1986 Aurora land use plan update

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

AQRORA.

1987

A A

LAND USE PLAN UPDATE

1986

HD
211
.A97
1986

1 9 8 6

A U R 0 R A L A N D U S E P L A N

U P D A T E

US Department of Commerce
NOAA Coastal Services Center Library
2234 South Hobson Aveniile%
Charleston, SC 29405-24

SEPTEMBER9 1986
ir

PREPARED BY:

MID-EAST COMMISSION
P.D. DRAWER 1787
WASHINGTON, NC

The preparation of the plan was financed in part by a grant
provided by the North Carolina Coastal Management Program,
through finds provided by the Coastal Zone Management Act of
1972, as amended, which is administered by the Office of
Coastal Zone Managementp National Oceanic and Atmospheric Admini-
stration.

Adopted by the Aurora Town Council on April 21, 1986.

Certified by the North Carolina Coastal Resources Commission
on September 9, 1986.

1786 AURORA LAND USE PLAN UPDATE

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Prepared by:

TOWN COUNCIL

Grace Bonner, Mayar

Bessie LaVictoire

Curtis Potter

Floyd Peed

Webster Walker

PLANNING BOARD

W. B. Thompson, Chairman

Charles Harding

Lloyd Hollowell

T. R. Thompsons Sr.

Marvin Sartin

Bill Herwig

MID-EAST COMMISSION PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT STAFF

Lynn Roche Phillips, Technical Advisor

Robert Paciocco, Planner-In-Charge

The preparation of this report was financed in part through a grant
provided by the North Carolina Coastal Management Program, through the
Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended. The Office of
Coastal Resource Management, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Adminis-
tration) is also responsible for funding for this document.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS 1
Introduction I
Establishment of the Data Base 2
PRESENT CONDITIONS 3
Present Population and Economy 3
Summary 12

EXISTING LAND USE 13
Introduction 13
Land Use Summary 13
CURRENT PLANS, POLICIES AND REGULATIONS 18
Plans 18
Policies 19
Regulations 20

CONSTRAINTS: LAND SUITABILITY 22
Introduction , 22
PHYSICAL LIMITATIONS FOR DEVELOPMENT 22
Hazards 22
-Soils 24
Water Supplies 25
Excessive Ground Slope Areas 27
Fragile Areas 27
Areas With Resource Potential 33

CONSTRAINTS: CAPACITY OF COMMUNITY FACILITIES 34
Introduction 34
Water and Sewer 34
Schools 36
Roads 36

ESTIMATED DEMAND 39
Population and Economy 39
Summary 41

REVIEW OF 1981 POLICY STATEMENTS AND ACTIONS 42
Resource Protection 43
Resource Production and Management 44
Economic and Community Development 45

ISSUES AND POLICY STATEMENTS 48
RESOURCE PROTECTION 49
Development in Areas with Constraints 50
AEC Development 52
Other Fragile Areas and AECs 53
Hurricane and Evacuation Needs 56
Protection of Potable Water 56
Use of Septic Tanks 57
Storm Water Runoff 58
Marina and Floating Home Development 60
Industrial Impacts around Fragile Areas 61

RESOURCE PROTECTION AND MANAGEMENT 62
Productive Agricultural Land 62
Existing and Potential Mineral Production Areas 64
Commerc-ial and Recreational Fisheries 65
Off-Road Vehicles 66
impact of Development Types on Resources 68
ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 68
Location and Types of Industries Desired 69
Commitment to Providing Services 71
Desired Urban Growth Patterns 73
Redevelopment of Developed Areas 74
Commitment to State and Federal Programs 75
Assistance to Channel Maintenance 76
Energy Facility Siting and Development 77
Tourism and Beach/Water Access 77
Types, Densitiesp and Location of Anticipated
Development 78

HURRICANE AND STORM HAZARD MITIGATION 80
Introduction 80
Hazards Map 81
Effects of*Storm Components on Hazard Zones 96
Summary Be
Post-Disaster Reconstruction 90
Introduction 90
Immediate Clean-Up 91
Recovery Task Force 93
Schedule for Repair and Reconstruction Over Longer
Period 94
Evacuation Routes and Times 95
Summary 97
Intergovernmental Coordination 97
Storm Hazard Mitigation and Post-Disaster Reconstruction
Policies 99

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION 100

LAND CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM 103

RELATIONSHIP OF POLICIES AND LAND CLASSIFICATION 110

INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION 112

APPENDIX A 114

APPENDIX B 118

APPENDIX C 120

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE NUMER NAME PAGE NUMBER

1 Aurora Planning Area 4

2 Population Change from 1960 to 5
1984 - Aurora and Beaufort
County

3 Employment by Persons 16 Years 7
and Over by Industry - Aurora

4 Aurora Area Manufacturing Firms 10

5 Existing Land Use 1986 14

6 Flood Prone Area 23

7 Distribution of Shallow and Prime 26
Agricultural Soils in the Aurora
Planning Area

8 Areas of Environmental Concern 28
and Historic Area

9 Public School Facilities 37

10 Population Projections - Aurora 40
and Beaufort County 1984-1995

11 Inundation Levels for Hurricanes 82
of Specified Intensity

12 Inventory of Structures in the 85
Hazard Area

13 Land Classification Map 105

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Introduction

Land development generally takes place as the result of a

series of decisions by private individuals and government. if

left entirely to chanceg the resulting pattern of development may

not be in the best overall community interest. To promote this

community interest for both present and future generations, a

land use plan is developed, adopted and kept current by the local

governments in the coastal area.

The land use plan is a framework to guide local leaders as

they make decisions affecting development. Private individuals

and other levels of government will also use the plan to guide

their land use decisions. Effective use of the plan by these

groups will lead to the more efficient and economical provision

of public serviceso the protection of natural resourcesq sound

economic development, the protection of public health and safetyg

and enhancement of the community's quality of life.

The Town of Aurora has responded to these needs by electing

to complete and update its land use plan. The preparation of

this plan represents an effort by the Town to guide development

in a way which will maximize public benefits. It was financed in

part through a grant provided by the Coastal Zone Management Act

of 1972. These funds are administered by the Office of Coastal

Zone Management of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Adminis-

tration through the North Carolina Department of Natural Re-

sources and Community Development (NRCD) Division of Coastal

Management.

ESTABLISHMENT OF THE.DATA BASE

One purpose of the 1986 Land Use Plan is to update the

information given in the 1981 plan and to outline any new
developments-that have taken 'place since the completion of the

last plan.. The 1981 plan and its counterpart, the original 1976

Land Development Plan, serve as the primary sources of informa-

tion for this ef fort. Various other sources were used to update

and expand the data base.

Socioeconomic data were gathered from a variety of sources.

The 1980 U.S. Census of PoQuIation provided updated population

figures, and these figures were updated with data provided by the

N.C. Department of Administration. The North Carolina Department

of Natural Resources and Community Development (NCDNRCD) Division

of Marine Fisheries provided data on the fishing industry in and

around the Aurora area. Additional statistics were gathered from

The Directory of Manufacturing Firms, 1984 and the Beaufort

County School Superintendent. The NCDNRCD Divisions of Environ-

mental Management and Soil and Water Conservation were very

helpful in providing information. Addi tional sources were

consultedp including the Mayor and Town Clerk.

Information on land use within the Town's jurisdiction was

acquired from a variety of sources. United States Geologic

Survey 7 1/2 minute quadrangles, the Beaufort County Soil Survey,

zoning maps, building permit records and on-site inspections were

used to assess the development that has occurred since the 19el

plan. Personal interviews with technical experts, such as the

District Soil Conservationistq supplemented information on land

development trends in the Aurora area.

To ensure the accuracy -of the data presented in this plan,

several groups and persons were asked to review the plan during

the writing stages. The Planning Boardi Mayor and Town Board of

Commissioners proofread the text to ensure its accuracy and

direction. The combination of these sources aimed to provide the

most concise picture of the development trends in Aurora.

PRESENT CONDITIONS

Present Population and Economy

The Town of Aurora is situated on South Creekq a tributary

of the Pamlico River, in southern Beaufort County (Figure 1). It

is a Town which, until the early 1960st, existed primarily as a

fishing community. Since 1970, howeverl the population has risen

significantly and the economy of the Town has changed. In

the past 26 yearso Aurora has grown by more than 60 percent

(Figure 2). In contrastq Beaufort County has increased its

population, but not at the same magnitude as Aurora. Looking at

the past 25 years reveals that most of the growth occurred from

1960 to 1970. This coincides with the decision by Texasgulf to

locate a phosphate mining plant near Aurora. The Town developed

residential areas as well as service industries to accomodate the

growth brought on by the industry. Since 1970, the population

increase has been slow, but steady. This growth can probably be

attributed to the decision by Texasgulf workers to locate

their residences closer to work.

4
Figure

AURORA PLANNING AREA

POINT..

33, AUR
10

TOW N LIMI rs

o
I
10
It GA
PflEOTOwN
%to,,
10

to . ......

.. sw

UE MMVRAMON OF MS W WAS FMV4MD IN
MU TH-RaQ A GRAN,7 PROVIDD BY UE NOM
GRAPHIC SCALE C,LR9-D;A COASTAL FRDGFAX, lTUZBL'Ui
1000, 01 1000, 2000, 3000, FLC)S F-tCVMM BY ME CUTM ZOE KNAMIF-Mr
ACT, OF 1972, AS A,ZNTE), WHICH IS AU-IINIST=
BY =- OFFICE OF Ca%SM RESaJRCE MILAMN=,
N*`-0N;-l OCEkNIC AND AM<WHEFJC AU-fMS`=ON.

Figure 2

POPULATION CHANGE FROM 1960 TO 1984:

AURORA AND BEAUFORT COUNTY

1960-80 1980-84
PERCENT PERCENT
1960 1970 1980 1984 POPULATION POPULATION
POPULATION POPULATION POPULATION POPULATION CHANGE CHANGE

Aurora 449 620 684 724 61.2% 5.84%

Beaufort
County 36,014 3S,980 40,355 43,818 21.6% 8.S8%

Source: N.C. Census of Population, 1980.

1984 Municipal estimates provided by N.C. Department of Administration.

A seasonal population flux does not play an important role

in the public service demands placed on Town facilities.

Recreational activities such as hunting and fishing attract a

very small number of tourists and summer residents to the area.

This limited number. of visitors, howevert does not tax the

adequate provision of water and wastewater services.

Other statistics may shed light on the composition and

lifestyle of the residents of Aurora. The population is composed

of approximately 58.7 percent whites, while non-whites account

for approximately 41.3 percent of the total population. The

median age of Aurora is 28.B years compared to 28.3 years for the

state. This implies that one half of the population in Aurora is

older than 28.8 years and the other half is younger. Aurora's

per capita income of 6p439 is sufficiently less than the state

amount of 89189 (1983 statistic).

The economy of Aurora is mixed. Figure 3 shows employment

of persons 16 years and older by industry in Aurora. Nearly 35

percent of those employed are in the fishing, farming, forestry,

or mining business. The phosphate industry is a major employer

for eastern North Carolina as well as Aurora. Plans call for the

expansion of the Texasgulf labor force by 1990. This wi 11 impact

the Aurora economy as many employees will look to Aurora as a

convenience center. Given the trend of Texasbulf employees

locating their residences within close range of the plant,

supplemental residential construction is likely to occur in and

around Aurora.

Figure 3

EMPLOYMENT BY PERSONS 16 YEARS AND OVER BY INDUSTRY

AURORA

Industry Total Persons Percent

Agriculture, Fores try, 85 34.7
Fishing and Mining

Construction 10 4.0

Manufacturing 37 15.1

Transportation 7 2.8

Communications and other Public 4 1.6
Utilities

Wholesale Trade 24 9.8

Retail Trade 23 9.4

Finance, Insurance and Real Estate 9 3.6

Business and Repair Services 4 1.6

Personal, Entertainment and 5 2.0
Recreation Services

Health Services 6 2.45

Education Services 18 7.3

Other Professional and Related 0 0.0
Services

Public Administration 13 5.3

TOTAL 245

UNEMPLOYMENT 21 8.57

SOURCE: N. C. Statistical Abstract, 1984.

-Aurora's economy is highly dependent on the phosphate mining

industry for jobs and revenue. But, it is important to note that

the local phosphate mining industry is sensitive to the world

phosphate market. Any significant'decline in demand would have

serious implications for Aurora. The recent buy-out of North

Carolina Phosphate Company by Texasgulf resulted in a net loss of

60 Aurora-area jobs. Additional declines in the demand for

phosphate could create economic distress in Beaufort County.

As stated aboveg primary industries like farming, fishingg

forestry and mining constitute more than one-third the total

employment. Agricultureq although not a major employer in the

areas is still an important component of the Aurora economy. The

overall decrease in agricultural employment has been triggered by

the widespread use of heavy machinery and the introduction of

farming methodologies which require less labor. Farming is very

important in terms of land use, however. Agricultural land use

constitutes approximately 40 percent of the total land area

within the one mile extraterritorial jurisdiction area. The

crops most widely grown are potatoesq corns soybeans' and wheat.

Peaks in agricultural employment typically occur during the

harvest season in late summer/early fall.

Although much of the land adjoining the one mile limit is in

forests, there appears to be little activity associated with

harvesting the timber from the land. Most of the forested areas

lie around South Creek and in the'extreme southern and northern

areas of the territorial limits. Other areas dense with forests

are east of South Cre-ek. Logging these areas would not consti-

tute a major economic impact on Aurora since most of these logs

would be exported to pulp mills out of Aurora's influence.

The fishing, and seafood industry is an important component

of the economy. This is largely because of the number of people

it employs and the financial gain it offers to the Town. Since

1981, Beaufort County has consistently been in the top eight

counties in commercial seafood catches, poundage and monetary

value. Several commercial fishermen claim residence in the

Aurora area. In addition, there are currently two seafood

processing plants in Aurora which employ a total of 100 persons

during the peak season. These seafood businesses deal with

crabs, shrimp and various types of finfish. There is also a

small industry nearby which makes wire crab pots for local

use. Recreational fishing and boating provide an unknown but

suspectedly large boost to the Aurora economy. Fuel, food,

beverage s, bait and marine supplies are items commonly purchased

by these seasonal recreators.

Only one industry, Texasgulf, employs a significant number

of workers (Figure 4). Texasgulf has about 1200 workers who come

from all parts of the surrounding area. As stated above, TG is

involved in phosphate mining as well as production of phosphate

products. All other local industries are reliant on the seafood

industry for their existence. Aurora has become a good site for

industrial location because of the extensive amounts and types of

raw material it can provide for manufacturing.

The phosphate mining business has had a strong impact on the

economy of Beaufort County and Aurora. Beaufort County officials

Figure 4

...AURORA AREA MANUFACTURING FIRMS

Employee
Name Address Product Number

Texasgulf, Inc. P. 0. Box 48 Phosphoric acid and 1000-2499
other phosphate
products

Carolina Seafood, Inc. P. 0. Box 354 Crab meat, raw crabs 20-49

Henries Fishing Supplies Highway 33 Wire crab pots 10-19

Bay City Crab Co. N. C. 306 Crab meat, raw crabs 20-49

Daniels Seafood Co. South Creek Crab meat, raw crabs 20-49

Aurora Packing Co. Highway 33 Crab meat', raw crabs. 20-49

Source: N. C. Directory of Manufacturing Firms, 1984.

clai-m that one out of every five tax dollars in Beaufort County

is paid by Texasgult. TG's economic contribution to the area has

been substantial, but the environmental impact of their intensive

phosphate mini.ng. facilities has been under question. Conserva-

tionists and entrepeneurs have worked hard to improve the

company's environmental record. There is an estimated amount of

mineable phosphate in the Aurora area to keep an operation like

Texasgulf in business for 300 y ears. THe expansion of mining

operations into the Aurora, planning area could have detrimental

effects on the land quality and quality of life for Aurora

residents. Againo the financial and natural value of the land

and water resources would be-under dispute. The Aurora zoning

ordinance requires that all mining within the planning area will

be subject to a special use permit that will be examined on a

case-by-case basis. Such an expansion of mining operations would

favorably impact the economyo but the value of the natural system

could be at stake. This dilemma, a common problem for any

large-scale, resource intensive manufacturing operation, would be

evaluated by the Planning Board at the time of the request.

A seasonal variation in employment is typically a problem in

the Aurora area. Off-season seafood processing and agricultural

unemployment is a serious concern for the economic development of

the area. Women are typically the victims of the seasonal

unemployment problem. No industries within the planning area

employ women on a full-time basis.

Summary

The analysis of the demographic and economic conditions

reveals that Aurora supports a stable economy and population.

Steady, population growth in the population has been the trend

over the past 25 years. This trend is expected t.o continue. The

major industries of the Town are currently experiencing pros-

perous times, but it is shown that this may not always be the

case. Most local industries are dependent upon market demand

fluctuations or the bounty of the land or water for their

economic growth. Additional growth in the economy, excluding the

phosphate mining industry, is not likely to have a significant

impact on the natural resources of the area. As,discussed in the

following sections, Aurora has adequate services to accomodate

any projected growth in population.

EXISTING LAND USE

Introduction

Before intelligent decisions can be made directing future

land use.in-a communi.ty, there. must be an inventory of the

present land uses.. This inventory should take note of the types

of land uses, their amountg and their distribution. The follow-

ing section details the existing land uses within the Aurora

planning area.

Land Use Summary

The Aurora planning area includes the land within the Town

limits and the land outside the Town to a distance of one mile

(Figure 1). The to tal area encompasses slightly more than eight

square miles, but only about 30 percent of the plqnning area is

within the corporate limits. Within the planning areaq approxi-

mately 12 percent of the land is developed for urban purposes.

Most of this developed land is within the Town limits. The

majority of the undeveloped land is in forests, agriculture, or

wetlands.

There has been little change in the layout of the land since

the 1981 plan (Figure 5). The existing land use map shows that

most land uses within the Town limits are residential, commercial

or related to agriculture. Residential development is concen-

trated in the areas south of Highway 33, the blocks surrounding

Main Street, and in the blocks between Main Street and NC 33.

Since 19819 only 11 building permits have been granted. Of

these, nine have been residential construction permits. Most new

< <

r r;'- I--
rrr
00
Jl*
46 o

Lr) j),
4- c rl
rr
rrrr

44
4 4r
;L
rr
r: f
f-: r
In
-v*r

4 Dog

$do Iva

I o

residential starts wiAhin the past five years have been in the

area around Grace Drive south of Highway 33. Several other

permits have -been granted for development of houses in the

northeastern quadrant of Town between Main and Railroad Streets.

This area has also been popular for the placement of mobile

homes. Outside the Town limits9 various traffic arteries appear

to be catalysts for housing development. Residential land uses

occur in the southeastern quadrant of the planning area along NC

1002. Other clusters of homes can be found in the vicinity of

Weeping Chapel Church, along NC 1925 south of Town, and.in the

Royal/St. Peter's church area. Other houses are scattered

sporadically throughout the planning area. Wide tracts of

undeveloped land are located within the Town limits as well as in

the planning area.

Commercial land uses are those which support retail or

personal services. Within the planning areaq several concentra-

tions of commercial uses exist. These are the downTown business
district, the'Fifth Street blocks, a nd the strip development

stretch extending westward along Highway 33. The NC 33 corridor

has attracted numerous commercial establishments within the past

five years. In fact9 since 1981, the two commercial business

permits granted have been for sites along this road. The block

made up by Highway 33 to the south, Third Street to the easts and

Fifth Street to the west has grown into an institution/office

center. The community health center and a dental office have

located here within recent years. It is expected that future

commercial, institutional and.office space needs will be met in

these existing commercial areas. Westward expansion of the

strip development is also expected.

The industrial areas of Aurora are located in the north-

eastern quadrant-of Town and.along Second-Street. They consist

mostly of fish and crab processors. The phosphate mining
industry i5 located outside of the Town"s extraterritorial

limitsy and therefore is not included in this plan. Recently, a

zoning request from commercial to industrial use was granted for

a stretch of land along Highway 33 west of Town near Potter Oil.

All future industrial uses should be confined to the existing

industrial zones because of industry's undesirable effects on

any other land use.

Only about 20 percent of the extraterritorial area is

forested. Of this, only about 5 percent is situated within the

Town limits. Two concentrations of forested land exist in the

planning jurisdiction. These are located in the northern section

of Town along Bailey Creek and the southern section of the

planning area along South Creek. Presently, there are no serious

land use compatibility problems with these forested lands.

However, should these areas be logged, short-term aesthetic

problems might result unless wise harvesting/reforestation

practices are used.

Most of the land within the extraterritorial limits is

cleared for agricultural uses. All of these lands are either

currently devoted to crop production as their primary function or

serve as pasture area. Most of these agricultural lands lie in

an unbroken stretch south of Highway 33 to the boundary of the

extraterritorial limits., There are tracts of land north of

Bailey Creek and in a block south of Highway 33 and east of Fifth

Street which are cleared for agriculture. Within the Town's

planning. jurisdictiong there are no apparent conflicts between

agricultural and other uses. As the demand for residential and

commercial uses increasesq the agricultural land along Highway 33
may be exposed to development pressure. No other compatibility

problems are expected to arise.

The zoning ordinance will prevent any compatibility problems

between commercial and residential land uses. The areas most

likely to experience change in the planning region can be found
in several locations. Additional residential development is

expected in the area near Grace Drive within the Town lim its.

Outside the Town limits, additional construction along transpor-

tation routes is possible. The Royal/St. Peter's church area is

already a small residential community and will likely grow as

additional dwellings are built. As statedy commercial uses are

likely to expand along the Highway 33 route in a westerly
direction from Town. This will not cause any infringement

problems on agricultural land, as the area is already consider-

ably developed. There are no major problems that have resulted

yet from unplanned development, nor any which will have a bearing

on future land use.

In summary, there are no significant land use compatibility
problems in the Aurora planning district, except for the large
phosphate mining operation located on the fringes of the planning

area. The conflict exists between agricultural land uses and the

mi,ning [email protected]. As stated above, a zoning ordinance has been

created which will prohibit mining within the Town's extraterri-

torial limits without aspecial use permit. No conflicts in land

use are anticipated within the next ten years. It is unlikely
that the phosphate industry or any other expanding development

will promote serious land use incompatibilities within the Town's

one-mile extraterritorial limit.

CURRENT. PLANS, POLICIES AND REGULATIONS

Plans.

Aurora presently has three planning documents that have a

direct, impact-on land development in the area. In addition,

numerous county and regional documentsq to a limited degree,

address Aurora development issues. 'The following is a list and

description of the plans since 1981 which are related to Aurora's

growth.

Community Facilities and Public Improvements Plans - The

1981 Land Use Plan update outlines a community facilities and

public improvements plan completed in 1978. Since the completion

of the plano nearly all of its goals have been attained.

Land Use Plans - Since the passing of the Coastal Area

Management Acto two land use plans have been completed. The land

classification map which accompanies the plan is useful in

determining land use changes in the planning area.

Capital Improvements Plan - Since 1981t no documents have

been prepared which outline the capital improvement plans for the

Town. The Town is currently carrying out a 201 Facilities

program in accordance with the NRCD Division of Environmental

Management.

Policies

Policies are defined as statements of intent and courses of

action which are followed to reach a desired goal. The following

is a list of the policies the Town of Aurora currently has

regarding development.

Utiliti'es Extension Policies - The capacity of the community

facilities is discussed in "Constraints: Capacity of Community

Facilities." (page 38). Aurora's sewer hook-up policy is applic-

-able to all potential customers who discharge at an equivalent

amount and quality as domestic customers. This is done on a

case-by-case basis depending on the waste characteristics. All

sewage lines are provided by the Town and maintained to the

customer's property lines. Owners of private wells are eligible

for sewer extension up to one year after the date of construction

completion. The same is applicable for water service. Water

fees are set higher for customers outside the Town limits.

Open Space and Recreation Policy - There is no comprehensive

recreation plan for the Town of Aurora. Duri'ng the summer

months9 the Town appoints a recreation director who arranges and

manages sports teams. The schools serving Aurora also have a

summer recreation program. There is little immediate need for

the Town to formulate a recreation policy with these two programs

in place. The Town owns and operates a boat launching facility

which was a part of the Capital Improvements Program outlined in

the 1981 plan.

Regulations

The Town of Aurora enforces several regulations which have

an impact on development. The building inspector is responsible

for enforcement. Regulations currently in place are:

Zoning Ordinance

Building and Housing Regulations

Mobile Home and Trailer Park Ordinance

Subdiv.ision Ordinance

Building and Plumbing Regulations

Flood Zone Insurance Requirements

Nuisance Ordinance

The Beaufort County Health Department regulates the permits

for septic tank and well placements. In addition, the subdivi-

sion ordinance regulates a minimum lot size of 20,000 square feet

for septic tank users. Within the Town limits, all but approxi-

mately ten percent of the inhabitants are hooked up to the

municipal water and wastewater systems.

Special use permits are required for various activities

within the Aurora extraterritorial limit. They are mandatory for

mining operations, any food processing plants, textile and

clothing manufacturers, business and professional offices,

multi-family dwellings, and boat storage docking facilities. In

addition to the special use permit, the Town also requires a

submittal of an outline of the environmental impacts of the above

types of development prior to rendering decisions.

The Town has no designated historic district, thereby

eliminating the need for historic district regulations. There

are several structures, however, located in the downTown area

that are historically and architecturally significant, but are

not recognized as such. Dune protection ordinances are not

required as there are no dunes within the planning area.

Sedimentation regulations are in accordance with the NC Sediment

Pollution Control Act. Other federal and state regulations

enforced in the Aurora planning area are outlined in Appendix A.

CONSTRAINTS- LAND SUITABILITY

Introduction

The fundamental premise of land use planning is that

distinctions.exi-st between.land masses which make them suitable

for various uses. Conversely, not all lands are suitable for the

same types of development.- For examples there may be areas with

sails too wet to support foundations. The following section

delineates areas with such constraints to guide future develop-

ment decisions.

Physical Limitations for Development

Hazards

Two types of hazards may impede growth: man-made and

natural hazards. There are four man-made hazard areas in the

planning area which should be excluded from development. First,

the phosphate mining pits located near the Town present a hazard

to development. Also, the large industrial complex which houses

Texasgulf could present a hazardous development situation because

of the dangerous gases, like hydrogen sulfide, used at the plant.

Very low density land uses, like agriculture and forestry, would

be best suited to areas around the plant.

A runway is located in the extreme eastern portion of the

planning area. It is used primarily as a landing strip for crop

dusting planes. Any development permitted near this site should

be limited to low density residential development. The land

underlying the approach pattern is exposed to obvious crash

hazards and inconveniences due to noise from aircraft.

Flammable-liquids, such as fuel oil, are stored in three

locations in Town. Aurora Gas, Potter Oil Company and Hooker &

Hollowell Oil. Company are situated on the major thoroughfares

through Town. Commercial structures are most likely to be

developed adjacent to these structures# given the zoning ordin-

ance. I It is re commended that residential development should be

targeted to less hazardous areas. Nuclear power plants would

not impact planning decisions as none are located in the immedi-

ate area.

Marine Corps Air Station Cherry Point and Seymour Johnson

Air Base, training bases for military aviators, are located near

Aurora. The.airspace located over Beaufort County has tradition-

ally been situated in military flight patterns for training

pilots. Recently, there has been discussion between military

officials and the public regarding the expansion of the Military

Operating Airspace (MOA) over Beaufort County. The increased

possiblity of air accidents poses a higher risk of danger and
would have an effec't on Beaufort County land use patterns.

The flood prone areas in Town are naturally hazardous zones

where development should be carefully monitored. The United

States Geological Survey flood prone area maps show that approxi-

mately 66 percent of the Town is located in the 100 year flood

plain (Figure 6). This means that' these areas have a one in 100

chance of being inundated in any one year. Nearly all parts of.

Town with paved roads are located in the 100 year floodplain.

Certain. building restrictionsg in accordance with the Flood

Figure 6 25

FLOOD PRONE AREA

01. $mot

ik%

t stephort

......... . ............
RU AREA
FLO

Awo" to

J
9
%

ping Pach*l
Cb occorew OA
LBLIIS
bUa Grow
Co.

st Pat
h-
tRo@q
so

7-7

Source: U.S.G.S. Flood Prone Area
Map, 1982. =ARATION OF THIS MF WAS FINAN= IN
GRAPHIC SCALE PART TMR= A GRA.W PROVE)ED BY ME NORTH
a 8000, 2000, 3wo CARMZNA CCA= K*@@ FROMM, IEROUGH
FLMS M= BY THE MASM ZUE MMAM4Xr
ACT OF 1972, AS *21M, WHICH IS.AaMINIIS=
BY THE OFFICE OF GOASEAL RE-SaJRCE
N=ONAL OMkNIC k"Z AnIOSPHERIC AEMMS=0N.

Insurance Rate programg exist in these areas (1986 Planning

Board).

Soils

Soils in the planning area-were mapped by the Soil Conserva-

tion Service. The soil'survey was used to determine which soils

present development limitations due to wetness or high shrink-

-swell potential. The local soils are composed mostly of the

Tomotley and Arapahoe fine sandy loamsv the Portsmouth loam and

the Dragston loamy sand. Probably 60 percent of the planning

area is covered by the Tomotley soil association. All these

soils are poorly drained and have severe Aimitations for the

placement of septic tanks because of their slow permeability,

poor filtering ability and wetness. The Beaufort County Health

Department is responsible for permitting septic tanks in the

Aurora planning region. All local soil types would also present

a problem for building foundationsg as subsidence is likely.

. Soil shallowness is not ordinarily a constraint for develop-

ment with the Tomotley association, but the seven inch surface

layer may be too shallow for certain types of construction. As

stated above) this soil type is widely distributed in the

planning area (Figure 7).

In summary, all soils found in the area have limitations for

the efficient placement of septic tanks and the Tomotley associa-

tion may cause problems for the stability of building founda-

tions. The overall development implications will translate into

higher overall costs per unit to overcome these constraints.

27
Figure 7

DISTRIBUTION OF SHALLOW AND PRIME

AGRICULTURAL SOILS IN THE AURORA PLANNING AREA

@9"

OLE
P'em T

LIMITS

it
R

Prime Agricultural
Source: 1982 Beaufort County Soil Survey, Soils
Soil Conservation Service. Shallow Tomotley
THE PREPARATION OF THIS MAP WAS FINANCED IN PART THROUGH Soils
A GRANT PROVIDED BY THE N. C. COASTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM,
THROUGH FUNDS PROVIDED BY THE COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT ACT
OF 1972, AS AMENDED, WHICH IS ADMINISTERED BY THE OFFICE OF
COASTAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT, NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION.

Water Supplies

The 1976 Aurora land use plan gives a lengthy discussion on

the location and sources of groundwater. To paraphrase, Aurora

gets-nearly all, of its groundwater from the Castle Hayne aquifer.

The Castle. Hayne is-recharged approximately 20 miles from Aurora

northwest of Wilmar near the Pitt County/Beaufort County bound-

ary. Since the onset of phosphate mining operations in the

Aurora area, the intake level of regional water supply has been

dramatically lowered. Texasgulf operations alone tap 60 million

gallons per day from the Castle Hayne aquifer. Initiallyp the

groundwater intake levels were lowered to accommodate this

depletion. Recentlyq the NCNRCD Division of Environmental

Management Groundwater Division stated that the groundwater level

has reached equilibrium. This implies that as much water is

being extracted from subsurface sources as is being added

through recharge. Obviouslys this balance must be maintained in

order to assure an adequate water supply for the future.

Expanded phosphate mining operations or any other additional

heavy water uses may upset this balance. It is recommended that

water use be an issue in considering what types of industry

locate in the region.

Excessive Ground Slope Areas

Excessive slopes are defined as areas where the predominant

slope exceeds 12 percentg i.e. where the change in elevation is

12 feet or more per one hundred feet of horizontal run. Most of

the land in Aurora.is very low and there are no areas which have

a slope of 12 percent or more.

-Fragile Areas

Fragile areas are -the water and land environments whose

physical and biological nature make them especially vulnerable to

damage or construction by inappropriate or poorly planned

development. There are several types of fragile areas which are

under the jurisdiction of several agencies including the Division

of Coastal Managemento the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the

local government. Those regulated by the State of North Carolina

are defined in-the North Carolina Administrative Code (NCAC) and

are called Areas of Environmental Concern (AECs) (Figure 8). The

Corps of Engineers has jurisdiction over "404 Wetlands", or

wetland areas that are not necessarily connected with a major

body of water. There are no 404 wetlands in the planning area.

Permits are required by the Corps and DCM for all types of

filling in these wetlands. The exact locations of AECs and

other wetlands must be identified through a field investigation,

but their approximate locations are shown on Figure B. Due to

their dynamic nature,, AECs are constantly changing, thereby

making their mapping difficult. For regulatory purposes, the

exact location of AECs must be verified with the appropriate

authorities.

Additional fragile areas, not protected under the NCAC or

the Corps,- can be found in the Aurora area. These are other

fragile areas, not under the jurisdiction of state or federal

Figure 8 30

AREAS OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN ANND LOCATION OF

HISTORIC STRUCTURES

Ilk

to 96.
CIL) AUR

TOWN LINIITS
AhL

to
PtEolrowk ROAD
A2@
10 US011
z

Public Trust Waters
GRAPHIC SCALE THE PFZPARATICN OF THIS MAP WAS FDLAN= IN
ixd 0 1000' 2OW 3000' PAIU THRCUGH A CRANr PFDVMM BY THE NORTH Estuarine Waters
CAROLINA COASM nVWIMM FROM&M, THR= Coastal Wetlands
FU,'ZS PROVIDED BY THE, OOASTAL =2 MAGDENT
ACT OF 1972, AS &M=, WHICH IS A=ST= Estuarine Shoreline
BY THE OFFICE OF Ca4SM WZ= MkNAGE@M,
-7 Historic Structures
NATICNAL OCEANIC AND ADM rMIC AU41NISTRATIONm

agenciesq that the-local government may deem suitable for local

protection, such as historical, archaeologicalo or. cultural

s.ites. 'Loc.al governments can,also opt to additionally,protect

other significant natural areas-. The following is a discussion

of the distribution of AECs and other.fragile areas and sugges-

tions for their managem ent.

The estuarine water AEC is@the most expansive in the Aurora

area. It includes all surface waters downstream of Whitehurst

Creek. Estuarine waters are defined as "all the water of the

Atlantic Ocean within the boundary of North Carolina and all the

waters of the baysq soundso rivers and tributaries thereto

seaward of the dividing line between coastal fishing waters and
inland fishing waters, as set forth in an agreement adopted by

the Wildlife Resources Commission and the Department of Natural

Resources and Community Development filed with the Secretary of

State.

Estuaries are among the most productive natural environments

of North Carolina. They support the valuable commercial and

sports fisheries of the coastal area which are comprised of

several species that must spend all of some part of their life

cycle with the estuarine waters to mature and reproduce. Of the

ten leading species in the commercial catch, all but one is

dependent upon the estuary. The estuarine circulation system is

responsible for the high productivity leve.1s. The circulation of

estuarine waters transports nutrients, propels plankton, spreads

seed and flushes wastes from animal and plant life. It also

mixes the water to create a multitide of habitats.

The management objective for. this AEC is to safeguard and

perpetuate its biological, socioeconomic and aesthetic values.

Suitable land/water,uses-shall be,consistent with NCAC Subchapter

7H guidelines.-

The estuarine shoreline AEC is located adjacent to the

estuarine waters AEC for a distance of 75 feet landward from the

mean high water mark. This includes the shoreline areas down-

stream of Whitehurst Creek. The estuarine shorelines are

considered to be an important component of the estuarine system

because of their close association with the adjacent estuarine

waters. Development along the estuarine shoreline directly

influences the quality of life for estuarine organisms. This AEC

is also especially vulnerable to the effects of shoreline erosion

and flooding.

The management objective is to ensure that shoreline

development is compatible with both the dynamic nature of

estuarine shorelines and the values of the estuarine system. The

NCAC sets the least restrictive set of allowable uses for the

estuarine shoreline AEC. Development requests within the defined

estuarine shoreline AEC must be granted permits.

All development must comply with the use standards estab-

lished in the NCAC Subchapter 7H. Development must not violate

the natural barriers to erosion or show to degrade the life of

the estuarine system. Minimizing the amount of impervious

surfaces and increasing the vegetative cover to increase evapo-

transpiration are two important considerations in permitting land

uses in this AEC.

Public- -trust areas are those waters to which the public has

a right of access. It includes all natural bodies of water and

lands thereunder to the. mean high water mark and all areas to

which the.public has@rights of navigation, access and recreation.

All surface waters in the area are in the public trust.

.These areas are significant in that the public has rights

including navigation and recreation. In addition, they support

valuable commercial and sports fisheries, have aesthetic value

and are important resources for economic development. These

areas should be managed so as to protect the public's rights for

navigation and recreation.

Acceptable uses should be consistent with the aforementioned

management objectives. The NCAC states that uses which would

negatively impact the public trust area will be prohibited.

These include projects that would directly or indirectly block or

impair existing navigation channels, increase shoreline erosionp

deposit spoils below mean high tidep cause adverse water circu-

lation patterns, violate water quality standards or cause

degradation of shellfish waters.

Coastal wetlands, another defined AEC, are found on the

banks of South Creek and its tributaries. Wetlands are defined

as "any salt marsh or other marsh subject to regular or occasi-

onal flooding by tides, 'including wind tides". The tide waters

can reach the marshland through natural or artificial water
courses. The NCAC sets forth a list of indicator plan ts for the

designation of a wetland.

The wetland environment is one of the most productive in the

estuarine system. Detritus (decayed plant material) and nutri-

ents exported from-the marshland support the estuary's food

chain.- The roots,,rhizomes, stems and seeds of coastal wetlands

act as the nursery area and food source for many fish and

shellfish species. in addition, coastal wetlands act as the

first line of defense in retarding estuarine shoreline erosion.

Marshlands also act as nutrient and sediment traps by slowing the

water which flows over them and causing suspended organic and

inorganic particles to settle out. Pollutants and excess-
ive nutrients are'absorbed by the marsh plants, thus providing an

inexpensive water treatment service.

The NCAC states that the management objective for this AEC

is to give highest priority to its protection and management so

as to and perpetuate its biological, socioeconomic and aesthetic

values. The coastal wetland has the most restrictive set of

allowable uses in the AEC system. It is recommended to utilize

wetlands as a natural resource which is essential to the func-

tioning of the entire estuarine system.

Suitable land uses in the wetland AEC should be consistent

with the management objective*of the NCAC. Acceptable uses would

be utility easementso fishing piers, and docks. The natural

functioning of the wetland must not be impaired by any develop-

ment types in the wetland area.

The NRCD Division of Marine Fisheries (DMF), through many

years of research, has developed a list of coastal water bodies

which are known spawning areas for juvenile fish species. These

3.5

waters are cal-led.primary-nursery.areas (PNAs). According to DMF

technicians, South. Creek and its tributaries are not included on

the PNA-list because they are considered inland waters. Biologi-

callyi the tributaries of South Creek function as PNAs and should

be protected as such.. Spots and croakers depend on these waters

for spawning and development during their juvenile stage. This

area is notq however, on the DMF list because inland waters are

out of the jurisdiction of DMF and considered within the juris-

diction of the Wildlife Resources Commission. It is recommended

that these nursery areas be protected as potential resource

areas because of their unique biological significance despite

coastal/inland jurisdictional discrepancies.

The historical integrity of the Town also deserves special

attention. There is no official historic districtp but three

structures in Town should be preserved for their historical

value. These include the Henry Harding Home, the Hooker-Litchfi-

eld House and the Rutledge House. The former two structures are

recognized and listed on the State Register of Historic Places.

The Rutledge House, under consideration for the national regis-

ter, has been renovated into the Aurora Civic Center. It houses

the Town offices plus several human services operations.

Historic redevelopment is encouraged in Town to preserve these

sites for future enjoyment. The general area of these historic

properties is shown on Figure 8.

The area is also rich in archaeological heritage. The N.C.

Division of Cultural Resources lists one archaeologically

significant site in the northern section of the planning area in

the-vicinity of.Whitehurst Creek.. The NCDCR recommends that this

site should be treated with the utmost respect. This can be

accomplished through survey, mitigative recovery of significant

datap-avoidanceg or preservation in situ. Also, the phosphate

beds are rich in fossils, Some of these artifacts have been

collected and. displayed in the Aurora Fossil Museum. The

archaeological heritage of the area is an irreplaceable resource

which should be protected and preserved.

Areas which sustain remnant species are those places which

support endangered species of plants and animals. An American

Bald Eagle was recently sited near the ferry landing. The

pilings for the ferry landing also provide a habitat for several

ospreys. These sites are located outside of the Town's planning

jurisdiction, but it is recommended that all precautions be taken

to ensure the safe reproduction of these birds. Due to the

Mobility and reproductive patterns of these birds, an additional

habitat could easily become established within the planning area.

AREAS WITH RESOURCE POTENTIAL

Although much of the land within the planning district is

developedq there may be particular areas which should be excluded

from or encouraged to be developed because of a particular soil

or development impediment. The 1976 Land Development' Plan

outlines the sites which are considered to have resource potent-

ial. The entire planning area is situated on one of the world's

largest phosphate deposits. All of Aur ora has phosphatemining

potential.

Pr,oductive soils could be considered a valuable resource as

well. Prime agricultural are found within one mile of the Town

limits (Figure 7)... . The. NCNRCD Division of Soil and Water

Conservation and- the U.S. Soil Conservation Service assisted in

gathering information necessary to map these soils. The existing
land use map shows that most of the prime soils are currently

under agricultural production or are still covered in forests.

As of yety none of these soils has been encroached or disturbed

by development. The Town has weighed the importance of produc-
tive farmland and has developed policy statements regarding its

protection in the "Resource Production and Management Policies"

section of this plan.

CONSTRAINTS: CAPACITY OF COMMUNITY FACILITIES

Introduction

Development is often encouraged because of the increased tax

base it-brings. 'Eventuallyq howeverg -the local government must

spend some of-its tax dollars to upgrade and expand the existing

facilities to accommodate such growth. The land use planning

process allows city officials to assess development trends and

analyze the requirements placed on the community facilities. The

following section discusses the existing conditions of the water

and wastewater treatment facilitiesq the schools and the roads.

Water and Sewer Systems

The-1981 land use plan update details the real,extent of

water and sewer service in Town. Since that timeo additional

hook-ups have been made in the western section of the Highway 33

corridor and in the residential area south of that road.

The design capacity of the water system is 288,000 gallons

and consists of two wells. This system is currently used at less

than 35 percent of its capacity. For the purposes of this plan,

an estimate of the average usage rate is measured. This is

calculated by the total gallons used daily based on the number of

people living in the area using the system. Given the present

population and usage rate, theoreticallyg the average Aurora

water customer utilizes 139 gallons per day. Assuming this

theoretical constant usage rateg this syste m can accommodate

approximately 1345 additional customers. Any peak load brought

on by a population surge could easily be accommodated with the

existing -facilities. Additional residential, commercial and

*industrial growth up to 1300 persons could occur without causing

undue stress on-.the.system.

The sewage treatment system's design capacity is .1200

milli-on gallons. The average use is .0903 mgd which represents a

75 percent usage rate. During peak times, the flow rate often

exceeds the design capacity by a factor of nearly two. Given

the current average usage rate by the 724 persons in Auroraq

this theoretically represents an average usage of 1247 gallons

per day per person. Operating at this theoretical usage rateg

only 238 more persons can be accomodated on' the sewer system.

This could present problems for future growth.

The Town sewer system has recently been put into an agree-

ment between the state and Town officials. In January , 1986,

the Division of Environmental Management (DEM) and the Town have

agreed to a "Special Order by Consent" regarding the wastewater

treatment plant. The plant has not been met effluent discharge

requirements for several years. In the SOC, the Town has

promised to make improvements at the discharge point within the

next two years. The SOC also required the Town to submit a 201

Facilities Plan by May, 1986. The system is proposed to be

altered by a relocation of the point of discharge. There are no

plans for a major upgrade or expansion of unit processes.

Until the plant meets requirements, only a limited amount of

additional gallons of waste per day can be added to the system.

The Environmental Management Commission is able to decide on

further allocations for wastewater input into the sy stem.

Information on the criteria for judging the advisability of

making these additions can be obtained from the Regional Water

Quality Secton staff-of DEM.

Until an upgrade of the system is madev little growth is

-able to occur. The wastewater treatment system is inherently ill

suited for the treatment of industrial wastes. Future growth

will be limited by the capacity of the wastewater treatment

facilities. Unless the system is improved to accommodate

significantly more customersq very little growth, particularly

industrial growtho will be able to occur.

Schools

The school facilities are often an item of concern for the

local residents. Aurora's schools, under the jurisdiction of the

Beaufort County School System, include Snowden Elementary and
Aurora High School. The Elementary School is operating at

approximately 96 percent of its capacity (Figure 9). The school

was constructed in 1938 and since that time, only one improvement

was made in 1953. The pupil/teacher ratio is not disproportion-

ately high, howeverp which would indicate that the crowded

conditions have not effected the attention given to each

student.

If the school age population increasesp contradictory to
demographic predictions, the Town will have to request the
Beaufort County Board of Education construct another facility or

an addition to the existing structure.

The high school is currently operating at 68 percent

Figure 9

PUBLIC SCHOOL FACILITIES

Pupil/
Teacher Teacher Grade Year
School Capacity Enrollment Allotment Ratio Taught Built Additions

Southwest Snowden
Elementary 650 625 34 1:18.4 K-8 1938 1953

Aurora High School 350 239 18 1:13.3 9-12 1954 1976

Source: Interview with Beaufort County School Superintendent, 1985.

X-

capacity. Since its construction projects in 19789 there have

been no additional improvements made to the school. The pu-

pil/teacher ratio is considered to be quite good, indicating that

no problems exist with attention being given to each student.

This school could accommodate an influx of students should a

population increase occur.

Solid Waste Collection and Police and Fire Protection

The Town Sanitation Department provides garbage collection

and trash disposal within the Town limits. Two persons work for

this department. Collection takes place two times per week and

is deposited at the Silver Hill landfill fifteen miles away in

Pamlico County.

Police service is provided for all persons located within

the planning area. The police force consists of one person and

one cruiser. Regular patrolling is limited to in Town locations

only. In addition, three Beaufort County Deputies with offices

in the Aurora area assist in servicing the area. All have

jurisdiction within the Town limits.

The Aurora Fire Department is manned by nearly 25 certified

volunteers. The Fire Department serves the entire Richlands

Township, as it is funded through a Township tax. The equipment.

includes two pumpers, an equipment van, a brush truck, and a

tanker. The size of the force can be increased when needed due

to agreements with nearby Towns. In-the event of a large fire,

other departments can be called in for fire fighting assistance.

Roads

The road system in Town is currently sufficient for any

traffic peaks which may occur. The NC Department of Transporta-

tion estimates that Highway 33 is extremely underutilized. It is

currently used at less than 20 percent of its capacity. It is

expected that any additional growth could be accommodated by the

present road system. According to the NC Department of Transpor-

tation Transportation Improvements Program 1986-1995, there are

no plans for any major improvements in the Aurora area. Some

secondary roads may become paved under the priority system the

DOT uses, but there will be no major improvements made to the

roads of the area.

ESTIMATED DEMAND

Population and Economy

.Population trends in Beaufort County have shown the popula-

tion increasing at a moderate rate. Historically, this has been

the trend for Aurora, also. It is anticipated that this growth

will continue in the next ten years (Figure 10). The population

is expected to be 767 by the year 1990. By 1995, it is projected

that the Town will grow by 45 person bringing the total to 813

persons. The Town can easily accomodate such modest growth if

the wastewater treatment problems are corrected. If the immi-

grant population brings small school age children, the Town may

have to request the Beaufort County School System to consider

constructing an addition to the elementary school. The water

system in Town could adequately accom modate such growth as 65

percent of its capacity is not in use. The wastewater treatment

facility cannot accommodate much growth as it is currently under

a moratorium instituted because of failure to meet effluent

standards. The road system could more than adequately service

this population growth.

Strains on the land would be minimal.. There is currently an

adequate amount of undeveloped land within the Town limits which

could be converted to residential uses. - Given the average 2.8

persons per household calculated by the U.S. Bureau of the

Census, an additional 31.7 dwelling units, would need to be

constructed to accommodate the growth. - Residences could be

placed south of Highway 33 or in areas zoned for residential that

are not completely developed.

Figure 10 45

POPULATION PROJECTIONS

AURORA* AND BEAUFORT COUNTY

-1984 1995

1984x 1990 1995

Aurora 724 767 813

Beaufort County 43,818 45,404 47,645

*Aurora projections made by Mid-East Commission.
XMunicipal and County estimates provided by the N. C. Department
of Administration.

Summary

The Aurora population is expected to grow at a modest rate

by the year 1995. The water, wastewater, school, and road

systems can adequately accommodate this growth. The land needed

for development is currently available. Zoning would ensure that

the land remain in its intended uses. Open spaces within each

zoning district could be developed to accommodate the 31.7

residential structures plus the accompanying service-orientedy
non-residential uses needed to accommodate the projected growth.

REVIEW OF 1981 POLICY STATEMENTS AND ACTIONS

During their October 1985 meeting, the Coastal Resources

Commission reviewed a land use plan update which included a

systematic analysis of all its 1980 policies as an introduction

to their 1985 land use plan update. This analysis included an

assessment of the effectiveness of the 1980 goals and a discus-

sion of actions and activities used to implement these policies

and goals. This "scorecard" approach gave the local government

an opportunity to reflect on how it achieved its previous goals

as a beginning step to formulating new policies. It also

provided the opportunity to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses

of the previous policies. It was recommended that all 1986 plan

updates adopt this "scorecard" approach to policy evaluation.

The following section includes an evaluation of the policies

addressed in the 1981 Aurora Land Use Plan Update. The planning
board critiqued these at one of its earliest meetings. Each

policy was analyzed for its content, means of enforcementg and

implementation strategy effectiveness. In a "checklist" format,

each implementation procedure was reviewed to see how well each

goal had been carried out since its formation.

In addition to providing an outlet for evaluating accom-

plishments since 1981, this also proved to be an effective

method for reflecting on the substance of each policy. The

planning board members were asked to. provi.de a grade on the

substance and effectiveness of the 1981 policiesi The board

gave Aurora an "A". Most planning board members felt that

the policy statements were well thought out and very few imple-

mentation methods had not been carried out. Most of the Town's

goals had been attained. The following section outlines the

policies for each major issue in the plan and describes the

deficiencies found by the planning board.

RESOURCE PROTECTION

Listed below are condensed versions of the policies and

implementation strategies regarding resource protection in the

1981 plan. The symbol ** indicates that the implementation

strategies were not completely carried out..

Policies and Implementat.ion Strategies

1. Protect AECs from potentially hazardous uses.

a. Use of setback regulations.

b. Change land classification map to reflect

policy changes.

2. Support flood programs.

b. Will participate in flood programs.

C. Will publicize Federal Flood Insurance Rate

Program and make maps available.

d. Design publication to identify building

restrictions.

e. Stay abreast of, Emergency -Preparedness and

distribute educational information.

f. Town Board will review special restrictions.
All the above policies had been successfully followed
through by means of the implementation procedures decided upon.
The Board felt, however, that although the polic.ies.were strong

and goodg all the issues required by the CAMA guidelines were not

completely addressed. The Board was pleased that extracurricular

efforts, such as the Building Restrictions Publication, had been

completed. It was decided that in this year's plan, the policies

formulated would be enforced only with existing regulations and

policies. Additional efforts are often too much to expect

without the assistance of a full-time professional planning staff

for the Town of Aurora.

RESOURCE PRODUCTION AND MANAGEMENT

Policies and Implementation Strategies

1. Discourage open-pit mining within one-mile juris-

dictional area.

a. Allow mining within one mile area only

with special use permit.

2. Protect agricultural lands.

a. Check with soil survey to determine which

areas are best suited to agricultural uses.

b. Classify agricultural lands as rural-agricul-

tural on land classification map.

3. Protect forested areas.

a. Check with soil survey to determine which

areas are best suited to forestry uses.

b. Classify forested areas as rural on land

classification map.

4. Protect estuary.

a. Classify estuary as conservation on land

classification map.

The planning board felt that while the above policies were

goodt the means for their support were not as strong as they

could be. All implementation strategies had been followed

through because, the board felt9 they were not as substantive as

they could have been.

ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

Policies and Implementation Strategies

1. Encourage growth to 19500 persons.

a. Bring the sewage treatment plant into 201

compliance.

b. Town Board will conduct survey to determine

feasibililty of water and sewer expansion for

every request.

2. Support industrial recruitment.

a. Recruit phosphate-mining industries

to take advantage of existing facilities.

b. Recruit women-employing industries.

3. Support diversification of housing market.-

a. Identify vacant lots and encourage their

owners to develop.

b. Promote housing code enforcement.

C. Review and implement.zoning and subdivision

regulations to ensure their compatibility.

d. Assist developers in complying with CAMA laws.

4. Support reconstruction of already developed land.

a. Assist owners of already developed land to get

money to reconstruct.

b. Clean up and improve waterfront and housing

to make land available for water-related uses.

c. Pave as many unpaved roads as possible.

d. Develop downTown renewal plan which deals with

destruction of old structures and makes them

available for resale.

e. Provide for public access pointst public

facilities and services at waterfront.

5. Support state and federal programs which encourage

growth.

a. Complete zoning and subdivision regulations

study to implement specific aspects of land use

plan.

6. Support Corps of Engineers efforts in channel

maintenance.

a. Ensure that Corps of Engineers keeps track of

channel depth for recreational nav.igation.-

7. Discourage siting energy facilities in Town..

a. Limit siting of energy facilities to rural or

transition areas.

B. Provide services only if the-request is appropriate

to the needs of the Towng the money is available

for expansionsg and there is-no land use conflict.

a. Conduct survey to determine feasibililty of

water and sewer expansion for every request.

9. Encourage capital improvements to in-Town facili-

ties.

a. Buy new fire and rescue equipment.

b. Improve the Aurora library.

C. Encourge physical and curricular improvements

to Snowden Elementary School and Aurora High

School.

d. Bring sewage treatment plant into 201 compli-

ance.

e. Provide for cost to maintain Federal Management

Account and continue to house Federal and N.C.

Human Services programs.

10. Promote tourism.

a. Provide for public access pointso public

facilities and services at waterfront.

b. Consider future public access points.

C. Cooperate with state and federal tourism

officials.

Of the policies listed above, the implementation strategies
regarding the wastewater treatment facility were.not addressed
during the planning period. The Special Order by Consent
between the Town and DEM reflects the Town's on-going commitment
to bringing the system into compliance. The plant will be in

compliance within two years.

The Board.felt tha-t the 1981 update was an excellent effort.

Due largely to the extra five years of experience, they agreed

that t-he.1986 plan would.show continued improvement.

ISSUES AND POLICY STATEMENTS

The formulation of specific policy statements regarding

g.rowth and growth management objectives is probably the most

important contribution of this land use plan update.. The

evaluation of the present population conditions, the condition

of the land and water'resources in Auroray and the methods of

enforcement for existing policies often suggest a. need for

modification of policy to accommodate changes in the living

conditions.

The Coastal Resources Commission requires that policies are

addressed in five categories:

Resource Protection

Resource Production and Management

Economic and Community Development

Citizen Participation

Storm Hazard Mitigation

Each policy category is intended to cover all issues associ-

ated with growth for the town in the coming years. The guide-

lines were prepared for a wide range of communities in coastal

North Carolina. The diversity within this area causes some of

the issues to be irrelevant to Aurora.

The policy statements in this section represent the result

of recommendations, input from citizens, plus the Planning

Board's experience in judging what is best for the future of

Aurora. These statements define the problem or issue, possible

alternatives for action, the selected alternative (s), and the

means of implementing and enforcing the chosen alternative.

It must. be noted that some issues are of such great importance

that only one policy alternative exists. I.n other cases, several

courses of action are possible. The following section repre-

sents the Town's best effort.to guide development in the planning

area.

RESOURCE PROTECTION

Aurora recognizes the need to protect its natural and

cultural resources. It is understood that these- are an irre-

placeable asset which require protection. Often, these resources

represent an economic return to the area's residents through

their exploitatiDn. It is in the best interest of all citizens

of eastern North Carolina.that these resources be protected and

managed to their highest potential.

The natural and cultural resources of the Aurora area have

been identified in the Constraints to Development: Land

Suitability section of this plan. Development should not occur

at the expense of the natural system. Converselyp the Town feels

development should not be impaired by the characteristics of the

natural system. For these reasonsg development should be targeted

to areas where it is not likely to jeopardize or be jeopardized

by the natural system. The following section details the issues

concerned with development and its relationship with the ecosys-

tem.

DEVELOPMENT IN-AREAS WITH CONSTRAINTS

The constraints to development in Aurora were discussed in

the preceding section and relate to both physical constraints

and limitations of community facilities. Physical constraints

include man-made fuel storage areas, high hazard flood zonest

Military Operating Airspace and areas with soil limitations. All

of the soils in the Aurora planning area are not well suited for

the safe placement of septic tanks. No soils are extremely

hazardous to building foundations. The Town recognizes the

importance of safe septic tank placement to prevent groundwater

and well contamination and also realizes its inability to change

or correct the characteristics of the soil.

Fuel storage facilities are located along Highway 33 west

of town. The Town acknowledges that any adjacent development

would be subject to-a fire risk and well contamination from tank

seepage. Also at risk is development located within the flood-

plain of South Creek. Water from the 100 year flood would

,inundate about two-thirds of the land in town (Figure 6). Since

most of town is subject to flooding, it is not realistic that all

development should be prohibited from these areas.

Policy Alternatives

Possible policy alternatives for growth management and

development in areas with identified constraints include :

1. Amendment of subdivision regulations to include

stricter design standards.

2. Develop and adopt additional regulations in flood

'damage prevention ordinance and zoning ordinance to regulate or

pr-ohibit all development in areas with physical constraints.

3. Permit development in those areas, utilizing

current statey federal and local regulatory processeso i.e.9

CAMA, flood insurance-, subdivision regulations and Corps of

Engineers 404 permitting system.

Policy Choices

Aurora adopts the following policies regarding development

in areas with constraints:

1. Aurora recognizes the inevitability of some

development occurring in high hazard flood areas due to the

prevalence of flood-prone land in the area. Thereforeq the Town

will continue to participate in Federal Flood Insurance Program

and promote enforcement through the County Building Inspection

Program. Proposed large scale developments, such as housing

subdivisions and industry, will be discouraged from locating in

the flood prone area.

2. The Town recognizes that it is unable to change

the condition of the soils to accommodate development. It has

decided to continue to support the County Health Department and

its decisions on septic tank placement. Aurora will continue to

support the Town Building Regulations which decide where con-

struction can occur based on soil characteristics.

3. Only industrial land uses will be encouraged

around the fuel storage sites. The zoning ordinance will be

changed accordingly.

AEC DEVELOPMENT

Aurora recognizes that the primary concern of the Coastal

Resources Commi.ssion is to protect our coastal resourceso especi-

ally,Areas ofEnvironmental Concern. The Town also shares this

concern for the protection and sound management of these

environmentally sensitive land and waters. The AECs in the

Aurora planning area were identified, in "Constraints: Land

Suitability" section of this plan and include estuarine waters,

the estuarine shoreline, public tr ust waters and coastal wet-

lands.

Aurora shares the state's policy and management objective

for the estuarine system "to give the highest priority to the

protection and coordinated management of these areas so as to

safeguard and perpetuate their biological, socio-economic and

.aesthetic values and to ensure that development occurring within

these AECs is compatible with natural characteristics so as to

minimize the likelihood of significant loss of private property

and public resources" (15 NCAC 7H. 0203). In accordance with

this overall objective, Aurora will permit those'land uses which

conform to the general use standards of the North Carolina

Administrative Code (15 NCAC 7H) for development within the

estuarine system. The maintenance of the AECs was considered to

be a top priority by the Town.

Policy Alternatives

The Town's policy alternatives for development in AECs are:

1. Continue to utilize the NCAC guidelines for

permittable uses in AECs.

2. Prohibit all development in AECs.

3. Establish '75-foot conservation buffer zone from

water or marsh's edge where no development shall be permitted.

Classify this area as "Conservation" according to Land Classifi-

cation system.

Policy Choices

1. The Town of Aurora has decided to continue to

utilize the current system for permitted uses in all AECs taking

advantage of Federal and State permit and review processeso i.e.

CAMA and Dredge and Fill.

2. The Town will take added precautions by developing

a 75 foot conservation buffer zone adjacent to the public

trust waters where coastal wetlands do not exist. In this

buffer zone only those uses will be allowed that are allowed in

coastal wetlands. This buffer zone is intended to be a devise of

the local government to show added protection for the resource.

The Town would like to be more restrictive regarding the allow-

able uses than the state guidelines. To function most effec tive-

ly, disturbance of this buffer should be kept to an absolute

minimum, leaving natural tree and shrub vegetation in tact to

hold soilf increase infiltration, and slow and filter runoff.

This area will remain in the jurisdiction of the town and will

preclude all forms of development, except for several restricted

uses (See "Land Classification System"). These area are ideal

for natural areas and/or parks.

Implementation Strategies

I.- Current State and Federal permit and review

processes will be emp.loyed to determine viable development

types in AECs.

2. The. land classification system, will restrict

development within the buffer zone.

3. Amend the zoning ordinance to reflect the estab-

lishment of the 75 foot buffer zone.

OTHER FRAGILE AREAS AND AECS

In addition to the AECsq other fragile areas in Aurora

warrant special considerations. These include the undesignated

primary nursery areas, the archaeological sites listed by the

North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources, and the historic

structures listed on the state and national Registers of Historic

Places. The Aurora area is also known locally to serve as a

habitat for the endangered American Bald Eag le.

A significant archaeological site has-been located in the

vicinity of Whitehurst Creek on the fringes of the planning

area. The NC Department of Cultural Resources made several

recommendations for management of these prehistoric sites:

effective treatment of known or discovered archaeological sites

may be accomplished through survey) mitigative recovery of

significant data, avoidance or preservation in place. Efforts

will also be made to provide recognition and protection through

such means as the National Register of Historic Places, if

appropriate, and through adherence to regulatory programs

administered by the: North Carolina Division of Archives and

History. The Town recognizes the historical and scientific

importance of this archaeological site and is committed to

preserving the valuable information it may contain.

The nursery areas in, South creel and its tributaries are

critical for the full development of several species of fish.

Protection of these nursery areas is a high priority for the

Town. Correction of the effluent standards violations for the

wastewater treatment plant is the first step the Town needs to

take to ensure the longevity of the nursery areas.

Several historically significant structures are located in

the planning area. The downtown area has been included for its

unique architectural style. The Town recognizes that the

historical integrity of the town is a part of its heritage. All

efforts should be taken to preserve this bit of history.

The Aurora area also houses several endangered American Bald

Eagles. The need for the protection of these predators is

widely recognized. The protection of these resources is of

such importance that no real alternatives exist except to offer

protection for the nesting sites if they are located.

The fragile areas not under the jurisdiction of state and

federal authorities, but protected by the Town, are discussed in

the Policy Choices above.

Policy-Alternatives

-As with the AECsj these fragile areas are of such importance

that no,reasonable alternatives exist but to offer protection for

these sites. The amount of protection is reflected these policy

alternatives:

1. Prohibit development over archaeological sites

listed by NC Department of Cultural Resources.

2. Acknowledge that nursery areas are critical to the

local economy and work to limit runoff into them.

3. Develop a program of "donating" historic properties

to the Town and work to set up an historic district.

4. If eagle nesting site is determinedp a thorough

examination of the site must be conducted by the N. C. Wildlife

Resources Commission.

5. Discourage development in all fragile areas.

Policy Choices

1. If archaeological site is identified, a thorough

investigation must be conducted by N.C. Department of Cultural

Resources before any building permit is granted.

2. Require a vegetative buffer from marsh or water's

edge to limit amount of runoff entering nursery areas.

3. Encourage preservation of historic sites by

providing Town assistance in locating funds for historic preser-

vation efforts.

4. If eagle nesting site is determinedp a thorough

examination of the site must be conducted by the N. C. Wildlife

Resources Commission.

Implementation Strategies

1. Work with building permits officer to require

thorough investigation of site before permit is granted.

2. Classify areas within 75 feet of marsh's edge and'

water line as "Conservation" on land classification map.

HURRICANE AND FLOOD EVACUATION NEEDS

The policy statements regarding Hurricane and Flood Evacua-

tion Needs are addressed in the Storm Hazard Mitigation and

Post-Disaster Reconstruction section of this plan.

PROTECTION OF POTABLE WATER

The availability of potable water is a critical concern

because of the large drawdown resulting from nearby phosphate

mining operations. Beaufort County is included in a state

groundwater management region, the Capacity Use Area. Recentlyq

there has been discussion among legislators and community leaders

about the possibility of constructing a pipeline to transport

mined water from the Texasgulf site to the Virginia Beach area.

This may one day jeopardize the supply for the Aurora area.

There are no alternatives other than protection of the water.

The Town recognizes the importance of the limited regional supply

of groundwater and the need for its protection.

Policy Choices

1. Support state efforts to manage groundwater

withdrawals in the Capacity Use Area.

2
Discourage activities which dangerously draw down.
.

the water supply.

3. Encourage Mayor to keep informed about the avail-

ability-and qual-ity of water from the Castle Hayne.

4. . Discourage development of a pipeline or other

system which exports water from the Aurora area thereby endan-

gering the limited available supply for Beaufort County-

5. If the purpose of the pipeline is to generate

revenue and to rid Texasgulf mining s-ite of its surplus water,

Town supports development of a county-wide water system.

Implementation Strategies

1. Continue to support Division of Environmental

Management Groundwater Division efforts to protect water in

Capacity Use Area.

USE OF SEPTIC TANKS

Soils are largely unsatisfactory for the safe placement of

septic tanks in the planning area. Most soils are too wet.

Unless care is exercisedq this could present problems for the

health and safety of area residents. Unsatisfactory performance

of soils around septic tanks could contaminate groundwater wells.

The Town recognizes that it has no power over the soils: they

cannot be altered in any way to improve their efficiency.

Because of these restrictions, little can be done for policy.

The optimal solution would be to have all area residents hooked

into the municipal wastewater treatment plant. This is currently

not possible because of the limitations of the Special Order by

Consent between the Division of Environmental Management and the

Town of Aurora. Given Aurora's poor soils for septic tanks, a

central sewage treatment facility is very important.

Policy Alternatives

1. Require larger than average lot sizes.

2. Where 'Use of septic tanks is unavoidable, town

supports implementation of techniques to improve the efficiency

of septic tankst i.e. mound systems and waterless systems.

3. As minimum, any septic tank installation applica-

tions must meet State and County regulations.

4. Encourage that everyone in "developed" and "transi-

tion" zones hook up to town's wastewater treatment facility,

providing that it is capable of handling the additions.

5.' Improve the capacity and efficiency of the Town

sewage treatment plant.

Policy Choices

1. Where the use of septic tanks is unavoidable, the

Town Supports the implementation of techniques to improve the

efficiency of septic tanks, i.e. mound systems ahd waterless

systems.

2. As a minimum, all septic tank applications must

pass requirements set forth by the Beaufort County Health

Department.

3. Improve the capacity and efficiency of the Town

sewage treatment plant.

4. When able, Town will encourage residents of

"developed9 and "transition" areas to hook on to the wastewater

treatment facility, providing that it is able.

Implementation.Strategies

1. Enforcement will remain the responsibilities of

the Building Inspector and the County Health Department, which

grants permits for septic tanks.

2. Continue to work with Division of Environmental

Management to improve wastewater treatment facility.

STORM WATER RUNOFF

Non-point pollution is considered a high priority for the

Town of Aurora. The amount of fertilizers, pesticides, oil

contaminants and litter which eventually enter the river system

is increased significantly by a heavy rain. The marshes and

other wetlands located along the river offer a water filtering

system that works naturally to sift out or uptake any pollutants

before they can enter the creek system. Storm water runoff

contributes to the water quality problems often discussed by

commercial fishermen and recreational boaters in the Aurora

area. Several days after a heavy rainfall, a fish kill occasion-

ally occurs in the creeks and river. Blame for the kill can be

largely placed on the bottom water anoxia resulting from storm

water runoff which enters the creeks and rivers after a rain.

Storm water runoff and flooding problems are connected and often

aggravated by the same land use practices.

The Town has selected policy options to mitigate storm water

runoff. Several techniques that have been proven effective in

slowing'down runoff are costly and because of the limited amount

of funds available for this-issue, the methods must be passive.

Aurora has decided to work to solve this problem by utilizing the

natural system for passive control of non-point pollution.

Several methods are effective in minimizing the creation of

runoff. It can be done throughout the town by minimizing

impervious surfaces, draining streets and parking lots to

grassed swales, and maintaining or planting as many trees and

shrubs as possible to maximize evapotranspiration. The Town

has found that land uses will be reviewed within 75 feet of the

surface waters (through the DCM permitting system for estuarine

shoreline AEC and the Town's established 75 foot vegetative

buffer zone) and the review process should consider the effects

of runoff in judging what uses will be allowed.

Policy Choices

1. Must control, treat and mitigate any storm water

runoff in town.

2. Encourage development and maintenance of riparian

vegetation.

3. Development adjacent to AEC must be designed so

that runoff will not violate water quality standards.'

4. Limit impervious surfaces to 15 percent within 100

feet of the shoreline.

Implementation Strategies

1. Continue to employ efforts of CAMA permitting

system and Corps of Engineers 404 permitting in determining

development types which do not violate water quality.

2.. Reclassify land classification map to "Conserva-

tion" for areas 75 feet from water or marsh's edge to regulate

land uses near creek.

3. Development in Conservation zone will be reviewed

on a case-by-case basis by the Planning Board.

4. Regulate land uses within conservation buffer zone

(for description of land uses, see definition of "Conservation"

.in Land Classification System section of this plan.

5. Consider revision of zoning ordinance to include

the 75 foot vegetative buffer zone estab lished by the Town.

MARINA AND FLOATING HOME DEVELOPMENT

Marinas are an essential convenience for boaters. Econom-

icallyq they may benefit a town through slip rental, repairs and

gasoline sales. Ecologically, marinas are known to degrade the

water in which they are located. Aurora currently has a pub-

licly-owned boat ramp, and in the recent past 9 several individu-

als have tried to develop a commercial marina.
Policy Alternat'ives

1. Encourage the development of marinas.

2. Discourage the development of marinas and location

of floating homes in light of their contribution to water

quality degradation.

Policy Choices

1. Support Marina development exclusively in the

vicini-ty of the two canals. Confine marinas to the existing

structures so as to not disturb the natural functioning of the

primary nursery area.

2. Discourage floating homes because of their negative

impact on water quality.

3. Allow marinas, but encourage their design and

size to not violate-water quality standards and the integrity of

coastal wetlands.

Implementation Strategies

1. Continue working with zoning ordinance, CAMA and

404 permitting systems in regulating siting of marinas.

2. The Planning Board will examine each marina

development request on a case-by-case basis.-

INDUSTRIAL IMPACTS AROUND FRAGILE AREAS

The policies above address development of all types in and

around fragile areas. Industry, another form of development,

should be exposed to no different standards than the other types

of development. In any location decision, the industry must

comply with the policies stated above.

It has been demonstrated that the town wants to mitigate the

effects of all development on its natural and cultural resources..

It wants to take all efforts to try to protect these resources.

Therefore, in an effort to maintain consistency in the policies,

the To.wn must work toward attracting economic growth while

encouraging the protection of the environment.

Policy Choices

1. Location. of industries in and around fragile

areas shall be discouraged, except water-dependent industriesi

i.e. commercial fishing.

2. Industry shall be discouraged near wetlands.

3. Industries which produce toxic or hazardous

substances will not be located near surface waters or groundwater

recharge areas.

Implementation Strategies

1. Continued support of CAMA and 404 permitting

systems, Building Inspector and County Building Requirements.

2. Areas within 75 feet of marsh and water's edges

will be classified as "Conservation" on land classification map

(See "Resource Protection" policies section).

3. Town Planning Board and Town Council will review

each application for siting of industries on a case-by-case

basis.

RESOURCE PRODUCTION AND MANAGEMENT

Appropriate management of productive resources -is very

important to any locality. In most cases, the productive re-

sources are intricately tied into the economic fabric of the

area. It is, therefore, wise to manage these resources to the

best of their productivity and to ensure their existence for

future generations. The major productive resources in Aurora

are related to agriculture, mining and commercial and recrea-

tional fisheries. Commercial fare 5try is not an important

component to the economy of Aurora as no commercially-owned

forested areas exist in the planning area. No policy statements

regarding forestry were needed.

PRODUCTIVE AGRICULTURAL LAND

Agriculture, as discussed in the Existing Conditions section

of this plan, is an important component of the local economy.

Farming brings in a great amount of income to the area through

the actual sale of farm commodities, farm supplies and equipment.

A large portion of the planning area is currently or has been

under c-ultivation. The Soil Conservation Service has identified

and mapped the soils in the planning area which are considered

to be some of the best in the county for agricultural producti-

vity (Figure 7). These soils occupy a large amount of land in

the planning area. ,

In principal, the Town could opt to conserve these farm

soils for future use by restricting any development from occur-

ring on them. Aurora realizes how important agriculture is to

the economy, but it feels that there is an excess of land under

cultivation already. This glut in farmland, and subsequently,

farm products, has caused farm prices to fall and foster economic

hardship for the family farmer. Programs, such as the Payment-

In-Kind, pay farmers to take their land out of production. The

Town feels that it should -not contribute to an already bad

problem by requiring that certain agricultural soils be restrict-

ed from any other uses.

The Town realizes the implications for this decision. A

policy choice not to' conserve prime agricultural land could

result in an irretrievable loss of a long-term renewable re-

source. In light of the present farm economy, the Town feels

that its policy is a realistic choice.

Policy Alternatives

1. Town could strive to protect agricultural lands

identified as "prime" by the SCS and Division of Soil and Water

Conservation.

2. Prohibit any land use other than agriculture,

forestry or conservation on prime agricultural soils.

3. Promote conservation of these lands by encouraging

owners of these tracts to implement the Best Management Prac-

tices.

4. Classify lands as Conservation-A, meaning that

these are agricultural areas which should be precluded from

development.

5. Town could take no additional measures to preserve

agricultural lands.

Policy Choices

1. Town will not take additional measures to encourage

the presenvation of- "prime" agricultural soils. Any types of

development, pending consistency with the zoning ordinance, will

be permitted to located over.these soils.

2. Encourage owners of these lands labelled as

prime" and other cultivated areas to implement the Best Manage-

ment Practices.

Implementation Strategies

1. Continue to work with Agricultural Stabilization

and Conservation Service and Soil Conservation Service workers

in getting farm ers to adopt BMPs.

EXISTING AND POTENTIAL MINERAL PRODUCTION AREAS

Open-pit mining has been the economic mainstay of Aurora

and Beaufort County since the Texasgulf mining operations came

to this county in 1965. The environmental and economic effects

of the phosphate mining have been witnessed by Aurora area

residents. Peat mining has also become an issue within recent

yearso but there are currently no known "prime" sites for peat

mining in the Aurora area. All peat soils are low BTU and would

be uneconomical to mine at this time.

In 1981, a policy was adopted which discouraged open pit

mining within the one-mile extraterritorial area of town. Any

mining activities proposed were required to apply for a special

use permit which was to be granted on a case-by-case basis. The

Town has decided that this policy is still applicable.

Policy Choices

1. Town discourages any type of open-pit mining within

the one-mile jurisdictional limit of town. Any mining activities

proposed must apply for -a special use permit which will be

granted on a case-by-case basis.

Implementation Strategies

1. Continued review process of applications for

special use permits to Planning Board.

COMMERCIAL AND RECREATIONAL FISHERIES

The commercial fishing industry is vital to the local

economy. Several independent full-time commercial fishermen

live and work in the Aurora areag plus Jour crab processing

plants are located in or near the planning area. South Creek and

its tributaries also serve as nursery areas for several species.

Concern has been raised by commercial fishermen and Division of

Marine Fisheries technicians about the effect of runoff on the

fisheries industries. Freshwater runoff from drainage ditches

and non-point pollution has been detrimental to the fishing

waters by altering the salinity content and adding pollutants to

the estuarine system. Concern has also been raised over inci-

dences of fecal coliform, largely from septic tank seepagey

being identified in shellfish beds in other parts of the state.

In order to support the commercial and recreational fishing

industries, the town needs to implement techniques to maintain

water quality.

To. remain consistent with the aforementioned Resource

Protection policies,-the town has elected to take all measures

possible to protect the fisheries. The Town has chosen to

protect the commerc.ial and recreational fishing areas within

the town's juri.sdiction and to take special care in protecting

the nursery areas and other waters in the South Creek system.

Policy Choices

1. Town will protect the commercial and recreational

fisheries areas within the town's jurisdiction. Also, those

areas unofficially recognized by the Division of Marine Fisher-

ies as significant resource areas will be treated as such.

These include all tributaries of South Creek.

2. Establishment of Conservation buffer zone of 75

feet between all development and water and marsh's edges.

Implementation Strategies

1. The CAMA and 404 permitting system, as well as the

town's subdivision ordinance will provide sufficient enforcement

for this policy.

2. The County Health Department, largely responsible

for the safe placement of septic tanks, will be responsible for

minimi,zing the likelihood of contamination of fishing waters from

the effluent of septic systems in unsuitable soils.

3. Classify areas within 75 feet of water or marsh's

edge as Conservation.

OFF-ROAD VEHICLES

The mention of "off-road' vehicles in coastal North Caro-

lina, typically.conjures i-deas of four-wheel drive type vehicles

driving up and down the sandy beaches of the ocean front. In

Auroraq there is no problem with these vehicles operating on

the beaches. They most often operate illegally along the

roadsides, frequently causing significant amounts of soil and

vegetation loss9 plus creating a nuisance from their noise.

Many local residents have expressed a concern over these vehi-

clesq ranging from complaints about noise to legitimate.questions

about their safety.

The Town is able to do very little to prohibit these

vehicles, as they are most frequently operated on private

prope rty.

Policy Alternatives

1. Town requires thatJ all off-road vehicle owners

registration.

2. Prohibit the use of these vehicles from the

planning area.

3. Restrict their use to areas classified as "Rural".
area. 4. Discourage use of off-road vehicles in planning

Policy Choices

1. Town requires that all off-road vehicle owners

registration.

2. Prohibit use of f'our-wheel vehicles in the vegeta-

tive buffer zone established 75 feet from water's edge.

Implementation Strategies

1. .- Cooperation with Town employees during time of

vehicle registration.

2. Work with Town Policemen to enforce this policy.

IMPACTS OF DEVELOPMENT TYPES ON RESOURCES

Aurora, as discussed in the "Existing Conditions" section

of this plan, is currently not undergoing large amounts of growth

like some other eastern North Carolina cities. It is, thereforeq

not experiencing the same levels of development pressure as other

towns.

The Town views itself as being in a position to accommo-

date growth and development. Consistent to the aforementioned

policies, the town is pro-growth as long as the development is

not environmentally degrading. The limitations imposed by

the Town's policies on the protection of sensitive natural and

cultural resources must not be violated in order to accommodate

any type of growth. Residential, commercial and industrial land

uses must meet these goals of the Town.

ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

The analysis of the present conditions of the population and

economy of the Aurora planning area revealed no alarming changes

in the general economic atmosphere of the area. Aurora is very

concerned about future growth.in economic and community develop-

ment. Since Texasgulf's location to the area in 1965) the town

has had the potential for explosive growth. An immediate

increase in population.spurred from Texasgulf, but in proportionj

this growth represented a small number of persons. Texasgulf

employees live in other counties and towns in eastern North

Carolina. Aurora serves as a part-time convenience center

for the Tg employees.

Several factors are responsible for this stunted growth:

lack of adequate housing, lack of recreational facilitiess poor

schools, limited retail opportunity, and lack of full-time

pastors in the church facilities. Whatever the reasong or

combination of reasons, the potential exists for an explosion of

growth in Aurora. Policies need to be in place to accommodate

this growth, when it occurs.

The following section outlines growth policies which

have an impact on land use decisions. These policies define the

goals Aurora has set for where it would like to be in the next

ten years. Particular issues, related to growth and the town's

commitment to economic development, are discussed below.

LOCATION AND TYPES,OF INDUSTRIES DESIRED

Aurora, as discussed in the preceding sections is blessed

with several natura,l and cultural resources. It sits on one of

the world's largest phosphate deposits, is situated on South

Creeks and has some of the county's most productive agricul-

tural soils.

Manufacturing in the area takes advantage of these re-

sources. The phosphate mining industry, one of the largest

operations in eastern North Carolina, employs about .1150 persons.

Four seafood processing operations are located within a five

mile radius of the area. Farming is also an economic activity

in the region, employing dozens of persons through farm labor

or through the sale of farming equipment and supplies.

Aurora encourages the continued development or expansion of

these types of resource-intensive industries. Aurora would also

like to invite industry which takes advantage of,the abundant

supply of low-skilled workers. In particulars there is an

abundant supply of low-skilled women workers. Expansion of the

phosphate mining operations, additional seafood processing

industries or light assembly manufacturing would be welcome in

Aurora. A sewing factory, or something-similar, could provide

employment for the low-skilled female workers in the area.

All industries considering locating in the Aurora planning

area must be low-pollution, light manufacturing industries in

order to remain consistent with the aforementioned resource

policy statements. All industries must be consistent with the

Town's policies to protect its water quality and wetlands. All

industries must have a low waste load output, because the sewage

treatment plant is unable to accommodate significant amounts of

additional waste.

Several -sites are available in the planning area for

industry. The Town would like to see industry locate in two

specific sites. The 'northeastern quadrantp currently undev-

eloped, would be well suited for a seafood processing firm or

some other type of industry which would take advantage of the

river and its resources. Another areas along Highway 33 west of

Town, near Potter Oil Company, is zoned for industry. The Town

feels that this site would be best suited to all other industrial

types listed above. It has good access and is currently served

by the water and sewer system.

Policy Choices

1. Encourage industry types which take advantage of

natural resource base and existing labor supply.

2. Encourage low-pollutiont light manufacturing types

which are compatible with resource protection, production and

management goals and policies.

3. Encourage low waste load industries to prevent

contributing to wastewater treatment problems.

4. Encourage seafood-related industries to locate in

northeastern quadrant of town, providing they are consistent

with resource protection goals of Town.

5. Encourage industry which employs low-skilled

workers, particularly women. Assembly-type manufacturing and a

garment factory would be well suited for this purpose.

6. Industrial sites will be confined to areas zoned

for manufacturing along Highway 33 and in northeastern section

of town.

Implementation Schedule

1. Town will establish more active contact with

state's industrial development representative fo r the regiong
making certain that the representative is aware of the Town's

stated policy choices on economic development.
2. Zoning ordinance, CAMA and 404 permitting systems

will regulate the development of industry in specific areas.

COMMITMENT TO PROVIDING SERVICES

The Town realizes the great importance associated with
bringing the wastewater treatment facility into compliance with
state discharge requirements. Unless this goal is attained,
very little growth can be permitted to occur. Although the
sewage plant is only operating at 75 percent of its intended
capacity, no additions can be made to the plant until the
"Consent by Order" is fully carried out between the state and

Aurora. This is expected to occur by 1988. Also, at the

current usage rate, only the amount equivalent to 238 persons

can be accommodated. All but three percent of all in-town

residents are currently served by this system.

Currentlyp nearly 100 percent of the area's residents are
hooked up to the water system. This represents a 35 percent

usage rate for that facility. Nearly 1350 more persons could be

served by this system.

Aurora acknowledges that the region's soils are not condu-

cive to septic tank usage and the optimal solution to this -

problem is to provide wastewater treatment service to all

residents in the planning area. This is a very expensive

and currently unfeasible proposition, however, because of the

problems associated with the wastewater treatment facility.

Aurora is committed to providing basic services to serve

increased development in the area. Industrial requests will

be examined on an individual basis. In this issue, there are no

alternatives; it is more of a question of scale.

Policy Choices

1. First priority in delivery of services is to areas
classified as "Developed'; on land classification map. Second

priority is to "Transition" areas.

2. Pending wastewater treatment plant compliance,

residential customers will be served first.

3. Industrial uses will be examined on a case-by-case

basis by the Town Council and Planning Board.

DESIRED URBAN GROWTH PATTERNS

In 1981, considerable debate was held over the anticipated

growth rates and size of Aurora. -It was decided at this time to

limit the population, no matter what trends might take place.

Town officials decided that 1500 persons is a good limit, based

on the design capacities of the water and sewer systems.

Aurora's 1985 population is one-half of this intended goal.

Projected population figures suggest that the slow, but steady
growth rates that Aurora has experience in the past will continue

for the next ten year.

Another trend in.the planning area which may affect urban

growth patterns is the increasing number of mobile homes scat-
tered throughout residential areas. The Town has adopted a

mobile home ordinanceg but the implementation of a mobile home

zoning district would limit their location to sites specifically

zoned for mobile homes.

Policy Alternatives

1. Limit growth to 1500 persons. Urban patterns will

be limited by zoning ordinance.

2. Consider developing zoning ordinance exclusively

for mobile homes.

3. Urban growth patterns will remain consistent with

zoning ordinance.

Policy Choices

1. Limit growth to 1500 persons. Urban,patterns will

be limited by zoning ordinance.

Implementation Schedule

1. Urban growth patterns and densities will be limited

by the subdivision ordinance, the County Health Department and

the zoning ordinance.

REDEVELOPMENT OF DEVELOPED AREAS

The Town of Aurora's policy on redevelopment of developed

land was discussed in the 1981 land use plan update. At that

time, the Town was concerned mainly with improving local tourism

through several redevelopment projects. The Aurora Libraryp

Community Center, Fossil Museumg Civic Center and marina were

projects associated with this community facilities development

program. The establishment of these facilities are proof of the

Town's commitment to redevelopment of older areas. Downtown

revitalization has been encouraged for the past several yearsq

but a limited amount of progress has been made toward this goal.

The Town still feels committed, to this effort, however.

About two-thirds of the town would be wiped out in the event

of total devastation by a storm. In this case, all structures

would be rebuilt to conform to the land use types as per the

zoning ordinance. All non-conforming uses would not be permitted

for reconstruction.

Policy Choices

1. Continued support of downtown beautification

efforts. Town will work to help secure funds for rehabilitation

projects.

2. In the event of destruction by a storm, redev-

elopment will occur in accordance with the prescribed land uses

of the zoning ordinance. Non-conforming uses will not be

permitted.

3. The Town supports the redevelopment of substandard

housing within the town limits.

Implementation Schedule

1. The Town will coordinate with private individuals

and organizations to secure financial support for downtown

beautification efforts.

2. Town will consider the feasibility of applying for

a Small Cities Community Development Block Grant to rehabilitate

substandard housing in town limits.

COMMITMENT TO STATE AND FEDERAL PROGRAMS

The Town of Aurora is receptive to State and Federal

Programs which provide'improvements to the Town. Aurora will

continue to fully support such programs that provide necessary

resources to meet identified community needs that compliment the

economic and community development goals of the town. Of

particular significance is the N.C. Department of Transportation

Road and Bridge Improvements program. The Pamlico River ferry

system is also important to the economic health of Aurora. The

Town will support these programs and will honor financial

assistance requests when financially able and when the proposed

project is in compliance with the town's goals for economic

development.

The Erosion Control program, carried out by the Agricultur-

al Stabilization and Conservation Servic e and the Soil Conserva-

tion Service are especially important to the farming community

in the planning area. The Town supports the efforts of these

agencies, including the implementation of Best Management

Practices to mitigate soil loss through erosion. In addition,

the Town has established a policy for a 75 foot conservation

buffer zone to reduce the sediment load from entering the system

(See Resource Protection policy statements).

There has been continued debate over the expansion of

the Military Operating Airspace in Beaufort County. Aurora is

opposed to this expansion because of the restrictions it would

impose on the local air traffic community. Noise levels were an

additional concern for the discouragement of this airspace

expansion.

ASSISTANCE TO CHANNEL MAINTENANCE

Proper channel maintenance is important in Aurora, mainly

because of recreational boating and the commercial fishing

industry. Special attention should be given to theeamount of

dredging that occurs, because excessive dredging can be just as

damaging as none at all. Dredge lines often disrupt valuable

fish habitat on the bottom of rivers, thereby robbing the river

of some of its economic value and important fish habitat.

Aurora will support channel maintenance projects, but

discourage excessive dredging because of its effect an fish

habitat. Financial aid for channel maintenance will be made

available when possible. Efforts will be made to provide

spoil and borrow sites within the planning area.

ENERGY FACILITY SITING 'AND DEVELOPMENT

In recent years, the development of peat mining operations

in Hyde,.Tyrrell and Washington Counties has brought on the

possibility of locating energy generating facilities in an area

nearby.the source of the raw material. Aurora believes that the

development of energy' generating facilities should be discour-

aged within the one mile jurisdictional area. Energy generating

facilities will be subject to a special use permits granted by

the Planning Board. If approved, all facilities will be re-

stricted to "Rural" areas as per the land classification map.

Public facilities, such as water and sewer, will not be provided.

TOURISM AND BEACH/WATER ACCESS

Aurora has demonstrated its commitment to public access to

public waters by having developed the Town boat ramp in 1992.

The Town is also committed to increasing tourism in the area.

Efforts to increase tourism were brought on when the Fossil

Museum was reopened recently, and when Aurora: was included as a

part of the Historic Albemarle Tour Highway. The Town supports

the efforts of the state agencies who work with these projects.

Policy Alternatives

1. The Town could establish no additional policies or

courses of action for development of these industries assuming

that the existing facilities are sufficient.

2. The Town could encourage acquisition of undevelop-

able waterfront properties for public access sites.

3. Development of a program for "donations" of

waterfront property for public use.

4. Continued support for Aurora Fossil Museum,

downtown revitalization efforts and other methods to increase

tourism.

Policy Choices

1. The Town will encourage acquisjtion of undevelop-

able waterfront properties for-public access sites.

2. Work with the Division of Coastal Management in

developing a program of "donations" of waterfront property

for public use.

3. Continued support for Aurora Fossil Museum,

downtown revitalization efforts and other methods to increase

tourism.

TYPES9 DENSITIES AND LOCATION OF ANTICIPATED DEVELOPMENT

Overly dense development is not a problem in Auroras nor

is it anticipated to become a problem during the next ten years.

Within the past five years, the land use trends have shown

residential growth to occur in areas south of Highway 33,

and commercial growth has expand along Fifth Street and Highway

33 west. Aurora would like to see continued development in

areas which are best able to accommodate growth and where support

services, like sewer and water, are feasible and practical to

provide. Much of the growth in recent years has been outside the

hazard areas identified in Figure 11. Industri al growth will be

targeted to the land along Highway 33 near Potter Oil and in

the northeaster-n quadrant of town.

Policy Choices

1. Continue to enforce the subdivision ordinance with

minimum lot size of 20,000 square feet for lots without public

water and sewer.

2. Continue with efforts to upgrade sewage treatment

plant to accommodate additional customers.

3. Ensure that future growth is consistent with the

above policies in Resource Protection, Resource Production and

Management. Also, the growth must be consistent with the

zoning ordinance and additional goals of the community.

-HURRICANE AND STORM HAZARD MITIGATION

INTRODUCTION

Hurricanes @and severe coastal storms represent serious

threats to people- and property on the North Carolina coast.

North Carolina has the second highest incidence of hurricanes

(Neumann et al.9 1978). To date, North Carolina has experienced

23 major hurricanes since 1890. This averages to one major

hurricane every four years. In addition to hurricanes, tropical

storms and "northeasters" present serious threats to eastern

North Carolina. The most recent major hurricanes Gloria,

originally classified as a Category 5 storm, skated past inland

North Carolina and brushed a small stretch of Hatteras Island as

it moved northward. If Gloria had made landfall near the mouth

of the Pamlico River, as had been predicted by the National

Weather Service at one period during the storm threats much of

eastern North Carolina could have been destroyed in its after-

math.

In order to effectively prepare for the hazards of storms

like Gloria, experts recommend adoption of a plan which encom-

passes all aspects of the storm period. This plan should deline-

ate areas most likely to sustain damage, methods to keep areas

affected to a minimums and guidelines for reconstruction after

the storm. Beaufort County adopted a storm hazard mitigation

plan, Before The Storm in Beaufort County: Avoiding Harm's Way,

in September 1984. Aurora is under the authority of this plan.

The CAMA Land Use Plan guidelines. require that procedures

for pre-storm mitigation, recovery, and immediate and long term

reconstruction be addressed in each plan. The purpose is to

assist Town and county officials in managing development in

potentially hazardous areas and to be able to expeditiously

"snap back" after a disaster. The first step taken to assess the

hurricane vulnerability of a site is to analyze the types and

locations of physical' hazards within the planning area. An

estimate of the amount of people and property that would be

exposed to the hazard is also required. The following section is

a discussion of the storm hazard mitiga-tion, post-disaster

reconstruction policies and evacuation plans included in Before

the Storm. All polic ies, unless otherwise referenced, are

county-wide policies included in the storm hazard plan.

HAZARDS MAP

The areas most vulnerable to the devastating effects of a

hurricane or other major coastal storm are identified in Figure

11. This map is the product of a computer model called SLOSH

(Sea, Lake and Overland Surge from Hurricanes). The SLOSH model

was developed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to simulate the

height of the storm surge from hurricanes of a predicted sever-

ity within a particular area. The National Weather Service ranks

hurricanes into Categories I through 5 based on their wind

speeds. The SLOSH model analyzes each hurricane category

scenario and provides theoretical areal boundaries where flooding

is expected to occur. For example, the Category 1 and 2 hurri-

canes, with wind speeds up to 110 miles per hour, would probably

produce a storm surge that would flood a small stretch of land

92
Figure 11

INUNDATION LEVET,S FOR HURRICANES

OF SPECIFIED INTENSITY

V A
All, ?''d -C
74 -, V .1 "P 14 1,
A V A A IV f- < 'F A .1,
-C,'4 7 a- V7r A >
4IC T .6 V 7V
4 -C A ), T
"P VAJ% A. ? ' 4 V, V r < .1 > .
1,1' 4 r, TV
r YAAA wTA T61 11 -4
&A Tj,V'4q -4 -q ir A
.4 'C4ATATJ. 4, r V 4L
A.1 V a AA .0 1.Tr f
A.44-dAA '%< &
-4 r q A
f'p
7.

j,
VP1%
V-9 7
rA,
4WA <
1. .11 > A L. *0 4.A4 TA
r. V
A 4 [email protected]
A4 1'VL, T %&>4
IV
4.4 r 2.w7
TA b417VC
A 303
VA 6%.,
'w LA A
!!_-_S' a,
A
v rA31 46 7
V. qA
V

'4 v rvw A v
V
A AIA7 191
4C 4L f
0, >'C &. 'C
4 7
A
T ORA- -f-

A 3.V

310
b, epr>pT CD
AT^4A'CA4 -
P 446 .7 46 V
A

30A L A
46
&Ask ROYAL P. I. r 4 4
boT 4
A
%r A
-F .1 A

> 71 w
3
A V
-C -d c 6, J%
V -7

rb
ApV@- v
T1 .4
'%,VA,&q
T< 4

It V
T
< %.A

-n
4.Vr Level 1 a
A A
2
TA-&&. i
30 P. PF-E-PARATION OF THIS MAP WAS F7.NW\=ED I Level 3
PAFT TIHR@ A GRAN7 PFZVMED BY U-1- NOFTH 4-.-]Level 4 an
Source: U . SA r my C o r p s o f E n g i n e e r s C-AXL INA CCA =FFZG@@-"% "ITURCLIGi 5
S.L.O.S.H. Model. rLNZjS P-:%OV= BY 7HE COASrAL = YANA@1@
ACr CF 1972, AS WICH IS AC@=S=
BY T-E OFFE= OF =,T,-@L RESM@C_-
=NIC A@0 A-_NnSP1-'_FRTC AL%TWITMA77MAN

along the river (Figure 11). The Category 3 storm, defined by

winds up to 130 mph, would inundate points further landward than

the Category I and 2-storms. The Category 4 and 5 storms, the

highest intensity storms possible, would push the water to areas

-still further landward. In this scenariog water levels Would be

highest in the areas of'Category 1 and 2 storms. The Category 4

and 5 flood zones have the least probability of inundation

because storms of such strength are not very common. Since the

category Is 2 and 3 storms are more common, the discussion will

be limited to their impact on the planning area.

In Aurora, the Category I and 2 flood zone incorporates a

large portion of the eastern section of Town as well as all

incorporated areas of South Creek. The flood boundary approxi-

mately coincides with Third Street. The limited development in

this flood zone includes about one-eighth of the Town's resi-

dences. No major commercial establishments are located here.

Development includes the public boat ramp, several homes along

East Main Street, plus an apartment complex located on First

Street. Within 75 feet of the shoreline, development is limited

because much of the area is in undevelopable marshes. The

combined value of structures in this flood zone is estimated at

$ 1,500,000.

The area which would be inundated by the Category 3 storm

is far more monetarily valuable to the Town. The boundary for

the Category 3 storm goes beyond the Category I and 2 storm

line and approximately coincides with the 100 year flood plain

(Figure 6). A much greater amount of development is located in

Figure 12

INVENTORY 01: STRUCTURES

IN THE HAZARD AREA AURORA

Conventional Dbl-wide Sng-wide Institution Commer. Industry Util. Total
Homes Mbl Homes Mbl 110111es

Town 200 12 38 3 16 1 1 271

Med ian.
va I Ile. 26K IOK 4K 45K 20K 40K 40K

-T,Q.Lal
-.Estimated
-Valug. 5.2mill. 120K 152K 135K 320K 40K 40K 6.727 mill.

YLQ94 _Pr6ne
Arqq
_(Ca@egory 1-3). 150 10 38 1 10 0 1 210

-TQ t a t

V al 1; Q 3.9mill. 100K 42K 45K 200K 40K 4.327 mill.

Note: The total assessed value for tax purposes of the Town of Aurora was $5,946,224 in January, 1986. (Town Clerk)

Source: Before the Storm in Beaufort County: Avoiding Harm's Way.

JC1

this area. Approximately 150 conventional houses, 10 commercial

establishments, 10 double-wide mobile homes and 38 single-wide

-mobile homes are located here (Town Clerk, 1986). The combined

estimated value of all property in the Category 1, 2 and 3

zones-is estimated at $ 4,327,000 (Figure 12). This figure is

more than 70 percent of' the total assessed tax va lue of the

Town. The municipal wastewater treatment facility is also

located in this flood zone. Consideration should be given to

its relocation to a less hazardous site.

Although many structures would be at risk from a storm, the

areas which would be most seriously affected would be the AECs in

the planning area. These include estuarine waters, estuarine

shorelines, coastal wetlands and public trust waters. Of these,

the estuarine shoreline and coastal wetlands AECs will bear the

greatest risk of destruction because they lie directly on the

land-water interface and are among the most dynamic features of

the coastal landscape. Shoreline erosion is a day-to-day

phenomenon that is accelerat ed greatly with the energy of a major

storm. Destruction that may take years to occur along a normal

low-energy shoreline can occur in a matter of several hours

during a strong storm. The shoreline area will be directly

impacted by severe erosion and scouring, direct wave action, high

winds and complete inundation by storm surge accompanying the

st orm. Development adjacent to the shoreline would obviously be

at a great risk.

EFFECTS OF STORM COMPONENTS ON HAZARD ZONES

Hurricanes ate extremely powerfulq destructive meteorolog-

i-cal.. events which are often unpredictable. Destruction is

typically the result of the combined energy of high winds,

flooding, erosion and wave action. Of these, the two most

damaging components of the hurricane are the high winds which

define it and flooding from excessive rains and the storm

surge. In addition to these two forces, wave action and erosion

are two by-products of the wind and rain along the land/water

interface. The following section discusses the effect of each of

these storm components on the planning area and delineates the

sites which are most vulnerable to their forces.

HIGH WINDS

High winds are the greatest risk factor associated with

hurricanes. Hurricanes areq in fact, defined in severity by

their wind speeds. The entire planning area would be subject to

the winds brought on by a hurricane making landfall nearby.

Ogain, the areas most seriously impacted would be the shoreline

areas, the wetlands, and other areas in the 100 year flood plain.

Sites that experience backwash such as open field ditches would

also be impacted. The high winds would result in flooding.

Building restrictions concerning wind stress should be applied in

areas closest to the shore and other areas with enough fetch to

create strong winds.

FLOODING

Unlike high winds, flood waters may not impact all areas

hit by a storm. According to the SLOSH model map, most of the

planning area would be subject to flooding from a Category 4 or

5 storms. The frequency a hurricane of this magnitude is less

than a one percent chance in any given year. More common

storms, like the Category 1 through 3 hurricanes, would flood

nearly two-thirds of the area in Town. There are about ten

commercial establishments located here, as well as nearly 150

homes. A rough estimate of $26,000 per home and $20,000 per

commercial establishment would bring the figure to about 4.3

million dollars. This is a substantial portion of the Town's tax,

base.

Flooding cannot only cause damage to buildings, but salt-

water flooding can also cause serious damage to cropland.

An estimated value of this cropland is unavailable, but short

term damage would be financially devastating. A large portion

,of the agricultural land located south of Town would be impacted

by flood waters. Consideration of potential flood damage to

crops is important to the overall storm hazard mitigation plan

for the region.

WAVE ACTION

Damage from wave action is very strongly correlated to wind

speed and direction. Most damage caused by waves will be

in the.immediate zone of the water along the estuarine shoreline

and coastal wetlands. Development adjacent to or included

as part of the estuarine shoreline would be subject to battering

by waves. Since marshes occupy a very large segment of the

shoreline, little Would be at risk. In Town, the public boat

ramp plus its pavement and docking would be at risk from wave

action. . Other structures are located at a safe distance from

the shoreline.

EROSION

The product of severe winds, high water and wave action is

erosion. The areas most likely to be impacted by erosion are the

shoreline areas within the planning jurisdiction. Riggs, Bellis,

O'Connor (1979) studied shoreline types and their vulnerability

to erosion. They concluded that the areas most likely to erode

were the low bankp marsh and high bank forms of shoreline. The

low bank and marsh are the most common shoreline types in the

Aurora area. Marsh shorelines are generally characterized by

vertical scarps which drop abruptly into one to eight feet of

water. Much of the Aurora shoreline is in marshes. Further

downstream, the low bank shoreline dominates.

Shoreline erosion could lead to structural damage to

buildings, loss of tons of topsoil, and the destruction of

bulkheads and other structures located at the land/water

interface. The establishment of a required setback from the

water's edge will mitigate most erosion caused by hurricane winds

and waves.

SUMMARY

In summary, all four of the major damaging forces of a

hurricane would negatively impact Aurora in the event of a

storm. The areas most likely to receive damage are the sites

located along the shoreline. The cumulative impacts of wind,

water, waves and subsequent erosion will cause the most destruc-

tion. Damage from flood waters in the Category I through 3

zones would. likely amount to $4.3 million, assuming total

destruction. The wastewater treatment. plant is located in a

high risk zone. Relocation of this facility should be a top

priority for the Town.

100

POST-DISASTER RECONSTRUCTION

INTRODUCTION

A post-disaster reconstruction plan allows the Town to deal

with the aftermath of,a storm in an organized and efficient

manner. - The plan provides for the mechanisms, procedures, and

policies that will enable the Town to learn form its storm

experience and to rebuild in a practical way.

A reconstruction plan typically has five purposes, according

to Before the Storm: Avoiding Harm's Way (McElyea, Brower and

Godschalk, 1982). It usually outlines procedures and require-

ments before damages occurg establishes procedures for putting

storm mitigation measures into effect after the disaster,

analyzes information about the location and nature of hurricane

damages, assesses the community's vulnerability and guides

reconstruction to minimize the vulnerability.

In 1982, Beaufort County adopted The Beaufort County

Disaster Relief and Assistance Plan, a post-disaster recovery

and reconstruction plan. As a municipality in Beaufort County,

Aurora is covered by this plan. The disaster relief plang in

concert with Before the Storm in Beaufort County: Avoiding

Harm's Way, provides Beaufort County with the tools necessary to

serve all its communities during the recovery phase of a hurri-

cane. Copies of these plans are available at the Beaufort County

Emergency Management office in Washington.

It is important that local officials clearly understand the

joint federal/state/local procedures for providing assistance to

rebuild after a storm so that local damage assessment and

101

reconstruction efforts are carried out in an efficient manner

that qualifies the community for the different types of assis-

tance that are available. The requirements are generally

delineated in the -Disaster Relief Act of 1974 (P.L. 93-288)

which authorizes a wide range of financial and direct assistance

to local communities and individuals.

During reconstruction after a disaster, two phases of action

are usually undertaken: immediate post-disaster clean-up and

clean-up and repair over a longer period. Although these

guidelines are directed for the county leveI9 the Town of

Aurora may take additional steps to complement this work. The

following section discusses guidelines set forth for reconstruc-

tion in the county plan.

IMMEDIATE CLEAN-UP

The Disaster Relief and Assistance Plang currently being

updated and revised by the Division of Emergency Management,

includes a program for immediate clean-up and debris removal from

roads9 beaches and other areas where public health and safety may

be jeopardized. The responsibility for completing these duties

will be a combined effort by several agencies from the public and

private sectors. The Department of Transportation will be

responsible for clearing debris from roads and the Forest Service

will remove fallen trees from the area, if necessary. In

addition, the county Emergency Management office will provide

names of volunteers to call upon for assistance in the immediate

clean-up efforts.

102

While clean-up efforts are taking place, a damage assessment

team will be sent out to evaluate the extent of damage in the

area. Damage assessment is defined as a rapid means of determin-

ing a-realistic estimate of the amount of damage caused by a

natural or man-made disaster. For a storm disasterg it is

expressed in terms of: 1) the number of structures damagedq 2)

magnitude of damage by type of 5tructureq 3) estimated total

dollar loss, and 4) estimated total dollar loss covered by

insurance.

After a major storm event, members of the Damage Assessment

Team should conduct two types of surveys: one which roughly

estimates the extent and type of damageg and a more detailed

second phase assessment after the initial damage reports are

filed. The initial damage assessment should include an estimate

of the extent of damage incurred by each structure and identify

the cause such as wind, flooding or wave action of the damage of

each structure. Rapid and general initial da mage assessment

reports are to be submitted by radio within one hour. Within six

hoursq private property summaries and more detailed reports

should be nearly complete. The format for damage assessments

will be conducted in accordance with Annex F of the Disaster

Relief and Assistance Plan. This plan is currently being

revised to accommodate for longer damage assessment periods;

however, for the scope of this plan, the available data is the

most accurate.

Under certain circumstances, interim development moratoria

can be used to give a local government the time to assess

103

damages, make sound decisions, and to learn from storm experi-

ences. Beaufort County can impose a development moratorium

if it get s disaster declaration from the appropriate federal

authorities. This disaster declaration must stipulate the type

and exten.t of reconstruction that will be paid for by the Federal

Insurance Agency. The length of the moratorium will depend on

the extent of the damage. A decision will be made at that time.

RECOVERY TASK FORCE

Damage assessment operations are oriented to take place

during the emergency period. After the emergency operations to

restore public health and safety and the initial damage assess-

ments are completed, the guidelines suggest that a recovery task

force to guide restoration and reconstruction activities during

a post-emergency phase which could lasts from weeks to possibly

more that a year. The county has formed a group with members

from all areas of the county to serve as a task force for

recovery.

The responsibilities of this task force are to review

the nature of damages in the community, establish an overall

restoration schedule, identify and evaluate alternative ap-

proaches for repair and reconstruction, and make recommenda-

tions for community recovery. The Task Force will work with

State and Federal representatives on the Interagency Regional

Hazard Mitigation Team and also the Section 406 Hazard Mitigation

Survey and Planning Teams. Members of the recovery task force

will include:

104

Beaufort County Commissioners

County Engineer and Building Inspector

County Manager

City Managers and Engineers from each municipality

County Emergency Management Coordinator

County Health Department

The Mayor of Auroraq Grace Bonner, will be called upon to serve
on this Task Force. John Pridgen, the Town Engineer, will

also serve. Although this task force will review damages, the

authority to approve or deny permits will remain the responsibi-

lity of the appropriate authorities.

SCHEDULE FOR REPAIR AND RECONSTRUCTION OVER LONGER PERIOD

The procedures listed above deal directly with policies or

clean-up immediately after a storm or disaster. In conjunction

with the policies stated above on storm hazard mitigation,

consideration should be given to long-term reconstruction.

Formulation of more stringent building standards should be

considered to prevent the destruction from recurring.

In the aftermath of a disaster, reconstruction efforts

will be rampant. A plan for the long-term reconstruction is

essential. In order to handle the rush, a priority system

has been designed to stage and permit repair s. Staging and

permitting repairs and construction for the county are as

follows:

105

First Priority: Replacement of essential services

such as power, waterp telephone and

streets and bridges.

Second Pr,iority: Minor repairs

Third Priority: Major repairs

Fourth Priority: New Development

In efforts to streamline the permitting process for the large

number of applications for building permits9 a policy has been

established by the county to repair and rebuild essential

service facilities first. Second priority is to repair other

public facilities as necessary for shelter. A triage (worst

damage) approach will be instituted for staging the reconstruct-

ion effort. Properties with little damage would be permit ted

immediately if they were in compliance with permit regulations

before the storm. The schedule for permitting other properties

is as follows:

1. Moderate damage, meeting permit regulations

2. Moderate damagep requiring permit decisions

3. Extensive damages requiring permits

This system was established to avoid interference with the

reconstruction of public utilities and facilities. The top

priority in post-disaster reconstruction is the replacement of

services.

The development standards for reconstruction will be in

accordance with the Storm Hazard Mitigation policies set forth by

the Town. As a minimump the State Building Code will be enforced

as well as building restriction imposed by the Federal Flood

106

Insurance Program. The County Commissioners will be the legis-

lative body to enforce these policies.

Consideration of -the possible relocation of public facili-

ties to safer locations was not undertaken by the County.

Since the Aurora wastewater treatment plant is located in the

hazard areaq this should be a priority for the decision-makers.

EVACUATION ROUTES AND TIMES

According to Before the Storm in Beaufort CounLK, the

current evacuation routes in the Aurora area are sufficient.

Highway 33 is the principal route for evacuation to safer

locations. This highway serves all of the Aurora area plus

those persons living near the Pamlico County line.

The planning area is broken into two evacuation zones:

Zones VI and VII. Since such a small portion of the planning

area is located in Zone VI, this discussion will be limited Zone

VII. The Zone VII evacuation route is Highway 33 North from

the Pamlico County line to Highway 17 near Chocowinity. There

are no surge inundation points along this route. It has an

adequate capacity, but safe evacuation will depend on the amount

of warning time provided and the willingness of the inhabitants

to evacuate. Based on the model in the Storm Hazard Mitigation

Plan, it would take less than seven hours to evacuate the

estimated 1,000 people in Aurora and its vicinity. The 1200

Texasgulf employees located outside of Aurora could also be

safely accommodated by this route. This time figure is well

within the 12 hour warning time period provi ded by the National

Weather Service. Highway 33 can accommodate approximately 455

1n7

vehicles per hour at 35 miles per hour. During a 12 hour period,

5460 vehicles could be relocated. This value is far above the

calculated volume of traffic estimated in the model provided in

the storm hazard plan.

Aurora area evacuees can find shelter at Aurora High

School. The High School is located at a higher elevation outside

of the flood hazard zone. A full description of the capacity and

adequacy of this shelter is provided in Beaufort County Disaster

Relief and Evacuation Plan.

SUMMARY

A large proportion of the Aurora Planning area is threatened

by the hazards associated with storms. In the event of a major

disasterl the planning area would be subject to the policies and
guidelines set forth in the Beaufort County Mitigation Plan.

In-Town reconstruction standards should be strengthened to

mitigate disaster in the future.

INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION

The Town of Aurora is responsible for reporting all of its

activities concerning storm hazard miti ,gation and hurricane

preparedness with the following agencies:

N.C. Division of Coastal Management
State Office: Division of Coastal Management
Department of Natural Resources and Community
Development
P.D. Box 27687
Raleigh, NC 27611-7687
(919) 733-2293

Field Of f ice: Division of Coastal Management
Department of Natural Resources and Community
Development
P.O. Box 1507
Washington, NC 278B9
(919) 946-6481

N.C. Division of Emergency Management,
State Office: Division of Emergency Management
Department of Crime Control and Public Safety
116 West Jones Street
Raleigh, NC 27611
(919) 733-3867

Regional Office: Area Emergency Management Coordinator
N.C. Division of Emergency Coordinator
607 Bank Street
Washington, NC 27889
(919) 946-2773

N.C. Division of Community Assistance
(National Flood Insurance Program Information)
Flood Insurance Coordinator
Division of Community Assistance
Department of Community Assistance
P.O. Box 27687
Raleighq NC 27611-7687
(919) 733-2850

Federal Emergency Management Agency
National Office: Federal Emergency Management Agency
500 C Street, S. W.
Washington, D.C. 20472
Public Information (202) 287-0300
Publications (202) 287-0689

Federal Emergency Management Agency
Regional Office: Federal Emergency Management Agency
Region IV
1375 Peachtree Street, N.E.
Atlantaq GA 30309
Public Information (404) 881-2000
Disaster Assistance Program (404) BBI-3641
Flood Insurance Program (404) 881-2391

109

STORM HAZARD MITIGATION AND POST-DISASTER RECONSTRUCTION

POLICIES

Policy Choices

1. Support county Storm Hazard Mitigation and Post

Disaster Reconstruction Policies. o

2. Discourage development in same manner as existing

structures destroyed in storm.

3. Consider relocation of public facilities to areas

outside the hazard area.

4. Consider developing Recovery Task force for Town.

5. Increase public awareness and preparedness.

Implementation Schedule

1. Stay abreast of changes in Beaufort County Storm

Hazard Mitigation plan.

2. Consider the adoption of new regulations for

post-disaster reconstruction.

3. Due to the lack and cost of available land,

Town facilities will be rebuilt at same pre-storm location.

4. Recovery Task Force members will include:

Mayor of Aurora

Planning Board Members

Rescue and Fire Squad Volunteers

Medical Board

Town Engineer

5. Educate Town employees and public about evacuation

procedures about their responsibilities in storm situation.

lio

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

Aurora realizes the importance of soliciting public input

into the planning process. During the development period of

this land use plan- update, several techniques were employed to

encourage involvement of Aurora area residents in the land use

plan's policies.

At the beginning of the planning period, a citizen partici-

pation plan was developed. At the first meetingg the planning

board decided to schedule regular monthly meetings every second

Wednesday from November through April. It was decided that all

planning board meetings concerning the CAMA Land Use Plan update

should be made public. Citizen input was to be strongly encour-

aged.

The board decided that initially, emphasis would be placed

on public education about the land use planning process. It was

felt that once the public understood the importance of the plan,

they would want to be involved in it. An effort was made to

inform the public about the existence of the plan and the

importance of their contribution on policy recommendations.

This was done in a variety of ways. First, news articles

appeared in the local newspapers which discussed the plan and its

purpose. Press releases were sent to three newspapers: the

Washington Daily Newsq based in Washington; the New Bern Sun

Journal; and the Pamlico News from Oriental. The purpose of the

articles was to explain the role of the CAMA plan and the

explanation of the issues addressed in it. Other methods

of public education involved direct communication with Aurora

residents and planning board members.

In addition to the public education efforts, press releases

were sent to the local newspapers prior to each meeting.

Included in the press release was a description of the land use

plan and its purpose as well as the agenda items. Upon comple-

tion of meetingt another news article was sent out which des-

cribed the meeting's events. The combination of these newspaper

articles intended to promote the understanding of the land use

planning process as well as to encourage the public to provide

their opinion on various issues. Examples of the newspaper

articles and a listing of article dates are included as Appendix

Another measure was taken to attract citizen input.

Letters were mailed to various civic and industry leaders in the

community (Appendix C). Special attention was given to solici-

ting names from a wide cross-section of individuals. Economic,

social, ethnic and cultural view points were considered in

developing the list. The intent of the letter was to educate

the individuals about the plan and to invite them to attend the

public meetings. This proved to be effectiveg as citizen

attendance increased markedly at subsequent meetings.

Draft sections of the plan were also made available for

public review. A current draft of the plan was kept in the Town

Hall and the public was encouraged to make written comments on

it. The purpose was to have as much citizen input as possible.

112

It is the belief of the Aurora Planning Board and Town

Board that all citizens should be provided adequate opportunity

to participate in the governmental and planning decisions which

affect themi In the future, citizen input will continue to be

solicited, primarily through the planning board. All upcoming

meetings will be advertised and adequately publicized to help

keep citizens informed about the land use changes occurring in

their community.

113

LAND CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM

The land classification system is a tool to identify the

anticipated land uses within a planning area. The land classifi-

cation map, the culmination of the land use planning effort,

designates specific areas for certain types of development

activities. It provides a uniform method of analyzing how the

planned use of land interacts with environmentally sensitive

areas during the development. process of the Town. The land

classification system promotes an understanding of the relation-

ships between various land use categories and the need to develop

policies to accommodate these relationships. The focus is to

evaluate the intensity of land utilization and the level of

services required to support that intensity. According to the

CAMA guidelines:

"The land classification system provides a framework to be

used by local governments to identify the future use

of all lands. The designation of land classes allows the

local government to illustrate their policy statements as

to where and to what density they want growth to occur,

and where they want to conserve natural and.cultural

resources by guiding growth." (7B.0204) (b)

The CAMA guidelines include five general land use classifi-

cations for the land classification map: Developed, Transition,

Communityl Rural and Conservation. Their definitions are ranked

according to the intended intensity of land uses within them.

Areas classified as "Developed" require the traditional level of

services associated with urban areas. "Transition" lands should

114

include areas developing or anticipating development which will

eventually require urban services. Lower density which will

not require services-should be classified as "Community". Areas

classified as "Rural".should be reserved for low intensity uses

such as agriculture, forestry, mineral extraction and highly

dispersed housing. Public water and sewer will not be provided

in rural areas. The purpose of the Conservation class is "to

provide for the effective long-term management and protection

of significant, limited or irreplaceable areas". Public or

private services should not be provided in this land classifica-

tion.

The five land.classifications and land classification map

are intended to serve as a visual definition of the policies

stated in this plan (Figure 13). The five land use classifica-

tionso, as they are applied in the Aurora planning areag are

discussed below.

DEVELOPED

The Developed land classification is intended for continued

intensive development and redevelopment of urban areas. It

includes areas already developed as urban or those areas with a

density of approximately 500 dwellings per square mile. In

most cases, the Developed class includes All urban areas.

In the planning area, most of the land within the Aurora

Town limits is classified as Developed. Exceptions include the

forested wetland area north of the downTown area. Approximately

97 percent of the persons living within this boundary are served

by sewer service. All residents are provided water service.

Figure 13 115

LAND CLASSIFICATION HAP

Aft

W- 71-,:,;,.

A-, qt0A

A-

.Ok
A&
Developed

Transition

TIE =ARATION OF THIS MAP WAS F D,: AN = IN
.RAP..C 3CALE PAA-r 7rTna@ A GRANT FROVMED BY ITIE NOFMi Community
1 "100 2coo 3000, C.L@CLLNA ODAgZ-%L KVNAGE@-7 FROCFAM, 1HUU
FUNDS FFZVEDM BY TI@Z COASIAL WKE MANAGEMENr Rural
ACT OF 1972, AS V1Z\=, 'WHICH IS AIIIINISI= Conservation
BY n@E OFF:CE OF CWSE@ RE-ca= WNAMIEN-r,
\,'A@'TIONAL OMWIC AND A2CS?r=C AUILN13=0N

116

TRANSITION

Transition land is categorized as the lands providing for

intensive urban development within the ensuing ten years. These

areas will be scheduled for provision of water and sewer in the

future. They will also serve as the overflow sites for develop-

ment when additional lands are needed to accommodate growth.

They will eventually become a part of the urban area.

The Transition classification includes the areas located

adjacent to the transportation routes that run through Aurora.

An additional concentration of the transition class exists in the

western section of Town near the High School. This is the site

of the new crab processing plantq as well as other commercial

enterprises. Since 1981, much of the development located along

Highway 33 West and Highway 306 North has been commercial.

Trends over the past five years have shown most of the Town's

residential development to occur in the area south of Highway 33

near the Town limits in an existing residential area. The land

use analysis showed that although the soils are generally

unsuitable for septic tanks, much of this area is not within the

hurricane hazard zone.

The relationship betw-een the Developed and Transition

classes is important in a predominantly rural area like eastern

Beaufort County. The area within these classes is where detailed

local land use and public investment planning will occur. Large

amounts of vacant land suitable for urban development within the

Developed class should be taken into-account when calculating the

1.17

amount of additional lands needed to accommodate projected

growth.

The local zoning ordinance recognizes this by specifying

each particular land use and intensity of use in both the

Developed and Transition land classes. The Developed areas are

zoned for commercial, industrial and residential uses and are

currently served by the Town's facilities. The Transition areas

are recognized on.the zoning map as having potential for future

growth. The zoning ordinance shows some these areas as rural;

but areas along traffic arteries are incrementally zoned for

less intensive commercial and residential uses. The zoning

ordinance recognizes that future development will be located in

these areas.

COMMUNITY

The "Community" classification is usual.ly characterized by

a small cluster of mixed land uses in a rural area which do

not require municipal services. It usually serves to meet the

housing, light shopping, employment and public services needs of

a rural area. The Community classification typifies crossroads

areas along primary and secondary roads.

In the Aurora planning area, only the Royal/St. Peter's

Church area is classified as Community. The Royal community

includes a small cluster of homes and a country store. It is not

anticipated that Aurora's municipal services will be extended to

this community. Wells and septic tanks currently serve the

basic needs of this community, and there is a limited need to

provide additional services to Royal.

RURAL

The "Rural" classification is designed- for agriculture,

forestry, mineral. extraction and other low intensity uses.

Urban services are not required because of the great dispersion

of development in these areas. These are lands identified as

appropr.iate locations for resource management and related uses;

agricultural, mineral, or forest lands; and areas with enough

limitations to make development hazardous or economically

unfeasible.

The majority of the land within the planning area falls

within this classification. In Aurora, most of this land is

under agricultural production. In addition, the Rural classifi-

cation is particularly important for the extension of phosphate

mining operations. It should be emphasized that development

should not be precluded from the. agricultural lands located in

this classification; this designation implies that urban services

will not be extended to accommodate future development.

CONSERVATION

The "Conservation" class provides for the effective long

term management of significanto limited or irreplaceable re-

sources. This includes, as a minimum, all of the statutorily

defined AECs such as the estuarine waters, the public trust

waters, the estuarine shoreline and coastal wetlands. This also

includes the land defined as the conservation buffer zone

extending for a distance of 75 feet beyond the shoreline of the

public trust waters and marshes (see Resource Protection policy

statements). Because of difficulties with mapping detail, the

1.19

definition of this buffer for permitting purposes will need to be

made on site. The Town has made a distinction between state

regulated areas of environmental importance and other areas not

offered state protection. The purpose of designating the

conservation buffer area is to provide added protection for water

quality in the surface waters in the public's trust.

The Conservation class does not imply "non-use". It is

intended to provide for careful and cautious management of the

uses allowed in it. Pre5ervation@ on the other hand, implies

total restriction of all uses in an effort to keep the natural

environment in tact. Through conscientious management, the

Conservation class requires all uses to be as unoffensive as

possible. The intention of the Conservation class is to strike a,

balance between careful long-term management of sensitive natural

and cultural resources and the freedom of landowners to utilize

their property to its best use.

In order to protect its natural integrity, various. types of

land uses should be prohibited from the Conservation classifica-

tion. The Town has decided that the NCAC permitted uses for

statutorially-defined AECs are consistent with the Town's

long-term goal of resource protection. The Town does not feel

the need to add specific uses to this already satisfactory list

of restrictive uses. All uses permitted by the state will be

considered consistent with the Town's objectives.

Within the conservation buffer zone, the Town has decided

to be more restrictive than the state. In order to protect the

natural integrity of the surface waters and marine life, Aurora

120

would like to-prohibit most types of uses in this area. Any

type of land use must meet a performance standard. Any disrup-

tion or de5truct.ion to the existing conditions of the land

located in the buffer zone will not be tolerated. The purpose is

to aim to provide for the most natural environment possible along

the banks of the waterways. All development should be very low

intensity and should prove not to damage the natural ecosystem.

The following is a list of the examples of the types of uses that

may be allowed within the conservation buffer zone.

1. Water-oriented uses such as docks, piers and

bulkheadingg if they are shown not to cause detriment to the

public trust waters or Conservation lands.

2. Necessa ry utility service lines, such as water,

sewer, electrical, natural gas, etc., when demonstrated that the

environmental integrity of the Conservation area will not be

violated.

3. Roadways and improvements to existing roads when

construction can be conducted without significantly altering the

ecological system, and in compliance with existing federal, state

and local regulations.

4. Barge landings.

5. Marinas, provided that they are in compliance with
size and water quality requiremients set by state.

In conjunction with the Policy Statements section of this plan,

each application for any type of use in the all Conservation

classifications, both defined by the state and the Town, shall be

reviewed on a case-by-case basis by the Town Council.

121

RELATIONSHIP OF POLICIES AND LAND CLASSIFICATION

As required by the Coastal Resources Commission, this plan must

discuss the manner in which the policies developed in the

Policy Statements section will. be applied to each of the land

classes. In addition, an identification must be made of the

types of land uses.which are appropriate in each class.

DEVELOPED AND TRANSITION CLASSES

Recent trends have shown that most of the growth in the

Aurora planning area is occurring on the fringes of the Aurora

Town limits. This is the area where basic services such as

waterp sewer and community support services are available or

-might be feasible within the planning period. These classes are

designed to accommodate all intensive land uses, including

residentialg commercial, industrial, transportation and community

facilities. Hazardous or offensive uses, such as land application

systems, electrical generating facilities, airports, and noxious

industries will not be permitted in the classes.

COMMUNITY CLASS

Intensive development will not be encouraged in this class

due to the lack of urban services and/or physical limitations.

The general range of acceptable uses are limited to residences,

isolated convenience stores and churches, and other public

facilities.

RURAL CLASS

The rural class is the broadest of the land classes and is

designated to provide for agriculture, forest management,

mineral extraction and other low intensity uses. Residences may

1.22

be located within the rural class where urban services are not

required and where natural resources will not be permanently

impaired. - Energy-generating facilities and airports will be

limited to this class.

CONSERVATION CLASS

The conservation class is designed to provide for the

effective, long-term management of significant limited or

irreplaceable areas including Areas of Environmental Concern and

the Town's defined conservation buffer zone. Development in the

estuarine system should be limited to uses such as piers,

bulkheads, marinas, and other water-dependent uses (See Land

Classification System section). Policy statements under Resource

Protection and Resource Production and Management and the list of

Conservation classification permittable uses in the previous

section address Aurora's intentions for regulating development in

fragile areas. The protection of water quality, a top priority

for the Town, is the key determinant for permitting specific

land uses within the Conservation class.

123

INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION

The land use plan is a tool for coordinating numerous

policies, standards, regulations and other governmental activi-

ties. The plan provides the framework for budgeting, planning,

and the provision and expansion of community facilities such as

water, sewer, school and road systems. It is the principal

policy guide for governmental decisions and activities which

affect land use in the Aurora area. The implementation of

policies in the land use plan requires coordination between the

local government and the state and federal governments. Enforce-

ment of the policies and goals requires a consistency with the

higher levels of government. The formation of a policy without

means of enforcement defeats the intention of the land use plan

update.

Aurora has worked to ensure compatibility between the

Beaufort County and Aurora Land Use Plans. There appeared to be

no inconsistencies between the policies in each plan. A good

working relationship exists between the Town of Aurora and

Beaufort County. During its development periodt the plan was

continuously evaluated for its consistencies between state and

federal regulation.

The Town of Aurora intends to foster intergovernmental

coordination by working with state and federal agencies to

implement policies to improve water qualityg as well carry out

goals for the agriculture and commercial fishing industries.

In addition, Aurora will work with the N.C. Department of

Cultural Resources in protecting and enhancing its heritage.

1.24

Coordination between the Division of Coastal Management and U.S.

Army Corps of Engineers will be maintained in the permitting

process for development in areas classified as wetlands. All

additional efforts will be made to promote cooperation between

the state, federalf county and Aurora governments.

125

APPENDIX A

'FEDERAL DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS

Agenc y Licenses and Permits..

Army Corps of Engineers Permits required under
(Department of Defense) Sections 9 and 10 of the
Rivers and Harbors Act of
1899; permits to construct
in navigable waters.

Permits required under
Section 103 of the Marine
Protections Research and
Sanctuaries Act of 1972.

Permits required under
Section 404 of the Federal
Water Pollution Control
Act; permits to undertake
dredging and/or filling
activities.

Coast Guard Permits for bridgess cause-
(Department of Transportation) ways and pipelines over
navigable waters required
under the General Bridge
Act of 1946 and the Rivers
and Harbors Act of 1899.

- Deep water part permits.

Geological Survey - Permits required for off-
Bureau of Land Management shore drilling.
(Department of Interior) - Approval of OCS pipeline
corridor rights-of-ways.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission - Licenses for sitings con-
(Department of Energy) struction and operation
of nuclear power plants
required under the Atomic
Energy Act of 1954 and
Title II of the Energy
Reorganization Act of
1974.

126

CONTINUED

Federal Energy Regulation. Permits for construction,
Commission (Department of operation and maintenance
Energy) of interstate pipelines
facilities required under
the Natural Gas Act of
1938.

Orders of interconnection
of electric transmission
facilities under Section
202 (b) of the Federal
Power Act.

Permission required for
abandonment of natural
gas pipelines and associated
facilities under Section
7C (b) of the Natur'al
Gas Act of 1938.

127

STATE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS

Agency Licenses and Permits

Department of Natural Resources Permits to discharge to sur-
and Community Development face waters or operate waste-
water treatment plants or oil
discharge permits; NPDES Per-
mits, (G.S. 143-215).

Division of Environmental Permits for septic tanks that
Management serve industrial process
water flow or are community
owned. Such systems owned
by the State or Federal
government are under the
jurisdiction of the Health
Departmento (B.S. 143-215.3).

- Permits for air pollution
abatement facilities and
sources (B.S. 143-215.109).

- Permits for construction of
complex sources; e.g. parking
lotso subdivisiont stadiumst
etc. (G.S. 143-215.109).

- Permits for construction of
a well over 100,000 gallons/
day (B.S. 87-88).

Department of Natural Resources - Permits to dredge and/or fill
and Community Development in estuarine waterst tide-
Division of Coastal Management landst etc. (B.S. 113-229).

- Permits to undertake develop-
ment in Areas of Environ-
mental Concern (B.S. 113A-

Note: Minor development
permits are issued by the
local government.

128

CONTINUED

Department of Natural Resources Permits to alter-or construct
and Community Development dams (G.S. 143-215.66).
Division of Land Resources
Permits to mine (G.S. 74-51).

Permits to drill exploratory
oil or gas wells (G.S. 113-
381).

Permits to conduct geograph-
ical explorations (G.S.
113-391).

Sedimentation erosion control
plans for any land disturb-
ing Activity of over one
contiguous acre (G.S.
113A-54).

D,?partment of Natural Resources - Permits to construct oil
and Community Development refineries.
Secretary of NRCD

Department of Administration - Easements to fill where lands
are proposed to be raised
above the normal high water
mark or navigable waters
(G.S. 146.6).

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).

Permits for septic tank
systems of 3000 gallons/day
or less capacity (G.S.
130-160).

129

APPENDIX B

PERSONAL INVITATION TO PUBLIC MEETINGS

..-MID.EAST: COMMISSION

February 3, 1986

Mr. Joe Hollowell
P. 0. Box 278
Auroray North Carolina 27eO6

Dear Mr. Hollowell:

The Town of-Aurora and the Mid-East Commission are currently
engaged i.-ri updating the 1981 Aurora Land Use Plan. The land
use plan -!.is a document used to assess and guide development.
It will be used by the county CAMA Permit Officers, developers
and other stated and federal agencies to make decisions about
development and preservation activities in the town.

Thus far, our work has concentrated on establishing a data
base on the existing conditions, all plans and policies,.and
physical constraints which might pose a development impediment
in the future. The next task of the planning board is to
formulate recommendations for policy on future development
issues

Your input in this decision-making process is essential. You
have been listed as one of the more prominent residents in the
Aurora 'community who has an interest 'in the future of the
town. We invite you to be heard in the community forum.
During@ the next meeting scheduled for February 129 we will
begin making policy statements on resource protection in the
area. .@Alsos we will be discussing the most relevant issues
facing Aurora today. The incorporation of, y our opinion on
these issues is one of our goals.

The meeting -is scheduled for February 12 at 7:00 pm, in the
Aurora Community Building. Subsequent meetings will be held
on the* second Tuesday of each month at the time given above.
We encourage-you to attend to provide guidance and direction.

E. Peterson Building a 310 West Main St. E RO. Drawer 17872 Washington, North Carolina 27889 (919) 946-8043.

130

If you have any questions about -the plan and its purpose or
the'meeting, please feel free to call me. We look forward to
working with you to guide the future of your town.

Sincerely,

Lynn Phillips
Consulting Planner

LP/lrw

131

Washington Daily News

December 13, 1985
Planning Board From Aurora
C7
Talks About Land Use Plan

AURORA,- Aurora got a "B- isting socioeconomic and land use
plus" on the report card which trends. Planner Lynn Phillips of
shows how well goals are accom- the Washington-based Mid-East
plished. Commission presented the plan to
The town s planning board met thi.board. Groundwater availabil-
Wednesday night to discuss the@ ity in*future years also was dis-
land use plan, which is being up- cussed.
dated-for 1986.The meeting fq@
cused on the *policies and goals set : The next meeting of the planning
in the 1981 plan and how well the board is scheduled for Jan. 8 at 7
implementation procedures have p.m. in the Aurora Community
been carried out since that time. Building. The agenda will cover
The land use plan update is a the town's current policies on re-
document used to assess and guide source protection. All members of
development. Each of 20 counties the community are invited.
covered by North Carolina's Coas-
tal Area Management Act must up-
date its land use plan every five
years. Munici -palities, like Aurora, February 14, 1986
have the option of updating their
plans as well.
In a checklist format, each policy
and implementation strategy was Planners Aim Towar(f
analyzed to assess how the town
has,moved forward in reaching
each goal. Out of 25 impleminta- S a, ving Water Qu'ality
tion strategies listed, 22, or*88 per-
cent, had been either partially or AURORA - The Aurora Plan- means that Ithe waters and associ-!
completely fulfilled. Each policy
and implementation strategy dealt ning Board has decided to stress ated. wetlands provide critical
with the issue of resource protec- water quality and overprotection habitat and food-for juvenile .forms
tion, production and management, of agricultural land in the town's of fish and shellfish.
as well as economic and commun- land-use plan. The board proposed policies on
ity development In proposing policy for the location of marinas and similiar
The planning board also over- town's 1986 land use plan this facilities, and establishing a c6n-.
looked the completed part of their. week, the planning bbard included servation buffer zone along the
1986 plan which analyze4 the ex- policies to protect water. quality shoreline.
and fish habitats in South Creek. While the U.S. Soil Conservation
The board also elected not to Service has identifled many areas
emphasize protection of prime 'in and near'Auroni as "prime agri-
agricultural land. It cited an cultural land," Thompson said pre-
abundance of farmland. ' - venting nbri-agricultural develop-
Aurora is, updating, its Coastal meiit. on this land should, not be, a
Area Management Act Land Use short-term priority.
Plan. The planning board met Thompson said there is no shor.
Wednesday night with consulting tage of good'farmland in Aurora,
planner Lynn Phillips of the Mid- while the town needs other types of
East Commission. who provided economic development.
thetechnical information on which I ..
the board based its decisions. The plap is not finished, and pub-
Chairman W.B. Thompson noted lic opinidn is still encodraged. The
that water quality and wetland re- board will meet again at 7 p.m.
sources and important to Aurora's March 12 in the Aurora Commun-
commercial fishing and recreation ity Building.
industrieso, The Planning Board will consid-
The area of South Creek near the er recommendations for policy on
town functions as a "primary @,@conomic and -community de-
nursery area," according to biolo. -4Wopment. All Aurora residents
gical data the board reviewed. That aminvited.----

PAGE 14 -'WASHINGTON DAILY NEWS, THURSDAY, MARCH 13,~q!
Aurora P~0qian~4qn~8qmg. Board S~2qeeks~'L ~qV~q"~'~Nt~.~.~6qOn~' Gr
~qK~qA~-~0qL

AURORA - After discussing development. Aurora is updating and seafood processing manu- are easily ~acc
anticipated growth over the next its 1981 plan. facturing firms would probably forms of transp
10 years, the Aurora Planning Although growth is currently*'"' be best for this area,," Chairman The board als
Board has continued to put a ceil~- not a problem for the town, a W.B. Thompson said. But any in- tle could be do
~qing on its growth. population ceiling of 1,500 per-. dustry which comes to the area hazards to the
The board met last night to dis- sons will be set. This figure repre- must prove its commitment to ment plant in
cuss~.the policy recommenda- sents the capacities of the muni- the environment, too, he added., strong hurrica
tiohs for the Land Use Plan up- cipal water and sewer capabili~-~ Water quality is a top priority for from a hurrica
date. ~- Storm hazard mitigation, ties. The town's current~.popula~- the~ Aurora planners. tensity could
economic and community de- tion is about 650.
Specific sites for industry were two-thirds of th
velopment and urban growth The board also elected to also evaluated. The northeastern age plant is incl
patterns were some of the issues emphasize the recruitment of in-' quadrant of town and a stretch of "In this case, th
discussed. dustry which employs the abun- road along N.C. 33 west of town able to learn f~qr
I The Land Use Plan is a do~cu- dant low-skilled workers in the-are the best suited industrial said board rn
m~q6~qnt used to guide and assess planning area. "Assemble-type zones in Aurora. Both locations Sartin.
Little if any
available for re
~age plant if it
The town woul
at its present lo
The land clas
Au ~'a-~0qC-~2q6 visual tool whi
ror m e~4qf~4qice --~0qVork
`4 areas over the n
~0
~0qG~_ along the hig~6qt
~6qQ ~4 cated~, pockets
AURORA The town. Most resi
tow~qi~l ~qof A~qUrora document used to assess and ~qgu~ mercial bu~qi~qldin
to~qQ~qk the f~qirst~'gte~qo ~ql~qa~qj~qaw~'~qoe~qlt Word d o~qpm~ent. Each of 20. counties
~.~s~e~8q@ its land ~u~6q*g~2qW~2qW~,~q4~, ori~. b o~qrth inthese areas
'ties for th~6qin~6q6rt give y~6q"rs~. ~'~8qC~qi~rol~qi~na's Coas~. pated that fut
e~0qpt Act must up- occur here as w
~qy
g~en
~'~j~qi
~'th~qe ~i~'~ql~g~qi~i~qd ~@~8qdse plan every fiv~qV The plan is
The Aurora Plan~qh~6qf~6qt Board 'Met ~6qi~qt~6q4d ~a~l
to discuss the orga~n~qiz~q;~j~qUon of. the years. ~8qP
Ila" are optional for mu~r~q4~6 public opinion
1~q9~q86 land use pla~n-upd~at~e~. The' t~q4essuch~'~q"'Aur~o~r~s.~*~.~. couraged. A co
meeting was des~qi~0qo~ed to introduce Phill~qi s of the W~qi~sh~qi~ngto
~. ~qP the land use pl
the board to.th~e~-P~ql~qar~u~qd~0qu Process ~-~,~,~i~qb~qA~q$~e4~i~6qX~qid~4q4~ss.t Commission, able for public
a~qnd.the board's responsibilities in -:.,which is Providing technical assist- next two week
plan deve1o~qpm~q*nt~t~;~-~q^~q%~,~,~,~i~qj-~, ~qj~.~,;
~8~;~@ ~y a~qA~qq~2q% o~u~2qq~qi~r~q@ed compo~qnents~'of th~qe~i sons can pick'
The Planning~. Bo~a~rd~,wi~ql~qlj~r~n~eet ~qp~ql~qa~6q@ i~i~n~'~clu ~q9 resource prote~q@~-
~- p1~8qm~.All ~.~.~6q#o~qr~% and economic. development.: Board is expec
monthly to d~qiscu~es~.th~e Town Hall. Th
~.meeti~n~6qa on open. and public par- ~qL~.~,~! ~4qAuth~,Legg~qv~6qu of the N.C. Divi~. document at its~8q@
ticipation is~.en~cour~ag~e~qd~.~,Th~e next ~.~,~s~qko~qn o~qf.~2qr~r~qpa~qstal ~8qManag~qime~nt ~qd~qi~s~'~- early April.
~qm~qi~qiti~ng~qiss~e~qtf~qbr7~,p.~qm~i~e~c. ~q11~-~qin ~q@~,~,~qC~qos~se~qd ~. techniques for, increasing
the Aurora Communi~qt~2qy~,~1p~u~qi~qld~qin~qg~. ~qju~0qW~qj~qn~V~0~q@~qj~v~qj~qjnent.~.
The land use pl~qa~8qo
~-~2qa~qpdat~e:~.i~qs a' ~qt~n~,~,~,~2qU~0qA~8qW~2qQ~r~0qWe ~8qB~o~qp~8qW presided..;

1@
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
IIIIHIMIMI'llum 1
3 6668 14101 8921 1