According to this story, the County of Maui is in the process of revising its shoreline setback rules.
The county’s shoreline setback rules determine where beachfront landowners can build on their property. The current formula to determine a setback is 20 feet, plus 50 times the annual erosion rate of the property. The minimum setback is 25 feet, while the maximum is 150 feet.
The proposed amendments include increasing the base used in the setback formula from 20 to 25 feet.
Abbott said the change was needed because some landowners whose properties had zero erosion have argued they should have a 20-foot setback based on the formula. He said the change would make the formula consistent with the minimum setback.
As I recently posted here, shoreline legal issues are a touchy subject, but in the rush to “protect” beaches, you cannot just blow by the property rights of owners. Government escapes liability for regulations imposing “no build” easements (setbacks being a classic example) only to the extent that the regulation is closely tailored. The reason advanced for Maui’s variable setback rules is the supposed history of beachfront erosion at particular locations, with a fixed “buffer zone” plus historical erosion rates added together to calculate the “no build zone” on a specific parcel. The major justification for setbacks is protecting the homeowner from building on property that may eventually be eroded.
If so, it seems odd that if a shoreline parcel has had “zero erosion” that the owner should be subject to a setback at all. What harm is caused by building where there has been no erosion, and what danger is being prevented?
