HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0284.001 1998-2000 r
HAWAII COASTAL EROSION
MANAGEMENT PLAN
Coastal Lands Program
Depai tinent of Land and Natural Resources
•
ofgy p`"'ad i ' a'
4^ di
•
St ate of Hasa
•
1999
•
Comm. No. 1 . 021
•
File No.a
Ref. To :! PC
'lei* A
f 7r�.' O I� = 3 O a� n s a C . 73 O s a 3 A �, w G` Et rp Li,
$Ta} oo a 3o no tomm D Am �' ma 0 r1 g 0-o ro am s m n
o^ N, = ro o o°° m c m m m c o ,��, S
8 i" ! I v) , 0 3I . a z. N b' - rn r F n o 0 r, (D a . ` 6 `. r a'� ' d cc -A. o = n
, bil m o = �' �, .-, w m o' o Th- a to O1 3 n m > >♦ S 'S.
r a y a o a ° Q a S ry t0 N 0 r to - ro !n o 0 d , v Cu ° 0
�n 3 3 `^ =- O rn N 0 no n ro n . - M a N v -, 0 o n o a a c z 0 ^� d 3 T w 6i a o, 7. m ^ _ o `mo N < m a =
n a Gy' ? a A x °: ° B o 5,"' v m = ° o= : = o .n = m
-X" - R m 4 �
a . N= O. Z O v = C 7 a m & 0- = N
CD
2 � e ' -° o a 3 "' o o m rn Z ;' y O n. 7 CU o 10 0
• -J .. a .. ci �, t° O Ci = O m O r0 S O R O a rD
3 ^ Z m 2 C t0 ^ rp d _ d N =_
^ g o rD d N i-f
_ . ^ w t a- i v, T m r n HI N go 7 / 11 d s N d 3 ft $� t ) 'r t r M ? 'irA � r �l r > m° s Cu
w ) 4 � f 7 f r ( U A n woo wo w i a. 3 r_
)1 �Q� C O wn ; @
\ \� ° m c_ ° r o ° o ro O o 5. T rr II 42 � d 7
G a c ti G 3 i " o a 3 0 0 v e i b t rrir ! ) o. • a w" N a .Q 7 , G O W � '� ^i WF At N N
co
° e n 0 o G �. O S .. o ,� 7.t 1n� !
tr = N 0 Nn m A a rl F I t/ rt r
C DJ ' ^ 3 n O O O N N
tn
b �, = O 0 0 1 d O
b C .7. z 0
. T 0 �' c ^,1 r
A o =
c
- 0. a n `° � s)) � `7 io
Q
lP � y v l' (t ..
a i i
V Y
�< <
60896 IH tnlnlouog
' 1 i IZ9 xoa Od
—i i
1t, utei6old spuoi leTseo0 2IN'IQ
r
"
a '. t S r . ,4 rc r
E S r I! "!q g
n co o m 3 z d s h � r + � , � i F ' s� , r t � �, p •
^ e A ∎�
tl
{ Y H' O
rp ^ W r 4 ; r i ,y,1 II Ver r ' l a
1 CD 0
T rD SI i ! • rrA M/ I fr t j ' • a. rD 3 i 4`1 � ` II ! fi C� = a 0 r • ro tin
m S o ( 1 t• br x'' .,r r. •� ro = w n b T r 4 / - l M cu o 5, p o ' ! I { t o • S �
CO Cli
o (ID = j t t t • r t [ t i `j' H
rD m v+ o ! t ill
t ..,
1' !
E rt r o n rY S ° ` 0
ft p! n a 5 � r 1 t i Ir t Y 0 n)
r. = S rr / 4 ' A�
ID a
= -' = a a. o o M O .. S o Cr 0 N= - O 7 !n M N
oat
A v _
c O _ r+ w r c . x w n U rD 0 £ ID 0 (D o n = S o ro ::.=
, c < , • r D ri a n stn a c F ca 0 Fa o N n rt r d ( - ! = Lill
d � , _ . - < as •o c n la Cu r t00 0 s m m m 0 �ePar�� 0 snarl
D_ ` O d O v m" o r 7 H N Z O v W F
O = (1774stti P7lo
0 G �G N O iD c w w ❑ b = = al n ,,,Cu
cu rti a a o. rza =_ = N rD m r
°' '^ m y h' y n H at D co o O d N O 0 O v O o n
2 S ro F o y 3 p W al IND M 0 n = o m d F � ' a 3 r0 0 i i
o . o m £ y ^ � ' rZ o o n m Or 4 a
r' co M ' O rD N . N I Q �C'
1--s 5 2�+\
saamo
n °, r • S t r� 0 x c 3 o s a r. r. F n 0- tr. 0 CO r. r. Cr 0 Cl. ° 0 SS 0 F 0 n 0
w o M d J p pl s s d o v s 0 o s to S o 1. d c N
Y D. m o " 0 n ?. m m O O J nl m m m N , o) o 0 S 0 m d N J al '= N
00 m c n r o o . f ° m° a m a °i a N' o� N F a rn n a? m o T in _. a g- a a 3' m
o H �' J ° rT N P' M ° N tot In (U -n ° rf OI rD s /0 l ° d _ D- o
7 Q. y 0 = 0 K n a° N n o o L n ° N N rU ? s Q ° = m< = m
n LO n r'1' o' (11 DO 0 N s °. c 0- J o T. J a N J N W °_ n d S
•o m ' � ° ro a m a o- m 7• o gy m „ m m , a m (D 0 o T n ' o n o °. w F N a s t, m.
H n = a s (.1) s a F a a v N v
A '" o' O l g" ° a ry a UD F o n o o p , ° _�- d m a ?. m < . o J m `°
7 C m n C c J o O O O r � ^ C m o O - !p CD A. n T m o 0 °- s m d N m oN a d -1 Vol a a 3 G M C m inr ° 4 o s 0 = m _° c o a v
ru IA
°' al 7 ° in N n T T o o r. 2 H °i 3 C m e 0 -.. r ` J. 0 m rr N N p� ,-. N 0 .4 J 0 d d
0' y ^ P' ' ' o m H 7'3- J n a, ° °
r" ' /Y 0 = = N 0 r J J
N n ,� � T ° w a o = 0, ° �` n ro « m m 3 = -o 0 = 0 3 ,� '°. F o rn In ° n-
3 n a = ro c a c o ? . rn o 3 o c ro d d F s F Di m = 0 < ti 0) 7-< 7 s 0` i f ,
P• •2 ° 0. a Cr c r. o m m n '^ m 3 _, -xo O o n a ro m „ 3. J ro j" c r o m m a m o
y y^. o m J F s o a N o n -• ° o , 0 3 v. • ro n' o a N m 3 0 �" i a m m o o m v.
0 ° 3
= .. m e ',� iO m o F ° o' ao 6 (p n N. s• Q' m
= = i s m °' m rr O c o
'° cw o s s N m Cu Cu 0 v, G`, J d �. (D a 3 d m KJ. o , ° ' �' d o
Cu r n - 0 N a m -, ,»
m a• w D o m o - o= r° = o. co . °' "' (n m n "O
al �. o C in J r= N Q °. « o n o 0 J.
r m 7: 0 3 . m -P. . T m°•- n v o c a m y �o a o .* I. o ,° s 7- o �, o, 0 0 Cr m
x m � `° 0 � m fD a ' � a al LO a 7 J: P a 0 a
0 0 0 << w 2 o _ m a 0 ? � o . m m p m `D •
vi 7. M O ' N a d N ( A , d a r. ° o o, n
= 7 3 s o a r , d s a o = �• s s O o
s a m m m s o ° r m . a 0 0 , io J =
o, m o � t o \ "' ' t G m
n s a 0 CS,' -^ ? m 3 n �' n. m a c _ i f j l
7 � ' ro m c TO a 7- s ' " m oo a a m m 7 N m R < = F w
H m m o - 0 m
3' c £
'" c N o N n ' r. - < d w e
ro J a m o s n s `2 - o ` - m a 0 ° m °u n E a m
o a tc m o ro m 0 = Cr o r � N o = d r° ro O. P m � N G-
c m m .- n
CD ?. �, io m o n m a ro n n
cu o `< o ry . w a ... c 'd
0 O am-
- °. ° m 5 0 A co . u, D u lD a O n 2 yN. 0 o q fD
in T rD m a E- a 3 ro m y m n e s,. f ' w tn co 0 m a, o o d L' o a o o' '° s {' v
7 ' o
a 0 A < 4 71
M
a r o x o 0 s ° ro Z 3 "' 1` n ,< . a
• • • r a F c m m c a m C 4 C i �• V
-r m UM n o s o en' -0 m n d n a s 0 C ° ' 1 1' 0 o Co x
0
•
. n m , a < ro < N N J N = 0) O GI o ' T 0 R. m °
a G ' m ro _ _ 3 m m s Z r_ _ 7 b S N
ro � c � � ° � ° G o 0 v ` � o a o p 5 ,. s ro co •
a a �. , r r- m r > M KS' o y; s g m in
3 v s p, z rr, J T In 6 7 1 _ w
o, m o s N ° O 4 o 0- m m 0- --1 2. . co T H o o v F
m o m -. 3 0-1^.0 n o m a A m N„ »w •
s o o' m ,2 o� 2 la , a J 0= ° no r ' q o v G ° z 7
a m tA m in m ci, N o m 3 m N. v m , o r o; • _ j_ a 7 6 Pi
0 J' ° 0 r+ 3 m d o m n m a 0 m 0 r o = B A m w 'o ro O= . - (U K • Oyr m O = d in- M 7 V Y _ O a b? L 0_ VI IA r < 0 3= 0 K Lo m c 0 r te . or '^ s - '< :; v tid
r m m G
'° ° = 3 °' fD d v r . � d ° M r v ro • '. 'o 0
73 o rr o' v =, s n a o r° = 0-m ° Gl .< ..^V'ti� m t' 0- ? 0r
r J N r a J 7.
0 o r ", 0. m m -O m r. 3 a A 0 ro .o o-
o C D m ro c
7 = CD = a a o s r 0 . n 3 '" m �'^ H o ^
o m m m °- 4 o S ro c 3 r ' v ^ i ,1 \ d= o
uo to Is j' d 0 10 cu O O A -. M ` a s J S '" 11 1 • Tin . Q O
10 m 0 m 5 C a al 4 n = a ^ q » . ( ' O
3 n 3 a n 7 H o. 3° ,.. N S 7 a _ rD 7-
•
J
C < rt m o r (7 < a o J 0 H
= 0 -0 I n n o n N <' O 2 m • o ° 3 0 v o m a s 0 0 "' 0 q' b ° a m
CO in r2 a p 3 F• 7 _ e ° ma
LO a
O S i 71
N R
W
O
N N rr r
• • • • • • r • • • • • N = o
o ,°'. - c'ID o o `� ° c a j o 3 T m m = v = = w c = ro VI d
3 a-I m s
J m O O. C O O . < _2 v m a a m = m r a °' m ^ O = 0 m N co o m N
a c 0 c F c m = s s a d to 0-m c s no °-' 0 = • `< Z r" S. ri nnn
C o m ,.. c r o m n ro 3 F o 1p m �, m ma
',� . a 0-70 , m y o S `o o , = io v s m o v r. `° d 3 0 '^ fD m
O a via
o
N = 2i 2 m O r! N V, - Cu C ^ N 3 m O O N o f C N o o r< N MN o N N _ . • � S C rY n n LO O o M J 0 - N N S n N Hi 0 s 0 m S S O 7 , p ^ r !o
TO W O n � J O m a n or -t . n = rt '^ Cu �^ a a S N ° a J. a 7 • n n N - m n_ O_ N O C
F ",- - 2 ^o o 3 3 U-• ° J m c o N m s a o
m o, '^ a 0 ?. c m s 0 O o m n ^
,+ v c J o, o o. a 3 m 3 a o , � . a 0 a° d d m "r a m 1-t• LO ° � 3 - o n ' a
a a 7 o m J v= °- < n 3 m m +' o' v a < � m o m 5 . s r n. o- ,„ = c u a - < IA
M n m � a a a o a o ri 7 o m � d n n' i a= o -h d- r` a o CD CD CD 2 n or a m o a
N o m N c m o e — ❑c 3 0- cr a r' 0 0 0 m m p o n m
n n m c O - o0 c 3 3 r* n of s m 3 3 S
m m �, s mm . o a d 3. 0 5: " o o ° ' = m° y
H d �. J ,< a° C u"
ro 5. °' m ° 07 ?. io ^' m x r° o m s °- Q n. r* rn o r. a
m n ° N m 7. O rn 3 °' ro a Cu m o C m s m =
o F ° s o o _ `< n •< ID v c' m 7- M r.n 0 vi a m 3 a
r° C 1 In t° _ a,, °= 0 o n t r - M a o m Pik C o -.. d a m o J
W
d d �. � 71- d '� M o 0 O d r. x j ca r = . m in
l0
c c a `° s ro s m a w N n = 5. a a m o. - -0 s a d 3' m N. m in
uu 0 J 77 a V o N 0 1 a x W ro C m CD D n C N N 71 In In G vi r 0 • a = 5= w a M F r} 0 a, = m N a
0 m r. m 0 J W Ln m w 9 d or m co m = o, in N o o v
n a m m ain a ! D O 7 H N 0' N O = O o v 3 ` C ❑. H O.
v.
° < a = �,' r w c.c. a `< 0- at 3 = o c_ a =
0 3 = 0 r - s ro ro m ' � 7 n r 10 _' F m a= = ° 3 a .-
0 m 0 a - r . y * 7 . 7 7 0 m n o, m O. F = = j. n
m
o = ° m O 3' w = i o 0 •
0 3'
0 0 3 (-1- s a
= rT ( N° hi ! D C H ' J N m � 0 C s H _
cil s a s < 7 . 5 • m 0 = 'n = N . a 0 = J ro a
a m 0 �, 0 tD. v or P. 7 °' _ < tD m m a - r° O 0- CD `G -1 J - < !� N a N C
o =
4- O r L, 0 w Wr C n ID O C VI
ii< -,
A
v4'3 • .a 0
Department of Land and dN Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Management Plan - COEMAP
1. Floodplain Policies 26
2. Applicability of NFIP to
Erosion 27
TABLE OF CONTENTS 3. F Vulne abili Erosion
b. Community Performance
Standards 28
• c. Coastal Lands Acquisition 29
1. Eminent Domain Powers 29
2. Negotiated Purchase 30
Executive Summary 4 3. Florida 30
Beach Loss in Hawaii 4 4. California 31
Beaches 4 d. Education and Outreach 32
Lands 4 e. Funding Research 33
Ho'olaulima 5 5. Five Alternatives for Erosion
Goals and Directions 5 Management 33
Recommendations 6 a. Abandonment 33
Initial Implementing Actions 9 b. Beach Restoration 34
c. Erosion Control 35
I. Our Restless Shore 10 d. Adaptation 36
Foreword 0 e. Hardening 36
A. Why COEMAP? 0 6. Design Considerations 37
B. Losing our Beaches 1 7. Project Performance Monitoring 38
I. Coastal Erosion vs. Beach Erosion 2 a. Physical Monitoring 38
C. Coastal Hazards 3 b. Biological Monitoring 3%
D. Ho'olaulima 4 c. Economic Monitoring 39
•
II. Managing Coastal Erosion 15 III. Recommendations 40
A. Hawaii's Current Management A. Owning -Up to the Past 40
Regime 15
I. Federal Authority 15 B. Strategic Recommendations 40
2. State Authority 15 L Develop CLP as Lead Agency 40
3. County Authority 16 2. Consider Erosion Trends when
4. Critique 17 Zoning and Subdividing Land 42
B. New Tools for Erosion Management 17 3. Develop a Technical Guidance
Manual 42
1. State and County Tools l7 4. Enhance Interagency
2. Criteria to Guide Decision - Making 18 Coordination 42
3. Regulatory Tools l9 5. Pilot Hazard Mitigation Project 42
a. Hawaii's Permitting Puzzle 19 6. Continuous Source of Data and
b. General Permit /1 NOAA Coastal Services Center
c. Rights of Ownership 21 Branch 43
d. Environmental Sequencing 22 7. Public Education and Awareness
I. Avoidance 22 Building 44
2. Minimization 22 . 8. Establish Community Performance
3. Compensatory Mitigation 22 Standards 45
e. Integrating Hazard Mitigation 22 9. Fund for Land Acquisition 46
F. Setback Programs 73 10. General Permit for Restoration 47
I. North Carolina 23 I t. Plan for Redevelopment and
2. Florida 23 . Renourishment 47
3. Hawaii 24 12. Adopt OEQC Guidelines 47
4. Georgia Beach Nourishment 13. Focus Regulatory Efforts 48
Project 24 14. Establish Decision- making
5. Certified Shoreline 24 Criteria 48
6. Other States 25 15. Research Products from Technical
•
4. Non- Regulatory Tools 26 Studies 48
a. Federal Emergency Management 16. General Permit for Small -Scale
• Agency 26 Nourishment Projects 53
•
2
Department of Land aQ Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion ML- ragement Pian - COEMAP
17. Use Interim Erosion Mitigation 54
18. Implement Erosion Control Use 55
19. Analyze Economic Factors 55
20. Integrate Hazard Mitigation and
Coastal Conservation 56
C. Initial Implementing Actions 56
1. Empower and fund the CLP 56
2. Interagency Collaboration 5 7
3. Institutionalize a data stream 57
4. Statutory and rule changes 57
5. Simplify regulatory system 58
6. Improved decision - making 58
7. No- tolerance policy 58
8. Fines and revocable easements 58
9. Build consensus 59
10. Fund CLP programs 59
11. Publicize new policy 59
12. Identify federal funding 59
13. Review management plans 59
14. Distribution of report 59
15. Public awareness campaign 59
16. Community input 59
17. Interim lands protection 59
18. Implement nourishment 59
19. Small -scale nourishment 59 •
20. Evaluate viability of concepts 59
21. Technical Guidance Manual 59
Technical Supplement, Part A
Summary of Past Erosion Management
Efforts 60
Technical Supplement, Part B
Coastal Erosion and Beach Loss
in Hawaii: Facts about beach erosion
and the new Coastal Lands Program
at DLNR 69
Technical Supplement, Part C
Causes of Coastal Erosion and Beach
Loss in Hawaii 72
Technical Supplement, Part D
Office of Environmental Quality
Control (OEQC). Department of
Health — Guidelines for Environmental
Assessment prepared in conjunction
with an application for shoreline
alteration and hardening 79
Fletcher. C.H.. 1999. Coastal Erosion Management Plan
(COEMAPI of the Siam of Hawaii. Department of Land and
Natural Resources. Coastal Lands Program. University of Hawaii.
School of Ocean and Earth Science and Technology. SOEST
Technical Report 99 -02. 81p.
3
• ,.
Department of Land and Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Management Plan - COEMAP
Beach loss seriously impacts the visitor
• economy in Hawaii' which in 1997 provided
EXECUTIVE 171.900 jobs in the state, accounted for 313
billion in tourism expenditures and supported
SUMMARY a payroll of S3.5 billion. Beach narrowing and
loss, and shoreline hardening. also severely
restrict public access to state conservation
lands and natural resources. Public access to
beaches and the ocean is a right that is
BEACH LOSS IN HAWAII preserved by the State of Hawaii constitution.
Beach loss and narrowing, and coastal dune
Beaches Studies conducted at the University of grading that accompanies coastal development
Hawaii' show that hardening the shoreline of causes environmental and ecological damage
Oahu causes beach narrowing and beach loss to natural resources and habitats. Coastal
where there " is chronic coastal erosion. hardening can also produce coastal water
Researchers have found that on Oahu 10,7 quality impacts through increased turbulence
miles of beach has been narrowed by shoreline and turbidity, and the direct tlow of domestic
hardening and 6.4 miles has been lost. This is sewage products into coastal waters because of
-24% of the 71.6 miles of originally sandy the prevalence of sewage soil filtration (septic
shoreline on Oahu. and cess pool systems) on shoreline plots. In
Beach loss in the state due to hardening of the heavily armored sectors, sand impoundment
shoreline is not limited to the island of Oahu'. volume o of walls can lead general sand
vole decreases causing or exacerbating
At visits to selected sites and through the sector -wide erosion trends.
review of beach erosion reports', beach loss or
recreational impacts have been found equaling Lands When coastal lands are attacked by
15 miles of actual or imminent losses on the erosion it is a natural reaction to protect them.
other main Hawaiian Islands. A' thorough Shorelines are hardened to stop coastal land
analysis of all the sandy shoreline in the state loss. Segments of the Hawaiian shore are
would yield much higher numbers of beach plagued by chronic or episodic erosion that
loss. destroys valuable private and public lands and
threatens critical infrastructure such as
roadways, emergency services, and water
• treatment plants. To simply let coastal
properties erode into the sea, and to allow the
heavy financial commitment along our shores
come under unmitigated attack by erosion and
Fletcher. C.H., Mullane. R.A., and Richmond, other coastal hazards would not be a rational
B. >I. ( 1997) Beach loss along armored shorelines of management decision.
Oahu. Hawaiian Islands. Journal of Coastal Research. Hawaii has limited buildable land area and
v. 13. p. 209 - 215. most usable land is at low elevations alone
Coyne. :M.A., Fletcher. C.H.. and Richmond. B.M. coastal plains bounded by the sea on one side.
(1999) Mapping coastal erosion hazard areas in and the mountains on the other. Population
Ha« aii: observations and errors. Journal of Coastal centers in Hawaii are typically linked by
Research. Special Issue no. 28, p. 45 -58. coastal roadways that are critical to emergency
Shoreline hardening refers to the construction of services, utility and power delivery, mainline
vertical seawalls or sloping stone revetments along a water and sewage delivery, and the need for
shoreline to protect coastal lands from marine commuting by residents.
ero ion.
H one, D.1., and Fletcher, C.H. (1992) Beach Coastal landowners are, on average, citizens
Management Plan with Beach Management Districts. paying mortgages and [axes, holding jobs and
A report prepared for the Coastal Zone Management otherwise gainfully contributing o he
Program. Office of Planning. 192p. economy and society of Hawaii. Many coastal
Makai Ocean Engineering. Inc. and Sea
Engineering. Inc. (1991) Aerial photograph analysis
of coastal erosion on the Islands of Kauai. Molokai. Travel Industry of America and U.S. Department of
Lanai. Maui. and Hawaii. A Report to the Office of Commerce. Office of Tourism Industries (1997)
Planning. Coastal Zone Management Program. Travel and Tourism Congressional District Economic
Honclulu. HI. 200p. Impact Study.
4
•
♦> D O
Department of Land a - Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Manaa =•Went Plan - COEMAP
homeowners grew up along the shore and are marine resources in general. and beaches in
busy raising their own families. Seeing the loss - specific. Successful stewardship will require a
of their lands by erosion is, for many. a flexible policy of interagency coordination
personal and financial disaster. Witnessing the and community participation built upon trust.
beach loss that frequently accompanies leadership and experience. Participants in
hardening leaves most shoreowners with mixed renovating our coastal management system
emotions of sadness, confusion. and bitterness must come to the table willing to define levels
over the seemingly intractable character of of acceptable change to past practices of
their plight. coastal use.
Ho`olaulima There is wide agreement that Options for managing erosion are expensive,
change is needed in our system of coastal land difficult, and will rarely prove completely
management. Resolving the need to conserve satisfactory to all stakeholders. Despite this, the
beaches and sustain coastal lands subject to problem must be met with optimism,
erosion is more than a matter of prohibiting commitment, and a dedication to work
seawalls. Erosion management requires together for success or the children of • Hawaii
comprehensive and creative land -use tools that will suffer because we were not willing to make
are applied in a coordinated fashion with the necessary difficult choices.
participation by all sectors of the community.
However, the direction and specific elements
of a new system of coastal lands management GOALS AND DIRECTIONS
are not simnle to construct, and may not find
• universal agreement among all stakeholders. There is no cookbook for managing erosion,
• and COEMAP is not a set of instructions. But
This document. the Coastal Erosion individuals working on the problem in Hawaii'
Management Plan (COEMAP), provides a and throughout the nation have identified
framework for community discussion and certain steps that will improve the currerf
assessment of coastal erosion and beach loss in erosion management regime in Hawaii. The
Hawaii. The objective of COEMAP, and the following goals represent broad targets for
public dialogue it seeks to foster, is to outline improving the erosion management system in
socioeconomic and technical mechanisms for Hawaii.
conserving and restoring Hawaii's beaches in a
framework of mitigating erosion impacts and 1. The lead agency for coastal erosion
reducing exposure to coastal hazards for management and beach conservation is the
future generations. Coastal Lands Program (CLP) at DLNR.
The CLP needs to be empowered, and
A series of technical supplements is provided PP P funded with a specific revenue source with
at the back of this document, these include: a nexus to coastal lands. One important
I . Technical Supplement, Part A - Summary early step toward empowerment is for the
of Past Erosion Management Efforts in CLP to issue guidelines for permits for
Hawaii. activities that have the potential to impact
Supplement, Part B - Coastal beaches and dunes and coastal
2. Technical Su
PP environments. Office of Environmental
Erosion and Beach Loss in Hawaii: Facts
about beach erosion and the new Coastal Quality Control coastal EA guidelines
Lands Program at DLNR. already exist and could be adopted by the
3. Technical Supplement, Part C - Causes of CLP. It is important that such guidelines
Coastal Erosion and Beach Loss in Hawaii. are adopted by other stakeholder agencies.
4. Technical Supplement, Part D — Guidelines The CLP should promote adoption of
for Environmental Assessment of shoreline COEMAP and OEQC guidelines
projects, Office of Environmental Quality
Control (OEQC), Department of Health.
" Challacombe, A. (1997) Beach Management in
Agency e fforts to manage erosion, and Hawaii: A Public Sector Perspective. Hawaii
a Y g Planning, v. xviii, no. 6, p. 5, June, Monthly
preserve and restore beaches, must ride on the Newsletter of the Hawaii Chapter of the American
shoulders of a strong public outreach and Planning Association: and, Hwang, D. (1997)
education effort. The citizens of Hawaii must Protecting Our Beaches: Balancing Public and Private
be made aware of the difficulty of managing Interests. Hawaii Planning, v. xviii. no. 6, p. 7,
the erosion problem. and there must be a June. Monthly Newsletter of the Hawaii Chapter of
heightened public value given to coastal and the American Planning Association.
5
1 - -0 ,
0 0 .
Department of Land and Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Management Plan - COEMAP
throughout state government so that there basis. but through common usage could
exists a consistent and uniform policy of become a standard for the sate.
erosion management at the state level. economical. and sustainable utilization of
2. • Encourage state and county decision- the coastline. Creation and development of
makers to consider erosional trends and such a manual will require funding
throu processes, and other coastal hazards, at takeho the various c ake pl c e
the zoning and subdivision stages of land stakeholder agencies, and could take place
development so that structures can be on a component by component (i.e.,
safely and properly located away from chapter by chapter) basis as needs arise.
hazard areas. This action would prevent The manual. could provide direction
burdening landowners and regulatory during zoning and subdivision stages of
agencies with foreseeable coastal hazard development so that coastal lots are created
slues at a later date. of sufficient dimension and size to
maintain a buffer between the shoreline
3. Implement beach and dune restoration and proposed structures. The manual
with sand nourishment as a viable could provide direction during the zoning
management option in Hawaii. Streamline of lands so that on large lots, structures are
and coordinate the permitting necessary built away from the shoreline on the
to achieve this goal and improve mauka portion of the lot. There are certain
interagency coordination and portions of our shoreline where existing
communication. • • development patterns offer a good
demonstration of properly - located
4. Implement a continuous source of structures with sufficient buffers against
scientific data and research products so erosion hazards. On Oahu. these include
that land managers can achieve expert portions of Waimanalo. Kailua, and
status on the physical processes and Kahuku where setbacks have been utilized
geographic patterns of erosion hazards that exceed the present 40ft requirement.
and the technical aspects of its
management. The manual could also offer guidance and
recommendations for implementing
5. Create and maintain a continuous public actions on already developed shorelines
education and awareness campaign so where erosion hazards constitute
• that all citizens can learn to value coastal management concerns.
natural resources and can become
participants in the decision - making
process for sustaining our coastline. RECOMMENDATIONS
6. Establish coastal land acquisition COEMAP offers the following detailed
programs to negotiate purchases from recommendations to improve erosion
willing sellers of coastal lands that have management in the state of Hawaii. These
high public resource value and that recommendations are:
constitute erosion management concerns
and coastal hazard risks. This program 1. Develop, fund, and empower the Coastal
I would have among its goals the restoration Lands Program at DLNR as the Lead
1 and revitalization of coastal lands and Agency for coastal erosion management.
environments, increasing public access,
mproving coastal ecological systems and 2 . Consider erosional trends and processes,
processes, releasing impounded sands. and and other coastal hazards, at the zoning
rejuvenating scenic beauty and amenity. and subdivision stages of land
development so that structures can be
• 7: Develop a Technical Guidance Manual safely and properly located away from
that provides direction for the hazard areas.
development, restoration, and
redevelopment of the coastline. The 3. Develop a Technical Guidance Manual
manual' would be used on a voluntary that provides direction for the
development, restoration, and
redevelopment of the coastline. The
' Maui County has already moved in this direction
with the creation ut a Technical Guidance Manual: Study. for Maui County, Oceanic Laboratories Inc..
"Coastal Protection and Beach Restoration Feasibility Nov. 1997. 122p.'
•
6
a- r
Department of Land a0Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion MOgement Plan - COEMAP
•
manual' would be used on a voluntary 3. Evaluate the applicability of "willing -
basis. but through common usage could user," community -based performance
become a standard for the sate. standards and/or 'planning districts as
economical. and sustainable utilization of erosion management tools at erosion
the coastline. hotspots. A significant challenge to coastal
4. Enhance Interagency Coordination. managers is the restoration and
.Agencies should improve and standardize redevelopment of densely populated and
permit processing criteria, develop and developed coastal communities where
agree upon acceptable guidelines for chronic erosion conflicts with beach
constructing Environmental Assessment conservation goals. One equitable
and permit applications for activities in the approach is to develop "willing- user,"
shore zone, and build an organized and community performance standards For
consistent system of erosion management guiding changes to land use as future
and resource conservation among CZM, needs arise. Performance standards could
CLP, OEQODOH, and the counties and be implemented in a framework of
federal COE. management authority that focuses on
controlling erosion through resource
5. Implement a Pilot Shoreline Hazard conservation. Performance standards act as
Mitigation Project Using Beach and Dune targets for modifying the land use pattern
Restoration. This single tool. though through future redevelopment efforts.
expensive and complex, holds the greatest Such targets would avoid penalizing
possibility of replacing the historic system current tenants, yet would establish
of shoreline hardening in Hawaii. A pilot community goals for achieving reduced
project, predicated upon identifying exposure to coastal hazards and restoring
technical and socioeconomic factors that beach and dune environments. Setting
would enhance it's success and the performance standards is a form of
longevity of the restored environments. is minimization that can be implemented
an extremely important step for Hawaii to through time on a schedule determined by
achieve. the landowner through the redevelopment
and renovation of existing structures and
6. Establish a continuous datastream, and voluntary changes in land usage.
formalize an enduring data source from
the UH -SOEST by creating a branch of 9. Fund Coastal Land Acquisition
the NOAA Coastal Services Center. The Programs — Ho'opono Kahakai. Create a
integration of scientific data is sporadic coastal land acquisition fund based upon
and haphazard, often dependent upon the negotiated purchase and willing- seller
vagaries of funding, project specific concepts. This fund will focus on restoring
investigations, and the availability and degraded coastlines to a high level of
goodwill of individuals. This is fragile health and sustainability.
footing for an essential component of l0. Establish a General Permit for Beach and
good coastal management. Dune Restoration. This would be in the
7. Establish a broad, pervasive and best interest of facilitating the use of
enduring public education and restoration as a viable option, and reducing
awareness - building campaign. Few the workload of agencies. A General
government objectives can be realized Permit would help to coordinate agency
without the support of the public, and the efforts and identify areas of overlapping
public cannot support what it does not concern such that the permitting process
understand. There are many avenues to can be made more efficient without
build public awareness through the media. sacrificing the present high level of
the Department of Education. special environmental and ecological safeguards.
events and functions. a print campaign, 11. Restoration is not a Permanent Solution —
slogans, themes and other techniques Plan for Renourishment and
Redevelopment. Planning for post-
' ,Maui County has already moved in this direction restoration realities must proceed on a
with the creation of a Technical Guidance Manual: parallel track. .and integrated with, any
"Coastal Protection and Beach Restoration Feasibility restoration project.
Study. for Maui County. Oceanic Laboratories Inc.,
Nov 1997. 122p."
7
f II .
Department of Land a Resources, Coastal Erosion
Management Plan - COEMAP .
12. Adopt, or alter for adoption, the OEQC there is an immediate need to provide a
guidelines for Environmental Assessment management response to emergency
of shoreline projects that were submitted situations confronting private and
For public commentary in the November commercial landowners. It is important to
23. 1995 OEQC Environmental Notice. develop a technical approach to control
These . guidelines are presented in interim coastal erosion on residential
Technical Supplement, Part D (pg. 79). lands where a short-term or seasonal wave -
13. Focus regulatory efforts and build local related erosion hazard exists, and where
expertise among agency personnel. If we long -term erosion trends have created user
are to improve the erosion management conflicts.
regime in Hawaii, energy and effort must 18. Implement an "Erosion Control"
be focused on those localities where there approach where feasible. This could
is beach degradation and where active include offshore breakwaters, and certain
permitting issues arise. types of attached structures (T -head
• 14. Regulators need to develop littoral sector - groins) used in combination with
specific planning objectives and goals to nourishment to stabilize particularly
provide decision - making criteria. dynamic beach segments where erosion
would be controlled effectively without
Decision - making authorities and negative impacts to adjoining beaches, or
regulators need clear and unambiguous the sediment budge[ of a littoral cell. The
information on littoral processes. sand design and specifications of this approach
resources. historical erosion and accretion should be conducted by professionals in
rates and projected future patterns. coastal engineering with an established
development patterns, land ownership record of successful use. Permitting
histories, land -use trends, structure authorities may wish to adopt the PE Seal
permitting histories, and other scientific (Professional Engineer) as one criteria
and socioeconomic trends and patterns at for accepting permit applications for
areas where erosion management decisions erosion control projects.
must be made. Regulatory decisions are
complex and require evaluation and 19. Analyze Economic Factors. The
analysis of numerous and interdependent economic factors governing the
factors. This is best achieved with pre- implementation and feasibility of various
established decision- making criteria. coastal management alternatives is poorly
15. Create a system of Research Products understood in Hawaii. Economic data
. resulting from technical studies of coastal designed to identify the necessary funding
processes and sand resources. Coastal and benefit/cost be rationale of t management
[
managers and administrators need options will be critical to establishing a
improved data on erosion patterns and framework for implementing a new
rates around the state. The scope and paradigm of coastal management.
• characteristics of the erosion problem need 20. Integrate Hazard Mitigation and Coastal
to be factually determined at a high Conservation. Erosion is only one of
•
resolution, at least to the parcel scale. several natural hazards that present
6. Implement a small-scale nourishment management challenges along the
General Permit. The Coastal Lands Hawaiian coast. High winds and associated
marine flooding.
Program (CLP) at DLNR has proposed to l h tsunami flooding, on
sea -
level
establish a Small -Scale Beach Nourishment rise, high waves, stream flooding
Program pursuant to the CDUP process coastal az. landslides, and seismic and
ank
and in collaboration with the COE State volcanic hazards all increase the risk
Program General Permit (SPGP) for exposure along g developed coastal lands.
expediting small -scale beach nourishment
projects and information gathering. A INITIAL IMPLEMENTING
draft version of this program is contained
in Technical Supplement, Part E. ACTIONS
•
7. Coastal erosion is an active and dynamic COEMAP ends with a series of initial
agent on our shorelines even during the implementing steps that emphasize the need
current period of increasing well- defined for efficiency and direct action for putting
and viable management options. Hence, into place some of the more expedient tools
8
Department of Land an Resources, Coastal Erosion M nement Plan - COEMAP
that regulators can use to improve our erosion to conservation lands. Consider adopting
management system. the same system to county encroachments.
1. Empower and fund the CLP so that they 12. Identify sources of federal funding for
can begin to implement specific hazard reduction and environmental
programmatic and planning tools such as restoration in Hawaii.
utilizing environmental sequencing, 13. Review management plans and planning
establishing awilting- seller acquisition goals for county and state beach parks
program, Facilitating community -based and confirm that current maintenance
performance standards. and reviewing and activities enhance the natural resources.
amending the shoreline certification 14. Distribute COEMAP to stakeholder
procedure. agencies and NGO's for comment.
2. Improve interagency collaboration with 15. Develop and initiate a public awareness
frequent MACZMAG Erosion and education campaign.
16. Specifically
Subcommittee meetings and interagency fically approach coastal user
consultations, with a General Permit for organizations for input, including land -
Small -Scale Nourishment, by adopting owner groups, community organizations,
COEMAP on a state -wide basis, defining environmental groups, land trusts,
standardized coastal EA guidelines. and development groups and others, with
spearheading an education and awareness education efforts and seek their input.
effort. 17. Develop an interim erosion mitigation and
3. Institutionalize a data stream to regulators lands protection system for owners with
using the UH -SOEST as the home base for legitimate fears of major land losses,
a new NOAA Coastal Services Center in define the interim period of use, and work
Hawaii. toward establishing a longer -term erosion
4. Define and identify statutory and rule management system for the sector under
• changes necessary to improve erosion erosion stress. •
management. These could include altering 18. Implement beach and dune nourishment
the accreted land law and the offshore plans in order to actualize a pilot
mining law. establishing a shoreline restoration project.
monument system for beach monitoring 19. Use the COE -SPGP to establish a small-
and shoreline certification surveying, and scale nourishment program at DLNR.
facilitating the creation of General Permits 0. Engage in an ongoing evaluation of the
for coastal restoration activities. viability of COEMAP concepts to gauge
5. Simplify the regulatory system for their effectiveness at achieving stated
conservation and hazard reduction goals.
activities requiring permits. 21. Plan the creation of a Technical
6. Improve decision- making and planing Guidance Manual for eventual use by all
with site - specific littoral land -use, natural coastal stakeholders including agencies
resource, and physical process and NGO's to improve our system of
information. erosion and coastal hazard management.
7. Establish a no- tolerance policy toward
new encroaching structures. Enforce the
policy using environmental sequencing
criteria for avoidance, minimization, or
compensatory mitigation of impacts.
8. Use fines and revocable easements as a
system of compensatory mitigation for
existing encroachments.
9. Build consensus among agencies and
communities for the concepts and tools
that will characterize the new erosion
•
management system.
•
' 10. Create a special fund for coastal
management at CLP using resource value
land revenues and other funds that offer
an alternative to legislative appropriations.
1 1. Publicize the new policy of compensatory
• mitigation guidelines for encroachments •
9
0 O
Department of Land and Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Management Plan - COEMAP
A. WHY COEMAP?
I . OUR RESTLESS This document, the Coastal Erosion
Management Plan (COEMAP), provides • a
S HORE framework for discussing, assessing,
understanding, and ultimately managing the
problem of coastal erosion and beach loss in
_ Hawaii. lts foundation is affirmed and
strengthened through the participation of
coastal landowners, the beach -going public,
FOREWORD government agencies and officials, commercial
interests, local planning and engineering firms,
Article X of the Hawaii State Constitution and other stakeholders. The objective of
inundates the state to conserve and protect COEMAP,.and the public dialogue it seeks to
Hawaii's natural resources for the benefit of foster, is to define legal, scientific, socio-
present and future generations. As the trustee economic, and engineering mechanisms for
of Hawaii's beaches, the Department of Land preserving, sustaining and restoring Hawaii's
. and Natural Resources (DLNR) has initiated a beaches for future generations.
comprehensive program, the Coastal Lands
• Program (CLP), to save this precious natural As far as possible, decisions to best achieve
resource for our future. This effort is guided improved erosiori management should arise
by the doctrine of sustainability promoting the from an informed and open exchange among
conservation, sustainability and restoration of all participants. COEMAP is one source of
Hawaii's beaches for future generations. information for that exchange. COEMAP
builds upon past efforts to increase
- understanding of the problems and issues and
� Wi ,^•• __ to develop mechanisms to improve erosion
management in Hawaii. A summary of past
erosion management efforts (prior to 1994) is
• i provided in the Technical Supplement, Part A.
• ��i_ ' -� * Y ^ r r which is a staff report of the Hawaii Coastal
*•., -g Zone Management Program ".
�r�:. , Agency. efforts to manage erosion, and
•
r preserve and restore beaches, should ride on
•
the shoulders of a strong public outreach and
�- _ *r " 4 education effort. Successful stewardship will •
• � ' require a flexible policy of interagency
coordination built upon trust, leadership and
`[ experience. These efforts must also be guided
Windward Oahu. Coastal development, by the wisdom and advice of those with
p knowledge in the legal, scientific, socio-
besieged by chronic erosion, has historically economic, and engineering sectors of coastal
relied on shoreline hardening for protection. lands management.
• In many cases this has caused beach
1 narrowing, beach and dune loss, and has The complexity of achieving these goals
restricted public access along miles of the demands a common level of education and
Hawaiian coast. COEMAP provides a familiarity among all participants. COEMAP
framework for decision- making and serves as a source of information and provides
implementation to better manage the problem a discussion of the issues. It offers
of coastal erosion and to improve the recommendations for action, and describes
conservation of our beaches and dunes. alternatives for consideration among
concerned parties. Consistent with the •goal of
• improved public awareness, DLNR, in
association with the Hawaii Sea Grant College,
' Technical Supplement. Part A. The Hawaii
• Coastal Zone Management Program Beach
•
Management Effort:' CZM Staff Report. February
(1994). 17p'.
1 0
P
Department of Land `..:j Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion NC,-_,:agement Plan - COEMAP
issued a pamphlet in 1998 tided "Coastal
Erosion and Beach Loss in Hawaii: Facts about Shoreline Hardening and
beach erosion and the new Coastal Lands Beach Loss
Program at DLNR." A copy of this pamphlet
is reproduced in the Technical Supplement,
Part B"' Initial shore profile
�
A long and unfortunate history of beach loss ; width
along the Hawaiian shoreline illustrates the
need for a renewed erosion management .t ,
system. It is useful, therefore, to articulate a ,. =
statement of the problem arising from coastal • • •
erosion in Hawaii such that there is a •
demonstrated purpose underlying new Shoreline profile after retreat
management strategies. This report documents =Lis
the loss or narrowing of approximately 24% i (no change u width)
width
of the sandy beaches on the island of Oahu dth •
over the 20th century and discusses technical
aspects of managing erosion. COEMAP ends ,-
with a series of policy and technical
recommendations for consideration by "•'��
stakeholder agencies.
Beaches on chronically eroding shores can
B. LOSING OUR BEACHES maintain their natural width as they slowly
retreat landward.
A study conducted at the University of
Hawaii" documents the problem of beach loss
due to hardening the shoreline of Oahu (Table Seawau Initial shore profile
1). Using an analysis of aerial photographs
from 1928 or 1949 to 1993, researchers found • Beaat
• that armoring a coastline experiencing chronic - width
erosion leads to beach loss, probably through
the process of passive erosion, as described by
Pilkey and Wright". Passive erosion is simply r
the continued retreat of a beach on an
armored shore, such that the beach eventually
disappears because it is prevented from further Shoreline profile after retreat
movement when it meets a wall (see diagram).
Passive erosion as a cause of beach loss is not Beach loss
unique to Hawaii and has been observed in
other studies (Tait and Griggs, 1990; Kraus, •
1988 "; and others). It is probable that sand
•
source: uS. Aimy Cope a Engineers (1991)
Technical Supplement, Part B, "Coastal Erosion Beach loss eventually occurs In front of a
and Beach Loss in Hawaii: Facts about beach erosion seawall where there Is chronic erosion.
• and the new Coastal Lands Program at DLNR."
DLNR Coastal Lands Program (1998), 2p. impoundment mauka (landward) of a seawall
" Fletcher, C.H., Mullane, R.A., and Richmond, is a contributing factor to chronic erosion ".
B.M. (1997) Beach loss along armored shorelines of Fletcher et al., found that on Oahu, 17.3 ±1.5
Oahu, Hawaiian Islands. Journal of Coastal Research, km (10.7 miles) of beach has been narrowed
v. 13, p. 209.215.
12 Pilkey, O.H., and Wright. H.L. (1988) Seawalls
versus beaches. Journal of Coastal Research, Special the beach: an extended literature review. Journal of
lssue, 4, p. 41 -64 Coastal Research, Special Issue 4, p. 1 -28.
Tait, J., and Griggs, G. (1990) Beach response w " Pope..1. (1997) Responding to coastal erosion and
the presence of a seawall. Shore and Beach. v. 58, p. flooding damages. Journal of Coastal Research. v. 13,
I 1 -28; Kraus, N.C. (1988) The effects of seawalls on p. 704 -710.
}. n O
•
Department of Land and Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Management Plan - COEMAP
TABLE 1
BEACH NARROWING AND LOSS ON OAHU
Mokuleia Kaaawa Kailua- Waimanalo Maili - Makaha Island -wide
A. Originally sandy (km) 12.2 ±1.0 7.5 ±0.6 15.5 ±1.3 6.0 ±0.5 115.6 ±9.8
11. Narrowed beach (km) 2.1+0.2 3.2+0.3 0.9+0.1 1.3 ±0.1 17.3 ±1.5
C. Lost beach (km) 0.2+0 0.8 ±0.1 1.6 ±0.1 0.2+0 10.4+0.9
D. Degraded beach 18.7% 53.6% 16.3 % 24.9% 23.9%
E. Short -term. maximum •
shoreline change rate (m /yr) -5.1 to 7.7 -5.8 to 14.0 -6.4 to 5.1 -2.2 to 4.0 not calculated
F. Net shoreline change
rate (m /yr) -0.2 to 0.3 -1.7 to 1.8 -0.9 to 0.6 -0.4 w 0.6 not calculated
G. Non- armored mean
sandy beach width 26.8 m 13.2 m 22.4 m 43.7 m not calculated
H. Armored mean
sandy beach width 12.8 m 8.9 m 7.1 m 24.5 m not calculated
1. Mean Tong -tens
shoreline change rate for
armored sites (m/yr) -0.2 -0.3 -0.6 -0.5 not calculated
J. Range of shoreline
change rates for armored
sites (m /yr) -0.1 to -0.3 0 to -1.7 0.2 to -1.8 -0.2 to - l.0 not calculated
• 97.4 per cent of armored beaches experienced chronic erosion prior to the period of narrowing.
• 92.1 per cent of armored beaches experienced Tong -term (>12 yr) chronic erosion prior to narrowing.
• Island -wide. all narrowed beaches are on armored shorelines.
by armoring and 10.4 ±0.9 km (6.4 miles) has possible to characterize the most likely causes
been lost by this process. This is -24% of the of erosion at a particular shoreline.
1 15.6 9.8 km (71.6 miles) of originally In broad terms, it is thought that the erosion of
sandy shoreline on Oahu. coastal lands is caused either singly or in
Along certain coasts it is known why erosion combination by sea - level rise, wave and
occurs. Many times, however, the causes of current action, or sediment deficiencies. These
erosion are hidden and even after close study each are discussed with regard to Hawaii in the
scientists and engineers are not able to - Technical Supplement, Part C ".
definitively, and quantitatively pinpoint all
original causes. Nonetheless, it is important
that erosion mitigation and management plans 1. Coastal Erosion vs. Beach Erosion
are predicated upon some effort to understand
he causes of erosion. This can be achieved Coastal erosion and beach erosion are not the
through examination of past land use patterns same, though they are related. Coastal lands
including sand mining, circumstances of reef may experience long -term, chronic erosion
degradation, analysis of historical aerial photos under some conditions. Coastal lands are
and beach profiles, the history of storms and typically composed of sand in Hawaii, so that
wave events, and the recollections of long -time as they erode and shift their position landward,
shorefront users. By integrating these sources they release a supply of sand to the adjoining
1 of information with an understanding of
coastal sedimentary processes, it is often " Technical Supplement (Part C) "Causes of Coastal
Erosion and Beach Loss in Hawaii." �p.
•
12
Department of Land anti Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Ma Plan - COEMAP
beach. The beach then, remains wide and Hawaiian shore depicted by the visitor industry
healthy even as it moves with the eroding are rare. Beaches are a critical component of
coastline. If sand is not available to a beach on the tourism infrastructure, like all
a chronically eroding coast, then beach infrastructure, they must be maintained.
erosion will ensue, leading to beach narrowing Conserving beaches is an economic as well as
and eventually beach loss. environmental responsibility of our system. of
Beach narrowing and loss occurs where sand land management. Resolving beach ;oss
supplies are diminished, or discontinued. should be the business of every Hawaiian
Where chronic erosion of coastal lands leads to citizen, the day may come when continued
shoreline armoring (the construction of beach loss will make a mark in everyone's life.
seawalls and. revetments, also known as Beach loss, however, does not occur in a
shoreline hardening), usually on shorelines vacuum nor without rationale. In nearly all
experiencing long -term retreat, sand supplies cases the same seawalls and revetments that are
are typically interrupted and nearby beaches damaging beaches are simultaneously
experience a decrease in sand volume. The protecting valuable coastal property. Along
original causes of chronic coastal erosion are residential shorelines, the ownership of
typically a combination of wave and current property, as in any neighborhood around the
action, sea -level rise, and/or sediment nation, is the focus of the day -to -day activities
deficiencies caused by human activities . In of families and hard - working individuals from
addition to Oahu, significant beach losses have . all walks of life. Coastal lands, like all lands,
occurred on all Hawaiian Islands, especially are owned by a cross - section of Hawaiian
the island of Maui, and to a lesser degree, on society. From absentee owners who may rent
Kauai and Hawaii. their lands, to long -time kamaaina families that
Beach loss incurs costs to all aspects of trace their roots on our shoreline through the
Hawaiian life. The local populace of Hawaii centuries, it is difficult to watch one's land
throngs to the beaches for the enjoyment of oas into the waves without taking action.
ocean access, socializing, exercise, being alone Coastal lands are all the more valuable in light
and being together. The beaches are among e
r the limited buildable land area and
the principle reasons many Hawaiians call restricted resources of our island home. Not
these islands home. On sunny weekends and only residences, but roadways, sewage lines
holidays, literally tens of thousands of and treatment plants, harbors,
manne airports,
residents can be found 'playing and commercial facilities and.all manner of public
communing along our sandy shorelines. As infrastructure may be found along our shores.
beaches disappear, the fabric of life in Hawaii To simply let our coastal investments and
will change and the daily miracle of living human efforts wash into the sea would not be a
among these islands will lose its luster. rational management decision.
The ecology of shorelines is destroyed when
beaches disappear. Further damage occurs C. COASTAL HAZARDS
with the frequently unrecognized demise of
coastal dunes which are often leveled and Erosion is not the only hazard impacting
graded (covered) with topsoil when shorelines coastal development. Tsunami's, hurricanes,
are developed. Continued beach loss will periods of large waves that occur seasonally,
undoubtedly impact our visitor industry, the kona (southerly) storms, high wind events,
principal engine driving the economy. stream flooding at the coast, undercutting and
Tourism in the state is closely tied to the slumping of steep shores, and long -term sea -
quality of Hawaiian beaches. As visitors find level rise are all natural processes that are of
access difficult to shorelines lined by seawalls concern to land managers and coastal land
and crowded with development, they will come owners .
to realize that our beaches are degraded, that
coastal vistas are no longer pristine, and that
fulfilling opportunities to. experience the
" Fletcher, C.H., and others (1994, and new edition
' Mullane. R. and Suzuki, D. (1997) Beach in press) Atlas of Natural Hazards in the Hawaiian
Management Plan For Maui. Prepared by University Coastal Zone. State of Hawaii. Coastal Zone
of Hawaii Sea Grant Extension Service and County of Management Program, Honolulu, and U.S.
•
•
Maui Planning Department. 41p. Geological Survey, Menlo Park, 400p.
I3
• 0
0
Department of Land and Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Management Plan - COEMAP
IS,n and Bay" describe the situation from the D. HO`OLAULIMA
go ‘ erument's perspective. Government has an (many hands working together)
Iu'ncrant ,take and an expressed obligation to
protect the lives and property of its citizens. Solutions to the apparent conflict o f
\litigaung damage from coastal hazards landowner expectations on retreating
reduces the heavy burden placed on limited coastlines subject to coastal hazards, are not
public Fiscal resources. easy, they are not cheap, and they will require
that all parties come to the table willing to
Hurricane Iniki, for example. caused 51.6 define levels of acceptable change to past
billion in losses to residential property. visitor practices of coastal use. Parties with aspirations
accommodations, public utilities, public to conflict. to place blame, and guided by
buildings and agriculture' ''. Recovery from distrust, will achieve only dissension. discord,
these losses required state public assistance of and ultimately failure. The result will be
over 517 million, federal assistance of 3621 continued beach loss. Parties with the intention
• million. and private assistance exceeding $38 to compromise, to reach understanding, and to
million. Iniki caused over 567 million in work in the spirit of achievement and
damage to state and county property. and 2 accomplishment will promote the ability of
years later Kauai County remained in an this generation to pass on a healthy and viable
economic recession with tourism down by 20 coastal environment to our children and
percent. auto sales down by 45 percent. jobs grandchildren. Options for managing the
• down by almost 8 percent, and an erosion problem are expensive. difficult, and
unemployment rate over 20 percent. Kauai will rarely prove completely satisfactory to all
County lost an estimated 314 million in stakeholders. Despite this, the problem must be
• property tax revenue during 1993 and 1994. stet with optimism. commitment and resolve or
the children of Hawaii will suffer because we
All these losses strain government assistance .
programs and result in tax losses at all levels. were not willing to make the necessary
For these reasons, and to enhance beach difficult choices.
conservation in an era of migrating shorelines The Board of Land and Natural Resources
and dynamic weather patterns, it is in circulated COEMAP for comment in 1997 as
government's interest to discourage an element of departmental policy to promote
inappropriate shoreline development in known the sustainable use of coastal resources.
hazard areas, including erosion hazard zones. including beaches. All aspects of COEMAP
Coastal hazard reduction can be achieved if were exposed to public scrutiny through a
structures are set back a rational distance from Year -long process of public presentations and
the shoreline, elevated above expected flood or discussion groups. This public awareness
water le\.elss, and built according to appropriate effort is ongoing and will be continuously
construction specifications. These actions, with
sustained. Outreach and awareness building is
additional and use guidelines detailed in this the first level of implementation of COEMAP
plan. are compatible with beach conservation
ecommendat
Importantly, the ideas in
and preservation measures. Hence it is in the COEMAP provide a conduit for feedback and
best interest of regulatory authorities to pursue envi i resolution that is a critical part of the
he compatible goals of beach conservation envsioned management framework. Indeed,
and hazard reduction using an integrated COEMAP is an organic document, meaning
amework. that it is ever - evolving, and it's purpose is to
incorporate new information and learned .
lessons to improve the erosion management
system in Hawaii.
COEMAP should be read by all coastal
stakeholders, including: State and County
authorities. the commercial and residential
'' Bay. 1. and Bay. M. (1996) Reducing hazards in development industry, land - use managers and
shoreline areas: policy and legal options. A report planners, coastal consultants, coastal residents.
Iron) the Coastal Acquisition Project. Phase 11. public interest groups, and the general public.
I Ha‘∎aii Coastal Zone Management Program. 15 p.
I ' Hanmctt. M.. Davidson Oh. K.G.. and Bryant. K.
( 1996) Hawaii Coastal Hazard Mitigation Planning
' Pnycct. Phase II: Findings and Recommendations
H.r.i.ui LI_M Pru_ Honolulu. 27p.
I4 .
r j
0 O
Department of Land and Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Management Plan - COEMAP
dredged or fill material into waters of the
�7 United States without a COE permit; and
1L MANAGING 3. Section 103, Marine Protection. Research
COASTAL EROSION and Sanctuaries Act of 1972. as amended
(33 USC 1413) — authorizes the COE to
issue permits for the transportation of
dredged material for the purpose of
dumping it into ocean waters'
A. HAWAII'S CURRENT The COE will not approve any projects until
MANAGEMENT REGIME all other applicable state and county permit
requirements have been satisfied.
The coastal management structure that has In addition to navigable waters authority,
evolved in Hawaii consists of three layers of federal jurisdiction is triggered for projects
jurisdiction, with varying degrees of overlap needing a federal permit, if significant federal
and prescribed coordination. Oceanic, Inc. and funding is involved, or if any major federal
Sullivan" and Lacayo Planning, Inc. and Sea action signifcantly affecting the environment
Engineering, Inc." present an overview of the is required. In all of these cases the National
erosion management framework in Hawaii. Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA)
requires the preparation of a federal
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) or
I. Federal Authority Environmental Assessment (EA). For many
Federal authority applies to the navigable actions that trigger the need for a federal EIS,
• waters of the United States, which extend from state law will also require a state-level EIS. Th
the mean high water mark seaward to the 200 two EIS documents can be combined, and
mile limit of the Exclusive Economic Zone. many of the content requirements are the same
• The federal government administers these or similar.
waters through the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (COE) and their Department of 2. State Authority
Army Permit (DA). The DA permit must be
obtained for virtually any construction fill and The National Coastal Zone Management Act
dredge or discharge activities. Private (CZMA) of 1972 was enacted to assist states in
ownership of the land beside, or below. or_near developing management policies for their own
the site of permitting does not change the need coastal resources. Coastal erosion is
for a DA permit. The regulatory authorities specifically mentioned in CZMA as an area of
and responsibilities of the COE are prescribed concern to be addressed by state policy. The
in the Following taws: , - CZMA requires that state programs include a
Section 10. Rivers and Harbors Act of planning process for assessing the effects of
1899 (33 .USC 403) — prohibits the shoreline erosion. evaluating ways to lessen the
•
obstruction or alteration of navigable impact, and restoring areas adversely affected
waters of the United States without a COE by erosion ". The national CZM program is
permit; administered by the Office of Ocean and
Coastal Resource Management (OCRM), an
2. Section 404, Clean Water Act (33 USC office in the National Oceanic and .
1344) — prohibits the discharge of Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), in the
U.S. Department of Commerce.
Hawaii's CZM law (Chapter 205A, FIRS) was
'" Oceanit. Inc. and Sullivan. J.N. (1990) Erosion enacted in 1977. Hawaii's coastal zone
Management Program Recommendations for Hawaii. includes all lands, and all waters from the
A report to the Coastal Zone Management Program. shoreline to the seaward limit of the state's
Office of Planning, State of Hawaii, Honolulu. 95p. jurisdiction In addition, although federal
21 Lacayo Planning. Inc and Sea Engineering. Inc.
( 1993) Beach Nourishment Viability study.
Rcgulauvy Analysis Component :A report to the
Coastal Zone Management Program. Orrice of Id.
Planning. State of Hawaii. Honolulu. 3' -p.. plus
''fhe shoreline is JelineJ as the "upper reaches of the
:nt..,!uncnn t .k .uh of the waves, other i hall ,farm and sc
0 s
Department of Land and Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Management Plan - COEMAP
•
lands are administratively excluded from the The Department of Health, Office of
CZM area, federal activities on these lands are Environmental Quality Control (OEQC)
subject to Federal consistency requirements. As administers the Hawaii EIS law (Chapter 343,
lead agency For CZM in Hawaii. the Office of HRS) and provides public notice of EA's
Planning (OP), in the State Department of (Environmental Assessments) accompanying
Business and Economic Development and CDUP's, Shoreline Certification Applications,
Tourism (DBEDT) is responsible for reviewing and other shoreline use projects, falling under
and deciding the consistency of Federal various lead agencies. For instance, associated
activities with the State's CZM program. with the Shoreline Certification process is the
Hawaii's Coastal Zone Management Program requirement for two public notices in the
(CZMP) establishes broad objectives and 12). Bulletin is to notify HA Sect. 13 -222-
12). The first is to notify the public that a
policies to guide all actions affecting the Shoreline Certification Application has been
coastal zone and is administered by the OP received, and requests comments within 14
through a network of state agencies and the days of publication, and the second is to notify
county planning departments. The erosion the acceptance or rejection of said application.
planning and management activities fall
primarily under the jurisdiction of the
counties, through the administration of the
Special Management Area (SMA) and 3. County Authority
shoreline setback provisions of Chapter 205A, Under Chapter 205A. HRS, the four counties
HRS, and the Department of Land and Natural are required to establish a "shoreline area"
Resources (DLNR), Conservation District with setbacks no less than 20 ft and no more
Regulations. than 40 ft inland from the shoreline wherein
All submerged lands seaward of the shoreline, no development is allowed. The law also allows
to the limit of state territorial waters, are counties to establish ordinances creating
included in the Conservation District, one of setbacks greater than 40 ft, and to extend
four land -use classifications in the state. jurisdiction over the shoreline area seaward to
Pursuant to Chapter 183, HRS, the Board of the mean sea level. Maui and Honolulu
Land and Natural Resources (BLNR), staffed counties have defined instances where the
setback is greater than 40 ft, but to date, no
by the DLNR, is responsible for establishing
he procedures and certifying where the county has moved its jurisdiction seaward to
shoreline is located, and for promulgating and mean sea level. The statute is intended to
administering the Conservation District use control development on es shoreline,
regulations. All activities proposed within the maintain open space, and preserve public
Conservation District require a Use Permit access, however, variances for prohibited
(CDUP), for which there is an application, and activities may be issued following review by
review process. BLNR can approve, deny, or county authorities.
approve with conditions, proposed uses of the Chapter 205A. HRS, provides authority to the
• Conservation District. counties to establish SMA boundaries and an
SMA permit process. Permits for activities on
SMA lands are classified as either major or
minor depending on the potential
environmental impact and the value of the
waves, at high tide during the season of the year in proposed development.
which the highest wash of the waves occurs, usually
evidenced by the edge of vegetation growth, or the Any proposed activities requiring a CDUP or
upper limit of debris left by the wash of the waves" SMA permit must undergo an application
(Chapter 205A -I, HRS). (n 1990, the Hawaii State procedure requiring a description of the
Legislature ammended the definition of state marine proposed activity, and known alternatives, the
waters to the water column and water surface, environmental setting and potential impacts,
extending from the upper reaches of the wash of the and proposed mitigative actions to lessen the
o the limit of the state's impacts. In certain cases (identified in Chapter
waves onshore, seaward to the authority, including 343, HRS) an Environmental Assessment (EA)
police power and
the United States territorial sea, notwithstanding any must be additionally submitted to the state
law to the contrary." (Chapter 190D -3. HRS). In a Department of Health, Office of
988 proclamation. President Reagan extended the Environmental Quality Control (OEQC), which
territorial sea of the U.S. linen three to twelve miles administers the Hawaii Environmental Impact
(h.1). Statement Law (Chapter 343, HRS). That
•
I3
t.
0 0
Department of Land and Natural Resources. Coastal Erosion Management Plan - COEMAP
office is responsible for advertising to the accommodation and enhancement. As
public that a period of review is underway for Hwang notes in retrospect, "Almost all of the
the EA and for soliciting document review by current shoreline problems could have been
all interested parties and agencies. If the avoided if shoreline instability were planned
OEQC makes a finding of significant impact for at the zoning stage, before parcels of land
(FOSI), a full EIS must be developed under are subdivided."
heir guidance. The OEQC has proposed Another related problem is that the linkages
e
s and guidelines governing he between the CZM program and other federal,
preparation of EA's for shoreline construction state, and county agencies responsible for the
projects, including projects that may result in administration, management or regulation of
environmental impacts to the beaches and coastal areas have traditionally been weak.
dunes of Hawaii (see Technical Suppletnent, Unlike other states that have well - integrated
Part D )' beach conservation programs in place or are in
the process of developing these programs, like
Texas, Hawaii has failed to move in this
4. Critique direction. The problem can be characterized as
As discussed above, Hawaii appears to have a a weak federal presence with respect to
well - developed and - comprehensive servicing local agencies with the latest
administrative system in place to effectively scientific and technical solutions to deal with
respond to coastal erosion and beach loss. This beach loss, and equally weak linkages between
system was codified in the early 1970's with stale and county agencies responsible for
the adoption of shoreline setback requirements beach and shore conservation. Hawaii, in
by county governments, and in the late 1970's effect, has no widely accepted program, or
with the establishment of the state's Coastal plan related to beach conservation at this time.
Zone Management Program. Why then, as It is time that Hawaii reinvents its shoreline
pointed to in Chapter I, has beach loss management regime with new cools,
occurred in such great proportions? techniques, and programs.
On one hand the problem lies in our failure to
recognize the problem in the first place, and B. NEW TOOLS FOR EROSION
our propensity to discount the economic, MANAGEMENT
cultural, and intrinsic importance of beaches.
On the ocher hand. the problem is essentially a Reducing the threat of coastal erosion and
planning issue rooted deeply in our failing processes such. as hurricane storm surge.
system of coastal zone management and - coastal stream flooding, tsunami inundation '
regulation. and high wave and high wind impacts requires
Hawaii's Coastal Zone Management Program full consideration of policy and legal options
designed to reduce exposure to these hazards.
was primarily developed as an adjunct to
Hawaii's uniform land use and zoning laws,
which fail to recognize the primacy of
shoreline dynamics in their implementing 1. State and County Tools
rules'". Coastal areas are dynamic zones that Across the nation, state coastal managers use
are undergoing constant change in response to many different management techniques.
a multitude of factors including sea -level rise, Regulatory measures such as permits. zoning
wave and current patterns, hurricanes. and ordinances and building codes are the primary
human influences. Traditional zoning tools elements of state programs to protect coastal
have promoted erosion control through resources. States also make wide use of
shoreline hardening rather than incentives, voluntary programs. land
• acquisition, planning, public education and
intergovernmental coordination.
` Technical Supplement (Part D) "Draft Shoreline
Hardening Policy." Office of Environmental Quality
Control (OEQC). Department of Heath. 6p.
Challacombe. A. (1997) Beach tManaeement in '' Hwang. D. (1997) Protecting Our Beaches:
Hawaii: A Public Sector Perspective. Hawaii Balancing Public and Private Interests. Hawaii
Planning!, v. x)Pi. nu. 6. p. 5. June. Moodily Planninu. v. xviii, no. 6, p. 7. June. Monthly
Ne)%clencr ul the Hawaii Chapter of the American Newsletter of the Hawaii Chapter of the AIIICtLI]II
'I.inniII A,m,- 1,LUUn. Planntn, Assuciatiun.
0
Department of and and Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Management Plan - COEMAP
Section 307 of the Coastal Zone Management :i) Federal Consistency Procedures
Act. which requires federal agencies to b) Operating Agreements
conduct their activities consistent with state
• coastal ianagement programs, is also a key ,Many of these tools, and others, are presently
management technique. However, resource used in Hawaii by various state and county
management priorities, management
and and resource management agencies. The
techniques. and organizational structure differ following sections of this chapter describe
certain of these techniques in more detail in
from state to state. Various management the expectation that they can be used more
techniques include': effectively or their scope broadened in
I. Research and Assessment managing the problem of beach loss and
coastal erosion. The description is not
a) Resource Assessments exhaustive, and the authors of COEMAP
b) Inventory and Mapping encourage the continued development of
c) Geographic information Systems
d) Habitat Restoration Research creative coastal management policies.
e) Sea -Level Rise Research
t) Beach Profile Development
g) Remote Sensing 2. Criteria to Guide Decision Making
2. Land and Water Management Any administrative approach to managing the
erosion hazards in Hawaii will need to
a) Land Acquisition incorporate the considerations of a broad
b) Conservation Easements spectrum of concerned stakeholders with a
c) Public Access Development diversity of interests and goals. .
d) Restoration /Enhancement County. state and federal administrations share
e) Public Investment Restrictions
t) Coastal Property Disclosure responsibility for governing the parcel by
parcel usages and management decisions that
3. Planning will determine the future state of our coastline.
a) Local Land -use Plans Together, they are responsible for the
b) Special Area Management Plans implementation of recommendations in this or
c) Regional Plans any other document and for the law as it is
d) Public Access Management Plans written in Chapter 205A. These levels together
e) Disaster Preparedness Plans will primarily be responsible for implementing
strategies for all types of both developed and
4. Regulation undeveloped lands. Although beach
tba
cks(Buffers conservation is primarily a state issue _because
a) Se
a) Special Setbacks/Buffers
Permits beaches lie seaward of the certified shoreline
P and fall under state Conservation District
c) Shoreline Stabilization Restrictions authority and management by the CDUP
d) Local Zoning Ordinances (Conservation District Use Permit), it is the
e) Compensatory Wetland Mitigation coastal [and losses, chronic erosion, and private
f) Mitigation Banking development rights that precipitate impacts
g) Wetland Permits and necessitate hazard mitigation on a day in
h) Development Permits and day out basis. These issues are the engine
5. Education driving our management of sandy shores, and
it is these that lie under shared jurisdiction.
a) Technical Assistance to
b) Landowners and Government State agencies and county planning and
c) Publications, Video and Other permitting departments attempt to coordinate
d) Media and facilitate their respective missions, but in
e) Workshops and Conferences the end, a common vision governing the
exercise of day to day administration of the
6. Intergovernmental Coordination shore on both sides of the certified shoreline
must be achieved: If agencies of the state and
counties seek to improve the management of
' National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration erosion, it will be crucial that both
(NOAH). 1998 (on- line). "Reducing the Impacts ur administrations establish mutually acceptable
Coastal Hazards" by Sandy Ward and Catherine Main. criteria for conservation and mitigation. These
NOAA's State or the Coast Report. Silver Spring. criteria must be articulated, reviewed and
N1D. NO:A:A
1 S
7 s 0
0
Department of Land and Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Management Plan - COEMAP
muddied. and finally accepted as policy with a. Hawaii's Permitting Puzzle On both a
governing rules for deal in; with erosion. One national and local level there has been much
example of such criteria are Found in die 1991 discussion on the applicability of using sand
Oahu Shoreline Management Plan which are nourishment For beach and dune restoration as
used • by the City and County of Honolulu an erosion management tool. If Hawaii is to
Department of Planning and Permitting to pursue beach and dune, restoration using
make consistent management decisions along marine sand sources as a policy of erosion
their shore. Ianagement, it will require conducting
activities seaward of the mean high water mark,
The fundamental and preeminent challenge
acing erosion managers is to create an an area that is regulated by the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers (COE). If a significant
effective marriage of agency goals and impact to the environment is identified, such as
methodologies for the betterment of their with a large -scale restoration project, then a
. constituency and our environment along the federal Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
shore. must be submitted in accordance with the
This fact is recognized in the structure and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of
function of the Coastal Zone Management 1969 in order to acquire the necessary
Program of the Office of Planning. Among Department of Army (DA) permit.
other efforts. the CZMP provides counties with The Hawaii Environmental Impact Statement
a framework, with funding, with information, _ Law (Chapter 343, HRS) also requires that a
and with guidance in managing the coastline Hawaii EIS be submitted for any activities
of Hawaii. Indeed, the counties are the involving eight types of conditions. Among
functional arms of a larger system of coastal these eight are the use of state or county funds
management that includes all levels of or lands, use of Conservation District lands, or
• government. Since the CZMP exists as a use of the Shoreline Setback Area. •
consistency and oversight body with a
mandate to enhance coastal management, and The Hawaii EIS law is modeled after NEPA,
the Coastal Lands Program (CLP) at DLNR is and since large -scale beach nourishment will
the permitting authority governing activities trigger both federal and state EIS requirements
on Hawaiian beaches, it is appropriate that it will be necessary to prepare a single EIS
both agencies work together to facilitate the document that addresses both federal and state
development of site - specific criteria for issues. The two levels of requirements are
decision making and permitting in the SMA• closely matched, however, and the burden of
(Special Management Area). This must be conducting the EIS study is not made
. achieved in collaboration with and under the significantly more difficult with the joint use.
guidance and agreement of the various The submission of the joint EIS is coordinated
counties. by the DOH Office of Environmental Quality
•
Control (OEQC) and its final acceptance at the
1 state level is granted by the governor or mayor
• 3. Regulatory Tools for public projects, and by the permit lead
agency for private projects.
Although the CZMP does issue determinations
to ensure that coastal activities are consistent Under the federal Clean Water Act (Section
with state CZM objectives and policies, except 401), an applicant requiring a federal license
for certain community development districts, it or permit to conduct work in state waters must
is not a regulatory body. and it does not also obtain a Water Quality Certification
possess the power to exercise the (WQC) from DOH. Additionally, any beach
implementation of state laws and to actively restoration activity that utilizes the discharge
manage state lands. The DLNR, the DOH, the of a sand slurry, or the placement of dredged
' counties, and the COE share the majority of sand in coastal waters will require a National
responsibility for implementing new programs, Pollution Discharge Elimination System
issuing permits and affecting true changes to (NPDES) permit. This permit application will
coastal erosion management in Hawaii. be reviewed by the federal Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) and issued by DOH.
As the lead agency for the CZMP of Hawaii.
Sea Engineering. Inc. and ; bluun.I3.A . 119Y11 the Office of Planning is responsible for
Oahu Shoreline (Management Plan. A rcpurt prepared reviewing and deciding the consistency of all
Ira [he Ciiy and County ul Honolulu Department of federal activities with state goals in CZM areas
I !al 1i it, /.Lieu. iip.
1,1
0 c
Department of Land and Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion iN1an'agement Han - COE,MAP
(coastal lands and waters). A consistency will be no adverse environmental or ecological
determination is required from OP /CZMP for impacts resulting from the action. and that
federally- funded activities and activities public access is maintained or enhanced as a
requiring federal permits and licenses. The result of the project.
ore's consistency determination can include Large -scale beach restoration will require a
conditions to mitigate or offset potential total of 13 permits or actions to obtain the
impacts of the activity ity or use proposed in the agreement of federal, state, and county
p application.
agencies, these are °:
The State DLNR under the legal authority of
Chapter 183, HRS will require a CDUP for 1. National Council of Environmental
large -scale restoration activities because Quality, Federal EIS, based on
beaches and lands seaward of the certified a) NEPA of 1969 (Public Law 91 -190)
shoreline will be impacted by sand dredging
and filling. The Land Division of DLNR will 2 . U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
also have to issue a separate Right of Entry for Department of Army Permit, based on
sand mining or fill based on a submitted a) Section 10. Rivers and Harbors Act of
Environmental Assessment (EA) describing 1899 (33 USC 403)
the proposed activities and possible impacts.
b) Section 404, Clean Water Act (33 USC
In order to obtain a CDUP, a shoreline 1344)
certification must be granted by the State
Surveyor under Chapter 205A, HRS. This c) Section 103, Marine Protection,
requires a separate application to the Land Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972,
Division of the Department of Land and as amended (33 USC 1413)
Natural Resources which requests a review by 3. Federal Consistency Determination,
the State Surveyor in the Department of Hawaii Coastal Zone Management •
Accounting and General Services (DAGS). A Program, Office of Planning, DBEDT,
period of public comment is announced in the under
OEQC Bulletin (14 days), after which a
recommendation is forwarded from . the a) CZM Act of 1972, Chapter 205A, HRS
Surveyor's office to the Chairperson's Office 4. Water Quality Certification, Hawaii
of DLNR, where it is approved or rejected. Department of Health, Clean Water Branch
Under county jurisdiction, sand mining or under authority of
moving and depositing by mechanical means a) Section 401 of the Clean Water Act,
for public uses within a shoreline area may be Federal Water Pollution Control Act of
authorized by a Shoreline Setback Variance 1972, Public Law 92 -500, Chapter
(SSV), provided that "moving of sand will not 342D, HRS
adversely affect beach processes, will not
diminish the size of a public beach, and be 5. Hawaii EIS, for the DOH, Office of
necessary to stabilize an eroding shoreline" Environmental Quality Control, can be
(Chapter 205A -46, HRS). The setback same document as 1. above, addressing
requirements are administered and enforced both federal and state guidelines, defined
by the permitting departments of the counties by
and they will be the issuing authorities of the a) Chapter 343, HRS
SSV for nourishment actions.
Because restoration will involve activities in the 6. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
S ecial Management Area" (SMA) that Environmental System Permit, from the DOH
�� " P g Environmental Management Division,
extends no less than 100 yards inland from the under authority of
shoreline, and the power to regulate these
lands is delegated to the counties under a) Chapter 342D, HRS and Title 11,
Chapter 205A, HRS, a "major" SMA Permit Chapter 55, HAR
must be obtained if the total valuation of the
project exceeds 5125,000 or if it may have a
significant adverse environmental or °' Lacayo Planning. Inc and Sea Engineering. Inc.
ecological effect. Otherwise. a SMA Nlinor (1993) Beach Nourishment Viability study.
Permit may be issued by the county. Th i Regulatory Analysis Component. A report Prepared
conditioned upon documentation that there for the Hawaii Coastal Zone Mana_gentent Program.
12p. plus attachments.
2 U
0 0
Department of Land and Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Management Plan - COEMAP
7. Shoreline Certification. Department of activities could include integrated conservation
Accounting and General Services and hazard mitigation projects. such as small -
a) Chapter 205A, HRS scale beach restoration.
8. DLNR. Lund Division, Conservation One General Permit applicable under state or
Federal jurisdiction, administered by a single
District Use [ r granted by the Board lead agency. that defines guidelines for Best
of Land and Natural Resources under Management Practices to achieve integrated
a) Chapter 205, HRS. Tide 13, Chapter 2 conservation and hazard mitigation along the
shoreline, would provide efficiency and
9. DLNR Right -of- Entry - Authorization economy to the effort to restore lost beaches.
under That lead agency should be the Coastal Lands
a) Chapter 171, HRS Program at DLNR. This would, in fact, move
directly toward the environmental restoration
10. A major Special Management Area Use and erosion mitigation identified in
Permit administered by the counties under management alternatives 2. (Beach
authority of Restoration), and 3. (Erosion Control)
• a) Chapter 205A, HRS and county articulated in Pope (1997) and described
governing ordinances ahead in section [I.B.5.
1 I . Counties will also issue a Shoreline c. Rights of Ownership An accompanying
Setback Variance For any activities within issue that must be addressed prior to filling
the designated setback zone under and accreting coastal lands is the rights of
ownership and use for private lands that have
a) Chapter 205A, HRS and county eroded and whose property boundaries (metes
governing ordinances and bounds) lie across the area of restoration?
12. A Permit for Grading and/or Grubbing It would be a mistake, and in fact would
will need to be issued for sand fill activities violate stated FEMA goals, if beach restoration
based upon resulted in increased development in coastal
a) County Ordinances hazard areas. It is highly likely that sand
nourishment and the resulting accretion of the
l3. A Flood Hazard Certification must be shoreline, would shift the highest reach of the
awarded by county agencies to certify that waves seaward of their pre- nourishment
the permitted activity will not alter the location. Future certifications at such sites by
- elevation of base flood conditions (100 yr owners with overlapping metes and bounds
flood) of the NFIP would result in a seaward shift in the setback
a) County Ordinances zone and the encroachment of development
into high hazard areas.
Property owners who have hardened their
b. General Permit It is clear from this review coastal lands, and thereby "fixed" the
that a high level of analysis and understanding position of the certified shoreline may be
must accompany any large -scale beach rewarded for their actions with larger areas of
restoration project in Hawaii. It would be in private property and buildable land compared
the best interest of facilitating the use of to owners who have not hardened their
restoration as a viable option, and reducing the property and who allowed the position of the
workload of agencies, to coordinate and shoreline to migrate inland over time.
identify areas of overlapping effort such that A discussion of this issue by the CZMP,
the permitting process can be made more Marine and Coastal Management Advisory
efficient without sacrificing the present high Group (MACZAG), Subcommittee on Coastal
level of environmental and ecological Erosion concluded that representatives of
safeguards. DAGS Survey Office should consult with the
One approach to realize this goal is to define a Office of the Attorney General and others with
single "General Permit" such as the legal expertise to further explore these issues.
Department of the Army State Program One approach would be to file a unilateral
General Permit (SPGP, administered by the agreement among property owners in a project
Corps of Engineers) that defines guidelines for area with the Bureau of Conveyances. It is also
activities seaward of the certified shoreline, expected that amended legislation will be
identifvine Mate or federal jurisdiction. Such necessary to resolve the Issue.
1 '1
0
Department of Land and Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Ma Plan - COEMAP
d. Environmental Sequencing Hwang" describes Planning Project". When combined, these
the "environmental sequencing approach" to initiatives represent an integrated approach to
erosion hazard reduction. Environmental coastal hazard mitigation. They
sequencing helps regulators to Focus on the most recommended:
efficient and acceptable means or shoreline
protection while reducing the burdens on the Hawaii government hould enforce
regulated community. Sequencing s an existing floodplain regulations and
environmental decision- making Framework shoreline setback requirements;
2. Designate coastal high hazard areas on all
based on the concepts of avoidance, county planning, zoning, and land -use
minimization, and compensatory mitigation. maps, and establish a hazard mitigation
• I. Avoidance Avoidance relies on historical review process:
shoreline data and erosion analysis to 3. • Review Flood Insurance Rate Maps and
determine a safe location for structures. This evaluate their adequacy in coastal high
is the most effective way to prevent shoreline hazard designations;
erosion problems. Avoidance requires that 4. Establish variable shoreline setbacks;
erosion hazards are recognized prior to 5. Adopt the latest version of the Uniform
zoning at the county level, and that. erosion Building Code;
projections are incorporated in plans for 6. Assess the capacity of county building
subdividing coastal lots. Hence, avoidance departments to adequately enforce the
leads to the safe siting of structures away provisions of the 1991 Uniform Building
from coastal hazards. Code;
2. Minimization If structures are improperly 7 . Encourage development of a federal tax
located and coastal hazards cannot be credit for hazard mitigation;
avoided, the environmental and economic 8. Monitor the availability of Federal
impacts need to be minimized. Minimization Emergency Management Agency grapt
funds for hazard mitigation and make the
employs an array of planning and
establishment of a hazard mitigation
engineering tools to take the place of the homeowner grant program a priority;
traditional, and harmful, seawall or 9. Encourage private groups to take a
revetment. These include seabags, dune leadership role in improving design and
enhancement, sand replenishment, offshore construction standards to reduce the risk
structures, and other erosion control and of future hurricane damage;
beach restoration technologies. 10. Develop a hazard mitigation incentive
3. Compensatory Mitigation If environmental program through the Hawaii Hurricane
impacts cannot be minimized, the concept of Relief Fund;
compensatory mitigation can be employed 11. Establish a Hurricane Mitigation Advisory
where the landowner contributes to the state Board;
or county an amount related to the costs to 12. Establish a beach monitoring program: .
develop or replenish similar beach resources 13. Develop a coastal retreat strategy for high
elsewhere. hazard areas:
Environmental sequencing for reducing 14. Fund training programs on the provisions
q g g of the 1991 Uniform Building code for
erosion hazards can be integrated with efforts county building department officials and
to reduce exposure to other coastal hazards, building contractors;
including hurricanes. l5. Establish a wind hazard assessment
e. Integrating Hazard Mitigation In October program;
of 1996, the University of Hawaii Social 16. Fund the development and distribution of
Science Research Institute (SSRI) provided 20 public information materials on the risk of
recommendations as the result of their CZM future hurricane damage and steps
funded Hawaii Coastal Hazard Mitigation individuals and businesses can take:
17. Develop a hurricane hazard mitigation
program for state buildings:
" Hwang, D.I. (1998) An environmental sequencing
approach to shoreline management. First Regional ` Hamnett, M., Davidson Oh. K.G.. and Bryant. K.
Conference on Coastal Erosion Management in (1996) Hawaii Coastal Hazard Mitigation Planning
Hawaii and other Pacilic Islands. Abstracts with Project. Phase II: Findings and Recommendations.
program. Link crsav or Hawaii Sca Grant College Hawaii CZM Program. Honolulu. 27p.
•
I'w rnn.
j 0
o.
Department of Land and Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Management Plan - COEMAP
18. Develop a hurricane recovery and hazard During the I980s. Florida's Department or
mniti_:tion plan, Environmental Protection established the
W. Create sate income tax credits for hazard CCCL ro upgrade the standards that guide land
mitigation( use and building construction in high- hazard
_U. Provide low interest loans for hurricane coastal areas. The CCCL defines the zone
hazard mitigation. along the coastline subject to flooding,
erosion. and other impacts during a "100 -year
These recommendations focus principally on storm" (a severe storm that has a 1% chance of
reducing hazards to coastal development, but occurring each year). Properties located
certain actions would also promote avoidance seaward of the CCCL setback are subject 10
and minimization of erosion threats, hence state- enforced elevation and construction
leading to enhanced beach conservation. requirements that are more stringent than
f. Setback Programs Various states have dealt National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) •
coastal (V -Zone) requirements. Likewise, the
■with the mitigation of coastal hazards, wind -load requirements seaward of the CCCL
including chronic erosion, through the use of are more stringent than those of the standard
construction setbacks (see Table 3). building codes'.
1. North Carolina North Carolina's coastal The test of the CCCL requirements came on
development regulations require property October 4, 1995, when Hurricane Opal struck
owners to set their buildings back from a portion of the Florida coastline as a category
eroding shorelines and protective beaches and 3 hurricane with 111 to 115 mile per hour
dunes. These natural features and the design winds (Table 2).
and size of the proposed development
determine the construction setback required. Coastal Flood forces, consisting of storm surge,
The setback is measured from the first line wind - generated waves, flood- induced erosion
along which aerial photos show stable natural and flood -borne debris, appeared to cause
\ egetation or from the point at which a ground most of the resultant structural damage during
survey shows stable vegetation. Opal. Of the 576 major habitable structures
located seaward of the CCCL and permitted by
New, smaller •structures must be set back
the state under the current standard, none
sustained substantial farthest landward of (I) a distance equal to 30 damage. In contras[, 768
the
times the long -term annual erosion rate, (2) s6b damago of the crest of the primary dune. (3) .the the CCCL sustained tia da se
t
landward toe of the frontal dune, or (4) 60 feet the CCCL sustained substanntial damage.
of
landward of the vegetation line. Larger Table 2. Damaged Structures seaward of the
structures must be set back a distance 60 times CCCL due to Hurricane Opal
the average annual erosion rate or l20 feet
landward of the vegetation line. Where erosion Structures - Structures
rates exceed 3.5 feet per year. the setback line built to.CCCL NOT built to
for larger structures is 30 times the erosion standards., CCCL
rate plus 105 feet. The law allows single- (576 tarsi) standards
family residences on preexisting lots not deep ,; ,. . ,
,., s .
enough to meet the erosion setback (1366 t6Fa1)
requirements as long as they are set back at require
cast re feet'`. substantially. - 576 598
damaged.:
2. Florida The State of Florida has Structures:.
implemented two effective tools for mitigating substantially 0 768
coastal hazards, land use and building code damaged
requirements. through its Coastal Construction ' Percentage of
Control Line (CCCL) regulation. structures
0% 56%
substantially
damaged
National (hemhu and Atmospheric Administration More structures were damaged or destroyed
i yUAAr- I v 1 Ni tom - line). "Reducing the Impacts of by wave erosion associated with Hurricane
C.,,,101 Huzaid." by Sandy Ward and Cath Main.
\r ) - \;\ N SLaIC H the Cl asi Repun. Sil"er Spring.
. N/) .' Id.
1
Department of Land an Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Marragement Plan - COEMAP
Opal than in all other coastal ,storms that have island concluded that the best was to preserve
occurred in Florida over the past 20 years the primary attraction of the resort, the beach.
combined. The fact that CCCL - permitted was with a beach nourishment project along
structures sustained no damage in Hurricane the shore. Although the project was expensive
Opal is a result of the use of hazard - resistant and the resort owners funded it themselves,
construction and siting requirements. they considered it an economic necessity for
• 3. Hawaii Bay and Bay" report on the he Future of the entire community.
minimum construction setbacks of 40 rt In 1990. the beach on Sea Island was
established in Hawaii which are required under nourished, and two groins were constructed to
Chapter 205A. Hawaii Revised Statutes. With alleviate the chronic erosion problem. Since
the granting of a variance from the governing then, the resort has continued the beach
county, a structure can be sited within 20 ft of nourishment project by moving sand from
the shoreline. or less in the County of Hawaii. time to time, planting vegetation and using
Variances are awarded in cases of emergency snow fences to hold the sand in place during
or because the 40 ft condition would render windy periods.
the lot unbuildable otherwise. The County of The project has thus far proved successful in
Hawaii Planning Commission Rules allow the maintaining a beachfront for residents and
granting of a Shoreline Setback Variance for vacationers, and in preventing the erosion that
lesser setbacks if certain criteria can be met. was threatening beachfront homes on the
The lesser setback is applicable to lots which
were created prior to adoption of the Planning island. After eight years. sand dunes and
Department's Rule 11 (January 19, 1997) vegetation are thriving on the beach; and the
when one of the following exist: 1) when the threat of coastal hazards impacting the
average lot depth of a parcel is one hundred beachfront homes has greatly diminished.
. feet or less; or 2) when the buildable area of a 5. Certified Shoreline'" The setback in Hawaii,
parcel is reduced to less than fifty percent of as mentioned earlier, is measured from the
the parcel after applying the forty -foot Certified Shoreline. It is defined in the Coastal
shoreline setback line and all state and county Zone Management Act (HRS -205 A) as,
requirements of the parcel.
the upper reaches of the wash of the waves, other than
Many nonconforming structures have been storm and seismic waves, at high ride during the
grand - fathered under the current setback law season of the year in which the highest wash of the
such that the typical residential developed waves occurs, usually evidenced by the edge of
coast in Hawaii has a range of permitted. vegetation growth. or the upper limit of debris left by
nonconforming, and non - permitted structures the wash of the waves.
at various distances from the shoreline. Under
the law the counties have the ability to increase This definition creates some problems, as
the setback. The City and County of Honolulu described by Fletcher and Hwang (1994).
has increased it's setback for new construction Chief among them is the fact that coastal land
from 40 ft to 60 ft. Maui County has a setback owners and managers (typically homeowners,
up to 150 ft depending on lot size and other and commercial interests) frequently
. aspects, and Kauai and Hawaii Co's have landscape their beachfront property to push
maintained the minimum 40 ft, except where he vegetation line seaward and thereby gain
county ties permit a lesser setback. valuable building space. This constitutes a slow
but inexorable encroachment of development
4. Georgia Beach Nourishment Project Sea upon the hazardous and fragile beaches of
Island, Georgia is a small resort island with Hawaii. Also, wave run -up does not provide
beaches that attract numerous vacationers and the surveying profession, responsible for
new residents. Since the late 1980s, beach identifying the certified shoreline, with a fixed
erosion has been chronic, primarily as a result natural monument or datum with measurable
of coastal stones and northeasters. The erosion characteristics. Hence, the defined shoreline is
persisted until it was difficult to walk on the based upon an inherently ephemeral and
beach at high tide. The owners of the resort unobservable phenomenon that is identified
Bay, J. and Bay, M. (1996) Reducing hazards in "' Fletcher, C.H.. and Hwang, D. J. (1994) Shoreline
• shoreline areas: policy and legal options. A report Certification Review and Recommendations: A
Front Ilse Coastal Ayuisition Project. Plt:uc 11. Hawaii Report to the Coastal Zone Manaeeinent Progrdw of
Cuascd ZaMC ALwagcment Pru_nr :un. 15 1, Hawaii. 76p.
24
Department of Land and Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Management Plan - COEMAP
by interpretation and judgement. leading to hearings a year that deal with certification. The
problems 01 inconsistency and disagreement. majority of these involve a dispute over the
The State Surveyor, who "certifies" the interpretation of physical evidence of the
position of the shoreline, processes upper reaches of the wash of the waves.
approximately 200 applications per year and it
mpossible a conduct an on -site visit to 6. Other States For comparison, some states
confirm the proper application of the law at use the Mean High Water tidal datum
each one. Currently. the Office of the Attorney measured from benchmarks, or other datums
General handles about 5 to 6 contested case that can be easily surveyed by civil engineers
• or surveyors (Table 3).
Table 3. States with fixed and rate-variable setbacks.
•
States with LtasisJ'st Reference
Eisgsi S ethack S ethack.:'•
EQ1IIL yA :. {i
Ssthack —
i Maine 75 feet Setback is part of the state zoning Seasonal Mean High
law and not specifically for erosion Water
• control
Delaware 100 feet, no Based on U.S'. Army Corps of Ocean beaches 10
(changing to development seaward of line Engineers study foot contour, Bay
erosion rates) beaches 7 foot
contour, NGVD
Florida Setback distance varies w/ Erosional trend;, shoreline Mean High Water
(see below) stricter building standards fluctuations 100 year storm surge,
seaward of line and associated waves
Alabama Setback ranges from 120 to 450 Ranking of 4 factors: ' Mean High Water
feet, no development seaward of I) impact of stoma;
line 2) alignment of existing structures;
3) buildable property;
4) maintain structures at higher
elevations
S tates with Setback ,Reference Point s hpreline Change:
Variablg tethodol2E. •
wetbacks -- __
New York 25 ft in low erosion areas (<1 Dune — Landward toe of 1st dune Aerial photographs
ft/yr): 40 yr setback +25 ft in Bluff — Landward receeding edge (40 to 50 yr time
high erosion areas (>1 ft/yr) span)
Rho& Island 50 feet in low erosion areas ( <1 Dunes — Primary dune crest Aerial photographs
It/yr) Bluffs — Landward edge with Zoom Transfer
' - 30 yr setback in high erosion . Wetland— Veg. transition line Scope (1970 -'80's
areas (>2 It /yr) Beach — Scarp or deposition change technology)
New Jersey 50 year setback Mean High Water, locally Aerial photographs
determined ( '71. '88, recent)
North I. Development <5000 sq. ft. I. a. Vegetation line Aerial photographs
Carolina tunhest of b. primary dune = to 100 year storm (22 to 50 years)
a. 30 year setback level +6 feet elevation orthogonal grid
h. behind crest of primary dune c. primacy dune with sufficient matrix system
c. behind land toe of frontal dune height. vegetation, continuity and
' d 60 feet landward of veg. line configuration to offer protective
2. Development >5000 sq. It. value
a. 60 vicar setback in areas with d. vegetation line
annual erosion rate >3.5 ft /yr 2.a. & h. vegetation line
• b. 30 vear setback + 105 ft in
areas mviih erosion rate <3.5 It /vr
1
1
c �
Department of Land and Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Management Plan - COEMAP
•
4. Non - Regulatory Tools exposure and in the event of a serious disaster,
a. Federal Emergency Management Agency insurance will not Fully alleviate the resulting
socioeconomic burdens.
1. Floodplain Policies In 1994, the Federal As pointed out by Hamnetr" the direct hit of a
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
hurricane on a densely populated area or
Identified coastal hazard mitigation as a new Hawaii has the potential to cause Financial
management initiative. Presently (1998), they losses exceeding the total annual state budget.
are in the last phase of a multi -year analysis of g
Accordingly, in order to reduce the
he national exposure to coastal erosion, and financial
will submit a future report to the U.S. exposure to catastrophic losses, FEMA offers
Congress with recommendations on the Programs providing incentives for reducing
agency role in both erosion planning and hazard exposure by lowering insurance costs if
response activities.
certain performance standards are achieved.
Current FEMA efforts seek to limit economic The FEMA Community Rating System (CRS)
exposure to coastal flooding hazards. The Provides incentives and guidelines for
establishing planning performance standards
agency uses the historical frequency and in coastal communities of homeowners. The
magnitude of coastal floodplain inundation
(including stream floods, storm surge and CRS offers reduced premium rates for
tsunami inundation, and high wave hazards) as communities that implement adequate land use
the basis for modeling the elevation and inland and loss control measures, facilitate accurate
limit of the "100 year flood" (1 per cent sk anking, promote Hood nsurance
annual recurrence probability). Results are awareness. and encourage measures for the
published as construction and building siting management of natural and beneficial
guidelines in a series of maps called Flood Ploodplain functions and erosion hazards. In
Insurance Rate Maps (or FIRM's). These maps Hawaii, these activities and measures would
show the inland limit of predicted coastal typically be enacted at the county level.
Flooding and high wave velocity hazards (V Communities may receive additional credit for
zones), and set minimum elevations (the Base implementing eligible mitigation activities.
Flood Elevation. or BFE) for building This could include changes in the shoreline
construction. FIRM's have been adopted setback, or development of mitigation plans
that place stricter development and building
nationally for insurance rating and tloodplain guidelines on structures in the coastal V zone.
management.
Communities in flood hazard areas as mapped The CRS has established a ranking system.
on the FIRM's are able to get affordable flood from l to 9, where a 5 per cent decrease in
nsurance, through the National Flood flood insurance premiums is offered for each
i Insurance Programs (NFIP) administered by lower ranking achieved with specified
FEMA. Commercial insurance carriers act as mitigation efforts, up to a maximum of 45 per
agents for the NFIP to offer flood insurance to cent reduction. Currently, Maui County is the
homeowners at reasonable rates through the only community in the state participating in
NFIP in what otherwise would be uninsurable he CRS. They have a Class 8 rating which
locations. earns a 10 per cent discount on their insurance
premiums.
However, although Hawaii has the highest per FEMA also offers the Flood Mitigation
capita NFIP participation rate in the nation, Assistance (FMA) program, which provides
numerous structures here are not insured since mitigation assistance grants and mitigation
they are not subject to federally backed or insurance coverage to eligible states and
insured mortgages . Additionally, many communities. One -time planning grants for
insured structures in Hawaii do not meet the mitigation development are available to states
mandated NFIP building codes because the ($75,000) and to communities (325,000).
titter requirements only apply to new or Mitigation activities could include planning
substantially rebuilt homes. Hence, the NFIP is
not fully resolving the problem of hazard
Hamnctt. M.P. (199.1) Findings and
Recommendations Coastal Hazard Mitigation
Bay, 1. and Bay, Nil. (1996) Reducing hazards in Planning Project: Findings, Recommendations and
,hurtling areas: policy and legal options. A report Technical Documents. Honolulu: Social Science
Lruni the Cu;oiul Acquisition Project. Phase 11, Research Institute, University of Hawaii for the
Hawaii Zone N Proer:un, 15 p_ Hawaii Coasud Zone Mtanugement Program.
26
I 1
O 0
Department of Land and Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Management Plan - COEMAP
the acquisition ut property For land banking. coastal areas and thereby reduce the amount
aggregate mitigation activities, and technical of damage caused by natural hazard events in
assisc The amount is capped of coastal areas. The agency is currently
55,000.000 to any state or community over a considering, and circulating For comment.
2 -year period. Amounts are subject to 75/35 draFt guidelines for erosion hazard analysis. If
. matching Funds. adopted in the new manual, these would
include a series of checklists. flowcharts and
2. Applicability of NEIP to Erosion In Hawaii, Figures to guide an erosion hazard
the exposure to marine flooding is not equal
all shorelines, and delineating historical vulnerability analysis of shoreline properties
along targeted For development, or redevelopment.
flood limits as the sole criteria guiding coastal
hazard mitigation neglects the ongoing They propose that erosion hazards be defined
erosion hazard and, alone. may not be as part of the evaluation criteria made by
adequate as a beach conservation measure. commercial and governmental professionals in
Nonetheless, many activities that reduce flood selecting designating, and designing
hazard exposure are consistent with erosion development projects along the coast. To
mitigation and beach conservation. define an erosion hazard it is necessary to
In the case of undeveloped shorelines. a level estimate the "Maximum Shoreline Erosion,"
of avoidance of flooding and erosion hazards based on the long -term erosion rate, a storm
can be achieved with the use of an increased erosion distance (eroded profile), and a stable
construction setback from the shoreline. It is bluff /dune face slope distance. To make these
determinations, anumber of variables must be
possible to determine a setback based upon the
historical rate of coastal erosion and thus considered by an erosion analyst.
define future erosion hazard areas (i.e., 30 I. General Information
times the annual erosion rate defines a distance a) property location and dimensions
of the current shoreline that is b) land use at site and adjacent properties
vulnerable e to the erosion hazard over the next c) history of damaging flood and erosion
30 years). This approach recognizes coastal
erosion as the principal hazard guiding events at site and nearby
mitigation policy, and establishes avoidance as 2. Physical and Natural Processes
the primary goal.
a) soils, geology and vegetation - site and
To achieve integration of flood and erosion region .
hazard reduction, a variable setback calculated b) site drainage - potential for erosion
with erosion rates used to delineate projected from surface water or groundwater
Future erosion hazards that also sets minimum c) coastal morphology and coastal
BFE's. would provide a high level of hazard processes
avoidance along the Hawaiian coast. d) presence and influence of nearby tidal
Additional building criteria implementing inlets and coastal structures
bearing wall orientation, load -path e) littoral sediment and sediment
construction techniques, and post and pier budget
construction would Further reduce hazard f) topography of nearshore, beach, dune.
exposure. Development guidelines based on bluff, uplands
criteria defined by BFE's and erosion hazard g) relative sea -level change - land •
zonation would achieve insurance premium subsidence or uplift
reductions. dune and beach conservation goals. 3. Historic Shoreline Changes - Magnitudes
and lower damage expenses carried on and Causes
government budgets in the event of storm
surge. high winds, large waves. chronic erosion, a) shoreline change maps and historic
coastal stream flooding, tsunami inundation, aerial photographs
and accelerated sea -level rise. Hence, erosion b) published erosion rates - long -term
mapping and Flood inundation mapping and short -term
•
should be undertaken with coordination and c) spatial variability in erosion rates
common standards by management agencies. d) temporal variability in erosion rates -
3. FERIA Erosion Vulnerability The FEMA seasonal, annual. and long -term
• is updating its Coastal Construction Manual e) erosion /accretion cycles - magnitude
(FEMA -551 in an orlon to improve the quality and periodicity
d durahilits of (c <idcntial construction in 1) inlet- or structure - induced erosion
2.7
0 0
Department of Land and Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Management Plan - COEMAP
4. Observed and Predicted Coastal Flood force can be applied to our shorelines than the
Conditions will of a community dedicated to conservation •
•
a) flood elevations due to tides, storm and mitigation goals.
surge, tsunami or seiche A first step is to raise public awareness of
b) wave conditions at shoreline (height. coastal hazards, and awareness of what are. and
period. direction) are not, appropriate shoreline development
c) wave runup, overtopping and flooding practices and alternatives. Heightened public
d) erosion of beach, dune and /or bluff awareness can lead to enhancing current land
e) sediment overwash use practices that are beneficial, reducing
0 breaching or inlet formation practices that are harmful or increase hazard
5. Other Sediment/Erosion Considerations exposure, and can encourage and help achieve
future goals of hazard avoidance and beach
a) erosion by wind • conservation. To reach these goals a shoreline
b) burial by storm overwash or wind- community may establish voluntary, willing
blown sand user performance standards. Such standards
c) erosion by channeling of flow between could be designed to conform to CRS
buildings or obstructions rankings and the community would be thus
d) local scour potential and presence of rewarded with reduced insurance premiums.
terminating strata Performance standards provide and define
6. Navigation and Erosion Control Projects — targets for future redevelopment and land
Type, Location, Age and Performance usage. Such targets should avoid penalizing
current tenants, yet would establish community
a) navigation projects (jetties, dredged goals for achieving reduced exposure to
channels, flood channels) affecting site coastal hazards. Setting performance standards
• b) shore protection structures, on is a form of minimization on developed coastal
property or nearby lands that can be implemented through time
c) dune /bluff stabilization projects, on on a schedule determined by the landowner
property or nearby through the redevelopment and renovation of
d) beach /dune nourishment projects — existing structures and voluntary changes in
completed or planned land usage.
Applicable performance standards include: •
b. Community Performance Standards defining nonregulatory, "willing user"
Along developed shorelines where existing variable setbacks and BFE's as targets to
setbacks have proven historically inadequate guide the redevelopment and renovation
and shoreline hardening has been used to stop of existing structures:
chronic erosion, it will not be possible to 2. setting construction standards promoting
establish a new setback policy without forcing wind and flood reinforcement and
much of the existing land usage to become avoidance:
"nonconforming." This may have 3. following Landscaping standards
undesirable financial implications for present promoting dune preservation. sand
tenants. Past efforts in Hawaii to overlay conservation and beach enhancement;
"after- the - fact" enhanced setbacks o n 4. promoting enhanced coastal access and
developed residential shores have been parking;
stopped by residents with fears of and 5. creating and paying into a community
devaluation. beach and dune restoration fund.
However, this does not mean that efforts to
alter and use patterns on developed shorelines These performance standards should be
should be abandoned. Indeed, it on such nonregulatory targets setting a future vision
developed residential coastlines that the for the community that would ultimately
community can become he primary enhance land values, increase community
workforce. Public education and awareness of pride, and estore damaged beach
the value of beaches and dunes, and the logical environments. A simple descriptive pamphlet
and rational steps that can be made toward containing site - specific maps and guidelines
heir conservation and the simultaneous could be the first step in implementing this
miti�aticn of coastal hazards can. in time. lead goal. Et would also be necessary to identify a
community representative or point person to
to improved land tuaue. No more powerful
'ti
0 0
Department of Land and Natural Resources. Coastal Erosion Management Plan - COEMAP
assist in awareness- building and to facilitate coast of Oahu for approx. $10 million to
communication between the neighborhood protect it From commercial development,
users and the lead agency. Placing lands into permanent protection status
to the spirit of the incentives offered by the provides greater guarantees of future
NFIP /CRS. the state and counties of Hawaii preservation than the use of zoning tools such
should provide incentives to communities of as variable setbacks. Land acquisition may be
homeowners located in erosion hazard areas a useful approach along developed shorelines
that seek to define and achieve performance where owners are willing to voluntarily sell
' standard goals for hazard exposure reduction lands (termed "negotiate(' purchase ") to the
and dune and beach conservation. This could state or county for the purpose of
include efforts along the lines of the CRS preservation. Bay and Bay" describe the
and /or FMA and /or alternative incentives to acquisition of lands in high coastal hazard
reduce exposure and promote beach areas as the most direct way to mitigate
conservation. Additionally this action would impacts. ,
move toward achieving recommendations 10, The government can purchase an interest in
6, 19, and 20 of the Hamnea et al'" report. land either through condemnation, known as
eminent domain, or through a negotiated
c. Coastal Lands Acquisition • purchase with a willing seller.
Many state coastal programs outside Hawaii 1. Eminent Domain Powers" The exercise of
have established the regulation and eminent domain by government authorities is
the least desirable approach to and
management of coastal development activities acquisition. It is the most expensive acquisition
and land use as a major component of their alternative, and usually the least sociality
efforts. Some states (Maine, North Carolina, popular. The power to condemn lands for
South Carolina) characterize these activities as
a "strategic retreat" From the shoreline public purposes resides with the government,
providing the landowner receives just
A powerful tool for resource protection can be compensation. To condemn land, the
the acquisition of lands that are subject to government must follow a specific set of legal
coastal hazards, that are environmentally procedures that effectively raise the cost of the
sensitive. and that have a high public resource transaction above the simple market value of
value. Acquisition and protection programs of the land. In Florida, the exercise of eminent
various types are being carried out in Hawaii domain is calculated to increase acquisition
by numerous agencies, each with its own costs an average of 150% of their fair market
mission, jurisdiction. and authority". At this value. Condemnations tend to be politically
writing, the City and County of Honolulu is unpopular because they are viewed by a wary
considering the purchase of Pua'ena Point on public as harsh and unfair treatment of
the north shore to protect it from landowners by big government.
development. :Maui County budgeted $15 Condemnations are generally the method of
million for coastal land purchases in FY'98 last resort in any land acquisition scheme. Any
and the City and County of Honolulu had program attempting to achieve conservation
512.5 million available for the same purpose. goals through a process of community
The State of Hawaii is in the process of dialogue and public decision - making should
acquiring the Ka Iwi shoreline on the south seek cooperative methods, not eminent
domain, to acquire coastal lands in order to
• avoid creating antagonistic relationships with
Han M.P. (1993) Findings and landowners and generating public distrust.
Recommendations. Coastal Hazard Mitigation
Planning Project: Findings. Recommendations and
Technical Documents. Honolulu: Social Science
Research Institute. University of Hawaii For the
•
Hawaii Coastal Zone Management Program. 239p. "' Bay, J. and Bay, M. (1996) Reducing hazards in
' "' BeLtIey. 1'.. Brower, D.J.. and Schwab, A.K. shoreline areas: policy and legal options. A report
1 I 994) Coastal Zone Management. island Press. from the Coastal Aquisition Project. Phase 11. Hawaii
\yasliington, D.C.. 210p. Coastal Zone Management Program, Up.
Bay. J.H. 1 IYYII Methods and Strategics lur '' Bay. J.H. ( 1994) Methods and Strategies tor
cLitiinng Cu:i'tel Lands. Prepared for Hawaii Coastal Acquiring'Coastal Lands. P•epurod fur Hawaii Coastal
(,one Alan; ccin,nt Program. Alp. plus appendices. Lune !Management Program. S2p. plus appcndiccs.
Department of Land and Natural Resources. Coastal Erosion Management Plan - COEMAP
2. Negotiated Purchase" The most direct and land. Depending on the terms. the owners may
most common method of land acquisition is to even be able to sell that right to a third party.
negotiate a purchase with a willing seller. As purchase urchase of an owner', right to develop
described below, the nations leading
acquisition programs in California and Florida, heir property has been used to prevent the
are predicated upon a "willing seller" destruction. or substantial transformation, of a
philosophy. Negotiated purchases offer parcel and to prevent the development of large
increased flexibility for all parties. and are open lands. Development rights may be
easily modified or tailored to support the purchased outright by a public entity and
needs of the landowner. For example, an banked in a charitable conservation trust.
owner can realize tax advantages by dedicating Alternatively, they may be purchased by a
part of their land and selling the rest to private developer and used to increase the
government for conservation. Further, if they density in a designated section of an urban
are willing to sell the total parcel provided they area where, typically, the right to develop at
are allowed to live on the land for the rest of greater than normal densities is extremely
their kfe, such a deal can be easily negotiated. valuable to private developers
In a negotiated purchase, lands can be Other land acquisition schemes include:
acquired in fee - simple by the state or county, I. building private- public partnerships with
although this is nearly always an expensive not - for - profit conservation groups to
proposition. However, the fee - simple purchase purchase lands, or various land -use
gives government total and permanent control options;
of the land. 2. conducting negotiated purchases of parcel
In the fiscally restrictive climate of the blocks on damaged shorelines and selling
1998/99 Hawaiian economy, a less -titan -fee- them for redevelopment under a new, site -
simple acquisition, with its reduced costs (and specific zoning regime;
reduced guarantees of preservation), may be a 3. using certain permit conditions to offset
more realistic approach to acquisition in some development impacts, or as a form of
situations. For instance, conservation compensatory mitigation where funds or
easements can be purchased by government, actions are applied by the permitee for
or donated by a landowner, as a less- than -fee- conservation purposes with some nexus
. simple status. This transaction incurs a land (relationship) to the original impacts;
control status whereby a parcel will be used for 4• impact fees assessment on new
conservation purposes and the owner agrees development to recover or offset a
not to put the property to any incompatible proportionate share of public capital
use. Future owners are also subject to the terms equired to accommodate he
of such an easement. development, such fees might be applied
to environmental conservation activities
Landowners can be persuaded to donate with a clear nexus to the nature of the
conservation easements, or sell them at less development.
than market value, because of the favorable tax
consequences involved, including a decrease in 3. Florida Florida is one of the nation's
the valuation of their property for tax Leaders in acquiring conservation and
• purposes. recreation lands. Their effort consists of a
Another less -than- fee - simple property interest number of related programs in and banking
is transferred development rights (TDR). This that collectively amount to an effort greater
method separates the development potential of than that of the entire federal government. The
land from the land itself and treats that primary approach to land acquisition that has
potential as a marketable commodity". evolved in Florida is the dedication of small,
continuous revenue sources, such as tax
In a TDR program, a regulatory agency
increments, that are used to support the debt
restricts further development of a parcel, but
allows the owners to take their right to service payments on large bond issues.
development and apply it to another piece of
Bentley, T., Brower. D.l., and Schwab. A.K.
" Id. (1994) Coastal Zune Management. Island Press.
" Id_ W:ultinutun, D.C.. 210p.
30
1 1
0 0
Department of Land and Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Management Plan - COEMAP
The largest of these acquisition programs. in order to nilnitiiize the risk or life and
CARL (Conservation and Recreation Lands) property and to reduce the need for
has acquired 435,400 acres of land and further disaster assistance;
expended 5807 million since it's- inception in 3. The value of acquiring beachfront parcels,
1979. In 1990, the Florida State legislature irrespective of size, to provide public
authorized the Preservation 2000 bond access and recreational opportunities in
program enacting t he issuance of 53 billion in highly developed urban areas:
bonds over a 10 year period for land 4. The value of acquiring identified parcels
acquisition the development of which would adversely
CARL projects must meet at least one of the affect coastal resources.
following 6 public purposes: CARL is a "willing seller," negotiated
I. To conserve and protect environmentally purchase program. The program has the
unique and irreplaceable lands that contain power to condemn property, however the
native, relatively unaltered fauna and flora statutory prerequisites are rigorous and
representing a natural area unique to, or experience has indicated that purchase
scarce within a region of Florida or a through. condemnation typically costs [50%
larger geographic area. of the fair market value. Instead, CARL uses
2. To conserve and protect lands within leases, conservation easements, and other less -
• designated areas of critical state concern, if than- fee - simple methods to. achieve its
the proposed acquisition is related to the objectives ". This has been a source of
natural resource protection purposes of the criticism by some involved with the effort who
designation. cite the high cost (80 to 85 per cent of fair -
3. To conserve and protect native species market value) of typical less -than -fee
habitats or endangered or , threatened purchases. In the end, less- than -fee acquisitien
• species. does not provide the enduring guarantees of
4. To conserve, protect, manage. or restore conservation that come with a fee - simple
important ecosystems, landscapes, and purchase. It is felt by some critics that full fee -
forests, if the protection and conservation simple purchases would be more cost -
of such lands are necessary to enhance or effective. Other critics state that CARL needs
protect significant surface water, ground strengthening in the areas of planning and
• water, coastal, recreational, timber, or fish resource management, and that many CARL
or wildlife resources which cannot targets were not the product of careful
otherwise be accomplished through local planning and goal setting, but rather were
and state regulatory programs. targets of opportunity not backed up by
5. To provide areas, including recreational careful consideration.
trails, for natural resource -based CARL nonetheless demonstrates the
recreation. significance of political support. If the
6. To preserve significant archaeological or political support is there, the money and
historic sites. y
programs will follo
By statute, 20 per cent of the Preservation 4. California Another state -level program that
2000 funds must be spent on acquisition of focuses on acquisition is the California State
coastal lands. In addition, CARL receives Coastal Conservancy created in 1976 to allow
recurring revenues from a 5.84% increment of the state to use acquisition, as well as
the real property documentary tax, from an regulation, for coastal protection, restoration,
excise tax on phosphate ore mining, and from and management' .s. .
some additional sources. The Coastal Conservancy is separate from the
1. En the planning phase for coastal parcels, 3 California Coastal Commission. The
additional criteria are considered: Commission is a state grantee agency under
the federal Coastal Zone Management Act and
2. The value of acquiring coastal high - hazard
has regulatory powers including permitting.
parcels, consistent with hazard mitigation The Conservancy has no permitting or
and post - disaster redevelopment policies,
t3ay. J.H. (1994) Methods and Stratew�ics for '" Id.
.Acyuirin_: Coastal Land.. Prepared l Hawaii Coastal '' Id.
/one i N rI aecment I'itni.un. ;Cp. iiIu. appendices. ° i Id.
Department of Land an Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Management Plan - COEMAP
regulatory powers and its primary mission is in land, or issue permits or denials. However.
act as a fac ilitator and problem - solver. critics state that an approach of compromise
The Conservancy is characterized by the does not well -serve the long -term interests of
ollowing features" resource protection and that sensitive.
mediated development has little to do with
I. It cannot exercise power of eminent conservation.
domain without legislative approval. d. Education and Outreach
2. Its projects, including and acquisition, are
A 1998 review of the Ocean Resources
not subject to individual legislative
approval. hence it has increased flexibility. Management Plan' highlights the value of a
3. [t has the authority to make grunts and mobilized and educated public as a means of
enter into partnerships with private achieving change in government management
nonprofit organizations. of natural resources. The Review identifies the
4. It can acquire and hold fee simple and general "lack of recognition of ecological and
ess -than -fee interests in lands without economic importance of ocean and coastal
going through the State Land commission resources for Hawaii." In general, coastal and
and other normal bureaucratic procedures ocean resources do not carry the same political
for lands acquisition. weight as higher profile political issues such as
5. It has been funded primarily by general the economy and education. This should not
obligation (GO) bonds until bond issues be the case. Our economy, and our lifestyle
failed at the polls in 1994 and 1998. and quality of life in Hawaii are all dependent
Those involved with the program, however, to a great degree upon the preservation and
• are optimistic that the statewide recession perpetuation of a viable, thriving, and healthy
of the last decade has ended and that coastal and ocean ecology and resource base.
- funding for the Conservancy will regain The fact that the management of these
is former strong footing. resources is not accorded high political value i
6. The Conservancy provides technical in the public arena of social discourse is a sign
assistance to plan and design projects, it of disorganization among the management
holds community meetings and workshops leadership. It signifies a lack of vision for the
to resolve conflicts, it provides grants and future of our ocean resources.
matching funds for projects, it undertakes Once a vision is identified, and a plan of action
demonstration projects, it works closely is defined, there can be the clear articulation of
with nonprofit groups to achieve a new coastal future communicated to the
conservation goals, and it leverages people of Hawaii. A rational plan for resource
funding with multi - stakeholder conservation must ride upon the political will
consortiums. of the constituency. However, the constituency
7. Through it's powers and philosophy it has (the people) can only give such a plan high
the flexibility to take risks, act quickly, value if they are educated and possess a high
innovate, and otherwise act to implement degree of awareness of the issues. The most
state coastal policies. effective strategy for altering the policies and
procedures of our coastal management system
The Coastal Conservancy has been especially are doomed to failure if we do • not build a
effective in its use of innovative acquisition high level of awareness and education among
techniques, including less- than -fee interests, lot the citizens of Hawaii, and the users of our
consolidation, area - planning programs. beaches and shorelands. The power to change
partnerships with nonprofit and trusts, and flows up from the people once the people are
TDR and the transfer of development credits educated on the issues and the possible
(TDC). directions for improvement.
Because its primary mission has been to
accommodate the competing demands of
development, public use, and resource
protection in creative ways, it's philosophy has
always been to utilize an approach of
inediation and compromise. It is not a Lowry, K., Hamneu, M.. Anderson, C.L.. and
program whose primary mission is (0 acquire LeMaitre, M. (1998) Review of the Ocean Resources
Ntanuecment Plan (dratt). A Report to the Rawa i
(Mice of Planning. Coastal Zone Manaecmcnt
•
Id. Program, 30p.
4 I
0 0
Department of Land and Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Management Plan - COEMAP
•
e. Funding Research efforts. and what data is needed to assist in
Coastal resource managers lack sufficient planning. Beach profile monitoring, storm
scientific data and analysis to make informed surge modeling, sand resource investigations,
decisions regarding he occurrence, annual tracking of erosion and accretion
magnitude. continued threat, causes, and patterns throughout the state, and new
magnitude of coastal erosion and other coastal technology development and application to
hazards. This prevents them from establishing coastal resource management are hall marks of
planning goals for coastal sectors". This also the Florida system. The availability of high -
places e planning process on a reactiona quality research products has made the
th
regulators and planners of Florida agencies
footing that is poorly equipped to protect acknowledged experts on coastal processes.
coastal resources. Often the first awareness that They are able to develop community plans in
regulators have of an erosion problem area is a the expectation of future hazard patterns, and
phone call from a homeowner in an they are able to engage a process of informed
emergency situation and in need of immediate decision - making, and goal - setting based upon
protection. This causes a chain of reactionary the best available scientific data and analysis.
events, on an accelerated schedule, driven by a
mixture of chaos, panic, emotion, and legal
regulation. The time for planning and 5. Five Alternatives for Erosion Management
proaction are long past. At this - point, the chain
of reactionan. events is oriented to the "Today's coastline is of economical, social,
immediate mitigation of the threat to the • cultural, and environmental value to
landowner. Resource conservation is lowered communities and to nations. However.
to secondary status. This would not necessarily shorelines are dynamic and ephemeral
be a bad system of management if it were places where erosion trends tend to •
limited to a few dozen homes, or . even a few dominate. Development along the shore
• hundred. The resource impacts might be places the desires of man (to have a safe and
relatively benign and the valuation of costs to stable home) in direct opposition to the
benefits might be in favor of such a system of natural trends of nature (to erode. transport,
management. But there are thousands of and deposit coastal lands)." "
• coastal properties in Hawaii that have been So wrote Joan Pope, a coastal geologist with
channeled through this system of reaction the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, in a
management. The combined impact of this
research article published in the Journal of
lack of planning, applied_ over the years to Coastal Research in 1997 ". She woes on to
miles of coastline, has now placed significant advise that coastal erosion management should
• portions of the shoreline on the brink of loss.
be the rational consideration of a range of
Managers are hampered by the lack of a options including: abandonment. beach
continuous datastream providing information restoration, erosion control, adaptation, or
on past. current and potential future problem hardening the shoreline.
• areas. W ithout objective, high- quality This succinct and clear statement of the
descriptive data in a useable format, it will be options is worth a closer look because it
impossible for managers to implement a provides a useful common language for
system of environmental sequencing. Without discussion, and sets out a framework for
- high resolution data on erosion patterns and
trends, regulators are consigned to reactionary decision- making.
permit processing...this is not planning. a. Abandonment • "do nothing"
The State of Florida, through its university The abandonment solution involves taking no
system, maintains a multi -level research action to protect human developments along
program that provides scientific products to an eroding shore. The beach is allowed to
managers. The managers themselves are behave as it will regardless of the causes or
involved in deciding where to focus research erosion or the impacts that shoreline retreat
may have upon the upland region. This is the
appropriate response in areas where erosion or
'' Challacumhe. A. ( 1997) Beach Management in
Hawaii: .A Public Seetur Perspective. Hawaii -
PI:mnin o. v xs lit. nu. 6, p. 5, June. Monthly '' Pepe. J. (1497) Responding to coastal crosiun and
Newsletter ul the Hawaii Chapter tit the American Iluudinu J:unaQes. Journal tit Coastal Rescal'eh. v. 11.
I'I.umme : A,a , .,_.ti,,n p. 704-710
0 0
Department of Land and Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Management Plan - COEMAP
flooding problems are so severe that hazard The restoration of a dune system with endemic
mitigation is not economically viable. that is. coastal vegetation may be a major component
where the cost of protection would exceed the of the el fort as the dune further enhances the
value of the investment. This may also be the sand storage capacity of the shoreline and
preferred approach in areas where the natural provides additional mitigation against the
appearance of the shoreline, and the natural effects of storm or seasonal wave erosion.
patterns of shoreline change. are important to The Coastal • Zone Management Program
the character and attractiveness of the system Funded a study and review of the state of
and deemed of highest priority in the
knowledge of offshore sand resources The
socioeconomic valuation of management results indicate that sand resources exist in
options. marine environments sufficient to promote the
Decision - making For this approach is based use of beach restoration using offshore
primarily upon socioeconomic considerations materials. Further discussions of beach
and must involve a high level of public restoration in various committees and public
participation and community dialogue. At forums, as well as additional research'', have
Shell Island, North Carolina, a 9 -story identified environmental, commercial, and
condominium is being allowed to fall into the technical aspects of the procedure that should
sea as the state Forbids the construction of be further investigated before the technique
seawalls or bulkheads because they often can be widely employed in Hawaii. These
aggravate nearby erosion. In Oregon. a row of include dredging impacts to offshore
newly -built townhouses perched on the lip of ecosystems, availability of suitable sand
an eroding coastal bluff are being undermined recovery and delivery technologies, sand grade
by erosion, and the state has stopped attempts and color inadequacies, and financing and
to protect them. Both New York and administrative issues including permitting and
Massachusetts have allowed. at times. cost sharing.
beachfront buildings to collapse rather than Typical beach restoration involves placing
permit their protection by shoreline sand on the upper portion of the beach profile
hardening. so that it is visible and leads to an immediate
Abandonment has not been considered in improvement in beach width and scenic
Hawaii as an erosion management alternative. amenity. Sand may also be placed lower on
What criteria would Hawaiian regulators use to the profile such that it is below the water level
define a situation where a home would be lost yet still acts as a feeder to the beach. Any sand
rather than protected from erosion? that is placed within reach of the waves will
Alternatively, what will regulators do when the immediately, and continuously thereafter
very first seawall application on an otherwise adjust to assume a dynamic equilibrium
pristine beach arrives on their doorstep? profile. This condition is achieved by the
b. Beach restoration - "fill the beach with natural migration of sand across the entire
sand" profile. That is, the dry beach width will
decrease because sand moves offshore to feed
Beach restoration involves the placement of the lower portion of the profile that is below
sand on an eroding shoreline to resupply sea level. The degree to which this sand
deficiencies in natural sand volume due to remains in the system and continues to provide
waves and currents or human activities, or to benefits to the dry beach varies from site to
counteract shoreline retreat caused by sea -level site and should be the focus of research
rise. Sand placed on the beach to offset these
losses may partially mitigate chronic erosion
or provide a buffer to protect the back beach
and upland against future storm or seasonal ' Sea Engineering, Inc. (1993) Beach nourishment
wave- induced erosion or flooding. A healthy viability study. A report prepared for the Coastal
beach may also provide recreational benefits Zone Management Program, Honolulu, 300p.
that contribute to the economic vitality of a Hampton, M.A.. Torresan. M.E., Wong. E.L..
community. This is the only management Fletcher. C.H., Bailey- Brock. J.H., and Cruickshank.
alternative that actually adds sand back into M.J. (1997) Reef - front sediment deposit in Kailua
he littoral system and restores the beach to Bay Hawaii: A possible sand resource? First Regional
ome previous configuration is an Conference on Coastal Erosion Management in
ntprocentent to its eroded state. Hawaii and other Pacific Islands. Abstracts with
programs. University of Hawaii Sea Grant College
Program.
•
a .4
0 0
Department of Land and Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Management Plan - COEMAP
designed to improve our understanding of Research Council' , all restoration efforts must
equilibrium profile fluctuations, be fully monitored so that lessons learned
from analysis of fill performance, and source
Challenges to beach restoration include
site recovery. can lead to improved Future
finding a source of sand with adequate grain
restoration efforts.
characteristics that will constitute a stable
beach under the expected range or wave Beach restoration is being seriously considered
enereies. There must also be a careful in Hawaii. Several small -scale projects are in
determination of the necessary till volume to progress on Maui and Oahu. The Department
not only restore the beach and dune system of Land and Natural Resources is proposing a
lost to historical erosion and development bill in the 1999 Legislature to Fund beach
practices, bui to also Fulfill the uneroded restoration projects, and together the CZM
potential sand volume that was denied by the program and DLNR are conducting a site
presence of shoreline armoring. That is, along assessment survey to identify a .viable large -
many shorelines actual erosion has been scale restoration project.
stopped because of walls and revetments, it c. Erosion control - "slow down the erosion
may be that any sand placed on such shores rate"
will immediately erode to fulfill some •
undefined "erosion potential" demanded by Coastal erosion control techniques use
• the system but unavailable because of structures that are designed to reduce sediment
armoring' It is important, therefore, to fully tosses and thus slow the rate of erosion. The
understand the sand budget of Hawaiian beach intent is to protect the backshore by trapping
systems to address this question and to make and holding sand and thus stabilize the beach.
realistic economic projections of sand (fill) The trapping characteristic of this approach
characteristics and volume '. Beach restoration could mean adverse impacts to adjacent
also requires data on historical shoreline beaches if sand held in the project area would
s P 1
9
changes and projections of future patterns of normally migrate through or accrete on
change, as well as studies of waves and currents neighboring beaches. Because of this, erosion
and sediment transport processes to assess the control projects • should include the use of
economic life and design components of the additional sand to fill the profile to an
project. equilibrium level relative to the structures plus
Potential environmental (benthic and pelagic any additional sediment the structures may
cause to be diverted offshore and lost to the
faunal communities and dependents)
littoral system.
disruptions at the sand source to be mined
must be fully assessed and mitigated to an The purpose of a beach erosion control
acceptable level among all stakeholders. [t project should be to slow the loss of the placed
does not make sense to destroy one sand, not to trap sand from the ambient littoral
environment in order to restore another. system.
Lardy, as recommended by the National Structures include groins, •T -head groins,
detached breakwaters, artificial headlands,
s' Bodge, K.R. ( 1998) Beach management and perched beaches, reef /sill systems. • dune
•
restoration. First Regional Co nference on Coastal fencing, beach dewatering, and a number of
Erosion Mana ement in Hawaii and other Pacific devices on the market (i.e., surge breakers at
Islands. Abstracts with programs. University of Kualoa Beach Park, Oahu). As with all aspects
Hawaii Sea Gram Collet Program. of coastal behavior, there are no guarantees
that the desired effect will be achieved with the
Id.
I I I Fletcher, C.H.. and Norcross, Z. (1998) Knowing system of choice. Nevertheless, certain
r e -scale coa,tulbehavior. First Regional structures, such as T -head groins and detached
Conference on Coastal Erasion Management in breakwaters, are solidly based in both theory
Hawaii and other Pacific Islands. Abstracts with and practice and can produce results with a
programs. Uni'ersity a Hawaii Sea Grant College high level of predictability under appropriate
Program.
" Bailey - Bruck 1.H.. and Giles. H. (1998) Bentltie .
euin■unities resident to the Kailua. Oahu and cell.
•
First Regional Conference on Coastal Erosion
:Mart :wentent in Hawaii and other Pacific Islands. "i National Research Council i 1995) Beach
Abstracts with pnwranr.. University of Hawaii Sea Nourishment and Protection. National Academy
(Iran (*Pee: i'rnr;un Press. Washinnun. D C.. 3 3'P.
3 j
0 °
Department of Land and Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Management Plan - COEMAP
conditions when their use is designed by an permit restrictions and allowable actions in an
experienced professional'. erosion hazard area. -
A properly designed beach erosion control Decision- making for this approach is bused
project is one of the greatest challenges of upon socioeconomic considerations and must
coastal engineering. The complex interaction involve a high level of public participation and
of these structures with the littoral system dialogue. Examples include:
requires a good understanding of local beach I. changing set -back requirements for new
dynamics, coastal processes. historical
shoreline patterns, and acceptable performance construction,
tolerances. In evaluating the performance of a 2. setting new limitations on development
particular structure, it is important to avoid the and landscaping,
classic mistake of misinterpreting natural 3. relocating structures threatened by erosion,
4. flood-proofing buildings,
profile recovery and accretion as the work of 5 new building standards for high winds,.
he structure. wave impacts and erosion threats,
The beach erosion control approach is more 6. land banking,
appropriate for areas where the problem is 7. implementing a "coastal retreat" policy.
chronic erosion due to diminished sediment
supply. These structures can be very useful in The basic assumption behind this approach is
areas where it is too expensive to maintain a that it is easier and cheaper to retreat than to
stay and eternally wage war with coastal
beach by continuing to bring in large
hazards". Developing an adaptation
quantities of sand from an outside source. methodology requires an economic analysis
Groins, breakwaters and headlands work best that includes a valuation of the scenic and
in areas where longshore transport is much recreational amenity of natural shorelines.
more dominant than cross -shore transport in
moving sediment out of the project area. Adaptation includes identification of " hazafd
Structures alone do not protect the back beach zones" where human activities and future
from wave- induced flooding and erosion. patterns of shoreline change may overlap. It is
They provide their benefit to the shore by within these hazard zones that the land -use
trapping and or holding sand in the desired tools are applied to implement adaptation. It is
location and allowing sufficient elevation of important, therefore, to involve the local
the beach profile to be maintained. It is the community and the larger population of beach
beach held by the structures that provides users in an open discussion of options and
protection to the coastal upland and related consequences, as well as uncertainties.
human developments.
e. Hardening - "build walls"
d..Adaptation - "live with it" •
Pope reviews coastal armoring as an erosion
Adaptation requires that development patterns response. Coastal armoring includes the use of
change in order to allow natural seawalls, revetments, bulkheads, levees and
erosion /accretion cycles to continue without dikes in an attempt to harden the shoreline.
interference. This is usually the approach of last resort, and
This protects natural shoreline attributes from is most appropriate where the primary
the impact of human alterations to coastal problem is one of storm- induced damages
processes, but requires modification of human rather than chronic erosion. In Hawaii, to the
occupancy and use of the coastal zone. This is contrary, armoring has been the typical
a management, rather than engineering, response to intermittent as well as chronic
approach that utilizes tools such as zoning erosion hazards and is often the first choice
restrictions, building standards, community among landowners.
facilities districts, new subdivision In her article, Pope states that if armoring is
requirements. and /or new rules governing placed along a chronically eroding coast, the
beach in front of the structure is likely to
eventually disappear. This is not due to an
Bodge, K.R.( 1 998) Beach management and
restoration. First Regional Conference on Coastal " Bay, J. and Bay. M. (1996) Reducing hazards in
Erosion i)lanasement in Hawaii and other Paeilic shoreline areas: policy and legal options. A report
Islands. Abstracts with programs. University of Irum the Coastal Aquisition Project, Phase IL Rawait
Haw:ui Sea Grant CulIece Prneram, Coastal Zone iblana Program. 15 p.
ltt
0 .•
0 0
Department of Land and Natural Resources. Coastal Erosion Management Plan - COEMAP
active a_graunion of the erosion process. but cross -shore reflection as a negative impact
rather because the hack beach reference has because actual sand deficiencies may not
been stabilized while the shoreline has not. be caused. Nonetheless, Cross -shore
This process is called passive erosion because reflection has been implicated in Lanikai
- uf the tendency' for a shoreline to passively as a negative influence on beach stability'.
•etreat• up to a wall, losing the beach in the
process. t�lunv studies by coastal scientists and 4. End effects are typically a localized scour
engineers alike support this finding". effect at the ends of a wall.
Other challenges accompany shoreline
5. Differential erosion in some circumstances
hardening. these include the following. may be a perceived, rather than real
occurrence. Differential erosion is
I. Groin-effects occur when a portion of a identified when an unprotected shore
wall protrudes across the shoreline and continues to retreat adjacent to a protected
blocks longshore sand movement causing shore, thereby giving the appearance of
down -drift erosion. having been caused by the wall. Historical
2. Sediment impoundment is the trapping of shoreline change data can be effectively
sand behind a wall, this leads to sand used to define the occurrence (and
volume deficiencies because erosion of the magnitude) of this phenomenon as a
Factor in the erosion of the beach.
land can be an important source of sand to
beaches. Sediment impoundment may •
create an increased demand for sand 6. Design Considerations
within a littoral cell causing accelerated
erosion along unprotected sections of In the majority of cases where erosion
shoreline. Only beach monitoring efforts threatens human habitation and infrastructure
can provide the data to fully investigate on the Hawaiian coastline, the challenge to
• this problem, and studies have not managers and engineers is to mitigate the
' undertaken this task to date. erosion hazard while at the same time fully
3. Cross -shore reflection occurs as waves preserving, even restoring, the beaches along
bounce off walls and cause scour and the the shoreline. However, it is foreseeable that on
deflection of sediment offshore. However, some shorelines the cost of beach preservation
ome studies`'` question the veracity of and restoration may be prohibitive and the
rational alternative may not be beach
conservation. It is equally foreseeable that the
'~ U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (1991) Beach cost of protecting upland development and
response to the presence of a seawall: Comparison of property is prohibitive and that abandonment
Field observations. U.S. Army Corp or Engineers, is he ational alternative. These are
Coastal Engineering Research Center, Technical socioeconomic decisions that are not likely to
Report CERC -9l -1, 63p.: McDonald. H.V. and be easy or obvious. But it is critically
Patterson, D.C. ((984) Beach response to coastal important that the valuation criteria and public
works. Gold Coast, Australia. Coastal Engineering dialogue for making these decisions be
• '84 (New York. American Society of Coastal engaged and openly defined rather than
Engineers), p. 1522-1538; Kraus, Y.C. ((988) The hidden from public view. In the end, it will be
effects of seawalls on the beach, an extended literature the case that combinations of various
review. Journal of Coastal Research. Special Issue 4, approaches are used to differing degrees to
p. I - 24: Pilkey. O.H., and Wright, H.L. ((988) resolve erosion hazards along the Hawaiian •
Seawalls versus peaches. Journal of Coastal Research, shore.
Special Issue, 4. p. 41 -64; Tait, J.F., and Griggs, The technical considerations necessary to fully
G.B. (1990) Beach response to the presence of a design and successfully implement these
seawall. Shore and Beach. v. 58. p. 11 -28; Hall,
M.I..:nd Pilkec. U. H. (1991) Effects of hard
stabilization on dry beach width for New Jersey.
Journal of Coastal Research, v. 7. nu. 3. p. 771 -785:
Fletcher. C.H.. Mullane, R.A.• and Richmond, B.M., literature review. Journal of Coastal Research. v. 12.
1997. Beach loos :dune armored shorelines on Oahu. no. 3. p 691 -701.
Rawai inir Islands. Journal of Coastal Research. v. 13. °" Lipp. D.G. (1995) Changes in peach profiles due
nu. I . p 2(19 -2I i_ to wave reflections ufl seawalls at Lanikai. Huw'ati
Kraus. N_C_ .ind McDuu!al. AV.C. t 1996) The (thesis). University of Hawaii. Department of Deean
el [Lets ,ii seasiuiils on the t I. Mutated lineineennc.,
•
,1
s 4
Department of Land and Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Management Plan - COEMAP
approaches to erosion management include 7. Project Performance Monitoring
the following ".
No solution for addressing coastal erosion is
I. Hydrodynamic Site Characteristics ever final and no coastal project is ever
a) understanding the wave climate, complete. There are no absolutes along the
b) wave transformation, coast, only compromise and adaptation. It is
c) current patterns, good to remember that no one type of erosion
d) fairweather vs storm conditions and management is best for all locations. What
frequency, works well in one place will not necessarily
e) b uenctry, work well somewhere else. It is also the case
f) water level conditions; that no erosion management approach will
work equally well in all conditions. Every
2. Geologic Site Characteristics approach is designed for a certain range of
a) present sediment supply rates and conditions. If chose conditions are exceeded or
not realized, the project may fail to function as
transport dominance, intended. There is no such thing as "low
b) historical shoreline trends and patterns, cost" erosion management. There are no
c) inherited geologic Features, bargains in the effort to preserve our beaches
d) foundation conditions, • and protect our lands.
e) profile variability,
f) sediment characteristics, It is important, therefore, to monitor project
g) availability and quality of construction • performance, especially in the case of beach
materials (sand fill); restoration, in order to improve technical
3. Project Economics understanding of all aspects of erosion
management. In fact, this was a major
. a) benefit -cost ratio, recommendation of the National Research
b) performance requirements, Council, Committee on Beach Nourishmettt
c) future land -use and partner funding and Protection ". Erosion hazard reduction
expectations, and beach preservation projects need continual
d) constructability, re- evaluation, maintenance, and modification.
e) ability to perform future maintenance, A monitoring program will require
f) acceptable levels of risk; establishing a base -line condition. and ideally
- 4. Environmental Considerations should start before any construction is
undertaken, and continue over several years
a) land use, during and- well after a project. This includes
b) biological community requirements, monitoring biological, geological, engineering,
c) environmental policy, and socioeconomic aspects of the effort. as
d) potential for physical and well as monitoring the sand borrow site if the
environmental impacts, potential for residual impacts from dredging
e) endangered species, exists.
f) cultural resources;
a. Physical Monitoring
5. Socio - Political Guidelines
Monitoring is essentially the collection of a
a) customer and partner expectations, time series of data that describes the need for,
b) future development trends, evaluates the performance of, and otherwise
c) user community requirements, builds a scientific framework for erosion
d) public safety and accessibility, management decision - making.
e) local legal and zoning restrictions,
f) national and state regulatory and Monitoring the physical processes associated
funding policies. with a beach restoration project, for example,
should be oriented toward establishing a
sediment budget "`. This includes identifying
and quantifying all sand sources and sinks,
and rates of exchange. Gains and losses in the
National Research Council (1995) Beach
r " Pope. J. (1997) Responding to coastal erosion and Nourishment and Protection. National Academy
hooding damuces. Journal of Coa. iul Research. v 13. Press, \Vashineton, D.C., 334p.
p. 704 -710_ Id. •
3 5
a ,
0 0
Department of Land and Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Management Plan - COEMAP
sand budget are balanced against the changes 7. What was the actual distribution of he
in -and volume in the area. Monitoring data is costs and benefits of the project - that is,
collected to yuantily the physical processes who benefited and who paid'?
that comprise the sources. sinks, and sand
volume changes in a project area. These can
include the previous history of the coastal site,
beach profiles. local anthropogenic impacts,
history of storms: waves and currents, historical
shoreline changes, water levels, structures,
sediment characteristics. rates and volumes of
transport. bathymetry, and photographic
documentation.
b. Biological iSionitoring
Biological monitoring should be oriented
toward determining the existing biological
resources that may be altered by a project and
providing recommendations that will avoid
long -term negative impacts to those resources.
This can be achieved by characterizing the
pre- project temporal and spatial variability in
biological resources present within and near a
management area. and evaluating the post -
project recovery of biological resources that
• may be impacted by the project' ''. •
c. Economic illonitoring
According to the National Research Council ',
• economic monitoring should attempt to
answer the following questions:
I. How large are the economic benefits, and
do they approximate those predicted for
the project?
2. What are the effects of the project on
property values and to what extent are
these effects linked to coastal hazard
reduction, enhanced aesthetics, and
recreational amenities?
3. What were the construction and other
related costs, and were they well
approximated by the cost estimates?
4. Are there other significant but perhaps
unanticipated costs and /or benefits
accruing from the project?
5 From the locality's standpoint, did the
project stimulate growth, and, if so. what
desirable or undesirable effects did the
growth have on the community?
6. Did the project encourage construction
that places more property at risk from
coastal hazards'
lil.
Department of Land ano- IJatural Resources. Coastal Erosion Management Plan - COEMAP
3. historical patterns of erosion management
have been too frequently inadequate and
have too often ignored resulting impacts:
1111 4. the existing regulatory framework for
RECOMMENDATIONS coastal conservation and hazard mitigation
is not sufficiently comprehensive, it can be
improved and its effectiveness can be
increased; and
5. the improvement of these failings will not
be easy, rapid. inexpensive, or simple.
A. OWNING -UP TO THE PAST
The people of Hawaii strive to live in harmony B. STRATEGIC
with [heir dynamic shoreline. No resident RECOMMENDATIONS
actively seeks to damage the beaches and Improved management guidelines and policies
dunes that are so much a part of the daily can emerge from a more detailed
beauty that surrounds us all. Awareness. understanding of coastal environmental
education, and foresight can build public processes, from the successful coordination of
conviction for an enhanced coastal future. The multiple levels of government, and from the
menu of options and tools for coastal land participation of communities of coastal users.
stewardship can be increased. Funding. statute The following recommendations individually
changes, and rule amendments to implement and collectively will move Hawaii toward the
new coastal policies for Hawaii are only as far attainment of these goals.
away as the political resolve to ask. A strong .
unified voice will be heard by our leaders. I. Develop, fund, and empower the Coastal
• Government can respond to the complex Lands Program at DLNR as the Lead
issues of erosion management in a manner that Agency for coastal erosion management.
enhances the interests of all stakeholders. But The mission of the CLP is to manage
it will take time, work, a willingness to forgive growth along the state's shoreline in order
and accept, vision on the part of our leaders. to achieve a balance of resource
• and a broad public awareness effort. • conservation and reduced hazard
exposure. This is best achieved through
This final section of COEMAP outlines actions participation and partnerships with all
and makes recommendations to reduce coastal stakeholder agencies and coastal
hazard exposure. and increase beach and dune communities. The Coastal Lands Program
conservation and restoration. These will oversee and assist in V the
recommendations are intended to be used as implementation of technical and policy
tools to authorize agencies seeking changes recommendations embodied in COEMAP
and to empower citizens searching for answers. and derivative efforts to promote the
Simplistic and non - comprehensive establishment of sustainable coastal use
management practices cannot be effectively policies and programs. The CLP should be
applied to our dynamic shoreline. But a staffed by experts in coastal management
comprehensive plan for managing erosion can and planning, and coastal science and
offer powerful guidance for developing engineering who will work cooperatively
policy, framing the discussion of issues and with other federal, state and county
stakeholder needs, and directing the actions of ag and workers to devise additional
agencies. management strategies to mitigate
shoreline degradation.
Several well- documented realities about the
management of coastal lands in Hawaii are a) F nding for the CLP can originate
now evident: from many sources, including:
I we have managed our beaches and dunes i) federal monies for coastal
poorly in the past, management.
• ii) donations,
1. coastal hardening as a solution to chronic legislative appropriations.
erosion is environmentally destructive:
40
�/�/ . ', o
Department of Land an Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Ma Plan - COEMAP
iv) bonds with debt service repaid by iv) sponsoring and conducting
small revenue streams with a nexus research and inonitoring efforts;
to coastal lands, v) conducting enforcement activities;
v) federal grants,
vi) planning and facilitating agency
vi) fines and penalties, • coordination on permitting and
vii) fees. and other revenues generated planning within coastal hot spots;
by public resource -value lands, vii) creating and providing GIS layers
and others. of shoreline data;
b) At this writing the state of Hawaii is viii) acquiring and maintaining a
experiencing a fiscal crisis that is coastal database with standardized
manifested in a declining annual format, accuracy and precision;
budget, a reduction in the size and ix) developing programs for beach
scope of government, and a restriction
in the flexibility of existing programs. nourishment, offshore sand
• The CLP was created in the midst of recovery, and alternatives to
this crisis and despite the widely shoreline hardening;
recognized importance of its mission, x) creating opportunities for
it is not likely to enjoy significant compensatory mitigation and
levels of funding in the immediate bringing into conformance
future. In fact, the CLP was created existing nonpermitted structures.
without an increase in DLNR staff or activities and usages;
expenditures.
xi) conducting land acquisition
c) A rational source of funding for the planning and implementation;
CLP is the utilization of state resource
lands to generate revenues. This could xii) setting planning goals oriented
include fees, tenantships, and fines toward sustainable development
generated by users of state lands with for specific littoral cells to promote
nonpermitted shoreline structures such resource protection and
as piers, docks, walls and other restoration.
structures crossing state lands. These e) The CLP may also provide grants -in-
could be a source of funds for aid to the counties, citizen groups. and
exercising compensatory mitigation individuals (homeowners) who wish to
under the CLP. A special fund should conduct activities that are consistent
be created to house these monies so with the CLP mission.
they are not lost from the coastal zone
so they can be applied to restoration f) The CLP should enhance the counties'
and mitigation activities of the CLP ability to contra! and regulate
and sister agencies. Grants (such as development activities along their
available from the EPA for shorelines.
environmental restoration) are another g) The CLP should facilitate working
source of funds for conducting • agreements with the counties, the
restoration and mitigation activities in federal government, and other state
fulfillment of the CLP mission. agencies to simplify the complex
d) Activities within the purview of the permitting process for projects such as
CLP may include: beach and dune restoration and
renourishment, and offshore sand
i) administering the CDUA process, mining.
ii) planning new state - regulatory h) The CLP should promote and support
functions and programs on the county programs designed to facilitate
shoreline in a framework of coastal restoration and hazard
mu1tiagency coordination and mitigation.
community participation;
i) The CLP should review and
iii) providing public education: recommend amendments to the
shoreline certification process for the
0 4
0 0
Department of Land and Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Management Plan - COEMAP
purpose of environmental restoration. 4. Enhance Interagency Coordination.
conservation. and hazard mitigation. Agencies should improve and standardize
permit processing criteria, develop and
2. Encourage state and county decision- agree upon acceptable guidelines For
makers to consider erosional trends and constructing Environmental Assessment
processes, and other coastal hazards, at and permit applications for activities in the
the zoning and subdivision stages of land shore zone, and build an organized and
development so that structures can be
afely and properly located away from consistent system of erosion management
and resource conservation among CZM,
hazard areas. This action would prevent CLP, OEQC/DOH, and the counties and
burdening landowners and regulatory federal COE. This coordinated system
agencies with Foreseeable coastal hazard should incorporate the best aspects of
issues at a later date. ideas embodied in COEMAP and other
3. Develop a Technical Guidance Manual applicable sources. A strong starting point
that provides direction for the would be to:
development, restoration, and a) guarantee a continuous datas[ream to
redevelopment of the coastline. The coastal managers,
manual' would be used on a voluntary
basis. but through common usage could b) build a prevalent, consistent, and
become a standard For the safe. continuous public education and
economical, and sustainable utilization of awareness campaign,
the coastline. Creation and development of c) implement beach and dune restoration
such a manual will require Funding as a viable management tool,
• • through the various responsible
stakeholder agencies, and could take place d) establish community redevelopmer_t
• on a component by •component (i.e.. procedures and guidelines to recover
chapter by chapter) basis as needs arise. and restore beaches and dunes where
The manual could provide direction they have been lost by shoreline
• during zoning and subdivision stages of hardening,
development so that coastal Lots are created
of sufficient dimension and size to institute environmental sequencing as
maintain a buffer between the shoreline the basis for coastal planning,
and proposed structures. The manual f) establish a coordinated approach
could provide direction during the zoning where federal expectations of CZM
of lands so that on large lots, structures are - activities, state resource .conservation
built away from the shoreline on the goals, and county development plans
mauka portion of the lot. There are certain are all integrated and defined in a
portions of our shoreline where existing mutually acceptable framework •
development patterns offer a good without exclusion of the goals at any
demonstration of properly located government level.
•
structures with sufficient buffers against
erosion hazards. On Oahu, these include 5. Implement a Pilot Shoreline Hazard
portions of Waimanalo, Kailua, and Mitigation Project Using Beach and Dune
Kahuku where construction setbacks have Restoration. Using federal Section 309
been utilized that exceed the present 40ft monies, th State Coastal Zone
equirement. Management Program has funded the
Coastal Lands Program at the DLNR to
The manual could also offer guidance and conduct a site selection analysis for the
recommendations for implementing development of a pilot beach restoration
actions on already developed shorelines project in Hawaii. DLNR, in turn, has
where erosion hazards constitute subcontracted for coastal engineering
management concerns. expertise to evaluate candidate sites on
Oahu and Maui shorelines that present the
strongest mix of socioeconomic. geologic,
72 lvtuui County has already moved in this direction and engineering factors promoting
with e creation of a Technical Guidance Manual: successful implementation of beach and
the
"Coastal Protection and Beach Restoration Feasibility dune restoration as a management option.
Study. for Maui County, Occanit Laboratories Inc..
•
No■ . 1997. 122p.
42 .
/�J a 0 D
Department of Land an Resources, Coastal Erosion Man Plan - COEivIAP
a) This is a critical and important first patterns in the area of the restoration
step to implement sand nourishment project. A planning analysis should
for the integrated purposes of beach examine the potential for increased
and dune restoration and hazard development, increased density. and
reduction. Nourishment is the use of increased economic commitment in
sand mined from either offshore' or the area that has been historically an
onshore to augment the littoral erosion hazard zone, but has with
sediment budget of a beach restoration achieved a temporarily
experiencing chronic erosion. reduced hazard exposure. It has been
Nourishment and restoration reduce the experience of many mainland
the exposure of coastal development to restoration efforts that sand
natural hazards by increasing beach nourishment leads to temporary
width, dune elevation, and profile decreases in hazard exposure. Hence,
recovery. stakeholders should engage in long -
b) This project should lead to a report term planning for upland development
identifying the best candidates for pattems under a range of scenarios.
coastal restoration from the perspective including a future return to increased
of both engineering and socio- hazard exposure.
economic criteria. The report should 6. Establish a continuous datastream, and
be used as a tool at the state legislature formalize an enduring data source from
to request funds for a full engineering the UH -SOEST by creating a branch of
study and analysis of the lead site. The the NOAA Coastal Services Center. The
expected cost may reach over coordination of agency functions within
S500,000 and the analysis may take 3 and between layers of government is
years or more to complete. Planners, formalized. in various ways, through law
regulators. and legislators should and administrative rule. However, the
expect to fund the actual restoration integration of scientific data is sporadic
effort within a few years of that and haphazard, often dependent upon the
appropriation at an expected vagaries of funding, project specific
additional cost of several million investigations, and the availability and
dollars to engage the final restoration goodwill of individuals. This is fragile
of the dune and beach environment. footing for an essential component of
c) This entire effort will fail if the good coastal management.
community does not support- it. a) The role of research and science in the
Education, awareness, outreach, and erosion management effort should be
public dialogue are fully as important solidified by establishing a consistent.
as the engineering and economics in reliable, and continuous datastream
completing this effort. from researchers at the UH School o f
Ocean and Earth Science and
d) Restoration must be established as a
m
viable coastal ma idol is Technology (SOEST). This would
Hawaii. This is best achieved with a provide access to the highly applicable
• carefully conceived pilot project that work presently being conducted there
• will have a high degree of success. on beach dynamics, sand resources.
Although there have been a number of coastal processes, sea level movements,
small -scale restoration efforts, there erosion patterns, and littoral cell
large-scale nourishment budgets. This would an gi o
has not been a lar
g provide a forum for managers to
project in Hawaii aimed at revitalizing request specific studies and data
an entire littoral cell. products in response to current needs,
e) An important, and often undiscussed and in expectation of near -term
component of this effort should be the planning issues.
evaluation of upland development b) One mechanism for this would be to
create a "regional node" of the
"Dollar. 5.1.. 1979. Sand mining in Hawaii: NOAA Coastal Services Center located
in Charleston. S.C. Another
Research, restrictions, and choices lur the future. Sea mechanism would be to establish a
Grant Technical Paper, UNIHI- SEAGRANT -TP -79 more autonomous entity that is not a
01, 106p
43
0 0 c
0 0
Department of Land and Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Management Plan - COEMAP
direct Federal effort. but which benefits d) These and other activities point to the
• from Federal funding. Various avenues already established role of erosion
for establishing a research service research at UH -SOEST as an effective
provider for the state and counties component in the erosion management
should be explored in light of Funding system of Hawaii. However, that role is
realities and management needs. undefined and unformalized and rests
c) A first step in this process is the solely upon the willingness of scientists
to become involved. This is a fragile
confirmation of regulatory authorities
that there is a NEED for a responsive, Footing and could at any time leave a
gapping void in the information
high quality. and nationally respected
•
coastal data research provider in network if individuals shifted priorities
or places of work. The importance of a
Hawaii. Administrators may choose to
continuous source of data and
submit legislation to create and fund
such a provider, and a resolution objective expertise is such that it must
establishing its need. As mentioned be institutionalized and codified, and
that a solid framework of high quality
throughout earlier recommendations,
managers at all levels have a need for data collection and dissemination not
improved data on coastal stability, be dependent upon the vagaries of
patterns of coastal change, and specific project funding.
characteristics and viability of sand for 7. Establish a broad, pervasive and
responding to chronic shortages. enduring public education and
j During 1998 MACZMAG awareness- building campaign in
coordination with the Ocean Resources
meetings, the City and County of
Management Plan and other resource
Honolulu has called repeatedly for
improved data collection and management efforts such as MHI -MRf
(DLNR) and the Polluted Run -off
dissemination n on erosion patterns. p Program (DOH). Few government
ii) The 1997 and 1998 report of objectives can be realized without the
the nongovernmental members of support of the public, and the public
MACZMAG identified the need cannot support what . it does not
for an improved database, and . understand. There are many avenues to
• even suggested that a government build public awareness through the media.
office dedicated to that purpose be the Department of Education. special
created. events and functions. a print campaign.
Maui County and the UH Sea slogans, themes and other techniques.
Grant College, at the 1998 Erosion a) Institutionalize a regularly occurring
Management Conference, coastal forum to give voice to all
identified the recent availability stakeholders and as a component of
and involvement of scientific public awareness building. Coastal
expertise at UH for assisting managers, scientists and engineers
decision- making, as a turning possess the expertise and knowledge to
point in the ability of the County predict, at a preliminary level, the
• Planning Department to effectively resulting physical and socioeconomic
manage their coast. impacts of management decisions. To
access this body of knowledge, it is
iv) Kauai County relies upon important to enhance communication
assistance from UH -SOEST to among coastal stakeholders.
develop permit guidelines, to Communities face the issue of erosion
testify in contested cases, and to on a daily basis and can provide the
assist in the decision - making perspective of "workability" and
process. feasibility For various socioeconomic
v) USGS, FEMA. DLNR, DOH, management options. The Fact that
and CZM rely on UH -SOEST as a successful erosion management rests
sounding board and feedback upon the participation of managers,
ource, as well as a point of origin scientists, engineers, and communities
for [ethnical assistance. advice, and increases the need for an open and
public awareness building. frequent forum designed to achieve
41
A 9
Department of Land and Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Ma Plan - COEMAP
m advantageous and accep table communicate with local community -
solutions. based resident and user groups, and
private property owners for their
1) One excellent example of this opinions on coastal management
was the 1998 First Regional options. Where communities are not
Conference on Coastal Erosion responsive to management alternatives,
Management in Hawaii and Other there is a reduced chance of successful
Pacific islands. This conference implementation and shared Funding
•
was jointly sponsored by the Sea for innovative conservation practices.
G
Grant College at UH Manoa, the Where communities and managers are
County of Maui Planning able to communicate on a common
Department, and the US level of understanding and education
Geological Survey. it was attended about alternatives and impacts, and
by a wide range of stakeholders, where common goals can be defined
including homeowners, hotel and articulated, there exists an
managers, scientists, engineers, and enhanced opportunity for achieving
agency authorities.
success.
ii) Another example of a public ) Most importantly, where
forum that improves projects incorporating beach and
communication among a range of dune restoration are proposed, the
stakeholders is the Marine and public must be educated regarding
Coastal Zone Management the specific criteria for project
Advisory Group (MACZMAG) success or failure. If they observe
and the Subcommittee on Coastal a wide sandy beach initially
Erosion. MACZMAG meets every resulting from a restoration project
other month to discuss the broad that soon begins to narrow as i4
issues related to effective and experiences profile adjustment,
sustainable coastal zone they may conclude the decrease in
management in Hawaii. The public dry beach width is a sign of project
is invited to attend and contribute failure. Whereas the planners had
tocthe dialogue and a diverse cross- fully expected the reduction as
section of concerns and opinions part of the profile equilibration
are regularly presented. process. More than any
iii) The Erosion Subcommittee of engineering criteria. the court of
MACZMAG meets on an irregular public opinion will judge the
though frequent basis to address success or failure of implementing
specific erosion management new management programs.
issues. This is also an open and 8. Evaluate the applicability of "willing -
broad- ranging forum that has
achieved a great deal of consensus user, community -based performance
and open communication among standards and/or planning districts as
erosion management tools at erosion
members of the public. the
research and private sector, and mama ts. A significant challenge to coastal
managers is the restoration and
government regulators and
redevelopment of densely populated and
planners. developed coastal communities where
iv) Another example of an chronic erosion conflicts with beach
effective public forum is the series conservation goals. One equitable
of colloquia and seminars that are approach is to develop "witting- user,
held by the UH- Manoa. For community performance standards for
example, in the fall semester of guiding changes to land use as future
1998, the UH Water Resources needs arise. Performance standards could
Research Center sponsored a be implemented in a framework of
speaker series on coastal erosion management authority that focuses on
highlighting local and national controlling erosion through resource
planners, scientists, and engineers. conservation. Performance standards act as
targets for modifying the and use pattern
b) Integrate management and public through future redevelopment efforts.
expectations. Coastal managers must
45
a 0 a
Department of Land a Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Management Plan - COEMAP
Such targets would avoid penalizing iii) following landscaping standards
current tenants. yet would establish that promote dune preservation.
community goals for achieving reduced sand conservation and beach
exposure to coastal hazards and restoring enhancement:
beach and dune environments. Setting iv) and promoting enhanced coastal
performance standards is a form of access and parking.
rnininti:(Iriun that can be implemented
through time on a schedule determined by d) These performance standards could be
the landowner through the redevelopment established as a mixture of
and renovation of existing structures and nonregulatory and regulatory targets
voluntary changes in hind usage. setting a future vision for the
a) Creating a new setback regime in a community that would ultimately
location experiencing chronic erosion enhance land values, ncrease
would relegate existing land tenancy to community pride, and estore
"nonconforming" status and levy damaged beach environments. A
•
significant economic penalties to simple descriptive community
andowners. A more equitable pamphlet containing site - specific maps
approach is to develop community- and guidelines could be the first step
based performance standards for
in implementing this goal.
guiding subsequent changes to land e) In the spirit of the incentives offered
use as future needs arise. Performance by the NFIP /CRS, the state and
standards could be implemented in a counties of Hawaii may wish to
framework of management authority consider providing incentives to
that focuses on controlling erosion communities of homeowners located
through resource conservation. This in erosion hazard areas. This could
would be ideal for implementing the include efforts along the lines of the
concepts of environmental sequencing. CRS and/or FMA and/or alternative
• and for using redevelopment tools and incentives to reduce hazard exposure
• coastal restoration to recover lost and promote beach and dune
resources and protect existing ones. restoration and conservation.
b) Performance standards act as targets 9. Establish a Fund for Land Acquisition —
for modifying the land use pattern Ho'opono Kahakai. Create a coastal land
through future redevelopment efforts. acquisition fund based upon negotiated
Such targets would avoid penalizing purchase and willing - seller concepts. This-
current tenants, yet would establish fund will focus on restoring degraded
• community• goals for achieving coastlines to a high level of health and
reduced exposure to coastal hazards sustainability, hence the fund can be called
•
and restoring beach and dune " Ho'opono Kahakai" (literally, to make
environments. Setting performance right the beaches). One aspect of this fund
standards is a form of minimization can be a focus on redevelopment as a tool
that can be implemented through time for implementing strategic improvements
on a schedule determined by the at erosion hotspots in the following
landowner through the redevelopment manner.
and renovation of existing structures
and voluntary changes in land usage. a) The CLP would use revolving funds of
Ho'opono Kahakai to negotiate a
c) Applicable performance standards willing- seller purchase of private
include: developed lands in an erosion hotspot,
i) defining nonregulatory. "willing and then resell them o he
user" variable setbacks as targets development sector under a new
to guide the redevelopment and management regime.
renovation of existing structures: b) The new beach management regime
ii) setting regulatory construction would require that all residential
•
standards promoting wind and development is sited landward of a 30
• flood reinforcement and year erosion hazard setback as
measured from the mauka toe of the
• avoidance:
primary dune. It would also define a
46
0 ° 0 A
Department of Land and Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Management Plan - COEMAP
relocation buffer zone located Program General Permit (SPGP.
landward or the 60 yr hazard administered by the Corps of
boundary which would be preserved Engineers) that defines guidelines for
for structure relocation in the event of activities seaward of the certified
• future shoreline retreat. These setback shoreline, identifying state or federal
guidelines would have to be defined jurisdiction. Such activities could
following an analysis of historical include integrated conservation and
shoreline fluctuations. hazard mitigation projects. such as
c) Construction guidelines and small -scale beach restoration.
landscaping recommendations would b) One General Permit applicable under
need to be specified such that state or federal jurisdiction,
exposure to losses due to coastal administered by a single lead agency, -
hazards are reduced and beach and that defines guidelines for Best
dune restoration and conservation is Management Practices to achieve
enhanced. integrated conservation and hazard
d) Lands in Ho'opono Kahakai would mitigation along the shoreline, would
be resold or auctioned to the private provide efficiency and economy to the
development sector for redevelopment effort to restore lost beaches. That lead
.under the new guidelines. Revenues agency should be the Coastal Lands
from the resale would infuse the Program at DLNR.
Coastal Lands Program to purchase I I. Restoration is not a Permanent Solution —
additional lands either adjacent to the Plan for Renourishment and
resold properties or. in other coastal Redevelopment. Planning for post-
. hotspots under the same strategy. restoration realities must proceed on a
e) Pre- arrange for participation of the parallel track, and integrated with, any
restoration project. If the source and cause
commercial development market.
Ideally Ho'opono Kahakai would restoration erosion is not. re xperie then any
function as a partnership program restoration effort will experience erosion.
under state and county agreement. There will be shorelines where erosion
causes are not well understood. and where
f) Ho'opono Kahakai may have other sea -level rise may be an important driving
characteristics to promote conservation force behind shoreline retreat. Whether the
and hazard mitigation goals. restoration offers hazard mitigation for 1
Regulators may wish to fund the year or 20 years, it will eventually need
program with bond issuances. Also, renourislunent. How long • can
negotiated purchases may result in the renourishment continue? Regulators,
state simply holding acquired lands planners, and communities of users must
without resale, perhaps used to increase honestly and openly explore future socio-
shoreline access. The program may economic scenarios. These may consist of
also wish to utilize "less -than -fee- continued erosion, accelerated sea -level
simple" title to parcels in order to rise, expanded development and
achieve erosion management population growth, exhausted sand
objectives. supplies, and storms that damage the
restoration project. The p
10. General Permit for Restoration. It would process rf
planning must not stop when the last yard
be in the best interest of facilitating the use of sand is placed on a restored shoreline.
of restoration as a viable option, and Restoration is not a permanent solution,
reducing the workload of agencies. to but it does buy time to plan for the future,
coordinate and identify areas of and the wise among us will use that time
overlapping effort such that the permitting effectively to plan for the future of all
process can be made more efficient coastal dependents.
without sacrificing the present high level
of environmental and ecological 12. Adopt, or alter for adoption, the
safeguards. environmental assessment guidelines of
the DOH -OEQC that were submitted for
a) One approach to realize this goal is to public commentary in the November 23,
define a single "General Permit" such 1995 OEQC Environmental Notice. The
• as the Department of the Army State guidelines were also aired in the form of a
47
Department of Land a Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion M Plan - COEMAP
major news story such that they gained erosion management program stronuly
significant public exposure. Modifications indicates the need for a "grassroots"
may be appropriate based on an analysis movement that convinces the
of responses and reconsideration of issues. legislative body that the need for
These guidelines are presented in change is immediate and the desire for
• Technical Supplement, Part D (pg. 79). change is strong.
a) ft is appropriate for additional state 14. Decision- making Criteria. Decision -
agencies, specifically the DLNR and making authorities and regulators need
the DBEDT to adopt these guidelines clear and unambiguous information on
in their application review process so littoral processes, sand resources, historical
that there become established, clear erosion and accretion rates and projected
and consistent standards for decision- future patterns, development patterns, and
. making along the shoreline. County ownership histories, land -use trends,
authorities should be involved in the structtire permitting histories, and other
adoption of the final guidelines so that scientific and socio- economic trends and
there is consistency, ownership, and patterns' at areas where erosion
application to the guidelines and the management decisions must be made.
review of shoreline projects. Regulatory decisions are complex and
13. Focus Regulatory Efforts, build local require evaluation and analysis of
awareness among agency personnel. If numerous and interdependent factors in
we are to improve the erosion management
order to carry out the letter of the law.
regime in Hawaii, energy and effort must a) To achieve the goal of providing an
be focused on those localities where there informed framework for decision-
is beach degradation and where active making, it is important to conduct
permitting issues arise. regional analyses of physical
•
a) Beaches that remain viable for the environmental and socio - economic
purposes of recreation, ocean access, patterns at the scale of the littoral cell.
hazard mitigation, scenic beauty, and These analyses should provide
regulators with recommendations in
function as a healthy ecosystem are
not an immediate management the form of general developmental,
sociological, infrastructural, and
concern—even if the adjacent back-
environmental targets that establish a
beach area is heavily armored.
Armoring in and of itself, is not a decision - framework for permitting,
concern unless it compromises or zoning, and otherwise guiding land -
poses a threat to one of the above use.
mentioned parameters. 15. Create a system of Research Products
b) All beaches should be monitored to resulting from technical studies of coastal
establish their continued health and processes and sand resources. Coastal
ability, but initial concerns should managers and administrators need •
focus on restoration, hazard mitigation, rates around data on erosion patterns and
and interagency coordination. rates around the state. The scope and
characteristics of the erosion problem need
c) As a rule, coasts undergoing long -term to be factually determined at a high
retreat and chronic erosion constitute resolution, at least to the parcel scale.
the greatest management concern. a) A series of erosion risk maps at
Hence, it is important to have scientific 1:2000 scale using color aerial
data on historical patterns of coastal photography should be created
• change. showing detailed rates of shoreline
d) Political realities in Hawaii dictate that change, including rates of volume
the State Legislature will be more change, on every coastal parcel or
' likely to fund and legislatively every 20 m along the coast. These data
implement a new erosion management will improve understanding of
regime if it has the support and sediment budgets. and shoreline
backing of the counties. A review of changes. The ERM series should be
other Mates experiences in wrestling distributed throughout the state to
with the s iinilar need to revamp - their agencies and Government offices with
48
Department of Land an Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Management Plan - COEMAP
coastal decision - making authority. accuracy beyond the 60 year level
ERMs must also be updated - on a (1912 NOAA "T- sheets" are the
regular basis. Users will need the data earliest accurate shoreline position
available in .GIS format. on CD ROM. available for Hawaii). The database
as :napped products, and on -line. for this process needs to be created
b) Define Statewide Erosion Hazard and periodically updated using a
Zones and map BFE's. Managers and combination of high- resolution
decision- makers need to have detailed aerial photogrammetry and a
information on the pattern and history network of beach profiles.
of erosion along our coastline. This ii) Erosion rates and BFE's
information can be integrated with the should be delineated at a high
FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps that density along the coastline.
set Base Flood Elevations for housing Current research at the UH
construction in coastal flood zones. indicates a spacing of
This data can be established in a approximately 20 m alongshore is
variety of media including digital sufficient to determine the erosion
layers on various GIS systems, CD rate pattern on nearly all
ROMS for desk -top viewing in PC or developed parcels and to
Mac formats, downloaded or viewed determine the large -scale coastal
interactively from on -line sites, and as behavior (i.e., dynamic shoreline
hard -copy map products. This meanders through time) that
recommendation can be combined control patterns of change ".
with recommendation a) (above) to Managers may wish to consult
improve the scientific framework for technical sources to determine the
regulatory and planning decision- favored statistical technique fa;
making. establishing erosion rates. Along
iJ Large -scale aerial photographs much of the Hawaiian shoreline
(1:2000) enlarged to poster size there are approximately to 8
offer a mapping surface on which • aerial photographs available over
this information can be provided the time period 1949 e 1996.
in the context of existing land -use There is also a 1912 mean high
rends. Aerial photo -maps can • water line, mapped by federal
display the present erosion rate, surveyors, that can ev compared to
projections of the future 30 year he photographic evidence for a
erosion hazard zone, FEMA total of 86 years of shoreline
BFE's, he contemporaneous history. One may use a number of
vegetation line, and the upper techniques to determine a rate of
debris line all clearly shoreline change through time:
superimposed upon the end-point analysis, linear
photographic background showing regression of shoreline positions,
development, land use, and least median of squares regression,
geologic features of the shoreline. jackknifing, average of rates, and
A series of these reference minimum description length
photomaps will greatly enhance criterion are all published statistical
the abilit of managers t assess methodologies for determining
he potential impacts actions in rates of shoreline change each with
a physical setting and with their own attributes and limitations.
knowledge of shoreline change iii) These data can be used to
patterns. These data can be identify areas of management
established as a map- series concern and potential community-
showing the statewide erosion based performance standards for
hazard zones. Managers may also
wish to include the 60 year. and 90
year erosion hazard zones, 14 Coyne. M.A.. Fletcher, C.H., and Richmond.
although the current database of B.M., (in press) Mapping erosion hmnrd areas in
past shoreline positions does not Hawaii: Observations and Errors. Journal QC Coastal
support significant projection Research.
49
Department of Land a ' aid Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Management Plan - COEMAP
hazard mitigation and resource uses. storms, sea -level rise, tsunami,
restoration. A rate -based setback and various environmental
system can also be established influences. Beaches also need to be
using such data for undeveloped monitored to distinguish short -
regions where avoidance is the term changes from long -term
primary management target co trends. Monitoring programs can
mitigate future hazards. identify human impacts causing
iv) Lands falling within a sediment deficiencies, and provide
particular • erosion hazard area a technical framework for
• improving coastal management
would be subject to specific practices that damage beaches.
construction • and and -use Florida, South Carolina, Texas, and
guidelines. FEMA has already other states have monitoring
proposed the framework for such a programs in place.
system, and it can be easily
modified and adopted by the state iii) The University of Hawaii has
and county administrations to meet maintained a network of -80
local needs. beach profile monitoring stations
v) Erosion rate data are necessary on Kauai, Maui, and Oahu since
for evaluating and enhancing the [994. This time series should be
setback egime: dentifying extended and supported and the
management decision criteria on data provided to agencies with
shoreline stability; defining erosion management authority.
community performance iv) Beach profile monitoring
standards; guiding the planning should be implemented as a permit
and application of negotiated condition for activities that have
purchase (willing seller) coastal the potential to cause sand
land acquisition programs; deficiencies, or alterations to the
identifying areas of present and morphology of beaches such that
future management concern where their ability to respond to seasonal
resources and efforts will need to wave and current events, and sea-
', be concentrated; assisting the real level rise, may be reduced.
estate and development sectors; Agencies, then, should become
and otherwise providing a familiar with technical aspects of
scientific framework for monitoring so that proper permit
developing improved management conditions can be provided, and
tools and options on a site - specific that monitoring results can be
basis. interpreted by agency•personnel.
c) Use aerial photography, ground -based d) Land management and disaster
surveys, and other survey techniques to mitigation agencies should support
monitor beaches. This will improve development of numerical wave run -
understanding of short and long -term up and storm -surge models (and their
changes in the shape and position of field verification) to predict and
beaches in response to sea -level rise. improve understanding of wave
wave and current processes, and - impacts, flooding patterns, coastal
sediment deficiencies. processes, and to augment the
i) The most common of these. shoreline certification process.
and the easiest to implement, is a i) Numerical modeling can be a
• ground -based monitoring effort valuable source of information for
using traditional survey techniques formulating guidelines for the safe
that provide a time - series of siting of coastal development,
measured beach cross - sections. defining BFE's for building codes.
•
known as "beach profiling." and for improving the evaluation
ii) A beach monitoring system of the certified shoreline and the
provide valuable information appropriateness of the existing
will
p setback re in Hawaii. Surge
for determining the potential and run -up models can be used to
impacts of coastal developmental
50
, 0 o
0
Department of Land and Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Ma Plan - COEMAP
improve understanding of characteristics on a sector by sector
adequate Buse Flood Elevations for basis will come the ability to establish
currently unmapped regions of the viable and realistic planning goals on
coast in Hawaii where the FEM1A behalf of regulatory agencies.
does not offer guidance on site
elevations for buildings. Models i) The number and quality of
should address run -up circulation studies and sediment
characteristics magnitude, transport analyses should be
recurrence interval, elevation) of increased and funding encouraged
tsunami, storm surge, swell, and From federal sources and research -
locally generated wind waves. oriented state sources.
ii) Run -up models also have the ii) County and state authorities
potential to improve the need information on the stability
identification of the certified and seasonal dynamics of
shoreline in Hawaii so that it can particular littoral cells. Those that
be ess subject o equivocal are identified as unstable, and
•
interpretation of sparse natural where erosion hotspots are
evidence. delineated, can be the focus of
restoration and mitigation efforts
e) Scientific understanding of the and enhanced management tools.
occurrence and magnitude of Stable cells can be the focus of
hurricanes and tsunami in Hawaiian conservation, monitoring,
waters, and their coaxal inundation avoidance, and proactive
patterns can be improved and should management practices.
be the subject of enhanced research
supported by agencies with coastal g) Research indicates the presence of
jurisdiction. High wind storms of less offshore reserves of sand that may
than hurricane strength, and the waves support estoration as a regular
they generate are also of concern to management option. The existing
coastal land managers and owners. practice of mining sand from active
Tsunami generated by the sudden dunes and dune fields should be
movement of the sea floor pose a viewed as a limited resource that has
continuous threat to the .Hawaiian attendant environmental and cultural
[stands. impacts that are negative. On -land
sand resources other than active dune
i) It is vitally important that fields should be explored as potential
research continue ID improve resources. It is important to closely
understanding of these and other examine the water quality and
meteorological and geophysical ecological impacts that may result
hazards along the coastline so that from the use of sands with high fine
enhanced mitigation can be sediment content for beach restoration.
achieved in a framework of i) The Mana Plain, on Kauai
environmental sustainability.
consists of regions composed of
ii) Public education and unlithified, or lightly lithified
awareness should be a high -level carbonate sand that may provide a
goal in these research efforts so sand resource option for coastal
that the populace of Hawaii can restoration. Many states have
react accordingly when a hurricane utilized "borrow pits" for sand
or tsunami threatens our shore. and gravel resources. The Mana
f) Wave and current patterns and other Plain should be assessed and
littoral characteristics. and sediment mapped as a potential sand
transport in coastal waters are poorly resource for coastal restoration. A
understood, yet they are a critical force mapping exploration effort should
in the seasonal and inter - annual cycle be directed at the Mana Plain y.
of beach fluctuations. They also
identify levels of dune activity.
cementation and lithification
influence the management of
history, thickness and lateral
sustainable coastal water quality. With
mproved knowledge of oral extent, statistical sedimeniological
5I •
4 6 e G
Department of Land and Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Management Plan - COEMAP
characteristics, and an assessment (4) What are acceptable
of potential use for coastal benefit /cost ratios to
restoration should be determined. restoration, and is it a
Other cuspate forelands. of similar sustainable management
origin and geologic history, should alternative in a future of
also be assessed for this purpose. increased population growth.
greater development pressure
ii/ As the mining of active dune and predicted higher sea
fields faces future restrictions and levels?
depletion, and offshore or
alternative onshore carbonate sand (5) How long will sand mining
mining comes on -line, it will be offer a solution for erosion
important for agencies to develop management? Dade County,
accessible stockpiles of beach- Florida is reportedly facing
grade sand that can be utilized by .depleted ,offshore . sand
pennit[ees seekina erosion resources after 20 years of
mitigation under the Small -Scale mining for restoration.
Nourishment Program of the
DLNR (see Recommendation I I, (6) Is offshore sand silt -free, and
below) does it have the proper grain
size and grain color for beach
iii) Sand nourishment is the restoration?
strongest technical option
• presently available to both protect (7) Do marine sand fields and
eroding coastal lands and sustain sand- filled channels contain
and restore public dunes and faunal communities that can be
beaches. The Hawaiian coast has impacted by mining without
many features that promote causing impacts to related
successful nourishment. including communities?
widespread fringing reefs that (8) Will offshore mining lead to
dissipate wave energy, short and turbidity problems in the water
• embayed beaches with prominent column?
headlands chat stabilize and isolate
the sediment budget of a littoral ) All nourishment projects should be
cell, and a predictable seasonal monitored by a state coastal surveying
wave field. A study released by the team in_order to establish a database to
National Research Council offers augment and improve beach fill design
guidance on this issue. strategies. It is already apparent that
beaches in Hawaii are being nourished
h) There are. nonetheless. significant with sand by local owner groups. and
•
problems associated with beach and the resulting morphological changes
dune restoration that need further and sand flux patterns are not
research and delineation. monitored with a standardized .
Do offshore sand resources methodology. Neither dd many of
exist in sufficient quantity and these existing efforts restore the role of
appropriate quality to support dunes as storehouses of sand for
estoration'? profile recovery from wave impacts,
rather they focus on beach restoration
(2) What are the attendant alone. These are lost opportunities for
environmental impacts to learning. Additionally, conflicts are
marine dredging and sand arising in the area of permitting and
mining and are they acceptable open communication between multiple
given the goals of doastal land user groups regarding the success and
conservation? legality of these efforts.
(3) Where will the money come i) All restoration projects must
from to pay for beach and have clearly identified
• dune restoration. and how will performance criteria so that public
the costs be shared° understanding of the technique
can be based upon realistic
5,
Department of Land and Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Ma'tagement Plan - COEMAP
expectations. For instance, there i) Sand reserve research should
. are no criteria for evaluating till include assessments or the
sand from the standpoint of environmental impacts of mining.
resulting turbidity. Schedules for turbidity effects, ecological /faunal
renourishment should be identified impacts, sand suitability. and the
and modified as experience sustainability of offshore sand
dictates, and cost ratios shared flats. Sea Engineering, Inc., the CH
among stakeholders should be Coastal Geology Group, the
shifted to match sustainable and Marine Minerals Technology
socially responsible sources of Center, and the US Geological
funding. Public expectations of Survey are four research
long -term dry beach width must be organizations with the expertise
evaluated and engineering realities and interest to support the
must be made public. development of this
j) Despite its great promise. nourishment recommendation.
is expensive and there is a significant ii) An onshore component of this
lack of knowledge pertaining to • effort should focus on coastal
offshore sand quality and quantity, plain sand resources, such as those
appropriate beach design, located on cuspate forelands and
renourishment schedules. extraction other geological accretion plains.
and delivery techniques. impacts on that exhibit high potential as sand
water quality and sand field faunal reserves. Environmental, social.
communities, and the sustainability of ecological, riparian and
the sand resources in Hawaii. groundwater hydrological impacts
k) The existence of these potential must be carefully assessed. •
barriers to beach nourishment make it 16. Small -scale Nourishment Projects. The
imperative • that a successful pilot Coastal Lands Program (CLP) at DLNR
project be conceived and implemented has proposed to establish a Small -Scale
in the immediate future in order to Beach Nourishment Program pursuant to
evaluate the full and long -term the CDUP process and in collaboration
potential of nourishment as a viable with the COE State Program General
management alternative. As part of the Permit (SPGP) for expediting small -scale
pilot project, a GIS database of sand beach nourishment projects and
reserves and sedimentary - information gathering. A draft version of
characteristics should be constructed this evolving program is contained in
using all available information and Technical Supplement, Part E.
improved with a directed sand reserve a) This program, which is still under
research program.
development, tentatively proposes a
I) Create and fund a sand reserve permit ceiling of 25,000 yd' as the
research program to delve into maximum allowable fill size for
relevant aspects and issues pertaining restoration under the SPGP. This
• to offshore sands. as well as selected number represents a reasonable limit
onshore sand resources. A sand based on studies of beach and dune
research program is necessary in order sand volume along windward Oahu.
to establish the viability of marine sand Four years of beach profile
extraction and beach restoration as a monitoring by the Coastal Geology
realistic alternative for coastal Group at UH offers guidance on
management. This would be best nourishment volumes. At Kailua
framed within a pilot restoration effort Beach. for example. possessing an
(see Recommendation 3. above) apparently healthy and viable sand
directed at a well understood littoral volume budget, for every 100 ft
cell. A funding structure should be alongshore distance, there exists an
established emphasizing cost- sharing average beach profile volume of 7.220
among federal, state. county. and yd (72.2 +57.4 vd7ft) of sand
landowner stakeholders. between the vegetation line and the
offshore depth of closure (the marine
limit of beach sand). When measured
53
Department of Land arid Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Management Plan - COEMAP
trom the mauka toe of the frontal ii) There is a need to define fill
. dune to the depth of closure. the placement construction practices
average volume increases to 10.800 including siltation control,
yd' (108 ±66.0 yd'/tt). Notice the permitting for fill placement, and
significant variance around the beach design.
average. indicating that the beach sand iii) There is a need to define
volume has a wide range of values conditions of success or failure of
even for this one littoral system. small -scale projects. and the
Hence. two large housing lots with a permitted schedule of
combined -200 frontage length, and renourishment. For instance,
perhaps as many as three or four landowners will not utilize fill for
medium -size lots, could accommodate mitigation if placed sand is rapidly
a healthy beach and dune restoration
to mitigate the erosion hazard" eroded and there is no condition
project for renourishing or otherwise
under this program. Because most protecting threatened land.
permit applications are from single
homeowners, or small groups of 2 or 3 iv) There -is a need to define a
• homeowners, 25,000 yd` provides a methodology of Hawaiian beach
reasonable and flexible estimate of design that is based on parameters
"small -scale nourishment." developed with field data from the
• Hawaiian shoreline. This effort
b) This effort is important and should be could conduct sensitivity analyses
encouraged, continued. and extended. of mainland design practices using
However, there is an immediate need to Hawaiian field scenarios to
conduct supporting research to better establish the viability of concepts
identify the Best Management and methodologies.
Practices guiding this program. This
research could be funded through the c) The program description (Technical
CLP or the CZM program., For Supplement, Part E) highlights
instance. monitoring all fill activities as a critical
Past research in Hawaii "' has need, this is consistent with federal
recommended that sand used for success ccs and this program achieves
beach restoration should have a co ana be c ables viewed by
typical grain-size distribution of 2 consultants nru as a viable alternative for
_ yP ' � their clientele, there will develop an
- 0.15 mm with <10 per cent finer increased demand for sand resources.
than 0.15 mm. There is a need to Hence. it will become increasingly
substantiate or redefine these - important to monitor performance in
criteria for fill sand acceptability order to determine the suitability of
including a review of existing various sand resources for this
• federal and state experiences. program, including: dune sand, coastal
determinations of sand /mud plain sand, offshore sand, sand from
thresholds and resulting turbidity, boat basins, harbor mouths and
definition of ambient turbidity in dredged channels.
coastal waters, and evaluations of
rain size. abrasion resistance. 17. Interim Controls. Coastal erosion is an
color. and sorting thresholds for active and dynamic agent on our
sand fill and beach stability. shorelines even during the current period
of increasing well- defined and viable
management options. Hence, there is an
immediate need to provide a management
" Beach volume measurements vary from 14.8 to response to emergency situations
129.8 yd' per It (alongshore) when measured from the - confronting private and commercial
vegetation line. and 26.3 to 184.7 yd` per ft when landowners. It is important to develop a
measured from the mauka toe of the frontal dune. technical approach to control interim
• 7 ' Hampton, M.A. (1998) Offshore Sand Research. coastal erosion on residential lands where a
•
Comments made during a briefing of current research short -term or seasonal wave - related
on the marine sand resources of Hawaii. DLNR Board erosion hazard exists, and where long - term
Room. numbers of MACZNIAG Subcommittee on erosion trends have created user conflicts.
Coastal Erosion..Auamt 28. 1998. Honolulu.
54
1 0 s
Department of Land and Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Management Plan - COEMAP
a) Both Conservation District Rules and ecological characteristics or the beach,
the County Special Management Area • should be given high priority.
Rules provide for emergency permits.
A consistent and uniform set of d) Seabag revetments present advantages
technical options, with components over the traditional use of placed
that can be tailored to the personality armor stone in that they are more
of the target shoreline, should be easily reconfigured to accommodate
developed to fulfill the need for changing conditions and they are
emergency protection. The term easily removed when a more
"emergency" should guide the permanent solution is implemented.
selection of applicable and appropriate They are also less hazardous for public
technology. In the past, in both Maui usage, and enjoy increased public
County and the City and County of acceptance because they are clearly an
Honolulu, rock seawalls and/or "interim" rather than permanent
revetments have been constructed
installation. Disadvantages include
under emergency permits. A rock reports of high expense, and high wave
revetment or seawall is not an reflectivity. Seabags differ little from
emergency solution — it is a permanent armor stone in terms of coastal
solution, and on a chronically eroding hardening, but their presence is a
shoreline it is an environmentally reminder that the job of mitigation and
damaging solution. An interim erosion conservation is not finished and
control technology should be effective, stakeholders must continue to work
emovable (temporary), and toward longer -term solutions.
"tunable." That is, 11 should be easily 18. Implement an "Erosion Control"
reconfigured to accommodate approach where feasible. This could
changing conditions and lessons include offshore breakwaters, and certath
learned. It also needs to have types of attached structures (T -head
characteristics that will permit it to be groins) used in combination with
integrated into future management nourishment to stabilize particularly
options that come online at a later dynamic - beach segments where erosion
date. would be controlled effectively without
b) If a permanent solution is requested, it negative impacts to adjoining beaches, or
hould be evaluated with full the sediment budget of a littoral cell.
consideration given to all long -term Managers must keep in mind that the
solutions (i.e., Pope's articulation. sect. purpose of the structures is to control the
[LBS), and should not be applied for erosion of placed sand fill, and that good
under the auspices of "emergency" erosion control projects use sand and
permitting. structures together as a system. not alone.
The design and specifications of this
c) Two technical approaches have approach should be conducted by
potential to fulfill emergency needs: professionals in coastal engineering with
large, protective sand bags, and small- an established record of successful use.
scale sand nourishment (see Permitting authorities may wish to adopt
Recommendation 1 I, above). Large I the PE Seal (Professional Engineer) as one
on sand - filled "sea bags" are being criteria for accepting permit applications
used successfully to protect property for erosion control projects.
on Oahu, Maui, Molokai, and Kauai. [9. Analysis of Economic Factors. The
These projects utilize seabag
revetments constructed at a low slope, economic factors governing he
ideally attended by small -scale sand implementation and feasibility of various
nourishment. In certain settings a small coastal management alternatives is poorly
groin or he use of detached understood in Hawaii. Economic data
breakwaters may be desirable to designed to identify the necessary funding
• stabilize the fill Landowners should be and benefit/cost rationale of management
prepared to renourish the fronting options will be critical to establishing a
beach as long as the sea bags remain. framework for implementing a new
Maintaining public access, and the paradigm of coastal management in
Hawaii.
55
Department of Land an Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Management Plan - COEMAP
a) Economic arguments for and against be isolated as the only land
certain management options should be management issues on our shorelines.
combined with considerations or However. because coastal erosion
environmental sustainability when management and beach preservation
deciding upon a course of action. are high profile issues, and they are
Presently, there is little economic chronic and widespread, they do
information available to guide provide a framework for establishing
decision- making. In the end. economic broader risk - reduction practices in the
data may be the most compelling coastal zone.
Factor when conceiving and b) Likewise, Hawaiian beaches are not
n t a program of isolated environments. They are
management on the coast of Hawaii.
intimately connected to adjoining
Utilize GIS tools to implement this marine and terrestrial ecosystems chat
recommendation. constitute a seamless system of natural
b) Beach user surveys, neighborhood environments along the coast. These
surveys, willing payer surveys, include reefs that are the sand
assembled valuation criteria from a factories, the dunes that are sand
diverse population of beach users and repositories, the coastal streams and
stakeholders can all be used to define wetlands that offer aquatic refugia and
the economy of various management are a source of nutrients, and the
options. If beach and dune restoration coastal marine water column and its
is planned, it must rest upon a solid vertical ecological strata. Our beaches
cost /benefit rationale. are dependent upon the health and
viability of these neighboring
c) The cost of exploration, recovery, geologic, aquatic, and oceanographic
delivery and construction of beach systems. Agency efforts to establish a
restoration efforts is at a low level of system of beach preservation and
understanding. All financial aspects of coastal management must recognize
restoration should be quantified for the interdependent ecologies of the
proper planning and feasibility coastal zone and practices must be
analysis. defined that will enhance the
. • d) The economy of land acquisition sustainability of the entire
should be investigated such that environmental system of the coastal
• random and potentially wasteful zone.
• acquisition procedures do not come to •
characterize this potentially valuable
approach to conservation and hazard C. INITIAL IMPLEMENTING
•
mitigation. How should a and ACTIONS
acquisition program be funded, •
managed, and planned? I. Establish, empower, and fund the Coastal
Integrate Hazard Mitigation and Coastal Lands Program and the creation of new
20. tote
g g erosion management,i beach conservation,
Conservation. Erosion is only one of and hazard mitigation programs. such as,
several natural hazards that present
. management challenges along the a) a small -scale nourishment program,
Hawaiian coast. High winds and associated b) a large -scale coastal restoration
marine flooding, tsunami flooding, sea- program,
level rise, seasonal high waves, stream
• flooding on coastal plains, landslides, and c) a system of management based on
seismic and volcanic hazards all increase avoidance, minimization, and
the risk exposure along developed coastal compensatory mitigation,
lands.
di a willing- seller and acquisition
a) Agency efforts to manage coastal program with a component
erosion must include a scientific basis emphasizing strategic redevelopment
for integrating the multiple hazards of and resource restoration (Ho'opono
• the coastal zone in order to reduce Kahakai),
risks to coastal populations. Beach
preservation and land loss should not .
56
0 1
Department of Land a Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion M an gement Plan - COEMAP
e) a community -based performance datum, that is, an elevation, such that it
standards program emphasizing continuously incorporates erosion
hazard mitigation and resource history. The elevation could be based
restoration (Ho'olaulima). - upon numerically modeled seasonal
f) provide assistance to enhance county high wave run -up characteristics
efforts to integrate historical erosion (which differ on every shore), or upon
trends and coastal hazard vulnerability
the height of the frontal dune, or other
at the zoning and subdivision stages of measurable feature with unequivocal
development, characteristics,
g) formulate and implement a public c) Clarify and strengthen enforcement
awareness and education campaign, efforts and programs,
h) review and amend the Shoreline d) Identify coastal lots where the 20 foot
Certification process. (or less) setback accommodation may
lead to future erosion hazards and
2. Enhance interagency collaboration. build potentially impact the beach
an organized and consistent system of environment.
erosion management among CZM, CLP. e) Identify minimum buildable area
• OEQC/DOH, and the counties and federal criteria for coastal lots in areas with
COE; histories of chronic or episodic
a) CZM and/or CLP should continue the erosion such that development may
dialogue and issue discussion of the lead to future erosion hazards and
MACZMAG Erosion Subcommittee as potentially impact the beach
it promotes a common level of environment.
' • understanding of the issues and f) Prohibit seaward shifts in the certifies
awareness of concerns among the shoreline,
public, commercial, and agency
sectors; adopt OEQC permit g) Identify littoral cells without current
guidelines, and work to improve the armoring and establish a prohibition
level of technical analysis in EA's for against any future armoring, establish
coastal projects including site- specific an abandonment policy in these areas.
descriptions identifying coastal perhaps with a temporary protection
stability, littoral cell characteristics. clause ( -1 yr) and a relocation
erosion patterns, and sand resources. assistance program. to mitigate -the
erosion hazard and to conserve
3. Institutionalize a source of high- quality beaches,
data and research products at the UH-
SOEST that would be available to all h) Implement a "Master CDUP" concept
public and private entities (government for large scale restoration programs,
sector and commercial sector) for i) Amend Chapter 183 HRS and Title 13
improving understanding of coastal Chapter 2 HAR to create a new
processes and reducing the costs associated subzone in the Conservation District
with data acquisition. for all submerged lands and beaches,
4. Introduce legislation to fund and support include a distinct set of objectives and
the necessary statutory and rule changes policies for conservation and work
and program operations that will with federal and county agencies to
implement the concepts and approach establish consistency hrough he
embodied in COEMAP, and consistent CZMP
with aspects of Chapter 205 -A and j) Improve education with videos.
derivative efforts. Workers should consider pamphlets, and 90 sec. Radio and TV
the following: spots.
a) Repealing or modifying the accreted k) Investigate sand resources for
land law, restoration including developing a
b) Establish a monument program for definitive understanding of he
the Shoreline Certification process and biological impacts of dredging and the
redefine the shoreline o a eadastral viability of marine sand fields and
channels. and the development of a
57
7 Q 0
Department of Land and Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Ma
r nagement Plan - COEMAP
"borrow pit" system for coastal plain 7. No- Tolerance Policy. The DLNR should
sands. announce a policy of no tolerance toward
new encroaching coastal construction of
5. Simplify and streamline the regulatory all types. The policy of no tolerance
and permitting system of the coastal zone. means that all structures chat encroach on
This point is especially critical. Attorney Conservation District beaches that are
Dennis Hwang has written, illegally built or illegally repaired
following the announcement date will be
"Nowhere is the need for increased torn down or a form of compensatory
coordination more important than in dealing mitigation will be applied.
. with the layers of regulations along the coast.
For a landowner to obtain permission for a S. Fines and Revocable Easements. DLNR
• seawall, only one or two permits may be should establish a system of fines and the
required. However, for a less environmentally provision for short-term, revocable
harmful alternative, such as sand easements at illegal encroachments. DLNR
replenishment and a containing structure such Land Division staff should build a list of
as a groin, the applicant may need a Shoreline encroachments, and a GIS layer; that will
Certification, Shoreline Setback Variance, be targeted for fines, fees, and revocable
Shoreline Management Area permit, easements in the immediate future. Parties
Conservation Direct Use Application, Clean in violation of the Conservation District
Water Act dredge and fill permit, NPDES Rules will be given the option of paying
permit. Water Quality Certification, Coastal the levied fine, and a schedule of fees.and
Zone Management consistency certification, accepting a short-term revocable easement. •
Right -of -Entry Authorization. and an or having the offending structure (or
Environmental Assessment or Environmental portion) removed. One avenue for
• Impact Statement at the state and federal level. developing a fine and fee schedule can be
The regulatory scheme designed to protect the the use of estimates of avoided cost on the
environment creates an incentive for part of the landowner.
landowners to select options that are less
environmentally friendly." 9. Build Consensus. Collected fines should
be used to fund the implementation of
6. Implement an improved technical basis CLP programs by paying costs related [o
for decision- making as outlined in earlier bringing together officials, and parties
recommendations. This should be the goal from all levels of Hawaii with overlapping
of all agencies concerned with coastal concerns in the coastal zone, to reach
• management in Hawaii. - consensus on a future administrative
u) establish and enhance scientific and direction within the general framework of
engineering research for the purpose he CLP. Parties that participate in this
of gathering data on shoreline change process should expect to assist in the
creation of a oli legislative package
and related processes, including establishing di erosion management
monitoring beaches;
system as outlined in COEMAP. At a
b) identify sand resources, and extraction minimum, the CLP should be staffed with
technologies for beach nourishment; - three planners with overlapping
responsibility for permit processing, but
c) define nourishment characteristics and who collectively possess expertise. in law, in
criteria: science /engineering, and in land
d) create GIS layers of existing and new management. Existing staffing levels in the
data; Land Management Division of DLNR are
overburdened and should be augmented
e) instigate economic analysis to develop with additional positions for CLP efforts.
economic policies:
10. Special Fund for CLP Programs. Create a
f) identify and rank erosion hotspots Special Fund for revenues so that they
where there are critical management may be used to implement COEMAP
concerns, and delineate the appropriate recommendations and CLP plans and
technical approach to their improved objectives.
mana_emenr.
I1. Publicize the New Policy. The policy or
no tolerance. the policy of fines and
58
•
Department of Land and Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Mamagement Plan - COEMAP
revocable easements, the distribution of ecology, and view planes of the coast. as
this report, and the solicitation of Federal, well as countering the incidence of short -
county and community. group involvement term. event- related erosion. Landowners
in the planning process and the creation of will need to design the interim protection
a legislative package, should occur using site - specific factors and professional
simultaneously in the form of a press assistance, as well as submit an EA or
release and press conference. CDUA (perhaps following emergency
rules if necessary). OEQC guidelines EA
12. Identify Federal Funding Sources. content should be adopted. Fill for the
Identify sources of Federal money that can system should be sand with native
be utilized to improve beach and dune characteristics with a low percentage of
conservation and restoration, and hazard fines. Preferably, administrative conditions
reduction in Hawaii. Specifically, monies for offshore, or coastal plain sand mining
that can be applied to beach nourishment can be implemented for these purposes in
and /or coastal land acquisition. response to emergency requests.
13. Review Management Plans. Review all 18. Implementing Beach Nourishment. Plans.
state and county beach parks and assess Conditions, directions, and plans should be
management plans at those sites. made for moving forward with a pilot
14. Distribution of Report. Circulate this beach nourishment project that has a high
document to county and other state probability of success. Beach nourishment
authorities for comment. projects should be accompanied by
planning studies that identify future
15. Public Awareness Campaign. Develop alternatives for continued hazard reduction
and initiate a public awareness campaign, and beach and dune preservation under
including —a poster for display at libraries realistic scenarios of erosion trends, spa
and schools; a teaching module for level rise and upland development.
elementary and high school science
classes; seminars to legislative committees 19. Small -Scale Nourishment. Implement a
and the general legislative membership; a small -scale beach and dune restoration
short video (5 -15 minutes) for use by program under CDUA authority and
neighborhood boards and citizens groups; through the COE – SPGP.
media field trips. 20. Evaluate Viability of Concepts. A
16. Community Input. Specifically approach planning analysis should be conducted at
land owner groups, community groups, an erosion hotspot to evaluate the viability
coastal user groups. . and the commercial of concepts described in this report as a
development sector with education means of erosion management on the
materials. and a request for input assistance Hawaiian coast. The analysis should focus
in developing solutions. on TMK -GIS applications of the
Ho'opono Kahakai concept and creating
17. Interim Coastal Lands Protection System. community -based performance standards
In order to meet the needs of landowners (Ho'olaulima). The analysis should
with legitimate fears of erosional losses, a specifically assess technical and policy
temporary protection system must be applications of these concepts.
established with an assessment of the level
and immediacy of need, an evaluation of 21. Plan the creation of a Technical
he costs associated with no action. an Guidance Manual for eventual use by all
analysis of the comparative benefits of coastal stakeholders including agencies
preserving the public resource against the and NGO's to improve our system of
benefits of he andowner. These erosion and coastal hazard management.
judgements should be framed within the
OEQC EA criteria. If it is determined that
erosion mitigation is the preferred
alternative, then a system of temporary
components, accompanied by dune and
beach restoration using sand nourishment,
will be developed. Sand nourishment is for
the purpose of enhancing or protecting
and preserving public access. marine
59
U 6
Department of Land ONatural Resources, Coastal Erosion Management Plan • COEMAP
Technical Supplement, Part A
THE HAWAII COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT
PROGRAM
BEACH MANAGEMENT EFFORT
60
4
0 u
Department of Land and - Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Management Plan - COEMAP
THE HAWAII COASTAL ZONE HAWAII CZM PROGRAM BEACH
MANAGEMENT PROGRAM MANAGEMENT PROJECTS
Beach Changes on Oahu as Revealed By
BEACH MANAGEMENT EFFORT Aerial Photographs, prepared by Dennis
Hwang for the Department of Planning and
February, 1994 Economic Development and the Hawaii
Institute of Geophysics, University of Hawaii,
INTRODUCTION 1981.
Beaches are one of Hawaii's most important This report analyzes aerial photographs of the
resources. They are precious natural features beaches of Oahu taken over a period of up to
that provide recreational opportunities and 50 years. To determine whether accretion or
scenic beauty. Hawaii's beaches are critical erosion had taken place, changes in the beach
for tourism, the primary industry of the State, vegetation line at designated transects are
and are culturally important to the residents of recorded. •Transects are conducted at
Hawaii. Furthermore, beaches, dunes, and approximately 1,000 -foot intervals. The
offshore sandbars help minimize risks from vegetation lines of sequential photographs are
coastal hazards by dissipating wave energy then compared to determine the net movement
• which may otherwise damage inland property. of sand.
Beaches are also important as habitats for
seabirds. turtles, seals, and other animals and To characterize the sandy shore of Oahu. the
plants. report develops 5 classifications: hazard area,
chronic erosion area, unstable beach area,
One of the themes heard most often at coastal stable beach area. and accreting beach areas.
zone management public meetings is a It notes that areas classified as hazard, chronic
concern about the "loss of beaches ". Clearly, erosion. and unstable should be areas of
"loss or beaches" means different things to greatest concern to coastal managers. Also,
different individuals and communities. Some the report indicates there are too many hard
are talking about the literal loss of beaches by control structures on Oahu, and many
means of erosion that in many cases has buildings have been placed in areas extremely
• already reduced recreational areas and vulnerable to large wave inundation.
threatened property. In this context, erosion.
and legal and illegal erosion control structures. Recommendations
such as seawalls, are a concern. Others are Hazard areas
referring to a continuing loss of coastal open
space that they associate with particular L. Establish a minimum S0 -foot setback from
beaches or the construction of homes and the vegetation line for all new
hotels that block views along the shorelines. construction.
Loss of beaches also connotes reduced access 2. Prohibit new houses within the new 80-
to popular beaches because of new foot zone.
construction, leasehold conversion, reduced
parking or other impediments. It also means 3. Carefully analyze reconstruction after
increased competition among residents and destruction of previous structures and
visitors for limited beach space and buildings.
competition among different types of 4. Discourage the reduction of dunes or
recreational activities. berms for vista creation because of their
Some of these problems are addressed by the role in protecting backshore areas from
shoreline setback and special management large waves.
area provisions of the Coastal Zone Chronic erosion areas
Management (CZM) Prograni. However, to
increase our understanding of the problems 1. To determine rate of retreat. conduct
and issues and to develop mechanisms to periodic field or aerial surveys.
improve beach management. a number of Prohibit new subdivisions in [here areas.
beach management studies have been
conducted. 3. Determine the extent of setback using
local erosion rates and the life expectancy
of proposed structure.
61
0 a
0
0 0
Department of Land and Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Management Plan - COEMAP
Unstable beach areas
I. Avoid development in accretion areas to 2. Coordinate the counties in the
avoid destruction during the erosional development of a on -going system for
phase of the cycle characteristic of these beach erosion monitoring. This includes
areas. routine data collection, aerial photography,
2. Obtain appropriate setback for unstable computer mapping, and erosion rate
beach areas by adding the historic range
projections. (CZM Office — lead role)
of the vegetation line position and a buffer 3. Monitor and enforce erosion management
of 40 ft. , regulations. (Counties lead role)
Accreting beach areas 4. Classify littoral cells as stable or unstable
• through a program of data collection and
1. Generally, in accreting beach areas, there analysis and then determine appropriate
are no major problems. However, shoreline setbacks, considering and use
ownership of accreted land may be a and erosion rates.
• concern.
Stable beach areas 5. First, develop long -term erosion plans for
critical, unstable, and erosion -prone areas
1. No major problems exist in these areas, involving combinations of structural and
• except for tsunami and storm damage non - structural remedies. Second, develop
possibilities. site- specific management plans for these
areas.
6. Littoral cell erosion management plans
Hawaii Erosion Management Study, should include policies and programs for
prepared by Edward K. Noda and alternative management and financing of
Associates, Inc., and DHM Inc., for Hawaii physical structures that benefit private
Coastal Zone Management Program, 1989.
property owners.
The study provides a comprehensive overview 7. Streamline the permit process and clarify
of erosion and erosion management in Hawaii erosion policy objectives in federal, state,
as an initial step towards the development of a and local permits.
uniform method or regulatory process for the
implementation of non - structural and 8. Develop in -house expertise and knowledge
structural measures. of coastal processes and engineering
Numerous factors affecting shoreline erosion principles in government agencies with
management and regulatory
control are discussed, including coastal responsibilities.
processes. probable longterm erosion trends,
methods for estimating long -term shoreline
• change, shoreline protection/stabilization, and Oahu Shoreline Study, Part I. Data on
erosion management and regulation. Specific Beach Changes (1988) prepared by Sea
case study sites apply these factors. In Engineering, Inc., for the City and County of
addition, reviews of states with more advanced Honolulu.
erosion Y
management systems (i.e. Florida and
g
North Carolina ) are included. The study p roduced two products. The first is
Alternative shoreline stabilization mechanisms, a collection of 1988 aerial shoreline
fitting of shoreline stabilization alternatives to photographs and computer - generated images
various geological, land use and development from these photographs which depict recent
scenarios, and benefit/cost analyses are shoreline changes. The second product is an
discussed. A proposed system to improve update of Dennis Hwang's previous study,
erosion management in Hawaii is developed. Beach Changes on Oahu as Revealed by Aerial
photographs (1981). The 1988 changes are
Recommendations measured and summarized in tables that
include the results the of [981 report.
•
I. Develop a statewide approach to funding,
planning, and designing appropriate
shoreline erosion counter- measures in
Hawaii. (CZM Office- preliminary role)
62
0 ,
0
Department of Land and Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Management Plan - COEMAP
Oahu Shoreline Study, Part 2. Management Erosion Management Program
Strategies, prepared by Sea Engineering, Recommendations for Hawaii, prepared by
Inc., for the City and County of Honolulu, Oceanit Laboratories, Inc., for Hawaii
1989. Coastal Zone Management Program, 1990.
Shoreline setback and management The report proposes the development of a
recommendations are provided for each beach comprehensive database on erosion. based on
sector studied on Oahu. The management the analysis of aerial. photography using
strategies are developed by integrating the computerized methods for calculating historic
beach change data with existing land use data, rates of beach recession. Guidelines for
the extent and conditions of existing shore evaluating and recommending solutions to
protection, existing beach conditions, and erosion problems are also proposed. A list of
qualitative and quantitative knowledge of information requirements and a set of
continuing beach processes. questions that should to be raised in dealing
with site - specific erosion problems is included.
Beach - specific setback recommendations Other recommendations are to develop a
I. Extend shoreline setbacks to comply with comprehensive erosion plan and create an
recommendations of this report (primary Office of Beaches. In addition, a proposed
recommendation). mission statement, guidelines, goals, and
objectives for the erosion management
2. Review zoning along Oahu's shoreline program are discussed.
within the context of existing and
recommended setback provisions. Recommendations
3. Investigate the establishment of "beach Informational Recommendations
improvement districts." L. Establish a database for the coastal zone of
4. Review the provisions of the Shoreline Hawaii, including oceanographic,,
Setback Rules. topographic, land and water uses. •
5. Focus shoreline setback provisions 2. Use aerial surveys and a computer -aided
prohibiting development in the shoreline digitizing method for monitoring the total
sectors on habitable, protective, and other coastline of Hawaii, supplemented with
structures that might impede natural shoreline surveys at selected high -risk
shoreline processes. locations.
6. Monitor the shoreline more closely for 3. Coordinate federal._ state, and county
illegal shoreline construction. Amend the erosion management funding to develop a
Shoreline Setback Rules to establish fines comprehensive database for coastal areas.
for setback violations. Institute a program Planning Recommendations
for monitoring setback violations by
conducting shoreline aerial photography I. Define the certified shoreline and tie it into
every two to four years. survey monuments. Revise the tine
7. Implement he shoreline setback continuously to account for erosion. •
provisions with close coordination between 2. Simplify the permit process and inform
the DLU and the State Department of coastal land users of permit requirements
Land and Natural Resource (DLNR). in their areas.
Beach - specific management policies 3. Create a master plan for state erosion
management addressing the nature and
1. Set examples of shoreline preservation cause of erosion problems, problem
with City and County beach parks. assessment, and immediate, medium, and
2. Establish public rights -of -way to all long -term mitigative activities.
_ beaches to ensure public access. 4. Develop a comprehensive State coastal
3. Update the data in this report every eight erosion plan as part of a shoreline plan.
to ten years. 5. Consolidate jurisdiction and regulatory
powers of the shoreline area into one
agency. Establish a separate division
within an existing agency responsible For
•
63
0 0-
0 0
Department of Land and Natural Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Management Plan - COEMAP
handling these matters. The division Recommendations
would be responsible for:
I. Give non - structural remedies preference
a) periodic updates of coastal database; over structural remedies for shoreline
b) regulating shoreline uses in management on Kauai.
accordance with the coastal erosion 2. Remove illegal shoreline structures.
plan; 3. Enforce more strictly all regulations
c) conducting enforcement matters affecting coastal development and beach
relative to illegal uses or structures: • preservation.
and
4. Establish setbacks of no less than 60 feet
d) implementing beach renourishment or for Haena area and 75 feet for Hanalei
shore protection measures when Bay.
necessary. 5. Develop and update a shoreline structure
Resource Management Recommendations inventory.
1. Clarify and strengthen enforcement power 6. Create overlay Shoreline Special Districts
over the actions and results of coastal area as specified in the Kauai Comprehensive
construction. Zoning Ordinance for the Hanalei, Haena -
2. Delineate areas susceptible to erosion Wainiha, and Poipu areas.
damage from storm waves, surge . and' 7. Develop a Shoreline Special Treatment
inundation. Zone Plan for adoption by the
3. Create maps of the hazard areas and 8. Establish a 80 -foot shoreline setback for
inform public of restrictions on protecting the Poipu Beach Park area.
properties in these areas.
Aerial Photograph Analysis of Coastal
Kauai Shoreline Erosion Management Study, Erosion on the Islands of Kauai, Molokai,
prepared by DHM Inc., Edward K. Noda Lanai, Maui and Hawaii, prepared by
& Associates, Inc., and Moon, 0 'Connor, Makai Ocean Engineering, Inc., and Sea
Tam & Yuen for Hawaii Coastal Zone Engineering, Inc., for the State of Hawaii
Management Program, 1990. Office of State Planning Coastal Zone
The study develops appropriate management Management Program, 1991.
recommendations for Kauai shoreline areas, Approximately 66.2 miles of sandy shoreline
analyzes the impacts of these are included in the study. Aerial photographs
recommendations, and develops specific from different years are analyzed for each
shoreline erosion management plans for area selected to determine historical changes in
selected areas of Kauai. Aerial photographs shoreline positioning. To determine erosion
were used to evaluate historic shoreline and accretion rates, photographs were
• movements. Beach vegetation lines, waterlines, digitized, corrected, and compared. This
and selected features in Hanalei Bay and the report is in atlas form with a description of the
Haena - Wainiha area were digitized into a coastal characteristics, beach history,
computer- aided drafting (CAD) system. The backshore development, shoreline processes,
long -term shoreline change data are used to and beach usage; graphs depicting erosion and
develop shoreline management accretion rates between photographic dates;
recommendations. • and a diagram of each shoreline area. The
Legal, social, and economic impacts of both diagram of each shoreline area includes
the recommended regulatory changes to shoreline protection structures. 1988 water and
shoreline setbacks and the adoption of Shore vegetation lines, roads and buildings, and the
Districts as an erosion management tool are transect lines used for the analysis.
discussed. Shore Districts allow the Kauai Recommendations
County Planning Department discretion in I. For future monitoring efforts, focus on
establishing shoreline setbacks in these areas. areas that are not already committed to
Possible implementation mechanisms for the shoreline protection structures.
recommendations are included.
•
64
•
0
D
Department of Land and Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Man Plan - COEMAP
'_. Develop and implement a program to Recommendations
select beaches needing more frequent Short -term, cost-effective, low impact
and /or detailed monitoring.
strategies
3. For the monitoring program, select I Eliminate the 20 -foot shoreline setback
beaches that are eroding. slated for future permitted under certain conditions.
development. or already have shoreline
protection that might affect the beach. 2. Require a minimum area of 3,000 square
4. For every monitored beach, take a feet buildable lot area for residential
complete set of overlapping vertical and ' beachfront properties. •
low -level oblique color aerial photographs 3. Prohibit shoreline setback credit for
every five years. The low -level oblique property owners who acquire, through
photographs will help interpret the vertical land court and/or consolidation and
. photographs and document further beach resubdivision, accreted shorefront land.
dynamics. 4. Require a minimum setback of 60 feet for
5. Add new data on shoreline change to the new developments on vacant land. or
existing digital database. redevelopments resulting in a higher unit
count.
1991 Oahu Shoreline Management Plan, 5. Create a mechanism to grandfather illegal
prepared by Sea Engineering, Inc., and shoreline protection structures that meet
Barbara Moon for The City and County of criteria established by technical
Honolulu Department of Land Utilization, engineering and design standards.
1991. 6. Prohibit the use of 'vertical seawall
The report focuses on 31 miles of sandy structures in areas where this form of
beaches on Oahu that 1) are being developed protection is not wide- spread and where
primarily for residential use, 2) are high- future seawall requests are likely. Require
l i • quality recreational beaches that should be buried revetments or similar form of
preserved for public use, and 3) were private property protection, if necessary,
recommended in Part 2 of the Oahu Shoreline without complex permitting requirements.
Study for increased shoreline setbacks. The 7. Strengthen criteria for granting shoreline
study setback variances by stricter standards for
- I) identifies natural beach sectors that are proving "hardship"
high - quality public recreational resources: 8. Apply established administrative
alternative' strategies to P reserve enforcement procedures to violations
2) develops within the shoreline setback area.
i beaches;
3) examines potential impacts of alternative Long Term Strategies
strategies on existing residences and other 1. Amend the City and County of Honolulu
private land abutting the shoreline; and Land Use Ordinance (Article7) or the
Special Management Ordinance to create a
4) recommends government regulations and Beach Preservation District to manage
other actions to implement a plan beach sectors subject to chronic long- term
encompassing the most promising strategies. erosion or episodic and severe erosion.
Digitized maps showing all major features 2. Establish objectives for each District sector
were created for the 13 miles of residential and develop specific regulatory
shoreline properties were created. This study requirements for problems specific to the
predicts future shoreline positions and
provides information on the statistical sector.
variability of the prediction. 3. Adapt the existing Improvement District
approach to vulnerable beach sectors
necessitating public /private cost - sharing.
4. Establish and fund a recruitment and
training program for professional
monitoring and enforcement staff.
65
0 9 0 •
0 0
Department of Land and Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Management Plan - COEMAP
The Hawaii Ocean Resources Management along the shore and to address the erosion
Plan, Hawaii Ocean and Marine Resources problems of currently - developed sections of
Council, January 1991. the coast. The report found that, since 1928,
The Office of State Planning, as a member of approximately 8 to 9 miles (or close to I5%)
the Hawaii Ocean and Marine Resources of the sandy shorelines studied on Oahu have
Council, was involved in the development of disappeared or been negatively impacted by
the Hawaii Ocean Resources Management shoreline stabilization structures. The loss of
Plan. This Plan addresses broad ocean beaches is also occurring on Hawaii's ocher
management issues as well as specific ocean stands. • Beach loss has accelerated due to a
combination of factors such as sea -level rise
management sectors, including beaches and and hardening of the shoreline. The report
coastal erosion. The stated objective for P
notes that beach loss is likely to accelerate
beaches and coastal erosion is to develop an unless there is a fundamental change in beach
integrated State erosion management system resource management.
that ensures: 1) the preservation of sandy
beaches and public access to and along the • Beach Management Districts (BMDs) are
shoreline; and 2) the protection of private and recommended as an alternative to hard control
public property from flood hazards and wave structures. The three general forms of BMDs
damage. Policies and implementing actions finance the study and implementation of
are also included. The policies are listed possible erosion control alternatives. Other
below: states, such as Florida and Maryland, have
1. Establish and maintain a comprehensive
successfully implemented BMDs.
coastal shoreline survey, database, and Recommendations:
other research. 1. Establish an agency responsible for the
2. Coordinate County, State and Federal administration and management of"
erosion and beach - management efforts. beaches.
3. Exercise greater enforcement of laws and 2. Establish improvement and overlay
regulations, districts to help in the management of
4. Ensure the continued natural production
Hawaii's beaches.
of sand and assess the potential for using 3. Promote erosion control devices ocher than
beach replenishment. traditional hard control structures through
Beach Management Districts.
5. Promote an erosion - control structure
•
limitation strategy. 4. Distribute the cost of preventive erosion
6. Develop an active public participation and measures between the State, counties, and
coastal landowners.
education program to preserve and protect
beaches. 5. Develop an education program to convey
7. Maintain and develop access to beaches the problems of beach loss, erosion, and
sea -level rise to the public.
and along the shoreline.
6
8. a adequate dequate funding resources and 6. Enable the modification of shoreline
ersoen setback regulations through new
p legislation.
9. Plan for climate change, sea -level rise, and 7 Concentrate further research on the
emerging issues. monitorisng of beaches with aerial
photographs and beach profile surveys to
Beach Management Plan with Beach facilitate proper beach management
decisions.
Management Districts, • prepared by Dennis
Hwang and Charles Fletcher for Hawaii's 8. Investigate the prospect of using offshore
Coastal Zone Management Program, sand deposits as a cheap source for
1997. renourishment projects.
The purposes of the study were to develop a
comprehensive and coordinated management
plan to preserve pristine beaches while
allowing for "intelligent and safe" development
66
. $
v
Department of Land and Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Mana Plan - COEMAP
Beach Nourishment Viability Study, 7. Request the State Legislature to establish a
conducted by Sea Engineering, Inc. and dedicated fund for shoreline research and
Lacayo Planning for the Hawaii Coastal beach management activities, into which
Zone Management Program, 1993. revenues from fines. licenses. damage
This study explores the viability of beach awards, and permit application tees for
nourishment from offshore sand sources. shoreline - related activities shall be
deposited.
Hawaii's, and other states', procedures,
permits, and environmental assessment 8. Charge the proposed office on beaches
requirements associated with offshore sand with responsibility for preparing beach
mining and beach nourishment are reviewed. management plans.
Options are presented to adjust Hawaii's 9. Charge counties with responsibility for
management framework to facilitate rather establishing and administering assessment
than discourage beach nourishment by casting districts for private shoreline properties
regulatory requirements in a more supporting that benefit from shore protection projects.
role. In addition, the report reviews previous
investigations of Oahu's offshore sand
resources, synthesizes and presents the useful RECENT DEVELOPMENTS AND
data, describes an unsuccessful effort to profile PLANNED PROJECTS
an offshore sand deposit, and outlines a future
work plan for sub - bottom profiling Legislative Proposals
Recommendations: In 1990, a review and assessment of the CZM
1. Establish an office of beaches within the Program was conducted. Through extensive
Division of Boating and Ocean Recreation. public and agency participation, the CZM
• DLNR. Program developed the Recommendations for
Improving the Hawaii Coastal Zone
2. Establish a Department of Environmental Management Program 0991). This report was
Protection to facilitate more effective sent to the Governor and the Legislature.
administration of water quality regulations Although an administrative bill was introduced
relative to beach nourishment projects. to the Legislature in 1991, no action was
3. Repeal the section of Chapter 205A. iIRS, taken. A revised version of this earlier bill was
that enables the counties to prepare beach considered by the 1993 Legislature. The
management plans and extend their resulting legislation amended the enforceable
CZ
jurisdiction makai to the high water line,
CZM objectives and policies to include the
providing instead that the new state office following objective and policies for beach
• of beaches be the lead agency for beach protection.
management. Objecrive:Protect public beaches for public
4. Amend Chapter 183, HRS, and Title 13, use and recreation.
Chapter 2, HAR. to create a new subzone Policies
in the Conservation District for all (A) Locate new structures inland from the
submerged lands and beaches. Include shoreline setback to conserve open space and
distinct set of objectives for the to minimize loss of improvements due to
conservation of ocean and beach
resources, and regulations to facilitate non- erosion;
structural approaches to shoreline (B) Prohibit construction of private erosion -
protection. protection structures seaward of the shoreline,
•
5. Implement the "master CDUA" concept for except when they result in improved aesthetic
beach nourishment activities. Also, and engineering solutions to erosion at the
• •
delegate the BLNR's decision- making sites and do not interfere with existing
authority to DLNR's Office of recreation and waterline activities; and
. Conservation and Environmental Affairs. (C) Minimize the construction of public
6. Continue the research in shoreline erosion erosion - protection structures seaward of the
and beach management issues through the shoreline.
CZM Program, but transfer the lead role
for research to the proposed office of
beaches. •
•
67
0 s.
• Department of Land and Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Management Plan - COEMAP
The legislation also made other revisions to FUTURE DIRECTIONS
Chapter 205A. Hawaii Revised Statutes. that
will help resolve beach management issues in The CZM Program studies have investigated
Hawaii. Bills being considered in 1994 may ' erosion trends, coastal processes. regulatory
make revisions persuant to recommendations options and jurisdictional improvements. A
in a number of the consultant reports. The number of recommendations have been
Fate of die proposed legislation will not be developed to improve the management of
known until June 1994. Hawaii's beaches. Further, the Hawaii Ocean
Resources Management Plan objective, policies •
and implementing actions for beaches and
Section 309 Strategy coastal erosion provide a structure For Future
beach management efforts.
The Hawaii CZM Program's Strategy for the Hawaii's agencies involved in beach
Section 309 Enhancement Grams Program management need to review and digest the
includes a multi -year effort specific to coastal
hazards, including erosion. The proposed results and recommendations of the previous
program change is the amendment of Chapter beach responsibilities. Such work has already
205A, Hawaii revised Statutes, to incorporate been initiated. Through the Coastal and
changes to the objectives and policies related Ocean Management Policy Advisory Group
to beach management. and shoreline setback COMPAG), the CZM Program is leading an
provisions hat were proposed n he effort to coordinate and prioritize the State's
Recommendations for Improving t he Hawaii beach management efforts. Both State and
Coastal Zone Management Program. Work on County agencies are involved in this effort.
this multi -year effort was initiated in FY '92. For effective beach management, a single
The program change s scheduled For agency should be assigned as lead with
• completion in FY '94. statutory responsibility. This will prevent.
erosion management from stalling at the
Another proposed program change Focused policy level with no implementation. Also, a
on public access will also benefit beach strategy for management needs to be worked
management efforts. The program change out with goals, approaches, and time frames.
will be a new acquisition program that will
improve Hawaii's ability to acquire coastal Until his coordination, prioritization.
lands, including those areas which should not esponsibility assignment, and rategy
be developed due to risks from coastal formulation effort is complete. we do not
hazards, including erosion. This project will anticipate further beach management projects.
be initiated in FY '93 and will be completed in However, in the interim, the CZM Program
FY '95 expects to continue monitoring beach changes
on a periodic basis through aerial
photography and perhaps beach profiling. In
Shoreline Certification Issues addition, the CZM program will continue to
monitor and push for enforcement of and
Legal research on the requirements for compliance with existing laws and rules
shoreline delineation in Hawaii for relating to beach management.
construction setback purposes and to
demarcate the boundaries between private and
public property is currently underway. The
effects of natural erosion and accretion,
natural and human- induced vegetative growth,
and other human - induced changes on the
legal shoreline is also being studied. The study
will conclude with recommendations for
amending existing State statutes, and county
regulations if necessary. to alleviate the
existing confusion and frustration that occurs
during the shoreline certification process.
•
68
o
Department of Land Q d Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Ma Plan - COEMAP
Technical Supplement, Part B
Coastal Erosion and Beach Loss in Hawaii: Facts about beach
erosion and the new Coastal Lands Program at DLNR
69
s
0
Department of Land and Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Management Plan.- COEMAP
O
VI t Y yv � _ t N Iiii1i - s u _ i _ T= L s 1 I!tI ! 1111,= _ � q c 3 a � a y y F d �
s a 's 3
y . Y
1-1 —0 r s y \ -
bI I °1 y • 4 ty,
pPR a o e « . n - 21 z
n V 0 U ; , Y " 4 > d 1 . c
OLNR Coastal Lands Program
PO Box 621
Honolulu, H196809
Cnt
— . r .7.2- - c E' IIi J
i s:
7 ^a1ti, _ R v a z - ;" !pi
f. / � •61 ( r J l -. 9 z mo ;IA o_ - _ i - e ms £ s
r� fi i f� J 1
n
v a '._
o N o _ a ; � - `
_ v s c - �.,
g - 3 0 _ z 5.51 a R v .
^ • 4 7
70
Department of Land a Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Management Plan - COEMAP
-- • - '_ _ s
a _ _
2 = _ _
;
-
a ^ _ j
-_ a .j 3 9 4 L => o i - 2 i. v _
_ _ .2 " ▪ S c 5 - a 3 r .. c J - � 5 - _
P g , �., 2fi -, dhg5u L O OL C t] -_
_ � '. .4a = . _ e v , -- 5 " 5 , s _
u y o. a • , ig' a 9 A2.ti
..5E j v c_ .. 3 a
n. 2
= m n Y to •
3 c
a j o 4-5 _
.� _ `j j 2 2 _ 5 i e
1 - c
9 = =cc - - _ - _ _
1 , / .. F ' - £ " J T, 3_
cc E „ -0 J _
V s ¢ Y i = _ _ _ 1 ` .e c _
t:. 1 C =
L i 0 - a ' a - : ? - _
__ _ r ( I 6 2 6 E v - z- 0 o, c-
_ / 1 I i. O l'5-75 - _ . _ _ _
' y V i- a c ° t y 2 _ a.
-� / ' w i _ a - _ - _ _
P ° _
in a
2. z E 6 _ w? E o I w ? 4 £ a _ _
o P9 c _ 3 ac ja-
,, w
_ = v - a - . 2 2 , e 9 - 3 a �Y y 1
_ 5 _ - - 3 - _ !",2..,74 - ' a - _ ; . q _ y 9 T j o
3 = _ _ = a _ - P y
- - 11111: _ : 5 _ - _ _ 5 = - - - -
�. • t ▪ ° d 9 - ; 4' c w i_ - s
Y 3- v '� _ a 2 't Y a _ -
L v -
_ - 3 _ _ v - = 3 'n _ _ _ M - 1
71
•
Department of Land an'd Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Management Plan - COEMAP
Technical Supplement, Part C
Causes of Coastal Erosion and Beach Loss in Hawaii
72
a 4
Department of Land and Resources, Coastal Erosion Management Plan - COEMAP
INTRODUCTION The Big Island, because it is young and still
growing, has not achieved an equilibrium
In broad terms, it is thought that the erosion of balance with the underlying layers of Earth
coastal lands is caused either singly or in that support it. Hence. it is slowly sinking in a
combination by sea -level rise, wave and process known as Iithospheric flexure. The
current action, or sediment deficiencies. These resulting relative sea -level rise Were is quite
each are discussed below with regard to rapid, --l.5 in /decade (3.8 - 4.0 mm /yr on the
Hawaii. Hilo Harbor tide gauge).
Maui, because it lies near the Big Island, and
A. SEA -LEVEL RISE due also to the youthful age of Haleakala, is
probably also experiencing flexure. Relative
1. Global Sea - Level Rise In recent years sea level there is rising -1.2 in /decade ( -2.4
inany studies using data from satellites and mm/yr at Kahului Harbor).
tide gauges around the world have examined
the questions "Is global sea level changing Oahu and Kauai lie outside the area of
and why? At what rate is it changing?" The subsidence and have lesser rates of rise, - 0.6
answer to these questions is of significant in/decade (1.5 - 1.8 mm /yr at Honolulu
merest to all coastal communities. In the Harbor, Kaneohe Bay, and Nawiliwili Harbor).
ensuing scientific discussion over this issue a Of interest. Oahu is actually slightly rising,
few widely accepted opinions are emerging: although not fast enough to outpace global
sea - level rise. Oahu is rising because it is
a. Global sea level is rising This trend may passing over a Flexural bulge in the crust that
or may not be seen at a particular coast surrounds the subsiding area around Maui and
because the land on most shorelines is the Big Island' ".
itself either rising or sinking due to 3. Global Warming & Future Sea Level Sea
geophysical and tectonic processes. This level rise, considered alone, is not presently a
has the effect of increasing or reducing the
sea -level trend on specific shorelines, a cause for concern in Hawaii. Worries
process known as "relative" sea -level regarding accelerations in the future rate of
change. rise resulting from an enhanced global
greenhouse effect (that is, global warming)
b. Global sea level is rising in the range 1.8 have been expressed by scientists, planners,
;r
ro 2.4 nvvt/vr (nearly per near) 1 inch decade makers throughout the decades of
) and policymakers
This global trend is influenced by many the 1980's and 1990's. Scientific consensus has
factors, including the El Nino been revised several times over this. period
phenomenon, human water -use patterns on regarding how high sea -level may rise during
a global scale, • global climate change, the next century. The most up -to -date
thermal expansion due to warming of the projection of future sea level indicates a 50
• upper ocean. and the growth or decay of cm (20 in) rise higher than today by the year
glaciers around the world. 2100, with a range of uncertainty of 20 -86
2. Sea - Level in Hawaii Hawaii has a system cm. This estimate assumes that most of the rise
of tide gauges located on the islands of Kauai, will be due to the thermal expansion of sea
water resulting from radiative forcing
Oahu, Maui, and Hawaii that record (atmospheric warming), followed by increased
system fluctuations in sea - level. The tide gauge melting of glaciers and ice caps. The authors
system is maintained and operated by the UH of the same study go on to suggest that much
Sea Level Center. Analysis of these records,
provide rates of sea -level rise around the state
over the last several decades. A fascinating
° Muhs, D.
result is that each island has its own rate of R. and Szabo. B.J. (1994) New uranium -
rising sea level. series ages of the Waimanalo Limestone. Oahu.
Hawaii: Implications for sea level during the last
interglacial period. Marine Geology, v. 113. p. 315-
_
" Nerent, R.S., Haines. B.J., Hendricks. J.. 326.
Minister. J.F.. Mitchun, G.T., and White, W.B. '° Warrick, R.A.. Provost. C. Le, Meier, M.F..
(19971 unproved determination of global mean sea Oerlemans, J., and Woodworth. P.L. ( 1996) Changes
level variations using TOPEXIPOSEIDON altimeter in Sea Level. Chapter 7. i Climate Change 1995,
data: Geophysical Research Letters. v. 24. p. 1331- The Science oFClimate Change: Published for the
1334. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
' (d. Cambridge University Press, p. 359 - 405.
Department of Land an Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Management Plan - COEMAP
of the rise in sea level over the next century, coasts of Oahu " using aerial photographic
especially the first half of next century. has measurements that show coastal erosion
been set in motion by the dumping of occurring in the range of -0.1 to 0.2 m /yr
pollutants in our atmosphere by industrial along much of the shoreline. Examples
activities [hat have already occurred. include Sunset Beach (mean erosion rate =
4. Impact on Beaches Despite he 0.22 m /yr), central Ewa Beach (mean erosion
uncertainties or predicting future sea levels. it rate = 0.11 in/yr) and the Oneula shoreline
is felt by some researchers that the present rate (mean erosion rate = 0.12 m /yr). However, a
of rise is sufficiently rapid to cause coastal nearly equal length of shoreline on Oahu
t at significant rates' . One engineering shows accretion. Indeed the entire coastline of
retreat, suggests from 5 rates'
to 88% of the total Kailua Beach has a history of long -term
erosion (1.7 to 5.5 m /yr) experienced on some limited interrupted only by erosion events of
duration.
l
continental shores can be attributed to sea- limited duration.
level rise, and the remainder to net sand losses At present, coastal researchers are not able to
from the site. isolate the effects of long -term sea -level rise
However, along many coastlines other factors on the stability and dynamics of the Hawaiian
exert more of a control on erosion and shoreline. It does appear that the rather
moderate rates of coastal erosion observed o
accretion patterns than sea level alone. Beaches
are subject to continuing processes that tend to large portions of the Oahu shoreline are
emove material. if these processes are not consistent with the influence of recorded sea
matched or exceeded by supply processes,
level as predicted by the Bruun Rule.
erosion is inevitable regardless of sea - level. In their historical shoreline analysis of long -
change. Hence, sea -level rise is just one of term trends on Oahu, Coyne et al. "' compiled
many factors impacting beach behavior and, as statistics for 20 km (13 miles) of beach length
an isolated process, its relative importance on showing net erosion or accretion over -45 yr
beaches can be difficult to ascertain because of period ending in 1996. Measurements at 873
dramatic near -term fluctuations caused by sites, spaced 20 m apart along beaches on all
other physical forces". shores of Oahu, reveal a mean rate of change
Using the local tide gauge trends, the of 0 m/yr, a mode (most frequent rate) of -0.1
commonly used "Bruun Rule (relating in/yr (erosion), and a standard deviation of 0.4
beach retreat to sea -level rise) predicts a retreat she r. Approximately 47.5 percent of the
of -0.12 to 0.15 m /yr ( -0.4 to 0.5 ft/yr) on shoreline is eroding at a mean rate of 0.27
Oahu and Kauai". This perhaps, may be taken n e and 23 4 percent is accreting at a mean
as one estimate of the background erosion rate rate of 0._3 m/yr. Although the study only
due to sea -level rise when additional processes examined the beaches at Lanikai. Kailua,
of coastal ediment ransport are not Sunset. of eroding Ewa, and Iroquois Point, the
nfluencing horeline fluctuations. This number of eroding and accreting sites was
general rate of retreat is found along many nearly normally distributed. Hence, these data
indicate that although sea level is rising around
Oahu, either it is not eliciting a uniform
response in the sandy beaches, and/or there are
other processes that are dominant in
+' National Research Council (1995) Beach determining the spatial distribution of eroding
Nourishment and Protection. National Academy and accreting sites. These other process most
Press. Washington. D.C.. 334p. likely include, wave and current action and /or
Everts, C.H. ( 1985) Sea level rise effects on sediment deficiencies.
shoreline position. Journal or Waterway, Port,
Coastal and Ocean Engineering, v. I 1 L6, p. 985-
999.
Id.
Bruun- P. (1962) Sea -level rise as a cause of shore
erosion. Journal of Waterays and Harbors division.
American Society of Civil Engineers. v. 88. p. 11 7-
130. '" Coyne.: M.A., Fletcher, C.H.. and Richmond,
Hwang, D.J.. and Fletcher. C.H. (1992) Beach B.M. (in press) Mapping coastal erosion hazard areas
management plan with peach management districts. in Hawaii: Observations and errors. Journal of
Report for the Hawaii Coastal Zone Management Coastal Research.
Program. Honolulu. 192p. Id.
74
c 4 r
Department of Land and Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Management Plan - COEMAP
B. WAVE AND CURRENT ACTION the process of land loss by erosion can be an
Beaches change their shape in response to important source of sand to many beaches.
wave and current forces. and to sand Armoring. to stop chronic coastal land loss.
availability. To improve understanding of refocuses wave forces onto the beach in front
beach dynamics. scientists and engineers track of a wall or- revetment. Beach erosion ensues.
these changes by measuring the profile, or leading to a volumetric loss of sand that
cross- section, of the beach ". produces beach narrowing, and eventually
1. Seasonal Profile Changes Beaches get beach loss.
sand from both the ocean and the land. Ocean 3. Local Variability Waves are the key
currents can move sand along the coast to players in the process of coastal retreat
build beaches. Dunes and other landward sand
deposits give sand to a beach in response to Seasonal beach profile
the forces of wind and waves. High waves will adjustments .
cause a beach to change its shape. or profile,
by redistributing sands across the shoreline Dunes Normal beach profile
(see diagram). To absorb high wave energy, •
beaches and dunes give up sand to the waves.
•
which carry it seaward and drop it on the Beach
bottom. This raises the seatloor and flattens . Coastal dunes , • the overall profile of the beach. Waves then - andeeach
shoal and break further offshore, minimizing
their erosive impact. This typically happens in .
response to seasonal shifts in wave energy. •
Beaches recover from these natural changes Adjustment for large waves
when smaller waves move the sand back onto 4 di
the beach'' and winds blow it into the dunes to Dunes
be captured by coastal vegetation. and beach
2. Chronic Erosion Erosion caused by eieasesand .
repeated episodes of high wave attack is sand moves -
typically focused on the upland immediately offshore
behind the beach, constantly drawing upon
sand stores there to feed the profile changes New dunes Recovery
occurring. Along most Hawaiian shores. sands
stored in dunes and fossil shorelines are . .
moved onto the beach by this process. Beaches •
benefit from this source of sand so that they
remain wide and healthy even as the land sand returns
behind them erodes. Chronic erosion. then, to beach
causes land loss but not beach loss. Studies are
underway at the University of Hawaii to more -
exactly quantify the source and variation of Large waves, which tend to occur seasonally
beach sands'''. Nonetheless, it is apparent that
in Hawaii, cause a beach to temporarily
change its profile.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Coastal because they are able to reach high onto the
Engineering Technical Notes 11 - 2, 11 - 8. U - 13. 11 -16. beach and into the dunes during certain
11 -20. [[ - 26. I[ -30. [1 -31, 11 -38. [1 -39, 11 -40. Coastal seasons of the year when they are at their
and Hydraulics Laboratory, Vicksburg. maximum height.
'' Dail. H.J.. Merrifield. M.A., and Bevis, M. On the north shores of .the islands, waves are
(manuscript) Steep beach morphology changes due to highest in the winter because they are
energetic wave forcing: Waimea Bay. Oahu. UH generated by distant storms in the Northern
Department of Oceanography, 3 l p. Pacific. On the south shores they are highest in
' Harney. J.N.. and Fletcher. C.H. ( I998)
Composition, and distribution of sediments in Kailua
' Bar. Oahu. Hawaii. First Regional Cunfcrence on Pacific islands. Abstracts with Programs. University
Cuabwl EruNion Munagcnunt in Hawaii and other of Hawaii Sea Grant College Program.
7 i
•
e 4 0
Department of Land and Resources, Coastal Erasion Management Plan - COEMAP
•
the summer because they are generated by for community decision - making. Analysis of
storms in the Southern Hemisphere. On the littoral cell sediment processes and budgets is
windward shores, high waves are generated by also critical to implementing a sustainable
strong tradewinds and by a mix of tradewinds program of dune and beach restoration and
and large north or south waves that wrap nourishment
around the coastline. The leeward shores are
typically hidden from tradewinds, but can
experience the wrap around of both south and C. SEDIMENT DEFICIENCIES
north waves in their respective seasons.
There are situations that call for human
Many local features combine to determine the interference with patterns of sand flow and
pattern and process of wave action on our accumulation. These include clearing storm
shores: the presence of reefs and offshore drainage channel mouths, dredging harbors
channels, the orientation of the coast to the and boat basins, widening harbors or
prevailing winds and the approach of distant extending breakwaters, crossing the shoreline
waves, the offshore depth variability, and with outfall pipes, or cutting new channels.
short -term weather systems that drive wave - These and other activities that are common on
generating winds in unusual ways. Waves that the Hawaiian shoreline have the potential to
approach our shores from an angle are cause sediment deficiencies along adjacent
capable of causing currents that Clow along the beaches. It is important to conduct a careful
coast, known as "longshore currents." These . assessment of dynamics and patterns on the
can move sand from one end of a beach to shoreline in question in order to minimize
another. impacts to coastal resources. Moderate erosion
Sometimes it is local wilds that generate waves trends can be exacerbated, and accreting
which in turn drive longshore currents. For coastlines caused to erode, by poorly
•
nstance, in Kailua Bay, the passage of cold conceived civil works projects on the coast char
fronts in the winter can drive strong winds trap sand or alter it's movement.
from the north that cause sand accretion along 1. Past Sand Mining In the past, Hawaii's
the southern end of Kailua Beach. The beaches have been subjected to sand mining
beaches of south Maui are influenced by for lime processing. The calcareous sand
tradewind- driven flow so that sand typically (CaCO is baked to release carbon dioxide
moves to the south. But when intense "Kona and produce simple lime (CaO) for use as a
storms" from the south and west occur there, building - material. Past mining sites include
sands are driven to the north in large Baldwin Beach Park and Sugar Cove on Maui,
quantities. Alternatively, the beaches of the and Kahuku beach and Waimea Bay on Oahu.
Waianae coast on Oahu experience longshore Old photographs of the beach at Waimea Bay
currents to the southeast driven by waves, not show the popular "jump rock" completely
winds, approaching from the north in the surrounded by sand where today it is offshore
winter, and reversing currents to the north, of the beach in moderately shallow water.
driven by southerly waves in the summer. Sand mining that ended there in 1965 is in
4. Improved Understanding Studies of these large part responsible for the retreat of both
highly variable local patterns of wind and wave the vegetation line and the beach foreshore
dynamics can be important keys to dispelling
over recent decades. With the end of sand
misunderstandings of beach processes, and mining, the beach is now stable, although it
unlocking effective management tools for does experience dramatic seasonal and shorter
coastal and conservation and beach term profile fluctuations in response to large
preservation. In the myriad coastal settings of winter waves °.
Hawaii. any knowledge that increases our Sand mining will result in obvious negative
insight to sand movement caused by wave and impacts to beaches by decreasing sand
current action along the shoreline can also
play a significant role in consensus building
' National Research Council (1995) Beach
Nourishment and Protection. National Academy
' for example. Noda. E.K. (1989) Hawaii Erosion Press. Washington, D.C., 334p.
Management Study. for Coastal Zone Management " Dail, 111., Merrifield, M.A., and Bevis, M.
Program, 1989: Noda. E.K.. Moon, 0 'Connor, Tam (manuscript) Steep beach morphology changes due to
& Yuen ( 1990) Kauai Shoreline Erosion Management energetic wave forcing: Waimea Bay. Oahu. UH
Swdv. for Coastal Zone Management Program. Department of Oceanography. 31 p.
76 .
Department of Land an Natural Resources, Coastal Erosion Mairagement Plan - COEMAP
•
volumes. steepening the morphology of the the Hawaiian coast. Our dune ecologies have
shoreline. and reducing the ability of profiles been decimated by common landscaping
to respond to seasonal wave stresses. Although practices "' that do not seek enhancement of
presently outlawed in Hawaii. there are the endemic environment. do not recognize
occasional requests to mine remote beaches the value of salt tolerant vegetation as a tool
that are perceived as being of low for beach and dune preservation, and do not
socioeconomic value and high sand volume. establish dune conservation as a goal of the
2. Sand Behind Walls Sediment impoundment landscaping effort.
accompanies coastal armoring ". Sands that Soil filling to support short -grass lawns is a
would normally be released into coastal waters source of siltation to coastal waters during
during high wave events and with seasonal erosion events, and acts to compact and trap
profile fluctuations are trapped behind walls dune sands such that the adjacent beach
and revetments and prevented from adding to experiences "deflation," or a lowering of
the beach sediment budget. One wall may have elevation due to sand removal by waves
minimal impact, but along many Hawaiian without replacement by dune sand. Deflated
coastlines a myriad of armoring types beaches fronting Filled dunes provide poor
combine to reduce sand availability to nearly erosion buffering capabilities and are
zero. Natural coastal erosion does not damage themselves a degraded environment with little
beaches that have access to a robust sediment to offer the normal coastal ecosystem and its
budget. Beaches on chronically eroding coasts host of organisms with beach - dependent •
that are not armored remain healthy even lifestages (turtles, various marine larvae, certairi
during shoreline retreat because sands are reef fishes).
released from eroding coastal lands that 4, Channelization Many streams that flow
nourish the adjoining beach. Armoring traps intermittently from our mountains to the coast
those sands and a sediment deficiency are subject to flash - flooding during heavy
develops such that the beach does not rainfall events. To prevent coastal zone
withstand seasonal wave stresses and begins to flooding, the most hazardous of these streams
narrow with time. Chronic beach erosion and have been channelized into concrete canals or
beach loss eventually results. Many beaches
gutters so that flooding is contained.
disappear simply because they are starved of
sand. Where these open onto the coastal zone, the
3. Dune Grading Studies show Hawaiian channel mouths tend to trap sand that is
beach sands are composed of fossil material °. moving along the shoreline. The buildup of
and have been stored in coastal sediment sand within the channel mouths increases the
reservoirs for a period of time prior to moving upstream flood hazard and creates a sand
onto the active beachface. deficiency on the adjacent beach.
One of the most important storage sites for Public works departments often .clear these
sand is the frontal dune system that lines many accumulations and dispose of the sand in
shores. As already mentioned, armoring traps various ways, including trucking it off -site to
these sands. Additionally, the leveling and be used elsewhere (i.e., golf courses). Unless
grading with topsoil that accompanies housing these sands are returned to the immediate
construction on beachfront lots is one of the beach area, the long -term dredging and
most destructive practices taking place along clearing is nothing less than a sand - mining
effort, and it will have a similar impact on the
adjacent beach. This has the potential to
reduce available sand volumes and create
°' Pope, J. (1997) Responding to coastal erosion and chronic erosion where none previously
tlooding damages. Journal of Coastal Research, v. 13, existed.
p. 704 -710.
Grossman. E.E...and Fletcher, C.H. (1998) Sea In placing cleared sands onto adjacent beaches
level 3500 years ago on the Northern Main Hawaiian it Is important to be aware of prevailing
Islands. Gculo_y. April. v. 26. no. 4, p. 363 - 366;
and Harney. 1.N.. and Fletcher, C.H. (1998)
Composition. and distribution or sediments in Kailua "6 Fletcher. C.H. (1997) The Science and
Bay. Oahu. Hawaii. First Regional ConFerence on Management or Coastal Erosion. Hawaii Planning. v.
Coastal Erasion Management in Hawaii and other 18. no. 6. June. 1997. p. 3 -10: Fletcher. C.H. (1997)
Pacific Islands. Abstracts with Programs. University Landscaping to Preserve Beaches. Hawaii
or Hawaii Sea Grant Culle�se Program. Landscaping. v. 1. no. 4.
77
•
Department of Land ar,.�Aatural Resources, Coastal Erosion Management Plan - COEMAP
sediment transport patterns so that returned Where there is coastal armoring causing beach
sand can Function in a manner that will loss, there is also reduced public access to the
provide nourishment. To ensure this. it will be ocean. Walls on narrowed beaches have the
necessary to conduct a review of the ambient effect of privatizing the otherwise publicly
littoral processes and develop schedules of accessible shoreline. Under the public trust
transport direction around each channel doctrine the state holds beach resources and
mouth, with guidelines on the placement of access in trust for the public and is
returned sand. constitutionally bound to defend, preserve,
protect, maintain, and perpetuate that resource.
D. HUMAN INFLUENCE Because the state owns the beaches, and is the
trustee of that resource. it is the state that has
Perhaps more than any other cause, it is the fiducial responsibility to take the lead in
human interference with natural sand transport beach management. Hence, it is critical to
processes that underlies much of the chronic outline the available options to be used as tools
erosion plaguing portions of the Hawaiian in managing coastal erosion.
shoreline.
Localized reef degradation, water quality
deterioration that impacts sand generating
ecosystems, sand impoundment, mining, and
dune grading are all activities that are still 1 t 4 7 4 ..7 r
prevalent in our coastal zone although their
y am.
rue impacts are often not recognized. a —�
•
It is critically important that all individuals and
agencies that use or manage the coast conduct
_
an audit and assessment of their assumptions,:
ales, and protocols so that potential impacts •
J .
of which they are not aware can be brought to
light, and better management practices defined _
and brought on line.
The beaches of Hawaii are vital economic,
environmental, and cultural resources. The
�,.
beach environment provides habitat for marine �— �- •; -� . -r•t
and terrestrial organisms with beach -
dependent life- stages and is home to species of
indigenous, endemic Hawaiian plants. A sandy
beach provides protection from the effects of
storm surge, tsunami flooding, and large wave
impacts. Beaches are the focus of traditional Waimanalo, Oahu. Sand impoundment
and modern religious, cultural, and behind this revetment at Bellows Airfield
recreational activities. Beaches also are the creates a local sand deficiency. As a result. it is
basis for an essential visitor industry that responsible for -1000 ft of beach loss and
exceeds, by a factor of three, alt other dune destruction. and chronic erosion
industries combined when providing direct characterizes the coast to either side of this
income co the State. Tourism supports over structure.
one third of all jobs in the state. in Hawaii, the
environment is the basis for a healthy
economy. As characterized in one national
media report. "...beaches are Hawaii's bread
and butter..." (CNN. June 31, 1996).
73
st m ' t/�,
Department of Land ani~;datural Resources, Coastal Erosion Management Plan - COEMAP
Technical Supplement, Part D
Office of Environmental Quality Control (OEQC),
Department of Health —
Guidelines for Environmental Assessment
prepared in conjunction with an application for
shoreline alteration and hardening
79
•
• p
0 o i
Department of Land al Natural Resources; Coastal Erosion Mo tagement Plan - COEMAP
COEMAP makes the following recommendation - It is appropriate for state agencies,
specifically the DLNR and the DBEDT to adopt the following guidelines in their application review
process so that there become established, clear and consistent standards for decision - making along
the shoreline. County authorities should also evaluate these guidelines and consider their adoption
so that there is consistency between state and local agencies in the evaluation criteria for shoreline
projects.
•
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES.
Following are amended (Fall. 1998) EA evaluation guidelines.
Guidelines for Environmental Assessment prepared in conjunction with an application for
shoreline alteration and hardening.
It is the policy of the State of Hawaii under HRS Chapter 205A to discourage all shoreline hardening
•
that may affect access to, or the configuration of. our island beaches.
Any Environmental Assessment prepared in conjunction with an application to construct a seawall,
revetment or similar structure, or an activity that will alter in any way littoral processes affecting the
shoreline, should be accompanied by appropriate justification and detailed studies including, but not
limited to, the following:
1. Historical shoreline analysis of coastal erosion and accretion rates This should
include a description of all movements of the neighboring shoreline over at least the past 30 years.
This analysis should be based. at least in part, on aerial photographs available through government
. agencies and private vendors (Air Surveys Hawaii, Inc.; Towill, R.Nt., Corp.; City and County of
Honolulu, Coastal Lands Program, Department of Planning and Permitting; DBEDT, Office of
Planning; and the various planning and permitting departments in each county). The analysis should
provide a detailed history of erosion and accretion patterns using all available evidence. This analysis
should include descriptions of shoreline erosion rates, a map (with scale. north arrow, and title)
showing past positions of the shoreline in the project area, and an analysis of the causes of erosion. it
is especially important to describe how the project will mitigate the cause(s) of erosion, and avoid
exacerbating erosion on the adjacent shoreline.
•
2. Shoreline type A description of the nature of the affected shoreline. whether sandy, rocky,
mud flats or any other configuration. The history and characteristics of adjoining sand dunes, streams
and channels, and reefs should be included.
3. Site maps Submit maps with title. north arrow and scale. and photographs that clearly show the
current certified shoreline, revious certified shorelines, the private property line and the location of
P P P P
the ro osed structure. Any nearby public access right -of -way should also be depicted. Applicants
P P Y P
vertical aerial photograph usual) can be purchased at
should also include a color copy of a color ( (usually P
P
reasonable price from Air Surveys Hawaii. Inc.) that shows the project area and the adjacent offshore
region. The applicant may wish to identify important components of the project on the color photo.
Color aerial photos exist for most of the shoreline area of Hawaii and often clearly show important
geologic and geographic features that are critical to fully evaluating the environmental context. and
even the likelyhood of success. of a proposed project. Evaluation of an aerial photo of a project site
can be an important tool yielding significant information relevant to the applicants planning efforts.
4. Beach profiles Submit beach profiles that extend offshore at appropriate intervals along the
beach indicating the width and slope of both the submerged and dry portions of the beach and
showing major features of the beach. Profiles should extend from the mauka toe of the primary dune
(0 the offshore depth of closure of profile fluctuations (refer to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Coastal Engineering Technical Notices 11 -31 (11/93), [[ -g0. 3/98. and other relevant documents for
guidance).
5. Existing walls Submit an analysis of any existing nearby walls or revetments and their
cumulative impacts on the shoreline.
6. Description of improvements A description of structures and improvements (such us homes
or swimming pools) on the subject property. their distance from the property line and shoreline. how
50
Cl 4
Department of Land any: Islatural Resources, Coastal Erosion Mana Plan - COEMAP
they may be affected by the construction of the proposed hardening project, and the specific
teasibility of relocating them as a hazard mitigation activity.
7. Coastal hazard history A coastal hazard analysis for the area in question. This should include
any relevant coastal processes such as hazardous currents and seasonal wave patterns, including a
description of the recent incidence of damaging high waves. high winds or water levels from storms,
vulnerability to tsunami. and the best estimate of Base Flood Elevations and flood zone designation as
mapped by the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps.
8. Waves and currents A description of the wave and current regime acting along the shoreline
in question, including, a wave refraction analysis (one simple form of this analysis is to describe wave
crest patterns as shown in an aerial photograph), a description of littoral currents and their seasonal
patterns and the impact of the proposed activity on these patterns.
9. Sediment movement [f the proposed activity involves any action that may interfere with the
normal pattern of sediment transport along the coast, or alter in any way the morphology of the
shoreline or the resident sand volume, applicants must submit a description of these alterations and
their impact on shoreline processes including an estimate of the annual volume of sediment in
transport and seasonal patterns of transport, and whether these impacts may have any deleterious
effects on neighboring shoreline segments.
10. 30 year erosion hazard An analysis that uses annual erosion rate data to project the location
of the 30 yr erosion hazard zone as measured from the certified shoreline or vegetation line in the
absence of any shoreline stabilization structures. This information should be provided in the form of
a mapped line or zone, and accompany text descriptions. The analysis may be combined with items I
or 3. or submitted independently.
11. Photographs Eye -level (taken by an individual standing on the ground) photos of the site that
illustrate past and present conditions and locate the proposed structure.
12. Alternatives All alternatives to shoreline hardening should be thoroughly researched and
analyzed. These alternatives should include beach and /or dune restoration using sand replenishment.
retreat from the shoreline by moving existing structures inland, and a no action alternative.
13, P.E. Seal The seal of a Professional Engineer (P.E.) with experience in the area of coastal
engineering should be included with any technical plans for a shoreline hardening structure that
accompany the application.
The inclusion of this information will help make an Environmental Assessment complete and meet
the requirements of Chapter 343. HRS. Only after thorough study and analysis should any permit
for shoreline hardening be considered.
•
8I