On September 22, the state Board of Land and Natural Resources did something unusual. But it was an unusual situation.
A decade ago, then-Department of Land and Natural Resources director William Aila granted Graham and Marisa Chelius a five-year emergency Conservation District Use Permit to install a sandbag revetment makai of their eroding beachfront property in West Kauaʻi, near Kikiaola Small Boat Harbor. Aila also issued a right-of-entry permit for the same period to install the bags.
By all accounts, the harbor was built in the late 1950’s and early 1960’s in such a way that it interrupts the natural flow of sediment along the coastline, causing the beach east of it to erode.
The erosion problem was well known before the Cheliuses bought their home in 2010. But they say that they relied on the state’s recognition beforehand of the harbor’s role in the erosion of adjacent properties and promises that it would regularly transport the sediment that accumulated on the west side of the harbor 1,000 feet to the east side.
Although the DLNR’s Division of Boating and Ocean Recreation transported some sediment over the years, it was nowhere near what was expected or necessary to stop the erosion. As a result, the Cheliuses requested and received a five-year extension of their emergency CDUP in 2018 from then-DLNR director Suzanne Case.
On May 6, they asked for another extension and permission to repair the revetment, which DLNR director and Land Board chair Dawn Chang approved.
Chang’s approval was based on recommendations from the DLNR’s Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands.
OCCL administrator Michael Cain explained to the board on September 22, “The fact that the natural system is broken by human development is what made our office comfortable with recommending the sandbag walls here and not in other places.”
Chang’s approval letter noted that the erosion in the area was due in large part to the boat harbor. She also acknowledged that the CDUP under which the DLNR’s Division of Boating and Ocean Recreation manages the harbor was amended in 2013 to include an initial transport of 80,000 cubic yards of sand and the annual maintenance transport of 5,000 cubic yards. However, DOBOR only transported 40,000 cubic yards in 2014 and 14,000 more in 2019.
“The shoreline along many of Hawaiʻi’s carbonate sand beaches are retreating due to natural wave dynamics and sea level rise. However, the sand in the subject area originates from volcanic sediments transported by the Waimea River. The shoreline along this region should be naturally accreting due to the steady source of sand from the river,” she wrote.
She added that the revetment would be necessary until DOBOR establishes a regular program of sand bypassing.
She then directed the Cheliuses to contact the DLNR’s Land Division about any land disposition that might be required. They did, and they did not like what the division had to say.
The Cheliuses’ revetment has been sitting on state land for nearly a decade, for free. In reviewing their request for permission to repair the revetment and retain it for another five years, the Land Division decided it was well past time that rent be paid. Failure to secure rent for their use of public land would be “an abrogation of the state’s right to regulate public resources and of the state’s responsibility to beneficiaries of the public land trust,” Land Division staff wrote in a September 22 report to the Land Board.
“The applicants contend that the erosion affecting their property is caused entirely by the existence of the Kikiaola Small Boat Harbor [and therefore they] should not be required to pay for and obtain a long-term disposition from the state for their shoreline protection structure,” the report stated.
Land Division staff argued that because the Cheliuses knew of the ongoing erosion conditions when they bought their property, they are responsible for mitigation measures undertaken “for the benefit of the fragile asset they knowingly purchased.”
The division recommended that the board do one of two things, given the Cheliuses’ adamant opposition to paying market rate for a long-term easement:
The board could authorize the repair and maintenance via a right-of-entry permit for six months, a revocable permit, and a 25-year easement (the last being subject to approval by the state Legislature and the governor). The revocable permit would allow the DLNR to impose rent while the easement approvals are obtained and documents prepared. It would also require the Cheliuses to post a removal bond in case the Legislature refused to authorize the revetment.
In the alternative, the board could require immediate removal of the structure via a right-of-entry permit.
Despite the harbor’s role in the erosion problem, Land Division administrator Russell Tsuji told the board that the department simply lacks any legal basis to allow the revetment to stay there rent-free.
If it were found that the revetment somehow served the best interests of the state, perhaps a nominal rent — rather than market rent — could be charged, he said. “Here, we just don’t see that. We see a structure protecting private property,” he said.
Tsuji noted that the original emergency CDUP contained a five-year deadline for the couple to either remove the sandbags or apply for a non-emergency Conservation District Use Permit, which would require Land Board approval.
“They never did come in for a CDUA,” he said.
Should the Legislature approve the easement, the Cheliuses would have — and would have to pay for — a 25-year land disposition, with an emergency CDUP that expires in a few years and no guarantee that they would receive another extension or Land Board approval of a non-emergency CDUP.
Even so, the majority of the Land Board voted to authorize the permits and long-term easement. Board members Aimee Barnes and Kaiwi Yoon opposed the motion. Both were dubious about DOBOR’s planned long-term sand bypass program, which has received a $2.1 million appropriation from the Legislature.
Yoon said the idea sounded bonkers and like a waste of money. “It’s like digging a hole in the sand and watching it fill up over and over and over again,” he said.
Despite Graham Chelius’ arguments that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers had determined in 2008 that a long-term bypass should solve the erosion problem, Barnes countered that the Corps’ job is to turn natural places into unnatural ones and its point of view may not be shared by everyone.
After the vote, Yoon expressed his disappointment with the board’s vote.
“As a matter of consistency, this board has had to make very, very difficult decisions about armoring [the shoreline] and people that have chosen to arm their shorelines to protect their homes. I think we’re on the right trajectory of being fair and equitable to everybody … but if we waffle on these things, I think our resolve becomes minimized,” he said.
“We’ve told others armoring is not the way to do it,” he added.
“I don’t see sandbags as armoring. … I see sandbags as temporary,” Chang said.
Barnes said she shared Yoon’s concerns and added that she considered a sandbag revetment to be armoring of the shoreline, especially if it’s beenthere for 10 years.
Given the concerns they raised, Chang said it was clear that she should not be unilaterally making decisions to extend the emergency permits.
“I realize now that we are going to bring all of those matters back to the board for action,” she said.
— Teresa Dawson
Leave a Reply