Laserfiche WebLink
Integrated Shoreline Policy <br />Board of Land and <br />Natural Resources <br />beach, which is under the jurisdiction of the state, begins to sustain impacts in the form <br />of narrowing) and eventual demise. <br />1 Kll .► 1Vvr <br />Stabilized - beach preserved <br />beach lost <br />land preserved <br />Figure 3. Example of distinction between beach loss and coastal erosion. <br />Faced with chronic erosion and land loss, abutting owners feel their only relief is to <br />harden the shoreline. Unfortunately, this often results in yet another poor decision (this <br />time by the landowner) to construct an illegal seawall or revetment. The state becomes <br />Wived through enforcement actions further complicating the situation. This is the <br />vector of coastal erosion: flawed planning producing poor siting, development <br />?ned by erosion, construction of shoreline hardening leading to beach loss, loss of <br />resource (access as well as the beach environment) (Figure 3) <br />The present system is almost entirely reactionary and contentious. Because there has <br />been little .to no planning for long-term shoreline change, the response is always time- <br />,ritical and completely reactionary every time a property owner or agency encounters <br />erosion event and potential property damage is apparent,. Requests for permitted <br />ions such as shoreline hardening end up being decided on a case -by -case basis <br />"S new rules have experienced no legal challenge and the Planning Director reports satidfaction with <br />results. <br />