Risky business

New condos along a flood-prone stretch of the Grand Strand raise concerns about what a hurricane could do to the area

By SAMMY FRETWELL

sfretwell@thestate.com

NORTH MYRTLE BEACH — In one of the most flood-prone stretches of the South Carolina coast, regulators have allowed construction of four oceanfront condominium towers that experts worry will cost taxpayers a bundle in insurance claims and shoreline maintenance.

State regulators say it’s OK to build the condo towers close to the ocean at Cherry Grove because $20 million in tax-funded beach renourishment has widened and stabilized the shoreline.

North Myrtle Beach, which includes the Cherry Grove community, has ranked 55th nationally in repeat flood insurance losses since 1978 — higher than any other South Carolina city, according to a National Wildlife Federation study. Cherry Grove is the most flood-prone section of North Myrtle Beach.

“We have to give people reasonable use of their property,” said Bill Eiser, with South Carolina’s coastal management division. “It probably makes sense from a state point of view.”

But Jon Boettcher, manager of natural hazards plans with the state Emergency Management Division, said computer models indicate a 20-foot-high surge of ocean water would swamp Cherry Grove if directly hit by a midrange Category 3 hurricane.

Boettcher said other Horry County beaches would suffer similar flooding, but the storm surge would extend farther and remain longer at Cherry Grove because it is so flat.

And while major condominium buildings sit on deep pilings, Boettcher said even they could be threatened if flood waters remained for extended periods of time.

“It’s not a guarantee the buildings would remain structurally intact,” he said.

MORE ROOM TO DEVELOP

At issue is the placement of state “setback lines,” imaginary markers that keep large-scale development off the beachfront. They were established nearly 20 years ago to protect state beaches from encroaching development that would worsen erosion.

After the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers spent $20 million widening the shore at North Myrtle Beach in the late 1990s, state regulators moved the lines seaward by 50 to 100 feet in the center of Cherry Grove.

That sharply reduced state development restrictions on about 20 blocks of beachfront, which in turn opened the floodgate for big condo projects instead of beach houses. Until the lines moved, beach houses could only be built in this area of oceanfront.

The change in development rules at Cherry Grove has proved more dramatic than at any other beach in South Carolina, although renourishment projects at Garden City and Hilton Head Island have eased restrictions in some spots.

Development projects in Cherry Grove include Prince Resort, which will feature two, 17-story oceanfront condominium buildings in the Cherry Grove pier parking area; and the Towers on The Grove, which proposes twin, 20-story towers on the oceanfront near Sea Mountain Highway.

The Cherry Grove beachfront has never had condo buildings that tall, said Paul Blust, North Myrtle Beach zoning administrator. The projects call for more than 1,200 new condominium units at Cherry Grove.

Developers say they are following the rules outlined by the S.C. Department of Health and Environmental Control; the projects have been proposed since the state moved setback lines seaward in 2000.

“It’s just a clear-cut, simple matter under DHEC’s regulations,” said Larry Brumfield, a project manager for the Prince Resort. “We’ve met the requirements.”

FLOOD-PRONE BEACH

Stan Riggs, a professor at East Carolina University, said bigger buildings along the seashore will put more people in peril when the next hurricane hits.

But he said the massive structures also could cost taxpayers big money to repair hurricane damage or to protect them from encroaching seas. He can’t believe the state moved setback lines closer to the ocean for bigger development.

“This was a terrible idea,” said Riggs, a nationally known coastal geologist and erosion expert. “These shorelines all along the Atlantic are eroding.”

Regulators say they had little choice. If the state did not change the rules after renourishment, oceanfront landowners could have sued under property rights laws, Eiser said.

At just six to seven feet above sea level, Cherry Grove has less than half the elevation of Myrtle Beach and other Horry County resorts, making it more susceptible to routine beach erosion and storm surges from hurricanes.

Parts of the beach once contained inlets that were filled in years ago for development or other purposes. One of those inlets is near the 17-story Prince Resort, according to Coastal Carolina University research.

Major storms can reopen inlets, causing more flooding and damage as the ocean recedes. Old inlets also are considered erosion “hot spots,” or areas most likely to wash away.

Such storm erosion imperils beachfront property.

During Hurricane Hazel, a Category 4 storm that smacked North Myrtle Beach in 1954, about 300 houses were destroyed in Cherry Grove, according to the S.C. Emergency Management Division. That was more than the number of homes lost at Myrtle Beach, Windy Hill and Crescent Beach.

More recently, 1998’s Hurricane Bonnie, a Category 3 storm, inflicted most of its damage in South Carolina at Cherry Grove. North Myrtle Beach officials initially estimated the damage at $30 million.

Since the federal government’s flood insurance program began in 1968, North Myrtle Beach has had nearly as many repeat insurance losses as all of Georgetown County to the south, according to recent statistics from the Federal Emergency Management Agency.

All told, 224 properties in North Myrtle Beach have received flood insurance payments more than once for storm damage. Repeat payments through the federal flood insurance program in North Myrtle Beach have topped $10 million. That corresponds with the National Wildlife Federation’s report on repeat flood insurance losses through the 1990s.

“Cherry Grove is more susceptible to damage because it is basically an island,” said Tom Barstow, North Myrtle Beach fire chief. “It is fairly low. The result is a lot of water damage.”

RIGHTS PROTECTED

South Carolina’s policy of loosening oceanfront development rules after renourishment is tied to beach erosion.

The state’s coastal management agency will crack down on oceanfront development if a beach erodes. But if the beach grows wider, whether naturally or artificially, the state will give credit. Communities that renourish also must show a continuing commitment to future projects for the rules to be loosened.

That happened in North Myrtle Beach.

After the Corps of Engineers project in the late 1990s, the city launched three small renourishment projects to keep the seashore from eroding between the Cherry Grove Pier and Sea Mountain Highway. The projects cost more than $700,000, said Kevin Blayton, the city’s public works director. They were in the same area where the state loosened oceanfront development rules.

The Corps is now planning a second round of renourishment on the Grand Strand in the next five years.

Supporters of the state’s policy say it’s a fair way to regulate development while allowing South Carolina’s tourism industry to grow. Big buildings on the oceanfront are a huge hit with tourists, who want sweeping views of the Atlantic.

Tourism in South Carolina has a $15 billion annual impact on the state’s economy; about one-third of that comes from the Grand Strand.

That not only translates to a healthy economy but also brings in a wealth of tax revenue.

Residential property taxes on an oceanfront condominium building can generate more than $1 million annually, according to the Horry County assessor’s office. By contrast, a beach house might bring in $3,000 to $4,000.

OCEAN WILL WIN

Riggs said the ocean ultimately will win the battle with development, whether through hurricanes or gradually rising sea levels.

That will further erode beaches and prompt the need for more expensive renourishment projects, he said.

Since the turn of the century, sea level has risen a foot on the South Atlantic coast; many experts predict it will rise at least that much in the next 100 years because of global warming. That could move the ocean to the first row of development at Cherry Grove.

“If sea level is rising, then the beach is going to move inland, period,” Riggs said.

Ed McMullen, president of the S.C. Policy Council, a conservative research foundation, said renourishing beaches can be a reasonable expenditure of public money to protect the state’s tourism economy.

Even so, he said renourishment should not encourage risky development on the beach. In the past 20 years, taxpayers have spent $130 million replenishing state beaches.

“We should not be looking to build bigger buildings closer to the sea that are more vulnerable and, in the end, will cost taxpayers more money,” McMullen said.

Orrin Pilkey, a widely quoted coastal geologist from Duke University, said the Cherry Grove story is a classic example of how beach renourishment projects encourage development. People are reluctant to build along the oceanfront when the shoreline is eroding, but extra sand widens the beach and changes their view, he said.

“People have a false sense of security,” he said. “But somebody has to take the long view.”

State Rep. Paul Agnew, D-Abbeville, said South Carolina might need to revise its coastal management law to prevent development so close to the beach.

The 1988 beachfront management act set a general policy of “retreat” from the immediate beachfront because of erosion and storm threats. Allowing development closer to the ocean works counter to that policy, critics say.

Storms such as Hurricane Katrina should drive home the importance of limiting big development in flood-prone areas, said DHEC board chairwoman Elizabeth Hagood.

A study last year by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology found that storms in the Atlantic and Pacific oceans have increased in intensity and duration by 50 percent since the 1970s. That’s because the oceans are getting warmer, a key ingredient for intense hurricanes.

Hagood said DHEC has received “ridiculous requests that come in for some of these buildings that obviously put people in peril and are dangerous.”

“I just see a lack of ... learning the lessons of these storms,” she said.

Reach Fretwell at (803) 771-8537.