2. They are aesthetically-pleasing, providing a sense of nature and wildness to
homeowners and tourists.
3. They protect housing and infrastructure from the impacts of future storms.
People on the Texas Coast routinely invest in expensive foredune restoration
projects, while understanding that they are likely to be destroyed in less than a
decade.
In this chapter, the incentives behind three dune restoration projects on Galveston
Island, and the storms that created and/or destroyed them, are examined. Additionally, an example is presented where Light Detection and Ranging (LIDAR) laser
altimetry, Global Positioning System (GPS), and Geographic Information System
(GIS) were used to develop a novel technique for dune restoration.
6.2 Delineation of Public–Private Property Boundary:
Pirates’ Beach Project
Tropical Storm Frances (1998) destroyed foredunes in the Pirates’ Beach area on
Galveston Island, Texas, leaving a flat profile with a low slope. No vegetation
remained between the ocean and the residential community of Pirates’ Beach that
was located approximately 75 m further landward.
Under Texas law, the Texas Open Beaches Act (§61.011), demarcates private
from public property using the vegetation line. Thus, after Frances, the residents of
Pirates’ Beach were concerned that the State of Texas might appropriate their land
through this Act, since the vegetation line had receded to a location landward of
their houses. In the past, the State had subjectively applied the act, often allowing
homeowners to remain, regardless of whether the line of 100 % vegetation coverage was landward or seaward of the housing structure. Although the State would
often declare all land seaward of these structures as publicly owned, they largely
avoided condemning the structures by declaring eminent domain over them,
because of the expense of fighting lawsuits that were often filed by the homeowners. Typically, the State waited until the erosion had become so severe that the
housing structures physically collapsed into the ocean. Most of the homeowners in
Pirates’ Beach were not in jeopardy of losing their homes to the State after
Frances; however, they had little to no land seaward of their homes.
Residents of the Pirates’ Beach community were concerned that the public
easement was encroaching upon their private lands, and they could foresee that the
most seaward structures would be lost in a few years. Moreover, residents
expressed concern that the public was accessing the beach through their property,
walking through their manicured lawns, creating the potential for crime, and
resulting in a loss of privacy for their high-income community.
The community of Pirates’ Beach pointed out that erosion at their location had
been hastened by the existence of shoreline armoring that had been in place for
decades prior (the Galveston Seawall and jetties), located upstream in the littoral
current to the east. Pirates’ Beach residents argued that their downstream loss of
94
R. Feagin
homeowners and tourists.
3. They protect housing and infrastructure from the impacts of future storms.
People on the Texas Coast routinely invest in expensive foredune restoration
projects, while understanding that they are likely to be destroyed in less than a
decade.
In this chapter, the incentives behind three dune restoration projects on Galveston
Island, and the storms that created and/or destroyed them, are examined. Additionally, an example is presented where Light Detection and Ranging (LIDAR) laser
altimetry, Global Positioning System (GPS), and Geographic Information System
(GIS) were used to develop a novel technique for dune restoration.
6.2 Delineation of Public–Private Property Boundary:
Pirates’ Beach Project
Tropical Storm Frances (1998) destroyed foredunes in the Pirates’ Beach area on
Galveston Island, Texas, leaving a flat profile with a low slope. No vegetation
remained between the ocean and the residential community of Pirates’ Beach that
was located approximately 75 m further landward.
Under Texas law, the Texas Open Beaches Act (§61.011), demarcates private
from public property using the vegetation line. Thus, after Frances, the residents of
Pirates’ Beach were concerned that the State of Texas might appropriate their land
through this Act, since the vegetation line had receded to a location landward of
their houses. In the past, the State had subjectively applied the act, often allowing
homeowners to remain, regardless of whether the line of 100 % vegetation coverage was landward or seaward of the housing structure. Although the State would
often declare all land seaward of these structures as publicly owned, they largely
avoided condemning the structures by declaring eminent domain over them,
because of the expense of fighting lawsuits that were often filed by the homeowners. Typically, the State waited until the erosion had become so severe that the
housing structures physically collapsed into the ocean. Most of the homeowners in
Pirates’ Beach were not in jeopardy of losing their homes to the State after
Frances; however, they had little to no land seaward of their homes.
Residents of the Pirates’ Beach community were concerned that the public
easement was encroaching upon their private lands, and they could foresee that the
most seaward structures would be lost in a few years. Moreover, residents
expressed concern that the public was accessing the beach through their property,
walking through their manicured lawns, creating the potential for crime, and
resulting in a loss of privacy for their high-income community.
The community of Pirates’ Beach pointed out that erosion at their location had
been hastened by the existence of shoreline armoring that had been in place for
decades prior (the Galveston Seawall and jetties), located upstream in the littoral
current to the east. Pirates’ Beach residents argued that their downstream loss of
94
R. Feagin