    [From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]

    Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.
    coastal & offshore engineering services . research & development

    EROSION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
    RECOMMENDATIONS FOR HAWAII

    Submitted to:
    HAWAII COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
    OFFICE OF STATE PLANNING

    July 1990

    Century Square 1188 Bishop Street, Suite 2512, Honolulu, Hawaii 96813
    TELEX:7431404   MCI: OCEANIT  Ph: (808)531-3017 FAX: (808)526-1519

                                                                                                         C2A4

                                    Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.
                         coastal & off shore engineering services 9 research & development

                                            EROSION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
                                            RECOMMENDATIONS FOR HAWAII

                                                       Submitted to:
                                   HAWAII COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
                                              OFFICE OF STATE PLANNING

                                                        Prepared by:
                                            Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.
                                                    Honolulu, Hawaii
                                                               and
                                               Jan Naoe Sullivan, Esq.
                                                    Honolulu, Hawaii

                                                          July 1990

              The preparation of this report was financed in part by the CoastaL Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended,
              administered by the office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, NationaL oceanic and Atmospheric
             Administration, United States Department of commerce, through the office of state PLanning, state of Hawaii.

                               Century Square 1188 Bishop Street, Suite 2512, Honolulu, Hawaii 96813
                      TELEX.- 7431404      MCI.- OCE-ANIT Ph.- (808) 531-3017          RAX. (808) 526-1519

                                   EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

           The Hawaii Coastal Zone Management (CZM) program, through the

           Office of State Planning (OSP) , requested Oceanit Laboratories,

           Inc. to support the development of an Erosion Management Program

           (EMP) by analyzing relevant information and recommending program

           guidelines and objectives.    Additionally, we were requested to

           recommend a suitable method for the collection of coastal

           information (e.g., erosion rates), which would later become an

           integral part of the EMP.

           Hawaii's land-use process is commonly referred to as "complex."

           This holds true for coastal activities.     The present management

           program i's geared to address coastal erosion concerns as a tangent

           to a land-use process.    However, coastal erosion is not only a

           land-use issue, but a resource management issue.       Analysis of

           Hawaii's existing programs that manage activities related to

           coastal erosion revealed that the current regulatory scheme

           operates in a piecemeal fashion that gives rise to various

           problems, including: inconsistent management strategies; 'lack of

           uniform policy guidelines for dealing with illegal or non-

           conforming structures and encroachment of state-owned land; complex

           and unresponsive regulatory processes with overlapping regulatory

           functions between agencies; and lack of comprehensive planning.

           Planning for erosion management is further impeded from a lack of

                                            i

                                                   Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

           data on coastal erosion phenomena and land-use activities in the

           coastal zone, which hinders the effective execution of regulatory

           efforts.

           Recommended actions include coordinating federal, state and county

           erosion management funding to develop a comprehensive data

           collection program; develop a comprehensive erosion management

           plan; and consolidate jurisdiction over the shoreline area to place

           the bulk of the regulatory powers in a separate agency or division,

           e.g., "Office of Beaches."

           Many other states and countries have regulatory authorities that

           handle erosion problems.      However, each program is uniquely

           designed to address their erosion problems, which directly reflect

           on socio/economic values.    In places where erosion represents a

           large economic loss, proportional monies are spent on the problem.

           The recommended EMP mission for Hawaii is "conserve beaches and

           minimize erosion," which is sufficiently broad to accommodate many

           of the complex matters associated with the problem; however, it is

           specific enough to emphasize the need to conserve beaches and

           minimize the loss of coastal property through erosion. The mission

           is further clarified with mission guidelines, objectives, goals and

                                                   Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

          a proposed schedule. These details are recommended as a starting

          point for the development of an EMP.

          Erosion monitoring methods are a direct reflection of the tradeof f s

          between social and economic values. Various methods are available;

          however, costs very widely. In Hawaii initial information can be

          extracted from historical maps and aerial photographs already

          available. The accuracy of the results will depend on the accuracy

          of maps and methods adopted for information extraction.            The

          methodology most suited for Hawaii requires aerial photographic

          monitoring with ground measurements at places that are of high risk

          or high need. High accuracy measurements cost more, but are only

          needed in certain high risk areas. Initial data collection is

          expected to be costly; however, ongoing data collection maintenance

          will be considerably less.

          All erosion control management activities have strong social,

          economic and legal components.        Land ownership, recreational

          requirements, beach access and proximity to public facilities must

          be considered when evaluating impacts from a proposed development.

          It is important to realize that the success of an erosion

          management plan is highly dependant on the degree of public

          participation while evolving the plan.        Issues connected with

          erosion, e.g, rights of private land owners and potential legal

          involvement, discourage regulatory agencies. These tradeoffs

                                         iii
                                                    Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

          between individual rights and public benefit are unavoidable;

          however, a method to evaluate potential economic losses and gains

          to all parties involved, as well as other related mitigation, is

          expected to be a major tool for resolving these unavoidable

          conflicts.

                                         iv

                                                Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

                             T B L E 0 F C 0 N T E N T S

                   DESCRIPTION                                             PAGE

                   EXECUTIVE SUMMARY    . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

                I. INTRODUCTION    . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
                   A. BACKGROUND   . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
                   B. OBJECTIVE    . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .         2

               II. EROSION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM MISSION        . . . . . . .     4
                   A.  THE EXISTING MANAGEMENT PROGRAM       . . . . . . .     6
                   B.  ANALYSIS  . . . . . . . . .    o . . . . . . . . .    13
                       B.1. INCONSISTENT MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES         . . . 14
                       B.2. LACK OF UNIFORM POLICY GUIDELINES       . . . .  16
                       B.3. COMPLEXITY OF REGULATORY PROCESS        .  o . . 20
                       B.4. LACK OF COMPREHENSIVE     PLANNING   . . . . .   22
                       B.5. RECOMMENDATIONS    . . . . . . . . . . . . .     24
                   C.  MISSION BACKGROUND    . . . . . . . . . . . . . .     25
                   D.  MISSION  STATEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .      32
                   E.  MISSION  GUIDELINES   . . . . . . . . . . . . . .     33
                   F.  MISSION  OBJECTIVES/GOALS    . . . . . . . . . . .    34
                   G.  EROSION  MANAGEMENT PLAN EXECUTION    . . . .   o . . 35
                   H.  EROSION  MANAGEMENT PLAN SCHEDULE     . . . . . . .   36

              III. EROSION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM PLANNING
                   A.  EROSION MONITORING METHODS     . . . . . . . . . .    38
                       A.l. BACKGROUND    . . . . . . . . .     o. . . . .   40
                       A.2. MONITORING METHODS      . . . . .   * ' '  ' * ' 48
                            A.2.a. RECOMMENDATION/BEST METHOD       . . . .  58
                       A.3.'IMPLEMENTATION SCHEME     . . . . . .   o  . . . 63
                   B.  GUIDELINES AND CRITERIA FOR RESPONDING
                       TO EROSION HAZARDS    . . . . . . . . . . . . . .     64
                       Bol. ENGINEERING CONSIDERATIONS     . . . . . . . .   66
                       B.2. SOCIO/ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS       . . . . . .  68
                             B.2.a. INFORMATION NEEDED     . . . . . . . .   74
                       B.3.  RESPONSE TO EROSION HAZARDS     . . . . . . .   80

               IV. FUTURE MANAGEMENT CONCEPTS       . . . . . . . . . . .    88

                V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS      . . . . . . . .    o 90

               VI. REFERENCES   . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .      o . 94

                                                v

                                                        Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

                                       LIST OF TABLES

           DESCRIPTION                                                    PAGE

           TABLE II-1     PRACTICAL STATE REGULATORY CONCERNS. .         . 7

           TABLE 11-2     PRACTICAL COUNTY REGULATORY CONCERNS     . . . .   8

           TABLE 11-3     SUMMARY OF STATE/TERRITORY EROSION
                          MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS   . . . . . . . . . . . .     31

           TABLE III-1    METHODS OF.COMPARISON MONITORING    . . . . . .   62

           TABLE 111-2    EXAMPLE QUESTIONS TO DETERMINE DATA FOR
                          RESPONDING TO EROSION AND FLOODING     . . . . .  80

           TABLE 111-3    EXAMPLE QUESTIONS TO FORMULATE A SOLUTION TO
                          EROSION PROBLEMS   . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    82

           TABLE 111-4    EROSION ISSUES  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .     84

                                       LIST OF FIGURES

           DESCRIPTION                                                    PAGE

           FIGURE I    . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .      37

                                              vi

                                                      Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

                                    I. INTRODUCTION

           A. BACKGROUND

           In January 1990 the State of Hawaii Coastal Zone Management Program

           (HCZMP) issued a request for proposals to perform studies related

           to the development of erosion management recommendations.

           Thereafter, Oceanit Laboratories, Inc. (OLI) was selected for

           execution of the study; in May 1990 an agreement was signed and we

           formally began work.

           The Hawaii Coastal Zone Management Program (HCZMP) is based on the

           Hawaii Coastal Zone Management (CZM) law Chapter 205 A, Hawaii

           Revised Statutes.    Objectives and policies of the law address

           recreational, historic, scenic and open space resources, coastal

           ecosystems, economic uses, coastal hazards and managing coastal

           development.   other state statutes that authorize regulations,

           plans and review processes for activities that affect Hawaii's land

           and ocean environment have either been incorporated in the HCZMP as

           supporting policies and mandates or, in the case of Federal

           Agencies, are reviewed for consistency by the State CZM agency.

           one of the objectives of the CZM program is to reduce hazard to

           life and property from tsunami, storm waves, stream flooding,

                                                   Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

           erosion and subsidence.   Policies set-down under this objective

           include the following:

                 � Develop and communicate adequate information on
                   storm wave, tsunami, flood, erosion and subsidence
                   hazard.
                 � Control development in areas subject to storm wave,
                   tsunami, flood, erosion and subsidence hazard.
                 o Ensure that developments comply with requirements of
                   the federal flood insurance program.
                 � Prevent coastal flooding from inland projects.

           Information on hazard intensities, locations and land use

           constitute an important input (for purposes implementing these

           policies).   Exposure to oceanographic phenomena such as waves,

           currents, storms, tsunamis and sea level elevations as well as

           bathymetric relief of the nearshore sea bed, and the geologic

           composition of the land strip adjacent to the waterline, contribute

           to the potential erosion hazard faced by the coastal land. The net

           effect from these forces can be erosion of coastal land and

           flooding of low lying areas along the coast. Long-term trends in

           land loss is an extremely important parameter that is needed for

           effective policy implementation and to control development in the

           hazard areas.

           B. OBJECTIVE

           The purpose of this repozt is to recommend a uniform method for

           monitoring long-term erosion trends and to develop erosion

           management recommendations for the State of Hawaii that will

                                           -2-
                                                   Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

            support the establishment of an erosion management program.

            Specific tasks to be addressed herein include the following:

                 1) Revise the mission and evaluate and prioritize the goals
                    and objectives of the erosion management program.
                .2) Analyze methods of monitoring and predicting long term
                    erosion trends in terms of cost, accuracy and technical
                    requirements. The analysis will address applicability and
                    usefulness, within the framework of resources and
                    responsibilities of government agencies and compatibility
                    with previous methods used, existing erosion data and the
                    type of erosion in Hawaii.
                 3) Develop general criteria and guidelines for responding to
                    coastal erosion. Develop general guidelines that can be
                    applied for responding to coastal erosion under various
                    environmental, erosion hazard and ownership
                    circumstances. Analyze socio-econamic issues related to
                    erosion such as protection of public versus private
                    rights, and public access.

            During the relatively short time available to complete this project

            several meetings were held with the CZM office and other

            departments in the City and County of Honolulu and State of Hawaii

            to discuss the different problems faced by them while implementing

            erosion management activities and engaging non-compliance actions

            by coastal property owners.

                                            -3-
                                                    Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

                        II. EROSION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM MISSION

           The mission of Hawaii's erosion management program should reflect

           federal, state and county laws governing coastal resource
           management. Erosion is not an isolated and independent topic, it

           is one of several f actors considered in making coastal resource

           management decisions.

           Since there are presently no clear and direct goals or objectives

           that guide coastal erosion issues, actions on erosion related

           matters have lacked resolve and direction. Now, more than ever,

           there is a need to clarify and strengthen the state's goals

           relative to coastal erosion.

           Hawaii is an island-stat,e with an increasing population base that

           continues to place urbanization pressures on its shoreline

           resources. In areas where there are f ew usable beaches or where

           population densities are high, shoreline resources have become

           increasingly rare and valuable. Meanwhile, public dissatisfaction

           and concern over shoreline encroachment issues has increased.

           Erosion issues either directly or indirectly affect important

           social issues such as:

                 � Public access to and along the shoreline.
                 o Public recreational use of the shoreline.
                 � The loss of private or public property.

                                          -4-
                                                  Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

           Coastal erosion has often been viewed as a natural hazard problem.

           However, it is in f act both a natural and a man-made problem.   For

           example, the construction of a seawall or groin can permanently

           alter the adjacent coastline.

           Existing coastal erosion management activities are based on

           regulation of development in the shoreline and nearshore area,

           thereby limiting development in areas prone to natural erosion

           hazards.  Program planning has not kept up-to-date with current

           social concerns over shoreline uses, as well as with technological

           developments in the ocean sciences.      Over the years a greater

           understanding of coastal processes has developed, as well as the

           effect of man-made structures upon the coastal environment, and

           alternate techniques or designs for structures affecting the

           coastal environment.

           Hawaii's erosion management efforts reflect various pieces of

           legislation that address coastal zone management issues. Section

           205A-2 (b) [6], Hawaii Revised Statutes, states that one of the

           objectives of the coastal zone manageme   nt program is to "reduce

           hazard to life and property from tsunami, storm waves, stream

           flooding, erosion and subsidence." The Special Management Area use

           permit procedure established in Section 205A, Hawaii Revised

           Statutes implements the state's coastal zone management program

                                           -5-
                                                    Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

           through the regulatory process. Furthermore, the state's land. use

           laws act independently to regulate shoreline management issues.

           In addition to these laws, other federal, state and county laws

           have been enacted to establish coastal management regulatory

           mechanisms.     However,   despite the relative      abundance of

           tangentially applicable laws, only a handful of core agencies and

           regulations materially affect the management of Hawaii's shoreline

           areas.

           Since other reports have provided comprehensive overviews of

           potentially applicable laws, this report will not attempt to

           duplicate those efforts.    Instead, our focus will provide the

           reader with an overview of the primary regulations that are

           currently being used to implement shoreline policies that involve

           coastal erosion issues, as well as provide a summary of the types

           of problems that exist under the current management system.

           A. THE EXISTING MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

           The primary actions or approvals that affect regulation of the

           shoreline area are listed in Table II-1 and Table 11-2, and are

           further described in the narrative that follows.

                                           -6-
                                                   Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

                                       TABLE II-1

                           PRACTICAL STATE REGULATORY CONCERNS

                             DECISION-
            APPROVAL         MAKING       PROCESSING/        ENABLING
                             AUTHORITY    RECOMMENDATIONS    LEGISLATION

            Shoreline        Chair,       Land Survey        Sections
            certification    Board of     Administrator,     205A-42 and
                             Land         Department of      205A-49,
                             & Natural    Accounting &       Hawaii Rev.
                             Resources    General            Stat.
                                          Services

            Land             Board of     Land Management    Chapter
            Disposition      Land         Division,          171, Hawaii
                             & Natural    Department of      Rev.
                             Resources    Land & Natural     Stat.
                                          Resources

            conservation     Board of     Office of          Chapter
            District Use     Land &       Conservation &       183-41
            Application      Natural      Environmental      Hawaii Rev.
            Permit           Resources    Affairs, Dept.     Stat.
                                          of Land &
                                          Natural
                                          Resources

            District         Land Use     Office of State    Chapter 205
            Boundary         Commission   Planning           Hawaii Rev.
            Amendment                                        Stat.

            Five Year        Land Use     Office of State    Section
            Boundary         Commission   Planning             205-18
            Review                                           Hawaii Rev.
                                                             jStat.

                                             -7-
                                                     Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

                                         TABLE 11-2

                          PRACTICAL COUNTY REGULATORY CONCERNS

            APPROVAL          DECISION     PROCESSING        ENABLING
                              MAKING       RECOMMENDATION    LEGISLATION
                              AUTHORITY

            Special           Planning     Planning          Chapter 205A
            Management        Commission   Department        Hawaii Rev.
            Area Use          (City        (Dept. of Land    Stat.
            Permit            council      Utilization
                              for          for Honolulu)
                              Honolulu)
            Shoreline         Planning     Planning          Chapter 205A
            Setback           Dept.        Department        Hawaii Rev.
            Variance          (Dept. of    (Dept. of Land    Stat.
                              Land Util.   Utilization
                              for          for Honolulu)
                              Honolulu)

           SHORELINE CERTIFICATION

           The shoreline certification procedure serves to standardize the

           certification of the shoreline statewide, and allows this certified

           shoreline to be utilized in implementing laws that affect the

           shoreline. The need for a shoreline certification may arise under

           several circumstances. For example, a certified shoreline may be

           required for the following:

                o  To obtain a boundary interpretation from the Land Use
                   Commission to determine whether portions of a parcel are
                   located in the conservation district.
                o  To determine what portions of a parcel are'
                   located within the shoreline setback area.
                o  To prepare a metes and bounds description of a
                   shoreline parcel for conveyance purposes, or for
                   purposes of applying for rezoning or a Special
                   Management Area use permit.
                o  To obtain building permits to construct on an ocean
                   front property.

                                             -8-
                                                      Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

           LAND DISPOSITIONS

           Land disposition issues may arise when shoreline str uctures intrude

           upon state-owned lands.    In particular, the disposition of an

           easement may occur where encroachments currently exist, or are

           proposed to be placed upon abutting state-owned lands.

           Administrative rules governing shoreline certifications were

           adopted in 1988 and have been effective as of December 1, 1988.

           The certification rules state that a shoreline may not be certified

           in cases where the owner's property or improvement encroaches upon

           state land   (Section 13-222-19, Shoreline Certifications).      The

           encroachment problem must be resolved with the department before

           the certification can occur. Certification may be suspended for

           example, in the situation where an existing seawall was built upon

           state-owned lands without any type of governmental authorization.

           The Division of Land Management is responsible for processing and

           making recommendations to the Board of Land and Natural Resources

           on land disposition items. This division has therefore taken the

           lead in attempting to resolve disputes of this nature that

           potentially affect state-owned lands.    Faced with the difficult

           problem of resolving these types of issues, the division has

           drafted and is utilizing objectives, criteria and guidelines for

           resolving disputes relative to shoreline encroachments on

           state-owned lands.

                                           -9-
                                                   Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

          CONSERVATION DISTRICT USE PERMIT APPLICATIONS

          Unlike the shoreline certification and land disposition processes,

          the conservation District Use Application ("CDUAII) permit process

          is directly tied to Hawaii Is land use laws.        A CDUA must be

          obtained to build a structure upon lands that are located within

          the conservation district.     Chapter 2, Title 13 sets f orth the

          administrative rules of the Department of Land and Natural

          Resources for governing uses of conservation district lands.

          The CDUA often comes into play in the shoreline area since

          generally, lands makai of the certified shoreline are placed in the

          conservation district.     In addition, many coastal parcels were

          originally placed in the conservation district at the adoption of

          the state land use law or during the last boundary review process F

          to place tighter land use regulations on the coastal areas.

          DISTRICT BOUNDARY AMENDMENTS

          The State Land Use Commission is responsible for reclassifying land

          to one of the four state land use districts - conservation,

          agriculture, rural or urban.      This boundary amendment process

          pertains   to coastal     erosion   issues   since   the   land   use

          classification of the property will ultimately influence the

          regulatory requirements that the property will be subject to.

          once the property is reclassified to the urban district, the CDUA

                                          -10-
                                                   Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

           process is no longer applicable, and if no state-owned land is

           involved, the state will have no further significant regulatory

           jurisdiction over the development of the property.

           Section 205-2 of Hawaii Rev. Stat., and Section 15-15-20 of the

           Hawaii Land Use Commission Rules, sets forth the standards that the

           commission must follow in determining district boundaries. Some

           of the standards that pertain to lands in the conservation district

           relate to coastal erosion issues. These include - providing beach

           reserves, preventing floods and sail erosion, and preserving areas

           of value for recreational purposes.

           FIVE YEAR BOUNDARY REVIEW

           Section 205-18 of Hawaii Rev. Stat. requires the office of State

           Planning to undertake periodic reviews of the classification and

           districting of all lands in the State. The first review process

           must take place within five years of December 31, 1985, and will

           take place every fifth year thereafter.     As part of its review

           effort, the office may initiate state land use boundary amendments

           which it deems appropriate.

           The last boundary review process took place in 1969. During that

           review, land use boundaries throughout the state were reviewed.

           Shoreline conservation was one of the issues that was considered in

           reviewing the designation of conservation district lands.        The

                                           _11-
                                                   Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

           consultants that analyzed these boundaries adhered to the concept

           of the shoreline as a zone rather than a line, and in many portions

           of the state a conservation district zone was adopted along the

           coastal area (Eckbo, Dean, Austin & Williams, State of Hawaii Land

           Use Districts and Regulations Review, 1969). The Office of State

           Planning is currently conducting a boundary review process.

           SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA USE PERMIT

           Regulation of the Special Management Area (11SMA11) was delegated to

           the counties through Chapter 205A of Hawaii Rev. Stat. Each county

           was required to establish rules and regulations to govern the SMA

           use permit procedure.

           The SMA permit procedure is applied independently of the zoning.

           The permit is required if a property is located within a designated

           SMA area, and if a proposed action qualifies as a "development",

           pursuant to the statutory definition of that term.       The SMA is

           defined as encompassing the land extending inland from the

           shoreline on maps filed with the county, or as amended by the

           county.

           The SMA permit procedure does not apply in all instances of coastal

           development that affect shoreline erosion.     The law does   exempt

           certain activities, such as the construction of single-family

           residences from the SMA permit requirement. In the City and County

                                           -12-
                                                   Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

           of Honolulu, most proposals f or shore protection structures are

           exempt from the SMA use permit procedure in Honolulu county, as the

           county defines the single-family residence exemption as including

           seawalls to be built on parcels containing a single-family

           residence.

           SHORELINE SETBACK VARIANCE

           The Shoreline Setback law established a state-wide setback        of

           forty feet from the shoreline, with a twenty foot setback from the

           shoreline allowed for smaller lots which met specific criteria.

           The statute essentially prohibited construction within the setback

           area, but established a variance procedure that was delegated to

           the counties to administer.

           The statute provides for the granting of variances in cases of

           hardship or public interest, the construction of shore protection

           structures for the protection of property and the replacement of

           nonconforming structures.

           B. ANALYSIS

           The current regulatory scheme addresses the management of shoreline

           resources and coastal erosion problems in a piecemeal fashion.

           This has given rise to numerous problems, which are identified and

           discussed in this section.

                                          -13-
                                                   Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

           B.1. INCONSISTENT MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES

           The establishment of shoreline setbacks, buffer areas or "no-build

           zones" are important tools in dealing with coastal erosion, and in

           preserving beaches and lateral shoreline access. Although these

           are fundamental planning concepts for the coastal areas, there is

           a lack of consistency and overall strategy in the utilization of

           shoreline setbacks or zones.

           For example, the 1969 state land use district boundary review

           process sought to establish conservation districts along the

           coastal areas to provide for added protection of the state's

           shoreline areas.     The conservation district boundaries were

           established based on four major criteria:

                1) Where a road or access way existed at the edge of an
                   agricultural use within reasonable proximity to the
                   shoreline, it was used as the boundary between the
                   Agriculture and conservation districts.
                2) Where a vegetation line such as a windbreak or rows
                   of trees more clearly mark the edge of the
                   agricultural practice, this line was used.
                3) Where the shoreline is bounded by steep cliffs or a
                   pali, the top of the ridge was used.
                4) Where no readily identifiable physical boundary
                   such as any of the above could be determined, a
                   line three hundred feet inland of the line of wave
                   action was used.

           Since the last boundary review process was completed, much

           shoreline land has been taken out of the conservation district.

           However, the concept of urbanizing land but retaining zones of

           conservation land along the shoreline area has still been retained

           on occasion. These conservation zones have not been applied in a

                                          -14-
                                                   Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

          consistent manner, and when they have been utilized they have not

          established unif orm zones. Areas contained within the conservation
          s .
           trips have not necessarily followed the criteria outlined above.

          Rather, development proposals have been reviewed on an ad hoc, case

          by case basis.

          The counties, in particular the City and County of Honolulu, has

          been grappling with the width of the shoreline setbacks that were

          originally established by Chapter 205A, Hawaii Rev. Stat.        The

          forty f oot setback has been viewed as being 'inadequate in many

          instances for effectively controlling coastal erosion problems and

          addressing beach preservation issues.

          The Department of Land Utilization of the City and County of

          Honolulu recently commissioned a study to develop strategies that

          would improve the management of the shoreline setback area [12).

          This study recommended the establishment of varying setbacks that

          were calculated based upon a probabilistic model that utilized

          historical beach transect data. This model provided preliminary

          setback recommendations that ranged from forty feet to over one*

          hundred feet inland from the shoreline.

          The department utilized this study to introduce an ordinance to

          establish setbacks greater than forty feet on specified beaches, as

          recommended by the study. The ordinance was opposed by residents

                                          -15-
                                                   Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

           of certain af f ected properties, and to date has not been adopted by

           the city council.

           Both the 1969 boundary review criteria, and the recent DLU study

           point to the need for a uniform method of establishing and

           maintaining shoreline setback areas.     This method must consider

           coastal erosion issues as well as other equally important coastal

           management problems.    Technical criteria should be utilized in

           establishing setbacks or providing for buffer zones in the

           shoreline area.

           B.2. LACK OF UNIFORM POLICY GUIDELINES

           Agencies that have the responsibility of regulating the shoreline

           area are faced with making difficult management decisions absent

           clear policy direction or cmidelines.       Permit procedures lack

           coordinated policy directions and approval criteria.

           For example, nonconforming structures such as existing seawalls

           present numerous problems.     Yet, there has been no consistent

           policy in dealing with such structures.

           As discussed earlier in this paper, the shoreline certification

           process requires that encroachment disputes involving state-owned

           land be resolved with the Department of Land and Natural Resources

           prior to certification.    Given the lack of policy direction in

                                           -16-
                                                    Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

          resolving shoreline disputes, the department drafted, and the Board

          of Land and Natural Resources subsequently adopted guidelines to

          establish some consistency in dealing with shoreline encroachment

          issues.

          The department's stated objective in dealing with shoreline

          encroachment problems is to protect, preserve and enhance public

          shoreline access and public beach areas.          This objective is

          supported by the following criteria: "If the encroachment serves to

          protect, preserve and enhance public shoreline access and public

          beach areas, it may be allowed to remain with appropriate land

          disposition from this Department. If not, then the encroachment

          should be removed.11      Recognizing the difficulties that are

          encountered in requiring an existing structure to be removed, the

          request was also made for the assistance of the Department of the

          Attorney General to pursue legislation as has been adopted in other

          coastal states, requiring the abutting property owner to remove

          undesirable encroachments.

          The department also adopted specific guidelines to govern the

          disposition of state land in shoreline encroachment situations.

          These guidelines allow dispositions to occur:

                 1) To allow repair work to be done on state-owned land for
                   existing seawalls built within private properties.
                 2) Where the seawall straddles the private property line and
                   the state land.
                 3) Where the encroachment does not prohibit public shoreline
                   access and does not take public beach area.

                                           -17-
                                                    Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

           Encroachment disputes may be resolved through the application of

           these guidelines. However, if a structure fulfills these criteria

           and is permitted to remain on state land, in all probability a CDUA

           permit will still be required.     Regardless of the fact that the

           encroachment issue has been resolved with one division of the

           Department of Land and Natural Resources, a second layer of

           approval process still exists in the same department within a

           separate division.

           After-the-fact CDUA's are processed in accordance with CDUA

           guidelines that are set forth in   Chapter 2, Title 13. In general,

           these rules are vague with respect to shoreline issues, and have no

           relationship to the guidelines that are used to evaluate

           encroachment issues.

           In addition, the counties do not use the      same guidelines as the

           state.    Under Honolulu's Shoreline Setback law for example,

           nonconforming structures in the shoreline area do not need a

           variance under many circumstances (25].

           A lack of consistent criteria to review proposals for new shoreline

           structures is also evident on all levels of the permit process.

           From the tech nical standpoint, the design of a seawall is extremely

           important and can affect the ultimate impact that the structure

                                            -18-
                                                     Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

           will have on the beach in front of and adjacent to the property.

           However, there are no clear construction or design guidelines to

           review proposals.

           To obtain building permits f or a house, building plans must be

           certified by an engineer and reviewed by the building department.

           The department would utilize standard professional review criteria

           f or evaluating the adequacy of the structure prior to issuing

           permits.   There is no similar method for evaluating shoreline

           structures and in particular, seawalls.

           The City and County of Honolulu had implemented a certification

           procedure to attempt to address this problem.       Rule 14 of the

           county's Shoreline Setback Rules and Regulations required that all

           applications for a setback variance be accompanied by a

           certification report from a coastal engineer.        The report was

           required to indicate that: 11  ... (1) the structure is needed for

           safety reasons or to protect the property from erosion or wave

           damages, (2) the proposed construction is the best alternative of

           several investigated, and (3) the proposed construction will not

           cause any adverse effect on or significant change to, the

           shoreline...

           The DLU faced several problems in implementing this certification

           requirement.     In particular, liability concerns of coastal

                                           -19-
                                                    Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

           engineers were so great (liability was high with respect to fees)

           that it became virtually impossible to find competent engineers to

           certify a design, with respect to compliance with criteria.

           Additionally, coastal engineering is a relatively new discipline.

           There is no license program.

           B.3. COMPLEXITY OF REGULATORY PROCESS

           The current regulatory process governing the simple construction of

           a seawall is such a quagmire, that many small landowners resort to

           the construction of illegal seawalls.    For example, a landowner

           that is simply trying to build a seawall may be subjected to

           obtaining a: shoreline certification, a Shoreline Setback Variance,

           a SMA use permit (not applicable in Honolulu), and if the seawall

           is in the conservation district, a CDUA.

           Many of these permit procedures are unduly complicated, time

           consuming and costly, particularly for the small landowner that is

           unfamiliar with the regulatory process. The overlapping regulatory

           functions between the state and the county, and even between state

           agencies in the same department, can present. an overwhelming

           situation to the general public.

           The shoreline certification rules have added to this jurisdictional

           confusion since the certification rules allow the department to

                                          -20-
                                                   Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

           suspend certification in cases where there are potential

           encroachment issues.   This suspension affects the entire permit

           process since the county is then unable to establish the setback

           line to determine whether a variance is required. The Office of

           conservation and Environmental Affairs is unable to determine

           whether a CDUA is required. The entire permit process is stalled

           until the issue can be resolved with the Division of Land

           Management.

           Problems with the shoreline certification procedure may also affect

           actions that are not being proposed in the immediate shoreline

           area. For example, suspension of certification may be triggered

           when there is a questionable existing seawall and improvements are

           being proposed on portions of the parcel that are mauka of the

           shoreline. These non-shoreline improvements may be affected since

           the suspension may affect zoning, SMA permit, subdivision or

           building permit approvals.

           The recent ordinance that was proposed to increase the shoreline

           setbacks on Oahu also contained a provision that sought to

           circumvent this problem.    The ordinance would have allowed the

           Director of the DLU to waive the certified shoreline survey for a

           development located more than fifteen feet landward of the setback.

                                          -21-
                                                   Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

          In 1989 Section 205A-45, Hawaii Rev. Stat. was amended to allow the

          counties to expand the setback area to include the area between

          mean sea level and the shoreline.     This area of the beach which

          extends seaward of the shoreline falls under the jurisdiction of

          the Department of Land and Natural Resources. Although to date,

          none of the counties have expanded their setback areas to include

          this portion of the beach, this statutory amendment raises the

          potential for further overlapping jurisdictions within the

          regulatory process.

          B.4. LACK OF COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING

          A lack of comprehensive data on coastal areas has stifled the

          development of a comprehensive plan for coastal erosion and coastal

          resource management, and has added confusion to the regulatory

          process.

          It would have been impossible to establish meaningful development

          policies and criteria for Hawaii's land use laws without obtaining

          an accurate inventory of the land uses in the state. Establishing

          a regulatory system to control development on the land, absent an

          adequate inventory of land use information would have been foolish.

          Yet, this is almost the situation that exists with regard to

          coastal erosion and in the larger picture, with regard to coastal

          resources management. There is no comprehensive inventory of the

                                          -22-
                                                   Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

           information regarding the type of issues that af f ect coastal uses -

           public use and public access, coastal views, and historical

           shoreline movement.

           The lack of a comprehensive inventory of shoreline measurements

           hinder planning and regulatory efforts. The shoreline location is

           analogous to the Land Use Commission's boundary maps. Without the

           boundary maps, the state cannot determine jurisdiction between the

           county and the state.      For example, if the property is in the

           conservation district it falls under state jurisdiction; if the

           boundary places it within the urban district it falls under county

           jurisdiction.

           There are many instances of illegal structures in the shoreline

           area.   Enforcement powers have been inadequate to address these

           illegalities and are hampered by the lack of comprehens        ive and

           coordinated plans with regard to shoreline uses.

           Landowners may challenge enforcement efforts through legal

           mechanisms. These claims are all the more difficult to prosecute,

           absent an overall justification for the action.             Without a

           comprehensive plan and supportive justification, enforcement

           efforts will be disjoint.

                                            -23-
                                                     Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

           B.5. RECOMMENDATIONS

           Based on the analysis of the existing management program, the

           following actions are recommended:

                 1)  Prioritize and coordinate federal, state and county
                     erosion management funding to develop a comprehensive data
                     base on coastal areas statewide. Necessary components of
                     the database are discussed in Section III of this
                     report.
                 2)  Develop a comprehensive coastal erosion plan for the
                     state. Since coastal erosion issues affect other
                     pertinent shoreline issues, the coastal erosion plan would
                     be one component of a shoreline plan. This plan should
                     consider the items that are discussed in this report.
                 3)  consolidate jurisdiction over the shoreline area to place
                     the bulk of the regulatory powers in one state agency.
                     The most logical way to develop this authority may be to
                     establish a separate division or "Office of Beaches"
                     within an existing agency that already handles these
                     matters, such as the Department of Land and Natural
                     Resources. The Office of Beaches would be responsible
                     for:
                        a) Update the coastal database discussed in item 1 on
                           a periodic basis.
                        b) Regulate proposed shoreline uses in accordance with
                           the comprehensive coastal erosion plan.
                        c) Conduct enforcement matters relative to illegal
                           uses or structures.
                        d) Implement beach replenishment actions or shore
                           protection measures, where necessary.

           These recommendations cannot be implemented unless the state

           decides to make the preservation of its beaches a priority. The

           recommended course of action will require a commitment of money and

           manpower.     It will require hiring persons who are technically

           competent with regard to coastal erosion and other shoreline

           problems.

           The most difficult recommendation to implement will be the        creation

           of a new authority. This action will obviously be controversial as

                                              -24-
                                                        Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

          it will require restructuring the current distribution of

          Jurisdiction that is spread between the various county and state

          agencies. Yet, without this consolidation, it will be extremely

          difficult to effectively address the various beach conservation

          problems that exist.

          C. MISSION BACKGROUND

          Erosion management policy decisions are the responsibility of the

          Coastal Zone Management (CZM) program, which is administered by the

          Hawaii office of State Planning (OSP). At present, the State of

          Hawaii does not have a coherent erosion management program.

          Erosion effects all of the Hawaiian Islands and becomes a serious

          problem when it occurs around populated areas, such as. parts of

          Maui, Kauai, Hawaii and Oahu. Sandy beaches are a resource that

          supports various sectors or the State; this resource is becoming

          scarce. Clearly, Hawaii would benefit from a comprehensive erosion

          management program.

          Many other states have CZM programs that address erosion similarly

          to Hawaii (approximately 29 states have CZM programs [23]).      Some

          states have gone further and have developed specific legislation or

          other mechanisms to deal with coastal erosion.         For example,

          Virginia has the Shore Erosion Control Act and subsequently set up

          the Shoreline Erosion Advisory service (SEAS) to assist property

                                          -25-
                                                   Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

            owners in preventing erosion (21].

            Nineteen states use direct regulatory authority to mitigate damage

            from coastal hazards.   Most states have established a threshold

            erosion standard of 1 foot per year to define a high hazard area

            [24]. Each state that administers an erosion management program is

            unique, and reflects a trade-off between social and economic

            values.

            MICHIGAN

            Michigan implements its management strategy for high-risk erosion

            through the following [24]:

                  � Identification of high-risk erosion areas. Only those
                    receding at a long-term average of 1 foot or more per year
                    are considered high risk.
                  � Designation of high-risk erosion areas. This includes much
                    community participation. After reviewing community input
                    and other relevant information a high-risk designation is
                    made.
                  � Implementation. Michigan emphasizes a non-structural
                    approach by requiring setbacks.
                    -  alert owner or buyer of shoreline property to the
                       potential of erosion hazard
                    -  setback is designed to protect permanent structures for
                       a period of 30 years
                    -  Building requirements. High risk designation requires
                       that the structure be setback a distance that would
                       protect it from erosion damage for 30 years.
                    -  special exceptions are made if a parcel was established
                       prior to high-risk erosion designation and lacks
                       adequate depth to provide the minimum required setback.
                       The parcel is then referred to as a "substandard lot."
                       A special exception may be allowed on a substandard lot
                       if the structure can be moved before it is damaged by
                       rosion. other special exceptions are also available.

                                            -26-
                                                    Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

           NORTH CAROLINA
           Over the last 50 years over half of North Carolina's coast has
           experienced average erosion of 2 feet per year or greater, with 20
           percent exceeding 6 feet per year. The erosion management program
           has the following capabilities [24]:

                  o Planning
                  o Regulatory
                  o Land acquisition
                  o Policy development

           This resulted in the development of a coordinated shore-front
           development program that has the following responsibilities:

                  o Regulates new development
                  o  Restricts shore erosion-control practices
                  o  Plans for redevelopment and relocation of damaged and
                     threatened structures
                  o  Purchases land for beach access
                  o  Develops public education programs

           The main  three goals of the program include:

                 1)  Minimize loss of life and property resulting from storms
                     and long-term erosion.
                 2)  Prevent encroachment of permanent structures on public
                     beaches.
                 3)  Reduce the public costs of inappropriately sited
                     development.

           North Carolina adopted a statewide minimum ocean setback for all
           new development in 1979.     As a result, the minimum setback now
           requires  all new development to be located behind the farthest
           landward  of these four points:

                 1)  Erosion rate setback, 30 times the annual erosion rate,
                     measured from the vegetation line, for small structures
                     and 60 times the erosion rate for structures with more
                     than four units or more than 5, 000 square feet total f lodr
                     area.
                 2)  The landward tow of the frontal dune.
                 3)  The crest of the primary dune.
                 4)  A minimum of 60 feet, 120 feet for larger structures,
                     measured from the vegetation line.

           Limited use that does not require permanent structures is allowed.

                                           -27-
                                                    Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

           FLORIDA
           In 1968 Florida initiated a comprehensive program for beach
           management in the Division of Beaches and Shores, Department of
           Natural Resources. Duties of this division include [241:

                  � Field measurements
                  � Research and analysis
                  o Permitting and regulation
                  � Beach nourishment

           To monitor beaches, the State of Florida installed a system of
           3,400 concrete monuments at nominal spacings of 1,000 feet along
           648 miles of sandy beach.       Shoreline change is determined from
           repeated profile surveys from these monuments.         Additionally, a
           separate program was initiated to establish a comprehensive data
           base of shoreline positions using historic information.

           A main component of the Florida regulatory program is the Coastal
           Construction Control Line (CCCL) that establishes the state's
           3urisdiction in coastal construction permits. The line identifies
           the limits of severe fluctuations caused by a 100-year storm event.
           This 100-year storm event is based on extensive data collection,
           including field surveys, aerial photographs, numerical modeling of
           storm surge and beach erosion. A Department of natural Resources
           permit is required for any excavation or alteration seaward of this
           line.   State law includes a 30-year erosion provision requiring
           single  family dwellings to be set back 30 times the annual erosion
           rate.

           In 1986 the Florida Department of Natural Resources proposed to the
           legislature a 10-year $472 million beach nourishment program for
           Florida's critically eroded beaches, which included $362 million
           for restoration and $110 million for renourishment. This amounts
           to an average of $2.6 million per mile (ranging from $1.9 million
           to $3.9 million per mile) to restore or renourish 140 miles of
           beach plus $24 million annually for maintenance on an indefinite
           basis.

           CALIFORNI
           California's coastal erosion as well as its management are complex.
           The major programs include: the California Coastal Commission;
           California State Coastal Conservency; Department of Boating and
           Waterways of the Resource Agency; State Land Commission; Bureau of
           Land Management; Department of Parks and Recreation; State Water
           Resources Control Board, etc.[24].

                                             -28-
                                                      Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

           The latest revision of the California Coastal Commission requires
           coastal localities to prepare their own plans for development
            'thin their jurisdiction via a Local Coastal Program. Priorities
           for coastal usage include the following:
           wi

                 o Public access
                 o Public recreation
                 o Marine environments
                 o Land resources, including sensitive habitats and
                   agricultural lands
                 o Development, with attention to concentration of new
                   development, scenic resources, and development in hazard
                   areas
                 o Industrial development

           The California Coastal Commission is the long-term planner for the
           California coast.      This requires in-depth research in the
           following:

                 o Consequences of the greenhouse effect and rising sealevels
                   for the coast.
                 o Long-term prospects for and implications of offshore energy
                   resource development.
                 6 Toxic and hazardous materials handling and spill cleanup
                   in the coastal region.
                 o Long-term land use possibilities and dangers for flood and
                   geographic hazard areas.
                 o Power plant development and siting.
                 o Shore erosion, especially in developed areas.
                 o scientific studies of existing coastal resources and the
                   impact of planned development.

           Because of adverse impacts associated with large coastal protective
           devices, the commission has favored the use of beach nourishment to
           reduce shoreline recession rates. In the case where structures are
           allowed, strict conditions and mitigative actions are part of the
           permit.

           Each state's ability to address erosion is a direct reflection of
           economic pressure, social values and political will. For example,
           California suffers from many complex problems such as toxic and
           hazardous materials, etc.     However, Florida created a division
           within its Department of Natural Resources, called the Division of
           Beach and Shores, that is specifically responsible for erosion
           matters.

           SRI LANKA
           In 1986 the country of Sri Lanka developed a Master Plan for Coast
           Erosion Management that identified erosion as the most critical

                                           -29-
                                                    Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

           problem in their Coastal Zone Management program. objectives of
           the plan include in the following [16]:

            � Manage the siting of development activities in the coastal zone
              - Define setbacks
              - Designate no-build zones
            � Halt coral mining in the coastal zone
                Identify means of rebuilding reefs in critical erosion areas
            � minimize impact of sand mining (on erosion)
              - Conduct research to identify alternative sources of sand
              - Conduct research to define sustainable yield limits
            � Ensure that erosion control techniques are cost effective and
              socially and environmentally acceptable
                Ensure that coastal works are built according to the Master
                Plan for Coast Erosion Management
                Construction in areas not designated as priorities shall be
                permitted only if performance standards are met
              - Emergency erosion control measures shall be constructed
                according to Coast Conservation Department guidelines
              - Research will be conducted on coastal processes related to
                erosion

           OMAN
           In 1986 the Council for the Conservation of Environment and Water
           Resources was established in the country of Oman. A Coastal Zone
           Management Plan was developed, including:

            o Establishment of general planning policies
            o Establishment of protected areas
            o Identification of specific issues, actions, and responsibility
              for implementing actions

           Erosion management was included with other CZM concerns.

                                          -30-
                                                  Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

                                                                                                TABLE 11-3
                                   SUMMARY OF STATE AND TERRITORY EROSION MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS

                                                  STATE             RECESS-      RECESS-      RECESS-      EROS ION     REF.     YRS.       LOCAL    ONE      FIXED    FLOAT
                                                  TERRITORY         ION          ION          ION           SETBACK     FEATU    OF         ADMIN    FOOT     SET      -ING
                                                                    RATES        RATES        RATES         EST.-       RE       SET                 PER      BACK     SET
                                                                    FROM         FRO14        FROM                               BACK                YR.               BACK
                                                                    AERIAL       CHARTS       GROUND                                                 STD.
                                                                    PHO     TOS               SURVEY

                                                  Alabama                   Y            Y            N            Y         MHW       NA        N        Y        N

                                                  -Alaska                   Y            Y                         N         NA        NA        NA       NA       NA           NA

                                                  American                  N            N            N            N         NA        NA        NA       NA       NA           NA
                                                  Samoa

                                                  California                Y            Y            Y            N         NA        NA        Y        NA       NA           NA

                                                  Connecticut               Y            Y                         N         NA        NA        NA       NA       NA           NA

                                                  -Delaware                 Y            Y                         Y4        TD        NA        Y        N        Y            N
                                                  Florida                   Y            Y                         Y5        NA        30        Y        N        Y            N

                                                  Georgia                   Y            Y                         N         NA        NA        NA       NA       NA           NA

                                                  -Hawaii                   N            N            N            Y         6         N         Y        N        Y            N
                                                  Indiana-                  Y            N            y            N         NA        NA        WA       Y        NA           NA
                                                  Illinois                  Y            Y            Y_           N         NA        NA        NA                NA           NA

                                                  -Louisiana                Y            Y            N            N         NA        MA        NA       NA       NA           NA

                                                  Maine                     N            N            Y            N7        NA        NA        NA       NA       NA           NA

                                                  Maryland                  Y            Y                         _N        NA        NA        NA       NA       NA           N@_
                                                  Massachusetts             Y            Y            N            N         NA        NA        NA       NA       NA           NA

                                                  Michigan                  Y            N            N            Y         BC2       30        Y__      Y        N            Y

                                                  Minnesota                 Y            N            N            N         NA        NA        NA       Y        HA           NA

                                                  Mississippi               N            N            N            N         NA        NA        NA       WA       NA           NA_

                                                  New Hampshire 1           N            N            N            N         NA        NA        NA       NA       NA           NA

                                                  -New Jersey               Y            Y            Y            Y         MHW       50

                                                  New York                  Y            Y            N            Y         BC  30-40           Y        Y        Y            N

                                                  North                     Y            N                         Y         DC  30-60           Y        N        N            Y
                                                  Carolina

                                                  North                     N            N            N            N         NA        NA        NA       NA       NA           NA
                                                  Mariana's

                                                  Ohio                      Y            Y            N            Ni        BC        30        NA       Y I      Y            N

                                                  Oregon                                                           N                   NA        NA       HA       NA           NL_
                                                  Pennsylvania              Y            N            Y                      BC        50+       Y        Y        N            Y

                                                  Puerto RICO               N            N  I         N            N         NA        NAI       _NA      NA
                                                  Rhode island              N            N  I         Y            Y         OC        30        N        N7       Y            N_
                                                  Sou         th                                      Y            Y                   40        Bt.               Y            N
                                                  _CaroLina

                                                  Texas                     Y            Y            Y            N         NA        NA        NA       NA       NA           NA

                                                  Virgin                    N            N            N            N         NA        NA        NA       NA       NA           NA
                                                  Istands

                                                  Virginia                  Y            Y                         _N        MHW_[     NA        Y
                                                  Washington                                                       N         NA        WA        NA  TNA           NA           NA
                                                  Wisconsin                 Y            Y            N            N3        NA  I     IIA       NAI        I      N            Y
                                                  Note:       1=setbacks may be established  within   2 years; 2=1oluff crest or edge of active erosion; 3=some counties
                                                  have setbacks; 4=has 100 foot setback    regulation over new subdivisions and parcels where sufficient room exists
                                                  Landward of setback; 5=not oil conties have coastal construction control tines established; 6=starm debris line
                                                  or vegetation Line; 7=2 feet per year standard. y,yes; n, no; NA, not applicable; BC, bluff crest: MHW, mean
                                                  high water; TD, toe of dune; DC, dune crest, toe of frontal dune or vegetation Line; 51, base tine. A blank
                                                  Teens no information was available.
                                                  most states have setbacks from water tine but not based on an erosion hazard.
                                                  "Managing Coastal Erosio      (221

                                                                                                                                 Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.
                                                                                                                                 J@A

           D. MISSION STATEMENT

           The mission of the successful erosion management plan should

           support an overall shoreline management plan and consider issues

           that pertain to coastal areas, including the following:

                    0  estimate current and future needs of the
                       community
                    o  protect valuable open space from unnecessary
                       encroachment and destruction
                    o  establish principles and standards designed to
                       achieve an optimum scenario
                    o  identify public and private actions necessary to
                       achieve goals
                    o  protect public and private investments from
                       erosion or destruction

           Hawaii is unique because its land use laws heavily interact with

           coastal zone management regulations to such a degree, that they

           appear to be inseparable. As such, a unique approach will have to

           be formulated for the state, tailor-made to effectively fit into

           the existing regulatory scheme.

           The mission of an erosion management program (EMP) should be broad

           to address the very complex issues associated with erosion;

           however, it should be specific so that direction and guidance is

           provided. Mission  guidelines, objectives and goals must provide

           support so that the mission is met. Objectives and goals should

           have distinguishable and measurable products, whereby progress,

           success and/or failure is measured. Goals and objectives can later

           be included in a coastal resource plan that will coordinate and

           regulate coastal zone utilization. The development, interpretation

                                          -32-
                                                  Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

           and execution of the EMP must take into account social as well as

           economic considerations, both with respect to execution and

           administration. The EMP will also provide reasonable guidance for

           future decisions with respect to resources and manpower.

           The following mission statements were considered for the EMP:

                1) "Protect, preserve and where possible enhance coastal
                    resources from erosion effects, for the benefit of the
                    general public."
                2) "Conserve beaches and minimize erosion."

           Although we clearly believe that the outcome should benef it the

           public, we chose mission statement 2 because it focuses on erosion,

           yet it allows for a broad interpretation.

           E. MISSION GUIDELINES

           Mission guidelines that further describe the mission statement for

           an EMP include the following:

                 o Areas with a high storm hazard risk must have adequate
                   planning to accommodate erosion.
                 o Retain as much coastal beach as possible.
                 o Retain shoreline in its natural state.
                 o Permit erosion control methods that will have the least
                   environmental impact (e.g., nourishment, seawall, etc.)
                 o Adopt a thirty (30) year planning horizon for erosion
                   cycles.
                 o Disagreements and other disputes should be resolved via
                   mitigation and dispute resolution methods.
                 o Special variances and conditions should be granted where
                   five (5) or more adjacent landowners share common problems
                   and solutions.
                 o Decisions should be made with the following order of
                   consideration; beach conservation, public access, public
                    recreation and marine environment.
                 o Information collection and management should be an ongoing
                   process.

                                           -33-
                                                   Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

          F. MISSION OBJECTIVES/GOALS

          Mission objectives identify the activity, group or condition that

          must be addressed. A variety of activities that cause erosion need

          to be controlled, addressed and in many cases stopped, including

          the following:

                 o Improper seawalls
                 o Improper groins
                 o Hurricanes and tsunamis
                 o High surf
                 o Sand mining
                 o Excess recreational use
                 o Fresh water and/or pollution on reef
                 o Excessive armoring coastlines
                 o Environmentally unsustainable development

          Various options are available to control erosion, including the

          restriction or controlled use of many of the previous activities,

          as well as the proper use of structures, nourishment, etc..

          Additionally, it may not be reasonable to stop erosion (it may not

          make economic sense). This should be part of the planned response

          to erosion in certain situations..

          Specific objectives of the EMP can be summarized as the following:

                 o Prevent activities that cause erosion
                 o Control existing erosion

          Five-year goals recommended for the EMP include the following:

                 o Information collection (e.g., erosion, boundaries, etc.).
                 o Public education program.
                 o Improve efficiency of regulatory process (e.g., office of
                   State Beaches).
                 o Develop EMP policies (e.g., setback scheme, monitoring
                   method, compensation).

                                          -34-
                                                  Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

          Long-term goals recommended for the EMP include the following:

                o Information collection.
                o Research (e.g., sand sources).
                o Enforcement system.
                o Information management.

          G. EROSION MANAGEMENT PLAN EXECUTION

          Execution of the erosion management plan must consider the

          coordinated   interaction   between   information,   planning    and

          administrative needs.

          Information and technology is key for the successful execution of

          the EMP. Information collection has two phases: (1) a short term

          data collection and (2) long-term data maintenance phase. There

          are always tradeoffs between the amount of information dnd cost.

          These tradeof fs can be guided from the rhetorical question: "How

          much information is needed to make a good decision?"         A good

          decision is one that adequately addresses the immediate problem and

          is always a relative judgement-call.-      It does not cover all

          possible cases. Technology has the same kind of trade-offs between

          cost and effectiveness.    An off-the-shelf design is always less

          expensive; however, it might not provide the level of service that

          a custom design would provide.

          Planning considerations must address issues such as land-use,

          infrastructure, setbacks, improvement districts, densities and the

                                          -35-
                                                  Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

           corresponding rules and regulations that would govern these

           activities.

           Administrative concerns are important for the successful execution

           of the plan. Fiscal planning needs to be part of the very first

           steps taken to construct an EMP.    Initially costs will be high

           because of major data collection efforts. Later, only maintenance

           and operation costs will exist. Administrative concerns will be a

           direct reflection of fiscal limitations and controls the number of

           individuals employed to maintain data systems, support the

           processing of related permit applications, and addresses the

           various legal and institutional issues related with the execution

           of the program.

           H. EROSION MANAGEMENT PLAN SCHEDULE

           The goals of the EMP include the timely execution of tasks that

           will support the mission guidelines and objectives.    Goals that

           should be considered in the development of the EMP are given in

           Figure II-1.

                                          -36-
                                                  Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

                                -2ul -valiolejeqrl )!uBa*o                                               -LE-

                                              0
                                                                                           a                                    C. a., i C.,
                                                                                                                                                   z
                                                               0      0                                                         0 cu
                                                               3      . ,     @ C,                   t cc
                                         0 is          at      'D  tz c       ; =
                                                                                                     17                             0              0
                                                                                                                                   Me           0
                                                       026-      o      m                                    z        00        0 ftI           z
                                                       40                                                                          10
                                                                                                             -Z          CL                  -0    >          >
                                         0 c                                                                         4@ z
                                         2                         zo                                                                                         z                   -n
                                                       .0      0              2    ft        -4                                 too =@       ?     -
                                                                                             0                                  C,     CL                     z
                                                                   c L        -                      0                   t                         0                   cn
                                                                                                     c
                                                                                                                                                   z          z

                                                                                                                     c              0
                                         P 0,          0 t     p   CL
                                                                                                                                                                                  CD
                                                                                                                                c   0

                                                                                                          CL

                                                                                                                                                                                  m

                                                                                                                                                                                  0
                                                                                                                                                                                  C/)

                                                                                                                                                                                  z

                                                                                                                                                                       M<         >
                                                                                                                                                                                  z
                                                                                                                                                                       N          >
                                                                                                                                                                                  G)
                                                                                                                                                                                  m
                                                                                                                                                                       M<
                                                                                                                                                                                  m
                                                                                                                                                                       Ct)        z

                                                                                                                                                                                  z
                                                                                                                                                                                  C0
                                                                                                                                                                       -CD<

                                                                                                                                                                                  m

                                                                                                                                                                       CD<

                                                                                                                                                            40
                                                                                               CA)                                                          CL)        0
                                                                                                                                                            0          0
                                                                                                                                   0
                                                                                                                                   0
                                                                                               0
                                                                                                                                                            0
                                                                                               0                                   0
                                                                                                                                   0                        0

                        III. EROSION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM PLANNING

           A. EROSION MONITORING METHODS

           Beaches are the natural boundary between land and sea, and are also

           the natural defense land has to resist erosive forces from waves

           and currents.     Beaches are either calcarious or sedimentary.

           Calcarious beaches are typically found in tropical and subtropical

           climates.     Sedimentary beaches are found in more temperate

           climates.

           Geologically, beaches are one point in the cycle of formation and

           destruction of sedimentary rocks and land masses. Sediments eroded

           from mountain areas far inland are brought to the coast by rivers.

           once at the beach, sediments are ground finer and finer by waves

           while being carried along the shore by littoral currents. When the

           sediments are too fine to settle in the nearshore area, they drift

           offshore and settle in the deep sea.       Sediments deposited in this

           manner build up over long periods of time into thick layers and

           metamorphose into sedimentary rocks.       Tectonic movements in the

           earth's crust push these sediments above the water surface to form

           mountain ranges and start the cycle again. Therefore, beaches are

           one point in the sedimentary cycle that marks geological time.

           Calcarious beaches are supplied from biological activities that

           occur in the nearshore area.          Among the various processes!

                                            -38-
                                                     Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

           photosynthesis reduces the acidity of seawater whereby coral polyps

           absorb dissolved calcium chloride and convert it to calcium

           carbonate. Millions of coral polyps living in groups form large

           coral reefs. The fragile portions of these reefs are broken up by

           wave action and are brought to the beach as a source of sediment.

           Gradually the particles are ground to f ine sizes and drift to

           deeper waters.   When these settle in deeper waters the slightly

           higher acidity dissolves the particles of calcarious origin. The

           dissolved material eventually reaches the shallow    waters due to

           circulation and are converted back to calcium carbonate by the

           corals. Other sources of calcarious material include grazing reef

           fish that snap and nibble coral and coralline algae.

           Beach sediments are sometimes carried into coastal lagoons by f lood

           tides and temporarily trapped as shoals or- sand bars.         Other

           sediments are blown landward and trapped as coastal sand dunes.

           During heavy storms when beaches experiences large waves, part of

           the sand trapped in the dunes is utilized to save land behind the

           dunes from erosion.   Due to the interaction of sediment supply,

           meteorological and oceanographic forces,        beaches   undergo

           continuous change all the time.

           Some of these changes occur over short intervals of time (up to a

           year) and are termed seasonal or cyclic.      However, longer term

           imbalances between supply of sediment and loss of sediment result

                                          -39-
                                                   Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

             in continuous erosion or accretion.      This can take place over

             several decades or even longer until a new balance is created by

             natural or artificial means. In the case of small islands far from

             continents, the sources of beach material are limited to the

             sediments brought by runoff from mountain areas and calcarious

             sediments from coral reefs and other marine sources.     In    these

             cases, imbalances can result in serious erosion or sedimentation

             problems. Erosion in these cases can continue until hard strata is

             exposed.

             Urbanization and settlement of coastal lands has added a new

             dimension to the instability problem.      Initially, beaches were

             believed to be extremely stable and would take any amount of abuse.

             However, the construction of harbor breakwaters and other

             navigational structures caused modifications to the existing

             coastal   processes   that   resulted   in   coastal   erosion    and

             sedimentation in undesirable areas.     Engineering solutions that

             followed resulted in hardening parts of the coast with seawalls, or

             the disruption of longshore sand transport from groins that caused

             erosion in downdrift areas. It took time to realize that many of

             the activities in the coastal zone upset the existing and delicate

             beach equilibrium.

             A.1 BACKGROUND

             The concept of coastal zone management was developed as a means to

                                             -40-
                                                      Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

             resolve the complex problems arising from conflicting uses of

             limited coastal resources and to conserve coastal resources for the

             future.    As a first step in coastal management, construction

             setbacks were established to control development activities in the

             coastal zone.

             MONITORING COASTLINES

             Determination of setback distances and planning for coastal

             developments depends on the potential -hazards faced by the coastal

             land of interest.     Hazards include erosion and flooding due to

             tsunamis and storm waves. In the absence of hard data, the

             long-term erosion hazard can only be estimated by evaluating

             coastal vegetation or by speaking to residents who have lived close

             to the beach f or a long period.        Comparing historical aerial

             photographs    with   recent    photographs    provides     qualitative

             conclusions based on coastal behavior.

             Shoreline changes that were of interest only to coastal

             geomorphologists now attract the interest of coastal zone planners

             and coastal engineers. Shoreline change information is also needed

             for estimating sediment movement, predicting effects of shoreline

             structures, and establishing setbacks f or control of development

             activities.    The types of information availablef advantages and

             disadvantages of methods used, based on cost, accuracy, technical

                                              -41-
                                                       Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

             requirements and institutional resources available, will be

             discussed in the following sections.

             HISTORICAL SHORELINE MAPS

             National Ocean Survey (NOS) topographic sheets are among the oldest

             coastline maps available. These are also the most accurate maps

             available for comparison purposes. They were prepared usually by

             field surveys, later versions were compiled from aerial photographs

             using stereo-plotters for rectification and plotting. NOS sheets

             can be changed and updated using aerial photographs, which are

             periodically available. NOS 'IT" sheets are available with a scale

             of 1:10,000;   stable points located on the maps are accurate to

             1/75 inch of actual position.      Therefore, the smallest field

             distance measurable in a map is about 7 feet to 16 feet for stable

             points [3]. Accuracy may be less for less unstable points such as

             the shoreline.

             Maps prepared by the United States Geological Surveys (USGS) cover

             a 7.5 minute square and are plotted to a scale of 1:24,000. These

             maps show more land details but were prepared to comply just within

             the guidelines of national map accuracy standards. USGS maps are

             accurate to 1/50 of an inch, which amounts to errors of up to 40

             feet when determining the position of a stable location on land.

             Any measurement from these sheets can be in error up to 40 feet.

                                            -42-
                                                     Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

             Local surveys made for land use and development activities close to

             the coast may be available in developed coastal areas. These maps

             usually are made to large scales and provide for higher accuracy

             measurements. However, they may contain only short stretches of

             the coastline. New field measurements are necessary to calculate

             land loss from these maps.    The resulting land loss calculated

             this way will be very accurate and can probably be used to check

             accuracy of other methods.    In cases where shoreline levels are

             available, volumetric sand losses can be calculated using

             consecutive beach profiles.

             AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS

             Aerial photography is an attractive alternative to time consuming

             field surveys for monitoring coastline change. Many states already

             use this method for shoreline monitoring. Aerial photographs pick-

             up all available ground details, whereas field surveys present only

             selected details.   Therefore, comparing photographs offer great

             flexibility. Common details will be available even if photographs

             were made by different companies for different purposes.

             Preparation cost is fixed; large areas can be photographed at a

             relatively low unit cost. When aerial surveys are performed with

             properly'surveyed ground marks, accurate maps can be constructed.

             Most of topographic sheets are prepared with stereo-plotters and

             stereoscopic photo pairs that are corrected for errors. However,

             this involves expensive instruments and expert services.

                                            -43-
                                                     Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

             Aerial photographs used for shoreline monitoring can also give

             inaccurate results.     The waterline position depends on many

             parameters. Water levels are affected by tides, winds, and waves.

             Mean waterlines move horizontally on a sloping beach due to water

             level variations.   Additionally, seasonal beach variations also

             causes the waterline to move.    The waterline responds to cyclic

             accretion or erosion by moving offshore or landward.               A

             coordination of these parameters with aerial photographs make the

             process very expensive.     Errors result when photographs taken

             during different phases of the cycle changes are compared and

             long-term erosion results are extrapolated. Furthermore, abnormal

             conditions, i.e., storms, can cause large temporary changes in the

             shoreline.   Aerial photographs taken immediately after such an

             event should not be used for monitoring long-term trends. In areas

             where long-term erosion trends are small in comparison to seasonal

             or cyclic changes, waterlines are not a good parameter for

             comparison.

             Coastal changes measured from aerial photographs reflect only the

             change in land area. However, rates of erosion, as well as impacts

             from protective structures, depend on the volume sand transport

             due to littoral processes.       This lack of three dimensional

             information can cause substantial errors in predicting shoreline

             changes, particularly if the land behind the shoreline shows

             appreciable relief.

                                            -44-
                                                     Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

             Distortions cause differences between aerial photographs, which

             arise from the methods used and limitations of the instruments.

             The scale of an aerial photograph depends on the height of the

             camera.   Atmospheric disturbances make it impossible for a

             airplane to always fly at the same height relative to the ground or

             to fly on a perfect straight line. Photographs taken successively

             during the same flight may have different scales due to variations

             in the flight altitude.       Edges of the photographs may show

             discontinuities from the vertical and horizontal movements of the

             airplane.   The scale of each photograph may need correcting for

             removal of distortion.

             when camera axis is not exactly vertical, the center point of the

             photograph does not coincide with the point vertically below the

             camera. This causes a distortion in the photograph, referred to as

             a tilt error. In general camera tilt is approximately one degree

             but under difficult conditions it can be as large as three degrees.

             In comparison studies, this error can be corrected by measuring

             distances between selected control points on maps and photographs.

             Lens distortions introduce errors that increase as the radial

             distance from the photocenter increases. However, modern mapping

             cameras have high quality lenses that minimize lens distortion.

                                             -45-
                                                      Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

             Ground relief is another factor that introduces errors into

             measurements made from aerial photographs. High relief introduces

             a scale variation in the photograph from point-to-point as well as

             a distortion in the main direction of the land slope. As a result,

             special care must be taken when points on photographs are selected
             for comparison with corresponding points on a map.      The objects

             selected should be at the same level for accurate results.

             However, in most coastal areas ground relief is very low and the

             error due to this is small.

             FEATURE TO BE MONITORED

             For purposes of monitoring long-term trends in shoreline behavior,

             it is essential to select a feature that can easily be identified

             on aerial photographs or maps.     The type of feature should also

             depend on the local topography and cyclic or seasonal behavior of

             the beach. Several different features have been used in earlier

             monitoring projects. These are the vegetation line [12], the high

             waterline (11] and the beach toe.

             The vegetation line is the most seaward boundary referenced for

             regular land-use.    Beyond this point the berm and the beach extend

             to the waterline. In most cases the berm is a temporary feature

             that can accommodate temporary vegetation, which may be less than

             a season old. In selecting a vegetation line the plants should be

             older than one year. The vegetation line shows up fairly well in

                                             -46-
                                                      Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

             aerial photographs, but is not generally marked as a detail in

             ordinary land maps. In general, one of the disadvantages is that,

             vegetation takes time to stabilize on accreting areas.         Since

             identifying the line on photographs is subjective, field checks may

             be necessary in ambiguous cases.

             In some projects the high waterline has been used as the monitoring

             feature [11]. On a sandy beach the high waterline appears as the

             boundary between two different shades of gray. The line is easily

             discernible in aerial photographs.     Many researchers argue that

             this is a good feature to monitor over long time periods. However,

             the high waterline varies with the tides, waves, and winds. The

             high tide line itself shows a considerable variation betvieen spring

             and neap tides. Waves produce a water level elevation at the beach

             called wave set-up. This can be as high as ten percent of the wave

             height and hence can be considerable in areas subjected to high

             swells such as the north shore of Oahu. On-shore winds also

             pile-up water at the coast from wind stress at the water surface.

             This contribution is generally small compared to other phenomena.

             on a sloping beach the waterline moves a considerable distance

             horizontally when water levels change.     For example, on a beach

             with a slope of one in ten (1:10) the high waterline will move ten

             f eet due to a rise in water level of one f oot.    Because of this

             beach slope amplification and the difficulty establishing actual

                                             -47-
                                                      Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

             water levels above datum at the survey time (aerial or otherwise)

             this method is not suitable when the rate of shoreline change are

             low or moderate. The method cannot be used at all in areas devoid

             of sandy beaches, as is usually the case on some eroding

             coastlines. Because of these reasons, the high waterline is not a

             suitable monitoring features for Hawaii shorelines.

             Beach toe has also been suggested as a monitoring feature. It is

             the point where the reef flat intersects the beach slope.

             In general, this line is in the surf zone; during high surf

             conditions it is difficult to identify because of suspended sand

             and breaking waves. The position of the beach toe depends on the

             amount of sand available at the beach; therefore, it can be used to

             show large cyclic or seasonal variations. However, this can induce

             relatively large errors in predictions of long-term trends of

             shoreline behavior.

             A.2. MONITORING METHODS

             Even though several methods are available for beach monitoring, not

             all methods are suitable. Selection must be made after considering

             all relevant factors.     Some of the important factors to be

             considered are:

                  o  Availability of previous data.
                  o  Resources available for field and office for
                     implementation.
                  o  Accuracy needed.
                  o  Type of results expected.

                                            -48-
                                                     Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

                 o Nature of the coastal area.
                 o Land use.

             Any method will require repetitive surveys at regular intervals,
             depending on the rate of erosion.     Surveys, whether aerial or

             field, should be planned for the same time of year to minimize

             errors due to seasonal changes.    Determining the most suitable

             boundary to monitor, e.g., high waterline, vegetation line, etc.,

             is also an important factor in long-term monitoring.

             BEACH PROFILE MEASUREMENTS

             Beach profiles are transects perpendicular to the shoreline that

             show ground level details. Usually they are evenly spaced, level

             measurements conducted regularly along the beach profiles.        An

             initial survey to find the position and direction of the lines, and

             to establish level datum must be carried out. Repetitive surveys

             can then be performed with relative ease.

             Data obtained is very accurate and data analysis gives the increase

             or decrease of area between the profile and the selected datum.

             Volumes of beach material lost can be calculated using numerical

             integration between successive beach profiles, assuming a linear

             change in the shore profile between sections. However, this is not

             strictly correct because some of the actual profiles will deviate

             from those calculated.    This introduces an error in the volume

             calculations.

                                            -49-
                                                     Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

          Movement of the selected boundary will be known accurately only at

          the prof ile locations.    Linear interpolations will be used to

          calculate changes in between profile locations; this too can

          introduce error. However, profiles are generally selected with due

          consideration of coastal behavior, errors can be kept small.

          Another disadvantage is the necessity of skilled surveyors to

          perform field work resulting in increased cost. However, simple

          computer programs can be written to calculate losses once data is

          available.

          POINT MEASUREMENTS

          Point measurements are made from known points to a selected shore

          boundary at regular intervals of time.       The points should be

          selected so that linear approximations are realistic between

          points.

          Two methods are used in point measurements. The first method is

          similar to the profile method; however, only a horizontal distance

          is measured from a known point to the boundary. These f ixed points

          have to be documented for repeated use.      In areas where public

          utilities such as highways run close to the beach, monuments can be

          established easily on or by the side of the road. No land levels

          are measured; therefore, the monitoring technique is simple and

          does not need highly skilled personnel. The data obtained is one

                                          -50-
                                                  Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

          dimensional and the method suffers from all other disadvantages of

          the surveys.

          The second method, referred to as transect analysis, makes use of

          historical aerial photographs where available.       In this method

          rectified photographs are obtained and scales of the photographs

          are determined by identifying stable points such as road

          intersections or building corners on the ground and in the

          photograph and then correlating distances. Ground relief errors

          are minimized by selecting stable points at the level of coastal

          land. Suitable transects are decided by using conspicuous marks

          close to the beach that are identifiable on the photographs. Next,

          the boundary line to be monitored is identified in the photograph

          with as much accuracy as possible. Distance is measured from the

          fixed points to this boundary. Land loss information is extracted

          by comparing this distance in successive sets of photographs.

          Calculation can be performed using mechanical or electronic

          digitizing methods.

          This method has all the shortcomings of field methods discussed

          earlier, and contains additional errors due to photographic

          distortion and measurement.      The photographic errors can be

          minimized if the area of measurement falls near the epicenter of

          the photograph and by using rectified photographs.           However,

          measurement errors depend on the scale of photographs used and can

                                                   Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

          be as much as 15 feet on a 1:10,000 scale. Additional distortions

          can result in a potential error of up to 30 feet. The usefulness

          of the method f or small beach changes is questionable.      Another

          disadvantage is that transect locations depend on identifiable

          marks, the coast between these points may not be linear.

          Costs incurred are low because the field work only consists of

          making the proper aerial surveys. However, results obtained may be

          below the expected accuracy. Transect analysis has been made in

          selected areas of Oahu, using rectified aerial photographs from

          1949 to 1988. Both mechanical and electronic methods were used in

          performing measurements.

          ORTHOGONAL GRID MAPPING SYSTEM

          In this method the aerial photographs are compared with topographic

          sheets. A base map at 1:5,000 scale is obtained; the ocean side

          edge of the paper is used as a base line [11]. Rectified aerial

          photographs are then enlarged to the same scale as the map by

          projecting them directly on to the map with the shoreline parallel

          to base line.     If the photographs are not rectified then a

          correction is applied by comparing object size and image size on

          the photograph.    Then a rectilinear grid of 100 meters by 100

          meters is projected on the map using the long side of the map as

          one axis. Next, the shoreline is digitized at points where the

                                          -52-
                                                   Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

          grid lines cut the shoreline approximately perpendicularly. The

          digitization is made relative to the base line established earlier.

          Orthogonal grid mapping systems produce best results on long

          straight shorelines where the grids can be oriented perpendicular

          to the shoreline at the photo projection stage.      This in effect

          amounts to a point measurement system.

          Matching the enlarged projection of the photograph on to the map is

          subject to errors, which can arise from the quality the of

          photograph and human factors.    This error is estimated to be as

          large as 10 meters.     Assuming  an accuracy of 1\100 inches for

          measurements from the photograph, this can cause a potential error

          of 1.25 meters at each point. This amounts to a potential error of

          2.5 meters on 1:5,000 scale.     Errors due to the quality of the

          photograph add to the above mentioned errors.          The maximum

          potential error is about 12.5 meters in addition to map errors and

          photo errors.

          The cost of  this type of monitoring is relatively low because no

          expensive equipment or highly skilled personnel are needed.

          However, the accuracy is very low and is not suited for areas with

          low to moderate land loss rates. This type of monitoring has not

          yet been performed in Hawaii. However, basic data are available

          from existing topographic sheets and aerial photographs.

                                          -53-
                                                   Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

          The shoreline shape may not be suitable for this type of monitoring

          due to sharp land features and a relatively rugged coastline with

          small pocket beaches, which may cut the grid lines perpendicularly

          at only a limited area in each photograph.

          SATELLITE IMAGERY

          Satellite imagery is typically used for land use planning and other

          activities where the land parcels are large.        Presently, the

          resolution of data is limited by the pixel size, which is

          approximately 80 X 80 meters for Landsat Imagery. This resolution

          is too low for monitoring shoreline changes that may amount to a

          few meters per year even in heavily eroding areas. However, this

          may be used over long time periods; future sensors may have higher

          resolution.   Computer methods are available that use original data

          before it is converted to photographs. At present resolution is

          too low for shoreline monitoring.

          A major portion of the expense for this method will go to analysis

          of data, since data is taken continuously at regular intervals by

          satellites already in orbit. Higher resolution information will be

          possible in future; this method has lots of potential.

          ZOOM TRANSFER SCOPE

          A Zoom Transfer Scope is used for revising maps from aerial

          photographs.    It provides a continuous differential change in

                                          -54-
                                                   Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

          magnification from 1 to 14 times between each eyepiece of a

          binocular viewing system. Therefore, the photograph scale can be

          considerably different from the map under comparison. Anamorphic

          lenses incorporated into the viewing optics enable one to change

          the scale in one direction, thereby permitting corrections f or tilt

          and relief displacement as well as other geometric anomalies

          between the photo image and the map image.          This method of

          shoreline monitoring is tedious and time consuming. Equipment is

          relatively expensive and trained personnel are necessary;

          transferring data to maps and calculating changes in the shoreline

          are separate subsequent activities.     This method is useful for

          special projects; equipment cannot be used for other purposes.

          STEREO PLOTTING METHODS

          Presently most map revisions are performed with stereoscopic pairs

          of aerial photographs and stereo-plotters. These machines correct

          for distortion due to scale, tilt, etc., and plot results that are

          relatively accurate.    However, these machines are expensive and

          skilled personnel are needed to provide quality results. Resource

          requirements may not be justifiable for the purposes of shoreline

          monitoring.

          COMPUTER ASSISTED DIGITIZING METHODS

          Recently, anew, semi-automated shoreline mapping technique (METRIC

          MAPPING) (7] has been developed that uses computer techniques

                                          -55-
                                                   Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

           together with aerial photographic analysis, which are made by

           aerial mapping cameras to ensure high image quality.     Base maps

           used in this case are topographic sheets made by National Ocean

           Survey (NOS 'IT") and are available for many areas dating back to

           several decades.   Stable control points are selected on NOS 'IT"

           sheets and are digitized to convert map coordinates into the state

           plane coordinate system. Aerial photographs are then selected as

           stereo pairs using a magnifying stereo viewer, the shoreline is

           drawn on the aerial photograph as a thin line. Control points such

           as road intersections or building corners that appear on the map as

           well as the photograph are identified.     The map coordinates of

           these points are converted to the state coordinate system using the

           primary point coordinate relationship established earlier.         A

           secondary set of corresponding points on the map and photograph are

           used to correct scale and other distortions in the photographs.

           Discontinuities at adjacent photograph boundaries are then smoothed

           using a computer. Finally, maps of the new shoreline are plotted.

           Comparisons may be made using final corrected coordinates of the

           shoreline before plotting; thereby, avoiding direct measurements

           off maps and associated errors. Shoreline change accuracy obtained

           depends on map accuracy, as well as shoreline selection and control

           point accuracy.

           A major part of the work is done by a computer; the method is

           relatively inexpensive. Equipment needed is generally available,

                                          -56-
                                                   Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

          and the need for skilled personnel is low. Results produced are

          relatively free from distortion. However, map accuracies and other

          errors can result in errors up to 26 feet, if 1:10,000 maps are

          used and a 1/64 inch digitizing accuracy is available.

          Additionally, errors of up to 13 feet are possible when 1:5,000

          scale aerial photographs are digitized to the same accuracy as the

          maps.   Accuracy of the NOS sheet is about 7 to 16 feet, which

          causes uncertainty in the results.

          OTHER LOCATIONS

          In many other states shoreline monitoring is carried out using

          combinations of aerial photographs and, field surveys (10].

          Digitizing    aerial   photographs   is   performed    in    Delaware,

          Massachusetts and New Jersey. Aerial photography is performed in

          California, where the coast is rugged and seasonal variations are

          much larger than long-term trends.      Aerial photographs are also

          used in Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Puerto Rico and Wisconsin.

          Indiana, Maine, New York, Rhode Island, North Carolina, South

          Carolina, and Texas use aerial photographic studies supplemented

          with topographic or other field surveys.       Georgia makes use of

          historical maps.

                                           -57-
                                                    Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

           Example data collection programs f rom several states include the

           following (24]:

                o Pennsylvania and Indiana update recession data with ground
                  surveys every two years.
                o North Carolina updates with aerial photographs every 5
                  years.
                o Michigan and texas-update every 10 years.
                o Florida, each county updates every 10-12 years.

           A.2.a. RECOMMENDATION/BEST METHOD

           Several factors should be considered, when selecting a method for

           erosion monitoring.   The main issue is the amount of information

           necessary to make appropriate management decisions.      Any method

           that utilizes available historic data will be helpful in making

           immediate management decisions. Therefore, data can be in the form

           of maps or aerial photographs.     Results can be used to address

           immediate management needs. Information needed for future and

           long-term planning and management may require specific data

           collection and processing methods.

           Important  criteria to be considered, particularly f or long-term

           monitoring programs , is how the information obtained from the

           monitoring program will be used for coastal management and

           development projects.    All methods discussed above except beach

           profile measurements and stereo-mapping techniques will result in

           only rates of land area change due to the changes in the shoreline.

           This information may be adequate for management issues such as

           setback determinations and related public use of beaches. However,

                                           -58-
                                                    Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

          results will not indicate volume losses of beach mat erial, which is

          more closely related to predictions of future coastal behavior.

          The insensitivity of these methods to hazards related to land

          levels such as flooding and subsidence is another serious

          disadvantage of the other methods.        Volume changes of beach

          material and the susceptibility of coastal land to inundation due

          to severe storms or flooding are important from social as well as

          coastal engineering points of view.       Data on long-term volume

          losses of beach materials are extremely useful in designing coastal

          stabilization, sand nourishment requirements and for evaluating

          impacts of coastal projects on adjacent coastal and offshore areas.

          Large-scale shoreline maps and historical aerial photographs used

          for determining erosion rates always lead to the questions

          regarding confidence in results. As discussed earlier, most map

          and photograph digitizing methods involve errors. uncertainty in

          maps and photographs casts a shadow on the accuracy of results.

          This is particularly true in highly developed areas where the rates

          of erosion are low but the consequences of erosion are economically

          significant.    Land loss near valuable public infrastructure and

          facilities, e.g., main roads, is a good example.      In such cases

          information obtained from remote operations, such as aerial

          photography, may not be accurate enough. Point measurements from

                                          _59-
                                                   Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

          monuments established close to the beach will give more useful

          information at a higher cost.

          Aerial methods are cost effective for preparing surveys of long

          beach stretches. However, compiling accurate maps for monitoring

          purposes involves stereo-plotting equipment and highly skilled

          technical personnel. The absence of clearly distinguishable ground

          features in early aerial photographs, particularly in less

          developed areas, is a serious drawback in their use for comparison

          studies. Accuracy can be improved without significantly increasing

          cost by clearly establishing distinguishable marks on the ground at

          predetermined locations, and including a few of these marks in each

          photograph.   Large white circular patches can be established as

          marks when located on easily identifiable coastal roads; thereafter

          their coordinates can be calculated with respect to the state

          coordinate system during field observations.      Establishing and

          identifying these features in aerial photographs, maps and on the

          ground is a necessary step for correcting distortion in

          photographs. Ideally these marks should be at the same level as

          the vegetation line. This may not be critical in coastal areas of

          low land relief.

          Because Hawaii consists of a series of islands, erosion problems

          are critical even over a relatively short length of coastline. In

          critical areas where management decisions can lead to economic or

                                          -60-
                                                   Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

          legal issues, accurate data on beach recession is necessary. In

          other areas where erosion and related socio/economic issues are not

          critical, accuracy from results obtained using digitization

          techniques and aerial photographs may be suitable. -

          The extent and rates of erosion experienced must be weighed against

          the cost of  monitoring methods. In areas where decisions must be

          made immediately, digitizing methods supplemented with profile

          measurements are recommended.        In areas that are critical,

          simultaneous photographic and field profiling methods are

          recommended. Information will be    used to select the best method

          for subsequent monitoring surveys.         In areas where coastal

          development activities are relatively low, monitoring methods that

          use digitizing techniques are recommended.

          Monitoring surveys must be made at regular time intervals with

          repetitions once in three to five years. As mentioned earlier, the

          best monitoring feature is the vegetation line.         The f inished

          photograph, scale should not be smaller than 1:20000. With a larger

          scale, identifying the vegetation line and other features will be

          easier; however, photographic distortion at overlapping areas may

          be high. The cost at larger scales will be correspondingly higher.

          In general photographs at a scale of 1:10000 are suitable for

          monitoring purposes. Aerial surveys should be carried out during

                                           -61-
                                                   Oce anit Laboratories, Inc.

           seasons with low wave activity, preferably in summer. Field

           measurements should be performed simultaneously so results can be

           compared.

                                          TABLE III-1

                        COMPARISON OF SHORELINE MONITORING METHODS

                  METHOD         COST       TIME ACCURACY          ASSESSMENT OF
                                                                   SUITABILITY
                                                                   for Hawaii

            1. Profile          Medium    Medium   0.51            Good for
            Measurements                           Horizontal      Highly
                                                   0.051           Developed
                                                   Vertical        Areas

            2. Point            Medium    Medium   0-0-51          Good for
            Measurements                           Horizontal      Medium
                                                   No Vertical     Developed
                                                   Data            Areas

            3. orthogonal       Low       Low      30-451          Poor
            Grid Mapping                           Horizontal
                                                   No Vertical
                                                   Data

            4. Satellite        Low       Low      80-1201         Poor
            Imagery                                Horizontal
                                                   No Vertical
                                                   Data

            5. Zoom             Medium    Medium   < 201           Fair
            Transfer Scope                         Horizontal
                                                   No Vertical
                                                   Data

            6. Sterio           High      High     0-.51           Fair
            Plotting                               Horizontal
            7. Computer         Medium    Medium   7-261           Fair
             ssisted                               Horizontal
            Digitizing                             at 1:10,000
            Methods                              I                I                  I

                                               -62-
                                                        Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

           A.3. IMPLEMENTATION SCHEME

           The following procedure is recommended for implementation of the

           monitoring program:

                1) Collect all available data including aerial photographs,
                   maps of coastal areas, local surveys maps, etc.
                2) Evaluate suitability of the data for different
                   types of analysis.
                3) Use aerial photographs and computer aided digitizing
                   methods for calculating the past recession rates using
                   vegetation line as the monitoring feature.
                4) Identify areas undergoing critical erosion by using the
                   extent of economic loss as the criteria. These areas must
                   be identified in coordination with State and County
                   agencies, which will eventually engage the problem.
                5) Establish marks identifiable on the ground from aerial
                   photographs, as-near-as possible to the shoreline
                   level. These marks will be used as secondary control
                   points. Mark these points on existing maps, or calculate
                   their central coordinates using field measurements.
                   Circular white marks on main road intersections or other
                   black background are easily identifiable on photographs.
                   These marks may have to be renewed prior to each
                   flight.
                6) In order to establish the accuracy of shoreline monitoring
                   by digitization methods, simultaneous aerial and field
                   surveys must be performed. comparison of field survey
                   results with those of digitized aerial photographs will
                   show the accuracy obtainable as well as the relative costs
                   of the two methods. These results can be used to decide
                   on the best method for future monitoring. A time lag of
                   up to a month between the aerial and field surveys may be
                   acceptable if the two cannot be carried out
                   simultaneously.

           Results from data analysis should be presented in f inal f orm,

           including raw data, to the public and all agencies involved with

           shoreline control activities. The State's GIS system is suitable

           for storage of this data, which should be made available f or

           planners, engineers, and other professionals involved in coastal

           development and management activities.

                                          -63-
                                                  Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

           B. GUIDELINES A ND'CRITERIA FOR RESPONDING TO EROSION HAZARDS

           Coastal erosion is a natural land formation and modification

           process that is nature's way of seeking an equilibrium at the

           land/sea interface. Sometimes erosion is undesirable due to the

           risk of loosing coastal protective structures or socio/economically

           important recreational and commercial facilities.        Previously,

           engineering solutions were implemented without'evaluating impacts

           on the environment.     This resulted in degrading the coastal

           environment and, in some instances, caused problems to adjacent

           areas. Since then, an awareness has developed whereby engineering

           techniques combined with an overall management approach is

           desirable for hazard management and conservation of coastal

           resources.

           Two basic options are available for responding to coastal hazards.

           one is to apply properly designed   engineering solutions that are

           directed only at the erosion problem. The other is to develop a

           comprehensive management program to conserve coastal resources and

           control coastal hazards. It is sometimes necessary to utilize a

           combination of these approaches to optimize solutions.

                                           -64-
                                                   Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

          Engineering solutions include:

                �  Construct properly designed shore protection
                   structures like seawalls, revetments, groins and
                   detached breakwaters.
                �  Nourish eroding beaches with sand from some
                   other source at regular intervals in order to
                   restore losses.
                �  Combine sand replenishment with structures designed
                   for retaining the sand for an extended period.

          Management solutions include:

                �  Relocate endangered structures (roads etc).
                o  Establish setback for new development.
                �  Relocate people away from high risk areas.
                �  Inform the public regarding the degree of risk in
                   hazardous areas.

          Beach sand sources can also be improved by creating conditions

          conducive to coral growth. Submerged artificial reefs could act as

          nuclei for developing this type of beach material source.

                                         -65-
                                                 Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

           B.1. ENGINEERING CONSIDERATIONS

           Three types of engineering structures are frequently used in

           controlling coastal erosion. Each structure affects the coast and

           coastal processes in different ways. Seawalls and revetments are

           constructed approximately parallel to the coast along the edge of

           an eroding scarp.   They prevent erosion by retaining the loose

           material behind the structure, which is designed to withstand wave

           forces as well as ground water forces. This type of structure will

           have only a limited effect on coastal processes because they do not

           cross the waterline under ordinary conditions. However, they cause

           hardening of the shoreline and increase wave reflection, which may

           have a detrimental effect on accretion processes. Groins, on the

           other hand, are used in erosion control when strong littoral

           currents are the main cause of erosion.    Groins are constructed

           perpendicular to the coast as a barrier to the littoral currents;

           they trap littoral material moving along the beach. They also push

           the longshore currents seaward reducing their erosive potential.

           Therefore, groins change littoral processes in a limited area and

           interrupt longshore transport of sand.     This causes erosion to

           downdrift beaches.

           Detached breakwaters are constructed parallel to the coast at some

           distance seaward from the shoreline. They absorb a portion of the

           incident wave energy      and deform nearshore wave patterns

           drastically.  Changes in nearshore wave patterns modify existing

                                          -66-
                                                   Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

           littoral processes; with proper design they can be used to control

           erosion. However, local coastal process modifications will ease

           erosion problems in one area while aggravating problems in adjacent

           areas. In all of these cases structures either harden the coast or

           create local modifications to the sand movement that mitigates

           erosion.

           Land erosion is basically an imbalance between sources and losses

           of sand (sinks) .   This concept has been ignored in all three

           solutions mentioned above. Structures only alter the pattern of

           beach loss.

           Structures like seawalls and groins create problems of beach access

           as well as recreational use of the beach.    The scenic value and

           continuity of the shore will be adversely effected by visual

           barriers caused from groins.     Depletion of beach resources in

           adjacent areas may lead to difficult legal problems where assessing

           the amount of loss due to the construction is almost impossible.

                                          -67-
                                                   Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

           Nourishment of eroding beaches with appropriate material that will

           counteract an imbalance between sources and losses is an accepted

           solution to coastal erosion. This has the advantage of creating or

           maintaining recreational areas.    Environmental impacts could be

           minimized if the rate of replenishment could be matched to the rate

           of beach material net loss. However, this is not possible because

           of implementation problems.     At best, nourishment schemes are

           typically carried out at regular intervals where the amount of

           material supplied at each execution is suf ficient to last several

           years. This temporary excess of material can end up in undesired

           locations and sometimes can smother coral reefs or cause

           sedimentation in nearby waterways or lagoons. Extensive studies

           have to be made when selecting the proper type of material and the

           acceptable amount that can be supplied at any given time. It may

           be advantageous under some circumstances to combine sand

           nourishment schemes with structures designed to retain the sand for

           a longer period. Additionally, encouraging natural growth of coral

           by creating environments conducive for growth of suitable coral

           species can result in an increase in ava ilable natural sources.

           B.2. SOCIO/ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS

           Coastal erosion and beach preservation measures must also consider

           the various social and economic issues that arise.      To address

           these issues, an inventory of the following items should be

           included in the comprehensive database:

                                          -68-
                                                   Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

                � Existence, location and current levels of usage of public
                  access to the shoreline
                � Existence, location and current levels of usage of public
                  access along the shoreline
                o Existence, location and current levels of usage of ancient
                  Hawaiian trail systems along or to the shoreline area
                � Public recreational uses of the shoreline and levels of
                  usage

          These issues are not confined to coastal erosion per se, and must

          be addressed in a comprehensive shoreline management plan.      The

          comprehensive plan should consider the following:

                o Anticipated future levels of usage with regard to public
                  access and public recreational use.
                o Adequacy of current access and recreational availability
                  with respect to meeting anticipated future needs.
                o Preservation of verifiable ancient Hawaiian trail systems
                  and kahaniki rights.
                o optimum public utilization scenario to address anticipated
                  levels of usage.
                o Necessity of implementing beach nourishment or shore
                  protection measures to achieve optimum scenario.

          Legal issues often arise with respect to government's ability to

          regulate uses of private shorefront property. The primary issue

          typically centers on whether the regulation constitutes an

          unconstitutional taking or results in an inverse condemnation

          action. In general, such statues or regulations have been upheld

          where courts have been able to find that the statute or regulation

          substantially advances a legitimate state interest, and does not

          deny the landowner of an economically viable use of property.

          The development of a comprehensive shoreline plan should bolster

          the legitimacy of the regulatory action if the plan is formulated

          to contain clear policy objectives and supporting justifications.

                                         -69-
                                                  Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

             In addition, to address these legal issues, the guidelines, rules

             and regulations for implementing the plan should, at a minimum, be

             formulated to provide the following:

                   � Give special exception to landowners in situations where
                     there will be damage to existing residences or like
                     structures due to coastal erosion.
                   � Consider the impact of loss of private property from
                     coastal erosion processes with respect to lot size and
                     configuration, and ability to utilize lot for permissible
                     purposes.
                   � Provide an administrative appeal procedure.

             Even though coastal erosion af f ects all aspects of the coastal

             zone, erosion management is only a part of coastal zone management.

             A management plan for the coastal zone should address conservation

             of all resources and should have provision to control all

             activities that ef f ect this resource. Hazards to lif e and property

             arising from natural causes such as tsunamis, storm flooding or

             erosion can only be minimized by controlling development and use

             activities.

             The public should be informed of potential hazards that' exist in

             coastal areas from natural events such as tsunamis and storm

             flooding, as well  as the probable frequency of such events. The

             intensity and the frequency of hazards will depend on factors like

             exposure of the coast, offshore bathymetry, backshore elevations

             and relief as well as the degree of development. Setback distances

             should be established by evaluating potential hazard intensities

             and frequencies. It may even be necessary to relocate residential

                                             -70-
                                                      Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

            areas f rom high risk to low risk areas. Engineering structures may

            be the only acceptable solution in certain areas where existing

            public infrastructure is in close proximity to the beach.

            Relocation may be acceptable when public structures are threatened

            by erosion.

            The socio/economic issues arising from erosion are somewhat similar

            to those that are important in considering development activities

            within the SMA. These considerations include the following:

                  � Loss of public beach access.
                  � Loss of recreational facilities and wild life areas.
                  o Hazards to beach users.
                  � Loss of public facilities.
                  � Damage to the coastal environment.
                  o Damage to coastal ecosystems.
                  � Loss of scenic resources and viewsheds.

            Consequences f rom the f irst f our will show an immediate social

            impact because the public will be directly effected.        Loss of

            public facilities such as parking areas, changing rooms etc. does

            not involve rights of private individuals. It enables the use of

            relatively straightforward mitigative measures where no legal or

            other confrontation arises.

            However, when recreational beaches are backed by valuable private

            land, the land owners will attempt to protect their properties from

            erosion by constructing protective structures such as seawalls.

            This type of s tructure will effect public access to the beach and

                                            -71-
                                                    Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

            may even result in loss of recreational beach area in the vicinity

            of the structure.

            The adequacy and suitability of a coastal structure are two

            separate considerations. A seawall may be structurally adequate to

            protect the land behind it from erosion and if properly designed

            will not damage the beach in front of it. However, erosion is not

            a process that effects isolated points on the beach. In general,

            a considerable length of the coast undergoes erosion at a given

            time. The erosion problem can be contained effectively only when

            a solution for the entire beach stretch is formulated.           This

            provides a suitable solution for erosion problems.      Hardening a

            small portion of an eroding beach may increase the rate of erosion

            at adjacent coastal areas and cause additional problems.          The

            suitability of a protective structure for this situation must be

            evaluated independently.

            Failure of an inadequately constructed structure may damage the

            property it was meant to protect, irreparably damage the beach; may

            even create hazardous conditions for beach users. Additionally,

            the scenic and recreational value of the beach will be reduced from

            scattered rocks and other debris.

            Structures and erosion may cause the loss of recreational water

            uses such as surfing and other wave dependant sports. Changes in

                                            -72-
                                                     Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

             wave behavior f rom bathymetric alterations caused by erosion, or as

             a hydraulic response from the protecting structure, can result in

             an environment not suitable for wave sports.

             Damage to coastal ecosystems, loss of scenic resources and

             viewsheds, as well as damage to the coastal environment will af f ect

             the economic importance of a coastal area. This is particularly

             true in the State of Hawaii where the tourist industry is oriented

             to coastal and undersea recreational activities.      These factors

             show that coastal erosion and construction of non-conforming

             protective structures will lead to adverse socio/economic impacts.

             However, when valuable property bordering the beach is eroding the

             land owner will do his best to protect it. Imposing conditions on

             these protective efforts may lead to legal problems.

             "Takings" issues involve a conflict between public interest in

             stopping the degradation of natural    resources versus an owner's

             asserted right to use his property as  he wishes. Claims regarding

             specific limitations or constraints    imposed on private uses of

             property that are so restrictive they  constitute the equivalent of

             constitutionally prohibited "takings" of private property for a

             public purpose without compensation will present enforcement

             problems.

                                             -73-
                                                      Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

            When narrow strips of private land bordering the coast are backed

            by important public infrastructure such as roadways, the erosion

            hazard faced by the private land should be considered as a

            potential future threat to the public property. In such cases the

            private land can be considered a buffer and adequate protection of

            land should be encouraged in the face of future social expenditure.

            This can be achieved by establishing a group of qualified

            personnel, e.g., in a state agency, who can provide guidance, data

            requirements and expertise during construction.

            B.2.a. INFORMATION NEEDED

            Decision making for any public resource is always difficult;

            however, coastal erosion related resource issues are further

            complicated by land ownership, existing land use, proximity of

            public facilities to the coast, and other socio/economic factors.

            A brief analysis of the most critical information needed for

            decision making is given in the following section.

            The types of information needed for decision making can be divided

            into two categories:      environmental and socio/economic.       The

            environmental information including, exposure of site to tsunami

            and storm flooding hazards, meteorological and oceanographic data,

            morphologic and geologic data, topographic,data, value of marine

            habitat, and importance of nearshore ecosystems. Socio/economic

            information needed includes land and water use in the coastal zone,

                                            -74-
                                                     Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

             -land ownership, value of land and public infrastructure immediately
             hinterland, recreational value of beach and nearshore water, public

             access to beaches, scenic value of coast and type of development
             pressure on the area such as,- residential,           commercial or

             recreational.

             Impact from storm surge, tsunamis and high swells on coastal areas

             will vary depending on the exposure of the coast to such phenomena,

             as well as nearshore seabed bathymetry, beach characteristics and

             backshore relief. Tsunami flooding hazard has already been studied

             and information on the intensity is available for many areas.

             Available data must be incorporated into maps; residents of high

             risk areas need to be informed of the hazard risk. High density
             residential development in-areas susceptible to flooding increases
             potential damage from flooding because the water flow will be

             restricted by buildings and other structures. Higher water flow

             speeds, arising particularly during the recession of flood water,

             can result in extensive damage due to scour. Construction should

             be controlled to avoid these situations.

             Material eroded from the beach during a heavy storm is temporarily

             deposited offshore. This deposition reduces the destructive force

             of the waves and decreases the rate of erosion.         Sand is then

             transported back to the beach after the storm passes.         If the

             nearshore area shows an abrupt increase in depth or the presence of

                                             -75-
                                                      Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

              deep channels leading offshore, the sand removed by storm waves
              will be permanently lost. Damage from the storm in this area will

              be more severe and permanent. Therefore, coasts fronted by deep
     Ik       channels or steep bathymetry must be identified and treated as high
              risk areas.
     11
              oceanographic conditions that cause erosion hazards are high water

              levels and large waves. Currents also play an important role, but
     ]k       are generally weak except close to lagoon entrances and river
              outlets.    Water level data are well documented from tide

              measurements and wave data for Hawaii are available from

              measurements and ship observations. Data can be found in tabular

              form giving wave heights, periods and wave directions as

              percentages. This data needs to be analyzed to obtain wave climate

              information for areas of different exposure.        Wave heights and

              directions are important parameters in evaluating risk because they

              C
               ause erosion from longshore transport. Erosion rates depend on

              the geologic formation of land and the coastal geomorphology of the

              area.   Areas with extensive dunes can survive severe storms by

              loosing part of the sand and building up again after the storm is

              over. If dune protection is absent and the backshore is low lying,

              the area will be at high risk from storm waves breaching through.

              When the coast is composed of hard geologic strata, erosion is slow

              and in general the backshore is steep.        The risk of erosion or

              flooding in this situation is low.

                                               -76-
                                                        Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

             -some nearshore environments provide uhique marine habitats and

             delicate ecological systems.     These areas are sensitive to any

             change in nutrients, circulation, influx of sediments and
             pollutants   as well as physical 'disturbances from recreational
             activity.    These. areas should not be disturbed; development

             activities in adjacent areas that may cause erosion in these unique

             habitats should be closely controlled.

             Accurate demarcation of the certified shoreline is very important

             for controlling of development activities, This line a    cts as the

             boundary between the conservation district and the Special

             Management Areas (SMA). Engineering structures designed to prevent

             erosiofi are constructed at this boundary. This line is loosely

             defined   as   the  vegetation    line  and   leads   to    different

             interpretations by officials and land owners,      Applications for

             Shoreline Setback Variances (SSV) cannot be processed efficiently

             when the location of the certified shoreline is in doubt.

             Attempting to determine the line after the application is forwarded

             leads to confusions and unnecessary delay.       This line ideally

             should be defined from monuments on land and updated periodically,

             as in the case of other district boundaries.

                                             -77-
                                                      Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

              Socio/economic information that needs to be considered will depend
              on the land, beach, and water uses in the co   astal zone. Land and

              water use in the area adjacent to the SMA zone is important for
              decision making.     Land use can.-be residential, agricultural,
              commercial,    recreational    etc.,    and   may    include    public

              infrastructure and facilities. Water uses can be of recreational,

              industrial or of aquacultural importance. Land ownership may be
              public or private. In the case of public lands, making a decision'
              on erosion management may be relatively straightforward. But in

              cases of privately owned or privately leased lands, the value of

              land and hardship to the owner makes matters much more complicated.

              When public facilities such as main highways are separated from

              the coast by a narrow strip of privately owned land, any structure

              constructed for the purpose of protecting the privately owned land

              from erosion may have an ef f ect on the long-term saf ety of the

              road. In such cases permitting land owners to construct individual

              seawalls to protect their property at their convenience may not be

              in the best interest of the public.         If private land is not

              protected and erosion continues, the social cost of relocating the

              road at a later date may be very high.         In such cases serious

              consideration should be given to assisting the land owners in

              designing an overall protective scheme. The design effort could be

              considered as an investment that would reduce large expenditures

              later.

                                               -78-
                                                        Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

             some of the information on land-use        and oceanographic data

             discussed above may already be available, and needs only to be

             compiled in a suitable way for use in erosion management.        Data

             collection programs should be designed where additional information

             is needed. The ty  pes of data necessary for responding to hazards

             at any location will depend on dif f erences in the environment. The

             degree of exposure to severe oceanographic and meteorologic
             conditions 'should be the primary consideration.       Intensity of

             erosion and the subsequent damage should be related to the level of

             development and the geologic, bathymetric, and morphologic

             conditions of th e coast. Hazards due to flooding will be dependant

             on development density, character of backshore, and the topography

             of the area.        Similarly, for economic and recreational

             considerations, the location will be a major criteria. A set of

             questions should be developed for determining data necessary for

             responding to hazards of erosion and flooding, including the

             following those found in Table 111-2:

                                             -79-
                                                      Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

                                     TABLE 111-2

           EXAMPLE QUESTIONS TO DETERMINE NECESSARY DATA FOR RESPONDING TO
                                 EROSION AND FLOODING

                1)  What is the level of inundation expected for a 100
                    year tsunami?
                2)  What is the water level and wave climate expected
                    for the 100 year storm?
                3)  What is the highest water level expected within the
                    next 100 years?
                4)  What is the heaviest runoff expected?
                5)  What is the worst wave /swell climate expected in
                    the next 100 years?
                6)  What is the geological formation of the coast?
                    (ease of eroding)
                7)  What is the character of the backshore?
                    (dunes/rising/low lying etc.) .
                8)  What is the major purpose of land utilization?
                9)  What is the major water use if any within the SMA?
               10)  What is the pattern of land ownership?
               11)  Is the beach accessible conveniently to the public?
               12)  Is the area used by the public for recreation?
               13)  Are there any public facilities close to the
                    coastline?
               14)  Are there any commercial uses of the coast?
                    (harbors/marinas etc.)
               15)  Is the area heavily built-up with residential units?

           B.3. RESPONSE TO EROSION HAZARD

           In general, waves approach the coastline at an angle, which results

           in a current parallel to the beach. This current is weak but since

           sediments are in suspension in the breaker zone it is capable of

           moving large amounts along the beach. This is called the littoral

           drift and is responsible for distributing the sand available from

           sources to all parts of the beach.    When the source capacity is

           lower than the littoral drift, beaches undergo erosion. This type

           of erosion can continue for decades or even longer until a new

                                          -80-
                                                   Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

          equilibrium is reached.   In most areas the wave climate shows a

          cyclic pattern over a period of one year. Because of this, the

          onshore/offshore movement of sand and the littoral drift also show

          a cyclic behavior.  As a result, the beach may also show cyclic

          erosion and accretion with large variation due to storms.

          Engineering solutions to erosion problems are satisfactory for the

          average sea conditions where they are designed.      They may not

          function as expected when the situation deviates from ideal design

          conditions. Any type of hard structure will impose changes in the

          coastal processes.     Revetments or seawalls will change the

          reflection of waves. The beach face will be modified, which will

          further modify waves and so on. Groins and detached breakwaters

          will impose more drastic changes on waves as well as on sediment

          movement. Because of these reasons, hard structures must be the

          last option be considered for erosion management. However, there

          may be cases where such drastic measures can be justifiable.

          Nourishment of beaches is a softer solution and can be applied in

          most cases.     Management solutions combined with engineering

          solutions give the optimum results in most cases.

          In responding to any erosion problem, answers to the questions

          found in Table 111-3 should be sought for better understanding the

          situation and to formulate a solution.

                                                 Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

                                     TABLE 111-3

          EXAMPLE QUESTIONS TO FORMULATE A SOLUTION TO EROSION PROBLEMS

               1)  Is the erosion chronic or seasonal?
               2)  What is the approximate rate of erosion?
               3)  Is there an immediate danger to public/private
                   structures from erosion?
               4)  Will erosion hazard be compounded by inland
                   flooding?
               5)  Is sufficient material available on the beach for use as
                   a buffer in case of a storm?
               6)  Is the nearshore seabed dominated by sediment
                   sinks such as deep gullies or deep channels leading
                   offshore?
               7)  What is the extent of facilities available for
                   evacuating people from endangered areas during a
                   severe event?
               8)  What are the social, economical and political
                   repercussions of relocation?
               9)  Can important existing infrastructure be shifted
                   from high risk areas?
              10)  What are the repercussions of an increased set
                   back?
              11)  Will extension of the SMA boundary up to a minimum
                   contour help in regulation of development?
              12)  What types of engineering and management solutions are
                   acceptable f rom the point of view of land, beach and water
                   use activities?
              13)  What alternate sites are available for relocation?
              14)  In cases where public infrastructure is separated from
                   an eroding coast by a strip of private land, is it
                   feasible to purchase the private land?
              15)  What types of natural sand sources exist in the
                   area for replenishment of eroding areas?
              16)  Can the-overall eroding process effecting the
                   coastal beach be identified before preparing an
                   overall erosion management scheme?
              17)  To what degree will structures harm public access
                   to the beach, and other coastal resources the area?
              18)  Is establishment of artificial reefs or promoting
                   coral growth by other means acceptable to the area?

                                         -82-
                                                  Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

          Answers to some of the questions in Table III-   will be simple and

          straightforward, others will be complicated and interdependent.

          However, the final outcome will give an indication of the best

          approach possible. Some questions will have more significance in

          certain  areas than others.    The issues identified above can be

          broadly categorized in to two areas:

               1) Issues of land ownership, land and water use and the threat
                  of erosion.

               2) Issues of Socio/economic and environmental nature.

          Sub-issues related to these categories are presented in Table III-

          4. In This framework, different values must be placed on each sub-

          issue.

                                          _83-
                                                  Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

                                        TABLE 111-4

                                      EROSION ISSUES

             I. LAND OWNERSHIP, LAND AND WATER USE

             1. Extent of Erosion
                 a. Length of coastline effected at the eroding site.
                 b. Land use in the whole stretch.(e.g. Parks,
                    infrastructur, other public facilities, Residential,
                    commercial)
              2. Land Ownership and Land Value
                 a. Totally owned by public.
                 b. Totally owned by one private owner.
                 c. Part owned by public and the rest by one private owner.
                 d. Owned by several private owners.
                 e. Extent of parcels and width of parcel landward.
                 f. Land use on the mauka side of the parcels.
                 g. Land value.

             3.  Beach and Water Use
                 a. Recreational sports (e.g. surfing, wind surfing,
                    swimming, diving, fishing)
                 b. Marinas
                 c. Commercial (Harbors, fishing harbors)
                 d. Industrial (effluent discharge, cooling water intake
                    and discharge)
                 e. Aquaculture (fish pands,shrimp farms)

             II. SOCIO/ECONOMIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL
                 a. Potential economic losses (land, infrastructure,
                    structures)
                 b. Loss of beach access to the public ( shore protection
                    structures, deep escarpments at berm, narrow beach)
                 c. Loss of recreational area (beach,surfing areas,swimming
                    areas due to deepening, live reefs effected by
                    deposition)
                 d. Loss of scenic value
                 e. Changes in the environment (wave patterns, currents,
                    sediment movement and resulting effect on ecosystem)

                                            -84-
                                                     Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

            In order to develop guidelines for decision making, an attempt is

            made to quantify losses to private and public parties from impacts

            arising from erosion. Generally, it is very difficult to set down

            fixed procedures for making erosion management decisions because

            issues are usually complicated by the land value, land ownership

            and socio/economic impacts.     It should be realized that in a

            dynamic zone such as the coastline, a degree of flexibility is

            needed on the part of both the private individuals and regulatory

            personnel. Methods to quantify positive and negative impacts are

            discussed below. This procedure should be considered a.starting

            point and should be modified later.

            CASE EXAMPLE 1: EROSION OF PARKS AND RECREATIONAL AREAS

            The loss can be divided into two parts:

                 1) Economic loss due to lost land.

                     o This is relatively straightforward and can be quantified
                        by multiplying the expected yearly land area loss by the
                        average value per square foot. Any structures that may
                        be partly or completely lost due to erosion may also be
                        included. The replacement cost should be used as the
                        economic loss.

                2) Reduction of the recreational capacity of the park land
                    lost by erosion.

                     o Value will vary from place to place depending on the
                        indirect economic importance of the facility from the
                        point of view of the tourist and recreation industry.

                     o In general, people tend to use the strip of land closest
                        to the beach for recreational purposes. This can be

                                            -85-
                                                     Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

                        valued by using the average number of person-hours of
                        recreations provided by the facility over a period of
                        one year. In this exercise a value of 50 to 100 feet
                        will be reasonable. By assuming a value for a
                        person-hour of recreation provided by the park, and
                        spreading the total over the most used strip, a
                        recreational value per square foot can be estimated.
                        Loss of recreational area from reconstruction of
                        destroyed facilities should also be calculated on the
                        same basis and added to the total loss.

            The two components discussed will give a total loss from erosion.

            Construction cost for protection of the coast in this example can

            be weighed against the total loss calculated over the design

            life-time of the structure. Any negative impact like erosion in

            front of the wall can also be quantified from the loss of

            recreational capacity. Values for picnicking, surfing, swimming,

            and beach activities can be estimated; values will become more

            accurate as more data is accumulated.

            CASE EXAMPLE II: EROSION OF PRIVATE LAND

            The same approach can be used in cases where protection of

            expensive coastal land threatens the recreational areas availabl    e

            to the public.     In this case the following issues should be

            considered:

                  1)  Loss to private land owner.
                  2)  Loss of recreational beach area due to structures.
                  3)  Possible loss of water recreational areas due to
                      structures.
                  4)  Possible land and recreational area loss to adjacent
                      areas.
                  5)  Partial compensation of public cost by private owners by
                      nourishing beach in front of structure over a period that
                      will be determined by the regulatory authority.

                                            -86-
                                                     Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

            In the case of a long stretch with multiple owners, construction of

            independent structures for protection of individual parcels should

            be discouraged because this type of structures is difficult to

            include in a future scheme designed to protect the whole stretch.

            The affected residents should be encouraged to participate in a

            total scheme designed to protect the whole stretch from erosion.

                                            -87-
                                                     Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

                              IV. FUTURE MANAGEMENT CONCEPTS

            Future concepts in erosion management are provided only for the

            purpose of encouraging new and innovative thinking.       Ideas put

            forth may not be possible under existing legal, social and

            technical conditions. Additionally, new ideas sometimes bring new

            problems. However, at the risk of being misunderstood, we provide

            the following concepts.

            In the future we expect coastal erosion problems to be dominated by

            two types of issues: social and environmental. Social issues will

            result from increased competition for limited resources. We are

            seeing our first view of this in 1990 with Hanauma Bay.        As a

            result of the bay's overuse, the City of Honolulu is restricting

            activities. Environmental issues include sealevel rise and other

            effects of global warming.      Global warming and the resulting

            sealevel rise is expected to hav e a major impact on coastal beaches

            in the far future. If we do not look too far into the future and

            address erosion only, the following suggestions would either

            provide financial resources or new planning schemes to deal with

            erosion problems.

            Ongoing beach nouri shment
            A state funded beach nourishment program that operated all year on
            all islands would dramatically reduce the cost per unit length to
            re-nourish beaches.     It would address major environmental and
            public concerns associated with structural solutions, e.g.,
            destruction of habitat, beach access, etc. It could operate with
            blanket permit authority, perhaps through the "Office of Beaches."

                                            -88-
                                                     Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

            Special tax for beach residences/beach users
            Modification to the existing property tax system could be
            implemented, e.g, a tax could be levied on coastal real estate.
            Perhaps, a percent of existing property tax could be used for beach
            maintenance and repairs. Another approach would be to include a
            use tax for those people (e.g., tourists) that use the beach for
            recreational purposes.

            Impact fee for coastal structures
            The construction of any structure along the coastline could carry
            am impact fee that would be assessed in proportion to the impact on
            the related issues, e.g., environment, public access, recreational
            value.

            Cost sharing with state and county governments
            The expense of beach repair and maintenance could be shared by the
            coastal land owner in proportion to the real estate value, e.g.!
            annual re-nourishment of beaches.

            Improvement districts
            Improvement districts would enable shore protection and repair
            activities to be performed by a group of private land owners. If
            the group were sufficiently large and addressed a continuous
            stretch of coastline, a benefit would be bestowed to the public
            because the impact from the collective efforts would be less than
            the sum of impacts from individual land owners. Additionally, cost
            would be reduced.

            State parks on all beaches
            The State could condemn all coastal lands and create a beach belt
            that would surround the island. The state would have total control
            over all coastal erosion and maintenance responsibilities. This
            may be necessary if global sealevel rise becomes a major problem.

                                            -89-
                                                     Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

                           V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

            The current regulatory scheme addresses shoreline management in a
            piecemeal fashion, including inconsistent management approaches
            between the state and county governments, lack of uniform policy
            guidelines, lack of overall planning and the overall complexity of
            the regulatory process.    of the various needs that exist with
            respect to coastal erosion management, a lack of information is the
            key shortcoming that is the most disabling. It prevents the clear
            determination of policy as well as the consistent execution of
            existing rules and regulations.

            We recommend the mission statement of the Erosion Management
            Program (EMP) to be 11 ... conserve beaches and minimize erosion."
            The first and foremost mission goal that needs to be addressed is
            the collection of information. other related concerns, including
            planning/regulation and fiscal/administration will become more
            focused as information is gathered. Without adequate information,
            all other related management concerns and regulatory schemes become
            considerably weakened.

            The various types of information collected and evaluated in this
            project were considered from the point of view of coastal hazards
            and erosion management in Hawaii.     Based on this information we
            draw the following conclusions and recommendations.
            1) INFORMATION CONCLUSIONS:

                  �  In general, coastal land is used as a recreational
                     resource in Hawaii. It has a clear economic value because
                     of the tourist industry. Development pressure within this
                     area is high; therefore, a real danger exists for
                     damaging the environment irreversibly. Management
                     decisions require, at a minimum information on
                     land loss rates. This type of data can only be obtained
                     by long-term monitoring.
                  �  For purposes of calculating past land loss rates,
                     historical maps are needed for baseline information. The
                     most appropriate maps that can be used for this purpose
                     are the National ocean Survey Topographic (NOS11T11) maps.
                  �  In spite of the disadvantages of aerial photographs for
                     calculating shoreline changes, it is clearly the most
                     inexpensive approach for monitoring long coastlines.
                  �  In areas where land loss rates are comparatively
                     low, but important economically, monitoring with aerial
                     photography has to be supplemented with field surveys
                     at least in a few selected places.
                  �  Computer assisted comparison methods are most
                     appropriate for monitoring coastal changes in undeveloped
                     areas. Results may not be accurate enough for
                     making management decisions in highly built-up areas.

                                            _90-
                                                     Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

            2) PLANNING CONCLUSIONS:

                  �  In past studies, different boundaries have been used for
                     monitoring coastline changes. For Hawaii, the most
                     appropriate boundary is the vegetation line.
                  �  There is a shortage of data on the coastal zone for
                     decision making.
                  �  At present, there is a lack of overall comprehensive
                     shoreline management planning and guidelines for
                     decision making.
                  o  Regulatory process for obtaining permits for
                     activities in the coastal zone are too complicated.
                     This prompts the public to ignore rules.

            3) RESOURCE MANAGEMENT CONCLUSIONS:

                  o  Neither the state nor the counties have sufficient
                     man power or resources to effectively manage coastal
                     erosion problems. This is reflected in the number of
                     illegal, and inadequately designed protective
                     structures constructed by land owners.

                  o  Problems regarding shoreline encroachments and
                     illegal structures already exist in Oahu.
                     shoreline certification rules complicate
                     the resolution of disputes on encroachment and illegal
                     structures.

                  o, The certified shoreline, which is the boundary
                     between the conservation district and SMA, is
                     defined as the vegetation line and is subjective and
                     depends on to individual judgment.

            The study brought out many shortcomings in the present status of

            managing erosion in Hawaii. The following recommendations are made

            as a first step to ease the situation and to enable decision making

            on issues in this area more streamlined.

                                            -91-
                                                    Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

           INFORMATIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS:

              o  Establish a data base for the State of Hawaii, including
                 oceanographic, topographic, land and water use
                 data for the coastal zone. Compile data already
                 available with Federal, State, County, or private
                 organizations.

              o  Use aerial surveys and a computer aided digitizing method
                 for monitoring the total coastline of Hawaii. This study
                 should be supplemented by shoreline surveys at selected
                 high risk locations for comparison purposes. These
                 monitoring activities should be repeated every five years.

              o  Prioritize and coordinate federal, state and county
                 erosion management funding to develop a comprehensive data
                 base on coastal areas statewide.
      ,2) PLANNING RECOMMENDATIONS:
              o  Define the certified shoreline by state coordinates
                 and tie it to already existing survey monuments so
                 that this line can be set out uniquely. The line
                 needs to be revised continuously as erosion occurs.

              o  Simplify permit process and inform coastal land
                 users regarding the permit requirements and the
                 procedures to follow for proposed activities in
                 this area.

              o  Draw up a master plan for erosion management for
                 the whole state. The plan should address the
                 nature of the erosion problem, causes for erosion,
                 problem assessment for different areas and
                 recommendations for the immediate, medium-term and
                 long-term mitigative activities.

              o  Develop a comprehensive coastal erosion plan for the
                 state. Since coastal erosion issues affect other
                 pertinent shoreline issues, the coastal erosion plan would
                 be one component of a shoreline plan.

              o  Consolidate jurisdiction over the shoreline area to place
                 the bulk of the regulatory powers in one state agency.
                 The most logical way to develop this authority may be to
                 establish a separate division or "Office of Beaches"
                 within an existing agency that already handles these
                 matters, such as the Department of Land and Natural

                                       -92-
                                                Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

                                       VI. REFERENCES

            (1]   Simon Baker, Aerial Photography For Planning And Development
                  In Eastern North Carolina: A Handbook Directory,       A
                  University of North Carolina Sea Grant Program Publication.
                  UNC-SG-76-03 (April 1976).

            [2)   An Analysis of South Coast Regional Commission First Year.
                  Coastal Zone Development in Los Angeles County.

            [3]   Managing Coastal Erosion, "The National Flood Insurance
                  Program", Committee on Coastal Erosion Management Water
                  Science and Technology Board Marine Board, Commission on
                  Engineering and Technical Systems, National Research
                  Council (November 1989).

            (4]   David A. Rice, "Taking" By Regulation And The North Carolina
                  Coastal Area Management Act, University of North Carolina,
                  Seagrant Publications UNC-SG 75-26 (July 1976).

            [5]   Donald B. Stafford, Jay Langfelder, Air Photo Survey of
                  Coastal Erosion, Photogrammetric Engineering (1971).

            [6]   Hawaii coastal Zone Management Program - Federal Consistency
                  Procedures Guide, Department of Planning and Economic
                  Development, state of Hawaii (April 1985).

            [7]   J. Beach Clow and Stephen P. Leatherman, Metric Mapping: An
                  Automated Technicrue of Shoreline Mapping, Proceedings of ASP-
                  ACSM Convention, Washington, DC. (1984).

            (8]   National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, State of
                  Hawaii Coastal Zone Management Program and Final
                  Environmental ImDact Statement (August 1978).

            (91   Ocean Natural Hazards Issues Study Group, Information
                  Memorandum, Issue No. 3 (March/April 1988).

            (10]  Response Summary to the ASFPM Coastal Committee Shoreline
                  Erosion Setback Questionnaire. Department of Environment
                  Protection, Trenton, New Jersey (October 1989).

            [11]  Robert Dolan, Bruce P. Hayden, Paul May and Suzette May,
                  The Reliability of Shoreline Change-Measurements from Aerial
                  Photographs, Shore  and Beach, pgs. 22-28 (October 1980).

            [12]  Sea Engineering Inc., Oahu Shoreline Study (1988).

                                            -94-
                                                     Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

              [13]   Stephen P. Leatherman, Shoreline Mapping: A Comparison of
                     Techniques, Shore and Beach, pgs. 28-33 (July 1983).

              [14]   Stephan P. Leatherman and John J. McDonough 111, America's
                     Eroding Beaches - NOS Data May Hold The Key, The Military
                     Engineer, No. 520, pgs. 143-144 (March/April 1988).

              (15]   Master Plan. Coast Erosion Management, The Plan vol. 1.
                     Coast Conservation Department Danida - Danish Hydraulic
                     Institute (June 1986).

              [16]   F. Gerritsen, V. Dayananda, "Changes in Littoral Processes
                     due to Construction of Nearshore Structures", Ocean Space
                     Utilization 185, Springer-Verlaz, Vol. 2:197-204 (1985).
              [17]   S. Shikada, M. Mino, K. Haji, T. Moriuchi, A          '. Arakawa, H.
                     Nishijima, E. Nagasaki, "A Direction and Policy for Coastal
                     Zone Management in Japan", Ocean Space Utilization 185,
                     Springer-Verlaz, Vol. 2:45-50 (1985).

              [18]   P. Faber, J. Liebster, "California's Fourteen Years of
                     Coastal Zone Management", Coastal Zone 187, American Society
                     of Civil Engineers, Vol. 3:2954-2967 (1987).

              [19]   D. Ortman,"Washington's CZMP - The First Shall Be Last",
                     Coastal Zone 187, American Society of Civil Engineers,
                     Vol. 3:2968-2982 (1987).

              (20]   C. Blair, E. Rosenburg, "Virginia's CZM Program", Coastal
                     Zone 187, American Society of Civil Engineers,
                     Vol. 3:2983-2998 (1987).

              (21)   Dr. R. Salm, J. Dobbin, "A Coastal Zone Management Strategy
                     for the Sultanate of Oman", Coastal Zone 187, American
                     society of Civil Engineers, Vol. 1:97-106 (1987).

              [22]   Managing Coastal Erosion, "State Programs and Experiences",
                     committee on Coastal Erosion Management Water Science and
                     Technology Board Marine Board, Commission on Engineering and
                     Technical Systems, National Research Council (November 1989).

              (23]   Edward K. Noda and Associates, Inc. and DHM, Inc., "Hawaii
                     Shoreline Erosion Management Study: Overview and Case Study
                     Sites (Makaha, Oahu; Kaulua-Lanikai, Oahu; Kukuiula-Poipu,
                     Kauai)" (June 1989).,

              (24]   Hawaii Revised Statutes, Section 205A-44 (b), (1986 as
                     amended).

                                                   -95-
                                                             Oceanit Laboratories, Inc.

                                                                               NOAA COASTAL SERVICES CTR LIBRARY

                                                                               3 6668 14110702 1