Bill Overview
Title: Coastal Virginia National Heritage Area Act of 2022
Description: This bill directs the Department of the Interior to conduct a study to assess the suitability and feasibility of designating a specified study area in Virginia as a National Heritage Area, which shall be known as the Coastal Virginia National Heritage Area.
Sponsors: Rep. Luria, Elaine G. [D-VA-2]
Target Audience
Population: People in Coastal Virginia affected by national designation
Estimated Size: 4500000
- Designation of a National Heritage Area usually impacts local residents through economic, cultural, and environmental changes.
- National Heritage Areas can attract tourists, impacting local economy and population.
- The study area mentioned is specific to Virginia, thus its residents will be directly impacted.
- People involved in tourism, conservation, and cultural preservation sectors may be indirectly impacted globally as these areas often serve as case studies.
Reasoning
- The Coastal Virginia National Heritage Area designation is aimed primarily at economic, cultural, and environmental impacts, with a direct focus on those living within the region.
- A portion of the Virginia coastal population will be directly impacted, including those involved in tourism, environmental conservation, fishing, and local businesses.
- National designations typically result in increased tourism, leading to economic opportunities, but may also include potential regulatory changes affecting various stakeholders.
- Indirect impacts could be examined through cultural preservation, improved local visibility, and potential economic development opportunities.
- Budget constraints suggest limited capacity for broad-scale projects, so impacts may initially be concentrated in key areas identified by the study.
Simulated Interviews
Local business owner (Virginia Beach, VA)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think the heritage area could bring more tourists to our city, and that's always good for business.
- I'm worried about any new restrictions or zoning changes that might come with it.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Marine biologist (Norfolk, VA)
Age: 28 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The designation would help bring attention to the importance of conserving our coastal resources.
- I'm hopeful it will lead to more funding and support for our conservation efforts.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
City planner (Richmond, VA)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Such a designation could bolster our efforts to preserve the area's rich history while promoting sustainable tourism.
- I'm concerned about balancing development and conservation needs.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Fisherman (Chesapeake, VA)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Worried about new regulations that could affect fishing operations.
- If managed well, it could open up more markets for sustainable seafood.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 5 |
Retired teacher (Williamsburg, VA)
Age: 63 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Excited about recognition of the area's cultural importance.
- Concerned about increased tourism impacting the local tranquility.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Tour guide (Newport News, VA)
Age: 39 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- A heritage designation could drive more interest in historical tours.
- I worry about the potential for overcrowding.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Student (Charlottesville, VA)
Age: 22 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The project might help my career by highlighting environmental issues.
- As a student, it's exciting to see government support for heritage and conservation.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Real estate developer (Hampton, VA)
Age: 48 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Development could see increased interest due to new funding and initiatives.
- My main concern is the bureaucratic process that might slow down projects.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Hotel manager (Virginia Beach, VA)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Optimistic about increasing off-season tourism with the new heritage area.
- There might be a challenge in adapting services to a potentially more diverse clientele.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Museum curator (Portsmouth, VA)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The heritage area could highlight the museum's significance and draw in more visitors.
- I'm worried about funding allocation and how it might be distributed among institutions.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $500000 (Low: $300000, High: $700000)
Year 2: $250000 (Low: $150000, High: $350000)
Year 3: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 5: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- The feasibility study is a critical first step towards designation, impacting costs and procedural timelines.
- Community engagement during the study can affect outcomes and longer-term acceptance and success of a heritage designation.
- Federal, state, and local coordination is essential for accurate and holistic impact analysis.