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

                                                                S220252SURN=  __ 2S20252SN22        552222525M

                                                              COASTAL ZONE
                                                              INFORMATION CENTER

                                  .COASTAL AREA MANAGEMENTACT

                                                         LAND USE PLAN

                                                      CITY OF WILMINGTON-NEW HANOVER COUNTY

                                                                  NORTH CAROLINA

                IT.

                             HD
                             268
                             M55
                             C63
                             1976
         Aw_
                                                                                                                          2W

                Si

                                                                                                                225522932S255M

                                                                                               /ff &
                                               COASTAL ZO    .NE
                                               JNFORMATION CENTER

                                                   NOTICE TO USERS

                         All major policy related maps and documents are either included within
                         the text or attached to the back of the plan. However, due to the expense
                         and technical limitations required for reprinting some illustrations may
                         be omitted. Complete copies are available for inspection at the N. C.
                         Coastal Resources'Commission offices in Raleigh or at the local government
                         offices.

               L

                                                                                   OVER

       J,                                                                        4,f
                             1739
                                           ljlauniq Gamraission
                          JL 0. Praffitr 1818                    Milmingtort, W. (IL 28401

                                                May 24, 1976

                    Mr. T. D. Eure, Chairman
                    Coastal Resources Commission
                    P.O. Box 650
                    Morehead City, N.C. 28557

                    Dear Chairman Eure:

                         on behalf of the Wilmington-New Hanover Planning  Commission,  the
                    Wilmington City Council, and the New Hanover County Board of Commissioners,
                    I am pleased to submit "Policies for Growth and Development of the
                    Wilmington-New Hanover Planning Area" and supporting material to the Coastal
                    Resources Commission for review and comment. These policies have been
                    endorsed by the Planning Commission-and jointly adopted by the Wilmington
                    City Council and the New Hanover County Board of Commissioners.

                         The planning process on which these policies are based has  been
                    designed to meet the guidelines of the Coastal Resources Commission-, however,
                    in meeting the particular needs of the Wilmington-New Hanover.Planning Area,
                    it has been necessary to deviate, in some cases,-from the format of the
                    traditional land use.plan.

                         The adoption of these policies complete the first phase of  a three-
                    phase land use planning process. Phases 2 and 3 will generate more detailed
                    land use recommendations and will develop the necessary tools to implement
                    these recommendations.

                         If this office can answer any questions concerning the "Policies for
                    Growth and Development," the technical studies, or any other part, of the
                    planning program, please feel free to contact us.

                                                                  Very truly yours,

                                                                  Richard A. Fender
                                                                  Director of Planning

                    RAF/jw
                    cc: Mr. Peter R. Davis, Chm., New Hanover Co. Comm.
                         Mr. Ben B. Halterman, Mayor, City of Wilmington
                         Mr. Dan Eller, County Manager
                         Mr. John A. Jones, City Manager

                                            RESOLUTION OF  THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WILMINGTON, NORTH
                                                     CAROLINA, ADOPTING A GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT
                                                   POLICY FOR WILMINGTON AND NEW HANOVER COUNTY

                                              WHEREAS, the Coastal Area Management Act of 1974 (G.S. 113A-107(a)

                                    requires that each of the twenty coastal counties of North Carolina develop

                                    and adopt a policy for growth and development of that county; and

                                              WHEREAS, a policy for the growth and development of Wilmington and

                                    the unincorporated areas of New Hanover County has been reviewed and recommended

                                    by the Wilmington-New Hanover Planning Commission; and

                                              WHEREAS, said policy is necessary to provide for and guide the orderly

                                    growth and development of Wilmington and the unincorporated areas of New Hanover

                                    County.

                                              NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED3 BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WILMINGTON,

                                    NORTH CAROLINA, AT A MEETING ASSEMBLED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF MAY, 1976 AS

                                    FOLLOWS:

                                              That the growth and development policy for Wilmington and New Hanover
                                    County is hereby adopted for purposes of submission to the Coastal Resources
                                    Commission for their review and comment.

                                              The foregoing resolution was duly adopted at the meeting aforesaid.

                                                                            Mayor

                                    ATTEST:

                                                          0
                                    City Clerk

                               CERTIFIED TO BE A TRUE COPY

                               CITY CLERK

                                                   RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
                                                    OF NEW HANOVER COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA,
                                                   ADOPTING A GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT POLICY
                                                     FOR WILMINGTON AND NEW HANOVER COUNTY

                                           WHEREAS, the Coastal Area Management Act of 1974 (G.S. 113A-107(a)

                                 requires  that each of the twenty coastal counties of North Carolina develop

                                 and adopt a policy for growth and development of that county; and

                                           WHEREAS, a policy for the growth and development of Wilmington and

                                 the unincorporated areas of'New Hanover County has been reviewed and recommended

                                 by the Wilmington@New Hanover Planning Commission; and

                                           WHEREAS, said policy is necessary to provide for and guide the orderly

                                 growth and development of Wilmington and the unincorporated areas of New Hanover

                                 County.

                                           NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, BY THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF NEW

                                 HANOVER COMM, NORTH CAROLINA, AT A MEETING ASSEMBLED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF MAY,

                                 1976 AS FOLLOWS:

                                           That the growth and development policy for Wilmington and New Hanover
                                 County is hereby adopted for purposes of submission to the Coastal Resources
                                 Commission for their review and comment.

                                           The foregoing resolution was duly adopted at  the meeting aforesaid.

                                                                         Chairman

                                 ATTEST:

                                 Clerk to the Board

                                 CERTIFIED TO BE A TRUE COPY

                                 El-ei@k-.to t1je Foard

                                                         TABLE OF CONTENTS

                                                            BACKGROUND

                            1. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY
                           II. SUMMARY OF TECHNICALISTUDIES
                          III. SUMMARY OF EXISTING PLANS AND POLICIES

                                             PART 1. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROGRAM

                            I. INTRODUCTION
                           II. FOCUS AND ORGANIZATION OF PARTICIPATION PROGRAM
                           III. PUBLIC INFORMATION PROGRAM
                           IV.  SUMMARY

                                 PART 2., RECOMMENDED POLICIES FOR GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT

                            I.  INTRODUCTION
                           II.  POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

                                              PART 3. GENERAL DEVELOPMENT GUIDE

                                      PART 4. POTENTIAL AREAS OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN

                                                   PART 5. TECHNICAL STUDIES

                            I.  AN ANALYSIS-OF HUMAN AND ECONOMIC RESOURCES
                           II.  ANALYSIS OF EXISTING LA   ND USE
                          III.  ENVIRONMENTALANALYSIS (This analysis with maps is oversized and
                                                            under separate cover.)
                           IV.  ESTIMATES OF FUTURE LAND NEEDS
                            V.  ANALYSIS OF GROWTH ALTERNATIVES
                           VI.  ANALYSIS OF SEPTIC TANK LIMITATIONS

                                               1. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY

                               This report represents tile culmination of the first phase of a three-phase

                          land use planning process which is being undertaken.for the Wilmington-New

                          Hanover Planning Area. The report's primary purpose is to present to citizens

                          and elected officials a comprehensive set of policies for the growth and

                          development of the Planning Area. It contains five,major parts:

                                    (1)  A description and evaluation of the Public
                                         Participation Program which has been undertaken
                                         to permit full involvement of citizens in the
                                         planning process;

                                    (2)  A set of policies which will provide
                                         principles to guide decision making at all
                                         levels of city and county government;

                                    (3)  A General Development Guide which serves to
                                         illustrate the policies for growth and development
                                         and which will set the parameters for the
                                         development of a more detailed land use plan
                                         in the second and third phases of the planning
                                         'process;

                                    (4)  A description of potential Areas of Environmental
                                         Concern which may be designated by the North
                                         Carolina Coastal Resources Commission and a
                                         description of the land uses which may be permitted
                                         within these critical areas; and

                                    (5)  A series of six studies which provide the technical
                                         support for the recommended policies and the General
                                         Development Guide.

                              The purposes of Phases 2 and 3 of the planning process are to, first,

                         develop specificland use recommendations for the Wilmington-New Hanover

                         Planning Area and, second, to develop the tools which will be required to

                         4implement these land use recommendations. Through this sequential process,.

                         which evolves successfully more specific land use policies, it is possible

                         "to look at the forest before dealing with the trees."

                              It is projected that Phases 2 and 3 of the Land Us-e Planning Process

                         will be complete by July 1977.

                                         RELATION TO THE COASTAL AREA MANAGEMENT ACT

                              The Land Use Planning Process, which is currently underway in the

                         Wilmington-New Hanover Planning Area, has been, in part, a response to the

                         requirements of the Coastal Area Management Act of 1974 (CAMA). This

                         legislation requires that each local government in the coastal area develop

                         a land use plan as a part of a state'wide program for managing North Carolina's

                         coastal resources. The legislation also created the Coastal Resources Commis-

                         sion which has the overall responsibility for implementing the provisions of

                         the legislation.

                              Among other responsibilities, the Coastal Resources Commission was charged

                         with developing a set of guidelines to be used by local governments in the

                         preparation of land use plans. These guidelines which were adopted on January

                         27, 1975 and amended on October 15, 1975 provide general criteria for the

                         land planning process to insure that local land use plans achieve the resource

                         management objectives set forth in CAMA. The technical studies and analyses

                         undertaken in Phase I of the planning process and the Public Participation

                         Program have been designed to meet or exceed the requirements of the Coastal

                         Resources Commission.

                                             II. SUMMARY OF TECHNICAL STUDIES

                              Since the initiation of the Land Use Planning Process in January of

                         1975, a series of technical studies have been undertaken by the Planning

                         Staff. Basically these studies have served three purposes:

                                   (1)  To document existing conditions in terms of the
                                        Planning Area's present population, its economy,
                                        and its existing land use;

                                   (2)  To forecast future conditions as indicated by
                                        projected employment growth and the resulting
                                        growth in total population; and

                                   (3)  To analyze the impact of this projected growth
                                        on the Planning Ar.ea's land and public services
                                        and facilities.

                              These studies are listed and briefly summarized below.

                                A. TECHNICAL REPORT #1. AN   ANALYSIS OF HUMAN RESOURCES

                              This report contains a detailed analysis of the Planning Area's population

                         and economy. It outlines past growth trends in both employment and total

                         population; it discusses the characteristics, or composition, of the area's

                         population and its workforce; and the report provides projections and forecasts

                         of future employment and population levels.
                              The U.S. Census Bureau is the major source'of statistics for this report;

                         however where appropriate census data has been "updated" using secondary sources

                         such as school.enrollment and Employment Security Commission data.

                              The "cohort-survival" technique was used to develop three population

                         projections -- low, moderate, and high. Based on an evaluation of the assumptions

                         used in these projections, the "high" projection of a population of 151j000 by

                         2000 is considered to be most probable. Using the projection, the Planning

                         Areals total employment in 2000 is expected to be 74,000.

                               B. TECHNICAL REPORT #2. AN ANALYSIS OF EXISTING LAND USE

                              This report outlines the basic information On current land utilization

                         which is required for developing policies for future land use. It addresses

                         both the amount of land committed to various uses and the problems resulting

                         from the location of existing uses and the manner in which they are developed.

                              The analysis is based on a survey of the Planning Area's land uses

                         conducted in the summer of 1973 and updated in the summer of 1975.

                              Six major problems were identified in this study:

                                   1.  urban sprawl
                                   2.  neighborhood decline
                                   3.  strip commercial development
                                   4.  over-zoning
                                   5.  poor drainage
                                   6.  malfunctioning septic tanks

                                    C.  TECHNICAL REPORT #3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS

                              This report, consisting primarily of a series of maps (submitted separately),

                         is designed to evaluate the suitability of the Planning Area's land resources

                         for urban-type development. Twelve separate environmental factors such as

                         wetlands, flood plains, drainage characteristics, and historic areas were used

                         in the analysis.

                              The Environmental Analysis identifies 17 square miles of land distributed

                         throughout the Planning Area which are suited for development without exten-

                         sive public investment in sewerage facilities.  Centralized sewerage facilities

                         could increase this reserve of suitable land to 52 square miles.

                               D. TECHNICAL REPORT #4. ESTIMATES OF FUTURE LAND NEEDS

                             Technical Repor .t #4 provides estimates of the amount of land which

                         will be required to meet the needs of the Planning Area's projected growth.

                         These estimates were made at two levels of detail. The first level, following

                         the guidelines of the Coastal Resources Commission, provides general estimates

                          of urban, rural. community, and rural land needs. The second level provides

                          detailed estimates of residential, commercial, and industrial land needs.

                                The two land needs estimates for the 1975-20  00 planning period are

                          summarized as follows:

                                   Gross Land Needs                         Detailed Land Needs

                              Category             Need                 Category            Need

                          Urban              22 square  miles          Industrial      7 square miles
                          Rural-Community    14 square  miles          Commercial      4 square miles
                          Disperse Rural     19 square  miles          Residential    21 square miles

                                E. TECHNICAL REPORT #5. AN ANALYSIS OF GROWTH ALTERNATIVES

                                This report compares-and evaluates the costs and benefits of six growth

                          alternatives to the Planning Area's residents. The growth alternatives were

                          defined in terms of two variables: projected total population (low, moderate,

                          and high) and the spatial distribution of the development generated by this

                          growth (compact and dispersed).

                                Three major conclusions have been drawn from this study:

                                     1.  Growth has positive impacts on the local economy
                                         incomes and retail sales increase with growth.

                                     2.  The per capita costs of public services remain
                                         relatively constant as population increases, but
                                         the per capita costs of providing services to a
                                         dispersed development pattern are much higher
                                         than for a compact development pattern.

                                     3.  With proper public investment in sewerage facilities,
                                         all three growth levels evaluated can be accommodated
                                         on environmentally suited land.

                                      F. TECHNICAL REPORT #6. SEPTIC TANK PROBLEMS

                                Technical Report #6 is a "special" study undertaken as a result of the

                          Coastal Resource s Commission's expanded concern for the water quality problems

                          caused by conventional septic tanks.

                                                            f &

                              The report outlines the dimensions of the Planning Area's existing

                         septic tank problems -- at least 19 subdivisions are presently experiencing

                         chronic septic tank problems. It also identifies the amount of land remaining

                         which is suited for septic tanks -- 17 square miles. it is estimated that

                         this land could support a maximum of 34,000 additional people.

                           of urban, rural community, and rural land needs. The second level provides

                           detailed.estimates of residential, commercial, and industrial land needs.

                                The two land needs estimates for the 1975-2000 planning period are

                           summarized as follows:

                                   Gross Land Needs                           Detailed Land Needs

                               Category             Need                 Category           Need

                           Urban              22 square  miles          Industrial      7 square miles
                           Rural-Community    14 square miles           Commercial      4 square miles
                           Disperse Rural     19 square miles           Residential    21 square miles

                                E. TECHNICAL REPORT #5. AN ANALYSIS OF GROWTH ALTERNATIVES

                                This report compares and evaluates the'costs and benefits of six growth

                           alternatives to the Planning Area's residents. The growth alternatives were

                           defined in terms of two variables: projected total population (low, moderate,

                           and high) and the spatial distribution of the development generated by this

                           growth (compact and dispersed).

                                Three major conclusions have been drawn from this study:

                                      1.  Growth has positive impacts on the local economy
                                          incomes and retail sales increase with growth.

                                      2.  The per capita costs of public services remain
                                          relatively constant as population increases, but
                                          the per capita costs of providing services to a
                                          dispersed development pattern are much higher
                                          than for a compact development pattern.

                                      3.  With proper public investment in sewerage facilities,
                                          all three growth levels evaluated can be accommodated
                                          on environmentally suited land.

                                       F. TECHNICAL REPORT #6. SEPTIC TANK PROBLEMS

                                Technical Report #6 is a "special" study undertaken as a result of     the

                           Coastal Resources Commission's expanded concern for the water quality problems

                           caused by conventional septic tanks.

                                      III. SUMMARY OF EXISTING PLANS AND POLICIES

                             The Coastal Resources Commission's planning guidelines require that
                        local land use plans contain a listing and summary of.existing plans and
                        policies having significant implications for future land uses. In accordance

                        with this requirement, the following.table contains a list of relevant plans,

                        studies, and ordinances which have be-en prepared or enacted in the Wilmington-

                        New Hanover Planning Area. From this list, the Wilmington Area Thoroughfare

                        Plan, the Greater Wilmington 201 Facilities Plan, the Lower Cape Fear Regional

                        Water Supply Plan, and the Wilmington Housing Assistance Plan have been

                        summarized.

                        A. Wilmington Area Transportation Study, prepared by Wilbur Smith and
                            Associates for the N.C. State Highway Commission in cooperation with
                            the City of Wilmington, New Hanover County, and the U.S. Department
                            of Transportation Federal Highway Administration.

                             Wilmington and New Hanover County comprise the most urbanized area in

                        southeastern North Carolina. The State POrt, located at Wilmington, is one

                        of two major seaports serving North Carolina.   The growth in population,,

                        trade and industry has resulted in an increasing demand for more and better

                        transportation facilities.

                             In January 1972, "The Wilmington Area Transportation Study" was accepted
                        by the City of Wilmington as a measure of existing and projected transportation

                        needs. (The  Thoroughfare Plan was last revised by the City of Wilmington in

                        May 1973). The Thoroughfare Plan as it shall hereafter be called is intended

                        to serve as a plan for a street and highway system which is adequate to accom-

                        modate the transpor.tation demands for the design year 1995.

                            The study area encompasses the Wilmington urbanized area which is approxi-

                        mately 114 square miles in area. Communities in New Hanover County excluded

                        from the study were Carolina Beach, Kure Beach, Wrightsville Beach, and Castle

                        Hayne.

                                       LIST OF RELEVANT PLANS, STUDIES, AND ORDINANCES

                                    PLANS AND ORDINANCES                        DATE OF ADOPTION AND/OR REVISION

                   NEW HANOVER COUNTY

                     1.   Zoning Ordinance                                     October 1969
                     2.   Subdivision Regulations                              February 1969
                     3.   Building Code                                        March 1965, update May 1968
                     4.   Septic Tank Regulations                              February 1975
                     5.   Soil.Erosion and Sedimentation Control Ordinance     July 1974
                     6.   Dune Protection Ordinance                            December 1972
                     7.   Land Development Plan                                April 1969
                     8.   Preliminary Report on Wind Tide Flooding             December 1969

                   WILMINGTON

                     1 .  Zoning Ordinance                                     Readopt June 1972, update Aug. 19
                     2.   Historic District Zone                               June 1972
                     3.   Subdivision Regulations                              May 1974
                     4.   Building Code                                        'Adopted December 1941,.readopted
                     5.   Land Use Plan                                         May 105'
                     6.   Wilmington Area Thoroughfare Plan
                     7.   Community Facilities Study                           1966
                                                                               May 1973
                                                                               December 1971
                   JOINT  PROGRAMS

                          Parks and Recreation Master Plan                     March 1976

                   REGIONAL PROGRAMS

                     1.   201 Facilities Plan (Draft)                          November 1975
                     2. Lower Cape Fear Regional Water Supply System           December 1975

                               The current roadway in th  e study area consists of 140 miles,'the
                         Recommended Thoroughfare.Plan consists of 204.8 miles of roadway. As
                         shown in Table 1, freeways and major thoroughfares comprise a majority       of

                         the recommended roadway network mileage for the year 19,95.

                                                            Table I

                                                    Total Network Mileage
                                             1995 Recommended Thoroughfare Plan

                                                                                    Percent
                                    Components              Total Miles            of Total

                                 Freeways                        34.6                  16.7
                                 Major Arterial                 132.6                  64.7
                                 Minor Arterial                  37.6                  18.4

                                    Total                       204.8                 100.0

                         Large portions of new mileage will be required to meet the 1995 traffic

                         demands in the Wilmington area.

                              The following new facilities are included in the Thoroughfare Plan:

                         1.  Circumferential Freeway System, beginning at U.S. Route 17 in Brunswick
                             County and extending northerly around the study area and intersecting
                             with Shipyard Boulevard south of the City, is the major network addition.
                             Future volumes assigned to this facility range from approximately 7,000
                             vehicles per day on the portion west of the Cape Fear River to approxi-
                             mately 25,000 vehicles per day on segments south of Shipyard Boulevard.

                         2.  The Smith Creek Drive Arterial is proposed as a four-lane, divided roadway
                             extending from U.S. Route 74 east of the City to U.S. Route 117.near the
                             Northeast Cape Fear River. An extension of this facility will run south-
                             wardly to the Cape Fear River along Water Street. Projected 1995 traffic
                             on segments of this facility will reach approximately 12,000 vehicles per
                             day.

                         3.  The University Drive facility should be constructed as a four lane major
                             arterial north of and running generally parallel to Wrightsville Avenue.
                             This will provide for an additional travel route in the Oleander-Wrightsville
                             Avenue Corridor. Anticipated traffic volumes on this facility will range
                             between 15,000 and 20,000 vehicles per day in 1995.

                         4.  McRae Avenue to begin at Castle Hayne Road (U.S. 117) near Smith Creek
                             and extend to Grace Street to serve north-south traffic in and out of
                             downtown area with estimated 1995 traffic volumes on this two lane facility
                             range to 7,500 vehicles per day.

                       5.   Independence Boulevard will form the principal north-south travel
                            route in the City. A new facility connecting 23rd Street and
                            Independence Boulevard will extend from Montgomery Avenue at Princess
                            Place Drive to 23rd Street near U.S. Route 117. Other elements of
                            the Independence Boulevard include a new facility south of the present
                            Independence Boulevard extending across Shipyard Boulevard to the
                            proposed southeast freeway segment. Major improvements are also
                            recommended for intersections along existing Independence Boulevard.
                            The 1995 traffic volumes along this route will be about 13,000 vehicles
                            per day.

                            In addition to the construction of new roadways, an extensive widening

                       program is included in the plan. Major widening projects are recommended

                       for such facilities as Castle Hayne Road, Shipyard Boulevard, Princess Place

                       Drive, Wrightsville Avenue, Oleander Drive and N.C. Route 132.

                       B. The Greater Wilmington Area 201 Facilities Plan Part II (Henry Von Oesen
                            and Associates, Inc. Consulting Engineers and Planners, Wilmington.
                            November 1975.

                            In an effort to improve and expand public utility services to meet the
                       growth and public@health demands of the area, New Hanover County, Wilmington,

                       and Wrightsville Beach have begun preparation of a 201 Facilities Plan. As

                       a result of the increase in population and extensive development in the Wilmington

                       area, there has been an increasing demand for water and sewer services necessary

                       to maintain the quality of life and protect valuable natural resources.

                            The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency publication, Guid ance for PrepariR&

                       A Facilities Plan, requires that any construction of-waste water treatment

                       and disposal facilities, for which federal financial assistance is sought,

                       must be preceeded by a 201 Facilities Plan, which demonstrates the need for

                       the proposed facilities and establishes that the-proposed measures represent

                       the most economical (cost-effective) means of meeting established teffluent

                       and water quality goals)compatible with local environmental and social factors.

                       The 201 Facilities Plan for the Greater Wilmington Area is being prepared to

                       comply with the "E..P.A. Guidelines for a Facilities Plan" and the "Federal

                       Water Pollution Control Act Amendements of 1972". The Greater Wilmington

                                                         161

                       Planning Area encompasses the, City of Wilmington, Town of Wrightsville

                       Beach and a large portion of the unincorporated areas of New Hanover County.

                            The following considerations and work tasks of the 201 Facilities Plan

                       are summarized as follows:*

                                 a.  A discussion of water quality objectives and other
                                     management goals.

                                 b.  An environmental inventory to identify natural,
                                     ecological and cultural values that will influence
                                     the conclusions and recommendations ultimately
                                     reaches in the study.

                                 c.  A summary of pollution sources, waste loads and
                                     water quality.

                                 d.  An inventory of existing wastewater treatment and
                                     collection systems.

                                 e.  An evaluation of the condition and performance of
                                     existing wastewater collection and treatment facilities.

                                 f.  A study to determine the existence or non-existence
                                     of excessive infiltration of inflow into existing
                                     wastewater collection systems and a determination
                                     of the requirements for further study of the removal
                                     of excessive infiltration/inflow.

                                 g.  An identification of potential sewerage service areas.

                                 h.  A development of alternative schemes for wastewater
                                     treatment and disposal and sludge handling and disposal.

                                 i., A cost effective analysis of alternatives.

                                 j.  An environmental evaluation of alternatives.

                                 k.  Final selection of the recommended facility plan and
                                     development of a plan and schedule for implementation.

                                 1.  Public meetings to present the report and its conclusions
                                     to the public and to receive input from interested
                                     local citizens.

                                 M. Publication of the final 201 Facilities Plan (incorp-
                                     orating results of public input).

                           The period covered by the "201 Plan" is 20 years beginning with the

                       initial operation of the treatment works. The 20 year period is generally

                      set for 1975 to 1995. Existing facilities now in operation will be used

                        Henry'Von Oesen and Associates, "Greater Wilmington Area 201 Facilities Plan,"
                        November 1975, (Draft).

                        and expanded to meet future needs and fundings as a result of recommendations

                        in this plan, e.g. an infiltration/inflow evaluation program and sewer

                        system rehabilitation project in the City of Wilmington,  are to begin

                        during 1975. Certain phases of the 20 year planning period goes beyond

                        the year 1995 to year 2000. This is necessary to plan for new intercept

                        or sewers in New Hanover County which will not begin operations until about

                        198Q. Therefore, the planning period for new interceptors in this plan is

                        set for 20 years (1980 to 2000) and 20 years for treatment works (1975 to

                        1995). The first ten years of the planning period (1975*to 1985) are the

                        most critical for it is during this period that longstanding serious water

                        quality problems will be corrected. The New Hanover County Commissioners

                        and the Wilmington City Council believe that the 201 Facilities Plan will

                        improve environmental conditions in New Hanover County and provide the county

                        with cleaner wa ter and an adequate wastewater collection and treatment system.

                        C. Regional Water Supply System, Lower Cape Fear Water and Sewer Authority
                            by O'Brien and Gere Engineers. December 1975.

                             The-Lower Cape Fear Water and Sewer Authority was formed to implement

                        water supply projects to meet the needs of the Authority area. Member counties
                        of the Lower Cape Fear Water and Sewer Authority include Bladen, Brunswick,

                        -Columbus, New Hanover, and Pender Counties. The proposed Authority project

                        will extend regional raw water service to rural areas via the pipeline route

                        and rural residential service will be expanded. Water for industrial use

                        will be made available to rural areas in New Hanover and Brunswick Counties.

                        A rural residential water supply is planned for New Hanover County through

                        extensions from the City of Wilmington's system.

                             Engineering studies have identified the need for additional surface water

                        supplies of 13.0 MGD by 1978, increasing to 33.0 MGD by 1985 and 48.0 MGD by

                        1990. All but a very small percentage of these additional needs will be for

                         rural areas. The following facilities are required to implement the water
                         supply projects to meet the needs of the Authority area.
                                    (a) A 45 MGD delivery system with either 48-inch
                                       or 54-inch pipelines.
                                    (b) Intake and Pumping station at Kings Blu'ff.
                                  *(c) A 48-inch diamenter transmission main.
                                  *(d) A 3.0 MG control reservoir.
                                  *(e) A 24-inch and 12-inch line along U.S. 421,
                                        including a booster Pumping station.
                             Sources funding the project:

                                  (a) EDA     $3,500,000

                                  (b) Coastal Plains Regional Commission     $1,000,000

                                  (c) N.C. Clean Water Bond Act     $2,782,450

                                  (d) Revenue Bonds purchased by the Farmers Home
                                       Administration -- $9,234,550

                             Annual operating costs have been prepared and used to establish necessary

                        water use charges. An allocation charge of $30,000 per MGD and a user charge

                        of $0.09 per 1,000 gallons will produce annual revenues which exceed costs.

                             A schedule for design and construction of the project has been prepared.

                        A total elapsed time of 39 months will be required to complete the project,

                        from initiation of design activities to completion of construction.

                             The following recommendations were made to the Authority:

                                  1.  Approve this Engineering Report, including the
                                      recommended facilities for the 45 MGD supply system.

                                  2.  Submit this report, along with the necessary grant
                                      and loan applications and supporting data to the
                                      appropriate funding agencies.

                                  3.  Authorize design of the recommended facilities upon
                                      receipt of a CPRC Grant and other funds.

                        *These recommended facilities are based on the availability of funds. The
                         estimated project cost of the recommended facilities is $16,517,000 based
                         on 1976 indices.

                         D. Wilmington Housing Assistance Plan. prepared by the Wilmington-New
                             Hanover Planning Department@ Community Development Division.

                              Wilmington has the potential of offering a variety of types of liveable

                         housing environments. However, it faces severe problems which currently

                         threaten to outweigh its resources. The positive features include both

                         older, historically significant houses as well as r  ecent construction,

                         especially of multi-family luxury apartments. The problems include high

                         incidence of substandard houses, lack of financial resources for rehabilitation,

                         and scarcity of homes for low-income persons. As will be seen, efforts are

                         being made to alleviate these unsatisfactory conditions.

                              Of the 19,289 housing units in the city, 3,227 (or 17%) have been found

                         to be substandard. It is es.timated that only 577 of the substandard units

                         are suitable for rehabilitation. This problem affects both owner-occupied

                         and rental properties in equal percentages, but the burden is borne   particularly

                         by home-owners, as there is only a 1% vacancy rate in owner-occupied structures,

                         whereas rental properties have a 107. vacancy rate. The low vacancy rate indi-

                         cates that persons wishing to purchase safe, decent housing may not be able to

                         find such, even if they have financial resources to do so. It does not appear

                         that immediate solutions will be found if the present slump in construction of

                         new housing continues. Permits issued in 1975 indicate that there we   re 60

                         permits issued for new construction and 105 permits for demolitions, for a

                         net loss of 45 housing units during one year. Some relief can be expected

                         as economic conditions improve.

                              The housing needs of low-income persons  art particularly acute. It is

                         estimated that low-income households needing  housing assistance total 3,403

                         families, including 1,157 elderly households. Information available from 'the

                         Wilmington Housing Authority shows that they have 1,866 rental units, which

                         at the present time are at 100% occupancy. There are also other types of

                                                           @z 0

                         publicly subsidized housing., However, current waiting lists for public

                         housing and other estimates show that there are still unmet needs for housing

                         for low-income families.

                              Several programs are being planned to combat Wilmington's housing problems.

                         First, $600,000 of the City  s Community Development Block Grant from HUD has

                         been-set aside for a housing rehabilitation program. Under the auspices Of

                         the.Urban Reinvestment Task Force, a Neighborhood Housing Service will be

                         established, providing assistance to homeowners desiring to bring their homes

                         up to standard. Financial assistance in the form of loans will be available

                         both from private lending institutions and from a "high-risk" revolving loan

                         fund. A rehabilitation self-help program is being planned to provide training

                         in construction skills for residents of the rehabilitation areas.

                              Second, the City has decided to use $277,496 from its "S'e@tion 8" alloca-

                         tion from HUD to build the first of two 150-unit highrise facilities for housing

                         the elderly. It is anticipated that a health and recreational facility will

                         also be included in the complex. The City is also investigating other uses

                         of Section 8 monies, such as providing rental assistance for existing or

                         rehabilitated housing.

                              In addition, the City's Minimum Housing Code has been thoroughly revised,

                        *with a new emphasis on remedial rather than punitive administration. A Housing

                         Services Counselor now works with persons whose homes have been found to be

                         substandard, providing assistance in securing a contractor or seeking financial

                         resources for repairs.

                              It is hoped that these and other efforts will enable the City to overcome

                         some of its housing problems.

                        WILMINGTON-EY PANOVER PLANNI[b DEPARITE9

                        COMPREHENSIVE

                        PLANNHE PROGRAM

                                                 PUBLIC PARTICIPATIll
                                                       PROGIN

                                                      MAY 1976

                                                   1. INTRODUCTION

                             The Coastal Area Management Act of 1974, which was passed by the North

                        Carolina General Assembly, requires that each of the state's coastal counties

                        develop a land use plan which "achieves responsible and needed growth within

                        the capacity of the land and adjacent waters to sustain it". The Act also

                        stat-es "that the Land Use Plan of each county should reflect the desires,

                        needs@ and best interests of citizens residing within the county".

                             In its "Guidelines for Local Planning", the CoastalResources Commission

                        has stated that, in the process of formulating future land use policies, "it

                        is important to employ effective methods to secure the view of a wide cross-

                        section of citizens representing not only each different geographic area of the

                        county, but those who can ably represent the varying economic-, 8ocial, 'ethnic,

                        and cultural interests as well". Further, in implementing this policy, the

                        Commission requires that the final land use policies adopted by local officials

                        contain a statement outlining the methods used to secure public participation

                        and an assessment of the degree to which these methods have been successful.

                             In accordance with this requirement, the purpose of this report is to

                        outline the organization of the Wilmington-New Hanover Public Participation

                        Program, to describe the activities which have been undertaken as a part of

                        this program; and to assess the overall effectiveness of the program in

                        achieving participation.

                                 II. FOCUS AND ORGANIZATION OF PARTICIPATION PROGRAM

                             The Coastal Resources Commission's publication, "Guidelines for Public

                        Participation", provides an excellent concept of public participation in

                        the planning process. The guidelines suggest that public participation

                        includes two separate but related activities -- public information and public

                        invo.lvement. Public information programs insure that citizens understand the

                        county's problems and the procedures involved in the planning process. Public

                        involvement programs give citizens the opportunity to participate, with

                        elected officials and the professional planning staff, in the formulation

                        of land use policies.

                             As stated in the Commission's guidelines, in order to achieve effective

                        and informed public participation, it is necessary to give equdl emphasis to

                        both steps on a continuing basis, for it accomplishes little to inform the

                        citizen without encouraging him to participate in the planning process, and

                        even less to get him involved if he is not informed.

                             The Public Participation Program which has been undertaken for the

                        Wilmington-New Hanover Planning Area has given proper emphasis to both informa-

                        tion and involvement.

                                            A. CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT PROCESS

                             The fundamental goal of the Wilmington-New Hanover Public Participation

                        Program is to obtain the effective involvement of citizens from all parts

                        of the Planning Area and from all socio-economic groups in the formulation

                        of public policies for the growth and development of the Planning Area. The

                        programs which have been designed to achieve this goal are an outgrowth of

                        the evaluation of several alternatives, ranging from neighborhood or community

                        meetings to public hearings and questionnaires, and they are judged by the

                        planning staff to represent t .he best features of available techniques

                        consistent with the very severe time constraints of the coastal management

                        program. Eighteen months is a short time to build an effective participa-

                        tion program.

                            The basic concept of citizen involvement in the Planning Area is simple

                        the organization of a number of citizen groups throughout the area to discuss

                        problems and identify priority concerns, to formulate future development

                        goals-based on these concerns 3and eventually to evaluate the effectiveness

                        of development plans designed to achieve these goals. The objective of this

                        approach is to recreate the "town meeting" atmosphere so that each resident

                        has the opportunity to become intimately involved with elected officials and

                        their staff in the planning process -- an opportunity not always available

                        with more traditional techniques such as questionnaires or public hearings.

                            Implementation of the Citizen Involvement Process has required five

                        major steps:

                               1.  Subdivision of the County into ten Planning Districts
                                   to provide a basis for obtaining the desired geographic
                                   perspect.ive on Planning Area problems and goals;

                               2.  Selection of Coordinators in each Planning District to
                                   provide citizen leadersip for the citizen involvement
                                   process;

                               3.  Formation of Planning District Task Forces, or citizen
                                   organizations, to identify problems and to set goals;

                               4.  Execution of Task Force activities; and

                               5.  Synthesis of problems and goals at Planning Area level
                                   through the joint efforts of the Planning Staff and
                                   elected officials.

                        1. Delineation of Planning Districts

                            Experience seems to indicate that the most successful citizen participation

                        programs are those based on small geographic areas where participants have a

                        sense of "neighborliness" or commonality and are able to express ideas more

                                                                                                                Jot

                                                                             c                  NE
                                                                             L     N                  T-

                                                   FL     INGTO
                                                 PL          G                                                            Al
                                                                              s     RO I
                                                                          L -A N                 DON ROA             M
                                                                                                                                      @ND

                                                                                                                           'A
                                                                                                       NG
                                                                                                      ic                Dis      T

                                                                                     IS        cw
                                                               Z           Dis      M

                                                                              C. H, p".1

                                                                                                     G
                                                                         ROA

                                                                                                 CT
                                                                       P      N   G

                                                                         DI  TRIC

                                                                          lip)

                                                                                                                                  MAP I
                                                                                                                      NEW FMOVER C"TY
                                                                                                                           WILUNGTON-NEWHANOvER
                                                                                                                            PLANNING CommissioN

                        topics were discussed, including the requirements of the Coastal Area

                        Management Act, citizen perceptions of existing community problems, and

                        the findings of various technical planning studies prepared by the planning

                        staff. To facilitate the actual identification of community problems and

                        to determine which of these problems were of priority concern., a group

                        process known as Nominal Group Technique was utilized.   Nominal Group Technique

                        is a.problem identification and problem solving process which encourages each

                        individual to generate his own list of ideas or problems; it allows each of

                        these problems to be discussed equally and in detail by the group; and finally

                        it allows the group to determine which of these problems should receive priority

                        attention. This technique is considered to be particularly well-suited for the

                        participation program which has been conducted in the Wilmington-New Hanover

                        Planning Area. By forcing groups to focus on the task of identifying develop-

                        mental problems, the technique is efficient, and efficiency is an important

                        factor considering the time constraints of the Coastal Area Management

                        Act. In addition the technique encourages the full participation of each

                        member of the Planning District groups. Nominal Group Technique permits each

                        person to put his ideas before the group, and it allows each of these ideas

                        to receive equal attention in the process of setting priorities.

                             A list of the seven most important problems, or concerns, which were

                        identified in each of the ten Planning Districts is presented in Table 1.

                        These priority concerns are the basis for the policy objectives which have

                        been identified for the Wilmington-New Hanover Planning Area. After the

                        meetings using the Nominal Group Technique were completed, the priority concerns

                        from throughout the Planning Area were utilized to develop a tentative set of

                        objectives for future development. These tentative objectives were then dis-

                        cussed with the citizen groups and the Wilmington-New Hanover Planning Commission.

                        The comments and criticisms identified in these reviews were incorporated

                                     Table 1. PRIORITY CITIZEN PLANNING CONCERNS

                        A.  Middle Sound

                            1.  Runoff from septic tanks into creeks and marshes causing pollution.
                            2.  a. Poor land drainage.
                                b. Lack of enforcement of zoning laws.
                            3.  Poor soil causes septic tank problems.
                            4.  Lack of safe and adequate water supply in area.
                            5.  Erosion due to runoffs, tides and boats.
                            6.  a. Overcrowding (too many people).
                                b. Development of unsuitable land because of cost factors.
                            7.  Proper control of commercial development.

                        B.  Masonboro-Myrtle Grove

                            1.  Quantitatively and specifically identify causes of coastal water
                                pollution, i.e. red flagging.
                            2.  Overdevelopment of subdivisions.
                            3.  Inform the steering committee of any changes on zoning, road
                                construction, etc.
                            4.  Drainage.
                            5.  Masonboro Island.
                            6.  a. Outer Loop.
                                b. Recreation.
                            7.  Encroachment of commercial uses into residential area.

                        C.  Flemington

                            1.  Landfill in residential area.
                            2.  Too much industry in district.
                            3.  Air pollution from local industry.
                            4.  a.  Roads in Planning District are not maintained.
                                b.  Too much noise and traffic.
                                c.  No buffer zone between residential area and industrial area.
                            5.  No mosquito control in the area.
                            6.  No traffic enforcement.
                            7.  No traffic control light.

                        D.  River Road

                            1.  County-wide sewage system.
                            2.  Recreation area similar to Empie Park at Monkey Junction.
                            3.  Establish marshes, rivers, and Masonboro Island as area of
                                environmental concern.
                            4.  Ditches maintained in developments. County officials irresponsible
                                in cases of subdivision problems.
                            5.  County needs to implement thoroughfare plan.
                            6.  No mixture of residential densities. Too much spot zoning for
                                mobile homes and small businesses.
                            7.  Improve and fill unauthorized dumps. County maintain drainage ditches.

                                                          6

                         K.    M-'.1411'ey crenk

                               I Improper drainnge in developments.
                               2. County-wide sewage system.
                               3. Protected transportation arteries to Wrightsville Beach.
                               4. Establish areas of environmental concern, establish marshlands,
                                 rivers and Masonboro Island.
                               5. a. County officials irresponsbile in cases of subdivision and
                                     development problems.
                                 b.  Central water system..
                               6. a. Lack of proper facilities for trash disposal.
                                 b.  Too much spot zoning for mobile homes and small businesses.
                               .7. Improve and fill unauthorized dump.

                         F.    Pleasure Island

                               1. a. Unsuitable land for septic tanks is being approved for development.
                                 b.  Beach erosion.
                               2. a. Improvement of drainage in development.
                                 b.  Pollution of waterways in Pleasure Island and Wrightsville Beach.
                                 C.  Excessive tise of septic tanks.
                               3. a. County-wide sewage system.
                                 b.  Improper fill and unauthorized dumps.
                               4. Lack of proper facilities for trash disposal.
                               5. a. County is not maintaining drainage ditches.
                                 b. Desecration of woodlands in buffer zone along river at Carolina Beach.

                         G.    Murraysville-Gordon Road

                               1. County-wide sewage system.
                               2. Erosion of soil.
                               3. Central water system.
                               4. a. Improve drainage in developments.
                                 b. County is not maintaining drainage ditches.
                               5. Recreation facilities.
                               6. Owners will not keep ditches clear in developments.
                               7. a. Lackof proper facilities for trash disposal.
                                 b. Excessive use of septic tanks.

                         H.- Castle Hayne

                               1. Tax incentives for farmers.
                               2. Drainage -- lack of stringent ordinances regulating land development;
                                 lack of enforcement of existing regulations.
                               3. Air pollution from industries..
                               4. Planned county-wide sewer system not wa*nted.
                               5. Proliferation of industries in unsuitable locations.
                               6. Absence of citizen particpation in important public decisions.
                               7. Current property taxes unfair to farmer.

                        1. Wrightsboro

                            1.  Lack of stringent ordinances regulating land development; existing
                                ordinances poorly enforced.
                            2.  Beltline or Outer Loop Highway needed but should not be routed
                                through existing residential areas or prime agricultural areas.
                            3.  Airport noise.
                            4.  No county-wide parks.
                            5.  Improper county equipment to maintain drainage ditches.
                            6.  Proliferation of industries in unsuitable locations.
                            7.  Excessive traffic on Highway 117.

                         I.-nto the tentative policy objectives, and a final set of recommendations

                         were prepared for consideration by the Planning Area's elected officials

                         the Wilmington City Council and the New Hanover County Board of Commissioners.

                                           III. PUBLIC INFORMATION PROGRAM

                            Public information has been the second major aspect of the Public

                       Participation Program in the Wilmington-New Hanover Planning Area. As

                       stated in the Coastal Resources Commission's "Guidelines for Local Planning

                       citizens cannot be expected to participate effectively in the process of

                       planning for the future if they are not aware of existing and potential local

                       problems and are not familiar with the public planning process. Therefore,

                       information has been a major concern throughout the Public Participation Program.

                            Since the Public Participation Program was initiated a number of public

                       information meetings have been conducted in each of the Planning Districts.

                       Where possible an attempt has been made to obtain expert speakers to address

                       the priority problems in each Planning District. For example', br. Joe Phillips,

                       an Agronomist from North Carolina State University, spoke to one group on the

                       relationship between soils and septic tanks. Table 2 contains a list of

                       the topics covered at the public information meetings.

                            In addition to the public information meetings, the planning staff has

                       attempted to use the media as widely as possible to insure that the residents

                       of the Planning Area are well-informed on the requirements of the Coastal

                       'Management Program and on the planning program which has been undertaken to

                       meet these requirements. There have been a total of ten television interviews.

                       Two of these public service television programs lasted one full hour.

                            There have also been a total of fifty-four short public service announce-

                       ments on both radio and television, and the planning program has been reported

                       in the local newspaper sixteen times.

                                                         3_3

                                       Table 2. Public Information Meeting Topics

                         1.  The Coastal Area Management Act and the New Hanover County Citizen
                             Participation Program    Bill Farris, Wilmington-New Hanover Planning
                             Department.

                         2.  Land Drainage Systems    George Taylor, USDA Agriculture Conservation
                             Service.

                         3.  Pollution of Shellfish Areas -- Bob Benton, N.C. DNER Shellfish Sanitation.

                         4.  Soils and Septic Tanks -- Dr. Joe Phillips, Agronomist
                             North Carolina State University.

                         5.  Countywide 201 Facilities Plan -- Col. Paul Dineson, Henry Von Oesen and
                             Associates.

                         6.  Widening of Carolina Beach Inlet -- David Patchell, U.S. Corps of Engineers.

                         7.  Airport Zoning -- Harry Oakes, Wilmington-New Hanover Planning Department.

                         8.  Countywide Recreation Plan -- Gardner Gidley, Gardner Gidley Associates
                             Recreation Planners.

                         9.  Southeastern Segment of the Wilmington Outer Loop -- William Pollard and
                             Roy Freeman, Jr. of William S. Pollard Consultants, Inc. (retained by NCDOT).

                        10.  Community Water and Sewer Systems -- Bob Williams, New Hanover County Engineer.

                        11.  Pollution of Howe Creek and the Sound -- Tyndell Lewis, N.C. Department
                             of Natural and Economic Resources.

                        12.  Spot Zoning and Development -- Bill Farris, Wilmington-New Hanover Planning
                             Department.

                        13.  Population and Economic Study of New Hanover County -- Ron Brown and
                             Bill Farris, Wilmington-New Hanover Planning Department.

                        14.  Pros and Cons of a Sanitary Land Fill    Rick Shiver, N.C. Department
                             of Natural and Economic Resources.

                                                    IV. S UMMARY

                           Since the initiation of the Wilmington-New Hanover Public Participation

                      Program in the late spring of 1975, over sixty meetings have been held to

                      discuss community problems and the plans which have been designed to solve

                      these problems. At these meetings almost 1900 area residents have become

                      involved in the coastal planning process. The Planning Department currently

                      maintains a mailing list of 1900 residents, and regularly sends each of these

                      residents a newsletter which summarizes planning progress, and which informs

                      them of evolving problems such as rezoning requests.

                           Numbers of meetings and numbers of people attending meetings are not

                      a good measure of the effectiveness of a Public Participation Program. The

                      measure of effectiveness actually lies in the successful impl'ementation of

                      the plans which evolve from the process and ultimately the effectiveness of

                      those plans in achieving the goals toward which they are directed. However,

                      it is the opinion of the planning staff that the Public Participation Program

                      which has been undertaken in the Wilmington-New Hanover Planning Area has

                      been effective. A substantial number of area residents are familiar with the

                      major problems which will confront this community over the next twenty-five

                      years and they are also familiar with the plans which have been developed to

                      deal with those problems. In addition the planning staff has gained an inval-

                      uable understanding of the values, the aspirations, and the major concerns of

                      its clients -- the residents of the Wilmington-New Hanover Planning Area. All

                      of these are essential ingredients in an effective planning program.

                                                       3J_

               WILMINGTON-NEW HANOVER

               COMPREHENSIVE
               PLANNING PROGRAM

                                    RECOMMENDED POLICIES FOR
                                     GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT

                                            DRAFT

                                         APRIL 291 1976

                                                          AMENDMENTS

                               The following is a description of the Planning Commission's recommended
                          changes resulting from review and dis.cussion of the recommended policies:

                               Section II, A. (3) (c) - Pg. 9:    Change "shall" to "should."

                               Section II, A. (3) (f) - Pg. 10: Change "shall" to "should."

                               Section 11, B. (1) (a) - Pg. 11:    Insert "seafood" at end of sentence.

                               Section II, B. (1) (c) - Pg. 13:    Insert "appropriate site improvements
                                    are made or" between "as" and "centralized." Also, revise last
                                    sentence to read "Where septic tanks are permissible, no part of
                                    the system shall be any closer than 100 feet to estuarine waters
                                    and drainageways which discharge to estuarine waters."

                               Section II, B. (2) (a) - Pg.   14: Strike "...the county's poor soils"
                                    and insert "those soils   of the county which are unsuitable for
                                    waste disposal."

                               Same Section, last paragraph: Change "impacted" to "affected."
                               Section II, B. (2) (c)     Pg. 15: First policy statem;nt      change
                                    "prohibited" to "restricted."

                               Section II, B. (3) (c) - Pg. 16: Add at end of second policy statement
                                    "or other uses which would not have the effect of damaging or
                                    altering the natural function of the marsh."

                               Section II., B. (4) (c) - Pg. 17: Strike out all of policy recommendation
                                    No. 2 and replace with "Based on an analysis of the Planning Area's
                                    future local and export mineral resource needs, prime resource
                                    sites should be identified and protected from incompatible
                                    development."

                               Same Section, last policy recommendation: Replace "impacts" with
                                    1'effects on surrounding areas."

                               Section II, B. (5) (a) - Pg. 17: In finding No. 2 change "an extreme"
                                    to "a significant."

                               Same Section, Finding No. 2 - Pg. 18:    Change "can" to "may" and strike
                                    Ifeasily."

                               Same Section, last paragraph - Pg. 18:    Change "threat" to "danger."
                                    Also, after "The New Hanover County Airport" add "and its approach
                                    patterns over populated areas."

                               Section II, B. (5) (c) - Pg. 19: In first policy recommendation strike
                                    "no" and change "permitted" to "discouraged."

                               Section II, C. (2)    Pg. 21: Change "insure" to "encourage."

                               Section II, C. (3) - Pg. 21: In second policy recommendation put a
                                    period (.) after "avoided.". Also, strike "and" and begin new
                                    sentence with "The development of          Also, put comma
                                    after "parks."

                               Same Section - Pg. 22: Change policy recommendation No. 10 to read
                                    "Housing market information will be provided to the real estate
                                    industry to assist in meeting consumers' housing needs, both
                                    numbers and types."

                               Section II, D. (3) - Pg. 23: In policy recommendation No. 3 strike
                                    "Outer Loop"; add "or route" between "highway" and "shall"; and
                                    change "minimal negative impact" to "least adverse effect." In
                                    policy recommendation No. 5 put "In the future design of
                                    thoroughfares," at the beginning.

                               Section II, E. (1) - Pg. 24: In finding No. 5 strike the quotation
                                    marks; Strike "There is no" at beginning and begin new sentence
                                    with "Public"; and, add "is inadequate" to the end.

                               Section II,.F. (3) - Pg. 26: In third policy recommendation change
                                    "fiscal techniques" to "tax benefits.!'

                                                    I. INTRODUCTION

                                                     A. BACKGROUND

                             The past decade has brought tremendous change to the citizens of
                        Wilmington and the surrounding areas of New Hanover County. Expanded

                        economic development has produced more industries, more shopping facilities

                        and more jobs. It has also attracted large number of new families and has

                        stemmed the flow of young people out of the county in search of jobs.

                             Equally important has been the-change in the area's landscape. New

                        factories, new shopping centers, new apartment complexes, and new residen-

                        tial subdivisions have gone hand-in-hand with the area's growth. Much of

                        this new development.has taken place in formerly rural areas where the

                        public was not prepared to service it, creating a demand for the investment

                        of tax dollars for new services, such as water and sewer facilities, and

                        for the expansion of existing services, such as police and fire protection.

                        In addition,factories, stores, and residences have been built in areas

                        where the land is not really suited for intensive development.

                             This decade of change has brought with it concerns on the  part of many

                        residents. These concerns are for threats to the quiet, rural    life-style

                        enjoyed by many residents; for environmental degradation resulting from unsound

                        development practices; and perhaps most concretely, for rising tax bills which

                        can be attributed, at least partially, to inefficient urban development.

                             In response to these concerns, the Wilmington-New HanoverPlanning De-

                        partment, a joint agency of city and county governments, began the preparation

                        of a comprehensive plan in 1974. The basic purpose of this planning effort

                        is to develop an effective growth management program which will permit

                        continued expansion of the area's economy while minimizing the taxpayers'

                                                             C7

                       costs for services and preventing further damage to the area's environmental

                       resources.

                            Concurrent with the initiation of this planning program, the North
                       Carolina General Assembly enacted the Coastal Area,Management Act of

                       1974 (CAMA). This legislation requires that local governments develop
                       land use plans in accordance with specifications adopted by the Coastal

                       Resources Commission, the organization having overall responsibility for

                       implementing CAMA. Therefore, the technical studies undertaken and issues

                       addressed in the planning program have been strongly influenced by the

                       Coastal Management legislation.

                           The planning program has been organized to include three phases.

                                   Phase 1. -- Policies for @rban Growth and Development:
                                        Addresses the basic questions of how much growth
                                        is desirable, where growth should occur, and'what
                                        types of growth should be encouraged?
                                   Phase 2. -- Detailed Land Use Recommendations: The
                                        outcome of this phase will be specific recommenda-
                                        tions on the location and proper interrelationships
                                        of major land uses.
                                   Phase 3. -- Land Management Tools: Develops recommenda-
                                        tions concerning the adoption of land management
                                        tools -- amending existing zoning ordinances and
                                        subdivision regulations, as well as new concepts.

                                             B. PHASE 1 RECOMMENDATIONS

                           As stated in a growth policy report by the New Hanover County Environ-

                       mental Impact Committee,

                                   IlThe freedom of an individual to use his land as he wishes
                                    has traditionally been cherished as an implicit value of
                                    American life. However, as land beoomes developed, indi-
                                    vidual freedoms often conflict. Protection of the private
                                    property rights of some often results in the restriction
                                    of the rights of other individuals and of the community
                                    as a whole.

                                    There is a need for balancing private rights, the public
                                    interest and the natural capabilities of the land to set
                                    mutual goals. These goals should protect what we most
                                    value in the environmental, cultural and aesthetic char-
                                    acteristics of the land while meeting the essential needs
                                    of the growing population for housing, transportation,
                                    recreation, industrial facilities and businesses."

                            The pUrpose of this report is to present the Planning Staff's policy

                       recommendations which have grown out of the technical studies and the Public

                       Participation Program which were undertaken in Phase 1 of the planning

                       program. Taken as a body, these recommendations define a need, suggest

                       appropriate objectives for meeting that need, and recommend policies which

                       are means of achieving these objectives.

                           .Seven separate areas of policy have been addressed:

                                   A. Urban Growth
                                   B. Environmental Quality
                                   C.  Land Use
                                   D.  Transportation
                                   E.  Recreation and Open Space
                                   F.  Agriculture and Forestry
                                   G. Historic and Archeological Sites

                       These policies, when adopted by the Wilmington City Council and the New

                       Hanover County Board of Commissioners, will provide a set of"peinciples to

                       guide decision-making at all levels of city and county government, whether

                       these decisions relate to a petition for rezoning, the extension of water

                       and sewer services, the location of a new school or some other question

                       concerning growth and development in the Wilmington-New Hanover Planning Area.

                                            II. POLICY RECOMMENDAT IONS

                                                 A.  Urban Growth

                           The need for a formal policy regarding growth in the Wilmington-New

                      Hanover Planning Area has been supported both by the technical studies

                      undertaken by the planning staff and by the concerns expressed by the

                      area is citizens through the Public Participation Program.

                           The areals recent growth has brought.4 degree of economic prosperity

                      to many residents. At the same time, however, the impact of this growth

                      is a matter of concern to many citizens and public officials. Growth and

                      its attendant problems has had a detrimental 'effect on the area's natural

                      resources; it has created extreme pressure on existing city and county

                      services, as well as escalated demands for new services; and it has produced

                      an unwanted change in the life-style of many residents.

                      1.  Findings

                           The major findings which form the basis for the planning staff's

                      recommended growth policy stem from the results of the staff's technical

                      reports and the Planning Area's Public Participation Program.

                      a. Population Growth

                           Recent growth trends are expected to continue. Increasing from a current

                      level of approximately 94,000, the county's population will range between

                      123,000 and 151,000 by the year 2000. The most current information available

                      indicates that the projected population level of 151,000 is most probable.

                           As in the recent past, it is expected that the bulk of this growth will

                      take place in the suburban and rural parts of the Planning Area where services

                      are poorly developed.

                                                        4

                                                        Zt

                        b. Income

                             As measured by median income, the economic well-being of all Planning

                        Area residents has improved significantly in recent years; however, there

                        remains a gap between the incomes of.local residents and the incomes of

                        other prosperous urban areas of North Carolina.

                             In spite of the Planning Area's,economic gains, there also remains

                        a substantial number of families which are economically disadvantaged.

                        These.poor families are predominantly black, city residents, and a large

                        percentage (45 percent) have female heads.

                             Studies of the local economy have shown that rising incomes are closely

                        paralleled by an increase in the number of people employed in the manufacture

                        of durable goods. Durables employment is generally characterized by higher

                        technical skill requirements, higher productivity, and higher wages.

                             Expansion In the number of jobs requiring high technical skills tends

                        to have a significant positive impact throughout the economy by introducing

                        a degree of upward mobility into the workforce. Semi-skilled workers can

                        move into higher paying skilled jobs, and the unemployed and under-employed

                        can fill the jobs vacated by the semi-skilled. Such a process, however,

                        requires an open job market and innovations in vocational education programs.

                             A study of the area's economy indicates that the five economic sectors

                        with the greatest impact on income at present are:

                                              1)  chemicals
                                              2)  trade
                                              3)  transportation, communication, and utilities
                                              4)  metals
                                              5)  apparel

                        These sectors should receive prime consideration in the Planning Area's

                        economic development program.

                                                          -5
                                                         Z43

                        C. Land Requirements

                             A significant amount of Ian d will be required to meet the needs of the
                        Planning Area's projected growth. It is estimated that, at the highest growth

                        rate, 30 square miles of land will be required for residential, commercial,

                        and industrial uses alone. This estimate is expanded to allow for adequate

                        choice and flexibility in site selection.

                            -However, this land requirement can be accommodated on environmentally

                        suited land. Final estimates indicate that approximately 52 square miles of

                        vacant land are suited for development (With proper improvements). Approxi-

                        mately 58 percent of this reserve would be consumed by the "high" population

                        projection, indicating that, even with a high growth rate, environmentally

                        unsuited lands need not be developed.

                        d. Urban Sprawl

                             Experience in New Hanover County, as well as other areas, indicates that,

                        if left entirely to the direction of the free market, development would occur

                        in a widely scattered, haphazard pattern.

                             Urban sprawl is costly to the taxpayers. An analysis of growth alterna-

                        tives for the Wilmington-New Hanover Planning Area indicates that the costs

                        of providing basic services to a sprawling development pattern may be more

                        than two-times greater than to a compact development pattern.

                             In some cases, sprawling development patterns may render the provision

                        of needed services economically infeasible because overall development densi-

                        ties are too low.

                        e. Sewerage Services

                             Engineering studies indicate that a centralized system for collecting,

                        treating, and disposing of sewage is essential to alleviate existing septic

                        tank pro blems and to prevent sewage problems generated by future development.

                                                        __L_

                              It is estimated that there remains a maximum of 11,000 acres of

                         undeveloped land which is suited for septic tanks within the Planning Area.

                         As a result of the existing proliferation of septic.tanks in unsuited soils,

                         19 residential subdivisions currently experience septic tank problems.

                              Centralized sewerage facilities are   expensive. and normally they cannot

                         be financed without federal and state: assistance. Combined 'Lederal/state

                         aid can be as much as 87.5 percent of eligible sewerage costs, but only if

                         guidelines are met.  The most relevant guidelines from the standpoint of

                         growth policy are the following:

                                    .1)  Projects must be the most cost-effective alternative
                                         for meeting water quality goals;

                                     2)  Projects must be energy-efficient; and,

                                     3)  Projects must be environmentally sound.
                         These guidelines favor a comIpact development pattern, where'pr'actical.

                         f. Loss of Farmland

                              The loss of prime agriculture land to development is an important con-

                         cern in the Planning Area. Even though full-time employment in agriculture

                         has declined for the past several years, it still represents a significant

                         source of part-time employment for area residents. In addition, through the

                         Public Participation Program, area residents have expressed a strong desire

                         to preserve agriculture as a way-of-life in New Hanover County.

                         9. Capitalize on Existing Investments

                             The multi-million dollar investments of New Hanover County and its

                         municipalities in public improvements and of the private sector in existing

                         buildings and other facilities are most readily optimized by encouraging

                         compact development around existing developed areas.

                        2. Policy Objectives

                             Based on these findings, the following policy objectives have been

                        defined for urban growth in the Wilmington-New Hanover Planning area:

                                    1)  To increase the accessibility of all Planning
                                        Area residents to the basic economic goods
                                        and services--food, clothing, decent housing,
                                        health care, and recreation--as indicated by
                                        rising median incomes among all groups of the
                                        population.

                                    2)  To enable the City of Wilmington and New Hanover
                                        County to deliver necessary basic urban services
                                        to urban development in the most cost-effective
                                        manner.

                                    3)  To enable local governments and private interests
                                        to capitalize on existing investments in buildings
                                        and other facilities in the extension of services
                                        to presently unserved areas.

                                    4)  To reduce any existing or po'tential tax inequities
                                        by insuring that taxes are proportional to the,
                                        cost of services consumed.

                                    5)  To improve the Planning Area's long term energy
                                        efficiency particularly as it relates to service
                                        delivery and transportation.

                                    6)  To improve the efficiency of land utilization and
                                        thereby reduce the development pressure on prime
                                        agricultural lands and environmentally sensitive
                                        areas.

                                    7)  To reduce the uncertainty of the real estate
                                        market as it relates to the provision of public
                                        services and thereby to lend greater security to
                                        the long-term investments of property owners.

                        3. Recommended Policies

                       a. Quantity

                             Three major considerations shall be used as guidelines for decisions

                       which have the effect of altering the Planning Area's rate of growth:

                                    1)  the impact of growth on the economic well-being
                                        of the Planning Area's residents;

                                    2)  the financial capability of local government to
                                        provide services to new residents; and,

                                     3) the impact of growth on the Planning Area's
                                         quality of life.

                         b. Quality

                              In order to insure that the' residents of the Wilmington-New Hanover

                         Plannina Area receive the greatest benefits from economic expansion,

                         economic development programs shall be encouraged to give priority to

                         indiistries and establishments which have the effect of diversifying the

                         local'economy, which require a more highly skilled labor force, and which

                         have the overall effect of increasing the area's median income.

                         c. Distribution

                              Future urban development (consisting of all residential subdivisions

                         having a density of two (2) dwelling units per acre or greater, commercial

                         establishments having a net usable area of 5,000 square feet or more, and

                         industries employing more than 25 workers) shall be contained within the

                         geographical limits of a defined, but flexible, Urban Services Area. The

                         purpose of the Urban ServicesArea is to encourage a compact development

                         pattern and to permit delivery of basic urban services--sewerage, water

                         facilities, and police and fire protection--efficiently and effectively.

                         d. Factors of Urban Services Area Delineation

                             In drawing the initial boundaries of the Urban Services Area, the

                         following factors shall be considered:

                                    1)  projected land use needs (10 years);

                                    2)  the location and supply of land which is
                                        environmentally suited for development;

                                    3)  a long-range service delivery plan (12 years)
                                        which specifies expected service needs,
                                        expected service costs, and the approximate
                                        revenues which will be available to fund
                                        public services;

                                                           Zf 7

                                     4)  th'e need for cooperation with governments
                                         outside the Planning Area in meeting
                                         mutual service needs; and,

                                     5)  existing critical needs related to the
                                         health and/or safety of Planning Area
                                         residents.

                         e.  Initial Priority of Service Delivery

                              In the development of new services and the expansion of existing

                         services, areas which are currently developed at urban densities but not

                         serviced shall receive priority.

                         f. Land Use-Plan Outside Urban Services Boundaries

                             In the development of detailed land use plans, the area outside the

                         urban services boundary shall be maintained by low-density residential areas,

                         rural communities, open space lands, farms, and other uses compatible with

                         the intent of the urban growth policy.

                         g. Expansion of Urban Services Boundary

                             When there is a demonstrated need and a positive cost-revenue ratio can

                         be shown, the boundary of the Urban Services Area shall be expanded, using

                         the same criteria as outlined above. In any case the extent of the Urban

                         Services Area shall be reviewed at least once every five years. When the

                         boundary is extended, land use plans for the expansion area shall be revised.

                         h. Urban Development Outside Urban Services Boundaries

                             Urban level development shall be permitted outside the Urban Services

                         Boundary only in such cases where the developer agrees to reimburse local

                         governments for the full cost of extending basic services or the developer

                         agrees to provide services in compliance with standards set by local governments.

                         1. Real Property Appraisal

                             As provided for in the North Carolina Machinery Act, the differing

                                                           zf

                         development potentials of land lying within and outside,the Urban Services

                         Area shall be fairly reflected in the property appraisal for tax purpos es.

                                                 B. ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

                         1. Surface_Water Quality

                         a. Findings

                              Surface water is, perhaps, the Wilmington-New Hanover Planning Area's

                         most important natural resource.

                              Under North Carolina General Statute 113-229(n)(2), virtually all of

                         the waters of New Hanover County are classified as estuarine waters. Estuaries

                         are highly productive natural environments, having value for almost everyone.

                         Some of the values are reflected simply in the richness of the life-style

                         enjoyed by'residents of the Planning Area. Estuarine waters are a major

                         aesthetic attraction and a recreational outlet for large numbers of residents.

                         The estuary's value is also reflected in the market place. Species which are

                         dependent upon the estuary during part or all of their life cycle--menhaden,

                         shrimp, flounder, oysters, and crabs--makeup over 90 percent of the total value

                         of North Carolina's commercial catch.

                              Thus, jDaintenance of these estuarine waters in the best possible condition

                         is essential for protecting the value of the area's residents; yet according to

                         information contained in a draft of the Greater Wilmington 201 Facilities@Plan,

                         the water quality picture in all.of New Hanover County is rather poor. The

                         North Carolina Division of Environmental Managelnent considers the following

                         stream segments to be below desirable water quality standards:

                                     1)  Smiths Creek from Burnt Mill Creek to the Northeast
                                         Cape Fear River;

                                     2)  The Mouth of Bradley Creek; and,

                                     3)  The sound waters in the vicinity of Wrightsville Beach.

                         From the standpoint of shellfishing where standards are more stringent,

                         the water quality problem is more extensive. According to the North Carolina

                         Shellfish Sanitation Program, most of the creeks in the eastern segment of New

                         Hanover County, most of the sound waters in and around Wrightsville Beach,

                         a large portion of Myrtle Grove Sound, Snows Cut, and the lower Cape Fear

                         River Estuary are closed to shellfishing.

                              The Planning Area's water quality problems can be attributed to several

                         sources--the discharges from municipal waste treatment plants, the discharges

                         from private waste treatment plants, industrial discharges, urban runoff,

                         agricultural runoff, and malfunctioning septic tanks.

                         b. Policy Objective

                              Based on these findings, the following policy objective has been defined

                         for surface water quality in the Wilmington-New Hanover Planning Area:

                                     Preserve and enhance the quality of the Planning
                                     Area's surface waters to increase and perpetuate
                                     their value--biological, economic, recreational,
                                     and aesthetic--to the residents of the area.

                         c.  Recommended Policies

                              The following policies are recommended in order to achieve the objectives

                         concerning the preservation and enhancement of the qualityiof the Planning

                         Area's surface waters:

                                     1). The quality and quantity of runoff from urban
                                         development and agricultural activities entering
                                         the estuarine waters of the Planning Area shall
                                         be as near to a natural condition as possible.
                                         To this end:

                                                a)  The system of land drainage shall
                                                    be maintained as near to natural
                                                    patterns as possible;

                                                b)  During the site development process,
                                                    the maximum possible amount of suit-
                                                    able vegetation shall be maintained
                                                    intact;

                                                           i2

                                                 c)  A suitable natural or vegetated
                                                     buffer shall be maintained between
                                                     drainage ways and development activites,
                                                     unless it is clearly demonstrated to
                                                     be infeasible; and,

                                                d)   Evaluate the implementation of the New
                                                     Hanover County Soil Erosion and Sedi-
                                                     mentation Control Ordinance to insure
                                                     that its objectives are being met.

                                     2)  Where soil  conditions require lowering of the water
                                         table to permit development, it must be clearly shown
                                         that the artificial land drainage will not seriously
                                         affect the quality and salinity of estuarine waters.

                                     3)  In the development of centralized sewage collection
                                         and treatment facilities, priority will be given to
                                         those areas experiencing chronic septic tank failures,
                                         areas where septic tanks have been placed in unsuited
                                         soils, and to developments currently discharging
                                         sewage effluent into the marshes and estuaries in the
                                         eastern and southern portions of the Planning Area.

                                     4)  To upgrade the quality of the surface waters df the
                                         Planning Area every feasible action will be taken to
                                         improve the quality of existing municipal sewage dis-
                                         charges and where possible to eliminate these discharges.

                                     5)  No new sewage discharges shall be permitted in the
                                         marshes and estuaries of the eastern and southern
                                         portions of the Planning Area.

                                     6)  Urban type development in areas where septic tanks are
                                         expected to malfunction will be prohibited until such
                                         times as centralized sewer services are available.
                                         Where septic tanks are permissible, no part of the
                                         system shall be any closer than 100 feet from drainage-
                                         ways, streams, ponds, and estuarine waters.

                         2. Ground Water Quality

                         a. Findings

                             A majority of families and a significant number of industries in New

                         Hanover County are presently dependent upon ground water. Outside of the

                         City of Wilmington, all water whether from individual wells or private.

                         systems, comes from groundwater.

                            While the quantity 0f groundwater is at this time adequate, in many

                       instances it is not of the best quality and generally presents problems

                       for use as adomestic supply because of iron, hardness, corrosiveness, or

                       chloride content. In addition, there is the potential for salt water

                       intrusion due to the increased pumping demands of a growing population.

                           These existing and potential ground water quality problems are complicated

                       by the county's poor soils and the urbanization currently taking place in the

                       unincorporated areas. More people bring more septic tanks, and the prolif-

                       eration of septic tanks increase the threat of ground water pollution in

                       many areas.

                           Engineering studies have concluded that a county-wide water treatment

                       and distribution system is needed to meet the needs of the Planning Area's

                       projected growth; however, such a system is only in the early planning

                       stages, and its implementation is a number of years away. In  the interim,

                       the county's ground water supply must be carefully managed to insure adequate

                       quality and quantity.

                           Ground water supplies are replenished from several sources; however,

                       from the standpoint of local ground water management, aquifer recharge areas

                       ar e the most important sources of replenishment. Precipitation and surface

                       whter move into the ground water supply in these areas. The rate of recharge

                       as well as the quality of water entering the underground supply is substan-

                       tially impacted by the type of development and land uses permitted in major

                       aquifer recharge areas.

                       b. Policy Objective

                           Based on these findings, the following policy objective has been

                       defined for ground water quality in the Wilmington-New Hanover Planning Area:

                                  To insure the long-term maintenance and improvement
                                  of the quantity and quality of the Planning Area's
                                  ground water supply.

                         C  Recommended Policies

                              In order to achieve the objective of long-term maintenance and improve-

                         ment of the Planning Area's ground water supply the following-policies are

                         recommended:

                                      1) The further use of septic tanks for sewage disposal
                                         in the Planning Area's primary aquifer recharge
                                         areas will be prohibited, unless it is clearly
                                         demonstrated that the use of septic systems will
                                         not lower the quality of ground water resources.

                                      2) The introduction of untreated industrial wastes into the
                                         ground water shall be prohibited.

                                      3) In primary recharge areas, developers shall be
                                         encouraged to minimize inpervious surface areas
                                         to permit maximum infiltration and ground water
                                         recharge.

                                      4) Where artificial drainage to lower the water
                                         table is required to permit development such
                                         drainage shall not have a significant impact
                                         on the ground water supply.

                         3. Wetlands

                         a. Findings

                             The wetlands of New lianover County consist of low salt marsh, high

                         salt marsh, brackish marsh, and riverine wooded swamps. These are the most

                         productive of the county's natural resources, performing several vital

                         functions, including the following: regulation of the quality and quantity

                         of runoff water entering the estuary; provision of a vital habitat for wild-

                         life and waterfowl; provision of the basic nutrients for the estuarine.food

                         web (90 percent of the total North Carolina commercial catch are estuarine

                         dependent species); and provision of an aesthetic attraction.

                         b. Policy Objective

                             Based on the findings of the environmental analysis the following objective

                         has been defined for the Planning Area's wetlands:

                                    TO proserve. and manage the Planning Area's wetlands
                                    ill Order to safeguard and perpetuate their biological,
                                    11CM1011lic, and aesLlleLic values.

                       c.  Recommended Polici.es

                            In order to achieve the objective of preservation and management of

                       .the Planning Area's wetlands the following policies are recommended:

                                    1) No development or activity will be permitted in an
                                       area of low tidal marsh which would have the effect
                                       of damaging or altering the natural function of the
                                       marsh.

                                    2) High salt marshes, brackish marshes, and riverine
                                       wooded swamps will be developed only for uses which
                                       require water access.

                                    3) The vital functions of the high marshes, brackish
                                       marshes, and riverine wooded swamps must be accomo-
                                       dated in the site planning process for all permitted
                                       uses.

                       4.  Mineral Resources

                       a. Findings

                            New Hanover County contains two important mineral resources--sand and

                       limestone. According to the latest employment statistics, industrial

                       activities based on these resources employed approximately 290 workers in

                       1974. In addition, in 1973 mineral production in the county was about 12

                       percent Of the state's total.

                       b. Policy Objective

                           Based on the findings of the environmental analysis the following

                       objective has been defined regarding the Planning Area's mineral resources:

                                  To recognize mineral deposits as non-renewable resources,
                                  to preserve sites where mineral extraction is economically,
                                  feasible, and to minimize the impact of mineral extraction
                                  on other land uses.

                                                        _L6_ -

                        C . Recommended Policies

                             In order to achieve the objective defined for the Planning Area's

                        mineral deposits the following policies are recommended:

                                    1)  The cooperation of the state geologist will be
                                        sought to develop a more complete study of
                                        New Hanover County's sub-surface geology and
                                        to specifically identify prime mineral resource
                                        sites.

                                    2)  A cost-benefit analysis will be undertaken for
                                        each of these sites to determine if the benefits
                                        of mineral extraction outweigh the cost of the
                                        extractive industry's impact.

                                    3)  Where extractive activities are permitted land
                                        reclaimation will be required.

                                    4)  Noise and dust, surface water pollution, and
                                        waste materials and spoils disposal must be
                                        controlled to minimize adverse impacts.

                        5. Development on Upland Areas

                        a. Findings

                            The upland areas of New Hanover County present both opportunities and

                        limitations for urban development. A study by the Wilmington-New Hanover

                        Planning Department reveals four major elements of the natural environment

                        having an impact on the suitability of the land for development. These

                        'four elements are described as follows:

                                   1)   Flood hazard areas. Flood waters represent a
                                        hazard to life and property when development takes
                                        place in flood prone areas; in addition, flood
                                        plain development may actually increase the severity
                                        of flooding by acting as a partial dam and by de-
                                        creasing the absorptive capacity of the flood plain
                                        soils.

                                   2)   Oc'ean beach and frontal dune system. Because they
                                        are subjected to flooding by diurnal tides and
                                        storm surges, the ocean beaches present an extreme
                                        hazard to life and property. The frontal dune
                                        system lying immediately landward of the ocean
                                        beaches constitutes the barrier island's major
                                        defense against storms. The vegetation on the
                                        frontal dunes is essential for their continued

                                         existence. This vegetation can be easily destroyed
                                         by development, thereby reducing the island's defenses.

                                    3)   Water table conditions. High water table conditions
                                         increase development costs; if uncorrected may render
                                         yards and recreation areas unusable; and extensive
                                         artificial drainage to lower the water table may reduce
                                         recharge of aquifers and seriously affect the quality and
                                         salinity of estuarine waters.

                                    4)   Load supporting capability. The load supporting
                                         value of soils is an important variable in most types
                                         of development. Failure to insure that subsoil condi-
                                         tions afford a suitable load-bearing capacity for a
                                         particular building, highway, or other structure can
                                         have serious consequences--foundation collapse, dif-
                                         ferential settling, rapid deterioration of roads, and
                                         perhaps damage to adjacent properties during the
                                         construction process.

                             In addition, man-made hazards have been identified as having limitations

                        for development. Like some natural phenomena certain types of development,

                        such as airports and tank farms, have characteristics which constitute a

                        threat to life and property in the surrounding areas. Some of.the majo  r

                        hazard areas are:

                                    1)   The New Hanover County Airport

                                    2)   The bulk storage petroleum areas

                                    3)   The North Carolina State Port

                                    4)   The Sunny Point Ocean Terminal buffer zone area

                                    5)   The Love Grove industrial area.

                        b. Policy Objectives

                            Based on these findings the following objectives have been defined

                        regarding development on the Wilmington-New Hano@er Planning Area's upland

                        areas:

                                    1) To minimize the impact of urban development on
                                         the Planning Area's natural and man-made environment.

                                    2) To minimize the risk to life and property from
                                         natural and man-made hazards.

                         c - Recommended Policies

                              In order to achieve the objectives defined for development on the

                        Planning Area's  upland areas the following policies are recommended:

                                     1)  All.permanent development within the 100 year
                                         flood plain shall be carefully controlled,
                                         and no land uses except those unharmed by
                                         flooding or those inseparable from the flood
                                         plain will be permitted within the 50 year
                                         flood plain.

                                     2)  With the exception of those uses which must
                                         be located there, all permanent development
                                         in the dynamic ocean beach-frontal dune area
                                         shall be prohibited. Where development must
                                         take place in this area, sound engineering
                                         practices must be applied to minimize hazards
                                         from wind and water and to minimize construction
                                         damage to the frontal dune.

                                     3)  Intensive development on wet soils will be dis-
                                         couraged; where wet soils are difficult or
                                         impossible to drain, urban-type development
                                         will be prohibited.

                                     4)  Lowering the water table by artificial land
                                         drainage must not seriously affect the recharge
                                         of aquifers or the quality and salinity of
                                         the estuarine waters.

                                     5)  Detailed site analysis shall be required in
                                         areas where soils are suspected of having in-
                                         adequate load bearing values, and safeguards
                                         will be required where appropriate.

                                     6)  Man-made hazards shall be delineated and pre-
                                         cautions will be taken to insure that develop-
                                         ment within these zones is compatible with the
                                         associated dangers.

                                                     C. LAND USE

                        1. Findings
                             A survey and analysis of existing land use in the Wilmington-New Hano@er

                        Planning Area has revealed several key issues which must be addressed in the

                        development policies adopted by local government. These issues include the

                        following:

                                       1)   The encroachment of incompatible land uses.
                                            The encroachment of incompatible uses into
                                            residential, commercial, and industrial areas
                                            tends to reduce property values, reduce main-
                                            tenance, and to eventually result in property
                                            decline.

                                       2)   Strip commercial development. Strip commercial
                                            development is evident in several areas. Such
                                            a development pattern is undesirable because it
                                            tends to encourage land speculation and inflated
                                            land values, resulting in a large amount of un-
                                            productive land; it depreciates the value of
                                            surrounding property for less intensive uses;
                                            and it tends to increase traffic volumes, often
                                            necessitating expensive street widenings.

                                       3)   Over-zoning. Over-zoning tends to encourage
                                            sprawling development patterns; it diminishes
                                            the potential that the most desirable commercial.
                                            and industrial sites will be developed; and it
                                            removes land from other productive uses.

                               Over the next twenty-five years approximately 19,000 acres of land

                         must be developed or redeveloped.to meet the growing populations needs

                         for homes, industries, and shopping facilities. Without proper guidance

                         this  development will result in a continuation and worsening of the area's

                         land  use problems. Therefore, we need to guide future development in a manner

                         which  will promote efficient land use patterns; which will permit utilization

                         of the area's prime sites for residential, commercial, and industrial uses;

                         which will prevent the occurrance of incompatible land uses, and, which will

                         protect established neighborhoods.

                         2. policy Objectives

                               Based on these findings the following objectives have been defined

                         concerning land use in the Wilmington-New Hanover Planning Area:

                                      1)    To provide adequate industrial space to meet
                                            the needs of existing and new establishments
                                            without sacrificing environmental quality.

                                      2)    To provide adequate commercial space in
                                            appropriate locations to insure that commer-
                                            cial activities can be developed in a manner
                                            that will conveniently satisfy expanding consumer
                                            needs without detracting from existing or future
                                            residential areas.

                                     3)  To insure the constant availability of housing
                                         to all individuals and families which satisfies
                                         their tastes, is within their economic means,
                                         and is located in a quality living.environment.

                        3.  Recommended Policies

                             In order to achieve the defined objectives the following land use

                        policies are recommended:

                                     1)  Industrial development shall be encouraged
                                         on sites which are environmentally suited
                                         and which have unique locational. advantages
                                         for industry.

                                     2)  Industrial development shall be located in
                                         such a manner as to minimize the threat of
                                         environmental pollution and excessive traffic
                                         congestion. To this end, over-concentration
                                         of industry in any area of the county will be
                                         avoided, and the development of industrial
                                         parks which decrease the cost of environmental
                                         protection facilities and which are more eff-
                                         icient land users will be encouraged.

                                     3)  Climatic factors will be considered in the
                                         location of industries having the potential
                                         for odors or hazardous emmissions.

                                     4)  The proper development of four major types
                                         of commercial areas will be encouraged:

                                               6) neighborhood services areas
                                               b) community services areas
                                               c) regional service areas
                                               d) highway service areas

                                     5)  Unplanned commercial development along the
                                         Planning Area's streets and highways will be
                                         discouraged.,

                                     6)  Any future commercial development which sub-
                                         stantially increases traffic volumes on resi-
                                         dential streets will be prohibifed.

                                     7)  "Spot" commercial development and the general
                                         encroachment of commercial uses into residential
                                         areas will be prohibited.

                                     8)  Recognizing that the existing housing stock is
                                         a major housing resource, sources of funds for
                                         housing rehabilitation will be identified and
                                         investigated and assistance will be provided to
                                         low and moderate income families in obtaining
                                         funds from appropriate sources.

                                                        -24 -

                                     9) The feasibility of developing and implementing
                                         a minimum housing code in areas not presently
                                         enforcing such a code will be studied.

                                    10)  A housing market analysis will be prepared and
                                         maintained to assist the real estate industry
                                         in meeting consumers' housing needs, both,
                                         numbers and types.

                                   11)   Residential areas shall be located in such a
                                         manner as to facilitate the delivery of required
                                         public services.

                                                  D. TRANSPORTATION

                        1.  Findings

                             A cursory examination and analysis of the Planning Area's highway

                        system indicates that, with the exception of U.S. 421, all of its major

                        roads are carrying traffic volumes which are either at or near their

                        design capacity. The area's thoroughfare plan indicates that major

                        upgradings of the existing traffic network and the addition of new major

                        facilities will be required within the next 20 years.

                             The alternatives to vehicular transportation in the Planning Area are

                        seriously limited. The Wilmington Transit Authority operates a bus system

                        with limited routes and schedules and is currently experiencing heavy losses.

                             There has been strong citizen opposition voiced toward some of the

                        improvements and new facilities advocated by the Wilmington Area Thoroughfare

                        Plan. This opposition centers On concern for damage to the Planning Area's

                        natural and man-made resources and the damage to viable residential areas.

                        2. Policy Objectives

                             Based on these findings the following objectives have been defined

                        regarding transportation within the Planning Area:

                                                          i5o

                                     I ) To develop and mal ntain an efficient system
                                         for movemcnt of people and goods within and
                                         thrOL18110LIt the area while minimizing the
                                         impact of transportation facilities on the
                                         living environment.

                                     2)  To provide sufficient transportation alterna-
                                         tives to meet people's transportation needs.

                        3. Recommended Policy

                             In order to achieve these objectives the following.policies are

                         recommended:

                                     1)  The development of coordinative plans for
                                         land, water, and,air transportation will be
                                         supported.

                                     2)  The maintenance and improvement of the county's
                                         secondary road system will be supported.

                                     3)  The development of an "Outer Loop" circumferential
                                         highway shall be supported while insuring that'
                                         its design and alignment will have a minimal
                                         negative impact on the county's living environment.

                                     4)  The integrity of all viable neighborhoods shall be
                                         considered in the thoroughfare planning and develop-
                                         ment process.

                                     5)  Public facilities such as schools and parks will
                                         be protected from traffic hazards.

                                     6)  Public access to public transportation on a county--
                                         wide basis, particularly for travel between home
                                         and employment, shall be improved.

                                     7)  The development of safe and efficient bikeway
                                         facilities throughout the county shall be supported.

                                             E. RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE

                        1. Findings

                             Wilmington and New Hanover County have recently completed a joint

                        planning program for parks, recreation, and open space.* Major findings

                             *Gardner Gidl ey and Associates, Parks and Recreation Master Plan, City
                       of Wilmington and New Hanover County, North Carolina, March 15, 1976.

                                                          .2-3r -

                        of this program are as follows:

                                    1)  "There are no public swimming pools in the city
                                        or the county."

                                    2)  "Facilities are not 6quitably distributed, or,
                                        in some cases, adequate to meet current needs."

                                    3)  "Land currently used for recreation is inadequate
                                        in size, and, in some cases, poorly located."

                                    4)  "Little provision has been made for relatively
                                        simple outdoor recreation for which both national
                                        and local samplings indicate a strong preference
                                        specifically bicycling, swimming, picnicking,
                                        nature activities, and fishing."

                                    5)  "There is no public access to major natural areas
                                        such as the Cape Fear River, the sounds, and
                                        the ocean beaches."

                                    6)  "Indoor recreation facilities are inadequate."

                                    7)  "No major recreation activities are conducted
                                        outside the City of Wilmington, except for
                                        organized Little League programs and programs
                                        serving relatively small populations at
                                        Wrightsville Beach and Carolina Beach."

                       2. Policy Objectives

                            Based on the study's findings two objectives have been defined for

                       recreation and open space:

                                    1)  To provide full opportunity for all residents of
                                        the Planning Area to make constructive use of
                                        their leisure time.

                                    2)  To conserve appropriate lands in a natural state
                                        to provide for passive uses, visual relief,
                                        scenic value, and to protect natural productive processes.

                       3. Recommended   Policies

                            To achieve  the defined objectives, the following policies are recommended:

                                    1)  Every feasible action will be taken to insure
                                        implementation of the Master Parks and
                                        Recreation Plan.

                                    2)  Support of state and federal agencies as well as
                                        private organizations will be sought to preserve

                                                          6;x-

                                          a natural area along the Northeast Cape
                                          Fear River for the purposes of passive
                                          outdoor recreation and wildlife management.

                                      3)  Efforts of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
                                          to secure a wildlife-and open space corridor
                                          along the Northeast Cape Fear River in
                                          conjunction with the Wilmington Harbor
                                          Project will be supported, recognizing
                                          that this area has important natural resource
                                          values as well as being a potentially value
                                          amenity to the Wilmington urbanizing area.

                                     4)   As development continues in the Planning
                                          Area adequate standards of open space for
                                          active and passive uses will be maintained.

                                     5)   When feasible the open space system recom-
                                          mended for the City of Wilmington will be
                                          expanded throughout the Planning Area in
                                          order to preserve natural and cultural
                                          resources, to provide passive recreational
                                          experiences, and to shape urban growth.

                                              F. AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY

                         1.  Findings

                              Through the Public Participation Program the citizens of New Hanover

                         County, particularly in the morerural areas, have expressed concern over

                         the loss of farms and woodlands to development. These areas are important

                         to the tradition and current life-style of many residents.

                              The county's growth has exerted considerable development pressure on

                         farms and woodlands. Although the decline in agriculture in New Hanover

                         County has been related to many trends such as labor costs and capital costs,

                         taxes have also played a significant role. Present use valuations provide

                         some needed relief; however, it appears that a significant number of farmers

                         do not fully understand this provision.

                              Urban sprawl also contributes to the loss of farms and woodlands. The

                         movement of urban development., such as residential subdivisions, shopping

                         facilities, and industrial activities, into prime agricultural and woodlands

                                                         -2-5-

                        t 4-nds 1 0 "I'tract more development resiilting in a significant loss of

                            cu I I ura I lands

                        2.  PoliSy_q@ @ective

                             The following objective for the Planning Area's farms and woodlands

                        has been defined:

                                         To encourage the main'tenance of agriculture
                                         and forestry as viablb industries and to
                                         capitalize on farms and woodlands as an
                                         integral part of the county's open space
                                         system.

                        3.  Recommended  Policies

                             To achieve  this objective the following policies are recommended:

                                    1)   The preservation of prime farm and woodlands
                                         for continued agricultural uses will be
                                         encouraged.

                                    2)   Land use controls which will facilitate the
                                         preservation of prime farm and woodlands
                                         will be developed.

                                    3)   Available fiscal techniques which will further
                                         the objective of preservation of farms and
                                         woodlands will be identified and publicized.

                                         G. HISTORIC AND ARCHEOLOGICAL SITES

                       i. Findings

                            The Wilmington-New Hanover Planning Area's archeological and historic

                       resources are among its most fragile assets. These resources are an essential

                       part of the area's tradition, its heritage, and are an invaluable element

                       of the quality of life afforded present residents. In addition, these

                       resources have an economic potential through tourism which is, as yet,

                       unrealized.

                            Within  the City of Wilmington two separate areas consisting of more than

                       200 block have been listed on the National Register of Historic Places and,

                                                         -2-6-

                        thereby, have been recognized as having historic and/or architectural

                        significance. However, only 38 blocks have been afforded the special

                        protection of "historic district  zoning". Outside the city there are

                        also a number of scattered individual buildings and sites which are

                        recognized as having historical significance. All of the buildings are

                        in private ownership and do not appear to be endangered. However, no

                        protection from incompatible development has been provided to these sites.

                             According to an Army Corps of Engineers inventory conducted in December

                        of 1973 there are 16 known archeological sites within New Hanover County.

                        The exact location of these sites are considered confidential and are not

                        normally released by the State Division of Archives and History due to

                        potential disturbance and destruction. However, only in major projects

                        using federal or state funds would the Divisions of Archives'ahd History

                        have an opportunity to review projects having a potential impact or arche-.

                        ological sites. This lack of coordination could be problematic as it

                        relates to local development activities and could result in the loss of

                        archeological sites.

                        2.  Policy Objective

                             From@the findings the following objective concerning the Planning  Area's

                        historic and archeological sites has been defined:

                                    To preserve and enhance the economic and cultural
                                    value of the Planning Area's historic resources
                                    for present and future residents.

                        3. Recommended  Policies

                             To achieve the objective the following policies are recommended:

                                    1)  A comprehensive preservation program consisting
                                        of advisory and counseling services, financial
                                        incentives, and investment as well as existing
                                        legal tools will be developed to support the
                                        preservation objective. This program will be
                                        coordinated with and supportive of area-wide
                                        development plans.

                                   2)   Full develOPment of the tourism potential of
                                        thc area's historic resources will be en-
                                        coiirn&L!d.

                                   3)   Existing programs designed to promote
                                        rehabilitatiori and preservation of deteriorated
                                        neighborhoods and structures within the
                                        National Register Area will be reviewed and
                                        monitored. Additionally, these programs
                                        will be updated, adjusted, and coordinated
                                        as the need arises.

                                   4)   Better coordination between local government
                                        and the North Carolina Division of Archives
                                        and History will be sought in order to
                                        prevent the inadvertent loss of valuable
                                        archeological sites.

                                   5)   The interdependence of the residential and
                                        commercial components of the Historic Area
                                        will be recognized and the compatibility of
                                        residential and commercial land use shall be
                                        promoted.

                                   6)   The role of the historically significant
                                        Central Business District in the urban
                                        environment shall be assessed, and programs
                                        will be developed and/or supported which
                                        focus on the preservation and improvement
                                        of the Central Business District as a.viable
                                        downtown core.

                                                         2-9--

                     WILMINGTON-NEW [ANOVER
                     OPREHENSIVE
                     PLANNING PROGP41

                                            GETBAL DEVELOM9 GUIDE

                                                  MAY 21J 1976

                                                   GENE-RAL DEVELOPMENT GUIDE

                              Using the "Recommended Policies for Growth and Development" as a basis,

                        a General Development Guide has been prepared to set the parameters for the

                        development of a more detailed land use plan in Phase II of.the planning

                        process. The Development Guide is based on a land classification system

                        which has been developed by the Coastal Resources Commission and is required

                        for use in the coastal resources management program.

                              The system's five categories--developed, transition, community, rural

                        resource, and conservation--provide a basis for identifying, very generally,

                        where, how much,-and what types of development will occur in the Planning

                        Area. The following is a description of the intent and application of these

                        land  classes.

                              a.  Developed

                                  The Developed class identifies developed lands which are presently
                              provided with essential public services. Consequently, it is dis-
                              tinguished from areas where significant growth and/or new service re-
                              quirements will occur. Continued development and redevelopment should
                              be encouraged to provide for the orderly growth in the area.

                                  Developed lands are areas with a minimum gross population density
                              of 2,000 people per square mile. At a minimum, these lands contain
                              existing public services including water and sewer systems, educational
                              systems, and road systems--all of which are able to support the present
                              population and its accompanying land uses including commercial, indus-
                              trial, and institutional.

                                  Within the Wilmington-New Hanover Planning Area, all "Developed"
                              areas are located within the City of Wilmington where a full range of
                              services are available.

                              b.  Transition

                                  The Transition class identifies lands where moderate to high density
                              growth is to be encouraged and where any such growth that is permitted by
                              local legislation will be provided with the necessary public services.
                              The requirement for a commitment to provide services cannot be overstated.

                                  The area to be designated as Transition should be no greater than
                              that required to accommodate the Planning Area-'s 10-year projected

                           population growth at a minimum gross density of 2,000 people per square
                           mile. It is estimated that 8.0 square miles of transitional land will
                           be required to accommodate the Planning Area's 1975-1985 population
                           growth.. In addition, the minimum services which will be required are
                           the necessary water and sewer facilities, educational services, and
                           roads. Consideration must be given to the cost of public services in
                           the Transition area.

                                Transition areas are located in a compact pattern around the City
                           of Wilmington in accordance with the recommended policies for urban
                           growth. This development pattern will permit optimum efficiency in land
                           utilization and the delivery of public services such as sewage collection
                           and treatment, water supply, police protection, and fire protection.

                           c., Community

                                The Community class identifies existing and new clusters of low
                           density development not requiring major public services.

                                The Community class includes existing clusters of one or more land
                           uses such as a rural residential subdivision or a church, school, general
                           store, industry, etc. This class will provide for all new rural growth
                           when the lot size is ten acres or less. Such clusters of growth may
                           occur in new areas, or within existing community lands.

                                In every case, the lot size must be large enough to safely accommo-
                           date on-site sewage disposal and where necessary water supply so that no
                           public sewer services will be required now or in the future. As a guide
                           for calculating the amount of land necessary to accommodate new rural
                           community growth, a gross population density of 640 people per square
                           mile or one person per acre should be used. Using this criterion, it
                           is estimated at additional 5.0 square miles will be needed to accommo-
                           date the 3,075*persons expected to settle in low density clusters over
                           the next ten Years.

                                Four "Rural Co=unities" have been designated on the Land Classifi-
                           cation Map: Castle Payne, Ogulen, Flemington, and Sea Breeze.

                           d.   Conservation

                                The Conservation class identifies land which should be maintained
                           essentially in its natural state and where very limited or no public
                           services are provided. Very low development densities should be en-
                           couraged in Conservation areas.

                                Lands to be placed in the Conservation class are the least desirable
                           for development because:

                                1)  They are too fragile to withstand development without losing
                                    their natural value; and/or

                                2)  They have severe or hazardous limitations to development; and/or

                                3)  Though they are not highly fragile or hazardous, the natural
                                    resources they represent are too valuable to endanger by develop-
                                    ment.

                                 All areas designated as Class III lands (not suited for develop-
                            ment) in the Environmental Analysis (Technical Report #3) have been
                            classified as Conservation.

                            d.   Rural

                                 The Rural class identifies lands for long-term management for
                            productive resource utilization, and where limited public services will.
                            be provided. Development in such areas should be compatible with
                            resource production; however, these lands constitute a future reserve
                            for Transition land.

                                 The Rural class includes all lands not in the Developed, Tran-
                            sition, Community and Conservation classes.

                                       9Z6T Al

                           NONOO IVIBNOWAN3 I SRV IVI-WHOd

                                                          M9Wd 9NINWid

                                                             3AMISH38M
                                                      EAOM 10-NO19NI'01M

                                              AREAS OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN

                              New Hanover County's beaches, its marshes, and its rivers, creeks and

                         sounds, as well as the rich cultural heritage preserved in its many historic

                         sites and old homes are all valued by the county's residents as an essential

                         part of their lifestyle. These resources have also been given special state-

                         wide significance by the Coastal Area Management Act of 1974. The Act

                         instructs the Coastal Resources Commission to identify critical areas which

                         need to be considered for protection and possible preservation in each county;

                         and to formally designate them as "Areas of Environmental Concern." Within

                         these "AEC's", development must be reviewed for compliance with state guide-

                         lines and local plans before it may proceed. The basic goal of this permit

                         system is to maintain or preserve the natural functions of thege areas as

                         the land is committed to more intensive uses.

                              Although the Coastal Resources Commission has not completed the process

                         of delineating AEC's, the Commission's local planning guidelines require that

                         potential AEC's be identified and considered in the development of land use

                         recommendations. A list has been developed to illustrate the possible occurence

                         of Environmental Concern.in the Wilmington-New Hanover Planning Area.

                               AEC Category                                   Appropriate Land Uses

                         1. Low Tidal Marshes                            Fishing piers, docks, or other
                                                                         uses which do not impair the
                                                                         natural functions of the marsh.

                         2. Other Coastal Marshland                      Uses which by their nature require
                                                                         water access such as ports, docks,
                                                                         and marinas.

                         3. Estuarine Waters                             Navigational channels, bulkheads
                                                                         to prevent erosion, piers, and
                                                                         wharfs.

                         4. Special Aquifer Areas                        Development which do not employ
                              Barrier Islands                            septic tank disposal systems, do
                                                                         not present a risk of accidental
                                                                         dishcarge or soluble contaminants,
                                                                         and do not increase the withdrawal
                                                                         of water to a rate that may cause
                                                                         salt water intrusion.

                                  AEC Category                                  Appropriate Land Uses

                          5. Existing State Parks                          Uses'associated withe recreational-
                                                                           cultural-educational character
                                                                           of the area.

                          6. Complex Natural Areas                         Uses which do not disturb the
                                                                           natural conditions of these
                                                                           scientifically or educationally
                                                                           valuable areas.

                          7.  Historic Places                              Uses which will not result in
                                                                           substantial irreversible damage
                                                                           to the historic value of the area.

                          8. Public Trust Areas                            Navigational channels, drainage
                                                                           ditches, bulkheads, piers, and
                                                                           wharfs provided they do not
                                                                           violate the public trust rights.

                          9. Sand Dunes Along The                          Uses which can be safely under-
                               Barrier Islands                             taken to minimize damage from wind
                                                                           and water.

                        10. Ocean Beaches and Shorelines                   Uses which do not interfere with
                                                                           the rightful use of the beach
                                                                           area or contribute to its envirOn-
                                                                           mental degradation.

                        11. Coastal Floodplains                            Recreation development or other
                                                                           development provided it conforms
                                                                           with the standards of the Federal
                                                                           Insurance Administration.

                        12. Excessive Erosion Areas                        Uses associated with recreational
                                                                           or conservational activities pro-
                                                                           vided only moveable temporary
                                                                           structures are placed in these
                                                                           areas.

                              These AECs are illustrated in "Technical Report #3, Environmental

                        Analysis".

        V41MIngton Aw
        new hanover
        COM rehensive
        plannlng7 program

            fechtkIC81 report

           part x: huma resoumes
           pairt u: ecoinotuiP resources
        M ANALYSE OF H UM4N
                    AND
        ECIOT@qom@c RE      URCES

                   Appli, 1070

               0                                                                                      0

                    PART 1. HUMAN RESOURCES

                                                       TABLE OF CONTENTS

                                                  Part     Human Resources

                                                                                                    Page

                          Introduction                                                                4

                          I. Growth Trend Analysis                                                    5

                              A. County Growth Trends                                                 5

                              B. State and Regional Comparisons                                       8

                              C. Subarea Growth Trends                                              10

                         II.  Population Dynamics                                                   12

                              A. Factors Affecting New Hanover County's Population Growth           12

                                  1) Natural Increase                                               12

                                  2) Birth Rates                                                    13

                                  3) Death Rates                                                    13

                                  4) Migration                                                      17

                        III. Estimates of Current Population                                        20

                         IV.  Population Composition                                                21

                              A. Age and Sex.Composition                                            21

                              B. Income'Characteristics                                             28

                              C. Household Characteristics                                          33

                         V. Population Projections                                                  38

                              A. Age-Specific Projections                                           41

                              B. Township Projections                                               41

                                            SUMMARV OF TRENDS ANO POPULATION FORECASTS

                            Poputation G&owth Ttends

                            1.    Since 1950 New Hanova County has been gtowing 6a,6teA than the state;
                                  but mote impoxtantty, the county's zhate o4 the totat state poputation
                                  has been incteazing.  Fo& the 1950-1960 decade, the gtowth Jot the
                                  state =z app&oximatety 12 peAcent, white the county expetienced an
                                  inctease o6 neakty 13.5 peAcent. DuAing the 1960-1970 decade, white
                                  the state's peAcentage incteaze Jett to app&oximatety 11.5 peAcent, the
                                  county had an incAease oJ 15.5 peAcent. Atso, got the 1950-1970
                                  pe&iod, the county's shaAe o4 totat state poputation incteased by
                                  app,toximatety 5 peAcent.

                            2.    Ovet the past two decades conzideted in this anatyziz, New Hanovet
                                  County has been a gtowth centeA jot SoutheazteAn Notth CaAotina.
                                  Duting that pexiod Region 1101.611poputation incteased by apptoximatety
                                  14 peAcent, due stAictty to natwLat incteaze. At the same time, the
                                  county's poputation g&ew at mote than twice that Aate--31 petcent jot
                                  the twenty yeat petiod.

                            3.    Atthough New HanoveA County is expetiencing tapid gtowth,, theAe ate
                                  signi@icant di64eAentiatz in the gtowth o6 zubateas oJ the county.

                                  (A)  Duxiykq the Zut twenty yeats, the ,&uAat,,a ateas o6 the county
                                       have g&own at a much 4aste& &ate than the city. Between 1950 and
                                       1970 the city gtew by 2.5 peAcent finctuding a majo& annexation),
                                       white the poputation o4 "tutat" New Hanovet Count,q incAeazed by
                                       mote than 100 peAcent.

                                  (B)  The "&u&aV poputp-tion is concenttated in Hatnett Townshi     which
                                       contained 21 petcent oA the totaZ county poputation in 1PO.,

                                  (C)  Atthough they ate 4etativety zmatt in poputation, Cape Feat and
                                       FedeAat Poin@ townships' shate o6 totat poputxttion incAea6ed
                                       tapidty oveA the p"t ten yewus. The two townships' shaAe o6
                                       county poputation inc&e"ed by 37 and 38 peAcent,&apectivety.

                            4.    Migtation is the majoA 6actot ptoducing the county'.6 tecent gtowth.
                                  Between 1950 and 1960, the county expetienced an out-mig&ation o6
                                  4.1 peAcent.  Between 1960 and 1970, howevet, this tAend tevetsed,
                                  and the county expetienced a net in-migtation oA 5.4 peAcent.

                                  a
                                  'RuAat as used heAe &e6etz to those atea-6 outside Witmington',s co&-
                            potate timits, inctuding smatt incotpotated ateaz.

                                                          7 7

                  5.    B"ed on avaitabte data on bitths and death,6 and on migution katm
                        deAived 6,tom .6choot enAottment in6otmation, the countylz 1975 poputa-
                        tion i,6 atimated to be apptoximatety 92,000. TW )Lep)Lesent-6 an
                        incAea6e o6 oveA 8 peAcent zince 1970 and a 1970-1980 decenniat
                        gtowth Aate o6 21 peAcent.

                  Poputation Compo4ition

                  1.    New Hanove,% County ha,6 an unu,6uaUy taAge 6emate poputation and, a-6 a
                        g,toup, the-6ounty's 6emate.6 a&e economicatty woue-o@6 than the %est
                        o6 the poputation. Fot exdmpte, atmozt 14 peAcent o6 the county.6
                        6amitie,6 have 6emate headt, and white the mean income 6o& att county
                        @
                        amitim is $9,368, the mean income 6ot 6amitie,6 with 6emate head6 i4
                        4489, wt tezz than hat@ that amount. The concentAation o4 6emateA
                        i,6 6ound pkimatity within the nonwhite poputation usiding within
                        the city.

                  2.    The median age 6o& New HanoveA  County d&opped 6,%om  28.6 in 1960 to
                        27.8 in 1970. TheAe weAe at,6o  compaubte decteases in the median ag"
                        6o)t each kace and sex catego&y. Thiz toweAing o6 the poputation's
                        median age is a &eveuat o6 the out-mig&ation tAend,6 expeAienced
                        duAing the 1950's and eaAty 1960'.6.

                  3.    The bitth &ate 6ot the pa,5t ten yeau has been cycticat with atoW in
                        1966 and a peak in 1970. TheAe iz a downuxftd tAend in biAth tate at
                        p&e,6ent, and thiz downwatd tLend i.6 te6tected in a decAea6ing peAcen-
                        tage o4 peAzonz in the 0-4 age gAoup. It appewLs that in-migAati6n
                        a accounting 4o& the absotute incAeases in thi6 g&oup.

                  4.    Discounting the e66ects o6 in6tation, totat ptanning GAea income,6
                        showed .6igni6icant incuazez between 1960 and 1970. Between 1960 and
                        1970, the totat county median 6amity income incteazed 64om $4,887 to
                        $7P114 in the conztant 1967 dottau . Thi6 inc4ea6e can be att4ibuted
                        to changu in the aAea',s emptoyment chaAactmizticz.

                  5.    Accokding to income .6tati.6tic.6, "&uAat" jamitie.6 a4e economicatty
                        betteA o46 than city 6amitie.6 in New HanoveA County. In 1970 the
                        income o6 a typicat city 6amity am $6,986, white that o6 a Autat
                        6amity uxu $8,547.

                  6.    In both 1960 and 1970,, the city contained a high concentAation o6
                        jamitia in the tow income tange.

                  7.    Among the majo& poputation g&oup.6 in the ptanning aAea, the uAban non-
                        white poputation " in the wout economic po.6ition, with an extAemety
                        taAge concentAation oj jamitie4 in the tow-income %ange.

                  8.    Hou,6ehotd 6i;e has been decAea6ing, and is expected to continue to
                        dectease in the nea& 6utuAe. The aveAage ho"ehotd .6ize-in 1970 ttku
                        3.08, and an aveAage hou.6ehotd 6ize og 2.9 peuon.6 iz pkojected 6o,%
                        1980.

                  9.    The numbeA and xetative peAcentage o6 otdeA peuons in the county ha-6
                        been ineAea.6ing and thi.6 tAend i,6 expected to continue in the neoA
                        6utuAe.

                                                            2

                            Poputation Atojections

                            1.   P)Lojections have been ptepaAed 6o)L the pexiod 1980 to 2000. Att oj the
                                 ptojection.6 emptoy auumptions conceAning the component-6 o6 poputation
                                 change, that is; biltth, death,6, and net migution.
                            2.   The tow and middte ptojectionz o6 the kange aAe based on hi6toticat
                                 t4end,s in the va&iabta. The highut ptojection o6 the kange i6 bazed
                                 on the cuhhent bixth Aate and a 6okecazted migAntion devetoped 6,kom
                                 1970-1974 zchoot en/totZnent data.

                            3.   PAojections

                                 Yea&                  Low                 Middte                High

                                 1980                 94038                 97546               101317

                                 1990                107613                116740               124608

                                 2000                122829                140283               151147

                                                                     3

                                                               7k

                                                   INTRODUCTION'

                                            OBJECTIVES AND ORGANIZATION

                        Considerations of the size, characteristics, and distribution of New
                   Hanover County's population are at the base of most decisions affecting
                   future development. Therefore, the description and analysis of the county's
                   population is a fundamental element in the Comprehensive Planning Program.
                   Population projections assist in estimating future levels of demand for
                   land for various uses and for community services and facilities. Studies
                   of population composition -- factors such as income, age, and race -- pro-
                   vide information of a more qualitative nature which is useful in the
                   description of important social and economic trends; in the definition of
                   problems to be,addressed by the planning program; and, in identifying
                   human resources which can be utilized in solving these problems.

                        A concentrated effort has been made to define the population informa-
                   tion needs of the Comprehensive Planning Program and to develop statistics
                   and meaningful analyses to meet these,needs. As a result, four primary
                   objectives have been identified for this study:

                        1.    Definition and interpretation of the recent population growth
                              trends of the planning area, giving particular attention to the
                              factors producing these trends and to their implications'fdr
                              future population levels;

                        2.    Identification of indicators of the planning area's social 'needs
                              as they relate to the Comprehensive Planning Program;

                        3.    Identification of major socio-economic differences between
                              residents of various communities within the planning area; and

                        4.    Preparation of reliable projections of the size and characteris-
                              tics of the planning area's future population.

                        Within the context of these objectives, this report has been divided
                   into three parts. The first part deals with the planning area's population
                   growth -- current size, growth trends, growth components, and comparisons
                   with other jurisdictions. The second part of the report consists of an
                   analysis of the county's population composition and its implications for the
                   Comprehensive Planning Program. The final part provides projections of
                   the planning area's future population.

                        The most widely used source of statistics for population analysis is
                   the U.S. Census Bureau, and the present study relies heavily on this data
                   source. However, utilizing census data does present problems. The 1970
                   census is now almost five years old, and the data collected at that time
                   do not adequately describe some of the more recent trends associated with
                   the planning area's rapid growth. To minimize this shortcoming, secondary
                   data sources have been used where appropriate to "up-date" the census data.

                                                   I. GROWTH TREND ANALYSIS

                                Analysis of growth trends is one of the most basic elements in   the
                          comprehensive evaluation of the planning area's population. Growth     trend
                          information serves four important functions in the planning process:

                                1.   Growth trends are an indicator of the pressure on the planning
                                     area's land resources and its community services and facilities.

                                2.   County growth trends can pinpoint significant changes in the
                                     structure of the area's economy.

                                3.   Analysis and comparison of the growth trends of various areas of
                                     the county permits identification of growth differentials. All
                                     areas of a county seldom experience uniform growth rates,
                                     presenting different problems of growth management.

                                4.   Analysis of historic growth trends provides a basis for making
                                     forecasts of the planning area's future population levels.

                                While the county boundaries do not conform precisely to the department's
                          formal area of planning responsibility, New Hanover County has been used as
                          the basic unit of analysis in evaluating growth trends; however, further
                          comparisons are made with the growth of other jurisdictions (the state and
                          the region) and with subdivisions of the county (townships, urban and rural
                          areas).

                                                   A. COUNTY GROWTH TRENDS

                                In describing and analyzing the population growth history of New Hanover
                          County, it is first important to understand that populations grow in much the
                          same way that money grows when interest is compounded. Just as the interest
                          dollars themselves earn interest, so people added to the county's population
                          produce more people. In this sense, county growth trends are geometric
                          rather than arithmetic, and although the determination of average annual
                          geometric growth rates requires more extensive calculations, they more
                          closely approximate the actual growth trend of the population.a Therefore,
                          geometric growth rates have been used to analyze the county's population
                          increases.

                                New Hanover County's recent growth history, both in terms of absolute
                          increases and annual growth rates, is summarized in Table 1. Between the
                          1.930 and the 1970 censuses, the county's population increased by nearly
                          100 percent, from approximately 43,000 to 83,000. During this period,

                                aAverage annual geometric growth rates are derived using the compound
                          interest formula:
                                                           P = Po (1 + r)n,
                                Where P0 is the initial popuYation, Pn is the population at the end of
                          the time period, n is the time period, and r is the average annual rate of
                          change.

                                                               5

                                                            7

                   however, the population increase has not been consistent. In the 1930's the
                   county experienced an average annual growth of 1.1 percent, but as a result
                   of the county's rapid industrial expansion during the war years, the growth
                   rate surged to 2.8 percent during the 1940-50 period. The censuses of 1960
                   and 1970 have shown that, although the county's rate of growth is much
                   slower, its population is increasing and that it is growing at an increasing
                   rate -- 1.3 and 1.5 percent per year respectively during the 1950's and the
                   1960's. This forty year growth trend is illustrated in Figure 1.

                         One of the best ways to assess the significance of the county's popula-
                   tion growth rates is to relate them to the number of years required for the
                   population to double at a given growth rate. With an annual growth of 1.1
                   percent which the county experienced during the 1930's, it would require
                   approximately sixty-three years for the population to double; however, at
                   the 1960's growth rate of 1.5 percent, it would require only forty-six years
                   for the county's population to double.

                                                         TABLE 1

                                NEW HANOVER COUNTY POPULATION GROWTH CHARACTERISTICS
                                      FOR SELECTED YEARS BETWEEN 1930 AND 1970a

                                                    County Popu  at on  b

                                                   1930 . . . .  43,010
                                                   1940 . . . .  47,935
                                                   1950 . . . .  63,272
                                                   1960 . . . .  71,742
                                                   1970 . . . .  82,996

                                                    Absolute Increase

                                               1930-40  . . . .    4,925
                                               1940-50  . . . .  15,337
                                               1950-60  . . . .    8,470
                                               1960-70  . . . .  11,254

                                              Average Annual    Growth Rate

                                             1930-40  . . . .   1.1 percent
                                             1940-50  . . . .   2.8 percent
                                             1950-60  . . . .   1.3 percent
                                             1960-70  . . . .   1.5 percent

                         a U.S. Census of Population; Wilmington-New Hanover Planning Department.
                         b Estimates of current population are found in a separate section of
                   this  report.

                                                             6

                                                              FIGURE I
                                               POPULATION GROWTH TRENDS
                                      NEW HANOVER COUNTY AND CITY OF WILMINGTON
                  90-                                       1930-1970                                            90

                  so-                                                                                         -80
                p
                0                      NEW HANOVER COUNTY
                p
                u                      CITY OF WILMINGTON
                L
                A TO-                                                                                         -70
                T

                0
                N

                1 60-                                                                                         -60
                N

                T
                H'
                0
                u 50-                                                                                         -50
                s                           oo@
                A

                D
                s
                  40-                                                                                         -40
                  301                       1                                                                 1-30
                      1930                 1940                 1950                  1960                  1970
                                                     I I t t t I I i I I I

                                                               YEAR

                                     B.   STATE AND REGIONAL COMPARISONS

                       As shown in Table 2, New Hanover County's average annual growth rate
                  over the past two census periods has been slightly higher than that of the
                  state as a whole. From 1950 to 1960, the county grew at an annual rate of
                  1.30 percent while the state's population increased by 1.15 percent each
                  year. During the 1960's the difference between the two rates of growth
                  was much greater; the state's annual growth rate declined slightly to 1.1
                  percent while that of the county increased to approximately 1.5 percent.

                       The relationship between the population increase of the county and
                  Region ,O,,a is similar. During both census periods, the growth rate of the
                  county was much higher than that of the region. At the same time, however,
                  the gap between the growth rates closed sharply from 1950 to 1970. During
                  the 1950's, the county's annual growth was more than 2.5 times greater than
                  that of the region. Between 1960 and 1970, however, the county's growth
                  rate was slightly less than two times the region's rate of growth.

                       In conjunction with the higher growth rates, the county's share of
                  regional and state population is also increasing. For example, between
                  1950 and 1970, New Hanover County's share of total state population in-
                  creased from 1.56 percent to 1.63 percent. Similarly, the county's share
                  of Region "0" population increased from 41.7 percent in 1950 to 48.2 percent
                  in 1970.

                       New Hanover Countyls recent growth in population has been dramatic: its
                  annual growth rate is increasing; it is growing faster than Region "0" or the
                  state; and its share of regional and state population is increasing. if
                  these trends mirror the county's future growth, then there are obvious
                  implications for the Comprehensive Planning Program:

                       1.   A rapidly expanding population will bring increasing pressure on
                            county's land resources, emphasizing the.need for new and improved
                            land management programs;

                       2.   The customary response time for bringing public services and
                            facilities "on-line" must be greatly reduced, requiring expanding
                            planning programs throughout the various agencies and departments
                            of city and county governments; and

                       3.   If the patterns of other urban areas are maintained, the expanding
                            population will bring a demand for qualitative as well as quantita-
                            tive increases in the level of public services.

                       a Region "0" includes New Hanover, Pender, Brunswick, and Columbus
                  Counties.

                                                     8

                                                                           TABLE 2

                               Comparison of Population Growth Rates      New Hanover County, Region "0", and North Carolina

                                                               Population                          Absolute                 Growth
                               Area                                                                Increase                 Rate
                                                    1950           1960          1970          50-60         60-70     50-60     60-70

                         New Hanover County         63,272          71,742        82,996       8,470        11,254     1.30%     1.50%

                         Region "0"                151,554         159,501       172,305       7,947        12,804     0.51%     0.78%

                         North Carolina          4,061,929      4,556,155      5,082,059      494,226      525,904     1.15%     1.10%

                         Source: U. S. Census of Population; Wilmington      New Hanover Planning Department

                                                                           TABLE 3

                                                New Hanover County Share of Total Population       1950    1970

                                                                    New Hanover County@Share of Total Population
                                            Area
                                                                    1950                 1960                 1970

                                       North Carolina                1*56%               1,57%                1.63%

                                       Region "0"                   41.10%              45.00%.              48.20%

                                       Source; U. S. Census of Population

                                         C.   SUBAREA GROWTH TRENDS

                      While New Hanover County has experienced a rapid growth in population
                 during recent years, a closer examination of subareas of the county indicates
                 that this growth has not been uniform. As shown in Table 4, census tabula-
                 tions permit analysis of subarea growth trends at two levels. First is a
                 comparison of Wilmington and the remaining portions of the county. This may
                 be characterized as an urban-rural comparison because, according to Census
                 Bureau, the towns of Wrightsville Beach, Carolina Beach, and Kure Beach have
                 populations less than 2,500 and are classified as rural. The second compari-
                 son is based on the growth differentials of the county's township subdivisions.
                 This system of subareas is illustrated in Figure 2.

                      Comparison of urban and rural growth characteristics found in Table 4
                 reveals a rapid suburbanization process occurring in New Hanover County. In
                 1950, almost three-fourths of the county's population resided within the
                 City of Wilmington. Over the past twenty years development patterns have
                 changed to the extent that in 1970 the county's population was almost
                 equally divided between the city and the rural areas of the county.

                      This process. of suburbanization is the product of many factors -- city-
                 county tax differentials, transportation patterns, land availability, and
                 residential amenities, to mention a few. The process is usually associated
                 with patterns of urban sprawl which has important implications for the'
                 Comprehensive Planning Program. There must be close cooperation and coordi-
                 nation between the various agencies and departments of city and county
                 government having responsibility for developing comprehensive plans.
                 Without this cooperation and coordination, the development of public
                 facilities may, through their tendency to attract residential growth, further
                 contribute to the development of sprawl patterns resulting in the inefficient
                 use of land resources and the inefficient expenditure of tax resources.

                      Within the rural areas of the county, the growth trends have been
                 uneven also. In 1970, Harnett Township in the northeast and Masonboro
                 Township in the central portion of the county had the largest populations.
                 Because of their locational characteristics -- close proximity to the City
                 of Wilmington and:the recreational resources of the county's beach areas --
                 these townships will remain growth areas of the county. At the same time,
                 however, it is important to note that, during the 1960's, the annual
                 growth rates of Federal Point and Cape Fear Townships -- both approximately
                 4.5 percent -- were the highest of any area in the county. Thus, it is
                 reasonable to expect that these areas will receive an increasingly larger
                 share of the county's population growth.

                                                                                TABLE 4

                                                    COMPARISON OF SUBAREA GROWTH TRENDS        1950, 1960 AND 1970

                                                                                           Average Annual              Share of Total
                                 Area                          Population                   Growth Rate              County Population
                                                      1950         1960        1970        50-60      60-70       1950       1960       1970

                            New Hanover County        63,272     71,742       82,996         1.3%     1.50%        N.A.       N.A.       N.A.
                            urban areab               45,043     44,013       46,169c      -0.23%     0.48%       71.2%-     61.3%      55.6%

                            Rural area                18,229     27,729       36,827       4.13%      2.82%       28.8%      38.6%      44.4%

                            Cape Fear Twp.            3,844        4,238       6,734       1.00%      4.55%        6.1%       5.9%       8.1%

                            Federal Point  Twp.       2,473        3,234       5,113       2.67%      4.50%        3.9%       4.5%       6.2%

                            Harnett TFp-              8,421      14,427       17,427       5.26%      1.88%       13.3%      20.1%      21.0%

                            Masonboro Twp.            3,491        5,830       7,553       5.02%      2.57%        5.5%       8.1%       9.1%

                                a Calculated from U.S. Census data.
                                b For this analysis, urban area considered to be Wilmington Township.
                                c Wilmington Township 1960-70 population increase includes additions from annexation in 1964.

                                                    CAPE FEAR

                                421          117
                                            t       132
                                            133

                                                               17

                                                           HARNETT
                                       . ...... .. ....

                                                            74

                                                          76

                                                    132

                                             MASON 10110

                                             421

                                                 Ole
                                        -9-  4(DE AL
                                               PO

                                                       0
                                                       tp
                                                   421 jo

                                                                    FIGURE 2
                                                         New Hanover CountY
                                                               Townships

                                                                       Urban Area

                                                                      "Rural" Area

                                       Ii. POPULATION DYNAMICS

                   A. FACTORS AFFECTION NEW HANOVER COUNTY"S POPULATION GROWTH

                    New Hanover County's recent population growth is the result  of two
                basic processes -- natural increase and net migration. Natural increase is,
                an internal growth factor which consists of the excess number of births over
                deaths. Migration, on the other hand, is an external factor which is
                determined by the net effect of in-migration and out-migration, and which
                may add to or offset the effects of natural increase. The main purpose of
                this section is to analyze these processes and thereby 6btain a better
                understanding of the planning area's future growth environment.

                1) Natural Increase

                    Natural increase is normally expressed as a ratea which relates excess
                births over deaths to total population. Implicit in the natural increase
                rates are the jurisdiction's birth rates (fertility rate) and death rates
                (mortality rate). While natural increase is adequate for explaining
                population growth in quantitative terms, it tends to obscure changes in
                birth and death rates which may point to more fundamental changes in the
                bocial and economic composition of the population. Therefore, in addition
                to analyzing trends in natural increase, it is also useful to examine trends
                in the county's birth and death rates.

                    Over the past twenty-four years, the importance of natural increase as
                a component of New Hanover County's total population growth has decreased
                dramatically. During the 1950's, the average annual rate, of natural increase
                was relatively high -- 16*4 percent -- and was the only source of growth since
                the county experienced a net out-migration for the ten year period. However,
                between 1960 and 1970, the natural increase rate dropped to 9.5 percent, and
                in the past four years (1970-1973) dropped further to 8.7 percent.

                    Trends in Wilmington's rate of natural increase provide a sharp contrast
                to the county as a whole. While the county's natural increase has been de-
                clining from a relativeTy high level during the 1950's, the city's rate of
                natural increase has remained low and stable. During the 1960's, the city's
                rate was approximately 3.2 percent, and between 1970 and 1974 it averaged 3.1
                percent per year. These apparent inconsistencies between the natural increase
                rates of city residents and the county as a whole are the result of changes
                in the socio-economic characteristics of Wilmington residents produced by
                long-term out-migration from the city. These trends will be discussed in
                more detail in later sections.

                    aNatural increase = total births - total deaths.
                    Average annual rate of natural increase = (number births-deaths) x 1000
                                                                            10
                                                             1960 population & 1970 population
                                                                             2

                                                  12

                           2) Birth Rates

                                New Hanover County births are the most complex of the county's growth
                           variables. They reflect such diverse factors as the level of economic
                           activity in the area, the level of education of county residents, the degree
                           of industrialization, the residents' attitudes toward ideal family size, and
                           the ethno-economic characteristics of the population. It is stressed,
                           therefore, that these variables acting in concert often make it difficult
                           to fully explain changes in birth rates.

                                New Hanover County's birth ratea trends for the past ten year period,
                           which are plotted in Figure 3, exhibit three fairly distinct phases. In
                           the first phase, extending from 1963 to 1966, the total birth rate declined
                           from a high of approximately 21.0 percent to a low of 17.0 percent. Between
                           1966 and 1970, the county's birth rate accelerated, reaching almost 21.0
                           percent in 1970. Since 1970, the birth rate has again entered a declining
                           phase, falling to 17.2 percent in 1973.

                                The county's total birth rate trends have been further analyzed using
                           the "least squares" method -- a technique which averages, or "smooths out",
                           the annual variations to show the general trend. The "least squares" trend
                           line plotted in Figure 3 reveals a slight overall downward trend in the
                           county's birth rate. The "least squares"  value for the birth rate in 1963
                           is 19.7 percent, and in 1973 it is 18.3 pe.rcent.

                                Wilmington's birth rate trends are plotted in Figure 4. While showing
                           somewhat more erratic annual fluctuations, the city's trend line follows
                           the three cycles which have been described for the county. Similarly, a
                           "least squares" analysis of the city's birth rate trend reveals a slight
                           overall decline for the 1963-73 period.

                           3) Death Rates

                                Deaths have traditionally been the most stable of the three variables
                           which produce population change. There is'a close relationship between age
                           and the risk of death, and age may be considered the most important variable
                           determining a population's death rate. It is emphasized, however, that
                           other contributing factors, such as race, level of health care, occupation,
                           and place of residence, also have a bearing on the death rate.

                                aBirth rates are computed for the total population and race-specific
                           components of the population according to the following formula:

                                Crude birth rate = number of live births Ic 1000
                                                         population

                                Using this formula, then, the "race-specific" birth rates presented in
                           this report should be viewed as'indicators of social characteristics rather
                           than from the standpoint of race-specific contributions to natural increase.
                           In other words, even though the nonwhite birth rate is higher than the white
                           birth rate, there are more white live births in absolute numbers than non-
                           white births.

                                                           's

                                                                                                  FIGURE 3
                             30-                                                                         1             1             1             1                                30
                                -                        NEW HANOVER COUNTY BIRTH RATES, 1963-1973

                         B  25                                                                                                                                                    -25
                         1                         %.%
                         R
                         T
                         H
                         s                                                                                                                                        ------- -
                         p
                         E
                         R
                         1   20-                                                                                                                                                  -2-0
                         0
                         0
                         0

                         p
                         U
                         L
                         A   15-
                         T                                                                                                                                                        -15
                         1      -                                                                                                                                                 -
                         0                                                                                                             TOTAL       POPULATION
                         N                                                                                                             NON WHITE POPULATION
                                                                                                                                       WHITE POPULATION
                                                                                                                                       LEAST SQUARES TREND
                                                                                                                                         LI NE
                            10                                                                                                                     1 - - I                     I L-10
                                 1963         1964           1965          1966          1967          1968          1969           1970         1971          1972            1973

                                                                                                     YEAR
                                   SOURCE: N.C. STATE BOARD OF HEALTH, VITAL STATISTICS

                                                                                                   FIGURE 4
                           30                                                                            1              1                                                             30
                                                                  WILMINGTON BIRTH RATES, 1963 -1973

                       B
                       1                                                                                                                                                           -25
                       R
                       T
                       H
                       s

                       p
                       E
                       R

                       0   20-                                                                                                                                                     -20
                       0
                       0
                       p
                       0
                       p
                       U
                       L
                       A
                       T
                       1    15-
                       0                                                                                                                                                              15
                       N
                                                                                                                                        TOTAL POPULATION
                                                                                                                                        NON WHITE POPULATION
                                                                                                                                        WHITE POPULATION
                                                                                                                                        LEAST SQUARES TREND
                            10                                                                                                             LINE
                                                                                                                                                                   --              L-10
                                1963          1964           1965          1966          1967           1968          1969           1970         1971           1972           1973

                                                                                                      YEAR
                                  SOURCE: N. C.    STATE BOARD OF HEALTH, VITAL STATISTICS

                                                                                                  FIGURE 5
                            20-                                                                                                                                                     20
                                                        NEW HANOVER COUNTY DEATH RATES, 1963-1973

                       D
                       E     15-                                                                                                                                                 -15
                       A
                       T
                       H
                       s                                                                                                                           #,dole
                       p
                       E
                       R
                       1    10-                                                                                                                                                    10
                       0                                                                                 SIM
                       0
                       0

                       p
                       0
                       p
                       U
                       L
                       A
                       T     5-                                                                                                                                                  -5

                       N
                                                                                                                                      TOTAL       POPULATION
                                                                                                                                      NON WHITE POPULATION
                                                                                                                                      WHITE POPULATION
                             01                                                                                                                   1 -           I               L-o
                                1963          1964          1965          1966          1967          1968          1969           1970         1971           1972          1973

                                                                                                     YEAR
                                  SOURCE: N.C. STATE BOARD OF HEALTH, VITAL STATISTICS

                                                         I

                                    The county's total death rates and its race-specific components for
                              tile 1963-1973 period are plotted in Figure 5. As expected, the total county
                              rate has remained relatively stable for the eleven year period, and the rate
                              for the white population has followed this trend closely. The death rate
                              for the county's nonwhite residents, on the other hand, has shown signifi-
                              cant annual fluctuations and has been consistently higher than the rate of
                              the white population. By making the somewhat tenuous assumption that
                              factors such as access to health care is uniform for both groups, then it
                              appears that the higher death rate of the nonwhite population is primarily
                              the result of an aging population produced,by long-term out-migration of
                              nonwhites in the younger age groups.

                             4) Migration

                                    a)   COUNTY

                                    During recent years, migration rather than natural increase has been
                              the most important variable in the county's overall population growth and
                              in the development of growth differentials within the county. People mi-
                              grate for many reasons, but primary among these are better economic
                              opportunitie.s, better and more abundant housing, and better recreational
                              opportunities and social benefits. All of these factors are evident in New
                              Hanover County's migration trends.

                                    Table 5 shows the county's migration        rates for the 1950's and 1960's
                              and provides a comparison of the recent migration trends of the urban and
                              rural portions of the county. During the twenty year period between 1950
                              and 1970, the county's migration showed a reversal from a net out-migration
                              during the 1950's to a relatively significant in-migration of 5.4 percent
                              during the 1960's. This reversal is the result of a significant expansion
                              of county employment opportunities, beginning in the early 1960's. This
                              aspect of the county's growth will be discussed in more detail in a subse'-
                              quent section analyzing the county's economy.

                                                                      TABLE 5

                                                      NEW HANOVER COUNTY MIGRATION RATES

                                                           195040                            1960     70
                                     Area             Number    Rate             Number                         Rate
                              New Hanover County      -2,599    -4.1             3,868                          + 5.4
                                   White              ------    ----             6,747                          +13.0
                                   Nonwhite           ------    ----           (-2,879)                        (-14.4)
                              Wilmington              ------    ----           (-1,03)                         (- 4.4)
                                   White              ------    ----                250                         + 0.9
                                   Nonwhite           ------    ----           (-2,173)                        (-13.1)

                              Rural New Hanover       ------    ----             5,791                          +20.9
                                   White              ------    ----             6,497                          +26.7
                                   Nonwhite           ------    ----  1             706)                       (-20.9)

                              Source: Wilmington-New Hanover Planning Department.

                                                                         1@6

                       b) URBAN-RURAL

                       Within the county there are sharp contrasts between the migration
                  rates of Wilmington and the rural areas of the county and between the white
                  and nonwhite population. Between 1960 and 1970, the city experienced a net
                  out-migration of 4.4 percent while the rural or suburban areas of the county
                  showed a net in-migration of more than 20 percent. There is good evidence
                  that a significant portion of residents leaving the city are locating in the
                  suburban areas of the county. For example between 1960 and 1970, the comty
                  as a whole experienced a net in-migration of 3,858 persons, while the rural
                  portion of the county gained 5,791 residents and the city lost 1,923 resi-
                  dents through migration. This is equivalent to suburban New Hanover County
                  receiving all 3,858 in-migrants to the county, plus 1,923 residents from
                  the city.

                       The principal causes of migration discussed above are evident in this
                  movement of population toward the suburban areas of the county. Subdivision
                  activity is much higher in the county than in the city, and the result has
                  been greater availability of housing in the suburban areas.

                       Taxes are also a significant factor. The 1974 ad valorem tax rate for
                  the unincorporated areas of New Hanover County is $0.79 per $100 valuation,
                  while that for city residents is $2.04 per $100 valuation. Although more urban
                  services are available to city residents, economics appear to be an im ortant
                  factor in the decision of many families to reside outside the city."   p

                       c) WHITE-NONWHITE

                       In recent years, New Hanover County and the City of Wilmington have
                  experienced heavy out-migration within the nonwhite population. Between
                  1960 and 1970, the county as a whole experienced a net out-migration of
                  2,647 nonwhite residents -- a rate of -14.4 percent for the decade. Since
                  most of the county's nonwhite population resides within the city, the bulk
                  of this out-migration occurred among city residents. The city's out-
                  migration rate for nonwhites during this period was -13.1 percent.

                       It is reasonable to assume that this heavy out-migration among non-
                  white residents has been a response to the combined effects of limited
                  employment opportunities within the New Hanover County economy and the
                  prospect for jobs in other areas. As the county's economy continues to
                  expand, the access of nonwhites to employment should improve, having the
                  effect of lowering out-migration.

                       New Hanover County's migration trends will have a significant impact
                  on the structure of the county's population. A nationwide study by the
                  Bureau of the Census during the@1950's and 1960's revealed that the migrat-
                  ing population had a median age approximately ten years younger than the
                  non-migrating population. The modal age category, or the age group appear-
                  ing most frequently, of the migrating population was 20 - 24 years. The
                  migrating population also abounded with pre-school children. Men and women
                  between the ages of 20 and 44 -- the child bearing years -- constituted 48
                  percent of the migrating population and only 31 percent of the non-migrants.

                                                        18-

                               Thus, the county's strong in-migration trends will have the overall
                          effect of lowering the population's median age and increasing the fecunditya
                          rate. Whether the increased fecundity rate will be translated into an in-
                          creased birth rate is dependent upon diverse social and economic variables.

                               Within the City of Wilmington, the situation is different. If the
                          heavy out-migration trends continue, the cityts population will experience
                          an increasing median age and a further lowering of the birth rate.

                                aFecundity is defined as the physiological capacity to reproduce.

                                                              ;57

                                    III. ESTIMATES OF CURRENT POPULATION

                         Due to the significant changes in New Hanover County's population
                   since the 1970 census, it is necessary to derive an estimate of the county's
                   current population. A Census Bureau technique which is based on vital
                   statistics and school enrollment data has been utilized to prepare current
                   estimates. Essentially, the technique uses births and deaths reported by
                   the N. C. State Board of Health and migration rates calculated from school
                   enrollment data to derive an estimate.

                         A current population estimate and its births, deaths, and migration
                   components are found in Table 6. The significant reversal of nonwhite out-
                   migration should be noted. During the 1960's, the county's nonwhite
                   population experienced a net out-migration of 14.4 percent; however, based
                   on school enrollment data for the 1970-74 period, a 1970-80 net in-migration
                   of 5.8 percent is projected for the nonwhite population. At the same time,
                   the county's white migration rate is projected to rise to 16 percent.

                         It is reasonable to assume that the 1970-74 trend on which these
                   estimates are based is an indication of,expanding employment opportunities
                   within the county.

                                                        TABLE 6

                                                                       a
                              NEW HANOVER COUNTY POPULATION ESTIMATE       DECEMBER, 1974

                                Growth Component April 1970-Dec. 1974              Population
                                                                                                1970-74
                   Population                        Net Migration                 Dec. 1974     Growth
                     Group      Births   Deaths Number 1970-80 Rate         1970   Estimate      Rate

                   Total        7,509    4,008    5,424        13.5%       82,996   91,921       10.7%

                   White        5,570    2,789   4,889         16.0%       63,951   71,621       12.0%

                   Nonwhite     1,939    1,219      535         5.8%       19,045   20,300         6.6%

                         aComputed from U.S. Bureau of Census, N.C. State Board of Health, and
                   New Hanover County Board of Education data. A detailed description of this
                   method can be found in The Methods and Materials of Demography, Vol. 2,
                   P. 751, U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, May 1973.

                                                         20

                                                IV. POPULATION COMPOSITION

                                The second major element of this study deals with the county's
                           population composition and its implications for the Comprehensive Planning
                           Program. Although, in strict demographic terms, "composition" refers to
                           all of the characteristics of the people who comprise the county's popula-
                           tion, the information and analysis in this section have been limited to
                           those factors which are most relevant to the county's planning program and
                           which will best explain the growth processes outlined in the first section
                           of this report.

                                Within the context of the comprehensive planning process, the study
                           of population composition is intended to serve three main purposes:

                                1.   To provide a basis for estimating demand for public and private
                                     services and facilities;

                                2.   To provide an information base for designing resource development
                                     programs by documenting the planning area's socio-economic
                                     problems and prospects;

                                3.   To identify the social factors r'elated to the growth processes
                                     outlined in the first part of the study.

                                These objectives suggest that four basic characteristics are essential
                           in the analysis of the planning area's population composition: sex, R&e,
                           race, and income. These characteristics, then, are the major focus of this
                           section of the report.

                                                 A. AGE AND SEX COMPOSITION

                                Age and sex are the most basic of the population characteristics, be-
                           cause age and sex groupings are traditionally viewed as the "building
                           blocks" of the population. As such, they are important considerations in
                           the comprehensive planning process. Age structure is an important variable
                           in estimating requirements for facilities and services, schools, health
                           care, housing, and recreation; sex and age characteristics are important
                           elements in natality,mortality, and migration trends. In addition, the
                           balance of the sexes, or distribution between male and females, affects
                           social roles and employment patterns in the community.

                           1) Sex Composition

                                The population sex ratio is a principal measure of sex composition
                           used in technical studies. This measure is defined as the number of males
                           per 100 females, or mathematically:

                                Sex ratio = Total males X 100   a
                                            Total females

                                all.S. Bureau of the Census, The Methods and Materials of Demography, by
                           Henry S. Shryock, Jacob S. Siegel, et al (Government Printing Office:
                           Washington, D. C., 1971) p. 191.

                                                               c

                         The basic assumption inherent in this method of evaluating sex
                    composition is that the expected distribution of population between males
                    and females is exactly even, resulting in a ratio of 100.0, and that major
                    deviations from this standard reveal an excess of males or females in a
                    population.

                         A second measure of sex composition is the excess (or deficit) of
                    males as a percent of the total population which is stated mathematically
                    as:

                         Total males - Total females X 100
                               Total population

                    In this method the balance point between the sexes is zero; therefore, a
                    positive value denotes a relative excess of males and a negative value
                    denotes an excess of females.a

                         While conveying essentially the same information, the sex ratio method
                    relates the two population groups to each other whereas the measure of male
                    excess (or deficit) relates the distribution of population between sexes to
                    the total population. Both these measures for Wilmington and New Hanover
                    County are shown in Table 7.

                                                         TABLE 7

                                 MEASURES OF SEX COMPOSITION -- 1950, 1960, and 1970

                                                                          Sex       Percent Male
                                   Year     Male     Female    Total     Ratio    Excess or Deficit

                    New Hanover    1950    30,038    33,234    63,272    90.38        (-5.05)
                    County         1960    34,223    37,519    71,742    91.22        (-4.59)
                                   1970    39,667    43,329    82,996    91.55        (-4.41)

                    City of        1950     N/A       N/A       N/A       N/A           N/A
                    Wilmington     1960    20,485    23,528    44,013    87.07        (-6.91)
                                   1970    21,245    24,924    46,169    85.24        (-7.97)

                    Source: Wilmington-New Hanover Planning Department, U.S.. Bureau of the
                             Census, U.S. Census of Population.

                         Nationally, sex ratios normally fall within a range of 95 to 102.
                    Therefore, ratios Ioutside the range of 90 to 105 may be viewed as "signifi-
                    cant variations'l.b Table 7 indicates a male deficit outside the normal

                         aU.S. Bureau of the Census, The Methods and Materials of Demography,
                    p. 192.
                         bIbid., p. 191

                                                           22

                          range for New Hanover County, and an even greater disparity for Wilmington
                          into the "extreme" range, where there were only 85 males to each 100 fe-
                          males in 1970.

                               Because sex ratios may vary between population subgroups the sex
                          composition by race is depicted in Table 8. This table shows that while
                          the county as a whole has a low sex ratio for whites, an even greater sex
                          disparity exists within Wilmington for both races. The deficiency of males
                          is in part attributable to migration patterns for both races.

                               The disparity in the planning area's sex ratios, especially within the
                          city, has several implications, including the following:

                               1.    Demands for health and social programs designed for women,
                                     especially those in the younger and older age groups;

                               2.    More women in the work force and demand for female-oriented
                                     industrial activity; and

                               3.    A need for female-oriented job training and education for female
                                     heads of households in, or seeking to enter, the labor force; and
                                     a concurrent provision for child care if desired.

                          2) Age Composition

                               Many planning activities require age data. The age structure of a
                          population considerably affects social relationships within a community and
                          demands placed upon public and private sectors in that community to meet
                          needs. Age composition is an important variable in studies of mortality
                          and fertility, housing demand, school population and labor force composition.

                               An analysis of the percent distribution of population among age groups
                          permits identification and analysis of changes in the county's age structure
                          over time. This distribution for New Hanover County is illustrated in
                          Figure 6 which shows the percentage of the county's 1960 and 1970 population
                          in five-year age group increments.

                               Comparing relative changes in age structure   between the two censuses
                          reveals a significant decrease in the percentage   of population under five
                          years of age and fewer youths in the five to ten   age group. This reflects
                          the declines in birth rate previously discussed,   with in-migration account-
                          ing for the absolute increases in this group. A    second trend of major
                          significance occurs in the fifteen to thirty age   groups which experienced a
                          relative increase in population between 1960 and   1970. Since these age
                          groups are included in those most directly affected by migration, this
                          trend, in Ipart, reflects a net in-migration most likely resulting from im-
                          proved economic opportunities within New Hanover County.

                               The thirty to forty-five age group experienced a relative decrease in
                          population'between 1960 and 1970. This characteristic is hold-over from
                          Ithe 1950's when the county experienced relatively heavy out-migration, and
                          it is anticipated that this pattern will be evident in the future as these
                          residents move into successively older age groups.

                                                               23

                                                                              TABLE 8

                                                  MEASURES OF SEX COMPOSITION BY RACE        1950, 1960 and 1970

                                          Year                     White                                    Nonwhite
                                                                         I Sex    % Male                               Sex    % Male
                                               I.Male ' Female Total      Ratio   Deficit    Male   Female Total       Ratio  Deficit

                           New Hanover    1950  20,854 22,576 43,430      92.37   (-3.96)    9,184 10,658 19,842 86.17        (-7.43)
                           County
                                          1960  25,053 26,691 51,744      93.86   (-3.17)    9,170 101828 19,998 84.69        (-8.29)

                                          1970  30,935 33,016 63,951      93.70   (-3.25)    8,742 10,313 19,045 84.67        (-8.30)

                           City of        1950   N/A      N/A      N/A     N/A      N/A       N/A     N/A     N/A      N/A      N/A
                           Wilmington
                                          1960 12,935 14,460 27,395       89.45 (-5.57)      7,550    9,068 16,618 83.26 (-9.13)

                                          1970 13,993 16,122 30,115       86.79 (-7.07)      7,252    8,802 16,054 82.39 (-9.65)

                           Source: Wilmington-New Hanover Planning Department; U.S. Bureau of        the Census, U.S. Census-of Population.

                                                                        FIGURE 6
                      12-                                                                                                             12
                                                              NE,W HANOVER, COUNTY                                                 -11
                                                                 AGE DISTRIBUTION                                                 1-10
                      lo-                                           -1960 -1970 -

                    p 9-                                                                                                           -9
                    E
                    R
                    c
                    E 8-                                                                                                              8
                    N
                    T 7-
                    0-                                                                                                             -7
                    P 6-
                    T                                                                                                                 6

                    T
                    A 5-                                                                                                           -5
                    L

                    p
                    0 4-                                                                                                           -4
                    p
                    U
                    L
                    A
                    T
                    1                 -1960
                    0 2-
                    N                 ---- wo
                      01                                                                                                              0
                                                                L                  I    I           I                              L
                         0     5     10   15   20    25    30    35   40    45    50    55   60    65    70    75    80   85+

                                                                            AGE
                         SOURCE: U S. BUREAU OF THE CENSUS

                        Median il&!1 Is a statistical measure of age composition which may be
                   defined as the age which divides the population into two equally-sized
                   groups, one younger and the other older than the median age. For compara-
                   tive purposes those populations with a median age under twenty may be
                   defined as "young", those with medians between twenty and,twenty-nine as
                                                                           a
                   "intermediate", and those thirty and over as "old".

                        Based on census information New Hanover County has experienced a slight
                   drop in median age between 1960 and 1970, from a median age in 1960 of 28.6
                   to 27.8 in 1970. Both of these are in the "intermediate" range (See Table
                   9), but, as already noted, the relative percentages of persons in older age
                   groups have been increasing. Therefore, this decrease in median years re-
                   flects the countering effect of the increases in the late teen years and
                   early twenties.

                                                        TABLE 9

                                   NEW HANOVER COUNTY MEDIAN AGE -- 1960 and 1970

                                  New Hanover County                          Wilmington
                              Total        Male       Female        TotaT       Male         Female

                   1960       28.6         26.9        30.1         29.1        26.6          31.1

                   1970       27.8         26.3        29.2         28.6        26.2          31.1

                   Source: U.S.   Census of Population

                   3) Age     Sex Composition

                        A "population pyramid" is an effective method of graphically depicting
                   the age-sex composition of a population. The basic population pyramid is
                   designed to display the age-sex structure of a population, in this case in
                   five year increments, in ascending order from the lowest to the highest,
                   horizontally pyramided on one another. Each bar represents the number of
                   persons within a specific five-year age group. The bars for females are
                   given on the right of the central vertical axis with the bars for males
                   being shown on the left of the axis.

                        A normal population pyramid has no appreciable sags or large jumps
                   between each age increment, and as shown in Figure 7, this typical situation
                   does not exist in New Hanover County. The county's pyramids show that a
                   large segment of young adults and middle aged persons are absent from the
                   population. Since these years are normally those of @roductivity in the
                                                                             p

                        aThe Methods and Materials of Demography, Vol. 1, p. 234, U.S. Depart-
                   ment Of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, May 1973.

                                                        26

                                                                                             F(GURE 7
                                                                                AGE DISTRIBUTION
                                                            NEW HANOVER COUNTY - 1960 & 1970
                                                                                               1960
                                         85'+
                                         80-84              MALE                                                               FEMALE
                                         75-79                  1                                                                     1
                                         70-'74            M NON WHITE
                                         65-69-             =     WHITE

                                         60-64

                                         55-59

                                         50-54

                                         45-49
                                         40-447

                                         35-39

                                         30-34

                                         25-29

                                         20-24

                                         15-19

                                         10-14

                                         5-9

                                         0-4

                                                   7    6       5     4      3      2       1     0       1     2      3      4       5     6     7
                                                   1                                 1      1     1       1     1      1      1       1     1      1
                                                                                  PERCENT OF TOTAL BY RACE
                                                                                               1970

                                         85+
                                         80-84              MALE                                                               FEMALE

                                         75-79
                                         70-74-                   NON WHITE--
                                         65-69                    WHITE

                                         60-64

                                         55-59

                                         50-54

                                         45-49

                                         40-44

                                         55-39

                                         30-34

                                         25-29

                                         20-24

                                         15-19

                                         10-14
                                         5-9       --Jm
                                         0-4

                                                   7    6       5     4      3      2       1     0       1     2     3       4       5    6      7

                                                                                 PERCENT OF TOTAL BY RACE

                    work force, this decrease indicates an abundance of dependent persons,
                    botli young and old in New Hanover County. The major causative factor is
                    out-migration prior to the 1960's resulting primarily from better employ-
                    ment opportunities elsewhere.

                         During the 1960's, the number of white youths in the 0-4 age group,
                    and to a lesser extent in the 5-9 group, decreased substantially relative
                    to total population. This pattern is even more pronounced-in the nonwhite
                    population for these age groups.

                         A second observation of change over the decade is that exhibited by
                    the white population in the age groups fifteen to twenty-nine where a sub-
                    stantial relative increase@occurs. This trend is observable also in the
                    ten to twenty-four year age groups of the nonwhite population. However, these
                    increases are off-set by a decrease in the percent of tne total population
                    in the age groups between thirty and forty-four-, a characteristic which is
                    a remnant of the out-migration experienced prior to the 1960's.

                         Both subgroups exhibit a relative increase in the number of persons in
                    the forty-five years and older groups. Implicit in the increase in concen-
                    tration of older aged persons in the community is the need to provide
                    adequate recreational, housing, economic, and health care programs to meet
                    the characteristic needs of that sector of the population.

                                           B. INCOME CHARACTERISTICS

                         Accurate evaluation of the overall economic well-being of the planning
                    areals residents is difficult because there are no indicators available
                    which give a comprehensive view of the economic welfare of various segments
                    of the population and at the same time remain sensitive to significant life-
                    style variations among various families in the planning area. However, by
                    making the simplifying assumption that life-styles in the area are similar,
                    the accessibility of goods and services is perhaps the best measure of
                    economic well-being; and income, as a rough measure of the household's
                    access to goods and services, can be used as a crude indicator of overall
                    economic well-being.

                    1) Average Income

                         Average income is one of the most common measures of a population's
                    income characteristics; statistically, however, there are several techniques
                    for devising an average. The implications of using a particular technique
                    should be understood because the improper use of income averages can bias
                    the income analysis.

                         mean and median income values are the "average" measures which have
                    been used in this report to analyze income characteristics; however, it is
                    important to make a careful distinction between the meaning of the two
                    measures. Most'people when speaking of the "average" are actually referring
                    to the arithmetic mean, and in the case of incomes, the mean is simply the
                    sum of all family incomes divided by the number of families. Since this
                    measure does not account in any way for the distribution of income, it may
                    be considered a summary average which reflects the total income available
                    in the planning area.

                                                      28

                                 The  'median, as a measure of  average income, is the income level at which
                            half the families make more and     half the families make less. Median income
                            values are a measure of income distribution, and as such, they might be con-
                            sidered a typical average which gives a rough idea of the typical income of
                            families in the area.

                                 Thus, in an area where there exists a considerable disparity between
                            the number of families in the lower income groups and those in the upper
                            income groups, the median income may be considerably below the mean income.
                            However, only in the case of a perfectly even income distribution will they
                            be equal.

                            2) Planning Area Income Trends

                                 Analysis of the average income statistics found in Table 10 reveals
                            some highly significant changes in the planning areals overall income
                            characteristics during the 1960-70 decade. Although Wilmington's median
                            family income moved closer to the mean during the past decade, there is
                            still a considerable disparity between the-two values in both 1960 and
                            1970, indicating an uneven distribution of income with a concentration of
                            families in the low income categories. On the other hand, the data show
                            that families residing in areas outside the Wilmington City Limits have
                            moved from a situation of even income distribution to one more closely re-
                            sembling that of the city with a disproportionately large numbler of families
                            in the lower income group. The 1960 mean and median values for rural
                            families are almost equal, but in 1970 the median is far below the mean,

                                 These apparent changes in income distribution appear to be related to
                            changes in the planning area's residential settlement patterns. In-migration
                            of high income families resulting from expansion of the area's economy to-
                            gether with the development of a number of residential subdivisions in the
                            unincorporated areas of the county has produced an increase in the percentage
                            of high income families residing outside the city.

                                                                 TABLE 10
                                           PLANNING AREA MEAN INCOME VALUES, 1960 and 1970a

                                                                                                     Percent
                                   Area                     1960                 1970                increase
                                                                                                     1960-70
                            Wilmington City
                              Family Income
                                 Mean                      $5,162             $ 8,651                   67.6
                                 Median                    $3,870             $ 6,986                   80.5

                            Rural New Hanover       b
                              County Family Income                             $10,804                 106.8
                                 Mean                      $5,224
                                 Median                1   $5,002       1         8,547                 70.9
                            Source :  aU. S. Bureau of the Census, General    Social and Economic Characteristics,
                                      1960, 1970. bRural    New Hanover County defined as all area outside city
                                      limits of Wilmington, including small incorporated areas. Income data
                                      is not reported for this geographical area; therefore, average values
                                      presented are estimates based on calculations using tabulations of
                                      income distribution.

                        Although the statistics show a tendency toward unevenness in the
                   distribution of income in areas outside the city, it should be emphasized
                   that "rural" families have remained in a relatively better economic position
                   than families residing in the city. In 1960, the typical city family income
                   was $3,870 compared to a typical rural county resident income of $5,002 --
                   29 percent higher. In 1970, the situation was similar. The typical income
                   of a city family was $6'986 while that of the county was $8,547.

                        In addition to showing relative changes in the distribution of income
                   in the planning area, the 1960-70 family income trends also point to an
                   actual improvement in the economic well-being of the area's residents.
                   Table 11 presents a conversion of the average income information found in
                   Table 10 to constant 1967 dollars. By converting to constant dollars and
                   thereby discounting inflation, it is possible to better evaluate the area
                   residents' actual increase in purchasing power.

                        With the effects of inflation removed, the income statistics in Table
                   11 reflect a real upward trend in the income of typical planning area
                   families. Between 1960 and 1970, the constant dollar median income for
                   Wilmington families increased almost 38 percent, from $4,361 to $6,008. The
                   median income for rural county families showed a corresponding increase of
                   30.4 percent during the same period.

                        This apparent improvement of family incomes can be attributed to'changes
                   in the structure of the planning area's economy during the past decade, and
                   recent shifts in the characteristics of the area's employment provide an
                   illustration of how economic expansion has affected incomes. In 1962, almost
                   75 percent of the planning area's total manufacturing employment was in
                   nondurables -- employment which is characterized by stability, but relaEively
                   low wages. By 1972, the nondurables share of total employment had decreased
                   significantly, and employment in durables with related higher wages had in-
                   creased to 47 percent of the total manufacturing employment.a It should be
                   noted that this increased dependence on durables employment brings with it
                   a somewhat higher risk of instability during periods of extremely adverse
                   mational economic conditions.b

                   3) Income Characteristics of Major Population Subgroups

                        Within the planning area's environment of generally improving economic
                   conditions, it is important to examine the relative economic positions of
                   the major subgroups of the area's population. In order to make these rela-
                   tive comparisons, an income index has been constructed to relate the median
                   incomes of white city families, nonwhite city families, rural county
                   families and the median state income which is used as a standard. Median
                   state income has been chosen as a standard of comparison because it repre-
                   sents a geographic area having a similar life-style and economy to that of
                   the planning area; and, it contains a sufficiently large sample of families
                   not to be affected substantially by extreme local variations.

                        aNorth Carolina Em ployment Security Commission, Annual Work Force
                   Estimates, (Raleigh, 1972).

                        bWilbur R. Thompson, A Preface to Urban Economics, (Resources for the
                   Future, Inc.: Washington, 1968), pp. 150-160.

                                                     30 -

                                                                  TABLE I I

                                        AVERAGE INCOME VALUES IN CONSTANT DOLLARS        1960 and 1970

                                                                Constant 1967 Dollars          Percent Increase
                                  Area                         1960                1970             1960-70

                              Wilmington City
                                Family Income

                                   Mean                        5,818               7,440               27.9
                                   Median                      4,361               6,008               37.8

                              Rural New Hanover
                                County Family Income

                                   Mean                        5,887               9,291               57.8
                                   Median                      5,637               7,350               30.4

                              Source:, Wilmington-New Hanover Planning     Department; U.S. Census of
                                        Population.

                                                                  TABLE 12

                                  INCOME INDICES FOR PLANNING AREA POPULATION GROUPS -- 1960 and 1970

                                                                       Income Index                 1960-70
                                                                    1960             1970           Change

                              Wilmington White Families             0.27             0.09

                              Wilmington Nonwhite Families        (-0.42)          (-0.46)          (-0.04)

                              Rural County Families                 0.26             0.10           (-0.16)

                              Source: Wilmington-New Hanover Planning Department; U.S. Census of
                                        Population.

                                                                    31

                        The income index for each population group is calculated as follows:
                               Income Index = Subgroup median family income
                                              State median family income

                  Calculated in this manner,  the income indicies can be.interpreted as
                  follows:

                        1.  A positive index  indicates that the population group is relatively
                            better-off than the reference population;

                        2.  A negative index indicates that the population group is relatively
                            worse-off than the reference group; and,

                        3.  A positive 1960-1970 change indicates an improvement in the group's
                            economic conditions, and a negative change indicates a
                            deterioration.

                        Based on these guidelines, the income indicies in,Table 12 show first,
                  that the economic position of all three population groups declined relative
                  to the state median family income during the 1960-70 decade; however, it is
                  important to note that the income of typical Wilmington white families and
                  rural county families remained substantially above that of the state in
                  1970, despite the sharp decline for the decade. Nonwhite families, on the
                  other hand, exhibit extremely low income indicies for both 1960 and 1970,
                  but with a smaller decline during the decade.

                        The underlying factors which have produced these trends will be dis-
                  cussed in detail in an analysis of the planning area's economy; however.-
                  there appear to be at least two factors influencing the income characteris-
                  tics of the major population:

                        1.  While the areals expanding economy has produced changes in
                            employment characteristics, the structure of the state economy
                            has also changed;a and,

                        2.  Structural unemployment and underemployment among nonwhite
                            families resulting from remnants of economic discrimination
                            and inadequate education.

                  4) Implications of Income Characteristics

                        The family income trends which have been described for the planning
                  area are intended to provide an overview of the residents' income
                  characteristics. Using primarily median income as a measure of the economic
                  well-being of typical families, the following factors have been identified:

                        aAccording to the Bureau of the Census' Census of Manufacturing, for
                  the years 1954, 1958, 1963, and 1967, per employee wages for the planning
                  area was below that of the state.

                                                   32

                                 1.   The distribution of income among families residing in the rural
                                      portions of the planning area changed from a relatively even
                                      situation in 1960 to an uneven distribution in 1970 with a dis-
                                      proportionately large number of families in the lower income
                                      groups.

                                 2.   As a group, rural families are economically better off than city
                                      families.

                                 3.   In both 1960 and 1970 the city contained a proportionately
                                      large number of families in the low income range.

                                 4.   After removing the effects of inflation, planning area incomes
                                      still exhibited significant increases between 1960 and 1970.
                                      These increases are related to changes in the area's employment
                                      characteristics.

                                 5.   Among the major population groups in the planning area, the urban
                                      nonwhite population's economic position is the worst, with an
                                      extremely large concentration of families in the low income range.

                                 The statistics on which these trends are based are not detailed enough
                            to be useful in the identification of specific problems related to income.
                            They do, however, reveal several issues or concerns which should be explored
                            in subsequent studies. Specifically, the following questions appear to be
                            relevant:

                                 1.   Are there inequities in city and county tax structures and.if so,
                                      how can they be minimized?

                                 2.   How do income differentials affect housing demand and production
                                      problems?

                                 3.   Can economic development programs be designed to help alleviate severe
                                      income differentials among the planning area's residents?

                                 4.   What specialized facilities and services -- particularly in the
                                      area of education -- are indicated by the area's income
                                      characteristics?

                                                 C. HOUSEHOLD CHARACTERISTICS

                                 A population's family composition is a significant demographic element
                            in that it shows the circle of persons who function together as a unit for
                            purposes of providing a livelihood, bearing and rearing children, rendering
                            mutual care in times of stress, and sharing in various social and recreational
                            activities. In this section an historical trend of households by type will
                            be reviewed and important subgroup characteristics analyzed.

                                 A trend occurring nationally during the past several years has been
                            that of a decreasing average household size. This trend has been experienced
                            by New Hanover County as well. Three factors contributing to this decrease
                            are (1) the slightly declining county birth rate, (2) an increase in single
                            member households, and (3) the increased incidence of older households wi th

                 no children present. In this section these single member households,
                 households with female heads, Black households and average household size
                 will be analyzed, trends discussed, and future household size estimated.

                 1) Average Household Size

                      Since the 1950 census the average size of a household in New Hanover
                 County has been decreasing (See Table 13). The average household size over
                 the three decade period has been smaller within the city than in the county,
                 with the 1970 average city household size slightly less than three persons
                 (2.95) and the county average at just greater than three persons (3.08).

                      The 1960 and 1970 censuses also list average household size for Blacks
                 within the city and county. During the decade the average Black household
                 size within the city decreased from 3.69 to 3.32, and from 3.75 to 3.37 for
                 New Hanover County, both reflecting the trend of Black families toward
                 smaller average household size. It should be noted that the Census of
                 Population has two "household" components, families and primary,individuals,
                 and this decrease in part reflects the increase in single member households
                 aswell as the actual decrease in size of families.

                      With the number of variables which influence the size  of households --
                 factors such as religious attitudes, economic conditions, and the overall
                 age of the population -- it is difficult to accurately forecast future
                 household size. However, using the "least squares" projection techniqu@
                 and historical household trends, it is estimated that the average household
                 size for New Hanover County in 1980 will be approximately 2.9 persons. This
                 factor will be an important consideration in the determination of housing
                 demand and land needs.

                 2) Single Member Households

                      One member households have been increasing in the nation, a trend which
                 is also.occurring in New Hanover County (See Table 14). Three basic reasons
                 for this increase are a higher percentage of single people (never married),
                 a lower percentage of married individuals, and a higher percentage of di-
                 vorced individuals. It is expected that this, trend will continue in New
                 Hanover County and, if so, housing stock should reflect the needs and life-
                 style of these people.

                 3) Female Head of Household

                      The number of women who head families has been increasing rapidly over
                 the past several years. Causal variables cited for this rise in female
                 family headship include high rates of marital dissolution through divorce
                 and separation, an increase in the number of single femaie heads, the
                 liberalization of adoption procedures permitting single parenthood, the
                 increased economic independence and participation in the labor force of
                 many women, and an increased availability of public assistance programs.

                      In addition to the sociological implications of a matriarchal versus
                 a patriarchal family structure there are economic factors associated with
                 female family headship. Of the 3,153 families in New Hanover County with
                 incomes below a federally defined poverty level., 45 percent had a female
                 head. (See Table 15) Further, female headed families comprised 52 percent

                                                   34

                                                                     TABLE 13

                                                             AVERAGE HOUSEHOLD SIZE
                                            WILMINGTON-NEW HANOVER COUNTY, 1950, 1960 and 1970

                                                            Wilmingt.                     New Hanover County
                                                   1950       1960        1970         1950        1960        1970

                               Total               3.42       3.29        2.95         3.51        .3.37       3.08

                               White                          3.08        2.83                     3.30        3.00

                               Black                          3.69a       3.32                    3.75a        3.37

                               Source: U. S. Census of Population.

                                                                     TABLE 14

                                                           SINGLE MEMBER HOUSEHOLDS
                                                WILMINGTON-NEW HANOVER COUNTY, 1960 and 1970

                                                         Wilmington                     New Hanover County
                                                   1960       1970                   ---T960             1970

                               Total               2228       3513                        2937           4784
                               White               1367       2325                        1957           3468
                               Black                 861b     1188                         980b          1316

                               Source: U.S. Census of Population.

                                    a1960 data include all nonwhites.

                                    b1960 data   include all nonwhites.

                                                                     -2-

                                                        TABLE 15

                                       FAMILY INCOME IN NEW HANOVER COUNTY, 1969

                                                                         Income Less Than
                                                                Poverty    75% Poverty    125% Poverty
                                                       Total      Level        Level          Level
                    Total Families                     $21,994   $3,153        2,161          4,360
                    Percent of All Families                        14.3          9.8            19.8
                    Mean Family Income or Deficita    $ 9,368    $2,021    (-$1,114)       (-$1,851)
                    Families with Female Head           3,055     1,427        1,113          1,716
                         Mean Income                  $ 4,289
                         Percent of Total                   14       45           52              39

                    Source: U.S. Census of Population, Table 124;      Wilmington-New Hanover
                              Planning Department.

                                                        TABLE 16

                                   HOUSEHOLD HEADSHIP IN NEW HANOVER COUNTY, 1970

                                                Total                 White           _____S=ack

                    in Households              81 869                 63,067                  18,484
                    Male Head                   18:686                15,885                  2,744
                    Female Head                 3,112                   1,678                 1,422
                                       I                      I                       I

                    Source: U.S. Census of Population, Table 36.

                                                        TABLE 17

                          CHILDREN OF FEMALE HEADED FAMILIES IN NEW HANOVER COUNTY, 1970

                                                Total                   White                 Black

                    Female Headed Families      3,112                   1,678                 1,422
                    Own Children Under 18       1,717                     866                    840
                    Own Children Under 6           612                    275                    322

                    Source: U.S. Census of    Population, Table 36.

                         aNegative sign denotes income deficit.

                                                         36

                            of all families with an income less than 75 percent of the poverty level.
                            Fourteen percent of New Hanover County's female headed families have a mean
                            income of less than half (46 percent) that of male headed families.

                                Black females headed over half (52 percent) of the Black households in
                            1970 for New Hanover County, contrasted with 16 percent for white families.
                            This concentration of Black females is found primarily within the city,
                            (Table 16). Table 17 shows thenumber of families having children under
                            the ages of six and eighteen.

                                This high incidence of female headed families again points to the need
                            for the programs and facilities outlined in the section discussing sex
                            composition disparity. It is evident that in addition to the need for health
                            and social programs, female-oriented industrial activity, job training, and
                            provision for child care, many of these female headed families simply may
                            need financial assistance to sustain their families.

                                                            -34-- -

                                            V. POPULATION PROJECTIONS

                          Basic to all long-range planning activities is the need     to have an
                     accurate esLimate of future population size and composition. There are
                     several methods which can be utilized for projecting the future population
                     of an area. However, the cohOrt-survival method is widely regarded as the
                     most reliable Lechnique. In this method, total population is broken down
                     into five year age groups, by sex and race, and individually projected.
                     These projections are based on the three major variables which affect pop-
                     ulation change: birth rates, mortality rates, and migration rates of each
                     age-sex-race group or "cohort-group".

                          Three different cohort-survival projections were generated by using
                     different growth trend assumptions and are presented in Table 18 and illus-
                     trated graphically in Figure 8.

                          The lowest-valued projection is based    upon race-specific migration rates
                     for the 1960-1970 decade and average birth    rates for 1969-1973 which, as
                     previously indicated, are declining.

                          The. intermediate-valued projection assures that all trends of the 1960-1970
                     decade hold constant. This projection, using the Hamilton-Perry method, is
                     based on the same migration rates as the lowest-valued one; however, it also
                     uses the higher birth rate values of the 1960-1970 decade.

                          The highest-valued projection is A departmentally modified North Carolina
                     State Department of Administration projection. For this projection migration
                     rates were recomputed using race-specific 1970-1973 school enrollment data.
                     This projection differs from the lowest valued projection only by those modi-
                     fied migration rates.

                                                       TABLE 18

                                     NEW HANOVER COUNTY POPULATION PROJECTIONS

                                                         PROJECTED POPULATION
                     YEAR                  LOW                   INTERMEDIATE                  HIGH

                     1980                 94,038                      97,546                   101,317

                     1990                107,613                     116,740                   124,608

                     2000                122,829                     140,283                   151,147

                     Source: Wilmington-New Hanover Planning      Commission

                          Because the highest-valued projection reflects the latest values of birth
                     and migration rates, it has been selected as the most reliable projection. This
                     projection is illustrated graphically by race in Figure 9.

                                                         38

                                                ADDENDUM 1 (5-21-76)

                            The 50 year population projection for New Hanover County (year 2025)

                       is 249,000.

                            This figure is derived by applying the average decennial growth rate of

                       the cohort-survival projection (22 percent) to the year 2020 and an 11 percent

                       growth rate from 2020 to 2025.

                                                             C@

                                                                                                  FIGURE 8
                        160                                                                                                                                                              160
                                                                            TOTAL           POPULATION
                              -                                          NEW HANOVERCOUNTY
                     p   140-                                                                                                                                                        -140
                     0                                                                                                                                                    .00
                     p                       ACTUAL
                     U
                     L                       PROJECTED
                     A   120-
                     T                                                                                                                                                               -120
                                                                                                                                                                0 CG
                                                                                                                                                         60-
                     0
                     N                                                                                                             0

                         loo-                                                                                                                                                        -100

                     T
                     H
                     0
                     U    80-                                                                                                                                                        -80
                     s
                     A
                     N
                     D
                     s
                          60-                                                                                                                                                        -60

                         40                                                                                                                                                          -40
                              1950                         1960                         1970                          1980                         1990                          2000

                                                                                                      YEAR

                                                                    FIGURE 9
                  160-                                                                                              -        -160

                                                                                                                  151468
                                COHORT' SURVIVAL
                  140-                                                                                                       -140
                     -                                                             MIGRATION RATES:
                     -   POPULATION         PROJECTION                                White +14.29%
               p     -                                 TY                              Non White + 5.29%
               0  120-     NEW HANOVER COUN                                                            V-124608           oo -
               p                                                                                                             -120
               U
               L
               A
               T
                  100-                                                                101317
               0                                                                                                             -100
               N

                  80-                                              82,996
               T                                                                                                             -80

               0
               U
               s
               A  6o-
               N                                                                                                             -60
               D
               s

                  40-
                                                                                                                             -40

                     -                                                              NON
                  20-
                                                                                                                             -20

                      1950               1960                1970                1980                1990
                                                                       YEAR        4'.-l @01 317
                                                                      `311
                                                                   8@9 9 @6

                                                      A. AGE PROJECTIONS

                                Age-specific population projections to the year 2000, based on the
                           highest valued projection, are presented in Table 19, and the percentage
                           age distribution to the year 2000 is illustrated in Figure 10. Table 19
                           offers a direct comparison of each five year age cohort to the horizon year.
                           Figure 10, showing the relative relationship of each age cohort, clearly
                           illustrates the lower birth rate and increased migration rate since 1970.

                                Age-sex-race population projections, based on the highest value projection,
                           along with the 1970 actualcomposition are presented in the appendix. Age-sex-.
                           race percentage distribution projections are also illustrated in the appendix.

                                              B. TOWNSHIP POPULATION PROJECTIONS

                                In order to arrive at population projections for the five townships of
                           New Hanover County a simple regression, or "least-squares", method was employed.
                           inherent in the projection are any boundary changes which have occured over
                           the base period, specifically, annexations by the City and Township of Wilmington.
                           The base data for arriving at the equation for each township were percent share
                           of the total county population for the period 1930-1970. The percent share of
                           each township was then projected in 10 year increments to the year 2000. The
                           projected population of each township was then derived by applying the projected
                           percentage of total county population from the highest valued co,hort-survival
                           projection.

                                Projected township populations along with estimates for January, 1975 are
                           presented in Table 20. Differences between the township totals and the New
                           Hanover County total discussed earlier are due to rounding.

                                                            TABLE 20

                                    NEW HANOVER COUNTY TOWNSHIP POPULATION PROJECTIONS
                                                    LEAST-SQUARES METHOD

                            TOWNSHIP             JAN. 1975           1980            1990            2000

                           Wilmington              50,400           53,080           59,400         64,870

                           Cape Fear                6,720             7,520           9,540         11,930

                           Federal Point            5,940             7,070           9,990         13,680

                           Harnett                 19,950           22,980           30,780         40,330

                           Masonboro                8,970           10,610           14,830         20,130

                             Total                 91,980           101,260         124,540         150,940

                           Source: Wilmington-New Hanover Planning Department

                                Projections for New Hanover county and the City of Wilmington are
                           graphically illu*strated in Figure 11.

                                                       TABLE 19

                                         AGE-SPECIFIC POPULATION PROJECTIONS
                                                  NEW HANOVER COUNTY
                                                      1970 - 2000

                                     1970             1980             1990               2000
                   Age Groups     Number   %       Number   %       Number     %      Number     %

                       0-4        7,117   8.6      8,652    8.5     10,750    8.6     12,509    8.2

                       5-9        8,229   9.9      8,054    7.9     10,666    8.5     12,593    8.3

                      10-14       8,254   9.9      8,076    8.0      9,817    7.9     12,201    8.1

                      15-19       7,731   9.3      9,277    9.1      9,080    7.3     12,027    7.9

                      20-24       6,828   8.2      9,349    9.2      9,207    7.4     11,176    7.4

                      25-29       5,940   7.2      9,158    9.0     11,115    8.9     10,967    7.2

                      30-34       4,859   5.9      8,413    8.3     11,407    9.1@    11,289    7.5

                      35-39       4,648   5.6      6,836    6.7     10,474    8.4     12,745    8.4

                      40-44       4,942   6.0      5,224    5.2      9,054    7.3     12,224    8.1

                      45-49       5,270   6.3      4,754    4.7      7,004    5.6     10,707    7.1

                      50-54       4,686   5.6      4,908    4.8      5,182    4.2       8,988   5.9

                      55-59       4,161   5.0      4,951    4.9      4,456    3.6       6,551   4.3

                      60-64       3,366   4.1      4,263    4.2      4,496    3.6       4,753   3.1

                      65-69       2,629   3.2      3,526    3.5      4,210    3.4       3,791-  2.5

                      70-74       1,938   2.3      2,666    2.6      3,365    2.7       3,560   2.4

                      75-79       1,202   1.4      1,550    1.5      2,073    1.7       2,492   1.6

                      80-84          683  0.8         901   0.9      1,240    1.0       1,552   1.0

                       85+           513  0.6         759   0.7      1,012    0.8       1,343   0.9

                   TOTAL          82,996          101,317           124,608          151,468--

                                                          42

                                                                                  FIGURE 10

                                                                      NEW HANOVER COUNTY
                                                                          AGE DISTRIBUTION
                      p  10-                                                                                                                        -10
                      E                                                    1980-1990-2000
                      R
                      c
                      E  9-                                                                                                                         -9
                      N
                      T
                         8-                                                                                                                         -8

                      T
                      0  7-                                                                                                                           7
                      T
                      A
                      L                                                                                                                             -6
                      P
                      0
                      P  5-                                                                                                                           5
                      U
                      L
                      A  4-                                                                                                                         -4

                      v
                      T
                      I            I      -     1980
                      N  3-                                                                                                                         -3

                         2-

                        .0-                                                                                                            7___o
                                     + -21

                                                                                                                        I     H

                             0     5     10     15   20     25     30    35    40     45     50    55     60    65     70     75    so     85+

                                                                                       AGE
                             SOURCE: WILMINGTON -NEW HANOVER       COUNTY PLANNING    DEPARTMENT

                 POPULATION GROWTH AND POPULATION PROJECTIONS

                  NEW HANOVER COUNTY AND THE CITY OF WILMINGTON

                                                        1940-2000

                                                          FIGURE 11
                       ITO-                                                                            170

                            -                    LEGEND

                       150-                       NEW HANOVER COUNTY                             A  -150
                p                                 CITY OF WILMINGTON
                0           -                     ACTUAL POPULATION
                p
                u                                 PROJECTED P -PULATION
                L      i3o-                                                                         -130
                A
                T

                0
                N      110-                                                                         -110

                T      so-                                                                          -90
                H

                u
                s

                N      TO-                                                                          -TO,
                D

                       50-                                                                          -50

                                                                         0.
                                      .000

                                                                         ..... .....
                       50-  1940       1950       1960        1970       1980       1990        2000  30
                                                                                L

                                                             YEAR

                                                               APPENDIX A

                                                                 TABLE I

                                              AGE-SEX-RACE COMPOSITION OF POPULATION

                                                         NEW HANOVER COUNTY

                                                                 1970

                                              White       White         Nonwhrt-e       Nonwhite
                            Age Groups        male        Female           Male          Female        Total

                                0-4           2,686       2,615             897            919         7,117

                                5-9           3,083       3,073           1,018          1,055         8,229

                               10-14          3,040       2,886           1,185          1,143         8,254

                               15-19          2,812       2,778           1,070          1,071         7,731

                               20-24          2,706       2,841             589            692         6,828

                               25-29          2,485       2,531             391            533         5,940

                               30-34          2,025       1,996             337            501         4,859

                               35-39          1,880       1,933             314            521         4,648

                               40-44          1,912       2,038             414            578         4,942

                               45-49          1,973       2PO91             509            697         5,270

                               50-54          1,668       1,812             561            645         4,686

                               55-59          1,451       1,649             521            540         4,161

                               60-64          1,122       1,480             333            431         3,366

                               65-69            837       1,133             236            423         2,629

                               70-74            589         912             173            264         1,938

                               75-79            372         617              91            122         1,202

                               80-84            175         366              45-             97           683

                                85+             119         265              48              81           513

                            TOTAL             30,935      33,016            8732     1   10,313    1   82,996

                            Source: U.S. Bureau of     the Census,  1970 Census of Population

                                                        APPENDIX A
                                                         TABLE 2
                                    1980 NEW HANOVER COUNTY POPULATION PROJECTIONS

                               HIGH RANGE AGE-SEX-RACE SPECIFIC POPULATION PROJECTIONS

                                                        NEW HANOVER COUNTY

                                                          1980

                                    White        White       Nonwhite       Nonwhite
                   Age Groups       Male         Female         Male          Female       Total

                      0-4           3,285        3,119           1,129         1,119       8,652

                      5-9           3,185        3,031            924            914       8,054

                     10-14          3,085                         988          1,009       8,076

                     15-19          3,410        3,575          1,100          1,192       9,277

                     20-24          3,507        3,508         @1,061          1,273       9,349

                     25-29          3,665        3,628            878            987       9.,158

                     30-34          3,494        3,547            642            730       8,413

                     35-39          2,991        2,888            381            576       6,836.

                     40-44          2,271        2,117            347            489       5,224

                     45-49          1,923        2,012            308            511       4,754

                     50-54          1,864        2,053            427            564       4,908

                     55-59          1,763        2,030            561            657       4,951

                     60-64          1,461        1,804            465            533       4,263

                     65-69          1,118        1,510            389            509       3,526

                     70-74            807        1,271            236            352       2,666

                     75-79            438           796           105            211       1,550

                     80-84            207           @494          58             142          901

                      85+             152           405           66             136          759
                   TOTAL            38,626       40X782 �=10 0T5__f           11,904      101,317

                  Source: Wilmington-New Hanover Planning Department

                                                        46

                                                               APPENDIX A
                                                                  TABLE 3
                                              1990 NEW HANOVER COUNTY POPULATION PROJECTION

                                          HIGH-RANGE AGE-SEX-RACE SPECIFIC POPULATION PROJECTIONS

                                                             NEW HANOVER COUNTY

                                                                     1990

                                               White        White       Nonwhite       Nonwhite
                             Age Groups        Male         Female        Male           Female        Total

                                 0-4           4,113        3,905         1,372           1,360       10,750

                                 5-9           4,246        4,041         1,196           1,183       10,666

                                10-14          3,773        3,571         1,244           1,229        9,817

                                15-19          3,523        3,526           998           1,033        9,080

                                20-24          3,559        3,639           885           1,124        9,207

                                25-29          4,444        4,669           903           1,099,      11,115

                                30-34          4,528        4,380         1,156           1,343       11,407

                                35-39          4,411        4,140           856           1,067       10,474

                                40-44          3,918        3,762           661             713        9,054

                                45-49          3,059        3$006           374             565        7,004-

                                50-54          2,214        2,133           358             477        5,182

                                55-59          1,718        1,953           303             482        4,456

                                60-64          1,632        2,044           354             466        4,496

                                65-69          1,358        1,859           374             619        4,210

                                70@74          1,051        1,549           330             435        3,365

                                75-79             585       1,061           173             254        2,073

                                80-84             284          688            79            189        1,240

                                 85+              179          522            76            235        1,012

                             TOTAL                 95       50,448        11,692          13,873     124,608

                                                                  --4-7

                                                        APPENDIX A
                                                          TABLE 4
                                       2000 NEW HANOVER COUNTY POPULATION PROJECTION

                                 HIGH-RANGE AGE-SEX-RACE SPECIFIC POPULATION PROJECTIONS

                                                      NEW HANOVER COUNTY

                                                               2000

                                       White         White        Nonwhite        Nonwhite
                    Age Groups         Male          Female          Male           Female         Total

                        0-4            4,803         4,560           1,580           1,566        12,509

                        5-9            4,997         4,756           1,428           1,412        12,593

                       10-14           4,724         4,471           1,512           1,494        12,201

                       15-19           4,697         4,701           1,20            1,337        12,027

                       20-24           4,353         4,340           1,114           1,369        11,176

                       25-29           4,591         4,605             819             952        10,967

                       30-34           4,595         4,544             964           1,186        11,289

                       35-39           5,349         5,328             880           1,188        12,745

                                       5,077         4,645           1,190           1,312        12,224

                       45-49           4,511         4,309             840           1,047        10,707

                       50-54           -3,820        3,790             682             696         8,988

                       55-59           2,733         2,917             368             533         6,551

                       60-64           1,938         2,124             297             394         4,753

                       65-69           1,323         1,788             226             454         3,791

                       70-74           1,174         1,755             251             380         3,560

                       75-79               711       1,306             166             309         2,492

                       80-84              370           838            110             234         1,552

                        85+               239           696            125             283         1,343

                    TOTAL        I    _60,Q05  1    61,471   1       13,846         16, 1@46     151,468

                                                            48

                                                                                   APPENDIX a
                                                                                      FIGURE 1
                    6-                                                                                                                                             6

                                              WHITE                                                                      NON       WHITE

                    5-                                                                                                                                             5
                P                                                W MALE GREATER                                                 MIGRATION RATES
                E
                R                                                [M] FEMALE GREATER                                                 + 1429% White
                c                                                                                                                   + 5.29% Non White
                E
                N   4-            911                                                                                                                           -4
                T
                A
                G
                E

                0
                F   3-                                                                                                                                          -3
            C-- P
                0
                P
                u
                L   2-      1 1 1 1
                A                                                                                                                              ia
                T

                0
                N

                    O-JI I I      I  I                                                                                                                          LO
                                                                                                                                          01 (7) 0) -4 --J CD OD
                                                                                                                     10 1*11        cp 0            0 (31 0 ()1
                             cjl0-u0a0a0a000"0a0a                                                        OCAF)uloo MA8-01
                                     @. @ @- @. -6 .6  z@ Z,. &) (@ , -@ -@ (@ +                                  L r@ & & & .6        6, -@@               +
                                  w-          w           w 4 W    4 w .4                                               (D    0 4   ;0 4 (D     0 4   tD
                                                                                    AGE GROUPS
                                  PROJECTED              PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION: NEW HANOVER COUNTY
                                                             WHITEaNON WHITE: YEAR 1980

                                                                                                 APPENDIX 8
                                                                                                    FIGURE 2
                      6-                                                                                                                                                                          6

                                                     WHITE                                                                                      NON WHITE

                      5-                                                                                                                                                                          5
                                                                            W MALE GREATER                                                              MIGRATION RATES
                 P                                                                                                                                I
                 E                                                          GID FEMALE GREATER                                                               + 14.29 %White
                 R                                                                                                                                            + 5.29% Non White
                 c                                                                                                                                                                                4
                 E    4-
                 T
                 A
                 G
                 E
                 0                                                                                                                                                                              -3
                 F    3-

                 P
                 0
                 P
                 U
                 L                                                     Tm
                 A    2-                                                                                                                                                                          2
                 T

                 0
                 N

                      Od                                                                                                                                                                       LO
                                                                                                                                                                 (M Cis 0)     -4  -4  OD CD
                                              N CW W 4@-        CA     M 0               (p                                  0         al 0 L71       CA 0 al    0 CA 0 (x             0 (x
                                                                    0 0 0 0 c"
                                                                                                                                        -- @a k (11   1@ .4 @,   61 61             @J @D +
                                                                                                                                       (0                .4 (D -4 ID .4 (D .4      0   .4
                                                                                                   AGE GROUPS
                                       PROJECTED PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION: NEW HANOVER COUNTY
                                                                       WHITE a NON WHITE: YEAR 1990

                                                                                                     APPENDIX B
                                                                                                        FIGURE 3
                       6-
                                                                                                                                                                                                      .6

                                                       WHITE                                                                                         NON WHITE

                       5-
                                                                                                                                                                                                     -5
                   P                                                           M MALE GREATER                                                                MIGRATION RATES
                   E                                                           OU FEMALE GREATER                                                                  + 14.29% White
                   R                                                                                                                                                  5.29% Non White
                   c   4-
                   E                                                                                                                                        R +
                   N                                                                                                                                                                                 -4
                   T
                   A
                   G
                   E
                       3-
                   0                                                                                                                                                                                 -3
             -4:Z  F       -                                                                                                                                     L

                   p
                   0
                   P
                   U   2-
                   L                                                                                                                                                                                    2
                   A                                                                                                                                                     ....
                   T

                   0
                   N

                       0-
                                             N  N   (A  (A                a) a) -4   -4  cD oD                                                                                                      Lo
                                             ?  @n  ?   ?                 ? @ p      ,   ?  u                                    0 (A          N r) (A (A 4 .4 U (A (7) 0)           -J -4 OD   00
                                                               4@ LR  0 0 0 -4       -4     +                                                  9       ? ? 9 ? ? v! 9                0      0
                                                               W -is  0 4, W 4       w                                           -@ W,         N N LW CA                             @1 @1  @D
                                                                                                      AGE GRl0UPs
                                         PROJECTED PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION: NEW HANOVER COUNTY
                                                                          WHITE & NON WHITE: YEAR 2000

                    PART 2. ECONOMIC RESOURCES

                                                         TABLE OF CONTENTS

                                                    Part 2. Economic Resources
                                                                                                        Page

                            Introduction                                                                  4

                            I. Worker Profile                                                             6

                                A. Data Sources                                                           6

                                B. Labor Force Participation                                              7

                                C. Education                                                              8

                                D. Unemployment                                                           9

                                E.   Commuting Patterns                                                 12

                                F.   Recruitable Labor Force                                            15

                                G.   Work Force Characteristics                                         17

                                H.   Income                                                             18

                           II.  Industrial Profile                                                      26

                                A. Agriculture                                                          26

                                B.   Manufacturing                                                      26

                                C.   Construction                                                       35

                                D.   Retail and Wholesale Trade                                         39

                                E.   Service Activities                                                 .43

                                F.   Transportation                                                     46

                          III.  Population and Employment Forecasts                                     52'

                                     SUMMARY OF ECONOMIC TRENDS AND  EMPLOYMENT FORECASTS

                        Labor Force  Characteristics

                         1.   When compared to Southeastern North Carolina as a whole, participation of
                              both males and females in New Hanover County's labor force is very high.
                              (a)  In 1970, the male and female participation rates for the southeastern
                                   area were 73.3 and 40.5 respectively, while the county's rates were
                                   81.8 and 48.8.
                              (b)  While male participation rates remained constant between 1960 and
                                   1970, female rates increased significantly, from 40.3 to 48.8.

                        2.    Overall the county's work force is well-educ ated, with slightly more than
                              @one-half of the residents aged 25 years and over having completed high school
                              and over 20 percent having completed some'college. However, the statistics
                              reveal a wide disparity between the formal education levels of white resi-
                              dents and nonwhites.

                        3.    According to 1975 data, the Wilmington SMSA has the second lowest annual
                              unemployment rate of all SMSA's in the state. Additionally, there appears
                              to be no seasonal unemployment prob.lem of unusual proportions in the county.

                        4.    Between 1960 and 1970, commuters, as a percent of the tptal work force more
                              than doubled (from 8.2 to 16.5 percent), reflecting the growing reliance of
                              the county on a regional labor force and its importance as a-source of jobs
                              for residents of neighboring counties.   It is expected that in-commuting
                              will level off at about 20 percent of the total work force.

                        5.    Surveys show that the county's recruitable labor area has a good supply of
                              well-trained workers (approximately 3,400 available in September, 1974).

                        6.    Work force data indicate that expansion of New Hanover County's economy
                              has produced a substantial increase in the number of jobs. Between 1962
                              and 1972, the number of job opportunities in the county increased by 46
                              percent, from 28,500 to 41,500. During the same period, total population
                              increased by only 17 percent, again confirming the county's position as a
                              regional employment resource.

                         Income

                        1.    Since 1965, New Hanover County's total personal income has been increasing
                              rapidly. Measured in current dollars total income increased by 126 percent
                              during that 8 year period.

                       2.     Disposable income, as measured by "effective buying income," is also in-
                              creasing rapidly. New Hanover County's total effective buying income
                              increased by 90 percent between 1967 and 1973.

                       3.     Projections of personall income per capita indicate a favorable trend for
                              the county. It is projected that total personal income per capita will
                              increase to approximacely $7,311 in the year 2000 as compared to $3170 in
                              1970.

                                                        1,67

                   4.   Increasing incomes can be attributed to increases in the number of
                        residents employed in "new-type" and durable manufacturing sectors which
                        are characterized by higher wages and salaries.

                   5.   The retail trade sector has responded positively to rising incomes as
                        evidenced'by' the expansion of existing establishments and the creation of
                        new ones.

                   Industrial Profile

                   1.   The role of agriculture in New Hanover County's economy, as measured by
                        dollar volumes, is minor, and it appears that it will diminish further
                        unless national factors such as scarce energy and the close proximity of
                        the county to lucrative eastern markets produces an up-swing.   This is
                        not to minimize the importance of agriculture as a user of land.

                   2.   Manufacturing
                        (a) Manufacturing is the major source of employment in New Hanover,
                            employing over 25 percent of the county's total workers in 1972.
                        (b) Between 1962 and 1972,  while the percentage of manufacturing em-
                            ployment to total work force remained relatively constant, a signi-
                            ficant shift occurred from nondurables to durables employment.
                            Durables employment is characterized by higher productivity and
                            higher wages.
                        (c) In 1972, the weekly  wage for workers in "new-type" industries
                            (primarily durables) averaged $181, as compared to $100 and $133
                            for "traditional" and "local ly-oriented" industries.

                   3.   Construction
                        (a) During the past decade the construction industry has  been a major
                            element in the local economy.   For example, between 1966 and 1973
                            nearly 11,300 dwelling units were constructed in New Hanover County.
                        (b) City construction activity valuation as measured in constant dollars
                            has remained relatively stable since 1966.   In contrast, value of
                            new construction in the county during this period has tripled.

                   4.   Wholesale and Retail Trade
                        (a) The county's trade sector is second to manufacturing in terms of
                            the employment of local residents.  In 1972 approximately 20 percent
                            of the county's total work force was employed in retail and wholesale
                            trade.
                        (b). Between 1967 and 1972 the total value of New Hanover County's retail
                            sales, in constant dollars, increased from $132 million to $199 million,
                            or 51 percent.
                        (c) Leaders in retail sale$ volume in 1972 were food stores, automotive
                            dealers, and general merchandise.  These three groups accounted for
                            over 57 percent of total county sales for that year.
                        (d) As measured by a buying power index of approximately 2, New Hanover
                            County demonstrated a high retail trade potential.
                        (e) Tiholesaling is an important facet of the county's economy.  According,
                            to the latest available county level data (1972) the dollar volume
                            of wholesale trarle exceeded retail trade volume by more than 15
                                e o tC r A f@) T@

                                                      2

                                5.     Service Activities
                                       (a) The county has experienced considerable growth in service industry
                                             activity in recent years.           In the five years between 1967 and 1972
                                              total adjusted county sales increased by 45 percent..

                                Population     and EmploymentForecasts,

                                1.     Using   the "low", "moderate", and "high" population projections developed
                                       in Part 1. of this report as a base, employment was projected,for 1980,
                                       1990 and the year 2000.

                                2.     Because of the quality and timeliness of the data used in arriving at the
                                       "high" population projection it was selected as the population forecast
                                       for New Hanover County, and was used to.derive an employment forecast.

                                3.     Resident Employment Forecast

                                                                       1970              1980              1990               2000
                                Population                            82,996             101,300         125,000            151,000

                                    Percent   in Labor Force            43.4              44.5               45.9              47.14

                                    Labor Force                       36,010             45,100          57,400              71,600

                                    Percent Unemployed                    3.3               5.0               5.0                5.0.
                                    Residents Employed               34 2 780            42,845     1    54,500              68,000

                                4.     Also using the "high" population forecast employment by major industrial
                                       sector was projected to the year 2000.

                                       Sector Work Force Employment Forecast*

                                                                                                                              2000
                                                                       1970              1980              1990
                                Total                                38,210              47,500          60,500             73,950

                                    Manufacture                        9,830             12,400          16,100             19,400

                                    Non-Manufacture                  223520              29,250          37,800             47,400

                                    Construction                       2,110             2,700             3,250             3,900
                                    TCU                                2,890             3,750             5,000             6,350
                                    Trade                              7,360             9,900           13,450             17,350
                                    Fire                               1,220             1,700             2,090             2,600
                                    Service                           4,190              5,2100            6,@00             8,400
                                    Government                        4,640              5,800             7,070             8,600
                                    ONIM                    t            130               200               265                 25
                                                                                                                               3
                                ONA                                   5,390              5,500             6,300             6,86o
                                1i A r j. Ct -L I r                                                          300                300

                                       *Work force refers to the total number of workers employed in the county;
                                work force   includes residents and incommuters.

                                                 INTRODUCTION

                                          OBJECTIVES AND ORGANIZATION

                        The analysis of New Hanover County's economy is a fundamental element
                   in the Comprehensive Planning Process. The analysis  has two major purposes:
                   First, it complements the population analysis contained in Part I by pro-
                   viding more detailed information on the economic characteristics of the
                   county's residents and by providing a basis for evaluating population
                   projections in the preparation of forecasts of future growtha; the second
                   and equally important function of the economic analysis is to provide an
                   economic information base from which to evaluate public policy alternatives
                   and private decisions related to future growth -- land use, economic develop-
                   ment, public service demands, and the related need for public facilities.

                        Therefore, this study will provide a comprehensive view of how New
                   Hanover County's economy is organized and how it operates. It will address
                   basic economic questions such as the following:

                          What are the characteristics Of the county's labor force?
                          Where do workers employed in New Hanover County live?
                          What are the county's sources of employment and income?
                          Which industries are most important in the local economy?
                          What are the prospects for growth?

                                         DEFINITION OF LOCAL ECONOMY

                        In initiating any planning study, a basic requirement is a general
                   understanding of the problems to be examined. Therefore, prior to organizing
                   and defining the scope of the economic study, it was first necessary to
                   develop a satisfactory working definition of the major elements of New
                   Hanover County's economy and to approximate the extent of its economic
                   influence.

                        Although economists have developed more complex definitions, in this
                   study the local economic system has been viewed simply as a collection of
                   people and industries (groups of firms producing similar products) which
                   have common economic interests and which occupy a definable geographic
                   area. By simplifying the concept of the local economy to include two major
                   elements (people and firms having common economic interests) this definition
                   provides a sound framework for analysis of the Planning Area's economy.
                   This analysis examines these two components of the economy and provides a
                   profile of the county's labor and its industries. In addition the study
                   contains projections and forecasts of the county's economic growth, as measured
                   by employment.

                                                ORGANIZATION

                        The report is divided into three major parts. The first part focuses
                   on the people (workers) in the Planning Areas's economy. It includes an

                        'See discussion of population forecasts on page 43.

                                                     4

                            analysis of labor and work force characteristics, commutation patterns., and
                            income.

                                 The second part of the report deals with industries (groups of firms
                           .producing'similar products) in the local economy. The economy's major
                            industries are examined basically from three perspectives: First, the
                            historical importance of the industry in the development of the economy;
                            second, the importance of the industry as a source of employment; and
                            finally, the overall impact of that industry on the growth and development
                            of the county's economy.

                                 The final section of the report deals with the prospects for future
                            economic growth through projections and forecasts of future employment.
                            Economic growth is addressed both in terms of total employment and
                            employment in each of the major industrial categories.

                                 Taken as a whole, this report provides a detailed profile of the
                            economy of New Hanover County. It provides a major portion of the
                            economic data required to make sound decisions for the future. Its
                            publication, however, should not be viewed as the final step in the
                            process of economic analysis. Rather, it should be viewed as  ' a first
                            step, and the data and scope of the analyses included in the study should
                            be continually up-dated, expanded, and revised to address the many questions
                            raised by the study and to keep abreast of the county's ever-changing
                            economic environment.

                                             I. 'WORKER PROFILE

                        People are the basic component of New Hanover County's economy. They
                   are the prime factors in both the production and consumption of the area's
                   goods and services, and as such, the economic characteristics of the county's
                   residents and its working force are major indicators of manpower problems
                   and resources, as well as the potential for future economic expansion.

                        The primary purpose of this section is to develop a profile of the
                   people included in the county's economic system. The first portion of the
                   profile is directed toward an analysis of the area's economically active  "
                   population which may be defined as those people who engage, in the produc-
                   tion of goods and services. It includes an analysis of labor force and work
                   force characteristics, an examination of commutation patterns, and an
                   analysis of the major sources of income in the area. The second portion of
                   the profile deals with New Hanover County residents as consumers, and it
                   includes estimates of the county's total buying power and compares its
                   commercial potential with other urban areas in the state.

                                             A. DATA SOURCES

                        Employment data, the basis of the county's economic analysis, are
                   available from several sources. However, each source has limitations'when
                   applied in a county's economic analysis. The two sources of employment data
                   -used most extensively in this report are census tabulations and North Carolina
                   Employment Security Commission (ESC) data.

                        While the U.S. Census of Population is the more comprehensive and
                   accurate data source,.the census tabulations have a serious drawback --
                   employment data are collected by place of,residence rather than by place of
                   work. Thus, a Brunswick County resident employed in New Hanover County
                   ;@-ould be tabulated in Brunswick's employment.

                        North Carolina Employment Security Commission data are collected on the
                   basis of place of.work and more accurately reflect the geographic extent
                   of the county's economic significance. The main disadvantage in using
                   ESC data, however, is that estimates are based on a much smaller sampling
                   and lack the statistical accuracy of census data.

                        The distinction between these two sets of data is important in
                   the analysis of local economies because it permits the description of
                   employment from two perspectives. For example, labor force data make it
                   possible to examine employment from the standpoint of New Hanover County's
                   residents to determine how many are employed or unemployed and the social
                   characteristics of the county's economically active population. On the
                   other hand, work forcedata have more validity in describing the economy
                   of New Hanover County and in analyzing the extent to which the county
                   serves as an employment resource for residents of areas outside the county.

                                                     6

                                These two complementary types of data provide a complete overview
                           of the county's employment; therefore, both data sources have been
                           utilized in the development of New Hanover County's economic profile.

                                                B. LABOR FORCE PARTICIPATION

                                Labor force participation is the most common measure of a population's
                           economic activity. Basically, there are two measures of participation: the
                           crude activity rate and the age-sex-specific activity rate. The crude
                           activity rate represents the number of economically active persons (employed
                           or seeking employment) as a percent of the total population. Since the crude
                           rate is very sensitive to the population's age structure, it is only indica-
                           tive of the relative number of persons in a population who are employed
                           irrespective of other factors which may be involved. For example, low labor
                           force participation may be the result of a large number of retired persons
                           in the population, but this factor would not be revealed by the crude rate.
                           Therefore, the major utility of crude activity rates is limited to measuring
                           the county's general level of economic activity and converting employment
                           projections into total.population projections.

                                For the analysis of manpower resources and assessment of the local
                           economy's performance in relation to supplying employment opportunities for
                           the county's residents, the age-sex-specific activity ratea is a more useful
                           measure of labor force participation. These rates are calculated for each
                           sex, and they are a device for relating the actual number of persons partici-
                           pating in the labor force to the countyts potentials as indicated by the
                           total population in the economically active age group -- 16 to 65 years. As
                           a standard of comparison, one would expect a very large percentage of males
                           in the 16-65 age group to participate in the labor force.b

                                New Hanover County's crude participation rates and age-sex-specific
                           activity rates are found in Table 1. The crude rate showed a slight
                           increase between 1960 and 1970, from 37.6 to 39.4. A major portion of
                           this overall increase is attributable to more women in the labor force.
                           The county's age-sex-specific rates indicate that participation of males
                           in the labor force remained relatively constant between 1960 and 1970,
                           with rates of 81.1 and 81.8 respectively. Participation by females,
                           however, increased significantly from a rate of 44.3 in 1960 to 48.8 in 1970.

                                aAge-sex-specific activity rates Are calculated by the following formula:

                                         Total male (female) employment                         X 100
                                         Total male (female) population in the 16-65 age group
                                bShyrock, Henry S., Methods and Materials of Demography, U.S. Department
                           of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, p. 367.

                                                      TABLE I

                     NEW HANOVER COUNTY LABOR FORCE PARTICIPATION RATES: 1960 and 1970

                              Po ulation                   Employment               Acti ity Rates
                                      Are  6 to 65                                         Age-See -Specific
                  Year Total         male   Female    Total I Male      Female Crude        Male   Female

                  1960 71,742      19,749   22,396    26,975 16,638     10,337     37.6     81.1     44.3

                  1970 82,996      24,225   26,478    32,750 19,814     12,936     39.4     81.8     48.8

                  Source: Wilmington-New    Hanover  Planning Department; 1970   Census  of Population

                       Using the total 1970 age-sex-specific activity rates      for southeastern
                  North Carolinaa counties as a standard of comparison, New      Hanover County's
                  participation rates appear to be exceptionally high. in 1970, the male and
                  female rates for the southeastern area were 73.3 and 40.5, respectively,
                  while the county's rates were 81.8 and 48.8. The county's high labor force
                  participation rates are the product of many factors, but it appears that the
                  following are the most significant among these:

                            The county's recent economic expansion    has created expanded job
                            opportunities for local residents. It     appears that industrial
                            expansions"have capitalized on resident skills, thereby permitting
                            the entry of a large portion of the county's residents into the
                            labor force.

                       2.   Entry of women into the labor force has had a significant effect
                            on overall participation rates, and greater female participation
                            can be traced to changing attitudes of women toward work outside
                            the home and to expanded employment opportunities for women.

                       From this analysis,   it appears that two trends are likely to occur in
                  the future. First, the county's crude participation rate will likely continue
                  to increase slowly as economic opportunities expand and the population becomes
                  younger. Second, the participation of women in the labor force will probably
                  continue to increase at a rapid rate; therefore, it is important that employ-
                  ment opportunities keep pace with this rising demand. The implications of
                  female participation in the labor force are discussed in Part I.

                                                C. EDUCATT-OF

                       There is a high correlation between an area's economic potential and the
                  educational attainment of its people. Formal education, labor force partici-
                  pation, job adaptability, and wages are closely related, and industries in
                  search of locations for new facilities favor communities having an educated
                  and skilled labor force and having technical and continuing education programs
                  through which their employees may upgrade their skills.

                       aincludes the counties of Bladen, Brunswick, Carteret, Columbus, Duplin,
                  Jones, New Hanover, Pamlico, and Pender.

                                                       8

                                 Overall, New Hanover County is in a very competitive position from
                           the standpoint of both programs and facilities for education and the
                           educational attainment of its labor force. In addition to its public
                           school system, the county has business and technical schools, and a four
                           year liberal arts college. Cape Fear Technical Institute offers a variety
                           .of courses designed to meet the needs of local industry, and the Institute
                           revises its curriculum to meet the changing needs of the community. The
                           University of North Carolina at Wilmington offers continuing education
                           courses in such fields as engineering and public affairs.

                                 The county's public education programs have also been very effective.
                           Of the 100 counties in North Carolina, the New Hanover County school system
                           currently has the fifth lowest,dropout rate (3.8 percent) for grades I
                           through 12.a In part, it is believed by educators that this low rate is
                           due to special programs, such as evening courses and work-study programs,
                           which permit flexibility in school attendance.

                                 Although no direct measures of the educational attainment of the
                           county's labor force are available, the educational characteristics of
                           the county's 25 years and.older population which are published in the
                           Census of Population provide an approximation of the labor force's educa-
                           tional characteristics. These data have been used in Table 2 to develop
                           an educational profile of New Hanover County residents.

                                 Overall, the county's work force is well-educated, with slightly more,
                           than one-half.of the residents aged 25 years and.over having completed high
                           school and over 20 percent having completed some college (see Figure 1).
                           However, the statistics in Table 2 also reveal a wide disparity between the
                           formal educational levels of white residents and nonwhites. Of the 9162
                           nonwhites in the 25 years and over age group in 1970, almost 75 percent had
                           not graduatedfrom high school; and further, slightly more than half of
                           the persons in this age group had only an,elementary education, or less.

                                 The profile indicates that the educational background of New Hanover
                           County's labor force is a significant contribution to the county's overalli
                           potential for economic development. At the same time, however, the county
                           can never realize the full benefits. of its labor resources as long as a
                           significant segment remains under-educated. Therefore, education must remain
                           a primary consideration in the development of the county's economy.

                                                      D. UNEMPLOYMENT

                                 Unemployme nt has been defined as a measure of all persons who did not
                           work at all during a reporting period but who were able, available, and
                           looking for work, and it is a measure of the performance of the local
                           economy in providing jobs as well as a measure of unemployed persons as a
                           percent of the total civilian labor force.b

                                 aSource: New Hanover County Board of'Education.
                                 bEmployment Security Commission of North Carolina, "North Carolina
                           Labor Force Estimates", November 1974.

                                                             FIGURE 1.

                           100%-

                                                                     COLLEGE GRADUATE OR MORE (9.7%)
                                                                       Of The 9.7 %  90% Are White And 10% Are Non White

                              90-

                                                                     SOME COLLEGE (11.50/6)
                                                                       Of T he 11.5 % - 9 2. 1 % Are White An d 7.9 % Are N on White
                      p       80-
                      E
                      R
                      C
                      E
                      N
                      T       70-
                      0
                      F                                              HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATE (28.9%)
                      c                                                Of The 28.9%-88.2%Are White And 11.8%Are Non White
                      0       601
                      U
                      N
                      T
                      Y
                      p                      a
                              50
                      0
                      p
                      U
                      L
                      A
                                                            . .. .... .
                      T
                              40-
                                                                     SOME HIGH    SCHOOL (2 3.4%)
                      0
                                                                       Of The 23.4% - 79.2% Are White And 20.8% Are Non White
                      N
                                                    AM@

                              30-

                              20-j
                                                                ..........

                                                                     ELEMENTARY SCHOOL(25.4%)
                                                                       Of The 2 5.4 % - 62.2 % Are Whi to An d 57 8 % Are Non White

                                                                     NO FORMAL EDUCATION (1.3%)
                            0%                                         Of The 1. 3%- 41.4% Are White And 58.6% Are Non White

                       EDUCATIONAL            ATTAINMENT OF NEW HANOVER COUNTY RESIDENTS
                                            AGED     25 AND OVER BY RACE, 1970.

                            SOURCE: 1970 CENSU3     O.F.POPULATION, WILMINGTON-N.EW HANOVER PLANNING DEPARTMENT

                                                                            TABLE 2

                                     EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT OF NEW HANOVER COUNTY RESIDENTS AGED 25 AND OVER, 1970

                                                                All Residents                     White Residents     Nonwhite Residents
                    Educational                      Total            Male           Female              Total                Total
                    Characteristic               No.       %      No.       %      No.       %        No.       %          No.       %

                    No Formal Education             561     1.3     260   46.3       301   53.7         232   41.4           329   58.6

                    Elementary School            11,372   25.4   5,567    49.0    5,805    51.0      7,079    62.2         4,293   37.8

                    Some High School             10,475   23.4   4,451    42.5    6,024    57.5      8,294    79.2         2,181   20.8

                    High School Graduate         12,934   28.9   5,641    43.6    7,293    56.4      11,410   88.2         1,524   11.8

                    Some College                  5,139   11.5   2,296    44.7    2,843    56.3      4,735    92.1           404     7.9

                    College Graduate or           4,328     9.7  2,350    54.3    1,978    45.7      3,897    90.0           431   10.0
                    More

                    Source:   1970 Census of Population

                       Average annual unemployment rates for New Hanover County compared
                  favorably with those of the state in the years between 1970 and 1973.a
                  (See Table 3). According to the latest available Employment Security
                  Commission data (January 1975), the Wilmington SMSA had the second lowest
                  unemployment rate of the seven state SMSA's reported, 8.1 percent (See
                  Table 4).

                                                      TABLE 3

                    NEW HANOVER COUNTY AND NORTH CAROLINA, UNEMPLOYMENT RATES: 1970-1973

                  Year                          New Hanover County                 North Carolina

                  19 70                                3.4%                             4.3%

                  1971                                 4.3                              4.8

                  1972                                 2.9                              4.0

                  1973                                 2.3                              3.5

                  Source: Employment Security Commission of North Carolina

                                                      TABLE 4

                             NORTH CAROLINA SMSA UNEMPLOYMENT RATES: JANUARY, 1975

                             North Carolina                                    10.4
                             Asheville                                         10.4
                             Burlington                                        10.9
                             Charlotte - Gastonia                              9.5
                             Fayetteville                                      9.2
                             Greensboro - Winston   Salem    High Point        8.3
                             Raleigh - Durham                                  5.1
                             Wilmington                                        8.1

                  Source: "Manpower Newsletter", North Carolina Employment Security Commission

                                           E. COMMUTING PATTERNS

                       Commutation, or the travel of a worker to a county-other than his place
                  of residence for employment, has major implications forthe Comprehensive
                  Planning Process and for the county's overall economic development. First,
                  and perhaps most important, is the relationship between an areals commutation
                  patterns and the size of the labor pool from which new and existing economic
                  activities can recruit employees. For example, a high rate of commutation

                       a Employment Security Commission data at the county level is normally
                  not available until late in the following year. Therefore, data is not yet
                  available for calendar year 1974 for the county.

                                                     - 12

                         indicates a willingness to travel for employment and is a rough measure of
                         the geographic area from which employers might expect to draw employees.
                         Similarly, commutation patterns also provide a measure of the geographic
                         extent of New Hanover County's economic significance and is a measure of the
                         extent to which the county serves as an employment resource for neighboring
                         counties.'

                              Finally, commutation affects employee spending patterns. While a worker
                         may spend a portion of his salary in the area in which he works, a major share
                         is normally spent on necessities such as food, rent, or mortgage payment At his
                         place of residence, thus    creating a "leakage" of money out of the economy.
                         At the same time, however, it should be noted that the in-commuting employee
                         does not demand the same level of public services and expenditures as the
                         permanent resident. Regardless of the net economic effect of commuting
                         workers, commutation patterns are a function of residential preferences, as
                         well as job opportunities,and the established commuting patterns of current
                         workers are difficult to modify to any great extent. Change in commutation
                         patterns are affected primarily by either the location of new job opportunities
                         or by in-migrant residential preferences.

                              The commuting patterns shown in Table 5, reflect the growing economic
                         interdependence of New Hanover County and its neighboring counties. During
                         the 1960-70 decade, the number of residents traveling outside the county
                         for employment increased from 1518 to'2335. Similarly, the number of
                         residents of neighboring counties employed in New Hanover inc@reased from
                         2195 in 1960 to 6055 in 1970. The overall effect of these trends has been
                         an increase in net commuting (in-commuters minus out-commuters) from 677
                         in 1960 to 3720 in 1970, or approximately 450 percent. The county's 1970
                         net commuting patterns are illustrated in Figure 2.

                              In both 1960 and 1970, Brunswick and Pender Counties were the major
                         sources of New Hanover's in-commuters. In 1960, Brunswick furnished 945
                         commuters and Pender County furnished 613 commuters to New Hanover County.
                         By 1970, the number of commuters from these counties had increased to 1837
                         and 1692 respectively. It is important to note that between 1960 and 1970
                         the number of commuters from Brunswick County as a percent of the total '
                         decreased sharply. At the same time, out-commuting from New Hanover County
                         to Brunswick has increased significantly. In 1960, 381 New Hanover residents
                         were employed in Brunswick. In 1970, the number of out-commuters to
                         Brunswick County had increased to 1154 -- more than 300 percent.

                              The trends in commutation between New Hanover and Brunswick Counties
                         are clearly the result of recent'expansion of employment opportunities in
                         Brunswick. It is impossible to determine whether commuters to Brunswick
                         County are "established" New Hanover residents or whether they are "new"
                         residents who have moved to the area specifically as a result of employment
                         in Brunswick County. However, given existing atiienities in New Hanover
                         County, including the level of public and private community,services and facili-
                         ties and more extensive shopping opportunities, it is reasonable to expect
                         that a large percentage of the Brunswick commuters are new residents who
                         have located in New Hanover County as a result of its residential preferences.
                         The economic questions associated with providing services to residents
                         without having the advantages of the associated industrial tax base will be
                         explored in a subsequent study of county costs and revenues.

                                                                              TABLE 5

                                                            COMMUTING PATTERNS FOR NEW HANOVER COUNTY
                                                                             1960-1970

                            COUNTY                                      1960                                       1970
                                                          OUT-                  IN-                  OUT-                  IN-
                                                      COMMUTING      %      COMMUTING      %      COMMUTING      %      COMMUTING      %

                            Bladen                          10       0.7         60       2.7           7       0.3        327         5.4

                            Brunswick                     381        25.1       943       43.0       1154       49.4      1837       30.4

                            Columbus                      277        18.2       210       9.5        194        8.3        825       13.6

                            Duplin                          26       1.7          26      1.2          23       1.0        344         5.7

                            Pender                        129        8.5        613       27.9       168        7.2       1692       27.9

                            Sampson                         15       1.0          32      1.5           0          0         57        0.9

                            Elsewhere                     680       44.8        311       14.2       789        33.8       973       16.1

                            Total                         1518     100         2195     100          2335     100         6055      100

                            Net Commuting Gain                         +677                                        +3,720

                            Source: North Carolina Commuting Patterns:      1960 and 1970; Employment Security Commission of North
                                     Carolina, developed from ESC data and unpublished census data.

                                                      FIGURE 2
                                          NET COMMUTING PATTERN
                                               NEW HANOVER COUNTY
                                                         1970

                                                                    o  DUPLIN
                                                                    P
                                          SAMPSON'                  e-
                                             0

                             BLAIDEN                                     RENDER

                                          aeo                                    0\0
                                              a
                                                 %

                                             631 17 %                 3720
                        COLUMBUS
                                                              all

                                                      0
                                                      0                               sto

                                               BRUNSWICK                      COUNTIES NOT SHOWN

                                                      SOURCE: North Carolina Commutina Patterns:1960 1970
                                                               Employment Security Commission of North
                                                               Carolina, developed from ESC data and
                                                               unpublished census data.

                                 The county's commuting patterns also emphasize the importance
                            of New Hanover as an employment resource in the Southeastern North
                            Carolina area.

                                                   F. :RECRUITABLE LABOR FORCE

                                 Recruitable labor force and labor force recruiting area       areconcepts
                            closely associated with commuting patterns, and they are one      of the factors
                            considered in a new industry's decision to locate in the area. The labor
                            force recruiting area is generally determined by driving time and distance
                            (25 miles and 30 to 40 minutes for Wilmington), The recruitable labor
                            force within the labor area is normally measured by the number of active
                            ESC job applicants.

                                 Using Wilmington as the center point@, New Hanover County's labor force
                            recruiting area is illustrated in Figure 3. The number of active job appli-
                            cants, according to September 1974 ESC data, are listed in Table 6. These
                            data show that the county has not only a significant potential labor supply
                            but also that its labor supply is well-trained. Of the 3,365 registered
                            job applicants, almost 90 percent have substantial work experience (Table 7
                            provides a profile of the labor supply by occupational classification).

                                 From this analysis of commuting patterns and labor force recruitment,
                            it is evident that the availability of labor is not at this'tfme a limiting
                            factor in the development of New Hanover County's economy.

                                                               TABLE 6

                                        NUMBER OF REGISTERED JOB APPLICANTS RESIDING WITHIN

                                       THE WILMINGTON LABOR RECRUITING AREA:      SEPTEMBER, 1974

                                                              With Substantial           With Limited or
                            Miles      Persons Reg stered     Work Experience          No Work Experience
                                      Total -Male Female       Male     Female         Male          Female

                             0-15     2,695 1,375 1,320       1,260      1,140         115           180

                            15-20       280      135    145    125         135           10           10

                            20-25       390      180   210     170         195           10           15

                            Total     3,365    1,690  1,675   1,555      1,470         135           205

                            Source: Employment Security    Commission of North Carolina

                                                               -41 @_

                                                                                                                                                                                         FIGURE 3
                                                                                                       LABOR FORCE RECRUITING AREA
                                                                                                                                                        NEW HANOVER COUNTY

                                                                                                                                                                                         13
                                                                                                                                                        V21                              W

                                                                                                                                                        16                               117

                                                                                                                                                                                         53

                                                                                                                                                                                         urga
                                                                                                                                                        Atkin Wards                      rner
                                                                                                                                                        6                                                             Holly R I d$
                                                                                                                                4                                                          D         E
                                                                                                                                 "I
                                                                                                                                                        C
                                                                                                                  elly
                                                                                                                  3                                                                      Rodw-PA                       1     21 2         Del Mar 'a
                                                                                                                  1-h                                                                          21                                       Surf City
                                                                                                                  No.                                   C'. 00o,                         3                                     50
                                                                                           u cil        8                                               1. mv.                           4213        ampste
                                                                                                t A di                                                                                   3                                        w Topsail Beach
                                                                                                                                                                                         Castl:                             rov it Inlet,
                                                                                                                                 iegel/.d                                                Hay .17Scatt;)iil
                                                                                   how         Bolton 7           48      4        c e                                                                             1    OP3.11 1. t
                                                                                                                                                                                         117 132
                                                                                     3 Lk           oAst          reeman  elco                          hoenix                                                .0'Int
                                                                                       .Mm.,                                                                                             WA0
                                                                                                                                    Ma
                                                                                                                                                        74
                                                                                                                  S                                     776                                          M450+1el
                                                                                        B                                                                                                ela 31134@,-AWK. C-d..
                                                                                                                                                        illming                          3 1
                                                                                                                                                        uss N-A C.,                      'Y7         rightsvilt Beach
                                                                                                                                                        9                                .11"ip3
                                                                                                                                                        Bishop M-i@j
                                                                                                                  4                                     Creek                            A5 421      baroAd                                         ly
                                                                                                                                                                                         'd  Mason
                                                                                                                                                                                         120 '-.
                                                                                                                                                        17                               5
                                                                                        R         U                       S                             C                                Seabreeze
                                                                                                                                                        ia                               Co.

                                                                                                                                                        ing                              Carolina Beac
                                                                                                                  Suppil                                ses                              reo" 2 Witminzto&08
                                                                                                                  6                                                                      nd ach    qh-
                                                                                                                                                        Smith                            2
                                                                                                                                                                                         Fl. Fih.,
                                                                                                                                   @@unrboer            33                               3
                                                                                                                                                                                         n1el
                                                                                                                  Holden    4,  *44                     Long Yaopon
                                                                                                                          ch                            Beach Beach
                                                                                                                      Bea                               Caswell                          SMIN J.
                                                                                                                                                        "NP Beach                        &,CAPE FEAR
                                                                                                                                                                                         IGHTHOUSE

                                                                                                                                                                                         SOURCE: Employment Security Commission of
                                                                                                                                                                                         North Carolina.

                                                      TABLE 7

                                  MAJOR OCCUPATIONAL CLASS OF JOB APPLICANTS

                                                 SEPTEMBER, 1974

                                                                 Male     Female        Total

                  Professional, Technical, and Managerial        130          90         220

                  Clerical and Sales                             140        445          585

                  Service                                         90        355          445

                  Farming, Fishing, and Forestry                  25          45            70

                  Processing                                      30          30           60

                  Machine Trades                                 130          70         @200

                  Bench Work                                      45        175          220

                  Structural Work                                440          20         460

                  Miscellaneous Occupations                      240          75         315

                  Partialsa                                      420        370          790

                       Total                                   1,690       1,675        3,365

                  Source: Employment Security Commission of North Carolina

                       aPartials are defined as persons registered for work but whose
                  applications had not been assigned an occupational class

                                                      16

                                               G. WORK FORCE CHARACTERISTICS

                                As discussed previously (page 4), the work force concept provides a
                           different, but significant, perspective on local employment. In contrast
                           .to labor force data which are collected from individuals and provide
                           employment information by place of residence, work force data are collected
                           from establishments and provide a measure of employment by place of work.
                           Therefore, work force estimates furnish a measure of the actual number and
                           types of jobs provided in New Hanover County.

                                New Hanover County's work force estimates for 1962, 1967,     and 1972,
                           which are summarized in Table 8, indicate a substantial increase in the
                           number of jobs provided by the local economy. In 1962, firms in New
                           Hanover County provided an estimated 28,500 jobs, and by 1972, the number
                           of jobs had increased to approximately 41,500, an increase of almost 46
                           percent.

                                In addition, Table 8 shows that the number of jobs in the county is also
                           increasing faster than the population. While the work force increased
                           by 46 percent between 1962 and 1972, the county's total population increased
                           by only 17 percent during the same period.       Further, the county's work
                           force as a percent of total population also increased significantly. For
                           examplet in 1962 the work force was approximately 39 percent of the population,
                           and in 1972 it had increased to 48 percent of the total population.

                                These trends verify earlier conclusions concerning the county's
                           position as a regional employment resource. Not only is the county providing
                           adequate job opportunities for its indigenous population and a large number
                           of migrants, it also provides a large number of jobs for residents of sur-
                           rounding counties.

                                                              TABLE 8

                           NEW HANOVER COUNTY WORK FORCE AND SIZE'OF POPULATION: 1962, 1967 and 1972

                                              -           Year                    Percentage Ch nge
                                                  1962     1967    1972    1962-1967 1967-1972 J-962-1972

                           Estimated Total       73,640 77,883 86,600         5.7%      11.2%      17%
                           Population

                           Civilian Work Forcc 28,480 34,210 41,510          20.1       21.3       45.7
                           (Number of jobs).

                           Source: Employment Security Commission of North Carolina, 1960 and 1970
                           censuses of Population, and Wilmington-New Hanover Planning Department.

                      Table 9 provides an overview of the types of jobs found in New
                 Hanover County. As expected, manufacturing is the most important source
                 of jobs, accounting for slightly more than 25 percent of all employment
                 in 1972. Within the manufacturing classification, it is important to
                 note the changing distribution of jobs between durables and non-durables.
                 In 1962, approximately 73 percent of all manufacturing employment was in
                 the production of nondurable materials. By 1972, the share of non-durables
                 employment had decreased to only 53 percent. This change in the durables
                 nondurables employment mix is a key factor in the county's rising incomes,
                 since traditionally durables employment yields higher wages than non-durables
                 (a detailed discussion of this relationship is found on page 18.)

                      Trade is the second most important source of employment with approxi-
                 mately 20 percent of the county's jobs in 1972. Government is the third
                 leading employment sector accounting for approximately 12 percent of the
                 total. Considering the ten year trend illustrated in Table 9, it appears
                 that employment in both of these sectors has remained steady as A percentage
                 of total county employment.

                      Agriculture has not been significant in the county's economy with
                 respect to employment for some time, and its share of total employment is
                 continuing to decline. Between 1962 and 1972, agricultural employment
                 declined by more than 40 percent -- from 760 to 450.

                      The distribution of county employment among major sectors of the
                 economy is illustrated in Figure 4.

                                              H. INCOME

                      Analysis of income is a fundamental el ement of basic comprehensive
                 planning studies. It serves both as a social indicator which measures
                 the economic well-being of the planning area's residents and as an
                 economic indicator which measures the quality of the planning area's em-
                 ployment opportunities and its potential for consumer-oriented business
                 activity. Since the social implications of the Planning Area's income
                 characteristics were discussed in detail in Part I, the major focus of this
                 section is the implications of income for the local economy. Specifically,
                 two income measures will be discussed. The first, total personal income,
                 is an indicator of the area's overall growth or decline and provides a basis
                 for analyzing the sources of income for the residents of the planning area.
                 The second measure is effective buying income, or disposable income, which
                 is an indicator of the resident's access to consumer goods and is also a
                 measure of the area's commercial potential. Together, these measures can
                 provide a balanced analysis of the Planning Area's income characteristics.

                 1)   Income Statistics

                      The decennial census is the most reliable source of income statistics for
                 planning purposes; however, use of census statistics in the analysis of in-
                 come characteristics has two disadvantages:

                                                 18

                                                                               TABLE 9

                                                         NEW HANOVER COUNTY ANNUAL WORK FORCE ESTIMATES:

                                                                        1962, 1967 and 1972

                                                                                         1962                1967             1972
                                                                                   Number     %        Number     %     Number       %

                       Civilian Work Force                                         28,480              34,210     -     41,510

                       Unemployment, Total                                          1,860    6.5%      1,430     4.27,   1,140      2.7%

                       Employment, Total                                           26,620    93.5      32,780    95.8   40,370     97.3

                       Manufacturing                                                6,400    24.10     7,880     24.0   10,160     25.2

                            Durable                                                 1,730    6.5       2,930     8.9     4,760     11.8

                            Non-durable                                             4,670    17.5      4,950     15.1    5,400     13.4

                       Construction                                                 1P160    4.4       1,840     5.6     2,280      5.7

                       Transportation, Communication, and Public.Utilities          1,920    7.2       2,710     8.3     3,200      7.9

                       Trade                                                        4,990    18.7      5,870     17.9    8,090     20.0

                       Finance, Insurance, and Real Estate                          1,010    3.8       1,040     3.2     1,510      3.7

                       Service                                                      2,740    10.3      3,560     10.9    3,930      9.7

                      .Government                                                   3,050    11.5      4,030     12.3    5,010     12.4

                       Agriculture                                                     760   2.8          570    1.7        450     1.1

                       Other                                                        4,590    17.3      5,280     16.1    5,740     14.3

                            Source: Employment Security Commission of North       Carolina   and the Wilmington-New Hanover
                            Flanning Department.

                                                FIGURE 4

                                 EMPLOYMENT BY SECTOR, 1972

                                                        AGRICULTURE 1.1%

              ALL OTHER NON-AGRICULTURAL
              EMPLOYMENT 14.3 %

                                                                           MANUFACTURING
                                                                              25.2%

                                                     Durable Mfg.
                                   OTHER

           GOVERNMENT
               12.4%

                                                           Non-durable Mfg.
                                                               13.4%

                                                                              CONSTRUCTION
                                                                                  5.7%
             SERVICES
               917%

                                                                             TRANSPORTATION,
                                                                             COMMUNICATION,
                                                                             PUBLIC UTILITIES
                                                                                 7.9%
           FINANCE, INSURANCE
           a REAL ESTATE
               317%

                                                                   TRADE
                                                                   20.0%

                                I.  Census data are seldom current. The most recent information
                                    currently available is five years old, and its use will not
                                    reflect significant recent changes in the Planning Area's
                                    income characteristics.

                                2. The Census reports gross income rather than actual net cash
                                    income available for the purchase of goods and services.

                                Complementary data to overcome this shortcoming has been obtained
                          from  Sales Management magazine's "Survey of Buying Power" and the U.S.
                          Department of Commerce's "Survey of Current Business".     'Sales Management
                          magazine's "Survey of Buying Power" reports data through 1973 and the
                          "Survey of Current Business" reports data through 1972.

                          2). TOTAL PERSONAL INCOME

                                Total personal income is  defined as all income from land, labor, and
                          capital before the deduction   of federal, state and local taxes. Analysis
                          of past trends in total personal income reveals the degree of economic
                          well-being and dynamics of an area such as decline, stability, or growth.

                                Figure 5 illustrates past trends in total personal income for the
                          Wilmington SMSA in both constant and current dollars and reveals two
                          distinct growth periods between 1950 and 1972. The first period, from
                          1950 to 1965, was one of relatively slow growth; the second"pekiod, 1965
                          to 1972, was one of much greater growth. During the 15 years between
                          1950 to 1965 total personal income in current dollars increased by approxi-
                          mately 112 percent. In the next seven years, or approximately half the
                          previous time period, total personal income increased by over 126 percent.
                          After converting the data to constant 1967 dollars to discount the effects
                          of inflation, the growth rates for these two periods are 62 percent and 71
                          percent, respectively, indicating that even with growing inflation incomes
                          are still increasing.

                                In addition to the trends revealed in Figure 5, the total personal
                          income growth of the Wilmington SMSA has been compared with that of four
                          other North Carolina SMSA's -- Burlington, Asheville, Fayetteville, and
                          Raleigh-Durham.@ Although total personal income is primarily a reflection
                          of population size, it can be seen in Figure 6 that in the period from 1965
                          to 1972 income in the Wilmington SMSA exceeded that of the Burlington SMSA,
                          which has approximately the same size population

                          3) EFFECTIVE BUYING INCOME

                                Effective buying income (EBI) is total personal income -- wages,
                          salaries, interest dividends, property income, and transfer payments -- minus
                          federal, state, and local taxes. It represents disposable income or income
                          which residents can actually spend, save, or invest.

                                Table.10, which is illustrated graphically by Figure 7, presents
                          effective buying income for three urban.North Carolina counties (New Hanover,

                                                                          FIGURE 5
                                                         TOTAL PERSONAL INCOME
                                                                   BY RESJDENTS
                                                                WILMINGTON SMSA
                                                                        1950 to 1972

                                              M    500-
                                              I                    CURRENT DOLLARS
                                              L                     1967 DOLLARS
                                              L    400-

                                              N
                                              S    300-
                                              0
                                              F
                                              D    200-
                                              0
                                              L
                                              L     100-
                                              A
                                              R
                                              S
                                                    0

                                                      1950          1959      1965 19691972
                                                                          YEAR

                                FIGURE 6                                                                FIGURE 7
                 TOTAL PERSONAL INCOME                                               EFFECTIVE BUYING INCOME
                           BY RESIDENTS                                  NEW HANOVER, DURHAM a BUNCOMBE COUNTIES
                         SELECTED SMSA!S                                                        1964 THROUGH 1973
                          (CURRENT DOLLARS)                                                      (CURRENT DOLLARS)
                   2000-                                                   600                                                          7
                                                                                  @ 1965 to 1974 sales management survey
                                                                        M             of buying. power,(f urther reproduction
                                                                        1  500-       Is forbidden).
                                                                        L
                   1000-                                                L
                                                                        1
                 M 900-                                                 0
                 1 800-                                                 N  400-
                 L 700-                                                 S
                 L
                                                          4V            0
                 1 600-
                 0
                                                                        F
                 N 500-                                                    300-
                 S                                      Z               D
                   400-                        'k                       0
                 0
                                                                        L
                 F                                                      L  200-
                   300-                                                 A                               -NEW HANOVER COUNTY
                 D                                                      R
                 0                                                      S                                       DURHAM COUNTY
                 L
                 L 200-                                                     100-                        _-BUNCOMBE COUNTY
                 A
                 R.                   (ate-
                 s
                                                                              0
                   10                                                         1.964 1965 1966    1967 1968    1969 1970 1971     1972 1973
                      0                                                                                    YEAR
                     90
                     so
                       1950            1959    1965     19691972
                                       YEAR                         SOURCE: Survey of Current Business, U.S. Department of
            0                                                                   Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis,
                                                                                May, 19T2.

                           Durham, and Buncombe) located within the three geographical provinces of
                           the state -- Coastal Plain, Piedmont, and Mountain.

                                New Hanover County's total EBI nearly doubled during the period
                           1967-1973 with a growth rate of 90 percent. This greatly surpassed the
                           two other representative urban counties. The total EBI represents the
                           potential market for consumer items; therefore, it is a useful tool for
                           retail enterprises desiring to locate additional outlets.

                                                             TABLE 10

                                                      EFFECTIVE BUYING INCOME
                               NEW HANOVER, DURHAM, AND BUNCOMBE COUNTIES: 1967, 1970, and 1973
                                                         (Current Dollars)

                                                 Effective Buying Income
                             County              (Thousands of dollars)               Percentage Change
                                              1967        1970        1973    1967-1970 1970-1973 1967-1973
                           New Hanover                  278,895      362,056     46.5        29.8        90.2.

                           Durham          333,194      437,265      585,107     31.2        33.8        75.6

                           Buncombe        357,559      429,299      549,266     20.1        27.9        53.6

                           Source:  Sales  Management  Survey of Buying Power;   further reproduction   is
                           forbidden.

                           4) EBI PER HOUSEHOLD

                                In order to more  accurately compare effective buying incomes among
                           different counties it  is desirable to discount the effects of population
                           differences since total effective buying income is largely a reflection of
                           population size    This is accomplished by the use of effective buying
                           income per hous;hold.    EBI per household represents the disposable income
                           earned by each household. In this sense, effective buying income per house-
                           hold more accurately reflects the purchasing power of the county's residents
                           and the overall economic retail potential of the county than does total
                           effective buying income.

                                Table 11, which is illustrated graphically by Figure 8, presents
                           effective buying income per household. Although a slight decline in EBI
                           per household between 1971 and 1972 caused a decline in the county's overall
                           growth rate from 1967 to 1973, from 1967 to 1973 the county's growth rate
                           greatly exceeded the rates for Durham and Buncombe Counties. in 1967 Durham
                           County's EBI per household was approximately $1,400 greater than New Hanover's,
                           but by 1973 this difference was nearly halved to a difference of only $771.
                           During this same period, New Hanover County's effective buying income per
                           household grew from approximately $250 less to more than $1,150 greater than
                           that of Buncombe County.

                                                       TABLE 11

                                        EFFECTIVE BUYING  INCOME PER HOUSEHOLD
                         NEW HANOVER, DURHAM, AND BUNCOMBE COUNTIES: 1967, 1970, AND 1973
                                                   (Current Dollars)

                                        EBI Per Household                       Percent Change
                County            1967        1970         1973       1967-1970    1970-1973    1967-1973
              New Hanover       8,064        10,253       11,949         27.1        16.5         48.2
              Durham            9,466        10,562       12,720         11.6        20.4         34.4
              Buncombe          8,315         9,134       10,791    1     9.8        18.1         29.8

              Source: Sales Management Survey of     Buying Power.

                                                         FIGURE 8

                                              EFFECTIVE BUYING INCOME
                                                    PER HOUSEHOLD
                                 NEW HANOVER, DURHAM, AND BUNCOMBE COUNTIES: 1964-1973
                                                    (CURRENT DOLLARS)

                            15,000-

                            10,000-
                         I
                         N
                         C
                         0
                         M
                         E

                             5,000-                 Now Hanover County

                                             .------Durham County

                                             ----Buncombe County

                                0
                                  1964 1965  1966 1967 19es 1969  1970 1971 1972 1973

                                                          YEAR

                                                         SOURCE: Sales management survey of buying power,
                                                                    (further reproduction Is forbidden.)

                          5) FACTORS RELATED TO INCREASING INCOMES

                                Changes in manufacturing employment have had a major impact on
                          New Hanover County incomes. Reference to Figures 14, 15, and 16 in the
                          Industrial Profile section reveals significant changes in manufacturing
                          employment characteristics in New Hanover County during the 1962 to 1972
                          period in which the county experienced'rapid income growth. The county's
                          employment trends over the last decade show a steady significant increase
                          in new-type and durable manufacturing sectors which are characterized by
                          higher technical skill requirements and higher wages and salaries. This
                          trend stimulates the up-grading of skills by local citizens and the migra-
                          tion of more semi-skilled, skilled, and professional employees to the
                          county.

                                Diversification and the resulting improvement in the county's indus-
                          trial mix has closely paralleledrising incomes. The growing durable
                          industries, in addition to providing increased incomes, are importing money
                          to the local economy by exporting goods to markets outside the county.

                                The nature of unemployment trends in New Hanover County is closely
                          related to the increasingly diversified industrial mix. Tables 3 and 4
                          in the Labor Force Characteristics section of this report illustrate the
                          favorable employment trends in the Wilmington    SMSA compared with the state
                          and other SMSA's within the state. For the period 1970 through 1973 the
                          county's unemployment rate averaged 0.9 percentage points below the state.
                          Although New Hanover County has suffered from the recent national economic
                          recession, the Wilmington SMSA had the second lowest unemployment rate of
                          the seven North Carolina SMSA's and was 2.3 percentage points below the
                          state as a whole in January, 1975. This relatively low rate for the area
                          is a reflection of local industrial diversification, thus eliminating the
                          reliance on one or two types of manufacturing employment and lowering the
                          local economy's susceptibility to fluctuations in the national economy.

                          SUMMARY

                                The preceeding analysis of Planning Area incomes indicate:

                                1.  The Planning Area income is increasing at a rapid rate even
                                    when compared with other urban counties in the state.

                                2.  This increase is attributable.in large part to parallel changes in
                                    the type of manufacturing employment and accompanying industry
                                    mix which, in turn, is affecting greater immigration of profes-
                                    sional, skilled, and semi-skilled workers.

                                3.  This growing population and accompanying increasing incomes is
                                    stimulating a rapidly growing trade sector which is serving both
                                    the local population and an expanding trade area outside the
                                    county.

                                                            _-2-57-

                                        II.   INDUSTRIAL PROFILE

                     This section provides the second element of the profile of New
                Hanover Countyls economy by tracing the growth and development of the
                county's industrial sectors over a period of years. Major emphasis has
                been given to identifying significant changes in the industrial composi-
                tion in recent years; the factors causing these changes; and the effects
                of these changes on employment, income and other important aspects of New
                Hanover County's economy. In developing this descriptive profile of the
                county's industry, no attempt has been made to determine the interrelation-
                ships between industries and their markets. This aspect of the local
                economy is described in a separate technical document which,uses the
                "Input-Output" technique to analyze New Hanover County's economy.a

                                            A. AGRICULTURE

                     Agriculture has played an important part in New Hanover County's
                development. The part-time farmer is still relatively common in outlying
                parts of the county, particularly in the Castle Hayne area. However, the
                role of the agricultural sector of the area's economy as measured in dollar
                volume is minor and.appears to be diminishing further.

                     The major dollar volume crops in the county are flowers, nur    ,sery
                crops, soybeans, and tobacco- Horticulture accounted for approximately
                45 percent of the county's total farming revenues in 1971.

                     The increasing urbanization of New Hanover County, coupled with
                industrial growth, taxes, changing agricultural practices, and low crop
                prices have all led to the decline of agriculture as a major economic activi-
                ty. Another factor leading to the demise of the local small farm is the
                opportunity to realize a profit through the sale of land to developers.

                     While there are well over an estimated, one hundred allotment farms
                in the county according to the local Agricultural Stabilization and Con-
                servation office, the'local Agricultural Extension Service estimates there
                to be no more than ten persons in the county who make their entire living
                by farming. The Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation office concurs
                with this estimate. There are no indicators showing a trend reversal as to
                the future of agriculture in the county; however, national factors such as
                scarce energy and the close proximity of New Hanover County to lucrative
                eastern markets may produce an up-swing in the agricultural sector.

                                           B. MANUFACTURING

                1) Hisitorical Perspective

                     New Hanover County's manufacturing was long based on the forest and

                     aWilmington-New Hanover Planning Department,    "An Input-Output Analysis
                of the Wilmington SMSA Economy."

                                                   26

                          farm products of its hinterland -- naval stores, lumber, cotton -- which
                          received minimum processing before being exported for secondary processing
                          outside the area. Fertilizer materials were imported into the Wilmington
                          area and processed for use in the rural hinterland. During the two world
                          wars, shipbuilding boomed but subsided when combat ceased. After World
                          War II, manufacturing expanded in textiles, apparel, food, and steam boiler
                          products but accounted for only a small portion o-f the economic base.

                               As shown in Table 12, only twelve new firms began production in New
                          Hanover County over the thirteen year period from 1954 through 1967.
                          However, these firms initiated a significant change in the structure   of the
                          local manufacturing industry. In 1963, the value added by manufacturing
                          (value of finished products minus cost of production) began to rise after
                          remaining relatively unchanged during the previous ten years. In 1965
                          employment in industries producing durable goods began to increase rapidly
                          as new plants opened and established plants expanded their production.
                          Over the-next seven years, employment in durable goods grew at a much faster
                          rate than employment inthe non-durable,manufacturers (see Figure 10).
                          Within the durable category, fabricated metals grew the fastest and by 1972
                          was the dominant industry, employing nearly 2,900 workers.

                               Among the larger manufacturing firms in New Hanover County are
                          Babcock and Wilcox Company, Corning Glass Works, General Electric Company,
                          Hercules Incorporated, The Singer Company and Timme Corporation.

                               The importance of manufacturing employment can be clarified by grouping
                          industries into generalized classifications that point out developing
                          trends and the impact of the trends on the local economy. Manufacturing
                          in New Hanover County and the southeast in general can be grouped into
                          three classifications -- traditional, new-typ , and locally-oriented
                          industries. Traditional industries (textiles, apparel, and lumber)
                          historically have been the dominant type of manufacturing in the southeast
                          The new-type industries (chemicals, fabricated metals, and machinery) are
                          activities which until recently accounted for only a small fraction of the
                          total manufacturing employment. Locally oriented industries (food, printing,
                          stone, clay, glass and miscellaneous) are manufacturers producing goods
                          which have predominantly local markets. The distribution and change in
                          manufacturing employment by industry type is shown in Table 13. Employment
                          trends for these three generalized classifications are shown in Figure 11.

                          2   Traditional Industries

                               For several decades, manufacturing employment in New Hanover County
                          was concentrated in the traditional industry category, mainly in textiles
                          and apparel. From 1940 through the mid-1960's these industries employed
                          over 50 percent of the production workers. After peaking in 1966, employment
                          in this category leveled off, then began to decline. This resulted not from
                          production cutbacks but from increased mechanization and improved technology.
                          Through modernization, Output per worker has increased to a point where it
                          is now possible for the textile and apparel industries to increase production
                          while cutting back their labor force.

                                                           -2-7-

                                                                                 TABLE 12

                                                       NUMBER OF MANUFACTURING ESTABLISHMENTS AND VALUE ADDED
                                       WILMINGTON., NEW HANOVER COUNTY, THE WILMINGTON SMSA, AND NORTH CAROLINA            1954-1972

                                                             1954              1�758           1963                1967                1972

                        .North Carolina

                            Establishments                    6,645              7,289           7,784               8,266               8,578
                            Value Added
                              by Manufacturing            2,210,463         3,095,677        4,566,547          6,606,50.0          11,023,100
                            Capital Expenditures            129,622           168,612          314,428            664,600             989,400

                         SMSA

                            Establishments                       131               141              133                156                 150
                            Value Added
               NJ             by Manufacturing               28P367            29,970          43,263              85,700             481,200
               00           Capital Expenditures              1  594             1,356         16,710              50,800             120,700

                         New Hanover County

                            Establishments                       101               106              106                113                  122
                            Value Added
                              by Manufacturing               25,820            24,724          36,896              80,300             473,700
                            Capital Expenditures              IP405              IpO13         16,084              50,500             120,300

                         Wilmington

                            Establishments                        74                71               70                 76           Data Not
                            Value Added                                                                                             Available
                              by Manufacturing               20,912            13,988            26,016            52,900
                            Capital Expenditures              19184                810            1,184              (D)

                         Note: Value added by manufacturing and capital expenditures         are in thousands of dollars.
                         (D) Withheld to avoid disclosure.
                         Source: Census of Manufacturers, U.S. Bureau of the Census.

                                                                               TABLE 13

                                                  NEW HANOVER COUNTY MANUFACTURING EMPLOYMENT: 1962 and 1972

                                                                           Number                                  Change 1962-1972
                                                                 1962                   1972                   Number              Percent

                            Traditional

                               Textiles                          1,630                  1,360                     270)                16.6)
                               Apparel                           1,530                  1,590                      60                   3.9
                               Lumber and Wood                      840                   800                      40)                 4.8)

                               Sub Total                         4,000                  3,750                     250                  6.3)

                            New Type

                               Fabricated Metals                    690                 2,890                   2,200                318.8
                               Machinery                              50                  500                     450                900.0
                               Chemicals                            510                 1,110                     600                117.6

                               Sub Total                         1,250                  4,500                   3,250                260.0

                            Locally-Oriented

                               Food                                 710                   970                     260                 36.6
                               Printing                             230                   310                      80                 34.8
                               Stone, Clay, Glass                   110                   280                     170                154.5
                               Miscellaneous                        100                   350                     250                250.0

                               Sub Total                         1,150                  1,9ro                     760                 66.1

                                    Total
                                    All Industries               6,400                  10,160                  3,760                 58.8

                            Source: Annual Average Work Force Estimates 1962-1972, Employment Security Commission of North
                            Carolina.

                                                                FIGURE 10
                                                MANUFACTURING EMPLOYMENT
                                                New Hanover County- 1962-1972

                        6P00 -                                                                                6,000

                   E    5,000-                                                                              -5,000
                   M
                   P                  Non-durable
                   L    4,000-                                                                              -4,000
                   0
                   Y
                   M    3,000-                                                                              -3,000
                   E
                   N
                   T
                        2,000-                                                                              -2,000

                                      Durable

                        1,000-                                                                              - 1,000
                                                                                              '70        1
                                   1962                                                      19            9T2
                                                                   YEAR

                                SOURCE: Annual average work force estimates 1962 -1972.
                                              Employment Security Commission of              North Carolina.

                                                                FIGURE 11
                                                MANUFACTURING EMPLOYMENT
                                                New Hanover County-- 1962- 1972

                        6,000-                                                                                6,000

                   E    5,000-                                                                              -5,000
                   M                                           -^-,,Traditional Industry     0 k
                   P                                       oo
                   L    4,000-                                                                              -4,000
                   0
                   Y
                   M    3,000-                                                                              -3,000
                   E
                   N
                   T                                                        Now-Type Industry
                        2,000-                                                                                2,000

                        1,000-                                      Locally Oriented Industry _17--           1,000
                                  1962                  1965                                              1972
                                                                  YEAR

                                SOURCE: Annual average work force estimates 1962-1972
                                              Employment Security Commission of North Carolina.

                               The traditional industries have historically employed semi-skilled
                           and unskilled workers and hence have been the low income producers. Although
                           modernization has added higher paying skilled jobs, this industry category
                           is still characterized by unskilled jobs and low wages. In 1972 the.tradi-
                           tional industries employed nearly 37 percent of the manufacturing workers
                           in New Hanover County, but produced less than 26 percent of the total
                           manufacturing payroll. As shown in Table 14, the average weekly wages for
                           workers in textile and apparel plants were $118 and $84, respectively, as
                           compared to an average of $127 for all manufacturing workers. However,
                           wages paid by these industries in New Hanover County were roughly the same
                           as the state average.

                           3) New-Type Industries

                               During the 1960's the structure of manufacturing in New Hanover County
                           changed significantly and in doing so made a significant impact on the
                           total economy. In the mid-1960's new-type industry began to expand. New
                           plants were constructed and established firms began expanding their
                           production. Over the seven year period from 1966 to 1972 employment in the
                           new-type industries increased from 1,860 to 4,500, a gain of 142 percent.
                           During this period the fabricated metal industry nearly tripled its employ-
                           ment while the chemical industry increased by more than 54 percent. Employ-
                           ment in the machinery industry grew fourfold; however, it still accounted
                           for only 10 percent of the total labor force working in the.new industry
                           category.

                               Among the larger manufacturing firms included in the new-type indus-
                           tries are Babcock and Wilcox, Corning Glass Works, General Electric and
                           The Singer Company.

                               The rapid growth in the new-type industries is significant not only
                           in the number of new jobs created, but more importantly in the amount of
                           money injected into the local economy as a result of higher wages. These
                           industries are highly productive firms employing professional, skilled and
                           semi-skilled workers. In 1972 the weekly wage for workers in the new-type
                           industries averaged $181, as compared to $100 and $133 for the traditional
                           and locally-oriented categories. The fabricated metal industries, in
                           addition to being the largest employer, also paid the highest average
                           wage -- $195 per week. As indicated in Table 16, this pay rate was substan-
                           tially higher than the average for any industrial group in the state.

                               The new-type industries, with more mechanized production, have also
                           had a profound effect on the productivity of the factory worker. Produc-
                           tivity per worker (value added in manufacturing less pay per employee)
                           is a good measure of the quality of an area's manufacturing. During the
                           decade preceeding development of the new-type Endustries, productivity
                           per worker in New Hanover County remained virtually unchanged while-the
                           state average increased by more than 100 percent. With the addition of
                           the new industries, productivity per employer improved substantially to
                           surpass the state average in 1967   In four years, productivity in the
                           county industries increased by over 109 percent to $9,081 per production
                           worker. Continued development of the new-type industries with their high-
                           valued products resulted in a considerable increase in productivity between

                                                                              TABLE  4

                                                              AVERAGE WEEKLY WAGES IN MANUFACTURING
                                                          NEW HANOVER COUNTY AND NORTH CAROLINA: 1972

                                                                   lNew Hanover County                  North Carolina

                             Traditional

                                Textiles                                       $118.83                       $118.38
                                Apparel                                          84.08                         83.87
                                Lumber and Wood                                  99.84                       120.18

                                Traditional Average                            100.05                        112.91

                            New-Type

                   Lj
                                Fabricated Metals                              194.51                        155.47
                                Machinery                                      144.84                        165.20
                                Chemicals                                      164.82                        174.47

                                New-Type Average                               181.16                        166.24

                            Locally - Oriented

                                Food                                           120.60                        124.14
                                Printing                                       132.25                        143.06
                                Stone, Clay, Glass                             136.01                        137.41
                                Miscellaneous                                  157.10                        143.12

                                Locally-Oriented Average                       132.70                        134.26

                                        Average All Industries                 $142.23                       $127.44

                            1967 and 1972. According to the 1972 Census of Manufacturers, produc-
                            tivity in New Hanover County had increased to $47,600 per production
                            worker -- nearly four times the state average. This high value is due to
                            the concentration of specialized manufacturers in New Hanover County which
                            produce high-valued products. Table 15 contrasts the productivity of manu-
                            facturing workers for Wilmington@areas and the state.

                                                                TABLE 15

                                  Productivity of Manufacturing Workers: 1963, 1967, and 1972

                                                            Dollar Output Per
                                                            Production Worker                Percen Change
                                   Area                           1967          1972     1963-1967    1967-1972
                            North Carolina            6339        8174       12,553         28.9         53.6
                            Wilmington SMSA1          4854        9138       46,678         88.3        411.0
                            New Hanover County        4349        9081       47,609        109.0        424.0
                            Wilmington           1    3968        9487       25,550        139.0        169.3

                            1. Wilmington Standard    Metropolitan Statistical Area (SMSA) includes
                                Brunswick and New Hanover County.

                            Source: Census of Manufacturers, U.S. Bureau of the Census

                                 In addition to the new industries which have located in New Hanover
                            County, a number of new-type industries have also located in Brunswick
                            County. Recently constructed chemical and fabricated metal plants are major
                            employers of manufacturing workers in Brunswick County. These industries
                            are important to the economy of New Hanover County because a significant
                            portion of,the workers attracted into the area by these industries established
                            their residences in New Hanover County; consequently, a sizeable portion of
                            the payrolls of these companies is interjected into the economy of New Hanover
                            County.

                            4) Locally.Oriented Manufacturing

                                 Historically, New Hanover County has had a number of industrial firms
                            which manufactures products primarily for the local market. These locally
                            oriented manufacturers include food processing; printing and publishing;
                            stone, clay and glass industries; and a variety of unclassified industries.

                                .The perishable nature of most food products      limits the time, and hence,
                            distance between production and consumption. Consequently, most food processors
                            operate wi .thin the local market. However, there are a few food processing
                            firms that market products outside the local economy. Bakery, beverage, and
                            dairy products are the major food items produced for local consumption.

                     Due to the weight and bulkiness of their products, most stone, clay
                and glass industries are locally oriented. The transportation cost incurred
                in handling their products limits exporting them for any great distance.
                One exception to this is cement manufacturing which does export large
                quantities of its product. The major locally oriented producers included
                in this class are concrete, sand and gravel firms, all of which exist as
                support elements for the construction industry.

                     The printing and publishing sector includes commercial printing and
                newspaper publishing. Commercial printing firms take a semi-finfshed product
                produced by other local industries (business, government agencies, and
                manufacturers) and produce a finished item for use by these industries.
                Thus commercial printing is a service oriented manufacturer and is linked
                directly to other segments of the local economy. Newspapers to a large
                extent are also service oriented in that they function as an information
                media for the county and surrounding area. However, from an economic point
                of view newspapers function as an advertising media which.is dependent on
                other local businesses. Newspapers are considered as manufacturing industries
                since they produce an item for sale. In general, production in the locally
                oriented manufacturing category is linked,closely with production in other
                economic activities. Similarly, employment in this type manufacturing is
                a function of employment in other sectors of the local economy. Over the
                ten year period from 1962 to 1972, employment in local manufacturing grew
                in direct proportion to the total county employment and maintained a constant
                share (four percent) of the total. Employment in food processing maintained
                a relatively stable growth rate in response to increased demands by the
                population. Employment in printing and the stone, clay and glass industries
                fluctuated with employment changes in the industries to which they are linked.

                     Although locally oriented manufacturers employ relatively few
                workers in comparison to other manufacturers, they are important as an
                income producer. In 1972, wages in this category averaged significantly
                higher than in the traditional category but were well below the average
                for new-type industries (Refer to Table 14). Food processing paid the
                lowest average wage while the miscellaneous industries is due to high paying
                jobs in a number of small but highly skilled industries. -In 1972, locally
                oriented manufacturing generated approximately $13.2 million in income for
                workers in New Hanover County.

                                                   3.4

                                                    C. CONSTRUCTION

                               During the past decade, the construction industry has been a major
                          element of the local economy. An accelerated rate of construction has inter-
                         .jected money into several associated industries including finance, real
                          estate, building material dealers and a variety of retail businesses which
                          market hardware and household products. The manpower requirements have pro-
                          vided employment for a significant portion of the'local labor force, both
                          skilled and unskilled -- nearly 6 percent in 1972.

                               A review of the construction industry indicates not only its economic
                          importance but also reveals the changing social and economic characteristics
                          of the residents. The recent boom in construction is mainly a direct result
                          of the changing social and economic desires of the civilian household. The
                          major factors impacting construction trends during the past decade include:

                               1. A growing population resulting from natural increase and immigration.

                               2. An abnormally high rate of family formation.

                               3.  Expanding employment opportunities with higher wages.

                               4.  The price of housing relative to the purchaser's ability to pay-

                               5.  The desire of inter-city dwellers to move to the suburbs.

                               6.  The availability of developable land and public utilities.

                                                                                              a
                               According to records of the city and county Building Inspectors
                          nearly 11,300 dwelling units were constructed in New Hanover County during
                          the period from 1966 through 1973 with 54 percent being built in the
                          city.  (See Table 16).

                               The unit mix for the two reporting areas is substantially different.
                          For the eight year period residential construction in Wilmington totaled
                          6,097 units of which 73 percent were multifamily units. Within the unin-,
                          corporated county area only eight percent of the toal units were in multi-
                          family structures. The concentration of multifamily units inside the city
                          is due primarily to the lack of adequate water and sewer utilities to handle
                          demands of high density developments in the unincorporated areas. The rapid
                          increase in apartment construction reflects efforts to meet the demand for
                          housing by young married couples, persons whose income will not support
                          purchasing a home, the growing number of one person households, and college
                          students.

                               aThe County Building Inspector reports permits for the county area
                          excluding the areas of the City of Wilmington and Wrightsville, Carolina
                          and Kure Beaches.

                                                                            TABLE 16

                                                             RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION: 1966-1973

                              Jurisdiction                                  Number of Units                                   Total
                                                    1966     1967     1968    1969     1970     1971      1972      1973    1966-1973

                          Wilmington

                              Single Family         135      189      190      129     437      369        192        35      1,676
                              Multi-Family            78     433      302      515     411      314     1,171     1,197       4,421
                              Total                 213      622      492      644     848      683     1,363     1,132       6,097

                          Unincorporated
                          New Hanover County

                              Single Family         230      365      567      477     701      752        866       830      4,788
                              Multi-Family             2                 2       10      20       66        32       269         401
                              Total                 232      365      569      487     721      818        898    1,099       5,189
                                                                                   t

                          Total Planning Area

                              Single Family         365      554      757      606    1,138    1,121    1,058        865      6,464
                              Multi-Family            80     433      304      525     431      380     1,203     1,466       4,822
                              Total                 445      987     1,061   1,131    1,569    1,501    2,261     2,331       11,286
                           L

                          Source: Building Inspection     Departments, Wilmington and New    Hanover County.

                              The predominance of single family construction in the unincorporated
                          area is primarily a result of the desire to move to the suburbs and the
                          availability of developable land outside the city. Avoidance of city
                          taxation is another factor influencing home ownership outside the Wilmington
                          city limits.a

                              Table 17 illustrates trends in the value of new construction in the
                          two reporting areas. These statistics are estimated cost of materials
                          and labor reported on the building permits. These data have been adjusted
                          by the "Engineering News-Record" construction cost index to permit a
                          valid comparison of values over the eight year period. The cost of land
                          is not included in these values; hence, they do not reflect selling prices.

                              aProperty in the unincorporated area of the county is only taxed at
                          county rates, while property in the city is taxed by both the city and the
                          county.

                                                                               TABLE 17

                                                                      VALUE OF NEW CONSTRUCTION

                                                            AUTHORIZED BY BUILDING PERMITS: 1966-1973
                                                                     (In 1967 Dollars)

                                           1966           1967           1968            1969          1970           1971           1972            1973

               City of Wilmington

                  Residential          $ 3,870,837   $ 6,852,873     $ 5,765,429   $ 5,963,630    $ 8,703,230    $ 8,386,158     $ 4,580,035    $ 8,054,396
                  Commercial              2,809,9180     6,032,693     4,431,551       6,127,296      2,213,340     .2,812,709      4,759,716      3,375,044
                  Industrial              2,029,809       402,008       1,261,726      1,618,697       283,822        609,865       1,057,346        157,410
                  Institutional           1,537,258         25,500       477,765         530,519      2,455,471       654,850        192,806         659,392

                  Total                $10,247,884    $13,313,074    $11,936,471   $14,240,142    $13,655,863    $12,463,582     $10,589,903    $12,246,242

          co   Unincorporated
               New Hanover County

                  Residential          $ 4,078,650   '$ 6,267,571    $ 8,670,31-5  $ 6,884,171    $ 9,908,244    $10,271,410     $12,049,406    $10,899,459
                  Commercial                184,647       216,754        211,054         772,093       225,906        530,122        428,590         368,305
                  Industrial                 38,065      5,407,774       153,660          53,687      1,180,262       505,766       1,836,618      1,245,134
                  Institutional             362,393       714,984        639,422         693,724       186,750        210,563        283,645      1,773,4291:

                  Total                $ 4,663,755     $12,607,083   $ 9,674,511   $ 8,403,675    $11,501,162    $11,517,870     $14,598,259    $14,286,327

               Source: Building Inspection Departments, Wilmington and New Hanover County.

                                                                                     FIGURE 12
                                                      NEW HANOVER COUNTY                                                                                                                                                                                                                     oe            Ia-
                                                                                                                                                                                                       I?    +              $ 1,                                           To keY5 so        +                     A       )a
                                                          RETAIL                        TRADE                       AREA                                                                                                                                                                     ena'sville
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     12
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        eulwill
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           U P L                     I
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           Mot ofix          10
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           nofix                                                                          Pichlas
                                                                                                                                                                                                   13                                                                                                                                       cwh-;
                                                                                                                                                                                                                            4                                                                                                                       kc
                                                                                                                                                                                                        Ingo?                                                              o,e H@l                                                                          58
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  2
                                                                                                                                                                            Arnmoft 11                                      Del.&                                                            G,een,ve'l                               Catherine Lake
                                                                                                                                                                                                             attend                                                        Te they 11                                                             +      Jackso
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  10                 N
                                                                                                                                                                          BLA EN                                                                                                                                    cypress
                                                                                                                                                                                     S                                                                                     ace                                         :reek                                    53
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             city                                         I
                                                                                                       0          N
                                              K                                                                                                               7                                       4                                                                    Pend-ea wMa6\                                          M. fe Hill
                                                                                                              41          1                                                                                          Kerr                                                                    Ij
                                             44moI                                                                                                                                          L                                                                              wl  he
                                                                                                          Lumberton       +               7                   2E@uxhef lo@n          FO E                                                                                  16
                                                 urvis      I?Wh,@- f1fif                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       50          Cann
                                                                                                       ailjorj@@ "" @             @V                                                                    I                                                                                    1@iL
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             1A
                                                                       . .....                                                                                13IIl "Ia
                                                                                             74                                                                                                      19
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           5w
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           Atkinson

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       Ho      Ridf
                                                                                                                                                              C1.1ito,
                                                 J. % Z@f                                                                                I                                                                            c v          4                                       111k
                                                                                     1 3                                  in                                                               carvers
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           C ... i

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               ROC4 Poirill                                          P
                                                                                                Baird                                                                                                                                                                      21                                                            1
                                           Mon                                                                      f-fe'-        13                                                                                                                                                                                              0,                          Del
                                                                                                                                                                                                  until        87                                                                                                                 t.                       Sort C,
                                                                                             BA-wilf                                                                                                                                                                                            I             I      SMpstea
                                                                                                                                                              +                                       I Arj@
                                                                                                                                                              w11 rvillf
                                                                                                                                                              i-4                                 1                                                                                          Castle                                             New    Topsail Be
                                                          Lh,  Vie                                                                                            fs         t0f W*Cch.sw ,              00110@                                                                it 1w call
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           Alctme            He-                                              Topsail 1.111
                                                            41                                  411-11         Cello Go,do                                    isboto St                                     AST feeman           Dtw                                       ,                                                      Old Topsail 1.1.1
                                                  2                                                                                                           U35*0                              Ica-                                                                      5M.'A hoemix      A      0                        Rich 1.111
                                                                                                                                                                 U              M                                     S                                                    I                 I@". 11
                                                                                             0              h                     I                                                                                                                                        +?a               I                      Maso. Inlet
                                              M                                                       4"          CIO,#                    701                                                                                                                             1                        74     ,-Aw,. c,,d_,
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  16       z       fightsville, Basch
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           "14,              . "
                                    -on                                                                                   "I               dr,sy              5                                                                                                            Town Sish         13
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           creek k"          Is
                                                                                                                                                              M III. ow Doc  0",        1,
                                                                                                                                     ;ran H.II                 kin&                                              211
                                                                                                        Gr@      Sri      1                                                                                                                                                177
                                                                                                                                                                                     B      R          U                        S                                              33            S
                                                                                                                                                              lain                   Ash                                                                                   0"S.
                                                           Gai'vants F,,,y                                                tolls                                                                                                                                            Bolivia 10                                   MW
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           C-d-,
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                A4-6- Sf. P*.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           Boiling              Carolina Beach
                                                            Sol  Ayno,               Asybuto    I                                                             P"Wly     904          j3o    11                                                                             Sam', Lakes
                                                                                                              110fook                                         j                                                                                                                                      - - - - -----
                                                                                                                                                                  Lwgcod
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           .. . . ........
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             .4 Kure Beach
                                                                              coof Saring                                                                     iyphif                                                                                                       ith271
                                                                                     7       fi                                                                       il'issettowo       11 Statiolt                                                                       I                 kFl. Fqh@
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           I   so
                                                                                                                                       Long%                                                                                                                               sunset3
                                                                                                                                                                      Ia                                            130                                                    Harbor3
                                                                                                                                                              9               S side 104
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  4@                                       W                 C-mcak@ Inlet
                                                                                        4                                         Ularr"'o,                                 l4b I                 ocean we'llw'.                                                           Be.,
                                                                                                                                                                                                               Is
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           C11"lin I         SMITH s.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           Beach
                                                                                 onwa                                             Z4                                                                                                                                                         CAII 'IAN
                                                                                                                                                                Chetty Crave Beath
                                                                                                                          N-lon"ll,      "do                  Ocean Drive Reath                                                                                                              IGMTHOUSS
                                                                                                                          Is, oo  siol                        restem Beach
                                                                                                                    011 17

                                                                                                                          Myrtle Beach

                                             D. RETAIL AND WHOLESALE TRADE

                               Wilmington has long functioned as the commercial center of south-
                          eastern North Carolina. Expansion of manufacturing employment, popula-
                          tion growth, and increased wages have had a significant impact on the
                          growth of local trade industries -- both retail and wholesale trade.
                          increased employment and rising incomes of the trade area (see Figure 12)
                          population have similarly added demands for new and different goods and
                          services.

                               The county's trade sector is second only to manufacturing in terms of
                          the number of jobs provided'for local residents. In 1972, approximately
                          20 percent of the total county work force was employed in the trade sector
                          (Refer to Table 9, Work Force Characteristics).

                          1) R6tail*Trade

                               The retail trade sector of an area's economy is a good indicator
                          of overall area economic growth. Tables 18 and 19 show total sales for
                          Wilmington and New Hanover County by major business group's, adjusted with
                          the Cost of Living Index to 1967 constant dollars for comparative purposes.
                          Total adjusted New Hanover County dollar volume sales in the 1967-72
                          interval increased by 51 percent, while adjusted city total retail sales
                          increased by 30 percent. Leaders in retail business sales volume were
                          food stores, automotive dealers and general merchandise. These three
                          groups accounted for over 57 percent of total county sales in 1972
                          (see Figure 13).

                               Wilmington's economic stagnation from 1954 to 1963 may be attributed
                          to a variety of factors including production cutbacks following the Korean
                          War, the recession of the late 1950's, and the closing of the Atlantic Coast
                          Line Railroad regional office in Wilmington.

                               The nationwide trend toward suburban shopping centers is also evident
                          in New Hanover County. Downtown Wilmington retail merchants hope to
                          minimize the effects of outlying centers with the revitalization of a segment
                          of Front Street in a semi-mall motif. Another significant factor affecting
                          commercial sales is that within both the city and county, merchandising
                          efforts are frequently hampered by excessive strip commercializa ti on.aThis
                          practice places unnecessary demands for services on municipalities and dilutes
                          the merchandising potential offered through clustering of sales outlets.

                               aStrip commercial activity exists when properties adjacent to a length
                          or strip of roadway are developed commercially with little or no regard to
                          adjacent commercial activities, and each business functions in disassociation
                          with others along the roadway.

                                                            39

                                                                TABLE 18

                            TOTAL RETAIL SALES BY MAJOR BUSINESS GROUPS, WILMINGTON: 1963, 1967 and 1972

                                                          In 1967 Dollars (000)

                                                                                              Percent. hange
                          Type of Retail Business          1963       1967        1972      1963-67a     1967-72

                          All Retail Businesses         83,822       116,900     152,683      39.5        30.6
                          Building Materials              1,868        (D)        4,324        NA          NA
                          General Merchandise           10,320       18,162       28,608      76.0        57.5
                          Food Stores                   20,097       27,911       35,440      39.8        27.0
                          Automotive Dealers            19,182       22,077       28,950      15.1        31.1
                          Gasoline Stations               4,055       7,048       8,736       73.8        24.3
                          Apparel, Accessory              6,233       6,744       9,588        8.2        42.2
                          Furniture                       3,796        (D)        8,852        NA          NA
                          Eating, Drinking Places         3,650       5,567       7,845       52.5        40.9
                          Drug Stores                     3,246       4,659          (D)      43.5         NA
                          Other Retailers               11,375       13,520          (D)      18.9         NA

                          (D) Withheld to    avoid.disclosure.

                          Source: Census    of Retail Sales,    1963, 1967, and 1972.

                                                                TABLE 19

                         TOTAL RETAIL SALES BY MAJOR BUSINESS GROUPS, NEW HANOVER'COUNTY: 1963, 1967 and 1972

                                                          In 1967 Dollars (000)

                                                                                               Percent Change
                          Type of Retail Business            1963      1967        1972      1963-67     1967-72

                          All Retail Businesses         109,695      131,523      199,106     19.9        51.4
                          Building Materials               4,614       (D)        15,480       NA          NA
                          General Merchandise             14,413      22,106      33,291      53.4        50.6
                          Food Stores                     27,839      30,768      43,093      10.5        40.1
                          Automotive Dealers              20,069      22,514      38,274      12.2        70.0
                          Gasoline Stations                7,177       9,242      12,377      28.8        33.9
                          Apparel, Accessory               7,031       6,902       9,997      -1.8        44.8
                          Furniture                        4,500       5,506       9,757      22.4        77.2
                          Eating, Drinking Places          6,299       7,874      12,488      25.0        58.6
                          Drug Stores                      4,289       5,023       6,451      17.1        28.4
                          Other Retailers                 13,464         (D)      17,898       NA          NA

                          (D) Withheld to avoid disclosure.

                          Source: Census of Retail Sales, 1963, 1967 and       1972.

                                a
                                 The growth rate for 1963-1967 is inflated     by the inclusion of establishments
                            in the 1967 census which were annexed to the city after the 1963 census.

                                    FIGURE 13
              RETAIL SALES BY MAJOR BUSINESS GROUPS
                          NEW HANOVER COUNTY9 1972

                                          BUILDING
                              OTHER       MATERIAL
                      DRUG     RETAILERS
                       STORE
                 EATING Ek  3%    10%      7%
                   DRINKING                       GENERAL
                      PLACES                     MERCHANDISE
                             6%
               FURNITURE                             17%
                         5%

              APPAREL,    0
                         5
              ACCESORY

                           6%
                 GASOLINE
                STATIONS                          FOOD STORES

                           AUTOMOTIVE
                             DEALERS                22%

                                19%

                          2) New HanQygr's.Retail Trade Potential

                               A buying power indexa, which is indicative of an  area's retail trade
                          potential, is shown in Table 20. The buying power index includes the three
                          major determinants of market potential -- population, effective buying
                          income, and retail sales. The index represents a modification of the buying
                          power index published by Sales Management Magazine's "Survey of Buying
                          Power" in that Sales Management's index is based on national percentages,
                          whereas the index figures here represent the counties' percent of total
                          state buying power from 1964 through 1973. Of the five counties shown,
                          New Hanover County is second only to Wake County in buying power growth
                          with a rate 13.2% between 1964 through 1973.

                               The county's rising incomes, growing population, and increasing retail
                          sales are acting in concert to create new retail markets and thereby to
                          generate expansion of existing establishments and encourage new establishments.

                          3) Wholesale Trade

                               Wholesaling encompasses the.activities of merchant wholesalers,
                          manufacturer's sales branches, merchandise brokers and agents, petroleum
                          bulk plants and terminals, and marketers of farm products. Wholesaling
                          is an important facet of the county's economy. According to the latest
                          available county data (1972) the dollar volume of county wholesale trade
                          exceeded the retail trade volume by more than 15 percent. Petroleum and
                          petroleum products comprise a major part of the area's wholesaling activity
                          at over 38 percent of total dollar volume for the Wilmington SMSA in 1972.
                          Table 21 shows wholesale trade sales volume for the city and county
                          adjusted to 1967 constant dollars.

                                                 E. SERVICE ACTIVITIES

                               Service industries consist of personal services (laundries, beauty and
                          barber shops, photographic studios, etc.); miscellaneous business services
                          (credit bureaus, advertising agencies, business consulting, etc); hotels,
                          m6tels, tourist courts and trailer parks; auto repair and services, miscel-
                          laneous repair services (golf and country clubs, theatrical presentation,
                          etc.). Employment in this sector accounts for approximately one tenth of
                          the total work force participation, dropping slightly between 1962 and 1972,
                          from 10.3 percent to 917 percent.,

                               The county has experienced,considerable growth.in service industry
                          sales activity in recent years (see Tables 22 and 23). In the five years between
                          1967 and 1972 total adjusted county sales increased by 45 percent, with the
                          auto repair, miscellaneous business services, and hotels and motels groups
                          all increasing at relative rates greater than 80 percent. County recreation
                          sales rose almost 70 percent. Personal services lead in total 1972 dollar
                          volume sales, followed by hotels and motels, and miscellaneous business
                          services.

                               aThe buying power index is caluculated by a weighted average giving A weight
                          of 5 to percent of state effective buying income, a weight of 3 to percent of
                          state retail sales, and a weight of 2 to'percent of state population. The
                          formula,is: BPI    5(% EBI) + 3(% Retail Sales + 2(% Population)
                                                                10

                                                           -4-a -,
                                                             30

                                                        TABLE 20

                                                   BUYING POWER INDEX
                                          SELECTED NORTH CAROLINA COUNTIES
                                                    1964 THROUGH 1973

                                   New Hanover          Pitt        Durham        Wake       Buncombe
                  Year                 County          County       County        County       Count

                  1964                  1.74            1.40         2.70         4.66          3.46

                  1965                  1.72            1.39         3.02         4.78          2.99

                  1966                  1.79            1.37         2.94         4.98          3.53

                  1967'                 1.86,           1.38         2.91         4.89          3.52

                  1968                  1.90            1.40         2.86         4.96          3.39

                  1969                  1.85            1.38         2.90         5.22          3.21

                  1970                  1.91            1.41         2.94         5.46          3.07

                  1971                  1.97            1.46         3.00         5.48          3.03

                  .1972                 1.92            1.44         2.98         5.46          3.04

                  1973                  1.97            1.39         2.95         5.52          3.01

                  % Change
                  1964-1973             13.2%          -0.7%         9.3%         18.5%       -13.0%

                  Source: Sales Management Survey of           Buying Power, Wilmington-New Hanover
                  Planning Department.

                                                         TABLE 21

                                                     WHOLESALE TRADE

                                              Sales in 1967 Dollars (000)

                                                                                  I    Percent Change
                                                1963          1967         1972      1963-67     1967-72

                  New Hanover County         $153,310      $170,747    $234,825       11.4          37.5

                  Wilmington                   115,654     $115,192    $157,817      (-0.4)         37.0

                  Remainder of County        $ 37,656     $ 55,555     $ 77,008      47.5           38.6

                  Source: 19   67 Census of Business: Wholesale Trade

                                                           44

                                                              TABLE 22

                                                  SELECTIVE SERVICES - WILMINGTON

                                   TOTAL SALES BY MAJOR BUSINESS GROUPS: 1963, 1967 and 1972

                                                           In 1967 Dollars (000)

                                                                                                Percent Change
                           ,Type of iusiness                    1963      1967      1972     1963-67    1967-72

                           All Services                         10,767    15,288    20,494      42.0      34.1

                           Personal Services                    4,841     6,744     6,597       39.3      -2.2

                           Misc. Business Services              1,669     2,507     4,355       33.4      73.7

                           Hotels, Motels, Tourist Courts           799   1,680     2,593     110.3       54.3

                           Auto Repair and Services                 (D)   1,759     3,209       ---       82.4

                           Miscellaneous Repair                 1,158     1,317     1,500       13.7      13.9

                           Amusement, Recreation                    (D)   1,281     2,240       ---       74.9
                                                             1         1         1         1 ., I

                           (D) Withheld to avoid disclosure.

                           Source: Census of Selected Services, 1963, 1967, 1972, and.Wilmington-New Hanover
                           Planning Department.

                                                              TABLE 23

                                              SELECTIVE SERVICES - NEW HANOVER COUNTY

                                   TOTAL SALES BY MAJOR BUSINESS GROUPS: i963, 1967 and 1972

                                                           In 1967 Dollars (000)

                                                                                                Percent Changa
                           Type of Business                     1963      1967      1972     1963-67    1967-72

                           All Services                         14,150    19,335    28,094    36.6       45.3

                           Personal Services                    5,423     7,025     7,119     29.5        1.3

                           Misc. Business Services              1,907     3,098     5,576     62.5       831.0

                           Hotels, Motels, Tourist   Courts     1,879     3,553     6,425     89.1       80.8

                           Auto Repair and Services             1,742     2,008     3,818     15.3       90.1

                           Miscellaneous Repair                 1,591     1@2802    2,026     13.3       12.4

                           Amusement, Recreation                1,608     1,849     3,130     15.0       69.3

                           Source: Census of Selected Services, 1963, 1967,       1972, and Wilmington-New Hanover
                           Planning Bepartment.

                      In part the growth of service activity is attributable to higher
                 incomes enjoyed by county residents and the concomitant demand for more
                 and better services. Population growth, the influence of in-migrants, and
                 the growth of the recreation industry is reflected here, too. Additionally,
                 there is an additive effect in which support of an activity such as theat-
                 rical presentations encourages other entr&peneurs to initiate similar
                 ventures.

                      A large part of the tourism dollar goes into service activities (see
                 Figure 14). While tourism plays an increasingly significant role in the
                 economy of the area, it is difficult to actually quantify its economic
                 impact, and while data sources vary widely on estimates of county tourism
                 revenues, clearly tourism is one of the most significant elements in the
                 service sector.

                      Wilmington is located along the eastern seaboard corridor, and in addi-
                 tion to attracting tourists to the area, it is a stopover point for travelers
                 from other areas who are journeying along the eastern coast. It is esti-
                 mated that one out of every six tourists in the U.S. journeys along the
                                                               a
                 Atlantic Coast between Florida and Maryland  .   Recognizing the enormous
                 potential of the county's recreation industry, New Hanover County's economic
                 development program should concentrate on the full development of thi's
                 significant county economic resource.

                                           F. TRANSPORTATION

                      Transportation, communication, and utilities employment accounted for
                 almost eight percent of the county's 1972 work force, increasing slightly
                 in relative percentage over the previous decade. Because of the significance
                 of the port as an economic determinant, it is discussed in the following
                 section of this report.,

                      The configuration and growth of an area is frequently related to the
                 physical features with which the area is endowed. Development of the Wil-
                 mington areas has been.greatly influenced and shaped by its relationship:to
                 water.

                      Historically, Wilmington functioned as a regional port from its beginning
                 settlement in the 1700's through the nineteenth century. The port served
                 as North Carolina's main point of entry for products required by the state's
                 industries. In 1840 the Wilmington and Weldon Railroad was constructed,
                 linking the port wi 'th North Carolina's agricultural hinterland and increasing
                 access to export markets. Strengthening of the Piedmont rail network, however,
                 coupled with Piedmont industrial growth and the decline of cotton production
                 and forest products as major area exports,eventually led to a decline causing
                 Wilmington to become a regional center of trade and service.

                      aNorth Carolina Travel Survey, Dr. Lewis Copeland, Department of
                 Statistics  University of Tennessee.

                                                    46

                                                                 FIGURE 14

                                  DISTRIBUTION OF TRAVEL EXPENDITURES
                                              IN NORTH CAROLINA,1973

                              ADMISSION FEES                             VEHICLE REPAIRS
                                         4.7%                                         1.3%

                     RECREATION
                           6.2%

                                     GIFTS/                                       FOOD
                                  SOUVENIRS                                       28.4%
                                       9.8%

                                      M I Sc.
                                      10.4%

                                          GAS, OIL, ETC.                       LODGING
                                                                                 19.8%
                                                 19.4%

                                                      SOURCE: 1973 North Carolina Travel Survey, prepared by
                                                                Resear ch Triangle Institute of the Research
                                                                Triangle Park, North Carolina.

                    The rail deemphasis of Wilmington and later development of a north-
               south highway system through the Piedmont combined to further diminish the
               importance and increase the isolation of Wilmington. The position of the
               area as a regional trade and service center has lessened, but the influence
               of water transport as well as other transportation modes is still strong.

               1) Por t of Wilmington

                    Wilmington Harbor is one of two deep water harbors in the state.
               Principal among local facilities is the North Carolina State Ports Authority
               (SPA) facilities. The SPA terminal has the capacity to handle containerized
               cargo, and has open and dry storage warehouses. Adjacent to the State Port
               are numerous private port facilities, the majority of which are involved
               with petroleum or chemicals transport. Residual fuel oil and gasoline were
               the Port of Wilmington's leading tonnage commodities in 1973, altogether
               constituting 44 percent of total port freight tratfic.a

               2) Import-F_xpott Mix

                    As shown in Table 25  the port's import-export tonnage mix has shifted
               from a position of export  dominance in 1954 (6:1) to one of import dominance
               in 1973 (3.8:1).   This change is important to the local economy, because
               simplifying greatly, exports represent goods which bring dollars into the
               community while imports represent goods for which dollars are paid and leave
               the area. Leaders in foreign import tonnage in 1973 were residual fuel
               oil, which comprises half the total foreign import tonnage volume, and crude
               petroleum. Leaf tobacco shipments lead foreign exports at 29 percent of total
               foreign export tonnage.

                    The absence of port linkages with other modes of transportation currently
               prevents the Port of Wilmington from reaching its full potential. Due to
               inadequate road linkages with other centers of commerce, particularly the North
               Carolina Piedmont, the State Port's potential for receiving and distributing
               goods is limited.

               3) Vehicle Registration

                    Vehicle ownership is one indicator of  ',economic well-being. As incomes
               rise there is a propensity for families to acquire additional autos, or for
               a business to purchase another truc k. Truck and auto ownership for the county
               is indicated in Table 26, County automobile registration for the period between
               1960 and 1970 shows a per capita registration increase from 0.33 to 0.48, or a
               growth of from one car for every three persons to a car for every two people.
               Total registration of cars and trucks during the same period rose from 0.38
               per capita to 0.56.

                    al,Waterborne Commerce of the United States", Department of the Army,
               Corps of Engineers, 1973.

                                                  48

                                                                    TAbLh Z4

                                      WILMINGTON HARBOR FREIGHT     TONNAGE, SELECTED YEARS, 1960-1973

                                                         196Q         1965          1970          1972         .1973

                          Total Cargo Shipped         5,168,062    4,742,108     6,308,517    8,519,041      9,995,987

                          Total Foreign                 753,999      949,269     2,132,215    3,716,613      4,299,093
                              Foreign Imports           472,019      754,758     1,914,751    3,540,883      4,083,311
                              Foreign Exports           281,980      194,511       217,464       175,730       215,782

                          Total Domestic              4,414,063    3,792,839     4,176,302    4,802,428      5,696,894
                              Coastwise
                                receipts              2,998,187    2,190,036     2,319,703    2,439,914      2,941   789
                              Coastwise
                                shipments                31,685      157,846       205,302       108,469         86,489

                              Internal Inbound           61,630      323,738       242,784       148,536       133,168
                              Internal Outbound         334,250      364,830       619,610    1,170,250      1,776,800

                              Through                   988,311      756,389       788,903       935,259       758,648

                          Source: Waterborne Commerce of The United States,         U.S. Army Corps of   Engineers.

                                                                    TABLE 25

                                WILMINGTON STATE PORT TERMINAL FREIGHT TONNAGE AND MODE OF TRANSPORTATION,
                                                           SELECTED YEARS, 1955-1973

                                                          1955           1960        1965        1970            1973

                          CARGO
                              Total (in tons)           250,794      352,271.      479,244    1,127,948      1,740,345

                                Foreign,Imports          35,545      118,510       226,453       532,503       641,519
                                Foreign Exports         215,249      226,995       163,039       159,766       167,769

                                Coastwise
                                   Inbound               -0-            2,566       58,770       259,107       595,917
                                Coastwise
                                  Outbound               -0-            4,200       30,982       176,562       335,138

                          MODE OF TRANSPORTATIOI@'
                          (numberof vehicles)

                              Ships                         115            311          417           464           .503
                              Barges                          NA            NA           NA           234            592
                              Rail Cars                    2,888        5,505         5,194        4,916          6,721
                              Trucks                       1,924        6,441       13,912         28,565        42,187

                          Source: North Carolina State Ports       Authority
                          Note: Strike occurred,a           ted    196J --- 65_dags, 1965 --- 20 days, 1969---55 days
                                  197     s           s lis    @ay
                                       -- 56 days, 973--- 7        S, 974-- 9 ays.

                      Comparison of vehicle registration since the 1960's has several
                 implications:

                      1.  A sense of economic well-being prevailed in the decade.

                      2.  Truck useage is frequently associated with increased industriali-
                          zation. Hence, the increase signifies the apparent rise of new
                          industry and/or growth of established firms,' and an optimism
                          about the future.

                      3.  Demands for effective roadways to accomodate increased vehicle
                          flow.

                      4.  Need for measures to   prevent excessive vehicular noise and
                          activity in residential areas.

                                                   TABLE 26

                                        ESTIMATED VEHICLE REGISTRATION
                                              NEW HANOVER COUNTY

                 Year               Automobiles                 Trucks                  Total

                 1960                  23,635                   3,935                   27,570
                 1961                  23,234                   4,099                   27,333
                 1962                  23,695                   4,077                   27,772
                 1963                  25,188                   4,178                   29,366
                 1964                  26,583                   4,500                   31,083
                 1965                  28,054                   4,834                   32,888
                 1966                  30,155                   5,049                   35,204
                 1967                  32,530                   5,434                   37,964
                 1968                  34,999                   6,000                   40,999
                 1969                  37,905                   5,822                   43,727
                 1970                  40,131                   6,629                   46,760
                 1971                  43,214                   7,296                   50,510
                 1972                  46,907                   8,097                   55,004
                 1973                  50,542                   9,192                   59,734

                 Source: North Carolina Department     of Motor  Vehicles.

                                                      50

                                                                     TABLE 27

                                                   COMMERCIAL AND PRIVATE FLIGHT ACTIVITY
                                                   NEW HANOVER COUNTY AIRPORT: 1966-1973

                                             1966       1967      1968      1969        1970      1971       1972       1973
                          Flights a         98,784    108,167 113,864 111,542 110,618 100,334 110,814 115,630
                          Passengersb
                             Enplane        30,982      37,330    44,52.0   49,090      61,847    63,114     68,041      76,045
                             Deplane        33,586      39,690    45,798    49,460      60,121    60,168     68,1828     76P649
                             Total          64,568      77,020    90,318    98,550     121,968   123,282    136,869    152,694

                          Average Daily
                             Activity
                             Flights           271         296       312         306        303       275       304         317
                             Passengers        177         211       247         270                  338       375         418

                          Source: Manager,     New  Hanover   County Airport.

                                                                     TABLE 28

                                                                CARGO TRANSPORTED
                                          NEW HANOVER COUNTY AIRPORT, SELECTED YEARS 1965-1973
                                                                     (In tons)

                                                                                                 PERCENTAGE CHANGE
                                                         1965         1970         1973      1965-1970       1970-1973

                              Enplaned
                                  Air Freight           171.7        892.2        520.8        419.6           -41.6
                                  Air Express            47.5        149.8        120.2        215.4           -19.8
                                  Air Mail               55.5        132.7         87.6        139.1           -34.0
                                      Total             274.7       1,174.7       728.6        327.6           -38.0

                              Deplaned
                                  Air Freight           134.7        .454.7       771.8        237.6            69.7
                                  Air Express            45.5         72.6         62.6          59.6          -13.8
                                  Air Mail               45.4         77.4         55.3          70.5          -28.6.
                                      Total             225.6        604.7        889.7        168.0            47.1

                                      Total   Cargo     500.3      1,779.4       1,618.3       255.7              9.1

                              Source: Airport Manager,        New Hanover   County Airport.

                                    aPrivate and commercial flights          in and out.
                                      bCommercial passengers enplaning and deplaning only.

                              III. POPULATION AND EMPLOYMENT FORECASTS

                      Most planning decisions are either directly or indirectly  based upon
                 population and employment projections and resulting forecasts. Estimates
                 of 'the size of the Planning Area's future population provide a basis for
                 determining future demands for housing, transportation services, various
                 types of land development, and public services and facilities. In addi-
                 tion, the age characteristics.of the future population are important
                 .factors in determining the need for specialized public facilities and
                 services, such as schools, hospitals and parks.

                      It is important to note that, although the terms "projection" and
                 "forecast" are often used interchangeably, the terms actually represent
                 different concepts. A projection generally represents a population size
                 implied by extending past and current growth trends into the future. If
                 the area's future growth mirrors its past, projections are very accurate.
                 Forecasts, on the other hand, are future estimates which are tempered by
                 the planner's assumptions about the future. They go beyond the projections
                 to the extent that factors which cannot be readily quantified are considered,
                 and in-most cases they represent more realistic estimates of future popula-
                 tion than do projections.

                      The purpose of this part of the report is to develop population and
                 employment forecasts for the 1975-2000 period. The basic methodology
                 consists of comparing and synthesizing the population projections found  in
                 Part I and the employment projections found in this part of the report.
                 The rationale for.this approach to preparing forecasts is based on two
                 major considerations:

                      1.  The direct relationship between employment growth and population
                          growth. 'The major factor in the decision to migrate is the presence
                          of job opportunities. Therefore, if the number of employment oppor-
                          tunities is not expanding, an area will not normally experience
                          population growth.

                      2.  The quality of the data. In developing the employment and popula-
                          tion projections for New Hanover County, the quality of the trend
                          data on population was felt to be superior to that on employment.
                          Therefore, the employment and population projections have been
                          reconciled in the forecasts, but much greater weight has been given
                          to the reliability of the population projections.

                                            A. PROJECTIONS

                 1) Population

                      A range of three population projections based on the "cohort-survival"
                 technique have been included in Part I of this report (page 40). Each of
                 these projections includes different assumptions.concerning the three popula-
                 tion growth variable    births, deaths, and migration. They were prepared,

                                                   52

                             however, without any explicit consideration of the economic growth trends
                             in the Planning Area.a

                                  The population projections for New Hanover County are summarized in
                             Table 29.

                                                                 TABLE 29

                                           SUMMARY OF POPULATION PROJECTIONS -- 1980-2000

                                                                   Population Projections
                             Year                   Low                    Moderate                    High
                             1980                   94,038                   97,546                  101,317
                             1990                  107,613                  116,740                  124,608
                             2000                  122,829                  140,283                  151,468

                             2)  Employment

                                  Projections of both total county resident population and employment
                             are shown in Table 30. These projections are based on a "least-squares"
                             analysis of employment data from the U.S. Bureau of the Census. In
                             essence, the "least-squares" technique is a straight-line projection of
                             the county's past growth trends into the future. It should be noted that
                             these projections tend to be conservative.

                             3) Comparison of Population and Employment Projections

                                  In order to compare the employment and population projections, the@
                             county's projected employment has been converted to an implied population
                             level. As discussed previously, total employment and -total population
                             Are directly related, and by applying conversion factors which account for
                             labor force participation, it is possible to approximate the total popula-
                             tion required for a given level of employment.

                                  As discussed in the "Labor Profile" section of this report a partici-
                             pation rate of 42.5 to  '45.0 can be expected for New Hanover County. There-
                             fore, participation rates of 42.5, 43.75, and 45.0 have been used to convert
                             projected employment to population for the years 1980, 1990, and 2000.

                                                                TABLE 30

                             CONVERSION OF EMPLOYMENT PROJECTIONS TO POPULATION: 1980, 1990 and 2000

                                                Projected               Conversion               Projected
                             Year              Employment                 Factor                Population
                             1980                38,750                    .4250                   91,176
                             1990               44,750                     .4375                  102,286
                             2000               48,900                     .4500                  108,667

                             Source: Wilmington-New Hanover Planning      Department.

                                  aA detailed explanation of the assumptions used in deriving these
                             projections is found on page 40.

                                                                   3

                       To facilitate comparison, the population projections in Table 30,
                  together with the three cohort-survival population projections have been
                  plotted in Figure 15. This comparison reveals a wide disparity between
                  the four sets of projections, with projection based on employment
                  being the most conservative.

                                                B. FORECASTS

                       In developing forecasts of New Hanover County's population and
                  employment, quality of data is a major consideration. The projection,
                  either population or employment, which-utilizes data best reflecting
                  the area's growth should be the basis for making forecasts of future
                  population and employment. As discussed in Part I, the high "cohort-
                  survival" population projection is highly reliable, because not only does
                  the projection technique treat all three growth variables--births, deaths,
                  and migration--it also utilizes up-to-date data (1974) on these variables.
                  In contrast, the employment projections are based on a "straightline"
                  technique using data for the 1930 to 1970 period. In comparison, the
                  employment projections appear to be much less reliable than the "high"
                  population projection; therefore, the "high" projection has been selected
                  as the population forecast for New Hanover County.

                       Using participation rates and adjusting for commutation, the popula-
                  tion forecast has been used to derive an employment forecast. The fol-,
                  lowing assumptions are inherent in this process:

                       1. Survival and birth rates remain the same as the 1970-73 period.

                       2.  Migration increases during the 1970's then declines moderately.

                       3.  Labor force participation rates increase for nonwhite males
                           and females of all races..

                       4.  Unemployment will stabilize at five percent.

                       5.  Net commuting as a percent of total workforce will increase slightly
                           in the 1970's then decline slightly.

                       These forecasts are shown in Table al.

                       In addition to the forecasts of total employment, it has been necessary
                  to allocate total employment to the.major industrial sectors. These alloca-
                  tions are.very important in many planning decisions such as space allocation
                  for industrial uses.   The allocations which are found in Table 32 have been
                  based on each industry's projected share of total employment as determined
                  by a "least-squares" projection of total employment for'each industrial
                  sector.

                       Age, sex, and race breakdowns for the population forecast are found
                  in the Appendix to Part I.

                                                      54

                                                                      FIGURE 15
                                                        NEW HANOVER COUNTY
                                                     POPULATION PROJECTIONS

                               170,000

                                             COHORT SURVIVAL
                                               PROJECTIONS
                                                      HIGH
                               150,000-               MODERATE
                                                      LOW
                                            0 0 0 0 0 0 EMPLOYMENT BASED
                                                        POPULATION PROJECTION
                           0
                           p
                           U   130,000-
                           L
                           A
                           T
                           N   110,000-                                              0a0000000000
                                                                          600 000000
                                                                      0 00
                                                             -,.-00000
                                                          0 0 0 0 0
                                                        00
                               90,000-              0000

                                                 1980                    1990                   2000
                                                                        YEAR

                                                  TABLE 31

                              POPULATION AND RESIDENT LABOR FORCE FORECAST
                                      NEW HANOVER COUNTY: 1970-2000

                                                1970          1980        1990          2000

               Population                       82,996      101,300     124,600        151,000

                  Percent in Labor Force          43.4        44.5          45.9         47.4

                  Labor Force                   36,020       45,079       57,400       71,600

                  Percent Unemployed               3.3          5.0          5.0          5.0

                  Residents Employed            34,780       42,845       54,500       68,000

                                                  TABLE 32

                                 SECTOR WORK FORCE EMPLOYMENT FORECASTa
                                      NEW HANOVER COUNTY: 1970-2000

                                                              1970      1980      1990     2000

          Total                                               38,210    47,500  60,500    73,950

            Manufacture                                       9,830     12,400  16,100    19,400

            Non-Manufacture                                   22,520    29,250  37,800    47,40

               Construction                                   2,110     2,700     3,250    3,900
               Transportation, Communication, Utilities       2,890     3,750     5,000    6,350
               Trade                                          7,360     9,900   13,450    17,350
               Fire                                           1,220     1,700     2,090    2,600
               Service                                        4,190     5,200     6,700    8,400
               Government                                     4,640     5,800     7,070    8,600
               Other Non-Manufacture                             110       200      265       325

            Other Non-Agriculture                             5,390     5,500     6,300    6,800
            Agriculture                                          470       350      300       300

               aWork force refers to the total number of workers     employed in the county;
         Work force includes residents employed in the county and in-commuters.

                                                     56

        newWnover
        comprebensive
        planning prognin

                     cm Q)

                 alRaksjs of

                             e
                          TD
           E   HM 0- -j@i IMIPPORT

                                                            TABLE OF CONTENTS

                                                                                                                    Page

                             I. INTRODUCTION     ..........................................                           I

                           II. OVERVIEW OF PLANNING AREA LAND USE           .............    o    o     o.........    3

                                  A. PLANNING AREA DEVELOPMENT TRENDS          .........                              3
                                  B. ANNEXATION-       .................    o .........  -  ......   -  .........     4

                          III.    ANALYSIS OF EXISTING LAND USE       .................    o ..................       5

                                  A.   RESIDENTIAL... -     .................................           --o-o-        5

                                       1. Summary of Residential Land Use Acreage            ...................      5
                                       2. Residential Density Patterns         ......  .......................        7
                                       3. Housing Stock Composition        ...................    o  ............     7
                                       4. Residential Land Use Problems          ............................         7

                                  B.   COMMERCIAL   .........................................           o....0 .... 13

                                       1. Summary of Commercial Land Use Acreage...            ...................  13
                                       2. Commercial Land Use Problems...         ......  o ..........  o........   13

                                  C.   INDUSTRIAL  ..................            ......  o                      ... 16

                                       1. Summary of Existing Industrial Land Use Acreage               ..... ....  16
                                       2. Industrial Land Use Problems.... .... oo-            .......  o..... - 17

                                  D.   TRANSPORTATION, COMMUNICATION, AND UTILITIES           .................     19

                                  E.   PARKS,AND RECREATION     ........................     o ........  o          19

                                  F.   OFFICE AND INSTITUTIONAL     ......  o................            o......  0 20

                                  G.   AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY      .....................................          20

                           IV. summARY    ..........................     o ... o...... o .....................      22

                                  A.   MAJOR LAND USE ISSUES-       ..................      -.0  ...............    22

                                  B.   ROLE OF LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT CONTROL ORDINANCES              .....o .... 23

                                                     List of Maps

                       Map I      Developed Areas in Wilmington-New Hanover Planning Area

                       Map 2      Wilmington Annexations

                       Map 3      Existing Land Use     Wilmington Urbanizing Area

                       Map 4      Existing Land Use     Rural Areas of Wilmington-New Hanover Planning
                                  Area

                       Map 5      Residential Development Densities

                       Map 6      Neighborhoods Threatened by Incompatible Land Uses

                       Map 7      Residential Subdivisions Experiencing Chronic Septic Tank Problems

                                                   I. INTRODUCTION

                            The characteristics and distribution of existing developed land in the

                       Wilmington-New Hanover Planning Area demand careful attention in the land use

                       planning process, because future development mu&t be built on this existing

                       base. The analysis and interpretation of existing land use provides the funda-

                       mental information which will be used to identify existing land use problems,

                       to estimate future land needs, and to predict future development trends.     In

                       short, the characteristics of existing land uses may be considered the key

                       shapers of public policies concerning the future use of the Planning Area's

                       land resources.

                            Thus, the purpose of this report is to outline the basic information on

                       current land utilization which is required for developing policie's for future

                       land use. It addresses both the amount of land committed to various uses and

                       the problems resulting from the location of existing uses and the manner in

                       which they are developed.

                            The analysis is based on a survey of the Planning Area's   land uses conducted

                       in the summer of 1973 and updated in the summer of 1975. As a result of this

                       survey, the area's developed land has been placed in one of the following clas-

                       sifications:

                                 1.  Residential
                                 2.  Commercial
                                 3.  Industrial
                                 4.  Transportation, Communications, and Utilities
                                 5.  Office and Institutional
                                 6.  Public and Private Recreational

                            In addition, agriculture and commercial forestry activities, which may not

                       be considered "developed" land uses, have been identified and analyzed.

                            In the analysis of land use problems, residential, commercial, and indus-

                       trial uses have been treated in the greatest detail. Because they occupy the

                       largest land area, are the most widely distributed, and have the highest potential

                                                          Lj

                    for conflict with other uses, these major land use categories pose the

                    greatest problems.for the Planning Area.

                                    II. OVERVIEW OF PLANNING AREA LAND USE

                                     A. PLANNING AREA DEVELOPMENT TRENDS

                         Map I shows the location of developed areas in the  Wilmington-New Hanover

                    Planning Area for the years 1956, 1966, and 1975. Over   time, development has

                    occurred primarily in eastward and southward directions. This development

                    configuration was strongly influenced by three factors: (1) the Cape Fear

                    River which acts as a barrier to development in the west; (2) the attraction

                    of the beaches and sounds in the east; and (3) Smith Creek which acts as a

                    barrier to the north of the city. Relatively little development has occurred

                    across the Cape Fear River in Brunswick County, and the area north of Smith

                    Creek, until recently, has remained mostly agricultural.

                         Recent development north of Wilmington has been primarily industrial,

                    accompanied by relatively small, compact, residential subdivisions. One reason

                    for this trend may be that the Planning Area's significant agriculture opera-

                    tions are concentrated in the north and, therefore, less land has been avail-

                    able for development. The eastward and southward development pattern has been

                    almost entirely residential with accompanying trade and service activities.

                         Transportation corridors, as in most urban areas, have exerted, a strong

                    influence on development patterns in New Hanover County. Major thoroughfare

                    construction has given access to formerly inaccessible land, and, therefore,

                    has promoted land subdivision and development. N.C. Highway 132 illustrates

                    this pattern. Since the construction of this highway in the early 1960's, de-

                    velopment has occurred in an almost continuous strip from Kings Grant Subdivi-

                    sion in the north to the Lansdowne Subdivision in the south.

                         From an overall view, development in New Hanover County exhibits.some of

                    the classic characteristics of urban sprawl conditions which may be defined as

                    a land development pattern where scattered residential, commercial, and

                                         GULF OF ALASKA BOTTOMFISH AND

                                              SHELLFISH RESOURCES

                                                       by

                                                Miles S. Alton

                          Resource Assessment and Conservation Engineering Division
                                    Northwest and Alaska Fisheries Center
                                      National Marine Fisheries Service
                               National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
                                         2725 Montlake Boulevard East
                                          Seattle, Washington 98112

                                                  March 1981

                                            US Department Of C0MMERCE
                                            NOAA Coastal Services Center Library
                 				    2234 South Hobson Avenue
    						    Charleston, SC 29405-2413

                                                             CONTENTS
                                                                                                           Page

                   Introduction   ................................       ..........................          1
                   Physical Setting...................................................            2
                   Fisheries...................................     6
                         Regulations.........................       9
                               Fishery Conservation and Management Act of 1976..........                9
                               State of Alaska .....................      11
                         U.S.  Fisheries ..................................11
                               Dungeness Crab Fishery......................11
                               King Crab Fishery ..........................13
                               Snow (Tanner) Crab Fishery..................15
                               Shrimp Fishery..............................17
                               Bottomfish Fisheries........................20
                         North  American Pacific Halibut Fishery ..........22
                         Foreign Fisheries.................................24
                               Trawl Fisheries.............................24
                             Setline Fishery.............................29
                   Characteristics of Fishery Resources....................35
                         Life History......................................35
                               Commercial Crabs............................35
                               Shrimp.....................................37
                               Bottomfish..................................37
                         Distribution of Resources.........................41
                               Pandalid Shrimp.............................43
                               Shelf Crab, Rock Sole, and Sculpins..........43
                               Cod and Flounders ...........................43
                               Pollock and Flathead Sole....................44
                               Dover Sole and Rex Sole......................46
                               Rockfish (Sebastes) Group....................47
                               Bathyal Group................................48
                   Acknowledgments...........................................49
                   References................................................49

                                                              Figures

                    1.  Gulf of Alaska showing key geographical locations and bathymetry.....4
                    2.  Typical temperature conditions in a vertical section of water
                        column above the continental shelf and upper slope southeast of
                        Kodiak Island during winter and summer...............................5                 5
                    3.  Domestic harvest of shrimp and crab in the Gulf of Alaska
                        (1960-79)............................................................6
                    4o  Annual catch of Gulf of Alaska bottomfish by foreign fisheries
                        (1960-79)............................................................6
                    5o  Annual U.S. harvest of all bottomfish compared to that of Pacific
                        halibut for the Gulf of Alaska.......................................8
                    6.  U.So annual landings of Dungeness crab in the Gulf of Alaska,
                        showing the principal harvesting method...............................12
                    7.  Average annual U.S. catch of crab by species for 1976-78, by
                        region, in the Gulf of Alaska........................................13

                                                                 i

                                                                                                                                                                            1'" 2
                                                                                                                                                          CITY OF WI
                                                                                                                                           CORPORATE Ll

                                                                                                                                                                          1915-19

                                                                                                                                                                     En

                                                                                          \_N N:\     'N'
                                                                                                                                                                     El

                                                                                                                               X X
                                                                                         XV

                                                                                                         V     \Xj
                                                                                                              \\"t\x x

                                                                :I LUr
                                                                                                                      NA

                                                                                                                           NIN
                                                                                                                       xN

                                                              "17
                                                                 jH__l
                                                                  A 11- 1

                                                                    liq
                                                               11. L '.L.

                                                                                                  Page

                 28.  Increase in fecundity with length of fish for commercially
                      important bottomfish............................................... 38
                 29.  Growth of Pacific halibut and other important bottomfish of
                      the Gulf of Alaska ...................................................39
                 30. Estimated decline in a year class of Pacific halibut, rock
                      sole, and walleye pollock from age 3 and above because of
                      natural mortalityo This is a generalized view for species
                      comparison and assumes a constant annual rate of mortality.................. 41
                 31.  Generalized scheme of the relative density with depth of the
                      principal bottomfish and crabs occurring on the continental
                      shelf and slope south of Kodiak Islando Distribution is of
                      the adults of these species during the summery............................. 42
                 32. Availability of Pacific cod and Atka mackerel during NMFS
                      1978 winter trawling survey in the Kodiak Island region,
                      using the NoAA research vessel Miller Freeman............................... 44
                 33.  Apparent density of rock sole and sculpins in various regions
                      of the Gulf of Alaska based on NMFS bottom trawl surveys
                      (1973-76) at depths of 4 m and less................................. 45
                 34.  Apparent density of Pacific cod and turbot in various regions
                      of the Gulf of Alaska based on NMFS bottom trawl surveys
                      (1973-78) at depths of 4 m and............................................ 46
                 35.  Apparent density of walleye pollock and flathead sole in
                      various regions of the Gulf of Alaska and eastern Bering
                      Sea as suggested from NMFS bottom trawl surveys (1973-78)
                      at depths of 4 m and less  .............................................  47

                                                         Tables

                  l.  Foreign and domestic harvest of bottomfish from the Gulf of
                      Alaska in 1978-79............................................................. 1
                  2. Principal species of bottomfish, crab, and shrimp of commercial
                      importance and species of minor importance in the Gulf of
                      Alaska........................................................................ 3
                  3.  Commercial landings of crab, shrimp, and bottomfish by U.S.
                      vessels operating in the Gulf of Alaska, 196-79.............................. 7
                  4.  Estimated potential yields of Gulf of Alaska bottomfish stocks
                      (excluding Pacific halibut) and actual yields obtained in 1979
                      by foreign fisheries......................................................... 1
                  5.  Number and type of vessels in the foreign fisheries on Gulf
                      of Alaska bottomfish in 1978.................................................. 27

                      Conversion table - inside back cover

                   Maps 3 and 4          Existing Land Use    Wilmington urbanizing area and
                                         rural areas of the Wilmington-New Hanover Planning Area
                                         are on display in the Wilmington-New Hanover Planning
                                         Department. These maps will be included in the final
                                         revision of the report.

                                                                                  TABLE 13

                                                                     SUMMARY OF EXISTING    LAND USE

                                                                                   1975

                   LAND USE CATEGORIES                CITY OF WILMINGTON           UNINCORPORATED NEW HANOVER COUNTY             TOTAL PLANNING AREA
                                                 Land     Percent    Percent of      Land      Percent    Percent of       Land      Percent    Percent of
                                                 Use In   of Total' Developed        Use In    of Total Developed          Use In    of Total Developed
                                                 Acres    Land        Land           Acres     Land        Land            Acres    Land         Land

                   Residential                    4,747     33.1          51.1          6,210     5.2          39.6        10,957       8.3          43.9

                   Trade                          1,064      7.4          11.5            159     0.1            1.0         1,223      0.9            4.9

                   Office and Institutional         623      4.3           6.7            145     0.1            0.9            768     0.5            3.1

                   Industrial                       153      1.1           1.6          5,470     4.6          34.9          5,623      4.2          22.5

                   Transportation, Communi-
                   cation, Utilities              2,019     14.1          21'. 8        2,964     2.5          18.9          4,983      3.8          20.0

                   Parks and Recreation             673      4.7           7.3            735     0.6            4.7         1,408      1.1            5.6
                   Total Developed Land           9,279     64.7          100.0      15,683      13.3          100.0       24,962      18.8          100.0

                   Agriculture and Forestry                                          16,100      13.6                      16,100      12.2

                   Water and Wetland                372      2.6                     31,268      26.5                      31,640      23.9

                   Vacant                         4,685     32.7                     55,100      46.6                      59,785      45.1

                      -TOTAL                     14-, 3 3 6 lO0._O                   118,151   -100.0                      132,487     100.0

                   Source: Wilmington-New Hanover Planning        Department

                    2. Residential Density Patterns

                         Using five dens_ity levels (high, moderate, and low density urban,

                    suburban, and rural) the various types of residential development are illus-

                    trated in Map 5. An analysis of this map reveals three important factors:

                              1.  Public housing comprises half of the total number of high
                                  density urban area (greater than 6 dwelling units per
                                  gross acre) within the City of Wilmington.

                              2.  Of the 15 low density urban areas (2 to 4 dwelling units
                                  per gross acre) outsidethe City, only one is serviced by
                                  a central sewer system.

                              3.  A "sprawling" development pattern.has developed along
                                  major transportation corridors. Areas of suburban and
                                  urban residential densities are spotted throughout most
                                  of the Planning Area.

                    3. Housing Stock Composition

                         Of the 29,069 year-round housing units in New Hanover County in 1970, 69.9

                    percent were single family units, 10.6 percent were duplexes, 13.3 percent were

                    apartments, and 6.3 percent were mobile homes or trailers.

                         Between the 1970 census and January 1, 1975, new residential building per-

                    mits were issued in the Planning Area for 4,430 single family units, 2,551 multi-

                    family units, and 2,323 mobile homes. Of this total of 9,304 authorized new

                    units, 47.6 percent were single family units, 27.4 percent were multi-family

                    units, and 25 percent were mobile homes. Only one apartment complex, Governours

                    Square, was located outside the City of Wilmington. The remaining multi-family

                    units authorized outside the City were duplexes. All new authorizations for

                    mobile homes were outside the City during this four-year period.

                    4. Residential Land Use Problems

                    a. Neighborhood Decline

                         it has been observed that the establishment of incompatible land uses such

                    as commercial activities, industries, and offices in residential areas often

                                                      7

                                                                                                           Jo

                                                                                                                                        0

                                                                                                                                  MAP 5
                                                                                                                           RESIDENTIAL
                                                                                                                  DEVELOPMENT DENSITY
                                                                                                                                  1975
                                                                                  m:
                                                                                                                                  LEGEND

                                                                                                                              URBAN

                                                                                                                              SUBURBAN
                                                                                                                    EJ
                                                                                                                    E
                                                                                                                              RURAL
                                                                                                                          l

                                                                                                                              NO DEVELOPMENT
                                                                                                                    F]

                                                                                                                   NOTE: This map generalized from more
                                                                                                                           detailed version on file in Wilmington-
                                                                                                                           Now Hanover Planning Department
                                                                                                                           office.

                                                                                                                    NEW HANOVER COUNTY
                                                                                                                           WILMINGTON -NEW HANOVER
                                                                                                                             PLANNING COMMISSION

                       triggers a definite process of neighborhood decline. This process has

                       several distinct steps, as described below, but almost invariably its end

                       product is a dilapidated neighborhood, a loss of essential housing, and.a

                       decline in tax revenues:

                                 1.  The establishment of incompatible uses (primarily office,
                                     commercial, and industrial uses) within a viable residen-
                                     tial neighborhood brings with it nuisance factors such as
                                     noise, traffic congestion, visual blight, air pollution,
                                     etc. which reduce the desirability of the area for resi-
                                     dential uses.

                                 2.  The decreased desirability of the neighborhood is followed
                                     closely by a decline in residential property values.

                                 3.  Accompanying this decline in property values is increased
                                     pessimism about the area's future particularly among its
                                     residents, the real estate.industry, and investors.

                                 4.  This pessimism results in economic disinvestment by prop-
                                     erty owners in the form of reduced maintenance leading to
                                     deteriorating property conditions, tax delinquencies,,a
                                     decline in the tax base, and an overall loss to the community.

                            The problem of incompatible uses within residential areas is most prevalent

                       within the incorporated portion of the Planning Area. Reference to Maps 3 and 4

                       which illustrate existing land use, reveals that commercial, industrial, and

                       office uses are dispersed throughout the city in such a manner as to pose a

                       potential threat to most neighborhoods except the newer, more affluent subdivi-

                       sions. This finding is reinforced by recent citizen surveys which have indi-

                       cated that problems.normally associated with incompatible land uses are among

                       the priority concerns of the community.*

                            To illustrate the extent of this problem in the city, the following five

                      .areas have been identified as being threatened by incompatible land uses (see

                       Map 6):

                           *Information obtained through,New Hanover County Public Participation Program
                       and from Community Analysis 1975: A Citizen's Guide to Wilmington Neighborhoods.

                                                          8

                                                                                 mn A

                                                                                                                                                                                         tp

                                                                                                             ---- --------

                                                                                                                                             >

                                                                                                                                                                                                      MAP 6

                                                                                                                                                                        NEIGHBORHOODS THREATENED BY
                                                                                                                                                                               INCOMPATIBLE LAND USES

                                                                                                            PA

                                                                                                                                            qT

                                                                                                                                                                               NEW HANOVER COUNTY

                             I.  Spofford Mills and Pinehurst area.
                             2.  Arcadia and Willowdale area.
                             3.  Mercer Avenue, Rosemont, and Beaumont area.
                             4.  Audubon area.
                             5.  Sunset Hills.

                        In most cases, the existing problems of incompatible land uses are

                   directly related to zoning practices -- the structure of the zoning ordinance

                  ,and the rezoning process. The city's zoning ordinance is constructed in what

                   is commonly referred to as a "pyramid". The ordinance restricts commercial

                   and industrial uses in residential areas.but it does not restrict residential
                   uses in commercial or industrial @istricts, nor does it prevent commercial uses

                   in industrial districts. This.situation actually encourages the establishment

                   of incompatible uses.

                        Rezoning is the second major factor. Numerous small tracts of land which

                   are zoned and used for residences have been rezoned to permit more intensive

                   non-residential uses without considering the impact on surrounding properties

                   and the community as a whole.

                        The relationship between zoning practices and incompatible land uses is

                   well illustrated by the Spofford Mills-Pinehurst and the Mercer Avenue-Rosemont-

                   Beaumont areas. The Spofford Mills-Pinehurst area, although residential in

                   character, is zoned for wholesale and light industrial activities (M-1). This

                   zoning would permit any use except the most offensive manufacturing uses, in

                   this residential neighborhood.

                        The Mercer Avenue-Rosemont-Beaumont area provides an example of the en-

                   croachment of incompatible uses through rezoning. Although this area was origi-

                   nally zoned exclusively for residential uses, recent rezonings to commercial (C-1)

                   and wholesale and light manufacturing (M-1) districts have permitted the encroach-

                   ment of incompatible uses in the area..

                                                     9

                       b. Residential Sprawl Patterns

                            Maps 3 and 4, which illustrate land use, and Map 5, which illustrates

                       residential development density, clearly show a    trend toward residential sprawl

                       conditions. Following the Planning Area's major thoroughfares residential sub-

                       divisions at suburban and, in some cases, urban densities are dispersed through-

                       out the Planning Area. Many factors which contribute to      residential sprawl can

                       be identified -- lower land costs in rural areas; the ad    valorem tax system;

                       the attraction of water-oriented recreational areas; and     the placemen,t of employ-

                       ment centers in outlying areas, to mention a few.

                            Such a development pattern has significant liabilities. In the first place,

                       studies* have indicated that the direct public costs of scattered suburban sprawl

                       may have been as high as $150 per family per year in 1�70; undoubtedly, they are

                       much higher now. These costs derive from increased expenditur     es ,for public serv-

                       ices such as police and fire protection, water and sewer, and transportation fa-

                       cilities resulting from inefficient land use patterns.

                            In addition, suburban sprawl is   wasteful in its use of land. Lands which

                       are skipped in the "leap-frogging" process of sprawl development become idle.

                       They have no recognizable use; they are not usually farmed or used for purpose-

                       ful forestry. Infilling may eventually take place; however, until that time,

                       the land represents an economic liability.

                       c. Residential Septic Tanks

                            In the unincorporated portion of the Planning Area where central sewerage

                       systems are not available, septic tanks are used extensively for treating

                       domestic wastes. Unfortunately, in many areas of the county septic tanks have

                       been developed at excessive densities or placed in unsuited soils resulting in

                            *Marion Clawson, Suburban Land Conversion in the United States, 1971.

                   a significant number of septic tank failures. A recent survey conducted by

                   the New Hanover County Health Department* indicates that at least 19 residen-

                   tial subdivisions have a history of chronic septic tank problems. The location

                   of these subdivisions is shown on Map 7.

                        The consequences of these septic tank failures are serious. In addition

                   to the obvious health hazards, malfunctioning septic tank systems make a sig-

                   nificant contribution to the pollution of surface and groundwaters, forcing

                   the closure of shellfishing areas; and   they represent an economic liability

                   to the property owner by requiring frequent maintenance.

                   d. Land Drainage

                        inadequate land drainage is one,of the most serious and widespread land

                   use problems found in the Wilmington-New Hanover Planning Area. Drainage

                   problems have been given high priority by the Planning Area's residents through

                   the-Public Participation Program. The residents' concerns for drainage have

                   also been supported by the Planning Staff's survey of existing land use which

                   identified numerous examples of inadequate drainage systems.

                        Due to an almost flat topography and the widespread occurrence of high water

                   table conditions, extensive artificial land drainage is required in the Planning

                   Area both to manage excess runoff generated by the development and to lower

                   the water table sufficiently to create buildable lots and to permit the temporary

                   use of septic tanks for sewage treatment and disposal.

                        The Planning Area's existing land drainage problems result primarily from

                   three factors:

                             1.  Inadequate initial design.   In some instances the initial
                                 design of drainage systems  is inadequate for managing the
                                 volume of runoff generated  by the development, and may not
                                 lower the water sufficiently to prevent standing water during
                                 wet seasons and to permit proper function of septic tanks.

                        *Henry von Oesen and Associates, Greater Wilmington Area 201 Facility Plan,
                   Part 11, 1975 (Draft).

                                                                                                                           MAP 7

                                                                                                            RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISIONS
                                                                                                        EXPERIENCING CHRONIC SEPTIC
                                                                                                                   TANK PROBLEMS

                                                                                                        SOURCE: Henry Von Dozen and Associates,
                                                                                                                  Greater Wilmington Area 201
                                                                                                                  Facility Plan, Part IL, 1975 (Draft)

                                                                                                                    NEW HANOVER COUNTY
                                                                                                                          WILMINGTON-NEW HANOVER
                                                                                                                            PLANNING COMMISSION

                              2.  Improper construction and maintenance. This is the most
                                  serious factor. Lack of ditch stabilization, using materi-
                                  als such as grass or riprap, together with inadequate annual
                                  maintenance leads to siltation and an accumulation of debris
                                  which eventually cause the drainage system to fail.

                              3.  Design of drainage systems on a parcel-by-parcel basis.
                                    st drainage systems are designed to meet the needs of an
                                  individual subdivision with little or no attention to the
                                  overall needs of the Planning Area. The result is that the
                                  volume of water moving from one parcel to another may exceed
                                  the capacity of the downstream drainage ditch, causing serious
                                  undercutting and erosion; or that high sediment loads may be
                                  carried from one drainage system to another, resulting in
                                  excessive silting of the downstream systems.

                         In summary, the overall consequences of poor land drainage include stand-

                   ing water during wet periods, excessive erosion and sedimentation, septic tank

                   malfunction, and increased maintenance costs to property owners.

                        The long-term environmental impacts of extensive artificial land drainage

                   also present potentially serious problems for the Planning Area.    .Th@ continued

                   productivity of New Hanover County's coastal ecosystems is dependent upon main-

                   taining the quality and natural salinity of the estuarine waters*; however,

                   artificial drainage systems tend to significantly increase the flow of fresh

                   water into the estuary, thereby changing the natural salinity regime. Artificial

                   drainage also reduces the cleansing effect of vegetation on runoff and may lower

                   the quality of the water entering the   estuary. A recent study** by the U.S.

                   Geological Survey in Northeastern North Carolina concludes that not only does

                   artificial land  drainage increase the amount of water entering the estuaries

                   during wet periods, but also that the  water removed by the drainage systems

                   contribute significant amounts of bacteria, nutrients, pesticides, and sediment

                   to the estuary.

                        *John Clark, Coastal Ecosystems: Ecological Considerations for Management
                   of the Coastal Zone, (The Conservation Foundation: Washington, 1974), pp. 38-9.

                       **Ralph C. Heath, Hydrology of the,Albemarle-Pamlico Region North Carolina:
                   A Preliminary Report on the Impact of Agricultural Developments, U.S. Geological
                   Survey Water Resources Report 9-75, May 1975. p. 75.

                                                      12

                         Clearly then, land drainage to facilitate urban development has serious

                    environmental impacts which must be addressed by policies for future land

                    development.

                                                 B. COMMERCIAL

                    1. Summary of Commercial.Land Use Acreage

                         Eighty-seven percent, or 1,064 acres, of all commercial uses (retail and

                    wholesale trade activity) land in the Planning Area is within the City of Wil-

                    mington. (See Maps 3 and 4.) Commerciatland usage accounts     for 11.5 percent

                    of all developed land within the City, and only I percent of  the total developed

                    land outside the City. This distribution reflects the fact   that Wilmington serves

                    as the commercial center for a broad trading area.

                         Within the City of Wilmington, commercial activity is con ceftfated

                    along Market Street, Third Street, Castle Street', Carolina Beach Road, and

                    Oleander Drive. Smaller concentrations are located on South College Road,

                    South Kerr Avenue, and Wrightsville Avenue.

                         Outside the City most commercial activity is located along Oleander Drive,

                    U.S. Highway 17, and Castle Hayne Road. This commercial activity consists mainly

                    of highway-oriented establishments (automobile sales, mobile home sales, and

                    service stations) and dispersed neighborhood-oriented establishments (convenience

                    food stores).

                    2. Commercial Land Use Problems

                    a. Strip Commercial Development

                         Within the Planning Area several traffic arteries are plagued by strip

                    commercial development. Although there are several legitimate highway commercial

                    activities, such as automobile sales and services and mobile home sales firms,

                    strip commercial development occurs when a succession of unrelated and unplanned

                    types of commercial activity develops along a segment of unlimited access traffic

                    artery.

                                                         &(

                         Strip commercial development is not only undesirable in itself but it is

                    also detrimental to the proper development of the community. When compared,with

                    grouped or clustered commercial concentrations, the disadvantages and detrimental

                    characteristics of strip commercial activity become apparent. The following is

                    a list of the more   obvious disadvantages of strip commercial development.

                               1.  Strip commercial development leads to speculation and inflated
                                   land values which results in a large amount of unproductive
                                   vacant land.

                               2.  Strip commercial development depreciates land for residential
                                   uses.

                               3.  The additional traffic generated by strip commercial develop-
                                   ment often results in:

                                   a.   the necessity to make street widenings, requiting
                                        purchase of expensive commercial frontage, and the,
                                        encouragement of further strip development;

                                   b.   vehicles turning into and out of many access points
                                        interrupt through traffic and creates serious traffic
                                        hazards.

                               4.  Strip commercial uses are at a definite disadvantage when com-
                                   peting with grouped commercial concentrations which are able
                                   to attract greater number of shoppers.

                               5.  Strip commercial development often results in uncoordinated,
                                   garish signs which lower the overall aesthetic quality of
                                   the community.

                         Many of  the disadvantages of this type of development are apparent       in the

                    Wilmington-New Hanover Planning Area. In the City of Wilmington, it is         most

                    apparent on Market Street, Oleander Drive, and Carolina Beach Road. The early

                    ,stages of strip commercial development are becoming apparent along sections of

                    Wrightsville Avenue, making this street extremely vulnerable to the continued

                    encroachment of commercial uses. Steps, should be taken at this time to prevent

                    further commercial rezonings in this area, and existing commercially zoned

                    parcels which are vacant should be examined for possible rezoning to less intensive

                    uses.

                         Outside the City there are two traffic arteries where the problems of

                    strip development are apparent and two for which there is a high potential for

                                                         14

                     strip commercial Problems. Strip commercial development exists along Market

                     Street (U.S. Highway 17) from the City Limits to the community of Ogden.

                     Although there is less commercial activity, a similar situation occurs on

                     Castle Hayne Road from the City Limits through Wrightsboro. Due to the land

                     use mix in this area, this traffic artery carries much industrial and residential

                     traffic, and continued commercial expansion can only lead to further problems

                     along this already overburdened highway.

                         The potential for strip commercial development exists along Oleander Drive

                     from the vicinity of Forest Park Drive to Greenville Loop Road. At present,

                     there are many legitimate highway commercial establishments along this segment.

                     The encroachment of other types of commercial activities in this area raises

                     the potential for undesirable strip development.

                         To a lesser extent the same problem exists on Wrightsville Avenue parallel

                     to Oleander Drive. It has been caused by continued encroachment of various

                     commercial and service activities from the City Limits to the general vicinity

                     of the Cape Fear Hospital.

                     b. Over-Zoning

                         Over-zoning exists when more property is zoned for a particular use than

                     the market demands. An analysis of the amount of land zoned for commercial uses

                     and the amount actually used indicates that the Planning Area is significantly

                     over-zoned.

                         It is estimated that in the Planning Area approximately 2,800 acres are

                     zoned commercial. Of this amount, approximately 1,200 acres, or 43.0 percent,

                     are currently in commercial use. According to general planning estimates of

                     commercial needs, a 10 percent margin above existing commercially developed land

                     should be zoned to allow for expansion. If this estimate is accurate, then ap-

                     proximately 1,320 acres of land should be zoned for commercial uses. Since 2,800

                                                        0

                  acres in the Planning Area are currently zoned commercial, it appears that the'

                  area is excessively over-zoned for commercial uses.

                       Over-zoning is most visible in the portion of the Planning Area lying

                  outside the City Limits. In this area,_1100 acres are zoned for commercial

                  uses while approximately 160 acres are actually in use. Using the 10 percent

                  rule-of-thumb mentioned above, only 180 acres of commercially zoned land is

                  needed in the unincorporated area, indicating that five times more land is

                  zoned commercial than is needed.

                       In the city,approximately 1700 acres are zoned commercial  and 1100.are

                  in use. With an indicated need for 1220 acres of commercial land, this repre-

                  sents 39 percent more land zoned for commercial uses than needed.

                       Over-zoning creates several physical and economic problems. Among its

                  main disadvantages are the following:

                            1.  Over-zoning causes inefficient and spotty development patterns.

                            2.  Over-zoning diminishes the potential for the most desirable
                                sites to be utilized.

                            3.  Unused, over-zoned land is removed from other productive uses.

                            4.  Over-zoning eliminates the potential advantages of clustering
                                mutually supportive uses.

                                              C. INDUSTRIAL

                  1. Summary of Existing Industrial Land Use Acreage

                       This category includes all manufacturing establishments, warehousing,

                  stockpiles, tank farms, and resource production and extraction.

                       There are approximately 5,600 acres devoted to industrial use in the

                  Planning Areaj making it the second most extensive category. Industry accounts

                  for 22.5 percent of all the developed land in the Planning Area. There are

                  5,470 acres, 97 percent, located outside the City of Wilmington, while only 153

                  industrial acres are located in the City.

                                                    16

                          Industrial activity outside the City is found mainly along U.S. Highway

                     421; the area bounded by North 23rd Street, Castle Hayne Road and Smith Creek,

                     the General Electric plant on Castle Hayne Road; the area bounded by Sunnyvale

                     Drive, the City Limits of Wilmington, and the Cape Fear River; and, the area

                     immediately north of Market Street and N.C. Highway 132.

                          In the city, industrial activity is located mainly in five areas:

                               1.  In an arc beginning south of the Northeast Cape Fear River
                                   Bridge extending through the Brooklyn neighborhood to Love
                                   Grove;

                               2.  Along the Cape Fear River south of the,Memorial Bridge to
                                   the city limits;

                               3.  Around the intersection of Shipyard and Burnett Boulevards;

                               4.  Along the eastern ends of Marstellar and Kidder Streets;

                               5.  Around the intersection of Oleander Drive, Dawson, and
                                   Wooster Streets.

                     2. Industrial Land Use Problems

                     a. Encroachment Into Residential Areas

                         Examination of Maps 3 and-4, which illustrate existing land use, clearly

                     reveals a trend toward the encroachment of industrial uses into residential and

                     commercial areas. Some of the more obvious examples are the Brooklyn-Love Grove

                     area; the Covil Avenue area; the intersection of Oleander Drive and Wooster and

                     Dawson Streets; and the intersection of 41st Street and Lake Street in Lincoln

                     Forest.

                         The negative consequences of the encroachment of incompatible land uses.

                     into residential areas have been discussed in Section III, A,4. It may be

                     assumed that similar problems -- reduced property values, reduced maintenance,

                     and property decline -- would result from the encroachment of industrial uses

                     into viable commercial districts.

                 b. Industrial Dispersion and Over-Zoning

                      While there is an observable degree of cluste ring of industrial uses

                 in the City, the trend in unincorporated areas of the county appears to be toward

                 dispersion. Most recently developed industries, such as General Electric and

                 Hercules, are located individually on large tracts of land. Although this trend

                 has not reached serious proportions at this time, it does  present some significant

                 problems from the standpoint of the efficient utilization of prime industrial

                 lands, the efficient delivery of public services, protection of natural resource

                 areas, and traffic congestion.

                      A more clustered or compact industrial development pattern would reduce the

                 cost of providing basic public services, such as water, sewer and fire protection.

                 In addition, clustered industrial districts could reduce the adverse environ-

                 mental impacts of industrial development. For example, if industries were located

                 in close proximity to one another along Rt. 421 North, they could utilize common

                 docking facilities and thereby protect valuable wooded swamp areas adjacent to

                 the river. It should be emphasized that the clustering of industries in this

                 manner would require special site planning and development precautions.

                      One of the contributing factors to the dispersion of industries is over-

                 zoning. It is estimate .d that approximately 20,000 acres are presently zoned

                 for industrial uses, with approximately 5,600 acres actually in industrial use

                 at this time. It has been estimated, based on employment projections, that

                 between 1975 and the year 2000, the Planning Area will need only 3,000 additional

                 acres of industrial land or a total of 8,600 acres in industrial use. Therefore,

                 the Planning Area has approximately 133 percent more industrially zoned,land at

                 this time than will be needed in the next 25 years. It should be noted that much

                 of the land that is zoned for industrial use is not suited for such uses from

                 environmental and locational standpoints.

                      The disadvantages of over-zoning which were discussed in relation to com-

                 mercial uses (Section III, B,2) also apply to industrial use.

                                                   18

                                  D. TRANSPORTATION, COMMUNICATION, AND UTILITIES

                            This category contains a diverse range of uses from industrial related

                       activities such as the N.C. State Port and power generating plants to utility

                       business offices. As such it is a significant land user comprising a total

                       of almost 5,000 acres in the Planning Area. This acreage represents 20 percent of

                       total developed land. Of this total approximately 2000 acres are located in

                       the Wilmington City Limits and approximately 3000 acres are located in the

                       balance of the Planning Area.

                            Three of the largest users of land in this category are the New Hanover

                       County.Airport, the Sutton Power generating plant, and the North Carolina State

                       Ports Terminal.

                                              E. PARKS AND RECREATION

                            This category includes both public and private cultural, entertainment,

                       and recreational activities and facilities.

                            There are 1,408 acres in this category in the Planning Area, with 52.2

                       percent located outside the City, and 47.8 percent located in the City.

                            When examining the distribution of the public component of this land use

                       category marked differences between the incorporated and unincorporated parts

                       of the Planning Area can be identified.

                            Reference to Maps 3 and 4 reveals a relatively dispersed distribution

                       of parks and:open space throughout the city, thus allowing greater access

                       by Wilmington's residents. In contrast, public recreational land and open

                       space areas outside the city is concentrated primarily in three areas -- Hugh

                       McRae Park which is owned by New Hanover County, Carolina Beach State Park,

                       and Fort Fisher State Historic Site.

                                       F. OFFICE AND INSTITUTIONAL

                       This category includes schools, churches, hospitals, business offices not

                  dealing in retail or wholesale trade, and government activities.

                       Office and institutional land use accounts for 3.1 percent of all developed

                  land within the Planning Area, with 81 percent (623 acres) of the total Planning

                  Area's office and institutional land uses being located within the City. Office

                  and institutional uses occupy 6.7 percent of the developed land in the City

                  and only 0.9 percent outside the City.

                       The experience of other cities and urban  areas indicates that the city,

                  particularly the downtown area, will continue  to be the center for office and

                  institutional activities in the future.

                                       G. AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY

                       This category includes all cultivated crop fields and cattle grazing

                  fields and forest lands where forestry management principles are conducted.a

                       Agriculture and forestry account for 12.2 percent (16,100 acres) of total

                  acreage in the Planning Area. Of this total 10,050 acres are in forest lands

                  and 6050 ac res are in cultivated fields and pastures. Maps 3 and 4 show a

                  concentration of this land use in the northern part of the county.

                       The importance of agriculture in New Hanover County has diminished in

                  recent years as the area has become more urbanized. In 1962, 2.8 percent of

                  the county's workforce was employed in agriculture, but by 1972 agricultural

                  employment fell to only 1.1 percent of total employment. Cash receipts for

                  crop and animal products has also shown a decline. In 1970 farm receipts totaled

                  2.4 million, but in 1971 receipts totaled only $2.1 million.

                       aCultivated crop fields and grazing pastures obtained from aerial photographs
                  taken in October, 1974. Forest lands identified with the assistance of Durwood
                  Baggett, Agricultural Extension Office.

                                                    20

                            Even though agriculture has been declining in New Hanover County, area

                       residents have expressed through the Public Participation Program a strong

                       desire to preserve agriculture as a way of life.

                                                IV. SUMMARY

                                         A. MAJOR LAND USE ISSUES

                       Basically, the survey and analysis of existing land uses in the

                  Wilmington-New Ha nover Planning Area has identified six key issues or problems

                  which must be addressed in,the land use and development policies adopted by

                  the Wilmington City Council and the New Hanover County Commissioners:

                  1. A sprawling development pattern

                       Urban sprawl, or "leapfrog" development, has been shown to be inefficient

                  in the use of scarce land resources, to increase energy consumption, and to
                  increase the costs of public services which must be borne by city and county

                  taxpayers.

                  2. Neighborhood decline through the encroachment of'incompatible uses

                       The development of incompatible uses such as businesses or industries,

                  within residential areas, have been shown to be an important contributor to

                  the decline of neighborhoods. Such deterioration is extremely costly to the

                  public through a loss of housing units, a loss of tax revenue, and an overall

                  decrease in the quality of life in the community-

                  3. Strip commercial development

                       Strip commercial development occurs when a succession of unrelated and

                  unplanned commercial activities develop along a segment of an unlimited access

                  highway. Strip development is undesirable because it-tends to encourage land

                  speculation, inflated land values, resulting in a large amount of unproductive

                  land; it depreciates the value of surrounding properties for less intensive

                  uses; and it tends to increase traffic volumes, often necessitating expensive

                  street widenings.

                                                    22

                       4.  Over-zoning

                            Over-zoning exists when more property is zoned for a particular use

                       than the market demands. It is estimated that the Planning Area has over

                       200 percent more commercially-zoned land than is needed and over 130 percent

                       more industrially zoned land than needed. Over-zoning to this degree tends

                       to encourage sprawling development patterns; it diminishes the potential that

                       the most desirable commercial and industrial sites will be developed; and it

                       removes land from other productive uses.

                       5. Drainage

                           Many artificial land drainage systems which are required for development

                       in most areas of New Hanover County have not been successful in removing water

                       runoff and in lowering the water table. The result has been standing water in

                       many subdivisions, malfunctioning septic tanks, and increasing maintenance

                       costs. In addition, studies have indicated that extensive artificial drainage

                       systems may have a serious negative impact on productive estuarine waters.

                       6. Septic tanks

                           In a large number of subdivisions, septic tanks have been developed at

                       excessive densities or in unsuited soils resulting in a high incidence of

                       failures. In addition to the obvious health hazards, malfunctioning septic

                       tanks make a significant contribution to the pollution of the Planning Area's

                       surface waters, and they represent an economic liability to the property owner

                       through the requirement for frequent maintenance.

                             B. ROLE OF LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT CONTROL ORDINANCES

                           Considering the extent of existing land use problems in the Planning Area

                       and the fact that zoning ordinances and subdivision regulations are in force

                       throughout the area, it seems appropriate in conclusion to examine the role of

                       these ordinances in guiding development, in protecting neighborhoods, and in

                 protecting the environment. More specifically, why have these ordinances

                 been ineffective in preventing the land use problems currently experienced

                 by the Planning Area?

                      For several years, the effectiveness of zoning and subdivision ordinances

                 have been criticized. However, in many instances, the criticism has been

                 directed toward.the ordinances themselves and their administration, and these

                 are not the proper targets of concern. Ordinances are merely the tools of

                 public policy, and where the policy basis for ordinances is weak, the ordinances

                 themselves will necessarily be weak and ineffective.

                      The Wilmington City,Council and the New Hanover County Commissioners adopted

                 zoning and subdivision ordinances several years ago.  Upon examination, however,

                 it appears that these ordinances were more the result of crisis situations

                 than the result of any comprehensive public policies concerning land development.

                 The outcome has been a set of ordinances which are weak, which are inconsistent

                 and often conflicting, and which contain some serious loopholes.

                      The New Hanover County subdivision ordinance provides an example. The

                 ordinance states that the regulation of the subdivision of land in the county

                 is necessary to create "conditions essential to public health, safety, and gen-

                 eral welfare"; however, provisions of the ordinance permit developers to aVo4d

                 meeting the minimum development standards by allowing the subdivision of land

                 through procedures known as metes and bounds.

                      The frequency of zoning ordinance amendments provides a further example.

                 Over the past five years the text and maps of the city and county zoning ordinances

                 have been amended a total of 493 times. This would indicate that the zoning

                 ordinances are not actually implementing any clear public policy directed toward

                 land development; rather, the policy seems to be to have a zoning ordinance.

                      Clearly then, to be effective in preventing the continued creation of land

                 use problems, the Planning Area's land use and development control ordinances

                                                  24

                        must be revised and up-dated so that they reflect rational and consistent

                        policies formulated through the land use planning process. Further, these

                        ordinances, once revised, should be amended only when it is explicitly shown

                        that (1) an error was made when the ordinances were adopted, or (2) that

                        conditions have changed sufficiently since adoption to merit amendment.

             newMnover
             comprebeasive
             planning progimin

                                         qP4

                                 e maies of
                                             Tt

                                     XPR I L

                                                      TABLE OF CONTENTS

                                                                                                  Page

                            1. INTRODUCTION   ..................................................    I

                           II. ESTIMATES OF GROSS LAND NEEDS    .................................   2

                          III. DETAILED LAND NEEDS ESTIMATES   ...........  ......................  4

                                A. INDUSTRIAL LAND NEEDS    .....................................   4

                                B. COMMERCIAL LAND NEEDS    .....................................   5

                                C. RESIDENTIAL LAND NEEDS    ....................................   7

                                1). SUMMARY  ...................................................    9

                         Appendix

                                  Gulf of   Alaska

                       Figure 16.--Location and magnitude of Pacific ocean perch catches in the Gulf of Alaska by the Japanese
                       trawl fishery. Catches are the average annual removals in 1963-75.

                       Since 1978 only stern trawlers (Figure 17) have been used in the trawl fish-
                       eries of the Gulf of Alaska. Many of these stern trawlers are 246 to 335 ft
                       (75 to 102 m) in length and between 2,000 and 4,000 gross tons. All have
                       freezing facilities and some have fish meal plants. A small number of trawlers
                       are less than 500 gross tons. In 1978, USSR had 32 trawlers operating in
                       the Gulf compared to 26 for Japan, 11 for ROK, and 5 for Poland (Table 5).

                         Figure 17.--Japanese stern trawler, Ryujin Maru No. 8, operating  in the Gulf of Alaska.
                         (Courtesy of U.S. observer Program, NMFS, Seattle).

                                                                           26

                                        II. ESTIMATES OF GROSS LAND NEEDS

                          Two levels of detail have been used in estimating future  land needs.

                     At the first level, at attempt was made to simply estimate the gross land

                     needs in three categories*:

                                (a)  Urban areas such as those found in the City of Wilmington
                                     and its suburbs. In these areas expected population
                                     densities would be at least. 2000 persons per square mile,
                                     requiring a full range of public services.

                                (b)  Rural communities, such as Ogden or Castle Hayne, where
                                     population densities would be much lower, using 640
                                     persons per square mile as a rule of thumb. Extensive
                                     public services probably would not be required in these
                                     areas.

                                (c)  Dispersed rural areas where lot sizes would be extremely
                                     large, averaging 320 persons per square mile, and where
                                     only minimal public services would be provided.

                          Based on an evaluation of past trends and the existing distribu tion of

                     population, it is estimated that approximately 75 percent of the Planning

                     Area's future population will be accomodated in urban areas, 15 percent in

                     rural communities, and the remaining 10 percent dispersed throughout the

                     rural areas of the county. Using these estimates the following table illus-

                     trates the amount of land needed in each general category.

                          According to these estimates, approximately 55 square miles of land will

                     be required to support the Planning Area's expected twenty-five year population

                     growth. Focusing on the urban and rural community categories which are most

                     sensitive to land capability constraints, approximately 36 square miles of land

                     suited for development will be required during the.twenty-five year planning

                     period.

                          *Analysis at this level is required by the Coastal Resources Commission s
                     "Guidelines for Local Planning Under the Coastal Area Management Act of 1974".

                                                       Table I

                                            SUMMARY OF GROSS LAND NEEDS

                                 1975-1985             1985-1995             1995-2000            1975-2000
          Category           People     Land       People    Land       People    -Land       People     Land

          Urban              15,400    8Sq. Mi.    18,750  9 Sq. Mi.     9,750   5 Sq. Mi.    43,900 22  Sq. Mi.

           ural Community     3,100    5Sq. Mi.     3,750  6 Sq. Mi.     1,950   3 Sq. Mi.     8,800 14  Sq. Mi.

          Dispersed Rural     2,100    7Sq. Mi.     2,500  8 Sq. Mi.     1,300   4 Sq. Mi.     5,900 19  Sq. Mi.

            Total            20,600   20 Sq. mi.   25,000  23 Sq. Mi.   13,000  12 Sq. Mi.    58,600 55  Sq. Mi.

          Source: Wilmington-New    Hanover Planning Department

                                                           3

                                         III. DETAILED LAND NEEDS ESTIMATES

                           At the second level of detail, estimates of the specific land needs

                      have been prepared for the primary users of land -- residences, industries,

                      and commercial  activities. These estimates are based on three considerations:

                                 (1)  A statistical analysis,of the amount of land required to
                                      support the Planning Area's current population;

                                 (2)  Accepted planning guidelines for estimating land needs;

                                 (3)  Population and employment projections.

                           In addition, the estimates based on these factors have been increased by

                      50 percent to allow adequate flexibility for the proper operation of the real

                      estate market and to account for land which will be held off the market in-

                      definitely.

                                              A. INDUSTRIAL LAND NEEDS

                           Estimating the amount of land required for industrial uses in the future

                      is very difficult. There is great variability in the site size, shape, and

                      location requirements among various types Of industries. In addition, specific

                      firms within major industrial groupings may have widely varying land needs.

                      Even though accurate estimates are difficult, it is important to approximate

                      industrial land needs so that adequate land in appropriate locations can be

                      set-aside for future use.

                           Estimates of the Planning Area's industrial land needs have been developed

                      using local information on the ratio of land to workers for major industrial

                      groups and employment projections for each of these groups. The estimates have

                      also been aggregated to show land needs in the extensive and intensive classifi-

                      cations which were discussed in the.first part of this report.

                           The estimates which are summarized in Table 2, indicate that the county's

                      extensive industries will require approximately 2690 acres over   the next 25

                                                          4--

                     years, while intensive industries which are smaller land users will require

                     145 acres. Overall, the county will require 2835 acres of industrial land

                     between 1975 and 2000, or an average of almost 110 acres per year. Considering

                     the requirement for market flexibility, a total of 4,200 acres of extensive

                     land and.220 acres of intensive land will be required between 1974 and 2000.

                     These estimates, of course, assume that current land to worker ratios will

                     persist into the future. (Table I in the Appendix illustrates the county's

                     current industrial land/em.ployee ratio and the employment projections for major

                     industry groups.)

                                                           Table 2

                                New Hanover County Industrial Land Needs             1974-2000

                Industry type                    1974-80     1980-90     1990-2000              1974-2000
                                                                                       Actual    Acres Required
                                                                                        Acres       For Market
                                                                                       Needed       Flexibility

                Extensive                          650         1070          970        2690            4200
                   Textiles                         40          60           60          260             390
                   Lumber and Wood                  60         100           90          250             380
                   Fabricated metals               350         580           530        1460             2200
                   Chemicals                       130         230           200         560             840
                   Stone, clay, and glass           70         100           90          260             390

                Intensive                           35          5@           53          145             220
                   Apparel                           6          11           10           27              40
                   Machinery                        14          22           20           56              84
                   .Food                             9          15           14           38              60
                   Printing                          3            4            4          11              16
                   Miscellaneous                     3            5            5          13              20

                JTotal                             685    1    1127    1    1023    1   2835            4420

                Source: Wilmington-New Hanover         Planning Department

                                                 B. COMMERCIAL LAND NEEDS

                           Since studies have shown that there appears to be only a slight correlation

                     between the amount of land in commercial-land uses and total population, the

                                                               5

                       estimates of total commercial land needs are based on projected retail sales

                       and projected trade sector employment. These variables are felt to more

                       accurately reflect the Planning Area's commercial needs because it serves

                       a large primary trading area consisting of New Hanover, Brunswick, Pender,

                       and Columbus Counties, as well as an extensive secondary trading area.

                            As expected, there is a significant gap between the needs estimates

                       based on trade employment per acre and retail sales per acre (Table 3);

                       however, in the absence of any data which favors one projection over the

                       other, an unweighted average of the two has been used as an estimate of

                       total commercial land needs.

                           As indicated in Table 3, the Planning Area will require approximately

                      2600 additional acres of commercial land by the year 2000. This land must

                      be allocated among four major commercial activities -- regional centers,

                      community centers, neighborhood centers, and highway service areas.

                                                       Table 3

                             Alternative Estimates of Commercial Land Needs, 1975-2000

                                                  Additional Commercial Area Needed (acres)
                  Estimate Basis           1975-80   1980-90    1990-2000          1975-2000
                                                                            Actual   Acres Required
                                                                             Acres     For Market
                                                                            Needed      Flexibility

                  Retail Sales/acre          371       836         838       2047         3100

                  Trade Employment/acre      279.      537         591       1407         2100
                  Lerage estimate            325       700         700       1725         2600

                  Source: Wilmington-New Hanover Planning Department

                           The regional shopping centers will have adequate facilities to offer full

                      depth and variety in comparative shopping. Each center will contain more than

                      500,000 square feet of sales area and must be suppported by a minimum of

                      100,000 people.

                                                         --6--

                     The community shopping areas, in addition to providing convenience

               goods and services found in the neighborhood shopping areas, will also

               provide a wide range of shopping facilities which will permit some degree

               of comparative shopping. The community shopping areas should be designed

               to service a population of between 20,000 and 70,000 and have from 50,000

               to 150,000 square feet.of commercial floor space. Community shopping areas

               should be located at the intersection of major arterial roads.

                     The neighborhood shopping areas will provide for a minimum of 5,000

               population and should contain from 15,000 to 50,000 square feet.of commercial

               floor space. The primary purpose of the neighborhood shopping area is to

               provide convenience goods and services to individual neighborhoods. Therefore,

               the neighborhood shopping area is limited in its scope of commercial facilities

               to such activities as retail sale of food, drugs, etc., and the operation of

               personal service establishments such as laundry, dry cleaning, barbering, etc.

               Neighborhood shopping areas ideally should be located at the intersection of

               arterial and collector streets.

                     The highway oriented service areas should contain only those establishments

               oriented toward providing services for automobile traffic. These service

               establishments would include motels,  restaurants and gasoline service stations.

               Such a service area would be located on a major arterial route.

                                      C. RESIDENTIAL LAND NEEDS

                     At the present time, there are approximately 11,080 acres of land in resi-

               dential uses in the Planning Area with an average gross density of 2.7 families

               per acre. Although residential densities are higher within the City of Wilmington,

               it is felt that an overall density of 2.5 families per acre is a useful guideline

               for determining total residential land needs.

                                                   7

                           According to population forecasts for New Hanover County, the population

                      will increase from a current level of 92,000 to 151,000 in the year 2000.

                      Assuming an average family size of 2.5 persons in the future, this amounts

                      to an increase of 23,600 families. By applying the gross density guideline

                      of 2.5 families per acre, approximately 9400 acres of land will be needed

                      for residential uses over the next 25 years.

                           How this land will be distributed among low, moderate, and high density

                      residential uses is dependent upon several factors -- public values and

                      attitudes, economic conditions, environmental capability, private development

                      decisions, and others. However, should current development patterns continue,

                      it is possible to approximate the number of acres needed for various residen-

                      tial densities.

                           A recent study of residential land uses in the Planning Area'indicates

                      that residential development generally occurs in three density classifications:

                      suburban-rural densities, moderate urban densities, and high urban densities.

                      These density classes and their yield of persons and dwelling units per acre

                      is illustrated in Table 4.

                           By assuming that the future distribution of residential development between

                      the three classes will be 25 percent suburban-rural, 50 percent moderate urban,

                      and 25 percent high urban, estimates of future land needs in each class can be

                      made. These estimates are summarized in Table 5.

                                                      Table 4

                            Existing Residential Density Classes -- New Hanover County

                                   Range of d.iT'.s  Avg. # d5T@.s   Range of persons   Avg. # persons
                  Density Class       per acre         per acre          per acre          per acre

                  Suburban-rural        0-2               1                  0-5              2.5

                  Moderate urban        3-6               4.5              7.5-15            11.25

                IHigh urban             7-12              8.5             17.5-30            23.75

                  Source: Wilmington-Ne,4 Hanover Planning Department

                                                       __8__
                                                             G

                                                    Table 5

                                Estimate of Residential Land Needs, 1975-2000

                                      Avg. d.u.'s      Families to be       Actual     Acres Required
                                       per acre         accomodated         Acres        For Market
                  Density Class                                             Needed        Flexibility

                  Suburban-rural           1                5,900           5,900            8,800

                  Moderate urban          4.5              11,800           2,600            3,900

                  High urban               8.5              5,900               700          1,000

                    TOTALS                                 23,600           9,200           13,700

                  Source: Wilmington-New Hanover Planning Department

                                                  D. SUMMARY

                       Table 6 provides a summary of the Planning Area's land needs for,the

                  1975-2000 planning period. The summary shows that approximately 21,000 acres,

                  or 33 square miles, will be needed for industrial, commercial, and residential

                  uses alone. Space must also be provided for a variety of additional uses such

                  as recreation, open space, and highways.

                                                    Table 6

                                        Summary of Future Land Needs

                                                             Number of Acres Required to Insure
                  Land Use Category                             Market Flexibility 1975-2000

                  Industrial                                                  4,420
                    Extensive                                                 4,200
                    Intensive                                                   220

                  Commercial                                                  2,600

                  Residential                                               13,700

                     TOTAL                                                  20,720

                  Source: Wilmington-New Hanover Planning Department

                                                       9

                                                            APPENDIX

                                                             TABLE I

                                   ACREAGE AND EMPLOYEE INVENTORY OF LOCAL INDUSTRIES

                                           Average@'       Average       Reporting Total          Total      Employees
                                         --Acreage     No. Employees       Units     Acres      Employees    Per Acre

                 Food and Kindred
                    Products                    1.8         41.9            18          32.4         754        23.3

                 Textile Mill
                    Products                   98.0        750.a             2          196.0     1,500         7.7

                 Apparel and Other
                    Textile Products            4.3        233.              8          34.4      1,866         54.2

                 Lumber and Wood
                    Products                   11.6         33.3            24          278.4        902        3.2

                 Printing and
                    Publishing                  1.0         27.4            11          11.0         301        27.4

                 Chemicals and
                    Allied Products           102.9b       190.             13       1,337.7      2,474         1.8

                 Stone, Clay, and
                    Glass Products             522.8        34.4             8       4,182.4         275           .1

                 Fabricated Metal
                    Products                   56.8        103.              7          397.6        722        1.8

                 Machinery,   Except
                    Electrical                  8.5         69.              8                       554        8.1

                 Electrical Equipment                           a
                    and Supplies               29.8        178.5             2            59.6       357        6.0

                       Totals                                               101      6,597.5      9,705         1.5

                       aData collected from tax records (all other data from County            Business  Patterns - 1972)
                       bLand currently used in production by Hercules figured only           in average     not total
                 holdings of land by Hercules.

                                                       APPENDIX

                                                        TABLE 2

                                 SECTOR WORKFORCE EMPLOYMENT FORECAST: 1972-2000
                                                     MANUFACTURING
                                                  NEW HANOVER COUNTY

                                                        1972                        EMPLOYMENT
                     Sector                  -Employment       Percent       1980                  2000

                     Textiles                      1360          13.3        1649       2141       2580

                     Lumber and Wood                800           7.9         980       1272       1533

                     Fabricated Metals             2890          28.4        3522       4572       5510

                     Chemicals                     1110          10.9        1352       1755       2115

                     Stone, Clay, Glass             280           2.8         347        451        543

                       Total Extensive             6440          63.3        7850       10191      12281

                     Apparel                       1590          15.6        1934       2512       3026

                     Machinery                      500           4.9         608        789        951

                     Food                           970           9.5        1178       1530       1843

                     Printing                       310           3.1         384        499        601

                     Miscellaneous                  350           3.4         422        547        660

                       Total Intensive             3720          36.7        4526       5877       7081

                     TOTAL                         10160        100          12376      16068      19362

                     Source: Technical Report    Number 1: Human and Economic      Resources

        ne" hanover
        comprehensive
        planning progTam

                          Tly

                  an*sIs of'
             9")"h akernadves
                MCI              6j

                                                  TABLE OF CONTENTS

                                                                                                 Page

                        I. INTRODUCTION   ......................................................    I

                            A. NATIONAL TREND TOWARD GROWTH MANAGEMENT    .......................   1

                            B. NEED FOR LOCAL GROWTH POLICIES    ................................   2

                            C. STUDY OUTLINE   .................................................    4

                       II.  ANALYSIS OF THE AFFECTS OF GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVES    ....  5

                            A. ALTERNATIVES   ..................................................    5

                            B. MEASURES OF AFFECTS  ...........................................     5

                            C.. METHODOLOGY  ...................................................    7

                            D. RESULTS OF ANALYSIS  ...........................................     8

                      III. INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT IMPACT   .....................................   12

                       IV. IMPACT OF GROWTH ON KEY FACILITIES   ................................  17

                            A.  WATER SUPPLY  ...................................................  17

                            B.  SEWAGE TREATMENT  ..............................................  18

                            C.  HIGHWAY SYSTEM  ................................................  19

                            D.  SCHOOLS  ........................................................  20

                            Appendix I:   Review of Population Projections

                            Appendix II: Cost Estimating Procedures for Public Services

                                            I. INTRODUCTION

                               A. NATIONAL TREND TOWARD GROWTH MANAGEMENT

                      The traditional ethic of growth is being challenged in many communities

                 throughout the United States. The premise that growth and progress go

                 hand-in-hand is no longer universally accepted.

                      The costs and benefits of growth are emerging as major public issues.

                 Misgivings over growth with its attendant consequences -- rapid consumption

                 of land, alteration of the environment, and increasing demand for public

                 services -- have led some communities to develop public policies which affect

                 the nature and extent of local growth. The growth management policies of

                 communities such as Ramapo, New York and Petaluma, California have been

                 challenged and upheld by the courts.

                      At the same time, this emerging trend toward local growth management has

                 not been without strong opposition.  Dissent over growth controls and limits

                 has been expressed by various business interests, property owners, builders,

                 and advocates for the disinfranchised: the poor, minorities, the underemployed,

                 and the aged.* Most often, the basis for opposition has been that the long-

                 range impacts of growth management have not been sufficiently evaluated and that

                 the overall impact of growth limits on the general welfare of the community may

                 be negative.

                      The predominant growth attitudes among some individuals and groups still

                 include the following:

                          .1. growth stabilizes or improves the local tax situation by
                               broadening the tax base and reducing per capita tax burdens;

                      ,vRandall W. Scott, ed., Management and Control of Growth, Vol. I (Washington,
                 D.C.: The Urban Land Institute, 1975), p. 2.

                               2.  most growth pays its own way;

                               3.  new development brings a broader range of goods and
                                   services to the community.

                               4.  growth improves local wage levels and brings a greater
                                   choice of job opportunities.

                               5.  growth brings a greater selection of housing types and
                                   locations;

                               6.  development and expansion eventually result in improved
                                   community facilities such as fire and health services,
                                   schools, and so forth.

                         Many growing communities, however, have found that these premis  es of

                    growth are not necessarily true. Growth has brought higher tax bills and a

                    widening gap between service needs and service delivery; new shopping centers

                    have drawn customers away from shopping areas, leading established business

                    interests to question the desirability of growth; and perhaps the..most

                    widespread concern linked to growth has been the lowered quality of life

                    a loss of small town atmosphere or a loss'of neighborhood identity.

                                       B. NEED FOR LOCAL GROWTH POLICIES

                         In recent years, Wilmington and New Hanover County have had informal,

                    unstated policies regarding population growth. Neither unit of government has

                    exercised measurable control over growth, and there have been no clear statements

                    concerning the amount of growth desired, the type of growth desired, or where

                    growth should occur.

                         The choice, instead, has been to focus on preserving the living environ-

                    ment of the areals residents by attempting to insure-that growth and accompanying

                    development has minimal impact on existing developed areas and by attempting to

                    provide needed public services and facilities in as timely a manner as possible.

                    It is fair to say that one of the major faults in this approach t o growth has

                    been a widening gap between public service needs and service delivery. Water

                  supply, sewage treatment and disposal, drainage, and recreation are primary

                  examples of service short-falls.

                       The need to close the gap between existing service needs and services

                  delivered is, in itself, a strong argument for a formal public growth policy.

                  At a recent meeting in the Murraysv ille-Gordon Road Planning District, one

                  resident stated that "we must take care of the needs of our current residents

                  before encouraging more people to move to the county." Similar concerns have

                  been expressed by residents of other areas.

                       In addition to these locally demonstrated needs, the Coastal Resources

                  Commission also requires that local governments develop growth policies as a

                  part of the Coastal Area Management program. The Commission has not specified

                  what type of policy should be adopted, only that the locality's growth objec-

                  tives be clearly stated and that policies be developed for achieving these

                  objectives.

                       The growth policies, themselves, need not be complex. Basically, they

                  should contain clear, concise statements of the community's growth objectives

                  and the policies or means to be used in achieving these objectives. Their

                  content should address the three fundamental issues of growth:

                            1. Quantity. How much growth is desirable for the community?

                           2. Location.    Where should development take place -- close to
                                           existing developed areas or dispersed throughout
                                           the Planning Area?

                           3. Type.        Does the community want to build an economy based
                                           on recreation, or does it want minufacturing activities?
                                           Do the people want more apartments or more single-
                                           family homes? What about shopping facilities?

                       The purpose of this technical report is to provide the citizens of

                  the Wilmington-New Hanover Planning Area and their elected officials with

                  information which can be used to facilitate the development of a policy re-

                  garding the area's growth. It is emphasized that much of the information

                  contained in this report is tentative and subject to significant errors in

                                                    3

                      some cases -- particularly in the examination of service costs. In all

                      cases, however, the staff has made every effort to apply cost and benefit

                      assumptions equally to all alternatives.

                                                 C. STUDY OUTLINE

                           This study contains two principle parts. The first addresses the

                      questions of "how much" and "where" should growth occur. It analyzes the

                      affects of alternative population growth rates and alternative development

                      patterns on the local economy, the costs of public services, and the land

                      resources of the Planning Area.

                          The second part deals with the third major element of growth policies

                      what type of growth should the Planning Area encourage? It is based on a

                      detailed analysis of the local economy which makes it possible'to'forecast

                      the impact of economic development alternatives on the economy. In general

                      terms, it identifies the industrial sectors having the greatest overall impact

                      on the economic well'-being of local residents.

                                                              C

                                    II. ANALYSIS OF THE AFFECTS OF GROWTH
                                         AND DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVES

                                               A. ALTERNATIVES

                        Six growth and development alternatives for the Wilmington-New Hanover

                  Planning Area.have been defined in terms of two variables: projected total

                  population and the spatial distribution of development generated by population

                  growth. For total population the alternatives assume the three population

                  growth levels identified in Technical Report   #1, and for density the alterna-

                  tives assume that each population level will   be accommodated in a dispersed

                  or compact development pattern. The six alternatives are described in Table

                                                    TABLE 1

                                     GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVES

                                                                  ASSUMPTIONS
                  ALTERNATIVE                    POPULATION                   DWELLING UNIT
                                                  YEAR 2000                      DENSITY

                  Low-Compact                      122,800               2 DU's per gross acre
                  Low-Dispersed                    122,800               .5 DU's per gross acre
                  Moderate-Compact                 140,300               2 DU's per gross acre
                  Moderate-Dispersed               140,300               .5 DU's per gross acre
                  High-Compact                     151,000               2 DU's per gross acre
                  High-Dispersed                   151,000               .5 DU's per gross acre

                                           B. MEASURES OF AFFECTS

                       In analyzing the effects of population growth, an attempt has been made

                  to measure the costs and benefits of growth which accrue to the residents of

                  the Planning Area. It would be very difficult, and perhaps impossible, to

                  specify and measure all of the costs and benefits of growth. Such an analysis

                  is limited, first, by the availability of information and, second, by the fact

                  that many costs and benefits cannot be measured. For example, it would be very

                                                      5

                     difficult to realistically measure, in quantifiable terms, the actual costs

                     of increased traffic congestion resulting from population growth. Therefore,

                     it has been necessary to utilize indicators of the costs and benefits of

                     growth.

                         For the purposes of this study, benefits have been measured in terms of

                     the impact of growth on the local economy. Four elements have been considered:

                               (1)  total employment which is a measure of the diversification
                                    of the local economy and, thereby, an indicator of the
                                    range of employment options available to local residents;

                               (2)  total manufacturing employment which is an indicator of
                                    the amount of money flowing into an area;

                               (3)  per capita income which is a measure of economic well-being,
                                    although it does not indicate distribution of income; and

                               (4)  retail sales which is an indicator of the vitality of the
                                    trade sector employing 20 percent of the Planning Area's
                                    workforce, and which is also an indicator of the'selection
                                    and types of goods available to the resident.

                         The costs  of growth have been measured in terms of the cost of providing

                     public services and the impact of population growth on the Planning Area's

                     land resources. Six public service areas have been considered:

                               (1)  water
                               (2)  sewerage
                               (3)  solid waste management
                               (4)  fire protection
                               (5)  police protection
                               (6)  highways

                     A variety of factors could be used to evaluate the impact of growth on the

                     local government. However, costs were selected. because they are readily

                     understood; they are easily compared; and, probably most important, they  are

                     of prime interest to citizens and elected officials alike.

                         The impact of growth on the Planning Area's land resources has been

                     analyzed in terms of the amount of land needed to accommodate the three

                     population levels. This is an important measure. It indicates the develop-

                     ment pressure which will be exerted on the county's marginal lands, as well

                 as the reduction in land use alt-ernatives available to future residents.

                 If, for example, 57,000 additional people require 30 square miles of land

                 and only 22 square miles of suited land are available for development without

                 improvement, it would indicate that either environmentally marginal land must

                 be developed or that there must be a change in life-style in the form of more

                 high density apartments and condominiums on environmentally suited land.

                                              C. METHODOLOGY

                 1. Measurement of Impacts on the Local Economy

                      Total employment and manufacturing employment have been derived from the

                 three population projections using projections and assumptions concerning the

                 percent of total population who will be employed and the unemployment rate.

                 Since these factors do not vary appreciably, they can be projected with an

                 acceptable degree of accuracy.

                      An analysis of past trends in incomes and employment reveals that per

                 capita income is highly correlated with total manufacturing employment.

                 Therefore, using this relationship, per capita income at the three population

                 levels has been projected based on total manufacturing employment.

                      A similar analysis reveals that retail sales and total population are

                 also highly correlated. Therefore, projected total population has been used

                 to project retail sales@.

                      It is understood that there are inherent dangers in long-range projections

                 based on assumptions that past trends will remain the same in the future.

                 Therefore, this information should only be used for the purpose of comparing

                 the relative impact of growth alternatives.

                 2. The Measurement of Impacts on the Provision of Public Servi ces

                      The analysis of the impact of growth on the costs of public services

                                                    7

                    relies heavily on a report by the Research Triangle  Institute.* This

                    report is designed primarily to provide a basis for  evaluating alternative

                    strategies for the allocation of public funds, and thus, the cost-estimating

                    relationships contained in the report are ideal for the purpose of analyzing

                    the impacts of population growth. The study permits estimation of the impact

                    of total population and the impact of population distribution (development

                    density). An outline of the assumptions and formulas used in this evaluation

                    are included in Appendix II.

                    3. The Measurement of Impacts on Land Resources

                         Estimates of specific land needs were prepared for the primary users of

                    land -- residences, industries, and commercial activities.  These estimates

                    are based on three considerations:

                              (1) a statistical analysis of the amount of land required
                                   to support the county's current population;

                              (2) accepted standards for estimating land needs; and

                              (3) population and employment projections.

                    In addition, the estimates based on these factors have been increased by 50

                    percent to allow adequate flexibility for the proper operation of the real

                    estate market.

                         These estimates of total land need have been compared with an

                    estimate of available developable land. The impact of growth on land resources

                    has been expressed as a percent of available developable land required to meet

                    the needs of each population growth level.

                                            D. RESULTS OF ANALYSIS

                         The results of the analysis of growth alternatives are presented in Table

                    2. The results show that there are significant differences between the costs

                        .*Research Triangle Institute, Center.for Development and Resource Planning,
                    Estimating Costs of Public Services,,Research Memorandum RM-26U-776-1-2, May 1974.

                                                                           TABLE 2

                                                             SUMMARY OF GROWTH IMPACT ANALYSIS

                                                                           GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVES
                                IMPACT                   LOW GROWTH                   MODERATE GROWTH                   HIGH GROWTH
                                                    COMPACT      DISPERSED        COMPACT        DISPERSED       COMPACT         DISPERSED

                         Public-Service Costs
                            Water                $ 3,900,000    $ 5,600,000     $ 6,300,000    $   8,800,000   $ 7,600,000    $  10,800,000
                            Sewerage                 7,00D,DD0   24,800,OOD       11,200,000     39,200,000      13,440,000      49,200,OOD
                            .Solid Waste                98,000        112,000        157,500         180,000        196,000         224,000
                            Police Protection          244,000        244,000        392,000         392,000        488,000         488,000
                            Fire Protection           492,000         492,000        791,000         791,000        984,000         984,000
                            Highways              .17,600,000    34,200,000      _28,400,000     54,900,000      35,500,000      68,300,000
                         Total                    $29,334,000    $65,448,000    $47,240,000     $104,426,300    $58,208,000    $129,996,000
                         Total Employment                  60,000                          69,000                          74,000

                         Manufacturing
                         Employment                        16,000                          18,000                          19,000
                         Retail Sales                   $1.06 Billion                  $1.39 Billion                  $1.60 Billion
                         Per Capita Income                 $7,000                          $8,300                          $9,100

                         Percent of Builddble
                         Land Consumed                       29%                            46%                             58%

                         Source: Estimating Costs of Public Services, Research Memorandum RM-26U-776-1-2, Research Triangle
                                  Institute, Center for Development and Resource Planning, May, 1974.
                                  Wilmington-New Hanover Planning Department.

                      and benefits between each of the six alternatives.

                           The benefits of growth as measured by its impacts on the local economy

                      appear to increase as total population increases. For example, estimated per

                    ).capita income at the high growth level is $2,100 higher than the low population

                      growth level, a difference of 30 percent. Similarly, retail sales at the high

                      growth level are 51 percent higher than those estimated at the low growth level.

                           The analysis of the costs of growth show similar trends. Considering only

                      total population and not the distribution of population the costs of providing

                      public services increases as growth increases. The per capita costs of services

                      in the six catagories analyzed remain relatively constant for the three growth

                      levels; however, at each population level the per capita cost for dispersed

                      development is more than twice as high as compact development. For example,

                      the per capita cost for servicing the "low-dispersed" growth alteinative ($533)

                      is 1.4 times greater than the per capita costs for servicing the "high-compact'f

                      growth alternative ($385).

                           An analysis of-the county's land resources capability to support develop-

                      ment indicates that there is an ample supply of environmentally suited land,

                      provided necessary improvements are accomplished, to support the county's

                      projected "high" population growth level and its attendant land needs.

                      Therefore, current and future development on environmentally marginal and

                      sensitive land is not necessary nor is the encouragement of a slower growth

                      rate necessary to accommodate future land needs. A final estimate indicates

                      that the "high" population projection would require 58 percent of available

                      developable land;Ithe moderate population level would require 46 percent; and,

                      the low population level would require 29 percent.

                           This study has aLtempted to analyze some of the measurable impacts of

                      growth alternatives on the residents of the Planning Area. As stated earlier

                                                      _44-

                  the intent of this analysis has been to compare'growth alternatives in

                  relative terms and not to develop absolute estimates of the costs and

                  benefits of any one alternative.

                       A further caution is necessary. There are as many, if not more, factors

                  both quantitative and qualitative, left out of this analysis as areincluded.

                  Many of these factors relate directly to the values and desires of the Planning

                  Area residents. They relate to considerations such as the social and political

                  acceptability of land use and growth controls and a desire for the continuation

                  of the present way-of-life. These factors must be considered in formulating

                  growth policies for the future.

                                         III. INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT IMPACT

                            In evaluating future growth alternatives one major consideration is what

                       types of industries and businesses should be expanded. From a public view-

                       point one of the main questions is which industries will have the greatest

                       impact on improving the income of the local residents. Determining an adequate

                       answer to this question requires a detailed examination of the economy of the

                       Wilmington Metropolitan Area (Wilmington SMSA). To accomplish this task a

                       sophisticated technique of economic analysis called "Input-Output Analysis"

                       was employed. Basically, Input-Output Analysis is a systematic method of

                       analyzing transactions between the different sectors of the economy. Sectors

                       refer to groupings of economic activities which produce similar products or

                       provide similar services. For example, the chemical sector includes manu-

                       facturers of industrial chemicals, synthetic fibers, agriculture chemicals,

                       and etc. The industry groupings used in this study are the same as that used

                       by the North Carolina Employment Security Commission for reporting workforce

                       estimates. Transactions between sectors are expressed in the dollar value of

                       each sector's purchases (inputs) from other sectors and the value of its sales

                       (outputs) to other sectors.

                            In the applications of Input-Output to the local economy, three types of

                       transactions were considered:

                                 1.  Sales of goods and services by local sectors to markets
                                     outside the local economy (exports).

                                 2.  Sales and purchases between sectors within the local area.

                                 3.  Purchases by local es'tablishments from sources outside the
                                     local economic area (imports).

                           The nature of each of these transactions has important implications for

                       development of the area's economy. The sale or export of goods and services

                                                       -.4-2

                 produ ced by local industries to markets outside the local area is the major

                 source for introducing "new money" into the economy. Most economists agree

                 that growth or decline in the volume and value of exports is the.most important

                 factor determining the economic growth or decline of an area. The impact of

                 exporting sectors on the income of local workers was a major consideration

                 in this study.

                      Once new money enters the economy through the export of goods or services

                 it is distributed among several sectors through sales and purchases. These

                 transactions have the effect of multiplying the money, thereby increasing

                 its impact on the income of the local workforce.

                      Since all the goods and services required for the economy to function

                 are not available locally, some must be purchased from outside sources. These

                 purchases (imports) represent a flow of money out of the local economy and

                 thereby represents a loss of potential economic benefit to local residents.

                 Generally the loss of money through imports can be minimized by diversifying

                 the industrial structure of the economy so that it can better support itself.

                      The flow of money as described above is illustrated in Figure 1. The

                 hypothetical diagram shows the partial disposition of income generated by a

                 tourist expenditure for lodging. This transaction introduces "new money"

                 into the economy through the export of a service - providing lodging. The

                 diagram shows that in addition to the direct impact of the "new money" on the

                 motel employees (part of the service sector), it also has indirect impacts on

                 several other-industries - food, clothing, and utilities - before finally

                 "leaking" out of the economy to suppliers. Thus expansion of economic activity

                 in any sector not only affects the income generated in that sector but in other

                 sectors as well.

                                                    13

                                                   FIGURE 1

                        FLOW OF MONEY THROUGH THE ECONOMY

                                                                                       S
                                                                                       U
                                                                                       P
                                                            3                          p
                                                                                       L
                                                                                       I
                                                   5                                   E
                                                        FOOD                           R

                                   17
                    T                   0                       EMPLOYEE               S
                    0                                                                  U
                    U                                       1.50                       P
                    R $25      MOTEL                                                   P
                                                                                       L
                    S              8                                                   1
                    IT                 EMPLOYEE        CLOTHES                         t
                                                                                       R
                                                           50   EMPLOYEE               S
                                                                                       U
                                                           80                          P
                                                                                       P
                                                                                       L
                                                        FUEL                           E
                                                                                       R
                                                           20@  EMPLOYEE

                         The flow of money through the economy is important in formulating

                     economic development policies. Decision-makers need to know what impact

                     developments,in different sectors will have on the income of the local work-

                     force. To illustrate these impacts a 10 percent expansion in exports (the

                     source of new money) of the SMSA economy was projected using input-output

                     techniques. A fixed percentage change in exports was assumed in order to

                     make a valid comparison of each sector's ability to generate additional income.

                     The task involved a series of projections computed separately for each'sector.

                     In each projection, the value of exports for one sector was increased 10 percent

                     while exports for all other sectors were held at their 1972 levels. Projec-

                     tions were not computed for the following sectors:

                               1. Lumber and wood processing.

                               2. Stone, clay and glass  producers.

                               3. Construction.

                               4. Domestic and self-employed persons.

                         These sectors consist mainly of local oriented businesses which have little

                     or no export trade.

                         Figure 2 depicts the total increase in income resulting from expansion

                     in the sectors. The value shown for each sector is the income generated for

                     workers in that sector plus the amount generated indirectly in other sectors.

                         This information should be helpful in evaluating development alternatives,

                     however, other factors such as environmental impacts, public facilities require-

                     ments, land needs and tax revenues must also be considered.

                         Although the chart shows the impact of increasing exports, the same rela-

                     tionships hold for cutbacks. Thus the chart can be used to project the loss

                     in income resulting from a 10 percent cutback in exports by the sectors.

                                                      15

                                                       FIGURE 2

                                PROJECTED INCREASE IN INCOME
                                        FOR SMSA WORKFORCE
                       (Due to a ten percent increase in sector exports)

                                                           MILLION DOLLARS.

                                    0          0.6                       1.8         2.4         3.0

                       CHEMICALS

                         TRADE

                         T C. U. (1)

                         METALS

                        APPAREL

                         GENERAL
                       GOVERNMENT

                        SERVICES

                         F 1. R. E. (2)

                           FOOD

                       TRANSPORTATION
                         EOUIPMENT

                       MACHINERY

                        TEXTILES

                       AGRICULTURE

                       PRINTING AND
                       PUBLISHING
                       GOVERNMENT
                       ENTERPRISES

                       MISCELLANEOUS
                       MANUFACTURERS

                           T C. U.- Transportation, Communication and Public Utilities
                     (2) F 1. R. E.   Finance, Insurance and Real Estate

                                    IV. INPACT OF GROWTH ON KEY FACILITIES

                       ,In the Coastal Resources Commission's publication, "Guidelines for

                   Local Planning", it is specifically required that the impact of population

                   growth on existing community facilities and the demand for new facilities.

                   resulting from growth be analyzed. Specific services and facilities to be

                   considered are water and sewer services, school facilities and basic trans-

                   portation facilities.

                        It is the opinion of  the Planning Staff that the preceding discussion

                   of growth alternatives in  terms of their impact on public service cost is

                   sufficient to insure that  the citizens and elected officials of the Wilmington-

                   New Hanover Planning Area  are fully apprised of the impact of growth. However,
                   to insure that state planning guides are met the following descriptix)e analysis

                   of the impact of growth on community facilities has been prepared. It is

                   important to emphasis that this analysis is only intended to provide an

                   indicator of the magnitude of overall impact of population growth on community

                   facilities   A detailed analysis of public service and facilities needs will be

                   u-ndertaken in a later phase of the Comprehensive Planning Program.

                                               A. WATER SUPPLY

                        The Planning Area's domestic and industrial water needs are currently

                   being met by two basic sources:

                           (1)  The City  of Wilmington is.served by a public treatment
                                and distribution system which takes its raw water supply
                                from the C ape Fear River some thirty miles above the city.

                           (2)  The unincorporated areas of the county are dependent upon
                                ground water, either from individual wells or from private
                                distribution systems.

                        Recent engineering studies indicate that both of these water sources

                   are limited. First, although an ample quantity of ground water is available

                                                      17

         HAWAII SHORELINE EROSION

            MANAGEMENT STUDY

                 VOLUME 11

                 APPENDICES

                                   CZIC FILE COPY

                FINAL REPORT
                   JUNE

                    the package treatment plants are also causing problems in that their effluents

                    have forced the closing of shell-fishing waters.

                         Engineers who are studying the sewage problems have determined that a

                    centralized sewage collection and treatment system is required to alleviate

                    probl ems stemming from current development and to prevent serious environmental

                    damage from expected population increases. They recommend the connection of

                    this system to Wilmington's existing sewage treatment plants which would

                    require substantial increases in the capacities of these facilities.*

                                                 C. HIGHWAY SYSTEM

                         An examination of the Planning Area's highway system indicates that,

                    with the exception of U.S. 421, all of its major roads are currently carrying

                    traffic volumes which are either at or near their design capacity. In addition

                    to extensive improvements in existing facilties which will be needed to

                    accommodate the area's projected traffic volumes:

                             1.  A circumferential freeway system.

                             2.  A four-lane arterial running along the northern limit
                                 of Wilmington from U.S. Route 74 in the east to U.S.
                                 Route 117An the west.

                             3.  A major four-lane arterial to the north of and parallel
                                 to Wrightsville Avenue.

                             4.  A north-south connector from U.S. Route 117 north of
                                 Wilmington to Grace Street in the central city.

                             5.  A new major north-south travel route in the city.

                         These  new facilities, along with required up-grading of existing facilities,

                    have been projected to   cost more than $100,000,000 over the next 20 years.**

                         *Ibid.

                        **Wilbur Smith andAssociates, "Wilmington Area Transportation Study",
                    1972.

                                                         19

                                                           D. SCHOOLS

                              The New Hanover County Board of Education provides public educational

                        services to the entire county. An analysis of the county's public schools

                        revealed a current overall capacity for 26,305 students and a current enroll-

                        ment of 20,435 students. The excess capacity of 5,870 represents a current

                        utilization rate of approximately 78 percent. Three new schools are sched-

                        uled to be in operation by September, 1976 raising the capacity to 29,269

                        students. School enrollment projections were made using the appropriate school

                        age category from the population study. On a total classroom basis, no

                        additional classrooms are required until after 1990. A summary of the public

                        school analysis and projections are provided in Table 3.

                                                             Table 3

                               SUMMARY OF PRESENT SCHOOL CAPACITY AND PROJECTED ENROLLMENT

                                                                                  1976-1977
                                        1975-1976 School Year                   School Year      Projected Enrollment
                                                   Excess +
                                                   Deficit(-) Percent
                 Grades Enrolled Ca acity Capacity               Utilization Capacity            1980      1990     2000

                   K-4        7,257      95269        +2012          78.3          9,893         8,054 10,666 12,593

                   5-8        6,854      8,811        +1957          77.8          9,651         6,865     8,344    '10,371

                    9         1,684      2,520          +836         66.8          2,520         2,019     2,454     3,050

                   10-12      4,640      5,705        +1065.         81.3          7,205         6,030     5,902     7,818

                  TOTAL      20,435  1   26,305  1    +5870    1     77.7      1 29,269       1 22,968, 27,366, 33,832
                                     @Ca 9

                                                  APPENDIX I

                                       REVIEW OF POPULATION PROJECTIONS

                         The three population projections presented in Technical Report #1 were

                    developed using the cohort-survival method which is widely regarded as the

                    most reliable technique for projecting population for small areas. The

                    cohort-survival method treats the three population growth variables

                    births, deaths, and migration -- individually, making it possible to base

                    projections on alternative assumptions.

                         The three different cohort-survival projections, which are summarized

                    in Table 1, are based on different assumptions regarding future migration

                    rates and birth rates. Death rates were held constant for all three projections.

                         The "Low Projection" is based on the migration rates experienced between

                    1960 and 1970 and the relatively low birth rates experienced since 1970. This

                    projection does not account for the growth surge experienced during the late

                    1960's and early 1970's.

                         The "Intermediate Projection" assumes that both the migration and birth

                    rates experienced between 1960 and 1970 will remain constant. This projection

                    does not consider the recent growth trends or the trend toward lower birth

                    rates.

                         The "High Projection" uses the most recent data of the three projections.

                    Assumed migration rates are those experienced between 1970 and 1974, and the

                    birth rates utilized in the projection reflect the recent downward trend. While

                    this projection is bas-ed on the most recent data, it is emphasized that these

                    data were collected over a very short time-interval.and may, therefore, reflect

                    an erroneous trend.

                                                           TABLE 1

                                           ALTERNATIVE POPULATION  PROJECTIONS

                                                              Estimated Population
                        Growth Rate                 1980              1990                2000

                        Low                        94,000            108,000             123,000

                        Intermediate               98,000            1,17,000            1.40,000

                        High                      101,000            125,000             151,000

                        Source: Wilmington-New    Hanover Planning Department.

                                     APPENDIX A
                                     FEDERAL REGISTER
                             Part 330, NATIONWIDE PERMITS

                                 CD @ (3560F0.70)(Mn)
                                 Where CD = Capital costs for"distribution
                                        F  = Family units per square mile
                                        Mn = Number of square miles developed at each population level.

                                 Based  on two assumed development densities (compact at 2 dwellings
                                 per acre  and dispersed at 0.5 dwellings per acre), the following
                                 values have been used to estimate distribution costs:

                                                              Families Per            Square Miles
                                 Population    Families         Square Mile            Required
                                     Level        Served   Compact    Dispersed    Compact    Dispersed

                                  Low              7,000     1280          320       5.5         22.0
                                  Moderate        11,250     1280        .320         8.8        35.2
                                  High            14,000                   320       11.0        43.8

                      b.) Operating and Maintenance     Costs

                            The Research Triangle Institute report recommends using a value of 10
                            percent of the capital for distribution as an estimate of annual operating
                            and maintenance costs.

                                       B. WASTE WATER COLLECTION AND TREATMENT

                      1. Treatment

                      a.) Capital Costs

                            The cost estimating relationship for the capital costs of a sewage
                            treatment plant is as follows:
                                 CT = 440P 0.77  (1.121)

                                 Where P = the population served.
                                        CT* = Treatment plant capital cost.

                      b.)   Operating Costs

                            Operation and maintenance costs are affected by the size of the treatment
                            plant. Manpower requirements can be reduced through automation; bulk
                            supplies are cheaper than small quantities. However the effect of economics
                            of scale can only be realized through increases in capital cost.

                            A value of 5 percent of total capital costs has been used for estimating
                            operation and maintenance costs for the sewage treatment plant.

                                                                t -7

              41254         Federal Register / Vol. 51, No. 219 / Thursday, November 13, 1986 / Rules and Regulations

                (vii) Description of improvements                   Department, whether such ti            ~2p~             mod~i~r~catio~s, ~V~ any. to the nationwide
              navigation not listed in paragraph (c)(5)                within or outside the navig~:~b~ql~t ~~rre~acs~c~)~r              permits can be ob~t~a'~qined from the
              of this section:                                              (c) Specific inquiries regarding the                appropriate district engineer.
                (4) Nature and location of significant                 jurisdiction of the Corps of Enginee                  ~qj  Nationwide permits are designed to
              obstructions to navigation in portions of                can be answered only after a                          I  allow certain activities to occur with
              the waterbody used or potentially                        determination whether (1) the w ers                      little, if ~anv, delay or paperwork.
              capable of use in interstate commerce:                   are navigable waters of the U~ni d                        Na~t~qionw~6q4e permits are valid only if ~th~c~-
                (5) Authorized projects:                               States or (2) if not navigable,           ether          conditions applicable to the nat~qion~i~v~ide
                (~i)~Natu~re, condition and location of                  the proposed type of activity ay                         permits are met. Failure to comply with
              any improvements made under projects                     nevertheless so affect the na i8able                     a condition does not necessarily mean
              authorized by Congress-                                  waters of the United States at t~qhe                       the activity cannot be authorized but
                (ii) Description of projects authorized                assertion of regu~q]Rtory ju ~' diction is                  rather that the activity can only be
              but not constructed:                                -its deemed necessary.                                        authorized by an individual or regional
                (~i~ii) list of known survey docum~e,                                                                              permit. Sex-era] of the nationwide
              or reports describing the w~a~qterbod~y:                     ~qJ 329.16 Use and ma~in~t           nc~e of lists of         permits require notification to the
                (6) Past or present interstate                         determinations.                                          district engineer prior to commencement
              commerce:                                                     (a) Tabulated lists f final                         of the authorized activity. The
                (~j) General typ~ps. extent, ~a~nd period in               determinations of n ~qi~qg~abil~qi~qty are to be
                                                                                                                                procedures for this notification are
              time-.                                                   maintained in ea~c         ~qistrict office, and            located at ~q1330.7 of this Part.
                                                                                       ~s
                (ii) Documentation if necessary:                       be updated as ne ss~qit~a~ted by court                       Nationwide permits ca~'n be issued to
                (7) Potential use for interstate                                     uri~s ~qi                                     satisfy the requirements of section ~q10 of
                                                                       decisions, jur~i~sd      t~ional inquiries. or
              commerce, if applicable:                                 other changed        nditio~ns.                           the Rivers and H~arb~O~Y'~s Act of 18~99.
                (~i) If in n~a~lu~r-~a~ql condition.                               (b~q) It shoul   e noted that the lists               section 404 of the Clean Water Act,
                (~ii) If improved:                                      represent on       those wate~rbodie~s for                 and for section 103 of the Marine ~
                (8) Nature of jurisdiction known to                    which deter ina~tions have been made;                     ~qP~r~ot~lection, Research and Sanctuaries
              have been exercised by Federal                           absence f~r       that list should not be                 Act. The applicable authority is
              gencies if any:                                          taken as       indication that the                       indicated at ~the ~e~rd of each nationwide
                (~) State or Federal court decisions                   ~qw ~4 rbo       is not navigable.                          permit.
              relating to ~n~av~qi~qga~qb~qi~l~l~i~fy of ~the                              (c) D et~qions from the list are not
              a

              w~terb~dy, if an~qy:                                       ~autho zed. If a change in status of a                    ~q�330.2 Definitions.
                (10) Remarks:                                          wate ody from navigable to non-                             (a) The definitions of 33 ~8qCFR Parts
                (11) Finding of r~i~d~-vi~qga~qb~qi~qli~ly (with date)             nav~* able is deemed necessa~r~@y, an                       321~-329 are applicable to the terms u~s~vd
              and recommendation for determination:                    up ~ated finding should be forwarded to                   in this Part.
              ~132~.15 Inquiries regarding                                   division engineer; changes are not                     ~q@b) The term "headwaters" means the
                                                                            ns~qidered f~qi~i~2qZ until a determination
              determinations,                                                              by the ~qd~i~v~qi                          point on a non-tidal stream above which
                (a) Findings and determinations                                                                                 the av~e~ir~age annual flow is less than five
              should be made whenever a question                       PART 330~q-NATIONWIDE PERMITS                              cubic feet per second. The district
              arises regarding the navigability of a                                                                            engineer may estimate this point f~rorn
              w~terb~dy. Where no determination h                      Sec.                                                     available data by using~t~q@e mean annual
              been made, a report of findi s will b                    330.1 Gener~t~il.                                          area precipitation, area drainage basin
                                                                       330.2 Definitions.
              prepared and forwarded to ~0q1~q1~,~qg~e divis~'              n    330.3 Activities o~c~cur~in~g before c~er~l~a~in                 maps, and the average runoff coefficient.
              engineer, as described ab ~a. ~qI~nq                              dates.                                              or by similar means. For streams that
                                                                  ~0~% rim u~qi~2qtes ~1~10A Public notice,
              may be answered by an ~qinte                          re~i y                                                         are dry for long periods of t~qhe year,
              which indicates that a final ~agen ~,                      330.5   Nationwide permits.                              district engineers may establish the
              determination ~rust be made by ~a                          330.~6   Management practices.                            "headwaters" as that point on the
              division engineer. If a need de~v lops for                330.7   Notification Procedures.                         stream where a flow of five cubic feet
              an energen~c~qy determination, ~s~t~-~r~ict                      330.8   Discretionary Authority~.                         per second is equaled or exceeded 50
              engineers may act in rel~i~a                          ~,an a330~.~9   State water quality certification.               percent of ~qt~qhe time.
              finding prepared as in ~qSecti n 3~-9~9.14 of                330~.~!~0 Coastal Zone Management                              (c) Discretionary authority means the
              this Part. The report of fin ~Ing~s should                      ~ consistency determination.                        authority delegated to division engineers
                                                                       3.~30.11 Nationwide permit verification.
              then be forwarded to the iv~qis~qion                         330.12 Expiration of nationwide permits.                 in ~q1330.8 of this part to override
              engineer on an expedite basis.                                Authority: 33 U~.S.C. 401 et seq.; 33 U.S.C~.         provisions of nationwide permits, to add
                (b) Wh                d !ermine ons have been          1~3~q"~; 33 U.S.C. 1413.                                     regional conditions, or to require
                            ,ere et~qi~6qX~in
              made b ~'e~qh~qe die         'on                         ~qgineer, inquiries                                             individual permit application.
                            ~y         ~" ~' ~s
              regarding ~t~qhe nuv~,~,~q!~q8~O~n~j ~qi ~*~q@~y of specific               ~qJ 330.1 General.                                         f 330.3 Activities occurring before certain
              portions of w~ql~et~aet~rbo imes co~qb~vered by                       The purpose of this regulation is to
                                      n i
                                      i
                                       I _~qy                                                                                     dates.
              these determ~qi           ~c                           e answered describe the Department of the A~rmy~*s
              as follows:                                              (DA) nationwide permit program and to                       The following activil~qies were
                This D~qep~qar~0qim t~q, in the                                 list all current nationwide permits which                permitted by nationwide permits issued
              administration f the laws enacted by                     have been issued by publication herein.                  on July 19, 1977, and unless modified do
              Congress for ~qa protection a~qnd                            A nationwide permit is a form/of general                 not require further permitting:
              preservation f t~36qA navigable waters ~qo~4qf                    permit which may authorize activities                       (a) Discharges of dredged or fill
              the United ~qa~0qte~qs, has determined that                     throughout the nation. (Another type of                  material into waters of the United States
                            ~q[R~2qi er) (~2qBa~4qy) (Lake, etc.) is a            general permit is a "regional permit"                    outside the limits of navigable waters of
              n~ev~qi~qgab~ql~q,     water of the United States                 and is issued by division or district                    the United States that occurred before
              from                    to                          Actions which engineers on a regional basis in                the phase-in dates which begar. July 25,
                            a
                            D
                            e~-s
                            ~0
                            ~qep
                            ~stra
                                      r

                            ~6~q8 for
                                      ~q,~qn
                                      ~6qm

                                      ~qa
                                      p
                                      t

                                      ~qr
                                                                  ~n
                                                                  ~qr
                                                                  ~qm

                                                                  a
                                                                  I
                                                                  e
                                                                  ~i~n

                                                                  e
                                                                  a
                                                                  a

                                                                  ~0
                                                                  d
                                                                  I
                                                                  d

                                                                  ~n
                                                                  e
                                                                  d
                                                                  ~qb
                                                                  ~r
                                                                  e
                                                                  ~n
                                                                  ~q'~_ ~q0~q'     a ~ao y
                                                                                 ~C~u ~1~1~1~1~t
                                                                  e ~2q/~nn
                                                                  S
                                                                  e~ct~) n 32~9
                                                                  fI
                                                                  g
                                                                  n nsh
                                                                  ~t~qh~.~.~.
                                                                  e~"~r~"~O~'
                                                                  te b~a~s~qis.~,
                                                                  a ~ons haveI
                                                                  .~q8in~ee r~,~qi~nq
                                                                  ~q1~;~.t~v~, of 'I) ~c~qi~,
                                                                  e

                                      ~0q1~6qh
                            ~rva tion  f
                            ni~qted     ~qt~qa~0qte~qs~q, I
                            ~q(R~qI er)   ~6q(~2q1~8q3a~q%
                            ~ab ~0qW~q'    ter of
                                      to_
                            ~qy         ~qr~q,~q% ~qj
              modif         r otherwise affect those waters            accordance with 33 C~8qFR Part 325).                        1975, and extended section 404
              are ~su ~qject to th~qajur~8qisd~4qiction of this                   Copies of regional conditions and                        jurisdiction to all waters of the United

    ~0

                                Federal Register 1~      Vol. 51, No. 219 / Thursday, November 13, 1986                         Rules and Regulations ~ 41255

                     States. (These phase-in dates are: After         .    (~~)Th~ repair, rehabilitation, or                separation scheme (where such limits
                     July 25, 1~97~s~. discharges nto navigable            replacement of any previously                       have not been designated or where
                     adjacent wetlands; after September 1.              structure or fill, or of any currently              engineers will consider recommending
                     waters of the United States and                    authorized, currently serviceable,                  changes are anticipated, district
                     1976. discharges into navigable waters             serviceable structure or fill constructed           the discretionary authority provided by
                     of the United States and their primary             prior to the requirement for                        330.8 of &is Part, and further subject to
                     tributaries, including adjacent wetlands.          authorization, provided such repair,                the provisions of the fairway regulations
                     and into natural lakes, greater than 5             rehabilitation, or replacement does not             in 33 CFR 322.5~q(1~q) (Section 10).
                     acres i~n surface area; and after July 1.           result in a deviation from the plans of               (~q9) Structures placed within anchorage
                     1977, discharges into all waters of t~qhe            the original structure or fill, and further         or fleeting areas to facilitate moorage of
                     United States.) (Section 404)                      provided that the structure or fill h~as not         vessels where such areas have been
                        ~8qN Structures or work completed                  been put to uses differing from uses                established for that purpose by the U.S.
                     before December 18,1968, or in                     specified for it in any permit authorizing          Coast Guard. (Section 10)
                     waterbod~qies over which the district                Its original construction. Minor                      (10) Non-commerc~ial, ~s~qin~qg~qle~-boat.
                     engineer had not asserted jurisdiction at          deviations due to changes in materials              mooring buoys. (Section 10)
                     ~t~qhe time ~qt~qhe activity occurred provided,           ~:~)r construction techniques and which                 (11) Temporary buoys and markers
                     in both instances, there is no                     ire necessary to make repair.                       placed for recreational use such as
                     interference with navigation. (Section             rehabilitation, or replacement are                  water skiing and boat racing provided
                     10)                                                permitted. Maintenance dredging and                 that the buoy or marker Is removed
                                                                        be~s~ic~qh restoration are not authorized by            within 30 days after its use ~qhas been
                     ~1330.4 Pub~0~c notice.                               &is nationwide permit. (Section 10 and              discuntinued.~2qAt Corps of Engineers
                        (a) Chief of Erg~qin~e~er~v. Upon proposed           404)                                                reservoirs, ~t~qhe reservoir manager must
                     Issuance of new nationwide permits,                   (4) Fish and wildlife harvesting                 approve each buoy or marker
                     modification to. or re~qissu~ance of,                 devices and activities such as pound                individually. (Section 10)
                     existing nationwide permits, the Chief Of          nets, crab traps, eel pots, lobster traps,            (12) Disc~ql~iar~qge of material for backfill
                     Engineers will publish a notice in the             duck blinds, and clam and oyster
                        ~0                                                                                                   or bedding for utility lines. including
                     Federal Register seeking public                    d~i~qg~qg~qi~a~qg. (Section 10)                               ou~tfall a~nd intake structures, provided
                                             ~in~qg the opportunity
                     comments and includ                                   (~q5) Staff gages, tide gages, water               there is no change in preconstruction
                     for a public hearing. This not-Ace will            re~co~rdi~r~qg devices, water quality testing            bottom contours (excess material must
                     state the availability of information at           and improvement devices. and similar                be removed to an upland disposal area).
                     the Office of the Chief of En~qg~fneers and           scientific structures. (Section 10)                 A "utility lire" is defined as any pipe ~qor
                     at all d~;s~qt~lict offices which reveals the             (6) Survey activities including core             pipeline for ~qL~q1~;e transportation of an
                     Corps' provisional d~eter~qmi~rati~on that              ~E~amp~qlin~qg~, seismic exploratory                        ~aseous, ~qI~;~qqu~*d, liqui~qriable, or slurry        ~qy
                     the proposed acti~vi~t~les ~co~i~nply with ~qLie           operations, and plugging of seismic shot
                                                                                                   ~0                        ~q:ubs~qtance~', f~o~.~.r any purpose, and any
                     requirements for issuance under general            ~qlio~q!~e~i~ and other exp~l~ord~qtory-typ~e bore             cable. line, or wire for the transmission
                          it ~au~l                                                               ~o~l
                     p~Er~:n~,     ~t~qhority.      Chief of Engineers        holes. Drilling of ex 'oration-type bore
                                    I                                                                                       for arty purpose ~a~- electrical energy.
                     Will prepare ~"~)~,~,~is information w~q1~i~qich will        h~ole~v for oil a~in~qd ~qS~d~s                   ~aot-       telephone and telegraph messages, and
                     be ~supp~ql~e~nne~nt~ed~, if ~i~ni~qppropr~i~2qWe, by              a~t~st~l~4~or~i~7~ed by this nationwide per~n~u~t;
                                                                                                                            radio and tel~evis~qi~cn co~qmm~un~qica~qf~qion.
                     d~qi~v~-s~i~on en~qg~i~nE~er~s.                                the plugging ~Of such holes is.a~0qw~thorized.           (The utility line and ou~tf~all and intake
                        (b) District engineers. Concurrent              (Se~qE~i~ql~qw~i~a~i ~qW kind                                   s~tr~uct~u~'res will require a Section 10
                     ~~~v~qith publication i~r ~t~qhe Federal Re~l-~i~st~ar           (7) O~utfall structures and associated            permit if in navigable waters o~qf ~qt~qhe
                     Elf proposed., new, or reissued                    intake s~qt~r~uctu~ies where the effluent from           United States. See 33 C~qFR Part 322. See
                     ~~@~a~t~qio~nwide permits by the Chief of            ~'   that DUt~qf~Z~-~ql~ql has been permitted under              also paragraph (a)(7) of this section).
                     ~qK~ig~qin~ee~rs~, district engineers will so              the National Pollutant Discharge
                     ~~ ~.                                           by an Elirn ination System program (Section
                        ~ot~:~,~'y the k~n~o~%M~' ~qi~r~!~er~qested public                                                                 (S~a~o~, on 40~4)
                     ~~pp~ropri~ate notice. The notice will               402 of ~qt~qhe CleanWater Act) (see 40 CF~qR                (13) Bank stabilization activities
                     in~-~qd~jud~e regional conditions, if any,              Part 122) pro~-~qdd~ed that the district or             provided:
                     developed by the division engineer.                division engineer makes a determination               (~qI) The bank stabilization activity Is
                                                                        that the individual and cumulative                  less than 5~0qW feet in length;
                        330.~5 N~a~0qf~0qtnw~i~qd~e permits.                        adverse environmental effects of the                  (ii) The activity is necessary for
                        (a) Authorized activities. ~8qT~qhe                  structure itself are minimal in                     eroson prevention:
                     following              are hereby p~e~.~-~T~n~q!~tt~!~6qA      3c~ccrd~ance with ~q1330.7 ~q(c)~q(2) and ~q(d).                (~qf~qli) The activity is limited to less than
                     provided thc~qY          the conditi~qo~qf~qi~s ~qh~s~q'~i ~q3      ~qInt~e~ql~ce structures per se are not                   an average of one cubic yard p~qer
                     in paragraph ~q(b) of this section a~nd,              inc~ql~uded-~-only those directly associated            running foot placed along the bank
                     where required, comply with the                    with an ou~tfall structure are covered by            within waters of the United States;
                     notification procedures, of ~q1330~-7~.                th ~.s~nationwide permit. This permit                   (iv) No materia~qtis placed in excess of
                        ~q(1) The placement of aids to                    includes minor excavation, filling and              the minimum needed for erosion
                     navigation and regulatory markers                  other work associated with installation             protection;
                     which are approved by and Installed in             of the intake and outfa~qll structures.                 (v) No material Is placed in any
                     accordance with the requirements of t~0qhe            (Sections 10 and 404)                               wetland area;
                     U.S. Coast Guard (33 CFR Part ~4q68,                     (8~6q) Structures for the exploration,                (v~8qi) No material is placed in any
                     Subchapter C). (Section 10)                        production, and transportation of oil,              location or in any manner so a~qs t~qo
                        (2) Structures constructed in artificial        gas, and minerals on the outer                      impair surface water flow into or out of
                                                          n~0qtial         continental shelf within areas leased for           any wetland area;
                     canals within principally reside,
                     developments where the connection of               such purposes by the Department of                    (Vill Only clean material free of waste
                     the canal to a navigable water of the              Inte:~qr~2qior, Mineral Management Service,              metal products, organic materials,
                     United States has been previously                  provided those structures are not placed            unsightly debris, etc. is used; and
                     authorized (see 33 C~2qF~16qR Part 322.5~4q(~2qg~0q)~0q).             wit~20qHn the limits of any designated                    (v~2qiii) The activity is a single and
                     (Section io~4q)                                       shipping safety fairway or traffic                  complete project. (Sections ~0q20 and 404~0q)

           0
         -wilm ngton
         newhanmr
         comprebensive
         planniong prognin

                    analust's of
             selAio, tank limitations
            IP    S         TD
                 H

                          177

                                                      TABLE OF CONTENTS

                                                                                                 Page

                                INTRODUCTION ..................................  ................. 1

                                DIMENSIONS OF THE SEPTIC TANK PROBLEM   .........................  2

                                A. EXTENT OF PROBLEM   .........................................   2

                                B. SEPTIC TANK SUITABILITY.@   ..................................  2

                                C. SEPTIC TANK FAILURE   .......................................   3

                                D. IMPACT OF SEPTIC TANK LIMITATIONS ON GROWTH     ............... 4

                                RECOMMENDED ACTIONS  ...........................................   5

                                            I. INTRODUCTION

                      The problem of septic tanks and sewage disposal was discussed generally

                in Technical Report #2 which analyzed existing land use. Since completion

                of that planning study, however, the Coastal Resources Commission (CRC) has

                expressed an expanded interest in the relationships between population, septic

                tanks, and water quality. In a recent memorandum (March 29, 1976), T.D. Eure,

                Chairman of the CRC, expressed the Commission's concern as follows:

                           "...the Coastal Resources Commission became concerned during
                           its review of draft Land Use Plans submitted in November
                           that some of-the plans did not give adequate attention to
                           the capability of the land and water resources of the area
                           to sustain projected growth. The Commission was particularly
                           concerned that local governments address in their plans the
                           effects of growth on water quality and water availability i.n,
                           their jurisdictions. A special concern was that problems
                           associated with waste disposal be more fully dealt with
                           especially problems associated with the increasing use of
                           septic tank sewage disposal systems in fragile coastal areas.
                           This latter issue has subsequently come to be commonly referred
                           to as the Iseptic tank problem'.

                           Within the limits of its legal authority, the Commission is
                           attempting to deal with these problems. However, the role
                           which the Commission can play at this time is somewhat limited.
                           During the land use planning phase of the implementation of
                           CAMA, the Commission's main prerogative in this regard is to
                           insure that the local Planning jurisdictions address in their
                           plans the problems associated with the capabilities of the land
                           and water resources to support projected growth, e.g. to
                           address problems related to the proliferation of septic tank
                           systems in coastal developments where local soil and water
                           conditions make their use unsuitable".

                     The suitability of the land for the installation of septic tanks was a

                specific consideration in the overall analysis of the capability of the Planning

                Area's land to support development (Technical Report #3). However,    considering

                the expanded concern of the CRC and the fact that septic tanks are an important

                planning issue in the Wilmington-New Hanover Planning Area, this report has been

                prepared to insure that citizens and public officials are fully aware of the

                extent of the septic tank problem and its implications for the future.

                                     II. DIMENSIONS OF THE SEPTIC TANK PROBLEM

                                                A. EXTENT OF PROBLEM

                            Septic tanks present a definite problem in the Planning Area. According

                       to a recent engineering report,* pollution caused by septic tanks and agri-

                       cultural runoff have been instrumental in the closing of extensive areas of

                       New Hanover County to shellfishing (Map 1). The closure of these areas to

                       shellfish harvesting represents a tangible loss in economic terms as well as

                       a loss in terms of the recreational pursuits of many county residents.

                            In addition, the report identifies at least nineteen residential sub-

                       divisions within the Planning Area which presently experience chronic septic

                       tank problems (Map 2).

                                             B. SEPTIC TANK SUITABILITY

                            Poor soil cha racteristics throughout most of the Planning Area and a

                       generally high water table through much of the year are at the base of most

                       of the areals sept.ic tank problems. These conditions tend to make conventional

                       septic tank sewage disposal systems environmentally unsuited for use in urban-

                       level development.**

                            A majority of the soils found in the Planning Area are not suitable for

                       sewage disposal by conventional septic tank systems. According to the recent

                       New Hanover County Soil Survey, it is estimated that 75 percent (87,000 acres)

                       of the land area is unsuited for the use of conventional septic tank systems.

                            *Henry Von Oesen and Associates, "Greater.Wilmington Area 201 Facilities
                       Plan", November 1975, (DRAFT).

                          **Amos Dawson, "A Report on Legal Authorities Pertaining to the Regulation
                       of Septic Tanks in the Coastal Area of North Carolina", N.C. Office of Marine
                       Affairs.

                   Within these unsuited areas, there is a very high probability that the

                   systems will fail within the first year's use.

                                           C. SEPTIC TANK FAILURE

                        It is important to discuss what constitutes septic tank failure. There

                   is a common misconception that if septic tank effluent does not appear on the

                   ground surface, then the system is functioning properly. Indeed surface

                   "breakouts" are a serious aspect of septic tank failure. When effluent appears

                   on the ground, it constitutes a health hazard, and it may also be washed into

                   nearby streams, contributing to the pollution of the area's surface waters.

                        However, there is a more subtle aspect of septic tank failure. On some

                   sites, the septic tanks "function" by injecting untreated wastes into shallow

                   ,groundwaters (generally sand acquifers). These soils are able to Acdept the

                   sewage load, but offer poor treatment of the waste. Studies have shown a

                   saturated sand to be only about 1 percent as effective in removing fecal coli-

                   form bacteria as soil of the same texture under dry, aerobic, intermittant

                   flow conditions.*

                        When untreated septic wastes are injected direcly into shallow groundwater,

                   most of the resulting pollution remains within the upper few feet of the water

                   table. The polluted groundwater then flows laterally and discharges into streams,

                   sounds, and other surface water bodies, and usually causes deterioration of

                   the surface water quality. Thus, improperly treated septic wastes contribute

                   to the degradation of both groundwater and surface water.**

                        *B.L. Carlile, "Alternatives for Onsite Sewage Disposal in Eastern North
                   Carolina", North Carolina State University Soil Science Department.

                       **Dawson, "Regulation of Septic Tanks".

                                                      3

                                   APPENDIX B
                      CHAPTER 205A, HAWAII REVISED STATUTES
                          COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT
                                  AND H.B. 1902

                                        III. RECOMMENDED ACTIONS

                     In view of the Planning Area's existi ng septic tank problems and the

                severe development constraints presented by the soil conditions, it is clear

                that both City Council and County Commissioners must take every feasible action

                to insure implementation of the "201 Facilities Plan" for the Greater Wilmington

                Area which is currently being reviewed by state and federal agencies. This

                plan would provide centralized facilities with the capacity to eventually

                ,provide sewage collection, treatment, and disposal services to most of the

                Planning Area. Implementation of the "201 Plan" would address existing septic

                tank problems on a priority basis, but it would also prevent additional water

                pollution problems from further development.

                     Centralized sewerage facilities are not, however, an immediate so'lkion

                to the Planning Area's  water quality problems., Some pessimistic estimates

                place the first phase of the '1201 Facilities Plan" at least ten years away.

                Therefore, interim measures are required to insure that further development

                using on-site sewage disposal does not further degradate the quality of the

                Planning Area's surface  .and groundwater resources.

                     The New Hanover County Board of Health has adopted one of the most stringent

                septic tank ordinances of any North Carolina coastal county. However, during

                the implementation phase of the land use planning program, at least three major

                aspects of this ordinance should be reviewed:

                          1.  "Grandfather" clause -- Section 3.312 of the septic tank
                              ordinance allows the Health Director to grant septic tank
                              permits to substandard (soil conditions and dimensions)
                              lots which were platted before the effective date of the
                              ordinance. In at least one area of the county, septic
                              tank permits are being issued for 5000 square foot lots
                              which have "very severe" rated soil types. This practice,
                              in the opinion of the Planning Staff, is questionable.

                                                    5

                                 2.  Minimum setbacks -- The existing ordinance requires
                                     that every septic tank system be located at least 25
                                     feet from any canal or stream, at least 50 feet from
                                     any water supply. Some authorities, however, recom-
                                     mend setbacks of 100 to 150 feet from estuarine waters
                                     (N.C. Division of Marine Fisheries, and John Clark in
                                     Coastal Ecosystems). Therefore, the setback require-
                                     ment for septic tank systems should be reviewed.

                                 3.  Minimum lot sizes -- Where soil conditions are favor-
                                     able, the septic tank ordinance permits septic systems
                                     on 15,000 sq. ft. lots. However, opinions expressed
                                     by sanitory engineers from the N.C. Division of
                                     Environmental Management (Coastal Resources Commission
                                     Memorandum of March 29, 1976) indicate that widespread
                                     development of septic tanks at this density may result
                                     in the pollution of ground and surface water.

                            In addition to reviewing these provisions of the Board of Health Septic

                       Tank Ordinance, it is important to insure that the Planning Area's land use

                       policies complement the septic tank ordinance in the proper regulation of

                       septic tanks. Specifically, it is essential to insure that the density of

                       development using on-site sewage disposal methods is consistant with the

                       capability of the land. Basically, it is necessary for the area's land use

                       policies, as expressed in various land use and development ordinances, to go

                       beyond the issue@of public health, which is the main focus of the Board of

                       Health ordinance, to a broader objective of maintaining and improving water

                       quality.

                                                          6