Erosion Control: Urgent Need for Regulatory Reform

1. Erosion Control: Urgent Need for Regulatory Reform NCBIWA’S Annual Conference, “Shaping the Future of Coastal North Carolina and the Southeast” November 2008 Mack Paul November 17, 2008

2. MASON INLET EXAMPLE

3. MASON INLET EXAMPLE

4. Current crisis: reflected in condition of sandbags on beaches

5. Current crisis: reflected in large structures facing imminent threat

6. Current crisis: reflected in public infrastructure under threat

7. Current crisis: reflected in diminishment of public access to beach

8. ROLL BACK POLICY • Emphasis on hazards such as erosion, flooding and storm damage • Emphasis on public access to waterfront • Development setbacks based on erosion rates • Low-density development patterns

9. NORTH CAROLINA’S EROSION CONTROL POLICY • No “hardened” erosion control structures • Temporary erosion control structures only • Time limit on use of temporary erosion control: • Relocation of structure • Beach nourishment • Reversal of short term event

10. CONFLICTS INHERENT IN ROLL BACK POLICY: VARIABLE EROSION RATES

11. CONFLICTS INHERENT IN ROLL BACK POLICY: VARIABLE EROSION RATES

12. CONFLICTS INHERENT IN POLICY:BUILD OUT IN DESTINATION COMMUNITIES

13. CONFLICTS INHERENT IN ROLL BACK POLICY: BEACH NOURISHMENT

14. CONFLICTS INHERENT IN ROLL BACK POLICY: PUBLIC ACCESS

15. RESULTS OF EROSION CONTROL POLICY • 370 permits issued for temporary erosion control • 150 subject to removal in May 2008, by regulation • Public and private property at risk • Legislation introduced in 2006 for terminal structure, a form of “hardened” erosion control

16. EFFORTS TO ENFORCE EROSION CONTROL POLICY • Prioritization of sandbags for removal, incremental approach due to lack of resources • Numerous variances already filed by property owners; potential for many contested cases and eventual litigation • Potential for costly, multi-year enforcement effort by North Carolina’s Division of Coastal Management • Rulemaking underway

17. UNANSWERED QUESTIONS • What happens to public infrastructure? • What is the drain on administrative resources? • Who removes structures/debris? • What is the impact on property values? • What is the impact on tax revenues? • What is the impact on coastal economy?

18. “STATIC” LINE APPROACH AS ALTERNATIVE • Oceanfront development setbacks measured from first line of stable, natural vegetation • If large-scale nourishment project undertaken, measured from pre-project (“static”) vegetation line

19. “STATIC” LINE APPROACH AS ALTERNATIVE • Issue: what if vegetation line migrates seaward post project?

20. ALTERNATIVE TO ROLL BACK: TARGETED DEFENSE (BEACH AS INFRASTRUCTURE) • Protect beaches at select locations, factoring economic development, socio-economic considerations, BIMP data and sea level rise • Beach nourishment • Limited use of hardened structures in inlet areas • Realistic time limits for sandbags • Commitment to funding at local, state and federal levels

21. 70 out of 362 miles

22. PATH TO CHANGE • Moratorium on sandbag removal • Passage of terminal structure legislation • Rulemaking that allows erosion control in targeted areas where comprehensive plan in place • Coalition of key stakeholders along coast • Public education (satisfaction, subsidy, entitlement)