Part 3 Shorline - Project PDF

Preview

Summary

Project...

Description

Assignment Report: Shoreline Property Assessment

Part 1: Shoreline Property Assessment Version 3 Please delete the inappropriate option. Note: To delete the inappropriate option, select the option you want to remove and press delete on your keyboard.

Shoreline Property Assessment Site

Property Klaster

Erosion Hazard Rating

At Risk

Site 1 Simpson Carter

At Risk At Risk

Site 2 Froughton Property 1

At Risk At Risk

Site 3 Property 2 Randall Site 4 Wilson

Safe

At Risk Safe

Add your comments and rationale here:

Site 1: From looking at the site map and the Shoreline erosion sheet provided, I decided that both Klaster and Simpson are at risk. The map shows that three new groins are going to be built in Klaster. Groins are built in areas where longshore current is eroding to slow the process. However, this decreased velocity on the up-side current of a groin results in a deposition. The water that passes the groin accelerates and starts to erode the same amount of sediment

that was dropped. Since Simpson is further down the shoreline it will have an erosion problem because of the increase in current velocity and longshore current, making it at risk. Klaster is also at risk because of the fact that the groins here are going to be the last ones built in this area. Therefore, with the longshore current running downstream towards Klaster, there may be a serious erosion problem before the groins are built. Site 2: This site, Clayton Point, is an area of rapid erosion. For this reason, I believe that both areas are at risk. Looking at the Historic and Recent Maps, the shoreline is large on both sides in 1988. However, in 2003, there are many more cottages being built in Froughton and this may be because it is evident that the shoreline is decreasing in Carter due to erosion, making it at risk. Although in Froughton the shoreline is increasing in size and area of deposition, without addition shoreline protection, the force of water could cause severe and rapid erosion, making it a risk. Also, if the wave direction pattern changed in Clayton point, this could cause the East shore to arode. Site 3: In this site, along Muskett River, there is two potential construction sites for a new cottage. From looking at the information on Stream Meanders, I’ve determined that Property 1 is at risk and Property 2 is safe. As water moves around a bend, its velocity decreases on the inside of the bend and increases on the outside of the bend. The velocity increase on the outside of the bend gives the water an increased ability to pick up and carry sediment. For this reason, erosion occurs, and this erosion would occur at Property 1. Because Property 2 is not on the outside of the bend and remains on the straight part of the river it will not be affected by the velocity of the water. The dropped suspended sediments creates a point bar on the inside bend, but this will also not affect Property 2.

Site 4: Along Beachfront Drive, there is a risk for shoreline erosion. Wilson is considered to be safe from erosion but Randall is at risk. The shoreline that is near Wilson is protected by recently placed rip-raps and the government does not plan on making more of them. The rip-rapping protects from erosion because the large pieces of rock will block the high current velocity. Randall, however, has no protection from the longshore current and for this reason it will be at risk of erosion....