[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]
COASTAL ZONE INFORMATION CENTER Beaufort County LAND USE [email protected]/ 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 [email protected] 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 0 0 40 0 0 0 I. INTRODUCTION 0 1 0 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. 2 0 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. 3 0 i 0 0 0 0 0 0 II. DESCRIPTION OF PRESENT CONDITIONS 0 0 4 v 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 [email protected] 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 [email protected] 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. 5 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. 6 01.9 0 40 000 80 4V 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. 8 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 [email protected] 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. 9 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. 12 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 13 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; '[email protected] 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. 14 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. 15 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 [email protected] 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. 17 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 [email protected] 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 [email protected] ty "10)498 Net CoTnmuting-Gain or toss -380 +561 Source: [email protected] ComrLission_of North Carolina North Carolina Co=Mting Patterns, 1960 and 1970... 18 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 [email protected] 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 [email protected] 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� [email protected] [email protected]@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. [email protected] .Household Appliances .Seacrest Marine Corp. Washington I [email protected] Washington Beverage Co. Washington Carbonated Beverages 10-19 *Washington Garment Co. Washington ...C.hildreft.l.�[email protected] 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 20 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 21 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. 22 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. 24 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 25 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 [email protected] 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. 27 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. 28 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. 29 III. MAJOR LAND USE ISSUES (PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ACTIVITIES) 30 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) [email protected], 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 32 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: 33 (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. 34 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 [email protected] 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 [email protected] 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 [email protected] 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. 36 Phosphate mining and,more [email protected],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 [email protected],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 37 16 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. 38 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 [email protected] 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 39 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: 40 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,[email protected] 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- 41 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 [email protected]@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 [email protected] Thosegroups have.been successful in protecting the [email protected]"s cultural, and historical resources. Plans for, and'control of growth in-the,couaty should include provisions for conserving these resources. 42 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 [email protected] 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,[email protected]!ft or [email protected] grOwt in t 0 include provisionsfor conserving valuable cultural and hist [email protected]!+&sources,.- ;.;-,:.To seek, [email protected] upgrading.,qf @higbways..U.,)-,S. 17 -264.- 43 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. 44 -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. 45 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 46 '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 [email protected] 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. 47 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, [email protected] 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 [email protected] 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. 48 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. 49 IV. CONSTRAINTS ON DEVELOPMENT so 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, 51 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. 52 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.. 53 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 [email protected] 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 [email protected] Ocean and the lands thereunder from the mean high water [email protected] 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 S4 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 55 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 Register of Historic Places and as such will.be considered as areas of 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. 56 A 6 SEE T 2 9 SEE NO E 1 0" 4i. BEAUFORT COUNTY-'-,, NORTH CAROUNA [email protected] - 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, .0 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 [email protected] 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 [email protected],_:_(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 [email protected] 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 [email protected] 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 ... [email protected]@ 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 [email protected] -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 [email protected] 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 [email protected] is deemed recoverable by current technology as ore (material that can be extracted and processed profitably) is 57 ul ........ . 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 [email protected],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. :[email protected]_-,,[email protected],,,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. 58 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. 59 Town of Pantego The Town of Pantego presently does not have a municipal water system. A study was [email protected] 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. 60 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 61 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, [email protected] [email protected] 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. 62 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[email protected] 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. 63 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. 64 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% C 65 V. EST I MATED DEMAND 66 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 [email protected] The following figure charts the projected populations to the year 2020. Table 15 breaks the population prbJettim '[email protected]'1970-,[email protected] 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 67 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 [email protected] 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 [email protected], 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. 68 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 69 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 70 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 [email protected]@117 11,125 12,300. Washington Park S17 356 268 204 156 120 SOURCE: Region Q Water Resource @[email protected], 197S, except.for Aurora and Belhaven which were prepared by the town planners. 71 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. [email protected] 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. 72 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 73 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. 74 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. 75 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. 76 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)[email protected] 11.1510.27 39PS87.15 .30 140.16,00 246.67 Pantego 11294)03S 5)935.94 [email protected],29S.94 .32 -0- -0- Washington [email protected],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 [email protected] Carolina Department of Natural and Economic Resources. db db vi, PLAN DESCRIPTION 78 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 [email protected] 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. 79 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. 80 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 81 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, 82 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 [email protected] 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: 83 (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 [email protected] 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 84 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 85 (b) Steep slopes and prominent high.points (c) Frontal dunes (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 (c) Inlet lands (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 (c) Undeveloped key parts of existing water supply watershed (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., 86 VIII POT,ENTIAL'AREAS OF ..ENVIRONM.ENTAL CONCERN 87 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 [email protected] tration and.not for determining areas requiring permits. 0 88 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. 89 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 [email protected] 6r preserve the [email protected]'r`[email protected]' ''of Aistricts. sites,@ building and objects in the above categories. APPROPRIATE LAND [email protected] Adjacent [email protected] 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. 90 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. 91 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 [email protected] 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 [email protected] 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. 93 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. 95 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%[email protected] 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 [email protected];_ 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. 96 Local goverment can [email protected] 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. 97 VIII, SUMMARY (BIBLIOGRAPHY) 98 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. 99 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 [email protected] -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 [email protected],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 [email protected] 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 [email protected] 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,[email protected] 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 [email protected] 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 [email protected] .,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 0 .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 [email protected]%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 [email protected] 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 [email protected] is afforded. The,development which on [email protected] 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 [email protected] ,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; [email protected] -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 [email protected]_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,- [email protected] 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 [email protected]'ion presented below was [email protected] by Freeman and Associates for thaRegion QWater Resources Management Pla n_ A projection [email protected]:.a guess based on past performance. Factors such.as the location of in Bath or:a substantial,influx of tourists are [email protected] 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 [email protected] 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 [email protected]: 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 [email protected] 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 [email protected] 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 [email protected],patterns have occurred in Chocowinity due-to [email protected] 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 [email protected] 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. [email protected] 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 [email protected] 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 [email protected] service re1ated. There are no industries located in Pantego. The nearest industries are in Belhaven. GOVERVENT Pantego is governed [email protected] 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 [email protected] 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, 61 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 [email protected] 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 Sl 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 [email protected] 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 [email protected] 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