[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]
State Ot Now York C~~tI ilanagement Program and Final Environmental Impact Statement U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Office of Coastal Zone Management UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT AND THE NEW YORK COASTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM AUGUST 1982 Prepared by: Office of Coastal Zone Management National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Department of Commerce 3300 Whitehaven Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20235 and New York Department of State 162 Washington Avenue Albany, New York 12231 The preparation of this publication was financed in part through the Office of Coastal Zone Management, NOAA. DESIGNATION: Final Environmental Impact Statement TITLE: Proposed Federal Approval of the New York Coastal Program ABSTRACT: The State of New York has submitted its Coastal Program to the Office of Coastal Zone Management for approval. Approval would allow program ad- ministrative grants to be awarded to the State, and would require that Federal actions be consis- tent with the program. This document includes a copy of the program (Volume 1), which is a com- prehensive management program for coastal land and water use activities. It consists of numerous policies on diverse management issues which are administered under existing State laws and is the culmination of several years of program develop- ment. New York's coastal policies either promote the beneficial use of coastal resources, prevent their impairment, or deal with major activities that substantially affect numerous resources. The program will improve decision-making processes used for determining the appropriateness of actions in the coastal area. Approval and implementation of the program will enhance governance of the State's coastal land and water areas and uses according to the coastal policies and standards contained in the existing statutes, authorities and rules. Federal alter- natives to program approval include delaying or denying approval, if certain requirements of the Coastal Zone Management Act have not been iret. The State could modify parts of the program or withdraw their application for Federal approval if either of the above Federal alternatives result from circulation of this document. APPLICANT: State of New York, Secretary of State LEAD AGENCY: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Office of Coastal Zone Management CONTACT: Ms. Kathryn Cousins North Atlantic Regional Manager Office of Coastal Zone Management 3000 Whitehaven Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20235 (202/634-4126) ~~~ ~STATE OF NEW YORK DEPARTMENT OF STATE ALBANY, N.Y. 12231 BASIL A. PATERSON SECRETARY OF STATr August 13, 1982 Mr. William Matuszeski Assistant Administrator Office of Coastal Zone Management United States Department of Commerce 3300 Whitehaven Street, N.W. Page Building I Washington, D.C. 20235 Dear Mr. Matuszeski: I am pleased to submit New York State's Coastal Manage- ment Program and Final Environmental Impact Statement. As Secretary of State, I have been designated, pursuant to the Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act of 1981, and Chapter 464 of the 1975 Laws of New York State, to prepare and implement a coastal management program. This document is the culmination of years of local, state and federal government efforts, as well as those of groups repre- senting civic, environmental, development, and other interests. The public and government officials have had numerous opportunities to shape this program. Public meetings, held in 1978, were followed by public hearings in early 1979 con- ducted by this agency. Legislative hearings were held in late 1979. There were over 1,000 meetings to assist in the preparation of this document. As a result of the comments received, the State's program uses a networking approach enforced primarily through the existing New York State En- vironmental Quality Review Act. In accordance with the provisions of Section 102(2) Cc) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 1,500 copies of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement on the proposed New York State Coastal Management Program were circulated for Mr. William Matuszeski August 13, 1982 Page 2 review and comment to Federal, State, regional and local govern- ment agencies as well as to numerous private interest groups. In response to the many comments received, numerous changes have been made to the program. in accordance with the requirements of the Coastal Zone Management Act regulations (Section 923.48), a letter from the Governor will follow after the minimum ten-day review follow- ing the notice of availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement. This review period is a requirement of the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act regulations (6NYCRR Section 617.9). Upon completion of the Federal review process, we antici- pate New York State will have an approved Coastal Management Program in September, 1982. * y~~~~~~~~~~onerely Basil A. Paterson Enclosure TABLE OF CONTENTS Page PART I - OVERVIEW Section 1 - Summary of the New York State Coastal Management Program ......... I- 3 Section 2 - Changes the Program Will Make ........ I- 5 Section 3 - Federal Coastal Zone Management Act. . . .. I- 6 Section 4 - Cross Reference to 306 Program Requirements ................ 1-10 PART II - DESCRIPTION OF THE NEW YORK STATE COASTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM Section 1 - Introduction .... .I-l-1 Section 2 - Coastal Regions, Resources and Problems of New York ................. II-2-1 . Marine Coast of Long Island and New York City . Hudson River Estuary . Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River Section 3 - Coastal Boundaries ............. 11-3-1 � Boundary Criteria � Special Accommodations � New York State Coastal Area Section 4 - Program Management ............. II-4-1 Section 5 - Coastal Issues .............. 11-5-1 Section 6 - Coastal Policies . . . ... . II-6-1 Section 7 - Planning Processes ............. II-7-1 Paae Section 8 - Special Management Areas . . . . . . . . . . II-8-1 . Identification and Selection . State Parks . Local Waterfront Revitalization Programs . Estuarine Sanctuaries . Areas for Preservation or Restoration Section 9 - Special Federal Program Requirements . .. . II-9-1 Section 10 - Description of Work Program . . . . 11-10-1 PART III - ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED ACTION . . . . .. III-1 PART IV - AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . IV-1 PART V - ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES . . . . . . . . . . . V-1 . Environmental Effects . Institutional Effects . Economic Effects . Development Effects . Energy Effects . Social Effects PART VI - AGENCIES CONSULTED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VI-1 PART VII - LIST OF AGENCIES AND ORGANIZATIONS RECEIVING COPIES OF THE DEIS . . . . . . . VII-1 PART VIII - DOCUMENT PREPARERS . . ... . . . . . . . . . . VIII-1 PART IX - RESPONSES TO COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT IX-1 - iv - APPENDICES VOLUME ONE NEW YORK STATE LEGAL AUTHORITIES - REGULATIONS AND GUIDELINES Page APPENDIX A - REGULATIONS AND AMENDMENTS Department of State Consistency Regulations . . . . . A-1 Department of Environmental Conservation State Environ- mental Quality Review Act amendments for Purposes of Executive Law, Article 42 Department of Environmental Conservation regulations to implement the Shoreowner's Protection Act Department of State Local Waterfront Revitalization Development and Approval Regulations NOTE: All the above regulations will be promulgated by the State agencies prior to approval of this Coastal Management Program by OCZM. APPENDIX B - GUIDELINES FOR LOCAL WATERFRONT REVITALIZATION PROGRAMS ....... B-1 APPENDIX C - FEDERAL-STATE CONSULTATION AND PLAN COORDINATION ......... C-1 APPENDIX D - EXCLUDED FEDERAL LANDS ........... D-1 VOLUME TWO NEW YORK STATE LEGAL AUTHORITIES - EXISTING LAWS AND REGULATIONS APPENDIX E - EXISTING LAWS PURSUANT TO WHICH REGULATIONS HAVE BEEN DRAFTED AND EXISTING REGULATIONS WHICH ARE PROPOSED TO BE AMENDED Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act - Executive Law, Article 42 .............. 3 State Environmental Quality Review Act, and existing Department of Environmental Conservation Regulations. 7 Shoreowner's Protection Act ............. 37 APPENDIX F - ADDITIONAL NEW YORK STATE LEGAL AUTHORITIES Tidal and Freshwater Wetlands Acts and regulations ... 47 Energy Law'.. .....................109 Public Service Law, Articles VII and VIII .. .....117 Summary of Other Legal Authorities .. .........205 Miracle Mile Associates, v. DEC. 430P. Supp 2nd 440 (July 10, 1980) .. ........223 VOLUME THREE APPENDIX G - MANAGEMENT PROGRAM FOR NEW YORK CITY Introduction Boundaries Organization and Implementation Waterfront Policies --Issues --Policies Special Revitalization Areas Appendix A: Major Statutory and Regulatory Provisions Appendix B: Future Approaches NOTE TO REVIEWERS: Volume Two, Appendices E and F, are not re- printed for review with the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS). -vi- ILLUSTRATIONS LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1 Legal Authorities Essential to the Imple- mentation of New York State's Coastal Management Program. .............11-4-14 2 Federal Activities and Development Projects Likely to Directly Affect New York State's Coastal Area. ................11-9-18 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Pg 1 Application of Boundary Criteria . . ..... 11-3-8 2 Application of Boundary Criteria . . . . . . . 11-3-9 3 Application of Boundary Criteria. ......11-3-10 4 Application of Boundary Criteria. ......11-311 5 Map of New York State Coastal Area. .....11-3-12 0 PART I - OVERVIEW is I. OVERVIEW V ~1. Summary of the New York State Coastal Management Program This document constitutes a framework for government decision-making which affects New York's coastal area. It provides statements of policy to which Federal and State agencies must adhere and also serves as a reference for local government action in the coastal area, In addition, the document complies with Federal regulations for submission of state coastal management programs set forth pursuant to the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended, and constitutes the environmental impact statement for the State Program. New York is unique among coastal states. It contains within its coastal boundary a great diversity of marine and freshwater areas divided into four distinct sectors: Long Island, a land mass fronting on the Atlantic Ocean; New York City, a major international port where the intensity of land and water uses is the greatest in the State; the Hudson River Valley, an ecologically and historically important corridor which extends 150 miles from New York City into upstate New York; and the Great Lakes - St. Lawrence River region, a vast freshwater, non-tidal coastal system. * ~~~While New York's coastal area is extensive and varied, a number of issues emerge as common to all sectors. The first and most obvious has been that, although New York has numerous laws, programs, and regulations to manage coastal resources and activities, State agencies were not fully coordinating their activities with each other and as a result, inconsistent decisions about the use of coastal resources were made. The Coastal Management Program has provided a means for improving this situation by describing in this document the forty-four coastal policies with which all State agency actions must be consistent. Generally, the policies fall under three headings: promotion of beneficial use of coastal resources; prevention of their impairment; and management of major activities substantially affecting numerous resources. The criteria embodied in these policies require all agencies to take into account the interrelationships that exist or should exist in the coastal area. *~~~~~~~~~ - 3 The main instruments for implementing the forty-four policies are a number of State regulatory and0 management authorities assigned to the New York State Department of State, the Department of Environmental Conservation, the Department of Energy, the Public Service Commission, arnd the Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation. Among these authorities is the recently enacted Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act (Executive Law', Article 42) which forms the basis for coordinating all State actions affecting the coastal area. Article 42 requires that the State Environmental Quality Review Act (Environ- mental Conservation Law, Article 8) be amended to assure adequate consideration of coastal policies and to provide that the Secretary of State review agency actions affecting achievement of coastal policies. Nine other issues were found to affect all sectors of New York's coastal area. The Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act gave the Coastal Management Program authority to advocate specific actions to meet or cope with these issues. The specific actions which the Coastal Management Program advocates include: promoting waterfront revitalization; promoting water dependent uses; protecting fish and wildlife habitats; protecting and enhancing scenic areas; protecting and enhancing historic areas; protecting farmlands; protecting and enhancing small harbors; protecting and enhancing public access; providing research, data, and information for participation of government agencies and citizens concerned with the State's coastal area; and coping with erosion and flooding hazards. The last action necessitated passage of the Coastal Erosion Hazards Area Act. The Coastal Management Program, in its dual role of coordinator and advocate, also seeks the voluntary assistance of local governments to help further its goals. Coastal communities are encouraged to participate under the Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act which provides the means, and incentives for municipalities to prepare and implement local waterfront revitalization programs. The Depart- ment of State will provide financial and technical assistance, as well as guidelines for developing local programs. A community may receive one twelve-month grant of up to 50% of its costs to develop a local program. I - 4~ New York City has already been developing a local pro- gram. The proposed program can be found in Volume III of this document. When a local waterfront revitalization program has been approved by the Secretary of State, the local govern- ment will be eligible to receive additional funding for pre-construction activities related to projects recomn- mended in the program. State consistency applies automatically to any approved local program. Further- more, an approved local program may be incorporated into the State Coastal Management Program; federal consistency provisions of the Program would then apply. 2. Changes the Program Will Make The New York Coastal Management Program, in addition to furthering national coastal management goals, will cause changes in the way existing environmental and economic development activities of State agencies affect the use of coastal resources, and it will offer local governments and private interests the means to focus on the waterfront and bring about solid improvements. More specifically: -- Forty-four coastal management policies will apply to State agency decisions and voluntarily adopted local government waterfront revitalization pro- grams. Twenty-nine of these policies are new or have significantly increased enforceability as a result of the State's Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act. Fifteen of the poli- cies are from such existing State laws as the Tidal and Freshwater Wetlands Acts. -- Development in areas subject to erosion and on beaches and dunes will be set back from the shorelines a distance sufficient to minimize damage from erosion. -- All activities involving a State permit, funding or other action will be undertaken in a manner consistent with the coastal policies. -- Protection of significant fish and wildlife habi- tats, significant coastal scenic areas, and important agricultural lands will be increased. -- The Department of State and the Office of Business Permits must consolidate, simplify, expedite or otherwise improve existing permit procedures which affect development in the coastal area. -- Non-structural measures for erosion control will be promoted. -- Land development will be encouraged to locate in areas where infrastructure and public services are adequate. -- The Department of State, Urban Development Corpor- ation, Environmental Facilities Corporation, Departments of Commerce, Environmental Conserva- tion, Transportation, and others must seek new and alternative means of effectuating waterfront revitalization. -- State agencies and local governments with approved waterfront revitalization programs must promote and protect the traditional character and uses of small harbors. -- Within the existing major ports, State agencies and local governments with approved waterfront revitalization programs must site land uses and development which are essential to or in support of waterborne transporation of cargo and people. -- Enforcement capabilities will be increased for existing State programs which protect natural coastal resources, and for those existing State programs which promote proper development of coastal resources. -Federal agency actions will be consistent with the0 coastal policies. -- State and Federal agency actions will also be con- sistent with approved local waterfront revitaliza- tion programs. -- Financial assistance will be provided to local governments to prepare and implement local ordinances for erosion hazard areas and waterfront revitalization programs. -- State and local agencies will be provided tech- nical assistance in solving coastal problems. 3. The Federal Coastal Zone Management Act In response to intense pressure, and because of the importance of coastal areas of the United States, Congress passed the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 (CZMA) (P.L. 92-583). The Act authorizes a Federal grant-in-aid program to be administered by the Secretary of Commerce, who in turn delegated this responsibility to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) Assistant Administrator for Coastal Zone Management, who heads the office of0 Coastal Zone Management (OCZM). - 6 The CZMA was substantively amended on July 16, 1976 (P.L. 94-370) and on October 1, 1980 (P.L. 96-464). The Act and its amendments affirm a national interest in the effective protection and careful development of the coastal zone, by providing assistance and en- couragement to coastal states (and U.S. territories) to voluntarily develop and implement management programs for their coastal areas. Financial assistance grants under Sections 305 for program development and 306 for program implementation were authorized by the CZMA to provide coastal states and territories with the means for achieving these objectives. Broad guidelines and the basic requirements of the CZMA provide the necessary direction to states for devel- oping their coastal management programs. The program development arnd approval provisions are contained in 15 CFR Part 923, revised and published March 28, 1979, in the Federal Register. In summary, the requirements for program approval are that a state develop a management program that: 1. identifies and evaluates those coastal resources recognized in the Act that require management or protection by the state or territorial government; 2. re-examines existing policies or develops new policies to manage these resources. These poli- cies must he specific, comprehensive, and enforce- able, and must provide an adequate degree of pre- dictability as to how coastal resources will be managed; 3.~ determines specific uses and special geographic areas that are to be subject to the management program, based on the nature of identified coastal concerns. Uses and areas to be subject to manage- ment should be based on resource capability and suitability analyses, socio-economic considera- tions and public preferences; 4. identifies the inland and seaward areas subject to the management program; 5. provides for the consideration of the national interest in the planning for and siting of facilities that meet more than local requirements; and 6. includes sufficient legal authorities and organi- zational arrangements to implement the program and to ensure conformance to it. I- 7 In arriving at these substantive aspects of the manage- ment program, states are obliged to follow an open process which involves providing information to and considering the interests of, the general public, special interest groups, local governments, and regional, state, interstate, and federal agencies. Section 303 of the CZMA provides guidance of specific national objectives that warrant full consideration during the implementation of approved state coastal management programs. Section 305 of the CZMA authorizes a maximum of four annual grants to develop a coastal management program. After developing a management program, the state is then eligible for annual grants under Section 306 to implement its management program. if a program has deficiencies which need to be remedied or has not received approval by the time Section 305 program development grants have expired, a state may continue development of a Federally approvable coastal manage- ment program using entirely state funding. However, new Federal funding assistance for program development is no longer authorized by the 1980 CZMA amendments. Section 306 requires states to devote increasing portions (up to 30 percent) of their grant funds to activities leading to significant improvements in achieving national coastal management objectives.0 Section 306(i) also authorizes the award of grants for preservation of important natural areas, public access and urban development. Section 306(A encourages states to inventory coastal resources of national significance and develop standards to protect them. Section 307 of the Act stipulates that Federal agency activities shall be consistent, to the maximum. extent practicable, with approved state management programs. Section 307 further provides for mediation by the Secretary of Commerce when a serious disagreement arises between a Federal agency and a coastal state with respect to a federal consistency issue. Section 308 of the CZMA contains provisions for grants and loans to coastal states to enable them to plan for and respond to onshore impacts resulting from coastal energy activities including grants to mitigate the coastal impacts of coal transportation and alternative ocean energy activities. To be eligible for assistance under Section 308, coastal states must be receiving Section 305 or 306 grants, or, in the Secretary's view, be developing a management program consistent with the policies and objectives contained in Section 303 of the C ZMA. Section 309 allows the Secretary to make grants to states to coordinate, study, plan, and implement interstate coastal management programs. Section 310 allows the Secretary to conduct a program of research, study, and training to support state management programs. The Secretary may also make grants to states to carry out research studies and training required to support their programs. Section 312 directs OCZM to evaluate the performance of state coastal management programs on a continuing basis. Section 315 authorizes grants to states to acquire lands for access to beaches and other public coastal areas of environmental, recreational, historical, aesthetic, ecological, or cultural value, and for the acquisition of islands for preservation, in addition to the estuarine sanctuary program to preserve a representative series of undisturbed estuarine areas for long-term scientific and educational purposes. 4. CROSS REFERENCE TO PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS (306) How the New York Coastal Program Meets the Requirements of the Coastal Zone Management Act Requirements Regulations New York Coastal Program Sec. 306(a), which includes the requirements of Sec. 305: 305(b)(1): Boundaries .....................................923.21-923.34 Part II. Section 3 305(b)(2): Uses subject to management ............................923.11 Part II, Sections 4,6,8 305(b)(3): Areas of particular concern ...........................923.21-923.23 Part II, Section 8 305(b)(4): Means of control .................................... 923.41 Part II, Sections 4,6,7,8;Appen.A,E,F 305(b)(5): Guidelines on priorities of uses ......................923.21 Part II, Sections 6,8 305(b)(6): Organizational structure ..............................923.46 Part II, Section 4 305(b)(7): Shorefront planning process ...........................923.24 Part II, Section 7 305(b)(8): Energy facility planning process ......................923.13 Part II, Section 7 305(b)(9): Erosion planning process ..............................923.25 Part II, Section 7 Sec. 306(c),which includes: 306(c)(1): Notice; full participation; consistent with Sec. 303 ..........................................923.3, 923.51 Part II, Section 9; 923.55,923.58 Part VI; Appendix D '-4 306(c)(2)(A): Plan coordination .................................923.56 Appendix C 306(c)(2)(B): Continuing consultation mechanisms ................923.57 Part II, Section 4 306(c)(3): Public hearings ...........................923.58 Part II, Sections 1,9 o *306(c)(4): Gubernatorial review and approval .......... ..........923.48 306(c)(5): Designation of recipient agency ......................923.47 Part II, Section 4 306(c)(6): Organization ........................923.46 Part II, Section 4 306(c)(7): Authorities ...........................................923.41 Part II, Sections 4,6,;Appendix A,E,F 306(c)(8): Adequate consideration of national interest ..........923.52 Part II, Section 9 306(c)(9): Areas for preservation/restoration ....................923.22 Part II, Section 8 Sec. 306(d), which includes: 306(d)(1): Administer regulation, control development; resolve conflicts..,....... ,...... ...,923,41 Part II, Section 4 306(d)(2): Powers of acquisition, if necessary ...................923.41 Part II, Sections 4,6; Appendix A,F Sec. 306(e), which includes: 306(e)(1): Technique of control ...............................923.42-923.44 Part II, Sections 4,5,8; Appendix A 306(e) (2): Uses of regional benefit ..............................923.12 Part II, Section 9 Sec. 307, which includes: 307(b): Adequate consideration of federal agency views ........923.51 Part VI; Part IX; Appendix C 307(f): Incorporation of air and water quality requirements...923.45 Part II, Section 6 * SEQR requires a minimum ten day review after notice of availability of FEIS prior to gubernatorial approval. 0 0 0 PART I I - DESCRIPTICr' CF THE NEW YORK STATE COASTAL MANAGEMENT ,,OGRAM 0s SECTION I INTRODUCTION Is ~New York State's coast is recognized as one of the State's greatest assets. It is unique, for it contains a variety of natural, recreational, industrial, commercial, cultural, aesthetic and energy resources of local, statewide and national significance. Unfortunately, the coast is severely threatened by competing demands. The resources of the State's Coastal Area are increasinqly subject to the pressures of population growth and economic development, which include requirements for industry, commerce, housing, recreation and energy production. These demands result in the loss of living marine resources and wildlife, the diminution of open space areas, shoreline erosion, permanent adverse changes to ecological systems, and a loss of economic opportunities. Tfo address these coastal problems and provide a means for resolving them, the New York State Department of State has prepared, in cooperation with the Federal government, other State agencies, the State Legislature, local governments and the interested public, a statewide Coastal Management Program. This proposed Program has three major parts: Vie first establishes the boundaries of the Coastal Area within which t-he Program applies. The second describes the organizational structure to imple- ment the Program. The third provides a set of statewide policies enforceable on all State and Federal agencies which manage resources along the State's coastline. New York State's Coastal Manaqement Program The New York State Legislature has, over the years, enacted legislation and established programs for protecting the State's valuable natural and man-made resources. The proposed Coastal Management Program is built upon these existing laws and programs. However, durincq the development of the Program, it was found that additional legislation was needed: (1) to protect shoreowners and their property from the damages caused by severe erosion, (2) to provide a method to accomplish coastal management objectives through coordination of existing programs and by developing a consensus among all levels of government and the private sector to achieve these objectives, and (3) to establish enforceable policies for State and Federal actions in the coastal area, in 1981, the New York State Legislature passed and Governor Carey signed into law two bills which will enable New York to meet these requirements -- The Coastal Erosion Hazard Areas Act (Article 34 of the Environmental Conservation Law) and . ~the Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act (Article 42 of the Executive Law). II - I - 3 The Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources law establishes a balanced statewide approach for encouraging development in the coastal area while protecting natural coastal resources. The law establishes boundaries for the State's Coastal Area by adopting a map which defines the area within which the Coastal Management Program will apply. It provides a set of policies which address significant coastal issues. State agencies will use the Department of State's review procedures and the existing State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEORA) process to abide by these policies in their decisions. The Act's coastal policies encourage the development and use of existing ports and other areas where infrastructure and public services are adequate. They also encourage facilitation of public access to coastal locations for recreational purposes. Certain policies affirm the need to protect and appropriately revitalize or develop such natural and man-made resources as fish and wildlife habitats, agricultural lands, other open space areas, and scenic and historic resources. One policy concerns protection of natural and man-made features from damage caused by flooding and erosion. Optional Local Waterf ront Revitalization Programs The new law offers local governments the opportunity to partici- pate in the State's Coastal Management Program on a voluntary basis. Localities are encouraged to prepare and adopt local waterfront revitalization programs which in turn, would provide more detailed implementation of the State's Program through use of existing broad powers such as those covering zoning and site plan review. With a waterfront revitalization program approved by the Secretary of State, a locality may take advantage of certain tanqible benefits. First, the Department of State is empowered to provide technical and financial assistance for the preparation and implementation of local programs. Secondly, State agencies' actions must be consistent with approved local programs to the maximum extent practicable. Thirdly, if a State's Coastal Management Program is amended to include the approved local program, Federal agencies will be required to adhere to this program to the same degree which is required of State agencies. Public Participation The core of the State's public involvement is the New York State Citizen's Advisory Committee. The advisory body is made up of representatives from the five coastal regions of the State. The Committee met regularly during the development of the Program to review technical reports, make recommendations on its content and legislative proposals and assist in public participation activities. 11 - I - 4 The Coastal Management Program has also been shaped by comments and suggestions from a wide variety of interest groups. This was a deliberate attempt to involve people and groups who are interested in and potentially affected by the Program. The Department of State actively sought input from the public and local interest groups, including local government, in developing the State's Coastal Management Program. In all, over one thousand meetings were held during the Program's development. At a very early stage in its preparation, a series of sixteen public meetings were held at various points along the coast, to solicit public comments on the general approach. The initial draft document and the proposed legislation derived from this input. The draft Program, in turn, was aired publicly, at a series of eight public hearings held in all areas of the coast during the spring of 1979. Based upon comments received at these hearings, the proposed legislation was substantially revised and introduced in the Legislature in May of 1979. Informational bulletins were at that time forwarded to all members of the public who had registered at the hearings, to update them, and demonstrate that their concerns were reflected in the proposed legislation. In the fall of 1979, further hearings were held by the State Legislature, and following additional bill revisions, in the spring of 1980, the Department sent further informational O ~bulletins to the interested public. In response to further comment by public interest groups, the proposed legislation was again substantially revised and re- introduced in the 1981 legislative session where it was over- whelmingly approved. The Governor signed this legislation into law in July, 1981. The State's proposed Coastal Management Program and Draft Environmental Impact Statement (CMP-DEIS) were distributed to interested agencies and organizations (See Part VII of this document). In July, 1982, hearings were held in Buffalo, Albany and New York City to receive additional public comment. This document contains responses to all comments received on the CMP- DEIS (See Part IX) as well as appropriate revisions. Program Development The Department of State relied heavily on local, county, regional and State agencies in the preparation of the Coastal Management Program. Under numerous contracts, State and local agencies analyzed coastal resources and provided recommendations which helped to shape the Program and ensure the necessary coordination. To aid in the preparation of the Program, New York's coast was divided into five coastal regions. Advisory documents were prepared for each region:W New York City - prepared by the Department of City Planning, City of New York. Nassau-Suffolk - prepared by the Long Island Regional Planning Board. St. Lawrence River-Eastern Ontario Area - prepared by the St. Lawrence-Eastern Ontario Commission. Hudson River Valley (including the Westchester County shore of Long Island Sound) - prepared by the New York State Department of State. Great Lakes West - prepared by the New York State Department of State. These regional reports were used in the preparation of the Coastal Management Program. Many of the recommendations on poli- cies, boundaries, special areas of concern, and implementation have been incorporated into the State's Program and will provide a framework for developing coastal programs at the local level. I -1-6 SECTION 2 COASTAL REGIONS OF NEW YORK: RESOURCES AND CONCERNS Introduction New York is unique among the coastal states. No other State encompasses three distinct coastal environments within its borders: the marine environment of Long Island and New York City; the tidal estuarine environment of the Hudson River; and the freshwater environment of the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence region. This richness of resources brings with it, however, a distinct complex of problems. There are no common solutions for these three coastal environ- ments. Both the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence and the Long Island regions, for example, are faced with serious erosion problems along portions of their coast; however, climatic conditions, land configuration, soil structure, and shoreline recession rates in each region differ so that solutions proposed for one region are not transferable to the other. Changing water levels mark both the freshwater environment of the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence and the marine environment of New York City-Long Island, but extreme tidal fluctuations and period differentials between freshwater inflow and outflow create additional concerns. While these problems may seem at times insurmountable, New York's Coastal Management Program provides an opportunity to devise ways not only to preserve but to enhance the environment in which its residents live and work. Distinctive characteristics and prin- cipal concerns of the State's three different coastal environ- ments are identified in the following discussion. Marine Coast of Long Island and New York City Long Island Long Island is a detached segment of the Atlantic Coastal Plain, separated from the mainland on the north by Long Island Sound and f rom Manhattan on the west by the narrow East River and New York Harbor. The Atlantic Ocean completes the Island's salt water encirclement. The island is 120 miles long, varies in width from 20 miles to less than a mile, and is surrounded by a shoreline (including barrier islands) of approximately 1,475 miles, 46% of New York State's designated coastline. Is ~~~~~~~~II - 2 - 1 The last continental ice sheets retreated from Long Island and elsewhere 10,000 years ago, leaving behind unconsolidated, highly erodible glacial materials. Since then, rising sea levels haveW shaped the Island's rough outline. Today, littoral forces of wind, wave, and tide constantly reform the coast. About once every two years, storms cause moderate damage to properties along the shoreline, and approximately three times a century a catas- trophic storm rips over the Island. In a few hours severe storm conditions can alter the shore as much as normal conditions do in a hundred years. Thus, shoreline recession is a variable process, depending mostly on the frequency and severity of storms. The north shore of Nassau County erodes at a rate of one half foot to a foot per year, and Suffolk County's north shore erodes at an even faster rate. Despite such vulnerability, people have continued to build all along this fragile shoreline. In order to protect shorefront property, it has been the practice to con- struct jetties, groins and seawalls and to nourish beaches. These measures, however, tend to be effective only in a limited area and may actually cause serious problems in adjacent areas. West of Port Jefferson is a highly irregular configuration of deep harbors and bays separated by peninsulas projecting into Long Island Sound. Sand and gravel eroded from the peninsulas have been deposited as spits (e.g., West Beach on Eaton's Neck) and bay mouth bars (e.g., Old Field Beach at Port Jefferson). East of Port Jefferson, a line of uninterrupted bluffs rising as high as 130 feet extends all the way to Orient Point. Erosion rates of these bluffs range from 0.8 to 5.2 feet a year.1 The Island's south shore includes two distinct physiographic features: an eastern headlands section on the Island's south fork and an off-shore barrier complex. The eastern headlands section, extending 33 miles westward from Montauk Point to South- ampton, is characterized by truncated hills of varying heights and steepness. Fronted by narrow beaches of gravel and coarse sand, these headlands have suffered severe erosion. The barrier complex stretches parallel to Long Island for 73 miles west from Southampton to the Nassau County-New York City boundary. Fire Island National Seashore and Jones Beach State Park and other recreational areas are found on these formations. Consisting of ocean beach, irregular sand dunes and bayside tidal lagoons, these narrow islands are continually subject to the action of waves, wind and westward longshore currents. Most important, these barriers receive the brunt of severe storms and protect the bays and 'mainland" from storm damage. 'Lee E. Koppelman, et al, The Urban Sea: Long Island Sound (New York, 1976), p. 50. II-2 - 2 In addition to the loss of land through erosion, valuable land resources on Long Island have been absorbed in the rapid popula- tion expansion from west to east. Although Suffolk County remains today the most productive agricultural county in New York State in terms of value of products sold, most of the farmland in Nassau and western Suffolk Counties has been developed, either for residential, commercial, and industrial purposes, or utilized for transportation services. The salt marshes and meadows of Long Island are highly productive fish and wildlife habitats. They also serve as pollutant filters and as natural buffers dissipating the energy of storm waves. However, during the period 1954-1964, these multiple values were often overlooked as 8,200 acres of marshland in Nassau and Suffolk Counties were filled in for residential, recreational, industrial and related development. This ten-year period saw somewhat greater losses in Nassau County (33 percent of the total 1953 acreage) than in Suffolk County (17 percent of the total).2 Increased development has also put added stress on the Island's groundwater aquifer, its sole source of potable water. Since the aquifer is vast and continually replenished, the overall quantity and quality of Long Island's underground water supply is satisfactory. However, a greater demand for water from the western end of the aquifer has created an east-west imbalance in the system. Failing septic tanks in natural aquifer recharge areas threaten to elevate nitrate concentrations in the ground- water. Stormwater runoff is another development-related problem affect- ing the groundwater supply. Recharge basins have been built throughout Long Island to retain this runoff and filter it back into the aquifer. Now, trace levels of toxic chemicals from lawns, roads, parking lots, industrial sites and other areas have been detected in some parts of the aquifer. Stormwater may require treatment to remove those chemicals. Although the overall condition of Long Island's marine surface water is good, human uses of the coast cause localized degrada- tion. Surface waters in and adjacent to highly developed areas are impacted by nitrates and BOD (biochemical oxygen demand) from municipal sewage treatment plants. These point sources of pollution contribute over 70% of the total internal loading of nitrogen in such areas as Manhasset Bay, Hempstead Harbor and Hempstead Day in western Nassau County, and Flanders Bay in 2Long Island Regional Planning Board, Fourteen Selected Marine Resources Problems of Long Island, New York: -Description Evaluations (Hartford, 1970), p. 37. II - 2 - 3 eastern Suffolk County. Generally, sewage treatment plant effluents are not considered a major source of bacterial (coliform) contamination of surface waters, unless the plants are outmoded, as in Hempstead Bay. There are relatively few industrial discharges to surface waters on Long Island, and those that do occur (e.g., in Glen Cove Creek) have only localized impacts. For certain areas, non-point sources of pollution carried by stormwater runoff, streamflow, and groundwater underf low are the major contributors of pollutants to surface waters. Areas where non-point sources are the major contributors include Oyster Bay and Port Jefferson harbors on the north and Great South Bay and Moriches Bay on the south. On-site sewage disposal systems (septic tanks and cesspools), landfills and scavenger waste treatment facilities, and fertilizers contribute directly to surface water quality by contaminating streams and groundwaters with nitrates and other soluble pollutants. Urban stormwater runoff contributes coliform bacteria to most surface waters and has necessitated the closing of large areas to shellfishing. Wastes from waterfowl populations and domestic animals on the Island's east end are collected in runoff and further degrade surface waters. Finally, development-related erosion, dredging and dredge spoil disposal add particulates and other pollutants to coastal waters. In addition to local point and non-point sources, pollution from New York City also affects the quality of Long Island's surface waters. Offshore, a potential for additional pollution exists with Outer Continental Shelf oil exploration and related activities. Based on United States Geological Survey estimates, there is a 59% chance of one to four spills of greater than 1,000 barrels over the life of North Atlantic field operations. Tankers using the Nantucket to Ambrose traffic lanes could endanger the Island's barrier beaches as well. Water quality problems may also affect the Island's important commercial fishing industry. Total landings of fish (finfish and shellfish) reached a peak of 31,000 metric tons in 1938, continued high for a decade, and declined steadily to about 15,000 metric tons in the late 1970's. This decline may have been caused by a combination of factors such as deteriorating water quality, overfishing, manmade environmental changes, and natural fluctuations. Nonetheless, the water surrounding Long Island continues to be a permanent or seasonal home for a wide variety of finfish and shellfish. Although certain species of finfish are present throughout the year, seasonal migrants tend to dominate the fish population. The important deepwater species are found primarily on the southern side of the Island and also in the vicinity of Block Island Sound, Montauk Point and Georges Bank. of all II - 2 - 4 shallow water species landed in 1978, hard clams accounted for the greatest tonnage and dockside value. They were found primarily in Great South Bay. Oysters and scallops were harvested primarily in the Gardiner-Peconic Bay area. Not only do the vast expanses of water -surrounding Long Island support commerce, they also constitute an extensive recreational resource serving residents of the entire New York metropolitan region. Public access, as well as good water quality, is essential to the enjoyment of coastal waters. The Fire Island National Seashore, seventeen State parks, and numerous county, town and private recreational areas provide access to coastal waters. In Nassau County, despite great development pressures, extensive lands have been set aside for recreation uses: 3,234 acres are Federally-owned, 5,261 State-owned, and 5,315 county- owned. In Suffolk County, where development pressures have been less, there was an opportunity to bank many more acres of park- land in anticipation of growth: 3,391 acres are Federally-owned, 18,545 State-owned and 14,787 county-owned.3 Still, the Island will require additional recreational capacity over the next 25 years, not so much to meet new demand as to relieve current pressures. New York City Each of New York City's boroughs is situated on an island, with the exception of the Bronx which is part of the continental land mass. The topography of these islands range from abrupt rocky outcroppings in linear patterns, such as those found in northern Manhattan, to steep slopes of unconsolidated glacial material in random clusters which level out on the edges of the island, finally ending in wetlands and beaches. Throughout the City's history, its land has been intensively used. Surface conditions have been radically altered by excavation, filling, construction and paving. The extent of wetlands has been significantly reduced and natural drainage patterns altered in many cases as filling activities extended the City's land area. Yet, with all these alterations, the general physiography remains predominantly as it was determined by geological formation and other forces. The Hudson River flows along Manhattan's western shore carrying water from the distant Adirondack Mountains. It is a tidal estuary, as are all the straits surrounding this island. Fresh water laden with nutrients mixes with salt water in these estuaries to create an ideal environment for a wide variety of O ~3Long Island Regional Planning Board, Nassau-Suffolk Regional Element Report, (Hauppauge, 1978) p. 18. 11 - 2 - 5 plant and animal species. Jamaica Bay, an estuary with associated wetlands, is a major spawning ground for finfish and crustaceans as well as a habitat for at least 200 species of birds. New York Harbor is naturally divided into several parts. The Lower Bay at the entrance to the Atlantic ocean is connected, via the Ambrose Channel, to the Upper Day which in turn meets the Hudson River. Forty-two channels run throughout the Harbor. These channels require constant maintenance. Unfortunately, adverse environmental impacts have been associated with the processes of dredging spoil disposal, particularly when the dredged materials are polluted. During dredging operations, sediments are resuspended and mixed with water, thereby increasing the potential for immediate release of contaminants into surrounding areas. When the dredged sediments or spoils are deposited at an open water disposal site, contaminants may be released slowly into the overlying water column for several years. Because of this threat, the Federal government is phasing out the disposal of polluted dredge spoils in open waters. Alternate methods for dredge spoil disposal must be developed for the New York City region. These methods include inland disposal and placement behind diked enclosures. However, the shortage of available and suitable onshore disposal sites and the potential leaching of contaminants from such areas into adjacent ground and surface waters make these alternative methods expensive and hazardous. Other important adverse impacts may result from dredging and disposal activities in New York City's waters. These include changes in bottom topography, local water circulation patterns, and flushing, erosion and sedimentation rates. Biological effects, such as the loss of the aquatic habitats mentioned above, may result from the physical and chemical impacts of dredging. The potential for oil and hazardous spills is high in New York Harbor due to the substantial amount of commercial shipping. This possibility is compounded by the location of numerous oil and other bulk storage facilities along the City's and New Jersey's waterfronts. While the development of offshore oil and gas production and new energy facilities may contribute to the revitalization of some deteriorating shorefront areas in New York City, the chances for spillage multiply. II - 2 - 6 Floating debris in the Hudson River and New York Harbor is another serious problem. The debris comes from decaying piers and bulkheads, abandoned ships, and vegetation. It is estimated that the River and the Harbor annually receive over 600,0004 cubic feet of debris which poses a threat to commercial shipping and recreational craft. The Port of New York has been the nation's foremost maritime center since the Brie Canal opened in 1825. For many years, the volume of foreign cargo grew tremendously; and industries, associated with or dependent on water transportation, developed along Manhattan's shores. However, the heyday of New York's port has passed. People and commerce have moved from inner city to suburb, leaving many underutilized, sometimes abandoned, sites along Manhattan's waterfront. New methods of production, increased reliance on the truck for product distribution, need for more space, anti- quated physical plants, deteriorating neighborhoods, and spiraling property taxes compounded by the financial incentives provided by suburban counties and other states, are among the reasons for the reduction in manufacturing and commercial activity along New York's waterfront. Revitalization of these areas is the most effective way to encourage economic develop- ment without at the same time consuming valuable suburban and rural open space. Some deteriorating waterfront areas might be redeveloped to meet the recreational needs of New York's seven million residents. Much of the City's outdoor recreation is based on structured activities, with opportunity for less structured relaxation provided along the southern shore in Gateway National Recreation Area and at other smaller sites in all five boroughs. Here, good water quality allows for such activities as swimming and fishing. However, a great many of the City's residents lack adequate means of transportation to outlying parks, are barred from their immediate shore by private development and forced to crowd into the more accessible facilities. Development of recreation sites in deteriorated waterfront areas closer to densely populated residential centers would relieve crowding at existing facilities, provide easier access, and at the same time contribute to an improved economic climate. More important than inadequate recreation resources for the people of New York City are the basic problems of solid waste disposal, and water and air pollution. Partially treated sewage is discharged into adjacent waters, however new treatment facilities are under construction and existing plants are scheduled for upgrading. 4Bruce Howlett Inc. New York City and Hudson River Waterway Use Study (Brewster, New York 1977) p. III-71 11 - 2 - 7 Urban stormwater runoff and combined sewer outflows significantly affect the quality of coastal waters in the New York City. While many of the critical environmental and economic problems besetting New York City affect areas well beyond its boundaries, the City's vast natural and cultural resources are a boon and creative stimulus not only to the immediate region, but also to the State, the Nation and beyond. Hudson River Estuary The Hudson River estuary is a long arm of the sea, extending 150 miles inland. Its present geologic form dates from the period after the last glacier. As the glacier melted, rising seawater moved in and flooded the old course of the river. Today, because it is so large a tidal and navigable river, the Hudson is unique in the northeastern United States. As an estuary, two major characteristics of the Hudson are its tidal action and its salinity. Up to Troy, the River's flow reverses with the tide, the mean tidal range at Albany being 5.3 feet. The limit of salt water intrusion in the Hudson varies. It is primarily determined by the interaction of the tidal force, which pushes salinity up the estuary, and the freshwater inflow, which flushes the estuary seaward. The limit, therefore, changes with the seasons; during spring runoff, freshwater inflow is greatest and salt water extends not far beyond Yonkers; while in the winter, salt water can extend nearly to Poughkeepsie, a distance of seventy miles. The history of the Hudson River reflects a strong relationship between the natural environment and the economy. Access to the River, water transportation, fisheries, agriculture and the scenic quality of the area have been major factors in the development of the Valley. These factors, plus the proximity of large population centers, some of which depend on the river as a source of water supply, continue to make the Hudson a unique economic and environmental resource for the State, and therefore, are the major- concerns of the Coastal Management Program for the Hudson Valley. The Hudson is an important link in the State's transportation network, being navigable for ocean-going vessels as far as Albany. Beyond Albany, the State Barge Canal provides a system for shallow draft vessels which connects the Port of New York with the Great Lakes and the St. Lawrence River. The Port of Albany is the most diversified of the upstate New York ports. It is a significant economic force in the Hudson Valley because of its location at the center of a large market area with excellent highway and railroad access, a 12-month operating capability, and a strong commitment from both the State and the Albany-Rensselaer II - 2 - 8 business community to see to it that the Port realizes its potential as a shipping and industrial center. Between the Port of New York and the Port of Albany, the Hudson River serves a limited but important group of water-related industries including petroleum, sand and gravel, cement, and gypsum. Without access to the River, these industries would operate at an economic disadvantage. In general, the region benefits from the lower cost of water transportation as compared to land routes. In some cases (particularly gypsum and gravel), the cost savings of water shipment are directly responsible for the location of those industries along the Hudson. In the mid-eighteenth century, rail lines were built along both sides of the Hudson. For almost the entire length of the east shore, and for half the length of the west shore, these railroads were built directly on the River's edge. Thus, railroads have severely limited access to the Hudson. However, the railroad must also be seen as essential to economic life in the State. it should also be noted that while the railroads have limited physical access, they have also served to prevent other develop- ment of the shore which might have had greater adverse impact on the quality of the coast. The Hudson River is inhabitated by an extraordinarily rich variety of fish species. Some of the best known are diadromous forms, those fish which spend part of their life cycle in fresh- water and. part in salt water. Among the important diadromous species are the American eel, shad, alewife, striped bass, and sturgeon. Two species of sturgeon, shortnose sturgeon (Acipenser brevirostrum) and Altantic sturgeon (Acipenser oxyrhynchus) are found in the river. The former is a listed endangered species. Indeed, the River is one of the major spawning grounds for several commercially significant Atlantic species, particularly striped bass. In the past, commercial fishing in this estuary was a viable industry. However, fishing activity has been reduced because of the sharply increased pollution, the unpre- dictability of the catches, and changing social conditions. While the quality of its waters has improved through treatment of municipal wastes, past discharges of toxic wastes still contamn- inate the River. Because of this toxic pollution, all commercial fishing in the River below Troy is banned except for shad, goldfish, and large sturgeon. Within this estuary and its immediate environs, there are many important wildlife habitats, particularly the numerous wetlands which are used by migratory waterfowl and other forms of wildlife. The Hudson Valley is an important fruit growing area. Orchards in Columbia, Ulster, Dutchess and Orange counties account for more than a fifth of the value of fruit grown in New York State. Most of this production occurs close to the River. It is found there because of the way the Hudson and the surrounding landforms have influenced the microclimate. The area's greatest concentra- tion of orchards is found in southern Ulster County and northern Orange County. Microclimate and soil conditions make these orchards among the most productive in New York. It is in this area also that the Hudson Valley's best vineyards and wineries are found. This is a small but significant industry with a long II - 2 - 9 history and a strong potential for growth. The agricultural land in the Hudson Valley is under pressure for conversion to other uses. However, reflecting a local concern for preserving farm- land, most of the important coastal agriculture now lies within agricultural districts.I The Hudson Valley coastal region is one of the most outstanding scenic attractions of the United States. Its scenery includes the dramatic vertical rise of the Palisades at the lower end, beautiful views of the Catskills along its upper reaches, the magnificent Hudson Highlands which rise straight from the water's edge, long stretches of farms and historic estates, and a scat- tering of urban waterfronts. The outstanding scenic resources of the Hudson Valley inspired one of the most significant and first truly American schools of painting. Most of the scenic area in the Hudson River Valley is in public ownership, notably that land owned by the Palisades Interstate Park Commission. In the Highlands, much scenic land is either in State parks or occupied by the U.S. Military Academy. However, significant areas of these scenic resources are not in public ownership and are not protected. Because the Hudson River can provide large amounts of water for cooling purposes, energy production facilities have been located along its banks. Numerous proposals for additional facilities, mostly nuclear, have been made and have engendered much contro- versey over their potential impact on existing industry, fisheries, agriculture, and the scenic quality of the region. Great Lakes - St. Lawrence Region The Great Lakes - St. Lawrence area has the most diverse shoreline of New York State's three coastal environments. Although the area has problems common to the State's other coastal regions, there are additional concerns unique to this area, which includes the State's second and third largest cities and its principal heavy industrial center. Its borders encompass the vast freshwater bodies of Lake Erie, the Niagara River, Lake Ontario, St. Lawrence River and internationally, renowned scenic resources of Niagara Falls and the Thousand Islands. The mainland coast of the Great Lakes area extends for over 700 miles. When 340 miles of island shoreline - located mostly in the two rivers - are added to this mainland frontage, New York's Great Lakes - St. Lawrence coastline comprises about one-third of the State's entire coast. The greater areal extent is repre- sented by its waters - approximately 4,000 square miles. Onshore, the area of the 78 communities which are located along the coast totals almost 3,000 square miles. The coastal lands lie in the Erie-Ontario Plain and in the St. Lawrence Marine Plain, areas of generally low relief broken only by drumlin formations along sections of eastern Lake Ontario. II - 2 - 10 Despite the absence of significant variations in the relative altitude of landforms along the coastline, there are many prominent topographic features which give the area a unique character. In addition to Niagara Falls and the Thousand Islands, which attract millions of visitors each year, those features include: the Genesee River gorge; embayments, such as Braddock Bay, Sodus Bay and Henderson Bay; and the area's only dunes which stretch for five miles along the eastern shores of Lake Ontario. A particularly significant topographic form are the bluffs found along a substantial portion of the coasts of Lake Erie and from Niagara to Oswego County on Lake Ontario, rising in many places to over 120 feet in height. These bluffs provide superb vantage points for sweeping views of the coast, an amenity which is prized by tourists as well as shoreline residents. However, the bluffs also severely limit access to the shores and to the waters of the coast. This means that the multifaceted relationships between land and water found in other regions are lacking along much of this Great Lakes coast. Because of the single dimension of the coastal experience in most of these bluff areas, and the lack of viewing points further inland owing to the flat land configuration, connection with the coastal waters fades quickly as one moves away from the shore's edge. Another characteristic of the Great Lakes coast is the scarcity of wide beaches, even when the lakes are at their average levels. This is due princi- pally to the absence of suitable beach-building materials. The waters of the area's lakes, rivers and tributary streams constitute one of the State's most valuable fisheries. Because of previous over-exploitation, water pollution, destruction of habitats and introduction of certain non-native fish, many valuable species, such as lake sturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens) and Atlantic Salmon, became virtually extinct. In recent years, because of intensely focussed fishery management practices such as the salmonid stocking program, many species highly prized by fishermen have been on the increase. Numerous fish habitats of significance are located throughout the area and include: Cattaraugus Creek; Strawberry Island in the Niagara River - a major spawning ground for muskellunge; Eighteen Mile Creek in Niagara County which serves as a spawning habitat for salmonids, northern pike and smallmouth bass; Oak Orchard Creek in Orleans County; Braddock Bay, a major wetland complex which supports bass and perch populations; the embayment habitats of Wayne and Oswego counties; the renowned fishery in the Salmon River; the northern pike fishery which extends from Henderson Harbor through the Thousand Islands; Chaumont Bay which provides not only sport but commercial fishing opportunities; and, Cranberry Creek Marsh on the St. Lawrence River. The area's fishing resources not only offer fine recreation to the residents of the coastal communities but contribute to the region's economic life by attracting large numbers of sports fishermen from both the United States and * ~~Canada. II - 2 - 11 The Great Lakes - St. Lawrence region has a wide array of opportunities for waterfowl hunting, or simply observation of hundreds of species including such rare birds as bald eagles, double-crested cormorants and red phalaropes. Of special note is the location of much of the area in the "flyway" used by thousands of migrating birds each year. These important fish and wildlife resources are located not only in rural communities but in or near urban centers such as Buffalo and Rochester. Unfortunately, these valuable natural resources continue to be subjected to intense pressures. Toxic substances released into the area's waters have been found in certain Lake Ontario fish. Wetlands, streams and other habitat areas are endangered by development which directly interferes with the life cycle of species or lowers water quality below that necessary for their optimum production. In many places, access to harvest or to observe those species is limited. Erosion is a regional problem, but it is more severe on Lake Ontario and on sections of the St. Lawrence River, because the shorelands there are composed mainly of vulnerable glacial soils. As the land is undercut, buildings gradually topple onto the beaches or into the water. Many structures, built at great expense to protect the shore, prove to be inadequate; in some cases they have caused erosion of adjacent lands. The financial losses incurred directly and indirectly by both public and private interests are substantial. The Great Lakes - St. Lawrence area differs from the Hudson River and the marine coast in one important respect -- its waters are not subject to tidal movements. However, the levels of Lake Erie and Lake Ontario respond first to inflows not only from their own drainage basins but also from Lake Michigan, Lake Superior and Lake Huron, whose waters eventually reach the sea through the St. Lawrence River. Water levels are also affected by the speed with which waters can flow down from Lake Erie and Lake Ontario. In the case of the former, the depth of Niagara River's existing channel limits the rate of outflow. Because Lake Erie in recent years has been at a level higher than the long-term average, studies are under way to determine the feasibility of changing the Niagara River's channel configuration to allow more water to escape from, the Lake. On the other hand, Lake Ontario' s outflow channel, the St. Lawrence River, was modified in 1958 so that the Lake's water level could be managed for three purposes: to allow deep draft ships to enter Lake Ontario from the sea; to provide for the operation of hydro-electric power plants; and, to permit a greater outflow from the Lake. In 1973, a severe storm, occurring during a period of very high water level, caused extensive damage to shoreline properties. Since then, coastal residents, fearful of the continuing high levels, heave criticized the International Joint Commission for failing to take their interests into account. 11 - 2 - 12 Recreation is a major concern in the area, not only as to the extent of the resources but also their quality and the public's accessibility to them. State, county and local governments and the private sector are all suppliers of such resources. Forty State parks line the shores, placed to take advantage of such features as: scarce wide sand beaches on low-lying lands, as at Lake Erie State Park, Evangola State Park, Hamlin Beach and Selkirk Shores; areas of high scenic quality, as can be viewed from the cluster of State parks around Niagara Falls and the river gorge; and the unique juxtaposition of land and water in the Thousand Islands region where several State parks are sited. County and municipal parks and facilities, and those owned by private interests, add considerably to the region's total number of recreational resources. Despite this abundance, a number of problems remain. In the urban areas of Buffalo and Rochester, there are still pressing needs for swimming, boating and fishing opportunities. In some instances, resources exist, but because of poor water quality, swimming is precluded. In Buffalo and in other places, highways block access to shorelands, thereby reducing the opportunities for residents to enjoy their coastal resources. The anticipated expansion of interest in boating will impose greater demands on existing facilities in the region which are not sufficient to satisfy needs in many areas, particularly on Lake Erie and Lake Ontario where the fisheries are attracting great attention. More harbors of refuge are required, because of the larger number of smaller craft being used by fishermen and the dangerous storms which can arise very quickly on both lakes. The residents of the Great Lakes - St. Lawrence area also share a major concern with those of other coastal regions - how to bring new life to the often abandoned, and run-down, waterfront sec- tions of their communities, both large and small. This concern reflects a growing recognition of the unrealized economic and social potential of ports and harbors, such as Buffalo, Rochester, Oswego and Clayton, which served in the past as mainsprings, for the area's development. The challenge is to revitalize those waterfront locations in a balanced way and thus restore them to their historic role as major contributors to the well-being of the region. II - 2 - 13 SECTION 3 COASTAL BOUNDARIES Introduction The Coastal Management Program has established statewide boundaries in accordance with the requirements of the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended, and its subsequently issued rules and regulations. This was not a sir'ple task; New York is unique among the coastal states in the diversity of its "coastal areas" and "coastal waters." As indicted previously, the State's Coastal Area is com- prised of distinct sectors: Long Island, a land mass frontinq on the Atlantic Ocean, which exhibits strong land and water interrelationships; New York City, where the intensity of land and water uses is the greatest in the State; the Hudson River Valley, with a unique estuary that extends 150 miles into upstate New York; and the Great Lakes - St. Lawrence River region, which contains a vast non-tidal freshwater coastal system. The Coastal Zone Management Act and the Federal rules and regulations pertaining to it define a number of general and specific requirements that rust be followed in determining statewide coastal management boundaries: 1. A determination of the inland boundary necessary for the management program to control shorelands, the use of which have a direct and significant impact on the coastal waters; 2. A determination of the extent of the territorial sea, or, where applicable, of State waters in the Great Lakes; 3. An identification of all federally-owned land or lands which are held in trust by the Federal government, its officers and agents in the coastal area and over which the State does not exercise any control as to use; 4. An identification of tidal and saline waters, transitional and inter-tidal areas, salt marshes, wetlands, and beaches; and, 5. A process for consultation with adjoining coastal states so as to minimize the possibility of incompatible uses occurring at boundary junctures. Both State and local agencies provided input to the definition of New York's Coastal Area. Regional and municipal planning agencies mapped in sketch form an initial coastal boundary , employing guidelines developed by the Department of State. The Department of Environmental II - 3 - I Conservation, under contract with the Department of State, proposed a statewide boundary determination process based upon work performed during the initial phase of the program by the various agencies. The Department of State summarized the initial boundaries which were developed and recommended by the local agencies. The recommended boundaries were delineated on maps at a scale of 1:24,000. Boundary Criteria Following this preliminary work, the Department of State adopted a set of boundary delineation criteria which were in accord with the Federal requirements and also recognized a variety of State and local concerns. These criteria, out- lined below, were employed in defining the final coastal boundary: 1. Utilize a one-tier boundary rather than a multiple-tier concept. Despite proposals by several jurisdictions for a multiple tier approach to boundary definition, the single tier boundary was adjudged to provide for simpler admininis- tration. 2. Conform with the nearest cultural feature or political boundary. Employment of recognizable or known land-marks such as a road, railroad, utility right-of-way, or municipal boundary as the onshore feature to delineate coastal boundaries permits speedy determination as to whether a particular parcel of land lies within the defined coastal boundary. Unless otherwise indicated, the shoreward side of a road, railroad or other right-of-way is to be considered the boundary line. 3. Include all land and water uses directly impacting coastal waters. The boundary encompasses all those "land and water uses of direct and signifi- cant impact on coastal waters" specified in the Coastal Zone Management Act.1 Such impact is defined as that which changes the physical, chemical, biological, littoral, or aesthetic characteristics, or the socio-economic values of coastal waters to the extent that the character, use or availability of its resources and/or the environmental quality standards of the coastal waters are so adversely affected that they can only be maintained or restored at high cost to society. 'Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended, Section 304 (1) II-3 - 2 4. Include any specially designated management areas. These comprise State parks along the shore, and areas for which a local waterfront revitalization program has been approved by the Secretary of State, and areas designated as estuarine sanctuaries. 5. Include tidal and saline waters, wetlands, islands and beaches. The State's Coastal Area includes all coastal waters which, as defined by the Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act, include "lakes Erie and Ontario, the St. Lawrence and Niagara rivers, the Hudson river south of the federal dam at Troy, the East and Harlem rivers, the Kill von Kull and Arthur Kill, Long Island sound, and the Atlantic ocean, and their connect- ing water bodies, bays, harbors, shallows and marshes." All barriers and other islands situated in these waters are within the coastal boundary. Also, significant portions of creeks, streams and rivers which are tributaries to these coastal waters are found within the Coastal Area. 6. Exclude present federally-controlled lands. The Federal legislation specifies that such lands be identified and then excluded from the boundary. All Federal lands and facilities situated in New York's Coastal Area are listed in Appendix D. Major land holdings are delineated on the Coastal Area maps. 7. Provide buffer areas, where appropriate. Where desirable for aesthetic or other reasons, a landward buffer area of up to 1,000 feet from an identified political/cultural feature is provided, where otherwise the feature itself would serve as such boundary. S. Coordinate boundary lines with those of adjacent states. Such action is necessary to avoid incompatible use conflicts at the juncture of New York's coastal boundary with those of Connecticut, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania. Throughout the development of New York State's Coastal Management Program, discussions were held and information was exchanged with officials from neighboring coastal states regarding the location of the coastal boundaries. It was determined that no major conflicts would arise due to any differences in the location of the inland boundaries at the borders of the respective coastal states. 9. Incorporate, to the greatest extent possible, local agency recommendations. Preliminary boundary proposals made by local agencies provided a basis 11 - 3 - 3 for final boundary determination, although some modifications were made to incorporate one or more of the preceding criteria. Special Accormodations The following were additional concerns, reflecting existing State policies and local circumstances which were recognized in the final landward boundary delineation: 1. Agricultural lands - The boundary was extended inland to include certain areas of coastal dependent agriculture where that use was very intensive, covered a large contiguous area and there was a clear inland boundary, i.e., a change in land use. 2. Viewsheds - Efforts were made to include within the boundary those avenues of visual access to the shore from public viewing points such as roads and public recreation areas. The ridgeline that defined the limits of what could be seen, for example, from the Hudson River or its shore was used to include the most scenic areas, primarily the Hudson Highlands and the Palisades. 3. Power Plant Sites - All existing steam-electric generating facilities of 50 megawatts or more, all sites for which application has been made to the State Siting Board to construct such a facility and all hydroelectric facilities, if coastal waters are used for cooling or generation purposes,, were included within the coastal boundary. If a site for which application has been made is rejected by the State Siting Board, the boundary will be re-evaluated according to the boundary criteria listed above. 4. Historic Sites - Those historic sites which have a close association with the history of New York's coast were included. Also included were small coastal villages with historic relationships to the coastal waters. 5. Industrial areas - All areas of coastal-dependent industrial activity and areas with known potential for such development were included, primarily areas zoned industrial and located adjacent to existing coastal dependent industrial areas. 6. 100 Year Flood Line - The area encompassed by this line, as identified by the Federal Emergency Management Administration under the National Flood Insurance Program, is the area most directly0 II - 3 - 4 af fected by the dynamics of the coastal process. Where the 100 year flood plain is clearly coastal related, it is included within the boundary. This flood line is a significant boundary determinant on many of the downstream segments of creeks, around embayments and along the shoreline itself. 7. Coastal Recreation Areas - Those recreation areas that are not State parks but are on or near the coast were included within the boundary. These areas include municipal and county parks and beaches, fishing and boating access sites, and campgrounds. it should be noted that the above were not rigidly applied; in some areas additional specific information from counties, citizen groups, and other sources was used in determining boundaries. Figures 1-4 illustrate the application of the boundary criteria and special accommodations at various locations in the State's Coastal Area. New York State Coastal Area Landward Boundary Generally, boundary proposals made by local government agencies form the basis for the delineation of New York's landward coastal boundary. Understandably, modifications were necessary where local recommendations did not satisfy the criteria established for the statewide approach. Where a local agency could not agree on a boundary proposal, the Department of State developed the boundary line in accord with the indicated criteria. As a result of the above process, the landward boundary of New York State's Coastal Area varies from region to region. Generally the following conditions prevail: 1. The inland boundary is approximately 1,000 feet from the shoreline of the mainland. 2. in urbanized and other developed locations along the coast, the landward boundary is about 500 feet from the mainland's shoreline or less than 500 feet at locations where a major roadway or rail- road line runs parallel to the shoreline. 3. At locations where major State-owned lands and facilities and electric power generation facilities abut the shoreline, the boundary extends inland to include such lands and facilities. 11 - 3 - 5 In the Long Island region, the State's Coastal Area includes all barrier and other islands which are situated in coastal waters. On the mainland, the landward boundary is generally0 1,000 feet from the shoreline, however, at major tributaries and headlands it extends several thousand feet inland. Along the Long Island Sound coast of Westchester County, the boundary extends 1,000 to 8,000 feet inland. In New York City, this boundary extends 500 to 1,000 feet inland at most locations. However, on Staten Island and along major tributaries, such as the Bronx River, Newtown Creek and Flushing Creek, the landward boundary is several thousand feet from the mainland's shoreline. Throughout most of the Hudson River Valley region, the landward boundary is generally 1,000 feet, but at some locations over 10,000 feet, from the River's shoreline. The latter occurs at places which are exceptionally scenic (for example, Hudson Highlands) or have significant agricultural and recreational lands. Finally, the Coastal Area in the Great Lakes region of the State is about 1,000 feet inland from the shoreline. However, in many of the urbanized and developed areas of the coast (for example, Buffalo, Rochester, Oswego, Alexandria Bay and Ogdensburg) and at several locations where State highways and rail lines parallel the shoreline, the boundary extends 500 feet or less inland. Seaward Boundary The Federal requirements regarding the seaward boundary are explicit. The State's Coastal Area must include all coastal waters that are within its territorial jurisdiction. in accordance with these requirements, the Department of State has established the following seaward boundaries: o Great Lakes - St. Lawrence Area - Beginning at the Lake Erie Pennsylvania/New York line, the boundary follows the international boundary through Lake Erie, the Niagara River, Lake Ontario and the St. Lawrence River to that point where the St. Lawrence River leaves the United States. o Atlantic Ocean Area - Beginning at the New York/New Jersey line, the boundary follows the State boundary in the Hudson River, Upper Bay, Arthur Kill and Raritan Bay to the three-mile limit of the territorial sea in the Atlantic; follows the New York/Rhode Island boundary in Block Island Bound and the New York/ Connecticut boundary within Long Island Sound. II - 3 - 6 Mapping As indicated above, a set of maps, presenting the entire Coastal Area of New York State at a scale of 1:48,000, has been filed with State agencies. Additionally, appropriate copies of these maps have been filed with the clerks of coastal counties, cities, towns and villages. These maps show the location of the State coastal boundary and major areas of excluded Federal lands. II -3 -7 now yak staft COASTAL MANAGEMgNT PROGRAM Coastal Area W- I - - .~TIDAL SALINE TRIBUTARY ~~ .111 III'TI DAL IF I'~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-el a~~~~~~~~ - -. - - - - -.. -~* - FIGURE 1 APPLICATION OF BOUNDARY CRITERIA II - 3-8 'K>: g N 4i~~COASTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM Ai 4tN Coastal Area CULTURAL V -� -CFEAUR~pp .i ~u1FEATURE � &u~ - ___~;� -1 i .r'; -.. ,,r *,ISLAN S -'~~~~`1 A~~S E�r P ~~~~~~AE .WY *ft ~ POWER 4 tit 7 hP at,, 4,r, ,v-w * - ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~TRIBUTR 4\ .LAND * ~ ~ IW WATE~~R DEPENDENT A ST~~~~~~~~~~LN *1 c he.'�~ " ~~i~~ �' ~~~C i" i*' - Z2( FIGURE 2 APPLICATION OF BOUNDARY CRITERIA 11-3-- 39 -~~ N~~ - COASTAL~~N Yak slow COATALMANAGEMENT PROGRAM t& ~~~~~~~~~~~Coastal Area ST~~~~~~~~ AT I~~~~~I 2> ~~~~~~~ITO AKi-' - ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~COO 4.-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~CNI /~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~VESE -"I~~~~~~~~~~~~~ FEDERAL~~~~~ : FIUR 3 APPLICTINOBUDARY CRITERIA 11 3 - 10 nwa Ymk Stat - ~ COASTAL MANAGEMf MT PROGRAM Coastal Area CONNECTING4, WATER BODIES &TRIBUTARY STATE-OWNED 0~~~~ L N S 1 FIGEAPIAINO ONAYCIEI /~~~~~~1 Ln t i-ow n ( ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~----- ---- ------------- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-4.---- Lon~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -----U- L~~jMsI~ \c~fimA./DU1 I * -*- -- ~ C)4 M0ICoGo RAAAN * I ~~~~~~~~~~~~~S-D--" CA"AAAusI CVM ." - N~~~~~IA Coastal Area -Q . ~ INo SECTION 4 PROGRAM MANAGE~MENT Introduction New York State's Coastal Management Program must perform two major roles in order to achieve its overall purpose. One is to coordinate existing programs, activities, and decisions affecting the State's coast. The second is to advocate specific desired coastal activities. These two functions are supported by regulations promulgated by the Federal Office of Coastal Zone Management which require a State's program to satisfy the following criteria: 1. The management program must contain policies relating to resource protection, land use and development, and governmental processes (15 CFR 923.3). 2. The State must have sufficient legal authority to carry out and assure compliance with the program's policies (15 CFR 923.40, 923.41 and 923.43). 3. The State must indicate the organizational structure that is to be used to implement and administer its program (15 CFR 923.46). 4. A single State agency must be designated to administer the management program (15 CFR 923.47). This section addresses all of the above-listed criteria. How- ever, the criteria pertaining to program policies and legal authority are discussed in some detail in Section 6. In the development of New York State's Coastal Management Program, several determinations were made in response to the above Federal requirements: 1. New York State would, to the greatest extent possible, rely upon existing laws and programs to implement the Program's objectives. 2. In July, 1981, two bills -- the Waterfront Revitaliza- tion and Coastal Resources Act and the Coastal Erosion Hazard Areas Act -- were signed into law. This legis- lation filled gaps in existing laws and programs, thus enabling the State to have an approvable Program. 3. Comprehensive review processes, such as the Environ- mental Quality Review (Environmental Conservation Law, Article 8) and Siting of Major Steam Electric Generating Facilities (Public Service Law, Article VIII), would be used to determine an action's * ~~~~consistency with the Program's policies. II - 4 I 4. Local governments would be encouraged, to develop and irnplem~ent waterfront revitalization programs, thus participating in the State's Coastal Management Program. The above factors were important in shaping the basic framework of New York State's Coastal Management Program, particularly the State's response to the Federal requirement as to the method for ensuring compliance with the Program's policies. New York State must clearly demonstrate that the entities (e.g., State agencies) responsible for the implementation of its Coastal Management Program will exercise their authorities in conformance with the Program's policies. The Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended, requires that one of three techniques (or any combination of the three) be used to ensure compliance with a State's coastal policies. New York State's Coastal Management Program utilizes the first two techniques identified by the Act, but primarily, the second technique, "direct State land and water use planning and regulation", because New York already has many regulatory, capital construction and other programs in effect at the State level which address coastal concerns. There are two ways of operating a coastal management program under this technique: 1) to adopt comprehensive legislation that addresses all coastal concerns and requires State agencies to comply with the law's policies; or 2) to 'network" existing programs so that when taken together they result in a comprehensive and unified approach for managing coastal land and water uses. flew York's Coastal Management Program employs the networking approach, and compliance with coastal policies is ensured by the consistency provision of Article 42 of the Executive Law and the proposed regulations which implement this requirement. For specific parts of the State's Coastal Management Program, the first technique will be utilized. Essentially, this technique involves implementation by local governments of State-established standards, criteria and procedures. flew York State has enacted several laws for the protection and management of particular resources and areas -- freshwater wetlands, coastal erosion hazard areas -- which authorize the use of this technique. In each case, the State has established criteria and standards that have been or must be incorporated into these local programs prior to implementation by a local government. The State must review and approve such programs and is responsible for assuring that the programs are implemented in accordance with the established criteria and standards. Where non-compliance is found, the State may withdraw its approval of the local programs. Where local implementation is not approved, the State will continue to rely upon the second technique. II - 4 - 2 Management Role of State Agencies Most State agencies will have a role in the implementation of the Coastal Management Program. The extent of their involvement will vary due to the nature and, in some instances, the geographic jurisdiction of the programs that they operate. Their participa- tion will involve the promotion and coordination of activities which occur within or affect the State's Coastal Area. Coastal Management Agency As the designated coastal managem~ent agency of New York State (L. 1975, C. 464, �47), the Department of State will be responsible for administering the Coastal Management Program as well as coordinating activities essential to its implementation. Chapter 464 of the Laws of 1973 authorizes the Secretary to apply for, receive and administer any Federal funds which are made available to the State under the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended. These Laws also permit the Secretary to enter into agreements with other State, regional, county and local agencies which could assist the Department of State in the administration and/or implementation of the Coastal Management Program. The Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act (Executive Law, Article 42) requires the Secretary to file, maintain and, when appropriate, amend the Coastal Area map. As discussed in Section 3, this map shows the lands and waters in New York State to which the Act's coastal policies apply. The Act also charges the Secretary to review and approve waterfront revitalization programs prepared by coastal communities. As part of this review process, State agencies and appropriate county and local governments will be consulted before the Secretary of State approves any local waterfront revitalization program. In situations where a conflict between a local program and an existing State policy arises, the Secretary must attempt to resolve the difference. The Department of State will perform other activities which are essential to the State's Coastal Management and Waterfront Revitalization Programs. Monitoring the decisions of State agencies as to the consistency of their proposed actions with coastal policies will be an important administrative activity. The Department will track actions proposed in the Coastal Area through the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEORA) process and will evaluate the consistency determinations made by State agencies. When appropriate, the Department will advise the agencies on the consistency of such actions with the coastal policies. The Program-related administrative and implementation activities of agencies under contract to the Department will also be monitored and reviewed. II-4 - 3 Changes to policies and boundaries of the Coastal Area require the review and approval of the Secretary of State.1 If appro- priate, such changes may necessitate notification, review and/or approval by Federal and local governments. Procedures covering amendments to local waterfront revitalization programs are found in the draft regulations pertaining to the Department's review and approval of such local programs. The Department of State will also be responsible for conducting the Federal consistency review process at the State level. Generally, the Department will evaluate major actions proposed in the Coastal Area of the State by Federal agencies or by entities requiring Federal permits and determine the consistency of those actions with the Program's policies. Specific procedures governing this review process are contained in Section 9 of this report. Departmental of Environmental Conservation (DEC) DEC has the major responsibility for protecting the natural resources of the coastal area. This responsibility includes new administrative authority for protecting coastal erosion hazard areas as well as its existing permit authority for wetlands, both tidal and freshwater, and air and water quality. In its permitting role, DEC reviews most activities that have the potential to impact coastal resources. Those with the potential for significant impact are thoroughly reviewed in connection with the SEQRA process and can be approved only after DEC has found that the activity will be consistent with the policies of the 0 coastal management program. This review will ensure compre- hensive implementation of the program with respect to a wide variety of activities. In addition, DEC is resporisibile for a number of direct and funding activities, some of which, such as the construction of wastewater treatment facilities, have major consequences for coastal development. The assured consistency of these activities will have major long range beneficial effects on the coastal area, lAmendments to the State's Coastal Management Program are also subject to National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's regulations under 15 CFR 923.0 1I - 4 -4 Other State Agencies State agencies, including State created authorities, commissions and boards, operate a number of programs which are critical to and may affect the proper management of New York's coastal resources. In addition to the Departments of State and Environmental Conservation, some of the other agencies include the Offices of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation, Business Permits, Energy, and General Services; the Departments of Transportation and Commerce; the Public Service Commission; the Power Authority of the State of New York; and the Port Authorities of Albany, Buffalo, Ogdensburg, Oswego, and New York - New Jersey; and the St. Lawrence-Eastern Ontario Commission. The State's property disposition, acquisition and leasing, capital project construction, financial assistance, regulatory and planning programs cover, many land and water activities that beneficially use and adversely affect these resources. Some of the land and water activities affected by the agencies' programs include the construction of highways; acquisition and development of parklands; siting of energy facilities; construction of seawalls, bulkheads, groins and jetties; and leasing of underwater lands. Most of these programs serve singular purposes, but collectively they form an impressive block of State programs which are aimed at the wise use and protection of coastal resources. Thus, agencies of New York State are equipped and are expected to perform a vital role in the implementation of the Coastal Management Program. . ~The Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act is the basis for bringing together all of the appropriate State agencies' programs for the purpose of implementing New York State's Coastal Management Program. Section 912 of the Act establishes several general policies applicable to the Coastal Area of the State and provides the legal basis for most of the policy statements contained in Section 6 of this report. The intent of these policies is to provide direction to State agencies when operating their programs in the Coastal Area. These policies cover a range of concerns pertaining to the use and protection of natural and man-made coastal resources, but one significant declaration is "...to achieve a balance between economic development and preservation that will permit the beneficial use of coastal resources while preventing the loss of marine resources and wildlife, diminution of open space areas or public access to the waterfront, shoreline erosion, impairment of scenic beauty, or permanent adverse changes to ecological systems". This policy sets the tone for New York State's Coastal Management Program, and the objective that State agencies' should strive to achieve in the Coastal Area. II - 4 - 5 Section 919(1) of the Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act requires that "...actions directly undertaken by' State agencies within the coastal area ... shall be consistent V with the coastal area policies of this Article.' This provi- sion of law effectively ties together the programs of State agencies by binding their decision-making actions to the coastal policies. Thus, the assurance that these agencies act in accor- dance with these policies is provided by Section 919(1). Actions which are not consistent with applicable coastal policies are to be prevented or, where appropriate, modified to an extent that they may be found consistent with the policies. The State agency having jurisdiction over a proposed action is responsible for determining the consistency of that action with the coastal policies. In instances where two or more agencies may have some jurisdiction over a proposed action, each agency is expected to make its own consistency determination. The actions of State agencies must also be consistent, to the maximum extent practic- able, with local waterfront revitalization programs which have been approved by the Secretary of State. Advocacy Role of State Agencies In carrying out their respective administrative and coordination responsibilities, the Department of State and other State agencies will promote a number of interests that are central to the overall purpose of the Coastal Management Program. These interests include: (1) the revitalization of waterfront areas; (2)the siting of water dependent uses; (3) the protection of significant fish and wildlife habitats, scenic and historic areas and farmlands; (4) the enhancement of economic and other activi- 0 ties in small harbors; (5) the reduction of damages caused by flooding and erosion; and, (6) the stimulation of research, dissemination of information, and the participation of the public and private sectors on coastal-related activities. The major vehicle for promoting waterfront revitalization is through the implementation of voluntary local government waterfront revitalization programs. Section 8 of this document details the minimuma requirements to be met by local waterfront revitalization programs. The implementation of these programs, once approved by the Secretary of State, is substantially assisted by the requirement that State agencies are to be consistent with the approved programs. In addition, when such local waterfront revitalization programs are incorporated into the State's Coastal Management Program through the amendment or routine implementation processes established by the U.S. Department of Commerce, Federal agencies must also be consistent. In addition to the local government effort, the Department of State, as the Coastal Management agency#, will further revitalization by: II - 4- 6 * Assisting State agencies in establishing priori- ties for waterfront projects. * Investigating and establishing alternative funding and land use mechanisms which would not unduly burden the public or private sector. This would include investigating the feasibility and appro- priateness of such mechanisms as simplification of State permits and other similar permits between levels of government, incentive zoning, revolving loan funds, special tax districts, dedication of property taxes, public benefit assessments, sand and gravel mining fees, tax increment financing, and Outer Continental Shelf revenue sharing. * Fostering interagency involvement in revitaliza- tion efforts on a continuing basis. There are two major vehicles for promoting water dependent uses. First, State agencies are required to avoid undertaking funding or approving non-water dependent uses when such uses would pre- empt the reasonably foreseeable development of water dependent uses. State agencies must also utilize appropriate existing programs to encourage water dependent uses. Second, the Depart- ment of State will work with other State agencies responsible for those coastal resources whose proper use could be water depen- dent. For example, the Department of State will work with the Departments of Agriculture and Markets, Environmental Conserva- tion, and Commerce to determine methods for expanding the State's commercial fishing industry at proper locations,, and then work with selected coastal communities that can feasibly increase this industry. A primary vehicle for protecting significant fish and wildlife habitats is through the authority granted the Department of Environmental Conservation by the Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act. Significant habitats will be identified and mapped on the State's Coastal Area map. In most instances, it will be possible to avoid or mitigate adverse effects of an action through careful timing or conditioning of that action. Two means will be utilized in the Coastal Management Program's advocacy for scenic areas. The first is through waterfront revitalization programs, described in Section S. The Department of State will also provide assistance on the usefulness of several approaches available to local governments for increasing the quality of and/or protecting scenic areas. The second means is through the Department of State's identifica- tion of a limited number of scenic resources of State-wide significance on the Coastal Area Map. Once identified, State agencies must determine whether a proposed action could affect this resource. If the proposed action does affect the resources agencies are encouraged to choose an alternative site for the action. if it is not feasible, special siting and design guidelines are offered which will minimize degradation of this resource* II - 4- 7 The Programn actively promotes the preservation of all historic and cultural resources which have a coastal relationship, by requiring protection of the area around historic sites, as well as areas of significance. Further, the Program requires State agencies and local governments with approved waterfront revitali- zation programs to actively seek to restore or revitalize appropriate areas through adaptive reuse. The Department of State's research efforts will include working with the Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation to develop additional means of augmenting preservation and develop- ment of coastal historic areas. Important agricultural lands will be identified and mapped on the Coastal Area map. State agencies are required to prevent actions that would result in a significant loss of such identified agri- cultural lands. Local waterfront revitalization programs are required to protect important farmlands if they are within the waterfront areas. State agencies are required to consider whether any proposed action would detract from recreational and commercial fishing, ferry services, marinas, historic preservation, cultural pursuits and other compatible activities which enhance small harbor areas and hence make significant contributions to the State's tourism industry. Local waterfront revitalization programs are required to recognize the social benefits of small harbors and ensure their protection. Further, through the Programs's research activities, alternative means for effectuating these actions will be sought. Visual and physical access to and along the shore will be protected and increased, in part thorugh a single coordinated statewide access planning process. This process will result in the identification of a list of the specific access improve- ment areas to which the State will give priority within financial and legal limits. Local waterfront revitalization programs must also increase access and protect existing access. Various procedures that may be used are discussed in Appendix B. The damage to property inflicted annually by flooding and erosion in the State's Coastal Area is not only a burden on individual shorefront residents, but on local governments and the State who lose valuable facilities and are called upon to expend substantial sums for the replacement and for the installation of protective structures. The Coastal Management Program's advocacy stance seeks to reduce this ever-increasing economic waste by setting standards for land development and for the protection of natural defenses which reduce the risk of damage in flood and erosion prone areas. 11 - 4- 8 The Department of State has collected and mapped basic coastal resources data. This information will be made available to all State agencies and any local government preparing and/or implementing a local program. The Department will maintain its coastal resources inventory of significant natural resources areas, historic sites, agricultural lands, and areas suitable for water dependent uses. This information will assist State and Federal agencies in ensuring consistency of their actions with the policies. It will also serve as a valuable tool to the private sector and government agencies in their development efforts. The Department of State maintains a clearinghouse of existing and potential Federal and State funding programs available for waterfront revitalization and a compendium of various approaches suitable for waterfront revitalization. The Department will work with Sea Grant to assist in determining research priorities which will serve the purposes of both programs. It will also work with State research and development agencies to establish alternative means of effectuating waterfront revitalization, and protecting significant coastal resources. The Coastal Management Program will continue providing information to raise the level of public awareness of coastal issues and opportunities, and will continue seeking advice from affected interests and government agencies in the decision- making process. The Department of State will periodically conduct workshops with State and Federal agencies to review the performance of the Program, resolve differences, and make improvements. Workshops will also be held with environmental, development and other interests to ensure the Program is meeting its objectives and addressing the problems of concern to these interests. The voluntary waterfront revitalization programs are based on building a consensus between all affected interests, users and regulators of the waterfront. This undertaking demands extensive participation resulting in broad based support of the Program. Consistency of State Agencies' Actions The basic thrust of New York State's Coastal Management Program is to have State agencies carry out their respective programs consistent with the policies contained in Section 6 of this document. All of the Program's policies are derived from existing laws and regulations administered by State agencies. Table I identifies the various laws that provide the basis for and are essential to the enforcement and implementation of the coastal policies. Many of the Program's policies are carried out by programs administered by the Department of Environmental Conservation. For example, the Department operates regulatory programs which provide protection to tidal and freshwater wetlands (Policy 44), restrict development and other activities in flood and erosion hazard areas (Polices 11-17), and protect II - 4 -9 air and water resources (Policies 30-35 and 40-43). Other agencies, such as the Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation, Public Service Commission and the State Board onV Electric Generation Siting and the Environment administer programs which provide coastal recreational facilities, regulate the siting of energy transmission facilities and regulate the location of electric power plans, respectively. Other Program policies are based upon the provisions of Article 42 of the Executive Law. These policies carry out the intention of the State Legislature that there be "a balance between economic development and preservation that will permit the beneficial use of coastal resources while preventing the loss of living marine resources and wildlife, diminution of open space areas or public access to the waterfront, shoreline erosion, impairment of scenic beauty, or permanent adverse changes to ecological systems" (Executive Law, Article 42, Section 912(1)). Executive Law, Article 42, requires that actions directly undertaken by State agencies within the State's coastal area be undertaken in a manner consistent with this second group of policies. In addition, the procedures of the State Environmental Quality Review Act (Environmental Conservation Law, Article 8) will insure that all State agency actions, of whatever type, will be consistent with these policies. The Department of State, in cooperation with the Department of Environmental Conservation, has prepared draft regulations to ensure that State agencies carry out their responsibilities under section 915(8) and 919(1) of the Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act. These regulations take two forms: (1) amendments to Part 617 of the State Environmental Quality Review regulations; and (2) new rules to be promulgated by the Department of State. State Environmental Quality Review Process Generally, SEQRA is a comprehensive review process that is applicable to all actions of State and local agencies which may have significant effects upon the environment. Agencies are required to determine whether or not a proposed action is subject to the review process. Exempt, emergency and ministerial actions (Type II actions) are exempted from this process, but other proposed activities must be evaluated for their probable impact on the environment. if an agency finds that an action will have significant adverse environmental effects, a "positive declaration" must be made and an environmental impact statement (EIS) must then be prepared. Before making any decision on an action that requires the preparation of an EIS, an agency must prepare written findings which indicate the following: (1) "consistent with social, economic and other essential considerations from among the reasonable alternatives thereto, 11 - 4 - 10 the action to be carried out or approved is one which minimizes or avoids adverse environment effects to the maximum extent, practicable; including the effects disclosed in the relevant Is ~environmental impact statement," and (2) "consistent with social, economic and other essential considerations, to the maximum extent practicable, adverse environmental effects revealed in the environmental impact process will be minimized or avoided by incorporating as conditions to the decision those mitigative measures which were identified as practicable." New York State's Coastal Management Program relies upon SEQRA as a means for implementing the consistency requirement under Section 919(1) of the Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act. This review process already contains points of consideration which would help a State agency determine the consistency of a proposed. action with coastal policies. In amending the SEORA regulations to accommodate the waterfront legislation's directives, two conditions were set: (1) the existing review procedures would not be substantially altered or made complicated; and, (2) the agencies be alerted "up front" of any new procedural and substantive requirements. The principal amendments to Part 617 of the SEQRA regulations address the following: For those actions having a significant effect upon the environment and necessitating the preparation of an environmental impact statement, State agencies must ensure that such actions are consistent with the appli- cable coastal policies contained in the Department of State regulations. Department of State Regulations As the State's Coastal Management Agency, the Department of State must be knowledgeable of the activities occurring in or affecting the Coastal Area. The amendments of SEQRA, as described above, will in part enable the Department to track major activities, for it will receive copies of the EIS documents and have the opportunity to comment on such proposed actions. Draf t SEORA amendments are located in Appendix A. To avoid burdening the SEORA requlations with additional procedures, requirements and criteria, the Department of State will promulgate regulations which are applicable to "Type I' and 'Unlisted" actions occurring in the Coastal Area. These proposed regulations dovetail with the SE(RA process. Essentially, the Department's regulations include the following requirements and/or items: 11-4-. 11 1. The completion of a Coastal Assessment Form (CAF) is required for all state agency actions in the Coastal Area. This CAP is to be used to supplement other information in order to assist that agency in determining the significance of the action, pursuant to SEORA. If the action will rnot have a significant effect, the CAP will assist state agencies in arriving at their certification decisions, as discussed below. 2. Certificates of consistency must be filed with the Secretary of State for actions that do not have a significant effect upon the environment (as determined under the SEQRA process) and which occur in or affect the Coastal Area or an area covered by an approved local waterfront revitalization program. 3. Coastal policies are described and made a part of these regulations. All proposed regulations needed to implement the Coastal Management Program will be final prior to approval of the Program. Judicial Review of Agencies ' Decisions State agencies will be responsible for determining the consistency of their actions with coastal policies. The Department of State will work with the agencies and assist them in fulfilling this requirement under Article 42 of the Executive Law. The Department is not authorized to override the decisions of its sister agencies on matters relating to this Law. A third party may seek judicial review of an agency's determination of consistency pursuant to Article 78 of the Civil Practice Law. Article 78 proceedings exist primarily to afford relief to parties personally aggrieved by governmental actions. One of the questions that may be raised in such proceedings is whether a determination was arbitrary and capricious or an abuse of discretion. This is a legislative enactment of what has long been the case law of New York. The courts have consistently held that administrative action which is arbitrary, capricious, unreasonable, or an abuse of discretion is subject to judicial review and annulment. In reviewing the action of a public body, the court determines not only whether the action is within the body's statutory power but whether, within the frame of power,the action is arbitrary. Even in the presence of a delegated power of discretion and legislative standards, a determination of a body is reviewed for arbitrariness or unreasonableness within the standards set down. The test usually applied in deciding the arbitrariness of a determination is whether it has a rational or adequate basis, Orr stated in another way, whether the record discloses circumstances which leave no possible scope for the exercise of discretion. Under both the substantial evidence rule and the arbitrary and 0 capricious standard, rationality is what is reviewed by the court. II - 4 - 12 With respect to who would be "personally aggrieved" so as to have standing to seek relief under Article 78, that hurdle is not a high one in New York State. While a respondent in an Article 78 proceeding may occasionally contest the aggrieved petitioner's standing to sue, the Court of Appeals (the highest court in New York State) has indicated that the right to challenge administra- tive action should be enlarged rather than diminished. Dairylea Cooperative, Inc. v. Walhley, 38 NY2d 6, 377 NYS2d 451, 339 NE2d 865 (1975). The Court stated that "only where there is a clear legislative intent negating review...or lack of injury in fact ...will standing be denied. Dairylea, supra., 38 NY at 11, 377 NYS2d at 455, 339 NE2d at 868. No such intent is expressed or manifest in Executive Law, Article 42, nor in any other of the State statutory authorities relied upon for implementation of this program. When taken together, the Department's proposed regulations, the amendments to the SEQRA process and the judicial review of actions will ensure that State agencies will carry out their actions consistent with the policies of the Coastal Management Program. Table 1 lists the major authorities which State agencies will utilize to implement the Program. II -4 - 13 TABLE I Legal Authorities Essential to the Implementation of New York State's Coastal Management Program 1. Agriculture and Markets Law . Article 25AA - Agriculture District Program 2. Energy Law *Article 3 - State Energy Policy *Article 5 - State Energy Office; Organization and Powers, Functions and Duties 3. Environmental Conservation Law *Article 3 - General Powers and Duties *Article 8 - State Environmental Quality Review Act *Article 9 - Lands and Forests *Article 11 - Fish and Wildlife *Article 13 - Marine and Coastal Resources *Article 15 - Water Resources *Article 17 - Water Pollution Control *Article 19 - Air Pollution Control *Article 23 - Mineral Resources *Article 24 - Freshwater Wetlands Act *Article 25 - Tidal Wetlands Act *Article 27 - Collection, Treatment and Disposal of Refuse and Other Solid Waste *Article 34 - Coastal Erosion Hazard Areas *Article 36 - Participation in Flood Insurance Programs *Article 37 - Substances Hazardous to the Environment *Article 45 - State Nature and Historical Preserve Trust *Article 49 - Protection of Natural and Mlan-Made Beauty *Article 51 - Implementation of Environmental Quality Bond Act of 1972 4. Executive Law *Article 42 - Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act S. Highway Law *Article II - Commissioner of Transportation *Article III - State Highways 11 - 4 - 14 6. Navigation Law . Article 3 - Navigable Waters of the State i Article 11 - Improvement and Preservation of Waterways � Article 12 - Oil Spill Prevention, Control and Com- pensation 7. Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation Law � Article 3 - Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation . Article 11 - State Board for Historic Preservation � Article 14 - Historic Preservation � Article 20 - State Park Preserve System 8. Public Buildings Law . Article 2 - Commissioner of General Services . Article 4B - Historic and Cultural Properties 9. Public Health Law � Article 2 - Department of Health � Article 11 - Public Water Supplies, Sewerage and Sewage Control 10. Public Lands Law � Article 2 - Office of General Services � Article 3 - Unappropriate State Lands � Article 6 - Grants of Lands Under Water 11. Public Service Law � Article 3C - Provisions Relating to Liquid Petroleum Pipeline Corporations � Article 4 - Provisions Relating to Gas and Electric Corporations; Regulation of Price of Gas and Electricity � Article VII - Siting of Major Utility Transmission Facilities � Article VIII - Siting of Major Steam Electric Generating Facilities II - ~- 15 Local Government Involvement Many coastal communities have adopted regulatory programs which reflect State-established standards and criteria on matters relating to the protection of freshwater wetlands and flood and erosion control. Federal approval of the State's Program is not, however, dependent upon the preparation and adoption of similar programs by local governments. The State of New York strongly supports a coastal management effort that encourages local governments to prepare and implement waterfront revitalization programs. Throughout the Coastal Area of the State, many communities have undertaken a variety of activities directed at protecting valuable resources and bringing new vitality to decayed and unused waterfronts. Other waterfront municipalities wish to do so, but lack the financial and/or technical support necessary to accomplish this objective. The State's Coastal Management Programr will, therefore, focus its attention on communities which want to initiate and/or continue activities that result in the wise use and protection of natural and man-made coastal resources. The Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act provides the means and incentive for municipalities in the Coastal Area to prepare programs for their waterfront areas and then work with the Department of State and other State agencies implement such programs. By participating, local governments will be eligible to receive financial and technical assistance for the preparation of their waterfront revitalization programs. Upon approval of these programs by the Secretary of State, the communities may also receive assistance for pre- construction activities (e.g., feasibility studies, engineering and architectural designs) essential to projects that are recommended in the approved programs. Further, Section 916(1) of the Act requires State agencies to carry out their various regulatory, capital construction, funding assistance and acquisition activities in ways which are consistent to the maximum extent practicable with the approved local waterfront revitalization programs. 11 - 4 - 16 For the purposes of the State's Coastal Management Program, approved local waterfront revitalization programs will provide more specificity to the coastal policies and their geographic application. Since these local programs contain a more detailed approach for managing activities in the Coastal Area, the water- fronts affected by such programs will be treated as special management areas. One of the ways to increase the specificity of the State's Coastal Management Program is the desig nation and adoption of a proyram for a special management area. Section 8 of this report provides more information on special management areas. Local Program Approval Process Draft rules and regulations have been prepared which establish review and approval procedures for local waterfront revitaliza- tion programs. These proposed rules and regulations are contained in the Appendix of this report. As required by the authorizing legislation, a local waterfront revitalization program must: clearly identify the geographic area to which it applies; state the goals and specific objectives of the program; demonstrate its consistency with the Act's purposes and coastal policies; inventory the waterfront's natural and historic resources; identify current and future land and water uses in the area; describe the municipality's activities essential to program implementation; demonstrate the community's authority and capability to carry out its program; and, identify specific actions by State agencies which would aid local implementation efforts. This information will assist State agencies in determining the effect, if any, that the local program will have upon their activities. Also, the required information is necessary to increase the specificity of the State's Coastal Mlanagement Program. In reviewing a local waterfront revitalization program, the Secretary of State will consider: 2Arnendments to the State's Program are also subject to National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's regulations under 15 CFR O ~~923 II - 4 - 17 1. Its consistency with the Act's policies. 2. Its fulfillment of the Act's criteria on water depen-0 dent and water enhanced uses; public access to coastal waters and water-related activities; promotion and protection of scenic, historic and natural resources; utilization of existing infrastructure; protection of sensitive ecological areas; promotion of port and harbor activities; and incorporation of aesthetic consideration in development activities. 3. its compliance with existing State policies and State agencies 'programs. 4. its effect upon the facilities, policies and programs of the county and adjacent local governments. 5. Comments provided by the general public, public interest groups, and business organizations. Notification of the Secretary's approval of a local waterfront revitalization program will be sent to all State agencies and appropriate county and local governments. Amendments to such local programs may be made, but are subject to review and approval by the Secretary. Periodically, the Secretary of State will review the administrative and implementation actions of local governments affecting the coastal area for which there is an approved waterfront revitalization program in order to determine if these actions are being carried out in accordance with the goals and objectives of the approved local waterfront revitalization program. Program Funding Pursuant to Congressional appropriations, New York State may receive $3 million in Federal funds in FY 82 for the administra- tion and implementation of its approved Coastal Management Program. The State will provide $.'75 - $1 million as its match to the Federal monies. State funds which are provided for the implementation of the Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources and the Coastal Erosion Hazard Areas Acts may be counted as part of the State's required match as appropriate. State Agencies' Activities The Coastal Management Program is a statewide program that relies upon State agencies for its implementation. Previous parts of this Section indicated what is expected of the various State agencies. Generally, funds will be provided to the Department of State for its administration of the Program, including its ad- ministrative functions required under the Waterfront Revitali- zation and Coastal Resources Act. The Department's technical assistance to State agencies and to local governments will also he funded by these Program monies.0 II - 4 - 18 Where necessary, State agencies will be eligible for funding to cover the costs associated with the consistency determination process. It is anticipated that only the Departments of Environ-- mental Conservation and Transportation and the Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation, and the Office of General Services may require funds for this purpose. The implementation of State programs critical to the continued approval of the Coastal Management Program. will receive necessary financial support. Some State agencies may assist the Department of State in providing technical assistance to local governments and in turn be compensated for their efforts. Finally, some agencies will be encouraged to undertake special studies that will advance Program objectives, including those contained in approved local waterfront revitalization programs. Such studies may focus on one or more coastal concerns and apply to the entire or some portion of the State's Coastal Area. Local Government Activities During the preparation of the State's Coastal Management Program, the Departmient of State encouraged coastal communities to become involved in the Program. Many local governments did participate. Funding was provided to some for the preparation of waterfront management programs; others received financial assistance to conduct special studies related to a local coastal issue or project. The desire of local governments to bring new or additional vitality to their waterfronts far exceeded the funds that the Department had for this purpose. is ~Local governments' interest and participation in the State's Coastal Ilanagement Program are expected to be substantial. In anticipation of this level of involvement, approximately 50% of the available funds will be allocated for local government efforts. The preparation of waterfront revitalization programs and preconstruction activities for projects recomiaended in approved waterfront programs will be eligible activities. Special studies wh ich address one or more coastal issues affecting two or more adjacent coastal communities will be eligible for funding under the State's Program. A maximum of one, 12 month grant, not exceeding 50% of the cost for preparing a local waterfront revitalization program may be available. Local governments will be expected to draw upon their own agencies for the technical expertise that is needed to perform any of the eligible activities. In instances where a local government may not have the capability to undertake such tasks, the Department of State, other State, county and regional agencies should be consulted and, if appropriate, requested to provide the necessary technical expertise. Program funds would be made available to the local government for this purpose. II-4 -19 Funding Priorities Pursuant to Congressional appropriations, the State of New York may receive $3 million. Given this uncertainty, it is not possible at this time to determine how much money will be allocated to the various Coastal Management Program related activities. However, some general priorities are established to guide the Department of State in its allocation of these funds. Coastal Management Program funds will be used by State agencies for implementation of State programs critical to the continued approval of the Coastal Management Program, including consistency activities and special studies, if necessary. Program funds for local government activities will be used for: 1. Preparation and implementation of local waterfront revital- ization programs and local ordinances for erosion hazard areas; and, 2. Pre-construction projects and other activities recommended in approved waterfront revitalization programs. II -4- 20 SECTION 5 COASTAL ISSUES DEVELOPMENT Introduction Coastal development is an all pervading concern of New York's Coastal Management Program, and its consideration is recognized and reflected throughout the other policy discussions -- most notably in Agriculture, Energy, Fish and Wildlife, and Recreation. There are several other aspects of coastal development which are discussed below and form the basis for the policies that will guide the State in its various development decisions along the shore. Deteriorated and Underutilized Waterfront Space The exodus of people and commerce from the inner city is most clearly manifested in the underutilized, sometimes abandoned and often deteriorated sites found along urban waterfronts. Outdated and deteriorating private and public facilities, the need for more space, increased reliance on trucking, deteriorated surrounding neighborhoods, spiraling property taxes, and financial incentives provided by suburban counties and other states, are some of the reasons for the reduction in development activity along New York State's urban waterfronts. The Program seeks to reverse this trend so that revitalized urban waterfronts can regain their position as focal points for industry, commerce, culture, recreation and housing. Competition for Space Although much of the State's coastline is underutilized, some areas are subject to intense use pressures. The reasons a particular site becomes desirable for development vary, but are generally related to such factors as topo- graphy, local climatic and soil conditions, access to transportation, aesthetic value, and surrounding land uses. Unfortunately, where there is competition for a particular site, the market mechanism and existing regulations do not always ensure that the public interest will be served. For example, many uses which are dependent on a waterfront location are preempted by development that merely seeks the convenience of a visually-enhanced setting, or by happen- stance. The problem of competition for space can be particularly acute in urban areas. Because it is the obligation of the Coastal Management Program to consider the long-range interest of the public, the task of the Program thus becomes one of determining which uses should receive priority treatment in the coastal areas, and what form that treatment should take. II - 5 - 1 Incompatible Adjacent Uses Because certain sites are desirable locations for a number of uses, a situation often develops where incompatible activities are forced to locate next to one another. An example of this would be in port areas where heavy indus- trial uses may lower air, water and visual quality, and raise surrounding noise levels, with a consequent reduction in the enjoyment of those people who are participating in nearby recreation activities. Recreational uses within harbor areas, on the other hand, can inhibit port develop- ment by restricting industrial expansion, forcing port interests to alter dredging operations, interfering with shipping movements, or by creating safety hazards. When incompatible uses are, or are proposed to be, located adjacent to one another, the Coastal Management Program, in conjunction with other State and local programs, is faced with the task of mitigating the negative aspects. When new development is to take place, steps should be taken to ensure it will locate where adjacent uses are compatible and, preferably, supportive. Transportation Issues State transportation policies have a substantial role in shaping the course of development. Following are those transportation issues which have particularly important implications for the Coastal Management Program: A. Consequences of Major Transportation Improvements Most of the State's planned transportation system is already in place. However, significant new develop- ments or modifications may occur in the future. Such improvements would probably bolster the economy of an area, but negative consequences are also possible insofar as another area might be put at a competitive disadvantage, orderly or planned growth patterns might be disrupted, or serious environmental problems might be caused. B. Access to the Waterfront While the State's coastlines have served as natural corridors for highways and railroads, the coastlines have frequently been made inaccessible by the existence of these same transportation facilities. For the most part, the damage is done and is, for the foreseeable future, irreversible. However, where new facilities are being planned and where existing facilities do not preempt use of the shoreline, opportunities to increase public access can be accommodated if cost and safety considerations are not prohibitive. This issue is further discussed in the Public Access section. II-5- 2- C. Competition Between Transportation Modes Relationships among the various modes of transport (particularly the relationship between rail and ship) will vary according to circumstance. In many cases, rail and ship lines are mutually supportive (as in Oswego, where the local Port Authority has opposed the abandonment of the Erie-Lackawanna rail line, and as in New York Harbor, where rail service is being re-estab- lished on the Brooklyn waterfront with the objective of enhancing general port activity.) In other situations, various modes of transportation may directly compete with each other, and State supportive action in favor of one may have negative effects on another. The State must encourage a relationship between the various modes of transportation that is based on healthy competition, if not mutual support. D. Water Transportation Issues Continued dredging of harbor areas and rivers is a necessary component in any long range improvement of the State's water transportation facilities. The depth to which the channels should be dredged, the precise location, and the manner in which the dredge spoils should be disposed of, are problems that must be addressed. Dredge spoils are further discussed in the Water Resources issue section. The shipping industry needs accurate knowledge of tides, wind and water depths so that ship movements can be effectively planned. To meet this need, New York State will soon install, and then begin testing, a tidal gauge system for New York Harbor and the Hudson River. Non-port related activities often have been proposed, or located, adjacent to major port areas, in a manner that could inhibit normal port operations. Mechanisms need to be developed that will recognize the needs of port development when potentially conflicting activities are proposed within or adjacent to port areas. Navigation on the Hudson River, in New York Harbor and in commercial boat harbors is severely constrained by floating debris. The debris comes from sources such as decaying piers and bulkheads, abandoned barges and ships, and vegetation such as large tree trunks. (it is estimated that approximately 600,000 cubic feet of debris enter the Hudson River and New York Harbor annually.) The debris poses a serious threat to commercial shipping and recreational craft. II-5- 3 Concentration of Development The argument for concentrating development is based on the need to increase energy efficiency, reduce the cost of public services, make more efficient use of existing infrastructure, increase the likelihood of downtown revitalization, and improve the protection of valuable natural resources. The Program considers the concentration of development to be crucial in coastal areas because development pressures there are more severe, while the unique natural functions per- formed by coastal areas are critical to attaining both a sound economy and a sound environment. The issue faced by the Program is how to accomplish concen- trated development, not with a negative approach that merely restricts development, but by adopting a positive approach that seeks to stimulate and guide development where it would be desirable. Permitting Procedures The public perceives that increased costs of "doing busnes" results from burgeoning government regulations. Builders state their costs have increased, in part, because of unnecessary regulations and excessive design standards. Some manufacturers view regulations in New York State as a reason not to expand and in some cases a reason to relocate out of State. The Coastal Management Program agrees that the accumulation of single purpose environmental and land use controls has frequently resulted in overlaps, redundancies and inequities in the administration of regulations. The way in which regulations of local, State and Federal government agencies are integrated can be improved. Consequently, the Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources bill was enacted so as to require the Secretary of State to work with other agencies in an effort to determine ways of expediting development and seeking additional means of effectuating waterfront revitalization. Simplifying and consolidating permit procedures is one means to achieve this desirable goal. II-5- 4 FISH AND WILDLIFE Introduction The abundant fish and wildlife found in New York's coastal areas, particularly its estuaries, have long been recognized as important food resources and for their recreational and commercial value. As an indicator of their direct value to the State, the economic benefits derived in 1976 from. commercial and sport utilization of Niew York's marine fisheries were estimated to be $87.8 million and $222.5 million respectively. In 1981, resources from sport fishing in freshwaters was estimated to be $405 million. The State's fish and wildlife resources also provide a less direct but equally important social benefit in that they function as indicators of the quality of man's environment. The decline of certain species (often the rarer species) is frequently an early symptom of environmental stress and degradation. Finally the State's living coastal resources are important in terms of their own intrinsic ecological value. Diversity of flora and fauna provides stability to an ecosystem. In addition, these living resources contribute to the produc- tivity of coastal environments through their conversion of energy and recycling of materials. Hence, the basic goal of New York's fish and wildlife management programs has been to protect, manage, and develop these resources so that they sustain their capacity to continue providing these economic, social, and ecological benefits. Habitat Protection Valuable fish and wildlife species cannot be protected and maintained without preserving their habitats. While loss of individual animals can usually be made up by reproduc- tion, loss of habitat will likely result in an irreversible loss to fish and wildlife. A habitat is an area where there exists a unique combination of resources (food, shelter, living space, etc.) and environmental conditions (temperature, climate, salinity, etc.) which animals need for their survival. When man destroys a vital resource or alters an environmental condition beyond an organism's range of tolerance, he destroys its habitat. II - 5- 5 Certain habitats, such as breeding grounds, nursery areas, and migratory routes, are special areas where fish and wildlife populations tend to congregate. Such areas must be identified and afforded special protection, since their0 loss would create' a greater threat to the survival of a population than would the loss of areas where the organisms were less densely distributed. In New York, a category of habitats which has been suffering the greatest losses are freshwater and tidal wetlands. Until 1973, draining and filling of we~tlands for development purposes was largely unregulated.* W'etlands provided convenient, inexpensive sites for disposal of dredge spoils. Such practices resulted in the loss of breeding, nesting and feeding grounds for reptiles, amphibians, mammals, shorebirds and waterfowl, as well as the loss of spawning and nursery areas for fish, shellfish and crustaceans. Many of the wetland areas around the highly developed waterfront sections in Luffalo, Rochester and New York City have been drained and filled. Less direct, upland land use practices have also contributed to the loss of wetland and aquatic habitats. Vegetation removal, stream channelization, and certain farming practices have increased the variability of water temperatures and surface runoff. Increased fluctuations in surface runoff induces stream bank erosion and sedimernta- tion in coastal tributaries. Important littoral areas used for fish spawning habitat are being blanketed with silt. The silty bay areas are then invaded by nuisance aquatic weed species which radically alter the ecology of the bay systems and thereby destroy vital habitats. Unfortunately, this pattern of habitat degradation is becoming increas- ingly common throughout the developed areas of New York's coastal region. *Prior to 1973, some freshwater wetlands (except those on Long Island) were being protected under the Stream Protection Act (Environmental Conservation Law, Article 15, Title 5). Wetlands contiguous to navigable waters and wetlands associated with protected waters (streams and rivers with a classification of C (t)or higher) were and still are being regulated under this Act. In 1973, however, New York increased its regulatory controls over wetlands -along the marine coast with the passage of the Tridal Wetlands Act. In 1975, the State adopted the Freshwater Wetland Act. II-5- 6 Toxic Substances and Other Pollutants In New York, a critical problem is the contamination of fish, wildlife and their habitats with toxic substances, in particular Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs), Mirex, Dioxin heavy metals (mercury and cadmium) and some pesticides. These compounds enter the environment from industrial and municipal discharges, atmospheric fallout, leachate from landfills, or agricultural run-off. Of particular concern is the accumulation and transfer of toxic substances in the aquatic food chain. For example, Mirex had been discharged into the Niagara River where it collected in the bottom sediments. Small invertebrates feeding on the bottom organic food materials directly ingest the Mirex. It then becomes increasingly concentrated at successive levels of the food chain. Unacceptably high concentrations of Mirex now exist in certain predator fish species such as salmon, lake trout, and smallmouth bass. In 1976, New York State restricted the possession of these and other fish species caught in Lake Ontario and its trib- utary streams. Although these restrictions were replaced by a health advisory in March, 1978, the contamination of Lake Ontario fish by Mirex and other toxic compounds persists. As recently as the summer of 1981, Dioxin was detected in Lake Ontario f ish. The New York State Health Department has broadened the health advisory for eating certain species known to be contaminated with Dioxin. An equally serious problem has occurred in the Hudson River where 440,000 pounds of PCBs were discharged into the River and these PCBs have contaminated the bottom sediments, as well as resident and migratory fish species. Cleanup costs for dredging the "hot spots" in the river were estimated to be approximately $49.5 million. Today, commercial fishing for striped bass and the American eel is banned. Recrea- tional fishing is also prohibited in certain portions of the Hudson. The more conventional pollution problems created by combined overflows, failing septic systems, urban stormwater runoff, oil spills, discharge of vessel wastes and solid wastes, adversely affect fish, shellfish, wildlife and their habitats. These problems persist in areas surrounding the major metropolitan areas of the State such as western Long Island, New York City, Albany, Rochester and Buffalo. Recreational Use of Fish and Wildlife Resources Throughout most of New York's coastal area, inadequate public access constrains present hunting and fishing as well as non-consumptive uses such as bird watching, wildlife photography and nature study. Posted lands, strip develop- ment, highways and railroads located along the coastline Is ~~severely limit physical access to the marshes and estuaries II - 5- 7 which support valuable fish and wildlife populations. Substantial efforts have been made by State, county and local governments to improve access to these resources through acquisition programs and construction of boat ramps and dock facilities. However, increasing cost of land and construction materials and decreasing amounts of available public funding will limit future efforts to meet increasing demands for public access. Commercial Fisheries Development For years, New York's commercial fishing industry has been sadly neglected. New York City, once a prominent fishing port, is used today as a home port by only one commercial fishing vessel. Although the Long Island commercial fishing fleet is still active, not one of the Long Island fishing ports is large enough to be included on the National Marine Fisheries' list of the top 100 fishing ports. Commercial fishing in the Hudson River and Lake Ontario has been severely curtailed due to toxic substance contamination of the fishery resources in these waters. However, a tremendous opportunity for expanding the State's commercial fishing industry was created with the passage of the Federal Fishery Conservation Management Act of 1976. This law provides U.S. fishermen priority rights to harvest the millions of tons of fist, previously being caught by foreign fishing fleets. To realize this development potential, New York must make adjustments in the harvesting, processing and marketing sectors of its fishing industry.0 Inadequate channel access and limited availability of docking, unloading, and processing facilities presently impede the growth of offshore, deepwater fisheries. An insufficient number of boat ramps, inadequate catch transfer sites, and lack of shellfish processing and gear storage facilities limit development of the near-shore fisheries. Also, it will be necessary to address and reconcile user conflicts between sport and commercial fishermen if growth of the fishing industry is to occur. Another opportunity for increased commercial fishery development exists with the possible expansion of acquaculture. As a process very analogous to agriculture, aquaculture has been a practice on Long Island since the mid-1800's. By 1880, the Blue Point Oyster had gained international fame. Approximately 10,000 metric tons of oyster meats were produced annually at the turn of the century. Today, however, only a few of the original private oyster farms still exist. Some firms have converted their facilities to grow hard clams. One recently formed enterprise is experimenting with growing striped bass to marketable size for sale to restaurants. But current production levels of these high-value seafood products do not meet domestic and export market demand. Results of a recent study of the feasibility for expanding acquaculture activities on Long Island indicate that the constraints on aquaculture are primarily institutional and economic rather than technological. Limited access to capital, restrictive State and local laws and insufficient acreage of underwater lands available for leasing to aquaculturists are the primary constraints to future industrial growth. II - 5- 9 FLOOD AND EROSION HAZARDS Introduction Flood and erosion hazards in the State's coastal areas can be classified into two types by location: along the exposed coasts of Long Island, New York City, Lake Erie and Lake Ontario and along the banks of its major rivers and tributary streams. The first category is the more crucial in New York State's coastal areas. Flooding and erosion on the State's coasts are generated by powerful natural processes setting water and wind against the shorelands. To maximize their benefits from resources in the coastal area, people have often ignored or been unaware of those processes and have built structures on beaches, dunes, barrier islands, erodible bluffs, and flood plains, where they are subject to damage or loss, or cause harm to natural protective landformns. People have also attempted to defend their property against flooding and erosion by installing protective structures, many of which have been inadequately designed and constructed, and have caused damage to adjacent property. As a result, great economic loss and public expense have been incurred, and human lives endangered. Beaches are the most valuable of the hazardous coastal landforms, because they are subject to the impact of both wave and current energy as well as continually rising sea levels in the tidal zone. In their natural state, with their movements unaffected by man, beaches may be reduced in extent (erosion), rebuilt (accretion) or remain stable over time, depending on the varying power and direction of the agents acting upon them and on the type and availability of beach materials. Wave energy is the principal agent of change on beaches although wind can also supply sediment to them or deplete them. Waves attacking a beach at oblique angles also generate longshore transport which, on extensive stretches of the State's coast, travels generally in one direction (for example, west to east on Lake Ontario, and east to west along Long Island's south shore). This redirected wave energy will carry beach materials along its path, period- ically depleting beaches at one point and augmenting them at others. In some cases, as on Lake Ontario, the sand particles are eventually lost in deep troughs offshore and thus permanently removed from the process.1 The most extensive beaches in the State's coastal area are found on the barrier islands and Hmainland" of Long Island, particularly along its south shore. Although the width of beaches on Lake Ontario and Lake Erie varies with the water levels of the lakes, for the most part the relative scarcity of sand in the coastal lands and, in the case of Lake Ontario, the sharp drop in the beach terrain offshore, have not permitted accumulation of beach materials to the same extent as on Long Island. Beaches are valuable as a first defense against storm waves. II-5-1 Dunes are formed from sand blown by onshore winds from adjacent beaches and, except for the Deer Creek Marsh and Sandy Pond Marsh area on Lake Ontario, are found only on Long Island. They are constantly changing form, reaching a degree of stability only as vegetation establishes itself. Those on Lake Ontario are of special concern because they were formed thousands of years ago when the lake was at a lower level. Once destroyed, they will never reform because their source of sand is now underwater. Dunes are fragile and very susceptible to damage by man's activities. Dunes have a high value as a second tier of defense against the powerful actions of storm-driven waters and as part of the shore system. Barrier islands are a unique shore form, the most significant being found on Long Island at Fire Island and Jones Island. (Smaller scale barrier features are also located elsewhere on Long Island and at the mouths of several bays and streams of Lake Ontario). These long, narrow accumulations of unconsolidated materials comprise a beach fronting the ocean, a dune system, and tidal wetlands or beaches and bays on their landward side. The islands are separated by tidal inlets which help flush the inner bays. This combination of shoreforms and natural coastal processes creates the most fragile and unstable of coastal lands which, because of their location, are most attractive for development. When unaltered by man, barrier islands respond to natural forces by absorbing wave energy which, in major storms, is dissipated on the beach and over the dunes, with beach materials often being carried into the bay beaches or wetlands. Barrier islands earn their name in this way by protecting the waters of the inland bays and the shoreline of the "mainland". After beaches, bluffs are the most prevalent landform in the State's coastal area. Erodible bluffs can be damaged by wave attack and by landward sources such as surface runoff and ground- water seepage. The degree to which waves contribute to bluff erosion depends principally on the geologic composition and structure of the bluffs, the strength of the waves, and the energy-absorbing capacity of the beach at the base of the bluffs. Strong waves, combined with high tides or lake levels which reduce the width and thus the protection provided by the beaches, will produce a high rate of bluff recession. The attack on bluffs by landward sources can have an effect at least as severe as that caused by waves, and includes: ground- water seeping along permeable layers of sand, carrying soil with it; the gradual slippage of upper bluff materials along a clay stratum; and direct erosion of the bluff face by run-off. The following estimates of annual bluff recession rates on the State's coasts reflect differences in the geologic composition of the bluffs, as well as the relative strength of erosion or other destructive agents at the bluff location: at Old Field Point on Long Island, 5.2 feet per year;2 on the Lake Erie shoreline of Chautauqua and Erie counties, from 0.5 to 1.1 feet per year;3 and in the stretches of bluff in Oswego County on Lake Ontario, up to 2.35 feet annually.4 Average annual recession rates, of course, do not necessarily mean that the bluffs erode steadily at a f ixed rate. In some cases, individual storms or slumping may remove land at many times the average rate. II - 5- 12 Damages Resulting from Flooding and Erosion . ~On beaches, barrier islands, bluffs, and other hazard areas such as low-lying flood plain lands, man has built houses and other permanent facilities. Measures of the hazard risks and of the large scale of investments made in those areas are suggested by the following examples. In March 1973, storm waves resulting from the action of strong northerly winds on a high lake level caused damage estimated at $25 million to both public and private property along the New York shore of Lake Ontario.5 As an indicator of extreme conditions, 1977 estimates showed that over $750 million in damages could be inflicted on the south shore of Long Island between Fire Island Inlet and Montauk Point if the coast were assailed by the most severe hurricane likely in that locale at record high tide levels ( a standard project hurri- cane).6 The effects of erosion and flooding, however, are not linked solely to catastrophic weather disturbances. For instance, the Corps of Engineers has calculated that annual damages along the 120 mile length of Long Island's south shore are in excess of $30 million. 7 In developing those hazard areas, private as well as public investments are threatened. The burden of maintenance or replacement of local, county or State facilities, and post-storm debris removal, necessitated by erosion and flooding, is borne by public funds. Thus, the drive to locate as close as possible to the shorefront has resulted in the commitment of massive private and tax-financed public expenditures in areas where it is subject to damage or loss. . ~An additional consequence of development on hazardous shorelands is that it may destroy natural protective landforms such as beaches and dunes which could absorb the energy of stormwaters. Thus, inland development which otherwise would be considered outside the principal hazard zone may become vulnerable. Damage from, riverine flooding and erosion, while not of major proportions compared with that incurred on the marine and Great Lakes frontal shorelands, is significant. Some of the damage occurs on the banks of tributary streams at points near the coast where ice jams, or sediments carried down by the streams or by longshore transport, block their flows. In the narrow channels of the Hudson and St. Lawrence Rivers, erosion caused by ship waves is of concern. Residents on the St. Lawrence River are also particularly disturbed by the threat of erosion caused by the movement of ice resulting from the Winter Navigation/Season Extension Program now under consideration by the Secretary of the Army. The State has affirmed its opposition to the Program.8 The State is not opposed to shipping on the St. Lawrence River at any time of year when ice conditions are not present. However, the State finds that adequate economic and environmental informa- tion does not exist to demonstrate the justifiability of any season extensions on the River which are defined solely by calendar dates. 9 The Program would have little economic benefit to the State while it would impose serious effects upon . ~the management of levels and flows, fish and wildlife and their habitats, production of hydroelectric power, rates of shoreline erosion, and upon shoreline property. II-5- 13 Responses to Coastal Hazards There are four types of responses to coastal hazards: (1) the building of protective structures, including those which use natural materials such as sand, to defend coastal property against damage by flooding or erosion - the "structural" response; (2) such actions as the planting of vegetative cover, the re-shaping of bluffs or, perhaps the most prudent approach, the avoidance of the hazards by siting buildings in safe loca- tions - the "non-structural" response; (3) the purchase of insurance against the hazards - the "insurance" response; and (4) acceptance of the risk of damage to, and eventual loss of property - the "do-nothing" response. The latter response is one not deliberately chosen by riparian owners but rather forced upon them, most often due to their unawareness of the hazards, or because of their inability to pay for the other alternatives. The other responses are often used in combination with one another. The "Structural" Response The most common type of structural response is the installation parallel to the shoreline of frontal protective devices against erosion or flooding. There are several difficulties associated with those widely used devices. Because of the great force generated by coastal processes, the structures must be soundly designed and constructed in order to be effective. However, one study showed that along the eastern end of Lake Ontario and the shores of the St. Lawrence River, less than half of the frontal structures inventoried were of more than limited 0 effectiveness.10 In addition, improperly designed frontal structures such as bulkheads, revetments and seawalls may accelerate the loss of beach materials as storm wave energy is focused on the beach. Thus, a natural shield may be lost. Difficulty also arises from attempts to protect a house located on a narrow stretch of shoreland. Because erosion may continue on the unprotected sides of the structure which are vulnerable to lateral wave attack, the useful life of an otherwise sound structure could be shortened considerably and erosion conditions on adjacent lands exacerbated. Protective structures are not only used as defenses against direct frontal attack but also to prevent the loss of, and 'to build up, beaches. However, the process of littoral transport will add sand on the desired side of a groin or jetty only at the expense of beaches down current which, being deprived of their natural supply of sand, will be more subject to reces- sion, thus eventually threatening buildings at that location. A breakwater may create a similar effect by blocking wave energy and slowing littoral transport, thus causing sand to accumulate on the landward side of the structure. II-5- 14 One group of structural responses takes advantage of natural materials. Dune-building and the replenishment of beaches- require sand in great quantities. Sand and gravel mining to meet the f uture needs of the construction industry is a potentially significant activity in the State's coastal waters. However, care must be taken to ensure that these materials are not obtained from sites, onshore or offshore, which are parts of the delicately-balanced coastal process. The particle sizes of the beach-building materials must also be compatible with the local beach environment or the investment will be lost. The high cost of protective devices is another problem of the structural response. Because the cost of the most appropriate structure will vary with specific site conditions, the following estimates for a 100-foot stretch of shoreline are only illustra- tive: stone revetment, eight feet high - $23,000; steel bulk- head, ten feet high - $58,000; timber crib bulkhead, seven feet high - $8,500.11 A further cost often overlooked by riparian property owners is that necessary to implement a program of maintenance for protective devices. Most structures, although built to reasonable standards and design, will succumb over time to the powerf ul forces of the sea or lakes and must be inspected and repaired to preserve their effectiveness. The long-term protective capacity design of devices, and thus their original cost may be reduced if property owners follow a prudent maintenance program. A final cost consideration arises from the case cited above of the property owner who attempts to protect his own small length of shoreline. On a stretch of coast possessing generally similar characteristics of form, geologic materials, and exposure to waves (technically termed a "reach"), the most efficient method may be to protect the entire shoreline. This would require, of course, the agreement of all property owners on the reach to finance the undertaking. However, there may be economies of scale which could make it attractive. An important aspect of structural responses to coastal erosion and flooding is public sector activities in providing costly large-scale structural solutions including major groin fields, bulkheads, beach nourishment, sand-bypass installations and dune-building. The Federal government is the principal source of those activities with the United States Army Corps of Engineers assigned the greatest responsibility. Generally, the Corps is authorized to become involved in shore, hurricane and tidal, and lake flood protection studies and projects on the Great Lakes and marine coasts as well as in riverine areas. However, in the case of shore erosion and restoration projects, Federal funds may not be used for the protection of private property unless it: (1) is incidental to the protection of public property; (2) would result in public benefits; or (3) is necessary to mitigate shore damages on private property caused by F~ederal navigation works. An exception to this principle is sometimes made in the event of the . ~threat of extreme flooding as in the Operation Foresight Program initiated during a period of high water levels in the Great Lakes is ~area in 1972-73 through which emergency assistance was provided to private property owners. II- 1 15 The Corps of Engineers may also provide technical assistance to private property owners on flooding and erosion problems. Most Corps projects require cost-sharing with State and local govern- ments for both construction and maintenance. The largest Corps of Engineers coastal flood and erosion projects are undertaken on the State's marine shorelands principally because: the coastal processes there are more powerful; above mean high water, many of the beaches are in public ownership while almost all of them are owned by the State below mean high water; and shoreline development is more intensive. However, those projects often provoke controversy reflecting disagreement as to their effects on shoreline resources as well as the substantial expenditures involved, particularly in regard to the State and local cost-sharing requirement. Those elements are seen in the project to protect 83 miles of Long Island's coast from Fire Island Inlet to Montauk Point at an estimated cost of $138 million (1976 prices). Only five percent of this project (authorized by Congress in 1960) has been com- pleted by the placement of 17 of 50 proposed groins and 2,000,000 cubic yards of fill. However, the 15 groins in the Westhampton Beach area, while stablizing the beach on the site, are alleged to have caused heavy erosion to the west and consequent storm damage to shorefront homes in early 1978. An interim project to cure this problem would cost initially $42 million and an additional $8 million every five years thereafter. The State's share of first costs would be over $8 million while Suffolk County would be required to provide almost $4 million. Although many of the Corps' projects are single purpose (beach 0 erosion, or hurricane protection), some are multi-purpose. On Lake Erie, a new project at Cattaraugus Creek is expected to reduce flooding upstream by preventing ice jams and longshore transport sedimentation at the mouth of the stream. The primary purpose of the project, however, is to create a harbor of refuge to protect recreation craft from storm driven waters. The Corps also has completed, or is investigating a few small projects which do not require Congressional approval: examples include the St. Columbans-on-the-Lake Emergency2Bank Protection and Wendt Beach Park Shoreline Erosion projects.2 The "Non-Structural' Response The first component of the 'non-structural' response is the strengthening of landforms and the use of appropriate design features in buildings as protection against flooding. A common technique of this type is the planting and careful preservation of suitable vegetation on dunes and on the top or on the face of bluffs to reduce erosion caused by wind, run-off or other agents. II-5 - 16 This technique, however, does not prevent wave erosion and is often used in combination with frontal structures at the base of . ~the landform. Other "non-structural" responses of this type include: sand-fencing on dunes to help build up and hold the sand; drainage systems on bluffs to prevent slumping and the formation of gullies; mechanically reshaping the face of bluffs to an angle of repose which will help prevent slumping, and the flood-proofing of buildings or their elevation above the base flood level. The second component of the "non-structural" response to coastal flooding and erosion is the initial siting of development entirely out of the hazard areas. This method is the most economical as it avoids the various difficulties, including the high cost, of the "structural" approach. Yet it has not been widely followed by shorefront owners. Although this approach does not guarantee perpetual protection, it does significantly improve property owners' chances of reducing the hazard potential. Some shore property owners with foresight, the necessary funds, and available land, are able to move their buildings out of the hazard zone before damage is incurred. Clearly, the less elabor- ate the building, the greater the savings; some cottages can be pulled to safety by a tractor while more substantial residences must be carefully and expensively transported. The "Insurance" Response * ~Structural and non-structural measures and combinations thereof, are allowable alternatives under the National Flood Insurance Program which offers insurance against property damage caused by flooding and flood-related erosion. Property owners in a community which is participating in this program may purchase insurance, provided the local government regulates development in the flood hazard area. Regulation includes requirements for flood-proofing of buildings and restrictions on their siting in the floodway. A special National Flood Insurance Program regulation is applicable only to identified Coastal High Hazard Areas on the marine coast which comprise lands subject to high velocity waters caused by tidal surges or hurricane wave wash. Designation of those areas has been made in the majority of communities on New York State's marine coast. The main require- ments applicable to such areas are that new construction or substantial improvements must be: located landward of the mean high tide line; elevated above the 100-year flood level with space under the first floor to permit tidal or storm waters to pass freely; and securely anchored. New mobile homes are prohibited. Additionally, alteration of sand dunes which would increase potential flood damage is prohibited. State-owned and State-financed facilities are subject to special regulations to ensure that public investment in flood hazard areas is carefully analyzed and appropriate steps taken to reduce the risk of damage and loss of life. II - -17 The National Flood Insurance Program also provides for the sale of insurance to property owners against flood-related erosion damage. However, the regulatory part of this program, which by law must include restrictions on building in flood-related0 erosion hazard areas, has not been initiated because the Federal Emergency Management Agency has not issued final regulations. The major obstacle is the difficulty in ascribing property damage to flood-related erosion as opposed to other types of erosion. Lake Levels A further coastal hazard issue pertains to high water levels on Lake Ontario and Lake Erie.13 The International Joint Commission (IJC), established by treaty between the United States and Canada, exercises control over the rate of outflow from Lake Ontario, and thus influences the lake's level, by ensuring implementation of the "Orders of Approval for the Regulation of Lake Ontario" (which it issued for the opera- tion of the St. Lawrence Power and Seaway Project in 1958). This document sets forth the range within which the lake level will be maintained, and the specific ways in which the interests of navi- gation, power and shoreline property owners are to be taken into account in regulating the lake's outflow. Direct responsibility for implementing the Orders of Approval has been delegated by the IJC to its arm, the International St. Lawrence River Board of Control (SLRBC). The SLRBC has developed a Plan of Regulation to provide a systematic framework for its decisions. Since the March 1973 storm mentioned earlier, the lake's water0 levels have been more often in the upper part of the range set by the Orders of Approval than in the lower half. Coastal property owners, fearful of these continuing high water levels, have criticized the IJC and the SLRBC for their failure to lower them. The property owners' criticisms are threefold. First, they claim that in its day-to-day examination of level and flow data and implementation of the Order of Approval, the SLRBC tends to favor navigation and power interests over shore property owners who have no direct representation on that body. Second, the shore- line residents claim that the regulatory plan and Orders of Approval are inadequate and should be re-examined to find ways to accommodate better the needs of shore property owners. Third, it is argued that the IJC should investigate the feasibility of changing the capacity of the St. Lawrence River to allow a greater overall rate of outflow from Lake Ontario and thus a greater flexibility for regulating its level. At least partial satisfaction of the first criticism was achieved in 1981 when an official of the State's St. Lawrence-Eastern Ontario Commission was appointed to the SLRBC, replacing a representative of the Federal Power Commission. 14 A second action taken in response to these criticisms was the Lake Ontario Shore Protection Act of 1976 (PL 94-587, Section 180-a), which directs the Corps of Engineers "...to develop a plan for shoreline and beach erosion control along Lake Ontario" ..and "...include recommendations on measures of protection and proposals for equitable cost sharing, together with recommenda- tions for regulating the level of Lake Ontario to assure maximum protection of the natural environment and to hold shoreline damage to a minimum". The f irst phase of this study was com- pleted, but funding for the remaining two phases is uncertain. The proposed Winter Navigation Program mentioned earlier is also of concern to lakeshore property owners because in addition to its other effects, the necessary ice breaking activities in the St. Lawrence River may increase the level of Lake Ontario. Shoreline residents of Lake Erie have also been concerned about high water as, during the past decade, the mean monthly lake levels have rarely been below the long term average. As a result, flooding and erosion have caused damage along the coasts of Erie and Chautauqua counties although, because of their more erosion-resistant shorelands, the magnitude of erosion is not as great as that on the Lake Ontario coast. The IJC's Lake Erie Regulation Study Board recently completed an investigation of the feasibility of limited regulation of the lake and found that: "the magnitude of the losses as compared to the benefits is such that no reasonable changes in assumptions or evaluative tech- niques could result in net benefits approaching the cost of the Niagara regulatory works" necessary to implement regulation.15 In response to the United States and Canadian governments' recog- nition of the need for a system-wide examination of levels and flows problems throughout the Great Lakes, the 1IJC established the International Great Lakes Levels Advisory Board (IGLLAB) in 1979. The U.S. and Canadian members of IGL.LAB, who include U.S. Section Chairman Robert C. Hansen, Coastal Program Manager, N.Y.S. Department of State, have been directed to: (1) find ways to increase public awareness and involvement in decisions regard- ing levels and flows; and (2) make recommendations to the IJC on actions which the Commission may wish to take regarding ongoing and proposed activities such as the regulation of lake levels and the Winter Navigation Program. The lake level issue is complex. The fluctuating flow of waters into and out of the Great Lakes system has produced in the past both low and high water conditions causing varying amounts of damage to the many interests which depend or front on the lakes' waters. The issue, therefore, is not how to avoid entirely loss to any one interest, but, rather how to ensure an equitable distribution of benefits among all interests. II-5 - 19 Evacuation Needs Climatological hazards such as hurricanes, northeasters, or seismic disturbances can seriously impact the coastal area.W During the last 100 years, seven hurricanes have directly hit the coast of New York State, and several other hurricanes have affected the coast while passing offshore. The methods of dealing with storm surge, wind, and flooding associated with these natural hazards are addressed in the coastal management program policies, particularly policies 11-17. Evacuation planning is a necessary component of Coastal NAanagement, particularly when existing protection from natural hazard impacts is inadequate. The New York State Office of Disaster Preparedness has primary responsibility for evacuation planning. Department of State will work with the office to ensure adequacy of evacuation plans which may be necessary for coping with these natural hazards. II -5 -20 FOOTNOTES 1 St. Lawrence Eastern Ontario Commission, A Report on Coastal 2Nassau-Suffolk Regional Planning Board, A Coastal Erosion Subplan for Nassau and Suffolk Counties, 1978. 3 Seibel, Erwin, et al, Technical Report on Determination of Quantity and Quality of Great Lakes U.S. Shoreline Eroded Material, International Reference Group on Great Lakes Pollution from Land Use Activities, International Joint Commission, 1976. 4 St. Lawrence-Eastern Ontario Commission, Report on Coastal Resources. 5 St. Lawrence-Eastern Ontario Commission, Lake Ontario and the St. Lawrence River: Analysis and Recommendations Concerning High Water Levels, 1975. 6 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, New York District, Final Environmental Impact Statement for Fire Island Inlet to Montauk Point, New York Beach Erosion Control and Hurricane Protection Project, 1977, in Nassau-Suffolk Regional Planning Board, op. cit. 7 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, New York District New York, telephone conversation, August, 1981. 8 Letters of Governor Hugh L. Carey dated March 11, 1980 to the U.S. Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors, and October 19, 1981 to Chief of Engineers, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 9 Carroll, J.L., et al, Season Extension on the Great Lakes/ St. Lawrence Seaway: A Critique of the Recommended Plan of the Corps of Engineers, prepared for the NYS Department of Transportation, July 1979; and Department of Environmental Conservation, Environmental Assesment, FY1979 Winter Navigation Demonstration on the St. Lawrence River, Summary volume and 15 studies appended as technicial report volumes, June 1978, prepared for the Winter Navigation Board. 10 St. Lawrence-Eastern Ontario Comtmission, A Report on Coastal Resources. 11 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, North Central Division, Help Yourself, 1978. Those data were prepared for the guidance of private property owners. II-5- 21 12 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Buffalo District, Current Civil Works Projects of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Buffalo District, May, 1977 and May, 1981. 13 See N.Y.S. Department of State, Coastal Management Program, Draft Regional Element-Great Lakes West, 1978 and St. Lawrence-Eastern Ontario Commission, Analysis and Recommenda tions Concerning High Water Levels, 1975 for more detailed information on the Lake Ontario water level issue. 14 The affiliations of the other three members of the SLRBC are: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the federal St. Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation and the Power Authority of the State of New York. 15 International Lake Erie Regulatory Study Board, Inter- national Joint Commission, Lake Erie Water Level Study: Main Report, 1981 II-5- 22 PUBLIC ACCESS Introduction Public access to both the recreational and aesthetic resources of the coast is a key element in the management of coastal areas in New York State. There are two prinicpal components of public access: access to existing recreation resources; and, access to publicly-owned lands and waters of the coastline at large. The first is linked to the coastal recreation issue discussed separately in this section. Therefore, this public access discussion does not delve into the need for recreation facilities or resources, but focuses on problems in getting to these facilities and the coastline at large. Access to the Coast at Large There are two types of conditions which impede public access to those lands available for public use along the coast: development and private ownership of land which create man-made barriers to shorefront access; and natural shore- line topography or conditions which make access difficult or impossible. A large portion of New York's coastline is devoted to private residential, commercial and industrial use. Along much of this shoreline, the existing land uses effectively block physical and visual access to the shore, even where there are lands immediately adjacent to the shore as well as lands underwater that are publicly-owned. In other cases, owners of private property that is adjacent to the publicly-owned foreshore and underwater lands often legally and illegally restrict lateral access along the foreshore. Where public rights-of-way to the shoreline do exist, use of the shore itself is often restricted by private beach/no trespassing signs. Transportation facilities are another major man-made barrier blocking access to the shore. Highways and railroads, both in urban and rural areas, often provide views of the shoreline and the water, but their presence usually makes it difficult to get to the shore. The railroad tracks and highways lining the Hudson River clearly illustrate this problem and indicate why the River has failed to fulfill its potential as a recreational amenity. The railroad tracks follow both shorelines for long stretches; highways are located adjacent to the river in cities such as Albany and Poughkeepsie. Where these conditions prevail, the Hudson, aside from its visual value, remains detached from the community. Moreover, where significant parcels of public land do exist between transportation rights-of-way and the river, one's ability to reach them is often restricted because it is either too dangerous to cross the right-of-way or too expensive to provide a safe crossing. The need to provide safe pedestrian and vehicle crossings is becoming even more acute now that high speed rail travel has begun. ii - 5- 23 Similar conditions exist along Lake Ontario, where the Lake Ontario State Parkway is a distinct barrier to physical access to the shore. In New York City, highways hinder much of the access to the shore in all boroughs. In many urban areas, there are numerous obstacles to increasing public access to waterfronts. In addition to industrial and commercial land uses, decaying piers, and abandoned buildings, unsafe neighborhoods have made the waterfront an undesirable location for almost any activity. Opposition from the coastal residential community also serves to impede efforts to increase general public access to the shore. Community opposition, somewhat justifiable, is rooted in the fear that increased public access would lead to: (1) diminished individual enjoyment; (2) decreased value of private property adjacent to access points; (3) increased pollution, litter, and noise; (4) undesirable commercial development; and (5) intensified use conflicts as competi- tion for waterfront space increases. Visual access problems are caused by development patterns and specific structural designs that either block the coast- line from view or intrude upon the scenic coastal landscape. The discussion on aesthetics contained in this Section deals with the particular problems of visual access. Public access is also limited by natural shoreline condi- tions. Along parts of Lakes Erie and Ontario, Long Island, and the Hudson River, cliffs and steep slopes, while they0 provide great scenic value, preclude all but the most ambitious from shoreline use. The nature of public ownership of underwater lands and the foreshore and the terms and legitimacy of their sale have a long and complex legal history. The rekindled public aware- ness of the value of coastal lands requires increased cir- cumspection before the public lands along the shore are disposed of or existing public rights of access are restricted or constrained in any way. Unfortunately, in a practice that still prevails, the State has sold off underwater lands and the foreshore without full consideration of the value of such lands for public use and access to the water. This should not be construed to mean that all sales must cease, but that each such proposed sale must be carefully evaluated from both a public interest and riparian rights standpoint. The public interest must include the concept that such lands can have value for public use and access to the water, and are held in trust. II-5- 24 Access to Coastal Recreation Resources The other major component of the public access issue is access to existing or potential coastal recreation resources. A beach is the most commonly identified coastal recreation resource. People want to get to the coast to use beaches for swimming, sun-bathing, fishing, walking, or simply for enjoyment of scenery. A problem in many areas is lack of access to beaches. Thus, there is a need to identify existing and future beach areas requiring additional access. To aid in this identification, a technical definition of "beach" has been developed (See Public Access Planning Process in Part II, Section 7). Various forms of coastal beaches are found in New York State. Steep headlands fronted by narrow beaches are common along Lake Erie, Lake Ontario, the Hudson River, and the Long Island Sound. Barrier complexes, formed by a sequence of long, narrow barrier islands or bars, separated from the mainland by a lagoon or marsh, are found along the south shore of Long Island and the Port Ontario-Ellisburg region of Lake Ontario. Sandy beaches fronting the continuous ridges of sand dunes are also common, especially along the southshore of Long Island. Barrier spits are formed when littoral transport causes the projection of a sediment body into a bay; I.e., Rockaway spit and Southhampton spit on Long Island. The bays and harbors that are found in many coastal areas of the State normally contain narrow beaches backed by bluffs or pocket beaches with associated dunes. 0 ~ ~There are several factors associated with the concern for access to existing or potential coastal recreation resources. One relates broadly to transportation limnita- tions and inadequate parking facilities. The lack of adequate public transportation to many coastal recreation areas effectively limits access for many people, partic- ularly urban residents unable to reach facilities located in suburban or rural areas. In some areas, the lack of public waterborne transportation limits access to key barrier beaches, preventing them from being fully utilized for recreation. Related to this problem are the limited parking facilities found at many coastal recreation areas. Beaches are often closed, not when the facilities are crowded, but when the parking lot is full. In many instances, recreation areas could accommodate increased use by limiting automobile access and providing public trans- portation such as shuttle buses from remote parking areas. Restrictions on use of public recreation areas to local residents exist in a number of coastal areas, such as along Lake Ontario and on municipal beaches of Long Island. These restrictions take the form of outright legal prohibi- tions against non-residents using the facilities, or more indirect means, such as restricting parking to residents only, allowing no parking on streets adjacent to beaches, and charging higher user fees for non-residents. TI - 5- 25 RECREATION introduction Coastal areas are New York's most important outdoor recrea- tion resource. Within these areas a narrow band along the shore provides a wide variety of water dependent and en- hanced recreational activities. Coastal residents and visitors make the coast the most heavily utilized recreation area in the State. This activity is often intensive and is an important contributor to the State's economy, with many coastal communities depending on the recreation industry for their economic well being. The appeal and importance of New York's coasts for recrea- tion creates several concerns. The principal issue is: how can the special qualities of the coastal area best serve the demand for recreation, while ensuring that other land and water use needs will be accommodated and that the natural resource base will be protected? Flowing from this broad issue are several more specific concerns. These include conflicts with other uses of the coast; overuse of existing coastal recreation areas; the deficiency of water based recreation in urban areas; conservation of historic and cultural resources; the particular needs of recreation boating and fishing; and the desire to promote the private sector's role in recreation. * ~~~~~~~~~Use Conflicts Use conflicts are major barriers to coastal recreation. A number of land uses which require coastal locations restrict recreational use of the coast. For example, use of the shoreline for rail transportation on both sides of the Hudson River has limited physical access to the river. Yet, the economic and social value of the railroad is such, that needs for recreation must be secondary to improved rail service. In urban areas, because the commerce and industry of an earlier day was heavily water-dependent, many such structures occupied shorefront locations. A number of these facilities still remain, often in a deteriorated or dilapi- dated condition, and limit access to the recreation oppor- tunities of the shore. The costs of their removal, where absolutely necessary, or Pore preferably their rehabilita- tion are, along with land acquisition, often prohibitive to cities wishing to reclaim the land for parks and recrea- tional use. However, structures such as existing piers are readily adaptable for recreational uses at reasonable costs. Other barriers to the enjoyment of coastal recreation include the presence of industrial plants, nearby sludge and spoil disposal heaps, pollution control facilities, and elevated transportation routes. In rural areas, residential development along the shoreline consumes potential public * ~~~recreation space as well as blocks access to the coast. II - 5 -. 27 Use conflicts also take the form of destruction of resources necessary for recreation. Poor water quality plagues existing swimming beaches and limits development in some coastal locations. Water pollution is also a major deter- rent to the growing sport fishery in the State. Toxic chemicals, such as Mirex, polychlorinated biphenols and mercury, have resulted in fishing bans on some species in the Hudson River and the issuance of health advisories regarding the consumption of fish from Lake Ontario. Air and noise pollution additionally limit the recreational appeal of waterfronts for many outdoor activities. Natural coastal processes create problems for recreation. Shifting sand bars intermittently block the openings to bays, creeks and rivers, thereby cutting off boater access to the coastal waters. Thus, if boating access is desired, dredging of channels is necessary. Heavy seas erode beaches and sudden storms create hazards for boaters if harbors of refuge are not nearby. In addition, natural, and in some cases even artificial fluctuations in water levels can adversely affect fish resources by disrupting breeding habitats and can severely reduce the size of beaches for swimming. On the other hand, the intensity or nature of recreation activities may pose threats to natural resources. For example, an embayment or estuary, which is now a productive fish and wildlife habitat, may be an ideal location for a harbor of refuge,but the attendant noise and pollution from motor boats and marine activity may disrupt the fish and wildlife habitat. Recreation development may also have an adverse impact on the character of existing shorefront residential areas by encouraging increased activity levels, commercial development, and other conflicts with existing development. Excessive Use Each recreation resource has a maximum capacity. Over-use can impair the quality of the resource and the recreation experience. Thus, with the increasing number of people participating in coastal recreation activities, there is a potential for excessive use of the coastal resources of the State. Excessive use has a number of effects. It can frequently result in water and noise pollution. Fragile coastal resources such as wetlands and dunes, may be damaged 'New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, En- vironmental Assessment, FY 1979 Winter Navigation Demonstration on the St. Lawrence River, Technical Summary Volume, V. 32. II - 5 - 28 merely by excessive foot traffic or off-road vehicles. Other areas, such as islets and offshore rocks that provide protected bird sanctuaries are of ten disturbed by any human intrusion. Most coastal recreation is seasonal due to climate and existing vacation habits. The coastal recreation season consists, for the most part, of weekends and the summer vacation months. This is an unavoidable complication en- countered when providing parks and recreation facilities for a large population. Urban Area Needs In New York State, urban areas generally exhibit the greatest recreation deficiencies along with the highest use of existing facilities. Poor water quality, restricted coastal access, high development costs, and many alternative demands for limited space severely restrict attempts to overcome these deficiencies. The needs of the poor, elderly, and handicapped are particularly affected. Historic and Cultural Resources New York State is rich in historic, archeological, and cultural resources which are important for their recrea- tional as well as aesthetic and educational value. Unfortu- nately, there is yet no program or law to prevent the owner of a significant historic resource from impairing its S ~ ~~historic character or demolishing it. Many significant historic sites have already been destroyed. Other sites are threatened by deterioration, lack of maintenance, and encroaching adjacent incompatible uses. Recreational Boating and Fishing Boating and fishing are significant recreational activities in the coastal waters of New York State. The fundamental requirement is to provide safe and desirable facilities to accommodate the demand. While some areas have adequate facilities now, growing demand indicates increased defic- iencies in the future. A recent study indicates future growth in recreational boating in the Great Lakes basin area.2 The Department of Environmental Conservation has initiated a fish stocking program in both Lake Erie and Lake Ontario. This also promises to increase demand for boating 2 New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, . u~Report on Regional Facilities in New York's Coastal Area', 1977. II - 5 - 29 facilities. A boating survey indicates the marina industry on Long Island is grossing $55 million annually, yet marina facilities are being lost to other more profitable land uses. 3 At the same time, existing facilities are not0 meeting current demands. Public and private marinas report backup lists of 200-300 requests. Furthermore, an undocu- mented but apparent trend seems to indicate that demand for small boat launching sites to service smaller boats is c~rowing. In New York City in particular, the high costs of boat ownership combined with an inadequate number of marina facilities discourage recreational boating in spite of the opportunities that exist in the waters around the City for enjoying this activity. New York State has the potential for developing one of the best sport fisheries in the nation (cf. section on FISH AND WILDLIFE). Realizing this potential will require the provision of adequate support facilities at the shoreline. Among the facilities needed are a sufficient number of "Harbors of Refuge" along the shoreline of the Great Lakes. These harbors must be provided at suitable intervals to assure safety in the event of rapidly developing inclement weather. In addition, adequate public marina facilities, including boat launching ramps, docks and storage areas, are needed to serve the sport fishermen. Public vs. Private Ownership Both the public and private sectors provide recreation facilities. In most cases there is little or no overlap. For example, lodging is generally provided by the private sector and large developed beaches are generally accepted as a public responsibility. Where government and private enterprise are providing the same type of facilities, they usually serve different markets. However, in some instances, direct competition has developed. This can create economic problems for private enterprise and utimately less service to the Public. For example, in the Buffalo area several firms lost a significant number of their customers to a recently constructed state-owned marina. On the other hand, in some areas of the State, public marinas have attracted additional boats to the area and boatyard owners have concluded that public facilities actually helped their businesses .4 3Sea Grant Advisory Service, Cornell University, Ongoing Research of Recreational Boating on the Shoreline of Westchester County, New York City and Long Island, Ithaca, NY, 1974. 4Noden and Brown, The New York Commercial Marina and Boatyard Industry, 1972, pp. 31, 45 11- 30 Often the laws and practices of the various levels of government have inhibited or at least not promoted coopera- tion with private enterprise in the provision of recreation facilities. Many jurisdictions do not permit the develop- ment of commercial facilities on public parkland.5 The term of a lease to a private individual that a municipality may grant for operation on public land is limited by State law. Since large recreation facilities require a long amortiza- tion period, this limitation has discouraged private investment in some aspects of public recreation. Because both public and private investment is necessary to ensure adequate recreation opportunities, the State must continue to address the issue of how to assure that a mutually beneficial relationship evolves between private and public investment in recreational facilities. 5 Bureau 'of Outdoor Recreation, National Urban Recreation *~~Study, New York, Newark, Jersey City, 1977, p. 94. 11 - 5 - 31 SCENIC QUALITY Introduction0 Of the shoreline's many attributes, coastal scenery is perhaps the most universally appreciated. At least three basic characteristics contribute to the visual quality of coastal landscapes: water in its many moods; dynamic coastal landforms; and expansive views. This environment attracts wildlife of all forms which also contributes to the aesthetic quality of the coast. To a degree, even the more ordinary coastal landscapes possess these attributes. In great part, scenic resource studies have concentrated on natural characteristics. This emphasis results from the perception that natural landscapes are more visually pleasing than man-modified environments. However, in many locations, man has changed coastal landscapes in ways which harmonize with or even enhance their natural scenic qualities. Old fishing villages, rolling farmlands, and dynamic city skylines are examples of man's intervention which have added character and interest to coastal areas. Beyond their inherent worth, scenic attributes of the coast augment other values. They combine with recreational possibilities to make the coast a prime location for vacationers and thus offer the potential for growth of the tourist industry. We have long recognized the importance of scenic resources for recreational, psychological, educational, and economic purposes. In 1972, Congress gave coastal aesthetic quality even greater importance through the Coastal Zone Management Act which states: The Congress finds that the coastal zone is rich in a variety of natural, commercial, recreational, industrial and aesthetic resources of immediate and potential value to the present and future well-being of the Nation. (S302(b)) Similarly, the New York State Legislature in the Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act of 1981 has found that: New York State's coastal area is unique with a variety of...aesthetic resources of state- wide and national significance. (�910) 115-320 Degradation of Scenic Resources While the New York State Legislature has recognized the value and benefits of scenic resources, its concerns are frequently not translated into real protection and enhance- ment of these resources. Instead, large and small-scale development projects often ignore and degrade natural coastal landforms and attractive man-made features. Large-scale development -- whether industrial, commercial or residential -- has a greater chance of impairing aesthetic value, but even a single prominent structure can signifi- cantly affect the scenic quality of an area. Other degrading conditions may accompany development and reduce the aesthetic quality of the coast. Such unattrac- tive conditions include: deteriorated buildings and piers, billboards and signs, power lines, transportation networks, litter, and visible air and water pollution. The most complete degradation occurs when development blocks views of coastal waters. In urban areas, the problem is especially serious,-because few visual access points remain. But the problem exists as well in rural areas where linear residential and commercial development often spreads to prevent visual access for all but shorefront property owners. Protection of Scenic Quality In order to protect scenic quality, the characteristics of scenic landscapes must be more completely considered during the course of making development decisions. Scenic quality assessment and protection is a relatively new and complex field. The complexity results from the uniqueness of each landscape area and from varying opinions about what consti- tutes scenic beauty. Even where there is agreement about the outstanding quality of a given resource, there may still be varying opinions about what would seriously impair this quality. As a result of the many complexities and differing opinions, scenic resources have been unsystematically inventoried and assessed; as noted above, they have often been disregarded altogether when development decisions were made. To assure more complete consideration of scenic quality, the State Coastal Management Progam will identify certain significant coastal resources and will provide more specific guidelines for protecting and enhancing scenic quality. Local, State and Federal agencies will, thus, be able to more fully consider the potential effect of proposed developments and avoid despoiling coastal scenery. II -5-33 AGRICULTURE Introduction Agriculture is New York State's largest industry, with 1979 sales of $2.2 billion.1 Dairy farming accounts for more than 50% of these sales.2 Fruit and vegetable production, the second largest source of income, accounts for 13% of the total. To produce this wealth, New York farming occupies 8.7 million acres, of which 35% (3.0 million acres) are in the coastal counties. These counties are the primary location of the State' s important fruit and vegetable farming, which in 1978 had a market value of $240.5 million. While only a small portion of the agricultural land in coastal counties is devoted to fruit and vegetable farming, it produces nearly 10% of the total market value of all agricultural products produced in New York State. Because of the positive climatic influences of coastal waters, most of this farming, particularly that devoted to fruit, is concentrated in areas immediately adjacent to the coast. Loss of Agricultural Lands Although the latest U.S. Census of Argiculture3 reveals that, for first time in decades, the amount of land devoted to farming in New York has not decreased, the following factors indicate that the preservation of good farmland is a continuing problem for the State. Since 1945 nearly half of the land then being farmed has been lost to other uses. Though much of this loss is irrevocable, it is not all so. And while it is understandable that a highly urbanized state might not, or need not, be self-sufficient in food produc- tion, New York's present very low level of self sufficiency increases the cost of food to the State's population and the State's vulnerability to agricultural calamity elsewhere. Finally, while the trend toward continual loss of land in farming may now not be alarming for New York State, the trend is not consistent across the State. Much land in the 1New York Crop Reporting Service New York State Department of Agriculture & Markets. 2 Unless otherwise identified all data is from the 1978 U.S. Census of Agriculture (published in 1982) and is for farms with sales of over $2,500. 3 According to the U.S. Censuses of Agriculture for 1969 and 1978, the amount of land in New York in farms with sales over $2,500 was 2,998',395 and 3,010,231 respectively, an increase of .4 per cent. II-5 - 34 state is continuing to go out of production, often in areas that possess the most agriculturally significant land.' These lands produce crops that are a unique or siqnificant part of national food production e.g., grapes? sour cherries, carrots, and onions. In two of the three important fruit growing areas alone the coast, land in orchards has declined. Along the southern shore of Lake Ontario from Niagara to Wayne County, land in orchards has declined by 13.3% between 1969 and 1978. In the Hudson Valley the principal fruit growing counties of Columbia, Ulster, and Dutchess have experienced 5.3% decline in orchards over the period. In Chautauqua County, however, there has been a 20% increase in the amount of land in vineyards. In Suffolk County, where much farmland is near the shore and where farming has consistently generated the highest market value of farm products of any county in the State, land in farming has declined by 16.4% between 1969 and 1978. While there is widespread recognition of the problem of the loss of farmland, mechanisms for addressing the problem remain at issue. To be effective, programs to preserve agricultural land must be comprehensive and authoritative, yet they must also be adaptable to changing market forces and responsive to the legitimate property interests of farmers. Urban development, as it expands outward into farming areas, is the major cause of farm loss. In addition, land goes out 0 ~ ~of farming at the urban/rural fringe for the following, often interrelated, reasons: 1) Farming is dependent on nearby agribusiness enterprises; these, in turn, require a minimum number of active farms. Once a certain number of farms cease production and the level of agribusiness is reduced, the economic viability of the remaining farms is in question. 2) The proximity of an urban labor market begins to provide alternative employment opportunities to farmers and farm laborers. 3) In urban/rural fringe areas, local ordinances often restrict farm operation. 4) Declining or low net farm income and high inheritance taxes4 are factors in the loss of farmland. 5) Urban land values raise local property taxes to levels beyond what is appropriate for its value for agricultural use. And, 6) Major public infrastruc- ture investment can accelerate or direct urban growth into farming areas. 4Recent changes in tax law have reduced this burden on farm owners II - 5 - 35 Definition of Important and Valuable Farmland Different approaches to identifying important farmland have been taken. Howard Conklin's 1968 study5 rated farms based on high, medium, and low economic viability. The State Development Plan6 restructured this identification into categories referred to as exceptional, high viability and medium viability farming areas. The Soil Conservation Service identifies soils according to several categories of capability and also has a system for identifying important farmland as prime, unique, or of statewide or local impor- tance. In a report prepared for the State '701 ' Land Use Element, the Agricultural Resources Commission recommended that "No one all-encompassing definition of important farm- lands is practical or desirable." Rather, the Commission recommended that agricultural land use policy be based on various combinations of information about soil quality, economic viability of farming, climate, and existing land use patterns. This recommendation was considered the best approach. Therefore, for the operation of the Coastal Management Program, important farmland has been defined as: 1) those lands which meet the United States Soil Conserva- tion Service' s criteria as being prime, unique, or of state- wide importance; 2) active farmland within Agricultural Dis- tricts; and 3) agricultural areas identified as having high economic viability.7 Note: Since the above definition was adopted, the State has developed a new system for identifying and valuing farmland. In the near future the program will shift to this defi-0 nition. The land captured by it is essentially the same. 5 Howard Conklin, The Nature and Distribution of Farring in New York State, New York State College of Agriculture, 1968 6 New York State Office of Planning Coordination, New York State Development Plan 1, 1971, p. 48 7 This term is defined in the explanation of Program Policy 26. 1-5-3 ENERGY Introduction New York's coast plays an important role in satisfying the energy needs of the State. It provides sites for numerous energy facilities, including steam-electric generating plants (oil, coal, nuclear); hydro-electric generating plants; electric and gas transmission lines; oil and gas exploration, development, transfer and storage facilities (including LNG facilities); and alternative energy facilities. All these facilities are located near the coast for one or more reasons: (1) access to shipping corridors for fuel; (2) proximity to the consumers of energy; (3) abundance of cooling water for electric generating plants; and (4) use of water for direct production of energy from hydro- power and possibly in the future from wind, wave and tidal power. Some energy facilities depend on coastal locations in order to function, while others, such as closed-cycle power plants and oil and gas storage tanks, are able to operate at sites inland from the shoreline. Therefore, in view of the competition among many types of uses for shorefront locations, proposed energy facil- ities must be carefully studied to determine their dependency on coastal sites and resources. In addition to technical require- ments, other factors must be considered, including public need, environmental impacts, and construction and operation costs of various site alternatives. The New York State Coastal Manaqement Program (CMP) recognizes that all energy facilities have certain positive and negative aspects. They satisfy enerqy demands of individuals, commerce and industry and create employment opportunities. But these facilities often require large parcels of land and present potential dangers to the people and natural resources of the coast. A special issue concerns ice management practices. The annual placement of an ice boom in the Niagara River is essential to protect power facility water intakes from ice jams and simultaneously to safeguard downstream shorelines from excessive ice scourinq and flooding. The timing of installation and removal of the boom, however, must be carefully reckoned to ensure the greatest benefits from its use. In other instances, skillful control of ice formation helps avoid loss of power production crucial to the State's economic growth while reducing the risk of flooding and erosion damage. II - 5- 37 Possible impacts of energy facilities on coastal resources include the following: * Chemical, thermal and/or radioactive discharges into the air and water of the coast and entrainment and thermal shock of fish resulting from the operation of various types of steam electric generating plants; * Alteration of landforms and vegetative cover, degrada- tion of scenic resources and possible health hazards from electric transmission lines or fuel pipelines. The extent of impact from transmission lines and pipelines on the coastal area will, of course, depend on whether they run perpendicular or parallel to the coastline; * Spills associated with the transport and storage of petroleum products; o Explosions and fires associated with petroleum or LNG facilities; o On-shore land use conflicts and disruption of underwater habitats from possible Lake Erie gas exploration and production and from OCS activities. * Degradation of air quality becasue of dust emissions resulting from the transportation and handling of coal for an increasing number of coal-fired power plants as well as the stack gases emitted from these fossil fuled facilities. New Energy Sources The State's coast may play an additional role in supplying new sources of energy. Natural gas is present under Lake Erie, and there is commercial as well as public interest in recovering this resource. Also, a high resource find on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) could be an important supplemental source of energy for the State. However, significant environmental problems could be associated with production in Lake Erie or the Atlantic Ocean. One issue in Lake Erie is the potential for damage to the lake's biota and water quality. Drilling operations and the placement of gas pipelines underwater would result in increased localized turbidity due to disposal of drilling muds and disturbance of bottom materials. These operations would have temporary adverse effects on benthic organisms. Mobile organisms such as fish should be able to avoid the area and thus any harmful effects, although significant fish habitats could be threatened. Damaging impacts would result if construction operations stirred up toxic wastes which were previously dumped in the lake. Concerns have also been expressed about the effect of gas exploitation on Lake Erie's waters upon which Buffalo and other communities depend for their water supply. II-5- 38 A second issue in Lake Erie centers upon the possibility of accidental oil and gas spills. it is generally accepted by . ~geologists that the chances of finding oil under the lake are is ~very small. As for natural gas, the extremely high pressures associated with well blowouts are not expected to be encountered in Lake Erie. If a leak does occur, the gas would bubble to the surface and disperse. A large leakage of gas would present an immediate hazard although such an occurrence would cause minimal environmental damage. OCS production could result in significant environmental pro- blems, including impacts on important fish wintering grounds and migration routes. Drilling, dredging, and laying pipelines could present possible dangers, but the most serious danger is that of oil spills, both at the platform and from tankers traveling the Nantucket-Ambrose lanes. Major and minor spills could adversely affect fish, wildlife and vegetation in the Long Island area. Controlling such spills is difficult at best and made all the more so by severe weather conditions which frequently occur in the Atlantic. Oil spills could not only damage shore and near- shore natural resources but also have drastic impacts on the economic health of Long Island's multi-million dollar fishing, tourism and recreation industries. A spill during harvesting or vacation periods could be devastating. In addition, potential OCS operations pose navigational risks to ships transiting the Nantucket - Ambrose lanes. Discarded equipment resting on the ocean bottom also poses a threat to fishing trawls. Finally, onshore support facilities, if any are sited in the New York City - Long Island area, may have beneficial and adverse impacts. The primary benefit would be the creation of jobs and an income producing industry. On the other hand, the nature and extent of any adverse effects would depend upon the facility. For instance, a supply base would generate excessive noise and reduce navigational safety due to increased shipping and helicopter traffic. II-5 - 39 WATER RESOURCES Introduction One of New York State's major assets is its abundant water resources available to meet domestic, commercial, and industrial water supply demands. The tourist industries thrive in the Eastern Ontario and Long Island regions of the State because of the distinctive water recreation and scenic values of these areas. Vast quantities of high quality water from Lake Ontario proved to be a key incentive for locating several breweries in upstate New York. The natural, deep-water harbor at New York City and the Hudson River provide an important transportation artery linking the Atlantic Ocean and upstate New York. New York State is committed to protecting and developing its water resources. Since 1962, the State has spent about ten million dollars to develop comprehensive sewerage studies. Under the Pure Waters Program established in 1965 and subsequent bond issues, voters have authorized nearly $1.7 billion for construction of sewage treatment facilities. In 1975, the State, after bringing its long standing pollutant discharge control program into conformance with requirements of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (FWPCA) Amendments of 1972 (PL-92-500), established the State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (SPDES) which, like its predecessor programs, regulates municipal and0 industrial discharges into surface and groundwaters of the State. Under the FWPCA, the State has also conducted basinwide water quality surveys (303(e)) and areawide water quality management (208)l studies. These studies provide a reassessment of the State's water quality problems and management needs. Of the six primary water basins with greatest water quality management problems, four of them encompass New York's entire coastal frontage. In addition, these studies indicate that although the State has been able to make great strides in controlling water pollution from raw sewage and easily discernable industrial wastes, there remains an even more complex set of water quality problems including toxic substances, surface runoff and residual wastes. These problems are nationwide in scope and their significance went unnoticed until previously unregulated point source pollutants were eliminated. More attention has been given to such pollution problems under the 1977 amendments to the FWPCA (the Clean Water Act, PL 95-217). IThe references are to sections of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (PL 92-500) II-5 - 40 Integration of State water quality and coastal management programs are precisely what was intended by Congress under, Section 307 (f) of the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended. This section specifies that water quality management requirements developed under or pursuant to F1JPCA, as amended, shall be the water pollution control requirements applicable under such coastal programs. Industrial Wastes and Toxic Substances New York State presently regulates the direct discharge of industrial wastes into surface and groundwaters through its State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System. Most of these wastes must be treated before being discharged. The effectiveness of this permit program is dependent on the availability of the information pertaining to the relative toxicity and the technology to treat these wastes. Without this information, certain chemical wastes may be unknowingly discharged into the environment in amounts greater than should occur, only to be discovered later to have danger- ously adverse health etfects. Such has been the case with the toxic industrial chemicals, Mirex and PCb's which have created serious biological consequences in Lake Ontario and the Hudson River. Presently, the annual proliferation of new chemicals creates a tremendous challenge to State and Federal governments' efforts to monitor their production and distribution, establish discharye tolerance limits, develop treatment technologies and regulate their discharge into the * ~~~environment. Municipal Sewage Treatment Through thre State's 208 program, the twenty-year population projections used for determining municipal waste water treatment needs have been updated, refined and disaggregated to a minor civil division level. Procedures are being developed to ensure that facilities planning and design will be consistent with these revised projections. The construc- tion of new and upgrading of existing municipal sewage treatment plants is funded with monies made available by the State Environmental Quality Bond Act of 1965 and Section 201 of the FWdPCA. Unfortunately, there have been construction delays due to difficulty in financing the local share; length of lead time required for planning, design and site preparation; delays in the processing of applications; and increasing costs. Hence, partially treated sewage is still polluting the State's waters, particularly in the vicinity of large metropolitan areas. Recent budget cuts for the federal Construction Grants Program may even further delay construc- tion of sewage treatment plants scheduled to be built. it should be noted that the Federal Environmental Protection Agency and Congress are considering a reduction in the biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) standard from 85% to 50%. II-5 -41 If this lower standard is adopted, the cost of treatment facilities that meet this requirement will be less, thus reducing future construction delays. Because of rising costs, conventional sewage collection and treatment systems may not be economically feasible in many small coastal communities and rural areas. In many of these areas, failure of on-site septic systems or absence of sewage treatment has resulted in excessive nutrient enrich- ment of surface waters, groundwater contamination and sanitary problems. Urban Stormwater Runoff and Combined Sewer Overflows As New York State has progressed in treating industrial and municipal point sources of pollution, the relative signifi- cance of the pollution effects of urban stormwater runoff and combined sewer overflows has become more apparent. In many of New York's major urban areas, a single sewer system collects and transports sanitary sewage and stormwater runoff to the municipal treatment plants. During storms, the volume of flow through the system exceeds the plant's treatment capacity. The excess, therefore, is not treated and is discharged directly into the receiving waters. Such discharges include nutrients, coliform and pathogenic bacteria, organic wastes, lawn and garden chemicals, animal wastes, petroleum wastes from streets and parking lots, road salt, garbage and other assorted debris. Even where separ- ated storm and sanitary sewer systems are used, such as on Long Island, untreated waters are discharged from the storm sewer systems with high levels of many of the same contaminants. Untreated discharges have forced the closing of public beaches near Rochester, restricted shellfishing on Long Island, reduced dissolved oxygen levels in the New York and Buffalo Harbors, and may be contributing to degradation of groundwater on Long Island. A major constraint to addressing the problems created by urban stormwater runoff and combined sewer overflows is the expense of structural control measures such as the installa- tion of separate sewer lines, large underground storage systems or construction of large catchment basins. At present, Federal financial assistance is not available for constructing stormnwater treatment facilities. Non-structural methods, such as control of lawn and garden chemicals and pet control ordinances, may prove difficult to enforce, because they often depend on voluntary citizen compliance. In some parts of the coastal area, such as Long Island, there are close relationships between stormwater runoff and groundwater quantity and quality. These issues are discussed further in the sub-section on "Groundwater". 11 - 5-42 Agricultural Runoff and Wastes In recent years there has been considerable controversy over' (1) the relative magnitude and significance of the pollution of State waters generated by agricultural activities and (2) the determination of which management practices are most cost effective in mitigating the water quality impacts of agricultural operations. The non-point water quality problem associated with agricultural practices is the transport of nutrients, pesticides, herbicides, organic matter and sediment by storm runoff into surface waters. Silting in of fish spawning habitats, excessive growth of algae or rooted aquatic plants, decrease in dissolved oxygen concentrations and contamination of certain aquatic organisms are impacts associated with this water quality problem. The variability in data from recent rural non-point studies makes it difficult to formulate a clearly defined cause and effect relationship between a given agricultural practice and an associated water quality impact. A case by case examination of potential problem areas and application of "Best Management Practices' for specific problems at a given site is presently the most practical approach to handling agricultural and other rural surface water runoff problems. Vessel Wastes Commercial and recreation boat discharges of shipboard wastes (e.g., sewage, garbage, bilge and cleaning wastes) degrade surface water quality, particularly in enclosed embayments and estuaries where diluting water volumes are low and vessel usage may be high. Serious public health hazards may result when untreated vessel wastes are discharged near shellfishing areas, bathing areas or public water supply intakes. The Coast Guard enforces Federal regulations established by the Environmental Protection Agency in waters of the United States, including territorial seas. Federal sanitary vessel waste treatment standards, however, are less stringent than New York's standards. Present technological constraints for treating sanitary wastes, particularly on smaller recreational craft, make statewide enforcement of the State's stricter effluent standards impractical. However, the prohibition of all vessel waste discharge is feasible on an area-specific basis, i.e., near shellfishing and bathing areas, and where adequate pumpout and treatment facilities are available. Federal law now prohibits discharges near public water supply intakes. 11 - 5-43 Dredging and Dredge Spoil Disposal Dredging is a usef ul management tool serving a variety of purposes such as navigation channel maintenance, marina and shoreline development, beach nourishment, and pollutant removal. There is also substantial interst in the extensive offshore sand and gravel deposits in the State's coastal waters, especially in the New York Bight. These are viewed as a future supply of materials for the construction industry in urban areas which now depends largely on decreasing local terrestrial supplies. Unfortunately, many adverse environmental impacts have been associated with the processes of dredging and dredge Spoil disposal, particularly when the sediments are polluted. During dredging operations, sediments are resuspended and mixed with water; this process thereby increases the potential for immediate release of contaminants into surrounding environments. After the dredge sediments are deposited at an open water disposal site, contaminants may be released slowly from the spoil mound into the overlying water column for several years. Because of this threat, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency requires that polluted dredge spoils be "capped" with clean sediments. Alternative dredge spoil disposal methods include upland disposal and placement behind diked enclosures. The shortage of suitable onshore disposal sites and the potential leaching of contaminants into adjacent ground and surface waters make these alternative methods expensive and environmentally unsafe. For example, New York State faces a0 difficult challenge in the safe removal and disposal of sediments that are contaminated with PCB's from "hot spots" in the upper Hudson River. Important adverse physical impacts on coastal waters may result from dredging and disposal activities. These include changes in bottom topography, local water circulation patterns, and flushing, erosion and sedimentation rates. Secondary biological effects, such as the loss of habitats, may result from the physical and chemical impacts identified above. Environmental problems associated with dredging and spoil disposal can be minimized through careful selection of the disposal sites and timing of the dredging and spoil disposal operations. Such efforts, however, are thwarted by a lack of baseline data, e.g., location of important habitats, seasonal distribution of fish populations, local hydrologic conditions and sediment transport patterns. II - 5- 44 Oil and Other Hazardous Substances Spills The potential for oil and hazardous substances spills in New York's coastal waters is high because of the substantial amount of commercial shipping. The possibility of such spills occurring in these waters is greater in major urban areas which have numerous oil and other bulk storage facilities. Nearly 1,000 oil and hazardous material spills were reported in New York State in 1976. In addition to spills, many bulk storage facilities also present air quality and fire hazard problems. The potential -development of offshore oil and gas resources along New York's Atlantic shore and the onshore facilities essential to this activity increase the chances for spillage. The recent lifting of the ban on gas drilling beneath Lake Erie and the possibility of extending the Great Lakes navigation season increase the potential of the spillage of oil and hazardous substances in these coastal waters. The cumulative effects of a series of small spills on water quality and other environmental degradation may be as great or greater than, those caused by a single large spill. Consequently, a sophisticated surveillance and cleanup program is needed. Adequate baseline data indicating the distribution patterns of important living aquatic resources is necessary in order to identify critical areas where spill incidents would cause serious biological damage. The data would assist in the proper siting of facilities and transportation routes and would be utilized in establishing cleanup priorities for New York Harbor and the Hudson and St. Lawrence Rivers and other vulnerable areas along New York's coastline where there is intense shipping traffic. Nutrients High nutrient levels in coastal waters can stimulate exces- sive growth of rooted aquatic plants and algae blooms, and thus lower dissolved oxygen levels. These conditions disrupt water-oriented recreational activities such as swimming, boating and fishing. in marine waters, nitrogen is usually the limiting nutrient to plant growth, while phosphorous is generally the limiting nutrient in fresh waters. While nutrients do not generally create a problem in open waters, recent episodes of anoxic conditions in the New York Bight indicate that the effects of nutrient overload have extended to the outer continental shelf. The effects of nutrients are most evident in bays and harbors of Long Island and the Great Lakes. II - 5 - 45 The accumulation of nitrates in groundwater can create a health problem, especially when an underground aquifer is the only source of drinking water. On Long Island, nitrate concentrations haves in some cases, approached maximum drinking water tolerance levels. Nutrients are discharged into surface and groundwater from a variety of sources, including municipal treatment plants, urban stormwater, combined sewer overflows, malfunctioning septic systems, animal wastes, and agricultural runoff. For any given nutrient problem, and depending on the nature of sources in a tributary watershed, unique regulatory and structural measures may be required for its correction. These may range from the sewering of shoreline cottages to application of special agricultural best management practices, or to nutrient removal at municipal treatment plants. Groundwater The relationship between land use activities occurring in the vicinity of ground water aquifer recharge areas and the water quality of the groundwater has become more apparent in recent years. For instance, excessive application of lawn fertilizers, failing septic systems and use of road salts for de-icing can cause elevated nitrate and chloride concen- trations in groundwater. Where communities, such as those on Long Island, must rely on groundwater as their primary source of drinking water, serious health problems could result. The challenge to Long island communities is not only to protect the quality but also the quantity of their ground- water resources. In an effort to reduce the leaching of contaminants from failing cesspools and septic systems into the groundwater aquifer, several communities have installed public sewage treatment systems. Although this results in a net removal and treatment of pollutants, significant quantities of water which otherwise would have recharged the aquifer ate instead treated and discharged into marine waters or their tributaries. This practice causes the volume of the freshwater aquifer to shrink, and the salt water intrusion from the surrounding sea to increase. A loss of potable groundwater results. Recharge basins have been built throughout Long Island to retain storm water and allow it to filter into the groundwater aquifer. When stormwater flows over roads, parking lots, industrial sites, and other areas, it picks up contaminants. It appears that treatment of the stormwater collected in the recharge basins may be necessary, since trace levels of toxic contam- inants are now being detected in some of Long Island's groundwater aquifers. I1- 5- 460 Solid Wastes As water pollution efforts lead to higher levels of- municipal and industrial wastewater treatment, greater is ~~volumes of residual sludges will result. Because of their physical and chemical properties, there are no easy solutions for the disposal of most sludges. Traditional methods have included land disposal either in landfills or by spreading on land, incineration, and ocean dumping. Land disposal poses problems with odors, runoff and leaching; incineration affects air quality conditions; and ocean dumping may have adverse effects upon water quality and aquatic life. Water Quality Management Planning programs being carried out at both the State and regional levels under Section 201 and 208 of Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (PL 92-500) are currently studying the available alternatives for environmentally sound sludge management and disposal, as well as the disposition of certain other residual wastes. In addition, the Clean Water Act of 1977 (PL 95-217) calls for EPA to conduct a study on the utilization of treated municipal wastewater and sludge. In New York State the most severe impacts from sludge disposal occur in the New York City metropolitan area. open water dumping in the New York Bight adversely affected fishery resources. Discussions are ongoing as to whether or not any dumping will be allowed at the present site or at some other undetermined location in the Bight. Solid wastes such as certain manufacturing wastes and residue from, incinerators also pose substantial hazards to water quality, especially in the New York metropolitan area where suitable onshore disposal sites are limited. Even where these sites are available, the toxicity or hazardous nature of some solid wastes necessitates expensive treatment and dispoal methods and long-term monitoring of land disposal sites. Thermal Discharges Most of New York State's electric generating facilities and certain other industrial activities are located along the coast because of the availability of large volumes of water needed for cooling purposes. The production of electric power results in large amounts of waste heat. Water used as a coolant is then discharged into water bodies. This discharge of warm water can create serious problems for the aquatic species and the quality of coastal water, especially if discharged intermittently as is customary with the start up and shut down of generating facilities. 11 - 5 - 47 Thermal discharges in small embayments or semi-enclosed areas (such as estuaries) are likely to have more negative effects on fish than discharges in open waters. These enclosed water bodies have low dilution capacities and0 flushing rates and thus cannot easily dissipate thermal discharges. These coastal waters, therefore, are less appropriate as locations for major stream electric generating facilities. During winter months fish often congregate in the warmer waters created by discharged water. However, should a generating facility be shut down for a period of time, the sudden drop in water temperature could cause thermal shock and subsequent death to large numbers of fish. Also, warmer water contains less dissolved oxygen which is needed by a water body to neutralize certain wastes. By discharging heated water into a water body, its capacity to assimilate waste is reduced. Water Supply Generally, New York State is blessed with ample annual precipitation to recharge the State's reservoirs, lakes, rivers, and groundwater aquifers. But from 1979-81, particularly the winter and spring of 1981, precipitation levels declined and drought-related impacts and problems started to become evident. In December 1980, Governor Carey established the State Drought Management Task Force to coordinate New York State agency efforts to manage the intensifying drought in the State. This Task Force prepared the New York State Drought Preparedness Plan which provides a staged plan of action for local and State agencies in the event of a drought emergency. Several short and long-range water supply projects were outlined in the Plan. While most of the water supply projects are proposed for inland water systems, one particular proposal to use the Hudson River to augment New York City's water supply is noteworthy. The Hudson River Flow Skimming Project would draw water from the river above the City of Poughkeepsie. This project poses a number of water quality and other environmental issues of concern to the State and coastal communities located along the Hudson which presently utilize the river as a water supply. A considerable effort will be needed to build broad-based support of this project before it can be implemented. Precipitation levels increased to normal levels in the following fall and winter of 1981 through the present, and New York is not presently threatened by drought. However, the State has prepared itself in the event of a future drought by completing a strategy for coping with drought- related problems. II -5-48 Other Water Resource Related Issues issues related to flooding, lake level management, and winter navigation are described under the Issue Section on Flooding and Erosion. Infrastructure related problems are addressed in the guidelines for implementing Policy 5 on Concentration of Development. Data and information gathered in the numerous water resource studies such as the 303e Basin Studies, and the Level 'B" Studies and the River Basin Studies, were used in developing the New York Coastal Atlas and in the preparation of the Coastal Management Regional Elements, published in 1979. 15 - 49 AIR DUALITY Introduction All of the State's coastal areas are affected by Federal and State policies to abate and prevent air pollution. The Coastal Zone Management Act, as amended, reflects this, for any State air pollution control program requirements developed pursuant to the Federal Clean Air Act must be incorporated into a State's Coastal Management Program. The State's Air Pollution Control and Coastal Management Programs must be coordinated to ensure that each can be effectively utilized to support mutually desirable objectives. New York State's air pollution regulatory programs can be enlisted to achieve coastal management objectives such as protection of habitats, farmland, or scenic areas. At the same time, these programs could conflict with some coastal management objectives such as those related to economic development. Coordination requirements are essential to develop and implement an effective coastal management program. Major air quality management concerns in the coastal area, as elsewhere, are grouped into four general categories: the attain- mnent and maintenance of National Ambient Air Quality Standards as proposed in the State Implementation Plan; protection of clean air areas from significant deterioration; air pollution control problems in rural areas; and control of toxic discharges into the0 Attainment and Maintenance of National Air Duality Standards Under the Federal Clean Air Act, National Ambient Air Quality Standards have been established for seven pollutants. Recent amendments to the Act (1977) require that the compliance status of all areas of the country be determined for five of the seven pollutants. The Act further requires that all areas not in compliance with thesc pollutant standards he brought into compliance by the end of 1982 or, in special cases, by the end of 1987. The Act also requires states to prepare "State Implementa- tion Plans" which detail the mechanisms that will be utilized to attain the standards by the statutory date. Table I indicates the coastal areas designated for nonattainment of the health related National Ambient Air Quality Standards for various pollutants. With the exception of the New York Metro, politan Air Quality Control Region, where extensions to 1987 have been granted by the United States Environmental Protection Agency for ozone and carbon monoxide, the entire coastal area is expected to attain all health-related National Ambient Air Duality Standards by the end of 1982. 50~~ TABLE 2 Coastal Areas Designated as Nonattainment Areas for Health-Related Pollutants Carbon Total Suspended Sulfur Location Monoxide Ozone Particulates Dioxide New York Metropolitan AQCR* New York City X X Nassau County X X Suffolk County X Westchester County X X Rockland County X Hudson Valley AQCR Albany County X Rensselaer County X Putnam County X Ulster County X Dutchess County x Greene County X Columbia County X Niagara Frontier AQCR Erie County X X X Niagara County X X Genesee Finger Lakes AQCR Orleans County X Monroe County X Wayne County X Central AQCR X Cayuga County *AQCR - Air Quailty Control Region In coastal areas not meeting air quality standards, any new major source of air pollution must install air pollution controls, and existing sources must reduce their air pollution emissions. These reductions in emissions from existing sources are often difficult to obtain. Because of this, nonattain- ment areas are not as desirable for certain types of economic activities. Maintenance of air quality standards is ensured through the review of the air quality impact of major new sources. Areas which have recently improved from the nonattainment to the attainment category will have little room for increased pollution emissions before violating air quality standards. Therefore, the air quality maintenance program may make it more difficult to locate certain types of activities in coastal areas which have just recently become attainment areas. Protection of Clean Air Areas from Significant Deterioration The 1977 amendments to the Clean Air Act require a State to protect "clean air areas" from significant deterioration through regulations that classify the entire State into one of three land area classifications based upon allowable deterioration of air quality. This program can be supportive of the overall coastal management environmental goal to preserve, protect, enhance, or restore natural resources. At the present time, all of New York State is classified "Class Ill' which allows for moderate increases in air pollution. After obtaining agreement from the affected local governments and the State Legislature, the Governor may redesignate areas as either Class I, where minimal increases in air pollution are allowed, or Class III where substantial increases in air pollution are allowed. The diffi- culty in obtaining and coordinating all of the approvals and the fact that the quality of air in most coastal locations is too near the established standards to allow full utilization of the increment permissable under Class 11 indicate that there will be few, if any, redesignations to Class III. Similarly, it is0 unlikely that there will be any redesignations of areas of the State to Class I, since the State air pollution source review system, other State development review programs, and local land use regulations are more suitable for preserving undeveloped areas than the inflexible Prevention of Significant Deterior- ation program. Air Pollution Control Problems in Rural Areas Air quality conditions outside metropolitan areas are generally good, and concentration levels for most pollutants are below national standards. Throughout the State, however, pollutants which are carried long distances from where they are produced can adversely affect agriculture, fish, wildlife and water quality. These pollutants, such as ozone and the acid rain precursors, sulfates and nitrates, are generated by motor vehicles, refin- eries, chemical plants and power plants which are often hundreds of miles from the rural areas affected. New York State has embarked upon a comprehensive program of documenting the mechan- isms and effects of acid rain while utilizing Section 126 of the Clean Air Act to attempt to force upwind states to limit their contributions to air pollution within New York State. Achieving coastal management policies for agriculture, fish, wildlife, and water quality will be, in part, dependent upon the State's continuing effort to reduce air pollution from sources which affect the rural areas of the State's coast.0 II-5 - 52 Control of Toxic Discharges into the Air Toxic discharges into the air, water and land are of major national and State concern. In some areas of New York, toxics have a significant adverse impact on the use of coastal resources for economic and recreational purposes. While the State has long regulated toxic emissions directly into the air from industrial facilities, toxic air pollution from old chemical dumps such as Love Canal, from the demolition of contaminated buildings and from facilities which detoxify waste products are presenting new challenges. Detoxification facilities and the potential use of toxic wastes as fuel in some industrial processes may foster the economic development potential of the State's coastal area. II - 5 - 53 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMVMERCE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT AND THE NEW YORK COASTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM AUGUST 1982 Prepared by: Office of Coastal Zone Management National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Department of Commerce 3300 Whitehaven Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20235 and New York Department of State 162 Washington Avenue Albany, New York 12231 The preparation of this publication was financed in part through the Office of Coastal Zone Management, NOAA. SECTION 6 COASTAL POLICIES AND IMPLEMENTATION The Coastal Management Program has a dual role. In one respect, it acts as an advocate for specific, desired coastal actions. In another respect it serves as a coordinator of existing State programs, activities, and decisions which affect the coastal area. The need for this double function became clear during the analysis of the State's coastal area. This analysis resulted in the identification of ten specific issues which were not then being adequately addressed by existing State law or regulations. The first and most obvious problem was that government agencies, assigned disparate responsibilities and programs, were not re- quired to coordinate, and as a result, decisions affecting the appropriate uses of the State's coastal resources were incon- sistent. Obviously, there was a need to coordinate decision- making within and between each level of government. With the passage of the Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act, Section 919 of that Act provided the authority to solve this problem. The nine other issues which required additional attention include: promoting waterfront revitalization; promoting water dependent uses; protecting fish and wildlife habitats; protecting and enhancing scenic areas; protecting and enhancing historic areas; protecting farmlands; protecting and enhancing small harbors; enhancing and protecting public access; providing solid and useful data and information an coastal resources and activities to decision makers; and coping with erosion and flooding hazards. Each of these items necessitated a specific action. The last problem -- coping with erosion and flooding hazards -- required passage of the Coastal Erosion Hazard Areas Act. The Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act gave the Coastal Management Program the authority to further advocate each of these activities. A more complete discussion of the Program's role in connection with these activities appears in PART II, Section 4, Program Management. Coordination In the past, agencies usually pursued single purpose programs without considering their interrelationships or combined effect on the coastal area. The Coastal Management Program provides the basis for coordinating these programs, in part by spelling out the 44 policies discussed below. For the first time, all State agencies are required to advance these policies toward their logical conclusion, not allowing one policy to override another. I-lore specifically, the use of this particular set of additional criteria as embodied in the 44 policies requires agencies to take into account the interrelationships that exist and/or should exist in the coastal area -- not just interrelationships evident 11 - 6 - I in a single ecosystem, i.e., wetlands, but the coastal area as a whole. This approach assures that future actions in the coastal area will, at a minimum, not interfere with the State's long term commitment to achieving for society the most beneficial use of coastal resources. Policies While the distinction can never be complete, for the most part, each of the 44 policy statements either promotes the beneficial use of coastal resources, prevents their impairment, or deals with major activities that substantially affect numerous resources. In all cases State agencies are required to adhere to each policy statement as much as is legally and physically possible. The policies designed to promote the use of coastal resources are summarized as follows: - revitalize underutilized waterfronts (Policy 1) - facilitate water dependent uses (Policy 2) - expand the State's major ports (Policy 3) - expand the State's commercial fishing industry (Policy 10) - expand public access and water related recreation (Policies 9, 19-22) - develop coastal energy resources (Policy 27, 29) - redevelop the existing built environment (Policies 1, 4, 5, 23) - expedite permitting procedures (Policy 6) Use of all coastal resources is, however, constrained by the realization that to assure a reasonable quality of life for the long term, the coastal resources essential to society must he carefully husbanded. This frugal use necessitates strong protection measures for certain fragile or rapidly diminishing resources. These resources identified as being in need of protection are as follows: - significant fish and wildlife habitats (Policies 7, 8) - the traditional character and purposes of small harbors (Policy 4) - historic and cultural resources (Policy 23) - exceptional scenic areas (Policy 24) II - 6 - 2 -agricultural land (Policy 26) -dunes, beaches, barrier islands and other natural protective features (Policy 12) -water and air resources (Policies 31, 32, 33, 26-28, 40-43) -wetlands (Policy 44) Supplementing the above, are a few policies which address major activities. These policies clearly state that in undertaking these activities, special care must be taken not to impair valued coastal resources. - siting energy facilities (Policy 17) - dredging for navigation, mining, and excavation in coastal waters (Policy 15) - managing solid water (Policy 39) - ice management practices (Policy 28) - siting and building structures in erosion hazard areas (Policies 11, 13, 14, 16, 17) - adequate consideration of State and public interests for all major coastal activities (Policy 18) The policies in this Section of the document constitute all the policies of the program and provide a source of information for all state agencies. All of the Program's policies are derived from existing laws and regulations administered by state agencies. Table IV-1 identifies the various laws that provide the basis for and are essential to the enforcement and implementation of the coastal policies. Mlany of the Program's policies are carried out by programs administered by the Department of Environmental Conservation. For example, the Department operates regulatory programs which provide protection to tidal and freshwater wetlands (Policy 44), restrict development and other activities in flood and erosion hazard areas (Policies 11-17), and protect air and water resources (Policies 30-35 and 40-43). Other agencies, such as the Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation, Public Service Commission and the State Board on Electric Generation Siting and the Environment administer programs which provide coastal recreational facilities, regualte the siting of energy transmission facilities and regulate the location of electric power plants. Other Program policies are based upon the provision of Article 42 of the Executive Law. These policies carry out the intention of the State Legislature that there be 'a balance between economic development and preservation that will permit the beneficial use 11 - 6 - 3 of coastal resources while preventing the loss of living marine resources and wildlife, diminution of open space areas or public access to the waterfront, shoreline erosion, impairment of scenic beauty, or permanent adverse changes to ecological systems" (Executive Law, q912(l)). Executive Law, Article 42, requires that actions directly undertaken by State agencies within the State's coastal area be undertaken in a manner consistent with this new, second group of policies. in addition, the procedures of the State Environmental Quality Review Act (Environmental Conservation Law, Article 8) will insure that all State agency actions will be consistent with these policies. It is important to note that no policy applies to the exclusion of the others. In applying these policies to a given action, all policies relevant to the action are to be adhered to. 19 NYCRR Part 600 and 6 NYCRR Part 617 dictate the only circumstances under which a policy need not be fully adhered to. The following pages in this section contain an explicit statement of State policy, followed by a more detailed explanation of that statement. In many instances, the explanation is followed by guidelines to be used by agencies in their decision making. II - 6 - 4 POLICY I Restore, revitalize, and redevelop deteriorated and underutilized waterfront areas for commercial, Industrial, cultural, recreational and * ~~~other compatible uses. A. Explanation of Policy State and Federal agencies must ensure that their actions further the revitalization of urban water- front areas. The transfer and purchase of property; the construction of a new office building, highway or park; the provision of tax incentives to businesses; establishment of enter- 'prise zones, are all examples of governmental means for spurring economic growth. When any such action, or similar action is proposed, it must be analyzed to determine if the action would con- tribute to or adversely affect a waterfront revitalization effort. It must be recognized that revitalization of once dynamic waterfront areas is one of the most effective means of encouraging economic growth in the State, without consuming valuable open space outside of these waterfront areas. Waterfront redevelopment is also one of the most effective means of rejuvenating or at least stabilizing residential and commercial districts adjacent to the redevelopment area. In responding to this policy, several other policies must be considered: (1) Uses requiring a location abutting the waterfront must be given priority in any redevelopment effort. (Refer to Policy 2 for the means to effectuate this priority); (2) As explained in Policy 5, one reason for revitalizing previously dynamic waterfront areas is that the costs for providing basic services to such areas is frequently less than providing new services to areas not pre- viously developed; (3) The likelihood for successfully simplifying permit procedures and easing certain requirements (Policy 6) will be increased if a discrete area and not the entire urban waterfront is the focus for this effort. In turn, ease in obtaining permits should increase developers' interest to invest in these areas. Further, once this concentrated effort has succeeded, stabilization and revitalization of surrounding areas is more likely to occur. Local governments through waterfront revitali- zation programs have the primary responsibility for implementing this policy. Though local water- is ~~~~front revitalization programs need not be limited - ~~11 -6- 5 to redevelopment, local governments are urged to identify areas as suitable for redevelopment, and establish and enforce redevelopment programs. 1. When a Federal or State action is proposed to take place in an urban waterfront area regarded as suitable for redevelopment, the following guidelines will be used: a) Priority should be given to uses which are dependent on a location adjacent to the water; b) The action should enhance existing and anticipated uses. For example, a new highway should be designed and con- structed so as to serve the potential access needs for desirable industrial development; C) The action should serve as a catalyst to .private investment in the area; d) The action should improve the deterior- ated condition of a site and, at a minimum, must not cause further deteri- oration. For example, a building could not be abandoned without protecting it against vandalism and/or structural decline; e) The action must lead to development which is compatible with the character of the area, with consideration given to scale, architectural style, density, and intensity of use; f) The action should have the potential to improve the existing economic base of the community, and, at a minimum, must not jeopardize this base. For example, waterfront development meant to serve consumer needs would be inappropriate in an area where no increased consumer demands were expected and existing development was already meeting demand; g) The action should improve adjacent and upland views of the water, and, at a minimum, must not affect these views in an insensitive manner; h) The action should have the potential to improve the potential for multiple uses of the site. II - 6 - 6 2. If a State or Federal action is proposed to take place outside of a given deteriorated, underutilized urban waterfront area suitable for redevelopment, and is either within the relevant community or adjacent coastal communities, the agency proposing the action must first determine if it is feasible to take the action within the deteriorated, underutilized urban waterfront area in question. If such an action is feasible, the agency should give strong consideration to taking the action in that area. If not feasible, the agency must take the appro- priate steps to ensure that the action does not cause further deterioration of that area. B. State Means for Implementing the Policy 1. Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act, Executive Law (Article 42) Section 919 of Article 42 requires (1) that State agencies' action, including funding, planning, and land transactions, as well as direct development activities, must be consistent with the policies of this act, one of which calls for the restoration and revitalization of natural and man-made resources. This provision of law is implemented by amendments to SEQR (cf. 2. below) and by DOS regulations. DOS regula- tions (19 NYCRR 600) provide that, for their direct actions which do not have a signifi- cant effect on the environment, State agencies certify that the action is con- sistent with the coastal policies, one of which is: 'Restore, revitalize, and redevelop deteriorated and underutilized waterfront areas for commercial, industrial, cultural, recreational and other compatible uses'; 2) that the Secretary of State shall review actions of State agencies that may affect achievement of the policy; and 3) that SEQR regulations will be amended to reflect consideration of the need to restore and revitalize coastal resources. Section 915 of the Act requires local govern- ments, if they choose to participate in the Waterfront Revitalization Program, to: identify uses, public and private to be accommodated in the waterfront area; describe means for long-term management and main- * ~~~~~tenance of waterfront development; and 1I - 6 - 7 specify their authority and capability to implement the program. Further, as appro- priate to the area, local programs must facilitate the location of industrial, commercial and other uses which benefit from a waterfront location. During the preparation of a program, local governments will be required to analyze the entire coastal area to determine the most desirable activities. (See Section 8 for a more detailed description of local Waterfront Revitalization Programs). Section 2 of the Act requires that State agencies analyze their programs' consistency with coastal policies and that the Secretary of State recommend any needed modifications to the Governor and the Legislature. 2. State Environmental Quality Review Act, Environment Conservation Law (Article 8) Pursuant to Article 42 of the Executive Law, SEOR regulations are amended to require that for actions by a State agency for which an EIS has been prepared, such actions shall be consistent with the coastal policies, one of which is: "Restore, revitalize, and redevelop deteriorated and underutilized waterfront areas for commercial, industrial, cultural, recreational and other compatible uses" 3. Public Building Law (Article 4-B) The Commissioner of General Services is required to consider the use and restoration of historic buildings in meeting the State's needs for building space. 4. New York State Urban Development Corporation Act, Unconsolidated Law (S6251). The Urban Development Corporation (UDC) created by this Act has the power to issue bonds and notes to obtain the capital resources necessary to carry out its powers to acquire, construct, reconstruct, rehabili- tate or improve industrial, manufacturing, commercial, educational, recreational, and cultural facilities as well as housing for low income persons and families in urban areas of the State. Where appropriate, and consistent with the other coastal policies, the power of UDC can be used to implement the intent of this policy. 11 - 6 - 8 POLICY 2 Facilitate the siting of water dependent uses and facilities on or adja- cent to coastal waters. A. Explanation of Policy There is a finite amount of waterfront space suitable for development purposes. Consequently, while the demand for any given piece of property will fluctuate in response to varying economic and social conditions, on a statewide basis the only reasonable expectation is that long-term demand for waterfront space will intensify. .The traditional method of land allocation, i.e., the real estate market, with or without local land use controls, offers little assurance that uses which require waterfront sites will, in fact, have access to the State's coastal waters. To ensure that such "water dependent' uses can continue to be accommnodated within the State, State agencies will avoid undertaking, funding, or approving non-water dependent uses when such uses would preempt the reasonably foreseeable development of water dependent uses; furthermore State agencies will utilize appropriate existing programs to encourage water dependent activities. The following uses and facilities are considered as water dependent: * ~~~~1. Uses which depend on the utilization of resources found in coastal waters (for example: fishing, mining of sand and gravel, mariculture activities); 2. Recreational activities which depend on access to coastal waters (for example: swimming, fishing, boating, wildlife viewing); 3. Uses involved in the sea/land transfer of goods (for example: docks, loading areas, pipelines, short-term storage facilities); 4. Structures needed for navigational purposes (for example: locks, dams, lighthouses); S. Flood and erosion protection structures (for example: breakwaters, bulkheads); 6. Facilities needed to store and service boats and ships (for example: marinas, boat repair, boat construction yards); II - 6 - 9 7. Uses requiring large quantities of water for processing and cooling purposes (for example: hydroelectric power plants, fish processing plants, pumped storage power plants); S. Uses that rely heavily on the waterborne transportation of raw materials or products which are difficult to transport on land, thereby making it critical that a site near to shipping facilities be obtained (for example: coal export facilities, cement plants, quarries); 9. Uses which operate under such severe time constraints that proximity to shipping facilities becomes critical (for example: firms processing perishable foods); 10. Scientific/educational activities which, by their nature, require access to coastal waters (for example: certain meteorological and oceanographic activities); and 11. Support facilities which are necessary for the successful functioning of permitted water dependent uses (for example: parking lots, snack bars, first aid stations, short-term storage facilities). Though these uses must be near the given water dependent use they shoulr9, as much as possible, be sited inland from the water dependent use rather than on the shore. In addition to water dependent uses, uses which are enhanced by a waterfront location should be encouraged to locate along the shore, though not at the expense of water dependent uses. A water-enhanced use is defined as a use that has no critical dependence on obtaining a waterfront location, but the profitability of the use and/or the enjoyment level of the users would be increased significantly if the use were adjacent to, or had visual access to, the waterfront. A restaurant which uses good site design to take advantage of a waterfront view, and a golf course which incorporates the coastline into the course design, are two examples of water-enhanced uses. If there is no immediate demand for a water dependent use in a given area but a future demand is reasonably foreseeable, temporary non-water dependent uses should be considered preferable to a non-water dependent use which involves an irreversible, or nearly irreversible commitment of land. Parking lots, passive recreational 11 - 6 - 10 facilities, outdoor storage areas, and non- permanent structures are uses of facilities which would likely be considered as "temporary' non- water dependent uses. In the actual choice of sites where water dependent uses will be encouraged and facilitated, the following guidelines should be used. 1. Competition for space -- competition for space or the potential for it, should be indicated before any given site is promoted for water dependent uses. The intent is to match water dependent uses with suitable locations and thereby reduce any conflicts between competing uses that might arise. Not just any site suitable for development should be chosen as a water dependent use area. The choice of a site should be made with some meaningful impact on the real estate market anticipated. The anticipated impact could either be one of increased protection to existing water dependent activities or else the encouragement of water dependent development. 2. In-place facilities and services -- most water dependent uses, if they are to function effectively, will require basic public facilities and services. In selecting appropriate areas for water dependent uses, consideration should be given to the following factors: a. The availability of public sewers, public water lines and adequate power supply; b. Access to the area for trucks and rail, if heavy industry is to be accommodated; and co Access to public transportation, if a high number of person trips is to be generated. 3. Access to navigational channels --if commercial shipping, commercial fishing, or recreational boating are planned, the locality should consider setting aside a site, within a sheltered harbor, from which access to adequately sized navigation channels would be assured. 11 - 6 - U1 4. Compatibility with adjacent uses and the protection of other coastal resources -- water dependent uses should be located so that they enhance, or at least do not detract from, the surrounding community. Considera- tion should also be given to such factors as the protection of nearby residential areas from odors, noise and traffic. Affirmative approaches should also be employed so that water dependent uses and adjacent uses can serve to complement one another. For example, a recreation-oriented water depen- dent use area could be sited in an area already oriented towards tourism. Clearly, a marina, fishing pier or swimming area would enhance, and in turn be enhanced by, nearby restaurants, motels and other non-water oriented tourist activities. Water dependent uses must also be sited so as to avoid adverse impacts on the significant coastal resources. 5. Preference to underutilized sites -- the promotion of water dependent uses should serve to foster development as a result of the capital programming, permit expediting, and other State and local actions that will be used to promote the site. Nowhere is such a stimulus needed more than in those portions of the State's waterfront areas which are currently underutilized. 6. Providing for expansion -- a primary objective of the policy is to create a process by which water dependent uses can be accommodated well into the future. State agencies and localities should therefore give consideration to long-term space needs and, where practicable, accommodate future demand by identifying more land than is needed in the near future. In promoting water dependent uses the following kinds of actions should be considered: 1. Favored treatment to water dependent use areas with respect to capital programming. Particular priority should be given to the construction and maintenance of port facilities, roads, railroad facilities, and public transportation within areas suitable for water dependent uses. 2. When areas suitable for water dependent uses are publicly owned, favored leasing arrange- ments could be given to water dependent uses. II - 6 - 12 3. Where possible, consideration should be given to providing water dependent uses with property tax abatements, loan guarantees, or loans at below market rates. 4. State and local planning and economic devel- opment agencies should actively promote water dependent uses. in addition, a list of sites available for non-water dependent uses should be maintained in order to assist developers seeking alternative sites for their proposed projects. '5. Local, State and Federal agencies should work together to streamline permitting procedures that may be burdensome to water dependent uses. This effort should begin for specific uses in a particular area. 6. Local land use controls, especially the use of zoning districts exclusively for water- fron t uses, can be an effective tool of local government in assuring adequate space for the development of water dependent uses. B. State Means for Implementing the Policy 1. Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act, Executive Law (Article 42) Section 919 of Article 42 requires: 1) that State agencies actions, including funding, planning, and land transactions, as well as direct development activities, must be consistent with the policies of this Act, one of which calls for the facilitation of the siting of water dependent uses and facilities. This provision of law is implemented by amendments to SEOR (see 2 below) and by MOS regulation. Those DOS regulations (19 NYCRR Part 600) provide that, for their direct actions which do not have a significant effect on the environment, State agencies certify that the action is consis- tent with the coastal policies, one of which is "Facilitate the siting of water dependent uses and facilities on or adjacent to coastal waters," 2) that the Secretary of State shall review actions of State agencies that may affect achievement of the policy; and 3) that SEQR regulations be amended to reflect consideration of coastal activities such as water dependent uses. 1I- 1 13 Section 2 of the Act requires that State agencies analyze their program's consistency with coastal policies and that the Secretary of State recommend any needed modifications to the Governor and the legislature. Section 915 of Article 42 provides for development of local waterfront revitaliza- tion programs (See Section 8 on Special Management Areas for a description of these programs.) A requirement of such local programs is that they must incorporate "the facilitation of appropriate industrial and commercial uses which require or can benefit substantially from a waterfront location, such as, but not limited to waterborne transportation facilities and services,, and support facilities for commercial fishing and aquaculture."1 2. State Environmental Quality Review Act, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 8) Pursuant to Article 42 of the Executive Law, SEQR regulations are amended to require that for actions by a State agency for which an EIS has been prepared, such actions shall be consistent with the coastal policies, one of which is "Facilitate the siting of water dependent uses and facilities on or adjacent0 to coastal waters". 3. New York State Urban Development Corporation Act, Unconsolidated Laws (56251) The Urban Development Corporation (UDC) created by this Act has the power to issue bonds and notes to obtain the capital resources necessary to carry out its power to acquire, construct, reconstruct, rehabil- itate or improve industrial manufacturing, commercial, educational, recreational, and cultural facilities as well as housing for low income persons and families in urban areas of the State. Where appropriate, and consistent with other coastal policies, the powers of UDC can be used to implement this policy. is II - 6 - 14 4. Capital Construction The capital construction authority of various State agencies, particularly the Departments of Transportation and Environmental Conserva- tion and the Offices of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation and General Services, can be used to provide the infrastructure or other amenities which would support or facil- itate the development of water dependent uses along the shore. 11 6 -15 POLICY 3 Further develop the State's major ports of Albany, Buffalo, New York, Ogdensburg and Oswego as centers of commerce and industry, and encourage the siting, In these port areas, Including those under the jurisdiction of State public authorities, of land use and development which Is essential to, or in support of, of, the waterborne waterborne tnspoation of cargo and people. A. Explanation of Policy The aim of this policy is to support port develop- ment in New York, Albany, Buffalo, Ogdensburg and Oswego. Three other development policies, discussed in this Section, have significant implications for port development, namely: water dependency, concentration of development, and the expediting of permit reviews. In implementing this policy, state agencies will recognize the legally-established jurisdictional boundaries of the port authorities. If an action is proposed for a site within or abutting a major port, or if there is a reasonable expectation that a proposed action elsewhere would have an impact on a major port, then the following guidelines shall be used in determining consistency: 1. In assessing proposed projects within or abutting a major port, given that all other applicable policies are adhered to, the overriding consideration is the maintenance and enhancement of port activity, i.e., development related to waterborne transporta- tion, which will have precedence over other, non-port related activities. 2. Dredging to maintain the economic viability of major ports will be regarded as an action of regional or statewide public benefit if: a clear need is shown for maintaining or improving the established alignment, width, and depth of existing channels or for new channels essential to port activitiy; and, it can be demonstrated that environmental impacts would be acceptable level according to State regulations governing the activity. 3. Landfill projects in the near-shore areas will be regarded as an acceptable activity within major port areas, provided adverse environmental impacts are acceptable under all applicable environmental regulation and a strong economic justification is demon- strated. 4. If non-port related activities are proposed to be located in or near to a major port, these uses shall be sited 'so as not to interfere with normal port operations. II - 6 - 17 S. When not already restricted by existing laws or covenants, and when there is no other overriding regional or statewide public benefit for doing otherwise, surplus public I land or facilities within or adjacent to a major port shall be offered for sale, in the first instance, to the appropriate port authority. 6. In the programming of capital projects for port areas, highest priority will be given to projects that promote the development and use of the port. However, in determining such priorities, consideration must also be given to non-port related 'interests within or near the ports that have demonstrated critical capital programming needs. 7. No buildings, piers, wharves, or vessels shall be abandoned or otherwise left unused by a public agency or sold without making provisions for their maintenance in sound condition or for their demolition or removal. 8. Proposals for the development of new major ports will be assessed in terms of the anticipated impact on: a) existing New York State major ports; b) existing modes of transportation; and c) the surrounding land uses and overall neighborhood character of0 the area in which the proposed port is to be located; and other valued coastal resources. 9. Port development shall provide opportunities for public access insofar as these opportun- ities do not interfere with the day-to-day operations of the port and the port authority and its tenants do not incur unreasonable costs. B. State Means for Implementing the Policy 1. Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act, Executive Law (Article 42) Section 919 of Article 42 requires: 1) that State agencies' actions, including funding, planning, and land transactions, as well as direct development activities, must be con- sistent with the policies of this Act, one of which calls for encouraging the development and use of existing ports and reinforcing their role as valuable components within the State's transportation and industrial network. This provision of law is imple- mented by amendments to SEQR (See 2. below). 11 - 6 - 18 DOS regulations (19 NYCRR Part 600.5) provide that, for their direct actions which do not have a significant effect on the environment, State agencies certify that the action is consistent with the coastal policies, one of which is: 'Further develop the State's major ports of Albany, Buffalo, New York, Ogdens- burg and Oswego as centers of comme~rce and industry and encourage the siting in these port areas, including those under the juris- diction of state public authorities, of land use and development which is essential to or in support of the waterborne transportation of cargo and peo Fle". 2) that the Secretary of State may review actions of State agencies that may affect achievement of the policies; and 3) that SEOR regulations be amended to reflect consideration of coastal resources that can accommodate encouragement of devel- opment and use of major ports. Section 2 of the Act requires that State agencies analyze their programs' consistency with Coastal policies and that the Secretary of State recommend any needed modifications to the Governor and the Legislature. 2. State Environmental Quality Review Act, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 8) Pursuant to Article 42 of the Executive Law, SEQR regulations are amended to require that for actions by a State agency for which an EIS has been prepared, such actions shall be consistent with the coastal policies, one of which is: 'Further develop the State's major ports of Albany, Buffalo, New York, Ogdens- burg and Oswego as centers of commerce and industry and encourage the siting in port areas, including those under the jurisdiction of state public authorities, of land use and development which is essential to or in support of the water-borne transportation of cargo and people." 3. Transportation Law, Article 2, Sections 14 and 15. This law gives the New York State Department of Transportation overall responsibility for developing, coordinating, and carrying out comprehensive, balanced transportation policy and planning, to be expressed in a comprehen- sive statewide master plan for transporta- tion. The Department also has responsibility II-6 - 19 to coordinate and assist in the balanced development and operation of transportation facilities and services, including marine facilities. All proposed revisions to the comprehensive statewide master plan for transportation are to be reviewed by the Department of State, with any recommendations to be submitted to the Governor, who must approve such revisions. 4. Council of Upstate Ports This Council, made up of representatives of the major upstate ports, acts to increase coordination among the ports and to increase cooperation between the ports and the State (State agencies, particularly the Departments of Commerce and Transportation, regularly attend meetings). 5. New York State Urban Development Corporation Act, Unconsolidated Law (�6251). The Urban Development Corporation (UDC) created by this Act has the power to issue bonds and notes to obtain the capital resources necessary to carry out its powers to acquire, construct, reconstruct, rehabil- itate or improve industrial, manufacturing, commercial, educational, recreational, and culutural facilities as well as housing for low income persons and families in urban areas of the State. Where appropriate and consistent with other coastal policies, the powers of UDC can be used to implement the intent of this policy. II-6 - 20 POLICY 4 Strengthen the economic base of smaller harbor areas by encourag- Ing the development and enhancement of those traditional uses and activities which have provided such areas with their unique maritime Identity. A. Explanation of Policy This policy recognizes that the traditional activities occurring in and around numerous smaller harbors throughout the State's coastal area contribute much to the economic strength and attractiveness of these harbor communities. Thus, efforts of State agencies shall center on promot- ing such desirable activities as recreational and commercial fishing, ferry services, marinas, historic preservation, cultural pursuits, and other comipatible activities which have made smaller harbor areas appealing as tourist destinations and as commercial and residential areas. Particular consideration will be given to the visual appeal and social benefits of smaller harbors which, in turn, can make -significant contributions to the State's tourism industry. The following guidelines shall be used in deter- mining consistency: 1. The action shall give priority to those traditional and/or desired uses which are dependent on or enhanced by a location adjacent to the water. 2. The action will enhance or not detract from or adversely effect existing traditional and/or desired anticipated uses. 3. The action shall not be out of character with, nor lead to development which would be out of character with, existing development in terms -of the area's scale, intensity of use, and architectural style. 4. The action must not cause a site to deteriorate, e.g., a structure shall not be abandoned without protecting it against vandalism and/or structural decline. 5. The action will not adversely affect the existing economic base of the community, e.g., waterfront development designed to promote residential development might be inappropriate in a harbor area where the economy is dependent upon tourism and commercial fishing. 11 - 6 - 21 6. The action will not detract from views of the water and smaller harbor area, particularly where the visual quality of the area is an identity. B. State Means for Implementing the Policy 1. Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act, Executive Law (Article 42) Section 919 of Article 42 requires: 1) that State agencies' actions, including funding, planning, and land transactions, as well as direct development activities, must be consistent with the policies of this Act, one of which calls for efforts to encourage the development and use of smaller harbors. This provision of law is implemented by amendments to SEOR (see 2 below) and by DOS regulations. DOS regulations (19 NYCRR Part 600) provide that, for their direct actions which do not have a significant effect on the environment, State agencies certify that the action is consistent with the coastal policies one of which is: "Strengthen the economic base of smaller harbor areas by encouraging the development and enhancement of those tradi- tional uses and activities which have pro- vided such areas with their unique maritime identity"; 2) that the Secretary of State shall review actions of State agencies that may affect achievement of the policy; and 3) that SEQR regulations be amended to reflect consideration of the need to use coastal resources. Section 915 of the Article requires local governments if they choose to participate in the Waterfront Revitalization Program to: identify uses, public and private, to be accommodated in the waterfront area; to describe means for long term management and maintenance of waterfront development; and specify their authority and capability to implement the program. Further, as appro- priate to the area, local programs must facilitate the location of industrial, commercial and other uses which benefit from a waterfront location. During the prepara- tion of a program, local governments will be required to analyze the entire coastal area to determine the most appropriate activities which should occur. Refer to Section 8 for a more detailed description of local Waterfront Revitalization Programs. 11 - 6 - 22 Section 2 of the Act requires that State agencies analyze their programs' consistency with coastal policies and that the Secretary of State recommend any needed modifications to the Governor and the Legislature. 2. State Environmental Quality Review Act, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 8) Pursuant to Article 42 of the Executive Law, SEQR regulations are amended to require that for actions by a State agency for which an EIS has been prepared, such actions shall be consistent with the coastal policies, one of which is: "Strengthen the economic base of smaller harbor areas by encouraging the development and enhancement of those tradi- tional uses and activities which have pro- vided such areas with their unique maritime identity.' 3. New York State Urban Development Corporation Act, Unconsolidated Law (S6251) The Urban Development Corporation (UDC) created by this Act has the power to issue bonds and notes 'to obtain the capital resources necessary to carry out its powers to acquire, construct, reconstruct, rehabil- itate or improve industrial, manufacturing, is ~~~~~commercial, educational, recreational, and cultural facilities as well as housing for low income persons and families in urban areas of the State. Where appropriate, and consistent with other coastal policies, the powers of UDC can be used to implement the intent of this policy. 11 -6 -23 POLICY 5 Encourage the location of development In areas where public ser- vices and facilities essential to such development are adequate. A. Explanation of Policy By its construction, taxing, funding and regula- tory powers* government has become a dominant force in shaping the course of development. Through these government actions, development, particularly large-scale -development, in the Coastal Area will be encouraged to locate within, contiguous top or in close proximity to, existing areas of concentrated development where infrastructure and public services are adequate, where topography, geology, and other environmental conditions are suitable for and able to accommodate development. The above policy is intended to accomplish the following: o strengthen existing residential, industrial and-commercial centers * foster an orderly pattern of growth where outward expansion is occurring * increase the productivity of existing public services and moderate the need to provide new public services in outlying areas * preserve open space in sufficient amounts and where desirable * foster energy conservation by -encouraging proximity between home, work, and leisure * activities. For any action that would result in large scale development or an action which would facilitate or serve future development, a determination shall be made as to whether the action is within, contig- uous to, or in close proximity to an area of concentrated development where infrastructure and public services are adequate. The following guidelines shall be used in making that determination. 1. Cities, built-up suburban towns and villages, and rural villages in the coastal area are *generally areas of. concentrated development where infrastructure and public services are adequate. n - 6 -25 2. Other locations in the coastal area may also be suitable for development, if three or more of the following conditions prevail: a. Population density of the area surround- ing or adjacent to the proposed site exceeds 1,000 persons per square mile; b. Fewer than' 50% of the buildable sites (i.e., sites meeting lot area require- ments under existing local zoning regulations) within one mile radius of the proposed site are vacant; C. Proposed site is served by or is near to public or private sewer and water lines; d. Public transportation service is avail- able within one mile of the proposed site; and e. A significant concentration of commer- cial and/or industrial activity is with- in one-half mile of the proposed site. 3. The following points shall be considered in assessing the adequacy of an area's infrastructure and public services: a. Streets and highways serving the0 proposed site can safely accommodate the peak traffic generated by the proposed land development; b. Development's water needs (consumptive and fire fighting) can be met by the existing water supply system; C. Sewage disposal system can accommodate the wastes generated by the develop- ment; d. Energy needs of the proposed land devel- opment can be accommodated by existing utility systems; e. Stormwater runoff from the proposed site can be accommodated by on-site and/or off-site facilities; and f. Schools, police and fire protection, and health and social services are adequate to meet the needs of the population expected to live, work, shop, or conduct business in the area as a result of the development.0 11 - 6 - 26 It is recognized that certain forms of development may and/or should occur at locations which are not within or near areas of concentrated development. Thus, this coastal development policy does not apply to the following types of development projects and activities. 1. Economic activities which depend upon sites at or near locations where natural resources are present, e.g., lumber industry, quarries. 2. Development which by its nature is enhanced by a non-urbanized setting, e.g., a- resort complex, campgrounds, second home develop- ments. 3. Development which is designed to be a self-contained activity, e.g.,r a small college, an academic or religious retreat. 4. Water dependent uses with site requirements not compatible with this policy or when alternative sites are not available. 5. Development which because of its isolated location and small-scale has little or no potential to generate and/or encourage further land development. 6. Uses and/or activities which because of public safety consideration should be located away from populous areas. 7. Rehabilitation or restoration of existing structures and facilities. 8. Development projects which are essential to the construction and/or operation of the above uses and activities. In certain urban areas where development is encouraged by this policy, the condition of existing public water and sewage infrastructure may necessitate improvements. Those State and Federal agencies charged with allocating funds for investments in water and sewer facilities should give high priority to the needs of such urban areas so that full advantage maybe taken of the rich array of their other infrastructure components in promoting waterfront revitalization. 11 - 6 - 27 B. State Means for Implementing the Policy 1. Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act, Executive Law (Article 42) Section 919 of Article 42 requires: 1) that State agencies actions, including funding, planning, and land transactions, as well as direct development activities, must be consistent with the policies of this act, one of which calls for the encouragement of concentration of development. This provision of law is implemented by amendments to SEQR (see 2 below) and by DOS regulations. DOS regulations (19 NYCRR Part 600) provide that, for their direct actions which do not have a significant effect on the environment, State agencies certify that the action is consistent with the coastal policies one of which is: "Encourage the location of development in areas where public services and facilities essential to such development are adequate, except when such development has special functional require- ments or other characteristics which necessi- tates its location in other coastal areas"; 2) that the Secretary of State shall review actions of State agencies that may affect achievement of the policy; and 3) that SEQR regulations be amended to reflect considera-0 tion of the use and conservation of coastal resources. Section 915 of the Article requires local governments to analyze their programs' consistency with coastal policies and that the Secretary of State recommend any needed modifications to State programs. 2. State Environmental Quality Review Act, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 8) Under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, State agencies and local governments are required to prepare an environmental impact statement for any action that might have a significant impact upon the environment. The environment is broadly defined to include existing patterns of development, and land resources. Pursuant to Article 42 of the Executive Law, SEQR regulations are amended to require that for State agency actions for 11- 6 -28 which an EIS has been prepared, such actions shall be consistent with the coastal policies, one of which is: "Encourage the is ~~~~~location of development in areas where public services and facilities essential to such development are adequate, except when such development has special functional require- ments or other characteristics which neces- sitates its location in other coastal areas" 3. New York State Land Use Element2 As approved by the Governor, the Land Use Element calls for a "concentrated pattern of development (that) would not only utilize existing services and facilities to their fullest capacity but would reduce growth pressures on valuable open lands and resources. Thus, both the economic vitality and environmental quality of the State would be improved". The Land Use Element is used to guide the State's funding and capital facilities decision-making processes. . ~2 New York 'State Land Use Element, Department of State, 1978, p. 25. 11 6 - 29 POLICY 6 Expedite permit procedures In order to facilitate the siting of develop- ment activities at suitable locations. 0 ~~~A. Explanation of Policy For specific types of development activities and in areas suitable for such development, State agencies and local governments participating in the Waterfront Revitalization Program will make every effort to coordinate and synchronize existing permit procedures and regulatory programs, as long as the integrity of the regulations' objectives is not jeopardized. These procedures and programs will be coordinated within each agency. Also, efforts will be made to ensure that each agency's procedures and programs are synchronized with other agencies' procedures at each level of government. Finally, regulatory programs and procedures will be coordinated and synchronized between levels of government, and if necessary, legislative and/or programmatic changes will be recommended. When proposing new regulations, an agency will determine the feasibility of incorporating the regulations within existing procedures, if this reduces the burden on a particular type of development and will not jeopardize the integrity of the regulations' objectives. B. State Means for Implementing the Policy 1. Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act, Executive Law (Article 42) Section 916 (2) of the Act calls for the Office of Business Permits (CBP), with assistance from the Secretary of State, to determine means for expediting development called for in approved Waterfront Revita- lization Programs, based on the consistency provisions of the Act. This activity of the OBP and Secretary of State is to include consolidatingF simplifying, expediting or otherwise improving permit procedures. II - 6 - 31 Section 915 of the Act requires local governments, if they choose to participate in the Waterfront Revitalization Program, to identify means for the long term management and maintenance of waterfront development0 including organizational structures, respon- sibilities and land use controls. To meet this requirement, a local government will have to, in part, determine if existing controls can be simplified in an effort to expedite desired development in areas suitable for such development. Further, the local government must identify those State and Federal permit programs requiring simplification in order to expedite the desired development [Section 915 (5) Jh)). As explained in Section 8 of this document, a local program must be approved by its legislative body. This approval will require local regulatory agencies to adhere to the program policies, which, if the program is approved by the Secretary of State, will be adhered to by State and Federal agencies. This adherence to one set of specific policies will provide the basis for improving the ease of obtaining permits. This require- ment, in conjunction with the requirement for all interests to be consulted during the program's preparation 1915 (3)], lessens the time necessary for public review of individ- ual actions when proposed, providing another means for expediting permits. Section 916 (1) (b) of the Act requires State agencies' actions to be consistent to the maximum extent practicable with approved local programs. As explained in Section VI of this document, local programs are, in part, a detailing of State policies. This detailing will significantly increase the specificity of State policies, decrease the discretionary power of the regulatory agency, increase the developer's understanding of approval conditions and provide a mechanism for expediting permits. Section 2 of the Act requires the Secretary of State to report to the Governor and Legislature additional means to further the purposes of the Act. Practical and efficient means for permit simplification will be a part of these recommendations. 16 - 320 2. Article 39 of the Executive Law The Of fice of Business Permits "will provide comprehensive permit information, one-step service for permit applicants, and the coordination of permit processing and review". [Section 975 (3)]. 3. Uniform Procedures Act, Environmental Conser- vation Law (Article 70) The Act establishes uniform procedures and specific time periods for the processing of permits applications by the Department of Environmental Conservation. 11- 6 -33 POLICY 7 Significant coastal fish and wildlife habitats will be protected, preserved, and, where practical, restored so as to maintain their viability as habitats. A. Explanation of Policy Habitat protection is recognized as fundamental to assuring the survival of fish and wildlife populations. Certain habitats are particularly critical to the maintenance of a given population and therefore merit special protection. Such habitats exhibit one or more of the following characteristics: (a) are essential to the survival of a large portion of a particular fish or wildlife population (e.g. feeding grounds, nursery areas); (b support populations of rare and endangered species; (c) are found at a very low frequency within a coastal region; (d) support fish and wildlife populations having significant commercial and/or recreational value; and (e) would be difficult or impossible to replace. In order to protect and preserve a significant habitat, land and water uses or development shall not be undertaken if such actions destroy or significantly impair the viability of an area as a habitat. When the action significantly reduces a vital resource (e.g., food, shelter, living space) or changes environmental conditions (e.g., tempe- rature, substrate, salinity) beyond the tolerance range of an organism, then the laction would be considered to 'significantly impairw the habitat. Indicators of a significantly impaired habitat may include: reduced carrying capacity, changes in community structure (food chain. relationships, .species diversity), reduced productivity and/or increased incidence of disease and mortality. The range of generic activities most likely to affect significant coastal -fish and wildlife habitats include but are not limited to the following: 16 - 36 1. Draining wetlands, ponds: Cause changes in vegetation, or changes in groundwater and surface water hydrology. 2. Filling wetlands, shallow areas of streams, lakes, balys, estuaries: May change physical character of substrate (e.g., sandy to muddy, or smother vegetation, alter surface water hydrology). 3. Grading land: Results in vegetation removal, increased surface runoff, or increase soil erosion and downstream sedimentation. 4. Clear cutting: May cause loss of vegetative cover, increase fluctuations in amount of surface runoff, or increase streambed scouring, soil erosion, sediment deposition. 5. Dredging or excavation: May cause change in substrate composition, possible release of contaminants otherwise stored in sediments, removal of aquatic vegetation, or change circulation patterns and sediment transport mechanisms. 6. Dredge spoil disposal: May induce shoaling of littoral areas, or change circulation patterns. 7. Physical alteration of shore areas through channelization or construction of shore structure: May change in volume and rate of flow or increased scouring, sedimentation. 8. Introduction, storage or disposal of pollut- ants such as chemical, petrochemical, solid wastes, nuclear wastes, toxic material, pesticide, sewage effluent, urban and rural runoff, leachate of hazardous and toxic substances stored in landfills: May cause increased mortality or sublethal effects on organisms, alter their reproductive capabilities, or reduce their value as food organisms. The range of physical, biological and chemical parameters which should be considered include but are not limited to the following: II - 6 - 36 1. Physical parameters such as: Living space, circulation, flushing rates, tidal amplitude, turbidity, water temperature, depth (loss of littoral zone), morphology, substrate type, vegetation, structure, erosion and sedimenta- tion rates. 2. Biological parameters such as: Community structure, food chain relationships, species diversity, predator/prey relationships, population size, mortality rates, reproduc- tive rates, behavioral patterns, and migra- tory patterns. 3. Chemical parameters such as: Dissolved oxygen, carbon dioxide, ph, dissolved solids, nutrients, organics, salinity, pollutants (heavy metals, toxic and hazardous materials). When a proposed action is likely to alter any of the biological, physical or chemical parameters as described in the narrative beyond the tolerance range of the organisms occupying the habitat, the viability of that habitat has been significantly impaired or destroyed. Such action, therefore, would be inconsistent with the above policy. In cooperation with the State's Coastal Management Program, the Department of Environmental Conserva- tioni has developed a rating system incorporating these five parameters (The Development and Evalua- tion of a System for Rating Fish and Wildlife Habitats in the Coastal Zone of New York State Final Report, January, 1981, 15 pp.). To further aid Federal and State agencies in determining the consistency of a proposed action with this policy, a narrative will be prepared for each significant habitat which will: (1) identify the location of the habitat; (2) describe the com- munity of organisms which utilize the habitat; (3) identify the biological, physical and chemical parameters which should be considered when assess- ing the potential impacts of a project on that habitat; (4) identify generic activities which would most likely create significant impacts on the habitat; and (5) provide the quantitive basis used to rate the habitat. Prior to formal desig- nation of significant fish and wildlife habitats, copies of the individual habitat narratives plus copies of habitat maps and completed rating forms will be provided to Federal and State agecies and the public for the review and comment. II - 6 - 37 B. State Means for Policy Implementation 1. Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act, Executive Law (Article 42) Section 919 of Article 42 requires actions directly undertaken by the State agencies within the coastal area be consistent with coastal area policies including the policy calling for the protection of significant habitats. When a State agency provides funding assistance, develops a plan, sells, leases, transfers or buys land, or directly uses or develops land within the coastal boundaries, it must find that its action will not adversely affect any significant habitat within or near the proposed project area. This provision of law is implemented by amendments to SEQR (see 2 below) and by DOS regulations. DOS regulations (19 NYCRR Part 600) provide that, for their direct actions which do not have a significant effect on the environment, State agencies certify that the action is consistent with coastal policies, one of which is: "Significant coastal fish and wildlife habitats, as identified on the Coastal Area Map, shall be protected and preserved so as to maintain their viability as habitats." The Secretary of State can review actions of State agencies that may effect achievement of the policy. SEQR regulations have been amended to reflect consideration of significant coastal fish and wildlife habitats. Section 2 of the Act requires that State agencies analyze their programs' consistency with coastal policies and that the Secretary of State recommend any needed modifications to the Governor and the Legislature. 2. State Environmental Quality Review Act, Environmental Conservation Law, (Article 8) Under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, State agencies and local governments are required to prepare an environmental impact statement for any action that is likely to have a significant impact upon the environ- ment. Actions which have been subject to an environmental impact statement must, consis- tent with social, economic, and other essen- tial considerations, minimize or avoid, to the maximum extent practicable, the adverse environmental effects revealed in the impact statement. i 11 - 6 - 38 in addition, pursuant to Article 42 of the Executive Law, SEQR regulations are amended to require that for actions by a State agency for which an EIS has been prepared, such actions shall be consistent with the coastal policies, one of which is: "Signif icant coastal fish and wildlife habitats, as identified on the Coastal Area Map, shall be protected and preserved so as to maintain their viability as habitats.' 3. Tidal Wetlands Act, Environmental Conserva- tion Law, (Article 24) Of the 3,107 total miles of New York coastal shorelines, about, 1,600 miles are subject to regulation under the Program. Tidal wetlands often provide wildlife habitats which include breeding, nesting, feeding grounds, and vegetative cover for many types of wildlife, waterfowl and shorebirds. Approximately two-thirds of New York's marine sport and commercial finfish and shellfish species utilize tidal wetlands at some stage of their life cycle. Under this permit program the State regulates any land use activities that would diminish the value of wetlands as fish and wildlife habitats. Regulated activities include any form of draining, dredging, excavation, dumping, filling, construction, pollutant discharge or any other activity which directly or indirectly impairs the tidal wetland's ability to provide habitat. The Department of Environmental Conservation has inventoried, classified and mapped the State's tidal wetlands. 4. Freshwater Wetland Act, Environmental Conser- vation Law (Article 24) Freshwater wetlands also function as important fish and wildlife habitat. The program established under this Act regulates activities such as draining, dredging, and filling, thus protecting many significant habitats. This program can be administered by local governments pursuant to State guide- lines and after official filing of wetland maps by the State. Counties, or the State, may administer the program in municipalities where local governments fail to exercise this responsibility. Until the maps are filed with the communities, the Department of Environ- mental Conservation regulates freshwater 11 - 6 - 39 wetlands through its interim permit program. Before granting or denying a permit, the municipality must determine if the activity will have an adverse impact on the habitat value of the wetlands 5. Stream Protection Act, Environmental Conser- vation Law (Article 15, Title 5) This law was enacted to minimize disturbances to the beds and banks of certain streams (Class C (t and above) which cause increased turbidity, and irregular variations in velocity, temperature and water levels, in order to protect fish and wildlife and their habitats. The Department of Environmental Conservation regulates dredging and filling in navigable waters and adjacent wetlands, and construction of certain dams and docks. Further, it requires the removal, replacement or repair of illegal or unsafe structures, fills or excavations. This could accomplish restoration of physically altered habitats. 6. Wild, Scenic and Recreational Rivers System, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 15, Title 27) Along stretches of rivers designated as "wild", "1scenic", or 'recreational", the State Department of Environmental Conserva- tion is authorized by this law to exercise land use controls in order to protect the outstanding natural, scenic, historic, ecological and recreational resources of these rivers. This may include the protec- tion of fish and wildlife resources and their habitats in the preparation and implementa- tion of adopted management programs. Presently, portions of the Connetquot and Carmens Rivers in Suffolk County have been designated as scenic and recreational rivers. Studies are underway in other coastal areas of the State to determine which additional rivers should be included in this system. 7. Fish and Wildlife Management Practices Co- operative Program, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 11-0501) This law enables the Department of Environ- mental Conservation to enter into cooperative agreements with private property owners to manage fish and wildlife resources and their habitats on privately owned lands. II - 6 - 40 8. New York State Park Preserve System,, Parks and Recreation Law (Article 20) This legislation gives the Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservation the power (in conjunction with Section 3.09 of PRL, authorizing acquisition of land for State recreational facilities) to purchase park preserve areas in or near metropolitan regions in order to "maintain the integrity of fauna..." and to 'Provide for the manage- ment of all unique, rare, or endangered species of fauna within park preserves areas." By purchasing fish and wildlife habitat areas for passive recreational uses, their preservation and management is assured. Assistance in identifying such areas can be provided to the Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservation through the Coastal Management Program. 9. State Nature and Historical Preserve Trust, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 45) This section of Environmental Conservation Law authorizes the Department of Environ- mental Conservation, after recommendation by the State Nature and Historical Preserve Trust Board of Trustees and authorization by the State Legislature, to purchase property for inclusion. Lands that can be a part of the preserve include those of ecological significance, including coastal fish and wildlife habitats. 10. Implementation of Environmental Quality Bond Act of 1972, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 51) Title 7 of Article 51 directs the Department of Environmental Conservation to appropriate monies from the Environmental Quality Bond Act for land preservation and improvement projects. These projects include acquisition of important tidal and freshwater wetlands. Section 3-0305 of the Environmental Conser- vation Law gives the Department of Environ- mental Conservation the power to acquire property for any of the functions of the Department. II - 6 - 41 POLICY 8 Protect fish and wildlife resources In the coastal area from the Intro. duction of hazardous wastes and other pollutants which blo- accumulate in the food chain or which cause significant sublethal or lethal effect on those resources. A. Explanation of Policy Hazardous wastes are unwanted by-products of manu- facturing processes and are generally character- ized as being flammable, corrosive, reactive, or toxic. More specifically, waste is defined in Environmental Conservation Law [S27-0901(3)] as �"waste or combination of wastes which because of its quantity, concentration, or physical, chemical or infectious charactertics may: (1) cause, or significantly contribute to an increase in mortality or an increase in serious irreversible, or incapacitating reversible illness; or (2) pose a substantial present or potential hazard to human health or the environment when improperly treated, stored, transported or otherwise managed." A list of hazardous wastes (NYCRR Part 366) will be adopted by DEC within 6 months after EPA formally adopts its list. The handling (storage, transport, treatment and disposal) of the materials included on this list is being strictly regulated in New York State to prevent their entry or introduction into the environment, particularly into the State's air, land and waters. Such controls should effectively minimize possible contamination of and bio-accumu- lation in the State's coastal fish and wildlife resources at levels that cause mortality or create physiological and behavioral disorders. Other pollutants are those conventional wastes, generated from point and non-point sources, and not identified as hazardous wastes but controlled through other State laws cited below. B. State Means for Implementing the Policy 1. Industrial Hazardous Waste Management Act, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 27, Title 9) The purpose of this State law is to authorize the NYS Department of Environment Conserva- tion (DEC) to regulate the handling of hazar- dous wastes generation, storage, transporta- tion, treatment and disposal in a manner con- sistent with the Federal Resource Conserva- tion and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA). 11 - 6 - 43 This State law mandates DEC to identify and list hazardous wastes, to develop and implement a manifest system for tracking the wastes "from cradle to grave", and to regulate all phases of handling hazardous wastes. Strict enforcement of this law by DEC will minimize new introductions of hazardous wastes into the environment, thereby protect- ing Coastal fish and wildlife resources. 2. State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 17, Title 8) The Department of Environmental Conservation regulates all industrial, commercial and municipal discharges as well as those from residential subdivisions of five or more lots, into the State's surface and ground- waters. Through this program, the State can control the discharge of toxics and other pollutants from point sources which contami- nate fish and wildlife resources. 3. State Certification, Federal Water Pollution Control Act (Section 401) This section of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 provides the State with authority to review applications. for licenses or permits submitted to any Federal agencies to conduct activities within the State and to certify whether discharges into the State's navigable waters are in compliance with water quality requirements stipulated under various sections of the Federal Viater Pollution Control Act and -its amendments. Federal permits covered by this section are primarily those issued by the Army Corps of Engineers for dredging and spoil disposal, by the Environmental Protec- tion Agency for certain waste water dis- charges, and by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Federal Energy Regulatory Commission for nuclear and hydroelectric energy generating facilities. The discharge of pollutants resulting from such Federal projects, which may affect the State's coastal fish and wildlife resources, can be regulated accordingly. 11 - 6 - 44 4. Toxic Substance Monitoring Program, Environmental Conservation Law(Article 17) This program is designed to monitor the occurrence and significance of 17 different toxicants in fish from 102 sampling locations statewide over a three-year period. This effort will enable the State to trace the distribution of toxic substances once they are discharged into the environment, identify those biological resources being affected, and direct clean-up operations accordingly. B. Substances Hazardous to the Environment, Environmental Conservation Law(Article 37) Substances which are hazardous and tend to accumulate in the food chain threaten fish and wildlife and other living coastal resources. The State recently passed this law in an effort to control the discharge of hazardous substances into the environment. Rules and regulations pertaining to the storage and discharge of these substances are under preparation. The hazardous substances identified will be included within these rules and regulations. *6. Solid Waste Management, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 27, Title 7) Garbage, refuse, industrial and commercial wastes, incinerator residue, sludge and other solid wastes can cause physiological disor- ders in fish and wildlife and contaminate their habitats if not treated and disposed of properly. The construction and operation of solid waste management facilities are regu- lated as authorized by this law, and such regulations are directed at the prevention or reduction of pollution of resources. 7. Stream Pollution Prohibited, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 11-0503) Deleterious or poisonous substances (e.g.* dyestuffs, coal tar, and refuse from a gas house) may not be discharged into any waters either private or public, in quantities injurious to fish life, protected wildlife or waterfowl inhabiting those waters or injur- ious to the propagation of fish, protected wildlife or waterfowl. Also, vessel wastes (oil, sludge, cinders, or ashes) may not be * ~~~~~~discharged into the Hudson River. 11 - 6 - 45 8. Control of Pollution injurious to Fish/ Shellfish, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 13-0345 and 17-0503) These sections of the law provide for the protection of shellfish and fin fish from contaminants (e.g., sludge, acid, refuse, and sewage) which affect the flavor, odor, color, or sanitary condition of these fishery resources. 9. Oil Spill Prevention, Contr~ol and Compensa- tion, Navigation Law, (Article 12) Unregulated discharge of petroleum or oil spills associated with the transport and storage of such products can damage the State's coastal fish, shellfish, wildlife and other biotic resources. This law authorizes the Department of Transportation and the Department of Environmental Conservation to control the methods of petroleum storage and transfer and to require prompt cleanup and compensation to damaged parties when spills or discharges occur. 10. Siting of Major Steam-Electric Generating Facilities (Public Service Law, Article VIII) Prior to construction of a major steam- electric generating facility, an applicant must obtain a certificate of public need and environmental compatibility from the State Siting Board. The applicant is required to collect detailed environmental data and be able to demonstrate that minimum adverse environmental impacts (including impacts on fish and wildlife resources) would result from construction and operation of the proposed facility at the selected site. The process established under Article Vill addresses Coastal Management Policies in connection with siting of major steam- electric generating facilities. 11. Sanitary Code, Public Health Law, (Article 3) Municipalities are authorized by this law to adopt a Local Sanitary Code. These sanitary codes are designed to insure that individual sewage disposal systems do not create health hazards, do not adversely affect the environ- ment, or do not impair the use of property. Obviously, fish and wildlife habitats can be protected from pollutants through the local adoption of such a sanitary code. . II-6 - 46 POLICY 9 Expand recreational use of fish and wildlife resources In coastal areas by Increasing access to existing resources, supplementing ex. Isting stocks, and developing now resources. A. Explanation of Policy Recreational uses of coastal fish and wildlife resources include consumptive uses such as fishing and hunting, and non-consumptive uses such as wildlife photography, bird watching and nature study. .Any efforts to increase recreational use of these resources will be made in a manner which ensures the protection of fish and wildlife resources in marine and freshwater coastal areas and which takes into consideration other activities depen- dent on these resources. Also, such efforts must be done in accordance with existing State law and in keeping with sound resource management consid- erations. Such considerations include biology of the species, carrying capacity of the resource, public demand, costs and available technology. The following additional guidelines should be considered by State and Federal agencies as they determine the consistency of their proposed action with the above policy. 1. Consideration should be made by Federal and State agencies as to whether an action will impede existing or future utilization of the State's recreational fish and wildlife resources, 2. Efforts to increase access to recreational fish and wildlife resources should not lead to overutilization of that resource or cause impairment of the habitat. Sometimes such impairment can be more sub~le than actual physical damage to the habitat. For example, increased human presence can deter animals f rom using the habitat area. 3. The impacts of increasing access to recrea- tional fish and-wildlife resources should be determined on a case-by-case basis, consult- ing the significant habitat narrative (see Policy 7) and/or conferring with a trained fish and wildlife biologist. 4. Any public or private sector initiatives to * ~supplement existing stocks-.(e.g. stocking a stream with fish reared in a hatchery) or 11-6-47 develop new resources (e.g. creating private fee-hunting or fee-fishing facilities) must be done in accord with existing State law. B. State Means for Implementinq the Policy 1. General Powers and Duties of the Department of Environmental Conservation, Environmental Conservation Law, (Article 11, Title 3) The Department of Environmental Conservation manages the State's fish and wildlife resources. it propagates fish and wildlife to supplement existing stocks; regulates their harvest through restricted seasons, bag limits, and gear restrictions, and develops new or improve existing habitats with such devices as stream improvement structures. 2. Stream Rights Acquisition, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 51-0701) This law enables the Department of Environ- mental Conservation to acquire access rights (fee-simple or less-than-fee-simple) on qual- ity streams guaranteeing fishermen access to various stretches of streams and rivers. Additional information needed for determining priorities in this acquisition program will be provided to the Department of Environ-0 mental Conservation through the Coastal Management Program. 3. Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act, Executive Law (Article 42) Section 919, of Article 42 requires 1) that State agencies actions, including funding, planning, and land transactions, as well as direct development activities, must be con- sistent with the policies of this Act, one of which calls the promotion of the recreational use of fish and wildlife resources. This provision of law is implemented by amendments to SEOR (cf 2 below) and by DOS regulations. DOS regulations (19 NYCRR Part 600) provide that, for their direct actions which do not have a significant effect on the environment, State agencies certify that the action is consistent with the following policy: "Ex- pand recreational use of fish and wildlife resources in coastal areas by increasing ac- cess to existing resources, supplementing II - 6 - 48 existing stocks and developing new resources." Such efforts shall be made in a manner which ensures the protection of renew- able fish and wildlife resources and con- siders other activities dependent on them. Section 2 of the Act requires that State agencies analyze their programs' consistency with coastal policies and that the Secretary of State recommend any needed modifications to the Governor and the Legislature. Section 915 of this law provides for funding of local government waterfront revitalization plans by the Department of State. Increased access to coastal waters for the purposes of fishing is strongly encouraged as one of the management objectives for a local waterfront revitalization plan. 4. State Environmental Quality Review Act, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 8) Pursuant to Article 42 of the Executive Law, SEQR regulations are amended to require that for actions by a State agency for which an EIS has been prepared, such actions shall be consistent with the coastal policies, one of which is: 'Expand recreational use of fish and wildlife resources in coastal areas by increasing access to existing resources, supplementing existing stocks and developing new resources. Such efforts shall be made in a manner which ensures the protection of renewable fish and wildlife resources and considers other activities dependent on them." 5. Other State Acquisition Powers, Parks Recreation Law (Section 3.09) This law authorizes the Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservation to acquire, establish, and operate facilities for recreational purposes, including valuable fishing and hunting areas. For further information on the Office of Parks, Recrea- tion, and Historic Preservation's powers, see the recreation policies contained in this report. II - 6 - 49 6. Urban Fisheries Program, Environmental Con- servation Law (Article 11) The Department of Environmental Conservation has elected to increase fishing activity in several metropolitan areas of the State, including Buffalo, Albany, Troy, and New York City, through its Urban Fisheries Program. Public education, eliminating problems of access to existing, under-utilized fisheries, and creation of new fisheries through stocking of ponds or establishing suitable habitat are specific means by which the objectives of this program will be accomp- lished. In most cases, these fishing areas are accessible by public transportation. However, in some instances, inadequate mass transportation constrains public use of these resources, 7. Urban Wildlife Program, Environmental Conser- vation Law (Article 11) 8. Fish and Wildlife Management Practices Co- operative Program, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 11-0501) II - 6 - 50 POLICY10 Further develop commercial finfish, shellfish and crustacean re- sources In the coastal area by encouraging the construction of new, or improvement of existing on-shore commercial fishing facilities, in- creasing marketing of the State's seafood products, maintaining ade- quate stocks, and expanding aquaculture facilities. A. Explanation of Policy Commercial fishery development activities must occur within the context of sound fishery management principals developed and enforced within the State's waters by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation and the Management plans developed by the Regional Fisheries Management Councils (Mid-Atlantic and New England) and enforced by the U.S. National Marine Fisheries Service within the Fishery Conservation Zone. (The Fishery Conservation Zone is the area of coastal waters extending from the three mile State waters boundary to the 200 mile offshore boundary of U.S. Waters. The Conserva- tion Zone is authorized by the U.S. Fishery Conservation and Management Act of 1976.) Sound resource management considerations would include optimum sustained yield levels developed for specific commercial fish species, harvest restric- tions imposed by State and Federal governments, and the economic, political (uses conflicts) and technological constraints to utilizing these resources. The following additional guidelines should be considered by State and Federal agencies as they determine the consistency of their proposed action with the above policy: a. A public agency's commercial fishing develop- ment initiative should not preempt or dis- place private sector initiative. b. A public agency's efforts to expand existing or create new on-shore commercial fishing support facilities should be directed towards unmet development needs rather than merely displacing existing commercial fishing activities from a nearby port. This may be accomplished by taking into consideration existing State or regional commercial fishing development plans. c. Consideration. should be made by State and Federal agencies whether an action will im- pede existing ..utilization or future develop- ment :of the state's commercial fishing resources. II - 6- 51 d. Commercial fishing development efforts should be made in a manner which ensures the main- tenance and protection of the renewable fishery resources. B. State Mleans for Implementing the Policy 1. Waterfront Revi-talization and Coastal Resources Act Executive Law, (Article 42) Section 915 of this law authorizes the Department of State to encourage municipali- ties which choose to develop local waterfront revitalization programs to implement commer- cial fishing port development projects. Such facilities might include the construction or rehabilitation of piers; facilities for catch transfer, freezer storage, fishing processing and packaging; or acquaculture facilities. Section 919, 'of Article 42 requires 1) that State agencies actions, including funding, planning, and land transactions, as well as direct development activities, must be con- sistent with the policies of this act, one of which is: Further develop commercial f in- fish, shellfish and crustacean resources in the coastal area by encouraging the construc- tion of new, or improvement of existing on- shore commercial fishing facilities, increas-0 ing marketing of the State's seafood products, maintaining adequate stocks, and expanding aquaculture facilities. This provision of law is implemented by amendments to SEQR (of 2 below) and by DOS regulations. DOS regulations (19 NYCRR Part 600) provide that, for their direct actions which do not have a significant effect on the environment, State agencies certify that the action is consistent with the following policy: "Further develop commercial finfish, shell- fish and crustacean resources in the coastal area by: (i) encouraging the construction of new or improvement of existing on-shore commercial fishing facilities; (ii) increas- ing marketing of the State's seafood products; (iii) maintaining adequate stocks and (iv) expanding aquaculture facilities. Such ef forts shall be made in a manner which insures the protection of such renewable fish resources and considers other activities dependent on them. 1I - 6 - 52 2. State Environmental Quality Review Act Environmental Conservation Law (Article 8) Environmental impact as defined in this law include not only impact on the State's natural resources but also the State's economy. Pursuant to Article 42 of the Executive Law, SEQR regulations are amended to require that for actions by a State agency for which an EIS has been prepared, such actions shall be consistent with the coastal policies, one of which is: "Further develop commercial finfish, shellfish and crustacean resources in the coastal area by: (i) encouraging the construction of new or improvement of existing on-shore commercial fishing facilities; (ii) increasing marketing of New York seafood products; (iii) main- taining adequate stocks and (iv) expand- ing aquaculture facilities. Such efforts shall be made in a manner which ensures the protection of such renewable fish resources and considers other activi- ties dependent on them." II - 6 - 53 POLICY 11 Buildings and other structures will be sited in the coastal area so as to minimize damage to property and the endangering of human lives caused by flooding and erosion. A. Explanation of Policy On coastal lands identified as coastal erosion hazard areas, buildings and similar structures shall be set back from the shoreline a distance sufficient to minimize damage from erosion unless no reasonable prudent alternative site is avail- able as in the case of piers, docks and other structures necessary to gain access to coastal waters to be able to function. The extent of the setback will be calculated, taking into account the rate at which land is receding due to erosion, and the protection provided by existing erosion protection structures as well as by natural protective features such as beaches, sandbars, spits, shoals, barrier islands, bay barriers, nearshore areas, bluffs and wetlands. The only new structure allowed in coastal erosion hazard areas is a moveable structure as defined in Section 505.3(u) of the regulations for ECL, Article 34. Prior to its construction, an erosion hazard areas permit must be approved for the structure. Existing, non-conforming structures located in coastal erosion hazard areas may be only minimally enlarged. In coastal lands identified as being subject to high velocity waters caused by hurricane or other storm wave wash - a coastal high hazard area - walled and roofed buildings or fuel storage tanks shall be sited landward of mean high tide; and no mobile home shall be sited in such area. In coastal lands identified as floodways, no mobile homes shall be sited other than in existing mobile home parks. Where human lives may be endangered by major coastal storms, all necessary emergency preparedness measures should be taken, including disaster preparedness planning. B. State Means for Implementing the Policy 1. Coastal Erosion Hazard Areas Act, Environ- mental Conservation Law (Article 34) This law provides for the identification of coastal erosion hazard areas, including natural protective features such as beaches II - 6 -55 and dunes. The law also requires the calculation of rates of recession of coastal lands. Standards and criteria are also prescribed for the regulation of the siting of buildings and other structures in relation to those defined areas. 2. Flood Plain Management Act, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 36) This law ensures that, if a community fails to qualify for the Federal flood insurance program, the State will develop flood hazard regulations for that community to make it eligible for participation in the program. The regulations are, at a minimum, those specified by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. State agencies are also constrained by this law through regulation of such activities as the financing of projects, or the authoriza- tion of implementation of projects, on State lands. The regulations are, at a minimum, those specified by the Federal flood insurance program. 3. Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act, Executive Law (Article 42) Section 919 of Article 42 requires (1) that State agencies' actions, including funding, planning, land transactions, as well as direct development activities must be consistent with the policies of this Act, one of which requires the use of non-structural measures whenever possible to minimize damage from flooding and erosion. This provision of law is implemented by amendments to SEQR (see 4 below) and by Department of State regula- tions. Those Department of State regulations (19 NYCRR Part 600) provide that, for their direct actions which do not have a signifi- cant effect on the environment, State agencies certify that the action is consis- tent with the coastal policies, one of which is: "Whenever possible, use non-structural measures to minimize damage to natural resources and property from flooding and erosion. Such measures shall include: (i) the set back of buildings and structures; (ii) the planting of vegetation and the installation of sand fencing and drainage systems; (iii) the reshaping of bluffs; and (iv) the flood-proofing or elevation of buildings above the base flood level." II - 6 - 56 (2) That the Secretary of State shall review actions of State agencies that may affect achievement of the policy and (3) that SEQR regulations be amended to reflect considera- tion of the use of set backs as a non-struct- ural measure. Section 2 of the Act requires that State agencies analyze their programs' consistency with coastal policies and that the Secretary of State recommend any needed modifications to the Governor and the Legislature. 4. State Environmental Quality Review Act, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 18) Under this Act, State agencies and local governments are required to prepare an environmental impact statement for any action which might have a significant effect on the environment. Pursuant to Article 42 of the Executive Law, SEQR regulations are amended to require that for actions by a State agency for which an EIS has been prepared, such actions shall be consistent with the coastal policies, one of which is: 'Whenever possible, use non-structural measures to minimize damage to natural resources and property from flooding and erosion. Such measures shall include: (i) the set back of buildings and structures; (ii) the planting of vegetation and the installation of sand fencing and drainage systems; (iii) the reshaping of bluffs; and (iv) the flood- proof ing or elevation of buildings above the base flood level." S. State and Local Natural and Man-made Disaster Preparedness Act, Executive Law (Article 2-B) This law provides for the establishment of a State Disaster Preparedness Commission and the preparation of a State Disaster Preparedness Plan. The Act also declares that it is a policy of the State that local governments "continue their essential role as the first line of defense in times of disaster' and authorizes counties and cities to prepare Local Disaster Preparedness Plans. 11 - 6 - 57 POLICY 12 Activities or development in the coastal area will be undertaken so as to minimize damage to natural resources and property from flooding and erosion by protecting natural protective features including beaches, dunes, barrier islands and bluffs. A. Explanation of Policy Beaches, dunes, barrier islands, bluffs, and other natural protective features help safeguard coastal lands and property from damage, as well as reduce the danger to human life, resulting from flooding and erosion. Excavation of coastal features, improperly designed structures, inadequate site planning, or other similar actions which fail to recognize their fragile nature and high protective values, lead to the weakening or destruction of those landforms. Activities or development in, or in proximity to, natural protective features must ensure that all such adverse effects are minimized. Primary dunes will be protected from all encroachments that could impair their natural protective capacity. B. State fleans for implementing the Policy 1. Coastal Erosion Hazard Areas Act, Environ- mental Conservation Law (Article 34) This law requires the identification of coastal erosion hazard areas, including natural protective features such as beaches, dunes, bluffs and barrier islands. Standards and criteria are also authorized for- the promulgation of -regulations which will require that activities and development will leave minimal adverse effects on such natural protective features. 2. Flood Plain Management Act, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 36) (See also Policy 11, B, 2 above) Regulations promulgated under this law include a prohibition on the alteration of sand dunes in coastal high hazard areas so as to prevent an increase in potential flood damage to lands and property. 1I - 6 - 59 3. Water Resources Act, Environmental Conserva- tion Law (Article 15) Sections 15-0503 and 15-0505 regulate the placement of permanent docks, piers and similar structures, as well as the placement of fill, in the waters of the State. The law also recognizes the adverse effect of such activities on soil erosion and will be used -to implement this policy. 4. Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act, Executive Law (Article 42) Section 919 of Article 42 requires (1) that State agencies' actions, including funding, planning, land transactions, as well as direct development activities must be consistent with the policies of this Act, one of which requires that damage to natural resources from flooding and erosion be minimized, including the protection of beaches, dunes, barrier islands, bluffs and other natural protective features. This provision of law is implemented by amendments to SEQR (see 5 below) and by Department of State regulations. Those Department of State regulations (19 NYCRR Part 600) provide that, for their direct actions which do not have a significant effect on the environment, State agencies certify that the action is consistent with the coastal policies, one of which is: 'Activities or development in the coastal area will be undertaken so as to minimize damage to natural resources and property from flooding and erosion by protecting natural protective features including beaches, dunes, barrier islands and bluffs. Primary dunes will be protected from all encroachments that could impair their natural protective capacity." (2) That the Secretary of State shall review actions of State agencies that may affect achievement of the policy and (3) that SEOR regulations be amended to reflect consideration of the adverse effect of activities or development on natural protective features. 11 - 6 - 60 Section 2 of the Act requires that State agencies analyze their programs' consistency with coastal policies and that the Secretary of State recommend any needed modifications to the Governor and the Legislature. 5. State Environmental Quality Review Act, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 18) Under this Act, State agencies and local governments are required to prepare an environmental impact statement for any action which might have a significant effect on the environment. Pursuant to Article 42 of the Executive Law, SEQR regulations are amended to require that for actions by a State agency for which an EIS has been prepared, such actions shall be consistent with the coastal policies, one of which is: "Activities or development in the coastal area will be undertaken so as to minimize damage to natural resources and property from flooding and erosion by protecting natural protective features including beaches, dunes, barrier islands and bluffs. Primary dunes will be protected from all encroachments that could impair their natural protective capacity.' I1- 6 -61 POLICY 13 The construction or reconstruction of erosion protection structures shall be undertaken only If they have a reasonable probability of con- trolling erosion for at least thirty years as demonstrated in design and construction standards andlor assured maintenance or replacement programs. A. Explanation of Policy Erosion protection structures are widely used throughout the State's coastal area. However, because of improper design, construction and maintenance standards, many fail to give the protection 'which they were presumed to provide. hs a result, development is sited in areas where it is subject to damage or loss due to erosion. This policy will help ensure the reduction of such damage or loss. B. State Means for Implementing the Policy 1. Coastal Erosion Hazard Areas Act, Environ- mental Conservation Law (Article 34) Within coastal erosion hazard areas identi- fied by this law, standards and criteria- required by the 'Act will be used to regulate the construction or reconstruction and main- tenance of erosion protection structures. 2. Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act, Executive Law (Article 42) 0 ~ ~~~~~Section 919 of Article 42 requires (1) that State agencies' actions, including funding, planning, land transactions, as well as direct development activities must be consistent with the policies of this Act, one of which states that it is State policy to minimize damage to property from erosion. This provision of law is implemented by amendments to SEQR (see 3 below) and by Department of State regulations. Those Department of State regulations (19 NYCRR Part 600) provide that, for their direct actions which do not have a significant effect on the environment, State agencies certify that the action is consistent with the coastal policies, one of wehich is: "The construction or reconstruction of erosion protection structures shall be undertaken only if they have a reasonable probability of controlling erosion for at least thirty years as demonstrated in design and construction standards and/or assured maintenance or replacement programs .' II - 6 - 63 (2) That the Secretary of State shall review actions of State agencies that may affect achievement of the policy and (3) that SEQR regulations be amended to reflect considera- tion of the adverse effect of improperly designed, constructed or maintained erosion protection structures. Section 2 of the Act requires that State agencies analyze their programs' consistency with coastal policies and that the Secretary of State recommend any needed modifications to the Governor and the Legislature. 3. State Environmental Quality Review Act, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 18) Under this Act, State agencies and local governments are required to prepare an environmental impact statement for any action which might have a significant effect on the environment. Pursuant to Article 42 of the Executive Law, SEOR regulations are amended to require that for actions by a State agency for which an EIS has been prepared, such actions shall be consistent with the coastal policies, one of which is: "The construction or reconstruction of erosion protection structures shall be undertaken only if they have a reasonable probability of controlling erosion for at least thirty years as demon- strated in design and construction standards and/or assured maintenance or replacement programs." 16 - 64 POLICY 14 Activities and development including the construction or reconstruc- tion of erosion protection structures, shall be undertaken so that there will be no measurable increase in erosion or flooding at the site of such activities or development, or at other locations. A. Explanation of Policy Erosion and flooding are processes which occur naturally. However, by his actions, man can increase the severity and adverse effects of those processes, causing damage to, or loss of property, and endangering human lives. Those actions include: the use of erosion protection structures such as groins, or the use of impermeable docks which block the littoral transport of sediment to adjacent shorelands, thus increasing their rate of recession; the failure to observe proper drainage or land restoration practices, thereby causing run-off and the erosion and weakening of shore- lands; and the placing of structures in identified floodways so that the base flood level is increased causing damage in otherwise hazard-free areas. B. State beans for Implementing the Policy 1. Coastal Erosion Hazard Areas Act, Environ- mental Conservation Law (Article 34) Within coastal erosion hazard areas identi- fied pursuant to this law, standards and criteria will be established to regulate activities and development, including the construction or reconstruction of erosion control structures, so that on-site erosion, and erosion of other lands, will not measur- ably increase. 2. l;ater Resources Act, Environmental Conserva- tion Law (Article 15) Subsections 15-0503 and 15-0505 regulate the placement of permanent docks, piers and similar structures, as well as the placement of fill, in the waters of the State. The law also recognizes the adverse effect of such activities on soil erosion and will be used to implement this policy. 3. Flood Plain Management Act, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 36) (See also Policy 11, B, 2 above) This law regulates encroachments in floodways identified under the federal flood insurance program so as to prevent increases in flood- water levels. 4. Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act, Executive Law (Article 42) Section 919 of Article 42 requires (1) that State agencies' actions, including funding, planning, land transactions, as well as direct development activities must be consistent with the policies of this Act, one of which states that it is State policy to minimize damage to natural resources and property from flooding and erosion. This provision of law is implemented by amendments to SEOR (see 5 below) and by Department of State regulations. Those Department of State requlations (19 NYCRR Part 600) provide that, for their direct actions which do not have a significant effect on the environment, State agencies certify that the action is consistent with the coastal policies, one of which is: "Activities and development including the construction or reconstruction of erosion protection structures, shall be undertaken so that there will be no measurable increase in erosion or flooding at the site of such activities or development or at other locations." (2) That the Secretary of State shall review actions of State agencies that may affect achievement of the policy and (3) that SEQR regulations be amended to reflect consideration of the adverse effect of activities or development upon coastal lands. Section 2 of the Act requires that State agencies analyze their programs' consistency with coastal policies and that the Secretary of State recommend any needed modifications .to the Governor and the Legislature. 11- 6 -66 5. State Environmental Duality Review Act, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 18) Under this Act, State agencies and local governments are required to prepare an environmental impact statement for any action which might have a significant effect on the environment. Pursuant to Article 42 of the Executive Law, SEOR regulations are amended to require that for actions by a State agency for which an EIS has been prepared, such actions shall be consistent with the coastal policies, one of which is: "Activities and development including the construction or reconstruction of erosion protection struc- tures, shall be undertaken so that there will be no measurable increase in erosion or flooding at the site of such activities or development or at other locations." II -6 -67 POLICY 15 Mining, excavation or dredgingIn coastal waters shall not significant- ly Interfere with the natural coastal processes which supply beach materials to land adjacent to such waters and shall be undertaken In a manner which will not cause an Increase in erosion of such land. A. Explanation of Policy Coastal processes, including the movement of beach materials by water, and any mining, excavation or dredging in nearshore or offshore waters which changes the supply and net flow of such materials can deprive shorelands of their natural regenera- tive powers. Such mining, excavation and dredging should be accomplished in a manner so as not to cause a reduction of supply, and thus an increase of erosion, to such shorelands. offshore mining is a future alternative option to land mining for sand and gravel deposits which are needed to support building and other industries. B. State Means for Implementing the Policy 1I Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act, Executive Law (Article 42) Section 919 of Article 42 requires (1) that State agencies' actions, including funding, planning, land transactions, as well as direct development activities must be consistent with the policies of this Act, one of which requires that damage to natural resources from erosion is minimized. This -provision of law is implemented by amendments to SEOR (see 2 belo'w) and by Department of State regulations. Those Department of State regulations (19 NYCRR Part 600) provide that, for their direct actions which do not have a significant effect on the environment, State agencies certify that the action is consistent with the coastal policies, one of which is: 'Mininq, excavation or dredging in coastal waters shall not significantly interfere with the natural coastal processes which supply beach materials to land adjacent to such waters and shall be undertaken in a manner which will not cause an increase in erosion of such land.' (2) That the Secretary of State shall review actions of State agencies that may affect achievement of the policy and (3) that SEOR regulations be amended to reflect consideration of the adverse effect of mining, excavation and dredging upon coastal lands. 11 - 6-69 Section 2 of the Act requires that State agencies analyze their programs' consistency with coastal policies and that the Secretary of State reconmmend any needed modifications to the Governor and the Legislature. 2. State Environmental Quality Review Act, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 18) Under this Act, State agencies and local governments are required to prepare an environmental impact statement for any action which might have a significant effect on the environment. The environment is broadly defined to include land and minerals: hence, sand, gravel, and other materials in coastal waters are viewed as environmental resources. Pursuant to Article 42 of the Executive Law, SEOR regulations are amended to require that for actions by a State agency for which an EIS has been prepared, such actions shall be consistent with the coastal policies, one of which is: 'Mining, excavation or dredging in coastal waters shall not significantly interfere with the natural coastal processes which supply beach materials to land adjacent to such waters and shall be undertaken in a manner which will not cause an increase in erosion of such land." 3. Coastal Erosion Hazard Areas Act, Environ- mental Conservation Law (Article 34) This law provides for the identification of coastal erosion hazard areas, including nearshore natural protective features such as shoals, bars and spits, which if altered might lower the reserves of sand or other natural materials available to replenish storm losses through natural processes. The law requires also that excavation or other alteration of land will be regulated to minimize adverse effects on those natural protective features as well as to prevent erosion of other lands. 11 - 6 - 70 4. Public Lands Law (Article 2) New York State owns the underwater lands in the State's coastal area, except where its rights have been sold, leased or otherwise transferred, or where they have been reserved to other interests. This law provides for the leasing of certain underwater lands for the mining of sand and gravel. Such mining activities must be implemented consistent with the policies of Executive Law, Article 34. S. Protection of Waters Act, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 15) This law recognizes the adverse effects on soil erosion of activities such as excavation in the State's navigable waters, or in marshes, estuaries, tidal marshes and wet- lands adjacent thereto, and requires the regulation of such activity by permit. G. Tidal Wetlands Act, Environmental Conserva- tion Law (Article 25) The regulatory jurisdiction of this law in the State's tidal waters includes: (1) coastal shoals, bars and flats, as well as other lands no more than 6 feet underwater at low mean watert and adjacent areas; and (2) the dredging, excavation or removal of sand, or other aggregate. To protect the contribu- tion which those lands make to flood, hurri- cane and storm control, those uses are presumed incompatible and a permit must be obtained from the Department of Environmental Conservation, upon demonstration that those values will not be adversely affected. 7. Freshwater Wetlands Act, Environmental Con- servation Law (Article 24) This law provides for the identification of freshwater wetlands and for the regulation of activities therein, including dredging, mining and excavation. 11- 6 -71 DOLICY 16 Public funds shall only be used for erosion protective structures where necessary to protect human life, and now development which requires a location within or adjacent to an erosion hazard area to be able to function, or existing development; and only where the public benefits outweigh the long term monetary and other costs Including the potential for Increasing erosion and adverse effects on natural protective features. A. Explanation of Policy Public funds are used for a variety of purposes on the State's shorelines. This policy recognizes the public need for the protection of human life and existing investment in development or new .development which requires a location in proximity to the coastal area or in adjacent waters to be able to function. However, it also recognizes the adverse impacts of such activities and development an the' rate of erosion and on natural protective features and requires that careful analysis be made of such benefits and long-term costs prior to expending public funds. B. State Means for Implementing the Policy 1. Coastal Erosion Hazard Areas Act, Environ- mental Conservation Law (Article 34) This law contains a provision that, within identified coastal erosion hazard areas, consideration be given to both the public benefits- and long range adverse effects of proposed activities and development which use public funds. 2. Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act, Executive Law (Article 42) Section 919 of Article 42 requires (1) that State agencies' actions, including funding, planning, land transactions, as well as direct development activities must be consis- tent with the policies of this Act, one of which requires that damage from erosion to natural resources and property is minimized by proper location of new development, pro- tection of critical coastal features and the use of non-structural measures whenever possible. This provision of law is imple- mnented by amendments to SEQR (see 3 below) and by Department of State regulations. 0 ~~~~~~~~~~11- 6 -73 Those Department of State regulations (19 NYCRR Part 600) provide that, for their direct actions which do not have a signif- icant effect on the environment, State agencies certify that the action is consis- tent with the coastal policies, one of which is: "Public funds shall only be used for erosion protective structures where necessary to protect human life, and new development which requires a location within or adjacent to an erosion hazard area to be able to function, or existing development; and only where the public benefits outweigh the long term monetary and other costs including the potential for increasing erosion and adverse effects on natural protective features." (2) The the Secretary of State shall review actions of State agencies that may affect achievement of the policy and (3) that SE(-R regulations be amended to reflect considera- tion of the costs and benefits of publicly funded erosion protective structures. Section 2 of the Act requires that State agencies analyze their programs' consistency with coastal policies and that the Secretary of State recommend any needed modifications to the Governor and the Legislature. 3. State Environmental Quality Review Act, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 18) Under this Act, State agencies and local governments are required to prepare an envi- ronmental impact statement for any action which might have a significant effect on the environment. Pursuant to Article 42 of the Executive Law, SEOR regulations are amended to require that for actions by a State agency for which an EIS has been prepared, such actions shall be consistent with the coastal policies, one of which is: 'Public funds shall only be used for erosion protective structures where necessary to protect human life, and new development which requires a location within or adjacent to an erosion hazard area to be able to function, or existing development; and only where the public benefits outweigh the long term mronetary and other costs including the potential for increasing erosion and adverse effects on natural protective features." 11- 6 -74 i POLICY 17 Non-structural measures to minimize damage to natural resources and property from flooding and erosion shall be used whenever possi- ble. A. Explanation of Policy 1. This policy recognizes both the potential adverse impacts of flooding and erosion upon development and upon natural protective features in the coastal area as well as the costs of protection against those hazards which structural measures entail. 2. 'Non-structural measures' shall include, but not be limited to: (1) within coastal erosion hazard areas identified under Section 34-104, Coastal Erosion Hazard Areas Act (Article 34, Environmental Conservation Law), and subject to the permit requirements on all regulated activities and development estab- lished under that Law, (a) the use of minimum setbacks as provided f or in Section 34-108; and (b) the strengthening of coastal land- forms by the planting of -appropriate vegeta- tion on dunes and bluffs, the installation of sand fencing on dunes, the reshaping of bluffs to achieve an appropriate angle of repose so as to reduce the potential for slumping and to permit the planting of stabilizing vegetation, and the installation of drainage systems on bluffs to reduce runoff and internal seepage of waters which erode or weaken the landforms; and (2) within identified flood hazard areas, (a) the avoidance of risk or damage from flooding by the siting of buildings outside the -hazard area, and (b) the flood-proofing of buildings or their elevation above the base flood level. 3. This policy shall apply to the planning, siting and design of proposed activities and development, including measures to protect existing activities and development. To ascertain consistency with the policy, it must be determined if any one, or a combina- tion of, non-structural measures would afford the degree of protection appropriate both to the character and purpose of the activity or development, and to the hazard. If non-struc- tural measures are determined to offer sufficient protection, then consistency with the policy would require the use of such measures, whenever possible. II - 6 - 75 4. In determining whether or not non-structural measures to protect against erosion or flooding will afford the degree of protection- appropriate, an analysis, and if necessaryl, other materials such as plans or sketches of the activity or development, of the site and of the alternative protection measures should be prepared to allow an assessment to be made. B. State Means for Implementing the Policy 1. Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act, Executive Law (Article 42) Section 919 of Article 42 requires (1) that State agencies' actions, including funding, planning, land transactions, as well as direct development activities, must be con- sistent with the policies of this Act, one of which calls for minimizing damage to natural resources and property from flooding and erosion by the use of non-structural mea- sures whenever possible. This provision of law is implemented by amendments to SEOR (See 2 below) and by the Department of State requlations. The Department of State regulations (19 NYCRR Part 600) provide that, for their direct actions which do not have a significant effect on the environment, State agencies certify that the action is consis- tent with the coastal policies, one of which is 'Whenever possible, use non-structural measures to minimize damage to natural resources and property from flooding and erosion. Such measures shall include: (i the set back of buildings and structures; (ii) the planting of v egetation and the installation of sand fencing and drainage systems; (iii) the reshaping of bluffs; and (iv) the flood-proofing of buildings or their elevation above the base flood level." (2) that the Secretary of State shall review actions of State agencies that may affect achievement of the policy, and (3) that SEQR regulations be amended to reflect considera- tion of the use of non-structural measures to minimize damage from flooding and erosion. II-6 -76 2. State Environmental Quality Rev iew Act, * ~~~~~~Environmental Conservation Law (Article 8) Pursuant to Article 42 of the Executive Law, SEOR regulations are amended to require that actions by a State agency for which an EIS has been prepared, such actions shall be consistent with the coastal policies, one of which is: 'Whenever possible, use non- structural measures to minimize damage to natural resources and property from flooding and erosion. Such measures shall include: (i) the set back of buildings and structures; (ii) the planting of vegetation and the installation of sand fencing and drainage systems; (iii) the reshaping of bluffs; and (iv) the flood-proofing of buildings or their elevation above the base flood level." 3. Coastal Erosion Hazard Areas Act, Environ- mental Conservation Law (Article 34) Within coastal erosion hazard areas identi- fied pursuant to this law, standards and criteria will be established to regulate activities and development as well as to protect natural protective features such as dunes, bluffs, beaches and barrier islands through a permit system. II -F- 77 POLICY 18 To safeguard the vital economic, social and environmental interests of the State and of Its citizens, proposed major actions In the coastal area must give full consideration to those interests, and to the safeguards which the State has established to protect valuable coastal resource areas. A. Explanation of Policy Proposed major actions may be undertaken in the coastal area if they will not significantly impair valuable coastal waters and resources, thus frust- rating the achievement of the purposes of the safeguards which the State has established to protect those waters and resources. Proposed actions must take into account the social, economic and environmental interests of the State and its citizens in such matters that would affect natural resouce's, water levels and flows, shoreline damage, hydro-electric power generation, and recreation. B. State means for implementing the Policy 1. Waterfront Revitalization -and Coastal Resources Act, Executive Law (Article 42) In part, Article 42 declares that it is the public policy of the State within its coastal 0 ~ ~~~~area: 'to conserve and protect fish and wildlife and their habitats; achieve a balance between economic development and preservation needs that will permit the beneficial use of coastal resources while preventing permanent adverse changes to ecological systems; and minimize darage to natural resources and property from flooding and erosion. The Act's policies also call for the assurance of consistency of State actions and Federal -actions with policies within the coastal area and cooperation and coordination with other states, the Federal government and Canada "to attain a consistent policy towards coastal management". Section 919 of Article 42 requires (1) that State agencies' actions, including funding, plan- ning, land transactions, as well as direct development activities, must be consistent with the policies of the Act. This provision of law is implemented by amendments to SEQR (See 2 below) and by the Department of State regulations. The Department of State 1I - 6 - 79 regulations (19 NYCRR Part 600) provide that, for their direct actions which do not have a significant effect on the environment, State agencies certify that the action is consis- tent with the coastal policies, one of which is: "To safeguard the vital economic, social, and environmental interests of the State and of its citizens, proposed major actions in the coastal area must give full consideration to those interests, and to the safeguards which the State has established to protect valuable coastal resource areas.' (2) that the Secretary of State shall review actions of State agencies that may affect achievement of the policy, and (3) that SE(R regulations be amended to reflect consideration of this policy. Section 2 of the Act requires that State agencies analyze their programs' consistency with coastal policies and that the Secretary of State recommend any needed modifications to the Governor and the Legislature. 2. State Environmental Q~uality Review Act, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 18) Under this Act, State agencies and local governments are required to prepare an envi- ronmental impact statement for any action which might have a significant effect on the environment. Pursuant to Article 42 of the Executive Law, SEQR regulations are amended to require that for actions by a State agency for which an EIS has been prepared, such actions shall be consistent with the coastal policies, one of which is: "To safeguard the vital economic, social, and environmental interests of the State and of its citizens, proposed major actions in the coastal area mrust give full consideration to those interests, and to the safeguards which the State has established to protect valuable coastal resource areas." 3. Water Resources Act, Environmental Conserva- tion Law (Article 15) Section 15-0101 states in part that " ... the sovereign power to regulate and control the water resources of this State ever since its establishment has been and now is vested exclusively in the State of New York except to the extent of any delegation of powers to the United States ..." II - 6 so8 4. Wild, Scenic and Recreational Rivers System, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 15, Title 27) Along stretches of rivers designated by the State as "wild", "scenic", or "recreational", the State Department of Enviromental Con- servation is authorized by this law to exer- cise land use controls in order to protect the outstanding natural, scenic, historic, ecoloqical and recreational resources of these rivers. 5. Protection of Waters, Environmental Conserva- tion Law (Article 15, Title 5) This law was enacted to minimize disturbances to the beds and banks of certain streams (Class C Wt and above) which cause increased turbidity, and irregular variations in veloc- ity, temperature and water levels, in order to protect fish and wildlife and their habitats. The Department of Environmental Conservation regulates dredging and filling in navigable waters and adjacent wetlands, and construction of certain dams and docks. Further, it requires the removal, replacement or repair of illegal or unsafe structures, fills or excavations. 6. Tidal Wetlands Act, Environmental Conserva- tion Law (Article 25) This Act requires that a permit be issued for activities or development in identified tidal wetlands. It must be demonstrated that pro- posed activities or development will not adversely affect water quality, flood and storm control, marine food production, wild- life habitat, open space, and aesthetically significant areas. 7, Freshwater Wetlands Act, Environmental Con- servation Law (Article 24) This law recognizes the value of freshwater wetlands in providing flood protection, wildlife habitats, open space and water resources. The program established under this Act regulates activities such as draining, dredging, and filling. It is ad- ministered by local governments pursuant to state guidelines and after official filing of wetland maps by the State. The Department of Is ~~~~~Environmental Conservation reg ulates fresh- II -6 -81 water wetlands through its interim permit program in communities where maps have yet to be filed. Before granting or denying a permit, the municipality or DEC must deter- mine if the activity will have an adverse impact on the value of the wetland. 8. General Powers and Duties of the Department of Environmental Conservation, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 11, Title 3) The Department of Environmental Conservation is empowered by this law to manage the State's fish and wildlife resources. The Department propagates fish and wildlife to supplement existing stocks, regulates their harvest through restricted seasons, bag limits, gear restrictions, and develops new or improves existing habitats with such devices as stream improvement structures. 9. Stream Pollution Prohibited, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 11-0503) Deleterious or poisonous substances (e.g., dyestuffs, coal tar, and refuse from a gas house) may not he discharged into any waters either private or public, in quantities injurous to fish life, protected wildlife or waterfowl inhabiting those waters or injuri- ous to the propagation of fish, protected wildlife or waterfowl. Also vessel wastes (oil, sludge cinders or ashes) may not be discharged into the Hudson River. 10. State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 17, Title 8) The Department of Environmental Conservation regulates all industrial, commercial and municipal discharges, as well as those from residential subdivisions of five or more lots, into the state's surface and ground- waters. Through this program, the State can control the discharge of toxics and other pollutants from point sources which contamin- ate valuable resources. 11 - 6 -82 11. Control of Pollution Injurious to Fish/Shell- fish, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 13-0345 and 17-0503) These sections of the law provide for the protection of shellfish and finfish from contaminants (e.g., sludge, acid, refuse, and sewage) which affect the flavor, odor, color, or sanitary condition of these fishery resources, 12. Substances Hazardous to the Environment, Environipental Conservation Law (Article 37) Substances, which are hazardous and tend to accumulate in the food chain, threaten fish and wildlife and other living coastal resources. The State recently passed this law in an effort to control the discharge of hazardous substances into the environment. Rules and regulations pertaining to the storage and discharge of these substances are under-preparation. The hazardous substances identified will be included within these rules and regulations. 13. Industrial Hazardous Waste Management Act, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 27, Title 9) The Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) regulates the handling of hazardous wastes generation, storage, transportation, treatment and disposal in a manner consistent with the Federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA). This state law mandates DEC to identify and list hazardous wastes, to develop and implement a manifest system for tracking the wastes "from cradle to gravel, to regulate all phases of handling hazardous wastes. Enforcement of this law will minimize new introductions of hazardous wastes into the environment, thereby pro- tecting coastal resources. 14. Oil Spill Prevention, Control and Compensa- tion, Navigation Law (Article 12) Unregulated discharge of petroleum or oil spills associated with the transport and storage of such products can damage the State's coastal fish, shellfish, wildlife, beaches and other resources. This law 11- 6 -83 authorizes the Department of Transportation and the Department of Environmental Conserva- tion to control the methods of petroleum storage and transfer and to require prompt cleanup and compensation to damaged parties when spills or discharges occur. 15. Public Health Law (Article 11) This law provides for the Department of Health to make rules and regulations for the protection from contamination of public sup- plies of potable waters. 16. Solid Waste Management, Environmental Con- servation Law (Article 27, Title 7) Garbage, refuse, industrial and commercial wastes, incinerator residue, sludge and other solid wastes can cause physiological dis- orders in fish and wildlife and contaminate their habitats if not treated and disposed of properly. The construction and oepration of solid wastes management facilities are regulated as authorized by this law, and such regulations are directed at the prevention or reduction of pollution of resources. 17. Transportation Law (Article 2, Section 14-F) This law authorizes the Commissioner of Transportation to regulate the transportation of hazardous materials. 18. Flood Plain Management Act, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 36) This law ensures that, if a community fails to qualify for the federal national flood insurance program, the State will develop flood hazard regulations for that community to make it eligible for participation in the program. The regulations are, at a minimum, those specified by the federal program, ad- ministered by the Federal Emergency Manage- ment Agency. State agencies are also constrained by this law through regulation of such activities as the financing of projects, or the authoriza- tion of implementation of projects on state lands. The regulations are, at a minimum, those specified by the federal national flood insurance program. 11 -6-84 I 19. Coastal Erosion Hazards Area Act, Environ- mental Conservation Law (Article 34) This law provides for the identification of coastal erosion hazard areas, including natural protective features such as beaches, dunes, barrier islands and nearshore areas, and coastal lands subject to significant erosion. Standards and criteria are also prescribed for the regulation of activities and development in relation to those defined areas so as to minimize damage to natural resources and property from erosion. 20. Protection of Natural and Man-Made Beauty, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 49) Under this law, DEC has the power and duty to: (1) "develop policies and programs to preserve and enhance the natural and man-made beauty of the State" and (2) 'designate scenic sites, areas and highways in the State and develop programs for their preservation and enhancement'. 21. Implementation of Enviornmental Quality Bond Act of 1972, Environmental Conservation Law (Article SI) Title 7 of Article 51 directs the Department of Environmental Conservation to appropriate monies from the Environmental Quality Bond Act for land preservation and improvement projects. These projects include acquisition of important tidal and freshwater wetlands. Section 3-0305 of the ECL gives the Depart- ment of Environmental Conservation the power to acquire property for any of the functions of the Department. 22. Stream Rights Acquisition, Environmental Con- servation Law (Article 51-0701) This law enables the Department of Environ- mental Conservation to acquire access rights (fee-simple or less-than-fee simple) on quality streams guaranteeing fishermen access to various stretches of streams and rivers. I1- 6-85s 27. New York State Historic Preservation Act of 1980, Parks & Recreation Law (Section 11.03, 11.09, 14); Public Building Law (Article 4-B); General Municipal Law (Article 5-K) The New York State Historic Preservation Act greatly expands the responsibilities of New York State agencies and municipalities with regard to historic preservation. Specifically the Act provides several means for preserving the historic architectural, archeological, and cultural resources of the State (includ- ing resources under water). Each State agency must designate a historic preservation officer to coordinate and implement state historic preservation programs. A State Register of historic places is created and an inventory of properties which may qualify for the Register is established. A Statewide Preserv ation Plan is to be prepared and updated annually. A review process has been established, to be undertaken concurrently with existing environmiental reviews; this process requires State agencies to consult with the Commissioner of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation if a state-funded project will have an adverse effect upon a historic property. The review process requires consideration of alternatives and that adverse effects he avoided or mitigated. The Secretary of State is added to State0 Board of Historic Preservation, and the Com- missioner of the Office of General Services is required to consider the use and restora- tion of historic buildings in meeting the State's needs for building space. 28. Parks and Recreation Law (Section 3.09) This statute authorizes the NIS Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation to acquire, establish, operate, and maintain state parks, parkways, historic sites, and state recreational facilities. 29. State Nature and Historical Preserve Trust, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 45) This program provides for acquisition, when authorized by act of the Legislature, of real property (including less than fee interests) and administration of lands, outside the For- est Preserve counties, I ... of special nat- ural beauty, wilderness character or geolog- ical, ecological, or historical signficance." 11 - 6 - 86 30. New York State Park Preserve System, Parks and Recreation Law (Article 20) This legislation gives the Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation the power (in conjunction with Section 3.09 of PRL, authorizing acquisition of land for state recreational facilities) to purchase park preserve areas in or near metropolitan regions in order to "maintain the integrity of fauna ..."I and to "provide for the manage- ment of all unique, rare, or endangered species of fauna within park preserves areas." By purchasing fish and wildlife habitat areas for passive recreational uses, their preservation and management is assured. 31. Harbors of Refuge, Navigation Law (Article 11, Section 141) This law authorizes the Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation to enter into agreement with the federal government and with municipalities to construct, oper- ate, and maintain such harbors. Priorities for locating harbors of refuge are determined by the State Comprehensive Recreation Plan Priority System. 32. State Marina Facilities, Navigation Law (Article 11, Section 143) This section of the Navigation Law authorizes the State to construct, operate, and maintain State marina facilities, including those incidental to a harbor of refuge. Priorities for location of these facilities are also determined by the State Comprehensive Recrea- tion Plan Priority System. 33. Local Marina Facilities, Navigation Law (Article 11, Section 142) Municipalities can help meet the demand for marinas by participating in this program which authorizes state financial assistance to municipalities in the construction of local marina facilities, including those incidental to a harbor of refuge. Priorities for giving financial assistance to munici- palities are determined by the State Compre- hensive Recreation Plan Priority System. 11-6 -87 POLICY 19 Protect, maintain, and Increase the level and types of access to public water-related recreation resources and facilities. A. Explanation of Policy This policy calls for achieving balance among the following factors: the level of access to a resource or facility, the capacity of a resource or facility, and the protection of natural resources, The imbalance among these factors is the most significant in the State's urban areas. Because this is often due, to access-related problems, priority will be given to improving physical access to existing and potential coastal recreation sites within the heavily populated urban coastal areas of the State and to increasing the ability of urban residents to get to coastal recreation areas by improved public transpor- tation. The particular water related recreation resources and facilities which will receive priority for improved access are public beaches, boating facilities, fishing areas and waterfront parks. In addition, because of the greater competition for waterfront locations within urban areas, the Coastal Management Program will encourage mixed use areas and multiple use of facilities to improve access. Specific sites requiring access improvements and the relative priority the program will accord to each will be identified in the Public Access Planning Process. The following guidelines will be used in determining the consistency of a proposed action with this policy: 1. The existing access from adjacent or proxi- mate public lands or facilities to public water-related recreation resources and facilities shall not be reduced, nor shall the possibility of increasing access in the future from adjacent or proximate public lands or facilities to public water-related recreation resources and facilities be eliminated, unless in the latter case, estimates of future use of these resources and facilities are too low to justify maintaining or providing increased public access, The following is an explanation of the terms used in the above guidelines: I1- 6 -89 a. Access - the ability and right of the public to reach and use public coastal lands and waters. b. Public water-related recreation resources or facilities - all public lands or facilities that are suitable for passive or active recreation that requires either water or a waterfront location or is enhanced by a waterfront location. C. Public lands or facilities - lands or facilities held by State or local government in fee simple or less-than- fee simple ownership and to which the public has access or could have access, including underwater lands and the fore shore. d. A reduction in the existing level of public access - includes but is not limited to the following: (1) The number of parking spaces at a public water-related recreation resource or facility is signifi- cantly reduced. (2) The service level of public trans- portation to a public water-related recreation resource or facility is significantly reduced during peak season use and such reduction cannot be reasonably justified in terms of meeting systemwide objectives. (3) Pedestrian access is diminished or eliminated because of hazardous crossings required at new or altered transportation facilities, electric power transmission lines, or similar linear facilities. (4) There are increases in the following: already existing special fares of public transportation to a public water-related recreation resource or facility; and/or admission fees to such a resource or facility, and an analysis shows that such increases will signifi- cantly reduce usage by individuals or families with incomes below the State government establishedS poverty level. 1I - 6 - 90 e. An elimination of the possibility of increasing public access in the future includes, but is not limited to the following: (1) Construction of public facilities which physically prevent the provision, except at great expense, of convenient public access to public water-related recreation resources and facilities. (2) Sale, lease, or other transfer of public lands that could provide public access to a public water-related recreation resource or facility. (3) Construction of private facilities which physically prevent the provision of convenient public access to public water-related recreation resources or facilities from public lands and facilities. 2. Any proposed project to increase public access to public water-related recreation resources and facilities shall be analyzed according to the following factors: a. The level of access to be provided should be in accord with estimated public use. If not, the proposed level of access to be provided shall be deemed inconsistent with the policy. b. The level of access to be provided shall not cause a degree of use which would exceed the physical capability of the resource or facility. If this were determined to be the case, the proposed level of access to be provided shall be deemed inconsistent with the policy. 3. The State will not undertake or fund any project which increases access to a water- related resource or facility that is not open to all members of the public. 4. In their plans and programs for increasing public access to public water-related resources and facilities, State agencies shall give priority in the following order to projects located: within the boundaries of the Federal-Aid Metropolitan Urban Area and served by public transportation; within the boundaries of the Federal-Aid metropolitan II - 6 - 91 Urban Area but not served by public transportation; outside the defined Urban Area boundary and served by public transportation; and outside the defined Urban Area boundary but not served by public0 transportation. B. State Means for Implementing the Policy 1. Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act, Executive Law (Article 42). Section 919 of Article 42 requires 1) that State agencies' actions, including funding, planning, and land transactions, as well as direct development activities, must be consistent with the policies of this act# one of which calls for preventing diminution of public access to the waterfront and another for encouraging and facilitating public access for recreational purposes. This provision of law is implemented by amendments to SEQR (see 2 below) and by DOS regulations. DOS regulations (19 NYCRR Part 600) provide that, for their direct actions which do not have a significant effect on the environment, State agencies certify that the action is consistent with the coastal policies, among which are the following: -- Protect, maintain, and increase the levels and types of access to public water related recreation resources and facilities so that these resources and facilities may be fully utilized by all the public in accordance with reasonably anticipated public recreation needs and the protection of historic and natural resources. In providing such access, priority shall be given to public beaches, boating facilities, fishing areas, and waterfront parks; -- Expand recreational use of fish and wildlife resources by increasing access to existing resources (19 NYCRR 600.5); and -- Water dependent and water enhanced recreation shall be encouraged and facilitated and shall be given priority over non-water related uses along the coast provided it is consistent with the preservation and enhancement of other coastal resources taking into account demand for such facilities. in facili- tating such activities, priority shall II - 6 - 92 be given to areas where access to the recreation opportunities of the coast can be provided by new or existing 0 ~ ~~~~~public transportation services and to those areas where the use of the shore is severely restricted by existing development (19 NYCRR 600.5); 2) that the Secretary of State review actions of State agencies that may affect achievement of the policies; and 3) that SEQR regulations be amended to reflect consideration of coastal resources that can accommodate public access needs. Section 2 of the Act requires that State agencies analyze their programs' consistency with coastal policies and the Secretary of State recommend any needed modifications to the Governor and the Legislature. 2. State Environmental Quality Review Act, Environmental Cons-ervation Law (Article 8). Under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, State agencies and local governments are required to prepare an environmental impact statement for any action that might have an impact upon the environment. Such actions include those contiguous to any publicly- owned or operated park land, recreation area or designated open space. Since actions deal with the provision of access, under this policy, to public water-related recreation resources and facilities, any action would require an environmental impact statement to be prepared if it exceeded 25 percent of any threshold specified for a Type I action (6 NYCRR Part 617). In addition, Article 42 of the Executive Law requires that SEQR regulations be amended to require that environmental impact statements address coastal policies whenever a proposed action would affect achievement of a coastal policy. Actions which have been subject to an environmental impact statement must, consis- tent with social, economic, and other essential considerations, minimize or avoid, to the maximum extent practicable, the adverse environmental effects revealed in the impact statement (ECL 58-0109-8). 0 ~~~~~~~~~11 -6 -93 In addition, pursuant to Article 42 of the Executive Law, SEQR regulations are amended to require that for actions by a State agency for which an EIS has been prepared, such actions shall be consistent with the coastal policies, among which are: -- Expand recreational use of fish and wildlife resources by increasing access to existing resources (19 NYCRR 600.5); -- Protect, maintain, and increase the levels and types of access to public water related recreation resources and facilities so that these resources and facilities may be fully utilized by all the public in accordance with reasonably anticipated public recreation needs and the protection of historic and natural resources. In providing such access, priority will be given to public beaches, boating facilities, fishing areas, and waterfront parks (19 NYCRR 600.5); and -- Water dependent and water enhanced recreation shall be encouraged and facilitated and shall be given priority over non-water related uses along the coast provided it is consistent with the preservation and enhancement of other coastal resources, taking into account demand for such facilities. in facili- tating such activities, priority shall be given to areas where access to the recreation opportunities of the coast can be provided by new or existing public transportation services and to those areas where the use of the shore is severely restricted by existing development (19 NYCRR 600.5). 3. Acquisition-Parks and Recreation Law (3.09); Environmental Conservation Law (3-0305); Highway Law �22. One of the most effective means of providing access to public beaches and other public areas of the type listed above is acquisition of real property, including either the full fee interest in real property or some lesser interest therein, such as an easement, or contractual right to use the real property. There are presently a number of specific 11 - 6-94 statutory acquisition powers which could be used to implement this public access policy. The cited Parks and Recreation Law and the Environmental Conservation Law provided broad acquisition powers to the office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation and the Department of Environmental Conservation respectively. The State Department of Transportation is authorized to acquire land for highway and specific transportation purposes, but these acquisition powers could be used to achieve their intended purposes as well as to implement coastal access policies. In addition to the basic power to acquire property for transportation facilities per se, such powers include "Acquisition of P;roperty... in order to provide multi-use areas adjacent to state highways and recreational, natural and scenic areas along, but hot necessarily contiguous to, state highways..." (Highway Law 522). This is a power which could be used to carry out a number of coastal policies involving actual physical access. The 'multi-use areas" are to complement highway facilities. The st atute provides that multi-use areas may include, but are not limited to walking, hiking, bicycle, and recreational vehicle trails, and there is express power to acquire less than fee interest. Acquisitions for this program must be reviewed by the Department of State, the Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation, and the Department of Environ- mental Conservation. The Secretary of State will review such acquisitions which are located within the coastal area. Pursuant to its general acquisition powers (see above), the Department of Environmental Conservation has instituted a program to acquire public fishing access to lakes, rivers and streams, including provision of boat launching sites. Substantial access has been provided through acquisition of easements on private lands. The Parks and Recreation Bond Act of 1960 and the Environmental Q~uality Bond Act of 1972 have provided a source of funds for such acqui- sition. (See Environmental Conservation Law, S51-0701). Within the coastal area acquisition will be made in accordance with II - 6 - 95 the priorities established by the "access planning process." Acquisition for improved coastal access made by these agencies or other funds must be consistent with the priorities described in Policy 20. 4. Access Road, Highway Law 510 (37) This section of the Highway Law gives the Commissioner of Transportation the authority, upon request of any head of a State agency, to construct an access road from a State highway to an agency facility (the agency would, however, be required to reimburse DOT for all incurred costs). Thus, access to coastal recreational facilities may be increased at those facilities where road access has been identified as deficient. 5. Abandoned Railway Acquistion, Transportation Law (�18) Railroads are a common feature of much of New York's coast and often restrict access to it. This section of the Transportation Law gives the Commissioner of the Department of Transportation the preferential right to acquire abandoned railroads, or to authorize other appropriate State agencies, or counties, cities, towns and villages to exercise a preferential acquisition right to such abandoned property. Wthere such abandoned property would improve access to existing or proposed public recreation areas and there is no viable transportation use for it, the Commissioner should give priority to the public agency that has jurisdiction over such coastal lands. This Law contains a consistency provision stating that the actions of the Department of Transportation in determining preferential rights to right-of-way, where a conflict over use exists between one or more government agencies, shall take action consistent with the effectuation of State plans and policies. This provision plus the State consistency provisions of the Coastal Management Program indicate coastal management policies will influence the decision where a conflict exists. I1- 6 -96 6. Siting of Energy Facilities, Public Service Laws (Article VII and VIII) and Commission opinion 72-3, case #26108 Many transmission lines, are located in the coastal area. Use of their rights-of-way can provide a suitable means of assuring additional access to water-related recreation opportunities including use by recreational vehicles. Under this Law a utility company is required to allocate an amount equal to two percent of the total construction cost of the transmission facilities to a fund to be used for recreational development of the right-of-way. Where the right-of-way could be used for needed additional access, this provision of the Law will be employed to provide that access. At the present time, however, recreational use of such rights-of-way is not being acted upon because of research that is underway in connection with health and safety effects which may be associated with high voltage transmission facilities. Because power plants generally locate along the coast and a large land area around the facility is often owned by the utility, these sites present significant opportunities for multiple use. At a minimum they can provide additional access to water-related recreation opportunities such as fishing. 7. Fish and Wildlife Management Act, Environ- mental Conservation Law, (Article II, Title 5) The Environmental Conservation Law provides for a "Fish and Wildlife Management Practices Cooperative Program", the purpose of which is to: '...obtain on the privately owned or leased lands and waters of the state practices of fish and wildlife management which will preserve and develop the fish and wildlife resources of the state and improve access to them for recreational purposes by the people of the state.' The program is used to provide, by agreement with land- owners, public rights to access to such lands for hunting and fishing purposes. Within coastal areas, efforts to obtain agreements will reflect coastal management policies. Is II - 6 - 97 8. State Comprehensive Recreation Plan, Parks and Recreation Law (�3.15) The State Comprehensive Recreation Plan has a priority system for allocating funds available for outdoor recreation acquisition and development projects under State and Federal grant programs and the State Environmental Quality Bond Act. One of the positive-rated allocation factors is the degree to which the project contributes to the implementation of State plans such as that for Coastal Management. In addition, consistency between the Coastal Management Program and the State Comprehensive Recrea- tion Plan will be assured by the Secretary of State's review of such plan, and by the State Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act which requires State agencies to act consistent with the Act's policies. 9. Parks and Recreation Law, �3.09 (7-a) The Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation is required to promulgate a comprehensvie plan for the establishment of a statewide trails system. Trails are to include footpaths, bike ways, snowmobile trails, horse trails, cross-country ski trails, roads and other rights-of-way0 suitable for hiking, strolling, cycling, horseback riding, skiing, and other means of motorized and non-motorized travel for recreational purposes. Included are to be combinations and systems of trails leading to scenic and recreational areas, such as those in coastal areas. 11 - 6 - 98 POLICY 20 Access to the publicly-owned foreshore and to lands immediately ad- jacent to the foreshore or the water's edge that are publicly-owned shall be provided and It shall be provided in a manner compatible with adjoining uses. A. Explanation of Policy In coastal areas where there are little or no recreation facilities providing specific water- related recreational activities, access to the publicly-owned lands of the coast at large should he provided for numerous activities and pursuits which require only minimal facilities for their enjoyment. Such access would provide for walking along a beach or a city waterfront or to a vantage point from which to view the seashore. Similar activities requiring access would include bicycling, birdwatching, photography, nature study, beachcombing, fishing and hunting. For those activities, there are several methods of providing access -which will receive -priority attention of the Coastal Management Program. These include: the development of a coastal trails system; the provision of access across transportation facilities to the coast; the improvement of access to waterfronts in urban areas; and the promotion of mixed and multi-use development. While such publicly-owned lands referenced in the policy shall be retained -in public ownership, traditional sales of easements on lands underwater to adjacent onshore property owners are consistent with this policy, provided such easements do not substantially interfere with continued public use, of the public. lands on which the easement is granted. Also, public use of such publicly-owned underwater lands and lands immediately adjacent to the shore shall be discouraged where such use would be inappropriate for reasons of public safety, military security, or the protection of fragile coastal resources. The following guidelines will be used in determining the consistency of a proposed action with this policy: 1. Existing access from adjacent or proximate public lands or facilities to existing public coastal lands and/or waters shall not be reduced, nor shall the possibility of increasing access in the future from adjacent or nearby public lands or facilities to public coastal lands and/or waters be II - 6 - 99 eliminated, unless such actions are demonstrated to be of overriding regional or statewide public benefit, or in the latter case, estimates of future use of these lands and waters are too low to justify maintaining or providing increased access. The following is an explanation of the terms used in the above guidelines: a. (See definitions under first policy of "access". and 'public lands or facil--i t i es" ) . b. A reduction in the existing level of public access - includes but is not limited to the following: (1) Pedestrian access is diminished or eliminated because of hazardous crossings required at new or altered transportation facilities, electric power transmission lines, or similar linear facilities. (2) Pedestrian access is diminished or blocked completely by public or private development. C. An elimination of the possibility of increasing public access in the future - includes but is not limited to, the following: (1) Construction of public facilities which physically prevent the provision, except at great expense, of convenient public access to public coastal lands and/or waters. (2) Sale, lease, or other conveyance of public lands that could provide public access to public coastal lands and/or waters. (3) Construction of private facilities which physically prevent the provision of convenient public access to public coastal lands and/or waters from public lands and facilities. 11- 6 -100 2. The existing level of public access within public coastal lands or waters shall not be reduced or eliminated. a. A reduction or elimination in the existing level of public access - includes but is not limited to the following: (1) Access is reduced or eliminated because of hazardous crossings required at new or altered transportation facilities, electric power transmission lines, or similar linear facilities. (2) Access is reduced or blocked completely by any public development. 3. Public access from the nearest public roadway to the shoreline and along the coast shall be provided by new land use or development except where (a) it is inconsistent with public safety, military security, or the protection of identified fragile coastal resources; (b) adequate access exists within one-half mile; or Cc) agriculture would be adversely affected. Such access shall not be required to be open to public use until a public agency or private association agrees to accept responsibility for maintenance and liability of the accessway. 4. The State will not undertake or fund any project which increases access to a water-related resource or facility that is not open to all members of the public. 5. In their plans and programs for increasing public access, State agencies shall give priority in the following order to projects located: within the boundaries of the Federal-Aid Metropolitan Urban Area and served by public transportation; within the Federal-Aid Metropolitan Urban Area but not served by public transportation; outside the defined Urban Area boundary and served by public transportation; and outside the defined Urban Area boundary but not served by public transportation. 6. Proposals' for increased public access to coastal lands and waters shall be analyzed according to the following factors: 0 U - 6 - ~~~~~~~101 a. The level of access to be provided should be in accord with estimated public use. If not, the proposed level of access to be provided shall be deemed inconsistent with the policy. b. The level of access to be provided shall not cause a degree of use which would exceed the physical capability of the coastal lands or waters. If this were determined to be the case, the proposed level of access to be provided shall be deemed inconsistent with the policy. B. State Means for Implementing the Policy 1. Waterfro nt Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act, Executive Law (Article 42) Section 919 of Article 42 requires 1) that State agencies actions, including funding, planning, and land transactions, as well as direct development activities, must be consistent with the policies of this act, one of which calls for preventing diminution of public access to the waterf ront and another for encouraging and facilitating public access for recreational purposes. This provision of law is implemented by amendments to SEQR (of 2 below) and by DOS regulations. DOS regulations (19 NYCRR Part 600) provide that, for their direct actions which do not have a significant effect on the environment, State agencies certify that the action is consistent with the coastal policies, one of which is: "Access to the publicly owned foreshore and to lands immediately adjacent to the foreshore or the water's edge that are publicly owned shall be provided and it shall be provided in a manner compatible with adjoining uses. To ensure that such lands remain available for public use they shall be retained in public ownership"; 2) that the Secretary of State shall review actions of State agencies that may affect achievement of the policy; and 3) that SEQR regulations be amended to reflect consideration of the use of coastal resources for including accommoda- tion of public access needs. Section 2 of the Act requires that State agencies analyze their programs,' consistency with coastal policies and that the Secretary of State recommenc. any needed modifications to the Governor and the Legislature. II - 6 - 102 2. State Environmental Quality Review Act, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 8) Pursuant to Article 42 of the Executive Law, SEQR regulations are amended to require that for actions by a State agency for which an EIS has been prepared, such actions shall be consistent with the coastal policies, one of which is: 'Access to the publicly owned foreshore and to lands immediately adjacent to the foreshore or the water's edge that are publicly owned shall be provided in a manner comnpatible with adjoining uses. To ensure that such lands remain available for public use they shall be retained in public ownership." 3. Acquisition of Property for Construction of Bikeways, Highway Law (S22) An important component of coastal trails systems would be the inclusion of bikeways, which are particularly desirable for providing access because they create few disturbances of the natural environment and are compatible with the protection of private property rights. This section of the Highway Law could be the principal means to acquire land for bikeways, since it authorizes the Commissioner of Transportation to acquire property for the purpose of constructing such facilities. Abandoned Railway Acquisition, Transportation 4. Law (S18) Where railroad transportation property in coastal areas has been abandoned for railroad transportation purposes, the potential is high for conversion of the right-of-way to a coastal trails system that will increase access to the coast. This section of the Transportation Law gives the Commissioner of Transportation the preferential right to acquire abandoned railroads, or to authorize other appropriate State agencies, metro- politan or regional transportation authorities; or counties, cities, towns and villages to exercise a preferential acqui- sition right to such abandoned property. The Law contains a consistency provision stating that the actions of the Department of Transportation in determining preferential rights to rights-of-way, where a conflict 5 ~~~~~~~~~11- 6 -103 over use exists between one or more govern- ment agencies, shall take action consistent with the effectuation of State plans and policies. This provision plus the State consistency provisions of the Coastal Manage- ment Program indicate coastal management policies will influence the decision where a conflict exists. 5. Statewide Trails System, Parks and Recreation Law S3.09 (7-a) This provision of the Parks and Recreation Law could be used in conjunction with the above provision, since it requires the Commissioner of the Office of Parks, Recrea- tion and Historic Preservation to promulgate � comprehensive plan for the establishment of � statewide trails system which may be implemented by the purchase and improvement of abandoned railroad rights-of-way. Through coordination with the Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation, the Coastal Management Program~ will ensure that development of trails in coastal areas receives a high priority, and within the coastal area the Secretary of State will identify areas where trail development should receive priority. 6. Highway Law (Article 1I, �22) Recreational, scenic and natural areas adjacent to coastal highways enhance not only the setting of the highway, but can provide access to coastal areas that, for example, would otherwise be cut off by the highway. This applies to both rural and urban areas. This section of the Highway Law could be used to provide for such areas because it authorizes the Commissioner of Transportation to acquire property in order to provide multi-use areas adjacent to State highways, and recreational, natural, and scenic areas along but not necessarily contiguous to State highways. Multi-use areas can be used for such facilities as walking, hiking, bicycle, trail-bike, recreational vehicle, and snowmobile trails. Plans for any acquisitions will be submitted to the Secretary of State for his review and recommendation. I1- 6 -1040 7. Siting of Major Steam Electric Generating Facilities, Public Service Law (Article VIII) Because power plants generally locate along the coast and a large land area around the facility is often owned by the utility, these sites present significant opportunities for multiple use, including access. Recognizing this, the law specifically provides for consideration of recreational use of power plant sites, which could, of course, include access to the shore. The law requires utilities to state "why the primary proposed location and source is best suited to promote the public health and welfare, including the recreational and other concerned uses which the site may serve." The Secretary of State will participate in the proceedings and will formally present to the Siting Board his recommendations on access. 8. Development of Transportation Corridors; Multiple Use Outside the Counties of Rings and Queens of Rights-of-Way, Transportation Law (Article 14-e) All transportation facilities, especially those in coastal areas, have the potential for development and multiple-use activities, including recreation and its necessary component access, in their rights-of-way. This article of the Transportation Law could be used for general access purposes to coastal areas, since it gives the Commis- sioner of Transportation the power to provide for the multiple-use of transportation facility rights-of-way in connection with the construction of such facilities. This applies throughout .the State with the exception of Kings and Queens Counties (New York City). 9. Wild, Scenic and Recreational Rivers Act, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 15, Title 27) This statute empowers the Department of Envirohmental Conservation to promulgate regulations for the control of land use and development within an area up to one half mile from the banks of designated rivers. While this statute provides for police power regulations, not acquisition, the commis- sioner of Environmental Conservation is authorized to order discontinuance of land uses, with payment of compensation. II- 1 105 Along designated rivers in coastal areas where development patterns deter access, this power could be indirectly used to facilitate the provision of access. 10. State Nature and Historical Preserve Trust, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 45) This program provides for acquisition, when authorized by act of the Legislature, of real property (including less than fee interests) and administration of lands, outside the Forest Preserve counties, .. of special natural beauty, wilderness character or geological, ecological, or historical significance.' Wherever properties are purchased in coastal areas, an indirect benefit of the program could be the improvement of access to the coast for a variety of passive activities, provided physical access would not conflict with preservation of the resource. 11. Tidal and Freshwater Wetlands Acts, Environ- mental Conservation Law (Articles 24 and 25) These acts contain authority for programs applying both performance standards and land use regulations for the protection of wetlands. The exercise of the police power in relation to wetlands is to be accomplished within the context of the broadly stated purpose of these acts. While public access is not specifically listed, several listed purposes relate to access, including recreational benefits ('provision of areas for hunting, fishing, boating, hiking, birdwatching, photography, and other uses"); "...education and scientific research by providing readily accessible outdoor bio-physical laboratories, living classrooms and vast training and education resources"; and "...open space and aesthetic appreciation by providing often the only remaining open areas along crowded river fronts and coastal Great Lakes regions..." 11 -6 -106 POLICY 21 Water dependent and water enhanced recreation will be encouraged and facilitated, and will be given priority over non-water related uses along the coast. A. Explanation of Policy Water-related recreation includes such obviously water-dependent activities as boating, swimming, and fishing as well as certain activities which are enhanced by a coastal location and increase the general public's access to the coast such as pedestrian and bicycle trails, picnic areas, scenic overlooks and passive recreation areas that take advantage of coastal scenery. Provided the development of water-related recreation is consistent with the preservation and enhancement of such important coastal resources as fish and wildlife habitats, aesthetically signifi- cant areas, historic and cultural resources, agriculture and significant mineral and fossil deposits, and provided demand exists, water- related recreation development is to be increased and such uses shall have a higher priority than any non-coastal dependent uses, including non- water-related recreation uses. In addition, water-dependent recreation uses shall have a higher priority over water enhanced recreation uses. Determining a priority among coastal dependent uses will require a case by case analysis. Among priority areas for increasing water-related recreation opportunities are those areas where access to the recreation opportunities of the coast can be provided by new or existing public transportation services and those areas where the use of the shore is severely restricted by highways, railroads, industry, or other forms of existing intensive land use or development. The DOS, working with the Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservation and with local govern- ments, will identify communities whose use of the shore has been so restricted and those sites shoreward of such developments which are suitable for recreation and can be made accessible. Priority shall be given to recreational development of such lands. 0 ~~~~~~~~~~11 -6 - 107 The siting or design of new public development in a manner which would result in a barrier to the recreational use of a major portion of a corn- munity's shore should be avoided as much as0 Among the types of water-dependent recreation, provision of adequate boating services to meet future demand is to be encouraged by this Program. The siting of boating facilities must be con- sistent with preservation and enhancement of other coastal resources and with their capacity to accommodate demand. The provision of new public boating facilities is essential in meeting this demand, but such public actions should avoid competition with private boating development. Boating facilities will, as appropriate, include parking, park-like surroundings, toilet facili- ties, and pumpout facilities. Harbors of Refuge are particulary needed along Lake Erie and Lake Ontario. There is a need for a better locational pattern of boating facilities to correct problems of overused, insufficient, or improperly sited facilities. Also to be encouraged is non-motorized recreation in the State's coastal area. Water-related of f- road recreational vehicle use is an acceptable activity, provide no adverse environmental impacts occur. Where adverse environmental impacts will0 occur, mitigating measures will be implemented, where practicable to minimize such adverse impacts. .If acceptable mitigation is not practi- cable, prohibition of the use by off-road recrea- tional vehicles will be posted and enforced. B. State Means for Implementing the Policy 1. Parks and Recreation Law (Section 3.09) This statute authorizes the NYS Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation to acquire, establish, operate, and maintain state parks, parkways, historic sites, and state recreational facilities. This Law is employed by the Office to implement the State Comprehensive Recreation Plan (SCRP) and funding priority system described below. II-6 - 108 2. State Comprehensive Recreation Plan, Parks and Recreation Law (Section 3.15) The State Comprehensive Recreation Plan has a priority system to allocate funding for public parks and outdoor recreation acqui- sition, development and rehabilitation projects under available State and Federal grant assistance funds and State Environ- mental Quality Bond Act monies. One of the positive rated allocation factors is the degree to which the project contributes to the implementation of the State Comprehensive Recreation Plan or other State, national or regional plans. Thus, the Coastal Management program would require that projects proposed for coastal areas be evaluated positively under this Priority System if they' are water-related or negatively if they are not water-related. The DOS will work with the OPR & HP in a review of the State Compre- hensive Recreation Plan to ensure that it assigns priority to water-related recrea- tional facilities and activities within the coastal area. 3. Waterfront Pevitalization and Coastal Resources Act, Executive Law (Article 42) Article 42, Section 919 provides: (1) that all State agency actions, including funding, planning, land transaction, as well as direct development activities must be consistent with the policies of this Act which call for the encouragement and facilitation of public access to the shore for recreation, recrea- tional fishing, maintaining open space, and in general, the beneficial use of coastal resources, particularly for recreation when- ever appropriate. This provision of law is implemented by amendments to SEOR (cf 2 below) and by DOS regulations. DOS regula- tions (19 NYCRR Part 600) provide that, for their direct actions which do not have a significant effect on the environment, State agencies' certify that the action is con- sistent with the coastal policies, one of which iS: 'Water dependent and water enhanced recreational activities shall be encouraged and facilitated and shall be given priority over non-water related uses along the coast, provided it is consistent with the preser- vation )and enhancement of other coastal resources and takes into account demand for such facilities. In facilitating such activities, priority shall be given to areas II - 6 - 109 where access to the recreation opportunities of the coast can be provided by new or exis- ting public transportation services and to those areas where the use of the shore is severely restricted by existing development." (2) that the Secretary of State review actions of State agencies that would affect achievement of the policies of the Act; and (3) that SEQR regulations be amended to require consideration of impacts on the use of coastal resources for recreation. Section 2 of the Act requires State agencies to analyze their programs' consistency with .coastal policies and that the Secretary of State review such analyses and make recom- mendations to the Governor and Legislature for any needed changes. The formula for allocating funding to localities and the State Comprehensive Recreation Plan are among the programs that will be analyzed. . 4. State Environmental Quality Review Act, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 8) Under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, State agencies and local governments are required to prepare an environmental impact statement for any action that might have a significant impact upon the environment. In assessing the significance of an action's impact on the environment, the impacts on open space and future recreational oppor- tunities are among those considered. The SEOR regulations (NYCRR 617.12) set a much lower threshold for triggering an environmental assessment for an action in or near a recreation area. In addition, as Article 42 of the Executive Law, requires SEQR regula- tions are being amended to require the con- sideration of impacts on the use of coastal resources, such as potential recreational use of coastal resources. Actions which have been subject to an environmental impact statement must, consistent with social, eco- nomic, and other essential considerations, minimize or avoid, to the maximum extent practicable, the adverse environmental effects revealed in the impact statement (ECL S8-0109-8). In addition, pursuant to Article 42 of the Executive Law, SEQR regulations are amended to require that for actions by a State agency for which an EIS has been prepared, such actions shall be consistent I1- 6 -110 with the coastal policies, one of which is: "Water dependent and water enhanced recrea- tion shall be encouraged and facilitated and shall be given priority over non water- related uses along the coast, provided it is consistent with the preservation and enhance- ment of other coastal resources and takes into account demand for such facilities. In facilitating such activities, priority shall be given to areas where access to recreation opportunities of the coast can be provided by new or existing public transportation services and to those areas where the use of the shore is severely restricted by existing development." 5. Plan for an Urban Cultural Park System; Parks and Recreation Law (Section 3.21) This Law has resulted in the formulation of a plan for the creation of a statewide system of urban cultural parks, many located within the coastal boundary and which include, among other areas of concern, consideration or urban waterways and other natural areas that offer active and passive recreational opportunities. 6. Parks and Recreation Law (Section 3.09 (7-a)) Where railroad property in coastal areas has been abandoned for railroad transportation purposes, the potential is high for con- version of the right-of-way to recreational use and for increasing access to the land shoreward from the railroad. This provision of the Parks and Recreation Law gives the Commissioner of the Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation the power to purchase and improve such abandoned railroad rights-of-way as can be used to implement a comprehensive plan for the establishment of a statewide trails system. 7. Abandoned Railroad Acquisition, Transporta- tion Law (Section 18) Th-is section of the Transportation Law gives the Commissioner of Transportation the preferential right to acquire abandoned railroads, or to authorize other appropriate State agencies; metropolitan or regional transportation authorities; or counties, cities, towns and villages to exercise a preferential acquisition right to such 11 - 6 - Ul1 abandoned property. The Department of Trans- poration is required to notify all interested State agencies of the availability of abandoned railway rights-of-way. This Law0 contains a consistency provision stating that the actions of the Department of Transpor- tation in determining preferential rights to rights-of-way, where a conflict over use exists between one or more government agencies, shall be consistent to the extent practicable with the effectuation of all State plans, policies, and objectives. This provision fits well with the State con- sistency provisions of the Executive Article 42. 8. Highway Law (Article 1I, Section 22) Recreational, scenic, and natural areas located adjacent to coastal highways enhance not only the setting of a highway, but can provide access to coastal areas that would otherwise be cut off by the highway. This section of the Highway Law can provide for such areas because the Commissioner of the State Department of Transportation is authorized to acquire property for multi-use areas adjacent to State highways, as well as recreational, natural, and scenic areas along, but not necessarily contiguous to,0 such highways. multi-use areas can be used for such purposes as walking, hiking, bicycling, trail biking, and for snowmobile trails. Acquisition and development-of such areas must be consistent with the coastal policies of Article 42, Executive Law. 9. Harbors of Refuge, Navigation Law (Article 11, Section 141) This law authorizes the Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation to enter into agreement with the Federal government and with municipalities to construct, operate, and maintain such harbors. Priori- ties for locating harbors of refuge are determined by the State Comprehensive Recreation Plan Priority System. it is particularly important that the location of such harbors be consistent with the preser- vation and enhancement of coastal resources so that resource use conflicts are avoided. 11 - 6 - 112 1.Local Marina Facilities, Navigation Law (Article 11, Section 142) Municipalities can help meet the demand for marinas by participating in this program which authorizes State financial assistance to municipalities in the construction of local marina facilities, including those incidental to a harbor of refuge. Priorities for giving financial assistance to rpunici- palities are determined by the State Compre- hensive Recreation Plan Priority System. 1.State Marina Facilities, Navigation Law (Article 11, Section 143) This section of the Navigation Law authorizes the State to construct, operate, and maintain State marina facilities, including those incidental to a harbor of refuge. Priorities for location of these facilities are also determined by the State Comprehensive Recreation Plan Priority System. 11 6 11l3 "'LICY 22 Development when located adjacent to the shore will provide tar water-related recreation whenever such use is compatible with reasonably anticipated demand for such activities, and is compatible with the primary purpose of the development. A. Explanation of Policy Many developments present practical opportunities for providing recreation facilities as an additional use of the site or facility. Therefore whenever developments are located adjacent to the shore they should to the fullest extent permitted by existing law provide for some form of water-related recreation use unless there are compelling reasons why any form of such recreation would not be compatible with the development, or a reasonable demand for public use cannot be foreseen. The types of development which can generally provide water-related recreation as a multiple use include but are not limited to: o parks o highways o power plants o utility transmission rights of way 0- o sewage treatment facilities o mental health facilities* o hospitals* o prisons* o schools, universities* o military facilities* o nature preserves* o large residential subdivisions (50 units) o shopping centers o office buildings Prior to taking action relative to any develop- ment, State agencies should consult with the State Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preser- vation, and if there is an approved local water- front program, with the municipality in which the development is to locate, to deterimine appropriate recreation uses. The agency should provide OPRHP and the municipality with the opportunity to participate in project planning. * the types of recreation uses likely to be compatible with these facilities are limited to the more passive forms, such as trails or fishing access. In some cases, land areas not directly or immediately needed by the facility could be used for recreation. II - 6- 115 Appropriate recreation uses which do not require any substantial additional construction shall be provided at the expense of the project sponsor provided the cost does not exceed 2% of total project cost. In determining whether compelling reasons exist which would make inadvisable recreation as a multiple use, safety considerations should reflect a recognition that some risk is acceptable in the use of recreational facilities., Whenever a proposed development would be con- sistent with CMP policies and the development could, through the provision of recreation and other multiple uses, significantly increase public use of the shore, then such development should be encouraged to locate adjacent to the shore (this situation would generally only apply within the more developed portions of urban areas). B. State Means for Implementing the Policy 1. Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act, Executive Law (Article 42) Section 919 of Article 42 requires that State agencies' actions, including funding, planning, land transactions, as well as direct development activities, must be consistent with the policies of this Act. These policies call for increased public access to the shore for recreation purposes. The Act therefore makes it incumbent on all State agencies to promote water-related recreation whenever there is an opportunity to do so. This provision of law is imple- mented by amendments to SEQR (see 2 below) and by DOS regulations. DOS regulations (.19 NYCRR Part 600) provide that, for their direct actions which do not have a signifi- cant effect on the enviroment, State agencies certify that the action is consistent with the coastal policies, one of which is: "Developments when located adjacent to the shore shall provide for water-related recreation whenever appropriate in light of reasonably anticipated demand for such activities and the primary use of such land.n Further, this Act requires review by the Secretary of State of State agency actions which may affect achievement of coastal policies. In addition SEQR regulations will be amended to require consideration of impacts on the use of coastal resources for such purposes as recreation. II - 6 - 116 Section 2 of the Act requires that State agencies analyze their programs' consistency with coastal policies and that the Secretary of State recommend any needed modifications to the Governor and the Legislature. 2. State Env ironmental Quality Review Act, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 8) Under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, State agencies and local governments are required to prepare an environmental impact statement for any action that might have a significant effect on the environment. In assessing the significance of an action's impact on the environment, the impacts an open space and future recreational opportunities are considered. Article 42 of the Executive Law requires that SEQR regulations be amended to require the consideration of impacts on the use of coastal resources for such activities as recreation. Actions which have been subject to an environmental impact statement must, consistent with social, economic, and other essential considerations, minimize or avoid, to the maximum extent practicable the adverse environmental effects revealed in the impact statement (ECL S 8-0109-S). In addition, pursuant to Article 42 of the Executive Law SEQR regulations are amended to require that for actions by a State agency for which an EIS has been prepared, such actions shall be consistent with the coastal policies, one of which is: "Developments when located adjacent to the shore shall provide for water-related recreation whenever appropriate in light of reasonably anticipated demand for such activities and the primary use of such land.' 3. Utility Transmission Facility Siting (Commission Opinion 72-3, Case *26108) Transmission line rights-of-way are often suitable for recreational activities such as hiking, cycling, cross-country skiing or horseback riding. Many transmission lines are located in coastal areas. Under this Commission opinion, a utility company is required to allocate an amount equal to two percent of the total construction cost of the 11 - 6 - 117 transmission facility to a fund for the recreational development of the right-of-way. The program applies to electric transmission lines of 115KV ten miles or more in length, or for higher voltage lines of one mile or more. Municipalities traversed by any part of the right-of-way, as well as State and Federal agencies, are eligible to use the fund, which provides fifty percent of the cost of any particular recreational develop- ment. The sponsor must pay the rest of the cost. The Public Service Commission policy relating to actual recreational development of a specific right-of-way is decided on a case-by-case basis. It is not an automatic part of every order issued by the Commission in connection with 'transmission line decis- ions. At the present time, the joint funding of recreational development for rights-of-way is not being acted upon because of research that is underway in connection with health and safety effects that may be associated with high-voltage transmission facilities. 4. Siting of Major Steam Electric Generating Facilities, Public Service Law (Article VIII) Because power plants tend to locate along the coast and require a large land area around the facility, these sites present significant opportunities for multiple use. Recognizing this, this Law specifically provides for con- sideration of recreational use of power plant sites. It requires utilities to state "why the'primary proposed location and source is best suited to promote the public health and welfare including the recreational and other concurrent uses which the site may serve." 5. Multi-use Areas Adjacent to Recreational, Natural, and Scenic Areas Along State High- ways, Highway Law (Article 22) Areas adjacent to highways in the coastal area can provide numerous opportunities for multi-use recreation. This part of the High- way Law authorizes the Department of Trans- portation to acquire property adjacent to State highways for multi-use recreational purposes and along, but not necessary con- tiguous to, State highways for recreation- al, natural and scenic purposes. Multi-use areas may be utilized for, but not limited to, hiking, bicycle, trailbike, recreational vehicle and snowmobile trails. II - 6 - 118 6. Development of Transportation Corridors; Multi-Use Outside tbe Counties of Kings and Queens of Right-of-Way, Transportation Law (Article 14-e) All transportation facilities, especially those in coastal areas, have the potential for development of multi-use activities, including recreation, in their rights-of- way. This article of the Transportation Law gives the Commissioner of the Department of Transportation the power to provide for the multi-use of transporation facility rights- of-way in conjunction with the construction of such facilities. This applies everywhere in the state except in Kings and Queens Counties. 7. Acquisition of Reforestation Areas, Environ- mental Conservation Law (9-0501) Numerous coastal recreational activities are compatible with reforestation and forest management. This law gives the Department of Environmental Conservation the power to acquire lands for reforestation and for establishment and maintenance of forests for watershed protection, timber production and other forest products, and for recreation and other purposes. The reforestation areas must consist of at least five hundred acres of contiguous lands. 11 - 6 - 119 POLICY 23 Protect, enhance and restore structures, districts, areas or sites that are of significance In the history, architecture, archeology or culture of the State, Its communities, or the Nation. A. Explanation of Policy Among the most valuable of the State's man-made resources are those structures on areas which are of historic, archeological, or cultural signifi- cance, The protection of these structures must involve a recognition of their importance by all agencies and the ability to identify and describe them. Protection must include concern not just with specific sites but with areas of signifi- cance, and with the area around specific sites. The policy is not to be construed as a passive mandate but must include active efforts when appropriate to restore or revitalize through adaptive reuse. While the program is concerned with the preservation of all such resources within the coastal boundary, it will actively promote the preservation of historic and cultural resources which have a coastal relationship. The structures, districts, areas or sites that are of significance in the history, architecture, archeology or culture of the State, its commu- nities, or the Nation comprise the following resources: (a) A resource which is in a Federal or State park established, among other reasons, to protect and preserve the rqsource. (b) A resource on, nominated to be on, or determinprl eligible to be on the National or State Registers of Historic Places. (c) A resource an or nominated to be an the State Nature and Historic Preserve Trust. (d) An archeological resource which is on the State Department of Education's inventory of archeological sites. (e) A local landmark, park, or locally designated historic district that is located within the boundary of an approved local waterfront revitalization program. (f A resource that is a significant component of an Urban Cultural Park. 11 6 - 121 All practicable means to protect structures, districts, areas or sites that are of significance in the history, architecture, archeology or culture of the State, its communities or the Nation shall be deemed to include the consider- ation and adoption of any techniques, measures, or controls to prevent a significant adverse change to such significant structures, districts, areas or sites. A significant adverse change includes but is no limited to: (a) Alteration of or addition to one or more of the architectural, structural, ornamental or functional features of a building, structure, or site that is a recognized historic, cultural, or archeological resource, or component thereof. Such features are defined as encompassing the style and general arrangement of the exterior of a structure and any original or historically significant interior features including type, color and texture of building materials; entry ways and doors; fenestration; lighting fixtures; roofing; sculpture and carving; steps; rails; fencing; windows; vents and other openings; grillwork; signs; canopies; and other appurtenant fixures and, in addition, all buildings, structures, outbuildings, walks, fences, steps, topographical features, earthworks, paving and signs located on the designated resource property. (To the extent they are relevant, the Secretary of the Interior's "Standards For Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings" shall be adhered to.) (b) Demolition or removal in f ull or part of a building, structure, or earthworks that is a recognized historic, cultural, or archeo- logical resource or component thereof, to include all those features described in (a) above plus any other appurtenant fixture associated with a building structure or earthwork. (c) All proposed actions within 500 feet of the perimeter of the property boundary of the historic, architectural, cultural, or archeo- logical resource and all actions within an II - 6 - 122 historic district that would be- incompatible with the objective of preserving the quality and integrity of the resource. Primary considerations to be used in making judgement about compatibility should focus on the visual and locational relationship between the proposed action and the special character of the historic, cultural, or archeological resource. Compatibility between the proposed action and the resource means that the general appearance of the resource should be reflected in the architectural style, design material, scale, proportion, composition, mass, line, color, texture, detail, setback, landscaping and related items of the proposed actions. With historic districts this would include infrastructure improvements or changes, such as, street and sidewalk paving, street furniture and lighting. This policy shall not be construed to prevent the construction, reconstruction, alteration, or demolition of any building, structure, earthwork, or component thereof of a recognized historic, cultural or archeological resource which has been officially certified as being imminently dangerous to life or public health. Nor shall the policy be construed to prevent the ordinary maintenance, repair, or proper restoration according to the U.S. Department of Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings of any building, structure, site or earthwork, or component thereof of a recognized historic, cultural or archeological resource which does not involve a significant adverse change to the resource, as defined above. B. State Means for Implementing Policy 1. Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Re- sources Acts Executive Law (Article 42) Article 42 S919 requires: 1) that all State agency actions including funding, planning, land transactions, as well as direct de- velopment activities must be consistent with the policies of this Act. One of these policies calls for 'restoration and revitali- zation of natural and man-made resources�; elsewhere the Legislature has determined that among most important man-nade resources of the State are its historical, architectural, archeological, and cultural assetsl; this 1 Park & Recreation Law S14.01 II - 6 - 123 provision of the Act will be implemented through amendments to SEQR regulations (see 2 below) and the regulations issued pursuant to Article 14 of the Parks and Recreation Law (see 3 below), and by DOS regulations. DOS regulations (19 NYCRR Part 600) provide that, for their direct actions which do not have a significant effect on the environment, State agencies certify that the action is consis- tent with the coastal policies, one of which is: 'Protect, enhance and restore structures, districts, areas or sites that are of signi- ficance in the history, architecture, arche- ology, or culture of the State, its communi- ties, or the Nation." 2) that the Secretary of State may review actions of State agencies that may affect achievement of the policies of the Act; and 3) that SEQR regulations be amended to, among other things,' require consideration of the effects of an action on the use and conservation of coastal re- sources, such as the historical, architec- tural, archeological, and cultural resources of the coastal area. 2. State Environmental Quality Review Act, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 8) Under this Act, State agencies and local governments are required to prepare an environmental impact statement for any action that might have a significant impact upon the environment. In determining whether an action may have a significant effect on the environ- ment, impairment of the character or quality of important historical, archeological, architectural, or of community or neighbor- hood character are to be considered as indicators of such significant effects. The SEQR regulations set a very low threshold for triggering an environmental assessment -- "any action (unless the action is designed for the preservation of the facility or site) occurring wholly or partially within, or contiguous to any facility or site listed on the National Register of Historic Places, or any historic building, structure, or site, or prehistoric site that has been proposed by the Committee on the Registers for considera- tion by the NYS Board on Historic Preserva- tion for a recommendation to the State Historic Officer for nomination for inclusion in said National Register". Actions which have been subject to an environmental impact statement must, consistent with social, II - 6 - 124 economic, and other essential considerations, minimize or avoid, to the maximum extent practicable, the adverse environmental effects revealed in the impact statement. In addition, pursuant to Article 42 of the Executive Law, SEQR regulations are amended to require that for actions by a State agency for which an EIS has been prepared, such actions shall be consistent with the coastal policies, one of which is: "Protect, enhance and restore structures, districts, areas, or sites that are of significance in the history, architecture, archeology, or culture of the State, its communities, or the Nation.' 3. New York State Historic Preservation Act of 1980, Parks & Recreation Law (Sections 11.03, 11.09, 14); Public Building Law (Article 4-B); General Municipal Law (Article 5-K) The New York State Historic Preservation Act greatly expands the responsibilities of New York State agencies and municipalities with regard to historic preservation. Specifi- cally, the Act provides several means for preserving the historic architectural, archeological, and cultural resources of the State (including resources under water). Each State agency must designate a historic preservation officer to coordinate and implement State historic preservation pro- grams. A State Register of Historic Places is created and an inventory of properties which may qualify for the Register is established. A Statewide Preservation Plan is to be prepared and updated annually. A review process has been established, to be undertaken concurrently with existing environmental reviews; this process requires State agencies to consult with the Commissioner of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation if a State-funded project will have an adverse effect upon a historic property. The review process re- quires consideration of alternatives and that adverse effects be avoided or mitigated. The Secretary of State is added to State Board for Historic Preservation, and the Commis- sioner of the Office of General Services is required to consider the use and restoration of historic buildings in meeting the State's needs for building space. 11I- 6 -125 4. State Nature and Historical Preserve Trust, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 45) This program provides for the acquisition and I administration of lands and waters which should be preserved for their historical significance, among other purposes. The Environmental Quality Bond Act of 1972 (ECL, Article 51, Section 51-0701) is the current source of State funds to acquire lands under this program. 116-126 POLICY 24 Prevent Impairment of scenic resources of statewide significance. A. Exp~lanation of Policy The Coastal Management Program will identify on the coastal area map scenic resources of statewide significance. A list of preliminarily identified resources appears in the Appendix. The following general criteria will be combined to determine significance: Quality. The basic elements of design (i.e., two- dimensional line, three-dimensional form, texture and color) combine to create all high quality landscapes. The water, landforms, and man-made components of scenic coastal landscapes exhibit variety of line, form, texture and color. This variety is not, however, so great as to be chaotic. Scenic coastal landscapes also exhibit unity of components. This unity is not, however, so complete as to be monotonous., Example: the Thousand Islands where the mix of water, land, vegetative and man-made components creates interesting variety, while the organization of these saw'e components creates satisfying unity. Often, high quality landscapes contain striking contrasts between lines, forms, textures and colors. Example: A waterfall where horizontal and vertical lines and smooth and turbulent textures meet in dramatic juxtaposition. Finally, high quality landscapes are generally free of discordant features, such as structures or other elements which are inappropriate in terms of siting, form, scale, and/or materials. Uniqueness. The uniqueness of high quality landscapes is determined by the frequency of occurence of similar resources in a region of the State or beyond. Public Accessibility. A scenic resource of significance must be visually and,, where appropriate, physically accessible to the public. Public Recognition. Widespread recognition of a scenic resource is not a characteristic intrinsic to the resource. It does, however, demonstrate people's appreciation of the resource for its *visual, as well as evocative, qualities. Public recognition serves to reinforce analytic conclusions about the significance of a resource. 11 - 6 - 127 When considering a proposed action, agencies shall first determine whether the action could affect a scenic resource of statewide significance. This determination would involve: 1.) a review of the coastal area map to ascertain if it shows an identified0 scenic resource which could be affected by the proposed action, and 2. ) a review of the types of activities proposed to determine if they would be likely to impair the scenic beauty of an Identified -resource. Impairment will include: (i) the irreversible modification of geologic forms; the destruction or removal of vegetation; the modif ication, destruction, or removal of structures, whenever the geologic forms, vegetation or structures are signif icant to the scenic quality of an identified resource; and (ii) the addition of structures which because of siting or scale will reduce identified views or which because of scale, form, or materials will diminish the scenic quality of an identified resource. The following siting and facility-related guidelines are to be used to achieve this policy, recognizing that each development situation is unique and that the guidelines will have to be applied accordingly. Guidelines irnclude% -- siting structures and other development such as highways, power lines, and signs, back from shorelines or in other inconspicuous locations to maintain the attractive quality of the shoreline and to retain views to and from the shore; -- clustering or orienting structures to retain views, save open space and provide visual organizaton to a development; -- incorporating sound, existing structures (especially historic buildings) into the overall development scheme; -- removing deteriorated and/or degrading elements; -- maintaining or restoring the original land form, except when changes screen unattractive elements and/or add appropriate interest; -- maintaining or adding vegetation to provide interests encourage the presence of wildlife, blend structures into the site, and obscure unattractive elements, except w~he n selective clearing removes unsightly, diseased or hazardous vegetation and when selective clearing creates views of coastal waters; i3: - 6 - 128 -- using appropriate materials, in addition to vegetation, to screen unattractive elements; -- using appropriate scales, forms and materials to ensure that buildings and other structures are compatible with and add interest to the landscape. B. State Means for Implementing the Policy 1. Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act, Executive Law (Article 42) Section 919 of Article 42 requires 1) that State agencies actions, including funding, planning, and land transactions, as well as direct development activities, must be consistent with the policies of this act, one of which calls for preventing impairment of scenic beauty. This provison of law is implemented by amendments to SEQR (cf 2 below) and by DOS regulations. DOS regulations (19 NYCRR Part 600), provide that, for their direct actions which do not have a significant effect on the environment, State agencies certify that the action is consistent with the coastal policies, one of which is: "Prevent impairment of scenic resources of statewide signficance, as identified on the coastal area map. Impairment shall include: (i) the irreversible modification of geological forms; destruction or removal of vegetation; modification, destruction or removal of structures, whenever the geologic forms, vegetation, or structures are significant to the scenic quality of an identified resource and (ii) the addition of structures which because of siting or scale will reduce identified views or which because of scale, form, or materials will diminish the scenic quality of an identified resource." 2) that the Secretary of State shall review actions of State agencies that may affect achievement of the policy, and 3) that SEQR regulations be amended to relect consideration of coastal resources such as scenic resources. 2. State Environmental Quality Review Act, Environ- mental Conservation Law (Article 8) Under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, State agencies and local governments are required to prepare an environmental impact statement for any action that might have a significant impact upon the environment. The environment is broadly defined to include existing patterns of develop- ment and land resources; hence scenic areas are viewed as an environmental resource. The SEQR regulations (6 NYCRR Part 617) require that II - 6 - 129 actions which have been subject to an environ- mental impact statement must, consistent with social, economic and other essential considera- tions, minimize or avoid, to the maximum extentS practicable, the adverse effects revealed in the impact statement (ECL S8-0109-8). In addition, pursuant to Article 42 of the Execu- tive Law, SEOR regulations are amended to require that for actions by a State agency for which an EIS has been prepared, such actions shall be consistent with the coastal policies, one of which is: 'Prevent impairment of scenic resources of statewide significance, as identified on the coastal area map. Impairment shall include: (i) the irreversible modification of geological forms; destruction or removal of vegetation; modification, destruction or removal of structures, whenever the geologic forms, vegetation or structures are significant to the scenic quality of an identified resource and (ii) the addition of structures which because of siting or scale will reduce identified views or which because of scale, form, or materials will diminish the scenic quality of an identified resource." 3. Protection of Natural and Man-Made Beauty, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 49-0103.1 and 0.0314) Under these two parts of the law, DEC has the power and duty to: (1) "develop policies and programs -to preserve and enhance the natural and man-made beauty of the State" and (2) "designate scenic sites, areas and highways in the State and develop programs for their preservation and enhancement". Where such programs exist for areas in the coastal zone, they can be used as a guide for determining the consistency of proposed actions with coastal policy. The Coastal Manage- ment Program will work closely with DEC to designate additional sites and develop programs for their protection. 4. State Nature and Historic Preserve Trust, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 45) The Trust provides for the acquisition and administration of lands and waters which should be preserved for their natural beauty. Scenic resources of particular significance in the coastal area would, thus, be eligible for acquisition. The Environmental Quality Bond Act of II- 6 -130 1972 (ECL, Article 51, Section 51-0701) is the major state funding mechanism to implement this acquisition program. 5. Utility Transmission Facility Siting Act and Power Plant Siting Act, Public Service Law, (Article VII and VIII) Transmission lines and power plants are highly visible and sometimes unwelcome intrusions upon scenic landscapes. These two legislative devices require that Certificates of Environmental Compability and Public Need be issued for major utility transmission facilities and steam-electric generating facilities. Aesthetic factors in utility planning and development are incorporated into Article VII and VIII deliberations. 6. Tidal Wetlands Act, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 25) The issuance of permits for regulated uses or activities in tidal wetlands requires that the preservation and protection of aesthetic resources be considered. 6 NYCRR, Part GG 1.10, specific- ally includes aesthetic considerations among the permit issuing standards. 7. Freshwater Wetlands Act, Environmental Conser- vation Law (Article 24) The preservation and protection of aesthetic resources is one of the objectives of this act. The regulations require the consideration of aesthetics in the issuance of a permit. 8. Coastal Erosion Razards Area Act, Environmental Conservation Law, (Article 34) While the purpose of this law is not to protect the quality of coastal scenery, those natural protective features (dunes, beaches, spits, barrier islands, bluffs) which the act protects are major components of coastal scenery. 11 - 6 - 131 POLICY 25 Protect, restore or enhance natural and man-made resources which are not Identified as being of statewide significance, but which con- * ~~~~~tribute to the overall scenic quality of the coastal area. A. Explanation of Policy when considering a proposed action, which would not affect a scenic resource of statewide significance, agencies shall undertake to ensure that the action would be undertaken so as to protect, restore or enhance the overall scenic quality of the coastal area. Activities which could impair or further degrade scenic quality are the same as those cited under the previous policy, i.e., modification of natural landforms, removal of vegetation, etc. However, the effects of these activities would not be considered as serious for the general coastal area as for significant scenic areas. The siting and design guidelines listed under the previous policy should be considered for proposed actions in the general coastal area. More emphasis may need to be placed on removal of existing elements, especially those which degrade, and on addition of new elements or other changes which enhance. Removal of vegetation at key points to improve visual access to coastal waters is one such change which might be expected to enhance scenic quality. B. State Means for Implementing the Policy 1. Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act, Executive Law (Article 42) Section 919 of Article 42 requires 1) that State agencies actions, including funding, planning, and land transactions, as well as direct development activities, must be consistent with the policies of this act, one of which calls for preventing impairment of scenic beauty. This provision of law is implemented by amendments to SEQR (cf 2 below) and by DOS regulations. DOS regulations (19 NYCRR Part 600) provide that, for their direct actions which do not have a significant effect on the environment, State agencies certify that the action is consistent with the coastal policies, one of which is: "Protect, restore or enhance natural and man-made resources which are not identified as being of statewide significance, but which contribute to the overall scenic quality of the coastal area.' 2) that the Secretary of State shall review actions of State agencies that may affect achievement of the policy, and 3) that SEOR regulations be amended to reflect consideration of coastal resources such as scenic resources. II - 6 - 133 Section 2 of the Act requires that State agenices analyze their programs' consistency with coastal policies and that the Secretary of State recommend any needed modifications to the Governor and the0 2. State Environmental Qualify Review Act, Environ- mental Conservation Law (Article 8) Under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, State agencies and local governments are required to prepare an environmental impact statement for any action that might have a significant impact upon the environment. The environment is broadly defined to include existing patterns of develop- ment and land resources; hence actions which have been subject to an environmental impact statement must, consistent with social, economic, and other essential considerations, minimize or avoid, to the maximum extent practicable, the adverse environmental effects revealed in the impact statement (ECL S8-0109-8). In addition, pursuant to Article 42 of the Executive Law, SEQR regula- tions are amended to require that for actions by a State agency for which an EIS has been prepared, such actions shall be consistent with the coastal policies, one of which is: "Protect, restore or enhance natural and man-made resources which are not identified as being of statewide significance, but which contribute to the overall scenic quality0 of the coastal area.' 3. Tidal Wetlands Act, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 25) See Policy 24. 4. Freshwater Wetlands Act, Environmental Conserva- tion Law (Article 24) See Policy 24. 5. Coastal Erosion Hazard Areas Act, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 34) See Policy 24. II - 6 - 134 POLICY 26 Conserve and protect agricultural lands In the State's coastal area. A. Explanation of Policy The first step in conserving agricultural lands is the identification of such lands. The Department of State is mapping all important agricultural lands within the State's coastal area. The following criteria have been used to prepare the maps, and the mapped information will be incorporated in the New York State Coastal Resources Inventory and on the Coastal Area Map. Land meeting any of the following criteria is being mapped.1 1. Land which meets the definition of the U.S. Department of Agriculture as being prime farmland, unique farmland, or farmland of statewide importance. as Prime farmland is defined by USDA Soil Conservation Service in CRF #7 Agriculture Part 657.5(a), January, 1979. A list of the soil associations that meet this definition has been prepared for each coastal county.2 . 1 After mapping according to this definition was substantially completed, the NYS Department of Agriculture and Markets completed development of a new agricultural land classification system. As soon as is practical the following definition will be the basis for revising the maps of coastal agricultural land. Important agricultural land shall include all land within an agricultural district or subject to an eight-year commitment which has been farmed within at least two of the last five years, or any land farmed within at least two of the last of the last five years in soil groups 1-4 as classified by the Land Classification System established by the NYS -Department of Agriculture and Markets, or any land farmed witlain at least two of the last five years which is influenced by climate conditions which support the growth of high value crops. Additionally, agricultural land not meeting the above criteria but located adjacent to any such land and forming part of an on-going agricultural enterprise shall be considered important agricultural land. 2 For the purposes of this map the urban areas which are to be excluded are all cities, the counties of Nassau, Westchester, Rockland, Putnam and Erie, and any built up area (this applies to c. also). 11 - 6 - 135 b. Unique farmland is defined by USDASCS in CRF #7 Agriculture Part 657.5(b). In the coastal area of New York all fruit and vegetable farming meets the terms of the definition. C. Farmland of Statewide importance is defined by USDASCS in CRF #7 Agriculture Part 656.5(c). Lists of soil associations which constitute farmland of Statewide importance have been prepared for each coastal county. 2. Active farmland' within Agricultural Districts. The maps of each Agricultural District shows land committed by farmers. This is the land that will be mapped as active farmland. The district boundary will also be shown. 3. Areas identified as having high economic viability for farming. Any farm not identified under I and/or 2 above and which is located in an area identified as having 'high viability" on the map entitled 'Economic Viability of Farm Areas" prepared by the Office of Planning Coordination in May, 1969. This would be the basis for initial identification of areas having high economic viability for farming. Areas will be added and/or deleted based on comments from the agricultural community. 4. Areas adjacent to land identified under I above if these areas are being farmed and are part of a farm with identified important agricultural lands. 5. Prime farmland, unique farmland, and farmland of Statewide significance will not be identified as important agricultural land whenever it occurs as parcels of land less than 25 acres in size and these small parcels are not within a mile of areas of active farming. II 6 -136 Given the Program's application to a narrow strip of land, implementing a policy of promoting agricultural use of land must, to be practical, concentrate on is ~~~controlling the replacement of agricultural land uses with non-agricultural land use as the result of some public action. The many other factors such as markets, taxes, and regulations, which influence the viability of agriculture in a given area, can only be addressed on a Statewide or national basis. The Program policy requires a concern for the loss of any important agricultural land. However, the primary concern must be with the loss of agricultural land when that loss would have a significant effect on an agricultural area's ability to continue to exist, to prosper, and even to expand. A series of determinations are necessary to establish whether a public action is consistent with the conservation and protection of agricultural lands or whether it is likely to be harmf ul to the health of an agricultural area. In brief these determinations are as follows: First, it must be determined whether a proposed public action would result in the loss of important agricultural lands as mapped on the Coastal Inventory. If it would not result, either directly or indirectly, in the loss of identified important agricultural lands, then the action is consistent with the policy on agriculture. If it is determined that the action would result in a loss of identified important agricultural lands but that loss would not have an adverse effect on the viability of agriculture in the surrounding area, then the action may also be consistent with the agriculture policy. However, in that case the action must be undertaken in a manner that would minimize the loss of important farmland. If the action is determined to result in a significant loss of important agricultural land, that is if the loss is to a degree sufficient to adversely affect surrounding agriculture's viability, - its ability to continue to exist, to prosper, and even to expand - then the action is not consistent with this agriculture policy. The following guidelines define more fully what mutt be considered in making the above determinations: 1I - 6 - 137 A. A public action would be likely to significantly impair the viability of an agricultural area in which identified important agricultural lands are located if: 1. the action would occur on identified impor- tant agricultural lands and would: a. consume more than 10% of the land of an active farm3 containing such identified important agricultural lands b. consume a total of 100 acres or more of identified important agricultural land, or C. divide an active farm with identified important agricultural land into two or more parts thus impeding efficient farm operation 2. the action would result in environmental changes which may reduce the productivity or adversely affect the quality of the product of any identified important agricultural lands. 3. the action would create real estate market conditions favorable to the conversion of large areas of identified important agri- cultural lands to non-agricultural uses. Such0 conditions may be created by: a. public water or sewer facilities to serve non-farm structures b. transportation improvements, except for maintenance of, and safety improvements to, existing facilities, that serve non-farm or non-farm related develop- men t C. major non-agribusiness commercial devel- opment adjacent to identified agri- cultural lands d. major public institutions e. residential uses other than farm dwellings. 3A farm is def ined as an area of at least 10 acres devoted to agricultural production as defined in the Agricultural District Law and from which agricultural products have yielded gross receipts of $10,000 in the past year. 11 6 - 138 e. any change in land use regulations applying to agricul tural land which would encourage or allow uses incompatible with the agricultural use of the land B. The following types of facilities and activities should not be construed as having adverse effects on the preservation of agricultural land: 1. Farm dwellings, barns, silos, and other accessory uses and structures incidental to agricultural production or necessary for farm family supplemental income 2. Agribusiness development which includes the entire structure of local support services and commercial enterprises necessary to maintain an agricultural operation, e.g., milk hauler, grain dealer, farm machinery dealer, veterinarian, food processinq plants C. In determining whether an action that would result in the loss of farmland is of overriding regional or Statewide benefit, the following factors should he considered: 1. For an action to be considered overriding it must be shown to provide significantly greater benefits to the region or State than 0 ~ ~~~~are provided by the affected agricultural area (not merely the land directly affected by the action). In determining the benefits of the affected agriculture to the region or State, consideration must be given to its social and cultural value, its economic viability, its environmental benefits, its existing and potential contribution to food or fiber production in the State and any State food policy, as well as its direct economic benefits. a. An agricultural area is an area pre- dominantly in farming and in which the farms produce similar products and/or rely on the same agribusiness support services and are to a significant degree economically inter-dependent. At a minimum this area should consist of at least 500 acres of identified important agriculture land. For the purpose of analyzing impacts of any action on agriculture, the boundary of such area need not he restricted to land within the coastal boundary. If the affected II - 6 - 139 agricultural lands lie within an agricultural district then, at a minimum, the agricultural area should include the entire agricultural district. b. In determining the benefits of an agricultural area, its relationship to agricultural lands outside the area should also be considered. C. The estimate of the economic viability of the affected agricultural area should be based on an assessment of i. soil resources, topography, condi- tions of climate and water resources ii. availability of agribusiness and other support services, and the level and condition of investments in farm real estate, livestock and ecquipmnent iii. the level of farming skills as evidenced by income obtained, yield estimates for crops, and costs being experienced with the present types and conditions of buildings, equipment, and cropland 0 iv. use of new technology and the rates at which new technology is adopted V. competition from substitute prod- ucts and other farming regions and trends in total demand for given products vi. patterns of farm ownership for their effect on farm efficiency and the likelihood that farms will ,remain in use d. The estimate of the social and cultural value of farming in the area should be based on an analysis of: i. the history of farming in the area ii. the length of time farms have remained in one family I1- 6- 140 i iii. the degree to which farmers in the area share a cultural or ethnic her itag e iv. the extent to which products are sold and consumed locally V. the degree to which a specific crop(s) has become identified with a community e. An estimate of the environmental benefits of the affected agriculture should be based on analysis of: i. the extent to which the affected agriculture as currently practiced provides a habitat or food for wildlife ii. the extent to which a farm landscape adds to the visual quality of an area iii. any regional or local open space plans, and degree to which the open space contributes to air quality Iv. the degree to which the affected agriculture does, or could, contribute to the establishment of a clear edge between rural and urban development D . Whenever a proposed action is determined to have an insignificant adverse effect on identified important agricultural land or whenever it is permitted to substantially hinder the acheivement of the policy according to DOS regulations, Part 600, or as a result of the f indings of an EIS, then the required minimization should be under- taken in the following manner: 1. The proposed action shall, to the extent practicable, be sited on any land not identified as important agricultural, or, if it must be sited on identified important agricultural land, sited to avoid classes of agricultural land according to the following priority: 11 -6 -141 a. prime farmland in orchards or vineyards b. unique farmland in orchard or vineyards C. other prime farmland in active farming d. other unique farmland e. farmland of statwide importance in active farming f. active farmland identified as having high economic viability g. prime farmland not being farmed h. farmland of statewide importance not being farmed 2. To the extent practicable, agricultural use of identified important agricultural land not directly necessary for the operation of the proposed non-agricultural action should be provided for through such means as lease arranqements with farmers, direct undertaking of agriculture, or sale of surplus land to farmers. Agricultural use of such land shall have priority over any other proposed multiple use of the land. B. State Means for Implementing the Policy 1. Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act, Executive Law (Article 42) Section 919 of Article 42 requires 1) that State agiencies actions, including funding, planning, and land transactions, as well as direct development activities, must be consistent with the policies of this act, one of which calls for the conserva- tion and protection of agricultural lands. This provision of law is implemented by amendments to SEOR (cf 2 below) and by DOS regulations. DOS regulations (19 NYCRR Part 600) provide that, for their direct actions which do not have a signifi- cant effect on the Environment, State agencies certify that the action is consistent with the coastal policies one of which is: To conserve and protect agricultural lands in the State's coastal area, an action shall not result in a loss or impair the productivity of important agricultural land, as identified on the coastal area map, 11 - 6-142 if that loss or impairment would adversely affect the valuability of agriculture in an agricultural district or, in the area surrounding such lands, if there is no agriculture district. Secretary of State may review actions of State agencies that may affect achievement of the policy, and 3) that SEOR regulations be amended to reflect considera- tion of coastal resources such as agricultural lands. Section 2 of the Act requires that State agencies analyze their programs' consistency with coastal policies and that the Secretary of State recommend any needed modifications to the Governor and the Legislature. 2. State Environmental Quality Review Act, Environ- mental Conservation Law (Article 8) Under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, State agencies and local governments are required to prepare an environmental impact statement for any action that might have a significant impact upon the environment. The environment is broadly defined to include existing patterns of develop- ment, and land resources; hence farming and important agricultural lands are viewed as an environmental resource. The SEQR regulation (6 NYCRR Part 617) set a very low threshold for 0 ~ ~~~~triggering an environmental assessment for actions within agricultural districts. Actions which have been subject to an environmental impact statement must, consistent with social, economic, and other essential considerations, minimize or avoid, to the maximum extent practicable, the adverse environmental effects revealed in the impact statement (ECL 58-0109-8). In addition, pursuant to Article 42 of the Executive Law SEQR regula- tionis are amended to require that for actions by a state agency for which an EIS has been prepared, such actions shall be consistent with the coastal policies, one of which is: To conserve and protect agricultural lands in the State's coastal area, an action shall not result in a loss or impair the the productivity of important agricul- tural land, as identified on the coastal area map, if that loss or impairment would adversely affect the valuability of agriculture in an agricultural district or, in the area surrounding such lands, if there is no agriculture district. 11 - 6-143 3. Agricultural District Program, Agriculture and Markets Law (Article 25AA) The Agricultural District Law provides the primary means for the State to directly pursue a policy of conserving important agricultural lands. Most of the important coastal agricultural land is already included in agricultural districts. The provi- sions of the act which lead to the conservation of farmland include 1) farm value assessments, (recent amendments improve this -provision); 2) limitations on the exercise of eminent domain; 3) a requirement that State agencies' regulations encourage maintenance of farming; 4) limitations on local ordinances that adversely affect farming and 5) limitations on the power of public service districts to impose taxes. These provisions, plus the power given the State to create such districts where it would further state environmental plans, policies or objectives, constitute the basic state program for conserving all important farmland. 4. Transportation Law (�14-a) This law requires that the Commissioner of Trans- portation cooperate with the Commissioner of Agriculture and Markets to assure that measures to preserve farmland and the natural characteristics of the land traversed by transportation facilities are included in all stages of such projects. I1- 6 -144 POLICY 27 Decisions on the siting and construction of major energy facilities in the coastal area will be based on public energy needs, compatibility of such facilities with the environment, and the facility's need for a shorefront location. A. Explanation of Policy Demand for energy in New York will increase, although at a rate slower than previously pre- dicted. The State expects to meet these energy demands through a combina tion of conservation- measures; traditional and alternative technolo- gies; and use of various fuels including coal in greater proportion. A determination of public need for energy is the first step in the process for siting any new facilities. The directives for determining this need are contained primarily in Article 5 of the New York State Energy Law. That Article requires the preparation of a State Energy Master Plan. With respect -to transmission lines 'and 'steam electric generating facilities, Articles VII and VIII of the State's Public Service Law require additional forecasts and establish the basis for determining the compatibility of these facilities with the environment and the necessity for a shorefront location. The policies derived from the siting regulations under these Articles are entirely consistent with the general coastal zone policies derived from other laws, particularly the regulations promulgated pursuant to the Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act. That Act is used for the purposes of ensuring con- sistency with the Coastal Management Program. The Department of State will comment on the State Energy Master Plan; present testimony for the record during relevant certification proceedings under Articles VII and VIII of the PSL; and use the State SEQR and DOS regulations to ensure that decisions on other proposed energy facilities (other than transmission facilities and steam electric generating plants) which would impact the coastal area are made consistent with coastal policies. 16 - 145 B. State Means for Inplementing the Policy 1. Energy Law (Article 5) Under this law an Energy Planning Board was established. As required, the Board prepared and adopted the first State Energy Master Plan which is currently in effect. The Board is now considering an updated plan. See Section 7 of this document for a more detailed discussion of this plan. 2. Public Service Law (Article VIII) - Siting of Major Steam Electric Generating Facilities Before preparation of a site or the construction of a major steam electric generating facility can commence, a Certi- fic~te of Environmental Compatibility and Public Need must be issued by the New York State Board on Electric Generation Siting and the Environment. This process is described in detail in Section 7. In granting this certificate, the Board must determine that the facility: o Represents the minimum adverse environ- mental impact, considering the state of available technology; the nature and economics of the various alternatives; and the interests of the state with respect to aesthetics, preservation of historic sites, forests and parks, fish and wildlife, and viable agricultural lands; o Complies with applicable State laws concerning, among other matters, the environment and public health and safety; o Serves the public interest, convenience and necessity. The regulations which implement Article VIII and govern the Board's decision (see Appendix A, *7) assure that this decision will be compatible with the policies articulated in .this document, both those relating to environmental protection and to economic development. To further ensure compatibility, the Depart- ment of State will review applications and may present testimony during proceedings 11 -6 -146 involving facilities proposed to be sited in coastal areas. When reviewing applications, the Department will examine the required description of reasonable alternate locations as well as the rationale for the preferred site, particularly with respect to potential land uses on or near the proposed site, and the justification for the amount of shore- front land to be used. Proposed uses which are likely to be regarded by the Department as requiring a shorefront location include: o Uses involved in sea/land transfer of goods (docks, pipelines, short term storage facilities); o Uses requiring large quantities of water (hydroelectric power plants, pumped storage power plants); and, o Uses that rely heavily on waterborne transportation of raw materials or products which are difficult to transport on land. 3. Public Service Law (Article VII) - Siting of Major Utility Transmission Facilities Prior to the construction of a major electric or fuel gas transmission facility, a Certifi- cate of Environmental Compatibility and Public Need must be granted by the Public Service Commission. See Section 7 of this document for a detailed description of this process. In issuing a certificate, the Commission must determine that the facility: o Represents the minimum adverse environ- mental impact, considering the state of available technology and the nature and economics of the various alternatives; o Conforms with applicable State laws; o Serves the public interest, convenience and necessity. As with steam electric generating plants, the Department of State will review applications and may present testimony during proceedings involving transmission facilities proposed to be sited in the coastal area. The Department will examine the same matters as under Article VIII. It will also use the same 11- 6 -147 criteria to determine the need for a shore- front location and the consistency of the proposal with coastal policies. Interstate transmission facilities, such as gas and petroleum pipelines, coal slurry pipelines and electric transmission lines associated with hydroelectric facilities, are regulated by Federal agencies. Through Federal consistency provisions, such facili- ties will be sited in a manner that is consistent with the Program's policies. 4. Environmental Conservation Law (Article 23, Title 17) - Liquefied Natural and Petroleum Gas All liquefied natural gas (LNG) and liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) facilities, must obtain an environmental safety permit before construction and operation. For a permit to be granted, it must be shown that such facilities would not endanger residential areas and contiguous populations and would otherwise conform to siting criteria established by the Department of Environ- mental Conservation. During the review of proposed projects, consideration is given to: the location of the proposed facility; the design and capacity of the facility; expected sources of the gas; methods of transporting gas to and from the facility and transporta- tion routes; the public need for the facility; its environmental impacts; and, descriptions of reasonable alternate locations for the facility. S. Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act, Executive Law (Article 42) Section 919 of Article 42 requires 1) that State agencies' actions, including direct energy development activities such as those undertaken by the Power Authority of the State of New York, must be consistent with the environmental protection and development policies of this act. This provision of law is implemented by amendments to SEQR (below) and by DOS regulations. DOS regulations (19 NYCRR Part 600) provide that, for their direct actions which do not have a signifi- cant effect on the environment, State agencies certify that the action is con- sistent with the coastal policies, 2) that the Secretary of State shall review actions II - 6 - 148 of State agencies that may affect achievement of the policy, and 3) that SEOR regulations be amended to reflect consideration of coastal resources. Section 2 of the Act requires that State agencies analyze their programs' consistency with coastal policies and that the Secretary of State recommend any needed modifications to the Governor and the Legislature. 6. State Environmental Quality Review Act, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 8) Under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, State agencies and local governments are required to prepare an environmental impact statement for any action that might have a significant impact upon the environment. This requirement applies to large scale energy facilities other than transmission lines and steam electric generating plants as described above. The environment is broadly defined to include existing patterns of development and land resources. Actions which have been subject to an environmental impact statement must, consistent with social, economic, and other essential considerations, minimize or avoid, to the maximum extent practicable, the adverse environmental effects revealed in the impact statement (ECL 58-0109-8). In addition, pursuant to Article 42 of the Executive Law, SEQR regulations are amended to require that for actions by a State agency for which an EIS has been prepared, such actions shall be consistent with the coastal policies. 7. Water Resources Law, Environmental Conser- vation Law (Article 15) Proposals, including those to construct all pipelines, which would excavate or deposit fill in any navigable waters and adjacent marshes and estuaries of the State require permits issued by the Department of Environmental Conservation. B. Tidal Wetlands Act, Environmental Conser- vation Law (Article 25) The Tidal Wetlands Act requires that a permit be issued for uses, including oil piplines, in identified tidal wetlands. It must be demonstrated that proposed facilities will II - 6 - 149 not adversely affect water quality, flood and storm control, marine food production, wild- life habitats, open space, and aesthetically significant areas. 9. Freshwater Wetlands Act,, Environmental Con- servation Law (Article 24) The Freshwater Wetlands Act requires that a permit be issued for uses, including oil pipelines, in identified freshwater wetlands. It must be demonstrated that proposed facilities will not adversely affect water quality, flood and storm control, erosion control, subsurface water resources, wildlife habitats, freshwater fish sanctuaries, open space, and aesthetically significant areas. 10. Oil Spill Prevention, Control and Compensa- tion, Navigation Law (Article 12, Section 170 et. seq.) This Article provides for the protection of the State's environment and economy by preventing unregulated discharge of petroleum from major facilities; by authorizing the Departments of Environmental Conservation and Transportation to respond quickly to remove any discharges; and by establishing liability for any damages sustained within the State as a result of such discharges. The Article also creates a fund for clean-up, restoration and compensation for damages caused by oil spills. Before a license to construct a major oil facility can be issued by the Department of Transportation, an applicant must pay the required fee to help maintain the fund and must show that the necessary equipment to prevent, contain and remove petroleum discharges will be provided. The Department will issue licenses for major onshore facilities only after the Department of Environmental Conservation has certified that the applicant has the necessary equip- ment to control oil discharges. 11. State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 27) This Article requires permits for construc- tion of new outlets or new disposal systems to discharge industrial and other wastes into State waters, including wastes from nuclear power plants, other steam electric generating 11 - 6 - 150 plants, and petroleum facilities. This permit Procedure ensures that established water quality standards are met. 12. Air Pollution Control, Environmental Con- servation Law (Article 19, Title 3) This Article gives the Department of Environ- mental Conservation the authority to promul- gate and enforce regulations controlling air emissions, including those released by energy facilities. These regulations appear in the State Implementation Plan which details State strategies for meeting Federal air quality standards under the Clean Air Act. 13:- 6- 151. POLICY 28 Ice management practices shall not interfere with the production of hydroelectric power, damage significant fish and wildlife and their habitats, or increase shoreline erosion or flooding. A. Explanation of Policy Prior to undertaking actions required for ice manage- ment, an assessment must be made of the potential effects of such actions upon the production of hydro- electric power, fish and wildlife and their habitats as will be identified in the Coastal Area. Maps, flood levels and damage, rates of shoreline erosion damage, and upon natural protective features. Following such an examination, adequate methods of' avoidance or mitigation of such potential effects must be utilized if the proposed action is to be implemented. B. State Means for Implementing the Policy 1. Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act, Executive Law (Article 42) Section 919 of Article 42 requires (1) that State agencies' actions, including funding, planning, land transactions, as well as direct development activities, must be consistent with the policies of this Act, which, among others, call for preventing the loss of fish and wildlife resources, minimizing damage to natural resources and property from flooding and erosion, and achieving the beneficial use of coastal resources. Those provisions of law are implemented by amendments to SEOR and by the Department of State regulations. In addition, the Department of State regulations (19 NYCRR Part 600) provide that, for their direct actions which do not have a significant effect on the environment, State agencies certify that the action is consistent with the coastal policies, one of which is: "Ice management practices shall not interfere with the production of hydro-electric power, damage significant fish and wildlife and their habitats, nor increase shoreline erosion or flooding.' (2) that the Secretary of State shall review actions of State agencies that may affect achievement of the policy, and (3) that SEOR regulations be amended to reflect consideration of this policy. 11- 6 -153 2. State Environmental Quality Review Act, Environ- mental Conservation Law (Article 8) Pursuant to Article 42 of the Executive Law, SEQR regulations are amended to require that actions by a State agency for which an EIS has been prepared, such actions shall be consistent with the coastal policies, one of which is: "Ice management prac- tices shall not interfere with the production of hydro-electric power, damage significant fish and wildlife and their habitats, nor increase shoreline erosion or flooding." 3. Energy Law (Article 5) See description under Policy 27. 4. Tidal Wetlands Act, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 25) See description under Policy 27. 5. Freshwater Wetlands Act, Environmental Conserva- tion Law (Article 24) See description under Policy 27. 6. Oil Spill Prevention, Control and Compensation, Navigation Law (Article 12, S170 et. seq.) See description under Policy 27. 7. Coastal Erosion Hazard Areas Act, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 34) See description under Policy 27. 11 - 6 - 154 POLICY 29 Encourage the development of energy resources on the Outer Con- tinental Shelf, In Lake Eris and In other water bodies, and ensure the environmental safety of such activities. A. Explanation of Policy The State recognizes the need to develop new indigenous energy sources* it also recognizes that such development may endanger the environ- ment. Among the various energy sources being examined are those which may be found oh the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) or in Lake Erie. The State has been encouraging the wise development of both. Matters pertaining to the OCS are the responsibil- ity of the Department of Environmental Conserva- tion. In 1977, the Department, in cooperation with regional arnd local agencies, completed a study which identified potential sites along the marine coast for on-shore OCS facilities. To date, these sites have not been developed for this purpose. The Department, also, actively partici- pates in the OCS planning process by reviewing and voicing the State's concerns about federal OCS oil and gas lease sales and plans. In its review of these proposed sales and plans, the Department considers a number of factors such as the effects upon navigational safety in the established traffic lanes leading into and from New York Harbor; the impacts upon important finfish, shell- fish and wildlife populations and their spawning areas; economic and other effects upon commercial and recreational fishing activities; impacts upon public recreational resources and opportunities along the marine coast; the potential for geo- hazards; impacts upon biological communities; and water quality. The Department of Environmental Conservation has also examined the potential impapts of Lake Erie gas drilling and is instituting reasonable guide- lines so that activities can proceed without damage to public water supplies and other valuable coastal resources. State law prohibits develop- ment of wells nearer than one-half mile from the shoreline, two miles from public water supply intakes, and one thousand feet from any other structure or installation in or on Lake Erie. Further, State law prohibits production of liquid hydrocarbons -in Lake Erie, either alone or in association with natural gas. The Department has not, however, reached a decision as to whether or not the lands under Lake Erie -will. be leased for gas exploration purposes. 11 - 6 - 155 B. State Means for Implementing the PolicY 1. Environmental Conservation Law (Section 23-1101) The Department of Environmental Conservation may lease the lands beneath Lake Erie accord- ing to specific siting, operation, and lia- bility requirements. Thus the State's envir- onmental agency will retain control over the process and ensure appropriate environmental safeguards. The production of liquid hydro- carbons is, however, prohibited by this Article. 2. Environmental Conservation Law (Section 23-0 305) This law provides that the Department of Environmental Conservation will retain juris- diction over any active or abandoned wells and -wellheads and may limit production. The Department may act to terminate hazardous discharges which threaten natural resources. Under this law, producers and handlers must maintain accurate records of quantities of gas handled. 3. Siting of Major Utility Transmission Facilities, Public Service Law (Article VII) This law establishes procedures to be followed by developers of natural gas in the construction of any gathering pipelines from wellheads and any master collecting pipelines in accordance with the environmental considerations of this Article as discussed under the previous policy. 4. Public Service Law (Article 4, Section 66) Under this law, the Public Service Commission regulates the safe construction and operation of natural gas pipelines from the wellhead to any onshore connection. 5. Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act, Executive Law (Article 42) See description under Policy 27. 6. State Environmental Quality Review Act, .Environmental Conservation Law (Section 8-0113) See description under Policy 27. 11 - 6 - 156 7. Water Resources Law, Environmental Conserva- tion Law (Article 15) See description under Policy 27. 8. Freshwater Wetlands Act, Environmental Con- servation Act (Article 24) See description under Policy 27. 9. Freshwater Wetlands Act, Environmental Con- servation Act (Article 24) See description under Policy 27. II -6 -157 POLICY 30 Municipal, Industrial, and commercial discharge of pollutants, in- cluding but not limited to, toxic and hazardous substances, into coastal waters will conform to State and National water quality stan- dards. A. Explanation of Policy Municipal, industrial and commercial discharges include not only "end-of-the pipe" discharges into surface and groundwater but also plant site run- off, leaching, spillages, sludge and other waste disposal, and drainage from raw material storage sites. Also, the regulated industrial discharges are both those which directly empty into receiving coastal waters and those� which pass through municipal treatment systems before reaching the State's waterways. B. State Means for Implementing the Policy 1. State Pollutant Discharge Eliminati6n System, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 17, Title 8) 2. Industrial Hazardous Waste Management, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 27, Title 9) 3. Substances Hazardous to the Environment, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 37) 4. State Certification of Public Sewage Treat- ment Plant Operators, Environmental Conserva- tion Law, (Article 3-0301), Public Health Law (Section 225) ~. - 6 - 159 POLICY 31 State coastal area policies and management objectives of approved local Waterfront Revitalization Programs will be considered while reviewing coastal water classifications and while modifying water quality standards; however, those waters already over-burdened with contaminants will be recognized as being a development constraint. A. Explanation of Policy Pursuant to the Federal Clean Water Act of 1977 (PL 95-217) the State has classified its coastal and other waters in accordance with considerations of best usage in the interest of the public and has adopted water quality standards for each class of waters. These classifications and standards are reviewable at least every three years for possible revision or amendment. Local Waterfront Revitalization Programs and State coastal management policies shall be factored into the review process for coastal waters. However, such consideration shall not affect any water pollution control requirement established by the State pursuant to the Federal Clean Water Act. The State has identified certain stream segments as being either "water quality limiting" or "effluent limiting." Waters not meeting State standards and which would not be expected to meet these standards even after applying "best practic- able treatment" to effluent discharges are classi- fied as "water quality limiting." Those segments meeting standards or those expected to meet them after application of "best practicable treatment" are classified as "effluent limiting," and all new waste discharges must receive "best practicable treatment." However, along stream segments class- ified as "water quality limiting," waste treatment beyond "best practicable treatment" would be required, and costs of applying such additional treatment may be prohibitive for new development. B. State Means for Implementing the Policy 1. Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act, Executive Law, (Article 42) 2. Classification of Waters and Adoption of Standards, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 17, Title 3) II - 6 - 161 POLICY 32 Encourage the use of alternative or Innovative sanitary waste systems In small communities where the costs of conventional facilities are unreasonably high, given the size of the existing tax base of these communities. A. Explanation of policy Alternative systems include individual septic tanks and other subsurface disposal systems, dual systems, small systems serving clusters of house- holds or commercial users, and pressure or vacuum sewers, These types of systems are often more cost effective in smaller less densely populated communities and for which conventional facilities are too expensive. B. State Means for Implementing the Policy 1. Construction and Operation Grants, Environ- mental Conservation Law (Article 17, Title 9) 2. Appalachian Regional Commission, Executive Law (Article 60) 3. Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act, Executive Law (Article 42) Approval of local waterfront revitalization programs authorized under Section 915 of this law would be contingent in part on the community's demonstrated effort to provide necessary treatment of any sanitary wastes being generated at waterfront properties. When hookup to the municipal sewage collec- tion and treatment facilities is neither economically or technically feasible, instal- lation of alternative treatment systems will be required as needed and practical. Is ~~~~~11 -6 -163 POLICY 33 Best management practices will be used to ensure the control of stormwater runoff and combined sewer overflows draining into coastal waters. A. Explanation of Policy Best management practices include both structural and non-structural methods of preventing or miti- gating pollution caused by the discharge of storm water runoff and combined sewer overflows. At present, structural -approaches to controlling stormwater runoff (e.g., construction of retention basins) and combined sewer overflows (e.g., re- placement of combined system with separate sani- tary and stormwater collection systems) are not economically feasible. Proposed amendments to the Clean Water Act, however, will authorize funding to address combined sewer overflows in areas where they create severe water quality impacts. Until funding for such projects becomes available, non- structural approaches (e.g., improved street -cleaning, reduced -use of road salt) will be encouraged. B. State Means for Implementing the Policy 1. Agreement of a Five Year Water Quality Management Program. 2. State "208" Water Quality Management Progam 3. Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act, Executive Law (Article 42) II - 6 - 165 POLICY 34 Discharge of waste materials into coastal waters from vessels sub- ject to State jurisdiction into coastal waters will be limited so as to protect significant fish and wildlife habitats, recreational areas and water supply areas. A. Explanation of Policy The discharge of sewage, garbage, rubbish, and other solid and liquid materials from watercraft and marinas into the State's waters is regulated. Priority will be given to the enforcement of this Law in areas such as shellfish beds and other significant habitats, beaches, and public water supply intakes, which need protection from contam- ination by vessel wastes. Also, specific effluent standards for marine toilets have been promulgated by the Department of Environmental Conservation (6 NYCRR, Part 657). B. State Means for Implementing the Policy 1. Disposal of Sewage and Litter in Waterways, Navigation Law (Section 33-c) 2. Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act, Executive Law (Article 42) 3. State Environmental Quality Review Act, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 8) - II - 6 - 167 POLICY 35 Dredging and dredge spoil disposal in coastal waters will be under. taken In a manner that meets existing State dredging permit re. quirements, and protects significant fish and wildlife habitats, scenic resources, natural protective features, important agricultural lands, and wetlands. A. Explanation of Policy Dredging often proves to be essential for water- front revitalization and development, maintaining navigation channels at sufficient depths, pollut- ant removal and meeting other coastal management needs. Such dredging projects, however, may adversely affect water quality, fish and wildlife habitats, wetlands and other important coastal resources. Often these adverse effects can be minimized through careful design and timing of the dredging operation and proper siting of the dredge spoil disposal site. Dredging permits will be granted if it has been satisfactorily demonstrated that these anticipated adverse effects have been reduced to levels which satisfy State dredging permit standards set forth in regulations developed pursuant to Environmental Conservation Law, (Articles 15, 24, 25 and 34), and are consistent with policies pertaining to the protection of coastal resources (State Coastal Management policies 7, 24, 15, 26 and 44). State Means for Implementing the Policy B. 1. Protection of Waters, Environmental Conserva- tion Law (Article 15, Title 5): Summarized in Vol. 2, page 214 2. Freshwater and Tidal Wetlands Acts, Environ- mental Conservation Law (Articles 24 and 25): Article 24 is in Vol. 2, pagef53; Regulations are in Vol 2, page 83; Article 25 is in Vol. 2, page 47; Regulations are in Vol. 2, page 66 3. State Environmental Quality Review Act, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 8): Article 8 is in Vol. 2, page 7; Regulations are in Vol. 2, Page 35 4. Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act, Executive Law (Article 42); Article 42 is in Vol. 2, page 3, Regulations are in Vol. 1 II - 6 - 169 POLICY 36 Activities related to the shipment and storage of petroleum and other hazardous materials will be conducted in a manner that will prevent or at least minimize spills Into coastal waters; all practicable efforts will be undertaken to expedite the cleanup of such discharges; and restitution for damages will be required when these spills occur. A. Explanation of Policy See Policy 39 for definition of hazardous materials. B. State Means for Implementing the Policy 1. Oil Spill Prevention, Control and Compensa- tion, Navigation Law (Article 12) 2. Penalties and Liabilities for Spills of Bulk Liquids, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 71-1941) 3. Transportation Law (Article 2, Section 14-F) II - 6 - 171 POLICY 37 Best management practices will be utilized to minimize the non-point discharge of excess nutrients, organics and eroded soils Into coastal waters. A. Explanation of Policy Best management practices used to reduce these sources of pollution could include but are not limited to, encouraging organic farming and pest management principles, soil erosion control prac- tices, and surface drainage control techniques. B. State Means for Implementing the Policy 1. Phosphate Limits, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 35) 2. State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 17, Title 8) 3. Realty Subdivision Approval, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 17, Title 15) 4. Freshwater and Tidal Wetlands Acts, Environ- mental Conservation Law (Articles 24 and 25) 5. Public Health Law (Section 228) 6. State Water Quality Management (108) Program 7. Soil and Water Conservation District Law (Section 9) II - 6 - 173 POLICY 38 The quality and quantity of surface water and groundwater supplies, will be conserved and protected, particularly where such waters con- stitute the prImary or sole source of water supply. A. Explanation of Policy Surface and groundwater are the principle sources of drinking water in the State, and therefore must be protected. Since Long Island's groundwater supply has been designated a 'primary source aquifer,' all actions must be reviewed relative to their impacts on Long Island's groundwater aquifers. B. State Means for Implementing the Policy 1. Well Drilling Regulation in Long Island, Environmental Conservation Law (151525 and 15-1527) 2. Realty Subdivision Approval, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 17, Title 15) 3. Solid Waste Management Act, Environmental Conservation Law, (Article 27) 4. Industrial Hazardous Wastes Management Act, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 27, Title 9) 5. Water Supply Approval, Environmental Conser- vation Law (Article 15) 6. Public Health Law (Article 11) 7. Phosphate Limits, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 35) 8. Public Health Law (Article 228) 9. Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resource Act, Executive Law (Article 42) II1- 6 - 175 POLICY 39 The transport, storage, treatment and disposal of solid wastes, par- ticularly hazardous wastes, within coastal areas Will be conducted In such a manner so as to protect groundwater and surface water sup. Plies, Significant fish and wildlife habitats, recreation areas, impor- tant agricultural lands and scenic resources. A. Explanation of Policy The definitions of terms 'solid wastesm and "solid wastes management facilitiesM are taken from New York's Solid Waste Management Act (Environmental Conservation Law, Article. 27). Solid wastes in- clude sludges from air or water pollution control facilities, demolition and construction debris and industrial and commercial wastes. Hazardous wastes are unwanted by-products of manu- facturing processes generally characterized as being flammable, corrosivej, reactive, or toxic. More specifically,, waste is defined in Environ- mental Conservation Law (Section 27-0901 (3)) as "wateor combination of wastes which because of its quantity, concentration, or physical, chemical or infectious characteristics may: (1) cause, or significantly contribute to an increase in mortal- ity or an increase in serious irreversible, or incapacitating reversible illness; or (2) pose a substantial present or potential hazard to human health or the environment which improperly treated, stored, transported or otherwise managed.0 A list of hazardous wastes (NYCRR Part 366) will be adopted by DEC within 6 mont~hs after EPA formally adopts its list. Examples of solid waste management facilities include resource recovery facilities, sanitary landfills and solid waste reduction facilities. Although a fundamental problem associated with the disposal and treatment of solid wastes is the contamination of water resources, other related problems may include: filling of wetlands and littoral areas, atmospheric loading, and degrada- tion of scenic resources. S. State Means for Implementing the Policy 1. Solid Waste Management Act, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 27) 2. Registration of Septic Tank Cleaners, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 27, Title 3) is ~~~~~11 - 6-177 3. Industrial hazardous Waste Management Act of 1978, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 17, Title 9) 4. Freshwater and Tidal Wetlands Acts, Environ- mental Conservation Law (Articles 24 and 25) 5. Protection of Waters Law, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 15, Title 5) 6. Coastal Erosion Hazard Areas, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 34) 7. Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act, Executive Law (Article 42) II - 6 - 178 POLICY 40 Effluent discharged from major steam electric generating and in- dustrial facilities Into coastal waters will not be unduly injurious to f ish and wildlife and shall conform to State water quality standards. A. Explanation of Policy The State Board on Electric Generation Siting and the Environment must consider a number of factors when reviewing a proposed site for facility con- struction. One of these factors is that the facility "not discharge any effluent that will be unduly injurious to the propagation and protection of fish and wildlife, the industrial development of the State, the public health, and public enjoy- ment of the receiving waters.' The ef fects of thermal discharges on water *quality and aquatic organisms will be considered by the siting board when evaluating an applicant's request to con- struct a new steam electric generating facility. B. State Means for Implementing the Policy 1. Siting of Major Steam Electric Generation Facilities, Public Service Law (Article V1II) 2. Thermal Discharge Regulation, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 17, Title 3, 6 NYCRR, Part 704) 0 ~~~~~~~~11 - 6-179 POLICY 41 Land use or development In the coastal area will not cause National * ~~~~~or State air quality standards to be violated. A. Explanation of Policy New York's Coastal Management Program incorporates the air quality policies and programs developed for the State by the Department of Environmental Conservation pursuant to the Clean Air Act and State Laws on air quality. The requirements of the Clean Air Act are the minimum air quality control requirements applicable within the coastal area. To the extent possible, the State Implementation Plan will be consistent with coastal lands and water use policies. Conversely, coastal management guidelines and program decisions with regard to land and water use and any recommendations with regard to specific sites for major new or expanded industrial, energy, transportation, or commercial facilities will reflect an assessment of their compliance with the air quality requirements of the State Implementation Plan. The Department of Environmental Conservation will allocate substantial resources to develop a regu- latory and management program to identify and eliminate toxic discharges into the atmosphere. The State's Coastal Management Program will assist in coordinating major toxic control programming efforts in the coastal regions and in supporting research on the multi-media nature of toxics and their economic and environmental effects on coastal resources. B. State Means for Implementing the Policy 1. Air Pollution Control Act, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 19), Environmental Quality Bond Act, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 15, Title 5) and Hazardous Substance Act, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 37). is II ~~~~1- 6 -181 POLICY 42 Coastal Management policies will be considered if the State reclass- ifies land areas pursuant to the prevention of significant deterioration * ~~~~~regulations of the Federal Clean Air Act. A. Explanation of Policy The policies of the State and local coastal management programs concerning proposed land and water uses and the protection and preservation of special management areas will be taken into account prior to any action to change prevention of significant deterioration land classifications in coastal regions or adjacent areas. In addition, the Department of State will provide the Depart- ment of Environmental Conservation with recommnen- dations for proposed prevention of significant deterioration land classification designations based upon State and local coastal management programs. B. State Means for Implementing the Policy 1. Air Pollution Control Act, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 19) This law provides the Department of Environ- mental Conservation with the authority to designate areas of the State based upon degree of pollution that may be permitted. It allows the Department to consider that what may be proper for a residential area, for example, may not be proper for a highly developed industrial area. 2. Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act, Executive Law (Article 42) Section 919 of Article 42 requires 1) that State agencies actions, including funding, planning, and land transactions, as well as direct development activities, must be con- sistent with the policies of this act, 2) that the Secretary of State shall review actions of State agencies that may affect achievement of the policy, and 3) that SEQR regulations be amended to reflect considera- tion and impacts on the use and conservation of coastal resources. Section 2 of the Act requires that State agencies analyze their programs' consistency with coastal policies and that the Secretary tof State reommernor any tneed modifications tof State Geommernor and theLegeoificature. II - 6 - 183 POLICY 43 Land use or development in the coastal area must not cause the generation of significant amounts of the acid rain precursors: nitrates * ~~~~~and sulfates. A. Explanation of Policy The New York Coastal Management Program incorpor- ates the State's policies on acid rain. As such, the Coastal Management Program will assist in the State's efforts to control acid rain. These efforts to control acid rain will enhance the continued viability of coastal fisheries, wildlife, agricultural, scenic and water resources. B. State Means for Implementing the Policy 1. Air Pollution Control Act, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 19). 2. Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act, Executive Law (Article 42). Section 919 of Article 42 requires 1) that State agencies actions, including funding, planning, and land transactions, as well as direct development activities, must be consistent with the policies of this act, 2) that the Secretary of State shall review actions of State agencies that may affect achievement of the policy, and 3) that SEQR regulations be amended to reflect considera- tion of impacts on the use and conservation of coastal resources. Section 2 of the Act requires that State agencies analyze their programs' consistency with coastal policies and that the Secretary of State recommend any needed modifications to the Governor and the Legislature. II - 6-185 POLICY 44 Preserve and protect tidal and freshwater wetlands and preserve the benefits derived from these areas. A. Explanation of Policy Tidal wetlands include the following ecological zones: coastal fresh marsh; intertidal marsh; coastal shoals, bars and flats; littoral zone; high marsh or salt meadow; and formerly connected tidal wetlands. These tidal wetland areas are officially delineated on the Department of Environmental Conservation's Tidal Wet- lands Inventory Map. Freshwater wetlands include marshes, swamps, bogs, and flats supporting aquatic and semi-aquatic vegetation and other wetlands so defined in the N.Y.S. Freshwater Wetlands Act and the N.Y.S. Protection of Waters Act. The benefits derived from the preservation of tidal and freshwater wetlands include but are not limited to: -- habitat for wildlife and fish, includinq a sub- stantial portion of the State's commercial fin and shellfish varieties; and contribution to associ- ated aquatic food chains; -- erosion, flood and storm control; -- natural pollution treatment; -- groundwater protection; -- recreational opportunities; -- educational and scientific opportunities; and -- aesthetic open space in many otherwise densely developed areas. B. State Means for Implementing the Policy 1. Tidal Wetlands Act, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 25) This act is designed to 'preserve and protect tidal wetlands, and to prevent their despoilation and destruction, giving due consideration to the reasonable economic and social development of the State'. The regulatory program associated with the act is contained in the NYCRR, Title 6, Parts 660 and 661. Part 660 describes a moratorium regulatory program, while Part 661 details a permanent regulatory program. II - 6 - 187 The moratorium program provided interim protection to wetlands while the tidal wetlands inventory was beincg completed. Once maps were filed with the0 appropriate local governments, the moratorium on development in the majority of wetlands was lifted and permanent land use regulations went into effect. For the purposes of the Tidal Wetlands Act, the permanent regulations apply to the six tidal wet- land types and divide land uses into four cate- gories: uses not requiring a permit; generally compatible uses; presumptively incompatible uses; and incompatible uses. All but the first category are subject to permit restrictions. More speci- fically, regulated uses include draining, dredging, excavation, filling, construction of facilities, pollution, and land subdivision. Each application for a permit is subject to a hearing. A notice of public hearing is sent to affected parties. If no objections are received, the hearing may be cancelled. The application is then reviewed and denied or granted with conditions to minimize impact. Permits may be suspended or revoked upon grounds stated in the regulations. 2. Freshwater Wetlands Act, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 24) This act authorizes the regulation of the use and development of the State's freshwater wetlands of 12.4 or more acres or of unusual local signifi- cance as determined by the Commissioner of DEC. The regulatory program is divided into two phases: the interim permilt program and the permanent permit programs. The interim permit program is described in the NYCRR, Title 6, Part 662. It is in effect in each locality until final county wetlands maps have been filed with the clerk of each local government and prior to implementation of a local freshwater wetlands'protection law or ordinance. Application for an interim permit must be made for certain alterations of regulated freshwater wetlands and adjacent areas within 100 feet of the wetland. Draining, dredging, filling, erecting structures and discharging pollutants are some of the activities which may substantially alter and impair the functions of a wetland. A public hearing may or may not be deemed necessary0 depending on the number of objections filed or the II - 6 - 188 nature of the alteration. DEC will finally decide to issue, deny or condition an interim permit depending on the effect a proposed activity would produce on the benefits of a wetland. The permanent program is fully described in NYCRR, Title 6, Parts 663 and 664. The permanent program takes effect in a particular county after DEC files its official regulatory maps with all of the local governments in that county. These maps depict freshwater wetlands of 12.4 acres or more plus certain smaller freshwater wetlands of special local concerns. These maps are filed after public hearings are held. At this writing only certain counties (and their constituent municipalities) have received these maps. Once these maps are completed, reviewed, and filed wetland laws adopted by communities become operative. These laws must be at least as restrictive as DEC's regulations. If a city, town or village fails to adopt and implement a local law, the county may take responsibility. If the county fails to participate, DEC will regulate the wetlands. Any city, town or village which defaults or transfers its authority may recover it at any time. Regulations for the permanent program contain standards for issuing permits to undertake specified activities. The standards are applied for four classes of wetlands granted according to their abilities to perform wetland functions and provide wetland benefits. DEC retains authority over Class I (highest quality) wetlands and certain other wetlands for reasons of size or other special characteristics. Where a local government has authority over a wetland associated with a major international or interstate river or lake (i.e., the Hudson, Niagara and St. Lawrence Rivers, and Lakes Erie and Ontario), it must consult with DEC before taking any regulatory action concerning that wetland. is II ~~1- 6 -189 3. Protection of Water Laws Act, Environmental Conservation Law (Article 15, Title 5) This law effectively affords State regulatory protection to any remaining wetland areas not being protected under the Freshwater Wetlands Act. This law require that a permit be obtained from the Department of Environmental Conservation for any activities which require excavation or filling of all wetlands that are adjacent to and contiguous with navigable waters of the State, and that are inundated at mean high water level. Furthermore, wetlands associated with protected waters (streams and rivers classified C(t) or higher) tributary to navigable waters are also protected by this law. 1I - 6 -190 SECTION 7 PLANNING PROCESSES Introduction Three planning Processes are incorporated into the State Coastal Management Program. They are: the Energy Facility Planning Process, the Shorefront Erosion/Mitigation Planning Process, and the Shorefront Access and Protection Process. These processes, which are described below, comply with federal regulations for the Coastal Zone Management Program. Energy Facility Planning Process Section 305 (b) (8) of the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended, requires the management program of each State to include "a planning process for energy facilities likely to be located in, or which may significantly affect the coastal zone, including but not limited to, a process anticipating and managing the impacts from such facilities" I. identification of Energy Facilities Likely to Locate In, or Significantly Affect a State's Coastal Area Energy facilities likely to locate in, or significantly affect New York's coastal area include electric generating facilities (oil, coal, nuclear, hydropowered); electric and gas transmission facilities; oil and gas exploration, development, transfer and storage facilities (including LNG facilities); and alternative energy facilities (e.g. wind). II. Procedures for Assessing the Suitability of Sites for Such Facilities 1. General Planning For all such facilities, the planning process begins with the preparation of the State Energy Master Plan, as required by Article 5 of the Energy Law; determines State energy needs; and identifies proposed new, expanding or converting facilities and their locations. It contains: a. A forecast of the State's energy requirements for periods of five, ten and fifteen years, together with 0 ~ ~~~the bases for such forecasts; b. A summary of the plans of the State's major energy suppliers for meeting forecasted energy requirements, including descriptions of new energy sources; 11 - 7 - I C. An identification and analysis of emerging trends related to energy supply, price and demand; d. A statement and justification for specific energy policies, as well as recommendations for administrative and legislative actions that the State Energy Office has determined are desirable to implement the State's energy policy; and e. Such additional information as the State Energy Office deems appropriate. 2. Activity Specific Processes More specific procedures for siting individual facilities depend on the facility involved. a. Steam Electric Generating Facilities and Electric and Gas Transmission Facilities i) Additional Planning Requirements Prior to any amendment of the State Energy Master Plan, members of the New York Power Pool and New York Gas Group must submit comprehensive long- range plans for future operations (including energy demands for the next five, ten and fifteen0 year period) to the State Energy Office and other State agencies. Public hearings must be held before the Board's adoption of a revision to the Master Plan. Once adopted, specific findings of projected electric and gas "requirements" for the forecast periods are binding, with respect to any determination of need for a facility, on those agencies having powers to issue certificates under Article VII and VIII of the Public Service Law. The Coastal Management Program will review the Master Plan and present its comments to the Energy Planning Board if any inconsistencies with the Coastal Management policies are found. ii) Permitting Processes The State's review process for individual facil- ities is set forth in Articles VII and VIII of the Public Service Law and regulations promulgated thereunder (see Appendix F). The procedure involves the following steps: 11 7 - 2 1) Application to the Public Service Commission for electric and gas transmission facilities, Is ~~~~~or to the New York State Board on Electric Generation Siting and the Environment for steam electric generating facilties. 2) Review for completeness 3) Establishment of dates for hearing -- within 60 days for an electric generating facility, 60-90 days for an electric transmission line, 20-60 days for a gas line 4) Pre-hearing (Electric generating) 5) Hearing (can be joint) 6) Examiner's decision (Electric generating) 7) Decision 8) Re-hearing procedures -- up to 3 months (Electric generating only) In making its application for a proposed electric generation facility, the "applicant in its direct testimony and as part of the exhibit information required to be submitted by Parts 72 through 80 of NYCRR, Title 16, shall explain the extent to which the location, design, construction, operation and maintenance of a proposed electric generation facility at a proposed site is designed to comply with each Federal and State law, rule, regulation or standard, interstate compact, and international requirement relevant and material to a determina- tion of the application". If a proposed facility will not be in full compliance with the above, the applicant must describe any limitation or proced- ure it proposes to assure compliance or justify nonconforming aspects. (see Appendix F of this document, NYCRR, Title 16, Subchapter E, Section 71.9.) In making its application, the applicant must pro- vide an analysis of the need for the facility. It must also provide information about the existing condition of and potential impacts on air quality, aquatic ecology, environmental noise, regional and site geology, land use and aesthetic characteris- tics, terrestrial ecology, and water quality and quantity, in addition to the waste characteristics of the proposed facility (see Appendix F of this document, NYCRR, Title 16, Subchapter E, Sections is ~~~~~72-80.) 11 - 7 - 3 The Board, in granting a certificate for construc- tion, must find and determine: (a) the public need for the facility; (b) the nature of the probable environmental impact; (c) that the facility represents the minimum adverse environmental impact, is compatible with public health and safety, and will not discharge any effluent that will be in contravention of the standards adopted by the department of environmental conservation; (d) that the facility is designed to operate in compliance with applicable state and local laws and regulations; (e) that the facility is consistent with long- range planning objectives for electric power supply in the state; (f) that the facility is in the public interest, concerning the environmental impact, the total cost to society, the possible available sites or alternative available sources of energy. (See Appendix F of this document, Article VIII of the Public Service Law, Section 146.) In making its application for a major electric or gas utility transmission facility, "the applicant shall state whether it has pending or knows of others who have pending, with this commission or with any other governmental department or agency (State or Federal), an application or filing which concerns the subject matter of the proceeding before the commission. If one or more such applications or filings is pending, the applicant shall state, for each application or filing pending, whether the granting of any such other application or filing will have any effect on the grant or denial of a certificate, and whether the granting of a certificate will have any effect-upon the grant or denial of any such other application or filing." (See Appendix F of this document, NYCRR, Title 16, Subchapter G, Part 86.9.) In making its application, the applicant must submit a statement describing any study which has been made of the impact of the proposed facility on the environment. The applicant must also state what changes, if any, the construction and operation of the proposed facility might induce in the physical or biological processes of plant life or wildlife through any permanent or significant temporary change in the hydrology, topography, or soil of the area. II-7 - 4 The Board, in granting a certificate for construc- tion, must f ind and determine: (a) the public need for the facility; (b) the nature of the probable environmental impact; (c) that the facility represents the minimum adverse environmental impact, is compatible with public health and safety, and will not discharge any effluent that will be in contravention of the standards adopted by the department of environmental conservation; (d) that the facility is designed to operate in compliance with applicable state and local laws and regulations; (e) that the facility is consistent with long- range planning objectives for electric power supply in the state; (f) that the facility is in the public interest, concerning the environmental impact, the total cost to society, the possible available sites or alternative available sources of energy. (See Appendix F of this document, Article VIII of the Public Service Law, Section 146.) In making its application for a major electric or gas utility transmission facility, "the applicant shall state whether it has pending or knows of others who have pending, with this commission or with any other governmental department or agency (State or Federal), an application or filing which concerns the subject matter of the proceeding before the commission. If one or more such applications or filings is pending, the applicant shall state, for each application or filing pending, whether the granting of any such other application or filing will have any effect on the grant or denial of a certificate, and whether the granting of a certificate will have any effect upon the grant or denial of any such other application or filing.' (See Appendix F of this document, NYCRR, Title 16, Subchapter G, Part 86.9.) In making its application, the applicant must submit a statement describing any study which has been made of the impact of the proposed facility on the environment. The applicant must also state what changes, if any, the construction and operation of the proposed facility might induce in the physical or biological processes of plant life or wildlife through any permanent or . ~significant temporary change in the hydrology, topography, or Is ~soil of the area. 11 - 7 -5 The applicant must also state what efforts have been made to assure that the transmission line right-of-way avoids scenic, recreational and historic areas; minimizes visibility from public 0 areas; avoids heavily timbered, high points, ridge lines and steep slopes; preserves the natural landscape and minimizes con- flict with any present or future planned land use. In addition, the applicant must indicate plans to protect natural vegetation, topsoil, wildlife habitat, and aquatic life. (See Appendix F of this document, NYCRR, Title 16, Subchapter G, Part 86.4.) The Commission in granting the certificate for construction or operation of the major transmission facility must find and determine: (a) the need for the facility; (b) the nature of the probable environmental impact; (c) that the facility represents the minimum adverse environmental impact; (d) in the case of an electric transmission line, (1) what part, if any, of the line shall be located underground; (2) that such facility conforms to a long-range plan for expansion of the electric power grid of the electric systems serving this state and interconnected utility systems, which will serve the interests of electric system economy and reliability; (e) in the case of a gas transmission line, that the location of the line will not pose an undue hazard to persons or property along the area traversed by the line; (f) that the location of the facility as proposed conforms to applicable state and local laws and regulations issued thereunder; (g) that the facility will serve the public interest, convenience and necessity. (See Appendix F of this document, Article VII of the Public Service Law, Section 126.) b. Offshore Gas and Oil Facilities and Activities Drilling rigs, pipelines, refineries, storage and other gas and oil facilities which are located in the State's coastal waters and adjacent shorelands are subject to several different laws and regulations that assess, among other things, the siting of such facilities. In addition, offshore gas and oil exploration, development and production activities must meet State requirements. 11 - 7 - 6 The location of fuel gas transmission lines are subject to Article VII of the Public Service Law. The Public Service Commission, before issuing a certificate for the construction and operation of a major gas pipeline, must find that there is a public need for the facili- ty and that it is compatible with the environment (See the discussion under Steam Electric Generating. Facilities and Electric and Gas Transmission Lines and Appendix F for further information on this comprehensive siting review procedure). The Department of State will review applications for gas transmission lines which are submitted to the Commission and may present testimony during the review proceedings regarding the siting of such facilities. Oil transmission lines in coastal waters are subject to several laws and their implementing regulations which focus upon the effects of such facilities upon valuable coastal resources. Any pipeline which would require excavation or fill activities is subject to the pro- visions of Article 15 (Water Resources) of the Environmental Conservation Law. In addition, the construction of such facilities would be regulated by the Tidal and Freshwater Wetlands laws (Article 25 and 24 of the Environmental Conservation Law, respec- tively). Such pipelines are evaluated as to their effects upon navigation, fish, aquatic and water resources, functions of wetlands and the public health, safety and welfare. Oil transmission lines subject to the above cited laws are subject to the review proced- ures established by Article 70 (Uniform Procedures) of the Environmental Conservation Law. These procedures call for: the submission of a complete application to the Department of Environmental Conservation; the publication of a notice of application including the date of any public hearing, if necessary, and time period for public comment; and, the approval or dis- approval of the permit application within sixty days after the close of the public hearing record, or, if no hearing was held, ninety days after the submission of a complete application. If the Department determines that a proposed oil pipe- line would have a significant effect upon the environ- ment, the preparation of an Environmental Impact State- ment (EIS) will be necessary as required by Article 8 (State Environmental Quality Review Act) of the Envi- ronmental Conservation Law (See Appendix E for further information on this review procedure). When an EIS is prepared, the proposed-action must be evaluated for its. consistency with the coastal policies contained in the Department of State's Part 600 regulations. II-7 -7 Oil and gas exploration, development and production activities in N4ew York's coastal waters are subject to the provisions of Article 23 (Mineral Resources) of the i Environmental Conservation Law. This law regulates the drilling, casing, operation and the spacing and plug- ging of wells. It also provides for the leasing of State-owned underwater lands for the purposes of gas and oil development and production. An applicant seeking approval from the Department of Environmental Conservation for a proposed oil or gas exploration, development and production activity must submit a com- plete application. The Department will then provide public notice of the proposed activity and hold a public hearing. Within sixty days after the conclusion of the hearing, the Department must either approve or disapprove the application. The Department would also be required by Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law to determine the environmental significance of the proposed activity. If it is determined that the activity would have a significant effect upon the environment, the prepara- tion of an environmental impact statement would be necessary., In such instances, the Department must also determine the consistency of the activity with the coastal policies contained in the Department of State's Part 600 regulations. Onshore oil and gas facilities (except for LNG and LPG0 storage and gas transmission facilities) must comply with established State air and water quality standards and tidal and freshwater wetlands requirements, where applicable. The discharge of pollutants into the air and water and the construction of facilities in or adjacent to designated wetlands are regulated by Articles 17 (Water Pollution Control), 19 (Air Pollu- tion), 24 (Freshwater Wetlands) and 25 (Tidal Wetlands) of the Environmental Conservation Law. The review of such facilities under the above cited laws is subject to the procedures established in Article 70 (Uniform Procedures) of the Environmental Conservation Law. The review procedure established by this law is presented in the discussion under oil transmission lines. In addition, onshore oil and gas facilities may be subject to the provisions of Article 8 of the Envi- ronmental Conservation Law which requires the prepa- ration of an EIS, if it is determined that such facilities may have a significant effect upon the environment. When this occurs the Department of Environmental Conservation will have to determine the consistency of such facilities with the coastal policies contained in the Department of State's Part 600 regulations. One of the policies calls for facili-0 tating the siting of water dependent uses which include energy-related uses and facilities. 11 7 - 8 co LNG Facilities Article 23 of the Environmental Conservation Law (Liquifiled Natural and Petroleum Gas) requires a certificate of environmental safety prior to construc- tion, reconstruction, enlargement, or Initiation of operation of LNG and LPG facilities. Procedures allow for complete consideration of the facility,, the pro- posed site and alternate locations prior to the decision an granting a certificate. The procedures involve the following: 1) Application for certificate to the Department of Environmental Conservation 2) Public hearings 3) Department decision 4) Renewals, modifications 5) Suspensionsa, revocations d. Other Energy Facilities The procedures for assessing the suitability of a site for other facilities likely to locate in the coastal zone are essentially the same as for assessing the suitability of any other type of project in the coastal zone, If a direct State action Is involved, the Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act requires consistency with the coastal policies. If no such direct or funding action Is involved, suitability of significant facilities will be assessed In the context of State permitting actions subject to Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law (State Environmental Quality Review Act) which requires an environmental impact statement to be prepared for all actions (except actions subject to Article VII and VIII of the Public Service Law) which may have a significant effect upon the environment. As amended, the SEOR regulations require that, a state agency's action be consistent with the coastal policies. Such a determination Is made In addition to any requirements under one or more permitting programs. (See permitting programs described under Policy 27 in Part II* Section 6 of this document.) III. Articulation and Identification of Enforceable State- Policies, Authorities and Techniques for Managing Energy Facilities and Their Impacts State energy policies are contained in the Energy Law and State Energy Master Plan (see Appendix F for the Energy Law). In general, the policies deal with maintaining a dependable, economic supply of energy, promoting economic development and protecting the environment. State energy policies are as follows: 1. The State's consumption of petroleum products must be reduced. The economic cost and vulnerability to disruption resulting from the State's continued disproportionate reliance on oil strongly support actions to shift to less costly and/or more secure energy sources. 2. Conservation and renewable resources must make a greater contribution to energy supply and will require, substantial additional government support to do so, at least in the near-term. In many applications, conservation and renew- ables appear to be the least costly, most economically productive and environmentally benign means to satisfy a significant portion of the State's current and anticipated energy requirements. Government action must enhance the respective contributions to be made by conservation and renewables in meeting those requirements. 3. The State of New York and its agencies should encourage the efficient use of natural gas and stimulate efforts to secure additional supplies of natural gas from sources that are economic and compatible with environmental, public health, and safety standards in order to reduce New York's depen- dence on oil. Natural gas is and will likely remain an economic and environmentally compatible alternative to oil. This policy will help insure that supply and demand remain balanced throughout the planning period. 4. The increased use of coal must be promoted where economic- ally feasible and consistent with applicable environmental standards. Compared to continued use of oil, particularly in the utility sector, use of coal will result in economic advantages, given current and forecast cost differentials between coal and oil, and significant improvement in certainty of supply over the forecast period. Increased utilization of eastern coal is likely to stabilize regional energy costs and will stimulate regional economic development. 5. Regional cooperation, coordination, and action must be promoted to enhance the region's energy supply prospects. Interconnection of New York's electric and natural gas supply systems with Canada should be pursued as a vehicle for reducing costs and oil dependence to the extent economic and feasible. Interconnection may also lessen the adverse impacts an the State's environment from construction and operation of energy supply facilities. 11 - 7 - 10 6. Because of the need to develop a fully adequate national nuclear waste disposal program, and a need to clarify substantial uncertainties associated with economic, safety Is ~~and regulatory issues related to the nuclear option, new nuclear power plants should not be included in the State's electricity supply plan at this time. 7. All consuming sectors must be given increased choice among competing energy forms, including conventional fuels, con- servation, and renewable resources. Increased choice will benefit consumers by increasing price competition among energy forms, and will benefit the State by stimulating innovation and efficiency improvements. 8. Government must act to remove any existing legislative and administrative barriers inhibiting the development of energy sources, competition among fuel forms and energy conserva- tion, except where such action would clearly compromise public health, safety or environmental quality. Justifica- tion for any such institutional barriers must be reexamined in light of compelling State energy needs. 9. The State's electric and gas utilities, as well as PASNY, should encourage and stimulate conservation and efficient use of energy by their customers. Electric and gas utili- ties should become more active purveyors of conservation and renewable resource technologies. . ~10. No person should be without adequate heat or should be forced to forego conservation improvements by reason of inability to pay. A commitment to protect public health and safety requires no less. 11. The energy research, development and demonstration programs being pursued in New York must be expanded and must empha- size those technologies that will, over the mid- to long- term, mitigate energy cost increases and energy supply interruption. Formal and informal coordination of the numerous energy RD&D programs throughout the State is essential to assure that these activities support and complement State energy policy. 12. In view of the extensive reliance on oil in the transporta- tion sector, the State should continue to take action to maximize the efficient use of energy in this sector. More- over, the relatively energy efficient mass transit and rail- road systems throughout the State must be maintained to prevent shifts of mass transit and railroad riders to less efficient automobiles. 13. Comprehensive energy emergency preparedness activities, directed at mitigating the adverse economic and social impacts of an interruption in petroleum supplies, must be continued and increased in order to protect public health is ~~and safety. II-7 - In addition to the above cited policies, the State of New York has enacted laws and adopted regulations which govern the siting of certain energy uses and facilities. The basic policies 0 contained in these laws and regulations are: 1. The siting of major steam electric generating and gas and electric transmission facilities shall be based upon public need and compatability with the environment (Articles VII and VIII, PSL) 2. The siting of liquified natural and petroleum gas facilities shall be based upon public safety and compatability with the environment (Article 23 ECL) 3. Facilitate the siting of water dependent uses and facilities on or adjacent to coastal waters (DOS Part 600 regulations) IV. Identification of How Interested and Affected Public and Private Parties May Be Involved in the Planning Process The Department of State, as the agency responsible for the Coastal Management Program, will ensure that coastal concerns are part of energy facility deliberations by continuing to review the State Energy Plan and any amendments thereto. It also by law receives proposals for review under Articles VII and VIII of the Public Service Law and will particpate in hearings under Article VII (as an automatic party) and Article VIII (as a party upon request). In addition, pursuant to the Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act, Department of State regulations and amend- ments to SEQRA regulations provide the procedural opportunities for the Department of State to undertake its requried review of all actions, including energy faciltiies, which may affect the achievement of the coastal policies. Before the State Energy Master Plan is amended, major private sector energy suppliers (NY Power Pool and NY Gas Group) are required to submit comprehensive long-range plans for future operations to the State Energy Office and other State agencies. These plans are reviewed and approved by the Energy Board. Local governments and the general public are provided the oppor- tunity to participate as parties in Article VII and VIII proceedings and other hearings conducted pursuant to the various permitting and environmental review procedures cited above. The Department of State will also encourage local governments which develop waterfront revitalization programs to consider future energy development activities, to identify appropriate sites, and to prepare local laws or other mechanisms for dealing with new or expanding energy development. 11 - 7 -12 . ~The national interest in the planning for and siting of energy facilities was determined from the National Energy Plan and through direct communication with appropriate Federal agencies. For a more complete discussion of the national interest in energy production and transmission facilities, see Part II, Section 9, Special Program Requirements, of this document. Shoreline Erosion/Mitigation Planninq Section 305 (b) (9) of the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended, requires that state coastal management programs must include a shoreline erosion/mitigation planning process, the regulations for which are presented in 15 CFR 923.25: "(1 The management program must include a method for assessing the effects of shoreline erosion and evaluating techniques for miti- gating, controlling or restoring areas adversely affected by erosion." "(2) There must be an identification and description of enforceable policies, legal authorities, funding techniques and other techniques that will be used to manage the effects of erosion as the State's planning process indicates is necessary." O ~As evidenced in the Flood and Erosion Hazards issue discussion (Part 11, Section 5), which is incorporated by reference as part of this response, the effects of shoreline erosion and the techniques for dealing with it are of major concern to New York State. However, the State lacked a systematic basis for dealing with that concern until 1981 when the Coastal Erosion Hazard Areas legislation was enacted. The law (Environmental Conser- vation Law, Article 34) recognizes: the extensive damage caused by erosion in the State's coastal area; man's contribution to the problem by activities which exacerbate the erosion process or by placing property where it is exposed to damage; and, that many measures taken to control erosion are costly, often ineffective, and may be harmful to other lands. The law has three principal components: delineation of the hazard areas; promulgation of regulations; and implementation. Procedures established by the law require the Department of Environmental Conservation, in full cooperation with affected local governments, to complete a preliminary identification of erosion hazard areas of the State's coastline. Coastal erosion hazard areas are defined by Article 34 in two ways. In the first, a requisite period of protection of structures is set at 40 years. That number is then multiplied by the annual land recession rate on lands where it is at least one foot, to define . ~the inland extent of the hazard area. The recession rate will be measured using comparable maps and aerial photography, including 1979 photographs of the State's Great Lakes coast which were 11 - 7 - 1 3 flown specifically for this purpose, and funded under the federal Coastal Zone Management Act. The second definition of erosion hazard area encompasses dunes, beaches, shoals and other features which offer natural protection to shorelands. After required public hearings and consultations, final identification of coastal erosion hazard areas will be made. Priority is being given by DEC to identifying first those areas of the coastline which are eroding at a rate of 4 feet or more annually. Within those identified erosion hazard areas, the regulatory provisions of the legislation will apply. For activitie~s and development in such areas, regulations promulgated under Article 34 are required to establish minimum standards and criteria including: the use of setbacks; prevention of increase in erosion; minimizing of adverse effects on natural protective features; and measures to ensure the effectiveness of control structures. The law also specifies that, when public funds are to be used for activities and developmnet, the public benefits must clearly outweigh the long-range adverse effects. Policies 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, and 17 are based on those regulatory provisions. Article 34 is designed to give, first, each affected local government the opportunity to implement its provisions with the adoption of a local coastal erosion hazard areas law or ordinance. If a local government fails to exercise its right, the county, or finally, DEC must issue regulations for that community., In summary, the effects of full implementation of the Coastal Erosion Hazard Areas Act are: all erosion hazard areas of the State's coastline will be identified and mapped; a regulatory framework govern activities and development in those areas; and all government as well as private actions and programs will be constrained by the Act. Shorefront Access and Protection Planning Process Several State, regional, and local agencies participating in development of the Coastal Management Program identified specific sites in need of improved access for their functional or geographic areas of concern. Access sites for fishing, boating and other waterfront related activities have been identified by the Department of Environmental Conservation; the Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation; New York City Planning Commission; the Long Island Regional Planning Board; the Erie and Niagara Counties Regional Planning Board; the St. Lawrence-Eastern Ontario Commission; and individual counties participating in the program. While most of the access site recommendations may reflect knowledge of the local area or specific functional plans, they are not based on a single coordinated statewide access planning process. The New York City Department of Planning has developed a methodology for identifying shorefront areas appropriate for II-7 - 14 . ~improved access. The Department tabulated the nature of the access issues for 33 areas. For three of these, detailed studies were undertaken consisting of: an examination of the study area in terms of current modes of access to the shore; identification of specific shorefront access concerns based on the above investigations; and recommended actions necessary to mitigate these concerns. The remaining identified areas will also be evaluated in this manner in the immediate future. The Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation has also inventoried recreational facility capacity and undertaken supply and demand studies which can be applied to determination of access roads. A single procedure for identifying, on a statewide basis, public shorefront areas appropriate for access has been developed as part of the Coastal Management Program and is outlined below. This procedure utilizes, in part, various methodologies and inventories already developed by State and local agencies and the lists of specific sites needing access improvements. This procedure satisfies the shorefront access and protection planning requirements of the Coastal Zone Management Act. Its application will result in a list of the specific access improve- ments to which the State will give priority within financial and legal limits. An interagency advisory committee will be established to oversee operation of the procedure. . ~1. Identify the types of public areas to which new or increased public access is desirable and a single planning process is appropriate for determining needed additional access. a. Beaches - definition of beach is as follows: A beach is a zone of unconsolidated material that extends landward from the level of lowest water to the place where there is a marked change in natural or physiographic form (first line of terrestrial vegetation) or to the upper limit reached by the highest storm waves, which is the area subject to alternate erosion and deposition of beach material. The offshore limit of a beach is the mean low water line. A beach consists of both foreshore and backshore zones. Beach elements include dry sand areas, sand dunes, and areas of reasonably graduated slope to the water. Beaches are composed of a variety of materials, including sand, gravel, or pebbles. Areas composed of other materials may function as beaches when they are used for traditional beach activities. b. Fishing and hunting areas C. Boat launching sites and marinas d. Scenic areas of statewide significance - as defined in the scenic quality issue discussion (Part II, Section 5) of this document 11 7 -1 e. Waterfront parks f. The coast at large, to include other non-federal publicly-owned land I 2. Inventory existing public areas to which public access is provided and/or desirable. a. Beaches - inventory and map those areas which meet the definition of beach above, including identification of those in public ownership. Sources are as follows: (1) Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservation Inventory of Recreation Sites (2) Land Use and Natural Resource Inventory (LUNR) (3) office of General Services State Land Inventory (4) New York City Coastal Management Program Report (5) Nassau-Suffolk Regional Planning Board Coastal Management Program Report (6) St. Lawrence-Eastern Ontario Commission Coastal Management Program Report (7) State Coastal Management Program Coastal Atlas (will map all beaches) b. Fishing areas - an inventory and map of sites to which the public has access for fishing purposes within the coastal area. Sources are as follows: Cl) Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservation Inventory of Recreation Sites (2) Department of Environmental Conservation's Fish and Wildlife Management Program (3) Office of General Services' State Lands Inventory (4) New York City Coastal Management Program Report (5) Nassau-Suffolk Regional Planning Board Coastal Management Program Report (6) St. Lawrence-Eastern Ontario Commission Coastal Management Program Report (7) Sea Grant 11 - 7 - 16 c. Boat launching sites and marinas - an inventory of all marinas and boat launching sites open to the public. Sources include all those listed under "a" above plus the Corps of Engineers, Sea Grant, and the Department of Transportation. d. Scenic areas of statewide significance - an inventory and map. Principal source is the Coastal Management Program Coastal Atlas, plus information from the Department of Environmental Conservation and the Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservation. e. Waterfront parks - an inventory and map. Sources are as follows: (1) Office of Parks, 'Recreation, and Historic Preservation's Inventory of Recreation Sites (2) Coastal Management Program Coastal Atlas f. Coast at large - a map and inventory of areas with general access to the shore. Sources include: (1) Office of General Services inventory of State Lands (2) County tax maps 3. Describe the level and type of existing access at each site identified in terms of mode, capacity, and condition. Major source is the Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservation's Inventory of Recreation Sites. 4. Assess the appropriateness of the above access relative to the capacity (physical and environmental) of the site to accommodate increased access and the present and future demand for use of the site. 5. Where increased access is appropriate, indicate the appropriate means for improving access and the agency's responsibility. 6. Establish a priority system for areas where increased access is appropriate. II - 7 - 17 SECTION 9 SPECIAL FEDERAL PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS * ~Introduction Several Federal program requirements warrant special discussion due to their particular subject matter and role in a State's coastal management program. They are the requirements pertaining to national interest, uses of regional benefit, Federal consis- tency and public participation A State must demonstrate that in the development of its program, adequate consideration was given to various types of facilities which may locate in coastal areas and are of interstate or national concern. In addition, the State's management program must ensure that consideration of such facilities will be con- tinued throughout its implementation phases (15 CFR 923.52). There are some types of land and water uses and facilities which are of benefit to several coastal communities, or for that matter, an entire region. Some of these uses may be subject to governmental regulations which could prevent their siting at coastal locations. A State's management program must identify uses and facilities of regional benefit and demonstrate how they would not be unreasonably restricted or excluded (15 CPR 923.12). It should be noted that these uses and facilities may be considered of national interest. A State's coastal management program must contain the procedures that will be followed by the State and Federal agencies in order to implement the Federal consistency requirement contained in the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended. These proce- dures are intended to help a State achieve its coastal policies (15 CFR 923.53). Finally, a coastal State must ensure that State agencies, local governments, various interest groups and the general public are afforded full opportunity to participate in the development of its management program (15 CFR 923.55). The preparation and distribution of program information and public meetings and workshops are the common means for addressing this requirement. The projects which meet one of the following two criteria have been determined to be projects for which a substantial amount of time, money and effort have been expended, and will not be sub- ject to New York State's Coastal Management Program and therefore will not be subject to review pursuant to the Federal consistency procedures of the Federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended: (1) those projects identified as grandfathered pursuant to State Environmental Quality Review Act at the time of its enactment in 1976; and (2) those projects for which a final Environmental Impact Statement has been prepared prior to the effective date of the Department of State Part 600 regulations [see Appendix A, DOS Consistency Regulations, NYCRR Title 19, Part 600, �600.3(4)1. If an applicant needs assistance to deter- is ~mine if its proposed action meets one of these two criteria, the applicant should contact the Department of State. II - 9 - 1 National Interest The Federal Act requires State programs, to provide "adequate consideration of the national interest involved in planning for, and in the siting of, facilities which are necessary to meet requirements which are other than local in nature" (Section 306 (c) (8)). In giving adequate consideration to such facilities, State programs must also assure that "natural resource considera- tions of a national nature enter into the assessment of the demand for the locational needs of particular types of facilities" (see 15 CFR 923.52 (c) (4)). New York State's coast possesses natural resource, historic, scenic, recreation, defense and broad-ranging economic values which are of importance not only to the State, but to the Nation. Certain development actions which could affect these coastal values were examined during the preparation of the Coastal Management Program to ensure that sufficient attention was given to various national interests. New York's Coastal Management Program assures continued protec- tion of natural resources of more than State significance through existing legislation, program policies and procedures, and special management areas. The State's Program includes detailed consideration of coastal resources, including water, wetlands and adjacent areas, fish and wildlife habitats, erosion hazard areas (including barrier islands and beaches), agricultural lands, historic and cultural resources, and scenic areas. At the same time, the Program also recognizes the critical need for develop- ment of certain facilities which depend upon and affect the various coastal resources. For the purposes of this Program, national defense, energy pro- duction and transmission, recreation, and transportation facili- ties are considered to be of national interest. For each type of facility, the following information is provided: (1) sources relied upon for description of national interest; (2) descrip- tions of national interest in above facilities; (3) description of how the CMP considers the national interest in such facili- ties; and (4) the process for continued consideration of the national interest. National Defense Facilities Through direct communications with the various branches of the U.S. Department of Defense and analyses of the policy papers issued by its agencies, it was determined that areas of national defense interest include: (1) the accurate identification of all lands owned or leased by the military; (2) the maintenance of transportation facilities within coastal areas at levels that would ensure optimum military mobility; and (3) the need to provide new or expand existing military facilities. 11 - 9 - 2 Military facilities in New York's Coastal Area are not substan- tial in size or number. Department of Defense (DOD) lands and * ~~aciities are listed in Appendix D. While the State's Coastal Management Program does not apply to Federally-owned lands, including those under the jurisdiction of DOD, it still recognizes the paramount importance of military facilities not only for national defense but also for their contributions to the economic, educational and cultural life of the Nation and State. Therefore, New York's Program contains no policy that contradicts the basic justification for new or expanded military facilities. It is also recognized that any new or expanded national defense facility can be sited at any location under the eminent domain authority of DOD. In the future, defense needs and other coastal interests could be in conflict if: increased public access to the coast would interfere with the military functions of defense installations; new defense facilities were planned for sensitive ecological areas; or, off-site transportation improvements were necessary for the continued operation of a military facility. New York State will seek to prevent serious conflicts between national defense interests and Coastal Management Program concerns by using the consistency procedures contained in this Section to comment on proposed military projects which affect the coastal area of the State. Through this process, the Department of State will suggest reasonable mitigation measures and/or alternative sites, if appropriate, so that DOD activities will be conducted in a manner which is consistent to the maximum extent practicable with the State's Program. Energy Production and Transmission Facilities The National Energy Plan was the primary source for determining the national interest in energy facilities. Direct communica- tions with the Department of Energy, Federal Energy Administra- tion, Bureau of Land Management, Maritime Administration, Geological Survey, Department of Transportation, Army Corps of Engineers, and Nuclear Regulatory Commission provided additional information. The National Energy Plan sets forth three overriding objectives for the Nation: (1) reduce dependence on foreign oil and vulner- ability to supply interruptions; (2) keep imports sufficiently low to weather the period when oil production approaches its capacity limitation; and, (3) have renewable and essentially inexhaustible sources of energy for sustained economic growth. The salient features of the National Energy Plan are: conserva- tion; national pricing and production policies; reasonable certainty and stability in government policies; substitution of abundant energy resources for those in short supply; and, development of non-conventional technologies for the future. II - 9 - 3 Many energy facilities are already situated in the state's coastal area, including steam electric generating plants, transmission lines, oil storage tanks and LNG facilities. The Program's policies on energy are in accord with existing State laws and plans which address energy needs and environmental quality in a comprehensive manner. The State has demonstrated its recognition of the national interest in energy facilities by the number and scope of facilities already located in or planned for New York's coastal area. The total 1981 capacity for New York State utilities was 30,331 megawatts. This was produced by the following types of existing facilities! (1) oil -100 units, (2) hydro - 17 units, (3) gas - 6 units, (4) coal -30 units, and (5) nuclear - 5 units. In addition, other facilities are in various stages of planning and development: (1) 2 nuclear - under construction, (2) 1 coal - under construction, (3 ) 3 coal - licensed to be con- structed, and (4 ) I pumped storage - licensed to be constructed. When operating, these new facilities will produce 5,868 mega- watts. Finally, 15 plants are proposed to be converted to coal and would produce 3,685 megawatts. Article 5 of the State's Energy Law is the principal authority under which the national interest in energy is considered. This law requires the preparation and adoption of a statewide energy plan which establishes the State's future energy requirements. In determining these requirements, consideration must be given to factors which relate to reducing the State's and the Nation's dependence on foreign oil and also to developing renewable sources of energy. Factors include: the extent to which energy conservation measures and new energy technologies may affect the State's energy requirements; the extent to which indigenous energy resources may contribute to meeting the State's require- ments. Section 5-110.a (4) of Article 5 requires that one of the factors that shall be taken into consideration in preparation of the Energy Plan is "the impact of the national energy policies on the State's energy needs and on available sources of supplies" The State Energy Master Plan must be reviewed at least once every two years; at that time the State Energy Office will prepare any amendments necessary to update the plan or issue a determination that no amendments are necessary and the reasons supporting the determination. Any interested person may seek such a review upon written application to the Energy Office for an amendment to the Master Plan. Amendments are to be adopted by the Energy Planning Board in the same manner as the plan itself; thus again the national interest will be considered. Under Article 5 of the Energy Law, the Energy Office must also formulate and revise a State energy conservation plan to be submitted pursuant to the Federal Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975. In addition, any action requiring preparation of an EIS under the State Environmental Quality Review Act must be 0 reviewed as to its effects on the use and conservation of energy. ii - 9 - 4 Article 5 requires the New York Power and Gas Pools to submit to the Energy office comprehensive long-range plans for future operations. After analysis and review of the plans, the Energy Office will project long-range electric and gas demands and supply requirements for 4, 3, 12 and 16 year forecast periods. These findings are binding under Article VII and VIII of the Public Service Law with respect to any determination of need for an electric generation or transmission facility. Interstate and international arrangements established by the members of the New York Power Pool also serve the national interest. Interconnections with the Pennsylvania - New Jersey - Maryland power system, the New England power pool, Hydro Quebec and Ontario Hydro provide mutual reserve capability to ensure those systems' reliability. Electricity generated by the Power Authority of the State of New York (PASNY) in its coastal hydro- electric plants is sold to the State of Vermont. Finally, PASNY purchases significant quantities of power from the two Canadian systems. In accordance with the provisions of Article 42 of the Executive Law, the Secretary of State will review the above described programs and actions for consistency with the coastal area policies. In particular, the Secretary will review the preparation of the State Energy Master Plan for assurance that there is adequate consideration of the national interest in the siting of the energy facilities which are necessary to meet requirements which are other than local in nature consistent with Article V, Section 110. a. (4). The Secretary will take particular note of Policy 27 ("Decisions on the siting and construction of major energy facilities in the coastal area will be based on public energy needs, compatibility of such facilities with the environment, and the facilities' need for a shorefront location") and Policy 29 ("Encourage the development of energy resources on the Outer Continental Shelf, in Lake Erie and in other wlater bodies, and ensure the environmental safety of such activities") in making these decisions. For a further description of the process of siting energy facilities, see Part II, Section 7. Recreation Facilities Various documents, legislation, and Federal agencies were consulted to determine the national interest in recreation facilities including: Nationwide Outdoor Recreation Plan; Gateway National Park Plan; Fire Island National Seashore Park Plan; Land and Water Conservation Fund Act; Historic Preservation Act - P.L. 89-665; Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service; and National Park Service. 0 ~~~~~~~~~11-9 -5 National recreation objectives drawn from the above sources are: (1) to consider recreation as an equal among other uses competing for space along coastlines; (2) to provide high quality recrea- 0 tional opportunities to all people while protecting the coastal environment; (3) to increase public recreation possibilities in high density areas; (4) to protect existing recreation areas from the adverse effects of contiguous uses; (5) to improve coordina- tion and management of recreation areas; and, (6) to accelerate the no-cost transfer of surplus Federal property for recreational uses. New York's coast possesses many fine and varied public recreation areas, including the Fire Island National Seashore and a portion of the Gateway National Park System. The State's Coastal Manage- ment Program recognizes the multiple values of these facilities in terms of their contribution to the economy, their role in achieving more desirable land use patterns, and their immeasure- able benefit to the health of residents and visitors. in support of these values and the national interest, New York's Program supports increasing the number of recreation facilities in its coastal area while protecting them from excessive use and incompatible adjacent development. For a complete discussion of recreation policies, see Part II, Section 6 of this report. Conflicts between various national and State interests arise inevitably when activities, such as residential, transportation or energy development, compete with recreational facilities for use of limited waterfront space. Frequently, the other uses prevail because they are considered more profitable and more critical. A number of State laws, plans and processes ensure that, among other critical concerns, the national interest in recreation will be adequately considered in New York State. First, the State Comprehensive Recreation Plan, administered by the Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation (OPRHP) contains a priority rating system for allocating funds for recreation purposes. One factor in that system gives positive weight to an activity which will contribute to the achievement of State, regional and national goals for recreation. OPRHP also administers the Urban Cultural Park Program which is intended to improve the physical, economic and recreational environments of the State's historic communities. Under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, recreational concerns must be considered as part of the environmental assess- ment process; so too under Article VII and VIII of the Public Service Law which requires environmental impact analysis for proposed energy facilities. Finally, under the Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation, Environmental Conservation, Transpor- tation, and Highway Laws, the State may acquire land for recrea- tional purposes. Appendices E and F contain additional informa- tion on these laws and programs. II - 9 - 6 Transportation Facilities In determining the national interest in transportation, the following documents and Federal agencies were consulted: Department of Transportation Act (49 US 1651, et. seq. ); Railway Safety Act of 1970 (45 Usc 421); Coast Guard, Primary Duties (14 USC 2) ; Department of Transportation; Maritime Administration; Interstate Commerce Commission; and, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. From these sources, it was determined that the national interest in transportation is: (1) to develop a balanced national transportation system including well-integrated surface, air, water, and subsurface modes; and, (2) to provide fast, safe, efficient and convenient transportation via one or more modes for the movement of people, goods and services to, from, and through coastal regions. The Coastal Management Program considers major ports, navigation channels, interstate highways, railroads, airports and their ancillary facilities to be in tne national interest. For these facilities, the Program supports the State's Department of Transportation policies. These policies, as presented in the Department's Transportation Measter Plan, are clearly supportive of national transportation concerns. In the development of its Coastal Management Program, the State has indicated where conflicts exist or could arise between the Program's policies and the national interest in transportation. In the Hudson River Valley and at many locations along the Great Lakes, public access to the shorefront is inhibited by rail lines and interstate highways. Expansion or improvement of existing port facilities could interfere with existing or the provision of new recreational waterfront facilities. Finally, the dredging and deepening of navigation channels may adversely affect significant fish habitat and the quality of coastal waters. In the face of these conflicts, New York State will continue to give adequate and balanced consideration to all national and State concerns through review of A-95 notifications and environ- mental impact statements prepared under the State's Environmental Quality Review Act. The Department of State will suggest reason- able mitigation measures and/or alternative sites as appropriate. Uses of Regional Benefit As indicated previously, a State's coastal management program must ensure that local regulations applicable to land and water uses within the coastal area do not unreasonably restrict or exclude those uses which are of regional benefit. This require- ment addresses the situation where a local government may oppose or place severe limitations on the siting of a needed regional serving facility or in another situation, where a municipality may fail to adequately protect natural resources which are deemed to be of areawide importance. II - 9 - 7 Identification Criteria New York's Coastal Management Program must identify uses of regional benefit and then demonstrate how each will not be unduly restricted or excluded. Two Federal guidelines are to be followed in identifying such uses. First, the use or facility must have an effect on more than one unit of local government. Second, the use or facility must have a direct and significant impact on coastal waters. This Program has used two additional guidelines in the identifi- cation of these regional uses. Since the overall objective of the State's Program is to implement its policies, such regional uses or facilities should then assist the State in the achieve- ment of these policies. In particular, the need for a waterfront location should be taken into consideration, for it is the land along the shoreline where local, State and national concern is the greatest. Area-serving uses and facilities which are either publicly owned or regulated by the State is the other guideline that was used in this identification process. Types of Regional Uses Based upon the above Federal and State guidelines, several types of land and water uses are identified, as well as the means for assuring that such uses will not be unreasonably restricted or excluded by local regulations. 1. Recreational uses of regional benefit shall include: -- State parks and other recreational uses -- County parks and other recreational uses All of the above uses satisfy the identification criteria. First, they provide recreational oppor- tunities to people who reside both within andoutside the municipality where such uses are located. Second, these uses have direct effects on coastal waters, for the recreational activities conducted on waters and the adjacent lands may impair the quality of such waters. Third, all of the uses are cited in coastal policies as possible means for increasing water-oriented recrea- tional oportunities. Finally, these uses are in public ownership and serve many communities. -9 - B The above recreational uses are not unreasonably restricted by local laws and ordinances. The acquisition and subsequent development of land with the Coastal Area for State and county recreational purposes are not subject to local regulations. Case law, rather than statutory provision, is the basis for this determination. Several judicial decisions have declared that State and county governmental functions are not subject to local land use regulation.1 Therefore, the siting of such recreational uses within the Coastal Area of the State cannot be unreasonably restricted or prohibited by a local government. 2. Transportation uses of regional benefit shall include: State and county highways, including necessary bridges and tunnels Intercity and commuter rail service facilities, including necessary bridges and tunnels -- Major cargo handling ports -- Navigation channels serving major ports 1 For general discussion on this subject, see Anderson, New York Zoning Law and Practice, Section 9.04, (2nd Edition. 1973). Specific judicial decisions on this topic are as follows: -- City of Rochester v. Town of Rush, 336 NYS 2d 160, 71 Misc. 2d 451 (1972) -- Nehrbas v. Incorporated Village of Lloyd's Harbor, 2NY 2d 190, 159 NYS 2d 145 (1957) -- Village of Larchmont v. Town of Mamaroneck, 239 NY 551 (1924) II - 9 - 9 These transportation and related uses satisfy the two Federally required identification criteria and partially fulfill the State's Coastal Management Program guidelines. With respect to the required criteria, the above uses and facilities are of benefit to the residents in the locality as well as the people and businesses in the general area where such uses are located. Because of their nature, these uses may have direct and significant impacts upon coastal waters. In terms of the State's criteria, the Program's policies address either singularly or collectively the above transportation uses, for they are essential to economic activity within the coastal area and the State as a whole. Ports do require waterfront sites and naviga- tion channels are, of course, situated in coastal waters. The other two transportation uses do not require a location in or near coastal waters, except in situations where a water body must be traversed to provide for uninterrupted service. Finally, most of the State and county highways are provided and main- tained by their respective governments. There are situations, however, where this is not true for parts of New York's coastal area. For example, public authorities have been established, such as the Triborough Bridge and Tunnel Authority in New York City2 for the purposes of constructing, operating and maintaining necessary bridges, tunnels and roadways leading to such facilities. All of the State's major port facilities and most of its rail service facilities 0 are also constructed, operated and maintained by public authorities established under New York's Public Authority Law. Some railroad lines in New York's coastal area are still under private ownership, such as the Delaware and Hudson. As for navigation channels serving major ports, these are situated on underwater lands owned and, thus, controlled by the State of New York. State and county highways are not subject to local regulation for the reasons discussed previously. The major ports and most of the rail facilities are not subject to local siting restrictions because of the 2 N.Y.S. Public Authority Law, Article 3, Title 3. II - 9 - 10 powers generally granted to public entities. The siting of such facilities are regulated by the State's Department of Transportation.3 The U.S. Corps of Engineers, in cooperation with the State's Department of Environmental Conservation, is responsible for maintaining the navigation channels serving the State's major ports. 3. Energy uses shall include: -- Electric generation facilities -- Electric and gas transmission facilities These uses and facilities fulfill several of the previously described identification guidelines. First, major electric and gas facilities are beneficial, for they supply the energy necessary for the operation of industries, transportation vehicles and services, and home heating. Second, these uses can have substantial impacts upon coastal waters. Third, if these facili- ties are properly sited and operated, several Coastal Management Program policies will be achieved and state- wide concerns over their effects on water quality, fish and wildlife, air quality and aesthetics will be mini- mized. Also, some of these facilities do require locations along the waterfront or access to coastal waters in order to properly function. Finally, some major electric generation and transmission facilities are provided by the Power Authority of the State of New York (PASNY). Steam electric generation and electric and gas trans- mission facilities are subject to the single compre- hensive siting and permit procedures established under Article VII and VIII of the Public Service Law. These processes ensure that such facilities will not be unreasonably restricted by local regulations. Hydro- electric and nuclear-fueled generation facilities are subject to Federal review and approval. Federal Consistency Federal agencies are responsible for numerous programs which can further the policies and purposes of the State's Coastal Management Program. The Coastal Zone . ~3 N.Y.S. Transportation Law, Article 5. II - 9 - 11 Management Act of 1972, as amended, requires that actions of Federal agencies which impact the coastal zone must be undertaken consistently with approved State management programs. These Federal actions are: -- Federally conducted or supported activities, including development projects; -- Federal licenses or permits; -- Federal financial assistance; and -- Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) plans. The Department of State will coordinate and review Federal actions affecting New York's Coastal Area for consistency with the State's Coastal Management Program. In carrying out this responsibility, the Department will consult with other State agencies and local governments before providing its official comment on all Federal actions. If an action, other than a Federally conducted or supported activity is determined to be inconsistent with the management program, the Federal agency proposing to permit, authorize or finance the activity may not proceed, unless the Secretary of Commerce finds that such action is consistent with the objectives or purposes of the Coastal Zone Management Act, or is necessary in the interest of national security. The basis for all consistency reviews are the enforce- able policies in Part II, Section 6 of this document, all the guidelines developed to assist in this review, and all approved management programs for Special Management Areas, particulary local waterfront revita- lization programs which have been formally incorporated into the State's Coastal Management Program. The Department of State intends to meet the Federal consistency provisions without causing burdensome responsibilities on applicants and Federal agencies. This will be accomplished by first seeking an early consultation between pertinent State and Federal officials and involved private parties. Federal agencies and applicants proposing an action for which a consistency review is or may be required should consult the Department of State as early as possible in the planning of the action. This will allow the Department to advise the agency or applicant of the relevant coastal policies and provisions of the State's Coastal Management Program and will help to eliminate potential conflicts before extensive work on a particular proposal 'has been completed. Implementing this principle will establish more efficient coordination between State and Federal actions. 1I - 9 - 12 Second, whenever possible, the Department of State will base its consistency determination on documents normally required for compliance with Federal regulations or approval. Generally, these will include environmental impact statements and assessments, applications for Federal permits and licenses, Federal grant applications, and supporting information. Third, if additional information should be needed to make a consistency determination, the Department of State will promptly notify the Federal agency or applicant of this need, specify in detail the nature of the required information, and indicate the reasons for the additional data. Fourth, whenever both Federal and State consistency determinations are required for proposed action, the review of this action will, whenever possible, occur at the same time. Fifth, the State, when appropriate, may enter into agreements with Federal agencies that would further define the scope, procedures to be used, and the notification process for reporting the results of that review. The primary objectives of such agreements will be to ease the burden of consistency review on applicants and Federal agencies, and to synchronize and simplify existing and new review and/or regulatory procedures and programs at both the Federal and State Consistency Procedures for Federally Conducted or Supported Activities Consistency reviews, including the necessary informa- tion outlined in the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Federal consistency regulations will be submitted to the Department of State. Activities, which are determined by the appropriate Federal agencies as directly affecting the coastal zone and are listed in Part I of Table 2, require a consis- tency determination. Activities not listed in this Table will be monitored through the A-95 review process and other relevant processess. If a consistency determination and review is needed for any unlisted activity, the Department of State will notify the Federal agency. Federal agencies must provide the Department of State with a consistency determination at the earliest practicable time in the planning of the activity, preferably when the analysis of alternatives is still ongoing. Federal agencies will notify the Department 0 ~ ~by procedures established by any future agreement that may be sought between a Federal agency and the Department, or by any recognized means of notification. II - 9 - 13 For the present, Federal agencies are encouraged to use existing mechanisms such as 0MB Circular A-95 and NEPA environmental impact statements to provide the notifi-0 cation. In any case, the consistency determination must be provided no later than 90 days before final approval of the activity. Upon receipt of a consistency determination from a Federal agency, the Department of State will review the determination and inform the Federal agency of its agreement or disagreement with the consistency deter- mination within 45 days. If needed, the Department may request an extension of 15 days. The Federal agency may presume State agency agreement if the State agency fails to provide a response within 45 days from receipt of the Federal agency notification. In the event the Department of State is in disagreement with a Federal agency's consistency determination, the agency will be informed of the reasons for disagree- ment, accompanied by supporting information and alternatives, if any, which would make the activity consistent. Consistency Procedures for Activities Requiring Federal Licenses or Permits Applicants, requiring Federal licenses or permits for activities affecting the State's Coastal Area or for0 certain renewals or amendments to such licenses or permits, shall provide the Department of State with the application and a certification, with required supporting information, demonstrating that the proposed activities are consistent with the State's Coastal Management Program. Federal agencies may not issue a license or permit unless: the State concurs with the applicant's consis- tency certification; it is conclusively presumed to concur; or the U.S. Secretary of Commerce finds that a proposal is consistent with the purposes of the Federal Coastal Zone Management Act or is necessary in the interest of national security. Licenses and permits subject to consistency review are listed in Part II of Table 2. In addition, the Department of State will continue to monitor other activities requiring a Federal license or permit, and, if necessary, will notify the Federal agency, the applicant, and the Assistant Administrator of Coastal Zone Management (within 30 days of receiving the notice for the license or permit) that an unlisted license or permit will be subject to a consistency review. 11 - 9 - 14 At the same time an application for a license or permit is submitted to a Federal agency, the applicant shall 0 ~ ~~transmit a copy of the application, together with the necessary data and information, and the consistency certification to the Department of State. The Depart- ment of State shall make the consistency determination based on the State's coastal policies, regulations and procedures and will make a decision or notify the applicant within 3 months, as provided in NOAA regula- tions. In no case can the consistency review take more than 6 months. With respect to Federal licenses and permits associated with those energy facilities subject to Articles VII and VIII of the Public Service Law (utility trans- mission -facilities and steam electric generating plants, respectively), the information needed to assess their consistency will be developed during the lengthy statutory review period, particularly the required formal hearings. Consequently, the State will not consider an application of any such license or permit to be supported by the necessary information and data under 15 CFR 930.56 (b) and 930.58 (a)(2) until the hearings have been completed. Concurrence or objection will be based upon the Certification of Environmental Compatibility and Public Need which will be issued within six months from the completion of the hearings. 0 ~ ~~Public notice will be given for any license or permit being reviewed for consistency in the Environmental Notice Bulletin, and in a newspaper having general circulation within the community where the license or permit activity is proposed. For activities which are subject to a State permit, the Department of State will use the applicable agency's notification process. Should this or other reasonable forms of public notifi- cation not be available or if the nature of the permit being applied for is of sufficient interest, the Department of State will carry out the public notice. When the Department of State objects to a consistency certification, it will notify, in writing, the appli- cant, the Federal agency and the Assistant Admini- strator of NQAA. The notification will describe how the proposed activity is inconsistent and alternatives, if any, which would make the activity consistent. Consistency Procedures for Federal Financial Assistance Federal assistance for projects or programs affecting the State's Coastal Area will be monitored by the Department of State. Those proposed projects or 0 ~ ~programs which are inconsistent with the Coastal Management Program may not be funded by Federal 11 - 9 - 15 agencies unless the U.S. Secretary of Commerce finds that such proposals are consistent with the Federal Act or are necessary for national security purposes. The Department of State will use the A-95 Project Notification and Review Process to monitor proposed Federal assistance projects in the Coastal Area. All applications for Federal assistance which are applic- able to the planning, design, construction, alteration or expansion of physical development projects or other activities which could affect the State's Coastal Area will be subject to a consistency review. The applicant must certify consistency with the policies of the Program. This certification should be contained in the A-95 Review Notification, or if not applicable, Federal agencies will notify the Department by procedures established by any future agreement which may be sought between the Federal agency and the Department, or by any recognized means of notification. The Division of the Budget, the State agency designated to administer the A-95 process, shall notify the Department of State of proposed Federal assistance projects in the Coastal Area. Within the time limits provided for review, the Depart- ment of State will notify the appropriate Federal agencies and applicants of any objections to proposed projects. The objection will describe how the proposed project is inconsistent with specific policies and0 shall recommend alternative measures, if any, which would make the project consistent. Applicants will also be notified of appeal procedures under TIOAA regulations. If the Department of State identifies an application for Federal assistance to conduct an activity which affects but is not within the Coastal Area, the Department shall provide notice to that effect to the Federal agency, the applicant, the A-95 Clearinghouse and the Assistant Administrator of NOAA within the designated comment period. The Federal financial assistance projects and programs subject to consistency review, are listed in Part III of Table 2. Consistency Procedures for Activities in Outer Continental Shelf Plans The activities described in detail in plans for the exploration, development and production of Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) resources and affecting the Coastal Area must be certified by the person submitting0 the plan that the activity complies with the program and will be carried out in a manner consistent with the 11 - 9 - 16 program. The activities described in the plans will be evaluated for consistency with the State's Coastal S ~ ~~Management Program in accordance with the NOAA Federal consistency regulations. The Department of State will coordinate and provide the public notification necessary for the review of OCS plans. During this review, the Department will consult with the Department of Environmental Conservation as to the consistency of the OCS plans with the State's Coastal Management Program. The review will be based on the enforceable policies, standards, laws, and regulations of the State's coastal program. All OCS plans will be processed as soon as reasonably possible. The maximum review period as established by Federal regulations is three months following commencement of State review, with an additional three month period available to the State upon notification to the appropriate parties of the status of the review and the basis for the additional time. Total review period cannot exceed six months. Based on the review, should the Department of State object to a consistency certification for an OCS activity, the Federal agency may not approve the plan or issue any license or permit for activities described in detail in the plan unless the U.S. Secretary of Commerce finds that the proposal meets the purposes of the Federal Coastal Zone Management Act or is necessary in the interest of national security. II - 9 - 17 TABLE 2 FEDERAL ACTIVITIES AND DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS i LIKELY TO DIRECTLY AFFECT NEW YORK STATE'S COASTAL AREA I. Direct Federal Activities and Development Projects Department of Commerce, National Marine Fisheries Service: -- Fisheries Management Plans Department of Defense, Army Corps of Engineers: -- Proposed authorizations for dredging, channel improve- ment, breakwaters, other navigational works, erosion control structures, beach replenishment, dams or flood control works, ice management practices and activities, and other projects with the potential to impact coastal lands and waters. -- Land acquisition for spoil disposal or other purposes. -- Selection of open water disposal sites. Department of Defense, Air Force, Army and Navy: -- Location, design, and acquisition of new or expanded defense installations (active or reserve status, including associated housing, transportation or other facilities). -- Plans, procedures and facilities for handling or storage use zones. -- Establishment of impact, compatability or restricted use zones. Department of Energy: -- Prohibition orders. General Services Administration: -- Acquisition, location and design of proposed Federal government property or buildings, whether leased or owned by the Federal government. -- Disposition of Federal surplus lands and structures. Departw'ent of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service: -- Management of National Wildlife refuges and proposed acquisitions. II -9 - 18 Department of Interior, National Park Service: 0 -- ~~National Park and Seashore management and proposed acquisitions. Department of Interior, Minerals Management Service: -- OCS lease sale activities including tract selection, lease sale stipulations, etc. Department of Transportation, Coast Guard: -- Location and design, construction or enlargement of Coast Guard stations, bases, and lighthouses. -- Location, placement or removal of navigation devices which are not part of the routine operations under the Aids to Navigation Program (ATON). -- Expansion, abandonment, designation or anchorages, lightering areas or shipping lanes and ice management practices and activities. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Admini- stration: -- Location and design, construction, maintenance, and 0 ~ ~~~demolition of Federal aids to air navigation. Department of Transportation, Amtrak, Conrail: -- Expansions, curtailments, new construction, upgradings or abandonments of railroad facilities or services, in or affecting the State's coastal area. Department of Transportation, St. Lawrence Seaway Develop- ment Corporation: -- Acquisition, location, design, improvement and construction of new and existing facilities for the operation of the Seaway, including traffic safety, traffic control and length of navigation season. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administra- tion: -- Highway construction I.Federal Licenses and Permits Department of Defense, Army Corps of Engineers: -- Construction of dams, dikes or ditches across navigable waters, or obstruction or alteration of navigable waters required under Sections 9 and 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401, 403). II - 9 - 19 Establishment of harbor lines pursuant to Section 11 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 404, 405). Occupation of seawall, bulkhead, jetty, dike, levee, wharf, pier, or other work built by the U.S. pursuant to Section 14 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 408). Approval of plans for improvements made at private expense under USACE supervision pursuant to the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1902 (33 U.S.C. 565). Disposal of dredged spoils into the waters of the U.S., pursuant to the Clean Water Act, Section 404 (33 U.S.C0 1344). All actions for which permits are required pursuant to Section 103 of the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972(33 U.S.C. 1413). Construction of artifical islands and fixed structures in Long Island Sound pursuant to Section 4 (f) of the River and Harbors Act of 1912 (33 U.S.C.). Department of Energy, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission: Licenses for non-Federal hydroelectric projects and primary transmission lines under Sections 3 (11), 4 (e) and 15 of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 796 (11), 797 (11) and 808). Orders for interconnection of electric transmission facilities under Section 202 (b) of the Federal Power Act (15 U.S.C. 824 a (b)). Certificates for the construction and operation of interstate natural gas pipeline facilities, including both pipelines and terminal facilities under Section 7 (c) of the Natural Gas Act (15 U.S.C 717 f (c)). Permission and approval for the abandonment of natural gas pipeline facilities under Section 7(b) of the Natural Gas Act (15 U.S.C. 717 f (b)). Department of Energy, Economic Regulatory Commission: Regulation of gas pipelines, and licensing of import or export of natural gas pursuant to the Natural Gas Act (15 U.S.C. 717) and the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974. --Exemptions from prohibition orders. II - 9 - 20 Environmental Protection Agency: NPDES permits and other permits for Federal installations, discharges in contiguous zones and ocean waters, sludge runoff and aquaculture permits pursuant to Sections 401, 402, 403, 405, and 318 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1341, 1342, 1343, and 1328). Permits pursuant to the Resources Recovery and Conservation Act of 1976. Permits pursuant to the underground injection Control program under Section 1424 of the Safe Water Drinking Water Act (42 U.S.C. 300 h-c). Permits pursuant to the Clean Air Act of 1976 (42 U.S.C. 1857). Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Services: -- Endangered species permits pursuant to the Endangered Species Act (16 U.S.C. 153 (a)). Department of Interior, Mineral Management Service: Permits to drill, rights of use and easements for construction and maintenance of pipelines, gathering and flow lines and associated structures pursuant to 43 U.S.C. 1334, exploration and development plans, and any other permits or authorizations granted for activities described in detail in OCS exploration, development, and production plans. Permits required for pipelines crossing federal lands, including OCS lands, and associated activities pursuant to the OCS Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1334) and 43 U.S.C. 931 (c) and 20 U.S.C. 185. Interstate Commerce Commission: Authority to abandon railway lines (to the extent that the abandonment involves removal of trackage and disposition of right-of-way); authority to construct railroads; authority to construct coal slurry pipelines. Nuclear Regulatory Commission: Licensing and certification of the siting, construction and operation of nuclear power plants pursuant to Atomic Energy Act of 1954, Title II of the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974 and the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969. II - 9 - 21 Department of Transportation, Coast Guard: Construction or modification of bridges, causeways or pipelines over navigable waters pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 1455. Permits for Deepwater Ports pursuant to the Deepwater Ports Act of 1974 (33 U.S.C. 1501). Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Adminis- tration: Permits and licenses for construction, operation or alteration of airports. III. Federal Assistance Department of Agriculture 10.068 Rural Clean Water Program 10.409 Irrigation, Drainage, and Other Soil and Water Conservation Loans 10.410 Low to Moderate Income Housing Loans 10.411 Rural Housing Site Loans 10.413 Recreation Facility Loans 10.414 Resource Conservation and Development Loans 10.415 Rural Rental Housing Loans 10.416 Soil and Water Loans 10.418 Water and Waste Disposal Systems for Rural Communities 10.419 Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Loans 10.422 Business and Industrial Loans 10.423 Community Facilities Loans 10.424 Industrial Development Grants 10.426 Area Development Assistance Planning Grants 10.429 Above Moderate Income Housing Loans 10.430 Energy Impacted Area Development Assistance Program 10.901 Resource Conservation and Development 10.902 Soil and Water Conservation 10.904 Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention 10.906 River Basin Surveys and Investigations Department of Commerce 11.300 Economic Development - Grants and Loans for Public Works and Development Facilities 11.301 Economic Development - Business Development Assistance 11.302 Economic Development - Support for Planning Organizations 11.304 Economic Development - State and Local Economic Development Planning 11.305 Economic Development - State and Local Economic Development Planning II - 9 - 22 11.307 Special Economic Development and Adjustment Assistance Program - Long Term Economic Deterioration 11.308 Grants to States for Supplemental and Basic Funding of Titles I, 11,III, IV, and V Activities 11.405 Anadromous and Great Lakes Fisheries Conser- vation 11.407 Commerical Fisheries Research and Development 11.417 Sea Grant Support 11.427 Fisheries Development and Utilization - Research and Demonstration Grants and Cooper- ative Agreements Program 11.501 Development and Promotion of Ports and Intermodal Transportation 11.509 Development and Promotion of Domestic Water- borne Transport Systems Department of Housing and Urban Development 14.112 Mortgage Insurance - Construction or Substantial Rehabilitation of Condominium Projects 14.115 Mortgage Insurance - Development of Sales Type Cooperative Projects 14.117 Mortgage Insurance - Homes 14.124 Mortgage Insurance - Investor Sponsored Cooperative Housing 14.125 Mortgage Insurance - Land Development and New Communities 14.126 Mortgage Insurance - Management Type Cooper- ative Projects 14.127 Mortgage Insurance - Mobile Home Parks 14.218 Community Development Block Grants/Entitle- ment Grants 14.219 Community Development Block Grants/Small Cities Program 14.221 Urban Development Action Grants 14.223 Indian Community Development Block Grant Program Department of the Interior 15.400 Outdoor Recreation - Acquisition, Development and Planning 15.402 Outdoor Recreation - Technical Assistance 15.403 Disposal of Federal Surplus Real Property for Parks, Recreation, and Historic Monuments 14.411 Historic Preservation Grants-In-Aid 15.417 Urban Park and Recreation Recovery Program 15.600 Anadromous Fish Conservation 15.605 Fish Restoration 15.611 Wildlife Restoration 15.613 Marine Mammal Grant Program 15.802 Minerals Discovery Loan Program II - 9 - 23 15.950 National Water Research and Development Prog ram 15. 951 Water Resources Research and Technology- Assistance to State Institutes 15.592 Water Research and Technology-Mlatching Funds to State Institutes Department of Transportation 20.102 Airport Development Aid Program 20. 103 Airport Planning Grant Program 20.205 Highway Research, Planning, and Construction 20. 309 Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement - Guarantee of Obligations 20.310 Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement - Redeemable Preference Shares 20.506 Urban Mass Transportation Demonstration Grants 20.509 Public Transportation for Rural and Small Urban Areas General Services Administration 39. 002 Disposal of Federal Surplus Real Property Community Services Administration 49.002 Community Action 49. 011 Community Economic Development 49.013 State Economic Opportunity offices 49.017 Rural Development Loan Fund 49.018 Housing and Community Development (Rural Housing) Small Business Administration 59.012 Small Business Loans 59.013 State and Local Development Company Loans 59. 024 Water Pollution Control Loans 59.025 Air Pollution Control Loans 59. 031 Small Business Pollution Control Financing Guarantee Environmental Protection Agency 66.001 Air Pollution Control Program Grants 66.418 Construction Grants for Wastewater Treatment Works 66.426 Water Pollution Control - State and Areawide Water Quality Management Planning Agency II - 9 - 24 66. 451 Solid and Hazardous Waste Management Program Support Grants 66.452 Solid Waste Management Demonstration Grants 66.600 Environmental Protection Consolidated Grants Program Support Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability (Super fund) Note: Numbers refer to the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Programs, 1980 and its two subsequent updates. II -9 - 25 Public Participation As indicated previously, governmental entities,0 interested parties and the general public must have the opportunity to participate in the development of a state's coastal management program. From the outset of developing New York's Program, the Department of State actively sought to inform and involve private citizens, local, regional and statewide interest groups, local governments, and regional and State agencies. The Department prepared a Coastal Management Handbook outlining the issues and explaining the purposes of the Federal program. A display and slide show were also prepared and taken to meetings to increase public awareness of coastal resources and issues. In the f irst years of program development, local and regional agencies were under contract with the Depart- ment to inventory coastal resources and to make recommendations on preliminary boundaries and areas warranting special management attention. During this period, Department staff met on a one-to-one basis with local officials and conducted small workshop sessions with officials, interest groups and coastal residents. These meetings proved to be a most productive public involvement technique. Citizens Avisory Committee The core of the State's public involvement effort is the Coastal Management Citizens' Advisory Committee. The committee is made up of representatives from the five coastal regions of the State. It met regularly during the development of the program to review technical reports, make recommendations on the State's program and legislation, and assist in public participation activities. Public Meetings During June and July of 1978, the Department held a series of 16 public meetings in the coastal regions of the State from Lake Erie to Long Island. The purpose of these meetings was to receive public reaction on the general approach for developing the coastal program. In advance of these meetings, the Department widely distributed a newsletter identifying certain coastal issues and suggesting possible alternatives for program administration. The newsletter 'asked whether local governments should be required to participate in a coastal management program or whether State agencies alone should operate this type of program. It also asked what State agency should be responsible for the program. Maps showing the proposed boundaries of New0 York's Coastal Area were displayed at these meetings. 11 - 9 ~-26 The meetings drew comments from coastal residents, community groups, universities, regional organizations, local governments and others. These participants raised excellent questions about boundaries, areas and S ~ ~~problems of particular concern, funding potentials, adequacy of existing authorities, private property rights, regional coordination, rationale for the various local/State administrative options, approval and monitoring of local programs and more. Following these meetings a draft Coastal Management Program document was prepared which incorporated recommnenda- tions submitted earlier by regional and local agencies and also included ideas expressed at the public meeting. Public Hearings In April, 1979, the Department of State held 9 public hearings in the coastal regions of the State. The purpose of these hearings was to receive conments from. all parties interested in implementing legislation. The Department broadly disseminated these documents prior to the hearings. A summary describing coastal policies and showing the proposed Coastal Area was also distributed. Comments The hearings again drew comments from a wide variety of individuals and organizations. Participants expressed major concerns about the following: -- The proliferation of State-bureaucratic structures which would be ineffective and which would infringe upon the authority of local governments. -- The need for expanded representation on the Coastal Management Board to include members from particular fields of expertise and from various geographic regions. -- The ineed to use existing review procedures to implement the coastal program. -- The definition of coastal erosion hazard areas and the procedures for identifying these areas. IT - 9 - 27 Responses In response to the above concerns, the following actions were taken: -- Program legislation was revised to provide that an existing agency - the Department of State - serve as the State's Coastal Management Agency. Certain additional responsibilities were given to the Secretary of State relative to determing consis- tency of Federal actions with the State's Program, and receipt and administration of Federal grants. -- The concept of a Board was dropped, but an advisory committee was structured to provide specific representation from ten particular areas of expertise and eight specific geog raphic areas. In addition to these 18 members, the advisory committee would be comprised of six ex-officio members representing the State agencies with major responsibilities for carrying out aspects of the Coastal Management Program. The advisory commit- tee would provide advice to the Secretary on the conduct of the Program. -- The legislation was revised to provide for the use of the State Environmental Quality Review Act as the mechanism by which State agencies would determine the consistency of their proposed actions with the Coastal ?lanagernent Program. Where two or more State agencies bad jurisdiction over a particular project, anC these agencies had irreconcilable differences. as to the consistency of an action, the legislation was revised so that a project applicant or either agency could request the Secretary of State to resolve differences. The Secretary could consult with the advisory committee in any dispute resolution. -- The definition of the coastal erosion hazard areas was expanded to permit identification of dunes, beaches and other natural areas providing protection against erosion to other land. In addition, this legislation was revised to provide for identification -of erosion hazard areas after the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) had adopted program 'regulations. A new requirement also called for the DEC to promulgate standards and criteria for the design and construction of erosion protective structures -so that they have a reasonable probabilit~y of controlling erosion for at least 30 years. 11 9 - 28 Legislative Hearings Late in 1979, the New York State Senate and Assembly jointly sponsored hearings to solicit public views on the proposed coastal management and coastal erosion hazards areas bills. Participants were asked to address a number of concerns including: the adequacy of the bills to address environmental, economic and social impacts on New York's coastline; the appropriate role of government agencies in implementing a State coastal program; the economic benefits of State and local participation in the Federal program as well as the costs to the private sector; and modifications which should be made in the two bills. Testimony at these hearings concerning the future of the Coastal Management Program was overwhelmingly in favor of the legislative passage of these two bills (38 statements in favor; 13 opposed). Even some of the testimony opposed to the proposed legislation was in support of the idea of coastal management and merely called for a restructuring of the management process. Comments The basic thrust of the supportive arguments was that: (1) a statewide management program was necessary to provide for the coordination of land use, and natural resource protection policies in the coastal regions; (2) erosion hazards areas legislation was needed since erosion has a major impact on people living along the shores of Lake Ontario and Long Island; (3) a statewide program, working in concert with local authorities, was necessary to ensure New York State's consistency with Federal guidelines and regulations concerning Coastal Zone Management; (4) a State-administered Coastal Management Program approved by the Federal government is a prerequisite for the allocation of Coastal Energy Impact Program (CEIP) funds to New York and that the State should not lose this opportunity for Federal monies. The arguments opposed to a State Coastal Management Program basically maintained that: (1) existing legislation, if properly implemented, was good enough to protect vital coastal resources and that additional legislation would duplicate existing regulation and cause confusion over authority leading to bureaucratic entanglement;- (2) the Federal government's CEIP funds were being offered to New York 'like a carrot on a stick' and that in the rush to receive a Federal grant, the legislation was not being properly considered; (3) bills did not offer enough protection to the coastal environment and were too permissive and vague in allowing commercial and industrial development along 11 - 9 - 29 ecologically sensitive waterfronts; and, (4) the proposed legislation would infringe upon economic or recreational activities of farmers and sportsmen, respectively, through the increased governmental control of land uses. Responses In 1980, the legislation was again modified to reflect the comments received at the legislative hearings: -- Water dependent activities were redefined to include other than economic activities, and specific recognition was given to the attraction of coastal areas for residential purposes. -- Membership of the advisory committee was expanded to include expert representatives from the areas of residential construction and tourism. -- Legislative provisions on Geographic Areas of Particular Concern were simplified and substanti- ally revised to include certain aesthetic areas, agricultural lands, fish and wildlife habitats and water dependent use areas. -- Coastal policies were simplified and the way in which they apply was clarified.0 -- Improvements were made to better integrate the consistency review process with State Environ- mental Quality Review Act procedures. -- A specific - procedure was added for voluntary withdrawal of local governments from participation in the State program. In June, 1980, the New York State Assembly passed both the program and erosion bills, but the Senate did not. In 1981, a new bill entitled the Waterfront Revitali- zation and Coastal Resources Act was introduced in the Legislature. This bill included a balanced approach to coastal resource protection and development; use and coordination of existing State environmental management and economic development programs; streamlining of procedures; and voluntary local programs. The bill was, however, shortened and simplified with an emphasis on local revitalization efforts. This was in response to criticism about potential negative economic impacts of a coastal program. In July, the Senate and Assembly passed the waterfront revitalization and erosion bills and the Governor signed them into law. 11 - 9 - 30 Year of the Coast In 1980, Governor Carey joined in proclaiming the Year of the Coast. The Department of State then organized or participated in organizing a number of events to hightlight the importance of the State's coast. The Department brought together local government represen- tatives from coastal areas to a workshop where they shared their experiences on a variety of local projects. In the summer, the Department worked with the Mid-Hudson League of Women Voters to organize a "See-shore Sail"; and in September, the Department held a Year of the Coast boatride in New York City to view potential revitalization sites. Finally, the Depart- ment co-sponsored a conference with the New York-New Jersey Port Authority on revitalization of the port. A number of brochures, updates and maps were prepared for distribution at these events. II-9 -31