07progressreport.pdf

(1)

Progress

Report

on

Charting

a Course

_for

Our

Coast:

Not

All

Smooth

Sailing

David

R.

Godschalk

Thisreportdiscusses progress

made

during

the pastfiveyears toward implementingthe 1994

reportoftheNorth Carolina Coastal Futures

Committee,asreviewed atthe State oftheCoast

Summit

heldin Wilmington on October8, 1999.

Itcomparesthe recommendations from Charting

a Coursefor

Our

Coastwithaccomplishmentsto

date,pointing out

some

dangerous shoals.

Year

of

theCoast

Marks

Two

Decades

of

Coastal

Management

The

1994National Conferenceon

Innovations inCoastal

Management,

heldin

Wilmington,

was

an upbeatevent.

The

conference

was

the culminatingstep ina well-publicized

yearlongeffortentitled The Year_ofthe Coastthat

celebrated the20"1

anniversary oftheenactment

ofthe 1974 NorthCarolina CoastalArea

Management

Act

(CAM

A).

Those

ofus

attendingtheconference believedthetimehad

finally

come

tocomplete theactionsnecessary for

an effectiveintergovernmental coastal

management

program, two decades afterthe

adoption ofthe original cautiousand limited

implementation approach.

The

printed conferenceprogram began with

optimistic quotes from state leaders

(NC

Coastal

Futures

Committee

1994b). Governor James Hunt

said:

"We

have amoral responsibility todo the

rightthing-forour peopleand forthe land."

The

governorgavearousing speech about theneed

David

R.

Godschalk

is the StephenBaxter

ProfessorofCity

and

Regional Planningatthe

University ofNorth CarolinaatChapelHill.

forwise land use planning, hearkeningbacktohis

father's

work

withthe landasan agricultural agent.

Jonathan

Howes,

then Secretaryofthe

NC

Department of Environment, Health andNatural

Resources, stated:

"We

must plan

now

toensure a

sound future for coastalNorthCarolina.

We

must

learn from both our mistakesandourtriumphs to

plan fortomorrow." Richardson Preyer, former

congressman,federaljudge,andchairofthe

Coastal FuturesCommittee, stated:"Protecting

ourcoast

means

protectingourrich anddiverse cultural and environmental heritage. If

we

work

together,

we

cansustainthis wonderfulresource

for future generations."

A

number

ofdistinguishedconference

speakers addressed topics such as Putting Science

to

Work

in Coastal

Management,

The

U.S.

Congress and

Our

Coasts, InnovativeState

Approaches toCoastal

Zone Management,

Sustainable

Development Through

Quality

Growth Management,

CoastalWaterQuality

Protection, Planning forthe Big Storm: Staying

Out

ofHarm's Way, and Program Implementation

and Enforcement. It

seemed

thatNorth Carolina

coastal

management was

not onlygoingto

shoulder its full responsibilities,butalso

was

poised toregain itsposition as anational leader in

innovativecoastal planning.

Chartinga Course for

Our

Coast

The

high pointofthe 1994 conference

was

thepresentation tothegovernoroftheFinal

Report oftheN.C. Coastal Futures

Committee—

Chartinga Coursefor

Our

Coast

(NC

Coastal

Futures

Committee

1994a).

The 15-member

committee

was

chargedbythe governorto review

CAMA's

accomplishments andshortcomings,and

o

X

CO

>

O

o

>

<

a

X

CD

O

a

(2)

chart a

new

courseofaction forthe next20years • Supporting environmentally sound

develop-andbeyond.

The

committee's report ment, includingaquaculture. marieultureand

acknowledgestheachievements underthe 1974 ecotourism.

CAMA.

including banningsea walls and other • Strengtheningandenforcing lawstocontrol

beach-destroyingstructures,protectingecological nonpoint source pollution, suchas runoff

systems, preservingpublicbeachaccess,and from citiesandfarms.

adoptingland use plans byall local governments

•

Applying a special classification,

Use

Resto-inthe 20coastal counties. rationWaters, toareassuch as the South However,the 1994report points outthat Riverwherechronicpollutionproblemsexist.

explosivepopulationgrowth and unexpected • Expandingthecoastal reserveprogram to

environmental dangers continueto threatenthe conserve environmentalsystemssuchas

coast. Itdescribesthe closingofshellfish waters riverineand estuarine fish nurseriesand andthe

damage

towetlands, maritimeforestsand maritime forests,andsecuringpermanent fishhabitats.

The

report also notes that the fundingforbeachaccess, coastal reserve, and

qualityof land use planning hasbeenuneven. otheracquisitionprograms.

while localinputcan be lostbecause

CAMA

does • Restoringfish habitats through improvedland

not requirethat adoptedplans be implemented. use planning,stricterwaterquality controls,

The

reportcallsfor a planthat will protect the

mapping

ofaquatic resources,andlimiting region's natural resources,

accommodate

damaging

activitiessuch as fishing,boating. sustainabledevelopment, andpreserve its anddredging.

o

characterandnatural beauty. • Enacting a freshwaterwetlandsprotection

The

report's

new

vision offersapproximately statute, similarto the saltwaterwetlands

£

200 recommendationstostrengthen landuse statute, that provides conservationincentives

2

planning,protect waterquality andpublic trust toprivate landowners.

rights,conservenatural areas, improve

CAMA

• Simplifyingthe

CAMA

permit processto CD regulations,promoteenvironmental education.

make

it

more

user-friendly,and raising fees

2

andsupport economic developmentwhile formajordevelopment tocover

administra-2

addressing environmentalprotection. tive costs.

Among

the most importantrecommendations • Developing acomprehensiveenvironmental

2

identifiedby thereport draftersare: education andoutreachprogram that begins

in pre-school andgoes throughcollege and

3

•

Strengthening land use planning, including

providing adequatetechnical assistance and

beyond.

financial supportandbasing local eligibility

To

reachits vision, the reportcalls forstrong for

CAMA

development permitsand state

commitment

and leadershipfrom citizensand

funding forwaterand sewerprojects, publicofficials. Whileitdoesnot attemptto cost

highway

improvements,

community

out itsrecommendations,the reportstates that development and tourismonthe successful substantial

new

funding for state environmental

implementationoflanduse plans bylocal programswill be required,andurges that

new

governments. revenuesourcesbe sought.

The

report leaves no

•

Planningon a regional basis forwaterquality doubt that itsdraftersbelievethat thetime has

protection, economic development, transpor-

come

to

move

forward wellbeyond theactivities tation, and wastedisposal, dealing withentire ofthe

CAMA

program'sfirsttwo decades.

riverbasinsand improvingwaterquality Following upin 1995, Governor

Hunt

standards toprotectshellfishbedsandfish announced hisCoastalAgenda, basedon

nurseries fromshorelinedevelopment. recommendations fromtheCoastal Futures

• Analyzing cumulativeand secondaryimpacts Report, as wellas theAlbemarle-Pamlico of growthon communities, waterquality and Estuarine Study.

The

agendasetgoals of

(3)

protectingand restoring natural areasandvital habitats, strengthening stateandlocal partnership

to improvecoastal

management,

andprotecting

andrestoring marine fisheries.

Responses totheCoastal Futures

Report

Count}- CommissionersResolution

The

firstresponsetotheCoastal Futures

report signaledthat there

would

not be

unanimous

supportfor itsrecommendations.

The

North

Carolina Associationof

County

Commissioners

passeda resolution objecting tothe report's draft

recommendations inAugust 1994, beforethe final

report

was

presentedinSeptember. Calling

them

"serious intrusionson thetraditionaland

constitutional rights oflocalgovernmentsto

govern," theAssociationresolution objectedto

provisions thatrequiredreportingofparticipation

by localelected officials inplanning; inclusionof

implementation, including zoning, in land use

plans;performance auditstodetermineadequacy

of implementation;and tyingofeligibilityfor

growth-relatedstate and federalgrants toplan

implementation. It

demanded

the rejection ofany

recommendationsthat allowthestate to"intrude"

in local land use planning, givestateemployees

the

power

to withholdstate or federal funding

basedon implementation, and permit thestate to

impose mandatory zoning onselectcounties.

The

County Commissioners,

resolution

showed

that,despite 20years ofeffortsby the

state tocollaborate with thecoastal iocal

governments,thereremained aperception of"us versus them"thatthreatenedto frustrate effective

landuse planningand implementation.

The

provisionsthatraised the ire ofthe

County

Commissionersare notradical.

The

ideathat

zoning should be tied toacomprehensive plan

has beenacceptedacross thecountryfor fifty

years.1

The

ideathatplans should be

implemented, ratherthanbeingpaperexercises, is

a requirementofstate lawin

many

states, asisthe

tying ofstategrants toadequacy oflocal plans. However, theexercise oflocal land use planning

in the coastalarea ofNorth Carolina appears tobe viewedas an onerous statemandate, ratherthan

an opportunitytodevelopand carry forwarda

shared local vision aboutthe futureofthe

community.

Stateofthe Coast

Summit

Five yearsafterthe 1994Coastal Futures

Committee

issueditsreport, the NorthCarolina

Coastal Federation broughtcoastal interest groups

togethertoassessprogress

made

towardthe

report's goals. It should notbe surprisingthatthe

assessmentofprogress by speakersat the October

1999 StateoftheCoast

Summit

in Wilmington

was

not all thatencouraging-foreitherlocal land

useplanning or forstate agencyperformance.

One

afteranother, thespeakerspointed out the

environmentaland planningfailuresofrecent

years.

The

NorthCarolina Coastal Federation

presentedtheir 1999State oftheCoastreport,

which assignedthe HuntAdministrationa grade

of

D+

andcalled onthe governorto

make

good

on hisCoastal

Agenda

of1995 and otherlong

promised coastal reforms. It

bemoaned

the relaxation ofenvironmental standards topermit

the constructionofthe

Nucor

steel mill on the

Chowan

River,and thesix

month

delay in

enforcement of wetland protection rules (dueto

lackofstate staff) thatallowedthe 1998-99

ditchingof 10,000acres ofcoastalwetlands. At

the

same

time, thereport alsoacknowledged

positive progressin theCoastalResource

Commission's moratorium on approvalof

CAMA

land useplans togivetime tostudy

ways

to

strengthenthe planningprocess,and theproposed

non-point source rules fortheTar-Pamlico River

Basin.

The

conference

program

listed a "reunion"of

theCoastal Futures Committee, suggesting that

there

would

beanactivedebate anddiscussionof

progress

made

toward carryingoutits

recommendations. Unfortunately,no formal

discussion took place. Instead,thecommittee

members

made

short comments,there

was

a brief

appearance bya staff

member

from the

Department ofEnvironment andNatural

Resources

(DENR),

and aquestion and answer

period

was

held

where

the

Committee members

respondedto audiencequeries.

Audience

members

asked

why many

recommendations had notbeen implemented.

Were

local land use plans

now

addressing

carrying capacity and cumulativeand sccondaiy

impacts ofgrowth'?

Were

local landuse

o

>

O

o

CO

>

Q

O

o

XI

a

o

D

CO

(4)

ordinances

now

requiredtobe consistentwith

approved

CAMA

plans?

Were

stateandfederal grants

now

tiedtoadoptionof land use plans and

implementation programs that

comply

with

minimum

Coastal Resource

Commission

(CRC)

standards'?

Few

answers wereforthcoming.

DCMs

ProgressReport

Rather than debating progressattheCoastal

Summit, the

NC

Division ofCoastal

Management

(DCM)

distributed a printedreport:

A

Progress

Reporton theCoastal FuturesCommittees

Recommendations

forCoastal

Management

(NC

DCM

1999).

The

reportstatesthat

many

recommendations have beenenactedsuccessfully or are currentlybeingreviewedby theCoastal

Resources Commission. Usinga

Recommendation/Result format, the

DCM

report

reviews systematicallyby topicthe actionstaken

bythestate since 1994, and appendsalist of39

recommendations thathavenot yet been

accomplished. Itstone ispositiveand its review

shows that

many

recommendations have been

followed.

Since 1995, anotherplanningpositionand

additional state funding for local planning

were

secured and

GIS

databasepackages ofplanning

information includingwatershed boundaries were

issued. Also, theland useplanning guidelines

wererevised torequire analysis of

community

servicesand inclusion of implementation

strategiesandtime lines inland useplans.

DENR

now

offersbonus pointstoward wastewater

treatmentplant funding foracceptable land use

plansandthosethat list implementation

strategies.

The

CRC

initiatedaone-year land use

plan moratorium, andappointeda

Land Use

Planning

Review

Team

in 1998tosuggest

improvements in theplanningguidelines.

The

Team

willconsidertheCoastal Futures

recommendations andreporttothe

CRC

in

mid-2000.

Setting aCollaborative

Course

forCoastal Planning

My

own

estimateofprogress toward

achievingtheprimary goaloftheCoastal Futures

report-asustainable coastalregion-is not as

sanguine as thatofthe DivisionofCoastal

Management's

progress report. Especially in

terms of land use planning, seriousprogressis

stillhardtodiscern.

On

the plus side,asthe

DCM

progressreport points out, area

number

ofuseful actions. These

includetheincrease in technicaland financial

assistance for localplanning, theprovision of

GIS

database packages,the requirementthat

implementation strategies andtimelines be

included in plans, thebonus pointsforacceptable

land use plans and implementationstrategies,and

the fundingforregionalplanningprojects.

On

theminus side,itdoesnotappearthat clear guidelineshave been given forconducting

carrying capacityanalyses orcumulative impact

assessments.

The

DCM

report states thattheball

hasbeenpassedtothe

Land Use

Plan

Review

Team

toconsiderthe levelofanalysis thatshould

be conducted

by

local governments.

The

progress

report alsoacknowledges that noprogress has

been

made

toward

making

eligibility forfunding

contingent upon involvement ofelectedofficials,

ortowardrequiring that all localordinancesbe

consistent withthe local land useplan.

However, the largest obstacletoplanning for

a sustainable coastalregion-acrisis of confidence

in thecoreconcept ofcollaborationbetweenthe

stateandthecoastallocal governments-appears

toremain. Coastal plannerstell

me

thatthe state

landuseplanning guidelines are a patchwork of

hard tounderstand "shalls"and"shoulds." It is

not clearthat thebonus pointsapproachwill

generate better plans,asboth localand state

planners are frustratedby thesystem.

The

two

yearmoratorium on land use planssignals thatthe oldapproach had notworked,but the outlinesofa

new

workable approach haveyet to

emerge

from

the

Land Use

Plan

Review

Team. Meanwhile, the

state's

own

actions appeartobe at oddswitha sustainable future, leaving usto

wonder

what happenedtothe 1994 state

commitment

to"do

the rightthing.

"

:

What

is needed at thispoint toturn land use

planningfrom an unpopularstatemandate toa

positivecollaborative activity. Planning needs to beseenasa

way

forthe localcommunities to

defineand realizetheir

own

visions, while

contributingtothe overall goalofasustainable

(5)

coastalregion andbeing supported bytheactions

ofstateagencies.1

Thatwill not bean easytask,

giventhe history ofintergovernmental

relationships todate. Butif

we

don't figureout

how

todo it, thecourseforourcoast

may

well be

heading fortherocks.(35*

Notes

I. However, theNorth Carolinacourtshavenotheld

thatzoningneedstoconformtoamasterplan,andthe original

CAMA

legislationdid not includethis

requirement.

2.

Some

attributethedecreaseinstateefforts toreform

CAMA

to achangeinthepoliticalwinds,

when

one of

the potential reform leaders.Representative Karen

GottoviofWilmington,wasdefeatedforre-election,

andtheRepublicans tookcontrolofthestate House

aftertheCoastal FuturesCommitteereport had been

issued.

3.Forsomeof

my

own

thoughtson

how

to accomplish

thisturnaround, see

my

essay,"CoastalNorth

Caro-lina:Planning foraSustainableFuture," in_{Eye of}the

Storm: EssaysintheAftermath (Coastal Carolina

Press,forthcoming).

References

North Carolina Coastal Federation. 1999. Stateofthe

CoastReport,a special editionofthe Coastal Review,vol. I7, no.4.

NorthCarolina Coastal Futures Committee. 1994a.

Charting a Course for

Our

Coast:AReportto

the Governor. Raleigh: NorthCarolina DivisionofCoastal Management.

NorthCarolina Coastal FuturesCommittee. 1994b.

NationalConference on Innovations in

Coastal Management Program.Wilmington.

NC: September7-9, 1994.

North Carolina DivisionofCoastal Management.1999.

A

Progress Report ontheCoastal Futures Committee'sRecommendationsforCoastal

Management. Raleigh: NorthCarolina DivisionofCoastal Management.

o

I

CO

>

z

Q

1 D

3J

a

o

co