CAMA Projects: 5 Assumptions That Can Create Costly Challenges

Coastal infrastructure projects come with layers of complexity. Existing development, environmental constraints, stormwater requirements, permitting, and changing coastal conditions all influence how a project moves from concept through construction.

For local governments, some of the most consequential decisions happen early —sometimes before design begins. Challenging a few common assumptions at the outset can help communities develop infrastructure that works with the site and serves the community for the long term, especially when dealing with the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) from the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality's Division of Coastal Management.

Assumption One: “We’ll deal with permitting after design.”

One of the most common misconceptions is that permitting begins with a permit application.

In reality, many permitting outcomes are shaped by engineering decisions made months earlier. Project layout, utility alignments, site access, and the location of proposed improvements can influence what approvals are required and how smoothly a project moves through review. CAMA requirements may also overlap with stormwater and other regulatory requirements, making it important to understand those considerations early.

“The more homework and legwork you can do before you ever submit a permit application is going to help smooth out the process,” says Dave Mayes, PE, McGill’s Shallotte Senior Project Manager.

Identifying constraints during planning gives the engineering team more flexibility to evaluate alternatives while options are still available. The goal is not simply to get through permitting — it is to develop a project that incorporates regulatory requirements from the start.

Takeaway: Permitting works best when it informs engineering decisions rather than reacts to them.

Assumption Two: “If I own the property, I can build what I want.”

Property ownership does not necessarily mean the entire site is available for development.

Areas of Environmental Concern (AECs) and existing site conditions can affect allowable uses, footprints, and the placement of improvements. That can be particularly important for redevelopment projects, where communities are working within a site that may already contain infrastructure or development within regulated areas. Michael Norton, PE, Principal-in-Charge, notes that existing conditions within CAMA jurisdictional areas are among the factors that can make redevelopment more challenging.

As Norton explains, communities may make assumptions about property use that prove inaccurate once regulatory restrictions are fully understood.

For the engineering team, that makes existing conditions one of the first pieces of the puzzle —not something to reconcile after a preferred concept has already been developed.

Takeaway: Start with what the site can support, then design the project around it.

Assumption Three: “A bigger solution is a better solution.”

On coastal projects, more infrastructure is not necessarily better infrastructure.

The engineering objective is to solve the community's need and minimize impacts. That may mean reconsidering a footprint, adjusting an alignment, or locating permanent improvements outside sensitive areas where practical.

Mayes gives the example of wastewater infrastructure: rather than placing a permanent facility footprint within a sensitive area, the first design consideration would be whether the improvement can be located outside it. A necessary utility connection may still cross the area, but the temporary disturbance may be restored once construction is complete.

That distinction between what a project needs to accomplish and how much impact is actually necessary to accomplish it can lead to better engineering decisions.

Takeaway: Solve the infrastructure problem without creating impacts the project does not need.

Assumption Four: “We’ll coordinate with agencies once plans are complete.”

For complicated coastal projects, waiting until plans are finished can mean waiting until some of the easiest opportunities to make changes have passed.

Norton points to scoping meetings and early regulatory dialogue as important tools when agencies are available to participate. Preliminary discussions give project teams an opportunity to communicate the proposed approach and identify potential concerns before substantial design effort has been invested.

Early coordination does not guarantee that questions will not arise later. However, the more complex the project, the more valuable early coordination and thorough documentation become.

Takeaway: Bring the right people into the conversation while the project still has room to adapt.

Assumption Five: “We’ll design for today’s conditions.”

Infrastructure built today may still be serving a community decades from now. The conditions it encounters over that lifetime may not look exactly like the conditions engineers are designing around today.

Mayes points to stormwater design as one example. The rainfall data used to develop intensity-duration-frequency (IDF) curves has continued to evolve as additional observations have been collected. In his experience, design rainfall amounts for certain storm events are higher today than those used earlier in his career. Coastal systems can also be affected by downstream water levels and tidal conditions, adding another consideration beyond the rainfall falling directly on a project site.

For communities making long-term capital investments, resilience therefore requires looking beyond the immediate problem. Engineers must consider how an asset will perform throughout its service life and how evolving conditions may affect the larger system around it.

Takeaway: Design for the life of the infrastructure, not just the conditions at the time of design.

Better Coastal Projects Start with Better Questions

CAMA permitting is only one part of delivering infrastructure in North Carolina’s coastal communities. As Norton explains, CAMA requirements sit alongside stormwater, erosion control, public water, wastewater, and other regulatory considerations that engineers routinely navigate as part of project delivery.

The goal is not to make permitting the focus of the project, but to understand the factors that can influence project success early enough to support better engineering decisions.

By questioning assumptions about permitting, property use, project footprint, coordination, and future conditions, communities can preserve more options during design  and position their infrastructure investments for more successful delivery and long-term performance.