WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

SB 665

Relating to monetary penalties.

2025 Regular Session Introduced by Daniel Bonham and 1 co-sponsor

Creates a fast-track permitting framework for upland basins (marinas above the high water mark) with a 60-day review and deemed approved if agencies dont act.

In committee upon adjournment.
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · SB 665

SB 665 — Upland Basin Permitting Reform (North Carolina, 2025)

Status: Passed 1st Reading (Introduced March 26, 2025)
Primary Sponsors: Senators Hanig and Sanderson

Main purpose

SB 665 creates a new statutory framework (Part 5A added to Article 7 of Chapter 113A) to facilitate and standardize permitting for "upland basins" — marinas excavated above the mean/ordinary high‑water mark — by (1) declaring legislative findings that upland basins can be preferable to open‑water marinas and (2) establishing specific permitting criteria, review timelines, and presumptions that enable predictable approvals when projects meet defined environmental and design standards.

Key provisions

  • Definitions
    • "Upland basin" = marina excavated above current mean/ordinary high‑water mark designed to accommodate >10 vessels or slips. Treated as a water‑dependent use under Coastal Resources Commission standards.
  • Permit review timeline and process
    • Division of Water Resources (DWR) and Division of Coastal Management (DCM) must approve an application within 60 days after a completed application (or after any supplemental information is submitted) unless the DWR Director finds site‑specific inability to substantially comply with the statutory criteria.
    • Agencies may request supplemental information once within 30 days of a complete application; the 60‑day clock restarts upon receipt of the supplemental information.
    • If the agencies fail to act within the 60‑day review period, the application is deemed approved.
    • Permits may be conditioned on measures necessary to assure compliance with the statutory criteria.
  • Mandatory criteria for approval (applicants must substantially comply with all)
    1. Designed to accommodate ≥10 vessels (including homeowner slips, boat lifts, dry stack).
    2. Post‑construction dissolved oxygen (DO) in basin must be equal to or greater than pre‑project DO measured ~50 ±5 feet from each proposed entrance. Applicants must provide site‑specific pre‑project DO sampling.
    3. Bond/set‑aside funds equal to five years of estimated annual operation & maintenance (O&M) costs for any required technology to meet water quality standards.
    4. Coastal wetland impacts limited to ≤5% of proposed basin water area.
    5. Coastal wetland fringe impacts limited to ≤10% of existing linear footage along applicant’s shoreline.
    6. Compliance with Coastal Resources Commission standards for navigation channels, canals, and boat basins (with some design clarifications — not considered a "finger canal" if project lacks right angle corners).
    7. A 30‑foot vegetated buffer along the post‑project shoreline, if required.
    8. Compliance with marina use standards, with two explicit exceptions:
      • Upland basins may be sited in or adjacent to areas important for shellfish harvesting.
      • Basin design is not required to meet Environmental Management Commission stormwater runoff rules; stormwater systems may be placed within the 30‑foot buffer.
    9. Mitigation or mitigation credits required when entrances/exits and vessel accommodation areas together exceed 125 linear feet of shoreline.
    10. Project must be sited/designed to avoid significant adverse impacts to coastal wetlands, shellfish beds, submerged aquatic vegetation, water quality, and spawning/nursery areas. Substantial compliance with the listed items creates a presumption of avoidance and compliance with antidegradation requirements.
  • Post‑construction oversight
    • After 24 months of operation, DWR may require additional information to assure long‑term compliance and may impose conditions where necessary.

Who is affected

  • Developers and property owners proposing marinas/upland basins on riparian/coastal property.
  • Coastal regulators (Division of Water Resources, Division of Coastal Management, Coastal Resources Commission).
  • Riparian property owners, boating community, shellfish harvesters, and environmental stakeholders (wetlands, water quality advocates).
  • Local governments involved in shoreline development approvals.

Timeline & procedural notes

  • Introduced March 2025; passed first reading and referred to Rules & Operations.
  • If enacted as written, applicants who meet the statutory criteria would benefit from an expedited and more predictable permitting timeline (60 days subject to one supplemental request).
  • The “deemed approved” provision (no agency action within 60 days) is a significant procedural change that shifts the balance toward timely decision‑making.

Potential impacts and considerations

  • Pros: Could increase riparian access to public waters, concentrate vessel impacts in contained basins (vs. open‑water marinas), encourage technology use and site‑specific monitoring, and reduce uncertainty for developers.
  • Cons / Risks: Faster approval timelines and statutory presumptions of acceptable impact may concern environmental groups, shellfish interests, and agencies worried about cumulative ecological effects; wetland impact caps and mitigation requirements attempt to limit harm, but enforcement and monitoring (including the 5‑year O&M bond) will be critical.
  • Interplay with existing standards: The bill references compliance with Coastal Resources Commission standards but creates limited exceptions (stormwater management), which may require coordination between agencies and stakeholders.

Next steps

  • The bill is at early legislative stages (passed 1st reading). Key points to watch: committee hearings/amendments, debates over the deemed‑approved provision, and any added monitoring/enforcement language.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.