department of Natural
Resources and Economic Development in 1977, identified water
resource needs for River Basins in the State. Needs identified
with Tyrrell County are as follows: (1) designate a-floodway for
Columbia; (2) develop regional water and sewer; (3) designate
conservation of Scuppernong River corridor, Alligator River south
to Gum Neck, wooded swamp along Albemarle Sound, Lake Phelps; (4)
designate fishing use of the Little Alligator; and (5) designate
scenic use of Second Creek.
d. Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan, SCORP.
The purpose of the SCORP is to compile and analyze the
existing supply of and demand for recreation facilities in the
27

0
State. The SCORP analysis is by regions and has no specific
analysis for each County. Tyrrell County is in Region R.
3. Local Regulations
In addition to the regulations listed under Local Plans
(subdivision regulations, State Building Code, and septic tank
regulations), the CAMA major and minor permit processes are also
enforced in the County. However, Tyrrell County does not have and
does not enforce other ordinances such as zoning, historic
districts, nuisance, sedimentation and erosion control, or on
local environmental impacts. The County also does not enforce a
local mobile home park ordinance.
4. Federal and State Regulations
In addition to the local ordinances and regulations discussed
above, there are also various State and local regulations which
could also affect land development in Tyrrell County.
1
t
1
r
1
[7
27 (a)
r

I
E. Constraints: Land Suitability
This section of the Tyrrell County Land Use Plan proposes to
identify features of the land or landscape of the County which
are or could pose serious constraints to development. Under land
suitability, these constraints are generally considered under the
broad categories of 1) physical limitations, i.e. hazardous (man-
made or natural) areas, areas with soil limitations, hazardous
slopes, etc., 2) fragile areas, i.e. AECs, complex natural areas,
or areas with cultural (architectural or archaeological) signifi-
cance, and 3) areas with resource potential, i.e. productive or
prime agricultural or forest lands, or potentially valuable miner-
al sites (peat, for example). Some of these elements were
discussed in the 1980 Land Use Plan Update, but because of the
implications for updating certain policies, additional discussion
will be presented below.
1. Physical Limitations
a. Man -Made Hazards
The most significant man-made hazard in Tyrrell County is a
United States Air force bombing range located in the Albemarle
Sound near the Dewey's pier (SR-1208). Another actively used
bombing range is located outside of Tyrrell County in the southern
portion of Dare County. However, the approach to the Dare County
range is directly over Tyrrell County. Because of these bombing
ranges, nearly all of Tyrrell County, except for a 10-mile-wide
corridor in the northern portion of the County, is "restricted
airspace." Currently, the military has plans to expand the air
space restrictions over the entirety of Tyrrell County, to become
effective in 1985. The continual presence of low -flying military
planes on subsonic training missions, has been the source of many
complaints by Tyrrell citizens -- particularly from farmers.
There have been reports of actual structural damage to roofs,
shattered glass doors and windows, and even broken dishes due to
the vibration from these planes. The County's perception of the
military restricted airspace, is that it inhibits agricultural
growth and development because of restrictions placed on crop
dusting. It is also felt that potential industrial development,
as well as development of an airport, is also hindered by the
airspace restrictions.
The other man-made hazards in Tyrrell County are all storage
facilities. Two of these are located in the Town of Columbia and
one is located in the Scuppernong community.
b. Natural Hazard Area
1. Flood Hazard Area
When the 1980 Land Use Plan Update was developed, a detailed
Flood Insurance Study showing elevations and flood hazard areas,
28
1

H
had not been prepared for Tyrrell County. However, the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) initiated a detailed study in
1982, with the preliminary results being published in July, 1984.
The study, which consists of a report and a series of maps of all
of the unincorporated area of the County (the Town of Columbia has
a separate study) shows the areas which are subject to inundation
by the 100-year flood (zone "A"s) along with elevations, as dis-
tinguished from areas subject to minimal flooding dangers (Zone
"C"). Not surprisingly, the detailed study shows that most of
Tyrrell County is subject to the 100-year flood; however, there
' are significant amounts of areas included in the "Zone C" classi-
fication, i.e. in the 500-year flood area and subject to minimal
flooding. These areas are mostly found in "pockets" on land
between the lower end of the Scuppernong River and Bull Bay -Albe-
marle Sound. Other pockets of relatively "high ground" are found
a few miles north and/or a few miles east of Columbia. There are
also pockets scattered in the central portion of the County. -
However, the largest and most significant area of "Zone C" is
located. in the southwest portion of the County, from the Washing-
ton County border, eastward and southward to the Hyde County bor-
der near the southernmost tip of Tyrrell County. (See Map 4,
attached). The rest of the County is located within the 100-year,
or "high hazard" flood area. The existing land uses within the
�j high hazard flood area, consist mostly of residential, agricultur-
al and forestry uses. The average elevation in the high hazard
areas is about four feet above mean sea level (4 msl).
2. Estuarine Erosion Area
As discussed under identification of Areas of Environmental
Concern (AECs), Tyrrell County has a substantial area of estuarine
waters and estuarine shorelines. Erosion of the estuarine shore-
line can pose possible hazards for certain waterfront develop-
ments, particularly residential. Estuarine erosion areas have
been determined by the Soil Conservation Service for 121 points
along the Albemarle Sound and Alligator River. Average annual
erosion rates which were identified in the 1976 Plan by "reach"
areas (P. 29) are as follows:
1. Shoreline in Scuppernong Township, 3.1 feet
2. Other shoreline along Albemarle, 2.1 feet
3. Little Alligator shoreline, 2.2 feet
4. Little Alligator to Second Creek on Alligator, 3.3 feet
5. Alligator to Gum Neck to Kilkenny, 1.5 feet
6. Alligator River, Gum Neck to Kilkenny, 1.5 feet
The overall average erosion rate is about 2.3
for Tyrrell County's estuarine shorelines, or about
feet per
23 feet
year
every
10 years. This rate of loss could be greatly intensified
in
the
event of major storms. Shoreline stabilization in
developed
areas
is an important consideration for Tyrrell County.
(See Map
5,
next page) .
29 _

J6 aoffl- 100001-
BULL sAV
7 SWAMP
00
4
V
5
SWAMP 9
r
t
4 PS
oil
C INS 1AVr
The preparation of this map was
financed In part through a grant
provided by the North Carolina
Coastal Management Program,
through funds provided by the
Coastal Zone Management Act o
1972, as
amended, which I, 9f administered by the office c
a 2F, 4, t '0
Coastal management, National MAP 5
Oceanic and Atmospheric Admini—
titration.
TYRRELL COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
N— -7 -4
SHORELINE
REACH EROSION
30

U
C. Areas with Soils Limitations
Detailed mapping of various soil types and respective proper-
ties were not available for Tyrrell County during the development
of the 1980 Land Use Plan Update. However, a "Special Soil Survey
Report, October, 1982," was completed and published in preliminary
form for Tyrrell County. The report was prepared by the USDA Soil
Conservation Service in cooperation with the Tyrrell County Board
of Commissioners. The report includes detailed descriptions of
the soil types and properties for Tyrrell County with discussion
of the suitability for various uses, such as croplands, urban
development, and recreation. The most important feature or
property of soils to consider in Tyrrell County is its drainage
capability, since well -drained, stable soils can be used for a
variety of "development" purposes, i.e. croplands or residential
(septic tank suitability).
In general, the soils in Tyrrell County have limitations for
many _uses because of wetness, too rapid permeability, too slow
permeability, or low strength. Of the 21 soils classifications
contained in the Special Soil Survey Report, all except two were
characterized as being poorly drained with limitations for urban
development uses. Most of the soil types, however, are suitable
for various agricultural uses if the proper drainage is provided.
Large acreages of the surface area of Tyrrell County soils con-
sists of highly decomposed organic matter. These peat -type soils
are poorly suited for agricultural use because of the high percent
of stumps and roots in the soil profile and the depth of organic
matter, which limit their use for cultivation.
With the recently established trend of population growth, as
well as the absence of centralized sewer facilities, a very impor-
tant consideration is the extent of soils suitable for urban
development, i.e. septic tank placement. As stated previously,
only two (2) soil types were classified as well -drained and clear-
ly suited for urban development and uses. These types are:
Conetoe Loamy Sand and State Sandy Loam. These soils are found
mostly in the northern half of the County along ridges, -particu-
larly in the Scuppernong Township area along the Albemarle Sound.
Two other soils, Altavista loamy fine sand and Tomotley fine loamy
sand have development potential with proper drainage: These soils
are also located mostly in the northern half of the County. (See
Map 6, attached, which shows the general locations of soil types
r most suitable for urban -type uses).
r
d. Sources and Estimated Quantity of Water Supply
1. Groundwater
"The Yorktown aquifer is the principal source of water supply
in Tyrrell County. This aquifer consists chiefly of beds of marl,
sand and consolidated coquina that are generally separated by beds
31
t

I
of clay or sandy clay. Yields of 5 to 20 gpm are common in most
small diameter wells in the Yorktown aquifer. Yields of 75 to 100
gpm may possibly be obtained from carefully constructed wells of
large diameter. The aquifer is recharged directly in the area of
outcrop and indirectly by seepage of water through overlying sur-
ficial sand. The chemical quality of water from the Yorktown
aquifer varies with the lithology. The water is commonly mode-
rately hard to hard.
"Surficial sediments of Pleistocene and Recent Age comprise
the non -artesian or water table aquifer... This aquifer is
recharged directly by precipitation and surface storage and, where
it immediately overlies artesian aquifers, acts as a source of
recharge to them. The water table is usually within 2 to 3 feet
of the land surface except in the swamp, where it is at the sur-
face. Water from this shallow aquifer is characteristically soft,
irony and corrosive." (1980 Land Use Plan Update, p. 26-27).
The Tyrrell County water system is tied onto the Town of
Columbia's water system. The Town's system, which was built in
1964, uses two wells. Raw water from these wells is treated at
the rate of 300 gpm and stored in a 200,000 gallon elevated
storage tank. Tyrrell County has a water purchase contract with
Columbia to serve users in various unincoprorated areas of the
County. Phase I of the Tyrrell County water system consisted of
two 250 gpm deep wells, one 250 gpm treatment facility, and a
250,000 gallon elevated storage tank and limited distribution
lines. Phase II of the County water system, which was completed
in late 1985, expanded the distribution system to serve some of
the areas not served by Phase I of the water system. However,
Alligator Township, located in the northeast portion of the
County, cannot be economically served by the water system. There
are also several dwellings in the Frying Pan area which cannot be
economically served. Problems from individual wells, i.e. for
users not connected to the County water system was cited in the
Preliminary Engineering Report: Tyrrell County Water System,
Phase II,.Revised September, 1982:
"Water for homes outside of the County Water System service
area is presently obtained from individual wells. Most of
the existing wells are inadequate as far as capacity is con-
cerned and are not protected from surface contami-nation.
Additional contamination is caused by flooding after exces-
sive rainfall. Some of the homes in the proposed service
area have outdoor privies and no water supply."
"Most existing wells,
few of which are deeper
than 48 feet,
yield from 5 to 15 gallons
per minute from the
surficial
sands and gravels, and
near -surface sands of the
water -table
aquifer. A few wells
obtain water from sands,
coquinas (a
soft whitish limestone
formed of broken shells
and corals)
32 _

and hardened shell marls of the Yorktown upper aquifer.
Wells in this aquifer range from 47 to 122 feet deep," p. 7-
8).
The report also pointed out that most private wells pumped
from the shallow, water -table aquifer, which yields typically hard
iron water. To make the water more suitable for domestic uses
(including drinking) users often must install rather expensive
water filters or softening units. Even with these mechanical
devices, the water quality is still often undesirable. (Prelimi-
nary Engineering Report, p. 8).
2. Surface Water
�+ Generally, the surface water quality in Tyrrell County is
good and not subject to acute long-term pollution. There has been
concern in recent years over the impact of freshwater intrusion
into the saline -concentrated estuarine waters, mainly from surface
runoff due to land clearings. However, no definitive studies have
been produced detailing such impacts in Tyrrell County. (Discus-
sions with N. C. Division of Environmental Management and Division
of Marine Fisheries).
e. Slopes in Excess of 12%
The elevations in all of Tyrrell County are all very low and
there are no steep slopes in excess of 12% anywhere in the
County.
2, Fragile Areas
These are areas which could easily be damaged or destroyed by
inappropriate or poorly planned development. There are several
fragile areas in Tyrrell County including those areas previously
identified and discussed as Areas of Environmental Concern (AECs).
These included coastal wetlands.(or marshlands); estuarine
waters, public trust areas, and estuarine shorelines (See pages 23
through 25, this section). However, there are other fragile areas
in the County which are not classified as Areas of Environmental
Concern, but nevertheless, due to either natural or cultural sig-
nificance, are environmentally sensitive. An example -are the
so-called "404" wetlands, as designated by the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers. These areas are extensive in Tyrrell County and
function similarly to AECs. However, the 404 areas are regulated
by the Corps and not by the State. Additional areas will be
identified and discussed below as either "Natural Resource Fragile
Areas," or "Cultural Resource Fragile Areas."
a. Natural Resource Fragile Areas
Natural resource fragile areas are generally recognized to be
of educational, scientific, or cultural value because of the
natural features of the particular site. Features in these areas
serve to distinguish them from the vast majority of the landscape.
33
11

These areas include: complex natural areas, areas that sustain
remnant species, unique geologic formations, pocosins, wooded
swamps, prime wildlife habitats, or registered natural landmarks.
With the exception of unique geologic formations and registered
natural landmarks, the above -listed natural resource fragile areas
tend to overlap in Tyrrell County. As noted in the 1980 Plan
Update, much of Tyrrell County could be considered as a "complex
natural area," p. 33-34). These areas are defined as "lands that
support native plant and animal communities and provide habitat
conditions or characteristics that have remained essentially
unchanged by human activity." These areas are to be determined to
be rare within the County or to be of particular scientific or
educational value. Complex natural areas are often surrounded by
landscapes that have been modified but still do not drastically
alter the conditions within the natural areas or their scientific
or educational value. The complex natural area in Tyrrell County
could also include areas that sustain remnant species, pocosins,
wooded swamps and wildlife habitats. (See 1980 Plan, pp. 29-34).
Also, the newly designated Alligator River National Wildlife
Refuge could also fit in these overlapping categories. There are
no registered natural landmarks or unique geologic formations in
Tyrrell County.
b. Cultural Resource Fragile Areas
Fragile areas may be particularly important to a locale eith-
er in an aesthetic or cultural sense. Fragile coastal cultural
resource areas are generally recognized to be of educational,
associative, scientific, aesthetik:, or cultural value because of
their special importance to our understanding of past human set-
tlement of and interaction with the coastal zone. Their impor-
tance serves to distinguish the designated areas as significant
among the historic architectural or archaelogical remains in the
coastal zone, and therein establish their value.
Although there has been no comprehensive archaeological or
architectural investigation of Tyrrell County, the State Division
of Archives and History has recorded several sites in the County.
One site, the Spruill House near Colonial Beach, has been investi-
gated for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places.
The Tyrrell County Courthouse is the only historic place in
Tyrrell County which has been placed on the National -Register of
Historic Places.
Although several sites have been identified as having the
potential for inclusion on the "study list" for possible recommen-
dation to the National Register of Historic Places, none have
actually been placed on the list.
34

L�
d
Fl
1,
1
t
I i
I
1
3. Areas With Resource Potential
a. Agricultural and Forest Lands
The primary areas with resource potential to be considered in
this 1985 update of the Tyrrell County .Land Use Plan are agricul-
tural and forest lands. As discussed under existing economic
conditions (pages 9 through 17), agriculture and commercial for-
estry are the largest income producers for Tyrrell County and
therefore cannot be under -estimated in value. In August, 1983,
the Governor of North Carolina issued a formal policy declaration
(Executive Order 96) concerning the State's desire to promote the
"Conservation of Prime Agricultural and Forest Lands" in support
of and to assist with compliance of the Federal Farmland
Protection Policy Act of 1980. The declaration of Executive Order
96 recognized the fact that in many areas of the State, prime
agricultural and forest lands are being converted to other uses at
such a significant rate that these irreversible uses may
ultimately reduce the capacity of food and fiber production.
Prime agricultural and forest lands were defined as those lands
" which possess the best combination of physical and chemical
characteristics for producing food, feed, fiber (including forest
products), forage, oilseed, and other agricultural products
(including livestock), without intolerable soil erosion."
The Governor directed the Secretary of the State Department
of Natural Resources and Community Development to assume the
responsibility of carrying out the Order. The program proposed in
the Executive Order involved the identification of and mapping of
prime agricultural and forest lands by the Soil and Water Conser-
vation Commission through the assistance of local Soil and Water
Conservation Districts. Also, by means of the existing State
Clearinghouse review process, the impact of any development pro-
posed on prime agricultural or forest lands would have to be
assessed beginning January 1, 1984.
However, as of the writing of this report, prime agricultural
or forest lands have not been identified or mapped in accordance
with Executive Order 96, in Tyrrell County. With appropriate
drainage facilities, most of the soil types in Tyrrell County
yield very productive farmland. The majority of the -productive
farmland is located in the northern portions of the County, with
forest lands dominating most of the rest of the County's land-
scape. (See Existing Land Use Map, attached as Map 3).
b. Productive Water Bodies
Because of the significance of commercial and recreational
fishing in Tyrrell County, the primary fishing areas should also
35

Ll
1
1
be considered as an area with resource potential. As noted in the
1980 Plan Update (p. 11), fisheries are varied in Tyrrell County
and include pound net activity, gill net, crabbing, and eeling.
Most fishing is done in the Albemarle Sound, the Alligator River,
and the Scuppernong River. Croaker, bass and perch are primarily
caught in the Sound, while herring is mostly caught in the Scup-
pernong River.
c. Mining Lands
As discussed elsewhere in this report and extensively in the
1980 Land Use Update, Tyrrell County has a substantial peat
reserve capable of being mined for commercial or industrial pur-
poses. An estimate made by First Colony Farms several years ago
projected that there were approximately 45,000 acres of peat
reserves in Tyrrell County (1980 Land Use Plan, p. 36). Detailed
maps of the locations of peat reserves are not currently avail-
able. However, review of detailed soils classifications maps
prepared by the U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service, indicates that
soil types with highly decomposed organic matter as surface layers
and underlayed by decayed logs, etc., may signify the presence of
peat. These types of soils can be found nearly all over the Coun-
ty in various pockets. However, the broadest concentrations
appear to be in the south, south-central, and eastern portion of
the County. A substantial portion of the potential peat lands are
currently forested.
d. Outdoor Recreation Lands
Lands used for hunting, fishing, boating, hiking, camping,
and other outdoor recreational uses are also important resources
to consider in the development of land use policies. In Tyrrell
County, because of many productive water bodies, and expansive
woodlands, recreational fishing and hunting opportunities, within
the appropriate seasons, abound. Also, Pettigrew State Park,
located around Lake Phelps (mostly in Washington County), is par-
tially located near the southwest corner of Tyrrell and is
increasing in significance as a State recreational area. Lake
Phelps contains camping sites, hiking trails, and facilities for
water sports such as boating. (1980 Land Use Plan, P. 37).
36
I

r
I
F. Constraints: Capacity of Community Facilities
1. Water
' The capacity of the combined Columbia -Tyrrell County water
system has not changed since the preparation of the 1980 Land Use
' Plan. However, improvements to the County's distribution system
were completed in early 1985. With the expanded distribution
lines, the only major area not served by the County water system
is the Alligator Township. This area is too sparsely populated to
' make the extension of water service economically feasible. Also,
there are several families in the Frying Pan area not economically
feasible to serve. There are no plans to serve these unserved
' areas in the the near future because of the economics.
The capacities of the combined water systems are summarized
' in Table 20 below:
Table 20: Columbia -Tyrrell Water Systems Capacity, 1984
'
Columbia
Tyrrell Co.
Total
*Daily Pumping Capacity
150,000
gpd
**168,000
gpd
318,000
Treatment Capacity
150,000
gpd
163,000
gpd
318,000
Elevated Storage
200,000
gpd
+300,000
gpd
500,000
Avg. Daily Consumption
75,000
gpd
84,000
gpd
159,000
'
Excess Capacity
Per Capita Consumption
75,000
94
gpd
gpd
84,000
38
gpd
gpd
159,000
66 gpd
(avcg. )
*10 hr day: **14 hr day:
+Includes 50,000 gal. detention storage
on ground
Sources: Town of Columbia;
Tyrrell County
' Both Columbia and Tyrrell County have considerable excess
water capacity, with a combined total of 159,000 gpd. At the
current combined average per capita consumption rate of approxi-
mately 52 gallons per day, this capacity could easily accommodate
a population increase within the service area of 3,058 additional
persons. The significantly lower per capita consumption rate for
Tyrrell County users, compared to Columbia's may be attributable
to the fact that many County water users still have their private
wells and pumps, which are also used.
' 2. Sewer
The only centralized
sewer system
in the County
is still the
'
one which serves the Town
of Columbia.
Past studies,
as reported
in the 1980 Land Use Plan,
have shown
that it is not
economically
feasible to serve a broader area with
the system, such
as the
'
Townships of Columbia and
Scuppernong.
Notice Table
21 below:
'
37

'
Table 21: Town of Columbia Sewage
Treatment
Capacity, 1984
Treatment Capacity
150,000
gpd
Current Daily Effluent Load
80,000
gpd
Excess Treatment Capacity
70,000
gpd
Per Capita Use
100
gpd
1
1
�1
Source: Town of Columbia
The Town's sewage treatment is based on an aeration and oxi-
dation system. The Town's sewer system has been extended to serve
the Secota Village assisted housing project, which consists of 35
units in 17 buildings. Also, by the Fall of 1985, the system will
be extended to serve a small single-family subdivision to be
developed within the Town of Columbia (12 units).
If the collection system were economical to expand and/or if
growth takes place in Columbia, the excess treatment capacity
could accommodate approximately 700 more persons -- an'increase of
nearly 88% over the estimated 1984 population of 800.
3. Solid Waste
The general elevations of Tyrrell County (18" above mean sea
level in some places) make location of a sanitary landfill vir-
tually impossible. Currently Tyrrell County has more than 50
dumpsters located in various places around the County. The County
owns and operates two refuse compactor trunks which collect the
solid wastes for delivery to a sanitary landfill in Washington
County.
4. School Enrollments
The Tyrrell County school system currently operates two
schools, an elementary (K-6) and a high school (7-12). Table 22
below compares 1980 enrollments with-1984-85 enrollments.
Table 22: Tyrrell County School Enrollments, 1980 and 1984-85
1980
1984=85
Elementary
411
441
High School
395
336
Teachers
53
52
Since the preparation of the 1980 Land Use Plan, some major
additions and improvements have been made, including a new audi-
torium, a new band building, and a library for the elementary
school. According to the County schools supervisor, "classroom"
M

' availability at both schools are at "capacity." As reported ear-
lier in the discussion of population projection, however, no sig-
nificant increases of school age children are anticipated. The
capacity of the current facilities should be adequate for quite
some time.
' 5. Transportation
There are only two primary roads in Tyrrell County, U. S.
' Highway 64, which runs east -west and N. C. Highway 94, which runs
north -south. N. C. 94 intersects with and dead ends at U. S. 264,
giving the County a "T-bone" thoroughfare network. Most of the
State -maintained secondary routes are located in the northern
' portion of Tyrrell County, with the road network being quite unde-
veloped in the southern areas of the County. Traffic volumes in
Tyrrell County are never excessively heavy. The capacities of the
' paved roads are more than adequate to handle projected traffic
volumes. Notice Table 23 below, which compares traffic counts at
certain points in 1979 to counts in 1983.
Table 23: Selected Primary Road Traffic Volumes
Location 1979 1983
1. U. S. 64 & U. S. 64 Bypass (west) 4,500 4,100
2. N. C. 94 & U. S. 64 Bypass 4,600 3,400
' 3. N. C. 94 (south of U. S. 64) 2,600 2,200
4. U. S. 64 Bus. & U. S. 64 Byp. (east) 2,100 2,000
Source: NCDOT, Division of Thoroughfare Planning, Raleigh, N. C.
The capacities of these roads, according to the NCDOT, is in
' the range of from 7,000 to 10,000 vehicles per day, which are more
than adequate for traffic in Tyrrell County. Notice also that
from 1979 to 1983, traffic volume declined.
' 6. Medical Services
Professional medical services have improved significantly
' since the preparation of the 1980 Land Use Plan (p. 41). Since
1981, the Tyrrell Rural Health Association has received grants for
the provision of a full-time physician and staff in Tyrrell Coun-
ty. The physician resides in Columbia, as well as a Nurse Practi-
tioner, staff nurse and X-ray technician. These medical personnel
are available for emergency service. There is also a dentist in
private practice in Columbia and a pharmacy store.
' 7. Emergency and Protective Services
' As reported in the 1980 Land Use Plan, police services for
both the County and Town of Columbia are still centered in the
1
39

1
County Sheriff's Department. The Sheriff's Department still con-
sists of the sheriff, three deputies and four radio dispatchers.
The dispatching unit is used to dispatch all emergency vehicles,
including ambulance and fire. Two volunteer fire departments
serve the County, operating from Columbia and one from Gum Neck.
The 1980 Plan reported the possibility of a third voluntary fire
department being established in the Newlands-Cross-Landing area.
However, this is no longer a consideration. Emergency rescue
service is currently provided by the Tyrrell County rescue squad
which is dispatched through the Sherriff's Department on a 24-hour
basis.
8. Other Facilities
Since the
1980 Land Use Plan, a new library
facility has been
constructed.
The library, which is located on U.
S. 64, a short
distance from
the Tyrrell County Courthouse, also
has meeting
rooms, one of
which is used for the County Board
of Commissioners'
meetings.
i Also, Tyrrell County has recently constructed a senior citi-
zens facility in Columbia which is being used for a variety of
activities for the County's elderly population, including a nutri-
tion program (hot meals) site. The facility was funded with local
and State funds and was completed in late 1985.
I
1
40

1 G. Estimated Demand
1. Population and Economy
' According to projections in Table 1, Tyrrell County's popu-
lation in 1995 will be 4,398, an increase of 264 persons over the
1985 estimate of 4,134. (Both estimates were provided by the
N. C. Office of State Budget and Management). This growth rate
(6.39%) certainly does not imply a "rapid growth" situation which
would impose stresses upon existing facilities and services. If
' current trends continue, the Town of Columbia can expect to gain
51 of the 264 additional persons, leaving 213 residing in the
County. (This is based on Columbia's proportion of the County's
current population estimate, assuming the proportion holds steady
and the Town does not annex. Columbia's population is currently
projected at 800, representing an increase since the 1980 Census).
Again, on the basis of current trends, most of the 213 additional
persons will reside in the Columbia and Scuppernong Townships.
Also, since there appears to be a trend toward smaller households
(e.g. the average household size in 1970 was 4.0 persons, but
only 2.88 in 1980), the average household size in Tyrrell County
by 1995 could be 2.5 persons. Thus, assuming an average of 2.5
persons per household in 1995, the increased population by that
time will result in 20 additional households for the Town of
Columbia, and 85 more households in the unincorporated portions of
the County, mostly in the Columbia and Scuppernong Townships.
' The 105 additional households will place certain demand upon
goods, services, and facilities. However, the most pressing
demand will likely be for employment. There is no appreciable
seasonal population in Tyrrell County.
2. Future Land Need
According to the current population estimate (4,134), compar-
ed to the estimated acreage of "urban and built-up land" (See
Table 1), the population density in the developed areas is
approximately 1.88 acres per person. Assuming the same proportion
for 1995, the 264 additional persons in the County will require
approximately 496 additional developed acres. This projected
developed acreage would include all urban -type uses,-i.e. residen-
tial, commercial and industrial. With 183,790 acres -currently in
forest lands and 68,370 acres in farms (including sizeable amounts
' of land in the "minimally flooded" and suitable soils areas), land
availability will pose no problem for development needs during the
planning period.
3. Community Facilities Need
The additional population increase by 1995 of 264 persons
' will require more water from the Columbia -Tyrrell County water
system. However, at the average per capita consumption rate of 66
gallons per day, an additional 17,424 gallons per day will be
41

needed, only a little more than 10% of the current combined excess
capacities. Provision of water supply should not pose a problem
during the planning period.
Outside of Columbia, additional residents will have to con-
tinue to rely on septic tanks for disposal of sewage. With the
availability of suitable, well -drained soils and/or the installa-
tion of modified septic systems in certain soil types, septic tank
placement should not pose major problems -- except possibly in the
Alligator Township which is not connected to the County water
' system. However, as Table 5, page 7 showed, Alligator Township
has been constantly declining in population and is not expected to
experience significant population growth during the planning
period.
The County's solid waste disposal system will still have to
1 rely on ultimate disposal in the Washington County landfill as the
most practical method of waste disposal.
Currently, there are three public boat ramps located in the
' County providing water access to the public, and nine private boat
ramps. As the population increases, there will be a need for
additional points of public water access.
' Other facilities and services, such as schools, roads, medi-
cal, protective and emergency services, are projected to be ade-
quate throughout the planning period.
u
42

Am L
iamm=
c
LLJ
cn
A
CM

SECTION.II: POLICY STATEMENTS
The formulation of specific policies regarding growth and
management objectives is perhaps the most important part of this
updated Land Use Plan. Those policies must, in some cases, strike
a delicate balance between objectives of the Coastal Resources
Commission and the desires and objectives of the citizens of
Tyrrell County. Most of the trends identified in the 1980 Plan
are still continuing, so in many instances, policies set forth in
the 1980 Plan will not require modification. As the analysis of
existing conditions showed, these ongoing trends include: a
moderately growing population, increased waterfront development,
and the continuing potential for the mining of peat.
The Coastal Resources Commission, recognizing the diversities
which exist among the Coastal counties and communities, required
the County to specify particular development policies under four
rather broad topics in 1980. For the 1985 Update, however, the
CRC has added a fifth issue, i.e., "Storm Hazard Mitigation." In
most cases, policies developed under these topics will cover most
of the local development issues, but in some cases, they do not.
In the latter case, the locality has the flexibility to address
its own locally defined issues. The five required broad topics
' are:
-- Resource Protection
Resource Production and Management
Economic and Community Development
-- Continuing Public Participation
-- Storm Hazard Mitigation
After an analysis of the existing conditions and trends and
input from the County's citizens, the foregoing policies were
developed to provide an overall framework for guiding growth and
development in Tyrrell County throughout the 10-year planning
period (1985-1995).
A. Resource Protection
1. Areas of Environmental Concern: Development Policies.
Tyrrell County recognizes the primary concern of the Coastal
Resources Commission, in terms of protecting resources, as
managing Areas of Environmental Concern (AECs). The County also
shares this concern for the protection and sound management of
these environmentally sensitive land and waters. The AECs which
occur in Tyrrell County were identified in Section I of this Plan
on pages 23 through 25. All of these areas are within the
Estuarine System. In terms of developing policies, the Estuarine
System AECs, which include Coastal Wetlands, Estuarine Waters,
Estuarine Shorelines, and Public Trust Areas, will be treated as
one uniform grouping since they are so closely interrelated.
Another reason for grouping these AECs together is the fact that
43

the effective use of maps to detail exact on -ground location of a
particular area, pose serious limitations.
Tyrrell County's overall policy and management objective for
the estuarine system is "to give the highest priority to the pro-
tection and coordinated management of these areas, so as to safe-
guard and perpetuate their biological, social, economic, and aes-
thetic values and to ensure that development occurring within
these AECs is compatible with natural characteristics so as to
minimize the likelihood of significant loss of private property
and public resources." (15 NCAC 7H. 0203) In accordance with this
overall objective, Tyrrell County will permit those land uses
which conform to the general use standards of the North Carolina
Administrative Code (15 NCAC 7H) for development within the
Estuarine System. Generally, only those uses which are water
dependent will be permitted. Specifically, each of the AECs
within the Estuarine System is discussed below.
a. Coastal Wetlands
By technical definition, there are no "coastal wetlands",
i.e., regularly flooded salt marsh areas containing certain plant
species, of any significance in Tyrrell County. Most of the "wet-
lands" in the County consist of freshwater marsh or "wooded swamp"
areas in the lowlands near the Alligator and Scuppernong Rivers,
with lesser occurrences along the northeastern shorelines of the
Albemarle Sound. Also, the more sensitive areas are those closest
to the water. The wooded swamps and pocosins in Tyrrell County
could also possibly contain areas that sustain remnant species,
and wildlife habitats, all of which are important to Tyrrell
County. However, the County does not believe that all land uses
in these areas should be prohibited. The first priority of uses
of land in these areas should be the allowance of uses which
promote "conservation" of the sensitive areas, with conservation
meaning the lack of imposition of irreversible damage to the
wetlands. Generally, uses which require water access and uses
such as utility easements, fishing piers and docks, will be
allowed, but must adhere to use standards of the Coastal Area
Management Act (CAMA: 15 NCAC 7H).
b. Estuarine Waters and Estuarine Shorelines
The importance of the estuarine waters and adjacent estuarine
shorelines in Tyrrell County was discussed in Section I of this
document on pages 23 - 25 and under "Estuarine Erosion Area,"
page 29. Tyrrell County is very much aware that protection of the
estuarine waters and adjacent estuarine shorelines -- both vital
components of the estuarine system -- is of paramount importance
to fishing, both commercially and for recreation.
Tyrrell County recognizes that actions within the estuarine
shoreline, which is defined as the area extending 75 feet landward
1 44

1
1
1
of the mean high waterline of the estuarine waters, could have a
substantial effect upon the quality of these waters. This area is
subject to erosion and occasional flooding, which could not only
affect the quality of the adjacent estuarine life, but also
threaten the security of personal property from developments
located therein. The estuarine erosion rates cited in Section I
of this report points that certain land areas in the County are
being lost to erosion at an average rate of 2.3 feet per year. If
a waterfront lot were to be located in such an area without stabi-
lization measures, 23 feet of the lot could possibly be lost to
erosion over 10 years.
In order to promote the quality of the estuarine waters as
well as minimize the likelihood of significant property loss due
to erosion or flooding, Tyrrell County will permit only those uses
which are compatible with both the dynamic nature of the estuarine
shorelines and the values of the estuarine system. Residential,
recreational, and commercial uses may be permitted within the
estuarine shoreline, provided that:
1. a substantial chance of pollution occurring from the
development does not exist;
2. natural barriers to erosion are preserved and not sub-
stantially weakened or eliminated;
3. the construction of impervious surfaces and areas not
allowing natural drainage is limited only to that neces-
sary for developments;
4. standards of the North Carolina Sedimentation Pollution
Control Act 1973 are met;
5. development does not have a significant adverse impact on
estuarine resources;
6. development does not significantly interfere with exist-
ing public rights or access to, or use of, navigable
waters or public resouces;
c. Public Trust Areas
Tyrrell County recognizes that the public has certain esta-
blished rights to certain land and water areas. (For definitions
and geographic locations of public trust areas, see page 25,
Section'I). These public areas also support valuable commercial
and recreational fisheries, waterfowl hunting, and also contain
significant aesthetic value. Tyrrell County will promote the
conservation and management of public trust areas. Appropriate
uses include those which protect public rights for navigation and
recreation. Projects which would directly or indirectly block or
impair existing navigation channels, increase shoreline erosion,
deposit spoils below mean high tide, cause adverse water circula-
tion patterns, violate water quality standards, or cause degrada-
tion of shellfish waters, shall generally not be allowed. Allow-
able uses shall be those which do not cause detriment to the
physical or biological functions of public trust areas. Such uses
45

as navigational channels, drainage ditches, bulkheads to prevent
erosion,
piers, docks, or marinas, shall be permitted.
d.'
Policy Alternatives: Development in AECs
Sections
a, b, and c of this Part have presented details of
Tyrrell
County's position on land uses in the statutorily defined
Areas of
Environmental Concern (AECs). Policy alternatives
include:
1.
Revising and strengthening the existing Subdivision
Ordinance, to impose stricter design standards, parti-
cularly in waterfront areas, or areas with water accessi-
bility.
2.
Adopt either a County -wide Zoning Ordinance, to establish
certain "zones," or districts with specified uses and
restrictions, or an ordinance covering just those deve-
loping areas of the County.
3.
Continue to utilize current system, i.e., existing Sub-
division Ordinance (with no modifications), along with
Federal and State permit and review processes, i.e., 404,
and CAMA.
e. Policy Choices
Tyrrell County will continue to utilize current system, i.e.,
existing Subdivision Ordinance (with no modifications), along with
Federal and State permit and review processes, i.e., 404, and
CAMA.
s 2. Development in Areas with Constraints
■ The constraints to development in Tyrrell County were dis-
cussed in Section I (pages 28-40) and relate to both physical
constraints and limitations of community facilities. The physical
constraints include man-made hazards such as the USAF bombing
ranges, high hazard flood areas, estuarine erosion areas, soils
limitations, and natural and cultural resource fragile areas.
Although the County does not favor the continued existence or
expansion of.the existing air space restrictions imposed by the
presence of USAF bombing ranges in the Albemarle Sound and in
southern Dare County, there appears to be little which can be done
to mitigate these operations. However, in October, 1985, the
Tyrrell County Board of Commissioners officially voiced their
position on military air operations by adopting a resolution
detailing the County's concerns, along with an official request
that operations and restrictions be reduced (See Appendix B,
attached). The high hazard flood areas, i.e., areas susceptible
to the 100-year flood, include the majority of Tyrrell County's
land area. As the attached Map 4 indicates, nearly all of Tyrrell
County is considered to be in the "Zone A" category, according to
maps prepared by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, with
46
I

1
1
i
1
r]
I I
Ij
1
some "pockets" of "Zone C" areas, i.e., minimally flooded areas
susceptible to a 500-year flood. The areas with the highest risk
appear to be the estuarine erosion areas (particularly along the
Alligator River shoreline) and interior lowland swamp areas.
Again, since most of the County is flood prone, it is not
realistic that all development should be prohibited from these
areas.
Estuarine erosion areas, as a physical constraint to develop-
ment, are closely related to the high hazard flood areas. Soils
limitations for development are also nearly a County -wide phenome-
non. Most of the soil types have limited permeability or too
rapid permeability, making septic tank placement a problem. Also,
the excessive spreads of muck or silt -type soils and peat -type
soils, cannot support septic tanks nor bear the construction of
heavy structures. The best soils for development are located in
the northwestern quadrant of the County in ridges along the Albe-
marle Sound and Scuppernong River areas.
The natural resource fragile areas are closely linked with
the previously identified AECs and the cultural resource fragile
areas were discussed on page 35). Existing community facilities,
i.e., water, solid waste collection, etc., do not pose a serious
constraint to development.
a. Policy Alternatives
Possible policy alternatives regarding managing growth and
development in areas with identified constraints include:
1. Amend subdivision regulations to include stricter design
standards.
2. Develop and adopt additional regulations such as a Zoning
Ordinance or Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance to regu-
late or prohibit all development in areas with identified
physical constraints.
3. Permit development in those areas, utilizing current
state, federal and local regulatory processes, i.e.,
CAMA, flood insurance, current subdivision regulations,
and Corps of Engineers 404 permits, and where adequate
protective measures have been taken.
b. Policy Choices
Tyrrell County adopts the following policies regarding deve-
lopment in areas with constraints.
1. Development will be permitted in some areas subject to
erosion, provided proposals comply with provisions
outlined for development within the estuarine shorelines
(see page 45).
47

2. Tyrrell County realizes the inevitability of some deve-
lopment occurring in high hazard flood areas, because of
the availability of soils suitable for septic tank place-
ment. Therefore, the County will continue to participate
in the National Flood Insurance Program and adopt a full -
phase Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance and promote
enforcement through the new County Building Inspection
Program. Proposed developments which are not otherwise
damaging to AECs may be permitted, provided protective
measures which comply with flood insurance requirements
are imposed.
3. Development in areas where soil types have limited bear-
ing capacity will not be encouraged.
4. In areas.with possible septic tank limitations, Tyrrell
County will remain committed to decisions rendered by the
Health Department's Sanitarian.
5. Tyrrell County does not favor the continued existence or
expansion of the existing air space restriction imposed
by the presence of U.S.A.F. bombing ranges in the
Albemarle Sound area near the County (See Appendix B,
attached).
b. Implementation Schedule
1. Beginning in 1985, Tyrrell County will initiate a
building inspection program employing the services of a
building inspector.
2. After the County's entrance into the regular phase of the
Flood Insurance Program, the subdivision ordinance will
be amended to require the inclusion of elevation above
mean sea level, for each lot in a subdivision plat.
3. Hurricane and Flood Evacuation Needs and Plans
An entire section within the Policy Statement discussions is
included separately for hurricane and flood evacuation, as well as
storm mitigation of post -storm redevelopment policies-; beginning
on page 66.
4. Other Resource Protection Policy Areas
There are some additional resource protection issues which
are required to be addressed by the CAMA planning guidelines and
which have lesser definition in Tyrrell County than in some other
coastal areas. These areas, along with relevant policy discussion
and statements are included below:
48 .

a Protection of Potable Water Supply
As discussed in Section 1, pages 31-32, and 37, Tyrrell
County's water distribution system is based on the Town of
Columbia's water system. Groundwater, drawn through a total of
four wells is the supply source of the system. Two wells are
located in the County, about 5 miles south of Columbia off Highway
94, and two are located within the Town of Columbia. Land uses
near groundwater sources are regulated by the North Carolina
Division of Environmental Management through N.C.A.C. Subchapter
2L and Subchapter 2C. Tyrrell County recognizes the importance of
protecting potable water supplies and therefore supports the
enforcement of these regulations.
b. Use of Package Treatment Plants
I
I
1
1
1
1
Since, as reported on page 37, the only centralized sewer
service in the County is in the Town of Columbia, it may become
necessary to develop small package treatment systems in order to
accommodate certain types of development in outlying areas of the
County. This development may be residential, commercial, or
industrial. It shall be the policy of Tyrrell County to allow
such package plants if they can be constructed within the overall
intent of this plan and meet other federal and state environmental
regulations.
C. Stormwater Runoff Associated with Agriculture, Residential
Development, Phosphate or Peat Mining, and Its Impact on Coastal
Wetlands, Surface Waters, or Other Fragile Areas
Stormwater runoff is basically the same issue as surface
drainage in Tyrrell County. Policies on surface drainage are
addressed in other areas of this Plan. (See Part B, this section,
"Resource Production and Management Policies", for policies relat-
ing to agriculture, [B.11, residential development [B.61, and peat
mining [B.31, and discussion of related impacts. Phosphate mining
is not an issue in Tyrrell County.
d. Marina and Floating Home Development
The development of marinas has significant commercial and
recreational potential in Tyrrell County. Therefore, the County
supports the development of marinas, in compliance with existing
environmental regulations. (Also, see Part C.4, "Redevelopment of
Developed Areas", Section II). So-called "floating homes" are not
an issue or problem in Tyrrell County.
e. Industrial Impacts on Fragile Areas
Part C.1, "Types and Locations of Desired Industry", contains
specific policy statements on industry. (See pages 55-57).
49

IB. Resource Production and Management Policies
Appropriate management of productive resources is very impor-
tant to any locality. However, in Tyrrell County, the productive
resources are intricately tied to the predominant economic sectors
of the County which makes the necessity of balanced management
policies of paramount importance. The major productive resources
to be considered relate to agriculture, commercial forestry, com-
mercial and recreation fisheries, peat mining, and recreational
land uses.
1. Agriculture
Agriculture, as discussed under analysis of existing economic
conditions, is the unchallenged leader in Tyrrell County's econ-
omy. More of the County's income comes from this sector than from
all the other major sectors combined. The importance of farming
and its supportive activities such as proper land clearing and
development of adequate drainage facilities, cannot be overesti-
mated in Tyrrell County. Executive Order 96, "Conservation of
Prime Agricultural and Forest Lands", was supposed to have led to
the identification of "prime areas," in both agriculture and
forestry, by the soil and water conservation districts. However,
this identification has not occurred in Tyrrell County. Neverthe-
less, assuming adequate drainage, the most productive farmlands
are located in the northern half of the County and south central
on either side of NC Highway 94.
a. Policy Alternatives
1. Do not impose any additional land use controls or
restrictions on agricultural practices, so that
needed land clearance and drainage activities can
continue.
2. Adopt a County -wide zoning ordinance and zone certain
lands as "agricultural," with use restrictions and
limitations.
3. Support and encourage use of the U. S. Soil
Conservation Service's "Best Management -Practices"
program.
b. Policy Choice
1. Tyrrell County, in recognition of the importance of
agriculture to the County's economy, believes that
existing federal and state permitting procedures
(CAMA and Corps of Engineers) pose enough limitations
to the use of farmland in the County. Because of the
soil types and topography, the County recognizes that
proper drainage is essential and must be allowed to
50

�J
i
i
1
1
1
11
1
1
n
1
continue as needed, and as it does not result in
irreversible damage to enrironmentally sensitive
areas. Therefore, no additional limitation or poli-
cies will be adopted. However, the County will
support and encourage the identification of "prime"
farmland in Tyrrell County and use of the "Best
Management Practices" program.
C. Implementation Schedule
1. Leave the existing process as is.
2. Encourage the Regional Soil and Water Conservation
District to identify prime agricultural lands by FY
87, so that these areas can be mapped.
3. Continue to support State Clearinghouse review of
impact of development on prime agricultural lands.
2. Commercial Forestry
Woodlands and forests cover most of Tyrrell County's land-
scape. Substantial amounts of income are generated annually from
forest products, mainly from saw timber. Some timberlands,
however, are located in pocosins or wooded swamps, both of which
are environmentally sensitive and need to be protected. "Prime"
forest lands, as defined in Executive Order 96, have not as yet
been identified for mapping in Tyrrell County. "Productive"
forest lands, however, are found in many sections of the County
(including a portion of the recently designated Alligator River
National Wildlife Refuge).
a. Policy Alternatives
1. The County could, through the adoption and enforce-
ment of local ordinances, impose restrictions on
timbering practices and -require commercial loggers to
replant and reclaim timbered areas.
2. The County could leave current practices as they are
without imposing additional restrictions.
b. Policy Choice
I. The County believes that imposing additional restric-
tions are not necessary at this time nor should be
throughout the planning period. However, Tyrrell
County will encourage reforestation whenever
feasible, as a sound timber management practice.
C. Implementation Schedule
1. Leave the existing process as is.
51

2. Encourage the Regional Soil and Water Conservation
District to identify prime forestlands by FY 87, so
that these areas can be mapped.
3. Continue to support State clearinghouse review of the
impact of development projects on prime forestlands.
3. Mining Resource Areas
The County still has vast, virtually untapped peat reserves,
as noted in the 1980 Land Use Plan. Proposals at that time to
develop peat mines did not materialize. However, the potential is
very much still there. If peat resources could be mined, the
economic impact upon the County could be substantial. The ad
valorem tax base could receive a generous boost; greatly needed
semi -skilled and unskilled jobs could be created, and, possible
"spin-off" support industries and commercial facilities could
develop. (See Appendix A, attached to this Plan, which was
excerpted from the 1981 Plan, for a detailed discussion of
possible environmental impacts of peat mining).
a. Policy Alternatives
1. The County could adopt local ordinances regulating
the mining of peat and requiring certain safeguards
to be imposed.
2. Not develop any local ordinances at this time, but
rely solely on State and Federal regulatory
enforcements, i.e., National Environment Protection
Act of 1969, along with the Clean Air and Clean Water
Acts enforced by the State Division of Environmental
Management, the State mining permit provisions, and
the 404 wetlands permit process, enforced by the
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers.
b. Policy Choice
1. The County supports the eventual mining of peat
resources in Tyrrell County and believes that
enforcement of State and Federal environmental regu-
lations are sufficient to mitigate possible adverse
impacts upon environmentally sensitive areas.
C. Implementation Schedule
1. Continue to rely on State and Federal enforcement
provisions and activities.
52 _

4. Commercial and Recreational Fisheries
The productive water bodies in and around Tyrrell County have
been valuable contributors to the local economy as well as provid-
ed many opportunities for recreational fishing. With increasing
annual catches over the last several years, it appears that com-
mercial fishing has the potential to expand in Tyrrell County. It
is, therefore, very important to protect the water quality of
productive fishing areas. In recent years, concern has been rais-
ed by commercial fishermen along North Carolina's Coast and the
State Division of Marine Fisheries, that freshwater run-off
(particularly from agricultural drainage) has been detrimental to
estuarine waters by altering the salinity content. Concern also
has been raised because of incidences of fecal coliform, coming
from septic tank seepage, showing up in primary shell -fishing
waters and forcing the "closing" of such waters. Tyrrell County
would like to see water quality in all of the productive water
bodies maintained.
a. Policy Alternatives
1. Seek to develop impositions, prohibiting the clearing
of additional land, and thereby reducing the extent
i of freshwater run-off.
2. Not impose local restrictions on additional land
clearing, but rely on the 404 permit process and
enforcement of septic tank placement regulations,
particularly in areas with unsuitable soils and high
erosion areas.
3. Seek funding assistance to develop artificial reefs
in the Albemarle Sound to attract fish, and thereby
enhance commercial and recreational opportunities
in the County.
b. Policy Choices
1. No definitive study for Tyrrell County has shown the
extent of detriment to the estuarine system caused by
freshwater run-off. The County does not believe that
it is necessary to limit either land clearing or
unnecessarily restrict agricultural drainage. The
404 permit process is viewed as being sufficient in
limiting the amount of land cleared.
2. The County will support enforcement of septic tank
placement regulations by the Health Department and
the Soil Conservation Service, to minimize the like-
lihood of effluent from septic systems in unsuitable
soils contaminating fishing waters.
53

3. Continue to enforce the County's subdivision regula-
tions, requiring larger lot sizes for residences in
areas where soils are not as well suited for septic
tank placement.
4. Seek to protect the integrity of surface waters by
requiring a minimum buffer of 1,320 feet on both
sides of estuarine waterways. This area will also be
designated "Conservation" in the County's land clas-
sification system (See Section IV of this report).
5. The County will apply for funds through the N. C.
Division of Marine Fisheries' Reef Development Pro-
gram in FY 86 in order to develop artificial reefs in
selected locations along the Albemarle Sound. The
reefs should attract fish and enhance commercial and
sports fishing in Tyrrell County.
c. Implementation Schedule
1. Continue to support enforcement of existing regula-
tory provisions as outlined in b. above.
5. Off -Road Vehicles
The mention of "off -road" vehicles in coastal North Carolina
usually conjures ideas of four-wheel drive type vehicles running
up and down sandy beaches. However, there are no recreational
beaches in Tyrrell County. Nevertheless, off -road vehicles are
important in some sections of Tyrrell County because of the neces-
sity for landowners to travel in "bog or swamp areas," as cited in
the 1980 Land Use Plan (p.58). As this property is private and
not available to the public as public beaches are, the use of
these vehicles is acceptable in these cases. No other policy
discussion on this issue is deemed necessary.
6. Residential and Commercial Land Development
Tyrrell County, as discussed under sections of this report
analyzing existing population and economic trends, is very sparse-
ly populated and has one of the lowest County per capita incomes
in North Carolina. Also, just between the census years of 1970
and 1980 did the County end a three -decade old trend of population
losses. Tyrrell County is not in a "rapid growth" situation and
does not suffer the potentially related pressures resulting from
increased residential, commercial, or industrial uses of land.
Besides the limitations presented in other policy discussions in
this report (particularly those relating to protection of sensi-
tive natural and cultural resources), Tyrrell County views itself
as being in a position to accommodate growth and development.
54

Additional development particularly commercial and industrial
development, is regarded as desirable because of the important
local revenue and employment generating impacts. The other policy
statements regarding resource protection adequately voice the
County's concerns regarding these resources. However, land deve-
lopment, whether for residential, commercial, industrial or peat
mining uses, and in conformance with existing regulatory controls
will be encouraged in Tyrrell County.
A more detailed discussion of the specific types of develop-
ment along with relevant policy statements are included in the
following section, "Economic and Community Development Policies".
C. Economic and Community Development Policies
The analysis of overall existing conditions and trends for
this 1985 Update of the Tyrrell County Land Use Plan did not show
any alarming trends which would drastically alter general economic
and community development policies contained in the 1980 Plan.
However, some relevant trends which have been identified include:
-- Population growth in the County, although nearly exclu-
sively in the Columbia and Scuppernong Townships;
-- Growth in the County's labor force, in the midst of
chronic high unemployment, indicating a need for expanded
job opportunities;
-- Growth and stability of the County's three basic resource
extraction economic activities, i.e., farming, fishing,
and forestry;
-- Continuing potential for the mining of peat in Tyrrell
-- County;
Continuing decline of the existing conventional housing
stock.
Tyrrell County is very much concerned about the future growth
in economic and community development. As the population gradual-
ly increases, the economic base will -need to expand, more housing
will be needed and increased, although relatively minor, pressures
will be placed on community facilities. Sound public investment
decisions will also have to be made. All of these issues and
others are important in the formulation of land use policies.
Particular issue areas and policy statements are discussed below.
1. Types and Locations of Desired Industry
Tyrrell County has an intense need for increased job opportu-
nities for many of its unemployed and underemployed citizens.
Industrial development could provide these opportunities as well
as expand the County's tax base.
�
55
I

1-1
Tyrrell County would like to see industry developed which
could take advantage of existing natural resources and/or expand
upon the current three major industries in the County. Industries
such as seafood processing, food canneries, paper and wood manu-
facture, and marine -related industries would all be considered
desirable as long as the integrity of environmentally sensitive
areas could be assured of maintenance and stability. Also, other
low -pollution, light manufacturing and/or assembly industries
would be desirable.
a. Locations and Standards
The County would like to see industry locate, if feasible, in
industrial parks which could be developed in suitable locations in
the County. However, because of soil and other limitations, indi-
vidual plant sites may be more feasible. All industrial prospects
will be required to comply with general development standards
which are designed to protect environmentally sensitive areas,
including:
1. Providing an assessment of the impact of the develop-
ment of the industry and be required to use the best
available technology to avoid pollution of air or
water during construction or operation.
2. Be located on land having stable, well -drained soils.
The sites should be located in areas adequately pro-
tected from flooding and be accessible to existing
public utilities and transportation routes.
To date, two potential industrial sites in Tyrrell County
have been identified and targeted for industrial prospects. These
sites are on file with the State Department of Commerce in
Raleigh. Some industries such as boat or ship maintenance and
repair, may need to be close to water areas, or have adequate
water access.
b. Policy Alternatives
Possible policy alternatives concerning industrial develop-
ment in Tyrrell County include:
1. the development of an active industrial recruiting
program within the County;
2. conducting studies to see which industry types may
want to locate in the County, and assessing possible
environmental impacts; and
3. seeking funding and technical assistance to develop
and industrial park or parks within the County.
56
t

I
Ic. Policy Choices
As Tyrrell County recognizes the need for economic expansion
and the fact that industrial development can greatly enhance this
expansion, the County hereby adopts the following position.
1. The County will seek to develop an active industrial
recruitment program, seeking low -pollution, light
manufacturing industries. The County Finance Officer
will coordinate this activity.
2. Tyrrell County will seek technical assistance and
financial help to develop at least one industrial
r park, to be located near Columbia.
3. The County believes that all industrial prospects
should be.given a fair, case -by -case assessment in
order to carefully compare possible economic benefits
with possibly negative environmental effects. Such
reviews will be coordinated by the Tyrrell County
Industrial Facilities and Pollution Control Financing
Authority.
4. The County and the Town of Columbia will provide, as
much as is locationally and economically feasible,
basic support services such as water and sewer, if
possible, to newly locating industries.
d. Implementation Schedule
The County will establish more active contact with the
State's industrial development representative for the region.
The County will actively explore funding assistance to develop an
industrial park near the Town of Columbia.
2. Local Commitment to Service Provisions
Currently, the major service to development provided by the
County is water. The County water system, connected by a purchase
agreement to the Town of Columbia's system, serves most concen-
trated areas of residential development in the County. The Town
of Columbia provides both water and sewer to the Town --and to areas
immediately adjacent to the Town. The Columbia -Tyrrell County
water system and the Columbia sewer systems are all currently
operating with substantial excess capacities. The excess capaci-
ties are more than adequate to meet projected demand based on
population growth trends throughout the planning period (through
1995). A county -wide sewer system has been shown to be economi-
cally infeasible. The economic infeasibility of serving other
areas in the Columbia Township with the Town's sewer system has
also been cited.
57

Both Tyrrell County and the Town of Columbia are committed to
providing basic services such as water and, where feasible, sewer
to serve increased development in the County, particularly pro-
spective industrial development, in those areas most suited for
development.
Other support facilities and services provided by or within
the County such as police and fire protection, health services,
social services, solid waste collection, and library services,
appear to be adequate throughout the planning period. As develop-
ment occurs and the local tax base expands accordingly, slightly
higher levels of county -provided services can be provided.
a. Policy Alternatives
1. Do not encourage the provision of services for new
development in an attempt to keep things as they
are.
2. Encourage extension and expansion of needed services
as much as feasible, to accommodate new residential,
commercial, or industrial development.
b. Policy Choice
1. Tyrrell County will remain committed to providing
needed services, as economically feasible, to accom-
modate new residential, commercial, and industrial
development in the County.
c. Implementation Schedule
1. The County will work with the Town of Columbia
throughout the period to encourage the provision of
services where needed, and as feasible, for new
development.
3. Desired Urban Growth Patterns
The only "urban" area in Tyrrell County is the Town of
Columbia. The rest of the residential development in the County
has a pronounced rural pattern, except for some of the -small, sub-
divisions near the Albemarle Sound in the Scuppernong Township.
Future subdivisions will all have to meet formal orderly develop-
ment design standards in accord with the County Subdivision Regu-
lations. The rural cluster community pattern, evident in the
Alligator, Gum Neck, and Travis communities, for example, is usu-
ally built around a church or churches and a community store.
Some older established communities, such as Alligator, are in
areas with generally unsuitable soils for urban development, or
are in high hazard flood areas. In the northern half of the
1
58
r

11
County, however, most of the developed areas appear to be located
in areas where the soils are more suited for development.
Another trend in the County possibly affecting urban growth
patterns is the increasing number of mobile homes. Although most-
ly scattered on individual lots, mobile homes have established
themselves as a viable housing alternative for many residents and
the County may wish to plan for the eventuality of mobile home
parks.
a. Policy Alternatives
1. Tyrrell County could encourage the continuation of
existing rural cluster community patterns.
2. The County could discourage a duplication and
continuation of the existing development patterns by
adopting a Zoning Ordinance which could prohibit
areas with identified limitations (soils, or presence
of AECs, for example) from developing.
3. Adopt and develop a Mobile Home Park Ordinance to
establish design standards for mobile home parks
which may eventually be proposed in the County.
b. Policy Choices
1. The existing rural cluster communities are a long
established residential pattern in Tyrrell County,
and will not be discouraged by the County. However,
the County will not encourage "new" developments in,
areas with identified limitations such as soils or
proximity to AECs; specifically, the County will not
extend water service to such areas. However,
redevelopment, or rehabilitation activities are
viewed as being acceptable. Also, water service may
be extended to address a severe health problem as in
portions of the Alligator Township.
2. The County does not deem it necessary to adopt a
Zoning Ordinance at this time, but will consider the
development of a draft Mobile Home Park Ordinance to
establish design standards for mobile home parks.
C. Implementation Schedule
1. Obtain assistance in developing a draft Mobile Home
Park Ordinance in FY 86.
59

I
4. Redevelopment of Developed Areas
The County's and the Town of Columbia's position concerning
redevelopment of developed areas was discussed thoroughly in the
1980 Land Use Plan (p. 62-64), and mainly related to activities
along the Columbia waterfront. A major issue cited was the need
for dredging the natural channel at the mouth of the Scuppernong
River, and that the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers would be re-
quested to do so. In 1984, the Corps of Engineers surveyed the
depths of the River from its mouth to beyond the U. S. 64 bridge.
Also, some redevelopment has occurred along the waterfront,
notably, the Tyrrell County Veteran's Memorial Park on the west
bank and renovated Town Hall facilities for Columbia and a public
wharf and docking facility on the east bank. Redevelopment of
Columbia's waterfront will continue to be encouraged throughout
the planning period. However, an additional redevelopment issue
which also needs addressing is the concentrated presence of sub-
standard housing conditions in the Alligator and Goat Neck commu-
tv The County may wish to pursue State and/or Federal fund-
ing to establish housing rehabilitation programs in these areas.
a. Policy Alternatives
1. Continue to work with the Town of Columbia in encour-
aging redevelopment of the Town's waterfront.
2. Encourage private sector development of the water-
front through the Industrial Development Committee's
activities in contacting industrial/commercial pro-
spects.
3. Seeking funding through the State -administered Small
Cities Community Development Block Grant Program to
establish a housing improvements program in either
the Alligator or Goat Neck communities.
b. Policy Choices
1. The County will work with the Town of Columbia in
requesting needed channel dredging at the mouth of
the Scuppernong River and encourage redevelopment of
the waterfront area, to the extent possible, by the
private sector.
2. Tyrrell County would like to see redevelopment/reha-
bilitation activities occur in such communities as
Goat Neck, Alligator, and Gum Neck, where there are
concentrations of substandard housing conditions.
1
A
W
I

IC. Implementation Schedule
1. In FY 86, request that Corps of Engineers or U. S.
Coast Guard snag the Scuppernong River.
5. Commitment to State and Federal Programs
Tyrrell County is generally receptive to State and Federal
programs, particularly those which provide improvements to the
County. The County will continue to fully support such programs.
The North Carolina Department of Transportation road and bridge
improvement programs are very important to Tyrrell County.
Examples of other State and Federal programs which are impor-
tant to and supported by Tyrrell County include: drainage plan-
ning and erosion control activities carried out by the U.S.D.A.
Soil Conservation Service, which is valuable to farmers; dredging
and channel maintenance by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; and
Federal and State projects which provide efficient and safe boat
access for sports fishing. However, Tyrrell County does not
support expansion of military restricted airspace over the County
as currently proposed by the U. S. Department of Defense.
All of these programs and others are important to Tyrrell
County, and the County is committed to their continued support.
6. Assistance to Channel Maintenance
Proper maintenance of channels is very important in Tyrrell
County, mainly because of the substantial economic impact of com-
mercial fisheries. Commercial fishing is increasing in the
County. If silt or other deposits fill in the channels, this
could impede efficient docking of the commercial vessels. With
adequate channel maintenance, Tyrrell County could begin to make
more utilization of its extensive waterways for water transporta-
tion purposes. Since there are no railroads in the County, water
transportation (particularly along the Intracoastal Waterway -
Alligator River) could be useful for bulk shipments in the County.
The County is quite aware of this situation. Tyrrell County pro-
vides assistance to the Corps and State officials by either help-
ing to obtain or providing spoil sites. The County will remain
committed to providing such assistance.
7. Energy Facilities Siting
In Tyrrell County, the siting or location of energy facili-
ties relates almost solely to peat mining, as noted in the 1980
Plan Update. The nature of peat mining is such that there is
little choice about particular extraction sites. Peat mining,
like strip -coal mining, must be done where the mineral is
located. It is always an on -site operation, yet the conversion
61
r

or processing of it can occur somewhere else. The County believes
that off -site processing should not occur in environmentally
sensitive or hazardous areas, or in any area where it is known
that major or irreparable environmental damage will result. The
1980 Land Use Plan Update referred to reports by First Colony
Farms that sufficient peat reserves existed in Tyrrell, Dare,
Hyde, and Washington Counties to support an electric generating
plant in that region. Although at the writing of this report, the
development of such a power plant does not appear to be a
consideration, Tyrrell County, as stated in the 1980 Plan,
supports the acquisition of sites in the shoreline areas of the
Albemarle Sound or the Alligator and Scuppernong Rivers, if such
siting will not have long-term detrimental impacts upon the
environment (p. 66, 1980 Plan Update).
8. Tourism and Beach and Waterfront Access
As discussed under the economic analysis section, tourism has
not historically had a significant impact upon Tyrrell County's
economy. However, throughout the planning period, the impact of
tourism may grow. With the recent designation of the Alligator
River National Wildlife Refuge area, more visitors may be attract-
ed to the County. Also, more commercial activities may develop to
capitalize on the Outer Banks beaches "pass -through" traffic,
which is substantial every summer. Tyrrell County does support
tourism and is aware of the potential economic benefit of such
activity.
"Beach access" is not a major problem in Tyrrell Count in
7 p Y Y
the conventional sense of the words. There is no ocean -front
shoreline in Tyrrell County and most of the shoreline along the
Albemarle Sound is not "beach", while much of the shoreline area
along the Scuppernong and Alligator Rivers consists of wooded
swamps. There are several State -maintained recreation boating
access points for public use located in various places around the
County. However, as waterfront residential development continues
along the Albemarle Sound and Bull's Bay area, concern has been
raised -over provision of public access to the waterfront. Section
14 of the Tyrrell County Subdivision Ordinance, "Waterfront Lots"
(p. 14), requires provision of water access to lot owners whose
lots do not have waterfrontage. These "water access" lots can be
either dedicated to the County for maintenance, or deeded to an
owners' association for common ownership by lot purchasers. If
the County elected to accept the water access lots dedicated, then
the property would likely be accessible to the general public.
However, if the access property were deeded to the lot owners, it
would remain private property, likely limiting access to the
general public.
62

i
I
1
0
a. Policy Alternatives
1. The County could establish no policies nor take any
additional action, and assume that existing boating
access points are sufficient for public access.
2. The County could take additional steps, including
amending its Subdivision Ordinance, to assure better
opportunity for general public waterfront access,
even with developing waterfront access.
3. The County could seek funding assistance through the
Division of Coastal Management's Beach Access Program
to acquire and develop specific public access sites.
4. The County could seek "donation" of sites by private
landowners for public access development.
b. Policy Choice
1. Tyrrell County wants to see improved waterfront
access opportunities for the general public and will
take additional measures to better assure those
opportunities.
c. Implementation Schedule
1. In FY 86, Tyrrell County will apply for funds through
the Division of Coastal Management's Beach Access
Program to develop a sound, practical public access
Plan which will analyze the County's public access
needs.
2. Also, in FY 86, Tyrrell County will seek financial
assistance through such agencies as the Division of
Coastal Management, the Division of Marine Fisheries,
the N. C. Wildlife Commission, and the Land and Water
Conservation Fund, to develop a "port of safe harbor"
at a designated site along the Albemarle Sound. This
facility would provide emergency docking for
recreational boats during storms.
9. Density of Development
Overly dense development is not a problem in Tyrrell County,
nor is anticipated to become a problem during the period covered
by this plan update. With an anticipated population growth of 264
persons between 1985 and 1995, (an increase of 6.4% over the 1985
estimate), the rate of growth will not push developed densities to
unacceptable levels. As presented in other discussions in this
report, the most suitable soils for residential development are
located in the northern half of the County -- particularly along
63

I
U
1
I
1
I
ridges near the Albemarle Sound and Scuppernong River. There are
also "pockets" of areas classified as "Zone C", i.e., minimally
flooded areas according to the Flood Insurance Maps prepared by
the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). (See Maps 4, 6,
and 7, attached). Tyrrell County would like to see development
continue in areas which are considered as most feasible to
accommodate growth and where support services, such as water and
sewer (including septic tank placement), are feasible and prac-
tical to provide. Also, the County will continue to enforce its
Subdivision Ordinance, which has established minimum lot sizes in
coordination with sanitary requirements of the County Health
Department which will affect development densities. The minimum
square footage for lots without access to public water or sewer,
is 20,000 S.F., and for lots with access to public water, but not
to public sewer, is 15,000 S.F. The average density of develop-
ment in these areas will range from 2.1 to 2.9 units per acre.
10. Land Use Trends
The overall land use trends, as have been discussed in other
sections of this report, include continuing, although at a slower
rate, land clearing activities; continued emphasis on agricultural
uses of land, and increasing, although not dramatic, waterfront
residential development. The projected land use changes are not
anticipated to be causes for alarm in Tyrrell County. Continued
enforcement and coordination, of existing local, state, and
federal land use regulations, i.e., through CAMA, Corps of
Engineers, 404 process, sanitary regulations, and the County's
Subdivision Ordinance and proposed building inspections program,
are adequate to help assure orderly growth and development in the
County.
D. Continuing Public Participation Policies
Tyrrell County recognizes that an important element in deve-
loping and implementing any local policies or plans.regarding the
use of land in the County, is involvement of the County's citi-
zenry. From the initial stages of development of this 1985 update
of the County's CAMA Land Use Plan, Tyrrell County has sought to.
provide open opportunities for citizen input. A "Public Partici-
pation Plan" was developed for the plan updating process, outlin-
ing the methodology for citizen involvement. The plan stated that
public involvement was to be generated primarily through the
County Planning Board and through "public information" meetings,
advertised in local newspapers and open to the general public.
The Planning Board meetings also are open to the general public.
Specifically, during the beginning stages of the update
process, the Planning Board met with the planning consultant to
review and discuss preliminary development issues; afterwards, a
64

public information meeting was announced in the Coastland-Times
newspaper, and public notices of the meeting were posted in con-
spicuous places in the County. This meeting was held with citi-
zens, the Planning Board, and the planning consultant attending.
Citizens provided input and voiced their concerns about land use
policies. Also, during the second quarter of the plan prepara-
tion, the County Board of Commissioners received a report on the
update process, and was presented with the major issues identified
by the citizens at the public information meeting. Throughout the
plan development process, both the County Planning Board and Board
of Commissioners were actively involved. A series of meetings, or
"joint -working sessions" were held. All of these meetings were
open to the public. Specifically, work sessions and/or meetings
were held on the following dates: October 8, 1984; November 5,
1984 (an advertised and posted Public Information Meeting);
November 5, 1984 (with County Board of Commissioners); January 15,
1985 (joint work session with both Planning Board and Board of
Commissioners); February 18, 1985 (joint session with both
Boards), April 25, 1985 (joint work session with both Boards,
meeting was announced in the Coastland Times, newspaper, and pub-
lic was invited to attend); and May 7, 1985 (final joint session -
with both Boards).
The final draft plan, prior to submission to the CRC, was
presented to the County Board of Commissioners on June 18, 1985.
After review and comments by the CRC staff and other agen-
cies, the revised plan was subject to a duly advertised final
public hearing for citizens in December, 1985. On January 8,
1986, this plan was adopted by the Tyrrell County Board of Commis-
sioners, for formal submission to the Coastal Resources Commis-
sion.
In addition to direct citizens' input through the public
meetings, interviews were conducted with representatives of vari-
ous agencies in the County to solicit input. These included: the
Tyrrell County Farm Extension Service; the U.S.D.A. Soil Conserva-
tion Service; the Farmers Home Administration; U. S. National
Park Service; N. C. Division of Emergency Management; and the Town
of Columbia.
*' In order to continue providing citizens an awareness of the
land use planning process, all of the regular meetings of the
Planning Board will be announced in local newspapers.
It is the belief of the Tyrrell County Board of Commissioners
that all citizens be afforded adequate opportunities to partici-
pate in the governmental and planning decisions which affect them.
Therefore, citizens' input will continue to be solicited, prima-
rily through the Planning Board with advertised and adequately
publicized public meetings held to discuss special land use
issues, and to keep citizens informed.
1 65
G

E. Storm Hazard Mitigation, Post -Disaster Recovery, and
Evacuation Plans
The entire North Carolina Coastal region, including Tyrrell
County, faces strong threats of damage each year from hurricanes,
Northeasters, or other major storms. For nearly 20 years, there
was a marked "slowdown", or "lull", in hurricane activity along
the State's coast. Predictions were that a major storm could
strike the State at any time during the hurricane season, since
such a storm was "long overdue". And then, in September, 1984,
the "waiting" ended. Hurricane Diana, with some of the strongest
J sustained winds ever recorded, rammed into the Southeast coast
near Wilmington. Although damage was extensive, the potential
destruction was much greater and the damage would have been great-
ly escalated had the storm hit land at a slightly different loca-
tion. This time the State and the Southeast coastal area were
` relatively fortunate. But what about next time?
Notice the excerpt below from, Before the Storm: Managing
Development to Reduce Hurricane Damages, McElyea, Brower, &
Godschalk, 1982, concerning development in coastal communities:
"At the same time, development along the coast has
grown by leaps and bounds. Unless this development is
wisely located and built to withstand hurricane forces,
North Carolina's coastal communities will face massive
destruction. Local governments, as the primary protect-
ors of the public health, safety, and general welfare,
have a responsibility to reduce the risk of property
damages and loss of life attending coastal development.
They also have a responsibility to ensure that recon-
struction following a major storm can occur quickly and
leave the community safer from disaster in the future.
These are the goals of hazard mitigation and reconstruc-
tion planning." (p.iii)
The purpose of this section of the 1985 CAMA Land Use Plan
Update, is to assist Tyrrell County in managing development in
potentially hazardous areas through establishing hazard mitigation
policies and to reduce the risks associated with future hurricanes
by developing post -disaster reconstruction/recovery policies, and
reviewing the adequacy of current evacuation plans. The overrid-
ing concept of this exercise is simply "planning ahead of time."
"Hazard mitigation includes any activity which
reduces the probability that a disaster will occur or
minimizes the damage caused by a disaster. Hazard miti-
gation includes not only managing devlopment, but also
evacuation planning and other measures to reduce losses
of life and property. Reconstruction involves the full
range of repair activities in the wake of a disaster
which seek to return the community to a "normal" level
66

�J
I
1
of operations." (McElyea, Brower, & Godschalk, p. iii).
With this introduction, the following pages will present the
storm hazard mitigation and post -disaster recovery policies, and
review of the existing evacuation plan along with appropriate
discussions and maps.
1. Storm Hazard Mitigation: Discussion
Hazard mitigation, or actions taken to reduce the probability
or impact of a disaster could involve a number of activities or
policy decisions. The starting point, however, is to identify the
types of hazards (including the relative severity and magnitude of
risks), and the extent of development (including residential,
commercial, etc.) located in storm hazard areas.
Hurricanes are extremely powerful, often unpredictable forces
of nature. The two most severe effects are fatalities and pro-
perty damage, which are usually the result of four causes: high
winds, flooding, wave action, and erosion, each of which are
discussed briefly below:
a. High Winds
High winds are the major determinants of a hurricane, by
definition, i.e., a tropical disturbance with sustained winds of,
at least 73 miles per hour. Extreme hurricanes can have winds of
up to 165 miles per hour, with gusts up to 200 miles per hour.
These winds circulate around the center or "eye" of the storm.
Although the friction or impact of the winds hitting land from the
water causes some dissipation of the full force, there is still a
tremendous amount of energy left to cause damage to buildings,
overturn mobile homes, fell trees and powerlines, and destroy
crops. Also, tornadoes can often be spawned by hurricane wind
patterns. Wind stress is an important consideration in storm
hazard mitigation planning. Because of a hurricane's size and
power, it is likely that all of Tyrrell County would be subject to
the same wind velocity in the event of a storm.
b. Flooding
Flooding, on the other hand, may not affect all areas with
equal rigor. The excessive amounts of rainfall and the "storm
surge" which often accompany hurricanes can cause massive coastal
and riverine flooding causing excessive property damage and deaths
by drownings. (More deaths are caused by drowning than any other
cause in hurricanes.) Flooding is particularly a problem in ocean
coastal areas because of the storm surge and low-lying areas.
However, flooding can cause extensive damage in inland areas also,
since many coastal areas have low elevations and are located in
high hazard or "Zone A" flood areas according to the Federal
67
1

' Emergency Management Agency Maps. Based on recent preliminary
flood insurance maps prepared for Tyrrell County, nearly all of
' the County is classified as being in the 100-year "high hazard"
flood zone, or Zone A. Because of low elevation, nearly all of
the County would be subject to flooding during a severe hurricane.
There are, however, "pockets" of areas classified as "Zone C",
' i.e., in the 500-year "minimally flooded" area. In severe storms,
Zone C areas would also likely be flooded, but risks are not as
severe as for Zone A areas. (See Map 7, "Composite Hazards Map,"
attached).
As Map 7 shows, most of the "development" in Tyrrell County
is in the high hazard Zone A areas, with the highest concentration
of residential development in Zone C areas being in the northwest
portion of the County, from Travis westward toward Washington
County, and north toward Bull's Bay.
' Flooding cannot only cause damage to buildings, but saltwater
flooding can cause serious damage to croplands, which is what took
place in the Albemarle region, including Tyrrell County in 1954
and 1955 from Hurricanes Hazel, Connie, Dianne, and Ione (McElyea,
Brower, & Godschalk, pp. 2-8, 9). Notice Figure 1 on the
following page. Consideration of potential flood damage is
' important to Tyrrell County's efforts to develop storm mitigation
policies.
11
11
1
68

FIGURE 1
Flooding in the Albemarle Sound Region from
Hurricanes Hazel, Connie, Diane, and Ione
(1954-1955)
PASQUOTANK �
car o(N \ Y
L LIL1ttTN CITE
h
C
\r J f
SOUND
P! dl
IAAN�E
SALT WATER FLOODING
cc,,,,,,,,,, �7� FRESH WATER FLOODING \\
WAVE ACTION
more- VIND DAMAGE THROUGHOUT AREA is or
IN DILATED.
4 QvC1�
STATUTE MILES- ■ 0 0 T Y
U �I
N 4V 11
Z
Z
C'-)
j "rose
-i rr
w
Source: N. C. Council of Civil Defense, 1955.
• •

' c. Wave Action
' Damage from wave action is connected very closely to the
storm surge, i.e., wind -driven water with high waves moving to
vulnerable shoreline areas. Areas most likely to be affected are
ocean erodible areas and estuarine shoreline areas. There are no
' ocean erodible areas in Tyrrell County, but there are extensive
estuarine shoreline areas (75 feet inland from the mean high water
mark of estuarine waters) in the County. However, wave action
damage would have the most significant impact along the Albemarle
Sound shoreline. As the existing land use map (Map 3, attached),
and the composite hazards map (Map 7, attached) show, there is a
significant amount of residential development in or near the
estuarine shoreline area. Wave action can cause erosion as well
as push possible flood waters to areas not reached by the storm
surge itself. The estuarine shoreline along Tyrrell's riverine
shores, i.e., Alligator, Little Alligator, Scuppernong, and the
Frying Pan are sufficiently inland from an open coast so that the
wave energy is dispersed and diffracted, mainly by the proximity
' to forested areas. Figure 1, page 67, also shows the pattern of
wave action damage in Tyrrell County from the hurricanes of 1954
and 1955.
' d. Erosion
The final major consideration in storm hazard mitigation is
' severe erosion, caused by high winds, high water, and heavy wave
action. Again, in Tyrrell County, the area most susceptible to
storm -related erosion is the estuarine shoreline AEC along the
' Albemarle Sound. This is essentially the same area potentially
affected by the action of damaging waves and described in part c.,
above. Shoreline erosion could lead to loss of property through
portions of waterfront lots being washed into the Sound or even
' actual structural damage to buildings. Erosion potential is an
important factor to consider in developing storm hazard mitigation
policies.
' e. Summary: Storm Hazard Mitigation Considerations
In summary, all four of the major damaging forces of a hurri-
cane, i.e., high winds, flooding, wave action, and shoreline er.--
sion could have a potential impact upon Tyrrell County in the
event of a major storm. The degree of susceptibility to losses
and/or damages was generally alluded to in the previous discus-
sions. However, Table 24, below, provides a better projection of
the percent of the County's building structures (residential and
' commercial, etc.), subject to the potentially devastating effects
of a major storm:
1
70

' Table 24 *Percent of Structures Subject to Storm Damage Factors,
' Tyrrell County
Storm Impact Percent Structures Possibly Affected
1985 Tax Value (Millions)
1. High winds 100% 133.9
2. Flooding 80% 107.1
3. Wave Action 5% 6.7
4. Shoreline Erosion 5% 6.7
Based on preliminary projections derived from examination of
Existing Land Use Map. Map prepared by Talbert, Cox &
Associates. Tax value provided by County Finance Office.
The information in the Table above is preliminary and is not
' intended to convey the impression that every single structure
possibly affected by damaging factors would be affected, only that
the potential is there. Knowing that the potential is there forms
the basis for setting forth storm hazard mitigation policies,
' keeping in mind that "mitigate" means actions which may reduce the
probability of disaster, or minimize the damage caused by a
disaster (McElyea, Brower, & Godschalk, p. iii).
' f. Policy Statements: Storm Hazard Mitigation
' In order to minimize the damage potentially caused by the
effects of a hurricane or other major storm, Tyrrell County pro-
poses the following policies.
' 1. High Winds
Tyrrell County supports enforcement of the N. C.
' State Building Code; particularly requirements of
construction standards to meet wind -resistive
factors, i.e., "design wind velocity". The County
' will also support provisions in the State Building
Code requiringltie-downs for mobile homes, which
help resist wind damage.
2. Flooding
Tyrrell County is supportive of the hazard mitigation
elements of the National Flood Insurance Program.
Currently, Tyrrell County is participating in the
emergency phase of the insurance program. However,
Preliminary Flood Insurance Rate Maps and a draft
Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance have been prepared
for the County's move into the Regular Phase insur-
ance program. Tyrrell County also supports continued
enforcement of the CAMA and 404 Wetlands development
1
71

I
permit processes in areas potentially susceptible to
flooding.
3.
Wave Action and Shoreline Erosion
Tyrrell
County is supportive of the CAMA development permit
process for
estuarine shoreline areas and the requisite develop-
'
ment standards
which encourage both shoreline stabilization and
facilitation
of proper drainage.
'
g. Implementation:
Storm Hazard Mitigation
1.
In FY 85-86, Tyrrell County will establish a County-
wide building inspection program, with the services
of a building inspector, enforcing provisions of the
N. C. State Building Code for new construction.
'
These provisions will include designing for wind
resistance and mobile home tie -downs for newly placed
mobile homes.
2.
Tyrrell County will adopt the Flood Damage Prevention
ordinance for the Regular Phase of the National
Flood Insurance Program, in FY 86-87, as of the
effective date of the finalized Flood Insurance Rate
'
Maps. This ordinance which will require basic
f loodproofing for all new construction, including all
'
first floor elevations being at or above the base
flood elevations, will be enforced as part of the
County's new building inspection program. The base
flood elevation, as shown on the flood insurance
'
maps, is the elevation of the 100-year flood.
3.
The County will continue to support enforcement of
State and Federal programs which aid in mitigation of
'
hurricane hazards, including CAMA and the U. S. Army
Corps of Engineers 404 permit process.
u
72

n
' 2. Post -Disaster Reconstruction Plan
Tyrrell County recognizes that in the event of a major storm,
it will be very important to have, at a minimum, a general recov-
ery and reconstruction plan. This section of the Land Use Plan
Update will address this issue.
' a. Appointment of a "Post Disaster Recovery Team"
Prior to a major storm having landfall in the vicinity of
Tyrrell County, when evacuation orders are issued, the Chairman of
the County Board of Commissioners shall appoint a "Post -Disaster
Recovery Team". This team shall consist of all of the members of
the Evacuation Plan Support Group as identified in the Tyrrell
County Evacuation Plan, and others whom the Chairman may appoint.
The total team may consist of the following:
' 1. County Finance Officer
2. Emergency Preparedness Coordinator (Team Leader)
3. County Sheriff
' 4. County Building Inspector
5. Director of Social Services
6. Local realtor or building contractor
The Emergency Preparedness Coordinator will serve as the Team
Leader and will be responsible to the Chairman of the Board of
Commissioners. The base of operations will be the Emergency
Operations Center (EOC) identified in the County Evacuation Plan
(the Sheriff's Department). The Disaster Recovery Team will be
responsible for the following:
' 1. Establishing an overall restoration schedule.
' 2. Setting restoration priorities.
3. Determining requirements for outside assistance and
' requesting such assistance when beyond local capabi-
lities.
4. Keeping the appropriate County and State officials
informed.
5. Keeping the public informed.
o. Assembling and maintaining records of actions taken
and expenditures and obligations incurred.
7. Recommending to the Chairman of the Board of Commis-
sioners to proclaim a local "state of emergency" if
warranted.
73

8. Commencing and coordinating cleanup, debris removal
and utility restoration which would include coordina-
tion of restoration activities undertaken by private
utility companies.
9. Coordinating repair and restoration of essential
public facilities and services in accordance with
determined priorities.
10. Assisting private businesses and individual property
owners in obtaining information on the various types
of assistance that might be available to them from
federal and state agencies.
b. Immediate Clean -Up and Debris Removal
Coordination of this activity will be the responsibility of
the Disaster Recovery Team.
c. Long Term Recovery/Restoration
The Disaster Recovery Team will be responsible for overseeing
' the orderly implementation of the reconstruction process after a
major storm or hurricane in accord with the County's policies.
7-7
J
1
11
1. Damage Assessments
Damage assessments will be necessary to determine as
quickly as possible a realistic estimate of the
amount of damage caused by a hurricane or major
storm. Information such as the number of structures
damaged, the magnitude of damage, and the estimated
total dollar loss will need to be developed.
As soon as practical after the storm, i.e., clearance
of major highways and paved roads in the County, the
Disaster Recovery Team Leader shall set up a Damage
Assessment Committee MAC), consisting of the Build-
ing Inspector, Emergency Preparedness Coordinator, a
local realtor or building contractor, and appropriate
personnel from the Tyrrell County tax department.
The DAC will immediately begin to make "windshield"
surveys of damaged structures to initially assess
damages and provide a preliminary dollar value of
repairs or replacement. The following general cri-
teria shall be utilized:
a. Destroyed (repairs would cost more than 80
percent of value) .
74

b. Major (repairs would cost more than 30 percent of
the value).
c. Minor (repairs would cost less than 30 percent of
the value, but the structure is currently uninhabit-
able).
'
d. Habitable (some minor damage, with repairs less
than 15 percent of the value).
Each damage assessment will be documented according
to County tax records. Also, County tax maps (inclu-
ding aerial photographs) and/or records may be used
for identification purposes. The total estimated
dollar value of damages will be summarized and
reported to the Disaster Recovery Team Leader.
'
2. Reconstruction Development Standards
Generally, reconstruction shall be held at least to
the same standards as before the storm. However,
developed structures which were destroyed and which
did not conform to the County's storm hazard mitiga-
tion policies, i.e., with basic measures to reduce
damage by high winds, flooding, wave action or ero-
sion, must be redeveloped according to those poli-
cies. In the event the loss of property containing
shoreline structures is substantial enough to prohi-
bit the reissuing of a septic tank permit, the County
will support the decision of the Sanitarian. In some
instances, this may mean relocation of construction,
or no reconstruction at all. To the extent feasible,
when relocation is required, such relocation will be
'
placed in less hazardous areas. Building permits to
restore destroyed or damaged structures, which were
built in conformance with the State Building Code and
County storm hazard mitigation policies, shall be
'
issued automatically, all structures suffering major
damage will be repaired according to the State Build-
ing Code. All structures suffering minor damage,
regardless of location, will be allowed to be rebuilt
to the original condition prior to the storm.
3. Development Moratoria
Tyrrell County, because of
a lack of densely populat-
ed areas, does not foresee
and all development for any
the need to prohibit any
specified period of time.
Residents shall be allowed
to proceed with redevelop-
ment and reconstruction as
soon as practical and in
accord with the various levels
of State and federal
disaster relief provided to
them. Damage to the
properties in some areas of
the County may indicate a
75

fl
higher susceptibility to storm damage than other
areas. If the County determines that some areas are
more vulnerable to storm damage than others, then the
Board of Commissioners may declare a development
moratorium, prohibiting all redevelopment for a
specified period of time. This will allow the County
' time to assess previous damage mitigation policies
for their effectiveness and possible modification.
4. Repair/Reconstruction Schedule
The following schedule of activities and time frame
are proposed with the realistic idea that many
factors of a hurricane may render the Schedule
infeasible.
Activity Time Frame
a) Complete and Report Damage Two weeks after storm
Assessments
b) Begin Repairs to Critical As soon as possible
Utilities and Facilities after storm
c) Permitting of Reconstruction Two weeks after damage
activities for all damaged assessments are
structures ("minor" to pre -storm complete
original status, "major" to State
building code and hazard
mitigation standards
5. Agency Responsible for Implementation
The Chairman of the Tyrrell County Board of Commis-
sioners, as chief elected official of the County,
will serve as overall Emergency Coordinator. The
Board Chairman will delegate the oversight of the
reconstruction and recovery effort and implementation
of the plan.
6. Repair and Replacement of Public Utilities
If water lines or any component of the water system
are damaged and it is determined that the facilities
'
can be relocated to a less hazardous location, then
they will be relocated during reconstruction.
76

3. Hurricane Evacuation Plan
Tyrrell County has an official "Civil Preparedness Hurricane
Evacuation Plan" which was adopted in March, 1977. A review of
this plan indicates that it is generally adequate for the County's
needs, all factors considered, many over which the County has no
' control. For example, since most of the County is in the 100-year
floodplain, all of the evacuation routes pass through at least
part of the flood hazard area. The plan indicated a projected
evacuation time of from 4-6 hours, which is adequate within the
National Weather Service warning system guidelines. The Civil
Preparedness Plan involves a number of County personnel and local
agencies, with varying specific duties and responsibilities. The
primary shelter is the Columbia High School. The County has
tentatively arranged for the school system to provide food through
the cafeteria. However, since there are no "stocked shelters,"
residents are also encouraged to bring food to the shelter site.
4. Re -Entry
Factors regarding re-entry are also included in the Civil
Preparedness Hurricane Evacuation Plan. Because of the
possibility of fallen power lines, or telephone lines, re-entry
will be closely coordinated with utility companies such as VEPCO.
The Plan was also reviewed by the North Carolina Division of
Emergency Management, without any substantive comments.
When Hurricane Diana was preparing to strike North Carolina's
Coast at an uncertain location during the autumn of 1984, Tyrrell
County implemented the evacuation plan. Although the storm struck
land well to the south of Tyrrell, implementation of the evacua-
tion plan was a useful "dry run" for the County. The evacuation
plan will be incorporated into the Land Use Plan by reference.
I
FL�ill
1
LI
1 77

1
I
1
u
1
1
[1
SECTIUN Gil
fin
LAND CLASSIFICATIGH'
SYSTEP,11

SECTION III: LAND CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
The land classification system provides a uniform way of
looking at how the planned use of land interacts with environmen-
tally sensitive areas and with the development of a County or
Town. It is not a strict regulatory device in the sense of a
zoning ordinance or zoning map. It represents more of a tool to
understand relationships between various land use categories and
how these relationships help shape local policy. Particular
attention is focused on how intensely land is utilized and the
level of services required to support that intensity. Land
classification is also useful in the staging of services necessary
to support development. The regulations for the Coastal Area
Management Act state:
"The land classification system provides a framework to be
used by local governments to identify the future use of all
lands. The designation of land classes allows the local
government to illustrate their policy statements as to where
and to what density they want growth to occur, and where they
want to conserve natural and cultural resources by guiding
growth." (7B.0204) (b)
There are five general land use classifications under CAMA:
Developed; Transition; Community; Rural; and Conservation. In
applying the land classification system, each local government
should give careful consideration to how, where and when certain
types of, and intensity of "development," will be either encourag-
ed or discouraged. A brief summary of the five broad classifica-
tions, as contained in the CAMA rules, might illustrate this. For
example:
"Urban land uses and higher intensity uses which presently
require the traditional urban services should be directed to
lands classified developed. Areas developing or anticipated
to develop at urban densities which will eventually require
urban services should be directed to lands classified transi-
tion. Low density development in settlements which will not
require sewer services should be directed to areas classified
as community. Agriculture, forestry, mineral extraction and
other similar low intensity uses and very low density, dis-
persed residential uses should be directed to lands classi-
fied rural. Generally, public or private water or sewer
systems will not be provided in areas classified rural as an
incentive for intense development." (7B.0204) (c)
The purpose of the conservation class is to "provide for the
effective long-term management and protection of significant,
limited, or irreplaceable areas." Consequently, urban services
(whether public or private) should not be provided to those areas
as an incentive to "stimulate" more intense development. Each of
these classes must be represented on a Land Classification Map.
78
I

The five land classifications and Land Classification Map are
therefore intended to serve as a visual reflection of the policies
previously stated in Section II. Ideally, the map which depicts
these classifications should be as flexible as the policies that
guide them. (See Map 8, attached, Land Classification Map)
The five land use classifications, as they will be applied in
Tyrrell County, are identified and defined below.
A. DEVELOPED
The developed class of land use provides for continued inten-
sive development and redevelopment of existing cities or munici-
palities. Areas to be classified as "developed" include lands
currently developed for urban purposes or approaching a density of
500 dwellings per square mile that are provided with usual munici-
pal or public services, police and fire protection. In other
words, such areas must currently be "urban" in character, i.e.
have mixed land uses such as residential, commercial, industrial
and institutional, or other uses at high to medium densities.
In predominantly rural Tyrrell County, the only area meeting
this criteria is the Town of Columbia. Columbia provides all of
the usual municipal services as well as water and sewer. In fact,
the only municipal sewer service in the County is located in
Columbia. As was presented in Section I, the water and sewer
service supply is projected to be more than adequate throughout
the planning period.
B. TRANSITION
Transition land is classified as those lands providing for
future intensive urban development within the ensuing ten years on
lands that are most suitable and that will be scheduled for provi-
sion of necessary public utilities and services. They may also
provide for additional growth when additional lands in the devel-
oped class are not available or when they are severely limited for
development.
Lands classified "transition" may include:
1. lands currently having urban services;
2. lands necessary to accommodate the population and econo-
mic growth anticipated within the planning jurisdiction
over the next five to ten years;
3. areas which are in, or will be in, a "transition" state
of development, i.e. going from a lower intensity to a
higher intensity, of uses and will eventually require
urban services.
79

CI
Transition lands must further:
1. be served or be readily served by public water, sewer,
and other urban services including public streets, and
2. be generally free of severe physical limitations for
urban development.
The "transition" class should not include:
1. lands of high potential for agriculture, forestry, or
mineral extraction, or land falling within extensive
rural areas being managed commercially for these uses,
when other lands are available;
2. lands where urban development might result in major or
irreversible damage to important environmental, scienti-
fic, or scenic values, or;
3. land where urban development might result in damage to
natural systems or processes of more than local concern;
and
4. lands where development will result in undue risk to life
or property from natural hazards or existing land uses.
The areas to be classified as "transition" in Tyrrell County
include the areas immediately adjacent to the Town of Columbia
which currently receive or are able to be served by the Town's
municipal services. This area extends along US 64, both to the
east of the Town and to the west for a short distance. However,
another area which is not adjacent to Columbia but which has been
developing more since the 1980 Land Use Plan and should also come
under this classification, is the Rider's Creek area. Currently,
the Rider's Creek area has central water from the County water
system. If funds become available and it becomes economically
feasible, the County would also like to see sewer service provided
to this area. The land use analysis showed that there were
generally suitable soils in this area, as well as a significant
area considered "minimally flooded."
The relationship between the "developed and transition"
classification is important in predominantly rural counties like
Tyrrell. The first class is meant to define the already developed
areas and/or those areas where public investment decisions will be
required to provide the necessary urban services. These become
important areas to closely monitor. The Coastal Resources Commis-
sion has further clarified this relationship as described below:
The Developed and Transition classes should be the only lands
under active consideration by the County or municipality for
intensive urban development requiring urban services. The area
within these classes is where detailed local land use and public
investment planning will occur. State and Federal expenditures on
80

projects associated with urban development (water, sewer, urban
street systems, etc.) will be guided to these areas. Large
amounts of vacant land suitable for urban development within the
Developed class should be taken into account when calculating the
amount of additional lands needed to accommodate projected
growth.
C. COMMUNITY
The "Community" classification provides for clustered land -
uses to meet housing, shopping, employment, and public service
needs within the rural areas of the County. It is usually charac-
terized by a small grouping of mixed land uses which are suitable
and appropriate for small clusters of rural development not
requiring municipal sewer service.
This is an important classification in Tyrrell County, since
most of the County's population not residing in the areas classi-
fied previously as either "Developed" or "Transition," live in
such clusters. There are no other incorporated municipalities in
Tyrrell County, other than Columbia, but many small communities
are located along the primary roads in the County. Areas classi-
fied as "Community" include: Travis, Goat Neck, Alligator, Gum
Neck, Kilkenny, and Ft. Landing. Also, the waterfront developing
areas of Colonial Beach and the River Neck area should also be
considered "Community." All of these areas except Alligator cur-
rently are serviced by the County water system. Although classi-
fied as "Community," the Alligator community needs to be provided
centralized water service in order to mitigate potential health
problems resulting from the use of relatively shallow wells.
D. RURAL
The "Rural" class provides for agriculture and forest manage-
ment, mineral extraction and other low intensity uses on large
sites including residences where urban services are not required
and where natural resources will not be unduly impaired. These
are lands identified as appropriate locations for resource manage-
ment and allied uses; land with high potential for agriculture,
forestry or mineral extraction; lands with one or more limitations
that would make development costly and hazardous; and land con-
taining irreplaceable, limited, or significant natural, recrea-
tional or scenic resources not otherwise classified.
The majority of land within Tyrrell County falls within the
Rural classification. This classification is very important in
Tyrrell County, because of the economic importance of agriculture
and forestry activities. Also, within the planning period, mining
of peat deposits within the County is also anticipated to assume
increased significance.
81

IE. Conservation
The final land use category, according to CAMA guidelines, is
the "Conservation" class, which provides for effective long-term
management of significant, limited, or irreplaceable resources,
specifically, and at minimum, all of the statutorily defined AECs.
However, beyond the presence of AECs, other areas within the
County, because of natural, cultural, recreational, productive, or
scenic value, may also require similar "effective long-term man-
agement." Examples could include major wetlands (other than•sta-
tutorily defined coastal wetlands); essentially undeveloped shore-
lines that are unique, fragile, or hazardous for development,
lands that provide necessary habitat conditions (especially for
remnant species); pocosins; or publicly owned water supply water-
sheds and acquifers.
The designation "Conservation" should not be misconstrued to
imply "non-use," but does imply a need for careful and cautious
management of any allowable use. For example, within a "conserva-
tion" area, there may be high ground areas which are suitablefor
"development," in which case development should be allowed to take
place under carefully managed conditions. The term "preserva-
tion," on the other hand, implies total restriction on all uses.
Within lands designated Conservation, each proposal, or applica-
tion for any "developed" use should be reviewed on a case by case
basis.
The Board of Commissioners of Tyrrell County recognizes that
additional areas of Tyrrell County could be considered by some to
have special features conducive to being placed in the
Conservation classification. However, since most of these lands.
are held in private ownership, the County does not wish to impose
undue and unnecessary restrictions on the use of private lands.
The overall premise for the designation "Conservation" in Tyrrell
County, will be to strike the delicate balance between careful
long-term management of sensitive or valuable resources and the
freedom of landowners to utilize their properties.
Therefore, in Tyrrell County, the environmentally sensitive
areas identified as Areas of Environmental Concern (AECs), i.e.,
Estuarine Waters, Estuarine Shorelines, and Public Trust Areas are
classified as "Conservation." There are no significant coastal
wetlands, or "salt marshes" in Tyrrell County. However, outside
of these Areas of Environmental Concern, the primary designation
of "Conservation" areas in Tyrrell County will be for the purpose
of sustaining shoreline stability and protecting water quality,
along the County's estuarine waterways, i.e. the Alligator and
Scuppernong Rivers and related creeks and tributaries such as
Alligator, Second, Juniper, and Rider's Creek, and the southwest
and northwest forks in the southeast portion of the County.
82

Specifically, designated conservation areas shall include land
areas extending to approximately 1/4 mile, i.e. 1,320 linear feet
on either side of the banks of these waterways. Along the
Albemarle Sound shoreline, conservation lands shall consist of
specific soil types with known nutrient or pollutant filtering
qualities, specifically Dorovan Muck, and Chowan Silt (numbers 38
and 39, respectively, according to the Special Soil Survey Report
for Tyrrell County, 1982, prepared by the U.S.D.A. Soil Conserva-
tion Service) will be so designated, when they occur within 1/4
mile of the waterway, or 1,320 linear feet inland (See Land Clas-
sification Map). This natural riverine floodplain buffer will
help sustain shoreline stability and contribute to water quality.
It should be noted that this soil information was not available
during preparation of the 1980 Plan Update.
Also included in this classification is the recently designated
federally managed Alligator River National Wildlife Refuge, and
shorelines around the Frying Pan. North of the Frying Pan (from
Goose Creek) and around the Frying Pan and along the southeast
shoreline of the Alligator River to the northwest fork, in addi-
tion to Dorovan Muck, the soil type, Pungo Muck, identified in the
1982 Special Soil Survey, is also considered to have suitable
filtering properties. Dorovan Muck, Chowan Silt, and Pungo Muck
all have severe limitations for any "developed" use, including
agriculture. The County will view any proposed use of these areas
with caution.
Since, as stated previously, "Conservation" does not imply "Pre-
servation," specific allowable uses in the Conservation class
shall include:
1. Drainage: Adequate drainage is essential to the economic
vitality of Tyrrell County; therefore, drainage facili-
ties over.and through these areas, but not with the
intent of draining the Conservation areas for "developed"
purposes, will be allowed. Such facilities may include
diking, tiling, and piping systems.
2. Low densityresidential development if and as allowed b
P Y
the County Health Department and the U. S. Soil Con-
servation Service. However, water and sewer services
will not be extended to such a residential area merely to
stimulate additional growth and development. On -site
services will be required.
3. Water -oriented uses such as piers, docks, and marinas, if
they are shown not to cause detriment to the estuarine
waters or the Conservation lands.
4. Necessary utility service lines, such as water, sewer,
electrical, natural gas, etc., when it is demonstrated
that the ecological system of the Conservation estuarine
83
11

11
area will not be significantly altered. (As noted in
Item 2 above, development of and/or extension of
necessary utilities and services will not be done merely
as a stimulus for additional growth and development, only
to the extent needed).
5. Roadways, when construction of roadways can be conducted
without significantly altering the ecological system, and
in compliance with existing federal, state, and local
regulations.
"
6.
Timber harvesting with approved management practices.
7.
Barge landings.
8.
Marinas (upon careful determination that substantial
pollution will not occur).
In conjunction
with the Policy Statements section of this Plan,
each application
fication,
for a "developed" use in the Conservation classi-
shall be brought before the County Planning Board and
reviewed
on a case by case basis prior to approval. The County
Planning
Board may recommend modification of the Proposal.
F. LAND
CLASSIFICATION SUMMARY
The proposed classification of land for varying levels of
intensity and provision of public services in Tyrrell County were
presented in parts A through E, above. These classifications
relate directly to the "policy statements" contained in Section II
of this Plan. Additional information on the relationship 'between
the land classification system and policies will be presented in
the following Section IV.
84
11

I
I
I
I
I
r
I
I
i
SECTION BV
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN POUCIES
AND LAUD CLASSF-CATION, 8

ISECTION IV: RELATIONSHIP OF POLICIES AND LAND CLASSIFICATIONS
1
As required by the Coastal Area Management Act, the land use
plan must relate the policies section to the land classification
map and provide some indication as to which land uses are appro-
priate in each class.
A. DEVELOPED AND TRANSITION CLASSES
As mentioned in the discussion of existing conditions, most
of the County's growth will occur around the developed community
of Columbia, in both the Columbia and Scuppernong Townships. This
is the area where basic services such as water, sewer, and commu-
nity support services are available or might be feasible within
the planning period. The developed and transition classes were
specifically designated to accommodate these more intensively
developed areas and land uses, including residential, commercial,
industrial parks and open space, community facilities and trans-
portation. Hazardous or offensive uses such as land application
systems, power plants, airports and bulk chemical storage facili-
ties will be located away from these classes.
B. COMMUNITY CLASS
Intensive development will not be encouraged in this class
due to the lack of urban services and/or physical limitations.
The general range of acceptable uses are limited to residences,
isolated general and convenience stores and churches, and other
public facilities. These areas are usually found at crossroads
within the "rural" classification. Most of these areas are cur-
rently served by the County water system, and because of the low -
density development, do not require centralized sewage collection
and disposal. The Alligator community does not receive County
water because of economic infeasibility. However, because of
the potential health threat, this area needs to have centralized
water if it becomes economically.feasible.
C. RURAL CLASS
The rural class is the broadest of the land classes and is
designated to provide for agriculture, forest management, mineral
extraction and other low intensity uses. Residences may be locat-
ed within the rural class where urban services are not required
and where natural resources will not be permanently impaired.
Some large developments may be encouraged in the rural class when
there is an absence of otherwise suitable land within the develop-
ment and transition classes and/or when there is a possible threat
to the urban populace. Such large developments include airports
and power plants. The County also reserves the privilege of
allowing specific types of industrial development in the rural
areas if in the opinion of the government there will be no harmful
or adverse effects from such a location.
85

ID. CONSERVATION CLASS
The conservation class is designated to provide for effective
long-term management of significant limited or irreplaceable areas
which include Areas of Environmental Concern (undeveloped shore-
lines that are unique, fragile, or hazardous for development), and
' publicly owned gamelands and parks and undeveloped forest lands
and cultural and historical sites. Development in the estuarine
system should be restricted to such uses as piers, bulkheads,
marinas, and other water -dependent uses. Policy Statements under
Resource Protection, and Resource Production and Management in
Section II of this plan address the County's intentions under this
class. Also, a more detailed discussion of the Conservation clas-
sification, along with permissible uses, is included in the
preceding Section III.
71
s
11
Ci
A
1
I
I
1
86

i
1
1
I
1
� SECTION V:
� I-NTERGO,VERN MENTAL
� COORDINAT'10N,:.'

Ll
t
1
1
I
SECTION V: INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION
Throughout the development of this Plan, effort was made
to make the policies consistent and compatible with other local,
State and Federal requirements. Implementation of the Plan will
likewise follow the same intergovernmental concern.
WN

APPENDIX A
I
Preliminary Overview of Peat Mining Operations
.In large areas of northeastern North Carolina, the surface
is covered by accumulations of organic matter commonly referred to a
peat. Such peat accumulations, if covered by mineral sediment and
left for several hundred thousand years, will form coal. The peat
lands in Tyrrell County support a vegetative cover of broad leaf
evergreen shrubs and occasionally mixed hard wood forest. As
agricultural soils, most "fuel quality" peatlands are of poor quality.
,\ They contain large quantities of buried wood (as much as 15% by vol-
ume) throughout the organic depth and they are very acid. Peat
bogs offer limited habitats for waterfowl and marginal habitats for
deer, bobcat and bear. Because peat in Tyrrell County and the
adjoining counties has energy values similar to lignite coal, it can
be used as a fuel when dried of its excess moisture content. In the
Soviet Union, Finland and Ireland, peat supplies a portion of the
for
total energy requirement electrical power generation. Peat is
a versatile fuel. In addition to being burned directly, it can be
gasified and converted to methanol and it has been mixed with oil -or
coal to extend these sources of energy.
Peat Proposal in North Carolina
First Colony Farms owns 120,000 acres of peat reserves spread
four in northeastern North Carolina. These
over counties peat
reserves are estimated to yield a harvest of approximately 165
million dry tons of peat. Each ton, in turn, promises to yield
about 10,200 BTU's per pound. The energy of these reserves is equi-
l

U
valent to that of 350 million barrels of fuel oil or 135 million
tons of good grade eastern coal. Put in another perspective, the peat
reserves are sufficient to fuel a. 800 megawatt power plant for 59 years
or a 5,000 ton per day methanol plant for 36 years.
In September, 1978 First Colony Farms (FCF) was granted a
permit from DNRCD, Division of Land Resrouces, to operate a peat mine
on.405 acres designated as "Experimental Peat Mine, #1".. In 1979 FCF
applied for a permit to mine 32,750 acres of peat in Washington,
Tyrrell and Hyde Counties. The proposal calls for strip mining the
land to a depth of 5.5 feet and a reclamation of the land for agri-
cultural purposes, particularly for row crops. A draft permit was
tendered to FCF for mining of 15,012 acres. At least two other
smaller companies have applied for a permit to mine peat in Hyde
County; one is to produce a commercial horticultural peat product
and the other is for energy related uses.
First Colony Farms has spent most of its efforts to date in
-
developing the equipment and procedures for harvesting peat from its
P 9
natural environment and testing reclamation procedures following peat
harvest. Raw peat contins roughly about 85% moisture. Tu be used
as a fuel, peat needs to be dried to or below'50% moisture.. To remove
this excess moisture by artificial means would consume as much energy
as could be generated. Consequently, the excess moisture is driven
away in the field by solar heat. Equipment and procedures utilized
by the Soviet Union and Finland to field dry and harvest peat were
tried in 1978 by FCF. Most of the pre-existing equipment could not
cope with #Oe large wood (size and quantity) found throughout the
2

depths of North Carolina peats, therefore new equipment and procedures
for drying and harvesting peat have required development. Two field
drying and harvesting approaches have resulted. Both procedures incorpo-
rate the residual wood with the peat instead of trying to remove the wood
before drying and harvesting the peat. One is referred to as the "sod
peat" method.. The procedure utilizes circular saws which cut through
,t
the soil 12-16 inches deep, propelling a mixture of raw peat and wood
chipa upward into an auger which compresses and expels the mixture through
.a round extruding head. The extruded material (sods) sun dries and is
harvested. The second procedure is the old milled peat procedure where
the residual buried wood is ground in place to a depth of about 4" at
time and the resulting peat and chips are harvested in approximately
a
1/2 inch increments as the land surface dries.
plant, FCF would need
In order to operate one (1) 400 MW power p
approximately 2.6 x 100 tons per year -of peat. To obtain a.working
unit, 5,562 acres would have to be cut to a depth of 10.5 inches annu-
ally. After five years, the working tract would be exhausted and the
tracts would be moved to a new site. Originally these large tracts would
be divided into six smaller tracts of 927 acres --each with equipment,
access and drainage.
In order to move -the peat from each working unit to the powerplant,
FCF proposes to use either trucks, a train or conveyor. FCF estimated
that the total payroll to harvest and operate the peat for one 400 MW
plant would be 182 persons. If the land is reclaimed, it should not in
fact depreciate in worth. Local tax revenues could be expected from
the land and the equipment as well as secondary revenues from purchases
of employees, both real estate, personalty and a share of the sales tax.
.3

By and large, real estate
tax revenue should account for
60 to 70%
of revenue from all
sources. Additional revenue could be
provided if the
municipality were to
find a method to tax the removal of
resources (some-
thing which has been
accomplished in many other states).
In the event
that a powerplant is
located within the county, it will
also provide per-
haps as many as 100
jobs following construction and add
significantly to
the tax base. Sales between the FCF and the utility will generate
�j additional revenues. (A complete study of these secondary effects
ought to be initiated.)
The Environment
In order to assess the effects of the project, we should attempt
to understand the
nature of the natural systems.,
.General Character. The region in which fuel quality peat resources
exist includes a significant part of the Albemarle -Pamlico peninsula and
especially a large part of Tyrrell County. The region contains the
largest contiguous tract of peat lands in North Carolina. :-(Heath, 1975)
(Ingram and Otte 1980).
Physiography. The dominant feature of the region. is its gradual
slope. Elevation on the peninsula ranges from 20 feet to sea level.
66% of the area is below 5 feet above m.s.l. The Phelps peat bog occupies
relatively high ground at 12 feet above m.s.l.
Hydrology. The entire natural area is termed "swampland" and
ridden. Prior to drainage, natural runoff is by "sheetflow" to a few
small creeks which ultimately flow to bays and sounds. (Heath, 1975)
Soils. The region is made up of three general soil classifications:
mineral, shallow organic and deep organic. The deep organic soils

typically exhibit an organic surface greater than 51 inches deep.
Most of the deep organics range from 5 to 8 feet, but there are a few
,i
channels containing peat up to 19 feet.thick. Most of the peat is
moderately to highly decomposed with low ash content (2-5%). (Ingram
Otte,
and 1980). Shallow organic soils have an organic surface
depth of 16 to 51 inches. No more than half of these soil areas
possess "fuel quality peat containing less than 15-20% ash.
Almost all of the deep organic soils are composed of the Pungo
and Dare soil series. The shallow and deep organic soils are formed
over mineral marine sediments low in base saturation. The result is
these soils are low in bases (calcium and magnesium), therefore the
pH of the organic material is very acid (pH 3.5 to 3.9). By�use of
` pollen and carbon dating techniques, it is proposed that these organic
surfaces began accumulating in their wet envirohment about 9000 years
ago at the end of the Wisconsin glacial period (Dolman and Buol, 1967).
Climate. The region is subject to a humid subtropical climate.
It receives 50+ inches of.precipitation per year and loses 36 inches
to evapotranspiration, leaving a yearly surplus of 15 inches.Soil
moisure is lowest in June to September due to the high evapotranspira-
tion rate during this period. Wind 9 P speeds revailin from the southwest
P
average 9-12 mph (Clay, et. al, 1978). Wind direction varies greatly
with seasons, however.
Vegetation. The region is covered by pocosin vegetation which
occurs in broad flat uplands. Dominant species are broad leafed ever-
green shrubs. Variability of species varies through the bog community.
Increased drainage can cause some shift in the dominant association,
originally cyrilla racemiflora to ilex glabra and myrica heterophylla

(Kologiski, 1977).. Repeated fires have also had a great influence on
existant vegitation in many areas. There appears to be few endangered
or threatened plant species in the region.
:'-Wildlife. Theeat mining areas are adjacent to im ortant wild-
P 9 J P
life habitats. High bog locations provide limited waterfowl potential
and marginal habitat for deer, bobcat and bear.
The Effects of Minin
Land Preparation. The first site to be mined (Phelps Peat Bog)
by FCF is already diteched. All other areas have at least part of the
primary drainage installed by previous land owners. Ditches are propo-
sed to be installed two years before mining activity is to commence.
After drainage, any existing commercial timber is to be removed and
remaining shrub vegetation is cleared by bulldozers.
The environmental effects from land preparation for peat are
similar to the effects of agricultural preparation minus the influences,
of liming, fertilizer and pesticide applications. The most profound
impact is the elimination of terrestrial -communities on the site. The
completed drainage system will lower the water table. A three-year
study conducted by Skaggs, et. al., on the "Effect of Agricultural
Waters 'n Land Development on Drainagei t h e North Carolina -Tidewater
Region" showed that average annual water tables on developed soils are
approximately 12 inches lower than on undeveloped soils. The soil types
studied included the shallow and deep organics in Tyrrell and Washington
Counties. This study also showed that -there was basically no difference
water from developed and undeveloped soils but the
in total flow of wat om op op ,
primary influence of drainage was that the flow rate (that amount that

1
did drain from the land) increased 3-11 times with agricultural development.
Since there are no plants growing on the land during peat harvest, there
will be induced evaporation from the land but there will be no transpira-
tion. Therefore, there should be a slight increase in total flow from
these areas until peat harvest is completed and the land put into agri-
cultural production. The influence of total increase in freshwater
flow is questionable since the number of acres involved in active peat
harvest at any one time is not extensive in relative terms. Peat
harvest on lands in Tyrrell and Dare Counties will drain ultimately
into the Alligator River which is fresh to brackish.- This drainage will
be by pump which will be discharged into standing swamps at least 2 mile
before reaching the receiving streams. Such practices are known to
serve as effective filters for dissolved and suspended material in drain-
age age waters and will also influence the flow rate entering streams. ere -
fore, the influence of mining and agriculture on water quality is an-
ticipated to be small. Such possible changes should and will be studied
and monitored..,.
Mining. Maximum area being mined at one time is 10,000 acres
(one plant). Areas are expected to decline in elevation gradually. As
peat is removed, canals will ultimately have to be deepened. Peat
mining will create a new lower -lying landform by the amount of depth
fuel
equal to and not exceeding the thickness of the quality peat.
Wind erosion may be noticeable during the mining period. Since
the colloidal organic material dries and forms a coarse, chaffy surface,
most of the airborne particles will be that which is stirred up by
traffic activity during harvest.
Reclamation Period. Once peat mining is complete and the land
7

is converted to agriculture (the anticipated land use following
reclamation),. the quality of drainage waters will be 'Similar to that of
the dark surface mineral soils which are presently being cultivated
in Tyrrell'County. Drainage waters from such soils are shown to have
slight increases in sediment load. Dissolved oxygen, biochemical
oxygen demand, temperature, pH and other water quality parameters are
measurably affected as compared to undeveloped areas, but the changes
are relatively small. Other parameters that -change but have no -appa-
rent effect on water quality are Ca, Mg, K, Na and C1 concentrations.
Nitrogen content in drainage waters from these soil types also increases
slightly, but remain lower than the content found in any other agricultu-
ral soil types (Skaggs, et. a., 1980).
The resulting water level will be lowered by that depth or
thickness.of peat which has been removed by mining plus the 10 to 12-inch
average annual water table drop that results from developed vs. un-
developed land use. This represents a reduction in present hydraulic
head, but the influence of such.:reduction is of intense debate since
the mineral substrata is imbedded with many impervious layers.
1
I
1

APPENDIX B
TYRRELL COUNTY
Board of Commissioners
RESOLUTION
' WHEREAS, the citizens of Tyrrell County have consistently shown their strong
support for the military, and;
WHEREAS, it is not in the best interest of the military, the civilian population,
the environmental effects to this region, economic development of this region,
and cost effectiveness, now;
THEREFORE, be it resolved that the following military restricted and Military
Operation Areas (MOA's) be changed as follows:
I. Delete the following special use air space:
(a) R-5301 A, B, C and R-5302 (Harvey Point)
(b) R-5313 (Stumpy Point)
(c) Stumpy Point MOA
(d) Pamlico A MOA
(e) Pamlico B MOA
(f) VR - 73 (low level mil. training route)
(g) VR 1057 (low level mil. training route)
(h) VR - 1058 (low level mil. training route)
(i) VR - 1758 (low level mil. training route)
(j) VR - 85 (low level mil. training route)
W Hatteras F MOA (low level mil. training route)
II. Install a radar system to provide low altitude air traffic advisory service in
eastern North Carolina. Specifically, fill the radar "GAP" existing between
Cherry Point and Oceana Approach Control. The "GAP" area is currently
controlled by Washington Center.
III. Restructure, (reduced the size), the physical dimensions R-5314 (Dare Range)
and R- 5306A (Cherry Point) to provide for safe turn radiuses, entry and egress
corriders.
IV. Restructure R-5306C and D to provide a corrider along the coast from W-122H
to 2 NM inland, from ground level to 3000 feet.
T This resolution duly voted and authorized by the Tyrrell County Board of Com-
missioners on October 15, 1985.
1
I

I
I
1
1
1
1
I, Kim V. Suter, Clerk to the Board of
Commissioners of Tyrrell County, North
Carolina, Do Hereby Certify That the
Foregoing Resolution was Adopted by
Said Board in its Session of October 15,
1985, And the Same Appears in the
Minutes of Said Session. In Witness
Whereof, I have Hereunto Set My Hand
and the Seal of Said Board This October 15,
1985.
Kim V. Suter, Clerk
2

IL
a

W
.T_ uuJ
O r
a
J:" G
Z
� xaw
1 N n O
7 �
I �
sQ• a
�. ul7'. tl;(tt ..ram \ •C. 4,j`.
� � .�ti���K•�N i� tYi t �, •. ��"1 '. •''} .�}�� Wii �r�iddd `,k4� t /sf;��.
�_. <,� �., i�i r } sx r i f' ° 1. yx - w.,. f �,sf t h �' x � 0 `iy'�`,h }.^��" • [ � . i i,,'r�
--� aa•a i,; tz Y' , #, Yr %- i 1 . r "+'-r�i' \.1)};arS� �ri�'1` i�b ,M F�tii�,,•p--�'),�lc �Wi,�;c�. s,f=
t•.r}J.�
jJ•rp f.
''F„ ti c `^. '� tr ti,iy'•'`YJJ�f''! "idsi7 t,.? r5 / "'A'�rrQ1 a:rc r 1+ 7•� � arc tt/`.•'^%t�.
�' � �. LAY L \ 3f}}�1! i~ ����,,//i.ry� � N �X���yw'�•ar' c 3��`R
a
a.
< � �\ §. +i. t'�: ,.7,:i � �� \ � � .,� \�\� �\\\\ `, '%�F/'✓j lrl Eiji +-? Y.
I � � .p +�, : a I� .• �,� �� ��� \\\�'�\+'��<,fi�r Fi�.,,rkrfi ►t Trfctlt �F
r,':f? i�-r��r�itfti'
;� § .ram ��\;`\\\ .� ��`..-f�Zrr',S'rf'S1t.r '�';], t�•• �`, •'� f'�( T% f
�F!
W �._ � 'F� .t�. A \ \ �\\� � :� � M ... n/� it�• <r I� � lr .%s.. rr !
•;� '\ i r }r csf•fr•(J.,� ".;�1� �Ir lj°'r%�'l.f.f.f l�.Cl>ir"lil ,.ii��YN �".' ar r4f-��
0
"
ci
C t x •f 4 ,f Y C rF "} r GJ +V h f rJ :"C y .`
)+ f if Flr,e
qr
h
�� •�r Fs,fl*{v' t���A����
"\ �
}r \ p f
•• �. v v v `v v vv ��\ \ v
�yA\w v� . Avrf9 sir frG ,�F
�. IF `.k
VO\N,
/. I i� � �t � � �A V•: Av� v�V � .±n �,P r
". \ .�. �_.\\��\���� �e•r, •�.tf}ra Mice
S G
J
I N i v MJ
1

L
£
A
S
�O
rec P
z
0
z
a
3
The preparation of thin'sap 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
0
ffice of Coastal Management, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
IYf•�'�r1
COUNTYTYRRELL
"GENERAL FLOOD HAZARD AREAS"]
LEGEND
E-:] RESIDENTIAL
COMMERCIAL
INDUSTRIAL
0 AGRICULTURAL
FOREST LAND
APPROXIMATE LOCATIONS OF
MINIMALLY FLOODED AREAS
ZONE "A' , 100 YR. FLOOD AREAS
I�2 a 1i2 SMILES
6RAPMtC SCALE
�■
M
EXISTING LAND USE MAP 19
S ov
R.G.L.
MAP TYRRELL COUNTY `"`°
K. W.
NORTH CAROLINA •""""'
4 �A acaawa, •1 aaaa,« 4...... M-
r�ac r�wart, n Ot

A R ` E S
4 G
E _ �
A
BULL I aA 1
f• J Ati.r�. Y ,' "'Qa< .� ,nlFr. t T S..,j u �(� /
'f ~ ` W � � � � � �' M•, .' ... �.r fir^ / -.b ! '
�.+ , 4 • Y ` y` r f'' - i r /� I... / :•> r r f t , i r rt ;
/ /// // •%//� wK�wti`'~�-4��pyp �/ / // �{r AL II GATOR RIVER
NATIONAL o%.DLIEFUGE
fE
r �
J ___
��",� �f(, }�Y* ham.. €� ,s%.f.M ; � : •.
Pi
Z" t
�i O
The preparation of this map was financed in mart rou0ithrough a grant provided
bed by
he
e the Nor[Ir Carolina Coastal Management Program, throu¢h funds provtded by the
Coastal Zone Manaeement Act of 1472, as amended, which Is administered by the
Office of Coastal MannpQment, National Oceanic and Atmosp'.leric Adminiptration.
011,
MN*fir,
TYRRELL COUNTY
"GENERAL SOIL SUITABILITY"
LGEND
Q
RESIDENTIAL
(
COMMERCIAL
INDUSTRIAL
AGRICULTURAL
FOREST LAND
SOILS SUITED FOR URBAN
DEVELOPMENT
(WELL DRAINED SOILS)
APPROXIMATE LOCATIONS
1,2 0
II/2 SMILES
' GRAPHIC
SCALE
EXISTING LAND USE MAP 1965
AS McHOWN
R.G.L.
MAP t_.w
TYRRELL COUNTY K. W.
NORTH CAROLlNA
6 Cm&A f
o.wc•c ��n..c c �•.w. • c m..R•. ar�nua. �

A R L i I E
S I
A.
"COMPOSITE HAZARDS"
LEGEND
Q RESIDENTIAL ® ZONE A, IOOYR. FLOOD AREAS
® COMMERCIAL
® INDUSTRIAL ZONE °C°, MINIMALLY FLOODED AREAS.
c _ AGRICULTURAL : 000• ESTUARINE SHORELINES
FOREST LAND
1 i2 0 1'/2 swLES
GRAPHIC SCALE
EXISTING LAND USE MAP I985
ate.`
RGI
"`•F`• a K^••� y--- by
the North Carolina CoastalManagementProgram, through funds provided by the
Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended, which is administered by the
Office of Coastal Management_ National Oreanic and Atm—h-4, AAT4.4.1 — 4....

\ M.LL H.AY
D K 0
The preparation of this map was financed in part through a grant provided by
a the Kurth Car,,lina Coastal :".tnagenent Program, through funds provided by the
Coastal lone 4nna¢en.•nt Act of 1972, as anonded, which is administered by the
office f Coastal 4anaement, National Oceanic and Atmosp!.eric Ad3lnintration.
fe
TYRRELL COUNTY
0
LEGEND
■-`E'�ELCPED
-CMMUNITY
®< TRANSITION
RURAL
CONSERVATION
I�p Q ._ _ 7MILES
, RAPHIC 3CALE
•19,35
LAND CLASSIFCATION MAP N
R. !
MAP - TYRRELL COUNTY �
NORTH CAROUNA A•
8 Talbert, Cox & Associates, Inc. s�.,