Myrtle Beach: A history of shore protection and beach restoration

Shore & Beach Pub Date : 2019-09-08 DOI:10.34237/1008732
T. Kana, H. L. Kaczkowski
{"title":"Myrtle Beach: A history of shore protection and beach restoration","authors":"T. Kana, H. L. Kaczkowski","doi":"10.34237/1008732","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The City of Myrtle Beach (South Carolina, USA) initiated a three-phase plan for beach restoration in the 1980s: Phase 1 — small-scale beach scraping; Phase 2 — mediumscale nourishment by trucks using inland sand; and Phase 3 — large-scale nourishment by dredge using offshore sand. Phases 1 and 2 were locally funded and served as interim measures (1981-1996) until a 50-year federal project could be constructed (1997 to present). In the course of this work, the city pioneered several approaches to beach management and became a model for the state. These include: the prototype SC beach survey program; the profile volume method for determining shorelines in the presence of seawalls, which was codified in the Beach Management Act (BMA) of 1988; the first locally funded nourishment (1986-1987) and FEMA-funded postdisaster renourishment after Hurricane Hugo 1989-1990; and the first surveys of offshore deposits for nourishment. Before restoration, nearly 65% of the 9-mile (14.5 kilometer) oceanfront was armored with seawalls, bulkheads, and revetments (1981). After nourishment, erosion control structures are now buried and fronted by a vegetated storm berm, while a wider beach accommodates millions of visitors each year. Total volumes and adjusted costs of nourishment from 1986 to early 2018 are 4,997,201 cubic yards (3,820,360 m3) and ~$70.8 million ($2018), respectively. On a unit annual beach length basis, the cost of beach restoration and improvement has averaged $46.80 per one foot of shoreline per year (~$153.50/m/yr) ($2018). Oceanfront property values on a unit length of shoreline basis presently range from ~$15,000/ft (~$49,200/m) for single-family homes to ~$75,000/ft (~$250,000/m) for high-rise buildings, suggesting that beach maintenance has cost well under 0.5% of oceanfront property values per year. Sand loss rates have averaged ~0.8 cy/ft/yr (2.0 m3/m/yr), and the rate of nourishment has been more than adequate to keep up with the ~0.37 ft (0.11 m) sea level rise between 1980 and 2018.","PeriodicalId":153020,"journal":{"name":"Shore & Beach","volume":"4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Shore & Beach","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.34237/1008732","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

The City of Myrtle Beach (South Carolina, USA) initiated a three-phase plan for beach restoration in the 1980s: Phase 1 — small-scale beach scraping; Phase 2 — mediumscale nourishment by trucks using inland sand; and Phase 3 — large-scale nourishment by dredge using offshore sand. Phases 1 and 2 were locally funded and served as interim measures (1981-1996) until a 50-year federal project could be constructed (1997 to present). In the course of this work, the city pioneered several approaches to beach management and became a model for the state. These include: the prototype SC beach survey program; the profile volume method for determining shorelines in the presence of seawalls, which was codified in the Beach Management Act (BMA) of 1988; the first locally funded nourishment (1986-1987) and FEMA-funded postdisaster renourishment after Hurricane Hugo 1989-1990; and the first surveys of offshore deposits for nourishment. Before restoration, nearly 65% of the 9-mile (14.5 kilometer) oceanfront was armored with seawalls, bulkheads, and revetments (1981). After nourishment, erosion control structures are now buried and fronted by a vegetated storm berm, while a wider beach accommodates millions of visitors each year. Total volumes and adjusted costs of nourishment from 1986 to early 2018 are 4,997,201 cubic yards (3,820,360 m3) and ~$70.8 million ($2018), respectively. On a unit annual beach length basis, the cost of beach restoration and improvement has averaged $46.80 per one foot of shoreline per year (~$153.50/m/yr) ($2018). Oceanfront property values on a unit length of shoreline basis presently range from ~$15,000/ft (~$49,200/m) for single-family homes to ~$75,000/ft (~$250,000/m) for high-rise buildings, suggesting that beach maintenance has cost well under 0.5% of oceanfront property values per year. Sand loss rates have averaged ~0.8 cy/ft/yr (2.0 m3/m/yr), and the rate of nourishment has been more than adequate to keep up with the ~0.37 ft (0.11 m) sea level rise between 1980 and 2018.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
默特尔比奇:海岸保护和海滩修复的历史
默特尔比奇市(美国南卡罗来纳州)在20世纪80年代启动了一项三阶段的海滩恢复计划:第一阶段——小规模的海滩清理;第2阶段-用卡车运送中型营养品,利用内陆的沙子;第三阶段-利用近海沙进行大规模疏浚养料。第一阶段和第二阶段由地方资助,并作为临时措施(1981-1996年),直到一个50年的联邦项目建成(1997年至今)。在这项工作的过程中,该市开创了几种海滩管理方法,并成为该州的典范。这些包括:原型SC海滩调查程序;在存在海堤的情况下确定海岸线的剖面体积法,已被编入1988年的《海滩管理法》;1986-1987年第一次由地方资助的营养品和1989-1990年雨果飓风后由联邦应急管理局资助的灾后营养品;第一次对近海沉积物进行营养调查。在修复之前,近65%的9英里(14.5公里)海滨都有海堤、舱壁和护岸(1981年)。在营养之后,侵蚀控制结构现在被掩埋,前面是一个植被繁茂的风暴护堤,而一个更广阔的海滩每年可容纳数百万游客。从1986年到2018年初,营养总量和调整后成本分别为4,997,201立方码(3,820,360立方米)和约7080万美元(2018美元)。以每年的单位海滩长度为基础,海滩修复和改善的成本平均为每年每英尺海岸线46.80美元(约153.50美元/米/年)(2018美元)。目前,海滨物业的单位海岸线价值从单户住宅的约15,000美元/英尺(约49200美元/米)到高层建筑的约75,000美元/英尺(约250,000美元/米)不等,这表明海滩维护成本每年远低于海滨物业价值的0.5%。砂粒流失率平均为0.8 cy/ft/年(2.0 m3/m/年),而营养物的流失率足以跟上1980年至2018年间海平面上升0.37英尺(0.11米)的速度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Supplemental Online Materials: The impacts of climate change on surfing resources Engineering and design of the Lightning Point Shoreline Restoration Project in Bayou La Batre, Alabama Tidal marsh restoration at Blackwater National Wildlife Refuge, Maryland: A case study in thin-layer placement Thin layer placement for marsh enhancement: Planning, design, construction, and monitoring considerations Evaluating direct and strategic placement of dredged material for marsh restoration through model simulations
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1