[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]
CAMA LAND DEVELOPMENT PLAN BELHAVEN, NORTH CAROLINA ADOPTED: NOVEMBER 3, 1980 -Z HD 268 .B45 L36 1980 LAND DEVELOPMENT PLAN BELHAVEN, NORTH CAROLINA NOVEMBER, 1980 C S C Prepared under the auspices of the North Carolina Coastal Area Management Act of 1974 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Prepared by: BELHAVEN PLANNING BOARD Dr. Charles Johnson, Chairman Mr. George Ebron Mr. Charles Latham Mr. Charles E. Powell, Jr. Mr. Mike Calfee Mr. Wilber Logan Mr. C. G. Tinker BELHAVEN TOWN COUNCIL Honorable Ralph Wallace, Mayor Mr. Z. J. Denton Mr. Jimmy Hodges Mr. W. P. O'Neal, Jr. Mr. W. R. Edwards Mr. R. B. Whitley The preparation of this report was financed in part through a grant from National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U. S. Department of Commerce. CONTENTS CHECKLIST 1. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS II. DEVELOPMENT POLICIES III. LAND CLASSIFICATION IV. ASSESSMENT OF PLAN EFFECTIVENESS V. INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION VI. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION vw SECTION I DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Dim INFORMATION BASE This plan is an updated version of Belhaven's first CAMA land use plan which was prepared in 1976. Section I contains a description of existing conditions within Belhaven and its extraterritorial jurisdiction. Topics covered in this section in- clude population, economy, land use, a list of current Town plans, policies and regulations, an identification of constraints to development and the estimated demand for community facilities o ver the next ten years. The data base was compiled Targelythrough a review of secondary sources, i.e., published information regarding the.material cited above. This method was supplemented by interviews with the City Manager and other local officials. Special topics - such as the material.dealing with com- mercial fishing and hi storic pres.ervat.ion were based upon interviews with state officials and personnel from the Mid-East Commission and other as appropriate. Throughout this report, the approach has been to identify changes which have occurred in Belhaven since the 1976 plan was prepared, particularly changes of such a nature as.to require a basic re-orientation of the Town's plan. The major conclusion of*the review of existing conditions it that the population of Belhaven seems to be..growing again. This is in contrast to the several-decades-long decline reported in the 1976 plan. This phenomenon is, of course, subject to verification by the 1980 Census which was conduct- ed during the course'of this study. Second, manufacturing employment seems to have increased in the planning area over the past five years, thus-sup- porting the estimated population increase. Employing the same methodology for future population estimates used in the 1976 plan, the third major conclusion is that the future population of the Town v,-;ll exceed the earlier forecast by a substantial percentage. Finally, and p--haps most important- ly, there appears to be a new interest in assisting rn_,; stimulating growth by the Town itself. This is evidenced by the decisior to undertake a com- munity development program, by statements of interest fn seeking new indus- tries for the waterfront, and by the Town's applicatic@- for Growth Center designation under the Balanced Growth Policy Act. -2- Go 37 civilQ I -1i I MY Colville S!, 17 1IS9 Jackwo I1 .11 17 Pat..&, I;-@X 2 Icro;S .6 ofilell Revision + 0, Wnot& Un Lt title Elizabe Halifax Oz land 1H F* 0D"lo 6 ,\@Shfth Q-L 'Ahoskie el der* ch.pano so@l pry510 solown uste 1 611 Old IPL U I A 11 Nixonlon .0%eefs.Ug ;tF-. -Aulandei 7yner SPI Is 7andef sville QI ... 1112 j, + min 4 rRo' eWestford "anoICCq AN% awwwr Enfield 13 RDSkYtIOC Dissents Neck 2Burde it7 4258 @l Valhalla 5tewiston Mount Gould ASkewville ga Scotto III Neck" noock -N well2Ashton -@Iil-@- Pt. stakers-4*35D--d Fit. 6/ lmyraa3 13 cahaba or" Midway Ed,nhou%e BIT tleboro51so 17 144h-ood ck LawrenceE Merl Mill6 he.toundta ,,ortka, I lu tA4 euett6 sit Sped 0sh C-4 90 Quitsna q@'4" 12 45 54Gobi a*" -,,1 F EDG-E C-0BE3 ......aleasant Gw C I -5 142364 4-17 1@13 lea seas 64 A. Woodard d. Scupperno TA-80ARDT44 j Hasseil9C ra 'ell 94 2+ IPrinceville old PointPr yrro Cher 7/Do r dUth Frying P 43 42 Wili a Stott A SWASHINGION'6 St. Pk. c43 Linville am 0-,w el 21 I 6ATPhelps Lake PlAstoAZ9Sear Gross is!13T YRR E L U Hinso Neck 124 0,\ 18 37,@ 71 Wenon@/@3.1,9. Lk, cclesfiela 3Crisp ,,-I-i- - - - I I %t; Sto... 61,c5 z ralklan 30 Alligator 33 13 r, 11 L4ke; ritkenn siru7710 FountaiUQ, 'I Toddy 43 Pliciolus\ on! Is Fz0R 7 2'far nville82 1 tj %10rante /H D are M I e, .... i-- d SouTlIFF-m2.... i-- for "'ootal siffie 14 impson i Lot 13 lp3r wyn i=- 13 26411Tis 7 Lake interville 11 Chq Scranton a, iLizzie4Black JkC' 6 92 Win'st 'd ilLe-\, S@'63 Ranso 7 Round see 171 23 Ond Bsyvie + Gull Rock 10 kIIly" I I , Hoke3Care FREE FY@, suit, Quarter, Calico Point Pamlico aRose At Wilmar ;L,!t IT,----I .......... 258 Cox Cross Sou,-Ih--) Bonsienots @,AfAlj@i WILDLIFE iVFUGE I Sk'" F4 Ciet-c(seek- At;@- Edwar3wlan@ GRE\ Dawson sfinge Vanceboto412 'nge Aurora "Filly, 'so 'Fon@fl&n.ell2 cnLI Hobucken insiton+N0Ceylon P\ M sic Holltvirlle 549, fcash ne 70 Poer cAV -'-El, NAkm Marioe2iLqd ere a., Pt. 55 C ve CR, WI ity Asper+ Fork8 4ayboro "Florence 70Y0IYmDia 7onews, -,? X, EN014 V r. 7-1@ Is carora@ 55 Merrill Whortonsvi X. /4 New Ber is met orismoulli Rhe,4-' P@ AML10Pamlic@, 'Ra".,, Pleasant hill ol@,rl..IBev Ik H@jl5Trenton +Oriental,,@ 7vk 0S7West Bom NER. 2 Potiocksville liverda 1, < <a4-Cqrn(-it-2ArIE, South River 1@ Lola , I--noso CEDAR ,cr CRO@TAN CrostaqA"'r,@ -., 12 to-Is -'HOFMANN j -- :' , ,In ,,1-% Merrimis Id. C41fish Petersburg _Alt Lok Long 2 a 5_411antic !ulaville @Ylays@ille NAfT101 Loll, +Havelock, 'o,.ID- 1.1,1 24 <1 31 xI @ichland"-:' FOREST a, L. -Sealevel Little 't" tilde &a ke Lsahsr,@,:N@AN it h Haft. Bell 10 y@Pa he -3 Cath"'i kl@ L- -F lou @q I's Harlowe 101REGIONAL LOCATION nl@i, Lake 58FRST3 'Pix0 %W N1. 5AR Catherine -L,+Kellum uhnsT r <7 Newpcr ,,\, - lei am.,i- 11--I rehead SPICE SN Jacks nville,-@.-,. 71: Fe0NLLP!Iet,ef O.E., 4-@ ity +?: sl 53 .6!?YIPITe4nsb ek it H@,betl 6c el2-Beaufort I.VORKS 4Bogve % S.." FI- 7Facoo" .11.7s", 1, arkei a Pine Kn*;1W. 4a7 zz@n.- 1501How 17-ey eers S ns or+Flo.AF.EW.NEEPtS - PLANNERS * ARCHMECTS Solicit Path Beach Ind,I -Am-c L!jEjNEh CFOLMZTS met dBea NO-1 A- 51 Pi. SURVEYWS Verona mA VIE PAS. as ma le Ili][ a&V., nlef Isle i,. c @, @-@ CAPE 100KOUll, GAAAD PAPE& IA SAw-ORID PLC 17: .1,1 POPULATION Belhaven's 1976 CAMA Land Use Plan contained an exhaustive description of the Town's population structure (pp. 15-27). A review of that material reveals no errors of fact nor of interpretation. Since 1976, some new information has become available which would sub- stantially change the picture presented in 1976. That picture is one of a relatively stable population over the past forty years. More specifically, the Town's population has varied within a narrow range since 1940 as shown in Table 1. TABLE 1 TOWN OF BELHAVEN POPULATION SINCE 1940 Year: 1940 1950 1960 1970 1978 Population: 2,360 2,528 2,386 2,259 2,390* 1978 estimate prepared by N. C. Department of Administration The estimated population increase from 1970 to 1978 can be interpreted as indicating a new period of growth for the Town (no annexations occurred during,this period). On the other hand, some analysts have commented that state agency estimates of municipal populations tend to be optimistic, i.e., that they are characteristically higher than actual.head counts produce. As the 1980 U.S. Census is being conducted at this writing, it seems point- less to debate the precise figure here. What is important is the order of magnitude and the direction of change. In March 1980, the Town's electrical -3- system had a total of 953 active residential accounts. Assuming that this figure represents the maximum number of dwellings in Town and further assum- ing a range of 2.7 - 3.0 persons per household, the Town's likely population range is 2,573 - 2,859. This range is consistent with the upward 'trend reported by the N. C. Department of Administration and is consistent also with a national trend of increasing rural populations. Finally, it is con- sistent with recent projections for Beaufort County. Over the past forty years, Belhaven's population has averaged 6.55% of the County's population. Population projections for Beaufort County prepared by the N. C. Department of Natural Resources and Community Development show a 1980 population range of 39,600 - 41,600. At the historical rate, Belhaven's 1980 share would be in the range.of 2,599 - 2,725. The conclusion it that Belhaven's population has grown measurably since 1970 and probably is higher now than at any time in the past forty years., SEASONAL POPULATION CHANGES Many North Carolina coastal communities experience public service over- loads during the summer when the normal population doubl'es or triples with the influx of tourists. Streets become overcrowded both with pedestrians and. automobiles, sewer systems become overloaded, and water supply systems prove inadequate to meet temporary demands. Belhaven to date has not experienced major population fluctuations during,any season. The one exception to this is during the annual Fourth of July celebration when the local'fireworks display attracts 'visitors for a single day from nearby communities. The major problem is traffic con,gestion and inadequaterestaurant seating capacity. The-Town still has only one motel. A second motel, planned in conjunc- tion with a marina at the N.C. 92 bridge over Pantego Creek, has not been developed as anticipated in 11976. The 1976 Plan discusses seasonal population changes, concluding that there is no major problem for Belhaven (p. 97). That assessment is still correct. -A- ECONOMY The 1976 plan identified Belhaven's economic structure as a classic case of geographic determinism; "Since the Town is in a predominantly rural area with excellent water resources, it is understandable that the local basic economic activities revolve around farming, commercial fishing, and- 1 umber i ng. . .In Addition, manufacturing and tourism are present. Finally the retail trade sector appears relatively strong because of the Town's dis- tance from other urban centers. Changes in Belhaven's economy since 1976 are virtually imperceptible. Commercial fishing and associated activities still dominate the economy. Seafood processing, for instance, is the single largest industry by number of persons employed. Manufacturing firms located *in the Belhaven area are listed in Table 2. Tak ing the average value for each size class, manufacturing employment in the Belhaven area is estimated at 503. This estimate cannot be directly compared with the estimates contained in the 1976 plan due to differences in firms covered and methodology. The present data do suggest, however, that manufacturing has at least remained stable over the past five years, and has probably increased slightly with the opening of the Coastline Sports Wear Company. It represents a distinct improvement over manufacturing employment for all of Pantego Township in 1970 when only 427 manufacturing jobs were reported. Comm ercial fishing and related activities (crab and seafood processing and packing) deserve some additional discussion due to their prominence in Belhaven's economy.. Estimates by the N. C. Division of Marine Fisheries put l'on-boat" employment in Belhaven at approximately 120 about half of whom are engaged specifically in crabbing. Processing and packing firms employ 60-75 persons on a full-time basis and approximately 350 at the height of the season (July August). Belhaven is listed as the "hailing port" for forty TABLE 2 MANUFACTURING FIRMS BELHAVEN, NORTH CAROLINA 1979 EmplDyment Firm Product Class Adams Logging Pine, Pulpwood A Blue Channel Company Crabmeat Baker Crab Company Crabmeat Belhaven Feed Mill Feed, Fertilizer. 13 Belhaven Fish & Oyster Company Crabmeat Harris Furniture Company Furniture 13 Coastline Sports Wear Sweatshirts 1:* Coastal Concrete Concrete 13 Gwinn Engineering Company Dredges* A Sea Safari Seafood Fred Smithwich Pulpwood, Pine H Younce Ralph Pine Logs, Lumber Closed, in September, 1980 Employment Code: A = 1-4; B 5-9;.C 10-19; D 20-49; E 50-519; F = 100-249. Source: Directory.of North Carolina Manufacturing Firms, 1979. -6- commercial fishing vessels greater than thirty feet in length. Processing and packing firms are particularly important as part-time employers because they employ a large percentage of minority persons and persons without skills required for other industries. Assuming a minimum wage of $3.00 per hour and an 8-hour work day, the hei.ght-of-season payroll would be on the order of $200,000 per month for land-side employment. Estimates for on-boat payroll are not available: many of the fishermen are owner-operators or are in partnerships. Belhaven's fishing industry is estimated to account for 90% of the commercial' catch in Beaufort County. Further, the processing and packing plants serve not only local fishermen but those in nearby counties. Crabs, particularly, are trucked into Belhaven from Hyde, Tyrrell, Pamlico, and occasionally, from Carteret Counties. No records are kept on these inflows from other counties. Thus, Belhaven's true contribution to North Carolina's fishing industry cannot be described from available data. The poundage and value of fish and crab landings are shown on Table 3. TABLE 3 BEAUFORT COUNTY COMMERCIAL FISHING LANDINGS Year Poundage Value 1960 4,212,000 $ 320,799 1973 2,971,600 773,498 1975 3,801,800 916,736 1976 5,963,900 2,202,949 1977 5,864,900 1,983,360 1978 4,735,900 1,525,051 Source: N. C. Division of Marine Fisheries. -7- Blue crabs traditionally account for over 50% of the poundage and about one- third of the value of landings reported for Beaufort County. The decline in poundage and total value of landings in 1977-1978 is primarily the result of harsh winters which depleted the populations of certain species, particular- ly shrimp and crab. Tourism is a somewhat significantelement in Belhaven's economy. The Town's location on U.S. 264 (the "Historic Albemarle Tour Highway") and near the Intracoastal Waterway make it a natural stopping point for tourists arriving by boat and by automobile. Food, fuel, and overnight accommoda- tions are available as are marine repair services. No recent data are available to describe local employment or dollar amount of sales resulting from tourism in Belhaven. Data from state'agencles are not disaggregated below the county level. Any further analysis of the tourism industry will have to await results of the 1980 Census or a special survey conducted by .the Town. Similarly, no data.are available on the economic impact of Beaufort Countyls@phosphate mining upon Belhaven. .EXISTING LAND USE The 1976 land use survey was updated in March, 1980. Briefly, the latter revealed only minor changes in the land use pattern. These consisted of the develoment of vac.ant residential lots, the installation of a number of mobile homes, and a small amount of new commercial development along U.S. 264 Alternate near the western corporate limit. The survey also indicated the construction of*a new post office behind Town Hall, and the development of a community center building on Pungo Street. No new residential subdivi- sions have been opened since 1975 nor have any new shopping centers been constructed. Problems of land use compatibility are still as described in the 1976 plan (pp. 69-77). Problems and implications of unplanned development are also described in the 1976 plan (pp. 69-77). 'No new problems have arisen since that time. Areas likely to experience a change of predominant land use include potential commercial strips along West Main Street and along U.S. 264A. Re- development of part of the Pantego Creek waterfront is the second area like- ly to change use in coming years This is discussed fully in Section II, Development Policies. Areas of environmental concern are identified in Section II, Develop- ment Policies. These include coastal wetlands, estuarine shorelines, and public trust waters. Maps showing the existing use of land in the planning area are shown on the following pages. BELHAVEN NORTH CAROLINA RESIDENTIAL LAND USE Air. -47 ,14 lop BELHAVEN NORTH CAROLINA COMMERCIAL LAND USE BELHA--,\./EN NORTH CAROLINA INDUSTRIAL LAND USE INCLUDES: MANUFACTURING TRANSPORTATION COMMUNICATIONS UTILITIES WHOLESALING 4 0 46' 777: 7:7 :r!:7 7: 7'77 7 BELHAVEN NORTH CAROLINA GOVERNMENTAL & INSTITUTIONAL LAND USE INCLUDES: SOCIAL CULTURAL ENTERTAINMENT RECREATION OTHER PUBLIC AND E.-PUBLIC USES CURRENT PLANS, POLICIES, REGULATIONS PLANS Local planning documents@pre-dating 1976 are listed in the 1976 CAMA plan (p. 78). Since 1976, three other plans have been prepared. These are listed below: Addendum to the 1976 Land Development Plan (1978): Prepared by N.C. DNRCD, the "Addendum" was a supplement to the 1976 CAMA plan intended to help the Town maintain its eligibility to receive HUD planning assistance funds. Public Improvements Program (1979): Prepared by Mid-East Commission. A twenty year list of capital improvement needs in the Town. Waterfront Improvements Program (1979): Prepared by Mid-East Commission. Proposals for revitalization of the Pantego Creek waterfront in Belhaven. Plans prepared by state agencies which impact the Belhaven planning area are listed below. North Carolina Airport System Plan ("NCASP") NCASP is prepared by NCDOT, Aeronautics Division. The plan presents recommendations concerning the type, location, and timing of airport development needed to establish a balanced system of public airports in North Carolina over the next twenty years. NCASP identifies two airports in Beaufort County. The first, Warren Field, is located in Washington, approximately 30 miles west of Belhaven. Because of its distance it is of little or'no direct concern to the Town. 7he second is proposed for construction in the Belhaven-Pantego area. This would be a general utility class field with a 3,000 foot runway. No specific site for the airport has been selected nor has the runway orientation been established. These features would be determined through an Airport Master Plan. Construction is not likely to be justified before 1986-1990, according to NCASP. The feasibility of the airport, however, must be establi!@hed by a Master .Plan, the preparation of which could begin at the discretion of the governing bodies of Beaufort County, Belhaven, and Pantego. North Carolina Rail Plan The State of North.Carolina (NCOOT) has initiated a statewide planning program for railroad service in response to the federal Railroad Revitaltzation and Regulatory Reform Act ("Q").of 1976. The 4R Act authorized planning assistance funds to states for the purpose of determining current. and future rail service needs. The Act also authorized financial. assistance both to states and, through the states, to railroad companies for railroad systems rehabilitation, operating subsidies, and outright purchase of lines subject to abandonment. Belhaven is served by the Norfolk Southern Railroad via a branch line from Pinetown. The line terminates in Belhaven. The significance of the Rail Plan*is that it identifies a number of "light density" (low traffic, unprofitable).rail lines across the state. Some of these c arry.so little traffic as to make them candidates for abandonment - cessation of service under-the liberalized abandonment procedures set forth in the 4R Act.. The Belhaven branch is a light density line carrying 100,000-300,000 gross ton* miles of traffic per year. In spite of the low density of traffic the Belhaven line has not yet been proposed for studies leading to abandonment. This could happen, however, if one or more of the railroads current customers goes out of business or shifts to another mode of freight transportation. Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan ("SCORP") The purpose of SCORP is to provide the Governor and General Assembly with a tool to assist them in examining and selecting investment alternatives for outdoor recreational.facilities. The scope of the plan is to maintain,an inventory of existing recreational facilities in North Carolina; to determinie current and future demand for such facilities; to analyze the capabilities of various providers of recreational opportunities to meet these needs; and to make -recommendations as to actions which would most effectively meet these needs. Standards for various types of facilities, including local facilities, are set forth as a guide for more detailed planning at the lcoal level. SCORP is updated regularly by NRCD. SCORP contains no proposals for land acquisition or facility development*,within the Belhaven planning area. It does describe the two major state outdoor recreation areas in Beaufort County - Goose Creek State Park and Goose Creek Wildlife Mana@ement'Areia. Both of these are of significance to Belhaven residents as outdoor recreation resources, but are of no consequence to the Town in the 1-and use planning context. Transportation Improvement Program This is a statewide schedule of highway improvement projects to be undertaken during@'the seven year period 1980-1986. No new highway construction nor major rehabilitation projects are proposed for the Belhaven planning area during the planning period 1980-1986. _12- URBAN SERVICE POLICIES Urban service policies are discussed in the 1976 CAMA plan (pp. 78-82). There have been no changes in these policies since 1976. LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS Local development regulations are listed in the 1976 plan (p. 83). Since 1976, the Town has qualified as the permit-letting agency for minor developments,within Areas'of Environmental Concern. The Town has designated a part-time officer for review of applications and approval-disapproval decisions. The Town's permit-letting program has been approved by, NRCD.- FEDERAL AND STATE REGULATIONS Federal and state regulations which affect the use of land and water in the planning area are included in the appendix. -13- CONSTRAINTS: LAND SUITABILITY HAZARD AREAS Man-made and natural hazard areas in the Belhaven planning area are discussed in Section II of this report. SOILS LIMITATIONS Areas with soil limitations for urban development were described in the 1976 plan (pp. 85-86). No better soil information has become available since then. Briefly the 1976 plan notes that much of the planning area is characterized by soils with moderate to severe limitations for septic tanks and landfills. Drainage throughout the planning area is poor. SOURCES OF WATER SUPPLY Belhaven's water is taken from two wells. As noted.in the 1976 plan (pp. 87,92) the wells have a combined'capacity of 1,000,000 GPD. STEEP SLOPES There are no sites in the planning area where the ground slope exceeds 12%@. FRAGILE AREAS Wetlands: Wetlands occur@on both the north and south banks of Pantego Creek an*d to the east along the Pungo River and its tributaries. Frontal Dunes: There are no sand dunes in the Belhaven planning area. Beaches: A few isolated beaches exist along the creeks of the planning area. "V I FRAGILE AREAS (continued) Wildlife Habitat: The wetlands provide habitat for waterbirds, reptiles, amphibians, and small mammals. The wetlands also serve-as nursery habitat for fish. Scenic and High Points: There are no high points in the plarning area. Pantego Creek, as.seen from the Belhaven waterfront, is a visual asset to the Town. Wynn's Gut, a small inlet from the Creek into the Central Business District has much potential for development of a park to help beautify the Central Business District. Complex Natural Areas; There are no complex natural areas in the plan- ning area as defined by the Coastal Resources Commission. Estuarine Water: The Pungo River, east of Belhaven, is saline and thus qualifies as estuarine water. Pantego Creek is classified as inland water. Public Trust Water: All surface water in the planning area is classi- f ied as public trust -water. Fragile Areas: There are no other fragile areas. in the planning area. Areas Sustaining Remnant Species: There ar- known remnant plant and animal species in the planning area. Registered Natural Landmarks: There are no --istered natural land- marks-in the planning area. Unique Geological Formations: There are no qjue geological forma- tions in the planning area. AREAS WITH RESOURCE.POTENTIAL Much of Beaufort County is underlain by phosphate-bearing sediments. These are being mined at Lee's Creek by Texas Gulf Corporation. The 1976 plan for Beaufort County indicates that such deposits are also found in the Belhaven area. In 1971, Dresser Minerals, a mining firm, identified pho'sphate deposits underwater in Pantego Creek. There appears to have been no action yet toward initiating mining activity in the Belhaven area. Since 1976, peat deposits of potentially commercial significance have been found in several eastern counties including the northeastern sector of. Beaufort County. Information available to date.from NRCD indicates that such deposits may lie just north of the Belhaven planning area along the Beaufort-Hyde boundary. In late 1980, tentative plans for a methanol producing plant, using peat as a fuel, were announced by a private corporation. The exact site for the plant has not yet been established. -16- CONSTRAINTS: CAPACITY OF EXISTING COMMUNITY FACILITIES WATER AND SEWER SERVICE AREAS There have been no major extensions of Belhaven's water and sewer service areas in the past five years. Thus, the service areas are still the same as shown on the 1976 plan (p. 94). For planning purposes, the Belhaven treatment facilities study area includes Pantego and runs as far west .Yeatsville. DESIGN CAPACITIES Design capacities for the Town's,water and sewer systems are described in the 1976 plan.(p. 92). There have been no expansions of either treatment capacities nor of treated.water storage since 1976. Consumption of treated water is still.only about 50% of capacity, i.e. peak consumption,is now approximately 250,00O.GPD. The sewage treatment plant, for the most part, still operates at about 80% of.its design flow capacity..Engineeringstudies are currently in progress toward two goals: (1) pre-treatment of industrial wastes from sea- food processing plants and 2) reduction of storm water inflow to the, sanitary sewer system. Accomplish ment of these goals would mean a reliable 100,000 GPD surplus above peak flows. L ESTIMATED DEMAND The 1976 plan indicated that Belhaven would continue to lose population through the end of this century (p. 100). Projections were as follows: TABLE 4 POPULATION PROJECTIONS BELHAVEN, NORTH CAROLINA 1980-2000 1980 1990 2000 2,134 2.113 2,031 Source: 1976 CAMA Land Use Plan As noted, the Town's population is now estimated to be considerably in excess of that forecast for 1980, suggesting an uptrend for the next decade and possibly longer.* Assuming that Belhaven maintains its 40-year share of Beaufort County's population, the following estimates are offered for 1990 and 2000. TABLE 5 POPULATION PROJECTIONS BEAUFORT COUNTY AND BELHAVEN 1980 1990 2000 Beaufort County 39,600 - 41,600 44,100 - 46,300 48,000 - 50,500 Belhaven 2,599 - 2,725 2,889 - 3,033 3,144 --3,308 Source: Beaufort County projections by N. C. Division of Environmental Management; Belhaven projections by Williams & Works Preliminary data from the 1980 census put Belhaven's population at 2,462. This figure is subject to revision. The projection for Belhaven thus shows increase of 290 3013 people over the next ten years, approximate ly 100 new families. Both the existing sewage treatment plant and water supply system are capable of handling th.is.growth without expansion. Similarly, the road system in Belhaven is, capable of accommodating the increased traffic. Vacant residential land in the planning area is currently estimated at approximately 150 acres. This'is more than adequate to house.the anticipa- ted population growth at densities as low as one dwelling unit per acre. Expected densities, however, are likely to be at least two units per acre thus providing a surplus residential land but allowing for a choice of locations. 1 -19- SECTION II DEVELOPMENT POLICIES LAND USE ISSUES AND POLICIES The most prominent feature of virtually every land use plan is the plan.map itself, showing proposals for new streets, community facilities, and the land use pattern to be developed in coming years. The land classification maps and others showing the location of Areas of Environmental Concern fulfill this function in CAMA and, typically, they receive the bulk of attention from elected officials and the -general public .during the plan design and review process. Those maps, however, do not by any means constitute the entire plan. They are merely graphic represen- tations of certain goals, objectives, and policies adopted by the community as the real guides to future development. The Coastal Resources Commission recognizes the limitations of maps as policy documents and requires that communities covered by the Act specify their development policies, in written form, for several broad topics- Resource protection Resource production and management Economic and community development The Commission has attempted to distinguish a number of sub-topics within the above categories for ease and clarity both in preparation and in reading. In Belhaven, however, and doubtless in many other communities, such distinctions are difficult to make. The issues simply do not break down easily and it over-simplifies a very complex situation to attempt to do so. Accordingly, some liberties are taken here with the Commission's suggested outline, but still remaining within the general framework set out above. -20- GOALS AND OBJECTIVES The 1976 CAMA Land Use Plan spells out Belhaven's development goals with respect to the following areas of community interest. Economic Growth and Development Goal: To obtain orderly and quality development of the economic sector of the Town. Health and Welfare Goal: To provide adequate health and welfare services to all in the'community. - Housing Goal: To preserve and enhance existing residential neighborhoods and insure the orderly development of new residential areas. - Governmental Operations Goal: To obtain more efficient and effective governmental serv-ices according to.acceptable cost-benefit considerations. - Social, Cultural and Recreational Opportunities Goal: To provide, preserve, and enhance the social, cultural, and recreational facilities of the community. - General Environmental Goal: To provide a physical environment that is livable, aesthetically pleasing, healthful and blight free. The 1976 Plan then sets forth a list of objectives - specific activities intended to connote progress toward goal achievement. These will not be recited here for the sake of brevity. It is sufficient for the purposes of this plan . update to note that the Belhaven Planning Board and Town governing body reaffirm those goals and objectives for the 1980-1990 period. VW -21- A reading of the Town'-s goals and objectives reveals, however, that some relate to the central concerns of the Coastal Area Management Act in only a marginal way. Few of them, further, are sufficient in their present form to serve as statments of policy on the specific fields of interest required by the Coastal Resources Commission as part of this' update. DEVELOPMENT POLICIES: 1980-1990 Accordingly, the Town sets forth the following policy statements to guide development in the Belhaven Planning area over the coming ten years. RESOURCE PROTECTION AREAS OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN The Town recognizes that one of the central concerns of the Coastal Area Managment Act is, properly, -the identification and protection of certain lands and waters designated as "Areas of Environmental Concern". Government interven- tion in the market place with respect to AEC's is necessary to assure the proper functioning of the physical and biological'systems of the coastal area. It must be observed, however, that many AEC's are attractive for develop- ment of various sorts. Further, the task of AEC definitions, both conceptually and on the ground, is as yet incomplete. This implies that the locations of AEC's and the potential uses to which they might be put*are to some extent unknown.. The effect of that state of affairs is to subject both Town government and private property owners to often considerable delay and confusion in determining the feasibility of development proposals. Belhaven is in a particularly difficult situation with respect to-AEC's: the largest blocks of vacant land in Town are beTieved to consist at least partially of AEC's. Unless these areas can be developed for typically urban uses, new development will be forced to take place outside the Town limits, producing considerable strip development and requiring the extension of public services years before they might otherwise be needed. SEA -22-- The Belhaven Planning Area contains three types of AEC's: coastal wetlands, estuarine erodible areas, and public trust waters. COASTAL.WETLANDS Coastal wetlands (marshes) extend along the north bank of Parltego Creek from the western edge of the planning area (above the NC 92 bridge) to Haslin Street Extension (near Pungo District Hospital).' Coastal wetlards also occur at the eastern end of Town on the two peninsulas surrounding Tooley's Creek. Portions of these areas were classifled as "Transition" land on the 1976 Land Classification Map and approved as such by the Commission. This, classification does not negate the existence of AEC's. however, and thus a conflict exists between the Land Classification and AEC Maps. A third expanse of coastal wetland occurs@ along the south bank of Pantego Creek. The 1976 plan describes uses appropriate for coastal wetlands. These include utility easements, fishing piers, docks and agriculturall uses except those -involving 'excavation or' filling which. affects estuarine or- other navigable waters. The 1976'plan and the North Carolina Administrative Code a"Iso identify inappropriate uses of coastal wetlands. These include restaurants, businesses, residences, apartments, motels and hotels, trailer parks, offices, parking lots, .factories, spoil. and dump sites, wastewater lagoons, public and private roads. This is a very restrictive list for.AEC's with in-town locations. As noted, Belhaven's major vacant land blocks lie along Pantego Creek. Part of this area.is covered by spartina cyhosuroide s, thus making it a coastal wetland AEC. Some parts have been used for industrial and other urban purposes in years past.. Previous use of these areas renders questionable their present and future significance as natural areas. More importantly, the wetlands west of Haslin Street represent a major resource for future industrial development. Development policy alternatives for this area include the following: (1) public acquisition for open space uses; (2) prohibition of private development through regulation; (3) regulated development within such parts of the area as r -23- .are actually within an AEC; and (4) action by the Coastal Resources Commission to remove the AEC designation from the area. The Town does not contemplate acquisition for several reasons. First, the acquisition and maintenance costs are beyond the Town's financial capability. Second, open space use of the property would be an under-utilization of land suitable for industrial uses.' Prohibition of development through regulation would force intensive uses to be oriented solely toward the railroad and Main Street. This would result in a much smaller area available for development, perhaps precluding it alto- gether for some uses, such as those requiring access to t he water for trans- portation purposes. Regulated development under existing AEC regulations is possible depend- ing upon the land and.water requirements-of the individual firm. These are not presently known, however. Removal of the AEC designation from marshland between N.C.. 92 and Haslin Street is the preferred solution. It is consistent with the 1976 Land Classi- ficAtion Map approved by the Coastal Resources Commission.and with the suitability of the site for industrial development in terms of utilities, transportation, and zoning policy. To summarize, Belhaven has little recourse but to seek the development and redevelopment of the waterfront for urban uses, particularly industri-al uses. Prohibition of such development would result in the Town's foregoing the benefits of industrial development or forcing it to inland locations. The latter would be no solution at all if the two types of locations are not interchangeable for a given development proposal. The precise type of industry to be sought cannot be stated at this time, but it is the Town's objective to identify firms which can make maximum use of the existing facilities: highway, water, and rail transportation. VW -24- They should also be relatively "dry" in terms of water consumption and wastewater discharges. The latter must be capable of treatment by the Town's treatment plant, with pre-treatment if necessary, provided by the f irm itself. For we'-lands in the eastern part of Town, residential uses are most appropriate due to the nature of adjacent land use. These areas, too, can be served by existing public water and sewer systems. In September 1980, a representative of the Office of Coastal Management and the Town Manager conducted an on-site inspection of 'both areas to define precisely the extent of AEC coverage. The result of this survey was the delineation of a relative small AEC along the Pantego Creek waterfront. It was noted that the presence of the AEC did not necessarily preclude development of the property, but that a permit would be required and that any proposed site .plan may be subject to revision depending upon the findings of the permit officer. Coastal wetlands were determined to exist on both peninsulas surrounding Tooley's Creek. Again, development is not necessarily precluded but it is subject to @he issuance of permits.* In boLlh cases, it is the position of the Town that if the property owners can obtain the required permits, development should proceed in accordance with the land classification map contained in this plan. ESTUARINE S;-:NELINES This '.s the second type of AEC found in the Belhaven planning area. Althc@.:h characterized as dry land, estuarine shorelines are included as AEC's beca:;----- of their close association with the estuary itself. The estuarine s-oreline extends landward for a distance of 75 feet from mean high tide normal water level. -25- Estuarine shoreline as an AEC has been defined along the Pungo River as far west as the breakwater. This area is now occupied ty scattered residences, and a marina at the head of Battalina Creek. The area has been zoned principally for residential development. Policy alternatives for development of estuar-Ifne shorelines include: '(1) prohibition of all construction through regulatior: (2) public acqui- sit ion of the shoreline; or (3) limited use of thE shoreline under AEC regulations. A complete prohibition of constructi:n seems unnecessarily restrictive and perhaps not legal ly- possible. TheTown does not have the resources to research the legal implications. Toc, it may unduly restrict access to the water. Acquisition is beyond the Toon's financial capability, though the Town would consider acceptance of dedications from property owners if maintenance funds were available. Limited use of the shoreline is consistent with state policy on this type of AEC. It is also an inexpensive method of shoreline management and technically effective. It is the policy of the Town of Belhaven to ?.'low development within estuarine shorelines in accordance with the ZonincOrdinance of the Town of Belhaven and the use standards as set forth in 15 %CAC 7H .0209 (e), and reprinted here. USE STANDARDS FOR ESTUARINE S-ORELINES (1) All development projects, proposals, and desi:ns shall substantially pre- serve and not weaken or eliminate natural bar-iers to erosion, including but not limited to, peat marshland, resistant clay shorelines, cypress- gum protective fringe areas adjacent to vulne-able shorelines. (2) All development projects, proposals, and des-'--ns shall limit the construc- tion of impervious surfaces and areas not all--wing natural drainage to only so much as is necessary to adequately se-jice the major purpose or use for which the lot is to be developed. I7,zervious surfaces shall not exceed 30 percent of the AEC area of the lot, unless the applicant can show that a limitation will allow no practicz-- use to be made of the lot. (3) All development projects, proposals, and des-'--ns shall comply with the following mandatory standards of the North C--_--olina Sedimentation Pollu- t.ion Control Act of 1973: A NW -26-. (A) All development projects, proposals, and designs shall provide for a buffer zone along the margin of the estuarine water which is sufficient to confine visible siltation within 25 percent of the buffer zone nearest the land disturbing development. .(B) No development project proposal or design shall permit an angle for graded slopes or fill which is greater than an angle which can be retained by vegetative cover or other adequate erosion-.control devices or structures. (C) All development projects, proposals, and designs which involve un- covering more than one acre of land shall plant a ground cover sufficient to restrain erosion within 30 working days cf.completion @of the grading;-provided that this shall not apply to clearing land for the purpose of forming a reservoir later to be inundated. (4) -Development shall not have a significant adverse impact on E!Stuarine resources. (5) Development shall not-significantly interfere with existing public rights of access toi or use of, navigable waters or public.resources. (6) No major public facility shall be permitted if such facility, is likely to require extraordinary public expenditures-for.maintenance and continued .,use, unless it can be.shown that the public purpose served by the facility outweighs the required public expenditures for construction, maintenance, and continued use. For the purpose of this standard, "public facility" shall mean a project which is paid for in any part by public funds. (7) In those instances where ground absorption sewage disposal systems may legally be.- placed less than 100 feet from the mean or normal high water .@.mark of any.waters classified as S.A., such systems shall be permitted only (A) The nitrification lines are separated from the seasonal high ground water by a minimum of 30 inches of suitable or provisionally suitable soil; and (B) It meet's all of the other applicable laws and rules for ground absorp- tion sewage disposal systems adopted by the North Carolina division of health services and the North Carolina division of environmental management. (8) Development shall not cause major or irreversible damage to valuable, document ed historic, architectural or archaeological resources. -27- PUBLIC TRUST WATER All surface water in the Belhaven Planning Area is public trust water and thus is an AEC. This includes Pantego Creek, Battalina Creek, Tooley Creek, Wynne's Gut, Shoemaker Creek, and,the Pungo River. The Zoning Ordinance does not deal adequately with the use of water-covered areas; it is aimed primarily at the use of land even though the land adjoins water. The zoning ordinance thus requires some adjustment to make this distinction- Pending such a revision, it is'the policy of the Town of Belhaven to allow development only of water dependent uses within the public trust water AEC. These uses include: Utility Easements Culverts Docks Groins Wharfs Navigational Aids Boat Ramps Mooring Pilings Bridges and Bridge Approaches Access Channels Revetments Drainage.Ditches Bulkheads In addition to the above and consistent with the zoning ordinance it is the pol icy of the Town to'allow the development of certain water related uses on docks and wharfs otherwise permitted. Such uses include: Restaurants Retail Sale of Seafood Amusement Halls Gift Shops Marine and Fuel and Oil Sales Boat and Motor Works Fishing tackle Boat Sales _28- In addition to Areas of Environmental Concern, there are several other constraints to development within the Belhaven Planning Area. The 1976 CAMA plan identifies several of these including (1) hazardous areas, (2) flood prone areas, and (3) areas with soil limitations. HAZARD AREAS The old air strip north of Town has been abandoned and plowed under for agricultural use. Thus, no hazard is present from this source. Several oil and petroleum product storage areas are located within the Town. These are located close to other structures which would be threatened in the event of explosion and fire. Future zoning policy will be to dis- courage the expansion of hazardous uses in locations close to residential areas and the central business district. The Town will also seek to identi- fy suitable locations for the development of new uses requiring storage of explosive and/or flammable products. An industrial park between Main Street and.Pantego Creek east of N.C. 92 may be appropriate for the development and/or relocation of such uses. FLOODING Parts of the Belhaven Planning Area are subject to flooding. The areas involved the entire incorporated area and much.of the unincorporated area were mapped in the 1976 Plan as "coastal flood plain" AEC's. The AEC classification has since been rescinded by the Coastal Resources Commission, but the area is *Still subject'to flooding. Alternatives for dealing with the flooding issue include (1) insurance to cover losses incurred - an after-the-fact technique; and (2) preventative measures such as the construction of a dike and floodgate system. The policy of Belhaven is to allow development within these areas if it conforms to the standards of the Federal Insurance Administraticn (FIA) for coastal high hazard areas and safety during th-e flood surge from a 100 year storm. V-1 Belhaven has qualified for flood insurance subsidies from FIA and will maintain that coverage through building code and zoning ordinance provisions designed to assure location and construction standards consistent with FIA regul at ions. Construction of a dike to prevent flooding in the central business district from Wynn's Gut is technically feasible and in fact such a plan has been prepared by the Corps of.Engineers. During FY 1981 the Town will review this plan and seek financial assistance from state and federal agencies to implement the plan. CULTURAL AND HISTORIC RESOURCES The Belhaven Planning area contains no buildings or sites listed in the National Register of Historic Places. There are no known sites of archaeological significance in the planning area, but the're has never been a thorough examination of the area for this purpose. The Town has encouraged the North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources to conduct such a study as funds become available. In 1979, the Mid East Commission conducted a windshield survey of the region, including Belhaven, to identify properties with architectural and/or historic merit. Some of those so identified may, upon further research, prove to be of sufficient value to nominate for inclusion in the National Register. The Commission's consultant found twenty properties in Belhaven with features qualifying them for inclusion in the regional inventory and further research. These are illustrated on the."Historic Buildings Inventory" map. All twenty are located in the Main Street - Water Street corridor, the majority lying east of Pamlico Street. Most are residences and can bie assumed structurally sound since they are in use. Three are churches. One industrial property, The Interstate Cooperage Company, is in ruins, likely beyond repair for any use. None are in imminent danger of destruction though two (Brooks and Credle houses) on Main Street are in the long-term path of commercial expansion from the central business district. -30- The cluster of inventory properties east of Pamlico Street presents the Town with possible justification for establishing a historic district in the zoning ordinance to provide for their protection. It is not within the scope of this plan to pass upon the architectural or historic value of any of these properties. It is appropriate, however, to point out that.the Main Street Water Str eet area.does have a distinct character in terms of residential building style, visual.relationship to the river, and in terms of scale. The area is strongly reminisicent of the early 19th century "walking city", a pedestrian- scale city with narrow lots, predominantly 2-story construction, .well-defined walkways,'and proximity to the central business district and industrial activity, on the waterfront. Its location and character are definitely urban, but the urbanness is softened by heavy foliage, distance from the most heavily travelled streets, and, of course, by the influence of.the river.. Creation of a historic zoning district here is one way of assuring the ma.intenance of the arealin its present form. The North Carolina General Statutes authorize such districts and the issuance of "Certificat.es of Appropriateness" for all construction within the district. It is recommended @that the Town explore this possibility in depth during the next -fiscal year. The study should include a more detailed inventory of arch itectural ly signi'- ficant buildings, possible district boundaries, alternatives for ordinance administration, design and preservation obje ctives, and district regulations. In fiscal year 1981 the Town will request grant funds and technical assistance to further research the properties identified in the '1979 Historic Buildings Inventory and to prepare a draft historic zoning district. A, historic district, of course, is not mandatory. If such a district is not cre ated, the Town will discourge the spread of commercial and industrial developm ent eastward into the Front Street - Main Street'area as a matter of routine zoning policy. If necessary, community development funds may be sought to ensure its long-term viability as a residential neighborhood. These funds would be used,. as appropriate, for the maintenance of basic public services and for structural rehabilitation of res,idences. -31- BELHAVEN NORTH CAROLINA Proposed S c Distri t In the coastal area, there are archeological and cultural resources of great importance which are underwater: shipwrecks, docks and wharves, etc. The N.C. Division of Archives and History offers the following advice to coastal communities: Underwater cultural resources often hold a wealth of information due to excellent artifact preservation and their normally undisturbed condition. Exploration and study of historic waterfronts.,-abandoned or wrecked vessels, etc., can shed light on many aspects of maritime history associated with this planning area which might otherwise be unknown. Therefore, the understanding and proper management of these irreplaceable cultural resources is extremely important to prevent their loss during future development. Disturbance of submerged bottom lands, particularly during new channel dredging and extensive waterfront development, should consider possible effects to underwater cultural resources during the earliest states of planning. In areas that have been used historically for maritime activities, domumentary investigations should be initiated to determine whether an underwater archaeological survey is necessary. Known shipwrecks, many of which are plotted on USGS maps or Coastal Geodetic Survey charts, should be.avaided or investigated and assessed for historical significance prior to final planning stages. The Division of Archives and History has noted the presence of a "known historic shipwreck" in Battaliha Creek. To prevent the possibility of damage to this wreck in the event of a development proposal for this area, the local permit officer has been advised of the Division's interest and will act in accordance with applicable regulations. State and federal regulations governing development proposals which may impact sites and structures of historic, archeological, and cultural merit are listed in the appendix. -32- HURRICANE AND FLOOD EVACUATION NEEDS Coastal North Carolina is frequently affected by hurricane-induced flooding. The barrier island chain is occasionally overwashed and bridges to the mainland have been rendered useless-by storm water. Belhaven is on the mainland dozens of miles from the open ocean. The Town is in no danger of being cut-off from high ground as are communities further to the east. This safety is a matter of degree, however. Storm induced flooding of a degree requiring evacuation is a possibility though one of low probability. These conditions suggest the need for hurricane warning procedures and for evacuation plans. For Belhaven, the options include (1) no.plan at all, (2) preparation of a plan independent of the other units of government, and (3) joining Beaufort County and its other municipalities in the Beaufort County Hurricane Evacua- tion Plan. The first alternative is simplyAangerous. The second denies the benefits available from a county-wide system. Accordingly the Town has selected option 3 and joined the other units in the county evacuation plan. The purpose of the plan-is to provide foran orderly and CODrdinated evacuation of threatened areas. It establishes a system for alerting public officials the evacuation of the public when necessary, and the designation of shelters for evacuees. Under the plan, the Mayor of Belhaven is a member of the "Control Group" whose responsibility is to qxercise overall direction and control of evacuation operations, and to institute other actions deemed necessary during a hurricane emergency. -33- RESOURCE PRODUCTION AND MANAGEMENT The 1976 CAMA plan discusses the economic base of the Belhaven Planning Area at length. It identifies therelative importance of agriculture, forestry, fishing, and tourism. Commercial fishing and associated processing and packing of seafood products emerged.as the strongest components of the Belhaven economy. Town policy with respect to natural resource production and management recognizes the close relationship between Belhaven resident's economic 'livelihood and the land and water resources of the area. PRODUCTIVE AGRICULTURAL LAND Several thousand acres of land in the northern part of the planning area are in agricultural use at this time. Principal crops are corn and wheat. There is nothing unique about these crops. They are grown throughout eastern North Carolina. Conversion of the land to non-farm uses would not irreparably damage the Town's economy nor deprive the state of some products which cannot be produced elsewhere. Agricultural production per se is not a development issue for Belhaven in the same sense as, say'. commercial fishing and substandard housing.. It is more properly an issue for state and county government. Agricultural production, therefore, is not amenable to policy alternatives analysis by the Town since these are pre-empted by higher levels of government. Indirectly, of course, agriculture has economic implications for the Town through employment and property taxes generated by agricultural service industries. This is thought to be a separate issue, one of overall economic development, rather than agricultural. Nevertheless, Town policy does tend to encourage continued agricultural production in the planning area through the Land ClassificationlMap, zoning ordinance, and utility extension policies. Much of the unincorporated portion of the planning area is Plassified as rural on the Land Classification Map there by giving agriculture a high priority for use of these areas. Utility 34- extensions into Rural areas (and reclassification of the land) would be made only in response,to public health problems or upon clear showing of market demand that there is an insufficient quantity of land within the Town to accommodate the proposed development. COMMERCIAL FOREST LAND There is no commercial forest land in the Belhaven Planning Area. Some timber is produced from family farms. Since 1976 several hundred acres of wooded land west of U.S. 264 were cleared for field crops. This is consistent with the rural classification of land in this area. No further policy state- ments appear necessary with respect to commercial forestry. MINERAL PRODUCTION AREAS There are no major mineral extraction operations in the Belhaven Planning area.. A small concrete plant has opened in the unincorporated part of the .planning area.on U.S. 264 Alternate. It occupies a site of approximately 2 acres in an area classified as Rural on the 1976 Land Classification Map. Its location in a rural area is consistent with the definition of that class found in' 15 NCAC 7B .0204. No f6rther policy statements appear necessary with respect to mineral production COMMERCIAL AND RECREATIONAL FISHERIES As noted elsewhere in this report, commercial fishing and associated indus- tries are the strongest components of Belhaven's economy. Recreational fishing is also important in the community as an attraction for tourists. It is the policy of the Town to take whatever steps are appropriate to maintain the vitality of the fishing industry in Belhaven. The Town's water- front along PantegO Creek is obviously a factor in the industry's future. The Town must insure the safe passage of fishing vessels to and from the docks and it must insure, the availability of public services and space on the land side to accommodate fishing per se and related businesses. Analysis of the present situation suggests that fishing and related businesses need additional space on the waterfront to allow proper operations at present levels of activity and to allow future expansion. A half dozen firms are now crowded onto less than five hundred feet of frontage east of Pamlico Street. The shortage of land not only prohibits on-site expansion but also produces congestion in the form of inadequate parking space and difficult maneuvers for trucks which serve the firm's inland transportation needs. Additional land may also be required for construction of industrial wastewater pretreatment facilities, depending upon EPA requirements. Expansion of the fishing and related business area to the east is undesirable due to the adverse effects on the adjoining residential area. Expansion immediately to the west is blocked by the hospital property and the public boar ramp area at Wynn's Gut. Clearly,'the fishing industry's problems cannot be settled in this document. Much more detailed work is required. Toward this end, the Town of Belhaven offers to sponsor 'a-community forum aimed at identifying problems, considering alternative solutions, and generating interest in designing a cooperative private-public sector solution. Specifically, it is proposed that the.owners of waterfront businesses consider the development of a consolidated "Port of Belhaven" west of the hospital as part of the proposed waterfront industrial park. -36- ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT. The 1976 plan indicated rather conservative prospects for new growth and development in the Belhaven planning area. This was the result of: Population projections showing continued decline through the year 2000,; Rigid interpretation of the land cla ssification'system; Inability of the Town to finance major sewer and water system improvements. In this updated plan the Town takes a more pro-growth posture based upon the following factors: Population seems to be growing again in contrast to the previous long period of decline. The Town has gained some new manufacturing jobs.in the past five years. The Town is engaged in a "20111 wastewater..treatme'nt facil ity study. The enthusiastic reception of the Town's community development program indicates the feasibility of efforts to restore blighted areas of the Town to usefulness and attractiveness. in taking.a pro-growth stance, a number of specific issues,arise. Funda- -mental to all is the Town's application for. designation as a Growth Center under the-North Carolina Balanced Growth Policy Act. If designated, it is assumed that the Town will receive a high priority for financial assistance from the state and federal governments to the proposed projects. TYPE AND LOCATION OF DESIRED INDUSTRY Jobs. These Virtually any growth in Belhaven must be supported by new I must be located in Belhaven or its immediate environs due to the Town's great distance from other populated centers along.the Pamlico River. -37- The basic choices to be made here include identification of areas suitable for industrial development, the types of industries to be sought, and the level of involvement by Town government in the industrial development effort. Possible locations include the inland area along U.S. 264, the area west of N.C. 92, and the waterfront east of N.C. 92. Industry selection could be haphazard - -essentially, no real selection - or it could be done based upon a comprehensive analysis of the Town's resources for specific types of industry. Finally, the level of activity by the Town could be low - serving merely in a review-capacity over proposals by private developers. Alternately, it could take an active part in industrial promotion by devoting some of it planning budget to the program. The best place in the planning area for the development of new industry is along the waterfront between N.C. 92 and Haslin Street. This area has been zoned for industry, served by water and sewer, and -has access to rail, highway, and water transportation. I Belhaven will seek to attract new industry to this area, specifically those types of firms which can use the energy-efficient rail and water transportation facilities which are available here. Specific industrial groups to be sought cannot be stated at this time. However, it would seem appropriate to consider those related to fishing, agriculture, and perhaps forestry. The Town will ask the Economic Development Administration to assist in identifying specific indus- trial categories suited to this,@site through its "Industry-Community Match" computer program. PROVISION OF SERVICES Belhaven's first priority for public service (e.g., water and sewer) provision is to Developed and Transition areas within the current corporate limits (see Land Classification Map). The Town is now engaged in the second stage of a sewage treatment needs study, including an examination of alterna- tives for dealing with industrial wastes. The latter element will obviously affect the Town's ability to maintain existing industries and to attract new firms. The Town's second priority for water and sewer extensions is to serve development beyond the current corporate limits. Given the slow rate of population growth and the possible residential development in the Tooley's Creek area, it is believed that extensions, beyond the corporate limits will be minimal in the 1980-1985 period. From 1985 to 1990, extensions into the area between US 264 and 264 Alternate are likely as the last vacant land in Town is developed. Virtually-any expansion of sewer and water treatment facilities will require federal and state financial assistance. DESIRED URBAN GROWTH PATTERN The polici.es outlined above imply the Town's desire to achieve a tightly clustered development pattern, focusing on the central business district. The alternative is a pattern of dispersal for new development. This would entail potentially high costs in terms of envirpnmental damage, agricultural land losses, and energy consumption for transportation within the planning area.. Finally, the Town is presently unable to finance major water and sewer extensions. Under the clustered pattern, in-town areas would be zoned to permit relatively high density development. Outlying areas.would be reserved for low density uses without water. and sewer services, at least over the next five years. REDEVELOPMENT OF CURRENTLY DEVELOPED AREAS BelhaIven recently began a community development program aimed at rehabili- tating substandard houses and providing improved public services to blighted neighborhoods. This program. was initiated in contrast to the "No Action" alternative under which rehabilitation would be left to the private market. The likely result of that course would have been no action by the market, either, and continued decline in the quality of housing for Belhaven citizens. Belhaven proposes to,continue this program over the next five years. In addition, the Town may.wish to examine the feasibility of applying community a development funds to non-residential areas - the central business district and the waterfront to assure their continued economic.usefulness. ALL_ -39.r COMMITMENT TO STATE AND FEDERAL PROGRAMS Erosion Control: Belhaven is particularly concerned about the erosion of its eastern waterfront. At one point, Front Street itself lies but a few feet from the water. Several homes are in danger of losing their foundations due to wave action. The Town will request technical assistance from the State of North Carolina in determining the allowable area to be reclaimed by filling and in designing appropriate stabilization measures. The alternative, to allow con- tinued erosion and loss of property, is not a reasonable position for Town government. Dredging: Development of an industrial park on the waterfront may require that the channel be dredged to allow tugs and barges to transport materials to and from new industries. Maintenance of existing water-related businesses also will require regular dredging. Other: There are no military facilities, highway improvements, or other port facilities planned for the Belhaven area. CHANNEL MAINTENANCE The Town supports the Corps of Engineers' program to maintain and improve the Intercoastal Waterway as an avenue of commercial and recreational traffic. Given the Town's heavy economic dependence upon water related industry, there is no real. alternative to this position. The Town will assist the Corps and State agencies in maintaining adequate.channels in the Belhaven area to the extent possible. Specifically, the Town will assist, if requested, in obtaining easements for work and in identifying and obtaining sites for "borrow' material and for deposition of "spoil" material. -40- TOURISM, WATERFRONT ACCESS Beaufort County and Belhaven receive substantial economic banefits from tourism. Yet it is not a fully developed segment of the Town's economy: much additional economic benefit remains to be captured. The majority of Belhaven's tourism is the result of its location on the water. That location produces opportunities for hunting, fishing, sailing, and other outdoor recreational pur suits. Thus, the waterfront again figures prominently in Town development policy. A.second basis for tourism is,the Pamlico region's hiStDric heritage. The Towns of Washington, Bath, and Belhaven all contain buildings,and/or sites of historical and architectural significance. These attract many visitors throughout the year but particularly during the summer. It is the policy of the Town to promote tourism as an important segment of the economy. Tourism, the waterfront, historic preservation and urban design are inextricably bound in Belhaven. As noted elsewhere in this document, the Town will consider the establishment of historic district in its zoning ordinance. A second project would be the preparation of a written history of the Town and of the buildings within the historic district. This might be undertaken by a local historical society rather than by Town government. The potential for guided walking tours of the historic area should also be evaluated after building documentation is complete. I.n addition to the physical linkages between tourism and the water, Town policy should also,be directed to visual linkages. The Town should seek to open up vistas toward Pantego Creek from city streets. One opportunity for a vista was lost year s ago when the hospital was built at the foot of Allen Street. The most important view of all - from Pamlico Street in the central business district - is now partially blocked by industrial buildings at Wynn's Gut. The development of an industrial park and consolidated fishing port facilities to the west offers potential for the eventual re-opening of the Pamlico Street view. A Town park and promenade could be the featured re-'use of the property along with an expanded recreational boat launching ramp. F7t, -41- Energy Facility Siting As noted, a tentative proposal to construct a methanol plant using peat as a fuel has been made by a Beaufort County business firm. The methanol would be distilled from corn grown in this area. No plant site has yet been specified and it is not known whether it will be located within the Belhaven planning area. The Town has too little information about this proposal to take any firm policy stance at this time. In general terms, however, the Town tends to favor industrial growth to the extent that it can be accommodated within existing environmental law. Potential use of the railroad to serve this firm should also help to insure continued service to Belhaven, clearly a favorable factor in the Town.'s view. The Town will otherwise have to rely on the appropriate state agencies to keep it informed of the potential impacts of the proposal. -42- SECTION III LAND CLASSIFICATION LLI I LAND CLASSIFICATION A land classification system has been developed as a means of assisting in the implementation of the policies adopted by the Town. By delineating land classes on a map, loca*l government and its citizens can specify those areas where certain policies (local, state and federal) will apply. Although specific areas are outlined on a land-classification map, it must be remembered that land classification is merely a tool to help implement policies and not a strict regulatory mechanism. The designation of land classes allows the Town to illustrate its policy statements as to where and to what density it wants growth to occur, and where it wants to conserve natural and cultural resources by guiding growth. The land classification system includes five broad classes. These may be subdivided into more specific land use designations. Any sub-classes which are used should be able to be aggregated back to the original five broad classes. The five general land classes are: Developed, transition, community, rural and conservation. (1) DEVELOPED (A) Purpose. The purpose of the developed class is to provide for continued intensive development and redevelopment of existing cities. (B) Description. Areas to be classified developed include lands currently developed for urban purposes at.or approaching a density of 500 dwellings per square mile that are provided with usual municipal or public services including at least public water, sewer, recreational facilities, police and fire protection. Areas which exceed the minimum density but which do not have public sewer service may best be divided into a separate class to indicate that although they have a developed character, they will need sewers in the future. (2) TRANSITION TAT-75-rpose. The purpose of the transition class to provide for future intensive urban development within the ensuing ten years on lands that are most suitable and that will be scheduled for provision of necessary public utilities and services. The transi- tion lands also provide for additional growth when additional lands in the developed class are not available or when they are severely limited for development. -43-- (B) Description. i) .Lands to be classified transition may include: (1) lands currently having urban services, and (2) other lands necessary to accommodate the urban population and economic growth anticipated within the planning jurisdiction over the ensuing ten year period. ii) Lands classified transition to help meet the demand for developable anticipated population and economic growth must: (1) be served by public water, sewer, and other urban- services including public streets, and (2) be generally free from severe physical limitations for urban development. In addition, the transition class should not include: (1) lands of high potential for agriculture, forestry, or mineral extraction, or land falling within extensive rural areas being managed commercial.ly for these uses, when other lands are available; (2) lands where urban development might result in major or irreversible damage to natural systems or processes of more than local concern. (iii) In determining the amount of additional transition lands necessary to meet projected urban population and economic growth, the Town may utilize *estimates of average future urban population density that are based upon local land policy, existing patterns and trends of urban development, and densities specified in local zoning, if any; an estimate of additional Transition class lands should be based upon a guideline density of 2,000 persons or 500 dwellings per square mile. (C) Discus,sion. The developed and transition classes should be the only lands under active consideration.for intensive urban develop- ment requiring urban services.. The area within these classes is where detailed-local land use and public 'investment planning must occur.. State and Federal expenditures on projects associated with urban development (water, sewer, ur6an street systems, etc.) will F-Fided to these areas. Large am-o-u-n-t-T-o-f-vacant land suit-aSTe- for urban development within the Developed class should be taken into account Aen calculating the amount of additional lands needed to accommodate projected growth. -The total area shown as Transi- tion should be equal to the land needed for proposed population increases that can not be accommodated in the vacant developed areas. The designation of Transition lands will be a very difficult and political process. Counties and municipalities with declining populations may show some limited transition lands as an inducement for future growth. As will be the case in all areas, however, the amount of transition lands shown should remain within reasonable limits, taking into account any significant amounts of undeveloped lands within the developed class. (3) Community. (A) Purpose. The purpose of the community class is to provide for clustered land development to help meet housing, shcpping, employ- ment, and.public service needs within the rural areas of the county. .-44- (B) Description. Lands to be classified community are those areas within the rural areas of planning jurisdictions characterized by a small grouping of mixed land uses, (residences, general store, church, school, etc.), and which are suitable and appropriate for small clusters of rural development not requiring municipal sewer service. (C) Discussion. It should be stressed that the community class applies to clustered rural development which usually occurs at crossroads. Some "communities" that nonetheless should not be classified developed or transition may have, or may require, public services to correct an existing condition or to avert an anticipated public health problem. Many of these communities might have their own water system because the density of the development precludes having both private wells and septic tanks. Due to the small size of most communities, it might suffice to identify them by a symbol on the land classification map. (4) Rural (A) Purpose. The purpose of the rural class is to provide for agriculture, forest management, mineral extraction and other low intensity uses. Residences may be located within "rural" areas where urban services are not required and where natural resources will not be permanently impaired. (8) Description. Lands that can be identified as appropriate for resource management and allied uses include lands with high potential for agriculture, forestry, or mineral extraction; lands with one or more limitations that would make development costly and hazardous; and lands containing irreplaceable, limited, or significant natural, recreational or scenic resources not otherwise classified. (C) Discussion. The rural class is the broadest of the five classes. In order to manage these lands effectively local governments will be encour'aged to create sub-classes within the rural class. For example, the rural class could be subdivided into two classes, rural-production to provide for the effective management of large agricultural, forestry, and mineral extraction areas, etc., and rural-residential for low density rural residences. (5) Conservation (A) Purpose. The purpose of the conservation class is to provide for effective long-term management of significant limited or irreplace- able areas. This management may be needed because of its natural, cultural, recreational, productive or scenic values. These areas should not be identified as transition lands in the future. (B) Description. The conservation class should be applied to lands that contain. major wetlands; essentially undeveloped shorelands that are unique, fragile, or hazardous for development; necessary wildlife habitat or areas that have a high probability for provid- ing necessary habitat conditions; publicly owned water supply water sheds and aquifers; and forest lands that are undeveloped and will remain undeveloped for commercial purposes. SUMMARY OF LAND CLASSIFICATIONS Land Classes Purpose Characteristics Services Usual it sive development and redevelop- purposes with urban services available Usual municipal or public servicie ment of existing cities including water, sewer, recreation facilities, police, and fire protection Transition To provide for future intensive Lands being developed for urban pur- Usu al municipal or public services are most suitable and that are urban services, lands necessary to most likely to be scheduled accommodate population qrowth for the for provision of necessary next ten year period, lands which to be made available at the time public utilities and services can be readily serviced with usual of development or soon thereafter urban services, lands generally free from severe physical limitations for development Community To provide for clustered mix Lands characterized by a cluster of Limited muunicipal type services uses to help shopping, housing, residential and commercial land employment and public service uses in rural areas such as fire protection, etc. needs within the surrounding may have public water but no area. !-ewer% public sewer system. Public sewers possible only to correct an existing or projected public health hazard Rural To provide for agriculture, Lands identified as appropriate Private septic tanks and wells, forest management, mineral ex- locations for natural other services such as rescue tractions and various low management and allied uses, lands squads, police and fire pro- intensity uses on large sites with one or more limitations that tection, etc. including residences where urban would make development costly and services are not required and hazardous natural resources will not be unduly impaired Conservation To provide for effective long- Lands that contain major wetlands, No services and limited access recreational, productive or lands which contain significant natural scenic resources with the intent scenic, recreational or productive that they will not be identified resources as Transition lands in the immediate future 41 o4xafdeveloped 0 0 00009 0 011 ------ .0 oil 00 0 0 -0* o 0. :.0 0 0 0 o 0 0 *0 , : 0 " oo:.. Go 0: 0 - -o o -o -.0. 0, --o- is '000. 0 - 0 0000 00 0 1100"01, o" " o 0 oo 0 Conservation 0 transition L r u ra L 1 4,0000. ir community Under iho.land claisificatlon system all land will be placed Into onsof live classits. The Community class will Include existing clustered rural residential and commercial &Fes% such as crossroad *development$. I I These areas may requite a Public water system but Public sewers should not be allowed. The Developed clais will inclutle eiasonif urban atess which The Rural class will identify those lands good for agriculture. ate currently supplied with a full tango of public Services Including loresiry. mining. and other land uses such at rural housing water and lower I-Icifiliol. depending on private wells and vpllc tanks. -j The Conspairstlon clau will ItIsn' T1 Tinsillo" C1,11% will ItIOR111V thoss, Drell Willi larld qO(d ........... 7". My IhOle $r@81 which dup to le -jithan ilevelt,tionent which will Im Supplied with public ierv,ces theit Significant, firniteol, or ottept ceable nalutal. fecroollo"Al. or scenic ffsOurces Flood in hit Prolect mcomiplate future pupulalion end pronomic growth. ed. LAND CLASSIFICATION MAP AND RELATIONSHIP TO DEVELOPMENT POLICIES The 1980 Land Classification Map contains numerous changes from the 1976 map. These changes do not imply extensive new development over the past five years nor the extension of water and sewer services to new areas.. The changes proposed here reflect two complementary ideas: (1) the Coastal Resources Commission's revised criteria for mapping the various classes of land, and (2) a re-interpretation of the existing land use pattern. The 1976 map was based upon a strict application of the commission's then current guidelines relating current and future population and services to the various classes. The result of that process was a map which tended to illus- trate ground coverage by structures rather than the use of land. Residential areas were mapped often without reference.to yards, storage areas, home garden plots and accessory uses of the:property. Vacant lots within otherwise develop- ed blocks were *Classified as transitional. Commercial areas were mapped with out refe rence to required off-street parking and loading space. Open space in public ownership (e.g. a park) was shown as transitional when, in fact, it was developed.for a,low intensity open space use. The 1980 map views the'land use pattern in broader terms. Land within the Town is mapped largely on a block-by-block bAsis, rather than the finer distinc- tions attempted- in 1976. The map also employs the revised classification guide- lines which acknowledge the presence of some vacant land within developed areas. Generally,. if at least half of a block is in use for urban purposes , and if water and sewer are available to that block, the entire block is classified as developed. Some large tracts along the waterfront are subdivided into transitional and developed land. These tend to distinguish the actual "in-use" portions of major -48 L H AV L N NORTH CAROLINA LAND CLASSIFICATION 1980 D= DEVELOPED T= TRANSITION R= RURAL C= CONSERVATION Amended, this the day of S er, 1981 )16 7% 0 01@ commercial an-d industrial holdings from those which are aviailable for new development or expansion of existing firms.* The relationship between the land classification map and the development policies is clear and simple. First, the extensive mapping of developed and transitional land within the current corporate limits is consistent with the Planning Board's desire to maintain a compact settlement pattern. By providing urban services only to areas now within the Town, high density development on the periphery should be discouraged. This implies and requires, however, that the Town must be allowed by state and-federal agencies to develop land which in other parts of the North Carolina coast might be considered undevelopable for ecological reasons. These areas .include (1) the waterfront west of Haslin Street including any marshland, which is proposed for industrial development, and (2) the land north of Tooley's Creek** which is proposed for residential development. In summary, the Land Classification Map and Town development policies call for the treatment of these areas as an urban waterfront and allowing for the development of the land consistent with that view. The rural classification of most land north of the current corporate limit is consistent with Town policy recognizing the importance of agricultural production to the local economy. It is also consistent with market forces which have shown virtually no inter est in this area for intensive development over the past ten years. South of Pantego Creek, a ribbon of conservation is shown at the water's edge. Maps from the Department of Natural Resources and Community Development indicate the presence of marshland here. As this area is undeveloped at this time and lacking utilities, the land should remain in a natural state. However, like that in Belhaven itself, the maps are of suspect accuracy. Therefore, the ----------------------------------- OfAvailable" at least in the sense that they are vacant at this time. Amended by Belhaven Town Council September 21, 1981. L -49- appropriate state and federal agencies should inspect this area and prepare accurate maps of the locations of Areas of Environmental Concern. All other land south of Pantego Creek is classified as rural. This again is consistent with the policy of not undertaking a major utility extension program at this time. This area is somewhat different from the northern rural area in that there have been several expressions of interest in developing year- round and/or vacation homes here. The Town will evaluate any development pro- posals in this area on a case-by-case basis if the area is retained within the Town's planning jurisdiction. There is some question whether the Town will benefit from its continued inclusion. Since the area is unlikely to be annexed in the foreseeable future, the Town could be saddled with the costs of regulating development there and never receive any benefit from the expenditure. This issue will be taken up as part of a re-evaluation of the Town's development codes. -50- SECTION IV ASSESSMENT OF PLAN EFFECTIVENESS I I I h I ASSESSMENT OF PLAN EFFECTIVENESS The Coastal Area Management Act is one of a myriad of programs of state and federal "assistance" to local governments. These programs are initiated with such objectives as maintaining environmental quality, improving housing conditions, promoting highway safety, economic development, and others. Their common denominator is the desire to improve the quality of life within the community in which the program is undertaken. The fact that such programs are based upon noble motives does not mean that all are "good" in some absolute sense. Each program has a cost in terms of dollars. Some, such as CAMA, also have a cost in terms of restrictions on the.activities of individuals, e.g. the owner of land in an area of environ- mental concern. The bill for state and federal assistance to local govern- ments amounts to many billions of dollars each year. The other costs are not so easily calculated, but they are known to exist. In many cases we do not even know precisely who is "paying" the bill. There is yet another matter which is sometimes overlooked in the race to "assist": is the program effective? That is, did the program bring about the desired change? The determination of program effecti'veness is called program evaluation. Program evaluation is designed to ask the fundamental question about program performance: "What difference did the program make?". Beaufort County and the Town of Belhaven, for instance, may have joint- ly established a goal for their CAMA plans of improving the quality of water in the Pungo River. Both units would have employed certain strategies and taken actions over a period of years designed to achieve this goal. Water quality is measured at the beginning of the planning period and then, say, five years later. Two questions are now asked: (1) Has there been any change in water quality during the 5-year study period? 7%X. q] I 1W -52- (2) What caused the change, i.e., was the change brought about by implementation of the Beaufort County and Belhaven plans? With respect.to the first question, we would hope to find that indeed there had been some change in water quality, that the water was now cleaner as measured by some standards, say, a lower level of phosphorus and a higher level of dissolved oxygen. The second question deals with the possibility that the plans in question had nothing to do with the improvement in water quality.. The im- provement could have resulted from actions taken several years prior to plan adoption, say, the construction of tertiary sewage treatment fac@lities, changes in farming methods, and the closing of industrial source of pollutants. A sound evaluation of plan effectiveness would thus conclude that the plans were not effective in improving water quality, that we could have achieved the improvement without the plans. This.example, of course, is highly simplified and CAMA is not a simple Program. Nevertheless, many residents of coastal North.Carolina would like to know "what difference" CAMA has made. The North Carolina General Assembly, the executive branch of state government, and the federal government also need to know the extent to which CAMA plans have been effective so that program modifications can be made if necessary. ASES OF THE CAMA LAND USE PLANS The obvious first step in assessing plan effectiveness is to identify the plan's goals and objectives. These are discussed in an earlier cbapter of this-report for the Town of Belhaven. Goals and objectives for- the State as a whole are set forth in the Act itself. The next step is to determine who uses the plan and for what purpose. The Coastal Resources Commission has prepared the following statement both -53- by way of information to coastal area residents and as a guide to the plan effectiveness element,of this plan update. The'land use plans which are prepared by local governments in the coastal area are distributed-widely,.and have many uses. Among the users of the plans are local governments, regional councils of government, state and federal permitting agencies and public and private funding and development gro ups. The discussion of policies and the land classification map will serve as the basic tools for coordinating numerous policies, standards, regulations and othe@ governmental activities at the local, state and federal levels. Such coordination may be described by three applications: (a) The policy of discussion and the land classification map encourage coordination and consistency between local land use policies and the state and federal governmental decisions and activities which affect land uses in the coastal region. (b) The local land use plans provide a framework for budgeting, plan- ning and for the provision and expansion of community facilities such as water and sewer systems, schools and roads. (c) The local land use plans will aid in better coordination of reg ulatory policies and decisions by describing the local land use policies and designating specific areas for certain types of acti'vities. Local Government Uses - Counties and municipalities may use the local land use plans in their day to day business and in planning for the future. Oftentimes, the land use plan provides guidance in local policy decisions relating to overall community development. The plans also provide the basis for development regulations and capital facility planning and budgeting. By delineating how the community wishes to grow, the land use plans help to assure the best use of tax dollars as public utilities can be extended to -54- the best areas for growth. Regional Uses - The regional councils of government or planning and development commissions use the local land use plans as the basis for their regional plans and in their function as regional clearinghouse for state and federa.1 funding programs. The local plans can indicate to these regional decision makers what types of development the local community feels are important and where the development should take place. State and Federal Government Uses - The local land use plans are used as a major component in the granting or denial of permits for various develop- ments within the coastal area. The state and-federal agencies must be sure that their decisions consider the policies which are set out by the local governments in their plans. The Coastal Area Management Act stipulates that no development permit may be issued if the development is inconsistent with the local land use plans. This is also true for decisions relatin(J to the use of federal or state funds within the coastal counties, and projects being undertaken by state and federal agencies themselves must also be consistent. with the local plans. SPECIFIC USES OF LOCAL LAND USE PLANS-IN PERMIT LETTING AND CONSISTENCY REVIEW The land use plans are being reviewed in all CAMA and Dredge and Fill permit reviews, and in the review of projects which come under the federal consistency provitions.. There are basically two ways in which the plans can be used: (1) as the primary reason for denial, that it there are not state environmental regulations involved, or (2) as a secondary reason for approval or denial, which when combined with the environmental regulations provide grounds for a specific action. To date, the land use plans have been used to find six projects incon- sistent. All of these projects involved the placement of structurE!S or fill -55- in freshwater wetlands where no CAMA or dredge and fill permits are required. In these instances, the local p1ans (New Hanover County, Pasquotank County, and Carolina Beach) designated the areas in question as conservation. All three plans described the conservation classification as "lands that should be left essentially in their natu ral state". The inconsistency determination brought about denial of federal permits by the Corps of Engineers. One of the projects also brought about objections from the Wildlife Resources Commission as the project involved the filling of an anadromous fish spawning area. In this instance, the land use plan was used in conjunction with the environmental objection to find the project inconsistent. In the state permitting process, the local plans have been used as a primary reason to deny projects; as the primary reason to approve a project; and as a clarifier in cases where there is a problem due to more than one environmental regulation applying. In many instances the local land use plan could have been used in these instances, however the intention of the plan was unclear. As.noted, CAMA is not a simple program and it is not limited to Belhaven and Beaufort County. A true program evaluation as described in the litera- ture is not possible from only the Town's standpoint. It must be conducted at the regional or state level by the Coastal Resources Commission. To date, only one application for a minor development permit within an AEC has been filed (and approved). This was for a bulkhead on Pantego Creek, located on property owned by River Forest Manor. No other development proposals have been made which required modification due to CAMA plans. -56- I z SECTION V . INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION I I I. INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION On May 7, 1980, the required meeting of Beaufort County planning agencies was held to assure consistency between county and municipal plans. Beaufort County and each municipality within the county was represented by a delegation of elected officials, appointed officials, and planners. Plans for the Town of Washington were pr esented jointly by the Town's Community Development Director, Mr. Marvin Davis, and by the Town's planning consultant, Mr. Robert M. Leary. Beaufort County plans were presented by Mr. John Prevette, Planning Director. Belhaven's plan was presented by Mr. Lee Downie, representing the firm of Williams & Works. Each participant described the major planning/policy issues under study within the community and proposals for dealing with them. It was noted that these proposals were still in draft form at the time of the meeting, but that signific ant departures from the drafts were unlikely before submission of plans to the Coastal Resources Commission in June, 1980. The conclusion of the participants was that there appeared to be no conflicts between the plans of the three planning units represented at the meeting. r,7 I SECTION VI CITIZEN PARTICIPATION A CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PLAN.UPDATE In preparing this plan,.citizen participation has been encouraged. through several methods. First, all meetings of the Planning Board are open to the public and held at Town Hall. Notice of all meetings is published in the local newspaper. Second, the Planning Board submitted a press release to the newspaper describing the purpose of the plan update, the major issues to be addressed by the plan, and an invitation to Belhaven citizens to assist the Board by providing input to the plan. The draft plan will be submitted to the newspaper along with an ekecutive summary highlighting major findings, after review by the Town Council. PUBLIC EDUCATION The Town Manager is the person with principal responsibility for public education on planning issues. The Manager does this through appearances before numberous civic groups to discuss a variety of planning matters. The Manager also maintains a close working relationship with the press, supply- ing much information to the public through published interviews and occasionally, through radio and TV appearances. These activities are vital elements of the Town's citizen participation program and will be continued in the future. -58- CONTINUING EFFORTS As noted, the draft plan update will be submitted to the local newspaper for publication. The Town Manager will continue his activities as described above. The Town Council's public hearing will provide a third major method of public participation. Other public participation activities will be specifically related to plan implementation activities as described in the plan. These will include: - Project area committee work on-future community development activities. - Waterfront revitalization "forum". - Assistance in creating a-historic zoning district. "V "59- APPENDIX ITATI 11111111 All IIIMITI Agency Licenses and Permits Department of Natural Resources and Permits to discharge to surface Community Development waters or operate waste water' Division of Environmental Management treatment plants or oil discharge permits; NPDES Permits, (G.S. 143-2157 Permits for septic tanks with a capacity over 3000 gallons/day (G.S. 143-215.3). Permits for withdrawal of surface or ground waters in capacity use areas (G.S. 143-215.15). Permits for air pollution abate- ment facilities and sources (G.S. 143-215.108). Permits for construction of com- plex sources; e.g. parking lots, subdivisions, stadiums, etc. (G.S. 143-215.109). Permits for construction of a well over 100,000 gallons/day (G.S. 87a-88). Permits to dredge and/or fill in estaurine waters, tidelands, etc. (G.S. 113-229). Permits to undertake development in Areas of Environmental Concern (G.S. 113A-118). NOTE: Minor development permits are issued by the local government. Department of Natural Resources and - Permits to alter or construct a Community Development dam (G.S. 143-215.66). Division of Earth Resources - Permits to mine (G.S. 74-51). - Permits to drill an exploratory oil or gas well (G.S. 113-381). - Permits to conduct geogra hical exploration (G.S. 112;-391@. - Sedimentation erosion control plans for any land disturbing activity of over one contiguous acre (G.S. 113A-54). Department of Natural Resources and Permits to construct an oil Community Development refinery. Secretary of NRCD Department of Administration Easements to fill where lands are proposed to be raised above the normal high water mark of navigable waters by filling. (G.S. 146.6 (c)). Department of Human Resources Approval to operate a solid waste disposal site or facility (G.S. 130-166.16). Approval for construction of any public water supply facility that furnishes water to ten or more residences (G.S. 130-160.1). 77..' -61- W-r FEDERAL LICENSES AND PERMITS Agency Licenses and Permits Army Corps of Engineers Permits required under (Department of Defense) Sections 9 and 10 of the Rivers and Harbors of 1899; permits to construct in navigable Waters. - Permits required under Section 103 of the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972. - Permits required under Section, 404 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972; permits to undertake dredging and/or'filling activities. Coast Guard Permits for bridges, causeways, (Department of Transportation) pipelines over navigable waters; required under the General Bridge Act of 1946 and the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899. Deep water port permits. geological Survey Permits required for off-shore Bureau of Land Management drilling. (Department of Interfor) Approvals of OCS pipeline corridor rights-of-'way, NeucleAr Regulatory Commi-ssion Licenses for siting, construc- tion and operation of nuclear power plants; required under the Automic Energy Act of 1954 and Title II of the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Permits for construction, ?peration and maintenance of interstate pipelines facil'iti '-es required under the Natural Gas Act of 1938. Orders of interconnecti-on of electric transmission facilities under Section 202 (.b) of the Federal Power Act. Permission required for abandon, ment of natural gas pipeline and associated facilities under Section 7C(b) of the Natural Gas Act of 1938. Licenses for non-federal hydro- electric projects and associ-ated transmission lines under Section 4 and.1.5 of the Federa,l Power Act. -63- FEDERAL AND STATE CONTROLS AFFECTING HISTORIC AND ARCHEOLOGICAL SITES FEDERAL National Historic Preservation Act of 1966. The Archeological and Historic Preservation Act of 1974, Public Law 93-291 Executive Order 11593, Protection and Enhancement of the Cultural Environment, 16 U.S.C. 470 (Supp. 1, 1971.) National Environmental Policy Act, Public Law 91-190, 42 U.S.C. 4321 Et. Seq. (1970) Community Deve-lopment Act of 1974, Public Law 93-383: Environmental Review Procedures for the Community Development Block Grant Program (40 CFR Part 58) Procedures for the Protection of Historic and Cultural Properties (36 CFR Part 800) Comprehensive Planning Assistance Program (701) as Amended by Public, Law 93-393 The Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Public Law 89-670 Identification and Administration of Cultural Resources: Procedures of Individual-Federal Agencies STATE G.S. 121-12(a) Protection of Properties in the National Register State Environmental Policy Act, Article I of Chapter 113A of the General Statutes Executive Order XVI Indian Antiquities, G.S. 70.1-4 Salvage of Abandoned Shipwrecks and Other Underwater Archeological 'Sites: G.S. 121-22, 23; 143B-62 (1) g, (3) Archeological Salvage in Highway Construction, G.S. 136-42.1 Provisions-for Cultural Resources-in Dredging and Filling Operations, G.S. 113-229 -64- Iflullsoll 3 6668 14103 0553