Conservation/preservation easements are a interesting animal. I am particularly intrigued by there often dual purposes. I have talked about easements on agricultural lands in class, but i would like to reflect here on conservation easements in subdivision open space. Specifically the Ginn Corporation who is developing Laurelmor had a number of purposes in placing a large amount of property into conservation easements. Ginn received some much needed good press from the donation. It appeared on the front page of the WSJ and many other local papers. Without discounting the environmental benefits, the land was some of the most ecologically sensitive, which by other regulations precluded it from being developed anyway. Things like trout buffers and high water quality watersheds made the land worthless for development. The biggest advantage that I think Ginn received from the donated conservation easement was the mitigation credit they received from the corps. This saved them thousands of dollars. While some may view this multi-purpose approach as a problem I think it is a necessity to preserving open space.

social capital

Yesterday afternoon I traveled to Charlotte to complete a delineation of a wetland for a good client of mine. I usually do not go to charlotte, but this client was in a fix for time and needed this done ASAP. Every time a make a change in scenery to the big city I am shocked at the amount of development that is going on in north Mecklenburg County. The particular site I was on was a proposed future cookie cutter development to serve the young professional crowd. On the way home last night I found my self debating the merits of clustered high density development versus lower density larger lots.
I suppose environmental aspects could be argued both ways. With higher density and more cluster development like in this particular proposed development larger green areas can be left and developed into trails and common areas. Where as lower density development concentrates less im pervious surfaces and abates the effects of concentrated flow causing erosion and sedimentation into the water. There is a side to this argument that I have not debated in my mind. This is the idea of social capital. It was obvious after our class discussion that social capital is much higher in clustered dense developments that it would be in more spread out subdivisions.

Ranting

I am frustrated beyond all measures with environmental zealots. AS I have stated in the past I own a small environmental consulting company who specializes in stream bank enhancement and rehabilitation. I have a client in a prominent location in Banner Elk that contracted with our company to complete a project from design to permitting to construction. It is a small project t that only took one day to complete and 10 days to design and 30 days to permit. By all accounts I have a good handle on all the permits necessary and have completed over 300 Army Corps nationwide authorizations. In addition I have coordinated with every imaginable division of DENR. My frustration lies at the set of complicated conflicted requirements. In North Carolina as a requirement of the clean water act which is administer both by denr and the Corps you have to go through a permitting process. If the project is less than 150 linear feet in the stream then the corps will only issue and permit and dent deems it authorized automatically. Our project was under 150 feet and had a corps permit and was deemed authorized by denr. They know that the stream has to get muddy to do the work to prevent long term erosion and sedimentation, but today dent decided that want to enforce a turbidity standard that is violated with has little as a half inch of rain. To me these statues are conflicting and are what is wrong with the environmental statues. They all conflict! It only matters when regulators who become environmental zealots decide to enforce them arbitrarily. So what happens next? Who knows……. Certainly the agencies do not.

P.S. I never intended to rant about business issues and while I am ranting I normally have a very productive relationship and respect for most regulators.

getting caught up.........

In class today Dr, Carp said something that I have been thinking about for a long time. She mentioned that everyone gets a warm fuzzy feeling that stream restoration is mentioned. To take that notion further I believe that all types of things involved with the environmental movement invoke romanticism. From Global warming to stream restoration people can get caught up in the movement. This is not always a good thing. The romantic and idealistic views often get in the way of basic scientific principles. This is where the planner can be useful in obtaining a balance.
I specifically have a lot of experience in the field of stream restoration. When I am called in to evaluate the feasibility of a restoration project 9 out of 10 times folks have unrealistic or idealistic ideas. I start by explaining that while in principle restoration is great it is impossible to accomplish. In stream channel work the best we can hope for is rehabilitation and enhancement. The problem with restoration of streams and other natural processes is that it is hard to be certain what the previous conditions were. In addition humans have altered the landscape and streams to a level that restoration would involve the elimination of infrastructure and residences nationwide. To be successful in think that planners must harden there senses to romanticism and focus on the facts.

I think one of the toughest tasks that a planner often gets stuck doing is regulating something. None of us went to school to try an enforce regulations. It has put planners in a bad light in many small towns such as Boone. Planners here are inevitably tied to zoning and rules and codes. It is almost as if people suspect a conspiracy. What citizens must realize is that while planners have there own set of values, the politics drives the decisions. The planner answers to the politicians and citizen planners.

I am sure we will discuss zoning and codes in class, but I always get a kick out of people who say that they do not like zoning. It all falls back to the not in my back yard complex! Contrary to popular belief there is some zoning in Watauga County. Consider the historic ordinances in Valle Crucis and Foscoe and the polluting industries and watershed ordinances. I once had a 20 minute argument that zoning already exist in some form or fashion. To add to the mystery many citizens have no trouble answering to the private governments of poa’s which by most accounts are much more stringent than public zoning.

where to start?????

What is the most precious natural resource? I think we could all say that they are all precious. I have been thinking about how daunting of a task that it is to try to protect our natural resources. Where do we do as planners directed the funds or recommended that they be directed? We have talked extensively about energy consumption and the carbon footprint in class. It is my experience that the public, at large is not as in tune to carbon problem as they are to issues such as water quality and solid waste. Maybe it is because they have been on the forefront so long that they have a stronger following.

The infrastructure to protect water quality is grand. Take for example all the grant and organizations that have sprung up to protect water quality. Here in North Carolina there are no less than 100 different non-profits and government agencies that are set up to protect water quality. I venture to guess that there are only a handful of agencies that deal particularly with carbon. I think it is probably going to catch up in the next 10 years. Back to my original question, where does the environmental planner start, do we start with what the citizens are interested in? Do we start with our interests? It is a difficult question to answer.

Random Planning Thoughts

The term environmental planner has a certain catchy quality. It is a hot job title that ,many graduates seek, but become disappointed to find out that there are very few of these types of jobs available. I argue that all planners practice some type of environmental planning. Planning is a holistic and multidisciplinary tak that must consider not only the environment, but also the social and cultural aspects of man interaction with land.
Maybe this is why I like planning. Planners can be a “jack of all trades” if you will a practioner of various disciplines, but not a master. I believe the secret to good environmental planning is not to be an expert at every facet of the physical landscape, but to know where to find the experts. That poses another problem that we have been dealing with in class. What are the experts Values? Are the cornucopian’s and environmentalists? How should our reliance on “experts” be tempered based on hidden agendas. For example maybe a planner requires an environmental assessment for a proposed subdivision. At this point the developer hires a consultant who is paid by the developer. The assessment finds that the impact is negligible. How reliable is this information if the consultant must rely on the developer to pay his salary. I think maybe the system should procure the assessment and then charge the costs to the developer as part of the permit fees.

This class is going to be a real jumping off point if you will. A starting point to ground myself in some of the philosophical underpinnings of environmental policy. As I read through the chapters today I can not help but think about how complex the laws are. People hire me to interpret the laws and to make sense of them in relation to there project. What is applicable here in Watauga County may not be applicable in Ashe County. In this first rambling I am concerned with the way environmental policy is interpreted and adopted across political jurisdictions. For example, In NC I can get a sediment and erosion control permit in Watauga County fairly simply, but in the Town of Boone it is much more difficult. The ordinances are almost identical, but it seems as if they are administered differently. If I go to Ashe County to get a permit for erosion control then I must submit my plans to the state office in Winston Salem. This type of variation breeds widespread confusion and just a general distaste in regulation from developers and land owners. I know this is not a new thought or idea, but more uniformity would aid in the public perception of regulations.
I make a living and a good living at that, managing and help human’s interact with the natural landscape. This interaction is why I love the multi-disciplinary nature of planning and geography! When asked what a geographer or a planner studies, I answer we study how man interacts with the land. I began my career working with farmers on conservation practices. Farmers so often get a bad rap, sometimes justifiably so, but more often than not farmers just need to know what they should do. When I think of man and land interaction I think of farmers first. Farmers are the ones to understand the topsoil and fertility, understand the importance of clean water for livestock. For the most part I believe that a disconnect to food and fiber production has caused a divide in American society away from the land. Without the daily interaction with land that farmers of both small scale and large scale have it is easy to have a lack of understanding about mans interaction with the human landscape.