Page 13
T
he Coastal Research Center (CRC) at the Richard Stockton College of New Jersey has been collecting beach and nearshore profile data since 1986 at 105 locations along New Jersey’s 210-mile Atlantic, Delaware Bay, and Raritan Bay shorelines. The survey data are collected biannually (spring and fall) for the New Jersey Department of Envi-ronmental Protection’s (NJDEP) New Jersey Beach Profile Network (NJBPN). This dataset proved invaluable for deter-mining the impacts of Hurricane Sandy along the New Jersey coastline.The post-tropical cyclone made land-fall on 29 October 2012 at approximately 2330 UTC near Brigantine in Atlantic County with 70-kt maximum sustained winds (Blake et al. 2013) (Figure 1). The size of the storm at landfall was a contributing factor in the storm surge
Hurricane Sandy: Beach-dune performance
at New Jersey Beach Profile Network sites
By
Daniel A. Barone, Kimberly K. McKenna, Stewart C. Farrell
Coastal Research Center
The Richard Stockton College of New Jersey 30 Wilson Ave., Port Republic, NJ 08241
daniel.barone@stockton.edu; kimberly.mckenna@stockton.edu; stewart.farrell@stockton.edu
ABSTRACT
The Coastal Research Center at the Richard Stockton College of New Jersey (CRC) initiated a post-storm survey and assessment of the New Jersey shoreline in re-sponse to Hurricane Sandy which made landfall in Atlantic County on 29 October 2012. The CRC has monitored shoreline trends for 28 years at 105 locations for the state-sponsored New Jersey Beach Profile Network (NJBPN) project and the data provided clear evidence on how the beaches performed during the storm. Ocean waves combined with storm surge caused significant erosion to the beaches and dunes along New Jersey’s Atlantic shoreline. Wave and surge elevations increased northward from the area of landfall, which contributed to increased erosion. Mea-surements of wave run-up ranged from 14.5 ft (NAVD88) at Atlantic City in Atlantic County to 24.6 ft (NAVD88) in Long Branch in Monmouth County, which suffered the greatest beach-dune volume losses of the stations within NJBPN. The extent of erosion of the beaches and dunes and damages to structures and infrastructure were dependent upon the elevation of the storm waters, volume and extent of the berm, elevation and width of the dune, and local management practices for shore protection. North of landfall, where storm surge and wave energy (and subsequent beach-dune damages) were greater, federally designed shore protection projects that included engineered dunes protected landward structures, particularly in Long Beach Island (Ocean County) where design dune elevations were 22 ft NAVD88. Communities that suffered the greatest damages to structures and infrastructure were those where dunes were non-existent, or where elevations of the beaches and dunes were low or had narrow beach widths. In addition, setbacks for new structures landward of secondary dunes or adhering to National Flood Insurance Program standards for elevation allowed adjacent structures to be spared damages.
ADDITIONAL KEYWORDS: Hur-ricane Sandy, New Jersey Atlantic shoreline, coastal erosion, shoreline change, coastal dunes, beach nourish-ment, overwash, New Jersey Beach Profile Network.
Manuscript submitted 20 June 2014, revised and accepted 2 November 2014.
and elevated wave heights that reached a maximum of 32.3 ft at the entrance to New York Harbor at buoy station 44065 (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 2012a). Storm surge and waves were the main factors producing the damages to the shoreline, as the storm was not a significant wind or rain event. Figure 2 shows the water levels recorded at the Atlantic City and Sandy Hook tide gauges. The highest observed water levels of 6.16 ft North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD88) on 30 Octo-ber at Atlantic City and 9.21ft NAVD88 recorded at Sandy Hook when it stopped operating at 2300 UTC on 29 October. (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 2012b). All of New Jer-sey’s Atlantic beaches were exposed to two high tide intervals on Monday, 29 October. Figure 3 shows the wind vector plots from two offshore buoys (44009
offshore Delaware and 44065 offshore New Jersey) (Gebert 2012, pers. comm.). The maximum wind speeds recorded for 44065 were 56 mph from the east at 0010 UTC on 30 October; coinciding with the highest water levels. Though well below the force of damaging winds, the coinci-dental timing, the fetch, and wave heights created significant wave energy that impacted the shore. The elevated surge and waves substantially eroded the coast, creating breaches in the northern Ocean County barrier-spit at Mantoloking that made national headlines, and depositing significant amounts of overwashed beach and nearshore sands along the back bar-riers in several areas of Ocean County. Sand losses were significant even to the beaches south of landfall. Coastal flood -ing occurred in the low-ly-ing areas of the back barriers of Cape May County to Bay Head in northern Ocean County. In Mon-mouth County, storm waves damaged existing shore projection structures such as sea walls and bulkheads, and eroded the armored coastal headland segment at approximately elevation 20 ft NAVD88.
Nearly all of the 105 NJBPN sites were surveyed within two weeks fol-lowing the storm to provide sand volume losses and shoreline changes. The survey stations along Raritan Bay and along the ocean coast of Sandy Hook were postponed to January 2013 because of water quality issues and the exposure of ordnance. The CRC was conducting
its fall NJBPN survey when Hurricane Sandy made landfall, and all but 14 of the 105 sites had been surveyed. As such, post-storm comparisons were made to either fall and spring 2012 pre-storm profiles. This paper provides a summary of the post-storm assessment reports that were submitted to the NJDEP Bureau of Coastal Engineering (Coastal Research Center 2012a). Figure 4 provides an overview of New Jersey’s coastline types (e.g. barrier island, spit, headland) as well as the names for coastal features and reaches along the state’s coast based on Oertel and Kraft (1994).
METHODOLOGY
The CRC has measured shoreline and volume conditions of New Jersey’s coastline spanning over 25 years to pro-vide the data for determining shoreline
position and sand volume change trends, defining erosional areas and potential causes, and monitoring the performance of beach nourishment or other types of shoreline management projects. NJBPN survey stations were chosen based upon their representation as typical community conditions and are established in every oceanfront community with spacing at approximately one-mile intervals along the New Jersey coastline. Biannual survey elevations are collected using a Leica TS06 Total Station which transfers the data to a DX10 data logger. The unit is initialized with position coordinates, the elevation for two known locations, transit height, and target height. Environ-mental factors such as temperature and atmospheric pressure, and unit collima-tion errors are entered. Field personnel
equipped with an optical prism mounted to a range pole traverse the dunes, back-shore, surf zone, and continue into the water to a depth of approximately -15.0 to -20 ft NAVD88. The prism pole height can be adjusted between data points as necessary to accommodate elevation change. The data are stored in the DX10 and then downloaded at the office into a personal computer. A beach profile typi -cally consists of 35 to 55 individual data points. Following Hurricane Sandy, dune and berm elevations were collected using Leica System 1200 and Viva Real-Time Kinematic Global Positioning System (RTK-GPS) with sub-centimeter vertical accuracy. Beach profile survey elevations are incorporated into the Beach Morphol-ogy Analysis Package (BMAP) survey reduction program to determine shoreline and volume changes. Volume changes are provided in cubic yards per linear foot (cy/ft) of beach, and for this report, volumes are specific to each NJBPN survey line. In addition, the volumes that are presented here represent changes of the beach-dune system (between 0.0 ft NAVD88 to the landward limit of the survey line; including the foredune).
RESULTS
South of landfall
The state’s southernmost beaches in Cape May County were located 15 + miles south of Hurricane Sandy’s land-fall. Here, the rapid change in the wind direction from the north-northeast to southwest decreased the impact of the second high tide and reduced the wave heights (Figure 3). Wave run-up on the dunes was measured between 13.5 and 14.5 feet NAVD88. This was 10 ft lower than similar measurements made in Long Branch, Monmouth County. Many of the Cape May County beach communities participated in federal beach nourishment projects that began in 1989, and the wide beaches with significant dune widths provided the protection from waves and flooding of the oceanfront streets. In northern Ocean City where the beaches are narrow, the results included dune fail-ure and volume losses that ranged from -15 cy/ft to -40 cy/ft. Portions of Sea Isle City and in Wildwood where there was no dune to stop the water (in spite of having the widest municipal beach in New Jer-sey) also suffered ocean wave and storm surge damages (Figure 5).
Hurricane Sandy made landfall in the northern portion of Atlantic County at Figure 1. Locations of NJBPN survey stations and the approximate location
Page 15 Brigantine Island (City of Brigantine).
A federal beach nourishment project was completed for Brigantine Island in 2004. Sand was placed in the erosional northern section of the island and carried to the south via longshore transport along a third of the island. The beaches adjacent to Absecon Inlet (which separates Brig-antine Island from Absecon Island to the south) are wide with extensive foredunes and secondary dunes, which acted as a protective buffer to Hurricane Sandy’s storm surge. Landward structures and infrastructure were not damaged. Along the northern, developed end of Brigan-tine, which is a historically eroding area waves overtopped the rock revetment and promenade and flooded the roadways.
On Absecon Island (consisting of the municipalities of Atlantic City, Ventnor City, Margate City, and Borough of Longport), beach nourishment projects have been constructed since the 1930s with the most recent federal project completed in 2003 that stretched from Atlantic City to Ventnor City. A post-Hurricane Irene emergency restoration project was completed prior to Hurricane Sandy and absorbed much of the storm’s impact. The municipalities of Margate and Longport declined to participate in 2003 and suffered substantial storm wave inundation (Figure 6). The 14.5 ft NAVD88 engineered dunes in Atlantic City withstood Hurricane Sandy’s waves but were covered with large timber debris on the dune crest, though the oceanfront boardwalk was spared damages. The lack of consistent shore protection along the Absecon Inlet shoreline exacerbated the damages that occurred on the inlet boardwalk, which was in a state of decay prior to the storm. In the communities that opted out of the federal project, significant amounts of water and sand washed over the timber bulkhead and old concrete seawall, flooding most of the streets. Houses located closest to these structures suffered damages.
North of landfall
In general, the beaches north of land-fall (in Ocean and Monmouth Counties) fared far worse than those to the south. In the community of Holgate on Long Beach Island (LBI), in southern Ocean County, 3-4 ft thick deposits of over-washed sands extended well beyond the first two blocks from the ocean (Figures 7 and 8) and displayed fluvial depositional structures (cross-beds). Here (NJBPN
Sites 135 [Webster], 136 [Dolphin] and 137 [Taylor]), the dunes were limited in height and width and the beach was too narrow to buffer Hurricane Sandy’s storm surge. Even where dunes were of sufficient height (16 ft NAVD88), limited dune width proved inadequate in protecting against wave damages and dune failure was evident.
Further north on LBI, federal shore protection projects had been completed in the communities of Surf City in 2007 (Site 241), Harvey Cedars in 2009 (Site 143) and Brant Beach in 2012 (Site 140). The wider beaches enabled the waves to break farther from the higher dunes (design elevation 22 ft NAVD88) and protected landward properties from storm surge. Beach elevations dropped over 5 ft as sand was moved offshore (Figure 9). A recovery sand bar had already begun to weld onto the beach within days of the storm’s passage. In Loveladies (a
com-munity with no federal shore protection project), public access ways between dune crests proved problematic as the lower elevations channeled storm waters and resulted in overwash deposits that were at least two lots wide. Figure 10 shows the loss amounts in all of the com-munities on LBI and the locations where the federal shore protection projects were completed.
Several northern Ocean County communities on the barrier spit were devastated by the storm (Figure 11). Two distinct images — one of the roller coaster in the Atlantic Ocean at Seaside Heights, and one of the newly formed breaches at Mantoloking — captured national attention (Figure 12). None of the beach communities within northern Ocean County participated in state or fed-eral shore protection projects and sevfed-eral communities periodically scraped sand from the berm to increase dune elevations Figure 2. Tide gauge records for Atlantic City (above) and Sandy Hook (below) (NOAA, http://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/).
Figure 3. Wind vector plot of Hurricane Sandy’s wind direction from offshore buoys NDBC 44009 (offshore Delaware) and 44066 (offshore New Jersey) (plot courtesy J. Gebert, USACE 2012).
Page 17 Figure 5. Cape May County Post-Sandy NJBPN volume changes.
Figure 6. Atlantic County Post-Sandy volume changes. and widths. In Seaside Heights, no dune
system was present and the result was catastrophic damage to the boardwalk and piers. Figure 13 shows the volume changes to the beach-dune system fol-lowing the storm. The greatest loss of beach-dune sands (-109 cy/ft) were re-corded at NJBPN Site 153 (Mantoloking) which was located within 300 ft from the temporary channel that opened during Hurricane Sandy.
The coastal segment between Manasquan Inlet and Asbury Park (southern Monmouth County) was the recipient of a federal beach fill in 1999 through 2001. No subsequent work was completed in this reach, and prior to Hurricane Sandy, between 55% and 135% of the initial placement volume remained (Coastal Research Center 2012b). Redistribution among the inter-mittent groin fields seemed to influence the amount of sand that was present prior to the storm. Also in Monmouth County, a federal beach nourishment project was completed in phases for the coastal seg-ment between Long Branch and Sandy Hook from 1994 to 1999 and several
Figure 7. View of Long Beach Island Boulevard and overwash sands in Holgate. The sand was transported from the beach and dunes less than one block (from right to the left) and carried bayward across the barrier island. Figure 8. View (bayward) of overwash sands in Holgate.
maintenance fills since that time. Prior to Hurricane Sandy, the CRC estimated that between 14% and 116% of the ini-tial placement remained. Two erosional hotspots (Site 179 [Monmouth Beach] and Site 173 [Long Branch]) have weak-ened the overall success of the project. The project was not continuous within this coastal segment, as four communities opted out of the federal project (Elberon, Deal, Allenhurst, and Loch Arbor). Also, this segment of the initial federal project did not include a designed dune because it was assumed that the seawall at Sea
Bright (top elevation 28 ft NAVD88) and the armored natural headland at Long Branch (top elevation 20 ft NAVD88) were adequate support in the overall proj -ect design. Dunes developed naturally over time but were irregular and varied greatly in width and elevation. In some areas of the project, dunes were unable to establish due to very high tourism usage. One major observation was that Hurricane Sandy’s waves were dra-matically higher upon breaking along the Monmouth County shoreline than in
other areas to the south. The total water level along the ocean coast of Monmouth County was estimated between 11 and 13 ft above the NAVD88 datum (Figure 14; National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 2012c). Destruction from the storm was notable. In Elberon, two homes with foundation elevations of +28feet NAVD88 were destroyed and a third of the lot’s width transformed into empty space as the headland retreated. The entire Long Branch boardwalk was destroyed. The waves eventually relo-cated sand up to the Sea Bright seawall and into the space between the coastal highway and the wall. In the Borough of Sea Bright, a gap in the rock seawall allowed storm waters to severely damage the municipal offices, fire department and police headquarters. Within days following the storm, a nearshore bar was evident, though it was clear that most of the sand was transported landward.
Volume losses of beach sands were significantly greater in northern Mon -mouth County when compared to the county’s southern reaches. The NJBPN site with the greatest volume loss in Mon-mouth County was at Site 272 in Long Branch at -71.4 cy/ft (Figure 15). This location was not included in the federal shore protection project. Unfortunately, Hurricane Sandy stripped sand from the beach and moved the sand landward. All structures landward were destroyed.
BEACH-DUNE PERFORMANCE
All NJBPN locations were evalu-ated for beach-dune performance during the storm. Of the 105 NJBPN sites, 63 contained a beach that was backed by either a natural, man-made, or federally-designed dune. Twenty-six NJBPN sites are located within federal shore protec-tion projects that consisted of engineered dunes (constructed after 2006). Table 1 shows the percentage of sites by county where dune failure occurred. Dune failure is defined here as the complete removal of the pre-storm feature (from the pre-storm peak dune elevation to the post-storm elevation at that site along the profile line). The NJBPN sites within the federal projects that were constructed after 2006 (recently nourished) and that included engineered dunes had lesser dune failure rates than those sites where nourishment was not undertaken after 2006, or the profile contained natural or man-made dunes. It was observed that only one profile out of the 26 NJBPN
Page 19 Figure 9. Pre- and post-Sandy cross sections at Harvey Cedars where the federally designed berm and dune were eroded, but were not overwashed and afforded the necessary protection to landward properties and infrastructure.
Figure 10. Volume changes by community on Long Beach Island. sites located within recently filled federal
shore protection projects had dune failure (3.85%). Conversely, 20 of the 37 profiles with non-engineered beach-dune systems experienced dune failure (54.05%).
All 63 profiles containing beach-dune systems (engineered and non-engineered) were analyzed to compare dune crest elevation (maximum dune elevation), average beach elevation (average of el-evations between zero-foot and seaward dune toe), dune width (distance from seaward dune toe to landward dune toe), and beach width (distance from zero-foot elevation to seaward dune toe) between NJBPN sites where dune failures did and did not occur as a result of Hurricane Sandy (Table 2). The average dune crest elevation for all profiles where dune failure did and did not occur was 17.38 ft NAVD88 and 17.84 ft NAVD88, re-spectively, with a difference of 0.46 ft. The dune width for all profiles where dune failure did and did not occur was 127.15 ft and 248.08 ft, respectively,
with a difference of 120.93 ft. The aver-age berm elevation for all profiles where dune failure did and did not occur was 5.80 ft NAVD88 and 5.36 ft NAVD88, respectively, with a difference of 0.44 ft. The average beach width for all profiles where dune failure did and did not occur was 146.85 ft and 267.86 ft, respectively, with a difference of 121.01 ft. These results clearly show that dune width,
beach width, and dune crest elevation (to a lesser extent) were significant factors in determining whether a dune did or did not fail in response to Hurricane Sandy.
SHORELINE MANAGEMENT AND STORM DAMAGES
Of the 127 miles of New Jersey’s Atlantic shoreline, 30 miles (24%) are managed as natural areas in federal,
Figure 11. View from the back barrier to the east toward the Atlantic Ocean at Camp Osborne, Normandy Beach in northern Ocean County. Overwash sands reached nearly to Route 35. (photo courtesy J. Ochanas, NJDEP).
Table 1. Comparison of dune failures at beach profiles with engineered and non-engineered beach-dune systems.
state, or local parks. Ninety-seven miles (76%) are considered developed. Coastal land use practices are rooted in the pres-sures of heavy usage. Families trek to the shore for annual vacations that have been shared through generations. Several shore towns have been popular destina-tions since as early as the 1800s and fam-ily traditions of visiting the shore have been the foundation for growth.
Interest in owning barrier island prop-erties began in earnest in the 1940s follow-ing World War II. However, development of the shore boomed after the 1962 Ash Wednesday storm when barrier properties became affordable for the middle class. Initially, coastal municipalities managed the shoreline and the development on the barrier islands. To mitigate erosion, locals installed groin fields and bulkheads but, these were installed without consideration of the coastal processes and sediment transport patterns of the area. In 1994, the New Jersey State Shore Protection Fund (N.J.S.A. 13:19-16) was established which allows 75% (state) / 25% (local) cost sharing for shore protection projects. Beach nourishment gained momentum as offshore sediment supplies became
Page 21 Figure 12. Lone structure within the breaches at Mantoloking (view to the east from the Route 35 bridge).
accessible through permitting with state and federal agencies and as state/local partnerships formed in the mid-1980s (e.g. at Strathmere in 1984 [Valverde et al. 1999]), but many of the projects were for berm fill only. Federal/state/local part -nerships began in the 1990s with the first tri-partner beach fill completed in Ocean City in 1992. The Cape May City project was started in 1989, but the federal gov-ernment contributed 90% of the funds due to erosion problems caused by the Cold Springs Inlet jetties constructed by the USACE. The largest beach nourishment project took place along the Monmouth County shoreline in 1995 where 19.9 million cubic yards of sand were depos-ited for shore protection at a cost of $210 million. As mentioned earlier, several sections within the project did not include a design dune.
Though beach nourishment projects are constructed for shore protection, New Jersey reaps the benefits from additional land for recreational use. Tourism is a multi-billion dollar industry contribut-ing $38 billion annually to the state’s general fund and eventually the Shore Protection Fund (NJ Travel and Tourism 2011). Spending for shore protection projects helped save money in storm damage repairs and recovery costs. This was clearly displayed within the com-munities of Long Beach Island where the
Table 2. Comparison of dune crest elevation, dune width, beach elevation, and beach width statistics for profiles with beach-dune systems where dune failure did and did not occur as a result of Hurricane Sandy. All units are in feet and elevations are referenced to the NAVD88 datum.
federally-designed beach nourishment projects (including a dune) protected landward structures and infrastructure from Hurricane Sandy’s ocean waves and storm surge. Much of the flooding of the island was attributed to the elevated water levels of Barnegat Bay during the storm. In addition to well-designed beach nourishment projects, homeowners’ compliance with regulations played into the amount of damages incurred. Where homeowners complied with the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) regula-tions and Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) by elevating structures and limiting the amount of items below base flood level, losses were less and, in most cases, homes were habitable
follow-ing the storm. Where homeowners did not comply with the standards or were grandfathered to bypass the standards (termed Pre-FIRM properties), damages were extensive and many homes were completely destroyed. Development setbacks from the ocean worked to limit damages in the shore town of Mantolok-ing where a new home was required to be constructed behind a secondary dune even though older homes adjacent to the lot were situated seaward on the primary dunes. Following Hurricane Sandy, the home behind the secondary dune was relatively untouched while the adjacent structures suffered damages (Figure 16).
The location and orientation of public access ways to the beach were
problem-Figure 13. Volume changes by community in northern Ocean County. Figure 14. Map of storm surge exceedance heights as determined using the Sea, Lake, and overland Surge from Hurricanes (SLOSH) model for the Atlantic coast at northern Ocean County and Monmouth County (NOAA, 2012b).
atic for some of the coastal communi-ties in Ocean and Monmouth Councommuni-ties. Most, if not all, public access ways are oriented perpendicular to the shoreline and many are located at street ends. The access ways where elevations were low-ered to allow grade-on access with the berm became easily-available conduits for Hurricane Sandy’s storm waters and damages of structures adjacent to them were extensive (e.g. Mantoloking). For access ways that were above berm grade over a former dune, erosion occurred but ocean storm waters were less likely to be carried to the back barrier.
CONCLUSIONS
Beaches and dunes along the New Jer-sey Atlantic shoreline were able to protect landward structures and infrastructure if those features were high in elevation and contained enough volume and width to absorb Hurricane Sandy’s storm surge and wave energy. The storm’s water levels in-creased in elevation from Atlantic County northward to Monmouth County and the lower water levels were attributing factors in minimizing the damages to the beaches south of landfall. Several shore communi-ties north of landfall suffered extensive damages where dunes were nonexistent or backed a narrow beach. The presence of maintained federally designed beach nourishment projects including engi -neered dunes played a significant role in protecting landward structures and infrastructure as the projects absorbed the impacts of the storm waters. In ad-dition, management practices for newer construction such as adhering to NFIP standards or setbacks behind secondary dunes seemed to diminish losses.
As the state and local communities move forward to rebuild one should be reminded of a remark by a former NJDEP Commissioner: “But one thing is certain: we cannot ignore lessons learned and repeat past mistakes as we redevelop our coast. We have to be smarter than that.” (Mauriello 2012)
Page 23 Figure 15. Beach volume losses in northern Monmouth County. For
comparison, the federal placement volumes were between 225 and 300 cubic yards of sand per foot of shoreline.
Figure 16. The structure (left-side of photo) sited landward of the secondary dune had no damage as compared to the neighbor next door whose structure was located on the primary dune.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This research was sponsored by the New Jersey Department of Environ-mental Protection, Bureau of Coastal Engineering. We thank all of the CRC staff who worked non-stop in the “name of science” to obtain and process the post-Sandy data. B. Steven Howard and Michael J. Flynn produced some of the figures and tables. Reviews by three anonymous reviewers improved the content of the paper and are greatly appreciated.
REFERENCES
Blake, E.S., T.B. Kimberlain, R.J. Berg, J.P. Cangialosi, and J.L. Beven II 2013. “Tropi-cal Cyclone Report: Hurricane Sandy (AL 182012), 22-29 October 2012.” Report from the National Hurricane Center, 12 February 2013, 157 p.
Coastal Research Center 2012a, Hurricane Sandy Reports to the New Jersey De-partment of Environmental Protection: http://intraweb.stockton.edu/eyos/page. cfm?siteID=149&pageID=160.
Coastal Research Center 2012b. “Shoreline Changes in New Jersey Coastal Reaches One through Fifteen, Raritan Bay to Dela-ware Bay: A Review of 25 Years 1986 to 2012.” Contract Report to the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection: http://intraweb.stockton.edu/eyos/page. cfm?siteID=149&pageID=151
Mauriello, M. 2012. “Political Will Needed to Redevelop Coastline Sensibly.” Asbury Park Press, Op-Ed article November 2, 2012. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA) 2012a. National Data Buoy Center, http://www.ndbc.noaa.gov/station_page. php?station=44065
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) 2012b. Water level information, http://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) 2012c. Tropical Cyclone Storm Surge Exceedence Heights, http://www.nhc. noaa.gov/.
New Jersey Travel & Tourism 2011. New Jersey’s Travel & Tourism By the Numbers, http:// www.njtia.org/tourism_numbers.php. Oertel, G. F., and J.C. Kraft 1994. “New Jersey and
Delmarva Barrier Islands.” In P.D.R.A.D. Jr (Ed.), Geology of Holocene Barrier Island Systems (pp. 207–232). Springer Berlin Hei-delberg. Retrieved from http://link.springer. com/ chapter/10.1007/978-3-642-78360-9_6 Valverde, H.R., A.C. Trembanis, and O.H. Pilkey
1999. “Summary of beach nourishment epi-sodes on the U.S. East Coast Barrier Islands.”
