ENFORCING LAKESHORE PROTECTION ORDINANCES

IN A REGULATION-ADVERSE ENVIRONMENT

LAKE GREENWOODConstructed by Greenwood County in 1937-1940

Buzzards Roost Hydroelectric Project

FERC Project # 1267

History of the Lake

• Project purchased to 440 elevation contour • Operates in summer at the 439 elevation • Poor public knowledge of land boundaries• Low encroachment enforcement effort

• Widespread attitude of “Do what you want” • Numerous dredge and fill constructions• Lot values have risen over 10x in 20 years

The Shoreline Management Mandate

• FERC relicensing in 1995 included the requirement to adopt a shoreline management plan in collaboration with the resource agencies

• FERC order mandated that the County implement an effective shoreline management program that protects habitat areas and requires permits on all structures located within the project boundary

• The requirement for an effective program implies that the program must enforce the program adequately to ensure compliance.

Lake Management Activity

• Subprogram under engineering department

• No staff dedicated to the program

• Low public profile due to limited resources

• The engineer held a few meetings with lakefront property owners groups at local fire stations in an attempt to raise awareness

• Voluntary compliance only

1980-1995

The Greenwood Program, Phase 1

• Existing staff increased education efforts under the existing regulations

• Property boundary conflicts offered an opportunity to educate the local surveyors on many lake issues

• Professional liability concerns led surveyors to assist the County in identifying correct boundaries on plats, and to inform developers and realtors .

• Began meeting with developers and realtors regarding the new habitat restrictions being implemented, identified the disclosure issues

1995-2003

New Ordinances and Resolutions• In 2003, Council passed a revised lake ordinance

providing for rulemaking by resolution of Council and penalties for violators

• The ordinance incorporated federal requirements for habitat protection and clarified adjacent landowner privileges allowed within the project

• Council established a lake committee of lakefront property owners from the three counties to recommend new encroachment rules for Council to consider

• Greenwood County obtained aerial lake photos and implemented web-based habitat maps

• Pier permits in habitat zones became prohibited, leading to disclosure liabilities for several developers

• Lake inspector began patrolling the lake and posting stop work orders, requiring silt fencing on graded lots,

• Three dredging incidents resulted in enforcement and fines

• Lake contractors notified that an acceptable contractor program will be implemented

2002-2004

The Greenwood Program, Phase 2

AERIAL PHOTO OF EXISTING ENCROACHMENTS

Lake Pool at 2’ below normal - note wall is located in water

Photo showing illegally dredged area in Rabon Creek arm

Photo showing silt fan extents in Reedy Arm

Protected Habitat at

Patriot’s Plantation

Protected Habitat

at

Smith’s Village

OBJECT LESSONS

Observations and Recommendations based on the County Experience in

Shoreline Management Implementation

Reality Factors

• Attitudes • Human Nature• Momentum• Economic pressures• Feedback and resistance• Location of regulatory authority• Location of regulatory enforcement• The “Grapevine” - dangers and uses

It doesn’t matter if you need to do if your program can’t get it done.

Personnel Factors

• Prepare for the long-term demands of operating a program with ongoing resistance

• The right public relations skills can make the program effective with less enforcement

• Field personnel must be able to relate to the constituents and present the objectives in a way the constituent can accept without becoming competitive

• Field reps should practice “good-natured arm twisting” before shifting to firmer methods

Implementing New Rules• Change is seldom perceived as good on the

public grapevine - especially if the public was not included in development process

• Public stakeholders will become upset at change and the unknowns that persist until new rules are settled and widely accepted

• Wide distribution of correct information is important but difficult, and requires repeated efforts through news, mailings, billboards

Benchmarks and Documentation• When applying rules to existing conditions, it

is extremely important to have documentation of existing conditions where possible

• Adopt rules that match the documentation dates

• Target the documentation to the problems addressed by the rules being implemented

• Good photographic, GIS, GPS, and survey documentation is more difficult to refute, and its existence alone will help in compliance

PROMOTING THE PROGRAM• Staff should relate the objectives of the

program each time they meet with a constituent, promoting the positive aspects and expected results

• Mention the documentation and use it in discussions

• Discuss the property rights issues, and use the lake owner’s land rights to make the case for the neighboring property owners to follow the program rules

• Meet and educate the realtors, surveyors, and developers to issues requiring disclosure