<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1" ?>
<doc callnum="KF5627 .S5 1978">
<metadata>
	<titleStmt>
		<mainTitle nfc="0"><title>Coastal zone management</title>:<titleExt>a strategy guide for AIA components</titleExt>/[<respStmt>written by Jane A. Silverman].</respStmt></mainTitle>
	</titleStmt>
	<authorStmt>
		<persAuthor mainEntry="y"><name type="surname">Silverman, Jane A.</name></persAuthor>
		<corpAuthor><name>National Ocean Survey.</name><subName>Office of Coastal Zone Management.</subName></corpAuthor>
		<corpAuthor><name>American Institute of Architects.</name></corpAuthor>
	</authorStmt>
	<imprint><pubPlace>Washington, D.C.</pubPlace>:<pubName>American Institute of Architects</pubName>,<pubDate>1978.</pubDate></imprint>
	<classStmt>
		<locClass>
			<subject cat="top">Coastal zone management</subject>
			<subject cat="geo">United States.</subject>
		</locClass>
		<locClass>
			<subject cat="top">Coastal zone management</subject>
			<subject cat="gen">Law and legislation</subject>
			<subject cat="geo">United States.</subject>
		</locClass>
	</classStmt>
</metadata>

<text xml:space="preserve">
<pb n="1" />

     THE AMERICAN
     INSTITUTE OF
     ARCHITECTS

     STATE
     COMPONENT
     AFFAIRS

                        COASTAL- ZGN@
                       "FOR!14ATION CENTER

     COASTAL ZONE
     RAA  NAGEMENT:
    KF    FRATEGY GUIDE
    5627
    .S5
    1978   1 AIA COMPONENTS
<pb n="2" />

     THE AMERICAN
     INSTITUTE OF
     ARCHITECTS

     STATE
     COMPONENT
     AFFAIRS

                             COASTAL ZONE
                             INFOR'MiATION CENTER

     COASTAL ZONE
 o   MANAGEMENT:
lU   A STRATEGY GUIDE
     FOR AIA COMPONENTS
<pb n="3" />

                                                                                                                                           'TER

                           COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT:
                           A Strategy Guide
                           for AIA Components

                                                        Property of CSC Library

                                                  U - S - DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NOAA
                                                  COASTAL SERVICES CENTER
                                                  2234 SOUTH HOBSON AVENUE
                                                  CHARLESTON, SC 29405-24 13

                           The American Institute of Architects
                           1735 New York Avenue,NW
                           Washington, D.C. 20006

                           December, 1978

                         co

               C6
              14N
              Ll    @k@ 9=0
<pb n="4" />

         "Coastal Zone Management: Balancing and Protection" and "Coastal Zone
         Management: A Strategy Guide for AJA -Components" were written by Jane
         A. Silverman and are based on the work of the AIA Regional Development
         and Natural Resources Committee. The publications were produced by the
         AIA Component Affairs and the Practice and Design Departments in conjunction
         with the Office of Coastal Zone Management.

         For assistance on legislative and/or regulatory activities, or for additional
         copies of this publication, contact State Component Affairs, Component Affairs
         Department, The American Institute of Architects, 1735 New York Avenue, N. W. ,
         Washington, D. C., 20006, (202) 785-7386.

         Preparation of this publication was partially funded by the National Oceanic and
         Atmospheric Administration, Office of Coastal Zone Management, U.S.
         Department of Commerce. The opinions and views contained in this document
         are those of the author and publisher and do not necessarily reflect official
         policy of the U. S. Government.
<pb n="5" />

                CONTENTS

                INTRODUCTION    . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .            I

                OVERVIEW I: THE COAST AND ITS USES      . . . . . . . . . . . . . .      .   3

                OVERVIEW II: THE COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT ACT            ... . . . . . .      5

                OVERVIEW III: CITIZEN PARTICIPATION    . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .         9

                   1.   Requirements of CZMA for Public Participation   . . . .              9
                   2.   Getting Architects Involved .  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .       10

                THE COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT PROCESS                    . . . . . . . . .   13
                   A. Initial Process  0 0 . 0  . .. . . . . . .               . . . . .   13
                   B.  Refinement of th e Management Plan . . o                o  . . o  . 15

                        1.  Establishment of Coastal Zone Boundaries                o .  . 15
                        2.  Permissible Uses. . . . . o      . . . . . .          . . . .  17
                        3.  Areas of Particular Concern . o    . .      o         .      o 19
                        4.  Areas for Preservation of Restoration                          21
                        5.  Priority Uses   . . . o o o . o . o                            22
                        6o  State Authority and Organization   . . . . .                   24
                        7.  Access to Public Coastal Areas.    o               . . . . .   27
                        8.  Erosion Mitigation                          . . . . . . .    o 29
                        9.  Energy Facilities                  . . . . . .     . . . . .   31

                   Co   The Implementation Stage .   .       o o .  .  o.  o   o  . o .  o 33

                        lo  The Intergovernmental Structure:   . o  .  o. .                33

                            a. Federal Consistency                             . . . . .   33
                            b. The National Interest and Coordination      . . . . . . .   35

                        2.  Coastal Energy Impact Program .    . . . . . . . . . . . .     37

                        3.  Emerging Issues in Coastal Zone Management       . . . . . .   41

                            a. Hazard Management       . . . . . . .       . . . . . . .   42
                            b. Urban Waterfronts . .      *                       * ' * *  43
                            c. Enhancing the Visual Resourcoe    of1he Coas;      . . . . 45
<pb n="6" />

        CONTENTS (Cont.)

        CONCLUSION   . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .47

        APPENDIX I: AIA POLICY ON THE COAST

        APPENDIX II: STATE COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT AGENCIES

        APPENDIX IIJI: MAJOR FEDERAL STATUTES AND REGULATIONS ON
                     COASTA L ZONE MANAGEMENT

        APPENDIX IV: FURTHER READING ON COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT
<pb n="7" />

                INTRODUCTION

                The Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) has as its objectives both
                environmental protection and economic growth. Under the law, which was
                passed by Congress in 1972 and amended in 1976, state and local
                governments are provided with loans and grants for planning, management
                and preservation, as well as incentives for increased coordination with
                the federal government. Congress intended the coastal zone management
                program to be a partnership process, carried out with a high degree of
                cooperation between federal, state and local officials, as well as the
                public.

                The theme of balance -- both in the uses of the coast and the process for
                determining those uses -- is the hallmark of the Act. Our shores are
                subject to many valid and competing uses -- recreational development,
                ports, estuarine sanctuaries, and industry. The coast is also a fragile
                and finite resource, one which can be wasted or used wisely. Decisions
                about the coast are so important that they should be made by as broad a
                spectrum of the public as possible. What happens on the shore affects all
                of us and we should all have a say in the future of the coast.

                The design "public" ccm make an especially valuable contribution to
                sensitive and balanced use of the coast through active involvement at
                various levels of coastal zone management and through exemplary design
                proposals. This publication describes the coastal zone management
                process and outlines a strategy for participation in it by architects,
                acting both through their state components and as individuals. The
                thrust of this booklet is on the planning and management process under
                CZMA -- some of the key issues raised by the law and ways that architects
                can help in their resolution. (Note: A companion publication describes
                the law and various coastal uses for a wider audience.)
<pb n="8" />

             OVERVIEW I: THE COAST AND ITS USES

             The American coastline (which includes the Great Lakes) contains America's
             seven largest cities, 53 percent of the population and 90 percent of the popula-
             tion growth. By the end of the century, according to some estimates, two
             hundred million people will live along the coast. Among the most important
             coastal activities are:

                     Recreation - The average American spends ten days a year on t1he coast ,
             much of it in recreational activity and these demands are expected to increase.
             Recreational uses of the coast have important social and economic benefits.
             In New Jersey, for example, recreation and tourism are the largest coastal
             industries and generate about $3 billion annually in goods and services. The
             1976 amendments to the Coastal Zone Management Act specifically call for a
             beach access planning process as part of state CZM plans, and water-related
             recreational development is given high priority under the CZM program.

                     Harvestin - Both onshore and off, coastal areas are highly productive
             sources. The commerical fishery harvest is already estimated to be $900 million
             (1973 dollars) and is expected to grow to as much as $4 billion by the end of the
             century. Coastal shore regions are often the source of rich delta soil and their
             welcoming climate supports highly productive agricultural land.

                     Industry - Roughly 50 percent of all manufacturing jobs in the United
             States are located along the coast. Manufacturing and industry are drawn to
             the shore by port facilities and abundant water supply, among other reasons.
             Power plants and mineral extraction are two especially prominent industrial users.

                     Offshore Energy Exploration - In 1975, the federal government announced
             its plans to lease 10 million Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) acres, as much as had
             been leased in the entire previous 20 years. Offshore oil and gas exploration,
             as well as increased deep seabed mining, will generate considerable onshore
             development. This includes oil rig construction and other support facilities,
             pipelines, power plants, processing facilities, ports and transportation systems,
             not to mention the ancillary growth -- housing, shops and services -- for an
             expanded population base. One of the major challenges of coastal planning is
             to ensure that energy development occurs in an orderly and environmentally
             responsible manner.

                                                                                           3
<pb n="9" />

         All of these diverse coastal activities must be viewed against the backdrop of
         the natural environment of the shore. The coast is a unique resource of extra-
         ordinary natural value. Increasing demands are being placed on this finite and
         environmentally sensitive natural system. Certain coastal areals are especially
         valuable and vulnerable:

                 Estuaries - These are waters at the mouth of coastal streams and rivers,
         where fresh and sea water mingle, creating a nutrient rich spawning ground for
         marine life. Estuaries are being threatened by dredging and pollution.

                Wetlands - These are critical areas that fall between the mean low tide
         mark and the early high storm mark. They include marshes and southern man-
         grove forests. Wetlands help control the flow of runoff and are valuable breeding
         grounds for fish and wildlife. Wetlands are highly susceptible to damage from
         dredging and development.

                 Dunes, beaches and barrier islands - The coastal system of dunes,
         beaches and barrier islands are our first defense against storms, winds and
         waves. Dunes and beaches are held in place by tough rooted plants. Develop-
         ment has altered the beach/dune plant matrix and resulted in erosion and
         increased hazards from flooding in many coastal areas. Develo- ment on barrier
                                                                        P
         islands, small inlets off the Gulf and Atlantic coasts, has weakened much of the
         dune system which is our frontline against severe storms.

           4
<pb n="10" />

              OVERVIEW II: THE COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT ACT

               The Coastal Zone Management Act is administered by the Office of Coastal
               Zone Management, (OCZM), a part of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
               Administration (NOAA) within the Department of Commerce. The Act provides
               grants and other financial aids for planning, management and conservation
               of coastal lands, as well as an important nonfinancial incentive -- the
               federal consistency provision -- which requires that all federal activities
               be consistent with approved state coastal zone management plans to the
               maximum extent possible. The 1976 amendments to the law created the
               Coastal Energy Impact Program (CEIP) to help states and local governments
               deal with some of the onshore impacts of offshore energy programs.

               Thirty-five states and territories (including those bordering the Great Lakes)
               are eligible to participate in the program grants under Section 305 of the Act.
               Thirteen states -- Washington, Oregon, California, Rhode Island,
               Massachusetts, Michigan, North Carolina, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, Maryland,
               Maine, New Jersey, Wisconsin -- are receiving grants for implementation of
               their coastal zone management plans. Up to 10 more programs are expected
               to be submitted for review during FY 1979. Actual appropriation of funds for
               Coastal Zone Management has not matched the funding levels authorized
               by the Congress. As of the end of FY 78 (Sept. 30', 1978) OCZM has issued
               grants, for all purposes, of $ 187.2 million. Listed below are authorized
               funds as described in the Coastal Zone Management Act, as amended.

                       Program Development Grants. Section 305 of the law (as amended in
               1976) provides federal/state matchin"g grants for preparation of coastal zone
               management programs. The federal share can be as much as 80% of the
               cost of preparation, and states are eligible for up to four annual grants.
               Congress has authorized $ 20 million annually for fiscal years 1977-79 for
               this purpose. Grants are awarded to states on the basis of a complex
               formula which takes into account the length of the state's shoreline, the
               population living in coastal counties, and specific coastal problems of a
               given state.

                       Preliminary Approval Grants. The 1976 amendments to the Coastal
               Zone Management Act create a "halfway" step between preparation of the
               coastal plan and the management process. This interim approval provides
               funds to states to carry out certain portions of the management program
               before final approval of the management plan is received from OCZM. As an
               example, such grants will be awarded to states which have completed the

                                                                                              5
<pb n="11" />

            basic design of their management program but are awaiting the passage of
            required state legislation or are completing necessary interagency
            agreements.

                    Administrative Grants. Section 306 provides administrative grants to
            states to carry out federally approved coastal zone management plans. The
            1976 amendments increased the authorization under Section 306 from $ 30
            million to $ 50 million annually for fiscal years 1977 - 1980. The federal
            share is now 80 percent and grants are awarded to states on the basis of
            the extent and nature of the shoreline, particular coastal problems,
            population, and the areas covered by the state plan.

                    Estuarine -Sanctuary Protection. Section 315 (1) of thE! CZMA as
            amended provides 50 percent federal matching grants for the acquisition of
            estuarine sancturies both for conservation and for use as laboratories for
            education and research. Five sanctuaries have been established with two
            proposals currently under consideration. Six million dollars has been
            authorized by Congress through fiscal year 1977.

            The law also provides grants for interstate planning; reasearch, technical
            assistance and training; and acquisition of land for public access to beaches
            and other coastal areas of special value. Funds for these three programs
            have not been appropriated, however.

            The Coastal Energy Impact Program (CEIP) was created by Section 308 of the
            1976 amendments to the Coastal Zone Management Act. Funding under the
            program enables communities to plan ahead for the services and facilities
            they may need to accommodate growth induced by energy development. It
            also provides assistance to help communities assume the fiscal burdens
            brought on by growth by allowing the federal government to act as a lender
            of last resort.

            There are five basic forms of CEIP assistance:

                    1). Planning grants, on an 80% federal matching share available to
            states and local governments to help prepare for "any economic, social or
            environmental consequence" cau@@ed by "new or expanded, energy facilities."

                    2) Public facility grants, grants are available to coastal communities

            6
<pb n="12" />

               impacted by Outer Continental Shelf energy activity. These grants may be
               used for a broad range of public facilities.

                       3) Credit assistance, available to communities in the form of direct
               loans or guarantees of loans and bonds. This can help communities provide
               needed facilities before the anticipated increase of their tax base is able
               to support repayment of securities. Repayment assistance is provided under
               CEIP to communities who fail to meet their credit obligations because the
               tax base increase did not materialize as expected. This protects communities
               from experiencing a net fiscal loss because of OCS activity.

                       4) Environmental grants, to be used to alleviate unavoidable losses
               of valuable environmental or recreational resources due to coastal energy
               development.

                       5) OSC administrative grants to be used by states to administer
               their responsibilities under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act.

               These programs are funded from three interlocking sources, which together
               will provide $ 2.1 billion over a ten year period:

                       The Coastal Energy Impact Fund   'currently authorized at $ 800 million
               over ten years. The fund will be used for planning assistance, credit assist-
               ance and repayment assistance when a borrowing government cannot meet its
               obligations. A formula based on the estimated impacts from energy develop-
               ment in a given year determines the allotment of Fund moneys to each state.

                       Formula Gr nt s, authorized at $130 million per year through 1988. The
               formula grants may be used to redress losses of valuable environmental or
               recreational resources, and to plan and develop public facilities and services
               which are directly required as a result of OCS activity. Allotments of formula
               grants to each state are based on OCS activity in the past year, as deter-
               mined by three measures.

                       OCS Administrative Grants, authorized at $ 5 million per year through
               1983. These grants are available to coastal states found by the Secretary of
               Commerce to be affected (or likely to be affected) by OCS energy activity.

                                                                                             7
<pb n="13" />

              OVERVIEW III: CITIZEN PARTICIPATION

              One of the major themes of the Coastal Zone Management Act is that the
              public should be brought into the process at every possible juncture. There
              are many "publics" -- private citizens, public interest groups, property
              owners, industry representatives and professional societies. And there
              are many ways of participating -- technical assistance, advocacy,
              representation on advisory committees, presence at public meetings.

              The Coastal Zone Management Act cites several points where "official"
              public input must be solicited. Most of these decision points occur during
              the planning stages of state programs or at the point when key proposals,
              such as those under CEIP, will be submitted. Citizen participation during
              these stages is very important for it can help insure that the outlines of a
              coastal zone management program meet the needs of the public. But the real
              substance of coastal zone management occurs in the implementation of the
              plans. Here the opportunities for citizen participation are less formal, but
              no less important. During the management stage, architects and others must
              insure that the opportunities for citizen participation are adequate. The
              demands on the coast are constantly changing, and the plan must be fluid
              and dynamic to meet changing needs. Furthermore, those who implement
              the plan also change as state administrations are voted in and out of office.
              Only a watchful public can really insure that the needs of coastal users are
              met by the coastal zone management plan.

              This section provides an overview of citizen participation under the law and
              some general ways that architects in particular can be involved in coastal
              zone management and planning. The next section explains the coastal zone
              management process in greater detail and outlines specific steps that can
              be taken by the design public at each juncture of the process.

              Requirements of CZMA for Public Participat ion

              In the opening to the CZMA, Congress declared that it is national policy
                   to encourage the particiaption of the public, of Federal, state and local
              governments and regional agencies in the development of coastal zone
              management programs. . . " Section 306 of the law requires that the state hold
              public hearings in the development of the management program as a require-
              ment for program approval. In its regulations for program development grants,
              the Office of Coastal Zone Management (OCZM) notes that "public partici-
              pation is an essential element of development and administration of a coastal
              management program... Participating states, therefore, should seek to obtain

                                                                                        9
<pb n="14" />

              extensive public participation in the development and administration of a
              coastal management program. "

              The regulations require that states hold at least two public hearings, at least
              one of which will deal with the total coastal management pnDgram; that states
              provide a minimum of 30 days notice of hearings; and that the state agency
              make available at the time of public notice, all agency materials pertinent to
              the hearings.

              These regulations also point out that "formal public" hearings may not provide@
              an adequate opportunity for information exchange and recommend various
              ways of getting the public involved, including citizen participation in the
              development of goals and objectives, establishment of citizen advisory
              committees, and establishment of processes to review elements of the
              management programs by selected citizen groups and the general public.

              Another opportunity for "official" comment on the states coastal zone
              management plan is through review of the environmental impact statement
              prepared by the federal government prior to state management plan approval.
              An EIS, which is required under the National Environmental Policy Act as
              part of the federal review of each completed state coastal zone management
              program, must provide a 45 day comment period during which citizens,
              public groups and government officials can make their VOiCes heard on the
              management plan. Citizen opposition to a coastal zone management plan
              will not itself stop approval, but the federal government is required to consider
              all comments on the EIS   Often well thought out and reasoned criticism by
              public reviewers could lead to modifications which can strengthen the plan.

              Getting Architects Involved

              How can these legal requirements and suggestions be translated into real life
              activity by architects? There are several ways, some formal, such as serving
              on state advisory commissions, and some less official, such as working behind
              the scenes to forge coalitions on a particular issue affecting the coast.
              Following is a brief summary of some of the most important ways that architects
              can get involved in coastal zone management.

                      Serving on Citizen AdvisoEZ Committees. There is :no reason why
              design professionals have to be appointed to a state's citizen advisory
              committee. The only way to insure that design interests are represented

              10
<pb n="15" />

            on such groups is to lobby hard for appointment of architects or other design
            professionals. In Georgia, for example, architects have served on the
            state advisory committee and played an important role in fashioning that
            state's program.

                   Technical Assistance. State coastal zone management staff will often
            seek outside technical assistance. Preservation of historic and aesthetic
            resources along the shore, designation of appropriate uses, and hazard
            mitigation methods are just a few of the broad areas where design talent could
            be useful. Architects should make themselves available for such technical
            assistance on both a paid and volunteer basis. The Rice Center for Community
            Design and Research is Houston, Texas, for example, has used the skills of
            design professionals extensively to make a comprehensive analysis of
            environmental and economic development issues confronting the Texas Gulf
            Coast.

                   Speaking Out on Issues. State components of the AIA offer an excellent
            structure for speaking out on important issues of coastal zone management,
            A public statement from an AIA chapter can have wide influence among officials
            and the public more generally and serve as convincing evidence that architects
            care about the future of the coast.@ The Virginia Society of the American
            Institute of Architects has developed a specific position statement on Coastal
            Zone Land Use and the Use of the Continental Shelf.

                   Coalition Building and Lobbying. Much of the most effective public
            participation in coastal zone management is going to be informal and behind
            the scenes. The first step is to get to know who the important people in the
            state and local government are with respect to coastal zone management. -
            This does not only mean the staff of the state coastal,agency (a list of these
            agencies, with addresses and telephones is included As an appendix to this
            report), but also the key elected officials in the legislature and local
            governments, and others in state government with an interest in the program.,
            The next step is to identify those groups outside of government with which
            architects might share interests with regard to coastal issues. A list of
            such organizations might include environmental groups, such as the state
            chapter of the Sierra Club, the National Wildlife Federation or the National
            Audubon Society; business organizations such as the state Homebuilder
            Association or the Chamber of Commerce; industry groups, especially those
            involved in energy production, extraction industries, chemical industries or
<pb n="16" />

               refining and agriculture; government watch dog groups, such as the League
               of Women Voters; state and local historic preservation associations; sports-
               man groups, such as fishing and boating associations; and local home-
               owner and community associations. Not all of these groups are going to
               share the views of the design profession on every coastal Issue, but there
               are opportunities for forging alliances with many of these organizations on
               certain issues. A coalition of organizations is more effective than such
               groups acting alone. It can pool resources to get information, bring out
               strong representation at public meetings, and generate well-organized,
               immediate response through newspaper coverage and phone calls to key state
               officials. Architects are in an excellent position to serve as a catalyst for
               such well organized and effective citizen involvement. They can appeal to
               many groups which care about the coast through their twin Interests in
               development and preservation.

                      Design Examples     Probably the most effective public participation
               by an architect is through his own work. There is no better statement of
               sound coastal zone management practices than an example of what to build
               and where (or where not) to build. Virtually every design proposal in
               coastal areas is touched at some point by an architect's pen. Special design
               challenges are posed by marinas, second home developments and urban
               waterfronts. It is difficult and perhaps not even desirable to write good
               design into law or regulation. But architects can and already have been
               leaders in good design along the coast through high quality plans and
               buildings. For example, on Botany Bay Island, a subtropical barrier island
               off the coast of South Carolina, the design team drew up a careful plan for
               sensitive use of this fragile site, one which would protect the unique function
               of barrier islands.

               12
<pb n="17" />

               THE COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT PROCESS

               A.  Initial Process-

                   The initial place for effective public participation in coastal zone manage-
                   ment is at the beginning of the planning process.

                   In order to be eligible for Section 305 program development grants, states
                   must provide the following to OCZM:

                       a summary of past and cur-rent activities in coastal zone management.

                       a ranking of major coastal-related problems and issues, as well as
                       identification of goals and objectives of the management program.

                       the governor's designation of a lead agency for coastal zone manage-
                       ment as well as a listing of all the agencies in the state with an
                       involvement in coastal zone management.

                       a work program for preparation of the management program. This
                       includes identification of existing sources of information, methods
                       of public participation, mechanism for intergovernmental cooperation,
                       approximate boundaries of the coastal zone, and mechanisms to
                       coordinate with federal lands excluded from the coastal jurisdiction of
                       the state.

                       an annual work program including manpower requirements, scheduling
                       and costs.

                       identif ication of other federal, state or local activity with a significant
                       impact on the coastal zone and ways to achieve, coordination and
                       cooperation with these entities.

                   States are eligible for grants under Section 305 for up to four years. Each
                   year of the planning process should result in a refinement of the state plan
                   in terms of setting priorities for coastal uses, establishing the precise
                   boundaries of the coastal zone, setting up the key legislative and
                   adminstrative mechanisms for management, and revising the plan in light
                   of new developments and problems, such as Outer Continental Shelf
                   exploration.

                   Most states are well into their second and third years of program
                                                                                           13
<pb n="18" />

                development and consequently many of the important initial planning
                decisions have already been made. However, it is important to review
                these early program development elements since, in some states, changes
                have been or are being made in these basic elements as the program
                matures.

                1. Key issues of this stage:

                    The work in the early stages of coastal zone management planning sets
                    the stage for the final refinement of the plan. There are three especially
                    important jobs carried out during this initial phase:

                       Inventory of coastal resources. The inventory inclu des not only
                       ecological resources, but also demographic, economic and social
                       data. The inventory of coastal resources forms the basis for
                       establishing permitted uses on the coast as well as designated
                       areas of special concern.

                       Designation of a lead agency. During this phase the governor must
                       designate a lead agencyfor carrying out the coastal zone management
                       program and begin the work of generating the legislative and
                       organizational framework for managing the coastal zone. The
                       official structure of the state program may be temporary, awaiting
                       the passage of a comprehensive state law. But it also can provide
                       a foretaste of the seriousness of coastal officials in carrying out
                       their program.

                       Establishment of goals and problems. The early stages of planning
                       are marked by a preliminary ranking of major coastal-related problems,
                       as well as the setting of objectives for the management program.
                       This is obviously tied in closely to the inventory of coastal resources.
                       Together they form the basis for most of the key state management
                       decisions on the coast.

                2. Architect Involvement:

                    Identify the lead players and key groups outside of government involved
                    in coastal zone management. Begin working closely with them.

                       Get appointed to citizen advisory boards.
             14
<pb n="19" />

                           Develop clear positions on coastal zone management at the state
                           component level.

                           Identify areas where architects can provide technical assistance.

                           Make sure that aesthetic resources (e.g. , special views, historic
                           buildings) are included in the inventory.

                           Lobby for inclusion of design protection goals in the statement of
                           objectives.

                           Make sure that the lead agency is taking the lead and that it has
                           adequate staff and finances. Work with other groups to lobby for
                           a strong state institutional and legislative structure for coastal
                           zone management.

               There is also an important official decision point which occurs at the early
               planning stage. OCZM requires that states submit an annual work program
               which includes plans for the coming year, an evaluation of the past year's
               activity, and the budget (funding and manpower) to carry out the current year's
               activities. This work program is available to the public and can be obtained
               fromthe state agency of OCZM. Furthermore, these work programs are subject
               to the requirements of the Office of Management and Budget Circular A-95,
               which mandates review and comment by all interested public and private parties
               through regional clearinghouses. Thus, each year, members of the public and
               architects in particular are in a position to review their state's progress in
               coastal zone management and help structure the following year's program.

               B.  Refinement of the Management Plan

                   The culmination of the Section 305 process is the acceptance by the federal
                   government of the state's coastal zone management plan. Third and fourth
                   year planning efforts, the point where most coastal states are in the
                   planning process, are normally times for a refinement of the work program
                   to meet the major requirements for approval of the state's coastal zone
                   management plan. These major requirements, the issues raised by them
                   and architect's role in meeting them are discussed below.

                       1. Establishment of Coastal Zone Boundaries. The Coastal Zone
                           Management Act defines the coastal zone in general terms, as

                                                                                             15
<pb n="20" />

                       "the coastal waters (including the waters therein and thereunder)
                       and the adjacent shorelands (including the waters therein and
                       thereunder) strongly influenced by each other and in proximity
                       to the shorelines of the several coastal states and. . includes
                       transitional and intertidal areas, salt marshes, wetlands, and
                       beaches." The boundary extends three miles on the seaward side;
                       on the inland side, the boundary is to be fixed "to the extent
                       necessary to control shorelands, the uses of which have a direct
                       and significant impact on the coastal waters." Bodies of water,
                       such as sounds, bays, ponds and estuaries "which contain a
                       measurable quantity or percentage of sea water" are also to be
                       designated as part of the coastal zone.

                       a.  Major Issues. The designation of coastal boundaries is obvious-
                           ly a critical first step in drawing up the state's management
                           program.

                           Each state will define its coastal boundary differently depending
                           on the diverse natural, institutional and legal characteristics.
                           The regulations for development of the management program
                           recommendthat states delineate a planning area which is larger
                           than but encompa 'sses, the area ultimately identified as the
                           coastal zone. "Specific coastal zone programing," the regulations
                           say, "must take into account current developmental, political and
                           administrative realities, as well as biophysical processes, that
                           may be external to the restricted zone eventually selected for
                           direct management control." The regulations also encourage
                           states to take into account other federal and state water and
                           land resource management programs, such as surface extraction
                           controls, flood plain designations, and 208 areawide waste
                           water planning jurisdictions. Finally, exluded from state coastal
                           zone designations are lands which are owned by or held in trust
                           by the Federal government.

                           The setting of a state coastal zone boundary is a complex matter.
                           The Michigan Coastal Management Program cites the following
                           questions which are explored: "How far inland do land and water
                           activities have direct and significant impact upon one another?
                           What should bethe geographic limits of program attention in terms
                           of existing laws and public sentiments? And what constitutes a
             16
<pb n="21" />

                              practical, easily identifiable boundary for such an area?,,
                              Special care chould be set in determining transitional areas or
                              what the Virginia coastal plan calls the "Boundaries at the
                              Edges." In Virginia, the plan notes, "The primary purpose for
                              which state management jurisdiction extends into transitional
                              areas above mean low water is for the protection of tidal wet-
                              lands," which are under the jurisdiction of a related state
                              program, The Virginia Wetlands Act of 1972. In other coastal
                              areas, development may proliferate just over the area regulated.
                              States should take care to set buffer areas so that such growth
                              will not have a negative impact on the coastal zone.

                              States define their boundaries in various ways. Some delineate
                              their management areas by geographic features (e.g. bluffs).
                              Others use manmade features (e.g. a highway). Still a third
                              option is to designate coastal management areas to conform with
                              jurisdictional lines (e.g. county boundaries). Some states (e.g.
                              North Carolina) also designate a two-tiered boundary, in which reg
                              regulation is intense along a narrow strip designated for special
                              protection and less intense in other, less critical areas.

                          b.  Architect Involvement.

                                 Offer technical assistance in assembling data to define
                                 boundaries. Offer special assistance in identifying relevant
                                 design-related data (e.g. views).
                                 Work closely with other interest groups and state officials to
                                 insure that boundaries are set not solely along narrow environ-
                                 mental or jurisdictional grounds, but, that political, develop-
                                 mental, economic and demographic data are also included.

                      2.  Permissible Uses. Section 305 M (2) of the Act requires that the
                          coastal zone management program include a "definition of what shall
                          constitute permissible land uses and water uses within the coastal
                          zone whichhave a direct and significant impact on the coastal
                          waters." The regulations for coastal zone management program
                          development grants note that the first step in defining permissible
                          uses is to develop criteria for potential impacts -- both good and
                          bad -- from the various uses of the shore. Some uses will have
                          virtually no (or no negative impact) and will be exempted altogether.

                                                                                         17
<pb n="22" />

                          Others may be inconsistent with state objectives and thus subject
                          to more strict scrutiny, or in the extreme case, prohibited. In
                          this last instance, the state management plan must-include its
                          reasons for excluding a use from the coastal area.

                          a.  Major Issues. Delineating the permissible uses of a coastal
                              area is really another aspect of "boundary" --- a use limit,
                              rather than a territorial limit. The regulations point out that
                              some of the factors involved in assessing im.pact and hence,
                              use, include "location, magnitude, the nature of an impact
                              upon existing or manmade environments, economic, commerical,
                              and other 'triggering' impacts, and land and water uses of
                              regional benefit." The definition and regulation of permissible
                              uses can determine the shpae of the coastline for years to
                              come. For example, California has lost an estimated one out
                              of twelve acres of cropland in its coastal zone in the 1960's
                              alone, much of it to residential development. If the state
                              has an interest in maintaining agriculture as a coastal industry,
                              it can use its CZM program to help direct residential growth
                              away from prime farmland to areas where development is more
                              compatible with state and local desires. Similarly, growth
                              inducing public works projects, such as sewage treatment
                              facilities and highways, can be guided by a CZM plan to
                              serve areas where development and growth are desired. The
                              Massachusetts C ZM plan lists several policies to direct
                              growth within the management area and to target financial
                              support to areas where growth is already occuring. One of the
                              policies in the Massachusetts plan encourages the adoption
                              of local zoning and regulatory controls which promote clustering
                              of new development to reduce wasteful land use patterns on
                              valuable coastal land. States differ in their approaches to
                              setting permitted uses and some have adopted quite sophisticated
                              sets of criteria. The Interim Land Use and Density Guidelines
                              for the Coastal Area of New Jersey, for example, set performance
                              criteria for specific project types, and then measures such
                              proposals against land and water features of the coastal zone
                              classified by Preservation, Conservation and Development .
                              Categories. For example, interceptor sewers are discouraged
                              in areas where no development presently exists or is scheduled.

               18
<pb n="23" />

                           b    Architect Involvement

                                --Monitor the process of determining permissible uses closely
                                  to insure that the use classifications of the state CZM
                                  program are inclusive and fair.
                                --Offer technical assistance to help determine use classifications,
                                  especially in those areas where development and c,)nstruction
                                  are involved.

                       3.  Areas of Particular Concern (APCS). The Act requires that the
                           management program include "an inventory and designation of
                           areas of particular concern within the coastal zone. 11 The regula-
                           tions for Coastal Zone Program Management Development Grants
                           list the following types of areas which might be considered under
                           these requirements:

                                --areas of unique, scarce, fragile, or vulnerable natural
                                  habitat, physical feature, historical significance
                                  value, and scenic importance.

                                --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 their well-being.

                                --areas where developments and facilities are dependent upon
                                  the utilization of, or access to, coastal waters.

                                --areas of unique geologic or topographic significance to
                                  industrial or commerical development.

                                --areas of significant hazard if developed, due to storms,
                                  slides, floods, erosion, settlement, and

                                  areas needed to protect, maintain or replenish coastal lands
                                  or resources, including such areas as coastal flood plains,
                                  aquifer recharge areas, sand dunes, coral and other reefs,
                                  beaches, offshore sand deposits, and mangrove stands.

                                                                                          19
<pb n="24" />

                       a   Ma  .or Issues - The starting point for the designation of areas
                           of particular concern (APC) is the resource inventory discussed
                           earlier in this paper. While many of the critical areas for
                           coastal control will be "fragile" in the environmental sense,
                           the definition of areas of concern clearly must go beyond these
                           narrow, though vital, bounds. The regulations note that "Such
                           areas are likely to encompass not only the more often citcd
                           areas of significant natural value of importance, but also
                           "(a) transitional or intensely developed areas where reclama-
                           tion, restoration, public access and other actions are
                           especially needed, and (b) those areas especially suited for
                           intensive development. In addition, immediacy of need should
                           be a major consideration in determining particular concern...

                           Many state coastal plans recognize this broad definition of
                           areas of particular concern and fashion their management
                           programs to meet such needs. Michigan, for example, designates
                           Areas of Particular concern according to their character as:
                           Areas of Natural hazard to development (e.g. erosion and flood
                           prone areas); areas sensitive to alteration of disturbance (e.g.
                           coastal lakes and urban areas); and areas of natural economic
                           potential (e.g. prime industrial sites or agricultural land).
                           The Michigan APCs are drawn from two sources -- those identified
                           by state legislation and those nominated by the public.

                       Several state coastal zone management plans make provisions for
                       reviewing and preserving special historic sites. Policy 12 of the
                       Massachusetts plan is illustrative: "Review proposed developments
                       in or near designated or register historic districts or sites to ensure
                       that federal, state and private actions requiring a state permit
                       respect their preservation intent and minimize potential adverse
                       impacts. " Several state and local requirements as well as the
                       federal consistency clause discussed later help lend enforceability
                       to this policy in the state.

                       b. Architect Involvement

                           --Monitor the preparation of the inventory of coastal resources
                             carefully during the planning stage because this is the basis
                             for the designation of APCs.
             20
<pb n="25" />

                                --Offer technical assistance in assembling data for determining
                                  APCs especially when design factors are critical (e.g. areas
                                  of scenic beauty, historic sites, buffer zones).

                                --Monitor the method and criteria for selecting APCs to insure
                                  that environmental developmental, socio-economic and
                                  aesthetic needs are met.

                      4.   Areas for Preservation or Restoration. Section 306 (c) (9) of the Act
                           requires that the management program "make provision for procedures
                           whereby specific areas may be designated for the purpose of
                           preserving or restoring them for their conservation, recreational,
                           ecological or esthetic values." While some states view this
                           provision as an extension of the APC requirements, designation
                           of areas for preservation and restoration usually involves sub-
                           stantially more intense regulation and control.

                           a.   Major Issues. As in the APC designation process, the starting
                                point for identifying areas of preservation or restoration is the
                                resource inventory discussed earlier in this paper. States must
                                identify the process and criteria they use for designation of
                                such areas and they must explain how areas of preservation
                                and restoration are to be distinguished from other APCs.
                                Michigan is an excellent example of a state that has developed
                                a special category for areas of restoration and preservation:
                                "a special category made up of the highest priority areas of all
                                kinds, especially those needing immediate management attention
                                for acquisition, preservation or restoration. " The Michigan
                                program requires that such areas be of.statewide or regional
                                importance and exhibit the following characteristics:

                                --high aesthetic, recreational, ecological value.

                                --high quality physical or functional characteristics.

                                --unique characteristics which are uncommon and occur in
                                  very limited areas of the shoreland.

                                --threat of irreversible harm and urgent need for management
                                  action.

                                                                                            21
<pb n="26" />

                            --problems or opportunities in the area beyond the financial
                              or regulatory capability of local units of government.

                       b. Architect Involvement

                            --Offer technical assistance in assembling data for these
                              high priority areas of preservation and restoration.

                            --Make sure that features of special aesthetic or cultural
                              value are considered for such special protection under state
                              programs and help identify these sites.

                   5.  Priority Uses.   Section 305 (b) (5) of the Act requires that state
                       management plans include "broad guidelines on priorities of uses
                       in particular areas, including specifically those uses of lowest
                       priority . " According to OCZM regulations, priority uses are meant
                       to serve three purposes:

                       1)   provide a basis for management in peographic areas of
                            particular concern

                       2)   provide the state and local government, areawide and regional
                            agencies, and citizens with a common reference point for
                            resolving conflicts; and

                       3)   articulate the nature of the state's interest, whether it is
                            preservation, conservation and/or development in geographic
                            areas of particular concern.

                       Along with the permissible use requirement discussed earlier,
                       these guidelines serve as the focal point for regulating land and
                       water uses and should be the basis for resolving most disputes.
                       Obviously, the setting of priorities depends on the specific coastal
                       issues of the state.

                       a .  Major Issues. Setting priorities for use of the coastal zone
                            is where the state program is directly confronted with balancing
                            competing environmental and economic needs for use of the
                            shore. One principle, endorsed by OCZM, is to encourage

             22
<pb n="27" />

                                those uses which are clearly water-dependent while placing
                                lower down on the scale those activities which could just as
                                easily occur inland. Thus, ports, fishing industry facilities,
                                marinas, water oriented recreation, and certain types of energy
                                facilities are all water dependent and should be considered
                                for higher priority designation in a state plan.

                                Policy 17 of the Massachusetts Coastal Plan provides an
                                example of some of the considerations in setting coastal
                                priorities: "Encourage maritime commerce and related develop-
                                ment in port areas. Prohibit pre-emptions of present and
                                proposed maritime dependent industrial uses. Permit non-
                                maritime dependent industrial uses which do not represent an
                                irreversible commitment of sites and which do not pre-empt
                                foreseeable maritime -dependent indistrial uses."

                                As important as setting the uses, is the establishment of
                                performance criteria, a technique used by some (e.g. New
                                Jersey) but not all states. This can insure that facilities
                                which may be high on the hierarchy -- such as a power plant
                                will be designed and constructed in such a way as to mitigate
                                adverse impacts and preserve other coastal objectives.

                           b.   Architect Involvement

                                --Work closely with other state and local groups to insure
                                   that the needs of coastal users are considered in drawing
                                   up the priorities and that there is a balance between
                                   environmental protection and development.

                                --Encourage your state plan to assign high priority to water
                                   dependent development, such as marinas and fisheries.

                                --If your state is implementing performance standards, make
                                   sure that they are fair and accomplish the management
                                   objectives of the plan. Help your state develop performance
                                   standards for hazard mitigation and preservation or visual,
                                   aesthetic and natural resources, two areas where architects
                                   can provide particular expertise.

                                                                                             23
<pb n="28" />

                    6.  State Authority and Organization. The Coastal Zone Management
                        Act requires that the management program include ". . an identifi-
                        cation of the means by which the State proposes to exert control
                        over the land uses and water usses ... including a listing of relevant
                        constitutional provisions, laws, regulations, and. judicial decisions.'
                        Elsewhere in the Act, the management program is required to include
                        " . . a description of the organizational structure proposed to
                        implement such management program, including the responsibilities
                        and interrelationships of local, areawide, state, regional and inter-
                        state agencies in the management process." The regulations for
                        Coastal Zone Management Program Development require that the
                        management program provide for one or a combination of the follow-
                        ihg three techniques for control of land and water uses in the
                        coastal zone:

                        --State establishment of criteria and standards for local implementa-
                          tion, subject to administrative review and enforcement of compliance.

                        --Direct state land and water use planning and regulation.

                        --State administrative review for consistency with the management
                          program of all development plans, projects, or land and water
                          use regulations, including 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.

                        a.  Major Issues.    The establishment of state authority and
                            organization of coastal zone management is one of the most
                            important aspects of the management program. Clearly, the
                            designation of permissible and priority uses and the identi-
                            fication of APC can be of little use without some means of
                            enforcement. OCZM takes an especially critical look at the
                            implementation mechanisms.

                            The CZM regulations note that "a fundamental purpose" of the
                            legislation is "to broaden the perspective by which decisions
                            affecting the coastal zone are made to incorporate a statewide
                            view. " But, while ultimate authority for managing the program

              24
<pb n="29" />

                                 rests with the state, the regulations make equally clear that
                                 coastal zone management is to be a partnership effort --
                                 including local and regional governments. The Act requires
                                 that: "local governments and other interested public and
                                 private parties must have an opportunity for full participation
                                 in the development of the program; the State has cooperated
                                 with local, areawide, and interstate plans; and the D-Li-ate has
                                 established an effective mechanism for continuing consultation
                                 and coordination with local governments and other unites to
                                 insure their full participation in carrying out the management
                                 program. " In reviewing state authority to carry out the manage-
                                 ment program, the regulations recommend that planners
                                 address: (a) whether the existing powers and authorities of
                                 state government are sufficient; (b) the new ones that would
                                 be needed; and (c) whether a shared State-local or State-
                                 regional consolidated regulatory system should be established.
                                 In particular, state government should have the authority to
                                 acquire land for public use when necessary, impose performance
                                 standards to implement priority uses and APC provisions,
                                 institute shoreline zoning to protect critical areas, and
                                 control the placement of key facilities, such as power plants.

                                 States have handled the issue of authority in various ways,
                                 with two general patterns emerging. One of the legislative
                                 approach in which major new enforcement authorities have
                                 been enacted by the state legislature. Approximately one-
                                 third of the states in the program have taken this approach.
                                 In 1976, the California legislature, for example, enacted the
                                 California Coastal Act, supplemented by laws establishing a
                                 State Coastal Conservancy and a Coastal Parklands Acquisitions
                                 Bond Act. The 1976 law creates a state Coastal Commission
                                 which certifies local land use plans and regulations in coastal
                                 areas. In many ways, the Calfironia law, one of the most
                                 comprehensive state coastal laws in the nation, is a state's
                                 mini-version of the Federal Coastal Zone Management Act.

                                 In the more typical approach states implement their coastal
                                 zone program through a "network" of existing authorities and
                                 agencies. Typically, the lead agency will execute a memo-

                                                                                                 25
<pb n="30" />

                           randum of understanding with other relevant state, local and
                           regional agencies to establish lines of responsibility in
                           implementing the program. Massachusetts has taken this
                           approach.

                           The ','network" form can create problems over jurisdiction and
                           lines of authority and is, in the -view of some observers, a
                           less strong approach. But i n many case-s it will he the only
                           possible mechanism politically. And- in some cases, such as
                           Massachusetts, existing state laws are already as stronger
                           than new authorities which would be enacted.

                           There are several approaches which a state can take to establish
                           an organizational structure. The CZM regulations require that
                           the lead agency have: "(a) authority to monitor the activities
                           of all State, local, areawide/regional or other entities in the
                           coastal zone and (b) appropriate access to the Governor."   -
                           Some states (e.g. New Jersey and Connecticut) have established
                           11 super-agencies " which carry out all facets of the coastal
                           zone management program, as well as other environmental
                           programs in the state. A few states have established a
                           special agency solely for the purpose of administering the
                           coa,;tal zone management program. For example, South
                           Carolina has created the Coastal Zone Planning and Management
                           Council. The predominant pattern, however, has been to create
                           a less comprehensive organizational structure, often vested in
                           the State Planning Office. Some states, such as Wisconsin,
                           have proposed a statewide council with overall coordinating
                           functions to oversee the program. While such agencies usually
                           lack implementation authority, they help give the program
                           visibility and prestige vis-a-vis the rest of the state government.

                       b.  Architect Involvement

                           --Become actively involved in the political process to insure
                              that the state program is as effective as possible. Remember
                              that the definition of "effectiveness" depends very much on
                              the political environment and the particular coastal issues
                              of a given state.

             26
<pb n="31" />

                               --Rally political allies and lobby both in the legislature and
                                 in state agencies for strong state authority and organization.
                                 Pay particularly close attention to budget and staff; access
                                 to the governor; existing and proposed state laws to implement
                                 the program; and the type of agency designated to administer
                                 the program.

                               --Monitor the legislative calendar so that your presence can
                                 be felt when there are key appropriation and legislative
                                 decisions. If legislation is not adequate, then work to get
                                 better laws passed.

                               --Review all proposed regulations issued by the state CZM
                                 agency to make sure that they are effective and fair. Comment
                                 on all proposed regulations so that state officials know that
                                 AIA members have a concern with coastal matters.

                               --Make sure that the state CZM agency has developed an
                                 adequate framework for decision making and public participa-
                                 tion.

                               --Make sure that the CZM agency is working with other state,
                                 federal and local officials with responsibility for coastal
                                 activities. Be a catalyst to bring these officials together.

                               --If the state adopts a management framework where sub-
                                 stantial decision making is delegated to local and regional
                                 government see that there is adequate authority at the
                                 state level to insure that statewide interests in the coastal
                                 zone are addressed. If the program is such that the
                                 majority of the decisions are made by the state agency, be
                                 similarly concerned that local needs are addressed.

                      7.  Access to Public Coastal Areas. Section 305 (b) (7) of the 1976
                          amendments to the Coastal Zone Management Act requires that
                          the management program include "a definition of the terms 'beach'
                          and a planning process for the protection of, and access to, public
                          beaches and other public coastal areas of environmental recreational,
                          historical, esthetic, ecological or cultural value." The regulations

                                                                                          27
<pb n="32" />

                         for program development grants emphasize that access is to be
                         defined in both physical and visual terms.

                         a.   MaLor Issues.    The issue of access to public coastal areas
                              is closely tied to the designation of Areas of Particular Concern
                              (APC) discussed earlier and the protection or acquisition of
                              public rights to coastal lands should be construed in a
                              similarly broad fashion, according to the regulations. Never-
                              theless the intent of the public access provision in the 1976
                              amendments is to increase the supply of coastal areas for
                              water-oriented recreation activities. A recent publication by
                              the Office of Coastal Zone Management points out that shore-
                              line is a scarce commodity and is being further reduced almost
                              daily by numerous factors. This has serious ramifications for
                              recreation one of the primary and best suited uses for coastal
                              lands. Several state plans address this problem directly.
                              Policy 21 of the Massachusetts plan is to: "Improve public
                              access to coastal recreation facilities and alleviate auto
                              traffic and parking problems through improvements in public
                              transportation" and Policy 26 reads: "Acquire and develop new
                              public areas and facilities for coastal recreational activities.
                              Give highest priority to new acquisitions in regions of high
                              need and where site availability is now limited. Assure that
                              both transportation access and the recr,eational facility is
                              compatible with social and environmental characteristics of
                              the surrounding community (ie s).

                              The coastal zone management regulations emphasize that
                              while access should primarily be defined in physical terms,
                              it also should be interpreted in "visual" terms: Visual access
                              may involve, but need not be limited to, viewpoints, setback
                              lines, building height restrictions and light requirements,"
                              according to the regulations. Visual access is an especially
                              important problem along highly urbanized arE!as of the coast.
                              In Orange and Los Angeles Counties along the southern
                              California coast, for example, roughly 20 miles of the 110
                              mile coastline have views blocked totally by structures.

            28
<pb n="33" />

                               In developing coastal access policies, states should take
                               into account existing facilities and sites, anticipated demand
                               of future use of such sites, and the capability of existing
                               areas to support increased access. The definition of beach
                               should be closely tied to the analysis of access and protection
                               needs and should include special features such as location,
                               fragility, origin and composition. Finally, any analysis of
                               coastal access should review ownership of beachland and
                               make provisions for public acquisition of especially threatened
                               or valued shoreland.

                           b.  Architect Involvement

                               --Offer technical assistance to state officials in analyzing
                                 coastal access problems. Make sure that the definition of
                                 "access" includes not only physical but visual access.

                               --Propose innovative design examples that increase both
                                 physical and visual access to coastal areas.

                               --Make sure that state plans include special consideration
                                 for public access in urbanized coastal areas.

                               --Help identify coastal areas which should be identified as
                                 Areas of Particular Concern (APCs) in terms of shorefront
                                 access planning.

                      8.   Erosion Mitigation. The 1976 amendments to the Coastal Zone
                           Management Act add a new requirement that the management program
                           include a planning process for ,(a) assessing the effects of shore-
                           line erosion (however caused), and (b) studying and evaluating ways
                           to control, or lessen the impact of, such erosion, and to restore
                           areas adversely affected by such erosion." In looking at erosion
                           problems, the regulations for program development plans emphasize
                           that states must consider the cause of the problem (manmade or
                           natural), existing and proposed state policies to deal with the
                           problem, and the most appropriate methods of regulation.

                                                                                        29
<pb n="34" />

                        a    Major Issues.   Erosion is a serious coastal problem and its
                             causes are diverse. Some are the result of construction and
                             some are the result of natural processes. The OCZM regula-
                             tions emphasize that states will want to consider both physical
                             (e.g. rebuilding of worn away portions of the coastline) and
                             regulatory (e.g. land use or zoning controls) solutions to the
                             erosion problem. There are also instances where a policy of
                             noncontrol will be most appropriate, such as on barrier islands
                             where there is a substantial amount of erosion caused by
                             natural forces. The Michigan Coastal Zone 2VIanagement plan,
                             for example, includes a combination of structural and non-
                             structural controls for erosion control on Sites designated as
                             "areas of natural hazard to development. "                             I

                             The erosion control section of state management plans is
                             closely related to Areas of Particular Concern and use restrict-
                             ions. State efforts at erosion control should be part of a larger
                             strategy at hazard mitigation and should be related to other
                             state and federal programs, especially those designed to
                             control development in the flood plain.

                        b.   Architect Involvement

                             --Work with state officials to identify erosion prone areas
                               which should be designated as APCs.

                             --Help determine the most effective sorts of measures
                               physical, regulatory, or none at all   to help solve erosion
                               problems.

                             --If the state program includes performance criteri a, assist
                               in establishing special design considerations for building in
                               high rish erosion areas.

                             --Develop special design prototypes for construction and site
                               planning in erosion prone areas. Help publicize particularly
                               noteworthy designs.

             30
<pb n="35" />

                                 --Make sure that state and local officials are working with
                                   other governmental (e.g. federal) agencies with an involve-
                                   ment in erosion control. Serve as a catalyst for bringing
                                   such groups together.

                       9.   Energy Facilities. The third new requirement for management plans
                            in the 1976 amendments requires 11 ... a planning process for energy
                            facilities likely to locate 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." According to the
                            regulations for CZM program development grants, this process must
                            include: (1)'an identification of facilities likely to locate in or
                            signficantly affect the coastal zone; (2) a procedure for assessing
                            the suitability of such sites; (3) a discussion of state policies to
                            manage energy facilities and their impacts; (4) a mechanism for
                            coordinating state coastal policies for energy facility siting with
                            other relevant federal, state, local and regional programs; and
                            (5) an identification of legal and other techniques which can be
                            used to meet management needs.

                            a.   Major Issues. The problem of energy facility planning touches
                                 on all the major themes of the coastal zone management program.
                                 As the regulations observe, "Essentially a balancing of national
                                 interests between resource preservation and conservation, on
                                 the one hand, and energy needs, on the other hand, must be
                                 achieved in order to avoid arbitrary exclusions or restructions
                                 of either interest." The regulations recommend one of three
                                 possible approaches: (1) designation of specific sites in or
                                 near the coastal zone for particular types of energy facilities;
                                 (2) development of performance standards that certain types
                                 of facilities would have to meet irrespective of their location;
                                 or (3) adoption of performance standards for permitted facilities
                                 with exclusion of specific types of facilities in selected coastal
                                 locations. The choice of technique depends on the particular
                                 coastal problems of a given state as well as the type of facility
                                 likely to locate on or near the shore. Energy development is one
                                 of the major issues confronting coastal zone management and is
                                 discussed in more detail in a later section on the Coastal Energy
                                 Impact Program.

                                                                                            31
<pb n="36" />

                       b    Architect Involvement

                            --Make sure that there is a balancing of environmental and
                              developmental objectives in siting decisions of energy
                              facilities. This is an area where these twin objectives of
                              the Act are often brought into sharp conflict.

                            --Carefully oversee proposed siting decisions to make sure
                              that all the options and impacts have been considered.

                            --Offer technical assistance in drawing up site plans.

            32
<pb n="37" />

              C    The Implementation Stage

                   The real test of whether coastal zone management will be effective or not
                   comes with the implementation of the plans themselves. At the point when
                   OCZM approves a state's management program, the plan ceases to be on
                   paper. It must be judged by its effectiveness.

                   The aspects of coastal zone management that we have discussed so far
                   have been concerned with process. During the implementation stage we
                   are concerned with substance. An OCZM official put it succinctly:
                   "Section 306 is where it counts and where the action is going to be. This
                   is where we'll make or break the program.

                   The law requires states to reevaluate their plans each year before the next
                   section 306 management grant will be approved. Each year's application
                   is subject to the A-95 review and comment process cited earlier. This is
                   an excellent opportunity for the public to "review" and "comment" on the
                   plan as well. For the most part, however, there are less formal opportu-
                   nities for public involvement during the implementation stage than in the
                   planning stages of the program. This makes it all the more important
                   for architects and others to monitor closely how the program is operating
                   and to press for ample opportunities for public discussion and public
                   input to ensure that the management plan meets the state's emerging
                   coastal needs.

                   The remainder of this section outlines the major areas of the law -- inter-
                   governmental relations and CEIP -- which are critical during the implementa-
                   tion stage. It also discusses some of the emerging issues such as hazard
                   control and coastal uses in urban areas which will, achieve greater importance
                   as states move beyond planning into true coastal zone management.

                   1. The Intergovernmental Structure: Federal Consistency, the National
                      Interest and Coordination

                      a.   Federal Consistency. One of the most powerful incentives in the
                           Coastal Zone Management Program is the "federal consistency
                           provision" contained in Section 307. Section 307 (c) (1) of the law
                           states that "Each federal agency conducting or supporting activities
                           directly affecting the coastal zone shall conduct or support those
                           activities in a manner which is, to the maximum extent practicable,

                                                                                           33
<pb n="38" />

                       consistent with approved state management programs. 11 Subpara-
                       graphs (2) and (3) of this section make similar requirements for
                       federal development projects and federal licenses and permits
                       respectively. The 1976 amendments to the Coastal Zone Manage-
                       ment Act extend the federal consistency requirements to include
                       Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) energy exploration, development
                       and production. Specifically, federal agencies must "provide
                       State agencies with consistency determinations for all Federal
                       activities significantly affecting the coastal zone ... at the
                       earliest practicable time in the planning or reassessment of the
                       activity," according to the regulations for federal cons istency.

                       The federal consistency requirement is a major test of the effective-
                       ness of the cooperative intergovernmental structure on which much
                       of the CZM program is based. This provision of the law provides
                       unprecedented state oversight over federal programs , although it
                       is not a blank check by any means. For one thing, the Act states
                       that "The Secretary shall not approve the management program
                       submitted by a State pursuant to Section 306 unless the views of
                       Federal agencies principally affected by such programs have been
                       adequately considered."

                       In addition, states do not have an absolute veto over federal actions
                       which may be inconsistent with state plans. For example, federal
                       actions necessary to fulfill national security goals will be given
                       priority over state coastal zone management plans.. Whenever there
                       is a dispute under the federal consistency provisions of the Act,
                       the federal agency and the state officials responsible for coastal
                       zone management are directed to make every@ effort to mediate the
                       dispute. The final arbiter in irreconcilable differences is the
                       Secretary of Commerce and the Executive Office of the President
                       (Office of Management and Budget).

                       The regulations for Federal Consistency go to the core of the
                       challenges in this provision when they say: "Coordination implies
                       a high degree of cooperation and consultation among agencies , as
                       well as a mutual willingness on the part of the participants to
                       accommodate their activities to the needs of others in order to
                       carry out the public Interest. Perceptions of the public good will

            34
<pb n="39" />

                          differ and it is recognized that not all real or potential conflicts
                          can be resloved by this process. . . "

                     b.   National and Regional Interest. Closely related to the consistency
                          requiremnet is the provision in the Act that state plans provide for
                          "adequate consideration of the national interest involved in the
                          siting of facilities necessary to meet requirements which are other
                          than local in nature. (See Coastal Zone Management Approval Regulations,
                          Federal Regis er, Vol. 42, No. 167, 43572.)

                          This provision exemplified the "cooperative" intergovernmental
                          theme of the Act. The final regulations for Program Administrative
                          Grants emphasize that "the requirement should not be construed as
                          compelling the States to propose a program which accommodates
                          certain types of facilities, but to assure that such national concerns
                          are included at an early stage in the State's planning activities and
                          that such facilities not be arbitrarily excluded or unreasonably
                          restricted in the management program without good and sufficient
                          reasons. " In fulfilling the national interest provisions , state
                          management programs "should make reference to the views of
                          cognizant Federal agencies as to how these national needs may be
                          met in the coastal zone of that particular State." The regulations
                          emphasize that "No separate national interest 'test' need be
                          applied and submitted other than evidence that the listed national
                          interest facilities have been considered in a manner similar to all
                          other uses and that appropriate consultation with the Federal
                          agencies listed has been conducted. "

                          The Act also requires that the management program include a method
                          of "assuring that local land and water use regluations within the
                          coastal zone do not unreasonably restrict or exclude land and water
                          uses of regional (intra-state) benefit. " States and local govern-
                          ments must also consider the needs of neighboring state coastal
                          regions. The importance of this type of interstate consultation,
                          the regulations point out, "cannot be over emphasized for it offers
                          the State the opportunity of resolving significant national problems
                          on a regional scale without Federal intervention.

                                                                                           35
<pb n="40" />

                   c    Coordination. Section 307 is subtitled "Interagency Coordination
                        and Cooperation," and while the federal consistency requirement
                        contained in this section has received the most attention, the
                        coordination of the federal coastal zone management program with
                        other federal programs is beginning to take place and deserves
                        encouragement. OCZM has executed interagency agreements with
                        the Environmental Protection Agency and HUD for cooperation under
                        the Section 208 Areawide Water Pollution Planning program and the
                        Section 701 comprehensive planning program respectively. Twin
                        executive orders issued by President Carter in May 1977 (EO 11988
                        on flood plains and EO 11990 on wetlands) require stricter controls
                        by federal agencies over activities in both types of critical area,
                        especially under HUD's Flood Insurance Program. This could have
                        major implications for hazard mitigation in coastal. areas. An
                        interagency agreement between OCZM and the Heritage Conservation
                        and Recreation Service in the Department of the Interior holds promise
                        for urban coastal zone management.

                        State programs must also include provisions for meeting the require-
                        ments under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended
                        and the Clean Air Act, as amended. Permitted uses for development
                        of industrial and residential complexes as well as new growth fueled
                        by energy exploration must be monitored closely by coastal planners
                        to ensure that they do not hamper attainment of national air and
                        water goals. OCZM clearly means for coordination to go beyond
                        cooperation with federal and state agencies. "One of the critical
                        aspects of the development of State coastal zone management
                        programs" the regulations say "will be the ability of the State 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. "               I
                        The regulations include extensive provisions for consultation with
                        private interests, such as AIA components, as well as coordination
                        in the state.

                   d. Architect Involvement

                        --Make sure that state officials consult with all the important actors
                          on the coastal scene -- other federal agencies , other agencies in

              36
<pb n="41" />

                             your own state and neighboring states , local government officials
                             and private groups and individuals. Such communication is a
                             prerequisite for successful intergovernmental cooperation.

                           --Monitor federal activities in the coastal zone and make sure that
                             other state agencies with programs in coastal areas (e.g. the
                             State Department of Transportation) cooperate with the coastal
                             agency staff when federal programs are involved.

                           --Help state officials define the impact of facilities of "national
                             interest" and develop criteria for fair consideration of such
                             facilities within state coastal zone management areas.

                           --Identify waysthat OCZM cooperative agreements with other
                             federal agencies can benefit your particular state. Bring to-
                             gether officials at the state and federal level to discuss the
                             relevance of such agreements for your state. A Michigan Great
                             Lakes community, for example, commissioned a comprehensive
                             design plan for their urban waterfront under their CZM program.
                             Funding for the construction of the plan came from the Depart-
                             ment of the Interior through the Heritage Conservation and
                             Recreation Service. Architects can help identify many such
                             resources to implement specific portions of state CZM plans.

                   2. Coastal Energy Impact Program (CEIP)

                      The most signficant of the 1976 amendments to the Coastal Zone
                      Management Act was the addition of Section 308, which creates the
                      Coastal Energy Impact Program (CEIP). CEIP, which was described
                      earlier in this report, provides funds for planning, public facilities
                      and repayment assistance, as well as grants for alleviating "unavoid-
                      able" loss or environmental resources from energy development in
                      coastal areas. The funding sources are the $800 million Coastal
                      Energy Impact Fund $1.3 billion in formula grants to specifically help
                      states mitigate the onshore impacts of our Continental Shelf (OCS)
                      activity and $25 million for state OCS administrative responsibilites.
                      To be eligible for CEIP, states must either be participating in the
                      coastal zone management program or be developing a program independ-
                      ently that meets the requirements of the federal program.

                                                                                             37
<pb n="42" />

                  A major objective of the CEIP program is to strike a balance between two
                  competing national goals: development of domestic energy resources
                  and increased energy self-sufficiency; and protection and management
                  of the Nation's coasts "in a manner consistent with the coastal zone
                  management programs and objectives of the individual States over both
                  the short and long term . "                         .                                I
                  Planning grants under CEIP can be used for a broad range of purposes
                  including: The study of and planning for the economic, social or
                  environmental consequences of energy facilities; cost-benefit analyses
                  and other comparisions of alternate energy facility proposals; risk
                  management studies; development of strategies for the public acquisition
                  of land or enforcement of other land use controls; and definition of
                  strategies for protecting recreational or environmental resources, among
                  other things. The territory of Guam, for example, has submitted a
                  proposal to use CEIP planning funds for compilation, summary and
                  distribution of data for use by Guam planners; development of mechanisms
                  for public, private and governmental agency input and review of energy
                  determination; analysis of project effects and impact of conventional
                  energy development over the next 10-20 years; assessment of the effects
                  and impact of alternative sources of energy proposed for Guam; and
                  review and analysis of superport proposals for Guam.

                  Formula grants can be used for public facilities and services related to
                  education, environmental protection, government administration, health
                  care, public safety, recreation, transportation and public utilities . The
                  need for these facilities must be directly related to OCIS activity. La
                  Fourche Parish in Louisiana submitted a CEIP proposal for purchase of
                  hospital equipment for a health facility whose patients are predominately
                  the employees or families of employees working for energy or related
                  industries in the Gulf of Mexico. Another provision of CEIP would help
                  a community such as LaFourche Parish repay a CEIP loan for expansion
                  or construction of a facility, such as a hospital if the increase to the
                  community's tax base did not materialize as expected from coastal
                  energy activity.

                  All of these types of CEIP assistance are aimed at mitigating economic
                  and social impacts of energy activity. Formula Grant funds are also used

             38
<pb n="43" />

                      to address the problem of environmental or recreational losses as a
                      result of energy development. The CEIP regulations define "unavoid-
                      able" as:

                           that part of damage to or loss of an environmental or
                           recreational resource resulting from coastal energy
                           activity or from the public facilities associated there-
                           with that either:

                           (1) cannot be attributed to any identifiable person or
                           persons; or

                           (2) cannot be prevented, reduced, or ameliorated by
                           assessment of the loss against an identifiable person
                           or persons through the reasonable implementation or
                           enforcement of the existing regulatory authDrity of
                           the State or of any political subdivision of the State
                           and

                           (3) cannot be paid for with funds that are available
                           from any other Federal program.

                      Such grarL's can be used to acquire beachfront, enforce environmental
                      standards on energy facilities, and develop controls to reduce "unavoid-
                      able" losses. St. Bernard Parish in Louisiana received a grant under
                      this section of CEIP to construct a freshwater diversion structure to
                      prevent further deterioration of wetlands from saltwater intrusion as a
                      result of previous dredging and construction of oil and gas pipelines.

                      OCZM requires that decision making for the use of CEIP funds be shared
                      by local and state  officials. OCZM allocates the funds to the states
                      according to a set of complex formulas, based on population, need and
                      OCS development, among other things. Each state. must develop an
                      allocation process which includes the following e    lements:

                           --participation of state agencies and local govern-
                             ments in establishing the allocation process.

                           --a "needs priority method."

                                                                                              39
<pb n="44" />

                       --a project evaluation and selection method.

                  In addition to distributing funds to local governments for CEIP projects,
                  states can also sponsor projects of their own. The state's process for
                  ranking projects and distributing funds will be reviewed by OCZM before
                  any funds are released under CEIP. Local governments can appeal first
                  to the state CZM agency and then to OCZM if they feel the state did not
                  follow its distribution process fairly. OCZM will only consider appeals
                  about the process itself, however, not the amount of assistance provided.
                  States with larger allocations must also have programs for public informa-
                  tion about the CEIP program.

                  a.   Major Issues.   Offshore energy exploration has both positive and
                       negative ramifications for coastal communities. Experience in
                       Scotland and Louisiana suggests that sound planning in advance
                       of offshore drilling can help mitigate the most serious negative
                       impacts. Such early preparedness is one of the main thrusts of
                       CEIP.

                       Communities must be prepared to plan for facilities legitimately
                       needed to accommodate energy exploration and to say "no" to
                       facilities which might just as well be located elsewhere, for
                       example, storage or refining installations should more appropriately
                       be located inland.

                       While much of the CEIP money will be used in developed areas, a
                       large preponderance of OCS activity is taking place! off the coast
                       of rural communities. The introduction of rapid development and
                       demand for services caused by oil and gas exploration may impose
                       a burden that such areas are in no way able to handle without care-
                       ful advance preparation. Urban areas, too, will be affected by off
                       coast energy development, often taxing already overloaded services
                       or harming precious coastal amenities. Citizens in Jersey City,
                       New Jersey, for example, rallied to oppose the construction of a
                       deepwater terminal because they did not want their water front area
                       permanently converted to industrial use.

             40
<pb n="45" />

                          Another important issue which must be faced by coastal planners is
                          the impact of energy development after the oil and gas fields are
                          depleted. The boom from OCS activity is of finite duration. Growth
                          patterns which emergy during the exploration and development stages
                          will have to be flexible enough to accommodate and readjust to
                          community needs once the boom has abated.

                      b.  Architect Involvement

                          --Become actively involved at the local level in helping communities
                             set priorities for CEIP use.

                          --Monitor the state distribution process to insure that funds are
                             distributed fairly and rationally.

                          --Help your local government (or when appropriate state agency)
                             prepare the assessment date for CEIP proposals. If OCZM
                             determines the potential impacts to be significant, then an
                             environmental impact statement must be prepared. This affords
                             a further opportunity for public review of the proposal.

                          --Monitor the A-95 review process to make sure that all the relevant
                             publics have taken advantage of their opportunity to comment on
                             CEIP proposals.

                          --Provide technical assistance on preparation of site plans and
                             design proposals for related services, such as housing develop-
                             ments and shopping center. New residential areas might best
                             be planned in a cluster design. Propose some prototype design
                             examples to your community.

                   3. Emerging Issues in Coastal Zone Management

                      There are many challenges ahead as more states enter the implementation
                      phase of coastal zone management.

                      Among the most important of these for AIA members are hazard manage-
                      ment and erosion control, urban coastal uses and preserving the important
                      visual and aesthetic qualities of the coast through advocacy of better
                      design. These issues are discussed below.

                                                                                            41
<pb n="46" />

                 a    Hazard Management. There are many natural hazards which threaten
                      the coast --hurricanes, floods, erosion, landslides, earthquakes,
                      land subsidence, and in some areas tsunami and volcanic eruptions.
                      More than six million people now live in hurricane prone locations
                      along the coast and these areas are growing at a rate of three to
                      four percent above the national average. About one-third of the nation's
                      shoreline (excluding Alaska) is subject to "significant erosion@'
                      and the erosion problem is considered "critical" along, 2,700
                      miles of the coast, according to the United States Corps of Engineers.
                      Property damage from erosion amounts to $300 million a year, accord-
                      ing to some estimates.

                      Coastal areas have natural defenses against many of these threats.
                      Barrier island and dunes, for example, form a front line against
                      severe ocean storms. Erosion, too, can be a necessary natural
                      process, for some parts of the shore. Construction in coastal areas
                      often tampers with these natural bulwarks or processes making the
                      coast dangerously hazard prone. While the Coastal Zone Manage-
                      ment Act focuses specifically on the problem of erosion, attention
                      to other coastal hazards is left to the discretion of state coastal
                      plans.

                      Most states do include some measure of hazard mitigation in their
                      plans. The Michigan management plan,for example, regulates
                      development in flood plains and erosion prone areas. Most states
                      have adopted statutes related to hazard control, especially erosiont
                      but, as a recent OCZM report observes, "no state has thus far
                      explored and tested the whole range of legislative and administrative
                      measures available for managing hazards along its coast. 11

                      There is much work also to be done at the federal level, although
                      the basic framework for hazard control is beginning to emergy. Under
                      the Coastal Zone Management Act, states must carry out a planning
                      and management process for coastal areas, including the designation
                      of permissible and priority uses, areas of particular concern, as
                      well as specific erosion control measures. The National Flood
                      Insurance Administration within HUD, provides minimum management
                      standards for areas subject to flooding and erosion. While the CZM
                      program works through the states, the NFIP deals with 1 ocal

            42
<pb n="47" />

                           communities directly by providing flood insurance to structures in
                           communities which have met the flood plain management provision
                           of the program. Needless to say, a substantial number of 16,000
                           flood prone communities in the NFIP are in coastal areas. Finally,
                           Executive Orders 11988 and 11990 require federal agencies to carry
                           out wise use of flood plains and wetlands respectively as a result
                           of federal programs and actions.

                           There is currently little explicit relationship between these programs,
                           but AIA members could lobby at both the federal and state level to
                           gain greater cooperation between local flood plain management efforts
                           and state coastal management. Architects can also monitor their
                           state coastal program to make sure that hazard mitigation is one of
                           the factors considered when APCs and priority uses are designated
                           in the state coastal region.

                           As much as anything else, however, architects can use the moral
                           suasion of good design and the knowledge of where and where not
                           to build in hazard prone areas. Architects can help states develop
                           design considerations for construction in high risk erosion and
                           other hazard areas and beyond this, set the best example possible,
                           through their own building and siting plans.

                      b.   Urban Waterfronts. While much attention in coastal zone manage-
                           ment is focused on natural areas and fragile lands, a large portion
                           of our coast is not beachfront at all -- it is urban waterfront. In
                           a different way, the urban waterfront is also a threatened part of
                           our coast. It is also a portion of our shore that offers marvelous
                           opportunities both for urban revitalization and for providing recreational
                           access to city residents. Too often these are missed opportunities.

                           Cities are beginning to take pride in their waterfronts and are
                           realizing that they are a vital resource in the  urban fabric -- one
                           that attracts new residents and tourists and enhances the tax base.
                           Philadelphia and Baltimore have turned their harbor areas into
                           thriving city neighborhoods. One of San Francisco's most important
                           tourist attractions is Fisherman's Wharf. on a smaller scale, St.
                           Ignace, Michigan has developed a public promenade along its
                           waterfront and Kenosha Wisconsin has improved beach access.

                                                                                                   43
<pb n="48" />

                      There is no explicit reference in the Coastal Zone Management Act
                      to specific planning considerations for urban areas, and, while many
                      aspects of state coastal zone plans touch on urban coasts , very few
                      have afticulated specific policies in this area.

                      Architects have to look beyond the bounds of the CZ1\A program for
                      many of the most promising resources for urban coastal development.
                      The Community Development Block Grant program of the Department
                      of Housing and Urban Development is an excellent source of funds
                      for getting many urban coastal designs built. Bridgeport, Connecticut
                      has used such funds for extensive redevelopment along its waterfront.
                      Another promising source is the Heritage Conservation and Recreation
                      Service (HCRS) within the Department of the Interior . OCZM has a
                      memorandum of understanding with HCRS to support matching grants
                      for access to publicly held areas along the coast. HCRS funds are
                      especially targeted toward expanding urban coastal recreational
                      opportunities. Local zoning, land use, and tax incentives can also
                      spur urban coastal development.

                      The local master plan could designate land for uses appropriate for
                      water related development. Architects could also help local
                      communities identify historic properties , many of which are located
                      along the i,7aterfront. When appropriate, cities could designate such
                      areas as historic districts and identify sites and areas for inclusion
                      on the National Register of Historic Places. This opens up oppor--
                      tunities for, federal rehabilitation loans and grants f or historic
                      structures , and can be the starting point for more general neighbor-
                      hood revitalization along the waterfront. The Massachusetts CZM
                      plan includes a policy to promote historic preservation in coastal
                      areas: "Review developments proposed near designated or registered
                      historic districts or sites to insure that Federal and State actions and
                      private actions requiring a State permit respect their, preservation
                      intent and minimize potential adverse impacts. Encourage use of
                      local zoning, land use controls and tax incentives to improve visual
                      access and the compatibility of proposed development with existing
                      community character. "                                                             I

                      Finally, architects can look to themselves to be the leaders for
                      designs of excellence in urban areas.

             44
<pb n="49" />

                         One such example is "Portobello" a mixed-use complex built on a
                         28.2 acre site owned by the Santa Fe Railroad on the Oakland water-
                         front. Phase I of the complex includes 2 00 apartment units , 2 0, 000
                         square feet of office space and 8,000 square feet of retail space,
                         a 50-berth marina, and 350 parking spaces. Its treatment of the
                         waterfront is especially noteworthy and includes decking over the
                         water and landscaped banks. A system of pedestrian walkways and
                         bike paths will link the complex with two nearby parks. As required
                         by the Bay Conservation and Development Commission, a 100-foot
                         strip of property has been dedicated as permanent open space, making
                         the entire waterfront open to the public.

                         Another noteworthy project is Camden Harbor, a 17 acre urban park
                         along the Camden, New Jersey waterfront. The objective of the plan
                         is to create a major urban recreational space against the backdrop
                         of the Philadelphia Skyline with the hope that it will serve as a
                         catalyst for further redevelopment on either side. The first stage
                         will include a promenade, a riverfront stage, and a Ferry and Rail-
                         road Museum. The second phase will include a 50-150 slip marina
                         and harbor for public use, a 1,300 seat restaurant overlooking the
                         harbor and a 560-space parking facility. A lighthouse will serve
                         as the focal point for visitors.

                     c.  Enhancing the Visual Resource of the Coast. One of the reasons the
                         coast holds a lure is because of its visual and aesthetic value.
                         Defining visual quality is difficult but it is clearly an important role
                         for the design professional. Some of the more obvious aesthetic
                         resources will be the natural views -- of offshore islands, of dunes ,
                         and of inlets -- which characterize the shore. Many coastal areas
                         are also the location of important historical sites and more current
                         man made aesthetic resources, such as recreational development
                         and marinas, can add to our aesthetic appreciation of the shore.
                         A special challenge to the visual resources of the shore is posed by
                         urban coastal development.

                         While the Coastal Zone Management Act recognizes the importance
                         of the visual assets of the coast, most coastal planning and manage-
                         ment efforts have made only the most preliminary efforts at preserving
                         and enhancing the aesthetic quality of the coast.

                                                                                         45
<pb n="50" />

                      The Act and its regulations do not make design factors an explicit
                      requirement in coastal zone management plans , nor do most state
                      plans include requirements for explicit design considerations. The
                      Massachusetts management plan is noteworthy and unusual in
                      including a policy to "encourage incoporation of visual concern into
                      the early states of the planning and design of all facilities proposed
                      for siting in the coastal zone.

                      Good design of coastal development is an excellent: example of
                      where the two seemingly contradictory objectives of development
                      and preservation can both be met. Throughout this report we have
                      made a major contribution to better design along the coast by
                      encouraging environmentally sensitive development. Architects
                      in short, are in an excellent position to advance the primary goals
                      of the Coastal Zone Management Act through what they do best
                      design.
<pb n="51" />

             CONCLUSION

             Coastal Zone Managemerit is a complex program, but one which is critically
             important to the architectural profession. The outcome of coastal zone manage-
             ment can determine the future of design and building, and the circumstances
             under which it will take place, for years to come in coastal areas.

             In their position paper on coastal zone management, the Virginia Society of
             the AIA said:

                        The Virginia Coastal Resources Management Program
                        has broad implications with respect to future statewide
                        land use policy development. Such issues as the
                        extent of property rights , the role of various levels
                        of government and citizens in land-use decisions,
                        and the balance between economics versus ecological
                        considerations are being tested by the coastal program
                        proces s .

             AIA components can and should become involved in coastal zone management.
             Through the opportunities for public participation discussed in this paper, and
             their advocacy of better design, architects can play an important and positive
             role in the future of our coasts.

                                                                                       47
<pb n="52" />

              APPENDIX I AIA POLICY ON THE COAST

              The American Institute of Architects -has issued several policy statements which
              deal with coastal issues, both directly and indirectly. A 1975 policy statement
              by the AIA asserts -

                      The coastal zone of the TInited States is one of our greatest
                      resources , capable of providing food, energy and many
                      economic and environmental benefits; it is also the scene
                      of our major resource-use conflicts. In this area are
                      concentrated the majority of man's activities, his
                      habitation, industry, recreation and wastes . The
                      Coastal Zone Management Act provides ways and means
                      for saving this priceless area of the United States ...

                      The Federal Coastal Zone Management Act encourages
                      states , through grants and other incentives , to develop
                      and implement management programs for the wise use
                      of coastal land and water resources. While under-
                      scoring the importance of public local, regional and
                      federal participation, the act clearly places the planning
                      and management responsibilities squarely at the state
                      level...

                      The AIA through its local chapters should take an active
                      part in encouraging local municipalities , counties, etc.
                      to assist wherever possible', so that the maximum benefits
                      can be achieved for their area during the research and
                      management program. There most certainly will be a
                      confrontation occuring during the implementations of
                      this act, but an interested local chapter can help to
                      implement this extremely necessary environmental safe-
                      guard. The coastal zone should be for the benefit of all
                      citizens, not just for those seeking a quick profit...

                      Most states have enthusiastically accepted this program
                      even though it took two years to get minimum funding from
                      the Federal Administration, but now that it has started an
                      active part by local AIA components will help to insure
                      the proper protection of the coastal zone. . .
<pb n="53" />

          Other AIA policy statements also have relevance for coastal zone mangement.
          Among the most important are the following-

                    A conservation strategy should be (1) designed to identify
                    and protect (a) fragile and/or unique natural areas or
                    topographical features (b) historical areas and building ...

                    A conservation strategy should be designed (4) similarly,
                    to conserve the land itself, an irreplaceable raw material,
                    by establishing a more rational system of design and
                    development...
                    Structure for a National Growth Policy, December 1973,

                    State governments should participate more directly in
                    planning and regulating the use of land, especially in
                    areas defined as 'critical' . . .                                                   I

                    Environmental controls and design standards should be
                    strengthened ...
                    A Plan for Urban Growth: Report of the National Policy
                    Task Force, January 1972

                    We believe that environmental considerations must be
                    integrated into planning and design processes ...

                    We urge that research, analysis, planning and design
                    efforts of interdisciplinary teams begin at the formulative
                    stage and continue in such a way as to make a maximum
                    contribution to orderly, creative processes of environ.-
                    mental design and public decision making ...
                    AIA Policy in Regard to the National Environmental Policy
                    Act (NEPA) January 1974
<pb n="54" />

            APPENDIX II: COASTAL STATE MANAGEMENT AGENCIES

            STATE COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT                COASTAL ENERGY IMPACT PROGRAM
            PROGRAM MANAGERS                             AGENCY DESIGNATIONS

            Alabama                                      Alabama

            Dr. Bruce Trickey                            R.C. "Red" Bamberg
            Executive Director                           State Planning Director
            Coastal Area Board                           Alabama Development Office
            General Delivery                             State Capitol
            Daphne, AL 36526                             Montgomery, AL 36130
            205/626-1880                                 205/832-6960

                                                         Contact:
                                                          Bruce Trickey

            Alaska                                       Alaska

            Murray Walsh                                 Ms. Lee McAnerney, Commissioner
            Policy Develop. &amp; Plan. Division             Dept. of Comm. &amp; Regional Affairs
            Office of the Governor                       Pouch B, Room 213, Community Bldg.
            Pouch AP                                     Juneau, AK 99811
            Juneau, AK 99801                             907/465-4700
            (via Seattle Op. 8-399-0150)
            907/465-3474                                 Contact:
                                                          Doug Griffin, CEIP Coordinator
                                                          907/465-3918

            California-                                  California

            Michael L.   Fischer, Exec. Dir.             Michael L. Fischer, Exec. Dir.
            California Coastal Commission                California Coastal Commission
            631 Howard St. , 4th Floor                   631 Howard St. 4th Floor
            San Francisco, CA 94105                      San Francisco, CA 94105
            415/391-6800
                                                         Contact:
                                                          Kevin Smith, CEIP Manager
                                                          same address as Fischer's

                                                                                             A-1
<pb n="55" />

                                                       Contact, cont.
                                                         Ms. Carla Walecka
                                                         Office of Planning &amp; Research
                                                         Governor's Office
                                                         1400 Tenth Street
                                                         Sacramento, CA 95814
                                                         916/445-1114

             Connecticut                               Connecticut

             Art Rocque, Director                      Anthony V. Milano, Secretary
             Coastal Area Mgmt.    Program             Office of Policy &amp; Mgmt.
             Dept. of Environmental Protection         State Capitol - Room 308
             71 Capitol Ave.                           Hartford, CT 06115
             Hartford, CT 06115                        203/566-5294
             203/566-7404
                                                       Contact:
                                                         Tom Fitzpatrick
                                                         Undersecretary for Planning
                                                         340 Capitol Ave.
                                                         Hartford, CT 0611.5
                                                         203/566-4298

             Delaware                                  Delaware

             DavidA. Hugg, III - Prog. Manager         David A. Hugg,III -- Program Manager
             Coastal Mgmt. Program                     State Planning Office
             Office of Mgmt. , Budget &amp; Planning       Thomas Collins Bldg.
             James Townsend Building                   530 South Dupont Highway
             Dover, DE 19901                           Dover, DE 19901
             302/678-4271                              302/678-4271

                                                       Contact:
                                                         John Sherman
                                                         302/678-4271

             A-2
<pb n="56" />

               Florida                                      Florida

               Dr. Ted LaRoe                                Wallace W. Henderson
               Bureau of Coastal Zone Planning              Assistant Secretary
               Dept. of Environmental Regulation            Dept. of Administration
               Twin Towers Office Bldg.                     Room 530, Carlton Bldg.
               2600 Blair Stone Road                        Tallahassee, FL 32304
               Tallahassee, FL 32301                        904/488-9290
               9 04/4 88-8614                               Contact:
                                                             Robert Weiss
                                                             Division of State Planning
                                                             (Director's Office)
                                                             Room 335, Carlton Bldg.
                                                             Tallahassee, FL 32304
                                                             904/4 88-1115

                                                             Wayne Voigt
                                                             904/4 88-1115

               Georgia                                      Georgia

               Bob Reimold                                  Gordan Carruth
               Coastal Resources Program                    Planning Division
               Dept. of Natural Resources                   Office of Planning &amp; Budget
               1200 Glynn Ave.                              270 Washington St., S.W.
               Brunswick, GA 31520                          Room 613
               912/264-4 771                                Atlanta, GA 30334
                                                            4 04/65 6-3 919 -

               Guam                                         Guam

               Robin Grove                                  David Bonvourloir
               Bureau of Planning                           Bureau of Planning
               Government of Guam                           Government of Guam
               P.O. Box 2950                                P.O. Box 2950
               Agana, Guam 96910                            Agana, Guam 95910
               (via Overseas Operator)
               477-9502

                                                                                                A-3
<pb n="57" />

           Hawaii                                     Hawaii

           Dick Poirier                               Dick Poirier
           Dept. of Planning &amp; Economic Dev.          Dept. of Planning &amp; Economic Dev.
           P.O. Box 2359                              P.O. Box 2359
           Honolulu, HI 96804                         Honolulu, HI 96804
           (via S.F. Op. 8-556-0220)                  808/548-4609
            808/548-4609

           Illinois                                   Illinois

           Donna Christman                            Donna Christman
           IL Coastal Zone Mgmt. Program              300 N. State St. , Room 1010
           300 N. State St. , Room 1010               Chicago, IL 60610
           Chicago, IL 60610                          312/793-312 6
           312/793-312 6

           Indiana                                    Indiana

           Roland Mross - Director                    Roland Mross - Director
           State Planning Services Agency             State Planning Services Agency
           143 W. Market St. , Harrison Bldg.         143 W. Market St. , Harrison Bldg.
           Indianapolis, IN 42604                     Indianapolis, IN 42EI04
           317/633-4346                               317/633-4346

                                                      Contact:
                                                       Russ Miller
                                                       317/633-4346

           Louisiana                                  Louisiana

           Paul Templet                               George Fischer, Secretary
           Coastal Resources Program                  Dept. of Trans. &amp; DeV.
           Dept. of Trans. &amp; Dev.                     P.O. Box 4486
           P.O. Box 44245, Capitol Station            Baton Rouge, LA 70804
           Baton Rouge, 1A 70804                      504/389-2931
           504/923-0765
                                                      Contact:
                                                       John E. Evanco
                                                       504/389-5425

           A-4
<pb n="58" />

               Maine                                      Maine

               Esther Lacognata                           Alec Giffen
               State Planning Office                      State Planning Office
               Resource Planning Division                 Resource Planning Division
               189 State St.                              189 State St.
               Augusta, ME 04333                          Augusta, ME 04333
               2 07/289-3155                              2 07/2 89-3155

                                                          Contact:
                                                            Charles S. Colgau
                                                            207/289-3261

               Northern Mariana Islands                   Mariana Islands

               Martha McCart                              Pedro Tenorio
               Office of Planning &amp; Budget Affairs        Office of Transition Studies &amp; Plan.
               Executive Office of the Governor           P. 0. Box 9
               Saipan, Mariana Islands 96950              Saipan, Mariana Islands 96950
               (via Overseas Operator)
               9457

               Massachusetts                              Massachusetts

               Eric Van Loon, Director                    Eric Van Loon, Director
               Program Manager                            Coastal Zone Mgmt. Program
               Executive Office of Env. Affairs           Exec. Office of Env. Affairs
               100 Cambridge St.                          100 Cambridge St.
               Boston,MA 02202                            Boston, MA 02202
               617/72 7-9530                              617/72 7-9530

                                                          C onta ct:
                                                            Priscilla Newbury
                                                            617/72 7-953 0

                                                                                              A-5
<pb n="59" />

             Maryland                                     Maryland

             Suzanne Bayley                               Suzanne Bayley
             Dept. of Natural Resources                   Dept. of Natural Resources
             Energy &amp; Coastal Zone Adm.                   Energy &amp; Coastal Zone Adm.
             Tawes State Office Bldg.                     Tawes State Office Bldg.
             Annapolis, MD 21401                          Annapolis, MD 21401
             3 01/2 69-3382                               3 01/269-3382

                                                          Contact:
                                                           Margaret R. Johnston
                                                           301/2 69-3382

             Michigan                                     Michigan

             Chris Shafer                                 Eugene B. Hedges, Director
             Coastal Zone Mgmt. Program                   Energy Administration
             Dept. of Natural Resources                   Dept. of Commerce
             Division of Land Use Programs                P.O. Box 30004
             Stephens T. Mason Bldg.                      Lansing, MI 48909
             Lansing, MI 48926                            517/374-9090
             517/373-1950
                                                          Contact:
                                                           John Trieloff
                                                           517/374-909 0
             Minnesota
             Roger Williams                               Minnesota
             State Planning Agency                        Roger Williams
             Capitol Square Bldg.                         State Planning Agency
             550 Cedar St. , Room 100                     Capitol Square Bldg.
             St. Paul, MN 55155                           550 Cedar St. , Room 100
             612/296-2633                                 St. Paul, MN 55155
                                                          612/296-2 884

            A-6
<pb n="60" />

              Mississipp                                Mississipp

              Jerry Mitchell                            J.E. Thomas
              MS Marine Resources Council               Executive Director
              P.O. Drawer 959                           MS Marine Resources Council
              Long Beach, MS 39560                      P.O. Drawer 959
              601/864-4 602                             Long Beach, MS 39560
                                                        601/864-4602

                                                        Contact:
                                                         Tim Wilson
                                                         601/863-04 00

                                                         Victor Frankiewicz
                                                         601/864-0261

                                                         Bill Cox

              North Carolina                            North Carolina

              Ken Stewart                               Dave Adams, Assistant Secretary
              Dept. of Natural &amp; Economic Res.          Dept. of Natural &amp; Economic Res.
              Box 27687                                 Box 27687
              Raleigh, NC 27611                         Raleigh, NC 27611
              919/733-2293                              919/829-4984

                                                        Contact:
                                                         Archie Beal
                                                         919/733-4918

                                                                                         A-7
<pb n="61" />

            New Jersey                                   New Jersey

            David Kinsey, Chief                          Joel R. Jacobson, Commissioner
            Office of Coastal Zone Mgmt.                 NJ Dept. of Energy
            Dept. of Environmental Protection            101 Commerce St.
            P.O. Box 1889                                Newark, NJ 07102
            Trenton, NJ 08625                            2 01/64 8-3410
            609/292-8262
                                                         Contact:
                                                           Edward Linky

                                                           Phyllis Salvato-COle
                                                           2 01/64 8-343 0

            New Hampshire                                New Hampshir

            Larry Goss                                   Larry Goss
            Division of Regional Planning                Division of Regional Planning
            Office of Comprehensive Planning             Office of Comprehensive Planning
            26 Pleasant St.                              26 Pleasant St.
            Concord, NH 03301                            Concord, NH 03301
            603/2 71-215 5                               603/2 71-215 5

                                                         Contact:
                                                           Mark Chittam
                                                           603/2 71-215 5

            New York                                     New York

            Robert Hansen                                Robert Hansen
            Coastal Mgmt. Unit                           Coastal Mgmt. Unit
            Dept. of State                               Dept. of State
            162 Washington Ave.                          162 Washington Ave.
            Albany, NY 12231                             Albany, NY 12231
            518/474-8834                                 518/4 74- 7210

                                                         Contact:
                                                           David E. Buerle
                                                           518/474-8834

            A-8
<pb n="62" />

               Ohio                                       Ohio

               Bruce McPherson                            Robert S. Ryan, Director
               Dept. of Natural Resources                 Ohio Dept. of Energy
               Division of Water                          30 E. Broad St. , 25th Floor
               19 3 0 Belcher Dr., Fountain Square        Columbus, OH 43215
               Columbus, OH 43224
               614/466-655 7                              Contact:
                                                           David Zimmer
                                                           614/4 66-6715

                                                           Seavery Knight
                                                           614/4 66-6797

                                                           Peter Kochman
                                                           614/466-679 7

               Oregon                                     Oregon

               Nancy Tuor                                 Jim Ross
               Land Conservation &amp; Dev. Comm.             Land Conservation &amp; Dev. Comm.
               1175 Court St., N.E.                       1175 Court St., N. E.
               Salem, OR 97310                            Salem, OR 97310
               503/378-4928                               503/378-4926

                                                          Contact:
                                                           Neal L. Coenen

                                                           Jon Christ-ens.on
                                                           503/378-4926

               Pennsylvani                                Pennsylvania

               George E. Fogg, Chief                      A.L. Hydeman, Jr., Secretary
               Division of Outdoor Recreation             Penna. Dept. of Community Affairs
               Dept. of Environmental Resources           216 S. Office Bldg.
               Third &amp; Reily Streets                      Harrisburg, PA 17120
               P.O. Box 1467
               Harrisburg, PA 17120
               717/7 87-6674

                                                                                             A-9
<pb n="63" />

           Puerto Rico                                Puerto Rico

           Frank A. Molther                           F. Sottero Harrington, Secretary
           Dept. of Natural  Resources                Dept. of Natural Resources
           P.O. Box 5887                              P.O. Box 5887
           Puerto de Tierra,  Puerto Rico 00906       Puerta de Tierra, Puerto Rico 00906
           809/724-8774                               809/724-'8774

                                                      Frank Castellon
                                                      Office of Energy
                                                      P.O. Box 41089
                                                      Minillas Governmental Center
                                                      Santurce, Puerto Ricci 00940

                                                      Contact:
                                                        Luisa D. Cerar
                                                        202/232-6000

                                                        Carmen Farre
                                                        Office of Energy

           Rhode Island                               Rhode Island

           Dan Varin                                  Dante Ionata, Director
           Statewide Planning Program                 Mgmt. &amp; Capability
           Dept. of Administration                    Governor's Energy Office
           265 Melrose St.                            80 Dean St.
           Providence, RI 02907                       Providence , RI 02903
           4 01/2 77-2 65 6                           4 01/2 77-33-74

                                                      Contact:
                                                        Lee Whitaker/Roger Buck
                                                        State Energy Office
                                                        80 Dean St.
                                                        Providence, RI 02903
                                                        401/2 77-2 65 6

          A-10
<pb n="64" />

                South Carolina                               South Carolina

                Wayne Beam                                   Mr. Joe Wickel, Director
                Wildlife &amp; Marine Resources Dept.            Office of Community Dev.
                1116 Bankers Trust Tower                     Edgar A. Brown Bldg.
                Columbia, SC 29201                           1205 Pendleton St.
                803/758-8442                                 Columbia, SC 29201

                                                             Contact:
                                                               Ms. Ann C. Baker
                                                               Energy Impact Coordinator
                                                               Suite 205 - 4 Carriage Lane
                                                               Charleston, SC 29407
                                                               803/556-4070

                Texas                                        Texas

                Ron Jones, Director                          Roy Hogan, Assistant Director
                Texas Coastal Mgmt. Program                  Budget &amp; Planning Office
                General Land Office                          Office of the Governor
                1700 N. Congress Ave.                        411 W. 13th St.
                Austin, TX 79711                             Austin, TX 78701
                512/472-7765                                 512/4 75-242 7

                                                             Contact:
                                                               John Gosdin
                                                               512/4 75- 2411

                Virginia                                     Virginia

                Don W. Budlong                               Don W. Budlong
                Office of Commerce &amp; Resources               Office of Commerce &amp; Resources
                5th Floor, Ninth St. Office Bldg.            5th Floor, Ninth St. Office Bldg.
                Richmond, VA 23219                           Richmond, VA 23219
                804/786-7652                                 804/786-7652

                                                             Contact:
                                                               Larry Minock
                                                               804/786-7652

                                                                                                 A-11
<pb n="65" />

           Virgin Islands                             Virgin Islands

           Darlan Brin                                Darlan Brin
           Virgin Islands Planning Office             Virgin Islands Planning Office
           P.O. Box 2606                              P.O. Box 2606
           Charlotte Amalie, St. Thomas               Charlotte Amalie, St. Thomas
           U.S. Virgin Islands 00801                  U.S. Virgin Islands 00801
           809/774-7859                               809/774-172 6

           Washington                                 Washington

           Rod Mack                                   Rod Mack
           Dept. of Ecology                           Dept. of Ecology
           State of Washington                        State of Washington
           Olympia, WA 98504                          Olympia, WA 98504
           206/753-6879                               206/753-6879

                                                      Contact:
                                                       Mike Hambra
                                                       206/753-6886

           Wisconsin                                  Wisconsin

           Al Miller                                  Ms. Victoria Potter, Director
           Office of State Planning &amp; Energy          Office of State Planning &amp; Energy
           One West Wilson St., B-130                 One West Wilson St., B-130
           Madison, WI 53702                          Madison, WI 53702
           608/266-3687                               608/266-3682

                                                      Contact:
                                                       Ms. Theresa Danovich
                                                       Office of State Planning &amp; Energy
                                                       One West Wilson St., Room 201
                                                       Madison, WI 53702
                                                       608/266-8022

                                                       Helen Ledin
                                                       608/266-6741

          A-12
<pb n="66" />

             BCDC

             Mike Wilmar
             Bay Conservation &amp; Dev. Comm.
             30 Van Ness Ave. , Room 2011
             San Francisco, CA 94102
             415/557-3686

             Also send state mailings to:

             Jerry Kota s
             Great Lakes Basin Comm.
             P.O. Box 999
             Ann Arbor, MI 48106
             313/769-7431

             Cornelia Potter
             New England River Basin Comm.
             53 State St.
             Boston,MA 02109
             617/223-6244

                                                                                   A-13
<pb n="67" />

               APPENDIX III MAJOR FEDERAL STATUTES AND REGU          LATIONS ON COASTAL ZONE
                              MANAGEMENT

                Statutes:

                The Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 (PL 92-583, 16 USC 1451)

                The Coastal Zone Management Act Amendments of 1976 (PL 94-370, 16 USC 1451)

                Related  statutes of importance:

                         The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 USC 4321)
                         The Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 (33 USC 1251)
                         The Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973 (42 USC 4001)
                         The Clean Air Act of 1970 (42 USC 1857)
                         The Marine, Protection Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972 (16 USC
                           1431 and 33 USC 1401)
                         The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 USC 470)
                         The Deepwater Port Act of 1974 (33 USC 1501)

                Regulations:

                Coastal Zone Management Development Grants (15 CFR 920)
                Coastal Zone Management Program Administrative Grants (15 CFR 923)
                Coastal Zone Management Program Approval Regulations (proposed)
                   (Federal Register, vol. 42, no. 167, August 29, 1977, 42552 et seq.)
                Federal Consistency with Approved Coastal Management Programs (15 CFR 930)
                Coastal Energy Impact Program (interim-final regulations) (Federal Register,
                   vol. 42, no. 3, January 5, 1977, 1164 et seq.)
                Coastal Zone Management Interstate Grants (15 CFR 932)
                Marine Sanctuaries (15 CFR 922)
                Monitor Marine Sanctuaries (15 CFR 924)
                Estuarine Sanctuaries (proposed rule) F, Federal Register, vol. 42, no 175,
                   September 9, 1977, 45523 et seq    ')
                Outer Continential Shelf Development Grants, Coastal Zone Management
                   Program, (interim regulations) (Federal Register, vol. 40, no. 104,
                   May 29, 1975, 23275 et seq.)
<pb n="68" />

             APPENDIX IV FURTHER READING ON COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT

             Further Reading on Coastal Zone Management

             Conservation Foundation Letter, "The Coast is Not Clear for Energy Planning"
             (February 1977) and "The Coasts are Awash with Disputes" (March 1977)
             available from the Conservation Foundation, 1717 Massachusetts Avenue,
             NW, Washington, D.C. 20036

             Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
             Natural Hazard Management in Coastal Areas, Office of Coastal Zone Manage-
             ment (Washington, D.C. , November 1976)

             Ditton, Robert B. and Stephens, Mark, Coastal Recreation: A Handbook for
             Planners and Managers, Office of Coastal Zone Management (Washington,
             D.C. , January 1976)

             League of Women Voters Current Focus, "Coastal Zone Management Program"
             (Pub. #572); "Energy and Our Coasts: The 1976 CZM Amendments" , (Pub #699);
             "The Onshore Impact of Offshore Oil" , (Publ #661); all available from: League
             of Women Voters of the United States, 1730 M Street, NW, Washington,
             D.C. 20036

             Roy Mann Associates, Inc. , "Aesthetic Resources of the Coastal Zone" ,
             Office of Coastal Zone Management, (Washington, D.C. , July 1976)

             Natural Resources Defense Council, Who's Minding the Shore?: A Citizens'
             Guide to Coastal Management, Office of Coastal Zone Management,
             Washington, D.C. 1976)

             Platt, Rutherford H. , "Coastal Hazards and National Policy: A jury-Rig
             Approach" , journal of the American Institute of Planners , (April, 1978)

             Simon, Anne W., The Thin Edge: Coast and Man in Crisis, Harper and Row,
             (New York, 1978)

             The Urban Land Institute, "The Economic Benefits of Coastal Zone Management:
             An Overview", Office of Coastal Zone Management (Washington, D.C. ,
             March 1976)
<pb n="69" />

           Urban Land Institute, Environmental Comment, "Coastal Zone 'Management"
           (November 1976-entire issue); "OCS Development and its Onshore Impact"
           (February 1978-entire issue). Available from: ULI-the Urban Land Institute,
           1200 18th Street, NW, Washington, D.C. 20036)
<pb n="70" />

                                                                                         DATE DUE

                                                                        GAYLORDINO. 2333                             PRINTED IN USA

                                                                              3 6 368 14105 8877
</text>
</doc>
