Florida coastal zone management program (section 305) status report to the Governor and Cabinet

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

FLORIDA 9 4t54 X
COASTAL ZONE
-7-
MANAGEMENT -
PROGRAM (SECTION 305)

STATUS REPORT TO
THE GOVERNOR AND CABINET
-! 10

JANUARY 1977 - --_
.... ,,,.,,..,,,,.,.,,....

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

BUREAU OF COASTAL ZONE PLANNING
DIVISION OF RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
HT
393 FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
.F5
F527
1977

FLORIDA COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
(Section 305)

STATUS REPORT

TO THE

GOVERNOR AND CABINET

January, 1977

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NOAA
COASTAL SERVICES CENTER
2234 SOUTH HOESON AVENUE
CHARLESTON, SC 29405-2 13

This public document was promulgated at an annual cost of
$1010.55, or 67.3� per copy for the purpose of presenting
the status of the coastal zone plan to the Governor, the
Cabinet, and the citizens of Florida.

The preparation of this material was financed in part
through Coastal Zone Management Program Development Grant
No. 04-7-158-44005 from the Office of Coastal Zone
Management, NOAA, under the provisions of Section 305 of
the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 (P.L. 92-583).

Pro.ePtY of CSc Library

Bureau of Coastal Zone Planning
~ Ad ~ ~Division of Resource Management
tl~ ~ Florida Department of Natural Resources

CONTENTS

Page

PREFACE .................................................

Chapter

I INTRODUCTION .....................................1

II FLORIDA'S COASTAL ZONE PLANNING PROGRAM:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................. 13

III PROPOSED MANAGEMENT POLICIES AND CRITERIA:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................. 27

IV BOUNDARIES OF THE COASTAL ZONE:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................. 43

V PERMISSIBLE AND PRIORITY USES IN THE COASTAL
ZONE: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ....................... 53

VI GEOGRAPHIC AREAS OF PARTICULAR CONCERN:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................. 67

VII PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........... 75

VIII FEDERAL/STATE INTERACTION: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .... 79

IX STATE/REGIONAL/LOCAL GOVERNMENT INTERACTION:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................. 85

X ORGANIZATION AND AUTHORITIES:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................. 95

XI ON-GOING CZM PROGRAM: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......... 107

XII BIBLIOGRAPHY OF PROGRAM PUBLICATIONS ............. 117

Appendix

A STATE AND FEDERAL CZM LEGISLATION AND THRESHOLD
PAPERS

B REGION 5: WITHLACOOCHEE (SAMPLE)

B-1 Florida Regional Coastal Zone Management Atlas

B-2 Land Use Analysis

B-3 Support Services Analysis

B-4 Land Ownership Analysis

B-5 Land Ownership Inventory

Appendix

B-6 Population Analysis

B-7 Economic Analysis

B-8 Environmental Quality Assessment

B-9 Florida Regional Coastal Zone Studies:
Existing Legal Authorities

B-10 Outer Continental Shelf Socio-Economic
Impact Planning Project

C Suggested State Objectives, Policy and Criteria
for Coastal Management in Florida

D Boundaries of the Coastal Zone

E Impact Assessment Handbook

F A Process for Defining a Permissible Use
Framework

G Proposed Geographic Areas of Particular Concern

H Examples of General Public Interaction

I-1 Federal Agency Comments on Florida's CZM
Program

I-2 Interaction with Other States and Countries

J State/Regional/Local Government Comments on
Florida's CZM Program

K Compilation of Laws Relating to Florida Coastal
Zone Management (3 v.)

L Analysis of Laws Relating to Florida Coastal
Zone Management

M An Overview of Existing Governmental Roles
and Responsibilities

N DNR Presentation on Section 306 Lead Agency
Designation for the Governor's Task Force on
Coastal Zone Management

P REFACE

As the United States embarks upon-its third century as a
democracy, a central issue being debated is how best to return
certain tasks, functions, and responsibilities to the individual
states rather than continuing the trend toward an ever-larger
federal bureaucracy. Among the tasks so recognized and acted
upon by Congress was establishment of a voluntary program of
assistance to states, designed to encourage protection and more
optimal utilization of one of the nation' s most valuable natural
= ~heritages--its irreplaceable coastal zone resources.

In acting upon this task, the Congress in 1972 recognized
that rational management of these vital resources involves
myriad physical, ecological, economic, and socio-political
factors which can best be understood and acted upon at the state
and local levels of government. The resulting Coastal Zone
Management Act of 1972 (PL 92-583) provides a mechanism for estab-
lishing federal/state partnerships, whereby financial incentives
are provided for states to develop and implement comprehensive
coastal zone management programs which include considerations
of national interests. By placing this responsibility on the
states (if they choose to accept it and demonstrate a resolve
for meeting it), the Congress essentially gave the states poten-
tial veto power over federal programs and activities found to
be inconsistent with approved state coastal zone management
plans.

Such a refocusing of responsibility, if successful, would
be a healthy step toward the goal of achieving better management
of coastal zone resources. However, the task of meeting this
responsibility is not a simple one, particularly for the State
of Florida. All of the concerns which prompted Congressional
action are evident, and in many ways, compounded in Florida's
coastal zone.

This dynamic fringe along our Gulf and Atlantic shores not
only contains some of the most sensitive and important ecosystems
in the world, but also is the residence of over 75 percent of
our population and the hub of our economy. If present trends
continue, by the year 2000, Florida's coastal zone will contain
over ten million permanent residents and play host to several
times that many visitors each year. No other state has more at
stake in its coastal zone than Florida.

The ability of our present institutional arrangements to
cope with the social and environmental ills associated with such
a concentration of people is at best questionable, at worst,.
totally inadequate. It is certain, however, that as people con-
tinue to respond to the lure of Florida's coastal resources and

iii

amenities, the number and complexity of conflicts between compet-
ing uses and man' s activities and the environment will increase
dramatically. Offshore oil development, energy facilities
siting, maintenance of marine fisheries, water quality, beach
access, coastal hazards, economic development, support services,
taxation, property rights vs. public interest, political juris-
dictions, interstate compacts, interagency rivalry--these are
but a few of the sources of conflict that will be increasingly
evident in the near future and which will probably require
significant modifications to our present methods of resolving
issues.

In recognition of many of these problems, major actions
have already been taken by the State Legislature as well as many
local units of government. The early 1970's produced a signifi-
cant package of legislation which has been heralded across the
nation as placing Florida in a position of leadership in managing
growth. Still, evidence strongly suggests that we are continuing
to make major allocations and commitments of public resources
based upon narrow scope, short-term expediency factors--without
adequate regard for cumulative, long-term consequences; without
consideration of available options that would be readily apparent
upon proper investigation; and without benefit of pertinent
information that is often readily available.

If we are to achieve the goal of optimal utilization of our
coastal resources, we must first develop a mechanism whereby
decisions regarding those resources are based upon well-informed
judgment, with a full awareness of the consequences to be
expected. Such a mechanism must, at a minimum, insure that the
best available information is incorporated in the decision-
making process and that readily apparent conflicts and options
are understood prior to making major commitments of resources.
It should strive to assure that long-term values are not sacri-
ficed for the benefit of short-term gains. This is the essence
of coastal zone management and the purpose of this plan.

The Florida Coastal Zone Mangement Program, to be approved
at the federal level, will have to show definite linkages with
the federal agencies, adjacent coastal states, the State
Legislature, the general public, all involved state agencies,
regional government such as Regional Planning Councils and Water
Management Districts, and local governments in the coastal zone,
both county and municipal. The program will have to contain
a certification process for development activities in the coastal
zone and a conflict resolution process with suitable appeal
channels. There will also be required a monitoring and "trouble-
shooting" activity to oversee all government levels that imple-
ment the program. The plan itself will have to be maintained,
updated and supported by on-going research and public partici-
pation. All of the above will have to be ready to operate or
already functioning before a state's program is approved. As of
this date, only the State of Washington has an approved plan.

The present status of Florida's coastal zone management
program (Section 305) is described herein. This is a draft
document which, after Governor and Cabinet review and revisions,
will be the subject of extensive public workshops and hearings
throughout the coastal zone during the summer of 1977. Revi-
sions will then be made and the program will again be submitted
to the Governor and Cabinet for action in late 1977. Every
attempt has been made to utilize all existing legislation and
on-going programs so as to minimize the need fpr additional
legislation. In its present form, the coastal zone management
program has been certified to be in conformance with the com-
pleted sections of the State Comprehensive Plan by the Division
of State Planning, Department of Administration.

A number of amendments to PL 92-583 requiring additions to
a state's coastal zone management program were passed into law
in the summer of 1976 having to do with onshore impacts of
energy-related developments, beach erosion and public access to
beaches, energy facility siting, interstate coordination,
research and technical assistance, and acquiring coastal lands
with public funds, especially islands. The subjects contained
in these amendments are not included in this Status Report
because the guidelines for their implementation have not yet
been finalized by the U.S. Department of Commerce for publica-
tion in the "Federal Register." However, the subjects are
summarized in Chapter XI, ON-GOING CZM PROGRAM, and the complete
PL 92-583, including the amendments, can be found in Appendix A.

It should be borne in mind that the value of any plan is
only as great as the magnitude and sincerity of commitments to
follow through with implementation actions. The proposed
coastal management program is the product of six years of effort
by literally thousands of participants representing a broad
spectrum of coastal zone interests. Obviously, some of these
participants may feel the plan is too stringent; others may feel
it does not go far enough. However, within technical, financial,
as well as time limitations, the plan is a sincere attempt to
comply with both the spirit and letter of congressional and
state legislative mandates. While it is impossible to adequately
address all facets of coastal management at this time, the pro-
posed goals, policies, processes and institutional arrangements
will, if carried out, place the State of Florida in a far better
posture for meeting its coastal management responsibilities on
a continuing basis.

CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION

FEDERAL COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT LEGISLATION

In the last half of the 1960's, the fragile nature of the
nation's coastal zone and the intense conflicts occurring there
drew the attention of the federal government and many members
of Congress. A special Commission an Marine Science, Engineering
and Resources was established by President Johnson in 1966,
and in its report, Our Nation and the Sea (1968), the Commission
concluded, "The key to more effective use of our coastline
is the introduction of a management system permitting conscious
and informed choices among developed alternatives .... for this
productive region in order to ensure both its enjoyment and
sound utilization."

Two other government reports, the National EstuarinePol-
lution Study (1969) and the National Estuarine Study (1970),
also suggested that a comprehensive federal/state management
system for coastal areas be established.

Debate on coastal management legislation centered in the
91st and 92nd Congresses. The final result was the Coastal Zone
Management Act of 1972 (CZMA) which was signed into law by the
President on October 27, 1972, and represented the first piece
of comprehensive land and water management legislation passed
by Congress.

Considered an example of the "~New Federalism", the CZMA
places the responsibility to act upon the coastal states. The
language of the CZMA is quite explicit. Congress declared it
to be the national policy "To preserve, protect, develop, and
where possible, to restore or enhance the resources of the
nation' s coastal zone for this and succeeding generations."
The Act provides financial assistance to states to help in
developing and implementing "management programs to achieve
wise use of the land and water resources of the coastal zone
giving full consideration to ecological, cultural, historic,
and esthetic values as well as to needs for economic develop-
ment." Funds are now granted on a 4/5 federal, 1/5 state
basis (CZMA Amendments, 1976). An important provision of the
Act provides for increased state control over federal activities.
once the federal government approves a state's management
program, all federal activities within a state's coastal zone
boundary must be consistent with the state's CZM program,
except when the "national interest" is at stake.

States are allowed three years to plan their management
programs (Section 305 of the Act -- Development Grants). The
1976 amendments to the Act allow four years, but add additional

requirements. If the program meets specific requirements
spelled out in the Act, states will then receive grants to
implement their plans (Section 306 -- Administrative Grants)
which will also be funded on a 4:1 matching basis.

The Act is more concerned with the "process" devised by
the states in their management programs than with spepific
land or water use decisions. States must address six planning
issues in their management programs:

* an identification of the boundaries of the coastal
zone: how far seaward and landward does the area to
be managed extend.

* a definition of permissible land and water uses within
the coastal zone boundary; uses which have a direct and
significant impact on coastal waters.

* an identification of the means by which the state pro-
poses to control permissible land and water uses,
including a list of relevant constitutional provisions,
legislative enactments, regulations, and judicial
decisions; what are the governmental authorities under
which permissible uses will be regulated?

* an inventory and designation of critical areas within
the coastal zone -- areas requiring special management
for protection or development.

* broad guidelines on priority of uses in particular
areas, including specifically those uses of lowest
priority.

* a description of the organizational structure proposed
to implement the management program, including the
responsibilities and interrelationships of local,
regional, and state agencies in the management process.

An important aspect of the Act requires that the public
and all levels of government (local through federal) , be
involved in the process of developing a state program. Congress
recognized that if CZM is to succeed, it must be developed
along with the coastal communities and be fully understood,
accepted, and supported by those citizens most directly affected.

To guarantee federal approval of the program, the Governor
must approve the program, and the state must have developed
the powers, arrangements, and authorities necessary for implemen-
tation. The Act specified three alternative control mechanisms:
a) direct state regulation, b) local regulation consistent
with state established standards, and c) local regulations
with state review of all coastal zone development projects.
A combination of any or all of the three is allowed.

The Act is administered by the Office of Coastal Zone Man-
agement (OCZM), National oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA), in the U.S. Department of Commerce. Threshold papers for
each of the federal requirements have been prepared by the OCZM
and are included as part of Appendix A.

FLORIDA'S COASTAL ZONE

BACKGROUND

Florida's coastal zone is its most important asset
economically, biologically, and aesthetically. The coastal
zone is the choice of residence for over 75% of the state's
population. The principal transportation terminals for people
and goods, the majority of the commercial centers, and the major
industrial centers and military bases are in the coastal zone.
It is visited by almost all of the over 25-million tourists
that come to the state each year. It serves as a "recreation
center" for citizens and visitors alike. By the year 2000,
if present trends continue, Florida's coastal zone will contain
10-million permanent residents and will serve a yearly influx
of several times that many visitors.

Florida, and especially the Florida coastal zone, has
been the recipient of extremely rapid growth during the 1960's
and 1970's. This growth has caused tremendous pressure on the
coastal zone and has threatened the very attractions that the
coast holds as a unique natural area. During the late 1960's
and early 1970's, Florida's leaders began to recognize that
many of the state's coastal areas were in serious trouble.
Uncontrolled and unplanned, man's activities were degrading
coastal resources at an unprecedented rate. Flood control
measures and land development were causing water shortages and
degraded water quality in the Everglades basin and in much of
southeast Florida. Estuarine resources, dependent upon fresh
water in the proper amount, quality, and timing, were being
threatened. Massive fish kills were occurring in Escambia
Bay and other estuarine areas. Boca Ciega Bay was sacrificed
for houses. Several coastal rivers were becoming open sewers,
in danger of being destroyed completely. Many major shellfish
beds were declared unsafe to utilize; some were killed outright.
Once popular swimming areas could no longer be utilized because
of pollution. Development had caused severe erosion of once
beautiful beaches. The list was long and getting longer.

The writers of the 1968 Florida Constitution, recognizing
the need for a policy that would assist the state to protect
its natural resources, including coastal resources, declared
that:

"It shall be the policy of the state to conserve and
protect its natural resources and scenic beauty."

in an effort to follow this policy and to put a halt to the
increasing threat to coastal resources, some excellent legisla-
tion and programs were initiated in the next several years.
These included:

1. The establishment of an air and water pollution control
agency and water quality standards. Any coastal
development that may degrade surface water quality
is subject to regulation.

2. More stringent state control of most submerged lands
and water column use. Permits and/or leases are
required for such activities as bulkheading, dredge
and fill, marinas, aquaculture, and living and non-
living resource extraction.

3. The establishment of beach development controls designed
to prevent construction practices., even on private
property, which might induce or accelerate erosion
of Florida's beaches.

4. The establishment of special use areas such as the
Aquatic Preserve System, the State Wilderness System,
the Environmentally Endangered Lands Program, the
State Park System, and Wildlife Refuges.

5. The passage of the Land and Water Management Act of
1972 establishing the Areas of Critical State Concern
and the Developments of Regional Impact programs.

6. The passage of the Water Resources Act of 1972 to
provide for the management of water and related land
resources.

The question arises, then, with all of these many tools,
why is there a need for a coastal zone management program?
The answer lies in the fact that these tools by themselves
simply are not adequate to the task. They are generally
single purpose, in reaction to an existing problem; they are
uncoordinated; and they fall under the authorities of several
different agencies. No effective coordinated management system
designed to manage the multiple uses of coastal resources while
providing as many future options as possible has been estab~-
lished. The complex nature of Florida's coastal zone makes a
coordinated, systematic management program of utmost importance.

COASTAL ZONE ISSUES AND PROBLEMS

The issues and problems that must be resolved in Florida's
coastal zone are multi-faceted. The most basic issue in the
state's coastal zone is how to effect a balance between the
tremendous growth pressures in the coastal area and the effort
to preserve those areas of the coastal zone that are of high
environmental and ecological value to the people of Florida,
present and future.

The issues that need to be resolved in developing a coastal
management program, can, perhaps, be best posed in the form of
questions:

*In how many ways is Florida dependent upon the coast
and its natural and economic resources? How do coastal
resources contribute to a healthy economy?

*Is there adequate public access to coastal resources
to swim, fish, sunbathe, boat, etc.?

* What activities require a coastal waterfront location?
Which don't?

* What activities should have top priori~ty in the coastal
zone? Who should make the decisions on priorities?

* What trade-offs are involved in making coastal manage-
ment decisions? Who should make the decisions regarding
trade-of fs?

* What coastal activities have or could have impacts that
would affect more than one locality? Who should make
the decisions regarding these activities?

* What coastal resources should be preserved for future
generations?

* What role should the different levels of government
play in future coastal management decisions?

Florida presently has a number of problems which make it
difficult to resolve many of the issues posed above. These
include:

1. Multiplicity of uses leading to use conflicts. For
example, housing needs may pre-empt recreation land
and destroy landmarks and ecologically valuable wildlife
areas; commercial and/or residential needs may
destroy wetlands necessary for fish propagation, storm
protection, and waste water assimilation.

2. Jurisdictional overlapping. There is no clear-cut
delineation of functions, in many cases, among the
various federal, state, 38 county government, and
close to 230 municipal government agencies with
respect to the management of the state's coastal zone.

3. L~ack of inter-agency coordination. Closely related to
and stemming from jurisdictional overlap is the problem
of lack of coordination among the various agencies
which have a stake in the vital coastal environment.
Various responsibilities for many coastal zone facets
are divided among, federal, state, county and municipal
entities. As a result, there is no individual agency
which can establish or coordinate policy and delegate
authority in dealing with problems ranging from marine
water pollution to beach sand removal.

4. Pollution of coastal waters. This problem is still
alarming in certain areas of the state. It should be
recognized that the quality of Florida's coastal
environment is the cornerstone of the tourist industry.
Because so much of the economy of the state depends
on tourism, Florida is concerned with such federally
regulated activities as the leasing of offshore lands
for oil exploration and drilling, superport construc-
tion, etc. Oil spills and/or water pollution from
these activities could have an extremely n'egative
effect on this aspect of the economy.

5. Destruction of the coastal environment. Governmental
agencies, environmental engineers, and many citizens
continue to express a great deal of concern about
the destruction of coastal resources. Beach erosion
and dredge and fill projects, as examples, have taken
a considerable toll on the resources that are of most
value to Florida's coastal zone.

6. Knowledge and understanding gaps. There is a lack of
understanding of the differences between traditional
land use planning and coastal management planning.
There is a need for knowledge on such things as the
cumulative effects of development and for more data
and analysis on the physical and biological parameters
of the shore and inshore areas of the coastal zone.

7. Non-implementation of existing authorities. At both
the state and local levels, there are coastal manage-
ment authorities and policies enacted which have
never been fully implemented. Non-implementation may
be due to lack of sufficient funds and personnel;
lack of knowledge as to the existence of authority or
policy; lack of technical expertise; or other reasons.
Whatever the reason, it would seem necessary for an
effective coastal management program that all available
implementation tools be used to the fullest possible
extent.

The future of Florida's coast depends on the resolution
of the issues and problems discussed above. A well-conceived
and carefully prepared program for the wise and balanced use
of the state's coastal zone can serve to both protect and
rationally use our valuable coastal resources.

FLORIDA COASTAL ZONE LEGISLATION

In recognition of the magnitude and complicated nature
of coastal zone problems, and in anticipation of federal
coastal zone legislation and funding, the 1970 Florida
Legislature created the Coastal Coordinating Council. The
Council members and staff were involved in coastal zone plan-
ning from September 1970 through June 30, 1975, and considerable
progress was made toward the development of a coordinated coastal
zone management program.
6

The primary charges given to the Council were to:

1. "develop a comprehensive state plan for the pro-
tec-tion, development and zoning of the coastal
zone, making maximum use of any federal funding for
this purpose."

2. "conduct, direct, encourage, coordinate, and organize
a continuous program of research into problems
relating to the coastal zone."

3. "review, upon request, all plans and activities
pertinent to the coastal zone and provide coordina-
tion in these activities among the various levels of
government and areas of the state."

4. "provide a clearing service for coastal zone matters
by collecting, processing, and disseminating pertinent
information relating thereto."

The 1975 Legislature, as part of the reorganization of
state environmental and natural resources agencies, abolished
the Coastal Coordinating Council and reassigned its powers,
duties, staff, and functions to the Division of Resource Manage-
ment in the Department of Natural Resources. The Division
assumed these responsibilities on July 1, 1975, and the former
Council staff now makes up the Bureau of Coastal Zone Planning
within the Division. The 1975 legislation called on the Division
to develop plans and carry out the programs of coastal zone
management, and to utilize "interagency cooperation and agree-
ments to insure the participation of other state and local
agencies involved in coastal zone management."

FEDEPAL FUNDING IN FLORIDA

Florida's coastal planning effort began to receive funds
from the federal government in 1974. By the end of the first
two years of funding, Florida had received grants totalling
$1,146,000 from the federal program. These grants provided
the means by which the program could be expanded to include
the participation of the regional planning councils and the
establishment of citizens' advisory councils in the coastal
regions of the state. Approximately 65% of the federal funding
received has been passed through to the RPC's. The planning proc-
ess described earlier was re-focused in order to meet the require-
ments -of the federal legislation as well as the duties mandated by
the state legislation.

PROGRAM GOALS

In the legislation establishing the Coastal Coordinating
Council, the 1970 Florida Legislature recognized that, "the
environmental aspects of the coastal areas of this state have
attracted a high percentage of permanent population and visitors

and that this concentration of people and their requirements
has had a serious impact on the natural surroundings and has
become a threat to the health, safety and general welfare of
the citizens of this state." It was determined by the lawmakers
that a coordinated effort of interested federal, state, and
local agencies of government was imperative in order to plan
for and effect a solution to this threat. The plan they
envisioned was for the protection, development and zoning of
the coastal zone.

The intent of the Florida Legislature tracks well with
the primary policy of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act
of 1972 which calls for the preservation, protection, develop-
ment, and where possible, the restoration and enhancement of
the resources of the nation's coastal zone for this and future
generations.

To respond to the duties mandated by the Legislature and
provide a focus for the coastal planning effort, it was neces-
sary to establish program goals. The goals were enunciated
in the Coastal Coordinating Councils annual status report for
1973 to the Governor, Cabinet and the Legislature, and in the
first proposal for funding to the federal office of Coastal
Zone Management. The goals for Florida's coastal zone program
are:

1. To provide for the coordination of all state, federal,
regional, county, and municipal efforts, as well as
private efforts, to effectively manage and utilize the
resources and features of the state's coastal zone.

a. To make maximum utilization of regional planning
concepts and coordination between the various
levels of government.

b. To provide measures for resolving conflicts and
prevent potential conflicts which arise out of
competition between uses and users of coastal zone
resources.

2. To provide for the most efficient utilization of
coastal zone resources.

a. To encourage multiple uses of coastal resources
wherever possible.

b. To support optimum future utilization of presently
undeveloped shorelines.

C. To restrict development and new construction to
those areas physically suited for development.

d. To support the modernization of existing port
facilities.

3. To provide for the protection, management and
beneficial utilization of water resources in the
coastal zone.

a. To maintain, restore and improve the quality of
water resources in the coastal zone.

b. To summarize and implement in the planning
process the latest fresh water management
techniques indicated by recent water resources
research.

4. To maintain, restore and imprcove air quality in the
coastal zone.

5. To maintain, increase and extend over time the
productivity and productive potential of the living
and non-living marine resources in the coastal zone.

a. To prevent declines in and increase the productivity
potential of the state's saltwater fishery and
shellfish resources.

b. To provide for the orderly and beneficial extraction
and use of minerals and other non-living resources
present in the state's coastal waters: extend the
productive potential of the coastal zone's limited
supply of petroleum, metallic and hard-rock minerals,
peat, and other muckland, and other exhaustible
and non-renewable land resources.

6. To provide for the preservation, protection, restora-
tion, improvement, and enhancement of the upland,
submerged land, and biological features of the coastal,
estuarine, and marine environment of the state.

a. To protect ocean and estuarine beaches from man-
induced erosion.

b. To restore those beaches and shorelines which
have already been damaged.

C. To minimize hurricane and flood damage in the
coastal areas of the state.

d. To provide for the preservation and enhancement
of intangible and aesthetic features of the environ-
ment and maintenance of ecological systems and
habitats in the coastal zone.

7. To establish and maintain in perpetuity the state's
coastal and estuarine areas of unique value so that
their features may be preserved for future educational,
recreational, and scientific purposes.

8. To maintain and increase over time the productivity
and productive potential of the forest, freshwater
fish, wildlife, soil, and other renewable land
resources of the coastal zone.

9. To provide recreational opportunities and meet the
recreational needs of the general public in the coastal
zone.

a. To maximize public access to oceanfront and
estuarine beaches.

b. To support the tourist industry.

10. To provide for the protection and preservation of all
significant historical and archaeological sites in
the coastal zone.

11. To acquire, evaluate, process, publish, and disseminate
basic knowledge and information about the coastal zone
environment and ways in which it might be managed to
benefit man.

a. To encourage and support federal, state and academic
initiatives in coastal zone and marine research,
oceanographic exploration, and utilization of
marine resources.

b. To encourage and support federal, state, and
regional initiatives in developing data manage-
ment systems to speed up data collection and
dissemination and avoid duplication of effort.

12. To provide for the acquisition and dissemination of
knowledge about general aspects of natural resources
and the physical environment of the coastal zone and
promote an increased understanding and appreciation
of concepts, values, and issties relative to man's
natural environment.

The passage of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act
necessitated an additional program goal. This goal, simply,
was "to develop a coastal zone program which would meet the
requirements of the federal CZMA so that Florida would be
entitled to receive the management funding provided for in the
act." The requirements of the federal legislation were
discussed on page 2.

THE PLANNING PROGRAM

Florida's developing coastal management program is a
process that will provide a systematic approach to decision-
makers regarding the use of the state's coastal lands and
waters. It is a means to ensure the continued productivity

of coastal land and water resources while maintaining an
acceptable level of environmental quality, and will indicate
those areas suitable for additional growth and development.

The heart of the proposed program is the concept of
preservation areas, conservation areas, and development areas.
This concept provides the basis for the policies presented
in Chapter III. A more detailed discussion of the planning
program and the preservation, conservation, and development
concepts will be found in Chapter II.

STATUS REPORT CONTENT

The material presented in this introduction has attempted
to provide a broad picture of coastal management and, in
particular, the need for a coastal management program in Florida.
The balance of this status report will present executive
summaries of the work completed thus far in the effort to meet
the requirements of state legislation and the federal Coastal
Zone Management Act.

A summary of Florida's planning program, the methodology
used and the information contained in the Florida Regional
Coastal Zone Management Atlas and accompanying texts constitutes
Chapter II. The use made of the information generated in the
development of the coastal management program is also covered.

Chapter III discusses the proposed state level objectives,
policies, and criteria that have been developed by the Bureau
of Coastal Zone Planning with the assistance of other involved
state agencies.

Chapter IV presents a discussion of the boundary require-
ment of the federal CZM Act and the boundary presently being
proposed for the Florida coastal zone.

A proposed process for determining permissible and
priority uses in the coastal zone is currently being studied
for effectiveness. Chapter V summarizes the current status
of the effort to meet this federal act requirement.

Florida has a number of existing tools and processes for
selecting and managing geographic areas of particular concern.
Chapter VI summarizes these coastal management tools.

The federal CZM Act requires extensive public involvement
in the development of a state's coastal management program.
Chapter VII summmarizes the public information/ public involve-
ment programs that have been carried out to this point in time
and discusses a proposed schedule of public meetings and hearings.

Federal-state interaction requirements and the work accom-
plished thus far to meet these requirements are summarized in

Chapter VIII. A similar discussion of State-Regional-Local
Interaction is presented in Chapter IX.

The organizational structure and additional authorities
necessary for implementation of a coastal management program are
discussed in Chapter X, whicn was prepared by the Legal Section of
DNR with the cooperation of the Bureau of Coastal Zone Planning.

Chapter XI discusses the on-going program both in terms
of tasks still to be accomplished in the program development
process as well as tasks that will need to be carried out
once a program has been implemented in Florida.

The final chapter contains a bibliography of documents
that have been published by or under the auspices of the
coastal zone planning program in Florida.

Appendices providing detailed information on material
summarized in many of the chapters are included.

CHAPTER II

FLORIDA'S COASTAL ZONE PLANNING PROGRAM: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

THE PLANNING PROCESS

The very difficult decisions that must be made in the state's
coastal zone cannot be resolved without adequate knowledge and
information concerning existing conditions and the range of
options available. The length, complexity, and diversity of
Florida's coastal zone and the close to 300 governmental entities
that must all work together dictate that a planning and analysis
methodology be developed that can be applied on a standardized
basis in all coastal areas.

The planning methodology developed by the Bureau of Coastal
Zone Planning involves an inventory, analysis, and evaluation
procedure that can be utilized by all levels of government making
decisions as to the "where, how, and why" of the rapid growth
occurring in Florida's coastal zone.

The planning process, beginning with a 1971 pilot study and
tested in the 1974 Florida Keys Coastal Zone Management Study,
is a five-step process and includes:

1. An Inventory of Biophysical Characteristics. A graphic
(mapped) inventory of the components that make up the
coastal environment of Florida, including areas already
developed, areas physically suited to accommodate
future development, and natural features that should be
preserved in their present state where possible.

2. An Inventory of Existing Soc io-Economic Parameters.
This second step looks at how man is presently making
use of and altering the biophysical environment of the
coastal zone. This includes both mapping and textual
analysis of land use, land ownership, and support ser-
vices. A textual assessment of population trends and
economic activity is also included.

3. An Inventory of Environmental Quality. The third step
involves looking at the impact that man's activities
in the coastal zone have had on the biophysical envir-
onment. Maps and textual material indicate documented
problem and stress areas and suspected problem areas.

4. A Planning Analysis. From the information gathered in
the first three steps, a planning analysis is made.
This includes an analysis of where in the coastal zone
new growth can be supported; an identification of
specific problems and opportunities; an analysis of
existing plans; and the formulation of recommended pol-
icies, priorities, and specific objectives for coastal
zone management at the regional as well as the state level.

5. A Management Analysis. The fifth step involves an
analysis from the management point of view. What
agencies at all levels of government now have respon-
sibilities and missions in Florida's coastal zone?
Where do these responsibilities and missions support
each other and where do they conflict or overlap?
What laws, rules, and regulations now exist that
support a coastal zone management program? Have there
been court decisions that will have an impact?, Where
are there "holes" in existing legislation that need to
be plugged before an effective coastal management pro-
gram can be implemented? What administrative structure
will be most effective in making the decisions that
must be made? These are just a few of the questions
that must be answered in the development of the manage-
ment procedures.

A more detailed discussion of the inventory and data
collection methodology and procedures appears later in this
chapter.

A COASTAL ZONE OVERVIEW

The 38 counties which contain Florida's approximately 11,000
miles of marine shoreline range from highly urbanized to almost
completely undeveloped. The coastal zone that has been used for
planning purposes contains only about 25% of the state's land
area but, as stated earlier, contains 75% of the state's popula-
tion. The majority of these people are concentrated in 16 of the
coastal counties.

The brief overview of the coastal zone presented here serves
to indicate the wide variation present in the coastal areas of
Florida.

BIOPHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS

There are three primary types of shoreline in Florida: beach,
tidal marsh, and mangrove swamp. Beaches constitute 1435 miles
(13%) of the state' s marine shoreline: 793 miles fronting on the
Gulf and Atlantic and 642 miles constituting bay and estuarine
beach. Approximately 30% of the shoreline is developed; 6% is in
public recreation; and the remainder (51%) is about equally
divided between tidal marsh and mangrove swamps. The majority of
beach shoreline is in private ownership.

Tidal marshes are found primarily on the Gulf coast north of
the Anclote River and on the Atlantic coast north of Volusia
County and account for about 5% of the total coastal zone land
area of 9.6-million acres.

Mangrove swamps are found primarily in southwest Florida
with some on the south Atlantic coastline and throughout the
Florida Keys. Approximately 4.7% of the coastal zone land area
consists of mangrove swamp.

Both the tidal marsh and mangrove areas are highly pro-
ductive in terms of providing food and nursery areas for fish
and shellfish; of considerable value in protecting upland areas
from storm surge and high tides; and serve, in urbanized areas,
as waste assimilation "catch basins", ameliorating pollution of
marine waters from storm water runoff and other non-point-source
pollutants.

Almost 36% of the coastal zone land area is within the 100-
year hurricane flood zone. In many areas, extensive development
has occurred in this flood zone and disasters of major propor-
tions could happen if a sizable hurricane were to hit these areas.

SOCIO-ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS

Population. The 1975 estimate of population in the deline-
ated coastal zone was 6,326,246. One county, Dade, had a coastal
zone population of over 1-million. Eleven other counties had
coastal zone populations of over 100,000: Broward, Pinellas,
Duval, Hillsborough, Palm Beach, Brevard, Escambia, Sarasota,
Volusia, Lee and Manatee. At the other end of the spectrum, we
find seven counties with coastal zone populations below 10,000:
Levy, Franklin, Wakulla, Dixie, Walton, Jefferson, and Flagler.

Land Use. Approximately 30% of the coastal zone land area
was classified as "urban and built up" in 1975 regional land use
studies. Once again, we find wide variations on a county-by-
county basis. All of Pinellas County is included within the
coastal zone planning boundary: here, 71% of the land is in the
"urban and built up" category. In contrast, seven counties, Gulf,
Jefferson, Taylor, Dixie, St. Johns, Flagler, and Nassau had less
than 5% of coastal zone land area in the "urban and built up"
category.

Twenty-one percent of coastal zone land area fell into the
agricultural" category of land use, and 48.9% was classified as
"vacant land and natural areas."

Measurements from the 1972 biophysical inventory, which are
currently being updated, indicated that public lands devoted to
parks and recreation constituted approximately 9% of coastal zone
land use. If Everglades National Park was subtracted from this
amount, less than 1% of coastal zone land was being used for
public parks and recreation. A preliminary review of the 1975
inventory indicates that there will be no significant increase
in this percentage.

Land Ownership. Private interests own 79.5% of the coastal
zone land area. The federal government has large holdings in
Florida's coastal zone and accounts for 16.9% of land ownership.
State and local government owns only about 3.6% of the land area.
Shoreline ownership figures are approximately the same: private
ownership, 77%; federal ownership, 17%; and state and local
ownership, 6%.

Economics. Annual per capita income in coastal zone counties
(1974) ranges from a high of $6,662 in Palm Beach County to a low
of $2,331 in Franklin County. The 1974 figures show that nine
coastal counties have a per capita income above the state average
of $5,412. Three counties in the coastal zone have a per capita
income below $3,000/year: Franklin, Wakulla and Dixie.

Sources of personal income indicate that a number of counties
have over 40% of personal income derived from a combination of
"Transfer Payments" (Social Security, pensions, etc.) and the
"Dividends, Interest, and Rent" category. In many instances,
this indicates a high percentage of retired persons on fixed in-
comes and/or a lack of diversity in the economic base. Only five
coastal counties show manufacturing as the highest source of
personal income, and only 16 of the 38 coastal counties include
manufacturing as one of the top five sources of personal income.
Duval County appears to be the most diversified in economic
activity of any of the coastal counties.

Tourism is the number one "industry" in many of the coastal
counties in the southern half of the state and is of increasing
importance in several of the "panhandle" counties. Approximately
$9-billion was spent by the over 25-million visitors to the state
in 1975, with much of this expenditure occurring in the coastal
zone. Sales tax from these expenditures is a major source of
state revenue.

Fourteen of the fifteen largest industries in Florida are
located in the coastal zone. The southeastern region of the state
(Dade, Broward, Palm Beach counties) has the largest number of
industrial firms. The Tampa Bay area, Duval County, and Escambia
County also rank high as industrial areas.

Commercial and sport fishing are of economic importance also.
Commercial fish landings in 1974 had a dockside value of $68.1-
million. Dockside value of landings in 11 counties amounted to
over $5-million. Three of these, Nassau, Monroe, and Lee counties,
showed landing values of over $10-million.

Although these are no "hard" statistics on salt water sport
fishing, it is estimated that this "industry" generates revenues
approaching the $500-million mark.

There are 15 deep draft ports (authorized depths of 25 feet
or greater) located in Florida's coastal zone. In 1974, these
ports handled over 85-million tons of freight and served well
over 1-million passengers.

Florida's strategic location for national defense purposes
has made it the site of several large military and defense bases.
There are 11 such bases in the coastal zone, using approximately
550,000 acres of land area. Military payrolls amount to close
to $1-billion, and additionally, civilian federal employees at

the bases earn close t6 $700-million. A large portion of personal
income in eight coastal counties is derived from federal military
and civilian payrolls.

SUPPORT SERVICES CHARACTERISTICS

The characteristics of water supply, sewage disposal facili-
ties, solid waste disposal facilities, transportation, recrea-
tional facilities, and other support services vary widely in the
coastal areas of the state. Perhaps the most widespread support
service problem for coastal counties is solid waste disposal--
almost all appear to be having problems of either where to put
or how to collect their trash and garbage.

Water supply is of great concern to the coastal counties in
the southern portion of the state. Urbanized areas that lie
directly on the coastline in the northeast and far northwest of
the state are also experiencing some water supply problems.

Studies indicate that sewage disposal and transportation
facilities are inadequate in many urbanized areas of the coastal
zone, especially those that are experiencing extremely rapid
growth.

Public parks and recreational facilities of any substantial
size are in short supply in almost all areas of the coastal zone.
in non-urbanized counties, the lack of such public facilities is
not as noticeable because of the large amount of privately owned,
undeveloped land that is available for use. Urbanized counties
are finding it more and more difficult to provide park and recre-
ational facilities because of the high cost of land.

ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY CHARACTERISTICS

The environmental concern and awareness demonstrated in the
late 1960's and early 1970's by citizens and public officials
has done much to halt the rapid environmental degradation that
was occurring, but the problems caused by that degradation are
still with us in many areas of the coastal zone. Some of the
early finger canals associated with housing developments are now
suffering the effects of poor planning and construction: they
are extremely polluted, give off noxious odors, and have become
highly unsightly. Many shellfish waters and swimming areas
closed because of water pollution are still closed. Other envir-
onmental quality problems caused by unplanned and uncontrolled
development also remain.

Water quality and quantity is considered by coastal zone
counties and cities to be the most significant environmental
quality problem. Storm water runoff is perhaps the most diffi-
cult surface water quality problem in urbanized areas. Salt
water intrusion into aquifers that supply drinking water is
causing a great deal of concern in a number of coastal areas,
i.e. southeast Florida, the Tampa Bay area. Duval County, and in

some specific places on the northwest coast. The provision of
adequate potable water is of great importance in planning for
future growth and development.

Adequate knowledge is lacking in almost all areas of
Florida's coastal zone as to water quality and the extent of
pollution of offshore marine waters. Sufficient funding for
extensive studies of marine pollutants has not been available
despite the need for such studies.

Another environmental concern in many areas of the coastal
zone is beach erosion. An inventory by the U. S. Army Corps of
Engineers (1971) concluded that 292 miles of Florida's beaches
could be categorized as demonstrating "critical erosion"~. Some
restoration and remedial measures have been taken since that time,
but with the beaches representing a top "drawing card" for
tourists, the prevention of further erosion needs to be a high
priority item for the state.

Air quality is not considered to be a critical problem in
most areas of the coastal zone. The southeast coastal area and
the Tampa Bay area suffer some air quality degradation, primarily
from automobile emissions. The Jacksonville and Pensacola areas
have occasional problems caused by industrial emissions.

DEVELOPMENT OF THE COASTAL ZONE ATLAS AND INFORMATION BASE

The overview above demonstrates that complexity and diver-
sity found in Florida's coastal zone. It indicates the need for
a comprehensive planning and management problem that will reflect
the wide variety of needs and interest of all those who depend
on the coast and its natural and economic resources.

Essential to an effective coastal planning/management pro-
gram is the requirement that a data and information base be
included at an early .stage. In order to build a sound informa-
tion base on which to make coastal management decisions, three
factors are of utmost importance.

1. A Standardized Approach. The development of a state
coastal zone program involves a great many inter-
related biophysical, social, and economic factors.
In addition, coastal zone decisions are being made
daily at all levels of government. In order to
achieve coordination and consistency in coastal zone
decision-making, it is important that the data and
information collected and the analysis of that data
and information be done as uniformly as possible.

2. A Graphic Format. Almost all of the concerns and
objectives involved in long-range coastal resource
planning can be grouped into a relatively few major
categories and can, in most cases, be illustrated
in graphic (map) form. This allows for a better

understanding of how coastal zone 'concerns and
objectives relate to the physical landscape and to
each other. Such understanding provides a sound
basis for analyzing proposed coastal zone activities
and making decisions regarding these activities.

3. Flexibility. A coastal zone planning methodology and
information base should be flexible enough so that it
can be used by varying levels of government and in
different geographical locales. It should also be
capable of accommodating changing condition~, programs,
and technical advancements over a long period of time.

With these requirements in mind, it was determined that there
were three elements necessary as an information base for Florida' s
coastal management decisions: biophysical characteristics,
socio-economic characteristics, and environmental quality
characteristics. A listing of these elements and the type and
format of information included in each element appears in
Table 1.

All of the mapping listed (biophysical, land use, land
ownership, support services, and environmental problem areas)
will be included in the nine-volume Florida Regional Coastal
Zone Management Atlas. The Atlas volumes and the accompanying
textual material will be distributed by the RPCs for use by
governmental and private entities involved in coastal zone
activities within the region.

BIOPHYSICAL INVENTORY AN4D ANALYSIS

The first step in establishing a statewide information base
involved looking at the coastal zone from the standpoint of its
physical and biological components -- an inventory of "what was
there." This resulted in the Florida Coastal Zone Management
Atlas (1972), which took into account in map form the following
factors:

a. The ecological significance of the areas and its
tolerance to alteration.

b. The existing state-level management tools and regula-
tions including the state's water classification.

C. The soil suitability of the area.

d. The susceptibility of the area to flooding both by
storm surge and runoff.

e. The archaeological and historical significance of the
area.

f. Unique environmental features that may warrant pro-
tection.

Table I

FLORIDA COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT
INFORMATION ELEMENTS

BIOPHYS ICAL

Analysis.:

Present Land & Water Use Resource Maps:
Geologic DataCopst
Water Classification Preservation R eourcesit
Ecological Significance & Conservation mapuce
Tolerance to Alteration Prime Agriculture Mp
Susceptibility to Flooding & Development
Soils Suitability
Archaeological & Historical
Significance
Unique Environmental Features
Legal Constraints

SOCIO-ECONOMIC

Ownership Analysis & mapping

Land Use Analysis & Mapping

Support Services Analysis & Mapping

Primary Secondar

Sewage Disposal Schools Parks
Fresh Water Supply Hospitals Marinas
Solid Waste Disposal Fire Stations Open Space
Electricity Police Stations Recreation
Transportation

Economic Analysis

Population Analysis

Summary: Development Opportunities and Constraints

ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

Evaluation of Existing Quality:

Documented Problem Areas
Suspected Problem Areas
Recommended corrective or Preventive Actions

Environmental Stress Maps

Summary: Environmental Quality constraints

g. Geologic and hydrologic information where available.

h. Present use of the area.

From an analysis of this inventory, it was determined that
coastal land and water would fit into three broad categories:
Preservation areas, Conservation areas, and Prime Agricultural
and Development areas.

1. Preservation Areas. Those portions of the coastal zone
identified as having major ecological, hydrological,
physiographic, historical, or socio-economic importance
to the public at large.

2. Conservation Areas. Conservation areas are lands and
waters of the coastal zone identified as having certain
natural or institutional use limitations which require
special precautions prior to conversion to development.

3. Prime Agriculture and Development Areas. Prime agri-
culture and development areas include (a) areas already
developed, (b) undeveloped areas intrinsically suitable
for intensive development and now used for other pur-
poses, including forestry and agriculture, (c) undeveloped
lands having minor physical limitations -- drainage
problems, poor permeability, bearing strength problems --
which can be corrected by application of special develop-
ment techniques, and (d) prime agricultural lands.

The following table indicates the subcategories included
within the preservation, conservation, and development categories
and depicted on the biophysical maps where they occur.

Table 2

RESOURCE SUB-CATEGORIES
PRESERVATION CONSERVATION PRIME AGR. a DEV.
Cles I Waters Class II Waters Class IV Waters
Class II Waters Aquatic Preserves Class V Waters
Marine Gross Beds Aquaculture Leases Presently Developed Areas
Selected Coastal Marshes Spoil Islands Non-Conflict
Selected Coastal Mangroves Conflict
Selected Freshwater Swamps Forestry end Game Undeveloped Lands
and Marshes Management Areas Suitable for Intensive
Gulf and Atlantic Beaches Wildlife Refuges Development
and Ounes Parks and Recreation Undeveloped Lands
Selected Estuarine Beaches Areas Suitable for Intensive
ODesignated Wilderness Areas River Flood Plains Development with
Historical and Marginal Lands Corrections
Archaeological Sites Hurricane Flood Zone Undeveloped Londs
Other Unique Suitable for Development
Enviroanmental Features if Protected from
Flooding
Prime Agricultural Lands
Prime Agricultural Lands
with other Potential
Suitabiluties

The 1972 biophysical inventory and analysis was updated and
refined in 1975 using aerial color infra-red photography and new
soils data. The new biophysical maps will be published as a
section of the nine-volume Florida Regional Coastal Zone Manage-
ment Atlas.

Appendix B contains a sample set of biophysical maps
(Withlacoochee Region) and textual material with a more Aetailed
explanation of the categories and subcategories mapped.

Table A, B, and C in Appendix C provide general information
relating to each subcategory, including:

1. Priority use

2. Description/criteria

3. State goals and objectives

4. General state policy

5. State agency(s) having directly related statutory
authority

6. Explanation of how the subcategory is identified

7. Brief explanation of major existing state regulatory
support and control applying to the subcategory.

It is important that the explanatory text and tables be
used in conjunction with the biophysical maps in order to prevent
misinterpretation of the mapped material.

SOCIO-ECONOMIC INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS

The socio-economic analysis section of the planning/manage-
ment methodology consists of five (5) major information categories:

1. Ownership Inventory and Analysis (Maps and text)

2. Land Use Inventory and Analysis (Maps and text)

3. Support Services Inventory and Analysis (Maps and Text)

4. Economic Study and Analysis (Text only)

5. Population Study and Analysis (Text only)

The coastal regional planning councils (RPCs), under contract
to the state coastal planning agency, were responsible for col-
lecting and analyzing socio-economic data and information for
their regions and for preparing county analyses as well as a
regional overview. The RPCs were asked to provide two additional
studies that are not included in the socio-economic work tasks.

The first, an analysis of existing legal authorities, allowed
them to look at the authorities now being used in the region
that relate to coastal zone planning/management activities. An
example of this analysis can be found in Appendix B-9. The
second study was a socio-economic study of possible onshore
impacts of OCS oil development (see Appendix B-b0).

Following contract guidelines, the RPCs were asked to pro-
vide the material discussed in each of the categories below.

OWNERSHIP

Maps, data, and a textual analysis of land ownership pat-
terns within the regional coastal zone were provided.

ownership of both public (10 acres or greater parcels) and
private lands (20 acres or greater parcels) was identified and
mapped in the following manner:

Public Lands Private Lands

-Federal -Undeveloped platted
-State -Developed platted
-County -Ownership density for
-City each quarter section
-Large Ownerships of over
20 acres each
-Submerged lands

The land owership maps will be included as part of the Regional
Atlas. A sample ownership map is included in the material in
Appendix B-l.

A listing of all private ownerships of 20 acres or greater,
including current assessed value, was included. Appendix B-5
contains this listing with the Withlacoochee Region, and the
textual analysis prepared for the region constitutes Appendix
B-4.

LAND USE

Existing land use data and analysis for the regional coastal
zone was prepared. The following land use categories were used
for preparing, displaying, and analyzing the land use data com-
piled (five acres or greater segments):

Land Use Classifications*

Urban and Built-Up Agriculture Other

- Residential - Cropland and - Natural Cover
- Commercial Pasture (includes parks,
- industrial - Groves, Orchards wildlife refuges,
- Transportation, - Citrus Groves open land, etc.)
Communication, - Confined Feeding
utilities - Other Agriculture
- Extractive
- Institutional *Adopted from Florida Land Use and
- Mixed Land Cover Classification System,
- Open and Other Division of State Planning Tech-
nical Report, April 1976.

The land use data and analysis, when coupled with the other
categories, will assist in determining current growth patterns
in the coastal zone and provide input into decisions concerning
location of future desirable growth areas.

Appendix B-i contains a sample land use map. A sample
textual analysis is found in Appendix B-2.

SUPPORT SERVICES

The input received from the RPCs relating to support ser-
vices includes mapping, inventorying, and textual analysis,
including the identification and location of both primary and
secondary support services and an analysis of these services
indicating the current service level, design capacity, and
current adequacy or inadequacy of the services. The categories
of primary and secondary support services which are identified
and analyzed are:

Primary Support Services Secondary Support Services

- Sewage disposal - Hospital & health care
- Solid waste disposal - School and educational
- Fresh water supply facilities
- Electrical supply - Police and fire protection
- Transportation facilities - Parks and recreation areas
- Public beaches, marinas,
and boat ramps

A sample support services map is included in Appendix B-i
and accompanying textual and inventory material can be found in
Appendix B-3.

ECONOMIC ANALYSIS

A study of the region's economy and existing economic con,
ditions was prepared and analyzed in terms of their effect on
coastal zone planning and management. Opportunities and con-
straints on the regional economy were identified and analyzed.

Categories that were to be included (minimum) were: business
and industry; tourism and commercial recreation; fisheries;
ports; government; retirees/second homes; and agriculture (where
applicable).

The economic analysis for the Withlacoochee Region is
included in Appendix B-7 as an example of the regional economic
studies.

POPULATION ANALYSIS

Existing population, population trends, and population
estimates are of considerable importance in planning and manage-
ment of coastal zone resources. The data and analysis provided
by the RPCs included, but was not limited to, the following:

1. A history of the coastal zone population by county
from 1950 to 1970.

2. An estimate of the population of the coastal zone
from 1970 to 1990.

3. A regional analysis of the population trends and
their possible impact on the coastal zone.

Appendix B-6 contains, as an example, the population analysis
of the Withlacoochee Region.

ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ASSESSMENT

The environmental quality assessment was a combined effort
of the RPCs and the Bureau of Coastal Zone Planning., This
assessment, which represents an important segment of the inven-
tory and analysis effort, consists of an overview of major
environmental systems and characteristics; an identification,
mapping and general analysis procedure for identifying environ-
mental problem areas; and a discussion of recommended management
actions, including both maintenance and restorative measures
appropriate to the region.

The assessment specifically consists of a textual analysis
and environmental problem area maps for each county. The text
includes a discussion of the geology, hydrology, physiology,
climate, vegetative communities and major environmental systems.
Environmental problems discussed within the text are mapped by
problem type.

The material contained in the environmental quality assess-
ment should assist decision-makers in identifying areas in need
of special protection or restoration; defining the scope and
magnitude of environmental problems; understanding the inter-
relationships that may exist between man's activities and
identified problems; and establishing a basis for evaluating
detailed applied research projects.

The text and a sample map from the Withlacoochee Region's
environmental quality assessment can be found in Appendices
B-8 and B-i respectively.

SUMMARY

The extremely rapid growth that occurred in Florida's
coastal zone during the 1960's and early 1970's has-slowed some
in the last two years, providing decision-makers with a bit of
"breathing room" to catch up on past problems and plan for the
future. This slower growth rate is not expected to continue,
and planning and management agencies at all levels of government
need to make decisions and set policy now to provide for renewed
demands on coastal resources.

The information and data collected from the effort dis-
cussed above will aid coastal zone decision-makers, both public
and private, by providing a sound basis for determining the
direction that new growth and economic activity should take.

--Cities and counties in the coastal zone should
find the information base of considerable assistance
in the development and adoption of many of the
planning elements required by the Local Government
Comprehensive Planning Act.

--The regional planning councils, by assisting in this
information collection and analysis effort, have now
established an effective data base to assist in their
planning and decision-making tasks, such as evaluating
Developments of Regional Impact.

--State agencies with regulatory and/or management
functions can use the information and data provided
to assist in the decisions they must make on a
regular basis.

--Private developers and business and industry interests
will be able to use the information base to assist
them in their planning for new housing and industrial
facilities.

it should be remembered that the inventory and analysis
materials presented in this chapter do not constitute a coastal
management plan. They do provide an overview of available
resources and existing conditions that form a rational basis
for future planning and management in Florida's coastal zone.

CHAPTER III

PROPOSED MANAGEMENT POLICIES AND CRITERIA: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

INTRODUCTION

BACKGROUND

Rational management of coastal resources demands that policies
relating to those resources be clearly and concisely articulated.
It also demands that policies so articulated be clearly related
to management goals and objectives. in recognition of this,
Section 302(h) of the national Coastal Zone Management Act of
1972 (CZMA) states:

"The key to more effective protection and use of the
land and water resources of the coastal zone is to
encourage the states to exercise their full authority
over lands and waters in the coastal zone by assisting
states, in cooperation with federal and local govern-
ments and other vitally affected interests, in developing
land and water use programs for the coastal zone, in-
cluding unified policies, criteria, standards, methods,
and processes for dealing with land and water use
decisions of more than local significance." (Emphasis
added.)

In furtherance of this recognition, federal guidelines for
state coastal management program development and approval have
been promulgated. Among other requirements, approved programs
must contain (Section 923.4, Rules and Regulations for Program
Administration Grants):

1. "Objectives of the program in preservation, protection,
development, restoration and enhancement of the state's
coastal zone", and
2. "Policies for the protection and conservation of coastal
zone natural systems, cultural, historic and scenic areas,
renewable and non-renewable resources, and the preservation,
restoration, and economic development of selected coastal
zone areas."

A key aspect of the program approval guidelines (Section
923.4(c) is that the various elements must be integrated into a
balanced and comprehensive program designed to achieve the stated
objectives and policies. In order to meet this requirement, the
policies and criteria must specifically address a variety of
concerns expressed in the rules and regulations, including those
related to: boundaries (Section 923.11); methods of assessing
impacts and defining permissible land and water uses (Section
923.12); geographic areas of particular concern (Section 923.13);
priority uses (Section 923.14); and means of exerting control
over land and water uses (Section 923.21).

PRINCIPLES APPLIED TO POLICY DEVELOPMFNT

Because policies and criteria provide the basis for imple-

menting coastal management, extreme care must be exercised to
assure that proper directions and focus are established at the
onset of the policy development process. In view of this, the
following general principles were recognized throughout the
policy development process:

1. Existing programs and policies should be utilized and built
upon where possible.
2. The policies should be clearly and concisely stated to allow
easy interpretation.
3. Where possible, the policies should reflect a clear appli-
cability to the coastal landscape.
4. The policies should focus on:

a. Achieving goals and objectives rather than simply main-
taining the status quo.
b. Improving predictability of governmental decision
making.
C. Increasing efficiency of administrative actions.

5. The policies should reflect recognition that rational coastal
management involves not only direct regulation of certain
activities, but also provision of positive government leader-
ship and incentives to achieve coastal management objectives.
Direct regulation should be restricted to those activities
that are an obvious potential threat to the overall public
interest.
6. The policies should strive for maximum utilization of
legitimate local authorities to achieve coastal management
objectives.
7. The policies should be based upon factual information
regarding the geographic areas and activities to be directly
affected.

POLICY DEVELOPMENT PROCESS

In order to satisfy federal program requirements as well as
adhere to the general principles stated above, a basic three-
step process was established (See Figure 1) . This process
involves:

1. Development of a general understanding of coastal zone
characteristics and conditions that must be taken into account
(biophysical, socio-economic, environmental quality, planning
and management).
2. Drafting potential policy statements based upon information
gained in (1); and
3. Formal review and modification of draft policy statements
by the State Interagency Advisory Committee on Coastal Zone
Management, Regional Citizens' Advisory Committees, and
other interested parties.

Step I - Understanding coastal zone characteristics and conditions.

This step involved establishment of a coordinated program
designed to provide a meaningful information base regarding

Figure 1

Ceneral Policy Development Process

Step 1 Develop Information Base:

A. Biophysical characteristics
B. Socio-economnic considerations
C. Environmental quality
D. Status of existing planning
E. Existing resource management responsibilities,
authorities and capabilities

Step 2 Drafting Potential Policy Statements:

A. BCZP first draft work product (to serve as impetus
for policy discussion).

B. Concurrent state and local policy articulation
efforts by:

1. State Interagency 2. Nine regional
Advisory Committee Citizens' Advisory
on CZM. Committees.

Suggested Suggested
{ Policy Policy

Step 3 Formal Review and Modification of State IAC and Regional
CAC Work Products

A. Identify any major state/local policy conflicts and
issues.

B. Combine State IAC and local CAC work products to
extent possible. (Resultinc in second BCZ? draft)

C. Review of combined products: State I.A.C., local
C.A.C.'s, other interested parties.

D. Submission to Governor and Cabinet for review.

8
E. Final draft for inclusion into proposed State
Coastal Management Program.

biophysical, socio-economic, environmental quality, planning
and management considerations in the coastal zone (see Table 1).
This task, involving state agencies, regional planning councils,
counties, universities, and private consultants has provided a
substantial volume of reference material directly applicable
to state and local policy development, planning, conflict resolu-
tion, and other requirements of CZMA. While such inventory and
analysis efforts will continue as the management program is
implemented, sufficient knowledge has been gained to provide a
sound basis for the proposed policies and criteria.

Step 2 - Drafting potential policy statements.

Based upon information gained in Step 1, a process was devel-
oped to articulate overall program objectives, specific policies
pertaining to various geographically defined coastal resource
areas, as well as policies pertaining to activities having poten-
tial direct and significant impacts on coastal resources. A
concerted effort was made to organize and incorporate the very
substantial volume of existing state level legislation, programs,
and policies into a unified coastal management program. This
step in the process involved concurrent state (through the
Interagency Advisory Committee on Coastal Zone Management) and
local (through the regional planning councils and citizens'
advisory committees) efforts, using resource areas and activities
identified in Step I as a common base of reference. Throughout
this part of the process, a concerted effort has been made to
gain the views and input of a broad spectrum of coastal zone
interests.

Step 3 - Formal review and modification of draft policy statements.

This step will consist of making a comparison of state and
local level work products and resolving, on a case by case basis,
any identified conflicts. To date, only minor conflicts have
occurred, with these usually being a result of local desires to
make policies more specific than is possible from a statewide
basis. In such cases, local government is usually empowered
to adopt policies more stringent than those of the state if so
desired.

APPLICABILITY OF THE POLICIES

1. Non-regulatory State and Federal Agency Activities

In accordance with the principles used in the policy develop-
ment process, the suggested policies reflect recognition that they
should provide positive guidance, leadership and incentives as
well as address concerns relating to direct regulation of poten-
tially harmful activities. In addition, they also reflect recog-
nition that, due to administrative inefficiency, governmental
projects, programs, and activities sometimes unnecessarily
cause (directly or indirectly) some of our most severe resource
management conflicts. This awareness of the influences and
impacts that governmental activities have on coastal tresource
management resulted in a recognized need to assure that govern-
mentally conducted or subsidized activities are *in conformance
with goals and objectives of the coastal managerient program.

Table 1

FLORIDA COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT
CONSIDERATIONS

BIOPHYSICAL

Analysis:

Present Land and Water Use
Geologic Data
Water Classification Resource Maps:
Ecological Significance &
Tolerance to Alteration Preservation Composite
Susceptibility to Flooding Conservation Resources
Soils Suitability Prime Agriculture Map
Archaeological & Historical & Development
Significance
Unique Environmental Features
Legal Constraints

SOCIO-ECONOMIC

Ownership Analysis & Mapping

Land Use Analysis & Mapping

Support Services Analysis & Mapping

Primary: Secondary:

Sewage Disposal Schools Parks
Fresh Water Supply Hospitals Marinas
Solid Waste Disposal Fire Stations Open Space
Electricity Police Stations Recreation
Transportation

Economic Analysis

Population Analysis

Summary:

Development Opportunities and Constraints

ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

Eval-uation of Existing Quality:

Documented Problem Areas
Suspected Problem Areas
Recommended Corrective or Preventive Actions

Environmental Stress Maps

Summary:

Environmental Quality Constraints
31

Table 1 (Cont'd)

PLANNING ANALYSIS

Existing Carrying Capacity (ability to support new growth)

Analysis of Existing Plans

Identification of Specific Problems and Opportunities

Formulation of Goals, Priorities and Specific Objectives

Planning Recommendations

MANAGEMENT ANALYSIS

Analysis of agency responsibilities and missions: federal-state-
regional-county-municipal

Analysis of mutual support or conflict between agencies

Identification of legal decision-making process at county and
municipal levels

Inventory of all existing laws applicable to CZM at federal, state,
county and municipal levels

Collection and analysis of state and federal court decisions
pertinent to CZM

Recommendations for management implementation at municipal, county,
regional and state levels (i.e. county and local ordinances)

Creation of administrative mechanisms to implement the plan and
meld state and local interests with regional and federal interests

Coordination of area CZM plan with overall state plan

in view of this obvious need and the fact that existing
authorities are used as a base, the stated policies are proposed
to be binding (where applicable) to the maximum extent practicable
t-o all non-regulatory activities of state and federal agencies
throughout the coastal zone except in cases involving national
security. Because the Governor and Cabinet collectively control
operations of all state agencies, it is felt that applicability
of the policies to non-regulatory state agency activities can
be achieved through executive order and Cabinet resolution. As
regards federal properties, which are specifically exempted
from state and local regulations, special efforts must be made
to establish conflict resolution procedures to assure compati-
bility of state and federal efforts.

2. State and Federal Regulatory Programs

Because the policies are based in large measure on existing
state legislation, programs, and regulations, most of the policies
can be implemented under existing authorities. However, due to
legislative constraints placed upon making authorities of state
agencies, certain needed adjustments in existing regulations can
only be addressed as part of ongoing program development. Taking
these constraints into account, it is proposed that state and
federal regulatory agencies be directed to exercise their full
existing authorities to carry out the stated policies. Any
regulatory deficiencies or conflicts identified should be
addressed as part of an ongoing policy review, resource evaluation,
and planning segment of program implementation. Table 2 summarizes
the primary authorities that could be utilized to implement the
policies.

3. Local Governments and Private Interests

Present state authorities are and will continue to be binding
on local governments and private interests in the coastal zone.
Traditionally however, many intergovernmental conflicts have
occurred as a direct result of a lack of local knowledge of state
programs, policies and criteria. The stated policies are intended
to help avoid or minimize such administrative conflicts and facil-
itate more direct involvement of local government in state resource
management efforts. A basic need of the state coastal management
program is that local governments recognize and incorporate legit-i-
mate state resource management concerns into their plans and pro-
grams and that state programs recognize the needs and constraints
of local government.

A significant step was taken toward meeting this need with
enactment of the Local Government Comprehensive Planning Act of
1975 (LGCPA - Ch. 75-257, Laws of Florida). As provided by
this act, counties, municipalities, and certain other units of
local government are required by July 1, 1979, to prepare and
adopt comprehensive plans for guiding future development. Among
the act's required planning elements are: future land use
(Section 7(6)(a), conservation (Section (6)(d), recreation and
open space (Section 7(6) (c) , intergovernmental coordination
(Section 7(6) (h), and where appropriate, coastal protection
(Section 7(6) (g) . Local plans adopted in accordance with
provisions of the act have the force of law and are binding

Table 2

PRIMARY AUTHORITIES TO BE UTILIZED

Florida State Comprehensive Planning Act, Chapter 23.011-
23.019, F.S.

Provides responsibilities for developing the State Compre-
hensive Plan.

Local Government Comprehensive Planning Act of 1975, Chapter 163.3161-
163.3211, F.S.

Requires mandatory comprehensive planning by cities and
counties by 1979.

New Cormunities Act of 1975, Chapter 163.601-163.632, F.S.

Provides for the establishment of new community districts
through which the cost, delivery and maintenance of necessary pre-
development facilities can be financed and operated.

The Florida Environmental Land and Water Management Act of 1972,
Chapter 380, F.S.

Provides for the accomplishment of proper state land and
water management policies through the coordination of local
decision-making and actions relating to growth and development.

Florida Transportation Act, Part III, Chapter 23, F.S.

Provides for planning and development of the state
transportation system.

Florida Water Resources Act of 1972, Chapter 373, F.S.

Provides responsibilities for conservation, development and
proper utilization of surface and ground water resources in Florida.

Drainage and Water Management, Chapter 298, F.S.

Provides for the formation of water management (drainage)
districts to preserve and protect water resources.

Management of State Owned Lands, Chapter 253, F.S.

Provides for the management of state-owned lands and waters.

Public Health, Chapter 381, F.S.

State version of the Federal Safe Drinking Water Act (P.L. 93-
423) which calls for the protection and regulation of public drinking
water supplies, and the regulation of septic tank installation and
use.

Table 2 (Cont'd.)

Saltwater Fisheries and Conservation, Chapter 370, F.S.

Provides for the administration, supervision, development,
and conservation of the state's natural resources, including the
development of a comprehensive coastal management plan for the
preservation and development of Florida's coastal zone.

Beach and Shore Preservation Act, Chapter 161, F.S.

Provides authorities for averting and preventing erosion and
minimizing hurricane and storm damage on Florida's beaches and shores.

Conservation of Oil and Gas Resources, Chapter 377, F.S.

Provides responsibilities to properly regulate and manage
oil and gas exploration and development activities.

Florida Aquatic Preserve Act of 1975, Chapter 258.35-258.46, F.S.

Sets aside certain state-owned lands in areas of exceptional
biological, aesthetic, and scientific value as aquatic preserves.

Historic Preservation, Chapter 266, F.S.

Creates a number of historic preservation boards to carry on
historic preservation planning.

Florida Archives and History Act, Chapter 267, F.S.

Establishes as state policy, the protection and preservation
of historical sites and property.

State Disaster Act of 1974, Chapter 272, F.S.
Provides authorities to the Governor and appropriate state
agencies to develop programs for disaster prevention, response
and recovery.
State Wilderness System Act, Chapter 258, F.S.

Establishes a process for setting aside wilderness areas as
permanent preserves.

Outdoor Recreational or Park Lands; Tax Assessments, Chapter
193.501, F.S.

Provides for special ad valorum tax considerations on lands
used for recreational or park purposes.

Florida Coastal Mapping Act of 1974, Chapter 177, F.S.

Established standards and procedures for coastal boundary
surveys and provides for use of such surveys as evidence in court
or before admministrative agencies.
35

Table 2 (Cont'd.)

Florida Uniform Land Sales Practices Law, Chapter 478, rF.S.

Establishes procedures and requirements for registration
and sale of lands.

Environmental Control, Chapter 403, F.S.

Provides authorities for state pollution control, electrical
power plant siting regulation,execution of interstate environmental
control compacts, solid waste management, and environmental regu-
lation.

Outdoor Recreation and Conservation, Chapter 375, F.S.

Provides authorities for developing and executing a compre-
hensive multi-purpose outdoor recreation and conservation plan for
Florida.

Land Conservation Act of 1972, Chapter 259, F.S.

Establishes a state program for purchase of environmentally
endangered lands and outdoor recreation lands.

Oil Spill Prevention and Pollution Control Act, Chapter 326, F.S.

Provides authorities for prevention and control of oil spills
in coastal areas.

upon future actions of local government.

Because of the extreme importance local plans can have to
future resource management efforts, it is mandatory that close
coordination be achieved between local and state programs. To
help achieve this, a basic requirement for local receipt of
coastal management assistance funding will be that local govern-
ment recognize state management concerns and, to the maximum
extent practicable, achieve consistency with state policy and
criteria related to the land use, conservation, recreation and
open space, intergovernmental coordination, and coastal zone
protection elements of local comprehensive plans.

If local comprehensive plans are to recognize state concerns
related to avoiding unnecessary irretrievable commitments of
coastal resources, the above referenced elements must serve as
the nucleus around which transportation, housing, utilities, and
other required elements of the LGCPA will be developed. Satis-
factory completion of local plans in this manner will provide a
sound basis for assuring consistency with state and federal
coastal management efforts. Furthermore, upon adoption of
satisfactory local plans and a demonstration that local govern-
ment has the capability to adequately address state management
concerns, it would be possible and desirable to delegate certain
existing state management responsibilities to local government.

APPROACH

Basically, the approach utilized for developing and organizing
the coastal zone policies involves classifying various portions of
the landscape into one of three major categories of concern re-
lating to preservation, conservation, development and agricultural
considerations. Specific proposed policies are then articulated
for each of the resource subcategories (resource areas) , which
are also mapped in generalized form for the coastal zone of each
county. In addition,- policy recommendations are stated for
specific activities, regardless of their geographical location.

In order to facilitate understanding of state policy regard-
ing various portions of the coastal landscape, general policy
statements were developed for each of the three types of
geographic areas. These general policies and criteria are
explained below.

PRESERVATION CRITERIA AND SUGGESTED POLICY

The preservation concept utilized in the Florida Regional
Coastal Zone Management Atlas includes those portions of the
coastal zone identified as having major ecological, hydrological,
physiographic, historical, or socio-economic importance to the
public at large. Preserving the natural integrity of these areas
enhances the aesthetics and quality of life for residents and
tourists; provides a measure of natural hurricane protection;
helps maintain at least minimum ecological balance; and promotes
maintenance of our invaluable commercial and sport fisheries.
Public policy should attempt to protect the functions or values
of these areas to the maximum degree legally possible consistent

with private property rights as determined by the courts. Where
possible, irretrievable commitments regarding these functions
and values should be made only by elected public officials and
only after full consideration of pertinent factors and an aware-
ness of long term consequences. In cases where private property
rights are involved, all legal rights of the property owners and
the public shall be considered and if other alternatives for
achieving preservation goals have proven inappropriate, public
funds should be expended and just compensation made for purchase
of areas in immediate jeopardy of destruction.

CONSERVATION CRITERIA AND SUGGESTED POLICY

As used in the Florida coastal management program, conser-
vation areas are lands and waters of the coastal zone identified
as having certain natural or institutional use limitations which
require special precautions prior to conversion to development.
Examples are areas within the hurricane flood zone or river
flood plains and lands with severe soils limitations (marginal
lands). Failure to consider these limitations may result in
direct or indirect consequences harmful to the public health,
safety and welfare. Public policy should attempt to ensure
that identified use limitations are fully considered and
addressed in furture coastal zone planning and management decisions.

PRIME AGRICULTURE AND DEVELOPMENT CRITERIA AND SUGGESTED POLICY

Prime agriculture and development areas, as used in the
Florida Regional Coastal Zone Management Atlas, include (1) areas
already developed, (2) undeveloped areas now vacant or used for
other purposes, including forestry and agriculture, which are
intrinsically suitable for intensive development, (3) undeveloped
lands having minor physical limitations--drainage problems, poor
permeability, bearing strength problems--which can be corrected
by minor drainage techniques, central sewage systems or application
of special building techniques, and (4) prime agricultural lands.
In general, these lands are not considered to be environmentally
fragile. However, there are presently developed areas that would
have been classified as "conservation" or "preservation" had they
not already been developed. Such areas are classified as "con-
flict" areas on the biophysical analysis maps. Decisions con-
cerning specific uses within "prime agriculture and development"
areas are considered almost entirely the responsibility of local
government, an exception being developments on the immediate
shoreline of estuaries and along the open Gulf of Mexico and
Atlantic Ocean. In addition, activities in these areas which
may degrade air and water quality are subject to direct state
regulation. The other subcategories of "prime agriculture and
development areas"' are included in the Atlas as an aid to local
government and developers. These subcategories are designed
to indicate the most favorable areas for development, the
relative degree of landscape modification needed, and the types
of physical limitations that may be anticipated. Public policy
should attempt to guide future growth and development into areas
having the best intrinsic suitability, while attempting simul-
taneously, to minimize and neutralize any identified conflicts.

Specific objectives, policies and criteria for the various
resource subcategories, as well as for specific activities are
treated in the full report (Appendix C). That document basically
represents Step 2,of the policy development process. While some
policy topics still must be addressed prior to finalization of the
program, the draft report contains 189 suggested policy state-
ments, relating to 65 objectives for 48 policy topics. The
policy topics are listed in Table 3.

The policy statements, in conjunction with the biophysical
analysis maps and other materials presented in the Florida
Regional Coastal Zone Management Atlas are intended to provide
a basic framework for managing Florida's coastal zone in a man-
ner which will allow economic development to tak~e place without
unnecessary sacrifice of our invaluable coastal resources.

FUTURE POLICY RELATED TASKS

There are several tasks which remain to be completed prior to
inclusion of the objectives and policy statements into the proposed
coastal management program. Among them are the following:
(1) referencing stated policies to appropriate legal authority(s),
(2) achieving consistency between IAC and CAC policy development
efforts, (3) developing needed statements regarding additional
policy topics, and (4) review and modification of the draft state-
ments to reflect comments of federal agencies and other interested
parties.

REFERENCING STATED POLICIES TO APPROPRIATE LEGAL AUTHORITIES

A prerequisite for federal approval of the state management
program is that the state has in place the necessary legal author-
ities and administrative mechanisms to carry out the stated policies
(CZMA Section 306(d) and Section 923.21, Rules and Regulations
for Coastal Zone Management Program Administration Grants) . In
view of this, it is intended that each final policy statement
be cross-referenced to reflect the appropriate constitutional
provision, statute, rule, executive order or other authority
upon which it is based. This should significantly aid in deter-
mining sufficiency of existing aulthorities and will indicate
deficiencies that need to be addressed as part of the ongoing
coastal management program.

ACHIEVING CONSISTENCY BETWEEN IAC AND CAC POLICY
DEVELOPMENT EFFORTS

As was mentioned earlier the policy development process
(Step 2) involved concurrent efforts by the State Interagency
Advisory Committee (IAC) and nine regional Citizens' Advisory
Committees (CAC's). This has resulted in draft policies re-
flecting the state agency perspective, as well as draft policies
reflecting the perspective of citizens in the nine planning
regions. A major task that remains to be completed is the
integration of these efforts into a cohesive framework which
permits recognition of both state and local concerns.

Table 3

Policy Topics

Preservation Areas

Class I Waters (1) Gulf and Atlantic Beaches
Class II Waters (2) and Dunes (7)
Marine Grass Beds (3) Estuarine Beaches (8)
Selected Coastal Marshes (4) State Wilderness Areas (9)
Selected Coastal Man- Historical and Archaeological
groves (5) Sites (10)
Selected Freshwater Swamps Other Unique Environmental
and Marshes (6) Features (11)

Conservation Areas

Class III Waters (12) Forestry and Game Management
Aquatic Preserves (13) Areas (18)
Aquaculture Leases (14) Wildlife Refuges (19)
Spoil Islands (15) Parks and Recreation Areas (20)
Hurricane Flood Zone (16) Marginal Lands (21)
River Flood Plains (17)

Development Areas

Class IV Waters (22) Undeveloped Lands Suitable
Class V Waters (23) for Intensive Development
Presently Developed Lands - if Protected from Flooding (28,
Non Conflict (24) Prime Agricultural Lands (with
Presently Developed Lands - limitations for urban
Conflict (25) development (29)
Undeveloped Lands Suitable for Prime Agricultural Lands With
Intensive Development (26) Other Potential Suit-
Undeveloped Lands Suitable for abilities (30)
Intensive Development with
Corrections (27)

Activities

Immediate Shoreline Use Marina Location and Design (41)
Priorities (31) Pipelines, Transportation and
Federal Activities (32) Utilities (42)
Bulkheads and Bulkhead Residential Development (43)
Lines (33) Septic Tanks (44)
Breakwaters, Jetties and Mosquito/Arthropod Control
Groins (34) Projects (45)
Dredging, Filling and Solid Waste Disposal/Sanitary
Artificial Waterways (35) Landfill Sites (46)
Docks and Piers (36) Amenities, Aesthetics and
Removal of Natural Vegetation (37) Design (47)
Forestry Management Practices (38) Development Activities on
Agricultural Practices (39) Barrier Islands and Barrier
Ports and Water Related Beaches (48)
Industry (40)
40

DEVELOPING NEEDED STATEMENTS REGARDING ADDITIONAL POLICY TOPICS

In addition to the policy topics covered in the draft report
there are several others needing attention as part of the coastal
management program. Among these are the following:

1. General economic development policy
2. Energy facilities siting
3. Outer continental shelf/offshore oil activities
4. Deepwater ports
5. Extractive industry
6. Coordination of state/federal permitting
7. Development of a working definition of the term "public
interest" as it relates to coastal zone management

Preliminary work has been done on several of these topics.
It is intended that over the next year suggested policy statements
will be developed on these and possibly other topics (if needed)
for inclusion into the final proposed coastal management program.

REVIEW AND MODIFICATION OF SUGGESTED POLICIES

in order to receive approval of its proposed management pro-
gram, the state must show that it "...has notified and provided
an opportunity for full participation in the development of its
management program to all public and private agencies and organi-
zations which are liable to be affected by, or may have a direct
interest in the management program" (CZMA Section 303(3)
and Section 923.31, Rules and Regulations for Coastal Zone
Management Program Administrative Grants) . In view of this
requirement the suggested policies will receive wide distribu-
tion for review and comment. As a result of this review, modi-
fications will be made to reflect the comments of affected
federal agencies, local units of government, and other interested
parties.

NOTE: See Appendix C: Suggested State Objectives, Policies
and Criteria for Coastal Zone Management in Florida.

CHAPTER IV

BOUNDARIES OF THE COASTAL ZONE: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

INTRODUCTION

A basic requirement of the Coastal Zone Management Act
(CZMA) is that state management programs include an identi-
* ~~fication of the boundaries of the coastal zone subject to the
management program (Section 305(a)). The following' discussion
explains the rationale used in defining the boundaries of
Florida's coastal zone, with emphasis on: (1) the various
physical and administrative considerations taken into account;
(2) examination of the most relevant options; and (3) the
proposed boundaries for management purposes.

MAJOR CONSIDERATIONS TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT

PHYSICAL CONSIDERATIONS

Efforts toward defining Florida's coastal zone took into
account the following major physical considerations described
in the CZMA (Section 304(a) and accompanying guidelines
(Section 923.11.)

1. The zone should extend inland to the extent necessary to
control shorelands, the uses of which have direct and
significant impacts on coastal waters.
2. The area included should not be so extensive that a fair
application of the management program becomes difficult
or capricious, or so limited that lands strongly influenced
by coastal waters and over which the management program
should reasonably apply, are excluded.
3. At a minimum, the coastal zone must include transitional
and intertidal areas, salt marshes, wetlands and beaches.
However, the coastal zone should not be restricted to only
those areas.
4. The seaward boundary must extend to the outer limit of
the United States territorial sea.
5. The process for identifying the boundary must be uniformly
applied throughout the state.
6. The process utilized must permit identification of the
boundary in a reasonable period of time.

ADMINISTRATIVE CONSIDERATIONS

In addition to the physical considerations, the following
administrative factors were taken into account:

1. The area included should, to the extent possible, allow
easy application of clearly defined management processes.
2. Existing regulatory and planning capabilities should be
utilized as much as possible.
3. Provisiorsof the CZMA prohibit utilization of program
planning and implementation funds in areas outside the
coastal zone boundaries.

4. Federal lands not subject to control under the program
must be identified and excluded.
5. The area should be defined in a manner which maximizes
utilization of existing social and environmental data
sources.
6. The management program should include provisions for
understanding and taking into account externalities;
that is, influences adjacent to or inland from coastal
resources having direct and significant impact on the
resources themselves.
7. State programs may utilize an initial boundary for
planning purposes, followed by identification of a
final management boundary(s).
8. Provisions of the management program may be implemented
at either the state, regional, or local levels of govern-
ment, or through administrative arrangements involving
all three levels.

IDENTIFICATION PROCESSES APPLIED

With the major physical and administrative considerations
in mind, the following specific processes were applied toward
identifying the planning boundaries:

(1) identification based upon a specific but arbitrary
distance inland (1000 feet, one mile, five miles,
etc.).
(2) Identification based upon physical features or
conditions (old shorelines, hurricane flood zone,
10 foot contour, saltwater/freshwater interface,
etc.).
(3) Identification through application of political
jurisdictions (county lines, city limits, special
districts, etc.) and
(4) Identification based upon a combination of physical
and socio-economic factors.

While processes 1, 2, and 3 proved unworkable for defining
the planning boundaries on a statewide basis, process number
4 (combination of physical and socio-economic factors) proved
very satisfactory.

RATIONALE

Th~! CZMA (Sections 302 and 303) is clear in its intent that
decisions relating to coastal resource management take into
account the increasing and competing demands on those resources.
To help bridge the gap between existing socio-economic data
sources and resource data to be generated under the state coastal
management program, it was decided to attempt identification of

the planning boundary based upon a combination of socio-economic
and physical factors. This method basically involved utilization
of inland boundaries of selected census enumeration districts
which most closely matched and specifically included coastal
resource areas needing treatment as part of the coastal manage-
ment program.

Using this process, coastal zone boundaries for initial
planning purposes were delineated for each of the 38 counties
involved. A variety of studies were then conducted within
this area to gain a basic understanding of factors crucial
to rational management of Florida's coastal resources. As
a result of these studies and input from local interests,
the initial planning boundaries were realigned slightly
(enlarged) in three counties (Putnam, Manatee, and Collier).

PROPOSED BOUNDARIES FOR MANAGEMENT PURPOSES

As mentioned previously, administrative feasibility should
be a major consideration in defining the management boundaries.
In view of federal administrative requirements, as well as
findings of completed studies, the boundaries used for planning
purposes are also the proposed management boundaries.

It is anticipated that the proposed boundaries will meet
the requirements of Section 923.11 of the federal guidelines.
However, due to the complexity of social and environmental
problems within urban areas, it is proposed that the inland
boundaries within such areas be reanalyzed as part of the
ongoing management program, with possible changes to be made
as justified by detailed study and public input.

REGIONAL APPROAC1,1

A basic problem to be recognized in establishing comprehen-
sive coastal management in Florida is the sheer magnitude of
the task. Florida's coastal zone involves 38 counties, 228
incorporated municipalities, 11 planning regions, at least 20
special districts, and approximately 11,000 miles of shoreline.
The diverse physical and social characteristics of this immense
area require that coastal management be conducted, to the extent
possible, from a regional perspective. For this reason, it is
proposed that the coastal zone for management purposes be sub-
divided into eleven regions with lateral boundaries correspond-
ing to those of existing planning regions.

SEAWARD BOUNDARY

Section 304(a) of CZMA defines the seaward coastal zone
boundary as being the outer limit of the United States terri-
torial sea (three nautical miles). While this definition is
consistent with Florida's territorial sea on the Atlantic
Coast, the Florida Constitution establishes the state's terri-
torial sea in the Gulf of Mexico as being three marine leagues

(10.35 statute miles). In addition, state legislative authori-
ties regarding natural resource management generally extend to
the limits of the state territorial sea. Under the coastal
management program the state will, consistent with CZMA intent
(Section 302(h)), continue to exercise its full authority over
the entire extent of the state territorial sea.

INLAND MANAGEMENT (ADMINISTRATIVE) BOUNDARIES

The proposed inland boundaries reflect recognition that
management of Florida's coastal resources must involve a combi-
nation of the three basic management techniques permitted by
CZMA.' In this regard, the term "management" must not be con-
fused with the more narrow term "regulatory." Program provi-
sions within the management or administrative boundary will
include a combination of governmental leadership, financial
incentives, as well as regulatory actions (Fi'gure 1).

The proposed inland boundaries also reflect a concern for
lack of coordination of federal/state/local efforts and encom-
pass that area along our shores where existing planning and
management authorities will be focused and coordinated to
achieve maximum administrative efficiency. It is proposed
that any local general purpose unit of government lying in
part or whole within this boundary be elegihle for participa-
tion in the state coastal management program, with priority
to be given to non-urban areas. Such participation will be
designed to provide financial and technical assistance to help
assure consistency between state and local plans and programs.

DELINEATION OF RESPONSIBILITIES

Study has shown that most of the necessary state resource
management authorities are already in place and functioning.
The proposed coastal zone is divided into two tiers reflecting
existing division of responsibility (Figures 2 and 3).

Tier 1 - that portion of the coastal zone subject to
direct state control except for specified
exemptions (submerged lands, tidal wetlands,
open beach areas, etc.).

Tier 2 - that portion of the coastal zone subject almost
entirely to local control except for specified
activities and geographic areas.

Tier 1

State Level Responsibilities

Withifi Tier 1, the state decision making and regulatory role
would basically remain the same as previous to plan adoption,
with the primary change being in the manner that resource manage-
ment decisions are made. After plan adoption, such decisions
must formally involve a broader range of factors and be in accord
with agreed upon goals, objectives, and criteria of the plan.

Figure 1

PROPOSED

COASTAL MANAGEMENT

BOUNDARIES

* ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~w

INLAND COASTAL ZONE BOUNDARY

--PLANNING REGION BOUNDARY

STATE TERRITORIAL SEA
NOTE: See Appendix D
47 for excluded federal lands

Figure 2

OPEN GULF & ATLANTIC BEACII SIIORELINES
FLORIDA COASTAL MANAGCEMENT ESPONSIDILITIES

Tier 2 Tier I o
Local Control {except Direct State Control
for specified actlv- (except for specified
itiea/geographio areas exemptions)

8 F~ Uplands ean

JI'1 T . .~,~a~.. IHigh
Inland Water
Coastal Zone
Management
(Administrative)
Boundary Construction
Setback Territorial Sea
~~Line I ~(M.L.W. to 3
BoundaryLine Nautical miles)
* All conatruction seaward of the coastal
construction setback line ( 50 feet
inland froin M.1..W. unless otherwise
D eoatablished through consideration of
natural beach processes) is regulated State Lands r -, *,
under Ch. 161 F.B.

Beach & Bhore Preservation Act

Dredge 6 Fill Rule

b ~ 7rc~tmcnt.racijiut-x-A,2.i. .,re:ate-<inf c

*X-t X3~------------t~ -----: ~ 4......~~---- fApplicable
.2 W~~on -on4r'$.-jl e olto oState
Authorities

r:..;[;;; i a A e;-,',"'ia,%-.-- - -- i--. - -,,- ;::h.u; :c '''
....`v:a::~.~x~` :..`~ :.:.i..`.`.:.......~ater neso rceC

...,...-,...... -, . . -.- , . .c .-,.tc ,,...-...
w[-:....kv ,,.,.,b,.............,:, .X....L,,.:....:.,... .. . .... .

Extent of Applicability

Figure 3

SHORELINES OTIIER TIAN OPEN GULF & ATLANTIC JEACIIES
FLORIDA COASTAL MANAGEMENT RESPONSIBILITrIES

Tier 2 I Tier 1
Local Control (except Direct tntae Control
for specified activ- (except for specified.
ities/geographic areas exemptions)
Inland
Coastal Zone
Management
(Administrative) Territorial Sea
Meanr eM.LrW. to 3
Bounayplands Nautical miles)

Most lakes , lligh

t* TransItion Zone ater
(50 ft. inland - I-____
from "submerged Lands a
vegetation" or defined
)h distance to Ch. 17-4
upland, whichever F.A.C
is greater)
** Dredge & Fill activities occurring in
area from the transition zone seaward
to be regulated under Ch. 403 P.8.,
Ch. 253 F.S., and Ch. 17-4 F.A.C.
-wSWS:8 ::;. ~.-l~.,: State Lands ti -:

.ja..;�.R���i�.� ___ 4'.._""A --~~l~yA .t.*� 'A" V DApplicable
r . '.& .t.,.~. ">.tji & ,aer 6PFilluto ..c.cit. _ ____ X'(

M .1_.gftWA.**V*t.>E*. . .;t.!, ey[8rAn Sthe t
,>~'k -.Extnt -fr- 3 Applicabile

*11t -. @~ ...t$X.ii -......... ..... . . ... g.,.%.

=o~~~~~~ ~~Extent of Applicability

Among other things, the following major activities would specif-
ically be subject to direct state regulation in Tier 1.

1. All activities related to oil and mineral exploration
and production in the state territorial sea.
2. Dredging, filling, or other construction below the
line of mean high water.
3. All construction on Gulf and Atlantic beaches seaward
of the coastal construction setback line.
4. Construction activities involving tidal wetlands or
wetlands bordering streams, lakes and drainage
corridors.
5. All activities that may potentially degrade waters of
the state.

State special use areas such as state parks, forests, refuges,
etc. will continue to be managed by the state.

Local Responsibilities

Local government responsibilities in Tier 1 would remain
the same as previous to plan adoption, except that more formal
recognition of legitimate state interests would be required.
Specifically, all planning, zoning, land use, and subdivision
decisions would remain as they now are, at the local level.
However, local plans and programs would need to recognize and
be consistent with state plans and programs as they relate to
long-term resource management.

Tier 2

Local Responsibilities

As previously stated, Tier 2 is and will continue to be
subject almost entirely to local control except for activities
and geographic areas specified by law as being of state respon-
sibility. The major difference will be that state financial
and technical assistance will be provided to local government
to help assure that local plans and programs recognize and, to
the extent practicable, achieve consistency with state and
federal resource management policies and programs.

State Responsibilities

Within Tier 2, state management responsibilities will remain
restricted to control of specified activities/geographic areas
(sewage treatment plants, septic tanks, state-owned lands, areas
of critical state concern, etc.), conducting further resource
analysis studies, providing technical and financial assistance
to local planning and management efforts, analysis of key facil-
ities siting (DRIs) , and assuring consistency of governmental
activities with adopted state policies, goals, and objectives.

Excluded Federal Lands

The CZMA is clear in its intent that federal activities in
the coastal zone be consistent with state efforts. However, the
exclusionary clause to CZMA Section 304(a) excludes all lands
owned by the United States from the definition of the coastal
zone. Accordingly, the state coastal management plan excludes
all federally owned lands from state regulation, except as may
be provided by special agreement. However., in order to prevent
unnecessary state/federal conflicts, activities on federal lands
that may potentially impact on adjacent resources subject to
state control will receive state review and comment through the
State Clearinghouse and as provided for by O.M.B. Circular A-95,
as amended. In addition, other formal state/federal coordina-
tion procedures will be utilized.

Major federal landholdings in the coastal zone have been
identified (see Appendix D, Figures 4, 5 and 6) and a complete
inventory will be conducted as part of the ongoing state coastal
management program.

NOTE: Refer to Appendix D for additional details of boundary
recommendations.

CHAPTER V

PERMISSIBLE AND PRIORITY USES

IN THE COASTAL ZONE: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

INTRODUCT ION

The CZMA (Section 305 (b) (2)) requires that state management
programs include "a definition of what shall constitute permissible
land and water uses within the coastal zone which have a direct
and significant impact on coastal waters." In determining permis-
sible uses, states should give consideration to "requirements for
industry, commerce, residential development, recreation, extraction
of mineral resources and fossil fuels, transportation and navigation,
waste disposal, and harvesting of fish, shellfish, and other living
marine resources." Thus, the Act is clear in its intent that state
coastal management programs utilize a balanced-use philosophy toward
defining permissible uses. Hence, permissible uses in the coastal
zone may very well result in some direct and significant impact on
coastal resources. However, the crux of this aspect of the program
is to assure that such impacts are recognized and clearly understood
prior to making irretrievable resource related comnmittments.

Federal guidelines (Section 920.12) recommend that in meeting
this requirement the following general types of study and evaluation
should be undertaken:

(a) Determining criteria and measures to assess the
impact of existing, projected or proposed uses
or classes of uses on the identified coastal
environments;

(b) Categorizing the nature, location, scope, and
conflicts of current and anticipated coastal
land and water use or classes of uses;

Cc) A continuing compilation, verification, and
assessment of general characteristics, values,
and interrelationships within coastal land
and water environments.

The CZMA requirements for defining permissible uses are closely
related to the requirements for designating priority uses (Section
305(b) (5)), designating geographic areas of particular concern
(Section 305(b) (3)), as well as several other major components.
To meet the intent of CZMA, the state management program must
closely coordinate provisions for; 1) impact assessment proce-
dures, 2) priority uses, 3) geographic areas of particular concern,
4) definition of permissible uses, and 5) goals, objectives and
policies of the coastal management program.

APPROACH TO MEETING CZMA REQUIREMENTS

In attempting to meet requirements of CZMA, a variety of
studies following the general thrust of guidelines Section
920.12(a), (b), and Cc) have been conducted (see Table I of Appendix
C). These studies have provided a sound basis for establishing

objectives and policies as well as impact assessment procedures,
permissible uses and priority uses.

PERMISSIBLE USE CONCEPT

The concept of permissible uses under the CZMA is not the
s~ame as that of permitted uses in the traditional zoning ordinance.
Rather than being automatically allowed in a given area as would
be the case with the permitted use schedule of zoning regulations,
permissible uses in the coastal zone management program encompass
both land and water use activities which have been determined to
potentially have "direct and significant impact on coastal waters."
This identified impact places them under the purview of the manage-
ment program, and while a use may be "permissibld' under certain
circumstances, it will not be a permitted use if in violation of
management criteria.

APPROACHES TO ESTABLISHING PERMISSIBLE USES

There are two basic approaches to establishing permissible
uses within the state's coastal management program; however, each
can be applied in several ways. First, permissible uses can be
established by reference to recognized performance standards
which must be met by development activities, thus only indirectly
specifying the permissible uses. Second, permissible uses can be
listed specifically by type.

While both approaches have favorable as well as unfavorable
aspects (explained fully in Appendix F), the performance standards
approach is considered most appropriate for Florida's management
program.

There are at least three ways that this approach can take
place: 1) application of performance standards to the entire
coastal zone, 2) application to specific geographic areas, and
3) application to types of resource units.

The Florida coastal zone planning effort is using the resource
unit approach and has established a resource unit classification
system based on a number of variables, including cultural as well
as physical characteristics. It contains recommended land and
water use guidelines based on intrinsic capabilities of resource
units to support development activities. The three types of
resource units identified in the Florida system are Preservation,
Conservation and Development.

Because of its utility for understanding coastal zone
interrelationships, the resource unit classification system has
been utilized as the basis for drafting overall policies for
the coastal zone (Appendix C) and is proposed to be used as
the basis for impact assessment and defining permissible and
priority uses (see Appendix E and F for details).

IMPACT ASSESSMENT PROCESS

The impact assessment process being developed for use under
the state coastal management program views the environment in
the broadest terms, with impacts upon socio-economic, biophysical,
and cultural factors being systematically included. in t~his
regard, several important factors should be empahsized.
54

1. It must be remembered that a project can have both
beneficial and adverse impacts, and an objective
assessment should identify both types.

2. Impacts must be viewed in terms of existing site
conditions as Well as scale of development proposals.

3. An effective and meaningful assessment of impacts
must take place within an established framework of
objectives and policies relating to planning, resource
management and development activities. By assessing
impacts within a clearly defined objectives/policy
structure, the potential for uncertainty and arbi-
trary actions is reduced.

4. The National Coastal Zone Management Act requires
states to develop a methodology for assessing "direct
and significant" impacts of coastal zone land and
water uses, thus relating an imract assessment
technique to a framework of "permissible uses" based
upon performance standards established by governmental
units in the state.

Taking these considerations into account, the process being
developed attempts to refine and relate existing assessment mech-
anisms (the D.R.I. process and permitting process of D.E.R.) to
the data base and needs of the coastal management program.

Measures of Impact

A concerted effort has been made to explore ways of reducing
subjectivity and personal bias from the proposed assessment pro-
cedures. This has resulted in identification of 143 potential
measures of positive and negative impact pertaining to 51 impact
categories (Table I and Appendix E, Pages 10-25) . Systematic use
of such measures can aid significantly toward objective decision
making.

Impact Thresholds

The assessment process being developed recognizes the impracti-
cality and undesirability of requiring every proposed use in the
coastal zone to undergo detailed impact assessment. Rather, it
strives to establish a basis for meeting the expressed intent of
CZMA (Section 302(h)) that coastal management programs include
"~unified policies, criteria, standards, methods and processes
for dealing with land and water use decisions of more than local
significance" (Emphasis added). This has resulted in definition
of the following potential "thresholds" for reviewing projects in
the coastal zone:

Local Impacts.... .Projects or uses which create impacts which
are primarily felt by one governmental unit. Review of im-
pact assessment by city or county. Development-scale per-
centage parameters are as follows:

*10-40% of residential DRI threshold
*20...60% of non-residential DRI threshold

Inter-Local Impacts.... .Projects or uses which create impacts
55

Table 1

GENERAL & SPECIFIC IMPACT CATEGORIES

I. PRIVATE ECONOMIC SECTOR VI. HOUSING

1. Employment 32. Inventory & Quality
2. Income 33. Value
3. Trade 34. Availability
4. Agricultural, Forestry
and Fisheries VII. BIO-PHY$ICAL ENVIRONMENT
Resources
5. Manufacturing 35. Air Quality
6. Housing Market 36. Water Quality
7. Tourism 37. Physiography & Geology
38. Wetlands
II. DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS 39. Upland Vegetation &
Wildlife
8. Populations Size & Growth 40. Marine & Estuarine
Rate Resources
9. Age-Sex Characteristics 41. Flood Plains
10. Labor Force 42. Natural Hazard Areas
11. Seasonal Residents 43. Noise
12. Educational Level
VIII. AESTHETIC & CULTURAL FACTORS
III. TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM
44. Historical Landmarks
17. Streets and Highways 45. Archaeological Sites
18. Mass Transportation 46. Scenic Natural Areas
19. Air and Rail 47. Views & Vistas
20. Water Borne
21. Parking IX. PUBLIC FINANCE

V. PUBLIC FACILITIES & SERVICES 48. Public Fiscal Balance
49. Ad Valorem Tax Yield
22. Wastewater Management 50. Public Capital Costs
23. Water Supply 51. Intergovernmental
24. Solid Waste Transfers
25. Surface Drainage System
26. Education
27. Recreation
28. Health Care
29. Fire
30. Police
31. Energy Supply

which are primarily felt by two or more governing bodies
within the same county. Review of impact assessment by
county and regional planning agency. Development-scale
parameters are as follows:

*41-99% of residential DRI threshold
*61...99% of non-residential DRI threshold

Regional Impacts.... .Projects or uses which create impacts
primarily felt by more than one county. Review of impact
assessment by regional planning agency and state. Develop-
ment-scale parameters correspond with those specified by
DRI rules.

Some examples of the types of projects *which should be subjected
to impact assessments (at some level of government) are:

1. Any project that is likely to be highly controversial on
environmental grounds,

2. A proposal that will lead to a noticeable change in the
surrounding noise level for a substantial number of people,

3. Development actions that will have a significant aesthetic
or visual effect,

4. Projects that will have any effect on areas of unique
interest or scenic beauty,

5. Actions that will enhance or detract from important
recreational areas,

6. Proposals that will substantially alter the pattern
of behavior for an animal species (such as barriers to
migration),

7. Actions that will interfere with or protect important
breeding, nesting, or feeding grounds,

B. Activities that will lead to significantly increased
or reduced air or water pollution in a given area
(assessment of impacts of projects with anticipated
beneficial impacts as well as those with anticipated
adverse impacts will help establish "equal application
of the law"),

9. Proposed developments that will either positively or
adversely affect the water table of an area,

10. Projects that will disturb the ecological balance of
a land or water area through removal of indigenous
species or introduction of exotic species,

II. Projects that will involve a reasonable possibility of
contamination of a public water supply source, treatment
facility, or distribution system,

12. Projects that will bring about marked changes in local
population, economic, and social characteristics, and

13. Projects that will markedly change the demand for or
capacity to provide public services and/or facilities.

Levels of Review

Since the complexity and type of impact assessment will be sharply
affected by a number of factors including type of use, location, scale
of development, anticipated impacts, etc., the strictness of review
will vary from project to project. Futhermore, it is highly probable
that large and complex development pro~3osals will require differing
levels of impact assessment for portions falling into or affecting
environmentally fragile or other areas having particular conditions.
The level of review should be firmly established prior to preparation
of the impact assessment.

Assignment of review levels is an extremely important step in
the impact assessment and review process. It is at'this point that
many crucial agreements are made between the developer and those
agencies responsible for review and decision making. These agree-
ments will set the ground-rules for numerous future actions in the
assessment and decision-making pr~ocess.

The existence of official qbjectives and policies dealing with
planning, development and resource management (Appendix C) will be
of primary importance when establishing review levels. Impacts must
be measured against some benchmark if objectivity and consistency are
to be maintained; therefore, the official status of public policies
will provide a clear basis for preliminary examination of a proposed
project within established decision-making guidelines. The relation-
ship of the proposed use to -the posture of adopted plans, objectives,
and policies will heavily influence the review levels that are
assigned to the 'impact assessment.

As a guide, the'-following preliminary levels of review are
defined:
Level I.... .This level would apply to any proposal presumably
meeting performance criteria established by regulatory and
planning agencies and considered basically acceptable. The
impact assessment will still be a requirement, but since an
initial determination that positive impacts outweigh nega-
tive consequences, the amount of necessary detail can be
significantly reduced on the basis of agency evaluation at
a pre-application conference with the developer. Although
there is a presumption of acceptability by the review
agencies, the following must be demonstrated:
1) that all performance standards and planning criteria are
met; and

2) that appropriate steps have been taken to remedy any
shortfalls of public facilities and services that the
project may bring about.

Level II.... .Any proposals receiving a Level II review will be
subjected to an especially thorough scrutiny of the data sub-
58

mitted and of any mitigating actions proposed by the applicant,
because of potential adverse impacts--even though the project
may contribute substantially toward achievement of some impor-
tant objectives and policies. Projects and impact categories
subjected to Level II review are not necessarily viewed as
being in conflict with plans and policies, but considerations
of project scale and anticipated impacts make it highly
advisable to closely examine the consequences of develop-
ment. A detailed justification of the proposed use, location,
development intensity, and design must be included in the
impact assessment.

Level III.... .A Level III review is based on the presumption
that the proposed use is unsuitable within the context of
location, site conditions, public objectives, plans and policies,
etc. Any development proposals being subjected to this level of
review must clearly present compelling reasons as to why the
project is in the public interest. The developers of such
projects will be required to submit extremely detailed impact
assessments, and the probability of providing additional infor-
mation and conferring extensively with review agency staff members
is very high. An applicant will still be at liberty to file for
a development order by the appropriate governmental agency,
challenge the review findings, and appeal an adverse ruling.

Assignment of a Level III review takes place when the pro-
ject or some major aspect of it is in conflict with adopted
plans and policies. The presumption of unsuitability must
be clearly based upon established guidelines for planning,
development and resource management.

In terms of an overall perspective, the Level II review will
probably be assigned in a majority of cases, because the
increasing pressures on fragile coastal zone resources man-
date a close inspection of the potential consequences of many
types of land and water utilization. The other review levels
represent extreme ends of the spectrum, and their application
by review agencies can be generally anticipated in situations
of an unusual nature.

It is not intended that a single review level must be assigned
to all projects. while one classification may be appropriate for
a small use in an area with a high tolerance to development, a
large, complex project may require that different review levels
be applied to various geographic areas and impact categories.
The following kinds of factors should be taken into consideration:

1) Planning and coastal zone management objectives and
policies;

2) Type, intensity, location, and scale of project;

3) Existing conditions on and around site;

4) Irretrievable commitments of coastal resources;

5) Anticipated impacts observed in association with other
similar projects;
59

6) The potential catalytic effects of the project in bringing
about marked changes in one or more components of the
overall environment;

7) Expected interrelationships and trade-of fs related to the
project;

8) Existing public facility and services capacities; and

9) Dependence on a waterfront or coastal zone location for
successful operations.

Based on these definitions of review levels, Table 2 presents
an illustrative display of the levels which may be appropriate for
various land and water uses located in three coastal resource units
delineated in the Florida Regional Coastal Zone Management-Atlas.
This is in no way intended to be a "permissible use" list and is
included for general guidance only.

In conducting impact assessment reviews, the following items
will be emphasized:

1) How the impacts relate to established standards, i.e. air
and water quality regulations, density, traffic and park-
ing, etc.;

2) How the impacts relate to commonly recognized benchmarks
such as median or percapita income, sales per square foot,
age distribution of population, etc.;

3) A clear identification of all direct impacts, whether
adverse, benign or beneficial;

4) A full exploration of the mitigating actions which are
proposed to reduce adverse impacts; and
5) Sufficiency of data to support the findings of the
coastal impact assessment.

PRIORITY USES

A basic requirement of CZMA and accompanying rules and regu-
lations is that the state management program shall include broad
policies or guidelines governing the relative priorities which
will be accorded in particular areas. As a part of the policy
devrelopment process (Appendix C) the following priorities were
developed and are intended to become a formal part of the
impact assessment/permissible use process.

IMMEDIATE SHORELINE USE PRIORITIES (in order of priority)

1) Water dependent activities such as recreation, ports, and
water dependent industry, marinas, certain military acti-
vities, navigation, fish and wildlife production, etc.

2) Water related or enhanced activities such as certain
utilities, water related commerce, water enhanced
recreation, water related industry, etc.
60

Table 2

POTENTIAL REVIEW LEVELS FOR COASTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENTS

LAND/WATER COASTAL RESOURCE UNIT
USE ACTIVITY PRESERVATION CONSERVATION PRIME AG.
& DEVELOPMENT

1. Military Facilities II or III II II
2. Ports III II or III II
3. Marinas II or III II I
4. Highways III II I
5. Airports III II or III II
6. Railway Lines II or III I or II I
7. Sewage Treatment
Plants III II I
8. Sanitary Landfills III II or III II
9. Shopping Centers III II or III I
10. Resorts/Motels III II I
11. Recreation Areas I or II I I
12. Low-density Housing III I or II I
13. Docks and Pierc III II II
14. Dredging & Filling III II or III I or II
15. Agriculture I or II I or II I
16. Forestry I or II I or II I
17. Aquaculture I I II
18. Electrical Generating
Plants II or III II II or III
19. Power Transmission
Lines II I I or II
20. Petroleum Storage
and Refining III II or III II
21. Hospitals III II I
22. Mining Operations III II or III III
23. Office Parks III II I
24. Schools III I I
25. Industrial Parks III II or III I
26. Bulkheads and
Seawalls III II or III I

NOTE: Different review levels can be assigned to projects on the
basis of factors such as water dependency, site and location
conditions, and other factors such as those cited above.
Multiple review levels can be assigned to a single project
according to both geographic areas and impact categories.

3) Non-water dependent or related activities such as
intensive urban residential, non-water dependent
or related industry and commerce, etc.

4) Of lowest priority are those uses which are non-water
dependent, non-water enhanced, and which would result in
irretrievable cornmittment of coastal resources.

PRIORITY USES FOR COASTAL RESOURCE AREAS (See definitions, discussions,
and suggested policies in Appendix C)

Preservation Areas

Subcategory Priority Use

Class I Waters - Public Water Supplies

Class II Waters - Shellfish Harvesting and propagation
of marine life.

Marine Grass Beds - Propagation of sport and commercial
fisheries; Waterfowl and wading
bird food production.

Selected Coastal Marshes - Propagation of marine life; Hurricane
buffer and shoreline stabili~zation;
Aesthetics; Waterfowl and wading
bird habitat.

Selected Coastal Mangroves - Propagation of marine life; Hurricane
buffer and shoreline stabilization;
Aesthetics; Propagation of bird life.

Gulf and Atlantic Beaches
and Dunes - Buffer areas; Recreation; Aesthetics.

Estuarine Beaches - Shoreline buffer areas; Recreation;
Aesthetics.

Wilderness Areas - Protection of biophysical environment;
Aesthetics; Scientific research;
Recreation; Fish and wildlife habitat.

Selected Freshwater Swamps
and Marshes - Open space; Wildlife habitat; Fresh-
water retention; Possible water
recharge; Water quality functions.

Historical and Archaeological
Sites - Cultural uses; Aesthetics; Recreation

Other Unique Environmental
Features - Environmental protection; Aesthetics;
Recreation.

Conservation Areas

Class III Waters - Fish and wildlife propagation
and management; Water contact
sports; Recreation.

Aquatic Preserves - Recreation; Research and education;
Aesthetics; Maintenance of marine
productivity; Propagation of
wildlife.

Aquaculture Lease's -Commercial cultivation of animal
and/or plant life.

Spoil Islands -Aesthetics; Bird and wildlife
habitat; Recreation

Hurricane Flood Zone -Uses which require waterfront
locations; Uses that will not
necessarily jeopardize human
life or economic welfare.

River Flood Plains -Uses which require waterfront
locations; Timber management;
Greenbelts; Recreation; Wildlife
habitat.

Forestry and Game Management
Areas -Timber production; Recreational
hunting.

Parks and Recreation Areas -Wildlife habitat; Recreation,
not including hunting.

Marginal Lands -Recreation; Greenbelts/open space;
Timber production; Extensive
agriculture/grazing if these
activities do not require draining
or pumping.

Prime Agriculture and Development Areas

Class IV Waters - Agricultural and industrial water
supply.
Class V Waters - Navigation, utility and industrial
use.

Presently Developed Lands
Non-Conflict - Development, according to local
desires and needs, utilizing
environmental safeguards.

Presently Developed Lands
Conflict -Uses which recognize and
effectively neutralize associated.
conflicts with biophysical
conditions.
63

Undeveloped Lands Suitable For
Intensive Development - Development according to local
desires and needs, utilizing en-
vironmental safeguards.

Undeveloped Lands Suitable For
Development if Protected
:from Flooding - Uses which require waterfront
locations; Public recreation;
Uses that will not unnecessarily
jeopardize human life or economic
welfare.

Prime Agricultural Lands - Agricultural uses.

Prime Agricultural Lands With
Other Potential Suitabi-
lities - Agricultural uses; Development
according to local desires and
needs, utilizing environmental
safeguards.

ADMINISTRATIVE CONSIDERATIONS

In order to meet federal requirements for approval (CZMA
Section 305(b) (4) and 306(c) (7), and Rules and Regulations Section
923.21 and 923.22), the proposed state coastal management program must
demonstrate that the state is capable of actually implementing the
objectives, policies and individual components of the management
programs. This must include "a description of the organizational
structure proposed to implement the management program, including
the responsibilities and interrelationships of local, areawide,
regional, and interstate agencies in the management process." The
responsibilities for assessing impacts and defining permissible
and priority uses must obviously be included in this description.

The following administrative considerations must be taken into
account in establishing the various review responsibilities:

1) In all cases, the process should be initiated with the
appropriate local governing body having jurisdiction
over the site of the proposed project;

2) Procedures for evaluating projects with local impact can
be incorporated into the city or county zoning ordinance;

3) Coastal impact assessments for projects exceeding the
DRI threshold can be reviewed under the rules adopted for
the Environmental Land and Water Management Act;

4) Procedures for projects having inter-local impacts can
be established by formal inter-local agreements among
the municipalities and counties in the planning region,
with the regional planning agency playing an integral
role in this process;

5) The procedures should make provisions for incorporating
state and federal regulations which have a direct influ-
ence on coastal zone development proposals.
64

6) Procedures for projects at every threshold should incor-
porate a close relationship with both statewide coastal
zone management policies and local planning guidelines;

7) A clear definition of the powers and responsibilities of
each governing body and review agency should be incor-
porated into the process, especially if the governing
body having jurisdiction over the site of the proposed
use wishes to retain authority in establishing review
levels;

8) Both administrative and judicial remedies should be spelled
out in the necessary appeals procedure; and

9) A reasonable time frame for the review process should be
established.

While much has been done in Florida, there remain numerous tasks
that must be accomplished prior to establishment of definitive
administrative procedures regarding land and water uses in the
coastal zone. Among them are the following (not necessarily in
order):

1) The policy framework for the coastal management program
must be adopted, thus filling the major void in the
essential foundation for analysis.

2) The state must adopt administrative rules regarding impact
assessment procedures, permissible uses, and priority uses
under the coastal management program. This should include:

a) Coordination of air and water quality regulations
with the coastal management program;

b) Expansion of D.R.I. impact assessment requirements
to encompass those activities falling within the
coastal management program, and

c) Development of procedures for establishing the levels
of review that will be needed to adequately assess
impacts of proposed activities.

Even though the administrative procedures which will be required
to operationalize the coastal impact assessment system have not been
defined, the following scenario indicates the general steps that could
be anticipated:

1) Developer conceives project idea and reviews it within the
context of local planning and zoning requirements, and
coastal zone management criteria.

2) Developer and local planning agency undertake a pre-application
conference regarding preliminary plans and development
specifications. Items covered in this step are:

a) impact threshold applicable to project

b) permissible use framework

c) geographic areas of particular concern

d) priority uses

e) location and site constraints and opportunities

f) appropriate review level

3) Developer prepares plans, studies, impact assessment, etc.
in preparation for application for a development order.

4) Developer applies for development order from appropriate
local government unit.

5) Official review procedure is initiated for project at
"local", "inter-local" or DRI threshold. This can
involve a number of meetings, hearings, requests for
and submission of additional information, design modi-
fications, commitments for permits, etc.

6) Submission of report by reviewing agencies to decision-
making body.

7) Decision by appropriate governmental unit.

8) Appeal, if appropriate.

FUTURE WORK TASKS

As a formal part of the 1976-77 work program, the Bureau of
Coastal Zone Plann-ing, Division of State Planning, Office of the
Attorney General, Department of Environmental Regulation, as well
as regional planning councils will work closely to determine speci-
fic modifications to existing rules and regulations or legislation
needed to operationalize procedures meeting the requirements of
C ZMA.

NOTE: Much of the material included in this chapter was taken from
the Impact Assessment Handbook (Appendix E) and A Process
for Defining a Permissible Use Framework (Appendix F)
prepared by the Planning/Design Group under a contract with
the Department of Natural Resources.

CHAPTER VI

GEOGRAPHIC AREAS OF PARTICULAR CONCERN: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

INTRODUCT ION

The federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 (CZMA)
requires that a state's coastal zone management program include
I"an inventory and designation of areas of particular concern
within the coastal zone." The Act also specifies that prior to
receiving approval of its CZM program, the state's management
program must make provision for procedures whereby specific
areas may be designated for the purpose of preserving or restor-
ing them for their conservation, recreational, ecological, or
aesthetic values. The basic purpose for inventorying and
designating areas of particular concern (GAPC's) is to demon-
strate that certain geographic areas of statewide concern will
be subject to special consideration under the purview of the
coastal management program.

FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS

In designating GAPC's, CZMA rules and regulation require
the state to at least consider certain types of areas upon a
review of coastal resources and state-established criteria.
These include:

1. "Areas of unique, scarce, fragile or vulnerable natural
habitat, physical feature, historical significance, cul-
tural value and scenic importance;
2. Areas of high natural productivity or essential habitat
for living resources, including fish, wildlife and the
various trophic levels in the food web critical to t~heir
well-being;
3. Areas of substantial recreational value and/or opportunity;
4. Areas where developments and facilities are dependent upon
the utilization of, or access to, coastal waters;
5. Areas of unique geologic or topographic significance to
industrial or commercial development;
6. Areas of urban concentration where shoreline utilization
and water uses are highly competitive;
7. Areas of significant hazard if developed, due to storms,
slides, flood erosion, settlement, etc.; and
8. Areas needed to protect, maintain or replenish coastal
lands or resources, including coastal flood plains, aquifer
recharge areas, sand dunes, coral and other reefs, beaches,
offshore sand deposits and mangrove stands."

In addition to considering the above types of areas, the
state must, prior to program approval, demonstrate that it has
developed and implemented policies or actions to address the
concerns expressed for each area.

APPROACH TAKEN

The proposed approach to meeting the federal requirements
essentially involves utilization of several existing state pro-
grams which have identified areas of particular state interest
where special management measures are applied. The five major
state programs which provide for the designation and management
of GAPC's within Florida's coastal zone area:

1. Aquatic Preserves Program
2. State Wilderness System Program
3. Environmentally Endangered Lands Program
4. Areas of Critical State Concern Program, and
5. Coastal Construction Setback Line Program.

The full report (Appendix G) explains each of the five pro-
grams in detail, with emphasis on (1) the type of state concern
involved, (2) selection criteria, (3) selection process,
(4) description of individual areas and (5) priorities regard-
ing those GAPC's designated for preservation and restoration
(ARP's).

Existing GAPC' s in the coastal zone are shown in generalized
form Figure 1 and are listed in Table 2. In addition, aquatic
preserves, state wilderness areas, and beach areas are mapped in
detail in the Florida Regional Coastal Zone Management Atlas.

SELECTION PROCESS

In accordance with provisions of CZMA and accompanying
guidelines, the several state programs have formal procedures
for selection and designation. These procedures are shown in
schematic form in Figures 2 through 8 and are discussed in
detail in the full report (Appendix G).

MANAGEMENT OF GAPC's
UNDER THE COASTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

Florida's existing GAPC's are being managed under guide-
lines outlined in their respective state program legislation.
For example, the 30 aquatic preserves in Florida's coastal zone
are essentially GAPC's, managed under the provisions of the
Aquatic Preserve Act (Chapter 258.35 - 258.46, F.S.). Table I
lists all of the major state GAPC programs, and their legisla-
tive basis. Under each of these state programs, additional
GAPC's can be designated.

Appendix G discusses in detail the management of GAPC's.
In addition to suimmary discussions of each program, copies of
the full text of program legislation are included. While the
total package of authorities is impressive and provides a solid
foundation for management of specific areas of the coastal zone,
there are deficiencies that must be addressed prior to sub-
mission of the final coastal management program for federal
approval.

Table 1
MAJOR STATE GAPC PROGRAMS

Number of Areas Legislative
Within the CZ Program Basis

30 Aquatic Preserve Program Ch. 258.35-258.46,F.S.

5 Wilderness System Program Ch. 258.17-258.33,F.S.

5 Environmentally Endangered Ch. 258, F.S.
Lands Program

2 Areas of Critical State Ch. 380, F.S.
Concern

Sandy ocean & Coastal Construction Set- Ch. 161, F.S.
Gulf-fronting back Line Program
beach areas
in 25 counties
(including 11
APR's).

As is the case with most of Florida's management authorities,
the GAPC authorities existed prior to passage of the CZMA and
promulgation of federal rules and regulations. Hence, not one
of the existing state authorities makes reference to the broader
objectives of coastal management or has formal mechanisms for
coordination with the coastal management program. While establish-
ment of such formal mechanisms might appear to be a simple task,
in practice it will be auite involved. Such mechanisms must
assure that state concerns regarding the designated areas
are taken into account by decision makers at both the state
and local levels of government. This will require changes in
existing state/local planning and permitting processes to
assure that permitting functions are carried out in accord with
the goals and objectives expressed for the GAPC's. These formal
mechanisms must be in place and ready to function before the
state can receive implementation funds under Section 306 of
the CZMA. Proposed coordination mechanisms will be a formal
part of the "Organization and Authorities" chapter of the
final plan.

;.-30

FIGURE I ~P

GEOGRAPHIC AREAS OF~ PARTICULAR CONCERNPR0

*\~~~ ~~ I - ~~AP-24

AP- ~~~~~~~I 'R \

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~AP-Z

~~~~~~R-Z~~~~~~~~~~~~A soR a

V -- ~~~~~PR-5

a~~~~~~~~~ ~~~ AP PU PR-3

AP29xI 3 '

AP- ~~~~~~~~~~I 19
W- s-.--P-

AP-1 AY-2 5 '~~~~~~~~~Z-

AP-5~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~P

LEGEND AP17

AQUATIC PRESERVES (AP) COUNTIES WITH BEACHES SUBJECT

a WiLDERNESS AREAS (WA) T EBC IE

* ENVIRONMENTALLY ENDANGERED LANDS (EL) U AREAS FOR PRESERVATION AND
RESTORATION (PR)
AREAS OF CRITICAL STATE CONCERN (CA)

- COASTAL ZONE -BOUNDARY
70

Table 2

REFERENCE MAP KEY

Geographic Areas of Particular Concern

Aquatic Preserves

Reference
Code GAPC

AP-1 Fort Pickens State Park Aquatic Preserve
AP-2 Yellow River Marsh Aquatic Preserve
AP-3 Rocky Bayou State Park Aquatic Preserve
AP-4 St. Andrews State Park Aquatic Preserve
AP-5 St. Joseph Bay Aquatic Preserve
AP-6 Apalachicola Bay Aquatic Preserve
AP-7 Alligator Harbor Aquatic Preserve
AP-8 St. Martins Marsh Aquatic Preserve
AP-9 Pinellas County Aquatic Preserve
AP-10 Cockroach Bay Aquatic Preserve
AP-11 Cape Haze (Gasparilla Sound) Aquatic Preserve
AP-12 Matlacha Pass Aquatic Preserve
AP-13 Pine Island Sound Aquatic Preserve
AP-14 Estero Bay Aquatic Preserve
AP-15 Rookery Bay Aquatic Preserve
AP-16 Cape Romano - Ten Thousand Islands
Aquatic Preserve
AP-17 Coupon Bight Aquatic Preserve
AP-18 Lignumvitae Key Aquatic Preserve
AP-19 Biscayne Bay Aquatic Preserve
AP-20 Loxahatchee River - Lake Worth Creek
Aquatic Preserve
AP-21 Jensen Beach to Jupiter Inlet Aquatic Preserve
AP-22 North Fork, St. Lucie Aquatic Preserve
AP-23 Indian River - Vero Beach to Fort Pierce
Aquatic Preserve
AP-24 Indian River - Malabar to Sebastian
Aquatic Preserve
AP-25 Banana River Aquatic Preserve
AP-26 Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve
AP-27 Tomoka Marsh Aquatic Preserve
AP-28 Pellicer Creek Aquatic Preserve
AP-29 Nassau River - St. Johns River Marshes
Aquatic Preserve
AP-30 The Fort Clinch State Park Aquatic Preserve

Table 2 (Cont'd)

Wilderness Areas

Reference
Code GAPC

WA-1 Audubon Island Wilderness Area
WA-2 Hallman Island Wilderness Area
WA-3 Robert Crown Wilderness Area
WA-4 Town Islands Wilderness Area
WA-5 Turkey Point Wilderness Area

Environmentally Endangered Lands

Reference
Code GAPC

EL-1 Lower Apalachicola River Tracts
EL-2 Weedon Island
EL-3 Cayo Costa, North Captiva Islands
EL-4 Fakahatchee Strand
EL-5 Big Cypress

Areas of Critical State Concern

Reference
Code GAPC

CA-i Big Cypress Area of Critical State Concern
CA-2 The Florida Keys Area of Critical State Concern

Counties With Beaches Subject To Setback Lines

1. Escambia 14. Dade
2. Santa Rosa 15. Broward
3. Okaloosa 16. Palm Beach
4. Walton 17. Martin
5. Bay 18. St. Lucie
6. Gulf 19. Indian River
7. Franklin 20. Brevard
8. Pinellas 21. Volusia
9. Manatee 22. Flagler
10. Sarasota 23. St. Johns
11. Charlotte 24. Duval
12. Lee 25. Nassau
13. Collier

Table 2 (Cont'd)

Areas for Preservation and Restoration

Reference GAPC
Code (APR)

PR-1 Ft. Walton Beach
PR-2 Longboat Key
PR-3 Miami Beach
PR-4 Bal Harbour
PR-5 South Broward
PR-6 Boca Raton
PR-7 Delray Beach
PR-8 Jupiter Inlet
PR-9 Indialantic - Melbourne Beach
PR-10 Cape Canaveral
PR-l11 Jacksonville Beach

NOTE: See Appendix G for a detailed discussion of the material
in this chapter.

CHAPTER VII

PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

one of the requirements of Florida's 1970 coastal planning
legislation was to "provide a clearing service for coastal
zone matters by collecting, processing, and disseminating
pertinent information relating thereto." in response to this
legislative mandate, public information and efforts -to involve
the public in Florida's coastal planning program were initiated
shortly after the coastal planning agency was established. An
expanded public participation program was initiated in 1974
in order to fulfill the extensive public participation require-
ments of the federal coastal zone legislation.

Beginning in November 1970, a monthly newsletter provided
information to the public and other governmental agencies
concerning program activities; activities of other agencies
and interests, both state and local, in Florida's coastal
zone; activities in other states that were attempting to
solve coastal problems; and activities at the federal level
that impacted on coastal zone planning and management. The
first issue of the newsletter encouraged readers to respond
to the material presented and to provide ideas and comments
regarding coastal zone activities. Requesting response from
the readers was continued throughout the life of the news-
letter.

The mailing list for the first newsletter contained fewer
than 300 names. By June 1975, over 3000 persons had asked to
receive this publication on a monthly basis.

Following the 1975 reorganization of environmental agencies,
the newsletter was discontinued and news items concerning the
coastal planning -program were placed in DNR's monthly publica-
tion, the Conservation News.

Using both the newsletter and direct mailings to individuals
and organizations, public input has been requested on a number
of specific subjects. These include: a fall 1971 request for
suggestions regarding estuarine areas sui~table for nomination
as estuarine sanctuaries; a July 1972 request for suggested
"1unique environmental features" to be included on the preserva-
tion maps; an August 1973 questionnaire sent to over 500
citizens of Monroe county regarding coastal zone problems in the
Keys; a February 1975 request for comments and suggestions
regarding a policy for residential canals; and a spring 1975
request for a response to the nomination of Rookery Bay as an
estuarine sanctuary. Excellent response was received on all of
these requests.

In the fall of 1971, presentations on the planning meth-
odology to interested groups of citizens and public officials
were begun. Each presentation emphasized the point that sug-
gestions and recommendations would be welcome and would be
considered in the development of the coastal management plan.
The number of such presentations increased each year, and
approximately 50 were made during 1975 and 1976.

over 25 publications have been issued in the past six
years. (Chapter XII lists these publications and the present
status of their availability). These publications, with the
exception of the 1972 Florida Coastal Zone Management Atlas,
were distributed free of charge upon request. The Atlas was
distributed free of charge to all federal, state, regional
and local agencies involved in coastal zone activities and
was placed in major public and university libraries for use
by the public. Because of the limited number published and
the high cost of printing, private firms and individuals
were charged on a cost basis.

Five-thousand copies of Coastal Zone Manaqement in
Florida -- 1971, the first annual report, were distributed,
and a great deal of comment and feed-back was received from
the public regarding the material in that report. Widespread
distribution was made of all succeeding annual reports and
of other publications such as Recommendations for Development
Activities in Florida's Coastal Zone. A form letter asking
for comment and/or questions regarding the material in the
publication was included as part of all mail-outs. All of
the published materials have been placed in public and univer-
sity libraries for referral and use by citizens.

As part of the public information effort, and to assist
in developing a management program, a coastal zone library was
established at an early date. The library, which now contains
over 7000 books, studies, and reports, is open to the public
and is used by other state agencies, legislative staff, consul-
tants, students, and others interested in the subject material.
Library materials are often used in responding to requests for
specific coastal zone information. A monthly list of publi-
cations received in the library is distributed to approximately
150 persons who have requested it.

It has been a continuing policy to respond to any request
for information and/or assistance relative to coastal zone
matters in as complete a manner as possible. Providing infor-
mation in response to requests has often led to continued
interest and involvement on the part of the information
seeker. Requests for information and publications average
approximately 50 per week.

The Bureau of Coastal Zone Planning has often worked on
a one-to-one basis with a number of interest groups in

developing educational materials and programs for their
membership. Materials and staff time have been provided to
such groups as the League of Women Voters, Audubon Society,
ECOSWF, Sierra Club, etc.

Materials and assistance have been provided to a number
of faculty members and students interested in coastal zone
planning and management. A number of junior colleges and uni-
versities offer environmental science, planning, and other
courses which include a coastal zone section. By assisting in
the development of these courses, the Bureau has been able to
stimulate additional interest and involvemfent in the program.

Materials and information have been provided and used as
the basis for a number of excellent newspaper and magazine
articles that have appeared over the years on Florida's coastal
zone and its problems. Many requests for further information
have been received as a result of the articles, and further
citizen interest was generated.

In 1974, following receipt of the first federal grant,
part of the public involvement effort became more formalized.
Each regional planning council participating in the program
was asked to establish a Citizens' Advisory Committee for
Coastal Zone Ma.nagement (CAC) made up of representatives from
(at a minimum) the following interest groups:

Commercial/sport fishing
Tourism and motel/hotel interests
Construction/home building
Conservation organizations
Science/education
industry
Business/commerce
City and county government
General public

The CACs began meeting on a regular basis early in 1975
and have been actively involved in the planning and policy
making process since that time. In some regions, county CACs
were established in addition to the regional group. Well over
800 people have been involved in this citizen participation
effort. it is anticipated that CAC members will play an
important role in the public meetings and hearings scheduled
for 1977.

The regional planning councils have also assisted the
public information/participation effort by publication of
coastal zone material in their newsletters and annual reports;
encouragement of media coverage of CAC meetings and coastal
planning developments; and response to requests for coastal
zone information.

As the material above indicates, the public's 'right to
know," has been a major thrust since the very beginning of
77

coastal zone planning in Florif!a. D;,ring 1977, the public
participation effort will be expanded to provide all of the
citizens of the state an opportunity to express their opinion
on a proposed coastal management program. Present plans call
for a public meeting in each of the 36 coastal counties and
a public hearing in every coastal planning region. The
regional planning councils and the CACs will be actively
involved in arranging for and conducting these meetings and
hearings.

It is anticipated that a brochure containing the high-
lights of the proposed program will be distributed in late
spring. The draft of the proposed program is scheduled for
wide-spread distribution in early June.

In addition to providing public input into the final
coastal zone management program, th.~ meetings and hearings
will enable the Department of Natural Resources to fulfill
all of the public participation requirements of the federal
Coastal Zone Management Act.

Appendix H contains examples of some of the types of
public interaction that have been part of the on-going coastal
planning program.

CHAPTER VIII

FEDERAL/STATE INTERACTION: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, (P.L. 92-583) and
its attendant guidelines, formally established the requirement
for meaningful federal/state interaction during both the devel-
opmental stage (Sec. 305) and the implementation stage (Sec.
306), of a state's coastal zone management process. To date,
Florida's conduct of coastal zone management activities has
met both the letter and spirit of the federal requirements.
The Congressional call for substantive federal participation
in a state's coastal zone management program was preceded in
Florida by the coordination provisions of Chapter 370.0211
(F.S.). This statute, passed by the 1970 Florida Legislature,
provided state authority for the development of a state
coastal zone management plan involving ".. coordinated effort
of interested federal, state, and local agencies of govern-
ment...". At this point, it would seem appropriate to briefly
address the level of federal/state interaction relative to
Florida's coastal zone planning effort that occurred prior
to participation in the federal CZM program.

The comprehensive nature of Florida's proposed coastal
zone management program, coupled with the expressed intent
to build upon existing authorities and programs, mandated
a major commitment to program coordination. This coordination
effort began in early 1971, when the Coastal Coordinating
Council (now the Bureau of Coastal Zone Planning) initiated
contacts with a number of federal agencies. The primary
thrust behind this coordination effort was threefold:

1. To delineate specific programmatic responsibilities
and authorities of federal agencies within Florida's
coastal zone;

2. To identify federal sources of information and
technical data useful to Florida's CZM planning
program; and

3. To evaluate federal regulatory authorities within
the coastal zone that could be interfaced with
existing state and local regulatory authorities
to best achieve the purposes of coastal management.

During the period between 1971 and the initial participation
in the federal CZM program in 1974, coordination was accom-
plished with some 23 federal agencies, two U. S. Senators, and
10 U. S. Representatives. Additionally, copies of all publi-
cations generated by the coastal zone planning program were
sent to these Congressional and federal contacts for review
and comment. (See Appendix I-1).

in October 1974, Florida's coastal zone planning
program began formal participation in the Congressionally
authorized federal CZM program. Involvement in the federal
program brought Florida not only some additional federal
funds for coastal zone planning, but some specific federal
coordination requirements as well.

one of the major challenges has been to identify those
federal agencies with specific programmatic interests and
responsibilities that would have to be addressed in a state
coastal management program. Additionally, many of these
federal agencies conduct their activities in concert with
one or more state agencies (e.g. EPA-DER). The establishment
of coordination networks with federal agencies, therefore,
is not only essential to the inter-facing of state CZM
elements with on-going federal activities, but is often a
required ingredient for the successful coordination with other
state agencies. In recognition of the necessary level of
federal/state interaction required of a state CZM program,
a program coordination section has been established within
the Bureau of Coastal Zone Planning. The primary objective
of this section is to establish and maintain effective
coordination linkages with interested and affected agencies
and individuals and to insure their full participation in
the coastal zone planning and management process.

Rules and regulations promulgated pursuant to the
Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 (P.L. 92-583) contain
a number of references to the need for substantive state/
federal interaction. Perhaps the most comprehensive state-
ment regarding the necessity for federal coordination is
contained in Section 923.31(2), CFR, which requires that
state CZM programs provide "opportunity for full participation
by relevant federal agencies, state-agencies, local govern-
ments, regional organizations, port authorities, and other
interested parties, public and private." Within the confines
of this rather broad directive, the federal Act and supportive
rules and regulations specify five elements that necessarily
involve extensive state/federal interaction. These five
elements address:

1. "excluded federal lands." and the consistency
of federal actions within these areas relative
to an approved state CZM plan;

2. consideration of the national interest in
facilities siting when the impact is of
greater than local concern;

3. the strengthening of cooperative mechanisms for
state/federal consultation in areas of key
mutual concern;

4. the location and utilization of existing
information and data, to the extent applicable,
rather than conducting unnecessary independent
research; and

5. the establishment of a conflict resolution process
for activities within the coastal zone.

of these five elements, only the questions of "excluded
federal lands" and the delineation of a conflict resolution
process are perceived as being "new" federal coordination
areas.

At the present time, federal coordination activities
are proceeding very well. To date, coordination linkages with
approximately eighty-five federal contacts representing
twenty-seven federal agencies have been established. The
major points of concern currently requiring extensive state/
federal interaction revolve around the issues of "excluded
federal lands," national security considerations, and CZM
program consistency with federal programmatic responsibilities.

The "excluded federal lands" issue has been the subject of
much discussion in the past, and holds the potential of requiring
substantive state/federal interaction throughout the life of
a state's CZM program. The underlying problem inherent in this
issue is not one of physically inventorying and excluding
federally-owned lands within Florida's coastal zone, but rather
one of insuring that federal agency actions within these
excluded areas are conducted in a manner consistent with an
approved state CZM plan "to the maximum extent practicable"
(CFR 920.11(c)). The rather nebulous language of this coordi-
nation requirement, ("to the maximum extent practicable")
obviously allows much interpretive latitude. It is, therefore,
vitally important that an attempt to clarify this issue with
the major federal landholding agencies such as the Department
of Interior and the Department of Defense be made. Troward this
end, the Bureau of Coastal Zone Planning has communicated with
all federal agencies holding lands within Florida's coastal
zone, and has mapped all major federal landholdings.

A corollary issue that has surfaced as a result of the
"excluded federal lands'' discussions concerns the question of
national security. Some federal agencies, primarily within
the Department of Defense, contend that many of their activi-
ties are essential to national security, and, therefore, should
be exempt from the consistency requirement of CFR 920.11 (c).
Concurrence with this position, provided that those military
activities deemed not directly supportive to national security
will be subject to the "consistency" clause, is recommended.

No insurmountable conflicts with federal agencies appear
to be looming on the horizon. This positive situation is
undoubtedly due, in part, to the long-standing coordination
linkages with key federal agencies. Every attempt has beet
made to keep these agencies abreast of state CZM activities
that may potentially impact upon their congressionally mandated
programs. In addition, all substantive federal comments
received relative to the coastal zone planning program to
date have been considered and integrated where possible. (See
Appendix 1-1).

Mechanisms used, or proposed to be used, to insure
adequate state/federal coastal zone management interaction
include the following:

1. A-95 Clearinghouse review and comment;

2. Direct agency contact, via document mailout,
personal contact and discussion, and formal
presentations;

3. Presentations to, and coordination with multi-
agency organizations such as the Southeast
Federal Regional Council;

4. Formal agreements between the state CZM agency
and various federal agencies to ensure compatibility
of state and federal efforts; and

S. Establishment of a formal conflict resolution
procedure.

The necessity for including a formal conflict resolution
process wlithin a state's CZM plan is specifically addressed in
CFR 923.4 of the federal rules and regulations. This process
will be especially significant once the state CZM plan is in
place. it will potentially be called upon to arbitrate juris-
dictional questions between state and federal agencies and to
settle differences arising from conflicting, competitive
activities within the coastal zone. A more definitive discus-
sion regarding the proposed conflict resolution process is
perhaps in order, but due to the close interrelationship of
this process with the proposed implementation structure, it
must await further state policy-level actions. it would
appear appropriate, however, to suggest examination of the
A-95 process as a starting point in building a conflict
resolution process.

In summation, state/federal interaction has been on-going
since 1971, relative to Florida's coastal zone management
program. It is not only a legal requirement, but a practical
requirement that should be continually relied upon throughout
both the development and implementation stages of coastal
management. Achieving successful coastal management is
analagous to the construction of a national rail system.

Many separate entities may construct miles of track, but unless
someone has had the forethought to require gauge standardiza-
tion, the end result might well be useless. Adequate state/
federal interaction is necessary to good coastal zone manage-
ment if we are to avoid building a narrow gauge rail system.

NOTE; As part of the coordination effort under the federal
czm program, Florida has provided information and materials
to other states and to foreign countries interested in
coastal zone planning. Appendix 1-2 contains examples
of letters that have been received from other states
and countries requesting or in response to receipt of
information concerning the Florida program.

Materials in Appendix 1-1 provide examples of state/federal
interaction during plan development.

CHAPTER IX

STATE/REGIONAL/LOCAL GOVERNMENT INTERACTION:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

One of the hallmarks of the Coastal Zone Management Act of
1972 (P. L. 92-583) was the congressional intent that units of
state, regional, and local government would utilize the coastal
management program as a vehicle for reasserting their rightful
governmental perogatives and responsibilities. In short, this
Act envisioned a state-level planning and management program
that, via meaningful coordination, would involve all interested
and affected governmental bodies within the management process.
It is clear that Congress did not int6nd for the program coor-
dination provisions of this Act to be mere "window dressing,"
as is too often the case. Two specific excerpts from the
rules and regulations, which amply demonstrate this position
are as follows:

1. "One of the most critical aspects of the development
of state coastal zone management programs will be the
ability of the states to deal fully with the network
of public, quasi-public, and private bodies which can
assist in the development process and which may be
significantly impacted by the implementation of the
program." (923.30 CFR)

2. "Section 306 (P. L. 92-583) requires that: Local
governments and other interested public and private
parties must have an opportunity for full participa-
tion in the development of the management program:
the state has coordinated with local, areawide, and
interstate plans; and, the state has established
an effective mechanism for continuing consultation
and coordination with local governments and other
units to insure their full participation in carrying
out the management program." (920.14 CFR)

The program coordination requirements contained in the
Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 serve only to reinforce the
on-going coordination effort of the Florida coastal zone plan-
ning program. Chapter 370.0211 (F.S.), which preceded the
federal Act by some two years, specifically directs the coastal
zone planning agency "To review, upon request, all plans and
activities pertinent to the coastal zone and to provide
coordination in these activities among the various levels of
government and areas of the state." This statute also requires
that a clearing service be provided for coastal zone matters
by collecting, processing, and disseminating pertinent infor-
mation relating thereto. These two legislative directives
have provided the opportunity to coordinate and assist state

agencies, regional planning organizations, local government,
and other public and quasi-public entities.

The importance of proper program coordination was recognized
early in the planning program and one full-time position was
established to accomplish these activities. in 1974, with the
advent of federal funding, a second coordination position was
added. During the last two years, coordination links with nine
regional planning councils, most of the t~hirty-eight coastal
counties, five water management districts, fifteen deepwater
ports, and numerous coastal municipalities have been initiated.
(See Appendix J')

The level of coordination that has been achieved to date
embraces both the letter and spirit of the governmental involve-
ment provisions of Chapter 370.0211 (F.S.) and P. L. 92-583. A
brief synopsis of the various levels of governmental coordination
are discussed in the following sections.

STATE-LEVEL COORDINATION

The primary focus of the federal CZM program is on the
development and implementation of state coastal zone management
plans. Section 303 of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act
clearly states the congressional intent of this Act, which is
to encourage and assist the states to exercise effectively
their responsibilities in the coastal zone through the develop-
ment and implementation of management programs to achieve wise
use of the land and water resources of the coastal zone giving
full consideration to ecological, cultural, historic, and
aesthetic values as well as needs for economic development..."
While recognizing the important management roles played by
other governmental entities, this Act places the major respon-
sibility for achieving sound coastal management squarely upon
the shoulders of state government. Therefore, the establishment
and maintenance of state agency coordination links is of
highest priority.

The coordination relationships with state agencies have
been on-going since 1970. As a result of this long-standing
and substantive interaction conducted pursuant to the
provisions of Chapter 370.0211 (F.S.), Florida's coastal
zone management program more thoroughly addresses state agency
goals, objectives, and responsibilities than is the case for
any other level of government. Substantive state-level
coordination activities conducted under the auspices of the
state and federal legislation include the following:

1. Participation in permit meetings of the Trustees
of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund and the

Department of Pollution Control for projects proposed
within the coastal zone,

2. Participation in the A-95 Clearinghouse review process
and weekly A-95 Clearinghouse meetings,

3. Participation on the Inter-Agency Planning Committee
for Endangered Lands,

4. Participation on Inter-Agency Committee for State
Wilderness Areas, and

5. Provision of coastal management project review and
technical data assistance, upon request, to various
state agencies and legislative committees.

In addition to these long-standing coordination functions,
several other state-level activities requiring close coastal
management interaction have materialized since mid-1975.
These activities include:

1. Passage of the Local Government Comprehensive Plan-
ning Act of 1975,

2. Completion of several draft elements of the "State
Comporehensive Plan,"

3. Establishment of a State "Inter-Agency Advisory
Committee on Coastal Zone Management,"

4. Creation of a Governor's Task Force on Coastal
Zone Management, and

5. Establishment of direct contractual relationships,
relative to Florida's developing coastal zone
management program, with the Division of State
Planning, the Department of Environmental Regula-
tion and the Attorney General's office.

A more detailed discussion of these activities is in order,
due to the significant nature of these five activities to
Florida's coastal management program.

1. Local Government Comprehensive Planning Act -
The Local Government Comprehensive Planning Act
of 1975 (LGCPA) holds the promise of becoming a
major tool in the effective development and imple-
mentation of Florida's coastal management program.
Various provisions of this Act have reinforced the
necessity of establishing close coastal management
coordination contacts with state agencies, regional
planning agencies, and local governmental bodies.
At the state level, the Bureau of Coastal Zone
Planning has worked cooperatively with the
Division of State Planning and the Department

of Community Affairs in providing planning assis-
tance and supporting data to local governments within
the coastal zone. The Bureau has also reviewed all
submitted local comprehensive plan elements within
the coastal zone, particularly the required "coastal
protection" elements. Written review comments have
been provided to the Division of State Planning as
well as the initiating local governmental body.
This LGCPA review function is on-going, and represents
one avenue toward achieving consistency between local
planning efforts and the developing state coastal
zone management plan. The Act does not, however,
require local governments to conform with the
consistency review comments submitted by the state
coastal management agency. This is an inherent weak-
ness in the LGCPA, which could result in built-in
conflicts between locally adopted plans and the state
CZM plan. Federal program guidelines will require
rectification of this situation prior to approval of
Florida's "306" submission.

2. State Comprehensive Plan - During the last eighteen
months, several draft elements of the State Compre-
hensive Plan have been developed by the Division of
State Planning and circulated for review. The Bureau
of Coastal Zone Planning has participated extensively
in this review process. Various elements, such as
the "Land Development", "Agricultural", and"'Economic
Development" elements have received special attention,
and substantive review comments have been provided to
the Division of State Planning. This review process
has resulted in an increased compatibility between
the draft state plan elements and the developing
state coastal management plan. It is anticipated that
the Bureau will continue to work closely with the
Division of State Planning throughout the developmental
stages of the State Comprehensive Plan. This program
interaction should result in a minimization of potential
conflicts between these two management documents, and
eventually enhance the goals of coastal management.

3. State Interagency Advisory Committee on Coastal Zone
Management - In October 1975, the Department of
Natural Resources established a State interagency
Advisory Committee on Coastal Zone Management. Com-
mittee mem~bership consists of designated representa-
tives from each state agency having an identified
program responsibility within Florida's coastal zone.
This committee was established as a formal means of
securing state agency input into the state coastal
management program.

The Committee has met on a monthly basis since October
1975, and has greatly assisted the Bureau of Coastal

Zone Planning in the development of the draft docu-
ment "Suggested State Objectives, Policy and Criteria
for Coastal Management in Florida." This Committee
has also substantively reviewed other documents
generated by the state coastal management program,
and has discussed at length CZM issues such as
management boundaries, "306" management alternatives,
and geographic areas of particular concern. The
Committee has been invaluable as an informal conflict
resolution forum during the development of the
"Suggested State Objectives, Policy and Criteria for
Coastal Management in Florida."

4. Governor's Task Force on Coastal Zone Management -
In October, 1976, Governor Askew signed Executive
Order 76-44, which created a coastal management Task
Force. This Task Force has been charged with the
responsibility of recommending to the Governor,
prior to the 1977 Legislative session, a proposed
legislative package for the creation of an "acceptable"
CZM managerial network. To date, the Task Force has
convened on three separate occasions, and appears well
on its way toward recommending a state-level "306"
management structure. Various state agencies,
including the Department of Natural Resources; the
Department of Environmental Regulation; the Depart-
ment of Administration, Division of State Planning;
the Department of Commerce; and the Department of
Community Affairs have made formal presentations to
the Task Force. Local governmental representatives
and private special interest groups have also
addressed the Task Force.

The final Task Force recommendations, followed by
specific legislative and/or executive action, will
form the cornerstone of Florida's coastal manage-
ment program. Many federally required details, such
as the delineation of a conflict resolution process,
must necessarily await a decision as to the "306"
management structure.

5. State Agency Contracts - The Bureau of Coastal Zone
Planning is currently working toward the development
and execution of contracts with the Department of
Environmental Regulation, the Division of State Plan-
ning and the Attorney General's office to fulfill
work tasks authorized by the federal office of Coastal
Zone Management as part of Florida's third year CZM
program. The purpose of the contracts is to allow
these key management agencies (DER, DSP) to evaluate
their programs relative to implementation of the state
coastal zone management plan. The Attorney General's
office will review the developing state CZM plan for
legal sufficiency.

On the whole, it appears that the current level of state
coordination is sufficient to satisfy the minimum federal
requirements established pursuant to P.L. 92-583. It is not,
however, sufficient to ensure that sound coastal management
principles are considered in day-to-day state level manage-
ment decisions. This matter will require further attention
once a proposed coastal zone management implementation frame-
work is established.

Successful completion of the state CZM program should
include the following coordination activities by the
designated management agency.

1. Continuation of the A-95 review and comment process,

2. Continuation of the State Interagency Advisory
Committee on Coastal Zone Management,

3. Direct consistency review and comment on all state
permit decisions within the coastal zone,

4. Continuation of review and comment on various
developing elements of the State Comprehensive
Plan.

5. Continuation and expansion of CZM consistency
reviews of projects proposed by state agencies
within Florida's coastal zone, and

6. Continuation of LGCPA Plan review and comment.

The accomplishment of the above-referenced coordina-
tion tasks will put Florida well on the road to realization
of a good coastal management program at the state level.

In addition to these state coordination efforts, special
attention should be given to the establishment of legislative
linkages. This particular program coordination activity
represents one of the specific requirements for state CZM
program approval, as established by the federal Office of
Coastal Zone Management. The newly established Coastal Zone
Select Subcommittee of the House Governmental Operations
Committee is a step toward satisfying this federal require-
ment. (See Appendix J) Creation of a similar body within
the Senate would effectively complete the necessary
legislative coordination network.

REGIONAL INTERACTION
Coordination and interaction with regional governmental
entities, especially regional planning agencies, has been,
and should continue to be an important activity of the state
coastal zone management program. (See Appendix J) As
creatures of local government, the regional planning councils
(RPCs) serve as sources of professional planning expertise,
and provide a direct link to local governmental bodies.

Beginning in October, 1974, contractual work programs
were initiated with the nine regional planning councils within
the coastal zone. Since that time, the regional planning
councils have been continually involved in coastal management
activities. These activities include the following:

1. Establishment of regional Coastal Zone Management
Citizens' Advisory Committees - Each REC was contract-
ually obligated to set up a citizens' advisory committee
representing the various coastal interests within
their region. These committees meet at least once
every two months, and usually once a month.

one of the primary purposes of these committees is
to assist in the development of a "workable" state
coastal zone management plan. To this end, each
of the nine regional advisory committees has developed
draft CZM policy documents reflecting the goals,
objectives and aspirations of their particular
regions. These committees have also reviewed and
commented on all work products developed by the
Bureau of Coastal Zone Planning and regional
planning agencies under the auspices of Florida's
coastal management program. This interaction has
resulted in the development of a more viable coastal
zone planning approach and has produced a greater
awareness of the goals of coastal management at the
local level.

2. Collection and assimilation of baseline CZM data -
During the first two contract years, the RPCs collected,
analyzed and assimilated a great deal of coastal
baseline data. Working in partnership with the
Bureau, the regions gathered information regarding
population, economics, support services, land
use, land ownership, legal structure, deepwater
ports, and OCS onshore impact. This data has been
mutually beneficial to the Bureau of Coastal Zone
Planning, the regional planning councils, and to
units of local government. in essence, the RPC's
have created a comprehensive regional data base,
having wide utility, and at the same time, have
assisted the Bureau in the development of a coastal
zone management process.

3. Local government assistance - One of the benefits
derived from RPC involvement in the CZM program has
been the development of regional coastal management
expertise. Contractual arrangements between the
Bureau and the RPCs strongly encourage the regions
to utilize this expertise in assisting local govern-
ments with coastal management problems. This expertise
is also of benefit to other regional programs, such
as DRI review of projects within the coastal zone.

4. Public information programs - One of the tasks under-
'taken by the RPCs has been to conduct public informa-
tion programs on coastal zone management. The forums
for these presentations have included county public
meetings, workshops, presentations to county commissions,
and presentations to private interest groups and civic
organizations. This work element is anticipated to
greatly intensify during the next year.

All of the RPCs have specific program activities which
should be recognized and incorporated iyito Florida's coastal
zone management program. Some of their major program activities
that bear directly upon CZM include:

1. DRI review and comment;

2. Local government planning assistance; and

3. Regional A-95 Clearinghouse coordination and review.

The RPCs should be considered as full participants in any
coastal zone management program formulated by state policy
makers. The regions will be especially important to the 1130611
management program from the standpoint of providing regular
planning updates, conducting CZM consistency reviews, and
serving as a formal part of the required conflict resolution
process. The RPCs should also continue an active citizen partic-
ipation program, as well as continue the programs of local
government assistance.

Other regional governmental entities with management
responsibilities and authorities within the coastal zone, such
as water management districts, must be incorporated into the
state CZM program. The Bureau has previously initiated
coordination activities with these bodies, but the present
degree of interaction must be increased if these important
management agencies are to be fully integrated into the state
CZM network.

LOCAL GOVERNMENT INTERACTION

The greatest opportunities for effective coastal zone
management reside within local governmental structures. Florida's
`ho~ie rule" provisions allow local governments to exercise a
wide array of resource management authorities except in areas
specifically exempted by state statutes. Additionally, county
and municipal governments are often in the best position to
properly gauge local resource management goals and objectives.

The Bureau has targeted local government coordination as a
priority item in recognition of the potential role local govern-
ments may play in the state CZM program. This priority consider-
ation, however, does not imply an absence of previous

local government coordination by the Bureau. It does imply
that previous program interactions have not been commensurate
with the opportunities available at the local government level.

In the past, the Bureau has made contacts with practically
every coastal county commission, and many municipal governments.
These contacts have been made via direct CZM presentations,
* ~~provision of technical data and planning assistance, and
active participation in the regional CZM Citizens' Advisory
Committees. Examples of local government interaction include
Sarasota and Franklin counties and the City of Clearwater.
(See Appendix J)

As Florida moves toward finalization of the State Coastal
Management Program every effort should be made to foster local
government involvement. In keeping with this proposal, the
Bureau is attempting to secure federal funds from OCZM that
can be passed through to coastal counties. This money could
then be utilized by the counties for the development of local
CZM plans. This local planning effort would also satisfy many
of the requirements outlined in the Local Government Compre-
hensive Planning Act of 1975.

Local government should be considered as potential
recipients of "306" management funds as the state enters the
implementation stage of its coastal zone management program.
This action would be consistent with the overall management
authorities present at the local level. Every effort should
be made to strengthen local governments' ability to actively
participate in matters such as conflict resolution, consistency
review, and compliance monitoring. Additionally, local
governments possess management tools, such as zoning and
eminent domain, wh~ich could be used as a valuable adjunct to
effective coastal management.

other local governmental and quasi-governmental bodies,
such as port authorities, must also be integrated into the
overall coastal management process. The Bureau has initiated
contacts with all of Florida's deepwater ports, and communicates
regularly with their operational bodies (See Appendix J). The
important role ports and other similar facilities play in main-
taining Florida's economic well-being is well recognized.
These water dependent facilities are also subject to direct
impact from any adopted state CZM plan, and it is essential
that the opportunity for full participation in the planning
and management process be afforded these entities.

Note: Materials in Appendix J provide examples of state/
regional/local interaction during plan development.

CHAPTER X

ORGANIZATION AND AUTHORITIES: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY*

INTRODUCT ION

Before a management program for the coastal zone of Florida
can be approved by the federal government, the state must demon-
strate that it is capable of implementing such a program. The
internal organization and legal authorities must be in place
and operable upon federal approval (Office of Coastal Zone
Management Threshold Papers (TP#6&7). See Appendix A). The
Bureau of Coastal Zone Planning (DNR) has been actively involved
in working toward compliance with the organization and authori-
ties requirements. The threshold documentation requirements
(TP#6&7) include:

1. An inventory of the constitutional provisions, laws,
regulations and judicial decisions which constitute
the legal basis for management of the state's coastal
zone.

2. An identification of the assigned responsibilities
of various state, regional and local bodies in admin-
istering the program, including submission of documents
delegating and assigning the needed authorities to
appropriate agencies.

3. A description of how the program would operate,
including "walk-through" examples of-how specific
projects would be regulated under the program.

4. A certification in letter form signed by the Governor
indicating that he has reviewed and approved the
program; that the state has the authorities and
organization needed to carry out the program, and
that the state as a matter of policy is committed to
implementing the program's terms and policies.

5. A description of how the federal consistency pro-
visions would be operated by the state including
specific "walk-through" examples for individual fed-
eral actions, development projects, licenses, permits
or financial assistance.

*Prepared by the DNR Legal Section with the assistance
of BCZP staff.

AUTHORITIES

Section 305(b) (4) of the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA)
requires that the state's coastal management program include
an "identification of the means by which the state proposes to
exert control over the (permissible land uses and water uses
within the coastal waters), including a listing of relevant
constitutional provisions, laws, regulations, and judicial
decisions." The authorities mandate is also found in Section
306(c) (7) of the CZMA, which requires that the state have "the
authorities necessary to implement the program, including the
authority required under (Section 306(d))."

INVENTORY OF AUTHORITIES

The Center for Governmental Responsibility, Holland Law
Center, University of Florida, under contract with DNR has
prepared two significant research reports toward fulfillment of
the authorities requirement. One report, published in three
volumes in June 1976, is Compilation of Laws Relating to Florida
Coastal Zone Management (See Appendix K). The report is an
inventory consisting of a brief summary of the laws, including
constitutional provisions, statutes, regulations and court
opinions, and a description of the impact of the law on the
coastal zone. The first volume contains federal and state laws.
The second and third volumes contain local laws arranged by
region.

A companion report, published in one volume in October
1976, by the Center for Governmental Responsibility, is Analysis
of Laws Relating to Florida Coastal Zone Management (See
Appendix L). That report analyzes federal, state and local
laws, discusses how those laws could affect the management
program, and makes some recommendations for change in the
existing legal structure.

The topics used for compiling the inventory of laws and
analyzing the laws were as follows:

1. Conservation of Living and Non-Living Resources

2. Environmental Quality

3. Coastal Hazard Prevention and Protection

4. Recreation and Beach Access

5. Land Use Regulation

6. Energy Siting

7. Port Operations, Waterways and Navigation

8. Mineral Resource Development

9. Water Resource Development

10. Economic and Development Assistance

11. Indirect Impact

These topics were selected because they cover the types of land
and water uses significant to the coastal zone.

A document which ties together existing legal authorities
and policies to be implemented in the coastal management pro-
gram is Suggested State Objectives, Policy and Criteria for
Coastal Management in Florida prepared by DNR's Bureau of Coastal
Zone Planning in cooperation with the State Interagency Advisory
Committee on Coastal Zone Management (See Appendix C). The
policies, having been based on existing laws and regulations,
can for the most part be implemented under existing authorities.
A table of "Primary Authorities to be Utilized" to implement
the policies is a part of the policy document, pages 11-13. The
policy document also includes charts of the three categories,
preservation, conservation, and prime agricultural and develop-
ment, indicating what existing state regulatory support and
controls can be brought to bear in carrying out the policies
assigned to the various subcategories. The preface to the
policy document does recognize the existence of potential legal
deficiencies, but points out that these may be addressed as part
of the ongoing management program.

SPECIFIC AUTHORITIES REQUIRED

Section 306(d) of the CZMA places the following authorities
mandate on the state:

"Prior to granting approval of the management program, the
Secretary shall find that the state, acting through its chosen
agency or agencies, including local governments, areawide agen-
cies designated under section 204 of the Demonstration Cities
and Metropolitan Development Act of 1966, regional agencies, or
interstate agencies, has authority for the management of the
coastal zone in accordance with the management program. Such
authority shall include power--

(1) "to administer land and water use regulations,
control development in order to ensure compli-
ance with the management program, and to resolve
conflicts among competing uses; and

(2) "to acquire fee simple and less than fee simple
interests in lands, waters, and other property
through condemnation or other means when neces-
sary to achieve conformance with the management
program."

Authorities to administer land and water use regulations
and to control development are abundant in Florida. For a com-
prehensive analysis, see Appendices K and L, which are the
inventory and analysis of laws prepared by the Center for
Governmental Responsibility. No single agency has all the
required authorities. The federal regulations governing the
CZMvA point out, however, that it is "clear that the State may
choose to administer its program using a variety of levels
of governments and agencies" (15 CFR Sec. 923.24).

Authority to resolve conflicts among competing uses is not
so clear as other authorities. Conflict resolution provisions
ought to be made a part of draft legislation to support the
coastal zone program.

Property acquisition authority resides mainly in local
governments although DNR is authorized under Florida Statutes,
Chapters 253, 259, 592, and 375 to acquire interests in land.
The power of eminent domain, however, lies primarily with local
governments, with some exceptions. Because the CZMA requires,
when necessary, more than the mere authority to purchase lands
or waters from a willing vendor, the power of condemnation is
essential (15 CFR Sec. 923.25). It is expected that local
governments would be relied upon in large measure where the
implementation of policies requires condemnation.

ORGANIZATION

Section 305(b) of the CZMA requires that the state's
coastal management program include a "description of the organ-
izational structure proposed to implement such management pro-
gram, including the responsibilities and interrelationships of
local, areawide, state, regional, and interstate agencies in
the management process." The organization mandate is also found
in CZMA Section 306(c) (6).

An initial step toward describing a proposed organizational
framework is a study of existing governmental organization at
all levels, federal, state and local. Such a study, prepared
by the Bureau of Coastal Zone Planning, entitled Overview of
Existing Governmental Roles and Responsibilities, is attached
as Appendix MA. Based upon that study, four coastal management
options were considered. These options included designation of
either the Department of Natural Resources (DNR), the Department
of Environmental Regulation (DER), the Department of Adminis-
tration (DOA) or an interagency commission as the state coastal
management authority. Of these four alternatives, the preferred
choice of the Department staff is that the Department of Natural
Resources be designated the state coastal management authority.

SINGLE AGENCY DESIGNATION

Section 306(c) of the Coastal Zone Management Act requires
that the Governor have "designated a single agency to receive

and administer the grants for implementing the management pro-
gram" before a state's program will be approved. The purpose
of single agency designation is to identify what agency will be
fiscally and programmatically responsible for receiving and
administering Section 306 grants (15 CFR Sec. 923.23). The
threshold paper, TP 6 & 7, lists the following capabilities a
single agency must have: (1) fiscal and legal capability to
accept and hold Section 306 funds, to make contracts and "pass-
through" grants and similar agreements with other agencies, and
to disburse Section 306 funds to other agencies; (2) adminis-
trative capability to monitor systematically and evaluate the
work of other agencies and local governments with specific
coastal management responsibilities regardless of whether they
receive Section 306 funds; (3) capability of accounting to the
federal government on adherence to the management program. DNR
presently has these capabilities although the capability to
monitor and evaluate work of other agencies and local govern-
ments could be strengthened to make it mandatory.

DNR staff has submitted to the Governor's Task Force on
Coastal Zone Management a rationale for receiving the single
agency designation. See Appendix N, entitled DNR Presentation
on Section 306 Lead Agency Designation for the Governor's Task
Force on Coastal Zone Management, December 7, 1976. Similar
written presentations were submitted to the Task Force by DER
and DOA.

TECHNIQUES FOR CONTROL

Section 306(e) of the Coastal Zone Management Act requires
that a state's management program provide "for any one or a
combination of the following general techniques for control of
land and water uses within the central coastal zone"

(A) "State establishment of criteria and standards for
local implementation, subject to administrative
review and enforcement of compliance;

(b) "Direct state land and water use planning and
regulation; or

(C) "State administrative review for consistency with
the management program of all development plans,
projects, or land and water use regulations, includ-
ing exceptions and variances thereto, proposed by
any state or local authority or private developer,
with power to approve or disapprove after public
notice and an opportunity for hearings."

Techniques (A) and (B) would be the major techniques of
control utilized. Technique (C) is presently viewed as unrealis-
tic.

Inasmuch as the authorities for implementing the policies
of the coastal management program are fragmented in Florida
among various state agencies and local governmental agencies,
the most suitable approach for Florida is to define an organi-
zational network which utilizes more than one of the above
techniques of control. State and local government entities
would continue to carry out their existing responsibilities.
The new factor introduced by the coastal zone management pro-
gram is accountability by all governmental entities as to the
consistency of their exercise of authorities with the coastal
zone management policies.

The Department of Natural Resources has prepared a general
outline of what the organizational framework might look like in
Florida (See proposed organizational chart, Figure 1). The
chart identifies proposed linkages or "interrelationships between
local, areawide, state, regional and interstate agencies" as
required by Section 305(b) (6) of the CZMA. Also shown are link-
ages with the federal government, with the state legislature,
and with the public through citizens' advisory committees at
local, state and regional levels. Conflict resolution could be
handled through an administrative appeals process as diagrammed
in Figure 2.

Central to the organizational structure proposed is the
belief that ultimate authority in coastal zone management
decision-making ought to reside in the Governor and Cabinet as
the body which unifies the fragmented executive branch of Florida
government and as the body which gives the people of Florida the
broadest opportunity for representation in the administration
of the coastal zone management program. Another principle
recognized in the development of the proposed organizational
structure is that local governmental entities ought to be allowed
maximum participation in the implementation phase.

FEDERAL CONSISTENCY

Sections 307(c) and (d) of the CZMA contemplate including
federal consistency provisions in a state's management program.
Basically, the CZMIA makes it incumbent on federal agencies to
conduct only those activities in the coastal zone which are,
to the maximum extent practicable, consistent with the state's
approved management program.

Under Section 307(c), any applicant for a federal license
or permit to conduct an activity that would affect land or water
uses in the coastal zone, and any person submitting a plan to
the Department of Interior for the exploration, development or
production of any area leased under the Outer Continental Shelf
Lands Act which is in the coastal zone, must submit to the
federal licensing or permitting agency or Department of Interior
a certification that the proposed activity will be consistent
with the management program. The applicant must simultaneously

100

Figure 1

Proposed Organizational Chart

Governor & Cabinet

Federal Coordination Legislative Oversight
-Federal Regional Council Committee
-A-95 Review of federal programs House/Senate "Government
-Memorandum Agreements with Operations Committee
federal agencies
fedra DNR as Section 306
Designated Agency,
staffed by BCZP
IInterstate Council ___\ -Certifies, monitors
troubleshoots & CAC
updates CZM plan Sa .
H IAC -Aids localSto
IAC - /A -Aids locaB to ~~~~~~~State Citizens Advisory
State Interagency /develop local CM
IAC ~~~~~~~~develop local CZM Committee
SCommitaetere on CZM _-/ plan & comply with
n I state CZM plan &
certification

CZM Planning
Certification Coordination
DER DNR DOA/DSP
Perm-its Per-mFts A---Ss
DRI 's
ACSC's

|Regional Planning egi Regional Citizens
RegCouncils |lal CZM Plan RAdvisory Committee

~~~~~~~~~~~I

Local Local Local Citizens
Government> CZM Plan | Advisory Committees

Figure 2

Proposed Conflict Resolution and Appellate Processes

Local Agency Local Regional Section 306 Governor I
Planning
(Private Interest) vs. Agency Council Designated Agencyabinet

Regional } Section 306
Local Agency State | ^ Planning q Designated Agency and Cabinet
I(Private Interest) vs. Agency Council

State State Section 306
Agqency vs. Agency | lDesignated Agency and Cabinet

| (Local Agency) Federal Administrator, Secretar
(State Agency) vs. Agency Section 306 National Oceanic U.S. Department iden
I(Private Interest) Designated Agency and Cabinet and Atmospheric inof Commercet
Administration

furnish the state or its designated agency a copy of the certi-
fication. if the state or its designated agency does not notify
the federal agency concerned that it objects to or concurs with
the applicant's certification within six months, the state's
concurrence is conclusively presumed. Procedures are required
to be established in the state for public notice of all certifi-
cations and, to the extent deemed appropriate, procedures for
public hearings in connection with certifications (CZMA, Section
307(c) (3) (A)). Although these procedures for public notice and
public hearings are not currently in place, the Department of
Natural Resources does have broad legislative authorization to
adopt rules which might arguably encompass this subject (Fla.
Stat. Sec. 370.0211(4) and (7)). More likely, however, additional
legislation would be required.

Under Section 307(d), any state or local government applying
for federal aid under programs that will affect the coastal zone
must indicate whether the appropriate state or local agency
views the proposal as consistent with the state's management
program.

The appropriate state agency to respond to or comment on
the consistency of proposed projects involving the federal govern-
ment through licensing, permitting or financial assistance would
be the state agency designated as the Section 306 agency.

EXAMPLES

The threshold paper on organization and authorites, TP #6 &
7, requires "walk-through" examples of how specific projects
would be regulated, including examples of how the federal con-
sistency provisions would operate in connection with federal
actions, development projects, licenses, permits or financial
assistance.

A. Example #1: Onshore Support Facilities for Offshore
Oil and Gas Production

Onshore port facilities, pipelines for transporting oil and
gas onshore, onshore terminal facilities, and offshore terminal
facilities and ports to receive the oil and gas are regulated
and controlled by a number of state laws and agencies. The
Department of Environmental Regulation (DER) would be involved
regarding the permitting of construction and dredge and fill
activities. The Department of Natural Resources (DNR) would be
responsible for leasing the submerged lands or water column, for
permitting pipeline installation or onshore facilities construc-
tion which is either below the mean high water line or seaward
of the coastal construction setback line, for monitoring the
pipeline, and for registering the terminal facility. If the
facilities are considered to be developments of regional impact,
the Department of Administration (DOA) would be involved, as
would local government and regional planning councils. Local

103

government may also be involved through the use of their zoning
powers. The federal government may become involved through the
Federal Water Pollutibn Control Act, the National Environmental
Policy Act and the Clean Air Act. Federal consistency provis-
ions would come into play with respect to the leasing of outer
continental shelf lands and with respect to federal licensing
and permits required under the federal acts. Florida's desig-
nated Section 306 agency would play an active role in commenting
on any such federal license or permit affecting the coastal zone
as a prerequisite to its issuance.

B. Other Examples

Other examples currently under study include (1) the develop-
ment of a salt-water marina; (2) the development of a coastal
building project such as a hotel; (3) the development of a public
recreation area on the coast. No small number of examples could
possibly devote attention to all the federal, state and local
authorities that can be brought to bear, but a proper selection
of categories of development should provide the necessary over-
view.

CONCLUSION

The Department staff is working on the premise that DNR
ought to be the single agency designated under Section 306.
This premise is based on a number of reasons:

1. DNR has been responsible for developing the coastal
zone management program (Fla. Stat. Sec. 370.02(3)(g) and .0211).

2. DNR is presently authorized to "carry out" the program
as it develops (Fla. Stat. Sec. 370.02(c)(g)).

3. DNR exercises a plethora of legal authorities signifi-
cant to the coastal zone, as noted in Appendices K through N.

4. DNR is responsible to the Governor and Cabinet as the
ultimate authority. See Table A (Preservation Chart) of
Appendix C (policy document) which states that "irretrievable
commitments regarding (preservation) functions and values should
be made only by elected officials."

5. DNR is interested in carrying out a coodinative role
which allows existing governmental roles and responsibilities
to remain essentially in place, except for strengthening respon-
sibilities where needed, e.g., making mandatory presently
voluntary roles.

6. DNR is committed to maintaining the integrity of local
governmental involvement so long as it is tied into the state
level for review for consistency with the coastal zone management
program.

104

7. DNR has the fiscal and legal capability to receive
and disburse funds, including subgranting to other governmen-
tal entities, e.g., contracts with DER, DOA and the Department
of Legal Affairs, and Regional Planning Councils.

8. Reorganization tends to create confusion and delays
which would hinder the smooth implementation of a management
plan.

9. The coordination and planning process ought to be
housed outside the most identifiable environmental permitting
agency in order to promote credibility in objective decision-
making (See 16 William and Mary Law Review 747, 768 (1975)).

105

CHAPTER XI

ON-GOING CZM PROGRAM: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

INTRODUCT ION

The federal Coastal Zone Management Act affords the State
of Florida as well as other coastal states the opportunity not
only to provide for the preservation, protection and development
of our coastal lands and waters, but also the means by which the
state and local government can regain control of the relevant
actions of federal agencies. Once the state's coastal zone
management program is developed by Florida and accepted by the
federal government, by law the actions of any federal agency,
with few exceptions, must be consistent with the state program.
The consistency requirement will also be applicable to any other
private or governmental unit that seeks any federal permit,
license or financial support. If Florida is to take advantage
of the opportunity presented, the state's coastal zone management
effort over the next two years will be transitional in nature and
will require the complex involvement of diverse entities. Funda-
mental management decisions will have to be made.

The Florida program, to date, has developed comprehensive
baseline data, inventories and summaries of the physical and
social/economic characteristics of the coastal zone as well as
the existing plans and controls for the interface of these charac-
teristics. Utilizing this basic information, the short-term
objectives of the on-going program must be the involvement in
program development of all affected entities and the selection
and adoption of the organizational structure and authorities to
implement a unified coastal zone management program in Florida.
For continued federal support, the resulting program must meet
general federal guidelines and be considered acceptable by the
federal government by October of 1978. if the program is accept-
able but requires additional legislative action to be complete,
the state may apply for "305�-" status for one additional year of
federal planning money. Because of review and possible amendment
requirements, as well as performance requirements of many levels
and agencies of government, the basic architecture of the program
should be completed by the sumrmr of 1977.

Also to be considered in any discussion of on-going programs
are the requirements for operating elements once the transition
has been made from Program Development (Section 305) to Program
Management (Section 306). The ultimate organizational structure
and authority mechanisms that will be contained in an adopted
coastal zone management program in Florida are unknown at this
time. It is, thus, not practical to consider organizational respon-
sibilities. Basic requirements and elements that must be con-
tained in the program, however, are known and can be considered
from the standpoint of functional responsibility.

107

In addition to the on-going efforts to take the coastal zone
management program from the development stage into the imple-
mentation stage, other on-going efforts must be introduced to
respond to this year's amendments to the federal Coastal Zone
Management Act. These efforts include additional planning ele-
ments which are to be eventually included in the state's manage-
ment program but need not necessarily be completed prior to
program approval as long as the planning process for each has
been established. The amendments also include separate but
complementary programs that can provide significant benefits to
Florida.

PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT (Section 305)

The completion of the development of the Florida coastal
zone management program will take the concerted and coordinated
efforts of some 300 local governmental units, ten regional
planning councils, adjacent states and most of the agencies of
the state and federal governments as well as participation by
concerned nongovernmental individuals and organizations. There
are a multitude of details to be completed. These have been
documented and are available to interested parties. In this
summary, only major tasks and responsibilities required to meet
minimum federal requirements will be considered. To the extent
possible, they will be considered in relation to the participating
agency/unit as defined in the federal grant application.

The Department of Natural Resources' Bureau of Coastal Zone
Planning will shortly complete the necessary extensive and coor-
dinated studies and planning to form a solid foundation upon
which a management structure can be based. The basic work com-
pleted is considered one of the most comprehensive in the
country. In addition to the efforts required to support the
amended Coastal Zone Management Act discussed elsewhere, DNR
has a prime responsibility for the successful transitional
effort since it is the Governor's designated 305 program devel-
opment agency and the prime contractor with OCZM on this phase.

in addition to program development administration and the
necessary documentation for the management program adoption and
approval, the BCZP's on-going program requires support elements.
Perhaps the most important element during the transition period
is the coordination effort with the public and all levels of
government. Drawing on the extensive coastal zone library, base-
line data and in-house expertise, assistance and review capabil-
ities must be provided by all affected by and involved in the
Florida coastal zone. That capability must be continually
improved through data update, development of state-of-the-art
techniques and research. The state's needs as well as problems,

108

issues, objectives, and policies for the coastal zone must be
finalized. The method of impact assessment of activities in
the coastal zone will be documented. An Environmental Impact
Assessment for the management plan will be required. The BCZP
will also need to provide for an on-going program during the
period of federal review after submission of the state's CZM
Plan. It must necessarily include the mechanism to respond to
comments and change requests by any and all federal agencies.

Most state agencies have been and are involved in the
Florida CZM effort via the State Interagency Advisory Committee
on Coastal Zone Management. However, in addition to DNR, the DOA,
DER, and the Department of Legal Affairs, Office of the Attorney
General have specified work elements and have received federal
funds for their completion in the third year 305 grant program.
These are:

DEPARTMENT OF LEGAL AFFAIRS:

1. Review each completed draft segment of the coastal Zone
management plan for legal sufficiency in terms of compliance
and conformity with applicable federal and state laws.

2. Interpret the Office of Coastal Zone Management's legal
mandates as applied to Florida's analyses of roles and
responsibilities of the various state and local governmen-
tal agencies.

3. Provide analysis of the University of Florida's existing
legal inventory of state laws applicable to the coastal
zone management program as well aS any other legislation
affecting the program including recent enactments of the
Florida Legislature.

4. Provide day-to-day legal advice for development of the
coastal zone management plan, including resolution of con-
flicting agency jurisdictions, determination of need for
enabling legislation, and participation in drafting needed
legislation.

5. Develop coastal zone management plan and program experience
in anticipation of establishing 306-funded Coastal Environ-
mental Law Unit.

DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION, DIVISION OF STATE PLANNING

1. Study and make recommendations on the adequacy of Developments
of Regional Impact and Areas of Critical State Concern pro-
cesses (Chapter 380, F.S.) for guiding developments of greater
than local concern in the coastal zone.

109

2. Investigate the feasibility of utilizing regional planning
agencies and local governments in the implementation of the
state's coastal zone management program. Special attention
would be given to the utilization of regional planning
agencies in handling appeals.

3. Prepare reports and recommendations as needed to guide
legislative budgetary decisions on programs by state
agencies which would be helpful in implementing the coastal
zone -management plan.

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION

1. Analyze Chapters 403, 253, 381, and 373, Florida Statutes
and the rules contained in Chapter 17, Florida Administrative
Code (the Chapter pertaining to the Department of Environ-
mental Regulation) for conflicts or compatibility with the
Bureau of Coastal Zone Planning's "Suggested State Policy
and Criteria for Coastal Management in Florida."

2. Study and make recommendations on how the regulatory process
of the Department of Environmental Regulation can be linked
into coastal zone management once the plan is adopted. This
will include a proposed mechanism for state Coastal Zone
Certification to the United States Army Corps of Engineers
for dredge and fill projects.

3. Analyze the department's report under HR 4251 on coordinated
state environmental permitting as it relates to the regula-
tory process in the coastal zone and to possible delegation
of regulatory authority to local governments and the water
management districts.

4. Coordinate water quality planning, water quantity planning,
potable water supply, air quality planning and solid waste
planning programs of the Department of Environmental Regula-
tion with the coastal zone management development program.

5. Insure Section 201 planning for the construction of sewage
treatment plants is coordinated with the CZM program.

Federal CZM rules and regulations place great emphasis on
the early and continued involvements of the public and local and
regional governments in the development of a CZM plan. In
addition to the coordination and information dissemination by
BCZP, much has and will be accomplished by pass-through funding
to the regional planning councils and local government units.
Regional planning councils have been providing for public partic-
ipation and the local review and hearing requirements as well as
doing some of the basic studies and analyses. The Florida Local
Government Comprehensive Planning Act of 1975 provides a vehicle

110

for the assurance of the compatibility of local, state and federal
CZM objectives, if it can be amended to provide for local com-
pliance with state review comments as required by OCZM guidelines.
The federal government will provide eighty percent of the funding
for the development of the Local Comprehensive Plans if the plans
are based on state guidelines and the local coastal zone manage-
ment plans receive state certification for compliance with the
comprehensive state CZM Plan. The Bureau of Coastal Zone Planning
and the regional planning councils will provide technical assist-
ance as required.

For the most part, Florida has in existence the knowledge
and the tools and mechanisms for the management of the coastal
zone. They are in place and, when properly applied, are working.
These tools and mechanisms, however, are not integrated and are
usually applied from the narrow agency mission standpoint rather
than from the broader requirements of comprehensive management.
The major task remaining to the development of a viable CZM
program, and by far the most difficult, is the integration of
state policies and mechanisms to manage the coastal zone with
the development of an organizational and authority network that
can effectively and efficiently implement the CZM program. This
is the last major element requiring completion before the CZM
program can progress from the development stage to implementation.

Upon final completion of all of the elements, the Department
of Natural Resources will prepare a draft of the proposed CZM
program for the review and approval of the Board of the Department
of Natural Resources. Public hearings and agency reviews meeting
specific federal guidelines will have' to be held, perhaps result-
ing in the need for additional legislative or executive action.
The Governor or his designated legal officer will need to document
compliance with several specific items before formal submission
of the Florida CZPM program to the federal government for approval.
Moreover, legislative action will probably be required to mandate
the selected organizational CZM structure, to amend the Local
Government Comprehensive Act and to consider a coastal wetlands
protection act and a construction setback line for estuarine
beaches.

Throughout this transitional phase, caution must be exercised.
Independent or uncoordinated action can easily destroy one of the
required elements of federal approval and set the program back
many months or totally defeat it.

PROGRAM MANAGEMENT (Section 306)

Once the federal government has accepted the Florida coastal
zone management program, the state will have the ability and means
to satisfy the original legislative objectives in the creation
of the Florida coastal zone legislation of 1970. The objective
to comprehensively provide for both the protection and development

ill

of the coastal zone is compatible with the federal policy stated
in 1972. The unexpected advantage, not originally foreseen,
will be the return of many of the federal decision processes to
the state and local governments.

Coastal zone management touches on all aspects of private
and governmental activities. Obviously, it cannot replace all
government and control all activity, nor should it. It can, how-
ever, provide the network to integrate plans and efforts to the
basic CZM objectives. The network of organizational structure
and authorities is yet to be defined. Probably local and state
agencies will maintain their basic responsibilities but will need
to exercise them in a more coordinated and comprehensive way.
There are basic requirements of an approved CZM program that can
be considered from a functional if not organizational standpoint.
These requirements may well be exercised by many different agen-
cies and levels of government. For program management, the
federal government anticipates funding at least 250 percent
greater than that for program development.

The minimum requirements for the CZM program are similar to
many of the elements of program development now being exercised
by DNR's Bureau of Coastal Zone Planning plus the need for
increased emphasis on consistency review/regulation and legal
support. minimum functional responsibilities are:

ADMINISTRATION

1. Program supervision.

2. Receive, sublet and administer state and federal CZM funds.

3. Measure program progress against established objectives.

4. Provide mechanism for continued consideration of national
and state needs.

5. Develop mechanism for review, monitoring and refinement of
the program in light of changing parameters.

6. Provide for periodic review by Governor, Cabinet and
Legislature.

COORDINATION

1. Provide for coordination of concerned federal, interstate,
state and local agencies.

2. Provide for continued public participation and education.

3. Provide informational services to all interested parties.

112

PLANNING

1. Program to recognize planning and program development is
essentially a continuing process, requiring continuing
review and update.

2. Provide planning assistance to local CZM efforts.

3. Review and provide assistance for Local Comprehensive Plans.

4. Provide for recognition and notice of program conflicts.

5. Plan for the siting and impact on the coastal zone of energy
facilities.

6. Plan for coastal and beach preservation, protection and
increased access.

TECHNICAL SERVICES

1. Improve data base and management capabilities through
monitoring and adapting state-of-the-art techniques and
research.

2. Provide a consulting mechanism and technical support, as
needed, to federal, state, regional, county, and municipal
agencies/planners.

3. Develop cooperative programs with air and water pollution
control agencies.

4. Develop training program to insure CZM capabilities at
all levels of government.

CONSISTENCY REVIEW

1. Provide for review and certification of consistency with
state's CZM program of federal activity or any application
for federal support, license, or permit.

2. Provide for assessment of consistency of proposed land and
water uses with the Florida CZM program.

3. Provide for assurance that local activity does not restrict
or exclude uses of regional benefits or the required needs
of state and federal governments.

4. Provide for public hearings as required.

5. Provide mechanism for appeal of decisions.

113

LEGAL SUPPORT

1. Provide day-to-day legal services for the program.

2. Participate in hearings, appeals and legal defense as
required.

3. Assist, where needed, in the acquisition of fee simple or
less than fee simple interests in lands, waters and other
property.

4. Attempt to recover damages to environmental or recreational
resources from coastal energy activities.

5. Provide mechanism for loans, loan guarantees, and loan
management for impacts of coastal-dependent energy activity
development.

1976 AMENDMENT REQUIREMENTS

In 1976 the Coastal Zone Management Act was amended. The
amendments included increased emphasis in three planning areas
of program development, provided for an increase in time for
program development and transition to the management phase,
and introduced or expanded several programs complementary to
the CZM program. The introduced "Coastal Energy impact Program"
is a particularly significant and controversial program and has
the potential of many times greater federal funding support than
that of all other CZM programs combined. It should be noted that
the amended programs are tied to the CZM program but need not
necessarily involve the same agencies. The amended planning
items are to be completed by the agencies responsible for CZM
program development irrespective of the status of or the respon-
sible agency or agencies for program management.

PLANNING ELEMENTS

1. Define the term "beach" and develop a planning process for
the protection of, and access to, public beaches and other
public coastal areas of environmental, recreational,
historical, aesthetic, ecological, or cultural value.

2. Develop a planning process for energy facilities likely to
be located in, or which may significantly affect, the
coastal zone, including but not limited to a process for
anticipating and managing the impacts from such facilities.

3. Develop a planning process for assisting the effects of
shoreline erosion (however caused) and studying and evalu-
ating ways to control, or lessen the impact of, such erosion,
and to restore areas adversely affected by such erosion.

114

INTERSTATE GP-ANTS

1. Coordinate state coastal zone planning, policies and pro-
grams with respect to contiguous areas of such states.

2. Study, plan and/or implement unified coastal zone policies
with respect to such areas.

3. Establish effective mechanisms for the identification,
examination and/or cooperative resolution of mutual pro-
blems with respect to marine and coastal areas which affect,
directly or indirectly, the applicable coastal zone.

RESEARCH AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE (Training)

1. The federal government will conduct a program of research,
study and training to support the general development and
implementation of management programs.

2. Grants are available to states to carry out specific research,
studies and training required with respect to CZM.

ESTUARINE SANCTUARIES AND BEACH ACCESS

1. Grants are available for acquiring, developing or operating
estuarine sanctuaries, to serve as natural and human pro-
cesses occurring within the estuaries of the coastal zone.
The Rookery Bay and Apalachicola areas are being considered.

2. Grants are available for acquiring lands to provide for
access to public beaches and other public coastal areas of
environmental, recreational, historical, aesthetic, eco-
logical, or cultural values, and for the preservation of
islands.

COASTAL ENERGY IMPACT PROGRAM

1. Plan for the impacts in the coastal zone of any new or
expanded energy facilities.

2. Provide loans and guarantees for the construction of new
or improved public facilities or services required as a
direct result of new or expanded Outer Continental Shelf
energy activity.

3. Assistance possibly available to state and local government
to prevent, reduce, or ameliorate unavoidable past or future
environmental and recreational losses in the coastal zone
resulting from specified coastal energy activity.

NOTE: The coastal energy impact program is complex and
controversial, still being interpreted by the federal
government, and being challenged by several states.

115

CHAPTER XII: BIBLIOGRAPHY OF PROGRAM PUBLICATIONS

STAFF PUBLICATIONS

1. Coastal Zone Management in Florida - 1971

2. Coastal Zone Management in Florida - 1972

3. Coastal Zone Management in Florida - 1973

4. Coastal Zone Management in Florida - 1974

5. Florida Coastal Zone Management Atlas. (1972)

6. Florida Keys Coastal Zone Management Study. (1974)

* 7. Florida Regional Coastal Zone Management Atlas. (1976)

8. Escarosa: A Preliminary Study of Coastal Zone Management
Problems and Opportunities in Escambia and Santa Rosa
Counties, Florida. (1971)

9. Unofficial Composite: General Permitting Procedures for
Coastal Zone Activities in Florida. (1971)

10. Newsletter (CCC). June, 1975, last issue.

11. A Selected Bibliography on: Thermal Pollution; Thermal
Effluents; and Electric Power Plants, Their Effects,
Planning, and Siting. (1971)

12. . 1972 Supplement.

13. Florida Coastal Zone Applied Research Needs. (1972)

14. Marine Environmental Studies of Florida's Gulf Coast:
Summary and Selected Bibliography. (1973)

15. Recommendations for Development Activities in Florida's
Coastal Zone. (1973). (Companion volume to Florida
CZM Atlas).

16. A Statistical Inventory of Key Biophysical Elements in
Florida's Coastal Zone. (1973). (Companion volume
to Florida CZM Atlas).

17. Salt Marsh Workshop and Conference. (1973)

18. Florida Keys Coastal Zone Management Study: Executive
Summary. (1974)

19. Proceedings of the Florida Keys Coral Reef Workshop. (1974)

20. Inventory of Florida Coastal Zone Planning Publications.
(3v.) (1975).
117

*Texts to Accompany Florida Regional Coastal Zone Management
Atlas. (1976). Regions 1-10:

Florida Regional Coastal Zone Management Atlas (Text). (7/1/76)

Biophysical Analysis Methodology Appendix to Florida Regional
Coastal Zone Management Atlas. (March, 1976)

Land Ownership Analysis (accompanies maps in Atlas).
Land Ownership Inventory.

Land Use Analysis (accompanies maps in Atlas).

Support Services Analysis (accompanies maps in Atlas).

Economic Analysis.

Population Analysis.

Existing Legal Authorities.

Environmental Quality Assessment.
(maps - included in Atlas)

CONTRACT PUBLICATIONS

1. Coastal Zone Resources Corporation. A Plan and Program for
Amenities and Aesthetics in the Escarosa Pilot Area.
(Dec. 1971)

2. Florida. State University System. Institute of Oceanography.
Escarosa I: An Oceanographic Survey of the Florida
Territorial Sea of Escambia and Santa Rosa Counties.
(Nov. 1973)

3. Hopkins, Thomas S. Marine Ecology in Escarosa. (Sept. 1973)

4. Livingston, Robert J. The Ecological Impact of Pulp Mill
Effluents on Aquatic Flora and Fauna of North Florida:
Comparison of a Polluted Drainage System (Fenholloway)
with an Unpolluted One (Econfina). (Dec. 1972)

5. Martin-Marietta Corporation. Florida Coastal Zone Land
Use and Ownership Atlas (1971).

6. Milo Smith and Associates. Planning Inventory: Florida's
Coastal Areas. (Dec. 1972)

7. Northwest Florida Development Council and Economic Develop-
ment District. Commercial Tourism Land Absorption Study.
(Dec. 1972)

8. O'Connor, Dennis M. Legal Aspects of Coastal Zone Management
in Escambia and Santa Rosa Counties, Florida. (March 1972)

9. RMBR Planning/Design Group. Clearwater Coastal Zone Manage-
ment Plan. (1972)

10. RMBR Planning/Design Group. Local Coastal Zone Management:
A Handbook. (1972)

11. South Florida Regional Planning Council. An Assessment of
the Development Suitability of Land in South Florida.
(June 1973)

12. Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council. A Preliminary Investi-
gation of the Use of Natural Resources in the Tampa Bay
Region as a Basis for Future Developmental Policy.
(Dec. 1972)

13. University of Florida. Department of Architecture. Identi-
fication and Evaluation of Coastal Resource Patterns in
Florida. (1972)

119

14. Barloga, Fred. Considerations for Review of Florida's
Coastal Canal Construction Policy. (1975)

15. Collier, Courtland. Seawall and Revetment Effectiveness,
Cost and Construction. (1975) (Sea Grant)

16. Planning/Design Group. Impact Assessment: A Case Study.
(July, 1976)

17. Planning/Design Group. A Process for Defining a Permissible
Use Framework. (July, 1976)

18. Planning/Design Group. Impact Assessment Handbook.
(July, 1976)

19. University of Florida. Holland Law Center. Center for
Governmental Responsibility. Compilation of Laws Relating
to Florida Coastal Zone Management. (3v.) (June, 1976)

20. . Analysis of Laws Relating to Florida
Coastal Zone Management. (Oct. 1976)

120

SPECIAL PROJECTS: PRODUCTS FROM REGIONS
(Not Yet Completed)

OCS Study.

JAPB, ECFRPC, NWFRPC, SWFRPC, WFRPC, WithRPC

Port Analysis.

JAPB, ECFRPC, NWFRPC, SFRPC, SWFRPC, WFRPC

Special OCZM Financed Projects:

Duval County (Selection of Heavy Industrial Sites).

Dade County Wetlands Project. (Shoreline Management Suggested
for Biscayne Bay)

121

AVAILABILITY OF DOCUMENTS LISTED IN BIBLIOGRAPHY OF
PROGRAM PUBLICATIONS

PUBLICATIONS AVAILABLE FOR DISTRIBUTION

Florida Keys Coastal Zone Management Study. (1974)

Recommendations for Development Activities in Florida's
Coastal Zone. (1973) (Companion volume to Florida
Coastal Zone Management Atlas - 1972).

A Statistical Inventory of Key Biophysical Elements in
Florida's Coastal Zone. (1973). (Companion volume
to Florida Coastal Zone Management Atlas - 1972).

Inventory of Florida Coastal Zone Planning Publications.
(3 v.) (1975).

Florida. State University System. Institute of Oceanography.
Escarosa I: An Oceanographic Survey of the Florida
Territorial Sea of Escambia and Santa Rosa Counties.
(Nov. 1973)

Hopkins, Thomas S. Marine Ecology in Escarosa. (Sept. 1973).

Martin - Marietta Corporation. Florida Coastal Zone Land
Use and Ownership Atlas (1971).

Collier, Courtland. Seawall and Revetment Effectiveness,
Cost and Construction. (1975) (Sea Grant).

Planning/Design Group. Impact Assessment Handbook.
(July, 1976).

University of Florida. Holland Law Center. Center for
Governmental Responsibility. Analysis of Laws Relating
to Florida Coastal Zone Management. (Oct. 1976).

LIMITED COPIES AVAILABLE - CAN BE REPRODUCED IN QUANTITY

Coastal Zone Management in Florida - 1972

Coastal Zone Management in Florida - 1973

Coastal Zone Management in Florida - 1974

Marine Environmental Studies of Florida's Gulf Coast:
Summary and Selected Bibliography. (1973).

Florida Keys Coastal Zone Management Study: Executive
Summary. (1974).

Proposed Geographic Areas of Particular Concern. (January 1977)

122

Planning/Design Group. Impact Assessment: A Case Study.
(July, 1976)

PUBLICATIONS AVAILABLE IN BUREAU OF COASTAL ZONE PLANNING LIBRARY

Coastal Zone Management in Florida - 1971

Escarosa: A Preliminary Study of Coastal Zone Management
Problems and Opportunities in Escambia and Santa Rosa
Counties, Florida. (1971)

Unofficial Composite: General Permitting Procedures for
Coastal Zone Activities in Florida. (1971)

Newsletter (CCC). June, 1975, last issue.

A Selected Bibliography on Thermal Pollution; Thermal
Effluents; and Electric Power Plants, Their Effects,
Planning, and Siting. (1971)

1972 Supplement.

Florida Coastal Zone Applied Research Needs. (1972)

Salt Marsh Workshop and Conference. (1973)

Proceedings of the Florida Keys Coral Reef Workshop. (1974)

Coastal Zone Resources Corporation. A Plan and Program for
Amenities and Aesthetics in the Escarosa Pilot Area.
(Dec. 1971)

Livingston, Robert J. The Ecological Impact of Pulp Mill
Effluents on Aquatic Flora and Fauna of North Florida:
Comparison of a Polluted Drainage System (Fenholloway)
with an Unpolluted One (Econfina). (Dec. 1972)

Milo Smith and Associates. Planning Inventory: Florida's
Coastal Areas. (Dec. 1972)

Northwest Florida Development Council and Economic Develop-
ment District. Commercial Tourism Land Absorption Study.
(Dec. 1972)

O'Connor, Dennis M. Legal Aspects of Coastal Zone Management
in Escambia and Santa Rosa Counties, Florida. (March 1972)

RMBR Planning/Design Group. Clearwater Coastal Zone Manage-
ment Plan. (1972)

RMBR Planning/Design Group. Local Coastal Zone Management:
A Handbook. (1972)

123

South Florida Regional Planning Council. An Assessment of
the Development Suitability of Land in South Florida.
(June 1973).

Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council. A Preliminary
Investigation of the Use of Natural Resources in the
Tampa Bay Region as a Basis for Future Developmental
Policy. (Dec. 1972).

University of Florida. Department of Architecture. Identi-
fication and Evaluation of Coastal Resource Patterns in
Florida. (1972).

Barloga, Fred. Considerations for Review of Florida's
Coastal Canal Construction Policy. (1975).

Planning/Design Group. A Process for Defining a Permissible
Use Framework. (July, 1976).

University of Florida. Holland Law Center. Center for
Governmental Responsibility. Compilation of Laws Relating
to Florida Coastal Zone Management. (3 v.) (June, 1976).

PUBLICATIONS NOT YET AVAILABLE IN FINAL FORM

Florida Regional Coastal Zone Management Atlas. 1976.

Biophysical Analysis Methodology Appendix to Florida
Regional Coastal Zone Management Atlas. (March 1976).

Texts to Accompany Regional Atlases: Regions 1-10

Land Ownership Analysis (accompanies maps in Atlas).
Land ownership Inventory.

Land Use Analysis (accompanies maps in Atlas).

Support Services Analysis (accompanies maps in Atlas)

Economic Analysis.

Population Analysis.

Existing Legal Authorities.

Environmental Quality Assessment.
maps - included in Atlas

Suggested State objectives, Policy and Criteria for
Coastal Management in Florida. (January 1977) (Draft)

124

Boundaries of the Coastal Zone.

Special Projects: Products from Regions.

OCS Study

Port Analysis

Special OCZM Financed Projects.

Duval County (Selection of Heavy Industrial Sites).

Dade County Wetlands Project. (Shoreline Management
Suggested for Biscayne Bay).

125