[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]
0:T 4OF A Q ' ' - ( '1ES of 0V State Of Connecticut Coastal Management 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 FINALENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT AND THE PROPOSED CONNECTICUT COASTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ~ope t of CSC Librar U. S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NOAA COASi-AL ERVICES CENTER 2234 SOUlh hOBSON AVENUE CHARLESTON , SC 29405-2413 Prepared by: Office of Coastal Zone Management National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administratior Department of Commerce 3300 Whitehaven Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20235 and Connecticut Coastal Management Program Connecticut Department of Environmental Proteci 71 Capitol Avenue Hartford, Connecticut 06115 ' - "0 This document was financed in part through a federal grant from the Office of Coastal Zone Management under the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972. DESIGNATION: Final Environmental Impact Statement TITLE: Proposed Federal Approval of the Connecticut Coastal Management Program ABSTRACT: The State of Connecticut has submitted its Coastal Management Program to the Office of Coastal Zone Management for approval. Approval would allow program administrative grants to be awarded to the state, and require that federal actions be consistent with the program. This document includes a copy of the program (Section II) which is a comprehensive management program for coastal land and water use activities. It consists of numerous policies on diverse management issues which are enforced by various state laws, and is the culmina- tion of several years of program development. 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. The effect of these policies is to condition, restrict or prohibit various uses in parts of the coastal zone, while encouraging development and other uses in other parts. This program will improve decision-making pro- cesses for determining appropriate coastal land and water uses in light of resource considerations and increase public awareness of coastal resources. The program may result in minor short-term economic impacts'o'n coastal users but these will be offset in the long-term and the program will lead to increased long-term protection of the state's coastal resources. Federal alternatives include delaying or denying approval if certain requirements of the Coastal Zone Management Act have not been met. APPLICANT: Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection 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 3300 Whitehaven Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20235 (202/634-4126) COMMENT PERIOD: Comments closed on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement on May 28, 1980. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES ...........................................vii SUMMARY ..............................................................S-1 A. Connecticut Coastal Management Program ....................S-1 B. Changes the Program Will Make ..............................S-3 C. What the Program Will Not Do ...............................S-4 D. Areas of Controversy .......................................S-5 E. Coastal Issues and Problems ................................S-7 SECTION I: PURPOSE AND NEED A. Federal Coastal Zone Management Act .......................I-1 B. How the Connecticut Coastal Management Program Meets ......I-4 the Requirements of the Coastal Zone Management Act SECTION II: DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION Part I, Connecticut's Coastal Management Program ............I-1 A. Introduction ..............................................II-1 B. Description of Connecticut's Coastal Environment ..........11-3 Part II, Boundary ................................................11-28 Part III, Management Issues and Problems .........................II-31 A. Introduction ..............................................11-31 B. Inadequate Coordination ...................................11-32 C. Inadequate Consideration of Coastal Resources .............11-32 D. Resolution of Management Issues and Problems ..............11-33 Part IV, Coastal Policies and Use Guidelines ...................... 11-36 A. Introduction .............................................. 11-36 B. Index to Policies ......................................... 11-41 Page Part V, Legal Authorities and Uses to be Managed .................ii-195 A. Introduction ..............................................11-195 B. Summary of the Connecticut Coastal Management Act ..........11-198 C. Existing State and Municipal Regulatory, Development .......11-202 and Planning Authorities Subject to the Coastal Management Act's Requirements D. Uses Subject to Control and Regulation Under the Coastal Management Act ..................................11-202 Part VI, Management of the Coastal Program ....................... 11-204 A. Introduction ............................................... 11-204 B. Planning & Coor./Coastal Management Unit .................. 11-204 C. Responsibilities of Other Units of the Department .......... 11-208 of Environmental Protection D. Responsibilities of Other State Agencies ................... 11-210 E. Responsibilities of Coastal Municipalities ................. 11-211 F. State Supervision of Municipal Coastal Site Plan ........... 11-216 Reviews Requirements G. Water Dependent Uses ....................................... 11-218 Part VII, Plan Coordination, Federal Consistency and Resolution... 11-221 of Conflicts Concerning Coastal Development A. Plan Coordination .......................................... II-221 B. Continuing Plan Coordination ............................... 11-224 C. Federal Consistency ........................................ II-226 Part VIII, Special Management Areas ............................... 11-248 A. Geographic Areas of Particular Concern ..................... 11-248 B. Areas for Preservation or Restoration ...................... 11-262 Part IX, National Interest and Regional Benefit ................... 11-263 A. National Interest .......................................... 11-263 B. Uses of Regional Benefit ................................... 11-278 iv Page Part X, Special Planning Elements ..................11-282 A. Energy Facilities......................11-282 B. Shorefront Access and Protection Planning..........11-296 C. Erosion Planning Process ...................I-319 Part XI, Public Participation and Federal Agency Consultation .... 11-332. A. Public Participation ....................11-332 B. Federal Consultation ....................11-337 SECTION II (APPENDICES): MANAGEMENT PLAN APPENDICES Appendix A, Coastal Boundary and Excluded Federal Lands Appendix B, Connecticut Coastal Management Act Appendix C, Tidal Wetlands Regulations Appendix D, Matrices: Legal Authorities and Uses To Be Managed SECTION III: ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED ACTION...........111-1 SECTION IV: AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT...................IV-1 SECTION V: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES A. Direct Effects of Federal Approval .............V-i B. Indirect Effects of Federal Approval ............V-3 C. Possible Conflicts Between the Proposed Action and the .... V-12 Objectives of Federal, Regional, State and Local Land Use Plans, Policies and Controls for the Areas Concerned D. Adverse Impacts and Mitigating Measures...........V-13 V Page SECTION VI: COASTAL AREA MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD ...................VI-1 LIST OF DOCUMENT PREPARERS ...............................VI-2 SECTION VII: LIST OF AGENCIES, ORGANIZATIONS, AND ....................VII-1 PERSONS RECEIVING DOCUMENT ATTACHMENT A: RESPONSES TO COMMENTS ON DRAFT EIS ....................ATT -i - Index of Commentators ...............................ATT - ii / vi LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES Tables Page 1 Shoreline Statistics 11-6 2A State Regulatory Authorities Subject to Coastal Appendix D Management Requirements 2B State Development Projects Subject to Coastal Appendix D Management Requirements 2C State Plans Subject to Coastal Management Requirements Appendix D 3A Municipal Ordinances and Regulations Subject to Appendix D Coastal Management Requirements 3B Municipal Plans Subject to Coastal Management Appendix 0 Requi rements 4 Uses Subject to Coastal Management Requirements Appendix D 5 Shoreline Composition and Erosion Statistics 11-321 Appendix A-1 Excluded Federal Lands A Figures Page 1 Long Island Sound and Its Environs S-2 1 Long Island Sound and Its Environs 11-4 2 Ecoregions of Connecticut 11-5 3 Distribution of Shoreline Features and Districts 11-7 4 Department of Environmental Protection Organization 11-205 Chart 5 Boundary Map Back Cover vii S U I "A R y SUMMARY A. CONNECTICUT COASTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM The Connecticut Coastal Management Act (CCMA) of 1978 (P.A. 78-152 as amended by P.A. 79-535) establishes a comprehensive coastal resource management program in Connecticut that is based on a combination of new and existing authorities. Under the provisions of the Act, responsibility for implementing Connecticut's program will be shared among agencies at both the state and municipal levels of government. The Department of Environmental Protection, which is the primary state permitting agency for both public and private coastal development activities, is designated as the lead agency to receive and administer CZM funds, to monitor, evaluate, and coordinate the overall implementation of the program, and to represent the state in all matters related to the federal consistency provisions of the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972. In addition to creating the basic structure for Connecti- cut's program, the Coastal Management Act delineates a coastal management boundary, establishes specific coastal policies, standards, and procedures to direct the implementation of the program, and defines management responsibilities for agencies at both the state and local levels of government. Under the CCMA authority, the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) will directly administer, supervise, or certify for consistency all state and federal actions subject to the management program. In addition, DEP will oversee and assure compliance of local implementation of CCMA coastal site plan review requirements for all activities subject to local zoning. Both the state and local components of the management program are based on a resource zoning concept with all land and water areas within the coastal boundary defined by statute and de- picted on 1:24000 scale resource maps. The policies and standards in the CCMA are organized around these statutorily defined coastal resources and major coastal development activities; they will be implemented by the existing state and local agencies with primary jurisdiction over the land and water uses subject to the management program. Coastal Boundary Connecticut has established a two-tiered management boundary. The primary nearshore tier is bounded on the seaward side by the limit of the state's jur- isdiction in Long Island Sound. On the landward side, this tier is bounded by a continuous line delineated by a one-thousand foot linear setback measured from the mean high water mark in coastal waters, or a one-thousand foot linear setback measured from the inland boundary of state regulated tidal wetlands, or the con- tinuous interior contour elevation of the one hundred year frequency coastal flood zone, whichever is farthest inland. This line is referred to in the CCMA as the I~1 "coastal boundary." Within this first tier, all major uses, activities and resources could have a direct and significant impact on coastal waters and thus will be managed by the Connecticut program using a combination of state and municipal authorities. The primary focus of the program is on this nearshore boundary since it encompasses all coastal resources,' the coastal flood hazard zone, and the majority of uses and activities of direct and significant impact. The secondary, inland tier, includes the area that is landward of the nearshore or coastal boundary and that is bounded by the inland boundary of the thirty-six coastal municipalities. Within this tier, only certain major uses or activities have been identified as potentially having a direct and significant impact on coastal waters. These major uses and activities will be managed by the state and federal governments under existing statutory authorities referenced in the CCMA. S-i MA S S A CH N -- _ S E 7. I W S~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~E Hartford 11,I~PG ~I U- 0 "N~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ C 0N N E CT IC UT R.I. 0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I~~~~~ C, C ,i\ II -c 0P A R~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ OC, R 0.-4. C'~ K rn 0 OsI ot. 50~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 0 G~~~~AL C cA N CONNECTICUT COASTAL AREA (TOWNS) (See back cover f or detailed boundary mnoP.) Connecticut has excluded from its total "coastal area" all lands which are under the sole jurisdiction of the federal government or which are held in trust by the federal government, its officers or agents. * ~~B. CHANGES THE PROGRAM WILL MAKE The Connecticut Coastal Management Program will make two major changes both of which directly affect the institutional environment as it pertains to the Connecticut coastal area. First, the program will change the criteria upon which public decisions are made regarding the use and management of Con- necticut's coastal land and water resources. Second, in order to insure that these new criteria are applied, the program will modify the process and pro- cedures by which these public decisions are made. Both of these changes are specifically enumerated in the Connecticut Coastal Management Act of 1978, as amended, and will be carried out under the-authority established by this leg- islation. These changes to the institutional environment have been designed to achieve the following two major coastal management objectives: 1) better coordination of coastal regulatory, planning, and management authorities at all levels of government: local , state and federal, and 2) thorough considera- tion of coastal resource capacities and their limitations in all coastal regulatory planning and management programs. The new standards and criteria for the use and management of Connecticut's coastal resources are embodied in a set of comprehensive coastal policies that are established in the Coastal Management Act. These detailed criteria provide specific guidance for 1) management of coastal land and water resources, 2) manage- ment of coastal uses, and 3) management of governmental programs that effect the coastal area. In addition to making these major improvements to the overall management structure, the Connecticut Coastal Management Program will also make a number of significant but less sweeping improvements to the management system. These improvements include the following: 1) Identification of those geographic areas within the coastal boundary that are of particular concern to the state, and implementation of special management techniques for these areas. 2) Implementation of special planning procedures to work toward the resolution of specific problems in the following four areas: - shoreline erosion - shorefront access and protection - energy facilities - dredging and the disposal'of dredged materials I ~~~~~3) Definition of uses and resources that are in the national interest and implementation of a specific statutory policy to evaluate such uses and resources. S-3 4) Implementation of measures to improve public awareness of coastal issues and increase public participation in coastal decision making processes. 5) Implementation of measures to simplify coastal regulatory procedures and improve inter-governmental coordination in the management of coastal resources. 6) Implementation of a procedure to insure the consistency of federal actions with Connecticut's Coastal Management Program. 7) Implementation of special measures to improve the data base for Coastal Management and conduct special management studies as necessary. C. WHAT THE PROGRAM WILL NOT DO The Connecticut Coastal Management Program is not d~signed to provide immediate and complete solutions to all coastal problems and issues; rather, it is designed to provide the governmental framework and standards by which such solutions may be achieved. Specifically, the Program will not accomplish the following: 1. The Program will not substantially alter the existing governmental regulatory jurisdictions over coastal resources, activities or land uses. Agencies currently having responsibility for management of these resources and activities will continue to exercisd their author- ities in accordance with the policies, starndards and evaluation pro- cedures established by the Connecticut Coastal Management Act (CCMA). 2. The Program will not stop all development in or near coastal resources as defined by the CCMA. Rather, development activities will be evalu- ated on the basis of their impact on coastal resources with permits and the capability of the affected coastal resources to withstand de- 3. In general , the Program does not require the regulation of individual single family homes or minor activities incidental to their use unless they are located within 100 feet of tidal wetlands, beaches and dunes or bluffs and escarpments as defined by the CCMA. However, such uses are subject to regulation under the Program if local zoning commissions do not act to specifically exempt them by regulation. 4. The Program will not change the existing patterns of public and private shorefront ownership except that additional pi~blic recreational access will be provided through state acquisition of suitable properties when they are available. 5. The Program does not propose direct state administrative control overI local zoning activities. However, local zoning activities subject to coastal site plan review requirements of the CCMA will be reviewed by the state for consistency with the policies, procedures and standards of the CCMA with judicial enforcement sought when necessary or warrant- ed to insure compliance. S-4 6. The Program is not specifically designed as a growth management pro- gram. Rather, it is a resource management program which includes spec- ific, enforceable statutory policies and standards which will direct development away from fragile coastal resources. 7. The Program does not require that all shorefront uses and activities be water dependent as defined by the CCMA. It does, however, require that water dependent uses be given highest priority in both planning and regulatory decisions and, in cases of direct conflict between proposed uses of substantially similar impacts on coastal resources, preference be given to any water dependent use. D. AREAS OF CONTROVERSY There were three principle areas of public controversy surrounding the dev- elopment of the Connecticut Coastal Management Program. These areas of controversy were 1) the basic management approach to be employed by the program, 2) the inland management boundary to be employed by the program, and 3) the starting date for implementation of the development review and control mechanisms established by the legislation. Management Approach The basic management approach to be employed by the coastal management program was one major area of controversy at the numerous public meetings, hearings, and workshops that were held throughout the development phase of the program. While there seemed to be widespread agreement on the need for better management of coastal resources and better coordination between state and municipal programs there was considerable public debate concerning the issue of how this improved management and coordination should be accomplished and by whom. Fear about loss of local initiative in the decision making process to the state and federal gov- ernment was the concern most frequently raised about implementation of a coastal management program in Connecticut. There was general agreement that a strong and p ~ ~central role for municipalities in the management program was necessary .1) if the program Was to adequately address and resolve coastal problems and 2) if the pro- gram was to gain acceptance in the state. There was some concern at the local level about state and federal intervention and national interest requirements in the federal Coastal Zone Management Act. A few people suggested that coastal management be implemented using only state funds, thus freeing the state from all possibility of federal intervention. This major program controversy regarding the basic management approach to be employed in Connecticut has been resolved through full public dialogue on the development of the CCMA over a two year period (over twenty public hearings, one year of legislative study, and over 300 public meetings). The Connecticut Coastal Management Act of 1978 establishes a shared state-local management program with municipalities playing a central role in the management process. Local initiative in the overall management program is maintained with state intervention based on demonstrated inconsistency with statutory policies in the CCMA. This approach was endorsed by all but one of the coastal municipalities commenting on the final version of the CCMA amendments of 1979. Similarly, national interest S-5 uses and resources and the policies pertaining to them were specifically stated in the CCMA to assure consistent, non arbitrary application. State, local and federal roles in the coastal management program were carefully designed to ensure that Connecticut's two major management issues, intergovernmental coordination, and consideration of the coastal resources, were addressed and are likely to be resolved by the management program. Management Boundary There was some concern expressed during public hearings, meetings, and work- shops about the inland coastal management boundary. Many people felt that Con- necticut should employ a two-tiered management boundary with intensive management of all resources and uses in the first tier and management of certain key uses or resources rin the second-tier. Such an approach, it was argued, would give Con- necticut an added measure of control over uses which might potentially have a minor or indirect impact on coastal resources. Other people felt that the proposedI management boundary was too inclusive, as proposed, and should at most include only a 500 foot or 250 foot setback from mean high water or tidal wetlands. The two-tiered management boundary, as defined and established in the Con- necticut Coastal Management Act, is a reasonable boundary for Connecticut's coastal management program. The inland zone includes a sufficiently broad area to provide for effective management of all major uses that are likely to have a direct and significant impact on coastal waters, yet it is not too large for efficient program administration. This zone will be managed by state and federal authorities as described earlier. The nearshore zone includes all of the specific coastal resources which are requi red to be included within a state's coastal zone under section 305(b)(1) of the CZMA. In addition, it reasonably incorporates all shorelands strongly affected by or affecting coastal waters based on scientific cri~teria such as the geographic extent of flood and erosion hazard areas, proximity of the land to coastal waters, and bio-physical factors such as microclimatic variation and salt- spray influence. This zone will be managed by municipal, state and federal agencies under a combination of local and state authorities as described earlier. Program Implementation Date The date for the initial implementation of Connecticut's coastal program proved to be a minor area of controversy during public hearings, meetings, and workshopsI on Connecticut's pr'oposed management legislation and management program. Many people felt that Connecticut could not afford to postpone implementation of the CCMA until after the program has been through the lengthy_ federal review process and had received formal federal approval. They felt that a long delay in the implementation of the Act could lead to a "land-grab" or an acceleration of development proposals as developers rushed to begin construction of poorlyI planned projects prior to the implementation of the management program in order to avoid the new requirements of the Act. S-6 The Program began implementation on January 1, 1980 and has operated with state funds since that date. E. COASTAL ISSUES AND PROBLEMS Connecticut has identified the following two fundamental coastal manage- ment related issues and problems: 1) lack of overall coordination among the existing array of management authorities (municipal, state, and federal) af- fecting the coastal area and 2) inadequate consideration of adverse impacts on natural resources in the process of reviewing and permitting coastal uses. The Connecticut coastal management program has been specifically tailored to cor- rect these deficiencies. Under the existing management structure in Connecticut, many agencies at all levels of government influence the conservation and development of the coastal area. Coastal towns, the state, and the federal government have all, over the years, become involved in coastal problems through a variety of activities such as planning and zoning, wetlands regulation, road construction, fish management, flood and erosion control, channel dredging and harbor development. The result is that scores of individual administrative and regulatory agencies make in- dependent decisions affecting the coast: some addr~essing one specific coastal issue; others applying only to a limited geographic area. Counting agencies at the state and federal level and relevant commissions and boards in each of Connecticut's thirty-six coastal municipalities, literally hundreds of independent decision making bodies are involved in some manner in the management of the coast. However, there is no notable coordination, uniform guidance or common long range direction among these agencies regarding coastal development and protection. Individual authorities that deal with one geographic area or one-specific issue are often not in a position to adequately address coastal problems that cross town lines or involve a large number of interrelated issues. A major consequence of this lack of coordination among management authorities has been historical inattention among decision-makers to the fate of coastal re- sources and their capacity and limits in supporting development activity. For example, nearly 15,000 acres of Connecticut's original tidal wetlands have been destroyed by encroaching development, most of them during the 30 years immediately after World War II. Connecticut now leases out only �', of the shellfish beds that it once did as a result of degraded water quality due to inadequately treated domestic and indust- rial effluent and other non-point water pollution sources. The closing of shellfish beds has meant the loss of a 3 to 6 million dollar industry annually. Many houses have been constructed in hazardous coastal flood and erosion prone areas, exposing S-7 the buildings tu the possibility of considerable damage in the event of severe storms and costing the state of Connecticut millions of dollars in bond funds spent for thei: protection. The CAM Program has been designed to address these basic management deficiencies of inadequate coordination and inadequate consideration of coastal resources. Correction of these short comings should, in turn, greatly facilitate the solution of many specific problems and issues which have been perpetuated or caused by these major management problems. S-8 SECTION I: PURPOSE AND NEED SECTIONJ I: PURPOSE AND NEED A. FEDERAL COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT ACT (FCZMA) In response to intense pressure, and because of the importance of coastal areas of the United States, Congress passed the Coastal Zone Management Act (P.L. 92-583) which was signed into law on October 27, 1972. The Act authori- zed 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 Atmos- pheric Administration's (NOAA) Office of Coastal Zone Management (OCZM). The Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 was substantially amended on July 26, 1976 (P.L. 94-370). The Act and the 1976 amendments affirm a national interest in the effective protection and development of the coastal zone by providing assis- tance and encouragement to coastal states to voluntarily develop and implement rational programs for managing their coastal areas. Broad guidelines and the basic requirements of the CZMA provide the necessary direction to States for developing coastal management programs. These guidelines and requirements for program development and approval are contained in 15 CFR Bart 923 as revised and published, March 28, 1979, in the Federal Register. In summary, the requirements for program approval are that a State develop a manage- ment program that: (1) Identifies and evaluates those coastal resources recognized in the Act that require management or protection by the State; (2) Re-examines existing policies or develops new policies to manage these resources. These policies must be specific, com- prehensive and enforceable, and must provide an adequate degree of predic- tability 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 which should be based on resources ca- pability and suitability analyses, socio-economic considerations 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 organiz- ational arrangements to implement the program and to insure conformance to it. I-1 In arriving at these substantive aspects of the management program, States are obliged to follow an open process which involves providing in- formation to and considering the interests of the general public, special interest groups, local government, and regional, State, inter-state and Federal agencies. 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 may submit it to the Secretary of Commerce for ap- proval pursuant to Section 306 of -the CZMA. If approved, the State is then eligible for annual grants under Section 306 to implement its manage- ment 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 be eligible for preliminary approval funding under Section 305(d). Section 307 of the Act stipulates that Federal agency actions shall be consistent, to the maximum extent practicable, with approved State management programs. Sect-ion 307 further provides for mediations 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 several provisions for grants and loans to coastal states to enable them to plan for and respond to on- shore impacts resulting from coastal 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 CZMA. Connecticut's Department of Environmental Protection discusses the purpose of developing a comprehensive program through participation in the Federal Coastal Zone Management Program and its desire to seek approval of its Program under Section 306-of the CZMA in Section II of this document. Approval of the Connecticut Coastal Management Program is considered a major action which significantly affects the quality of the human environ- ment. An immediate effect of approval is the qualification of the State for Federal matching funds for use in administering the program. in addition, the CZMA stipulates that Federal activities affecting the coastal zone shall be consistent to the maximum extent practicable with an approved management program. It is the general Policy of OCZM to issue a combined final environmental impact statement (FEIS) and program document. Sections I, III, IV, and V of this HIlS were prepared by OCZM. Section 1I of this HIlS is a description of the state's program and was prepared by the Connecticut Department of Environ- mental Protection. Attachment A (Responses to Comments) was prepared by OCZM in consultation with the Connecticut DEP staff. 1-2 For purposes of reviewing the proposed action, the key questions are: -whether the Connecticut Program is consistent with the objectives and policies of the national legislation, -whether the award of Federal funds under Section 306 of the Federal act will help Connecticut to meet those objectives, -whether the State's management authorities are adequate to imple- ment the Program, and -whether there will be a net environmental gain as a result of program approval and implementation. OCZM has made an assessment that the answers to these questions are affirmative. OCZM wants the widest possible circulation of this document to all interested agencies and parties. OCZM thanks those participating in the review of the Connecticut Program and this Final Environmental Impact Statement. I-3 B. How the Connecticut Coastal Management Program Meets the Requirements of the Coastal Zone Management Act: Requirements Sections of Approval Regulations Sec. 306(a), which includes the requirements of Sec. 305: 305(b)(1): Boundaries .....................................923.31-923.34, Part II (p.II-28), Part V (p.II-198), Appendix B, back cover 305(b)(2): Uses subject to management .....................923.11, Part IV (p.II-36), Part V (p.II-202) 305(b)(3): Areas of particular concern ....................923.21-923.23, Part VIII (p.11 - 248) 305(b)(4): Means of control ................................ 923.41, Part V (p.II-195), Part VI (p.1II- 204), Part VII (o.11-221) 305(b)(5): Guidelines on priorities of uses ...............923.21, Part IV (p.II-36), Part V (p.II-195), Part VIII (p1ll-248) Appendix B 305(b)(6): Organizational structure .......................923.46, Part VI (p.II-204) 305(b)(7): Shorefront planning process ....................923.24, Part X (p.II-296) 305(b)(8): Energy facility planning process ...............923.13, Part X (p.II-282) 305(b)(9): Erosion planning process .......................923.25, Part X (p.II-319) Sec. 306(c), which includes: 306(c)(1): Notice; full participation; consistent with Sec. 303 ...............................923.3, 923.51, Part XI, (p.II-332) 923.55, 923.58 306(c)(2)(A): Plan coordination .........................923.56, Part VII (p.II-221) 306(c)(2)(B): Continuing Consultation mechanisms ..........923.57, Part VII (p.II-221) 306(c)(3): Public hearings ................................923.58, Appendix L of DEIS 306(c)(4): Gubernatorial review and approval ..............923.48, page II-i 306(c)(5): Designation of recipient agency ................923.47, Part V (p.II-195) 306(c)(6): Organization ...................................923.46, Part VI (p.II-2-04), Appendix B 306(c)(7): Authorities ...................923.41, Part V (p.II-195), Appendix B 306(c)(8): Adequate consideration of national interest ....923.52, Part IX (p.II-263), Appendix B 306(c)(9): Areas for preservation/restoration .............923.22, Part VIII (p.II-262) Sec. 306(d), which includes: 306(d)(1): Administer regulation, control development; resolve conflicts .................923.41, Part V (p.II-195), Part VI (p.II-204), Part VII (p.II-221), Appendix B 306(d)(2): Powers of acquisition, if necessary ............923.41, Part V (p.II-195), Part VIII (p.II-248), Part X (p.II-304) Sec. 306(e), which includes: 306(e)(1): Technique of control ...........................923.42, 923.44, Part II (p.II-28), Part V (p.II-195) 306(e)(2): Uses of regional benefit .......................923.12, Part IX (p.II-278) Sec. 307, which includes: 307(b): Adequate consideration of Federal agency views....923.51, Part XI (p.II-332) 307(f): Incorporation of air and water quality requirements ......................................923.45, Part I (p.II-22), Part VIII (p.II-248), Part IX (p.II 263) ELLA GRASSO STATE OF CONNECTICUT GOVERNOR EXECUTIVE CHAMBERS HARTFORD July 31, 1980 Mr. Michael Glazer Assistant Administrator Office of Coastal Zone Management * ~~~National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 2001 Wisconsin Avenue Washington, D.C. 20235 Dear Mr. Glazer: I am pleased to submit for your approval Connecticut's Coastal Management Program prepared in response to the Coastal Zone Manage- * ~~~ment Act of 1972 (P.L. 92-583), as amended. Connecticut's program is based on the existing authority vested within the Department of Environmental Protection and on existing municipal planning and zoning authority as amended by the Connecticut Coastal Management Act (CCMA. As you know, the CCMA was passed by the 1979 session of the General Assembly. It was my pleasure to sign this bill into law on June 29, 1979. The effective date of the Act was January 1, 1980. Our program has been organized to meet all the requirements of your office's Program Approval Regulations, 15 CFR 923, as amended, utilizing a shared state-local management system. The Department of Environmental Protection has been designated as the lead agency to administer and oversee program implementation. The experience of the six months under the COMA indicates that our shared state-local manage- ment system is both workable and effective in preserving Connecticut's valuable coastal resources without denying devel opmient opportunities, particularly for water-dependent uses, within our coastal area. I am anxiously awaiting federal approval and continued federal funding to assist our state agencies and coastal municipalities in * ~~~carrying out their responsibilities under the Connecticut Coastal Management Act. Thank you for your assistance and the assistance of your staff in developing Connecticut's Program. With best wishes, Cordially, ELLA GRA SO Governor SECTION I I DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION CONNECTICUT'S COASTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM PART I CONNECTICUT'S COASTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM A. Introduction Long Island Sound has been frequently characterized and described as an "Urban Sea." The image raised by this description is appropriate for Connecticut's coastal area which has historically been the center of intense industrial, commercial and residential activity. While residential usage of the Connecticut shoreline in other than the vicinity of the ports of Stamford, Norwalk, Bridgeport, New Haven, New London and Norwich began as seasonal dwellings, changes in land use patterns following World War II and the corresponding residential and corporate exodus from the New York metropolitan area have changed the residential mix from seasonal to permanent. Vacant shorefront land and open space in Connecticut's heavily developed coastal area is at a premium. Recent studies of population growth and correspond- ing industrial, commercial and residential activity along Connecticut's coast completed under contract to the Coastal Area Management (CAM) Program indicate that this trend will continue for the forseeable future. Because of historical growth patterns along the coast, a sioni- ficant number of traditional public safety and welfare oriented police power regulatory programs have been implemented at both the state and municipal level for coastal lands. For example, planning and zoning began in Connecticut in the early 1930's and the state's regulatory program for coastal structures was underway by 1940. To- day all of Connecticut's coastal municipalities exercise full plan- ning and zoning authorities with most communities retaining professional support staff. The notable exception is in the lower Connecticut River estuary which remains largely undeveloped. Municipalities in this region generally rely on the capabilities of the Connecticut River Estuary Regional Planning Agency which also provides staff sup- port to the Connecticut River Gateway Commission, established as part of the lower Connecticut River Conservation Zone. While land use regulatory programs at the state and municipal level,complimented by a variety of federal coastal regulatory programs, have provided complete regulatory coverage of development activities in the coastal area, it was not uitil passage of Connecticut's tidal wet- lands act in 1969 and creation of the Department of Environmental Protection in 1971 that the management of coastal resources became part of the statutory mandate. Using the initiative established during the early 1970's by the Committee on Coastal Management headed by State Senator George Gunther and the U.S. Senator Abraham Ribicoff sponsored New England River Basins Commission's Long Island Sound Regional Study, the CAM Program of the Department of Environmental Protection has developed a comprehensive coastal management program for statewide implementation at both the state and municipal level of government. II-1 The recommended program utilizes the significant array of existing state and municipal regulatory programs as its foundation and has two central purposes; first, to assure that adequate con- sideration of the impacts of development on coastal resources is given by both the state and coastal municipalities and, second, to increase the level of intergovernmental coordination through planning and regulatory programs affecting the coast by providing common, statewide policies to guide federal, state and municipalI agencies. To achieve these purposes, Connecticut is not proposing additional regulatory programs nor arie existing regulatory juris- dictions bei ng si ani ficantly al tered. Rather coastal management will be implemented through a coastal site plan review as part of municipal planning and zoning programs and through statewide coastal policies to guide federal, state and municipal planning and investment programs. Coastal municipalities are also encouraged to develop municipal coastal programs by revising existing town plans of development for their coastal areas. Existing state regulatory pro- grams will be required to be consistent with the same coastal resource definitions, policies and impact criteria proposed for the municipal coastal site plan review,and coastal municipalities are given a4 formal role in state regulatory actions. Because of the highly developed nature of Connecticut's coast and the resultant loss and degradation of critical coastal resources, the focus of the management program is first, the resources at the land- water interface significantly affecting or affected by natural coastal4 processes and second, adjacent land and water resources. This focus is critical if Connecticut is to protect, restore and enhance remaining coastal resources. For example, CAM surveys indicate that, except for urbanized port areas, over 50% of the remaining undeveloped shore- front property is classified as tidal wetland. In addition, much of the remainder is in flood or erosion hazard areas. To assure a con- centrated effort in protecting those endangered resource areas, critical resources and the natural processes that they support have been identified as in the "national interest." Further, tidal wet- lands and shellfish concentration areas have been nominated as "areas of particular concern" along with the activities that most significantly affect them, dredging and spoil disposal. To assist in better regulatory decisions at all levels of government, coastal resources and adverse impacts have been defined by statute in Connecticut's Coastal Management Act and a comprehensive set of coastal resource maps- have been prepared for-the entire coastal area. Funding through the federal Coastal Zone Management Act will be used to provide a continuing state overview through the Department of Environmental Protection's CAM Pro- gram and to provide needed technical and financial support to state and municipal coastal regulatory programs. 11-2 B. Description of Connecticut's Cuastal Environment Natural Environment The coastal seaboard and waters of the Long Island Sound estuary and their resource systems form an integrated coastal ecosystem that is unique and fragile. Long Island Sound occupies a basin, 113 miles long and 21 miles wide, located between Long Island and the Connecticut- Westchester County, New York region. The Connecticut coast bordering the Sound is 98 miles long, but total shoreline frontage, including tidal rivers and embayments, is 583 miles. Forty percent of Connecticut's population lives in the 36 coastal towns; however, seventy-five percent of that population, or nearly 910,000 residents,lives in the 17 southwestern towns (west of Guilford). This population pattern reflects the proximity of these towns to New York city and its markets. This pattern of development and the dense urban areas surrounding many harbors have significantly affected the quality of nearsho-e water and its ability to support both recreational interests and healthy marine resources. Although most of the Sound's offshore waters are of acceptable quality, the westernmost waters show deteriorated characteristics. These characteristics are a result of the cultural effluents and urban runoff from the western Long Island, Westchester County, and southwestern Connecticut urban environments. The most notable cause is the East River, which is joined to New York Harbor and runs through sections of New York city. Connecticut's coastal seaboard, which is the coastal part of the flew England Uplands, is a glaciated zone underlain by crystalline bed- rock which slopes southward at 50 feet per mile. In contrast the Connecticut Lowland Valley at New Haven is comprised of shales, sandstones, and limited exposures of trap rock. Elevations vary from sea level to a maximum of 400-500 feet inland, but shoreline relief is maximal where the rocky uplands intersect with the coast. Low, rolling hills and occasional rocky lands interposed by level to undulatory sand and gravel plains characterize the coastal landscape. Biophysical Zone V, depicted in Figure 2 , embodies two ecoregions that are virtually coextensive to the seaboard. The moderat- ing effect of seabreezes, penetrating 5-10 miles inland, produces a cooling trend in spring and summer and a warning one in fall and winter. The mean annual temperature is 51 degrees F, and precipitation averages 44-48 inches a year. The coast experiences one of the longest frost free seasons in the state, 180 days in duration. The maritime climate, and the recurrent pattern of landforms and glacial inceptsolic soils, create a vegetation zone called the coastal hardwoods zone. 11-3 II ) i, f~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1,7 Ca :3 C N N E C I C UmT Ila. 01 ,~~~~~~~~ a CL Cn M K t~ew~ ~< a- ,o~~~~~~~~~~e~ ~ ATL CONNECTICUT COASTAL AREA (TOWNS) (See back cover for detailed boundary map.) -Aift -4.w. (Mass.) I ~~~~~~~~~~~~III-D-(R.I.) (N.Y.) (R.I.) IV-H~~~~V-C Long Island Sound Fig. 2. Ecoregions of Connecticut I. Northwest Highlands-Northern Hardwoods zone A. Northwest Highlands ecoregion II. Northern Uplands-Transitional Hardwoods zone A. Northwest Uplands ecoregion B. Northeast Uplands ecoregion C. Northern Marble Valley III. Northern Hills-Central Hardwoods-White Pine zone A. Northwest Hills ecoregion B. North-Central Lowlands ecoregion C. Northeast Hills ecoregion D. Central Marble Valley IV. Southern Hills-Central Hardwoods zone A. Southwest Hills ecoregion B. South-Central Lowlands ecoregion C. Southeast Hills ecoregion D. Southern Marble Valley V. Coastal Hardwoods zone A. Western Coastal ecoregion B. Eastern Coastal ecoregion 11-5 The Connecticut shoreline is subject to the forces of wave action, and sea level rise presently averaging approximately one to one and one-half feet per century. These forces act in concert on Connecticut's shore (85% of which is composed of potentially erodible materials) and the result is a retreating and submerging shoreline. This shoreline has an ir- regular geometry with many headlands, embayments, and islands. The following composition statistics illustrate the diversity of resources along the shore interface: sandy beach - 14.2%; glacial drift - 11.3% artificial fill - 8.2%; bedrock - 7.2%; and combined tidal wetland and undifferentiated tidal river shores - 59.1%. The variety of coastal landforms, and the variable marine processes affecting them, preclude a simplistic management treatment of the coast. In addition. seven complex districts, each representing a recurrent pattern of coastal landforms that are mixed or uniform in nature, can be discerned along the coast. The following district composition statistics in Table 1 together with the descriptions below show the characteristics of each district (see Figure 3). TABLE 1 Shoreline Statistics TIDAL SANDY GLACIAL ARTIFICIAL WETLANDS TOTAL LINEAR DISTRICT BEACH DRIFT BEDROCK FILL (Acres) MILES MILES A 25.7% 28.8% 19.3% 19.1% 7.1%(911) 79.9 15 B 37.0% 20.1% 0.7% 28.4% 13.7%(3424) 59.8 20 C 50.4% 15.2% 4.0% 30.4% 0.8%(400) 12.5 8 D 13.2% 10.2% 56.3% 9.0% 11.1%(2326) 33.2 12 E 54.9% 18.8% 1.7% 10.1% 14.5%(5290) 34.6 22 F 27.9% 36.0% 12.7% 12.9% 10.2%(827) 39.4 13 G 16.0% 40.8% 16.6% 9.9% 16.6%(865) 18.2 8 Source: CAM Planning Report No. 29, Shoreline Erosion Analysis and Recommended Plannina Process (1) Mixed Districts (A, F, G) are embayed and have an irregular geo- metry controlled by the preponderance and distribution of the least erodible materials: bedrock and till. Surficial resources are mixed, but central to district F are the three tombolos: Black Point Spit, Bushy Point Beach, and Groton Long Point. (2) Outwash Districts (B,E). Salient features in these wave- straightened, linear to arcuate districts, are the extensive stretches of sandy (predominantly fringing) beaches fronting two broad zones of sandy outwash. II-6 _ - - -U--- M J C. Glacial drift and rock t rn - -'g b B. Glacial drift and beachesn A. Rock and drift; much artificial fill . Rock and marshes rn LONG ISLAND SOUND C, SHORELINE FEATURES 3 Bedrock B Glacial drift Sand or gravel beaches )~-~-~----~ h~ ~ Tidal marshes AF. Glacial drift and rock Rc nd marshes Artificial fill E. Glacial drift and beaches LONG ISLAND S OUND (3) Mixed Drift District (C) has a scalloped shoreline controlled by recurrent but limited outcrops of bedrock. Conspicuous in this district of mixed till and outwash are the largest sea cliffs in Connecticut ranging upwards to 40 feet. (4) Bedrock District (0). Rocky headlands that have been stripped of their veneer of drift and residuum by wave erosion essentially account for this irregular district of rocky headlands shorefront, limited pocket beaches, and tidal wetlands. The many small rocky islands and reefs in the Thimble Isl and system are a unique characteristic of this district. (Note: The preponderance of artificial fill in districts A through C reflect the intense urbanization of southwestern Connecticut.) The Long Island Sound basin is an asymetric, preglacial valley situated between the bedrock of southern New England and the coastal plain sediments of Long Island. The estuary is unusual in that two independent and restricted passages to the ocean exist at opposite ends of the Sound. There are multiple passages at the eastern end which link the Sound with Block Island Sound. The East River, a tidal strait con- nected with New York Harbor is the passage at the western end of the Sound. The Mattituck sill and the Hempstead sill are submarine ridges with minimum elevations of 10 and 20 meters respectively, which delimit the eastern and western boundaries of the main central basin (averaging 26 meters) and its water mass. West of the Hempstead sill to the Throgs Neck lies the westernmost basin. Its waters are a mixing zone with an estuarine circulation that shunts lower density East River water into the western basin. The chain of morainal islands between Orient Point, Long Island and southwestern Rhode Island demarcate the eastern boundary of the Sound and the irregular eastern basin. Its waters are connected with the Block Island Sound. These cold, saline waters, dominated by an estuarine circulation pattern coupled to the ocean tides entering the Race, influence the overall water and salt budget of the central basin. Volume exchange rates at the Race are 60 times that of the western passage. Tides and currents are dominated by semi-diurnal lunar tides. Basin geometry amplifies the ocean tides such that they increase progressively from east (2.5') to west (7.8'). The scouring effect of the turbulent tidal exchange at the Race has sculptured the irregular bathymetry in the eastern basin, and caused sediments predominantly of medium sands to collect in sheltered regions, and coarse sands, gravel, and cobble to settle in the main channels. Concurrent with the net westward motion of the bottom waters in the eastern basin is the conveyance of medium and fine sands to the Mattituck sill. The sedi- ments in the central basin and western basin, regions of low tidal cur- rents, are characterized by a non-uniform veneer of marine silts and fine sands over deposits of glacial sands and gravels. Extraction of these valuable glacial sediments in the main is economically unfeasible and not without severe environmental impacts. 11-8 Coastal waters are defined by the Connecticut Coastal Management Act as those waters containing a measurable quantity of seawater,(waters With a salinity at or above 0.5 parts per thousand). Freshwater drain- age from the five major drainage basins fronting on the Sound and its estuaries contain countless small streams and creeks. Principal to the chemical properties of the Sound are the three tidal rivers: the Housatonic, the Connecticut, and the Thames. Secondary are the Saugutuck and Quinnipiac Rivers. In fact, the Connecticut River, dis- charging into the eastern basin, accounts for more than seventy percent of the Sound-wide runoff. The low salinity plumes at the mouths of the Housatonic and Connecticut Rivers are frequently visible from the air. The net transport of low salinity surface waters eastward, and dense, saline bottom waters westward in the eastern basin, has the pro- pensity to conserve essential nutrients in the central basin, parti- cularly when surface waters are depleted of nutrients by phytoplankton. Reputedly, nitrogen limits phytoplankton blooms. Average salinities in the western and central basins are 26 parts per thousand and 27-28 parts per thousand respectively. Waters in the central basin are highly mixed, except during prolonged periods of calm that promote vertical stratification. Residence time of water in the eastern basin is on the order of one week, but the renewal rate increases westward to the point that the westernmost waters have limited capacities to assimilate cultural pollutants. The enriched estuarine waters of Long Island Sound support a variety of marine finfish and shellfish. More than 100 species of fish inhabit Connecticut's coastal waters, although significant commercial and re- creational species number fewer than one dozen. The otter trawl com- mercial fishing industry harvests blackback and yellowtail flounders, porgy, butterfish, and to a lesser extent mackerel and herring. The anadromous American Shad supports the most valuable commercial industry in the lower reaches of the Connecticut River. Principal commercial shellfish species are hardclams, scallops, and mussels, but especially important are the oyster and American lobster. The western region of the Sound supports the largest populations of both oyster and lobster. Bluefish is the most important recreational fish, followed by striped bass, flounder, blackfish, porgy, mackerel, and weakfish. The Sound functions as an important resting and feeding areafor migratory waterfowl and shorebirds in the Atlantic Flyway. Numerous bay-marsh complexes function as critical waterfowl staging areas. The intertidal flats at New Haven Harbor and the Great Meadows also con- centrate large numbevs of shorebirds. Large rafts oT waterfowl frequent the Sound in winter, particularly Black Duck, Greater Scaup, Canada Geese, Red-breasted Mergansers, Scoters, and Golden-eyQ. A few onshore beaches and offshore islands support small localized breeding colonies of terns. These habitats are more important than ever because many suitable habitats have been destroyed along the entire eastern seaboard. Rare and declining coastal avifauna include American bittern, Common Egret, Little Blue Heron, Yellow-Crowned Night Heron, Black Rail, Piping Plover, Willet, and the endangered Osprey. The recreational value of coastal wildlife, save the hunting aspect, is predominantly an aesthetic one. II-9 COASTAL RESOURCES The area within the coastal boundary as defined by the Connecticut Coastal Management Act and each of its component resources form an in- tegrated but fragile ecosystem. The coastal management boundary en- compasses (1) all coastal waters, (2) all nearshore lands with the potential to significantly impact coastal waters, (3) lands prone to coastal flooding, and (4) unique resources found nowhere else in the state. In principle, these are composite resources, each with their own distinct abilities to assimilate impacts or their own unique intrinsic properties with respect to the welfare of the larger coastal ecosystem. A detailed treatise of the 14 coastal resources defined by the Act is beyond the scope of this document but the cursory treatment below will suffice to delimit their physical attributes and to function as a foundation for discussion of the issues. Definitions of each re- source are contained in the Connecticut Coastal Management Act and accompany the coastal policies (see Part IV). Coastal Waters Long Island Sound is composed of discrete water masses and sub- strates including countless tidal estuarine streams and creeks which collectively form an integrated, continuous, and composite water system. Each component differs in chemical and physical properties and overall significance to the coastal water ecosystem or specific biota. Most notably they contain different capacities to assimilate anthropogenic impacts and cultural pollutants. Offshore waters, nearshore waters, and estuarine embayments, are the principal resource elements in this system. The texture and pattern of benthonic sediments in addition to offshore topography(below the 10 meter bathymetric con- tour), in the main, are not influenced by wind-waves occurring during either normal conditions or storms. The nearshore zone is distinguished by coarse sediments, predominantly coarse to fine sands, and a well-mixed water column. Turbulence at the shore and upper shoreface creates typically unstable substrate conditions which preclude all but the most active marine organisms. This zone varies considerably in width from 0.5 miles contiguous to rocky shorelines, to a maximum of 4 miles where the broad, sandy outwash plains intersect with the shore. The average southward slope is 1:200'. The offshore, however, slopes more gently southward, and its waters are moderately stratified to well-mixed by tidal currents and waves. The role of the turbulent tidal exchange at the race is an important one for both the coarse nature of the sediments, and the rapid flushing rate in the eastern basin. Estuarine embayments are small, confined waters encircled by land that are semi-enclosed with a restricted tidal passage to the Sound. Fringed by vital tidal wetlands and flats, embayments represent a highly productive resource. Basin geometry varies, and depths average 6 feet but range to over 20 feet in the principal tidal rivers. Tur- bidity is generally higher than in nearshore waters and salinity ranges from 0.5 to 28 parts per thousand. Sediments are predominantly fine- textured. An important characteristic of these sheltered environments is the submerged flats of eelgrass (Zostera marina)which enhance pro- II-10 ductivity, transfer essential nutrients from the sediments to the water column, mitigate the impact of wave energy on the shoreline, trap and stabilize sediments, and are an essential substrate to the life cycle of the scallop for brief periods of time. It is, therefore, not unusual that the preponderance of scallops coincides with the distribution of eelgrass which is essentially restricted to the eastern- most embayments, and to the protected Fishers Island Sound. Embayments are particularly susceptible, more so than nearshore waters, to pol- lutants because of their small water volume, fine-textured sediments, and limited circulation. Intertidal Resources Tidal Wetlands -- Tidal wetlands have a significant role in the estuarine environment. Notably, these grassy coastal floodplains are highly productive. Salt and brackish marshes are the two primary tidal wetland systems that occur in the coastal area. In southern New England, tidal marsh soils are predominantly organic. However, suspended riverine silts are essential to marsh maintenance and growth. There are four vegetation zones in the salt marsh. These zones run in progression from the low to high marsh: (1) the lower slope marsh comprised of a belt of salt marsh cordgrass, (Spartina alterniflora) (2) the upper slope dominated by either salt marsh hay (Spartina ipatens)or Spike grass (Distichlis spicata) or an intricate mosaic of bot3, (3) the lower border of the rush, Black Grass (Juncus gerardi), and (4) upper border transition between the marsh and upland which is inundated by extreme annual storms and supports a grassy belt of switchqrass (Panicum virgatum). Historically, impacts, such as dredging and filling, have irreversibly destroyed up to 50% of Connecticut's marshes. In addition, certain activities, particularly the construction of tidal gates that significantly alter hydrology, flood frequency and salinity of the upstream estuary, have culminated in the conversion of acres of salt marsh to brackish reed (Phragmites communis) marshes. Only a small percentage of Connecticut's salt marshes are in a natural state. Most contain a complex network of mosquito ditches that have altered drainage and vegetation patterns. Progressing upstream, as salinities diminish, salt marsh species are replaced by a plethora of brackish water taxa, predominantly the brackish water reed and the brackish water cattail (Typha angustifolia). Lesser in importance are the bulrushes (Scirpus americana, Scirpus olneyi, S. validus and S. fluviatilis). Intertidal Flats -- Intertidal flats are level to gently seaward sloping areas, restricted to protected, low wave energy embayments, that are subjected to alternating tidal inundation and dessication incidental to exposure. Substrate characteristics range from mud to sand in the more exposed cases. These flats generally average less than 1,000-2,Q00 feet in width. They function as temporary nutrient traps, act as limited sinks for pollutants, are specialized habitats for certain marine inverte- brates, and are particularly important feeding and resting areas for migratory shorebirds. II-11 Coastal Land Resources Beach Systems (Beaches and Dunes) -- The beach composed of un- consolidated sands and gravels, in addition to landforms of wind deposited sands, constitutes an integrated'but complex resource system. Along Connecticut's shore these systems develop under conditions of low wave energy and are therefore narrow features, generally less than 200 feet in width. The generic classes of beach systems are interspersed between a multitude of headland and rocky shoreline which preclude lateral continuity of the littoral transport system creating "pocket" beaches, the most common type of beach system in Connecticut. Such beaches are characterized by their short, narrow topography. Fringing beaches fronting glacial drift uplands, and barrier beaches surrounded by water are the two classes of beach systems on the coast although their coastwide distribution is limited. Fringing beaches generally lack aeolian landforms and border escarpments or seacliffs (bluffs). Aeolian landforms, however, are conspicuous on Connecticut's few barrier beach systems. Generally, in Connecticut, aeolian dunes are rare landforms. A single dune ridge, averaging less than 1-2 meters in relief, and level to undulatory sand flats leeward, typify the nature of aeolian systems at the coast. Sufficient breadth and elevation of these deposits to support a freshwater table and marshes do not exist. Ridges and flats support a one-layered coastal grassland dominated by Beach Grass (Ammophila breviligulata) and Poison Ivy (Rhus radicans), the two most important sand dune and ridge stabilizers. Limited in occurrence are dunes which provide sufficient protection from the rigors of salt spray to permit development of a coastal scrub woodland of Wild Black Cherry (Prunus serotina) and Shadbush (Amelanchier species). Beach systems are valuable coastal resources in Connecticut. However, because of the encroachment of development, notwithstanding the above noted natural limitations, most are only of local importance from either a natural or a recreational perspective. Few beaches are devoid of structural devices built to mitigate the impacts of erosion, particularly groins and seawalls. Aeolian landforms and their biotic communities have all but been obliterated by low to moderate residential development and concurrent pedestrian traffic. Notable exceptions are Griswold Point, Bushy Point Beach, Black Point Spit, Milford Point and Long Beach, re- presenting virtually the only significant and unaltered beach systems in the state. It should be noted that because of the fetch limits on wave energy imposed by physiography of Long Island Sound, Connecticut has no true "barrier beaches" or "barrier islands." Coastal Bluffs and Escarpments -- Bluffs and escarpments are steep, seaward sloping coastal cliffs etched into glacial drift headlands. Near- shore bathymetry is also steep, permitting the maximum expenditure of wave energy on these shorelines. These shorelines have dynamic slopes that adjust to the rate of erosion of the lower slope as mediated by waves, substrate composition, drainage and degree of plant cover. Seacliffs range from small marine escarpments with a relief of 0.5 to 1 meter up- wards to a maximum of 40 feet fronting the most prominent headlands. Concurrent with slope failure and wave action is the formation of narrow headland beaches of cobble mixed with boulder. Like rocky shorefronts, these landforms are less than 100 feet in width. Today, most bluffs and escarpments have been modified by seawalls and riprap. II-12 Because of these attempts to stabilize bluffs and escarpments, an invaluable sediment source to the contiguous beaches is lost, causing accelerated downdrift erosion. Inevitably, the stabilization influence of structures is a temporary one, and if fetch limitations were not im- posed on wave energy by the physiography of the Sound, many of these structures would have been undermined and destroyed long ago. The few remaining natural bluffs support a diverse variety of herbaceous veg- etation and scattered shrubs. This vegetation provides natural stab- ility but does not interfere with the function of these sea cliffs to nourish beaches with sand. Coastal Islands -- The former seaward extent of Connecticut's coast is marked by the distribution of coastal islands, representing upland hills with sufficient elevation to preclude inundation which have not yet succumbed to wave erosion. These islands are chiefly composed of bedrock, mantled with a thin veneer of droughty soils, and have rocky shorelines (e.g., the Thimble Islands). In addition, abutting the shore are numerous islands of till. The Norwalk Islands and the two islands'south of Guilford, Falkners and Goose, which are reputedly morainal in origin, are less common. The shorelines on both till and morainal islands are replete with a variety of resource types, in- cludina boulder shorefront, seacliffs, salt marshes on sheltered shores, and stony or cobble beaches. Sandy beaches, dune ridges and sand flats are rare elements. Less than 20%1 of these islands exceed 10 acres with the average areal extent of 7 acres. Physical parameters such as salt spray, habitat diversity and acreage affect the structure and floristic composition of island vegetation. Small islands often support scant vegetation consisting of herbs and salt pruned shrubs. Dry coastal woodlands of oak and, locally, pitch pine (Pinus rigijda) occur on the larger islands. Certain islands support wil dl ife not found on the mainland coast because of the limited'developmnent commonplace to islands. Two islands merit mention. The first, Chimon Island in the Norwalk group, contains one of the few Northern heron rookeries of Black Crowned Night Herons, Snowy Egrets, and state rare taxa, the Little Blue Heron, Cattle Egrets, and Great Egret. Although Chimon Island is the largest heron rookery in Connecticut, it represents an extreme Northern habitat for the rare species (which are more common to the South) that nest there. The second, and of regional and perhans national importance, is the Roseate tern breeding population onFalkner's Island which is owned by the U.S. Coast Guard. Not only does the island contain the largest Con- necticut Common and Roseate tern colony, but it also contains one of the largest of the few remaining Roseate tern colonies on the eastern seaboard. In 1978, 160-180 pairs nested on this island. Historically, this island served as a refuge for terns during periods of disturbances at the main regional colonies such as Great Gull Island, New York. In fact, at one time, Falkners and the nearby island, Goose, supported 1,600 pairs of Roseate Terns. 11-13 Rocky Shorefront -- This category entails both intertidal and supralittoral shorefront of gently to steep sloping rockland, and dense aggregations of boulder armoring the shore. Rocky shorefront constitutes a relatively erosion stable shoreline, and is an insigni- ficant sediment source to downdrift landforms like beaches. Beyond the reach of the tides, the rock is exposed, devoid of vegetation, and rarely exceeds 100-200 feet in width. Intertidal rocky shorefront functions to provide a stable substrate for a plethora of specialized marine plant and animal communities. Barnacles, mussels, snails and rockweed are prevalent here. Shorelands -- Shorelands together with Rocky Shorefronts, as defined by the Connecticut Coastal Management Act, comprise the most dominant features of Connecticut shoreline. Shorelands are defined as those areas with elevations that exceed the still water flood level of the 100 year coastal event, thereby precluding coastal flooding. Activities initiated on shorelands may not significantly impact coastal waters. These lands are replete with a variety of upland landforms including drumlins, rocky lands, glacially rounded till hills and plains, each with their own con- spicuous and characteristic sequences of soils. Cuastal vegetation in both the shorelands and coastal hazard areas are differentiated by the preponderance of oaks, particularly scarlet, black and white, and the absence of northern species. Rich silty loams and lower concave slopes support a rich, fast growing forest dominated by oaks. Coastal Hazard Area -- These nearshore lands as defined by the Con- necticut Coastal Management Act are subject to coastal flooding and con- current erosion incidental to normal or extreme coastal events (upward to the 100 year event as identified by FEMA-FIA mapping). This zone embodies beach systems, rocky shorefront, bluffs and escarpments, tidal wetlands, occasionally freshwater wetlands, and uplands of low elevation. The biotic communities here are markedly similar to those inhabitating shorelands. However, plant communities contiguous to the shore can be markedly pruned by the dessicating action of salt spray. Freshwater Wetlands and Watercourses -- The definition of this com- pound category conforms to the Wetlands and Watercourses definition in the Connecticut General Statutes which defines wetlands on the basis of certain soils that are poorly drained, very poorly drained, alluvial, or flood plain types as designated by the soil conservation service. At least 20 different wetland soils exist in the coastal area reflecting these categories, not all of which meet the statutory definition for tidal wetlands. Watercourses include rivers, streams, brooks, waterways, lakes, and ponds. Flood mitigation, recharge, filtration of pollutants and im- portant wildlife habitat are included in the functional role of these indispensible and fragile resources. Wetland vegetation on both mineral and organic soils is primarily a swamp type, dominated by Red Maple. There are, however, local occurrences of Atlantic White Cedar. Floodplains and alluvial deposits are scarce. Urban Shorefront -- These nearshore lands are defined by the Con- necticut Coastal Management Act as those areas that have been highly engineered and developed so that the relationship of the natural land- scape and systems to contiguous resources is functionally impaired and irreversibly altered. In principle, these lands are major coastal economic centers. Their land use ranges from light to heavy industry, II-14 commercial, institutional to high density residential uses. The former natural structure and function of the soils have been sub- stantially altered by grading and capping with artificial fill and impervious surfaces. The shoreline is generally rectilinear with a host of seawalls, wharves and docks to accommodate shipping activities. As a result of urban runoff, groundwater contamination, oil spills, discharges from municipal treatment plants, and certain industrial uses, water quality in these harbor areas may be significantly degraded or altered. 11-15 Man-Made Envi ronment The preceding description of the natural environment explains the unique, fragile system which borders Long Island Sound's north shore. Upon this fragile base is a pattern of development that has evolved over a period of three hundred years. While the type of development has changed throughout the years, the pattern of intensive shorefront use and development remains. In fact, the unindoctrinated visitor expecting white clapboard houses and historic seaports of New England would be surprised upon travelling Interstate 95 as it parallels the coast from Greenwich to Stonington, to find urban sprawl, fuel storage tank farms and industrial centers dominating much of the landscape. Stretches of natural beauty and historic settings can be found, but a great deal has been changed by three centuries of progress and growth. Some of the earliest colonists' migrations from Massachusetts fol- lowed the Connecticut River to its mouth at Old Saybrook, Connecticut. By the mid-1600's the entire Connecticut coast was settled and patterns of land use began to develop. In the beginning, argriculture was the major land use along the coast. Though not well suited to agriculture because of the predominant bedrock base and hilly terrain, this use of the land was born of necessity. Today, agriculture is a minor use within the coastal area. Only 5% of the total area within the thirty-six muni- cipalities is in agricultural use. Between 1970 and 1975 there was a 6.5% decrease in the amount of land in agricultural use. Approximately two thirds (2/3) was returned to natural vegetation; the remaining third (1/3) was permanently lost to other uses. This decline is expected to continue. Two revolutions helped implement the change from agricultural to urban dominance - the American Revolution and the Industrial Revolution. Unlike its suitability for agricultural usage, the Connecticut coast was very well suited to the demands of water-borne commerce and water-powered industries. The natural embayments along Long Island Sound and numerous waterways facilitated the growth of major port and harbor areas which, in turn, spurred the development of major urban centers in those areas. Though the range of activities has changed, the combined elements of com- merce, transportation and industrial uses maintain the significance of ports and harbors. The state's three largest harbors are lew London, New Haven and Bridgeport. New London Harbor comprises the lower twelve miles of the Thames River in southeastern Connecticut. The main channel is 3.8 miles long. New Haven Harbor (the third largest port in New England) is 4.5 miles long, located on a bay in southcentral Connecticut. It is com- prised of a 35 foot entrance channel and three subsidiary channels: the Quinnipiac River, the Mill River and the West River. Bridgeport Harbor, located in southwestern Connecticut is actually a port area consisting of two harbors, Bridgeport Harbor (the main harbor) and Black Rock Harbor which are about 2 miles apart. The main harbor has three subsidiary chan- nels: the Yellow Mill Channel, the Poquonnock River and Johnson's River. Together, these three major harbors supply 34 oil handling facilities, and over 1,000 storage tanks with combined capacities of over 14 million barrels. The smaller ports include Stamford Harbor, Norwalk Harbor, and ports along the Housatonic and Connecticut Rivers. Between 1952 and 1972 the total volume of waterborne commerce increased 114%; commerce in petroleum products II-16 increased 156%. In 1972, the total volume of waterborne commerce handled at Connecticut's ports was approximately 29 million short tons. Over 80% of this was in petroleum products. Commercial and industrial activities were once totally water dependent and, thus, coastally oriented. Today the range of activities encompasses water-dependent and non-water-dependent uses. Commercial fishing, shell- fishing and sportfishing, marina facilities and other tourist facilities exemplify water dependent commercial uses. While historically of great economic importance to the state, commercial finfishing and shellfishing activities are no longer major commercial uses of Connecticut's coast. Total finfish landings have declined 75% in the twenty years between 1950 and 1970 (from 20 million pounds to 5 million pounds). The shellfish industry which underwent a similar decline has been enjoying a slow re- surgence since the mid-1970's. In contrast to the three hundred natural growthers, hundreds of steamers, and thousands of employees associated with the oyster industry at the turn of the century, there now exist approximately 70 natural growthers, 29 large vessels, five companies and 200 employees utilizing the oyster resource. Sportfishing, commercial recreation and water-based tourism are, on the other hand, growing in their importance as segments of the state's economy. There are approximately 70,000 registered power boats and in excess of 30,000 sailboats in Con- necticut. Some of these boats are accommodated by 164 commercial marinas, many of which supply a host of associated facilities (i.e., boat repairs, restaurants, filling and pump-out stations) all adding to their economic import. Many older factories and industries located along the coast are no longer water-dependent, yet occupy valuable coastal acreage. Shipbuilding, petroleum storage and mineral extraction (i.e., sand and gravel mining) are existing industrial uses of the coast. Manufacturing includes production of machinery, primary and fabricated metals, transportation equipment, che- micals and food products. Commercial and industrial activities beyond the immediate shorefront have greatly contributed to the economic growth of the thirty-six coastal municipalities. Commercial uses within the coastal muni- cipalities include shopping centers, office buildings, and other trades and services facilities. Between 1960 and 1970 there was an increase of 133% in commercial land use in the municipalities. From 1970 to 1975 there was a 3.4% increase. Average annual expansion was 740 acres per year in the 1960's and 151 acres per year in the 1970's. In addition, many nationally known industries are represented within the coastal municipalities (i.e., American Can Company, AVCO, Arnold Bakers, Inc., and U.S. Tobacco Corp. in Greenwich; Charles Pfizer Chemicals and Electric Boat Division of General Dynamics in Groton). The most industrial region, southcentral Connecticut, is the site of Armstrong Rubber Co., Bic Pen Corp., Cheeseborough-Pond's Inc., Federal Paper Board Co., Pratt-Whitney Aircraft, Upjohn Co., and many other large and small manufacturing firms. (Manufacturing accounts for 39% of employ- ment within the coastal area.) There was a 50% increase in industrial land use from 1960 to 1970. From 1970 to 1975 there was a 12.8% increase. Most new industrial land use has located adjacent to the highway system (e.g., along 1-95 in Greenwich, Stamford, Fairfield, Stratford, Milford and Branford; along Route 8 in Shelton; near Route 52 in Norwich; along 1-91 in North Haven). II-17 Connecticut's highway system, as noted above, is just one transport- ation advancement which facilitated growth within the coastal area while decreasing commercial and industrial water-dependence. All major forms of transportation are represented along Connecticut's coast. The main rail- road line from Boston to Washington, D.C. parallels the coast for its entire span from New York to Rhode Island. Interstate Route 95 also par- allels the entire Connecticut coast and north-south Route 8 and 91 in the west, and Route 9 along the Connecticut River, connect the coast to inl~and areas. Three airports - Bridgeport M~unicipal,Tweed-New Haven, and Groton- New London - are located in the coastal area. Cross-Sound ferries operate between Bridgeport and Port Jefferson, New York and between New London and Orient Point, New York. Water as a power source was a major factor in the historically intensive use of the coast. Electric generating plants located on the coast, utilizing Long Island Sound and major rivers as a water source. There are currently twenty electric generating stations operating within the coastal municipali- ties. (Three of these are nuclear powered with a fourth under construction.) These facilities are fairly evenly distributed among the western, central and eastern coastal regions, with a noticeable lack in the Connecticut River Estuary area. Transmission lines transporting electricity facilitated the location of consumers along the coast and inland. (See "Energy Facilities," Part X.) Throughout the centuries, the economic growth spurred by commercial and industrial development was accompanied by increasing residential use of the shorefront and inland areas. Residential use accounts for 25% of shorefront use. Rising land values and a lack of undeveloped shorefront land have stimu- lated more recent residential growth away from the immediate waterfront. Within the thirty six coastal municipalities, residential land acreage in the five years between 1970 and 1975 accounted for nearly one-half of the total newly developed land acreage. While recreational and institutional uses have always occurred along the shorefront, they too have changed in character. Boating facilities are prominent along the coast. In addition to the 164 commercial marinas pre- viously cited, there are 63 private yacht clubs and 8 public marinas together4 supplying over 25,000 berths and slips, and 23 state boat ramps to accommodate the more than 100,000 boaters in coastal Connecticut. The state does not have extensive beach resources. However, the 78.6 miles of sandy beach areI intensively utilized. Public ownership accounts for 30.2 miles of sandy beach; 32.1 miles are privately owned and 16.3 miles are owned by associations. Of the 30.2 miles of beach in public ownership, 7.52 miles are state owned and 22.65 miles are municipally owned. Furthermore, there are 5,599 acres of public campgrounds affording 1,332 sites within the 4 coastal counties. Within one mile of the shore there are over 8,400 acres of recreation lands inclu- ding some acreage attributable to small municipal parks and playgrounds. The range of recreational activities accommodated both along the coast and within the coastal municipalities encompasses both active and passive re-. creational uses. (See Planning Report No. 25, and "Shorefront Access and Pro- tection Planning," Part X.) 11-18 Water dependent institutions along the coast include military fac- ilities and marine research facilities (e.g., Naval Submarine Base, Navy Underwater Systems Lab, Coast Guard Academy, University of Connecticut's Marine Science Institute). Other specialized services and cultural fac- ilities such as public buildings, landfills, museums, prisons and schools are also coastal occupants (e.g., Seaside Regional Center in Waterford; Niantic Prison Farm; and Camp Grasso, the Connecticut National Guard train- ing center). Land Use Patterns Connecticut's coast is part of an urbanized area that stretches along the eastern seaboard from Portland, Maine to Norfolk, Virginia. Figure I (p. 11-4) depicts Connecticut and its coast as the intrinsic link between Boston and New York. The state's size and location left it subject to inter-state as well as intra-state development pressures. An urban "corridor" extends along the southwestern coast to New Haven where it curves north-ward following major transportation links toward Hartford. This creates a primary division of the coast-the urbanized densely populated areas west of New Haven and the less intensively developed areas east of New Haven. Further regional subdivisions, often used for statistical purposes, identify the dominant characteristics of the given areas. Southeastern Connecticut. The. coexistance of heavy industry and rural, historic districts in this region epitomizes the diversity of the coast. New London, one of Connecticut's oldest cities, and Groton form the major industrial center east of New Haven. New London Harbor, bordering the Thames River, spurred the growth of New London;an old manufacturing city. The harbor is bounded on the east by Groton, the home of Electric Boat Division of General Dynamics Corporation, the Pfizer Chemical Company and the U.S. Naval Sub- marine Base. These towns are flanked on either side by Stonington and Waterford which are mainly suburban to rural, residential in character. Water- ford is the location of the Millstone Point nuclear power plants (two are operational and a third is under construction). Stonington is sparsely populated, suburban-rural in character and is the location of an eighteenth century village (Stoning~ton Borough), historic Mystic Seaport and Connecticut's last remaining commercial fishing fleet. Employment opportunities and an increasing economic base have caused a rate of growth in this region almost twice that of the nation over the past decade. The Connecticut River Estuary Region originally developed as a center for boat building and shad and salmon fishing. It went through a period of economic decline brought on by competition from the railroad and commercial deepwater vessels. With the completion of 1-95 in 1958 and Route 9 in 1968 the area opened up gaining an economic base from the large pleasure boating population to which it became accessible. Today the Connecticut River has the distinction of being one of the largest rivers in the United States without a major city at its mouth. The region, extending from Clinton to East Lyme and up the Connecticut River, is largely rural in character. Much of the shoreline is devoted to seasonal homes. Old Saybrook and Westbrook exper- ienced the fastest increase in population in the state between 1960 and 1970. This increase was largely attributable to the conversion of seasonal housing units to year-round homes, and highway development (Route 9 and 1-95). 11-19 (This region also has the highest median age group, which, when viewed in conjunction with the conversion of seasonal homes, implies its attractiveness for retirement.) The towns in this region are experiencing the development pressures of suburbanization. Southcentral Connecticut. This reaion is dominated by urban New Haven and the industrial development along New Haven Harbor, the Mill River, the Quinnipiac River and the West River. Sixty-three percent of New Haven's shoreline is zoned for industry. With the exceptions of East Haven which is highly urbanized and Branford which is experiencing residential and industrial relocation, towns to the east of New Haven (Guilford and Madison) are suburban/rural in character. They have long acconfoodated seasonal.homes and summer vacationers' activities (e.g., recreational boating). In the past, towns north and west of New Haven (i.e., Hamden and West Haven) absorbed the large suburban population increases. The trend now appears to be moving eastward. The Greater Bridgeport Area. This region is mostly urban with Bridge- port Harbor dominating the area. Bridgeport has the largest population of all the urban areas in Connecticut. The shoreline houses a number of in- dustrial uses, a landfill operation, the University of Bridgeport, and municipal recreational facilities. Residential use is intensive throughout this region with strips of commercial use. Stratford and Fairfield also have large expanses of open space and wetlands which are threatened by development pressures. Most developnient pressures, however, have shifted to the suburban areas. Shelton, for example, experienced the greatest residential growth in the area since 1960. Southwest ern Connecticut. This is the most densely populated region within the coastal area. From World War 1I through the 1960's the region grew rapidly, serving as a "bedroom community" for the New York City job market. The highest priced waterfront is along the so-called Gold Coast- Greenwich, Darien, Westport and the portion of Fairfield known as Southport. The New York Times recently reported waterfront property values range from about $500,000 an acre in Greenwich to $200,000 for a "few remaining" lots in Westport. Because of the high land values, low density zoning and existing high population densities in addition to general trends of decreasing birth rates and net in-miqration, growth in this area has slowed since 1960 and will continue to do so, according to projections. Recently however, sub- urban relocation of corporations has been substantial. For example, the international headquarters of Continental Group, Inc. and Kennecott Copper Corporation are relocating in Stamford. Norwalk Harbor and Stamford Harbor stimulated commercial and light industrial use in the region and Norwalk Harbor houses one of the last oyster companies operating in the state. Population and Demographics In 1975 an estimated 1.25 million persons lived in the thirty-six coastal municipalities. Over 80% of the total coastal population reside in the three regional areas west of Clinton (i.e., Southwestern, Greater Bridgeport and Southcentral regions). Since 1970 net in-migration and births in the coastal area have decreased. Population projections for the 11-20 next twenty years show a continued decelerating growth rate. Major reasons include the continuation of lower birth rates and smaller net in-migration. These trends are accompanied by a continually decreasing mortality rate and the assumption that the economy will undergo a slow, steady recovery from the mid-1970's recession. The following table depicts annual growth rates for the. past and as projected for the future for the, total coastal area. % Annual Growth Total Coastal Area 1950-1960 1960-1970 1970-1980 1980-1990 1990-2000 2.5% 1.5% .6% .5% .4% While the growth rate will generally decelerate along the coast, rates of growth will vary among towns and regions from east to west. For example, the following chart depicts annual percent growth rates for the western and eastern regions. % Annual Growth Western Eastern 1970980*(Greenwich-Madison) (Clinton-Stonington) 1970-1980.42% 1.51% 1980-1990 .39 .99 1990-2000 .32 .82 Generally, decreasing rates of growth are evident in major urban areas (e.g. New Haven, Bridgeport, New London) with projected increases for the suburban and rural areas. In 1975 population densities ranged from a low of 48.5 persons per square mile in Lyme to a high of 8708.6 persons per square mile in Bridgeport. The median age in the coastal area was 29.2 years in 1970. The highest median age was in the Connecticut River Estuary region. The lowest median age, largely attributed to the presence of military establishments, was in Southeastern Connecticut. The five to twenty-four (5 to 24) year old age group showed the largest increase between 1960 and 1970 and has a major fiscal impact on municipalities in terms of educational and associated fac- ilities. The next most significant increase was in the twenty-five to forty- four year age group. This age group is associated with young and growing families and thus has a major impact on housing and related services. Median family incomes in 1970 ranged from a low of $9,031, in New Haven to a high of $22,172 in Darien. The median income for families in the coastal area as a whole was $11,991. In general, the lowest median incomes were found in major urban areas (e.g., Bridgeport, New London, Groton). The highest median incomes were found in the suburban communities of the South- western region (e.g., Westport, Greenwich). *Projected populations and growth rates are based upon a "modified-trend"' approach developed by the Office of Policy and Management in conjunction with the regional planning agencies for CAM. 11-21 Air Quality While significant progress has been made in improving Con- necticut's air quality, violations of the National Ambient Air Qual- ity Standards continue to occur. The state has met the national standards for sulfur dioxide and nitrogen dioxide, but a determin- ation of non-attainment has been made for total suspended partic- ulates (TSP) and photochemical oxidants. Current ambient pollution levels are the result of three general categories of source emis- sions: 1) natural sources, 2) out-of-state sources, and 3) in- state sources. Natural sources are essentially uncontrollable and their impact considered minor. Out-of-state sources consist of an air mass portion and an urban plume portion. The general air flow from west to east brings pollutants from across the country to Con- necticut. Located just a few miles to the southwest of Connecticut, the New York City/New Jersey Urban Complex is one of the state's largest emissions sources. In fact, DEP studies show that on cer- tain southwest wind days up to two-thirds (2/3) of elevated photo- chemical oxidant (ozone) levels are assignable to this complex. At other times, however, levels of both photo-chemical oxidants and total suspended particulates are attributable to instate sources and intrastate air pollutant transport. The major instate emission source is the automobile and associated traffic congestion. The coastal area lies within three of the four Air Quality Control Regions (AQCR) established for the state, For the most part, ambient air pollutants can more readily be attributed to a generic source than a specific source. However, several points directly associated with the coastal area can be noted. Non-attainment of the primary standard for total suspended particulates (TSP) in AQCR 43 has been related to the coal fired Cos Cob Power Plant in Greenwich. The violation was caused by re- duced stack height. The stack has been replaced and the station is converting to oil which should eliminate the violation. AQCR's 42 and 43 have been determined non-attainment for the 8 hour car- bon monoxide (CO) standard. The primary cause here is traffic con- gestion in urban areas. The coastal area not only houses many of Connecticut's urban areas but several major traffic routes including Interstate 95 which runs along the length of Connecticut's coast- line. The coastal area contributes to intrastate air pollutant trans- port through both mobile and stationary sources. In a sense, the coastal location contributes to the transport of out-of-state sources of air pollutants. Winds are a dominant factor in TSP trans- port. The land-sea breeze affects the direction of prevailing winds. The frequent occurrence of land and sea breezes alono coastal Con- necticut, especially in spring and summer, accounts for the transport of out-of-state and in-state emissions beyond Sh coastal area to inland areas. 11-22 The Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection prepared its first State Implementation Plan (SIP) for air quality in late 1971 and received EPA approval in May 1972. Under existing state regulations new or modified stationary sources must obtain permits from DEP for the construction and operation of a facility. A Transportation Control Plan was submitted to EPA in 1976 as a revision to the orginal SIP which did not meet standards for auto-related pollutants. This plan has not yet received approval from EPA. The DEP is in the process of formal revision to the State Imple- mentation Plan for Air Quality. The strategies proposed in this plan are oriented toward achieving federal emissions goals and stand- ards. DEP projections show probable attainment of emissions standards by 1987 since the federal government revised the .08 ppm oxidant standard to a .12 ppm oxidant standard. Six of the fifteen proposed strategies deal with mobile sources wthich mostly affect hydrocarbon and carbon monoxide levels. The nine remaining strategies deal with stationary sources to reduce volatile organic compound emissions (non-methane hydrocarbons). It is important to note that if the State Implementation Plan is not approved the Environmental Protection Agency may impose sanctions. Were these sanctions to take the form of the state's loss of sewer construction grants, serious set backs to the im- provement of water quality in Long Island Sound would result. The Department of Environmental Protection is responsible for both Air Quality and Coastal Management. This has facilitated con- sultation and coordination between the two programs and helps ensure the continuation of similar efforts. Coordination during both coastal management program development and SIP revision has occurred (see Part VII,Plan Coordination) and resulted in compatible programing. The Connecticut Coastal Management Act incorporates by reference all state and federal requirements established in accordance with the 1977 Clear Air Act Amendments. Specific coastal policies, use guide- lines and implementation strategies addressing air quality are discus- sed in "Air Resources and Air Quality," Part IV. 11-23 Water Quality Connecticut has long been in the forefront of water quality control. Significant progress has been and continues to be made toward the Federal goal of fishable-swimmable waters by 1933. The offshore waters of Long Island Sound are suitable for all sea- water uses (class SA). The harbors and nearshore waters of the State have, for the most part, been upgraded in quality since the incep7 tion of the state-'s.water pollution control oroqrams. However,'the dynamics of "water" preclude quality control as a purely coastal matter. It is an interstate, as well as intrastate, concern. Historically, heavily settled areas coincide with river basins and thus, the location of most of the existing sources of water contamination. The Sound is the recipient of waters from eleven river basins. Three of these (the Housatonic River Basin, the Connecticut River Basin, and the Thames River Basin) drain areas which extend beyond Connecticut's political boundaries and empty directly into the Sound. Waters of degraded quality enter the state from drainage areas which include Canada, New Hampshire, Vermont, New York, Massachusetts and Rhode Island. For example, the major source of high PCB levels in the Housatonic is located in Mas- sachusetts. Typical problems in all three basins have been low dissolved oxygen concentrations and high levels of coliforms, solids, nitrogen and total phosphorus. Over 50% of the state's river miles do, however, meet state water quality standards and 86% are expected to be Class B-fishable/swimmable or better by 1933. The major in-state impediments to water quality control are combined sewers, municipal and residential discharges, and non- point sources. Combined sanitary and storm sewer systems overload treat- ment facilities during heavy rains. This overflow of untreated waste water causes periodic pollution problems in the Thames River downstream of Norwich, and in coastal waters of New Haven and Bridgeport. According to DEP statistics, municipal sewage effluent is 80% of thie problem of water quality. The sewage collectors and treat- ment facilities in Connecticut discharge approximately 200 million gallons per day of secondarily treated effluent. Significant reduction in this source of pollution is expected through expenditure of funds now available for facilities. Municipal wastewater also enters the Sound from the Upper East River in New York. Non-point source pollution is also of concern. Pollutants enter coastal waters from various non-specific sources. These general sources include: stormwater runoff, rainfall and wind- borne contaminants, resuspension of previously deposited pol- lutants, seepage from contaminated ground water and leaching from dumps and landfills. Erosion, sedimentation and flooding carry and deposit pollutants from unknown sources. Control of these non- point sources is often. problematic. 11-24 Oil as a water pollutant results from accidental spills, discharge of oily bilge water, inadequately treated municipal and industrial wastewater, overflow of combined sewers, and runoff from land. Though the coastal area contains no refineries, it is a major transportation route for small tankers and oil barges. Oil unloading and storage facilities are major coastal activities with over 50 associated hazardous material storage areas. Oil spills occur most commonly during the unloading process. Recreational and commercial vessels contribute untreated or inadequately treated wastes to Long Island Sound. The mobility of these sources is an additional detriment, as the discharge is not limited to specific areas. The U.S. Coast Guard presently controls vessel discharges via sanitary device requirements and over-side discharges. (The DEP is drafting regulations for state control of vessel discharges, including the establishment of "no discharge zones", for inclusion in the 1930 update of State Water Quality Standards.) The Department of Environmental Protection administers all state water pollution control programs which is widely considered one of the best programs in the United States. Its success is evidenced by the significant'improvement made in water quality statewide, since its inception in the mid-1960's. In fulfilling the Federal Clean I-ater Act requirement (303)(e), Connecticut has developed a "Continuinq Planning Process" for water pollution control. This includes the preparation of Water Quality Management Plans, Water Quality Standards, a Water Quality Strategy and an annual Water Quality Inventory Report. State Water Quality Management Plans coordinate and direct water quality decisions on a river basin scale by identifying water quality problems and proposing measures (including efflu- ent limitations and revision of water quality standards) to cor- rect those problems. Phase I of these plans focused primar- ily on point source pollution. Phase II will deal further with point sources and also develop non-point source pollution control strategies. State Water Quality Standards were approved most recently by the EPA in November 1977. The overall goal is for "fishable/ swimmable" (classes B,SB or better) waters and includes a non- degradation policy for waters with existing quality better than established standards. An update of standards is due in Novem- ber 1980. Using the EPA-delegated National Pollutant Discharge Elim- ination System (NPDES) program supported by state statutes, the state is controlling point source discharges. Most industrial permits issued in 1974 were reissued in 1978, some with modifica- tion. Since most municipal discharges met secondary treatment requirements, or were subject to state modification orders, no II-25 municipal sewage treatment permits required reissue in 1978. New permits continue to be issued for acceptable new discharges. Monitoring and enforcement of NPDES compliance have been stressed. DEP also administers "401" certification requirements for act- ivities such as dredging, which may result in discharge into nav- igable waters. Connecticut's "208" program began, in June 1976, as a plan- ning process to assess non-point sources' contribution to the state's waters and to develop a program to control non-point sources. The culmination of the 208 program is the implementation of a management system to control non-point sources of pollution to the degree necessary to achieve swimmable/fishable waters. An inventory of existing regulations and controls at the local, regional, state, and federal levels, has been conducted by the regional planning agencies. Management strategy recommendations have been made based on studies of specific problem areas. Detailed studies of groundwater, industrial sites and sludge disposal sites, erosion and sedimentation, and urban and agricultural runoff reached completion by the end of 1979. These studies were carried out by the state's regional planning agencies, the U.S. Geological Survey and U.S. Soil Conservation Service. Recommended water quality controls include amendments to existing DEP regulations, zoning changes and adoption of municipal ordinances, and, to some degree, newly drafted DEP regulations. Work efforts of Phase 1I of the aforementioned State Water Quality Management Plan have been coordinated with 208 studies. The 208 program is also coordinating with the Municipal Sewer Avoidance Program. The voluntary sewer avoidance program has been established as a compliment to state water pollution control efforts by State statute (CGS Sec. 7-245 to 7-273). Through this program (and existing state and federal funding) municipalities are encouraged to find alternatives to sewers and incorporate community growth plans with plans for sewered and non- sewered areas. A requirement of this program is development of a plan which would include information which already has been compiled and mapped by the RPA's under the 208 program. This information includes: water quality data, zoning, population density projections, soils, wetlands, and other natural resource data. (Note: DEP's Deputy Commissioner of Environmental Quality is the Chairman of the 208 Board and a principal coordinator of DEP's water quality management planning and areawide 208 planning.) The DEP also licenses the design, construction and operation of oil and chemical terminal facilities, collection and disposal of oil or chemicals. Through this Oil and Chemical Handling Facility Licens- ing Program, DEP is authorized to set bond for potential clean-up costs of oil and chemical carriers, and to supervise and coordinate containment and clean-up of oil and chemical discharges. 11-26 Connecticutis Water Pollution Control Program and Coastal Area Management Program are both housed within the Department of Environ- mental Protection. Consultation and coordination between the two programs have occurred during program development and are an ongoing process (see PartVII,Plan Coordination.) The Connecticut Coastal Management Act incorporates by reference all state and federal re- quirements established in accordance with the Federal Clean Water Act. Specific coastal. pol1fcies, use guicfelines and implementation strategies addressing water quality are discussed in "Coastal Waters and Estuarine Embayments", Part IV. Furthermore, coastal uses with the potential to pollute the waters of the state are subject to coastal site plan review and the assessment of adverse impacts as required by the Connecticut Coastal Management Act. 11-27 PART 11. BOUNDARY Inland and Seaward Boundaries The Connecticut Coastal Management Act (Appendix B) establishes a two- tiered management boundary for Connecticut. As defined in the Act (C.G.S. Sec. 22a-94 as amended by P.A. 79-535), the nearshore tier is bounded on the seaward side by the limit of the state's jurisdiction in Long Island Sound. On the landward side, this tier is bounded by a continuous line delineated by a one-thousand foot linear setback measured from the mean high water mark in coastal waters, or a one-thousand foot linear setback measured from the inland boundary of state regulated tidal wetlands, or the continuous interior contour elevation of the one hundred year frequency coastal flood zone, which- ever is farthest inland. This line is referred to in the CCMA as the "coastal boundary." Within this first tier, all major uses, activities and resources could have a direct and significant impact on coastal waters and thus will be managed by the Connecticut program using a combination of local and state authorities (see Part V, "Legal Authorities"). The primary focus of the Connecticut coastal program is on this nearshore boundary since it encompasses all coastal resources, the coastal flood hazard zone, and uses and activities with direct and significant impact on coastal waters. This first tier includes all of the following areas that are speci- fically required to be included in a state's coastal management program pursuant to federal regulations (15CFR Sec. 923.31): (1) Those areas the management of which is necessary to control uses which have a direct and significant impact on coastal waters, (2) areas of particular concern, (3) waters containing a significant quantity of seawater, (4) salt marshes and wetlands, (5) beaches, (6) intertidal areas, areas subject to coastal storm surge, and areas containing vegetation that is salt tolerant and survives because of conditions associated with proximity to coastal waters, and (7) islands. The secondary, inland tier, includes the area that is landward of the nearshore or coastal boundary and that is bounded by the inland boundary of the following thirty-six coastal municipalities: Greenwich, Stamford, Darien, Norwalk, Westport, Fairfield, Bridgeport, Stratford, Shelton, Milford, Orange, West Haven, New Haven, Hamden, North Haven, East Haven, Branford, Guilford, Madison, Clinton, Westbrook, Deep River, Chester, Essex, Old Saybrook Lyme, Old Lyme, East Lyme, Waterford, New London, Montville, Norwich, Preston, Ledyard, Groton and Stonington. Within this second tier, only certain major uses or activities have a "potential" to impact coastal waters. These major uses and activities will be managed by the state and federal governments under existing authorities (see Part V , "Leqal Authorities"). Together, the two management tiers make up what is referred to in the CCMA as the total "coastal area" of Connecticut. A map of Connecticut's two-tiered coastal boundary is presented in the back cover of this document. Connecticut's coastal boundary was selected from a number of boundary options that were considered during the development of the coastal management program. Planning Report No. 20, published in May, 1977 outlined these boundary II-28 / options and assessed the relative advantages and disadvantages of each major option. The inland boundary options considered were classified as one or a combination of the following basic approaches: 1) Fixed Linear Distance Boundaries 2) Political Boundaries 3) Natural Features Boundaries 4) Transportation Corridor Boundaries 5) Aesthetic Distance Boundaries 6) Long Island Sound Study Recommended Boundary 7) Multiple Zone Boundaries The chosen option combines el ements of a natural features boundary (based on the 100 year frequency flood elevation), fixed linear distance boundary (based on a 1,000 foot linear setback), and a political boundary (based on the jurisdiction of the thirty-six coastal towns). In addition it is a close var- iation of the boundary recommended by the Long Island S6und Study.* As defined, the selected two-tiered management boundary is reasonable for Connecticut's shared state-local program. It includes a sufficiently broad area to provide for effective management of all significant coastal resources and all uses subject to management, yet it is not too large for efficient pro- gram administration by either level of government. The area within the coastal boundary includes all coastal resources, coastal hazard areas, and uses which have a direct and significant impact on coastal waters. In addition, the coastal boundary reasonably incorporates all shorelands strongly affected by or affect- ing coastal waters based on scientific criteria such as the geographic extent of flood and erosion hazard areas, proximity of the land to coastal waters, and bio-physical factors such as microclimatic variation and salt-spray influence. Excluded Lands In accordance with the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, Connecticut has excluded from its coastal boundary all land the use of which is by law subject solely to the discretion of or which is held in trust by the federal government, its officers or agents. A list of the major such excluded federal land is contained in Table A-i of Appendix A. This list was compiled from information provided by federal agencies in response to an extensive CAM survey. Interstate Boundaries Connecticut has consulted with and coordinated the development of its coastal management program with the adjoining states of Rhode Island and New York. This Consultation and coordination has occurred through direct program contact with the adjoining states as appropriate, and through the regular forum provided by the New England River Basins Commission's New York- New England Coastal Zone Task Force. While Connecticut's coastal boundary is not precisely coterminous with either Rhode Island's adopted boundary or *The Long Island Sound Study, completed in 1975, was a federal level B water resources planning study prepared by the New England River Basins Commission. Among numerous other recommendations, it called for Connecticut to establish a coastal management program with a management boundary which would be defined as the area from the state's territorial limits in Long Island Sound to 500 feet inland of mean high water or to the ten foot elevation whichever was larger. 11-29 New York's proposed boundary, the boundaries are reasonably close and should not present any particular manager1ent difficulties or incompatibilities that cannot be handled through the existing interstate and regional coordinating mechanisms. Note: See Figure I on page 11-4 for a locational map of Connecticut's coastal area. A ma p delineating the coastal boundary is included in the back cover of this document. 11-30 PART III: MANNAEMENT ISSUES AND PROBLEMS A. INTRODUCTION Under the existing land use and resource manageinent system, many agencies at all levels of government, local, state and federal, influence the conservation and development of the Connecticut coastal area through a variety of planning, regulatory, funding, construction, acquisition, and other management authorities (see Section II, Part V, Authori~ties)'. Counting relevant aciencies at the state and federal level, and relevant commissions and their counterparts in each of Connecticut's thirty-six coastal municipali- ties, literally hundreds of agencies are involved in the management of the Connecticut coast, often with conflicting responsibilities or overlapping jurisdiction. Historically, these numerous authorities and agencies were established to solve or address various public problems and issues that arose or were anticipated as the state and the coastal areas grew, develop- ed, and became more urbanized. For example, the state level regulatory authority over coastal structures was established almost forty years ago in response to severe devastation and destruction of the Connecticut coast caused by the hurricane of 1938. More recently, the state regulatory authority over tidal wetlands was established in 1969 as an increasing number of wetlands were being destroyed by the continuing urbanization of the coast and as the general public became more aware of the value of tidal wetlands and the important role that tidal wetlands play in the functioning of the coastal environment, Given the existence in Connecticut of these individual authorities that address many specific problems and issues of the coast, the Connecti- cut Coastal Management Program has been designed to correct two fundamental shortcomings of the present management system. These shortcomings are 1) lack of overall coordination and guidance of the regulatory authorities that are already in existence, and 2) inadequate consideration of coastal resources in the coastal decision-making process. Correction of these basic management deficiencies should, in turn, greatly facilitate the solution of many specific problems and issues which are either perpetuated or caused by these major management problems. In response to these two fundamental problems, the Connecticut General Assembly passed the Connecticut Coastal Management Act during the 1.978 and 1979 sessions (P.A. 78-152 and P.A. 79-535). Codified as Cnapter 444 of the Connecticut General Statutes, the Act establishes a "resource zoning" approach to coastal management to be implemented jointly by the state and coastal municipalities. The Act relies substantially on existing state and municipal regulatory programs and their existing jurisdictions, refocusing them through the imposition of over fifty specific, statewide resource management, coastal use and government process policies. These statewide policies, together with specific definitions of coastal resources and adverse impacts, provide the standards and criteria for a new coastal development permit procedure, coastal site plan review, to be implemented by coastal municipalities through existing planning and zoning for all uses with direct and significant impact on coastal waters that are under exclusive municipal jurisdiction. 11-31 B. INADEQUATE COORDINATION As noted above, Connecticut's impressive array of existing manage- ment authorities has been instituted gradually over the years in response to specific needs and problems. However, under the current management structure, there is a notable lack of overall coordination, guidance, uni- formity or long range direction given to the application of these authori- ties. For example, neighboring municipalities which share common resources may use the same authorities to manage these common resources in greatly different and often contradictory ways. Overlapping or complimentary permit authorities at the state, local, and federal levels are largely uncoordinated, resulting in needless duplication of applications, hearings and other regulatory proceedings, unnecessary time delays and occasional conflicting decisions (see CAM Planning Report #21). Necessary commercial and industrial uses have been constructed in locations which are harmful to coastal resources such as tidal wetlands, intertidal flats and shell- fish beds, while suitable, vacant urban shorefront goes begging for develop- ment or redevelopment. Water dependent or water enhanced uses such as marinas and port and harbor facilities are being converted to non-water dependent or non-water enhanced commercial, industrial, and residential uses which do not require valuable shorefront sites. Power plants, federally maintained dredged channels, and state or federally owned marine related recreational facilities and other facilities and resources of regional and national importance are actively solicited by some towns and shunned by others. Compounding these coordination problems under the existing management structure is a critical absence of continuous oversight, monitoring and evaluation of the effectiveness of existing authorities. For example, CAM analysis of the state-administered coastal structures, dredging, and tidal wetlands regulatory programs has revealed high violation rates, both in terms of violation of permit conditions and activities conducted without valid permits for the period under study (see CAM Planning Report #21). These problems are just a few examples of the management difficulties that have resulted from lack of adequate coordination and monitoring of existing authori- ties. C. INADEQUATE CONSIDERATION OF COASTAL RESOURC-FS Historically in Connecticut, coastal resources and hazards have not been given adequate consideration in the coastal decision-making process. This situation has largely resulted from three interacting factors: 1) a historical lack of public awareness regarding the importance of coastal resource and hazard considerations in determining land and water use patterns (see Planning Reports #13 and 17), 2) inexplicit and unclear legal authority at the state and local level to consider coastal resources and hazards in making public decisions (see Planning Reports #11, 14 and 18), and 3) a lack of available technical assistance and expertise in the area of coastal resource management to make effective resource based decisions (see Planning Report #13). 11-32 Many specific problems and issues have resulted from this management deficiency. For example, over half of Connecticut's original tidal wet- lands have been destroyed by encroaching development. Highly productive shellfish beds have been closed to harvesting and a number of recreational beaches have been closed to swimming as a result of degraded water quality due in large part to inadequately treated domestic and industrial effluent and other non-point water pollution sources. Houses and other vulnerable buildings have been constructed in hazardous coastal flood and erosion prone areas and could be subject to considerable damage or destruction in the Ilikely event that another storm as severe as, or more severe than, the 1938 hurricane should occur. Public access to the Connecticut shorefront has been influenced by a pattern of dense shorefront land use which to- gether with the lack of large contiguous stretches of sandy beach make it physically difficult to get to the water in many places and, because of the pattern of small, highly valued land parcels, and small, narrow "pocket" beaches, difficult to manage or develop the shorefront for public recreation- al use. Valuable plants and wildlife species have disappeared or all but disappeared from the Connecticut coast largely as a result of natural habitat destruction. Shorefront erosion has, in many cases, been accelerated or ag- gravated by the construction of shoreline stabilization structures. These are just a few of many examples of specific problems and issues that have resulted from inadequate consideration of coastal resource capacities a-nd limitations by decision-makers at all levels of government: federal, state and local. D. RESOLUTION OF MANAGEMENT ISSUES AND PROBLEMS Connecticut's shared state-local coastal management program has been specifically designed to address and resolve the two fundamental management problems and issues discussed above. To resolve the problem of inadequate coordination, Connecticut has pursued an approach to coastal management which creates an active partnership between all levels of government: local, state and federal (see Section 11, Parts V, VI). A set of uniform, consistent, and comprehensive coastal policies have been developed to guide and coordinate decision-making at all levels of government (see Part IV). The responsibility for overall coordination of Connecticut's management program is assigned to the State Department of Environmental Protection within which a permanent coastal management unit has been established in the Office of the Commissioner. Specific provisions have been. included in the Connecticut Coastal Management Act which require the DEP to coordinate all of its planning and regulatory programs for the coastal area based on the standards set by the specific statewide policies in the Act. in addition, the Coastal Management Act gives DEP the authority and responsibility to coordinate its coa~stal regulatory programs with those of the federal Army Corps of Engineers, Coast Guard, and-other applicable federal agencies specifically to eliminate duplication and simplify the permit process. In addition, the CAM Act requires other state agencies to coordinate, and if necessary, revie theirplarmnstnpo grams to be consistent with theAct's coastal policies. TeDprmn of Environmental Protection is also required to continuously monitor the effectiveness of the coastal management proaram and annually to propose II -33 necessary revisions to the program to ensure that the authorities are coordinated and that the program operates effectively to solve specific coastal problems and issues and~manage coastal resources. At the local level, coastal municipalities are given the authority in the CAM Act to revise their municipal plans and ordinances consistent with the Act's goals and policies. In addition, they are required to review coastal site plans and to make all regulatory decisions for uses having a direct and significant impact on coastal waters consistent with the Act's policies and standards. Such decisions pertain to construction (building) permits, municipal funding and acquisition projects and munici- pal construction projects (see Section II.. Part'V). Under the management program, the Department of Environmental Protection's Coastal Management Unit, in its capacity as a central coordinating body for the coastal management program, will also function as 1) a central source of information, expertise and technical assistance on coastal resources, issues, problems and needs, 2) a planning body to conduct long-range plan- ning and research into the future needs of the coastal area, including major long-range planning needs in such areas as shorefront access and protection, shorefront erosion, coastal energy-related facilities, tidal wetlands, shellfish areas, and dredging and dredge spoil disposal, 3) an advocacy voice in state government for the coastal area, responsible for oversight of state, municipal and federal activities under the coastal management program, and 4) a body to coordinate public participation in the coastal decision-making process. To resolve the problem of inadequate consideration of coastal resources in coastal land use decision-making processes, the Connecticut Coastal Manage- ment Act refines and clarifies existing statutory authorities to both allow and require that coastal resources and hazards be considered in decision- making processes at the state and local level. Coastal municipalities are explicitly given the authority to prepare municipal coastal programs through which municipal plans and ordinances would be revised to reflect coastal resource capabilities and limitations. In addition, coastal municipalities are required to review coastal site plans, and to base their regulatory decisions in part on an assessment of the impact of the activity on coastal resources and hazards and to assure consistency of their decisions with the Act's statewide coastal policies. Under these refined, coordinated and focused authorities, relevant municipal agencies and state agencies will explicitly have the authority to address and correct specific management problems and issues related to environmental degradation and resource management. For example, Muni- cipalities will be able to make planning and regulatory decisions based on considerations such as the impact of the proposed plan or activity on tidal wetlands, beaches and dunes, water quality, shellfish productivity, or flood- ing and erosion. To support and guide such decisions, resource factor maps depicting coastal resources as defined by the Connecticut Coastal Management Act are available from the state CAM Program and from the municipalities (see Section 1I, Appendix D Of Draft EIS). In addition, adverse impacts have been specifically defined by the Act and Use Guidelines have been prepared for the specific resource policies in the Act (see Section II, Part IV). 11-34 While, as noted, there are many specific problems and issues to be managed by Connecticut's coastal management program, generally these problems and issues represent a specific component of the two basic manage- ment needs identified above. One specific issue and problem common to many other coastal states is notable by its absence from the preceding discussion. While the impact related to the Outer Continental Shelf oil and gas exploration and development is an important issue in many coastal states, it is not expected to be a major issue in Connecticut largely because of major transshipment problems in the shallow Long Island Sound basin, the lack of large vacant parcels of shorefront property for OCS-related develop- ment, the distance to lease areas of high interest, and on-shore air pol- lution problems (see Section II, Part I, Air Quality and Part X, Energy Facilities) which could preclude the construction of any major oil or gas processing facilities or major support bases. 11-35 PART IV: COASTAL POLICIES ANlD USE GUIDELINES A. INTRODUCTION This rnart of the management Plan Presents connecticut's coastal policies and use guidelines. Taken from the Connecticut Coastal Management Act and relevant sections of the existing statutes, the coastal policies provide the foundation for the management program. Their purpose is to guide all federal and state planning, development, acquisition and regula- tory activities that are subject to the management program within the coastal area. Further, they are to guide all municipal planning, develop- ment, acquisition and regulatory activities that are subject to the manage- ment program within the coastal boundary. In short, the coastal policies provide uniform standards and criteria for all public agencies that conduct or regulate activities subject to the management program. The policies contained in the Connecticut Coastal Management Act have been developed specifically for the purpose of coastal management. They are based on draft policies originally published in CAM Planning Report No. 26 (August, 1978) and commentary received during a six month public review period. Together with policies from existing statutes for coastal planning and regulatory programs which are incorporated in the Act by re- ference, the coastal policies refocus existing state and municipal planning and regulatory programs to adequately address the two fundamental management issues identified in Part III - lack of coordination and inadequate con- sideration of coastal resources. The policies have been adopted as an integral part of the Act and are directly enforceable through implementation of the management program. Connecticut's coastal management program incorporates a resource manage- ment/impact zoning concept to be used by both state and municipal agencies. Uses and activities subject to the management program are evaluated, through all applicable state and municipal permit programs, for their consistency with the coastal policies and for their adverse impacts on coastal resources. To provide the necessary guidance to implement this resource-based approach to coastal management, the policies are divided into three broad categories- coastal land and water resource policies, coastal use policies, and govern- mental process policies. The Connecticut Coastal Management Act specifically defines all coastal resources within the land and water areas of the coastal boundary. Such resource definitions range from natural resources (e.g. tidal wetlands, beaches and dunes) to man-made resources (e.g. developed shorefront). Each defined resource category has a set of specific statutory policies pertaining to it. The Act further requires that all defined coastal resources be mapped (resource factor maps - see Appendix D:- of Draft EIS) and that copies of such maps be available through the state CAM Program and each coastal munici- pality prior to its effective date. 11-36 To assist in the evaluation of the impacts on coastal resources as- sociated with activities in the coastal area, the Act specifically defines * ~~the adverse impacts (see box on page 11-39) which must be considered in conjunction with all applicable coastal policies. Use guidelines have * ~~been provided for each defined resource category in order to provide further guidance in interpreting the technical aspects of the coastal land and water resource policies and in evaluating adverse impacts on coastal resources. The purpose of the use guidelines is two-fold. First, they provide specific technical detail to be used in both the state and municipal regulatory programs as uses or activities are evaluated in light of the coastal policies in the Act and the statutorily defined adverse impacts. Second, they will be used by the state as guidance in determining whether individual regulatory decisions are consistent with the relevant statutory policies, as required by the Connecticut Coastal Management Act. In addition to the coastal land and water resource policies which apply to all uses occurring in or affecting any defined resource category, the Act also contains specific "1coastal use" policies for major uses and activities subject, to the management program. These policies pertain to certain major uses and activities independent of their location within the coastal area. They must be considered in addition to and in conjunction with all applicable coastal land and water resource policies and potential adverse impacts. The third broad category of policies, "governmental pro- cess" policies, pertain to intergovernmental coordination, permit simpli- fication, planning programs, national interest and related topics. Their purpose is to provide direction and standards for program implementation, coordination and long-range planning. USING THE COASTAL POLICIES The most important function of the coastal policies, of course, is to guide program implementation through the state and municipal regulatory programs that issue permits for uses or activities subject to the manage- ment program. (For a full discussion of these regulatory programs and the interrelationships between them, see Part V, Legal Authorities, Part VI, Management of the Coastal Program.) The following is a brief discussion describing the use of the coastal policies through the regulatory programs, notably the state coastal permit programs and the coastal site plan review procedures established by the Connecticut Coastal Management Act for municipal zoning programs. At the outset it should be noted that the Act establis4hes the burden of demonstrating consistency with the coastal policies and adverse impact standards on the applicant. (The level of detailed information that will be necessary directly correlates with the magnitude of the project and the fragility of the resources affected by it.) Agencies, in reviewing permit applications, may require modifications or establish conditions to assure consistency and must state their findings as to consistency in writing. Further, consistency with all applicable policies and standards in the Act must be certified before a valid permit may be issued. That is, a permit issued without such certification for a use or activity subject to the 11-37 management program does not constitute a legal permit. The initial step in assuring consistency with the coastal policies for any use or activity subject to the management program is to determine the coastal resources on or near the site that may be affected. To aid potential applicants (and decision-makers) in makinci this determination, coastal resources are defined in the Connecticut Coastal Management Act and mapped on resource factor maps available either through the state or each of the coastal municipalities. Determining the resources to be affected will indicate which of the coastal land and water resource policies are applicable to the project. The second step is to review the coastal use policies to determine if there are specific policies regarding the use or activity under considera- tion. The applicable coastal land and water resource policies together with any applicable coastal use policies will indicate the criteria and standards with which the proposed activity or use must be consistent. At this point, a review of the use guidelines for the applicable policies will provide specific technical guidance as to whether the proposed use or activity is consistent or may be altered or redesigned so as to be consistent with the coastal policies. Given the restrictive nature of the policies for sensitive resource areas together with the technical guidance pertaining to construction and design practices in the use guidelines, it is anticipated that the majority of uses and activities inconsistent with the coastal policies will be terminated at this stage. Review of applicable coastal policies constitutes the resource manage- ment component of the resource management/impact zoning system established by the Connecticut Coastal Management Act. Assuming consistency with all applicable coastal resource and use policies, the remaining step in the evaluation process is assess the adverse impacts on the affected coastal resources. The adverse impacts to be considered (see box, page 11-39) are defined by the Act. Obvious- ly, the magnitude of the impacts is dependent upon the nature of the project (e.g. its size, available infrastructure such as sewers, water service, method and time of construction) and the project's location (i.e. the fragility of the affected resources). While the coastal land and water re- sources and the coastal use policies are designed to provide specific locational and siting criteria for major uses or facilities, the adverse impacts are designed to prevent significant long-term degradation of the coastal resources. Once an applicant has determined consistency with applicable coastal policies and has evaluated the adverse impacts associated with the use or activity, he seeks the required permits through municipal zoning and state regulatory programs, The review. of the application by the permitting agency or agencies includes determination of consistency with the coastal policies and assessment of the adverse impacts, upon which permit certifi- cation is based. Further, any federal permits required must be issued consistent with the coastal policies under the federal consistency provisions of coastal management. 11-38 The goal of the resource management/impact zoning system established by the Connecticut Coastal Management Act is to incorporate coastal re- source management considerations into the decision-making process on development at all levels of government. The system has been designed with sufficient standards and criteria through the coastal policies and adverse impact definition to give landowners and developers guidance as to the approvability of a proposal through the evaluation process outlined above. In general, uses and activities subject to the management program are not prohibited outright. Rather, the system encourages developers to modify proposals to eliminate or minimize long-term adverse effects on coastal resources, assuring preservation of their natural form and function and to abandon proposals not meeting the standards of the Act. Because the coastal policies, use guidelines and adverse impacts are less stringent or easier to comply with i'n resource areas most suitable for development, development is encouraged in those areas and discouraged in sensitive re- source areas. By giving existing municipal and state regulatory programs the authority and responsibility to assure compliance with the standards contained in the Act, the potential of conflicting decisions is substantially reduced. That is, regardless of the nature of other criteria applicable to municipal zoning or state regulatory permits, certification of compliance with the standards contained in the coastal policies and adverse impacts definitions in the Connecticut Coastal Management Act is required prior to issuance of a valid permit for uses and activities subject to the management program with the evidential findings on consistency stated in writing. ADVERSE IMPACTS - Degrading water quality through the significant introduction into either coastal waters or groundwater supplies of suspended solids, nutrients, toxics, heavy metals or pathogens, or through the significant alteration of temperature, pH, dissolved oxygen or salinity. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 3(15)(A)) - *Degrading existing circulation patterns of coastal waters through the *significant patterns of tidal exchange or flushing rates, freshwater input, or existing basin characteristics and channel contours. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 3(15)(B)) - Degrading natural erosion patterns through the significant alteration of littoral transport of sediments in terms of deposition or source reduction. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 3(15)(C)) *Should read, "significant alteration of patterns of tidal exchange..." 11-39 - Degrading natural or existing drainage patterns through the significant alteration of groundwater flow and recharge and volume of runoff, (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 3(15)(D)) - Increasing the hazard of coastal flooding through significant alteration of shoreline configurations or bathymetry, particularly within high velocity flood zones. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 3(15)(E)) - Degrading visual quality through significant alteration of the natural features of vistas and view points. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 3(15)(F)) - Degrading or destroying essential wildlife, finfish or shellfish habitat through significant alteration of the composition, migration patterns, distribution, breeding or other population characteristics of the natural species or significant alterations of the natural components of the habitat. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 3(15)(G)) -Degrading tidal wetlands, beaches and dunes, rocky shorefronts, and4 bluffs and escarpments through significant alteration of their natural characteristics or function. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 3(15)(H)) The remainder of this part presents the Coastal policies, grouped in the three basic categories - coastal land and water resource policies, coastal use policies, and government process policies. Under each subcategory, rele- vant definitions, use guidelines, technical resources (e.g., maps) and brief descriptions of uses or activities subject to the policies and implementation authorities are included. Other statutory policies that are indirectly ap- plicable or applicable only under certain circumstances are cross-referenced. Relevant policies from the Conservation and Development Policies Plan (Plan of Conservation and Development) are identified but not reproduced in the text. Copies of the Plan are available from the state's Office of Policy and Manage- ment. For a more complete discussion of implementation authorities, see Part V, Legal Authorities. An index to the policies contained in this part is included below as a guide to the reader.4 11-40 B. INDEX TO POLICIES Page INTRODUCTION I. COASTAL LAND AND WATER RESOURCES A. General Resource ......................11-43 B. Bluffs and Escarpments ..... . ............. 11-46 C. Rocky Shorefronts. 11-52 D. Beaches and Dunes ..................... II-57 E. Intertidal Flats ....................... 11-64 F. Tidal Wetlands ....................... 11-70 G. Freshwater Wetlands and Watercourses ............11-79 H. Coastal Hazard Areas ................... 11-86 I. Developed Shorefront . . . .................11-97 J. Islands .......................... .11-104 K. Shorelands .........................11-110 L. Shellfish Concentration Areas ................ II-114 M. Coastal Waters and Estuarine Embayments .......... 11-121 N. Air Resources and Air Quality ............... 11-135 II. COASTAL USE POLICIES A. General Development .................... 11-138 B. Water Dependent Uses ....................II-141 C. Ports and Harbors .....................II-144 D. Coastal Structures and Filling ...............11-146 E. Dredging and Navigation .................. 11-149 F. Boating ..........................11-152 11-41 Page G. Fisheries ..........................11-156 H. Coastal Recreation and Access ............... 11-158 I. Sewer and Water Lines ................... 11-161 J. Energy Facilities ...................... 11-163 K. Fuel, Chemicals and Hazardous Materials .......... 11-166 L. Transportation ...................... 11-170 M. Solid Waste ........................11-173 N. Dams, Dikes and Reservoirs ................ 11-174 0. Cultural Resources .....................11-176 P. Open Space and Agricultural Lands ............. 11-176 III. GOVERNMENT PROCESS A. Intergovernmental Coordination of Planning and Regulatory Activities ..................11-182 B. Coordination and Consistency of State Programs, Projects, Expenditures and Acquisitions ........ 11-184 C. Flooding and Erosion Planning ...............11-188 D. Dredging and Dredged Material Disposal Planning ......II-190 E. Coastal Related Research .................. 11-191 F. National Interest Facilities and Resources .........11-192 II-42 I. C9ASTAL LAND AND WATER RESOURCES A. GENERAL RESOURCE DEFINITION - "Coastal Resources" means the coastal waters of the state, their natural resources, related marine and wildlife habitat and adjacent shorelands, both developed and undeveloped, that together form an integrated terrestrial and estuarine eco- system. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 3(7)) POLICIES POLICIES TO BE FOLLOWED BY MUNICIPAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES A. To preserve and enhance coastal resources in accordance with the policies established by chapters 439, 440, 447, 473, 474, 474a and 477. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(a)(2)) B. The general assembly hereby declares that the policy of the state of Connecticut is to conserve, improve and protect its natural resources and environment and to control air, land and water pollution in order to enhance the health, safety and welfare of the people of the state. (Source: C.G.S. sec. 22a-1 as referenced by P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(a)(2)) C. It is hereby found and declared that there is a public trust in the air, water and other natural resources of the state of Connecticut and that each person is entitled to the protection, preservation and enhancement of the same. (Source: C.G.S. sec. 22a-15 as referenced by P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(a)(2)) POLICIES FOR STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES ONLY D. The commissioner shall carry out the environmental policies of the state and shall have all powers necessary and convenient to faithfully discharge this duty. In addition to, and consistent with the environ- ment policy of the state, the commissioner shall (a) promote and coordinate management of water, land and air resources to assure their protection, enhancement and proper allocation and utilization; (b) pro- vide for the protection and management of plants, trees, fish, shellfish, wildlife and other animal life of all types, including the preservation of endangered species; (c) provide for the protection, enhancement and management of the public forests, parks, open spaces and natural area II-43 GENERAL RESOURCE POLICIES (CONT.) preserves; (d) provide for the protection, enhancement and management of inland, marine and coastal water resources, including, but not limited to, wetlands, rivers, estuaries and shorelines (e) provide for the prevention and abatement of all water, land and air pollution including, but not limited to, that related to particulates, gases, dust, vapors, noise, radiation, odors, nutrients and cooled or heated liquids, gases and solids; (f) provide for control of pests and regulate the use, storage and disposal of pesticides and other chemicals which may be harmful to man, sea life, animals, plant life or natural re- sources; (g) regulate the disposal of solid waste and liquid waste, including but not limited to, domestic and industrial refuse, junk motor vehicles, litter and debris, which methods shall be consistent with sound health, scenic environmental quality and land use practices; (h) regulate the storage, handling and transportation of solids, liquids and gases which may cause or contribute to pollution; and (i) pro- vide for minimum state-wide standards for the mining, extraction, ex- cavation or removal of earth materials of all types. (Source: C.G.S. sec. 22a-5, referenced by P.A. 79-535 sec. 2(a)(2)) SEE ALSO: - Coordination and Consistency of State Programs, Projects, Expenditures and Acquisitions Policy C (improving and coordinating state environ- mental plans, functions, programs, and resources). - Coordination and Consistency of State Programs, Projects, Expenditures and Acquisitions Policy D (improving and coordinating state environ- mental plans with all public and private organizations and concerned individuals). USES TO BE REGULATED The above policies apply to all uses subject to DEP permit requirements and municipal coastal site plan reviews. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 12 and sec. 21) MAPS Maps of all coastal resources will be prepared at 1:24,000 scale by the Coastal Area Management Unit of DEP. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 5(b)) 11-44 GENERAL RESOURCES POLICIES (CONT.) IMPLEMENTATION STATE Issuance of DEP permits under all of its regulatory programs must be con- sistent with all of the above general environmental policies. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 25) All state agency actions significantly affecting the environment in- cluding land acquisitions, development projects and grants for develop- ment projects must be consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(b)) All major state agency plans must, by July 1, 1981, be revised to insure consistency with all of the above policies. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(a)) MUNICIPAL - The decisions of municipal planning and zoning agencies and zoning boards of appeal concerning activities subject to coastal site plan review requirements must be consistent with policies A through C above, where applicable, and in addition such agencies and boards must deter- mine whether or not the adverse impacts of the activity on coastal resources and future water dependent development opportunities are acceptable. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 11(e), 12(a), (b) and (e)) - Municipal agencies preparing voluntary municipal coastal programs must insure that they are consistent with policies A through C above. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 8(a) and 9(a)) FEDERAL - Federal agency actions including development projects, permits and grants must be consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: Sec. 307 of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, 16 U.S.C. 1456) II-45 B. BLUFFS AND ESCARPMENTS DEFINITION - "Coastal Bluffs and Escarpments" means naturally eroding shorelands marked by dynamic escarpments or sea cliffs which have slope angles that constitute an intricate adjustment between erosion, substrate, drainage and degree of plant cover. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 3(7)(A)) POLICIES POLICIES TO BE FOLLOWED BY MUNICIPAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES A. To manage coastal bluffs andescarpments so as to preserve their slope and toe. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(b)(2)(A)) B. To discourage uses which do not permit continued natural rates of erosion. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(b)(2)(A)) C. To disapprove uses that accelerate slope erosion and alter essential patterns and supply of sediments to the littoral transport system. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(b)(2)(A)) POLICIES FOR STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES ONLY SEE: - Coastal Structures and Filling Policy C (maintenance of access to and along the public beach when permitting structures). ADVERSE IMPACTS MUST BE EVALUATED (see box on page II-39) 11-46 BLUFF AND ESCARPMENTS POLICIES (CONT.) USES TO BE REGULATED - All buildings, uses and structures, all uses requiring a municipal special permit, all subdivisions, all variances, all planned unit develop- ments and all municipal projects occurring within bluffs and escarpments and above the high water mark are subject to municipal site plan review requirements with the exception of gardening, agricultural activities and minor projects exempted by local regulation. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 11(b), 15(a) and 15(b)) MAPS - Maps at 1:24,000 scale will be prepared by the Coastal Area Management Unit of DEP. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 5(b)) IMPLEMENTATION STATE - All state agency actions significantly affecting the environment including land acquisitions, development projects must be consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(b)) - All major state agency plans must, by July 1, 1981, be revised to insure consistency with all of the above policies. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(a)) MUNICIPAL - The decisions of municipal planning and zoning agencies and zoning boards of appeal concerning activities subject to coastal site plan review requirements must be consistent with policies A through C above, where applicable, and in addition such agencies and boards must determine whether or not the adverse impacts of the activity on coastal resources (including bluffs and escarpments) and future water dependent development opportunities are acceptable. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 11(e), 12(a), (b) and (e)) 11-47 BLUFF AND ESCARPMENTS POLICIES (CONT.) FEDERAL - Federal agency actions including development projects, permits and grants must be consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: Section 307 of the Federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, 16 USC 1456) BACKGROUND DISCUSSION Natural Functions of Bluffs and Escarpments: - function as a significant sediment source for other features such as beaches - provide valuable wildlife habitat - support unique plant communities and species Social Value of Bluffs and Escarpments: - provide coastal flooding protection; dissipate wave energy - are a moderately important recreational resource for hiking and vistas USE GUIDELINES PRIORITY USE: PRESERVATION GENiERAL USE CRITERIA (applicable to all uses) - Preserve bluff and escarpment slopes through the maintenance, enhancement and restoration of natural vegetative cover. - Preserve the natural patterns and volumes of littoral transport between bluffs/escarpments and related beaches and dunes. - Maintain coastal bluffs and escarpments as vertical buffers to storms and flooding. - Employ development setbacks for siting of structures which occur on lands adjacent to bluffs and escarpments. Allow for predictable bluff/escarpment recession which may be expected to occur during the useful life of the structure. - Employ temporary erosion control techniques such as mulch, hay bales, fabric nets and short term drainage controls during the erection of consistent structures on bluffs and escarpments. II-48 BLUFF AND ESCARPMENTS POLICIES (CONT.) Maintain or enhance public access to and along the shorefront. . When compatible with the proposed use, design facilities so as to take advantage of waterfront location in order to provide an area for public enjoyment. . Maintain or improve access to and along publicly owned shorefront including public trust lands below the mean high water mark. Incorporate site planning and design features which limit or avoid negative visual and aesthetic impacts or which create positive visual and aesthetic impacts on the site and surrounding area. � Alleviate blighted or deteriorated conditions on-site. � Blend the architecture, size, materials, color and textures of new structures with the existing qualities of the surrounding natural and man-made environment. Provide visual setbacks from the water based on considerations of building height and mass for all structures which do not function- ally require a shorefront location. ? flake extensive use of landscaping plantings, and natural ground coverings. � Maintain, improve, or enhance visual access to the coast. Employ non-structural erosion control techniques such as erosion setbacks and buffers, location of vulnerable uses out of hazard areas and vegetative stabilization. Apply general use criteria for coastal hazard areas. A. Activities and Uses Generally Consistent with the Coastal Policies. Recreation: Passive recreational activities such as hiking, nature study, fishing, bird watching and picnicking, which do not result in the destruction of vegetation, accelerate erosion or alter the drainage of the bluff or escarpment area are generally consistent with the coastal policies. Conservation: Conservation activities such as the planting of stabiliz- ing vegetation and control of drainage so as to prevent accelerated erosion due to upland runoff are generally consistent with the coastal policies. 11-49 BLUFF AND ESCARPMENTS POLICIES (CONT,) B. Activities and Uses Which May Be Consistent with the Coastal Policies Under Special Conditions. Filling: Fillinc may beconsistent with the coastal policies when 1) the material is placed as part of an erosion control project de- signed to protect the bluff or escarpment or to provide sediment to related beaches and dunes, 2) the material is of a sediment grain size, composition and character which is compatible with the bluff or escarpment sediments, 3) the material does not contain any chemical, biological or man-made pollutants which may violate state water quality standards, 4) the material is placed in such a manner as to minimize the destruction of bluff/escarpment vegetation, 5) the material does not significantly alter the surface water drainage pattern of the bluff or escarpment in such a manner as to accelerate erosion, 6) dispersal of sediments during the placement of the material is controlled so as to minimize its impact on water quality and sedimentation in surrounding areas, 7) all vegetated areas disturbed during the placement of the material are restored. Disposal of Dredged Material: Disposal of dredged material may be consistent with the coastal policies when it meets the guidelines for filling. Grading: Grading may be consistent with the coastal policies when 1) it is conducted in conjunction with a filling activity as part of a consistent structural stabilization project or in conjunction with the disposal of dredged material, or 2) it is conducted for the pur- pose of increasing bank stability by terracing. Seawalls, Bulkheads and Revetments: Seawalls, bulkheads and revetments may be consistent with the coastal policies when 1) the use of fill in their construction is limited to the minimal amount necessary and incidental to erection of the structure, 2) excavation is limited to the minimum amount necessary and incidental to the erection of the structure, 3) they are erected for the purposes of providing flooding or erosion protection to water dependent uses, infrastructural facilities or existing inhabited structures which were in place prior to January 1, 1980, 4) other non-structural flood and erosion control techniques have been explored and found to be infeasible, 5) the slope of the protective structure is no steeper than 3:1 when the bluff/escarpment to be pro- tected is fronted by a beach system, 6) the design of protective structure incorporates drainage spillways or vegetation suitable to accommodate or diffuse surface water runoff, 7) the protective structure contains sufficient weep holes or interstices to accommodate the release of groundwater drainage, 8) the protective structure does not encroach on adjoining beach systems except as minimally and absolutely necessary to achieve structural stability, and 9) measures necessary to mitigate the protective structure's impact on adjacent beaches are incorporated. Piers, Docks, Wharves: Piers, docks and wharves may be consistent with the coastal policies when 1) they do not interfere with sediment transport from bluffs and escarpments to related beach systems and II-50 BLUFF AND ESCARPMENTS POLICIES (CONT.) nearshore areas, 2) they do not alter the physical dimensions of the bluffs or escarpments, 3) they do not disturb bluff and escarpment vegetation, 4) all vegetated areas disrupted during their construction are restored and replanted immediately following the completion of the structure, and 5) they do not interfere with or obstruct navigation. Pipes and Cables: Pipes and cables may be consistent with the coast- al policies when 1) the pipes/cables must pass through the bluff/ escarpment and no suitable alternative route is available, 2) they are set sufficiently below the existing grade so as to prevent their exposure by erosion, 3) they do not interfere with littoral movement of sediments, 4) they do not alter surface water drainage so as to accelerate bluff/escarpment erosion, 5) they do not permanently destroy or disrupt bluff/escarpment stabilizing vegetation, and 6) all areas excavated during the placement of pipe or cables are restored to their previously existing grade and replanted. Point Discharge Structures: Point discharge structures may be con- sistent with the coastal policies when 1) the discharge is for the the purposes of storm water drainage, 2) the discharge pipe and head- wall do not alter local surface water drainage in such a manner as to accelerate bluff/escarpment erosion, 3) the velocities of discharged storm water are not sufficient to cause bluff/escarpment erosion or scouring, 4) the discharge pipe is equipped with catch basins and gas traps which are periodically cleaned. iTraffic Corridors (Pedestrian): Pedestrian traffic corridors may be consistent with the coastal policies when 1) they are designed so as to avoid or eliminate the destruction of bluff or escarpment vege- tation or to prevent the disruption of slope stability, 2) they do not alter the surface water drainage of bluffs or escarpments so as to accelerate erosion, 3) low impact pile or timber construction is utilized where practical, 4) they do not inhibit sediment transport from bluffs or escarpments to related beach systems, intertidal or nearshore areas. C. Activities and Uses Generally Inconsistent with the Coastal Policies. - Dredging - Excavation - On site waste disposal - Transportation corridors (rail, air, road) 11-51 C. ROCKY SHOREFRONTS DEFI4NITION - "Rocky Shorefronts" means shorefront composed of bedrock, boulders and cobbles that are highly erosion resistant and are an insignificant source of sediments for other coastal landforms. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 3(7)(B)) POLICIES POLICIES TO BE FOLLOWED BY MUNICIPAL, STATE AN4D FEDERAL AGENCIES A. To manage rocky shorefronts so as to insure that development proceeds in a manner which doesnot irreparably reduce the capability of the system to support a healthy intertidal biological community; to provide feeding grounds and refuge for shorebirds and finfish and to dissipate and absorb storm and wave energies. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(b)(2)(B)) POLICIES FOR STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES ONLY SEE: Coastal Structures and Filling Policy C (maintenance of access to and along the public beach when permitting structures). (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(c)(1)(K)) ADVERSE IMPACTS MUST BE EVALUATED (see box on page II-39) USES TO BE REGULATED - All buildings, uses and structures, all uses requiring a municipal special permit, all subdivisions, all variances, all planned unit developments and all municipal projects occurring along rocky shorefronts and above the high water mark are subject to municipal site plan review requirements with the exception of gardening, agricultural activities and minor pro- jects exempted by local regulation. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 11(b), 15(a) and 15(b)) II-52 ROCKY SHOREFRONTS (CONT,) MAPS - Maps at 1:24,000 scale will be prepared by the Coastal Area Management Unit of DEP. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 5(b)) IMPLEMENTATION STATE - All state agency action significantly affecting the environment including land acquisitions; development projects and grants for development pro- jects must be consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(b)) - All major state agency plans must, by July 1, 1981, be revised to insure consistency with all of the above policies. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(a)) MUNICIPAL - The decisions of municipal planning and zoning agencies and zoning boards of appeal concerning activities subject to coastal site plan review re- quirements must be consistent with policy A above, where applicable, and in addition such agencies and boards must determine whether or not the adverse impacts of the activity on coastal resources (including rocky shorefronts) and future water dependent development opportunities are acceptable. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 11(e), 12(a), (b) and (e)) Municipal agencies preparing voluntary municipal coastal programs must insure that they are consistent with the above policy. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 8(a) and 9(a)) FEDERAL - Federal agency actions including development projects, permits and grants must be consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: Sec. 307 of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, 16 USC 1456) II-53 ROCKY SHOREFRONT (CONT,) BACKGROUND DISCUSSION Natural Functions of Rocky Shorefronts: - resist erosion - provide hard substrate and habitat for rocky intertidal organisms - serve as feeding grounds and refuge areas for some shorebirds and finfish Social Value of Rocky Shorefronts: - provide recreational opportunities: climbing, wildlife observation and vistas - dissipate and absorb storm and wave energywithout significant changes in shoreline configuration USE GUIDELINES PRIORITY USE: CONSERVATION/LIMITED DEVELOPMENT GEtERAL USE CRITERIA (applicable to all uses) - Preserve rocky shorefront slope and composition in order to provide a natural buffer to wave attack, storms and erosion. - Maintain the natural features of rocky shorefront which provide habitat for intertidal shellfish and molluscs, feeding grounds and refuge areas for shorebirds, finfish and shellfish. - Maintain or enhance public access to and along the shorefront. When compatible with the proposed use, design facilities so as to take advantage of waterfront location in order to provide an area for public enjoyment. * Maintain or improve access toand along publicly owned shorefront including public trust lands below the mean high water mark. - Incorporate site planning and design features which limit or avoid negative visual and aesthetic impacts on the site and surrounding areas. * Alleviate blighted or deteriorated conditions on-site. II-54 ROCKY SHOREFRONTS (CONT,) Blend the architecture, size, materials, color and textures of new structures with the existing qualities of the surrounding natural and man-made environment. Provide visual setbacks from the water based on considerations of building height and Miass for all structures which do not functionally require a shorefront location. � Make extensive use of landscaping, plantings and natural ground coverings. � Maintain, improve or enhance visual access to the coast. Apply general use criteria for coastal hazard areas. A. Activities and Uses Generally Consistent with the Coastal Policies. - Recreation: Recreational activities such as fishing, climbing, hiking, bird watching and nature study are generally consistent with the coastal policies. - Conservation Activities: Conservation activities such as access control for the purposes of protecting shorebird nesting, breeding and feeding areas are generally consistent with the coastal policies. B. Activities and Uses Which May Be Consistent with the Coastal Policies Under Specific Conditions. - Dredging: Dredging may be consistent with the coastal policies when 1) it does not alter the shorefront's natural resistance to erosion, 2) it does not permanently alter a productive shorebird, finfish or shellfish habitat to a significant areal extent, 3) it does not in- crease the natural slope of the intertidal shorefront, 4) it does not reduce the capacity of the shorefront to act as a buffer to flooding, storms and waves, 5) the finished side slopes of the dredged area are of the same or similar roughness and composition as the existing shore, 6) it does not adversely affect water quality, and 7) appropriate sedimentation controls are employed when necessary to protect shellfish beds, adjacent beaches, finfish populations or water quality. - Filling: Filling may be consistent with the coastal policies when 1) the finished slopes of the filled area are of the same or similar roughness and composition as the existing shore, 2) sedimentation and erosion control techniques are employed during construction when II-55 ROCKY SHOREFRONTS (CONT.) necessary to prevent disturbances of water quality and to prevent spillover of sediments into surrounding resource areas, 3) the fill does not contain any chemical, biological or man-made pollutants which may have an adverse affect on surface or ground water quality or which may result in a violation of state water quality standards, 4) the filling does not permanently disrupt littoral transport of sediment to adjacent beaches, 5) the fill does not significantly re- duce the areal extent of a productive shorebird, finfish, or shell- fish habitat, and 6) the material is suitably contained so as to prevent it from being eroded or re-entering a waterway, unless it is being placed as part of an erosion control project. Disposal of Dredged Material: Disposal of dredged material may be consistent with the coastal policies when it meets the guidelines for filling. Seawalls, Revetments and Bulkheads: Seawalls, revetments and bulkheads may be consistent with the coastal policies when 1) they do not significantly reduce or interfere with the supply of littoral sedi- ments to adjacent beaches 2) they do not increase erosion on adja- cent beaches, bluffs or escarpments, 3) they do not substantially reduce the areal extent of productive shorebird, finfish or shell- fish habitat, 4) other non-structural means of erosion control or stabilization have been explored and found to be infeasible, and 5) they are constructed for the purposes of protecting water dependent uses, infrastructural facilities, or existing inhabited structures which were in place prior to January 1, 1980. Groins: Groins may be consistent with the coastal policies when they meet the guidelines for seawalls, revetments and bulkheads. Jetties: Jetties may be consistent with the coastal policies when they meet the guidelines for seawalls, revetments and bulkheads. Piers, Docks and Wharves: Piers, docks and wharves may be consistent with -the coastal policies when 1) they do not reduce the resistance of the shorefront to erosion, 2) they do not increase erosion on adjacent beaches, bluffs and escarpments, 3) they do not substantially reduce the areal extent of productive shorebird, finfish or shellfish habitat, and 4) open pile or timber construction is used to the maximum extent practical in order to avoid the reduction of benthic habitat. Pipes and Cables: Pipes and cables may be consistent with the coastal policies when 1) they are set below grade where feasible, 2) they do not reduce the shorefront's natural resistance to erosion, 3) they do not increase erosion on adjacent beaches, bluffs or escarpments by altering sources, volumes or directions of movement of littoral sediments, 4) areas excavated or otherwise altered during placement are restored to their pre-excavation grade and character, and 5) sedimentation and erosion control techniques are employed during construction when necessary to prevent disturbances of water quality and to prevent spillover of sediments into surrounding resource areas. 11-56 ROCKY SHOREFRONTS (CONT.) - Point Discharge Structures: Point discharges may be consistent with the coastal policies when 1) the discharge pipe and/or headwall do not alter local surface water drainage in such a manner as to ac- celerate erosion, 2) the velocities of discharged storm water are not sufficient to cause erosion or scouring, and 3) the discharge pipe is equipped with catch basins and gas traps which are periodically cleaned. C. Activities and Uses Generally Inconsistent with the Coastal Policies. - Excavation - On-site waste disposal - Transportation corridors (air, rail, road) D. BEACHES AND DUNES DEFINITION' - "Beaches and Dunes" means beach systems including barrier beach spits and tombolos, barrier beaches, pocket beaches, land contact beaches and related dunes and sandflats. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 3(7)(c)) POLICIES POLICIES TO BE FOLLOWED BY tMUNICIPAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES A. To preserve the dynamic form and integrity of natural beach systems in order to provide critical wildlife habitats, a reservoir for sand supply, a buffer for coastal flooding and erosion, and valuable re- creational opportunities. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(b)(2)(C)) B. To insure that coastal uses are compatible with the capabilities of the system and do not unreasonably interfere with natural processes of erosion and sedimentation. (Source P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(b)(2)(C)) C. To encourage the restoration and enhancement of disturbed or modified beach systems. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(b)(2)(C)) SEE ALSO: Sewer and Water Lines Policy B (extension of lines into sensitive resources). 11-57 BEACHES AND DUNES (CONT.) POLICIES FOR STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES ONLY D. To require as a condition in permitting new coastal structures, including but not limited to groins, jetties or breakwaters, that access to, or along, the public beach below mean high water must not be unreasonably impaired by such structures. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(c)(1)(K)) ADVERSE IMPACTS MUST BE EVALUATED (see box on page 11-39) USES TO BE REGULATED - All buildings, uses and structures, all uses requiring a municipal special permit, all subdivisions, all variances, all planned unit developments and all municipal projects occurring on beaches and dunes and above the mean high water mark are subject to municipal site plan review requirements with the exception of gardening, agricultural activities and minor projects exempted by local regulation. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 11(b), 15(a) and 15(b)) - All structures and fill in coastal waters are regulated under the DEP structures permit program (CGS 25-7b to 7f). (Source: CGS 25-7b) - All new dredging in coastal waters is regulated under the DEP dredging permit program (CGS 25-10 to 18). (Source: CGS 25-11) MAPS - Maps at 1:24,000 scale will be prepared by the Coastal Area Management Unit of DEP. IMPLEMENTATION STATE - Issuance of the following DEP permits must be consistent with all of the above policies: a) permits for structures or fill in coastal waters II-58 BEACHES AND DUNES (CONT.) pursuant to CGS 25-7b, b) permits for new dredging in coastal waters pursuant to CGS 25-11. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 21) All state agency actions, significantly affecting the environment, in- cluding land acquisitions, development projects and grants for develop- ment projects, must be consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(b)) All major state agency plans must, by July 1, 1981, be revised to insure consistency with all of the above policies. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(a)) MUNICIPAL The decisions of municipal planning and zoning agencies and zoning boards of appeal concerning activities subject to coastal site plan review requirements must be consistent with policies A through C above, where applicable, and in addition such agencies and boards must determine whether or not the adverse impacts of the activity on coastal resources (including beaches and dunes) and future water dependent development opportunities are acceptable. (Source: P.A. 79-535, secs. 11(e), 12(a),(b) and (e)) Municipal agencies responsible for preparing voluntary municipal coastal programs must insure that they are consistent with policies A through C above. (Source: P.A. 79-535, secs. 8(a) and 9(a)) FEDERAL Federal agency actions including development projects, permits and grants must be consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: section 307 of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, 16 USC 1456) II-59 BEACHES AND DUNES (CONT.) BACKGROUND DISCUSSION Natural Functions of Beaches and Dunes: - provide critical nesting habitat for some shore birds - provide unique habitats for plant species and communities - dunes and dune ridges act as reservoirs for sand supply to beaches Social Value of Beaches and Dunes: - act as a buffer to coastal flooding and erosion - dissipate wave energy - provide very important recreational resource for fishing, swimming, sunning, hiking and vistas - provide areas of scientific and educational value USE GUIDELINES PRIORITY USE: PRESERVATION GENERAL USE CRITERIA (applicable to all uses) - Apply general use guidelines for coastal hazard areas to all activities proposed for beach systems. Preserve or enhance the natural form, volume and stability of beach systems through: 1) the maintenance, restoration and enhancement of natural beach and dune vegetation, 2) the control of pedestrian ac- cess so as to prevent the trampling or destruction of beach system vegetation, 3) the utilization of non-structural erosion control techniques such as the planting of dune grass and placement of sand fill and snow fencing for dune management purposes; placement of sand fill for beach nourishment. Employ development setbacks for siting of structures which must occur on or in areas abutting beach systems. Setbacks should allow for predictable shoreline recession and/or dune migration which may be expected to occur during the useful life of the structure. - Protect the nesting and breeding habitats of terns and other shorebirds which occupy beach areas through the control of pedestrian access 11-60 BEACHES AND DUNES (CONT.) and temporary restriction of access to such areas during breeding season. Employ low impact pile and timber construction for the siting of consistent uses on beach systems. Preserve the natural dynamic relationships between littoral sediment sources and depositional features of beach systems by avoiding the location of structures or uses which divert or otherwise alter littoral drift volumes, patterns and directions. Preserve public access to or along beaches below the mean high water mark by requiring that consistent development not obstruct passage along the public portion of the beach. Preserve the physical and spatial relationship between beach systems and related intertidal flats through the prohibition of excavation, grading and dredging of intertidal flats when they abut or are related to beach systems. Employ construction techniques which minimize the necessary alteration of beach system, form, volume and vegetation such as 1) top side construction, 2) storage of construction materials and equipment off- site at a non-beach location, 3) placement of construction materials or elevated ramps so as to prevent soil compaction and destruction of beach vegetation, 4) scheduling of construction so as to avoid shorebird and shellfish breeding seasons, 5) restricting equipment movement to non-vegetated areas, and 6) restore and revegetate areas disturbed by construction. Incorporate site planning and design features which limit or avoid negative visual and aesthetic impacts on the site and surrounding area. � Alleviate blighted or deteriorated conditions on-site. �Blend the architecture, size, materials, color and textures of new structures with the existing qualities of the surrounding natural and man-made environment. *Provide visual setbacks from the water based on considerations of building height and mass for all structures which do not function- ally require a shorefront location. � lake extensive use of landscaping plantings and natural ground coverings. � Maintain, improve or enhance visual access to the coast. 11-61 BEACHES AND DUNES (CONT.) USE CONSISTENCY A. Activities and Uses Generally Consistent with the Coastal Policies. -Recreation: Active and passive recreational activities such as swimming, fishing, hiking, sunning, bird watching which do not result in the destruction of sand dunes and ridges and dune vegetation are generally consistent with the coastal policies. Conservation: Conservation activities such as erection of temporary access control structures to protect shorebird nesting and breed- ing habitat, planting and transplanting of dune vegetation, place- ment of snow fencing for dune stabilization or for protection of beach and dune vegetation are generally consistent with the coastal policies. B. Activities and Uses Which May Be Consistent with the Coastal Policies Under Special Conditions. -Filling. Filling may be consistent with the coastal policies when 1) the fill is placedfor the purposes of beach nourishment or dune management, 2) the fill is of a grain size distribution and character which is compatible with the existing beach or dune sand, 3) the fill is free of chemical, biological or man-made pollutants which may adversely affect water quality or violate state water quality standards, 4) the fill is placed in a manner utilizing techniques which restrict, eliminate or substantially limit the destruction of dune and beach vegetation and/or shorebird nesting and breeding habitat, 5) the filled beach slope is the same as the natural beach slope, and 6) dis- persal of sediments during filling is controlled when necessary to minimize impacts on water quality and sedimentation in surrounding areas. -Groins and Jetties: Groins and jetties may be consistent with the coastal policies when 1) other non-structural techniques of erosion control have been explored and found to be infeasible and there is no other less environmentally damaging alternative, 2) the groins or jetties are being placed to provide protection to infrastructural facilities, water dependent uses, or existing inhabited structures which were in existence prior to January 1, 1980, 3) measures to mitigate the impacts of permitted structures on erosion and sedi- mentation such as: limiting their height and length and requiring the placement of sand fill between groins and jetties oreliminating sediment losses to the littoral transport system are instituted. -Traffic Corridors (Pedestrian): Pedestrian traffic corridors may be consistent with the coastal policies when 1) they are laid out so as to minimize or eliminate the destruction or trampling of beach and dune vegetation, 2) elevated pile, supported walkways are utilized for access over dunes or sand ridges, 3) they avoid shorebird nesting and breeding habitats, and 4) they do not inhibit sediment movement in the beach system, particularly in downdrift areas.b 11-62 BEACHES AND DUNES (CONT.) Disposal of Dredged Material: Disposal of dredged material for the purposes of beach nourishment or dune management may be consistent with the coastal policies when it is accomplished according to the special requirements for filling as listed above. Grading: Grading may be consistent with the coastal policies only when it is accomplished as part of a beach or dune nourishment or filling project. -Pipes and Cables: Pipes and cables may be consistent with the coastal policies when 1) the pipes or cables must cross the beach system and no suitable alternative route is available, 2) they are set sufficiently below the existing grade of the beach or dune so as to eliminate their interference with sediment transport and to prevent their exposure by erosion, 3) all areas excavated during the laying of the pipes and cables are restored to their previously existing grade with materials which are compatible with the beach system, and 4) all excavated areas are replanted immediately following construction. Piers, Docks, Wharves: Piers, docks and wharves may be consistent with the coastal policies when 1) pile construction is utilized, 2) they do not interfere with sediment transport on the beach system, 3) they do not alter the form or volume of the beach or dune, 4) their construction does not permanently destroy beach or dune vegetation, 5) they do not interfere with access to or along the public beach below mean high water, and 6) all vegetated areas disturbed by construction are replanted. Point Discharge Structures: Point discharge structures may be con- sistent with the coastal policies when 1) the discharge is for the purposes of stormwater drainage, 2) the discharge pipe and head- wall do not project onto the beach or dune in such a way as to inter- I ~ ~~~~fere with sediment movement, 3) the velocities of the discharged water are not sufficient to cause beach or dune erosion or scouring, and 4) the discharge pipe is equipped with catch basins, gas traps and is periodically cleaned. -Seawalls, Revetments, Bulkheads: Seawalls,revetments and bulkheads may be consistent with the coastal policies when they meet the conditions prescribed for groins and jetties and 1) the use of fill in their construction is limited to the minimal amount necessary for the erection of the structure, 2) excavation is limited to the minimum amount necessary and incidental to the erection of the structure, 3) they do not encroach on dunes, 4) their intrusion onto the beach system is the minimum necessary to provide protection to water dependent uses, infrastructura] facilities, or existing in- habited structures which were in place prior to January 1, 1980. 11-63 BEACHES AND DUNES (CONT.) C. Activities and Uses Generally Inconsistent with the Coastal Policies. - Dredging - Excavation - On site waste disposal (septic systems, leach fields, solid waste landfills) - Dikes - Transportation corridors (rail, highway, road, air) E. INTERTIDAL FLATS DEFINITION - "Intertidal Flats" means very gently sloping or flat areas located between high and low tides composed of muddy, silty and fine sandy sediments and generally devoid of vegetation. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 3(7)(D)) POLICIES POLICIES TO BE FOLLOWED BY MUNICIPAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES A. To manage intertidal flats so as to preserve their value as a nutrient source and reservoir, a healthy shellfish habitat and a valuable feed- ing area for invertebrates , fish and shorebirds. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(b)(2)(D)) B. To encourage the restoration and enhancement of degraded intertidal flats. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(b)(2)(D)) C. To allow coastal uses that minimize change in the natural current flows, depth, slope, sedimentation, and nutrient storage functions. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(b)(2)(D)) D. To disallow uses that substantially accelerate erosion or lead to significant despoliation of tidal flats. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(b)(2)(D)) 11-64 INTERTIDAL FLATS (CONT.) POLICIES FOR STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES ONLY E. To require as a condition in permitting new coastal structures, in- cluding but not limited to groins, jetties or breakwaters, that ac- cess to, or along, the public beach below mean high water must not be unreasonably impaired by such structures. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(c)(1)(K)) ADVERSE IMPACTS MUST BE EVALUATED (see box on page 11-39) USES TO BE REGULATED - All structures and fill in intertidal flats are regulated under the DEP structure permit program (CGS 25-7b to 7f). (Source: CGS 25-7b) - All new dredging of intertidal flats is regulated under the DEP dredg- ing permit program (CGS 25-10 to 18). (Source: CGS 25-11) All activities in tidal wetlands adjoining intertidal flats are re- gulated under the DEP tidal wetlands permit program (CGS 22a-28 to 22a-35) except for state Health Department mosquito control activities, DEP conservation activities, the construction and maintenance of aids to navigation, the activities authorized in emergency decrees of the muni- cipal public health officer. (Source: CGS 22a-29(3)) - All buildings, uses and structures, all uses requiring a municipal special permit, all subdivisions, all variance, all planned unit developments and all municipal projects occurring adjacent to inter- tidal flats and above the high water mark are subject to municipal site plan review requirements with the exception of gardening, ag- ricultural activities and minor projects exempted by local regulation. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 11(b), 15(a) and 15(b)) MAPS - Maps at 1:24,000 scale will be prepared by the Coastal Area Management Unit of DEP. (Source P.A. 79-535, sec. 5(b)) 11-65 INTERTIDAL FLATS (CONT.) IMPLEMENTATION STATE Issuance of the following DEP permits must be consistent with all of the above policies: a) permits for structures or fill in coastal waters pursuant to CGS 25-7b, b) permits for new dredging in coastal waters pursuant to CGS 25-11, and c) permits for activities in tidal wetlands pursuant to CGS 22a-32. All state agency actions significantly affecting the environment in- cluding land acquisitions, development projects and grants for develop- ment projects must be consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(a)) - All major agency plans must, by July 1, 1981, be revised to insure consistency with all of the above policies. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(a)) MUNICIPAL The decisions of municipal planning and zoning agencies and zoning boards of appeal concerning activities subject to coastal site plan review requirements must be consistent with policies A through D above, where applicable, and in addition such agencies and boards must deter- mine whether or not the adverse impacts of the activity on coastal resources (including intertidal flats) and future water dependent development opportunities are acceptable. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 11(e), 12(a), (b) and (e)) - Municipal agencies preparing voluntary municipal coastal programs must insure that they are consistent with policies A through D above. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 8(a) and 9(a)) FEDERAL Federal agency actions including development projects, permits and grants must be consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: Sec. 307 of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, 16 USC 1456) 11-66 INTERTIDAL FLATS (CONT.) BACKGROUND DISCUSSION Natural Functions of Intertidal Flats: - serve as rich nutrient source and reservoir - provide valuable feeding areas for invertebrates, fish and shorebirds - provide significant shellfish habitat - act as sink for toxic materials (thereby contributing to water quality) Social Value of Intertidal Flats: - provide recreational opportunities including shellfishing, fishing, wildlife observation - buffer storm energy - are areas of scientific and educational value USE GUIDELINES PRIORITY USE: PRESERVATION/LIMITED DEVELOPMENT IN DEVELOPED SHOREFRONT AREAS GENERAL USE CRITERIA (applicable to all uses) - Avoid or minimize activities that interrupt or alter the nature, chemistry or tidal pattern of estuarine waters that inundate and permeate inter- tidal flats. - Maintain the natural patterns of sedimentation and littoral transport which determine the character and quality of intertidal flats. Protect and when practicable, restore the shellfish species diversity and capacity of intertidal flats. Utilize all reasonable siting and construction practices that avoid or substantially reduce the negative impacts of development in or on inter- tidal flats such as, but not limited to, 1) locating inconsistent uses and activities on other compatible and less sensitive coastal resources, when feasible, 2) minimizing the area of intertidal flat affected by the activity, 3) avoiding the disruption of intertidal flats in areas identified as shellfish concentration areas, and 4) minimizing and -11-67 INTERTIDAL FLATS (CONT.) controlling, through the best mitigatory practices, the adverse impacts of suspended sediments generated during construction on intertidal flats and contiguous estuarine habitats especially when shellfish concentration areas may be impacted. Initiate all reasonable design practices and mitigation measures which will avoid or substantially limit the negative impacts to intertidal flats such as 1) use of elevated pile construction, 2) use of topside construction techniques, 3) use of siltation screens, 4) storage of construction materials on an upland area, 5) provide waterborne or elevated access to the site, and 6) scheduling the activity so as to avoid critical finfish, shellfish or shorebird breeding or migratory periods. Apply general use criteria for coastal hazard areas. USE CONSISTENCY A. Activities and Uses Generally Consistent with the Coastal Policies. - Recreation: Recreational activities such as bird watching, hiking, nature study, clamming, crabbing and fishing that do not alter significantly the physical nature of and biota on intertidal flats are generally consistent with the coastal policies. - Conservation: Conservation activities and practices such as habitat restoration, shellfish management, shellfish restoration and wildlife management that do not require substantial alteration of, or do not commit irreversible impacts on, the natural elements of intertidal flats are generally consistent with the coastal policies. B. Activities and Uses Which May Be Consistent with the Coastal Policies Under Special Conditions. - Traffic Corridors (Pedestrian): Construction of pedestrian traffic corridors across intertidal flats may be consistent with the coastal policies when 1) they are used to ameliorate the impact of moderate to heavy pedestrian traffic incidental to bird watching and nature study, and 2) they are constructed of timber and are elevated. - Piers, Docks, Piles: Construction of these structures may be con- sistent with the coastal policies when 1) the area of intertidal flats to be impacted is minimized, 2) the structure can not be reasonably located in or on a less sensitive coastal resource, 3) the integrity and physical dimensions of intertidal flat is not altered substantially or tidal circulation is not impeded, 4) no filling or excavation is required, 5) no construction of basins for anchorage, turning or new navigation channels are required, 6) pile or timber construction is used, 7) construction activities are timed to avoid critical finfish or shellfish spawning periods, and 11-68 INTERTIDAL FLATS (CONT.) 8) controllable sedimentation generated on the site is reduced in order to minimize the impacts to shellfish or finfish. - Disposal of Dredged Material: Disposal of dredged material may be consistent with the coastal policies only when used for the purpose of habitat restoration or tidal wetland creation and when 1) the material does not contain any chemical, biological or man-made pollutants which may violate state water quality standards, 2) the texture~of the material is compatible with the existing disposal site, and 3) as necessary, the material is containerized in order to minimize the off-site impacts to shellfish and other sensitive resources. - Dredging (Maintenance and Enhancement): Maintenance and enhancement dredging may be consistent with the coastal policies when 1) the channel or basin is not substantially enlarged from the original project and dimensions, 2) the best available technologies are used to reduce controllable sedimentation, and 3) the timing of the dredging activity avoids critical shellfish or finfish spawn- ing periods. - Pipes and Cables: Placement of pipes and cables in intertidal flats may be consistent with the coastal policies when 1) they are set below grade, 2) there are no less environmentally sensitive alterna- tive locations, 3) the affected area of flat is kept to a practicable minimum, 4) the impacted intertidal flat is restored following place- ment, and 5) the proper erosion/sedimentation practices are employed. - Transportation Corridors: Transportation corridors may be consistent with the coastal policies only when 1) no feasible and less damaging alternative exists, 2) the corridor is designed in such a manner so as to minimize the impacts to intertidal flats through elevated pile structure, 3) the area affected is minimized, and 4) direct and in- direct impacts to shellfish concentration areas and important finfish habitats are avoided. C. Activities and Uses Generally Inconsistent with the Coastal Policies. - Dredging (new) - Excavation - Filling - Grading - Seawalls, Revetments, Bulkheads, Dikes - Groins - Jetties II-69 INTERTIDAL FLATS (CONT.) - Breakwaters - Floats and Floating Docks - On-site Waste Disposal NOTE: Where intertidal flats occur in urban port areas and contiguous to developed shorefronts, certain of the above activities may be consistent with the coastal policies under special conditions (see guidelines for Developed Shorefront). F. TIDAL WETLANDS DEFINITION "Tidal Wetlands" means "wetland" as defined by CGS Section 22a-29. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 4(7)(E)) POLICIES POLICIES TO BE FOLLOWED BY MUNICIPAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES A. To preserve tidal wetlands and to prevent the despoliation and des- truction thereof in order to maintain their vital natural functions. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(b)(2)(E)) B. To encourage the rehabilitation and restoration of degraded tidal wetlands. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(b)(2)(E)) C. Where feasible and environmentally acceptable, to encourage the creation of wetlands for the purposes of shellfish and finfish management, habitat creation and dredge spoil disposal. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(b)(2)(E)) D. It is declared that much of the wetlands'of this state have been lost or despoiled by unregulated dredging, dumping, filling and like activities and despoiled by these and other activities, that such loss or despoliation will adversely affect, if not entirely eliminate, the value of such wetlands as sources of nutrients to finfish, crustacea and shellfish of significant economic value; that such loss or despoliation will destroy such wetlands as habitats for plants and animals of signi- ficant economic value and will eliminate or substantially reduce marine commerce, recreation and aesthetic enjoyment; and that such loss or 11-70 TIDAL WETLANDS (CONT.) despoliation will, in most cases, disturb the natural ability of tidal wetlands to reduce flood damage and adversely affect the public health and welfare; that such loss or despoliation will substantially reduce the capacity of such wetlands to absorb silt and will thus result in the increased silting of channels and harbor areas to the detriment of free navigation. Therefore, it is declared to be the public policy of this state to preserve the wetlands and to prevent the despoliation and destruction thereof. (Source: CGS sec. 22a-28, referenced by P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(a)(2)) SEE ALSO: - Sewer and Water Lines Policy B (extension of lines and sensitive resources). - Coastal Structures and Filling Policy A (construction in tidal wetlands). - Coastal Hazard Areas Policy A (management of development). - Coastal Hazard Areas Policy B (solutions to flood and erosion problems). - Coastal Hazard Areas Policy C (natural relationship of landforms). - Coastal Hazard Areas Policy D (nonstructural erosion mitigation). - Coastal Hazard Areas Policy E (structural erosion mitigation measures). National Interest Facilities and Resources Policy A (planning for and protection of resources which are in the national interest including tidal wetlands). POLICIES FOR STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES ONLY E. In granting, denying or limiting any permit the commissioner or his duly designated hearing officer shall consider the effect of the proposed work with reference to the public health and welfare, marine fisheries, shell fisheries, wildlife, the protection of life and property from flood, hurricane and other natural disasters, and the public policy set forth in sections 22a-28 to 22a-35 inclusive. The fact that the department of environmental protection is in the process of acquisition of any tidal wetlands by negotiation or condemnation under the provisions of section 26-17a, shall be sufficient basis for denial of any permit. (Source: CGS sec. 22a-33 as referenced by P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(a)(2)) 11-71 TIDAL WETLANDS (CONT.) SEE ALSO: - Coastal Structures and Filling Policy B (filling of tidal wetlands). - Dredging and Navigation Policy D (dr'edging in tidal wetlands). - Coastal Structures and Filling Policy E (restoring and maintaining saltwater circulation patterns). - Coastal Hazard Areas Policy F (public flood protection measures). -Coastal Hazard Areas Policy G (exposed land areas defined).I - Coastal Hazard Areas Policy H (establishment of stream channel encroachment lines). SEE ALSO PLAN OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT POLICIES:I -Land and Water Resources Policy A, action 5 (protection of wetlands). ADVERSE IMPACTS MUST BE EVALUATED (see box on page 11739) USES TO BE REGULATED -All activities in tidal wetlands are regulated under the DEP tidal wet- lands permit program (CGS 22a-28 to 35) except for State Health Depart- ment mosquito control activities, DEP conservation activities, the construction and maintenance of aids to navigation, and activities authorized in emergency decrees of a municipal public health officer. (Source: CGS 22a-29(3)) -All buildings, uses and structures, all uses requiring a municipal special permit, all subdivisions, all variances, all planned unit developments and all municipal projects occurring within tidal wetlands and above the high water mark are subject to municipal site plan review requirements with the exception of gardening, agricultural activities and minor pro- jects exempted by local regulation. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 11(b), 15(a) and 15(b)) MAPS -Maps at 1:24,000 scale will be prepared by the Coastal Area Management 11-72 TIDAL WETLANDS (CONT,) Unit of DEP. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 5(b)) Maps at 1:2,400 scale are available from the Water Resources Unit of DEP. (Source: CGS 22a-30) IMPLEMENTATION STATE - Issuance of DEP permits for activities in tidal wetlands pursuant to CGS 22a-32 must be consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 21) All state agency actions significantly affecting the environment, in- cluding land acquisitions, development projects and grants for develop- ment projects must be consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(b)) All major state agency plans must, by July 1, 1981, be revised to insure consistency with all of the above policies. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(a)) MUNICIPAL The decisions of municipal planning and zoning agencies and zoning boards of appeal concerning activities subject to coastal site plan review requirements must be consistent with policies A through D above, where applicable, and in addition such agencies and boards must deter- mine whether or not the adverse impacts of the activity on coastal resources (including tidal wetlands) and future water dependent develop- ment opportunities are acceptable. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 11(e), 12(a), (b) and (e)) - Municipal agencies preparing voluntary municipal coastal programs must insure that they are consistent with policies A through D above. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 8(a) and 9(a)) 11-73 TIDAL WETLANDS (CONT.) FEDERAL - Federal agency actions including development projects, permits and grants must be consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: Sec. 307, federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, 16 USC 1456) BACKGROUND DISCUSSION Natural Functions of Tidal Wetlands: - are areas of high nutrient and biological productivity - provide detrital products forming base of food chain in Long Island Sound - provide habitat, nesting, feeding and refuge areas for shorebirds - serve as a nursery ground for larval and juvenile forms of many of the organisms of Long Island Sound and of many estuarine dependent oceanic species - provide significant habitat for shellfish Social Value of Tidal Wetlands: - improve water quality by trapping sediments, reducing turbidity, re- stricting the passage of toxics and heavy metals, decreasing BOD and trapping nutri ents - buffer storm and wave energy4 - vegetation stabilizes shoreline and buffers erosion - provide recreational opportunities: fishing, wildlife observation, hunting - provide area of scientific and educational values - are a major source of coastal open space - are important to commercial and recreational shell and finfisheries 11-74 TIDAL WETLANDS (CONT.) USE GUIDELINES PRIORITY USE: PRESERVATION GENERAL USE CRITERIA (applicable to all uses) -Preserve or restore the natural landscape of tidal wetlands. -Preserve or restore the structure, function, and integrity of the I ~ ~~physical and biological components of tidal wetlands. . Maintain or restore the natural tidal flushing, circulation, and chemical characteristics of tidal wetlands and adjacent estuarine waters. . Maintain or restore the natural plant and animal species that inhabit tidal wetlands. . Where feasible, avoid adverse impacts to U.S. and state rare and endangered species. -Provide development setbacks and vegetation buffers surrounding tidal wetlands which are adequate to protect the wetlands from runoff, erosion, and other negative impacts that might result from development on adjacent upland resources. Employ siting alternatives such as the following, which will avoid or substantially limit negative impacts: 1) siting inconsistent use out of tidal wetlands on adjacent upland areas, or 2) siting consistent uses in such a manner as to minimize the marsh area affected. Employ design modifications such as the following (where feasible) which will avoid or substantially limit negative impacts: elevation of con- sistent uses on low impact, pile foundations at a height sufficient to meet the minimum requirements of the National Flood Insurance program and to allow for light penetration to the marsh surface below. -Employ construction techniques such as the following (where feasible) which will avoid or substantially limit impacts: 1) use of above-ground, "top-side"t construction techniques, 2) storage of construction materials and equipment off-site in non-wetland areas, 3) provision of waterborne access to the construction site, or use of temporary elevated construction accessways, 4) scheduling construction activities during late fall, winter r ~~~or early spring months when impacts to marsh systems are generally the least, 5) scheduling construction activities so as to avoid shorebird, shellfish and finfish breeding seasons, and 6) restoring all disturbed marsh surfaces as nearly as possible to their natural topographic con- dition following construction activities and reestablishing a natural vegetation cover. 11-75 TIDAL WETLANDS (CONT.) Where applicable, as a component of permitted activities, rehabilitate and restore degraded tidal wetlands through such means as 1) restoration of natural tidal range or circulation patterns 2) restoration of tidal flushing and circulation to wetlands which were formerly connected to tidal waters, and 3) reestablishment of marsh vegetation. Incorporate site planning and design features which limit or avoid negative and aesthetic impacts or which create positive visual and aesthetic impacts on the site and the surrounding area.I � alleviate blighted or deteriorated conditions on-site � make extensive use of landscaping, plantings, and natural ground coverings � maintain, improve, or enhance visual access to the coast Maintain or improve access to and along publicly owned shorefront in- cluding public trust lands below the mean high water mark. Maintain or improve water quality in accordance with the highest standards set by federal, state or local authorities. *Preserve and maintain those waters with existing quality better than established standards. *Restore the surface waters of the state to a quality consistent with its use for the protection and propagation of fish, shellfish, and wildlife including breeding, feeding and nursery grounds, and with its use for recreation in and on the water. Restore all waters to the maximum extent possible to a quality consistent with Class B or Class SB. Prohibit the discharge of sewage from marine sanitation devices on those waters of the state (i.e. No Discharge Zones) where greater control is required for public health or environmental protection. Apply general use guidelines for coastal hazard areas. 11-76 TIDAL WETLANDS (CONT.) USE CONSISTENCY A. Activities and Uses Generally Consistent with the Coastal Policies. -Recreation: Passive recreational activities such as bird watching, hiking, nature study, fishing, crabbing, hunting, and canoeing that do not result in significant compaction of the peat soils or destruction of the vegetation are generally consistent with the coastal policies. -Conservation: Conservation activities such as habitat restoration, wildlife management, or property maintenance, which do not require substantial physical alteration of the wetland or continuous compaction of the peat soils are generally consistent with the coastal policies. -Agriculture: Low intensity agricultural uses such as salt haying that do not result in significant compaction of the peat soil; do not require plowing, grading, or excavation; and do not alter the composition of the marsh vegetation are generally consistent with the coastal policies. I ~~ ~~ Floats: Floats in tidal waters within wetland boundaries that do not involve or encourage the encroachment of inconsistent uses on adja- cent wetland areas are generally consistent with the coastal policies. B. Activities and Uses Which May Be Consistent with the Coastal Policies Under Special Conditions. -Active Recreation: Active forms of recreation which involve the pas- sage of large numbers of people on or through a marsh may be con- sistent with the coastal policies only if appropriate mitigation measure are employed to protect the peat soils, vegetation, and overall natural landscape of the marsh in accordance with the general use criteria above. -Piers, Docks and Piles: Small piers, docks, piles and other similar structures may be consistent with the coastal policies only when 1) they do not involve dredging or filling of the marsh surface, 2) they are elevated on low-impact pile foundations, 3) they do not interfere with or obstruct navigation, 4) they do not restrict tidal circulation or flushing and 5) other siting, design, and construction measures areemployed to mitigate impacts, in accordance with the general use criteria above. -Pipes and Cables: Pipes and cables may be consistent with the coastal policies only when 1) they are installed below grade, 2) they are sited to take advantage of existing areas of disturbances such as mosquito ditches or existing transportation corridors, 3) damage to the wetland system as a result of construction activities is minimized in accordance with the general use criteria, 4) the wetland is re- stored to its natural condition following construction, and 5)ap- propriate erosion and sedimentation controls are instituted during placement of the pipes and cables so as to minimize impacts on water quality and sedimentation in surrounding areas. 11-77 TIDAL WETLANDS (CONT.) - Transportation Corridors (road, rail, pedestrian): Roads, railroads, trails, and pedestrian access routes through tidal wetlands may be consistent with the coastal policies only when 1) all non-wetland alternatives have been considered and have been shown to be in- feasible, 2) the transportation corridor is designed to minimize impact on the wetland using elevated, low-impact pile foundations, in accordance with the general use criteria above, 3) construction techniques minimize impacts on the wetland in accordance with the general use criteria above, 4)rthe improvements have a beneficial effect or negligible adverse effect on coastal access or recreation, 5) they do not interfere with or obstruct navigation, and 6) they do not restrict tidal circulation and flushing. - Point Discharge Structures (stormwater): Stormwater discharge structures may be consistent with the coastal policies only when 1) the pipe empties into tidal streams or ditches within the tidal wetland rather than directly onto the marsh surface, 2) the discharge pipe and head wall do not project onto the marsh surface or require fill of the marsh surface, 3) the velocities of the discharged water are not sufficient- ly large to cause erosion or scouring of the marsh surface or vege- tation, and 4) the discharge pipe is equipped with catch basins, and gas traps which are periodically cleaned. C. Activities and Uses Generally Inconsistent with the Coastal Policies. - Dredging (new) - Filling - Disposal of Dredged Material - Grading - Excavation - Bulkheads, Revetments - Dikes, Tidal Gates - Culverts - On-site Waste Disposal (septic systems, leach fields, solid waste, landfills) - Point Discharge Structures (wastewater) - Transportation Corridors (air) 11-78 G. FRESHWATER WETLANDS AND WATERCOURSES DEFINITION - "Freshwater Wetlands and Watercourses" means "wetlands" and "watercourses" as defined by Section 22a-38. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 3(7)(F)) POLICIES POLICIES TO BE FOLLOWED BY MUNICIPAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES A. It is, therefore, the purpose of sections 22a-36 to 22a-45, inclusive, to protect the citizens of the state by making provisions for the protection, preservation, maintenance and use of the inland wetlands and water courses by minimizing their disturbance and pollution; maintaining and improving water quality in accordance with the highest standards set by federal, state or local authority; preventing damage from erosion, turbidity or siltation; preventing loss of fish and other beneficial aquatic organisms, wildlife and vegetation and the destruction of the natural habitats thereof; deterring and inhibiting the danger of flood and pollution; protecting the quality of wetlands and water courses for their conservation, economic, aesthetic , recreational and other public and private uses and values; and protecting the state's potable fresh water supplies from the dangers of drought, overdraft, pollution, misuse and mismanagement by providing an orderly process to balance the need for the economic growth of the state and the use of its land with the need to protect its environment and ecology in order to forever guarantee to the people of the state, the safety of such natural resources for their benefit and enjoyment and for the benefit and enjoyment of generations yet unborn. (Source: CGS sec. 22a-36 as referenced by P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(a)(2)) POLICIES FOR STATE AN4D FEDERAL AGENCIES ONLY B. In carrying out the purposes and policies of sections 22a-36 to 22a-45, inclusive, including matters relating to regulating, licensing and en- forcing of the provisions thereof, the commissioner shall take into consideration all relevant facts and circumstances, including but not limited to: (a) The environmental impact of the proposed action; (b) The alternatives to the proposed action; (c) The relationship between short term uses of the environment and the maintenance and enhancement of long term productivity; 11-79 FRESHWATER WETLANDS AND WATERCOURSES (CONT,) (d) Irreversible and irretrievable committments of resources which would be involved in the proposed activity; (e) The character and degree of injury to, or interference with, safety, health or the reasonable use of property which is caused or threatened; and (f) The suitability or unsuitability of such activity to the area for which it is proposed. (Source: CGS sec. 22a-41, referenced by P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(a)(2)) SEE ALSO: - Dams, Dikes and Reservoirs Policy B (construction in inland wetlands). - Coastal Structures and Filling Policy C (maintenance of access to and along the public beach when permitting structures). SEE ALSO PLAN OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT POLICIES: - Land and Water Resources Policy A, action 5 (protection of wetlands). ADVERSE IMPACTS MUST BE EVALUATED (see box on page II-39) USES TO BE REGULATED All activities in inland wetlands and watercourses are under either the DEP or local agency inland wetlands permit program (CGS 22a-36 to 45) except for agricultural uses, boat anchorages or moorings, uses incidental to residential property, construction of dams for water supply and minor conservation and recreational uses. (Source: CGS 22a-38(13) and 22a-40, RCSA 22a-39-3 and 22a-39-4.2) - All dams and reservoirs in inland wetlands or watercourses are under the DEP dams and reservoir permit program (CGS 25-110 to 112). (Source: CGS 25-110) All buildings, uses and structures, all uses requiring a municipal special permit, all subdivisions, all variances, all planned unit developments and all municipal projects occurring adjacent to freshwater wetlands and watercourses and above the high water mark are subject 11-80 FRESHWATER WETLANDS AND WATERCOURSES (CONT.) to municipal site plan review requirements with the exception of garden- ing, agricultural activities and minor projects exempted by local regulation. (Note: This requirement is in addition to requirements for inland wetlands permits pursuant to CGS 22a-38(13) and 22a-40.) (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 11(b), 15(a) and 15(b)) MAPS - Maps at 1:24,000 scale will be prepared by the Coastal Area Management Unit of DEP. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 5(b)) - Maps at various scales -re available from the Water Resources Unit of DEP and the town offices. (Source: CGS 22a-39) IMPLEMENTATION STATE Issuance of DEP permits for activities in inland wetlands and watercourses pursuant to CGS 22a-42(f)(1) and for dams, dikes and reservoirs pursuant to CGS 25-110 must be consistent with the above policy. Administrative regulations governing inland wetlands permits have been promulgated. (RCSA 22a-39-1 to 22a-39-132). (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 21) All state agency actions significantly affecting the environment including land acquisitions, development projects and grants for development pro- jects must be consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(a)) MUNICIPAL Issuance of local inland wetlands agency permits pursuant to CGS 22a-42a(c) must be consistent with policy A above and local regulations. Local regulations must be consistent with DEP regulations (RCSA 22a-39-1 to 22a-39-132) and must be approved by DEP. (Source: CGS 22a-42 and 42a) FRESHWATER WETLANDS AND WATERCOURSES (CONT.) The decisions of municipal planning and zoning agencies and zoning boards of appeal concerning activities subject to coastal site plan review requirements must be consistent with policy A above, where applicable, and in addition such agencies and boards must determine whether or not the adverse impacts of the activity on coastal resources (including freshwater wetlands and watercourses) and future water dependent development opportunities are acceptable. It should be noted that review of a coastal site plan for a project in an inland wetland or watercourse is in addition to and does not supercede the permit review undertaken by either DEP or a local inland wetland agency. Criteria for issuing inland wetlands permits are contained in the inland wetlands statutes (CGS 22a-41) and regulations (RCSA 22a- 3902(15) and 22a-39-6.1) and in applicable local regulations. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 11(e), 12(a), (b) and (e)) Municipal agencies preparing voluntary municipal coastal programs must insure that they are consistent with policy A above. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 8(a) and 9(a)) FEDERAL - Federal agency actions including development projects, permits and grants must be consistent with all the above policies. (Source: Sec. 307 of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, 16 USC 1456) BACKGROUND DISCUSSION Natural Functions of Freshwater Wetlands and Watercourses: - provide for stormwater storage and transfer - are areas of high biological productivity - provide wildlife habitat for birds and small animals - serve as spawning areas for anadromous fish - influence salinity and estuarine circulation through freshwater input - contribute to the productivity of Long Island Sound II-82 FRESHWATER WETLANDS AND WATERCOURSES (CONT.) Social Value of Freshwater Wetlands and Watercourses: - act as an erosion buffer - provide recreational opportunities: swimming, fishing, hunting, wildlife observation, boating - transport toxics, heavy metals and pathogens to coastal waters - act as flood control buffer USE GUIDELINES PRIORITY USE: CONSERVATION/LIMITED DEVELOPMENT GENERAL USE CRITERIA (applicable to all uses) - Apply requirements and criteria contained in the Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Act and pursuant administrative regulations. - Protect, preserve and maintain the natural form and integrity of wetlands and watercourses by minimizing their disturbance and pollution. - Maintain and improve water quality in accordance with the highest standards set by federal, state or local authorities. . Preserve and maintain those waters with existing quality better than established standards. . Restore the surface waters of the state to a quality consistent with its use for the protection and propagation of fish, shellfish and wildlife including breeding, feeding and nursery grounds and with its use for recreation in and on the water. Restore all waters to the maximum extent possible at least to a quality consistent with Class B or SB. .The discharge of sewage from marine sanitation devices installed on vessels shall be prohibited on those waters of the state (i.e. no discharge zones) where greater control is required for public health or environmental protection. - Utilize site and engineering designs which are compatible and harmonious with the natural amenities of wetlands and watercourses and which 1) will not adversely affect or destroy important natural features such as vegetation, landscape, and drainage, but will preserve and incorporate these into the design, 2) will not adversely impact unique biologic, geologic or hydrologic features, 3) minimize the amount of disturbance and extent of clearing, 4) will not reduce or increase the natural ground and surface water retention capacity of the wetland, 5) consider the II-83 FRESHWATER WETLANDS AND WATERCOURSES (CONT.) capability of the soil and subsoil conditions to support the activity, 6) apply Soil Conservation Service erosion/sedimentation guidelines as appropriate, and 7) employ adequate vegetation buffers to protect the wetland from runoff and sedimentation from adjacent upland and wet- land sites. -Apply general use criteria for coastal hazard areas. -Employ construction techniques,such as the following, that avoid or substantially limit impacts to wetlands and watercourses: 1) minimize the area of wetland affected, and 2) restore the disturbed wetland area following construction. -Incorporate site planning and design features which limit or avoid negative visual and aesthetic impacts or which create positive visual and aesthetic impacts on the site and surrounding area. � Alleviate blighted or deteriorated conditions on-site. �Blend the architecture, size, materials, color and texture of new structure with the existing qualities and characteristics of the man-made and natural environment. � Make extensive use of landscaping, plantings, and natural ground coverings. USE CONSISTENCY A. Activities and Uses Generally Consistent with the Coastal Policies. - Recreation: Outdoor recreation including play and sporting areas, golf courses, field trials, nature study, horseback riding, swimming, skin diving, camping, boating, water skiing, trapping, hunting, fishing, and shellfishing where the indigenous character of the land is not disturbed are permitted as a right and are consistent with the coastal policies. - Agriculture: Agricultural activities such as grazing, farming, nurseries, gardening, harvesting or crops and farm ponds of three acres or less are permitted as of right and are consistent with the coastal policies. - Conservation: Conservation activities and practices including con- servation of soil, vegetation, water, fish, shellfish and wildlife are permitted as of right and are consistent with the coastal policies provided the indigenous character of the land is not disturbed. B. Activities and Uses Which May Be Consistent with the Coastal Policies. - Piers and Docks: Conservation of piers and docks may be consistent with the coastal policies when 1) the area of wetland affected is 11-84 FRESHWATER WETLANDS AND WATERCOURSES (CONT.) minimized, 2) the best available technologies are used to reduce the amount of controllable erosion and sedimentation, 3) pile, timber or float construction are used, and 4) the structure is sited so as to take advantage of natural deep water or channels in order to avoid the necessity of dredging. -Culverts: Culverts may be consistent with the coastal policies when 1.) the natural conveyance capacity of the drainageway is not signi- ficantly reduced, 2) irreversible changes in the character of the I ~ ~~~wetland do not ensue,and 3) the flood hazard potential is not signi- ficantly increased. I ~~ ~~ Traffic Corridors (Pedestrian): Construction of pedestrian traffic corridors may be consistent with the coastal policies especially when constructed of wooded elevated walkways so as to minimize the impact of moderate to heavy pedestrian traffic to those wetlands com- posed of organic soils (Adrian, Palms, Carlisle). -Dredging (Maintenance and Enhancement): Maintenance and enhancement dredging may be consistent with the coastal policies when 1) the dimensions of the channel or basin is not significantly enlarged from the original project dimensions, 2) the impacts of dredging does not adversely affect coastal waters or violate state water quality standards, and 3) the operations are timed so as to avoid critical anadromous fish runs. -Bulkheads and Revetments: Bulkheads and revetments may be consistent with the coastal policies when 1) used for the purpose of controlling bankline erosion when non-structural solutions have been shown to be infeasible, 2) the natural conveyance capacities of the watercourse are not impeded, and 3) their intrusion on wetlands is the minimum necessary to provide flooding or erosion protection. -Point Discharge Structures: Point discharge structures may be con- sistent with the coastal policies when 1) the discharge pipe is equipped with catch basins and gas traps which are periodically cleaned, 2) the discharge does not violate state water quality standards, and 3) the velocity of the discharge waters are not sufficient to cause wetland erosion. -Traffic Corridors (Road, Rail): Traffic corridors may be consistent with the coastal policies when 1) it is not feasible to locate them r ~ ~~~in a less sensitive resource area, 2) the best available mitigation technologies are employed to reduce controllable sedimentation inci- dental to construction and roadway drainage, 3) the corridor is constructed so as to maximize the encroachment on the wetland area, and 4) low impact pile construction is used when feasible. -Filling: Filling may be consistent with the coastal policies when 1) all non-wetland alternatives have been considered and demonstrated to be infeasible, 2) the facility is designed and sited so as to 11-85 FRESHWATER WETLANDS AND WATERCOURSES (CONT.) minimize the amount of wetland area filled, 3) the flood hazard potential is not significantly increased, 4) the fill is not placed on wetland areas that are unique, unusual, important wildlife habitats for rare and endangered species or important fish runs, and 5) the fill does not contain any chemical, biologic, or man-made pollutants which could adversely affect coastal water quality or violate state water quality standards. - Pipes and Cables: Pipes and cables may be consistent with the coastal policies when 1) there are no reasonable alternatives such as siting in or on less sensitive upland resources, 2) the affected area is kept to a minimum, 3) all disturbed areas are restored to their pre- viously existing grade and are replanted as necessary, and 4) they areI - Dikes: Dikes may be consistent with the coastal policies when they meet thic guidelines fo,- filling. C. Activities and Uses Generally Inconsistent with the Coastal Policies. - Grading (except as incidental to grading permitted fill). - Excavation (except as incidental to placement of consistent structures). - Disposal of Dredge Material - On-site Waste Disposal (septic systems, leach fields, landfills) - Dredging (new) - Dams DEFINITION -"Coastal Hazard Areas'" means those land areas inundated during coastal storm events or subject to erosion induced by such events, including flood hazard areas as defined and determined by the National Flood Insurance Act, as amended (U.S.C. 42 Section 4101, P.L. 93-234) and all erosion hazard areas as determined by the Commissioner. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 3(7)(H)) COASTAL HAZARD AREAS (CONT.) POLICIES POLICIES TO BE FOLLOWED BY MUNICIPAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES A. To manage coastal hazard areas so as to insure that development pro- ceeds in such a manner that hazards to life and property are minimized. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(b)(2)(F)) B. To promote nonstructural solutions to flood and erosion problems ex- cept in those instances where'structural alternatives prove unavoid- able and necessary to protect existing inhabited structures, infra-' structural facilities or water dependent uses. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(b)(2)(F)) C. To maintain the natural relationship between eroding and depositional coastal landforms. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(b)(2)(J)) D. To minimize the adverse impacts of erosion and sedimentation on coastal land uses through the promotion of nonstructural mitigation measures. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(b)(2)(J)) E. Structural solutions are permissible when necessary and unavoidable for the protection of infrastructural facilities, water dependent uses, or existing inhabited structures, and where there is no feasible, less environmentally damaging alternative and where all reasonable mitigation measures and techniques have been provided to minimize adverse environmental impacts. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(b)(2)(J)) SEE ALSO: - Flooding and Erosion Planning Policy A (consider impacts of flooding and erosion in the planning process). - Beaches and Dunes Policy B (insure coastal uses are compatible with coastal resources). - Beaches and Dunes Policy C (restoration of disturbed beach systems). I1-87 COASTAL HAZARD AREAS (CONT.) -Bluffs and Escarpments Policy B (discourage uses interfering with natural rates of erosion). -Bluffs and Escarpments Policy C (disapprove uses that accelerate erosion). -Intertidal Flats Policy D (disallow uses adversely impacting tidal flats). POLICIES FOR STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES ONLY F. It is hereby found and declared that, because of the occurrence of severe storms accompanied by winds up to hurricane force, abnormal high tides and tide flooding, the lives and property of residents and other persons within areas exposed to such hazards are endangered, and that, in the interest of-public health, safety and general wel- fare, it is necessary to minimize, and as far as possible to prevent, loss of life, property and revenue to municipalities and the state from taxation by the construction of protective works on or near shores and beaches within such areas. As title to the land between high and low watermark is vested in the state, it is further found and declared to be in the public interest to secure such exposed areas by the most economical and effective means for safeguarding life and protecting property and, because it is uneconomical and ineffective for the general purpose for an individual landowner to attempt to maintain protective installations separated from and lacking co-extension with those of abutting properties, that it is in the public interest to provide the ways and means for collective and cooperative action to alleviate the dangers and destruction common to such exposed areas.I It is further found and declared that because of the recurrence of severe flooding of many of the waterways of the state and their tri- butaries, taking a huge toll in life and property, extensive flood protection measures must be inaugurated. It is, therefore, found andI declared to be in the public interest that encroachment limits along waterways be established and any flood control features at dams and reservoirs be utilized as a part of the construction and installation of any flood control project. (Source: C.G.S. 25-69, referenced by P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(a)(2)) G. Land areas fronting on the ocean, or on bays, inlets and coves, or bordering on rivers in which tides occur, that are subject to the full force of storms; or land areas in direct contact with storm waves, including banks, bluffs, cliffs promontories and headlands or similar topographical or geological formations, that are subject to erosion through wave action; or open beach areas, including spits, dunes and barrier beaches, that are subject to loss of sand through high waves, strong currents or scouring wave action; or land areas subject to inundation during storms or vulnerable to storm damage because of geographic situation, may be classed as exposed areas 11-88 COASTAL HAZARD AREAS (CONT.) within the meaning of sections 25-69 to 25-75, inclusive. The limits of such areas shall be the extent of the natural configuration of the land surface not necessarily co-extensive with political boundaries, and shall include privately-owned and municipally-owned properties upon which public money may be spent and public debt incurred for the protection and conservation thereof, and taxes levied to support expenditures for such purposes. (Source: C.G.S. 25-70, referenced by P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(a)(2)) H. The commissioner shall establish, along any tidal or inland waterway or flood-prone area considered for stream clearance, channel improve- ment or any form of flood control or flood alleviation measure, lines beyond which, in the direction of the waterway or flood-prone area, no obstruction or encroachment shall be placed by any person, firm or corporation, public or private, unless authorized by said commissioner. The commissioner shall issue or deny permits upon applications for establishing such encroachments based upon his findings of the effect of such proposed encroachments upon the flood-carrying and water storage capacity of the waterways and flood plains, flood heights, hazards to life and property, and the protection and preservation of the natural resources and ecosystems of the state, including but not limited to ground and surface water, animal, plant and aquatic life, nutrient exchange, and energy flow, with due consideration given to the results of similar encroachments constructed along the reach of waterway. (Source: C.G.S. 25-4a, referenced by P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(a)(2)) i.To require as a condition in permitting now coastal structures, including but not limited to groins, jetties or breakwaters, t'iat access to, or along, the public beach below mean high water must not be unreasonably impaired by such structures. (Source: PA. 79-535, sec. 2(c)(1)(K)) SEE ALSO PLAN OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT POLICIES: -Land and Water Resources Policy A, action 3 (prevent uneconomic develop- ment in state's flood plain). -Preservation Areas Policy B.2 (mitigation measures in flood hazard areas). -Conservation Areas Policy B.2 (flood fringe development). ADVERSE IMPACTS MUST BE EVALUATED (see box on page II-j9) 1.1-89 COASTAL HAZARD AREAS (CONT.) USES TO BE REGULATED - All structures and fill in coastal waters are regulated under the DEP structures permit program (CGS 25-7b to 7f). (Source: CGS 25-7b) - All new dredging in coastal waters is regulated under DEP dredging permit program (CGS 25-10 to 18). (Source: CGS 25-11) - All activities in tidal wetlands are regulated under the DEP tidal wetlands permit program (CGS 22a-28 to 35) except for State Health Department mosquito control activities, DEP conservation activities, the construction and maintenance of aids to navigation, and activities authorized in emergency decrees of municipal public health officer. (Source: CGS 22a-29(3)) - Obstructions or encroachments within state established flood encroach- ment lines are regulated under the DEP flood encroachment line permit program (CGS 25-4a to 4g). (Source: CGS 25-4a) - All activities in coastal waters requiring certification of water quality from DEP pursuant to the Federal Clean Water Act of 1972. (Source: 33 USC 1411, sec. 401) - All buildings, uses and structures, all uses requiring a municipal special permit, all subdivisions, all variances, all planned unit developments and all municipal projects occurring within coastal hazard areas and above the high water mark are subject to municipal site plan review requirements with the exception of gardening, agricultural activities and minor projects exempted by local regulation. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 11(b), 15(a) and 15(b)) MAPS - Maps of both flood hazard and erosion hazard areas at a scale of 1:24,000 will be prepared by the Coastal Area Management Unit of DEP. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 5(b)) II-90 COASTAL HAZARD AREAS (CONT.) Maps of flood prone areas prepared by the federal Flood Insurance Program at various scales are available from the Water Resources Unit of DEP and from the town offices. (Source: Federal Flood Insurance Regulations 24 CFR sec. 1914.3) IMPLEMENTATION STATE - Issuance of the following DEP permits must be consistent with all of the above policies: 1) permits for structures or fill in coastal waters pursuant to C.G.S. 25-7b, 2) permits for new dredging in coastal waters pursuant to C.G.S. 25-11, 3) permits for activities in tidal wetlands pursuant to C.G.S. 22a-32, and 4) permits for obstructions beyond flood encroachment lines pursuant to C.G.S. 25-4a. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 21) - Issuance of a certificate of water quality by DEP pursuant to the Federal Clean Water Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1411, sec. 401) must be consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 21) All state agency actions significantly affecting the environment in- cluding flood and erosion control projects, land acquisitions, develop- ment projects and grants for development projects must be consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(b)) - All major state agency plans must by July 1, 1981 be revised to insure consistency with all of the above policies. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(a)) MUNICIPAL - The decisions of municipal planning and zoning agencies and zoning boards of appeal concerning activities subject to coastal site plan review requirements must be consistent with policies A through E above, where applicable, and in addition such agencies and boards must deter- mine whether or not the adverse impacts of the activity on coastal resources (including coastal hazard areas) and future water dependent development opportunities are acceptable. (Source: P.A. 79-535, secs. 11(e), 12(a), (b) and (e)) 11-91 COASTAL HAZARD AREAS (CONT.) - Municipal agencies preparing voluntary coastal programs must insure that they are consistent with policies A through E above. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 8(a) and 9(a)) FEDERAL - Federal agency actions including development projects, permits and grants must be consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: Sec. 307 of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, 16 USC 1456) BACKGROUND DISCUSSION Natural Functions of Coastal Hazard Areas: - encompass most other important coastal resources Social Value of Coastal Hazard Areas: - constitute hazard areas for structural development - serve as a flood and erosion buffer zone USE GUIDELINES PRIORITY USE: CONSERVATION/LIMITED DEVELOPMENT GENERAL USE CRITERIA (applicable to all uses) - Maintain or restore the natural relationship between eroding and de- positional coastal landforms. - maintain or restore natural patterns of littoral transport � avoid uses and activities which interrupt or alter natural sediment transport from eroding source areas to depositional receiving areas - Maintain or restore natural landforms within or adjacent to coastal hazard areas that serve as buffers to flood and erosion such as beaches, dunes and wetlands. 11-92 COASTAL HAZARD AREAS (CONT.) - Maintain or restore natural vegetation in coastal high hazard areas (V-Zones as designated by the FEMA, National Flood Insurance Program) to serve as a buffer against storm, wind, and wave energy. -Site outside of coastal hazard areas, all facilities which have the potential to cause pollution or hazardous conditions as a result of flooding or erosion, such as energy and oil and chemical handling facilities. In the event that a facility cannot, by reason of its water dependent nature, be located outside of a coastal flood hazard area, incorporate flood proofing measures in the design of the facility that will protect against extreme flooding conditions (generally a 500 year frequency flood event or greater). -Apply the National Flood Insurance Program, flood plain management re- quirements (24 CFR 1909 et. seq.) administered by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, to all activities in designated A-Zones and floodways. - Apply the National Flood Insurance Program, flood plain management requirements (24 CFR 1909 et. seq.) administered by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, to all new construction or substantial improvements in designated coastal high hazard zones (V-Zones) with the following additional constraints: 1) site all new or substantially improved buildings, dwellings and non-water dependent structures out of the designated coastal high hazard zone (V-Zone), 2) for those new or substantially improved water dependent buildings and habitable structures which cannot functionally be sited outside the designated V-Zone, elevate the lowest floor sufficiently above the base flood level, so as to be free from the impacts of wave action generated by 100 year frequency storm events. In all erosion hazard areas designated by the Commissioner of the De- partment of Environmental Protection, where applicable, require that allI new development in erosion-prone areas beset back from the water to create a safety buffer consisting of a natural vegetative or contour strip. The width of this buffer should be based on the predicted erosion rate in conjunction with the anticipated "useful life" of the proposed structure. Employ non-structural flood and erosion control techniques such as erosion setbacks and buffers, location of vulnerable uses out of hazard areas, vegetative stabilization, and construction of artificial dunes, as the primary means of controlling flood and erosion hazards except in instances where such non-structural techniques would be inadequate to protect infrastructural facilities (such as sewer and water lines), water dependent uses, or existing inhabited structures that were in place prior to ~January 1, 1980. II-93 COASTAL HAZARD AREAS (CONT.) Employ structural flood and erosion control techniques such as groins, seawalls, and revetments only when 1) the structures are being placed to provide protection to infrastructural facilities, water dependent uses, or existing inhabited structures thattwere in place prior to January 1, 1980, 2) non-structural techniques have been explored and are found to be infeasible, 3) there is no other less environmentally damaging alternative, and 4) all reasonable mitigation measures and techniques are employed to minimize adverse environmental impacts. Control or mitigate on-site and off-site impacts resulting from soil erosion, sedimentation and stormwater runoff through the use of ap- propriate construction, siting, and design practices such as 1) timing and staging of earthmoving, grading and vegetation to minimize soil exposure, 2) use of vegetative control techniques such as sod, tempor- ary vegetation, or vegetation buffers, 3) use of non-vegetative control techniques such as mulches, nettings, and chemical binders, 4) use of structural control techniques such as filters, traps, basins, ponds and diversion structures, 5) avoiding excavation on steep slopes (greater than 25%), and 6) terracing. Incorporate site planning and design features which limit or avoid negative visual and aesthetic impacts or which create positive visual and aesthetic impacts on the site and on the surrounding area. � alleviate blighted or deteriorated conditions on-site blend the architecture, size, materials, color, and texture of new structures with the existing qualities and characteristics of the man-made and natural environment. * provide visual setbacks from the water based on considerations of structure, height and mass for all structures which do not function- ally require a shorefront location. � make extensive use of landscaping, plantings, and natural ground coverings. � maintain, improve, or enhance visual access to the coast. Avoid any use or activity which would significantly increase floodwater elevations, or otherwise increase flood or erosion hazards. Maintain or enhance public access to and along the shorefront. � when compatible with the proposed use, design facilities so as to take advantage of waterfront location in order to provide an area for public enjoyment. � maintain or improve access to and along publicly owned shorefront including public trust lands below the mean high water mark. 11-94 COASTAL HAZARD AREAS (CONT,) All activities and uses should be consistent with the capacity of the soil and subsoil to support such use or activity. Maintain or enhance cultural features through measures such as 1) pro- tection of historic sites and districts from incompatible land uses and 2) prevention of harmful alteration of significant archaeological or geologic sites. - Apply all coastal policies and use guidelines for all other coastal resources where they occur within coastal hazard areas (see bluffs and escarpments, rocky shorefronts, beaches and dunes, intertidal flats, tidal wetlands, freshwater wetlands and watercourses, developed shore- fronts, islands, estuarine embayments, and coastal waters). USE CONSISTENCY A. Activities and Uses Generally Consistent with the Coastal Policies. When undertaken in accordance with the general use criteria above, the following uses and activities are generally consistent with the coastal policies for those areas that are exclusively coastal hazard area (i.e. all coastal hazard areas that are not composed of other coastal resources). To determine the consistency of various uses and activities in those coastal hazard areas that are composed of other basic coastal resources, refer to the use guidelines for the component resources (i.e. bluffs and escarpments, rocky shorefronts, beaches and dunes, intertidal flats, tidal wetlands and watercourses, develop- ed shorefront, islands, estuarine embayments and coastal waters). - Recreation - Agriculture - Conservation Activities - Grading - Excavation - Pipes and Cables B. Activities and Uses Which May Be Consistent with the Coastal Policies Under Special Conditions. When undertaken in dccordance with the general use criteria above, the following activities and uses may be consistent with the coastal policies, as noted, for those areas that are exclusively coastal hazard areas (i.e. all coastal hazard areas that are not composed of other coastal resources). To determine the consistency of various activities and uses in those coastal hazard areas that are composed of other basic II-95 COASTAL HAZARD AREAS (CONT.) coastal resources, refer to the use guidelines for the component resources (i.e. bluffs and escarpments, rocky shorefronts, beaches and dunes, intertidal flats, tidal wetlands, freshwater wetlands and watercourses, developed shorefront, islands, estuarine embayments, and coastal waters): -Disposal of Dredged Material: The disposal of dredged material may be consistent with the coastal policies when 1) the dredged material is clean and free of chemical, biological or man-made pollutants which are likely to adversely affect water quality or violate state water quality standards, 2) the best available technologies are used to reduce controllable sedimentation, and 3) the dredged material is contained so as to prevent its release to coastal waters. Seawalls, Revetments, Bulkheads: Seawalls, revetments and bulk- heads and other such flood and erosion control structures may be consistent with the coastal policies only when 1) the structures are being placed to provide protection to infrastructural facilities, water dependent uses, or existing inhabited structures which were in place prior to January 1, 1980, 2) non-structural techniques have been explored and are found to be infeasible, 3) there is no other less environmentally damaging alternative, 4) all reasonable mitigation measures and techniques are employed to minimize adverse environmental impacts, and 5) the structures comply with all ap- plicable general utse criteria above. -Buildings: Buildings and related structures may be consistent with the coastal policies only when 1) the structures comply with the National Flood Insurance Program requirements (24 CFR 1901 et. seq.) administered by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, and 2) the structures comply with all applicable general use criteria above. -Point Discharge Structure: Point discharge structures may be con- sistent with the coastal policies when 1) the discharge is for the purpose of stormwater drainage, 2) the velocities of the discharged water are not sufficient to cause erosion or scouring, and 3) the discharge pipe is equipped with catch basins and gas traps which are periodically cleaned. -Transportation Corridors (road, rail, air, pedestrian): Road, rail, air, and pedestrian transportation corridors may be consistent with the coastal policies only when 1) in the case of all vehicular traf- fic improvements, the improvements involve the rehabilitation, up- grading, or improvement of existing transportation facilities, 2) the improvements are designed and constructed to minimize adverse impacts on coastal resources in accordance with the general use criteria above, 3) the improvements have a beneficial effect or a negligible adverse effect on coastal access and recreation, 4) other less environmentally damaging alternatives including location of the improvements outside of the coastal boundary have been considered -II-96 COASTAL HAZARD AREAS (CONT.) and are shown to be infeasible, 5) in the case of highway improvements, mass transportation alternatives have been considered and are shown to be infeasible, 6) in the case of airport improvements, the improve- ment does not involve the construction of a major new airport facili- ty or the substantial expansion of an existing airport, and 7) the flood hazard potential is not significantly increased. Dikes: Dikes may be consistent with the coastal policies when 1) they are designed so as not to increase the flood hazard potential be- hind the structure due to the effects of ponding or backwater, and 2) all reasonable mitigation measures have been employed to minimize the impact of the structures on coastal resources, in accordance with the general use criteria above. Filling: Filling may be consistent with the coastal policies when 1) the flood hazard potential is not significantly increased, and 2) the fill is clean and free of chemical, biological or man-made pollutants which could adversely affect water quality or violate state water quality standards. C. Activities and Uses Generally Inconsistent with the Coastal Policies. On-site waste disposal (septic systems, leach fields, solid waste landfills). Transportation improvements (major new airports and substantial expansion of existing airports). Jq DEVELOPED SHOREFRONT DEFINITION - "Developed Shorefront" means those harbor areas which have been highly engineered and developed resulting in the func- tional impairment or substantial alteration of their natural physiographic features or systems. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 3(7)(1)) "Water Dependent Uses" means those uses and facilities which require direct access to, or location in, marine or tidal waters and which therefore cannot be located inland, including but not limited to: marinas, recreational and commercial fishing and boating facilities, finfish and shellfish pro- cessing plants, waterfront dock and port facilities, ship- yards and boat building facilities, water based recreational uses, navigational aids, basins and channels, industrial uses dependent upon waterborne transportation or requiring large volumes of cooling or process water which cannot reasonably be located or operated at an inland site and uses which pro- vide general public access to marine or tidal waters. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 3(16)) 11-97 DEVELOPED SHOREFRONT (CONT.) POLICIES POLICIES TO BE FOLLOWED BY MUNICIPAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES A. To promote, through existing state and local planning, development, promotional and regulatory programs, the use of existing developed shorefront areas for marine related uses, including but not limited to commercial and recreational fishing, boating and other water dependent commercial, industrial and recreational uses. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(b)(2)(G)) SEE ALSO: - Boating Policy D (maintain existing boating harbor space). - Water Dependent Uses Policy A (high priority to uses and facilities dependent on proximity to the water). - Water Dependent Uses Policy B (management of uses in the coastal boundary). POLICIES FOR STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES ONLY - Coastal Structures and Filling Policy C (maintenance of access to and along the public beach when permitting structures). ADVERSE IMPACTS MUST BE EVALUATED (see box on page 11-39) USES TO BE REGULATED - All structures and fill in coastal waters are regulated under the DEP structure permit program (CGS 25-7b). (Source: CGS 25-7b) - All new dredging in coastal waters is regulated under the DEP dredging permit program (CGS 25-10 to 18). (Source: CGS 25-11) 11-98 DEVELOPED SHOREFRONT (CONT.) All buildings, uses and structures, all uses requiring a municipal special permit, all subdivisions, all variances, all planned unit developments and all municipal projects occurring on developed shore- front and above the high water mark are subject to municipal site plan review requirements with the exception of gardening, agricultur- al activities and minor projects exempted by local regulation. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 11(b), 15(a) and 15(b)) MAPS - Maps at 1:24,000 scale will be prepared by the Coastal Area Management Unit of DEP. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 5(b)) IMPLEMENTATION STATE Issuance of DEP permits for structures or fill in coastal waters pursuant to CGS 25-7b and permits for new dredging in coastal waters pursuant to CGS 25-11 must be consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 21) Establishment of boundaries seaward of the mean high water mark by DEP for the regulation of uses, obstructions, encroachments and facilities pursuant to CGS 25-7b must be consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 21) - Designation of channels and boat basins by DEP pursuant to CGS 25-3d and 25-14 must be consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 21) - Approval of municipal harbor improvement plans by DEP pursuant to section 15 must be consistent with the above policy. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 21) All state agency actions significantly affecting the environment in- cluding land acquisitions, development projects and grants for development projects must be consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(a)) 11-99 DEVELOPED SHOREFRONT (CONT.) All major state agency plans must, by July 1, 1981, be revised to insure consistency with all of the above policies. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(a)) MUNICIPAL - The decisions of municipal planning and zoning agencies and zoning boards of appeal concerning activities subject to coastal site plan review requirements must be consistent with policy A above, where applicable, and in addition such agencies and boards must determine whether or not the adverse impacts of the activity on coastal resources (including developed shorefront) and future water dependent develop- ment opportunities are acceptable. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 11(e), 12(a), 12(b) and 12(e)) - Municipal agencies preparing voluntary municipal coastal programs must insure that they are consistent with policy A above. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 8(a) and 9(a)) FEDERAL - Federal agency actions including development projects, permits and grants must be consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: Sec. 307 of the federal Coast- al Zone Management Act of 1972, 16 USC 1456) BACKGROUND DISCUSSION Natural Function of Developed Shorefront: - limited Social Value of Developed Shorefront: - are areas of significant economic development and importance - serve as transportation centers - function as commercial centers 11-100 DEVELOPED SHOREFRONT (CONT.) - are recreational boating centers - are areas of significant cultural and historic value USE GUIDELINES PRIORITY USE: DEVELOPMENT GENERAL USE CRITIERIA (applicable to all uses) -Where feasible, reserve developed shorefront areas for water-dependent uses, including but not limited to commercial and recreational fish- ing, boating, uses providing public access and other water-dependent I ~ ~~commercial, industrial and recreational uses. -Control or mitigatoe on-site and off-site impacts resulting from soil I ~ ~~erosion, sedimentation and stormwater runoff through the use of appropriate construction, siting, and design practices such as 1) timing and staging of earthmoving, grading and vegetation to b. ~~~minimize soil exposure, 2) use of vegetative control techniques such as sod, temporary vegetation, or vegetation buffers, 3) use of non- vegetative control techniques, such as mulches, nettings, and chemical binders, 4) use of structural control techniques such as filters, traps, basins, ponds, and diversion structures, 5) avoiding develop- ment on steep slopes (greater than 25%) and 6) terracing. -Avoid any use or activity which would significantly increase flood or erosion hazards. -Incorporate site planning and design features which limit or avoid negative visual and aesthetic impacts or which create positive visual and aesthetic impacts on the site and on the surrounding area. *alleviate blighted or deteriorated conditions on-site *blend the architecture, size, materials, color, and texture of new structures with the existing qualities and characteristics of the surrounding man-made and natural environment *provide visual setbacks from the water based on considerations of building height and mass for all structures which do not function- ally require a shorefront location . make extensive use of landscaping, plantings, and natural ground coverings . maintain, improve, or enhance visual access to the coast 11-101 DEVELOPED SHOREFRONT (CONT,) Maintain or enhance public access to and along the shorefront. when compatible with the nature of the proposed use, design waterfront utility, commercial, industrial, residential and institutional facilities so as to take advantage of the op- portunity presented by a waterfront location to provide an attractive area along the water for public enjoyment of the shoreline. maintain or enhance public access to and along shorefront areas that are publicly owned (including public land below the mean high water mark). Reuse and redevelop built-up or vacant shorefront in preference to development of previously undeveloped shorefront. Insure that shorefront development is compatible with municipal har- bor development plans, where such plans are consistent with the coastal policies in the Connecticut Coastal Management Act. All activities and uses should be consistent with the capacity of the soil and subsoil to support such use or activity. Apply general use criteria for coastal hazard areas, where appropriate. USE CONSISTENCY A. Activities and Uses Generally Consistent with the Coastal Policies. - Grading - Excavation - Pipes and Cables - Recreation - Conservation Activities B. Activities and Uses Which May Be Consistent with the Coastal Policies Under Special Conditions. - Piers, Docks, Wharves, Piles, Floats: Piers, docks, wharves, piles and floats may be consistent with the coastal policies when 1) siting and design practices are used which minimize impacts to estuarine em- bayments, intertidal flats, and shellfish concentration areas, 2) the structures are designed so as not to impede tidal flushing or circulation, and 3) the structures do not interfere with or ob- struct navigation. 11-102 DEVELOPED SHOREFIRONT (CaNT.) Seawalls, Revetments, Bulkheads: Seawalls, revetments and bulkheads may be consistent with the coastal policies when 1) the structures are being placed to provide protection to infrastructura] facilities, water dependent uses, and existing inhabited structures that were in place prior to January 1, 1980, 2) non-structural techniques have been ex- plored and are found to be infeasible, 3) there is no other less environ- mentally damaging alternative, and 4) all reasonable mitigation measures and techniques are employed to minimize adverse environmental impacts. Disposal of Dredged Material: The disposal of dredged material may be consistent with the coastal policies when 1) the dredged material is clean and free of chemical, biological or man-made pollutants which are likely to adversely affect water quality or violate state water quality standards, 2) the best available technologies are used to reduce controllable sedimentation, and 3) the dredged material is con- tained so as to prevent its release to coastal waters. -Filling: Filling may be consistent with the coastal policies when 1) the flood hazard potential is not significantly increased, and 2) the fill is clean and free of chemical, biological or man-made pollutants which could adversely affect water quality or violate state water qudlity standards. Point Discharge Structures: Point discharge structures may be consistent with the coastal policies when 1) the discharge is for the purpose of stormwater drainage, 2) the velocities of the discharge are not suf- ficient to cause erosion or scouring, and 3) the discharge pipe is equipped with catch basins and gas traps which are periodically cleaned. Transportation Corridors (road, rail, air, pedestrian): Road, rail, air and pedestrian transportation corridors may be consistent with the coastal policies when 1) in the case of all vehicular traffic improve- ments, the improvements involve the rehabilitation, upgrading, or improvement of existing transportation facilities, 2) the improvements are designed and constructed to minimize adverse impacts on coastal resources in accordance with the general use criteria above, 3) the improvements have a beneficial effect or a negligible adverse effect on coastal access and recreation, 4) other less environmentally damaging alternatives including location of the improvement outside of the coastal boundary have been considered and are shown to be infeasible, 6) in the case of airport improvements, the improvement does not involve the construction of a major new airport facility or the substantial expansion of an existing airport, and 7) the flood hazard potential is not significantly increased. -Dikes: Dikes may be consistent with the coastal policies when 1) they are designed so as not to increase the flood hazard potential behind the structure due to the effects of ponding or backwater, and 2) all reasonable mitigation measures have been employed to minimize the impact of the structures on coastal resources, in accordance with the general use criteria above. 11-103 DEVELOPED SHOREFRONT (CONT.) C. Activities and Uses Generally Inconsistent with the Coastal Policies. - On-site waste disposal (septic systems, leach fields, solid waste landfills). -Transportation corridors (major new airports and substantial ex- pansion of existing airports). J. ISLANDS DEFINITION - "Island" means land surrounded on all sides by water. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 3(7)(J)) POLICIES. POLICIES TO BE FOLLOWED BY MUNICIPAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES A. To manage undeveloped islands in order to promote their use as criti- cal habitats for those bird, plant and animal species which are indigenous to such islands or which are increasingly rare on the mainland. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(b)(2)(H)) B. To maintain the value of undeveloped islands as a major source of recreational open space. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(b)(2)(H) C. To disallow uses which will have significant adverse impacts on islands or their resource components. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(b)(2)(H)) ADVERSE IMPACTS MUST BE EVALUATED (see box on page II-39) USES TO BE REGULATED - All buildings, uses and structures, all uses requiring a municipal special permit, all subdivisions, all variances, all planned unit II-104 ISLANDS (CONT.) developments and all municipal projects occurring on islands and above the high water mark are subject to municipal site plan review requirements with the exception of gardening, agricultural activities and minor projects exempted by local regulation. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 11(b), 15(a) and 15(b)) - All structures and fill in coastal waters are regulated under the DEP structures permit program (CGS 25-7b to 7f). (Source: CGS 25-7b) - All new dredging in coastal waters is regulated under the DEP dredging permit program (CGS 25-10 to 18). (Source: CGS 25-11) All activities in tidal wetlands are regulated under the DEP tidal wetlands permit program (CGS 22a-28 to 35) except for the Depart- ment of Health Services' mosquito control activities, the construc- tion and maintenance of aids to navigation, and activities authorized in emergency decrees of a municipal public health officer. (Source: CGS 22a-29(3)) All activities in inland wetlands and watercourses are regulated under either the DEP or local agency inland wetlands permit program except for agricultural uses, boat anchorages, uses incidental to residential property, construction and recreational uses. (Source: CGS 22a-38(13) and 22a-40) All activities in coastal waters requiring certification of water quality from DEP pursuant to the Federal Clean Water Act of 1972. (Source: 33 USC 1411, sec. 401) MAPS Maps at 1:24,000 scale will be prepared by the Coastal Area Manage- ment Unit of DEP. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 5(b)) 11-105 ISLANDS (CONT,) IMPLEMENTATION STATE Issuance of the following DEP permits must be consistent with all of the above policies: 1) permits for structures or fill in coastal waters pursuant to CGS 25-7b, 2) permits for new dredging in coastal waters pursuant to CGS 25-11, 3) permits for activities in tidal wetlands pursuant to CGS 22a-32, 4) permits for activities in inland wetlands and watercourses pursuant to CGS 22a-42, and 5) certification of water quality pursuant to the Federal Clean Water Act of 1972. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 21) All state agency actions significantly affecting the environment in- cluding land acquisitions, development projects and grants for development projects must be consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(b)) - All major state agency plans must, by July 1, 1981, be revised to insure consistency with all of the above policies. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(a)) MUNICIPAL - The decisions of municipal planning and zoning agencies and zoning boards of appeal concerning activities subject to coastal site plan review requirements must be consistent with policies A through C above, where applicable, and in addition such agencies and boards must determine whether or not the adverse impacts of the activity on coastal resources (including islands) and future water dependent development opportunities are acceptable. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 11(e), 12(a), (b) and (e)) - Municipal agencies preparing voluntary municipal coastal programs must insure that they are consistent with policies A through C above. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 8(a) and 9(a)) 11-106 ISLANDS (CONT.) FEDERAL Federal agency actions including development projects, permits and grants must be consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: Sec. 307 of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, 16 USC 1456) BACKGROUND DISCUSSION Natural Functions of Islands: - provide isolated nesting areas and critical habitat for shorebirds - provide valuable habitat, support many floral and faunal species which have all but disappeared from the mainland - constitute a large percent of undeveloped shoreline - morrainal islands constitute unique geologic features Social Value of Islands: - provide unique recreational opportunities for fishing, swimming, boating, and wildlife observation - contain large amounts of open space - are areas of scientific and educational value - provide a storm buffer for adjacent mainland areas USE GUIDELINES PRIORITY USE: CONSERVATION/LIMITED DEVELOPMENT GENERAL USE CRITERIA (applicable to all uses) Apply all coastal policies and use guidelines for all other coastal resources where they occur on islands (see bluffs and escarpments, rocky shorefronts, beaches and dunes, tidal wetlands , intertidal flats, freshwater wetlands and watercourses, coastal hazard areas, developed shorefront, shorelands, estuarine embayments and coastal waters). 11-107 ISLANDS (CONT.) Control or mitigate on-site and off-site impacts resulting from soil erosion, sedimentation and stormwater runoff through the use of ap- propriate construction, siting, and design practices such as 1) timing and staging of earthmoving, grading, and vegetation to minimize soil exposure, 2) use of vegetative control techniques such as sod, temporary3 vegetation, or vegetation buffers, 3) use of non-vegetative control techniques such as mulches, nettings, and chemical binders, and 4) use of structural control techniques such as filters, traps, basins, ponds, and diversion structures. -Avoid any use or activity which would significantly increase flood or erosion hazards. Incorporate site planning and design features which limit or avoidI negative visual and aesthetic impacts on the site and the surrounding � alleviate blighted or deteriorated conditions on-site � blend the architecture, size, materials, color and texture of new structures with the existing qualities and characteristics of the man-made and natural environment *provide visual setbacks from the water based on considerations of building height and mass for all structures which do not function- ally require a shorefront location *make extensive use of landscaping, plantings, and natural ground coverings -Maintain, restore or enhance critical habitats for terns, herons, shore- birds and other valuable,unique, rare or endangered flora and fauna. -Limit development to low-density, low-impact residential or recreation- al uses. -Prohibit extension of fixed access route (such as roads or bridges) and infrastructural facilities (such as sewer and water lines) that would induce or support high intensity urban or suburban use of islands. -Maintain or enhance public access to and along the shorefront. when compatible with the nature of the proposed use, design island uses so as to take advantage of the opportunity presented by a waterfront location to provide an attractive area along the water for public enjoyment of the shoreline maintain or enhance public access to and along shorefront areas that are publicly owned (including public land below the mean high water mark) 11-108 ISLANDS (CONT.) USE CONSISTENCY A. Activities and Uses Generally Consistent with the Coastal Policies. - Recreation: Low intensity recreational uses such as swimming, fishing, hiking, bird watching, nature study, and crabbing that do not adversely impact sensitive resources or valuable wildlife habitats, are generally consistent with the coastal policies. - Conservation: Conservation activities such as habitat restoration, wildlife management, property management and erection of temporary access control structures to protect shorebird nesting and breeding habitat are generally consistent with the coastal policies. Agriculture: Agricultural uses such as grazing, farming, and aqua- culture are generally consistent with the coastal policies when the indigenous character of the land is not significantly dis- turbed and where sensitive coastal resources are not adversely impacted. Apply Use Guidelines for Component Resources (bluffs and escarp- ments, rocky shorefronts, beaches and dunes, intertidal flats, tidal wetlands, freshwater wetlands and watercourses, coastal hazard areas, developed shorefront, shorelands, estuarine embay- ments, and coastal waters). B. Activities and Uses Which May Be Consistent with the Coastal Policies Under Special Conditions. Apply Use Guidelines for Component Resources (bluffs and escarp- ments, rocky shorefronts, beaches and dunes, intertidal flats, tidal wetlands, freshwater wetlands and watercourses, coastal hazard areas, developed shorefront, shorelands, estuarine embay- ments, and coastal waters). C. Activities and Uses Generally Inconsistent with the Coastal Policies. - Transportation improvements (road, rail, air) - On-site waste disposal (solid waste landfills) - Excavation (major) - Apply Use Guidelines for Component Resources (bluffs and escarpments, rocky shorefronts, beaches and dunes, intertidal flats, tidal wet- lands, freshwater wetlands and watercourses, coastal hazard areas, developed shorefront, shorelands, estuarine embayments, and coastal waters) II-109 K. SHORELANDS DEFINITION - "Shorelands" means those land areas within the coastal boundary exclusive of coastal hazard areas, which are not subject to dynamic coastal processes and which are comprised of typical upland features such as bedrock hills, till hills and drumlins. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 3(7)(M)) POLICIES POLICIES TO BE FOLLOWED BY MUNICIPAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES A. To regulate shoreland use and development in a manner which minimizes adverse impacts upon adjacent coastal systems and resources. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(b)(2)(I)) ADVERSE IMPACTS MUST BE EVALUATED (see box on page II- 39) USES TO BE REGULATED - All buildings, uses and structures, all uses requiring a municipal special permit, all subdivisions, all variances, all planned unit developments and all municipal projects occurring within tidal wet- lands and above the high water mark are subject to municipal site plan review requirements with the exception of gardening, agricultural activities and minor projects exempted by local regulation. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 11(b) 15(a) and 15(b)) MAPS - Maps at 1:24,000 scale will be prepared by the Coastal Area Manage- ment Unit of DEP. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 5(b)) II-110 SHORELANDS (CONT.) IMPLEMENTATION STATE All state agency actions significantly affecting the environment including land acquisitions, development projects and grants for development projects must be consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(b)) All major state agency plans must, by July 1, 1981, be revised to insure consistency with all of the above policies. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(a)) MUNICIPAL The decisions of municipal planning and zoning agencies and zoning boards of appeal concerning activities subject to coastal site plan review requirements must be consistent with the above policy, where applicable, and in addition such agencies and boards must determine whether or not the adverse impacts of the activity on coastal re- sources (including shorelands) and future water dependent development opportunities are acceptable. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 11(e), 12(a), (b) and (e)) - Municipal agencies preparing voluntary municipal coastal programs must insure that they are consistent with the above policy. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 8(a) and 9(a)) FEDERAL - Federal agency actions including development projects, permits and grants must be consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: Sec. 307 of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, 16 USC 1456) SHORELANDS (CONT.) BACKGROUND DISCUSSION Natural Functions of Shorelands: function as immediate source of upland runoff contributing to coastal drainage serve as immediate source of upland sediments - may provide wildlife habitat when undeveloped Social Value of Shorelands: - provide scenic vistas - have high development potential USE GUIDELINES PRIORITY USE: DEVELOPMENT GENERAL USE CRITERIA Maintain vegetative buffer areas on the perimeter of shorelands as necessary to 1) protect adjacent coastal wetlands, beaches and water- courses from the impacts of accelerated velocities or increased volumes of upland runoff and associated sedimentation and erosion, 2) pre- serve coastal water quality, 3) provide visual buffers, and 4) pro- tect important habitat areas. Prevent increases in volumes and rates of upland runoff by 1) limit- ing the amount of impervious surface area created by construction, 2) requiring installation of stormwater detention facilities such as ponds and holding basins capable of preventing increases in pre- existing natural runoff rates for all intensities and durations of rainfall, 3) requiring the installation of temporary drainage con- trols during construction, and 4) limiting site clearing to the minimum necessary for construction and location of facilities and requiring the maintenance of vegetative buffers adjacent to wetlands and watercourses. Prevent erosion by 1) minimizing site clearing and devegetation through phasing of construction activities in order to limit soil exposure, 2) requiring that vegetative buffers be maintained in an undisturbed condition, 3) requiring replanting and revegetation of areas disturbed during construction, 4) employing temporary erosion II-112 SHORELANDS (CONT.) control techniques such as hay bales, mulching, sod, nettings, diversion structures and filters, 5) avoiding development on steep slopes (25% or greater), 6) limiting development on moderately steep slopes (15% to 25%) to low intensity uses), and 7) avoiding the alteration of natural drainage channels which would accelerate stream flow. IProtect rare and endangered species and preserve their critical habitats. Maintain or enhance public access to and along the shorefront. � maintain or improve access to and along publicly owned shorefront including public trust lands below the mean high water mark. � discourage development which reduces or eliminates public access to Vhe shoreline � pro, serve groundwater quality in recharge and aquifer areas by pre- venting the discharge, disposal, or storage of toxic or hazardous materials on or near such areas - Insure that all activities and uses are consistent with the capacity of the soil or subsoil to supoort such activities. Where appropriate, provide setbacks for new structures when they occur near bluffs and escarpments, beaches or dunes. Setbacks should allow for predictable erosion which would occur over the useful life of the structure. Incorporate site planning and design features which limit or avoid negative visual and aesthetic impacts or which create positive visual and aesthetic impacts on the site and on the surrounding area. � alleviate blighted or deteriorated conditions on-site blend the architecture, size, materials, color, and texture of new structures with the existing qualities and characteristics of the man-made and natural environment � make extensive use of landscaping, plantings, and natural ground coverings � maintain, improve, or enhance visual access to the coast Maintain cultural characteristics of shorelands by 1) protecting historic sites and districts against incompatible land uses, and 2) preventing the alteration of significant archaeological or geologic sites. 11-113 SHORELANDS (CONT.) USE CONSISTENCY A. Activities and Uses Generally Consistent with the Coastal Policies. -All activities are generally consistent with the coastal policies when conducted in accordance with the general use criteria with the following exceptions: � construction of new airport facilities � substantial expansions of existing airport facilities *solid waste landfills L. SHELLFISH CONCENTRATION AREAS DEFINITION -"Shellfish Concentration Areas" means actual, potential or historic areas in coastal waters, in which one or more species of shellfish aggregate. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 3(7)(N)) POLICIES POLICIES TO BE FOLLOWED BY MUNICIPAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES SEE: - National Interest Facilities and Resources Policy A (planning for and protection of facilities and resources which are in the national inter- est including restoration and enhancement of Connecticut's shellfish industry). - Intertidal Flats Policy A (preservation of value as nutrient source and shellfish habitat). - Tidal Wetlands Policy C (creation of wetlands for shellfish management). - Water Dependent Uses Policy A (priority to uses and facilities which are dependent upon proximity to coastal waters). - Boating Policy C (protection and upgrading of facilities servi-ng the commercial fishing industry). II-114 SHELLFISH CONCENTRATION AREAS (CONT.) POLICIES FOR STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES ONLY A. To manage the state's fisheries in order to promote the economic benefits-of commercial and recreational fishing, enhance recreation- al fishing opportunities, optimize the yield of all species, pre- vent the depletion or extinction of indigenous species, maintain and enhance the productivity of natural estuarine resources and preserve healthy fisheries resources for future generations. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(c)(1)(I)) B. The department of health services is empowered to prohibit the taking or harvesting of shellfish in certain tidal flats, shores and coastal waters whenever it finds by examinations and surveys that such flats, shores or coastal waters are contaminated or polluted to the extent that the waters do not meet standards of purity established by said department, and that shellfish obtained therefrom may be unfit for food and dangerous to the public health. Such closure may be perman- ent, temporary or contingent upon the occurrence of specified events. (Source: CGS 19-55a) C. The department of health services may inspect shellfish beds and areas in this state where shellfish are grown or harvested for market, all boats, tools and appliances used in the production and preparation of shellfish for market and; all wharves or buildings where shellfish are opened, packed and prepared for sale or shipment. It nay prescribe regulations for the sanitary growth, production and preparation of shellfish for market. (Source: CGS 19-53) D. Nothing in sections 19-52 to 19-58, inclusive, shall prohibit the taking of shellfish from closed areas when they are removed for transplanting to approved areas under permits issued by the department of health services and under supervision of state and local health agencies having jurisdiction. (Source: CGS 19-59) SEE: Coastal Waters and Estuarine Embayments Policy B (adoption of water quality standards). Coastal Waters and Estuarine Embayments Policy C (management of estuarine embayments to insure substantial biological productivity and the mainte- nance of healthy marine populations). II-115 SHELLFISH CONCENTRATION AREAS (CONT.) - Coastal Waters and Estuarine Embayments Policy 0 (alteration of eelgrass flats for purposes of shellfish management). - Dredging and Navigation Policy E (protection of shellfish grounds in the regulation of dredging). - Coastal Structures and Filling Policy C (maintenance of access to public beach when permitting structures). ADVERSE IMPACTS MUST BE EVALUATED (see box on page II-39) USES TO BE REGULATED - The taking of shellfish from state-owned shellfish beds is regulated by the Department of Agriculture's Aquaculture Division (CGS 26-187 to 26-237). (Source: CGS 26-192) -The taking of shellfish from beds under municipal jurisdiction is regulated by local shellfish commissions or other designated local agencies or boards (CGS 26-238 to 26-294). (Source: CGS 26-240) - The harvesting of shellfish from all shellfish beds is subject to regulation for health purposes by the Department of Health Services (CGS 19-52 to 19-59). (Source: CGS 19-53 and 19-55) - All structures and fill in coastal waters overlying shellfish con- centration areas are regulated under the DEP structures and fill permit program (CGS 25-7b to 25-7f). (Source: CGS 25-7b) - All new dredging in coastal waters overlying shellfish concentration areas is regulated under the DEP dredging permit program (CGS 25-10 to 25-18). (Source: CGS 25-11) SHELLFISH CONCENTRATION AREAS (CONT,) MAPS - Maps at 1:24,000 scale will be prepared by the Coastal Area Management Unit of DEP. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 5(b)) IMPLEMENTATION STATE - The Department of Agriculture's management program for shellfisheries must be consistent with policy A above. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(b)) The taking of shellfish from state-owned beds is regulated by the Department of Agriculture (CGS 26-137 to 26-237). Detailed criteria governing the issuance of leases and permits, harvesting methods, and limits on numbers are contained in the statutes. (Source: CGS 26-187 to 26-237) Department of Health Services regulation of all shellfish beds for health purposes pursuant to the Shellfish Sanitation Law (CGS 19-52 to 19-59) must be consistent with policies B, C and D above. Regula- tions have been promulgated by the Public Health Council to cover various aspects of shellfish sanitation including the sale of shell- fish, transplanting of shellfish, cleanliness of shellfish boats, and construction and operation ofshellfish processing plants.(RCSA 19-13-B64 to 19-13-B77). (Source: CGS 19-52 to 19-59) - All permits and orders issued by DEP for water pollution control pur- suant to CGS 25-27, 25-54g, 25-54h, 25-54i, 25-54j.and 25-54k must be consistent with policy H above. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 21) - Issuance of DEP permits for structures and fill in coastal waters overlying shellfish concentration areas pursuant to CGS 25-7b and for new dredging in coastal waters overlying shellfish concentration areas pursuant to CGS 25-11 must be consistent with policy A above. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 21) 11-117 SHELLFISH CONCENTRATION AREAS (CONT.) - All state agency actions significantly affecting the environment in- cluding land acquisitions, development projects and grants for develop- ment projects must be consistent with policy A above. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(b)) - All major state agency plans must, by July 1, 1981, be revised to insure consistency with policy A above. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(a)) MUNICIPAL The harvesting of shellfish from beds under local jurisdiction is regulated by municipal shellfish commissions or other designated local agencies pursuant to the Local Shellfisheries Statutes (CGS 26-238 to 26-294) and to local regulations. Detailed criteria are contained in the statutes governing such matters as jurisdictional disputes, methods for taking of shellfish from the waters of certain municipalities, and size and catch limits for various species of shellfish. (Source: CGS 26-238 to 26-294 and local regulations) FEDERAL Federal agency actions including development projects, permits and grants must be consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: Sec. 307 of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, 16 USC 1456) BACKGROUND DISCUSSION Natural Functions of Shellfish Concentration Areas: - provide habitat for several species of shellfish - contribute to the diversity of benthic life - provide source of food for shorebirds, lobsters and other marine life Social Value of Shellfish Concentration Areas: - support an important source of food 11-118 SHELLFISH CONCENTRATION AREAS (CONT.) - provide recreational shellfishing opportunities - provide economic opportunities for the shellfish industry - provide employment through shellfish industry USE GUIDELINES PRIORITY USE: CONSERVATION/LIMITED DEVELOPMENT IN DEVELOPED SHOREFRONT AREAS GENERAL USE CRITERIA (applicable to all uses) - Maintain and insure the continued viability and productivity of shellfish concentration areas. revitalize and increase the number and-extent of productive shell- fish beds restore and maintain healthy and productive bottom conditions - Preserve eelgrass beds except in those instances where it can be demonstrated that the benefits accrued through their alteration or removal for the purposes of shellfish management outweigh the bene- fits of preserving such flats in their natural state. - Avoid activities that may have an adverse impact on water column characteristics, sedimentation,.andsubstrates in shellfish concentra- tion areas during critical spawning'periods. - Apply guidelines for coastal waters and estuarine embayments. - Maintain and restore water quality to a condition that permits direct harvesting of shellfish for human consumption. - Avoid uses and activities which would restrict the harvesting of shellfish of a quality suitable for human consumption. - Avoid the placement of structures which would restrict access to or prevent the harvesting of shellfish. USE CONSISTENCY A. Activities and Uses Generally Consistent with the Coastal Policies. - Recreation: Recreational activities such as hiking, bird watching, swimming, fishing, and shellfishing which do not destroy the productivity potential or alter the integrity of shellfish concentra- tion areas are generally consistent with the coastal policies. II-119 SHELLFISH CONCENTRATION AREAS (CONT.) -Conservation: Conservation activities and practices for the purposes of wildlife and finfish management are generally consistent with the coastal policies. -Agriculture (Aquaculture): Aquaculture practices are generally consistent with the coastal policies. B. Activities and Uses Which May Be Consistent with the Coastal Policies Under Special Conditions. -Dredging (Maintenance and Enhancement): Maintenance and enhancement dredging may be consistent with the coastal policies when 1) the dredging is staged so as to avoid impacts to shellfish or finfish populations during critical breeding periods, 2) the best available technologies are used to reduce controllable sedimentation and pre- vent adverse impacts on water quality, 3) significant impacts on contiguous shellfish concentration areas are avoided, 4) the activity is timed so as to avoid reductions in dissolved oxygen concentrations which may result in fish kills, and 5) the channel or basin is not substantially enlarged from the original project dimension. -Pipes and Cables: Pipes and cables may be consistent with the coastal policies when 1) they are placed to avoid significant impacts to shellfish concentration areas, 2) the best available technologies are used to reduce controllable sedimentation, 3) they are installed below grade so as not to interfere with the harvesting of shellfish, 4) they are designed to minimize their encroachment on shellfish beds, 5) no less environmentally damaging alternative-exists, and 6) the activity is staged so as to avoid impacts to shellfish populations during critical breeding periods. -Piers, Docks, Wharves, Piles: Piers, docks, wharves and piles may be consistent with the coastal policies when 1) they are properly designed so as to not impede tidal flushing or circulation, 2) they are placed so as to minimize their encroachment into shell- fish concentration areas, 3) they do not unreasonably restrict the harvesting of shellfish, 4) there is no less environmentally damag- ing alternative, 5) elevated pile construction or floats are utilized and 6) they do not interfere with or obstruct navigation. -Transportation Corridors (Rail, Highway): Rail and highway corridors may be consistent with the coastal policies when 1) they are proper- ly designed so as not to impede tidal flushing or circulation, 2) they are placed so as to minimize their encroachment into shell- fish concentration areas, 3) they do not unreasonably restrict the harvesting of shellfish, 4) there is no less environmentally damaging alternative, 5) they utilize elevated pile supports where feasible, 6) their construction is timed so as to avoid critical spawning periods., and 7) construction is accomplished from floating barges or top-side construction techniques are used. SHELLFISH CONCENTRATION AREAS (CONT,) C. Activities and Uses Which Are Generally Inconsistent with the Coastal Policies. - Filling - Disposal of Dredged Material - Dredging (new) - Traffic Corridors (air) - Point Discharge Structures - Tidal Gates M. COASTAL WATERS AND ESTUARINE EMBAYMENTS DEFINITION - "Coastal Waters" means those waters of Long Island Sound and its harbors, embayments, tidal rivers, streams and creeks, which contain a salinity concentration of at least five hundred parts per million under the low flow stream conditions as established by the commissioner. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 3(5)) "Nearshore Waters" means the area comprised of those waters and their substrates lying between mean high water and a depth approximated by the ten meter contour. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 3(7)(K)) "Offshore Waters" means the area comprised of those waters and their substrates lying seaward of a depth approximated by the ten meter contour. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 3(7)(L)) "Estuarine Embayments" means a protected coastal body of water with an open connection to the sea in which saline sed water is measurably diluted by fresh water including tidal rivers, bays, lagoons and coves. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 3(7)(G)) 11-121 COASTAL WATERS AND ESTUARINE EMBAYMENTS (CONT.) POLICIES POLICIES TO BE FOLLOWED BY MUNIICIPAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES A. It is found and declared that the pollution of the waters of the state is inimical to the public health, safety and welfare of the inhabitants of the state, is a public nuisance and is harmful to wildlife, fish and aquatic life and imp~airs domestic, agricultural, industrial, recreational and other legitimate beneficial uses of water, and that the use of public funds and the granting of tax exemptions for the purpose of controlling and eliminating such pollution is a public use and purpose for which public monies may be expended and tax exemptions granted, and the necessity and public interest for the enactment of this chapter and the elimin- ation of pollution is hereby declared as a matter of legislative determi nati on. (Source: CGS sec. 25-54a, referenced by P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(a)(2)) SEE ALSO: -Coastal Structures and Filling Policy A (structures and fill in tidal' wetlands and coastal waters). -Boating Policy A (increased recreational boating use of coastal waters). -National Interest Facilities and Resources Policy A (planning for and protection of resources which are in the national interest including tidal wetlands and related estuarine resources and the use-of waterI pollution control measures). POLICIES FOR STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES ONLY B. The commissioner of environmental protection shall adopt, and may thereafter amend, standards of water quality applicable to the various waters of the state or portions thereof as provided in subdivision (a) of section 22a-6. Such standards shall be con- sistent with the federal Water Pollution Control Act and shall be for the purpose of qualifying the state and its municipalities for available federal grants and for the purpose of providing clear and objective public policy statements of a general program to improve the water resources of the state; provided no standard of water quality adopted shall plan for, encourage or permit any wastes to be discharged into any of the waters of the state with- out having first received the treatment available and necessary 11-122 COASTAL WATERS AND ESTUARINE EMBAYMENTS (CONT.) for the elimination of pollution. Such standards of quality shall: (1) Apply to interstate waters or portions thereof within the state; (2) apply to such other waters within the state as the commissioner may determine is necessary; (3) protect the public health and welfare and promote the economic development of the state; (4) preserve and enhance the quality of state waters for present and prospective future use for public water supplies, propagation of fish and aquatic life and wildlife, recreational purposes and agricultural, industrial and other legitimate uses; (5) be consistent with health standards as established by the state department of health. (Source: CGS sec. 25-54e(a) referenced by P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(a)(2)) C. To manage estuarine embayments so as to insure Enat coastal use~' proceed in a manner that assures sustained bi.ological productivity, the maintenance of healthy marine populations and the maintenance of essential patterns of circulation, drainage and basin configura- tion. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(c)(2)(A)) D. To protect,. enhance and allow natural restoration of eelgrass flats except in special limited cases, notably shellfish management, where the benefits accrued through alteration of the flat may out- weigh the long term benefits to marine biota, waterfowl, and com- mercial and recreational finfisheries. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec.2(c)(2)(A)) SEE ALSO: - Fuel, Chemicals and Hazardous Ilaterials Policy A (minimize the risk of spillage). - Coastal Structures and Filling Policy B (disallow filling of tidal wetlands and coastal waters). - Coastal Structures and Filling Policy E (maintain water circulation and exchange in placement of flood control structures). - Fuel, Chemicals and Hazardous Materials Policy E (provide containment and clean up of accidental spills). - General Resource Policy D, sec. (d) (protection, enhancement and management of coastal water resources). - Fisheries Policy A (management of fisheries to promote economic and recreational benefits). 1,-123 COASTAL WATERS AND ESTUARINE EMBAYMENTS (CONT.) - Dredging and Navigation Policies A through F (maintenance and enhance- ment of federal navigation channels, criteria for approving dredging projects and duties of harbor masters). - Dredging and Dredged Material Disposal Planning Policy A (cooperation with federal government on long range planning for channel maintenance and dredged material disposal). - Coastal Recreation and Access Policy A (expansion, development and effective utilization of state-owned recreational facilities to promote public access to the waters of Long Island Sound). SEE ALSO PLAN OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT POLICIES: - Wastewater Management Goal (maintain existing high quality waters and restore the quality of all surface waters). ADVERSE IMPACTS MUST BE EVALUATED (see box on page 11-39) USES TO BE REGULATED - All structures and fill in coastal waters andiin estuarine embayments are regulated under the DEP structures and fill permit program (CGS 25-7b to 7f). (Source: CGS 25-7b) - All new dredging in coastal waters and in estuarine embayments is regulated under the DEP dredging permit program (CGS 25-10 to 18). (Source: CGS 25-11) - All discharges into the waters of the state begun prior to May 1, 1967 which cause pollution are subject to abatement orders pursuant to CGS 25-54h. (Source: CGS 25-54h) - All new discharges into the waters of the state are regulated under the DEP water pollution permit program (CGS part II of Chapter 474 and Chapter 474a). (Source: CGS 25-54i) - All municipalities causing pollution of the waters of the state or having an existing or potential community pollution problem are 11-124 COASTAL WATERS AND ESTUARINE EMBAYMENTS (CONT.) - All state agency actions significantly affecting the environment in- cluding land acquisition, development projects and grants for develop- ment projects must be consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(b)) - All major state agency plans must, by July 1, 1981, be revised to in- sure consistency with all of the above policies. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(a)) MUNICIPAL The decisions of municipal planning and zoning agencies and zoning boards of appeal concerning activities subject to coastal site plan review requirements must be consistent with policy A above, where applicable, and in addition such activities and boards must determine whether or not the adverse impacts of the activity on coastal resources (including coastal waters) and future water dependent development op- portunities are acceptable. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 11(e), 12(a), (b) and (e)) - Municipal agencies preparing voluntary municipal coastal programs must insure that they are consistent with policy A above. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 8(a) and 9(a)) FEDERAL - Federal agency actions including development projects, permits, and grants must be consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: Sec. 307 of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, 16 USC 1456) BACKGROUND DISCUSSION Natural Functions of Coastal Waters: - are areas of high primary and secondary productivity - provide habitat for a variety of marine organisms (shellfish, finfish, crustaceans and benthic organisms) 11-125 COASTAL WATERS AND ESTUARINE EMBAYMENTS (CONT.) subject to abatement orders pursuant to CGS 25-54g. (Source: 25-54g) - All sources of water pollution, actual or potential, permitted or un- permitted are subject to abatement orders pursuant to CGS 25-27, 25-54j, or 25-54k. (Source: CGS 25-27, 25-54j and 25-54k). - All activities in coastal waters requiring certification of water quality from DEP pursuant to the Federal Clean Water Act of 1972. (Source: 33 USC 1411, sec. 401) MAPS - Maps at 1:24,000 scale will be prepared by the Coastal Area Manage- ment Unit of DEP. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 5(b)) IMPLEMENTATION STATE All permits and orders issued by DEP for water pollution control pur- suant to CGS 25-27, 25-54g, 25-54h, 25-54i, 25-54j and 25-54k must be consistent with the above policies. The state's water pollution control program satisfies all requirements of the Federal Clean Water Act. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 21) DEP certification of water quality pursuant to the Federal Clean Water Act of 1972 (33 USC 1411, sec. 401) must be consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 21) Issuance of DEP permits for structures and fill in coastal waters pur- suant to CGS 25-7b and for new dredging in coastal waters pursuant to CGS 25-11 must be consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 21) II-126 COASTAL WATERS AND ESTUARINE EMBAYMENTS (CONT,) - support many diverse floral and faunal species - provide spawning and breeding areas for many species - are an important contributor to the productivity of contiguous ocean waters Social Value of Coastal Waters: - are critical to the assimilation of industrial, commercial and residential wastes - support commercial and recreational fisheries - are important to marine transportation and navigation - provide recreational opportunities: boating, swimming, fishing, diving and vistas Natural Functions of Estuarine Embayments: - are areas of high biological productivity - significant habitat for shellfish, finfish and waterfowl - serve as spawning and feeding grounds for commercially important finfish - are essential biological corridors for spawning anadromous and cata- dramous fish - exhibit unique circulation patterns (estuarine circulation) which influence nutrient distribution, control salinity, mix the water column and work and redistribute sediments - supply sheltered areas for the development of eelgrass flats which are highly productive; provide nursery grounds, shelter and refugia for various aquatic species; are a vital food source for marine organisms, support an important biomass of epiphytic plants; and transfer nutrients from sediments into the water column Social Value of Estuarine Embayments: provide protected locations for activities such as boating, swimming, fishing and other passive recreational activities - provide protected point of deep water access and navigational corridors for commercial and industrial waterfront uses - are areas of unique scientific and educational value - eelgrass flats (a component of some embayments) reduce current velocities and control erosion by trapping and binding sediments 11-127 COASTAL WATERS AND ESTUARINE EMBAYMENTS (CONT.) USE GUIDELINES (Coastal Waters) PRIORITY USE: CONSERVATION/LIMITED DEVELOPMENT GENERAL USE CRITIERIA - Maintain, enhance or restore the quality of coastal waters and the submerged lands. - Maintain, enhance or restore the natural circulatory patterns and biochemical processes of coastal waters. Maintain the continued biological productivity and viability of Long Island Sound as a resource capable of supporting 1) healthy marine and finfish resources, 2) a broad spectrum of safe and healthy re- creational opportunities, and 3) an efficient system of marine trans- portation and navigation. Maintain and improve water quality in accordance with the highest standards set by federal, state or local authorities. preserve and maintain those waters with existing quality better than established standards restore the surface waters of the state to a quality consistent with its use for the protection and propagation of fish, shellfish and wildlife including breeding, feeding and nursery grounds and with its use for recreation in and on the water; restore all water to the maximum extent possible, at least to a quality consistent with Class B or SB the discharge of sewage from marine sanitation devices installed on vessels shall be prohibited on those waters of the state (i.e. no discharge zones) where greater control is required for public health or environmental protection - Preserve and restore shellfish concentration areas and important finfish breeding grounds or fishruns. - Phase activities when necessary so as to avoid or minimize impacts to shellfish concentration areas during critical breeding periods. USE CONSISTENCY A. Activities and Uses Generally Consistent with the Coastal Policies. - Recreation: Recreational activities such as swimming, fishing, 11-128 COASTAL WATERS AND ESTUARINE EMBAYMENTS (CONT,) shellfishing, boating, and skiing which do not degrade water quality or accelerate shoreline erosion are generally consistent with the coastal policies. Conservation: Conservation activities and practices such as habitat restoration or finfish management are generally con- sistent with the coastal policies. Agriculture (Aquaculture): Aquacultural practices are generally consistent with the coastal policies. B. Activities and Uses Which May Be Consistent with the Coastal Policies Under Special Conditions. Dredging (Maintenance and Enhancement): Maintenance and enhancement dredging may be consistent with the coastal policies when 1) the dredging is staged so as to avoid impacts to shellfish or finfish populations during critical breeding periods, 2) the best available technologies are used to reduce controllable sedimentation and prevent adverse impacts on water quality, 3) significant impacts on contiguous shellfish concentration areas are avoided, 4) the activity is timed so as to avoid reductions in dissolved oxygen concentrations which may result in fish kills, and 5) the channel or basin is not substantially enlarged from the original project dimensions. Dredging (New): New dredging may be consistent with the coastal policies when 1) it can be demonstrated that existing navigation channels are inadequate to provide access from the facility to deep water, 2) sensitive coastal resource areas such as shellfish areas, intertidal flats, important finfish habitats and major eelgrass flats are avoided, 3) the channel, basin, or anchorage area is designed to take optimal advantage of naturally deep water or existing natural channels so as to minimize the need for dredg- ing, 4) dredging does not induce or contribute to accelerated erosion or sedimentation in critical resource areas such as beaches, bluffs and escarpments, tidal wetlands, intertidal flats, and shell- fish concentration areas, and 5) appropriate guidelines under maintenance dredging are applied. Excavation: Excavation may be consistent with the coastal policies when 1) the excavated material is for the purpose of beach fill, 2) the grain size and distribution of the material is compatible with the beach, 3) the excavated material is clean and devoid of chemical, biological or man-made pollutants, 4) the extent of excava- tion is minimized and avoids the creation of anaerobic holes, 5) the excavation avoids shellfish concentration areas and important finfish habitats such as offshore reefs, 6) the best available technologies are used to reduce controllable sedimentation and prevent adverse impacts on coastal waters and shellfish concentra- tion areas, and 7) excavation is not conducted in "nearshore waters" when it may induce accelerated shoreline erosion. 11-129 COASTAL WATERS AND ESTUARINE EMBAYMENTS (CONT.) Groins: Groins may be consistent with the coastal policies when 1) other non-structural techniques of erosion control have been explored and found to be infeasible and there is no less environ- mentally damaging alternative, 2) the groins are being placed to provide protection to infrastructural facilities, water dependent uses or existing inhabited structures that were in place prior to ~January 1, 1980, 3) measures to mitigate the impacts of-groins on erosion and sedimentation are employed such as: limiting their height and length and requiring the placement of suitable fill between groins to reduce or eliminate sediment losses to the littoral transport system, particularly in downdrift areas , and 4) they are placed so as to avoid significant impacts on shellfish concentration areas. -Jetties: Jetties may be consistent with the coastal policies when 1) used to stabilize an inlet, 2) there is no less environmentally damaging alternative, 3) tidal circulation and-flushing is not impeded, and 4) measures to mitigate the impacts of jetties on erosion and sedimentation are employed when necessary. -Breakwaters: Breakwaters may be consistent with the coastal policies when 1) used for the creation of an anchorage area or harbor protection, 2) critical resource areas such as shellfish concentration areas or important finfish habitats are avoided, and 3) the breakwater is de- signed and positioned to minimize adverse impacts on adjacent shore- lines and to prevent accelerated erosion. -Piers, Docks, Wharves, Piles: Pie',,, docks, wharves and piles may be consistent with the coastal policies when 1) the structures are placed in such a manner so as to not interfere with the littoral transport of sediment, 2) they do not restrict tidal exchange or flushing, 3) designed and constructed in a manner that best avoids impacts to adjacent sensitive resource areas and shellfish concentra- tion areas, and 4) the structures are sited so as to take advantage of existing deep water and natural channels. Point Discharge Structures: Point discharge structures may be consistent with the coastal policies when 1) the velocities of the discharged water are not sufficient to cause shoreline erosion or scouring, 2) the structure contains gas traps and catch basins that are periodically cleaned if the structure is for the purposes of stormwater discharge, 3) the structure is designed to the maximum extent possible, to minimize disturbance of or adverse impacts to shellfish beds and intertidal flats, and 4) the quality of the dis- charged water does not adversely impact coastal waters or violate state water quality standards. -Pipes and Cables: Pipes and cables may be consistent with the coastal policies when 1) they are placed to avoid significant impacts to shellfish concentration areas, and 2) the best available technologies are used to reduce controllable sedimentation. 11-130 COASTAL WATERS AND ESTUARINE EMBAYMENTS (CONT.) C. Activities and Uses Generally Inconsistent with the Coastal Policies. - Culverts - Filling - Traffic Corridors (rail, road, air) USE GUIDELINES (Estuarine Embayments) PRIORITY USE: CONSERVATION/LIMITED DEVELOPMENT GENERAL USE CRITERIA (applicable to all uses) -Maintain the essential physical dimensions and configurations of estuari ne embayments. -Maintain ambient patterns of tidal currents, tidal circulation and tidal flushing and the chemistry of the estuarine waters. -Maintain and improve water quality in accordance with the highest standards set by federal, state or local authorities. . preserve and maintain those waters with -uxisting quality better than established standards . restore the surface waters of the state to a quality consistent with its use for the protection and propagation of fish, shellfish and wildlife including breeding, feeding and nursery grounds and with its use for recreation in and on the water; restore all waters to the maximum extent possible at least to a quality consistent with . the discharge of sewage from marine sanitation devices installed on vessels shall be prohibited on those waters of the state (i.e. no discharge zones) where greater control is required for public healf-h or environmental protection - Avoid modifications which alter hydraulic characteristics of inlets and result in measurable changes in tidal wetland vegetation and - Maintain, restore or enhance eelgrass beds, shellfish concentration areas and important breeding areas for finfish or waterfowl. - Use all reasonable siting and construction practices that avoid or quaity tial irclaton ndflushing and basin configuration in esturineembayments such as but not limited to: 1) minimizing the COASTAL WATERS AND ESTUARINE EMBAYMENTS (CONT,) area of embayment affected by the activity or development, 2) locating inconsistent uses and non-water dependent activities on other less sensitive and compatible resource areas when possible, 3) avoiding to the fullest degree possible, the effects of direct or indirect impacts on shellfish concentration areas, eelgrass beds, critical finfish breeding habitats and anadromous fish runs, 4) using the best available technologies to reduce controllable sedimentation, 5) avoiding activities that accelerate erosion of sedimentation on contiguous sensitive re- sources, 6) scheduling the activity so as to avoid critical shellfish and finfish breeding periods, and 7) locating the activity in areas which would not significantly impede or alter natural drainage and circulation patterns. Initiate all reasonable design practices and mitigation measures which will avoid or substantially limit the negative impacts on estuarine embayments, eelgrass flats and shellfish concentration areas such as elevated pile and timber construction. Minimize the effects of boat wakes on intertidal flats and tidal wet- land resources through the establishment of "no wake" zones. USE CONSISTENCY A. Activities and Uses Generally Consistent with the Coastal Policies. - Recreation: Recreation activities such as swimming, fishing, crabbing, clamming, boating that do not alter the physical characteristics of estuarine waters, estuarine basins, eelgrass flats, and contribute to or cause shoreline erosion are generally consistent with the coastal policies. - Conservation: Conservation activities and practices such as shell- fish or finfish management or restoration, waterfowl management or protection, and habitat restoration projects including restoration of tidal wetlands, intertidal flats and tidal circulation are gen- erally consistent with the coastal policies provided that substantial physical alteration of the basin does not ensue or that water quality is not reduced. B. Activities and Uses Which May Be Consistent with the Coastal Policies. - Dredging (Maintenance and Enhancement): Maintenance and enhance- ment dredging may be consistent with the coastal policies when 1) the dredging is staged so as to avoid impacts to shellfish or finfish populations during critical breeding periods, 2) the best available technologies are used to reduce controllable sedimenta- tion and prevent adverse impacts on water quality, 3) significant impacts on contiguous shellfish concentration areas are avoided, 4) the activity is timed so as to avoid reductions in dissolved oxygen concentrations which may result in fish kills, and 5) the channel or basin is not substantially enlarged from the original project dimensions. 11-132 COASTAL WATERS AND-ESTUARINE EMBAYMENTS (CONT.) Dredging (New): New dredging may be consistent with the coastal i ~ ~~~~policies when 1) it can be demonstrated that existing navigation channels are inadequate to provide access from the facility to deep water, 2) sensitive coastal resource areas such as shellfish areas, intertidal flats, important finfish habitats and major eel- grass flats are avoided, 3) the channel, basin, or anchorage area is designed to take optimal advantage of naturally deep water or existing natural channels so as to minimize the need for dredging, 4) dredging does not induce or contribute to accelerated erosion or sedimentation in critical resource areas such as beaches, bluffs and escarpments, tidal wetlands, intertidal flats, and shellfish concentration areas, and 5) appropriate guidelines under maintenance dredging are applied. Disposal of Dredged Material: Disposal of dredged material may be consistent with the coastal policies only when 1) placed only for the purpose of ancillary filling behind erosion control structures or for habitat restoration or creation such as tidal wetland re- storation, island creation, etc., 2) the material is clean, devoid of toxic pollutants or is suitably contained to prevent the release of pollutants to the embayment, 3) the sediment texture is compatible to the disposal site, 4) the placement of dredged material does not alter tidal circulation, flushing or increase flood hazard potential in the estuarine embayment, and 5) it meets the guidelines for filling. Groins: Groins may be consistent with the coastal policies when 1) other non-structural techniques of erosion control have been explored and found to be infeasible and there is not less environ- mentally damaging alternative, 2) the groins are being placed to provide protection to infrastructural facilities, water dependent uses or existing inhabited structures that were in place prior to ~January 1, 1980, 3) measures to mitigate the impacts of groins on erosion and sedimentation are employed such as: limiting their height and length and requiring the placement of suitable fill between groins to reduce or eliminate sediment losses to the littoral transport system, particularly in downdrift areas, and 4) they are placed so as to avoid significant impacts on shellfish concentration areas. Jetties: Jetties may be consistent with the coastal policies when 1) used to stabilize an inlet, 2) there is no less environmentally damaging alternative, 3) tidal circulation and flushing is not impeded, and 4) measures to mitigate the impacts of jetties on erosion and sedimentation are empl-oyed when necessary. Piers, Docks, Wharves, Piles: Piers, docks, wharves and piles may be consistent with the coastal policies when 1) they are properly designed so as to not impede tidal flushing or circulation, 2) they are placed so as to avoid significant impacts on intertidal flats and shellfish concentration areas, 3) they use pile or timber con- struction or floats where feasible, and 4) they do not interfere with or obstruct navigation. 11 -133 COASTAL WATERS AND ESTUARINE EMBAYMENTS (CONT.) Pipes and Cables: Pipes and cables may be consistent with the coastal policies when 1) they are placed to avoid significant impacts to shellfish concentration areas, and 2) the best avail- able technologies are used to reduce controllable sedimentation. Seawalls, Bulkheads, Revetments: Seawalls, bulkheads and revet- ments may be consistent with the coastal policies when 1) the use of fill in their construction is limited to the minimum amount necessary for erection of the structure, 2) they are erected for the purposes of providing flooding or erosion protection to infra- structural facilities, water dependent uses or existing inhabited structures which were in place prior to January 1, 1980, 3) other non-structural flood and erosion control techniques have been ex- plored and found to be infeasible, 4) the protective structure in- corporatc~s drainage spillways to accommodate or diffuse surface water runoff, 5) the protective structure contains sufficient weep holes or interstices to accommodate the release of groundwater, 6) the protective structure does not encroach on adjoining inter- tidal flats or shellfish concentration areas except as minimally and absolutely necessary to achieve structural stability and, 7) they do not significantly interrupt the littoral transport of sediments. Point Discharge Structures: Point discharge structures may be consistent with the coastal policies when 1) the velocities of the discharged water are not sufficient to cause shoreline erosion or scouring, 2) the structure contains gas traps and catch basins that are periodically cleaned if the structure is for the purpose of stormwater discharge, 3) the structure is designed to the max- imum extent possible, to minimize disturbance of or adverse impacts to shellfish beds and intertidal flats, and 4) the quality of the discharged water does not adversely impact coastal waters or violate state water quality standards. Filling: Filling may be consistent with the coastal policies when 1) the material is placed as part of an erosion control project or for the purposes of promoting a water dependent use in a developed shorefront area, 2) the material does not contain any chemical, biological or man-made pollutants which may violate state water quality standards, 3) dispersal of sediments during the placement of the fill is controlled so as to minimize impacts on water quality or sedimentation, 4) the filling is timed so as to avoid impactts~ on shellfish beds or spawning activities when necessary, and 5) the fill does not restrict or alter tidal circulation or flushing.I Transportation Corridors (Rail, Road): Rail and highway corridors may be consistent with the coastal policies when 1) they utilize open pile supports to the maximum extent feasible, 2) they do not interfere with or obstruct navigation, 3) they do not significantly * affect tidal flushing or circulation, 4) they do not restrict ac- cess to the shoreline, and 5) they meet all appropriate guidelines for filling when fill is used in their construction. 11-134 COASTAL WATERS AND ESTUARINE EMBAYMENTS (CONT.) C. Activities and Uses Generally Inconsistent with the Coastal Policies. - Grading - Excavation - Traffic Corridors (air) - Tidal Gates - Dikes - Culverts N. AIR RESOURCES AND AIR POLLUTION DEFINITION - "Air Pollution" means the presence in the outdoor atmosphere of one or more air pollutants or any combination thereof in such quantities and of such characteristics and duration as to be, or be likely to be, injurious to public welfare, to the health of human, plant or animal life, or to property, or as unreasonably to interfere with the enjoyment of life and property. (Source: CGS 19-505) POLICIES POLICIES TO BE FOLLOWED BY MUNICIPAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES SEE: National Interest Facilities and Resources Policy A (planning for and protection of resources which are in the national interest, including use of air pollution control measures). POLICIES FOR STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES ONLY A. The commissioner, in the manner provided in subdivision (1) of sec- tion 22a-6, shall have the power to formulate, adopt, amend and re- peal regulations to control and prohibit air pollution throughout the state or in such areas of the state as are affected thereby, which regulations shall be consistent with the Federal Air Pollution Control Act and which qualify the state and its municipalities for 11- 135 AIR RESOURCES AND AIR POLLUTION (CONT.) available federal grants. Any person heard at the public hearing on any such regulation shall be given written notice of the determina- tion of the commissioner. (Source: CGS sec. 19-508(a)) B. The commissioner in making regulations and issuing orders and in en- forcing the provisions of this chapter shall take into consideration all of the facts and circumstances bearing on the reasonableness of the activity involved and the regulations proposed to control it, including: (a) The character and degree of injury to, or interfer- ence with, safety, health or the reasonable use of property which is caused or threatened to be caused; (b) the social and economic value of the activity involved; (c) the suitability or unsuitability of such activity to the area in which it is located; and (d) the practicability, both scientific and economic, of reducing or eliminat- ing the discharge resulting from such activity. In all cases the commissioner shall exercise a wide discretion in weighing the equities involved and the advantages and disadvantages to the resi- dents of the area involved and to any lawful business, occupation or activity involved resulting from requiring compliance with the specific requirements of any order or regulation. (Source: CGS sec. 19-510) SEE ALSO: -General Resources Policy D (prevention and abatement of air pollution). ADVERSE IMPACTS MUST BE EVALUATED (see box on page 11-39) USES TO BE REGULATED -All sources of air pollution existing and proposed are subject to DEP's air pollution permit and order program. (Source: CGS 19-519a) - Sources of air pollution in municipalities or in inter-municipal air pollution control districts with air pollution control regulations approved by DEP pursuant to CGS 19-520a are subject to regulation by such municipalities or districts. (Source: CGS 19-520a) 11-136 AIR RESOURCES AND AIR POLLUTION (CONT.) IMPLEMENTATION STATE - Issuance of DEP permits and orders for air pollution pursuant to CGS 19-508(c), 19-519a, 19-514 and 19-519 must be consistent with the above policies and, pursuant to CGS 19-507(d) and 508(a), with the detailed regulations issued by DEP (RCSA 19-508-1 to 508-25 and 19-508-100). The DEP air pollution control program meets federal Clean Air Act requirements. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 21) MUNICIPAL - Municipal and municipal air pollution control district regulations and ordinances must be in conformity with the above policies and DEP regulations. (Source: CGS 19-520a) FEDERAL - Federal agency actions including development projects, permits and grants must be consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: Sec. 307 of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, 16 USC 1456) II-137 II. COASTAL USE POLICIES A. GENERAL DEVELOPMENT POLICIES POLICIES TO BE FOLLOWED BY MUNICIPAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES A. To insure that the development, preservation or use of the land and water resources of the coastal area proceeds in a manner consistent with the capability of the land and water resources to support devel- opment, preservation or use without significantly disrupting either the natural environment or sound economic growth. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(a)(1)) B. To resolve conflicts between conflicting uses on the shorelands ad- jacent to marine and tidal waters by giving preference to uses that minimize adverse impacts on natural coastal resources while provid- ing long term and stable economic benefits. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(a)(4)) POLICIES FOR STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES ONLY C. It is found and declared that there exists in the state a great and growing need for industrial and commercial development and activity to provide and maintain employment and tax revenues; that assistance and encouragement of industrial and commercial development to provide and maintain such employment and revenues is an important function of the state; that the availability of financial assistance and suit- able facilities are important inducements to industrial and comn- mercial enterprises to remain or locate in this state and therefore the necessity in the public interest and for the public benefit and good for the provisions of this chapter is hereby declared as a n~atter of legislative determination. It is further found and de- clared that there exists a great and growing need for the construction of facilities by private water companies in the state for the furnish- ing of clear and wholesome water to the general public and that financial assistance by the Connecticut development authority is an important inducement to such companies to construct such facilities and therefore this necessity in the public interest and for the public benefit and good is hereby declared as a matter of legislative determination. It is further found and declared that there exists a great and growing need for the acquisition and construction of ferry boats for the transportation of persons, goods or vehicles and of all facilities, equipment, land and improvements necessary or use- ful in connection with ferry operations in coastal and inland water- ways of the state, and that financial assistance by the Connecticut 11-138 GENERAL DEVELOPMENT (CONT.) development authority is an important inducement to the acquisition and construction of ferry boats and such related facilities and therefore this necessity in the public interest and for the public benefit and good is hereby declared as a matter of legislative determination. It is further found and declared that there exists a great and growing need for the acquisition and construction of railroads for the operation of freight and passenger trains and associated equipment to transport persons and goods and for the acquisition and construction of: Facilities and equipment necessary or useful in connection with railroad operations, including railroad right-of-way and all associated tracks and facilities, including but not limited to switches, sidings, yards, signal systems and bridges; related plant facilities, including but not limited to station buildings, maintenance facilities and storage facilities; locomotives and rolling stock and other railroad related equipment, including but not limited to maintenance of way equipment, shop equipment, communications equipment and snow and wreck clearing equipment and that financial assistance by the Connecticut development authority is an important inducement to the acquisition and construction of rail- roads and associated facilities and equipment and therefore this necessity in the public interest and for the public benefit and good is hereby declared as a matter of legislative determination. It is further found that there exists in the state a great and grow- ing need for the development of municipal civic and cultural centers to furnish recreation to the general public and to improve the economy of the state, increase employment and provide a wider tax base, and that financial assistance by the Connecticut development authority is an important inducement to the acquisition and construction of municipal civic and cultural centers and related facilities, and therefore this necessity in the public interest and for the public benefit and good is hereby declared as a matter of legislative deter- mination. It is further found and declared that there exists in the state a great and growing need for the conservation, protection and improvement of the natural resources and environment and to control land, water, sewer, air, noise and general environmental pollution derived from the operation of industry and commerce to provide facilities to control such pollution is an important function of the state; that the availability of financial assistance by the state is an imporant inducement to industry and commerce to control such pollution and therefore the necessity in the public interest and for the public benefit and good for the provisions of this chapter, is hereby declared as a matter of legislative determination, and shall be a guiding policy of the department of economic development. It is further found and declared that there is a necessity in the state of creating a department of economic development to coordinate and be responsible for matters affecting the growth of business and industry in the state and the maintenace and development of industry in the state as well as the promotion of tourism in the state and for the establishment and creation of an authority to assist the department and the state to carry out the needs and policies of the state as set forth in this section. (Source: CGS 32-23c) I1- 139 GENERAL DEVELOPMENT (CONT.) SEE ALSO PLAN OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT POLICIES: - Economic Development Policy A (strengthening of state economy by attracting private investment and directing state expenditures into areas of major economic development needs and long term opportunity). - Economic Development Policy A, action 2 ( economic assessment and direction of economic development assistance). - Economic Development Policy A, action 4 (public investment to optimize long term economic development potential). - Economic Development Policy C (efficient management of state govern- ment activities). - Housing Policy C, action 2 (environmental impacts of housing develop- ments). - Urban Centers Guideline A-2 (state grants for rehabilitation of urban centers). IMPLEMENTATION STATE - Issuance of all DEP permits must be consistent with policies A and B above and with other applicable resource protection policies con- tained in the Coastal Management Act. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 21) - All state agency actions significantly affecting the environment in- cluding land acquisitions, development projects and grants for development projects must be consistent with policies A and B above. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(b)) - All major state agency plans must, by July 1, 1981, be revised to insure consistency with policies A and B. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(a)) - All development activities of the Connecticut Development Authority must be consistent with policy C above. (Source: CGS 32-23e) 11-140 GENERAL DEVELOPMENT (CONT.) MUNICIPAL The decisions of municipal planning and zoning agencies and zoning boards of appeal concerning activitiessubject to coastal site plan review requirements must be consistent with policies A and B above, where applicable, and in addition such agencies and boards must determine whether or not the adverse impacts of the activity on coastal resources and future water dependent development opportunities are- acceptable. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 11(e), 12(a), (b) and (e)) - Municipal agencies preparing voluntary municipal coastal programs must insure that they are consistent with policies A and B above. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 8(a) and 9(a)) FEDERAL Federal agency actions including development projects, permits and grants must be consistent with policies A and B above. (Source: Sec. 307 of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act o1 1972, 16 USC 1456) B. 14ATER DEPENDENT USES DEFINITION - "Water Dependent Uses" means those uses and facilities which require direct access to, or location in, marine or tidal waters and which therefore, cannot be located inland, including but not limited to: marinas, recreational and commercial fishing and boating facilities, finfish and shellfish processing plants, waterfront dock and port facilities, shipyards and boatbuilding facilities, navi- gation aids, basins and channels, industrial uses dependent upon waterborne transportation or requiring large volumes of cooling or process water which cannot reasonably be located or operated at an inland site and uses which pro- vide general public access to marine or tidal waters. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 3(16)) 11-141 WATER DEPENDENT USES (CONT.) POLICIES POLICIES TO BE FOLLOWED BY MUNICIPAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES A. To give high priority and preference to uses and facilities which are dependent upon proximity to the water or the shorelands im- mediately adjacent to marine and tidal waters. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(a)(3)) B. To manage uses in the coastal boundary through existing municipal planning, zoning and other local regulatory authorities and through existing state structures, dredging, wetlands, and other state siting and regulatory authorities, giving highest priority and preference to water dependent uses and facilities in shorefront areas. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(b)(1)(A)) SEE ALSO: - Ports and Harbors Policy A (high priority to water dependent and boating support uses in fishing ports). - Ports and Harbors Policy B (disallow uses which congest navigation channels and preclude boating support facilities). - Developed Shorefront Policy A (promotion of marine related uses). - Boating Policy A (limiting non-water dependent uses that preclude boating support facilities). - National Interest Facilities and Resources Policy A (criteria for siting of facilities which are in the national interest). IMPLEMENTATION STATE - Issuance of DEP permits must be consistent with all of the above policies and with other applicable resource protection policies con- tained in the Coastal Management Act. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 21) II-142 WATER DEPENDENT USES (CONT,) Issuance of permits by other state agencies must be consistent with policy B above. (Source: requirement included in the policy) All state agency actions significantly affecting the environment in- cluding land acquisitions, development projects and grants for develop- ment projects must be consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(b)) - All major state agency plans must, by July 1, 1981 be revised to insure consistency with all of the above policies. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(a)) MUNICIPAL The decisions of municipal planning and zoning agencies and zoning boards of appeal concerning activities subject to coastal site plan review requirements must be consistent with all of the above policies, where applicable, and in addition such agencies and boards must determine whether or not the adverse impacts of the activity on co:astal resources and future water dependent opportunities are acceptable. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 11(e), 12(a), (b) and (e)) - Municipal agencies preparing voluntary municipal coastal programs must insure that they are consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 8(a) and 9(a)) FEDERAL - Federal agency actions including development projects, permits and grants must be consistent with policies A and B above. (Source: Sec. 307 of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, 16 USC 1456) II-143 C. PORTS AND HARBORS POLICIES POLICIES TO BE FOLLOWED BY MUNICIPAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES A. To promote, through existing state and local planning, development, promotional and regulatory authorities, the development, reuse or redevelopment of existing urban and commercial fishing ports giving highest priority and preference to water dependent uses, including but not limited to commercial and recreational fishing and boating uses. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(b)(1)(C)) B. To disallow uses which unreasonably congest navigation channels, or unreasonably preclude boating support facilities elsewhere in a port or harbor. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(b)(1)(C)) SEE ALSO: - Fuel, Chemicals and Hazardous Materials Policy A (minimizing risk of spills at port facilities). - Boating Policies A through E (encouraging increased recreational boat- ing, utilizing existing altered, developed or redeveloped areas for boating facilities, limiting non-water dependent land uses, protect- ing and upgrading facilities serving fishing and boating industries, maintaining existing harbor space, and locating recreational boating facilities so as not to interfere with the needs of the commercial fishing industry). POLICIES FOR STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES ONLY SEE PLAN OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPM4ZNT POLICY: -Transportation-Services Policy A, action 7 (expansion of existing water-borne transportation facilities). 11- 144 PORTS AND HARBORS (CONT.) IMPLEMENTATION STATE - Issuance of DEP permits must be consistent with all of the above policies and with other applicable resource protection policies contained in the Coastal Management Act. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 21) - Issuance of permits by other state agencies must be consistent with policies A and B above. (Source: requirement contained in policy) - Approval of municipal harbor improvement plans by DEP pursuant to CGS sec. 13b-56 must be consistent with the above policies. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 21) - Establishment of boundaries seaward of the mean high water mark by DEP for the regulation of uses, obstructions, encroachments and facilities pursuant to CGS 25-7c must be consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 21) - All state agency actions significantly affecting the environment in- cluding land acquisitions, development projects and grants for develop- ment projects must be consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(b)) - All major state agency plans must, by July 1, 1981, be revised to insure consistency with all of the above policies. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(a)) MUNICIPAL The decisions of municipal planning and zoning agencies and zoning boards of appeal concerning activities subject to coastal site plan review requirements must be consistent with policies A and B above, where applicable, and in addition such agencies and boards must 11-145 PORTS AND HARBORS (CONT.) determine whether or not the adverse impacts of the activity on coastal resources and future water dependent development opportunities are acceptable. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 11(e), 12(a), (b) and (e)) Municipal agencies preparing voluntary municipal coastal programs must insure that they are consistent with policies A and B above. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 8(a) and 9(a)) FEDERAL Federal agency actions including development projects, permits and grants must be consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: Sec. 307 of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, 16 USC 1456) D. COASTAL STRUCTURES AND FILLING POLICIES POLICIES TO BE FOLLOWED BY MUNICIPAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES A. To require that structures in tidal wetlands and coastal waters be designed, constructed and maintained to minimize adverse impacts on coastal resources, circulation and sedimentation patterns, water quality, and flooding and erosion, to reduce to the maximum extent practicable the use of fill, and to reduce conflicts with the riparian rights of adjacent landowners. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(b)(1)(D)) SEE ALSO: Coastal Hazard Areas Policy B (promotion of nonstructural solutions to flood and erosion problems). - Coastal Hazard Areas Policy E (structural solutions to flooding and erosion problems permissible under certain circumstances). 11-146 COASTAL STRUCTURES AND FILLING (CONT,) POLICIES FOR STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES ONLY B. To disallow any filling of tidal wetlands and nearshore, offshore and intertidal waters for the purpose of creating new land from existing wetlands and coastal waters which would otherwise be undevelopable, unless it is found that the adverse impacts on coastal resources are minimal. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(c)(1)(B)) C. To require as a condition in permitting new coastal structures, in- cluding but not limited to groins, jetties or breakwaters, that access to, or along, the public beach below mean high water must not be unreasonably impaired by such structures. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(c)(1)(K)) D. To encourage the removal of illegal structures below mean high water which unreasonably obstruct passage along the public beach. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(c)(1)(K)) E. To maintain, enhance, or where feasible, restore natural patterns of water circulation and fresh and saltwater exchange in the place- ment or replacement of culverts, tide gates or other drainage or flood control structures. (Source: P.A. 79-535, 2(c)(2)(B)) F. The commissioner of environmental protection shall regulate the erection of structures and the placement of fill, and work in- cidental thereto, in the tidal, coastal, or navigable waters of the state with due regard for indigenous aquatic life, fish and wildlife, the prevention or alleviation of shore erosion and coastal flooding, the use and development of adjoining uplands, the improve- ment of coastal and inland navigation for all vessels, including small craft for recreational purposes, the use and development of adjacent lands and properties and the interests of the state, including pollution control, water quality and recreational use of public waters and management of coastal resources, with proper regard for the rights and interests of all persons concerned. (Source: CGS 25-7b as amended by P.A. 79-201 as referenced by P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(a)(2)) SEE ALSO: - Coastal Hazard Areas Policy H (establishment of stream channel en- croachment lines). II-147 COASTAL STRUCTURES AND FILLING (CONT.) IMPLEMENTATION STATE Issuance of DEP permits for structures and fill in coastal waters pursuant to CGS 25-7b must be consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 21) - Issuance of DEP permits for activities in tidal wetlands pursuant to CGS 22a-32 must be consistent with policies A, B and E above. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 21) Establishment of boundaries seaward of the mean high water mark by DEP for the regulation of uses, obstructions, encroachments and facilities pursuant to CGS 25-7c must be consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 21) All state agency actions significantly affecting the environment including land acquisitions, development projects and grants for development projects must be consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(b)) - All major state agency plans must, by July 1, 1981, be revised to insure consistency with all of the above policies. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(a)) MUNICIPAL The decisions of municipal planning and zoning agencies and zoning boards of appeal concerning activities subject to coastal site plan review requirements must be consistent with policy A, where applicable, and in addition such agencies and boards must determine whether or not the adverse impacts of the activity on coastal resources and future water dependent development opportunities are acceptable. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 11(e), 12(a), (b) and (e)) II-148 COASTAL STRUCTURES AND FILLING (CONT.) Municipal agencies preparing voluntary municipal coastal programs must insure that they are consistent with policy A above. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 8(a) and 9(a)) FEDERAL Federal agency actions including development projects, permits and grants must be consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: Sec. 307 of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, 16 USC 1456) E. DREDGING AND NAVIGATION POLICIES POLICIES TO BE FOLLOWED BY MUNICIPAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES SEE: - Tidal Wetlands Policy C (creation of wetlands for dredged spoil disposal) - National Interest Facilities and Resources Policy A (planning for and protection of national interest facilities and resources including federal navigation channels). POLICIES FOR STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES ONLY A. To encourage, through the state permitting program for dredging activities, the maintenance and enhancement of existing federally maintained navigation channels, basins and anchorages. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(c)(1)(C)) B. To discourage the dredging of new federally maintained navigation channels, basins and anchorages. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(c)(1)(C)) 11-149 DREDGING AND NAVIGATION (CONT.) C. To reduce the need for future dredging by requiring that new or ex- panded navigation channels, basins and anchorages take advantage of ex istin g or a uthori zed water depths, circulIat ion and silItat ion patterns and the best available technologies for reducing controllable sedimentation. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(c)(1)(D)) D. To disallow new dredging in tidal wetlands except where no permissible alternative exists and where adverse impacts to coastal resources are minimal. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(c)(1)(E)) E. The commissioner of environmental protection shall regulate the taking and removal of sand, gravel and other materials from lands under tidal and coastal waters with due regard for the prevention or alleviation of shore erosion, the protection of necessary shell fish grounds and finfish habitats, the preservation of necessary wildlife habitats, the development of adjoining uplands, the rights of riparian property owners, the creation and improvement of channels and boat basins, the improvement of coastal and inland navigation for all vessels including small craft for recreational purposes and the improvement, protection or development of uplands bordering upon tidal and coastal waters, with due regard for the rights and interests of all persons concerned. (Source: CGS sec. 25-10 as referenced by P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(a)(2)) F. Harbor masters shall have the general care and supervision of the harbors over which they have jurisdiction, subject to the discretion and control of the commissioner of transportation, and shall be responsible to the commissioner for the safe and efficient operationI of such harbor in accordance with the provisions of this chapter. The commissioner may delegate any of his powers and duties under this chapter to such harbor masters or to any existing board of harbor commissioners, but shall at all times be vested with responsibility for the overall supervision of the harbors of the state. (Source: CGS sec. 15-1) SEE ALSO: -Dredging and Dredged Material Disposal Planning Policy A (cooperation with federal government on long-range planning for channel maintenance and dredged material disposal). -Boating Policy F (state regulation of boating). -Ports and Harbors Policy B (disallow uses which congest navigation channels). 11-150 DREDGING AND NAVIGATION (CONT.) MAPS - Federal navigation channels and existing dredge spoil disposal sites are depicted on a statewide map at 1:125,000 scale. - Maps of federal navigation channels at 1:24,000 scale will be prepared by the Coastal Area Management Unit of DEP. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 5(b)) IMPLEMENTATION STATE Issuance of DEP permits for new dredging in coastal waters pursuant to CGS 25-11 must be consistent with policies A through E above and with other applicable resource protection policies contained in the Coastal Management Act. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 21) - Issuance of DEP permits for activities in tidal wetlands pursuant to CGS sec. 22a-32 must be consistent with policies C and D above. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 21) Designation of channels and boat basins by DEP pursuant to CGS sec. 25-3d and 25-14 must be consistent with policies A, B, C and E above. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 21) Regulation of harbors by the Department of Transportation and state- appointed harbor masters pursuant to CGS sec. 15-1 must be consistent with policy F above. (Source: CGS sec. 15-1) All state agency actions significantly affecting the environment in- cluding grants for development projects must be consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(b)) DREDGING AND NAVIGATION (CONT,) FEDERAL Federal agency actions including development projects, permits and grants must be consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: Sec. 307 of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, 16 USC 1456) F. BOATING POLICIES POLICIES TO BE FOLLOWED BY MUNICIPAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES A. To encourage increased recreational boating use of coastal waters, where feasible, by (i) providing additional berthing space in existing harbors, (ii) limiting nonwater dependent land uses that preclude boating support facilities, (iii) increasing state owned launching facilities, and (iv) providing for new boating facilities in natural harbors, new protected water areas and in areas dredged from dry land. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(b)(1)(G)) B. To protect coastal resources by requiring, where feasible, that such boating uses and facilities (i) minimize disruption or degradation of natural coastal resources, (ii) utilize existing altered, develop- ed or redevelopment areas, (iii) are located to assure optimal dis- tribution of state owned facilities to the statewide boating public and (iv) utilize ramps and dry storage rather than slips in environ- mentally sensitive areas. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(b)(1)(H)) C. To protect and where feasible, upgrade facilities serving the com- mercial fishing and recreational boating industries. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(b)(1)(I)) To maintain existing authorized commercial fishing and recreational boating harbor space unless the demand for these facilities no longer exists or adequate space has been provided. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(b)(1)(I)) II-152 BOATING (CONT-) E. To design and locate, where feasible, proposed recreational boating facilities in a manner which does not interfere with the needs of the commercial fishing industry. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(b)(1)(1)) SEE ALSO: -Ports and Harbors Policy B (uses which congest navigation channels and preclude boating support facilites). F ~~POLICIES FOR STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES ONLY F. In performance of his duties under part 1I the commissioner shall (1) Classify all waters and all vessels for the purpose of establishing uniformity in the regulation of such waters and such vessels; (2) pre- I ~ ~~scribe uniform navigation aids for state waters and regulate the use of such aids; (3) establish restricted zones or sea lanes within navi- gable waters and adopt regulations pertaining thereto for the purpose of protecting the natural ecology of such waters and the abutting shore- line from environmental damage resulting from marine accidents which cause the release of petroleum products or other hazardous substances and materials into the waters of the state, provided before establishing such lanes, zones and regulations the commissioner shall consider at least the following factors: (i) The danger in transporting the type of material; (ii) the evidence of deleterious incidents arising from the transportation of such hazardous materials; (iii) available alterna- tives; (iv) the public need; and (v) the effect on interstate commerce; and further provided any such regulations promulgated by the commissioner shall list and define the substances and materials which are classified F ~~~as hazardous; (4) prescribe uniform standards for safety devices and equipment required by part 11-and certify the types of devices and equipment which meet such standards; (5) designate and assist the several towns in designating prohibited and restricted boating areas and waters limited to special boating purposes and prescribe uniform standards for the marking and regulation of such areas; (6) adopt such regulations respecting water skiing and underwater swimming and diving as he finds necessary for public safety (7) study, plan and recommend the develop- ment of boating facilities, safety education and means of improving boating safety; (8) in cooperation with the department of health, in- vestigate matters relating to and recommended means of improving boating sanitation; (9) cooperate with the department of transportation and the bureau of aeronautics concerning regulations governing the operation of seaplanes on state waters; (10) cooperate with the United States and the several states in promoting uniformity of boating laws and regulations and their administration and enforcement, and (11) subject to the applicable provisions of chapter 54 and section 4-117 and the limitations of part TI, adopt such regulations to provide for public safety and environmental quality as he finds necessary to administer and enforce 11- 153 BOATING (CONT.) the provisions of said part and to promote the safe use and protection of waters and the safe operation of vessels, provided the commissioner shall make no regulations respecting the operation of vessels on Long Island Sound except as are necessary to secure inshore waters and establish and secure restricted areas. (Source: CGS sec. 15- 121(b)) SEE ALSO: Dredging and Navigation Policy F (harbor master duties). IMPLEMENTATION STATE - Issuance of DEP permits for structures and fill pursuant to CGS 25-7b must be consistent with policies A through E above and with other applicable resource protection policies contained in the Coastal Manage- ment Act. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 21) Issuance of DEP permits for new dredging pursuant to CGS 25-11 must be consistent with policies A through E above and with other applicable resource protection policies contained in the Coastal Management Act. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 21) Establishment of boundaries seaward of the mean high water mark by DEP for the regulation of uses, obstructions, encroachments and facilities pursuant to CGS 25-7c must be consistent with policies A through E above. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 21) - Designation of channels and boat basins by DEP pursuant to CGS 25-3d and 25-14 must be consistent with policies A through E above. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 21) - DEP regulation of boating pursuant to CGS 15-121 through 15-140d must be consistent with policy F above. (Source: requirement contained in policy F) II-154 BOATING (CONT.) All state agency actions significantly affecting the environment in- cluding land acquisitions, development projects and grants for development projects must be consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(b)) All major state agency plans must, by July 1, 1981, be revised to insure consistency with all of the above policies. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(a)) MUNICIPAL The decisions of municipal planning and zoning agencies and zoning boards of appeal concerning activities subject to coastal site plan review requirements must be consistent with policies A through E above, where applicable, and in addition such agencies and boards must deter- mine whether or not the adverse impacts of the activity on coastal resources and future water dependent development opportunities (in- cluding boating facilities) are acceptable. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 11(e), 12(a), (b) and (e)) - Municipal agencies preparing voluntary municipal coastal programs must insure that they are consistent with policies A through E above. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 8(a) and 9(a)) FEDERAL Federal agency actions including development projects, permits and grants must be consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: Sec. 307 of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, 16 USC 1456) 11-155 G. FISHERIES POLICIES POLICIES TO BE FOLLOWED BY MUNICIPAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES SEE: - Boating Policy C (protection and upgrading of facilities). - Boating Policy E (recreational boating facilities and the commercial fishing industry). - Intertidal Flats Policy A (intertidal flats as nutrient source, habitat and feeding area). - Coastal Waters and Estuarine Embayments Policy A (water pollution as public nuisance and use of public funds to eliminate pollution). - National Interest Facilities and Resources Policy A (planning for and protection of resources and facilities which are in the national interest including restoration and enhancement of fisheries and the shell- fish industry).4 POLICIES FOR STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES ONLY A. To manage the state's fisheries in order to promote the economic benefits of commercial and recreational fishing, enhance recreation- al fishing opportunities, optimize the yield of all species, prevent the depletion or extinction of indigenous species, maintain and en- hance the productivity of natural estuarine resources and preserve healthy fisheries resources for future generations. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(c)(1)(1)) B. The party states, for the purpose of promoting the restoration of Ana- dromous Atlantic salmon, hereinafter reffered to as Atlantic salmon, to the Connecticut River basin by the development of a regional pro- gram for stocking, protection, management, research and regulation, do hereby establish the Connecticut River Atlantic Salmon Commission. (Source: P.A. 79-528, Article I) SEE ALSO: - Coastal Waters and Estuarine Embayments Policy C (maintenance of biologi- cal productivity and healthy marine habitats). 11- 156 FISHERIES (CONT.) - Coastal Waters and Estuarine Embayments Policy D (restoration of eel- grass flats). - Coastal Waters and Estuarine Embayments Policy B (establishment of water quality standards). IMPLEMENTATION STATE DEP regulation of marine fisheries pursuant to CGS chapter 490 and regulations thereunder (RCSA 26-114-1, 26-142a-1 through 15, 26-194-1 through 3, 26-157b-1, and 26-159a-1) must be consistent with policy A above. (Source: requirement is contained in the policy) All state agency actions significantly affecting the environment in- cluding land acquisitions, development projects and grants for develop- ment projects must be consistent with policy A above. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(b)) - All major state agency plans must, by July 1, 1981, be revised to insure consistency with policy A above. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(a)) FEDERAL - Federal agency actions including development projects, permits and grants must be consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: Sec. 307 of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, 16 USC 1456) II-157 M. COASTAL RECREATION AND ACCESS POLICIES POLICIES FOR STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES ONLY A. To encourage public access to the waters of Long Island Sound by expansion, development and effective utilization of state owned recreational facilities within the coastal area that are consistent with sound resource conservation procedures and constitutionally pro- tected rights of private property owners. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(a)(6)) B. To make effective use of state owned coastal recreational facilities in order to expand coastal recreational opportunities including the development or redevelopment of existing state owned facilities where feasible. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(c)(1)(~J)) C. To require as a condition in permitting new coastal structures, in- cluding but not limited to groins, jetties or breakwaters, that access to, or along, the public beach below mean high water must not be unreasonably impaired by such structures. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(c)(1)(K)) D. In making grants-in-aid for open space land acquisition or development the commissioner of environmental protection shall: (a) Seek to achieve a reasonable balance among all parts of the state in the rela- tive adequacy of present areas devoted to recreational and conservation purposes and the relative anticipated future needs for additional areas devoted to recreational and conservation purposes; (b) give due con- sideration to the special park requirement needs of urban areas; (c) wherever possible, give priority to land which will be utilized for multiple recreational and conservation purposes; (d) give due con- sideration to coordination with the plans of departments of the state and regional planning agencies with respect to land use or acquisition. (Source: P.A. 79-607, sec. 7) E. To such extent as may be necessary to assure the proper operation and maintenance of areas and facilities acquired by municipalities or regional authorities pursuant to any program participated in by this state under authority of sections 22a-21 to 22a-26, inclusive, such areas and facilities shall be publicly maintained for outdoor re- creation or natural resources purposes, and such city or other local governmental unit shall give such assurances to the state as may be COASTAL RECREATION AND ACCESS (CONT,) required by the commissioner of environmental protection, that it has available sufficient funds to meet its share of the cost of the project and that the acquired or developed areas will be operat- ed and maintained at municipal or regional expense for public out- door recreation or natural resources use. (Source: CGS 22a-27 as referenced by P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(a)(2)) SEE ALSO: - Transportation Policy B (rail corridors and improvement of coastal access and recreation). - Transportation Policy E (enhancement of coastal access and recreational opportunities in highway improvements). - Coastal Structures and Filling Policy D (removal of illegal structures). - Boating Policies A through E (encouragement of increased recreational boating by provision and expansion of facilities in a manner which protects coastal resources). - National Interest Facilities and Resources Policy A (planning for and sit- ing of facilities which are in the national interest including provision of adequate state and federally owned recreation facilities. SEE ALSO PLAN OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT POLICIES: - Land and Water Resources Policy B (provision of outdoor recreation opportunities). - Land and Water Resources Policy B, action 3 (priority to recreation facilities that are accessible to many users). - Land and Water Resources Policy B, action 4 (acquisition, development and improvement of water-based recreation sites). - Land and Water Resources Policy B, action 5 (acquisition and expansion of coastal recreation areas). - Urban Centers Policy C-4 (recreational use of urban rivers). IIi-159 COASTAL RECREATION AND ACCESS (CONTa) IMPLEMENTATION STATE - DEP's acquisition and management of state recreational facilities pur- suant to CGS chapter 447 and 22a-21 through 27 must be consistent with policies A, B and C above and with other applicable resource protection policies contained in the Coastal Management Act. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20) - DEP's grants to municipalities for recreation pursuant to CGS 22a-21a and 22a-22 must be consistent with policies D and E above. (Source: requirement is contained in the policies) - Issuance of DEP permits for structures and fill in coastal waters pur- suant to CGS 25-7b must be consistent with policies A through C above. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 21) - All state agency actions significantly affecting the environment in- cluding land acquisitions, development projects and grants for develop- ment projects must be consistent with policies A through C above. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(b)) - All major state agency plans must, by July 1, 1981, be revised to insure consistency with policies A through C above. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(a)) - DEP must include a norefront access and protection planning process in the coastal management program. This process is described in Part X of this document. (Source: Sec. 305(b)(7) of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, 16 USC 1456) FEDERAL - Federal agency actions including development projects, permits and 11-160 COASTAL RECREATION AND ACCESS (CONT.) grants must be consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: Sec. 307 of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, 16 USC 1456) I, SEWER AND !WATER SERVICES POLICIES POLICIES TO BE FOLLOWED BY MUNICIPAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES A. To locate and phase sewer and water lines, so as to encourage con- centrated development in areas which are suitable for development. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(b)(1)(B)) B. To disapprove extension of sewer and water services into developed and undeveloped beaches, barrier beaches and tidal wetlands except that, when necessary to abate existing sources of pollution, sewers that will accommodate existing uses with limited excess capacity may be used. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(b)(1)(B)) POLICIES FOR STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES ONLY SEE PLAN OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT POLICY: - Wastewater Management Policy B, action I (extension of sewer collection systems into non-urban areas). IMPLEMENTATION STATE Issuance of DEP approvals, orders and permits for sewer systems pursuant to CGS 25-26 and 25-54g through 25-54k must be consistent with the above policies and with other applicable resource protection policies contained in the Coastal Management Act. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 21) 11-161 SEWER AND WATER SERVICES (CONT.) Issuance of DEP permits for activities in tidal wetlands pursuant to CGS 22a-32 must be consistent with the above policies. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 21) All state agency actions significantly affecting the environment in- cluding land acquisitions, development projects and grants for develop- ment projects, including DEP grants for municipal sewer construction pursuant to CGS 25-54r, must be consistent with the above policies. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(b)) All major state plans, except the plan of Conservation and Development must, by July 1, 1981, be revised to insure consistency with all of the above policies. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(a)) MUNICIPAL - The decisions of municipal planning and zoning agencies and zoning boards of appeal concerning activities subject to coastal site plan review requirements must be consistent with the above policies, where applicable, and in addition such agencies and boards must determine whether or not the adverse impacts of the activity on coastal resources and future water dependent development opportunities are acceptable. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 11(e), 12(a), (b) and (e)) Municipal agencies preparing voluntary municipal coastal programs must insure that they are consistent with the above policies. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 8(a) and 9(a)) FEDERAL - Federal agency actions including development projects, permits and grants must be consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: Sec. 307 of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, 16 USC 1456) II-162 J. ENERGY FACILITIES POLICIES POLICIES FOR STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES ONLY A. The legislature finds that power generating plants and transmission lines for electricity and fuels, community antenna television towers and telecommunication towers have had a significant impact on the environment and ecology of the state of Connecticut; and that continued operation and development of such power plants, lines and towers, if not properly planned and controlled, could adversely affect the quality of the environment, the ecological, scenic, historic and recreational values of the state. The purposes of this chapter are: To provide for the balancing of the need for adequate and reliable public utility services at the lowest reasonable cost to consumers with the need to protect the environment and ecology of the state and to minimize damage to scenic, historic, and recreational values; to provide environmental quality standards and criteria for the location, design, construction and operation of facilities for the furnishing of public utility ser- vices at least as stringent as the federal environmental quality standards and criteria, and technically sufficient to assure the wel- fare and protection of the people of the state; to encourage research to develop new and improved methods of generating, storing and trans- mitting electricity and fuel and of transmitting and receiving tele- vision and telecommunications with minimal damage to the environment and other values described above; to require annual forecasts of the demand for electric power, together with identification and advance planning of the facilities needed to supply that demand and to facili- tate local, regional, state-wide and interstate planning to implement the foregoing purposes. (Source: CGS 16-50g) B. The council shall not grant a certificate, either as proposed or as modified by the council, unless it shall find and determine: (1) A public need for the facility and the basis of the need; (2) the nature of the probable environmental impact, including a specification of every significant adverse effect, whether alone or cumulatively with other effects, on,and conflict with the policies of the state concerning the natural environment, ecological balance, public health and safety, scenic, historic and recreational values, forests and parks, air and water purity and fish and wildlife; (3) why the adverse effects or conflicts referred to in subdivision (2) of this subsection are not sufficient reason to deny the application; (4) in the case of an electric transmission line, (A) what part, if any, of the facility shall be located overhead, (B) that the facility conforms to a long- range plan for expansion of the electric power grid of the electric systems serving the state and interconnected utility systems and will serve the interests of electric system economy and reliability, and 11-163 ENERGY FACILITIES (CONT.) (C) that the overhead portions of the facility, if any, are consistent with the purposes of this chapter, with such regulations as the council may adopt pursuant to subsection (a) of section 16-50t, and with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission "Guidelines for the Protection of Natural Historic Scenic and Recreational Values in the Design and Location of Rights-of-Way and Transmission Facilities" or any successor guidelines and any other applicable federal guidelines; (5) in the case of an electric or fuel 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. (Source: CGS 16-50p(a)) SEE ALSO: -National Interest Facilities and Resources Policy A (planning for and siting of facilities that are in the national interest including energy facilities serving statewide and interstate markets). SEE ALSO PLAN OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT POLICIES: -Energy Policy E,'action 3 (preservation of potential energy facility sites). -Conservation Areas Guideline B-7 (development of potential energy facility sites and surrounding areas). IMPLEMENTATION STATE The siting of power facilities including: 1) electric generating or storage facilities, 2) substations and switchyards, 3) electric trans- mission lines with a capacity of 69 kilovolts or more, 4) fuel trans- mission facilities except gas lines with a capacity of less than 200 pounds per square inch pressure, and 5) other facilities which may have a substantial adverse environmental effect is under the regulatory jurisdiction of the state Power Facility Evaluation Council (see CGS 16-50i(a)). Issuance by the PFEC of a "certificate of environmental compatibility and public need" for the siting of a power facility must be consistent with policies A and B above. In addition, as stated in policy B, issuance of a certificate by PFEC must be consistent with other environmental policies (including those of the Coastal Management Act) unless the Council makes a reasonable determination that the public need for the facility outweighs denial of a certificate based on the environmental policies. The PFEC has exclusive jurisdiction which 11-164 ENERGY FACILITIES (CONT.) supercedes other state regulatory programs regarding the type and siting of power facilities (see CGS 16-50x(a)). By a two-thirds vote the PFEC may override local restrictions or exclusions of power facilities (see CGS 16-50x(a) and (d)). However, the PFEC's jurisdiction over effluents, thermal effects, air and water emissions, protection of fish and wildlife and other environmental factors is in addition to, not in lieu of, other state regulatory programs (see CGS 16-50t(b)). (Source: CGS Chapter 277a and P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(a)) DEP energy facility permits for effluents (CGS Chapter 474a), air emissions (CGS Chapter 360), protection of fish and wildlife (CGS Chapter 490), structures and dredging (CGS Chapter 473), and wetlands and watercourses (CGS Chapter 440) must be consistent with all policies contained in the Coastal Management Act and other resource, use, and governmental process policies found elsewhere in this document. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 21) All state agency actions significantly affecting the environment in- cluding land acquisitions, development projects and grants for develop- ment projects must be consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(b)) All major state agency plans must, by July 1, 1981, be revised to insure consistency with all of the above policies. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(a)) The Coastal Area Management Unit of DEP has prepared an energy facility planning process which is contained in Part X(A) of this document. (Source: Sec. 305(a)(8) of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, 16 USC 1456) FEDERAL Federal agency actions including development projects, permits and grants must be consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: Sec. 307 of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, 16 USC 1456) II-165 K. FUEL, CHEMICALS, AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS POLICIES POLICIES TO BE FOLLOWED BY MUNICIPAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES A. To minimize the risk of oil and chemical spills at port facilities. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(b)(1)(C)) B. To require any new storage tanks which must be located within the coastal boundary to abut existing storage tanks or to be located in urban industrial areas and to be adequately protected against floods and spills. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(b)(1)(E)) C. To disallow the siting within the coastal boundary of new tank farms and other new fuel and chemical facilities which can reasonably be located inland. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(b)(1)(E)) SEE ALSO: - National Interest Facilities and Resources Policy A (planning for and siting of energy facilities that are in the national interest including facilities used for storage, receiving or processing petroleum products). POLICIES FOR STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES ONLY D. To minimize the risk of spillage of petroleum products and hazardous substances. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(c)(1)(A)) E. To provide effective containment and clean up facilities for accidental spills. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(c)(1)(A)) F. To disallow offshore oil receiving systems that have the potential to cause catastrophic oil spills in the Long Island Sound estuary. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(c)(1)(A)) 11-166 FUEL, CHEMICALS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS (CONT.) G. The commissioner of environmental protection shall, to the extent possible, immediately, whenever there is discharge, spillage, un- controlled-loss, seepage or filtration of oil or petroleum or chemical liquids or solid, liquid or gaseous products or hazardous wastes upon any land or into any of the waters of the state or into any offshore or coastal waters, which may result in pollution of the waters of the state, damage to beaches, wetlands, stream banks or coastal areas, or damage to sewers or utility conduits or other public or private property or which may create an emergency, cause such discharge, spillage, uncontrolled loss, seepage or filtration to be contained and removed or otherwise mitigated by whatever method said commissioner considers best and most expedient under the circumstances. The commissioner shall also determine the person, firm or corporation responsible for causing such discharge, spillage, uncontrolled loss, seepage or filtration. (Source: C.G.S. 25-.54cc(a) (as amended by P.A. 79-605, sec. 3) as referenced by P.A. 79-535, sec. 2 (a)(2)) H. The commissioner may: 1) license terminals in the state for the loading or unloading of oil or petroleum or chemical liquids or solid, liquid or gaseous products or hazardous wastes and shall adopt, in accordance with Chapter 54, reasonable regulations in connection therewith for the purposes of identifying terminals subject to licensure and pro- tecting the public health and safety and for preventing the discharge, spillage, uncontrolled loss, seepage or filtration of oil or petroleum or chemical liquids or solid, liquid or gaseous products or hazardous wastes, 2) provide by regulations for the establishment and maintenance in operating condition and position of suitable equipment to contain as far as possible the discharge, spillage, uncontrolled loss, seepage or filtration of any oil or petroleum or chemical liquids or solid, liquid or gaseous products or hazardous wastes, 3) inspect periodically all hoses, gaskets, tanks, pipelines and other equipment used in connection with the transfer, transportation or storage of oil or petroleum or chemical liquids or solid, liquid or gaseous products or hazardous wastes to make certain that they are in good operating condition, and order the renewal of any such equipment found unfit for further use, 4) require by regulations, in accordance with said subdivision (a), that suitable equipment be readily available and in operating position to remove from the waters of the state any oil, petroleum or chemical liquids or products spilled or discharged therein. (Source: C.G.S. 25-54cc(b) (as amended by P.A. 79-605, sec. 3) as referenced by P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(a)(2)) 11- 167 FUELj CHEMICALS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS (CONT.) I. The safe and sanitary disposal of toxic or hazardous wastes shall be the responsibility of the generator and shall be accomplished in a manner approved by the commissioner. (Source: CGS 19-524n as amended by P.A. 19-605) J. The commissioner of environmental protection shall (1) provide and maintain necessary equipment and train adequate emergency response personnel for the purpose of oil spill containment and removal with- in the lower Connecticut river and adjacent shoreline area; and (2) assist in and coordinate the development of oil spill contain- ment and removal contingency plans for the towns located within the lower Connecticut river and adjacent shoreline area. (Source: P.A. 79-319, sec. 1(b)) SEE ALSO: - Boating Policy F (establishment of sea lanes). IMPLEMENTATION STATE Issuance of DEP licenses for petroleum, chemical or hazardous wastes terminals pursuant to CGS 25-54cc(b) must be consistent with policies A through F and H above and with other applicable resource protection policies contained in the Coastal Management Act. Regulations have been promulgated for terminal licenses (RCSA 25-54cc-I through 25-54cc-7). (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 21 and CGS 25-54cc(b)) Construction and operation of such terminals must be consistent with the State Fire Code (RCSA 29-62-1 to 29-62-215), especially RCSA 29-62-5 to 29-62-15 (above ground storage), and 29-62-58 to 29-62-66 (tanks in flood prone areas). .(Source: RCSA 29-62-1 to 29-62-215) - Issuance of DEP approvals for disposal of hazardous wastes pursuant to CGS 19-524n must be consistent with policies A, D, E, H and I above and with other applicable resource protection policies contained in the Coastal Management Act. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 21 and CGS 19-524n and 25-54cc(b)) II-168 FUEL, CHEMICALS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS (CONT.) - Issuance of DEP permits for structures in coastal waters pursuant to CGS 25-7b and for new dredging in coastal waters pursuant to CGS 25-11 must be consistent with policy F above. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 21) - All state agency actions significantly affecting the environment in- cluding land acquisitions, development projects and grants for development projects must be consistent with policies A through H above. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(b)) - All major state agency plans must, by July 1, 1981, be revised to insure consistency with policies A through H above. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(a)) - DEP's implementation of the requirements of Policy J above must be consistent with all of the above policies and with other applicable resource protection policies contained in the Coastal Management Act. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(b)) MUNICIPAL - The decisions of municipal planning and zoning agencies and zoning boards of appeal concerning activities subject to coastal site plan review requirements must be consistent with policies A through C above, where applicable, and in addition such agencies and boards must deter- mine whether or not the adverse impacts of the activity on coastal resources and future water dependent development opportunities are acceptable. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 11(e), 12(a), (b) and (e)) - Municipal agencies preparing voluntary municipal coastal programs must insure that they are consistent with policies A through C above. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 8(a) and 9(a)) FEDERAL - Federal agency actions including development projects, permits and grants must be consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: Sec. 307 of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, 16 USC 1456) 11-169 L. TRANSPORTATION POLICIES POLICIES TO BE FOLLOWED BY MUNICIPAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES A. To make use of rehabilitation, upgrading and improvement of existing transportation facilities as the primary means of meeting trans- portation needs in the coastal area. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(b)(1)(F)) SEE ALSO: - National Interest Facilities and Resources Policy A (planning for and sit- ing of facilities which are in the national interest including improvements to existing interstate rail, highway and waterborne transportation systems). POLICIES FOR STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES ONLY B. To require that new or improved shoreline rail corridors be designed and constructed so as (i) to prevent tidal and circulation restrictions and, when practicable, to eliminate any such existing restrictions, (ii) to improve or have a negligible adverse effect on coastal access and recreation and (iii) to enhance or not unreasonably impair the visual quality of the shoreline. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(c)(1)(F)) C. To require that coastal highways and highway improvements, including bridges, be designed and constructed so as to minimize adverse impacts on coastal resources. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(c)(1)(G)) D. To require that coastal highway and highway improvements give full consideration to mass transportation alternatives. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(c)(1)(G)) E. To require that coastal highways and highway improvements, where possible, enhance, but in no case decrease coastal access and recreational. op- portunities. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(c)(1)(G)) 11-170 TRANSPORTATION (CONT.) F. To disallow the construction of major new airports. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(c)(1)(H)) G. To discourage the substantial expansion of existing airports within the coastal boundary. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(c)(1)(H)) H. To require that any expansion or improvement of existing airports minimize adverse impacts on coastal resources, recreation or access. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(c)(1)(H)) SEE ALSO PLAN OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT POLICIES: - Transportation Services Policy E, action I (public investment in trans- portation systems). - Transportation Policy A, action 3'(modernization of west end rail system and consideration of new rail passenger service). - Transportation Policy C, action 5 (maintenance and upgrading of exist- ing highway network). - Transportation Policy A, action 7 (preference to expansion of existing air transportation facilities). IMPLEMENTATION STATE Issuance of DEP permits for transportation facilities pursuant to its various air, water and water related permit programs must be consistent with all of the above policies and with other applicable resource pro- tection policies contained in the Coastal Management Act. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 21) All state agency actions significantly affecting the environment in- cluding land acquisitions, development projects and grants for develop- ment projects, including highway projects pursuant to CGS Chapters 236-243, airport projects pursuant to CGS Chapter 242 and rail projects pursuant to Chapters 242 and 292 must be consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(b)) 11-171 TRANSPORTATION (CONT.) All major state agency plans (including the Master Transportation Plan pursuant to CGS 13b-15) must, by July 1, 1981, be revised to insure consistency with all of the above policies. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(a)) MUNICIPAL The decisions of municipal planning and zoning agencies and zoning boards of appeal (particularly those of planning commissions under CGS 8-24) concerning activities subject to coastal site plan review. requirements must be consistent with policy A above, where applicable and in addition such agencies and boards must determine whether or not the adverse impacts of the activity on coastal resources and future water dependent development opportunities are acceptable. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 11(e), 12(a), (b) and (e)) - Municipal agencies preparing voluntary municipal coastal programs must insure that they are consistent with policy A above. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 8(a) and 9(a)) FEDERAL Federal agency actions including development projects, permits and grants must be consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: Sec. 307 of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, 16 USC 1456) M. SOLID WASTE POLICIES POLICY FOR MUNICIPAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES A. Each municipal authority shall make provisions for the safe and sani- tary disposal of all solid wastes which are generated within its boundaries, including septic tank pumping, sludge from water pol- lution abatement facilities and water supply treatment plants, 11-172 SOLID WASTE (CONT.) solid residues and sludge from air pollution control facilities and F ~~~solid wastes from commercial, industrial, agricultural and mining operations excluding wastes which are toxic or hazardous. (Source: CGS 19-524n as amended by P.A. 79-605, sec. 1) POLICIES FOR STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES ONLY B. The commissioner shall administer and enforce the planning and implementation requirements of this chapter. He shall examine all existing or proposed solid waste facilities, provide for their planning, design, construction and operation in a manner which conserves, improves and protects the natural resources and environ- ment of the state and shall order their alteration, extension and replacement when necessary to conserve, improve and protect the state's natural resources and environment and to control air, water and land pollution so that the health, safety and welfare of the people of the state may be safeguarded and enhanced. (Source: CGS 19-524b) SEE ALSO: Fuel, Chemicals and Hazardous Materials Policy I (safe disposal of * ~~~hazardous or toxic wastes). IMPLEMENTATION STATE Issuance of DEP permits for solid waste disposal sites pursuant to CGS 19-524b(c) must be consistent with policy B above and other ap- plicable resource protection policies contained in the Coastal Management Act. Regulations governing solid waste disposal have been promulgated. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 21 and CGS 19-524b(c)) Municipalities must comply with policy A above. Moreover, the de- cisions of municipal planning and zoning agencies and zoning boards of appeal concerning activities subject to coastal site plan review requirements (including reviews of solid waste disposal facilities) must be consistent with all applicable resource protection policies contained in the Coastal Management Act and, in addition, such agencies 11-173 SOLID WASTE (CONT.) and boards must determine whether or not the adverse impacts of the activity on coastal resources and future water dependent development activities are acceptable. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 11(e), 12(a), (b) and (e)) FEDERAL Federal agency actions including development projects, permits and grants must be consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: Sec. 307 of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, 16 USC 1456) N. DAMS, DIKES AND RESERVOIRS POLICIES POLICIES FOR STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES ONLY A. All dams, dikes, reservoirs and other similar structures, with their appurtenances, without exception and without further definition or enumeration herein, which, by breaking away or otherwise, might en- danger life or property, shall be subject to the jurisdiction con- ferred by this chapter. (Source: CGS sec. 25-110 as referenced by P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(a)(2)) B. The commissioner or his representative, engineer or consultant shall determine the environmental impact of the construction work on the inland wetlands of the state, in accordance with the provisions of sections 22a-36 to 22a-45, inclusive, and examine the documents and inspect the site, and, upon approval thereof, the commissioner shall issue a permit authorizing the proposed construction work under such conditions as the commissioner may direct. (Source: CGS sec. 25-112 as referenced by P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(a)(2)) II-174 DAMS. DIKES AND RESERVOIRS (CONT.) IMPLEMENTATION STATE - The issuance of DEP permits for dams, dikes and reservoirs pursuant to CGS 25-112 must be consistent with the above policies and other policies contained in the Coastal Management Act including policies concerning freshwater wetlands and watercourses. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 21 and CGS 25-112) All state agency actions significantly affecting the environment including land acquisitions, development projects and grants for development projects must be consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(b)) - All major state agency plans must, by July 1, 1981, be revised to insure consistency with all of the above policies. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(a)) FEDERAL Federal agency actions including development projects, permits and grants must be consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: Sec. 307 of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, 16 USC 1456) II-175 0. CULTURAL RESOURCES POLICIES POLICIES TO BE FOLLOWED BY MUNICIPAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES A. To require reasonable mitigation measures where development would adversely impact historical, archaeological or paleontological resources that have been designated by the state historic preserva- tion officer. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(b)(1)(J)) B. Any municipality may, by vote of its legislative body and in conformance with the standards and criteria formulated by the Connecticut historical commission, establish within its confines an historic district or dis- tricts to promote the educational, cultural, economic and general wel- fare of the public through the preservation and protection of buildings,I places and districts of historic interest by the maintenance of such as landmarks in the history of architecture, of the municipality, of the state or of the nation,- and through the development of appropriate settings for such buildings, places and districts. The development of appropriate settings for such buildings, places and districts. The legislative body of any municipality may make appropriations for the purpose of carrying out the provisions of sections 7-147a to 7-147k, inclusive. (Source: CGS sec. 7-147a) C. Any municipality or private organization may acquire, relocate, restore, preserve and maintain historic structures and landmarks and may re- ceive funds from the state and federal government for such purposes. Grants-in-aid may be made to owners of historic structures or landmarks in an amount not to exceed fifty percent of the non-federal share of the total cost of such acquisition, relocation, historic preservation and restoration. (Source: CGS 10-321(b)) D. It is found that the lower Connecticut River and the towns abutting the river possess unique scenic, ecological, scientific and historic value contributing to public enjoyment, inspiration and scientific study, that it is in the public interest that the provisions of this chapter be adopted to preserve such values and to prevent deter- ioration of the natural and traditional riverway scene for the enjoy- ment of present and future generations of Connecticut citizens and that the powers of the commissioner of environmental protection, con- ferred by the provisions of section 22a-25, should be exercised in the furtherance of the purposes hereof in conformity with his general 11-176 CULTURAL RESOURCES (CONT.) responsibility to preserve the natural resources of the state. (Source: CGS 25-102a) POLICIES FOR STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES ONLY * ~~E. The commission may, using such funds as may be appropriated to it or available from any other source, acquire by gift, grant, bequest, devise, lease, purchase or otherwise historic structures or land- marks, including such adjacent land as may be necessary for the com- fort and safety of the visiting public, which the commission deter- mines to be of national or state historical importance and to be of such concern to the public at large that they should be held forever in good condition for visitation by the public and for the protection of the heritages of the people of this state and nation. The commission may restore, maintain and operate such properties in such a condition as to render them suitable for public visitation and to inform the public of the historic event or circumstance con- nected therewith. The commission may charge reasonable visitation fees in order to help defray the cost of maintenance and operation. (Source: CGS 10-321d) * ~~SEE ALSO: -Open Space and Agricultural Lands Policy C (natural areas preserves system). * ~~SEE ALSO PLAN OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT POLICIES: -Conservation Areas Guideline 8-4 (use of historical and cultural resources and surrounding areas). IMPLEMENTATION STATE - Issuance of DEP permits for air, water, solid waste and water-related resource development projects must be consistent with policy A above. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 21) - All state agency actions significantly affecting the environment in- cluding land acquisitions, development projects and grants for development projects must be consistent with policy A above. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(b)) II- 177 CULTURAL RESOURCES (CONT,) - All major state agency plans must, by July 1, 1981, be revised to insure consistency with policy A above. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(a)) Acquisition of property by DEP within the boundaries of the Lower Con- necticut River Conservation Zone must be consistent with policy D above. (Source: CGS 25-102f) Acquisition of property by the Connecticut Historical Commission must be consistent with policy E above. (Source: CGS 10-321d) Grants by the Connecticut Historical Commission for preservation of historic structures must be consistent with policy C above. Regula- tions governing grants for historic preservation have been promulgated (RCSA 10-321-6 and 7). (Source: CGS 10-321d) MUNICIPAL - The decisions of municipal planning and zoning agencies and zoning boards of appeal concerning activities subject to coastal site plan review requirements must be consistent with policy A above, where ap- plicable, and in addition such agencies and boards must determine whether or not the adverse impacts of the activity on coastal resources and future water dependent development opportunities are acceptable. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 11(e), 12(a), (b) and (e)) - Municipal agencies preparing voluntary municipal coastal programs must insure that they are consistent with policy A above. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 8(a) and 9(a)) - Municipalities establishing historic districts must be consistent with policy B and the criteria formulated by the Connecticut Historical Commission. (Source: requirement contained in policy B) 11-178 CULTURAL RESOURCES (CONTa) The eight municipalities within the Lower Connecticut River Conserva- tion Zone (six of which are also in the coastal area) have adopted common standards governing zoning, planning and subdivision regulations in the conservation zone consistent with policy D above and have established the Connecticut River Gateway Commission to review the common standards and insure local compliance with the standards. The standards of the Connecticut River Gateway Commission are deemed con- sistent with the policies in the Coastal Management Act. Any revisions to the standards affecting the area within the coastal boundary must be consistent with the policies in the Coastal Management Act. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 16) FEDERAL Federal agency actions including development projects, permits and grants must be consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: Sec. 307 of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, 16 USC 1456) P. OPEN SPACE AND AGRICULTURAL LANDS POLICIES POLICIES TO BE FOLLOWED BY MUNICIPAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES A. It is hereby declared (a) that it is in the public interest to en- courage the preservation of farm land, forest land and open space land in order to maintain a readily available source of food and farm prod- ucts close to the metropolitan areas of the state, to conserve the state's natural resources and to provide for the welfare and happiness of.the inhabitants of the state, (b) that it is in the public interest to prevent the forced conversion of farm land, forest land and open space land to more intensive uses as the result of economic pressures caused by the assessment thereof for purposes of property taxation at values incompatible with their preservation as such farm land, forest land and open space land, and (c) that the necessity in the public interest of the enactment of the provisions of sections 7-131c and 12-107b to 12-107e, inclusive, is a matter of legislative determination. (Source: CGS 12-107a) 11-179 OPEN SPACE AND AGRICULTURAL LANDS (CONT.) POLICIES FOR STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES ONLY B. The general assembly finds that the growing population and expanding economy of the state have had a profound impact on the ability of public and private s~ctors of the state to maintain and preserve agri- cultural land for farming and food production purposes, that unless there is a sound, state-wide program for its preservation, remaining agricultural land will be lost to succeeding generations and that the conservation of certain arable agricultural land and adjacent pastures, woods, natural drainage areas and open space areas is vital for the well-being of the people of Connecticut. (Source: CGS 22-26aa) C. Connecticut is a state of relatively small area, undergoing rapid industrialization and rapid diminution of areas remaining in their natural condition. It is, therefore, declared to be the public policy that carefully selected areas of land and water of outstanding scientific and educational interest be preserved. In implementation of this policy, there is established a Connecticut system of natural area pre- serves. (Source: CGS 23-5a as referenced by P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(a)(2)) SEE ALSO PLAN OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT POLICIES: - Existing Preserved Open Space Guideline A-i (state capital investment and grants to be consistent with natural resource and open space values). - Existing Preserved Open Space Guideline A-2 (approval of investment and grants that are not consistent with preservation values). - Existing Preserved Open Space Guideline A-4 (encouragement of public use of open space). - Food Production Policy A (securing prime agricultural land fo'r future needs). - Food Production Policy B (prime agricultural lands considered in highest and best use for food production). - Food Production Policy C (long range food production plan and preservation of active agricultural lands). OPEN SPACE AND AGRICULTURAL LANDS (CONT.) IMPLEMENTATION STATE - Acquisition of agricultural lands by the Department of Agriculture pursuant to the pilot program established by CGS 22-26cc must be con- sistent with policy B above. (Source: CGS 22-26cc) - Acquisition of property for natural area preserves by DEP pursuant to CGS 23-5h must be consistent with policy C above. (Source: CGS 23-5a) MUNICIPAL - Municipal tax assessments of farmland, forests and open space pursuant to CGS 12-107c, 12-107d, 12-107e and 7-131c must be consistent with policy A above. (Source: CGS 12-107a) FEDERAL - Federal agency actions including development projects, permits and grants must be consistent with all of the above policies. (Source: Sec. 307 of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, 16 USC 1456) II-l131 III. GOVERNMENT PROCESS A. INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION OF PLANNING AND R~EGULATORY ACTIVITIES POLICIES POLICIES TO BE FOLLOWED BY MUNICIPAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES A. To coordinate planning and regulatory activities of public agencies at all levels of government to insure maximum protection of coastal resources while minimizing conflicts and disruption of economic development. Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(a)(9) POLICIES FOR STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES ONLY SEE: - Coordination and Consistency of State Programs, Projects, Expenditures and Acquisitions Policy A (agency coordination and state expenditures). SEE ALSO PLAN OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT POLICIES. - Preservation Areas Guideline A-5 (coordination with State Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan and Environmental Plan). - Preservation Areas Guideline A-6 (continuation of 5-year open space -acquisition and recreation development plans). IMPLEMENTATION S TATE - The issuance of all DEP permits must be consistent with the policies in the Coastal Management Act. Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 21) - DEP is authorized to simplify and coordinate permit programs under its jurisdiction and to coordinate permit administration with federal permit programs. Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 21; C.G.S. 22a-96a and 22a-96b) II-182 INTERGOV T. COORDINATION OF PLANNING AND REGULATORY ACTIVITIES (CONT.) - DEP is required to provide boundary maps, resource factor maps and technical assistance to municipalities. Source: P.A. 79-535, Sec. 4 and 5) - All state agency actions significantly affecting the environment in- cluding land acquisitions, development projects and grants for dev- elopment projects must be consistent with policy A above. ( Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(b)) - All major state agency plans must by July 1, 1981 be revised to insure consistency with policy A above. ( Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(a)) MUNICIPAL - The decisions of municipal planning and zoning agencies and zoning boards of appeal concerning activities subject to coastal site plan review requirements must be consistent with policy A above, where applicable, and in addition such agencies and boards must determine whether or not the adverse impacts of the activity on coastal re- sources and future water dependent development opportunities are acceptable. ( Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 11(e), 12(a), (b) and (e)) - Municipal agencies preparing voluntary municipal coastal programs must insure that they are consistent with policy A above. ( Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 8(a) and 9(a)) FEDERAL - Federal agency actions including development projects, permits and grants must be consistent with all of the above policies. ( Source: sec. 307 of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, 16 U.S.C. 1456) - DEP is responsible for representing the state in matters concerning federal consistency. ( Source: C.G.S. 22a-96(c) and (d)) 11-183 B. COORDINATION AND CONSISTENCY OF STATE PROGRAMS, PROJECTS, EXPENDITURES AND ACQUISITIONS POLICIES POLICIES FOR STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES ONLY A. To coordinate the activities of public agencies to insure that state expenditures enhance development while affording maximum protection to natural coastal resources and processes in a manner consistent with the state plan for conservation and development adopted pur- suant to Part I of chapter 297. ( Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(a)(8)) B. In addition to the policies in this section, the policies of the state plan of conservation and development adopted pursuant to Part I of chapter 297 shall be applied to the area within the coastal boundary in accordance with the requirements of section 16a-31. ( Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(c)(2)(d)) C. In furtherance of and pursuant to sections 22a-1 and 22a-15, the general assembly, recognizing the profound impact of man's activity on the inter- relations of all components of the natural environment, particularly the profound influence of population growth, high-density urbanization, industrial expansion, resource exploitation, and new and expanding tech- nological advances, and recognizing further the critical importance of restoring and maintaining environmental quality to the overall welfare and development of man, declares that it is the continuing policy of the state government, in cooperation with federal and local governments, and other concerned public and private organizations, to use all practicable means and measures, including financial and technical assistance, in a manner calculated to foster and promote the general welfare, to create and maintain conditions under which man and nature can exist in productive harmony, and fulfill the social ,economic, and other requirements of pre- sent and future generations of Connecticut residents. In order to carry out the policy set forth in sections 22a-la to 22a-lf, inclusive, it is the continuing responsibility of the state government to use all practicable means, consistent with other essential considerations of the state policy, to improve and coordinate state plans, functions, programs, and resources to the end that the state may: (1) Fulfill the responsibility of each generation as trustee of the environment for suc- ceeding generations; (2) assure for all residents of the state safe, healthful, productive, and esthetically and culturally pleasing surround- ings; (3) attain the widest range of beneficial uses of the environment without degradation, risk to health or safety, or other undesirable and COORDINATION AND CONSISTENCY OF STATE PROGRAMS, PROJECTS, EXPENDITURES,, AND ACQUISITIONS (CONT.) unintended consequences; (4) preserve important historic; cultural, and natural aspects of our Connecticut heritage, and maintain, wherever possible, an environment which supports diversity and variety of indiv- idual choice; (5) achieve an ecological balance between population and resource use which will permit high standards of living and a wide shar- ing of life's amenities; (6) enhance the quality of renewable resources and approach the maximum attainable recycling of depletable resources; and (7) practice conservation in the use of energy, maximize the use of energy efficient systems and minimize the environmental impact of energy production and use. Source: C.G.S. 22a-la(a) and (b) as referenced by P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(a)(2)) D. The general assembly finds that the growing population and expanding economy of the state have had a profound impact on the life-sustaining natural environment. The air, water, land and other natural resources, taken for granted since the settlement of the state, are now recognized as finite and precious. It is now understood that human activity must be guided by and in harmony with the system of relationships among the elements of nature. Therefore the general assembly hereby declares that the policy of the state of Connecticut is to conserve, improve and pro- tects its natural resources and environment and to control air, land and water pollution in order to enhance the health, safety and welfare of the people of the state. It shall further be the policy of the state to improve and coordinate the environmental plans, functions, powers and programs of the~state, in cooperation with the federal government, regions, local governments other public and private organizations and concerned individuals, and to manage the basic resources of air, land and water to the end that the state may fulfill its responsibility as trustee of the environment for the present and future generations. Source: C.G.S. 22a-1 as referenced by P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(a)(2)) E. The secretary of the office of policy and management shall develop a form for capital development impact statements on which state agencies shall indicate the manner in which a planned or requested capital project or program addresses the following goals: (1) Revital- * ~~~ization of the economic base of urban areas by rebuilding older commercial * ~~~and industrial areas, and encouraging new industries to locate in the central cities in order to protect existing jobs and create new job op- portunities needed to provide meaningful economic opportunity for inner city residents; (2) revitalization of urban neighborhoods to reduce the isolation of various income, age and minority groups through the promotion of fair and balanced housing opportunities for low and moderate income residents; (3) revitalization of the quality of life for the residents of urban areas by insuring quality education, comprehensive health care, access to balanced transportation, adequate recreation facilities, responsive pub- lic safety, coordinated effective human service programs, decent housing and employment and clean water and by insuring full and equal rights and opportunities for all people to reap the economi-c and social benefits of society; (4) coordination of the conservation and growth of all areas of 11-185 COORDINATION AND CONSISTENCY OF STATE PROGRAMS., PROJECTS., EXPENDITURES., AND ACQUISITIONS (CONT.) the state to insure that each area preserves its unique character and sense of community and further insure a balanced growth and prudent use of the state's resources. The secretary shall establish criteria for determining the capital projects and programs for which such state- ments shall be required to be filed with said secretary and with the state bond commission. Source: P.A. 79-607, sec. 1) SEE ALSO PLAN OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT POLICIES: - Economic Development Policy A, Action 4 (public investments which optimize long-term economic development potential). - Land and Water Resources Policy A, Action I (areas of critical envir- onmental concern). - Land and Water Resources Policy A, Action 2 (rare, unique and otherwise significant plant and physical features). - Land and Water Resources Policy B, Action3 (priority to recreation fac- ilities accessible to greatest number of users). - Land and Water Resources Policy B, Action 4 (new and existing water- based recreation sites). - Land and Water Resources Policy B, Action 5 (increasing amount of shoreline land available for public recreational use, expansion and development of facilities, recommendations for state purchase of coastal recreation areas) . - Urban Centers Guideline A-2 (State Industrial/Business Development grant program). - Urban Centers Guideline A-7 (locating state facilities on sites served by public transportation). - Urban Centers Guideline C-2 (priority consideration to urban center needs in state/federal funding programs). - Existing Preserved Open Space Guideline A-i (state capital investment and grants to be consistent with natural resource and open space values). - Existing Preserved Open Space Guideline A-2 (approval of investments and grants that are not consistent with preservation values). - Existing Preserved Open Space Guideline A-4 (encouragement of public use of open space). - Preservation Areas Guideline A-2 (investments of a development nature should not contribute to expansion into preservation areas). COORDINATION AND CONSISTENCY OF STATE PROGRAMS, PROJECTS, EXPENDITURES., AND ACQUISITIONS (CONT.) - Preservation Areas Guideline A-3 (plans and proposals incompatible site values). - Preservation Areas Guideline A-4 (project occurring within or adjacent to preservation areas). - Preservation Areas Guideline A-7 (special project acquisition fund for large-scale preservation projects). - Conservation Areas Guideline A-2 (uses compatible with resource or hazard of concern). - Conservation Areas Guideline A-3 (proposals that are clearly incompatible with conservation). - Conservation Areas Guideline B-4 (uses compatible with historical and cultural resources). - Conservation Areas Guideline B-8 (development projects that affect natural areas, wetlands or recreational areas). IMPLEMENTATION STATE -All state agency actions significantly affecting the environment including land acquisitions, development projects and grants for development pro- jects must be consistent withall of the above policies and other policies in the Coastal Management Act. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(b)) -All state agencies must review their policies and practices to insure consistency with policies C and 0 above. Source: C.G.S. 22a-lb(a)) -All state agencies undertaking actions including programs, projects and grants which may significantly affect the environment must prepare an environmental impact evaluation describing the action's consistency with all of the above policies and with the goals and policies in or referenced by the Coastal Management Act if applicable to the proposed action. The environmental impact evaluation must also describe: direct and in- direct environmental effects; unavoidable and irreversible resource com- mitments; alternatives to the proposed action; mitigation measures; short and long term economic, sodial and environmental costs and benefits; and the effects on use and conservation of energy. The evaluation must be made available for public comment. Adequacy of evaluation is determined by the Office of Policy and Management. The agency issuing the evaluation must take agency and public comments on the evaluation into account in making a final decision on the proposed action. Regulations governing 11-187 COORDINATION AND CONSISTENCY OF STATE PROGRAMS; PROJECTS, EXPENDITURES, AND ACQUISITIONS (CONT.) preparation of environmental impact evaluations have been promulgated by DEP (RCSA 22a-la-1 through 12). ( Source: C.G.S. 22a-lb(b), 22a-ld, 22a- le as referenced by P.A. 79-535, sec. 2 (a)(2); P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(b)) - Policy B above provides the clarification that policies in the coastal management act are supplementary to those of the state Plan of Conserva- tion and Development. Copies of the Plan of Conservation and Develop- ment are available from the state's Office of Policy and Management. As noted in the cross-references many of the policies contained in the Plan are relevant to coastal management. The Plan of Conservation and Development serve as an advisory document for the following actions by state agencies undertaken with state or federal funds: 1) the acquisi- tion of real property; 2) development or improvements of real property costing more than $100,000; 3) acquisition of public transportation equipment or facilities costing more than $100,000; 4) state grants of more than $100,000 for the purchase, development or improvement of real property or for the acquisition of public transportation equip- ment or facilities. The secretary of the Office of Policy and Manage- ment must prepare an advisory report on the conformity of all actions defined above with the Plan of Conservation and Development. The advisory report must also be considered by the State Bond Commission prior to the allocation of bond funds for actions defined above. State plans required by state or federal law must also be reviewed in an advisory report by the secretary of the Office of Policy and Management for conformity with the Plan. (Source: CGS 16a-31) C. FLOODING AND EROSION PLANNING POLICIES POLICIES TO BE FOLLOWED BY MUNICIPAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES A. To consider in the planning process the potential impact of coastal flood- ing and erosion patterns on coastal development so as to minimize damage to and destruction of life and property and reduce the necessity of public expenditure to protect future development from such hazards. ( Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(a)(5)) 11-188 FLOODING AND EROSION PLANNING (CONT.) SEE ALSO: - Coastal Hazard Areas Policies A through G (management of hazard areas and mitigation measures for flooding and erosion problems). IMPLEMENTATION STATE - DEP's planning activities must be consistent with the above policy (as well as the policies for Coastal Hazard Areas). Relevant DEP planning activities include: 1) Coastal plans pursuant to 22a-96(c), 2) the erosion planning process described in Part X of this document, and 3) flood control and beach erosion project plans pursuant to C.G.S. chap- ter 477. ( Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(a) and (b)) - All major state agency plans must by July 1, 1981 be revised to insure consistency with policy A above. ( Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(a)) MUNICIPAL - Municipal agencies preparing voluntary municipal coastal programs must insure that they are consistent with policy A above. Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 8(a) and 9(a)) FEDERAL - Federal agency actions including development projects, permits and grants must be consistent with policy A above. ( Source: sec. of 307 of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, 16 U.S.C. 1456) 11-1-89 D. DREDGING AND DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL PLANNING POLICIES POLICIES FOR STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES ONLY A. To initiate in cooperation with the federal government and the continuing legislative committee on state planning and development a long range plan- ning program for the continued maintenance and enhancement of federally maintained navigation facilities in order to effectively and efficiently plan and provide for environmentally sound dredging and disposal of dredged materials: ( Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(c)(1)(1)) SEE ALSO: - Dredging and Navigation Policies A through E (maintenance of existing navigation channels and criteria for approval of dredging projects and dredged material disposal). IMPLEMENTATION STATE - DEP is responsible for implementing the above policy in cooperation with other state agencies, the continuing legislative committee on state plan- ning and development, the state of New York and federal agencies. ( C.G.S. sec. 22a-96(c)) FEDERAL - Federal agency actions including development projects, permits and grants must be consistent with all of the above policies. ( Source: sec. 307 of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, 16 U.S.C. 1456) 11-190 E. COASTALRELATED RESEARCH POLICIES POLICIES TO BE FOLLOWED BY MUNICIPAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES A. To conduct, sponsor and assist research in coastal matters to improve the data base upon which coastal land and water use decisions are made, Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2 (a) (7)) POLICIES FOR STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES ONLY SEE PLAN OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT POLICY: - Preservation Areas Guideline A-8 (funding of research that is necessary to protect environmental, resource and recreation areas of statewide significance). IMPLEMENTATION STATE - DEP has the primary responsibility for implementing this policy within available appropriations. Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 17(a)) MUNICIPAL - Municipal agencies may conduct research studies as part of their pre- paration of voluntary municipal coastal programs. Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 7(a) and 8(b)) FEDERAL - Federal agency actions including development projects, permits and grants must be consistent with policy A above. ( Source: sec. 307 of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, 16 U.S.C 1456) 11-191 F. NATIONAL INTEREST FACILITIES AND RESOURCES DEFINITION -"Facilities and resources which are in the national interest"I means : (A) adequate protection of tidal wetlands and related estuarine resources; (B) restoration and enhancement of Con- necticut's shellfish industry; (C) restoration, preservation and enhancement of the state's recreational and commercial fisheries, including anadromous species; (D) water pollution control measures and facilities consistent with the require- ments of the Federal Clean Water Act, as amended; (E) air pol- lution control measures and facilities consistent with the requirements of the Federal Clean Air Act, as amended; (F) continued operations of existing federally funded dredged and maintained navigation channels and basins; (G) energy facilities serving statewide and interstate markets, in- cluding electric generating facilities and facilities for storage, receiving or processing petroleum products and other fuels; (H) improvements to the existing interstate rail, highway and waterborne transportation system; (I) provision of adequate state or federally owned marine related recrea- tional facilities, including natural areas and wildlife sanctuaries and (J) essential maintenance and improvement4 of existing water dependent military, navigational, re- source management and research facilities. Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 3(14)) POLICIES4 POLICIES TO BE FOLLOWED BY MUNICIPAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES A. To insure that the state and the coastal municipalities provide adequate planning for facilities and resources which are in the national interest as defined in section 3 of this act and to insure that any restrictions or exclusions of such facilities or uses are reasonable. Reasonable grounds for the restriction or exclusion of a facility or use in the national interest shall include a finding that such a facility or use: (A) may reasonably be sited outside the coastal boundary; (B) fails to meet any applicable federal and state environmental, ,halth or safety standard or (C) unreasonably restricts physical or visual access to coastal waters. This policy does not exemp~t any nonfederal facility in use from any applicable state or local regulatory or permit program nor does it exempt any federal facility or use from the federal consis- tency requirements of section 307 of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act. Source: P.A. 179-535, sec. 2(a)(10))4 II-192 NATIONAL INTEREST FACILITIES AND RESOURCES (CONT.) IMPLEMENTATION STATE - All state agency actions significantly affecting the environment in- cluding land acquisitions, development projects and grants for develop- ment projects must be consistent with the above policy. ( Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(b)) - All major state agency plans must by July 1, 1981 be revised to insure consistency with the above policy. ( Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 20(a)) - Issuance of DEP and other state agency permits must be consistent with the above policy. ( Source: For DEP consistency P.A.79-535, sec. 21 and the policy itself for other state agencies) MUNICIPAL - The decisions of municipal planning and zoning agencies and zoning boards of appeal concerning activities subject to coastal site plan review requirements must be consistent with policy A above, where applicable, and in addition such agencies and boards must determine whether or not the adverse impacts of the activity on coastal re- sources (including tidal wetlands) and future water dependent develop- ment opportunities are acceptable. ( Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 11(e). 12(a), (b) and (e)) - Municipal agencies preparing voluntary municipal coastal programs must insure that they are consistent with the above policy. ( Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 8(a) and 9(a)) 11-193 NATIONAL INTEREST FACILITIES AND RESOURCES (CONT.) FEDERAL - Federal agency actions including development projects, permits and grants must be consistent with the above policy. ( Source: sec. 307 of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, 16 U.S.C. 1456). NOTE: The above policy should be considered in conjunction with other policies pertaining to the uses and resources listed in the definition of "national interest facilities and resources." Thus, the above policy is referred to in the appropriate sections of LAND AND WATER RESOURCES and COASTAL USE POLICIES. 11-194 PART V: LEGAL AUTHORITIES AND USES TO BE MIANAGED A. INTRODUCTION The legal authorities for Connecticut's Coastal Management Program are designed to accomplish four primary tasks: 1. To insure that all uses of the coast with major impacts on coastal resources are subject to management control (see the introduction to Part III). 2. To coordinate the coastal management activities of the various state and local agencies implementing the program (see the introduction to Part III). 3. To integrate coastal management considerations with other land and water use concerns by incorporating them under existing programs. 4. To implement the program's resource management/impact zoning approach for controlling coastal uses (see the introduction to Part IV). The key to understanding Connecticut's legal authorities for management is that they build on pre-existing legal authorities at the state and local level rather than replacing them. Every use of Connecticut's coastal resources is sbetto regulatory ordevelopment controls which predate passage of the Coastal Management Act. Frequently, multiple clearances at both the state and local level are required before an activity affecting the coast may be under- taken. The Coastal Management Act refocuses these existing programs to insure that in reviewing coastal uses under them, all government decision-makers take into account the impacts on coastal resources under a set of common policies. Because it builds on pre-existing legal authorities, Connecticut's Coastal Management Program consists of policies, standards, criteria and procedures in- cluded in both the Coastal Management Act and other state statutes, and state and local administrative regulations. The interconnections between the Coastal Management Act and other legal authorities is discussed in subpart C following. The important point is that the total program can only be understood in the context of all relevant authorities: These are a number of benefits to using pre-existing programs to implement the state's management plan: * "Red tape" is minimized: - No new regulatory or development agencies are created; - Primary regulatory jurisdiction over both uses and geographic areas remains essentially unchanged; - Established and well understood regulatory procedures are altered only insofar as necessary to insure consideration of coastal impacts. * Coastal management considerations are integrated with other important land and water use concerns at all levels of government: 11-195 - All agencies with regulatory, planning and development authority must take into account the effects of their decisions on coastal resources; - Coastal management policies and procedures supplement existing criteria and procedures. * Comprehensive management of coastal resources and uses is facilitated: - State agencies control , through existing environmental protection programs, the direct and significant impacts of large uses and the uses of sensitive natural resource areas; - Local agencies control , through existing zoning programs, the indirect and cumulative impacts of smaller uses. * Coordination of coastal management decisions at all levels of government is facilitated: - Common policies enhance coordination among municipalities; - Common policies enhance coordination among state agencies; - Common policies enhance coordination between state and local agencies. The state's Coastal Management Program is comprehensive covering uses likely to have significant impacts on coastal resources whether they be direct, indirect or cumulative. Sections 305(b)(2) and 305(b) (4) of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act and section 923.11 of the federal regulations require as a condition of federal approval that the state's program identify and control all uses having a "direct and significant" impact on coastal water. Connecti- cut's program controls all such uses and, in addition, controls uses with indirect or cumulative impacts in sensitive resource areas (tidal wetlands, beaches and dunes). As noted in the discussion of benefits above, the comprehensiveness of Connecticut's program is a direct result of using pre- existing legal authorities to implement the management program. On the basis of extensive analysis of the quality, location, distribution and demand for the natural and man-made resources occurring in the coastal area, the state has determined that the following uses may potentially have a direct and significant impact on coastal waters: 1. Construction in and filling of coastal waters including construction of flood and erosion control projects. 2. Dredging in coastal waters and disposal of dredged materials in or near coastal waters, including dredging for navigation channels, berthing areas, and turning basins. 3. Construction in and filling or alteration of tidal wetlands. 4. All uses significantly polluting the waters of the state. 5. All uses significantly polluting the air resources of the state. 11-196 6. Construction of dams, dikes and reservoirs. 7. Commercial and recreational finfishing. 8. Disposal of solid wastes. 9. Handling, storage, processing, disposal of oil, chemical and hazardous substances. 10. Boating activities. 11. Sea lanes, port navigation and anchorage patterns. 12. Port and harbor development projects. 13. Power facilities, including electric generation and transmission lines and gas pipelines. 14. Sewer systems and wastewater treatment and disposal systems. 15. Construction in and filling or alteration of freshwater wetlands and watercourses. 16. Construction in and alteration of coastal hazard areas (high velocity flood zones and erosion prone areas). 17. Construction on and alteration of beaches and dunes. 18. Construction on and alteration of bluffs and escarpments. 19. Acquisition and development of state beaches and recreational areas. 20. Acquisition and management of state conservation areas. 21. Commerical and recreational shellfishing. 22. Construction and expansion or major modification of major transportation facilities including state and interstate highways, bridges, airports, and railroads. 23. All state actions significantly affecting the natural environment, including programs, acquisitions, projects and grants. All these uses are subject to control under the state's Coastal Management Program. Most of these uses are controlled directly through state regulatory or development programs. In addition, several of them are controlled through local regulatory programs. In addition to the above, the following uses with indirect or cumulatively significant impacts are also subject to the state's management program: 24. All building, structures and uses subject to local zoning requirements except gardening and agricultural uses and specified minor developments exempted at the option of local agencies including individual single 11-197 family homes in non-sensitive resource areas (i.e. not within 100 feet of tidal wetlands, beaches and dunes or bluffs and escarpments as defined in P.A. 79-535 and mapped by CAM). 25. Planned unit developments. 26. Subdivision of land. 27. Variances from local zoning requirements. 28. Uses subject to special permit requirement by local zoning. 29. Municipal development projects. 30. Historic districts and structures. A full discussion of uses subject to Connecticut's Coastal Management Program is included in subpart D of this part. B. SUMMARY OF THE CONNECTICUT COASTAL MANAGEMENT ACT The legal authority for insuring that state and local agencies consider coastal impacts under a set of common policies is the Connecticut Coastal Manage- ment Act (hereafter referred to as CCMA). The CCMA was passed in the 1978 session of the General Assembly by Public Act 78-152 and codified as Chapter 444 of the Connecticut General Statutes, Sections 22a-90 through 22a-96. The CCMA was substantially amended in the 1979 session of the General Assembly by Public Act 79-535 to provide detailed legal authority for the state's manage- ment approach. Hereinafter references to Sections I to 25 of P.A. 79-535 will be cited as references to Sections 1-25 of the CCMA. The CCMA contains the following specific authorities. Coastal Management Boundary Sections 3(3) and 4(a) of the CCMA define the 36 towns bordering on Long Island Sound and rivers with measurable salinity as the state's coastal area. Within the coastal area, sections 3(4) and 4(b) define the coastal boundary as the seaward extent of the state jurisdiction over Long Island Sound, the state's borders with Rhode Island and New York and all land areas 1) within the U.S. Flood Insurance Program boundaries, 2) within 1,000 feet from the mean high water mark, and 3) within 1,000 feet of state designated tidal wetlands. A full discussion of the boundary can be found in Part II of Section II of this document. Coastal Resources Section 3(7) of the CCMA defines fourteen resource categories which sub- divide the entire area within the coastal boundary. The resource categories have been mapped by DEP pursuant to Section 5(1) of the CCMA. The resource 11-198 categories include hazard areas and developed areas in addition to natural resource categories. Coastal Policies, Standards and Criteria Section 2 of the CCMA contains coastal-related management policies to be followed by state and local decision-makers which supplement the policies, standards and criteria of other state statutes and state and local regulations. Section 3(15) of the CCMA defines adverse impacts on coastal resources which must also be considered in government decision-making. Section 3(16) defines water dependent uses which receive the highest priority and preference for shoreline siting. Section 5(c) requires DEP to prepare use guidelines and other criteria pertinent to implementation of the program's policies and standards (see Part IV). A full discussion of the policies is contained in Part IV and are summarized here. 1. Resource Policies. The policies include specific resource policies which apply to all development activities in designated resource areas defined in Section 3(7) and mapped by DEP pursuant to Section 5(b). 2. Use Policies. The policies include specific use policies which apply to a number of specific uses regardless of the resource area for which they are proposed. They are in addition to all-relevant resource policies for the specific use. 3. Government Process Policies. The policies include government process policies which apply to intergovernmental coordination during program implementation. 4. Multi-Purpose Nature. The policies are designed to guide all major governmental activities affecting coastal resource utilization at both the state and local level, including: regulation, planning, public projects and public investment. 5. Enforceability. State and local agencies responsible for regulatory and development decisions under the management program are legally bound to insure that their decisions are consistent with all of the applicable specific resource and use policies in Section 2 of the CCMA. 6. National Interest and Regional Benefit Facilities and Resources. Section 3(14) of the CCMA defines facilities and resources in the national interest (the state has also determined that these are facilities and resources of regional benefit). Section 2(a)(10) of the CGMA contains a specific policy which requires adequate considera- tion of these facilities and resources in planning and regulation, and further, requires that any restrictions on or exclusions of them are reasonable and justified under the statutory definitions. The national. interest and regional benefit policy is fully discussed in Part IX. 7. Relationship to Other Policies. The policies in Section 2 of the CCMA were designed to supplement and must be read in conjunction with policies in other state statutes and state and local regulations. Because of 11-199 their inclusion in the legislation, no further adoption or ratification of the policies in Section 2 is required prior to implementation by4 state and local agencies. In the case of any conflict with state or local regulations, the policies in Section 2 prevail. 8. Policy Clusters. The full impact of a specific resource or use policy cannot be determined in isolation from either the specific proposed activity to which it will be applied or the other policies or standards which are also applicable to the proposed activity. Each of the policies in Section 2 of the CCMA addresses a distinct aspect of coastal develop- ment and use. Decisions concerning a proposed activity will seldom be dependent solely on a single policy. Hence, projects and plans must be evaluated in terms of the "cluster" of policies that apply to them, including policies from the CCMA and other statutes and regulations. State Regulatory Programs Section 21 of the CCMA requires that issuance of permits by coastal-related regulatory programs be consistent with the coastal policies in Section 2 and that coastal-related regulatory programs be coordinated. All such regulatory programs are under the jurisdiction of the DEP. (See Tidal Wetlands Regulations in Appendix C.) State Development Projects and Programs Section 20(a) of the CCMA requires that state agency actions significantly affecting the environment, including programs, development projects, acquisition and grants must be consistent with the coastal policies in Section 2. It should further be noted that, under Connecticut statute, state agencies are subject to the same permit requirements as private development. State Plans Section 20(b) of the CCMA requires that major state agency plans affecting the coast must be revised, if necessary, to insure consistency with the coastal policies in Section 2. Municipal Coastal Site Plan Review Sections 11 through 15 of the CCMA require that the regulatory decisions of local agencies concerning private and municipal land and water uses within the coastal boundary must be consistent with policies in Section 2. Municipal Coastal Programs Sections 7 through 10 of the CCMA authorize municipalities, at their option, to prepare a comprehensive coastal program which, if undertaken, must be consistent with the policies in Section 2. These municipal coastal programs are made up of both revisions to the municipal plan of development and revisions I11-200 to local zoning regulations and other municipal land use regulations and ordinances conforming to and implementing the revised plan of development. DEP Commissioner's Supervisory Responsibilities and Right as a Party to Municipal Decisions Section 17 of the CCMA requires the Commissioner of DEP to exercise general supervision of the implementation of the Act and to monitor and evaluate the activities of federal and state agencies and the activities of municipalities to assure continuing, effective, coordinated and consistent administration of the requirements and purposes of the Act. Section 19 authorizes the Commissioner of DEP to intervene as a party or appellant to site plan review decisions at the municipal level in order to insure proper consideration of coastal impacts and to enforce compliance with the policies in Section 2. Municipal Right as a Party Section 18 authorizes municipalities to intervene as a party to state regulatory decisions affecting the coast to insure that the state gives proper consideration to coastal impacts and the policies in Section 2. Connecticut River Gateway Commission Compact Section 16 of the CCMA requires that any revisions to the conservation and land use standards adopted by the Connecticut River Gateway Commission and any approval of local regulations by the Commission to be consistent with the policies in Section 2. Coordination of State and Federal Programs Section 22a-96 of the CCMA (C.G.S. 22a-96) authorizes the Commissioner of Environmental Protection to enter into agreements with federal agencies to simplify and coordinate administration of state and federal coastal permit programs. Section 22a-96 also designates the Commissioner to represent the state in all matters concerning the application of the "federal consistency" provisions of section 307 of the federal CZM Act. A full discussion of the state's approach to federal consistency is discussed in Part VIII. State Assistance to Municipalities Section 6 of the CCMA requires the Commissioner of DEP to provide continuing financial assistance to coastal municipalities and section 5 requires DEP to provide coastal municipalities with technical assistance for the purpose of management program implementation at the local level. II-201 C. EXISTING STATE AND MUNICIPAL REGULATORY, DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING AUTHORITIES SUBJECT TO THE COASTAL MANAGEMENT ACT'S REQUIREMENTS. To gain a full appreciation of Connecticut's approach to coastal manage- ment, the preceding discussion of the requirements of the Connecticut Coastal Management Act must be supplemented by a description of state and local regulatory, development and planning authorities subject to those requirements. In Appendix D, these authorities are broken down and listed in tables. Table 2 describes existing state programs subject to the CCMA requirements. Table 3 describes municipal programs subject to the requirements. Columns I and 2 of both tables give the title and statutory authority of programs affect- ed by the CCMA. Column 3 provides a brief description of each program's juris- diction and procedures. Column 4 lists the state or local agency responsible for program administration. Finally, column 5 gives a brief description of the changes in program administration affected by CCMA requirements (see Tables 2 and 3, Appendix D). D. USES SUBJECT TO CONTROL AND REGULATION UNDER THE COASTAL MANAGEMENT ACT. As noted in the introduction to this Part, all uses having a direct and significant impact on coastal waters are regulated or controlled under Con- necticut's coastal management program. As also noted, uses having an indirect or cumulative impact on coastal resources are also subject to program juris- diction. This broad comprehensiveness is a result of the state's decision to utilize and build on existing state and local authorities governing public and private uses of the coast. All uses subject to the Coastal Management Act's requirements are already subject to state and local control or regulation. No new state or local approvals are required. No new regulatory or control agencies are created. However, the legal authorities of state and local regulatory and development agencies have been altered to require that agency decision-makers, in reviewing proposed activities within the coastal boundary, consider coastal impacts in light of the coastal policies. In Appendix D, column I of Table 4 provides a detailed listing of uses having the potential for significant coastal impacts. Column 2 gives the statutory authority for the regulatory or development control to which the use is subject. Column 3 describes briefly the manner in which coastal impacts of the use will be considered in light of the coastal policies. Column 4 refers back to the appropriate sections of Tables 2 and 3 which provide more complete information on how the use will be reviewed under existing regulatory and development programs for the purposes of coastal management (see Table 4, Appendix D). Also in Appendix D, uses I through 18 in Table 4 are uses subject to state regulatory jurisdiction. As noted in Table 4 they may also be subject to municipal control. Uses 19 through 24 are primarily state development pro- jects. Uses 25 through 29 are uses primarily subject to municipal regulation or control, but may also be subject to state regulation depending on their location and nature. It should be noted that uses, structures and buildings proposed by private developers or municipal agencies are, at a minimum, subject to muni- cipal coastal site plan review requirements. Section 15(b) of the CCMA exempts gardening, grazing and the harvesting of crops from coastal site plan review. Section 15(b) also authorizes municipal zoning commissions to exempt 11-202 the following minor activities from the coastal site plan review process: 1) Minor additions to or modifications of existing buildings or detached accessory buildings, such as garages and utility sheds. 2) Construction of new or modification of existing structures incidental to the enjoyment and maintenance of residential property including but not limited to walks, terraces, driveways, swimming pools, tennis courts, docks and detached accessory buildings. 3) Construction of new or modification of existing on-premise fences, walls, pedestrian walks and terraces, underground utility connections, essential electric, gas, telephone, water and sewer service lines, signs and such other minor structures as will not substantially alter the natural character of coastal resources or restrict access along the public beach. 4) Construction of an individual conforming single-family residential structure except in or within one hundred feet of the following coastal resources: tidal wetlands, coastal bluffs and escarpments, and beaches and dunes. 5) Activities conducted for the specific purpose of conserving or pre- serving soil, vegetation, water, fish, shellfish, wildlife and other coastal land and water resources. 11-203 PART VI: MIANAGrEM'ENIT OF THE COASTAL PROGRAM A. INTRODUCTION While under Connecticut's approach to coastal management no new regula- tory or control programs or agencies are created, the authorities of existing agencies are altered to incorporate coastal management responsibilities. As part of those responsibilities, the Department of Environmental Protection is required to coordinate, supervise and assist state and local agencies in carrying out their coastal management related duties. The purpose of this discussion is to systematically list the duties of state and local agencies and to describe the interrelationships among them. The primary emphasis will be on the supervisory responsibilities of the Department of Environmental Protection and the new duties assigned to munici- pal planning and zoning agencies. B.THE PLANNING AND COORDINATION/COASTAL MANAGEMENT UNIT (hereinafter CAM Unit) Section 17 of the Connecticut Coastal Management Act (CCMA) requires the Department of Environmental Protection to coordinate, supervise and assist the activities of existing state and local agencies in carrying out coastal management requirements. These responsibilities have been assigned to the Department of Environmental Protection because that agency was both the lead agency in developing the state's coastal management program and either directly administers or has a role defined by statute in all of the coastal-related regulatory procirams at the state level. A Coastal Area Management (CAM) Unit has been established within DEP to administer DEP's statutory responsibilities (see Figure 4 ). The CAM unit is within the Office of the Commissioner to facilitate communication and coordination with other units in the Commissioner's office and with the two major operating divisions of the Department, the Division of Environmental Quality (which is responsible for permitting activities) and the Division of Conservation and Preservation (which is responsible for parks, recreation, fish and wildlife management, conservation measures and property management). The major functional responsibilities of the CAM Unit are discussed bel ow. 1. Administration of State and Federal Coastal Management Funds -- In accordance with Section 22a-96 of the General Statutes the CAM Unit has been given the following responsibilities with respect to administration of state and federal funds for coastal management: a. With the cooperation of DEP's Business Administration Unit, the CAM Unit is responsible for the annual preparation of the state's application for federal financial assistance under Section 306 of the federal CZM Act. b. With the cooperation of DEP's Business Administration Unit, the CAM Unit is responsible for administering annual grants to 11-204 FIGURE 4 DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION General Mailing Address: STATE OFFICE BUILDING HARTFORD. CONNECTICUT 06115 ALL TELEPHONE EXTENSIOhS ASST ATTORNEY PRECEDED BY 566- COMMISSIONER -NEY 2110 GENERAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, Division of Conservation Director, Director Division of 4 & Preservation 4522 4 | Director, Director, Environmental Quality l856 Business Administration Unit Staff Services Unit 4026 40171 CHIEF OF OPERATIONS & MAlhNTNANCE. DIRECTOR. OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE UNIT AlP COMPLIANCE UNIT 5191 | PERSONNEL & PAYROLL DIRECTOR. 4030 CHIEF OLA3468 INFORMATION & EDUCATION SECTION CHIEF OF LAW ENFORCEMENT. 3489 DIRECTOR. LAW ENFORCEMENT UNIT PURCHASING & CENTRAL SERICES | :TEP COMPLIANCE UNIT 3978 1 2285 1 CHIEF HEARINGS OFFICER. 3245 ADJUDICATION SECTION CHIEF OF FISHERIES. LICENSING & REENLEUES ,acat DIRECTOR. FISHERIES UNIT 4409 SOL A9 GSTE MAhAGEMENT UNIT 228 7 CHIEF. 3672 MANAGEME~T NhALYSIS ~LAND ACQUISITION SECTION STATE FORESTER. 7246 2904 DIRECTOR. FORESTRY UNIT NOISE CONTROL UNIT 5348 IhNACI3L SER4ICS 7494 ATURAL DIRECTSOURCES CETER CHIEF OF PROPERTY MANAGEENT. NATURAL RESOURCES CENTER PROPERTY AAGEMENT HEARINGS TRANSCRIPTS 3:TEP RESOURCES UNIT 4026 7220 DIRECTOR. CHIEF OF PARKS & RECREATION. DATA PROCESSING PLANNING & COORDINATION SECTION DIRECTOR ~PARK~S & RECREATION~ UNIT7 7385 31740 R:DIATION CONTROL LNIT 230A [ 5668 'WILDLIFE UNIT 7404 A HAZARDOCS MATERIALS MANAGEMENT 4683 5148 D'RECTOR. REGION I DIRECTOR REGION II DIRECTOR REGION III DIRECTOR REGION IV DIRECTOR REGION V NORTHWEST QUARTER SOUTHWEST QUARTER MIDDLE-EASTERN QU'RTER FAR-E STERN QUARTER MARINE 3i9-0771 758-1753 7596 OR 295-9523 37i6-2513 443 0166 1 79 I i9 municipalities for the purpose of carrying out their duties for coastal site plan reviews and for preparation and implementation of municipal coastal programs. c. With the cooperation of DEP's Business Administration Unit, the CAM Unit is responsible for allocating state and federal funds to other units of DEP, other state agencies, regional planning agencies and outside consultants and contractors as applicable for the purposes of relevant regulation, planning, technical assistance, and research. d. With the cooperation of DEP's Business Administration Unit and the Land Acquisition Unit, the Planning and Coordination/Coastal Management Unit is responsible for preparing applications and administering federal grants for purchasing estuarine sanctuaries and land for access to public beaches and other public coastal areas under Section 315 of the federal CZM Act and the HCRS SCORP Program. e. With the cooperation of DEP's Business Administration Unit, the CAM Unit is responsible for preparing applications for and ad- minitering special federal grants from the federal Office of Coastal Zone Management and other federal funding sources for activities such as urban port studies and fisheries management studies. f. In cooperation with the state's Office of Policy and Management, the CAM Unit is responsible for preparing applications and ad- ministering federal grants for studying and ameliorating the effects of energy-related impacts under Section 308 of the federal CZM Act. 2. Coordination of DEP Responsibilities for Coastal Management -- The CAM Unit is responsible for coordinating the following coastal management duties of DEP. a. The CAM Unit is responsible for preparing the coastal boundary maps required by Section 22a-94 of the General Statutes as amended by section 4 of the CCMA. b. The CAM Unit is responsible for providing technical assistance to municipalities as required by section 5 of the CCMA, including preparing of a model municipal program (see Appendix C of the Draft EIS) and preparation of resource factor maps (see Appendix D of the Draft EIS). c. The CAM Unit is responsible for preparing use guidelines to assist state and local agencies in evaluating the impacts of coastal development consistent with COMA coastal policies in accordance with section 5 of the CCMA (see Part IV). d. The CAM Unit is responsible for monitoring the coastal management activities of state and local agencies and for preparing an annual report in accordance with section 17 of the CCMA. 11-206 e. With the cooperation of the Water Resources, Water Compliance, Air, Marine, Fisheries, Solid Waste, and Hazardous Materials Management Units of DEP, the CAM Unit is responsible for insuring that all coastal related permitting activities are administered consistent with CCMA coastal policies as required by section 21 of the CCMA. f. The CAM Unit is responsible for monitoring municipal regulatory decisions within the coastal boundary and advising the Commissioner of DEP on when to intervene as a party or appellant to such decisions as authorized by section 19 of the CCMA (see Part VI, E). g. The CAM Unit is responsible for reviewing revisions to municipal plans of development and revisions to municipal zoning regulations undertaken in preparation of municipal coastal programs in ac- cordance with sections 8(d) and 9(b) of the CCMA. h. In cooperation with the Water Resources Unit of DEP and the Aquaculture Division of the Department of Agriculture, the CAM Unit is responsible for developing policies for the state's areas of particular concern (see Part VIII, A). i. In cooperation with the Division of Conservation and Preservation and the Land Acquisition Unit of DEP, the CAM Unit is responsible for the state's activities with respect to preservation and restora- tion of coastal areas (see Part VIII, B). j. The CAM Unit is responsible for monitoring the administration of the national interest policy (see Part IX). k. The CAM Unit is responsible for providing staff support to the Commissioner of DEP's Coastal Area Management Advisory Board (see Part IX). 1. The CAM Unit is required to (a) revise regulations concerning state project environmental impact statements (CEPA) to include consistency with the coastal policies, (b) revise the coastal-related section of the State Comprehensive Outdoor Recreational Plan, and (c) con- duct coastal-related e.i.s. and A-95 reviews (see also NOTE on p. 11-209). 3. Coordination with Other State Agencies -- The CAM Unit is responsible for the following activities concerning coordination of the duties of other state agencies for coastal management. a. The CAM Unit is responsible for consulting with other units of DEP and other state agencies revising major state plans to insure consistency with the coastal policies in accordance with section 20a and 21 of the CCMA (see also the discussions on erosion planning, shorefront planning and energy planning in Part VIII). b. The Planning and Coordination/Coastal Management Unit is responsible for revising the regulations for state agency project environmental impact statements in accordance with section 20b of the CCMA. 11-207 C. In cooperation with the State Power Facilities Evaluation Council (PFEC), of which the Commissioner of DEP is a member, the CAM Unit is responsible for insuring that the coastal policies are considered in licensing electric generating facilities and and other power facilities regulated by the PFEC in accordance with Section 16-50p of the General Statutes. 4. Federal Consistency Reviews -- In accordance with Section 22a-96 of the General Statutes, the CAM Unit is responsible for reviewing the consistency of federal agency activities, actions, permits, grants and outer continental shelf energy related activities with the state's coastal program (see also the discussion of federal consistency in Part VII, C). 5. Coordination and Simplification of State and Federal Coastal Permit Programs -- With the cooperation of the Water Resources and Water Compliance Units of DEP, the CAM Unit is responsible for procedural coordination and simplification of state and federal coastal permit programs in accordance with Section 22a-96 of the General Statutes. 6. Interstate Coordination -- The CAM Unit is responsible for coordinat- ing the state's coastal management program with the coastal management programs of New York and Rhode Island and other interstate agencies as required by Section 306(c)(2)(B) of the federal CZM Act. 7. Public Participation -- The CAM Unit is responsible for insuring continuing public participation in the state's coastal management program (see Part XI). C. RESPONSIBILITIES OF OTHER UNITS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION. Water Resources Unit -- The Water Resources Unit is required to administer the following coastal-related programs in conformity with the coastal policies: Tidal wetlands, coastal structures, coastal dredging, inland wetlands, stream channel encroachment lines, dams and reservoirs, flood and erosion control, and FEMA Flood Insurance Program. The Water Resource Unit also assists the CAM Unit in providing technical assistance to municipalities and other state agencies in developing shoreline erosion and coastal flood hazard management planning processes, in developing regulations and performance standards for coastal-related regulatory programs, and in developing a state dredged materials disposal policy. Water Compliance Unit -- The Water Compliance Unit is required to admini- ster the following coastal-related programs in conformity with coastal policies: NPDES water pollution permits, sewer treatment facility grants, sewerage system approvals, sewer avoidance regulations, 401 water quality certification, and 208, 303(e) and 201 planning. The Water Compliance Unit also assists the CAM Unit in developing a state dredged materials disposal policy. Hazardous Materials Management Unit -- The Hazardous Materials Management Unit is required to administer its oil and chemical terminal regulatory program in conformity with the coastal policies. 11-208 Air Compliance Unit --The Air Compliance Unit is required to administer its air pollution regulatory activities in conformity with the coastal policies and must consider the coastal policies in revising the State Air Quality Imple- mentation Plan, the Air Quality Maintenance Plan and Transportation Control Plan. Solid Waste Management Unit -- The Solid Waste Unit is required to administer its solid waste facility permit program in conformity with the coastal policies. Fisheries Unit -- The Fisheries Unit is required to administer its regula- tion of commercial and recreational marine fisheries in conformity with the coastal policies. Parks and Recreation Unit -- The Parks and Recreation Unit is required to conform to the coastal policies in planning and developing coastal recreational facilities. Marine Region Field Office -- The Marine Region Field Office is required to conform to the coastal policies in regulating boating activities. The Marine Region Field Office will also assist the CAM Unit in conducting research studies. Natural Resources Center -- The Natural Resources Center assists the CAM Unit in providing technical information and assistance, preparing flood and erosion plans, resource maps, and preparing management plans for natural areas. I ~ ~~~Open Space Acquisition Unit -- The Open Space Acquisition Unit is required to conform to the coastal policies in recommending coastal property for pur- chase under the HCRS SCORP Program. Business Administration Unit -- The Business Administration Unit will assist the CAM Unit in administering grants from the federal government and in providing grants to municipalities. Information and Education Unit -- The Information and Education Unit will assist the CAM Unit in public participation activities. NOTE: As this document is being released, the CAM and Planning and Coordination Units of DEP have been merged. While both units were part of the Commissioner's Staff Services Unit and no changes in the overall respons- ibilities of the CAM Unit were proposed, this merger substantially strengthens the relationship of the CAM Unit to other units within the agency. The com- bined unit in addition to its CAM responsibilities serves as the Commissioner's policy planning and research staff; responsibilities include agency planning II-209 (including statewide recreational (SCORP) planning), policy planning and analysis, program evaluation and coordination, new program development, budget review, development of regulations (in conjunction with the admini- stering unit), liaison with the legislature and legislative drafting (in conjunction with the administering unit), coordination of agency review of all environmental impact statements, A-95's and related documents, super- vision of activities under the Connecticut Environmental Policy Act (CEPA), and agency staff participation on the Power Facilities Evaluation Council (PFEC). The Director of the combined unit has been designated Program Manager for coastal management. This merger was proposed because of the essentially parallel functions of the two units. It should be noted that the Coastal Management Program was originally developed by Planning and Coordination, prior to becoming a separate operating unit during the program development (305) phase of the program. D. RESPONSIBILITIES OF OTHER STATE AGENCIES All state agencies have three major responsibilities under the Coastal Management Act: (a) they must revise major state plans to conform to the coastal policies, (b) in planning and undertaking major development projects they must insure that such projects are consistent with the coastal policies, and (c) they must include an evaluation of coastal impacts in preparing state environmental impact statements. (It should also be noted that all state agency development projects are also subject by statute to regulation under state permit programs.) The discussion below focuses on state agencies subject to the plan revision requirements of the CCMA or agencies with other special responsibilities for coastal management. 1. The Office of Policy and Management -.- The Office of Policy and Manage- ment has three major responsibilities related to coastal management: (a) review of state project environmental impact statements (CEPA) to insure that they are consistent with the coastal policies, (b) revision of state energy plans to insure consistency with the coastal policies, and (c) administration of energy impact planning grants under Section 308 of the federal CZM Act after consultation with the CAM Unit of DEP and subject to final approval by the Commissioner of DEP. It should be noted that CEPA regulations under which these reviews are conducted are developed and supervised by DEP's Planning and Coordination/Coastal Management Unit. 2. Department of Transportation -- The Department of Transportation has three major responsibilities related to coastal management: (a) re- vision of the State Master Transportation Plan to insure consistency with the coastal policies, (b) coordination with DEP concerning the activities of Harbor Masters and municipal harbor improvement agencies, and (c) conduct of the development activities of its major bureaus (Highways, Aeronautics, Waterways and Rail) in a manner consistent with the revised Master Transportation Plan and the coastal policies. Such activities are also subject to CEPA and all applicable coastal permit programs. 11-210 3. Division of Aquaculture -- The Aquaculture Division of the Department of Agriculture will prepare a management program for state-owned shellfish beds that is consistent with the CCMA. 4. Power Facilities Evaluation Council -- The Power Facilities Evaluation Council (of which the Commissioner of DEP is a member) is required to consider the coastal policies in licensing the siting and operation within the coastal boundary of electric generating and storage facili- ties, electric transmission lines, fuel transmission lines, and sub- stations and switch-yards within the coastal boundary. 5. The Department of Economic Development -- The Department of Economic Development is required to revise its economic plan for the state to insure consistency with the coastal policies. 6. Connecticut Resources Recovery Authority -- The Connecticut Resources Recovery Authority is required to revise its plans for the develop- ment of a solid waste recovery system in the coastal area to insure consistency With the coastal policies. 7. University of Connecticut -- The services of the Marine Sciences Institute and Marine Advisory Service of the University of Connecticut will be utilized in coastal research studies. The activities summarized above are required to be consistent with the coastal policies of the CCMA in accordance with Section 20 of the CCMA. Section 20(a) requires consultation with the Commissioner of DEP during plan revision and Section 17(b) of the CCMA establishes the Commissioner of DEP's responsibility for oversight of state programs not under his direct jurisdiction. E. RESPONSIBILITIES OF COASTAL MUNICIPALITIES Municipalities have two major responsibilities for coastal management: Administration of the mandatory coastal site plan reviews and preparation of voluntary municipal coastal programs. Each of these responsibilities will be discussed separately. 1. Municipal Coastal Site Plan Reviews -- Sections 11 through 15 of the Connecticut Coastal Management Act (CCMA) require municipalities to review coastal site plans for proposed development projects currently under their regulatory jurisdiction to evaluate the impacts of the proposed project on coastal resources and future water dependent use of the site. Because the coastal site plan reviews are mandated directly by state statute superceding any conflicting local ordinances or regulations, no revision to municipal zoning regulations or other land use ordinances or regulations is required for its implementation. Insofar as they differ from existing planning and zoning requirements, the standards and procedures for decision are contained in the COMA. Municipalities currently exercise regulatory jurisdiction over land and water uses under the following major programs and authorities: 11-211 a. Zoning under the authority of Sections 8-2 and 8-3 of the General Statutes -- all buildings, uses, and structures are regulated by the municipal zoning commission. b. Subdivisioi regulations under the authority of Section 8-25 of the General Statutes -- all subdivisions of land are regulated by the municipal planning commission. c. Planned unit development regulations under the authority of Section 8-13f of the General Statutes -- all planned unit develop- ments of greater than 25 dwelling units are regulated by the municipal planning commission. d. Variances under the authority of Section 8-7 of the General Statutes -- variances from zoning regulations are regulated by the municipal zoning board of appeals. e. Special permits under the authority of Section 8-2 of the General Statutes -- municipalities may, by regulation, permit development otherwise excluded from a particular zone if it meets specified conditions as determined (at the option of the municipality) by the zoning commission, planning commission or zoning board of appeals. f. Review of municipal improvements under the authority of Section 8-24 of the General Statutes -- all major municipal development projects are subject to review and approval by the municipal planning commission. Section 11(b) of the CCMA provides that development projects subject to the above programs and occurring within the coastal boundary are also subject to coastal site plan review requirements. Municipalities, under authority provided in Section 15(b) of the CCMA, may adopt a regulation ex- empting certain minor uses subject to the zoning regulations from a coastal site plan review. Allowable uses for exemption are specified by statute in Section 15(b). The coastal site plan review, in practice, consists of the following four steps: Initiation of the Review Procedure -- As under existing planning and zoning procedures, an applicant initiates the review process by sub- mitting a complete application and request for approval to the local board or commission with jurisdiction over the proposed activity (i.e. planning commission, zoning commission, zoning board of appeals). If the project has been exempted from coastal site plan review by local regulation, the applicant need only include the information normally required to determine compliance with the zoning regulations. An application for a project subject to a coastal site plan review must contain sufficient data, maps, drawings and other back-up materialsI necessary to adequately describe the proposed activity and to enable the appropriate local commission to conduct the coastal site plan review. 11-212 Information necessary for the coastal site plan review includes the following: All information required under the applicable exist- ing regulation; a detailed description of the project including the time sequence, duration and methods of construction; plans showing the location and design of the project and the location and spatial relationship of the coastal resources on and contiguous to the site; an identification of all beneficial and adverse impacts associated with the project; a description of the proposed methods to mitigate the adverse impacts of the project on coastal resources; and such additional information that the commission may deem necessary to make a decision on the application. The applicant, as part of his submission, must also demonstrate that the project, as proposed, is consistent with all applicable coastal policies and further, that the adverse impacts on coastal resources and future water dependent develop- ment opportunities are acceptable. Much of this material is required already under existing municipal regulations with the exception of environmental information. The amount of detail necessary would depend both on the size or extent of the project and the fragility of the coastal resources that would be affected as dictated by the coastal policies in the CCMA. The CCMA contains the necessary coastal resource definitions, all coastal policies and the definitions of "adverse impacts on I ~~~~coastal resources" and "water dependent uses." Part IV contains these same coastal policies and definitions along with use guidelines to aid in determining the consistency of a project with the coastal policies and information on identifying and mitigating adverse impacts. Maps depicting the location of all coastal resources within the coastal boundary have also been prepared by the CAM Program. Samples of these coastal maps are contained in Appendix 0 of the Draft EIS. Commission Review and Evaluation -- It is the responsibility of the appropriate municipal commission to review the information provided by the applicant in a coastal site plan for completeness and accuracy and to evaluate the proposed activity for compliance with the applic- able existing regulations and with the following three standards for review of coastal site plans contained in the CCMA. First, the commission must determine the project's consistency with all applicable coastal resource and use policies; second, the commission must deter- mine the acceptability of adverse impacts on coastal resources; and third, the commission must determine the acceptability of adverse impacts on future water dependent development activities. Then, based on their findings, the commission must make a decision to approve, approve with conditions, approve with modifications or deny the proposed project. The majority of development projects evaluated by a municipality under the coastal site plan review would not require detailed technical analyses and site inventories beyond the material provided by the applicant and the coastal resource maps provided by the Department of Environmental Protection. However, should the need for such ser- vices arise, technical assistance would be available through the 11-213 CAM Unit of DEP. Available resources would include technically trained personnel, resource inventories, maps, photographic sur- veys and related data. In addition, state financial assistance under federal CZM Act funding will be available to the municipali- ties for staff or consultant services (either private or through coastal regional planning agencies) to assist in the site plan reviews. Prepare Written Findings -- After reviewing and evaluating the information contained in the Coastal Site Plan, the commission must prepare a written statement detailing their findings concerning the consistency of the project with the coastal policies and the accept- ability of adverse impacts on coastal resources and future water dependent development activities. The commission must state in writing its decision, the reasons for the decisions, and any conditions or modifications being imposed to assure consistency. Certification of Project -- Before issuing a building permit for any proposed activity subject to the zoning regulations, the official charged with enforcement of the zoning regulations must certify in writing that the proposed activity has either been reviewed and approved in accordance with the requirements for a coastal site plan review contained in the CCMA, or is a use exempt from a coastal site plan review under regulations adopted by the zoning commission. 2. Municipal Coastal Proqrams --Sections 7 through 10 of the CCMA allow coastal municipalities to prepare and adopt a comprehensive Municipal Coastal Program. Financial and technical assistance will be available from the state for muncipalities electing to prepare a coastal program in accordance with the provisions of section 6 of the CCMA. Municipal coastal programs apply to that portion of a municipality within the coastal boundary and landward of the mean high water mark. A Municipal Coastal Program, if undertaken, must be developed in two major phases: First, revision of the municipal Plan of Development based on a consideration of the municipality's existing conditions, the character and distribution of its coastal resources, identified coastal related issues, and the coastal policies contained in the CCMA, and second, revision of municipal zoning regulations and other land use ordinances and regulations to conform with the revised Plan of Development. The primary mechanism for continued implementation of the Municipal Coastal Plan Program would be the coastal site planI review process. In contrast with and in support of the Coastal Site Plan Reviews, the Municipal Coastal Program would provide municipalities with an opportunity to undertake better coordinated long range planning and management of their coastal resources by making municipal zoning and related ordinances consistent with long term management objectives. It should be noted, however, that Municipal Coastal Programs are not required since the means to implement them, coastal site plan reviews, are both mandatory and supercede, by statute, any conflicting local regulations or ordinances. 11-214 Preparation of a municipal coastal program includes the following steps: - Issues and Problems Identification. The municipal planning commission identifies the major coastal related problems and issues facing the community. - Revision of the Municipal Plan of Development. The municipal planning commission prepares revisions of the municipal Plan of Development consistent with (a) the community's coastal problems and issues, (b) the coastal policies contained in the CCMA, (c) the nature and location of coastal resources, (d) future water-dependent development opportunities, (e) existing land use and development patterns, and (f) public service needs. - Review by the Commissioner of DEP. Proposed revisions of the municipal Plan of Development are submitted to the Commissioner and the regional planning agency for review for consistency with the criteria contained in section 8 and the coastal policies of the CCMA. - Adoption of Revised Municipal Plan of Development. After receiving comments from the Commissioner and the regional planning agency, the municipality adopts the revisions to the municipal Plan of Develop- ment and other related plans in accordance with existing planning and zoning procedural and public participation requirements. - Revisions to Municipal Land Use Regulations. After adopting revisions to its Plan of Development, the municipality prepares necessary re- visions to its zoning, subdivision and planned unit development re- gulations and other land use regulations and ordinances to conform to and implement the revised municipal Plan of Development. - Review by the Commissioner of DEP. Proposed revisions to municipal land use regulations and ordinances are submitted to the Commissioner for review and comment as to their consistency with the municipality's previously revised and adopted municipal Plan of Development. - Adoption of Revised Land Use Regulations. After receiving comments from the Commissioner, the municipality adopts the revisions to land use regulations and ordinances in accordance with existing planning and zoning procedural and public participation requirements. - Revision of Other Municipal Plans. The municipality may also revise other municipal plans and programs listed in Section 7(d) of the CCMA to be consistent with the revised and adopted municipal Plan of Development. - Implementation. Implementation of the municipal coastal program would occur through existing regulatory and development programs, and, in particular, the coastal site plan review process. - Amendments. Future amendments or revisions to the municipal plan of development and land use regulations for the area within the coastal boundary would be undertaken in accordance with these steps. II-215 Appendix C contains a model municipal coastal program. The model program explains in greater detail the preparation of a Municipal Coastal Program. It also contains mans which illustrate the types of changes to municipal plans and zoning regulations that could be undertaken pursuant to sections 7 through 10 of the CCMA. F. STATE SUPERVISION OF MUNICIPAL COASTAL SITE PLAN REVIEW REQUIREMENTS. The Connecticut Coastal Management Program relies primarily on state agency regulatory and development controls, particularly in controlling uses having a direct and significant impact on coastal waters (see subparts A and D of Part V). However, the Connecticut Coastal Management Act also grants municipal planning and zoning agencies expanded regulatory authority over many coastal uses and municipalities have exclusive regulatory authority over some categories of uses having direct and significant impacts on coastal waters. Municipal re- gulation is not unconstrained; local decisions are subject to DEP review and court enforcement for compliance with CCMA requirements. Coastal municipalities are legally bound by Section 11 of the CCMA to conduct coastal site reviews in accordance with the procedures, policies, and criteria in the Act. Municipal agencies failing to adhere to the requirements of the Act are subject to court appeal taken by project sponsors or other aggrieved parties. In addition, the Department of Environmental Protection is required to review municipal compliance with the coastal site plan review requirements and is empowered to seek judicial enforcement of compliance. Section 17 of the CCMA requires DEP to "monitor and evaluate... .the activities of municipalities to assure continuing, effective, coordinated and consistent administration of the requirement and purposes of" the CCMA. In order to monitor municipal compliance with the coastal site plan review requirements, DEP will utilize the following mechanisms: - DEP will require quarterly reports summarizing the written findings of fact and reasons for decision required for all municipal coastal site plan review decisions pursuant to Sections 12(d) and 12(e) of the CGMA. DEP will review them for compliance and consistency with the policies, standards, and procedural requirements in the CCMA. - DEP permit applications for activities requiring concurrent local coastal site plan review approvals will be reviewed. - Third party complaints, in particular those raised pursuant to Section 14 of CCMA, will be investigated. 7 DEP will review its requests for technical assistance on coastal site plan reviews. - Reports of suspected violations submitted by DEP field enforcement staff will be investigated. - DEP will continue to subscribe to and review all weekly and daily newspapers covering coastal towns, giving particular attention to 11-216 legal notices for activities subject to coastal site plan review. -DEP will utilize spot checks, and periodic aerial photo surveys similar to those undertaken for state regulatory programs (see CAM Planning Report No. 21). In evaluating and monitoring the municipal administration of the coastal site plan review process DEP will focus primarily on the following factors: - Compliance with the procedural requirements in Sections 11, 12, and I ~ ~~~~15 of the CCMA. - The consistency of local decisions with the policies in Sections 2(a) and 2(b) of the CCMA. - The reasonableness of local decisions in terms of both the information evaluated by the local agency and the agency's written findings and reasons for decision. - The reasonableness of local agencies' determinations that the adverse impacts of a project on both coastal resource and future water de- pendent development opportunities are acceptable and that all reason- able measures have been taken to mitigate those impacts. The use guidelines included in Part IV will be used by DEP in evaluating both the consistency of local decisions with the resource policies in Section 2(b)(2) of the CCMA and the reasonableness of local determinations that adverse impacts on coastal resources are acceptable. The use guidelines constitute DEP's best technical judgement concerning the application of the statutory policies, standards and criteria to common development situations. They have been published in accordance with Sections 5(b) and (c) of the CCMA to provide further assistance to both municipal agencies and developers. The decisions of local agencies regarding specific development proposals must be consistent with the statutory policies, standards, and criteria and need not follow in detail the use guidelines. However, local decisions significantly at odds with the use guidelines will be given special and careful review by DEP to insure their consistency with statutory requirements. In the event that monitoring efforts discover a proposed project potentially having substantial impact on coastal resources in a manner likely to be in- consistent with the policies and standards of the CCMA, DEP may, pursuant to Section 19 of the CCMA, intervene as a party to the local regulatory proceeding, present evidence and testimony concerning the coastal-related impacts of the proposed activity and recommend conditions or modifications to assure consistency with the policies, standards and criteria in the CCMA. Such DEP testimony would have to be reflected in the written findings of fact and subsequent decision on the project. Should the resultant decision not be consistent with the requirements of the CCMA, DEP may request court enforcement under Section 19 of the CCMA. 11-217 In the event that monitoring efforts uncover a local decision substantially J inconsistent with the requirements of the CCMA, DEP may, pursuant to Section 19 of the CCMA, appeal to the decision for court enforcement whether or not it has intervened as a party prior to the decision. If monitoring efforts reveal development activities which have occurred without a local coastal site plan approval or in violation of the terms of a certified local approval, DEP may, pursuant to Section 14 of the CCMA and section 22a-6 or 22a-7 of the General Statutes, issue administrative cease and desist and abatement orders. Alternatively, DEP may request the Attorney General to seek court injunction of the development activity since Section 14 deems such projects as "public nuisances." In the event that a pattern of non-compliance is detected, DEP may adopt any one or a combination of the above enforcement strategies to obtain com- pliance with the legal requirements of the CCMA. Where patterns of non-compliance are detected, DEP will notify the municipality of its finding, offer technical assistance, and request copies of all decisions and accompanying written find- ings. Should this approach be refused or should the pattern of non-compliance persist, DEP will intervene directly in the local regulatory process and request court enforcement as necessary. It should be noted here that the requirement of written findings pursuant to Section 12(e) of the CCMA followed by the certification requirement of Section 15(f) were incorporated into the CCMA to encourage continued compliance through a local "check and balance" system. Such a system not only provides a clearer record for court enforce- ment, but also provides substantial notification and incentive for private sector compliance through lending institutions (i.e., lack of proper certifi- cation of the building permit renders the permit invalid). This system was developed because the DEP believes that the avoidance of non-complying activi- ties before they occur is inherently more successful in terms of resource pro- tection than is after-the-fact enforcement. To put local compliance in the proper perspective, it should be reempasized that the majority of significant uses subject to the management program are under state regulatory and development control. Additional discussion of state oversight of municipal coastal site plan review may be found in the discussions of uses and resources of national interest and of regional benefit (Part IX) and water dependent uses (see below). G. WATER DEPENDENT USES Although the major emphasis of the state's Coastal Management Program is on coordinating government controls and protecting coastal resources, both the program and the CCMA encourage appropriate development of the coast. In particular, water dependent uses receive special treatment. Section 3(16) of the CCMA defines water dependent uses as follows: "Section 3(16): 'Water dependent uses' means those uses and facilities which require direct access to, or location in, marine or tidal waters and which therefore cannot be located inland, including but not limited to: marinas, recreational and commercial fishing and boating facilities, finfish and 11-218 shellfish processing plants, waterfront dock and port facilities, shipyards and boat building facilities, water based recreational uses, navigational aides, basins and channels, industrial uses dependent upon waterborne transportation or requiring large volumes of cooling or process water which cannot reasonably be located or operated at an inland site and uses which provide general public access to marine or tidal waters." In addition, a number of specific water dependent uses have been defined as in the national interest and are subject to the COMA's national interest policy. (See Part IX for a full discussion of the national interest policy and uses.) The general policy in section 2(a)(3) of the CCMA requires that high priority and preference be given in all government planning, regulatory, and development programs to the siting of water dependent uses along the coast. This general policy is strengthened by the specific requirement in section 2(b) (1)(A) that state and local regulatory programs given highest priority and preference to such uses. In addition, water dependent uses are given highest priority and preference in specific policies for developed shorefront areas (see Section 2(b)(2)(G) of the COMA) and ports and harbors (see Section 2(b) (1)(C) of the COMA). Specific water dependent uses such as boating facilities (see Section 2(b)(1)(I) of the COMA) are specially encouraged. While the general policy establishes an overall policy for the encouragement of water dependent uses, recognizing that not all areas of Connecticut's coast are suited for such uses, the specific policies together with the state and local regulatory authorities discussed below require the evaluation of waterfront sites in light of both specific development proposals and the suit- ability of the site for water dependent uses which individually are of the highest priority. Since use decisions of this nature have traditionally been, at least in part, under the jurisdiction of the municipal planning and zoning authori- ties, the municipal coastal site plan review requirement in Sections 11 and 12 of the CCMA require that local agencies assess the adverse impacts of proposed projects on future water dependent development opportunities. Municipal agencies must specifically determine that the adverse impacts of a project on water de- pendent development opportunities are acceptable (Section 12(a)). Moreover, they must insure that all reasonable measures which would mitigate adverse impacts of a project on future water dependent development activities have been incorporated in an approved project. There are several practical consequences of these policies, standards and their implementing authorities for water dependent uses in the COMA. First, the specific water dependent use policy in Section 2(b)(1)(A) of the OCMA requires state and local regulatory agencies to give siting preference to a water dependent project over a competing, non-water dependent project proposed for the same site. This assumes, of course, that other factors are equal - that is, the projects are consistent with all other applicable policies of the CCMA and can meet the standards for adverse impacts on 11-219 Second, the water dependent use policy in Section 2(b)(1)(A) of the CCMA in conjunction with local zoning authorities amended by Sections 11 and 12 of the CCMA and in conjunction with existing DEP permit authorities authorizes state and local agencies to reject a non-water dependent project,I when there is no competing water dependent use, if it can be demonstrated that the site is well suited for a water dependent use and there is a reason- able expectation of demand for a water dependent use for which the site is suited. While the CCMA authorizes such rejection under the above circum- stances, Sections 12(a) and 12(e) require a rejection when the impact of siting a non-water dependent use has unacceptable impacts on future water de- pendent development opportunities. A rejection of a non-water dependent use under these conditions would be required in instances where a viable water dependent use was being displaced, the site was uniquely suited for a water dependent use for which there was a clear, expressed demand, or where exist- ing public access was being substantially reduced or inhibited by the proposed non-water dependent use. As noted in subpart F above, DEP will monitor state and local decisions for reasonableness in this regard. Third, the water dependent use policy in Section 2(b)(1)(A) of the CCMA allows developers to receive highest priority and preference for projects if they are water dependent or if they incorporate as a significant aspect of the project a water dependent element, such as the provision of general public access. In this way, the CCMA encourages water dependent uses as well as discouraging non-water dependent uses. 11-220j PART VI I: PLAN COORDINATION, FEDERAL CONSISTENCY AND RESOLUTION OF CONFLICTS CONCERNING COASTAL DEVELOPMENT A. PLAN COORDINATION Section 306(c)(2)(A) of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act and federal regulations thereunder (15 CFR 923. 56) require that , as of January I, 1980 the contents of the state's management program have been coordinated with local, areawide and interstate plans and planning programs applicable to the coastal area.'-Listed below are those government agencies identified by the Connecticut Coastal Area Management Program as having major coastal related plans and planning responsibilities, as of January, 1980., A.brief summitry of the plan or program toward whicn CAM has directed its coordination efforts is also included. It should be noted that this subpart is intended to highlight major plans and planning responsibilities as required in 15 CFR 923.56(a). This subpart is not intended to provide an in-depth discussion of agency plans and planning programs not is it intended to provide a comprehensive review of all relevant agency responsibilities.* For a discussion of the roles and responsibilities of other Connecticut agencies in the CAM program, see the discussion of management roles and responsibilities in Part VI. Department of Transportation -- The Department of Transportation prepares the annual Connecticut Master Transportation Plan which serves as the basis for implementing statewide transportation improvement programs. Department of Economic Development -- The Department of Economic Develop- ment is presently preparing an Economic Plan for the state covering such topics as manpower training, taxation, and industrial growth and decline. Office of Policy and Management (OPM) -- The Office of Policy and Manage- ment is charged with general state planning activities including preparation of the legislatively adopted Conservation and Development Policies Plan. OPM also shares responsibility with the Department of Economic Development and the Department of Environmental Protection for Outer Continental Shelf Exploration and other energy related planning activities. I ~~~~Department of Environmental Protection -- The Department of Environmental Protection is responsible for a number of coastal related planning programs focusing upon: - air quality (State Implementation Plan for Air Quality) - water quality (Section 208, 303(e) and 201 planning require- ments of the Clean Wate~' Act) - fisheries management *Additional information on Connecticut plans and planning programs and the relevant responsibilities of other Connecticut agencies is available in: The unpublished Department of Planning and Energy Policy report, Review of Plans and Planning Processes, prepared under contract to CAM; CAM -Planning Report No. 9: Major Public and Private Interests in the Coastal Area: An Overview of the Present Management System; CAM Planning Report No. 16: Major Policy Options for State Involvement in Coastal Management; CAM Planning Report No. 21: Discussion Papers: Options and Recommendations for a Connecti- cut Coastal Management Program, Part II; and an unpublished CAM white paper, Recommendations for the Functional Responsibilities and Organizational Framework of the Section 306 Coastal Management Program. 11-221 - solid waste management - recreation (State Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan) - statewide Environmental Plan ConnecticutResources Recovery Authority -- The Connecticut Resources Recovery Authority is in the process of developing and implementing a state- wide solid waste recovery system. This system is outlined in the State Solid Waste Management Plan. Thirty-Six Coastal Municipalities -- The planning commission (or combined planning-zoning commission) of each municipality is responsible for preparing, adopting, and amending a municipal Plan of Development. Coastal Regional Planning Agencies -- Each regional planning agency pre- pares a Regional Plan of Development which sets forth general use recommendations for the area under its jurisdiction. Tri-State Regional Planning Commission -- This planning organization has broad transportation and comprehensive planning responsibilities for the inter- state urban regions of Connecticut, New York and New Jersey. New England River Basins Commission (NERBC) -- The New England River Basins Commission's planning responsibilities focus on river basin planning; comprehen- sive, coordinated joint planning; and regional coastal planning. To date, the Long Island Sound Study is one of the major NERBC plans concerning Connecticut's coastal resources. In the course of developing the management program, a number of mechanisms have been utilized by the Coastal Area Management Program to ensure coordination with the above plans and planning programs. From its inception, the CAM program has been guided by an Advisory Board which has served as a major forum for program coordination. As noted in Part XI, the Advisory Board included re- presentatives from the seven major state agencies with interests in the coast and all of the coastal regional planning agencies. The CAM Advisory Board has been utilized throughout the program's development to establish policy direction, to provide continuing advice, to act as a sounding board on major issues, and to coordinate management program development with relevant Connecticut agencies. A listing of all formal Advisory Board meetings is presented in Appendix E. In addition, to ensure coordination during program development, CAM has maintained a continuous liaison with state, local, and regional officials. Coordination efforts with officials have included numerous workshops and meetings , widespread distribution of CAM planning reports and the Land's End newsletters, and other public participation endeavors. For a listing of CAM's meetings, workshops and public participation engagements, see Appendix E. Contractual work assignments to independent agencies are a further mechanism which has been used by CAM to ensure coordination. In this respect, the regional planning agencies, the Office of Policy and Management, and the Department of Economic Development have contributed to program development by assisting CAM in data collection and analysis and formulation of program re- commendations including review of applicable plans. Regional and interstate coordination has been handled primarily through the A-95 review process, the New- England River Basins Commission's (NERBC) Coastal Activities Committee and i ts working subcommittees (Coastal Zone Task Force, Dredge Management Work Group, Ports and Harbors Study Group,etc.) 11-222 and direct contacts with neighboring states. In keeping with the A-95 review requirements, CAM's federal grant applications have been circulated by the authorized "clearinghouses" (Tri-State, Connecticut River Estuary and Southeastern Regional Planning Agencies, Office of Policy and Management) for review and comment. The NERBC New York-New England Coastal Zone Task Force was organized in direct response to CZMA coordination requirements as a forum for discussion of state programs and issues of common concern. Connecticut has served as an active member of the Task Force since its inception . Connecticut has also established a number of informal working relationships with individuals in the New York and Rhode Island coastal pro- grams thereby enhancing and faciltating the flow of information between neighboring states. Because of CAM's ongoing coordination efforts, there are no conflicts between the management program and the previously identified local, regional, state and interstate plans and programs requiring resolution at this time. This conclusion is supported by the unpublished report prepared by the De- partment of Planning and Energy Policy (now the Office of Policy and Manage- ment) under contract to CAM. This report, entitled Report of Plans and Planninq Processes, reviewed all major Connecticut plans and planning programs and identified no major unresolved plan conflicts with the'coastal management program. The federal regulations at 15 CFR 923.56(b)(3) require identification of both conflicts between the coastal management program and plans of a regulatory nature and the means that can be used to resolve them. As of January 1, 1980 the only plans of a regulatory nature affecting the coastal area are local planning and zoning regulations, local regulations adopted by municipalities to qualify them for participation in the federal Flood Insurance Program (42 U.S.C., section 4101 et seq) and (for towns along the lower Connecticut River valley) the standards adopted by the Connecticut River Gateway Commission. There are no conflicts between these local regulations and the state's coastal management program; Sections 11 through 15 of the Connecticut Coastal Manage- ment Act effectively amend, by state statute, the regulations of all local agencies pertaining to the coastal boundary area and require adherence to the policies in section 2 and the standards and criteria in sections 3 and 12 of the CCMA. In the case of any conflict between local regulations and the require- ments of a state statute, the statutory requirements prevail and supercede con- flicting local regulations. This rule of state preemption of local regulations is summarized in the case of Luaricella v. Planning and Zoning Board of Appeals, 32 Conn. Supp. 104, 343 A. 2d 374: "The interrelationships between state and local law on the same subject matter is best expressed in the leading case of Shelton v. Shelton, III Conn. 433, 150 A. 811 .... If the general law is enacted after the ordinance covering the same field, it will take the place of the ordinance and supercede it. If the ordinance is enacted after the general law in conflict with it, the ordinance will be void. Where the statute and ordinance deal with the same subject matter, the statutory power will prevail, to the exclusion of the ordinance, so far as they conflict." 11-223 With respect to local regulations implementing' the federal Flood Insurance Program, it should also be noted that there is no substantive conflict with the state's coastal management program. The coastal boundary area includes all coastal flood hazard areas (see Part II). Local flood hazards regulations are incorporated as part of the management program and serve as minimum standards. However, in some instances the coastal hazard area policies in the CCMA (see Part IV, p. II-80 may impose more severe requirements for development in flood prone areas. Similarly, there is no substantive conflict between the standards of the Connecticut River Gateway Commission and the state's coastal management program. After in depth review, the state has determined that there are no existing conflicts between the Commission's current standards and the coastal policies of the Con- necticut Coastal Management Act (see section 16(a) of the CCMA). Section 16(b) of the CCMA requires that any future revision of the Commission's standards be consistent with the coastal policies. In addition, Section 16(c) of the CCMAI requires that Commission approvals of regulations of municioalities participat- ing in the conservation zone program must also be consistent with the coastal policies. B. CONTINUING PLAN COORDINATION The Connecticut Coastal Management Act incorporates a number of provisions designed to ensure continuing cooperation, consultation and coordination with the planning programs identified in subpart A (above). The mechanisms for continuing coordination are discussed below. Coordination of State Plans -- Section 20(a) of the CCMA requires that all major state plans affecting the coastal area be consistent with the coastal policies in section 20 of the Act. Existing plans are required to be revised, if necessary, by July 1, 1981 after consultation with the Commissioner of ~DEP to insure such consistency. Local Plans -- Sections 7, 8 and 10 of the CCMA require that municipalities adopting a coastal program shall be consistent with the coastal policies in revising and amending local plans. The plans of municipalities whichI do not choose to prepare a coastal program need not be consistent with the coastal policies in revising and amending local plans. The plans of municipal- ities, which do not choose to prepare a coastal program need not be consistent with the coastal policies, because, as noted in Part VI, such municipalities are required to be consistent with the coastal policies in making determinations concerning development project coastal site plan reviews. The coastal site review process is the primary implementing authority at the local level and will, in those municipalities not revising plans, serve as an ad hoc planning process. Regional Planning Agencies Development Plans -- Section 8-35a of the General Statutes requires that the preparation of a regional plan of develop- ment "be based on studies of physical, social, ecomonic and governmental conditions and trends." Since the CAM Program is a major "government condition" the regional planning agencies must consider the CAM Program and the coastal policies in revising regional plans. Coordination with Interstate Plans -- Coordination with the Tri-StateI Regional Planning Commission and the New England River Basins Commission (including, in particular, its New York-New England Coastal Zone Management 11-224 Task Force) will be handled through the state's representatives to those organizations. Coordination with Federal Plans -- Coordination with federal agencies will be handled through both the "federal consistency" process (see the discussion on federal consistency in subpart C below) and through the "A-95" review process. Federal agencies have also had an opportunity to comment on the state's developing management program through direct solicitation of views, meetings and workshops (see Part XI). These contacts and activities will be continued during the management program. Other Means of Plan Coordination -- Consultation with state and regional planning agencies will also be maintained through the continued existence of the CAM Advisory Board. The CAM Advisory Board has representatives of both state and regional planning agencies and will continue to advise the F ~ ~Commissioner on coastal management issues. Continuing contact with municipal officials is also a major responsibility of the Department of Environmental Protection. Section 17 of the CCMA requires DEP to monitor and evaluate municipal coastal management activities, while section 5 requires DEP to consult regularly with municipal officials, to hold periodic workshops for them and to provide technical information and staff assistance upon municipal request. Furthermore, in order to provide coastal municipalities an adequate opportunity to comment on major program decisions and to satisfy the requirements of section 306(c)(B) of the federal CZM Act and the federal regulations, thereunder, (15 CFR 923.57) the Depart- ment of Environmental Protection will notify in writing those municipalities whose zoning authority may be affected by a proposed major Program decision as defined in section 923.57(b)(2)(ii) of the federal regulations. Upon receipt of such notice, affected municipalities will be given a thirty (30) day review period (during which they may provide written comments including I ~ ~any recommended alternatives to the proposed decision, providing that no action is taken by a municipality which would interfere or conflict with the proposed decision). DEP will consider such comments and will hold a public hearing, as appropriate, Prior to implementing the decision at the end of the thirty (30) day period. In the event that the program decision involves I ~ ~adoption of an administrative regulation, 'the hearing notice and other procedural requirements of the state's Uniform Administrative Procedures Act (C.G.S. Chap- ter 54) will be followed and affected municipalities will be given at least thirty (30) days notice. In addition, section 17(c) of the CCMA requires DEP to prepare and submit an annual report to the General Assembly and Governor. Among the items which must be explicitly addressed in the report is coordination with other state, federal , regional and municipal Programs. 11-225 C. FEDERAL CONSISTENCY I nt rod uc tion The federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 (as amended) requires that each federal agency conducting or supporting activities directly affecting the coastal zone shall conduct or support those activities in a manner which is, to the maximum extent practicable, consistent with approved state manage- ment programs. If a state determines that an activity will be inconsistent with its management program, the federal agency sponsoring or undertaking that activity may not proceed with that particular activity, project or plan unless the Secretary of Commerce finds that such activity, project or plan isj consistent with the objectives or purposes of the CZMA, or is necessary in the interest of national security. The Office of Coastal Zone Management has provided coastal states, federal agencies and other interested parties with regulations (15 CFR Part 930, 44 Federal Register p. 37142, June 25, 1979) that set forth the policies and procedures necessary for the implementation of the federal consistency pro- visions (section 307) of the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972(as amended). The state agency designated to administer and review federal actions in Connecticut to determine their consistency with the state's coastal manage- ment program is the Department of Environmental Protection. In the DEP, the Coastal Management Unit is responsible for securing the necessary review and comment from other state, regional or local government agencies and is authorized to comment officially on a federal consistency determination, con- cur with or object to a consistency certification, or determine the consistency of a proposed federal assistance activity. The following guidelines, which provide consistency review procedures for each of the four categories of federal activities outlined in the federal regulations mentioned above, have been designed to incorporate three management principles. The first is to arrange early consultation between state and federal officials and applicants to federal agencies. Federal agencies and applicants proposing to conduct an activity for which a consistency review is or may be required should consult DEP's Coastal Management Unit as early as possible in the planning of the activity. This will allow the Coastal Management Unit to advise the agency or applicant of the relevant coastal policies and provisions of the Connecticut Coastal Management Plan, and will help to elimin- ate any potential conflicts before extensive work on a particular proposal has been completed. The Coastal Management Unit feels that implementing this principle will establish more efficient coordination between state and federal activities and will avoid unnecessary or duplicative procedures. The second is to avoid unneeded duplication of information. Whenever possible, the Coastal Management Unit will base its consistency determination on documents 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. 11-226 I ~~~~The third is to keep information requirements at a manageable level. Whenever additional information is needed to make a consistency determination, the Coastal Management Unit will promptly notify the federal agency or applicant that additional information is needed, will specify in detail the nature of the required information, and will advise the agency or applicant why it is needed. General Definitions--The term "Act" means the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1451 et seq.). The term "Section" means a section of the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended. The term "Secretary" means the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Commerce. The term "Executive Office of the President" means the office, council, board, or other entity within the Executive Offic6 of the President which shall partici- pate with the Secretary in seeking to mediate serious disagreements which may arise between a Federal agency and a coastal State. The term "OCZM" means the Office of Coastal Zone Management, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce. The term "Assistant Administrator" means the Assistant Administrator for Coastal Zone Management, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce. The term "Federal agency" means any department agency, board, commission, council, independent office or similar entity within the executive branch of the Federal Government, or any wholly owned Federal Government corporation. The term ''State agency'' means the agency of the State government designated pursuant to section 306(c)(5) of the Act to receive and administer grants for an approved coastal management program, or a single designee State agency appointed by the 306 (c)(5) State agency. Any appointment by the 306 (c)(5) State agency of a designee agency must be described in the State's management program. In the absence of such description, all consistency determinations, consistency certifi- cations and Federal assistance proposals shall be sent to and reviewed by the 306 (c)(5) State agency. The State agency is responsible for commenting on Federal agency consistency determinations ,concurring with or objecting to consistency certifications for Federal licenses, permits, and Outer Continental Shelf plans, and reviewing the consistency of Federal assistance activities proposed by State or local govern- ment agencies. The State agency shall be responsible for securing necessary re- view and comment from other State, regional, or local government agencies. There- after, only the State agency is authorized to comment officially on a Federal consistency, certification, concur with or object to a consistency certification or determine the consistency of a proposed Federal assistance activity. The term "management program" has the same definition as provided in section 304(11) of the Act, except that the term is limited to those management programs adopted by a coastal State in accordance with the provisions of section 306 of the Act, and approved by the Assistant Administrator. 1 - 227 Federal consistency regulations (15 CFR Part 930) set up four categories of federal actions that require a consistency review. These categories are as follows: direct federal activities; federally licensed and permitted activi- ties; federally licensed and permitted activities described in detail in OCS* (Outer Continental Shelf) plans; and federal assistance to state and local govern- ments. Direct federal activities that "directly affect" the coastal area must be conducted in a manner that is consistent to the "maximum extent practicable" with Connecticut's approved coastal management program for those federal activities affecting land or water uses in the coastal zone. Activities in the latter three categories must be certified by the Coastal Management Unit as being "consistent" with its management program before the license, permit or grant is approved by the federal agency. It should be pointed out that federal consistency does not require a federalI agency to approve activities which the state has determined to be consistent with its coastal management program. A state determination on consis tency is a necessary but insufficient requirement for federal decisions concerning licenses, permits or assistance grants. Also, federal consistency does not refer to the consistency of state permit decisions and state coastal policies. Section 307 of the Coastal Zone Manage- ment Act applies only to federal activities. Whether a state regulatory decision is consistent with the policies governing that decision is a matter of state law. Consistency is required for federal activities "directly affecting" or "affecting" the coastal zone. Activities not directly affecting or affecting the coastal zone are not subject to review. The federal regulatory format requires that the initial determination that an activity does or does not directly affect the coastal zone be made by the person or agency seeking to conduct that activity, unless the state has already done so. The Connecticut Coastal Management Unit regards the specific activities listed below (for each of the four categories mentioned above) as activities requiring a consistency review. Activities not contained in these lists ("unlisted activities") may also directly affect the coastal area. The Coastal Management Unit reserves the right to notify persons or agencies that a consistency review is required for such an unlisted activity. The geographic scope of the Connecticut Coastal Management Plan is described in Section II, Part II of this document and a map of the coastal boundary is presented in the back cover of this document. The consistency review requirement will, in some cases, extend beyond those activities taking place within the coastal boundary. Activities on federal lands and on other lands outside the boundary are subject to consistency review if it is found that they may directly affect the coastal zone (15 CFR 930.33c). Whether these "spillover effects" will have such an impact will depend generally on the type of activity to be conducted, its magnitude, and its proximity to the coastal zone. Agencies and persons proposing to conduct an activity with potential spillover impacts should consult with the Coastal Management Unit early in the planning process in order to avoid later problems. *OCS Plan - the term "OCS Plan" means any plan for the exploration or development of, or production from, any area which has been leased under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 USC Sec. 1331 et. seq.). 11-228 Direct Federal Activities (15 CFR 930.31) General -- Direct federal activities include any functions performed by or on behalf of a federal agency in the exercise of its statutory respons- ibilities. A development project is defined as any federal activity involv- ing the planning, construction, modification or removal of public works facilities or other structures, and the acquisition, utilization, or disposal of land or water resources. Federal activities other than development projects may be viewed as a residual category covering federal actions which are neither federal develop- ment projects nor activities covered by the Federal License and Permits and the Federal Assistance to State and Local Governments sections discussed below. An example would be federal assistance for housing development to entities other than state and local governments, such as to private or non- profit interests or Indian tribes. Activities and Projects Subject to Consistency Review -- Federal activi- ties and development projects are subject to consistency review if it is determined that these activities or projects will " directly affect" the coastal area. Actions or projects are deemed to have a ' direct effect" if they cause: - Changes in the manner in which land, water, or other coastal area natural resources are used; - limitation on the range of uses of coastal area natural re- sources; or - changes in the quality of coastal area natural resources. Th~estr " dretlafect" or "affecting the coastal zon" dscrbesthe coastal zone effect caused by a federal activity (in- cluingdevlopentproect),a federal license or permit activity (includ- ing CS ctiitie), r afederal assistance activity which is sufficient to tiggr te reponibiityfor complying with federal consistency require- The issue of whether a particular type of federal action (e.g. federal activity, development project, license, permit or assistance) directly affects the coastal zone is separate from whether the proposed action satis- fies the relevant consistency requirements of the Act. The former issue simply addresses a test (described above) which, once met by a federal action, leads to an opportunity for state agency review of the proposed action. During the consistency review stage, the issue of the consistency of the proposed federal action (with the state's management program) is analyzed and resolved. Under the consistency regulations, direct federal activities and develop- ment projects within the coastal boundary must be consistent with the manage- ment program to the "maximum extent practicable." According to the federal regulations, "maximum extent practicable" means "to be fully consistent with such programs unless compliance is prohibited based on the requirements of existing law applicable to the federal agency's operations." It should be noted that a federal license or permit activity (including OCS activities), or a federal assistance activity must meet simple ''consistent with the state's management proqram" criteria. 11-229 Federal agencies shall determine which of their activities directly affect Connecticut's coastal area and shall consider all development projects within the coastal boundary to have a direct effect. In order to facilitate this determination, a listing of federal activities and development projects which are likely to directly affect the coastal area and, if so, would require a consistency determination under Section 3O7(c)(1) are provided below: Federal Agency Activity or Development Project Army Corps of Engineers -Proposed authorizations for dredging, Department of Defense channel improvements, other navigation works, beach replenishment, erosion control structures, dams or flood control works, maintenance dredging. -land acquisition for spoil disposal or other purposes -selection of open water disposal sites Other Department of Defense - location, design, acquisition of new or Agencies expanded defense installations (active or reserve status, including associated housing, transportation or other facilities). - plans, procedures and facilities for handling or storage of hardous materials - establishment of impact, compatibility or restricted uses zones. Department of Transportation - locati~on, design, construction or enlarge- ment of Coast Guard stations. - location, placement or removal of air or sea navigation devices. - expansion, abandonment, designation of anchorages, lightering areas, shipping lanes or pilot areas. Department of Energy - prohibition orders Department of Interior - proposed land acquisition by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or the National Park Service. - OCS lease sales and other actions taking place on the Outer Continental Shelf, including but not limited to operating orders, etc. (see number 2 on p. 11-231). 11-230 Federal Agec Activity or Development Project -development of federal minerals ownership (FMO) riqhts General Services Administration -location and design of proposed federal government property or buildings whether leased or owned by the federal government -disposal of federal surplus lands and approval National Marine Fisheries -preparation and approval of plans Service (and North and implementing mechanisms pur- Atlantic Fisheries suant to management of fisheries Management Council) within the 200 nautical mile ex- tended jurisdiction Amtrak, Conrail -expansions, curtailments, new con- struction, upgradings, or abandonments of railroad facilities or services in or affecting the state, inclu- ding actions regarding the Northeast Corridor Realignment Generally, the following types of activities and development projects whether or not listed above are generally assumed to directly affect Connecticut and, therefore, are subject to a consist- ency determination. 1. Actions on Excluded Federal Lands -any activity which would cause a discharge which otherwise would be subject to Connecticut air, water or hazardous materials regulations. -any activity in a flood prone or erosion prone area which would lead to a significant change in drainage patterns, run-off coefficients, or sediment loadings. -any activity which would result in a significant change in land or water use/development patterns or which would require major new public investment. 2. Actions Outside the Coastal Management Area/State: - any activity or development project (landward or seaward of the management area) which would result in a significant change in air or water quality within the management area. - construction of a major federal facility in close proximity to Connecticut which could result in significant land or water use impacts, or require major public invest- ment, or adversely affect the state's economy. 11-231 Notes (1) Activities and development projects listed above should be reviewed specifically with respect to their impacts on: - Water quality - Air quality - Living resources, both terrestrial and marine - Natural, scenic, historic and cultural areas - Social and economic resources land use patterns - Effect on public facility and service investment - Plans and regulations of state and local governments - Recreational and visual access to coastal waters (2) The state recognizes the need to r-,iv'Lain flexibility in this process and acknowledges tiiat a shorter review time or the developmcnt- o', coaisistency agreements and waivers may be necessary in t'he interests of national security or other overridins national interest. (3) The state through negotiation with federal agencies may enter into agreements limiting the applicability of consistency review based upon the sc6pe, size, location or other characteristics of the proposed action. (ref. Sec. 22a-96 of the Connecticut General Statutes) Notification Process--Federal agencies must provide the Connecticut Coast- al Management Unit with consistency determinations at the earliest practicable time in the planning of the activity, preferrably before the activity or project reaches a decision stage likely to restrict the evaluation of alternative approach- es. In any case, the consistency determination must be provided to the Coastal Management Unit at least 90 days before final approval of the federal activity or project. Although use of existing notification procedures is not required, federal agencies are encouraged to provide consistency determinations through existing mechanisms such as OMB Circular A-95 and NEPA environmental impact statements. The consistency determination must contain the following: - a brief statement indicating whether or not the proposed activity or project will be undertaken in a manner consistent to the maxi- mum extent practicable with the Connecticut Coastal Management Plan: - an evaluation of the relevant provisions of the program, particularly the coastal policies contained in the Connecticut Coastal Management Plan; - a detailed description of the activity or project, associated facili- ties, and related coastal area effects; II-232 -comprehensive data and information sufficient to support the federal agency's consistency statement. If a federal agency decides that a consistency determination is not required for a federal activity (1) identified by a state agency on its list, (2) which is the same as or similar to activities for which consistency determinations have been prepared in the past, or (3) for which a federal agency undertook a thorough consistency assessment and developed finding on the effects of the activity on the coastal zone, the federal agency shall provide the state agency with a notification, at least 90 days before final approval of the activity, setting forth the reasons for its negative determination. State Review Process--Pursuant to Secion 930.41 (15 CFR Part 930) the state shall inform the federal agency of its agreement or disagreement with the federal agency's consistency determination at the earliest practicable time, but in no case later later than 45 days following receipt of federal notifica- tion, unless an extension has been granted. State concurrence is presumed if no response is received within the 45 day period. The state may request and shallI be given one 15 day extension; longer or additional extensions may be granted by the federal agency. If notice is made through the A-95 process and the Coastal Management Unit cannot complete its revievwwithin the A-95 required 30 day review period, the Coastal Management Unit will notify the A-95 clearinghouse that additional time is required and the reason for the delay. Upon receipt of federal notification, the Coastal Management Unit will notify the Coastal Area Management Advisory Board and any affected agencies, organizations or individuals. Additionally, the Planning and Coordination/Coastal Management Unit with the Department of Environmental Protection will notify all affected DEP units. The Unit shall be responsible for compiling comments and responding to the federal agency. If notice is received through the AL95 Clearinghouse, a copy of the commr~ents and tite response will also be sent to the Clearinghouse. If the Coastal Area Management Advisory Board elects to review the federal agency's consistency determination, the Advisory Board review will include consideration of the application and supportive information to determine if: (a) the proposed activity conflicts with the objectives and policies of the Connecticut Coastal Management Plan; (b) the proposed activity by itself, or in consideration with existing projects, would cause a violation of a Connecticut statute or regulation contained in the program or result in an adverse impact of an unacceptable nature as defined'by the management program; or (c) alternative measures exist, which if adopted by the applicant would permit the proposed activity to be conducted in a manner consistent with the management program. The Advisory Board will render its recommendation to the Coastal Manage- ment Unit and such recommendation will be part of the record upon which the unit's consistency certification decis~ion is based. 11-233 State Agency Disagreement -- In the event that the Coastal Management Unit disagrees with the federal agency's consistency determination, the Coastal Management Unit will respond to the agency with its reasons for disagreement and any necessary supporting information. The response will describe: (a) how the proposed activity will be inconsistent with specific elements of the Coastal Management Plan; (b) alternative measures, if feasible, which if adopted by the federal agency would make the proposed action consistent; and (c) the nature and necessity of additional information that would be necessary to determine the consistency of the activity or development. The Coastal Management Unit will send copies of its objections to the affected federal agency and to the Assistant Administrator of NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). In the event of disagreement, the state will utilize the remaining portion of the 90 day review period to attempt to resolve its differences with the federal agency. Mediation -- Provisions have been made and a procedure described in sub- part G of NOAA regulations published in the Federal Register of June 25, 1979 (15 CFR Part 903 Section 930.110 through 930.116) by which the Secretary of Commerce may mediate disagreements arising from consistency determinations for (a) federal activities and development projects; (b) federal licenses and permits; (c) OCS plans; and (d) federal assistance to state and local governments. The purpose of the rules in subpart G is to describe mediation procedures which federal and state agencies may use to attempt to resolve serious disagree- ments which arise during the administration of approved management programs. The availability of mediation does not preclude use by the parties of alternative means for resolving their disagreement. In the event a serious disagreement arises, the parties are strongly encouraged to make every effort to resolve the disagreement informally. OCZM shall be available to assist the parties in these efforts. The Secretary or other head of a federal agency, or the Governor or the Commissioner of the Department of Environmental Protection may notify the Secretary in writing of the existence of a serious disagreement, and may request that the Secretary seek to mediate the serious disagreement. A copy of the written request must be sent to the agency wit-h which the requesting agency disagrees, and to the Assistant Administrator. Within 15 days following receipt of a request for mediation the disagreeing agency shall transmit a written response to the Secretary, and to the agency re- questing mediation, indicating whether it wishes to participate in the mediation process. If the disagreeing agency declines the offer to enter into mediation efforts, it must indicate the basis for its refusal to participate in mediation efforts, the Secretary shall seek to persuade the disagreeing agency to re- consider its decision and enter into mediation efforts. If the disagreeing agencies do not agree to participate, the Secretary will cease efforts to provide mediation assistance. 11-234 If the parties agree to the mediation process, the Secretary shall appoint a hearing officer who shall schedule a hearing in the local area concerned. The hearing officer shall give the parties at least 30 days notice of the time and place set for the hearing and shall provide timely public notice of the hearing. At the time public notice is provided, the Federal and State agencies shall provide the public with convenient access to public data and information related to the serious disagreement. Hearings shall be informal and shall be conducted by the hearing officer with the objective of securing in a timely fashion information related to the disagreement. The Federal and State agencies as well as other interested par- ties, may offer information at the hearing subject to the hearing officer's supervision as to the extent and manner of presentation. Unduly repetitious oral presentation maybe excluded at the discretion of the hearing officer with a written submission of the proposed oral presentation. Hearing will. be re- corded and the hearing officer shall provide transcripts and copies of written information offered at the hearina to the Federal and State agency parties. The public may inspect and copy the transcripts and written information pro- vided to these agencies. Following the close of the hearing, the hearing officer shall transriit the hearing record to the Secretary. Upon receipt of the hearing record, the Secretary shall schedule a mediation conference to be attended by representa- tives from the Office of the Secretary, the disagreeing Federal and State agen- cies, and any other interested parties whose participation is deemed necessary by the Secretary. The Secretary shall provide the parties at least 10 days no- tice of the time and place set for the mediation conference. Mediation shall terminate (a) at any time the Federal and State agencies agree to a resolution of the serious disagreement, (b) if one of the agencies withdraws from mediation, (c in the event the agencies fail to reach a reso- lution of the serious disagreement within 15 days following secretarial con- ference efforts, and the agencies do not agree to extend mediation beyond that period, or (d) for other good cause. The--availability of mediation services is not intended expressly or impli- citly to limit the parties' use of alternate forums to resolve disputes. Speci- fically, judicial review where otherwise available by law may be sought by any party to a serious disagreement without first having exhausted the mediation process. Federal Licenses and Permits (15 CFR 930.50) General--The term federal license or permit means any authorization, certification, approval or other form of permission which any federal agency is impowered to issue to an applicant. OCS leases and permits are not covered in this definition and they are explained in detail in the following section describing OCS Exploration, Development and Production Activities. 11-235 Applicants for federal licenses or permits for activities affect- ing the coastal area or for renewals or amendments to such licenses or permits shall provide the Coastal Management Unit with a certification that the proposed activity is consistent with the Coastal Management Plan. Federal agencies may not issue a license or permit if the state objects to the applicant's consistency certification unless the U.S. Secretary of Commerce finds that a proposal is consistent with the purpose of the Federal CZMA or is necessary in the interest of national security. Prior to or concurrent with the consistency review process, any appropriate state permit applications should be submitted to the Department of Environmental Protection. If the Coastal Management Unit receives a consistency certification for an activity which requires a state permit but for which no~permit application has been submitted, the Coastal Management Unit will advise the agency or person proposing to conduct the activity that such a permit, or permits, is required. Listed Licenses and Permits--All the licenses and permits listed below for activities occuring within Connecticut's coastal management boundary are con- sidered as significantly affecting Connecticut's coastal zone and, therefore, are subject to consistency certifications and review.* Federal Agency License or Permit and Statutory Citation Army Corps of Engineers -Construction of dams, dikes or ditches Department of Defensd across navigable waters, or obstruction or alteration of navigable waters required under Section 9 and 10 of the Rivers alid Harbors Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401, 403) -Establishment of harbor lines pursuant to Secion 11 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 404,405) -Occupation of sea wall, bulkhead, jetty, dike, levee, wharf, pier, or other work built by the United States pursuant to Section 14 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 408) -Approval of plans for improve- ments made at private expense under USACE supervision Pursuant ()Mechanisms may be developed to allow for a waiver of certain steps in the State Review Process for projects covered by listed permits and licenses. Such waivers will be based on the size, scope, location and extent of State and local control of the proposed activity and shall be negotiated pursuant to Sec. 22a-96 of the Conn. General Statutes. II-236 Federal Agency License or Permit and Statutory Citation Army Corps of Engineers to the Rivers and Harbor Act of Department of Defense 1902 (33 U.S.C. 565) Discharge of dredged spoils into the waters of the United States pursuant to the Clean Water Act, Section 404(33 US.C. 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 artificial 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.) Coast Guard Department of Transportation 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) Environmental Protection - NPDES permits and other permits for federal Agency installations, discharges in contiguous zones and ocean waters, sludge runoff per- mits and agriculture 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 injecti( control program under Section 1424 of the Safe Drinking Water Act (42 U.S.C. 300h-c) - Permits pursuant to the Clean Air Act of 1976 (42 U.S.C. 1857) 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. 11-237 Federal Agency License or Permit and Statutory Citation Federal Energy Regulatory licenses and permits ordering inter- Commission connection of electric transmission lines or issuing certificates of public convenience and necessity for interstate natural gas transmission, including ap- proval of LNG sites pursuant to the Federal Power Act, the Energy Reorganiza- tion Act of 1974 and the Natural Gas Act. - siting, construction and operation of non-nuclear power plants. Department of Energy Regulation of gas pipelines, and licensing of import or export of natural gas pur- suant to the Natural Gas Act (15 U.S.C. 717) and the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974. exemptions from prohibition orders U.S. Geological Survey Department of the Interior (*) - permits to drill, rights of use and ease- ments for construction and maintenance of pipelines, gathering and flow lines and associated structures pursuant to 43 U.S.C. 1334, exploration and development plans. Bureau of Land Management (*) permits required for pipelines crossing Department of the Interior 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. Fish and Wildlife Service endangered species permits pursuant to Department of the Interior the Endangered Species Act (16 U.S.C. 153(a)). (*) These activities may be covered under review of OCS plans. If the permits and licenses are part of such plan no separate review will be required. 11-238 As a convenience to applicants, federal agencies are requested to list the requirements for consistency determinations on their application forms and inform the applicant of the address and telephone number of the designated Connecticut consistency agency (Coastal Management Unit). At the same time that an application for a listed federal license or permit is submitted to the federal agency, the applicant will transmit a copy of the application and consistency certification in the form specified by Sections 930.57 and 930.58 to the state. If the application would ordinarily be sent to a state agency other than the Coastal Management Unit, a copy must also be sent to the Coastal Unit. State Review Process -- Pursuant to Section 930.60, state review of a federal license or' permit application commences at the time the Coastal Manage- ment Unit receives a copy of the consistency certification and supportive information in the form specified under Sections 930.57 and 930.58. Public notiicaionof the application will be carried out by the most applicable procedure listed below. Wherever possible, federal and state agencies are encouraged to issue joint public notices to minimize duplication of effort and to avoid unnecessary delays. (a) in cases where a federal agency reviewing an application for a license or permit is required to give public notification such as through NEPA environmental impact statements, the Coastal Management Unit will rely upon these notification procedures. (b) in those cases that require public notification by a state agency (NPDES, 401 Water Quality, USAGE 404 Permits, etc.), notification will be carried out by the state agency utilizing that agency's notification procedures as well as required state procedures. State Concurrence with a Consistency Certification - Notice and Process-- At the earliest practicable time, and generally with 60-days after receipt I ~~of the certification in acceptable form, the Coastal Management Unit shall notify the federal agency and the applicant whether it concurs or objects to the consistency certification. Concurrence shall be in writing. (If the Coastal Unit has not issued a decision within 90 calendar days of the commencement of the review, the Coastal Unit shall notify the federal agency and the applicant of the status of the matter and the basis for further delay). Concurrence by the Coastal Management Unit shall be automatically and conclusively presumed if the Coastal Management Unit does not respond within six months of the commence- Federal Action When the Coastal Management Unit Concurs with a Consistency Certification -- If the Coastal Management Unit issues a con- currence (or concurrence is conclusively presumed) with the applicant's consistency certification, the federal agency may approve the application for a license or permit. If a federal agency determines that it will deny an application, early notification to the Coastal Unit is desired in order to avoid an unnecessary consistency review. 11-239 Licenses and permits listed which relate to activities occurring outside the boundary established pursuant to Connecticut's Coastal Management Plan will be considered to affect the coastal zone (i.e. subject to a consistency review) if they: (a) could result in a significant change in air or water quality or quantity within Connecticut's coastal boundary; or (b involve activities in close proximity to Connecticut's coastal boundary and could lead to significant land or water use pattern impacts, require new or expanded facilities or services within Connecticut, or have the potential to adverse- ly impact the conduct of commerce, trade or agricultural pur- suits within Connecticut; or (c) involve actions which could impact commercial or recreational fishing, marine transportation, or other uses of the state's coastal waters or submerged lands; or (d involve the transport, storage or handling of hazardous or toxic materials such that spills or other accidents could impact Connecticut's land or waters. The list of federal licenses and permits may be refined by the Coastal Management Unit following consultation with the affected federal agency and approval of additions or deletions by the Assistant Administrator of NOAA. Unlisted Licenses and Permits -- Section 930.54 of the federal regulations pertaining to Federal Consistency (15 CFR 930) provides that state agencies, with the assistance of federal agencies, may monitor other federal license and permit activities which may reasonably be expected to affect the state's coastal zone. Connecticut proposes to monitor other federal license and permit activities through the A-95 process, state and regional clearinghouses, NEPA environmental impact statements, and routine reporting of regional resource agencies (New England River Basins Commission, New England Regional Commission, etc.). Notification Process - Applicant's Responsibility -- Federal agencies are required to inform applicants for listed federal licenses and permits of the applicant's responsibilities for notification to the state and submission of required information including a consistency certification. Form of notice and the consistency certification shall comply wit~h Sections 930.57 and 930.58 (15 CFR Part 930). These requirements shall also apply to unlisted licenses and permits and to licenses and permits for activities occurring outside of Connecticut's coastal management boundary if the Coastal Management Unit notifies the federal agency, the applicant and the Assistant Administrator of NOAA within 45 days of the public notice of the federal license or permit. Applicants should, as a preliminary matter, seek the views of the state and seek the assistance of the Coastal Management Unit regarding the means for ensuring the proposed activity will be coordinated in a manner consistent with the Connecticut program. 11-240 Federal Action When the Coastal Management Unit Objects to a Consistency Certification -- At any time during the six months following commencement of the review period, the Coastal Unit may object to the consistency certifi- cation. Such objection will be contained in a written notice to the applicant, the federal agency and the Assistant Administrator of NOAA. The notice will describe how the proposed activity is inconsistent, any alternatives which will F ~~make the project or activity consistent, and the nature and necessity of any information required to determine program consistency. Upon receipt of the state's objection, the federal agency shall be prevented from granting the F ~~federal license or permit, except where permitted upon approval by the Secre- tary of Commerce based upon a finding that the proposed activity is consistent with the purposes of the Federal Coastal Zone Management Act or in the interest of national security (15 CFR 930, subpart H). Mediation -- See Mediation section contained under Direct Federal Activities section. Waiver of Review -- The Coastal Management Unit may, after program approval, establish procedures to waive the consistency review for certain classes or types of projects based on a consideration of their size, scope, location or extent of state and local control. Such waivers will be con- sidered whenever the objectives of the Coastal Management Program are met, when in the opinion of the state adequate safeguards are built into state and local permitting authority, or when the interests of the public and the applicant are best served by such action. Waivers will apply only to the F ~~State Review Process set forth above, not to the requirements placed on the applicant for a consistency determination. OSC Exploration, Developement and Production Activities (15 CFR 930.70) General -- Subpart E of 15 CFR Part 930 provides that OCS* plans sub- mitted to the U.S. Secretary of the Interior for Outer Continental Shelf exploration, development and production, and all associated federal licenses and permits described in detail in such OCS plans, shall be subject to a determination of their consistency with a state's coastal management program. To be included in a consistency determination are: (a) license and permit activities which are described in detail in the OCS plan, such as, permits to drill, rights-of-use and easements for the construction and maintenance of structures, platforms, gathering and flow lines; and (b) OCS-related licenses and permits, such as for pipelines crossing federal land, including OCS lands, artificial islands or other fixed structures, transport of dredged materials, and discharge or emissions subject to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 or the Clean Air Act of 1970. *OCS Plan - the term "OCS Plan" means any plan for the exploration or development of, or production from, any area which has been leased under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 USC Sec. 1331 et. seq.). 11-241 It should be noted that the Department of the Interior's OCS prelease sale "activities", such as determination of tracts to be offered and choice of lease sale stipulations, are subject to the requirements of Subpart C (Federal Activities). OCS plan federal license and permit activities which are not required to be described in detail in the plan are subject to the requirements of Subpart D (Federal License or Permit). A certification of consistency for activities described in detail in the OCS plan shall be attached to the OCS plan at tne time it is submitted to the Secretary of the Interior. No f'~deral official or agency shall grant any license or permit for activities described in detail in the OCS plan until the state has received such certification and plan together and until the state has concurred or conclusive concurrence is presumed. Notification Process -- Any person submitting to the U.S. Secretary of the Interior any OCS plan must provide the Department of the Interior with a consistency certification, attached to the OCS plan, and must furnish the Coastal Management Unit with a copy of the OCS plan (excluding proprietary information) and a consistency certification. When satisfied that the proposed activities described in detail in the OCS plan meet the federal consistency requirements, the OCS lessee or opera- tor shall declare in the consistency certification that "The proposed activities described in detail in this plan comply with Connecticut's approved Coastal Management Plan and will be conducted in a manner consistent with such plan" Supporting information to accompany the certification will include com- prehensive offshore, nearshore and onshore data and material required by the Department of the Interior's operating regulations governing exploration, development and production operations on the OCS (30 CFR 250) and regulations pertaining to the Interior's OCS information program (30 CFR Part 252) and must also include a brief assessment of the probable coastal zone effects and a brief set of findings indicating that the proposed activities, their associated facilities, and their combined effects, are all consistent with the provisions of the management program. State Review Process -- The Coastal Management Unit will utilize the re- view process described under Federal Licenses and Permits for purposes of consistency review of OCS exploration, development and production activities. Any Department of the Interior OCS prelease sale activities, such as deter- mination of tracts to be offered and choice of leases sale stipulations will be reviewed under the process described in the Direct Federal Activities section. State Concurrence with Consistency Determination -- At the earliest practicable time, and generally within 60 days, the Coastal Unit will notify the person and federal agency whether it concurs with or objects to the consistency certification. If the state issues a concurrence, it will notify the Secretary of Commerce, the Secretary of the Interior and the Assistant Administrator of NOAA. Concurrence by the state agency shall be conclusively presumed in the absence of an objection within three months following commencement of state review. 11-242 If the Coastal Unit has not issued a decision within 90 days following the beginning of review, it will notify the person, the Department of the Interior and the Assistant Administrator of NOAA of the status of the review and the basis for further delay in issuing a final decision. If the state issues a concurrence or is conslusively presumed to concur, the person will not be required to submit additional certifications and supporting information for state review at the time federal applications are actually filed for the federal permit activities described in detail in the OCS plan provided that the OCS plan is not amended or substantially altered. The lessee or operator must, however, supply the Coastal Management Unit with copies of permit applications to allow the state to monitor the approved OCS activities. State Objection to a Consistency Determination -- In the event the state objects to the person's OCS plan certification, it will accompany its objection with reasons and supporting information concerning each activity which the state finds to be inconsistent with the Coastal Management Plan. The state's objection will include a statement informing the person of a right to appeal to the Secretary of Commerce on the grounds described below. Following the receipt of a state agency objection, federal agencies may not issue any of the licenses or permits for activities described in detail in the OCS plan unless the Secretary of Commerce finds that such activities are consistent with the objectives of the CZMA, or is necessary in the interest of national security. Mediation -- See Mediation Section contained under Direct Federal Activities. Federal Assistance to State and Local Governments (15 Cfr 930.90) General -- Federal assistance to state and local governments for projects affecting the coastal area may not be granted until the Coastal Management Unit certifies that the activity will be consistent with the Con- necticut Coastal Management Plan, unless the Secretary of Commerce finds that the proposal meets the objectives of the federal CZMA or is necessary in the interest of national security. The Coastal Management Unit will consider an activity consistent if it does not conflict with the Coastal Policies contained in the Connecticut Coastal Management Plan or is the available alternative most supportive of that plan. The term "federal assistance 11 means assistance provided under a federal program to an applicant through grant or contractual arrangements, loans, subsidies, guarantees, insurance, or other forms of financial aid. The term "applicant" refers to any unit Of state or local government that submits an application for federal assistance after the date that the Connecticut Coastal Management Plan has received federal approval. Listing of Applicable Federal Assistance Pro~rms- Federal regulations, 15 CFR 930.94, require that the state list th-espec-if-c federal assistance programs subject to consistency review. The following is a list of federal assistance programs subject to consistency review. 1-243 DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 10.409 Irrigation, Drainage, and other Soil and Conservation Loans 10.414 Resource Conservation and Development Loans 10.418 Water and Waste Disposal Systems for Rural Communities 10.419 Watershed Protection Flood Prevention Loans 10.422 Business and Industrial Loans 10.423 Community Facilities Loans 10.424 Industrial Development Grants 10.901 Resource Conservation and Development (construction only) 10.904 Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention (construction only) DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 11.300 Economic Development Grants and Loans for Public Works and Development Facilities 11.304 Economic Development-Public.Works Impact Projects 11.310 Local Public Works Capital Development and Investment Act of 1976 Projects 11.407 Commercial Fisheries Research and Development 11.501 Development and Promotion of Ports and Intermodel Transportation DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 12.101 Beach Erosion Control Projects 12.106 Flood Control Projects 12.107 Navigation Projects 12.108 Snagging and Clearing for Flood Control 12.109 Protection, Clearing and Straightening Channels DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT 14.001 Flood Insurance 14.112 Mortgage Insurance-Construction or Rehabilitation of Condominium Projects 14.115 Mortgage Insurance-Development of Sales-Type Cooperative Proj ects 14.124 Mortgage Insurance-Investor Sponsored Coop;erative Housing 14.125 Mortgage Insurance-Land Development and New communities 14.126 Mortgage Insurance-Management Type Cooperative Projects 14.127 Mortgage Insurance-Mobile Home Parks 14.128 Mortgage Insurance-Hospitals 14.129 Mortgage Insurance-Nursing Homes and Related Care Facilities 14.207 New Communities-Loan Guarantees 14.218 Community Development Block Grants/Entitlement Grants 14.219 Community Development Block Grants/Discretionary Grants 14.701 Disaster Assistance DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 15.802 Minerals Discovery Loan Program 15.950 Additional Water Resources Research 11-244 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 20.102 Airport Development Aid Program 20.205 Highway Research, Planning and Construction (construction f ~~~~~~only) 20.506 Urban Mass Transportation Demonstration Grants ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 66.005 Air Pollution Control Survey and Demonstration Grants (construction projects only) 66.418 Construction Grants for Wastewater Treatment Works 66.452 Solid Watte Management Demonstration Grants 66.505 Water Pollution Control-Research, Development, and Demonstration (construction projects only) 66.506 Safe Drinking Water Research and Demonstration Grants (construction projects only) --Sole Source Aquifer Program Grants Note: 1) Reference to Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance, 1978. 2) DEP reserves the right to monitor proposed federal assistance projects other than those described above through the A-95 and other review processes. Where such monitoring indicates a significant impact on the State's coastal region and a subsequent need for a consistency determination DEP shall notify the statewide A-95 clear- ing house, relevant regional A-95 clearinghouse, the applicant agency, involved federal agencies, and the Assistant Administrator of HOAA of its intention to make such a determination. Notification Process -- The Coastal Management Unit will use the A-95 Project Notification and Review Process to monitor proposed federal assistance projects in the coastal area. The Connecticut Office of Policy and Manage- ment, the state agency designated to administer the A-95 process, shall notify the Coastal Management Unit of proposed federal assistance projects in the coastal area. If, pursuant to the A-95 process, the Coastal Management Unit identifies an application for federal assistance to conduct an activity which significant- ly affects the coastal area but which is outside the coastal boundary, the Coastal Management Unit shall provide noti'ce to that effect to the federal agency, the applicant, the A-95 Clearinghouse and the Assistant Administrator of NOAA within the A-95 comment period. State Review Process -- The A-95 distribution process generally requires that only a summary of a large scale grant application, and not the full application, be made available for A-95 review and comment. The Coastal Management Unit anticipates that a review of the full application for federal assistance to state and local governments for projects significantly affecting the coastal area will often be required before a consistency determination can be made. The short period of time available for comment and review under the A-95 process (thirty days less the time it takes for the notice to arrive from the A-95 Clearinghouse) and the fact that full applications are not generally submitted for A-95 review is likely to result in a large number ofcomments by the Coastal Management Unit to the A-95 Clearinghouse that addiional information is required for a consistency review. 11-245 When additional information (e.g. a full application) is needed to make a consistency determination, the Coastal Management Unit will submit comments to that effect to the A-95 Clearinghouse, thus allowing the Clearinghouse to complete its A-95 review within the 30 day period. These comments should not4 be construed as a consistency determination. The consistency review is a separate review process conducted by the Coastal Management Unit, not the A-95 Clearinghouse. The Coastal Management Unit will then notify the grant applicant and the granting federal agency (and send a copy of this notification to the A-95 Clearinghouse), that additional information is needed to make a consistency determination. This notice will contain the nature and degree of specific- ity of the needed information and the reason such information is required. Whenever possible, the Coastal Management Unit will base its consistency decision on the document or documents required for compliance with federal regulations or to complete the application for federal assistance. However, when it is possible, the applicant is advised to submit the following information: (a) geographic location of the proposed project for which federal assistance is requested in sufficient detail to allow the Coastal Management Unit to determine which coastal resources may be affected; (b) description of the proposed project including, where ap- plicable, scope, nature, timing, public facility and service requirements, population impact, employment impact, total cost, and other features or characteristics in sufficient detail to allow for review of the proposed project relative to the Connecticut Coastal Management Plan. The chief executive officer of the governmental agency or unit making the application shall ensure that a consistency certification by the applicant accompanies the application for federal assistance. The following form is recommended: "The proposed activities described in this application comply with the approved Connecticut Coastal Management Plan and will be conducted in a manner consistent with that program." The federal agency reviewing the application for assistance should not delay processing the application pending receipt of the Coastal Management Unit's consistency approval or objection. If the federal agency determines that an application will not be approved on some basis other than consistency certification, it shall immediately notify the applicant and the Coastal Management Unit. Pre-application consultation between state and federal officials as well as applicants proposing to conduct an activity for which a consistency review is or may be required is encouraged. Such pre-application conferences will avoid duplicative or unnecessary procedures and will delineate the information requirements for an adequate consistency review. 11-246 State Concurrence with a Consistency Certification - Notice and Process -- At the earliest practicable time, and generally within 60 days atr-receipt of the information required for a consistency review, the Coastal Management Unit shall notify the federal agency and the applicant whether it concurs or objects to the consistency certification. Concurrence shall be in writing. Concurrence by the Coastal Management Unit shall be automatically and conclusively presumed if the Coastal Management Unit does not respond within six months of the commencement of the review. If the Coastal Unit has not issued a decision within 90 calendar days of the commencement of the review, the Coastal Unit shall notify the federal agency and the applicant of the status of the matter and the basis for further delay. State Objections to Federal Assistance Application -- In the event the Coastal Management Unit objects on grounds- 6__inconsistency with the Coastal Management Pla~ to the applicant's proposal, it shall accompany its objections with reasons and supporting information, The Coastal Management Unit objections will: (a) describe how the pro- posed project is inconsistent with specific elements of the management pro- gram; (b) indicate alternative measures, if any, which if adopted would make the proposal consistent; and (c) if the objection is on the basis of in- y ~~sufficient information, indicate the nature of the information and necessity of having such information to determine the consistency of the activity. The Coastal Management Unit will notify the applicant and the federal agency directly of the objections to the application as well as the applicant's right to appeal to the Secretary of Commerce. The Coastal Management Unit will agree to a request of the applicant for informal meetings to resolve the consistency disagreement anytime within thirty days of the applicant agency's receiving notice of the objection from the Coastal Management Unit. Mediation -- See Mediation section contained under Direct Federal Activities. Monitoring Activities for Continuing Consistency -- In the event that the Coastal Management Unit determines that an activity previously determined to be consistent with the Coastal Management Plan is now being conducted in such a manner or is having such effects on the coastal area as to be incon- sistent with such program, it shall request that the federal granting agency take appropriate remedial action. The Coastal Management Unit request shall include necessary supporting information and a proposal for recommended remedial action. 11-247 PART VIII: SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREAS A. GEOGRAPHIC AREAS OF PARTICULAR CONCERN Introduction The federal Coastal Zone Management Act recognizes the fact that certain areas in the coastal zone embody unique coastal-related values and that these areas require special management attention. The CZMA requires each state to include in its management program "an inventory and designation of areas of particular concern within the coastal zone." While no specific management techniques are required for these areas, sufficient authority must exist and other techniques must be used to protect these 'resources and to encourage uses for which they are best suited. Connecticut's approach to the designation and subsequent manage- ment of areas of particular concern takes into account both the Physical nature of the coast and the state's approach to coastal management. The diverse and segmented nature of the Connecticut coast has nec- essitated a comprehensive resource management approach to resolving conflicts among the many uses 4n the coastal area. Under the coastal management program, virtually all uses and resources will be managed at either the federal, state, or local level of government. Therefore the primary objective in designating areas of particular concern is to focus puiblic attention on certain significant areas that are distin- quished by unique coastal-related values including their economic and ecological importance. An initial inventory of potential areas of particular concern was completed by the coastal regional planning agencies during the early stages of program development. This inventory was supplemented with information gathered by the Coastal Area Management Program staff on critical habitats, other important natural areas, and areas of economic significance. Four options for designating areas of particular concern are discussed in CAM Planning Report No. 20 (1977). Subsequently, three basic criteria were developed to select areas of particular concern. 11-248 These criteria are as follows: (1) The resource should be of regional or statewide significance based on its ecological and/or economic values. (2) The resource should be coastal related--i.e. the area should be directly related to natural and man-made coastal systems and processes. Thus APC's should be unique in or to the coastal area including the riverine and estuarine components of the coastal area. (3) Adequate legal authorities (state or federal) must be available to promote desired uses of the area. Based on these criteria, the following four generic categories of areas of particular concern are designated as part of Connecticut's coastal management program: ~ 1) Tidal Wetlands 2) 'Shellfish Concentration Areas (3) Federal Navigation Channels (4) Dredoed Materials Disposal Sites All of these areas have been mapped at a statewide scale of 1:125,000. In addition, tidal wetlands, shellfish areas, and federal navigation channels have been mapped at the quadrangle base scale of 1:24,000 (see Coastal Maps, Appendix D of Draft EIS). It should be noted that tidal wetlands, federal navigation channels, and the restoration and enhancement of the state's shellfisheries and shellfish industry have been designated as in the national interest (Connecticut Coastal Management Act, sec. 3(14), Appendix B). Descriotion of APC's 1. Tidal Wetlands ne~hRationale--Tidal wetlands are areas which border on or lie be- nahtidal waters, such as banks, bogs, salt marshes, s'wamps, meadows, flats or other lowlands subject to tidal action and which have surfaces at or below an elevation of one foot above local extreme high water. This includes regulated and unregulated areas as defined by Section 22a- 29 of the Connecticut General Statutes. As areas of high biological productivity, tidal wetlands are an important link in the food chain of the Long Island Sound and adjacent shorelands. They provide habitat, nesting, feeding and refuge areas for shorebirds, nursery grounds for larval and juvenile forms of many marine species, and a significant habitat for shellfish. Tidal wetlands provide economic and social benefits to the people of Connecticut. In addition to providing recreational and educational 11-249 opportunities, they act as water purifiers by trapping sediments, reducing turbidity, and restricting the passage of toxic sub- stances and heavy metals. Healthy wetland vegetation can help to buffer storms and wave energy and stabilize shoreline erosion. It is estimated that fifty percent of the tidal wetlands that were present in Connecticut in 1914 have been destroyed as a result of man's activities. These activities include filling, dredging, tidal gates, ditching, chemical dumping, and waste disposal. Appro- ximately 15,500 acres of tidal wetlands remain but few exist in their natural state. The Connecticut General Assembly recognized the need to protect the state's remaining tidal wetlands by passing the Tidal Wetlands Act in 1969. Management Approach--The state Tidal Wetlands Act (C.G.S. Section 22a- 28 to 35) gives the Department of Environmental Protection (Water Resources Unit) significant authority for regulating activities in designated tidal wetlands. A permit must be obtained from DEP for virtually any alteration of a wetland including draining, excavation or removal of material, dumping of any material, filling, erection of structures and placement of any obstructions. DEP permit decisions must consider the effect of the proposed activity on the public health and w~]fare, marine fisheries, shellfisheries, wildlife, flood and storm protection, and the public policy set forth in Sections 22a-28 to 35 of the Connecticut General Statutes. In addition, a permit may be denied if DEP is in the process of acquiring an area of tidal wetlands. Areas exist that fit the statutory definition of tidal wetlands but have yet to be designated as such. These areas may be regulated under the Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Act (CSG Sections 22a-36 to 45) until such time as they are mapped and designated as state- regulated tidal wetlands. Other authorities which are relevant to the regulation of tidal wetlands are the state Water Pollution Control Law (C.G.S. 25-54a to 25-54g, 25-26, 25-27, and 25-54aa), state and local shellfish statutes (CGS 26-187 to 294), Coastal Structures Law (CGS 25-7b to 7f) and Coastal Dredging Law CGS. 25-10 to 25-18). A complete discussion of relevant state authorities appears in Part V of this document. All permits issued by DEP for activities in tidal wetlands must be consistent with applicable resource protection and use policies contained in the Coastal Management Act (Appendix B)> The Act contains four specific policies to guide the regulation of tidal wetlands. The policies are as follows: To preserve tidal wetlands and to prevent the despoilation and destruction thereof in order to maintain their vital natural functions. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(b)(2)(E)) 11-250 To encourage the rehabilitation and restoration of degraded tidal wetlands. (Source: P.A. 79-535, 'sec. 2(b)(2)(E)) Where feasible and environmentally acceptable, to encourage the creation of wetlands for the purposes of shellfish and fin- fish management, habitat creation and dredge spoil disposal. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(b)(2)(E)). To disallow new dredging in tidal wetlands except where no feasible alternative exists and adverse impacts to coastal resources are minimal. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(C)(1)(E) Other coastal management policies concerning tidal wetlands are contained in Section II, Part IV of this document. Use Prioriti2s--High Priorities are preservation, restoration, conservation, low intensity agriculture, research, and passive recreation. Low priorities are dredging of new channels, filling, structures, dredged material disposal, waste disposal, chemical dumping, grading, excavation, bulkheads and revetments, dikes and tidalgates, culverts, transportation corridors (air) and point discharge structures (wastewater). For fur- ther clarification of use priorities, see USE GUIDELINES for tidal wet- lands in Part IV of this document. 2. Shellfish Concentration Areas Rationale--As defined by the Connecticut Coastal Management Act, (sec. 3(7)(N)) shellfish concentration areas are "actual ,potential or historic areas in coastal waters, in which one or more species of shellfish aggregate". These species include oysters (Crassostrea virginica), hardshell clams or quahogs (Mercenaria mercenaria), soft shell clams (Mya arenaria), and bay scallops (Aequipecten irradian). Shellfish concentration areas include both natural shellfish habitats and areas that have been cultivated for aquaculture purposes. At present there are approximately 46,000 acres of state-owned shellfish beds and 18,000 acres under local jurisdiction. Shellfish concentration areas are important for economic, recrea- tional, and environmental reasons. Although oystering represents the largest commercial shellfish industry in the state, scallops, quahogs and softshell clams are of substantial value to sportfishermen and small commercial establishments. 11-251 Connecticut's oyster industry used to be among the world's largest. In 1898, it is estimated that 15 million bushels were harvested by an industry that employed thousands of people. By 1970, oyster production was reduced to about 16,000 bushels and presently only 5 companies and 200 employees are involved in the commercial oyster industry. Although water pollution and overfishing appear to have been the primary reasons for this decline, natural factors such as storms, the presence of predators (starfish and oyster drills) and changes in salinity, temp- erature, oxygen and food supply, sediment grain size and stability, sediment organic matter, current velocity and circulation may have had a significant impact on oyster populations. Over the last few years, improved water quality and advanced aquaculture techniques have led to increased oyster production in Connecti cut. Particularly significant have been techniques developed to increase the harvest of marketable oysters including the prepara- tion of seed beds, spawning in hatcheries, the spreading of quicklime to control starfish and oyster drill populations, off- bottom cultivation, intensive cultivation of off-shore (artificial) beds, and the removal of juvenile and adult oysters from polluted nearshore waters to cleaner sites in deep water where they can purify themselves in approximately two weeks. It should be noted that oysters harvested in Connecticut are primarily, seed oysters (smaller than the size of 3�- inch market oysters) which are usually transplanted to "growth beds" in bays around Long Island, New York. Aside from oysters, quahogs (hard-shell clams) are the only other species of commercial significance in Connecticut. Because this fish- ery relies on natural sets and recruitment (bed cultivation is rarely practiced), quahog harvests are unpredictable. For example, over the last thirty years, hard clam landings have ranged from less than 10,000 pounds to over 400,000 pounds annually. The quahog fishery is limited as an offshore resource to a few large companies with most individual activity occurring in nearshore and intertidal areas within town jur- isdiction. Many productive nearshore areas are closed due to water quality problems and harvesting is generally restricted (by state statutes and local regulations) to inefficient hand-power methods. The soft-shell clam and scallop fisheries represent potential commercial fisheries although both species have declined to the point of commercial insignificance. Some recreational harvesting of both occurs and 1977 saw a commercial harvest of about 2,000 bushels of scallops which appear to be recolonizinci in nearshore areas of Long Island Sound, especially in southeastern Connecticut. Mussels and conch are also considered to have potential commercial value. Although the number of shellfish grown and harvested in Connecticut's waters has increased in recent years, attempts to manage and protect the shellfish resource and to develop the recreational and commercial shellfish industries have been limited by a lack of specific information in several critical areas. Preliminary analysis has identified 5 sig- nificant issues that will require further study (summarized from the Connecticut Shellfish Management Report prepared by CAM, see "Manage- meent Approach" below): 11-252 1. Land-based facilities. The decreasing availability of dock space and waterfront plants and the prohibitive costs of available space are limitations to individual or small group operations. 2. Authorities, jurisdictions, programs and studies. Coordination of efforts at all levels of government is needed to reduce discrepancies and overlap between jurisdictions and to establish an equitable distribution of costs and benefits between public and private interests. 3. Economic data. More information on the extent of recreational shellfishing and the supply and demand aspects of the commer- cial shellfish industry is needed. 4. Water quality. Approximately 30% of Connecticut's shellfish beds have been closed by the Department of Health Services due to high pollution levels. Several~types of water pol- lution can affect shellfish marketability or viability as a resource including sewage discharge, industrial and chemical pollution, heavy metals, radionuclides, the disposal of contaminated dredged material, and increased turbidity and siltation (resulting from storms, dredging and dredged mat- erial disposal among other sources). S. Scientific data. More information is needed on the biological and ecological aspects of shellfish including the following; a) the exact location and extent of natural shellfish beds, b) the effects of various pollutants on the shellfish and MaaeetApoch--Th Department of Agriculture, Aquaculture Division leases and regulates state-owned shellfish beds pursuant to C.G.S. 26-187 to 26-237. DOA activities include administration of leased, franchised, and natural beds, supervising volunteer shellfish policemen, leasing grounds, collecting taxes, issuing licenses, and designating spawning beds. Certain general restrictions on harvesting methods, catch limits and seasons are contained in the State Shellfish Statutes mentioned above. Pursuant to section 20 of the Coastal Management Act, all Depart- ment of Agriculture actions significantly affecting the environment must be consistent with the policies contained in the Act. In addition, major state agency plans, including plans developed for the purposes of shellfish management, must by July 1, 1981, be revised to insure consistency with the coastal policies. local agencies lease and regulate shellfish beds under town jur- isdiction (C.G.S. 26-238 to 26-294). Shellfishing authorities may be assumed by the local shellfish commission or by the chief legislative body. These authorities include the issuance of licenses, the setting of quantity and size limits, and participation in research efforts. 11-253 The Department of Health Services regulates health aspects of shellfisheries (C.G.S. 19-52 to 19-59). Other relevant authorities include the Tidal Wetlands Act (C.G.S. 22a-28 to 22a-35), Coastal Structures Law (C.G.S. 25-7b to 25-7f), Coastal Dredging Law (C.G.S. 25-10 to 25-18), and the Water Pollution Control Law (C.G.S. 25-54a to 25-54g, 25-26, 25-27, and 25-54aa). A complete description of relevant authorities appears in Part V of this document. The Coastal Management Act contains a specific policy concerning the state's fisheries including shellfish concentration areas: To manage the state's fisheries in order to promote the economic benefits of commercial and recreational fishing, enhance recreational fishing opportunities, optimize the yield of all species, prevent the depletion or extinction of indigenous species, maintain and-enhance the productivity of natural estuarine resources and preserve healthy fish- eries resources for future generations. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(c)(1)(I) Other coastal policies relevant to shellfish concentration areas as well as use guidelines and implementation methods can be found in Part IV of this document. Of particular significance to shellfish concentration areas are the policies dealing with national interest facilities and resources and water dependent uses. The "restoration and enhancement of Connecticut's shellfish in- dustry" has been included in the list of facilities and resources which are in the national interest (Connecticut Coastal Management Act, sec.3(14), Appendix B). Thus all plans and evaluations of activities affecting the shellfish industry will include consideration of the national interest policy contained in the Connecticut Coastal Management Act(sec. 2(a)(10), Appendix B). In addition, recreational and commercial fishing facilities, shell- fish processing plants and waterfront dock and port facilities are in- cluded in the definition of "water dependent uses" (Coastal Management Act, sec. 3(16), Appendix B) and thus must be given hiqh prior4ty for siting in shorefront areas by state, federal and local agencies (see "Water Dependent Uses" in Part IV of this document). The Coastal Area Management Unit of DEP has completed a draft of a preliminary study of the state's shellfisheries entitled the "Con- necticut Shellfish Management Report". The study includes the following: 1) a description of the shellfish resource, 2) the status and potential for growth of commercial and recreational shellfisheries, and 3) problems associated with the growth of both of these industries including water quality and governmental coordination. In addition, the "Connecticut Shellfish Management Report" identifies several issues that require further study. These issues are summarized above (under "Rationale"). II-254 A technical economic study concerning oysters has been prepared for the Coastal Area Management Program by the Department of Agri- cultural Economics and Rural Sociology at the University of Connecticut. Entitled "Estimation of Demand for Long Island Sound Oysters", this report presents information on production, price trends and other market demand aspects of the oyster industry in Connecticut. Other studies on various aspects of the state's shellfisheries will be undertaken by CAM in order to resolve the issues raised by the above mentioned studies. Use Priorities--Aquaculture, restoration, recreation and conservation, are high priorities. Dredging of new channels, filling, disposal of dredged material, point discharge structures, traffic corridors (air), and tidal gates are low priorities. Limited development in developed shorefront areas may be consistent with the coastal policies under certain circumstances. For further clarification of use priorities, see USE GUIDELINES for shellfish concentration areas in Part IV of this document. 3. Federal Navigation Channels and- Dredged Material Disposal Areas Rationale--Connecticut's recreational and commercial ports and harbors have an extensive history of navigational dredging improve - ments. Materials derived from upland erosion, industrial and municipal discharges and, in large part, from Long Island Sound itself are continually transported to and deposited in the state's estua- rine harbors. Unless they are dredged, harbors become unsafe for boating and marine transportation. Subsequently, the need to maintain navigational improvements and to dispose of materials removed from various channels and basins have been long-standing. In addition to numerous private anchorages, channels, and basins, more than 30 federal navigation projects have been instituted in the state's coastal waters since 1892; While the 'number of miles of privately dredged and maintained'areas is not known, more than 240 applications to conduct dredging in Connecticut's waters were reviewed and approved by state and federal regulators between 1968 and 1977. At present there are approximately 100 miles of federally main- tained channels in the coastal area and additional improvements are being contemplated for Bridgeport Harbor, Black Rock Harbor, New Haven Harbor, Clinton Harbor, the Patchogue River and New London Harbor. These federal navigation channels are constructed, maintained, and periodically improved by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers as authorized by Congress under various Rivers and Harbors Acts. Unquestionably both private and federal navigation works play a major role in influencing the recreational and economic vitality of ports and harbors throughout the coast. Nearly 100,000 recreational vessels are registered in Connecticut and use Long Island Sound. Twenty- three thousand tons of general and bulk cargo worth more than $111,000,000 (1976 figure) are handled in the state's ports each year including large amounts of petroleum. 11-255 In order to maintain and enhance the navigability of the state's ports and harbors, and e~nhance their recreational and commercial viability, it is estimated that a projected 58.9 million cubic yards of material will be removed from rivers and harbors in the state between 1985 and 2035 (Estimate by U.S. Army Corps of Engin- eers, New England Division). Approximately 38.8 million cubic yards of the total will be removed from federal navigation channels while the remainder will be generated by private dredging. To facilitate removal of these projected volumes from Con- necticut's waters some provision must be made for disposal of dredged material. Historically, the most common methods of dispos- ing of dredged niaterial were open water dumping in Long Island Sound or land disposal. Until 1970 dredged material was often deposited in tidal wetlands in an effort to "reclaim" them. At that time tidal wetlands were afforded the protection of state regulation under Sections 22a-28 through 22a-35 of the Connecticut General Statutes (CGS). In the past, nineteen aquatic disposal areas were utilized in the Sound. Today only three are still in use. They have been designated as areas of particular concern by CAM and include the following: (1) A two square mile area in the middle of the Sound south of New Haven; (2) A one mile square area in the middle of the Sound south of the mouth of the Connecticut River; and (3) A one mile square area south of the mouth of the Thames River. These sites and the issue of dredged material disposal in Long Island Sound, Block Island Sound and adjacent open waters are currently being re-evaluated as part of a Corps-sponsored Composite Environmental Impact Statement. The impact statement will serve to form part of the basis of a more complete long range dredging management plan. As a result of the re-evaluation it is possible that the locations of the regional disposal sites may change. It is also possible that, in the future, alternative regional disposal sites other than open water may be im- plemented. For these reasons regional dredged material disposal sites located within the Cbnnecticut Coastal Area have been designated as generic APC'S. Problems--The problems of dredging and dredged material disposal are focused primarily on disposal operations. Whether the dredged material is to be disposed of on land or in open water, key concerns4 are related to its physical and chemical composition and subsequent impacts on water quality and indigenous biota during and after dis-I Materials dredged from Connecticut's harbors are variable in their content of contaminants. Harbors in the western end of the ' Sound are relatively more contaminated than those in the eastern and 11-256I central areas. Contaminant levels are also variable within individual harbors. Materials removed from inner more upstream areas exhibit higher levels of pollutants than outer more seaward areas. The occurrence of pollutants in harbor sediments is the result of a number of factors. Water circulation patterns, industriali- zation and intense urbanization of harbor areas are important con- tributors. The historic use of Long Island Sound as a receiver of untreated waste waters has also had a significant effect on the chem- ical and biological quality of harbor sediments. As a consequence of these land uses and discharges a number of potentially toxic con- stitutents may be found in dredged material. Depending on its origin, sediment may contain significant amounts of volatile solids, oil and grease, heavy metals (mercury, lead, zinc, etc.), pathogenic viruses, bacteria and pesticides. The environmental impacts of disposing of sediments containing any or all of the noted pollutants are less readily quantified than the presence of the contaminants themselves. Much research has been conducted in an attempt to identify actual disposal impacts. However, many concerns surrounding the disposal operations and their short and long term effects have yet to be resolved. Degradation of water quality through release of pollutants to the water column; initiation of increased turbidity; elimination of benthic (bottom dwelling) hab- itat and bio-accumulation of heavy metals, pesticides and organic wastes are central issues involved in aquatic disposal.* In order to address these concerns on a case-by-case basis and to coordinate the regulatory evaluation of potential impacts at state and federal levels the processing of environmental permits has taken on an added degree of complexity. As a result, the accomplishment of dredging and disposal in a timely fashion has become exceedingly difficult. Obviously some mechanism must be evolved to address cogent impact related issues of dredging and dredged material disposal and to bal- ance environmental impacts with the economic and recreational needs of the state's coastal communities. Equally apparent is the need to efficiently coordinate various state and federal regulatory evaluations of dredging and disposal alternatives. Alternatives--In addition to open water disposal of dredqed material several other alternatives are potentially useful. They include: contained disposal in shore, nearshore and offshore areas; beach nourishment; habitat development; and contained disposal in upland areas. Although each of these alternatives may prove feasible in selected instances none has yet been developed to the extent necessary to accommodate large volumes of materials from the maintenance of federal navigation projects. * Gordon, Robert B., Rhoades, Donald C. and Karl K. Turekian, 1972 "The Environmental Consequences of Dredge Spoil Disposal in Central Long Island Sound: I. The New Haven Spoil Ground and New Haven Harbors." II-257 Preliminary investigation of contained disposal of dredged material in shoreline, nuarshore, and offshore areas indicates that this alter- native will be extremely expensive. *WContainerized disposal facilities may cost as much as $150,000,000 to design and construct. The use of dredged material for beach nourishment is feasible and is currently accomplished when materials with suitable characteristics for beach placement occur in navigation channels. These types of material , however, constitute only a small portion of the material removed from port and harbor areas. Habitat development utilizing dredged material has also been investigated but attempts to put this technique into actual practice in the state have encountered logistical problems and public opposition. The character of most dredged material and its ability to support marine and terrestrial flora and fauna are still highly problematic. Upland disposal is also unlikely to present a real solution to the problem of dredged material disposal in the immediate future. The intense use and development of lands in the coastal area coupled with development limitations imposed by the mechanical properties of the material and its possible effects on ground and surface waters make this alternative unattractive at present. In recognition of the limitations currently associated with alter- natives to open water disposal and of the unresolved concerns surrounding its use the following management approach has been designed to address navigation channels and regional disposal sites as areas of particular concern. Management Approach--Techniques for managing federal navigation channels and dredged material disposal areas include the use of existing federal and state authorities, federal consistency provisions of the Coastal Zone Management Act; application of the guidelines and policies adopted as part of the "'Interim Plan for the Disposal of Dredged Material from Long Island Sound," CAM Coastal Policies, and programs for coordinating the management efforts of all levels of government. Authorities--The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is authorized by various federal Rivers and Harbors Acts to construct, repair and main- tain specific navigation projects. General authority for these projects was granted in the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 which authorizes funds for "construction, completion, repair and preservation" of projects. The Corps' activities in these areas consist primarily of the channels but may also include the development of safe entrance channels, major access channels, and maneuvering and turning basins. Individual projects are authorized by Congress when a municipality demonstrates the need for improved navigation facilities. Both state and federal authorities are involved in the selection process for dredged material disposal sites in Long Island Sound. Corps of Engineers disposal permits are issued pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. The Clean Water Act (Sec. 404b) also requires the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to develop guidelines for the designation of disposal areas within the Corps' 404 permit program. **U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1979, "Reconnaissance Report: Dredged Material Containment in Long Island Sound". 11-258 The Act prohibits the designation and use of any disposal site when its use would result in unacceptable adverse' impacts on municipal water supplies, shellfish beds and fishery areas (including spawning and breeding areas), wildlife, or recreation areas. Pursuant to Section 307(c) of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act, Corps of Engineers and EPA activities related to dredging and dredged spoil disposal must be consistent with the objectives and coastal policies of the Connecticut Coastal Management Act'. The state currently regulates dredging and disposal of dredged material in its coastal and tidal waters under Sections 25-10 through 25-18 of the Connecticut General Statutes (CGS) and Section 401 of the federal Clean Water Act (as amended) respectively. Under these author- ities a state permit is required for the original dredging of channels or basins and state water quality certification is necessary for the disposal of dredged material from original or maintenance dredging act- ivities (including Corps of Engineers' activities). In addition, if dredging or disposal involves a tidal wetland as defined by CGS Section 22a-29 state authorization is required under CGS Sections 22a-28 through 22a-35. Applications for dredging and disposal under these authorities are evaluated with respect to water quality, erosion, shell and fin- fish habitat, preservation of wildlife habitat, navigational improve- ments, protection of uplands, flooding and the preservation of tidal wetlands. A complete discussion of existing state authorities relevant to dredging and dredged material disposal is contained in Part V of this document. CAM Policies -- Coastal policies have been developed to guide and coordinate the activities of state regulators and to evaluate the consistency of federal actions involving navigational dredging and disposal. They appear in Coastal Policies and Use Guidelines (Part IV of this document). The relevant policies are as follows: -To encourage, through the state permitting program for dredging activities, the maintenance and enhancement of existing federally maintained navigation channels, basins and anchorages and to discourage the dredging of new federally maintained navigation channels, basins and anchorages. (Sources: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(c)(1)(C)) -To reduce the need for future dredging by requiring that new or expanded navigation channels, basins, and anchorages take advantage of existing water depths, circulation and siltation patterns and the best available technologies for reducing controllable sedimentation. (Sources: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(c)(1)(D)) 11-259 - To initiate in cooperation with the federal government a long range planning program for the maintenance and enhance- ment of federally maintained navigation facilities in order to effectively and efficiently plan and provide for environ- mentally sound dredging and disposal of dredged materials. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(c)(1)(C)) - To disallow new dredging in tidal wetlands except where no feasible alternative exists and adverse impacts to coastal resources are minimal. (Source: P.A. 79-535, sec. 2(c)(1)(E)) Long Range Dredged Material Management -- Following preliminary in- vestigations into the problem of dredged material disposal, Connecticut and New York in conjunction with relevant federal agencies initiated development of an interim disposal plan for the Long Island Sound. The Plan was adopted by the New England River Basins Commission (NERBC) on June 20, 1980. Presently, management efforts at all levels are being coordinated through NERBC's Dredging Management Committee. The Dredging Management Committee consists of members from the New England Division of the Corps of Engineers, the National Marine Fisheries Service, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the EPA, the New York Department of Environmental Conservation, the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection, the U.S. Third District Coast Guard, the Interstate Sanitation Commission, and NERBC. The objectives of the efforts are: 1. To provide a basis for the assessment of alternatives to open water disposal. 2. To confirm the specific roles and responsibilities of federal, state, and local agencies for various aspects of dredged material disposal and develop the planning basis for public agencies to carry out their responsibilities. 3. To develop substantive data that will improve the dredged material disposal regulation process. The eventual goal of this cooperative endeavor is an effective, environ- mentally sound management plan for dredged material disposal in the Long Island Sound region. A Proposal to Study was designed to supplement exist- ing work in those areas required to complete an overall dredging management plan and submitted to the Water Resources Council by FY 82 funding. A proposal has been initiated for the establishment of an intra-agency task force within the Department of Environmental Protection. This task force, if it is created, would provide a mechanism for collecting all existing information pertaining to dredging and dredged material disposal and for evaluating the viability of specific probjects and techniques. The task force could also be used to establish Department policy regarding dredging and disposal and to assist the federal government in the timely and effective completion of individual navigation projects. 11-260 Use Priorities--For federal navigation channels, shipping and recreational boating are high priorities. Structures and other re- creation are low priorities. Regarding disposal sites, dredged material disposal is high priority. Uses that would alter disposal sites by disturbing sediments or preventing access are low priorities. 11-261 B. AREAS FOR PRESERVATION OR RESTORATION The Connecticut General Statutes provide both broad criteria and a mechanism by which areas for preservation and restoration may be identi- fied and designated. The Commissioner of the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) has authority to acquire and manage areas that are in need of preservation or restoration. Specifically, the Commissioner "May acquire in the name of the state..-lands (and) waters... .for any purpose or activity relating to or compatible with the functions of the department of environmental protection" (CGS Section 22a-25). This provision allows the Commissioner to designate sites within the coastal area for the purpose of preserving or restoring them for their conservation, recreational, eco- logical, or aesthetic values. Under this authority, the Commissioner is specifically authorized to acquire and manage property for the following purposes: to establish natural area preserves (CGS Sections 23-5a to 23-5i), to make available public open space for recreation (Sections 23-8 to 23-9), to establish state forests (Sections 23-20 to 23-22), to improve, protect, and conserve tidal wetlands (Section 26-17a), and to establish fish and game refuges (Sections 26-99 to 26-107). In general, state-owned property under the jurisdiction of DEP must be managed in a way that is compatible with the uses for which the property was acquired. For example, the legislative act establishing the Bluff Point Coastal Reserve (P.A. 75-45) states the following: "Section 4. Said coastal reserve shall be maintained and administerd by the Department of Environmental Pro- tection and no improvement shall be undertaken which does not contribute to the preservation of the natural, scenic, historical or ecological values of the reserve .... The Connecticut Natural Area Preserves System (CGS Sections 23-5a to 23-5i) provides a mechanism for identifying and designating areas for preservation and restoration. A preliminary inventory of the state's natural area has been completed. Final designation of a natural area is made by the Governor after the site has been approved by the Commissioner of DEP. Areas may be designated if they contain, or have the potential to support, "Plant or animal life or geologic features worthy of pre- servation in their natural condition" (CGS Section 23-5b). The Natural Area Preserves System also includes a process for recommending the ac- quisition of specific lands which are suitable for natural area preserves. In addition, an intra-agency taskforce designated by the Governor and including the state's Historical Preservation Officer may recommend the acquisition of cultural, historical and prehistorical archaeological sites for inclusion under these programs. II-262 PART IX; NATIONAL INTEREST AND REGIONAL BENEFIT A. NATIONAL INTEREST Consideration of the National Interest Recognizing the distinct and irreplaceable nature of the nation's coast, the United States Congress, in enacting the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 found that, "...there is a national interest in the effective management, beneficial use, protection, and development of the coastal zone." Further, Section 306(c)(8) of the Coastal Zone Management Act specifically requires that state management programs provide for adequate consideration of the national interest involved in the siting of facilities (including energy facilities ... ) necessary to meet requirements which are other than local in nature. This requirement is intended to assure that national concerns over facility siting are considered in the development and implementation of the coastal zone management programs. In order to meet the requirements of subsection 306(c)(8) of the Coastal Zone Management Act and the 15 CFR Section 923.52 regulations, states must: 1) Describe which national interests in the planning for and siting of facilities were considered during program development. 2) Indicate the sources relied upon for a description of the national interest in the planning for and siting of the facilities. 3) Indicate how and where the consideration of the national interests is reflected in the substance of the management program. 4) Describe the process for continued consideration o f the national interests in the planning for and siting of facilities during program implementation, including a clear detailed description of administrative procedures and decision points where such interests will be considered. By itself, section 306(c)(8) of the federal CZM Act requires that adequate consideration of the national Thterest be given only with respect to major facilities which are necessary to meet requirements which are other than local in nature. However, as noted in a comment in the federal regulations,15-CFR 923.52(c)(4), there is also a national interest in the use, management and protection of important state and national cultural and natural resource areas. These also merit adequate consideration in the state management program. In response to the requirements and the comment noted above, the Coastal Area Management program staff undertook a thorough review of: 1) the state's coastal resources and uses, 2) federal laws and regulations, 3) policy state- ments and executive orders of the President of the United States, 4) state laws and regulations, 5) planning reports and studies prepared by federal, state and regional agencies, and 6) comments from public hearings and meetings on the CAM program. In addition, during the summer of 1978 questionnaires were sent to federal and state agencies, industries, trade groups, environmental II-263 groups, and other interest groups on the regional, state and national level. The questionnaire provided an opportunity for them to identify facilities and resources they perceived to be in the national interest. Based on the staff review of the sources cited above and response to the questionnaires, the CAM Advisory Board identified and recommended a list of facilities and resources in the national interest which resolved conflicts among conflicting opinions in light of both the federal requirements and the specific needs and characteristics of Connecticut's coastal area. The CAM Advisory Board's recommended identification of national interest facilities and resources was adopted by the General Assembly as section 3(14) of Public Act 79-535: "'Facilities and resources which are in the national interest' means: (A) adequate protection of tidal wetlands and related estuarine resources; (B) restoration and enhancement of Con- necticut's shellfish industry; (C) restoration, preservation and enhancement of the state's recreational and commercial fisheries, including anadromous species;,(0) water pollution control measures and facilities consistent with the requirements of the federal Clean Water Act, as amended; (E) air pollution control measures and facilities consistent with the require- ments of the federal Clean Air Act, as amended; (F) continued operations of existing federally funded dredged and maintained navigation channels and basins; (G) energy facilities serving statewide and interstate markets, including electric generating facilities and facilities for storage, receiving or processing petroleum products and other fuels; (H) improvements to the existing interstate rail, highway and waterborne transportation system; (1) provision of adequate state or federally owned marine related recreational facilities, including natural areas and wildlife sanctuaries and (J) essential maintenance and improvement of existing water dependent military, navigational, resource management and research facilities;" A full discussion of the justification for including each of these facilities or resources as in the national interest is included below (see P. 11-266). Continuing Consideration of National Interest Facilities and Resources in Implementation of the Coastal Management Program Consideration of the national interest in the planning for, siting, manag- ing and regulating of facilities and resources listed in Section 3(14) of CCMA is implemented through a number of methods. It should be noted that the majority of these facilities and resources are under state control or regulatory jurisdiction. Hence, the responsibility for considering the national interest lies primarily with the state. The primary mechanism for insuring that facilities and resources in the national interest receive adequate consideration is the policy in section 2(a)(10) of Public Act 79-535 which establishes the following as applicable to state and local agencies: II-264 "To insure that the state and the coastal municipalities provide adequate planning for facilities and resources which are in the national interest as defined in section 3 of this act and to insure that any restrictions or exclusions of such facilities or uses are reasonable. Reasonable grounds for the restriction or exclusion of a facility or use in the national interest shall include a finding that such a facility or use: (A) may reasonably be sited outside the coastal boundary; (B) fails to meet any applicable federal and state environmental, health or safety standard or (C) unreasonably restricts physical or visual access to coastal waters. This policy does not exempt any nonfederal facility in use from any applicable state or local regulatory or permit program nor does it exempt any federal facility or use from the federal consistency requirements of section 307 of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act." This policy requires that adequate consideration be given to facilities and resources in the national interest under state and local authorities. More- over, it requires that adequate consideration be given to the siting or regulation of these facilities and resources by requiring that any restric- tion or exclusion of them be based on reasonable grounds concerning their environmental impacts, water dependency, and restriction of coastal access. In addition to this general policy which applies to all facilities and resources in the national interest, the CCMA contains specific policies for each of the facilities and resources, individually. These specific policies are listed in Part IV , Coastal Policies and Use Guidelines. References to the specific policies for each national interest facility and resource are provided in the discussions below (see p. 11-266). The CCMA established a number of requirements concerning implementation of state authorities which affect national interest facilities and resources. Section 20(a) requires that all state agency plans be revised to insure con- sistency with both the general national interest policy in section 2(a)(10) * ~~and the specific policies pertaining to each facility and resource. Section 20(b) requires that all state agency actions significantly affecting the * ~~environment, including programs, projects, acquisitions and grants be consistent with both the general national interest policy and specific use and resource policies. Similarly, section 21 requires that issuance of environmental permits by DEP be consistent with both the general national interest policy and the specific policies. The CCMA also requires that implementation of local coastal management legal authorities consider national interest facilities and resources. Section 12(b) requires that in reviewing coastal site plans, local agency decisions must be consistent with both the general national interest policy and specific policies for individual uses and resources. Sections 8(a) and 9(a) require that voluntarily adopted municipal coastal programs must be consistent with both the general national interest policy and specific policies. 11-265 It should also be noted that tidal wetlands, shellfish concentration areas and federal navigation channels are also designated as "areas of particular concern" (see Part VIII) and that energy facilities and state recreation areas are also subject to special planning processes (see Part X ) Justification of Connecticut's Selection of National Interest Facilities and Resources As previously noted, the basis on which facilities and resources were identified as in the national interest were extensive. Included in the exhaustive identification processes were numerous consultations with the public and state and federal agencies. In the context of the following justifications for Connecticut's determi ned national interest facilities and resources, relevant agencies are listed among the sources consulted. This listing also includes relevant state and regional agencies, public interest groups, state and federal laws and policy statements and relevant studies. (A complete listing of public participation and federal consultations is located in Appendix E of the Draft EIS. Table 10 of this appendix specifically documents federal consultation including the recipients of and respondents to a National Interest and Federal Consistency Questionnaire.) The objectives of citing the determined facilities and resources as in the national interest are summaries of specific policies contained in Part IV. References to the specific policies are provided. 1. Adequate Protection of Tidal Wetlands and Related Estuarine Resources. In determining the national interest in tidal wetlands and related estuarine resources the following sources were consulted: -Endangered Species Act of 1972I - Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act - Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972 - Executive Order No. 11990 (protection of wetlands) - Migratory Bird Act - Executive Order No. 11988 (flood plain management) - Fishery Conservation and Management Act - Connecticut Tidal Wetlands Act of 1969 - Connecticut Forest and Park Association, Inc. The major objectives of the national interest in tidal wetlands and related estuarine resources are: - To preserve tidal wetlands and prevent the despoliation and destruction thereof in order to maintain their vital natural functions; - to encourage the rehabilitation and restoration of degraded tidal wetlands; - to encourage the creation of wetlands (see p. 11-70) 11-266 Protection of the state's tidal wetlands is in the national interest particularly in view of the substantial amount of destruction this resource has faced. It is estimated that only about one-half of the tidal wetlands Connecticut once had are in existence at the moment (about 15,000 acres). Wetlands play a significant role in the coastal ecosystem as they remove impurities caused by pollution, serve as a buffer from storms, and provide spawning, nursery and feeding areas for fish and wildlife. Two-thirds of the fish and shellfish population spend part of their life cycle in tidal wetlands. Connecticut recognized the value of tidal wetlands in 1969 with the passage of P.A. 69-695. This Act declared as public policy the preservation of the wetlands and prevention of their despoliation and destruction (C.G.S. Sec. 22a-28). Many responses to CAM's national interest questionnaire identified tidal wetlands protection and enhancement as in the national interest for Connecticut. The State Council on Environmental Quality cited the importance of tidal wetlands as a habitat for endangered species. Other organizations citing tidal wetlands were the Connecticut Forest and Park Association and the Nature Conservancy. Connecticut's Coastal Area Management Program recognized the national interest in tidal wetlands and the urgent need to protect this biologically valuable resource from further destruction. (In addition to "National Interest" policies and "Tidal Wetland" policies, see PartVIII, "Areas of Particular Concern.") 2. Restoration and Enhancement of Connecticut's Shellfish Industrv. In determining the national interest in Connecticut's shellfish industry, the following sources were consulted: - CZMA (as amended) Section 16 - National Marine Fisheries Service - Connecticut Department of Agriculture/Aquaculture Division - Fish and Wildlife Service - Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act - Connecticut Forest and Park Association, Inc. - Valley Regional Planning Agency. The major objective of the national interest in Connecticut's shell- fish industry is: To manage the state's shellfisheries in order to promote the economic benefits of commercial and recreational shellfishing, enhance recreational shellfishing opportunities, optimize the yield of all species, prevent the depletion or extinction of indigenous species, maintain and enhance the productivity of natural estuarine resources and preserve healthy shellfisheries resources for future generations. (see p. 11-114) 11-267 Historically, Connecticut has been a leader in the shellfish industry. Many may recall the heyday of oystering in the state, particularly in the southwestern portion. Today however, commercial oystering is limited to a few active companies. In the 1800's, oystering was carried out by a fleet of over 450 vessels but by 1970 only 30 vessels were still active in Long Island Sound. Connecticut leases only about one-quarter of the shellfish beds it once leased. A major and disturbing reason for the decline of this industry was and continues to be severe pollution of the coastal waters. Numerous shellfish beds have felt the adverse im- pact of pollution, being closed for health reasons. The national interest in this resource was cited by a number of agencies and interest groups. For example, the State Department of Agriculture, Aquaculture Division, stated that the shellfish industry and the lands required to produce the necessary seed to insure a con- tinuing ability to grow oysters and clams is in the national interest. The National Marine Fisheries Service of the U.S. Department of Commerce identified the protection of living aquatic resources and their habitat in coastal waters, marshes and shoal areas as in the nationl interest. Because of these factors, CAM views the restoration and enhancement of Connecticut's shellfish industry as a critical and national interest concern. (In addition to "National Interest" policies and "Shellfish Concentration Areas" policies, see Part VIII, Areas of Particular Concern.) 3. Restoration, Preservation and Enhancement of the State's Recreational and Commercial Fisheries, Including Anadromous Species. In determining the national interest in the state's recreational and commercial fisheries, the following sources were consulted: - A Compilation of Federal Laws Relating to Conservation and Develop- ment of Our Nation's Fish and Wildlife.Resources, Environmental Quality, and Oceanography. The Library of Congress, Congressional Research Service. January, 1975; - A Marine Fisheries Program for the Nation. U.S. Department of Commerce. July, 1976. - Fishery Conservation and Management Act - Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act - Army Corps of Engineers - National Marine Fisheries Service - Regional Planning Agencies - Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection, Fisheries Unit - Connecticut Fisheries and Game Statutes (C.G.S. Chapter 490) The major objective of the national interest in the state's com- mercial and recreational fisheries is: -To manage the state's fisheries in order to promote the economic benefits of commercial and recreational fishing, enhance recreation- al fishing opportunities, optimize the yield of all species, pre- vent the depletion or extinction of indigenous species, maintain and enhance the productivity of natural estuarine resources and preserve healthy fisheries resources for future generations. (see p. 11-156) Closely related to the national interest identified in the previous section is the interest in recreational and commercial fisheries. Com- mercial fishing, as with shellfishing activities, was once extensive in Long Island Sound but has steadily declined in recent years, particularly since the 1950's. The factors contributing to the decline of the shell- fish industry, primarily the pollution problems, are also responsible for the gradual decrease in recreational and commercial fishing opportunities. The federal government, through the National Marine Fisheries Service of the Department of Commerce, regards protection of fisheries as in the national interest. Their response stated, "permitted uses of the coastal area should be designed to be compatible with, and potentially protective of, existing fishery resources and associated habitats such as wetlands, nursery and spawning grounds, commercial and recreational fishery grounds. In this sense, the national interest should be equivalent to Connecticut's for the purpose of ensuring environmental integrity." 4. Water Pollution Control Measures and Facilities Consistent with the Requirements of the Federal Clean Water Act, As Amended. In determining the national interest in water pollution control the following sources were consulted: - Clean Water Act of 1977 - U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - Connecticut State Plan for Conservation and Development - State Water Quality Management Plans - New England Interstate Water Pollution Control Commission - Connecticut Water Pollution Control Statutes - C.G.S. Chapters 474 and 474a. The major objective of the national interest in water pollution control is: -To preserve and enhance the quality of state waters for present and prospective future use for public water supplies, propagation of fish and aquatic life and wildlife, recreational purposes and agricultural, industrial and other legitimate uses. (see p. 11-121) II-269 An examination of the shellfish and fish industry in Connecticut has served to highlight the detrimental impact of water pollution. This form of pollution is no longer solely a concern for the "ecology- conscious" but has become a problem posing serious problems for all living things. The federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 recognized the importance of effective water pollution control measures in each state's development of a coastal management program. The Act states in Section 307(f), "notwithstanding any other provision of this title, nothing in this title shall in any way affect any requirement (1) established by the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended... .or (2) established by the Federal Government or by any state or local government pursuant to such Acts." This section further stipulates that "such requirements shall be incorporated in any program developed pursuant to this title and shall be the water pollution control requirements applicable to such programs." As the Connecticut coast continues to face development pressures, particularly in the area of energy facilities and production, meeting strict clean water standards becomes all the more crucial for Connecticut and the broader national interest. 5. Air Pollution Control Measures and Facilities Consistent with the Requirements of the Federal Clean Air Act, As Amended. In determining the national interest in air pollution control the following sources were consulted: - Federal Clean Air Act - U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - State Implementation Plan for Air Quality - Connecticut State Plan for Conservation and Development - Gonnecticut Air Pollution Statutes - C.G.S. Chapter 360. The major objective of the national interest in air pollution control is: - To protect and enhance the quality of the state' s air resources so as to promote the public health and welfare and the productive capacity of its population. (see p. 11-135) The inclusion of air pollution control measures as a national interest concern again stems from federal legislation -- the Clean Air Act. The federal Coastal Zone Management Act states in Section 307(f), "notwithstanding any other provision of this title, nothing in this title shall in any way affect any requirement (1) establish- ing the... .Clean Air Act, as amended, or (2) established by the Federal Government or by any state or local government pursuant to such Act. Such requirements shall be incorporated in any program developed pur- suant to this title and shall be the..-air pollution control requirements applicable to such program.'' 11-270 The national interest in air quality control also impacts on the successful protection and enhancement of other natural resources in the coastal area, some of which are themselves considered to be of national importance. Air quality standards also impact upon facility development as to whether the facilities can be site~d outside the coastal boundary and whether the facility meets federal and state environmental, health or safety standards. 6. Continued Operation of Existing Federally Funded, Dredged and Maintained Navigation Channels and Basins. In determining the national interest in federally funded, dredged and maintained navigation channels and basins the following sources were consulted: - Sections 401 and 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act, as amended - U.S. Army Corps of Engineers - U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - New England River Basins Commission, "Interim Plan for the Disposal of Dredged Material in Long Island Sound." The major objectives of the national interest in these facilities are: -To initiate a long-range planning program for the continued main- tenance and enhancement of federally maintained navigation facilities in order to effectively and efficiently plan and provide for environ- mentally sound dredging and disposal of dredged materials; -To encourage the maintenance and enhancement of existing federally maintained navigation channels, basins and anchorages; -To discourage the dredging of new federally maintained navigation channels, basins and anchorages; -To reduce the need for future dredging. (see pp.II-149 and 11-190) The Connecticut Coastal Area Management Program recognizes the particular national interest in the dredging and maintenance of existing navigation channels and basins given the substantial military presence of the state, the importance of the Connecticut coast as a center for commercial activity, and the frequent use of recreational harbors. The southeastern portion of the coast is the site of military facilities and industries involved in the construction of naval vessels. These facilities, a subject of the national interest themselves (see #10 - "Essential Military, Navigational, Resource Management and Research Facilities") depend on well maintained navigation channels. Numerous harbors in the state are presently attempting to cope with the growing demand for recreational boating. The success of such facilities depends on adequately dredged and maintained navigation channels and basins. 11-271 The New Haven Terminal responded to the national interest question- naire by emphasizing the importance of maintaining navigational channels for commercial activity. It felt that New Haven Harbor is in the national interest because it can handle deep craft ocean-going vessels. Addition- ally, this interested party stated "because of the limited amount of land adjacent to deep water, marine terminal facilities should be given priority in New Haven Harbor." The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is mandated by Congress to maintain navigability of Connecticut's harbors, ports and channels. The disposal of dredged materials has raised serious questions to both short and long term effects on the environment. Prior to the Tidal Wetlands Statute (C.G.S. Section 22a-28), Connecticut disposed of some dredged material by dumping it on tidal wetlands for reclamation purposes. This statute wisely stopped this practice. Presently, Connecticut generally disposes of it on land or in the Sound, but suitable land disposal sites are be- coming scarce. The impacts from this activity are not fully known although the short term impacts appear to be minimal according to a state Department of Environmental Protection report ("Dredging and Dredged Spoil Disposal in Long Island Sound: A Discussion Paper", 1975). This report also stated "if deep water access in industrial ports, recreational harbors, slips and marinas in Connecticut is to be maintained, a 'solution' to the dredged materials disposal problem must be found." (In addition to "National Interest" policies and "Dredging and Navigation" policies, see PartVIII, "Areas of Particular Concern.") 7. Energy Facilities Serving Statewide and Interstate Markets, Including Electric Generating Facilities and Facilities for the Storage, Receiving or Processing of Petroleum Products and Other Fuels. In determining the national interest in energy facilities the follow- ing sources were consulted: - The Department of Energy - The National Energy Plan - The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission - The Federal Energy Administration - The Bureau of Land Management - The Maritime Administration - The U.S. Geological Survey - The Department of Transportation - The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers - The Energy Research and Development Administration - The Nuclear Regulatory Commission - Long Island Sound Study - Brookhaven National Laboratory - Power Facility Evaluation Council - Public Utilities Control Authority - Sierra Club - Connecticut Chapter - Northeast Utilities - Connecticut Petroleum Council 11-272 - Connecticut Office of Policy and Management - Southeastern Connecticut Regional Planning Agency - Connecticut Public Utility Environmental Standards Act, C.G.S. Chapter 277a. The major objectives of the national interest in energy facilities are: -To balance the need for adequate and reliable public utility services with the need to protect the environment and ecology of the state and to minimize damage to historic, scenic and recreational values; -To provide environmental quality standards for facilities furnishing public utility services; -To encourage research to develop new and improved energy technologies. (see p. 11-163) Most of the controversy surrounding the interpretation of the national interest requirements has arisen in regard to energy facility siting. Some organizations have read Section 306(c)(8) as requiring an affirmative commitment to the siting of energy facilities in the coastal area. Energy interests stress the language of Section 306(c)(8), which specifically mentions "energy facilities" in making their argu- ment. However, a recent federal court decision* involving a challenge to the California coastal plan said that an affirmative commitment to energy facility siting is not required under the federal Coastal Zone Management Act. The national interest in energy is not to be placed above other national interests. It is not to be denied however, that energy facility siting is an important component of the national interest and must receive adequate consideration in a coastal management program. A significant number of'questionnaire responses identified energy facilities as in the national interest. For example, the U.S. Depart- ment of Energy stressed the need to make energy self-sufficiency a basic policy objective. The agency provided an extensive list of those types of facilities it considered to be in the national interest including facilities utilized for importing or exporting energy resources in inter- national commerce, facilities for the transportation or marketing of energy resources in interstate commerce, facilities receiving special federal financial support for research and development, and facilities owned and/or operated by the federal government. The Department of Energy also stated that it "does not conclude that energy projects must be permitted in the coastal zone simply be- F ~~~cause they are of larger than local nature." A management program must have a "balancing of the national interest in energy self-suf- ficiency with state and local interests involving social, environmental and economic factors." *American Petroleum Institute v. Knecht, 456F Suppl 889 (C.D. Cal), August 31, 1978. 11-273 The federal Energy Regulatory Commission believes that a balancing of conflicts between energy facilities and other interests is not for federal agencies to determine. Rather, it is a problem "the state must decide on the basis of all national interest considerations along its coast." The Power Facility Evaluation Council in Connecticut sited the national significance of nuclear facilities in Connecticut. They also made the observation that while generating facilities aren't necessarily coastal dependent, they require large quantities of water for cooling. The Connecticut Coastal Area Management Program considers energy facilities serving statewide and interstate markets to be in the national interest, but an interest on a par with other resources and facilities of national importance. 8. Improvements to the Existing Interstate Rail, Highway and Waterborne Transportation System. In determining the national interest in these transportation facilities the following sources were consulted: - Department of Transportation Act - Railway Safety Act of 1970 - U.S. Coast Guard - Department of Transportation: Federal Highway Administration, Federal Aviation Administration - Maritime Administration - Brookhaven National Laboratory - U.S. Army Corps of Engineers - Connecticut Master Transportation Plan - New Haven Terminal - Connecticut Construction Industries, Inc. - Sierra Club, Connecticut Chapter - Northeast Utilities - Connecticut Office of Policy and Management - Connecticut Department of Transportation - Long Island Sound Study The major objectives of the national interest in these facilities are: - To make use of rehabilitation, upgrading and improvement of existing transportation facilities as the primary means of meeting transportation needs in the coastal area; - To enhance or not unreasonably impair the visual quality of the shoreline, coastal access and recreational opportunities in designing, constructing and improving coastal highways and shoreline rail corri- dors. (see p. 11-170) Connecticut's CAM Program considers the upgrading of existing ele- ments of the transportation system to be in the national interest. Much 11-274 of the state's interstate highway network and rail corridor are located in or near the coastal boundary. Long Island Sound and Connecticut ports are the scene of extensive commercial activity. The transporta- tion system has a direct relationship to future development in the coastal boundary as well as to health, access, and environmental quality concerns. This national interest choice generated responses from a variety of agencies and interest groups. The Greater Bridgeport Regional Planning Agency listed the Bridgeport Harbor and associated dock and terminal facilities, rail lines and interstate routes as in the national interest. The Connecticut Chapter of the Sierra Club cited transportation, particularly the restoration of rails along existing rights of way on the shore as in the national interest. However, it did feel that construc- tion of new interstate highways in the coastal area was not in the national interest. Northeast Utilities was concerned about the adequacy of transportation facilities for fuels needed for generating facilities and transportation by water. Brookhaven National Laboratory considered transportation a high priority interest but also acknowledged that it must be balanced against the national interests in environmental legislation. 9. Provision for Adequate State or Federally Owned Marine Related Re- creational Facilities, Including Natural Areas and Wildlife Sanctuaries. In determining the national interest in these facilities the follow- ing sources were consulted: - Federal Coastal Zone Management Act, as amended, Section 305(b)(7) - The Nation-Wide Outdoor Recreation Plan -Land and Water Conservation Fund Act -Historic Preservation Act -Connecticut State Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan -Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service -National Parks Service -Fish and Wildlife Service -CAM Planning Report No. 25, "Coastal Recreation" -Connecticut Marine Trades Association, Inc. -Connecticut Chapter - Sierra Club -Connecticut Forest and Park Association, Inc. -Regional Planning Agencies -Long Island Sound Study The major objectives of the national interest in these facilities are: -To encourage public access to the waters of Long Island Sound by expansion, development and effective utilization of state owned recreational facilities within the coastal area that are consistent with sound resource conservation procedures and constitutionally pro- tected rights of private property owners; II-275 -To make effective use of state owned coastal recreational facilities in order to expand coastal recreational opportunities including the development or redevelopment of existing state owned facilities where feasible. (see p. 11-158) Long Island Souri is an important natural and recreational resource serving an interstate area. Recreational uses include boating, bathing, fishing, nature study, etc. The number of recreational boats in use continues to decrease as does the construction of marinas and clubs. Additionally, the Sound is "home" to an avid contingent of recreational fishermen. The Connecticut Marine Trades Association noted the growing demand for marine related recreational facilities. "Coastal dependent facilities that make use possible are in the national interest.'' The Connecticut Chapter of the Sierra Club cited the national interest in the preservation of coastal land for recreational use. The Nature Conservancy found critical natural and wildlife areas to be in the national interest as did the Connecticut Forest and Park Association. Finally, the U.S. Department of the Interior, Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service (formerly the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation) is "concerned about adequate access to the coast for recreational purposes for minorities, the handicapped and the underpriveleged." The Connecticut Coastal Area Management Program considers state and federal recreational facilities, including natural areas and wildlife sanctuaries, to be in the national interest. Because of the high cost of waterfront property and because of the unique physiographic nature of Connecticut's coast due to the generally low wave energy in Long Island Sound, it is believed that only state or federal agencies will have the financial resources to acquire property parcels of sufficient size to warrant "national interest" designation. State and federally owned re- creation areas are also discussed within "Shorefront Access and Protection Planning" (see Part X). 10. Essential Maintenance and Improvement of Existing Water-Dependent Military, Navigational, Resource Management and Research Facilities. In determining the national interest in these facilities the follow- ing sources were consulted: - Department of the Navy - Department of Defense - Department of the Air Force -.Brookhaven National Laboratory - Connecticut Office of Policy and Management - Regional Planning Agencies - Department of Environmental Protection, Natural Resources Center - Federal Coastal Zone Management Act - Sea Grant - U.S. Coast Guard II-276 t The major objectives of the national interest in these facilities are: - To ensure adequate facilities for the national defense; - To ensure adequate facilities for the safe and efficient operation of vessels; -To ensure adequate facilities to improve the data base upon which coastal land and water use decisions are made. (see p. 11-191, 11-149) The active presence of the military in Connecticut coastal area was outlined in number 6 concerning dredging and navigation channels. Ob- viously, military facilities are in the national interest because of their defense and security importance. Many commentators on the question- naire listed military facilities as in the national interest. For example, the United States Department of the Navy, the major military unit on the coast stated, "all Navy facilities are in the national interest as each contributes to the national defense.... .Conflicts, if any, will be minimal since the Navy will be consistent with all coastal zone considerations to the maximum extent practicable and the requirements of NEPA will be met." Siting criteria considered by the Navy are nondegradation of the environ- ment and attention to air and water pollution. Another division of the armed forces, the U.S. Department of the Air Force, commented that national defense installations are in the national interest. It is Air Force policy to "plan, initiate and carry out environ- mental programs and actions in a manner to avoid adverse effects on the quality of the human environment, insofar as practicable, and with appro- priate consideration of assigned missions and of economic and technical factors." Brookhaven National Laboratory, National Center for Analysis of Energy Systems (Long Island), regards military facilities as a high priority but recognized the balancing process that must take place with national interests identified in environmental legislation. I ~~~~State and regional agencies citing the national interest in military facilities were the Office of Policy and Management, the Valley Regional Planning Authority and the Southeastern Connecticut Regional Planning Agency. Electric Boat, a major defense contractor in the southeastern coastal area, must be viewed in conjunction with the national interest in military facilities. Navigational facilities, including lighthouses, buoys and other aids, have also been declared as in the national interest. The basis of this designation lies in the use of these facilities for transportation. This F ~~~use, in turn, serves the national interest in terms of interstate commerce, national defense, and recreation. This designation is consistent with the designation of federal navigation channels as discussed above. 11-277 In Section 302(a) of the CZMA the Congress found that "There is a national interest in the effective management, beneficial use, protection, and development of the coastal zone." Connecticut's CAM Program has de- clared research and resource management facilities to be in the national interest in order to actively implement and effectuate the coastal policies of both the federal Coastal Zone Management Act and the Connecticut Coastal Management Act. B. USES OF REGIONAL BENEFIT Introduction The federal CZM Act recognizes the importance of insuring that local agencies do not arbitrarily restrict or exclude land and water uses with benefits of importance to an entire region. Section 306(e)(2) of the federal CZM Act states: "Prior to granting approval, the Secretary shall also find that the program provides... .for a method of assuring that local land and water use regulations within the coastal zone do not unreasonably restrict or exclude land and water uses of regional benefit." In order to meet the above requirements the federal regulations at 15 CFR 923.12 require the state to: 1)"Identify what constitutes uses of regional benefit" and 2)"Identify and utilize any one or a combination of methods, consistent with the control techniques employed by the state, to assure local land and water use regulations do not unreasonably restrict or exclude uses of regional benefit."I Identification of Uses of Regional Benefit The federal regulations recommend that the state consider two criteria in identifying uses of regional benefit. First, that the use have an effect on more than one local unit of government. And second, that the use have a direct and significant impact on coastal waters. The federal regulations note that uses in which there is a national interest will ordinarily meet 11-278 these two criteria. Thus, the regulations offer the state the option of defining uses of regional benefit as those uses in which there is a national interest. Connecticut has chosen this option. The state has identified uses of regional benefit as those facilities and resources in which there is a national interest as defined in section 3(14) of the CCMA: "'Facilities and resources which are in the national interest' means: (A) adequate protection of tidal wetlands and related estuarine resources; (B) re- storation and enhancement of Connecticut's shellfish industry; (C) restoration, preservation and enhance- ment of the state's recreational and commercial fisher- ies, including anadromous species; (D) water pollution control measures and facilities consistent with the re- I ~ ~~~~quirements of the federal clean water act, as amended; (E) air pollution control measures and facilities con- sistent with the requirements of the federal clean air act, amended; (F) continued operations of existing I ~ ~~~~federally funded dredged and maintained navigation channels and basins; (G) energy facilities serving statewide and interstate markets, including electric generating facilities and facilities for storage, receiving or processing petroleum'products and other fuels; (H) improvements to the existing interstate rail, highway and waterborne transportation system; (I) provision of adequate state or federally owned marine related recreational facilities, including natural areas and wildlife sanctuaries and (J) essential maintenance and improvement of existing water dependent military, navigational, resource management and research facili- ties;" All of these uses have a direct and significant impact on coastal waters (see subpart A of Part V ). An individual discussion of the greater than local significance of each of these facilities and resources may be found in subpart A, p. II- 263. Methods for Assuring That Local Regulations Do Not Unreasonably Restrict or Exclude Uses of Regional Benefit A comment in the federal regulations, 15 CFR 923.12, describes several I ~ ~methods which individually or in combination may be utilized by the state to assure that local land and water use regulations do not unreasonably restrict or exclude uses of regional benefit, including: 1. "Statewide siting laws that supercede local regulations when necessary." 11-279 2. "Definition of what constitutes unreasonable restrictions or exclusions and identification of standing and an ad- ministrative or judicial mechanism to assure that such unreasonable restrictions or exclusions do not occur." Connecticut has adopted a combination of these two approaches to assure that local regulations do not unreasonably restrict or exclude uses and resources of regional benefit. First, most of the facilities and resources defined in section 3(14) of the CCMA are either not subject to local regulation or are also subject to state regulatory jurisdiction which overrides local regulation. Second, the national interest policy in section 2(a)(1O) of the CCMA requires that local decisions insure that restrictions or exclusions of the few regional benefit facilities subject to local regulation are reasonable. Moreover, section 17 of the CCMA requires DEP to review such local decisions, while section 19 authorizes DEP to seek judicial enforcement of the national interest policy where a local agency has failed to comply with it. As noted above, most of the facilities and resources identified in section 3(14) of the CCMA are either under direct state or federal develop- ment control and, therefore, not subject to local regulation or they are under state regulatory control which preempts or overrides local regulations. Hence, restrictions or exclusions of uses of regional benefit by local regula- tions will seldom be an issue. The control techniques applicable to each of the facilities or resources of regional benefit may be found by referring to the discussion of uses subject to the management program in Part V. The only facilities and resources of regional benefit not subje'ct to the exclusive control of federal or state agencies or to state agency regulatory authority overriding local regulations are the following: 1. Energy facilities (excluding the siting of power generating facilities and electric and gas transmission lines, which are subject to the state Power Facilities Evaluation Council which may override local regulations under C.G.S. Chapter 277a). 2. Land-based improvements to the existing waterborne transportation system. 3. Land-based maintenance and improvements of existing water-dependent resource management and research facilities. Local regulation of these three categories of uses is subject to the coastal site plan review requirements of sections 11 through 15 of the CCMA. Section 12 of the CCMA requires that the decisions of local agencies be con- sistent with all applicable policies in the Act, including the national interest and regional benefit policy in section 2(a)(1O). As noted in subpart A, above, this requires that regulatory agencies insure that re- strictions or exclusions of regional benefit facilities (i.e., national interest facilities) are reasonable. The policy also provides three criteria 11-280 for de~termining the reasonableness of restrictions or exclusions: "Reasonable grounds for the restriction or exclusion of a facility or use in the national interest shall include a finding that such a facility or use: (A) may be reason- ably sited outside the coastal boundary; (B) fails to meet any applicable federal and state environmental health or safety standards or (C) unreasonably restricts physical or visual access to coastal waters.'' Under the state's judicial case law on land and water use regulation a re- striction or exclusion of facilities and resources of regional benefit will be deemed unreasonable and overturned by the courts if it is arbitrary; capricious; confiscatory; clearly erroneous in view of the reliable, probative and substantial evidence; or, in violation of constitutional or statutory provisions. Section 17 of the CCMA requires DEP to monitor and evaluate the activities of municipalities to assure compliance with the requirements of the Act including the requirements of the national interest and regional benefit policy in section 2(a)(10). Moreover, section 19 of the CCMA authorizes DEP to appeal the decision of local agencies to the courts in order to ensure com- pliance with the policy. In addition, a project applicant and any other ag- grieved party may seek court enforcement of the policy. II-281 PART X SPECIAL PLANNING ELEMENTS A. ENERGY FACILITIES Introduction Historically, coastal sites have been in great demand for the location of energy facilities. The availability of water for cool- ing, waste disposal, and fuel transportation as well as the proxi- mity of major population centers for distribution have all contri- buted to this high demand. Recently developed technologies such as nuclear power and Outer Continental Shelf oil and gas extraction often require coastal locations for economic and practical reasons. In the future, the development of energy sources such as ocean thermal energy conversion, wave energy, tidal energy, and salinity gradients will maintain the importance of the coastal area as a source of energy. A large number of major energy facilities are located in Connecticut's coastal area including three nuclear power units (two are in operation), several oil fueled power plants, and facilities for the receiving, sto- rage, and distribution of oil and natural gas. Due to the physical nature of the coast and the generally high level of development, few large open tracts of land remain that would be suitable for large scale industrial development such as oil refineries and gas processing plants. It is likely that the shortage of adequate suitable land will also limit the siting of new power plants in the coastal area. Environmental concerns and supply and demand considerations will further limit the siting of facilities that may have substantial negative impacts on coastal re- sources. This is particularly true with respect to the demand for energy. Total end use net energy demand in Connecticut is expected to increase by only 0.2% per year until 1997 including a 3.3% annual growth rate in electricity demand.* The purpose of this part is to describe an energy facility planning process for Connecticut's coastal area. It includes an identification of energy facilities which are likely to locate in, or which may significantly affect, the coastal area. It also in- cludes a description of state and federal authorities that have planning responsibilities and jurisdiction over facility siting, CAM policies regarding facility siting and the national interest, and an identification of how affected public and private parties may be in- volved in the planning process. References to either sections of this document and to previous CAM publications are included where appropriate in order to prevent unnecessary duplication of material. *Connecticut Energy Advisory Board, Connecticut's Energy Outlook: 1978-1997, annual report to the Governor and General Assembly, 1978. 11-282 1) Identification of energy facilities which are likely to locate in or significantly affect the coastal area (923.13(1)) Power Plants and Related Facilities According to the Connecticut Energy Advisory Board's 1978 report, electricity consumption in Connecticut is expected to show an annual growth rate of 3.3% over the next 20 years. This translates into a 29% total increase or 1.4% annual growth rate in electric power plant fuel consumption. Barring unexpected improvements in energy conserva- tion or other factors influencing the demand for electricity, there will be a need for increased generating capacity in the future. At the present time nuclear power provides 52% of the state's electricity. This is expected to increase to 56% by the end of the 20 year projection period (1978-1997), with the addition of Connecti- cut's fourth nuclear power unit , Millstone III. It is expected that nuclear power will provide most of the electricity needed to satisfy increased demand in the forseeable future. In fact, Connecticut pre- sently exports electricity to other states in the region, and will continue to do so. This excess supply situation has been an important factor in the delayed completion of Millstone III. Originally scheduled to be completed in the early 1980's, the nuclear power plant is now expected to come on line around 1986. Therefore, no other generating plants are being planned. However, the unpredict- able oil supply situation, which has led to the formulation of a national policy to reduce dependence on petroleum, could create a need for more facilities using various energy sources. While Connecticut has made a firm commitment to nuclear power in the last decade, a heavy dependence on petroleum has also been main- tained. Approximately 46% of the state's electricity is generated by oil fueled plants, while the use of coal for electric generation has decreased from 82% in 1965 to 0.1% in 1970, due to air quality concerns as well as lower residual oil prices in the 1960's and the growing commitment to nuclear power. The state's other significant source of energy for electricity, hydro power, accounted for 1.6% of all generat- ing capacity in 1976. CAM supports the statutory goal of balancing the "need for adequate and reliable" electric power generation at the lowest reasonable cost to consumers "with the need to protect the environment and ecology of the state and to minimize damage to scenic, historic, and recreation- al values..." (CGS Section 16-50g). Impacts that should be consider- ed in the siting of power plants include preemption of natural areas, impacts on existing land use, alteration of land runoff patterns, effects on water quality from thermal and chemical discharge, esthetics, and air quality impacts including the emission of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide and particulates, fogging and noise. In addition, radiation emission is an environmental impact associated with nuclear power plants. While none of these impacts are confined to power plants located in the coastal area, the vulnerability and scarcity of certain valuable coastal resources,as well as the heavy population concentra- tion along the Connecticut coast, require a close examination of environmental impacts during the power plant siting process. 11-283 Recent energy-related events have led to a renewed interest in the utilization of this country's vast coal reserves. Uncertainties regarding petroleum supplies and the rising costs of petroleum products may increase the pressure on Connecticut's utilities to convert some generating plants to coal. However the future of coal in Connecticut is not clear. Because of air quality problems and the lack of adequate transportation facilities, it is unlikely that new coal-fueled power plants will be built in the coastal area. According to the State Implementation Plan for Air Quality, the entire state is classified as non-attainment (exceeds federal standards) for particulates, a major pollutant emitted by coal plants. Sulfur oxides and nitrogen oxides present problems in certain areas of the state. In addition, the cost of converting oil-fueled plants to coal would appear to be prohibitive especially since many of the existing plants were only con- verted from coal to oil in the last decade. New technologies, however, may increase the attractiveness of coal use in the future. The conversion of coal to oil and natural gas, fluidized bed combustion, solvent refining, and pollution control devices such as scrubbers and electrostatic pre- cipitators may be utilized. In fact, one Connecticut plant is subject to a prohibition order (Bridgeport); two others are anticipated in the near future (Norwalk and Devon). The lack of adequate transportation facilities is another factor limit- ing the use of coal in Connecticut. Rail and harbor facilities for storing and handling coal are limited and there are few existing harbor-rail link- ages. Coal transportation in Connecticut is the subject of a study being conducted by the state Departments of Commerce and Transportation and the Office of Policy and Management. This project is funded in part by the Coastal Energy Impact Program and is being conducted with advice from the Coastal Area Management Adivsory Board, regional planning agencies, munici- palities, and operators of port and rail facilities. The study has the following objectives: - examine alternative means and routes for coal shipments; - document technical barriers; -identify handling and storage facilities as needed and harbor land use implications; - assess environmental consequences; - consider factors affecting unloading time, such as space for storing and moving rail cars. The projected completion date for this study is September, 1980. While it is possible (but not probable) that additional nuclear and oil- fueled power plants will be needed in Connecticut to satisfy state and regional electricity demands, these facilities are not necessarily de- pendent on location in, or proximity to, marine or tidal waters. Because of their potential for having significant adverse impacts on coastal resources, inland locations are preferred. According to Section 2(a)(10) of the Coastal Management Act ( Sect-ion II, Appendix B), nuclear and oil-fueled power plants, as facilities of national importance, may be excluded from the area within the coastal boundary if it is demonstrated that they may reasonably be sited outside the coastal boundary, fail to meet any applicable environmental standards, or unreasonably restrict access to coastal waters. In addition, existing petroleum supplies and the recently raised economic, environmental, and safety concerns associated with nuclear power may affect the demand for these facilities. 11-284 It is clear that other sources of energy will become more important in the future. There are presently 18 hydro power facilities located at dams throughout the state and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has identi- fied several existing dams that are adaptable to hydro-electric generating equipment. The Legislature recently appropriated funds for the Office of Policy and Management to formulate a state policy concerning the restoration and use of hydroelectric energy sources in Connecticut. The report is to be developed in consultation with D.E.P., the Power Facility Evaluation Council, and the Division of Public Utility Control. A 3,000 watt wind turbine in Winsted now provides electricity to the first Connecticut public building powered by the wind. Bridgeport and Waterford, both coastal municipalities, have been cited as areas that have average wind speeds sufficiently high to support a typical wind energy conversion system. Other potential future energy sources for electric generation include co- generation, biomass conversion, photovoltaics, and solid waste. Additional electrical transmission lines, switchyards, and substations may be needed in the future to facilitate the efficient distribution of electricity to Connecticut and other New England states. While economic and environmental considerations should be considered in the siting of these facilities, their operation should not generally result in significant and wide-ranging impacts. The siting of electric generating facilities, electrical transmission lines (except those having a design capacity of less than 69 kilowatts), switchyards, and substations is regulated by the Power Facility Evaluation Council (PFEC) pursuant to the Public Utility Environmental Standards Act (CGS Sections 16-50g to 16-50y). A "certificate of environmental com- patibility and public need" must be obtained from the PFEC in order to construct any of the above mentioned facilities. These certificates pre- empt all other state and municipal permit authority. PFEC authorities are discussed in detail below. Fuel Storage, Handling and Receiving Facilities These facilities include all land-based petroleum storage, handling, and receiving facilities that are not discussed under OCS facilities (see below). Generally, they are located in the state's major harbors in order to facilitate the handling and distribution of fuel shipped by barges and small and medium sized tankers. Petroleum products first enter the state almost entirely by water, predominately at the three deepest ports on the coast - New London, New Haven, and Bridgeport. Shipments from Mid- Atlantic refineries as well as from Caribbean and Gulf Coast refineries generally arrive in tankers of 38,000 deadweight tons. Subsequently, petroleum products are distributed throughout the state via barge, coastal tanker, truck, pipeline, and rail. Petroleum demand projections contained in the 1978 Report of the Connecticut Energy Advisory Board and a background study prepared for CAM by the Department of Planning and Energy Policy (DPEP, now the Office of Policy and Management) do not indicate a future need for significant additional petroleum storage capacity in the state. The DPEP Study presents a detailed analysis of the fossil fuel receiving, storage and distribution system in Connecticut. II-285 Because of the frequent occurrence of oil spills at marine terminals and fuel storage facilities, the Coastal Management Act disallows the siting of tank farms and other fuel storage facilities within the coastal boundary which can reasonably be located inland and requires any new storage tanks that must be located within the coastal boundary to be sited near existing tanks or in urban industrial areas and to be adequate- ly protected against floods and spills in accordance with applicableI standards (Section 2(b)(1)(E) of the Coastal Management Act, Sec. 11, Aopendix B). Receiving and handling facilities are, for the most part, coastal dependent and should be sited and constructed with the goal of minimizing the risk of oil spills which may damage valuable coastal resources. TheI provision of effective containment and cleanup facilities for accidental spills is another CAM policy related to marine terminals (Sec. 2(c)(1)(A) of the Coastal Management Act, section II, Appendix B). Fuel storage, handling and receiving facilities are licensed for operation by the Hazardous Material Management Unit of the Department of Environmental Protection under the Oil and Chemical Handling Law (CGS 25-54bb to 25-54kk as amended by P.A. 79-605). In addition, regulations have been promulgated for terminal licenses (RCSA 25-54cc-I through 25-54cc-7). The siting of these facilities is under the jurisdiction of local zoning autho- rities subject to the requirements of state regulatory programs (e.g. tidal wetlands, structures, and dredging) and to coastal policies. Because of the need to protect the natural resources of the lower Connecticut River from spills resulting from the high volume of petroleum shipments on the river, the General Assembly, in 1979, passed a law which requires D.E.P. to provide for the effective containment and removal of 'oil spills within the lower Connecticut River and adjacent shoreline area. This includes the provision of necessary equipment and trained personnel (Public Act 79-319). Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Exploration, Development and Production Facilities The National Energy Plan recognizes that oil and gas under federal ownership on the Outer Continental Shelf are important national assets and should be "developed in an orderly manner consistent with national energy and environmental policies." As part of New England, Connecticut can expect to experience some portion of the impacts stimulated by the activity on the Georges Bank; activity that will modify both the offshore and onshore environments. However, the onshore impacts are of less immediate concern to Connecticut than to other New England states for several reasons. In general ,five factors will affect the siting of major OCS-related facilities in Connecticut's coastal area: (1) The large dist ance separating Connecticut from the major areas of OCS activity and the availability of suitable alternative sites closer to major lease areas; (2) The lack of suitable vacant tracts of land; 11-286 (3) Insufficient deepwater access to the coast; (4) Transshipment problems posed by the narrow entrance F ~~~~~~~channels to Long Island Sound and the existing large volumes of commercial and recreational boat traffic. (The waters of eastern Long Island Sound, New Haven Harbor and Bridgeport Harbor have been designated as "confined and congested" by the U.S. Coast Guard in proposed I ~ ~~~~~~regulations dealing with navigation safety (33CFR part 164 April 16, 1979).) (5) Air pollution and other environmental quality concerns. These factors indicate that, even if significant finds of offshore oil and gas are made in the North Atlantic, it is highly unlikely that any major OCS-related facilities will be located in Connecticut. However, the state may experience some indirect economic impacts of OCS development because of increased production in industries, such as tool and machinery manufacturing, that support OCS development activities (see CAM Planning Report No0 . 22). OCS-related facilities include oil refineries, gas processing plants, deepwater ports, pipelines and shore terminals, and support facilities (platform fabrication yards, pipecoating yards, etc.). Potential en- vironmental, social and economic impacts resulting from OCS development have been analyzed in CAM Planning Report No.22 (1976) as well as in the Report of the Governor's Fact-Finding Task Force on Oil Reflineries(1975). The important considerations regarding each type of OCS-related facility are summarized below. Oil Refineries -- An oil refinery is used to convert crude oil (a raw material) into a variety of useable products such as gasoline, home heating oil, industrial oil and asphalt. The three major steps in the refining process are separation, transformation of molecules, and the removal of impurities. A refinery located in New England could be built with a design capacity of anywhere from 250 to 450 thousand barrels per day, thereby constituting a heavy industrial use. The need for an oil refinery in New England will depend on significant finds of offshore oil in the North Atlantic and Mid-Atlantic regions. Con- sidering recent exploration results, there is a low probability of finding a supply of crude oil substantial enough to justify locating a refinery in southern New England. Even if offshore wells do produce significant quan- tities of oil, energy company officials have indicated a preference for expanding existing facilities as opposed to finding new locations (see Report of the Governors Fact-Finding Task Force on Oil Refineries). Connecticut's generally poor air quality makes it highly unlikely that a refinery will be sited anywhere in the state. According to the Report of the Governor's Fact-Finding task Force on Oil Refineries (1975), a re- finery that emits 10,000 tons per year of hydrocarbons (a conservative estimate) will cause violations of the ambient air quality standards for hydrocarbons as well as lead to an increase in oxidant concentrations in much of the state. Strict application of existing hydrocarbon standards would likely prohibit -the siting of a refinery in Connecticut. In addition, a refinery would cause a significant increase in existing concentrations of sulfur oxides and particulates. II-287 Other significant effects of an oil refinery include impacts on water supply, water quality (including an increased risk of oil spills in vulnerable estuarine areas), critical ecological, historic, and scenic areas, and existing land use. There is no centralized permit authority for this facility. However, numerous regulatory mechanisms would apply if a facility were proposed. The Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) is the principal agency re- sponsible for issuing air and water pollution permits, structures and dredging permits, and licenses for the storage, handling and transportation of Petroleum products. A complete discussion of these authorities is pre- sented in Section II, 'Part V of this document. Refinery siting is indirectly regulated by the Public Utility Envir- onmental Standards Act (CGS Sections 16-.50g to 16-50z) which requires that a Certificate of Environmental Compatibility and Public Need be obtained from the Power Facilities Evaluation Council for the construction of oil Pipelines. Federal agencies that may be involved in the refinery siting process include the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (dredging and filling), Coast Guard (transportation of hazardous materials), and the Environmental Protection Agency (water pollution standards). Federal and State agencies issuing various types of permits for an oil refinery would have to assure consistency with CAM policies (Section 11, Part IV of this document) including the policy on national interest facilities and resources. The national interest policy is discussed in detail in Section II Part IX of this document. Gas Processing Plants--United StatesGeological Survey estimates indicate that commercially profitable quantities of natural gas may be found in the Georges Bank area. The gas must be purified at a processing plant before entering commercial pipelines. A gas plant is a large industrial facility (utilizing 20 to 75 acres of land) and would have a significant impact on air quality, including large emissions of nitrogen oxides. Impacts on water quality and supply would also be significant as anywhere from 200,000 to 750,000 gallons of water per day would be used for cooling, depending on the process employed. Other environmental impacts include the production of hazardous wastes, esthetic considerations and noise. No such plant has ever been considered for location in Connecticut and it is unlikely that one will locate here in the future. The air quality problems discussed in the preceding section on oil refineries, the need for a large land area, and the greater distance separating offshore sources of natural gas from the Connecticut coast relative to suitable alternative sites in the region are the primary reasons The siting of a gas processing plant would be subject to various regulatory programs under the jurisdiction of DEP including. air and water pollution control and regulation of structures and dredging. These authorities are described in Part V of this document. The CAM policy on national interest facilities and resources (as discussed in Section II, Part IX.) 11-288 Deepwater Ports -- Deepwater ports used to transfer bulk products such as oil may serve important economic and environmental interests. They would allow supertankers (VLCC's) to unload large quantities of oil at a safe distance from land in order to minimize the risk of damage to the coast from oil spills. However, deepwater ports will probably not be located in Connecticut's coastal waters for several reasons. While the use of supertankers may necessitate fewer tanker trips than if smaller ships were used, thereby reducing the probability of chronic low volume spill levels, severe navigational difficulties would be posed. The relatively narrow natural channels at the Race and be- tween Block Island and Rhode Island are likely to be dangerous for supertankers. In addition, the large maneuvering areas required around single point moorings would make it difficult to find suitable sites for deepwater ports in Long Island Sound. (This issue is discussed in the Report of the Governor's Fact Finding Task Force on Oil Refineries.) An offshore facility will also pose a danger to navigation due to normally heavy commercial and recreational boat traffic in most areas of the Sound. Nearly 100,000 recreational vessels are registered in Con- necticut and the state's waters are also heavily utilized for commercial shipping. As noted earlier, the waters of eastern Long Island Sound, New Haven Harbor and Bridgeport Harbor have been proposed for designation by the Coast Guard as "confined and congested"(proposed regulations, 33CFR Part 164, April 16, 1979). While none of these problems are presented by deepwater ports located a sufficient distance from the shore, this would include waters well beyond state jurisdiction. The siting of deepwater ports in Connecticut's waters would be subject to various regulatory programs under DEP's jurisdiction including the Coastal Structures Law (CGS Sections 25-7b to 25-7f), Coastal Dredging Law (CGS Sections 25-10 to 25-18), and Water Pollution Control (CGS Sections 25-54a to 25-54g, 25-26, 25-27, and 25-54aa to 25-54hh). These authorities are discussed in detail in Section II, Part V. Pipelines and Shore Terminals -- Significant oil or gas finds on the outer continental shelf may necessitate the construction of pipelines to connect the mainland with wells and deepwater ports. A pipeline shore terminal would also be needed to house pumping machinery that moves oil or gas through the pipeline and to provide connections to a refinery or pro- cessing plant. Several factors limit the potential for locating an OCS pipeline and shore terminal in Connecticut. First, large quantities of oil and/or gas would have to be found in the North Atlantic in order to provide eco- nomic justification for the construction of a pipeline. Second, for economic reasons, pipelines are generally directed to the land area closest to the drilling source. Finally, as noted previously, it is unlikely that an oil refinery or gas processing plant will be located in the state. For these reasons, Massachusetts and Rhode Island are the most likely locations for a pipeline landfall. II-289 In the unlikely event that an OCS pipeline is proposed for Connecticut, certain impacts would have to be considered. On the positive side, a pipe- line and shore terminal could provide economic benefits while posing less danger to the environment than supertanker transport (see discussion of deepwater ports above). Negative environmental impacts include spills and damage to barrier reefs and wetlands resulting from dredge and fill operations required to bury the pipeline. A pipeline shore terminal would probably have a significant environ- mental impact, but it would not be nearly as severe as impacts resulting from a refinery or gas processing plant. An oil spill is possible if the pumping machinery is damaged but the risk of a catastrophic spill caused directly by the terminal is minimal. Air pollution impacts can be mit- igated by the use of proper emission controls. A number of federal agencies are involved in overseeing the siting, construction, and operation of interstate pipelines. These agencies deal with safety and environmental considerations, economic requirements and the proper development of natural resources in general. Included are the Department of the Interior, Interstate Commerce Commission (for oil), Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (for gas), Department of Transportation, and the Army Corps of Engineers. Coordination with the states is provided informally through Department of the Interior field personnel and more formally through CZMA (section 307(c )),1978 Outer Continental Shelf Lands. Act Amendments (P.L. 95-372), Oil and Gas and Sulfur Operations in the Outer Continental Shelf (30 CFR 250), and OCS Oil and Gas Information Program (3OCFR 252). The siting of pipelines below the mean high water mark is also regulated under the Coastal Structures Law (CGS 25-7b to 25-7f). A pi~peline shore terminal would be subjected to various state and local land use authorities that are discussed elsewhere in this document. OCS Support Facilities -- Facilities that may be needed if significant OCS finds are made in the North Atlantic include oil and gas platforms, platform fabrication yards, storage depots, crew and supply bases, and tank farms. The potential demand for these facilities will depend on several factors including where recoverable amounts of oil and gas are found, the quantity of production estimated from exploratory drilling results, the composition of the find (i.e. all oil, all gas, or a mixture), and the rate of production. As in the case of the other OCS-related facilities discussed above, Connecticut's distance from the drilling locations will generally restrict the siting of support facilities in the state. However, if the demand were to arise for such facilities the economic benefits could be signi fi cant. Although some OCS support facilities are not coastal dependent, coastal sites are often preferred for economic reasons. Proposed facilities should be examined on a case-by-case basis utilizing all relevant federal, state, and municipal authorities. Such an examination will include an assessment of the impact on coastal resources using coastal policies (Part IV of this document) and should provide an analysis of alternative sites within and outside the coastal area. II-290 LNG FaciIi ti es A typical liquefied natural gas (LNG) import facility consists of a marine unloading pier, a cryogenic pipeline leading from the pier to storage tanks, vaporizers, storage tanks and pipeline facilities to trans- port gas. Such a facility would be used to handle the importation of foreign gas supplies. The federal Department of Energy recently denied a proposal to import LNG to the northeastern United States because of the lack of demonstrated regional need for the imports. Given this decision and the fact that large LNG terminals are presently located in Massachusetts and the New York-New Jersey area, it is unlikely that one will be proposed for Connecticut in the near future. Since at least some parts of LNG facilities are coastal dependent, any site evaluation would have to carefully examine impacts on coastal resources includingi the large land area needed, increased tanker traffic, the effect on shipping, increased air and water pollution due to LNG shipping and processing, and socioeconomic impacts. Another major concern associated with LNG facilities is the risk to public health and safety should an LNG spill occur. Security and safety measures at the Massachusetts fac- ility have been questioned in recent years. LNG transshipment problems in Connecticut's coastal waters will be difficult to overcome. As in the case of supertanker transport (see discussion of deepwater ports), LNG transport will be limited by the narrow channels at the entrance to Long Island Sound, the lack of large deepwater harbors, and the large volume of recreational and commercial vessels presently using the Sound. The large land-area required by LNG facilities would also limit the potential for siting in Connecticut. The siting of LNG facilities is subject to various regulatory programs under the jurisdiction of DEP including air and water pollution control and structures and dredging regulations (See Section II, Part V of this document). The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and the Economic Regulatory Administration are the primary federal agencies involved in the LNG permit process. 2) State authorities involved in energy facility planning and siting (923.13 (2), 923.13 (3)) Connecticut has instituted a coordinated and comprehensive system for energy facility planning and for regulating the location and construction of power plants, distribution facilities, and transmission lines. The Power Facilities Evaluation Council (PFEC) is the chief agency responsible for the siting of major energy facilities. Facilities which are not under the PFEC's jurisdiction are subject to State permit authority centralized in the Department of Environmental Protection, or to municipal zoning authority. Coastal policies Section II, Part IV of this document) have been developed to guide and coordinate the planning and decision-making processes at all levels of government. In addition, the Energy Advisory Board has responsibility for developing energy supply and demand projections and for recommending broad energy policy and regulatory changes to the General Assembly and the Governor. 11-291 Planning -- Many state agencies are currently involved in decision- making that affects energy policy, including the execution of programs aimed at reducing energy consumption through conservation and increased efficiency. Agencies having energy planning responsibilities include the Energy Division of the Office of Policy and Management, Connecticut Resource Recovery Authority, PLublic Utilities Control Authority, Power Facility Evaluation Council, Department of Administrative.Services, I Department of Transportation, and Department of Environmental Protection. The Energy Division of the Office of Policy and Management is the central energy office for the state. Policy planning and program oper- ations that the Energy Division is charged with include the following: (1) Analysis of all aspects of energy production and supply, transportation, consumption, and conservation. (2) Development of recommended energy policies and programs for the state which are designed to balance economic, environmental, and social considerations. (3) Execution of federal and regional programs involving energy conservation, renewable energy resource develop- ment, ancFenergy allocation. Another division of the Office of Policy and Management (Comprehensive Planning) is responsible for implementing the Coastal Energy Im~pact Program in Connecticut. (4) Coordination of state energy activit~ies. The Energy Division also provides staff support to the Connecticut Energy Advisory Board. The board consists of representatives of various state agencies as well as members of the general public and is responsible for submitting an annual report to the Governor and General Assembly. The report must contain both short-range and long-range forecasts of energy supply and demand for the state as well as recommendations for correcting energy imbalances. In the event of projected shortages in energy supply, these recommendations must include the following (CGS Section 16a~-17): ...measures to develop new or expanded sources of energy, including any recommendations to authorize the establish- ment of oil refineries, deepwater ports, nuclear power facilities, off-shore drilling facilities, or other similar major capital facilities. The board shall identify any beneficial or adverse social, economic, or environmental impact of such energy projections and recommendlations." Informal coordination between CAM and the Energy Advisory Board is maintained by the three state agencies that are represented on both the Coastal Area Management Advisory Board and the Energy Advisory Board -- the Power Facility Evaluation Council, the Department of Environmental Protection and the Department of Economic Development. The Office of Policy and Management is also represented on the CAM Advisory Board. 11-292 Another energy planning mechanism is contained in Section 16-S0r of the General Statutes which requires all electric generating com- panies to furnish an annual report to the Power Facility Evaluation Council containing long term forecasts of loads and resources. In addition to supply and demand forecasts, these reports must include lists of existing and planned energy facilities. The CAM Program provides guidelines for facility siting in Connecticut's coastal area. Under CAM, virtually all uses and resources in the coastal area will be managed. Coastal policies have been developed for energy facilities as well as for other coastal uses, land and water resources, research, inter-governmental coordination, and national interest facilities and resources. These policies will serve as a guide to energy facility planning and siting by all levels of government in the coastal area (Section I' Part IV of this document). Siting -- The Power Facility Evaluation Council (PFEC), established pursuant to the Public Utility Environmental Standards Act (CGS Sections 16.,50g to 16-50z), consists of one representative each from the Department of Environmental Protection, Public Utilities Control Authority, House of Representatives, and Senate, in addition to five members of the general public The PFEC has jurisdiction over the siting and modification of the following energy facilities (Section 16-50i): (1) Electric transmission lines of a design capacity of 69 kilovolts or more, including associated equipment; (2) Fuel transmission facilities, except gas pipelines having a design capacity of less than 200 pounds per square inch gauge pressure (interstate gas pipelines are regulated by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission); (3) Any electric generating or storage facility using any fuel, including nuclear materials, including associated equipment for furnishing electricity by electric utilities; (4) Such substations,.switchyards, and other facilities which may have an adverse environmental effect. No construction or modification of the above mentioned facilities may be undertaken without a "certificate of environmental compatibility and public need" (herein referred to as "certificate") issued by the PFEC. Any proposed facility must "be built , maintained and operated in con- formity with such certificate and any terms, limitations or conditions contained therein.'" The requirement for obtaining a certificate provides a mechanism for regulating the siting of energy facilities. The PFEC must adhere to statutory criteria in deciding on an application for a certificate. The decision must be based on a determination of the following factors (Section 16-50p): (1) The public need for the facility and the basis for the 11-293 (2) The nature of the probable environmental impact in- cluding an identification of every significant adverse effect on, or conflict with State policies concerning the natural environment, ecological balance, public health and safety, scenic, historic, and recreational values, forests and parks, air and water purity, and fish and wildlife; (3) Why the adverse effects or conflicts referred -to above are not sufficient reason to deny the application-, (4) In the case of an electric transmission line, that the facility serves the interests of electric economy and reliability and that the overhead portions are consistent with all applicable state and federal guide- lines; (5) In the case of an electric or' fuel transmission line, that the location of the line will not pose an undue hazard to persons or property. Section 16-50p clearly requires a balancing of the need for the facility with the environmental impact of the facility. In addition, violation of any state environmental policy or standard, including coastal management policies, is sufficient reason to deny a certi- ficate unless the PFEC presents an explicit finding that the public need for the facility outweighs violations of such standards. This statement is substantiated by Section 16-50t which allows the PFEC to adopt standards for power facilities in addition to, but not inconsistent with,other federal and state environmental standards. Prior to any hearings on applications, the PFEC is specifically required to consult with the Department of Environmental Protection, Department of Health Services, Council on Environmental Quality, Division of Public Utility Control within the Department of Business Regulation, Office of Policy and Management, Department of Economic Development, and Department of Transportation. Section 16-501 which describes the required content of an application for a certificate provides additional input into the assessment of public need and environmental impact of energy facilities. Regulations governing PFEC procedures have been promulgated (RCSA 16-50j-1 to 16-50j-84, 16-501-1 to 16-501-5, 16-50v-1 to 16-50v-2, 16-50z-1 to 16-50z-4). 3) Identification of how interested and affected public and private parties will be involved in the planning process (923.13(4)). The Public Utility Environmental Standards Act provides for the incorporation of all relevant public and private interests into the facility siting process. The composition of the PFEC (described above), strict requirements for public hearings, and the inclusion of various interested groups and individuals as potential parties to certification proceedings all serve to provide input into the decision- making process. In addition, municipal zoning commissions and inland wetland agencies may regulate and restrict the proposed location of a facility although a municipal decision may be revoked by a vote of 11-294 six members of the PFEC. The mechanisms used to involve all relevant public and private grpups are consistent with the efforts of CAM to involve all affected local, regional, state, and federal agencies as well as interest groups and the general public in all phases of coastal management. CAM's past efforts at involving the public in coastal management as well as plans for future coordination are described in Section 11, Part XI of this document. In addition, CAM's approach to planning for and siting of facilities which are in the national interest, including "energy facilities serving statewide and interstate markets", is described in Section 1I, Part IX of the document. 11-295 B. SHOREFRONT ACCESS AND PROTECTION PLANNING Introduction Three major factors influence the planning process for enhancing shore- front access and protection in Connecticut: first, the extent of development of the immediate shorefront area; second, the natural physiographic limit in the amount of suitable coastal resource; and third, the high cost of acquis- ition and development coupled with a real lack of available acquisition and development opportunities. These factors are laf'gely a result of the physical (or geologic) characteristics of the shorefront and the patterns of land use resulting from the historical development of Connecticut's coast. The coast of Connecticut is, for the most part, highly developed. Unlike many coastal states, the development of Connecticut's shorefront began over 300 years ago. The pattern of land use and intensity of development evident along Connecticut's coast today is the result of a Iona history of development in which a variety of often conflicting uses competed for an increasingly scarce resource. The greatest intensity of development in the coastal area occurs in the western part of the state. Industry and other urban uses have concentrated along the western shorefront in New Haven, Bridgeport, Norwalk and Stamford. In terms of population, these four cities along with Fairfield and Greenwich represent six of the ten largest cities in Connecticut; together, they support 20% of the state's population (40% of Connecticut's population is located in the 36 coastal communities). The remaining towns along the western shoreline are characterized by dense residential development due in part to their proximity to New York City and their general location along the major northeastern trans- portation corridors connecting Boston and Washington, D.C. The coastal area east of New Haven is less intensely developed, but the same general patterns of land use evident in the western end of the state are repeated, particularly in the immediate shorefront area. Though several of these towns are decidedly rural in overall character, land use densities increase as one moves toward the shore. This development trend is expected to continue. Studies conducted under contract to the Connecticut Coastal Area Management Program show that even in some of the least developed sections of the coast, development within 1000 feet of the shore increased by 50% over the decade from 1965-1975. Though ad- vancing technology and changing needs have recently permitted less intense uses such as recreation to be emphasized as an important use of the coastal area, the long established pattern of development along Connecticut's shorefront has left few undeveloped areas suitable for new recreational opportunities. This historical demand from competing land uses for the desirable shorefront property has resulted in the private ownership of much of the coast. The state of Connecticut has 583 miles of shoreline bordering on coastal waters. Of this total coastal frontage, 215 miles front directly on Long Island Sound and the remaining 368 miles consist of major and minor river and cove frontage. Of the 11-296 total frontage, the state owns 49 miles (8.4%), the municipalities 64 miles (11%), and the federal government only 4.3 miles (.7%). The great majority(80%) of the shoreline is privately owned. Individuals or private commercial, indust- rial or institutional interests own approximately 434 miles (74.5%). Residential associations (generally beach associations) own 19.5 miles (3.3%) and private conservation groups hold 12.4 miles (2.1%). The Connecticut shorefront does not have an abundance of those physical resources which support the most demanded forms of coastal recreation. Sandy beach comprises only 13.5% of the total shoreline; tidal wetlands account for 6.5%. The remaining shorefront is a combination of bedrock, glacial drift and artificial fill. These latter resources constitute a significant portion of the shorefront and though they are not sought out to satisfy a specific recre- ational demand, they can provide valuable physical and visual access opportunities. The natural limit in the amount of suitable resource and the history of in- tense development alung the coast has left very little undeveloped land available for recreational use. These two factors effectively limit the opportunity to rely either on land use controls or on acquisition (either in fee simple or less-than- fee simple) as the primary means of improving access to the shorefront. Requirements of Section 305(b)(7) of the CZMA Section 305(b)(7) of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) requires that the management program for each coastal state include "a definition of the term 'beach' and a planning process for the protection of, and access to, public beaches and other public coastal areas of environmental, recreational, historical, esthetic, ecological or cultural value. The federal regulations concerning this section of the CZMA require that the program contains "a procedure for assessing public beaches and other public areas.. .a description of appropriate types of access and protection, and ...an identification and description of enforceable policies, legal authorities, funding programs and other techniques that will be used to provide such shorefront access and protection that the state's planning process indicates is necessary." Public Shorefront Areas: Identification and Analysis of Supply and Demand Planning Report #25, published by the Coastal Area Management Program in March, 1978, discusses in detail the recreational demand, opportunities and limitations in Connecticut's coastal area. Recreational use of the coast takes many forms and depends on the availability of different resources and facilities. Sandy beaches are sought out for swimming; boating requires some type of shore based facility; fishing can be done from the beach, rocks, jetties and piers; and hunting and wildlife observation depend on the existence of natural habitat. Given the pressure from competing land uses and the limited amount of undeveloped land in the coastal area, satisfying the public demand for these and other re- creational activities requires that access to all publicly-owned coastal land be ensured. Publicly owned coastal areas include those portions of the shore held in fee ownership by the state and also that portion of the shore between mean high and mean low tide lines. This latter area is held in trust by the state under 11-297 jus publicum or public trust doctrine. Of these areas, the coastal resource in greatest demand and, from a geological perspective, in shortest supply is sandy beach. Beach Recreation For the purposes of CAM's shorefront planning element, "beach" is defined as gently sloping deposits of loosely consolidated sedimentary material (sand and/or gravel on cobbles) fronting on coastal waters and extending landward from mean low water to the location where a distinct change in the physical composition or physiographic form occurs. This definition includes all of the "beach and dune" coastal resource areas enumerated in sec. 3(7)(c) of the Connecticut Coastal Management Act: "'Beaches and Dunes' means beach systems including barrier beach spits and tombolos, barrier beaches, pocket beaches, land contact beaches and related dunes and sandflats." Due to the general physiographic character of Connecticut and the estuarine setting of the coast (see Part II), sandy beach is not abundant along the Con- necticut coast; of the 583 miles of total shorefront only 78.5 miles (13.5%) is sandy beach. The lack of beach resource in Connecticut is the result of: 1) a paucity of beach-forming sediments due to glaciation and the extensive occurrence and nature of bedrock along the coast, and 2) the low wave energy estuarine system of Long Island Sound. These factors also account for the uneven dis- tribution of the resource, the generally poor sand quality and the high percent of comparatively small and narrow beaches. Characteristics of the Resource An analysis of the Connecticut Coastal Area Management Program's coastal resource maps and aerial photographs reveals that-Connecticut's 78.5 miles of beach consist of over 190 separate stretches of resource. Almost one half (46%) of these stretches of beach are under 1000 feet in length and approximately 60% are less than 1500 feet i~n length. The beaches in Connecticut also tend to be narrow. A survey of beaches owned by the state, municipalities and associations indicates that even these beaches, which were acquired for intensive recreational use and are often artificially nourished,average only about 100 feet in width. The remaining beach resource in the state is, on the average, considerably nar- rower. Because of these factors, a sizable number of Connecticut's beaches, both private and public, afford only limited recreational opportunities in terms of capaci ty. The physical limitations of the resource also diminish the quality of the beach experience as do the small wave heights and the coarse texture of the sand. Waves approaching the Connecticut shoreline rarely reach two feet in height--in fact, 60% of the waves are less than one-half foot. These small wave heights are at- tributable to the protection afforded Long Island Sound by the presence of Long Island and by the nature of the local wind patterns. The beach resource is also unevenly distributed throughout the coast. The towns along the southwestern and far southeastern shore have very little beach resource due primarily to the predominance of bedrock, and what resource does exist tends to be small, narrow pocket and fringe beaches. In addition, many of the beaches along the western shoreline are heavily developed and highly modified through bulkheading and artificial fill. Private residential development crowding I11-298 and dissecting the larger beaches and poor water quality caused by intense industrial, commercial and residential use of the shorefront are major limit- ations to providing additional public recreational access. The central portions of the shoreline, with a few exceptions, have the greatest amount of beach resource. Most of the state's barrier beaches, offering the longest and widest stretches of resource are found here. Beach Ownership Of the 78.5 miles of sandy beach, 48.4 miles (62%) are in private ownership; 16.3 miles (20% of the total beach frontage ) are owned by beach associations, the great majority of which are located east of New Haven. Though there are a few fairly long stretches of beach owned by associations, the average length is under 1000 feet. Access to these beaches is usually restricted to the residents/ members of the associations, They are generally heavily utilized by both the residents who live on the waterfront and the residents whose property is back from the shore. Private conservation organizations own 1.2 miles of Connecticut's beaches. Limited access is often available, but the primary resource management objective of these organizations is to preserve the beach in a natural state. Most of the remaining 31 miles of privately-owned beach are held by indiv- iduals ( a small percent is owned by private commercial, industrial or institu- tional interests). This represents 39% of the total beach frontage. Though the exact number of owners and lengths of beach held by each has not been compiled, it is known that private individual ownership of the beach is characterized by small house lots fronting on small (100-200 feet +) portions of beach. There are very few instances of individual ownership of large stretches of beach. The state holds 7.5 miles (9.5% of the total) of beach in fee ownership. Sherwood Island, Hammonasset and Rocky Neck State Parks (totaling 4.5 miles) are managed by the state as recreational beach areas. Bluff Point, Harkness Memorial and Silver Sands State Park ere state-owned preserve or undeveloped beach areas and account for most of the remaining 2.5 miles of state fee-owned beach. Sherwood Island and Hammonasset State Parks encompass two of the longest stretches of beach resource in the state. There are no large, and very few medium lengths of beach in the state that are not already owned by the state or municip- alities that would be suitable for acquisition and development as a state recreational beach facility. Municipalities own the remaining 22.7 miles (28.8%) of sandy beach. The municipal beaches range in size from short (100 ft.) stretches of sand with very limited parking and user capacity to highly developed, good quality beach areas offering a full range of support facilities. There are approximately 78 separate municipal beaches owned by 24 of the 36 coastal communities. Though the average length is only about 1500 feet, the municipalities own many of the largest stretches of beach; a good example of this is Pleasure Beach/Long Beach owned by Bridgeport and Stratford, the former beina the second most populous city in the state. In fact, of the ten longest stretches of beach owned by a single entity, mun- icipalities account for six (the state owns three and a private conservation organ- ization owns one). Appendix D (Designated Public Recreational Beaches) of Planning Report #25 contains a listing of the municipally-owned beaches in the state, and gives the location, frontage and area, restrictions, and capacities of each. II-299 Public Access to Connecticut Beaches Given the lack of basic beach resource in Connecticut and the historical land use patterns of-the coast, public access to Connecticut's beaches is rea- sonable. The general public has access to virtually all of the state fee-owned beach (approximately 7 miles) and greater than 90% of the municipally owned beach (approximately 17 miles). It is unlikely that the removal of municipally imposed residency requirements in the few areas of restricted access would provide new use opportunities since these municipal facilities tend to be small and are gen- erally used to capacity. Of the four stretches of beach in Connecticut over 10,000 feet in length, the public either owns or has good access to all of them. Eight of the ten longest beaches in single ownership are held by the state (3) or municipalities (5) and afford unrestricted access to the general public. As previously noted, the portion of shore below the mean high water mark is owned by the state. All of the state fee-owned beaches and most of the municipally-owned beaches can provide general public access to this state-owned portion of the contiguous beach where private ownership of the dry-sand area may prevent perpendicular access. The 7.5 miles of state fee-owned beach allow direct access to an additional 3.3 miles of contiguous public beach below mean high water. About 25 municipally-owned beaches are part of a larger stretch of continuous resource and afford direct public access to over 15 additional miles of this state-held portion of the beach. Therefore, the total amount of beach directly accessible to the general public from state fee-owned or unrestricted municipal beaches is at least 42 miles or 54% of the total length of beach re- source in Connecticut. This figure does not include any amount of state-owned beach below mean high water that is accessible from any other type of publicly- owned upland or coastal resource, or that is accessible through public easements over private property. Wheh all the factors presented in the preceding sections are considered together, it is apparent that the major constraint to significantly improving beach access in Connecticut is not the existence of extensive, privately-owned and restricted beach areas, but simply a genuine lack of suitable resource. It is with an understanding of this situation that the state will attempt to satisfy public demand for sandy beach-based recreation opportunities. General Recommendations for Improving Beach-Based Recreation Opportunities The State Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan, which assesses statewide recreational n~eeds, identifies swimming--particularly saltwater swimming utilizing Connecticut's Long Island Sound beaches--as the most popular form of recreational activity. Through an analysis of statewide supply and demand data a significant level of unmet need for public swimming facilities was identified. it is prim- arily the state's responsibility to provide for state-wide and regional recreation needs, and according to SCORP, much of this swimming capacity deficit can and will be met through development of state facilities on inland water bodies. However, improvement of access to shoreline beaches is a top priority in the state's recreation plan. Given the lack of available beach resource in Connecticut, improvement of public access to coastal beach areas may best occur in four major ways. II-300 First, by developing or reutilizing former or currently underutilized state- owned beach areas; second, by increasing the capacity of, and improving the access to, existing state-owneec recreational beach facilities; third, by acquisition and development of new state-owned recreational beach facilities when suitable properties become available and as acquisition funds allow; and fourth by re- quiring the provision or improvement of access through applicable state regulatory and planning programs. Access may also be improved, to a lesser degree, through a fifth method: use of municipal regulatory and land use control techniques such as 1) bonus and incentive zoning and 2) dedication of subdivision open space and access rights-of-way, to encourage provision or improvement of shorefront access by private developers. However, because of the small size and extent of beach resource in Connecticut, the narrow width and length of "public beach" areas below mean high water, and the basic lack of undeveloped shorefront property, use of municipal land use control techniques is not expected to result in a significant increase in access opportunities. These basic approaches to in- creasing shorefront access are further discussed in the analysis of Connecticut actions below. Boating Boating is another major recreational use of the coastal area. There are approximately 70,000 power boats registered in Connecticut and an unknown but sizeable number of sailboats (estimated in excess of 30,000). The improvement of existing, and the development of new support facilities to create new boating opportunities and enhance the recreational experience was the major recreational issue raised by the public throughout the development of the Connecticut Coastal Area Management Program. A 19~76 survey of marinas in Connecticut conducted by the state Department of Commerce under contract to the Coastal Area Management Program identified 164 commercial marinas (down 30 in the last 5 years), 8 public marinas and 63 private yacht clubs. In addition, there are 13 state boat launching ramps providing access directly to the Sound, and 10 ramps providing access to the lower Connecticut River. A listing of the marinas, clubs and boat launching facilities is provided in Appendix E (State Boat Launching Ramps, Marinas) of Planning Report No. 25. Aside from the approximately 5,000 car capacity of the public boat launching areas, available slips and berths total roughly 25,000. An unsurveyed but significant number of individual harbor moorings provide additional boating facilities. It is evident from the data presented in Planning Report #25, that a large share of the boating facilities are supplied by the private sector. Within the economic constraints of the user, these facilities are largely accessible to the general public. Both Planning Report # 25 and SCORP identify a need to provide relatively inexpensive Public boating access and recommend the development of additional state boat launching sites throughout the coastal area to meet that need. Since boating relies on the coastal waters and not a particular type of land resource, the state can provide additional boating access from any pub- licly owned land--beach, tidal wetland-or urban shorefront. In addition, the Coastal Area Management Program recognizes the significant role of the private sector in providinci boating access to the Sound and has developed policies which encourage the development of commercial boatinci facilities in suitable locations. 11-301 Other Public Coastal Areas Tidal Wetlands Though sandy beaches comprise the most demanded coastal resource in terms of coastal recreational opportunities, it is not the only one. Tidal wetlands constitute an important resource from both an ecological and recreational stand- point. The state owns significant tidal wetland acreage and other similar areas preserved and valued for their natural features. Over 2500 acres of tidal wetlands are owned by the state and managed by DEP as fish and wildlife areas. These wetlands, such as Barn Island in Stonington, G.E. Wheeler Wildlife Area in Milford and Great Harbor in Guilford are maintained primarily for fish and wildlife habitat which support wildlife management and extensive recreation including hunting, fishing, educational field trips, bird watching and hiking. Tidal wetlands are also generally considered a scenic resource and provide a valuable source of visual access to the coastal waters; they comprise more than 50% of the remaining open or undeveloped shore frontage in Connecticut. State-owned tidal wetlands account for 14.5 miles of shoreline and contain public boat launching sites which provide access to rivers and the waters of Long Island Sound. Urban Waterfronts As stated earlier, Connecticut has a highly developed coastal area. A number of the state's most populated urban centers are located along the coast where natural harbors became commercial ports, providing the basis for the area's economy. Four of the state's seven largest cities -- Bridgeport, New Haven, Stamford and Norwalk -- are located on the shoreline in the western part of the state. Groton, New London and Norwich, located in the eastern end of the state are smaller in size but also possess significant segments of major river and Sound frontage. The waterfront of these urban areas can and do provide an important source of access to coastal waters for large concentrations of the population, some of which depend on nearby opportunities. The urban waterfronts often contain marine related historic, cultural and aesthetic resources as well as boating facilities which provide physical access to the water. Though all of Connecticut's coastal cities provide some public access to the waterfront, this is a resource that needs additional attention. Improvement of water quality and the re-use of underutilized or redevelopable properties by uses that enhance visual access and provide physical access to the waterfront are encouraged by the coastal policies in the Connecticut Coastal Management Act. Cultural and Historic Areas Long Island Sound and the major rivers played a central role in much of Connecticut's history. In particular, the Long Island shore east of the mouth of the Connecticut River along with the lower Connecticut River valley and Thames River estuary still possess a substantial degree of native landscape charm and cultural interest. The seaport villages of Mystic and Noank as well as the Borough of Stonington still retain their character from the late 1830's 11-302 when they were major shipbuilding centers. In this section of the coast, the combination of historic sites and villages, parks and preserves, tidal marshes, and busy harbor scenes maintain the sense of this region's marine heritage and provide excellent physical and visual access to both the natural and cultural aspects of the coastal environment. Islands The Connecticut coast is dotted with some 143 nearshore islands that range in size from under one acre to seventy acres. Most of these islands have remained undeveloped largely as a result of access difficulties and development constraints. Many of these islands support populations of flora and fauna which have all but disappeared from the mainland. A number of the larger islands in the Norwalk Island group have good quality sandy beaches, and state acquisition could provide a valuable addition to avail- able public shorefront. The primary obstacle to public acquisition of these islands is the cost. Asking prices for the properties have been substantially above appraised value. In addition, there is the special problem of providing efficient, low cost general public access to the island, which would be obliga- tory if substantial amounts of public recreation funds were expended for acquisition. The principal value of many of the islands is as natural habitat for shore- birds and other species. It is unlikely that public ownership will provide better protection of these unique habitats than private ownership has for many years. The access difficulties and small size of most of the islands will continue to be effective barriers to development. Shorefront Access and Protection Planning Connecticut will utilize the existing state Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Planning (SCORP) process as the planning process for the protection of, and access to, public beaches and other public coastal areas of environmental, re- creational, historical, esthetic, ecological or cultural value. The State Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan is prepared by the Con- necticut Department of Environmental Protection in response to the planning requirement of the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965. SCORP must be prepared and updated on a continuing basis in order for the state or its munici- palities to be eligible to receive grants from the Land and Water Conservation Fund administered by the federal Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service. The Connecticut SCORP serves as a guideline for the allocation of these funds. The SCORP planning process encompasses the major elements which a shorefront enhancement planning process should include. On a statewide basis, the plan determines recreational needs, analyzes the supply and capabilities of existing facilities and areas and includes policies and recommendations to meet these needs. The plan identifies capital investment priorities for acquiring, developing, and protecting all types of outdoor recreation resources within the state. Coastal area concerns, needs, and recommendations have been, and will continue to be, incorporated into this established recreation planning process. The on-going coordination of the SCORP planning process with the CAM shore- front access and protection planning process will continue under the 1 1-303 306 implementation phase of the coastal management program. Section 20 of the Connecticut Coastal Management Act requires that all major state plans (in- cluding SCORP)which affect the coastal area be consistent with the goals and policies of the CCMA, and further, that these state plans be revised as neces- sary by July 1, 1981 to make them consistent. One of the primary advantages of utilizing the SCORP process is that coastal recreation can be considered and balanced in light of statewide recreation demands and opportunities. While recreational access is an important use of coastal land and water, it is not the only potential use. Given the li.mited amount of undeveloped land in the coastal area and the competition from alternative uses, the priority for recreational use of coastal resources should be determined from a statewide perspective. Other parts of the state can provide water oriented recreational opportunities that will alleviate some part of the demand for the limited recreational resources of the coast. SCORP's Chapter V (Major Water and Land Recreation Resource Issues), Chapter VIII (Goals, Policies and Recommendations for Meeting Outdoor Recreation Needs) and Chapter IX (Connecticut's Five Year Action Plan), incorporate coastal recrea- tion analyses, recommendations and a number of policies from Planning Report #25 for increasing coastal access through coastal area acquisition and development projects. Authorities The essential legal authorities necessary to carry out shorefront access and protection planning are held by the Commissioner of Environmental Protection (see Part V, Legal Authorities). The Commissioner of DEP has broad statutory authority to plan for, acquire, operate and maintain state recreational, conservation, open space and natural areas. Section 22a-21 of the Connecticut General Statutes (C.G.S.) authorizes the Commissioner of Environmental Protection to prepare, maintain and keep up-to-date a comprehensive plan for the development of the outdoor recreation resources and other natural resources of the state. This statute provides the legal authority for preparation of the State Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan. Section 22a-25 of the C.G.S. gives the Commissioner of Environmental Pro- tection the authority to acquire land for any purpose or activity relating to or compatible with the function of the Department of Environmental Protection. Sections 23-8 and 23-9 of the C.G.S. give to the Commissioner the power to acquire, maintain and make available to the Dublic open space for recreation. The Commissioner is authorized to acquire, in the name of the state and for the benefit of the public, by purchase, gift or other device, or by right of eminent domain, lands and rights in land for public open spaces. He is further authorized to maintain open spaces that may be entrusted or given to the state by the federal or local governments, corporations, or individuals for the purposes of public recreation, or for the preservation of natural beauty or historical significance. Sections 22a-27 and 7-131f (as amended by P.A. 79-607, Sec.7) of the C.G.S. gives the Commissioner of Environmental Protection exclusive authority to ad- minister all state and federal grant funds for munidipal acquisition and development of outdoor recreation resources or other natural resources. II-304 Though DEP has primary responsibi jity for the protection and enhancement of the scenic and cultural character of the state, another applicable authority is held by the Connecticut Historical Commission which is the central authority for historic preservaticn in the state. Section 1O-321d of the C.G.S. gives to the Connecticut Historical Commission, the authority to acquire, restore, maintain and operate historic structures or landmarks and adjacent lands which the commission determines to be of national or state historical importance. This Commission also has the authority (through Sec. 321b of the C.G.S.) to administer all state and federal grant funds for municipal acquisition and maintenance of historic structures and landmarks. Policies Policies contained in P.A. 79-535 (Connecticut Coastal Management Act) and other statutory policies contained in the Connecticut General Statutes (which have been incorporated by reference in Sec. 2(a)(2) of P.A. 79-535) provide guidance to the Commissioner in carrying out his statutory responsibilities for the provision of public recreational. opportunities and the protection of natural resources in the coastal area. Policies contained in both the state's Conservation and Development Policies Plan (formerly the Plan of Conservation and Development) and the State Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan provide additional guidance to the Commissioner when undertaking actions which fall within the purview of these Plans. The Conservation and Development Policies Plan provides a policy framework for the planning and investment decisions of state government which influence the future growth and development of the state and the conservation of its natural resources. The Plan must be applied (through advisory reports prepared by the Office of Policy and Management) when state agencies, including the Department of Environmental Protection, undertake the following actions with state or federal funds: 1) acquisition of real property, 2) development or improvement of real property costing more than $100,000, 3) acquisition of public transportation equipment or facilities costing more than $100,000, or 4) state grants-in-aid of more than $100,000 to be used for the above purposes. In addition, all functional plans prepared by DEP and other state agencies must be reviewed in an advisory report prepared by OPM for conformance with the policies of the Plan. Bond commission allocations related to the state capital investment actions identified above must be similarly reviewed. As discussed above, SCORP goals, policies and recommendations are to be applied by the Commissioner when allocating funds from the Federal Land and Water Conservation Act of 1965. General State Polidy for Environmental Protection General environmental policies concerning protection of the state's land and water resources are contained in Sections 22a-1, 22a-la, 22a-15, and Sec. 25-54a of the Connecticut General Statutes. Briefly, these sections State that it is the Policy of the State of Connecticut to conserve, improve and protect the State's natural resources and environment and to control air, land and water pollution. It is the Policy of state government to use all practicable means and measures including financial and technical assistance, the improvement and coordination of state plans, functions, Programs and resources to assure a safe, II-305 healthful, productive, and esthetically and culturally pleasing environment for the present and future generations of Connecticut residents. Sec. 22a-5 of the Connecticut General Statutes states that the Commissioner of Environmental Protection shall carry out the environmental policies of the state and, consistent with these policies, shall provide for the protection, enhancement and management of the public forests, parks, open spaces and natur- al area preserves and of inland, marine and coastal water resources, including, but not limited to, wetlands, rivers, estuaries and shorelines. Sec. 25-54c directs the Commissioner to adopt standards of water quality, consistent with the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, and to preserve and enhance the quality of state waters for all legitimate uses including recreation. SCORP goals for the Department of Environmental Protection include: �To provide an adequate supply and-v~riety Of open space and recreational opportunities for the 'citizens of Connecticut" �To protect and further the optimum use of Connecticut's marine resources." As detailed above, the State, through the Commissioner of DEP, has primary authority and responsibility for providing recreational access and natural re- source protection in Connecticut. Policies from P.A. 79-535, the Conservation and Development Policies Plan and SCORP provide specific guidance to the Com- missioner for providing access to, and protection of, public beaches and other publ ic coastal areas of envi ronmental , recreational , hi stori cal, estileti c, eco- logical or cultural value. Recreational Access Policies: Acquisition and Development The following policies pertain to the provision of recreational access in the coastal area through state and municipal acquisition and development. Two policies from P.A. 79-535 enhance existing state policy concerning the primary role of the state: To encourage public access to the waters of Long Island Sound by expansion, development and effective utilization of state-owned recreational facilities within the coastal area that are consistent with sound resource conservation procedures and constitutionally protected rights of private property owners." (sec. 2(a)(b)) To make effective use of state-owned coastal recreational fac- ilities in order to expand coastal recreational opportunities including the development or redevelopment of existing state owned facilities where feasible." (sec. 2(c)(1)(J)) Policies from the Conservation and Development Policies Plan incorporated by reference in P.A. 79-535 Section 2(d)) that the State: Provide a wide variety of high quality outdoor recreation op- portunities to all citizens." 11 -306 Give priority to the purchase and development of facilities in and locations accessible to the greatest number of users. Acquire and develop new water-based recreation sites and im- prove existing water recreational areas of the Plan. Take advantage of every opportunity to increase the amount of shoreline land available to the public for recreational use. a. Increase opportunities for public access to saltwater swimming through expansion of existing facilities and development of new facilities. b. Identify areas of highest coastal water-based recreation potential with recommendation for state-first option to purchase and lease-back, and other incentives to main- tamn and increase public access to coastal areas. Insure that development in watersheds tributary to recreational water-bodies is fully compatible with water-based recreation." (Sec. 10, Policy B) Another policy from the Conservation and Development Policies Plan con- cerning "preservation areas" recommends: "undertaking of long-term acquisition of storm-damaged coastal areas where appropriate for increased public access to Long Island Sound." SCORP policies and recommendations offer further guidance. Specific acquisition priorities include: -"Coastal region purchases for public access to Long Island Sound and for future development of water based activities." -"Acquire coastal beach access.. .offering a potential for swimming opportunity wherever they become available." -"To provide fishing and boating opportunities.. .acquire and develop a publicly-owned boat-launching site.. .in every town along the coast and along navigable streams such as the Connecti cut River." -"Selection, acquisition and expansion of areas for new State Parks that are near cities." Because land acquisition presents particular difficulties with respect to the timing of land sales and the availability of funding, SCORP contains a number of recommendations (from the Coastal Area Management Program and/or the state's Conservation and Development Policies Plan) for land acquisition as- sistance that are specifically related to the coastal area. These are: -"Establishment of a state-first op -tion to purchase areas of highest coastal water-based recreation potential." II-307 -"Establishment of a funding procedure to allow timely exercise of purchase options where appropriate especially for shorefront properties following natural disasters." -"Provision of State matching funds for shorefront access plan- ning under Sec. 315(2) of the Coastal Zone Management Act of 19 72.' SCORP policies concerning development of recreational areas and facilities in- cl ude: -"The State should concentrate its development funds on expanding and upgrading the recreation potential of its existing coastal swimming beaches. - 'Development of additional coastal swimming capacity at Rocky Neck, Ilammonasset and Sherwood Island State Parks... .Begin con- struction of Silver Sands State Park; one of the state's few remaining opportunities for significant new coastal swimming capacity." -" The Department should make a thorough evaluation of the potential of all state owned coastal lands to increase recreational usage especially in providing swimming capacity." -" The Department should develop existing sites acquired for boat launching areas and rehabilitate sites as'ttie first priority in meeting demand". The Municipal Action Plan contained in SCORP encourages municipal acquisition and development when it is more appropriate (for example, when an available parcel is not of sufficient size to manage as a statewide facility). The policies in SCORP provide general guidance to the municipalities for developing individual goals for addressing local recreational needs and demands. A number of state policies which are applicable to the coastal area concern the acquisition, protection and preservation of public areas of cultural, historic, and natural values. Section 23-5a of the C.G.S. concerns Connecticut's system of natural area preserves: "It is... .declared to be the public policy that carefully selected areas of land and water of outstanding scientific and educational interest be preserved. In implementation of this policy, there is established a Connecticut system of natural area perserves." Section 25-102a contains the state policy behind establishment of the Lower Connecticut River Conservation Zone: "It is found that the lower Connecticut River and the towns abutting the river possess unique scenic, ecological, scientific and historic value contributing to public enjoyment, inspiration and scientific study, that it is in the public interest that the provisions of this chapter be adopted to preserve such values and to prevent deterioration of the natural and traditional riverway scene for the 11-308 enjoyment of present and future generations of Connecticut citizens and that the powers of the commissioner of environmental protection, conferred by the provisions of section 22a-25, should be exercised in the furtherance of the purposes hereof in conformity with his general responsibility to preserve the natural resources of the stateO SCORP policies and recommendations that are applicable to acquisition and development of historic, cultural and natural areas include the following: -HProtect sites, villages, and areas of historic or cultural significance as well as surrounding areas which act as their setting." -"Assist in the acquisition of cultural and historic sites, in conjunction with the Connecticut Historical Commission, where recreation can be provided." -"Acquisition of natural areas listed on the State's Inventory of Natural Areas and other critical habitats which are im- mediately endangered and cannot be protected by other methods... A program of planned acquisition of threatened sites or preser- vation through conservation easements and other land use control techniques must continue to be a state priority for preserving Connecticut's environment for its scientific, educational and natural values." Recreational Access Policies: Regulatory and Planning Programs P ~~P.A. 79-535 establishes twelve policies relevant to shorefront access and coastal recreation that are to be used by the state in 1) administering exist- ing DEP regulatory programs, 2) undertaking all state development activities, and in 3) revising all state plans affecting the coastal area as discussed in Part VI of this document. These policies are also to be used by coastal municipalities in regulatory decisions under the coastal site plan review pro- cedures and in developing municipal coastal programs as discussed in Part VI of this document. All of these policies appear below; three of them deserve particular note. First, to strengthen existing state regulatory programs pertaining to stru- ctures on or over the public beach (area below mean high tide), P.A. 79-535, Sec. 2 p (c)(1)(K) requires that new structures not unreasonably impair access to, or along the public beach. To require as a condition in permitting new coastal structures, including but not limited to groins, jetties or breakwaters, that access to, or along, the public beach below mean hicih water must not be unreasonably impaired by such structures and to en- courage the removal of illegal structures below mean high water which unreasonably obstruct passage along the public beach." Second, P.A. 79-535 establishes several policies that place highest priority on water dependent uses in shorefront areas for planning purposes and for the 11-309 purpose of resolving conflicts between competing uses. The definition of water dependent use (ref. P.A. 74-535, Sec. 3(16)) specifically includes water based recreational uses and other uses which provide general public access to marine or tidal waters. "To manage uses in the coastal boundary through existing municipal planning, zoning and other local regulatory authorities and through existing state structures, dredging, wetlands, and other state siting and regulatory authorities, giving highest priority and preference to water dependent uses and facilities in shorefront areas." (P.A. 78-535, Sec. 2(b)(1)(A)) Third, P.A. 79-535 identifies state and federally owned recreation facilities as being in the national interest ( ref. -P.A. .79-535, Sec. 3(14)). The state's national interest policy requires adequate planning for and prohibits exclusion of any such facilities: and requires that in no case may other national interest facilities unreasonably restrict access to coastal waters: "To insure that the state and the coastal municipalities provide adequate planning for facilities and resources which are in the national interest as defined in section 3 of this act and to insure that any restrictions or exclusions of such facilities or uses are reasonable. Reasonable grounds for the restriction or exclusion of a facility or use in the national interest shall include a finding that such a facility or use:.. .(C) unreasonably restricts physical or visual access to coastal waters..." (P.A. 79-535 Sec. 2(a)(10)) Other policies from P.A. 79-535 are applicable to state and municipal planning and regulatory program and state-initiated development projects which pertain to shorefront access and protection. These include: - "To encourage increased recreational boating use of coastal waters, Where feasible, by (i) providing additional berthing space in existing harbors, (ii) limiting nonwater dependent land uses that preclude boating support facilities, (iii) increasing state owned launching facilities, and (.iv) providing for new boating facilities in natural harbors, new protected water areas and in areas dredged from dry land." (Sec. 2(b)(I)(G) - "To protect and where feasible, upgrade facilities serving the commercial fishing and recreational boating industries; to maintain existing authorized commercial fishing and recreational boating harbor space unless the demand for these facilities no longer exists or adequate space has been provided; to design and locate, where feasible, proposed recreational boating facilities in a manner which does not interfere with the needs of the commercial fishing industry." (Sec. 2(b)(1)(I)) - "To preserve the dynamic form and integrity of natural beach systems in order to provide critical wildlife habitats, a reservoir for sand supply, a buffer for coastal flooding and erosion, and valuable recreational opportunities; to insure that coastal uses are compatible with the capabilities of the system and do not unreasonably interfere with natural processes of erosion and sedimentation, and to encourage the restoration and enhancement of disturbed or modified beach systems." (Sec. 2(b)(2)(c)) 11-310 - "To promote, through existing state and local planning, development, promotional and regulatory programs, the use of existing developed shorefront areas for marine related uses, including but not limited to commercial and recreational fishing, boating and other water dependent commercial, industrial and recreational uses." (Sec. 2(b)(2)(G)) - "To manage undeveloped islands in order to promote their use as critical habitats for those bird, plant and animal species which are indigenous to such islands or which are increasingly rare on the mainland; to maintain the value of undeveloped islands as a major source of recreational open space; and to disallow uses which will have significant adverse impacts on islands or their resource components." (Sec. 2(b)(2)(H)) - To require that new or improved shoreline rail corridors be designed and constructed so as..., (ii) to improve or have a negligible adverse effect on coastal access and recreation and (iii) to enhance or not unreasonably impair the visual quality of the shoreline." (Sec. 2(c)(1)(F)) To require that coastal highways and highway improvements where possible enhance, but in no case decrease coastal access and recreational opportunities." (Sec. 2(c)(1)(G)) "...To require that any expansion or improvement of existing airports minimize adverse impacts on coastal resources, re- creation or access." (Sec. 2(c)(1)(H)) "To manage the state's fisheries in order to promote the economic benefits of commercial and recreational fishing, enhance re- creational fishing opportunities..." (Sec. 2(c)(1)(I)) The Conservation and Development Policies Plan includes the following policy concerning state funded development projects: "Promote the consideration of potential recreation and aesthetic uses of urban rivers in connection with state funded projects or urban renewal, drainage control, flood control, wastewater treatment, and other construc- tion projects in Urban Centers." (Urban Centers Policy C.4) SCORP includes the following policy: "Attempt to build-in recreation facilities in conjunction with the projects developed under the Federal Water Pol- lution Control Act." 11-311 Connecticut Actions Many of the recommendations contained in Planning Report No. 25 and the State Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan are currently being implemented in Connecticut. Increasing the capacity at, and improving the access to, the public beaches of Long Island Sound is the objective of a number of State4 recreational development projects now underway. These projects are described in the following paragraphs. Increasing Access to the Public Beach: State Development Projects Silver Sands State Park in Milford is the state's best opportunity forI increasing access to the shorefront. It is approximately 300 acres with 3100 feet of Sound frontage, and is ideally located midway between two exist- ing State beaches (Sherwood Island in Westport and Hammonasset in Madison) and in proximity to the urban centers of New Haven and Bridgeport. Two remaining obstacles to development of this area for recreational use must be removed before actual construction of park facilities can commence. First, an active landfill within the Park's boundary is contributing to pollutants which are degrading the water quality of the area. This facility must be closed and the pollution controlled. Second, United Illuminating Co. owns a nearshore island and a strip of land bisecting the park. This property must be acquired by the state.I The state is currently moving on a number of fronts which will make the development of a future active recreation area on the land feasible. The legislature has approved general bonding authorization for preliminary studies and for acquisition of the United Illuminating Co. property. Pre- limnaydesinwrka on the Deartmess roadfTrasomrtation the Dparkmentranc PbicWrs limnayderinwork at the Deartment road Trasomrtatioto The DpartmentranPblce Wors is working on a number of on-going contracts involving preliminary design of such site improvements as the closing of the landfill and improvement of an existing drainage and erosion problem at Great Creek. Final plans for the closing of the landfill are due by January 1, 1980. Requests for additional funds will be submitted by DEP, with the full support of the Governor, to the 1980 legislature to proceed with implementation of these projects. A draft of a study concerning shoreline stabilization of Sherwood Island State Park has recently been completed. The report includes a Plan of Improve-I ment which would combine an economical and practical method of erosion control with the creation (by direct placement of borrow sand) of a pocket beach 225 feet wide and extending for 800 feet. At Hammonasset State Park, improvements to the interior roads will be made in the next few months to improve vehicular circulation and related access difficulties. In addition to these development projects which will increase userI capacity, the State has a variety of transportation-related programs which improve public access to the State beaches. 11-312 increasing Access to the Public Beach: Transportation This past summer, beginning on the last weekend in June, the State Department of Transportation inaugurated a bus servide operatinca on weekends and holidays between nine inland cities and towns and two State'-beach parks-- Hammonasset and Sherwood Island. The purpose of the service was to encourage conservation of gasoline and to provide increased public transportation for weekend recreational travel, particularly for use by inland, urban residents. Two programs administered by DEP which apply to all twenty-two State Parks with swimming facilities (i.e. those that charge an entrance fee) are particu- larly effective in increasing the accessibility of the three State shoreline beach parks, since Hammonasset, Sherwood Inland, and Rocky Neck account for 2/3 of the 95,100 person total capacity of all State swimming facilities. The first is the Charter Oak Pass which is available from D.E.P. for five dollars and allows summer-long admission to all State Parks at which an entrance fee is otherwise charged. The second measure allows any group in Conn. using a bus for transportation to a State Park free addmission upon receipt of a bus pass from DEP's Parks and Recreation Unit. Another transportation program involving the State Recreation areas (again, the three large shoreline beach parks play a major role) which has been particu- larly valuable in alleviating urban area recreational deficiencies, is geared toward improving the recreational opportunities of disadvantaged youth in Con- necticut. Utilizing federal funds provided by the Federal Reimbursement Program for Social Services (Title XX), the Conn. Dept. of Income Maintenance administers the Summer Recreation Transport Program. This program, implemented on the local level by the 31 cities and towns with the highe st number of low income families, provides transportation for disadvantaged youths to State Parks. It effectively addresses both the need to improve access to public recreational areas (beaches) and the special access needs of one segment of the urban population. Increasing Access to Other Coastal Areas In addition to the measures described above which improve the availability and accessibility of public beach areas, the State is relying on a variety of I methods to address similar needs in other coastal areas cited by the Federal Coastal Zone Management Act and of other recreational needs identified through the supply and demand analysis in SCORP. In its fourth year of funding, the Coastal Area Management Program received a supplemental grant to be used for urban waterfront planning and coastal access projects. Three grants were a- warded to municipalities for urban waterfront studies, each with a recreational component, and one for a statewide recreational access study. General Access The CAM Program commissioned a study of the feasibility of retro-fitting certain coastal erosion control and navigation structures, constructed in whole or in part through the use of public funds, for the purpose of providing fishing and other recreational access for the general public. 11-313 Approximately thirty-three coastal structures (breakwaters, groins, jetties, and revetments) that have been constructed through the use of public funds were studied to determine the feasibility of using the structures for recreational purposes, primarily as fishing piers and walkways: Each of the structures were evaluated and ranked using the following criteria: accessibility from shore, availability of parking, availability of public transportation, safety, avail- ability of adequate recreational fishing stocks, and stability of the structure for supporting and maintaining use. Particular emphasis was placed on the suitability of use by the elderly and handicapped and accessibility by urban populations.4 The study produced the following conclusions: (1) the concept of retro- fitting a coastal erosion or navigation structure for use as a fishing pier is economically viable when compared to the cost of constructing a new pile andI timber pier specifically for that purpose, and (2) of the top five ranked structures, Ash Creek in Fairfield and Hammonasset Beach in Madison represent the best choices for improvement based on cost per use. Urban Waterfronts The City of Norwalk, using a coastal management urban waterfront grant, has prepared a plan for the revitalization of the urban waterfront in South Norwalk.p The plan proposes a Maritime Center for South Norwalk which includes an aquarium,4 a maritime museum, and a historic seaport. Also included in the proposal are major public improvements which are designed to open up the city's waterfront to public access and to encourage public use and enjoyment of the Norwalk River.4 The proposed Maritime Center will serve as a focus for the revitalization of the South Norwalk business district and surrounding neighborhoods. The urban waterfront grant awarded to New Haven was used by the city to identify and define several coastal issues including: expansion of recreational access to the harbor, port expansion potential, and commercial fisheries develop- ment potential. An interim report on recreational access was prepared in which existing access points were examined and proposals developed to improve public access to the waterfront parks and private commercial developments, and to improve transportation facilities. The City Plan Department will incorporate4 these recreational issues and proposals into the Municipal Coastal Program being prepared under the same urban waterfront grant. The City of Stamford has completed a study of the South End using a coastal management urban waterfront planning grant. The study recognizes that one ofI the South End's major assets is its harbor location. The "Action Plan" element of the South End Study includes recommendations for improving public access and recreational opportunities along the waterfront. An additional grant awarded to the City will also enhance access (both physical and visual) to the water-I front. The City will prepare a development plan for an urban trail connectingI the waterfront to the downtown with trailside recreational features. Areas of Cultural and Historic Value The maritime heritage of Connecticut's coastal area, particularly evident in the eastern portion of the state, is a valuable historic and cultural resource and is receiving considerable attention from all levels of government as well as the private sector. 11-314 Historic district commissions exist in a number of coastal communities and serve to protect and maintain the local historic character by regulating al- terations to buildings within an established district. The Connecticut River Gateway Conservation Zone is an eight town compact established to protect the natural, historic and aesthetic values of the lower valley of the Connecticut River. The Gateway Committee, consisting of local, regional and state members, developed proposals for minimum zoning standards to be applied in the conservation zone and recommended areas in which the State should acquire scenic easements and development rights. All eight towns have adopted at least the minimum standards; the State DEP has acquired one easement and has been negotiating with other towns for additional easements. Two proposals have been made recently concerning the historic and recreational resources of the Thames River Estuary region. One proposal emanating from the DEP recommends that the various sites of historic interest (many of which are already in public ownership) in the Thames River area serve as the basis of a National Maritime Historic Area developed and operated by the National Park Service. This, the proposal suggests, "would be in line with the recent National Park Service trend to emphasize historic themes in the urbanized northeast ... Furthermore, this theme would seem to be timely in view of the newly authorized Federal Maritime Heritage Preservation Grant Program." The second proposal is a draft Plan for Recreational Development of the Thames River Area prepared by the Southeastern Connecticut Regional Planning Agency. This proposal "suggests a strategy whereby people might be attracted to the Thames River area by improved opportunities for tourism and recreation-". The plan proposes linking existing and proposed recreational facilities along the Thames River by establishing an overall theme based on the River, and by providing public transportation between each facility. Railroads which run along both sides of the river could be used in conjunction with a boat excursion. Natural Areas Another category of coastal resources receiving protection through State action is comprised of areas of educational, scientific and scenic value. In 1969, the Connecticut General Assembly passed P.A. 727, creating the Natural Area Preserve System. This Act declared it "to be the public policy that carefully selected areas of land and water of outstanding scientific and educational interest be preserved". This program is administered by the Com- missioner of Environmental Protection who is given the "responsibility for selection, care, control, supervision and management of all natural area preserves within the system ... and to maintain such preserves in as natural and wild a state as is consistent with educational and scientific purposes" sTathatmypoe Commy finclsione wisathoized sytem "ondc ivnatorelo areaswti the- state thatmayssiovewrisathyrizednclusiondc wtinvensytorem of natusalithin pre- serves" and further "to acquire real property of any interest therein for natural area preserves by purchase, gift or devise ... and to accept any gift or bequest of money or other personal property to be used to acquire natural area preserves, or any interest therein, or to meet expenses involved in matters pertaining to the system of national area preserves." To date, 3704 acres are managed statewide under the Natural Area Preserve system. This includes over 600 acres of salt marsh in Hammonasset State eark. 11-315 The New England Natural Areas Project coordinated by the New England Natural Resources Center conducted in the early 1970's, an inventory of natural areas in Connecticut having important geologic, biological and soil type signi- ficance. This inventory, which is a first step in the eventual protection of important natural land areas is being updated by DEP's Natural Resource Center. To focus attention on coastal sites, the CAM Program will continue to assist in the Natural Resource Center's efforts to maintain a current and accurate inventory of natural land areas. In 1975, the Connecticut General Assembly enacted P.A. 75-45 which created a coastal reserve at Bluff Point in Groton. Bluff Point represents the last remaining significant piece of undeveloped land along the Connecticut coast. The State owns 803 acres at Bluff Point including one and one half miles of barrier beach which is the only completely undeveloped sand barrier in Con- necticut. The Act declared that 750 acres of the State-owned land at Bluff Point be designated as ''a coastal reserve for the purpose of preserving its native ecological associations, unique faunal and floral characteristics, geological features and scenic qualities in a condition of undisturbed integrity". The Coastal Reserve is maintained and administered by the Connecticut DEP. Other Methods of Increasing the Access and Protection Needs of the Coastal Area Municipal Coastal Programs Municipalities will address recreational access within their jurisdiction when developing Municipal Coastal Programs under Section 7 of the CCMA. As provided in the Act, municipalities are required to consider all applicable coastal issues, including specifically recreational facilities, when making revisions to their municipal Plans of Development. The revisions to the goals, policies and recommendations of the Plan of Development must be consistent with the coastal (recreational) policies contained in Section 2 of the CCMA and must address the identified issues. This revision could include such changes as 1) alteration of plan policies concerning recreational uses in the coastal area, 2) changes in acquisition and development priorities to focus on deficiencies of coastal recreational facilities, and 3) designating certain undeveloped parcels in the coastal area as open space. The municipality must then revise the municipal zoning ordinance and revise or adopt related municipal ordinances to conform to and implement the policies and land and water use strategies of the Municipal Coastal Plan. These revisions could include: 1) bonus and incentive zoning regulations to encourage pro- vision of access by the private sector to the public shorefront below mean high water, 2) building height limitations and setback requirements for shorefront property to enhance visual access to the water, 3) dedication of open space requirement in subdivision regulations to provide for shorefront recreational and public access needs, or 4) adoption of a Planned Unit Development ordinance with flexible design considerations encouraging the provision of open space and public access. The Long Island Sound Heritage Bill At the federal level, the Long Island Sound Heritage Bill,sponsored by U.S.I Senator Abraham Ribicoff of Connecticut, calls for the federal appropriation of 50 million dollars to provide New York and Connecticut with up to 75% of the costs of acquiring and/or developing fifteen areas of recreation, scenic and conservation value on Long Island Sound. The plan calls for federal acquisition II-316 of these lands and federally-supported state administration of the areas. While this bill would not greatly increase state land holdings since most of the proposed areas in Connecticut are currently either state or municipally owned, it would provide Connecticut with needed additional funds for development, restoration, and maintenance of recreational facilities along the coast, thereby increasing both the quality and availability of recreational opportunities in the coastal area. Areas of Particular Concern Another method for protecting certain shorefront areas is provided in this document. The protection needs of certain significant shorefront areas will be enhanced through their designation as areas of particular concern. The method and criteria for designating these areas - tidal wetlands, shellfish * ~concentration areas, federal navigation channels, and dredged spoil disposal sites are described in Part VIII. Other shorefront areas can be protected for their conservation, recreation, ecologial or esthetic values by designation as areas for preservation or restoration. The procedures for identifying and * ~designating future APR's are also described in Part VIII of this document. Funding Connecticut will continue, as it has in the past, to rely on a number of funding programs to enhance shorefront recreation and/or access. The State currently has over $20 million in bonding authorizations for land acquisition and related recreational development that can be used to match existing federal funding sources. The major source of federal funding is the Heritage Conservation and * ~Recreation Service's Land and Water Conservation Fund. This program provides grants-in-aid to states and their municipalities for the acquisition and de- velopment of outdoor recreation areas and facilities for the general public. * ~The Land and Water Conservation Fund is used by the state and its municipalities for approximately 50% of the assisted recreational projects. Connecticut receives * ~approximately six million dollars per year, of which on the average, 40% is used for state purposes and 60% for municipal. Two other related sources of federal funding are the Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Program (Pittman-Robertson) and the Federal Aid in Sport Fish Restoration Program (Dingell-Johnson). Both programs provide up to 75% reimbursement of total project cost. The purpose of the Pittman-Robertson * ~fund is to restore or manage wildlife populations and provide for public use of these resources. Connecticut's annual appropriation of $500,000 is used primarily for acquisition of lands providing habitat for wildlife such as marshes and farmland. State coastal areas acquired using this funding * ~source are Ragged Rock, Nell's Island and Barn Island. The Dingell-Johnson fund supports projects designed to restore and manage sport fish populations for fhe preservation and improvement of sport fishing and related uses of these fisheries resources. Connecticut receives approximately $220-230,000 per year from this source. A State Boating Fund, consisting of 'state funds only, is administered by the Dept. of Environmental Protection. These funds are used by the state and municipalities for the administration and enforcement of the boating laws and regulations and for acquisition, construction, maintenance and improvement of public boating facilities. There is currently about 5450,000 in the fund. 11-317 Sec. 315(2) of the CZMA Amendments could provide another source of federal funds for improving shorefront access. Though currently unfunded, Sec. 315(2) authorizes grants of up to 50% of the cost of acquiring lands to provide access to public beaches and other valuable coastal areas. Thus, if funded, Sec. 315(a) could become a significant additional source of assi stance. A new program with potential for improving access to the waterfront in urban areas is the Urban Parks and Recreation Recovery Program. Five cities along Connecticut's coast--Bridgeport, New Haven, New London, Norwich, West Haven -- are included among the nine cities in Connecticut and 360 cities and counties selected nationwide to be eligible for matching grants to rehabilitate or develop urban recreation areas under the National Parks and Recreation Act of 1978. The Act establishes a five year program to provide Federal grants to economically hard pressed communities specifically for the rehabilitation of critically needed recreation areas and facilities. All of the eligible coastal communities have waterfront recreational areas in need of rehabilitation. It is anticipated that at least some of these facilities will be among those chosen by the cities for improvements using this funding source. Two other federal programs with the potential for providing funds to the state for improving the public access and protection needs of ecological, cultural, historic and esthetic areas are the Maritime Heritage Preservation Grants Program of the National Trust for Historic Preservation and the Coastal Zone Management Estuarine Sanctuaries Program. The former provides funding, for selected projects, to encourage creative and innovative approaches for the identification, protection and enhancement of historic maritime resources, and grants from the latter can be used to cover 50% of the cost of acquisition, development and operation of estuarine sanctuaries for the purpose of creating natural field laboratories. A listing of additional sources of financial assistance for recreational activities appears in Appendix H (Complementary Legislation and Funding) of Planning Report #25. II-318 C. EROSION PLANNING PROCESS Introduction Connecticut's coastal area shoreline and Long Island Sound were briefly introduced and described in Part II, Description of the Natural Environment. Geologically speaking, the north shore of Long Island is most aptly described as an embayed, pri- mary coast, originally formed by glacial deposition and currently being submersed by rising sea level. These two processes, glacial deposition and submergence, are responsible for the overall con- figuration of Connecticut's present-day shoreline. Coupled with the low energy environment of Long Island Sound, which is protected from the open ocean by Long Island, they have produced a shoreline which is variably irregular and curvilinear in configuration and is composed of bedrock, glacial drift, tidal marshes and beaches. The seven morphologic districts which comprise the north shore of Long Island Sound are shown in Figure 3 . Statistics on their composition have been tabulated from surficial geology and soils maps and are presented in Table 1,. Review of all available pertinent literature and research dealing with the problems of shoreline erosion in the state indicates that only those portions of the coastal area fronting directly on Long island Sound and the lower reaches of the state's three major tidal rivers are affected by erosion of any consequence. This direct Long Island Sound fronting shoreline constitutes 278 miles of the total 583 miles of coastal area frontage. Examination of state and federal expenditures for erosion control over the past twenty-five years further verifies this conclusion. For these reasons the analysis and planning processes have focused on the 278 mile portion of direct Sound-fronting shoreline. A detailed discussion of the processes of shoreline erosion, their impacts, and legal, institutional and operational means of mitigating their ef- fectsare presented in Planning Report No. 29. Nature and Occurrence of Shoreline Erosion Shoreline erosion in Connecticut has consistently expressed itself most significantly as a beach erosion problem. Statistics compiled for the Long Island Sound Regional Study (LISRS) in 1975 by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers indicate that approximately 26 miles, or 10 percent of our shoreline, can be classified as subject to "critical erosion." The LISRS further states: "The erosion is mainly confined to beaches that are receding at an estimated rate of one to one and one- half feet per year." II-319 A more recent inventory conducted by the Coastal Area Manage- ment Program has concluded the following. Connecticut has a total of 278 miles of shoreline which front on Long Island Sound. Of that approximately 85 miles are beach, 69 miles are composed of glacial drift, 30 miles are saltmarsh, 44 miles consist of bedrock and the remaining 50 miles are dominated by artificial fill. Potentially, the beach, saltmarsh, glacial drift and artificial fill portions of the shoreline are erodible, while bedrock can be considered non- erodible. Based on a comparative analysis of historical shoreline information and aerial photographs, 47 miles, or approximately 17 percent of our shoreline, are significantly affected by erosion. Table 6 gives further details on measurement techniques and definitions, and statistical breakdowns by town. Examination of the data con- tained in the table indicates the following towns encompass a major- ity of the state's significantly eroding shoreline: Milford 6.5 miles West Haven 4.6 miles Fairfield 4.6 miles Madison 4.0 miles Old Lyme 3.5 miles Stratford 3.2 miles Westport 2.7 miles Stamford 2.7 miles It is also worthy of note that approximately 35 percent of the total shoreline miles classified as significantly eroding is attri- butable to shoreward migration being experienced along the state's larger barrier beaches. Information on areas of significant erosion is being transferred to resource factor maps (Appendix D, Figure D-6 of the Draft EIS). Relatively speaking, shore erosion on the north side of Long Island Sound is not as critical in terms of magnitude as that encountered along shorelines exposed to the open ocean. For instance, the outer shore of Cape Cod is subject to erosion rates on the order of three feet per year, or almost three times that experienced along Connecticut's coast. This difference is primarily a result of fetch limiting by Long Island. That is , Long Island functions as a wind break which effectively controls the generation of surface waves in the Sound. Consequently, smaller, shorter waves predominate in the Sound and littoral transport along the shoreline is generally very weak. As a secondary characteristic,fetch limiting confines significant erosion to those periods when major storms and hurricanes occur. It also markedly reduces the generation of swell (long, low waves) which can act to move material onshore to replenish eroded areas. Near the mouths of the three major coastal rivers, the Connecticut, Thames and Housatonic, and at several of the larger seaward projecting headlands strong tidal currents act to supplement weak wave induced littoral transport and may, at times, play a dominant role in the erosion process. II-320 TABLE 5 SHORELINE COMPOSITION AND EROSION STATISTICS 3 . M ! .i ~ ;: T S H 0 R E L I N E C O M P O S I T I O N SHOREL I[IE POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANTLY GLACIAL SALT ARTIFICIAL ERODIBLE AFFECTED SHORELINE TOWN BEACH DRIFT2 MARSHS FILL SHORELINE3 BY EROSION 3 BEDROCK TOTAL' -- mi. (km) mi. (km) mi. (km) mi. (km) mi. (km) mi. (km) S mi. (km) mi. i'm) Greenwich 1.7 (2.7) 7.3(11.8) 2.7 (4.4) 7.0(11.3) 18.7 (30.3) 0.8 (1.3) 3.5 3.8 (6.1) 22.5 (36. 5) Stamford 3.2 (5.2) 1.1 (1.8) 0.3 (0.5) 3.8 (6.1) 8.4 (13.6) 2.7 (4.3)26.2 1.9 (3.1) 10.3 (16.7) Darien 0.6 (1.0) 4.9 (7.9) 1.1 (1.8) 1.1 (1.8) 7.7 (12.5) 5.9 (9.5) 13.6 (22.0) Norwalk 15.0(24.3) 9.7(15.7) 1.6 (2.6) 3.4 (5.5) 29.8 (48.4) 0.4 (0.6) 1.1 3.8 (6.1) 33.6 (54 4) Jestpo-t 5.0 (8.2) 4.3 (6.9) 2.1 (3.4) 2.6 (4.2) 14.1 (22.9) 2.7 (4.3119.1 --- 4.1 22.) Fairfield 4.2 (6.8) 1.6 (2.6) 0.7 (1.1) 1.3 (2.1) 7.8 (12.6) 4.6 (7.4)58.9 ---- 7.8 (12.6) Bridgeport 3.0 14.8) 2.1 (3.4) 0.3 (0.5) 8.7(14.0) 14.1 (22.3) 2.4 (3.3)17.0 ---- 14.1 (22.9) Stratford 4 0 (6.5) 0.7 (1.1) 3.2 (5.2) 3.6 (5.8) 11.5 (18.6) 3.2 (5.1)27.8 11.5 (13.6) Milforj 5.9 (9.6) 3.3 (5.4) 1.9 (3.1) 0.8 (1.3) 12.0 (19.4) 6.5(10.4)52.4 0.4 (0.7) 12.4 (20.1) West Haven 4.5 (7.4) 1.1 (1.8) 0.1 (0.2) 0.4 (0.7) 6.3 (10.2) 4.5 (7.4)71.8 0.2 (0.3) 6.4 (10.4) 'ew Haven 1.8 (2.9) 0.8 (1.3) --- 3.4 (5.5) 6.0 (9.7) 1.0 (1.6)15.8 0.3 (0.5) 6.3 (10 2) East Haven I O (1.6) 0.2 (0.3) 0.2 (0.3) --- 1.4 (2.3) 0.9 (1.5 39.1 0.9 (1.5) 2.3 (3.7) Branfuro 2.6 (4.2) 2.3 (3.7) 2.0 (3.2) 1.1 (1.8) 8.0 (13.0) ---- 12.9(20.3) 20.9 (33.1) Guilford ".8 (1.3) 0.9 (1.5) 1.5 (2.4) 1.9 (3.1) 5.1 (8.3) 1.3 2. 1) 13.0 4.9 (7.9) 10.0 (16.2) Madison 4.9 (7.9) 1.1 (1.8) .2 (0.3) 0.8 (1.3) 7.0 (11.3) 4.0 (6.4)52.6 0.6 (1.0) 7.6 (12 3' Clinton 2.7 (4.4) 5.8 (1.3) 1.3 (2.1) 1.2 (1.9) 6.0 (9.7) 1.2 (1.9) 20.0 ---- 6.0 (9.7) Westbroo, 3.8 (6.2) 1.7 (2.8) 5.6 (9.1) 1.4 (2.2)25.0 ---- 5.6 (9.1. Old Saybrook 3.8 (6.2) 1.5 (2.4) 1.4 (2.3) 1.4 (2.3) 8.1 (13.1) 2.0 (3.2)24.6 ---- 8.1 (13.1) Old Lyme 3.8 (6.2) 1.4 (2.3) 2.1 (3.4) 0.1 (0.2) 7.4 (12.0) 3.5 (5.7) 47.3 --- 7.4 (12.0) East Lyme- 3 0 (4.7) 2.7 (4.4) 1.3 (2.1) 0.2 (0.3) 7.1 (11.5) 0.5 (0.8) 5.4 2.0 (3.2) 9.1 (14.7) iaterC-td 2.5 (4.0) 2.7 (4.4) 0.2 (0.3) 0.6 (1.0) 6.0 (9.7) 1.2 (1.9)17.6 0.9 (1.3) 6.3 (11.J) New London 1.7 (2.7) 1.2 (1.9) ---- 1.7 (2.7) 4.5 (7.3) 0.5 (0.7)10.0 0.4 (0.7) 5.0 (8.1) Groton 3.8 (6.1) 7.6(12.3) 2.5 (4.3) 2.6 (4.2) 16.5 (26.13) 1.2 (1.9) 6.6 1.8 (2.9) 18.3 (29.6) Stoninrgton 2.9 (4.7) 7.4(12.0) 3.0 (4.9) 1.8 (3.0) 15.2 (24.6) 0.3 (0.5) 1.6 3.0 (4.9) 18.2 (29.5) TOTALS 06.2(139.6) 68.4(110.8) 29.7i(48.1) 49.5(80.1) 234.3(379.4) 46.9(75.0) 16.8 43.6(70.6) 277.9 (450.1) I. Shoreline composition categories indicate dominant shoreline types (i.e. minute. narrow.beach shorefront, backed immediately by glacial till. is considered to be dominantly glacial drift). Measurements were compiled from Surficial Geology and Soils maps of a scale of 1:24.000. 2. Glacial drift includes all types of glacial material: outwash, till, end moraine, etc. 3. Beacnh. glacial drift. salt marsh and artificial fill are all considered to be potentially erodible. 4. Bedrock is consntered to be non-erodible or to have limited potential for erosion. S. Sal& 'Iarsh neasurrments are genPralized and io not Inrolre frontaqes on minor streams and ditches 6. I0lv large islands. such as Masons' Iland ( ttonlnqgto, and large island iroups, .uch as the Norwalk and Thimole Islands, are included in the snorel ine measurement. 7. Shoreline measurements include river frontage up to the first bridge. usually 1-95. 8. Siqnificant erosion occurs where erosion iresents signlficant oroblem because the rate )f erosion, considered In :on'unction ltn *conomic. industrial, recreational. demoqr.ir,i-, environlmlntJ1 lrd It, mrr relevant ictors indicates that acthin t!' nl.'' ltn soo.h croslon 'lv re jIstif'ed. II-321 In conjunction with erosion, rising sea level is also affecting the shoreline. Recently (within the last 100 years),sea level in Long Island Sound has been rising at the rate of one to one and one- half feet per century. On initial consideration an annual increase in sea level of .08 to .16 inches seems insignificant. However the impact of such a fluctuation is more evident when its effect on a sloping land surface is considered. For example, an increase in sea level of one to one add one-half feet over a century would "drown" 20 to 30 feet of shorefront with a slope of 1:20 (one foot increase in elevation for every 20 horizontal feet). Although Connecticut's shoreline experiences lower erosion rates as a result of sheltering by Long Island, the intense use and development of the coast offset these lower rates and focus the impact of smaller scale changes. This phenomenon is particularly evident along the more intensely developed coastal segments west of New Haven. Historically, structural stabilization (groins, seawalls, breakwaters, etc.) has accompanied recreational, residential, commercial and industrial uses of the shoreline, almost as a corollary. As a result, structural stabilization plays a major role in the erosion-sedimentation process affecting our shore. Revetments (sloping seawalls) seawalls and bulk- heads have been used to stabilize many of the sediment sources which naturally supplied materials to beaches and dunes through wave and cur- rent induced erosion and transport. Groins and jetties which are utilized to protect beaches and retard littoral (along shore) transport of material have worked,but often at the expense of inducing erosion on adjoining parcels. In addition, figures compiled as part of the LISRS indicate that total erosion damacies of $1.8 (1970 dollars) million are experienced along our coast annually. Of that total approximately $ .5 million are attributable to the cost of repairing existing erosion control struc- tures. In short, structural methods used to 'nrevent erosion are not only costly but have been utilized without adequate attention to natural pro- cesses, or without the benefit of a clearer understanding of coastal processes which exist today. Clearly the erosion ''problem'" is a manifestation of the interaction of a number of variables. However, it may be briefly characterized as a storm. induced beach erosion problem which has been intensified by the high use demand for recreational beach in the state; the intense use of all shorefront areas for recreational, commercial, residential and in- dustrial purposes; and the high degree of structural shoreline stabil- ization. In terms of its spatial occurrence, significant erosion is limited to two general segments of our shoreline. The first segment lies west of New Haven and includes shorefront in the towns of Westport, Fairfield, Bridgeport, Stratford, Milford and West Haven. The second segment encom- passes the shoreline area between Guilford and Old Lyme. Geographically 11-322 these two segments correspond with shoreline districts B, C and E (Figure 3 ). Their composition is largely glacial drift (primarily outwash) and beaches. Damages arising from erosion in these areas account for nearly 65 percent of the totIal annual damages experien- ced as a result of erosion. Erosion Management Techniques Many techniques may be applied to shorelines in an attempt to control or mitigate the effects of erosion. In general, they fall into two categories. Structural alternatives are those involving the construction of a concrete, timber, sheet steel or rock structure which divert erosive forces or contain the shoreline which is eroding. Non-structural alternatives are those which involve no structures at all, such as placement of sand fill, dune building or restoration, and control of land use in such a manner as to allow erosion to continue without affecting buildings or facilities. Over the long term neither structural or non-structural techniques will halt shoreline recession. Rising sea level in conjunction with storms, winds, waves and tidal currents will continue, on a geologic time scale, to rearrange and submerge Connecticut's shoreline. With this in mind, the approach to be used in dealing with eroding shore- line will depend on the economic value and use of the shoreline for which protection is considered and the monies available for implemen- tation of protection. A complete presentation of erosion control techni- ques is contained in Planning Report #29. The following is a brief discussion of structural and non-structural alternatives. Structural Techniques Structural erosion control techniques may be generally divided into three categories: (1) Wall-type structures built immediately adjacent and parallel to shore such as seawalls, revetments and bulkheads. (2) Structures built perpendicular and connected to shore such as groins and jetties. (3) Structures built offshore or near. shore such as breakwaters. Each of these generic types of control works *is common along Connecticut's shore. 11-323 Seawalls, Revetments and Bulkheads--These wall type structures are commonly used to contain fill placed in shoreline areas and/or to protect eroding shorefront in the immediate vicinity of houses, roads and other endangered facilities. In and of themselves they are not effective means of protecting beaches. In many instances they have been used to stabilize sources of beach material supply thereby contributing to erosion in adjacent areas. Seawalls and bulkheads may actually induce erosion at their bases by reflect- ing scouring waves from their vertical faces. Groins and Jetties--Groins and jetties are typical structural means of controlling beach erosion or containing sand fill placed to form beaches. Their function is to retard the transport of materials along and parallel to shore. Jetties differ from groins in that they are also used to stabilize inlets and channels. On the north shore of Long Island Sound groins and jetties appear along nearly every shorefront. They have compartmentalized or divided most of the natural beach areas along the coast and have signifi- cantly altered nearshore sediment systems. Short term alterations in shoreline configuration are almost invariably associated with the place- ment of groins and jetties. Realignment is caused by groin initiated erosion of the beach on the downdrift side and accretion on the up- drift side. Groins and jetties are not effective means of controlling movements of material perpendicular to shore such as storm overwash. Breakwaters--Breakwaters are erected in offshore waters for the purposes of providing protection for harbors, anchorages and port facilities. They produce quiet water areas by forming a surface against which waves break. By providing protection from wave action they enhance the depositional environment in shoreline areas which they serve. Breakwaters are extremely expensive to construct and their design and layout require extensive analysis of local conditions. Use of these structures solely for erosion control can be very effective but it is generally economically unsound. Non-Structural Techniques Dune management, placement of sand fill and shoreline use controls can provide effective non-structural alternatives for the mitigation of erosion. The central value of these techniques lies in their abil- ity to function with the natural processes of erosion. Sand Fill--Placement of sand as fill in beach areas or to create beaches is one of the most common types of erosion mitigation tech- niques in use in Connecticut. Sand fill may be used in two ways. It may be placed directly onto the shore to be protected or developed as beach, or it may be placed in an area adjacent to and updrift of the area to be protected. That is, it may be directly placed or placed to form a feeder beach which is designed to be eroded by waves and II-324 currents and transported via littoral transport to the area to be protected. In Connecticut sand fill has been used nearly exclu- sively in conjunction with groins and jetties. In order 'JOr sand fill to provide effective mitigation to erosion a source of sand must be readily and economically available to provide initial fill material and to facilitate annual replacement of eroded fill. The fill must also have grain size and distribution characteristics that are compatible with the area into which it is to be placed. Fill material placed along any shoreline to create or enhance beaches is, at best, a temporary solution. Continuous re- placement of eroded fill is necessary annually. F ~~~~~Dune Management--The construction of dunes and the stabilization of natural and artificial dunes with vegetation, commonly American Beach Grass (Ammophila breviligulata) represent a second type of non-struc- tural erosion mitigation. Under this technique dunes are constructed or enhanced by the placement of sand fill and planting of stabilizing vegetation. Snow fences may also be used to physically retain in- itial sand fill until vegetative cover is adequate,or to control access points so as to prevent the destruction of dune grasses. Dunes are constructed parallel to and behind the beach proper and serve to trap and absorb sand which is transported onshore by wind and storm overwash. Dune maintenance and/or construction can provide a most effective means of alleviating shoreline erosion. Since dunes act as a dynamic beach sand reservoir and flood barrier they are able to adjust to varying wave and wind conditions and rising sea level, in contrast to static structures such as seawalls and groins. Dune management has been limited in use as an approach to shoreline erosion in Connecticut. Only one such management effort has been under- taken at Hammonassett State Park in Madison. The effort was initiated Utilization of dune management and construction does have several drawbacks. Existing uninterrupted dunes are not common along the shore- line and in many areas construction has taken place in such close prox- imity to the beach proper that creation of a dune line would also require massive beach fill. Even so, dune enhancement is probably the most viable approach to managing barrier beaches where necessary. Use Controls--Controlling the use of shoreline areas in order to avoid the creation of erosion hazards and to prevent endanger~'Ient of development is another method of non-structural mitigation. Under this approach shoreline areas may be designated as no-construction areas or special structural design may be required within them. Alternatively, setbacks for buildings may also be established. These setbacks may be based on some multiple of the annual erosion rate at the location where construction is to occur and the expected longevity of the proposed structure. Both methods require the identification of 11-325 jusitifiable and equitable parameters for delineation of boundaries or setbacks. The former approach is being applied in Connecticut, through the Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) Flood Insurance Program. HUD-FIA has identified several zones within the coastal area on the basis of the 500 year (B zone) and 100 year (A zone) coastal floods and the occurrence of areas exposed to storm waves (V-zones). These zones have been designated primarily for flood management purposes. However, they are also effective for use in erosion management since most erosion is storm induced. Both methods are best applied to property which is undeveloped. Establishment of a setback line after an area is developed provides no protection for development nor does it preclude the need to con- struct'protective works. In addition, the setback method requires an accurate and enforceable determination of erosion rates and lines. Unfortunately, annual erosion rates which are accurate and area specific are not presently available for Connecticut's coast. Final establishment of HUD-FIA hazard zones has not been completed in all coastal municipalities but preliminary boundaries and associated criteria have been implemented coast-wide. Al ternatives Each structural and non-structural alternative has unique char- acteristics which make it the most desirable approach to erosion mitigation in a particular situation. For example, non-structural protection of a developed bluff area is more difficult to achieve than structural protection simply because of topographic and use considerations. Setbacks and building restrictions would prove use- less to protect existing development and the placement of beach fill or dunes is not always compatible with the shoreline characteristics. Hence, structural controls, such as a revetment, would need to be im- plemented in order to provide protection. In addition to site and development considerations, costs of construction and maintenance needs play a significant role in the selection of erosion control alternatives. In the case of Connecticut's shoreline these considerations take on an added complexity. The varied use and development of the shoreline coupled with its extremely variable and diverse composition and con- figuration preclude the application of one type of alternative (stru- ctural or non-structural) coast-wide. Several observations serve to provide a basis for the establish- ment of priorities for the use of control techniques. General evalu- ation of structural alternatives implemented in the state indicate that: 1. Repayment periods on state loans which have been incurred by local interests (towns and private associations) to implement erosion control works have often exceeded the effective life of protection projects. II-326 2. The cost of annual maintenance of structures and sand fill have resulted in neglect of maintenance, and reduced project lives. Further, lack of regular maintenance can lead to catastrophic structural failure. 3. Structural means of erosion control such as seawalls and groins have often aggravated erosion in adjacent areas, or in the case of vertical seawalls, induced erosion on site. 4. Structural stabilization which has historically occurred along the coast has depleted or limited sediment sources necessary for the natural development of protective beaches, and has significantly altered shoreline behavior and the way in which the shoreline naturally copes with erosion. In contrast to wholly structural measures, non-structural alterna- tives, provide several distinct advantages. Sand fill, beach development and dune construction serve to enhance and expand recreational resources and, therefore provide recreational benefits in addition to mitigating shore erosion. These types of erosion protection also function more effectively with the natural system as opposed to structural measures which seek to limit or alter completely erosional processes. Because they augment natural erosion and flood control mechanisms, non-structur- al managerial techniques are often more easily maintained. In recognition of the advantages and drawbacks of both structural and non-structural erosion control techniques, Connecticut's approach to determining the most effective means of mitigating erosion will be predicated on site specific conditions. in general, however, it will be the state's policy to implement controls on the following priority basis: First priority: non-structural control Second priority: combination structural and non- structural control Third priority: structural control Fourth priority: no control Management Approach In order to provide for continued planning and management of the effects of shoreline erosion the state has implemented an approach consisting of the following interrelated components: (1) Regulation of activities affecting and affected by shoreline erosion through use of state authorities governing coastal structures and dredging, and mun- icipal authorities under coastal site plan review, as provided for by the Connecticut Coastal Manage- ment Act, and the National Flood Insurance Program. 11-327 (2) Funding, design, construction and management of structural and non-structural erosion control techniques, in accord- ance with the coastal policies of the Connecticut Coastal Management Act, through the existing state initiated Flood Control and Beach Erosion Program. (3) Provision of technical assistance to individuals and municipalities, through the Department of Environmental Protection, during the design and implementation of non- publicly, funded control techniques. (4) Continued planning and evaluation of erosion and its effects in all coastal shoreline areas in cooperation with established municipal flood and erosion con- trol boards. Authorities Coastal Structures Regulatory Program--Sections 25-7b through 25-7f of the Connecticut General .Statutes (C.G.S.) authorize the Commissioner of Environmental Protection to regulate the erection of structures and the placement of fill in the tidal, coastal and navigable waters of the state. Under this regulatory program all construction and filling waterward of the mean high wlater line in the state's tidally influenced waters must be conducted in accord- ance with a permit issued by the Department of Environmental Pro- tection (DEP). All permits issued under these authorities are, by law, evaluated with respect to "the prevention or alleviation of shore erosion" (Section 25-7b). Provision is also made under these sections for the removal of nuisance structures and levying of fines for violations. Coastal Dredging Regulatory Program--The authority to regulate the removal of sand, gravel or other material from beyond the mean high water mark is vested in the Department of Environmental Pro- tection by Sections 25-10 through 25-18 of the Connecticut General Statutes. Prior to the initiation of any dredging or excavation within the state's coastal waters a permit must be obtained from the Commissioner of Environmental Protection. Only previously per- mitted maintenance dredging of navigation channels, berths, basins, moorings and waterfront facilities are exempt from regulation. As part of its review of dredging and excavation applications the Department of Environmental Protection must evaluate the impact of the activity on shore erosion. Section 25-18 provides penalties for violations. II-328 Flood Control and Beach Erosion Program -- Authority for cooperative funding, design and construction of erosion control-works is derived from sections 25-69 through 25-98 of the Connecticut General Statutes. These sections provide for the organization of municipal flood and erosion control boards and empower the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) to cooperate with such boards and the federal government in the construction of and payment for flood and erosion control systems. An initial sum of four million dollars was allo- cated to pay for the costs of state participation in the development of beach erosion control systems under the following cost sharing formulae: PERCENT CONTRIBUTION Property Ownership State Muni ci pal public (municipal) 66.6% 33.3% public (state) 100% --- private 33.3% 66.6% State funded loans are also available to local authorities for the initial payment of the local contribution on federal projects. During the period between 1955 and 1971 a total of fifty erosion control projects were completed at a total cost of 7.5 million dol- lars. Nineteen of the projects involved in the partici- pation of the federal government through the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers under Section 103 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. Sections 426e to 426i). The Corps' involvement consisted of contribution of 50% of the cost of the construction of protection works which benefitted public property. More recently, in 1978, the state legislature allocated an additional 3 million dollars for the continuation of the beach erosion control program. Utilizing these and other specially allocated funds, studies have been initiated for the protection of shoreline areas in Milford, East Haven and Westport. It is fully anticipated that erosion manage- ment under the existing program will continue to improve contingent upon funding availabilities at state, municipal and federal levels. In order to provide for a fair and equitable allocation of public funds for the mitigation of shoreline erosion and to provide for the greatest public benefit from expenditures, it will be the state's policy to provide erosion control funds on the following basis: 1. State owned public shorefront. 2. Municipally owned public shorefront. 11-329 3. Quasi-public recreational shorefront where public access is provided. 4. Privately owned recreational shorefront where public access is provided. 5. Privately owned recreational shorefront. This policy is not intended to exclude privately owned shorefront from receiving the financial benefit of state-owned protection when such protection is justified and economically feasible. Rather it is designed to prioritize expenditures when projects involving several different types of shorefront are competing for limited state and federal funds. Coastal Site Plan Review -- Connecticut's Coastal Area Management Act requires municipalities to initiate a site plan review for the following activities when they occur within the coastal boundary: 1. Buildings, uses or structures subject to zoning regulations (Section 8-3 of the Connecticut General Statutes (C.G.S.). 2. Subdivisions of land (C.G.S. Section 8-25). 3. Planned unit developments (C.G.S. Section 8-13f). 4. Variances (C.G.S. Section 8-7). 5. Requests for special exceptions or special zoning permits (C.G.S. Section 8-2). 6. Municipal improvements (C.G.S. Section 8-24). Under the provisions of the site review procedure any person or municipal board undertaking an activity which is regulated under the sections of the general statutes listed above must submit a coastal site plan to the municipal planning or zoning commissions for review. As part of the review process, and in addition to the criteria provided for by municipal regulations, the board or commission responsible for coastal site plan review must consider three criteria in the evaluation of a coastal site plan: 1. The characteristics of the site, including the location and condition of any coastal resources defined by the Coastal Area Management Act. 2. The potential adverse and/or beneficial effects of the proposed activity on coastal resources and future water dependent development opportunities. 3. The coastal policies contained in the Coastal Area Management Act. 11-330 Based on consideration of these three criteria the municipal board or commission responsible for coastal site plan review may approve, deny or modify permits issued for development within the coastal area. Cer- tain minor activities may be exempted from the review process by local regulation. To aid municipal decision-makers in the evaluation of erosion hazards, resource factor maps depicting shoreline composition, areas F ~~~of significant erosion and historic shoreline changes are being developed by the Coastal Area Management Program. Sample maps are contained in Appendix D of the Draft EIS. National Flood Insurance Program--The National Flood Insur- ance Act (42 U.S.C. 4001-4128) provides low cost insurance against flood damages in designated hazard areas(see Part V on use con- trols). In return, communities must apply a set of established regulations to the evaluation of any development involving hazard areas. Part of the regulations which are applied involve the evaluation of erosion hazards. Sections 1910.5 (a) (1), (2) and (3) of Title 24 of the Code of Federal Regulations apply in all of Connecticut's coastal communities. Under these authorities a permit is required for development in areas of flood-related erosion "as they are known to the community". In the evaluation of permit applications a determination is made regarding the safety of site improvements from flood-related erosion and the likelihood that the proposed improvements will induce erosion. In the event a proposed improvement is found to be in the path of flood-related erosion or likely to induce flood-related erosion, relocation or protective measures may be required. Factor maps depicting areas of significant erosion are being developed by the CAM Program and may be used in the identifi- cation of hazard areas (Appendix D, Figures 5 and 6 of the Draft EIS). Coastal Policies In addition to the policies specifically noted in this section the coastal policies contained in Part IV will be applied in the state and municipal regulatory review of shoreline activities. The coastal policies will also apply to state instituted erosion control projects and to federal mitigation efforts through consistency requirements. Particular attention and emphasis will be given to the policies developed for: I. COASTAL LAND AND WATER RESOURCES A. Bluffs and Escarpments B. Beaches and Dunes C. Intertidal Flats D. Coastal Hazard Areas II. COASTAL USE POLICIES A. Coastal Structures and Filling III. GOVERNMENT PROCESS POLICIES A. Flooding and Erosion Planning 11-331 PART XI PUBLIC PARTICIPATION AND FEDERAL AGENCY CONSULTATIOi A. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Public participation in Connecticut's CAM program has been and will continue to be a serious effort. The Federal Coastal Zone Management Act requires genuine public involvement in every phase of development of a coastal management program. CAM has encouraged and sought active public assistance in both drawing up the management program and in seeking reaction to its var- ious recommendations. Affected local, regional, state and fed- eral agencies as well as interest groups and the general public have been involved. CAM is committed to providing continued op- portunity for public and government involvement during program review and approval and implementation. As described below, a variety of methods has been used to make full participation an actuality in Connecticut's CAM pro- aram. Documentation of all meetings is contained in Section II, Appendix E of the Draft EIS. CAM Advisory Board A cornerstone of CAM's public participation process has been its Advisory Board, made up of twenty-four representatives of state anencies, regional planning agencies and citizens. The ten citizen members reflect a wide variety of social and economic interests including business and industry, coastal recreation, marine fisheries, coastal property owners, con- servation, environmental-ecological concerns, urban minorities and inland residents concerned with the coastal area. From its inception, the CAM program has received policy direction from the Advisory Board. Meeting each month, it has acted as a soundino board for major issues and policy options during program development. The Board established eight sub- committees, each to work on one major component or aspect of Connecticut's proqram such as management options, coastal lea- islation, and regional facility siting. The public information and citizen participation subcommittee worked with CAM staff to establish and implement a comprehensive public participation strategy. In both 1978 and 1979 the Advisory Board sponsored and introduced proposed coastal manaoement legislation to the Conn- ecticut General Assembly. A precise listing of Board members and meetings appears in Appendix E of the Draft EIS. 11-332 public Pleetit1gs Between the fall of 1975 and December1979 the CAM Program has been formally involved in over 300 public meetings with local of- ficials, special interest groups and organizations, and interested citizens. In 1976 CAM initiated preliminary meetings with mayors, first selectmen, and staffs of coastal municipalities to discuss CAM's objectives, federal requirements, and possible approaches. In 1977 and 1978, further discussions were conducted with chief elected officials and town staff, including Planning and Zoning Commissions, Conservation Commissions, Inland Wetland Commissions, and others, on CAM's proposed draft legislation. A series of twenty-three coastal town meetings were conduct- ed for CAM during October and November of 1976 by the League of Women Voters. The meetings were held to obtain preliminary in- formation and opinions from coastal residents concerning prob- lems in their communities, and suggestions for the design of a coastal management program. The findings of these meetings were collected by the League in a report and published by the CAM Program. In early 1977, CAM sponsored nine regional workshops and three Cooperative Extension workshops to present program op- tions and obtain input from local officials and interested cit- izens. By invitation CAM staff members have met with over one hundred special interest groups and organizations between 1975 through 1978. Many meetings were briefings on the status of CAM, while others were presentations concerning natural resour- ces, resource management, the history of the coast, or other special topics. In addition, approximately 20 meetings have been held with a citizen initiated "Friends of CAM" coalition, which consists of several special interest groups explicitly interested in coastal management. Legislative Process and Public Hearings Efforts to secure new legislative authority to establish a shared state/local coastal management program began in late 1977. In November, 1977, a discussion draft of CAM legislation was released for public review and comment by the CAM Advisory Board. At that time, the CAM staff met with each of the thirty- six coastal towns to solicit comments of local officials and cit- izens. Revisions based on comments received were incorporated into a final draft, dated February 6, 1973, and it was submitted to the General Assembly's Environment Committee. After five public hearings in March 1978, a substitute Coastal Management Act (P.A. 78-152) establishing coastal manaqement policies and a framework for further legislative action was passed and signed into law. An interim committee of legistators was also estab- lished to work on finalizing CAN enablinglegi~lation for follow- up action by the 1979 session of the General Assembly. 11-333 The 1978 Coastal Management Act also required the CAM pro- gram to submit a special report to the General Assembly by Sep- tember 1978. This report (Planning Report No. 27) addressed specific information requests listed in P.A. 78-152 and included revised draft legislation recommended for consideration in the 1979 General Assembly. During October and November 1978, ten public hearings were held by the Interim Study Committee through- out the coastal area to solicit public testimony on the CAM re- port and leaislative proposals. Subsequently, the CAM draft leg- islation was submitted by the Interim Study Committee in their January 1979 report to the General Assembly for consideration by the Environment Committee. Public hearings on final legislation took place in March. The result, P.A. 79-535, was passed in both Houses of the General Assembly by wide margins and was signed into law by Governor Ella Grasso on June 29, 1979, becoming effective January 1, 1980. Media Efforts Early in CAM program development, a comprehensive media con- tact list including all major newspapers and radio and television stations in Connecticut was assembled for use in publicity and information efforts. To afford maximum opportunity for public involvement, ad- vance notice of workshops and public hearings as well as re- leases on CAM events of general public interest have been dis- seminated to the press and radio stations. Media efforts have also included slide show and film presentations and several radio and television appearances. Public Information Providing information to the public on CAM's progress, major coastal policy issues and opportunities for involvement has been a continuing role of CAM's public participation staff. The pro- gram newsletter, technical planning reports and several special publications have been widely distributed throughout Connecticut. Land's End: CAM's quarterly newsletter LAND'S END covers CAM's program proposals, announces meetings and workshops, adver- tises publications and CAM speakers, and includes informational and educational items of interest to coastal citizens. Circul- ation has grown to approximately 4,200 and includes a wide range of organizations and interested citizens throughout the state. Citizens' Bulletin: Each month CAM has written an article on coastal management related topics for the state Department of Environmental Protection's Citizens'Bulletin. The Bulletin is an informational and educational publicat-ion, which covers program and unit activities of the Department, with a circulation of some three thousand. One issue in 1976 was completely dedicated to the coast, and coastal management. 11-334 Citizen's 1-andbook & fluestionnaire, and Resource Atlas. ~In June 1977, CAfI publTished a fourteen-page Citizen's Handbook which P ~~~was distributed to several thousand citizens. The purpose of the handbook was to outline CAMi's preliminary recommendations and to obtain public input. A citizen questionnaire, concerning coastal management options was included in the handbook, and a subsequent survey of citizen responses was completed. Long Island Sound: An Atlas of Natural Resources was also published in June of 1977. The fifty-four pace scientific doc- ument touches on all the different natural aspects of Long Island Sound and its environs, and was intended as an educational and informational tool. In response to the document's popularity, several thousand copies have been distributed to schools and citizens throughout the state. Circulation to date has amounted to over 12,000 copies. Planning Reports. To date, CAM has published thirty planning reports on a variety of topics. Although the reports are technical in concept and serve as research and development tools, many copies have been distributed to local officials and technical staffs, and to citizens upon request. A complete ann- otated listing of CAM planning reports and publications is pro- vided in Appendix E of the Draft EIS. Seacoast Celebrations Governor Ella Grasso declared June 11, 1977 and September 17, 1977 coastal awareness days for Connecticut. Over twenty 'thousand people attended the two Seacoast Celebrations in Mystic and in New Haven. The purpose of the celebrations was to attract large num- bers of Connecticut residents to the coast in order to increase awareness of the shoreline, the problems that confront it, and the opportunities for its future. Many private and governmental or- ganizations provided exhibits, and many entertaining and educa- tional activities took place. A CAM, display was set up, and staff members were on hand to distribute free literature and to answer questions. For CAM the celebrations provided opportunities to reach more people, to spread CAM Program news, and to encourage citizen participation in the coastal management planning process. Oyster Festivals, Boat Shows, Exhibits Several oyster festivals took place in 1977 along Connecticut's coast, namely, in Milford, Norwalk, and New Haven. At each of the festivals CAM operated an exhibit, handing out free publications and answering questions. In addition, each Near CAM has dis- played at the Connecticut Marine Trades Boat Show, a three day ev- ent that attracts large crowds, and nearly every boating manu- facturer and dealer in the area. With the cooperation of the Union Trust Bank of Connecticut, during the summer and fall of 1977, CAMI 11-335 placed week-long displays in the lobbies of those banks located in Groton, New London, Old Saybrook, New Haven, and Madison. Continued Public Involvement The CAM program will continue to provide ongoing opportunities for public input and involvement in the following ways. 1. The CAM Advisory Board, made. up of government agency, re- gional planning agency and citizen membership will con- tinue to provide policy direction to the CAM program throughout program approval and implementation. 2. Public information efforts via LAND'S END, media releases, speaking engagements, special workshops, a film and slide show loan library and participation in coastal events will be an ongoing commitment of the CArl program to increase public awareness and involvement. 3. CAM will provide pertinent information to enable users to act in a manner consistent with Conn- ecticut's coastal program and policies. A handbook on local coastal program development will be prepared to as- sist coastal municipalities. 4. The draft coastal management program will be widely dis- tributed for review and comment by federal, state, regional and local governments as well as the general public. All key program documents will be advertised, made available and sent to interested agencies and citizens. 5. An annual CAM reportto the General Assembly will summarize the activities of the agency with regard to the imple- mentation of the provisions of a Coastal Management Act. The report will be a public document. (See Appendix B Section 17(c)). 6. CAM will conduct periodic workshops throughout program imple- mentation with citizens and municipal officials responsible for working decisions under a coastal management program. (See Appendix 3, SectiOn 5(d).) II-336 B. FEDERAL CONSULTATION In the course of program development, CAM has recognized the importance of providing full federal participation. During the first and second year of the program, contacts were initiated and views exchanged with several interested federal agencies. Des- criptions of agency responsibilities were solicited and agency liaisans to the Connecticut program were identified. In 1976 CAM contracted with the Soil Conservation Service for mapping of the accelerated soil survey data being developed in the coastal area and arranged for the Corps of Engineers to survey coastal flooding in Connecticut. In addition, representatives from a few federal agencies, such as the National Marine Fisheries Service, have participated in the CAM Advisory Board meetings. In September 1976 all relevant federal agencies were invited to send representatives to a special Federal Agency Workshop in Conn- ecticut that focused on establishing better state and federal coor- dination in coastal management matters. This workshop marked the beginning of more formal coordination through the implementation of a review and comment process. CAM formally solicited comments on key portions of the management program that were sent to relevant fed- eral agencies. Copies of a National Interest and Federal Consistency Questionnaire, Coastal Goals and Policies and CAM draft legislation were sent to agency contacts. A summary of the nature and frequency of these contacts can be found in Appendix E of the Draft EIS. In addition, CAM formally asked federal agency assistance in identifying federal properties located in the coastal area; As Connecticut approaches the review and approval phase of the program, a careful evaluation of federal comments on the program draft will be conducted and where appropriate the substance of re- levant comments will be accommodated in the management program. The following points cite mechanisms that the CAM program will employ to insure future input in Connecticut's program. 1. CAM will maintain an updated andlactive list on relevant federal agencies and will continue to solicit agency comments on program documents involving major program decisions. Copies of the program newsletter LAND'S END and CAM annual reports will continue to be sent to relevant agencies. 2. Through the A-95 review process federal, state and in- terstate agencies are provided the opportunity to review Connecticut's annual grant applications and sup- plemental grant applications. 11-337 3. Because federal agencies will be obligated to carry out their activities in a manner consistent, to the maximum extent possible, with the Program, appropriate federal agencies will be contacted to insure consistency with the state management plan; particularly with regard to: 1) direct federal activities, 2) federally licensed and permitted activities, 3) federally licensed and permitted activities described in OCS plans, and 4) federal assistance to state and local governments. 4. CAM will initiate contact with relevant federal agencies regarding permit coordination and simplification (i.e. Army Corps of Engineers, Department of the Interior, Department of Transportation, EPA). 11-338 SECTION II MANAGEMENT PLAN APPENDICES I MANAGEMENT PLAN APPENDIX A EXCLUDED FEDERAL LANDS II APPENDIX A Connecticut Coastal Area Excluded Federal Lands AGENCY TOWN FACILITY ACREAGE Department of the Air Force Orange West Haven and Orange Air National 28.2 (Corps of Engineers) West Haven Guard Facility Department of the Army Westport Bridgeport Defense Area Nike 64.4 (Corps of Engineers) Battery 73 Westport Bridgeport Defense Area Housing Site 5.6 Fairfield Bridgeport Defense Area Nike 54.3 Battery 65 _ ~~~~~~~~~~Fairfield Bridgeport Defense Area Housing Site 7.0 Bridgeport Army Reserve Center 5.1 Stratford Stratford Army Engine Plant 75.3 Shelton Bridgeport Defense Area Housing Site 26.6 Milford Bridgeport Defense Area Nike 63.4 Battery 17 Milford Bridgeport Defense Area Housing Site 5.0 Milford Bridgeport Defense Area Tactical Site 2.6 Support Facility Orange Bridgeport Defense Area Nike 79.6 Battery 15 Orange Bridgeport Defense Area Housing Site 9.3 New Haven Army Reserve Center 5.6 AGENCY TOWN FACILITY ACREAGE Department of Commerce Milford National Marine Fisheries Service Laboratory Department of the Interior Westbrook Salt Meadow National Wildlife Area 183.4 (Fish and Wildlife Service) Department of the Interior Stonington Federally owned mineral rights 3.5 (Bureau of Land Management) 75% coal, oil and gas Department of the Navy Stamford Navy Reserve Training Center 4.5 Bridgeport Navy Reserve Training Center 2.7 New Haven Navy Reserve Training Center 7.2 East Lyme Navy Underwater Sound Laboratory 24.1 Dodge Pond Annex Waterford Navy Underwater Sound Laboratory 9.8 Millstone Research Field Station New London Navy Underwater Sound Laboratory 25.5 New London Naval Submarine Base 547. 0 State Pier Groton Naval Submarine Base 552.0 Department of Transportation Greenwich Great Captain Island Light 0.3 (U.S. Coast Guard) Stamford Stamford Channel Lights (2) 0.4 AGENCY TOWN FACILITY ACREAGE (Continued) Department of Transportation Norwalk Green Ledge Light Station 1.0 (U.S. Coast Guard) Norwalk Norwalk Channel Light 0.7 Norwalk Round Beach Light 0.7 Norwalk Fitch Point Light 0.7 Norwalk Long Beach Light 0.3 Bridgeport Bridgeport Harbor Light 0.2 Bridgeport Black Rock Harbor Lights (2) 1.4 Bridgeport Housatonic River Light 0.7 Bridgeport Penfield Reef Light Station 0.2 Stratford Stratford Point Light and Housing 1.6 Stratford Stratford Shoal Light Station 1.0 New Haven New Haven Station 9.4 Branford Branford Reef Light 1.0 Guilford Falkner Island Light Station 5.0 Old Saybrook Lynde Point Light Station 0.7 Old Saybrook Brockway Island Light 0.7 Essex Essex Reef Light 1.1 Old Lyme Calves Island Light 0.2 Old Lyme Brockway Reach Light 0.7 New London U.S. Coast Guard Academy 93.0 AGENCY TOWN FACILITY ACREAGE (Continued) Dept. of Transportation New London Bartlett Point Light 0.7 (U.S. Coast Guard) New London Bartlett Reef Light 0.7 New London New London Harbor Light 0.2 New London Scotch Cap Light 0.7 New London Ice House Light 0.7 New London New London Station 5.5 Nlew London New London Ledge Station 0.1 New London New London Depot 1.5 New London New London Thames Shipyard 16.1 4~~~~~1 ~~~~Groton Groton Research and Development Center Groton Seaflower Reef Light 1.0 Norwich Long Reach Lights (2) 1.4 General Services Bridgeport U.S. Courthouse - Federal Building Admi ni stration New Haven U.S. Federal Building New London U.S. Custom House Veteran's Administration New Haven Veteran's Administration Hospital 47.4 - - -~~~~~~~~~~~ - ~~~~lf r ~ ~~ p A ~.JY ]OWl! F;\CILIY ACREAGE POST OFFICE UNIT ST ADDRESS COUNTY TOT SITE SQ FT ERANFORD MAIN OFFICE 1111 MAIN ST NEW HAVEN 42125 Postal Service EM; FORD MAIN OFFICE PARK PLCE NEW HAVEN 66000 ERANFORD SHORT BEACH STA. BRADLEY AVE & MAIN ST NEW HAVEN 1118 ERA:NFCRD STONY CREEK STATION 202 THIMBLE ISLAND PD NEW HAVEN 4800 ERIDGEPORT BARNUM STATION 1434 STATE ST FAIRFIELD 11754 E=IDGSEORT EEA.DSLEY STA 27,1 MAIN ST FAIRFIELD 16456 E.IDGEFORT EMPLOYEE PARKING 10 MIDDLE STREET FAIRFIELD 94500 ERICGEPORT HILLSIDE STA 36 BC:ND ST. FAIRFIELD 4232 BRIDGEPORT HILLSIDE STA VEH PK 36 BOND ST FAIRFIELD 6000 EIIDGEPCRT MAIN OFFICE 120 MIDDLE ST FAIRFIELD 112435 BRIDGEPORT NEWFIELD STATIONI 1387 STRATFORD AVE FAIRFIELD 4486 IDOGEPORT NOBLE STATION Q34 EAST MAIN STREET FAIRFIELD 20070 -RIDGEPCRT SSRU - STRATFORD BR. DOCK SHOPPIN:G PLAZA FAIRFIELD 132 'RIDGEPCORT STRATFORD ERANCH MAIN ST & HURD AVE FAIRFIELD 67300 ERIC'GEPCRT TPRUMBSULL ER MAIN ST. FAIRFIELD 32900 -"ICGERORT TPUBULL EB.-PARKING QUALITY STREET FAIRFIELD 10500 E.IDGEPCPRT V M F 015 HOUSATONIC AVE FAIRFIELD 36000 ERIDGEOCRT VMF CITY LAND W'TEP ST FAIRFIELD 8568 CESTER MAIN OFFICE MAIN ST MIDDLESEX 2o900 CLINTON MAIN OFFICE 2 WEST MAIN ST MIDDLESEX 21503 DARIEN MAIN OFFICE 30 CCEIN DR FAIRFIELD 28786 IDARIE N NOPOTON HEIGHTS STA. 352 HEIGHTS ROAD FAIRFIELD 2597 0Ln~~~DAR'RiEN NOROTON STATION 1I39 POST ROAD FAIRFIELD 991 DARIEN PARKIN;G CC7EIN DRIVE FAIRFIELD 16592 DEEP RIVER MAIN OFFICE M'IN ST. MIDDLESEX 22464 EAST LYME MAIN OFFICE 225 eCBOSTON POST RD NEW LCONDON 660 ESSEX MAIN OFFICE MAIN ST MIDDLESEX 3013 FAIRFIELD MPO 1262 POST ROAD FAIRFIELD 64800 FAIRFIELD SAMP MORTCR STA. 2055 BLACK POCK TPKE. FAIRFIELD 17292 G'LES FERRY LEDYARD STATION COL.LEDOD HGHWY & IRON NEW LON:;DON 30722 SALES FERRY MAIN OFFICE CP OLD MILITRY& WINTHRP NEW LCI;DCNI 11642 E EE:NWICH GLENVILLE STA GLEN RIDGE RD FAIRFIELD 30450 BEN:'ICH MAIN OFFICE 310 GPEEN;WICH AVE FAIRFIELD 21623 GREE NWICH WEST FUTNAM AVE. STA. 4E0 W PUTNAM AVE FAIRFIELD 41Q25 GROTON BOCROU'H STA 204 THAMES ST NEW LONDON 3164 GCOTDN MAIN OFFICE 100 PLAZA COURT NEW LO:NDON 35700 G.OTCN NCO:K PEARL ST MEW LONDON 6168 GUILFORD MAIN OFFICE 42 WATER ST NEW HAVEN 30000 JEWETT CITY MAIN OFFICE 78 MAIN ST. NEW LC:;DON 7944 MD1ISON MAIN OFFICE 781 POSTON POST ROAD NEW HAVEN 19677 MILFORD DEVON STA 504 NAUGATUCK AVE NIEW HAVEN 3222 MILFCPRD DEVON STA -DRIVEWAY 5CO NAUGATUCK AVE NEW HAVEN 466 MILFCOD MAIN OFFICE 6 WEST RIVER STREET NEW HAVEN 25802 MILFCPORD PARCEL POST ANNEX 1400 BOSTON POST RD NEW HAVEN 32442 MILFCRD WILDEMERE BEACH S 21 BROADWAY NEW HAVEN 3138 MILFCRD WODODICNT STA 27 VILLAGE ROAD NEW HAVEN 4530 MCNTVILLE MAIN OFFICE MAIN ST NEW LDNDON 684 NEW HAVEN ADD'L FRKG-KILBY STA. 437 CONGRESS AVENUE NEW HAVEN 1500 NEW HAVEN ADDL PKG - HAMDEN STA DIXWELL AVENUE NEW HAVEN 900 NEW HAVEN ADDL FKG - TERM STA BREWERY STREET NEW HAVEN 123710 AGENCY TOWN FACIL I TY ACREAGE POST OFFICE UNIT ST ADDRESS COUNTY TOT SITE SQ FT Postal Serv ice NEW HAVEN AMITY STATION 30 AMITY RD NEW HAVEN 13876 (continued) NEW HAVEN CENTERVILLE-MT CARMEL 35 WO^TH AVENUE NEW HAVEN 19212 NtEW HAVEN EAST HAVEN ER. 333 1/2 MAIN STREET NEW HLVEN 17229 N:EW HAVEN EAST HAVEN ER. 539 CAMFEELL AVENUE NEW H;VEN 28240 N:EW HAVEN FAIR HAVEN STA GRAN'D A.E NEW H'VEN 7839 !NEW HAVEN FAIR HAVEN STATION 230 GRAND AVENUE NEW HAVEN 2071 NEW HAVEN HANDEN ERANCH 1744 DI:W4ELL AVENUE NEW HkVEN 31714 NEW HAVEN KILBY STA. 730 HC;AcD AVENUE NEW HAVEN 9435 NEW HAVEN MAIN OFFICE 141 CHURCH STREET NEW HAVEN 49692 NEEW HAVEN PARKING VETS MEMORJIAL COLISEUM NEW HAVEN 12000 NEW HAVEN TERMINAL ANNEX 50 EREWERY ST NEW HAVEN 183000 NEW HAVEN W HAVEN TEMP CARR SPC 719 CAMPBELL AVE NEW HAVEN 18698 N:EW HAVEN WESTVILLE STATION 95 FOUNTAIN STREET NEW HAVEN 34605 NEW HAVEN WHITNEWVILLE P4RKING 1210 WHITNEY AVENUE NEW HAVEN 4500 ,NEW HAVEN WHITHEYVILLE ER. 40 PUTNAM AVENUE NEW H VEN 7040 ;NEW HAVEN YALE STA. FKG. 280 CRCON STREET NEW HAVEN 3600 !:EW HAVEN YALE STATICOI ELM & HIGH STS NEW HAVEN 3j29 NEW LOCD0N MAIN OFFICE 27 MASCOIC ST NEW LONCCON 52893 NEW LCNDOCN VEHICLE STC-AGE GOV WINTHROP & ONEIL NEW LONDON 10200 NORTH HAVEN MAIN OFFICE 74 WASHIN:TOCN AVE NEW HAVEN 29356 ;NORWLK BELOEN STATION 2 BELDEN AVENUE FAIRFIELD 42953 N7t L ; 'LK MAIN OFFICE 16 WASHINSTON ST FAIRFIELD 51207 NCORnALK RCWAYTON STA 144 RCW'YTC!N AVE FAIRFIELD 1139 NFORICH ADDITIONAL PARKING REAR OF 352 MAIN STREET NEW LDONDON 3072 N;;gICH MAIN OFFICE 340 MAIN ST NEW LONDON 33035 NOCR ICH P;-KING (25 SPACES) MAIN STREET NEW LONDON 7500 OLD LYME MAIN OFFICE LYME ST NEW L3NDCN 47320 COLD SATEROOK MAIN OFFICE #36 MAIN ST MIDDLESEX 46000 CF4,"SE MAIN OFFICE 36 OLD TAVERN RD NEW HAVEN 31110 SHELTON EHPLOrEE PKG HOWE STREET NEW HAVEN 9000 SHELTCON HUNTI;NSTC:I STA. TA,'XES FAIPFIELD 30165 EHELTON MAIN OFFICE 83 ERIOGE ST FAIRFIELD 19000 STAMFCORD DAVENPORT ST.-PARKING 12 DAVEPFOoT STREET FAIRFIELD 3000 STAM:FCRD GLENEFRCC STA. 370 HPFE STREET FAIRFIELD 17000 STAMFCFD MAIN OFFICE 421 ATLANTIC ST FAIRFIELD 47040 STAMFCRD PEDC, FIN,FERS. 365 ATLANTIC ST. FAIRFIELD 13752 SLTAMFC-ED FPA-DAVENFCRT ST. 17 DAVEN.-CRT STREET FAIRFIELD 24046 STA.FC-:D RICSEW4AY STATION 60 SIXTH ST FAIRFIELD 23492 STAMFORD SFRIN-DALE STA. 1004 HCPE ST FAIRFIELD 5594 STAMOCFD VEHICLE PARKING 70 FEDERAL STREET FAIRFIELD 1260 STAMFCOD VMF 717 WASHINSTONI BLVD. FAIRFIELD 37902 STCNINGTON MAIN OFFICE BEOAD STREET NEW LCNDON 31373 WATERFCRD MAIN OFFICE 169 BOSTCN POST RD NEW LONDON 24725 WESTEROCK MAIN OFFICE NORTH MAIN STPEET MIDDLESEX 1637 WESTEROCK MAIN OFFICE GOLF LINtSS OLD TROLLEY MIDDLESEX 28582 WESTPORT MAIN OFFICE 154 EAST STATE ST FAIRFIELD 20599 WESTPORT SAUSATUCK 626 RIVERSIDE AVE FAIRFIELD 10341 WESTPORT WESTON BRANCH WESTON RD-RTE 57 FAIRFIELD 16160