[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:


             ï¿½ Develop and communicate adequate information on
               storm wave, tsunami, flood, erosion and subsidence
               hazard.
             ï¿½ 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.
             ï¿½ 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:

             ï¿½ Public access to and along the shoreline.
             o Public recreational use of the shoreline.
             ï¿½ 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]:



              ï¿½ 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.
              ï¿½ 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.
              ï¿½ 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:

              ï¿½ Field measurements
              ï¿½ Research and analysis
              o Permitting and regulation
              ï¿½ 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]:

        ï¿½ Manage the siting of development activities in the coastal zone
          - Define setbacks
          - Designate no-build zones
        ï¿½ Halt coral mining in the coastal zone
            Identify means of rebuilding reefs in critical erosion areas
        ï¿½ minimize impact of sand mining (on erosion)
          - Conduct research to identify alternative sources of sand
          - Conduct research to define sustainable yield limits
        ï¿½ 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:


            ï¿½  Construct properly designed shore protection
               structures like seawalls, revetments, groins and
               detached breakwaters.
            ï¿½  Nourish eroding beaches with sand from some
               other source at regular intervals in order to
               restore losses.
            ï¿½  Combine sand replenishment with structures designed
               for retaining the sand for an extended period.


      Management solutions include:


            ï¿½  Relocate endangered structures (roads etc).
            o  Establish setback for new development.
            ï¿½  Relocate people away from high risk areas.
            ï¿½  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.








            ï¿½ Existence, location and current levels of usage of public
              access to the shoreline
            ï¿½ 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
            ï¿½ 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:

               ï¿½ Give special exception to landowners in situations where
                 there will be damage to existing residences or like
                 structures due to coastal erosion.
               ï¿½ 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.
               ï¿½ 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:


              ï¿½ Loss of public beach access.
              ï¿½ Loss of recreational facilities and wild life areas.
              o Hazards to beach users.
              ï¿½ Loss of public facilities.
              ï¿½ Damage to the coastal environment.
              o Damage to coastal ecosystems.
              ï¿½ 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:

              ï¿½  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.
              ï¿½  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.
              ï¿½  In spite of the disadvantages of aerial photographs for
                 calculating shoreline changes, it is clearly the most
                 inexpensive approach for monitoring long coastlines.
              ï¿½  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.
              ï¿½  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:

              ï¿½  In past studies, different boundaries have been used for
                 monitoring coastline changes. For Hawaii, the most
                 appropriate boundary is the vegetation line.
              ï¿½  There is a shortage of data on the coastal zone for
                 decision making.
              ï¿½  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