Land use plan / Southport, N. C prepared for City of Southport

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

LAND USE PLAN

SOUTHPORT, N. C.

Coastal Area Management Act of 1974

May 5, 1976

COASTAL ZONE

INFORMATION CENTER

Prepared For: City,of Southport
E. B. Tomlinson, Jr., M4yor

Board"of Aldermen
James Harold Davis
William P. Furpless
Mrs. Dorothy R. G.il-ber,t
W. P. Horne
Conley D. Koontz
Mrs. Mary McHose

Alvin Kornegay, Jr., City Manager
Carter Lampeth, City Attorney

Prepared By: City Planning Board
Mrs. Earl Clewis
Roscoe Davis
Mrs. H. A. Franck
Mrs Janice Jackson
J. i. Porterfield, Chairman
Joe Walton, Jr.
J. 0. Ward

Abstract: Land Use Plan prepared in accordance
with CAMA of 1974.

Technical Assistance
Provided By: North Carolina Department of Natural
and Economic Resources
Division of Community Assistance
Local Planning and Management Section

Southeastern Field Office, Wilmington
John J. Hooton, Chief Planner
Thomas M. Cassell, Planner-in-Charge
Melba Thompson, Planner Technician

LAND USE PLAN

Table of Contents Page
Article I - Introduction I

Article II - Present Conditions 3
Section 1: Population and Economy 3
Section 2: Existing Land Use 10
Section 3: Current Plans, Policies, and Regulations 20
Article III - Public Participation Activities 21
Section 1: Public Participation Process 21
Section 2: Major Issues 25
Section 3: Development Alternatives 30
Section 4: Objectives and Policies for Dealing with Issues 31
Article IV - Constraints 34
Section 1: Land Potential 34
a. Physical Limitations 34
b.. Fragile Areas 44
c. Areas with Resource Potential 46
Section 2: Capacity of Community Facilities .51
Article V - Estimated Demand 54

Section 1: Population and Economy 54

Section 2: Future Land Use Needs 58

Section 3: Community Facilities Demand 62

Article VI - Plan Implementation 66

Section 1: Intergovernmental Coordination 66

Section 2: Land Classification System 67

Section 3: Areas of Environmental Concern 70

Section 4: Location and Development Standards 84

Article VII - Conclusion 86

Article VIII - Appendix 87

Introduction

Why have a Land Use Plan for Southport?

"In recent years the coastal area has been subjected to increasing
pressures which are the result of the often conflicting needs of a society
expanding in industrial development, in population, and in the recreational
aspirations of its citizens," according to.@the Coastal. Area Management Act.
It goes-on to say that "unless these pressures are controlled by coordin-
ated management, the very features of the coast which make it economically,
esthetically, and ecologically rich will be destroyed.

In adopting the Coastal Area Management Act for 1974, the N.C. General Assembly
empowered local governments in 20 N.C. coastal counties to exercise control
over their future. Communities along the coast are now blueprinting the
best use of their valued resources--whether it's their estuary and marshland
waters, which serve as a nursery for as.much as 90 percent of the best sport
fisheries in the East; or their beaches, which serve as recreational havens
for those employed in the ever-expanding urban-centers.

Designed to be a cooperative program, local governments are authorized
to initiate planning for their local values, and State government to defi.ne
those areas valued for more general use. In addition to granting some
financial support for local. planning, the State-is to provide guidelines and
assistance necessary to enforce the plans adopted by a particular community.

Public participation in developing the, Land Use Plan has'been enlisted

by: 1) public meetings held by the Planning Bcard; 2) two surveys: one mailed
to 1000 water and sewer customers; the other, a sampling from all neighborhoods
conducted by high school students; 3) numerous informal discussions with citizens
regarding their interests; 4) meeting with local civic groups; 5) coverage by
local weekly newspaper.

The scope of the Land Use Plan is outlined in the table of contents. It
benefits greatly from the "State Guidelines for Local Planning... .," adopted
by the Coastal Resources Commission in January, 1975, and amended that October.
The local plan includes a summary of data collected and its analysis; maps of
existing land use, types of soil, and Areas of Environmental Concern; and a
section on how the land use objectives, policies, and standards for Southport
can be implemented.

Following its presentation to the Planning Board and the Board of Aldermen
last November, the Plan was forwarded to the Coas tal Resources Commission for
comments and suggestions In addition, some two dozen State and Federal agencies
have added observations from their particular frame of reference and expertise.

Article II Present Conditions*

Section 1: Population and Economy

The population of Southport, as well as that of Brunswick County has
witnessed a period of startling growth. The establishment of two large indus-
trial plants near the city has been accompanied by a major influx of workers
which has added significantly to the total population. The 1970 United States
Census (the last official enumeration) placed the total count of persons in
Southport at 2220, and that of Brunswick County at 24,223. These figures represent
increases from the 1960 Census of 9.1% and 19.4% respectively. With due regard to
the 1970 statistics, however, it is a generally recognized fact that a great deal
of change has occurred within the last few years which would probably render
1970 data particularly deceptive. The North Carolina Office of State Planning,
for example, estimates the population of Southport as of July 1, 1974, to be
2,900 persons, while other unofficial estimates have reached as high as 3,200.
The vast majority of this upsurge is most likely an outgrowth of industrial
expansion, particularly the Carolina Power and Light Company nuclear power
generating station located just outside of town. This industry has employed a
large quantity of construction workers during the early part of the seventies, and
will continue to provide jobs for a large number of workers on a permanent basis.
Smithville Township, where the plant itself is located, registered a gain of
29.5% (about 1,000 persons) during the decase, indicating that some people are
taking up residence near the plant, but outside of the city limits per se.

Migration rates which have been caluclated for Brunswick County reflect the
assumption that more and more of the County's people are staying in the county rather
than moving out. A study done in 1969, for example, compared specific age groups
in 1950 with the same groups a-decade later in order to measure the percentage of
persons who had remained within the county during that period (e.g. ages 25-34 in
1950 compared with ages 35-44 in 1960). In every case Brunswick had shown a loss of
residents, that is,less than 100% remained ten years later. From 1960 to 1970, the

North Carolina Department of Natural and Economic Resources, Division of
Community Assistance Community Profile, Southport, N. C., David Long
January 1975.

situation was altered significantly: most age groups exhib'ted net gains
(over 100%) during this span, and in each instance, the pe-rcentage

of persons continuing to reside in the county was larger than that ex-

perienced during the previous enumeration. Although age breakdowns are

unavailable for 1975, the reportedly substantial additions to the total

population would lend support to the notion that currently, an even

higher proportion of each age group is being retained. These statistics

tend to indicate that Brunswick County is becoming an increasingl7 attrac-

tive area in which to live and work.

The median age of a population, that is, the point at which half

of the people are older and half are younger, gives a description of the

age composition of a given population. The forces which normally act on

the median age are births. deaths, and migration, and the complex inter-

play of these forces can drive the age either up or down. There is present-

ly anationwide trend toward lower birth rates, and this has caused the

median age to rise slight ly, since.young people become a lesser propor-

tion of the total. From 1960 to 1970, each segment under study (male,

female, black, white) grew older. The median age for.all groups in

Brunswick County was 26.4 in 1970 as opposed to 23.9 in 1960. Southport

in 1970 stood at 32.2 and Smithville Township registered 32.4, while the

North Carolina figure was 26.5. The reason for this.appears to be that

Southport cont ains a reiatively large sector of elderly people (those

over 65) within its boundaries. North Carolina, for example, listed 34.6%

of its people less than age IS and Southport compared closely with 32.2%.

In the over 65 category, however. Southport contrasted significantly with

12.9% versus the state average of 8.1% nearly one and one half

times as many. This situation could have possibly changed since the last

Census, but from these figures, it would appear that Southport is a
favorable environment for the elderly, perhaps the retiree, and should

take this into account when formulating policies and programs in the

future.

POPULATION CHANGE 1930-1970

Brunswick Smithville Twp Southport'
1930 15,818 2912 1760
1940 17,125 (+8.3%) 2936 (+0.8%) 1.760 (0.0%)
1950 19.238 (+12.3%) 2873 (-2.2Z) 1748 (0.,7%)
1960 20,278 (+5.4%) 3355 (+16 @ 8Z) 2034 (16.4%)
1970 24,223 (+19.5%) 4346 (+29.5%) 2220 (+9.11)
Source: U.S. Census, 1970

SURROUNDING CITIES: POPULATION CHANGE 1960 @70
1960 1970 % Change
Southport 2034. 2220 +9.1
Wilmington 46169 +4-9
Burgaw 1750 1744 -0 ,.3-
Whiteville 4683 4195, -10..4
Source: U. S. Census, 1970

MIGRATION RATES: BRUNSWICK CO. 1950-60, 1960-70
0-4 5-9 10-1415@19 20-24 25-34 35-44 45-54
Age Groups in 1960 1441 2469 2417 1928 1125 2298 2509' 2155
Same Group in 1970 2653 2320 1840 1542 1326 2634 2677 2320
Percent Remaining 109%. 94 76 80 118 115 107 108
Percent Remaining 1950-60 96% 81 54 61 81 94 92, 88
Source: Southport Population & Economy Study 1969 and Calculated from Census, 1970

POPULATION CHARACTERISTICS:' 1970
Total Male Female White Black Under IS Over 65 Med. Age
Brunswick T4-,223 730-% 50% 69% 37.4% 8.4% 26.4
Smithville Twp. 4,346 49% 51% @72% 26% 32.4% 12.1% 32.4
Southport 20,220 47% 53% 62% 35%@ 32.7Z 12.0% 32.4
North Carolina 5,082,059 49% 51% 37Z 222 34.6%, 8.1% 26.5
Source: U.S. Census, 1970

MEDIAN AGE: BRUNSWICK CO. 1940 1970.
White Male White Female Black Male Black Female
1940 22.3 21.5 20.1 20.2
1950 25.1 24.4 @19.2 19.9
28.0
1960 27.8 17.4 18.2
1970 28.8 29.7 18.9 20.8

Source: U.S. Census, 1970

An accurate appraisal of Southport's economy would be especially

difficult to gauge at the time of this report. The latest Census figures

are probably outdated, and the 1!conomic picture as of January, 1975, is

hopefully not representative of the first half of the seventies as a unit.

Certain valuable informa tiou may be extracted from existing economic data,

however, and should merit close attentioni

A delineation of occupations by class of industry reveals.two basic

differences between Brunswick County and the State. Based on employment

in 1969, the percentage of.workers engaged in construction is more than twice

the state.average for the same category. . . 14.7% compared to 6.7%. This

gain is offset bya proportionately small segment of the labor force employed

within the.manufacturing sector. Brunswick,registers approximately one

fourth of its workers in this category while the state total is greater than

one third (Brunswick 25.9%, North Carolina 35.4%). According to the North

Carolina Employment Security Commission's Annual Average L abor Force Estimates

.1970-73, this trend seems to be leveling off somewhat. Construction labor

reached a peak in 197,2 and fell in.19,7 3 and 1974, while.manufacturing as a

rule has been steadily increasing. In the remaining categories, Brunswick

very closely parallels state averages.

Figures for the rate of unemployment are reproduced in the statistical

section of this report on two different bases. The first, 1970-73-estimates,

indicates that Brunswick should be lowering its rate of unemployment. Due

to the instability of the national economy at this time, however, these impli-

cations should not be relied upon too heavily In order to analyze the

current situation, a second table is included listing unemployment for the

period July - November, 1974. Of the s.ix counties shown, Brunswick is the

highest in unemployment with 10.1% of its'labor force'jobless as of November.

The North Carolina rate as of Deceinber 174 was 8-M Local observers

ofthe economy tend-to believe that much of Brunswick's unemployment
is related to closings and layoffs of several small businesses located

primarily in the southern section of the County. Unemployment, in, South-

port itself is currently being attributed to the stagnant condition of the

small-scale construction industry. and also the fishing industry. These

businesses are seasonable and usually decline during the winter months, but

they have been especially hard-hit recently. Long-term contra,ctural work,

such as the Carolina Power and Light and Pfizer Company construction projects,

are believed to have exerted. a stabilizing force on the local economy in the

sense that they have continued to maintain their operations with few layoffs

while similar smaller concerns have been faltering.

Characteristics of income include median family income, per capita.

income, and. those persons/families below'tbe poverty level. The median

family income for Brunswick County as of 1970 was $6,409 as measured against

$7,774- for the state, a deficiency of 17.6%. Half of the. families in the
county have incomes above this level, and half" are,below. The per capita

income, which is the total income divided by each man, woman and child

was $2,010 for Brunswick and $2,492 for the state,' a deficit of 19.4%.

Poverty level statistics are. based on a formula which accounts for number of

persons in a family, sex of head of householdi agricultural/non-agricbltural

subsistence, etc. There is no set income below which is 'Considered "poverty

stricken", rather, it is a flexible level which.considers.many components.

Once adjustments are made', however, Brunswick still has a larger number of

poverty cases. The incidence of poverty for all persons is roughly 36%

greater than the state average Personal income pr'ojectIpns computed by the

North Carolina Department of Administration for Planning Region 0 (Brunswick,

Columbus, New Hanover, and render Counties) predict that the discrepancy

between the overall income.of the region and that of the nation will slowly

begin to close within the coming. decades. In.1980, reglon O's income is

projected to be 71% of the national average and by the year 2020 should reach

85%. It should be kept in, mind that these are very far-sighted forecasts and"

could change drastically over the next fifty years no-vertheless, they can

be viewed as a long-term spark of optimism.

UNEMPLOYMENT: JULY NOVEMBER, 1974

Brunswick Columbus Carteret New Hanover Onslow Pender
July 7.3% 3.2% A. 2% 6.9Z 7.6%
August 6.6 6.9 2.7 .3.8 5.9 9.1
September .7.4 7.2 3..4. 4.8 9.3
October 7.2 8.1 C5. 4.1 4.9 7.4
November 10.1 9.5 6.1 5.8 8.1 9.7

Source: North Carolina Employment Security Commission

AVERAGE ANNUAL LABOR FORCE ESTIMATES 1970-73'
Brunswick County 1973 1972 1971 1970
Civilian Labor Force 170,680 10,390 8,480 8,580
Unemployment, Total 480 56.0 560
Rate of Unemployment 4.5 5.4 6.6 5.0
Employment, Total 10,200' 9,830 7,920 8,150
Agricultural Employment 530 510 560
Nona&. Wage & Salary Emply. a,,340 7,990 6,320 6,490
All Other Nonag. Employment 1,330 1,310 '1,090 1,100

INDUSTRY EMPLOYMENT BY PLACE OF WORK

Manufacturing 1,060 2,560 1,480 1,690
Food 120 90 80 80
Lumber & Wood 60 80 90 100
Other Manufacturing 2,880 2,390 .1,310 1,510

Non-Manufacturing 5,830 6,330 A,550 38-440,
Construction 2,620 20930 1,240. 220
Trans., Comm., & P. Util. 310@ 660 790 1,010
Trade 1,020 940 .750 730.
Fin., Ins., & Real Estate 230 .200 130 110
Service 250 230 240 .190
Government 1,280 1,280, 1,360 1,160
Other Manufacturing 120 - 90 .40 20
Source: North Carolina Employment Security Commission

(1969) OCCUPATION BY 111DUSTRY OF EMPLOYED PERSONS 16 ANT OVER

Brunswick North Carolina
Construction 1147 (14.7) 6.M.
Manufacturing 2031 (25.9)' 35.4
Transportation, Communications 757 (9.7) 5.6
Utilities and Sanitation
Wholesale and Retail 1384 (17.7) 17.6
Financial, Insurance, Business 367 (4.7) 5.6
and Repair
Health, Education, Welfare, Legal 854 (10.9) 14.2
and Misc. Professional Services
Public Administration 378 (4.8) 3.5
other Industries (Agriculture, Forestry, 910 (11.6) 11.4
Fisheries, mines, Personal Services)
7828 (100%) 100%
Note: Figures for Southport are unavailable at this time, but should be
available soon.
Source: U.S. Census 1970,

(1969) DISTRIBUTION OF INCOME FOR FAMILIES

Brunswick N. C.
Less Than $1,000 334 (5.4Z 3.4%
$1000 - 1999 540 (6.7) 5.4
2000 - 2999 432 (7.0) 5.71
3000 - 3999 449 (7.2) 6.5
4000 - 4999 593 (9.7) 7.2
5000 - 5999 548 (8.8) 8.0
6000 - 6999 496 (8.0) 7.8
7000 - 7999 362 (5.8) 7.7
8000 - 8999 436 (7.0 7.6
9000 - 9999 426 (6.9) 6.9
10000 -11999 665 (10.7) 11.7
12000 -14999 411 (6.6) 10.6
15000 -24999 407 (6.6) 9.0
25000 -49999 84 (1.4) 2.0
Greater Than $50,000 15 (0.2) 0.5
.6198 100% 100%
Source: U. S. Census 1970

(1969) PERSONAL INCOME CHARACTERISTICS

Brunswick Co. North Carolina
Total: Bla@k- Total Black
Median Family Income $6409 $4568 $7774 $4803
Mean Family Income 7468 5740. 8872 5682
Per Capita Income 2010 1219 2492 1342
Persons Below Poverty Level 27.7% 51'.5% 20.3% 44.5Z
Famililies Below Poverty Level 22.9% 44.7% 16.32 38.7%

Source: U. S. Census, 1970

Section 2: Existing Land Use

The existing land use of the Southport planning area is illustrated'on the
next page. Together with the accompanying Table 3i the general land use@@of the
community is indicated. The classification of land use was made,for the most
part in accordance with.the U.S. Department of Interior's "A Land-Use CIA ssificAtion
System for Use with Remote-Sensor Data". The following is a brief description of
the various uses with particular attention given to:

Significant land use compatibility problems;
Major problems which have resulted from unplanned development, and
which have implications for future land use;
An identification of areas experiencing or likely to experience major
changes in predominant land uses;
Areas of Environmental Concern.

TABLE 3

SOUTHPORT LAND USE
Extraterritorial
Within Corporate Limits Jurisdiction
Approximate ; Approximate
Category, Acreage Percent Acreage Percent

1. Residential 360.0 29 .150.4 6
Single Family 351.0 .145.6
Multi Family 5.1 0.0
Mobile Home 3.9 4.8
2. Commercial 22.4 2 less than 1
3. Industrial 1.6 less than-1 50.0, 2
4. Transportation, Communication
and Utilities 186.0 15 24.8 1
5. Government & Institutional- 09.5 5 less than I
6. Cultural, Entertainment &
Recreational 3.2 less than 1 0.0 0
7. Agricultural* & Forest/land 235.5 19 1881.3 78
8. Wetlands 244.0 20 11
9.,.Undeveloped -120.0 10 0.0 0
Total 1242.2 100 2398.4 100
Included in forest land due to photo data
Source: Soil Conservation Service aerial photos (2/4/72)
N. C. DNER, DCA Windshield Survey (12/74)
N. C. DOT Aerial Photos (12/18/74)

AF
4T"

'EXISTING [AND I kJ--

Residential Land Use

This category 4ccounts for 32% of the total land use in Southport.

Residents are almost exclusively single family dwelling units. The

first problem regarding residential land use is strip development occurring along

the major thoroughfares particularly in the extra-territorial area. This threatens

to "land lock" quantities of desirable land located behind the roads, and increase

the possibility of future blight of houses presently being built along.these roads.

Another consequence of strip development is the connecting driveways along major

thoroughfares. Numerous individual driveways greatly decrease the utility of the

road and increase the danger to residents and motoring publ ic.

The second problem relative to residential land use is the condition of homes

as witnessed during the land use survey conducted by the Division of Community
Assistance personnel in December, 1974. The Bureau of Census in 1970 reported

that 14.6% of all housing units (811) in Southport lacked some or all plumbing

facilities. However, this represents a reduction.in sub6tandard homes siiice 19.60

when 31% of occupied houses lacked some or all plumbing facilities. The City of

Southport compares 1ess favorable with the state as a whole. In North Carolina

14.3 percent of all housing unitsJacked some or all plumbing facilities.

The extra territorial jurisdictional area is and will. continue to experience

major changes in predominant land use. Increased residential development causing

urban sprawl has occurred in areas adjacent to the Carolina Power and Light nuclear

plant and Pfizer Industries* Approximately 6% of the total land use in the

extra-territorial jurisdiction is devoted to residents, This is the major

U. S. Bureau of Census, Census-of Housing. 1960 to 1970 Gene'ral Housing
Characteristics.

)2Z

urban use of land in this area.

Commenting further on residential land use in the Southport planning are4,

one finds, as is the case throughout North Carolina, a growing number of mobile

homes. This is particularly true in the extra-territo.rial area. The mobile home

now and in the future will house families for permanent and vacation housing,

therefore, the same considerations should be given the mobile home as is given

to the conventional residential dwelling*

Commercial Land Use

Less than 3% of the total land use in the So uthport planning area is devoted

to commercial uses. This is a result of theretail mark,eting influence of

Wilmington. Nevertheless, expl'anding economic development in Smithville Township

has brought about an increase in commercial trade and services witness the

opening of a new savings and loan associationi restaurant, and grocery store

during 1975.

Also recent development has seen the establishing,of a community shopping

center at the intersectionof North Howe Street and NC 87. Not only will this

event spur additional commercial activity (which is permitted by the Zoning Ordinance)

along Howe Street but, moreover, it threatens the-'economic stability of the central

business district.

other areas of commercial concentration are those adjacent to the small boat

harbor marina and the old Yacht basin. These areas, as expected., serve primarily

the boating public and commercial fisherman. Naturally the future development of

these areas depends on their respective trade.

Industrial Land Use

Until.recently the industrial activity in Smithville Township was nominal.

at best. The construction of Carolina Power and Light's nuclear generating,,

Dlant (actuallv CP&L is classified as a utilitv) and Pfizer's ditric acid Diant,

has changed considerably the complexion of the area. However, there has been almost

no change in industrial land use.inside the city limits. Almost all of CP&L' s

3000 acres lies beyond the extra-territorial area and of Pfizerts.,1300. acres,

approximately 50 acres are within the extra-territorial area. It i's-anticipated

that both CP&L's utility plant and Pfizer, given their location and the commodity

produced,, will attract additional development within the vicinity. ''Thus, land

which is not owned by either company becomes attractive for a multiple.of,uses
which could serve to reduce the value for potential indus try.

From the Community Profile,,Southport, N._ C., we see that Brunswick County's

major industrial employment in 1973 was in,non-manufa cturing with construction,

government, and trade the leading groups. Wh,ile.we d o not have ;�pec,ific ,information

for Southport we can surmise that this is representative of Southport since at

that time it was the center of county,go.vernment, home of the county hospital,

and neat the sites of two large construction projects. Another important employment

aspect of the community i's the fishing industry. While we are unable to determine

the exact value added by this 'segment we know.that -;,Lt is.A.commercial and sport.

fishing center for the county. This is especially i ortant at a time when
IMP

.statistics indicate that the total landings in quantity for shellfish and finfish
are decreasing (1960-73) in the state as a whqt,e. w4le"Brunswi6k County has its

largest total landings in quantity ever recorded iral 972i"

'Easley, J. E. Jr. and Be .th Sossamon. N. C. Fisheries Data N. C. Agric.
Extension Service.No. 1974 p. 6 20.

Some of the largest employers in the Southport planning area are:

Company Year est. Product Employees
Blake Builders Supply 195()"-.4. building supplies 45
Boiling Springs Const. Co. 1973 grading and paving 65
Brown & Root, Inc. 1969 construction (CP&L) 2000
Caroon's Crab Co. 1965 fresh and frozen seafood 30
Carolina Power & Light 1@75@ electrical power 175
Daniels Const. Co. 1974 construction (Pfizer) 1040
East Coast Ice & Fisheries 1973 manuf. ice 25
Pfizer, Inc. 1975 citric acid 30

Transportation, Communication, and Ut lities Land Use

Transportation, communication, and utilities represent the third largest land

use within the city limits with [email protected]% of the total land. The bulk of,

this. consists of street rights-of-way which are in many instances .99 feet in width.

.............. ...
Table II

Southport., N.C. 1974 Average Daily Traffic Count

Location ADT
N. Howe St. at city limits
Howe St. at Moore St. 6200
just north of junction NC211&87 6200
Moore St. 100 block 3000
North Leonard St. & SR1526 3050
Southport-Fort Fisher Ferry 77

These figures indicate more than a 1.08 per cent increase in traffic along

North Howe St. since 1967. Other thoroughfares have experienced a considerable

increase in traffic volume,too. Increased traffic volume and generally inacces-

sible areas in the northeast quadrant of the planning area.produce a poor

circulation pattern. Future subdivision and major thoroughfares need to be better

coordinated. Additional problems encountered with traffic circulations are:

natural soil and water barriers throughout the commun.ity; unpaved streets

particularly in the northwest quadr.ant;,narrow,pavement; and development within

rights-of-way particularly in the City.

N. C. DOT, Div. of Highways,Ralei'gh 1974

N. C. Dept. of Cons. & Dev.,, DCP. Land Dev. Plan, Southport, N. C,
1969 P. 30 -1:7

Other uses within this category include the sewage treatment plant on

West Street and water pumpin--,, stations on Howe, Le&nard, and Moore Streets.

Government and Institutional Land Use

This category occupies 6 percent of land use within the corporatejimits

and less than 1 per@,ent in the extraterritorial area. As of this date there are

three facilities in this category whose future is unknown. They are: Doshei

Memorial Hospital, Count-,r Courthouse and Tax Office Department'and old primary

school. Since several local.agencies are in need of new facilities-it would be

in the best.interest of, the community to make these existing facilities available

by offering first refusal to local agencies once, they.are vacated.. other large

land.uses.in this category are: s.mall boat harbor, new primary :school, Fort

Johnston, Southport city garage and cemeteries, and churches.

There are ten churches located in Southport. Many of these, such as Saint,

Phillip's Epi scopal., are, of great historical value and reflect,past period of

architectural style and achievement.' A future.community appearance/architectural

review program should address religious centers to protect them from enroaching

land uses.

The Southport schools are operated by one administrative unit: Brunswick

County School System.' South Brunswick High,School se,rvis the Southport planning area

and is located

The Southport schools are operated@byone administrative 'Unit: Brunswick
County School System, There are'two. school.t wi thin the city limits of Southport::
SouthPort Primary School located on West George Street an"d Southport.Midd7e School
located on 8th Street.

.Cultural, Entertainment, and Recreational Land Use

This is one of smallest categories of land use acreage in Southpcrt.,-It

consists primarily of recreational use* Franklin Square Park is located adjacent

to the Southport City Hall, and the old,southport High School athletic f ,'eld

is located at the East Nash Street. A neighborhood park was recently dedicated at

the corner of Owens and Clarendon Streets, and another at the corner of Moore and

Caswell Streets. There is a Municipal. fishing pier at the end of Davis@Street

There are additional facilities owned by the Brunswick County School System, but

are not at this time commonly used by the.general public. There is-also a community

center building adjacent to Fort Johnston for meetings by local civic groups and the

Frying Pan Ligbtship tour.

The 1969 Land Development Plan and the.1974 Community-Facilities Plan

.identified the tremendous need to upgrade recreational opportunities in

Southport. At present the Board of Aldermen are negotiating with.property owners

to purchase the area between the Municipal pier and Whittler"s Bench for a

waterfront park. This is a highly desirable site for recreational purposes.

Additional consideration has been given recehtly to.the hiring of a full time

recreational director. If these two events occur then recreational.activities will

be given a significant commitment by the City 'of Southport which it so desperately

needs.

Agriculture and Forestland

This category represents approximately @l perc-ent of,land'use within the

corporate limits and nearly 78 percent in the extraterritorial area. The

amount of acreage was determined by using SCS. aer ial photographs (2/5/72).

Due to the date of the photos it was.not feasible to delineate agricultural land

separate from forestland.

Owing to recent economic development pressure and urban sprawl this

category is likely to experience the greatest transformation in,the future..

Land that is owned by individual property owners but not forest product

companies is more susceptible to this pressure. Thus, it is most important that

agricultural and -forestland conversion to urban land 'be given careful review

so that new uses will be compatible. An example is best illustrated by the

construction of.the Pfizer plant which was previously an area of agriculture

and forestry. These "pressures" will be exerted to develop lands between Pfizer,

and Southport, thereby contributing to,further urban sprawl and inefficient

utility service.

Wetlands

Wetlands include,t.he following land uses: low tidal marsh, other

marsh land. watero estuarine streams and waterways. These land uses were.

identified from the following sources:,

SCS aerial photographs 2/5/72

N.C. DOT aerial photographs 12/18/74

N.C. DNER.,,Marine Fisheries, aerial photographs 1973

For various rea sons,'such as changes in watercourses; difference'in scale of

photos; and date and time differences of photos, it is most difficult to

analyze the impact that development is having upon wetlands. Nevertheless, the

most notable changes have occurred Along the waterfront and surrounding the

mouth of the tributaries which drain the upland areas of Southport. Sediment

carried downstream is deposited at the junction with,l'arger'water bodies.

In some cases this process has been speeded up with the filling in of areas

such as Bonnett's Creek, small boat harbor, and near Municipal pier by man. Due

to the significant part wetlands play in the development of our marine and

wildlife resources, it is imperative that these areas be preserved in their

natural state.

_22-

Wetl ands constitute almost 10 percent of the total land area in the planning

area., Price's Creek and Bennett's Creek are threatened more by recent development'.

than others and should be given adequate protectionfor future survival.

Undeveloped Land

Undeveloped land is vacant, unimproved land without agricultural or

forest use. This category occupies approximately 11 percent of the land in

Southport. This is an important resource for prudent development in the
future. City officials should encourage and promote the utilization of this

land in order to achievelleconomy of scale" in terms of municipal services.

Areasi of Environmental Concern

The Southport Planning area contains the following a:reas of environmental

concern:

Coastal Wetlands CW

Estuarine Waters EW.

Historic Places HP

Coastal Flood-Plains CF
Ate-as ContaininA Unin6e, Geological Form'.ations.GF
Public Trust.Waters PT
To some aegree, some more severely than others, all the areas are experiencing

the impact of recent development, A detailed description of each area.and its

affect upon adjacent land use appears later in this text.

Section 3: Current Plans, Policies, and Regulations

The following plansbave been prepared by Southport with technical assist-
ance from the Division of Community Assistance and have significant implica-

tions for land use:

Plan., Date Published

Phase I.Population Economy Study January 1969
Phase II Land Use Survey & Analysis Janu
4;y 1969
Phase III Land Development Plan, April 1969
Extraterritorial Area Land Development Plan February 1973
Community Facilities Plan, Public Improvement,Program
Capital Improvements,Budget March 1974,
Initial Housing Element June,,.1974
Community Profile January 1975
The following land use control: regulations have been adopted by the
City of Southport:
Regulation Date Adopted
North Carolina State Building Code July 12, 1912
(including beating, plumbing, etc.)
Subdivision Regulations July 12, 1972:,
Zoning Ordinance July 12,. 1972
The City of Southport hasmeans of enforcing.these regulations but has
been hampered by a part-time building inspector, confusion on the part of
boards (e.g. Board of Adj Iustment)on their duties and responsibilities, and unwill-,
ingness of governing body to follow recommendations of advisory.groups and
city attorney.

Article III Public Participation Activities

Section 1: Public Participation Process

The Coastal Area Management Act could not have come at a more critical time
for the Southport planning area. Yet, land use planning has had to take a back
seat to more pressing political issues in Brunswick County. The relocation of
the county seat and the construction of the new hospital which will occur near
Bolivia have consumed a major portion of the elected officials' time and citizens'
attention.

However, efforts were made to provide information and to.solicit actual
involvement in the preparation of Southport's Land Use Plan. Among the steps
taken were:

1) Reorganizing the Planning Board into a functioning advisory group;

2) Conducting two opinion surveys; mailing 1000 questionnaires to water
and sewer customers and sample interviews conducted by high school
students in all neighborhoods;

3) Meetings with local civic groups to discuss community issues and
goals;

4) Open public meetings conducted by the Planning Board employing the
Nominal Group Technique to identify and,prioritize issues as perceived
by that group; and

5) Local weekly newspaper,coverage.

An initial survey was conducted by T.ailed questionaires to 1000 residents,
L
The results appear below. Furthermore, high school'students conducted a randor.
survey by interviews covering.all neighborhoods which essentially supported
the results of the first survey.

The following represents an analysis,of opinions of the 130 persons

who took the time, including one individual who penned a poem to emphasize

his or her dismay (a copy.of which appears on the last page).

The median age of the'respondentis 59 years of age-,-generally of an age

group who would have more time to.complete' a questionnaire but, certainly not

to be considered a cross section of the community. (In 1970 the median age

of Southport's population was 32 years of age.) Of those responding,

eighty-eigbt percent live in- a.. singl.e.-f amily dwelling.

Community Growth

The fifth question dealt with the amount of community growth desired.

Forty-seven percent wanted a slight increase in population; thirty-three

percent wanted a great increase, while seventeen percentwanted the population

to remain the same.

Development Preferences

The sixth question asked which type of devel
opment. would you like to see
more or less of in Southport?, The following types o
f development were requested
most often in order of priority: si
ngle-family dwellingg recreational facilities
and public open space,-industrial# commercial and apartments. The least
requested type of developm .ents were: mobile,homes and condomi
niums.

Pea@-_ons for

The seventh question dealt with the reasons. for locating in Southport, In

most cases., several reasons were indicated thuso of 220 selections: thirty-two

percent chose the cormunity for its pleasant surroundings; twenty-four percent'

because of its closeness to family and friends; and sixteen percert said becau,se

it was close to work. of all the choices provided the least selected 'IV-as due to

the proximity to the beach and low taxesp all of which was not too surprising

in view of the median age of the respondee.

Public Expenditures

The eighth question probed which areas do you feelmoice or,less public funds

should be spent? The categories receiving the highest number of votes in. order

were: park and recreational facilities, and programs, water and sewer service,

fire and police protection# and roads. The categories receiving the fewest

number of votes in order were: industrial development, (it should.be pointed out

that while this category was number one for least expenditures, it was still.less

total votes than the category receiving the fewest votes for more expenditures),

environmental protections and, town Imanagement.

Likes and Dislikes

The ninth question was, what do.you like most about Southport? The responses

occurring most often were the people., locations climate., and the hospital. The

tenth question 'asks just the opposite. Items mentioned must frequently we re:

too rapid pace of growth, unsightly and unkept yards, lots, and kigbts-of-way, and

roaming dogs.

Areas of Environmental Concern

,Question number eleven was to determine whether there was support for restric-@

tive development along fragile and biological productive areas of 'the. coast. From

the response, it may generally be concluded that the respondents were, opposed -to

.development on land near inletso marshes and dunes;, while permitting to some degree,

development on beaches and long the inland waterway.,

Areas for Preservation

Question number twelve asks for any specific location.swhich one felt should

be preserved or protected in its natural state.. the most frequently mentioned

areas were: Franklin Park waterfront,, old yacht basin, Bonnetts Creek and

other watercourses. Additional comments offered were regarding the maintenance

of Dosher Hospital, the need for a do& ordinance, and additional boat access

and public parks.

Section 2: Major Issues

In order to formulate a series of goals and objectives which can in turn
be molded into policies for future development, we must identify the major land

use issues facing the Southport planning area. The following is a discussion of

issues under five broad headings. An issue is defined as "a point of debate or

controversy" and only thro-igh a discussion of all the issues can we hope to
begin to achieve the optimum accommodation of spatial growth.

.Impact of Population and Economic Trends

The Southport planning area has experienced unparalleled economic growth in
its history. It is a difficult task to measure the long-term impact of the
development which has occurred. zWe know-that it has provided benefits in terms of:
increased job opportunity, more commer cial trade and services, and an increased
tax base to support governmental services to mention a few. However, we also know
that unless the proper development policies are implemented, that this
unprecedented growth can cause unmanageable consequences in terms of increased
school enrollment, unmet health care needs, traffic congestion, spiraling demand for
police and fire protection, increased social services.demand, unav ailability of
adequate recreational facilities and continued demand for water and sewer services also

The important impact of this new growth will,befelt upon the policies,

ordinances., and administrative mechanisms which are presently in place. It has

been pointed out by citizen survey, governmental bod ies, and in public discussion

.of the general laxity and arb.itrariness,in which many adopted policies and ordi-

nances are presently being enforced by City officials. Vested interests will

continue to exert pressure and influence on-City policy.

Another impact in the Southport planning has resulted in an increased conmunity
demand for "low density sprawl". Low density sprawl is defined as the entire
comimunity consisting of single family homes, 75% sited in a traditional grid patte-P
and the rest clustered. Neighborhoods are in a.leapfrog.pattern with.little con-
tiguity. As indicated by the land use survey analysis, the Southport planning area
clearly exemplies this point and alread we see signs of this pattern-conti i
y i.nuing.
Unfortunately, the cost analysis of this pattern of developmOnt a,s compared with
"combination mix" and "high density planned" reveals that in every factor (operating
and maintenance cost, water pollution generation, energy consumption, .land utilization
water consumption, and apital. cost) the overall cost to the neighborhood or community
is significantly more.;

in particular, along Jabbertown Road and Moore Street extension, residential
7"
developm ent has occurred as opposed to the development of available residentially,

zoned land located within the City limits. The aging solution to this trend--

annexation--only perpetuates the problem. Furthermore, residential development

is not the only land use affected by urban sprawl.. Strip commercial development

which is sanctioned by the Zoning Ordinance along North Howe Street, NC 133 and

2111, threatens a very attractive and viable central business district.

Another impact of recent population and economic growth has been the increased

traffic.congestion and lack of accessibility particularly in the northeast quadrant.

Interestingly enough, is thefact that Brunswick County has one of the highest

traffic accident death rates of any county in southeastern North Carolina.

Associated with congestion is the-potential for water,, air,.and noise pollution

which affects the social as well as the physical environment. While tber"e is a

lack of specific monitoring data..,.engi.neerihg calculations would suggest that

water and air resources have probably.experienced some contamination as a result

'Of recent development.

of Spravi Ekecu 59EMar
Real Estate Research Corp** ThS Q-0st j, April 1974,
Page 2-8.

Z
Another impact is speculation. Much of,tbe bapha'ard and unplanned growth
occurring around Southport can be traced to. land *speculation. Strip developments
as previously mentioned form a thin veneer of intensive land use that bides much
larger areas of undeveloped vacant land. Most of these interior lands are being
held with the hope that they will eventually command a Iligher price.
Other land use issues are: loss of open space, use,of the best agricultural
land for development, and premature land development.,
Housing and other Services

The primary housing and housing related controversies in the SouthpoIrt

planning area are: public concern over subsidized housing; local responsibility

for increasing housing opportunity; absence of vacant standard units; non-available

variety of housing; quantity of substandard units; high percentage of substandard

units which are rental properties; scattered,-trasb and abandoned vebicles throughout
the community; poor street conditionsAn. [email protected] areas; and the City's
unIofficial posture to discourage the use of mobile homes yet an obvi ous relu.ctancy
to abide by land use controls as adopted'.*

The two most controversial issues in Brunswick County are over the relocation
of the county seat and the establishment of a new county hospital near Bolivia.

Due to recent growth in the Southport area and its environmental attractiveness,
the,relocation of the county seat offices would not appear to be a prolonged economic
loss to the Southport.business community. Many county departments are quartered in
temporary offices.
The construction of the new county hospital has been resistedby residents of the
Southport area only if it means. the closing of Arthur.J. Dosher Hospital in Southport.
Recent growth in the Southport area can be attributed Wpart because,of this facility.
The commu nity does not want to break commitmentsto its citizens.

The major substandard housing area lies ih,the northwest quadrant-bound by
Howe, Burrington, Ninth and Brown Streets. Good housing is needed for industrial
stability and growth.

The city of Southport provides the following services and facilities to its
residents: City Hall, police and fire.protection, public library, water and sewer
service, electric distribution service, recreation, "refus:ei collection and disposal,
streets, city garbage, cemeteriest street lighting 4nd:signs. Of.those services
.and facilities, the-foll6wing have been recommended for'majorImprovement: fire
protection improvement by obtaining a Class.7 rating; water and sewer service

X Department of Natural and Economic Resciurc Ies, Division of Community Assistance
South ort, N.-.L Tnitial HoUsing Elenient June 1974 Page 1-4

-6-

capacity and extension improvement; acquiring adequate and highly desirable recrea-

tional areaso

Conservation of Productive Natural Resources

Foremost among the Southport planning area's productive natural resources

are the applicable Areaslof Environmental Concern. A detailed discussion of

relevant Areas of-Environmental Concern appears later. The designation and enforce-

ment,of AEC policy objectives and appropriate uses will no doubt give rise to dispute.

Soils, surface water,, groundwater, and air quality are productive natural

resources which deserve the utmost consideration in the management of these limited

natural resources. A thorough examination of these factors begins under.the Article.IV

"Constra, ints"..

Protection of Important Natural Environments

Probably-the'most important natural environment in the Southport planning area

is the waterfront which constitutes several natural resourceso While this environ-

ment provides recreation for some and a livelihood for others, it is largely respon-

sible for the settlement of Southport. Without a doubt, the waterfront and its.

access to the ocean is Southport's greatest asset. As the community continues

to grow there will be added "pressure" for developing the waterfront for a multiple

of uses. Asthe existing land use map indicates thevaterfront supports a variety

of uses already: residential, commercial, govermental,, industrial,,,utilities, and

recreational. Competition for sgace along the waterfront will become even more

keen. This environment directly affects a high percentage of the residents in the

planning area; therefore, it warrants a great deal of,protection so that a maximum.

number of people will continue to benefit from its use,,

Specifically, the municipal dock and yacht basin and the attendant-.development

nearby which services the fishing.fleet should continue to be protected.from

'ces,, DCA Community !Ea c 3i I it i e'
Department of Natural and Economic Resour _ir-ies,.
ents Budget Southport-N.C.-
Public improvements Program, and Ca@it @22rov -3.
March 1974, PO 1-22.

enroaching uses. Also, the area just.northeast of the City L#it s' provides

excellent development sites for future industrial activity.

Protection of Cultural and Historic Resources

There are certain unique features'that readily represent the character of an

area, This is particularly true in the Southport planning areas On a drive

through the community one discovers that Southport is rich in history with its:

age old tree lined streets, Fort Johns-ton,Whittler's 'Bench along the waterfront,

Frying Pan Lightship, Franklin Park, Widowts'Walk.,on a waterfront home,, Bennett's

Creek., and the view towards Baldhead Island Lighthouse. All these features as well

as moored fishing boats at t@e yacht basin., display cl.quaint and friendly fishing

village. Yet, there remain a number of features which would improve and heighten

the attractiveness,of the community. The property between Whittler's Bench and

the Municipal Pier could provide the community with an ideal.location for a waterfront

park. Another feature not yet capitalized on by the contaunity is the promotion of

its historical significance. A local museum or an information.center to house

artifacts and tell the Southport story.could serve a vital community interest.-

2'@

Section 3: Development Alternatives

.There are several development alternatives for Southport. Since the major
land use in Southport is residential, we can describe' these alternatives,interms
of residential density: low density with I to 8 dwelling units per residential
acre; medium density with 8 to 16 dwelling units per residential acre; and high
density with 16 dwelling units or more per residential..'acre.

The present density in Southport is 2.6 dwelling units per residential area.
Using the above standard, this is low density which consists almost@entirely of
single family dwellings in a traditional gridiron pattern. [email protected] of development
is an'easy route for municipal approval and a moderate land value return. however,
land consumption is high and cost benefit ratio for municipal utili ties is high.
Annexation of sparsely settled areas perpetuates this "leap frog" development pattern.
Unless another alternative is selected this pattern will. continue in Southport.

Another development alternativeis high density development with 16,dwel ling units
or more per residential acre which,necessitates multi-storied structures., Whil,e market-
ability is often questionable, this density provides-greater land value return.. It
is a more economical way of providing services. Based on available information,
approval is unlikely by the municipal governing body because of local sentiment a nd
prejudice.

The third development.alternative is medium density wi th 8 to 16 dwelling
units per residential acre. This density may be accomplished by.the use of cluster
development of townhouses. This type of development affords lower land consumption,
better cost benefit ratio for municipal services and positive compromise on.other
factors. Clustering in small groups would result in minimum visual change to the
property and marketability would seem high. However, this alternative would require
the implementation of at least the following citywide policies: 1) encourage
development to occur within existing city limits; 2) limit future municipal-services
to only areas within the corporate limits; and 3) revise zoning and subdivision
control ordinances to permit-cluster dev6lopment@ at higher densities..

Section 4: Objecfives and Policies for Dealing,with 1,ssues

A great deal of development pressure has already been exerted upon Southport.

Consequently, the overall appearance of the community shows signs-of change and w411

no doubt continue to do so. The amount of change tolerated depends upon the citizens

of the community. From all available information (surveys, interviews, public
meetings), people in the Southport planning area want a viable' community, yet..,
they do not want to lose the assets which the community presently enjoys.. Thus,

it is imperative that the City's elected and.appointed officials and citizens

vigorously support the goals and objectives enumerated bereini Only when these

goals and objectives.are adopted*and adhered to As the City's policies for land

development and future growth, will the community retain the pleasant characteristics

it has today.

In order.to avoid any misunderstanding, the frequently used terms of goal,.

objective and policy are defi.ned-as, follows:

goal a desired future condition;

objective a task or course of action to be performed; and

policy - a commitment to action to reach a goal.,

in,thebroadest sense, the goal of Southport planning area is to improve the

soIcialt economic,'and physical environment of the [email protected] as.

possible Within this broadly stated goal, several: specific goals and objectives

relating to the physical development of the area can be stated.

Coal- Prov Iide i management system capable of preserving-and managing'tbe natural

resources.in the Southport planning areas.

Objectives..

designate 'a code enforcement official to'enforce.the ado'ted N. C.
p

State Building Code, Subdivision Regulations, Zoning Ordinance,

and others.

support the findings of fact and recommendations of appointed boards,,

comm.].Lssions and professional staff.

Goal: Develop adequate and efficient public utilities and ,community facilities.

Objectives:

encourage development within the existing corporate limits and avoid

"urban sprawl".

purchase waterfront property for a community park.
. provide service and facilities to' all areas within the corporate limits

before annexing new areas*,

implement the recommendations of the Community Facilities Plan Public

Improvements Program, and Capital Improvement Budget Southport N. C.

1974.
improve fire protection service by acquiring class. 7 rating.

.Goal: Provide safe, decent, and a variety of housing for all citizens,

Objectives:

aid property owners in the demolition of dwelling units unfit for human

habitation.

seek., encourage and support the development of ,publicly assisted housing'

projects available from Federal agencies such as the Farmer's Home

Administration 502 Program ,and Community Development Act of 1974.

establish a zoning district which would permit A mobile home on an

individual lot in a specified area.

Goal: Promote accessibility and safety in Area transportation,

Objectives:

. emphasize safety and a continuous street improvement and construction

program,

. review thoroughly new residential development plans and ,insure that

they comply with Subdivision Regulations
mutually adopt a detailed thoroughfare Plan with the N.C. Department

of Transportation, Division of. Highways,

prohibit development in any Area of Environmental Concern,which would-
have a substantial likelihood of.causing pollution of the w#ers of the
State to the extent that such waters would be closed to the taking of
shellfish under standards set by@ the Commission for Health Services
pursuant to G.S. 130-169-01.

prevent development in any Area of Environmental.Concern which would-
result in a contravention or violation of any rules, regulations, or
laws of the State of North Carolina or of the City of Southport' and
its extriterritorial jurisdictionAn which development takes pl ace..

adopt a flood plain district'as part of the Zoning'Ordi.na.nce which.,
would protect the flood prone areas. as identified by.the U.S. Corps
of Engineers and HUD Federal Insurance Administration.
employ full-time qualified personnel in order to improve the.City's
mnagement capability.

Goal: Preserve the existing character of a "small fishing village".

Objectives:

. establish an appearance commission to preserve the community's-

aesthetic quality with power to review architectual plans in accordance

with GS 160A-451.

. promote the history and heritage of the community by organizing and

sponsoring an information center.,
cooperate with the county in the establishment of a Southport-BrunswiCk
County Historic District Commission.

-3 3

Article IV Constraints

Section I Land Potential

a: Physical Limitations

An analysis of laid suitability and capacity of.crmmunity facilities,
will aid in determining a land classification map. Moreover, it will give

a more complete picture of the Southport environment.

Two man-made hazards are the Carolina Power and Light nuclear generating

plant and the Military Ocean Terminal at Sunny Point. Neither facility is

located within. the territorial jurisdiction of Southport and the degree of
hazard presented in the event of'a national emergency or natural cat.as-
trophe is 1)@)2i-led Howeverso for planning purposes it is

sufficient.to.-note their presence and the potential (no matter how remote)

hazards that exist.

There are three natural hazards applicable to the Southport.planning area:
estuarine, sound and river erodible areas, flood hazard areas, and the controversial
subject of the potential for earthquakes. Representatives of'the U. S.
Soil Conservation Service have indicated
that they are unaware of any significant shoreline erosion to the Southport
waterfront. In regard to flood h,azards there are two types-.@ "riverine", which
is caused by precipitation and "coastal flooding'.' caused by wind-driven water by
the coincident of storm and high tides. There is no coastal.hazard.area comparable
to the riverine "floodway" which must be maintained free of obstructions, to convey

Telephone conversation,,October 6, 1975, with Mr. L. D. Hunnings, SCS,

-3 zJ

flood flows. This is perl laps the most important difference between

regulations for coastal and riverine areas* Coastal regulations are not

designed to preserve flood flows yet high hazard coastal areas deserve

special attention. Beaches'and shorelines are buffeted by high energy waves

that destroy all but thestrongest structures. At some locations,, special

regulations are needed to protect dunes and other natural protective

barriers which blunt the force of wind and waves and minimize property

damage.

Many coastal communities like Southport are constructed at the con-

fluence of a river and the sea, a location subject to'both riverine and

coastal flood problems. Here regulations pertaining to both sorts of

problems are needed. Special regulations are also needed to meet inland

drainage problems at many coastal locations even without a major river or

stream, Torrential rains accompany hurricanes and coastal storms often

overtax drainage channels. Flood problems arise if seawalls., dikes, or

other engineering works constructed to prevent flooding by onrushing

seas block the seaward.flow of water from inland drainage channels.

At present Southport is an eligible community for Federal Flood Insur-

ance under the emergency program. More detailed information which would

qualify the community for the regular program is now being prepared by

HUD and Corps of Engineers.and is scheduled for release in 1976.

Preliminary information reveals that a great amount of Southport's land,

k
-U.S. Water Resources Council, Washington, D. C. Regulations of
Flood Hazard Areas,,. Vol. II parts V-VI 1971 p. 122

area is within a 100 year flood area which tentatively coincides with the
14 foot contour. (See Flood Prone Map.) A velocity zone which is a result
of coastal flooding is tentatively delineated along the building line and
where no buildings exist it will be at "tree level"."

"The summary presented below wa s written for the Southport land-use
plan, but it pertains to the whole soutbeastern Coastal Plain of Worth
Carolina with little or no modification.

Carolina Power and Light Company at the direction of the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission is carrying out an investigation to determine whether
or not there is a significant seismic risk in the Southport area. Seismic
monitoring is taking place at several stations in Brunswick -county. At present
there are. no indications that should cause.. citizens to be concerned.

The factors that determine the type and extent of damage substained
as the result of an earthquake Include: a) distance from the epicenter of the
earthquake, b) distance from the area where an active fault, if present' can be
traced on the ground surface, c) magnitude of the earthquake, d)geology, soils,
and surface configuration of the site, and e) structural integrity of buildings,
etc.

With respect to earthquakes those factors that are of concern In
land-use planning are 1) location of areas 'where earthquake epicenters are con-
centrated, 2) location of fault, traces on the ground surface, and 3) geology,
soils, and surface configuration of building sites. In the case of Southport
we have no history of seismic. activity which would enable us to make any plans
on the basis of 1 and 2 above. Thus, we look for structurally poor ground.

Experience shows that intensity of shaking is greatest in-places
underlain by young, soft, water-saturated sediments not only is shaking greater
in intensity but also failure of the ground itself. Ground failure includes
liquefaction, landslides., land spreading, ground cracking, and differential sub-
sidence.

Given that much of the Southport area is underlain by materials like
those above what do we look for? We look for areas that are relatively less
stable than others such as filled lands,either formerly marsh or bays, areas
with an unusually high water table$ and poorly drained areas. Existing soil
maps might help delineate some of these areas, but to properly examine potential
earthquake hazards a detailed hazards analysis would be necessary. Such an
analysis would include geologic mapping and an overall ground stability analysis
with an assessment of the potential for failure of the ground at depth as well
as near the surface. It Is my judgement that the expense of such an Analysis
is not warrented at this time.

S. Department of Interior, Geological Survey'' Flood Prone Areas
Southport, NC, 1973
Telephone conversation, Mr. Bernie Ingram, Corps of Engineers
Memo from Mr. E. R. Burt, Mineral Resources Sec., IDNER Raleigh, N.C.Feb. 3, 1976

FLOOD-PRONE AREAS

I PRON't
AREA

Soil s

The soils of.an area will greatly determine the extent of present

development and the suitability for future growth. Unless an area has.

p.roper soils, urban development that occurs will be costly and may posea

healrh hazard. Soils occurring together in a characteristic and,repeating

pattern constitute a generalsoil area or soil Association., An association

consists of two or more principal soils and at least@one minor soil which

may be quite similar to or quite different from each other*' Although

closely associated geographically,, the.soils in azi association maydiffer

in their suitability for.agricultural and non-farm useo

A General Soil Map (Map 11) appears on the following page which@shows

the location and extent of the four soil associations in the,Southport,

planning area. Such a map provides the general soils data needed to plan

the efficient use and orderly development of the communityl:s@sqil resources.,

The General Soil Map is.useful for,(l) those who want a general idea of the

soi.Is$ (2) those who want to compare the potential of different parts of the

planning area, or (3) those who seek.the location of areas suitable for

specific types of land use., It is no.t'designed to show accurately the

kinds of soil on an individual tract of land and is not suitable for@

planning such units land,

In addition., immediately following the General Soil Map is:A Soil

Interpretation Chart indicating the suitability of the principal soils

for various uses. It gives their limitations for septic tank filter

fields, recreation.uses, foundations for light industry and general

agriculture.

... . . . .............

IEWkL S()-jL IAAP
I,EGF,ND
am
ela,d-Rimin' -Wagr AcsociatiOn
pactoll-16 -
&SsociatiOn
-n-Rxltledc,e-
r, Lumbee
-johnstO - A,.OciatiOrl
)b h & Salt)
,Fh (Fres

WAY

From the,Soil Interpretation Chart it can be seen that only the

Lakeland-Rimini-Wagram Soil Association has generally sligit limitation

for structures whose footings are in suo'soil-0 The other three Lssociations,

have severe limitations due to high water table and flooding characteristics.
Shallow soils are generally not present since the coastal plain area is

rock free as a result of sedimentary deposits.

With the general exception of 'the Lakeland-Rimini-Wagram Soil.
Association the soils range in drainage capability from somewhat poorly
drained to very poorly drained soils.. The Lakeland-Rimini-Wagram Soil

Association generally is well drained. From the Soils Interpretation
Chart generally all the.soils in the Southport planning area are unsuitable

for septic tank filter field.s. However there are. pockets of soils such as

the Wagram. soil groupwithin the'Lakeland-Rimini-Wagram Associations

which contain favorable soil,s. Severe limitations for almost all

community development type uses are found.in the Leon-Rutlege-Pactolus

and Capers Soil Associations. Thus, the soils in the Southport area are

generally poor outside the Lakeland-Rimini7Wagram SoilAssociation.

Fortunatelys as one can see from the General Soil Map, post of the total

land area is within.the Lakeland-Rimini-Wagram. Associationo

Phillips, Joseph A. and others Soil Associations of-theI Coastal
Area Management Area. NCSU June., 1975.

SCS, @n Appraisal f Potential for outdoor Recreation Development

SOIL INTERPRETATIONS CHART

SOUTHPORT, N. C.

Limitations For
% Dwellings with Recreation Suitability For
of Septic Tank Intensive Light 1 2 General
Sail Associations Assoc. Sewerape System Filter Fields Camp Sites Ptcn@,c Argas Play Areas Paths & Trails Industry -Roads & Stre_et@ Agricu'4ture Woode
LAKELANL-RIMINI-WAGRAM 3 Fair-Poor Poor
Lakeland 60 Slight Slight-Sever Severe ST Severe ST Severe ST Severe ST Moderate BS Slight
Rimini 20 Slight Severe-Perc Severe ST Severe ST Severe ST Severe ST Slight Slight Poor Poor
Wagram 10 Slight Slight Moderate ST Moderate ST Severe ST Severe ST Slight Slight Fair-Good Fair

LEON-RUTLEGE-PACTOLUS
Leon 55 Severe WT Severe WT Severe WT Severe WT Severe WT Severe ST Severe WT Severe WT Poor Fair
Rutlege 20 Severe WT Fl Severe WT Fl Severe WT Fl Severe WT F1 Severe WT Fl Severe WT F1 Severe WT F1 Severe WT F1 Poor Fair-Good
Pactolus 15 Moderate 9evere WT Moderate Severe WT Moderate Severe WT Moderate WT Fl Moderate Severe WT Moderate WT F1 Severe WT Moderate Severe Wr Fair Fair

BIBB-LUMBEE-JOHNSTON
Bibb 40 Severe WT Fl Severe WT F1 Severe WT F1 Severe WT F1 Severe WT Fl Severe WT F1 Severe WT F1 Severe WT F1 Poor Good
Lumbee 20 Severe WT.Fl Severe WT Fl Se.vere WT Traf Severe WT Traf Severe WT Traf Severe WT Fl Severe WT Fl Severe WT F1 Fair-Good Good
Johnston 20 Severe WT Fl Severe WT Fl Severe WT Fl Severe WT Fl Severe WT Fl Seyere WT Fl Severe WT F1 Severe WT Fl Poor Good

CAPERS 100 Severe WT Fl Severe WT Fl Severe WT Fl Severe WT F1 Severe WT Fl Severe Fl TSC Severe Fl TSC Severe Fl TSC Poor Poor

Structures whose footings are in subsoil Abbreviations for Limiting Factors: Definitions of Soils Limitations

Refers to roads and streets that have BS - Bearing Strength None to Soils have properties favorable for the rated use. Limita-
subsoils for base FL - Flood Hazard Slight tions are so minor that they can be easily overcome. Good
WT - Water Table performance and low maintenance can be expected from these
Possible contamination of shallow water Traf - Trafficability Soils.
supply Perc - Percolation Rate
TSC Traffic Supporting Capacity Moderate Soils have properties moderately favorable for the rated
ST Surface Texture use. Limitation can be overcome or modified with
planning, design, or special maintenance.

Severe Soils have one or more properties unfavorable for the
rated use. Limitations are difficult and costly to modify
URCE: SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE, BRUNSWICK COUNTY or overcome, requiring major sail reclamationo special
AN APPRAISAL OF POTENTIAL FOR OUTDOOR design or intense maintenance.
RECREATION DEVELOPMENT, AUGUST 1973

Hydrogeology
An understanding of the hydrogeology of the area is the first step
toward evaluating the availability, occurrence, and chemical quality of
the ground water in the planning area. The void spaces between the rock

materials that underlie Southeast constitute the reservoir in which the
water is stored and the conduits through which the water moves, While a
thorough examination of the geology and ground water has. not been completed
at this times there are pertinent facts that have been completed by the Regional
Hydrologist with North Carolina Department of Natural and, Economic Resources.
"Although located in the Lower Cape Fear River, Basins Southport is not
in a designated public water supply watershed, since surface, waters do not
supply the City; Class A2 surface waters are unavailable for use and hence,

ground water resources supply all water needs.

Hydrogeologically Southport is complex., A post-miocene aquifer

exists between land surface and approximately 40 feet below land surface;

this aquifer consists of sand-and contains potable water under water table

conditions. Below the post-miocene is the tertiary system aquifer, the

primary source of Southport's water supply. Porous and permeable limestone

provides the geologic framework in which excellent quality ground water
is stored under artesian near artesian conditions. The tertiary system
aquifer is approximately 140 feet thick and. extends from 40 feet below,

land surface and 200 feet below land surface. Probably, the post-miocene

aquifer and the tertiary sustem aquifer are hydraulically connected.

Between 200 feet below land surface and 1550 feet below land surface

is the upper, middle, and low cretaceous system acquifer. Brackish ground

water is contained within unconsolidated sands under artesian and flowing

artesian conditions. Basement hard rock is encountered at 1550 feet below

land surface.

Memo from Mr. Rick Shiver,, Regional Hydrologist, N. C. Department
of Natural and. Economic Resources, Wilmington September,1975

Ground water recharge to the post-miocene 'aquifer by direct inf-Itration

of rainfall is active in Southport. As the post-miocene aquifer is

hydraulically connected to the tertiary system aquifer2 recharge to the

pos.t-miocene aquifer results in effective recharge to the tertiary'system

aquifer.

Groundwater from the post-miocene aquifer is of potable quality and

exists in significant quantity. Ground water from.the.tertiary system

aquifer is of excellent potable quality and is available in large quantities.

However, it is'suspected that the quality and quantity of ground.water from

both aquifers is.in jeopardys is, suspected (bult.not yet substantiated)

that the Brunswick Steam Electric Plant (CP&L) canal, the inland waterway,

and the dredged Cape Fear River are man-made activities which have allowed

brackish water to enter the post-Miocene aquifer and tertiary system aquifer.

Therefore, these suspected sources are responsible for initiat,ing/,

accentu.ating a salt water encroachment problem. To preclude further

quantity and quality problems, man-made activities which would have

detrimental effects on the aquifers should be avoided.

Southport is served by three wells which tap the tertiary system

aquifer. The wells are nearly 175 feet in total depth and collectively

yield 700 GPM. It. is suspected that.these wells are now beginning.to

exhibit a quality problem related tc s alt water, encroachmenf; and.., hence,

deserve close quality monkto ring. To date quantity: of.waterjs not a

problem and with future reasonable use should 06 t present a-problem.'
in summary, the aquifers of significance are the post-miocene'.and

tertiary system aquifer., Past m4n-made,actf.vities are suspected. to.. have

resulted in quality problems in both@aquifers,. _7t,is vital that future

activities avoid additional qualityjmpairm@nt. @Quantity of ground water

is.not now a problem and future quanti,ty.problems are not@anticipated,
assuming reasonable.us,e. Southport's impending use of central suWies

precludes a lengthy discussion on future wafer planning.11.

b. Fragile Areas

Coastal Wetlands

Coastal wetlands are defined as "any salt marsh or other marsh subject
to regular or occasional flooding by tides, including wind tides (whether
or not the tide wat ers reach the marshland areas through natural or art'ifi-
cial watercourses), provided this shall not include hurricane or tropical
storm tides. (See map; Fragile Areas) Coastal wetlands may be considered
in two categories: low tidal marshlaud serves as a crItical component in
the coastal ecosystem. The marsh is the basis for the high net yield system
of the estuary through the production of'organ detritus (partially decomposed
plant material) which is the prime input source for the food chain of the
entire estuarine system. In addition, the roots and rhizomes of the Spartina
alterniflora serve as waterfowl food and the stems as wildlife nesting
material. Low tidal marsh also serves as the first line of defense in re-
tarding shoreline erosion. Other coastal marshland contributes to the detritu
supply and provides quality wildlife and waterfowl habitat depending on the
biological and physical conditions of the marsh.
Most of the wetlands In Brunswick County are of the bog type and support
good habitat for wildlife. The marsh near Southport provides good clapper
rail shooting but public hunting opportunities for waterfowl in general are
poor. Most waterfowl hunting is done on private property along the Cape Fear
River. Except for a few marsh areas along the Cape Fear River and the coast
and some swamp in the Waccamaw an&Cape Fear river basins,the development
potential for waterfowl in the county is poor.

Source: SCS An Appraisal of Potentials for Outdoor Recreational Develop
ment.

-Coastal Resources Commission, "State Guidelines for Local Planning
January 27, 1975 P. 49-51

Kenneth A. Wilson, N. C. Wetlands, Their Distribution and Management,
Wildlife Resources Commission, Raleigh-April, 1962, P. 43

Protection of wetland areas requires the proper control of man's
activities to prevent disturbing significantly the terrain and impairing
the quality of the wetland area, Alteration in quantity or quality of the
natural flow of water, which nourishes the ecosystem, should be minimized.

Estuarine Waters
Estuarine waters are defined in G.S. 113-229 (n)(2) as, "all the water
of the Atlantic Ocean within the boundary of North Carolina and all the
waters of the sounds, rivers, and tributaries thereto seaward of the dividing
line between coastal fishing waters and inland fishing waters, as set forth
in an agreement adopted by the Wildlife Resources Commission and the-Depart--;
ment of Conservation and Development filed with the Secretary of State eu-
titled "Boundary Lines, 'North Carolina Commercial Fishing - Inland Fishing
Waters, revised March 1, 1965.11
Estuaries are among the most productive natural environments of North
Carolina. They not only support valuable commercial and sports fisheries,
but are also utilized for commercial navigation, recreation, and aesthetic.
purposes. Species dependent upon estuaries such as menhaden, shrimp, flounder,
oysters and crabs make up over 90% of the total value of North Carolina's
commercial catch. These species must sp9nd all.or some part oftheir life
cycle in the estuary. The high level of commercial and spor,t'fisheries and
the aesthetic appeal of Coastal North Carolina is dependent upon the protection
and sustained quality of our estuarine areas.
Areas Containing Unique Geological Formations
These are places that contain surface or near surface formations that are
either themselves unique or are especially unusual or notable examples. of
geologic formations or processes in the coastal area@ The formations are
tentatively identified as "Carolina Bays" and,are a much discussed feature of

the Coastal Plain.
The large area north 6f the new Southport Primary School displays
characteristics of the Carolina Bay formation while the small ones to the south
are somewhat lacking in characteristics associated with Carolina Bays.
Throughout Brunswick County there are depressions which resemble Carolina Bays,
but lack some of the essential characteristics..

*-Coastal Resources Commission, "State Guidelines for Local.Planning

Mr. Maynard Owens, SCS telephone conversation, October 9, 1975..

Carolina Bays are shallow elliptical depressions, some occupied by lakes
and there is disagreement as to their origin--meteorite scars or solution
depression.

Historic Sites
Of the historic sites listed on the next two pages, only Fort Johnston is
recognized in the National Register of Historic Places. All the other sites
should be considered as potential historic sites in the future.

Public Trust Areas
Areas such as waterways and lands under or flowed by tidal waters or navigable
waters, to which the public may have rights of access or public trust rights and
areas which the State of North Carolina may be authorized to preserve, conserve,
or protect under Article XIV, Section 5, of the North Carolina Constitution.

Other Fragile Areas

The Southport planning area contai ns other fragile areas such as wooded swamps
and prime wildlife habitats particularly along Dutchman Cottage and Prices Creek.
One notable scenic area is along the Cape Fear River west bank.

c. Areas with Resource Potential

Areas with resource potential incluce productive and unique.agricultural
lands; potentially valuable mineral sites; publicly owned forests, parks., fish
and game lands, and other nonintensive outdoor recreation lands; and privately
owned wildlife sanctuaries.

There are no known areas of resource potential in the Southport planning area.

_J_
114 Ile Historic Sites

Arrington House (architecture)
location Atlantic Avenue and Bay Street
@description - unknown date - considered haunted-
present use - private residence

Fort Johnston -The Garrison (architecture, military)
location - Bay Street
description - The Garrison housed his majesty's troops from,1745-1764;
burned by Whigs 1775, rebuilt in 1794-1809
,present use - residence of commanding officer.of Sunny Point

St. Pbilli2s Espicopal Church (architecture, religion)
location - Courthouse Square
description - first established in Brunswick Town in 1.754; present
structure was erected in 1851; original furnishings are in' evidence

Old Southport CemeterX
location - Moore Street
description - dates from 1760
present use - Southport landmark

Frying Pan Lightship
location - foot of Howe Street
description - ship guarded Fry Pan Shoals; built in 1929, replaced
in 1964 by light tower, given to Southport by United States Coast Guard
present use - navigational museum

Brunswick County Courthouse
location - Courthouse Square on Moore Street
description - third location but not the last, erected in 1842

Whittler's Bench
location - foot of Howe Street
description - originally a Lombardy-Poplar and two ancient gnarled
.cedars formed popular shady spot fo.r,sailors,and townspeople to con-
gregate.

Old Thompson House
location - Bay Street
description - example of widow's watch used to scan borizon for return-
in& ships or planning voyages; once owned by-Captain Thomas M. Thompson,
who collected treasures from over the world; he was also famous Civil
War blockage runner
present use private residence

9 Franklin Square-"The Grove"
location - Howe Street
description land bequeatbed to town by Governor Benjamin Smith for
educational, fraternal, religious, and recreational purposes; contains

an old hand water pump

9 City Hall
description - stately colonial structure looks out upon Franklin Square;
built in 1904 by Masonic Lodge; it has functioned as a school, American
Legion Hut, community center and new seat of Town Government.

9 "Four Sisters"
description - a rare arrangement of canopying giant live oaks hundreds
of years old, directly behind City Hall.

10 Prices Creek Lighthouse
location - 2 miles north of Southport on Cape Fear River,
description - brick ruins largely intact built in 1851 as a range
light, taken over by South In 1861 used as telegraph signal station;
after Civil War abandoned; Pfizer, Inc. plans to restore.

11 Price-Davis Family Cemetery
location.- West Street behind First Apostolic Church
description - secluded old burying ground

12 Indian Trail Tree-Keziah Park
location - corner of Moore and Lord Streets
description ancient and gnarled live Oak is estimated to be over
800 years old; Believed that Indians bent this tree marking route
to fishing grounds reported in Ripley's Believe it or Not; Named in
honor of W. B. Keziah known as "Mr. Chamber of Commerce."

13 Old Southport Hospital

location- Atlantic Avenue and West Street
description - moved from N. Bay Street sometime after Civil War; used
as first real hospital reported to be. the oldest remaining building
in Southport prior to 1790's
present use private residence

14 Bonnet's Creek
location - E. Moore Street
description - Stede Bonnet, supposedly "Gentleman Pirate" hid his vessel
The Royal James, here; Bonnet's lady love. lived in Southport; she
reportedly buried her diary here; this controversial pirate was captured
November 8, 1718 by Colonel William Rhett, and died on the gallows with
a handful of followers in Charleston, South Carolina

Source: North Carolina Division of Archives History
County Historic Site Inventory; Brunswick County Historic Society;

The Bald Head Island Gazette, M. A. Page; "Southport Scenic Driving
Town" 1975

FRAGILE AREAS

COASTAL
WETLANDS
ESTUARINE WATERS Ew
AREAS CONTAINING UNIQUE GEOLOGICAL GF
FORMATIONS (POTENTIAL)

c w

w OF
jz
co cw
...... cw

Secti on 2 Capacity of Corou h i tY Fad I i ti es

Water System

Southport is served by three wells which tap the Tertiary System

Aquifer. The wells are nearly 175.feet in total depth and collectively yield

700 gallons per minute. Conceivably this system could provide 504,000

gallons per day (12-hour demand). From January 19@74 to July 1974, the

.,average water used was approximately 2118,206 gallons per day. Thus, the

water system is presently operating at 43 percent-capacity. However,

there are many other factors to consider before determining excess capacity.

Nevertheless, 25 percent more of capacity could be utilized and, still pro-.,

vide a very reasonable safety factor.

For a discussion of water quality and future planning needs,', see the'

section entitled "Hydrogeology", in this.report., For an ido-utif-ication.of,water,

service area including expansion consult the Corimnunity Facilities Plan

and Proposed Water and Sewer System Extension.

Sewer System.

Southport's,wastewater treatment plant has a designed capacity of

300,000 gallons perday. The average monthly flow was 130,!000 ga llon� per

day in August, 1974. It is anticipated that,the proposed sewer extension

will generate an additional 14.6,000, -gallons per day, thus,,,,pXo4@icing@-a@..._fo.ta,l
ly"A
of 276,000 gallons per day. Estimated monthly flow is 175 to-200 thousand

4 Oepa'rtment of Natural and Economic Resources, Division of Community,
Assistance, Communi Ity Facilities Plan, Sou Ithport, N. C. March, 1974 p..8

Henry von Oesen and Associates, Proposed Waterand Sewer System
Extension.:Southport, N. C. 1972

F. Tyndall Lewis, Regional'Engineer in a memorandum to Engineerin g
Branch, Env. Mgt. Div., approvin
gsewer line construction August 2, 1974

gallons per day in September..1975, with construction roughly 60 percent.

complete. Therefore, once sewer extension is complete the wastewater

treatment plant will be.operating at approximately 92 percent capacity.

For a discussion of future planning needst and identification of.sewer

service area including expansion consuLt the Community Facilities Plan

and Proposed Water and Sewer System Extension.

Thoroughfares

According to the Highway Capacity Manual, the practical.capacity

for two lanes plus parking.for two way traffic is 5,700-8,200 vehicles,

per day. Capacity is defined as.the maximum number of vehicles which hap

a reasonable expectation of passing over a given section of a lane or a

roadway in both directions during a given time period under prevailing

roadway and traffic conditions. Based on this standard, the only thorough-

fare in the Southport Planning area which warrants improvement is North

Howe Street at the city limits. This street is -on the State Highway System

(G.S. 136 Article jA) and in 1974 had an average daily. traffic count

of 8850 vehicles per day. However, there ar other factors-(i.e..desi&n,

cost, traffic generators,,,accident frequency origin-destination studies,

etc.) besides capacity analysis which must be@considered before alterationF

are made.

Southeastern Field Office, Env.,Mgt. Div. Wilmington, N. C.

Department of Natural and Economic Resources Community Facilities
Plan p. IO/Henry von Oesen'. Proposed Water and Sewer System Extension

Highway Research Board, Highway Capacity Manual,, Special Report 87, 1965.

Educational Facilities

There are,three educational facilities administered 4y the.Brunswick.coun',ty
Board of Education which serve theSouthport Planning Area. The City of Southport
actually has little or no authority with regard to school policies.' The three
facilities are:

Southport Primary K-4
Design capacity: 600,pupils
1974-75 enrollment (last day): 487
Pupil/Teacher ratio: 21:1.
Future plans: K-5 grade with,the additfon of 8'classrooms

Southport Middle School 5-8
Design capacity: 500 pupils
197.4-75 enrollment (last day):.,. 493"
Pupil/Teacher ratio: 27:1,
Future plans: 6-8 grade with the construction of,a new
junior school

South Brunswick High School 9-12 (locatedJn Boiling Springs
Design Capacity: 750 pupils Lake, N. C.)@
1974-75 enrollment (last day): 636
Pu
pil/Teacher ratio: 28:1
Future plans: construction of'. additional'. shop facil ities.

Article V - Estimated Demand

Section 1: Population and Economy

In order to better understand population projections and population

change, historic population and current estimates are summarized below.

Population change is the result of birth., deaths and migration. Migration

is the most difficult variable to predict because it, is subject to so

many outside factors,

Under the historic population. count we see that the City of Southport's

percent increase from 1930 to 1970 has been less than either Smithville

Township or Brunswick County, It should also be noted that Southport

from: 1930 to 1970 has represented an average 9.8 percent of the County's

total population.

The two, basic sources of regional population projections are the

OBERs Series E projections,, which uses projected economic growth to account
for the regional distribution of population, and North Carolina Population

Projection Model,, which is based upon births, deaths, and observed trends

(1970-73 in migration. The OBERs Series data are disaggregated from

larger multicounty Bureau of Economic Analysis economic areas. The 1973

adjusted trend projections are adjustments of the previous trend projections

based on a comparison of observed migration from 1970-73 with predicted

migration.

Due to Southport's small size and lack of a data base it is more,

accurate to discuss population changes at the, county 1evel Brunswick
54

County has grown very rapidly since 1970 because of several large construction
jobs around Southport. The beach areas have contributed to this growth also.
Continuation of this growth, without further economic development, is doubtful
because construction workers are very mobile and will probably move on when the
projects are completed. Although outmigration will occur, it is not likely to
continue to 1980 because the Wilmington SMSA which includes Brunswick County is
growing. It is likely that attendant development resulting from major projects
will cause the population in Southport and Brunswick County to level off slightly
higher in 1980 than at present. Therefore, the most accurate projection appears
to be the 1973 Adjusted Trend for 1980, 1990 and 2000. Consequently, most of the
population growth expected between 1970 and 1980 has already occurred.
The economic boom that has engulfed Southport and Brunswick County has begun
to level off. According to two economic indicators such as personal income and
employment characterists Brunswick County has improved but still lags behind
the state in most cases. Since November 1974, the unemployment rate has continued
to increase: January 1975 - 12.1% May 1975 - 12.7% and August 1975 - 14.8%.
Projecting future economic conditions is a most difficult task, since many factors
are dependent upon the national economy and are beyond the control of the local
decisions makers.
N.C. Employment Security Commission
55

HISTORIC POPULATION

Ave. Percent of 1930 1940 Percent Change 1950 Percent Change 1960 Percent Change 1970 Percent Change Percent ChangE
County 1930-70 1930-40 1940-50 1950-60 19.60-70 1930-70

Southport* 90@8 lp760 1,760 0 1,7418 -.7 2,034 16,3 29220 9.1 26.1

Smithville Twp- 17.10 2,912 2p936 .8 2,873 -2 3s,355 16.7. 4,,346 29.5 49.2

Brunswick Go. 15,818 17..125 8 199238 12.3 20,278 5.4 24.,223 19.4 41.4

Source: U.S. Dept. of Commerce 19500 1960., 1970 U.S. Census of Population

AVERAGE PERMANENT RESIDENT POPUIATION
19731 1974 1 1975
Southport* 2,,730 20900 NIA2
3
Brunswick CountY 299800 31s,900 35.9621

City Only
I As of July I according to N.C. Dept. of Administration, OSP
2 Not available because of small data base
3 As of January 1 according to Brunswick County Planning Dept.

POPUIATION PROJECTION

1980 1985, 1990 2000

Southport*

OBER Series E 3tO38 3'445 3,851 4P508
1973 Adjusted Trefid 3,136 31641 4il45 5,341

Brunswick County

OBER Series E 31,000 35i ;50, 39000 46,000
1973 Adjusted Trend 32,000 37,150 429300 54S600
Brunswick Go. Planning Dept. 41,914 523583 61$199 83$768

@City only

Source: U.S. Dept. of Commerceq'Bureau of Economic@Analysis
N.C. Dept. of Administration, OSP
Brunswick County Planning Dept.

However, there are some ke economic indicators which have-been
@y

projected by the U. S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis
by regions. In any event there are assumptions made., which if proved
erroneous,, could render the outcome.totally invalid.. if we apply the@
1970 percent of county population of total regional population to,r'egiona,l
employment, we arrive at a county projected employment,?

Year 1980.. 1990 2000
Total Employment 91,249 11V787 J3.,324

If.we apply the population projections discussed earlier to the projected
Total County personal ome, we arrive at projected per capita pers Ional

income for Brunswick County:

Yeai 1980 1990, 2000

Population
320000. 39.?300
Total County Personal Income $92,158 $142 $222,56 8.
143 8.
Per Capita Personal Income $ 24880, $ 3,624 419838

Per capita personal income is all money earned divided by every man, woman,
and child. Naturally, this is below the average family or household income
Unfortunately, these projections are based on,data which has occurred between
1950, 1960 and 1970 and do not in any. way reflect what has occurred since 1970.
We have every reason to believe that the local economy is.in better shape than,
indicated by these two factors.

Section 2: Future Land Use,Needs

The existing patterns of development were analyzed under the section

N. C. Dept. ofAdministration. Office of State Budget, Statistical Abstract,
pg. 207 1973

-42-

entitled "Existing Land Use" in this report. However, a brief summary

of those findings and a comparison to the April 1968, Land Use Analysis where

appropriate will be beneficial to understanding future land needs.

Land Use

Within Corporate Limits
Approximate
Category 1974 Acreag 1968 Acreage
1. Residential 360.0 200
2. Commercial 22.4 11
3. Industrial 1.6 2
4. Transportation, Communication
and Utilities 186.0 125
5. Government & Institutional 69.5 45
6. Cultural, Entertainment &
Recreational 3.2 2

Subtotal Developed 642.7 .387

7. Agriculture* & Forestland 235.5
8. Wetlands 244.0
9. Undeveloped 120.0
Total 1142 i. 2

Comparisons for the last three categories are inappropriate because of

dissimilar categories and differences in interpretations. Since residential

land use is the largest category, it deserves special review. As one can

readily see this land use increased 80 percent from 1968 to 1974, Reasons

for this astounding increase have already been identified. Yet it is

Included in forestland due to photo data

Source: 1974 Land Use Information
Soil Conservation Service aerial photos (2/4/72)
N. 0. DNER, DCA Windshield Survey (12/74) dwelling unitp 779
N. C. DOT Aerial Photos (12/1,8/74"
1968 Land Use Information
N. C. DNER, DCA Land Use Analysis, Southport, N. C. 1968 p. 62

probable that this increase will not continue. There -are several methods

for forecasting future acreage requirements for new residential construction,
ail of which have basic assumptions but normally employ the family or.

household as the key element.' For the City.of Southport,, tbe.number of

new dwelling units needed in 1985 is 161.3 (1974-1985: population Increase

of 600 persons divided by 3.72 -persons. per dwelling unit). New dwelling

units needed is converted to an acreage requirement -of 74.2 acres (new dwelling

@units divided by 2.16 dwelling units per residential acre in 1974). This

method involves assumptions as to a constant household size,, stable vacancy

rate and no losses in existing stock',of dwelling units from demolition, fire

or other catastrophes. Because of this and the.fact that the metbodAoes

not provide flexibility for the location of@additional employment generators,

a safety factor of 25 percen t is added, to produce a total residential acreage

need in 1985 of 92.8 acres.

Due to a lack of pertinent data and asmall amount of acres in the

other land use categories., acreage requirements are determined below by

dividing projected population growth (600 persons) by persons per acre

in 1974.

F- Stuart Chapin Urban Land Use Piannir!gs University of Illinoir PrerF,
Urbana 1965 pg. 423

Land Use Needs

Within Corporate Limits
Approximate 1985 Acreage
Category 1974 Acreage Persons per acre Requirement**
1. Residential 360.0 8.i 74.1
2. Commerci-11, @22.4 1.29.5 4.6
3. Industrial 1.6 181.3 3.3
4. Transportation, Communication
and Utilities 186.0 15.6 38.4
5. Goverrunent & Institutional 69.5 41.1 14.3
6. Cultural, Entertainment &
Recreational 3.2 .906.3 .6

p
Subtotal Developed 642.7 @4. 5 Total '135.3

7. Agriculture* & Fo Irestland 23505
plus 25% safety
8. Wetlands 244.0 factor Total 1.69. 0'
9. Undeveloped 120.0

Total @1242.2 2.3

Included in forestland due to photo date.,

Does not include safety factor

Source: Land Use Information
.Soil Conservation Service aerial photos (2/4/72)
C. DNERt DCA Windshield Survey'(12/74)
N. C. DOT Aerial, Pho,tos (12/l8/74)

Total acres required to-accomodate development in 1985 is 135.3 acres.

If a safety factor of 25 percent is addedtben., the total 'acres needed to

accomodate all land uses resulting from new growth,in 1985 is 169.1 acres,.

Section 3: Community-Facillities Demand

TEN-YEAR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM FOR SOUTHPORT*

The Public Improvements Program for the City of Southport includes only
the public improvements for which the city is directly responsible and which
must be provided for in the City's Capital Improvements Budget.

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS PROJECTS FOR FISCAL 1974-1979

Improvement Items, Justification

1. Remodel present city hall to 1. This would provide adequate
provide adequate office space and office space for the town adminis"
paint the exterior of the building. trative functions without the need.to,
expand the existing structure.

2. Complete extensions of the 2. This would provide an Adequate
water distribution system as water sys'tem to the city for the
recommended by the water and sewer next twenty years. It wouldalso-
system planning report. serve the new junior high school
and the small boat harbor.

3. Complete extensions of the sewer 3. This would provide an adequate
system and increase the capacity of sewage system meeting federal and
the sewage treatment plant. state requirements for the projected
growth of the community in the next
twenty years.

4. Acquire sufficient land for 4. As a recreational and resort
a civic center complex adjacent to the area, the city is in need of a.
new junior high school site. facility to house large groups and
to provide recreati.onal. and cultural
activities.

5. Purchase the land adjacent to the 5. This would complete the second
fishing pier to provide a picnic and phase of this federally funded
open space area on the waterfront. program. Federal monies have already
been appropriated for this acquisi.tion.

6. Purchase a new utility truck for 6. This is done to insure dependable,
the volunteer fire department and the safe, and low maintenance transportation.
necessary safety equipment needed.

7. Replace street, water, and 7. This heavy equipment should be
sewer department equipment on a replaced on a regular basis to insure
staggered time basis at five year low maintenance and high performance.
intervals.

N.C. Department of Nat.ur;-.1 andEconomic Resources, Division of Community Assistance
Community Facilities Plan Southport, N. ,C. Farch, 1974.

Improvement Items. Justification

8. Purchase a new bucket truck for 8., This vehicle is now ten years
the electrical department. old. To insure dependable service
and low maintenance, it should be
replaced every five years.

9. Purchase new patrol vehicles for 9. This is done to insure dependable,
the Police Department every two years., safe'and low maintenance transportation.
Additionally,.this would be a predicable
and easily planned for expense.

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT FOR FISCAL 1979-1.984

Improvement Items. Justification

1. Acquire sufficient land at the .1. This site would protect'a small
end of Willis Drive to develop a portion of the riverfront area and'
riverside park. provide recreational facilities to
the 'residents of Southpqrt'andto
the many tourist-that Viisit the area.
2. Purchase new patrol vehicles 2. Same.as-#.9 under Fiscal'Yea.rs
at a two year interval. @1974-1979.'

3. Purchase new street, water and 3. Same as #7 under Fiscal Years
sewer department equipment on a staggered 1974-1970.,
basis at five year intervals.

4.' Pave the parking area of the town 4. This is needed for the overall
garage and provide sufficient buffersto protection of the stored vehicles
shield the adjoining areas. and.to, shield "ifie. adjacent property
from the" activities- and storage
facilities of the',area. ,

5. Pave the existing parking facili- 5. This would provide an adequate
ties adjacent to City Hall and mark off -parking area and would prevent
spaces. haphazard parking arrancemen.ts.

6. Construct a new fire station '6. The present fire station has no
with room for expansion and proper room.for exponsion or for additional
maintenance of equipment. equipment and.the present facilities
are .inadequate for maintenance of
equipment and,,; training.
7. Purchase foam equipment 7. This would@provide better-fire
forthe Fire Department. protection to the city a,nd expand
their present service...

Table I

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM FISCAL YEAR 1974-1975 THROUGH FISCAL-YEAR 108-1979

General
Revenue Current
Depa rtments and Projects Total Cost Assistance Assistance Bonds Sharing Revenue 1974-1975 1975-1976 1976-1977 1977-1978 1978-1979

Fire Department

10 H.P. Fire Siren 3,000 1,600 1,600 3,300
1,000 ft. of Double Jacket
2 112 inch fire hose 1,900 1,900 1,900
Rescue Equipment 2,500 $ 2,500 $ 2.500
1 Utility Truck 4,200 $ 4,200 4,200

Police Department

7 new automobiles
normal replacement 24,500 24,500 3,500 1 7,500 3,500 7,000 3,566

City Administration

City Hall Remodeling 10.000
5,000 5,000

Water System

Water Line Extension 4 -197,000 $132000 $ 65,000 $197,000

Sewer System

Extension of Lines and
Upg,rading Treatment
Plant 646' 060 $276jOOO $370 000 $646,000

Table I Cont'd.-

CAPITAL IMPROVEMMS PROGRAM FISCAL YEAR 1974-1975 THROUGH FISCAL YEAR 1978-1979

General
Federal State Revenue Current
Departments and Projects Total Cost Assistance Assistance Bonds Sharing Revenue 1974-1975 1975-1976 1976-1977 1977-1978 1978-1979

Sanitation Department

1 new Packer $ 12,000 12,000 $12,000

Electric Department

1 Pickup Truck $ 4,200 $ 4,200 $ 4,200
1 Bucket Truck $ 18,500 189500 18,500

Streets Department

2 2-ton Trucks $ 12,200 12,200 $ 6,100 $ 6,100
-11/2-ton Pickup Truck $ .4,200 .4,200 $ 4,200 $
1 3/4-ton Pickup Truck :7 00 $ 7,000 $ 7,000
1 Street Sweeper $ 15:0000 $ 15,000 $ 15.000

Recreation

Water Front Park Land
Acquisition 27,500 3,750 $23,750 7,500 $10,000 $ 10,000
.$ 10,000
Civic Center Complex 240,000 -$200,000 $40,000 $40,000 $111,500 -$111,500
Total $1,230,000 @613,350 $410,000 $435,000 $33,750 $107,000 $885,400 $84,300 $144,200 $135,500 $ 3,500

Furthermore, while it is not considered a capital improvement item, the
city will have to consider the employment of a full time fireman due to pro-
jected growth. This will also permit the City to gain a lower class fire rating
07) which will bring about a reduction in fire insurance rates.

Article VI Plan Implementation

Prior to 1974, 'ocal land use plans were purely advisory in nature. Local
governments often adopted comprehensive plans and then proceded to ignore them
by zoning land and building facilities in a manner inconsistent with the plan.
Undcr the Coastal Area Management Act of .1974 the development of land use plans
is,just the initial phase of the coastal area management program, for this is a
continuing process calling for periodic review (at least once after five years)
and revision to keep the plan current, and for management of other governmental
actions in a manner consistent with the plans.

The law requires each town.desiring to develop its.own implementation
and enforcement plan to identify a "designated local official" to review,
-process and issue permits in Areas of Environmental.Concern.

While regulations called for in the act relate only to permit authority,
affecting designated Areas.of Environmental Concern, the permits need to be
coordinated with both the local land use plan and other existing regulations.
The really crucial part of the program will be to see if the local plans can be
effectively used to guide government actions--by local, state, and federal
agencies--within the local jurisdiction.

Section 1: Intergovernmental Coordination

In Southport there are two local units of government which provide services
to the City and have authority to levy taxes. These two units are: the City.of
Southport and the County of Brunswick. Historically, counties have been responsible
for software services (i.e., health, education and.welfare) while municipalities
were responsible for hardware services (i.e4, water, sewer, streets and sani.tation).

However with a changing demographic picture, both cities and counties have
initiated services of both types. Coordination of services between Southport and
Brunswick County are very few. However, agreements in several areas should be
explored. Possible areas for joint services include recreation, wastewater
treatmentt historic district commission, -water service, and housing rehabilitation.
The degree to which any of these service agreements can be achieved will be deter-
mined by the cost involved. The cost in turn can be held to a !nin.imum.by land use
control. Only Southport has authority to regulate the use of land Putside,AECs.

The City of Southport shall continue to coordinate all plans for its develop-
ment with those of other governmental agencies.,

Coordination in the development of the Land Use Plan between Brunswick County
and Southport has been achieved through informal meetings by planning staff and by
citizens through attendance at County Advi'sory Committee meetings.

Section 2: Land Classification System

The North Carolina Land Classification System contains five classes of land:
a. Developed--Lands where existing population density is moderate to
high and where there are a variety of land uses which have the
necessary public services.
b. Transition--Lands where local government plans to accommodate moderate,
to high density development during the following ten year period and
where necessary public services will be provided to accommodate that
growth.
c. Communi@y'--Lands where low density development is grouped in existing
settlements or will occur in such settlements-during the following
ten year period and which will not require extensive public services
now or in the future.
d. Rural--Lands whose highest use is-for agriculture, forestry, mining,
water supply, etc., based on their natural resources potential. Also,

lands for future needs not currently recognized.
e. Conservation--Fragile, hazard and other lands necessary to maintain.
a healthy natural environment and necessary to provide for@the public
health, safety or welfare.

These five classes provide a framework to be used by the City to'.identify
the general use of all lands within the corporate limits. Such a'system presents
an opportunity for Southport to provide for its needs as well as to consider
those of the whole state. Also, it is a statement of policy on where and to
what dens'ity we want growth to occur, and where we want to conserve the City's
natural resources by guiding growth.

Applying this system to Southport as shown on the accompanying map, land
falls into four categories: Conservation, Developed, Transition, and Rural.
Conservation represents all land identified as AECs an d where soil conditions
will not support development. Developed land is the area within city limits
which presently have the necessary public services.

Since an objective as stated in the section "Objectives and Policies for
Dealing with Issues" is to encourage development within the existing corporate
limits and avoid urban sprawl, then it is reasonable to hope that a percentage
of the new growth occur in the Developed Land Class (where water and sewer service
is, and the density is 4.5 persons per acre using just the developed acres).
How much should occur and would occur is debatable. Undeveloped land within the
city limits accounts for 120 acres. Fifty percent of this land should be used for
new growth ---- 109 acres remains to be accommodated, most likely in the
extraterritorial area. Consequently, the Transition Land Class is allocated the
109 acres beyond the city limits near areas already developed.

Thus, Transition includes land that will be provided water and sewer service
within the next ten years. The remainder of the land area is classified as Rural
for future land needs not currently recognized.

111

" cl'%44,0@ 1.4@ -,@e

Section 3: Areas of Environmental Concern

1.0 Coastal Wetlands - General

Coastal wetlands are defined as "any salt marsh or other marsh

subject to regular or occasional flooding by tides, including wind

tides (whether or not the tide waters reach the marshland areas

through natural or artificial watercourses),provided this shall not

include hurricane or tropical storm tides. Salt marshland or other

marsh shall be those areas upon which grow some, but not necessarily
all, of the following salt marsh and marsh plant species: Smooth or

salt water Cordgrass (Spartina alterniflora); Black Needlerush

(Juncus roemerianus); GlAsswort (Salicornia spp.); Salt Grass

(Distichlis Spicata); Sea Lavender (Limonium spp.); Bulrush (Scirpus

spp.); Saw Grass (Cladium Jamaicense); Cat-Tail (Typha spp.); Salt-

Meadow Grass (Spartina Patens); and Salt Reed Grass (spartina
cynosuroides)." Included in this statutory definition of wetlands

is "such contiguous land as the Secretary of NER reasonably deems

necessary to affect by any such order in carrying out the purposes

of this Section." (G.S. 113-230 (a))
For policy purposes, coastal wetlands may be considered in two

categories: (1) low tidal marsh; (2) other coastal marshlands which

have different significance and policy implications.

1.1 Coastal Wetlands - Low Tidal Marshland

a. Description. Defined as marshland consisting primarily of

Spartina alterniflora and usually subject to inundation by the normal

rise and fall of lunar tides.

b. Signif icance. Low tidal marshland serves as a critical

@component in the-coastal ecosystem. The marsh is the basis for the

high net yield system of the estuary through the production of

organic detritus (partially decomposed plant material) which is the

primary input source for the food chain of the entire estuarine
system, Estuarine dependent species of fish an d.shellfish such as

menhaden, shrimp, flounder, oysters and crabs currently make up over

90 percent of the total value of North, Carolina's commercial catch.

In addition, the roots and rhizomes of the, Spartina alterni-

flora serve as waterfowl food and@the stems as wildlife nesting

material. Low tidal marsh also serves as'the first line of defense'

in retarding shoreline erosion. The plant stems, and leaves.tend to

dissipate wave action while the vast network of roots resists soil

erosion. Marshes of this type operate additionally as traps for

sediment originating from upland runoff thus reducing siltation of

the estuarine bottoms and consequent detriment to.marine organisms.

C. Policy Objective. To give the highest priority to the

preservation of low tidal marshland.

d. Appropriate Land Uses. Appropriate land uses shall be
those consistent with the above policy objective'. These marshes

should be consider ed unsuitable for all development which will alter

their natural functions. Inappropriate land uses include, but are

not limited to the following examples: restaurants,and businesses;

residences, apartments, motels, hotels,.and trailer parks; parking

lots and offices; spoil and dump sites; wastewater lagoons; public

and private roads and highways; and factories-! Examples of accept-

able land uses may include utility easements, fishing piers, docks

certain agricultural uses except when excavation or filling affecting

estuarine or navigable waters is involved, and such other uses which

do not significantly alter the natural functions of the marsh.

1.2 Coastal Wetlands Other Coastal Marshland

a. Description. All other marshland which is.not low tidal

marshland and which contains the-species of vegetation as listed in

the first paragraph under Section 1.0 on page 51.

b. Significance. This marshland type also contributes to the

detritus supply necessary to the highly.productive.estuarine system

essential to North Carolina's economically valuable.cpmmercial and

sports fisheries.

The higher marsh types offer quality wildlife and waterfowl

habitat depending on the biological and physical conditions.of the

marsh. The vegetative diversity in the higher marshes usually

supports a greater diversity of wildlife.types than the limited-

habitat of the low tidal marsh. This marshland type also serves as

an important deterrent to shoreline erosion especially in those

marshes containing heavily.rooted species. The dense system of

rhizomes and roots of Juncus roemerianus are highly resistant to

erosion. In addition, the higher marshes are effective sediment traps.

c. Policy Objective. To give a high priority to the pre-
servation and management of the marsh so as to safeguard and perpetuatE

their biological, economic and aesthetic values.

d. Appropriate Land Uses. Appropriate land uses shall be those

consistent with the above policy objective.. Highest priority shall

be allocated to the conservation of existing marshlands. Second

priority for land uses allocation of this type shall be-given to

development which requires water access and cannot function anywhere

else, such as ports, docks and marinas, provided that the actual

location of such facilities within the marsh consider coastal,

physical and biological systems and further provided that feasibl e'

alternatives regarding location and design have been adequately

considered and need for such development can be demonstrated. Such

allocation may only be justified by the projected land use demands

and by community development objectives,,but in -no case shall the

allo-2ation exceed the capacity of the marshland system to sustain

losses without harm to the estuarine ecosystem unless the losses

would be offset by a clear and'substantial benefit to the public.

2.0 Estuarine Waters

a. Description. Estuarine waters are defined in G.S. 113-

229 (n) (2) as, "all the water of the Atlantic Ocean within the

boundary of North Carolina and all the waters of the bays, sounds,

rivers, and tributaries thereto seaward of the dividing line between-

coastal fishing waters and inland fishing waters, as set forth in an

agreement adopted by the Wildlife Resources Commission and the

Department of Conservation and Development filed with the Secretary

of State entitled 'Boundary Lines, North Carolina Commercial Fishing-

Inland Fishing Waters, revised March 1, 1965,111 or.as it may.be sub-

sequently revised by the Legislature.

b. Si nificance. Estuaries are among the,most productive

natural environments of North Carolina. They not only spport valu-

able commercial and sports fisheries,. but are also utilized for

commercial navigation, recreation, and aesthetic purposes. Species

dependent upon estuaries such as menhaden, shr imp, flounder, oysters

and crabs make up over 90 percent of the total.value of North

Carolina's commercial catch. These species must spend all or some,

part of their life cycle in the estuary. The high level of com-

mercial and sports fisheries and the aesthetic appeal of coastal

North Carolina is dependent-upon the protection and sustained quality

of our estuarine areas.,
c. Policy Objective. To preseAe and manage estuarine waters

so as to safeguard and perpetuate their biological, economic and

aesthetic values.

d. Appropriate Uses. Appropriate uses shall be those consis-

tent with the above policy objective. Highest priority shall be

allocated to the conservation,of-estuarine Vaters. The*development

of navigational channels, the use of bulkheads, to prevent erosion,

and the building of piers or wharfs where no other feasible alter-

native exists are examples of land uses appropriate within estuarine

waters, provided that such land uses will not be deterimental to the

biological and physical estuarine functions and public trust rights.

Projects which would directly or indirectly block or impair existing

navigation channels, increase shoreline erosion deposit spoils

below mean high tide, cause adverse water circulation patterns,

violate water quality standards, or cause degradation of shellfish

waters are generally considered incompatible with the management of

estuarine waters.

4.4 Fragile, Historic or Natural Resource Areas Areas Containin
Unique Geological Formations

a. Description. Areas containing unique geological,formations

will be identified by the State Geologist. These places contain

surface or near surface formations that are either themselves unique

or are especially unusual or notable examples of geologic formations

or processes in the coastal area.

b. Significance. Unique geological areas provide surface or

near surface exposures of unique geologic formations or processes
of the coastal area. They are important educational, scientific,
or scenic resources that would be jeopardized by uncontrolled or

incompatible development.

c. Policy Objective, To preserve the scientific, educational

or scenic values of unique geological formations so that they may
be available for future study and enjoyment.

d. Appropriate Land Uses. Appropriate land uses shall be

those consistent with the above policy objective. Uses within areas

containing unique geological formations shall be tailored to the

particular unique qualities of the individual area.

4.5 Fragile, Historic or Natural Resource Areas - Historic Places

a. Description. Defined as historic Places that are listed,

or have been approved for listing by the North Carolina Historical

Commission, in the National Register of Historic Places pursuant to

the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966; historical, archae-

ological, and other places and properties owned,managed, or

assisted by the State of North Carolina pursuant to G.S. 121; and

properties or areas that are designated by the Secretary of the

Interior as National Historic Landmarks.

b. Significance. Historic resources are both non-renewable

and fragile.They owe their significance to their association with

American history, architecture, archaeology, and culture. Properties

on or approved for the National Register of Historic Places may be

of national, state, or local significance.

C. Policy Objective. To protect and/or preserve the integrity

of districts,sites, buildings, and objects in the above categories.
d. Appropriate Land Uses. Appropriate land uses shall be those

consistent with the above stated policy objective. Land use which
will result in substantial irreversible damage to the historic value

of the area is inappropriate.

5.0 Areas Subject to Public Rights - General

Areas such as waterways and lands under or flowed by tidal

waters or navigable waters, to which the public may have rights of

access or public trust rights and areas which the State of North

Carolina may be authorized to preserve, conserve, or protect under

Article XIV, Section 5, of the North Carolina Constitution.

5.1 Areas Subject to Public Rights - Certain Public Trust Areas

a. Description. All waters of the Atlantic Ocean and the lands

thereunder from the mean high water mark to the seaward limit of

State jurisdiction; all natural bodies of water subject to measur-

able lunar tides and lands thereunder to the mean high water mark;
all navigable natural bodies of water and lands thereunder to the
mean high water mark or ordinary high water mark as the case may be,

except privately owned lakes to which the public has no right of
access; all waters in artificially created bodies of water in which
exists significant public fishing resources or other public resources,
which are accessible to the public by navigation from bodies of water

in which the public has rights of navigation; all waters in artifi-
cially created bodies of water in which the public has acquired
rights by prescription, custom, usage, dedication or by other means.
In determining whether the public has acquired rights in artificially

created bodies of water, the following factors shall be considered:

(i) the use of the body of water by the public; (ii) the length of

time the public has used the area; (iii) the value of public

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

in the body of water are mobile to the extent that they can move-

into natural bodies of water; (v) whether the creation of tbe

artificial body of water required permission from the State; and,

(Vi) the value of the body of water to the public for navigation
from one public area to another public area.
For purposes of the description in 5.0 and 5.1, the following

definitions shall apply:

(1) Mean High water Mark means the line on the shore
established by the average of all high tides. It is
established by survey based on available tidal datum.
In the absence of such datum, the mean high water mark
shall be determined by physical markings or comparison
of the area in question with an area having similar
physical characteristics for which tidal datum is
readily available.

(2) Navigable means navigable-in-fact

(3) Navigable-in-fact means capable of being navigated in its
natural condition by the ordinary modes of navigation
including modes of navigation used for recreational
purposes. The narturla condition of a body of water for
purposes of determining navigability shall be the condition
of the body of water at mean high water or ordinary high
water as the case may be, and the condition of the body
of water without man-made obstructions and without tempo-
rary natural obstructions. Temporary natural conditions
such as water level fluctuation and temporary natural
obstructions which do not permanently or totally prevent
navigation do not make an otherwise navigable stream non-
navigable.

(4) Ordinary High Water Mark means the natural or clear line
impressed on the land adjacent to the waterbody. It may
be established by erosion or other easily recognized
characteristics such as shelvi8ng, change in the character
of the soil, destruciton of terrestrial vegetation or its
inability to grow, the presence of litter and debris, or
other appropriate means which consider the characteristics
of the surrounding area. The ordinary high water mark
does not extend beyond the well defined banks of a river
where such banks exist.

b. Significance. The public has [email protected] these waters

including navigation and recreation. In addition, these waters

support valuable commercial and sports fisheries, have aesthetic

value, and are important potential resources for economic developnent.

C.. Policy Objective. To protect public rights for navigation

and recreation and to preserve and manage the pulllic trust waters so

as to:safeguard and perpetuate their biological, economic and

aesthetic value.

d, Appropriate Uses. Appropriate uses shall-be those con-

sistent with the above policy objective_ Any land use.which inter-

feres,with the public right of navigation, or other'public trust.

rights, which the public may be found to have in. these waters, shall

not be allowed. The development of navigational-cha nnels, drainage

ditches, the use of bulkheads to prevent erosion, and the building

of piers or wharfs are examples of.land uses appropriate within

public trust waters provided that such land-uses will not be, detri-

mental to the biological and physical functions and public trust

rights. Projects which@ivould directly or indirectly block or impair

existing navigation channels, increase shoreline erosion, deposit

spoils below mean high 'tide, cause adverse water circulation patterns,

violate water quality standards, or.cause degradation of shellfish

waters are generally considered incompatible with the management of

public trust waters.

6.3 Natural Hazard Areas -Coastal Ploodplains
a. Description. Coastal floo,dplain.is, 'defined as the land

areas adjacent'to coastal sounds, estuaries or the ocean which are

prone to flooding from storms with an annual probability of one

percent or greater (100 year storm), These areas ar.e.analogous to

the 100 year floodplain on a river. Information necessary to,identify

these areas will be supplied by the State Geologist..-

b. Significance. Coastal.1loodplains are@those land.s subject

to flooding or wave action during severe storms or hurricanes.
C!
They are lands where uncontrolled, incompatible,' :or. improperlyI

designed building, structures, facilities, and developments,can

unreasonably endanger life and property. Except for those portions

of the areas lying within estuarine or. ocean erc,dible areas, they,

are not generally or-,-"cessarily subject to. severe erosion or
dynamic action leading to replacement of the,land'with a body of--.

water. In most instances, structure's within this,area do not

obstruct the flow of waters or create any additional back waters.

c. Policy Objective. To ensure that all-buildings, struct ures.,

facilities and developments are properly designed- and built. to main-
tailn their, stability, integrity, and safety in the event of'flood

surge from a 100 year storm.
d. Appropriate Land Uses'. Appropriate land uses shall be those

consistent with the abov6 policy objective. It. is 'reasonable to

allow a certain degree of development.if its is carefully controlled

and meets stringent engineerinvstandards.for stability,: integ rity
and safety during a,100 year storm.*' The`land@use'plan@may allow,

development activities, and if such, development is :,undertaken, as

a minimum it must co.nform,with the standards of the Federal.Insurance

Administration for coastal high hazard.areas and s4fety:during the

flood surge from a 100 yearstorm. (Code of Federal Regulations,

Title 24, Chapter 10, Subehapter B)

7.0 Development Standards Applicable to All AECs

a. No development'should-be allowed in any AEC which would

result in a contravention or violation of any rules,.regulations,

.or laws of the State of North Carolina or of local government in

which the development takes place...

b. No development should be allowed in any AEC which 'would have

a substantial likelihood of causing pollution of.the waters of the

State to the extent that such waters would be cl osed to the taking

of shellfish under standards.set by the Commission for Health Servi.ces

pursuant to G.S. 130-169,01.

Section 4: Location and Development Standards

These standards serve two purposes: as a basis for the Land Use Plan

and as a guide to public officials and citizens for evaluating development.

proposals. These standards state where the various land uses should be

located and bow land should. be developed for each land use4

.Residential areas sb@uld:

have public water and sewer service within corporate limits.

have minimum lot sizes, where community/public water and sewer

serviceis unavailable 20-,000.square feet; if either water and

sewer facilities are available but not both 15,000.square feet.

be bound but not crossed by major thoroughfares.

construct utilities including electric and telephone lines under-

ground, where.t.he ground water table-prohibits.underground electric.,

wires, utility poles should follow rear property lines.

not locate in flood prone areas or in the.case of beach communities

should be above minimum building elevation and flood proofed as

determined by MW Federal Insurance Administration..

provide locations for churches, schools, recreation, and neighborhood

serving stores near their center.

be buffered from other land uses..

Commercial areas should:

locate near intersections of major thoroughfares to better, serve

trade areas.

not be permitted to develop in strips, but rather in compact, grouped

and consolidated into functional units.

provide adequate of f*-street parking with.dedignated entrances and

exits.

have adequate space; neighborhood shopping cealter'3 o'bould-range.from

3 to 6 acres in size while for community shopping centers from

10 to 30 acres in size.

have compatible signs.which do not obstruct eight.

Office and institutional areas should:
serve as buifers between residential areas and commercial or

industrial uses..

located in planned office.and.institutional parks.

--.have adequate off-street parking facilities.

have compatible signs which do not obstruct sight.

Industrial areas should:

locate onn"rly level ground; generally not more than 5%.

be well drained and. on good load bearing soil.

locate where public water,;'pewer'and other utilities are available.

locate near railroads, major'@.thordughfares, airports, navigable

waters, and major utility and transmission lines.

provide sites large enough for expansion,

--.have property owner commitment at a set price.,

Artirle-VII Conclusion
The Land U@e Plan culminates six months' of work by the Southport Planning.
Board and planning advisor plus the substance of public meetings and surveys
where input was given by local residents.

Obstacles to present and future development are, clearly identified, means,
and methods for dealing with development problems and development opportunities
are' recommended. The protection of the public health, safety.,an,d welfare of
present and future residents can te assured provided the Board of Aldermen imple-
ment the recommendations listed herein.as development poliQ-@

Major conclusions of the Land Use Plan are:
--Unless the proper safeguards are installed future development,,threatent
the quality of surface waters and groundwater.
--Present development can be.classified as very1ow density with
approximately 120, acres available for development within the city
limits.
--Southport requires the professional services of fulltime qualified
personnel to insure the efficient.and wise management of the
community's resources.
--Southport and Brunswick County have coordinated very few'services.
--Recreation facilities, fire protection, street surfacing and
municipal services are in need of improvement'.
--Southport contains many historic sites which have yet to achieve local
recognition.
--Critical Areas of Environmental Concern and,the fishing 4nd@recreational
industry provide Southport with a character all its own.

APPENDIX

CITIZEN OPINION SURVEY

FOR THE

CITY OF SOUTHPORT

Southport is preparing a.land use plan in order to comply with the

requirements of the Coastal Area Management Act Of 1974. One of the.most

important aspects of land use planning is that the plan adequately reflect
citizen opinions and attit.udes,'toward the use of.the community's land--both
public and private.- The following survey is intended to give each. citizen

the opportunity to express his.opinion on land use problemsand issues. Your

cooperation in answering the following questions will be ap reci4ted.
p

Upon completing the questionnaire, please, return to:

'Mr. Alvin Kornegay
City Manager
City Hall
S,outhport, NO C. 28461

1. Are you a permanent resident of Southport? yes no

20 if not, bow often do you live in Southport?

weekends- summer months

3. What is your a8e?
4. Do you live in a: single-family house@
duplex
mobile home.
apartment
co7ndom'inium

5. During the next five years would,you like to see the population of

Southport

increase greatly
increase slightlyt
decrease grgatly_
decrease $I iotly
stay the

2. -

6, which of the following types of development would you like,to see moreor

less of in Southport?,,
More 'Less.

single-family housing
apartments
condominiums.
mobile homes
commercial
industrial
public open,s ace
1acilities
publid.recreation
(playgrounds and parks)'.
other .(specify

to liVe in SoUt4pokt..,
Yor.what reasons did youch ose
7. 01

close to work
ple.asant.surroun,dings
low 'taxes
reasonably priced 'land and house
'Close. t f ilyL and friends
.0 am
single-family beach% L
other

8. In which of the following areas do you'feel.more public funds.-.should

be ent?
sp
More Less.

water and sewer
garbage collection
fire and police, protection...(,*
school s
parks and recreational
facilities programs
roadsor public tranSitL
environmental protection
opment -
industrial devel
town manageme.nt@@
other

9. What do you like most about Southport?

10. Wbat do you like least about Southport?

11. Do -you think development should be permitted in the following areas

Never Seldom Frequently Always

lands near inlets
beaches.
marshes
dunes
inland waterway
other

12. Is there any particular area o r typ e of area within the Town limits or

within one mile of.the Town, limits that you feel is unique or .special. and

should be preserved or protected in its present state or form?

13. Please use the following space to make any.additional comments you would like.

Thank you for your help and cooperation.. This questionnaire shoul.d.be

returned to the Town.Hall by April 30th,

Rare and Endangered Species

BRUNSWICK COUNTY

Amphibians
Gopher Frog - Rana Aerolata amphibian
Status: Peripheral Undetermined in North Carolina

Reptiles
American alligator Alligator Mississippiensis
General Comments: Protected, North Carolina, Kit development and
alteration of habitat endangers-species.
Status: Peripheral Endangered in North Carolina and nationally

Coral Snake Micurus Fulvius
General Co ents: Very Fe-cretive, North Carolina northern limit..range.
Status: Peripheral- Rare in North Carolina

Eastern Diamond Rattlesnake Crotalus Ad-anteus
General Comments: North Carolina northern limit range
Status: Peripheral Rare.in North.Carolina

Vascular Plants

Sagittaria teres
Preferred Habitat: Acid, Sandy@ ponds and begs@
General Comments: Very Rare
Status: Rare
Ultricularia Olivacea

Preferred Habitat: Ponds
General Comments: Very rare
Status: Rare and endangered

Heterotheca Correllii

Preferred Habitat: Sandy woods
General Comments: Very Rare
Status: Rare.

Source: North Carolina Department of Natural and Economic Resourcesi
Preliminary list of Endangered Plant and Animal Spicies'in
North Carolina, June 1973.

ji COASTAL SERVICES CYR LIBRARY
3 6668 14112962 @l