protect lives and property and the general welfare." 



Clark says that while the courts and the public are 

 familiar with the legal aspects of owning private property, 

 the public's rights to beaches are not as generally 

 understood. 



"Right now, the part of the beach now in public trust is 

 only considered to be between mean-low and mean-high 

 tide," Clark says. "But it might be shown that the public 

 has acquired an implied easement to the berm as well." 



Clark says that the public right to public land is at issue 

 when a beach disappears in front of a seawall, or when a 

 building encroaches on the recreational beach. The Coastal 

 Resources Commission, he says, has decided that setbacks 

 are the most practical way to protect all the vital 

 interests — public and private. 



Clark says that even though North Carolina's setback 

 regulations have stood up well in court so far, there will be 

 other challenges ahead, especially to the regulations con- 

 cerning seawalls and bulkheads. 



He gives as an example the case of a beachfront cottage 

 with waves lapping at its foundations. If that cottage was 

 built before the setback rules took effect in June 1979, the 

 owner can often get permission to build walls between his 

 house and the sea. But if the construction began after that 

 time, regulations say no walls, period. Unless it is moved, 

 that post- 1979 cottage may soon be a pile of kindling on the 

 beach. And the owner will have to clean it up. 



Clark points out that few of the biggest, newest or most 

 expensive development projects have been threatened yet, 

 since most have built in accordance with the setbacks. 



So what happens twenty or thirty years from now, when 

 the sea is at the doorsteps of big hotels and condominiums? 



"It's a very difficult proposition," says Dave Owens. 

 "You've got somebody sitting there with a couple-million- 

 doliar investment, and the local government's looking at the 

 tax revenues it's bringing in, and it's impractical to move it. 

 Then, the commission is faced with, well, what do you want 



Photo by Steve Wilson 



"Development 

 pressure is 

 continuing, but 

 the supply of 

 good land is 

 restricted, so 

 there's more and 

 more pressure on 

 these marginal 

 lands. " 



— Dave Owens 



us to do, let it fall in the ocean? And that's a very difficult 

 thing to put to a commission. So far, they have not granted 

 any variances to let people put in hardening devices, but 

 they are looking into allowing some temporary things, like 

 sandbags." 



Owens pointed out that, while the setback is based on ero- 

 sion data gathered from 30 to 40 years worth of aerial 

 photographs, the setback calculations can not predict the 

 future or guarantee anyone safety. He says his office is 



Photo by Steve Wilson 



Oceanfront building is a calculated risk 



always looking for ways to improve the methods by which 

 erosion rates are determined. 



Some opponents of the state's approach to managing the 

 shoreline have expressed a preference for methods used to 

 control beach development in Florida. There, all new 

 buildings permitted seaward of a "coastal control line" — a 

 line frequently several hundred feet landward of the 

 beach — must meet very stringent construction standards 

 for durability and storm-resistance. 



But Spencer Rogers, Sea Grant's coastal engineering 

 specialist, says that the Florida method, while not relying 

 on setbacks, might even be more restrictive to new con- 

 struction than some people think." 



"If Florida's program were applied here, a lot of the 

 buildings that are going in here wouldn't be," Rogers says. 



"North Carolina's program is certainly one of the most 

 effective at addressing the hazards of coastal development," 

 he adds. "But even so, it's a compromise; it has to be to ex- 

 ist, and it has limits. It's by no means a cure to develop- 

 ment, erosion and storm damage." 



Rogers says that too many people build immediately 

 behind the setback line, even when they have room to spare. 

 Rogers helped Alan Stutts and Crystos Siderelis of NCSU 

 complete a study of setbacks and construction in several of 

 the state's beach communities. In these towns, the study 

 found that most new buildings were placed within 10 feet of 

 the setback line. 



Many of these structures were sited at the line for prac- 

 tical reason — the lots simply were not deep enough to ac- 

 commodate more setback. But other buildings representing 

 about 30 percent of the group surveyed, were sited at the 

 setback line even though there was room to spare. In these 

 cases, builders may have sacrificed years of erosion protec- 

 tion for a closer view of the sea. 



Rogers adds that the problem is compounded by the fact 

 that the eventual homeowner is frequently not the home- 

 builder. Developers apply for permits, and receive Coastal 

 Management's warnings about the property's vulnerability 

 to erosion and storms. But very often, these warnings never 

 reach the homeowner. 



There have been several drafts of a bill that would require 

 disclosure of such hazards to prospective buyers of coastal 

 property. But these have all failed to gain support among 

 legislators. 



So, for now, it is "buyer beware." And, as Rogers points 

 out, too many buyers simply aren't aware. 



— Neil Caudle 



