DOCSLIB.ORG

Beach Nourishment Effects at Ystad Sandskogen Project in Practice

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Beach Nourishment Effects at Ystad Sandskogen Project in Practice Beach nourishment effects at Ystad Sandskogen Project in practice At The Department of Geoscience and Natural Resource Management, Copenhagen University and The Danisch Coastal Authority (DCA) Nikolai Heath Sørensen (bsj791) Supervisors: Troels Aagaard (IGN) and Per Sørensen (DCA) 20th of March 2020 The north-eastern end of Ystad Sandskogen. Photo by Nikolai Sørensen, 2020. Table of Contents 1. Intro and background ..................................................................................................................................... 2 1.1 Objectives ................................................................................................................................................ 3 2. Theory............................................................................................................................................................ 3 2.1 Sediment transport ................................................................................................................................... 3 2.2 Bedforms ................................................................................................................................................. 3 2.3 Seasonal profile variability ...................................................................................................................... 3 2.4 Beach nourishment .................................................................................................................................. 3 2.5 Coastal management structures ............................................................................................................... 4 3. Study site ....................................................................................................................................................... 5 4. Hydrodynamics and physical processes ........................................................................................................ 7 4.1 Waves ...................................................................................................................................................... 7 4.2 Sediment transport convergence zone ..................................................................................................... 9 4.3 Storms .................................................................................................................................................... 10 5. Methods and data ......................................................................................................................................... 10 5.1. Data processing .................................................................................................................................... 10 5.2. Data accuracy ....................................................................................................................................... 11 5.3. Sediment volume calculations .............................................................................................................. 12 5.3.1. MorphAn volumes ......................................................................................................................... 12 5.3.2. Sediment volume sections ............................................................................................................. 13 5.4 MorphAn momentary coastline position (MCL) ................................................................................... 14 5.5 Morphological evolution (Timestack plot) ............................................................................................ 14 6. Results ......................................................................................................................................................... 14 6.1 Volumes ................................................................................................................................................. 14 6.1.1 Total volume evolution ................................................................................................................... 15 6.1.2 Profile volumes ............................................................................................................................... 16 6.1.3 Section volumes .............................................................................................................................. 18 6.2 Morphology ........................................................................................................................................... 18 6.4 Momentary Coastline (MCL) ................................................................................................................ 20 7. Discussion.................................................................................................................................................... 21 7.1 Nourishment impact on the beach volume ............................................................................................ 21 7.2 Nourishment distribution ....................................................................................................................... 21 7.3 Hydrodynamic and nourishment impacts on morphology, MCL and volumes ..................................... 23 8. Conclusion ................................................................................................................................................... 24 9. References ................................................................................................................................................... 25 Appendix A: Timeline ..................................................................................................................................... 26 Appendix B: Profile volume evolutions .......................................................................................................... 27 1 1. Intro and background Certain parts of Ystad Sandskogen Beach are subject to erosion and shoreline retreat, especially at the southwestern part, which is the most visited part, where the SPA hotel Ystad Saltsjöbad and the easiest access to the beach are located. The coastline has retreated by an average of 1-1.5 m/yr over the past 150 years (Halldén, 2017). Almström, B & Hanson, H, 2013 estimate a sediment loss of 147,000 m3 from 1997 to 2010, 90 % of which has been eroded from below the water surface. This study, however, finds a less significant volume loss. The construction of Ystad harbour and several groynes influence the sediment budget at Ystad Sandskogen. Sediment is trapped upstream of these structures, resulting in beach erosion of the downstream beaches as the sediment outflow becomes much greater than the sediment input. This study finds a retreat of the coastline, especially at the most visited parts of the beach, which indicates a sediment redistribution or loss. Ystad Sandskogen is a beach of high recreational value and therefore of socioeconomic importance to the municipality of Ystad. The value of the beach is estimated to be 42 million euros per year (Halldén, 2017). The hinterland located behind the relatively small dunes are at risk of flooding if the beach is not assisted to sustain a certain resilience level to flooding and sea level rise. Beach nourishment is a coastal management action that is applied to increase the resilience of the beach to flooding and erosion and furthermore maintain a firm beach width and volume (see Figure 1 for nourishment effects on the shoreline extent). Beach nourishment has a lifetime of 1 to 5 years in general, depending on wave climate and the magnitude of nourishment (Giardino et al., 2019). This study finds the 2011 nourishment to have had positive effects on the beach volume and beach width for up to at least three years after the nourishment. Some areas, however, have not benefitted from the nourishment at all, while others only showed advantage from the nourishment in the first five months. 224,000 m3 of sand has been applied to Ystad Sandskogen over three intervals, 80,000m3 in May 2011, 64,000 m3 in March 2014 and 80,000 in April 2017. The last nourishment of the total four nourishments is planned to be carried out in April 2020 (Bontje et al., 2018). The purpose of this study is to assist parts of the EU, Interreg Building with Nature (BwN) project. BwN is a concept which researches the opportunities of accommodating climate change challenges, such as sea level rise and increased storm frequency, by applying nature’s own dynamics. Through the examination of seven, so called, living laboratories along the coast of the North Sea region (Ystad Sandskogen is one of these living laboratories), the projects aims to quantify nourishment effects for future policy making (Interreg, 2015). Figure 1: Ystad, Sandskogen Beach in December 2010, before the first nourishment (left) and June 2012 roughly one year after the 2011 nourishment (right) (Google Earth, 2020). 2 1.1 Objectives The aim of this study is to analyse the effects of the 2011 beach nourishment carried out at Ystad Sandskogen. By examining the cross and longshore distribution of the 80,000 m3 applied sediment and relating this to physical and hydrodynamic processes, the desired outcome is to estimate volume distributions, the lifetime of nourishment, the impact on morphology and the impact on the beach width. Research questions: - How does the total volume evolve post and prior beach nourishments? - How does the nourished volume distribute? - How does the momentary coastline (MCL) fluctuate
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Field Experiment on a Nourished Beach
    CHAPTER 157 A Field Experiment on a Nourished Beach A.J. Fernandez* G. Gomez Pina * G. Cuena* J.L. Ramirez* Abstract The performance of a beach nourishment at" Playa de Castilla" (Huel- va, Spain) is evaluated by means of accurate beach profile surveys, vi- sual breaking wave information, buoy-measured wave data and sediment samples. The shoreline recession at the nourished beach due to "profile equilibration" and "spreading out" losses is discussed. The modified equi- librium profile curve proposed by Larson (1991) is shown to accurately describe the profiles with a grain size varying across-shore. The "spread- ing out" losses measured at " Playa de Castilla" are found to be less than predicted by spreading out formulations. The utilization of borrowed material substantially coarser than the native material is suggested as an explanation. 1 INTRODUCTION Fernandez et al. (1990) presented a case study of a sand bypass project at "Playa de Castilla" (Huelva, Spain) and the corresponding monitoring project, that was going to be undertaken. The Beach Nourishment Monitoring Project at the "Playa de Castilla" was begun over two years ago. The project is being *Direcci6n General de Costas. M.O.P.T, Madrid (Spain) 2043 2044 COASTAL ENGINEERING 1992 carried out to evaluate the performance of a beach fill and to establish effective strategies of coastal management and represents one of the most comprehensive monitoring projects that has been undertaken in Spain. This paper summa- rizes and discusses the data set for wave climate, beach profiles and sediment samples. 2 STUDY SITE & MONITORING PROGRAM Playa de Castilla, Fig. 1, is a sandy beach located on the South-West coast of Spain between the Guadiana and Gualdalquivir rivers.
    [Show full text]
  • Management of Coastal Erosion by Creating Large-Scale and Small-Scale Sediment Cells
    COASTAL EROSION CONTROL BASED ON THE CONCEPT OF SEDIMENT CELLS by L. C. van Rijn, www.leovanrijn-sediment.com, March 2013 1. Introduction Nearly all coastal states have to deal with the problem of coastal erosion. Coastal erosion and accretion has always existed and these processes have contributed to the shaping of the present coastlines. However, coastal erosion now is largely intensified due to human activities. Presently, the total coastal area (including houses and buildings) lost in Europe due to marine erosion is estimated to be about 15 km2 per year. The annual cost of mitigation measures is estimated to be about 3 billion euros per year (EUROSION Study, European Commission, 2004), which is not acceptable. Although engineering projects are aimed at solving the erosion problems, it has long been known that these projects can also contribute to creating problems at other nearby locations (side effects). Dramatic examples of side effects are presented by Douglas et al. (The amount of sand removed from America’s beaches by engineering works, Coastal Sediments, 2003), who state that about 1 billion m3 (109 m3) of sand are removed from the beaches of America by engineering works during the past century. The EUROSION study (2004) recommends to deal with coastal erosion by restoring the overall sediment balance on the scale of coastal cells, which are defined as coastal compartments containing the complete cycle of erosion, deposition, sediment sources and sinks and the transport paths involved. Each cell should have sufficient sediment reservoirs (sources of sediment) in the form of buffer zones between the land and the sea and sediment stocks in the nearshore and offshore coastal zones to compensate by natural or artificial processes (nourishment) for sea level rise effects and human-induced erosional effects leading to an overall favourable sediment status.
    [Show full text]
  • Littoral Cells, Sand Budgets, and Beaches: Understanding California S
    LITTORAL CELLS, SAND BUDGETS, AND BEACHES: UNDERSTANDING CALIFORNIA’ S SHORELINE KIKI PATSCH GARY GRIGGS OCTOBER 2006 INSTITUTE OF MARINE SCIENCES UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SANTA CRUZ CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF BOATING AND WATERWAYS CALIFORNIA COASTAL SEDIMENT MANAGEMENT WORKGROUP Littoral Cells, Sand Budgets, and Beaches: Understanding California’s Shoreline By Kiki Patch Gary Griggs Institute of Marine Sciences University of California, Santa Cruz California Department of Boating and Waterways California Coastal Sediment Management WorkGroup October 2006 Cover Image: Santa Barbara Harbor © 2002 Kenneth & Gabrielle Adelman, California Coastal Records Project www.californiacoastline.org Brochure Design & Layout Laura Beach www.LauraBeach.net Littoral Cells, Sand Budgets, and Beaches: Understanding California’s Shoreline Kiki Patsch Gary Griggs Institute of Marine Sciences University of California, Santa Cruz TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary 7 Chapter 1: Introduction 9 Chapter 2: An Overview of Littoral Cells and Littoral Drift 11 Chapter 3: Elements Involved in Developing Sand Budgets for Littoral Cells 17 Chapter 4: Sand Budgets for California’s Major Littoral Cells and Changes in Sand Supply 23 Chapter 5: Discussion of Beach Nourishment in California 27 Chapter 6: Conclusions 33 References Cited and Other Useful References 35 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY he coastline of California can be divided into a set of dis- Beach nourishment or beach restoration is the placement of Ttinct, essentially self-contained littoral cells or beach com- sand on the shoreline with the intent of widening a beach that partments. These compartments are geographically limited and is naturally narrow or where the natural supply of sand has consist of a series of sand sources (such as rivers, streams and been signifi cantly reduced through human activities.
    [Show full text]
  • Beach Nourishment: Massdep's Guide to Best Management Practices for Projects in Massachusetts
    BBEACHEACH NNOURISHMEOURISHMENNTT MassDEP’sMassDEP’s GuideGuide toto BestBest ManagementManagement PracticesPractices forfor ProjectsProjects inin MassachusettsMassachusetts March 2007 acknowledgements LEAD AUTHORS: Rebecca Haney (Coastal Zone Management), Liz Kouloheras, (MassDEP), Vin Malkoski (Mass. Division of Marine Fisheries), Jim Mahala (MassDEP) and Yvonne Unger (MassDEP) CONTRIBUTORS: From MassDEP: Fred Civian, Jen D’Urso, Glenn Haas, Lealdon Langley, Hilary Schwarzenbach and Jim Sprague. From Coastal Zone Management: Bob Boeri, Mark Borrelli, David Janik, Julia Knisel and Wendolyn Quigley. Engineering consultants from Applied Coastal Research and Engineering Inc. also reviewed the document for technical accuracy. Lead Editor: David Noonan (MassDEP) Design and Layout: Sandra Rabb (MassDEP) Photography: Sandra Rabb (MassDEP) unless otherwise noted. Massachusetts Massachusetts Office Department of of Coastal Zone Environmental Protection Management 1 Winter Street 251 Causeway Street Boston, MA Boston, MA table of contents I. Glossary of Terms 1 II. Summary 3 II. Overview 6 • Purpose 6 • Beach Nourishment 6 • Specifications and Best Management Practices 7 • Permit Requirements and Timelines 8 III. Technical Attachments A. Beach Stability Determination 13 B. Receiving Beach Characterization 17 C. Source Material Characterization 21 D. Sample Problem: Beach and Borrow Site Sediment Analysis to Determine Stability of Nourishment Material for Shore Protection 22 E. Generic Beach Monitoring Plan 27 F. Sample Easement 29 G. References 31 GLOSSARY Accretion - the gradual addition of land by deposition of water-borne sediment. Beach Fill – also called “artificial nourishment”, “beach nourishment”, “replenishment”, and “restoration,” comprises the placement of sediment within the nearshore sediment transport system (see littoral zone). (paraphrased from Dean, 2002) Beach Profile – the cross-sectional shape of a beach plotted perpendicular to the shoreline.
    [Show full text]
  • Ystad Sweden Jazz Festival 2018!
    VÄLKOMMEN TILL/WELCOME TO YSTAD SWEDEN JAZZ FESTIVAL 2018! Kära jazzvänner! Dear friends, Vi känner stor glädje över att för nionde gången kunna presentera It is with great pleasure that we present, for the ninth time, en jazzfestival med många spännande och intressanta konserter. a jazz festival with many exciting and interesting concerts – a mix Megastjärnor och legendarer samsas med unga blivande stjärnor. of megastars, legends and young stars of tomorrow. As in 2017, we Liksom 2017 använder vi Ystad Arena för konserter vilket möjliggör will use Ystad Arena as a venue to enable more people to experience för fler att uppleva musiken. I år erbjuder vi 44 konserter med drygt the concerts. This year we will present over 40 concerts featuring 200 artister och musiker. Tillsammans med Ystads kommun fortsätter more than 200 artists and musicians. In cooperation with Ystad vi den viktiga satsningen på jazz för barn, JazzKidz. Barnkonserterna Municipality, we are continuing the important music initiative for ges på Ystads stadsbibliotek. Tre konserter ges på Solhällan i Löderup. children, JazzKidz. The concerts for children will be held at Ystad Bered er på en magisk upplevelse den 5 augusti, då vi erbjuder en unik Library. There will be three concerts at Solhällan in Löderup. And, konsert vid Ales stenar, på Kåseberga, i soluppgången. get ready for a magical experience on 5 August, when we will Jazzfestivalen arrangeras sedan 2011 av den ideella föreningen present a unique sunrise concert at Ales stenar, near Kåseberga. Ystad Sweden Jazz och Musik i Syd i ett viktigt och förtroendefullt The jazz festival has been arranged since 2011 by the non-profit samarbete.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 the Influence of Groyne Fields and Other Hard Defences on the Shoreline Configuration
    1 The Influence of Groyne Fields and Other Hard Defences on the Shoreline Configuration 2 of Soft Cliff Coastlines 3 4 Sally Brown1*, Max Barton1, Robert J Nicholls1 5 6 1. Faculty of Engineering and the Environment, University of Southampton, 7 University Road, Highfield, Southampton, UK. S017 1BJ. 8 9 * Sally Brown ([email protected], Telephone: +44(0)2380 594796). 10 11 Abstract: Building defences, such as groynes, on eroding soft cliff coastlines alters the 12 sediment budget, changing the shoreline configuration adjacent to defences. On the 13 down-drift side, the coastline is set-back. This is often believed to be caused by increased 14 erosion via the ‘terminal groyne effect’, resulting in rapid land loss. This paper examines 15 whether the terminal groyne effect always occurs down-drift post defence construction 16 (i.e. whether or not the retreat rate increases down-drift) through case study analysis. 17 18 Nine cases were analysed at Holderness and Christchurch Bay, England. Seven out of 19 nine sites experienced an increase in down-drift retreat rates. For the two remaining sites, 20 retreat rates remained constant after construction, probably as a sediment deficit already 21 existed prior to construction or as sediment movement was restricted further down-drift. 22 For these two sites, a set-back still evolved, leading to the erroneous perception that a 23 terminal groyne effect had developed. Additionally, seven of the nine sites developed a 24 set back up-drift of the initial groyne, leading to the defended sections of coast acting as 1 25 a hard headland, inhabiting long-shore drift.
    [Show full text]
  • Guidance for Flood Risk Analysis and Mapping
    Guidance for Flood Risk Analysis and Mapping Coastal Notations, Acronyms, and Glossary of Terms May 2016 Requirements for the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Risk Mapping, Assessment, and Planning (Risk MAP) Program are specified separately by statute, regulation, or FEMA policy (primarily the Standards for Flood Risk Analysis and Mapping). This document provides guidance to support the requirements and recommends approaches for effective and efficient implementation. Alternate approaches that comply with all requirements are acceptable. For more information, please visit the FEMA Guidelines and Standards for Flood Risk Analysis and Mapping webpage (www.fema.gov/guidelines-and-standards-flood-risk-analysis-and- mapping). Copies of the Standards for Flood Risk Analysis and Mapping policy, related guidance, technical references, and other information about the guidelines and standards development process are all available here. You can also search directly by document title at www.fema.gov/library. Coastal Notation, Acronyms, and Glossary of Terms May 2016 Guidance Document 66 Page i Document History Affected Section or Date Description Subsection Initial version of new transformed guidance. The content was derived from the Guidelines and Specifications for Flood Hazard Mapping Partners, Procedure Memoranda, First Publication May 2016 and/or Operating Guidance documents. It has been reorganized and is being published separately from the standards. Coastal Notation, Acronyms, and Glossary of Terms May 2016 Guidance Document 66
    [Show full text]
  • The Project for Pilot Gravel Beach Nourishment Against Coastal Disaster on Fongafale Island in Tuvalu
    MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS, TRADES, TOURISM, ENVIRONMENT AND LABOUR THE GOVERNMENT OF TUVALU THE PROJECT FOR PILOT GRAVEL BEACH NOURISHMENT AGAINST COASTAL DISASTER ON FONGAFALE ISLAND IN TUVALU FINAL REPORT (SUPPORTING REPORT) April 2018 JAPAN INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION AGENCY NIPPON KOEI CO., LTD. FUTABA INC. GE JR 18-058 MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS, TRADES, TOURISM, ENVIRONMENT AND LABOUR THE GOVERNMENT OF TUVALU THE PROJECT FOR PILOT GRAVEL BEACH NOURISHMENT AGAINST COASTAL DISASTER ON FONGAFALE ISLAND IN TUVALU FINAL REPORT (SUPPORTING REPORT) April 2018 JAPAN INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION AGENCY NIPPON KOEI CO., LTD. FUTABA INC. Table of Contents Supporting Report-1 Study on the Quality and Quantity of Materials in Phase-1 (quote from Interim Report 1) .............................................................. SR-1 Supporting Report-2 Planning and Design in Phase-1 (quote from Interim Report 1) ............ SR-2 Supporting Report-3 Design Drawing ..................................................................................... SR-3 Supporting Report-4 Project Implementation Plan in Phase-1 (quote from Interim Report 1)................................................................................................. SR-4 Supporting Report-5 Preliminary Environmental Assessment Report (PEAR) ....................... SR-5 Supporting Report-6 Public Consultation in Phase-1 (quote from Interim Report 1) .............. SR-6 Supporting Report-7 Bidding Process (quote from Progress Report) ...................................... SR-7 Supporting
    [Show full text]
  • Mathematical Model of Groynes on Shingle Beaches
    HR Wallingford Mathematical Model of Groynes on Shingle Beaches A H Brampton BSc PhD D G Goldberg BA Report SR 276 November 1991 Address:Hydraulics Research Ltd, wallingford,oxfordshire oxl0 gBA,United Kingdom. Telephone:0491 35381 Intemarional + 44 49135381 relex: g4gsszHRSwALG. Facstunile:049132233Intemarional + M 49132233 Registeredin EngtandNo. 1622174 This report describes an investigation carried out by HR Wallingford under contract CSA 1437, 'rMathematical- Model of Groynes on Shingle Beaches", funded by the Ministry of Agri-culture, Fisheries and Food. The departmental nominated. officer for this contract was Mr A J Allison. The company's nominated. project officer was Dr S W Huntington. This report is published on behalf of the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, but the opinions e>rpressed are not necessarily those of the Ministry. @ Crown Copyright 1991 Published by permission of the Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office Mathematical model of groSmes on shingle beaches A H Brampton BSc PhD D G Goldberg BA Report SR 276 November 1991 ABSTRACT This report describes the development of a mathematical model of a shingle beach with gro5mes. The development of the beach plan shape is calculated given infornation on its initial position and information on wave conditions just offshore. Different groyne profiles and spacings can be specified, so that alternative gro5me systems can be investigated. Ttre model includes a method for dealing with varying water levels as the result of tidal rise and fall. CONTENTS Page 1. INTRODUCTION I 2. SCOPEOF THE UODEL 3 2.t Model resolution and input conditions 3 2.2 Sediment transport mechanisms 6 2.3 Vertical distribution of sediment transport q 2.4 Wave transformation modelling L0 3.
    [Show full text]
  • The Shifting Sand of Provincetown
    The Shifting Sand of Provincetown Greg Berman (Woods Hole Sea Grant & Cape Cod Cooperative Extension) March 15, 2019 Glacial History 25,000 yr ago 400’ below SL, ~1 mile thick By ~ 15,000 ice was gone. 11,000 years ago 6,000 years ago Present Day (Shaw et al., 2002) General Coastal Processes Longshore Sediment Transport +3’/yr +4’/yr +5’/yr +8’/yr -2’/yr -2’/yr -1’/yr 0’/yr Direction of Direction of Longshore Current Longshore Current Deposition Erosion Downdrift Coastal Structure Source: MORIS: CZM’s Online Mapping Tool Longshore Sediment Transport Longshore Sediment Transport Longshore Sediment Transport Longshore Sediment Transport Longshore Sediment Transport Google Earth Engine: Timelapse is a global, zoomable video that lets you see how the Earth has changed over the past 32 years. It is made from 33 cloud-free annual mosaics, one for each year from 1984 to 2016, which are made interactively explorable by Carnegie Mellon University CREATE Lab's Time Machine library. General Coastal Processes Coastal Processes: Barrier Migration Perpendicular to Shore Overwash: Storms push sand across the island and into the lagoon area beyond. Barrier `rolls over on itself.‘ Coastal Processes: Barrier Migration Perpendicular to Shore Adapted from http://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/lookingatearth/katrina_poststorm.html Peggotty Beach 2016 Video by Peter Miles Perpendicular Transport…….Blocked input 1.3mi What is Erosion? It’s all sediment transport! What is Erosion???..... just more leaving than coming in Accretion Dynamic Equilibrium Erosion Living with Erosion 1. Erosion of glacial landforms is the MOST important source of sediment for dunes and beaches in Massachusetts.
    [Show full text]
  • Shoreline Stabilisation
    Section 5 SHORELINE STABILISATION 5.1 Overview of Options Options for handling beach erosion along the western segment of Shelley Beach include: • Do Nothing – which implies letting nature take its course; • Beach Nourishment – place or pump sand on the beach to restore a beach; • Wave Dissipating Seawall – construct a wave dissipating seawall in front of or in lieu of the vertical wall so that wave energy is absorbed and complete protection is provided to the boatsheds and bathing boxes behind the wall for a 50 year planning period; • Groyne – construct a groyne, somewhere to the east of Campbells Road to prevent sand from the western part of Shelley Beach being lost to the eastern part of Shelley Beach; • Offshore Breakwater – construct a breakwater parallel to the shoreline and seaward of the existing jetties to dissipate wave energy before it reaches the beach; and • Combinations of the above. 5.2 Do Nothing There is no reason to believe that the erosion process that has occurred over at least the last 50 years, at the western end of Shelley Beach, will diminish. If the water depth over the nearshore bank has deepened, as it appears visually from aerial photographs, the wave heights and erosive forces may in fact increase. Therefore “Do Nothing” implies that erosion will continue, more structures will be threatened and ultimately damaged, and the timber vertical wall become undermined and fail, exposing the structures behind the wall to wave forces. The cliffs behind the wall will be subjected to wave forces and will be undermined if they are not founded on solid rock.
    [Show full text]
  • ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT Proposed Coastal Modification Works at Ayada Maldives Gdh
    ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT Proposed Coastal Modification Works at Ayada Maldives GDh. Magudhdhuvaa Island August 2019 Prepared for: Maldives Tourism Development Corporation (MTDC) PLC Prepared by: Mohamed Zuhair (EIA01/15) & Ibrahim Shakir (BP03106) Page | 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS .............................................................................................................................................. 14 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................................... 17 2. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................ 21 2.1 OVERVIEW OF THE PROJECT ......................................................................................... 21 2.2 LEGAL REQUIREMENT .................................................................................................... 22 2.3 PROJECT JUSTIFICATION AND RATIONALE .............................................................. 23 2.4 DONORS AND INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS ................................................... 25 2.5 EIA BACKGROUND AND RATIONALE ......................................................................... 25 2.6 EIA APPROACH, SCOPE AND OBJECTIVE ................................................................... 25 2.7 EIA METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................................ 26 2.8 REVIEW OF RELEVANT STUDIES ................................................................................
    [Show full text]