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

         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

         THE AMERICAN
         INSTITUTE OF
         ARCHITECTS

         STATE
         COMPONENT
         AFFAIRS

                                 COASTAL ZONE
                                 INFOR'MiATION CENTER

         COASTAL ZONE
     o   MANAGEMENT:
    lU   A STRATEGY GUIDE
         FOR AIA COMPONENTS

                                                                                                                                               '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

             "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.

                    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

            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

                    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.)

                 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

             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

                  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

                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

                   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

                  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

                  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

                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

                   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

                   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

                    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

                               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

                           "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

                                  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

                              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

                               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

                           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

                                    --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

                                --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

                                    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

                        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

                                     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

                               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

                                   --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

                             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

                                   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

                            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

                                     --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

                           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

                  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

                           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

                              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

                       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

                                 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

                      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

                          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

                           --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

                              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

                     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

                               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

                          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

                             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

                          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.

                 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

                  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. . .

              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

                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. & Plan. Division             Dept. of Comm. & 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

                                                           Contact, cont.
                                                             Ms. Carla Walecka
                                                             Office of Planning & 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 & 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 & 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

                   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 & 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

               Hawaii                                     Hawaii

               Dick Poirier                               Dick Poirier
               Dept. of Planning & Economic Dev.          Dept. of Planning & 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. & DeV.
               Dept. of Trans. & 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

                   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 & Budget Affairs        Office of Transition Studies & 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

                 Maryland                                     Maryland

                 Suzanne Bayley                               Suzanne Bayley
                 Dept. of Natural Resources                   Dept. of Natural Resources
                 Energy & Coastal Zone Adm.                   Energy & 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

                  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 & Economic Res.          Dept. of Natural & 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

                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

                   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 & Dev. Comm.             Land Conservation & 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 & Reily Streets                      Harrisburg, PA 17120
                   P.O. Box 1467
                   Harrisburg, PA 17120
                   717/7 87-6674

                                                                                                 A-9

               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. & 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

                    South Carolina                               South Carolina

                    Wayne Beam                                   Mr. Joe Wickel, Director
                    Wildlife & 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 & 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 & Resources               Office of Commerce & 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

               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 & Energy          Office of State Planning & 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 & Energy
                                                           One West Wilson St., Room 201
                                                           Madison, WI 53702
                                                           608/266-8022

                                                           Helen Ledin
                                                           608/266-6741

              A-12

                 BCDC

                 Mike Wilmar
                 Bay Conservation & 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

                   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.)

                 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)

               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)

                                                                                             DATE DUE

                                                                            GAYLORDINO. 2333                             PRINTED IN USA

                                                                                  3 6 368 14105 8877