Coastal Subsidence Study 2005 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

maybe a concern due to the risk of flooding and subsidence in the area. Appropriate hazard mitigation measures are thus recommended. Another option is to use the mauka edge of the roadway as an arbitrary cutoff for determining the shoreline (similar to using the face or edge of a seawall or revetment). A third option is to encourage the State to base the shoreline with increased emphasis on evidence such as the vegetation line. For this option, the State would have the final say on its use. Finally the option of using a shoreline certification based on tidal flooding having connection with the open ocean is suggested as a viable alternative. While this policy followed by the Hawaii County Planning Department has been criticized as leading to an impasse, this option has also served to indirectly restrict development in high flood areas. Given the nature of the subsidence found in this report, this may be the safest and most sound option in the long-run. In Chapter 4, the many issues dealing with the administration of the Special Management Area are presented, including permits for new seawalls, extending the height of existing seawalls, wastewater disposal, and permits for new structures or existing structures. These are common issues faced by the residents and the Planning Department for Hawaii County. The difficulty in administration is compounded by the shoreline certification process (Chapter 3) and the risk of hazards in the area, such as subsidence (Chapter 2). If development and construction does proceed in areas subject to periodic inundation or subsidence, general guidelines or suggestions are provided. Chapter 4 addresses the goal in the scope of work, which is to: Evaluate the need to amend the special management area and shoreline setback laws and/or rules regarding new structures and new structures and seawalls with the study area. Recommendations shall consider the economic, environmental and legal ramifications resulting from the existing and potential expansion of residential development and seawall improvements within the study area. The recommendations and options in this report are driven by interviews with scientists, Kapoho residents, as well as government agencies such as the Department of Land and Natural Resources, Army Corp of Engineers, the Department of Health, and the Hawaii County Planning Department. During the course of the study – two formal site visits were made and two community meetings were held. At all times, input was sought on possible solutions, concepts, strategies and options. 8