Managing Coastal Erosion (1990) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
5. State Programs and Experiences
5. State Programs and Experiences
Pages 94-119
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 94... ...
with the use of aerial photographs. Besides being used for state regulation, recession rates are useful in providing information and education to property owners and in support of local government regulations.
|
From page 95... ...
State and local governments employ several techniques to transform recession rate data into hazard zones with specific setback requirements. Many state programs employ data averaging or "grouping" procedures.
|
From page 97... ...
97 _ Ct cd _C o _ ~ LL V, .5 o In ED Z ~ Z Z Z ~ Z Z Z Z Z ~ c)
|
From page 98... ...
State experience has shown that recession rate data must be updated periodically to reflect changes in the effectiveness of shore protection or beach nourishment; other human-induced changes such as dredging, harbor construction, and so on; water level fluctuations on the Great Lakes; subsidence or mean sea level rise; and other
|
From page 99... ...
Although state coastal zone erosion management programs are effectively addressing setbacks for new construction, they have had limited success in addressing losses in areas where development predates the implementation of the setback program. Nor have the states fully addressed the anticipated eventual losses to structures built following current setback guidelines a structure with a useful life of 60 to 100 years eventually may be lost if built with a Midyear setback.
|
From page 100... ...
Where shore protection is used to extend the life of buildings, problems associated with shore protection usually occur, including high cost, limited effectiveness, maintenance needs, adverse impacts on adjacent property, and Toss of recreational beaches. To provide specific examples of the nature of state coastal erosion management programs, this committee reviewed programs in four states: Michigan, North Carolina, Florida, and California.
|
From page 101... ...
In past instances when severe storms have caused extensive erosion damage, the public has absorbed part of the loss through disaster assistance, disaster loans, and damage to public facilities. For example, after a 1973 storm, disaster declarations led to Small Business Administration loans and grants to property owners along southern Lake Huron for repair of shore protection and damaged homes.
|
From page 102... ...
Michigan's program emphasizes a nonstructural approach to reduction of damages from shore erosion. This approach has been taken because structural protection in the form of erosion control devices may be prohibitively expensive in some cases, ineffective in others, and, if improperly designed, may accelerate erosion on adjacent property.
|
From page 103... ...
The special exception will be granted only if the shore protection is designed to meet or exceed proper engineering standards for the Great Lakes and a professional engineer certifies that the shore protection has been designed and built in accordance with these standards.
|
From page 104... ...
Michigan's Shorelands Protection and Management Act provides that local units of government may administer and enforce the minimum setback requirements established under the act by incorporating them into zoning ordinances. The primary advantage of local enforcement of shoreland regulations is that it increases the efficiency of administration.
|
From page 105... ...
the erosion rate setback (30 times the annual erosion rate, measured from the vegetation line, for small structures; 60 times the erosion rate for structures with more than four units or more than 5,000 square feet total floor area)
|
From page 106... ...
Since the In beaches are a vital economic resource, the foundation of a tourism economy, and a key publicly owned recreational resource, the state has aclopted a strong policy of protecting its beaches. Effective January 1985, no erosion control devices designed to harden or stabilize the ocean beach's location are allowed in North Carolina.
|
From page 107... ...
FLORmA'S COASTAL EROSION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM In 1968 the state of Florida initiated a comprehensive program of beach management. This program, in the Division of Beaches and Shores of the Department of Natural Resources, has grown from a single employee in 1968 to more than 75 employees in 1988.
|
From page 108... ...
Factors considered in permit approval include structure footprint, ability to withstand a 100-year storm event, proximity to the shoreline, erosion rate, shoreparalle} coverage, and vegetation disturbance. State law also includes a 30-year erosion provision requiring, with minor exception, singlefarruly dwellings to be set back 30 times the annual erosion rate.
|
From page 109... ...
Eighty percent of California's population of 26 million people live within 30 miles of the 1,100 anile shoreline (California State Senate, 1989~. It extends In latitude from Boston, Massachusetts, to Charleston, South Carolina.
|
From page 110... ...
There are a number of state agencies concerned with various aspects of California's coastal zone management program. The major ones are the California Coastal Commission; California State Coastal Conservancy; Department of Boating and Waterways of the Resources Agency; State Lands Commission; Bureau of Land Management; Department of Parks and Recreation (the state park system includes 292 miles of ocean and bay frontage)
|
From page 111... ...
The California Coastal Commission issues a large number of staff reports on specific cases that come before the commission. The comrn~ssion also prepares more general technical reports, some specifically concerned with coastal erosion Dewing et al., 1989; Howe, 1978~.
|
From page 114... ...
The act mandates the creation of the Coastal Resource Information Center to collect information ranging from past Coastal Commission decisions to scientific studies and technical data relevant to specific portions of the coastal zone. Due largely to budgetary restraints, the center is not yet in operation (California State Senate, 1989~.
|
From page 115... ...
In order to rn~nimize or prevent damage from storms such as those that battered the state in 1982 and 1983, the California Coastal Commission has attempted to regulate the design of structures in potentially hazardous areas. The Statewide Interpretive Coastal Act Guidelmes contain a section that defines coastal bluff top areas that will require detailed geologic and/or eng~neer~g studies before a development permit can be issued by the commission.
|
From page 116... ...
, the commission has favored the use of beach nourishment to reduce shoreline recession rates. However, it was decided that in some instances large coastal structures are the only viable alternative to solving a severe shore erosion problem.
|
From page 117... ...
1989. Report on the California Coastal Commission, Advisory Commission on Cost Control in State Government.
|
From page 118... ...
Staff Report, California Coastal Commission, December 11. Inman, D
|
From page 119... ...
1987. Northern California Coastal Photography, Beach Profile and Bathymetry Index.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.