2007 Cape Charles Comprehensive Plan Draft Existing Conditions

2007 Cape Charles Comprehensive Plan Draft

Existing Conditions

Last Revised: May 25, 2007

Table of Contents

Table of Contents...... 1 Tables...... 5 Figures...... 7 Maps...... 8 Community Profile...... 9 History...... 9 Current Conditions...... 12 Population Characteristics ...... 15 Population ...... 15 Age Distribution...... 18 Families...... 19 Racial Composition...... 20 Educational Attainment ...... 20 Conclusions...... 22 Housing...... 23 Housing Distribution...... 23 Occupancy Characteristics...... 25 Housing Construction Trends ...... 28 Housing Conditions ...... 31 Housing Affordability...... 33 Conclusions...... 35 Economy ...... 37 Labor Force...... 37 Income...... 38 Poverty Status ...... 40 Commuting Patterns...... 41 Occupational Characteristics ...... 42 Major Employers ...... 44

Commercial and Industrial Activity...... 46 Future Economic Development ...... 49 Conclusions...... 50 Natural Conditions...... 53 Climate...... 53 Topography...... 53 Soils...... 55 Surface Water...... 57 Ground Water...... 61 Chesapeake Bay Impact Crater...... 64 Wetlands ...... 64 Habitat...... 65 Waterfront Access...... 67 Shoreline Erosion...... 68 Conclusions...... 71 Community Facilities and Services ...... 72 Town Government ...... 72 Public Safety ...... 72 Harbor ...... 74 Public Beach ...... 76 Town Pier...... 77 Library...... 78 Parks and Recreational Resources ...... 79 Arts and Cultural Facilities ...... 81 Healthcare Services...... 81 Schools...... 82 Public Works...... 82 Solid Waste...... 82 Public Land and Buildings...... 83 Bay Creek Facilities and Services...... 85 Conclusions...... 85

Public Utilities ...... 86 Water Supply ...... 86 Wastewater Treatment ...... 92 Stormwater Sewer System ...... 93 Conclusions...... 94 Transportation...... 95 Street System ...... 95 Daily Traffic Volume...... 98 VDOT Street Plans ...... 102 Alleys ...... 104 Parking ...... 104 Sidewalks and Multiple Use Paths...... 105 Resident Transportation Patterns ...... 106 Water Transportation ...... 108 Rail Transportation ...... 110 Keller Co Transportation Study...... 111 Conclusions...... 111 Land Use and Community Character...... 113 Historic Resources ...... 113 Annexation Agreement of 1992...... 114 Existing Land Use Categories...... 115 Residential Land Use ...... 118 Vacant Residential Land Use...... 120 Commercial Land Use ...... 120 Vacant Commercial Land Use...... 122 Industrial Land Use...... 123 Vacant Industrial Land Use ...... 123 Public and Semi-Public Land Use ...... 124 Agriculture/Forest Land Use...... 125 PUD/Undeveloped Land Use...... 126 Surrounding Land Uses...... 127

Entrance Corridors...... 127 Route 13...... 129 Conclusions...... 130 Appendix...... 132

Tables

Table 1: Population...... 15 Table 2: Cape Charles Age Distribution...... 18 Table 3: Northampton and Virginia Age Distributions ...... 19 Table 4: Families...... 19 Table 5: Cape Charles Racial Composition...... 20 Table 6: Northampton and Virginia Racial Composition...... 20 Table 7: Cape Charles Educational Attainment, Population 25 Years and Older ...... 21 Table 8: Northampton and Virginia Educational Attainment...... 21 Table 9: Cape Charles Housing Occupancy by Tenure...... 26 Table 10: Northampton and Virginia Housing Occupancy by Tenure...... 27 Table 11: Cape Charles Occupancy, 2001...... 28 Table 12: Residential Building Permits by Type...... 28 Table 13: Cape Charles Housing Conditions...... 31 Table 14: Northampton and Virginia Housing Conditions...... 32 Table 15: Cape Charles Housing Costs ...... 34 Table 16: Northampton and Virginia Housing Costs ...... 35 Table 17: Labor Force Data, 2000 ...... 37 Table 18: Median Household Income...... 38 Table 19: Cape Charles Household Income...... 39 Table 20: Northampton and Virginia Household Income...... 39 Table 21: Per Capita Income...... 40 Table 22: Poverty Status ...... 41 Table 23: Commuting Destinations ...... 41 Table 24: Means of Transportation to Work, 2000...... 42 Table 25: Occupational Structure, 2000 ...... 43 Table 26: Largest Northampton County Employers, 1st Quarter 2006 ...... 45 Table 27: Commercial Building Permits by Type ...... 46 Table 28: Tourism-Related Tax Revenue, FY0203 - FY0506 ...... 48

Table 29: Condemned Shellfish Grounds in Acres...... 61 Table 30: Northampton Memorial Library Usage Statistics...... 78 Table 31: Ground Water Withdrawal in Gallons, 2001-2006...... 89 Table 32: Annual Average Daily Traffic for Route 184 and Route 642, 2001 - 2005 ..... 98 Table 33: Level of Service Characteristics for "Urban/Suburban" Roads...... 101 Table 34: 2020 Transportation Plan Recommendations...... 102 Table 35: Vehicles Available per Occupied Housing Unit, 2000...... 108 Table 36: Cape Charles Harbor Gross Income, 2003-2006...... 109 Table 37: Existing Land Use Categories and Distribution ...... 115 Table 38: Bay Creek Residential Subdivisions - Completion Status, May 2007 ...... 120 Table 39: Surrounding Land Use Categories and Distribution...... 127

Figures

Figure 1: Cape Charles Population Projections, 2005 – 2020 ...... 17 Figure 2: Cape Charles Age Distribution, 2000...... 18 Figure 3: Cape Charles Racial Composition, 2000...... 20 Figure 4: Housing Occupancy by Tenure, 2000 ...... 26 Figure 5: Cape Charles Occupancy, 2001...... 28 Figure 6: New Residential Construction Permits...... 29 Figure 7: Miscellaneous Residential Permits...... 30 Figure 8: Total Residential Permits by Month, 2000 - 2006 ...... 30 Figure 9: Median Household Income ...... 38 Figure 10: Per Capita Income ...... 40 Figure 11: Poverty Status...... 40 Figure 12: Cape Charles Occupational Structure, 2000...... 44 Figure 13: Total Commercial Building Permits by Year...... 47 Figure 14: Cross Section of Eastern Shore Ground Water Flow...... 62 Figure 15: Water Treatment Process...... 88 Figure 16: Average Monthly Ground Water Withdrawal in Gallons, 2001-2006...... 89 Figure 17: Parking Spaces in the Historic District...... 105 Figure 18: Cape Charles Harbor Average Monthly Gross Income, 2003-2006 ...... 110

Maps

Map 1: Location of Cape Charles ...... 10 Map 2: Cape Charles Historic Districts ...... 14 Map 3: 2000 Population Distribution ...... 16 Map 4: Historic District Structures...... 24 Map 5: Enterprise Zone Boundaries ...... 51 Map 6: 100-Year Floodplain...... 54 Map 7: Soils ...... 56 Map 8: Chesapeake Bay Preservation Areas ...... 60 Map 9: Wetlands...... 66 Map 10: Community Facilities ...... 73 Map 11: Cape Charles Harbor ...... 75 Map 12: Publicly Owned Land ...... 84 Map 13: Public Utility Facilities...... 87 Map 14: Private Wells and Septic Systems ...... 91 Map 15: Major Transportation Facilities ...... 96 Map 16: 2004 AADT Data ...... 99 Map 17: Change in 2001 – 2004 AADT Data ...... 100 Map 18: Proposed Route 1108...... 103 Map 19: Proposed Multi-Use Trail...... 107 Map 20: Annexation of 1992 ...... 116 Map 21: Existing Land Use ...... 117 Map 22: Surrounding Land Use...... 128

Community Profile

The Town of Cape Charles is located in Northampton County on Virginia’s Eastern Shore, as illustrated in Map 1. The Town is situated on a small peninsula, bordered by the Chesapeake Bay to the west, King’s Creek to the north and Old Plantation Creek to the southeast. With a land area of 2,817 acres and a population of 1,423 residents, Cape Charles is the largest of Northampton’s five incorporated towns in terms of both land size and population.

History

The Eastern Shore of Virginia, one of the earliest colonized areas in North America, remained a seafood and agricultural region with scattered small towns until the 1880s. At this time, the land that became the Town of Cape Charles consisted of farmlands and wetlands. The construction of what is now the Bay Coast Railroad led to the evolution of the area from a small agricultural community to a bustling railroad town.

In the late 1870s, the Pennsylvania Railroad served many of the large cities on the east coast. However, along the Delmarva Peninsula, the railroad only came as far south as Pocomoke, Maryland. Extending the railroad farther south was only feasible if a barge and steamer link could be built near the southern end of the Delmarva Peninsula, where freight and passengers could then transfer across the Chesapeake Bay to Norfolk. When William L. Scott, a congressman from Erie, Pennsylvania with vast rail interests in the West, proposed this rail-sea link to Pennsylvania Railroad officials, very little interest was generated initially.

Despite a lack of support, Alexander Cassatt, then an engineer and Vice-President of Traffic with Pennsylvania Railroad, was interested in Scott’s proposal. In 1882, Cassatt resigned from his position to work with Scott on his proposed project. Traveling by horseback from Pocomoke, Cassatt personally laid out the 65 mile route the railroad would take and chose the spot for its southern terminus, harbor, and connecting channel, which he dredged at his own expense. At the southern terminus, Scott envisioned a town that would meet the needs of the railroad and its passengers. This led to the creation of Cape Charles.

Map 1: Location of Cape Charles

In 1883, Scott purchased three plantations comprising approximately 2,509 acres from the heirs of former Virginia Governor Littleton Waller Tazewell. Of this land, 136 acres went to create the Town of Cape Charles. From its very conception, Cape Charles was a planned community. Scott commissioned two engineers to do the official mapping of the Town in 1884. The original Town was approximately 136 acres divided into 644 equal lots. Seven avenues which extend from east to west were named for Virginia statesmen; the streets which extend north and south were named for fruits. The original layout of the Town is still visible today.

By October 1884, the railroad's first passenger and freight trains began running and within six months, two passenger steamers, as well as specially designed railroad freight barges, were regularly making the 36 mile Bay crossing. Trains soon arrived daily from New York, and the Eastern Shore’s towns prospered as their produce could easily be exported to metropolitan areas. By 1885, the first residential and commercial buildings existed in Cape Charles along with a volunteer fire department, a newspaper, a school, and multiple churches.

Incorporated on March 1, 1886, Cape Charles quickly became the economic focus of Northampton County. Paved streets, electricity, telephones, and a central water and sewage system made the Town more cosmopolitan than other Eastern Shore towns. Members of older county families were attracted to the Town and built their homes among those of the railroad employees.

Many houses in Cape Charles were built by William H. Lambertson, who came to the Town from Pocomoke. It is said that when he arrived in the 1880s, there were fewer than 50 houses, and by the time of his death in 1948, he had built more than half of the structures in Cape Charles.

In 1911, wetlands near the Chesapeake Bay were drained and filled. The original east- west avenues were extended west, and two more north-south streets were added: Bay Avenue along the edge of the Bay and Harbor Avenue between Bay Avenue and Pine Street. The additional 38 acres of filled land provided 97 new building lots in the Sea Cottages Addition.

The Town continued to grow and develop throughout the golden age of railroads, through World War II with its mission of ferrying troops and supplies, and into the 1950s until the auto ferry was moved to Kiptopeke. At the Town’s peak period of development in the early 1900s, as many as 300 cars per day were transported through the Town’s harbor. In 1958, the last passenger train left Cape Charles. The railroad is still in operation for commercial and industrial purposes, as it has been continuously since 1884.

Current Conditions

With the decline of the railroad industry following World War II and the increase of local truck shipping resulting from the opening of the Chesapeake Bay Bridge-Tunnel in 1964, the Town began to experience hard times. The Cape Charles economy endured several decades of decline. However, the Town has recently seen an increase in its economic prosperity, and has experienced a great deal of growth in the past several years.

In 1992, the Town annexed 2,191 acres of land from Northampton County. Most of the property was owned by Brown and Root. Part of the property was also owned by Bayshore Concrete, a major manufacturer of prestressed and precast structural components. The annexed land’s proximity to the Chesapeake Bay and other nearby amenities made the area a prime location for a new residential community. The Town recognized the property’s future need for public services, which could be offered more efficiently by Cape Charles than Northampton County. This led to an annexation agreement among the Town, Northampton County, Brown and Root, and Bayshore Concrete. The annexed land increased the Town’s land area by 350%.

In 1998, the Brown and Root property was sold to Baymark Construction for the creation of the Bay Creek development. Two large tracts of land, consisting of 1,750 acres surrounding the original Town, are currently being developed. As of May 2007, Bay Creek has completed approximately 10% of 3,000 planned residential units. Two upscale golf courses designed by Arnold Palmer and Jack Nicklaus have also been constructed, as well as a marina and commercial areas.

While significant new development has occurred in recent years, Cape Charles also has one of the best collections of historic buildings of any community on the Eastern Shore. The Town strives to preserve this rich architectural heritage. An architectural survey that identified historic properties in the Town led to the listing of the Cape Charles National Register Historic District in 1989. In 1997, the Town adopted a Historic Preservation Plan and in 2001 adopted Historic District Guidelines. A Historic

District Review Board administers the guidelines and oversees new construction and renovations in the Town’s Historic District. The boundaries of the local, state, and national Historic Districts are illustrated in Map 2.

Currently, most commercial land uses are concentrated in the historic downtown area along four blocks of Mason Avenue between Peach Street and Harbor Avenue, and along the first blocks of Strawberry Street and Peach Street where they intersect Mason Avenue. This downtown commercial core is characterized by the historic character of the buildings. Commercial activity consists of retail and service establishments and specialty shops catering to local and regional customers as well as tourists and visitors. Historic buildings make up the north side of Mason Avenue, while across the street is the railroad area and two retail stores. Sidewalks line the north side of Mason Avenue. The commercial area has historically developed with brick facades and a pedestrian orientation.

Today, Cape Charles is governed by a Mayor and Town Council, and is served by a Town Manager and 32 employees. The fiscal year 2006-2007 budget was $3.5 million. Town services include public water and wastewater treatment, a five officer police force, a library, public works, and financial and administrative staff. As Cape Charles enters a new era of revitalization, the Town seeks to preserve its historic character while growing to meet the modern needs of its citizens.

Map 2: Cape Charles Historic Districts

Population Characteristics

A comprehensive planning effort should consider demographic data in order to gain an understanding of general population characteristics. In addition to data for Cape Charles, this section presents data for Northampton County and the state of Virginia for points of comparison.

Population

The population of Cape Charles has recently begun to grow rapidly after several years of decline. After decreasing by almost 19% in the 1990s, the full-time population grew by 25.5% from 2000 to 2005. The U.S. Census Bureau estimates that Cape Charles’ full- time population is now 1,423. Though not measured by the U.S. Census Bureau, the Town has also observed a major increase in part-time residents.

The growth rate of full-time residents in Northampton County has been stagnant since 1990, but as in Cape Charles, the County has observed an increase in part-time residents. Virginia’s population has seen a greater rate of change during this time period than Northampton County, but has had a lower rate of change than Cape Charles. This indicates that population trends in Eastern Shore communities are not following the same patterns as those observed at the state level. Current population data is displayed below in Table 1.

Table 1: Population

Cape Charles Northampton Virginia Population change Population change Population change 1990 1,398 13,061 6,187,358 2000 1,134 -18.9% 13,093 0.2% 7,078,515 14.4% 2005* 1,423 25.5% 13,120 0.2% 7,564,327 6.9% Data Sources: U.S. Census Bureau * 2005 statistics are U.S. Census Bureau estimates

The population in Cape Charles has traditionally been concentrated in the Historic District. Map 3 illustrates the distribution of the 2000 population among blocks as classified by the U.S. Census Bureau. Most of the population is located in the area bound by Washington Avenue, Mason Avenue, Bay Avenue, and Fig Street. Large pockets of population are also located at Seabreeze Apartments and Heritage Acres. Most of the Bay Creek development is not shown on Map 3, because the land was vacant at the time

Map 3: 2000 Population Distribution

of the 2000 Census. However, new residents now live in these areas as people have moved to newly constructed homes.

Population projections for the Town are not available from major sources of population projections, such as the U.S. Census Bureau and the Virginia Employment Commission, because these groups only calculate population projections for cities, counties, and states. However, several estimates of growth rates can be used to examine future changes in population.

Population estimates indicate a population increase from 1,134 in 2000 to 1,423 in 2005. This means the U.S. Census Bureau has used a 5.10% average annual growth rate when estimating the recent population changes in Cape Charles. However, research from Malcolm Pirnie shows that local developers expect an average annual growth rate of approximately 12% for about 15 years. The estimates of possible future growth in Cape Charles vary significantly, but each perspective should be taken into account when estimating future growth. In addition to an increase in permanent residents, Cape Charles is also expected to see seasonal variations in population as people purchase houses as seasonal and vacation homes. Possible population trends have been illustrated below in Figure 1 using growth rates of 5.10% and 12%.

Figure 1: Cape Charles Population Projections, 2005 – 2020

9000 8000 7000 6000 5000 4000

Population 3000 2000 1000 0 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Year

5.10% growth rate 12% growth rate

Age Distribution

The age distributions in both Cape Charles and Northampton County are significantly different than the age distribution of Virginia’s population. As shown below in Table 2 and Table 3, Cape Charles and Northampton County have a high percentage of their populations in the 65-79 age cohort and the Over 80 age cohort when compared to Virginia. Nearly 24% of the population in Cape Charles is 65 or older, while only 11.2% of Virginia’s population is 65 or older. Conversely, a higher percentage of Virginia’s population is young and of working age. Roughly 14% of the population in both Cape Charles and Northampton County is in the 20-34 age cohort, but 21.4% of Virginia’s population is in this cohort.

Disparities in age are further illustrated by median ages. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the median ages in Cape Charles, Northampton, and Virginia are 44.2, 42.4, and 35.7, respectively. The median age in Cape Charles is 8.5 years more than the median age at the state level.

During the 1990s, the older age cohorts in Cape Charles increased in size as the younger age cohorts decreased in size. The three oldest age cohorts represented 42.2% of the population in 2000, while this number was only 33.0% in 1990. This is partially due to older retirees moving to the area to take advantage of the Town’s amenities, while young families have left the area as real estate values have increased.

Table 2: Cape Charles Age Distribution Figure 2: Cape Charles Age Distribution, 2000

Cape Charles

% of 1990 % of 2000 1990 2000 change Over 80 total total 7.0% Under 20 Under 20 452 32.3% 274 24.2% -39.4% 65 - 79 24.2% 16.8% 20 - 34 273 19.5% 161 14.2% -41.0%

35 - 49 212 15.2% 220 19.4% 3.8%

50 - 64 195 13.9% 209 18.4% 7.2% 20 - 34 50 - 64 65 - 79 200 14.3% 191 16.8% -4.5% 14.2% 18.4% Over 80 66 4.7% 79 7.0% 19.7% 35 - 49 Total 1,398 100.0% 1,134 100.0% 19.4% Data Source: U.S. Census Bureau

Table 3: Northampton and Virginia Age Distributions

Northampton Virginia

% of 1990 % of 2000 % of 1990 % of 2000 1990 2000 change 1990 2000 change total total total total Under 20 3,635 27.8% 3,361 25.7% -7.5% 1,704,603 27.5% 1,937,086 27.4% 13.6%

20 - 34 2,440 18.7% 1,835 14.0% -24.8% 1,660,554 26.8% 1,517,539 21.4% -8.6%

35 - 49 2,253 17.2% 2,840 21.7% 26.1% 1,363,753 22.0% 1,726,911 24.4% 26.6%

50 - 64 2,144 16.4% 2,286 17.5% 6.6% 793,978 12.8% 1,104,646 15.6% 39.1%

65 - 79 1,966 15.1% 2,056 15.7% 4.6% 525,920 8.5% 598,634 8.5% 13.8%

Over 80 623 4.8% 715 5.5% 14.8% 138,550 2.2% 193,699 2.7% 39.8%

Total 13,061 100.0% 13,093 100.0% 6,187,358 100.0% 7,078,515 100.0%

Data Source: U.S. Census Bureau

Families

The number of families living in Cape Charles has been decreasing in recent years. The U.S. Census Bureau defines a family as “a group of two or more people who reside together and who are related by birth, marriage, or adoption.” The number of families in Cape Charles decreased by 24.5% during the 1990s, while there was a slight increase in the number of families in Northampton County and a greater increase in families at the state level. The sharp decline in families living in Cape Charles is partially due to existing families leaving the area as real estate values have increased.

The average family size also decreased from 3.06 in 1990 to 2.91 in 2000. This drop is partially due to younger families with children leaving the area, while older couples who no longer live with their children have moved to Cape Charles.

The percentage of the population living in families has seen a marked decrease as well because of a decrease in families, a decrease in family size, and an increase in single people living in the Town. These trends are also a major reason for the recent changes in the Town’s age distribution. Table 4 shows statistics related to families.

Table 4: Families

Cape Charles Northampton Virginia

1990 2000 change 1990 2000 change 1990 2000 change

Number of Families 368 278 -24.5% 3,516 3,546 0.9% 1,629,490 1,847,796 13.4%

Population in Families 1,126 808 -28.2% 10,752 10,441 -2.9% 5,030,344 5,620,658 11.7%

% Population in Families 80.5% 71.3% -9.2pp 82.3% 79.7% -2.6pp 81.3% 79.4% -1.9pp

Average Family Size 3.06 2.91 -4.9% 3.06 2.94 -3.9% 3.09 3.04 -1.6%

Data Source: U.S. Census Bureau

* Note - pp stands for percentage points

Racial Composition

The racial composition of Cape Charles did not change significantly during the 1990’s. Census data from 2000 indicates that approximately 43% of the population is black. The black population in Cape Charles is a higher percentage of the total population than at the state level, but from 1990 to 2000 the percentage share of the black population decreased by 3.1 percentage points. Northampton’s racial composition is nearly identical to that of Cape Charles. The Town, Northampton, and Virginia all saw increases in the population of other races, but the percentage share of population of other races in Cape Charles and Northampton is still small and trails the percentage share of other races in the state as a whole. Table 5 and Table 6 show details of racial compositions.

Table 5: Cape Charles Racial Composition Figure 3: Cape Charles Racial Composition, 2000

Cape Charles

% of 1990 % of 2000 Other 1990 2000 change total total 3.4% White 760 54.4% 610 53.8% -19.7%

Black 629 45.0% 486 42.9% -22.7% Black 42.9% Other 9 0.6% 38 3.4% 322.2% White 53.8% Total 1,398 100.0% 1,134 100.0% Data Source: U.S. Census Bureau

Table 6: Northampton and Virginia Racial Composition

Northampton Virginia

% of 1990 % of 2000 % of 1990 % of 2000 1990 2000 change 1990 2000 change total total total total White 6,882 52.7% 6,977 53.3% 1.4% 4,791,739 77.4% 5,120,110 72.3% 6.9%

Black 6,035 46.2% 5,634 43.0% -6.6% 1,162,994 18.8% 1,390,293 19.6% 19.5%

Other 144 1.1% 482 3.7% 234.7% 232,625 3.8% 568,112 8.0% 144.2%

Total 13,061 100.0% 13,093 100.0% 6,187,358 100.0% 7,078,515 100.0%

Data Source: U.S. Census Bureau

Educational Attainment

The overall educational attainment of Cape Charles residents has improved in recent years. The number of people without a high school diploma or equivalent decreased by 26.1% during the 1990s. During this same time, the population with a Bachelor degree or higher increased by 87.2%. The percentage of the population with only a high school diploma, with some college, or with an Associate degree decreased, but this can partially

be attributed to people earning higher levels of education and overall decreases in population. Northampton County has a similar distribution among educational attainment levels.

Despite improvements in educational attainment among Town residents, the Town’s education levels still trail those of the state in many categories. The percentage of the population without a high school diploma is still 16.5 percentage points higher than at the state level, and the percentage of the population with a college degree is low in comparison to the state level. The number of Town residents with a Bachelor degree or higher has risen, but part of this increase is the result of educated people in older age cohorts entering the county, rather than an increase in the number of existing county residents obtaining these degrees. Educational attainment statistics can be viewed below in Table 7 and Table 8.

Table 7: Cape Charles Educational Attainment, Population 25 Years and Older

Cape Charles

1990 % of 1990 total 2000 % of 2000 total change

No high school diploma or equivalent 357 40.5% 264 35.0% -26.1%

High school graduate or equivalent 277 31.4% 233 30.9% -15.9%

Some college, no degree 126 14.3% 106 14.1% -15.9%

Associate degree 36 4.1% 31 4.1% -13.9%

Bachelor degree 52 5.9% 69 9.2% 32.7%

Graduate or professional degree 33 3.7% 51 6.8% 54.5%

Total 881 100.0% 754 100.0%

Data Source: U.S. Census Bureau

Table 8: Northampton and Virginia Educational Attainment, Population 25 Years and Older

Northampton Virginia % of % of % of % of 1990 1990 2000 2000 change 1990 1990 2000 2000 Change total total total total No high school diploma or equivalent 3,760 42.7% 2,977 32.6% -20.8% 987,203 24.8% 864,610 18.5% -12.4%

High school graduate or equivalent 2,414 27.4% 2,669 29.2% 10.6% 1,059,199 26.6% 1,212,463 26.0% 14.5%

Some college, no degree 1,177 13.4% 1,572 17.2% 33.6% 736,007 18.5% 951,700 20.4% 29.3%

Associate degree 371 4.2% 479 5.2% 29.1% 219,511 5.5% 262,813 5.6% 19.7%

Bachelor degree 703 8.0% 961 10.5% 36.7% 612,679 15.4% 835,011 17.9% 36.3%

Graduate or professional degree 388 4.4% 475 5.2% 22.4% 360,215 9.1% 539,977 11.6% 49.9%

Total 8,813 100.0% 9,133 100.0% 3,974,814 100.0% 4,666,574 100.0%

Data Source: U.S. Census Bureau

Conclusions

The size of Cape Charles’ population decreased during the 1990s, but has begun to increase. Projected growth rates vary, but it appears that the Town’s population will continue to grow at a rapid pace. In addition to permanent residents, the seasonal population is also expected to continuing growing. The population entering the Town has predominantly been older, educated people who are single or live in small families. This is consistent with the general perception that Cape Charles has become an attractive location for retirees. Population decreases have been apparent among young people, minorities, and people with low educational attainment, which is due in large part to families and lower income households leaving the Town because of the increasing cost of living. Some of these population trends are similar in Northampton County, but differ at the state level, which indicates that population trends on the Eastern Shore are not following widespread trends. It is likely that this will continue for the foreseeable future.

Housing

The Town’s housing stock has changed dramatically in recent years. There has been significant new construction and many older homes have been renovated. It is important to understand current trends and expected future changes when planning for housing in Cape Charles.

Housing Distribution

The housing stock in Cape Charles is clustered in three main areas. The traditional residential area is located in the Town’s Historic District. Two other major clusters of housing are present in the north and south tracts of Bay Creek, where construction of several residential subdivisions is underway.

Housing in the Historic District of Cape Charles consists of approximately 750 dwelling units, many of which are single-family houses built between 1885 and 1920. The houses range from small bungalows to larger homes and are grouped into neighborhoods which blend together but maintain distinctive character.

There are many excellent examples of Victorian, Colonial Revival, Craftsman, and Neo-classical styles of homes in the Historic District. The oldest houses, dating from the 1880s to the early 1900s, are found in the center and eastern sections of the Historic District. The Town’s Historic District Review Board reviews all construction in the Historic District to ensure construction of new buildings and alterations to existing buildings do not adversely affect the historic character of the area.

The Town was originally laid out in a grid of 40 foot wide by 140 foot long lots with houses spaced close together. Map 4 shows the layout of residential structures in the Historic District. A limited number of vacant lots also exist in the Historic District. A study conducted by Town staff during the summer of 2005 found that approximately 95 new homes could be built in the Historic District if “build-out” occurred. Additional vacant land is present near the outskirts of the Town along Route 642.

Map 4: Historic District Structures

In recent years, significant residential construction has occurred in Bay Creek. The development’s north and south tracts span approximately 1,750 acres, and will continue to bring a large number of new housing units to the area. Although the actual number of homes constructed will be driven by market forces, the Annexation Agreement of 1992 allows up to 3,000 dwelling units to be built in Bay Creek. Many of the homes already built in Bay Creek are marketed towards high income households, retirees, and seasonal home owners. This trend is expected to continue as more houses are built in Bay Creek.

Occupancy Characteristics

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, in 2000 there were 204 vacant homes in Cape Charles. This was 27.6% of the housing stock and roughly a 10 percentage point increase over 1990. In Northampton County, 18.7% of the housing stock was vacant in 2000, and 7.1% of the housing stock was vacant in Virginia. The large number of vacant homes in Cape Charles and Northampton County was partially due to seasonal homes being counted as vacant by the U.S. Census Bureau. The number of seasonal homes in Cape Charles increased from 7 in 1990 to 82 in 2000, and has probably increased significantly since then. Since the 2000 Census, many other vacant homes have been repaired and are now occupied, but vacant housing units are still present in the Historic District.

A high percentage of the homes in Cape Charles are renter occupied. In 2000, 38.1% of housing units were renter occupied, while only 29.7% were renter occupied at the state level. Many of these rental units were single family homes in the Historic District. The number of owner occupied homes has likely risen since 2000 due to the renovation of single family homes in the Historic District and the construction of owner occupied homes in Bay Creek.

Most of the Town’s multi-family rental housing is located at Seabreeze Apartments in the northwest section of the Historic District and Heritage Acres on Route 184. These apartment complexes account for 111 of the Town’s multi- family dwelling units. The multi-family rental market supply is mostly restricted to

elderly and low-to-moderate income residents. Rental units in duplexes are also common in the Historic District. More multi-family housing has recently been constructed in The Fairways subdivision of Bay Creek. These units are mostly owner occupied condominiums and vacation rental units. Detailed housing occupancy statistics are displayed below in Figure 4, Table 9, and Table 10.

Figure 4: Housing Occupancy by Tenure, 2000

70.0%

60.0%

50.0%

40.0% Cape Charles Northampton 30.0% Virginia

20.0%

10.0%

0.0% Owner occupied Renter occupied Vacant

Table 9: Cape Charles Housing Occupancy by Tenure

Cape Charles 1990 % of 1990 total 2000 % of 2000 total % change Owner occupied 299 43.4% 253 34.3% -15.4% single family 278 40.3% 236 32.0% -15.1% multi-familty 11 1.6% 15 2.0% 36.4% mobile, other 10 1.5% 2 0.3% -80.0% Renter occupied 268 38.9% 281 38.1% 4.9% single family 128 18.6% 177 24.0% 38.3% multi-familty 130 18.9% 96 13.0% -26.2% mobile, other 10 1.5% 8 1.1% -20.0% Vacant 122 17.7% 204 27.6% 67.2% for rent 31 4.5% 22 3.0% -29.0% for sale 11 1.6% 9 1.2% -18.2% seasonal 7 1.0% 82 11.1% 1071.4% other 73 10.6% 91 12.3% 24.7% Total 689 100.0% 738 100.0% 7.1% Data Source: U.S. Census Bureau SF1 and SF3 data Note: Tenure information for 2000 is SF3 data SF3 data is not based upon a 100% population sample.

Table 10: Northampton and Virginia Housing Occupancy by Tenure

Northampton Virginia

% of 1990 % of 2000 % of 1990 % of 2000 1990 2000 % change 1990 2000 % change total total total total Owner occupied 3,372 54.5% 3,655 55.8% 8.4% 1,519,521 60.9% 1,837,958 63.3% 21.0%

single family 2,840 45.9% 3,149 48.1% 10.9% 1,347,175 54.0% 1,650,389 56.8% 22.5%

multi-familty 20 0.3% 25 0.4% 25.0% 53,646 2.1% 65,081 2.2% 21.3%

mobile, other 512 8.3% 481 7.3% -6.1% 118,700 4.8% 122,488 4.2% 3.2%

Renter occupied 1,757 28.4% 1,666 25.4% -5.2% 772,309 30.9% 861,215 29.7% 11.5%

single family 1,179 19.1% 1,139 17.4% -3.4% 285,122 11.4% 314,241 10.8% 10.2%

multi-familty 304 4.9% 244 3.7% -19.7% 446,406 17.9% 508,361 17.5% 13.9%

mobile, other 274 4.4% 283 4.3% 3.3% 40,781 1.6% 38,613 1.3% -5.3%

Vacant 1,054 17.0% 1,226 18.7% 16.3% 204,504 8.2% 205,019 7.1% 0.3%

for rent 142 2.3% 112 1.7% -21.1% 67,899 2.7% 47,563 1.6% -30.0%

for sale 72 1.2% 67 1.0% -6.9% 33,295 1.3% 27,407 0.9% -17.7%

seasonal 344 5.6% 488 7.5% 41.9% 41,742 1.7% 54,696 1.9% 31.0%

other 496 8.0% 559 8.5% 12.7% 61,568 2.5% 75,353 2.6% 22.4%

Total 6,183 100.0% 6,547 100.0% 5.9% 2,496,334 100.0% 2,904,192 100.0% 16.3%

Data Source: U.S. Census Bureau SF1 and SF3 data

Note: Tenure information for 2000 is SF3 data. SF3 data is not based upon a 100% population sample.

A more recent survey of housing occupancy was conducted by the Town of Cape Charles in the summer of 2001. The study saw a significant shift in owner occupancy when compared to the 2000 Census data. In 2001, 43.8% of housing units were owner occupied, while the 2000 Census shows that 34.3% of housing units were owner occupied. The 2001 Cape Charles study also found that the number of renter occupied housing units and the number of vacant housing units had decreased since 2000. This is partly due to changes in tenure and partly due to definition differences between the Census data and the Cape Charles study. “Seasonal” residences were counted as vacant by the Census Bureau, while “part-time” residences were counted as occupied in the Cape Charles study. Table 11 and Figure 5 illustrate the findings of the 2001 Cape Charles study.

Table 11: Cape Charles Occupancy, 2001 Figure 5: Cape Charles Occupancy, 2001

2001 % of 2000 total Vacant Owner occupied 324 43.8% 23.5% full-time residence 230 31.1%

part-time residence 94 12.7% Ow ner Renter occupied 242 32.7% occupied 43.8% full-time residence 222 30.0% part-time residence 20 2.7% Vacant 174 23.5% for rent 12 1.6% for sale 18 2.4% weekly rental 7 0.9% other 137 18.5% Renter occupied Total 740 100.0% 32.7% Data Source: 2001 Town of Cape Charles Study

Housing Construction Trends

The housing stock in Cape Charles has changed dramatically in recent years. An examination of building permits can offer insight into recent trends in construction. Table 12 shows residential building permits issued for the construction of new residences, demolition, and miscellaneous permits. Miscellaneous permits include electrical permits, mechanical permits, plumbing permits, and permits for renovations. A spreadsheet showing detailed permit data can be viewed in the Appendix.

Table 12: Residential Building Permits by Type

New Construction Misc. Permits Demolition Bay Rest of Bay Rest of Bay Rest of Creek Town Creek Town Creek Town 2000 12 2 17 186 0 1 2001 10 1 50 171 0 2 2002 24 3 63 170 0 3 2003 81 1 267 196 0 3 2004 123 7 367 221 0 6 2005 38 13 266 243 0 7 2006 22 2 104 227 0 5 Total 310 29 1,134 1,414 0 27 Entire Town 339 2,548 27

Data Source: Cape Charles Building Permits

As illustrated in Table 12 and below in Figure 6, the vast majority of new housing units constructed in Cape Charles have been in Bay Creek. Construction in Bay Creek accelerated during 2003 and 2004. Many of the permits issues in these two years were for condominiums in The Fairways subdivision. The subsequent decline was partially due to limitations posed by the capacity of the Town’s water treatment plant, which is discussed in the Public Utilities chapter.

Figure 6: New Residential Construction Permits

140 120 100 80

60 Permits 40 20 0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Year

Bay Creek Rest of Town

Other permits can be used to examine changes in the existing housing stock. Statistics for “miscellaneous” permits can be viewed above in Table 12 and below in Figure 7. These permits include electrical permits, mechanical permits, plumbing permits, and permits for renovations. In the portion of Cape Charles not included in Bay Creek, about 200 of these permits have been issued annually since 2000. These permits indicate that significant renovations have occurred in the Historic District. The number of these permits issued in Bay Creek increased rapidly in 2003 and 2004 due to the need for electrical, mechanical, and plumbing permits associated with the construction of new housing units.

Figure 7: Miscellaneous Residential Permits

400 350 300 250 200

Permits 150 100 50 0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Year

Bay Creek Rest of Town

As shown in Figure 8, permits are often issued more frequently during certain times of year. More permits are usually issued in the Historic District during the spring and early summer when property owners are preparing to begin renovation projects, while the number of permits issued decreases during the fall. A large number of permits were issued in Bay Creek during the fall months due to the construction of The Fairways condominiums beginning during these months.

Figure 8: Total Residential Permits by Month, 2000 - 2006

180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Bay Creek 136 81 119 102 84 76 115 133 140 157 145 156 Rest of Town 130 96 135 113 126 124 132 101 127 113 136 137

Housing Conditions

The need to improve housing conditions in parts of Cape Charles has been a major issue in past decades, and continues today in some parts of the Town. Dilapidated, abandoned, and seriously substandard housing is of concern to all citizens. Many rental properties are in substandard condition, and certain areas in the Town are seriously substandard. Some of the problems include sagging roofs, missing siding, hazardous entryways, missing windows, deteriorating appearance, and unkempt yards and outbuildings. Table 13 and Table 14 provide a summary of housing condition statistics.

Table 13: Cape Charles Housing Conditions

Cape Charles 1990 % of 1990 total 2000 % of 2000 total % change Median year built 1939 n/a 1940 n/a n/a > 1.0 occupants per room * 15 2.2% 16 2.2% 6.7% > 1.5 occupants per room * 3 0.4% 0 0.0% -100.0% Heat Source * electricity * 106 15.4% 204 27.7% 92.5% Gas * 93 13.5% 79 10.7% -15.1% Fuel oil, kerosene, etc. * 344 49.9% 234 31.8% -32.0% no heat source * 22 3.2% 17 2.3% -22.7% other * 2 0.3% 0 0.0% -100.0% Lacking complete plumbing 37 5.4% 28 3.8% -24.3% Lacking complete kitchen 40 5.8% 40 5.4% 0.0% Total Occupied Housing Units 534 77.5% 534 72.6% 0.0% Total Housing Units 689 100.0% 736 100.0% 6.8% Data Source: U.S. Census Bureau SF3 data Note: SF3 data is not based upon a 100% population sample. * Data based only on occupied housing units

Table 14: Northampton and Virginia Housing Conditions

Northampton Virginia

% of 1990 % of 2000 % % of 1990 % of 2000 % 1990 2000 1990 2000 total total change total total change Median year built 1958 n/a 1960 n/a n/a 1970 n/a 1975 n/a n/a

> 1.0 occupants per room * 191 3.1% 156 2.4% -18.3% 65,042 2.6% 86,456 3.0% 32.9%

> 1.5 occupants per room * 42 0.7% 28 0.4% -33.3% 20,875 0.8% 34,137 1.2% 63.5%

Heat Source *

electricity * 1,054 17.0% 1,426 21.8% 35.3% 919,790 36.8% 1,178,739 40.6% 28.2%

gas * 1,183 19.1% 1,570 24.0% 32.7% 721,003 28.9% 1,057,551 36.4% 46.7%

fuel oil, kerosene, etc. * 2,311 37.4% 2,131 32.5% -7.8% 463,578 18.6% 362,618 12.5% -21.8%

no heat source * 576 9.3% 187 2.9% -67.5% 181,716 7.3% 93,249 3.2% -48.7%

other * 5 0.1% 7 0.1% 40.0% 5,743 0.2% 7,016 0.2% 22.2%

Lacking complete plumbing 753 12.2% 395 6.0% -47.5% 46,119 1.8% 33,265 1.1% -27.9%

Lacking complete kitchen 488 7.9% 345 5.3% -29.3% 33,097 1.3% 30,412 1.0% -8.1%

Total Occupied Housing Units 5,129 83.0% 5,321 81.3% 3.7% 2,291,830 91.8% 2,699,173 92.9% 17.8%

Total Housing Units 6,183 100.0% 6,547 100.0% 5.9% 2,496,334 100.0% 2,904,192 100.0% 16.3%

Data Source: U.S. Census Bureau SF3 data

Note: SF3 data is not based upon a 100% population sample.

* Data based only on occupied housing units

Some homes in Cape Charles do not provide their residents with basic necessities. In 2000, 3.8% of housing units lacked complete plumbing facilities and 5.4% of housing units lacked complete kitchen facilities. Many housing units in Northampton County also lacked these facilities. In Northampton, 6.0% of housing units lacked complete plumbing facilities and 5.3% of housing units lacked complete kitchen facilities. Both of these figures are about 1.0% in Virginia, which indicates housing quality is a major concern in and around Cape Charles.

The houses in Cape Charles also tend to be older than houses in the state as a whole. In 2000, the median year the housing units in Cape Charles were built was 1940. This figure was 1960 in Northampton County and 1975 in Virginia. The age of the housing stock in an area is often used when judging the quality of housing. While many of the older homes in Cape Charles are well maintained and contribute to the Historic District, other older homes are in substandard condition and are in need of repair.

In 2000, the most used source of heat in Cape Charles was fuel oil and kerosene. This heat source was used in 31.8% of homes, while electricity was used in 27.7% of homes. Electricity was used in 21.8% of homes in Northampton County and 40.6% of homes in Virginia. The use of electricity as a heating source is often considered an indication of the age of a heating system. While the percentage of homes using electricity rose by 12.3 percentage points from 1990 to 2000, many homes appear to still be using older heating systems.

Overcrowding is not a major problem in Cape Charles. Homes having more than 1.0 occupant per room are considered overcrowded, and homes having more than 1.5 occupants per room are considered severely overcrowded. In 2000, only 2.2% of homes in Cape Charles were overcrowded, and no homes were considered severely overcrowded. In Virginia, 3.0% of homes were overcrowded and 1.2% of homes were severely overcrowded. The difference between overcrowding in Cape Charles and Virginia is due to overcrowding generally being more of a problem in urban areas.

Much of the Town’s substandard housing is in the northeast section of the Historic District. In 1995, the Town was awarded Community Development Block Grant funding for the rehabilitation of 30 substandard houses located in the northeast area. The rehabilitation project, known as the Northeast Neighborhood Comprehensive Community Development Project, helped many of the Town’s residents improve their housing conditions.

Due to the construction of new homes in Bay Creek, the overall statistics for housing conditions in the Town have likely seen major changes since the 2000 Census. Building permit information also indicates that a significant amount of renovation work for existing homes in the Historic District has occurred since the 2000 Census data was collected. While new statistics are expected to show improvements, it is important to remember that substandard housing is still a major problem in some parts of Cape Charles.

To help improve housing conditions, the Town has adopted an ordinance to enforce the repair or clearance of dilapidated structures. All existing buildings and structures must be properly maintained to protect the occupants from health and safety hazards that might arise from improper maintenance or use of a building.

Housing Affordability

As in many localities, affordable housing has become a major issue in Cape Charles. The Town’s proximity to amenities such as golf courses and beaches has resulted in an increase in real estate values. Many local residents are unable to afford the new homes being built in Bay Creek and the renovated homes in the Historic District, which results in the displacement of lower income households.

Table 15 and Table 16 provide Census data for housing costs in 1990 and 2000. A more recent source of data for these statistics is unavailable, but newer data would reflect a large increase in housing costs in Cape Charles since 2000. When compared to Northampton and Virginia, the median gross rent changed very little in Cape Charles from 1990 to 2000, but this figure has probably increased greatly since then. Town residents faced a high cost burden for living expenses in 2000. Roughly 35% of renter occupied households paid more than 30% of their household income towards gross rent, and about 30% of owner occupied households paid more than 30% of their household

income towards select housing costs, which include mortgage payments and utility payments. Cost burdens have probably increased more since 2000 as housing costs have increased. A positive point for many homeowners in Cape Charles and Northampton is that only about 41% of owner occupied housing units have a mortgage, while this number is 75.1% at the state level. This means a lower percentage of homeowners in Cape Charles and Northampton include a mortgage payment as a part of their housing cost burden.

Table 15: Cape Charles Housing Costs

Cape Charles % of 1990 % of 2000 % 1990 total 2000 total change Median gross rent* 335 n/a 349 n/a 4.2% Renter occupied households paying > 30% of household income towards gross rent* 132 49.8% 99 35.5% -25.0% Median value of owner occupied housing units** 39,400 n/a 103,600 n/a 162.9% Owner occupied housing units with a mortgage** 90 32.6% 93 41.3% 3.3% Owner occupied households paying > 30% of household income towards select housing costs** 69 25.0% 66 29.3% -4.3% Total Specified Renter Occupied Housing Units 265 100.0% 279 100.0% 5.3% Total Specified Owner Occupied Housing Units 276 100.0% 225 100.0% -18.5% Data Source: U.S. Census Bureau SF3 data Note: SF3 data is not based upon a 100% population sample. * Data based only on specified renter occupied housing units ** Data based only on specified owner occupied housing units

Table 16: Northampton and Virginia Housing Costs

Northampton Virginia

% of % of % of % of % % 1990 1990 2000 2000 1990 1990 2000 2000 change change total total total total Median gross rent* 260 n/a 382 n/a 46.9% 495 n/a 650 n/a 31.3% Renter occupied households paying > 30% of household 530 31.9% 490 30.7% -7.5% 270,214 36.2% 285,768 33.9% 5.8% income towards gross rent* Median value of owner occupied 47,500 n/a 75,100 n/a 58.1% 90,400 n/a 118,800 n/a 31.4% housing units** Owner occupied housing units with 824 32.9% 1,170 41.2% 244.8% 863,766 71.5% 1,135,138 75.1% 74.9% a mortgage** Owner occupied households paying > 30% of household 477 19.0% 647 22.8% 35.6% 246,526 20.4% 307,258 20.3% 24.6% income towards select housing costs** Total Specified Renter Occupied 1,662 100.0% 1,596 100.0% -4.0% 746,163 100.0% 843,433 100.0% 13.0% Housing Units Total Specified Owner Occupied 2,508 100.0% 2,841 100.0% 13.3% 1,208,434 100.0% 1,510,798 100.0% 25.0% Housing Units

Data Source: U.S. Census Bureau SF3 data

Note: SF3 data is not based upon a 100% population sample.

* Data based only on specified renter occupied housing units

** Data based only on specified owner occupied housing units

Updated data reflecting recent changes in housing cost burdens are unavailable. However, assessment data can be used to examine changes in value. Sharp increases in assessment values were seen from 2003 to 2004. The average property assessment in Cape Charles increased by 164.68% during this time period. While increases in property value can benefit homeowners, rising land values can also decrease the availability of affordable housing options. Increases in assessment value also result in property owners paying higher personal property taxes, which can be particularly troublesome for low income households.

Conclusions

As illustrated by building permit data, the Town’s housing stock has undergone major changes within a short period of time. Numerous single family homes in the Historic District have been renovated, and significant residential construction has taken plan in the Bay Creek development. Many of the new and renovated homes are marketed towards high income households and are occupied seasonally, as indicated by the large number of residences that appear vacant at times.

Despite positive changes in the Town’s housing stock, some residents face major housing issues. Substandard housing is

still present, particularly in the Historic District where some older homes are in poor condition. Although rising property values have benefited many homeowners, increased rents and housing prices create difficulties for low and moderate income households. If the current housing trends continue as expected, the availability of quality affordable housing will continue to decrease. It is important to address these concerns when planning for the future of housing in Cape Charles.

Economy

The economy of Cape Charles has been evolving in recent decades. It is important to understand recent trends and the current state of the economy when planning for the Town’s future.

Labor Force

An area’s labor force consists of working-age people who are currently employed or who are unemployed and actively seeking employment. Cape Charles’ labor force consisted of 471 people in 2000. Labor force statistics can be viewed in Table 17. The Virginia Employment Commission is usually the preferred source of labor force data, but the VEC does not have labor force data for towns. U.S. Census Bureau data has been used instead.

Table 17: Labor Force Data, 2000

Cape Charles Northampton Virginia Labor Force 471 5,581 3,694,663 Population 16 and older 863 10,412 5,529,980 Labor Force Participation, >16 54.6% 53.6% 66.8% Population 16 - 64 593 7,641 4,737,647 Labor Force Participation, 16 - 64 79.4% 73.0% 78.0% Unemployment Rate 5.9% 6.0% 3.8% Data Source: U.S. Census Bureau SF3 data Note: SF3 data is not based upon a 100% population sample

The labor force participation rate is usually calculated by dividing labor force members living in an area by the population that is 16 years and older. This results in the percentage of the population that is a part of the labor force. Those who are not working or actively seeking work, and thus not participating in the labor force, may be disabled, they may be students, they may be homemakers, or they may be capable of working but discouraged from seeking work by poor employment prospects.

Both Cape Charles and Northampton have labor force participation rates that are more than ten percentage points lower than the rate for Virginia. As shown above, Northampton’s is the lowest at 53.6%, and Cape Charles’ is 54.6%. These low labor force participation rates are partially a result of the population’s age. The difference between Cape Charles’ rate and Virginia’s rate is 12.2 percentage points when the older population is included in the calculation. However, the rate in Cape Charles is actually

1.4 percentage points higher than the state level when the labor force participation rate is calculated using the population between the ages of 16 and 64. The labor force participation rate in Northampton is still five percentage points lower than at the state level when the older population is excluded, which indicates that underemployment is more common in Northampton County than in Cape Charles or at the state level.

Unemployment rates on the Eastern Shore have historically been higher than at the state level. In 2000, the unemployment rates in Cape Charles and Northampton were 5.9% and 6.0% respectively, while the unemployment rate for Virginia was 3.8%.

Income

Median household income in Cape Charles trails Virginia’s median household income significantly, and has also increased at a slower rate. In 2000, the median household income in Cape Charles was $22,237, while the state’s was $46,677. Also, the Town’s median income only increased by 28.9% from 1990 to 2000, while a 40.1% increase was seen in Virginia. Northampton’s 56.1% increase from 1990 to 2000 is a greater increase than that seen at the state level, but the county’s median household income still trails the state’s level by about $18,000. Table 18 and Figure 9 illustrate the details of median household income.

Table 18: Median Household Income Figure 9: Median Household Income

1990 2000 % change

Cape Charles $17,258 $22,237 28.9% $50,000 $45,000 Northampton $18,117 $28,276 56.1% $40,000 Virginia $33,328 $46,677 40.1% $35,000

Data Source: U.S. Census Bureau SF3 data $30,000 $25,000 Note: SF3 data is not based upon a 100% population sample $20,000 2000 $15,000 $10,000 1990 $5,000 $0 Cape Charles Northampton Virginia

The number of Cape Charles’ households in lower income groups dropped between 1990 and 2000, while the number of households in middle and upper income groups increased. The distribution of Northampton’s households among income groups also improved. However, the percentage of people in lower income groups is still higher in Cape Charles and Northampton than at the state level. In 2000, 46.7% of households in Cape Charles earned less than $20,000. This figure was 36.6% in Northampton and 18.7% in Virginia. Much of the increase in the number of people in higher income groups can be attributed to the older, educated population moving to the Eastern Shore. This means the increase in median income among the existing residents in Cape Charles and Northampton is not

necessarily as large as the overall increase shown in U.S. Census Bureau data. Table 19 and Table 20 show the distribution of households among income groups.

Table 19: Cape Charles Household Income

Cape Charles 1990 % of 1990 total 2000 % of 2000 total % change Less than $20,000 307 56.0% 238 46.7% -22.5% $20,000 - $29,999 138 25.2% 77 15.1% -44.2% $30,000 - $39,999 30 5.5% 63 12.4% 110.0% $40,000 - $49,999 27 4.9% 37 7.3% 37.0% $50,000 - $59,999 18 3.3% 23 4.5% 27.8% $60,000 - $74,999 4 0.7% 28 5.5% 600.0% $75,000 - $99,999 11 2.0% 21 4.1% 90.9% $100,000 - $149,999 12 2.2% 11 2.2% -8.3% $150,000 or greater 1 0.2% 12 2.4% 1100.0% Total 548 100.0% 510 100.0% -6.9% Data Source: U.S. Census Bureau SF3 data Note: SF3 data is not based upon a 100% population sample

Table 20: Northampton and Virginia Household Income

Northampton Virginia

% of 1990 % of 2000 % % of 1990 % of 2000 % 1990 2000 1990 2000 total total change total total change Less than $20,000 2,730 53.7% 1,945 36.6% -28.8% 645,501 28.1% 503,832 18.7% -21.9%

$20,000 - $29,999 913 17.9% 840 15.8% -8.0% 374,912 16.3% 324,305 12.0% -13.5%

$30,000 - $39,999 489 9.6% 734 13.8% 50.1% 339,165 14.8% 320,666 11.9% -5.5%

$40,000 - $49,999 366 7.2% 499 9.4% 36.3% 272,838 11.9% 287,256 10.6% 5.3%

$50,000 - $59,999 240 4.7% 316 5.9% 31.7% 200,661 8.7% 249,733 9.2% 24.5%

$60,000 - $74,999 124 2.4% 404 7.6% 225.8% 191,693 8.4% 299,679 11.1% 56.3%

$75,000 - $99,999 98 1.9% 269 5.1% 174.5% 150,094 6.5% 307,107 11.4% 104.6%

$100,000 - $149,999 79 1.6% 144 2.7% 82.3% 84,233 3.7% 254,948 9.4% 202.7%

$150,000 or greater 49 1.0% 168 3.2% 242.9% 35,625 1.6% 152,809 5.7% 328.9%

Total 5,088 100.0% 5,319 100.0% 4.5% 2,294,722 100.0% 2,700,335 100.0% 17.7%

Data Source: U.S. Census Bureau

Note: SF3 data is not based upon a 100% population sample

Per capita income is defined as the total income received by all persons divided by the total population. Cape Charles’ per capita income in 1990 was $13,789, which was about $10,000 lower than Virginia’s per capita income and about $3,000 lower than that of Northampton. However, the percentage change in Cape Charles and Northampton from 1990 to 2000 was higher than at the state level. This can be attributed to the large increase in high income households entering Cape Charles and Northampton. The much smaller increase in median household income in Cape Charles is due to the large number

of households still earning low incomes. Table 21 and Figure 10 show per capita income statistics.

Table 21: Per Capita Income Figure 10: Per Capita Income

1990 2000 % change

Cape Charles $8,756 $13,789 57.5% $25,000

Northampton $10,176 $16,591 63.0% $20,000 Virginia $15,713 $23,975 52.6%

Data Source: U.S. Census Bureau SF3 data $15,000

Note: SF3 data is not based upon a 100% population sample $10,000 2000

$5,000 1990 $0 Cape Charles Northampton Virginia

Poverty Status

As shown in the previous section, Cape Charles and Northampton County have a disproportionate percentage of households in low income ranges. Many of these households are below the poverty level. To determine poverty status, the Census Bureau uses a set of income thresholds that vary by family size and composition. These thresholds are provided in the Appendix. If the total income for a family or unrelated individual falls below the relevant poverty threshold, then the family or unrelated individual is classified as being "below the poverty level."

Poverty status information is provided in Table 22 and Figure 11: Poverty Status Figure 11. In 2000, 28.4% of the population in Cape Charles was below the poverty level. 35.0% This was 2.3 percentage points 30.0% less than in 1990, but was still almost exactly triple the 25.0% percentage for Virginia. In 20.0% Northampton, 20.5% of the 15.0% 1990 population was below the 10.0% poverty level in 2000. This 5.0% 2000 data indicates that poverty is a 0.0% major problem in Cape Charles Cape Charles Northampton Virginia and Northampton County.

Table 22: Poverty Status

Cape Charles Northampton Virginia % % % 1990 2000 1990 2000 1990 2000 change change change Population below poverty 425 319 -24.9% 3,405 2,633 -22.7% 611,611 656,641 7.4% level Population for whom poverty 1,383 1,122 -18.9% 12,821 12,833 0.1% 5,968,596 6,844,372 14.7% status is determined % of population below poverty 30.7% 28.4% -2.3 pp 26.6% 20.5% -6.1 pp 10.2% 9.6% -0.6 pp level

Data Source: U.S. Census Bureau SF3 data

Note: SF3 data is not based upon a 100% population sample. "pp" stands for percentage points

Commuting Patterns

A high percentage of people who live in Northampton County also work in the county. More than three-fourths of Northampton’s population works within the county. The isolated location of the county is a major reason for this fact. Most of the workers who commute outside of Northampton work in Accomack County. There are 898 Northampton County residents working in Accomack. The Chesapeake Bay Bridge Tunnel toll discourages most workers from commuting to Hampton Roads. There are very few workers commuting elsewhere. Table 23 shows data for commuting patterns. Cape Charles resident are included in the Northampton County commuting data. Data specific to Town residents is not available.

Table 23: Commuting Destinations

Northampton # of workers % of total Northampton County 3,915 77.2% Accomack County 898 17.7% Hampton Roads 139 2.7% Elsewhere 117 2.3% Total 5,069 100.0% Data Source: U.S. Census Bureau SF3 data Note: SF3 data is not based upon a 100% population sample.

The 2000 Census reveals that 17.4% of the Town’s workers either walk to work, bicycle to work, use other means of transportation to reach work, or work at home. This percentage is significantly higher than the corresponding percentages for Northampton

and Virginia, and indicates that many people in Cape Charles work near their residence. Table 24 provides details of how residents of Cape Charles travel to work.

Table 24: Means of Transportation to Work, 2000

Cape Charles Northampton Virginia Workers % of total Workers % of total Workers % of total Private vehicle 345 80.2% 4,419 87.2% 3,130,187 89.9% Public transportation 10 2.3% 109 2.2% 124,166 3.6% Bicycle 5 1.2% 15 0.3% 7,930 0.2% Walked 37 8.6% 200 3.9% 80,487 2.3% Other means 8 1.9% 88 1.7% 28,983 0.8% Worked at home 25 5.8% 238 4.7% 110,067 3.2% Total 430 100.0% 5,069 100.0% 3,481,820 100.0% Data Source: U.S. Census Bureau SF3 data Note: SF3 data is not based upon a 100% population sample

Occupational Characteristics

An examination of an area’s occupational structure can offer valuable insight into the local job market. Occupational categories generally contain workers with similar skill sets and often offer similar labor market rewards. Studying the occupational structure of Cape Charles can help in understanding the opportunities that are available to local workers and the skills possessed by the workforce.

Some occupational categories have more desirable jobs than others. There is a certain amount of variance within each category, but the general characteristics of each category can be observed. The jobs in the management, professional, and related occupations category generally pay well, require specialized skills, and are considered desirable. Sales and office occupations usually require certain skills and are sought-after as well. Conversely, service occupations are usually lower paying and often do not require special skills. Similarly, jobs in the construction, extraction, and maintenance occupations category and the production, transportation, and material moving occupations category do not require a high degree of skill. However, usually jobs in these two categories pay more than the service occupations, making them wanted by people who may not be able to obtain the more desirable jobs that require more skill.

Employment in the two occupational categories that usually have the highest wages and usually require more specialized skills is relatively low in Cape Charles and Northampton County. Cape Charles’ percentage of workers in the management, professional, and related occupations category is 8.0 percentage points lower than the state level, while Northampton trails state levels by 11.1 percentage points. Employment in the sales and office occupations category is also higher at the state level than locally.

Cape Charles and Northampton have higher levels of employment in occupational categories that usually do not require as many specialized skills. Employment in the production, transportation, and material-moving category is higher than at the state level, particularly in Cape Charles. Approximately 17% of Cape Charles’ workers are in this category. The construction, extraction, and maintenance occupations category has higher levels of employment in Cape Charles and Northampton as well. Employment in the service occupations category is about 14% in both Cape Charles and Virginia, but 20.0% of Northampton’s workers are in this category. The percentage of employees in the farming, fishing, and forestry occupations category is much higher in Cape Charles and Northampton than in Virginia, but the category’s percentage share of total employment is still the lowest of the six major categories. Table 25 and Figure 12 contain details of occupational statistics for Cape Charles, Northampton, and Virginia.

Table 25: Occupational Structure, 2000

Cape Charles Northampton Virginia

% of % of % of Employment Employment Employment total total total Management, professional, and related occupations: 134 30.2% 1,401 27.1% 1,304,906 38.2%

Management, business, and financial operations occupations 54 12.2% 513 9.9% 530,148 15.5%

Professional and related occupations 80 18.0% 888 17.2% 774,758 22.7%

Service occupations: 62 14.0% 1,033 20.0% 468,179 13.7%

Healthcare support occupations 11 2.5% 189 3.7% 54,170 1.6%

Protective service occupations 6 1.4% 150 2.9% 72,883 2.1%

Food preparation and serving related occupations 23 5.2% 252 4.9% 147,316 4.3%

Building and grounds cleaning and maintenance occupations 15 3.4% 273 5.3% 102,939 3.0%

Personal care and service occupations 7 1.6% 169 3.3% 90,871 2.7%

Sales and office occupations: 93 20.9% 1,032 19.9% 868,527 25.5%

Sales and related occupations 45 10.1% 504 9.7% 359,850 10.5%

Office and administrative support occupations 48 10.8% 528 10.2% 508,677 14.9%

Farming, fishing, and forestry occupations 15 3.4% 341 6.6% 16,336 0.5%

Construction, extraction, and maintenance occupations: 63 14.2% 520 10.0% 327,733 9.6%

Construction and extraction occupations 38 8.6% 356 6.9% 196,291 5.8%

Installation, maintenance, and repair occupations 25 5.6% 164 3.2% 131,442 3.9%

Production, transportation, and material moving occupations: 77 17.3% 850 16.4% 426,966 12.5%

Production occupations 37 8.3% 433 8.4% 240,015 7.0%

Transportation and material moving occupations 40 9.0% 417 8.1% 186,951 5.5%

Total 444 100.0% 5,177 100.0% 3,412,647 100.0%

Data Source: U.S. Census Bureau SF3 data

Note: SF3 data is not based upon a 100% population sample

Figure 12: Cape Charles Occupational Structure, 2000

Production, transportation, and material moving Management, occupations: professional, and 17.3% related occupations: Construction, 30.2% extraction, and maintenance occupations: 14.2% Farming, fishing, and forestry Service occupations: occupations: 3.4% 14.0% Sales and office occupations: 20.9%

Major Employers

Bayshore Concrete Products Corporation is the largest employer in the Town with approximately 250 employees. The company was originally established in 1961 to produce concrete components for the Chesapeake Bay Bridge Tunnel. Bayshore now manufactures and supplies pre-cast concrete structures for a wide range of utility and construction projects. Almost all of the products manufactured by Bayshore are exported, making the company an important part of the Town’s economic base, and also the regional economic base.

Many employment opportunities have been created in recent years by Bay Creek. Bay Creek Marina and Resort is responsible for the operation of Bay Creek facilities and services, and has emerged as a major local employer. Baymark Construction, the developer of the Bay Creek residential and golf community, is also a major employer. The new residential and golf development has generated jobs through the construction of two golf courses, a marina facility, and residential units. Building trade and service jobs have also been created indirectly by Bay Creek. More spin-off jobs will be generated in

the future as construction continues and more permanent and seasonal residents enter the Town.

The majority of Cape Charles residents work for businesses outside of the Town in Northampton County. Most of the largest employers in Northampton County can be put into a few major categories. One major group provides healthcare. This group includes Northampton’s largest employer, Shore Memorial Hospital. The public sector is also a major employer. This category includes the local governments and schools. Service sector employers are common as well. Businesses in this group include restaurants and retail stores. Agricultural businesses and seafood businesses are two other groups of major employers.

A list of the largest employers in Northampton County can be viewed in Table 26. Some major employers, such as Baymark Construction, are not included. Despite employing a significant number of local residents, the Virginia Employment Commission does not list them because they are not based within Northampton County.

Table 26: Largest Northampton County Employers, 1st Quarter 2006

Rank Company Name OC SC Ownership Code (OC) 1 Shore Memorial Hospital 50 8 10 - Federal Government 2 Northampton County Schools 30 8 20 - State Government 3 Bayshore Concrete Products Company*** 50 6 30 - Local Government 4 County of Northampton 30 6 50 - Private 5 Chesapeake Bay Bridge Tunnel 30 6 6 Laurel Meadows 50 6 Size Code (SC) 7 Lfc Agricultural Services Inc 50 6 9 - 1000 and over employees 8 Food Lion 50 6 8 - 500 to 999 employees 9 New Raveena Inc 50 6 7 - 250 to 499 employees 10 Broadwater Academy 50 5 6 - 100 to 249 employees 11 Eastern Shore Rural Health System 50 5 5 - 50 to 99 employees 12 Bailey Enterprises 50 5 4 - 20 to 49 employees 13 Tankard Nurseries 50 5 3 - 10 to 19 employees 14 Ballard Fish and Oyster Company Inc. 50 5 2 - 5 to 9 employees 15 Bay Creek Marina & Resort*** 50 5 1 - 1 to 4 employees 16 Hardee's 50 5 17 Michael Angelo II LLC 50 5 Data Source - Virginia 18 David's Nursery 50 4 Employment Commission 19 Eastern Shore Physicians 50 4 20 Town of Cape Charles*** 30 4 *** Located in Cape Charles 21 Rayfield's Pharmacy*** 50 4 22 Bernies Conchs LLC 50 4 23 Best Western Sunset BeachResort 50 4 24 Delmarva Power 50 4 25 The Trawler Restaurant 50 4

Commercial and Industrial Activity

The economy of Cape Charles has traditionally relied upon the railroad and harbor. The Town experienced an economic downturn during the second half of the twentieth century. This was due to several factors, including the decline of the railroad industry, the development of interstate highways, and the opening of the Chesapeake Bay Bridge Tunnel. Almost 40% of the commercial buildings in the Town’s commercial core were vacant in 1999, and only 26 businesses existed in the downtown area.

The downtown area of Cape Charles has seen increased activity in recent years. In May of 2007, 36 businesses existed along Mason Avenue, and approximately 75% of the commercial buildings were occupied. Many of the vacant buildings have being repaired and are advertised as being for sale or rent. Most of the businesses present on Mason Avenue are specialty retail stores, personal service establishments, and restaurants. The downtown area maintains a certain character as a result of the quality of many of the structures and their historical nature.

Commercial building permits provide evidence of the restoration efforts currently underway. Miscellaneous permits, which include electrical permits, mechanical permits, plumbing permits, and permits for renovations, reached a high-point in the downtown area in 2002, and again in 2005. New commercial construction has taken place in Bay Creek. Table 27 and Figure 13 provide a summary of commercial building permits since 2000. A spreadsheet showing detailed permit data can be viewed in the Appendix.

Table 27: Commercial Building Permits by Type

New Construction Misc. Permits Demolition Bay Rest of Bay Rest of Bay Rest of Creek Town Creek Town Creek Town 2000 3 1 11 29 0 1 2001 3 1 6 31 1 3 2002 2 0 8 50 0 2 2003 8 0 13 31 1 1 2004 7 0 17 30 0 1 2005 6 5 24 58 0 0 2006 0 0 8 43 0 0 Total 29 7 87 272 2 8 Entire Town 36 359 10

Data Source: Cape Charles Building Permits

Figure 13: Total Commercial Building Permits by Year

70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Bay Creek 14 10 10 22 24 30 8 Rest of Town 31 35 52 32 31 63 43

As the types of businesses located in Cape Charles have changed, so has the local economic base. Local economies are usually more specialized than larger economies. This results in a local surplus of goods and services in certain industries, which are purchased by outside buyers. This process is important because exporting goods and services stimulates the rest of the economy by bringing in additional income, which circulates locally through transactions among companies and individuals.

Industrial activity related to the railroad and harbor has traditionally been an important part of the local economic base. The Bay Coast Railroad and the Cape Charles Harbor still play an important part in the local economic base. Bayshore Concrete Products Corporation, the largest employer in Cape Charles and a major contributor to the economic base, relies heavily on both of these assets. Sand, gravel, and crushed rock are transported through the harbor and the railroad on a regular basis.

The tourism industry has recently emerged as another important part of the economic base. Many of the local service related establishments have benefited from an increase in tourism. Cape Charles’ primary strengths relative to tourism are its location, character, and amenities. Location is important in terms of the natural beauty of the Eastern Shore,

the available access to the ocean and the Chesapeake Bay, and the quiet “hide-away” sense of the Town. The Town’s waterfront location, small town atmosphere, and historic character are important resources which enhance its desirability as a destination for visitors and tourists. Several bed and breakfast establishments have opened in Town and offer overnight accommodations. Historic character and the natural environment are attributes which need to be protected in order to expand tourism in Cape Charles. New construction in Bay Creek, including the two new golf courses, has resulted in additional amenities that attract tourists.

Tax revenue related to tourist activities can be used to examine changes in spending patterns. The Town’s meals tax is applied to food served in restaurants. Overnight boarding facilities such as hotels and bed and breakfast establishments are charged a transient occupancy tax. A third tourism-related tax is the admissions tax, which is applied to admission fees charged for access to facilities such as the Bay Creek golf courses, and to admission fees charged for special events.

As shown in Table 28, tourism-related tax revenue has increased significantly during the past four fiscal years. The significant increase in meals tax revenue from FY03-04 to FY04-05 is due in large part to the opening of several new restaurants. Though a portion of the increased revenue can be attributed to residents and changing spending patterns, much of the revenue comes from other people entering the Town.

Table 28: Tourism-Related Tax Revenue, FY0203 - FY0506

Avg. % change, FY03-04 FY04-05 FY05-06 Annual % FY02-03 – change FY05-06 Meals Tax $23,411 $78,889 $78,055 118.0% 233.4% Admissions Tax $14,306 $20,155 $23,794 29.5% 66.3% Transient Occupancy Tax $5,072 $5,208 $8,176 29.8% 61.2% Total $42,788 $104,252 $110,025 74.6% 157.1% Data Source: Town of Cape Charles Finance Department

Though still a part of the local economic base, retailing has changed significantly in Cape Charles and nationwide over the past several decades, as seen by the proliferation of large retail stores, supermarkets, national chains and others which have opened at shopping centers along major transportation corridors. Their buying power is significant, resulting in prices that cannot be matched by independent operations. If commercial development continues along Route 13,

businesses, jobs, and investment will be drawn from the traditional downtowns to regional shopping centers located along the highway, resulting in the deterioration of the County’s towns.

Future Economic Development

Several local partners play an important part in economic development. The Northampton County Chamber of Commerce is located in Cape Charles and organizes several special events for the Town each year. The Town receives additional promotion from the Eastern Shore of Virginia Chamber of Commerce and the Eastern Shore of Virginia Tourism Commission. The downtown area also benefits from the efforts of the Cape Charles Renewal Program and the Regional Main Street Team. STAR Transit offers weekday bus service from Chincoteague to Cape Charles, and is a valuable transportation resource for citizens without access to cars, and for employers.

The Town has harbor and railroad infrastructure which is already established to support industrial activity. This infrastructure allows convenient accessibility to rail and highway networks, as well as ocean and inland waterways. The harbor and railroad are valuable assets in terms of economic development for Cape Charles.

The Town’s harbor area supports both industrial and recreational activity. Industrial activities at the harbor include Bayshore Concrete Products Corporation and the Bay Coast Railroad. Local watermen also make use of the harbor. The harbor is dredged to a depth of approximately 18-19 feet, providing clearance for large commercial vessels. Recreational use of the harbor is heavy, especially during summer months. The harbor is economically beneficial to the Town, both in terms of current industrial and recreational use, and for its strong potential to attract future industrial activity and tourists.

Cape Charles came into existence because of the railroad, which continues to play an important and visible role in the Town. The Bay Coast Railroad is headquartered in Cape Charles, which serves as the facility and equipment maintenance center for the Railroad. Commodities transported by the Railroad include coal, stone,

chemicals, grain, concrete, brick, and lumber, with over 50% of these commodities originating or terminating on the Eastern Shore. The Railroad also operates a ferry barge for transporting railroad cars to Norfolk.

Available space will also be important to future economic development efforts. Space is available in vacant buildings in the downtown area, and also at the Cape Charles Sustainable Technology Industrial Park (STIP), which is one of the country’s first eco- industrial parks. Building One, a 30,400 square foot multi-tenant facility, currently has one tenant and has additional space available. The building meets “green building” standards, which are more energy efficient, sensitive to the environment, and cost effective than those of traditional structures.

The Industrial Development Authority transferred ownership of the STIP to Northampton County in 2006. The STIP’s future is unclear, because developers have shown interest in purchasing the land and applying to rezone the property for residential use. The Town controls the property’s zoning and will have to seriously consider all aspects of any rezoning application. Cape Charles recognizes how important this property is to the Town hopes to work with Northampton in planning for the future of the STIP.

In addition to the physical infrastructure available to businesses, several federal and state programs offer incentives to businesses in Cape Charles. The entire Town is in a Historically Underutilized Business (HUB) Zone, which gives local businesses preferential consideration when competing for federal contracts. The Virginia Enterprise Zone program is also available, and offers commercial construction grants and job grants for businesses in areas designated Enterprise Zones. Map 5 illustrates the boundaries of the Town’s Enterprise Zone. Additionally, the STIP is in a Foreign Trade Zone. This program gives businesses the ability to defer or reduce duty charges for goods exported internationally. Federal and state tax credit opportunities for the rehabilitation of contributing structures in the Historic District are available as well. These programs can be used to help improve the feasibility of commercial projects in Cape Charles.

Conclusions

While many upper income households have recently entered the area, there is still a high percentage of low income households in Cape Charles. The percentage of the population living in poverty is much higher than at the state level. Unemployment has been fairly high in Cape Charles and Northampton County, and many of the jobs held by local workers are in occupations requiring few specialized skills and offering low wages. This is partially due to a lack of diversity in available economic opportunities, which is particularly troublesome for an area with a high percentage of residents who work close to home. Employment options in and around the Town must be improved in order for these households to improve their economic conditions. The population must also improve its education and training levels in order to access additional employment opportunities.

Map 5: Enterprise Zone Boundaries

Cape Charles has experienced increased commercial activity in recent years. If this trend continues, economic opportunities for local residents will improve. The Town must create an atmosphere conducive to the growth of existing businesses and the establishment of new businesses. This can be achieved through cooperation with regional economic development partners and the continued support of existing infrastructure related to economic development, including the harbor and railroad. The Town’s other strengths, such as the natural environment and historic character of the built environment, must be preserved as well to encourage economic prosperity.

Cooperation with Northampton County will be of particular importance to the economy of Cape Charles. The Town must work with Northampton to plan for the future of the STIP. Regional cooperation is also needed to plan for commercial activity outside of the Town’s boundaries. Commercial investment should be encouraged where it is needed, not in developing agricultural land, but in revitalizing the County’s towns.

The shopping center constructed near the intersection of Route 184 and Route 13 is a case in point. The presence of a large Food Lion grocery store in this shopping center creates a situation where it would be difficult for a grocery store located within the Town to be successful. While specialty stores in the Cape Charles contribute to the local economic base, the overall sales volume of retail stores in the Town has decreased as commercial development along Route 13 has increased.

Natural Conditions

The natural attributes of the landscape influence how and where a community grows. Topography, drainage, soil characteristics and other natural features define areas suitable for development and areas with potential problems. This chapter reviews relevant natural characteristics which exert an influence on growth patterns.

Climate

The climate of Cape Charles can be described as temperate. Summers are usually warm and humid. July is the warmest month, and has an average daily high temperature of 86 degrees Fahrenheit. Winters are relatively mild, with January being the coldest month. The average daily high temperature in January is 46 degrees, and the average daily low temperature is 29 degrees. The entire Eastern Shore is usually slightly warmer than the rest of Virginia due to its proximity to the Chesapeake Bay and the Atlantic Ocean.

On average, the most precipitation in Cape Charles occurs in March, but generally rainfall is evenly distributed throughout the year. The Town averages 40 inches of precipitation yearly. Severe storms present a risk during hurricane season from June 1 to November 30. Severe northeasterly storms can also affect the area during the fall and winter months.

Topography

Cape Charles lies on a peninsula and is surrounded by water on three sides. The Town is situated on the Chesapeake Bay, bordered by King’s Creek to the north and Old Plantation Creek to the south. The land in Town is low lying and relatively flat, with most of the developed land in Town between five and fifteen feet in elevation. Due to its low-lying topography, Cape Charles is vulnerable to flooding. Hurricanes and northeast storms, which are characterized by high winds, heavy rainfall, higher than normal tides, and higher than normal wave action, pose threats for flooding.

Portions of Cape Charles are located within the 100-year floodplain, as shown in Map 6. The floodplain and associated wetland areas provide valuable wildlife habitat areas as well as protect upland areas from erosion and flooding. The 100-year floodplain is delineated by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Land within the 100-year floodplain statistically averages one flood in a 100-year time period, which equates to a 1% chance of flooding in any given year. However, flooding can occur more

Map 6: 100-Year Floodplain

often if conditions warrant. Development within a floodplain must take these risks into account to ensure the safety and welfare of property owners.

Soils

As shown in Map 7, Bojac and Munden soils are the predominant soils in Cape Charles. Bojac soils are considered very suitable for development, while Munden soils are considered fair. Poor soils, which are generally unsuitable for development, are found along the edges of the Town’s shorelines and in isolated areas inland. All of the soils in Town are either hydric or highly permeable, with ground water being a relatively shallow distance underneath. Highly permeable soils are extremely susceptible to pollutant leaching and create a high potential for ground water pollution. Hydric soils are primarily wet and drain poorly.

Soils are identified with a three character symbol. The first letter is the first letter in the soil’s name. The second letter distinguishes between classifications that begin with the same letter. The third letter indicates the class of the slope. The A class has the lowest slope, while the E class has the steepest slope present in this area. Soil types within Cape Charles are discussed below:

Assateague Sand (AsE): Gently sloping to very steep, very deep, and excessively drained. On and between dunes along the Bay. Very rapid permeability and low water capacity. Used mainly for wildlife habitats and recreation areas. High permeability, slope, sandy texture, and the hazards of seepage and instability limit development.

Beaches (BeB): Sandy marine sediments deposited by wave action. Used mainly for wildlife habitats and recreation areas. Tidal flooding, severe erosion, and accretion of sediments limit most other uses.

Bojac Fine Sandy Loam (BoA): Nearly level, very deep, and well-drained farmland. Moderately rapid permeability and instability of the soil are limitations to development.

Bojac Loamy Sand (BhB): Gently sloping, very deep, and well drained. Moderately rapid permeability and instability of the soil are limitations to development.

Camocca Fine Sand (CaA): Nearly level, very deep, and poorly drained. Very rapid permeability. Used for wildlife habitats and recreation areas. Seasonal high water table, flooding, sandy texture, and instability hazard limit soil for development.

Map 7: Soils

Chincoteague Silt Loam (ChA): Nearly level, very deep, and very poorly drained soil located primarily in tidal marshes. Tidal flooding, the seasonal high water table, ponding, low strength, and salt are major limitations for development.

Dragston Fine Sandy Loam (DrA): Nearly level, very deep, and somewhat poorly drained. Used mainly for cultivated crops and woodland. Seasonal high water table, rapid permeability, poor filtering capacity, and seepage limit development.

Fisherman Fine Sand (FhB): Nearly level, gently sloping, very deep and moderately well drained.

Molena Loamy Sand (MoD): Moderately sloping to steep, very deep, and somewhat excessively drained. Rapid permeability. Slope, high permeability, and droughtiness limit soil for development. Used mainly for woodland and wildlife.

Munden Sandy Loam (MuA): Level, deep, and moderately well drained. Seasonal high water table and rapid permeability limit development.

Nimmo Sandy Loam (NmA): Nearly level, deep, and poorly drained. Used for farmland when drained. Seasonal high water table, seepage, and rapid permeability are limitations for development. Limited for roads and streets.

Polawana Loamy Sand (PoA): Nearly level, very deep, and very poorly drained. Used mainly for woodland. Seasonal high water table, rapid permeability, flooding, and wetness are major limitations for development.

Udorthents & Udipsamments (UPD): Mainly fill and spoil materials and sandy materials in excavated areas. Characteristics are so variable that on-site investigation is necessary to determine suitability for most uses.

Surface Water

Surface water in Cape Charles includes the Chesapeake Bay to the east, King’s Creek to the north, and Old Plantation Creek to the south and east. All surface water has a high saline content, except for several small ponds located within the Town, which are fresh or brackish water. Cape Charles is characterized by extensive shorelines, ranging from sandy beaches on the Chesapeake Bay to marsh fringes on King’s Creek and Old

Plantation Creek. Approximately 19,200 feet (3.6 miles) of shoreline front directly onto the Chesapeake Bay.

The entire Town lies within the Chesapeake Bay watershed, draining either directly into the Bay, or into Old Plantation Creek and King’s Creek, and then into the Bay. The Chesapeake Bay has played an important role in the history and identity of Cape Charles and the Eastern Shore, providing valuable economic, environmental and recreational resources, and serving as the nation’s largest and most productive estuary. However, pollution is causing the Bay’s water quality to decline. Pollution can be classified as either point source or nonpoint source. Point source pollution results from discharge at a specific point, such as the Town’s wastewater treatment plant, which is discussed in the Public Facilities section of this plan. Nonpoint source pollution is not attributable to distinct, identifiable source, but enters water indirectly.

Nonpoint source pollution includes stormwater runoff from developed land and impervious surfaces, runoff from agricultural land, and erosion of soil and shorelines. Under natural conditions, water running off the land soaks into the ground and is filtered by soils and vegetation root systems. Disturbing sensitive areas can increase the speed and volume of surface runoff, resulting in erosion, sedimentation, and siltation of ship channels — a particularly devastating process to a Town with economically vital harbors and marinas. In settled areas where much of the land is paved or “impervious,” stormwater cannot soak into the ground and runs off very rapidly. The runoff carries pollutants such as oil, sediment, chemicals, pesticides, and excess nutrients from fertilizer, which eventually reach the waters of the Chesapeake Bay unless filtered or retained by some structural or nonstructural technique. Pollution of the water column and a reduction in the amount of light reaching submerged aquatic vegetation choke important parts of the aquatic food chain. Ultimately, spawning grounds and benthic habitats are destroyed, resulting in serious problems for commercial fishermen.

Land management techniques that minimize the amount of impervious surfaces and increasing the filtering capacity of the land can be used to reduce nonpoint source pollution. The Town has enacted a Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act Program, which enables the Town to protect water quality through local land use regulations. The Bay Act is a Virginia Law, which provides a legislatively mandated approach to protect and improve the waters of the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries by reducing nonpoint source pollution through wise resource management practices. The Town has designated Chesapeake Bay Preservation Areas (CBPAs), and has applied certain development standards to these areas. The Town’s CBPAs consist of Resource Protection Areas (RPAs), Resource Management Areas (RMAs) and Intensely Developed Areas (IDAs).

Future development activities in these preservation areas are guided by the Town’s Zoning Ordinance, which establishes standards to mitigate development impacts on water quality.

RPAs consist of sensitive lands at or near the shoreline which have important water quality value to the Bay, such as tidal shorelines and wetlands. RPAs also include a 100- foot vegetated buffer area landward of these features, where development activities are restricted. RMAs consist of sensitive land types which have the potential for causing significant water quality degradation if they are improperly developed. RMAs in Cape Charles include the 100-year floodplain and nontidal wetlands. Development within RMAs should be planned in a manner which reduces the impact of nonpoint source pollution. IDAs consist of densely developed areas that are largely devoid of natural vegetation. The Town’s IDAs are located adjacent to the Cape Charles harbor and at the Bay Creek Marina. IDAs are designated to focus development in areas where it is already concentrated and supported by existing infrastructure while improving water quality. New development and redevelopment in IDAs must achieve a 10% reduction in nonpoint source pollution from storm water runoff. Opportunities for water quality improvement through redevelopment of IDAs include re-establishing natural vegetation and establishing a vegetated buffer over time to promote the water quality benefits of natural vegetation. Map 8 shows the location of Chesapeake Bay Preservation Areas in Cape Charles.

Another element of nonpoint source pollution includes boating activity. Due to its location on the Chesapeake Bay, Cape Charles is popular with recreational boating and fishing enthusiasts. In addition, commercial fishing is a small yet visible activity in Cape Charles. While boating-related activity has a positive impact on the local economy, it can adversely impact Bay water quality if not handled properly. Several boat-related facilities are located in the Town, including a public marina and harbor as well as a commercial marina. Boating activity can potentially degrade water quality through inappropriate discharge of human waste and trash, fuel spills, oil spills, and toxic bottom paints. In order to lessen the impact of water pollution through proper waste disposal, the Virginia Department of Health requires marinas to have restroom facilities, pump-out facilities, and sewage dumping stations for portable toilets.

Numerous shellfish grounds are located in waters near Cape Charles. A large portion of the bottoms of Old Plantation Creek, King’s Creek, and Cherrystone Inlet are leased grounds. The majority of these shellfish grounds are comprised of clam aquaculture, with the most intensive harvesting taking place in Old Plantation Creek, followed by Cherrystone Inlet.

Map 8: Chesapeake Bay Preservation Areas

An extremely clean environment is needed for shellfish to thrive and be consumed safely. Shellfish require water fourteen times cleaner than where humans can safely swim. The Virginia Department of Health (VDH) monitors water quality to determine where shellfish can be safely harvested. Unclean areas are condemned by VDH and cannot be harvested. Table 29 provides a summary of shellfish grounds that have been condemned in areas near Cape Charles

Table 29: Condemned Shellfish Grounds in Acres

% change 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2001 to 2005 Cherrystone Inlet * * * 192 192 0.0% King's Creek 52 52 27 45 115 121.2% Old Plantation Creek 56 56 30 70 70 25.0% Data Source: Virginia Department of Health; Virginia Eastern Shorekeeper * 2001 - 2003 data for Cherrystone Inlet is unavailable

In addition to shellfish grounds, a substantial amount of submerged aquatic vegetation is located in the waters surrounding Town. Boating activity can impact fisheries in the area by causing increased water turbidity, which can choke shellfish grounds and decrease the amount of sunlight reaching submerged aquatic vegetation.

Ground Water

Cape Charles, along with the entire Eastern Shore of Virginia, depends entirely upon ground water for its water supply needs. As shown below in Figure 14, ground water on the Eastern Shore is made up of a series of aquifers — bodies of sediments capable of yielding water. The uppermost aquifer is called the Columbia aquifer, also known as the water table. In the Cape Charles area, the Columbia aquifer is approximately 40 to 70 feet thick. Below the Columbia aquifer is the Yorktown aquifer system, consisting of upper, middle and lower units. The Town’s water supply is withdrawn from the upper and middle Yorktown aquifer units. The Yorktown aquifer system is separated from the Columbia aquifer by confining layers of clay, which help protect it from contamination, but also impede the amount and rate of recharge.

Figure 14: Cross Section of Eastern Shore Ground Water Flow

Source: Richardson, 1992; Accomack-Northampton Planning District Commission, 2005

Fresh water is supplied into the aquifer system by rainfall, which penetrates the soil and recharges ground water aquifers. The Eastern Shore ground water flow system is characterized by brackish water of the Bay to the west and salt water of the Atlantic Ocean to the east, with limited occurrence of freshwater. Most water in the Columbia aquifer flows laterally from the center of the Eastern Shore peninsula, discharging into the Atlantic Ocean and Chesapeake Bay. A much smaller portion of water flows down through the clays and silts that separate the Columbia aquifer from the underlying Yorktown aquifers. Ground water recharge occurs near the center spine of the peninsula, forming an island-type freshwater lens. The Town is not located within the spine recharge area. Ground water modeling studies indicate approximately 11 million gallons of water are recharged to the Yorktown aquifer each day.

Because ground water is a limited resource, water conservation is critical in protecting and managing this valuable resource. Overpumping of ground water is a concern for the Eastern Shore, and could lead to well interference, saltwater intrusion, and a deterioration of water quality. In Cape Charles, water conservation measures are crucial for maximizing the available water supply and meeting future demands.

The Eastern Shore of Virginia is divided into five wellhead protection areas, based on ground water divides created by pumping patterns of the major ground water withdrawers on the Eastern Shore. Cape Charles is located in Wellhead Protection Area E - Cape Charles Area. This wellhead protection area is the southern-most wellhead protection area on the peninsula.

In 1997, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) designated the Eastern Shore’s aquifer system as the Columbia and Yorktown-Eastover Multiaquifer System Sole Source Aquifer. A sole source aquifer is defined as an aquifer that supplies at least 50 percent of the drinking water to its overlying area. This designation helps protect ground water quality by requiring EPA review of all projects receiving federal funding.

The Eastern Shore of Virginia was declared a Critical Ground Water Area in 1976. Any party needing to withdraw 300,000 gallons per month or more in the Eastern Shore Ground Water Management Area must obtain a permit from the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). All permit holders are required to report ground water use and implement a water conservation and management plan.

Cape Charles has been approved for a Ground Water Withdrawal Permit from the DEQ allowing a withdrawal capacity of 5.8 million gallons per month. A ground water impact assessment was conducted for the Town to study possible effects of the withdrawal, and found that over the 10-year permit period, no measurable saltwater intrusion or other water quality changes are expected to occur. However, it is possible that some saltwater intrusion may occur in the lower Yorktown aquifer in the long term (100 years) as a result of the Town’s withdrawal, in which case treatment of potable water by reverse osmosis can be used as a contingency. An in-depth discussion of the Town’s water treatment process is provided in the Public Utilities chapter.

The Ground Water Withdrawal Permit specifies conditions and restrictions, including monthly withdrawal limits, which are designed to minimize any adverse impacts from the Town’s withdrawal. The Permit also requires routine well monitoring for water quality and ground water level changes to protect against water quality degradation. The routine well monitoring helps to ensure that saltwater intrusion will not occur. If monitoring information indicates there is potential for adverse impacts on ground water levels or water quality that are due to withdrawal, the Permit may be reopened to address those impacts.

Leaking underground storage tanks may pose a potential threat to ground water quality. On the Eastern Shore, most underground storage tanks (USTs) contain petroleum products stored in tanks constructed of steel. The average life of a steel tank is approximately 15 years, although many are much older. Because USTs are not visible, leaks may not be detected until a substantial amount of pollutants have seeped into the surrounding soil. Corrosion of the tanks over time produces pin-hole type leaks resulting in discharge of many gallons over a short period. Gasoline contains benzene, toluene, and xylene, all of which are detrimental to health. It has been estimated that one gallon of gasoline is sufficient to contaminate one million gallons of ground water. Older tanks are being replaced by new tanks made of material resistant to corrosion to eliminate leakage.

Any person who has a UST on their property is required by law to notify the DEQ of the tank’s existence. Data from the DEQ indicates 39 registered users have owned 115 USTs in or near Cape Charles. Of these, 28 are still in operation, 2 are temporarily out of use, 15 are closed in ground, 4 are out of use but have not been closed in ground, and 66 are closed and removed from the ground. None were reported leaking. Gasoline, diesel, and kerosene are the materials stored in the tanks. The average age of the USTs in or near the Town is 25 years. The Appendix presents detailed information about USTs in the vicinity of Cape Charles.

Ground water contamination due to septic filter fields is not a major issue in Cape Charles because most residents and businesses in the Town are served by public utilities. However, nine septic systems still exist. When demand is created by future development, public sewer services will be extended to parts of Cape Charles that are not currently served. Property owners receiving the new services will pay for the cost of extending public utilities to these areas, as provided for in the Town Code. Private septic systems are discussed in more detail in the Public Utilities chapter.

The Eastern Shore of Virginia Ground Water Committee has overseen the development of regional ground water plans and studies since 1990. Although Cape Charles is within the area overseen by the committee, the Town does not have member status. The mandate of the committee is to “assist local governments and residents of the Eastern Shore in understanding, protecting and managing ground water resources, to prepare a ground water resources protection and management plan, to serve as an educational and informational resource to local governments and residents of the Eastern Shore, and to initiate special studies concerning the protection and management of the Eastern Shore ground water resource.” Cape Charles recognizes the regional nature of the ground water issue and supports the committee in its efforts.

Chesapeake Bay Impact Crater

A meteorite impact crater more than fifty miles wide is located in the vicinity of Cape Charles. The crater was created approximately 35 million years ago by a mile-wide meteorite. The impact occurred in an area of Virginia’s Tidewater region which was beneath the Atlantic Ocean at the time. The Earth’s crust experienced a major upheaval as a result of the meteorite impact. Though the impact crater was only recently discovered in 2000, some scientists have theorized that the impact resulted in the formation of the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries.

The Eastern Shore’s ground water resources were shaped in part by the meteorite impact. Sediment layers in the area were fractured as a result of the impact. This is believed to be partially responsible for the presence of salt in the Eastern Shore’s ground water. Scientists are currently studying the impact crater and the possible ways the area’s ground water has been affected.

Wetlands

Several parts of Cape Charles are considered wetlands. Wetlands can be defined as areas that are wet or have wet soils during some part of the growing season. Tidal wetlands are influenced by tidal fluctuations and exist along the coastline. Tidal wetlands may include vegetated marshes and swamps or nonvegetated mud and sand flats. Nontidal wetlands

are usually found inland and are not impacted by tidal changes, but still meet the definition of a wetland. Local land that is included in the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s National Wetlands Inventory can be viewed in Map 9.

Wetlands have historically been considered wastelands, because they are usually not suitable for farming or building due to their unstable and wet nature. Often these areas are also breeding grounds for insects. In the past, wetlands were frequently drained or filled to make the land developable.

This negative view overlooks several important characteristics of wetlands. Wetlands are home to a diverse population of mammals, waterfowl, and marine organisms. Hunters and fishermen have benefited from the animal population in wetlands for many years. In addition to providing homes for species that are of direct benefit to humans, many other plant and animal species are exclusively present in wetlands, making the areas an important part of regional ecosystems.

Wetlands also offer a natural means of protecting water quality. Densely vegetated wetlands act as a natural filter by trapping sediments and nutrients before they reach nearby waterways. The filter feeding organisms present in nonvegetated wetlands also protect water quality by removing suspended solids from the water column.

Because of their location near coastlines, wetlands can also protect an area from flooding and erosion. The dense root systems present in vegetated wetlands can help slow erosion caused by unusually high tides and wave action. The sponge-like quality of the soils present in wetlands can also protect the upland against flooding by absorbing some flood water resulting from a rise in sea level.

Cape Charles recognizes the multitude of important characteristics wetlands possess. Many regional wetlands have been filled or drained in recent decades, making it imperative to preserve the existing wetlands. The Town has adopted a Wetlands Ordinance to regulate the use of these areas, and has a Wetlands Board that oversees activities in wetlands.

Habitat

Cape Charles encompasses diverse and significant ecosystems which support a variety of wildlife and plant species. Forested upland areas are located in the southern portion of Town along the edges of Bay shoreline, and in several large tracts further inland. These forested areas, particularly near the Bay shoreline, provide important habitat for a variety

Map 9: Wetlands

of wildlife. As previously mentioned, the Town’s wetlands also support a variety of species. The Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries lists several species of animals as threatened in the Town and its vicinity. These species include, but may not be limited to, the Northeastern Beach Tiger Beetle and the Bald Eagle.

Cape Charles is located along one of the most significant flyways on the eastern seaboard for migratory birds, including waterfowl, shorebirds, and migratory songbirds, which are declining worldwide. The eastern coastline of the Bay is vulnerable to forest fragmentation and other disturbances. Habitats required for transient, breeding, and resident bird species, and particularly the vegetation upon which they depend, have been greatly reduced. Protection of these areas is critical to insure the healthy continuance of local and regional ecosystems. Future development could potentially place further stress on migratory and other land bird species, as well as the large variety of wildlife and plant species found in the area.

Located south of Bayshore Concrete is the Coastal Habitat Natural Area Preserve, a 26-acre habitat protection area. The Preserve encompasses an ecologically significant secondary dune system which is one of the last remaining natural communities of its kind in Virginia. Volunteers planted over 600 species of native plants, grasses, shrubs, and trees to provide critical habitat for migratory birds which utilize the Preserve as a feeding, resting, and recovery area. Coastal sands dunes located outside of the Coastal Habitat Natural Area Preserve are protected by the Town’s Coastal Primary Sand Dune Zoning Ordinance.

Waterfront Access

By providing public waterfront access, the Town encourages the public to experience firsthand the importance of water quality in Cape Charles through recreational pursuits such as sightseeing, fishing, and swimming. Numerous public waterfront access areas exist in Cape Charles, including the harbor, Cape Charles beach, the municipal pier, and the Coastal Habitat Natural Area Preserve. Bay Creek Marina also provides waterfront access. Preserving the quality of the Bay and its tributaries is a high priority in Cape Charles. Development pressure in waterfront areas threatens environmentally sensitive habitats which are critical to Bay wildlife and water quality. The high demand for waterfront property has increased land values, making public acquisition of these lands difficult or impossible. This makes it critical that the Town maintain, improve, and preserve all public lands which provide waterfront access.

Shoreline Erosion

The Town has approximately 19,200 feet of shoreline fronting directly on the Chesapeake Bay. The mean tide range is 2.4 feet and the spring tide range is 2.9 feet. Prevailing winds along the shoreline have an average velocity of 10 miles per hour and are from the south to southwest. The effective fetch from Cape Charles to the south/southwest is about 16 miles, with an average depth of 25 feet.

Cape Charles Beach, which begins at the Cape Charles harbor and extends north approximately 2,800 feet (1/2 mile), consists of a narrow sandy beach, bordered by a boardwalk and public street. North of Cape Charles Beach is approximately 4,400 feet (3/4 mile) of natural shoreline bordering the Bay, extending to the mouth of King’s Creek. At the mouth of King’s Creek, the shoreline extends for 9,500 feet (1.8 miles), forming the eastern boundary of the Town. The shoreline of King’s Creek is characterized by wetlands, consisting of fringe and embayed marsh.

South of Cape Charles Beach and the Cape Charles harbor is a 12,000 foot (2.2 mile) stretch of natural shoreline fronting the Bay, characterized by a sandy beach. The northern half of this beach is wide and sandy, with sand dunes. The southern half of the beach is sandy and narrow, with tree stumps and woody debris, and an elongated pond running behind and parallel to the south end of the beach. The beach extends to the mouth of Old Plantation Creek, where the shoreline turns inland, extending approximately 14,500 feet (2 3/4 miles) and forming the southeastern boundary of the Town. The shoreline of Old Plantation Creek is characterized by wetlands consisting of fringe and embayed marsh.

Cape Charles Beach has been used as a recreational area since the early 1900’s. In 1982, Brown and Root, Inc. transferred the title of the public beach to the Town. The transfer stipulated that the beach would remain public and would be maintained by the Town. The beach had been steadily deteriorating for thirty years before the transfer.

Portions of this shoreline are still eroding. A study conducted by Byrne and Anderson in 1978 found that the historic erosion rate in Cape Charles had been 1.5 feet per year. Erosion accelerated in the 1980’s. A study by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in 1991 indicated that erosion rates from 1986 to 1990 were four to five feet per year. Current documentation of erosion rates in Cape Charles do not exist. However, based on visual assessment of the beach, it is likely that the Town’s erosion rate has remained high. This trend may continue, as there is belief in the scientific community that overall erosion rates in the Chesapeake Bay area have accelerated in the past several years.

The most significant cause of shoreline erosion in the Chesapeake Bay system is the combined action of wind and waves on the shoreline. Storm winds generate large waves which cause much of the damage. During storms and hurricanes, strong winds push

additional water against the ocean coast and into the Chesapeake Bay, resulting in higher water levels of tides, which generally range between one and three feet, but may reach several feet in magnitude. Aside from the obvious hazard of flooding low-lying areas, these higher tides permit the erosive action of the waves to directly attack the fastland above the usual buffer provided by the beach. Offshore shoals help protect Cape Charles by reducing the height of waves that are greater than three feet in height. However, the impact of these waves is still significant.

According to the Public Beach Assessment Report for Cape Charles Beach, prepared by VIMS in 1993, the shoreline in Cape Charles is typically affected by northwest winds which occur from late fall to early spring, as well as southwest and westerly winds that are most frequent from early spring to late fall. Waves created by northeast storms do not impact the Cape Charles shoreline directly, but usually produce significant storm surge. As the post-storm winds often shift to the northwest, the water level is elevated for a short period of time. This scenario can produce high waves acting on the Cape Charles shoreline.

Erosion activity is further influenced by short-term fluctuation of lunar and storm tides and long-term sea level rise. The average sea level rise in the Bay is about .01 foot per year, or one foot per century. Although this rate seems small, its effect is dramatic considering that the fringes of the Bay have very gentle slopes, where a small increase vertically covers appreciable horizontal distance. Thus, each decade brings constant encroachment against the fastland.

Significant shoreline erosion has occurred in recent years, especially following Hurricane Isabel in the fall of 2003. Significant erosion was seen near Kings Creek, and about two feet of shoreline eroded near the Sustainable Technologies Park.

Several shoreline protective measures have been taken in recent decades. The public beach contains a seawall, consisting of a walkway and bulkheading which extends 2,300 feet along the back of the beach from the stone jetty. In 1982, groins were constructed at the public beach, which were 150 feet long and 300 feet apart. A severe storm in November, 1985 resulted in extensive damage to the beach. The beach was significantly widened in 1987 as a result of beach nourishment with 87,000 cubic yards of sand dredged from the harbor channel by the Army Corps of Engineers. The beach fill project was of major beneficial impact to the public beach.

In 1988, the Town initiated a project to install sand fencing and dune grasses, to help stabilize the public beach and control blowing sand. Fences were installed by the Department of Transportation and the Youth Conservation Corps, and dune grasses were

planted by volunteers. Extensive dunes have developed as a result of these efforts. The current dune system has reached elevations between five and ten feet above sea level.

In 1993, VIMS prepared the Public Beach Assessment Report for Cape Charles Beach, which assessed the rates and patterns of beach change on Cape Charles’ public beach. According to the Report, the public beach had been reduced in volume approximately 19% since the beach nourishment project of 1988. By 1995, severe erosion along the north end of the beach had exposed the face of the bulkhead. Approximately 1,200 cubic yards of sand were used in 1995 to fill the area in front of the bulkhead, and in 1996 dune walkovers were constructed to prevent erosion due to foot traffic.

Several other shoreline protective structures exist in Cape Charles, located at the harbor and the public beach. A stone jetty is located at the northside of the harbor entrance, extending 1,200 feet into the Bay. The jetty protects the harbor somewhat from waves and limits sedimentation in the harbor from longshore drift. The jetty also helps protect the public beach by serving as a significant barrier to littoral transport of nourished beach sand. At the southside of the harbor entrance is a 200 foot earthen jetty, or mole, which anchors the end of the beach and helps keep the harbor mouth open. Approximately 4,500 feet of bulkheads line the periphery of the harbor and eliminates most shoreline erosion in the harbor.

The storm drain outfall has also had a local impact on the very north end of the beach. The public beach is bordered on the north by a large storm water outfall pipe that extends about 300 feet from the bulkhead into the Bay. The pipe was installed as part of the 1988 beach nourishment project and subsequently has been reinforced with gabions including gabion spurs on either side. Presently, the outfall has a local effect on the public beach by partially blocking sand moving south along the shoreline from King’s Creek. The outfall and associated spur are also causing an alteration in the beach platform to the immediate south.

Artificial nourishment is needed periodically on the beach, due to lack of sufficient natural sand supply for replenishment. Sand retaining devices are also needed to prevent sand from eroding. The Town has recently hired Vanasse Hagen Brustlin, Inc. to design shoreline stabilization for Cape Charles Beach. Four breakwater structures will be constructed to control erosion along approximately 1,700 linear feet of shoreline. Additionally, the beach will be nourished with 35,000 cubic yards of sand, and 70,000 square feet of dune plantings will be used for stabilization.

Conclusions

An abundance of natural resources exist in Cape Charles. Critical wildlife habitats, such as wetlands and natural areas, are present within the Town’s boundaries and nearby. In addition to serving an important ecological function, the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries are important to the local economy and lifestyle. These natural environments can be considered delicate and should be protected from degradation. Similarly, the area’s ground water resources also must be protected to ensure the availability of drinking water. The Town’s concern for its natural resources is illustrated by projects such as the recent beach replenishment and the careful usage of ground water. Land use policies must continue to take into account the importance of the local environment in order to protect these resources for current and future generations.

Community Facilities and Services

The Community Facilities and Services section provides a summary of all public facilities and services offered by the Town. Regional resources are also described, as well as major private facilities and services in Cape Charles. These resources benefit local citizens, businesses, and visitors. Map 10 shows the locations of community facilities described in this section.

Town Government

Cape Charles is governed by a Mayor and six Town Council members. The Mayor is elected every four years and three Council members are elected every two years with each serving a four year term. The Town is staffed by a Town Manager and 35 employees. In addition to the Town’s elected officials and staff members, Cape Charles is served by several boards and commissions. These include the Planning Commission, the Historic District Review Board, the Board of Zoning Appeals, the Wetlands and Coastal Dune Board, the Building Code Board of Appeals, and the Library Board. There are a total of 34 positions on these six boards and commissions.

Public Safety

Police protection for the Town is provided by the Cape Charles Police Department. The mission of the Police Department is to enhance the quality of life in Cape Charles by working cooperatively with the public to preserve the peace, enforce the laws, prevent crime, reduce fear, and provide for a safe community.

The Cape Charles Police Department is currently staffed by four full-time officers and a Chief of Police. All members of the department are LEC certified. Two officers are EMT certified and two are ALS certified. The Town owns five radio- equipped police cars, which are used to patrol all areas within the Town boundaries on a regular basis. Citizens can call the Police Department directly, and the department is also dispatched through the Northampton County Sheriff’s Office. The

Map 10: Community Facilities

Northampton County Sheriff’s Office provides assistance when necessary, and the Cape Charles Police Department also uses the Northampton County jail to house inmates.

Other law enforcement agencies provide assistance to the Police Department. These agencies include the Northampton County Sheriff’s Office, the Virginia State Police, the Chesapeake Bay Bridge-Tunnel Police Department, and the Town of Exmore Police Department. Law enforcement for neighboring water bodies is provided by the Virginia Marine Resources Commission, the United States Coast Guard, and the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries. The Cape Charles Police Department also provides assistance to these agencies when needed.

Fire protection and emergency medical services for the Town and surrounding areas are provided by the Cape Charles Fire Department and Rescue Squad. The Fire Department is located next to the Town’s Municipal Building and the Rescue Squad is located in Bayview. The Cape Charles Fire Department and Rescue Squad are dispatched by the Eastern Shore of Virginia 9-1-1 Communications Center and work cooperatively with other local fire departments and rescue squads. The Cape Charles Police Department also provides support to the Fire Department and Rescue Squad.

Approximately thirty volunteers staff the Fire Department, and thirty additional volunteers support the Rescue Squad. The Fire Department has two fire trucks, a tanker, a brush truck, a ladder truck, and a command vehicle at its disposal.

The International Standards Organization gives an ISO rating to all communities based on the personnel and equipment available for fire protection. Ratings are on a scale of 1 to 10, with 1 being a high level of protection and 10 being a low level. Cape Charles has an ISO rating of 7. Due to the acquisition of new equipment, this rating is expected to improve the next time the Town is evaluated.

Harbor

The Cape Charles Harbor serves local industry and commerce operations as well as tourists and recreational users. The harbor was originally developed to load and unload railroad cars on barges, which continues today. In addition to the Bay Coast Railroad, industrial users of the harbor include Bayshore Concrete and the Sustainable Technology Industrial Park. The harbor is also used extensively by commercial watermen, particularly in the winter months. Map 11 provides an overview of the harbor area.

Map 11: Cape Charles Harbor

The harbor is dredged to 18-19 feet, except for a portion at the northeast end, which is dredged to seven feet. The main channel into the harbor is approximately 18 feet deep and 500 feet wide, and extends 2.7 miles from the harbor entrance. Dredging of the harbor is performed periodically by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, with spoils deposited at a nearby spoils site.

Several aspects of the harbor have been upgraded recently. A portion of the harbor’s bulkhead was replaced in late 2005 and early 2006. The $300,000 project involved replacing some of the existing timber wharf and constructing a new vinyl bulkhead. A new $110,000 fuel system has been installed as well. The Town will be able to buy fuel at a wholesale price once the system is installed. This will give the Town the ability to resell the fuel at a lower price and benefit all of its customers. A $280,000 repair project for the gravel docks is also taking place to replace the pilings and whalers.

The Cape Charles Harbor includes a marina owned by the Town, with 51 boat slips and four public boat launching ramps. The boat slips and ramps are used by residents of the Town as well as regional and out-of-state visitors. The Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries maintains the four free public boat ramps located at the harbor, and a dock for short-term usage. The harbor’s public parking lot provides parking for approximately 75 vehicles and is often filled to capacity, especially during summer months when use of the boat ramps increases. Commercial docking facilities are also present, and are currently leased on a monthly basis.

A new temporary harbormaster office was installed in 2006. The temporary building includes two unisex bathrooms, one of which is handicapped accessible. Permanent harbormaster facilities with bathrooms and showers are needed to meet the requirements of Town staff and harbor users.

The harbor is in need of expansion due to current traffic and demand for both long-term and transient boat slips. As of May 2007, there were 46 people on a waiting list for boat slips. Approximately 20 additional boat slips could be created by rearranging the slip layout and decreasing the width of some slips.

Public Beach

The Town’s beach extends one-half mile along Bay Avenue with a paved walkway bordering the length of the beachfront. Residents and visitors of the Town use the beach for swimming, sunbathing and similar recreational pursuits. Public access onto the

beachfront is provided by two wooden walkovers located near the end of Tazewell and Randolph Avenues. The Pavilion and several park benches are located on a paved walkway. The Pavilion is one of the Town’s prominent landmarks, serving as a visual symbol for the Town and featured on the Town’s seal. Restroom facilities are also available for users of the public beach.

There are three public beaches on the Eastern Shore of Virginia, with the other two being located at Kiptopeke State Park and Assateague Island National Seashore. The Town’s beach is the only public beach on the Eastern Shore of Virginia that does not require an entrance fee.

The beach is stabilized with buried groins, a bulkhead, and a breakwater. The Town has recently undertaken a 1.1 million dollar beach nourishment project. Four new breakwaters have been constructed, and 35,000 cubic yards of sand have been used to nourish the beach. Fencing has also been installed to stabilize the sand. Shoreline erosion and steps to prevent it are discussed in more detail in the Natural Conditions chapter.

Town Pier

Adjacent to the public beach is a municipal pier, known as the Fun Pier, which extends across the stone jetty at the entrance of the harbor. The pier has a railed siding and several built-in benches, and is frequently utilized by Town residents and visitors for sightseeing and fishing.

The pier has recently been upgraded. Previously, fishing opportunities were limited at the pier due to its location over the stone jetty. In 2005, a $300,000 project extended the pier beyond the jetty to a total length of 407 feet, and old sections of the pier were rebuilt. The Town has also purchased a saltwater fishing license for the facility so that the general public will not be required to have licenses to fish.

Library

The Northampton Memorial Library is located in Cape Charles and serves the citizens of the Eastern Shore. The library began in a private home in 1919. In 1926, the library was moved to the vacant First Presbyterian Church, which was built in 1900. The Northampton Memorial Library was dedicated in 1927 to the memory of local men who died in World War I and was the first memorial library in Virginia.

The library provides local residents with access to books, periodicals, newspapers, and Internet resources. In 2005, the library had an estimated 18,000 books in its collection, and subscribed to forty periodicals and two newspapers. Four computers with Internet access are also available for use. Circulation has increased significantly in recent years. Library usage statistics can be viewed below in Table 30.

Table 30: Northampton Memorial Library Usage Statistics

2000 2004 2005 Books borrowed 7,706 12,921 14,310 Patron visits 4,816 11,187 11,823 Library users unavailable 1,139 unavailable Times Internet used 602 3,378 4,772 Data Source: Northampton Memorial Library

Several programs are offered by the library, including reading programs for children, guest speaker programs, and computer literacy programs. Outreach programs are also organized through local schools. The library is currently staffed by a full time librarian and a part time worker. Volunteers provide additional support for about 10 to 15 hours per week.

The library is owned and operated by the Town through the appointment of a Library Board. Financial support for the library is provided by the Town, through fundraising activities of the Library Board, and from private donations. Support is also provided by the Friends Group of the Northampton Memorial Library, which contributes volunteer time and participates in fundraising activities.

The Northampton Memorial Library is affiliated with the Eastern Shore Public Library in Accomac and shares its collection through an Internet catalog. Two weekly delivery and pickup services allow material to move between locations. The NML library contains current and

popular books, books on tape and CDs, videos, computer software, large print books, books in Spanish, a basic reference collection, newspapers, and magazines.

The library’s building is currently filled to its capacity. In 2005, the exterior of the library was painted and repairs were made to both the interior and exterior of the building, but the limited space available has created a need for a new location or an addition to the existing building. The Library Board recently hired a consultant to assess the future needs of the library. The consultant suggested adding an addition to the rear of the building or moving the library to the Town’s old school building to address the library’s space issue.

Parks and Recreational Resources

A central park is located in the center of the Town. The land has traditionally been used in relation to the Cape Charles School. Though no longer used as a school, the Cape Charles School building still occupies the park. The central park has two lighted, public tennis courts. A basketball court is inside the school building, and a new outdoor basketball court was constructed in 2006. There is also a “Cape Kids” playground for young children. A large pergola, benches, and landscaping occupy an area of the park used for public events. There plans to construct a gazebo on the pergola. In addition to the built environment, a large area of open land is available for events and recreational uses.

The Coastal Dune Natural Area Preserve encompasses a 26-acre habitat protection area located next to the Sustainable Technologies Industrial Park. The Preserve features an ecologically significant secondary dune system which is one of the last remaining in Virginia. A wooden plank boardwalk runs through the Preserve, beginning at the Sustainable Technology Industrial Park and terminating at the Chesapeake Bay, offering a scenic view of the Bay’s shoreline.

Cape Charles is also home to two baseball fields, which are used by the Cape Charles Little League. The fields are located on property leased by the Town from the Bay Coast Railroad. The Cape Charles Little League consists of baseball and softball teams for children of various age groups. Although no formal plans have been established, the fields may need to be relocated due to future development of the property by the Bay Coast Railroad.

Recreational boating and fishing is a very popular sport in Cape Charles as well as the entire Eastern Shore. Boat ramps are located at the Cape Charles Harbor and Bay Creek Marina. Given the popularity of recreational boating and fishing in the region, the Town serves as an important water access site for the area. Recreational finfish in this area include striped bass, spot, croaker, gray and speckled trout, channel bass, black drum, flounder, bluefish, and channel catfish.

Before the recent upgrades to the Town Pier, recreational fishing opportunities for people without access to a boat were limited because of the pier’s location over the jetty. Fishing opportunities for all local residents have been improved by the extension of the Town Pier.

Private recreational facilities are located in the Bay Creek development. The Arnold Palmer Signature Golf Course and the Jack Nicklaus Signature Golf Course were designed by two of golf’s premiere players and have received significant recognition in the national golfing community. Bay Creek Marina, a commercial facility located in the North Tract of Bay Creek, provides boating and fishing opportunities including 120 boat slips, as well as a restaurant and retail shops. Upon completion, Bay Creek Marina will have 224 boat slips.

Additional amenities that will be constructed in Bay Creek include the Cabana Yacht Club and the Beach Club. The Cabana Yacht Club will be located near Bay Creek Marina, and will feature pools, a lounge, and meeting space. The Beach Club will be constructed near the Bayside Village subdivision and will include a fitness center, a restaurant, and beach access. A 1,375 foot long multi-purpose pier will be constructed near the Beach Club. The pier will be used for fishing and other recreational pursuits, and also for water taxis and boat rentals.

Several major parks can be found outside of the Town. Northampton County’s Parks and Recreation Department is based in Indiantown Park, and offers a variety of programs for local citizens. Kiptopeke State Park is located south of Cape Charles, and is a natural area state park and regional attraction. The Eastern Shore of Virginia National Wildlife Refuge is at the southern end of Northampton County. The 653 acre refuge is a part of the East Coast Migratory Flyway.

Arts and Cultural Facilities

Arts Enter Cape Charles, Inc. is a local non-profit organization devoted to the arts. The organization was incorporated in 1997 and is governed by a Board of Directors. Arts Enter was originally based in a classroom in the former Cape Charles School. In 1998, the organization purchased the Art Deco Palace Theatre on Mason Avenue. The building has been renovated, and has been home to numerous instructional programs and performances. Arts Enter also owns the Stage Door Gallery, which exhibits work from local artists and offers instructional classes.

Another major cultural facility is the Cape Charles Museum and Welcome Center. A former power plant houses the museum. The building was constructed in 1947 and was donated by Delmarva Power to the Cape Charles Historical Society. The museum opened in 1996 and is dedicated to preserving and presenting the history of Cape Charles and the surrounding areas.

As of early 2007, ten churches of various denominations operate in Cape Charles. These churches include the Church of the Lord Jesus Christ, Saint Stephen’s Church AME, Trinity United Methodist Church, Saint Charles Catholic Church, the Anglican Church of the Ascension, Cape Charles Baptist Church, Emmanuel Episcopal Church, First Baptist Church, First Presbyterian Church, and the Church of the Apostolic Faith. Many other churches also exist nearby in the Northampton County.

Other arts and cultural facilities can be found in the nearby region. Many of these facilities are related to the area’s rich history. The Town of Eastville has the oldest continuous court records in the United States, and has the records available for viewing at the courthouse. Other nearby historic sites include the tomb of Major General John Custis, Eyre Hall, Hungars Church, and the Cape Charles Lighthouse located on Smith Island.

Healthcare Services

Several doctors have offices in Cape Charles, including a dentist, an optometrist, and general physicians. The medical needs of many residents are met outside of Cape Charles. The closest hospital is Shore Memorial Hospital in Nassawadox. The hospital is a part of Shore Health Services, Inc. Some of the departments in the 143 bed facility

include a Skilled Nursing Facility, a Psychiatric Services Unit, a Maternal and Child Health Unit, Intensive Care and Emergency Departments, a Radiology Department, and Shore Cancer Center. Another major regional healthcare provider is Eastern Shore Rural Health Systems, Inc., which has offices in Nassawadox and Bayview. A cluster of various healthcare providers can also be found in Nassawadox near Shore Memorial Hospital. Many local residents travel to Hampton Roads to meet specialized medical needs.

Schools

Educational opportunities for Town residents are provided through Northampton County public schools. Children living in Cape Charles have access to Kiptopeake Elementary School, Northampton Middle School, and Northampton High School. Vocational programs are available at Northampton High School through the Center for Careers and Technology. Head Start programs are also available for pre-kindergarten educational opportunities. Additionally, Broadwater Academy, located in Exmore, is a private school that offers pre-kindergarten through Grade 12 classes.

Postsecondary programs are available at the Eastern Shore Community College, a two- year institution of higher learning in Accomack County. The college’s new Business Development and Workforce Training Center will open in 2007 and will provide additional training opportunities. Beginning in February 2007, the college will offer some of its courses at an extension location in Cape Charles. Bay Creek also offers local training programs targeting workers in the hospitality industry.

Public Works

The Public Works Department protects and maintains Town assets by providing a wide range of services. Public Works is responsible for the operation, maintenance, and repairs of Town property, including buildings, vehicles and equipment. Some of the areas the department maintains include streets, alleys, sidewalks, signs, street lights, the stormwater system, the public beach, the Town’s harbor, the fishing pier, and parks. The department also provides support for special events, and provides support for contracted services, including residential sanitation and grounds maintenance services.

Solid Waste

Davis Disposal provides solid waste collection to Town residents and commercial users. The Town provides 96-gallon containers to users of the disposal service. The contract

between Davis Disposal and the Town stipulates that waste is collected once per week, and arrangements can be made for additional collections. Solid waste is deposited by Davis Disposal in the Accomack County landfill. The Town currently only has a recycling program for cardboard. Northampton County’s recycling program is very limited, mainly consisting of recycling collection bins at the County’s greenbox trash sites.

Private Utility Services

Several private utility services are available to residential and commercial users in Cape Charles. Electrical services are provided through Delmarva Power. Cable television services are available through Bay Creek Communications and Charter Communications. In addition to cable television services, several satellite television services are also offered in the area, including Dish Network and DirecTV. Land line telephone services are provided by Verizon. Bay Creek Communications will soon be offering land line telephone services as well. Several cellular telephone services are also available, including Cingular, which is the only cellular telephone service provider with an antennae located in Cape Charles.

Public Land and Buildings

The Town owns 46 parcels of land consisting of approximately 68 acres. Most of the land owned by the Town is concentrated in the Historic District and near the Cape Charles Harbor. Land owned by the Town is shown in Map 12.

The Town’s Municipal Building is a two-story brick building located at the corner of Mason Avenue and Plum Street. The building houses the offices of the Town Manager, the Planning and Zoning Department, the Town Clerk, the Treasurer’s Department, Code Enforcement, the Public Utilities Department, and the Department of Motor Vehicles. The Council Chambers are also located in the Municipal Building. The building is in fair to poor condition, and is not handicapped accessible. Space for administrative activities, public hearings and other public uses is limited. The present facility is undersized for the Town’s needs and has no room for expansion. The Town is researching both short term and long term solutions to address its space issues.

Map 12: Publicly Owned Land

The former Cape Charles School is also owned by the Town. The building is a large brick structure which operated as a public school from 1912 until 1992. The former school is now used primarily for storage, and also has an indoor gymnasium. A consultant has studied the feasibility of renovating the building for various uses. The Town is currently considering options for future uses of the building.

Northampton County has become another major owner of public land in the Town with the recent acquisition of the Sustainable Technologies Industrial Park from the Industrial Development Authority. A 30,400 square foot building occupies the STIP. The STIP is discussed in more detail in the Economy chapter.

Conclusions

Significant improvements have been made to community facilities and services in recent years. Major upgrades have been made to public facilities, such as the Cape Charles Harbor, the public beach, the Fun Pier, and the central park. The Town’s staff has also expanded to meet changing needs of Cape Charles. In addition to public facilities, existing private facilities have been expanded and new facilities have been created, including the Arnold Palmer Signature Golf Course, Jack Nicklaus Signature Golf Course, the Palace Theatre, and Bay Creek Marina.

While major progress has been made, additional improvements are still needed. The Town lacks adequate space to house its growing staff. More space is also needed for the library, which can be accomplished through expansion of the existing building or a new location. The Cape Charles Harbor needs additional upgrades, such as new boat slips, a permanent Harbormaster building, new pilings and whalers for the south side, and a method for blocking westerly swell from entering the harbor. Citizens have also expressed interest in having a Community Center. Most of these needs are related to the growth Cape Charles has experienced in recent years. As Cape Charles grows and changes, additional needs for facilities and services will continue to arise.

Public Utilities

The availability of pubic utilities is a major determinant of the type of development that can occur in an area. Cape Charles is one of the few Towns on the Eastern Shore of Virginia that has a municipal water supply and a wastewater treatment plant. These systems will continue to play a critical role in the health and development of the community. Map 13 shows the location of major public utility facilities.

Water Supply

The Town’s water supply comes from a ground water source public water system. The Natural Conditions chapter includes a detailed discussion of ground water. Two wells supply approximately 150,000 gallons of water per day. The wells are screened in the upper and middle Yorktown aquifer at depths of 230 feet and 210 feet, and are located on Route 184 near the outskirts of Town. Two additional wells will be brought online in the near future. One has been drilled to a depth of 280 feet and will be screened in the lower Yorktown aquifer. The other has been drilled to a depth of 210 feet and will be screened in the upper and middle Yorktown aquifer. The depths of the new wells will evenly distribute withdrawals from the three levels of the Yorktown aquifer, thereby reducing the threat of salt water intrusion.

Water is stored in an elevated tank with a capacity of 300,000 gallons. The water tower, painted in the image of the Cape Charles Lighthouse, also serves as a prominent landmark that is visible near the Town’s entrance on Route 184. In 1992, the tank won the “Elevated Steel Tank of the Year” award from the Steel Plate Fabricators Association.

The water treatment plant includes an onsite laboratory and treatment facilities. The treatment plant is located near the water tower on Route 184. When water is pumped to the plant, it first goes through Greensand filtration to remove excess iron and manganese. The Greensand filter media was replaced in early 2007 to improve the filtration process. After filtration, an ion exchange process is then used for water softening. Various chemicals are used to treat the water throughout the process. Figure 15 provides details of the water treatment process.

Map 13: Public Utility Facilities

Figure 15: Water Treatment Process

The most recent Annual Drinking Water Report for Cape Charles was issued in 2006. No contaminant levels were found to be in violation of state or federal regulations. Contaminant information from the report can be viewed in the Appendix.

The amount of water treated by the plant has increased annually over the last five years. During this time period, the average increase of annual ground water withdrawal has been 6.7%. A total of 57,118,600 gallons of groundwater were withdrawn in 2005. More water is withdrawn during warmer months, as illustrated below in Figure 16. Table 31 provides details of ground water withdrawal.

Table 31: Ground Water Withdrawal in Gallons, 2001-2006

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Average

January 3,518,959 3,391,884 4,872,105 4,136,972 4,679,100 4,207,466 4,134,414 February 2,845,294 2,661,436 3,851,093 3,143,518 3,875,500 3,596,228 3,328,845 March 3,245,430 3,452,964 3,567,163 3,511,846 4,520,300 4,568,462 3,811,028 April 3,696,643 3,188,687 3,682,011 3,811,701 4,364,000 4,427,518 3,861,760 May 3,751,074 3,550,420 3,996,681 4,945,720 4,705,000 5,249,500 4,366,399 June 3,814,141 4,517,342 4,482,055 4,935,293 5,315,500 5,452,846 4,752,863 July 4,728,487 4,991,578 4,784,563 5,369,816 5,630,600 5,730,218 5,205,877 August 3,945,515 5,239,749 4,604,976 5,219,830 5,387,600 6,006,055 5,067,288 September 3,726,222 3,685,323 4,350,008 5,045,775 5,421,900 4,981,830 4,535,176 October 3,649,884 3,352,801 3,782,984 4,780,688 4,587,400 4,818,012 4,161,962 November 3,505,462 3,205,734 3,039,118 4,236,039 4,399,900 4,423,262 3,801,586 December 3,671,061 3,555,286 3,316,792 4,387,882 4,231,800 4,005,829 3,861,442 Total 44,098,172 44,793,204 48,329,549 53,525,080 57,118,600 57,467,226 50,888,639 Annual n/a 1.6% 7.9% 10.8% 6.7% 0.6% 5.5% Change Data Source: Cape Charles Quarterly Ground Water Withdrawal Reports, 2001-2006

Figure 16: Average Monthly Ground Water Withdrawal in Gallons, 2001-2006

6,000,000

5,000,000

4,000,000

3,000,000

2,000,000

1,000,000

y ry ril e l st er er er rch p n u b b b uary A May u Ju nua r J m m a Ma Aug te J eb p October cem F e ove e S N D

In 1998, the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) approved a ground water withdrawal permit which allows an increased withdrawal capacity for accommodating anticipated future growth needs in the Town. The current maximum monthly withdrawal amount of 5.8 million gallons per month (187,100 gallons per day) will be increased to a maximum monthly withdrawal of 25.3 million gallons per month (816,129 gallons per

day) and an annual withdrawal of 252.2 million gallons (690,959 gallons per day). The maximum monthly permitted withdrawal was almost met in July of 2005, when 5,630,600 gallons of ground water were withdrawn. The two new wells and their depths are requirements of the DEQ permit. The permit requires the new well screened in the lower Yorktown aquifer to be the first new well to be brought online. The Town will need to drill its new wells and upgrade its treatment plant to make use of the permitted ground water withdrawal increase.

A ground water impact assessment conducted for the Town found that over the 10-year DEQ permit period, no measurable saltwater intrusion or other water quality changes are expected to occur. The permit contains restrictions specifically designed to minimize any adverse impacts, including saltwater intrusion, from the withdrawal. It is possible that some salt water intrusion may occur in the lower Yorktown aquifer in the long term, in which case processes such as reverse osmosis could be used to remove excess salt.

The treatment plant has an operational permit from the Virginia Department of Health (VDH) to treat 360,000 gallons of water per day. As of May 2007, there were approximately 995 residential connections and 86 commercial connections to the public water system. The Town recently petitioned VDH to change the equivalent residential connection (ERC) usage rate from 400 gallons per day to 225 gallons per day. The new ERC usage rate reflects the Town’s relatively low usage per connection which results from the large number of homes that have a water account but are not occupied, or are only occupied on a seasonal basis. By lowering the ERC usage rate, the Town will be able to add additional connections to the public water system. Half of the new connections have been allotted to Bay Creek, and half are available for use in other parts of Cape Charles. As a part of the agreement, the Town is required to file an annual Water Monitoring Program Report beginning in June 2007 to analyze water usage per connection.

A consultant has been hired to examine expansion and optimization of the waste treatment plant. The project is currently in the preliminary engineering stage. An immediate needs study has been conducted to determine steps for optimizing the plant’s functioning. The consultant and Town staff have also conducted demand projections to determine future need. The demand projections can be found in the Appendix.

Most of the Town’s residences and businesses are connected to the public water system, but some private deep wells predating the current regulations still exist. Bayshore Concrete has several deep wells, and is the largest user of private water in Cape Charles. The Town Code does not allow additional private deep wells to be drilled. Shallow wells no deeper than fifty feet are allowed through a permit process. Map 14 shows existing and proposed private wells permitted by the Virginia Department of Health.

Map 14: Private Wells and Septic Systems

Wastewater Treatment

The Town owns and operates the only municipal wastewater treatment facility in Northampton County. The facility has the capacity to treat 250,000 gallons of wastewater per day. Average daily flows are approximately 150,000 gallons per day. Treatment at the facility presently consists of secondary biologic decomposition of waste matter and includes ultraviolet light disinfection, with treated water discharging into the harbor. Sludge from the facility is disposed of at the Accomack County landfill. The Town’s wastewater treatment plant undergoes annual inspections by the Department of Environmental Quality, and has consistently received satisfactory ratings since 1992.

Wastewater flows to the treatment facility through two vacuum systems and a gravity system. Wastewater is actively pumped through pipes in the vacuum systems. The gravity system is designed with destination points at low elevations so that gravity can pull wastewater through the pipes. A vacuum system in the south tract of Bay Creek pumps wastewater directly to the treatment plant. A vacuum system in Bay Creek’s north tract pumps wastewater into a gravity system, which services the rest of Cape Charles and flows into the wastewater treatment plant. A total of six pump stations in the gravity and vacuum systems serve as collection points. There is also a lift station, which is located at the intersection of Mason Avenue and Bay Avenue in the vicinity of the public beach. Many people consider the lift station unsightly, and a smell is associated with the grit collector. Part of the smell can be attributed to a storm drain located near the lift station. The Town is currently studying alternatives to relocate or screen the facility.

The presence of excess nitrogen and phosphorus in wastewater discharge has become a problem in recent years. Excessive nutrient loads adversely impact the water quality of the Chesapeake Bay. One of the goals of the Eastern Shore Coastal Basins Tributary Nutrient Reduction Strategy is to ensure no net increase in nitrogen.

The Department of Environmental Quality funded a cost-share grant with the Town to find solutions to the Town’s nutrient problem through an optimization study and a basis of design report. Excess phosphorus was found to be the main problem that needs to be addressed in the immediate future. This can be handled by adding chemicals to the wastewater, which will cause the phosphorus to settle into the sludge. The phosphorus in the sludge is then disposed of in the Accomack County landfill rather than the Chesapeake Bay. The basis of design report found that the best solution to the nutrient problem would be the installation of a sequential batch reactor, which could more effectively remove nutrients from wastewater.

Adequate ammonia treatment has been a problem in the past, but this has been solved through several approaches. Ammonia discharge has been addressed by ensuring discharged wastewater has adequate alkalinity levels and adequate amounts of dissolved oxygen. Nitrifiers are also used to oxidize the ammonia.

The current wastewater treatment plant is roughly twenty years old. Due to the anticipated increase in need for wastewater treatment, additional treatment capacity is needed. The Town’s current Virginia Pollution Discharge Elimination System (VPDES) permit, issued in 2004, outlines a preliminary plan to increase treatment capacity from 250,000 gallons of wastewater per day to 500,000 gallons per day, and eventually 750,000 gallons per day. Increased wastewater treatment will lead to a higher volume of discharge, and will result in an increased amount of nutrients entering the Chesapeake Bay. A new treatment facility will be needed to prevent this, because the equipment of the current facility cannot be upgraded to take advantage of new treatment technology. Sufficient land exists near the existing wastewater treatment plant for construction of a new facility.

A consultant has been hired to examine construction of a new wastewater treatment plant. The consultant and Town staff have conducted demand projections to determine future need. The demand projections can be found in the Appendix. The project is currently in the preliminary engineering stage.

Most of Cape Charles is served by the municipal wastewater treatment facilities. However, nine septic systems still exist. Five of these systems are owned by Bayshore Concrete, and three are located on Old Cape Charles Road, and one is located on Stone Road. Map 14 shows the locations of septic tanks within Town boundaries. Property owners who do not currently have access to the treatment facilities will be expected to connect to public utilities when service is extended to their areas.

Stormwater Sewer System

The Town’s wastewater treatment facility is categorized as a sanitary sewer system, which means it is separate from the Town’s stormwater sewer system. The Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) constructed the stormwater sewer system. Maintenance is performed by VDOT and the Town. The system discharges from several pipes located in the vicinity of the public beach. Because the stormwater discharge pipes are located at or below sea level, drainage is a problem during higher than normal tides.

The sanitary sewer collection system experiences inflow and infiltration problems caused from stormwater entering the sanitary sewer system at cross connections from the stormwater sewer system, and possibly from individual residential plumbing and illegal taps into the sanitary sewer system, such as basement sump pumps. Severe storms can lead to an increase in inflow and infiltration. The Town has conducted a smoke test and

an engineering study to assess the inflow and infiltration problem, and will be taking steps to address the issue.

Conclusions

The Town’s public utility systems have allowed for denser development in Cape Charles than in the rest of Northampton County. The public utility systems must be maintained and expanded to ensure current and future needs are met. Major capital expenditures will be required for the construction of new facilities. Grants, connection charges, and developer funding will help finance the process.

As discussed in the Natural Conditions chapter, private wells and septic systems in and around Cape Charles can threaten the quality of the Town’s water supply. The Town has a policy of prohibiting new private deep wells and septic systems. The Town also encourages Northampton County to adhere to its policy of concentrating denser development within the incorporated towns. This will help prevent dense development served by private well and septic systems from occurring in neighboring rural areas.

Transportation

Transportation is a major factor affecting the growth and development of a community. Residents and businesses depend upon an area’s transportation network for the safe, reliable movement of vehicles, goods, and people. Map 15 provides an overview of the Town’s major transportation facilities.

The Town’s transportation plans and policies encourage and can to a large extent guide the type and direction of development. While road systems offer an effective way to move people and goods among various geographical areas, they also have other effects. Roadways have a significant impact on land development, economic conditions, and the overall quality of life in a community. Public services such as police, fire and emergency rescue also rely on the safe and adequate provision of roadways. Furthermore, the course of a roadway often determines the paths for public utility lines, including water, sanitary sewer, storm sewer, electrical power, and communications. Facilities for rail, water, pedestrian, and other modes of transportation must also be taken into account. These factors make transportation planning crucial to many aspects of a community.

Street System

The predominant form of transportation in Cape Charles is the street system, which consists of arterial roads, collector roads, and local roads. Arterial roads link the local transportation network to destinations outside of Town. Collector roads gather vehicles from local roads or rural areas and distribute them to either local destinations or to an arterial road. Local neighborhood roads serve to collect and distribute traffic between parcels of land and the collector or arterial roads. Local roads provide access to collector roads in such a manner that through traffic is not encouraged to use these minor roads as a shortcut route.

Route 184 connects Cape Charles to Route 13 and serves as the main arterial road of the Town. Route 184 intersects the Town’s historic street grid at Fig Street. The Town’s most active collector roads in the Historic District are Fig Street, Mason Avenue, Bay Avenue, and Randolph Avenue. These roads conduct traffic from the local roads in the historic grid to Route 184.

Map 15: Major Transportation Facilities

Route 642 connects the Historic District to the harbor area and the southern tract of the Bay Creek development, and also serves as another arterial connection to Route 13. Route 642 includes an overpass, referred to as “the hump,” which intersects Mason Avenue at a sharp angle. Railroad tracks extend beneath the hump. The sharp intersection of the hump and Mason Avenue results in difficult turns for large commercial vehicles. There has been discussion of eliminating the hump, but the hump serves an important role in preventing traffic conflicts between motor vehicles and trains. If an at-grade vehicular crossing was used to connect Route 642 and the Historic District instead of the hump, the overpass may still be necessary to provide emergency access between the northern and southern portions of Cape Charles.

Significant portions of Route 184 and Route 642 are outside of the Town’s boundaries. Planning for the sections of these roads outside of the Town’s boundaries is handled by the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT), and land use planning is handled by Northampton County. Cape Charles has recognized the important relationship these corridors have with the Town, and will continue to work with VDOT and Northampton as these parties plan for the futures of Route 184 and Route 642.

The Town’s primary commercial road is Mason Avenue, which serves as the Town’s “Main Street.” The north side of Mason Avenue is lined with commercial buildings, with residences located at the east and west ends of the street. The railroad area and other commercial development are on the south side of Mason Avenue. Parking for commercial establishments along Mason Avenue consists of on-street parking. Customers also park in the large parking lot of the former grocery store on Mason Avenue.

Mason Avenue is connected to Fig Street, making the entrance into the Town’s commercial area somewhat disjointed. The Town and VDOT have discussed constructing a roundabout at the intersection of Fig Street and Route 184 to improve traffic flow, but a plan for future intersection improvements is needed to formalize this concept. The functionality of this intersection is particularly important, because it serves as a Town entrance, and traffic on both Route 184 and Fig Street is expected to increase in the future.

The Bay Creek development is served by a network of private roads. While these roads are kept in a good state of repair, their physical specifications do not meet Virginia Department of Transportation standards for public roads. Therefore, these roads must remain private and in the future these roads must be maintained by either Bay Creek or an association of property owners. Future impacts on the Town’s transportation network can be expected as the population in the Bay Creek development increases. The main

roads impacted will be those leading directly to the north and south tracts of Bay Creek, including Route 184, Route 642, and Fig Street. Secondary effects will also be experienced on other roads as the population increase leads to an increase in traffic circulating throughout Town.

Daily Traffic Volume

The public roads in Cape Charles are owned and maintained by VDOT. VDOT measures the volume of traffic on its roads periodically. This information is used to estimate Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) on designated road segments. AADT equals the total annual traffic estimate divided by the number of days in the year. Traffic counts for primary and secondary roads are performed annually, while counts for other public roads are performed less frequently.

Route 184 and Route 642 are the only roads in Cape Charles for which VDOT performs traffic counts annually. VDOT data indicates that these roads have seen little to no traffic increase in recent years. From 2001 to 2005, the AADT for Route 184 remained roughly the same. The AADT increased by 6.7% for Route 642 from 2001 to 2005. Table 32 provides annual AADT data for Route 184 and Route 642. The dates of the annual readings are unavailable, but visual observations indicate that traffic varies significantly on a seasonal basis.

Table 32: Annual Average Daily Traffic for Route 184 and Route 642, 2001 - 2005

2001 - 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 Street Name Route From To 2005 AADT AADT AADT AADT AADT change Town Heritage Stone Rd 184 4100 4100 4300 4100 4100 0.0% boundary Acres Ct Old Cape Town Mason 642 960 960 940 910 900 6.7% Charles Rd boundary Ave Data Source: VDOT Daily Traffic Volume Estimates, 2001-2005

Traffic was measured on most of the Town’s other public roads in September of 2001 and again in February of 2004. The details of this data can be viewed in the Appendix. Map 16 provides a summary of the 2004 AADT data, and Map 17 shows the change in AADT data from 2001 to 2004.

Overall, a significant decrease in traffic was seen in the residential areas of the Town’s Historic District. It is likely that a significant portion of the decline is due to seasonal variations in traffic patterns. Traffic increases were observed on some roads, such as Randolph Avenue, Fig Street, Bayshore Road, and Marina Rd. It is likely that increases in commercial activity on Mason Avenue and near Bay Creek Marina are the reasons for the traffic increases on Randolph Avenue and Fig Street, while increases in activity at the

Map 16: 2004 AADT Data

Map 17: Change in 2001 – 2004 AADT Data

100

Cape Charles Harbor and Bayshore Concrete are the reasons for the traffic increases on Bayshore Road and Marina Road.

VDOT uses a level of service rating to characterize the operating conditions of roads. The rating is based on measures related to speed, travel time, maneuverability, traffic interruptions, and driver comfort. Table 33 provides a description of the level of service categories. VDOT considers the roads in Cape Charles to be in the “Urban/Suburban” category. The specific level of service present on the Town’s roads has not been determined by VDOT, but most roads in Cape Charles can be described as having an “A” level of service, and some busier intersections with delays of five to fifteen seconds during peak hours may have a “B” level of service. A “C” level of service is considered an acceptable level of service in rural areas. Traffic is expected to increase in Cape Charles, but it is unlikely that a “C” level of service will be reached in the near future.

Table 33: Level of Service Characteristics for "Urban/Suburban" Roads

Level of Service Characteristic Description Flow Free flow Maneuverability Unimpeded A Driver Comfort No tension Delay < 5 sec Flow Free flow Maneuverability Slightly restricted B Driver Comfort Little tension Delay 5.1 - 15 sec Flow Stable Maneuverability Some restrictions C Driver Comfort Appreciable tension Delay 15.1 - 25 sec Flow Unstable Maneuverability Limited D Driver Comfort Appreciable tension Delay 25.1 - 40 sec Flow Significant approach delay Maneuverability Extensive queuing E Driver Comfort Appreciable tension Delay 40.1 - 60 sec Flow Extremely slow speeds Maneuverability Intersection congestion F Driver Comfort Appreciable tension Delay > 60 sec Source: Virginia Department of Transportation

101

VDOT Street Plans

In 1999, VDOT developed the Town’s “2020 Transportation Plan” in cooperation with the Town, Northampton County, and the Accomack-Northampton Planning District Commission. The plan provides a working guide for local and state agencies to select and prioritize appropriate improvements to the Town’s transportation system. A set of recommendations was combines the results of field inspection, professional judgment, and comments received from local citizens, business owners, local staff, and elected officials. These recommendations can be viewed below in Table 34.

Table 34: 2020 Transportation Plan Recommendations

Facility From To Recommended Improvements Rehabilitate sidewalks, curbs, and Town-wide n/a n/a gutters as funds become available Designate bike route for local travel in Town-wide n/a n/a and around Cape Charles Reconstruct road at 24' pavement Old Cape 0.25 mi south Railroad Bridge width with proper shoulders and Charles Road of RR bridge ditches Reconstruct road at 24' pavement Old Cape Bayshore Road Marina Road width with proper shoulders and Charles Road ditches New Pedestrian Construct safe and legal pedestrian Mason Avenue Marina Road Facility access across railroad yard Construct new roadway facility from New Roadway Route 1108 State Route proposed Route 1108 extended to Facility extended 642 existing Route 642. Source: Town of Cape Charles 2020 Transportation Plan

The Annexation Agreement of 1992 provides for the construction of an extension to Route 1108 and the closure of Route 642 (Old Cape Charles Road) at the intersection of Route 642 and Route 667 (Bender’s Lane). Route 1108 is expected to connect to Route 184 near the outskirts of Town and extend west to the intersection of Bayshore Road and Route 642. The approximate path of Route 1108 is shown in Map 18. The project will be funded by the developer of Bay Creek. Though the project has been planned since 1992, the exact path of the new roadway is unclear.

If the developer of Bay Creek proceeds with the extension of Route 1108, VDOT has recommended in the Town’s 2020 Transportation Plan that a new roadway connect Route 1108 and Route 642. The purpose of this connection is to provide a secondary public travel route into and out of Cape Charles. VDOT views the need for this alternate route as critical due to potential road blockages that could occur on Route 184, which would sever access to and from the Town.

102

Map 18: Proposed Route 1108

103

Alleys

A substantial number of alleyways exist in the Town’s Historic District. Approximately half of these alleys are used for garbage collection. Alleys also provide critical access for public safety vehicles. Where possible, alleys need to be continuous to provide adequate accessibility. Additional alleys may be needed in some areas, particularly behind major commercial space.

Many alleys in the Historic District are in need of repair. The Town is responsible for the maintenance of all public alleys. There is a need to clearly define ownership of all alleys to ensure the appropriate parties are aware of their maintenance responsibilities.

Parking

The availability of public parking will be a concern as downtown traffic increases. There could be a shortage of public parking spaces for the downtown area as more commercial space opens. Special events and seasonal traffic also create a need for additional parking at certain times.

A study of parking spaces in the Historic District was performed in 1999 by the Cape Charles Police Department. The study concluded that a total of 3,418 spaces are available. Parking near Mason Avenue is of particular concern to many citizens. The study determined that there are 456 spaces on Mason Avenue and the first blocks of the streets intersecting Mason Avenue. The parking lot of a former grocery store on Mason Avenue is frequently used for parking, but there is no formal agreement for this lot to be used for public parking. Parking near Bay Avenue is also a common concern. A total of 388 spaces exist on Bay Avenue and the first blocks of the streets intersecting Bay Avenue. Figure 17 shows the results of the study, while the details for each street are provided in the Appendix.

104

Figure 17: Parking Spaces in the Historic District

Fulcher St 69

Fig St 160

Nectarine St 176

Plum St 164

Peach St 113

Straw berry St 184

Pine St 172

Harbor Ave 145

Bay Ave 161

Streets Park Row 32

Washington Ave 251

Jefferson Ave 255

Madison Ave 269

Monroe Ave 296

Tazew ell Ave 353

Randolph Ave 322

Mason Ave 296

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 Parking Spaces

Sidewalks and Multiple Use Paths

Sidewalks exist in the downtown area for pedestrian traffic. The sidewalks within the Historic District are owned by VDOT and are located within the public right of way. While sidewalks exist in a large portion of the Historic District, many of the Town’s sidewalks are in a state of disrepair. Additionally, sidewalks were missing in some areas, particularly in the northern section of the Historic District and along streets east of Fig Street. A sidewalk assessment study conducted by the Town in 2006 found that a substantial portion of the Historic District’s sidewalks were cracked or overgrown. Details of the study are included in the Appendix. The Town’s 2020 Transportation Plan recommends repairing sidewalks Town-wide as funds become available. With the exception of privately maintained sidewalks in the Signature subdivision, the Bay Creek subdivisions do not have sidewalks.

105

The Town lacks bike paths and other multi-use paths. With the expected increase in visitors and residential population, it is important to consider alternative means of transportation, including walking, golf carts, and bicycling. The Town’s 2020 Transportation Plan recommends creating a system of bike routes and multi-use paths to accommodate the Town’s current and future transportation needs.

There is a distinct need for a multi-use path connecting Mason Avenue to the harbor, so that access from downtown to the harbor is convenient and safe. The downtown area is separated from the harbor by the railroad yard, and pedestrian access between the harbor area and Mason Avenue is currently limited. Some pedestrians cross the railroad yard, but there is no clearly marked path, and railroad activities pose a potential safety hazard to pedestrians.

The Town has received a TEA-21 grant from VDOT to create a multi-use trail, part of which would connect the downtown area to the harbor. Land Studio has been hired to complete the preliminary planning stage of the project. Map 19 shows the proposed route of the multi-use trail.

A series of private multi-use paths exist in the southern tract of Bay Creek. Golf carts frequently use these paths. An increase in golf cart usage has also been observed in the Historic District. The Town issues licenses for golf carts, and allows them to operate on streets where the speed limit is twenty-five miles per hour. As of May 2007, there were twelve golf carts licensed to operate on public roads. Additional unlicensed golf carts are used on the private roads in Bay Creek. The usage of golf carts is expected to continue increasing as the Town expands. This will likely create further demand for multi-use paths.

Resident Transportation Patterns

The 2000 Census indicates that 29.8% of occupied housing units in Cape Charles have no vehicle available, as shown in Table 35. This is 17.2 percentage points higher than the percentage in Northampton County and 22.1 percentage points higher than the percentage in Virginia. The comparatively high percentage of occupied housing units in Cape Charles with no vehicle available, or only one vehicle available, indicates that many Town residents are dependent on other modes of transportation. This lower level of dependence on motor vehicles is further demonstrated by data in Table 24 of the Economy chapter, which details means of transportation used to travel to work. Accordingly, Town residents may request upgrades to streets and sidewalks to make non- motorized movement easier and safer.

106

Map 19: Proposed Multi-Use Trail

107

Table 35: Vehicles Available per Occupied Housing Unit, 2000

Cape Charles Northampton Virginia Households % of total Households % of total Households % of total No vehicles 159 29.8% 672 12.6% 206,604 7.7% 1 vehicle 214 40.1% 1,988 37.4% 853,080 31.6% 2 vehicles 118 22.1% 1,898 35.7% 1,068,102 39.6% 3 vehicles 22 4.1% 572 10.7% 412,673 15.3% 4 or more 21 3.9% 191 3.6% 158,714 5.9% Total 534 100.0% 5,321 100.0% 2,699,173 100.0% Data Source: U.S. Census Bureau SF3 data Note: SF3 data is not based upon a 100% population sample

Public transportation is provided to Town residents by STAR Transit, which provides daily bus service along Route 13. STAR Transit offers multiple routes with fixed stops in Cape Charles, and also allows riders to request stops anywhere along designated routes. The buses are equipped with bicycle racks, which allow riders to travel to and from bus stops by bicycle. This service is of particular value to Town residents who do not have access to a private vehicle.

Water Transportation

The Cape Charles Harbor and Bay Creek Marina provide access to water transportation. The physical infrastructure of these facilities is discussed in the Community Facilities and Services chapter, while usage of these transportation facilities is discussed in this chapter.

The Cape Charles Harbor serves local industry and commerce operations as well as tourists and recreational users. The Harbor was originally developed to load and unload railroad cars on barges, a use which continues today. In addition to the Bay Coast Railroad, industrial users of the harbor include Bayshore Concrete, T&W Block, and Waco Chemicals. The Harbor is also used extensively by commercial watermen, particularly in the winter months. Map 11 in the Community Facilities and Services chapter provides an overview of the Harbor area.

Activity at the Cape Charles Harbor has increased in recent years. As of May 2007, the waiting list for boat slips had grown to 46 names. Income statistics can also be examined to discern usage trends. From 2003 to 2006, there was a significant increase in gross

108

income, with an average annual increase of 26.8%. The increase in gross income is due in large part to increased activity, as well as rising fuel prices and increased usage fees. Gross income statistics can be viewed in Table 36. A breakdown of various harbor income sources can be viewed in the Appendix.

Table 36: Cape Charles Harbor Gross Income, 2003-2006

2003 2004 2005 2006 Average January $18,323 $34,196 $30,948 $52,949 $34,104 February $20,819 $42,192 $34,930 $32,265 $32,551 March $26,746 $28,437 $55,619 $48,833 $39,909 April $23,264 $21,265 $58,762 $50,649 $38,485 May $24,950 $27,608 $46,307 $35,663 $33,632 June $17,681 $11,874 $20,391 $42,579 $23,131 July $18,584 $16,923 $24,352 $43,482 $25,835 August $14,506 $13,592 $16,772 $37,091 $20,490 September $7,653 $7,239 $13,871 $19,952 $12,179 October $7,015 $5,900 $7,839 $18,021 $9,694 November $9,206 $8,694 $12,324 $31,047 $15,318 December $46,747 $46,195 $54,309 $60,745 $51,999 Total $235,495 $264,114 $376,425 $473,276 $337,327 Annual Change n/a 12.2% 42.5% 25.7% 26.8% Data Source: Cape Charles Harbor Monthly Reports, 2003-2006

The Harbor generates the most income in December when crab dredging season begins. Traffic from commercial watermen remains high through the end of crab dredging season in March. The crab pot season is also busy in the spring months. Gross income decreases in the summer and fall as activity among commercial watermen decreases, but transient traffic from recreational activity increases during this period. Seasonal changes in gross income can be viewed in Figure 18.

109

Figure 18: Cape Charles Harbor Average Monthly Gross Income, 2003-2006

$60,000

$50,000

$40,000

$30,000

$20,000

$10,000

h y ly t r r c ne u s e e ary r Ma J ber b ber u ruary April Ju o Ma m ct m mb Jan Augu O Feb ece Septe Nove D

Bay Creek Marina is a commercial marina located in the North Tract of Bay Creek with 120 boat slips. Bay Creek plans to expand the marina to a total of 224 boat slips. Upon completion of the multi-use pier in the Bayside Village subdivision of Bay Creek’s South Tract, a water taxi will provide transportation between Bay Creek Marina and the pier. The intent of the water taxi is to provide an alternative means of transportation between the two tracts of Bay Creek. The specifics of the water taxi have not been finalized, but there has been discussion of adding a Cape Charles Harbor stop on the water taxi’s route.

Rail Transportation

The Bay Coast Railroad is headquartered in Cape Charles, which serves as the facility and equipment maintenance center for the railroad. The Railroad is linked to Norfolk by way of daily ferry operations, with barge capacity for 20 to 25 railroad cars, depending on the weight of the load. From the Norfolk terminal, the Railroad connects with CSX Transportation and Norfolk Southern rail service. From its terminus in Maryland, the Railroad also connects with Norfolk Southern rail service. Rail and shipping connections from Cape Charles could potentially offer links to more than 250 ports and 60 shipping lines around the world.

The Railroad has the capacity to run approximately 13,000 loaded cars per year, but only ran approximately 3,500 loaded cars in 2006. This is a decrease from the approximately

110

8,000 loaded cars that were run in 2001. Much of the decrease in activity is a result of businesses using other transportation modes to ship goods.

The Bay Coast Railroad was previously called the Eastern Shore Railroad until a recent change in management. In early 2006, the developer of Bay Creek signed a thirty year management agreement with the owner of the Railroad, the Accomack-Northampton Transportation District Commission. The Railroad’s new management has plans to construct a new office and maintenance shop in Cape Charles. In addition to the existing industrial uses, excursion trains will begin running in 2007.

Keller Co Transportation Study

A transportation study was conducted for the Town by Keller Co. in the spring of 2005. Information was gathered from citizens at a public input session, as well as meetings with Town officials, the developer of Bay Creek, the Accomack-Northampton Planning District Commission, and Northampton County. The comments received from these meetings were analyzed and an immediate action plan was created to provide guidance to the Town’s transportation planning efforts. The Keller Co study can be found in the Appendix.

Conclusions

As in all areas, the local transportation network has played a key role in shaping many aspects of Cape Charles. Since the Town’s inception, the harbor and the railroad have served as important regional transportation facilities that have created an environment conducive to the physical and economic growth of the rest of the Town. The historic street grid system and its arterial connections to the regional street system have also been important in the transportation of people and goods. These elements of the transportation system will continue to play an essential role in the future of Cape Charles.

Based on recent AADT data, the Town’s street system is able to handle current traffic volumes. Traffic is expected to increase as the population grows and seasonal activity increases, but the Town’s 2020 Transportation Plan does not anticipate that that capacity of the existing roads will be exceeded in the foreseeable future. However, increased traffic may result in a need for upgrades in certain areas, such as the intersection of Fig Street and Randolph Avenue, and the portion of Route 642 known as “the hump.”

Other features of the local transportation system may also require improvements. The ownership of all alleys in the Historic District needs to be clarified so that a plan for improvements and maintenance can be created. The availability of public parking, particularly during peak usage hours and special events, needs to be examined as well.

111

Improvements to the Town’s sidewalks and multi-use paths are also needed to support alternative means of transportation, such as walking, biking, and golf cart usage, which are expected to be used more frequently as the population increases.

The local transportation system links the area to the rest of the region. Routes 184 and 642, the Town’s two main arterial roads, intersect Route 13, one of the Mid-Atlantic region’s major north-south corridors. Since Route 13 and portions of Routes 184 and 642 are outside Town boundaries, the Town must continue to work with VDOT and Northampton County as they plan for the future of these roads.

112

Land Use and Community Character

The Town of Cape Charles consists of 2,817 acres of land. The Town annexed 2,191 acres of land from Northampton County in 1992, thereby increasing in size by 350%. The original 626 acres of the Town is mostly developed, while the annexed land is currently being developed. Land use in Cape Charles has changed significantly in recent years. This chapter explores existing land use patterns, as well as features of the community’s character.

Historic Resources

Cape Charles was founded as a planned town in 1884. The Town’s original 644 lots were 40 feet by 140 feet. The lots were laid out on an orthogonal grid consisting of seven streets running east to west and six streets running north to south, with a park located in the center of the Town. The Sea Cottage Addition was created in 1911, resulting in an additional 145 new lots between Pine Street and Bay Avenue, with slanted blocks aligning with the Bay rather than the rectangular grid. The Town’s original street patterns, lot configurations, and boundaries have remained largely unaltered and add to the Town’s historical integrity.

The Town’s Historic District has an architectural character which has been remarkably well preserved. The Historic District has experienced little physical change since the 1920s, mainly due to its physical isolation and a low level of economic activity during the latter half of the twentieth century. An interesting stock of architectural styles is present in both the residential area and the downtown commercial area.

Cape Charles was surveyed by the Virginia Department of Historic Resources (DHR) in 1989. The survey included 568 buildings, and found that only forty were less than fifty years old. Excellent examples of Victorian, Colonial Revival, Craftsman, and Neoclassical architectural styles, as well as combinations of styles, were found by the survey. The results of the survey led to the creation of National and State Historic Districts, and Cape Charles was listed on the National Register of Historic Places. The districts include 560 buildings, of which 523 are considered contributing structures and 37 are noncontributing structures. The boundaries of the National and State Historic Districts can be viewed in Map 2 of the Community Profile chapter.

113

The National and State Historic District designations are honorary and mean that the listed properties have historical significance and integrity. These districts do not restrict the rights of property owners, and offer several benefits. Rehabilitation projects in the district are eligible for tax credits, and threatened properties may qualify for state grant programs. Additionally, any adverse impact of a federally funded or licensed project in the district must be determined and minimized if possible.

The Town adopted an historic preservation plan in 1996, entitled Preservation Plan for the Town of Cape Charles. The Preservation Plan contains an inventory and analysis of the Town’s historic resources, including architectural descriptions and exterior photographs of residential and commercial structures. The Preservation Plan also provides recommendations and policies for protecting and enhancing the historic resources of Cape Charles, including downtown and residential revitalization. The Preservation Plan and its inventory are considered parallel documents to the Town’s Comprehensive Plan, and should be updated periodically.

A great deal of concern has been expressed regarding the negative effect of inappropriate redevelopment and infill development. In the past, newer dwellings have not always complemented historic structures, and some alterations to existing buildings have been detrimental to their historic character. This led to the adoption of a Historic District Overlay in 2001 as a part of the Town’s Zoning Ordinance. As shown in Map 2, the local Historic District expands on the boundaries of the State and National Historic Districts.

The Historic District Overlay regulates the architectural style of new construction, changes to the exterior of existing buildings, and the demolition of structures considered to be contributing to the Historic District. The Cape Charles Historic District Guidelines were adopted as a companion to the Historic District Overlay, and provide illustrated examples of acceptable architectural styles. Applications for new construction and the exterior modification of existing buildings in the Historic District are reviewed by the Town’s Historic District Review Board to ensure the historic character of the Town is maintained.

Annexation Agreement of 1992

Before 1992, Cape Charles was surrounded by a large area of undeveloped, unincorporated land. The area was part of the original Scott Estate, and had remained under a single owner. Miles of undeveloped shoreline, combined with the natural beauty of the area and its strategic location, resulted in increased pressure for future development. The Town and the property owner recognized that a base for future expansion was in place due to the presence of public water and sewer, an industrial rail port, extensive waterfront resources, historic character, and an established local government. This led Cape Charles to annex 2,191 acres of land from Northampton

114

County in 1992. Map 20 shows the boundaries of Cape Charles before and after the annexation.

The annexation greatly increased the size of the Town, from 626 acres to 2,817 acres. Most of the annexed land was undeveloped when it entered the Town, and was characterized by a rural landscape including fields, woodlands, marsh grasses and long stretches of tributary creeks and Chesapeake Bay shoreline. Annexation of the remaining estate holdings provided the Town with expansion potential and oversight of the majority of land between King’s Creek and Old Plantation Creek.

Existing Land Use Categories

Existing land uses in Cape Charles have been classified in the categories provided below in Table 37:

Table 37: Existing Land Use Categories and Distribution

Approx. % of Approx. % of Avg. Lot Land Use Category Lots Total Lots Acres Total Acres Size (Acres) Residential 1,580 71.4% 445 19.8% 0.28 Vacant Residential 85 3.8% 15 0.7% 0.18 Commercial 120 5.4% 40 1.8% 0.33 Vacant Commercial 40 1.8% 15 0.7% 0.38 Industrial 10 0.5% 190 8.4% 19.00 Vacant Industrial 3 0.1% 50 2.2% 16.67 Public/Semi-Public 85 3.8% 85 3.8% 1.00 Agriculture/Forest/ 35 1.6% 175 7.8% 5.00 Undeveloped PUD/Undeveloped 255 11.5% 1,235 54.9% 4.84 Total 2,213 100.0% 2,250 100.0% 1.02 Data Sources: Cape Charles Planning Department; Northampton County GIS data

Map 21 illustrates the distribution of land uses in Cape Charles. The following sections provide descriptions of each of the land use categories. Some aspects of other Comprehensive Plan chapters overlap or provide additional information about certain land uses. For example, the Housing chapter also discusses changes in residential land use, and the Community Facilities and Services chapter provides more detailed descriptions of facilities located on public and semi-public land.

115

Map 20: Annexation of 1992

116

Map 21: Existing Land Use

117

Residential Land Use

Residential land use comprises the largest use of developed land within the Town. This category consists of the Town’s single family and multi-family residential land uses. The majority of residential land use in Cape Charles has traditionally been located in the historic grid area. In recent years, new residential subdivisions in the Bay Creek development have greatly increased the quantity of housing elsewhere in Town.

There are approximately 1,580 lots totaling roughly 445 acres in the residential land use category. Bay Creek has about 315 acres of residential land on approximately 760 lots, while the rest of Cape Charles has approximately 130 acres of residential land on about 820 lots. It should be noted that all Bay Creek residential subdivisions with at least one Certificate of Occupancy were included in the figures above, including those lots that have not been developed. These lots were included due to the fast rate of change in the Bay Creek development.

Most land in the Historic District is residential in nature. The Historic District housing stock consists mostly of single family houses spaced close together, as well as a significant number of duplexes. The residential structures are primarily two-story frame houses built in the late 1800’s and early 1900’s. Several larger ranch style houses were built in the 1950’s between Harbor Avenue and Bay Avenue, and between Fig Street and Fulcher Street. There are also a number of single story houses in the northeast area of the Historic District.

Most of the multi-family housing in and near the Historic District is located in Seabreeze Apartments and Heritage Acres, which have a total of 120 housing units. Other multi- family housing in the Historic District includes row houses containing two to four dwelling units per structure, and single-family houses which have been converted into multi-family dwelling units.

Large canopy and flowering trees located along streets, in private yards, and in the public right-of-way are common in the residential area of the Historic District. These trees provide structure and formal patterns along streets, unify diverse architectural elements, and provide shade, color, and spatial variety. However, some of the Town’s existing trees have been poorly maintained, and other areas are lacking canopy trees. In addition, pruning by local utility companies has resulted in stunted and amputated trees. The Town has recognized the importance of its trees, and has adopted a Master Tree Plan and a Tree Conservation and Preservation Ordinance.

118

General deterioration of a number of historic houses is a critical concern in the community. To ensure the safety of residents and preserve the historic character of the area, the Town’s Building Department and Historic District Review Board are currently working to abate instances of demolition by neglect.

The north side of the Historic District is bordered by residential development in Bay Creek’s north tract. Two residential subdivisions known as The Colony and King’s Bay currently exist in this area. These subdivisions are characterized by large, pastel-colored, two and three story houses with British West Indies architectural influence. The lots in these two subdivisions average one fifth of an acre. As of May 2007, The Colony was about 8% complete, and King’s Bay was about 53% complete. The north tract’s third residential area, Marina Village East, has been subdivided and is in its initial stages.

There are also several large residential subdivisions within the gated community of Bay Creek’s south tract. The New Quarter subdivision consists of duplexes and is near the entrance to Bay Creek’s south tract. New Quarter has 72 dwelling units and is the first Bay Creek subdivision to have reached “build-out.” The Signature is surrounded by the Arnold Palmer Signature golf course and is approximately 33% complete. The Hollies is about 28% complete, and is characterized by its wooded surroundings. Both Heron Pointe and Plantation Pointe are in the initial stages of development. Heron Pointe is located near the Chesapeake Bay and the mouth of Old Plantation Creek, and Plantation Pointe is located on Old Plantation Creek. Multi-family housing is located in The Fairways, which is about 31% complete. Upon completion, The Fairways will have 37 buildings, each with six condominiums.

Table 38 provides the completion status of the Bay Creek residential subdivisions. The number of Certificates of Occupancy issued for each subdivision has been compared with the total number of planned dwelling units to determine completion percentages. Partially completed units have not been included in the completion percentage calculations. Bay Creek will be creating additional subdivisions in the future. In accordance with the Annexation Agreement of 1992, the Bay Creek development will

119

have a maximum of 3,000 residential units. Approximately 8.5% of the 3,000 units have been completed.

Table 38: Bay Creek Residential Subdivisions - Completion Status, May 2007

Subdivision CO's Issued Expected Units % complete Heron Pointe 4 63 6.35% King's Bay 37 70 52.86% New Quarter 72 72 100.00% Marina Village East 2 117 1.71% Plantation Pointe 3 53 5.66% The Colony 9 118 7.63% The Fairways 68 222 30.63% The Hollies 31 111 27.93% The Signature 31 94 32.98% Total 257 920 27.93% Data Sources: Certificates of Occupancy; approved construction plans

Vacant Residential Land Use

The vacant residential land use category consists of vacant, developable land in close proximity to residential uses. This category does not include unoccupied lots that are actively being used as side yards, and it does not include lots with unoccupied structures. A completion percentage has been included on Map 21 for each of the Bay Creek residential subdivisions, but vacant lots in these subdivisions have not been included in the vacant residential land use category. Therefore, all of the lots in this category are in the Historic District, where there are about 85 vacant residential lots totaling approximately fifteen acres.

Many of the lots in this category are for sale, or the property owners plan to construct single family homes on the lots. The highest concentration of lots in this category can be found in the northern section of the Historic District. The Historic District will be close to “build out” when new houses are constructed on these lots. Before the creation of the local Historic District, newer homes did not always complement the existing historic housing stock. The adoption of the Town’s Historic District Overlay has helped prevent newer construction from detracting from the historic character of existing homes.

Commercial Land Use

Cape Charles has a downtown area on Mason Avenue, where most of the commercial land uses have traditionally been concentrated. In addition to the downtown area,

120

commercial land uses exist on Stone Road and are scattered through other parts of the historic district. Commercial land uses are also located in both the north and south tracts of Bay Creek. Approximately forty acres in 120 lots are used commercially in Cape Charles.

The two block area of Mason Avenue between Fig Street and Plum Street serves as the entry to the downtown commercial core, and includes both commercial and residential land uses. The majority of downtown commercial activity is located along four blocks of Mason Avenue between Plum Street and Harbor Avenue, and along the first blocks of Strawberry Street and Peach Street where they intersect Mason Avenue.

The downtown commercial core accounts for the primary commercial center in the community, and is characterized by the historic character of the buildings. Commercial activity in this area consists mostly of retail and service establishments and specialty shops catering to local and regional customers, as well as tourists and visitors. Historic buildings make up the north side of Mason Avenue, while across the street is the railroad area, a medical center, and a vacant retail store. Customer parking consists of on-street parking and two large retail store parking lots. Sidewalks line the north side of Mason Avenue, providing pedestrian access to the commercial establishments.

An increase in downtown commercial activity has been evident in recent years. In 1998, 39% of the commercial buildings in the downtown area were vacant. By May of 2007, this figure had dropped to about 25%. While the downtown area maintains a certain character as a result of the quality and historical nature of the structures, the vacancy rate is still high, and some buildings suffer from visible disinvestment. The number of merchants in the downtown area has increased, but the loss of certain major retailers, such as the former grocery store, has left some large commercial buildings unoccupied. This condition is common in other downtown areas as well, where traditional retail establishments have closed and relocated to newer commercial centers along major transportation corridors.

An established character or identity is extremely important in commercial areas. Cape Charles’ downtown commercial area has historically developed with brick facades and a development pattern with a pedestrian orientation. Older brick buildings located at the sidewalk line suggest a definite small town urban commercial character and pedestrian orientation. Cape Charles’ early history as a railroad town and transportation hub is also reflected in the layout of the downtown area, which is characterized with commercial buildings along the north side of Mason Avenue and the harbor and railroad facilities on the south side.

121

Over the past several decades, substantial improvements have been made to the downtown commercial area, including the removal of overhead wires and poles, and the addition of street lamps, sidewalks, and brick pedestrian crosswalks. It is important to maintain and improve the aesthetics of the downtown area for continued economic revival, and to protect historic buildings from demolition or renovation which would damage their historical integrity.

Other commercial activity has traditionally been located on Stone Road and other parts of the Historic District. Commercial uses are located on the south side of Stone Road near the Town’s entrance, and also near the intersection with Randolph Avenue and Fig Street. Other commercial uses are scattered throughout the Historic District, including several service establishments and a beverage distribution center.

The Bay Creek development also contains commercial uses. Bay Creek Marina is located in the north tract of Bay Creek. Other commercial buildings have recently been built nearby, and are occupied by several retail and restaurant establishments. Commercial activity can also be found in the south tract of Bay Creek at the golf clubhouse. The clubhouse serves as the commercial center for the golf operations, and includes a restaurant.

Vacant Commercial Land Use

The vacant commercial land use category includes vacant, developable land in close proximity to commercial uses. Developed but unoccupied commercial land greater than one half of an acre in size has also been given this designation. Developed but unoccupied land that is less than one half acre in size has not been included in this category. This category includes roughly forty vacant commercial lots totaling approximately fifteen acres.

Most of the land in this category is in the Historic District. Two large parcels of vacant commercial land can be found on the south side of Mason Avenue. One of the parcels is undeveloped, and the other is occupied by a vacant retail building. A significant amount of vacant commercial land also exists east of Fig Street along Stone Road. There are some undeveloped commercial parcels on the south side of Stone Road. A large vacant retail building is located on the north side of Stone Road near the edge of the Historic District, and a vacant medical center can be found north of the vacant retail building.

122

Industrial Land Use

Industrial land use in the Town is concentrated near the Cape Charles Harbor. There are about 190 acres of industrial land distributed among approximately ten lots. Major users of industrial land include the Bay Coast Railroad, Bayshore Concrete, T&W Block, and the Sustainable Technologies Industrial Park.

The character of much of the Town’s industrial land is defined by the Bay Coast Railroad and the Cape Charles Harbor, which are integral parts of the Town’s history. The rail yard on the south side of Mason Avenue is a flat, open area that is often occupied by rail cars. A major consideration for industrial land use is accessibility. Raw and finished products need to be shipped in and out of every industrial operation. The railroad and the harbor meet this need in Cape Charles, along with the local street system. The location of the Bay Coast Railroad’s southern terminus near the Cape Charles Harbor makes the area an attractive location for heavy industrial operations such as Bayshore Concrete and T&W Block.

The Sustainable Technologies Industrial Park was created to help attract industrial development to the area. Many light industries favor a location in an industrial park where supporting infrastructure is established. The Sustainable Technologies Industrial Park is still in operation, but its future is in question due to a lack of tenants and the recent transfer of ownership from the Industrial Development Authority (IDA) to Northampton County. The Park’s Building One is a 30,400 square foot facility with multi-tenant capacity. Initially, construction of several multi-tenant buildings was planned, but due to market conditions, additional buildings were not constructed.

Vacant Industrial Land Use

Vacant, developable land in close proximity to industrial uses has been included in the vacant industrial land use category. Developed but unoccupied industrial land greater than one half of an acre in size has also been given this designation. There are approximately fifty acres of vacant industrial land distributed among three lots.

Vacant industrial land can be found near the railroad and the Cape Charles Harbor. A large amount of vacant industrial land exists south of the railroad tracks near the Town entrance. This site is owned by the Virginia Port Authority, and is the location where spoils from dredging of the Cape Charles Harbor have been deposited. A portion of the

123

area known as Portunity on the south side of the Cape Charles Harbor is also in this category. This site is currently unoccupied but has been used for industrial purposes in the past.

The Cape Charles Rosenwald School is in this category as well, because it was last used by a seafood company for industrial purposes. Before being used industrially, the school was used by African-American children before the end of segregation. Approximately 5,000 schools of similar design were constructed by Julius Rosenwald throughout the South, but many have been demolished or have experienced significant deterioration. The building is not currently included in the local or national historic districts, but preservation efforts are underway due to the building’s historic significance.

Public and Semi-Public Land Use

Public and semi-public land uses, such as Town owned land, parks, and churches constitute a significant part of a community’s character. These areas offer public services, as well as recreational amenities for the public. There are about 85 lots in this category totaling roughly 85 acres.

The Town owns 46 parcels of land and a total of approximately 68 acres. Most of the land owned by the Town is concentrated in the Historic District and near the Cape Charles Harbor. Land owned by the Town is shown in Map 12 of the Community Facilities and Services chapter.

The Town’s public beach is one of its major amenities and identification features. Unlike any other town on the Eastern Shore, Cape Charles has over a mile of community beachfront. The beachfront Pavilion is a visual symbol for the Town and is featured on the Town’s seal. The beachfront offers a view of the Chesapeake Bay, and serves as a terminus vista for each of the Town’s seven streets running east to west. The Fun Pier is located at the southern end of the public beach, and offers public access to fishing and sightseeing opportunities.

The Cape Charles Harbor is another unique identifying feature of the Town.

124

The Town owns a significant amount of land in the vicinity of the harbor. The public uses in this area are for both recreational and commercial purposes. The Town has recognized the opportunity presented by publicly owned land near the harbor, which has the potential to be greatly enhanced as a Town asset if properly developed. The Harbor Area Conceptual Master Plan and Design Guidelines were adopted in 2006 to guide both public and private investment in the harbor area.

Other Town owned buildings, such as the Municipal Building, the former Cape Charles School, and the Northampton Memorial Library, are also in this category. The office space in the Municipal Building cannot sufficiently meet the needs of the Town’s staff. Northampton Memorial Library also has a need for additional space. A consultant has been studying the feasibility of renovating the former Cape Charles School to house the Town’s office and library.

Public utility facilities are also considered a public land use. These facilities include the wastewater treatment plant, the water treatment plant, the water tower, the pump stations, and the lift station.

Several parks are included in this category. The Town’s central park has traditionally been a center of recreational activity, and includes tennis courts, a basketball court, a children’s playground, and open space. A Little League baseball park also provides recreational opportunities. The baseball park is located immediately east of “the hump,” and is on property leased by the Town from the railroad. A natural area park is located near the Sustainable Technologies Industrial Park. The Coastal Dune Natural Area Preserve is approximately 26 acres and is a restored natural area with indigenous plants for migratory birds.

Other governmental uses of land are considered public land uses as well. The United States Coast Guard has a station at the east end of the Cape Charles Harbor. The United States Post Office on Randolph Avenue is another public land use.

Several churches and nonprofit organizations also operate in Cape Charles. There are ten churches located in the Historic District. A museum on Randolph Avenue is operated by the Cape Charles Historical Society, and the Historic Palace Theatre on Mason Avenue is run by Arts Enter, another nonprofit organization.

Agriculture/Forest Land Use

There are several areas of forested land in Cape Charles. The trees and vegetation growing in these areas offer environmental as well as aesthetic benefits. Though not a historically significant part of the Town’s economy, some agricultural activity exists as well. Forested areas in the Bay Creek development have not been included in this category. A total of approximately 35 lots, consisting of about 175 acres, are in the agriculture/forest land use category.

125

Several large, wooded parcels are located southeast of the Cape Charles Harbor. The eastern portion of the Sustainable Technologies Industrial Park has not been cleared, nor has a large portion of the Portunity site south of the harbor. A large area of nearby Town-owned land is also forested. The close proximity of these wooded parcels makes this area the largest forested land in Town. Other forested land can also be found on the south side of Stone Road near the Town’s entrance. Large sections of Bay Creek are forested as well, but these areas are included in the PUD/Undeveloped section. Very little agricultural activity exists in Cape Charles, with the exception of parcels on Old Cape Charles Road that have historically been used for farming purposes.

PUD/Undeveloped Land Use

The PUD/Undeveloped land use is the largest of the Town’s land use categories. This category consists of 255 lots totaling 1,235 acres, which are all within the north and south tracts of Bay Creek. The land in this category includes two golf courses, open space, undeveloped natural areas, and areas that have been cleared but have not been developed. Undeveloped lots in the Bay Creek residential subdivisions are included in the residential land use category.

Two golf courses use a large amount of land in Bay Creek’s southern tract. Both the Arnold Palmer Signature Golf Course and the Jack Nicklaus Signature Golf Course have received recognition in the national golfing community. Parts of the golf courses neighbor Bay Creek’s residential subdivisions, while other parts are bordered by wooded areas, lakes, the Chesapeake Bay, and Old Plantation Creek.

A substantial amount of the PUD/Undeveloped area is comprised of shorelines, tributary creeks, marsh grasses, forests, and critical wildlife habitat. These natural features are discussed in more detail in the Natural Conditions chapter. Some of these areas are regulated by the Town’s Wetlands Ordinance, or the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Areas Overlay District, which provide protection for natural features and limit development, particularly in areas near hydric features. A large portion of Bay Creek’s north and south tracts was previously wooded or used agriculturally until recent years. Agricultural uses no longer exist on this land, and a large amount of forest land has been cleared for the construction of Bay Creek’s golf courses and residential subdivisions.

126

Surrounding Land Uses

Neighboring land uses can impact Cape Charles in many ways. The Town’s entrance corridors provide a rural landscape, which helps enhance the Town’s sense of place and identity. Surrounding land uses also have environmental impacts. For example, all new development outside of Cape Charles utilizes private well and septic systems, which can affect the area’s groundwater supply. Economic impacts are experienced as well. Changes in the supply of residential and commercial space near Town affect local markets. These factors make the compatibility of neighboring land uses critical to the future of Cape Charles.

Map 22 illustrates the Town’s surrounding land uses, and Table 39 shows the distribution among the land use categories. The same land use classifications used in the existing land uses map have been applied in the surrounding land uses map. For the purpose of discussing neighboring land uses, the surrounding land has been broken into the regions near the Town’s entrance corridors and the land near Route 13.

Table 39: Surrounding Land Use Categories and Distribution

Approx. % of Approx. % of Avg. Lot Land Use Category Lots Total Lots Acres Total Acres Size (Acres) Residential 180 61.9% 315 29.3% 1.75 Vacant Residential 10 3.4% 10 0.9% 1.00 Commercial 20 6.9% 40 3.7% 2.00 Vacant Commercial 15 5.2% 10 0.9% 0.67 Industrial 3 1.0% 40 3.7% 13.33 Vacant Industrial 2 0.7% 5 0.5% 2.50 Public/Semi-Public 1 0.3% 35 3.3% 35.00 Agriculture/Forest/ 60 20.6% 620 57.7% 10.33 Undeveloped PUD/Undeveloped 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.00 Total 291 100.0% 1,075 100.0% 3.69 Data Source: Cape Charles Planning Department

Entrance Corridors

Views along entrance roadways have a significant impact on how the community is perceived. Attractive entryways help create a positive impression for tourists and other travelers entering Cape Charles. Route 184 and Route 642, which serve as the Town’s entry roads, have a rural identity characterized by open farm fields and a narrow road width.

127

Map 22: Surrounding Land Use

128

A large part of the north side of Route 184 is characterized by agricultural land use and includes a number of single family residences. Commercial uses can be found on the north side of Route 184 near the Route 13 intersection. Several of these commercial uses are real estate offices.

The King’s Creek Landing residential subdivision is also on the north side of Route 184, and is about 16% complete. As of May 2007, 18 certificates of occupancy had been issued by Northampton County. The subdivision will have 111 single family homes upon completion. The average lot size in King’s Creek Landing is approximately half an acre. Like all development surrounding the Town, each of the homes will have a private well and septic system.

All of the industrial land near Cape Charles is used by the Bay Coast Railroad. Railroad tracks are located on the south side of Route 184 and act as a visual buffer of open space. The railroad land will continue to serve as a transitional area in the event of future development along the road’s south side. A commercial storage facility can also be found on the south side of Route 184.

Route 642 has a character similar to Route 184. Agricultural uses are found on the north and south sides of the road, along with scattered residences. A cluster of residences on Bender’s Lane are located on the north side of Route 642 near the Town boundary. The cemetery on the south side of the eastern end of Route 642 is the only semi-public land use in the area surrounding Cape Charles.

Both Route 184 and Route 642 are intersected by Parson’s Circle, which forms a semi- circle west of Route 13. Parson’s Circle intersects Route 13 north and south of the Route 13/Route 184 intersection, which is the primary intersection used to enter Town. Residential land uses and forested areas, as well as scattered commercial land uses, can be found on Parson’s Circle.

Route 13

Development along Route 13 poses numerous issues for Cape Charles. The land along Route 13, particularly near the Route 184 intersection, can have an immediate visual impact on travelers who are entering Town in the same way as the character of Routes 184 and 642. Furthermore, environmental and economic issues are magnified along Route 13. In recent years, a large amount of commercial activity has relocated from traditional towns to land near major transportation corridors. This trend is apparent along Route 13 and in Cape Charles. Route 13 is also located in the primary aquifer recharge area, which makes groundwater protection particularly important in this area. While some agricultural and forest land remains, much of the land along Route 13 near the Route 184 intersection has been developed or development is underway.

129

Several commercial land uses are located along Route 13. A strip mall is located on the east side of the corridor. A large grocery store, a fast food restaurant, and smaller retail establishments can be found in the strip mall. Other commercial land uses, such as a motel, a gas station, a restaurant, and a marine supply establishment can also be found on Route 13 in the vicinity of the Route 184 intersection.

A large residential subdivision called Tower Hill is currently under construction on the west side of Route 13 north of Route 184. As of May 2007, Northampton County has issued 16 certificates of occupancy for the subdivision. Upon completion, Tower Hill will have 92 single family homes located on lots averaging approximately three quarters of an acre in size. Most of the homes currently constructed are located in the western part of the subdivision, but the completed subdivision will extend to the edge of Route 13.

Conclusions

Cape Charles is distinguished by its historic residential and commercial areas, the railroad, access to water, a new planned community, and a great deal of natural beauty and shoreline scenery. The most desirable future development will respond conscientiously to the Town’s established character and natural setting.

As Cape Charles grows, Town residents face numerous issues relating to community character. These issues range from infill development in the historic residential area to the character of large-scale new development on the Town’s periphery. In the historic residential area, one issue is whether proposed infill development fits into the existing neighborhood’s character or whether it will alter or adversely impact it. On Cape Charles’ periphery, the major land use decisions concern the relationship of the character of new development to Cape Charles’ historic, small town character.

The Historic District’s late nineteenth and early twentieth century character is a key element in the Town’s interest and attractiveness to residents and visitors. It is important that the Town’s historic character be protected, not only for its intrinsic value, but also to continue to attract and expand tourism in Cape Charles.

The Town’s housing stock has increased significantly in recent years as residential land use has expanded to areas outside of the historic residential area. Although the total number of housing units built in Bay Creek will be determined by market demand, the Annexation Agreement of 1992 allows up to 3,000 units. There are also limited opportunities for infill development in the Historic District. As residential land use continues to expand and the population increases, increased local demand will create a need for additional public services and facilities.

The foreseen population increase will also lead to an increased demand for local goods and services, which will stimulate commercial growth. Commercial activity in the historic commercial core has increased recently and will continue to grow. Further

130

expansion of commercial land uses will also occur outside of the Historic District. Additionally, industrial land uses concentrated around the harbor and railroad will continue to play an important part in the economic base. Vacant land around the Cape Charles Harbor offers significant opportunities for commercial and industrial expansion. There is a large amount of publicly owned land in this area, and both public and private investment will be important in shaping the future of land around the harbor.

The Route 184 and Route 642 entryways are positive assets to the Town, and the rural character of these corridors should be preserved and protected. Route 13 is also critical to the future of Cape Charles. New land development along these roadways needs to be carefully considered to ensure that changes do not detract from the rural character that exists in these areas. Development along these roadways should also take into account the potentially significant economic and environmental impacts that could occur.

An important land use factor that should be considered is the Northampton County Comprehensive Plan. In the County’s Comprehensive Plan, Cape Charles has been identified as an area in the County where future growth will be directed. Additionally, Northampton County’s draft Future Land Use Plan states that the County will work with each town to establish Town Edge plans. Zoning map amendments and other land use decisions for land near Cape Charles should reflect policies established in the County’s Comprehensive Plan and the Cape Charles Town Edge plan in particular. It is important that the Town be an active participant in land use decisions that affect land near Cape Charles, because County planning policies and regulations will have a significant effect upon the Town’s long term character and economic prosperity.

Physical, cultural, and aesthetic features that most define the local character of the Town are of critical value to the community and should be preserved. However, an integral part of realizing community aspirations lies in the willingness of private developers and landowners to pursue desired projects. Accordingly, successful future land use plans will rely to a significant extent on cooperation between the public and private sectors.

131

Appendix

The Appendix contains the following items:

• Residential and Commercial Building Permit Data • Poverty Thresholds • Underground Storage Tank Information • Annual Drinking Water Reports • Water Demand Projections • Average Annual Daily Traffic Data • Parking Information • Sidewalk and Curb Study • Harbor Usage Statistics • Keller Co. Transportation Study

132