Beaufort County Land Use Plan

[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]

COASTAL ZONE
INFORMATION CENTER

Beaufort County

LAND USE PLAN@/

HD
1291
343
B43
1976 CAMA
1976
[
12917
@B

COASTAL ZONE
INFORMATION CENTER

THIS REPORT HAS BEEN PREPARED FOR THE RESIDENTS OF

BEAUFORT COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA

BOARD OF.COMMISSIONERS

J. Stancil Lilley, Chairman

M. D. Whisnant Frank Bonner
Calvin Pittman Mrs. Arthur Lee Moore
Thomas Baines, County Manager

PLANNING BOARD

Robert L. Smith, Chairman
Robert A. Smith John. Hird
Ray Tuten Malvin Respess

PREPARED BY

N. C. DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL & ECONOMIC RESOURCES
h Northeastern Field Office
Thomas B. Richter, Chief Planner
John W. Shore, Community Planner
Marian Alligood, Secretary
Debra Ingalls, Secretary
Mary E. Noe, Secretary
Mike Yount,, Draftsman
Danny Smith, Draftsman

May 19 76

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page
I. Introduction 1

II. Description of Present Conditions 4

A. Population and Economy 5

B. Existing Land Use 21

C. Current Plans, Policies, and Regulations 22

III. Major Land Use Classes (Public Participation Activities) 30

A. Identification and Analysis of Major Land Use Issue 31

B. Alternatives Considered in the Development of

Goals and Policies 40

C. Land Use Goals and Objectives 43

D. Process Used in Determining Goals 46

E. Securing Public Participation 46

IV. Constraints on Development so

A. Land Potential 51

B. Capacity of Community Facilities 59

V@ Estimated Demand 66

A. Population and Economy 67

B. Future Land Needs 73

C. Community Facilities Demand 74

VI. Plan Description 78

Vii. Areas of Environmental Concern 87

VIII. Summary (Bibliography) 98

IX. City - County Plan Relationship 103

LIST OF TABLES

Table No. Description Page

1 Population Changes, Beaufort County, 1920-1970 6

2 Sumary of Population Trends, Beaufort County and
Townships, 1960 and 1970 8

3 Black Population By Townships, Beaufort County,
1960 and.1970 9

4 Population Trends, Selected Places, 1960 and 1970 9

5 Median Age, Beaufort County & North Carolina,
1960 - 1970 11

6 Population Change By Age Group, Beaufort County,
1960 - 1970 12

7 Years of School Completed, Beaufort County,
1960 and 1970 13

8 Work Force Estimates, Beaufort County, 1962, 1967,
and 1972 14

9 Employment Analysis, Beaufort County, 1962, 1967,
and 1972 16

10 Commuting Patterns, Beaufort County, 1960 and 1970 18

11 Family Income Data, Beaufort County, 1969 19

12 Manufacturing Finns, Beaufort County, 1975 20

13 Inventory of Historic Areas, Beaufort County 56-B to 56-J

14 Utilization of Primary Roads, Beaufort County, 1974 65

is Projected Township Population, Beaufort County,
1970 - 2000 70

16 Projected Population, Municipalities of Beaufort
County, 1970 - 2000 71

17 County and Municipal Revenue-and Debt Data,
Beaufort County 77

1 Population By Age and Sex, Bath, 1970 107

2 Projected Population, Bath Township, Bath and
Beaufort County, 1970 - 2020 114

LIST OF TABLES (Continued)

Table No. Description ' Page

1 Population By Age and Sex, Chocowinity, 1970 118

2 Projected Population, Chocowinity, Chocowinity
Township and Beaufort County 122

1 Population By Age and Sex, Pantego, 1970 127

2 Projected Population, Pantego, Pantego Township and
Beaufort County, 1970 2020 131

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure No, Description Page

1 Projected Population, Beaufort County, 1970 2020 69

1 Population Trends, Bath, 1940 - 1975 107

1 Population Trends, Pantego, 1940 - 1975 126

LIST OF MAPS

Map Number Description Page

1 Population Distribution 7

2 Townships 10

3 Transportation 23

4 Phosphate Deposits 37-A

4-A General Soils Map, Beaufort County

5 Historic Sites 56-A

6 Phosphate Deposits 57-A

1. Flood Hazard Area, Pantego, N.C. 129-A

I. INTRODUCTION

This document, The Beaufort County Coastal Area Management Act Land Use

Plan, is,the result of almost two years of intensive effort on the part of

many people in Beaufort County. The plan was initiated in.response to the

North Carolina Coastal Area Management Act passed by the 1974 General Assembly.

The Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) established a cooperative program

of land use management-between local andstate governments. The goals of the

act were:

1) To provide a management system capable of preserving and

managing the environmentally sensitive areas;

2) To ensure that development in the coastal area proceeds in an

orderly manner; and

3) To provide a balance between the use and preservation of our

coastal resources.

Under the Act local governments are responsible for developing local land

use.plans which reflect the public's desires concerning local growth and devel-

opment. The Coastal Resources Commission (CRQ was established by the Act to

oversee the development of local land use plans. The CRC was also given the

responsibility of designating Areas of Environmental Concern (AEC), which are

to receive special attention from both the local governments and the CRC.

This document represents Beaufort County Is efforts to comply with the re-

quirements of the Act. It is written in accordance with the "State Guidelines

For Local Planning In The Coastal Area Under The Coastal Area Management Act

of 1974.11 These guidelines were prepared by the CRC and adopted on January 27,

1975, amended October 15, 1975.

The planning process that resulted in this plan was a trying experience

for local government officials, planning board members and the.public Issues

were raised which many people did not wish to face. Emotion often overruled

reason with the result of more heat than light being created by the debate.

In,the end, the county established goals for its future development. There

exists no concensus of these goals in Beaufort County.; but'hopefullythey,

and the resulting plan, represent a reasonable course with which the majority

of the citizens concur.

II. DESCRIPTION OF PRESENT CONDITIONS
0

A. POPULATION AND ECONOMY

1. Population

Beaufort County has experienced a population loss during the past two

decades. There was a decrease of 1,120 people between 1950 and 1960 and a small

decrease of 34 people between 1960 and 1970. This large loss of population

between 1950 and 1960 can probably be attributed,in part,to the national trend

of population migration from the rural areas to urban areas,coupled with a change

in agricultural practices which reduced labor demand.

Most rural areas, especially in Eastern North Carolina@continued to expe-

rience population loss during the 19601s. Beaufort County's minor loss of pop-

ulatibn can be attributed to the opening of the phosphate mining industry,plus

location of a number of other industries in the county. These job opportunities

countered the loss of jobs in other sectors of the economy and he ld population

loss at a min1mum.

While the county managed to minimize population loss during the 19601s,

it continued to lose black population. Between 1960 and 1970,the county lost

a total of 1,355 blacks, or 10.11 percent. Every township except Long Acre

lost blacks (Table 2). In one township, Pantego, blacks accounted for 83.7

percent of the township's population loss.

The major population movement during the 1960's was within the county. Of

the six townships in the county, three lost population, headed by Washington

Township and followed by Pantego and Bath. The remaining three gained popula@.

tion. Richland Township had an increase of 31.2 percent.

Of the incorporated areas in the county, only Aurora had a population in-

crease (Table 4). Aurora's population increase accounted for 104.2 percent of

Richland Township's population increase.

The above indicates a pattern of population loss in most areas of the

county, with Long Acre Township, which serves as a residential area for Wash-

ington, and Aurora increasing in population.

TABLE 1 POPULATION CHANGES

BEAUFORT COUNTY

1920 - 1970

CHANGE
BEAUFORT IN
YEAR COUM-- NUMBERS

1920 31,024

1930 35,026 4,002

1940 36,431 1,405

1950 37,134 703

36,014 11120

1970 35,908 34

SOURCE: U. S. Census of Population: General Population-Characteristics,
North Carolina, 1920 1970.

01.9

000

9 0 4V

BEAUFORT COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA 0 0 0 0

POPULATO ON 0
OISTRIBUTION
1 Dot Represents 50 People MAY
Map

TABLE 2 SUMMARY OF POPULATION TRENDS

Beaufort County and Townships

1960 and 1970

Change: 1960 and 1970

1960 1970 Number Percent

Beaufort County 36,014 35,980 - 34 0.1

Chocowinity Township 4,628 4.1661 33 0.7

Long Acre Township 5,318 6,976 1,658 31.2

Bath Township 3,323 3,237 - 86 2.6

Richland Township 3,462 3,626 164 4.7

Pantego Township 5,377 5,126 - 251 4.7

Washington Township 13,906 12,354 -1,552 -11.2

SOURCE U. S. Census of Population: Number of Inhabitants 1960 and 1970.

TABLE 3 BLACK POPULATION BY TOWNSHIPS

BEAUFORT COUNTY

1960 and 1970

TOWNSHIPS 1960 1970 NLMER CHANGE % CHANGE

County 13,290 11,935 -1,355 -10.11

Bath, 940 813 127 -13.S

Chocowinity 1,540 1,366 .174 -11.2

Long Acre 648 89 13.7

Pantego 2,730 1,753 - 210 7.6

Richland 1,822 1,753 - 6 9 -@3.7

Washington 5,610 4,746 - 864 -15.4

SOURCE: U. S. Census of Population, 1960 and 1970.

TABLE 4 POPULATION TRENDS

Selected Places

1960 and 1970

Change: 1960 and 1970

1960 1970 Number Percent

Aurora 449 620 171 38.1

Bath 346 231 -115 -33.2

Belhaven 2,386 2,259 -.127 - 5.3

Chocowinity 580 566 - 22 - 2.4

Pantego 262 218 - 44 -16.8

Washington 9,939 8,961 -978 - 9.8

Washington Park 574 517 57 9.9

SOURCE: U.S. Census of Population: Number of Inhabitants, North Carolina
1960 and 1970.

TOM EGO
p

lop

"6 V

AT 04 T

c IN y

HLA
Ty
BEAUFORT COUN
NORTH CAROLINA lop

TOWNSHIPS

Map MA)

Table S examines the median age of the population in Beaufort County and

North Carolina for 1960 and 1970. The table indicates that Beaufort County's

median age rose faster than that of the state. This reflects an increase in

the ratio of older people to younger. Table 6 examines population change in

the county by age group between 1960 and 1970.

TABLE 5 NEDIAN AGE

Beaufort County and North Carolina

1960-1970

1960 1970

Beaufort County 26.2 29.0

North Carolina 25.5 26.5

The age groupings have important inplicationsfor the provisions of ser-

vices by local government. The different age groups make different demands for

services. An increase in population below five years of age, for instance, would

indicate an increased demand on schools in the near future.

The educational attainment of the county's population increased between

1960 and 1970. Table 7 examines the number of years of school completed for the

county. Notice the sharp decline in the number with no schooling, while those

with some high school or college increased.

2. Economy

A definitive analysisof Beaufort County's economy is beyond the scope of

this study. This section will attempt to.provide an economic overview and

framework ofBeaufort County to be,used.by.local derision makers.

TABLE 6 POPULATION CHANGE BY AGE GROUP

Beaufort County

1960 1970

1960 1970 Number Percent

Under 5 years 4,08S 2,90S -1,180 -28.8

5 to 9 4,209 3,517 - 692 -16i4

10 to 14 4,305 3,1867 - 438 -10.1

15 to 19 3,152 3,S97 445 14.1

20 to 24 1,809 2,431 622 34.3

25 to 29 1,849 2,072 223 12.0

30 to 34 2,027 1,8S9 168 8.2

35 to 39 2,075 1,8S9 216 -10.4

40 to 44 2,181 2,038 143 - 6.S

45 to 49 2,340 2,013 327 -13.9

SO to S9 3,621 4,229, 608 16.7

60 and over 4P361 5,593 1,232 28.2

TOTAL 36,014 3S,980

SOURCE: U.S. Census of Population Characteristics, 1960 1970.

TABLE 7 YEARS OF SCHOOL C OMP LETED

Beaufort County

1960 and 1970

Number Percent
Total 1960 1970 Change Change

Male and Female, 2S yrs. and over 18,SO8 19,6S3 1,14S 6.1

Number school years completed 733 367 - 366 -49.9

Elementary: I to 4 yrs. 3,065 21279 - 786 -25.6

S to 8 yrs. 7,128 5,86.3 -1,265 -17.7

High School: I to 3 yrs. 2,801 4,295 1.1494 S3.3
.4 yrs. 3,050 4,'448 1,308 4S.8

College: 1 to 3 yrs. 1,003 1,236 233 23.2

4 or more 728 1,162 434 59.6

SOURCE: U. S. Census of Population, 1960 and 1970.

The past two decades have witnessed a profound change.in the agricultural

practices in the United States. Farming has become increasingly mechanized,

creating a trend toward fewer, but larger, farms and fewer workers needed to

produce equal or greater yields. This change in agricultural practice has had.

its impact upon Beaufort County.

In 1962, 31.8 percent of Beaufort County's total employed were engaged in

agricultural employment. During the following decade, the county lost 1,550

agricultural jobs. As Table 8 shows, this, loss in agricultural jobs was more

than made up for in industrial jobs. During the same period the county gained

4,910 non-agricultural wage and salary jobs. These are largely accounted for

by the opening of Texas Gulf's operations in 1964 and the Hamilton Beach plant

opening in 19661.With several other smaller concerns locating in the county

during the period.

TABLE 8 WORK FORCE ESTIMATES

Beaufort County 1962, 1967 and 1972

Net Change
1962 1967 1972 (+Or) 1962-72

Civilian Work Force 12,760 14,830 16,740 +3,980

UnemploymentJotal 760 640 S90 170

Rate of Unenployment 6.0 4.3 3.5 2.5

Employment, Total 12,QOO 14,190 16,150 +4,lSO

Non-Agricultural Wage
Salary Employment 6,440 9,180 11,350 +4,910
Manufacturinszl/ 2'31010 3,260 4,310 +2,300
2/ .7 040
Non-Manufacturingz-, 4,430 5,920 +2,610.

All Other Non-Agricul-
tural Employment 1,780 2)230 2,570 + 790

.Agricultural Employment 3')780 2,780 2,230 -1,550

-!/Includes: Food; lumber and wood; tobacco; apparel; printing; stone, clay
and glass; and non-electrical machinery.
@/Includes: Construction; transportation commun
ication and public utilities;
'i@eal estate; service; government
trade; financial, insurance and
and other non-manufacturing.

Over the past decade Beaufort County has enjoyed a period of economic

prosperity with the civilian work force expanding and the number and rate of

unemployed dropping. This is in contrast.,to a number of neighboring rural

counties who have not been able to Teplace the jobs lost in the agricultural

sector with jobs in the non-agricultural sect9r.

One method of analysis of the -work force estimates for counties is to

divide the reported activities into basic and non-basic activities. Basic activ-
41
ities are defined as those which-export goods and services outside the county.

In exporting goods and services, these activities inject outside money into the

local economy. This "outside" money has a multiplier effect, in that it sup-

ports other non-basic activities within the county. The non-basic activities

are defined asthose which provide goods and services for consumption within

the county

An.example of the basic and non-basic activities defined abovemight be

provided by a worker at Texasgulf. This worker assists in the production of

phosphate fertilizer which is sold for consumption-outside of the county. The

11outside'! money paid for the product goes, in part, to pay the worker-,1s,wages.

The worker's activity is basic. With the money'the worker receives, he purchases,

items for his family, pays taxes which are used to educate his children and dis-

poses of his "outside" money in other ways. The merchants who sell the worker

items, the teacher who teaches his children and others who provide other goods

and services are engaged-in non-basic activities.

In this basic-non-basic approach, the export base is the major factor

determining the level of the county income in that it supports the non-basic

sector. An indication of the area's economic health can be gained by examining

the ratio of basic to non-basic activities in a county. While a large ratio

of basic to non-basic activities would generally indicate a healthy economy,

it must be noted that a county that depends too heavily on one or a few large

ba-8ic industries may prove unstable in an economic slump.

Table 9 utilizes employment figures in breaking down Beaufort County's

employment'into basic and non-basic activities for the years 1962, 1967 and

1972. The trend shows a slight decrease in basic activities vis-a-vis non-basic.

This has proven to be a national trend as service industries have come to play

a larger role in the economy. Beaufort County's decrease is smaller than the

national and state average. The success in locating industries in the county,

ten industries between 1962 -and 1972, has assured the county a healthy economy.

The new basic activities support new non-basic activities.

TABLE 9 EMPLOYMENT ANALYSIS

Beaufort County
-.1962.q 1967 and 1972

Number of Employees
Employment Category 1962 1967 1972

BASIC

Manufacturing 2i010 3,260 4,310

Food 340 380 430

@Wood Lumber 360 350 380

Other Manufacturing 1,310 2,530 3,500

Non4bnufacturing 5@560 5,010 4,800

Agricultural 3,780 2,780 2,230

All Other Non-Manufacturing 1,780 2,230 2,570

TOTAL BASIC 7,570 8,270 9,110

TOTAL NON-BASIC 4,330 5,920 7,040

Total Employed 12,000 14,190 16,150

Percentage Basic/Total Employed 63.1 58.3 56.4

Not only have the increased job opportunities in Beaufort County provided
jobs to county.residents, but they have also provided job opportinlities to

workers commuting into the county.. Between 1960 and 1970 the county has

experienced also a 300 percent increase in the number of workers commuting into

the county.
16

In 1960, Beaufort County had a net commuting-loss as workers commuted to

other counties to work. By 1970,the county had a net commuting-gain of 561

workers. Table 10 examines the commuting patterns for Beaufort County in

1960 and 1970.

Beaufort County had a total of personal income of $117 million in 1972.

This broke down on a per capita basis of $3,248,which is 72 percent of the

national average and 86 percent of the state average.

Income data for families, often a more meaningful.index.of income, shows

that while Beaufort County has not been successful in providing job opportuni-

ties, those job opportunities have not raised the median income above the
state level., The median income for Black fwd,l-ies is only $3,575. Almost 52%

of all Black families have a family income below poverty level.,and 62.9 percent

have aii income which is less than 125 percent of the poverty level. Table 11

examines.family income levels for the county, The data is further broken down

by race,,

This income data gives an indication of the overall wealth and prosperity

of the county's.population. Incomes,can serve as the bellweather of the local
0
economy.

Another indication of economic health is the number of manufacturing f irms

in the county and the number employed by the fii* . Table 12 lists manufacturing

firms in.Beaufort County.

TABLE 10 COMMUTING.PATTERNS

Beaufort County, 1960 and 1970

1960 1970
Out- In- Out- rn -
County Commuting Co=ting Commuting Commuti

Bertie 12 5 .22 48

Carteret 14 0

Graven 176 74 334

Dare 0 0 7 0

Edgecombe 0 .0 8 19

Halifax 0 0 7

Hyde 115 .37 65 115

Lenoir 35 30 0

Martin 99 76 '231 263

Nash .0 0

Onslow 0 0 .15 17

:Pamlico 40 .12 19 150

Pitt @145 223 .132 580

Tyrre.11 0

Vashington 70 31 _286 110

Wayne% 0 .0, 14

0 0. 0

Elsewhere 191 68, 278 225

TOTAL. qo6 526 1@314 1.1875

Live & Work:in.Beaufort County .92,972 .91972 112751 11,751

Employed Residents 10,878 @XXX 13.,o65

Persons Working in Beaufort Coun XXX XXX 13@626
ty "10)498

Net CoTnmuting-Gain or toss -380 +561

Source: Emplbynient.Securi@y ComrLission_of North Carolina
North Carolina Co=Mting Patterns, 1960 and 1970...

TABLE FAMILY @,IUCOIME DATA

Beaufort County, 1969

Deaufo t County North Carolina
All Families
Yedian Income 06,435 $7,774
0.
Percent Receiving Publ I c Assistance 7.8 .:,4.4
Percent Less than Poverty Level 16.3
Percent Less,than.75% Poverty Level, ...17.9 11. 0
.:.Percent Less thanl:125%.Poverty Vel 32.4 22.3
'@Black Families

-Median..
Income 43075 $4.9 803
Percent Receiving Public Assistance ;18.8 .37
4
Percent Less than Poverty.Level -'38.;7
511.1
:.Percent Less,than 75% Poverty Level 38.o 0.3
Percent Less than 125% Poverty Level 62.9 49.3

SOURdE: U. S.- Gensus, @1970..

_19-

TABrZ 12 MANUFACTURING FIRMS

Beaufort County, 1975

Employmen@
Firm lnczftion Product Range
Aurora Packing Co. Aurora Crab Meat 50-99
Texasgulf, Inc., Aurora Phosphoric Acid 500-999
Diarmonium Phosphate
Phosphate Rock
Granular Triple Superphosphate
Baker Crab Co. Belhaven Crab Meat 50-99
Belhaven Feed Mills,'Inc. -Belhaven Livestock Feed 5-9
Liquid & Dry Fertilizer
Belhaven Fish & Oyster Go. Belhaven Crab Meat 50-99
Belhaven Manufacturing Co. Belhaven Ladies Outwear 50-99
Harris Furniture & Upholstery Co. Belhaven Furniture 1-4
Blue Channel Corp. Belhaven Canned Crab Meat 100-249
Gwinn Engineering Co., Inc.. Belhaven Dredges 5-9
Molded Polyurethane
Younce & Ralph Belhaven Lumber Pine @20-49
Hatteras Industrial Corp. Chocowinity Rubber Linings 5-9
Metal Fabrication
The Singer Co. Chocowinity Wooden Furniture, 250-499
Coastal Lumber Co. Pantego lumber,, Wood Chips 20-49
Kamlar Corp., Pantego Pine Bark Products 20-49
Pungo Machine Shop., Inc. Pantego Job Shop 5-9
..F. 0. Howell & Son ..Pirieto-wn Dimension Stock Hardwood 20-49
Beaufort County Iron Works.,'Inc. 'Washington Machine Shop 1-4
0 .10-19
.Coca Cola Bottling Co....Inc. Washington Carbonated Beverages
East,Coast Electronic.Weighing,'Inc.. Washington Wheel Load Weigher
On board Truck System
Special Weighing Equipment
Edinburg.:--, Hardwood Lumber, Co. Washin 20-49
gton. Hardwood Furniture.Squares
.@Logs Hardwood,, Chips.:
Flanders Filters.,. Inc. .,Washington. :Air Filters '50-99
Glass Fibre Filter Papers
Foster Wheeler:Corp. Washington Valves Nuclear Power 20-49
Hackney ,Sons -..Inc. Washington Truck.Bodies,,Delivery Vans 100-249
'Washington :Shirts
A� 14f@ 0@-@C6 500-999
_P
S.- Hill do'niftruc,ticn. Co. Washington Ready Mix Concrete 10-19
Jackson Bedding Co. Washington Bedding Products Furniture 1-4
Ma1lisons Climate.Craft Washington Sheet Metal Work., Heating 10-19
.-Air Conditioning
Maola. Ice Cream Co.,,.jnc. Washington .Ice Cream .:20-49
Mason Lumber Co. Lumber @20-49
*Moss Planing Mill Washington Lumber, Millwork 500-999
National Spinning Co., Inc. Washington Yarn 2j500 & 01
Roberson Beverages, Inc. .-Washington Soft Drinks 100-249
Scovill Manufacturing Co. Washington@ .Household Appliances
.Seacrest Marine Corp. Washington I .@Boats
Washington Beverage Co. Washington Carbonated Beverages 10-19
*Washington Garment Co. Washington ...C.hildreft.l.�-Dres@es 100-249
Washington Graphics Inc. -Washington Commercial Printed Material 1-4
Washington News Publishing Co. Washington Newspaper .20-49
'Sausage Products, Pork
Washington Packing Co. -:Washington Products .10-19
R. So Wiley & Son Washington Lumber Hardwood, 5-9

B. EXISTING LAND USE

Beaufort County has a total of 618,179 acres within its boundaries. Water

areas comprise 88,836 acres, or 14.4 percent of this total area. The predomi-

nant land use in the remaining land area is forestry, which utilizes 340,497

acres, or 55.1 percent of the total acreage. This is followed by cropland, with

137,449 acres (22.2 percent); other land, such as farm roads, feed lots, mines,

etc., with 28,954 acres (4.7 percent); urban and built-up with 11,983 acres
(1.9 percent); pasture, 8,157 acres (1.3 percent); and federal land with 2,300

acres (0.4 percent).

Between 1959 and 1967, Beaufort County had a 137.5 percent change in urban

and built-up land. There was a small increase in other lands category, 18.1

percent, and cropland, 5.8 percent. There was a decrease in pasture, -17.4

percent, and forest, -5.4 percent,

An examination of the existing land use map will reveal that the county's

population is largely grouped in the western portion of the county. Small con-

centrations exist in the eastern population; but, by and large, the population is

centered around Washington. Conceptually, the county can be viewed as having

the eastern portion devoted to resource production--forestry, mining, and

agriculture--while the area around Washington is the residential and comercial

center.

This seem to be the trend in development--with the townships in the eastern

portion of the county losing population, and most new development taking place

around Washington, especially between Broad Creek and Washington.

Although there has been no effort on the county level to influence devel-

opnent patterns, there have been few problem encountered with land use com-

patibility. The major problem which has resulted from unplanned development

has been unsightly riverfront development. Largely, this development has

occurred in a helter-skelter fashion to the detriment of the Pamlico River,
one of the county's most valuable resources. Areas which are likely to expe-

rience major changes in predominant land use are the areas north of Aurora and

in the vicinity of Pamlico Beach. Phosphate mining is scheduled to begin in

both of these areas in the neat future.

C. CURRENT PLANS, POLICIES, AND REGULATIONS

1. Plans and Policies

Transportation Plans - Beaufort County- has no transportation plans.

'The following is an analysis of the county's transportation

systems.

Roads and Hig

Primary roads in Beaufort County include U. S. 264 and N. C. 33,

providing east-west transportation, and U. S. 17, N. C. 32 and N. C. 305,

providing transportation -in a north7south.axi,s. 'Ihe,two principal routes

are U. S. 17 and U. S. 264 and, as such., are highest in priority for

inprovement. The State DOT.has -in its seven year plan,four-laning a por-

tion of U. S. 17 in Washington.

@Iany groups in the county.i,@'led primarily by the Chamber of Commerce,

have pushed for the -upgrading of U. S. 17 and U. S. 264 to four lanes.
While the-right-of-way has been purchasedoh U. S. 17, little progress

has been evidenced toward upgrading of these two vital highway routes.

In addition to the above primary routes, transportation in the

county is centered on secondary -roads which iace the county. There are

369 miles of paved secondary roads and 35S miles of unpaved secondary

roa. ds in the county.

JUTE

p 1;--w- G

Iio

BEAUFORT COUNTY

NORTH CAROLINA

TRANSPORTATION
J

MaP
m

The major obstacle to highway transportation in the county is the

Pamlico River. Local groups have supported a proposal for bridging the

river in the Bayview.area and thus providing an eastern link between the

northern and southern halves of the county. Those efforts have failed

and are unlikely to succeed in the future. Building of such a bridge

would be a major expense and is a project unlikely to be undertaken by

the State Department of Transportation. Any plan for the future develop-

ment of Beaufort County, in order to be realistic, must take into account

the highway transportation barrier created by the Pamlico River.

Rail Transportation.

Beaufort County is served by the Seaboard Coast Line and the Norfolk-

Southern Railroad. Seaboard Coast Line serves Washington with a branch

line. Norfolk-Southern serves Chocowinity, Pinetown and Washington with

a main line and has branch lines serving Belhaven, Pantego, Aurora and

the Texas Gulf Phosphate mining conplex. No passenger service is avail-

able.

Air Transportation

Beaufort,County has no commercial air service. The county is served

by four airports: Albert J. Ellis Airport (Jacksonville), Seymour Johnson

Air Force Base (Goldsboro), the.Simmons-Nott Airport (New Bern), and

Stallings Field (Kinston). Con=ter service can be obtained at Greenville

through Wheeler Airlines. Serving general aviation, Washington Municipal

Airport has three 4,500-foot paved runways and Belhaven has a 2,600-foot

grass strip. In 1973, 25 general aviation aircraft were based in the

county.

Trucking Companies

Beaufort County has one motor freight carrier terminal, Estes.

Motor freight carriers certified to stop in the county include Bell,

Carolina-Norfolk, Everett, Fleming, Helms, Hemingway, JNL, Jones,

McLean, New Dixie, Pilot, Northeast, Thurston., Virginia-Carolina and

Estes. Piggyback service is available with the nearest ramp in Green-

ville.

Water Transportation

Although the Pamlico River is the dominant physical feature in

Beaufort County, present water transportation is limited. A 12-foot

deep channel connects the City of Washington with the Intercoastal Water-

way. Bulk cargo is moved to and from the county over this route. The

major user is the Texas Gulf Phosphate operation, which transports

phosphate from the mine site to the State Port in Morehead City.

The possibility exists that the Pamlico River could be used more

for commuting purposes. Large numbers of people move daily in an east-

west direction in-the county,commuting to and from jobs. Some type of

mass transit might be,possibleusing the river. Hydrofoil boats are

uged in Europe today to turn rivers into highways for millions of people.

Such a system used in Beaufort County could use the Pamlico River to

join the county,rather than create a barrier.

Bus Service

Beaufort County is served by Carolina Trailways with a terminal

in Washington.

Conmiunity Facilities Plan - Beaufort County has no conprehensive com-

munity facility plan. Such a plan is presently being prepared for the

county by the Department of Natural and Economic Resources' Division of

Community Assistance. The plan will.examine the capital needs of the

county for a 20 year planning period and will establish a capital

budgeting process.

The Region Q Water @bnagemnt Plan,completed in 1975,examines water

and sewer needs of Beaufort County for a 50-year planning period. This

information is presented later in this plan.

Two 12011 areas have been designated in Beaufort County. One is

located in and around Belhaven,and the second covers Washington, Washing-..

ton Park, Choco winity and the surrounding area. Plans are being developed

for wastewater treatment in these areas. See the Belhaven and Washington

plans for more complete information on these 12011 areas.

Utility Extension Policies - Beaufort County has a policy for the exten-

sion of water and sewer lines. The policy establishes a formula based

on the tax value of the project. This policy has been used one time.

None of the current elected officials or employees of the county were

aware the policy existed.

Recreation Policy - With the advent of Revenue Sharing, the county began

making recreation grants available to local governments. In 1975 the

County Commissioners established a county recreation advisory committee

to assist the commissioners in determining recreation needs in Beaufort.

County. The current policy of the advisory committe.e and the county com-

missioners; is to continue making recreation grants to local communities.

Open Space Policies Beaufort County has no policy for the acquisition

or preservation of open space.

Prior Land Use Plans.- Beaufort County contracted with the North Carolina

Department of Conservation and Development in 1967 to prepare an economic

potential study and a land potential study. These studies provided a look

@26

at Beaufort County and its needs. As a result of the study, the county

planning board recomended the adoption of subdivisiaj@ regulations. The

proposal met stiff opposition, was permanently tabledY and, as a result,

the planning board disbanned. As a result, neither plan had any bene-

ficial impact on land development patterns in the county. The county

was without a plarming board until January, 1975.

Prior Land Use Policies - Beaufort County had no prior land use policies.
It has had industrial development policies which would have a signifi-

cant impact on land use patterns. In February, 1962, the county appro-

priated $5,000 to match state and federal funds for a survey of the

phosphate deposit in Be-aufort County.

In Nhy, 1962, the county adopted a resolution requesting the State to

postpone leasing the river bottoms" ... until such time as the survey and

study of phosphate deposits is conpleted and until a thorough investiga-

tion reveals what damage will be done to the river bottoms and .... how

the land,owners in Beaufort County will be affected..."

In June, 1962, another resolution was passed requesting that the state

pr,
ovide in any leases for the mining of phosphate or other minerals

under the bottom of the Pamlico and P Iungo Rivers reasonable safeguards

for the protection' '.of wildlife, fish, recreation and shore lines.

:Jn November,.1966; March,@1969; and Apr1l, 1969,@resolutions were-passed

endorsing a bridge-dike across the Pamlico River.

2. Local Regulations-

Counties in North Carolina have avai lable to them a broad range of regu-

latory powers which enable local goverment to influence land use decisions.

Below are listed a number of these regulations and their status in Beaufort

County.

Zoning Ordinance Beaufort County does not enforce a zoning ordinance

in any form.

Subdivision Regulations - Beaufort County does not enforce any sub-

division regulations. The county commissioners have recognized the

need for subdivision standards,inthe county and have requested that

the planning board prepare si*division regulations for consideration.

Floodway Ordinances --Beaufort County is not presently enforcing any

floodway ordinances. The county is under the emergency flood in-

surance program. Flood prone areas should be mapped by 1979. Follow-

ing mapping of the flood prone areas, the county will enforce flood-

way ordinances.

Building Codes - Beaufort County is presently enforcing the North

Carolina Plunbing and Electrical Codes. The county is not enforcing

any other form of building codes at this time.

Mobile Home and Travel Trailer Ordinance - Beaufort County passed an

ordinance in September, 1975,,establishing minimum standards for mobile

home and travel trailer parks. The ordinance also required tie-downs

on all mobile homes in the county.

Septic Tank Regulations - The Beaufort County Health Department enforces

septic tank regulations. These regulations are more stringent than

the regulations promulgated by the N. C. Department of Human Resources.

Historic District Regulations Beaufort County does not enforce any

historic district regulations. However, there is.a county historic

properties commission.

Nuisance Regulations Beaufort County has no nuisance regulations

which inpact land use patterns.

Dune Protection Ordinances Beaufort County has no dune protection

ordinances.

Sedimentation Codes The county has no sedimentation codes. The

Mobile Home & Travel Trailer Park Ordinance does requre that a sedimen-

tation control plan be filed with the plat. This provision will be

incorporated into future county ordinances, such as subdivision regu-

lations.

Environmental Impact Statement Ordinance While the county has no

EIS ordinanc4e* an EIS provision is included in the Mobile Home

and Travel Trailer Ordinance.

3. Federal and State Regulations

As can be seen above, Beaufort County enforces few regulations which

have a significant inpact on land use decision. Of more consequence are the

myriad of state and federal regulations which inpact on the citizens of

Beaufort County.

The state guidelines for preparation of these land use plans require that

these state and federal regulations be listed and discussed. The N. C.

Department of Natural and Economic Resources was to prepare such a listing

and.discussion for inclusion in their plan. At the date of this writing,

the listing has not been presented to local governments for inclusion into

the Plan.

III. MAJOR LAND USE ISSUES
(PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ACTIVITIES)

A. IDENTIFICATION AND ANALYSIS OF MAJOR.LAND USE ISSUES

The framework of this plan is the identification of major land use issues

and proposed courses of action to deal with the identified issues. In identi-

fying the major land use issues discussed in thi s plan, seven subject areas

were examined. These were: (1) the impact of population and economic trends;

,(2) the provision of adequate housing and other services; (3) phosphate mining;

(4) oth er industrial development; (5) agricu@ture, forestry and commercial

fishing; (6).Iocal control over environmentally sensitive areas; and (7)

recreation related development.
0 The issue of how fast and where growth would take place in Beaufort.County
was considered a major land use issue. While in the past Beaufort County.has.,

not lost a large portion of population like other rural.areas, there has been
0 a shift in population distribution within the county. Population has shifted
from the rural eastern portions of the county into the more urbanized area

around Washington. This is most evident in Long Acre Townshipin the area
0 between Washington and Broad Creek.
Beaufort County is projected to gain in populationover the next fifty years.

Is this growth to be encouraged to occur as rapidly as possible or will attempts

be made to control the rate of growth? The citizens of Beaufort County indi-

cated they wanted a slow, orderly.pace of growth. This would call for actions

by localgovernment to control the rate of growth in Beaufort County.

-Where should futuie growth be accommodated? If no action were taken by local

government, it is anticipated that the past trend of development being accom-

modated in the Washington area would continue. Most of this development is

located outside of the City ofWashington Planning and Zoning jurisdiction. No

action by local government would mean that patterns of conflicting land use would.

0 31

likely develop in the growth area. High density development relying on septic

tanks for sewage disposal would create water quality problems in the area.

The citizens of the county indicated that they would like to centergrowth

around the towns in the county. This concentrating of population will minimize

the cost of providing public services by local government. While a.majority of

future growth will probably occur in the-Nashington area, there was adesire by

the county to ensure that the.smaller towns such as,,Belhaven and Aurora remain

viable towns in order.to serve the population in their section of the,.county.

A second issue identified.as a major land use issue is that of protecting

the quality and natural setting of the county's waterways. The Pamlico and

Pungo Rivers and their.tributaries are considered the major asset of the county

by many people. The quality and natural setting of the county's waterways are

threatened in many ways.

Portions of the county's waterways are underlaid by phosphate deposits.

These deposits are controlled by the state. At the present time Texasgulf has

leased from the state mineral rights for a portion of the Pamlico River,that is

in front of its protessing plant. While there are presently no plans by Texas-

gulf to mine thephosphate under the river, the maintenance of.the.lease agree-
ments with the 9tate IeAves the possibility open that they may be mined in the

future. Open pit mining of.the river would involve diking off portions of the

river in order that a dry pit could be obtained.

The citizens of the county were concerned that the mining of the river

would alter the natural-setting.of the county's waterways-and that the mining

would have adverse long-term environmental impacts. It was felt that the county

should register with the State opposition to mining of the river.

Another project which threatens the quality and natural setting of the

river is a proposal to dam the Pamlico River. This is a proposal which has

surfaced several times. The-proposed project, which would not actually dam the
river,, but would create-two je,tties with a gap in the middle to allow a.contin-
uous flow of water, is, perceived as having several benefits., Its proponents

state that the project would (1) provide flood protection to large areas of the

county, (2) ensure a large body of fresh water for the development of the Wash-

ington area, (3) provide a transportation link across the river in the Bath areal

and (4) provide fresh water that could be used by the phosphate mining concerns

both in processing and to.recharge the fresh water aquifer affected by.Ahe Mining

process. Opponents of the project feel that the benefits are overstated and

that the environmental impacts,,.such as destruction of portions of the estuary,

would make the project an environmental disaster.

The damming of the Pamlico River is backed by such groups as the.Washington

Chamber of Commerce. However,, a.majority of the citizens in the county oppose

the project. The County Commissioners had considered positive and negative

impacts of such a project.and feel that more study of the proposal is necessary

before it can be determinedwhethe-r.the benefits outweigh the cost.

The water quality of the county's waterways is threatened by development in

the county. Much of the development occurring in Beaufort.County relies on

septic tanks for sewage disposal,.despite the fact that few soils in the county

are suitable for septic tanks. The result is pollution of our shallowground

water and surface waters.

The Division of.Environmental Management, N. C. Department of Natural and

Economic Resources,, hasidentified four areas in Beaufort County where there is

concern over pollution of surface waters from development relying on septic tanks.

These areas are:

(1) The north shore of the Pamlico.River from,Washington Park to Broad
Creek. This area.has very dense development which is unsewered.
There is probably some direct discharge into the waterways., Marinas,
boat basins and heavy boat traffic on Broad Creek constitute a poten-
tial problem. This whole area presents potentially severe problems.

(2) Bath - There is moderately dense development on Bath and Back Creeks
.which is unsewered. There is pressure for additional development and
marinas. The soil.and water tableis.generally suitable for septic
tanks but continuing development poses a potential for water quality
degradation-.

(3), North shore of the Pamlico River below Bath - There are isolated
po,ckets.of dense development with increasing pressure for additional
development. The soil is marginal to unsuitable with.a high water
table in some areas.

(4) Chocowinity Bay Area - This area is developing with pressure for ad-
ditional-.development. Soil is generally suitable for septic tanks.
Should not create water quality problems if density is controlled.

The North Carolina Board of Water and Air Resources classifies.all streams

in the sfate as to their best usage. This,in effect,establishes water quality

standards. They provide a'guide-in determining what level of treatment is

necessary prior to dischar ge of waste into the streams. A brief explanation

of the "best.usagell for which waters in each class must be protected is given

as follows:

Fresh Waters
Class A-I - Suitable as a source of water supply for drinking, culinary,
or food processing purposes after treatment by approved dis-
infection only, and any other usage requiring waters of
lower quality.

Class A-II Suitable as a source of water supply for drinking, culinary,
or food processing purpqses after approved treatment equal
to coagulation, sedimentation, filtration, and disinfection,
etc., and any other usage requiring waters of lower quality.

Class B Suitable for outdoor bathing, boating and wading, and any
other usage requiring.waters of lower quality.

Class C Suitable for fish and wildlife propagation. Also suitable for
boating, wading, and other uses requiring waters of lower
quality.

Class,D Suitable for agriculture and industrial cooling and process
water supply, fish.survival,.navigation,, and any other usage,
except fishing, bathing, or as a source of water supply for
drinking, culinary or food processing purposes.

Tidal Salt Waters
Class SA Suitable for shellfishing-for market purposes and any other
usage requiring waters of lower quality.

Class SB Suitable for bathing and any other usage.except shellfishing
for market purposes.
Class SC Suitable for fishing, and.any other usage except'bathing and
shellfishing for market purposes.

Swamp Waters. r-Those waters which are topographically located so as to
generally have low velocities-@and certain other character
istics which are different 'from adjacent streams draining
steeper topography are designated by the letters.11SW' in
the schedule.

The large number of streams in Beaufort County and the wide range of class-

ifications exhibited by those streams make it very difficult to map the streams

and code them as to classification. For this reasonl a,listing of the streams

in the Tar-Pamlico basin as pertains to Beaufort County is provided. This

list is contained in the North Carolina Administrative code.

A final type of development which poses a problem to the county's water-

ways is marina development. There is-ificreas.ing pressure for this type of

development in Beaufort County. The county commissioners are being asked by

groups such as the U.,S:, Army,.Corps of Engineers to-Comment on applications

for permits for marina developments. Itis difficultif not impossible,,for

the county to respond without.having a stated policy. Beaufort County needs

to develop a policy on marina.development in the county.

The.most controversial land use issue discussed was the issue of phosphate

mining. Public opinion was divided on what the county's posture should.be
0 toward this.industry which has such@a large impact on the local economy, land

use patterns and environment.

0 3S

Large tracts of potentially recoverable phosphate reserves are owned by

Texasgulf, North Carolina Phosphate, FMC, and Weyerhaeuser. Also, 10,000 acres

of state-owned land in the Pamlico estuary are under lease for potential ex-
traction. Open cast mining is currently being employed to recover thick high
-grade ore in the Lee Creek.area.. Expansions of operating plants and.other
developments are underway. Hydraulic mining thru bore holes has been .t6sted,

and plans to develop some deeper high grade ores in the Pungo River'Pamlico

River peninsula area are underway.

Mining and reclamation regulations involved with ore extraction are under

Ahe auspicies of the Department of Natural and Economic Resources of.North

Carolina as set out in the Mining Act of 1971. The agency is anply staffed

with competent professionals to regulate the operations.

The ground water* and surface water usage involved with the phosphate.

mining and.processing operations are likewise monitored and regulated by the

Department of Natural and@Economic Resources under the Water Use Act and Well

Construction Acts of 1967. Theseacts regulate depressurization of the aquifer

by the mining companies. This depressurization affects the water level in

wells and may cause salt water intrusion into.fresh water aquifers.

*Groundwater Water standing in or moving through the soil and underlying strata.

Phosphate mining and,more im@ortantly,the processing of the recovered ore

is an important industry of Beaufort County and of the state. The current

operations are one of the largest of its kind in the world,and future develop-

ments promise much largerestablishments. The industry is directly related to

agriculture whereby phosphate-is an absolutely essential@mineral,used along with

nitrogen and potash,to enhance the growth of c rops. With the increasing United

States and world demand for food., the usage of phosphate,fertilizers will con-

tinue to expand while sources of theraw materials diminish. The long-range

projections of the phosphate industry in Beaufort County are for steady growth

and security to provide quality employment foradditional work forces for many

decades. Currently, over $13 million is annually pumped into the local economy

thru salaries, property taxes and procurements. Revenue from property taxes from

Texasgulf phosphate operations amounts to -30% of the entire county.property

tax returns. Expansions will,in tum.,increase these revenues,subsequently in-

creasing the affluence of the entire population of the county.

Regulationaof. mining activities has been a function of state government

to.,date. The state has a mining act which regulates the mining itself, and

regulations concerning the amount of water which can be withdrawn to depres-

surize the aquifer so that mining can take place. Local government can, and

shoul&, also play a regulatory role in assuring that the mining can continue

and to. as,@ure that the continuing mining does not disrupt desired features with---,

in the county.

Several existing population centers are located over phosphate deposits.

Most of the people living in,these centers do not want their communities dis-

rupted and dislocated by mining activities. Therefore, the Town of Aurora,

Bath, Pantego, and Belhaven should take steps to zone within their territorial

jurisdiction to prohibit mining activities from encroaching. The county should

BEAUFORT COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
Map 4 -------- --- WMI,
PHOSPHATE DEPOSITS
A
I m.."'

PHOSPHATE DEPOSITS (MINABLE BY OPEN PIT)
PHOSPHATE DEPOSITS (NOT 4INABLE BY OPEN P
IT MAY 19

institute zoning to protect unincorporated population concentrations such as

Bayview.

Many citizens are,concerned that open pit mining will begin on the

north side,of the Pamlico in the Bath area. Neither N. C.-Phosphate or Texas-

gulf, the two companies mining or planning to mine by the open pit method, have

any plans to mine on the north side.of the river at present. It is felt that

mining in that area in the near future is unlikely due to (1) the fragmented

land ownership pattern in the area,..(2) the presence of population centers that

could*be protected by zoning and (3) the location of process plants on the south

side of the-river which would present transportation problems.

The land underlying the rivers is under state control and the state will

make the decision on whether or not to allow mining in these areas. However,

.due to local desires to protect the integrity of the county's waterways,

Beaufort County should notify the state of its opposition to mining of the rivers

unless competent studies demonstrate that such mining can be accomplished with-

.out permanently changing the character of the rivers or creeks.

Another major land use issue was industrial development. In order to

achieve the growth policy stated earlier, it will be necessary to selectively

recruit industries that meet certain'needs in the local economy. The citizens

of the county desired to recruit highquality industries which would meet the

labor demands of the area. Ideally, these industries should utilize local

-products.such as agricultural goods or fish products, thereby strengthening

the existing economy.

The fifth major land use issue identified dealt with agriculture,

forestry and conmercial fishing. These industries, which are dependent upon

the county's productive natural resources, have historically played a major

role in Beaufort County.

'The estimated cash farm income for Beaufort County in 1975 was

$56,975,841.42. As you can see, this is an important segment of the local

economy. If agriculture is to continue to prosper it is important-that.the@

impact of local goverment's actions on agriculture is evaluated. In develop-

inga long range development plan for the county, prime agriculture must be
protected. Bu t,.be:rore.it can be protected, it must be identified. Beaufort

County should begin a program of identifying its prime agricultural land.

Once identified, the county can take actions to protect*it.

Much of the agriculture that is conducted in Beaufort County ishampered
by a high water table, and it is necessary to drain the land to farm it.

Farmers in the county have encountered increasing difficulties in securing the

permits necessary for drainage, particularly if.the drainage canals are to

traverse marsh grass. It is essential that the process to obtain these permits

be streamlined.to insure that minimum delays are encountered.by.a farm seeking

to drain his land. One avenue suggested would be to allow the local Soil and

Water Conservation District-administer permits for drainage.

In addition to agriculture, forestry and commercial fishing were found

to be important uses of productive natural resources. Local goverment is

limited in its impact on these two industries. Beaufort County should seek

to ensure that the natural resources that these.industries are dependent on,

Temain in abundant supply.

Beaufort County has a number of enviromentally sensitive areas which

will be-designated as Areas, of Environmental Concern by the CRC. The CAMA

legislation allows local governments to issue permits for minor development

in AEC's. The citizens of Beaufort County feel that control should remain on

the local level and therefore favored enforcement of permits for minor develop-

ment in.AEC's by the county.

In addition, it was felt that the county's development plaris should seek

to protect these AEC's.. For exanple, it was felt that while Goose Creek State

Park would.be an AEC that the land adjoining it should be protected to ensure

that development occurring in the vicinity of the park would be compatible with

The final major land use issue identified by the county was the need to

deal with recreational development. Beaufort County's major attraction, the
natural environment and the activities it supports (hunting, fishing, boating,

and camping) creates additional development pressures. People outside of

Beaufort County enjoy these activities as well. As a result second homes,

marinas, campgrounds and camercial establishments are built to cater to those

who visit. Adding to these pressures is the establishment of a state park

at Upper Goose Creek, further development of Historic Bath and activities

related to the historicsite. These attractions will mean more people'coming

to Beaufort County. Even the ferry between Swan Quarter and Ocracoke will

mean more.people coming through the county. If the growth that occurs is not

guided, then that growth could destroy the very thing that created it the.

first-rate natural environment.

B. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED IN THE DEVELMENT OF GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

A number of alternatives to the selected goals were considered and

rejected. These included:

1) Growth A no growth alternative and rapid growth alternative were

considered. Both were rejected as incompatible with the

public's desires. It was felt that rapid growth would not

enable the retention of the quality of life desired by most
41
citizens. The no growth alternative was viewed as unrealistic

in view of the development pressures facing the county.

2) Population Distribution - A laissez-faire alternative and a dispersed

population alternative were considered. The laissez-faire

approach would result in the additional development occur-

ring only in the Washington area and possibly to a small

extent in Ailrora. This would be counter to the county's de-

sire to maintain the present towns in the county as viable

conmmities able to serve the surrounding areas. It would

also result in undesirable development patterns in the

Washington area. The dispersed population altemative would

have scattered population throughout the county with the

adverse impacts of higher service.cost and inefficient land

use patterns. The alternative chosen,.to@center future

growth among existing towns throughout the county, would allow

for more efficient utilization of service and a more efficient

land use pattern. It would also protect agricultural land

from encroachment of urban-type development.

3) Phosphate Mining - The phosphate mining issue was a complex issue

with many facets. Alternatives considered but rejected were

(a) no action by the county leaving the issue to be decided

by the state, (b) land use regulation which would have pro-

tected potential phosphate deposits from incompatible

development, and (c) favoring mining at all environmental

cost. The question of the state and national interest

in the phosphate deposit was.addressed. Local governments

role. is in monitoring permit letting by state and federal

agencies. Local regulations should be used.in the event

state and federal regulations,fail to represent local

interest.

4) Other Major Land Use Issues - The remaining land use issues were clear

cut. The only other major alternative considered was to do

nothing at the local-level.

5) Housing and Other Services - It was felt that housing was not a

major land use issue in Beaufort County. The private market

and public housing authorities are meeting the demand in

the County.* Other governmental services we-. re not-perceived

as major land use issues but@as@tools to,be used by local

government.in guiding growth.
6) Th&-Pr6t&dt:ion._..of Cultural 'and His'tor:ic'a'l'.R6s6ur'ces_ protection

of-cultural andhistorical resources Wasnot--identified as

a m4jor,land use issue., The., Quitural,and,historical heri-
ew'ed.by tIhe.citize'"
ta'ges are vi ns'a':s'v'al'uable' resources.

Beaufort County has-a very active Arts Council;.and Historic

P@operties.Commission. Thosegroups have.been successful
in protecting the coLuit@"s cultural, and historical resources.

Plans for, and'control of growth in-the,couaty should include

provisions for conserving these resources.

C. GOALS FOR DEVELOPMENT

Goals provide an ideal or.target for which to aim. The following goals

and objectives were established for Beaufort County. The goal is a broad,

general area or issue such as how fast growth should occur. The objectives

listed under that goal describe specifics such as where growth should,occur.

When taken together, these goals and objectives draw a.picture of what Beaufort

County should look like in the future. Your elected officials will constantly

refer to these goals while considering matters related to the future growth

and development of-Beaufort County. The goals and objectives for Beaufort

County are:

GOAL: To guide growth in Beaufort County so that it occurs in a slow,
orderly manner.

OBJECTIVES:

-To center future growth around the towns in the county.
-To-,,zone areas of rapid and intensive growth throughout the
county and along major thoroughfares to ensure that future
growth occurs in an orderly manner.
-Public facilities, such as water and sewer, schools, etc.
will be provided in a manner that.encourages development
to occur in areas@best suited for development.
County regulations will considex natural constraints on
development such as soil limitati6ns, fragile areas, etc.
-Building codes, subdivision regulations and other minimum
standards will be enforced to ensure that the development
that takes place in Beaufort County"is of high quality.
-Industries will be recruited in a manner consistent with
this goal.
-f h" h county -'should
-Pl,aj@hi!ft or cdntr6f@of grOwt in t 0
include provisionsfor conserving valuable cultural and
hist orlt@l!+&sources,.-
;.;-,:.To seek, the@. upgrading.,qf @higbways..U.,)-,S. 17 -264.-

II. GOAL: To protect the quality and natural s etting of the county's
waterways,

OBJECTIVES:
-To oppose any land using projec t or development such'as mining or
damming of the river which cannot be shown by competent studies
to have.no,harmful impact on the natural setting environmental
quality of our waterways.
To discourage location of industries or development in Beaufort
County which would be detrimental to water quality.
-To develop local regulations which would ensurethat waterfront
development does not constitute visual pollution or contribute
to water quality problems.
-To develop a policy regarding water-based recreation development,
such as marinas.

III. GOAL: To encourage the.further development of phosphate mining while
ensuring that the natural environment and lifestyle of Beaufort
County is protected.

OBJECTIVES:
-To register with the State, which regulates.mining, the county's
desire to ensure that the environment is protected during and
after mining activities. .
-To encourage that open-pit mining remain on the south side of
the river for the foreseeable future.
-To oppose mining of the rivers.and creeks until a competent study
can be conducted as to the ' act on such mining..
imp
-To zone existing unincorporated residential areas to protect them
from undesirable land uses.
-To encourage incorporated towns to exercise land use controls
to protect their residential areas from undesirable land uses,
-Mining should not be allowed to jeopardize the ground water
supply of the area.

IV. GOAL: To encourage quality industries to locate in Beaufort County.

OBJECTIVES:
-To recruit.industries at a pace consistent with the county
growth policy.
-To recruit industries which would utilize local products such
as.agricultural goods.and fish products.

-To recruit industries to meet the specific labor requirements of
various areas of the county.
-To identify markets within reach of Beaufort County, available
labor and resources to aid in industrial recruitment.

V. GOAL: To develop the agriculturalY forestry, and commercial fishing
sectors of our local economy.

OBJECTIVES:
-To identify and protect our prime agricultural land.
-To remove unnecessary impediments to maintaining agricultural
drainage canals and other conservation practices.
-To continue and further develop extension services such as
.agricultural education, Agricultural Extension Service and
Soil Conservation 96Yvice.
-To stress the importance of proper forest management.
z
-To protect habitats essential to fish production with
reasonable consideration for farm drainage,

VI. GOAL: To maintain local control over environmentally sensitive
areas and implementationof the,plan.

OBJECTIVES:
-To issue permits locally for minor development in areas
designated as Areas of Environmental Concern by the Coas'tal
Resources Commission.
-To design County development plans so as to protect environmentally
sensitive areas.
-To protect Goose Creek.State Park from conflicting land uses.
-To insure that local desires and concerns are considered by..
State and Federal agencies.
-To insure administration of local matters by local people
familiar with local problems.
-To speed the issuance of permits for desirable projects.

VII. GOAL: To ensure that recreational developments such as camping areas,
marinas., travel trailer camps, second home developments, etc.,
will occur in a manner that will protect the natural amenities
that attracted such development.
OBJECTIVES:

-To establish and enforce minimum standards for recreation-based
development.
-To regulate corridors leading to recreation-based developments
so as to avoid congestion, unsightly construction, and unnecessary
alteration of natural amenities.

D. PROCESS USED IN DETEPHINING GOALS

A process known as the nominal group process was used to determine

Beaufort County's goals. These goals were determined at a workshop held in

August, 197S, and attended by planning board members, elected officials, and

members of the Citizen Advisory Council.

Upon arriving at the workshop, participants were provided with the results

of the efforts to obtain citizen.input into the planning process. Results of

the county-wide survey and small group discussions were to be considered in

conjunction with the results of their own personal interviews of the county's

.populace., The participants were divided into small groups to identify and

to discuss issues facing Beaufort County. These issues.were prioritized in

each group.

Following discussion by,each group, the issues from each group.were..

listed for display. All ofthe participants then meet to discuss the.identi-

fiedl.issues. Following this discussion, the issues were once again prioritized

by the group as a whole,

Staff then took the.results,of the workshop and grouped compatible issues'

into broader headings entitled goals. These goals @vere then submitted to the

planning board for action.,

For a detailed discussion of how this process fits into the overall

public participation process, see the following section.

E. SECURING PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

Beaufort County's public participation program was developed by its

Planning Board generally following the suggestions outlined in the. Coastal

Resources Commission's "Handbook on Public Participation." In addition.to

the steps outlined in the "Handbook", there was extensive use of the nominal

'group process. This process centered on small-groups identifying count land

use issues.

The first phase of the program was to inform local citizens about the

CAMA program. The local newspaper, the Daily News, with a circulation of

9,112, gave extensive coverage-to the Planning-Board's activities, In

addition,,, a number of articles related to CAMA were published. The local

television and radio stations,also provided coverage of CAMA activities and

over 31000 CANA leaflets were distributed.

While the informational process was.evolving, the Planning Board began

making a concerted effort to provide avenues for local,citizens to input into

the planning process. Basically three@different avenues were provided. They

were (1) personal interviews, (2) surveys, and (3) workshops and public

meetings. An undetermined number of personal interviews were conducted by

elected officials, planning board members and members of the Planning.Board's

Citizen Advisory Council. This face-to-face contact enabled a two-way flow

of information about the issues facing Beaufort County,

During the spring of 197S, approximately 3,000 questionnaires were dis-

tributed in Beaufort County...These questionnaires asked questions related-to

local problems, level of.local-government expenditures and a number'of questions

regarding development and environmental quality.

In addition to the personalinterviews and questionnaires, a number of

workshops and public meetings-were held throughout the county.

Following these efforts, a day-long goal setting workshop was held. At

this workshop, planning board members, elected officials, and members of the

.Citizen Advisory Council established a comprehensive set of goals for Beaufort

County. These goals e stablished the framework for a draft plan that was to

be submitted to the CRC by November 23, 197S.

During and after discussion of the November 23 draft, public interest

in the plan ignited. A number of goals in the plan, particularly those related

to.mining, generated a great deal of controversy.

Simultaneous with this rising debate in the,county over the goals, the

CRC was reviewing the March 23,draft plan, In@their review the CRC felt that

the plan did not address sufficiently the negative impacts of mining and that

theissues facing the county needed to be better defined.

In response to the debates-locally and the CRC review, the planning

board identified four major land.use issues facing the county and scheduled

three public hearings to enable the public to express their views on these

major land use issues. The-issues were 1) mining, 2) growth, 3) water

quality and 4) land use regulations.

These public hearings generated a great deal of participation. Public

opinion on the issues was often.divided. The planning board attempted to

develop new goals relating to the major land use issues. These were agreed

upon and then staff developed arevised plan using the new goals as the

framework for the plan.

The Planning Board held'a public.hearing on the plan in April and recom-

mended it to the county commissioners. The county commissioners held a

public hearing on May 10, 1976 and adopted a land use plan prior to the

May 21 CAMA deadline.

To what extent was the.pub@lic participation process successful?. It

would appear that the initial attempts to obtain meaningful public partici-

pation were a failure.. This can be attributed mainly to public apathy.. De.-

sP11--te efforts by the planning board to impress upon the public the-significance
+
of the CAMA legislation, the public did not feel that it would affect them

personally and that there was no great need to become involved.

Meaningful public participation occurred only after preparation ofthe
01
November 23 draft. Goals set forth in that document were strongly opposed by

individuals in the county. They served as targets which could be criticized
and debated. The resulting debateenabled interested groups such.as the r
Pamlico-Bath.Preservation Foundation to mobilize people to ensure that their

opinions were represented.

The final plan does.not represent the concensus of opinion on the major

issues - for no concensus exists. It does represent what the planning.board

and county commissioners feel is the most reasonable course of action., a course

that.will benefit the whole county. Ideally, the issues raised in this plan

will continue to be debated and that free and open discussion of the issues

by all interested groups will result in,decisions which will prove right

when our children examine our actions fifty years hence.

IV. CONSTRAINTS ON DEVELOPMENT

A. LAND POTENTIAL

Physical Limitations

a. Hazard Areas

Hazard areas can be either man-made or natural. Beaufort County

has few man-made hazard areas. Possibly.of greatest danger are above

ground tanks used for storage of flammable liquids. No large concentra-

tion of these exist in Beaufort County. Caution should be exercised in

development of sites imediately adjacent to any existing tanks, Future

land use regulation should address the problem of storage tanks..

TWO types of natural hazard areas exist in Beaufort County., flood

hazard areas and shoreline erodible areas, The shoreline of the Pungo

and. Pamlico River have a high probability of excessive erosion occurring,

thereby endangering development in the area.

Large areas of Beaufort County are subject to flooding. The

flooding is largely in conjunction with hurilcanes or severe winter

storms, Beaufort County has taken steps to come under the National

Flood Insurance Program. Once mapping has been.completed the county will

adopt and enforce regulations to control development in flood hazard

areas.

b. Soil Limitations

Soil limitations in Beaufort County will determine where, and to

what extent future growth can occur. While it is possible, from an

engineering point of view.,.to carry on almost any a .ctivity or-develop-

ment in any type of soil, the.soils can present problems that, for

economic reasons, are.impossible to overcome.
The* following map examines the soil associations',in Beaufort

County,

The accompanying legend list on the limitations encountered in each

soil association.

c. Water Supply Areas

There is only one water supply area identified by the N. C.

Department of Human Resources in Beaufort County. That is the Tranters

Creek Watershed.which serves the City of Washington as a water.source.

Since the watershed rep-resents a source of potable water for-Washington,

any loss or serious detriment to the area would have serious public

health implications. Such a loss would also have a significant adverse

financial impact.

Uncontrolled development within the watershed would cause signifi-

cant changes in the runoff patterns and would affect the quantity of

water available as a raw water supply. Such development would also

adversely affect water qualityby.,introducing a wide variety of.pollu-

tants from homes, businesses, or industries, either through.discharge

or surface runoff into the water supply.

d. Steep Slopes

Steep slopes for the purpose of this plan are definedas.areas

where the predominant slope exteeds twelve percent. The only areas in

Beaufort County which could be defined in this manner are the cliffs

and high banks along the south side of the Pamlico.River. These cliffs

and high banks are constantly threatened by erosion and any development

.occurring too close to these areas could be threatened.

2. Fragile Areas

Many areas exist in coastal North Carolina which are important

economically, environmentally and aesthetically, yet can be easily-

destroyed by inappropriately or poorly planned development. These areas.

in Beaufort County include coastal.wetlands., estuarine and public

trust waters., areas that sustain Temnant specie s, scenic areas and

archaeological and historic sites,

Wetlands, estuarine and public trust waters, areas that sustain

remnant species and some historic sitesare to be given particular

attention as to their constraint on development.

a. Coastal Wetlands

Beaufort County has. a number of coastal wetlands (marshes)

located along the.Pamlico and.Pungo Rivers and their tributaries.

This marshland type contributes to the detritus supply necessary

to the highly productive estuarine system essential to North Carolina's

economically valuable commercial and sports fisheries.

The higher marsh types offer quality wildlife and waterfowl

habitat depending on the biological and.physical conditions of the

marsh- The vegetative diversity in the higher marshes. usually supports

a greater diversity of' wildlife types than the limited habitat of the

low tidal marsh. This marshland type also serves as an important

deterrent to shoreline erosion especially in those marshes containing

heavily rooted species, The dense system of rhizomes and roots of

Juncus roemerianus are highly resistant to erosion. In addition,, the

higher marshes are effective sediment traps.

b. Outer Banks and Dunes

Beaufort County has no outer banks or dunes.

c. Ocean Beaches and-Shorelines.

Beaufort County has no ocean beaches and shorelines..

d. Estuarine Waters and Public Trust Waters

Estuarine waters are defined in G.S. 116-229(n) (2) as, "all the

water of the Atlantic Ocean within the boundary of North Carolina and

all the waters of the bays, sounds, rivers, and tributaries thereto

seaward of the dividing line between coastal fishing waters and inland

-.fishing waters, asset forth-.in an agreement adopted by the Wildlife
Resources Commission and t@e Department.of Conservation and Development.
C
filed with the Secretary of Stateltentitled 'Boundary Lines, North

.Carolina Commercial Fighing -.Inland-Fishing Waters, revised March 1,

1965,111 or as.it may be subsequently 'revised bythe Legislature.

Public trust are-as are.defined through the CAMA Planning Guide-

lines as "All-waters of the Atlau@lc Ocean and the lands thereunder
from the mean high water m@rk to the seaward limit of State,ju'ris-

diction; all natural bodies-of water subject to measurable lunar tides

and lands thereunder to the mean high water mark; all navigable natural

bodies of water and lands thereunder to the mean-or ordinary high.water

mark as the case may be, except privately owned lakes having no public

access; all waters in artificially created bodies of water in which

exists significant public fishing resources or other public resources,

which are accessible to the public by navigation from bodies of water-

in which the public has rights of.navigation; all waters in artificially

created bodies of water in which the public hasacquired rights by

prescription, custom, usage, dedication or any other means. In deter-

mining whether the public has acquired rights in artificially created
bodie,s of water*, the following factors shall be considered: (1) the
use of the body of water by the public;.(ii) the length of time the

public has used the area; (iii) the value of public resources in the

body of water; (iv) whether the public.resources in.the body of water

are mobile to the extent that they can move into naturallbodies of
water; (v) whether the crea'tion.of the-artificial body of water.required

permission from the State; and (vi) the value of the body of water to.

.the public for navigation iTom...one public area to another public area.

While estuarine waters.and public. trust areas are treated separa-

tely in the State Guidelines, they will be considered as one for the

purpose of this plan. The distinction drawn between them in..the guide-

lines is an artificial one and has no basis other than as a political

division between the camercial and sport.fisheries intere st. .,.The,

significance of both areas is identical as are the appropriate land uses.

The estuarines of any-river system dre among the most productive

natural ewvironments of North Carolina. They not only support valuable

commercial and sports fisheries, but are a1so-utilized for comercial

navigation, recreation and aesthetic purposes, The high level of

commercial and sports fisheries and.the aestheti.c,appeal of coastal

North Carolina is dependent upon the protection and sustained quality

of our estuarine and river systems.

e. CoS21ex Natural Areas

Complex natural areas are defined.as areas that, have,remained

essentially unchanged by human activity. The Planning Board does not

identify any areas in Beaufort County as complex natural areas,

f. Areas Sustaining Remnant Species

Both the American alligator and the red-cockaded woodpecker are

listed as endangered species in North Carolina, and both.have recently

recorded occurrence in Beaufort County. No recent sightings of the

bald eagle or the peregrine falcon are known. The Atlantic sturgeon,

which is considered to be rare., and the short-nosed sturgeon which is

classed as.endangered possibly occur in the Pamlico River.

9. Areas Containing Unique Geological Formations

Beaufort County has no areas containing unique geological for-

mation,

h. Registered Natural Landmarks

Beaufort County has no registered natural landmarks.

i. Archaeological and Historic Sites

Forty-eight-archaeological or historic sites have been identified

in Beaufort County. Six of these.are registered on the National

environmental concern. The remaining 42 sites possibly have as much

local significance as those listed on the National Register. The

County should encourage that these historic sites be retained and

that adjacent development be-compatible with the sites. Map S,,,'locates

the historic sites which are listed on Table 13.

SEE T 2

SEE NO E 1
0" 4i.

BEAUFORT COUNTY-'-,,

NORTH CAROUNA
Ma@ - S

HISTORIC SITES
(Numbers Keyed To Table)
140TE 1: Bath Historic Site Numbers 4, 8, 11, 16, 19,\3,@,, 8, 45
NOTE 2: Washington Historic Site Numbers 5, 21, 28, 30,

Table 13 INVENTORY, OF 'HISTORIC *AREAS BEAUFORT COUNTY

Map No.
or
Letter Name Type of Area Location Description Present Use

1 Archbell Point Historic Bath Location of Seca on Texasgulf, Inc.
Site (Aboriginal) John White's map Horse Farm
-(private)

2 Back Creek Site Pre-historic Bath Midden layer has been located Private farm
(Aboriginal)
.. ............ I....................

3 .-Bath Creek Site Pre-historic Bath Sherds and flint fragments Private farm
(Aboriginal) have been located
. .......................

U1 4 Bath Historic Historic Bath In 1705 Bath became the first Town
District (Commercial- incorporated town in N. C.
(Entered in Political) Cary's Rebellion (1708-1711)
National Reg took place in the vicinity.
ister of In 1744 and 1752, Colonial
ni@storic Assembly met here; and three
Places colonial governors made their
homes in Bath. The town con-
tains St. Thomas Church
(ca. 1734), the oldest church
building in the state. Other
old homes include the Palmer-
Marsh House (ca.1750) and the
Van Der Veer House (ca.1790).

Table 1@,_:_(Cofttinaod) INVENTORY'OF HISTORIC'AREAS* 9EAUFORT COUNTY

Map No.
or
Letter Name Type,of*Area .Location Description Present Use

5 Beaufort County Historic Washington Constructed in 1786 when the Courthouse
Courthouse (Architectural) county seat was moved from
(Entered in Bath to Washington, this court-
National Regis- house has been continuously
ter o=istoric used for its original purpose.
Present structure built in
1913 in Neo-Classical style.

6 Blounts Creek Pre-Historic Chocowinity Potsherds found together with Private homes
Site (Aboriginal) a shallow humus

7 Bonner House Historic Ca.1835,.two-story frame house Restored by
(Entered in (Architectural) with exterior and interior Historic Bath
National'Regis- chimneys, one-story veranda, Commission
ter of Hisf3ric and a number of outbuildings. Oscar Smith
7ra_ce_sT_ Lots originally owned by John Foundation
Lawson. Part of Lawson House
foundation still present.

8 Broad Creek Pre-Historic Long Acre Shreds have been located Salvation Army
Site (Aboriginal) C4-""Site

9 Buzzard Hotel Historic Bath Circa 1850-1860. Operated as Private
(Comercial) an ordinary inn. residence

10 Carrow House Historic Bath Late 18th Century. One-story Private home
(Architectural) frame house with a shed porch.

0 0 0

Table 13 (Continued) INVENTORY'OF'HISTORIC AREAS BEXJFORT COUNTY

Map No.
or
Letter Name D26 of Area Location Description Present Use
11 Chocowinity Pre-Historic Chocowinity Site of an Indian village or Private
Site (Aboriginal) dwelling area

12 Core Point Historic Richland John Lawson, first Survey- Private homes and
Site (Aboriginal) General of North Carolina, summer homes
located the Core Indians
at this site.

13 Fort Hill Historic Chocowinity CiTca 1860. Site of Private homes
U'l Site Confederate batteries on
Pamlico River used hAiege
of Washington, North-Carolina,
in 1863.

14 Fort Hill Pre-Historic Chocowinity Site of an Indian village Private homes
Site (Aboriginal)

15 Glebe House Historic Bath 1762, two-story frame house Rectory
(Architectural, with fanlights in the gable
Religious) ends. Built to serve as the
rectory for St. Thomas
Episcopal Church,

16 Graveyard Pre-Historic Pantego Site of an Indian village Private farm
Point Site (Aboriginal)

17 Gum Point Pre-Historic Bath Aboriginal materials found Private farm
Site (Aboriginal)

Table 13 (Continued) INVENTORY'OF'HISTORIC AREAS BEAUFORT COUNTY

Map No.
or
Letter Name Type Of Area Lociii8ii Description Present Use
18 Handy's Point Historic Bath Site of Secoitan village. Private homes
Site (Aboriginal.)

19 Hassell Site Pre-Historic Bath Sherds have been located Private farm
(Aboriginal)
....... ......

20 Haven Varehouse Historic Washington Ca.1776. One of the four Private storage
and Fowle Ware- (Commercial- original warehouses built in area
house Military) Washington to handle the West
Indies trade. Used as a
quartermaster depot and
Confederate and Union prisons
during the Civil War

21 Hunter's Bridge Pre-Historic Bath Evidence of Indian village Private farm
Site (Aboriginal)

22 Jarvis Site Pre-Historic Richland A small midden has been Private homes
(Aboriginal) located

23 Kirby Grange Historic Bath Early 18th Century. Home of Private home
Site (Political) Christopher Gale, first Chief and farm
Justice of North Carolina

24 Lawson Shore Pre-Historic Bath Midden materials have been Private farm
Site (Aboriginal) fomd

Table 13 (Continued) ......... INVENTORY'OF'HISTORIC AREAS BEAUFORT COUNTY

Map No.
or
Letter Name . . . D]@e of Area' Description --Present Use

25 McGowan Site Pre-Historic Bath Sherds; have been located Private farm
(Aboriginal)

26 Maul's Point Pre-Historic Chocowinity Possible site of an Indian Private farm and
Site (Aboriginal) village sumer homes
.......... ....

27 Mayo Law Historic Washington No known date Law office
Office (Political)

28 Moore's Beach Pre=Historic Bath Midden, marked by black Sumer homes and
Site (Aboriginal) humus and shell lenses, private beach
. ............I................... has,been Ilocated

29 Myers House Historic Washington Ca.1814, 'Two-story frame Private
(Architectural) townhouse on a brick founda- residence
tion. Myers and Telfair
Houses are the two oldest
houses extant in Washington

30 Norfleet Site Historic Bath Possible site of Asquatock Private farm
(Aboriginal) village

Table 13 (Continued) ... ............ .... INVENTORY-OF-HISTORIC AREAS BEAUFORT COUNTY

Map No,
or
Letter Name Typo of Area 'Lotatiot Descr@2tion Present Use

31 N.C. National Historic Washington Constructed in 1854, this Bank
Bank, West End (Architectural- fine exarple-of Classic
Branch (Formerly Comercial) design is one of the few
known as Bank of remaining small buildings
Washington, West in North Carolina built in
End Branch) the temple-form idiom.
Entered in
National Regis-
ter OF Hi9f�ric
Places.
......................... ......

32 Palmer-Marsh Historic Bath Built about 1750, the house Restored and
House. National (Architectural- is an excellent exanple of furnished by
Historic Land- Comercial) a two-story townhouse design Historic Com-
mark, entered in for both business and resi- mission. Home
National Regis- dential use. The east end is maintained as a
ter 6=1storic dominated by two great English Historic Site,
PI-aces bond chimneys united by a N.C. Dept. of
two-story brick pent-roofed Archives and
closet. House once served as History
a chandlery.

33 Pamlico Beach Pre-Historic Bath Shell midden located Private summer
Site (Aboriginal) homes and beach

34 Pine Crest Pre-Historic Bath Midden located Private homes
Site (Aboriginal)

Table 13 (Continued) INVENTORY OF'HISTORIC AREAS BEAUFORT COUNTY

Map No.
or
Letter Name Typo of Area Location Description Present Use

35 Rest Haven Pre-Historic Bath Midden located Private summer
Site (Aboriginal) homes
.............

36 Rodman Creek Pre-Historic Washington Sherds and shells Private land,
Site (Aboriginal) located woodland
...........

37 St. Thomas Historic Bath 17314-1740. St. Thomas Worship
Episcopal (Religious) Parish was organized in
Church 1701, and services were,
Lq (Entered in being held in St. Thomas
T National Regis- Church by 1739, making it
@3:: ter OF HiTt@otic the oldest building still
MacesT standing in North Carolina.
It has been the scene of
religious services for over
230 years.. Originally,
Church of England.
............... ...... .......I.............

38 Service Camp Pre-Historic Long Acre Sherds located Summer camp for
Site (Aboriginal) retarded children

39 Shell.Landing Pre-Historic Richland Possible site of a village Private farm
Site (Aboriginal)

40 Sparrow's Point Pre-Historic Bath Site of a large Indian Private fann
Site (Aboriginal) village

Table'13, (Continued) ...... -- ''''INVEMRY OFEISTORIC'AREAS BEAUFORT COUNTY

Map No.
or
Letter ... N@@ T)@pd of 'AteA .... Location Description Present Use
41 Telfair House Historic Washington Circa 1818. Two-story frame Private
(Architectural) townhouse on a brick founda- residence
tion. Telfair and Myer Houses
are the two oldest houses
extant in Washington

42 Trinity Chapel Historic Chocowinity Originally built in 1773 on a Worship
(Religious) site on the east side of the
Washington-Greenville hwy.
(U.S. 264) near present Chapel
Ul Branch. (lapel was moved to
present site in early 20th
Century because of constant
vandalism.
...............

43 Van Der Veer Historic Bath Originally located on property Being restored by
House granted to Thomas Sparrow by- Bath Historic
the Bath Town Commissioners Commission
in 1706. The gamble-roofed
house changed hands several
times before it was bought by
Jacob Van Der Veer in 1824

44 Washington Historic Washington .19th Century large group of Commerce
Waterfront (Commercial) commercial buildings which
reflect port activity

0 0

Table 13 (Continued) ......... INVENTORY'OF'HISTORIC AREAS BEAUFORT COUNTY

Map No.
or
Letter Name Type of Area@ -Location Description Present Use
45 Whalen Site Pre-Historic Bath Possible Indian village site Private farm
(Aboriginal)
..............

46 Woodlawn Historic Washington Early 18th Century. Private
Originally faced Hackney Ave. residence
Later moved to West Main St.
and remodeled

47 Woodstock, Historic Bath Incorporated in 1738. Private farm
Townsite of (Commercial- The remains of the town
Ln Political) of Woodstock

C-4
48 Wooland Site Pre-Historic Chocowinity Site of a large Indian Private farm
(Aboriginal) village area

3. Areas with Resource Potential

The County has large acreages of prime agricultural land, forest

land (much of which is publically owned), park and wildlife land, and

areas underla in with phosphate minerals. All of these resources should

be used for their mo st desirable purpose, for productivity and economic

gain, or for conservation and recreation.

a. Agricultural Lands

The highly organic soils and much of the mineral soils are highly

producti ve when drained and,managed correctly. Much of the forest land

is cropped on well organized bases yielding high quality pulp and saw

timber. The cleared and drained areas ate some of the state's most

productive grain, fodder, potatoes, and tobacco lands. For the purpose

of identifying the prime agricultural lands, more detailed soils maps

ate needed for re-evaluation of the forest lands whereby taxes will be

levied on the potential@ of the land to grow timber.

b. Mineral Resources

Much of the county is underlain by phosphate bearing sediments.

and some heavy minerals. , The limits of the phosphate sediments are

-well-known and are found to be feather edged at. about Blounts Bay on

N-S strike and extend continuously beneath land and rivers on a gently
dipping and thickening trend*eastward to some unknown distance beneath

or beyond Pamlico County (see Mqp 6).- The phosphate content of the

sediments vary widely in thickness and in grade. The total tonnage of

phosphate bearing material is estimated in several billions of tons,

However, the material th@Lt. is deemed recoverable by current technology

as ore (material that can be extracted and processed profitably) is

........ .

BEAUFORT COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA

PHOSPHATE 'DEPOSITS
PHOSPHATE DEPOSITS (MINABLE BY OPEN PIT)
PHOSPHATE DEPOSITS (NOT MT
INABLE BY OPEN P I
MA
Map 6

estimated at over 1 billion tons. With changes in thefertilizer values

and technological developments, these ore tonnages can vary greatly.
With the rapid.Aepletion of the Florida phosphate reserves, it.is ex-

pected that much of the thinner and lower grade sections anddeeper

buried material will be feasibly classified as*ore in thenottoo dis-

tant future, thus, it is not cognizant to establish fixed boundaries

to this ore deposit for the.purpose of extraction,

Large tracts of potentially recoverable phosphate reserves. are
owned-by,Texasgulf, North Carolina Phosphate, FMC, and Weyerhaeuser,
Also,, 10,000 acres of state owned land in the Pamlico estuary are under

lease for potential extraction.. Open case mining is currently being

employed to recovex thick high grade ore in the Lee Creek area.

Expansions of operating plants and other developments are underway.

Hydraulic mining thru bore holes has been tested and plans to develop

some deeper high grade ores in the Pungo River-Pamlico River peninsula

area are underway.

Mining and reclamation regulations involved with ore extraction

are,underthe auspices-@,of the Department of 'Natural., and::Ec6nomic Resources
of North Carolina as set out in the Mining Act of 1971. The agency is

amply staffed with competent.professionals to regulate the operations..

c. :P@Ilicly_-,,.@,,,Owned Lands and Other Non-Intensive Outdoor Recreation Lands
Goose Creek State Park is being developed along Upper Goose Creek

in Long Acre Township. The site is intended to provide: (1) an area of

unique value; (2) recreational use of natural resources; (3) portrayal

and interpretation of plant and animal life and natural features; and

(4) preservation of a natural area of state importance.

d. Privately-Owned- Wildlife Sanctuaries

The only privately-owned wildlife sanctuaries in Beaufort County

are those lands contained in.--the Goose Creek Wildlife Refuge that border

on Lower Goose Creek.

B. CAPACITY OF COMMUNITY FACILITIES

Identification., Desi2 Capacity and Utilization of Existing Water and
Sewer Service

Town of Washington Park

The Town of Washington Park abuts the southeastern municipal

limits of the City of Washington. The residents rely on individual
wells for water. The proximity of-individual septic tanks and shallow
wells increases the chances of utilizing contaminated water.

Town of Chocowinity

The Chocowinity water.system is supplied by.one deep well, capable

of producing 150 gallons per minute. A 75,000 gallon elevated storage
tank supplies a distribution!"system of eight and six inch mains, The

town is presently in need of an additional well and additional storage.

Town of Bath

The Town of Bath, in conjunction with the Farmers Home Adminis-

tration, recently started construction of a central water system. The

system will consist of two deep wells treatment facilities... 50,000

gallons of elevated storage, and a distribution system consisting of

Six) four, three, and two inch mains.

Town of Pantego

The Town of Pantego presently does not have a municipal water

system. A study was made-to@determine the feasibility of,installing a

small groundwater system,for,the town, but to date funding has not been

acquired,.

The cities of Washington, Belhaven, and Aurora have water and

sewer services. For 4 complete discussion of those systems, see the

individual town plans.

2. Identification; Design Capacity and Utilization of Existing Schools

Education

There are two public school systems serving the primary and secondary

educational needs of Beaufort County. These are the Washington City Schools,

which serve all of Washington Township and the portion of Long Acre Town-

ship west of Broad Creek., and the Beaufort County Board of Education, wh ich

serves all of thecounty outside the Washington City School district.

The Washington City Schools operate five schools within theirsystem.

All-of the schools arelocated in the City of Washington. A brief des-

cription of each school follows.

a. EasternElementary.School is located on the comer of'Highway 264 and

Hudnell Street. The original building was built in 1966. Classrooms

were added in 1969 and 1975. The condition of the present facility

is good. A new roof will be addedin the near future, The present

facility is filled in excess of capacity with 946 pupils. There are

38 teachers assigned to this school. Kindergarten, first and second

grades are housed in this facility.

b. John C. Tayloe Schoolis located on Tarboro Street extension.

The orig;j-nal building was built.in 1960. Add itions were made in

1964, 1970 and 197S. The.condition of this building is good.

The presentfacility is filled to capacity with S51 third and

.fourth grade pupils. There are 29 teachers assigned tothis school.

C. John H. Small-Sthool is located-on Fourth Street between Harvey

and Bonner Streets. It,was built in 1922. An addition was made

in 1958. The condition of this facility is poor. The building

and grounds are inadequate. It is presently filled with 611 fifth

and sixth graders.. Additional classroom space will probably come

from renovation of the auditorium. Plans have not been made, but

this building will have to be replaced in the not too distant

future. Twenty-nine teachers are assigned to this school.

d. P. S. Johes.Junior High School is located on Seventh and Ninth

Streets between Pierce and Bridge Streets. The original building

was constructed in 1922. This portion.of the building was reno-

vated after a fire in the.19501's. Primary rooms were added on

this.site in 1950. A cafeteria was added in 1951. The present

lift
ninth grade building was,completed.in 1952. Other additions

weremade in,1964 and 1965. The gymnasium was completed in 1970...

The condition ofthis facility varies from very poor to good.

The original building (two-story section and auditorium) should

be replaced. Plans have not been completed for replacement at

this time. The present facility is not crowded. There are

presently 1,109 seventh,-.eighth, and ninth grade pupils in this

school. There is room for some growth. Projections do not

indicate any large increase in the near future There are 46

teachers assigned to this school, Plans to renovate and to expand

the present library are in the making.

e., Washington High School is located on Eighth-and Harvey.Streets.

The original building was.completed in 1952. The auditorium was

completed in 1955. Eight classrooms were added in 1965. "Nissen

huts" are used for agriculture and carpentry shops. The condition

of the facility is fair. There are now 884 tenth, eleventh, and

twelfth graders. The present facility could accommodate about

950 students. Plans are presently being formulated for the con-

struction of a Vocational Education Building and for the expansion

of the library. There.are 48 teachers assigned to this school,

A special $.08 tax is levied.in the Washington school district. This,
combi@bd with@l local, state and federal sources, allows the system an expenditure

of $835 per pupil for the 1.973774 school year. This is $61.18 higher per pupil

expenditure than the.county school,.,system.

An average of SS percent of the 1970 graduates from the Washington City

school system,have continued-their education after graduation.

The Beaufort County Board of Education operates ten schools-throughout.

the county. A.brief description of the schools follows.

a. Aurora High School, Aurora, was constructed in 1928 with additions

in 1954, 1966, and 1972. The Board of Education has determined

that the school is in need of replacement. The present facilities

can handle 600 students with-460 p resently,attending. Twenty-two

teachers are assigned to the school.

b. Bath High School, Bath, was constructed in 1920 with additions in

1938, 1943, 1948, 19531 1967, 1972,, 1974 and 1975, The Board of

Education has determined thatthis building needs replacing. The

present facilities are capable of handling 8SO students with 718

presently attending. Thirty-four teachers are presently assigned

to the school, teaching.grades kindergarten through 12.

C. Beaufort County Elementary School., Pantego, was constructed in @1923
with addi tions in 1956, 1974, and 197S. The conditio n@is rated as

good. Thepresent facilities are capable of handling 600 students

with 309 students presently attending.

d. Belhaven Elementary School, Belhaven, was constructed dn 1950 with

additions in-1953, 1974 and 197S. The condition of the buildings

is rated,as good. The present.facilities 'are capable of handling
600 students with 490 presently attending. There are 23 teachers 41

assigned to the school.

e. Chocowinity Primary School, Chocowinity, was constructed in 19S2 with
additions in 1974. and 1975. Condition'of the buildings is rated good
to new. The facilities are designed to handle 366 students with

204 presently attending. Nine teachers are assigned to the..school.

f. Chocowinity Hi gh School, Chocowinity, was constructed in 1937 with

additions in 1949, 1952, 1964 and 1967. The condition of the building

is rated as good. The facility is designed for 900 students with

838 students,presently attending. Thirty-five teachers are assigned

to the school.

9. John A. Wilkinson High School, Belhaven, was constructed in 1938 with

additions in 19S1, 1953, 1961, 1.965 and 1968. Condition of the facili-
ties is rated as fair to good. The facility is designed to.handle 700

students with 47S presently attending. Twenty-four teachers are present-

ly assigned to the school.

h. Pantego High School, Pantego, was constructed in 1924 with additions

in 1939, 1952.1 1963., 1972, 1974.and 197S.' The Board of Education has
determined that the facility needs replacing. The facility.is capable

of handling S40 students with 264 presently attending. Sixteen teachers.

@are presentlyassigned to the school.

i.. Pinetown Elementary School,.Pinetown, was constructed in 1937 and 19SO.

The condition of the facility is rated as good. It is capable of hand-

ling 240 students with 183 presently attending. Nine teachers are

assigned to the school.

S. W. Snowden Elementary School, Aurora, was built in 1938 with addi-

tions in 19SS, 1964 and 1966. The condition of the fac'ility.is rated

as good. The facility can handle 720 students with 611 presently at-

tending. TWenty-eight teachers are presently assigned to the school.

The expenditure per student in the Beaufort County school system is $773.82.

In addition to the above public educational institutions, primary and secon-*-

dary education is provided by three private institutions, Pamlico Community School

in Washington Park, the Pungo ChristianAcademy in Belhaven and.Terra Ceia

.Christian School in Pantego.

Pbst-secondary education is offered by Beaufort Technical Institute. The

present facilities at the technical institute are overcrowded. A bond referendum

to construct additional facilities was held during the spring of 1975 but was

defeated.

3. -Identification, Design Capacity and Utilization of Primary Roads

Beaufort County's primary roads consist of U.S. 17, running north-

south in the western portion of.the county; U.S. 264, running east-west

on the north side of the Pamlico River from Hyde County to Pitt County;

N.C. 33, running.east-west on the south side of the Pamlico River; N.C.

306, running from N.C. 33 west of Aurora, south; N.C. 92 running from

264 to Bath and rejoining U.S. 264 at Belhaven; N.C. 32, running north

from U.S. 264 to Plymouth; and N.C. 99 running from Pantego to N.C. 32.

In order to determine capacity,. the peak 24 hour traffic flow is

.compared to design capacity. Those peak traffic counts are only for

areas in county jurisdiction.

.Table 14 examines percentage utilizations.

TABLE 14

utilization of Primary Roads
Beaufort County, 1974

Road Design Capacity Max. 24 hr. County Percent Utilization

U.S. 1T 10,920 6,900 63.2%
U.S. 264 10,920 7,400 67.8%
N.C. 32 10,920 1,600 14.6%
N.C. 33 10,920 4,000 36.6%
N.C. 99 7,200 1,400 19.4%
N.C. 92 7,200 1,500 20.8%

V. EST I MATED DEMAND

A. POPU .LATION & ECONOMY'

1. Population

Accurately estimating future population figures is recognized as an almost

impossible task, yet it is recognized that it is essential to attempt such esti-

mates in order to plan for future development. Providing services, such as

schools, water and sewer require that local government make som6estimate of

the demand that,might be placed on these services.

The population projections used in this study were prepared by Freeman
and Associates in their study, Region Q Water Management Plan. These projections

show Beaufort County gaining population. These projections seem most reasonable
in light of (1) the anticipated expansion of phosphate mining in the county, and
(2) an estimated.population of 37,000 on July 1, 1974 by the U. S. Department of
Com@6rce. The following figure charts the projected populations to the year

2020.

Table 15 breaks the population prbJettim 'Tor@.'1970-,2000-.@down- by townships.

These township projections were prepared by the North Carolina Department of

Natural and Econ-omic Resources. Table 16 gives the projected municipal popula-

tions for .1970-2020.

Beaufort County is projected to increase population by 1,460 from 197S to

198S.

The above population projections are consistent with the desires of the citi-

zens of Beaufort County. The people of.the county desired a moderate pattern of

growth, which is reflected in the population projections.

The capability.of the land and water to sustain the above projected popula-

tibn is largely defined by the'means used to dispose of sewage. Beaufort County

has an abundant supply of ground water and water supply provides no constraints

to growth..

If the projected population is accommodated in dwellings utilizing septic

tanks, it is conceivable.that the projected population could exceed the capacity

of the land and:water to sustain it. In the coastal area the detrimental

effects of sewage disposal on ground and surface water resources represent an

important example of physical limitations of development. After the density

is-reached which-the land can effectively assimilate in its natural state, then

any increased-development.results in a diminution of the quality of ground and

surface waters. Up to a certain point., which varies depending on-the species,

this diminution in water quality can be tolerated by marine organisms which

dwell in the surface waters. Also, up to a certain point, the diminution in sur-

face and ground-waters can be tolerated by humans. However, afterone of these

threshold "toleration" points. is-reached, the waters become unusable or unaccept-

able for use by marine organisms and humans. Beyond such a threshold a different

order of public@investment is, needed to prevent degradation. Thus upon approach-

ing these thresholds, an d thereare no easily determinable indices1by which these

thresholds can be established, certain planning decisions need to be made.

Basically these decisions involve determining whether to limit further increases

in density-, to put money and energy into the system to provide alternative

methods of waste@disposal, or to tolerate the diminution in water quality as

an acceptable "cost" of further development. If neither one of the first two

choices is made, then the third)alternative is chosen by default. It is clear

that at some point density must be regulated or water quality will diminish.

It is not possible to choose both alternatives without expending money and

energy on alternative solutions,to the problem.

FIGURE I PROJECTED POPULATION

BEAUFORT COUNTY

1970-2020

50,00
49,200
,500
4o,,oo @Ooo
,go
0
7.4oo
305000

20,000

io.:Iooo

0
1970 @2U 0

TABLE 1S PROJECTED TOWNSHIP POPULATION

Beaufort County

1970-2000

1970 1980 .1990 2000
Beaufort County 35,980 37,400 41'.000

Bath Township 31237 2.1993 2,837 2,712

Chocowinity Township, 43,661 .4,854 5,050 5,300

Lon g Acre Township 6,976 7,686. 8P-930 10.94.57
Pantego Township S,126 5,043 4,958 4,916.

Richland Township 3,626. 3,185 21966 2,786

Washington Township 12,354 13$1637 14,159 14,829

TABLE 16 PROJECTED POPULATION

Yunicipalities of Beaufort County

1970-2020

1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020

Beaufort County 35,980 37,400 38,900 41,000. 44,500 @49,200

Aurora 620, 726 8SO 995 15,190 1P380

Bath 231 13S 83 S1 32 20

Belhaven .2,259 2,134 2,113 2,031

Chocowinity 566 532 S09 490 475 462

Pantego 218 172 139, 114 94 7-7

Washington 8,961 9,S28 9,947 10@@117 11,125 12,300.

Washington Park S17 356 268 204 156 120

SOURCE: Region Q Water Resource @bn@.gement, 197S, except.for Aurora and
Belhaven which were prepared by the town planners.

Since it is unknown at what den sity and where the projected population

will be accomodated and to what extent means other than septic tanks will be

used for sewage disposal, it is impossibleto determine the exact'capacity,

of the land and water to sustain population growth. During the inplementation.

of this plan, it will be necessary to constantly monitor the impact of new

development an the-land and water.

Seasonal population has not traditionally played a major role in Beaufort

-County. It@is anticipated that the amount of seasonal population will increase

in the future."drawn,to the amenities offered here. The major impacts this

will have locally are 1) an increase in service related activities and 2) in-

creased.demands made on selected local governmental services such as solid

waste disposal.

2. Economy

In order to make decisions for the future, it is necessary to understand

forces at wd;rk in our national economy which will influence Beaufort County.

What follows is a look at these forces.

There recently has emerged a national recognition that resources are
limited.' The,impact-of-,this is just making itself..flelt on.the national economy.,

'The resulting competition for limited resources will have a largely positive

impact on Beaufort- County.

The,local,economy is dependent to alarge extent on. resource extraction.

Forestry, agriculture and mining provide resources for which there is increasing

competition::-Theplanned expansion of phosphate mining was triggered by an in-

creased demand-for fertilizer to aid in the production of.world food suppliers.

In addition., other:major deposits of phosphate-in the U. S. are being depleted,

giving added importance to Beaufort County.

The long range prospect for the county's resource extraction businesses,

such as forestry, agriculture and mining is good. Beaufort County remains

rich in natural resources which will bring an increasingly higher price in

the market place.

Agriculture has played a dominant role in Beaufort County, but that role

is changing. With changes in agricultural practices, mainly mechanization,

the number'of workers needed in agriculture has been. reduced. There are in-

Aications that the impact of mechanization has leveled off. In the future

be fewer jobs lost to mechanization, but it is likely that the

remai-ning jobs will demand a higher level of training and skills.

The major negative impact from the incr eased competition for natural

reso urces will be in the area of higher energy cost, particularly gasoline.

Most workers not employed in agriculture are dependent upon-the private auto-

mobile to transport them from place of residence to place of work. Many

workers commute to work as much as 30 miles one way each day. These workers

will come under increasing pressure to locate closer to where they work or

find an alternate means of transportation.

An additional negative inpact will result from the increased competition

for naturaIresources. As this competition increases, agricultural and

forestry land will.be displaced by urban uses,.mining and recreational develop-

ment. The county will have to take steps to ensure that prime agricultural

land is not displaced by competing land uses.-

B. FUTURE LAND NEEDS

The North Carolina Coastal Area Management Act Guidelines direct that a.

gross ten year estimate of land needs be allocated to the appropriate land

classes. Ih doing this, the estimated population, growth is allocated to the

Transition, Community and Rural classes of the Land Classification System. This

system is explained in detail in Part Three of this plan.
Beaufort County's projected population increase from 1975 to 1985 is

1,460. Some of this population will locate in rural areas, but the majority

will locate in the areas classed Community, especially the area east of Wash-

ington. The only areas likely to be transitional are those immediately adjacent

to Washington. The City of Washington plans to annex adjacent areas in the

future. These are classed Transitional.

C. COMNITY FACILITIES.DEMAND

1. Ten-Year Population Increase-

As discussed in the previous section, Beaufort County's population is

expected to increaseby 1,460 between 197S and 198S. Most of this increase is

expected to be absorbed in the area east of Washington.

2. Services Needed;toAccommodate Projected Population

What type of services will be required to accommodate the projected popula-

tion increase? What will they cost? Of the major services discussed previous-

ly (water andsewer, school and roads), the school system will be the most

severely affected. The facilities-of the Washington City School System are,

already overloaded in some cases. The majority of the population increase is

anticipated to locate in the area served by the Washington City Schools. This

will further tax this system and necessitate constructing additional facilities.

The Washington Chamber of Commerce has recently completed a study of all the

schools in Beaufort County and estimates that a total of $12 million of

improvements are needed.

Two 12011 studies are being conducted in Beaufort County at this time.

These studies will evaluate the wastewater treatment needs of.the two study

areas. While this study is not couplete, it is anticipated that a need will

be demonstrated to extend sewer service outside to Washington to Washington

Park, Chocowinity and certain growth areas east of Washington. If these facili-

ties are provided, then the expected population increase in the area could.-be

accommodated utilizing federal money from the 12011 Program.

The other 12011 study area is Belhaven-Panteo and surrounding area., It

is anticipated that the study will recommend that the Belhaven sewage treatment

plant be upgraded to accommodate seasonal demands.

Upgrading of this system should accommodate any anticipated increases in

population.

Due to the ease with which potable water is obtainable in Beaufort County,

it i:s not anticipated that water supply will become a factor in accommodating

population increases.

The present road systems are capable of accommodating anticipated popula-

tion increase.

3. Ability of Local Economy to Finance Service Extension

A local government's ability to provide services to its citizens is limit-

ed by the amount of revenues it can raise. Local governments in North Carolina

depend basically on four sources of revenue. An important share comes from

grants from the State and Federal government. While these are important.sources

of revenue, local goverment has limited control over how much money they will

receive and how it will be spent.

A second source.of funding is local property taxation. Beaufort County has

a higher per capita appraised value of taxable property than the state average.

This reflects the high capital investment involved in mining operation. Expan-

Sion of mining in Beaufort County will mean an even higher per capita value for

taxable property. The county presently has the lowest effective tax rate in

Region Q.. Increased capital investment in the county will allow county govern-

ment to either lower taxes or raise the level of services offered.

.A relatively new source of income for local governments in North Carolina
is the local sales tax. The county's per cap i..t.,a retail sales of $2,033 is

higher than Region Q's and near the state level. This relatively high level

of retail sales makes the local sales tax an important source of revenue for

county government.

Other revenues-are collected from miscellaneous sources such as; ABC

revenues, licenses and fees. Table 17 looks at county and municipal tax and

debt data.

TABLE 17 COUNTY. AND NUNICIPAL'REVE-NUE: AND.DEBT DATAY
Beaufort-County.

Per Capita
Local Appraised. Appraised Total All Tax Bonds Per Capita
Goverment Value Value Revenues. Rate Outstanding Debt

Beaufort County $349,697,283 9,719.21 $2,913,509.00 1$.62 $3,220,000 $-89.20
rora 3,833,361 6,182,84 96)060.31 177,5001/ 286.29

Bath 1)023,923 4)432,57 .32 .70.1000 304.35

Belhaven 10,197,656 4,514.23 763)292.50 .52 503,000 221.58

Chocowinity 6)S41@812 11.1510.27 39PS87.15 .30 140.16,00 246.67

Pantego 11294)03S 5)935.94 17@,29S.94 .32 -0- -0-

Washington 63@461,819 7)082.00 SP403,313.02 .68 1)672,1000 18S.98

Washington Park 4,573,158 8)84S..S7 34,029.46 .45 -0- -0-

!-/County "data is for 1975-75. Mmicipal data is for 1973-74.
@-/Bond anticipation rates.

SOURCE: North Carolina Local Government Commission and local governments.
Computation by@No-rth Carolina Department of Natural and Economic
Resources.

db db

vi, PLAN DESCRIPTION

The Land Classification map which is included in this document depicts

a desirable future land use pattern for Beaufort County consistent with the

goals outlined in this plan. The map,represents a generalized overview of

desirable land development patterns over the next ten years and should be

used as an aide to decision making regarding location of public facilities,

economic development activities, adoption of land use regulations and other

decisions which affect development activities.in the county.

Conceptually, the map depicts the area around Washington as being the

major developed area in the county. The eastern portion of the county is

depicted as a resource extraction area with the principal activities being

agriculture, forestry, and mining. The incorporated areas of Aurora, Bath)

Belhaven and Pantego would serve as service.centers for the resource extrac-

tion area.

The land classification map depicts the above by classifying all of the

land in the county into six classes of which five are part of the North

Carolina Land Classification System and a sixth -class, Secondary Transition

has been added to meet development needs in Beaufort County.

As a statement of,local policy consistent with statewide needs@and goals,

the county land classification map will serve as a basic tool for coordinating

numerous policies,.standards., regulations and other governmental activities

at the local, State-and Federal level.,

The system also provides a guide for public investment in land. For

example, State and local governments can anticipate the need for early acqui-

sition of lands-and easements in the Transition class for schools., recreation.,

transportation and other.public facilities.

The system can al so provide a useful framework for.budgeting and plan-

ning for the construction of community facilities such as water and sewer

systems, schools and roads.. The resources of many state and federal agencies,

as well as those..of the local government which are used for such facilities,

can then be more.efficiently allocated.

In addition, such a system will aidin better coordination of regulatory

policies and decisions. Conservation and rural production lands will.help

to focus the attention of state and local agencies and interests concerned

with the valuable natural resources of the state. On the other hand, lands

in the Transition and Conmunity classes will be of special concern to those

agencies and interests who work for high quality development through local

land use controls.such as zoning and subdivision regulations.

Finally, the.system ca n help to provide guidance for a more equitable

distribution,of the land tax burden, Private'lands which are in the Rural

and Conservation classes should have low taxes to reflect the policy that

few, if any, public services will be provided to these lands., In contrast,

lands in the Transition and Secondary Transition classes should be taxed to

pay for the large.cost of new public services which will berequired to

support the density,of growth anticipated.

THE SIX CLASSES

DEVELOPED

Pu
@ose: The Developed Class identifies developed lands which are..presently

provided with essential public.services. Consequently, it is distinguished

from areas where significant growth and/or new service requirements will

occur. Continued development and redevelopment should be encouraged to pro-

vide for the orderly growth in the area.

Description: Developed.l.ands.are-areas within a mini= gross population

densitylof.2.,.000.peop le per square mile. At a minimum, these lands contain

existing public services including water and sewer systems, educational

systems, and road.systems--all of which are able to support the present popu-

lation and its accompanying land uses including commercial, industrial and

institutional.

TRANSITION

Purpose: The Transition class identifies lands where moderate to.high den-

sity growth is to be encouraged and where any growth that is permitted by

local regulation will be provided with the necessary public services.

Description: The area to be designated as Transition must be no greater than

thatrequired.to accommodate the estimated county.p6pplation growth at a

minimum gross density of 2,000 peopleper square mile. For example, if the

population increase for'the following ten year period is projected to be

10,000 people, and it is planned that 8,000 of them will be accommodated in

the Transition area, then no more than four square miles of transition area
shiuld be shown. In,addition, the minimumservices which will be required

are the necessary water and sewer facilities,.educational services,, and roads,

Consideration must be given to the.cost of public services in the Transition

area. Each local government is encouraged to estimate the approximate cost

of providing public services where they do not already exist.
Lands to be classified Transition should be considered in the following

..order:

1) First priorityis for lands which presently have a gross population

density of more than 2,000 people per square mile, but do not

qualify as Developed-because they lack the necessary minimum public

services.. These areas may not be expected to accomodate additional

population, but they will require funds for services to avoid,public

health and.safety problems.

2) Second.priority is for lands that have all the necessary public

services in place, but which lack the minimum gross population

.density of 2,000 people per square mile needed to qualify the area

as.,Developed. These areas.therefore have not utilized the capacity

of the existing.services..

3) Additional lands necessary to accornmodate the remainder of the

estimated Transition growth for the, ten year planning period.,

In choosing lands for the Transition class, such lands should not.in-

clude,:,

1) Areas with severe physical limitations for development with

public services.

2) Lands which meet the definition of the Conservation class.

3) Lands of special value such as the following unless no other

reasonable alternative exists:

a) Productive and unique agricultural lands;

b) Productive forest lands;

c) Potentially,valuable mineral deposits;

d) Potential aquifers and key parts of water supply watersheds;

e) Scenic and tourist resources;

f) Habitat for economically valuable wildlife species;

g) Flood fringe lands;

h) Open coast flood hazard areas, exclusive of ocean erosive areas;

i) Estuarine flood hazard areas, exclusive of estuarine erosive areas,

SECONDARY TRANSITION

Purpose: The Secondary Transition class identifies lands where moderate den-

sity growth is to be encouraged. It would be desirable.to provide these

areas with necessary public services such as water.and sewer., but the I local

goverment made no commitment to provide their services during the ten year

planning period,

Description: The area designated as Secondary Transition shall be those

lands where development exists and is anticipated to accommodatefurther

development during.the planning period. These lands shall be suitable for

development as stipulated in the Transition class. While local government

anticipates development in these areas@ it makes no commitment to.provide

services during the planning period. If the local goverment is able to

provide services beyond the Transition areas, then the secondary areas will

be provided the additional services.

COMMUNITY

Purpose: The.Community class identifies existing and new clusters. of low

density development not requiring major 'public services.

Description:
1) The Community class includes'-existing clusters of one or more

land uses such as a rural residential subdivision or a church,

school,.general store, industry, etc. (Cluster is defined as a

number of structures grouped together in association or in physical
proximity - Websterls'Dictionary).

2) This class.will provide for all new rural growth when the lot size

is ten acres.or less. Such clusters of growth may occur.in new

areas, or within existing community lands. In choosing lands for

Community growth, such lands should not include:

(a) Areas with severe physical limitations for development;

(b) Areas meeting the definition of the Conservation class;

Cc) Lands of special value such as the following unless no

other reasonable alternative exists;

(1) Productive and unique agricultural lands;

(2),. Productive forest lands;

(3) Potentially valuable miiieral deposits;

(4) Potential aquifers and key parts of water supply

watersheds;

(5) Scenic and tourist resources;

(6), Habitat for economically valuable*wildlife species;

(7) Flood fringe lands;

(8) Open coast flood hazard areas;

(9) Estuarine flood hazard area*s excTuIsive.6-f .0stuarine-1--.1

erosive areas.

3) New development in the Community Class areas will.be subject to sub-

-.division regulations under the Enabling Subdivision Act (G.S., 153A-

330 et. seq..)

4) In everycase, the lot size must be large enough.to safely accoyr@mo-

date onsite sewage disposal and where nertessary, water supply so

that no public,sewer services will be required now or in the future.
S) Limited public services should be provided in the Community class

such as public road access and electric power.

6) As a guide for calculating the amount of land necessary to accommo-

date new rural community growth, a gross population density of 640

people per square mile or one person per acre should be used. For

example, if 1,000 new people are expected to settle in low-density

clusters during the following ten year period, then roughly 1,000

acres of.land should be allocated for new growth in Community

class areas.

RURAL

Purpose: The Rural class identifies lands for long-term management for-

productive resource.utilization,- and where limited public services will'be

provided. Development in such areas should be compatible with resource

production.

Description:. The Rural class includes all lands not in the Developed,

Transition, Community and Conservation classes.

CONSERVATION

Purpose: The Conservation class identifies land which should be maintained

essentially in its natural state and where very limited or no public services

are provided.

Description: Lands to be placed in the Conservation class are the least

desirable for development because:

1) They are too fragile to withstand development without losing their

natural value and/or

2) They have ,s evere or hazardous limitations to development and/or;.

3) Though they are nothighly,fragile or hazardous, the natural

resources they represent are too valuable to endanger by development.

Such lands at a minimum should include:

1) Fragile

(a) Wetlands

(b) Steep slopes and prominent high.points

(d) Beaches

(e) Surface waters including

Lakes and ponds

Rivers and streams

Tidal waters below mean high water
41
(f) Prime wildlife habitat

(g) Unique natural areas and historic and archaeological sites

2) Hazard

(a) Floodways

(b) Ocean. erosive areas

(d) Estuarine erosive areas

3) Other

(a) Publicly owned forest, park, and fish and game lands and

other non-intensive outdoor recreation lands

(b) Privately owned sanctuaries, etc., which are dedicated to

preservation

(d) Potential water impoundment sites

In addition to the above named types of land, a county'may include

other areas to be maintained in an essentially n.atural state which are

needed to implement their stated policy objectives.,

VIII POT,ENTIAL'AREAS OF
..ENVIRONM.ENTAL CONCERN

INTRODUCTION

The North Carolina Coastal Area Management Act states that the local

land use plan "shall give special attention to the protection and appropriate

development of areas of environmental concern" designated by the Coastal

Resources Comission. Thatis the purpose of this part of the plan.

Those areas of environmental concern which are listed in the "State

Guidelines for Local Planning in the Coastal Area" and occurs in Beaufort

County will be described, the significance will be discussed, a policy ob-*

jective stated and appropriate land uses.prescribed.

Once the areas of environmental concern (AEC) have been adopted by the

Coastal Resources Commission.,then development taking place within an AEC

will require a permit. Major developments must receive their permit from

the State.while minor developments can be administered their permits by.

local goverment. However, the identification of AEC's in this document.

will not serve for-purposes of permit letting., This identification is for

planning purposes only.

All maps identifying areas of environmental concern are general illus-@

tration and.not for determining areas requiring permits.

DESCRIPTION

An existing state park is defined as existing sites that have been'

acquired for use as state parks, as identified by the Secretary of Natural

and Economic Resources.

The only existing state-park,in Beaufort County is the Goose Creek
State Park property located around upper Goose Creek in Long Acre Township.

SIGNIFICANCE

Existing state parks are areas containing environmental or natural

.resources of more than local significance where uncontrolled or incompatible

development could result in major or irreversible damage to important his-.

toric, cultural, scientific, or scenic values, or natural systems, or

.would be detrimental to the recreational uses of natural systems. These.

sites provide: (1) areas of unique or scenic value: (2) recreational

uses of natural resources; (3) portrayal and interpretation of plant and

animal life, geology and natural features; and (4) preservation.of scientific

sites and natural,areas of statewide importance.

POLICY' OBJECTIVE

.To protect and preserve the scenic, historic, cultural, scientific

and natural values,, of state parks.

APPROPRIATE LAND USES

Land use within the park will be determined by the state. Beaufort

County should ensure that development in areas surrounding the park are

compatible with the park. Emphasis should be placed on entrances to the

park with careful consideration given to sign control and aesthetics.

HISTORIC PLACES

DESCRIPTION

Historic'places are.defined as historical, archaeological, and other

places and properties owned, managed, or assisted by the State of North

Carolina pursuant to G.S. 121; and properties or areas that have been desig-
nated by the..Secretary of the Interior as..National Historic Landmarks.

Specifically these sites are the Palmet-Marsh House., Bath..

SIGNIFICANCE

Historic resources are.,both non-renewable and fragile. They owe their

significance to their association with American history, architecture, arch-

aeology and culture. Properties on or approved for the National Register of

Historic Places may be of riational,`�tate or local significance.

POLICY OBJECTIVE

To prot@bft 6r preserve the int6g@'r`ity@' ''of Aistricts. sites,@ building

and objects in the above categories.

APPROPRIATE LAND USBS@l
Adjacent vei6p@t should be in keepIn'g'-with the character of.the
historic place. Local government can ensure this by historic zoning, estab-
lishing a historic properties commission.and careful planning of facilities.,
Thecounty and state should encourage the appropriate municipalities to take
the action necessary to protect these historic sites.

ESTUARINE AND'RIVER ERDDIBLE AREAS

DESCRIPTION

Estuarine and river erodible areas are defined as the area above ordinary

high water where excessive erosion has a high probability of occurring. In

delineating the landward extent of this area a recessionline shall be deter-

mined.

The erodible areas in Beaufort Countytare found along the Pamlico and

Pungo, Rivers.

SIGNIFICANCE

The estuarine, sound and river erodible areas are natural hazard areas

especially -vulnerable to erosion, Development within this type of AEC is

subjected to the damaging process of erosion unless special development stand-

ards; and preventative measures are employed.

POLICY OBJECTIVE

To ensure that development occurring within the 2S-year erodibility line

is compatible with the dynamic nature of the erodible lands thus minimizing

the likelihood of significant loss of property.

APPROPRIATE LAND USE

No development activity shall take place within the area vulnerable to

erosion unless measures are taken to prevent the erosion which have proven

effective in similar situations.

The 25-year erodibility line shall be used in determining setback from

the river or sound in all ordinances and regulations such as subdivision

regulations and health regulations.

SMALL SURFACE WATER SUPPLIES

DESCRIPTION

Small surface water supplies are defined as relatively small watersheds

or catchment areas which cqntain streams classified A-I or A-II by the Environ-

...mental Management Commission. In Beaufort County this includes the Tranters

Creek Watershed.

SIGNIFICANCE

Small water supply watersheds represent a source of potable water for a

''locality or region. Any-loss or serious detriment to such an area would have

serious public health implications. Such a loss would also have a significant

..''adverse financial impact.

Uncontrolled development within the watershed would cause significant

changes in the-runoffpatterns and would affect the quantity of water avail-

able as@a raw water supply. Such development would also adversely affect water

quality by introducing a wide variety of pollutants from homes, businesses, or

industries, either through discharge or surface runoff into the water supply.

...''POLICY OBJECTIVE

To insure the continued maintenance-of water quality and-quantity of the

surface water supply.

APPMPRIATE LAND USE

Development should be stricly controlled in this area. Extra caution

should be@taken in designing and placing septic tank nitrification fields to

.,ensure that streams are not endangered. Discharge into any stream must meet

water quality standards.

0 92

COASTAL MARSHLANDS..

DESCRIPTION

Marshes subject to regular or irregular flooding by tides, including

wind tides (whetheror not the tide waters reach the marshland areas through

natural or artificialwatercourses), provided this shall not include hurri-

cane or tropical storm tides. Marshlands shall be those areas upon which

grow some, but not necessarily all, of the following marsh grass species:

Smooth or salt water Cordgrass (Spartina. alterniflora); Black Needlerush

(Juncus roemerianus); Glasswort (Salicornia spp...); Salt Grass (Distichlis

Spicata); Sea Lavender (Limonium spp..); Bulrush (Scirpus; spp ); Saw Grass

(Cladium Jamaicense); Cat-Tail (Typha spp.); Salt-Meadow Grass (Spartina

Patens and Salt Reed Grass (Spartina cynosuroides Marshlands are

located along the Pamlico River.and Pung'o River and their tributaries.

SIGNIFICANCE
This marshland type,also contribute Is to the detritus supply necessary

to the highly productive estuarine system essential to North Carolina's

economically valuable commercial and sports fisheries.

The higher marsh types offer quality wildlife and waterfowl habitat

depending on the biological and physical conditions of the marsh. The

vegetative diversity in the higher marshes usually supports a greater

diversity of wildlife types than the limited habitat of the low tidal marsh.

This marshland type also serves as an important deterrent to shoreline ero-

sion especially in those marshes containing heavily rooted species. The

dense system of rhizomes and roots of Juncus roemerianus are highly resis-

tant to erosion. In addition, the higher marshes are effective sediment

traps.

POLICY OBJECTIVES

To give the highest priority to the preservation of low tidal marshland.

APPRDPRIATE LAND USES

Appropriate land.uses shall be those consistent.with,the policy objective.

These marshes should be considered unsuitable for all development which will

alter their natural-Tunctions. Inappropriate land uses include, but are not

...,1imited to the following examples: restaurants and businesses; residences.,

apartments, motels,:-hotelsP,an&trailer parks; parking lots and offices;

..spoil and dump sites; wastewater lagoons; public and private roads and

highways; and factories. Examples of acceptable land uses may include

utility easements, fishing-piers, docks, certain agricultural uses and such

other uses which,do not significantly alter the natural functions of the

marsh. Agricultural drainage canals and maintenance of such canals shall

be an, appropriate land use.

ESTUARINE WATERS AND PUBLIC TRUST AREAS

DESCRIPTION

Estuarine waters are defined in G.S. 113-229 (n)J2) as, "all the water

..of the Atlantic 0cean within the boundary of North Carolina and all the waters

of the bays, sounds, rivers, and tributaries thereto seaward of the dividing
line:betweeri coastal fishing waters and 'inland fishing waters, as set forth

in:an agreement adopted by the Wildlife Resources Commission and the Depart-

ment of Conservation and Development-filed with the Secretary of State en-

-titled 'Boundary Lines,- North Carolina Commercial Fishing - Inland Fishing
@Waters, revised March 1, 1965,11"or as it may be subsequently revised by the
0
Legislature.

Public trust areas are defined through the CAMA Planning Guidelines 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 thereunder to

the mean high water mark; all navigable natural bodies of water and lands

thereunder to the mean,or ordinary high water mark as the case may be, except

'privately owned lakes;having no public access; all waters in artificially

created bodies of water in which exists significant public fishing resources

resources,-which are accessible to the public by navigation

bodies of water in which the public has rights of navigation; all

waters inLartificially created bodies of water in which the public has ac

quired rights by prescription, custom, usage, dedication or any other means.

In determining whether the public has acquired rights in artificially

eated.bodies of water the following factors shall be considered: (i)
cr

the use of the body of water by the public; (ii) the length of time the
public has used the area;.(iii)- the value of public resources in the body of

'water; (iv) whether the public resources in the body of water are mobile to

the extent that they can move into natural bodies of water; (v) whether the

cr-eation of the artificial body of.water required permission from the State;

and (vi) the value of the body of water to the public for navigation from

:one public area to another-public area.

While estuarine waters and,public trust areas are treated separately in

the State Guidelines., they will-be considered as one for the purpose of this

-plan. The distinction drawn between them in the guidelines is an artificial

--one and-has nolbasis.other than as a political division between the commercial

and'sport fisheries interest. The significance of both areas is identical as

are the appropr iate land uses.

SIGNIFICANCE

The estuaries of any river system are among the most productive natural

environments of North Carolina. They not only support valuable commercial

and sports fisheries, but are also-utilized for commercial navigation, rec-

reation and aesthetic purposes. The high level of commercial and sports

fisheries and the aesthetic appeal of coastal-North Carolina is dependent

upon the protection and sustained quality of our estuarine and river systems.

POLICY OBJECTIVE

To preserve and manage our estuarine-waters and public trusV%areas@so

as to safeguard and perpetuate their biological, economic and aesthetic values.

APPROPRIATE USES

Appropriate uses shall be consistent with the above policy objective.

Highest priority shall be given to the conservation of estuarine waters and

protection of-public trust rights. The-development of navigation channels,

the use.of bulkheads to prevent erosion, and the building of piers or wharfs

are examples of appropriate land use, provided such land uses will not be

detrimental to the biological and physical-estuarine fi.Jnction and,public
trusi waters.@;_ Projects which would directly--or-indirectly block @oT-inpair-

existing navigation channels, increase shoreline erosion, deposit spoils

below the mean high tide., cause adverse water circulation pattern, violate

water quality standards, or cause degradation of shellfish waters are gen-

erally considered inconpatible with the management of estuarine waters and

public trust areas.

Development control over development occurring in estuarine water or

public trust areas is presently exercised by state or federal government.

Local goverment can assist@in managing these areas by controlling develop

Ment adjacent to these,areas.. Devices such as setback lines, minumm lot

sizes, septic tank ordinances, flood plain ordinances and sedimentation

control can be used to control adjacent development which could impair

estuarine waters or public trust areas.

VIII, SUMMARY (BIBLIOGRAPHY)

Dawson, Amos. "Report on Land and Water Resource Use Problem Related to the
Carrying Capacity of the Coastal Area of North Carolina.", N. C. Coastal
Resources Commission., Raleigh, N. C.). 1976.

Employment Security Commission. North Carolina Commuting Patterns, 1960-1970,
Raleigh, N. C., 1974.

Endangered Species Committee. "Preliminary List of Endangered Plant and Animal
Species in North Carolina, 'IN. C-Department of Natural and Economic Re-
sources, Raleigh,'N. C., 1973.

Ferrell, Joseph S. County Government in North Carolina, Institute of-Govern-
ment, U.N.C. of Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, N. C., 1975.

Fish, Frederic F. A Catalog of the Inland Fishing Waters of North Carolina.
The Graphic Press, Raleigh, N. C., 1969.

Freeman and Associates. Region Q Water,Mana gement Plan, Mid-East Economic
Development Commission, Washington,.N. C., 1975.

:Mid-East Economic Development Development Commission. Planning for Open Space
and Recreation in the Mid-East Region Washington, N. C., 1975.

Mid-East Economic Development Commission. A Guide;for Land Use and Development
In the Mid-East Region, "R6gional Land Use Plan", Washington, N. C., 1975.

Mid-East Resource Conservation and Development.Project.of North Carolina.
Natural Resources for Today and Tomorrow, Washington, N. C.,1975.

North CarolinaState Government-.Statistical Abstract. N. C. Department of
Administration,, Raleigh; N. C., 1973.

N. C. Department of Administration.. Profile:._ North Carolina.Counties, Raleigh,
N. C. 19 7 S.,

N. C. Department of Conservation and Development. Economic Potential Study:
Beaufort County-, N. C.-, Raleigh, N.,C., 1968.

N. C. Department of Conservation and Development. Land,Po'tential.Study: Beau-
fort County, N.. C., N. C. Department of Conservation-and Development,
Raleigh, N. C., 1969.

A. MANNER OF DATA ASSEMBLY AND ANALYSIS

Due to time and monetary limitations, very little primary data was generated

for this study. Data,used in this plan was obtained from six different sources.

These sources are:

1) Standard references such as U.S. Census, N.C. Statistical Abstract,
N.C. Agricultural Statistics, Profile: N.C. Counties, etc.;

2) A county-wide survey-conducted by the Planning Board;

3) Small group discussions held county-wide;

4) Interviews;

S) Previous studies; and

6) Field studies.

Analysis of this data was conducted by staff and presented to the Planning

Board for their consideration.

The following is a bibliography of material used.

Barick, Frank B. and T. Stuart Critcher. Wildlife and Land Use Planning with
Particular Reference to Coastal-Countie'sN. C. Wildlife.Res,ources Commission,
Rale.ig1j,, N. C. T9_75.

Beaufort,Soil and Water Conservation District. An raisal of Potentials:
Outdoor.Devel2pEent,@Beaufort-Comty,.N.'C., Beaufort Soil and Water Con-
servation District, Washington, N. C. 1972.

Bechtel Incorporated. Overview of'.Pr9posed FMC Phospn e Operation, Beaufort
County,,North Carolin7a_@ -FMC.Corporation, 1975.

Bureau of Employment Security R'esearch. North Carolina Labor Force Estimates,,
Employment Security Commission of N.C., Raleigh, N.. C. 1975.

County Population Trends:,,North.Carolina 1790-1960. Carolina Population Center
U.N.C. and Statistical Services Center, N. C. Department of.Administration,
Raleigh,.N. C. 1969.

100

N.,C. Land Policy Council. "North Carolina Land Policy Council--A Land
Policy Program for North Carolina", Raleigh, N. C., 1976.

N. C. Department of Agriculture. North Carolina Agricultural Statistics,
1974-75,.Raleigh, N. C., 1975..

N. C. Department of Transportation. Seven Year Highway Plan,, Raleigh, N. C.,
1975.

Ospina, Enrique and Leon Danielson., North Carolina Land Use Data, The North
Carolina Agricultural Extension Service,.Raleigh, N. C., 1973.

Parsons, Brickeshoff, Hall and Macdonald. North Carolina Inland Waterways.
Parsons, Brinckeshoff,, et.. al., New York-,--N. Y., 1954.

Rodman, W. C. Comprehensive Water and-Sewer Study: Beaufort County, N. C.,
W. C. Rodman--Land Surveying and-Civil Engineering, Washington, N. C.1,1_971.

Sharpe, Bill. A New Geography-of,North Carolina,.Edward and Broughton, Raleigh,
N. C, 196 6.

U. S Department of Commerce. U. S. Census of Agriculture: 1959, WashingtonI
D. C.P 1960.

U. S. Department of Commerce. U. S. Census of Agriculture: 1964, Washington,
D. C.J% 1955.

U. S. Department of Commerce. U. S. Census of Agriculture, 1969, Washington,
D. C., 1970.

U. S. Department of Commerce. U. S. Census of Housing, Washington, D. C., 1972.

U. S. Department of Commerce. U. S. Census_.of.Population,,19 70: General Social-
and Economic Characteristics, Washington, D. C., 1972.

U. S. Department of Commerce. U. S. Census of Population, 1960: General Social
and Economic@Characteristics7,7WasHington, D. C., 1962.

U. S. Water Resources Council. OBERS Projections, Series E, Bureau of the Census,@,_:
Washington, D. C., 1972.

101

VEPCO. City of Washington and,Beaufort-County, North Carolina: A Economic
Study, Virginia Electric and Power Company of Williamston, N."C'.' 1964.

Welch, Robert L.@and Herbert A. .Kn ight. Forest Statistics for the Northeast
Coastal Plain of North Carolina, Uftited States Department of Agriculture,
Southeaste orest Experimental Station, Asheville, N. C., 1974

Wilkinson, Richard P. and R. Paul Darst. Critical Environmental Areas of
North Carolina, N. C. Department of Administration, Raleigh, N. C., 1972.

Wils on, Kenneth A. North Carolina.Wet1ands, Their Distribution and Nhnagement,
T, N. C., 1962.
N. C. Wildlife:Resources Conmission, Ralel-g

B. APPLICATION OF DATA TO,PIAN F01;MLATION

Once data was assembled and analyzed, then it was presented to the

Planning Board. The Planning Board utilized the data by using it as (1) a

catalyst to discussion of issues, (2) parameter to discussion,. and (3) docu-

mentation that problems and issues exist,

102

IX. CITY-COUNTY.RELATIONSHIP

103

RELATIONSHIP DEFINED

The'Washington, Aurora, Belhaven and Beaufort County Plans' relation-

ship can be.defined-as "a coordinated effort through effective land use plan-

..ning:to provide a balanced growth that.offers the best affordable working

and living environment for all Beaufort residents." This relationship has

been part of,a continuous process which has taken two forms: (1) complementing

goals and objectives and (2) a compatible County-City Land Classification

System.

Both,County and City Plans address similar interest and citizen concerns.

There are many examples of City and County Plan relationships in terms of

complementing goals and-objectives. For more specifics, the reader is asked

consult the goals and objectives sections of individual plans. In addition,

-examination of both-Land Classification Maps and text will graphically and

verbally depict compatibility and relationship of the plans land classifica-

@tion system..

While the municipalities of Aurora, Belhaven and Washington were per-

to prepare,-their own plans, the remaining municipalities were under

the county. A'small"Imini- lan!' has been prepared for each of those
p

These "mini-plans" give a more detailed look at each area. Goals

and desired growth patterns were not determined for each area. All popula-

tion figures are projections and may vary from local desires.

104

COASTAL AREA MANAGEMENT ACT

LA14D DEVELOPMENT PLAN

,BATH., NORTH CAROLINA

BEAUFORT-COUNTY

105

The@Town of Bath is locate&at.the confluence-of Bath and Back'Creek

on the north-side of the Pamlico River in Beaufort County. The town was

@incorporated in 1705 and is North Carol* Is oldest town.
ina

Bath played:an important role in th,6@-early history of North-Carolina.

It served.as the state port of entry for A,number of years. The General

Assembly met in Bath from 1744 to 1752. Blackbeard,,the notorious pirate,

made his headquarters in Bath.

'Today Bath is a quiet farming comunity. The primary means of access

to the town.is:via. N.C. 92 which links,Bath with Washington, 15 miles to

the west, tuid-Belhaveh,18 miles to the east. Transportation south, across

the Pamlico River, is provided by the ferry at Bayview. Secondary roads
,connect Bath with@surrounding rural areas.

0 POPULATION

Bath's population -is estimated at 220 for 1974. The town has been

experiencing a.decline in population since 1950 (Figure 1). This pattern

of population loss is.occurring at a more rapid rate than the county's popu@

.,lation decline.-

A look at Bath's population in 1970 shows that over 50 percent of the

population is over 45 years of age (Table 1). This is a disproportionate

number of,older people as compared to county, state and national averages.

The,higher proportion of older people indicates that Bath will not be as

-likely to increase in population due to deaths exceeding births. Any popu-

lation increases,or even maintaining existing population levels, will

-require people moving into Bath.

106

Table 1

Population by Age and Sex
Bath, 1970

Age, Total Male. Female Percent of Total Population

'Under 5 yrs. 7 4 3 3.03%
5 - 14 29. 14 is 12.55%

15 - 24 35 is 15.15%

25 - 34 is, 8 7 -6.49%

35 - 44 24 12 12 10.39%

45 - 54 25 13 12 10.82%

55 - 64 47 is 32 20.35%

65+ 49 18 31 21.21%

TOTAL 231 99 132 100.0%

Figure 1
Population T-rends
Bath, 1940-197S

400 380 381

375
350 6

325

300

275
250 231.
22S
220
200

1940 1950 1960 1970 1975

.107

The age distribution in.Bath also-has implications for provisions of
services by' local goverment. For instance, Bath probably would not be

interested in placing the major emphasis in their recreation program on

programs for pre-school children with only seven.pre-school children in town.

Other characteristics for the.231 people in Bath in-1970 include: 13

percent,of the population was Black, the average household size was 2.4

people, and 84.6 percent of the families in Bath had both husband and wife

living with the family.

ECONOMY

Bath is largely a residential community with residents commuting to

work. There are no industries in Bath or immediately adjacent to it. The

nearest-industry is Texa-4gulf, which is located across the river.

The. only businesses. in town are service related businesses, such as

general merchandise stores, service stations, a bank, grocery stores, etc.

There is-presently one marina located on Bath Creek and one on Back Creek,

@with others planned.

the Bath Historic DistTict,attracts a n-1,391ber of tourists to Bath. This

tourist trade supports a few gift shops and contributes to the support of

other service:-related businesses. This tourist trade does not represent a

significant contribution to Bath's local economy.

..''Plans are underway to establish a historic drama in Bath. If these

plans are realized,,there should be an increase.in the numberof tourists

visiting Bath and thus increased economic opportunity for those businesses

serving the tourist trade.

108

GOVEWIENT

Bath is governed by a Mayor-Council form of government. The town has

no full-time employees. The town has'a historic zoning regulation which is

not enforced..and,due to alack of standards within -t,-,he ordinance, is of

questionable legality.

EXISTING LAND.USE

Most of the land in Bath is vacant or in agricultural production. Of

the developed land in Bath., the overwhelming majority is residential. Com-

mercial development is spotted largely along the ,,Testern side of Main Street

and along-N.C. 92.
The Bath Historic District is centrally located in town. Land uses

.Within the Historic District include a visitors.' center, restored houses,

and residences.

There are no distinct commercial and residential areas,in Bat h. These

activities are located adjacent to each other but,due to the low level of

commercial activity, do not pose a problem of cmflictingland uses.

CONSTRAINTS ON DEVELOPMENT

Several factors act as--constraints on development in Bath. Thege may

be broken into the broad categories of land potential- the natural con-

straints placed on development-- and capacity of community facilities.

These constraints on development do not mean that development cannot take

place in the affected areas. With society's engineering expertise Bath can

develop anywhere, but the constraints listed will affect the economic

feasibility of developing.

109

Soils

Bath has good soils for development. The soils are moderately well

drained with a friable-subsoil. These type soils are suitable for septic

tanks. As such,.they provide. few constraints on development.

Flood Hazard

Areas within Bath.which are below a ten foot contour can be considered

flood prone. This means that they are subject to flooding in the event of
a 100-year frequency flood, in other words, they have a 1% chance of being

flooded in any given year.

The areas in Bath which meet this criteria are those immediately adja-

cent to Bath and Back Creek.,,Most structures that are located on property

adjacent to the creeks are situated so as to be out of the flood area.

Flooding presents little problem to existing development and poses few

constraints on future development.

Water. Supply

Bath relies on ground water for its water supply. Ground water is

abundant throughout the area,and availability of water provides no con-

straints.upon development.

-The,availability and quality of ground water could be affected by open

pit mining activities in the area. The town should remain cognizant of this

if,asked to comment on permits for additional pumping of ground water by a

mining concern.

:Wetlands

Small patches of marsh grass spot Bath's shoreline. This marsh grass

serves as a vital link in the food chain of the area's fisheries. As such,

110

efforts are madeat the state level to preserve as much of the marsh grass

..as possible. This is accamplished through the N. C. Dredge and Fill Act which

requires a state p6nnit for dredging an4 filling in North,Carolina coastal

waters..

The marsh grass also serves a beneficial purpose for the.property owner.

.The grass., due to its.rizone root structure, serves as an effective means of

erosion.control. Property owners,should encourage growth of the marsh grass

to prevent@%erosion. : .

Due to the small quantities of marsh grass in Bath, it does not serve

as a constraint on development.

'Scenic Areas and Townscape

The proximity of large bodies of water to Bath provide an abundance of

scenic vistas. , Enterin&, into Bath from the west along N.C. 92., one-passes

@'over,,Bath Creek. The initial view,of Bath, across Bath Creek with its marina

boat docks,creates a unique impression of Bath.

Once in town, the,tree-shaded streets., large, historic residences and

-rural,atmospherecreate a townscape@worth preserving... The-well.laid-out

:streets make,Bath reminisceht of Williamsburg and other colonial towns, but

for the shabby condition of many of Bath's buildings.

If.one proceeds down Main Street:to,Teach's Point, the panorama of Bath

Creek opening up into the@.Pamlico-River is afforded. The,development which

on the@-visible shoreline is obscured from view by a buffer zone

of-trees and other vegetation., As a..result, the shoreline looks undeveloped.

If Bath is to capitalize on.its historic past and retain its desirable
..features., it must preserve its scenic areas and townscape. This poses some

constraints on development, largely in thearea of architectural design of

buildings and provision of buffer zones between new@ ,Ievelopraent and the water.

Hdstoric Areas

The Bath Historic District, created by the General Assembly in 19S9.,

comprises a significantpon:ion of the town. Phe State of North.Carolina

owns the property on the Historic Site and controls the land use within.

Included within the site are the Pairer-Marsh House and the Bonner House.

The Town of Bath should take action to i nsure that development occur-

ring adjacent to the historic site is not detrimental to it. This could be

accomplished by a historic zoning district.

Presently there are no.constraints to development due to historic

sites except on state-owned property. if the toiAni adopted a historic zoning

district, these wouldbe a constraint on development adjacent to the historic

site. This would not preclude development; rather@it -would insure compatible

development.

Capacity of Community Facilities

Lack of community facilities or inadequate co=mmity facil-ities can

serve as a constraint on development. For imstance, the density of develop-

ment within Bath is limited as long as the to-im is dependent on septic tanks.

Other factors such as water systems, fire departments, etc. influence both

individuals and businesses in decisions on where to locate.

At the present time Bath has no wastewater facilities and relies totally,

on on-site disposal methods. This,in effectimposes a minimum lot size due

to the area needed for septic tank and drain field. This places a constraint

on development both from-a density standpoint and from the standpoint of the

town being unable to accommodate any type of development which cannot use

septic tanks for wastewater disposal.

112

The town has recent@y_constructed a water system. The system is sup-

..plied.by two deep wells with hydroneumatic tanks. A 12,000 gallon ground

tank provides,limited storage for the system. The distribution system con-

sists of .6!1-,, 41?, -and 211 mains and-sixteen fire hydrants. The only extension

outside the municipal limits is to Springdale Village, a residential area

just, to the,- east@ of town.,

The water system is adequate to meet Bath's anticipated demands. It

poses no constraints on devel opment.

ESTIMATED FUTURE DEMND

Population

Bath is projected to continue losing population. The town's past track

record is-failing to attract new residents; a lack of any basic job oppor-

tunit ies and a high percentage of people past the child bearing age tend to

,.bear this out.

The population@project'ion presented below was compu@ted by Freeman and

Associates for thaRegion QWater Resources Management Pla n_ A projection

..@isionly:.a guess based on past performance. Factors such.as the location of

in Bath or:a substantial,influx of tourists are not@taken into

if these'occurred,,then it would affect the

population change.

113

Table 2 Projected Population
Bath Township
Bath,' and Beaufort County
1970-2000

1970 1980 1990 2000' 2010 2020

Bath 231 13S 83 S1 32 20
Bath Township 3,237 2,993 2,837 2,712
Beaufort County 35,980 37,400 39,900 41,000 44,SOO

Source: Region Q Water Resources Management Plan; Township projections by
N.C. Department of Natural and Economic Resources.

Economy

There are no indications that Bath's service -related economy will change.

A decline in the area's population possibly will curtail the current level

of, service.

Bath has no basic industries and no developed industrial sites. The

probability of attracting industry is small.

The area with the most potential for growth in the,Bath economy is

tourism. If current plans for a historic drama are realized, there-should be

an increase in the number of tourists visiting historic Bath.

Bath Creek provides one of the finest sheltered harbors in Eastern North

Carolina. With a growing interest in recreational boating, more people are

seeking an area suchas Bath to build marinas. At the present time there

are a number of people interestedin opening marinas in Bath. These would

attract people into Bath on a short-term basis and supplement the tourist

-trade visiting Historic Bath. This would benefit those service related

businesses which rely'in part on tourist trade.

114

Future Land Needs

..If Bath should be able to reverse its population loss, it should concen-

trate-on developing land within the existing service areas of the town..

This:would allow the town to realize the greatest return on the investment

already made in the water system and would minimize the cost of providing

future services, such.as sewer.

This policy of containing growth@within the existing town boundaries and

existing services within those areas has resulted in the town being

classified Transitional in the county land use plan.

Community Facilities Demand
0
.,If the community maintains,its; present population or declines in popula-

tion, the present water system and reliance upon on-site disposal of waste-

water is adequate. A gain in population or location of an industry in Bath

might require'a wastewater treatment system.

LAND USE ISSUES

ln@: summary.,., the: land- use: issues facing Bath are:

I)-Continuing population loss;
2)-Lack of'local. economic base,*
3)A high:proportion of elderly population;
4) A need to protect the historic aspects of Bath;
5) A need to retain the existing townscape;
6) A need to protect the scenic properties.of Bath;
7) The impact of marina development on Bath Creek and Bath itself; and
8) The.impact of an outdoor drama on Bath.

IWLEENTATION
If Bath is to retain the desirable characteristics of the community and
address the land use issues outlined above, it must,

115

1) Form a planning board to advise local officials on development
issues;

2) Make a decision on. whether the town will attempt to attract
industry, increase the tourist trade, or face a continuing
loss of population; and-

3) Develop landuse -regulations to protect the historic aspects
of Bath, the townscape and the aesthetic qualities of the town.

Due to its small,size it is questionable whether Bath would be able to

properly administer a set of land use regulations as proposed. The town

should explore the possibility of the county administering these regulations

for the town.

116

COASTAL AREA MANAGEMENT ACT

LAND DEVELOPMENT PLAN

CHOCOWINITY.0- NORTH CAROLINA

BEAUFORT COUNTY

117

The Town of Chocowinity is located on the south,bank of the Pamlico,

opposite Washington. It is an old,community, originally strictly agricultural.

The large plantations which supported the town were-broken up after the Civil

War. Since that.time Chocowinity h as been largely a crossroads trading place.

Primary access to Chocowinity is afforded via U.S. 17 which connects

Chocowinity with Washington,.four miles to the north, and New Bern, 31 miles

to the,south.., U-S-264 also connects Chocowinity with Washington and with

Greenville, 16 miles to the west. N.C.'33 links Chocowinity with Aurora, 26

miles to the,east. Secondary roads connect Chocowinity with the surrounding

rural areas. The Norfolk-Sout hern railroad serves the comunity.

POPULATION

Chocowinity was;formally incorporated during the 1950's. The 1960
Census.indicated that Chocowinity's population was 580. The 1970 Census

indicated.a@small drop in population to 566. Chocowinity's population for
,1974 was estimated at 580,' back up to the 1960 level.

TABLE 1

POPULATION BY AGE AND SEX
CHOCOWINITY, 1970
Percentof
Age Total Male Female Total Population

Under Syrs. 46 21 25 8.1%
5 14 94 31 63 16.6%

15 24 97 41 56 17.2%

25 34 67 38 29 11.8%

35 44 59 28 31 10.4%

45 54 84 39 45 14.8%

55 64 63 32 31 11.1%

65+ 56 20 36 10.0%

TOTAL S46 250 316 100.0%

118

'A look at Chocowinity's population in 1970 (Table 1) shows a normal

distribution.by age group. There is an unusuallyhigh.percentage of females

in the S - 24 age group.

These age and sex distributions have implications for services provided

by local government. For instance, if Chocowinity was providing a recreation

program for young people,.that -recreation program would be affected by the

large number of females relative to males in the 5 - 24 age group.

Other characteristics of the 566 people in Chocowinity in 1970 include:

only 4.6 percent of the town's population was Black- compared to 33.2 percent

for the county; the average household size was 2.8 people; and, 82.9 percent

of the families had both husband and wife living at home.

ECONOMY

Chocowinity originated as. an agricultural community. However, like the

county,- Chocowinity has in recent years broadened its local economy. Hatteras

Industrial Corp. located in Chocowinity in 1966,employing 5 9 workers. The

Singer Company opened a plant in 1970 which employs 275. Edinburg Hardwood

Lumber Company opened in 1971 and employs 30. In addition to these local

plants, a number of people commute tojobs in Washington, Greenville and

Texasgulf.

In addition to the above industries, a number of retail establishments

line U. S. 17 between Chocowinity and Washington. A livestock market is

located south of town.

119

LOCAL GOVERNMENT

Chocowinity is governed by a Mayor-Council form of government. The town

has two full-time employees--a town clerk and a policeman. The town exercises

no regulations which would impact larid development patterns.

EXISTING LANDUSE

Most of the land in Chocowinity is vacant, or in forestry or agricultural

production.. Of the developed landj@the overwhelming majority is residentia 1.

Commercial development exists-in strips along-U.S. 17 and N.C. 33.

A pattern of development has emerged in Chocowinity, where comwrcial
is located along the major thoroughfares. Residential development

"i's-located behind this ccmmercial. strip on connector roads.

Conflicting.and-undesirable land@use,patterns have occurred in Chocowinity

due-to the@.commerciai strip devel opment. Residential neighborhoods abut

commercial and industrial land use.

CONSTRAINTS ON DEVELOPMENT

Several factors-act as constraints on development in Chocowinity. These

-may be broken down into the broad categories of land potential -- the natural

'constraints placed on development -- and capacity of community facilities.

These,,constraints-on,developmeiit do not mean that development cannot take

place in the affected areas, only that the development may not be economically

feasible.

120

Soils

Chocowinity has moderately well drained soils. The subsoils are firm

resulting in a low percolation rate. The low percolating rates impose con-

straints on the use of septic tanks, thereby imposing a constraint on develop-

ment.

Water Supply

The Town of Chocowinity is presently served by a water system supplied

by one deep well., A 75,000 gallon elevated.sto-rage tank supplies,a distribu-

system of 8" and 6" mains. The town is constructing an additional well

and an additional 27S,000 gallons of elevated storage.

The area had abundant groundwater; therefore,water supply provides no

constraints upon development.

Capacity of Community Facilities

Lack of community facilities or inadequate facilities can serve as a

constraint on development. For instance, the density of development in
Chocowinity is limited as long as:the town is dependent upon individual

septic tanks as a means of wastewater disposal. Factors such as this in-

fluence both individuals and businesses in location decisions.

At the present time, Chocowinity has no wastewater, or sewage system.

.,This, in effect, imposes a minimum lot size due to.the-area needed for indi-

vidual septic taiiks-and drain fields. This places-@a constraint on develop-

ment both from a density standpoint and,from the standpoint,of the town being

unable to accommodate any type of development which cannot use septic tanks

for wastewater disposal.

121

ESTIMATED FUTURE DEMAND

Population

Chocowinity is projected to continue-losing population. Since Chocowinity

was incorporated-durixig-the 19501s, the only Census data for the town is the

1960 and 1970 Census. The town lost a small number of people between 1960 and

1970; therefore,most population projections will indicate a decline in popula-

tion..

The population projection presented below (Table 2) was computed by

Freemanand Associates for the Region Q Water Resources Management Plan. A

'projection is only a guess based on past performance. Factors such as the

.location of an industry in Chocowinity are not-taken into account in the

projection and if such occurs, it would affect the population change.

Table 2 PROJECTED POPULATION
CHOCOWINITY, CHOCOWINITY' TOWNSHIP AND BEAUFORT COUNTY

Area 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020

Chocowinity S66 532 509 490 475 462

Chocowinity Township 4,661 4,854 S,050 S,300

Beaufort County 35,980 37,400 38,900 41,000 44,500 49,200

Source: Re, ter,Resour t Plan; Township projections by
gion Q Wa ces Managemen
N. C. Department of Natural and EconmTc-Pesources.

The projected decline in population for Chocowinity seems unrealistic

in view,of:

1) An estimated increase in population between 1970 and 1974.
2) A projected increase in township population, and
3) Anticipated growth in the Washington area.

122

Economy

Chocowinity should benefit from expected development in the western

.portion of Beaufort County. With development of a -wastewater treatment,

facility, the town will be more attractive to industries.

Future Land Needs.

Choc6winity has enough vacant land-idrhifi its botnidaries,to meet future

land needs.,

The town is classed Transitional in the:coim.ty land use plan. Under this

-classification, the county would have a policy of providing facilities in this

area before in Community or Rural areas.

.Community Facilities Demand

Chocowinity's water system is adequate to meet anticipated demand. Due

to poor soil conditions, the town will need a sewer system to accommodate

future demand.

LAND USE ISSMES

In suhmary, the land use issues faciing.Chocoi,;inity are:

.1. Strip development along major thoroughfares;

2. Conflicting land uses; and.

3. Need for municipal sewer system.

I@TLEYENTATION

If Chocowinity-is to address the'land use issues outlined above, it

Must:

1. Expedite development of a municipal sewer system, and

2. Establish,zoning to address the issues of strip development and
conflicting land uses.

123

COASTAL AREA MANAGEMENT ACT

LAND DEVELOPMENT PLAN

PANTEGOj.NORTH CAROLINA
BEAUFORT COUNTY

124

The Town of Pantego is located on'Pantego Creek in eastern Beaufort

County. The foundation of.the town was laid in 177S when homes were estab-

lished on three hundred.acres north of Pantego Creek.. No growth occurred

until 1840 when lumbering,-operations were started. The town was incorporated

in.1881 with a population of approximately 300. After 1900 a number of

-dr.ainage.districts were formed west of town. Since that period Pantego has

been a farming community.

'The primary means of access to P@Lntego is via U.S.
264 which links

Pantego with Washington, 27 miles to the westj and Belhaven, 4 miles to the

east. N.C..,99 connects Pantego with Plymouth in Washington County, 23 miles

north. Secondary roads.connect Pantego with surroundingrural areas. The

town is served by a railroad line.

POPUI ATION

Pantego's population is estimated at 220 for 1974. The town has been

experiencing a decline in,population since 1940 (Figure 1). This pattern

of population loss is occurring at a more rapid rate than the county's

population decline.

A look'at Pantego's population!in 1970 shows that only 15.6 percent of
0 its population is in the 2S-44 year age bracket. This is the result of

past population loss. Generally, those who leave a community are the young

who are seeking greater opportunity elsewhere. If Pantego is to reverse

past pattern of population los s, opportunities will have to be proVided

for those completing their secondary education.

125

FIGURE 1

POPULATION TRENDS
Pantego, 1940 1975

300 294

280
262
260

250

240

230
18 220
220. -------

200 1940 19so 1960 1970

126

TABLE I

POPULATION BY AGE AND SEX
PANTEGO, 1970

Percent of
Age Total Male F6male Total Population

Under S yrs. is 7 8 6.9%

5 14 35 17 18 16.1%

15 24 28 16 12 12.8%

2S 34 24 14 11.0%

35 44 10 5 5 4.6%

45 S4 22 7 is 10.1%

55 64 40 20 20 18.3

65t 44 15 29 20.2%

TOTALS 218 101 117 100.0%

127

71he age distribution pattern in Pantego also has indications for pro-

vision of.services by local government. For instance, Pantego would want to

aim a recreation program at school age children and older adults rather thazi

only programs aimed at adults 25-44 years old,

Other characteristics.of the 218 people in Pantego in 1970 include:

37.7 percent of the population was Bllac_k; the average household, size was

2.9 people, and 83.9 percent of the families.had both husband and wife

living at home.

ECONOMY

Pantego has largely a farm-service related --conomy. Almost all of the

businesses. in town are farm@- service re1ated.

There are no industries located in Pantego. The nearest industries are

in Belhaven.

GOVERVENT

Pantego is governed by@a Mayor-C6uncil form of government. The town

has no full-time employees. The town exercises no regulations.which would

impact land development patterns.

EXISTING LAND USE

Most of the land in Pantego is vacant or. in forestry or agricultural

production. Of the developed land in-Pantego, the overtvhelming majority is

residential. Commercial development is spotted largely along U.S. 264.

The only distinct commercial area in town is at the. junction of U,S. 264

.and N.C. 99. Several comercial establishments are grouped together here.

Elsewhere, commercial and residential-areas are not distinct. There are

no real conflicting land,uses in Piantegodue to the low level of deve lopment.

128

CONSTRAINTS ON DEVELOPMENT

Several-factors: act as constraints on development in Pantego. These

may be-broken,.down,into the broad categories of land potential - the natural

placed on development - and capacity of community facilities.

These constraints on development do not mean that development cannot take

-place in the affected areas, only that the development may not be economically

feasible.

@Soils

Pantego has poor to very poorly-drained soils. While the soils have a

good percolation rate, they are affected by seasonally high water tables,

-twelve.to-eighteen inches below the surface. Due to this,the area is not

suitable for septic tanks and,therefore,provides a constraint upon develop-

ment.

Flood Hazard

Large areas of Pantego lie@in the flood hazard zone. This means they
identified-by the.Federal Insurance Administra tion as subject to C
floodInglin the event of a 100-year frequency. flood. In'other words., they

percent chance of being:flooded in any given year.

The.areas in Pantego which meet this criteria are those adjacent to

Creek. Flooding;in these areas provides.a constraint on development

(Map 1)

Water Supply

'Pantego does,not have a municipal-water system. A study has been made

the feasibility of installing a small groundwater system for

.'_the town, but-to date, funding has not been acquired.

The area has abundant groundwater and whether relying on individual wells

or a water system, there is no constraint on development due to water supplies.
129

Flood llnzard Aron

palit('go,

A, .......

L 4:::::
I ..........
y
.. . .......
.................
. . ..............
. ........
...... .....
cPr-CIAC
-A
.............. ............

... ...........
..... .. ..... ..... ....
...... . ...... .... ......
.. .. .... ..

CD ....... .
CD

-ZD: i:

00 . ......

o 6
coz-.,
Iq .-Gov,

129-A

Netlands

Marsh grass can be found along,,@antego.Creek. This marsh grass serves

as.a vital link in the food chain of:-the area's fisheries. As such, efforts

...are,made.at.the @�tate:level to preserve as much.of the marsh grass as possi-

ble. This is accomplished throughthe N. C. Dredge and Fill Act which re-
a state permit.for dredging and filling in%rth Carolina coastal

waters..

The marsh grass also serves a beneficial purpose for the property owner.

Thegrass, due to its rizone root structure,.ser .v.es as.an effective means

of erosion,control.. Property owners should encourage the growth of the

to prevent erosion..

Where marsh grass is present along Pantego Creek, it should serve as a

constraint upon development.

Community Facilities

Lack@of community-facilities or inadequate.community facilities can

serve-as a constraint on development. For instance, the density of develop-

.:ment.:in Pantego is'limited as long as-the town is dependent on individual

wells:and septic tanks- These factors influence both individuals and busi-

in decisions on where to locate.

At the present time, Pantego has neither a water system or a wastewater

system. This, in-effect, binposes a minimum lot size due to the area needed.
@@-for individual well, septic tank an&design field. This places a constraint

on,development both from a density standpoint-and from the standpoint of

the town.being-unable to accamodate any type of development which cannot

I* use septic.tanks for wastewater disposal.

130

T 'RE DBMAND
ESTIMAIED FUTU

Population

Pantego is projected to continue losing population. The town's past

track record in failing to retain young adults and a lack of basic ido

opportunities tend to bear this out.

The population projection presented-beloiwT (T-able 2, was computed by

Freeman and Associates for the-Region Q Water Resources Management Plan.

A-projection is only a guess based on past perfonriance. Factors such as the

location.of an industry in Pantego are not taken into account in the projec-

tion;and,if such occurs, it would affect the papulation change.

Table 2 PROJECTED POPULATION
PANTEGO, PANTEGO TOWNSfHP AND BEAUFORT COLNTY
1970-2020

.Area 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020

Pantego .218 172 139 114 94 97

'Pantego Township 5,126 5,043 4,958 4,916

Beaufort County @5,980, 37,400 38,900 41,000 44,500 49@1200

SOURCE: Region Q Water Resources Management Plan-, Township Projection by
N. C. Department of Natural and Economic Resources.

Econorgy
There are no indications that Pantego's land econemy will change from 46
its present-farm senrice economy. There are no industrial sites and no

infrastructure to attract any industry.

131

Future Land Needs

If Pantego should be able.to service its population loss, there is

adequate vacant land within the corporate limits to meet future land needs.

The town is classed Tri4�itional in the county,land use plan. Under

this classification, the county would have a policy of providing facilities

in this area before in Community or Rural areas. Due to little prospect for

growth, Pantego should have a low priority of the Transitional areas in pro-

vision of services.

Comimmity Facilities Demand

If.the community maintains its present population or declines in popu

lation, the reliance on individual-well and septic tank is adequate. A

gain in population or location of an industry in Pantego, might require a

wastewater system.

LAND USE ISSUES

In summary, the land use issues facing Pantego are:

1) Continuing population loss,

2) Lack of any local basic jobs;

3) Soil condition unsuitable for proper septic tank operations; and

4) Extensive areas@subject to flooding.

INPLEMENTATION

If Pantego is to address the land use issues outlined above, it must:

1) Explore suitable means for wastewater disposal;

2) Make a decision on whether the town will seek location of an.
industry in Pantego or rely on the farm service economy; and

3) Request that the county regulate development in the flood hazard
area so residents will be eligible for federally backed flood
insurance.

132

Pq Department comerce
('@nter Library,

Charleston, Sc 2.9405-2413

3 6668 14102 0752